4 ms·
They had own civilization. They lost war and were genocided out. And for the record, they had wars against themselves too, just like Europeans had wars against
by watwut 1y ago
They had own civilization. They lost war and were genocided out. And for the record, they had wars against themselves too, just like Europeans had wars against other Europeans.
Both slavery and territorial expansion by force were wealth builders. Both took quite a lot of time too. Both were quite barbaric from our point of view, but cruelty and violence can be wealth builder. After all, Putin is super wealthy too. Stalin ended up wealthy too. Hitler same deal. There is not much difference in there.
- rayiner 1y ago> Both slavery and territorial expansion by force were wealth builders. It’s mathematically impossible for American settlers as a group to have become wealthy by expropriating wealth from Indians. Individual Indians had almost nothing—they were hunter gatherers with a small number of subsistence farmers. Nor did they have much wealth in the aggregate—their population was quite small even pre-contact. The America population in the first census was almost 4 million, which is higher than most estimates of even the pre-contact north america population. A more populous society can’t become rich by expropriating wealth from a poor, less populous society. That’s just math. What actually happened is that the American settlers built a civilization that utilized the resources of the continent vastly more productively than the Indians had. That’s entirely different.
- alex1138 1y agoHowever, I think the Spanish can certainly be blamed Some incredibly harrowing stories in Wade Davis's One River There is also a chance some of the disease giving unto the native americans was by accident, not intentional