Basic bit of opinion here : France’s policy of allying with the Indians, which is sometimes romanticized, was obviously solely a geostrategic choice by a power which was slightly less powerful than the British rival. France would have behaved differently if they had gotten the best territories in the Northern American continent and not the cold areas around the St Laurent, the hinterland and the marsh of Louisiana. The behaviour of French colonists in Africa has never shown any particular respect of the indigenous rights that the British did not. They were as cruel.

I was reading an article explaining how the French and Indian wars was actually started by a team of British men led by George Washington himself whereas the French group seems to have been in their path “for diplomacy”. The natural evidence is that groups of Iroquois did not follow the other Indians and nevertheless helped the enemy of the French.

I won’t comment nevertheless on the almost elimination of the American Indians latter which of course saddens me ; it’s nevertheless also another treasure for propaganda which has been consistently used by antiliberals ; I have pinpointed in my scientific article on Sismondi how he already used excesses of foreign colonial powers while almost exempting France (even though he wasn’t even a French citizen but a Swiss and hence had not even the political pressure of the people with actual juridictional power on him). See end of my book.

I can give another example on a publication in French found printed in Spain in 1972, landed in a group of books I retrieved from my parents’ archive, about the American Indians, romanticizing them a lot, how they were proud warriors dragging their injured soldiers from their horses to retrieve them and avoid them being killed by the US militias, etc. I somehow respect Franco for he really eliminated the Communist infiltration of his country, saving it from a disaster [I recommend to read the Black Book of Communism on NKVD behaviour in the Spanish Civil war – in addition to the 100 million victims this books lists there are ~27 million more in the USSR (the first uranium extermination mine opens in 1939 actually even though Communists didn’t understood yet fission, it was an extermination mine in Novaya Zemlya), ~9 million more in China in my vague estimates and extermination camps are still running at a very low regime in China and the Russian federation, with many less harsh uranium death camps in other dictatures around the world today]. Franco used Nazi help (their powerful antitank weapons… the first nano nuclear warheads in history, the tech that’s now even in the hands of the PKK, of Muslim terror groups (RPGS ! to start with and all “conventional” antiarmour weapons) were used in the Spanish 1936-1939 conflict) while afterward resisting wholly their pressure to kill Jews and actually saving thousands and thousands and thousands of them – also his anti-gay policies were not harsh and there was a margin of tolerance, hostels and bars were seemingly tolerated and public figures whose homosexuality was known but not “open” were as well accepted, there were internment camps but with solely 5 000 people, therapies with shocks, but the “antigay law” was drafted to target homosexuals together with vagrants, the “spirit” is more about exhibitionism. So, Franco was clearly not the savage the Communist infiltrates in public universities want you to believe. But, given Spain’s imperial past in Latin America, when the only book I find about Indians in Latin America published in Francoist Spain is to present Bartolomé de las Casas as an half-paranoid (Ramón Menéndez Pidal, 1963, El padre Las Casas: Su doble personalidad Madrid, ed. Espasa Calpe, col. «Grandes Biografías»), I must confirm my initial hypothesis of secret anti-US nationalist propaganda of Franco’s regime in France, obviously a fertile ground.