Was Russia more humane to Siberians & C. Asians than USA was to Indians?

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,197
SoCal
#1
Was Russia more humane to Siberians and Central Asians when it settled their territories with ethnic Russians than the U.S. was when it settled various Native American lands with White settlers?

Also, how humane was the French settlement in Algeria in comparison to the Russian and U.S. examples above?

I'm curious as to how settler colonialism was similar and different in regards to its treatment of the native peoples of a particular territory. In other words, I'm curious if some powers were more humane in their settler colonialism than other powers were.

Anyway, any thoughts on this?
 
May 2018
100
Antarctica
#2
Well, since Siberians and Central Asians are still around while the Amerindians of North America are pretty much exterminated, then I'd say yes: Russians are more humane than Americans. :)
 
Sep 2016
556
天下
#3
It was similar. When Cossacks were conquering Sibir Khanate they were doing do by exploiting local divisions. When they were conquering local Mansi, Khanty, Selkup tribes they were employing their rivals to make the conquest easier. Then when Russian settlers made their way towards the new territories, they took over the best territories from the locals and were pushing them towards the less favourable ones. Whenever locals tried to oppose the process, they were met by force.

The difference would be that the Siberian locals were not numerous to begin with, so any resistance would be quickly destroyed by Cossack forces or Russian army. But they were not exterminated because the furs they gathered were too valuable for the state, there was no incentive for genocide.

If you want a read I recommned: A History of the Peoples of Siberia: Russia's North Asian Colony 1581-1990 by James Forsyth.
 

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
5,638
#5
Frankly the population reductions due to Russian military campaigns eastwards wasn't that dissimilar from the death-toll inflicted on the native Americans. Estimates in the 40-90% range.

Opening the way eastward also clearing the war for the spread of disease — smallpox not least — also seems to have been a similarity. Possible the native populations at the eastern end of the Old World was somewhat less hard-hit (smallpox got them, but things like measles didn't).

If I was going to compare the mechanisms of the Sibirian conquest to something, it wouldn't be North America, but how Brazil was pacified by the Bandeirantes at about the same time the Cossacks were busy in Siberia and the Russian Far East. (Hard men on horses, not too picky about the means used, and quick to use violence.)

Again, and possibly it might please someone, the Brazilian situation was likely rather more gruesome, since the Bandeirantes actively hunted natives for slaves, while the Cossack game was primarily about tribute — getting the natives to fork over valuables, furs not least, that could be shipped westward and sold of extremely good money in Europe.

Initial colonization in Brazil, North America and Siberia were all tied in with the extension of the Western European global trade networks. Whether this was Dutch, English or even Swedish traders cooperating with native groups in the North American "Beaver Wars", the slave-hunting expeditions of the Bandeirantes in Brazil, or the Cossack subjugation and exaction of tribute of the native of Siberia and the Far East.

Regardless, sooner rather than later it involved violence-for-profit wholesale, and led to massive loss of life on the part of the native populations targeted in all the areas affected.
 

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
5,638
#6
Well, since Siberians and Central Asians are still around while the Amerindians of North America are pretty much exterminated, then I'd say yes: Russians are more humane than Americans. :)
Considering the Russian native groups have all been reduced to small minorities in their own lands, the difference tends to evaporate before ones eyes.

Not least since you would seem to underestimate the number of Native American groups still around. Despite their disadvantages most of them have made a demographic come-back in the 20th c. Take a gander:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federally_recognized_tribes

The impact of disease was far worse in the Americas, and the Native American groups that went extinct were the ones along the US eastern sea-board. Most of those groups went extinct in the course of the 17th c. already. California in the 19th c. is the other example of massive genocide. For the rest, it's more of a mixed bag.

The Sibirians and far easterners also tended to be more numerous, better organized — further away, actually — and put up more of a fight.
 

robto

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
6,150
Lisbon, Portugal
#7
Well, since Siberians and Central Asians are still around while the Amerindians of North America are pretty much exterminated, then I'd say yes: Russians are more humane than Americans. :)
Amerindians were extremely vulnerable to Eurasian diseases, and epidemics was the largest culprit for their demise. Siberians and Central Asians on the other hand, share the same immunity with other Eurasians.
 

Maribat

Ad Honorem
Mar 2012
5,048
#8
Amerindians were extremely vulnerable to Eurasian diseases, and epidemics was the largest culprit for their demise. Siberians and Central Asians on the other hand, share the same immunity with other Eurasians.
May we say that it cuts both ways? Were the Europeans vulnerable to the local New World deseases too?
 
Jun 2016
1,784
Russia
#9
Very strange topic. Very many Indian tribes in America distinguishes to the last man, not the single one of them has written language or literature. While all Siberian tribes exist now, all of them have written language, rather rich literature, education in national languages. The biggest danger for Siberian nations was freedom after October revolution when there was allowed vodka trade in these regions.
 
Sep 2012
3,886
Bulgaria
#10
Very strange topic. Very many Indian tribes in America distinguishes to the last man, not the single one of them has written language or literature. While all Siberian tribes exist now, all of them have written language, rather rich literature, education in national languages. The biggest danger for Siberian nations was freedom after October revolution when there was allowed vodka trade in these regions.
I presume you meant "were extinguished to the last man, woman and child"? to distinguish means различат, выделить и т.д?

distinguish - ??????? ?? ??????? - ??????? ?????????? | Reverso Context