• 🏳️‍⚧️ 新星 [she/they]@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    I think so but the outcome of the Seven Years’ War treaties was to allocate that land for indigenous use:

    (Note that if it had been less expensive to keep a military presence there, the British would have been as eager as the Americans to keep genociding in that region as well)

    • huf [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 days ago

      oh yeah, the brits just signed those treaties as a temporary measure while they did other stuff, they would’ve come back eventually, kicked the treaties over and taken the land.

      but the US elite couldnt wait that long. they wanted the land NOW.

      • l0tusc0bra@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        7 days ago

        Exactly lol there’s no way the British were going to actually honour and safekeep their land forever. They’d have just bided their time and invaded later. Guess that wasn’t soon enough for the heroic founding fathers.

          • l0tusc0bra@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            I didn’t even know about this specific case but wow, nice catch. So yeah I rest my case lol. Unless maybe it was just a weird coincidence that the vast majority of the founding fathers’ wealth rested on enslaved people’s labour.