How were the american indians subjugated?

[NeOmega]

In The Pacific Northwest, "freedom of speech" did not apply to Indians, as speaking their language became illegal, and their children were forced to attend English speaking schools by America. This was something I was aware of, but not personaly until an older (Suquamish) Indian came into my store and talked about how he was learning his language at the tribal community center, and remembered his parents spoke it, but he was not allowed, so he understood it soemwhat, but couldn't speak it.

Most Natives were killed by disease to be sure.... some estimates say 200,000,000, but surely, this can only be the fault of evolution, and not pinned on Western Civilization... in other words, bad luck for Native Americans, and their culture.

An interesting analogy, comparing middle easterners to the natives of America, one I have not given much thought to. All though I do not believe it is land the "white man" wants in the case of "colonizing" the Middle East.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by NeOmega
The first documented case of bio-warfare.

The Mongols flung corpses with plague into the Genoese Black Sea holdings of Kerch and Kaffa. From there it traveled by ship to Messina, and from there, spread throughout Europe.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by jdd2007
We were the aggressors 99 of 100 times.

Says the self-hating white.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Caligastia
Says the self-hating white.

Trust us to know our history a bit better than you.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Trust us to know our history a bit better than you.

So you go along with the statement that 99% of the time whites were the aggressors? That shows you don't know **** about history.

[NeOmega]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


The Mongols flung corpses with plague into the Genoese Black Sea holdings of Kerch and Kaffa. From there it traveled by ship to Messina, and from there, spread throughout Europe.

Recorded by whom? After seeing plenty of ethnocentric writings today, I find most allegations as such questionable. Is it possible the black death arrived naturally, or perhaps the crowded conditions of a city under siege made it prime for plague.

In the case of the Pontiac rebellion, the general himself records the act in his journal.

[debeest]

Originally posted by Dissident
I was wrong I admit it.

Obviously it was wrong to purposely infect the Indians. But wouldn't they have eventually been introduced to smallpox anyways? Don't forget- americans and europeans weren't immune to this. They were dying as well. It's just that their populations have been exposed to it for a while, many of the really weak have long been dead. Although I'd imagine many still died from it.

Indians dying from diseas was inevitable. That is what happens when you introduce a new species to an environment. It was only sped up by purpsely spreading the disease.

Dis, you're not paying attention. The natives died off en masse from disease almost as soon as Europeans arrived. It was hundreds of years later that there was one documented instance where Europeans may have deliberately tried to infect them. If that did happen, it had a vanishingly small impact compared to the accidental exposure that followed automatically on contact.

I repeat, the invaders did anything they could to the Indians without regard to right or wrong by our modern standards, so I'm not defending them in any way. I'm just saying that accidental introduction of diseases had a vastly greater impact than all the deliberate efforts at genocide.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Caligastia
So you go along with the statement that 99% of the time whites were the aggressors?

Did I write that?

[debeest]

Originally posted by Caligastia

So you go along with the statement that 99% of the time whites were the aggressors? That shows you don't know **** about history.

Depends on how you define aggression. If moving into someone else's land and taking it for yourself counts as aggression, then the Europeans were aggressors 100% of the time. That's only one view, but it's a valid one.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Did I write that?

You defended it.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by debeest


Depends on how you define aggression. If moving into someone else's land and taking it for yourself counts as aggression, then the Europeans were aggressors 100% of the time. That's only one view, but it's a valid one.

You would have to take a tiny slice of time in order for that view to resemble anything accurate.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Caligastia
You defended it.

It was hyperbole, dude. While the exact numbers would be a little lower, it is true that we were the aggressors in the vast majority of cases, especially West of the Mississippi.

My statement was a reaction to your insult.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Caligastia
You would have to take a tiny slice of time in order for that view to resemble anything accurate.

Contrary to your opinion, the Americas were opccupied before the European invaded. During the whole period of expansion, we were taking someone else's land.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


It was hyperbole, dude. While the exact numbers would be a little lower, it is true that we were the aggressors in the vast majority of cases, especially West of the Mississippi.

My statement was a reaction to your insult.

So you think self-hating whites know their history better than other whites? Self hate is an irrational emotion that clouds your view of history.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Contrary to your opinion, the Americas were opccupied before the European invaded. During the whole period of expansion, we were taking someone else's land.

Not all land was spoken for Che, you know that. There were also situations in which settlers were given use of the land by the local tribe and then attacked.