[ExI] "an aboriginal human from 70,000 B.C."

[MB]

Lee wrote:

>
> If we examine the piecemeal actual causes, we see that those
> people are in no way permitted (or find it impossible) to maintain
> the same traditional culture that worked better for them. The
> Americans tried another approach,  locking up their aboriginals on
> reservations, free to practice whatever traditional ways they wanted
> to (though I confess they didn't get good hunting land, in general).
> But new technology and new drugs sneaked in anyway. With
> similar, but not so extreme results. (Probably because the American
> Indians were already at a rather higher level of technology and
> civilization than the Australian aborigines.)


I kinda think there was more to it than that. In the USA, IIUC, missionaries were
often sent to start schools and remove the children from their native culture and
convert them. The children (from what I've read) were not permitted to speak their
native tongue, nor wear their native clothing, nor learn their native
history/arts/culture/religion.

Did that work "better"?

What is "better"? From what point of view? Perplexing.

Or perhaps all that is Political Correct Speak about the Evil White Men. ?

Regards,
MB