Americans committed the worst genocide in world history

reply to post by Visiting ESB



You're absolutely correct.

People who end up in positions of power do so because they sought those positions out. There is a reason for it. And not many I can imagine speak very well of their intentions..

I don't buy that crap, "I just want to make a difference". Because "a difference" is never made.

Cultures and civilizations rise and fall for many reasons. Many native groups displaced other earlier groups including a group of white "giants". Often times a culture is destroyed because of God's judgment. Once you start into child sacrifice and satanism, the end is usually swift.

The Mayans, Aztecs and Incas were heavily into human sacrifice to their demonic idols. Some North American tribes were into constant warfare and cannibalism. Just as he did to the Canaanites, for the same reasons, God destroyed those cultures. In recent times western civlization has decided it's OK to do a little child sacrifice of their own in the form of abortion on demand. Millions have died, sacrificed to the god of sexual immorality.

We can therefore expect the same fate as so many civilizations that have gone on before us.

Originally posted by SevenThunders
Cultures and civilizations rise and fall for many reasons. Many native groups displaced other earlier groups including a group of white "giants". Often times a culture is destroyed because of God's judgment. Once you start into child sacrifice and satanism, the end is usually swift.

The Mayans, Aztecs and Incas were heavily into human sacrifice to their demonic idols. Some North American tribes were into constant warfare and cannibalism. Just as he did to the Canaanites, for the same reasons, God destroyed those cultures. In recent times western civlization has decided it's OK to do a little child sacrifice of their own in the form of abortion on demand. Millions have died, sacrificed to the god of sexual immorality.

We can therefore expect the same fate as so many civilizations that have gone on before us.

Which God destroyed those cultures? Zeus?

reply to post by Metallicus


Just because you didn't have "anything to do with it" doesn't absolve the country as a whole. Let's not forget that we still celebrate Columbus Day, even though his own personal diaries provide evidence that he was a horrible human being that was at the forefront of this travesty.

You also didn't have "anything to do" with the fact that this country approved of slavery. Again, that doesn't make it right, correct, or acceptable. And, we should, as a nation, do whatever possible to restore the wrongs that have been committed against both indigenous people and African Americans. Period.

Would you like to learn the other side of American history, the version that wasn't written by the winners? Please read "A People's History of the United States" by Howard Zinn, and then attempt to support the assertion that just because you had nothing to do with it, you are somehow relieved of the burden perpetuated by the people this country's past.

That position is indefensible. We all bear the burden of guilt as long as we continue to claim that no harm was done, and that it was never our fault.

Please think.

reply to post by ThinkingHuman


OP.

Do some more research, your numbers include Canada, Central America, and South America. So which "Americans" are you attempting to portray as the masters of Genocide? The English? The French? The Spanish? They were not all working under a single authority figure, which you seem to think. (based upon how you talk about Hitler/Stalin's genocide)

While it is difficult to determine exactly how many Natives lived in North America before Columbus,[5] estimates range from a low of 2.1 million (Ubelaker 1976) to 7 million people (Russell Thornton) to a high of 18 million (Dobyns 1983).[6]

It would also be fair to say that, despite Europeans intentionally giving some Native American populations diseases, there was also a great number of Native Americans that died due to disease that was not intentionally given to them, simply because they had no immunity.

during the late 1630s, smallpox killed over half of the Wyandot (Huron), who controlled most of the early North American fur trade in what became Canada. They were reduced to fewer than 10,000 people.[10]

There are no real definitive figures of how large the Native American population was anyways, and some experts argue that our high estimates of the Pre-Columbian Native American population is frankly MADE UP.

some have argued that contemporary estimates of a high pre-Columbian indigenous population are rooted in a bias against Western civilization and/or Christianity. Robert Royal writes that "estimates of pre-Columbian population figures have become heavily politicized with some scholars, who are particularly critical of Europe, often favoring wildly higher figures."[14]

Some argue that the total population of Native Americans is higher today than it ever was. (or at least larger than it was in recorded history - including when Columbus first stumbled upon America)

The indigenous population in 1492 was not necessarily at a high point and may actually have been in decline in some areas. Indigenous populations in most areas of the Americas reached a low point by the early 20th century. In most cases, populations have since begun to climb.[15] In the United States, for instance, the numbers may already have recovered to pre-Columbian levels or even exceeded them.[16]

Many of the European immigrants who came to America (or the British Colonies, or Canadian Territories, Etc.) assumed the Native Americans had always had a low population because disease had been so devastating to them before records of their population were kept. And those diseases occurred naturally. Even if the Europeans hadn't come over when they did, someone would have eventually, and rampant disease would have occurred regardless.

Disease killed off a sizable portion of the populations before European observations (and thus written records) were made. After the epidemics had already killed massive numbers of natives, many newer European immigrants assumed that there had always been relatively few indigenous peoples. The scope of the epidemics over the years was tremendous, killing millions of people—possibly in excess of 90% of the population in the hardest hit areas—and creating one of "the greatest human catastrophe in history, far exceeding even the disaster of the Black Death of medieval Europe"

Not only that, but Europeans brought diseases which were common back to Europe, which had devastating effects there. The exchange of rampant disease was a two-way road.

One of the most devastating diseases was smallpox, but other deadly diseases included typhus, measles, influenza, bubonic plague, cholera, malaria, tuberculosis, mumps, yellow fever, and pertussis (whooping cough), which were chronic in Eurasia. The indigenous Americas also had a number of endemic diseases, such as tuberculosis and an unusually virulent type of syphilis, which soon became rampant when brought back to the Old World.

I'm not saying wars and massacres didn't occur - they did. But they were certainly not as large as the ones committed by Hitler and Stalin. One of the more notable ones is:

While some California tribes were settled on reservations, others were hunted down and massacred by 19th century American settlers. It is estimated that some 4,500 people of the Population of Native California suffered violent deaths between 1849 and 1870.[45][46]

Eugenics and ethnic cleansing are terrible - but this occurred at a time when these concepts weren't able to be refuted by DNA evidence.

All of these quotes came from the very Wiki page you cited. Maybe you should read it more carefully next time.

As for me.. I'm Irish-American and my ancestors were slaves and civil war POW's. I certainly will not accept your blame, and won't RSVP for your pity-party.

Originally posted by Thejaybird
reply to post by Metallicus

 

You also didn't have "anything to do" with the fact that this country approved of slavery. Again, that doesn't make it right, correct, or acceptable. And, we should, as a nation, do whatever possible to restore the wrongs that have been committed against both indigenous people and African Americans. Period.

Where did your ancestors come from? There's a good chance they were slaves at one point. But I guess that doesn't matter now, because you don't claim to be part of that culture anymore?

reply to post by Thejaybird


Hey, just food for thought.

I don't know anybody who celebrates Columbus Day.

Maybe the Brits do?

Don't get me wrong, it is a FEDERAL holiday, but no on that I know celebrates it.

Originally posted by ThinkingHuman

Originally posted by MrInquisitive

 

I, too, wonder about your numbers.

Then give me correct numbers, IYO.

I don't have a strong basis for stating what the numbers are/were. But here is something to consider: at the time of the US Civil War, the US population was 23 million. Given more advanced agriculture and fishing techniques, I would say that the white devils would have higher population density than the native Americans, so at most, in pre-Columbian times I figure there were no more than 23-25 million throughout the entirety of the lower 48 states. If 95% of these people died off from the initial epidemics brought by explorers and conquistadors, then that would leave a bit more than a million -- let's say 1.5 million. And let's further say that this population grew again from about 1500 to 1800, so say 2 million.

I'd bet half to two thirds of this number were actually killed by American settlers and the US military, both in battles and through the Trail of Tears death march, more epidemics, forced famines and such. And the remaining population slowly grew again to whatever it currently is (I think you're saying 3 million).

If there were anywhere near 23 million native Americans during the early years of westward American expansion, they would have overwhelmed us white devils, even with our better killin' technologies and military organization, just through shear numbers.

My issue with your thread isn't solely about your numbers but also about who did the ethnic cleansing and such. Like I said, the Spanish conquistadors did a lot of killing, as well as spreading of European diseases, which was an added bonus for conquering the new world. The Spanish and Portuguese attempted to make the natives into slaves, but that didn't work too well because of diseases; hence they started importing African slaves, who already had developed resistance in their populations to the diseases of the Old World (Small Pox, etc).

You put too much blame on American colonists and then on Americans. And you way overestimate the number killed by Americans -- probably by a factor of 25. But like I said before, I am not excusing US American atrocities against the native Americans, I'm just trying to put a more accurate number on it, and point out that other European colonists were responsible for a lot of the genocide and ethnic cleansing of the native peoples in the Americas. By overstating the case against America (the US) for this, you are letting other peoples off the hook and also will cause people to dismiss your claim from the outset.

I highly recommend Howard Zinn's book, A People's History of the United States as a good place to start on studying this issue, as well as other ugly aspects of American history (this issue essentially is just the first chapter of the book); I believe it is well footnoted with sources. A couple of good movies on the early colonization and interactions with the native peoples are "The Mission" (with Robert DeNiro) and "The Black Robe". I believe they are both based loosely on historical events.

Originally posted by txinfidel
reply to post by Thejaybird

 

Hey, just food for thought.

I don't know anybody who celebrates Columbus Day.

Maybe the Brits do?

Don't get me wrong, it is a FEDERAL holiday, but no on that I know celebrates it.

Of course the brits celebrate it because Columbus was British

Originally posted by Thejaybird
reply to post by Metallicus

 

Just because you didn't have "anything to do with it" doesn't absolve the country as a whole. Let's not forget that we still celebrate Columbus Day, even though his own personal diaries provide evidence that he was a horrible human being that was at the forefront of this travesty.

You also didn't have "anything to do" with the fact that this country approved of slavery. Again, that doesn't make it right, correct, or acceptable. And, we should, as a nation, do whatever possible to restore the wrongs that have been committed against both indigenous people and African Americans. Period.

Would you like to learn the other side of American history, the version that wasn't written by the winners? Please read "A People's History of the United States" by Howard Zinn, and then attempt to support the assertion that just because you had nothing to do with it, you are somehow relieved of the burden perpetuated by the people this country's past.

That position is indefensible. We all bear the burden of guilt as long as we continue to claim that no harm was done, and that it was never our fault.

Please think.

Ok, so the country "as a whole" isn't absolved of these crimes. Ok.... so what does that mean? Specifically? Does that mean that every single person with American citizenship is guilty? Or do you mean more specifically white Americans are still guilty?

Who is "we" that celebrate Columbus day? I don't know a single person in my entire family, circle of friends, coworkers, or anybody else that celebrates Columbus day. Who's fault is it that Columbus day is a national holiday? Did we have some sort of say in this? I don't remember being asked to vote on whether or not we as a nation were to celebrate Columbus day... yeah... I'm definitely not taking any responsibility for that one.

Nobody alive today had anything to do with slavery, black or white. So what are we going to do to "restore the wrongs" (as you put it, whatever that means....)

You say "we as a nation:" well among the nation are Native Americans and blacks, are you saying native Americans and blacks need to work to "restore the wrongs" of history? No? Then only white people? Why?

You say the following:

" then attempt to support the assertion that just because you had nothing to do with it, you are somehow relieved of the burden perpetuated by the people this country's past."

I absolutely AM absolved of ANY and ALL burden of ANY actions taken by ANYBODY in the history of the United States. Anything other than that is tantamount to slavery. The very idea that a human being can be held accountable for something simply due to his own birth is atrocious.

You say:

"We all bear the burden of guilt as long as we continue to claim that no harm was done, and that it was never our fault."

Who said no harm was done? You add random words and phrases to your post to feign intelligence, but they lack substance. So by your own words, if we say harm WAS done, we are free of the burden?

It is a stone cold fact that NOTHING that has happened in the history of humankind is our fault. It is physically IMPOSSIBLE for anything in the past to be our fault. How is it MY fault, or YOUR fault what someone did 200 years ago? Did you have ANY control of it? You and me did NOT EXIST. How can we be held responsible for something that happened when WE DID NOT EXIST. The idea is totally ridiculous.

Are you accountable because your grandfather was a thief? Is it YOUR fault that your grandfather robbed people's houses? By your logic it is your fault. By your logic every misdeed gets passed down generation by generation. Every new generation simply adding burden of guilt to a new one.

What kind of person would support such a viewpoint? If you truly believe that every human is responsible for everything done by other humans in different periods of time, then that means that EVERY single human on the face of the Earth is responsible for EVERYTHING bad that has ever happened in the world. What rubric do you, oh holy wise one of unfathomable knowledge and wisdom, use to judge your fellow man? Why do you willingly take the blame for every atrocity committed in the history of humankind? How arrogant do you have to be to think yourself so powerful as to be responsible for all the ills that have ever effected the human race?

Couldn't expect good behavior from a population driven by fate to pseudo-choose to escape Enlightenment Europe...

To be sure, there were many pro-freedom settlers who became the Americans -- that always is pointed out -- but what is NEVER pointed out is an equally significant statement... there were many anti-enlightenment reactionaries who became the American settlers.

The first type of people are called logicians, and the second, equally significant type of people are called the syllogicians.

Obviously their behavior was impolite, far worse than how the Europeans behaved with natives, usually. I think people do not identify that there are 2 types of humans. Look for my website, djedefsauron. I've covered details out there...

The syllogicians have too much political power in America. That is why we saw Truman. And all these people who are talking about how the genocide against natives was ok -- they ought to be ashamed of their herd mentality? Let me additionally point out Truman, nobody has ever nuked another country except America, so it is not as if the blame is with great-great-great-grandfathers alone...

Originally posted by James1982

Originally posted by Thejaybird
reply to post by Metallicus

 

Just because you didn't have "anything to do with it" doesn't absolve the country as a whole. Let's not forget that we still celebrate Columbus Day, even though his own personal diaries provide evidence that he was a horrible human being that was at the forefront of this travesty.

You also didn't have "anything to do" with the fact that this country approved of slavery. Again, that doesn't make it right, correct, or acceptable. And, we should, as a nation, do whatever possible to restore the wrongs that have been committed against both indigenous people and African Americans. Period.

Would you like to learn the other side of American history, the version that wasn't written by the winners? Please read "A People's History of the United States" by Howard Zinn, and then attempt to support the assertion that just because you had nothing to do with it, you are somehow relieved of the burden perpetuated by the people this country's past.

That position is indefensible. We all bear the burden of guilt as long as we continue to claim that no harm was done, and that it was never our fault.

Please think.

Ok, so the country "as a whole" isn't absolved of these crimes. Ok.... so what does that mean? Specifically? Does that mean that every single person with American citizenship is guilty? Or do you mean more specifically white Americans are still guilty?

Who is "we" that celebrate Columbus day? I don't know a single person in my entire family, circle of friends, coworkers, or anybody else that celebrates Columbus day. Who's fault is it that Columbus day is a national holiday? Did we have some sort of say in this? I don't remember being asked to vote on whether or not we as a nation were to celebrate Columbus day... yeah... I'm definitely not taking any responsibility for that one.

Nobody alive today had anything to do with slavery, black or white. So what are we going to do to "restore the wrongs" (as you put it, whatever that means....)

You say "we as a nation:" well among the nation are Native Americans and blacks, are you saying native Americans and blacks need to work to "restore the wrongs" of history? No? Then only white people? Why?

You say the following:

" then attempt to support the assertion that just because you had nothing to do with it, you are somehow relieved of the burden perpetuated by the people this country's past."

I absolutely AM absolved of ANY and ALL burden of ANY actions taken by ANYBODY in the history of the United States. Anything other than that is tantamount to slavery. The very idea that a human being can be held accountable for something simply due to his own birth is atrocious.

You say:

"We all bear the burden of guilt as long as we continue to claim that no harm was done, and that it was never our fault."

Who said no harm was done? You add random words and phrases to your post to feign intelligence, but they lack substance. So by your own words, if we say harm WAS done, we are free of the burden?

It is a stone cold fact that NOTHING that has happened in the history of humankind is our fault. It is physically IMPOSSIBLE for anything in the past to be our fault. How is it MY fault, or YOUR fault what someone did 200 years ago? Did you have ANY control of it? You and me did NOT EXIST. How can we be held responsible for something that happened when WE DID NOT EXIST. The idea is totally ridiculous.

Are you accountable because your grandfather was a thief? Is it YOUR fault that your grandfather robbed people's houses? By your logic it is your fault. By your logic every misdeed gets passed down generation by generation. Every new generation simply adding burden of guilt to a new one.

What kind of person would support such a viewpoint? If you truly believe that every human is responsible for everything done by other humans in different periods of time, then that means that EVERY single human on the face of the Earth is responsible for EVERYTHING bad that has ever happened in the world. What rubric do you, oh holy wise one of unfathomable knowledge and wisdom, use to judge your fellow man? Why do you willingly take the blame for every atrocity committed in the history of humankind? How arrogant do you have to be to think yourself so powerful as to be responsible for all the ills that have ever effected the human race?

edit on 4-8-2013 by James1982 because: (no reason given)

You put that perfectly James, you have shown exactly why the op was and is ridiculous, bravo.

Originally posted by ThinkingHuman

Originally posted by Metallicus

 

Is your life really so boring that you need to look for something to feel bad about?
Mine isn't.

Then why are you on ATS? I am trying to learn from history, either to repeat it or not to repeat it. You seem to have no concern for the future. That's okay, just enjoy your life until next time when you get the part of the 'Natives'.

This is true. But I think the problem here is your trying to assign blame and guilt to Americans who are alive today that had nothing to do with these atrocities.

Sure I feel sad about what happened to the Native Americans. But as an American born in 1975 , with family that came to this country from Italy long after the "United States of America" came into being I cannot feel "guilty" about it.

I feel sadness for everyone who has been killed for pointless reasons, or greed, or jealeousy, or what have you. But guilt? No. If you wan't people who reside in America today to feel guilt over something they had nonthing to do with, then everyone in the entire world should feel guilty just for being human beings.

Sad...yes. Guilty, no.

Knowing history is great of course, but at some point you have to let it go, move on and heal. Live in the moment is best, and try to do the best with what's in front of you. That's the only way we can change as a whole.

Harping on the past and blaming people just for where they just happened to be born is as bad as blaming someone for thier skin color. Come on now.

I think people are not going to see your "point" because you are talking out both sides of your mouth. On one side you portend to promote awareness of the collective "zombie" state of the human race, and on the other you say...

Originally posted by ThinkingHuman
I get it, its not the Americans' fault. Never mind that they were Americans by then. Never mind that they're our grandparents.

Just as I said, Americans don't get blamed.

Your focus of blame does not support your stated lofty goal of "awareness".

Weird...

Genocide is awful. What was done to the Native Americans was genocide. Okay, fine. I will accept the truth of that, and call a spade a spade. However, genocide is part and parcel to the human condition, and some of those get swept under the rug, and some are buried by history, and some are a bit of both. The travesty of what happened to the native population is not the only instance of this. If the broader picture is truly what you are after then that broader historical perspective would have made more sense.

As it stands, you come across as just having some strange guilt-driven chip on your shoulder (if you are actually American, which I have some doubts about); or you are simply claiming that in order to try to give yourself more credibility. Either way all that you really have is a muddled, confused attack on Americans. This may get some play because America-Hate is trendy right now, so you will get your stars and flags from that crowd; and the Americans are going to be angry by the propaganda spin on some uncomfortable history, so you will get you attention.

Originally posted by James1982
Can someone PLEASE answer a serious question for me? I suspect nobody will give me a serious answer because it kind of undermines your whole thing, but I'm asking you to be honest and answer this question.

Before Europeans came to the Americas there were tribes and civilizations that went to war with each other, stealing land, taking slaves, etc etc. These were ALL Native Americans of North America and South America doing this.They raped, killed, and pillaged EACH OTHER.

The Europeans came here, set up camp, and began expanding and doing EXACTLY what the natives of this continent had ALREADY been doing. They stole land, people, and goods from their enemies.

So my question is, why are Europeans evil for doing the same thing Native Americans had already been doing for thousands of years? Do you hold Europeans to a higher standard? If so, that seems truly racist to hold Native Americans to a lower standard, as if them killing each other is OK because they are "just native americans" but Europeans killing them is bad.

Kind of like how it's OK that young black men are killing EACH OTHER at a ridiculously high rate, but when someone of another race kills a black person instantly it's a big deal and everyone needs to take notice.

Do you see the double standard? The Europeans were superior militarily and able to take over the natives of America.The Europeans also unwillingly carried illness with them, it worked well for the Europeans, and while there were instances of purposeful infection of natives, the majority of deaths were due to just regular spread of illness among a non-resistant population. It's not as if Europeans, while leaving Europe, made sure to have sick people on board to bring illnesses to the new world.

So I ask again as to be direct, why are you making Europeans to be villains when they did nothing different than the Native Americans? You are basically just punishing them for winning. If any native tribe was as powerful and numerous as the Europeans they would have conquered the Americas themselves and decimated the other tribes, and I'm sure you wouldn't have a problem with it. You only have a problem because its WHITE people doing the bad stuff. When any other race does anything, it's ignored and glossed over. When whites do the SAME EXACT thing they get called evil for it.

Every single patch of land on this Earth has been stolen, conquered, every people have had some sort of bad history. I don't understand the relevance of you singing out Europeans treatment of the natives. What is it you are trying to say? Are you just going to make threads on EVERY single battle and population change throughout human history as part of a "History of violence" series of threads you are writing for ATS?

the throne/crown is behind IT ALL!

for the last 500 years at least.

the Euro/UK monarchies --------------> ARE BEHIND IT ALL!!


The lowest level on the IQ scale ---- people who actually think ----------- the "crown" is just a figurehead!!

straight up gullible, and maybe stupid...

that is your answer... clear and allows you to research and come to your own conclusion

reply to post by ThinkingHuman


Explain it?

OK.

It's called expansion/war. Wars lead to this sort of thing. Over the course of four hundred years, Europeans (for the most part) invaded North and South America looking for land, wealth, a new home. The reasons are myriad.

Problem was, there were people there already.

What happens when a group of people have something that another group of people want? ...and are willing to do just about anything to get it? It's called war.

...and that's what it was. Complete with truces, broken truces, peace treaties not worth the paper they were printed on... Massacres (on both sides). The Native Americans fought hard, giving until the nineteenth century just as good as they got. It was the industrial revolution that doomed them...the railroad.

Hardly a unique situation in the history of the world...before or after.

The reasons? Greed. As simple as that...

reply to post by ThinkingHuman


first of all what is you world view?

theistic atheistic or agnostic

Originally posted by Nola213

Originally posted by ThinkingHuman

Originally posted by Metallicus

 

Is your life really so boring that you need to look for something to feel bad about?
Mine isn't.

Then why are you on ATS? I am trying to learn from history, either to repeat it or not to repeat it. You seem to have no concern for the future. That's okay, just enjoy your life until next time when you get the part of the 'Natives'.

This is true. But I think the problem here is your trying to assign blame and guilt to Americans who are alive today that had nothing to do with these atrocities.

If your Grandfather stole a car in 1935, it was then passed onto your father, and he then passed it onto you and you are driving around in it still, then it still makes it a stolen vehicle. Land was stolen from The Native Americans and non-Native Americans still live on and use it today.
It doesn't matter when it was stolen, the fact is it was still gained by foul means.

Here is a case that can be used as an example:-

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by alldaylong


Did the native Americans have the permission from the first settler to live on his land? No! They just moved in..
You can't compare the land to a purchased car.
Lots of land has been taken by force through out history and will always be taken.

Originally posted by Hoosierdaddy71
reply to post by alldaylong

 

Did the native Americans have the permission from the first settler to live on his land? No! They just moved in..

How do you know that? Where is your evidence to prove what you stated?