Same bullshit logic that helped many support the genocide of those “barbaric” Native Americans because some actually had the gall to attack their colonial invaders.

I wonder how few will draw some of the parallels of the colonial expansion in Australia and the West in general.

I love the types that say others should go back to where they come from ignoring their parents and grandparents were not that far removed from the boat that brought them here.

Then they don’t want to acknowledge that these groups were probably not that thrilled at being slaughtered and their kids taken away from them to make way for their colonial ancestors.

It’s a amazing trait to me that humans can hold such diabolically opposed ideas as the same truths for them.

Eurasian empires have been shaped by this for millenia. Nomadic horse tribes harass existing empire until it starts to crumble. Tribes annex land and establish new empire/ruling class and give up the nomadic lifestyle. New nomadic horse tribes show up and start harassing. Rulers who are only 1 or 2 generations removed from living a nomadic lifestyle and conquering call them barbarians and uncivilized for their brutality. New horse tribes topple empire, rinse and repeat.

To list a few: Mongols, Turks, Huns, Scythians… It was like a revolving door until gunpowder showed up.

Each generation completely ignoring the atrocities of their forebears while also framing their successors as monsters. Tale as old as time.