[ExI] Religious Idiocy Triumphs Over Science Yet Again

[Dan TheBookMan]

On Dec 6, 2558 BE, at 2:36 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 12:05 AM, Dan TheBookMan wrote:
>> 
>> I think you're using this as an excuse. Whites, likewise, warred with each other, including, for the US, its Civil War, which was brutal in the extreme.
> 
> ### Wars among whites destroyed a minuscule fraction of the population, compared to the daily slaughter among Indians. We are talking about orders of magnitude differences. 

This is true for that particular war I mentioned, but varies depending on the time and location. Some estimates place the death toll for the wars of religion in Germany at 30%, which is comparable for extreme estimates for the death rates amongst Stone Age humans in Europe.

> I specifically brought up the example of the Sand Creek Massacre because that's exactly what it was: a massacre by the US military. 
> 
> ### You are pointing at the straw while completely ignoring the beam. Whites, especially of West European extraction, are substantially less violent than Indians. For every massacre committed by US troops there is a dozen attacks, massacres, rapes and murders committed by Indians.

This is much more complicated, but, regardless, the massacre of one group can be justified because of incidents from yet another group. This is exactly what happened with the Sand Creek Massacre. What's more it seems the finding gold in Colorado was the major motivation for removal or extermination of the natives. (There would be the issue of deciding who owns what and whether the US military should've been involved at all. Anderson and McChesney, in the famous paper on raid vs. trade seem to show that native-White relations were more peaceful -- based on trade -- until the cavalry arrived, then became much more violent -- based on raid. Why? IIRC -- it's been a while -- this is because violence paid off for Whites when they could simply push The natives out of areas the Whites coveted. If they're right here, one can imagine an alternative history where natives and Whites continued to trade, evolving a market order outside of federal purview.)

>> I'm a little shocked here. Can you imagine aliens landing on Earth and perhaps massacring humans based on the same arguments you're making: humans fight amongst themselves, so anything done to them is fine? And, oh, it'd be fine as long as they didn't wipe out all humans, but left a tiny fraction alive, which they herded into the least desirable locations -- in order for their kind to take the best land?
> 
> ### If humans kept attacking the aliens, stupidly, well, they would deserve to be wiped out. 

What your saying is humans should just accept whatever changing terms are offered or else they're justifying whatever actions a greater force deems expedient. (Of course, there's the issue of whether it's wise to continue a conflict with a superior force. The American Indian case is complicated here, too, because the "civilized tribes" did attempt to work within the courts and acceded to many changing demands.)

> I am not pointing to violence among Indians as an excuse to attack them. I am mentioning it as an illustration of the violent nature of their societies, which also led them attack Europeans. And it is these attacks that justified an armed response.
> --------------
>> And this has nothing to do with whitewashing. I completely agree there were warlike tribes and individuals. That's not an valid justification for anything goes against all of them. It doesn't give a carte blanche on war.
> 
> ### All tribes were warlike, or else other tribes would have long since slaughtered them all. 

I pointed to the Sand Creek Massacre in particular as an example of an unprovoked attack by the US military against natives who were not only not involved in attacks against Whites, but also did not offer initial resistance.

Regards,

Dan
  Sample my Kindle books via:
http://author.to/DanUst

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20151206/13a4d6a1/attachment.html>