I have always read that native Americans were victims of genocides and I was always, and still am, inclined to believe that narrative.
Recently I have been reading The History of the American People. The book, as far as I understand, describe the plight of the native Americans as a struggle for interests andland between the natives and the European settlers rather than a black-and-white genocide. I have also learned that the natives themselves have had a fair share of brutality between themselves long before the arrival of the whiteman.
Were the natives always targeted by the new settlers since the beginning? Was there a turning point between them? Were their leaders among the Europeans who wanted to take a different approach with the natives?
First of all, lets deal with a few problems with your opening statement.
I have also learned that the natives themselves have had a fair share of brutality between themselves long before the arrival of the whiteman.
This is a very problematic way of thinking. For the record, it is not inaccurate, and violence was indeed a part of the Pre-Columbian Americas. However, that alone does not excuses colonial attitudes and practises against Native Americans, especially when that violence is presented completely out of context. Context is important, especially when discussing violence, as it grounds our understanding of conflict in a specific set of circumstances within a particular era, and of the people who were acting. Not to do so would simply be repeating colonial era stereotypes of the 'Savage Indian,' who does violence simply because he has a 'savage nature.'
As for genocide, well the important thing to remember is that Colonial and US policies were complex and inconsistent, as can be expected over a period of 400 years, and because the US (in particular), dealt with a lot of different people over a vast region, and did not always choose the same strategy. In addition, we also have to note that private US citizens/state governments, and different administrations had very different policies and attitudes. I don't think that the whole process of colonisation can be reduced to a single word.
Having said that, it is important to note a few features of European and US colonialism, to put it into context. By this, I mean that violence did not end with the defeat of the Native groups. Colonial policies often perpetuated brutality towards conquered people. We can see this in laws restricting Native American religious rites. In addition there is the stealing of Native American children from their families. In the past, they were taken to boarding schools where they were incredibly vulnerable to physical and sexual abuse. Even in recent history (including today), Native Americans suffer from what is called 'environmental racism,' where toxic industries are placed on or near to their land, often without clear consent/consultation. The Dakota access pipeline protests were essentially about this. And last of all, there is a tendency for US textbooks (not that I'm an expert in US textbooks) to minimise or erase Native Americans and their perspectives from the historical record. I think that when people are talking about genocide, they are more referring to this continued erasure than they are about battles fought hundreds of years ago.