I’m not offended by your viewpoint, I think many people share it (although “rather shabby” is a gross understatement of what took place). But take a moment to r

I’m not offended by your viewpoint, I think many people share it (although “rather shabby” is a gross understatement of what took place). But take a moment to reflect on a couple of things: 1) You used the word “primitive” to describe these cultures. However, these cultures had developed advanced techniques and ways of being that ensured their survival for millennia, and there’s no reason to think this could not have continued for many more millennia. Is a society that is capable of surviving in perpetuity “primitive”? How does that contrast with our current society, which can fairly be called self-destructive? There is a serious risk that we don’t survive the next few centuries - perhaps even decades! Would you call that “advanced”? 2) I’m not discounting the value of science, nor am I romanticizing the hardships that many indigenous communities endured in the absence of science, advanced technology, modern medicine and so on. But First Nations peoples were not stupid when they encountered western technology. They adopted what was useful or superior to what they had. There could have been a synthesis of ancient indigenous practices and modern science. And indeed many indigenous practices were adopted by Westerners. But fundamental truths like, destroying your own home is not a recipe for long-term success, were ignored.