4 ms·

They were killed by what the settlers brought with them. No, it was not deliberate (#), but nevertheless, their arrival is what killed most of the natives. (#)

They were killed by what the settlers brought with them. No, it was not deliberate (#), but nevertheless, their arrival is what killed most of the natives. (#) Obviously the settlers would have preferred to keep the natives alive since then they would not have needed to ship vast quantities of Africans across the ocean to enslave, but could have just done that with the locals.

macspoofing 4y ago
>They were killed by what the settlers brought with them. No, it was not deliberate (#), but nevertheless, their arrival is what killed most of the natives. That's all I meant to clarify. You'd be surprised how many people today actually think that the native population was wiped out through deliberate and intentional action. Your wording made it seem you believed that as well, but that seemed to not be the case. >Obviously the settlers would have preferred to keep the natives alive since then they would not have needed to ship vast quantities That's a caricature.
- 8note 4y ago
  It was intentional though. The bison didn't disappear because of western disease, they were hunted out to break up the natives ability to resist, so they could be killed and corralled, and the land be granted to settlers. Canada intentionally withheld food it owed to natives as part of treaty agreements, with the understanding that if a bunch of people starved to death, Canada wouldn't need to send as much food. Similarly, disease was spread intentionally through small pox blankets, with the intention listed
- ldh0011 4y ago
  It may not be the case that deliberate and intentional actions alone could have wiped out the natives but it seems pretty clear that there were a lot of deliberate and intentional actions both to kill them and take their land (Trail of Tears, Spanish conquests in South America). Those actions just wouldn't have been as successful without the diseases.

macspoofing 4y ago

>They were killed by what the settlers brought with them. No, it was not deliberate (#), but nevertheless, their arrival is what killed most of the natives. That's all I meant to clarify. You'd be surprised how many people today actually think that the native population was wiped out through deliberate and intentional action. Your wording made it seem you believed that as well, but that seemed to not be the case. >Obviously the settlers would have preferred to keep the natives alive since then they would not have needed to ship vast quantities That's a caricature.

8note 4y ago
It was intentional though. The bison didn't disappear because of western disease, they were hunted out to break up the natives ability to resist, so they could be killed and corralled, and the land be granted to settlers. Canada intentionally withheld food it owed to natives as part of treaty agreements, with the understanding that if a bunch of people starved to death, Canada wouldn't need to send as much food. Similarly, disease was spread intentionally through small pox blankets, with the intention listed
ldh0011 4y ago
It may not be the case that deliberate and intentional actions alone could have wiped out the natives but it seems pretty clear that there were a lot of deliberate and intentional actions both to kill them and take their land (Trail of Tears, Spanish conquests in South America). Those actions just wouldn't have been as successful without the diseases.