4 ms·
Two things: 1. I think a much appropriate term to use here is Native American instead of American Indians. 2. I disagree with your statement "the reason why t
by mongrelion 4y ago
Two things:
1. I think a much appropriate term to use here is Native American instead of American Indians.
2. I disagree with your statement "the reason why the Europeans became dominant was mostly luck and genetics". I do agree that the disease brought by the Europeans played a very important role in the whole colonization effort but mostly it was violence the main driver. Saying otherwise is just downplaying the genocide.
- gwbas1c 4y agoI'm repeating well established historical fact: 1491 (Second Edition): New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000JMKVE4/ref=cm_sw_r_apan_FAD53KQSMXG141WVRJ44 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000JMKVE4/ref=cm_sw_r_apan_FAD53K... I'm also following the book's terms. Native American is a confusing term, and the author includes an appendix explaining it
- mongrelion 4y agoI understand where the confusion is coming from: that Columbus thought that he had arrived in India and so named the natives "Indians" but it's been long established that this was a terrible mistake and that the peoples from the Americas were, in fact, not Indians but rather Native Americas. They were not brought from India. They were already established here. So it's incorrect to call them American Indians. It's just plain offensive these days to call them so. Don't take my word for it, though. Just ask any "American Indian" which term they prefer and you'll find your answer quickly.
- gwbas1c 4y ago> Don't take my word for it, though. Just ask any "American Indian" which term they prefer and you'll find your answer quickly. And you'll get many different answers, especially as you travel. North and South America are two large continents; and the Indians were diverse and had many different names for themselves.