Why were the Spanish conquistadores absolute cunts?

the dominicans were particularly against any cruelty. There's this guy called Bartolomé de las Casas who was a dominican friar, he wrote an extense document called "A brief listing on the destruction of the Indies" where he denounced, among other things, an instution called the "encomienda" intended to put indians on indentured slavery. He himself renounced to his own "encomienda" granted to him when he was a soldier.

Later, the spanish king Phillip III abolished thie encomiendas.

t. swarthy spanimoor

when I mention "the dominicans" I'm refering to the dominican order, not the current inhabitants of eastern Hispaniola

Neither colonization nor the conquest was particularly brutal. It was pretty roman-like. Conquer and assimilate.

Pre-columbian religion and culture was zealosly persecuted. But considering those cultural and religious traits involved taking the heart of prisoners/slaves/unlike lads in ritual human sacrifices or killing children, scalp them and throw their corpses to cenotes in order to plead the god of the sky for some rain, cracking down on those guys was a righteous thing.

Especially compared to anglo conquest and colonization, which followed a pattern of: kill indians-expel remaining indians from that land-colonize the land-kill Indians-expel remaining from that land-colonize the land ad infinitum all the way to the Mississippi first, the Pacific later.

Honestly it was pretty standard behaviour for both the Europeans and the natives of the day.
The worst killer was smallpox and European diseases.
>like ISIS today
lol no. The dynamic was incredibly different. Conquistadors were largely driven by an urge to gain higher social status rather than fanatic religious fundamentalism.
True they were on a high off the reconquista.
And the moral debate was not about the conquests but the treatment of the natives by the settlers later on.

(((conquistadores)))

>Especially compared to anglo conquest and colonization, which followed a pattern of: kill indians-expel remaining indians from that land-colonize the land-kill Indians-expel remaining from that land-colonize the land ad infinitum all the way to the Mississippi first, the Pacific later.

Anglo method was far superior.

This reminds me. I have a head canon where the genders are reversed and spanish conquistadores take the native men as concubines and husbands to make a new society.

>Why were the Spanish conquistadores absolute cunts
To secure victory, and apparently it worked.

First pic is a zambo. Middle right is actually Amerindian.
Oversimplification of an entire period. We also don't much about southamerican "conquest", considering that conquistador chronicles are proven to be full of lies.

Last decade we founf out that every battle was fought by natives. We found out that they didn't play a big role in the destruction personally, as the diseases were the main factor. And the most important factor, their only confirmed and trascendent intervention in Cajamarca is also morphed by the chronicles.

Jeez, they're huge omegas. Who in their right mind would think that those chicks are being fucked by them?

Have you ever been in Lima?
Blondes are the sluttiest even though they are so scarce.

Go to Mexico, you see this all the time.

Stop samefagging

First pic clearly has no significant amount of nigger in him.

What a waste of good white girls.... baka

Are you argentinian?

You know shit about zambos. Shut the fuck up.

>that compilation
fucking pathetic

Hmm, it’s almost if you’re a zambo yourself

It's a common story, told all around the world since the dawn of history. You and your small force are camped deep in foreign territory surrounded by an alien people who vastly outnumber you. Everything you've heard about them emphasizes their inhuman savagery, their bloodthirsty god/s. Their language, their customs, even their environment conspires to alienate and unnerve you. You don't trust them and, despite the lavish welcomes they throw, you know they don't trust you either. But you can't leave, you'll be a disgrace to your god and your country if you do. And these people are rich, and you could become someone of power and status if you figure out how to tap into that wealth. So you persist. These new lands begin to take their toll on your numbers. The people are losing their fear of you, they begin to pressure you for tribute, for obeisance. Their pagan way of life is obscene to you, and you find your hand drawn to your weapons more and more. Then, something happens. A colleague oversteps his bounds, one of them pours scorn on your god. All the submerged violence pours out like lava from a volcano. Carnage. Destruction. Now you know, these people were just savages all along. If you don't kill them, they'll kill you. Anything is justified.

Instead of posting these cringe pics, take screenshots of dance halls videos or some of those clubs. Women don't give a shit about society when they are dancing and they reveal their true desires.

It's a similar fenomena if we compare this to women in USA in night clubs. "Dating websites" and census record marriage and some registered stuff, but nobody registers the ammount of pingas these sluts take every time they go party ;^)

This is actually far from what actually happened. At least in South America. See

True, I didin't really mention the diseases or alliances the conquistadores made (and broke when their goals were met), just that greed, isolation and fear can make ordinary men do things they'd never consider back home.

I don't believe south american conquistadors were evil. I agree with your statement, however the trascendence of their actions wasn't important to the fall of the inca empire till the arrival of reinforcements and the rest of european diseases. As the civil war ended near 1570, the populations of the imperial side wad decimated and the militar force succumbed to the diseases. Meanwhile the side that spanish supported (their support wasn't relevant) mixed with them. As the diseases decimated also their populations, the immunized ones(spanish) agreed witht the nobles of the inca winner side. As years passed, those populations kept having a high mortality rate and only a few maintained their noble families. Those mixed with spanish over time.

That's why peruvian high classes have noble inca blood.

They look happy. This is cute.

Why do they look asian?

Day of the rope is getting close for you.

Indigenous people have mongoloid ancestry.

ITT

why so hateful user?

This is a meme.

The Spaniards cleansed entire areas of natives. In Cuba, the Caribbean, Argentina, Uruguay, Northern Mexico, they wiped them all out.

The problem was regions that either were:
1. Inaccessible (the Amazon)
2. Heavily populated with advanced Empires numbering in the millions (Peru, Mexico, Guatemala, etc.)... Here genocide was impossible, and it was more convenient to take over the existing empires and use the native social structures to their benefit (The Incan mita turned into the Encomienda system).

There was nothing unique with the Spaniards compared to other Europeans. If the British had taken over Mexico or Peru they would have done the same thing as Spain.

In fact, when faced with an advanced civilization and heavily populated area they did the same, in India.

I agree with the ISIS comparison, the best archaeological sites are the ones that were abandoned by the time the Spanish came, as they burned the cities and destroyed all temples they found.
This is a 800 Ca mayan city. Picture from 1898

Just look at how many of their books survived the conquest. 3 from the Maya region, fragments of a fourth discovered, a few from Oaxaca and the Puebla Borgia codex set.

t. Anglo

lol no, try again shithead

The problem is the lack of soy in their nutrition.
In an age with complete lack of soy in the bodily system conquest and dominance are considered as positive and xenophobia is considered normal.

No wonder why people don't take you seriously anymore.

We are living in an intoxicated world

Not true, in all those cases aboriginals were genocided by post colonial governments, mostly in the XIX century, emulating what the Americans did.

p.anglo

Gonna post'em again

Reminder that the Spanish Inquisition ended nearly 800 years of war, the Reconquista. Over the century after the Inquisition, Spain became a world superpower.

>no mention of notrth african crusades
>reconquista conveniently left out
>and the crusades against the turks in the balkas
>and the 4th crusade (still technically a crusade)
>and the baltic crusades
>and the albigensian crusade

100% bullshit

And the funny thing was: the Crusades wasn't a reaction to all that.

They didn't wipe natives off Argentina, that's kind of a meme the Oligarchic governments of the late XIXth and early XXth centuries tried to impose to make the country seem fully white and European. Note in pic related how many provinces received little European immigration, who do you think lived there? Protip, they weren't blond and blue eyed.

Well he was a conquistador and encomendero himself. From what I read he was specifically against natives being forced to fish for pearls as most of them would drown or start bleeding from their ears and would be killed if they tried to rest

Can confirm, I'm a mestizo and only white girls are into me.

>>reconquista conveniently left out
I mention that here:
The first picture is the reaction to Islamic expansion, through a series of sphere of influence conflicts.

Here's why you're the dumbest brainlet of all time: The pic you responded to is specifically comparing the Muslims and the Christians and what incited the crusades.

Were the Balt's muzzies? No. French Cathars? Not at all. This pic is only about M*slims vs Christians. If we had to show all the conflicts of Muzzie's we'd have to pull up a picture of eastern Asia too. All the green the Mudslimes took was originally Christian. Manichaeism had spread a form of Christianity all the way to southern China and fucking mong rape baby Mudslimes had to terrorize and suppress the entire region into submission. The only problem with the crusades is that there were not enough since we ended up having to fight in Vienna when hey besieged it and the Order of the Dragon had to take back their land and get bogged down in the Balkans. The M*slim shits kept invading Iberia for 800 years. If that was a troll post good fucking job this business gets me riled up every damn time.

Well at least they didn't slice open babies to appease the snake deity.

That only shows European-born people, not descendants, brainlet. Argentina was second to the US in European immigrants received. Relative to original population, it received more.

800 thousand people at independence and 7 million European immigrants on top results in a European-majority country, not a big mystery.

Technically it wasn't the Spaniards, it was the governments that followed.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_of_the_Desert
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selk'nam_genocide

I was talking of the country as fully white which is a meme.

Nobody said it's fully white. Probably about the same percentage as the USA these days due to immigration of mestizos from neighbouring South American countries (Peru, Bolivia, etc.) over three decades.

Full blooded natives are 1% of the population so I still don't see your point.
They were exterminated.

>they seemed especially brutal
>because they carried out asymetrical warfare on human-sacrificing tribal empires
Pffffthahahahaaha

I was referring that almost all of the 1,8 million people in the 1869 census were mestizos with significant native blood, they became a minority with the 6 million immigrants but not as much as people might want to believe.

Well the natives were a bunch of barbaric savages.

Worked out decently I guess.

There's no statistics on that period so it's hard to tell... I still don't see your point. Most native tribes were totally wiped out. Tehuelches for instance were sterilized to the last man and forced to live in Quilmes, so it was genocide. Querandies, Selk'nam and Napalpis were completely erradicated. Even today those claiming to have ancestry in native tribes are usually from neighbouring countries' natives (mapuches, originally from Chile, migrated across the Andes in the 1800s, guarani were almost wiped out and then re-migrated from Paraguay). Modern descendants of Argentine tribes are very few... wichis, tobas, qom, Jujuy quechuas, some querandies and guaranies, etc.

Not interested in a "muh whiteness" argument, some say 60% white, others 85% white, sources vary and thank God we don't have official statistics on race because it would be a huge can of worms, I don't want diversity quotas, affirmative action, racial politics, and the other insanity Americans have. It's one of the good things about this country that race matters so little in national debate and public discourse. Only native tribes deserve special protection and reparations, since they were here first, and that's the only ethnicity the census tracks, as it should be.

Disgusting.

Holy shit

Same. Lost my virginity to a spanish girl. And fucked spanish sluts in HS.

Latino mestizas didn't like me. Most of them prefered lanklets. ;_;

>They seemed particularly brutal

As compared to the noble savages who would perform human sacrifice and collect the heads or other body parts of defeated warriors

Actually Amerindians had a higher civic and technological development rate compared to europeans. In other words, Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans. How is this hard to get?

Prove it.

Have Injuns sailed to China or Europe?
If they were so developed they would have reached China, got blackpowder and developed firearms

>europeans:
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to solutrean:10000 years (30000BC-20000BC)
>from aurignacian-antelian to neolithic: 15000 years(30000BC-15000BC)
>from neolithic proto-agriculture societies to neolithic revolution: 6000 years (15000BC-9000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to copper and arsenical bronze: 4000 years (9000BC-5000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to bronze age and tin bronze: 5200 years (9000BC-3800BC)

>Amerindians:
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to clovis: 4000 years (15000BC-11000BC)
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to the start of crop development: 7000 years (15000BC-8000BC)
>from neolithic proto-agriculture societies to neolithic revolution: 5000 years (8000BC-3000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to copper and arsenical bronze independently: 2000 years (3000BC-1000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to bronze age and tin bronze: 4000 years (3000BC-1000 AD)
Amerindians had a higher development rate compared to europeans. In other words, Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans.

How is this even a question?

In Argentina and Uruguay it was the already independent governments the ones who exterminated the natives, not Spain

The Anglos know how to hide bodies

Roman empire was more advanced than Injuns ever were. Therefore Europeans have been more adavanced for over 1000 years before meeting injuns.

Maybe you like to dwell on the past glory of human sacrifice and being naked savages but injuns really were not adavanced for their time when Europeans met them.

Sure Nigel

Wrong in all accounts.

Even though Amerindians had thousands of years less to develop than romans. Amerindians had reached technology traits superior to contemporary europe, such as anti seismic foundations in 3000BC, Tenochtitlan (the greatest hydroengineered city of the time), andean irrigation platforms built all over the Inca empire (2M m^2), venturi principle structures in 2500BC, aztec education.

Even then, Amerindians accomplished everything europeans did till 3200BC in almost half the time.

Amerindians have demonstrated a higher develpment rate thus they have more civilization potential than europeans. Conclusion: Amerindians are superior to europeans. How is this hard to get?

>potential
That's what all inferior civ can hope to say. Who cares if it didn't happen
Who cares if it didn't happen.

>southern vikings

They didn't discover the venturi effect, that is a blatant lie. Your argument is obvious utter shit straight from the beginning yet you spend countless hours spamming it on Veeky Forums.

Did a racist trigger you or something? Do something with your life.

Portuguese were more of the blanda upp variety in their colonies, but probably just because they didn't have the manpower to conquer territory like the Spanish.
Also they never met civilizations that would give them a lot of shit, except maybe Kongo in Africa and Ottomans in the Indian Ocean

>potential
>genetic heritage between generationd shows a continuity of success in noble and high class families
These traits are genetic. Amerindian genes are superior.
>denying reality
google.es/amp/s/www.ndtv.com/world-news/perus-ancient-city-caral-inspires-modern-architects-1242381?amp=1&akamai-rum=off

Amerindians had a higher development rate compared to europeans. In other words, Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans.

Time to deal with the facts.

>t-time to d-deal with the faacts
lmoakbye