Were the European settlers that first came to America right in taking the land from the Native Americans?

Answer 1

Yes they were. In the context of the times, it was perfectly acceptable. It was only made so glaring because it was the most technological advanced civilizations beating up on a stone age civilization. It was no worse than any of the wars of conquest fought by any other power (including native americans) throughout history.

Answer 2

If you want to apply today’s standards to those time you will never arrive at a competent answer. To the Europeans, this land was, for the most part, unused and ownerless. Two very different cultures came together, one tribal and the other committed to sovereign leaders who owned everything. In addition, both sides viewed land through how they viewed their religion. There was no way these two diverse peoples could peacefully come together.

It is not a matter of right or wrong, but rather, the abrasive meeting of two incompatible cultures. In reality it was more that two cultures. Europe had more than one culture and the indigenousness peoples of the Americas certainly had more than one culture. While we can say that one culture took from another, and certainly the Europeans had the greater power, in part, these two cultures merged with each other.

This is little different form when Alexander conquered the world or, when the Romans took over most of the known world or when William conquered England in 1066, or when Christianity took over much of the known world. .

Answer 3

Well the first Europeans to come over were Vikings like Eric the Red, who didn't take land, they were just visiting.

The group that stayed were the Pilgrims, who really didn't steal the land from the Indians, because the Indians there were a bit nomadic, so they didn't stay the same place alot. The Pilgrims kind of almost died off when they got there, and some accounts say that the Indians believed the land the pilgrims landed at was cursed, because of a bacteria or virus there. So the Indians weren't really going there, anyway.

Now the folks in Jamestown were much more aggressive, and was interested in taking metals and resources out of their colony, and they were nice to the Indians when it suited them, and jerks to the Indians when it suited them.

so it all depends on which group of Europeans your talking about.

Answer 4

I suppose you could argue that the Europeans brought knowledge invention and resourcefulness to the American continent. Since the native Americans (I don't like the term indian because to me it sounds ignorant and and insult to native Americans because after all Columbus didn't get to India.) .....since the native Americans as a rule didn't believe in owning the land the land was not stolen from anyone. The best you could say is the colonists just moved on to land that no man owned. I suppose you have to decide if in the modern world and native American alive today have benefited from European influences on society in general in terms of modern medicine and knowledge.

Answer 5

It is impossible to put todays moral values on a different time and circumstance. The Native Americans did not actually own anything, most were nomadic. As for taking, you must realize, not necessarily subscribe to, the fact that back then, might made right. Settlers had technology going for them. Right or wrong, it happened.

Answer 6

Probably not, but in a sense the circumstances were beyond their individual control. The settlers brought an agrarian economy with advanced tools and diseases to which the natives weren't resistant, so while some settlers may have acted admirably and others poorly towards native americans, the tragedy of native american displacement was more due to demographic and economic circumstances than specific amoral decision-making.

Answer 7

Absolutely not. Actually, there were many Native American tribes that were willing to trade for it. Unfortunately, a number of Europeans saw themselves as more "civilized" so there ended up being the mass genocide of the Native American population.

Answer 8

The stronger tribes would have overrun the weaker ones, same as they were doing before the arrival of Europeans. Apache and Navajo would be raiding the Rio Grande Puebloans, Acoma, Laguna, Hopi and Zuni. Karankawans, Tonkawans would be stalking one another, making meals of leg bones. Maybe the east-of-the Mississippi tribes would be getting along okay with one another. Without horses the plains tribes would be living feast-to-famine.

Answer 9

Given the social development of mankind at the time the answer is yes. Since the dawn of known history leaders have been taking control of other people's property. Consider what Mao did to the land owners in the 1950s.

Answer 10

No. The Europeans "stole" the land and displaced the Indians.

The Indians did not consider themselves the "owners" of the land, but that the land was everyone's, to be enjoyed by everyone. They couldn't understand the Europeans need to own land.