|
Deltasquid posted:Having gone to Greece this very summer, I can guarantee the nazis are being overblown in Greece. It's like not going to the UK because the EDL scares you.
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 01:31 |
|
|
I was in Greece 2 years ago, we bumped into a Communist party rally while on Crete. A nice old communist drew a caricature of my girlfriend. The Golden Dawn stuff is mainly concentrated in a few urban areas you're unlikely to go.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
Torrannor posted:Though to be fair, while WW2 reduced much of the continent to rubble and killed an unbelievable number of people, this is still not quite the level of destruction that the indigenous societies of America suffered. Care to back that up? Most of the American deaths were from unpreventable disease.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:Care to back that up? Most of the American deaths were from unpreventable disease. I would think it's backed up by the fact that several countries conquered and occupied by the Germans or Japanese in WWII are now thriving success stories, whereas indigenous communities in the Americas are at best an impoverished underclass and at worst actually, successfully, genocided.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
Tony Jowns posted:I would think it's backed up by the fact that several countries conquered and occupied by the Germans or Japanese in WWII are now thriving success stories, whereas indigenous communities in the Americas are at best an impoverished underclass and at worst actually, successfully, genocided. wikipedia posted:According to the U.S. Bureau of the Census (1894), "The Indian wars under the government of the United States have been more than 40 in number. They have cost the lives of about 19,000 white men, women and children, including those killed in individual combats, and the lives of about 30,000 Indians."[6] wikipedia WWII combat deaths chart posted:22,000,000 You are off your goddamned rocker.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
I guess all the indigenous americans just, you know, left. If only 30 000 were killed, all those other millions must have just gone someplace else. Nobody's fault really.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
It's totally impossible to get reliable numbers for non-combat deaths. And I already talked about disease, far and away the biggest killer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
Given the discussion I would like to share this:
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:You are off your goddamned rocker. The Indian Wars were a tiny part of the genocide against Native Americans. We had already killed 90+ percent of all native Americans on this continent by the time those had even started. Granted, a lot of it was not actually done by America, it was done by the Spanish before we even really got here, but we drat sure didn't help it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
I don't think it's fair to say killed there, but yeahquote:this is still not quite the level of destruction that the indigenous societies of America suffered. is absolutely true. WW2 was maybe more intentionally devastating (although I think that's still a dubious claim) but the spread of old world diseases over the Americas, either passively or actively, was far and away, without any question, the largest destroyer in human history.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 06:29
|
|
|
When Europeans started really settling the American continent they were quite literally moving into an apocalyptic hellscape. There's plenty of blame for actual deliberate bad poo poo to go around as well so I'm not trying to absolve anyone of blame here (Like the time we deliberately gave native people infected blankets  ), but the impact of the diseases which Europe took to the New World is pretty much without precedent. Maybe Ghenghis Khan's horde came close to similar destruction on such a scale, but that's about the only possibility in terms of parallels.Plus, in the modern era, many of the Native tribes/societies which survive live in conditions worse than that endured by any other group in America today.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 06:44
|
|
|
How much was the impact of disease exacerbated by the conditions of forced migrations/resettlements?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 07:06
|
|
|
Mister Adequate posted:When Europeans started really settling the American continent they were quite literally moving into an apocalyptic hellscape... I'm in total agreement about the immense and unimaginable tragedy that fell upon the native Americans, but I do take objection at your use of the term hellscape. For the natives it obviously was, but the many of the settlers saw the land as a paradise, and in many ways it was. The natives who had been so recently wiped out had engineered it to the point where it was a truly great place to live. Which I realize is pretty unrelated to the point you're making here, I just wanted to point that out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 07:13
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:I'm in total agreement about the immense and unimaginable tragedy that fell upon the native Americans, but I do take objection at your use of the term hellscape. For the natives it obviously was, but the many of the settlers saw the land as a paradise, and in many ways it was. The natives who had been so recently wiped out had engineered it to the point where it was a truly great place to live. That's fair, I used to word to try to drive home how disastrous it was, but it's really not the best descriptor given the size and bounty of the land.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 08:07
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:Care to back that up? Most of the American deaths were from unpreventable disease. I was just talking about the outcomes. For example, the post-war society here in Germany 70 years after the war is quite different from the pre-war society in several aspects (thank god!), but it is still recognizable "German". And it is still a country made up mostly of ethnic Germans, and we are quite prosperous. Who would have thought that after WW2 ended? The balance of power is roughly the same as before the war, which is rather surprising I think. Contrast that with the American tribal societies, whose members died in much greater numbers than any European people in WW2 . And those that survived were either relegated to reservations, or had to convert to Christianity and had their culture stripped and supplanted by European culture.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 08:36
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:The natives who had been so recently wiped out had engineered it to the point where it was a truly great place to live. "Engineered" Tribes moved into an area, burned down the forest, hunted down all animals, and then moved on to the next spot where they burned down the forest and hunted all the animals. They simply lived in a vast and great country.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 08:59
|
|
|
The common cold was like the 16th century version of the atomic bomb y'all. Those darn Europeans did everything to spread the disease, because they knew about infection, micro organisms, immune system, hell yeah. The most heinous act of biological warfare in the history of man.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 09:08
|
|
|
Riso posted:"Engineered" That's the way it looked a couple of hundred years after contact with Europeans following a huge population collapse due to introduction of European diseases that the native populations were unable to resist due to lack of previous exposure. 1491 is a great read - agriculture was far more widespread in the pre-Columbian Americas than most people think. HighClassSwankyTime posted:The common cold was like the 16th century version of the atomic bomb y'all. Those darn Europeans did everything to spread the disease, because they knew about infection, micro organisms, immune system, hell yeah. The most heinous act of biological warfare in the history of man. Stuff like smallpox, malaria and yellow fever which spread accidentally from European settlers who had more immunity. Also there was at least one documented example of deliberate spread - The Siege of Fort Pitt chippocrates fucked around with this message at 09:13 on Mar 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 09:09
|
|
|
chippocrates posted:That's the way it looked a couple of hundred years after contact with Europeans following a huge population collapse due to introduction of European diseases that the native populations were unable to resist due to lack of previous exposure. 1491 is a great read - agriculture was far more widespread in the pre-Columbian Americas than most people think. To be honest wasn't thinking about the Aztecs/Mayans/Incas, I meant the North Americans. quote:Stuff like smallpox, malaria and yellow fever which spread accidentally from European settlers who had more immunity. It's alright, in exchange they gave us tobacco, coca and syphilis. Who's laughing now?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 09:23
|
|
|
Riso posted:To be honest wasn't thinking about the Aztecs/Mayans/Incas, I meant the North Americans. That's who Chippocrates meant too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 10:16
|
|
|
Riso posted:It's alright, in exchange they gave us tobacco, coca and syphilis. I'd say that's a fair deal if you consider the amount of deaths caused by tobacco.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 10:49
|
|
|
 Riso posted:"Engineered" That's funny, because if you read any account from the Oregon Trail era the people are all amazed that there's so many orchards , groves , paths and fish ponds and are constantly thanking God for providing this wonderful paradise, but very few of them connect it to the fact that people had been living in and managing that area for the past fifteen thousand years. Or hell, Look at the first wave of North American immigration, Jamestown has a 90% fatality rate and only survives by sending wave after wave of colonists to prop it up ; Popham and Roanake have to be completely abandoned, Plymouth is going the same way, but then a native American who speaks English and had lived in London for years shows up, gives them some food and takes them to a village that had been wiped out by smallpox, and within in another two years he's showed them how to get the place working again and they're producing a surplus. Ghetto Prince fucked around with this message at 14:09 on Mar 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 11:56
|
|
|
Riso posted:It's alright, in exchange they gave us tobacco, coca and syphilis. They did get a lot of free pesticides and violence though. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 12:20
|
|
|
Ghetto Prince posted:Plymouth is going the same way, but then a native American who speaks English and had lived in London for years shows up, gives them some food and takes them to a village that had been wiped out by smallpox, and within in another two years he's showed them how to get the place working again and they're producing a surplus. The pilgrims built Plymouth on top of the abandoned village before that guy showed up, I think. Bonus facts: that was the guy's village, he'd been captured by Europeans 15 years before, sent to London and had only just managed to make his way back home, only to find everyone there had died and a bunch of English folks squatting in the ruins. Also the name by which he introduced himself to the colonists roughly means "Wrath of God". Let that sink in. Kassad fucked around with this message at 12:35 on Mar 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 12:25
|
|
|
Kassad posted:The pilgrims built Plymouth on top of the abandoned village before that guy showed up, I think. Bonus facts: that was the guy's village, he'd been captured by Europeans 15 years before, sent to London and had only just managed to make his way back home, only to find everyone there had died and a bunch of English folks squatting in the ruins. Also the name by which he introduced himself to the colonists roughly means "Wrath of God". Let that sink in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 12:52
|
|
|
Negative Entropy posted:I'm still amazed at the incredible string of coincidences that allowed Squanto to return and help the pilgrims. Massachusetts colony's fate hinged on serious dumb luck. Not the least of which is that it's likely the only reason he stayed with them was because with all of his tribe dead, Plymouth was surrounded by his tribe's mortal enemies. The pilgrims were his only way to avoid death.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 13:04
|
|
|
Riso posted:To be honest wasn't thinking about the Aztecs/Mayans/Incas, I meant the North Americans. When English and French ships first sailed around the New England coast looking for places to build settlements, they reported that they were unable to find enough empty space to settle on, so numerous were the native villages. Until the diseases burned through the area that is, then they could just take over the abandoned native settlements. Same thing happened when the Spanish marched through the south (Florida to part of Texas I think?), the place was thick with native towns. 100 years later when some French came looking around, it was a unpopulated devastated wilderness. Plus, America remained very vulnerable to smallpox even for the settlers, there was a smallpox epidemic during the American Revolutionary War that killed thousands. Washington had to inoculate his army before smallpox lost him the war. Nobody is blaming anyone here, but the destruction wrought on the Americas by disease is mind blowing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 13:16
|
|
|
Mister Adequate posted:When Europeans started really settling the American continent they were quite literally moving into an apocalyptic hellscape. There's plenty of blame for actual deliberate bad poo poo to go around as well so I'm not trying to absolve anyone of blame here (Like the time we deliberately gave native people infected blankets You seem to be overlooking that Genghis khans conquests also caused the black plague.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:You seem to be overlooking that Genghis khans conquests also caused the black plague. Smallpox alone was deadlier than the plague, and it wasn't the only disease brought in by Europeans and their livestock. Native groups suffered the equivalent of a plague outbreak every few years, for something like a century. The really sad thing is that those epidemics were basically unavoidable even if the Europeans that came to the Americas had been literal saints.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 15:38
|
|
|
Kassad posted:
I sort of want to write a post-apocalyptic story where humans make First Contact with a bunch of aliens that seem all right, but they have to leave to finish a trade deal and in the interim period a disease comes down that destroys most of the population.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 15:41
|
|
|
I generally think that the Native Americans were doomed to have a massive from disease as soon as they killed almost all of the potential domestic animals in the America's but I think that the spread of disease could of probably been slowed. For example had Muslims from say Morocco or a surviving Al-Andalus been first over rather than the filthy Spanish conquistadors I am sure the spread of disease would of been slower. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 15:49
|
|
|
Lawman 0 posted:I generally think that the Native Americans were doomed to have a massive from disease as soon as they killed almost all of the potential domestic animals in the America's but I think that the spread of disease could of probably been slowed. I wonder how different American history would have been if smallpox had been brought over by the Vikings, giving the Native Americans 500 years or so to recover before Columbus showed up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:You seem to be overlooking that Genghis khans conquests also caused the black plague. Uhhhh, excuse me? I've heard several theories about the Black Plague, but none of them have involved Genghis Khan (who, it's worth pointing out, died over a hundred years before the plague hit Europe).
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
Basil Hayden posted:Uhhhh, excuse me? I've heard several theories about the Black Plague, but none of them have involved Genghis Khan (who, it's worth pointing out, died over a hundred years before the plague hit Europe). Sorry, Mongols in general.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
Kassad posted:Smallpox alone was deadlier than the plague, and it wasn't the only disease brought in by Europeans and their livestock. Native groups suffered the equivalent of a plague outbreak every few years, for something like a century. Literal saints were even filthier than your average Spaniard, so it would have been even worse.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:You seem to be overlooking that Genghis khans conquests also caused the black plague. The Mongol invasions are usually exaggerated in their total death count. He really didn't kill as many people as he and his descendants are claimed to have killed. They co-opted much of their opposition, and they weren't as quick to wipe a city off the map as is usually portrayed. Surprise surprise, dead people don't pay tribute. Sure he killed a lot of people, but it's not a good comparison to the devastation that the Native populations of the new world experienced.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
So how come we Europeans were such filthy disease-ridden hobos? Greater population? Better links to the rest of the world? Both?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
marktheando posted:I wonder how different American history would have been if smallpox had been brought over by the Vikings, giving the Native Americans 500 years or so to recover before Columbus showed up. Interestingly, Vikings placed a bigger emphasis on hygiene than the Christians OR Muslims of their time. quote:Although the popular image of the people of the Viking Age is one of wild-haired, dirty savages, this is a false perception. In reality, the Vikings took care with their personal grooming, bathing, and hairstyling.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
I've read that the Spaniards were really filthy and that they smelled awful to the Aztecs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 16:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 01:31 |
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:So how come we Europeans were such filthy disease-ridden hobos? Greater population? Better links to the rest of the world? Both? Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel talks about this. Yeah, I know Diamond and this book in particular get a lot of flak for their deterministic view of history, but this explanation of why the Old World passed on so many diseases to the New World but not the other way around makes sense to me, though I'm not an expert by any means. The Old World was full of agrarian societies where people lived in close proximity to live animals their whole lives. Many of the worst diseases affecting humans crossed over from livestock, so the keeping of livestock plus all the trade that went on among Old World societies meant that people from the Old World simply carried a lot more diseases than New World societies did.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 16:26
|
|
