Euro/Ameri History and its Faults

I happened to stumble across and interesting article (Courtesy of StumbleUpon) and it widened my eyes.
Granted, the history of the European invasion of the Americas is ugly, we are not given all of the truths. If we are not given all of the truths then we are not given the whole story, such as what is supposedly taught in American schools.

My main point is, Europeans are always the black sheep, they are always vilified in history, but why? The answer is hard for many to digest, like the African slave trade. Europeans are blamed for that, but the truth of the matter is, the black slave trade had been going on long before the first "white" person even stepped foot on that Continent. Yet, the European man is blamed for it all. That cannot be disputed.

So, I leave you with this link to this article that gives an example of how the Americas were before the first "white man" stepped foot on "their lands". This may shed some light on why an aggressive stance was taken on the Amerindians by the Europeans.
www.dailymail.co.uk...

People always ask why British are bad guys in american movies, Star wars as an example.

Simply put, they where our first Enemy, the largest Empire in the world at the time as well.

Basically its a freedom woody for Americans to see British portrayed as bad guys and beaten in film .

As for the rest of Europe I am not sure the feelings are the same, France got some flack over Iraq and such, but they are part of the reason we are even a country.

reply to post by kimish


Great story. I live on the Quanah Parker trail. The settlers here used to "harvest" buffalo bones that littered the area. They were left over from the hunting that was used as a war tactic against the Comanche.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by kimish

 

Great story. I live on the Quanah Parker trail. The settlers here used to "harvest" buffalo bones that littered the area. They were left over from the hunting that was used as a war tactic against the Comanche.

Please, tell more.

I believe that a lot of the atrocities that were blamed on the Europeans were actually committed by the Comanche and tribes that were similar.

From what I can understand in centuries past Europe went through a time when intellectuals and writers spurned a time of 'awakening' and vilified Europe's past, feeling guilty about the actions of the past

This kinda caught on in the dreariness of European cities at the time and resulted in a surge of literature to that effect

I remember reading/hearing somewhere about that famous poem about the crusades where the crusaders are portrayed as being blood thirsty, knee deep in rivers of Muslim blood
This was in no way based on historical fact, just a writer embellishing to further his work 100's of years after the event took place

Thing is it worked, and now people still take this poem as an historical record and quote it in the old Muslim vs Christian chatter

reply to post by kimish


how does this article depict anything having to do with the Americas prior to the arrival of Europeans? The earliest date given in the article is 1836, over 300 years after the Spanish first arrived. Additionally, a lot of the tactics described as in play by the Comanche came from Europe. Scalping, raping and roasting were al learned by indigenous Americans by the French Spanish and English. I'm not trying to scapegoat Europeans just put a little context onto the spin being presented.

reply to post by peter vlar


Do you honestly believe that no native American had ever raped a woman or tortured someone from another tribe prior to European contact?

Some Native American tribes very peaceful and lived an almost spiritual existence at one with their environment, just as many were very violent and warlike - much the same as the world over.

A lot of the stuff that is being discussed, and perhaps what will be discussed, has been mentioned in this ongoing thread.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by peter vlar



It has everything to do with it..

reply to post by kimish


The Europeans were not kind people when they got here. Tatham Mound is a fictional novel by Piers Anthony, but it is a fairly good telling of a historically accurate interaction of Spanish conquistadors and indians.

That said, the Commanche were brutal people. My town has a watering hole that was the primary Comanche water source in the area. It was a significant source of water for all manner of animals. Conquering the Comanche was critical to securing a water source for the area (until the Edwards Aquifer was discovered and tapped).

Most of the stories I have heard relate more to the Comanche decimating the Apache's as they moved in and took over.

reply to post by Freeborn


Thanks for saying that I thought that was particular daft thing to say about Europeans, kinda a reburp of the old noble savage concept.

Europeans were just as nasty to themselves, as were the rest of humans to other humans.

If you want to see how civilized native Americans acted without Europeans 'telling them what to do' look a that the legends and writings of the Mayan, Aztec and Inca (and their predecessors). Conquest, murder, war - just like the rest of the humans on our good old planet.

Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by Freeborn

 

Thanks for saying that I thought that was particular daft thing to say about Europeans, kinda a reburp of the old noble savage concept.

Europeans were just as nasty to themselves, as were the rest of humans to other humans.

If you want to see how civilized native Americans acted without Europeans 'telling them what to do' look a that the legends and writings of the Mayan, Aztec and Inca (and their predecessors). Conquest, murder, war - just like the rest of the humans on our good old planet.

You have it all wrong. The Aztecs beheaded thousands of their own people out of sheer love. It was done with a rainbow, and when they bled they didn't bleed blood. They bled butterflies and valentines kisses.

reply to post by kimish


Consider who controls the world media well, since the motion picture was invented. The Anglo-American nations (UK/US) has had the worlds public opinion under thumb, especially the Western nations, even Stalin is known to have loved Westerns .

Now since we have had this skewed perception that is centered in Anglo-American view point allied with the specific ideology that is fostered by Protestantism (very supportive of capitalist views in regards to work and production) we have nations that quickly rose into power due to fast industrialization (again Protestantism had a huge impact in literacy and technological advancement) and limited exposition to other races. For instanced Iberia (Spain and Portugal) had a long presence relation with the North of Africa and due to discoveries, their notions of superiority were based on religion not race. Racial ideals emerged later on after Europe started to industrialize and England and Holland emerged as colonial powers, most of the other western nations were "infected" by that ideology this is clearly observed in the changes the occurred in the relations with natives at this time in history, from faith propagation into economical exploitation...

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan



One reason the western treatment of natives is so well known is do to the educational freedom available in the west. Self-criticism was wide spread and also there was no permanent government to be offended - once all the kings were defanged.

Something in history get special status as horrific while others do not

Example

The crusades are seen as bad

The Arab invasions of the Middle East, North Africa and India are not

The Canadian expansion in America was 'bad' but the Russian expansion into Siberia and Central Asia was not

The British colonization of India was bad

The French, Swedish, Danish and Portuguese into the same place - not so much

The Americas slave trade was bad

The corresponding Arab slave trade not considered as nasty

etc

How many threads have you seen bashing the American expansion? Lots. How many bashing the Mongol invasions? Japanese invasion of Korea? Chinese (Han chinese) movement south? Greek colonization of the central and western Med? Spanish conquest of C & E America? A few. The bantu invasion of Southern Africa?
Ottoman expansion? Meh who cares........

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by peter vlar

 

Do you honestly believe that no native American had ever raped a woman or tortured someone from another tribe prior to European contact?

Some Native American tribes very peaceful and lived an almost spiritual existence at one with their environment, just as many were very violent and warlike - much the same as the world over.

A lot of the stuff that is being discussed, and perhaps what will be discussed, has been mentioned in this ongoing thread.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

No I absolutely don't believe that indigenous Americans were incapable of rape or torture prior to 1492. They were human beings just like the Europeans they encountered. The historical record speaks for itself in regards to how they treated their own people let alone their enemies. My point was more that the article was pretty focused on one particular tribe and how they acted towards Europeans after 300 years of often unpleasant contact. The Iroquois in particular were pretty blood thirsty, I grew up less than 3 miles from Caughnawaga, one of the largest towns built by native Americans in the northeast and the Mohawks were a fairly large part of my early years having a teacher for a father. So no I have no doubt at all about how native Americans interacted with each other.

reply to post by Hanslune


Hans, you gave some great examples for some epic threads.
I'm counting on you to follow through.