this post was submitted on 20 May 2023
-2 points (0.0% liked)
Comradeship // Freechat
12 readers
1 users here now
Talk about whatever, respecting the rules established by Lemmygrad. Failing to comply with the rules will grant you a few warnings, insisting on breaking them will grant you a beautiful shiny banwall.
A community for comrades to chat and talk about whatever doesn't fit other communities
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I never said they had an "inferior civilization." I said they did not have the right kind of civilization, to fight off the colonizing forced that would repeatedly come for the Americas, even had they had killed the first group.
Their conditions simply didn't require them to form a civilization like that. They didn't need to make fortified bases and castles, invent firearms, develop large scale unified armies with tactics designed to fight other large scale armies. Sure, they had battle experience. They went to war and such but they had never had to deal with something like these European colonizers before that would have required them to unify against a threat like that.
Them having said large scale unified front would require pretty drastic changes to the society that would go back much farther in time. Had your original comment been "The native Americans forming a cohesive, unified civilization capable of keeping the Europeans out of the Americas." Then I would have to agree. Had that happened, even with the technical superiority of the EUs it would have drastically changed how North America would develop. The US as we know it probably wouldn't ever come to exist.
There is however, a significant difference between that and simply saying " the Natives should never had trusted the Europeans," which is what my first response was to.
To add to this, the colonizers had diseases on their side.