4 ms·
Wikipedia says that the US genocide of Native Americans numbered somewhere between 30-50K people over 120 years, some of those in military conflicts. In compari
by merpnderp 11y ago
Wikipedia says that the US genocide of Native Americans numbered somewhere between 30-50K people over 120 years, some of those in military conflicts. In comparison in the Rape of Nanking, the Japanese murdered 50-300K. And averaged 300-500K civilians murdered per month between 1937 and 1945.
By 1941 Japan had no reason to believe the US was in any way expansionist. There had been 20 years of isolationist rhetoric from both political parties and almost no public support for intervention in wars abroad.
- novaleaf 11y agoThe Manifest Destiny doers didn't know it, but most of the Americas had been cleared a hundred years earlier by disease. Some estimate 95% fatality rates.
- LeoardoDavinci1 11y agoSo, is OK to decimate everybody left because disease had already killed a lot of the native people. So if another country had come to conquer the European nations after the black plague and committed genocide would it have been OK? Otherwise I'm not exactly sure what is your point. Is like you are trying to say, hey, I only killed 4%, the other 95% were already dead so is not so bad.
- merpnderp 11y agoThere's no one saying it is okay here. Everyone agrees it meets the modern definition of a genocide. But I'd would certainly need some evidence that the US was responsible for 80% of the deaths of the remaining native Americans. I looked around for these numbers and have never seen anyone claim this.
- pyre 11y agoI'm guessing the parent post is saying that the numbers of dead would have been higher had the populations not been decimated by disease.
- protomyth 11y agoIf that is what Wikipedia is claiming then it is off by orders of magnitude on the the Native American genicide.
- merpnderp 11y agoIf you try to prove this you'll find the problem. There is very little evidence to go by except guestimations. You can say it is off by orders of magnitude (which is silly because 2 orders of magnitude would be the total estimated population of N. American before Columbus), but you certainly can't back that up with evidence.
- protomyth 11y ago18 million was the estimated population for North America alone. So, yes, the population drop has been in the millions. the Trail of Tears alone would cover half the 30k. U of OK did a lot of the research.
- merpnderp 11y ago18 million is the max with other estimates being much lower. That's certainly not a fact. And the only source for deaths on the trail of tears is the US government which gives 4000.
- protomyth 11y agoYou quote a government source on the deaths cause by said government? "And the only source for deaths on the trail of tears is the US government" No, they are not the only source. "Cherokee Population Losses during the Trail of Tears: A New Perspective and a New Estimate" gives the loses as double. Not counting the subsequent increase in loses where they ended up. I doubt we would take German official's word at numbers during WWII, so I'm not sure why the US's word is valid in this instance. The US couldn't even keep the land ownership and payments straight for the tribes and lost a massive lawsuit because of it.