[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The Pilgrims left England to avoid religious persecution. First they went to Holland, but after settling in that liberal place, found themselves again threatened (by the possibility of encroachment and control by aggressive foreign powers). Holland was no longer considered the secure safe haven. So they went across the sea. Was it a just thing, that they sought freedom from religious persecution by colonizing the New World? What followed after was inevitable due to the continued influx of Englishmen and Europeans. Resources, including land, became increasingly contested, and the stronger and more numerous side won.

[/ QUOTE ]

I assume you're not suggesting the European settlers were justified in murdering and taking the land of those who were here first since they did so to flee religious persecution, and since the results seemed inevitable given their determination to settle here. I gather you're just demonstrating that it's explainable. Yes, we can explain it, but I don't think we can justify it.

While it's true justice is merely a human construct, we can do our best to apply it. It doesn't seem we've done so here.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes it's tragic but I don't think the settlers or pioneers could have afforded to just pack up and go back home acros the sea. It cost many everything they had just to make the initial journey, at great risk and often loss of good health as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps they could have ceased the migration once it became clear it would impose a grave injustice on the indigenous people here. Surely, though, they might have at least sat down and hashed out more mutually acceptable agreements.

I understand that in a time when many probably thought they were carrying out some sort of manifest destiny, that wouldn't likely have happened. But that doesn't justify it either, I don't think.

Though it's been the way of history, it doesn't mean it's right or that it *should* have been the way of history any more than the fact that people do kill people justifies a given murder. You know?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying it was justified. I'm saying that it is the way of the world, and those who pushed the Indians out had their own needs. When group needs collide, that often leads to tragedy and ruthlessness.

Maybe a better more mutually beneficial arrangement could have been worked out...and as I said, I'd have preferred to see it left so the Indians at least retained far larger reservations, perhaps on the order of whole states.

Amends at this late date though make virtually no sense to me. If my great-great-grandfather was murdered, I don't expect the killer's great-great-grandson today to try to give me (the victim's great-great-grandson) money or something to try to make up for it. The time for amends is long past, and the actors today are completely different persons, in a different world.

[ QUOTE ]
And certainly, we've done very, very little to make amends.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again I must quibble. They did very little to make amends. We had, and have, nothing to do with it.

I would bet that I probably feel as sad for the plight of the original American Indians as you do. I just don't think there is anything much we can or should do about it at this far-too-late date.

Different eras = different people = different worlds.

For all the responsibility you and I bear, the tragedy of the American Indians might have happened on some planet orbiting Alpha Centauri. The same holds true for the plight of the American blacks which occurred under slavery.