Debunking Native American Fairy Tales

[Waterglass]

Matt is pretty good. He goes through academic statistics and historic accounts, with a focus on exposing the actual narrative. Many of these modern tales emerged from scholastic activism in the 1960's....sounding a lot like today's liberal playbook.

Matt cites the book, "War Before Civilization", he details the neverending wars and resulting homicide rates 80x modern stats, and other niceties like torture, mutilation, scalping and lots of cannibalism, not to mention infanticide and massacre of women and elders.

[Video: https://youtu.be/mxapaXrHr1Y]

Just a funny FYI, in the Deny Ignorance "spirit"

He should do a documentary of the Confederacy before the Civil War. We were taught as Yankees these people were "Gone with the Wind" types aka as nice, gentile, classy and polite and respectful to the extreme. 

I have been in the deep South since 2014. I once asked a Jehovah's Witness Elder who knocked on my door as to why a majority of Southerns treat each other with disrespect and basically shit on each other. He said its always been like that!

The truth be told

[Solvedit]

What happened in Mexico didn't happen in Pennsylvania, however.   And your AI says "possible" but never comes up with any sources to suggest this does happen.  This, again, is the whole issue with your ideas.

Epidemics spread.

Staving off the possibility of pirate kingdoms when 90% of the natives were gone is a valid reason Europe had to step in and take charge of the Americas.

There would not have been a modern native American coalition in charge of the Americas. There would have been colonies, or there would have been pirates or the Ottoman Empire.

"Possible" covers a lot of things such as "it's possible they trained parrots to fly into upper windows and steal jewelry." 

 

If you read up on pirates, you will note that they didn't have smiths on board ships.  Master cannoneers did repair weapons, but they didn't craft them.  Making a gun is actually very difficult because you need a good forge and some specialized tools.   Pirates didn't lug around forges and hammers and so forth.  You'd get weaponsmiths in towns and cities where they could build a forge building and actively trade for the materials they needed and where they could easily buy a lot of charcoal.

You're right, I forgot, there was no way to get charcoal in the new world. Europeans introduced trees.

Interactions with natives depended on the area.  If the natives had been decimated by disease, the LAST thing they want is strangers who don't speak the language or know the culture. 

Don't believe it?  Swap around the situation and think how YOU would react --

90% of the people gone = no longer in charge.

Do you deny that pirates probably practiced human trafficking?

Do you think that nowhere was there ever a blacksmith who committed murder or something and had to throw in his lot with pirates to avoid hanging? Or got captured on the high seas?

Besides, after colonization picked up, authorized or unauthorized settlers could have turned to piracy occasionally when it suited them. It probably happened in maritime communities in the old world too. I doubt all pirates were full-time.

In Europe, yes.  To Europeans, yes. 

To Native Americans, no.  They had no use for what you're calling a "high value slave."  And that assumes that both the opium and slaves managed to survive the voyage.

Do you know if the natives themselves developed all of the technology or governance that they had? You recklessly assume they did but you don't know.

It would be a poor economic decision for the Ottomans... Even if both sides paid the same for the goods, you get six trips in the Mediterranean versus one across the Atlantic.  That means that a ship in the European waters can make six trades versus one single trade.

And there's the source of your confusion. The market was flooded in Europe and the exchange rate for their gold was well-known. You only have to be able to charge 7X what you got in the flooded markets of the old world in order for your math not to work. The natives Columbus first encountered were apparently able to still pick up gold from stream beds yet you remain blithely oblivious to the notion that the exchange rate for gold was not necessarily the same as in the old world.

And piracy in the Americas wasn't that profitable for them, either.  The Mediterranean is small and full of ships.  Easy prey.  The Atlantic is huge and it's not that easy to find another ship.

So now there were no pirates in the Caribbean? Just a reminder, I am not scrambling timelines. I am hypothesizing a long window of opportunity for several different groups.

Before that, what if a pirate reasoned the voyage took 6 times as long but he could make 7 times the gold because to the natives, it was worth the time it took to pick it up out of streams, like the ones Columbus encountered?

Besides that, what if a fugitive crew broke some pirate law and had to flee, and their old ship only had a trip or two left in it?

Or what if foreign captives felt slighted and marginalized? Or the piracy was so good at some points that there were too many pirates for the victims?

And you're scrambling up timelines again.

No, you are insisting on specifics in order to pretend to remain oblivious to the fact that there was a centuries-long window of opportunity by various groups.

Perhaps the lack of much evidence of a pirate kingdom is only because of the combined efforts of the navies of Europe?