|
|
|
|
micahmcguire
Oct 1, 2004, 3:29 PM
Post #101 of 120
(9864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 18, 2002
Posts: 889
|
In reply to: To get back on topic What if this were an issue of First Nations Peoples (Indians) climbing christian churches? As for the term "Indian", in 1492 Columbus was lost. He thought he found India, so he called the peoples there "Indians". I wonder if most of us are still lost. And as for some First Nations Peoples calling themselves Indian, that is thier choice.
You are a moron. How can you even begin to compare trespassing on and perhaps damaging a building erected and funded by a private organization with people climbing on rocks that have been standing since before humans even meandered over from Asia? The analogy is totally inept. Shame on you for even thinking on such a dismal level. Its also little surprize that you lashed out at Christianity instead of any of the other prevailent religions in this country. Lashing out at Christianity sure is the trendy thing for psuedo-intellectuals to do these days isn't it?
Yes, most of us have been hearing that same thing "they are not 'Indians, they're native Americans' bit since preschool. Thanks for pointing out the obvious, that India is not in the Americas. You get a gold star, dumbass. Congratulations, you are a simpleton. What about the natives and native organizations who openly refer to themselves as "Indians." I suppose they should get it right too, politically incorrect bastards!
Sheesh, idiot.
|
|
|
|
|
deleted
Deleted
Oct 2, 2004, 1:02 PM
Post #102 of 120
(9862 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
Wow,let the red herrings fly. Someone is pertending to be intellegent, but instead of discussing a topic the are only able to throw insults.
I was being accused of attacking christianity by asking a simple question, because of this I will give my own opinion to help those with the trouble to understand what I was asking.
I would be offended if some one was disrespecting my place of worshop ( which happens to be a christian church), and although I may not agree with the beliefs of some of this first nations, I will respect it. I make the analogy, even though it may be falty to some, to put it into a different perspective on it. Some people only understand the lack of respect when they are the disrespected.
Once again the term "Indian". Ready for the next falt analogy...forget it, I will leave this one lest someone get angry and start to thouw insults instead of an intelligent exchange of ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
micahmcguire
Oct 2, 2004, 6:32 PM
Post #103 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 18, 2002
Posts: 889
|
In reply to: Wow,let the red herrings fly. Someone is pertending to be intellegent, but instead of discussing a topic the are only able to throw insults. I was being accused of attacking christianity by asking a simple question, because of this I will give my own opinion to help those with the trouble to understand what I was asking. I would be offended if some one was disrespecting my place of worshop ( which happens to be a christian church), and although I may not agree with the beliefs of some of this first nations, I will respect it. I make the analogy, even though it may be falty to some, to put it into a different perspective on it. Some people only understand the lack of respect when they are the disrespected. Once again the term "Indian". Ready for the next falt analogy...forget it, I will leave this one lest someone get angry and start to thouw insults instead of an intelligent exchange of ideas.
Your eloquent diction says it all. 'Nuff said. Dolt.
|
|
|
|
|
phillygoat
Oct 2, 2004, 10:43 PM
Post #104 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 22, 2004
Posts: 428
|
micahmcguire= The Poster Child for Manifest Destiny!
|
|
|
|
|
micahmcguire
Oct 3, 2004, 7:09 AM
Post #105 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 18, 2002
Posts: 889
|
I hate to keep railing on people here, but I have to disagree with Philygoat's misinterpretation of what I am trying to say. He accuses me of subscribing to a "manifest destiny" perspective.
Manifest destiny was a notion that ruled the political thinking of the US particularly circa the mid-nineteenth century. Basically we felt the need to impose our "enlightened" democratic civilization on natives and other cultures dissimilar from our own. We still see this occuring in places like Iraq and Afganistan. I disagree strongly with this concept of manifest destiny. Cultures and governments who are forced to change, kind of like the way we are hoping to change the political atmosphere in the mideast, seldom tend to benefit all that much from it (at least from an ethnic, cultural point of view-sure technology and such improves, but is that really improvement? I think "improvement" is a much more relative term than that....). Anyways, before I go off-topic here, what we did to the Indians in our country was generally not good for their society. Manifest Destiny has harmed the Native American way of life. Certainly they would probably be better off having never encountered European civilization. However, the time for debating whether or not we should infringe on the Indian way of life is over. It has been over for a century. In calling me a poster-child for Manifest Destiny, you are about 100 years too late. Forced integration has already occurred, and its really too bad. Its killed so many beautiful cultures.
My position is one that relates most directly to the present state of things. We are all part of an American society now, whites, hispanics, natives, anyone who lives in the US is part of this society. What I believe we need to do now is not encourage the native populations of the US to slip further between the cracks by allowing them to receed deeper into the reservations in a vain attempt to keep away from the pressures of modern civilization. They don't need handouts, they need to participate. They are (with exceptions, especially in Alaska where I live) no longer a race of hunter/gatherers, no matter how much they, I, or anyone else wishes they could be. Its not a question of whether we should impose our culture on them, we've already thrust it on them at full-force. I can't help this, my parents couldn't help it, their parents...., manifest destiny has been a reality for generations. The only thing we can do now, for the good of our American culture, is learn to effectively participate in our American social and economic environment.
If I had lived 100 years ago, I should like to believe I would have been opposed to "civilizing the Indians." Its been bad for many of them. Some, who have decided to accept reality, have prospered. Others think that the government, or white people, owe them something. These people are culturally recidivistic and need to get with the times. Our pity is their crutch, and the only way many of them will overcome their current social problems is to buckle down, study real hard, get a good job, and lead a functional life.
Its too bad its too late to stop a manifest destiny, but it is. Live with it.
|
|
|
|
|
deleted
Deleted
Oct 3, 2004, 1:49 PM
Post #106 of 120
(9862 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
I just wanted to tell micahmcguire that I am sorry about my dictation, but insults are not needed here. May be one should wonder who is on the other end. I do not ask for pity here because I am on the road to recovery and I will come back more that 100%. But let me explian my poor spelling and gramar. I survived a auto collision with massive head injuries and have just regained some use of my limbs and my speech.
However, that aside your attacks on me personally with your insults of dolt and idiot will only be take as coming from such. I have read some of you other post and you seem to be an intellegent preson, so why do you lower yourself to the lowest common denomanator when one just simply ask a question?
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Oct 3, 2004, 5:03 PM
Post #107 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
In reply to: In reply to: To get back on topic What if this were an issue of First Nations Peoples (Indians) climbing christian churches? As for the term "Indian", in 1492 Columbus was lost. He thought he found India, so he called the peoples there "Indians". I wonder if most of us are still lost. And as for some First Nations Peoples calling themselves Indian, that is thier choice. You are a moron. How can you even begin to compare trespassing on and perhaps damaging a building erected and funded by a private organization with people climbing on rocks that have been standing since before humans even meandered over from Asia? The analogy is totally inept. Shame on you for even thinking on such a dismal level. Its also little surprize that you lashed out at Christianity instead of any of the other prevailent religions in this country. Lashing out at Christianity sure is the trendy thing for psuedo-intellectuals to do these days isn't it? Yes, most of us have been hearing that same thing "they are not 'Indians, they're native Americans' bit since preschool. Thanks for pointing out the obvious, that India is not in the Americas. You get a gold star, dumbass. Congratulations, you are a simpleton. What about the natives and native organizations who openly refer to themselves as "Indians." I suppose they should get it right too, politically incorrect bastards! Sheesh, idiot.
Got to agree witht he 6088803 number fella, thats a mean unfounded personal attack Michah.
In response to my origonal post, I am at odds over the whole thing myself. I often find myself using the word "Indian" and then laughing at the 400 plus years of stupidity (which I just personally exibited out of long standing convention ad habit) of still refering to some people who live here as they are the real Indians (dots: not feathers) who actually live on the other side of the world.
I'd like to see everybody healthy and prosperous, and generally buy into the melting pot thing: but what about those who don't? That history is a heavy burden for us all. Should someone be forced to "melt" if they don't want to? We tried to teach them through force to abandon their ways so that they could be "improved" and "like us" and now everybody who thinks that over tends to be damn embarrased at how it went.
I like the idea of a voluntary Devils tower closure, I respect it myself. I like the idea that folks who have fished for generations can fish and make a living off of it, even with preferential treatment, and can continue to teach their kids to fish like their fathers did. I like the idea of a land of plenty and opprotunity, but does that mean you turn the lights off and breach all the damns so the fish runs return?
I'm not sure there is an answer. Just questions.
|
|
|
|
|
deleted
Deleted
Oct 3, 2004, 11:02 PM
Post #108 of 120
(9862 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
Thank you billcoe.
I like to look at some issues with the shoe of the other foot, it sometimes bring things into perspective. Even if the analogy is somewhat faulty.
We all believe strongly in our rights, but sometime we have to stop and wonder if our own rights are treading on the rights of others (privledges may be a better word than rights). It doesn't always lead to an answer, but may lead to a better understanding of the people we share this planet with.
A little respect goes a long way.
|
|
|
|
|
elsinore
Oct 3, 2004, 11:16 PM
Post #109 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 28, 2002
Posts: 6
|
As far as refering to the American Indian is concerned.. Native American, Indian etc. are all basically genralizationsfor a group of people who happened to be native to the current land that is the United states. In reality most of these people would like to be refered to by their tribe. ie. Makah, Iroquois, Mohawk beacuse each tribe was a seperate nation. Calling them Native Americans is generlizing, the same way we genralize by calling the French, Germans, Italians and Spanish european.
[In reply to: micahmcguire I hate to keep railing on people here, but I have to disagree with Philygoat's misinterpretation of what I am trying to say. He accuses me of subscribing to a "manifest destiny" perspective. Manifest destiny was a notion that ruled the political thinking of the US particularly circa the mid-nineteenth century. Basically we felt the need to impose our "enlightened" democratic civilization on natives and other cultures dissimilar from our own. We still see this occuring in places like Iraq and Afganistan. I disagree strongly with this concept of manifest destiny. This is not manifest destiny, or even close to soemthing that resembles manifest destiny. Manifest Destiny had to do with the fact that the government of the United States felt it was our god given right to endowourselfs with all the land from the atlantic to the pacific, that is now the lower 48. GOD wanted this to be America. We were not trying to force our culture on any native people, we just wanted them the hell off our land, any way possible,the same way we wanted the Mexicans off of it. If some of them happened to assimalate then it was more or less coincidence. What happened to the seperate nations of People that were native to the land that is now the USA was genocide, it happened as a result of manifest destiny to some extent. So.. before you go calling people Dolts and Idiots you should at least have some idea of what the hell your talking about.
The people who have prospered in the current US society have done so as a result of being proud of their own culture. Telling them to "get with the times" is completly meaningless. Most American Indian cultures are rich with many of the same values that our society expects from its citizens. The solution involves embracing these values by teaching tribal languages, history and rituals. In some respects I agree that pity is their crutch. 'Buckling down, studying real hard and getting a good job' are completly ridiculious expectations for someone growing up on a economically depressed, poorly educated environment.
This is the same train of thought that our government has held for the last 50 years and its not working. These impovershed groups need funding, they need qualified and educated teachers and they need to take pride in their own culture once again.
|
|
|
|
|
blue_ice
Oct 3, 2004, 11:27 PM
Post #110 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 34
|
Well said!
|
|
|
|
|
micahmcguire
Oct 4, 2004, 7:12 AM
Post #111 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 18, 2002
Posts: 889
|
Elsinore, talk is cheap. You can claim to know what you are talking about until you are blue in the face, but it doesn't make it so. You can claim that I don't know what I am talking about, but that doesn't make it so either. A good explaination of WHY you feel that way can really come in handy when you are making a point. To rag on your point, Manifest Destiny has little to do with God or a religious movement, it has everything to do with ethnocentrism. Like I said before, we felt it was our duty to civilize the world with democracy and an "American" way of life. Whether the real driving force of manifest destiny was based on religion, or on a desire to control the land, the public reasoning was that we were "saving the savages from their savagery," not "God has given us the task of wiping out anything not liken to us." And to some extent, many people did justify it through religion. Whatever it took I suppose. Anyways, you can't really suggest that "I don't know what the hell I am talking about" without backing that up with a real reason.
So, getting with the times is meaningless? How else are these people supposed to prosper? Via my tax-dollars? Living off of handouts is not measure of success. Its not like we can return them to the Old West, its not like we can just destroy our cities and way of life, plant lots of trees, and let them have all the land again. Lets try and stick to suggestions that are remotely plausable. Besides, your argument begins on the premis that you "agree, pity is their crutch," yet ends with the suggestion of giving them more pity-which one is it? When do we draw the line and say "what a man soweth, he also shall reap?" When do we look at the situation realistically and realize that the easier we make life for groups such as impoverished natives by giving them handouts, the more reliant they become on these handouts? The world is too mean a place to suggest that a white person must study and work hard to gain success, but a native need only recieve some sort of financial aide. So for you to suggest that my idea of buckling down, studying real hard, and getting a good job is not the answer is specious, and perpetuates the problem that these underdog minority groups have.
You would be absolutely right if there were a way to reestablish the traditional native way of life, but think about it. The US is too populated, and the times have changed too much for tribes to roam the plains hunting buffalo anymore. Sad or not, this subsistance lifestyle just won't work in most places. The weakness of these assimilated cultures is that they are not generally educated to the level of the typical middle-class American, and do not have the financial assets to build on that most ofus do, so therefore do not play the game of capitalism up to par with the rest of us. If they did, most of their problems as we see them would dwindle. The only way for them to achieve this level of participation is to buckle down, study real hard, and get a good job. I've seen plenty of underprivaledged people rise from the ashes of poverty and ascend the ladder of success, so to say that this suggestion is meaningless is utter tripe. It has meaning for the people who have proven my point.
Anyhow, I guess what it boils down to is, if you give a man a fish, he'll be back tomorrown in need of another fish. If you teach a man to fish, he will prosper on his own. Statistically unsuccessful minority groups need more schools and better study habits, not welfare checks.
By the way, being proud of your culture has very little to do with success. Many "cultures," by which I mean a sense of ethnic pride and the practice of ethnic tradition, have become extinct in America, yet we see plenty of lauded success stories that have nothing to do with cultural pride. One does not relate to the other on a degree which can be perceived as useful statistically. Sure being proud of your heritage is a good thing, but it does very little to empower success. Success comes from either work or luck, not a sense of self.
680322, you ask how I can label you as ignorant when all you have done is pose a question. What question? You've asserted points that I consider silly and trite, you've proven to me that you lack much depth understanding of the issues, and you use the english language poorly. I sympathize with you if you have gotten into some debilitating accident, but this does not change the content of your posts, which I still find quite lacking. Perhaps were this not an internet forum, where anonymity permits me to insult and fluster at will with no fear of reciprocity, I would have chosen a somewhat lighter shade with which to paint my opinion of you. However, it is an internet forum, so don't take it too seriously. Half of the aggression I show on here is just my way of making myself feel like a big man anyways, so rest easy knowing that its my own sense of self-worth I am trying to bolster with labels like "idiot" and "dolt."
Anyhow, I'm sure to be attacked with further senseless drivel, and to that I say "bring it on, baby!"
|
|
|
|
|
coldclimb
Oct 4, 2004, 7:40 AM
Post #112 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2002
Posts: 6909
|
In reply to: Maybe we should just give the native Americans the entire country back--and move back to Europe. Curt
My feeling too. :?
|
|
|
|
|
saltspringer
Oct 4, 2004, 9:36 AM
Post #113 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 12, 2001
Posts: 274
|
sometimes it is useful to read a little bit about a topic before commenting on it...
there was no such thing as "India" in the 15th century and, therefore, no such thing as Indians (it was, at that time, Hindustan). It is believed that Columbus named the local inhabitants of the Americas "Indios" due to the fact that they lived in harmony with their surroundings.
a good start to understanding some of the problems with the current land claims issues would be to read Peter Mathiessen's "Indian Country" or "In the Spirit of Crazy Horse" and then come back and write a comment
|
|
|
|
|
timstich
Oct 4, 2004, 10:05 AM
Post #114 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2003
Posts: 6267
|
In reply to: In reply to: Maybe we should just give the native Americans the entire country back--and move back to Europe. Curt My feeling too. :?
Yes. Midnight Oil has a song saying just that called "Burning Beds" or some such nonsense. Or perhaps the song is just about someone who smokes in bed once too often while tripping on 'shrooms? Take your pick.
|
|
|
|
|
timstich
Oct 4, 2004, 10:15 AM
Post #115 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2003
Posts: 6267
|
In reply to: a good start to understanding some of the problems with the current land claims issues would be to read Peter Mathiessen's "Indian Country" or "In the Spirit of Crazy Horse" and then come back and write a comment
Perhaps, but this sums it up much simpler:
European men and women came to the New World. They took what they wanted and fought each other over its control. Force backed up their claims, nothing more and nothing less. This was similar to how the Native Amercians lived, but they did not possess major war-making technologies or biological agents, so their influence was limited. Some tribes war making skills were so limited that they said, "Hey. You know what? We'll just be peaceful tribes." The more successful warmaking bastard Europeans won.
Years later, this proved to be advantageous, as simple rights concepts like that of owning land inspired people to actually do something with it. Of course, this led to excesses, like all things. But this New Way of doing things let many people fit into tiny areas called cities in densities impossible under current Native American technologies that had stagnated for many centuries due to overwhelming religious fanaticism and cultural statism, which the European settlers would later label "quaint" and "natural."
|
|
|
|
|
saltspringer
Oct 4, 2004, 2:15 PM
Post #116 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 12, 2001
Posts: 274
|
funny thing....the "european" men and women you speak of also came armed with things called "treaties" to avoid fighting. When the settlers first arrived in Florida (with military backup) they were hopelessly outnumbered by the Indians and had no chance of "conquering" any of the people with or without military aid. Through bribery and coersion, the US government convinced a large number of the Indians to move out West to Oklahoma but not all of them left and treaty negotiations continued on and on: promises never fulfilled. The Spanish and the Brits also made treaties to avoid bloodshed and there are tribes out here on the West coast as well that never capitulated.
People assume that the Indians were subdued by might but in most cases it was through subterfuge: alchohol, infested blankets, false promises...what a noble bunch! You could say "well, we could have just killed them all and been done with it" but, guess what? That's not what happened and now it needs to be dealt with properly.
Giving away the country is not an option but perhaps talking about land stewardship is...there has to be some middle ground. Many of today's Indians have been assimilated to a large degree but those that still wish to live a "traditional" existence should be left to do so whenever it is reasonably possible.
|
|
|
|
|
timstich
Oct 4, 2004, 3:04 PM
Post #117 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2003
Posts: 6267
|
In reply to: Many of today's Indians have been assimilated to a large degree but those that still wish to live a "traditional" existence should be left to do so whenever it is reasonably possible.
If by that you mean giving out free land to someone based on their heritage, then I'm sure I can dig up some ancestors that lost their land way, way back. In fact, I think I am due a nice townhome in southern France by that token. As far as I am concerned, any reservations currently owned are it. That's all. Finis. If you want to start carving up National Forests and handing it away, you can get rid of the national park system, fire all of the rangers, and just yell, "SOUP'S ON!" We should all get a swipe at that land, right? Every poor bastard ever wronged has an equal claim.
|
|
|
|
|
doublehelix
Oct 4, 2004, 7:45 PM
Post #118 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 28, 2004
Posts: 13
|
Wow, what a hot bed topic. I couldn't even bring myself to read all of it because people started getting so personal and flinging attacks back and forth. I'm native american myself, Tlingit from southeast Alaska, so here's what I have to say on the issue....well what do I have to say? It's complex and there's probably right and wrong arguments on both sides. I think if it's a voluntary closure than it's not that big of a deal. It won't kill climbers to go somewhere else for a month. Mutual respect between all people will do a lot to solve these kinds of problems. So rather than complain about who's right and wrong why don't people start flinging around ideas to appease everyone involved?
|
|
|
|
|
corporatedog
Oct 5, 2004, 9:40 PM
Post #119 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 21, 2003
Posts: 25
|
Cool Doublehelix bro - native Catawba here. (go to Cherokee and take a left)
You're right in saying "what can we say?". I get such a kick out of white people (yes, we call you that) talking about Native Americans and Indians like we are some collector's item at a museum. We are just humans - nothing more folks. We live, love, stink when dirty, eat when hungry. We want safety and security for our families - we want to be left alone by helpful people.
Were we "savages" in our past lives - probably so. Hate to burst anyone's romantic bubble but "gasp" - we had slaves, we killed each other for land and food (why do you think we had Warriors if not to fight wars). We practiced slash and burn technology and killed a crap load of animals when the chance was there. The only difference was that your great grandparents were better at it than we were.
Why didn't "we" build a technologically advanced world while we had the chance - hell if I know - Great Grandmother Pack said that they didn't need to - works for me.
So now it has come down to this simple question - since we got our butts kicked by the Euros - and lost our land, way of live, etc - is there a bill due for losing and if so, what is the price and who pays?
Most NAs couldn't care less - but like any other good 'merican - we have learned not to turn down a freebie. If your guilt prompts you to fork over the green - I'll take it - why the hell not. Build a casino and stick the fools for their money - why not?
But that behavior is only on the surface for me - it's the old "when in Rome - do as Romans" kind of thing. On the inside - I am not "white", I can't really get into a picture of a white Jesus, and I really don't think like a European descendent does - I look "red", I remember the stories of my Great Grandmother - I feel my gods in nature - not in a building.
Some of us do attempt to touch the memories of our forefathers - to try to recreate for ourselves what our culture once was. Do some NAs desecrate these places by development - sure they do. Remember the part about being human - there are some good NAs and some that just plain suck.
America says we allow all beliefs - so allow mine. Let me hold onto to the few sacred places that remain. Maybe since I don't dance around in feathers and beads you think I don't care anymore - we just went underground with our personal beliefs - that's why they are called personal. Stay out of my church unless you come to seek wisdom and guidance from those voices that speak from such places. If you are asked to stay away for a while - do so would you. Doesn't mean I don't like you - some of my best friends are white. Just sometimes you want to hear your own people's voices and feel like a family again.
Peace.
Quit fighting about this okay. Nothing good will come of it.
|
|
|
|
|
timstich
Oct 6, 2004, 1:44 PM
Post #120 of 120
(9871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2003
Posts: 6267
|
In reply to: I get such a kick out of white people (yes, we call you that) talking about Native Americans and Indians like we are some collector's item at a museum. We are just humans - nothing more folks. We live, love, stink when dirty, eat when hungry. We want safety and security for our families - we want to be left alone by helpful people.
Fecking GREAT post. Not many people get those points. I especially like the "we want to be left alone by helpful people" part. Reminds me of the one-armed cajun guy in the film "Southern Comfort."
Dis place is mah home. We live up in hear so no one don't fuk wit us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
