EhBeth: is not the "genocide" term an exaggeration? No one deliberately killed the Indians or Eskimos in order to eliminate them physically. I agree that they were mistreated, but they did not undergo genocide attempts. Spanish policies in the S. America toward Indians partially conform the definition of genocide, but not the British/American policies in the N. America, Australia or N. Zealand.
There are many facets of genocide which have been implemented upon indigenous peoples of North America. The list of American genocidal policies includes: Mass-execution, Biological warfare, Forced Removal from homelands, Incarceration, Indoctrination of non-indigenous values, forced surgical sterilization of native women, Prevention of religious practices, just to name a few.
By mass-execution prior to the arrival of Columbus the land defined as the 48 contiguous states of America numbered in excess of 12 million. Four centuries later, it had been reduced by 95% (237 thousand).
Indoctrination of the non-indigenous values is not a genocide, it is an attempt of integration into the advanced nation. It may only contribute to improvement of quality of life of those that undergo such an indoctrination.
The genocidal practices perpetrated against Australian Aborigines were the outcome of policies adopted and implemented by all Australian governments from British settlement in 1788 until the present. A people who had virtually no contact with the outside world, were suddenly confronted with a hostile and alien force. Aborigines were forced out of their traditional homes, hunted like wild animals, poisoned or shot, and confined to the harshest and most desolate climes. The effect of British settlement upon these people led to near extinction within 120 years.
BTW, what biological warfare are you talking about, Dyslexia? Do you mean that Indians were deliberately infected with anthrax or any other stuff? It is possible that some European diseases were occasionally imported to Americas, and the natives did not have immunity to them; but this does not mean that this was a deliberate policy of the colonists: they also suffered from the same diseases and died from them.
ANDREW JACKSON GENOCIDE BY WITHHOLDING SMALL POX VACCINES-
In 1832 Congress appropriated $12,000 dollars to begin the fight against smallpox in Indian country. 20 years after they did the same for whites. Significantly, actual vaccination expenditures that first year "for smallpox and certain other things" amounted to only $1,786, as opposed to $5,721 for "missionary improvement" and $9,424 for the "civilization of the Indians." One year later, in 1833, actual expenditures were down to $721. (ed. Stuewe, Paul K., KANSAS REVISITED: HISTORICAL IMAGES AND PERSPECTIVES, article by Unrau, William, The Depopulation of the Kansas Indians") This is why most Native Americans today who are knowledgeable of their history are pointing out the United States Government waged genocide against their people. When medicine to heal children and families from a deadly and mortal disease is withheld, that agency which does this crime against humanity is committing genocide.
dyslexia wrote: Aborigines were ... hunted like wild animals, poisoned or shot...
I cannot believe that this were official policies of the civilized British administration. Given that the first colonists were the criminal convicts, that might have been their trespasses that were eligible to punishment by the authorities, if the guilty persons were found, but not the official line of behavior directed by the UK government.
... Captain Simeon Ecuyer had bought time by sending smallpox-infected blankets and handkerchiefs to the Indians surrounding the fort -- an early example of biological warfare -- which started an epidemic among them. Amherst himself had encouraged this tactic in a letter to Ecuyer. [p. 108]
steissd wrote:
I cannot believe that this were official policies of the civilized British administration. Given that the first colonists were the criminal convicts, that might have been their trespasses that were eligible to punishment by the authorities, if the guilty persons were found, but not the official line of behavior directed by the UK government.
OK, I get it. You're kiddin', right? Or is the result of Russian propaganda? Surely you know that the UK over the years has done many, many, MANY unseemly things.
Streissd, are you at all interested in learning the truth?
Then this was embezzlement of money for aims different from the purpose of its assignment, and not a deliberate genocide. If there were no Whites, no inoculation against smallpox would be possible. This inoculation was invented by Dr. Edward Jenner in the UK in 1796, and not by some tribal chief or sorcerer.
I am interested in learning the truth, but I am tired of the Whites' self-bashing that occurs every time the Aborigines/Indians/Eskimos are concerned. "Inverted" racism is not better than the "old-fashioned" one.
The Communist propaganda, on the contrary, claimed that British, French, Spanish and Americans committed genocide against the indigenous population of the Americas, Asia, Africa and Australia. I see, this propaganda was efficient on the other side of the Iron Curtain as well.
Steissd- Looking at any aboriginal culture, through western eyes, one might possibly conclude that the native peoples lives are somehow enhanced by the introduction of modern civilization. Personally, I think that
that judgement is ethnocentric, and racist.
The aboriginal people had THEIR culture, THEIR religion, THEIR folkways. It worked for them, for many centuries. Their problem was that they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, and were overrun by so called "civilized" folks, who forced their ways and religion on them "for their own good", whether they liked it or not.
It would be an interesting intellectual exercise to try to imagine what it would be like for us if a more evolved civilization descended upon US and tried to superimpose THEIR ways on us!
There is no need to give up. My general idea is as follows: indigenous people should be assimilated by the advanced nations, but the methods should be more humane and scientifically verified than those that were used in 18th-19th centuries. And abusers that compromise the very idea should be punished the same way they are punished when they abuse the White or Black population.
"I got my mind made up
I got my mind made up
I got my mind made up
I got my mind made up
I got my mind made up"
bob dylan
Phoenix, do you think that such developments of the Western society as scientific medicine, machinery, social security, justice for all, democracy, enlightenment, information technologies, etc. are not in favor of any of the aborigines? I believe that they belong to the same biological species we do, and what is good for us, is good for them. If the technological advance was insignificant, then the indigenous people would not lose competition to the Europeans. Now they have a unique chance to enjoy all the fruits of our civilization for free. If I want to enjoy these, I have to undergo the complicated bureaucratic procedure of immigration, and the result is not guaranteed. These people are already in the USA, Canada or Australia, but their tribal chiefs try to preserve their retardation in order to keep their power over the tribe members. Democracy and free competition are incompatible with hereditary chiefs' power, openness to scientific medicine may force the sorcerers to start working for salary as non-qualified laborers in the GM assembly lines, mixed marriages undermine the idea of ethnic exclusiveness.
