Denials Of The Genocide Of Native Americans
There are many other examples of denial by perpetrators who wish to escape negative reactions to their deeds. More troubling are the later denials by people not directly involved in the genocidal events but who appear to have ideological reasons for their denials. (Encyclopedia Of Genocide. Vol. 1 Israel W. Charney)
American fascists by definition deny genocide, and that is so with Steven Crowder.
CROWDER: Give all the land back. Well, we don't want whole country to look like every episode of Cops. Ever driven through tribal land recently? Does it look like they're living off the – you could. You could just live off the land. What does Comanche mean? Land of a thousand trailer parks? Have you guys driven through? At a certain point you're like, well, this is what you've done with it. Why would we give it back to you? Also, why would we give back any of it? We won. I know you don't like it but that did happen. And you tried to win because you were actually killing their ancestors, and you were raping their ancestors, and you were enslaving their ancestors, and then we came here and, you know, we tried to purchase land from you and in some cases like Manhattan and Canarsie we have a bill of sale and then you came back anyway. And so we had to start fighting you.
5. Rationalize the deaths as the result of tribal conflict.
Perpetrators stress that the circumstances are the inevitable consequences to the history of relationships between the perpetrator and victim groups.
And Crowder also blames victims of genocide, indigenous people in this instance, by saying "you were actually killing their ancestors, and you were raping their ancestors, and you were enslaving their ancestors,..." To the contrary, the differences in making war between the predators and the prey may not be the topic here, but let’s summarize them - there are significant differences.
Unlearning the Language of Conquest Scholars Expose Anti-Indianism in America. "Peaceful verses Warlike Societies" essay by James Demeo. p. 150 - 151.
"This evidence, drawn from history, archeology, and anthropology, speaks clearly: The New World prior to Columbus was a far less violent place than the Old World. And it can be argued that, in spite of many terrible events which followed after Columbus, the New World remained a less violent place all the way down through the centuries because of its geographical isolation from the more violent Saharasian empires...This summary suggests the general vindication of the vast majority of Native American values and peoples as standing on the peace – making side of history. Certainly, not all Indigenous American cultures fit the peaceful images given in Dances with Wolves, but it is not an exaggeration to say that the majority did
Crowder wasn't "directly involved in the genocidal events," and has "ideological reasons" for denying genocide of indigenous people, by blaming them and "stress(ing) that the circumstances are the inevitable consequences to the history of relationships." What are his "ideological reasons?" Whatever specific reasons he has, those cannot be known without more information. However, by looking at his Twitter page, in which I will not link to, his beliefs are the same as any run-of-the-mill ignorant Republican. Moreover, what his beliefs have in common with his group are, they are baseless. Those ideological reasons also share the same purpose, which is to take away rights from anybody who is not white with their brand of plastic Christianity. Sound premises in reasoning aren’t employed - motive is.