Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 94 of total 94 in this topic |
Standing Strong
Trad climber
heart's all over the world tonight
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Feb 12, 2008 - 05:10pm PT
|
the spanish or the english?
|
|
TrundleBum
Trad climber
Las Vegas
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 05:12pm PT
|
Dickey and Poppa Bush
|
|
TrundleBum
Trad climber
Las Vegas
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 05:12pm PT
|
ooh ooops yah mean "Classical" history... he he
|
|
cintune
climber
Penn's Woods
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 05:23pm PT
|
The Spanish.
|
|
Standing Strong
Trad climber
heart's all over the world tonight
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 12, 2008 - 05:35pm PT
|
^^^ that's what i'm saying. i'm aware of the atrocities on ALL sides, all over north america, but i thought the spanish were way, way bloodier/crueler than the english, esp. w/the conditions in their mines and missions.
i'd love to hear other people's thoughts/opinions on the spanish v. the english.
please feel free to expound on your opinions, rant and rave all you want.
thanks,
T*R
|
|
Domingo
Trad climber
El Portal, CA
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 06:00pm PT
|
I feel like maybe Spanish atrocities were worse, what with Cortez rampaging his way around South and Central America. Also, there was the inherent slave labor, as you mentioned. At the same, the English stole people from Africa and brought them to North America, and then continued to break treaties with the people they hadn't slaughtered for the next several hundred years.
Why debate the worse of two evils?
|
|
Standing Strong
Trad climber
heart's all over the world tonight
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 12, 2008 - 06:06pm PT
|
reason i'm asking is because a prof thought it was the english, but she was making vague comments. i asked if the spanish were bloodier than the english because of their mines and missions but she got defensive and was rather rude - made a comment about the whole continent and everyone being killed off. well duh, but the spanish were still a lot bloodier/crueler than the english. this is not to say that the english wern't. but i was pissed. so i left. i didn't make a scene. i waited a couple of minutes and then slipped out the door. i have to go back on thursday tho. it's gonna suck. i'm not the only one who can't stand this prof. she does not have a great reputation amoung students here. i would drop the class but i can't because i need it to transfer.
there are a lot of interesting people on this forum and sometimes i like hearing people's input on this kind of stuff.
|
|
ToeJamCheeseHog
climber
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 06:14pm PT
|
Spanish for sure. English tried to coexist with Indians as allies against the French.
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 06:15pm PT
|
Most of the killing happened by disease. I'm not sure if that's "bloody" or not; it depends on what you mean.
|
|
cintune
climber
Penn's Woods
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 06:15pm PT
|
Google the term "Black Legend" you'll find tons of info and opinions. It is controversial and hard to pick through all the propaganda, but the most important aspect, I think, is that Spanish atrocities were first condemned by a Spaniard, La Casas, while the English didn't produce any similar whistle-blowers until the anti-slavery movement of the 1800s. But it's a pot and kettle situation, ultimately.
|
|
Domingo
Trad climber
El Portal, CA
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 06:16pm PT
|
Toe's wrong. Most of the time, the French aligned with the Native Americans.
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 06:19pm PT
|
Los Conquistadors!
But then the English kicked their ass and sank their armada.
|
|
cintune
climber
Penn's Woods
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 06:24pm PT
|
The French hooked up with Algonquins, the English with Iroquois and Cherokee.
Also, the English came to settle and colonize, so they had to try to coexist somewhat, while the Spanish initially came only for gold, intending to take it back to Europe, so they were more immediately exploitative.
|
|
ToeJamCheeseHog
climber
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 06:27pm PT
|
True Domingo. I misplaced two words. That's why the English had to build so many forts. The English did not appear to engage in wholesale slaughter of Indians.
|
|
Standing Strong
Trad climber
heart's all over the world tonight
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 12, 2008 - 06:29pm PT
|
domingo - esp. in the area that you're from - great lakes, right?
i should buckle down, stop looking at this forum so much and go get ready for my next class. feel free to continue this thread.
later.
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 07:25pm PT
|
I'm no historian, so I can't add much to the OP.
But check out Werner Herzog's movie "Aguirre, the Wrath of God".
It is about one Spanish explorer's venture upon South America's Orinoco river in search of the golden city of Eldorado.
|
|
bachar
Trad climber
Mammoth Lakes, CA
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 08:03pm PT
|
Spanish for sure...here's a couple woodcuts of them butchering the locals...
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 08:11pm PT
|
Neil Young's song Cortez the Killer, one of my fav's.
|
|
andy@climbingmoab
Big Wall climber
Park City, UT
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 08:29pm PT
|
No doubt the Spanish. Las Casas was too late - the city that bears his name(San Cristobol de las Casa) was known as the evil city(Ciudad Viciosa) for a long time before he came on the scene, and Chiapas is still a weird scene. Probably the worst of the whole bunch was Pedro de Alvarado down in central america - he made Cortez look like a kind man.
The mines and missions were pretty tame compared to just conquering territory and then making an example of people to stop uprisings preemptively. Check out the history of Leon Nicaragua and Antigua Guatemala. I'm in Leon right now and have driven through the whole area in the last month, and its something people still talk about though it happened 400-500 years ago.
|
|
rockermike
Mountain climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 08:33pm PT
|
I'm no expert but my sense is that the Spanish came, killed, conquered, then made peace (and often married) with the natives; maybe exploitive peace - but peace of a sorts. The English came with friendly gestures but brought their wives and in the long run the Anglo/white culture was at odds with the natives and slowly - creepingly - overran and destroyed the native culture and almost all the people.
Look at the percentage of the population that is native in Latin America (high) vs. North America (< 1%). Says something.
Sort of off-topic but I watched the movie Apocalypto last night. Interesting. A very -what?- exotic, re-creation of Mayan culture. And I think fairly accurate - but I'm no expert. Of course Mel Gibson through in his Catholic chauvinism stuff, the "Christian" Spanish saviors show up just in time to save the heathens. what ever, I still enjoyed the movie.
|
|
cintune
climber
Penn's Woods
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 08:53pm PT
|
Another aspect, too, is that native American cultures weren't shy when it came to bloodlust either. They didn't call them savages for nothing. But at least they were honest about it, unlike the Europeans who brought Christian hypocrisy into the mix. Reading Las Casas is pretty eye-opening. He describes these massacres on Hispanola where they're unleasing war-dogs and cutting women and chidren to ribbons, but it turns out what was really bugging him was that he didn't get enough chances to "save their souls" before they died. And his solution to the whole genocide problem was to import Africans to work the mines and sugar cane fields. So, applying our modern humanistic standards to just about anything that went down is ultimately a pretty frustrating exercise.
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 09:19pm PT
|
The proof is in the result.
Look at the condition of former English holdings versus Spanish ones.
Where would you choose to live?
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 09:27pm PT
|
I'm with Clint. It was disease, but I'm not a big Jared Diamond fan.
But in his seminal work, 1491 New revelations of the Americas before Columbus, Charles C. Mann points out the vast devastation to indian tribes in the wake of De Soto's expedition noting a vector investigated by Anne Ramenofsky and Patricia Galloway who say," the source of contagion was very likely not De Soto's army but it's ambulatory meat locker; his three-hundred pigs. De Sotos company was too small to be an effective biological weapon. Sicknesses like measles and smallpox would have burned through his six-hundred men long before they reached the Mississippi. But that would not have been true for pigs.....
swine transmit anthrax, brucellosis, leptospirosis, trichinosis, and tuberculosis. Pigs breed exuberantly and can also pass disease to deer and turkeys, which can then infect people. Only a few of De Sotos pigs would have had to wander off to contaminate the forest."
|
|
andy@climbingmoab
Big Wall climber
Park City, UT
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 09:38pm PT
|
There are things I like and admire about both cultures. In general I like the culture and lifestyle better in Latin America, but the weather is too hot for me to want to live here full time.
The USA is what it is much more because of having the most favorable geography in the world for any large country than any other factor. I don't think Spanish vs English culture has very much to do with it - California has done ok for itself, and it is mostly a product of Spanish colonialism. Belize and Guyana are former English holdings, and aren't doing as well as say Costa Rica.
Native relations are an odd subject. The population density was much higher and most people lived in or close to large urban areas in Latin America, which was not the case in the US. The combination of more available women for conquistadors separated from their wives and those women being in settled urban areas in very close proximity to the new Spanish settlements is mostly what was responsible for Latin America becoming Mestizo instead of European. Native affairs have been settled differently in place to place - strong native culture in Guatemala versus almost total annihilation in neighboring El Salvador. Simple conclusions are generally wrong and even dangerous to draw.
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 10:13pm PT
|
California had a large English influence very early on and the Californios felt themselves a bitseperate from Mexico. There were plenty of Anglo Californios with large land grants and family relationships with the majority Hispanics. For instance the Californios beat the Mexicans at the battle of Cauenga Pass with the help of a cannon borowed from a retired American ship captain that he revived from lawn ornament status.
The LA locals put the mostly Hessian (German mercinaries) Mexican troops sent down from Frisco into a rout the only casualty being one mule.
World wide though it is indisputable that the French and Spanish in particular and the Dutch and Portugese to a lesser extent left their former holdings in far worse shape than the English.
VDH nukes Damond's premise convincingly in Carnage and Culture.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 10:26pm PT
|
I wouldn't say Victor Davis Hansen nukes it, but he definitely shows the other side of the coin.
Of course the disease thing is a two way street. Why do we always assume that europeans infected the indians but not the reverse?
Anybody know where syphilis originated?
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 10:43pm PT
|
Hey SS--
This is a great question, although one without a correct answer. If you are looking at a really, really big picture, then overall, Native populations fared better under the centuries of Spanish colonialism than under the centuries of British. But the reasons for that don't always have much to do with who was "crueler" than whom. And yes, I do do this for a living.
I don't know your Prof, and can't speak to her lecture, but one of the reasons that some folks have come to stress the nastiness of British colonialism is that the critique of Spanish colonialism was historically part of nasty anti-Catholic and anti-immigrant sentiment. The "Black Legend" that Clint mentions-- the claim that the Spanish were unnaturally bloodthirsty, cruel, and barbaric in their conquest of the Americas-- was originally created by Protestant historians in England and the Low Countries in the early years of the Reformation and was frankly war propaganda. In the 19th century US, Protestant historians looking to say nasty things about Catholics found la Lejendra Negra pretty attractive. But that probably says more about how much they hated Italians and the Irish than about comparative colonialism.
In the 20th century, we've seen a backlash, and so nowadays, when historians offer sweeping judgments in survey courses, they frequently describe French and Spanish colonialism as more benign than English, because the Spanish/French largely hoped to convert and integrate the Natives-- make them into subjects (more more especially peasants)--while the English mostly wanted to get the Natives the hell out of the way (once they had killed the Catholics or the insubordinate American colonists.
Your Prof.'s curtness may have had nothing to do with your question-- academia is a pretty vicious place-- so her curtness may have had a lot to do with other stressors and nothing at all to do with you, the class, or the question.
|
|
Robb
Social climber
Pick Up Truck Heaven
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 10:47pm PT
|
On the subject of slavery, I can't recall where I read it years ago, but I read that the Spanish had far more slaves (in the New World) than the English, (or later Americans), ever had. This was pertaining to African slaves.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..apologies to grammaticists everywhere.
|
|
SammyLee2
Trad climber
Memphis, TN
|
|
|
Feb 12, 2008 - 10:49pm PT
|
Humans. Of all sorts of histories and genetic backgrounds. The term "bloodier" is misleading and trends to a mistake.
Who let more blood of the "enemy", the natives? Good grief, who knows. Among the tens of thousands of gallons that spurt onto the ground, who is more responsible? Only some fictious divine being could tell.
As Curt said, disease did more killing of the original peoples of "America", whatever the hell that means.
I'd have to say the English, cause they won. Let's face it, near genocide was accomplished.
I am considering a novel, based on the premise that the first native to encounter the whites, who was a supreme leader, said to himself and to all natives, "These white people, kill them all on first sight, spare no man, woman, child or animal that they bring to our shore, upon the threat of death. This is my command." What if ALL natives took this as the rule of law. How much longer would have America stayed native? Maybe 50 years? 75 to 100 at most.
The outcome is assured. Those with money, power and greed, therefore, guns, germs and steel, would eventually win. Might be a funny outcome.
I love these discussions about the history of peoples. I lived through the segretation/integration of the South in the 60's. I swear to anything, that slavery was the seed of destruction of this nation. I will likely be dead for many years before this becomes obvious, but may these words remain.
|
|
mark miller
Social climber
Reno
|
|
|
Feb 13, 2008 - 12:03am PT
|
The diseases the proud europeans brought over to the New Continent wiped out more indigenous people than any Nefarious activities. We still have knott evolved that much in the last 35k years despite what some fools want you to believe..... It's hard to kill millions of people by force ( check with the Nazi's) but an influenza effortlessly will destroy millions.
|
|
Standing Strong
Trad climber
heart's all over the world tonight
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 13, 2008 - 03:14am PT
|
"This is a great question, although one without a correct answer"
thank you for your eloquent reply to my query. i wish my prof would be this way.
|
|
TradIsGood
Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
Feb 13, 2008 - 07:40am PT
|
The Colombians.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Feb 13, 2008 - 09:07am PT
|
As bad as things turned out for the indians of north America, it was worse for those of south America.
|
|
TradIsGood
Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
Feb 13, 2008 - 09:09am PT
|
stich, South America, not Ohio.
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
Finally viewed Apocalypto. Enjoyed the happy ending. I don't agree that the arrival of the Spainish represented a 'savior' situation as mentioned previously. More of an enigma or the arrival of aliens.
|
|
Brian
climber
California
|
|
Joseph Ellis claims that at one point shortly after the revolution, our founding fathers (so, I guess we are mostly going with the English here) were working under the assumption that we would not expand the country west and that we would have genuine treaties and relations (unlike the backstabbing and lying that eventually occurred) with native tribes (already decimated by disease), just as we would with other nations in the world. The reasons this never came about are complex (Ellis' chapter on Henry Knox and Alexander McGillvray is a real page turner). Anyhow, worth a read alongside Diamond's work, referenced above.
http://www.amazon.com/American-Creation-Triumphs-Tragedies-Founding/dp/030726369X
Brian
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Since I read this far, maybe I should contribute something, which is kinda OT but what the heck.
The "Mission" is an outstanding movie. See it on Netflix or something.
People who claim any old or ancient times had better moral bearings are mistaken. Humans have always been bloodthirsty, thieving and murderous. We're better than we've ever been but have tools that are deadlier than ever, so our damage remains as great or greater.
The spread of disease by both English and Spanish may have been unintentional, but the question we're not asking yet, but which may arise is:
The tons of nano-Depleted Uranium Particles spread over Iraq and other wars zones by us Americans...which may turn out to make those area poisonous for hundreds of years...what will be the ultimate effect and curse of that "unintended genocide?... a real genocide because it may affect the very genes)
If it turns out that the nano-particles created when DU munitions explode and lodge in people's lungs and systems, radiating at close range for the rest of their lives actually isn't causing a huge spike in children's cancer, it's not because we were right, just lucky.
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=37167
Peace
Karl
|
|
Studly
Trad climber
WA
|
|
Actually there are quite a few Native Americans still in the US, but not so much in California. One of the reasons why is that in about 1850 California issued a bounty on Indian scalps of $5.00 each. This lasted for about the next 25 years and resulted in almost the complete elimination of the Indians in California.
$5- was allot of money in those days and bullets were cheap. Many cowboys made really good livings off of killing. Didn't matter if they were men, women, child, or baby. You got the full amount for each. Many sad untold stories of slaughter that haunt the lands..
|
|
ExtraBlue
Ice climber
the ford VT
|
|
when the vikings showed up in Canada their first instinct was to find a native and stab them to see if they bled, before looking for gold...
Interesting note from the Nor East. When Champlain first showed up the natives (Alconquin??) were at war with the (Iroquis??) and their first thing was something along the lines of "bring your guns and come fight our enemies". When they did take captives their ideas of torture ended with Champlain requesting that he be allowed to just kill the prisoners 'cause he couldnt stomach what they were doing.
No is nice.
But I say Spanish were worse. They had a head start, and a larger landmass to f-up.
|
|
Brokedownclimber
Trad climber
Douglas, WY
|
|
The Spanish were a lot heavier handed with "the Church" as their guide, and imposed Catholocism along with slave labor to build mission churches.
|
|
Reeotch
Trad climber
Kayenta, AZ
|
|
It was the United States, under our beloved Andrew Jackson, that actually had a policy of extermination towards the native americans, the Indian removal Act of 1830.
I would guess that the U.S. military once it got involved in the removal process, probably killed the most natives in a violent way.
|
|
rockermike
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
I've had this book recommended by more than one scholar (though I haven't read it yet).
American Holocaust: The Conquest of the New World (available at Amazon (of course). Book gets excellent reviews from the serious book press.
Basically he considers the conquering of the Americas the greatest genocide (and the most denied) in the history of humanity.
http://www.amazon.com/American-Holocaust-Conquest-New-World/dp/0195085574
(see the reviews at the bottom of the amazon page), and look inside to read the first few pages of the intro. Powerful stuff.
Oh yea - but at least the Spanish had the respect to marry local women - I guess after they killed off all the men.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
It would definitely be los pinches gachupines although I think
the Detroit automakers should get some votes too.
|
|
Dolomite
climber
Anchorage
|
|
Re: Spanish conquest of Mexico: "on the eve of the conquest, its population is about 25 million; in 1600, it is one million." From The Conquest of America by Tzvetan Todorov.
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Elk Creek, Idaho
|
|
David S Jones, in Virgin soils Revisited, writes that native Indian populations declined by as much as 95 percent in the first century after the arrival of Christopher Columbus.
Epidemiological vulnerability studies led William McNeill and Alfred W. Crosby in the 1970s to claim the overwhelming majority of native polulation decline was due to disease. Many argue that the depopulation of the Americas was almost completely and inevitablly the result of contact between disease-experienced Old World populations and the "virgin" populations of the Americas
Most estimates of the native population at Columbus' arrival in the Americas run between 22 million and 120 million.
Oppression demands a wider definition and measure than blood or body count. How do we relate and correlate resource exploitation of Spaniards to the land grabbing of the English, the ruthlessness and forcd labor of the Spanish to the arrogance and ethnocentrism of the English?
Perhaps we'd rather compare the evils of Nazism vs Bolshevism. .....doesn't hit as close to home.
|
|
Josh Nash
Social climber
riverbank ca
|
|
this guy hands down
|
|
rockermike
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2012 - 05:20pm PT
|
^^^^who is "this guy"?^^^^
Another recommended book (though quite long) on related subject - 'Conquistadors', full bloody detail on Cortez's conquest of the Aztecs. Ruthless people - on both sides I suppose. Many non-Aztec Indians joined forces with Cortez because they were sick of the Aztecs. But in true Cortezian fashion, once the Aztecs were out of the way he turned on his allies. What a fine species we are.
Available on Audible.com if you need something to listen to while working out (which is how I get most of my reading done these days. ha)
|
|
hb81
climber
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2012 - 05:26pm PT
|
^^^^who is "this guy"?^^^^
Vlad the Impaler aka Dracula
Batshit crazy, but not a conquistador
|
|
dirt claud
Social climber
san diego,ca
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2012 - 05:57pm PT
|
This book is available as a TV series on Netflix on free streaming I believe.
Another good one on there is called Conquistadors.
|
|
aspendougy
Trad climber
Los Angeles, CA
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2012 - 06:52pm PT
|
I read that the Yosemite Indians were nearly wiped out by a disease epidemic about 200 years before the white man showed up; then they had repopulated the area by the time the Mariposa Battalion went in. Many epidemics were introduced by whites, but maybe not all.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2012 - 07:28pm PT
|
^^^
There is some discussion as to how far diseases introduced by Europeans into the eastern Americas in the 16th and 17th centuries propagated westward before fading out. Once a disease such as smallpox caught on in Amerindian populations on the east coast, there was sufficient population density for it to infect successive populations westward at least to the prairies. Whether the diseases managed to find enough victims to leapfrog across the western plains and mountains, with much lower population density, being the key.
|
|
Tobia
Social climber
Denial
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 12:47am PT
|
Timing is everything. I am knee deep into American Holocaust that rockermike is speaking of.
Disease certainly was devastating; but it was incidental. At least when it was unleashed in the 16th Century by the Spanish. The blood-letting was intentional and meant for total annihilation, no defensive posturing in their motives.
The English Governor of Virginia, William Berkeley, had genocidal warfare figured out with a balanced budget plan to slaughter all adult Indian males and sell the women and children in the lucrative slave market to cover the cost.
When the native population shrinks from 100,000 to less than 600 and the colonists population starts at zero and hits 60,000 in the same time frame, there is some serious killing goin' down.
From what I've read in this book I'd say the brutality was split even between the European powers. Whichever nation was lacking in numbers made up for it in style points.
|
|
Tobia
Social climber
Denial
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 01:15am PT
|
Tony,
I guess every one that thirsts for blood has a lighter side and vice versa, even someone who could dream up the Cowardly Lion. On the other hand, he also came up with those evil flyin' monkeys.
Nice guys didn't win in the age old struggle of good over evil in the Western Hemisphere. I can't quite wrap my mind around that kind of greed and brutality.
|
|
juar
Sport climber
socal
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 01:25am PT
|
at the time,
africans cost money. it was investment
the irish cost nothing. the brit were subsidizing their export. so in the early colonies an irish slave cost much less than an african. you took care of your african slave because he cost money. you abused and threw away your irish slave because the streets were full of them.
the first landed owners in the new world immediately started tying down the irish women they got and giving their african slave a go at them.
cuz a darker skinned child was more valuable than a white one
business here, turn of the 17th
whatever the spanish were doing,
they wernt enslaving their next door neighbors, shipping them off and forcing them to breed as a a business model based on selling children
or were they?
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 01:56am PT
|
Ironic how easily we see the abuse and genocide, intentional and unintentional of the past and yet the present is hardly in question.
and the aftereffects of colonialism threaten our existence many years after it's demise. Without colonialism, there would have been no Iraq war, no Vietnam War (2-3 million dead), and the Israeli-Arab conflict that could spark WW3 comes right from colonialism too.
And while germs were the big unintended killers way back in the day, who knows which of our new innovations will kill millions in retrospect? We nuked the Japanese in WW2 and if their #4 reactor building at Fukushima were to fall and burn, in turn making them abandon the whole plant to overheat and burn, it's possible that the Japanese could wind up nuking us right back
Peace
Karl
|
|
Tobia
Social climber
Denial
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 02:05am PT
|
I don't think it is a matter of questioning the happenings of the present. But it is difficult to discuss all the world's trouble at once.
Understanding the past sheds a lot of light on the present. As the sayings go: history repeats itself and greed is the root of all evil.
|
|
giegs
climber
Tardistan
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 02:08am PT
|
Tim Flannery does a good job of advancing and refining Diamonds argument in The Eternal Frontier. By distinguishing the characteristics of French, Spanish, and British invasions he argues that the English was the least mutualistic.
French invasion into the continent was sparse and the nature of the fur trade promoted friendly relations and more intermingling.
The Spanish were able to graft their system of governance onto a society accustomed to conquerors. This can be framed as a transfer of power and helps explain the extent of indigene slavery in Spanish colonies.
The part of North America conquered by the English had experienced a great ice age for soil creation and need for control of soil rather than furs and the lack of readily subverted power structures made expansion expulsion and extermination the most sucessful means of invasion.
Brief summary of the argument, but it certainly has its appeal.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 02:13am PT
|
On a lighter note
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 02:26am PT
|
Without doubt the east coast indian tribes were the bloodiest. The idea of developing a peaceful society never caught on during the thousands of years they happily spent feuding (ie murdering) each other until the Euro's arrived
A few gory details
http://www.garykelleywriter.com/end_notes.htm
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 02:48am PT
|
I was recently trying to understand how a woman raised as a Native American had female European DNA, typical of Hispanic and Mediterranean Jewish ancestry.
That led me to read the Wiki article on "The History of Florida" where I learned that English colonists from the Carolinas allied with Cherokee and Choctaw, routinely raided Florida to acquire both Native American and Spanish slaves.
Not surprisingly most of the women who were thought to be of Native Ancestry by culture and identity who turned up with European ancestry were Cherokee.
|
|
StahlBro
Trad climber
San Diego, CA
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 02:50am PT
|
Give me an f*ing break... the euros exterminated the aboriginal inhabitants for their own gain. The US government broke every treaty with the Native Americans. Every one. Get a clue. It doesn't matter which euro country they came from. It is shameful for all of them.
What matters is what we do going forward. Trying to justify genocide after the fact based on inter tribal conflict is the weakest form of rationalization ever.
|
|
Anastasia
climber
InLOVEwithAris.
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 02:56am PT
|
As a historian, I would say both. We so called Americans wiped out more tribes in California then the rest of the states during the gold rush. Gold makes us blood thirsty idiots. Russians, English, Spanish, Chinese etc... They would kill anything for wealth.
AFS
|
|
juar
Sport climber
socal
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 03:07am PT
|
funny how western afficianados
will parade a list of incident of violence
as an excuse for him us out culture to do worse
supposedly were her offing culture and advancement to savages
while were robbing and stealing
know the story of what the pilgrams who would have died without natives saving their lives did?
didnt just massacre them
cut their chiefs head off and brought it home and stuck it on a pike outside their encampment
and left it their over over a year
the man who saved them months previous
f*#king animals
this make it into your history books?
|
|
climbski2
Mountain climber
Anchorage AK, Reno NV
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 03:26am PT
|
I'd bet on Insurance companies..
They kill millions
|
|
Tobia
Social climber
Denial
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 07:30am PT
|
Juar,
To answer your question, yes. Stannard's book documents many of the atrocities like the spiking.
Just as a curiosity, what source provides the "supposed" information for you?
I don't think anyone posting here is flaunting Western Culture to be more just than another. The question is posed as more of a statement about the nature of mankind and the atrocities committed by members of the human race as opposed to being a question about the superiority of one nationality over another (chime in, OP). At least that is my take on it.
The "history books" present the facts of what happened, based on fact as documented by those that participated or witnessed the events. They aren't written as statements of political philosophy like Mien Kampf or The Communist Manifesto; but rather a chronicle of what went down in this part of the world at a given time. Specifically the 15th - 17th centuries.
It is a friendly debate over how people understand what they have learned or interpreted what they have read. I guess if someone is presenting facts based on their witnessing the events that would fit in also.
|
|
juar
Sport climber
socal
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 10:12am PT
|
whats all the more curious is how
when these incidents come to light
their hardly ever refuted
the facts stand, and the authors are berated simply due to their choice of adjectives to describe them
some examples of this are much more subtle than others,
take this one for example
"The Spanish were able to graft their system of governance onto a society accustomed to conquerors. This can be framed as a transfer of power and helps explain the extent of indigene slavery in Spanish colonies. "
hard to drag out the phrase "they deserved it" any longer than that, but here it is today, thrown in our faces.
"nothing to see here, what are you looking at?!?!?"
how many seperate and distinct cultures did these spanish annihilate in the western hemisphere?
there are man good factual points in the referenced authors work,
but noticed the first order of business is to state " hey look, they were all brown people, so what the f*#k?"
subtle
dirty white academia on its game
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 10:32am PT
|
Wow, going way back to the early part of this thread here.
Most of the killing happened by disease.
Yes Clint, there is a lot of truth to that, and it was a good book.
But that sentence also sugarcoats a LOT of evil, and demonizes the most "innocent" of all the killers.
Disease played a big part to be sure, but disease doesn't have the ability to distinguish right from wrong. The English and the Spanish were equally evil in this regard.
But here's the real bullshit:
The proof is in the result.
Look at the condition of former English holdings versus Spanish ones.
Where would you choose to live?
Indeed. The places that the Nazis conquered and controlled all turned out pretty well too. I guess they were on the right track eh TGT?
Besides, everybody knows that the Muslims are the worst, right Fatty?
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 12:28pm PT
|
Are talking about outright murder or disease or mindset?
|
|
Studly
Trad climber
WA
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 12:41pm PT
|
How about "Californians"? In California there was a $ scalp bounty placed on Indians in the 1850's thru almost the turn of the century, and so some people made a fortune killing Indians and bringing in their scalps. Not to many Indians left in California.
|
|
juar
Sport climber
socal
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 01:01pm PT
|
they leave out john sutters taste for native children as well
|
|
dirt claud
Social climber
san diego,ca
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 01:01pm PT
|
To get a good idea of how England and Spain treated theme selves and the natives of other parts of the world read the compiled writings of
Richard Hakluyt.
These are 1st hand reports of the explorations going on in the 1500 and 1600s and gives a vivid account of how these people treated each other.
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 01:14pm PT
|
While all that was going on here, what was happening around the rest of the world?
If you answered "the same thing", go to the head of the class.
|
|
Sredni Vashtar
Social climber
LA CA via UK
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 01:36pm PT
|
British conquered most of the world and by and large the original inhabitants still exist and werent subjected to a genocide. many native peoples of the US fled to Canada (Sitting bull for example) as he knew the British there allowed the native peoples protection under law. the British empire was based on commerce not relgious conversion or annihilation. In the context of empires it was relatively benign, but in a modern context its aborrhent. an dont forget it was the British the forcibly ended the Trans-Atlantic slave trade to the Americas.
god save the queen ;)
SV
Disclaimer, i am British and American
|
|
monolith
climber
albany,ca
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 01:42pm PT
|
The australian aboriginals might disagree about the intents of the british. 50% died of smallbox in the Sidney area, as well as ultimately all being pushed onto reservations or otherwise worthless land.
|
|
mouse from merced
Trad climber
merced, california
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 02:17pm PT
|
The Spanglish. They are responsible for all the First World's Problems.
But seriously, folks--
Some good reads are Gary Jennings' series on the Aztecs, beginning with the 1980 Aztec, and Aztec Autumn from 1997. (There are three more in this series, none of which I have read as yet.) As are most Jennings novels, they are Grade VI in length. I always take a good novel over the drier things like Diamond's. Tried it, laid it down. With a novel and a computer, it's easy enough to tell how much truth is stretched by the novelist. Purism is for Puritans, who happened to be of English stock.
Spanish Inquisition vs. the Star Chamber of King Charles I.
|
|
harihari
Trad climber
Squampton
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 05:16pm PT
|
Dingus--
Regarding the Colombian women. I too was frankly astonished when I got to Bogota, and my brain basically fell out when I got to Medellin. Shakira is run-of-the-mill for a paisa. (Any guy who is single, and wants to have a great time (and not just cos of the ladies), go to Colombia...friendly people and good cragging there too). However, I think the beauty questions has a totally different answer.
Colombia is one of the places where the Spanish were especially savage (and their latifundista descendents even more so, right until now). It was also a place which had significant immigration from Sephardic jews (who did not generally marry outside their faith). The result was that the country is VERY (genetically) European. So us wealthy white guys dig their women. In Bolivia and Mexico, by contrast, a majority are descended from Natives, and these facial/body types are way diff than European (generally but not always). I didn't find the Mexican or Bolivian women particularly attractive.
So basically it was the LACK of interbreeding in Colombia that gives it its very European-looking people.
|
|
sandstone conglomerate
climber
sharon conglomerate central
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 05:18pm PT
|
Aztec kicked ass. The sex was outlandish and very fictionalized, as was the portrayal of the priest class, but as far as the depictions of pre-European Mexico, it was really well done. Haven't read Aztec autumn. The portrayal of the downfall of the Aztecs by the Spanish was pretty depressing. It's too bad they didn't treat the Spanish the same way the Comanche did...drive them out of the llano for 200 years or so.
|
|
dirt claud
Social climber
san diego,ca
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 05:40pm PT
|
Except for the disease factor. It appears to me the Spanish would have had a much much harder time conquering the natives of central Mexico if the Aztecs had not alienated so many of the tribes around them. The Montezuma legend thing didn't help either.
If you go to southern Mexico near Chiapas and Yucatan there are very many european looking Mexicans. Not sure if less interbreeding has so much to do with it as much as the fact that there were not as many Spanish or europeans that got north of Mexico City during the 1st years of the conquest.
Apocalypto was a pretty good flick except that the movie shows the Spanish landing at the apex of the maya culture. All the major ceremonial centers had been abandoned for almost 300 or 400 years by the time the Spanish landed in Yucatan.
|
|
sandstone conglomerate
climber
sharon conglomerate central
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 05:53pm PT
|
During the siege of Tenochtitlan, the Spanish would catapult bucket fulls of their rotted teeth at the Aztecs in the hopes of spreading as much disease as possible. Very similar to delivering small pox infected blankets too the Sioux and Cheyenne...
|
|
mouse from merced
Trad climber
merced, california
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 05:56pm PT
|
Yaqui resisted.
Fit fire wit fire.
Exacted more than revenge.
Terror.
Still free.
[Click to View YouTube Video]
You did not conquer, only die.
Wah-nah-be.
|
|
rmsusa
Trad climber
Boulder
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 06:31pm PT
|
An interesting table:
Distribution of slaves (1519–1867)[91]
Destination Percentage
Portuguese America 38.5%
British America (minus North America) 18.4%
Spanish Empire 17.5%
French Americas 13.6%
British North America 6.45%
English Americas 3.25%
Dutch West Indies 2.0%
Danish West Indies 0.3%
Brazil was the principal destination of the slave trade.
|
|
TomCochrane
Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 07:55pm PT
|
unfortunately the genocides of the past pale in comparison to the future we are facing
|
|
mynameismud
climber
backseat
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 09:19pm PT
|
Interesting question without a good answer. I starting reading books on Indian history over 30 years ago. Not to become an expert but because I grew up in the North West where there was a lot of tension between the "Humans and the Indians" (a term coined by an Indian boy I was fighting with).
After reading dozens of books over the years I say both sides. After a bit the pattern is always the same. Disease is the biggest culprit and there are so many of them. Neither side can get off easy by any means. For those that say there are more white people in North America you then need to take into account the percentage of Black people in South and Central America. Not saying they caused the "problem". They are there because of actions taken by the conquerors.
It did take me a couple of decades (yeah I know I am slow) to come to the realization that most of the history books out there on "Indian History" are written from the perspective of our time since there is very little documentation out there about what these cultures were like before the large scale introduction of the Europeans. Once a person decides to start digging into this part of history the number of books out there drops off quite a bit. Still very many but comparatively there are less.
As far as Mel Gibson's movie. If a person thinks that is an accurate portrayal of history then you really need to start reading a few books. The good and the bad is, there are so many different books out there. Some seem to indicate that whites are all bad, some the opposite. Read a dozen of both and you will have scratched the surface enough to know that 90% of what you have been told is nonsense, most of the rest is conjecture.
|
|
matlinb
Trad climber
Albuquerque
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2012 - 11:49pm PT
|
I don't know anything about history, just what I was taught in school and have read in a few books. However, to the few climbers who have posted, and do this stuff for a living I have a question.
I have read that the only people in the Americans to have a written language in Precolumbian times were the Mayan. If this is true, than the only original texts you can study were written by the Europeans at the time. And all of these people were on the company dole, so to speak, if they were in America. How much can you really trust that what they said was even remotely true.
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
chingadero de chula vista
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2012 - 12:13am PT
|
go to the head of the class matlinb.
|
|
laughingman
Mountain climber
Seattle WA
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2012 - 12:29am PT
|
The spanish did not do all the conquering of the south America on their own. The portuguese carved out there chunk of the americas.
Personally I think the long term effects of spanish viceroys (they had little oversight and lots of corruption) did far more damage to the indigenous societys then cortez's butchering could ever have done.
|
|
laughingman
Mountain climber
Seattle WA
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2012 - 12:43am PT
|
According to photographer and writer Aaron Huey....
The last chapter in any successful genocide is the one in which the oppressor can remove their hands and say, ‘My God, what are these people doing to themselves? They’re killing each other. They’re killing themselves while we watch them die.’ This is how we came to own these United States. This is the legacy of manifest destiny.” (Aaron Huey)
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2012 - 09:37am PT
|
unfortunately the genocides of the past pale in comparison to the future we are facing
i think of that every time we go by the interpretive center at manzanar. we stopped in there once--it was quite enough. you can't redeem yourself from the injustices and atrocities committed today and tomorrow by putting the past into a neat little bundle.
|
|
sandstone conglomerate
climber
sharon conglomerate central
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2012 - 09:49am PT
|
It makes no difference what men think of war, said the judge. War endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner.This is the way it was and will be. That way and not some other way.
|
|
mouse from merced
Trad climber
merced, california
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2012 - 10:32am PT
|
I hope we all got something from this thread, t*r, no matter the original motive.
Has anyone any information about the Indian Museum in Sacto., specifically their collection of N.A. skulls? Our Cub Scout den/pack took the tour in the fifties and they were on display then, but I have not been back and wonder how the collection has fared since the Graves Protection Act. I understand the Act was a federal response to outraged Native Americans. But did the State of California respond to their protests in like manner?
Every time I think about that tour, I feel creepy. Every time I think about the beads our gang collected on the American R., I feel a little guilty. They came from graves. Times and attitudes have changed greatly since then.
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2012 - 10:39am PT
|
"let the dead bury the dead." wasn't it jesus who said that? some call him the prince of peace, but he's king of nothing in this world. sadly, sandstone conglomerate has gotten to the heart of the matter, but i wonder if he lived through the 1960s.
|
|
| Messages 1 - 94 of total 94 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!