but not a problem for me i dont live there

and iceland

I think you're mistaking the idea that history didn't just start after 1776. Genocide is nothing new, and undoubtedly there were people in the middle of Asia that will never be in any history book because they were never allowed to be written about. If you think history comes from a howard zinn book you're kidding yourself. And as far as I know, there are still American indians around and their pop hasn't been reduced to zero.

http://prntscr.com/jvj2jy

We're both speaking in generalities because American history didn't itself start in 1776 anyway. And because we can't blame our founding fathers on what the British and French did to natives and Spain's stain in mexico. Or maybe we can, since europe is just a cancer or whatever it is people believe.

i realized it didint happen in 1776, i just let you get away with it. consitering i was talking about the contanent

@Arch-Fiend Jared Taylor has made a video on native americans. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K84c7NlZzno

Americans didn't genocide the natives. diseases killed 90% plus of 2 million native americans and American and Canadian settlers fought for control over territory just like the natives did for centuries before Europeans even arrived the difference is the whites were more successful. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rL2XX_2tNk8&t=867s

Sorry whos claiming the whites genocided them?

Arch-fiend claim the natives were genocided.

I thought that was kinda not true. The natives were killing each other. Even bought rifles from whites to do it.

There were the infected blankets thing. Whether its intentional or not is not observable. Cant claim to know what the people doing it were thinking.

They did kill off some belligerant groups however, though I dont think thats genocide, but they did kill natives.

Not for their race but cause they were being a nuisance.

I mean, who wouldnt?

All very true mate.

Nah, I think you two just have a different definition of genocide really.

I'm bassing my reply on what he said here.

Yeahh not gonna take sides. Have a good one,

Thanks mate.

@Arch-Fiend Even if Americans did genocide the natives North America wasn't the first contanent to have most of it's population be genocided. Africa was the frist, if you don't believe me look up the bantu expansion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bantu_expansion

http://africancurators.com/2017/10/10/the-genocide-of-the-khoi-sans/

you can cover any patch of ground on the world with a coating of lava, and afterwords eventually something will regrow, however if you cover it in concrete and asphalt, its chances of ever regrowing are highly deminished. to say that the native americans are not genocided throws out what actually occured to their native tarritorys which dispite how many of them died to diseases brought to the new world all native american tribes remained up until they were pushed farther and farther west by european encrochment. we know this because we know the names of every tribe in both the west and east north america, if they had all died we would never have learned their names. we also had atleast 3 wars with them, the revolutionary war, the war of 1812, and the indian war (basicly when we got fed up with skermishing them in the west and brought the military to give them the ultimatum to become registered to our country or be exterminated)

Yes Europeans did enslave africans but they weren't the frist and whites are the race solely responsible for ending slavery so if you are going to blame a race for slavery why are you blaming the race that ended it? The Arab slave trade enslaved millions more Africans than European slavery did, in fact the barbary slave trade enslaved more whites than there were black slaves in America. https://archive.org/details/TheHiddenHistoryOfArabSlaveTradeOfAfricans

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_trade

it was a genocide, it doesent matter how many people died, we killed the genetic to geographic connection between a group of people to the extent people who had a genetic tie to the entire north america are now religated to less than a quarter of its total landmass and to the most inhospitable locations among it

this is the FIRST successful genocide on an entire contanent

though one might argue australia did it to but abos have access to 50ish percent last maps i saw

mostly because australia is half wasteland

Yes Americans did take land from the natives like the natives toke land from each other all the time even before the Europeans arrived the only diffence was the whites were just more successful it wasn't a genocide.

it was by all best definitions a genocide

the only more successful genocide outside north america was tasmania

hey aussie can you define "white genocide" for me?

So the natives genocided each other than?

on small scales if they ever completely whiped a population out to the extent it never recovered then yes

but im mostly talking about the SCALE

were not just talking about single countrys and ethnicitys were talking about contanents and core race groups

Tasmania wasn't a genocide. The natives in Tasmania lost 90% plus of their population from diseases and they then didn't have a large enough population to keep their population going.

you put them into camps after their population dropped from 18000 to just 400. wonder what happened to them in those camps

Yes scale is important I agree with you their but their is also intent. If their is a deliberate attempt to wipeout whole or part of a population then it is a genocide. So if their is a massacre lead by a goverment or group of people then that is a genocide.