Yikes, the optics were definitely bad on that one. Not that these guys haven't been doing this for years, though...

You are completely misinterpreting this! They playing cowboys and Indians! They just ran out of Indians.

Are we at all interested in the context of this image or are we all just gonna nod our heads like dopes and agree with your shockingly hot take?

Does that context include climate change, slavery, the U.S. occupation and domination of Haiti throughout most of the 20th century, and Texas being stolen from the indigenous peoples?

Don't forget European genocide of the Taíno indigenous people of Hispaniola (the island on which Haiti is located).

Thanks.

And he calls us dopes.

Technically I didn't, but at this point my confidence in your ability to understand the nuance of my arguments is rather shaken.

Damn, your respect was the top item on my Amazon wishlist.

Make sure you're shopping AmazonSmile if you pull the trigger.

Technically I will.

Genocide implies targeted action. At no point in history has there ever been a document found in which the Spanish crown authorized the extermination of the natives. In fact, there were VERY powerful elements within Spain that fought to no end to protect the natives of Hispaniola. They didn't succeed, obviously, because there were also VERY powerful elements that wanted cheap labor for their gold and silver mines, but my point stands and history is on my side.

If you knew much about the island you might be surprised to learn that monuments and fond memories of some of these people, such as Bartolome de las Casas, stand today. :)

I'm not sure what is the correct definition of genocide these days, but that seems like a semantic point. Here is a quote from de Las Casas you can describe it in whatever terms seem appropriate to you:

“They [Spanish explorers] forced their way into native settlements, slaughtering everyone they found there, including small children, old men, pregnant women, and even women who had just given birth. They hacked them to pieces, slicing open their bellies with their swords as though they were so many sheep herded into a pen. They even laid wagers on whether they could slice a man in two at a stroke, or cut an individual’s head from his body, or disembowel him with a single blow of their axes. They grabbed suckling infants by the feet and, ripping them from their mothers’ breasts, dashed them headlong against the rocks. Others, laughing and joking all the while, threw them over their shoulders, shouting, ‘Wriggle, you little perisher.’"

Genocide has always been defined as the intentional attempt to entirely exterminate some group

Nice quote. It drives home my point Las Casas experienced a profound change of heart towards the Natives because he lived amongst them for years upon years. He dedicated his life to ending the Conquest, arguing that because all humans have intrinsic dignity and rights the only moral choice open to the Spanish was for them to peacefully settle land the Natives hadn't and only evangelize peacefully. In fact, his only allowed justification for any form of force was if aforementioned peaceful evangelists were harmed or denied entry to an area, because freedom of movement and expression should be respected everywhere. That is a very limited exception though.

Notably, he even argued that the Aztec, Maya, Inca, and all other native civilizations had a right to defend their pagan practices from the Spanish because the Spanish were waging an unjust war against them.

Las Casas wasn't alone. Plenty of Spanish officials in the government (including the monarchy) and the Church (including the Pope) agreed with him. The Crown banned slavery and the Pope affirmed the right of all human civilizations to govern their own lands without fear of external invasion. But when the fastest communication is by galleon and letters take months to travel, it's easy to lie. What the Spaniards in charge of the New World *said* they were doing was most definitely not what they *actually* did. This was a tragedy and crime in its own right, and it's been doubly compounded by the Black Legend.

There are a couple of interesting and short books on the subject I highly recommend. One is by Robert Royal and is called, "Columbus and the Crisis of the West". The second is called, "Bartolomé de las Casas and the Defense of Amerindian Rights", edited by Lawrence Clayton and David Lantigua.

I doubt you'll read them, but if you want honest information about that era then they're fantastic.

Hey I'm happy to talk about any one of those instances if you'll agree to stay civil when you don't like what I have to say.

But for now, I'm asking you a specific question as to whether you can provide any background info (a link to a news article, for example) as to the context of this specific image. Otherwise it just looks like you've found a photo that, viewed alone, gives off a very bad psychological vibe. It then would appear you're using the skin color of the folks in the photo to further your own agenda, actual facts of the matter be damned.

Come on, man, you know I can be counted on to not remain civil. I'm as bad as any trumpsucker!

Anyway, context:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-house-homeland-security-chair-denounce-horrific-mistreatment-of-haitian-migrants-by-border-patrol-officers/2021/09/20/bb66dfce-1a40-11ec-a99a-5fea2b2da34b_story.html

I unfortunately am not subscribed to the Post. But my reading of the other results on Google did not clarify whether these folks were seeking asylum or merely trying to cross illegally.

Yes, make them get off their methods of transportation and chase the people illegally entering the country on foot with at least one arm tied behind their back with a patch over one eye.