How did the Native Indians compare to the Africans, when Europeans first met them?

submitted by radicalcentristNational Centrism from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]YJaewedwqewqClerical Fascist 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

The Native Americans were better and more advanced than Africans in many ways, but they were still very savage and brutal. Unlike Africans they did have more advanced ideas of things like settlement building as you mention, with rather impressive feats of architecture (compared to their primitiveness, at least) especially down South with such feats as Tenochtitlan.

Despite their somewhat more advanced technological nature, they were still savage and brutal primitives that lacked the materials and intelligence to form long-lasting, prosperous societies, and their inhumanities and brutality were almost indescribable.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Can you describe what materials they were missing?

In comparison to Europe or even Asia, the Americas was just as resource rich. Brazil is home to the second largest iron deposits, or responsible for 17.2% of the world's entire production.

The ammunition needed to make guns and gunpowder was also spread throughout the continent.

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

The ammunition needed to make guns and gunpowder was also spread throughout the continent.

They don't understand chemistry or engineering, call it science. It's very difficult to build advanced weapons if you don't even know what science is.

[–]YJaewedwqewqClerical Fascist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well, it wasn't that they were lacking of the materials, more that they didn't have the intelligence or knowledge to utilize them.