Was there a genocide committed against Native Americans?

[Unbeknownst]

I want to see DP's opinion. Note that I am talking about the entirety of the Americas, not just the United States.

Some resources:

An essay on the issue:

Genocide and American Indian History

"Genocide and American Indian History" published on by Oxford University Press.

oxfordre.com

UN Definition of genocide:
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

1. Killing members of the group;
2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

UN genocide convention: https://www.un.org/en/genocidepreve...n and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.pdf

Some acts committed against the Native American peoples:

The Sand Creek Massacre – Legends of America

The Sand Creek Massacre on Nov 29, 1864, one of the most infamous incidents of the Indian Wars, resulted in military and Congressional investigations.

www.legendsofamerica.com

Trail of Tears: Definition, Date & Cherokee Nation - HISTORY

The Trail of Tears was the deadly route used by Native Americans when forced off their ancestral lands and into Oklahoma by the Indian Removal Act of 1830.

www.history.com

California genocide - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Canadian Indian residential school system - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Cultural genocide in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Fall of Tenochtitlan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Genocide of indigenous peoples in Brazil - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A video about the issue:

 

[nvflash]

I want to see DP's opinion. Note that I am talking about the entirety of the Americas, not just the United States.

Some resources:

An essay on the issue:

Genocide and American Indian History

"Genocide and American Indian History" published on by Oxford University Press.

oxfordre.com

UN Definition of genocide:
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

1. Killing members of the group;
2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

UN genocide convention: https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.1_Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.pdf

Some acts committed against the Native American peoples:

The Sand Creek Massacre – Legends of America

The Sand Creek Massacre on Nov 29, 1864, one of the most infamous incidents of the Indian Wars, resulted in military and Congressional investigations.

www.legendsofamerica.com

Trail of Tears: Definition, Date & Cherokee Nation - HISTORY

The Trail of Tears was the deadly route used by Native Americans when forced off their ancestral lands and into Oklahoma by the Indian Removal Act of 1830.

www.history.com

California genocide - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Canadian Indian residential school system - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Cultural genocide in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Fall of Tenochtitlan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Genocide of indigenous peoples in Brazil - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A video about the issue:

By our modern standards, some of which you have quoted, absolutely yes. Genocide and ethic cleansing were a policy of the European governments that ruled the colonies before the foundation of the US and a policy of the US government thereafter.

Still goes on because we are still tribal and when a tribe with greater means meets a tribe with lesser means we tend to think it is ok to take from them by force and/or to force them to join our tribe.

 

[TheParser]

Well, according to what little I have read on the subject, yes, one might call it a genocide.

I guess we all remember what one famous soldier said, "The only good [Native American] is a [deceased Native American]." (And supposedly Theodore Roosevelt also had a negative attitude toward them.)

Although Native Americans were not all hapless angels, nevertheless, it does seem that many Americans had no qualms about taking their lands, often in contravention of signed treaties.

It will be really interesting (to our great-grandchildren) to see how the new majority of Americans (African Americans, Asian Americans, & Hispanic Americans) treat Native Americans. (Personally, I hope that some of the bigger reservations are granted independence.)

 

[soylentgreen]

This cannot be ignored.

Cultural genocide in the United States has manifested through the physical and cultural disintegration of the indigenous people by forcing them to attend boarding schools along with the discrimination against them due to the instrumental use of the law. Cultural genocide comprises the dismantling of a culture and the de-socializing of a people.

 

[ecofarm]

Genocide is defined by motive. There was no motive or effort to eliminate NAs from existence by the US. What happened was the same bloody land-grabbing that was happening everywhere in the world at that time. The objective was not to wipe out NAs. The objective was to murder them and steal all their stuff. That's a war crime but it's not genocide, which is defined by motive.

When we conflate bloody land-grabbing with genocide, we make excuse for genocide.

 

[ecofarm]

Genocide is when people sit down and decide, "what can we do to wipe them out". Then they try to wipe the other out.

That's different than common bloody land-grabbing. The two things should not be conflated. Doing so apologizes for genocide.

 

[Schism]

Mankind is a killing machine regardless of skin color, culture, or ethnicity.

Africa, South America, Middle East, Asia, Europe, and North America are all historical killing fields.

 

[Schism]

Genocide is when people sit down and decide, "what can we do to wipe them out". Then they try to wipe the other out.

The Democratic Party election strategy.

 

[Unbeknownst]

Genocide is defined by motive. There was no motive or effort to eliminate NAs from existence by the US. What happened was the same bloody land-grabbing that was happening everywhere in the world at that time. The objective was not to wipe out NAs. The objective was to murder them and steal all their stuff. That's a war crime but it's not genocide, which is defined by motive.

When we conflate bloody land-grabbing with genocide, we make excuse for genocide.

A quote from the governor of California at the time of the genocide, Pete Burnett: "That a war of extermination will continue to be waged between the races until the Indian race becomes extinct must be expected. While we cannot anticipate this result but with painful regret, the inevitable destiny of the race is beyond the power or wisdom of man to avert."

A quote from the perpetrator of the Sand Creek massacre, Col. John Chivington: "Damn any man who sympathizes with Indians! ... I have come to kill Indians, and believe it is right and honorable to use any means under God's heaven to kill Indians. ... Kill and scalp all, big and little; nits make lice."

Note that during the Sand Creek massacre children and women were killed, brutally scalped and mutilated. The Native Americans at the camp had all surrendered. How is this just "land-grabbing," and not an attempt by the US military to completely exterminate this group of Native Americans?

 

[Rexedgar]

Genocide is defined by motive. There was no motive or effort to eliminate NAs from existence by the US. What happened was the same bloody land-grabbing that was happening everywhere in the world at that time. The objective was not to wipe out NAs. The objective was to murder them and steal all their stuff. That's a war crime but it's not genocide, which is defined by motive.

When we conflate bloody land-grabbing with genocide, we make excuse for genocide.

What do you call non-consensual sterilization?

 

[bomberfox]

Genocide is defined by motive. There was no motive or effort to eliminate NAs from existence by the US. What happened was the same bloody land-grabbing that was happening everywhere in the world at that time. The objective was not to wipe out NAs. The objective was to murder them and steal all their stuff. That's a war crime but it's not genocide, which is defined by motive.

When we conflate bloody land-grabbing with genocide, we make excuse for genocide.

Ummmm yes there was motive. We’re not going to agree i think. Its like saying Hitler just wanted lebensraum therefore no genocide.

 

[ecofarm]

What do you call non-consensual sterilization?

An isolated incident and not US policy.

 

[Rexedgar]

An isolated incident and not US policy.

Is the US Indian Health Service part of the US government?

Wouldn’t IHS action fall under “policy?”

 

[ecofarm]

Ummmm yes there was motive like holy shit you could not be more wrong. We’re not going to agree i think. Its like saying Hitler just wanted all the stuff that jews had look at all the gold teeth!

The Nazi regime was specific and clear in its goals: kill all Jewish people.

The US never had any such goals for any group.

Surely you can see the difference.

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

Yes absolutely... But it was a different time... I have a very hard time holding what people did 100,200, 300 years ago to modern day standards and morals... And that includes slavery and what was done to the American Indians...

Much of western society, government, language today is taken from the Roman Empire.. Can't get much more brutal than the Romans..So should we dump all of our ties to the Romans? No...

 

[bomberfox]

Genocide is when people sit down and decide, "what can we do to wipe them out". Then they try to wipe the other out.

That's different than common bloody land-grabbing. The two things should not be conflated. Doing so apologizes for genocide.

Thats what America did. They did exactly that.

 

[ecofarm]

Is the US Indian Health Service part of the US government?

Wouldn’t IHS action fall under “policy?”

An isolated incident does not reflect national policy.

 

[bomberfox]

The Nazi regime was specific and clear in its goals: kill all Jewish people.

The US never had any such goals for any group.

Surely you can see the difference.

So was the American regime

 

[Unbeknownst]

An isolated incident and not US policy.

The OP is not about US policy, it is about a genocide against the indigenous peoples of the Americas committed by white people. Let me remind you again of this definition:

UN Definition of genocide:
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

1. Killing members of the group;
2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

 

[bomberfox]

An isolated incident does not reflect national policy.

It wasnt an isolated event, it was national policy, especially during Jackson’s presidency.
Extermination wasnt immediate policy for the nazi regime when it initially took over according to this logic.

 

[ecofarm]

intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group,

Read that part a few times. It's stupid to skip ahead and pretend all "such as" qualifies.

Genocide is defined by motive not act.

 

[Rexedgar]

An isolated incident does not reflect national policy.

This doesn’t strike me as “isolated.”

The U.S. Indian Health Service (IHS) later applied forced sterilization to American Indian women in the 1960s and 1970s, sterilizing 3,406 Native American women between 1973 and 1976. In 1976, the U.S. General Accounting Office admitted that this took place in at least four of the 12 Indian Health Service regions.

 

[ecofarm]

This doesn’t strike me as “isolated.”

The U.S. Indian Health Service (IHS) later applied forced sterilization to American Indian women in the 1960s and 1970s, sterilizing 3,406 Native American women between 1973 and 1976. In 1976, the U.S. General Accounting Office admitted that this took place in at least four of the 12 Indian Health Service regions.

Not policy.

 

[cpwill]

No, because the question is writ-large, though there are examples of tribes that were wiped out in armed conflict/repression. Plenty of white folks (and mixed folks) committed horrific tragedies against Native Americans, but, what wiped them out en masse was the natural spread of disease from first contact. European governments could have somehow immediately jumped into 21st Century Ethics When Dealing With Other Cultures, and the vast majority of the deaths would still have happened.

 

[bomberfox]

Read that part a few times. It's stupid to skip ahead and pretend all "such as" qualifies.

Genocide is defined by motive not act.

Actually it is defined by both.