
Originally Posted by
Marootsoobutsu
I would put slavery for America, genocide for the Spanish. America bears absolute guilt for much of its treatment of American Indians, but actual genocide was rarely an actual goal. There were individual generals who had it as an aim, and the Indian Wars were absolutely one-sided. But far, far more died from disease than from the total of all wars of conquest, and there is not only a lack of actual evidence of deliberate spreading of disease (the total claim of Small Pox Blankets comes from two post-scripts that were never followed up on, and in the context of the time, could not have had the sinister nature we now ascribe, simply because the actual understanding of spreading of disease didn't exist at the time of the letters), there is in fact abundant evidence that we tried very hard-- as official policy and as frequent social works, to stem the spread of disease. Serious historians have strongly discredited Isaac McCoy's claims of deliberate infestation, and McDougall's famous claim was not only never acted upon, but was deliberately shown as a sign of friendship-- Europeans took extraordinary efforts to stem the spreading of smallpox at every point they could. The primary guilt of America in dealing with American Indians is far more cultural extinction than biological... there were *definite* attempts to wipe out the cultural identity of American Indians, in large part because of a decisive desire *NOT* to commit genocide. There was widespread, often romantic adoration of them, and a desire to Christianize them.
The Spanish had no such compulsion (or very little such compulsion, save as a talking point with the Vatican), and *did* engage in systematic, whole-cloth enslavement and slaughter on a scale that is truly horrifying. Even so, disease did most of their work for them, accounting for (by some estimates) up to 90% of the total deaths in the New World-- between smallpox, influenza, the plague, cholera, malaria, tuberculosis, mumps, yellow fever, typhus, what happened here *dwarfed* what happened in Europe with the Plague. The Spanish *absolutely* carved up the weakened populations, extinguished entire people groups, and enslaved others with a brutal efficiency that even the South couldn't replicate with blacks (and they were very nearly uniquely brutal in their application of slavery). And their impact and devastation deserves more condemnation than American slavery does-- not because American slavery wasn't horrific (it is a monumental sin, and does deserve a special place because of its hypocrisy in a land founded on freedom), but because the scale of Spanish extermination was so monumental. It eclipsed American interactions by orders of magnitude, and was nearly devoid of conflicting moralities from Spain, whereas American Indians always had steadfast, vocal, and powerful advocates in every Presidency and legislature we had in Washington. The few times individuals and monasteries did intervene (and there were many Spanish individuals who did try to stem the tide of official brutality of the Spanish government), their efforts were short-lived and ultimately overwhelmed by the cruelty of the Conquistadors.
There were still wars, and "Indian Education" was phenomenally cruel, and remains the primary cause of continued poverty and poor education amongst tribal societies-- the abuse and flat-out-torture turned a people willing to accept American culture and education poisoned the last remnants of goodwill that too many could muster, and has festered as lingering distrust of education that still hasn't been cleared up in too many places. But we were never, ever, ever at a point of deliberate eradication of the American Indian as official policy, and the few generals who attempted to engage in it were almost-without-exception court marshaled for their efforts and left in disgrace. We have plenty of fault in our treatment of American Indians, but the sin of their genocide belongs to the Spanish, not to America. Not denying it happened, just pointing out who actually did it.