Explore our other sites
  • kotaku
  • quartz
  • theroot
  • theinventory
    earpjon--disqus
    Jon
    earpjon--disqus

    My bad. In my anti-genocide venting, I lumped your two statements together. Once again, my bad. However, I do object to the phrase 'Genocide of the Native Americans' for reasons I have articulated below with Lord Lucan. I apologize for not reiterating, but they are rather longish and I do have to go. Read them if

    Eh, sorry, but no. What about inter-religous warfare and genocide. Those aren't always racial.

    Btws, I do appreciate someone else appreciating my historical expertise. It does not happen nearly enough in my own humble opinion.

    Yeah, okay. I'm fine with that. Just don't generalize. Also, I don't think "mass killings" is an appropriate measure of genocide. Just look at all the anti-jewish programs in history. Those don't count as genocide (to my knowledge). Yes there violence against the Amerindians, but I wouldn't call it as a whole the

    See, I think you're being to broad here. I extremely doubt that each and every single tribe was eradicated or was targeted at eradication. I also doubt that every single settler, "European", conqueror, whatever (the "They"s you referred to) tried to kill all NA's. I imagine statistical odds will back me up here.

    My problem is that the statement "Native Americans were intentionally eradicated" is that that statement means all were. 100%. Does this include South Americans (in common nomenclature no) because they are STILL NA tribes in Brazil that we just found and probably some that we still haven't found. So obviously, they

    Oh yeah, I'm fine with that. My original statement was merely against the notion of equating that to the Holocaust. Once you show me proof that Americans gassed native Americans, did scientific experiments on them, tortured them, and killed 6 million of them, then you can call it a holocaust. Until then, leave the

    Is unknowingly transmitting germs to people who don't have an immune system capable of defending against them a genocide? By those standards whatever central Asian (maybe even Han Chinese) people who transported the black death to Europe committed genocide. Or whomever (the Sassanids?) started Justinian's Plague.

    Trail of Tears is nothing compared to THE Holocaust. Everyone wants to claim the Holocaust so as to garner more sympathy.

    Genocide? No. As for sub-Saharan (mostly) west-African deaths, I'd bet probably a few million at the most (in North America. I believe the Spanish/ Portuguese used a lot more in South America).

    Brilliant!!!!

    But the resistance communists probably would regroup and slaughter you…

    Question. Now I don't know this or not, but was Austria looking back at the Habsburg empire with reverence and this inspired them to join Germany? As in Hungary.

    Convincing someone of something has no bearing on whether or not that thing is a fact or not.

    Certainly not all German soldiers were like that. And is there any reason to suppose that a significant amount (over 50%, 25%) did commit atrocities?

    Also, I'm curious, is Papa Lugba a Voodoo religion god, or demi-god? Is he indigenous?

    Oh. Sorry. I was watching in a noisy area and it was hard to hear much of anything until about forty minutes in. As for making Papa the devil, they presumably just didn't want to take time to explain the differences to the audience. After all, they do have like 15+ other characters on this show. Or Murphy and

    That's my point. They all matter a little too much and there's so god damn many of them, that when one or two don't show up (in this case, Kyle and LaLaurie) then it becomes an issue. I would be surprised if every important character has appeared in every episode thus far. And sometimes, they appear, but barely.

    I mean, did they say his full name in the episode? I figured he was just the Jamaican/Voodoo version of the devil and a nice twist on Dr. Faustus. I'm not up to date on my non-Abrahamic religions.

    Couldn't agree more.