Are British as responsible as Spaniards for the tragic fate of Natives in the New World?

[kratz]

I noticed that studying from English sources(writings, documentaries, etc.) seems like British hands are thoroughly cleaned of any wrongdoings in the New World. I noticed that 80% of the blame is placed on Spaniards. And then 20% is placed on Americans(which are said to be German/Irish and other northern central European groups) with the trail of tears since that's a somewhat recent even that it is tough to deny it.

To the eyes of most, even the most radical liberals, the UK is a modern, vibrant country whose civilization had a very minimal role in the Americas. However, is that the case?

The argument could be made it was British language(othering, us vs. them), values(racial purity), practices(ethnic tensions), and traditions(segregation) that brought the doom of the Native Americas. Natives in Northern America(the US and Canada) do not exist or have been forced to live on reservations. All of these practices which are alive today in South Africa we see the tensions between Blacks and Afrikaners. Even in Canada, they live in the most impoverished areas of the country. Meanwhile, throughout the Spanish American territory, you do see natives. Also, if it were the case that Spanish killed more natives, they managed to come back to life.

Who do you believe? Do you think the British and their civilization have responsibility for the tragic fate of natives?

Or do you believe the BBC narrative that the English tried to be friendly; however, Natives attacked them, so they had to fight back. Natives were so minimal, and the area was sparsely populated. Therefore, today there are more natives in the Americas than when the British/Puritans arrived.

Notice the wording when people say who killed the natives? They'll say either the Spaniards did it or "The White man did it," never the "Anglo man" did it. The White man is a very broad term. Does it mean the Poles were killing Natives? Does it mean that Lithuanians were killing natives? It seems most of the colonists were from a British/English background.

[Kamui]

Eran la falta de respuesta inmunologica a las enfermedades, eventualmente los amerindios hiban a decaer en numeros en cualquier epoca donde la medicina experimental fuese ausente. Cualquier caso la culpa seria mayoritariamente de los espanoles por que propiciaron la misceginacion en los lugares con mas densidad poblacional amerindia.

[tekken999]

En realidad Los Anglosajones deberían besar los culos de los indígenas en vez de los negros si realmente quisieran expiarse por sus pecados del pasado

[StonyArabia]

Yes and they were worse than the Spaniards to the Natives

[gixajo]

Eran la falta de respuesta inmunologica a las enfermedades, eventualmente los amerindios hiban a decaer en numeros en cualquier epoca donde la medicina experimental fuese ausente. Cualquier caso la culpa seria mayoritariamente de los espanoles por que propiciaron la misceginacion.

La exclusión social por razones racistas no implica un confinamiento que evite ningún contagio, es una separación social, no física.

Pero vamos a ver, dónde está la enorme mayoría de personas con etnia amerindia, mayoritaria o mezclada en toda América???

Es que se necesita mayor prueba de como se comportaron unos y otros con los indígenas americanos?

Cuántas personas hay de México para abajo en proporción con sangre amerindia? y cuántos en EEUU o Canadá?? y en qué proporciones se presentan en unos y otros???

Los españoles y los portugueses , tuvieron la voluntad, desde el principio,en convertir al cristianismo y de integrar a la población indígena como unos ciudadanos más de sus respectivos imperios, con sus particularidades, de la misma forma que un borgoñón, o un Sardo, o un Holandés, tenían particularidades propias. Los ingleses, NO. Ni al principio ni al final, ni enmedio , jamás tuvieron esa intención, para ellos los indígenas sobraban, y no servían para nada, ni como mano de obra.

Los españoles y portugueses usarían métodos brutales para someter a las poblaciones que se les enfrentaron, como cualquier otro pueblo en esa época, pero una vez sometidos,voluntaria o forzosamente, la voluntad era de integrarlos, de que formaran parte de algo.

Las enfermedades infecciosas las transmitía cualquier europeo, y no intencionadamente.En Europa no estamos dando la lata continuamente por la peste negra a los asiáticos.

Salvo casos particulares en EEUU o Argentina(en Chile igual también), después de sus respectivas independencias, que buscaron eliminar a ciertos pueblos indígenas que les molestaban.En esas épocas ya se conocía mejor como se transmitían las enfermedades y usaron métodos arcaicos de lucha bacteriológica, como regalar a los indígenas pieles, o mantas contaminadas, y no creo que tuvieran mucho éxito, porque a esas alturas, aunque esas enfermedades causaran todavía mucha mortandad, el impacto sería bastante menor que justo al principio de los contactos entre europeos e indígenas.

[sean]

To the eyes of most, even the most radical liberals, the UK is a modern, vibrant country whose civilization had a very minimal role in the Americas. However, is that the case?

That's true Pedro. We have got nothing to do with Latin America. British conquerors brought their own women and practised de facto segregation with the natives while outbreeding and displacing them in North America. If Spaniards did the same, Americas would be just like Spain.

The argument could be made it was British language(othering, us vs. them), values(racial purity), practices(ethnic tensions), and traditions(segregation) that brought the doom of the Native Americas. Natives in Northern America(the US and Canada) do not exist or have been forced to live on reservations. All of these practices which are alive today in South Africa we see the tensions between Blacks and Afrikaners. Even in Canada, they live in the most impoverished areas of the country. Meanwhile, throughout the Spanish American territory, you do see natives. Also, if it were the case that Spanish killed more natives, they managed to come back to life. Who do you believe? Do you think the British and their civilization have responsibility for the tragic fate of natives?

Stop drinking tequila, Pedro.

The whole native genocide in Canada is a myth and is totally fabricated, they were wiping each other out and its clear history that different tribes fought on either side of the British and French war for Canada. The natives in the prairies did especially bad because the bison stocks ran out (this is due to Americans over hunting south and mostly natives over hunting with awful strategies like getting all the bison to leap over a cliff). When the bison ran out these natives started to starve because bison was everything for them. Even back then (1890s) the government was handing out RCMP rations to natives as an early form of welfare to KEEP THEM ALIVE. If they wanted to kill them all they could have just let them starve. Then, when the government tries to give natives free education in farming its considered a cultural genocide.

British policy was never to exterminate native populations, when you look at any British colonies there are always the native populations. It's America that exterminated natives because they would put them on reserves and sign treaties and then just forget about the treaties and populate the land (like what Israel is doing in Palestine).

The reserves in Canada were made for the sole purpose of preserving native people and culture. They started welfare schemes because the natives were starving because the buffalo population ceased to exist and ever since then natives haven't learned how to farm their land. Residential schools were made for the purpose of teaching natives things like farming and basic math so that they could progress as a society, it was never to "eliminate the native population" or whatever. It's only the past couple decades where they started pushing "native genocide" or whatever.

Notice the wording when people say who killed the natives? They'll say either the Spaniards did it or "The White man did it," never the "Anglo man" did it. The White man is a very broad term. Does it mean the Poles were killing Natives? Does it mean that Lithuanians were killing natives? It seems most of the colonists were from a British/English background.

Europeans in general invaded the American continents. Not just the British. What you think the Aztecs were happy to have Spaniards arrive at their shores? Before anyone knew what a germ was, they traded textiles with the natives. The natives in Central America got small pox, which killed ~20% of the local population. Ignore the 2 other plagues in North America that were not a result of European contact which killed another 70% of the native population in the next 60 years. Ignore that Europe got syphilis from the New World which killed millions.

The Spaniards bleached the surviving Native Americans and the resulting latin mongrels are as violent as negroes, but smarter and more capable at organisation and crime.

In retrospect, the North American model was better, since our natives are largely relegated to a few alcoholism and gambling zones.

[Teutone]

Might is right.

Weak Mestizo

[Synapsid]

Might is right.

Weak Mestizo

It was mostly diseases tbh

[gixajo]

Y ya de paso, los anglos no tuvieron nada que hacer en América hasta bastante después de que dejaran de ser colonia Británica las 13 colonias, osea hasta casi el momento en que toda la América hispana empezara a dirigirse hacia sus independencias nacionales.

Lo único que hacían era dar guerra en el Caribe de vez en cuando.

Pero claro, si la idea que se hace la gente de como era la historia es a través de la visión que nos lleva dando Hollywood durante cien años, es lo que pasa.

Estaban quietecitos en la costa este sin hacer ruido.

[Synapsid]

That's true Pedro. We have got nothing to do with Latin America. British conquerors brought their own women and practised de facto segregation with the natives while outbreeding and displacing them in North America. If Spaniards did the same, Americas would be just like Spain.





Stop drinking tequila, Pedro.

The whole native genocide in Canada is a myth and is totally fabricated, they were wiping each other out and its clear history that different tribes fought on either side of the British and French war for Canada. The natives in the prairies did especially bad because the bison stocks ran out (this is due to Americans over hunting south and mostly natives over hunting with awful strategies like getting all the bison to leap over a cliff). When the bison ran out these natives started to starve because bison was everything for them. Even back then (1890s) the government was handing out RCMP rations to natives as an early form of welfare to KEEP THEM ALIVE. If they wanted to kill them all they could have just let them starve. Then, when the government tries to give natives free education in farming its considered a cultural genocide.

British policy was never to exterminate native populations, when you look at any British colonies there are always the native populations. It's America that exterminated natives because they would put them on reserves and sign treaties and then just forget about the treaties and populate the land (like what Israel is doing in Palestine).

The reserves in Canada were made for the sole purpose of preserving native people and culture. They started welfare schemes because the natives were starving because the buffalo population ceased to exist and ever since then natives haven't learned how to farm their land. Residential schools were made for the purpose of teaching natives things like farming and basic math so that they could progress as a society, it was never to "eliminate the native population" or whatever. It's only the past couple decades where they started pushing "native genocide" or whatever.



Europeans in general invaded the American continents. Not just the British. What you think the Aztecs were happy to have Spaniards arrive at their shores? Before anyone knew what a germ was, they traded textiles with the natives. The natives in Central America got small pox, which killed ~20% of the local population. Ignore the 2 other plagues in North America that were not a result of European contact which killed another 70% of the native population in the next 60 years. Ignore that Europe got syphilis from the New World which killed millions.

The Spaniards bleached the surviving Native Americans and the resulting latin mongrels are as violent as negroes, but smarter and more capable at organisation and crime.

In retrospect, the North American model was better, since our natives are largely relegated to a few alcoholism and gambling zones.

The population density was higher in the Andes and Mesoamerica than in N. America