Posted on 11/26/2015 12:22:48 PM PST by Jacob Kell
“When there were Native Americans only on the continent was the only time black crime was non existent.”
But there was still plenty of “red crime”.
Native American community? The tribes are not even close to homogeneous, in history, location, whatever. Sounds like more liberal highjack political drival.
For later....
The MAIN problem with the Indians IS they didn’t have Lawyers.
as did the Dallas Cowboys
As someone who studies history I will say this:
1. The Native Americans were not the saints they are often made out to be by leftists. They fought wars among themselves over territory and resources the same as every other tribe, people, or nation on the planet. Powhatan intimated to John Smith that he had built his confederation of tribes through conquest.
2. The relations between the early settlers and the natives were much more equal than commonly supposed. The Pilgrims and their near neighbors often played referee among the various tribes who lived nearby in hopes of keeping the peace.
3. The natives adapted to the societies of the settlers around them, often effectively to the point where there was not much difference. Joseph Brant, an Iroquois chief in the 1700s lived in a house that had glass windows. In researching my own family I believe the first ones who had glass windows might have been in the late 1800s....
4. Let’s just take a historical supposition. Suppose, instead of white Europeans, the Mongols had somehow come. Genghis Khan and his ilk. Does anyone rationally suppose the lot of the natives would have been better? I think rather that the whole of their culture and people would have perished from the earth, fighting against people who were ruthless enough to kill all male children taller than a wagon axle. My point is they could have come out a whole lot worse.
Maybe your ancestors shouldn’t have sided with the French in the French and Indian War—maybe you should not have murdered women and children in that war. Then in the Revolutionary War you shouldn’t have fought for the British. Bad choices won you no friends with the Americans.
The mayan cities have inscriptions. Few perusable materials have been preserved. Some of it was destroyed by missionaries, in part because it continued rituals that to the friars and indeed to us were pretty awful, blood sacrifices of animals and even humans. This made it hard to decipher the inscriptions on the temples. But very sophisticated stuff including celestial calendars of great accuracy; Further, there is something else to be considered. The Aztec capital that Cortes found was probably as livable as any European or middle eastern city of the time. And even in north America, in the Southeast of these United States, the ordinary person in his village was probably about as well off as the ordinary French peasant.
Suppose even if the Chinese fleets of the early 15th century, which certainly reached Africa and maybe explored the Coast of North America (they certainly had the capability), had colonized California. Would the natives bee treated any better than they were by the Spanish when they came in the 1770s? There is an effort by the Left to demonize there Europeans and to romanticize the Indians. But California before the Europeans arrived was no eden.
Read the book “Guns, germs and steel”. Very insightful
>>Read the book “Guns, germs and steelâ€. Very insightful
Yes it is, but it is not the whole story.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.