Is It Time To Cut Off Native Americans?

The most fatalities that stemmed from conflict occurred in the sixteenth century, when the densely populated regions of Mesoamerica and the Andes were invaded by European colonizers.

The majority of Europeans' slaves were West Africans. Even so, killing a large portion of a population in order to subdue and enslave the remainder itself constitutes genocide, just as labor and death camps coexisted under Nazi rule.

Spaniards are "white settlers from Europe." At one time, they controlled the majority of the Americas.

Cortes cannot be solely credited for "overthrowing" the Aztec Triple Alliance. The majority of its inhabitants actually died of disease, and the majority of combatants that killed the Aztecs and their allies were Indians such as Tlaxcalans.

Hate probably cannot be empirically measured, but there is significant anti-Spanish sentiment in Mexico. While many people are familiar with the national epithet that Mexicans use for U.S. citizens, gringo, fewer are familiar with the epithet that they use for Spaniards, gachupin.

 

I understand that most deaths occured in the 16 century but those stemmed from disease and not as much from direct conflict. The disease was not intentional for all intents and purposes. I've had to study mesoamerica and the thugs of Columbus for research and I honestly cannot find them stating in any of their writings that they intentionally went out to use disease as a mass weapon. They were certainly aware of what was happening and that millions were dying but I have not seen where they had the knowledge to try and use this in any controlled fashion.

If i'm wrong, which is certainly possible than i'd be curious to know if they did. Colombus was even in trouble with the King and Queen for his brutality saying to me that there was on orchestrated genocide happening.

 

The majority were caused by disease. A significant minority were still caused by violence and mistreatment. A majority of the post-disease Indian population was still effectively exterminated, and the criteria for genocide are still met.

European colonists are morally culpable for the causation of actions or conditions that they could reasonably believe would result in Indian deaths and suffering. Many regarded the disease and deaths of Indians as divine plague similar to the Ten Plagues of Egypt that indicated God's sanction of their colonial-imperial expansion and correlated with their aggression, even if they lacked a sophisticated understanding of the nature of microbes, pathogens, etc.

The Castilian expeditionaries and other colonialists became aware of diseases that seemed to inordinately affect enemies that they were in hostile engagements with, perhaps too late to be fairly charged with having caused the majority of Taino fatalities on Hispaniola and neighboring Caribbean islands, but probably within a few decades after initial contact. The diseases were not regarded as inexplicable plagues because of their long history in Europe, but the colonialists were not in a position to know of a scientific explanation why their enemies were so disproportionately affected. As a result, they instead invented a supernatural explanation that still created a causative link with their aggressive actions, i.e. heathens were being punished for their idolatry by a two-pronged means of disease and human destruction, and it was their responsibility as faithful Christians to comply with God's will.

The pathogens were carried by colonialists and their slaves, making them functionally responsible for their spread even if not morally culpable. The moral culpability aspect comes through the fact that they conceptualized the further spread of these diseases as causatively linked to their aggression. While they were not aware of all disease fatalities and therefore could not conceive of them all this way, even many of those can be linked to their malice in attacking populations whose territory was contiguous to that of other populations affected by epidemics that the colonialists had imported, even if they were not deliberately targeted yet.

The most explicit reference to that is during Pontiac's War, with British General Jeffery Amherst's writing to Colonel Henry Bouquet, "You will do well to inoculate the Indians by means of blankets, as well as every other method that can serve to extirpate this execrable race."

As the aforementioned quotes evidenced, colonial aggressors were aware of the connection between their activity and disease epidemics, even if they regarded them as divine plagues that were sanctions or results of their campaigns of aggression. The understanding of cause-and-effect existed.

Genocide does not have to be ordered by the highest ranking officials in a state or other governing body. If colonial administrators independently orchestrated genocide, it is still genocide.