4 ms·

A not-insignificant number of people think that Europeans should never have settled there, and it should have been left in its pastoral state to tribal people,

A not-insignificant number of people think that Europeans should never have settled there, and it should have been left in its pastoral state to tribal people, meanwhile the rest of the world advanced technologically and industrially on its own.

fortran77 3y ago
…yet those same people argue out of the other sides of their mouth that people who have “too much” stuff should have that stuff taken away from them and redistributed.
- anonymouskimmer 3y ago
  Yes, there are many indigenous Americans who think that the lands and gold that were taken from them by the ancestors of those who now have "too much stuff" should be taken from those people and returned to them. It's not hypocritical.
- xpe 3y ago
  No, not necessary the “same people”. Perhaps you would like to clarify?
dvt 3y ago
> in its pastoral state to tribal people But this is the bon savage trope, which itself is quite problematic.
gregjor 3y ago
Pastoral describes people who raise grazing animals, generally sheep or cattle, both species introduced by European explorers and colonizers (as were horses). Prior to Columbus no species of domesticated cattle or sheep existed in the New World, thus no "pastoral state." Describing the world Columbus and those who followed him discovered (for Europeans at least) as a "pastoral state of tribal people" shows a poor understanding of pre-Columbian history in the New World. Early European explorers and conquerors described finding large-scale farming, cities, extensive trade networks, empires, warfare, and of course slavery. Archaeology and the remaining records of those people confirm European accounts. We can condemn Columbus for many things, but neither he nor the Europeans who followed introduced violence and slavery to the New World. They did introduce novel pathogens which led to large-scale, if somewhat accidental genocide (prior to a germ theory of disease).
- crooked-v 3y ago
  Large-scale industrialized slavery as introduced by Europeans was a new thing, though, outside of perhaps the Aztecs (if you look at the whole mass sacrifices thing as an 'industry').
  - gregjor 3y ago
    Large-scale slavery existed prior to the European colonizers. Look at the history of Rome, Greece, Egypt, China, India. Ancient Rome and Greece had fully slave-based economies, more or less so depending on when and where you look. Over time the process got more efficient in economic terms, "industrialized" as you call it, but slavery existed almost everywhere, in many forms, as far back as we have records, and of course still goes on. For example, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_among_Native_Americans_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_among_Native_Americans...

fortran77 3y ago

…yet those same people argue out of the other sides of their mouth that people who have “too much” stuff should have that stuff taken away from them and redistributed.

anonymouskimmer 3y ago
Yes, there are many indigenous Americans who think that the lands and gold that were taken from them by the ancestors of those who now have "too much stuff" should be taken from those people and returned to them. It's not hypocritical.
xpe 3y ago
No, not necessary the “same people”. Perhaps you would like to clarify?

dvt 3y ago

> in its pastoral state to tribal people But this is the bon savage trope, which itself is quite problematic.

gregjor 3y ago

Pastoral describes people who raise grazing animals, generally sheep or cattle, both species introduced by European explorers and colonizers (as were horses). Prior to Columbus no species of domesticated cattle or sheep existed in the New World, thus no "pastoral state." Describing the world Columbus and those who followed him discovered (for Europeans at least) as a "pastoral state of tribal people" shows a poor understanding of pre-Columbian history in the New World. Early European explorers and conquerors described finding large-scale farming, cities, extensive trade networks, empires, warfare, and of course slavery. Archaeology and the remaining records of those people confirm European accounts. We can condemn Columbus for many things, but neither he nor the Europeans who followed introduced violence and slavery to the New World. They did introduce novel pathogens which led to large-scale, if somewhat accidental genocide (prior to a germ theory of disease).

crooked-v 3y ago
Large-scale industrialized slavery as introduced by Europeans was a new thing, though, outside of perhaps the Aztecs (if you look at the whole mass sacrifices thing as an 'industry').
- gregjor 3y ago
  Large-scale slavery existed prior to the European colonizers. Look at the history of Rome, Greece, Egypt, China, India. Ancient Rome and Greece had fully slave-based economies, more or less so depending on when and where you look. Over time the process got more efficient in economic terms, "industrialized" as you call it, but slavery existed almost everywhere, in many forms, as far back as we have records, and of course still goes on. For example, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_among_Native_Americans_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_among_Native_Americans...