Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Colonialism and genocide" in English language version.
Genocide in the Course of Colonization or Consolidation of Power: Genocide that is undertaken or even allowed in the course of or incidental to the purposes of achieving a goal of colonization or development of a territory belonging to an indigenous people, or any other consolidation of political or economic power through mass killing of those perceived to be standing in the way.
It is important to realize that there is not a single European nation which, when the opportunity came, did not engage in practices as vicious and cruel as those of Spain—and in the case of England, worse—with very much the same sort of demographic consequences. The Spanish, for all their faults, at least thought it right to convert, and in many cases to marry, the Indians, regarding them on a plane of humanity, capable of receiving Christian precepts and European civilization, above that generally accorded by other colonizers.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)As a result of these twin logics, whole nations and civilizations were wiped out by the settler colonialist movement in the Americas. Native Americans, south and north, were massacred, converted by force to Christianity, and finally confined to reservations. A similar fate awaited the aboriginals in Australia and to a lesser extent the Maoris in New Zealand. In South Africa, such processes ended with the imposition of the apartheid system upon the local people, while a more complex system was imposed on the Algerians for about a century.
Foundational theories in settler colonialism studies distinguish settler colonialism from classical colonialism through work that demonstrates that settler colonizers destroy indigenous peoples and cultures in order to replace them and establish themselves as the new rightful inhabitants. In other words, settler colonizers do not merely exploit indigenous peoples and lands for labor and economic interests; they displace them through settlements.
The crucial relevance of this to debates over colonial violence lies in the argument, made in recent years in many different contexts and with unprecedented force, that settler colonialism is inherently bound up with extreme, pervasive, structural and even genocidal violence....And quite simply, since Britain (and, before a United Kingdom or a compound British identity were formed, England) founded more and more successful, 'explosive' settler colonies than anyone else, so probably more alleged or potential cases of pre-twentieth century genocide occurred in the British world than anywhere outside it...For British North America and for Australasia, however, the case for numerous genocidal episodes –by even restricted definitions, since large-scale deliberate killing was repeatedly involved– seems to me very strong.
One of the most important observations is that genocide and colonization were always closely linked. The largest ever genocide in modern history was committed by half a dozen European stales in what was later called the Third World. Large scale genocide was committed against American Indians, against Africans and against subjugated peoples in European colonies.
The field of Genocide Studies also includes a group of scholars who have argued that settler colonial warfare is genocidal, often deploying "slow violence" or "slow genocide" to achieve its aims in infinitesimal acts of violence interspersed with larger genocidal episodes.
What, however, does make these Australian moments of genocide particularly noteworthy – if not in themselves that unusual – is not only the bizarre disjuncture between their regular reportage in the local and national press and official denial, or more accurately silence on the matter on the part of the authorities, but the peculiar lengths to which the latter were prepared to go to give the appearance that such 'extra-judicial' killings would not be tolerated and that the pacification of hostile tribes would rather – somehow – proceed by due legal process.
Settler colonialism, commonly the most vicious form of imperial conquest, provides striking illustrations. The English colonists in North America had no doubts about what they were doing. Revolutionary War hero General Henry Knox, the first Secretary of War in the newly liberated American colonies, described "the utter extirpation of all the Indians in most populous parts of the Union" by means "more destructive to the Indian natives than the conduct of the conquerors of Mexico and Peru", which would have been no small achievement. In his later years, President John Quincy Adams recognized the fate of "that hapless race of native Americans, which we are exterminating with such merciless and perfidious cruelty, [to be] among the heinous sins of this nation, for which I believe God will one day bring [it] to judgement".
Foundational theories in settler colonialism studies distinguish settler colonialism from classical colonialism through work that demonstrates that settler colonizers destroy indigenous peoples and cultures in order to replace them and establish themselves as the new rightful inhabitants. In other words, settler colonizers do not merely exploit indigenous peoples and lands for labor and economic interests; they displace them through settlements.
It's a grand drama in which the glimmers of enlightenment barely survive the savagery, what Yeats called "the blood-dimmed tide," the brutal establishment of slavery, the race wars with the original inhabitants that Bailyn is not afraid to call "genocidal," the full, horrifying details of which have virtually been erased.
One of the most important observations is that genocide and colonization were always closely linked. The largest ever genocide in modern history was committed by half a dozen European stales in what was later called the Third World. Large scale genocide was committed against American Indians, against Africans and against subjugated peoples in European colonies.
The field of Genocide Studies also includes a group of scholars who have argued that settler colonial warfare is genocidal, often deploying "slow violence" or "slow genocide" to achieve its aims in infinitesimal acts of violence interspersed with larger genocidal episodes.
Settler colonialism, commonly the most vicious form of imperial conquest, provides striking illustrations. The English colonists in North America had no doubts about what they were doing. Revolutionary War hero General Henry Knox, the first Secretary of War in the newly liberated American colonies, described "the utter extirpation of all the Indians in most populous parts of the Union" by means "more destructive to the Indian natives than the conduct of the conquerors of Mexico and Peru", which would have been no small achievement. In his later years, President John Quincy Adams recognized the fate of "that hapless race of native Americans, which we are exterminating with such merciless and perfidious cruelty, [to be] among the heinous sins of this nation, for which I believe God will one day bring [it] to judgement".
It's a grand drama in which the glimmers of enlightenment barely survive the savagery, what Yeats called "the blood-dimmed tide," the brutal establishment of slavery, the race wars with the original inhabitants that Bailyn is not afraid to call "genocidal," the full, horrifying details of which have virtually been erased.
One of the most important observations is that genocide and colonization were always closely linked. The largest ever genocide in modern history was committed by half a dozen European stales in what was later called the Third World. Large scale genocide was committed against American Indians, against Africans and against subjugated peoples in European colonies.
The field of Genocide Studies also includes a group of scholars who have argued that settler colonial warfare is genocidal, often deploying "slow violence" or "slow genocide" to achieve its aims in infinitesimal acts of violence interspersed with larger genocidal episodes.