Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > General History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

General History General History Forum - General history questions and discussions


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old February 21st, 2017, 02:48 AM   #91

Edric Streona's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: Japan
Posts: 3,180

The Spanish priest Bartolomé de las Casas (who had lived in Santo Domingo) wrote in his 1561 multi-volume History of the Indies

There were 60,000 people living on this island [when I arrived in 1508], including the Indians; so that from 1494 to 1508, over three million people had perished from war, slavery and the mines. Who in future generations will believe this?

Doesn't sound like the Indians got treated better in the carribbean. Are there any left?
Edric Streona is offline  
Remove Ads
Old February 21st, 2017, 03:02 AM   #92

Edric Streona's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: Japan
Posts: 3,180

Rhodesia had racial segregation laws. Yes. It also is written that people, "protestants" I assume often ignored them.

South Africa introduced its racial segregation laws in 1950. Not during its British empire days.

The Spanish empire introduced a caste system based on racial purity. Laws enacted prevented people with non pure blood from certain jobs and areas. (Segregation).

India had a caste system already. Well established.
Edric Streona is offline  
Old February 21st, 2017, 03:12 AM   #93
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: In the bag of ecstatic squirt
Posts: 18,030

Quote:
Originally Posted by martin76 View Post
My theory is clear.. Spaniards were Catholics: the natives were fully human in the eyes of God. For the Crown of Spain, the Indians were Spaniards, they have souls and they have subjects of the crown...

The British were Protestant... they believed in CALVINISM...the theory of fair prosperous (Calvinus)

the popular strain of Calvinism that dominated many culturally-English colonies felt entitled to dismissing the savage as having been predestined to having been born a savage, thereby indicating their eternal damnation.That was the main reason... Calvinus and the Protestantism...made British extermianted Indians in their dominions whilst the crown of Spain protected and cared for them. (Leyes de Indias)

Calvinus was the guilty of the Anglo-saxon racism.
I agree with you on this aspect. The Anglo Saxon and the Dutch had their segregation being the way of life. You don't find the British and the Dutch going in the same church with their colonial subjects the way it was done by the Spaniards in their colonies. You don't find the British and the Dutch dining, partying and dancing with the natives because there was wall created by them as compared to the manner the Spaniards would do it with their colonial subjects.

When Britain attacked the colonies of the Dutch the latter were not accorded with support the way the Spaniards were lent with helping hand by their native subjects that must explain the human relationship of the parties as colonial master and colonial subjects.

Also, the way the slaves were treated in the Protestant territories was way different as you mentioned it Martin. It was evident that the Spaniards abused the Indians, which was factual, but those natives were given the opportunity to maintain their family. They were lesser human being in the eyes of the Spaniards but definitely they were not seen as cows or chattel the way the British and the Dutch looked at their colonial subjects.

Seldom you will find any love from former colonies of Britain and Netherlands but I don't see that with Spain. The Indians today hate the British Empire, but you don't find that form of disgust from South Americans, Mexico or the Philippines. Of course, such is not true in the US, Canada or Australia because they were the same white racists who created walls against the natives which is the subject matter of this thread.
dagul is offline  
Old February 21st, 2017, 03:21 AM   #94

Edric Streona's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: Japan
Posts: 3,180

Quote:
Originally Posted by dagul View Post
I agree with you on this aspect. The Anglo Saxon and the Dutch had their segregation being the way of life. You don't find the British and the Dutch going in the same church with their colonial subjects the way it was done by the Spaniards in their colonies. You don't find the British and the Dutch dining, partying and dancing with the natives because there was wall created by them as compared to the manner the Spaniards would do it with their colonial subjects.

When Britain attacked the colonies of the Dutch the latter were not accorded with support the way the Spaniards were lent with helping hand by their native subjects that must explain the human relationship of the parties as colonial master and colonial subjects.

Also, the way the slaves were treated in the Protestant territories was way different as you mentioned it Martin. It was evident that the Spaniards abused the Indians, which was factual, but those natives were given the opportunity to maintain their family. They were lesser human being in the eyes of the Spaniards but definitely they were not seen as cows or chattel the way the British and the Dutch looked at their colonial subjects.

Seldom you will find any love from former colonies of Britain and Netherlands but I don't see that with Spain. The Indians today hate the British Empire, but you don't find that form of disgust from South Americans, Mexico or the Philippines. Of course, such is not true in the US, Canada or Australia because they were the same white racists who created walls against the natives which is the subject matter of this thread.
Most wildly innacurate post yet.
First rate comedy. I hope

Native Amerindians hate the Spanish empire. European latinos might not but they are not the natives.

Philippines rarely pine for the days of Spanish Empire.

Indians today might hate the empire but Indians then accepted it and thrived under it. Most hated the Mughals too. They were not protestants.

Give me some Arawak quotes on how great the Catholics were.
Edric Streona is offline  
Old February 21st, 2017, 03:22 AM   #95
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: In the bag of ecstatic squirt
Posts: 18,030

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edric Streona View Post
Rhodesia had racial segregation laws. Yes. It also is written that people, "protestants" I assume often ignored them.

South Africa introduced its racial segregation laws in 1950. Not during its British empire days.

The Spanish empire introduced a caste system based on racial purity. Laws enacted prevented people with non pure blood from certain jobs and areas. (Segregation).

India had a caste system already. Well established.
Those White people in African may not be British decent but they were definitely from Western Europe and were either English or Dutch speaking people. That situation was the same in the US when the Africans needed to sit at the back of the bus and it happened not during the existence of the British Empire but they were former territories of the British Empire.

When the Spaniards arrived in the Philippines, they abolished slavery, and for sure there was that caste as you mentioned, but, it was not like the upper class must have different park or church the way it was done in British or Dutch territories. The people in Spanish dominion would still be in the same public places thought they had that social stratification. Simply untrue in British territories.

In India there was caste, and the British instead of abolishing it, rather exploited it and in modern India, a lot of them hate Britain. People may not be so intelligent to know of the exploitation but they are not that stupid not to understand everything that happened to them under the colonial rule.
dagul is offline  
Old February 21st, 2017, 03:23 AM   #96

Edric Streona's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: Japan
Posts: 3,180

And in South America?
No caste system til Spaniards turn up rape lots of women. Enslave the natives. And create a caste system!

Tell me about the Taino. Were they accorded their rights as humans in the eye of god? I'd ask one but they aren't that many around....
Edric Streona is offline  
Old February 21st, 2017, 03:31 AM   #97
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: In the bag of ecstatic squirt
Posts: 18,030

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edric Streona View Post
Most wildly innacurate post yet.
First rate comedy. I hope

Native Amerindians hate the Spanish empire. European latinos might not but they are not the natives.

Philippines rarely pine for the days of Spanish Empire.

Indians today might hate the empire but Indians then accepted it and thrived under it. Most hated the Mughals too. They were not protestants.

Give me some Arawak quotes on how great the Catholics were.
I won't agree with what you state but won't make such silly comments. Anyway that is you.

If the native Amerindians hate the Spaniards then they won't support them during the time that Britain attacked them in their South American territories. In the Philippines the natives supported Spain when Britain attacked it. I don't think they are not bulls eye facts.
dagul is offline  
Old February 21st, 2017, 03:33 AM   #98
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: In the bag of ecstatic squirt
Posts: 18,030

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edric Streona View Post
And in South America?
No caste system til Spaniards turn up rape lots of women. Enslave the natives. And create a caste system!

Tell me about the Taino. Were they accorded their rights as humans in the eye of god? I'd ask one but they aren't that many around....
Indians in Americas like the Aztecs hunted and ate their fellow being before the Spaniards came. After they were baptized instead of eating fellow human to worship their god, they were given hosts by priests during communion.
dagul is offline  
Old February 21st, 2017, 03:37 AM   #99

Edric Streona's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: Japan
Posts: 3,180

Right. Nice logic.
When the Japanese attacked India. The Indians fought alongside the British. The maori did too. And the Burmese.
And the Native American in Canada and USA joined the British too in many battles.
Edric Streona is offline  
Old February 21st, 2017, 03:38 AM   #100

Edric Streona's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: Japan
Posts: 3,180

Quote:
Originally Posted by dagul View Post
Indians in Americas like the Aztecs hunted and ate their fellow being before the Spaniards came. After they were baptized instead of eating fellow human to worship their god, they were given hosts by priests during communion.
The ones that weren't killed.
Regardless. Before the Spaniards they were not racially inferior. After they came they were the bottom of the rung in a racist caste system.
Edric Streona is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > General History

Tags
australia, canada, natives, zealand



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why didn't New Zealand and Fiji join Australia? WeisSaul Asian History 42 February 27th, 2017 06:30 AM
Historic sites in Australia and New Zealand weezer17 Asian History 0 April 29th, 2015 05:34 PM
Canada vs Australia Toltec Speculative History 33 November 13th, 2009 08:15 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.