Genocide And The NFL

All other sports including pro, high school and more!
Post Reply
dal4018
Level5
Level5
Posts: 10239
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:17 pm
I am a fan of: South Carolina St
A.K.A.: SC State

Genocide And The NFL

Post by dal4018 »

Just saw this about The San Francisco 49ers https://www.youtube.com/shorts/oSAdfeD6 ... ture=share
User avatar
Gil Dobie
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 30939
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:45 pm
I am a fan of: Norse Dakota State
Location: Historic Leduc Estate

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by Gil Dobie »

dal4018 wrote: Wed Mar 08, 2023 8:58 am Just saw this about The San Francisco 49ers https://www.youtube.com/shorts/oSAdfeD6 ... ture=share
Could probably say that about several team nicknames. Patriots, Commanders, Buffalo Bills, Texans, Cowboys, Vikings, Rangers, etc.
Image
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59295
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by kalm »

When Columbus landed, population estimates of the Americas were are as high as 90 million people 1/3 of the world’s population.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by Winterborn »

kalm wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 7:54 am When Columbus landed, population estimates of the Americas were are as high as 90 million people 1/3 of the world’s population.
Finally a rabbit hole I know something about. :D

That's one theory, others have it around 8 million, ranges from a million to 118 million. Depends on how one considers the lands carrying capacity, starting point, and who is doing the calculations (some of larger ranges are a bit suspect in their methodology).

William Denevan did alot of research into the topic and estimated it around 53 million with a 20% margin of error. With a breakdown of 3.8 million living in North America, the rest in Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean and South America. Disease, warfare, slavery cut that by 89% by the 16th century.
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19949
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by UNI88 »

Winterborn wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 10:23 am
kalm wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 7:54 am When Columbus landed, population estimates of the Americas were are as high as 90 million people 1/3 of the world’s population.
Finally a rabbit hole I know something about. :D

That's one theory, others have it around 8 million, ranges from a million to 118 million. Depends on how one considers the lands carrying capacity, starting point, and who is doing the calculations (some of larger ranges are a bit suspect in their methodology).

William Denevan did alot of research into the topic and estimated it around 53 million with a 20% margin of error. With a breakdown of 3.8 million living in North America, the rest in Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean and South America. Disease, warfare, slavery cut that by 89% by the 16th century.
90 million seems high. 53 million also seems high but makes sense with the higher populations in Mexico, Central America and South America. There weren't a lot of denser population centers in what is now the US and Canada that I'm aware of outside of possibly Cahokia.

Any book recommendations for the topic?
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
AshevilleApp
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 5224
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:29 pm
I am a fan of: ASU
A.K.A.: AshevilleApp2

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by AshevilleApp »

UNI88 wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 2:01 pm
Winterborn wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 10:23 am

Finally a rabbit hole I know something about. :D

That's one theory, others have it around 8 million, ranges from a million to 118 million. Depends on how one considers the lands carrying capacity, starting point, and who is doing the calculations (some of larger ranges are a bit suspect in their methodology).

William Denevan did alot of research into the topic and estimated it around 53 million with a 20% margin of error. With a breakdown of 3.8 million living in North America, the rest in Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean and South America. Disease, warfare, slavery cut that by 89% by the 16th century.
90 million seems high. 53 million also seems high but makes sense with the higher populations in Mexico, Central America and South America. There weren't a lot of denser population centers in what is now the US and Canada that I'm aware of outside of possibly Cahokia.

Any book recommendations for the topic?
1491
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by Winterborn »

UNI88 wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 2:01 pm
Winterborn wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 10:23 am

Finally a rabbit hole I know something about. :D

That's one theory, others have it around 8 million, ranges from a million to 118 million. Depends on how one considers the lands carrying capacity, starting point, and who is doing the calculations (some of larger ranges are a bit suspect in their methodology).

William Denevan did alot of research into the topic and estimated it around 53 million with a 20% margin of error. With a breakdown of 3.8 million living in North America, the rest in Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean and South America. Disease, warfare, slavery cut that by 89% by the 16th century.
90 million seems high. 53 million also seems high but makes sense with the higher populations in Mexico, Central America and South America. There weren't a lot of denser population centers in what is now the US and Canada that I'm aware of outside of possibly Cahokia.

Any book recommendations for the topic?
You are correct that the only empires of the Aztecs, Mayans, and Inca's held most of the populations. Denevan had it split up for 8.6 million in the South America lowlands, Andes (15.7 million), Caribbean (3 million), Mexico (17.2 million), Central America (5.6 million), and Northa America (3.8 million). Personally I think 53 million is still high but like I mentioned above, it depends on what time range one picks. What I find a bit more fascinating is why the native populations did not have as strong as immune resistance as they should have.


As App mention 1491 by Charles C Mann is good (I haven't read it but heard good things about it). The author I mentioned above specifically deals with population, where as 1491 by Mann is more broad about the America's in general.

William Denevan's book "The Native Population of the Americas in 1492" is collection of academic papers of the time and some explanations. It is older (re-published in 1992) but still has a good well rounded look at the population question in general. It is also the only book that I know of that deals strictly with the population question.
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59295
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by kalm »

Winterborn wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 7:06 am
UNI88 wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 2:01 pm

90 million seems high. 53 million also seems high but makes sense with the higher populations in Mexico, Central America and South America. There weren't a lot of denser population centers in what is now the US and Canada that I'm aware of outside of possibly Cahokia.

Any book recommendations for the topic?
You are correct that the only empires of the Aztecs, Mayans, and Inca's held most of the populations. Denevan had it split up for 8.6 million in the South America lowlands, Andes (15.7 million), Caribbean (3 million), Mexico (17.2 million), Central America (5.6 million), and Northa America (3.8 million). Personally I think 53 million is still high but like I mentioned above, it depends on what time range one picks. What I find a bit more fascinating is why the native populations did not have as strong as immune resistance as they should have.


As App mention 1491 by Charles C Mann is good (I haven't read it but heard good things about it). The author I mentioned above specifically deals with population, where as 1491 by Mann is more broad about the America's in general.

William Denevan's book "The Native Population of the Americas in 1492" is collection of academic papers of the time and some explanations. It is older (re-published in 1992) but still has a good well rounded look at the population question in general. It is also the only book that I know of that deals strictly with the population question.
Good stuff, WB.
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19949
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by UNI88 »

Winterborn wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 7:06 am
UNI88 wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 2:01 pm
90 million seems high. 53 million also seems high but makes sense with the higher populations in Mexico, Central America and South America. There weren't a lot of denser population centers in what is now the US and Canada that I'm aware of outside of possibly Cahokia.

Any book recommendations for the topic?
You are correct that the only empires of the Aztecs, Mayans, and Inca's held most of the populations. Denevan had it split up for 8.6 million in the South America lowlands, Andes (15.7 million), Caribbean (3 million), Mexico (17.2 million), Central America (5.6 million), and Northa America (3.8 million). Personally I think 53 million is still high but like I mentioned above, it depends on what time range one picks. What I find a bit more fascinating is why the native populations did not have as strong as immune resistance as they should have.

As App mention 1491 by Charles C Mann is good (I haven't read it but heard good things about it). The author I mentioned above specifically deals with population, where as 1491 by Mann is more broad about the America's in general.

William Denevan's book "The Native Population of the Americas in 1492" is collection of academic papers of the time and some explanations. It is older (re-published in 1992) but still has a good well rounded look at the population question in general. It is also the only book that I know of that deals strictly with the population question.
I would flip that and wonder why there weren't also diseases that the native populations were resistant too that devastated Europeans without that resistance?
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by Winterborn »

UNI88 wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:26 am
Winterborn wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 7:06 am

You are correct that the only empires of the Aztecs, Mayans, and Inca's held most of the populations. Denevan had it split up for 8.6 million in the South America lowlands, Andes (15.7 million), Caribbean (3 million), Mexico (17.2 million), Central America (5.6 million), and Northa America (3.8 million). Personally I think 53 million is still high but like I mentioned above, it depends on what time range one picks. What I find a bit more fascinating is why the native populations did not have as strong as immune resistance as they should have.

As App mention 1491 by Charles C Mann is good (I haven't read it but heard good things about it). The author I mentioned above specifically deals with population, where as 1491 by Mann is more broad about the America's in general.

William Denevan's book "The Native Population of the Americas in 1492" is collection of academic papers of the time and some explanations. It is older (re-published in 1992) but still has a good well rounded look at the population question in general. It is also the only book that I know of that deals strictly with the population question.
I would flip that and wonder why there weren't also diseases that the native populations were resistant too that devastated Europeans without that resistance?
That is a very good question and one of the current theories is that the typical animal or plant carriers here in the America's were sanitized somehow, so the local inhabitants lost what resistance they had coming over here from Asia, Europe, and Africa. They basically had a very weak immune system that was tailored to their environment, which lacked the normal hosts that other parts of the world had and built up the resistances of their populations. There is some speculation that when the Vikings and Welsh came over here long before Columbus that their interactions started the process. But we don't know for sure. And outside of time machine we may never know.
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19949
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by UNI88 »

Winterborn wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 11:09 am
UNI88 wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:26 am

I would flip that and wonder why there weren't also diseases that the native populations were resistant too that devastated Europeans without that resistance?
That is a very good question and one of the current theories is that the typical animal or plant carriers here in the America's were sanitized somehow, so the local inhabitants lost what resistance they had coming over here from Asia, Europe, and Africa. They basically had a very weak immune system that was tailored to their environment, which lacked the normal hosts that other parts of the world had and built up the resistances of their populations. There is some speculation that when the Vikings and Welsh came over here long before Columbus that their interactions started the process. But we don't know for sure. And outside of time machine we may never know.
That is fascinating and you are correct about the time machine.

Is it talked about in Denevan's works?
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18033
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by GannonFan »

Winterborn wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 11:09 am
UNI88 wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 10:26 am

I would flip that and wonder why there weren't also diseases that the native populations were resistant too that devastated Europeans without that resistance?
That is a very good question and one of the current theories is that the typical animal or plant carriers here in the America's were sanitized somehow, so the local inhabitants lost what resistance they had coming over here from Asia, Europe, and Africa. They basically had a very weak immune system that was tailored to their environment, which lacked the normal hosts that other parts of the world had and built up the resistances of their populations. There is some speculation that when the Vikings and Welsh came over here long before Columbus that their interactions started the process. But we don't know for sure. And outside of time machine we may never know.
I think you're right - and the Europeans simply had much more variety of domesticated animals, as well as the interaction of those animals across Europe, Asia, and Africa, that it just added more oomph to the evolution of diseases and viruses.

I still think the crazy number is that of the deaths of native people's in the America's, the estimate is that 90% of the population was killed off by disease alone. We think a bad flu season or a COVID pandemic is big, but that's a tiny fraction of the deaths due to disease as compared with what befell folks living here before Columbus and other Europeans got here.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by Winterborn »

GannonFan wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 11:25 am
Winterborn wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 11:09 am

That is a very good question and one of the current theories is that the typical animal or plant carriers here in the America's were sanitized somehow, so the local inhabitants lost what resistance they had coming over here from Asia, Europe, and Africa. They basically had a very weak immune system that was tailored to their environment, which lacked the normal hosts that other parts of the world had and built up the resistances of their populations. There is some speculation that when the Vikings and Welsh came over here long before Columbus that their interactions started the process. But we don't know for sure. And outside of time machine we may never know.

I think you're right - and the Europeans simply had much more variety of domesticated animals, as well as the interaction of those animals across Europe, Asia, and Africa, that it just added more oomph to the evolution of diseases and viruses.


I still think the crazy number is that of the deaths of native people's in the America's, the estimate is that 90% of the population was killed off by disease alone. We think a bad flu season or a COVID pandemic is big, but that's a tiny fraction of the deaths due to disease as compared with what befell folks living here before Columbus and other Europeans got here.
Add in the trade between those locations that had been going on for 1000's of years, and you have a pretty big mixing bowl.
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
dal4018
Level5
Level5
Posts: 10239
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:17 pm
I am a fan of: South Carolina St
A.K.A.: SC State

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by dal4018 »

Glad to see ppl respond to this article
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by JohnStOnge »

Gil Dobie wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 5:57 am
dal4018 wrote: Wed Mar 08, 2023 8:58 am Just saw this about The San Francisco 49ers https://www.youtube.com/shorts/oSAdfeD6 ... ture=share
Could probably say that about several team nicknames. Patriots, Commanders, Buffalo Bills, Texans, Cowboys, Vikings, Rangers, etc.
Yes doing that sort of thing was just what Homo sapiens did until relatively recent history. I think most people have heard about how brutal the Mayans, Aztecs, and Incas were. But the North American natives were brutal too. I read relatively recently about how brutal the Comanches were. They did their best to complete genocide against the Apaches and came pretty close to succeeding. They were really into torture, rape, etc. They also kept captives as slaves.

it's true that people from Europe did horrible things to other people. But so did people from Asia, Africa, and the Americas. Don't know about Australia but my guess is that if I looked into it I'd find brutality among the original inhabitants there as well. The biggest thing about the Europeans is that the world came to a point in history where their military and transportation technologies were so much superior to those of other lands that they ended up pretty much taking over completely. They were the ones generally on top when the species matured to a point of starting to think wiping out, oppressing, enslaving other people is wrong.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
dal4018
Level5
Level5
Posts: 10239
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:17 pm
I am a fan of: South Carolina St
A.K.A.: SC State

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by dal4018 »

JohnStOnge wrote: Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:01 pm
Gil Dobie wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 5:57 am

Could probably say that about several team nicknames. Patriots, Commanders, Buffalo Bills, Texans, Cowboys, Vikings, Rangers, etc.
Yes doing that sort of thing was just what Homo sapiens did until relatively recent history. I think most people have heard about how brutal the Mayans, Aztecs, and Incas were. But the North American natives were brutal too. I read relatively recently about how brutal the Comanches were. They did their best to complete genocide against the Apaches and came pretty close to succeeding. They were really into torture, rape, etc. They also kept captives as slaves.

it's true that people from Europe did horrible things to other people. But so did people from Asia, Africa, and the Americas. Don't know about Australia but my guess is that if I looked into it I'd find brutality among the original inhabitants there as well. The biggest thing about the Europeans is that the world came to a point in history where their military and transportation technologies were so much superior to those of other lands that they ended up pretty much taking over completely. They were the ones generally on top when the species matured to a point of starting to think wiping out, oppressing, enslaving other people is wrong.
Nothing shocks me about this country.
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19949
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by UNI88 »

JohnStOnge wrote: Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:01 pm
Gil Dobie wrote: Thu Mar 09, 2023 5:57 am

Could probably say that about several team nicknames. Patriots, Commanders, Buffalo Bills, Texans, Cowboys, Vikings, Rangers, etc.
Yes doing that sort of thing was just what Homo sapiens did until relatively recent history. I think most people have heard about how brutal the Mayans, Aztecs, and Incas were. But the North American natives were brutal too. I read relatively recently about how brutal the Comanches were. They did their best to complete genocide against the Apaches and came pretty close to succeeding. They were really into torture, rape, etc. They also kept captives as slaves.

it's true that people from Europe did horrible things to other people. But so did people from Asia, Africa, and the Americas. Don't know about Australia but my guess is that if I looked into it I'd find brutality among the original inhabitants there as well. The biggest thing about the Europeans is that the world came to a point in history where their military and transportation technologies were so much superior to those of other lands that they ended up pretty much taking over completely. They were the ones generally on top when the species matured to a point of starting to think wiping out, oppressing, enslaving other people is wrong.
Read Empire of the Summer Moon: Quanah Parker and the Rise and Fall of the Comanches, the Most Powerful Indian Tribe in American History

Image
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by Winterborn »

UNI88 wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 11:25 am
Winterborn wrote: Fri Mar 10, 2023 11:09 am

That is a very good question and one of the current theories is that the typical animal or plant carriers here in the America's were sanitized somehow, so the local inhabitants lost what resistance they had coming over here from Asia, Europe, and Africa. They basically had a very weak immune system that was tailored to their environment, which lacked the normal hosts that other parts of the world had and built up the resistances of their populations. There is some speculation that when the Vikings and Welsh came over here long before Columbus that their interactions started the process. But we don't know for sure. And outside of time machine we may never know.
That is fascinating and you are correct about the time machine.

Is it talked about in Denevan's works?
Sorry, I missed your post here '88.

I do not remember as it has been sometime since I read Denevan's work. I ordered his book just so I have a copy of it as I checked the last one out of the college library. (which was well over a coon's age ago :lol: )
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by Winterborn »

UNI88 wrote: Mon Mar 13, 2023 10:54 am
JohnStOnge wrote: Sun Mar 12, 2023 5:01 pm

Yes doing that sort of thing was just what Homo sapiens did until relatively recent history. I think most people have heard about how brutal the Mayans, Aztecs, and Incas were. But the North American natives were brutal too. I read relatively recently about how brutal the Comanches were. They did their best to complete genocide against the Apaches and came pretty close to succeeding. They were really into torture, rape, etc. They also kept captives as slaves.

it's true that people from Europe did horrible things to other people. But so did people from Asia, Africa, and the Americas. Don't know about Australia but my guess is that if I looked into it I'd find brutality among the original inhabitants there as well. The biggest thing about the Europeans is that the world came to a point in history where their military and transportation technologies were so much superior to those of other lands that they ended up pretty much taking over completely. They were the ones generally on top when the species matured to a point of starting to think wiping out, oppressing, enslaving other people is wrong.
Read Empire of the Summer Moon: Quanah Parker and the Rise and Fall of the Comanches, the Most Powerful Indian Tribe in American History

Image
The Comanche, Sioux, Apache, Kiowa, and Cheyenne were all tribes you definitely wanted to stay away from back then. Interestingly enough, some of the tribes had no word for "friend" in their vocabulary, as anybody not of their tribe (or village in some cases) was automatically considered an enemy.

One of the eastern tribes, I forget which one, they would cut off the hands, feet and genitals of their enemy's so they would not be able to wield a weapon against them nor sire other males to fight against them.
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
User avatar
UNI88
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19949
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:30 am
I am a fan of: UNI
Location: the foggy, woggy banks Of the Limpopo River

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by UNI88 »

Winterborn wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 9:31 am
The Comanche, Sioux, Apache, Kiowa, and Cheyenne were all tribes you definitely wanted to stay away from back then. Interestingly enough, some of the tribes had no word for "friend" in their vocabulary, as anybody not of their tribe (or village in some cases) was automatically considered an enemy.

One of the eastern tribes, I forget which one, they would cut off the hands, feet and genitals of their enemy's so they would not be able to wield a weapon against them nor sire other males to fight against them.
I think it was CID that recommended that book and it was fascinating. The Comanche had varying degrees of slavery, younger captives might be adopted and not made slaves and the children of slaves could be Comanche. Quanah Parker's mother was captured, adopted, married a chief and was mother to a great chief. Their ability to assimilate captives increased their numbers and along with their mastery of the horse contributed to their success.
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by Winterborn »

UNI88 wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 9:47 am
Winterborn wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 9:31 am

The Comanche, Sioux, Apache, Kiowa, and Cheyenne were all tribes you definitely wanted to stay away from back then. Interestingly enough, some of the tribes had no word for "friend" in their vocabulary, as anybody not of their tribe (or village in some cases) was automatically considered an enemy.

One of the eastern tribes, I forget which one, they would cut off the hands, feet and genitals of their enemy's so they would not be able to wield a weapon against them nor sire other males to fight against them.
I think it was CID that recommended that book and it was fascinating. The Comanche had varying degrees of slavery, younger captives might be adopted and not made slaves and the children of slaves could be Comanche. Quanah Parker's mother was captured, adopted, married a chief and was mother to a great chief. Their ability to assimilate captives increased their numbers and along with their mastery of the horse contributed to their success.
They are a fascinating people (actually almost all of the native tribes are, IMHO). :nod: An interesting what if is if the the Westward expansion of the U.S. and North-Western expansion of Texas would have held off another 30 or so years what might have been. One of their biggest hurdles is the low reproductive rate and their nomadic lifestyle to having any lasting influence int eh areas they claimed.
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18033
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by GannonFan »

Winterborn wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 11:39 am
UNI88 wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 9:47 am

I think it was CID that recommended that book and it was fascinating. The Comanche had varying degrees of slavery, younger captives might be adopted and not made slaves and the children of slaves could be Comanche. Quanah Parker's mother was captured, adopted, married a chief and was mother to a great chief. Their ability to assimilate captives increased their numbers and along with their mastery of the horse contributed to their success.
They are a fascinating people (actually almost all of the native tribes are, IMHO). :nod: An interesting what if is if the the Westward expansion of the U.S. and North-Western expansion of Texas would have held off another 30 or so years what might have been. One of their biggest hurdles is the low reproductive rate and their nomadic lifestyle to having any lasting influence int eh areas they claimed.
What are you referring to by saying if the westward expansion waited 30 years later? What do you think that would've done? Just curious what you're referring to.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
User avatar
Winterborn
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 8812
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
Location: Wherever I hang my hat

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by Winterborn »

GannonFan wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 11:56 am
Winterborn wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 11:39 am

They are a fascinating people (actually almost all of the native tribes are, IMHO). :nod: An interesting what if is if the the Westward expansion of the U.S. and North-Western expansion of Texas would have held off another 30 or so years what might have been. One of their biggest hurdles is the low reproductive rate and their nomadic lifestyle to having any lasting influence int eh areas they claimed.
What are you referring to by saying if the westward expansion waited 30 years later? What do you think that would've done? Just curious what you're referring to.
If several things were a bit more delayed, I think the possibility exists that the Comanches would have been able to grow enough to re-shape several of the areas that became eventual states. But even giving them 30 more years, it was inevitable that they would have to submit to the U.S. Army but they may have been able to win enough concessions to change where they wound up at (Oklahoma).

They were a significant threat back then in the area, so the possibility exists that even with more time, they just might have been wiped out. Hard to judge what-ifs. :nod:
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf

"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18033
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by GannonFan »

Winterborn wrote: Wed Mar 15, 2023 5:01 am
GannonFan wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 11:56 am

What are you referring to by saying if the westward expansion waited 30 years later? What do you think that would've done? Just curious what you're referring to.
If several things were a bit more delayed, I think the possibility exists that the Comanches would have been able to grow enough to re-shape several of the areas that became eventual states. But even giving them 30 more years, it was inevitable that they would have to submit to the U.S. Army but they may have been able to win enough concessions to change where they wound up at (Oklahoma).

They were a significant threat back then in the area, so the possibility exists that even with more time, they just might have been wiped out. Hard to judge what-ifs. :nod:
No, good point. In addition, the additional time would've gotten them closer to the time when people and governments stopped using war and genocide as legitimate political means. Not all by all means, but a decent critical mass that got the ball moving. Unfortunately for most Native American tribes, they didn't last long enough to get into that particular age of enlightenment.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
dal4018
Level5
Level5
Posts: 10239
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 12:17 pm
I am a fan of: South Carolina St
A.K.A.: SC State

Re: Genocide And The NFL

Post by dal4018 »

GannonFan wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 11:56 am
Winterborn wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 11:39 am

They are a fascinating people (actually almost all of the native tribes are, IMHO). :nod: An interesting what if is if the the Westward expansion of the U.S. and North-Western expansion of Texas would have held off another 30 or so years what might have been. One of their biggest hurdles is the low reproductive rate and their nomadic lifestyle to having any lasting influence int eh areas they claimed.
What are you referring to by saying if the westward expansion waited 30 years later? What do you think that would've done? Just curious what you're referring to.
Good old fashioned Bum Rush!!!!!!!!
Post Reply