How Hawaii was annexed by the USA

royal744

Ad Honorem
Jul 2013
9,962
San Antonio, Tx
#71
Well, if businesses want something from the government in Washington, they make campaign contributions and hire lobbying firms. The Congressional committees and regulatory agencies are generally strongly influenced by the businesses they legislate on or regulate. My understanding is that in Mexico City thing are more blatantly corrupt.

I can't see how the Spanish and Mexican governments were granting land for free to businessmen, who would then resell it, without those businessmen handing out money in some way.
OK, fine. It doesn’t matter one way or the other if money changed hands under or over the table before or after. I think the Mexicans were quite content at the time (not so later) to place American settlers on the frontier to take the brunt of the Indian wars.
 
May 2018
100
Houston, TX
#72
Makes me wonder: would the (indigenous) people of Hawaii have been (and be today) better off if the U.S. had not annexed them? A lot of water under that bridge of course, so that's just a rhetorical kind of question.
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
4,905
Portugal
#73
Algonquins are a Canadian tribe. There may have been a few in northern Michigan but Canada is where they were and are based.
As I said, out of my area, but this map, from this Wikipedia article (Algonquian peoples - Wikipedia) doesn’t give the idea that they are “Canadian”, gives the idea that they are North American:
Algonquian peoples - Wikipedia

And, my post was written months ago, but if I recall correctly I was trying to mention the tribes in the Western Coast (roughly the Thirteen Colonies coast), so my mention about the Algonquins.
 

betgo

Ad Honorem
Jul 2011
5,889
#74
OK, fine. It doesn’t matter one way or the other if money changed hands under or over the table before or after. I think the Mexicans were quite content at the time (not so later) to place American settlers on the frontier to take the brunt of the Indian wars.
My point about corruption is that the initiative was on the part of the people from the US, not the Spanish or Mexican government.

The Spanish took over an existing empire, and did not have a pioneering tradition, so it wasn't desirable for them to move into an area with hostile natives.

There is talk about native American genocide. However, what happened in the US and Texas was that people without land established farms in native American controlled areas knowing they were risking their lives to do that. It isn't really known how many whites and native Americans were killed over the years in irregular frontier fighting.
 

royal744

Ad Honorem
Jul 2013
9,962
San Antonio, Tx
#75
You can say some of these tribes still exist, but they what is left is small. There isn't much left of many of the eastern tribes. Granted, they could have been partly killed off by disease, sold as slaves, and assimilated or intermarried with whites.

You look at how much more Mexico is native American culturally and genetically. Now there was a large agricultural population in much of Mexico. However, it does raise some questions that the native American population of California decreased to 20% of its former level in the 40 years after it came under US rule.
This is interesting but we are unlikely to know with any exactitude how many “pure natives” there are in Mexico. It is my understanding that the vast majority of Mexican “natives” are “mestizo”, meanning they are a mix of Spanish and native Indians. But I’m not an expert on this...
 

royal744

Ad Honorem
Jul 2013
9,962
San Antonio, Tx
#76
My point about corruption is that the initiative was on the part of the people from the US, not the Spanish or Mexican government.

The Spanish took over an existing empire, and did not have a pioneering tradition, so it wasn't desirable for them to move into an area with hostile natives.

There is talk about native American genocide. However, what happened in the US and Texas was that people without land established farms in native American controlled areas knowing they were risking their lives to do that. It isn't really known how many whites and native Americans were killed over the years in irregular frontier fighting.
I don’t understand this. The American settlers in Mexico - at least the legal ones - were there at Mexico’s invitation.
 

royal744

Ad Honorem
Jul 2013
9,962
San Antonio, Tx
#77
More than a question of “purity” is a question of way of life and culture. If a person is raised in a tribe, accepted by the tribe, has the tribe values and culture has his own, then he is a member of the tribe, doesn’t really matter if he is pure, not pure, mestiço, white, black or pink, as far as he is human.



Didn’t knew that the Spanish had invited USA businessmen to establish in their lands in Texas. How and when was that?
From Wikipedia:

Stephen Fuller Austin (November 3, 1793 – December 27, 1836) was an American empresario. Known as the "Father of Texas", and the founder of Texas,[1][2] he led the second, and ultimately, the successful colonization of the region by bringing 300 families from the United States to the region in 1825.

Born in Virginia and raised in southeastern Missouri, Austin served in the Missouri territorial legislature before moving to Arkansas Territory and later Louisiana. His father, Moses Austin, received an empresario grant from Spain to settle Texas. After Moses Austin's death in 1821, Stephen Austin won recognition of the empresario grant from the newly independent state of Mexico. Austin convinced numerous American settlers to move to Texas.
 

royal744

Ad Honorem
Jul 2013
9,962
San Antonio, Tx
#78
As I said, out of my area, but this map, from this Wikipedia article (Algonquian peoples - Wikipedia) doesn’t give the idea that they are “Canadian”, gives the idea that they are North American:
Algonquian peoples - Wikipedia

And, my post was written months ago, but if I recall correctly I was trying to mention the tribes in the Western Coast (roughly the Thirteen Colonies coast), so my mention about the Algonquins.
From Wikipedia:

The Algonquian are one of the most populous and widespread North American native language groups. Today, thousands of individuals identify with various Algonquian peoples. Historically, the peoples were prominent along the Atlantic Coast and into the interior along the Saint Lawrence River and around the Great Lakes. This grouping consists of the peoples who speak Algonquian languages.
 

Similar History Discussions