>But that Euros were some especially brutal oppressors/conquerors compared to the whole of human history?
Kind of. It's like when historians delineate historic genocides with Nazi genocides. Or slavery vs chattel slavery. Functionally they're mostly the same, but the latter was also something new, and possibly worse. Historically, non-european expansionism/colonialism due to large power asymmetries were regional neighbourhood affairs that ended in mass assimilation within a few generations. European, post age-of-sail conquest/oppression was uniquely brutal in suppressing/eliminating indigenous peoples globally, for hundreds of years without any real effort at integration. Generally Mongols worked with traditional administration systems of territories they conquered, if only because it's easier for nomadic culture to embrace settled people's cultures. Post Mongol conquest, Chinese, Central Asian or Persian empires were basically the same "empires" but administered by Mongol Dynasties - they typically levied tax and drafted troops but didn't intervene much in domestic affairs or customs. European colonies expansion was built on proselytize/imposing continental culture, and deliberately avoided integration in their colonies, stretching out a few decades of bloodshed into a few centuries. IMO that makes Euros "especially brutal oppressors/conquerors", not because Euros are inherently more savage but the logic of certain forms of conquest (made possible by confluence of factors) is sometimes bloodier than others.
Kind of. It's like when historians delineate historic genocides with Nazi genocides. Or slavery vs chattel slavery. Functionally they're mostly the same, but the latter was also something new, and possibly worse. Historically, non-european expansionism/colonialism due to large power asymmetries were regional neighbourhood affairs that ended in mass assimilation within a few generations. European, post age-of-sail conquest/oppression was uniquely brutal in suppressing/eliminating indigenous peoples globally, for hundreds of years without any real effort at integration. Generally Mongols worked with traditional administration systems of territories they conquered, if only because it's easier for nomadic culture to embrace settled people's cultures. Post Mongol conquest, Chinese, Central Asian or Persian empires were basically the same "empires" but administered by Mongol Dynasties - they typically levied tax and drafted troops but didn't intervene much in domestic affairs or customs. European colonies expansion was built on proselytize/imposing continental culture, and deliberately avoided integration in their colonies, stretching out a few decades of bloodshed into a few centuries. IMO that makes Euros "especially brutal oppressors/conquerors", not because Euros are inherently more savage but the logic of certain forms of conquest (made possible by confluence of factors) is sometimes bloodier than others.