“European” Native Americans
- Thread starter Siberian Tiger
- Start date
Bassarion Korax
Banned
Who said I believed in it? I just said that I’m not convinced that there is a widespread problem with White Supremacy, and that your attempt to derail the thread for conjuring its phantom was pretentious.
I mean, it's not like the reverse ever happens much around here. There are lot of threads around here that ask how to make Latin America and Africa whiter than they are in OTL, where as the reverse of making Europe, the US, or Australia and New Zealand browner hardly ever happens, in comparison. There clearly is a disparity around here. I once made a thread about Arab and Indian immigration to Africa, but most people just ended up talking about European immigration to Africa. To be honest, it just gets super tiring to see the same old general thread of "How can whites/Westerners be more dominate in alternate history than in OTL history". And I don't remember those types of questions ever being particularly creative. I mean it's not like they create a new culture or try to go into specifics. Instead they just try to ask how it can happen, rather than what it actually looks like, although that's probably more of a general board issue than anything else. But, anyways, the point I am trying to make, is that a lot of what people talk about here tends to be Eurocentric in nature. One of the more blatant topics of that nature is when people are trying to make mostly POC regions be whiter. In the case of Latin America and Africa, they tend to give off the implication that these countries would be better and richer being whiter. There's even kind of a meme here that "Anglos automatically make a region more prosperous" as that's a direction some of these questions tend to go in. And it's not a coincidence that this happens. But, this is a topic that's probably better for Chat, but I just wanted to make a bit of my point here.
The first difference would be the Spanish colonial caste system. More fluid boundaries, more upward mobility possible for natives. This would unpredictably butterfly everything subsequent. This might even result in Alt-Cortez figures trying to break free of the Spanish crown.
Then there would be tons of idiotic theories about where the natives came from, which would result in unpredictable nuttery.
Vikings and Colombus arrive? Stop mass murdering butterflies!
Apart from that, I am not sure how much ice there were during the coldest time of the ice age, but I think it´s safe to assume that you would need an ASB amount of ice in order to make it possible to walk from Europe to America.
Apart from that, I am not sure how much ice there were during the coldest time of the ice age, but I think it´s safe to assume that you would need an ASB amount of ice in order to make it possible to walk from Europe to America.
I really think the "racial" phenotype has much to do with how Europeans would treat the native inhabitants of the new world, unless of course these inhabitants had evolved indigenous civilizations as technologically advanced as Europeans. Presuming they were technologically equivalent to actual native American peoples (eg. far less developed technologically), they would be treated in similar ways - exploited,enslaved, conquered. Also, since these people would probably have no resistance to old world diseases, their societies would decline irrespective of how Europeans treated them. The Church would have the same debate as to whether or not these people were descendants of Adam or the product of some other, unholy, creation, since they do live in a hitherto undiscovered land. One difference is that, since they looked like Europeans, interbreeding and even intermarriage between conqueror and conquered would probably not be looked down upon as much as in our world. This would be particularly different in the English colonies, where admixture was especially frowned upon in our history and assimilation of native peoples into the colonial culture did not occur. In this TL, attempts at conversion to Christianity and forced cultural assimilation would probably be even more prevalent than in our history, since that is the way conquest happened in the old world. Colonizers even in the English-speaking colonies would simply conquer, kill or enslave, and eventually assimilate the surviving native people into the colonial culture, not see them as aliens to be forced into exploitative treaty relationships and then reservations.
Well, the English didn't exactly try to assimilate the Irish, despite both being Indo-European, nor did they do that with the Northern Indians, did they?
Bassarion Korax
Banned
That’s probably because this board is dominated by young White males from the Anglosphere, and they’re just playing off of what they’re familiar with, in a similar manner to the way high fantasy in the Anglosphere is just about always acted out with British accents and reflects Medieval Europe in one way or another. I liked your comment because I agree that it’s a little bit annoying, but this has nothing to do with White Supremacy and everything to do with a lack of creativity, I think.
Albert.Nik
Banned
Assimilation is a two sided thing. Irish are well assimilated now in the USA.
Coming to Indians,it is not possible to assimilate a large population strictly adhering to a different religion. Even the early attempts by the British to do so failed. Plus,Hinduism being an ethnic religion played it's part. You can't force someone to assimilate. That's not possible. The best you can do is provide significant amount of education or input to change their norms and consider to assimilate. This would be ultra expensive for the British. Integrating with a distant foreign ethnicity would be an ultra taboo then for Indians. Even today,after being one of the richest communities in the West,intermarrying with White people is a sensitive thing in so many families. So going back 100 years or more,it would be a lot,lot harder.
Last edited:
I wouldn't see these as equivalent to the situation in the new world. It is my impression the English didn't settle Ireland as much as they were absentee landlord exploiters, so there wasn't the need to force the Irish to "become English". As to India, the English were ruling over a population larger than themselves that was recognized as an advanced civilization. It's pretty difficult for a comparatively small group of British colonists to force a large and culturally advanced population to assimilate to British culture and religion.
If the Soluetrian Hypothesis is true (I have doubts in terms of mass migration) then I thin k it would've been the result of seal hunters following the seals. As Dennis Stanford has pointed out, boats have been around a long time. As I understand it evidence of deep water fishing tools have been found in the region associated with the Solutrean Culture. I could see where a group of hunters may have wound up on the Eastern Coast. The things that bothers me about the SH is
1) The bigots that latched on to it.
2) The detractors that claim its absolute impossibiity.
3) The detractors that claim Stanford is a)crazy, b)doesn't know what he's talking about or c)he's pushing some agenda of his own.
I have seen were he publicly states that the Solutreans or their ancestors came most likely from North Africa. Plus Stanford probably knows as much or more than his detractors about Ica Age hunting conditions along the edge of the Ice Pack.
One needs to keep in mind that Alfred Wegener and continental drift was considered a crazy idea one time too. Pre-Clovis has faced a wall of doubt and scorn that is finally crumbling. Plus there have been the odd anomalous finds that fly in the face of conventional wisdom. Some of these have yeilded ages of over 100k years. I really think that these are mostly cases of contamination from younger material. On question I wonder about is just how much the landscape of North America was changed at the end of the last glaciation and the one before. Just look at what outburst floods did to the landscape of the Pacific Northwest. I really think the peopling of the Americas is a much richer story than we are led to believe. There may well of been earlier population groups that either died out to various reasons or merged into waves of Siberian hunters their DNA sinking into statistical insignificance.
And ITTL, when they head over, they find a continent already filed up. The other 2 migrations might happen, but they will mostly be limited to the arctic regions of Alaska and Nunavut.
The Opossum formerly known as GeckSerpent, people are trying to immigrate into China and Japan, there won't ever be a "filled up", especially in the time frame you are thinking of. The climactic changes that enable this migration will really hurt any pre-electric society that would be living in the way of the migration, which would make them vulnerable to territory intrusion.
This brings me to a good point, how did primitive hunter gatherer people ever cross the Columbia River? They had to have used boats.
Maybe you are right, but how will climate make them be vulnerable to territory invasion if the entire continent is already inhabited? Also, how are people immigranting to China and Japan? Not saying you are wrong, just what do you mean? And yes, they probably did use boats, swimming was possible as well.
Last edited:
NO, I do not think they would be treated better.
Europeans came to the Americas to steal land from the natives and I cannot see that changing.
A lot depends on how resistant the natives are to introduced diseases.
I suspect they would be hit just as hard by introduced diseases due to long isolation from the rest of the world.
Europeans came to the Americas to steal land from the natives and I cannot see that changing.
A lot depends on how resistant the natives are to introduced diseases.
I suspect they would be hit just as hard by introduced diseases due to long isolation from the rest of the world.
Burton K Wheeler
Moderator
Why? That is somewhat true for the Aleut/Eskimo people, because they had a very sophisticated Arctic tool package, but not the Athapascans. Until the Comanche (Shoshone from the Wind River originally) were the first to acquire horses, Athapascans were all over the Great Plains (Dismal River culture, proto-Apache people), as well as scattered down the Pacific Coast. As for the Eskimos, they were by no means limited to the Arctic. They settled Alaska all the way to the Copper Delta and were probably going to expand down the Pacific Coast if they continued on an uninterrupted trajectory. Plus, what is stopping the ancestors of the Amerindian people from crossing the strait?
This is not going to change just because some American Indians have green eyes and wavy hair.
Weather pattern changes affect the abundance of food. Throughout the history of North America, climate change has been linked to famine and societal collapse. A farming society can exert a much greater force of arms to repel border crossers than migrating hunter-gatherers can muster to impose their migration, but a starving sedentary society would not be able to block the intrusion.
And when the ancestors of amerindians cross over the Bering strait, they find an already inhabited continent and disappear into the gene pool.
Burton K Wheeler
Moderator
Right, but my point was that more people are coming from Asia than from Europe so even phenotypical change is unlikely to happen.