4 ms·

"Fear is the mind-killer." --Frank Herbert You also need enough love to be willing to be the first to fall in defense of your people. Maybe they didn't even k

"Fear is the mind-killer." --Frank Herbert You also need enough love to be willing to be the first to fall in defense of your people. Maybe they didn't even know that the horses could be killed? They could've looked like monsters to the locals. But yeah, the lens of history is far from clear, except for "Fuck the conquistadors." That said, would the locals have abandoned human sacrifice and cannabalism without getting their asses kicked? Who knows? Sometimes, it's just assholes killing assholes, usually with innocents caught in the crossfire.

devilbunny 2y ago
> "Fuck the conquistadors." I don't know the story of the Inca very well, but I did just read about Cortes' conquest of the Aztecs (Buddy Levy, Conquistador), and the primary moral of the story that I got was "if you believe in human sacrifice of other people, and if the tribute you demand of vassal states is a certain number of their sons and daughters, don't be surprised if they follow some other dude who's got better gear". He'd have gotten nowhere without native allies, and lucky for him the Aztecs had managed to make enemies out of just about everyone else nearby. Was he a good person? I think we can firmly say "no". Was he worse than the Aztecs? That's a tougher question. If you were an Aztec, almost certainly. If you were one of their subject peoples who cut an early deal with him, almost certainly not.
- lukan 2y ago
  "If you were one of their subject peoples who cut an early deal with him, almost certainly not." If you ask the descendants of those people, you might get a different answer. Because even the highest ranking "natives" in the new order were still lower, than the lowest white conquisator.
  - devilbunny 2y ago
    Being under the rule of the Spaniards in Mexico was no ball of fun, but then again being under the rule of the Aztecs (if you weren't one) wasn't either. I'm not qualified to judge the details.
    - lukan 2y ago
      For sure not. And if I would be destined to be sacrificed to one side, I probably would prefer being a badly treated slave for the other side. But in general I likely would have prefered to have no more Imperial master.

devilbunny 2y ago

> "Fuck the conquistadors." I don't know the story of the Inca very well, but I did just read about Cortes' conquest of the Aztecs (Buddy Levy, Conquistador), and the primary moral of the story that I got was "if you believe in human sacrifice of other people, and if the tribute you demand of vassal states is a certain number of their sons and daughters, don't be surprised if they follow some other dude who's got better gear". He'd have gotten nowhere without native allies, and lucky for him the Aztecs had managed to make enemies out of just about everyone else nearby. Was he a good person? I think we can firmly say "no". Was he worse than the Aztecs? That's a tougher question. If you were an Aztec, almost certainly. If you were one of their subject peoples who cut an early deal with him, almost certainly not.

lukan 2y ago
"If you were one of their subject peoples who cut an early deal with him, almost certainly not." If you ask the descendants of those people, you might get a different answer. Because even the highest ranking "natives" in the new order were still lower, than the lowest white conquisator.
- devilbunny 2y ago
  Being under the rule of the Spaniards in Mexico was no ball of fun, but then again being under the rule of the Aztecs (if you weren't one) wasn't either. I'm not qualified to judge the details.
  - lukan 2y ago
    For sure not. And if I would be destined to be sacrificed to one side, I probably would prefer being a badly treated slave for the other side. But in general I likely would have prefered to have no more Imperial master.