# American Indian - was genocide the only solution? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 31, 2001, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-indian-was-genocide-the-only-solution/90712 "2001-10-31T15:20:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2001, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-indian-was-genocide-the-only-solution/90712/61 "2001-11-07T17:31:43Z")
**Dinsdale** wrote: > [@](#): > > Just a minor observation, spoke, but I’m not sure the Declaration of Independence should be relied upon as a definitive and objective chronicle of events. > > Moreover, would it be appropriate to distinguish between instances where Indian tribes acted violently towards settlers on their own initiative, as opposed to when they were manipulated by European nations? A fair observation. The language of the Declaration of Independence was influenced by the predations of Indians during the French and Indian War. During that war, the Indians (certain tribes, anyway) were actively encouraged by the French to attack English settlements. I’m not sure “The French told us to do it,” is an excuse for atrocities, but you are right to mention this as an point to ponder. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2001, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-indian-was-genocide-the-only-solution/90712/62 "2001-11-07T18:07:31Z")
Spoke, so Columbus leaves a bunch of people in Hispaniola and when he returns they’re all dead (at the hands of the locals I would presume). Later he runs aground and is forced again to establish a settlement on land during which time he also had some conflict with the indians. For how long was Columbus there? As soon as he could he returned to Spain so he could not have been there long. Your definition of this is “Columbus wreaked havoc among the indians” Hmmm… Ok, whatever. I guess my dialect of English is a different one because for me “Columbus was trying to get the hell outta there and go home” seems a more apt description. I would also like to see some support for the assertion that he traded in slaves etc which was made by someone else in this thread and which I cannot go back and see because my connection is so slow. Anyway, I think Columbus is best described as a navigator, mariner and discoverer. Any contact he had on land was incidental and AFAIK he did not trade in slaves or have any other business or investment in America. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2001, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-indian-was-genocide-the-only-solution/90712/63 "2001-11-07T20:29:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by sailor \* > \*\*Spoke, so Columbus leaves a bunch of people in Hispaniola and when he returns they’re all dead (at the hands of the locals I would presume). Later he runs aground and is forced again to establish a settlement on land during which time he also had some conflict with the indians. For how long was Columbus there? As soon as he could he returned to Spain so he could not have been there long. Your definition of this is “Columbus wreaked havoc among the indians” Hmmm… Ok, whatever. I guess my dialect of English is a different one because for me “Columbus was trying to get the hell outta there and go home” seems a more apt description. > > I would also like to see some support for the assertion that he traded in slaves etc which was made by someone else in this thread and which I cannot go back and see because my connection is so slow. Anyway, I think Columbus is best described as a navigator, mariner and discoverer. Any contact he had on land was incidental and AFAIK he did not trade in slaves or have any other business or investment in America. \*\* “AFAIK”? Maybe you should read a bit more on the subject, **sailor**. “As far as I know” is not an argument, and you have already shown that your knowledge of Columbus’s activities is limited. After all, “as far as you knew,” Columbus never established a colony in the first place. You were wrong about that. Has it occurred to you that you might be wrong in your other assumptions about Columbus? Did you read the links I provided in my last post? They might help. You have the time line confused, so let’s go over it again. Here (in chronological order) are the pertinent facts (from [this site](http://school.discovery.com/homeworkhelp/worldbook/atozhistory/c/125200.html)):[ul][li]Columbus sails on first voyage.[_]Christmas Eve, 1492, his flagship runs aground off of Hispanola and is capsized.[_]Columbus founds the colony of La Navidad nearby.[_]Columbus leaves 39 sailors, with orders to gather as much gold as possible before his return.[_]Columbus returns to Spain.[_]September 1493- Columbus sets sail on his second voyage.[_]Columbus takes with him 17 ships, **including colonists who intended to settle the island**.[_]November, 1493- Columbus lands at La Navidad, but the men he had left are gone.[_]Columbus sails down the coast and establishes a new colony, La Isabela.[_]Colonists become discontent.[_]Columbus sends expeditions into interior of the island looking for gold.[_]Spring, 1494- Columbus leaves his brother in charge of colony, goes off to explore Cuba.[_]Columbus returns, places another brother in charge of the colony. Settlers are unhappy.[_]Indians begin to grow restless and agressive.[_]Columbus forces all male Tainos over age 14 to pan rivers for gold. Those who fail to collect an assigned quota of gold are punished, sometimes by having their hands cut off. The quotas are almost impossible to meet. When the Indians threaten to rebel, Columbus uses their rebellion to justify **enslaving** them.[_]The colony’s priests write to Spain to complain of Columbus’s treatment of the Indians and conditions in the colony generally. [_]1496- Columbus returns to Spain to defend himself.[_]1498- Columbus returns to Hispanola. Colony is in disarray.[_]Columbus tries to pacify colonists by giving them land and allowing them to enslave Indians to work the land. [_]Rebellion breaks out, subdued by Columbus.[_]1500- Ferdinand and Isabela send commissioner to investigate complaints about Columbus. Columbus is arrested, sent back to Spain for trial. Columbus stripped of his authority as governor of Hispanola.[_]1502 Columbus sets out on fourth voyage. When his ships are threatened by hurricane, he is forbidden permission to even land in Hispanola.[_]Thus ends Columbus’s association with Hispanola.[/ul][/li] That clear things up, **sailor**? ---
**Author:** ![OK9372](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/958977/32.png) [@OK9372](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OK9372)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2001, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-indian-was-genocide-the-only-solution/90712/64 "2001-11-08T02:08:00Z")
**C Columbus, part time slaver.** [http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/8533/columbus.html](http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/8533/columbus.html) **Columbus** reported to the Court in Madrid that he had reached Asia and an island off the coast of China. He asked for ships and men for a second expedition and promised to bring “as much gold as they need… and as many **slaves** as they ask.” Columbus, after or during his inept handling of a position as colonial governor, dealt in slaves for income, even though, the Britich Monarchy had not too long before declared slavery illegal. He still had plenty of buyers. Later, after being so inept at being a governor, he was forcefully shipped home in chains, he proceeded to battle for the money from the rights of his dicoveries and the governorship of all of the lands in said discoveries as promised him prior to his voyages. He was ignored. The Discovery Channel had a program about him once his entitlement book surfaced, showing that he indeed, was to have been made a general governor and to get a percentage of all of the wealth coming from the lands he discovered but was stiffed in the end by the royalty. Probably because he was not the nicest of guys and he did deal in slaves, packing them into his slave ships like sardines. **Unlike most slavers, Columbus** recognized and wrote that the natives were intelligent and had a civilization of their own but could be easily exploited and made into useful servants. ---
**Author:** ![OK9372](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/958977/32.png) [@OK9372](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OK9372)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2001, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-indian-was-genocide-the-only-solution/90712/65 "2001-11-08T02:39:30Z")
Little additional note on the OP here; The Indians slaughtered innocents, women and children alike, **but** only after they had been **taught** this type of warfare from the invading Europeans, especially the Spanish, who often killed Indians just for fun, raped and killed their women, worked their men to death, killed their children for something as minute as just wanting to ‘test the edge of their swords’ and generally treating them worse than the majority of slaves in the American South were treated. To the American South, slaves were a valuable commodity and most were treated like valuable animals but the Spanish treated them as useless objects, to be used and discarded. (Funny how everyone screams about the American mode of Inhumane Slavery, but not one peep is mentioned about the type of brutality the Spanish used on natives that would make the WW2 holocaust almost pale in comparison.) ((Maybe because said slaves were not African and Black??)) Again, in the arguments you all have been expounding on, you keep forgetting about the maturity levels of the time. You cannot compare those people with anyone today and expect to develop a **rational** explanation. Were you to encounter any of the great American historical figures of the time and engage them in lengthy conversation, you would probably be stunned at how they actually thought of things and their reasons for doing them. The History books were **written by educated historians** many years later, most of whom, as we well know now, adjusted the telling according to how they personally felt about things. You can get a mindset of the times by reading any good collection of personal letters or diaries people of the times left behind. (These people _bathed once a month_\*, used perfumes and powder to cover up their stink, had the brilliant idea of running open sewers down the middle of public streets, thought nothing of dumping full chamber pots out of second story windows, and wore, what we would consider, heavy clothing that was not washed nor changed every day. They had a lot of time on their hands if they were rich, more than enough time to think up ways to get into trouble because there was no TV nor radio and often not much in the way of news. Their world view was generally limited and the average person never got more than 20 miles away from his village. They use **sour milk** to whiten sheets! Can you imagine how they smelled even after being hung outside to dry for a few days? The insides of those glorious mansions must have reeked quite frequently, especially during parties. In a certain time period, birth was thought to be something like budding from a tree or plant _even though they **saw** live births from people and animals!!_ (There are paintings depicting this strange process.) I saw a period painting once, in a museum, on TV, done by a good artist, of what looked like a couple of teens dressed up in flouncey, bouncy period clothing. It turned out to be a painting of a rich Lord and his wife in their mansion! You could tell by looking at them that they were spoiled and not generally mature, yet they commanded a lot of power in their community. Like I said, you need to consider the maturity of the people of the times who did not have the vast amount of information available to them daily like we have today. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2001, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-indian-was-genocide-the-only-solution/90712/66 "2001-11-08T14:32:49Z")
**OK9372** wrote: [quote] The Indians slaughtered innocents, women and children alike, but only after they had been taught this type of warfare from the invading Europeans… [quote] Sorry, but that just ain’t so. The Jamestown women and children were slaughtered by Indians who’d had no prior contact with Europeans. No one had to “teach” the Indians how to commit atrocities. Like I said before, _Homo sapiens sapiens_, regardless of skin color, is capable of remarkable cruelty. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2001, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-indian-was-genocide-the-only-solution/90712/67 "2001-11-08T14:34:24Z")
**OK9372** wrote: > [@](#): > > The Indians slaughtered innocents, women and children alike, but only after they had been taught this type of warfare from the invading Europeans… Sorry, but that just ain’t so. The Jamestown women and children were slaughtered by Indians who’d had no prior contact with Europeans. No one had to “teach” the Indians how to commit atrocities. Like I said before, _Homo sapiens sapiens_, regardless of skin color, is capable of remarkable cruelty. ---
**Author:** ![CBEscapee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b19c9b/32.png) [@CBEscapee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CBEscapee)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2001, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-indian-was-genocide-the-only-solution/90712/68 "2001-11-08T16:15:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by OK9372 \* > Little additional note on the OP here; > > To the American South, slaves were a valuable commodity and most were treated like valuable animals but the Spanish treated them as useless objects, to be used and discarded. (Funny how everyone screams about the American mode of Inhumane Slavery, but not one peep is mentioned about the type of brutality the Spanish used on natives that would make the WW2 holocaust almost pale in comparison.) **((Maybe because said slaves were not African and Black??))** > > Like I said, you need to consider the maturity of the people of the times who did not have the vast amount of information available to them daily like we have today. Where did you reach the conclusion that slaves in Mexico weren’t of African origin? Check out some of the vast information that’s we have available daily. > [@](#): > > The Mexican slave trade, both the domestic trade and the importation of new slaves, reached its peak between 1580 and 1640, when imports from Africa averaged better than 1000 slaves a year and two out of every three slaves bound for Spanish America were destined for Mexico. Most of the slaves arrived at the port of Veracruz, on Mexico’s Caribbean coast. From there they were sent to Mexico City and points beyond, although many were kept in the vicinity of Veracruz to work the fisheries and ports. It is estimated that by the mid-1600s Afro-Mexicans, enslaved and free, totaled slightly fewer than 150,000. [http://www.africana.com/Articles/tt\_610.htm](http://www.africana.com/Articles/tt_610.htm) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-indian-was-genocide-the-only-solution/90712.md?page=3)