Sorry, where was I talking about the Aztecs?
That’s not what the actual scientists studying the site think. Perhaps you were … let’s say confused … by the references to earlier Siouxan culture strata at the start of the cite. Maybe you want to reread it - the *whole *thing, this time, not just the bits that you think are an easy gotcha.
:rolleyes:
The word “internecine” was a quote from his own cite.
By authority of the Christian God, of course.
Yes, the Aztec Empire was part of the continuum of empires in that region. However, a least they were engaged in conflict in their own neighborhood and on pretty even terms with their adversaries. Oh, and they did not attempt to completely annihilate the cultures of their foes.
You really believe that BS don’t you?
Have a read of this, and get back to me, thanks.
No it’s not, I’ve not blamed the Native Americans for anything, I’ve just stated they were not passive in their circumstances.
Fair enough, then they were not background actors in their own circumstances.
So you’re asking for a Utopian ideal, it’s not gonna happen.
Garbage, Barbados became depopulated and then colonised with indentured Europeans and African slaves.
Doesn’t mean areas of colonisation were not without people. Emphasis on some.
How can they “rob” them if nobody is left alive in that particular area?
Lol what? What argument did I have ‘demolished’ Years ago? I don’t have an argument, I’m exploring the concept through discussion, of which you are taking highly personally.
No need for me to try when it’s blatantly obvious you are.
Example of impersonal discussion:
I don’t like the answer because it’s not that simple, and you know it.
It happened in Barbados. Nor have I said depopulation did happen in North America, I posed a hypothetical of when it becomes a circumstance, is it still theft?
Native populations may not have been wiped out altogether but they were eliminated from certain areas.
No one has said that wasn’t the case in this thread, implied or otherwise.
Some Europeans stole some land which was unoccupied. This is your problem with nuance. Case in point.
Me considering what he said as BS isn’t taking it personally. Him having multiple posts ascribing certain judgements of my moral character because of this topic is.
cite?
Alternatively, the subjugated peoples co-operated (to their ultimate disadvantage) with the Spanish in the overthrow of the vicious, exploitative, genocidal Aztec empire.
It’s worth remembering that the empire of the English included England. Where the ruling class, to use their own language, regarded agricultural labourers as a separate race, and stole their land.
The period of ‘enclosures’ includes the period when the population of Britain doubled, importation of food was not possible due to war and revolution, and there was literally not enough to eat for 50 years. The rich got richer by charging extortion rates for food grown on the land they had annexed.
If they stole the TV from the previous owners, who they also killed, it’s not quite as immoral as your version.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
The corn laws and navigation acts were all based on the predominant economic theory of Merchantilism of where there is a finite amount of resources in the world. Unless of course you’re refering to something else which requires a citation.
I’ts not “BS”, and yes, I do.
I’m sorry, what does some rich man’s toy, that failed at any industrially useful work, have to do with this? Oh, right, because it led to Newcomen?
You might have just answered “Yes” when I asked if you subscribed to the March of Progress nonsense, would have saved you a lot of typing.
Steam Engine alone =/= Industrial Revolution.
Yes, you have. I get that you don’t see that you have, but you very much have.
This is hardly a startling discovery.
If you hold me up at gunpoint and force me to type my own PIN at the ATM, I’m also a “background actor” in my own robbery…
No, I’m asking that we have some sort of truth in labeling for history.
I’m not saying history didn’t happen. I’m saying we shouldn’t paper over what Empire actually is by avoiding calling rapine “rapine”.
“Became depopulated”, gosh, you really love the passive voice.
So you’re claiming it was all disease and Spanish slave raids had nothing to do with it?
Or are you *really *going to make the disingenuous argument that because it wasn’t the English that did the raiding, but they did the settling, that somehow absolves Empire of theft?
“Some” is enough.
Make up your mind. “Some” is not “nobody”.
:dubious:
Please. Everyone can see your posts. And previous threads.
Like I said - obvious bullshit is obvious. When you don’t have facts on your side, go for the ad hominem. Never mind that it’s a clear sign you don’t actually have a leg to stand on. It’s all you have now.
I’ve made exactly zero posts of judgement of *your *moral character. Unless you care to cite where I have?
Yes, I do know it. That’s why I’m saying you’re wrong. There were no areas anywhere in the Americas or in Australia or in New Zealand that were devoid of native populations when the Europeans arrived. So anyone claiming otherwise is wrong.
There were some islands that were uninhabited when Europeans arrived. Places like Bermuda, Cape Verde, and Mauritius. I have no problem with the discoverers claiming ownership of these places. They were uninhabited and therefore not stolen.
I am not a historian: I don’t know why you think that posting the observation that the English ruling class used such language is an extraordinary claim.
What kind of citation? In the 18th century, the population doubled: the area under cultivation did not. Do all such observations require citations? We aren’t in GC: is there a particular reason to require a citation for this point?
(Doesn’t matter anyway: I thought it was an interesting observation, but you can take it or leave it.)
IANAL, but it would seem it was the property of someone who isn’t you (probably the estate of the decadents?) so it’s still stealing.
Gotta admire the Aztecs. They murdered, raped, and pillaged with the greed and ferocity of white men. That’s why we now consider them to have been an ‘advanced culture’.
Like Americans did ti Native Americans?
Even better, I built a brand new house with all the modern conveniences including a swimming pool which I let the surviving previous tenets clean for me. So it worked out well for them too.
How about we start with the ‘Rah rah imperialism’
That’s just pathetic then.
Nope, you’re saying that people only invented things for financial gain, whereas people invented things because they were interested in those fields. Not everything is driven by a profit motive.
But I don’t subscribe to that, stop trying to ascribe my intentions to fit your position.
Never said that, but it wasn’t all done in the name of a financial motive.
No I haven’t, giving them agency and not relegating them to something akin to a background character isn’t blaming them.
No, but if I take your gun and then proceed to rob in turn then it’s hardly a background character.
Truth bordering on a utopian ideal.
I’ve not denied that happened.
That’s what you’re insinuating, I took those circumstances as a given and focused on the subsequent colonisation.
Nope, it’s an example of how an empire didn’t do theft, and the crux of my discussion was ‘is all empire based on theft’
We’re discussing all
Well, enlighten me. Which ‘Argument’ Was demolished?
I do have facts on my side. You’re getting all upset obviously because you’re from South Africa and have experienced the taking away of land from Black South Africans and its manifesting itself in this thread. I can appreciate that. I don’t need to ad hominem anything but I’ll always respond to someone personally attacking me.