This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Violent anti-Japanese demonstration in Beijing OFFTOPIC about Western colonisation

Wang

先輩
Joined
21 Apr 2004
Messages
432
Reaction score
17
Here is some information about Western/European Imperialism.


Unfortunately for the United States, rhetoric cannot take the place of reality, and sugarcoated speeches cannot change historical facts. Despite Morrison窶冱 infatuation with the glory of the Columbus persona, he admits, 窶徼he cruel policy initiated by Columbus and pursued by his successors resulted in a complete genocide窶? A glance at history therefore discloses the rather horrifying facts that the citizens of the US - as well as the other Western nations - have, quite astoundingly, managed to erase from their consciousness. When the Americans celebrate Columbus Day they fail to realise that they are celebrating the systematic slaughter of the entire indigenous population of the Americas: Genocide was a central factor in the establishment of the United States.

There were originally an estimated 80 million Native Americans in Latin America when Columbus discovered the continent, and approximately 12 to 15 million more north of the Rio Grande. By the year 1650, 95 per cent of the native population of Latin America had been massacred. Michael A. Dorris observes that by the time the continental borders of the United States were established, the entire population had been decimated 窶徼o a low of 210,000 in the 1910 census.窶拏13]

Even Columbus expressed his admiration for the culture of the South American 窶露ndians窶 whom he subsequently slaughtered, describing them as 窶徭o free and so naive with their possessions that no one who has not witnessed them would believe it. When you ask them for something they have, they never say no. To the contrary, they offer their share with anyone窶?[14] He even acknowledged: 窶弋hey [the Native Americans] are the best people in the world and above all the gentlest - without knowledge of evil - nor do they murder and steal窶?[15] A French Jesuit priest similarly observed of the Iroqouis tribe: 窶廸o poorhouses are needed among them, because they are neither mendicants nor paupers... Their kindness, humanity and courtesy not only makes them liberal with what they have, but causes them to possess hardly anything except in common.窶拏16] According to the missionary priest Las Casus the natives:

"窶ヲ are by nature the most humble, patient, and peaceable, holding no grudges, free from embroilments, neither excitable nor quarrelsome. These people are the most devoid of rancors, hatreds, or desire for vengeance of any people in the world... they not only possess little but have no desire to possess worldly goods. For this reason they are not arrogant, embittered, or greedy... They are very clean in their persons, with alert, intelligent minds."[17]

However, this Native American culture of altruism, fraternity, and mutual compassion was to be replaced by other more important European values. The indigenous population 窶忤ould make fine servants窶? noted Columbus. 窶弩ith fifty men we could subjugate them all and make them do whatever we want.窶拏18] Accordingly, Columbus had returned to the continent in 1493 with a force of 17 ships, to implement a programme of mass slavery and extermination of the Taino population of the Caribbean: Within three years five million were dead; fifty years on, the Spanish census recorded only 200 alive. It is worth analysing this representative case study of colonialism in some detail to comprehend the reality behind the distorted version we are so often presented with.

----------------------------

Indeed, Clarke provides extensive documentation of how slavery and genocide were institutionalised into a new global system of domination and destruction, which colonised land, labour, resources and information at the expense of indigenous people. The Holocaust perpetrated against the Native Americans was therefore characteristic of European colonial exploits in general. In other regions, such as Asia and Africa, the combination of enslavement, slaughter, and the introduction of European diseases combined in a similar fashion to facilitate European domination. For instance, in the African Holocaust between 10 and 20 million Africans were deported in the name of the Western slave-trade; which means that Africa窶冱 population was decimated by about 100-200 million, since ten people had to be killed for a single African to be taken alive during capture by slave-traders. Professor Clarke comments: 窶廬 am not saying it [the Jewish Holocaust] was not tragic, or that it was not wrong. [However] There is no comparison between six million and 100 million deaths.窶 The African Holocaust, he notes, was 窶彗 protracted act of aggression窶ヲ Europeans declared war on everybody窶冱 culture, everybody窶冱 way of life窶ヲ If you weren窶冲 like him you were an infidel, a savage.窶 That was has continued in a more sophisticated form within the current world order. 窶弋his was not a war against the African body, but against the African mind. And it has not let up to this day.窶拏36]

The European invasion and occupation of Aboriginal Australia is another characteristic example of outright genocide committed by colonialists intent on acquiring land and wealth, which has similarly been dispensed to the memory hole. Sir Ronald Wilson, President of the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission stated: 窶廨enocide is the attempt to destroy a people, a culture. The first act was the dispossession of Aboriginal people of their children. The land was stolen. The children were stolen. What is the third act going to be?窶拏37] From 1910-1970, up to a third of Aboriginal children were forcibly removed from their families - 100,000 children - were stolen from their families from the early 1900s to 1970 and forced into slave labour, often to undergo physical and sexual abuse.[38] Australian historian Bruce Elder comments that:

"The blood of tens of thousands of Aboriginal Australians killed since 1788, and the sense of despair and hopelessness which informs so much of modern-day Aboriginal society, is a moral responsibility all white Australians share. Our wealth and lifestyle, the much-touted 窶連ussie way of life窶? have all been achieved as a direct consequence of Aboriginal dispossession. We should bow our heads in shame."[39]

The consequences continue to plague the indigenous population. Today, 40 per cent of Aborigines are so poor they still lack 窶徼he most basic needs imaginable.窶 Such dire conditions are part of the legacy of Australia窶冱 colonial history. Dr Keith Wollard, President of the Australian Medical Association, notes that: 窶廴uch of the poverty and disease in Aboriginal communities is a result of the dispossession of their lands.窶拏40] The motive throughout this global colonialist Holocaust was the enrichment of European elites, obtained through the establishment of a hegemony in which newly conquered colonies were to be either eliminated or forced into mass slave labour.

http://www.globalresearch.org/view_article.php?aid=636311629#376480390

WHAT IS IMPERIALISM?

HOW DID IT DEVELOP IN EUROPE IN THE LATE 19TH CENTURY? WHY?

Racism: HOW DID MOST EUROPEANS EXPLAIN THEIR ABILITY TO CONQUER LARGE AREAS OF THE WORLD?


Imperialism is empire building. Expansion occurs when one state is more
powerful than are the obstacles to expansion. The obstacles may be other states or peoples, or they may be geographic or physical or technological obstacles.

The central core of the empire may be a nation-state, or in ancient times, a city state or a tribe.

European civilization experienced a period of unprecedented rapid expansion around the globe during the last third of the nineteenth century. European nation-states had become very powerful because of industrialization and because of the organizational efficiency of the nation-state.

European global expansion had actually begun in the fifteenth century, but the process greatly accelerated in the nineteenth century.

Latin America and the seaports of Asia and Africa were the first to be colonized by Europeans. Native Americans were liquidated or thoroughly subjugated to European rule. Most Latin American descendents (Latinos) of the Spanish conquerors gained independence from Spain by the early 19th century, while many indigenous peoples remained subject.

The African climate, disease and geography delayed most European colonization until the 19th century, although the descendents of Dutch settlers, known as Afrikaans or Boers, came to South Africa as early as the 16th century.

Slavery took a heavy toll on African development ever since the 16th century. Millions of young people of working age were taken away. Great conflict ensued.

Asia's population was too great, its civilization too firmly established for Europeans to rule it directly. The Europeans did establish control over seaports and trade. In places like India and Indonesia, Europeans ruled indirectly through their domination of the local aristocracy.

England was the leading European colonial power and had already established much of its overseas empire by the beginning of the 19th century.

France was second, with its holdings in Southeast Asia and in North Africa, both
of these being established during the 19th century.

Portugal, Spain and Holland retained some colonies because they had been
the earliest colonial powers, and still retained some of them in the 19th century.

Germany and Italy were late arrivals on the colonial scene because they
had only unified themselves in the 1860's.

The United States became a colonial power at the end of the 19th century, after having spent the century moving across the North American continent to the Pacific Ocean. Defeat of Spain in the Spanish-American War led to the establishment of American colonies in the Caribbean and in the Philippines. The Hawaiian Islands were conquered at the sametime. (1890's)

Japan was the first Asiatic nation to become a colonial power. Long isolated and refusing to trade with Europeans, except for a limited, controlled trade with Holland, the Japanese were forced to trade by a United States naval squadron in 1845. Subsequently, the Japanese experienced a political revolution. The new leadership modernized rapidly
by adopting European technology and organization.

The British forced China to open itself to the Opium trade in the 1840's. China also experienced social upheaval (The Tai Ping rebellion), and was unable to prevent foreign domination of its trade. By the end of the 19th century, England, Germany, Russia, Japan, and the United States had all compelled China to trade with them. Russia occupied Manchuria and Port Arthur, Japan was in Korea, Germany was in the Shantung peninsula, and the British were in Hong Kong.

The French, the British, the Germans and the Italians competed with each other in the last third of the 19th century to lay claim to Africa. The Belgian king Leopold was also extensively involved. The only remaining areas of Africa not colonized by the end of the century were Ethiopia in the horn of Africa and Liberia on the Atlantic coast.

Another aspect of European expansion in the last half of the 19th century involved the emigration of large numbers of Europeans to other parts of the world. European population had been increasing more rapidly than non-European populations during this time. Population pressure combined with improved overseas transportation led to the greatest migration in history up to that time.

The ease with which Europeans dominated non-European areas of the world is explained by the power they had resulting from industrialization and the nation-state organization.

But the explanations that Europeans made to themselves were that they
were superior to non-European peoples. There were a number of racist ideas widely believed by Europeans:

Whites were superior to non-whites. One variation was Rudyard Kipling's idea of the White Man's Burden. The white man had the burden and responsibility of bringing the blessings of their superior civilization to the savages of the non-European world.

Another was a variation of Social Darwinism in which white Europeans were considered more fit in the struggle for survival. Another variation was that Christianity was the only true religion.

Racist attitudes also separated northern Europeans from southern Europeans, Anglo-Saxons, Nordics and Teutons from Latins, and Aryans from Semites.

Anti-Semitism had traditionally been interpreted on the basis of religion with Jews considered to be Christ-killers. A new anti-Semitic concept of Jews as an inferior race, which endangered the purity of Aryans, developed in the late 19th century, particularly in
eastern Europe.

Vienna, as the capitol of the multi-ethnic Austrian Empire, was a particular site for the greatest variety of anti-Semitic writings.

Racism and anti-Semitism was a virulent motivating force in 19th century Europe, which boded ill for the future.

http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/westn/imperialism.html

European Emigration 1851-1960

Origins

Gr. Britain & Ireland 34%
Italy 19%
Germany 11%
Spain 9%
Austria 7%
Poland 5%
Portugal 5%
Russia 4%
Sweden, Norway, Holland 4%
Finland, Denmark, France, Belgium, Switzerland 4%

Destinations
United States 45%
Asiatic Russia 20%
Argentina 10%
Canada 8%
Australia & N. Zealand 7%
Brazil 7%
Other 4%

Source: Statistics based on W. Woodruff, Impact of Western Man: a Study of Europe's Role in the World Economy, St. Martin's Press, NY, 1967

http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/westn/emigration.html

I have to say that the European massive colonization and emigration to other regions in the world in the past has not been a success in the long run. Because today, White/western/European people are decreasing in numbers rapidly, because of low birthrates of Europeans and non-Europeans are growing in numbers in their own countries, because of massive immigration, racial mixing etc. Here is a article about that: The last days of a white world Non-whites will be majority in US and Europe by 2050
 
Oh man, what a diatribe. Wang, maybe you should check your sources again.

What's more, I don't see how this could change in any way Japanese responsibility for a war of aggression & atrocities.

Wang said:
A glance at history therefore discloses the rather horrifying facts that the citizens of the US - as well as the other Western nations - have, quite astoundingly, managed to erase from their consciousness.
Believe it, or not: it's still in the textbooks (at least in Europe).

Massacred? AFAIK, most Indians died of disease (introduced by Europeans) rather than aggression.
What's more, what you forgot to mention: The estimates for the pre-Columbian population range from 5m to 100m. Since we can't know the actual number, the accusation of 95% being massacred is highly questionable, anyway.

However, this Native American culture of altruism, fraternity, and mutual compassion was to be replaced by other more important European values.
Ask the Aztecs about fraternity & mutual compassion.
This crappy view of the noble savage has long been discarded.

For instance, in the African Holocaust between 10 and 20 million Africans were deported in the name of the Western slave-trade; which means that Africa窶冱 population was decimated by about 100-200 million,
Which is a quite strange extrapolation.

Because today, White/western/European people are decreasing in numbers rapidly
Rapidly? In Western countries the growth is rather slow or even stagnating. I think, only a few countries, like Germany, have actually a birth rate below the death rate. Anyway, the same goes for most industrialised countries & even for some parts of Africa (though not due to industrialisation).

What's that to do with "(lack of) success" of imperialism is beyond me, though.
 
Wang said:
When the Americans celebrate Columbus Day they fail to realise that they are celebrating the systematic slaughter of the entire indigenous population of the Americas: Genocide was a central factor in the establishment of the United States.

I think everybody is aware of that, and I think American (of the USA) people have done a lot to repair thir past wrongdoing. But keep in mind that the English, French or Americans were not the Spaniards, and the massacres were usually in retaliations to attacks on their settlers or in open wars (solier to soldier, as the stereotypical train or fort attacks by the Native Americans). Here is a list of Native American massacres between 1622 and 1890. The death toll of each "massacre: is between 6 (!) and 850 people. That seems ridiculously low compared to WWII atrocities. It is disease such as the common cold or flu that did the worst damages to the Native American population. There is a good explantion here : Population history of American indigenous peoples.

The "Native Americans" are now well integrated into the US and Canadian society. American and Canadian children learn in quite a lot of detail about the history of the Natives, the various tribes, languages, etc.

As for Latin America, the natives have mixed with the European settlers. Colombia and Brazil, for instance, have a lot of mestizos. There is still a a high percentage of pure Amerindians in countries like Mexico (60% mestizo, 30% pure Ameridian), Ecuador (40% mestizo, 40% Ameridian), Peru (45% Ameridian) or Bolivia (55 to 70% Ameridian). That's 60 million mestizos and 30 million Ameridians in the former Aztec empire, and 23 million Ameridians and 5 million mestizos for the former Inca Empire. Quite a lot considering that the Americas were much more thinly populated than Europe 600 years ago.


As Bossel said, first the estimation of the total population of North and South America before the arrival of the Europeans is very difficult to assess, and secondly, it is pretty certain that 90% of the people who died (especially on the mainland) did because of epidemic diseases brought by the Europeans. On this matter you should read the wonderful book Guns, Germs and Steel.

Michael A. Dorris observes that by the time the continental borders of the United States were established, the entire population had been decimated 窶徼o a low of 210,000 in the 1910 census.窶拏13]

Do you know that that Native American now make up 1.5% of the US population of 295 million ? That's about 6 million people. Quite an increase (30x) in 3 or 4 generations since 1910. That means that they all had in average 20 children (that survived to procreate) per couple including those who were already elderly in 1910! How is that possible ?

However, this Native American culture of altruism, fraternity, and mutual compassion was to be replaced by other more important European values.

I am not sure if you realise that you are assuming that Columbus's decription of one Carribean tribe can be generalised for the hundreds of tribes of the American Continent. That's a huge mistake ! Just look at the Aztec that were doing human sacrifice, the cult of death, etc. That's almost the opposite from the naiveness of the Caribbean tribe described. Anyway, why do you trust so much Columbus's ability to analyse foreign cultures when he was just a navigator, not a sociologist or anthropologist ? I guess my first impressions of the Japanese was quite similar to that of Columbus, but that does not mean that they were not able of some of the world's worst atrocities some 60 years before. The reason that the Caribbean and Aztec Ameridians were so servile toward to first Spanish explorers was that they were in awe, as they came with huge ships, wore metal armour, rode majestic beast that they had never seen before (horses) and had the ability to kill at distance and make sounds similar to the thunder (guns, canons). In fact, they were seen as gods when Columbus & co first set foot there. How would you react if technologically-advanced aliens suddenly came to your doorstep ? But the Natives were also quick to react once they realised that the Spaniards were no gods.

I'd like to add this from Wikipedia :

Even taking the highest figure (15 million) of deaths resulting from the European colinisation over 300 to 400 years (many generations), that is still only a fraction of the WWII death toll in Europe, Russia and Asia, and the equivalent of the deaths caused by the Japanese in just a decade. But the US or Canadian government (and others) have apologised for what happened. It's a bit more complex in a country like Mexico where 90% of the population is still at least partly Amerindian. They never lost their country or land. We could compare the Spanish colonisation of Mexico to the Germanic invasion in the 5th and 6th century, or the Viking invasions of the 9th to 11th century in Europe. A minority of the population still descent from these invadors, who kept the power for a while, then lost it to the bigger number of natives, or became undistinguishable from each others with time and intermarriages.
 
bossel said:
Oh man, what a diatribe. Wang, maybe you should check your sources again.

What's more, I don't see how this could change in any way Japanese responsibility for a war of aggression & atrocities.

Just comparing and my conclusion is western imperialism was on a much larger scale.


 
Last edited:

Quotation:

"The destruction of the Indians of the Americas was, far and away, the most massive act of genocide in the history of the world." David E. Stannard. 4
"This violent corruption needn't define us.... We can say, yes, this happened, and we are ashamed. We repudiate the greed. We recognize and condemn the evil. And we see how the harm has been perpetuated. But, five hundred years later, we intend to mean something else in the world." Barry Lopez. 3
"By then [1891] the native population had been reduced to 2.5% of its original numbers and 97.5% of the aboriginal land base had been expropriated....Hundreds upon hundreds of native tribes with unique languages, learning, customs, and cultures had simply been erased from the face of the earth, most often without even the pretense of justice or law." Peter Montague 1

Overview:

The population of North America prior to the first sustained European contact in 1492 CE is a matter of active debate. Various estimates of the pre-contact Native population of the continental U.S. and Canada range from 1.8 to over 12 million. 4 Over the next four centuries, their numbers were reduced to about 237,000 as Natives were almost wiped out. Author Carmen Bernand estimates that the Native population of what is now Mexico was reduced from 30 million to only 3 million over four decades. 13 Peter Montague estimates that Europeans once ruled over 100 million Natives throughout the Americas.

European persecution of Natives started with Christopher Columbus' arrival in San Salvador in 1492. Native population dropped dramatically over the next few decades. Some were directly exterminated by Europeans. Others died indirectly as a result of contact with introduced diseases for which they had no resistance -- mainly smallpox, influenza, and measles.

Later European Christian invaders systematically murdered additional Aboriginal people, from the Canadian Arctic to South America. They used warfare, death marches, forced relocation to barren lands, destruction of their main food supply -- the Buffalo -- and poisoning. Oppression continued into the 20th century, through actions by governments and religious organizations which systematically destroyed Native culture and religious heritage. One present-day byproduct of this oppression is suicide. Today, Canadian Natives have the highest suicide rate of any identifiable population group in the world.

The genocide against American Natives was one of the most massive, and longest lasting genocidal campaigns in human history. It started, like all genocides, with the oppressor treating the victims as sub-humans. It continued until almost all Natives were wiped of the face of the earth, along with much of their language, culture and religion.

Genocide of Natives in the Western Hemisphere, starting 1492 CE

The "Native Americans" are now well integrated into the US and Canadian society. American and Canadian children learn in quite a lot of detail about the history of the Natives, the various tribes, languages, etc.

racismagainstindians.org -&nbspThis website is for sale! -&nbspNative American American Indian Native People Mascots Stereotypes Racism Education Sports Image Resources and Information.
 
Wang, you can quote as much as you want, you still don't understand that
1) The Indians of America does not mean only USA, but the American Continent.
2) This was mostly the acts of the violent Spanish and Portuguese colonisation in the 16th and 17th centuries + diseases.
3) These authors' estimates are only estimates, and often contradicted by other estimates.

Author Carmen Bernand estimates that the Native population of what is now Mexico was reduced from 30 million to only 3 million over four decades.

When ? There could not have been 30 million people in Mexico in the late 15th or 16th century. That's 1/3 of today's fast-growing population, and more than Mexico's population in 1950. Thinking that Mexico could have had a population of 30 million 500 years ago (when all Europe had maybe less than 30 million people) is just ludicrous. As there was no massacre in Mexico the 20th century, there could not have ever been 30 million people in Mexico before the 20th century.

Various estimates of the pre-contact Native population of the continental U.S. and Canada range from 1.8 to over 12 million. 4 Over the next four centuries, their numbers were reduced to about 237,000 as Natives were almost wiped out.

I already explained that it is almost impossible for the Native American population of the US and Canada to have been as low as 237,000 in the late 19th or early 20th century, as it would mean that all of them would have to have about 10 children to reach the current 6 million in the US (+ 1 million pure Amerindians and 300,000 metis in Canada ). Take in consideration that they should have had the financial means to support such large families for the last 4 generations, when families in all Western countries have been steadily decreasing because it has become so costly to raise children in the 2nd half of the 20th century. This makes it even more unlikely.

I guess these authors have no idea what they are talking about. Maybe it was 2,370,000 not 237,000. That doesn't mean that many Ameridians were killed, but I have no reason to protect the US on this, as I am not particularily pro-American, and my country has never colonised the Americas.
 

When Cortテゥz entered the great Aztec city of Tenochtitlテ。n in 1519, Mesoamerican civilization was over 3000 years old. The ruins of cities that we marvel over today such as Chichテゥn Itzテ。 or Teotihucテ。n had been deserted for centuries and other great cities had arisen in their stead. The population of Mexico was about 20 million -- which had to equal or exceed that of Spain at the time. Cortテゥz was amazed at the vast markets of Tenochtitlテ。n which were larger than those of Constantinople. With the help of superstition, smallpox, gunpowder and resentment to Aztec rule within five years he was able to subdue the whole Aztec empire and drastically alter the course of 3000 years of history. He handed out to himself and his lieutenants the conquered cities to do with as they wished, which meant wholesale enslavement. By the end of the 16th century the population had been reduced by 90%.

In the next two centuries settlers from Spain continued to arrive, the Catholic Church Chritianized the native population, and a rigorous system of aparteid was practiced which granted rights and status on the basis of race. In the beginning of the 19th century with Spain under attack by Napoleon Mexico revolted. The rebellion was led by a parish priest named Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla in 1810, citing 300 years of Spanish tyranny and oppression. From then on Mexico has been on a broken but essentially upward path of independence and constitutional rule. The difficulties have been immense.

http://www.pacificnet.net/~dpm/mexico/intro.htm


King Philip II needed money for his European wars and forced Mexico to give him loans; this doubled the tribute natives had to pay. By the end of the 16th century wars, pestilence, and pushing people off their land had reduced the native population of Mexico from 25 million in 1519 to about one million. By 1615 nearly a hundred thousand Spaniards and their descendants were living in New Spain. Increasing numbers of African slaves were imported; many Africans married native women, producing mestizos called zambos, which some considered unruly. In 1600 the estimated number of these Afromestizos was 140,000. Trade with Mexico flourished, and in the first decade of the 17th century the tax on merchandise yielded the government 2,671,190 pesos.

America and Its Conquerors 1300-1615 by Sanderson Beck

The conquistadors and colonists were followed by Spanish missionaries. They destroyed the existing temples and idols and set up Roman Catholic churches in their place. They tried to force all the Indians to become Christians. In less than a century, European diseases, such as smallpox, and brutal torture, murder and slavery slashed the population so that 19 out of every 20 natives died. In 1519, the population of Mexico was 25 million, but had fallen to just over 1 million in 1600. The pride modern-day Mexicans feel for their Aztec past, however, is represented by the snake-eating eagle on their flag.

Camelot International: Britain's Heritage and History
 
Wow

Maciamo and Bossel got in here fast! More or less what I wanted to say. (and more) You two should be part of the thread emergency response team.

Cheers!

 
Wang, you shouldn't trust so easily things you read on amateur websites like those who cited in links. I can search Google 10 seconds and find data that completely contradict that Mexico or Spain's population in the early 1500's was 25 or 30 million.

http://www.fsmitha.com/h3/time16.htm

1510 CE: ... India these days has a population of around 105 million
...
1579 CE: The population of China reaches 60 million.

Can you sincerely believe that Spain and Mexico were as populous as China at that time ?

Spain's current population is about 40 million. Here is another link that indicates its population at the time of the colonisation :

The overall effect of plague and emigration reduced Spain's population from 8 million in the early sixteenth century to 7 million by the mid-seventeenth century.

You can see here that the world' population started growing dramatically from the mid-20th century. So it's impossible for any country to have been nearly as populous 500 years ago as it is now or was in 1950.

The following link shows the population of a few European countries around 1600 :

France: 20 million
Italian peninsula: 13.1 million
Spain: 8.10 million
Germany: 5 million
England: 4.2 million
Poland: 3.4 million
Scandinavia: 2 million
The Netherlands: 1.5 million
The Spanish Netherlands: 1.5 million
Portugal: 1.1 million
Scotland: 1 million
Ireland: 1 million

This site claims that the Aztec Empire's population in 1519 was 150,000 inhabitants. Very improbable, but it just goes to show that you can't just trust any info you find on amateur websites (even with domains in .edu like this one).

In 1519, the Aztec Empire covered an area of 625,000 square miles and had 150,000 inhabitants. (At this time London had 200,000 thousand people and Madrid had 64,000 people.)
 
Last edited:
Pity you didn't show any of that data then.

[EDIT]Right, I see you've added some data and links now.
窶「ツェ窶堙ェ窶堙寂?堙ヲ窶堙ォ窶堋オ窶堋「ツ。

Maciamo said:
Can you sincerely believe that Spain and Mexico were as populous as China at that time ?
What sort of logic do you call that?
 
PaulTB said:
What sort of logic do you call that?

Because both Mexico and Spain have always been much more sparesely populated than China or India. Nowadays China has a population 10x bigger than both countries combined, and Mexico's has been growing much faster over the last 50 years. What's more, the agricultural resources of the aztec were quite poor (no wheat, no rice, mostly corn and squash), and they had no cows, no pigs, no horses, no sheep and no goat, as none of these animals existed on the American continent before the arrival of Columbus. That means that their low protein supply, and Mexico's arid climate and mountainous land, made it virtually impossible to support of population of 30 million with their technological advancement (they also didn't have iron, steel or any such metals that could have been used as a plough, and the absence of cows or horses meant that there were anyway no animals to draw plough or carts).
 
Maciamo said:
Because both Mexico and Spain have always been much more sparesely populated than China or India.
That's starting with the conclusion.

See, now that's called putting forward an argument.

What you had before was an emotional appeal with no backing provided.
 
PaulTB said:
See, now that's called putting forward an argument.

What you had before was an emotional appeal with no backing provided.

Sorry, didn't have time before. I had to leave. :sorry:

Found more here, although contradicting my theory :


Whatever the total population, the number of human sacrifices practised by the Aztecs is absolutely astounding.

Now here:


I wonder why Peru's population would just halves through the epidemics, forced labour, etc. while Mexico would drop by 25x. That's seems very improbable. The explanation may just be a smallpox epidemic limited to Aztecs and not the Inca Empire :


Encarta mentions something similar, but insist that the 3 million Aztecs who died from smallpox were 1/3 of the total Aztec population, so for Encarta, the total population was 9 million.


This other site and that one too claim that the Aztec population at the time of Cortes's conquest was 5 million. Who are we to believe ? Personally I think that 25 million is unlikely, because of the resource and technological limitations I exposed above.
 
Last edited:
Wang said:
Just comparing and my conclusion is western imperialism was on a much larger scale.
Comparing pears to apples, I see. But what for?
Anyway, "western" imperialism? Not all Western countries had empires or were imperialistic, & the scale & form of imperialism varied from country to country.

Even if we only look at the time before the 20th century, the extent of democide in China was greater than - say - on the American continent. Acc. to Rummel even the deaths of Amer-Indians & African slaves combined are lower in number.

Not nearly as detailed as these articles.
& not nearly as biased, as it seems.
BTW, detail was not the issue, what you wrote was "rather horrifying facts that the citizens of the US - as well as the other Western nations - have, quite astoundingly, managed to erase from their consciousness." & this is just crap.

Ah yes, those diseases helped them take care of the non-europeans faster.
Can't call this massacres, though.

I don't think it is very questionable. It were a lot of people that's for sure.
"A lot of people" is not the same as "95% being massacred". If you want to be taken seriously, you should be at least somewhat consistent in your argumentation.


You get the point by reading the last article of the Guardian. The unsuccessful atempt to expand the european/white population in the world.
Nope. There was no "unsuccessful atempt to expand the european/white population."
1) Attempt implies that there was some kind of concerted action (a conspiracy, if you want) by imperial powers to spread the "white" race. Which is a silly idea. Colonial policy varied from country to country & even from colony to colony.
2) The article differentiates anglo-saxon from hispanic "whites." Which is another silly idea.
3) The idea of the "last days of a white world" is quite racist in itself. What's more, the "Western" world is not exclusively white, anyway.
 
Maciamo said:
Who are we to believe ? Personally I think that 25 million is unlikely, because of the resource and technological limitations I exposed above.

Of course low protein diets aren't impossible to live on. In fact a low calorie low protein diet is probably responsible for the high life expectancy in Japan (although it's dropping now). Although they didn't have much in the way of animal power the Aztec's did have terracing / irrigation systems which were probably quite 'high density' for growing crops. (I saw a documentary a year or two about an attempt to revive the system because, for the terrain, it was much better than any other methods available).

As for the conflicting population values
a) 9 / 25 million are probably at the high/low edge of estimates. I doubt there was a census taken each year ;-)
b) Couldn't there be confusion over which the land area is included? I doubt Modern Mexico = Aztec Empire
 

Can you give a link to those statistics of "Rummel".

Can't call this massacres, though.

It is a indirect way to neutralize possible hostile natives.

"A lot of people" is not the same as "95% being massacred". If you want to be taken seriously, you should be at least somewhat consistent in your argumentation.

The different sources give different numbers.


Most hispanics aren't "white europeans." Most are mixed with indian and spanish.
 
Wang said:
Can you give a link to those statistics of "Rummel".
Death by Government, Rummel 1994.

It is a indirect way to neutralize possible hostile natives.
This implies deliberateness, which is not really close to the truth.

The different sources give different numbers.
Exactly.

Most hispanics aren't "white europeans." Most are mixed with indian and spanish.
The article you linked specifically mentioned that "The biggest growth is among Latinos (largely derived from Spain)". I'm well aware that there are Hispanics of every background, mixed, negroid, caucasoid & even mongoloid.
 
PaulTB said:
Of course low protein diets aren't impossible to live on. In fact a low calorie low protein diet is probably responsible for the high life expectancy in Japan (although it's dropping now).

2 mistakes here. Japanese people after WWII have had a diet extremely rich in protein. It's almost impossible for a vegetarian (like my sister who visited me in Japan) to find something without meat/fish in Japan except pasta or soba. Sushi/sashimi, fried fish, yakiniku, sukiyaki, katsudon, gyuudon, etc. are all meat/fish based dishes. Add to this all the eggs, the protein-rich beans (like in natto, miso...), and you'll see that the Japanese diet is very protein-rich, which may explain why they are so thin.

Secondly, Japan's life expectancy is still increasing. And it was not nearly as high as in the West before Meiji or even before 1945.

Why do you think the Aztecs had to do so many human sacrifices ? Because there was not enough food to support all the people. That's a way of "pruning" the population.

a) 9 / 25 million are probably at the high/low edge of estimates. I doubt there was a census taken each year.

There were no cnesus at all. These are estimated made by Westerners in the 20th century, not Aztec data.

b) Couldn't there be confusion over which the land area is included? I doubt Modern Mexico = Aztec Empire

Good point. The Aztec Empire was smaller than today's Mexico. Just the South of Mexico and Guatemala. That is also why it is highly unprobably that the population ever reached 25-30 million, as it would be more than the same region in the late 20th century with chemical fertilizers, tractors, asphalted roads, electricty, imports/exports from overseas, etc. How could that be possible ? The whole of Mexico (over twice the area of the Azte Empire) only had 27 million inhabitants in 1950.

Wikipedia has yet other figures :

The population at the time of the conquest is estimated at 15 million; seventy years after the conquest, the estimated population was 3 million.
 
Actually, it's not entirely impossible. The Maya, who lived nearby, may have had a population of 15m in their heyday (8th century). But this population collapsed long before the Europeans arrived due to lengthy drought periods (probably caused by over-population), wars & perhaps economical factors.

The Mayas had a more sophisticated system (of agriculture) than the Aztecs, AFAIK. Yet, the Aztecs theoretically would have been able to sustain a population of roughly 20m. This is rather improbable, though, & even if so, the population most probably would have collapsed rather sooner than later, anyway.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…