Many folks...wonder why the same did not happen in Africa as occured in North America. The disease worked the other way around there, holding the whites at bay, much more than what occured in North America. South America was somewhat like Africa and, to a certain extent, still is. If North America had diseases like Africa did, then the situation today may have been more like South Africa. The Indigenous people are back in charge there after a "short" rule by the whites. Some other considerations:

1. Does the hot tropical or desert nature of certain areas have anything to do with it and, if so, is the causal factor diseases or the white's lack of adaptation/evolution to such environments, or both?; or,

2. Did the Europeans who colonized Africa and remained tied to their home government maintain a more dignified, honorable and less decietful relationship with the Africans than did the U.S. revolutionaries? (I don't deny the abuses that occured in Africa but something tells me the British/Dutch/French, etc. might have maintained a more respectable, honorable, nation-to-nation relationship with the plains tribes than did the U.S., more in keeping with their relationships with the Zulu, etc.

I guess what I mean to say by this is NOT that the British etc. had any more respect for the indigenous people than did the U.S. or that they thought of them as equals, but, rather they had more respect for THEMSELVES, a greater sense of personal/national honor and were less inclined to break their word and lie, regardless of how they felt about the people they happened to be dealing with at any given time.)

Dear Jimamy,

It sounds nice, but I suspect it is only wishful thinking. For one thing, the English (and the French & Dutch, "etc") didn't really have all that good a record in their dealings with Indians (Read up on colonial history up to 1776, by way of illustration).... at best, they occasionally issued "paper proclamations" that were then deliberately ignored in the SAME way that later U.S. treaties were. And in those cases where they did seem to be trying to protect Native's rights, it was often just an internal political ploy back in England (designed to curtail colonists who followed out-of-favor religions, or who might end up competing economically with English back home, or keeping Indians pacified rather than thinking of switching dealings to another European country. Fact is, England wanted the colonies weak enough to be dependent on "Home", and just barely strong enough to be profitable and protected from other Colonial powers).