… that most Amerindians died from Old World diseases to which they had little or no natural immunity, not because of some deliberate, pre-planned genocide by Europeans.
The dying out of millions of Amerindians was a horrible and terrible event to be sure, but the Left’s narrative on this is full of lies and fraud.
I repeat here some excellent analysis of why and how so many Amerindians died after the European discovery of the Americas.
We know that the Native Americans faced a severe group disadvantage caused by differential evolution: namely, their inability to resist or have immunity to new diseases brought by Europeans like smallpox (Cochran and Harpending 2009: 158–159). The HLA gene alleles, in various forms, protect human beings against infectious disease by regulating the nature and strength of the immune system.
But the Amerindians had an unusual distribution of HLA alleles – evolved from their distinct evolutionary history in the Americas – and a much weaker immune system, because they were simply not exposed to the same type and variety of pathogens as the farming peoples of the Old World (Cochran and Harpending 2009: 160–161, citing Cavalli-Sforza and Paolo Menozzi 1994). But the weaker immune systems of Amerindians had an advantage in their distinctive environment: they were much less subject to autoimmune diseases than other peoples with stronger immune systems (Cochran and Harpending 2009: 161).
But when Europeans brought infectious diseases such as measles, smallpox, diphtheria, whooping cough, leprosy, and bubonic plague, the consequences for Amerindians were horrific: there is some evidence that the Amerindian population of the New World suffered a stunning 90% fall in just a few centuries – and most of the deaths were caused by exposure to these diseases introduced by Europeans which Amerindians could not resist because of their different evolutionary history (Cochran and Harpending 2009: 162, citing Cook 1998). For instance, while only about 30% of Europeans might die in smallpox epidemics, a shocking 90% of Amerindians would die from the disease (Cochran and Harpending 2009: 167). This terrible series of plagues obviously aided the European conquest of the Americas, and even with superior European technology, was a factor in the success of the Conquistadors.
For example, the conquest of the Incan Empire by Francisco Pizarro was facilitated by a smallpox epidemic (Cochran and Harpending 2009: 163).
Even Jared Diamond, an academic beloved by the Left, admits these facts:
As late as the 20th century, isolated populations of Amerindians have suffered the same fate: in instances where first contacts occurred between Amerindians and European-descended people in the 20th century the same European diseases have killed 33–50% of the natives (Cochran and Harpending 2009: 167).
The same kinds of biological differences caused terrible epidemics and mass deaths of Australian Aborigines and Polynesians when Europeans invaded or colonised their homelands as well (Cochran and Harpending 2009: 169).
Cavalli-Sforza, L. Luca and Alberto Piazza Paolo Menozzi. 1994. The History and Geography of Human Genes. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Cochran, Gregory and Henry Harpending. 2009. The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution. Basic Books, New York.
Cook, Noble David. 1998. Born to Die: Disease and New World Conquest, 1492–1650. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
During his interview, the Dalai Lama revealed his bigotry and complained that “Beijing was planning the mass settlement of 1 million ethnic Chinese people in Tibet after the Olympics with the aim of diluting Tibetan culture and identity,” and, if that happened, that Tibet would be transformed into a “truly Han Chinese land and Tibetans [sc. would] become an insignificant minority.”
How does the Dalai Lama get away with this racism and hateful demonisation of immigrants??
Doesn’t he know that millions of Chinese immigrants will culturally enrich Tibet?
Doesn’t he appreciate how much vibrant diversity millions of Chinese immigrants will create in Tibet? What’s more, to be truly diverse, Tibet should clearly import millions of Muslims, Indians, and Africans too – because we know that diversity is always a strength!
Furthermore, it is certain that these Chinese immigrants to Tibet will just be doing the jobs that native Tibetans don’t want to do! Who could object to that?
Even worse, the Dalai Lama actually thinks that native Tibetans should have a right to control their borders and immigration policy, so that they will not become a minority in their own homeland! What kind of racist, hateful bigot and evil “Tibetan supremacist” would believe such a Nazi idea??
After all, there is no evidence of any kind that people who become minorities can suffer discrimination, prejudice or horrible persecution (as long as we exclude Roma Gypsies, Jews, and Palestinians … but it would be racist to mention them).
In short, why do so many Western Liberals and Leftists support the hateful bigotry and racism of the Dalai Lama and his racist Tibetan followers?? Why does the modern Left support “Tibetan Supremacy” and evil “Tibetan Privilege” in Tibet?
Why isn’t diversity a joyful strength in Tibet??
Back to Reality
And now I’ve finished trolling we can turn to the real issues here.
The native people of Tibet who support the Dalai Lama obviously think the following:
(1) Tibet is the homeland of the native Tibetan people;
(2) native Tibetans want control of their borders, and do not want mass immigration of culturally and ethnically alien people forced on them, people who threaten the cultural and ethnic homogeneity of their nation, and
(3) Tibet must remain a nation where the native Tibetan people are the majority of the population and where their national culture is preserved.
There is, of course, nothing wrong with these ideas: they are normal, natural, moral and healthy.
For years, Western Leftists and Hollywood Liberals who campaign for freedom for Tibet have either explicitly or tacitly supported these ideas too.
But why is it that the modern Left goes insane with rage and cannot support the following ideas?:
(1) Europe is the homeland of the native European people;
(2) native Europeans want control of their borders, and do not want mass immigration of culturally and ethnically alien people forced on them, people who threaten the cultural and ethnic homogeneity of their nations, and
(3) Europe must remain a region with nations where the native European people are the majority of the population and where their national cultures are preserved.
Even people on the mainstream Left before the 1960s would have believed these propositions.
But in our Western culture today shaped by the Left – and even on most of the worthless and idiotic mainstream Conservative right – the ideas above are usually condemned as “racism,” “hate,” “fascism” or “white supremacy.” But they, expressed simply in the terms above, are nothing of the sort.
As I said: they are normal, natural, moral and healthy.
If Leftists support these ideas for Tibet, why don’t they support them for Europe?
To maintain a stable population, a First World nation needs a fertility rate of 2.1. But most Europeans have fertility rates below this:
If European fertility rates continue to stay below 2.1, then Europeans will slowly die out, though, admittedly, this would take a long time.
This is because of a basic principle of Darwinian evolution and population genetics: differential birth rates. If, in one region, Group A has a lower birth rate and Group B has a higher birth rate, then over time Group B replaces Group A. If more and more members of Group B enter the given region, then this trend will be massively accelerated.
Data from a Pew Research Center report of 2011 shows that in Europe Muslim immigrants have a higher fertility rate than native Europeans (Grim et al. 2011: 131). The demographic trends predicted in the Pew Research Center report will be greatly accelerated by Angela Merkel’s importation of over 1.3 million migrants into Europe in 2015–2016, and the further mass immigration from family reunification.
You don’t have to be a genius to understand what the long-run demographic trends will be if present policies are continued.
Some on the truly sick and depraved Left actually celebrate this as some kind of wonderful achievement:
But it gets even worse. Insane European governments are importing millions of Muslims into Europe, who will not assimilate and who live in communities that become centres of radical Islam and violent Islamism. Long before the demographic catastrophe happens, Europe will be hit by a full-scale Islamist insurgency, and, indeed, Europe is already in a low-level Islamist insurgency.
It doesn’t take a lot of intelligence to see where Europe is headed: it will experience catastrophe not only because of the economic collapse caused by Neoliberalism, but also because of the demographic and cultural collapse caused by mass immigration, and perhaps even a civil war caused by Islamism.
In these circumstances, Europeans will increasingly be driven to vote for the populist right and far right, and, if things get bad enough, perhaps even for full-blown fascism.
As I have said before, you would think that the Left would contain people who can see the truth and would like to stop such a disaster from happening.
But, no, the reality is that what passes for the modern Left has no interest in supporting policies or addressing the underlying issues that would stop this rising tide of popularity for the far right: on the contrary, most of the Left vehemently demand policies that will only accelerate the collapse. This is why the modern Left, as it currently exists, is hopeless and doomed to fail.
Grim, Brian J. et al. 2011. The Future Global Muslim Population: Projections for 2010–2030. Pew Research Center, Washington, D.C.