Well we don’t know that, plus it’s completely irrelevant.
We don’t look at (war) crimes in the context of “Well, if they hadn’t done it, another group may have at some future time”.
Why not just condemn what Columbus and the early voyagers did, end sentence? Why must we strain really hard to conceive of some “but…”?
Well, they co-existed for about 135 million years without the pesky little mammals knocking them off of their perch. It took a nine-mile-wide asteroid to do that.
How many do you think there were? Instead of calling me out, tell us what you think.
Here is what I posted earlier, which you apparently didnt read-
So, the only city building civilizations left were the Aztecs and the Mayans. Oh, and I missed the Incas, because we were talking about North America. I may have missed a couple others in South America, but in North America, the civilizations that build cities were either gone or just those two.
Because all the empires of the time were assholes. All of them. It was a time of assholes. Columbus didnt stand out in a sea of assholes. Context is important.
Yes, Columbus and the Spanish, and the Portuguese were rat bastards. The mayas and Aztecs were evil rat bastards. Ok the brits were just bastards, since they werent so heavily into slavery.
This is incorrect.
I’ll give you hint of at least one more:
Yes, but some groups of dinosaurs were declining before the asteroid hit, due to climate change, competition, sea level fluctuation, and volcanic activity. Some groups of mammals were getting more advanced and diversifying, though they were still mostly small, nocturnal insectivores.
Primitive cats, dogs, primates, and others evolved before the asteroid hit. Dinos were still King of the Hill, but their world was becoming more competitive. Competition and environmental change spur evolution. It was time for them to adapt or perish. Fish, or cut bait. Shit, or get off the pot.
I don’t think the non-avian dinosaurs would have relinquished their crown without a fight. They had to evolve or die. They had to survive or go extinct.
Some obvious pathways for them to evolve and continue their dominance would be to gain more intelligence, become more social, and perhaps even become fully warm-blooded.
So, I think it’s fair to say that mammals were becoming more competitive with dinos, and that probably would have continued if the bolide collision didn’t occur. Both dinosaurs and mammals would have continued to evolve.
One thing is certain, our world today would have been much different if that asteroid missed hitting our planet 66 million years ago. For one thing, I don’t believe we humans would have evolved into existence at all. And, if we didn’t exist, we wouldn’t be facing the Holocene extinction today. Frankly, our biosphere would have been better off without us.
So, on the one hand, I’m happy the asteroid hit our planet. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be here to experience the hedonistic qualia you and I experience from birth to death.
But, on the other hand, I feel guilty that my species really fucked things up for us and the rest of the species on Earth.
Maybe the next dominant species will do a better job. It can’t do much worse.
So, instead of listing others, you give one, then say "
This is not a contest. If you have additional information, share it.
Yes, the Purépecha Empire were very late foes of the Aztecs, coming into their height just about in time to ally with the Spanish against their foes. Their capital was mostly a ceremonial center, with a population not even 1/10th the size of the Aztec capital. But still it was certainly a civilization, just one little is known about, so that’s good, and thank you.
It presumptuous of humanoids to think the only reason we successfully evolved, grew more intelligence and populated, ad nauseum, was our own human-ness. So many other things happened that changed how we evolved to where we came to the place we are now. Other species dying, weather, ice ages, earthquakes and other disasters. Disease. The plague alone changed things significantly.
I can’t see Columbus as all that important. I mean cool we got to the Americas. Humans were already here.
Who’s to say what they would’ve done had European exploration not happened til way later?
Sounds like you’re possibly confused again. What you’re calling “the Aztecs” had fallen before Purépecha contact with Spain. Maybe you’re thinking about the Tlaxcalans?
In any case, to end the hijack, it’s an absurd simplification to claim that mesoamerica only consisted of “Aztecs” and Mayans in 1492.
Firstly, no-one has limited this to empires except you. You’ve limited it to empires because conveniently it means we don’t need to compare Columbus to the Arawaks who he was butchering.
Secondly, no, it’s at least debatable whether Columbus was particularly evil, even by the standards of the time:
You also appear, if I understand you correctly, to be considering “civilization” to be only “the thing that is done in cities.” That does fit with the derivation; and does also seem to be the general use of the term. It’s not, however, synonymous with “culture covering a sizeable area with routine intercommunication and co-ordination of governing techniques.”
And I’m not sure what the point is – because people don’t have cities it’s OK to conquer them, murder them, enslave them, force them into building cities?
Nor did I claim that.
Look, if you have something to contribute about mesoamerican civilizations, do so.
No, like I said the Five Tribes confederation were civilized, despite having no cities.
Hardly.
It was in reply to
and i said 
Read the whole thread.
The whole thread amply supports the claim that Christopher Columbus was an unusually evil man, even for his time, and that he was one of the causes of a collapse of civilization in the Americas, along with a massive amount of human suffering.
Indeed.
And that’s “are”, not “were”. They are very much still in existence.