- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 25436 Hour
- Reading permission
This post was edited by wchao37 at 2018-11-18 04:43|
Ted180 Post time: 2018-11-15 01:52
The brutal subjugation of aboriginal people was an inevitable occurrence. This happened every time a ...
Brutal subjugation is not even an acceptable way an 'advanced' culture should use to show its superiority, but unfortunately that's what America has been trumpeting in its rise to power.
As I see it, aggressive and hegemonic use of force is completely a matter of individual choice.
For example, in the state of California, the state legislature decided not to allocate reservation lands for the Native Americans (Indians) but instead chose to exterminate them physically to avoid future headaches.
Under Spanish rule, the population of Californian Indians had dwindled from 300,000 in 1769 to 150,000 in 1848 when the Americans took over. In January 1848, a Californian newspaper called "Star" carried an editorial arguing that Indians were inferior non-Christian savages and opined that the latter needed to be treated like animals.
California's Legislative Ordinance spelt out the limited ‘rights’ of local Indians -- including that Indians couldn't testify in courts against whites. So if an Indian got robbed or raped he/she or other witnesses couldn't testify against whites in court, not to mention the fact that the Indians could be killed at random without cause.
The so-called 'Indian Code' was supposedly written to 'protect' Californian Indians, but as in most promises or contracts made by white America with the natives, it turned into a hollow piece of paper which in reality suppressed the Indians even further.
Not only were the Indians rented like properties to whites as indentured laborers, no one was permitted to make higher bids once labor contract was signed between the two parties because in practice the contracts were always unilaterally renewed against the wishes of the natives. That means under the guise of protecting work and businesses for the white businessmen, the government could find an individual bidder guilty for his 'crime' of bidding higher for a native's work.
In 1850 California passed an Act for 'governing and protecting' Indians, in which the infamous "Apprentice Program" was initiated. They yanked native children away from their parents so that they could be in control of their lives from a young age and paid them a pittance for their work (later they simply sent them to Boarding Schools to study English and the kids weren't even allowed to use their own native languages).
When white businessmen couldn't get enough of them using legal contracts, they simply pillaged Indian villages and kidnapped the surviving children as 'apprentices.'
In one of these documented cases, a white man was charged with kidnapping native children, to which he simply replied to the court, "I didn't kidnap them. Their parents were dead." When the court asked him how he knew that, he simply grimaced and said, "I killed them myself."
That's how the Native American population in California dwindled from 150,000 in 1848 to 120,000 in 1870. The only Native Americans you see today in California are the pitifully few remnants you see from such willful, state-sponsored genocide using the excuse of justifiable Christianity-originated ethnic cleansing.
The tenets of Social Darwinism are neither carved in stone nor are they physical laws of nature.
Had that really been a sacrosanct law of nature, Ming Admiral Zheng He's naval armada of up to 22,000 soldiers transported in hundreds of ships each measuring many times as large as Columbus's "Santa Maria" should have sent Europeans into slavery and traded them in open markets before 1433. One of his four vice-admirals had already reached the Vatican according to the studies of British Royal Navy's ex-submarine commander Gavin Menzies and subsequent findings.
In sole possession of superior cannons, mariners compass, and flying fire-arrows (rockets), these Ming sailors could have at least pillaged the eastern coast of Africa had they had conquest in mind. Instead, not a single record of such acts exists whether from home sources or the historical records from Europe, Africa or the Middle East.
The only record we have today is the fact that from 1421 to 1433, Zheng He and his men made seven voyages to East Africa (and some historians claim that one of his four vice-admirals sailed as far as the Americas) and generously brought along China's extant technological know-how at that time to the Vatican, and this eye-opening event ignited the Italian Renaissance represented by the likes of Leonardo Da Vinci whose 3-D depictions of machines thitherto unknown to Europe were merely plagiarized versions of 2-D drawings long known in Chinese books like "Tiangongkaiwu."
That China could have exterminated the entire European population between 1422 and 1433 had it had the intention to do so is no longer a contestable issue – it is a historical fact.
Re-focusing on today's China you can see that more than fifty ethnic minorities have been encouraged to thrive by having had a written phonetic-language system designed for them and tailored to their needs since the mid-1950s, and yet white America still finds it conscionable to lodge complaints against China despite the latter's more-than-fair treatment of minorities, while conveniently failing to mention their own bona fide genocidal homicides against the Native Americans.
Such hypocrisy with evaluative double- or multiple- standards is both unprecedented and self-serving, and it speaks volumes about the Western mindset itself -- as spelt out in the concept of American Exceptionsim.
In this case, the only thing you need to remind yourself is that China’s 50-plus minorities are still physically and culturally intact, while America’s Native American population has almost been wiped out.
As a civilization-state with incomparably rich and colorful historical experience of multi-state governance, China is one of a few civilizations (if not the only one) that have had such experience of taking into account the interests of all countries on a grand scale, and that's why any unbiased Western observer should have welcomed China's age-old concept of Shijie Datong now dubbed as Shared Destiny of Mankind -- as had happened on January 17, 2017 during the World Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland.
That's why America's proclivity to deny the reality of China's rise is fruitless -- because what China says appeals to the peoples of the entire non-racist world.
The world's expectant eyes -- including those of the environmentally-endangered islanders in the South Pacific -- are today focused on China, and it is in everyone's interest to help her in fulfilling her dream of globalized shared prosperity, and not that of a narrow-minded, stingy and selfish faction of Trumpsters.