NationStates Jolt Archive

Has anyone speculated on what would have happened if the Native Americans had been able to fight off the European colonizers? What would the world look like if they had remained in control of the American continent?

Has anyone speculated on what would have happened if the Native Americans had been able to fight off the European colonizers? What would the world look like if they had remained in control of the American continent?

We would have come back with bigger boats and better guns.... I suppose.

We would have come back with bigger boats and better guns.... I suppose.
Pretty much and their numbers would've been significantly less in the end.

How about this? The land bridge at the Bering Straits remained intact and the Americans were thus used to Eurasian diseases, had horses when the Spanish arrived and wheat and rice as well. Clash of civilizations! Maybe the Aztecs would settle Spain?

Has anyone speculated on what would have happened if the Native Americans had been able to fight off the European colonizers? What would the world look like if they had remained in control of the American continent?A better question would be "What would the American continent have looked like in order for the Native Americans to fight off the Europeans?"
I've worked on that a bit.

one big reason they couldnt fight off europeans is because the tribes rarely worked together. some attepts were made to unite and were successful but they needed to get a lot more alliances to form, and they needed to group together instead of having scattered regions of tribes...

Given a long enough time, I think they'd have ended up pretty much where some other part of the world is. (i.e. it's hard to say.) If they responded like, say, Euorpeans when their tribes ended up (somehow or other) as some semi-united regions, they'd be on their way there. Another area with a bunch of warring groups is Africa though... and they're still just all at war, not necessarily going anywhere fast. On the other hand, if you take the way Asia's gone, you could end up with a few large nations. Personally, I tend to think they'd have gone the way of the African tribes, but that's just a guess. I'd probably have said that about europe too.

Given a long enough time, I think they'd have ended up pretty much where some other part of the world is. (i.e. it's hard to say.) If they responded like, say, Euorpeans when their tribes ended up (somehow or other) as some semi-united regions, they'd be on their way there. Another area with a bunch of warring groups is Africa though... and they're still just all at war, not necessarily going anywhere fast. On the other hand, if you take the way Asia's gone, you could end up with a few large nations. Personally, I tend to think they'd have gone the way of the African tribes, but that's just a guess. I'd probably have said that about europe too.

yeah africa was a mess in the atlantic world period. when the portugese and spanish were taking slaves, they made alliances with the coastal kings who attacked the inner regions and captures slaves to sell/trade. its the big truth in attacking or defending, there needs to be unification...

one big reason they couldnt fight off europeans is because the tribes rarely worked together. some attepts were made to unite and were successful but they needed to get a lot more alliances to form, and they needed to group together instead of having scattered regions of tribes...

Read 'The Years of Rice and Salt' by Kim Stanley Robinson. It's about the black plague wiping out 99% of Europe, and what happens afterwards. (For instance, the Iroquois Confederacy has more time to grow so that by the time Chinese and Muslim colonists start coming in from both sides, they're in a better position to fight them off.)

Read 'The Years of Rice and Salt' by Kim Stanley Robinson. It's about the black plague wiping out 99% of Europe, and what happens afterwards. (For instance, the Iroquois Confederacy has more time to grow so that by the time Chinese and Muslim colonists start coming in from both sides, they're in a better position to fight them off.)

those six nations still had no chance to fight off eurpeans in my opinion. i think there needed to be a widespread unification of northamerican tribes. the iroquios did not jsut fight europeans, they fought other tribes as well...

those six nations still had no chance to fight off eurpeans in my opinion. i think there needed to be a widespread unification of northamerican tribes. the iroquios did not jsut fight europeans, they fought other tribes as well...

In this book, by the time the Chinese and Muslims start seriously considering colonisation, the confederacy is much bigger than 6 nations. It evolves into a form of Native American Democracy. Pretty cool actually.

Wasn't it diseases like smallpox that the Europeans brought over that killed lots of them too, not just war?

Wasn't it diseases like smallpox that the Europeans brought over that killed lots of them too, not just war?

Yeah.

So what would happen if the diseases had gone the other way around, going back to Europe and killing off the population there? It would be much more devastating due to the cities and high population density. Perhaps setting Europe back decades, maybe centuries...

Yeah.

So what would happen if the diseases had gone the other way around, going back to Europe and killing off the population there? It would be much more devastating due to the cities and high population density. Perhaps setting Europe back decades, maybe centuries...

i bet the aztecs would not have fallen for many, many more years if they were not effected by smallpox. even with only 1/3 of their population they put up a noble fight against the spanish...

i bet the aztecs would not have fallen for many, many more years if they were not effected by smallpox. even with only 1/3 of their population they put up a noble fight against the spanish...

I don't know; the Aztec methods of rule seemed to be unstable in the long run and probably would have eventually fallen to the Inca or a rebellion amongst their vassals. Also, they were technologically stagnant (anything they had they had previously taken from their vassals) which means they would have fallen behind the other tribes who had developed and continued to develop their own technology.

The Inca would have probably emerged as the dominant power, especially if they put accquired technology from the defeated colonists to good use and built on it. Even so, it's pretty much a given that the Spanish would have returned with greater numbers,

It's also possible that the dominant colonial powers might have changed; instead of Britain, Spain, and France it might have ended up being the Dutch, Swedish, and Portugeuse...or even the Holy Roman Empire?

The native americans, like most indiginous tribes in the world, seemed to be more or less in equilibrium with the environment. there was none of the mass expansion that characterises european cultures, either in terms of population or technology. so if they had somehow repelled the europeans, or if we had never gone there, I imagine america would be virtually the same as it was before columbus arrived.

which leads me to another question. is it a genetic or environmental factor which leads to the white peoples virus like expansion, while the indiginous people of other places, like the americas, australia, africa, did not seem to expand or advance?

The native americans, like most indiginous tribes in the world, seemed to be more or less in equilibrium with the environment. there was none of the mass expansion that characterises european cultures, either in terms of population or technology. so if they had somehow repelled the europeans, or if we had never gone there, I imagine america would be virtually the same as it was before columbus arrived.

which leads me to another question. is it a genetic or environmental factor which leads to the white peoples virus like expansion, while the indiginous people of other places, like the americas, australia, africa, did not seem to expand or advance?

It's not just the 'white' peoples, it's pretty much any civilization that went through the agricultural revolution. More food made by less people = a lot of extra people who don't necessarily need to farm.

Add the age of sail to that equation and it gave Europe the mobility to go out and take what it wanted.

Semi-nomadic tribes just can't compete with that level of population growth. (with the possible exception of the mongols?)

I don't know; the Aztec methods of rule seemed to be unstable in the long run and probably would have eventually fallen to the Inca or a rebellion amongst their vassals. Also, they were technologically stagnant (anything they had they had previously taken from their vassals) which means they would have fallen behind the other tribes who had developed and continued to develop their own technology.

The Inca would have probably emerged as the dominant power, especially if they put accquired technology from the defeated colonists to good use and built on it. Even so, it's pretty much a given that the Spanish would have returned with greater numbers,

It's also possible that the dominant colonial powers might have changed; instead of Britain, Spain, and France it might have ended up being the Dutch, Swedish, and Portugeuse...or even the Holy Roman Empire?

well i think the aztecs were technologically advanced. in the empires later years, education was a required for the younger citizens, and they had a longing for further development in sciences. the incas may have taken them eventually, but i would think that neither one would be able to take over the other. it would be like the greeks and persians...