Was the Native American genocide the most successful genocide in history?
Was the Native American genocide the most successful genocide in history?
>genocide
Nice meme
It wasn't a genocide, the vast majority of natives were killed by disease.
I think Spanish flu was a bigger genocide.
It comes close but the neanderthals were BTFO even harder
There was no genocide, they were violent savages and actively fought against peaceful settlers. Also they voluntarily traded their land away for some shiny beads.
It ain't no meme
>genocide - acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group
Disease may have killed off most Indians, but that doesn't mean Euro-Americans didn't engage in genocide.
No it was the Amalek one
en.wikipedia.org
And the Egyptian one
youtube.com
>genocide
>killing hundreds of thousands of people based on their ethnicity isn't genocide
>implying it was based on ethnicity and not geopolitcs
Yes millions died of disease but afterwards you can't argue there wasn't a systematic policy to remove them and kill them and end their way of life/culture. Maybe for not all tribes but at least for some this was the case, especially after the US gained independence. In fact natives probably would have been better off if the brits still controlled the 13 colonies.
>implying smallpox cares what color you are
I say it was ethnicity due to manifest destiny really not starting until after the Louisiana Purchase and the approximate doubling in size of the United States basically in a day. The French openly traded and lived along side many native tribes and had no qualms with their right to land and existance, when the English-Americans came through it was a more systematic removal and destruction of the Native American.
Her animations are comfy
>feminist
>historically illiterate
>jewish
Yawn.
What genocide? They sold their women for shiny beads.
Literally nothing wrong with jews or feminists.
t. jew feminist
there was no genocide
It has to be an intentional act.
You faggots are aware that while you Yankees were fighting your retarded Civil War the settlers on the West Coast actively pursued extinction of the natives through various campaigns in the Indian Wars
When 99% of the deaths involved are by plague, then it's not really a genocide, is it?
It was. Genocide doesn't just mean the killing of people, it also means destroying them as a distinct people, which the Euro-Americans have all but accomplished. Today's Indians are little more than rednecks LARPing as their ancestors
I guess you're right. "Native American" wasn't even a thing/identity until whites started cathegorizing them as a single group. Before that, they were no more than wildlife trying to rape and scalp everyone who wore a different set of feathers in his hair. So in a way, the whites did distroy their existing identity and replaced it with something else, arguably better.
>Ha, if I change the definition of genocide, they can't refute it
my sides are in orbit
>Native americans slaughter and sacrifice eachother in wars and raids, taking lands from eachother
>"land is for everyone, especially us"
>Europeans come to take lands this time instead of natives
>Lose war because they're too backwards
>have to rely on raids were you murder man women and child
>lose the war despite guerilla tactics
>complain about being to incompetent
native americans everyone
They really were fucking idiots that started conflicts over the most mundane shit. There was a case in I think Minnesota when they thought some local white trader cheated them, so they literally launched a war party that slaughtered a defenseless white settlement and kept fucking with every white person who went to the area until the US government had enough and sent troops there. Then upon getting royally BTFO by the US Army they had to move several states to the west and to this day complain like bitches that they were treated unfairly. Fuck them lol.
en.wikipedia.org
>60.5 million redskins alive today
Some genocide, OP. More redskins are probably alive today than any other time in history.
>you can't argue there wasn't a systematic policy to remove them and kill them and end their way of life/culture
I'm not sure you can argue it was truly systematic. The military considered itself duty-bound to protect both settlers and the borders of reservations, it was just an impossible task. There are many accounts of prospectors being forcefully removed during the Black Hill gold rush, so much so that dodging the cavalry became a higher priority than avoiding hostile Indians.
>"We were in constant expectation of seeing a troop of cavalry come upon us from the rear, seize our train, burn our wagons and supplies, march us back in disgrace, and possibly place us in durance vile."
Annie Tallent, "The First White Woman in the Black Hills"
The federal government also armed the Indians with rifles better than the carbines used by the cavalry. The Peace Commission essentially refit them every winter; bribed to the reservations with food stuffs, rifles, and supply only to resume war with them when they inevitably bolted in the spring.
>"If the Government cannot protect its own citizens let the fact be made known, that the people may endeavor to protect themselves. The Peace Commission is a mockery and their policy a disgrace to the nation. I trust, therefore, that you will keep the Commissioners at home, and stop issuing arms, ammunition and supplies to hostile Indians while they are robbing, murdering and outraging defenseless people. The savage devils have become intolerable, and must and shall be driven out of this state."
Gov. Samuel Crawford of Kansas
Fucked up way to go about extermination.
In Canada we tried to cultural genocide them, but it just ended up creating a generation of ptsd ridden suicidal alchoholics.
t h i s
it was a conquest, plain and simple. they lost.
obviously it would be frowned upon today, but it was a different time
Nah. Wiping out indigenous people's in the Hindu Kush that we only know existed thanks to bragging about it was more effective.
>Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?
Tasmanian Aboriginie genocide was the most successful genocide that comes to mimd
It was small but the Maori ended the Moriori pretty effectively. They literally tortured dozens maybe even hundreds of them to death for no reason.
But now it's 'muh treaty'
never happened, no proof
Nobody is denying that the Native Americans were massacred to point of almost complete annihilation.
The topic of genocide, though, depends on intent and purpose.
The question is did European settlers intend on annihilating the native population?
You can find countless records of peaceful and even friendly interactions between settlers and the natives. You can also find settlers (in the minority, mind you) who did want them wiped out entirely, or people (far bigger group) who were just plain old racist and viewed them as nothing more than animals.
Another problem is the time table, or the fact that this all happened over several hundred years. Like what and are suggesting, if these are to be considered genocidal acts, then it wouldn't be accurate to characterize every European-Native interaction as genocidal. In other words, a smallpox outbreak from the 1600s has nothing to do with a very intentional massacre in the 1800s.
The answer is murky, and I can see it being argued either way, but in my opinion, no, it wasn't genocide. The disease aspect was too deadly for genocidal intent to really be proven, and the vast majority of the deaths occurred from diseases spreading over time.
You're retarded
Semantically, why does it need to be intentional to be genocide? An extinction is an extinction whether it was intentional or not and civilisations "collapse" whether or not another group actively caused their demise. Genocide shouldn't be any different, if one group wipes out another then it's genocide, plain and simple.
>What is the Armenian Genocide
>>Semantically, why does it need to be intentional to be genocide?
because liberals have faith in free will, consent, self determination
>native americans make up over 60% of the population of the Americas
>most succesful genocide in history.
>implying
Hey, we tried to stop them.
Nope. The Dzungar genocide by Qing China was.
>Killing, looting, spreading diseasing, and driving this race into the Taklamakan desert.
>With no survivors.
thread inspired me to make this oc, already posted it in the meme thread
5/5 breddy good
I would say Yes, if you go the to Islands of Hispaniola, Cuba, Haiti etc. there is no one single native left. They were worked to dead and then africans were imported so that now they are mostly blacks living there.
He needs to be whiter.
Ah yes, 3 shitty islands in the middle of the ocean with very little populations to begin with got wiped out, therefore the entire continent was genocided.