Any historian will tell you it was the difference in livestock that caused the vast difference in success. The Native Americans did the best with what they had, but the animals they were surrounded with weren’t suited for growing a society, only maintaining it. This was also why everyone knows about Europeans bringing diseases to the Native Americans and not both ways. Because Europeans had more technology, they made cities. These cities were covered in shit because proper plumbing wasn’t a thing so you just threw it outside. The poor sanitation of the cities along with how close they were led to lots and lots of diseases (like the plague but there were tons of others) that the Europeans grew immunities to. This is why everyone remembers how Native Americans were massacred by European diseases and not the other way. There’s historical reasons for all of this that we know. You’re just saying random things with no real backup.
The myth of europeans not understanding sanitation and that disease single handedly knocking out the native war machine has been debunked numerous times. These myths are on par with "guns, germs and steel" which has skewed the narrative fairly dishonest.
Eurasia is more than twice the size of North America. If less space equals more advanced societies, we'd have seen that in at least North America. As for farming; sugars, buffalo, and deer are more than sufficient if properly cultivated. Also the "old people dying out" excuse doesn't really apply. The natives lived wild, and so most native americans didn't live beyond 40 in the first place. There is no excuse for the poor performance of the natives.
I appreciate your comment though and I hope you have a great day!!!
I mean to be fair, not only is the Eurasian continent much more useful for developing a society from nothing when you consider the advantages it had over the North American continent like horses, livestock, and crops, but you have to also consider that human growth and development is exponential (consider the difference between the years 1800 and 2000 compared to 10000 BCE and 9800 BCE). Europeans had established themselves in Europe around 45,000 years ago, while people only came to the Americas around 20,000 years ago, a huge advantage. The Aztecs, Incans, and Mayans were great. Sure nothing compared to Rome, but Rome wasn’t exactly great tens of thousands of years before its peak.
It’s also not really true that natives rarely lived beyond 40. It wasn’t uncommon for a native to live beyond 60, even. The misconception comes from the fact that any early society has many people dying in infancy or very young; the ones who survived beyond that often could live beyond 40.
Well...the aztecs and incas were a bit advanced,but i assume that in this caption it's about the natives of us and canada right ? If so then it makes sense
This was simply inevitable with how she goes commando, she was practically screaming for the first White man she meets to colonize her with how much of her ass is being flaunted around
Damn, now I gotta pick from chink Nagatoro or Blasian(?) Nagatoro. It's a hard choice! But it won't be a hard choice when I decide to poke some holes in her next "batch" and properly bleach the bitch, putting her in her place. She's not likely to talk back when she feels that hot cum colonizing her womb.
