5 ms·

What's striking to me is that despite the Spanish conquistador's well-earned reputation for brutality, the Americas south of the Mexican border is genetically e

What's striking to me is that despite the Spanish conquistador's well-earned reputation for brutality, the Americas south of the Mexican border is genetically extremely native. The average American who says they have native ancestry, maybe has something like 3-5% precolumbian American ancestry I would guess... but if a Mexican says they have no native ancestry, they may well have ~50% native ancestry and just don't know it. I haven't read a good explanation for why it is so.

willvarfar 2y ago
The native populations that were put to work survived?
- qwytw 2y ago
  Compared to having to choose between being murdered, enslaving or moving to Oklahoma (slightly different periods I know..) that's not necessarily that awful. e.g there were thousands and thousands of Native American refugees fleeing to Spanish Florida from the Carolinas after the British got there. When Florida was captured some were lucky enough to be evacuated to Cuba and other Spanish colonies (in the few ships they were willing and able to send). The rest? Well...
  - lurk2 2y ago
    > When Florida was captured some were lucky enough to be evacuated to Cuba and other Spanish colonies Interesting. Do you have any further reading on this topic? I had never heard about it.
qwytw 2y ago
Emigration from Spain to their new world was relatively low. The estimate seems to be that only around 0.42 million people moved from Spain to the Americas between 1492 and 1820. Considering the massive amount of territory they controlled that's very low. In contrast over 1.2 million people from Great Britain emigrated to their colonies which were many times smaller geographically. Also before modern medicine and other stuff the climate outside of mountainous areas (which besides some exceptions weren't necessarily able to sustain high population density) wasn't great. e.g New England was a much nicer place to live and therefore natural population growth was relatively low. Combine those things with there being way less Native Americans in the North (due to various reasons) to begin with, very different colonial policies and treatment of the native people and the result is not that surprising.
anthk 2y ago
The Americans really needed something like the "Americaness" (the American law it's over any race), kinda like the Hispanidad with the Hispanic people does. It doesn't matter where you come from, but where you all as a whole are heading to. Segregation and White Power/Black Power/Native Power should be dealt as something totally obsolete, kinda backwards. "Mi tribe it's the best one, and the rest of the worlds sucks". As a Spaniard I always hated the concept of reservations and idiots like Jim Crow. The point of America should have been to leave out your tribe behind to be something else.
- graemep 2y ago
  I agree with you, but I think the problem, with regard to the US (I do not know about the rest of the Americas) is that they are victims of their history. While they can understand at an intellectual level that race is cultural construct, they cannot at other levels stop regarding race (rather than culture, language, etc.) as a essential and immutable part of people's identity. I have blogged about this compared to my own experience of race in different cultures https://pietersz.co.uk/2023/08/racism-culture-different https://pietersz.co.uk/2023/08/racism-culture-different Also worth thinking that the attitudes you (and I) have have been rejected by many people in the US. For many, a "melting pot" culture is no longer considered desirable.
  - anthk 2y ago
    The Mediterranean civilization and the further Enlightenment was due to sharing knowledge and goods back and forth, not by keeping the countries and tribes isolated. Rock music it's a mix between Black and White cultures, creating something else, but better. In Spain we had groups like Triana in the 70's who mixed American Folk and Rock like Jethro Tull (the first two albums are almost a Jethro Tull wannabe, really good) with some Flamenco music. And Flamenco itself it's a mix of Arabic, Gypsy and -who knows- more roots...
  - john_texas 2y ago
    [dead]
  - anthk 2y ago
username332211 2y ago
Isn't it fairly obvious? The Spanish were conquering advanced urbanized civilizations. Seizing the cities and their people was the goal of the entire enterprise. The land was an afterthought. The British/Americans were settling the territory of primitive tribal nations. Taking over the land was the goal of the entire enterprise. The people were an afterthought.
lurk2 2y ago
> I haven't read a good explanation for why it is so. Iberians bred with the people they conquered. The Spanish in particular practiced an intentional policy of breeding a caste of illegitimate mixed-race offspring that would mediate between the Spaniards proper and the aboriginals they had enslaved. In the Spanish colonies, there emerged a project to “Mejorar La Raza” (literally: to better the race) by encouraging breeding with those of a fairer complexion than oneself. I suspect (though have never confirmed) that this attitude was primarily fostered to encourage women to more readily breed with Iberian men, but in the present day the attitude is quite prevalent among both Latino men and Latina women; Latinos fetishize white features, which are associated with being not only high-status and wealthy, but also simply beautiful in their own right. The Americans largely arrived after small pox had substantially reduced the native population, and subsequently followed a comparatively genocidal path of historical development. They did not tend to breed with the natives they encountered, so they have a far lower proportion of aboriginal ancestry. At some point between the late 1800s and early 1900s, they developed a romantic appreciation for Native Americans, which later leads to the common trope of every American family claiming to have a Cherokee great great grandmother on their mother’s side. Since the 2000s, the common trope is that all the growth in these tribes has been from white-passing people looking to cash in on affirmative action; this is not an undeserved stereotype.

willvarfar 2y ago

The native populations that were put to work survived?

qwytw 2y ago
Compared to having to choose between being murdered, enslaving or moving to Oklahoma (slightly different periods I know..) that's not necessarily that awful. e.g there were thousands and thousands of Native American refugees fleeing to Spanish Florida from the Carolinas after the British got there. When Florida was captured some were lucky enough to be evacuated to Cuba and other Spanish colonies (in the few ships they were willing and able to send). The rest? Well...
- lurk2 2y ago
  > When Florida was captured some were lucky enough to be evacuated to Cuba and other Spanish colonies Interesting. Do you have any further reading on this topic? I had never heard about it.

qwytw 2y ago

Emigration from Spain to their new world was relatively low. The estimate seems to be that only around 0.42 million people moved from Spain to the Americas between 1492 and 1820. Considering the massive amount of territory they controlled that's very low. In contrast over 1.2 million people from Great Britain emigrated to their colonies which were many times smaller geographically. Also before modern medicine and other stuff the climate outside of mountainous areas (which besides some exceptions weren't necessarily able to sustain high population density) wasn't great. e.g New England was a much nicer place to live and therefore natural population growth was relatively low. Combine those things with there being way less Native Americans in the North (due to various reasons) to begin with, very different colonial policies and treatment of the native people and the result is not that surprising.

anthk 2y ago

The Americans really needed something like the "Americaness" (the American law it's over any race), kinda like the Hispanidad with the Hispanic people does. It doesn't matter where you come from, but where you all as a whole are heading to. Segregation and White Power/Black Power/Native Power should be dealt as something totally obsolete, kinda backwards. "Mi tribe it's the best one, and the rest of the worlds sucks". As a Spaniard I always hated the concept of reservations and idiots like Jim Crow. The point of America should have been to leave out your tribe behind to be something else.

graemep 2y ago
I agree with you, but I think the problem, with regard to the US (I do not know about the rest of the Americas) is that they are victims of their history. While they can understand at an intellectual level that race is cultural construct, they cannot at other levels stop regarding race (rather than culture, language, etc.) as a essential and immutable part of people's identity. I have blogged about this compared to my own experience of race in different cultures https://pietersz.co.uk/2023/08/racism-culture-different https://pietersz.co.uk/2023/08/racism-culture-different Also worth thinking that the attitudes you (and I) have have been rejected by many people in the US. For many, a "melting pot" culture is no longer considered desirable.
- anthk 2y ago
  The Mediterranean civilization and the further Enlightenment was due to sharing knowledge and goods back and forth, not by keeping the countries and tribes isolated. Rock music it's a mix between Black and White cultures, creating something else, but better. In Spain we had groups like Triana in the 70's who mixed American Folk and Rock like Jethro Tull (the first two albums are almost a Jethro Tull wannabe, really good) with some Flamenco music. And Flamenco itself it's a mix of Arabic, Gypsy and -who knows- more roots...
- john_texas 2y ago
  [dead]
- anthk 2y ago

username332211 2y ago

Isn't it fairly obvious? The Spanish were conquering advanced urbanized civilizations. Seizing the cities and their people was the goal of the entire enterprise. The land was an afterthought. The British/Americans were settling the territory of primitive tribal nations. Taking over the land was the goal of the entire enterprise. The people were an afterthought.

lurk2 2y ago

> I haven't read a good explanation for why it is so. Iberians bred with the people they conquered. The Spanish in particular practiced an intentional policy of breeding a caste of illegitimate mixed-race offspring that would mediate between the Spaniards proper and the aboriginals they had enslaved. In the Spanish colonies, there emerged a project to “Mejorar La Raza” (literally: to better the race) by encouraging breeding with those of a fairer complexion than oneself. I suspect (though have never confirmed) that this attitude was primarily fostered to encourage women to more readily breed with Iberian men, but in the present day the attitude is quite prevalent among both Latino men and Latina women; Latinos fetishize white features, which are associated with being not only high-status and wealthy, but also simply beautiful in their own right. The Americans largely arrived after small pox had substantially reduced the native population, and subsequently followed a comparatively genocidal path of historical development. They did not tend to breed with the natives they encountered, so they have a far lower proportion of aboriginal ancestry. At some point between the late 1800s and early 1900s, they developed a romantic appreciation for Native Americans, which later leads to the common trope of every American family claiming to have a Cherokee great great grandmother on their mother’s side. Since the 2000s, the common trope is that all the growth in these tribes has been from white-passing people looking to cash in on affirmative action; this is not an undeserved stereotype.