metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I fully agree, and I simply cannot see how it is in any way justifiable.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do you think European colonization of America was a good thing?
- Thread starter Spiderman
- Start date
By that standard, Daesh is attempting to bring unity and peace to Syria and Iraq.
Tom
The pre-Columbian natives were hardly "primitive". Most of them died due to diseases that the filthy Europeans brought over and that the natives had no immunity to.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
If my memory is correct, a Viking anchor was found in Newfoundland. Also, there was the discovery of something else there and in Greenland: some blonde-haired/blue-eyed Inuit.
VioletVortex
Well-Known Member
Did you have to make that last statement? Just like people, various diseases are native to different areas. Diseases like smallpox had invaded Europe from Asia hundreds of years prior. The Europeans eventually became immune to this disease, but the Native Americans were not, so upon exposure, many died. Also, these Europeans colonizing what is now the US were not ideal Europeans, they were the weirdos rejected by the British majority. They were probably less advanced than the average Europeans of the time, and in turn, the average Europeans were still less advanced than their ancestors were 500 years before.
You are right in saying that the Native Americans were far from primitive. The southern tribes who came from Mongolia were, however, the northern Eastern Uralic, Siberian, and Arctic Inuit people were quite advanced. They had very interesting cultures and ideal tribal civilizations.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Pro
Good for the Europeans.
Con
Not so good for indigenous peoples.
In the end
People are people. It would still end up like it is now.
VioletVortex
Well-Known Member
Logic. Who explores a land without at least setting up temporary camps. Greenland was definitely settled by the Norse during the Viking age, and as the Vikings also explored Northwestern Canada, it would make sense that they set up forts there.
VioletVortex
Well-Known Member
Exactly. The same applies to Europe, though. It's a shame that many ignore that fact.
Wirey
Fartist
Read "Guns, Germs, and Steel". It was neither good nor bad, merely inevitable.
And the complete destruction of less civilized societies by contact with more advanced ones isn't just a European thing. Check out the history of Papua, or Fiji, or Hawaii, or South America, or Africa, or New Zealand (especially New Zealand). When an inferior society (technologically speaking) bumps into a superior one, the result is never good for the yokels.
And the complete destruction of less civilized societies by contact with more advanced ones isn't just a European thing. Check out the history of Papua, or Fiji, or Hawaii, or South America, or Africa, or New Zealand (especially New Zealand). When an inferior society (technologically speaking) bumps into a superior one, the result is never good for the yokels.
roger1440
I do stuff
Conquest is always “ugly, brutal, and inhumane”. It wouldn’t have worked if the welcome wagon brought milk and cookies. The “colonization of America” worked out great for the winners. As for the losers…. we all know how that turned out.
Wirey
Fartist
Way worse based on a 21st century democratic society's idea of morality. or way worse based on the morals of medieval Europe's societies? Because they are different. Judging someone who was lucky to live until 40 and never heard of dentists or unemployment insurance by our morals is pretty pointless.
It would have been good for peace if Jesus had inflicted secular humanist morality on Christendom 500 years earlier though.
Instead of rewarding the ruthlessness of EuroChistians with so much wealth and power they quickly became as arrogant as Genghis Kahn.
Tom
Especially if that were found in Scripture.
Instead of what actually is found in Scripture.
Tom
Politesse
Amor Vincit Omnia
I can conceive of no "upside" to genocide. No true advancement of humanity ever required blood sacrifices to occur. The good things you associate with Europe would still exist without the rape, murder, and kidnapping of millions of people. I don't have to rape your wife and murder your father to trade with you; in fact, it doesn't even help.
Lucida Sidera
Member
The answer will depend on which identity and ideology you believe you belong to. Many Europeans think that the Roman colonization was good, and they feel that they are their heritors. Their ancestors, the Celtics, however, knew what this was about.
You can find periods of places as far as the Nordic lands where people almost wished to have been conquered by Alexander, by so much hommage and proud they had of their "Greek" roots. The places where Alexander did actually step, like Iran or Egypt aren't really that proud of it.
To believe that a certain civilization is more evolved, progressed, or basically adding a lot of broad perspectives of life as it was part of a certain "culture" and not related to any other is part of this ideology. Any colonization based on violence, or anything based on violence, is obviously horrible, but the intrepidous time and lack of memory can open wings to ideologize about anything.
You can find periods of places as far as the Nordic lands where people almost wished to have been conquered by Alexander, by so much hommage and proud they had of their "Greek" roots. The places where Alexander did actually step, like Iran or Egypt aren't really that proud of it.
To believe that a certain civilization is more evolved, progressed, or basically adding a lot of broad perspectives of life as it was part of a certain "culture" and not related to any other is part of this ideology. Any colonization based on violence, or anything based on violence, is obviously horrible, but the intrepidous time and lack of memory can open wings to ideologize about anything.
Silverscale derg
Active Member
It was bad. They were naturalists living off the land. They weren't hurting anyone. They used all of what they killed and respected nature...