Have any of you heard about this? Will it help in the long run? Is it a bold and good first step towards reclaiming heritage and pride and well-being? Or will it cause further distress? Sounds like the legal folks will be busy, if nothing else, ironing out property rights. The statistics outlining the suffering of these people is sobering and shameful.
quote: Some excerpts from the press release:
WASHINGTON, DC - December 20 - Lakota Sioux Indian representatives declared sovereign nation status today in Washington D.C. following Monday's withdrawal from all previously signed treaties with the United States Government. The withdrawal, hand delivered to Daniel Turner, Deputy Director of Public Liaison at the State Department, immediately and irrevocably ends all agreements between the Lakota Sioux Nation of Indians and the United States Government outlined in the 1851 and 1868 Treaties at Fort Laramie Wyoming.
The Lakota reservations are among the most impoverished areas in North America, a shameful legacy of broken treaties and apartheid policies. Lakota has the highest death rate in the United States and Lakota men have the lowest life expectancy of any nation on earth, excluding AIDS, at approximately 44 years. Lakota infant mortality rate is five times the United States average and teen suicide rates 150% more than national average. 97% of Lakota people live below the poverty line and unemployment hovers near 85%.
posted
I fail to see how this will help them at all. Last time I checked they could move anywhere, working doing anything, and weren't forced to do anything in particular.
How is this going to help them?
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Their land has been illegally occupied for quite a few years, according to some treaties that are referenced. IIRC, there was a case a few years ago where the Lakota or some other tribe in the Dakotaa or Montana was demanding to be paid several billion dollars for land rents that had been promised them in treaties back in the early 1900s.
The government has more lawyers. Who do you think will win? I think we already know.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Precedent is not with them on this one, but maybe it'll get them enough attention that the government will have to make more of an effort. It's not like they could make less of an effort to help them.
Although I have to agree with Kwea to some degree. If you hate where you live, why not go elsewhere? The fact that it used to be a great place or meaningful doesn't offset the need to raise your kids somewhere safe.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Russell Means is a nutball and this will end up having as much legitimacy as if I'd declared Colorado independent.
The only positive thing that could come out of this is more attention paid to tribal sovereignty and fulfillment of treaty and contract but a number of bad things may also happen.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Who do these guys actually represent? It says that they're a "delegation" and lists several organizations, but I couldn't see for sure whether they actually had any authority whatsoever.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you click on the "Lakota Freedom -- Why" link, it has this to say. I imagine there is much more . . . it is an interesting website.
"Emerging from the Wounded Knee Occupation in 1973, the International Indian Treaty Council drew together more than 5000 delegates representing 98 Indian tribes and Nations from North and South America. This manifesto, representing the wisdom of thousands of people, their Ancestors, and the Great Mystery explicity supports the rights of Indigenous Nations to live free and to take whatever actions necessary for sovereignty."
Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think this very well might help the Lakota people in the long wrong, since many of their tribal government leaders in the past have scratched backs with the U.S. government to help each other, not the people.
"Go live somewhere else" is easy to say when you have been raised in a culture that puts no value other than monetary on the land. The Black Hills and surrounding lands are not just where the Lakota live, it is who they are. Or at least, who they were. Their holy places are there, their ancestors lived there, their entire culture is enveloped and intertwined with the landscape. The U.S. government was defeated in battle by the Lakota and Cheyenne enough that they relented and signed a treaty promising that the land would not be compromised again, that it could not be sold unless 75% of the (male members) of the tribe agreed, so long as the grass grew, etc. This was quickly broken once gold and other resources were found in the area. Then the Dawes Act further complicated issues, splitting the land between individual families-- something completely foreign to the Lakota people. According the Sen. Dawes, "they knew no selfishness, which is at the bottom of civilization," and that hopefully this would teach them the value of personal property and accruing material possessions. Before this, there was not poverty among the Lakota.
The killing of the buffalo, their main source of food, was instituted by the government as means of starving out a fearsome enemy that was too hard to beat through traditional means of battle. The entire people was made to be dependent on the government for survival, as their traditional way of life was outlawed.
I don't think Russell Means is a nutball. I have a lot of respect for a lot of the work he has done in his lifetime as a member of AIM to try and restore the culture and rights of a people whose exploitation has been a part of the the American institution since before America even was.
I would like to suggest some reading for those that are not familiar with the story of the Lakota people. The Dull Knifes of Pine Ridge is a fabulous book that follows four generations of the Dull Knife family, who are Northern Cheyenne and Oglala Sioux. It begins with Chief Dull Knife, who signed the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty (which was broken in full by 1874). He also lead his band along with their other chief, Little Wolf, out of the Darlington Agency in what is now Oklahoma back to their home in Montana. They were promised they could return after a year if they did not like Darlington, but even that was revoked and they had to flee in secret. They were hunted by the U.S. calvary the entire way. Most did not survive. Chief Dull Knife's son, George Dull Knife, travelled with Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show. His son, Guy Dull Knife, fought in World War I, and his son, Guy Dull Knife Jr. fought in Vietnam.
It is a fabulous book, I can't recommend it enough. It helps put a personal face on the history of a severely tried people.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Other reading suggestions for anyone curious about Native American History and issues beyond what you were taught in grammar school: In the Spirit of Crazy Horse, by Peter Matthiesen which is focused around the 1975 Pine Ridge Shoot out between AIM members and the FBI. Contemporary issues.
American Holocaust by Joe Stannard (?)is more a wide scope look, with lots of specific anecdotes pertaining to particular peoples. It examines the destruction of these millions of cultures on a whole, and attempts to identify some causes in the second half.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, if someone withdraws from a treaty that ended a war, is that the same as re-declaring the war? Possibly not a good idea.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm all for keeping cultures alive and respecting different peoples and their histories, but I honestly don't get the American Indian and Inuit people who seem to want to live in the past. It isn't that I necessarily have a problem with it, I just absolutely don't understand why a group of people would intentionally refuse to progress socially, economically, spiritually, technically, and so forth.
I mean, when your life expectancy is 44 years versus 80+ for your neighbors in the next county, is your way of life really worth embracing that forcefully?
If it were me, I'd have some parades and a museum and get on board with the quality health care and education.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:So, if someone withdraws from a treaty that ended a war, is that the same as re-declaring the war? Possibly not a good idea.
I don't know about that. I doubt that the American public in this day and age would be on board with fighting a war against Native Americans...
quote:I just absolutely don't understand why a group of people would intentionally refuse to progress socially, economically, spiritually, technically, and so forth.
I mean, when your life expectancy is 44 years versus 80+ for your neighbors in the next county, is your way of life really worth embracing that forcefully?
If it were me, I'd have some parades and a museum and get on board with the quality health care and education.
First of all, they drive cars. They take insulin and other medications and monitor blood sugar for diabetes and such like (at least most of them will, when the medicine is available.) Many work modern jobs (when they're available) and are very willing to embrace most technological advancements-- the ones that can go hand in hand with traditional beliefs. They're not Amish, they just have a different belief system. The problem is that many services and opportunities aren't provided equally, or on terms they can accept. And leaving the land that is holy in their tradition would be like... losing their soul, basically. I know that's dramatic but I can't think of a better way to put it. I think the problem is not to make them lose everything of value to them in order to increase their life expectancies-- it's how to help integrate those services and opportunities and meet those needs while at the same time allowing them to preserve their beliefs-- and respecting their rights.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It isn't wanting to live in the past, it is wanting at least a portion of your lands and right to rule yourselves restored. How is that different from India wanting independence from Britain? I was definitely for that.
And what is your definition of progress? I do not call forcing a self sufficient people into dependence and poverty progress. Life expectancy in most native americans is down because many were forcefully relocated to foreign climates, and forced into depending on rations of flour, coffee, sugar, and beef. Doesn't sound very healthy, does it? They were also initially forced to stay on specific reservations that never received adequate funding, and then the funding received was often misappropriated by sheisty agents.
Holy crap. Refuse to progress SPIRITUALLY? Are you farking serious? I don't even know if i can stand to stay in this thread. There is obviously an intense level of prejudice, ethnocentrism, and ignorance about Native American histories, cultures, and political issues on this board that, quite frankly, I find both shocking and appalling. Mighty Cow, your entire post just proves your entire lack of education on the matter. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt that it is indeed just ignorance, and not hatred, that fueled your response.
I think an autonomous group of people that were colonized have a right to try and gain back their independence. You'd think that is something a lot of Americans could recognize, but apparently not when it happens on their own soil.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: So, if someone withdraws from a treaty that ended a war, is that the same as re-declaring the war? Possibly not a good idea.
Yeah, it wasn't a good idea when the U.S. Government did so in 1874, the turn of the century, or the seventies; and it isn't now, either.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
(In re-reading my post, for the record, I have no problem with the Amish, either. And I think that it's bad and wrong when the government tries to make them live against their beliefs too-- for instance, trying to make their midwife-attended home births illegal. I was just pointing out that I've never heard of Native Americans who rejected technological advances for the sake of technological advances.)
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by porcelain girl: There is obviously an intense level of prejudice, ethnocentrism, and ignorance about Native American histories, cultures, and political issues on this board that, quite frankly, I find both shocking and appalling. Mighty Cow, your entire post just proves your entire lack of education on the matter.
Agreed.
quote:Originally posted by porcelain girl: Thank you, KQ. That was a very measured and open-minded response.
posted
I admitted that it's entirely due to ignorance of their position. I don't hold any ill will towards American Indians, and in fact wish them well. If you want to take offense, or presume prejudice or hatred on my part, honestly I think that says more about your point of view than it does of mine.
I spent some time in High School delivering medicine to a local reservation, and the entire place was in abject poverty. The whole reservation was a mess, with unkempt wild areas, run-down houses, fallen trees, rutted roads... it certainly didn't look like the land was sacred or revered. It was heartbreaking, but at the same time, they were surrounded by middle class homes of people of all races, religions, and jobs.
I felt bad for the people I was delivering medicine to, but I really didn't understand why they chose to live that way, when 10 miles away, living on the same "land" were people with family from Mexican, Portuguese, African, Northern European, Asian, Pacific Island, and I'm sure countless other backgrounds - all living in modern homes, going to modern schools, and living in any way they wanted to as far as remembering their history, following their religious beliefs, respecting their histories, and whatever else.
So yes, I am indeed ignorant of the modern people of Native American descent, and why so many choose to live on a reservation, in poverty, rather than live among the rest of the American population, while keeping their cultural and historical beliefs intact, but also taking advantage of the opportunities just down the street.
I don't think that they deserve their fate, or that they're bad people, or they're savages or anything of the like. I simply cannot fathom why I drove through that reservation every day for months watching children play on rusted cars, and entire families sitting out on their porch all day rather than going to school or a job.
I didn't see any people reveling in their cultural heritage or trying to live life as their ancestors. I just saw a lot of sick, poor, unfortunate people, and I honestly didn't understand what it was about the reservation that made them want to choose that life.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
And so I repeat: read a book. Perhaps one of the ones I suggested, or better yet, all three.
I think The Dull Knifes of Pine Ridge is a fast and easy read that gives an intimate look at a large problem. See what you learn, and if you feel the same after reading it. Maybe you will, but at least you will be informed. In fact, if you want I will even buy you (and anyone else on Hatrack) a copy and ship it to you.
I *do* take offense to your position, and I don't think that says anything negative about me. I just happen to be educated and informed about these issues. It frustrates me deeply that these peoples have been consistently marginalized. The quandary the majority have been forced into has been ignored, misunderstood, and flat out lied about for years. These issues are very important to me, and I am very passionate about them.
I think this is the first thread in over six years that has me fired up to the point of considering not participating simply because I'm so pissed.Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
porcelain girl: I didn't realize you were so fired up about this. I'm not, so I'll just step out.
I'd hate to deny you the opportunity to be offended at anyone who doesn't understand something which most people don't understand and in which you're an expert. Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
porcelain girl -- please continue to share what you know with us -- I think it's very important. Hatrack is a place of learning and growth -- and that happens with courage on all sides of the equation.
Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: porcelain girl: I didn't realize you were so fired up about this. I'm not, so I'll just step out.
I'd hate to deny you the opportunity to be offended at anyone who doesn't understand something which most people don't understand and in which you're an expert.
Ignorance itself isn't offensive. Making broad, definitive statements about that which you are ignorant is offensive.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Alabama tried succession once. We joined this union thingy in like 1819, and then 30 years later we reconsidered, because we weren't being fairly represented in the union's government, in any of the three branches. They were passing laws that would bankrupt our largest financial concerns, forcing them to sell at a lower than market price to the interests who had most control over that government. So our duly-elected government decided the union had been a bad idea and we wanted to withdraw. It was even legal to do so, according to the laws of said union.
But they invaded us, destroyed everything here, then exploited what was left and kept us in poverty for 100 years afterward. We're only just now emerging from that.
I say if they want to secede, more power to them. I wish them luck.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: porcelain girl: I didn't realize you were so fired up about this. I'm not, so I'll just step out.
I'd hate to deny you the opportunity to be offended at anyone who doesn't understand something which most people don't understand and in which you're an expert.
Ignorance itself isn't offensive. Making broad, definitive statements about that which you are ignorant is offensive.
Seconded. I'm kinda interested in the book btw, KQ. The whole thing about Native Americans is something that has always seemed very obsure in any history course I've taken, even U.S. History. Yes, they tell us that they were massacred and all that stuff but I also wonder how some of them got from being dirt poor and having their cultures almost extinct to the ginourmous casinos that exist now. And what about those that didn't make casinos and all that other stuff. I'm interested.
Posts: 3389 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: I just absolutely don't understand why a group of people would intentionally refuse to progress socially, economically, spiritually, technically, and so forth.
Is that what you consider "admitting ignorance?" That was the statement that reeked of prejudice, racism, and ethnocentrism.
Just so you better understand my indignation. I'd hate to deny you the opportunity. Sincerely, not sarcastically.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: Alabama tried succession once. We joined this union thingy in like 1819, and then 30 years later we reconsidered, because we weren't being fairly represented in the union's government, in any of the three branches. They were passing laws that would bankrupt our largest financial concerns, forcing them to sell at a lower than market price to the interests who had most control over that government. So our duly-elected government decided the union had been a bad idea and we wanted to withdraw. It was even legal to do so, according to the laws of said union.
But they invaded us, destroyed everything here, then exploited what was left and kept us in poverty for 100 years afterward. We're only just now emerging from that.
I say if they want to secede, more power to them. I wish them luck.
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: I just absolutely don't understand why a group of people would intentionally refuse to progress socially, economically, spiritually, technically, and so forth.
Is that what you consider "admitting ignorance?" That was the statement that reeked of prejudice, racism, and ethnocentrism.
Just so you better understand my indignation. I'd hate to deny you the opportunity. Sincerely, not sarcastically.
I think that while it makes sense where she's coming from, albeit I don't agree with it, the part where "spiritually" is used is just wrong. If you can't figure out why, then read it again until you do.
Yup, joining the country that is the product of those that ruined the continent for you and your kind is definitely the way to grow spiritually. Hurray for Corporate America and Capitalism.
Posts: 3389 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: As is belitting someone who disagrees with you about something, particularily if they have said they don't understand something.
I am fairly well-read regarding the subject, BTW.
If this is directed at me, I don't understand why. Mighty Cow was not belittled, but his position *was* called out as being ignorant, as a means of avoiding assuming that he was purely being racist.
I would hope that anyone on this board would feel well within the bounds of propriety to call me out if I claimed not to understand why the younger Jews in Nazi Germany didn't just renounce their cultural heritage and religion and join the HJ.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: So, if someone withdraws from a treaty that ended a war, is that the same as re-declaring the war? Possibly not a good idea.
Yeah, it wasn't a good idea when the U.S. Government did so in 1874, the turn of the century, or the seventies; and it isn't now, either.
From the point of view of Realpolitik, it was presumably a good deal for the US, or they wouldn't have done it. Without touching on intention, it's pretty clear that the Lakota have, at this point, zero ability to win any sort of armed conflict, although presumably they could make a reasonable terrorist movement if they tried.
Another point: From what I understand, the tribes sued the government back in the eighties, were accorded a settlement of roughly a hundred million dollars, and refused to take it. That money has since been sitting about accruing interest and is up to something over 800 million. I wonder how much land could be bought for that sum? We are presumably speaking of pretty thinly-settled areas, possibly owned mainly by the government. Of course, private or rather tribal ownership of the land under US law is not that same thing as national sovereignty over the land, but it could be made a reasonable approximation.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sorry if my passion and subsequent anger has been seen as arrogance or hurt anyone's feelings. Many of the responses in this thread have struck a chord with me.
It was sort of like growing up assuming everyone in my generation abhorred racism, only to overhear a girl on the bus I'd assumed was a friend whisper that our neighborhood would be so much better if there were no black people.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I also wonder how some of them got from being dirt poor and having their cultures almost extinct to the ginourmous casinos that exist now.
From what I understand, lawyers and investors.
OH. Well...that's embarrasing. Porcelain girl, then? I'm interested in the book. n_n
Well, between all the legal crap and stuff, how did they rise to become so powerful? At least in the West Coast where I see Casino billboards all over the place.
Posts: 3389 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: Alabama tried succession once. We joined this union thingy in like 1819, and then 30 years later we reconsidered, because we weren't being fairly represented in the union's government, in any of the three branches. They were passing laws that would bankrupt our largest financial concerns, forcing them to sell at a lower than market price to the interests who had most control over that government. So our duly-elected government decided the union had been a bad idea and we wanted to withdraw. It was even legal to do so, according to the laws of said union.
But they invaded us, destroyed everything here, then exploited what was left and kept us in poverty for 100 years afterward. We're only just now emerging from that.
I say if they want to secede, more power to them. I wish them luck.
That is a highly debatable interpretation.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by porcelain girl: I'm sorry if my passion and subsequent anger has been seen as arrogance or hurt anyone's feelings. Many of the responses in this thread have struck a chord with me.
It was sort of like growing up assuming everyone in my generation abhorred racism, only to overhear a girl on the bus I'd assumed was a friend whisper that our neighborhood would be so much better if there were no black people.
ouch. I don't think that's exactly what she said. I mean, she didn't say that the world would be better if there were no Native Americans, amirite? I've seen ignorance in her posts, yes. But not racism of that sort.
Posts: 3389 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
As per the casinos (as far as my understanding goes):
Only a few tribes run successful casinos. They are permitted to do so because tribes are under federal, not state, jurisdiction.
The motivation behind starting casinos was because the tribe was not receiving enough funding from the government to fulfill their basic needs, so they figured they would set up another means of revenue. The revenue from the casinos goes to helping the respective tribe at large. Very few of the casinos accrue what could be considered wealth for the tribes, and the majority of the successful ones are indeed in California. There is one in the East Coast, I think run by the Pequot?
I don't think they are a fabulous idea, but that is as far as my information goes without further research.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
A LOT (as in over 90%) of the money to build those casino's came from investors from outside the US, and a ton of the profits (in some cases 80% or more) go back to those investors.
Tribal politics have been very ugly in some cases.
Without Reservation is another great book about a basically non-existant tribe....the Mashnantucket Pequot tribe....which was never really a tribe at all.
They own the most profitable Indian casino in the US, and the largest single casino in the world.
posted
I don't know about the specific conditions of the Lakota Sioux reservation system, but most of the reservations I've seen don't seem like they would fare well as independent nations. There's too much of a lack of infrastructure, and too many absent services; while those things are often underprovided as part of the United States, one worries that as a sovereign nation, they might more or less cease.
It's true that without the exploitation of reservation resources there might be the possibility of improvement, but I'd wonder if that future possibility would be worth such a drastic course. Are the problems lakotafreedom describes likely to improve without significant exterior assistance?
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Altáriël of Dorthonion:
quote:Originally posted by porcelain girl: I'm sorry if my passion and subsequent anger has been seen as arrogance or hurt anyone's feelings. Many of the responses in this thread have struck a chord with me.
It was sort of like growing up assuming everyone in my generation abhorred racism, only to overhear a girl on the bus I'd assumed was a friend whisper that our neighborhood would be so much better if there were no black people.
ouch. I don't think that's exactly what she said. I mean, she didn't say that the world would be better if there were no Native Americans, amirite? I've seen ignorance in her posts, yes. But not racism of that sort.
I didn't mean to infer that her statement was the same as my peer, just that the feelings of sad revelation were the same for me. I consider most of the initials posts on this thread to be terribly uniformed, uncomfortably imperialistic, and prejudiced. It was very unexpected, and forced a paradigm shift. It didn't feel good.
I don't expect everyone to have the same gut reaction, nor do I think that if someone disagrees with me that they are immediately ignorant or racist. I was reacting to specific phrases, and said so. I have never (that I can remember, I have been around for eight years or so) participated in flaming or belittling anyone. I feel that I tend to be fair-minded and polite. I think my points thus far have been founded and appropriate.
I am personally invested in the welfare of the American Indian, and truth-telling in general. I would never belittle anyone for wanting more information or knowledge. But apparently I am being offensive by being offended. I am not offended for my own sake, but for the sake of most people that aren't given their proper due.
Alt, if you would like a copy of The Dull Knifes please email me at sweetrevengeellis at yahoo dot com. I will gladly send you one within the next few months, so long as you pass it on to someone else when you are done. And I welcome your thoughts on it if you read it Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:It was sort of like growing up assuming everyone in my generation abhorred racism, only to overhear a girl on the bus I'd assumed was a friend whisper that our neighborhood would be so much better if there were no black people.
That kind of thing is VERY hard for me as well. Imagine it being your own brother. *sigh*
I grew up in a family where we did our best to understand all conflicts from both sides before making a decision about whose side we were going to come down on, and did not use derogatory words or words that a group has asked not be used for them, if we knew about it. I am horrified that my brother has decided to become a white supremacist. I was also not happy when I asked my brother-in-law not to call little people what he persisted in calling them (a word just about as offensive in my house, growing up, as the n-word) and he refused even after I explained why. *sigh*
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by porcelain girl: I would hope that anyone on this board would feel well within the bounds of propriety to call me out if I claimed not to understand why the younger Jews in Nazi Germany didn't just renounce their cultural heritage and religion and join the HJ.
...
It was sort of like growing up assuming everyone in my generation abhorred racism, only to overhear a girl on the bus I'd assumed was a friend whisper that our neighborhood would be so much better if there were no black people.
The fact that you use these two examples to characterize what I posted is exactly my point.
Neither of these are anywhere close to what I said, and neither are accurate representations of the situation in question as far as I'm able to see.
This shows me that you're reacting to the situation, and not actually listening to or responding to what I'm talking about. In fact, I think we all know what throwing down the Nazi card means.
I do wish you luck in your pursuit of knowledge and wish the various Native American peoples well in their hardships.
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: A LOT (as in over 90%) of the money to build those casino's came from investors from outside the US, and a ton of the profits (in some cases 80% or more) go back to those investors.
Tribal politics have been very ugly in some cases.
Without Reservation is another great book about a basically non-existant tribe....the Mashnantucket Pequot tribe....which was never really a tribe at all.
They own the most profitable Indian casino in the US, and the largest single casino in the world.
Foxwoods.
Thank you for the recommendation. As aforementioned, Indian Gaming is not something I completely understand. Though I have always been invested due to cultural heritage, it was not until the past few years that I started vigorously pursuing the facts and history from all sides of the "Indian Problem." We are not taught even a fraction of the truth in American public schools.
I empathize, KQ. I still remember being six years old and having to learn that people were "different." The idea of race had to be taught to me, because I simply didn't classify people or make judgments about them based on skin color. And yet there are some things I have been admonished not to discuss with my grandfather or some of our older family friends, such as my dating someone "different."
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by porcelain girl: I would hope that anyone on this board would feel well within the bounds of propriety to call me out if I claimed not to understand why the younger Jews in Nazi Germany didn't just renounce their cultural heritage and religion and join the HJ.
...
It was sort of like growing up assuming everyone in my generation abhorred racism, only to overhear a girl on the bus I'd assumed was a friend whisper that our neighborhood would be so much better if there were no black people.
The fact that you use these two examples to characterize what I posted is exactly my point.
Neither of these are anywhere close to what I said, and neither are accurate representations of the situation in question as far as I'm able to see.
This shows me that you're reacting to the situation, and not actually listening to or responding to what I'm talking about. In fact, I think we all know what throwing down the Nazi card means.
I do wish you luck in your pursuit of knowledge and wish the various Native American peoples well in their hardships.
P.S. I'm a guy.
A: I thought Alt was referring to someone else; I know you're a dude. (I had thought Alt was referring to Kwea, but then I remembered Kwea is also of the dude variety, then figured the gender of my pronoun didn't matter as my point was not person-specific.)
I was responding EXACTLY to what you said. You inferred that Native American culture was spiritually, socially, technologically, and economically primitive.
The majority of Native American tribes in America have been victims of genocide due to their ethnic, religious, and cultural status. MAYBE if they chose to progress, as you put it, they would not have to suffer. The Nazi card was totally relevant. Why couldn't the Indians (Jews) just wake up and see that the European (Aryan) way was superior and get on board?
As to my relaying the anecdote about the girl on my bus, I was referring to the feeling it gave me, and how that was analogous to what reading your and previous posts gave me. It hurt, because it was uniformed AND definitive.
I was giving you the opportunity to explain your stance before declaring YOU personally to be prejudiced and ethnocentric ( as opposed to your stance). You did so, and though I disagree with it still, at least you provided reasons for making assumptions, and admitted ignorance when I took offense to your initial statement.
posted
Could she pass it to me? I want to learn more about Native Americans and their plights. I cannot blame them for seceding. Things like slavery or having your land systematically taken from you doesn't just go away. Take how members of my family are still affected by slavery even though it happened centuries ago. The pain of it takes so long to recover from and racism is a thing that is practically engrained in our society. It isn't any wonder that so many pockets of people in this country live in poverty. Sometimes it becomes part of a mindset, limiting people for generations. It doesn't help that native culture is often mocked in our society.
quote:Originally posted by porcelain girl:
quote:Originally posted by Altáriël of Dorthonion:
quote:Originally posted by porcelain girl: I'm sorry if my passion and subsequent anger has been seen as arrogance or hurt anyone's feelings. Many of the responses in this thread have struck a chord with me.
It was sort of like growing up assuming everyone in my generation abhorred racism, only to overhear a girl on the bus I'd assumed was a friend whisper that our neighborhood would be so much better if there were no black people.
ouch. I don't think that's exactly what she said. I mean, she didn't say that the world would be better if there were no Native Americans, amirite? I've seen ignorance in her posts, yes. But not racism of that sort.
I didn't mean to infer that her statement was the same as my peer, just that the feelings of sad revelation were the same for me. I consider most of the initials posts on this thread to be terribly uniformed, uncomfortably imperialistic, and prejudiced. It was very unexpected, and forced a paradigm shift. It didn't feel good.
I don't expect everyone to have the same gut reaction, nor do I think that if someone disagrees with me that they are immediately ignorant or racist. I was reacting to specific phrases, and said so. I have never (that I can remember, I have been around for eight years or so) participated in flaming or belittling anyone. I feel that I tend to be fair-minded and polite. I think my points thus far have been founded and appropriate.
I am personally invested in the welfare of the American Indian, and truth-telling in general. I would never belittle anyone for wanting more information or knowledge. But apparently I am being offensive by being offended. I am not offended for my own sake, but for the sake of most people that aren't given their proper due.
Alt, if you would like a copy of The Dull Knifes please email me at sweetrevengeellis at yahoo dot com. I will gladly send you one within the next few months, so long as you pass it on to someone else when you are done. And I welcome your thoughts on it if you read it
I imagine that declaring them apart from the US government is the first step of many, many lawsuits.
I doubt this will help them at all, for the same reasons that the casinos haven't helped many either.
I know that my sister worked at Foxwoods, and while it was a decent job, the difference between the way NA workers and non-NA workers were treated shows that racism is alive and well on the reservation as well. Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
*nods* My best friend growing up was half Navajo. Her father had left the reservation when he was just a boy; his mother chose to leave for many reasons, but their life was almost as hard after leaving as it was before they left. And, well, he was not welcome any more among his family and people because he left the reservation and married a white woman and lived a "white" life. It was sad to hear him talk about it.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
I know that my sister worked at Foxwoods, and while it was a decent job, the difference between the way NA workers and non-NA workers were treated shows that racism is alive and well on the reservation as well.
My first assumption is that this stems from the conflict between "traditionals" and "assimilated" Indians that has been around since Europeans had political power in the Americas. Do you think that is the case?
It is that intra-tribal conflict that perpetuated a lot of the problems on the Pine Ridge Reservation in the seventies. AIM members were invited to the reservation because traditionals on the reservation received no aid, acknowledgment from the government. Assimilated Indians were given cushy jobs by the Tribal Council Chair, Dick Wilson. There's a guy who lived up to his name. Both sides of the tribe were pitted against each other over the scarce resources available on the reservation, especially in way of employment.
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
What I took from MC's comments...and I know he will correct me if I am wrong...is that a lot of different nationalities seem to honor their own heritage without leaving modern advances out of their lives.
I have been to some of those reservations out west, and they are pitiful. I know some of the responsibility lies with how they have been treated in the past, but a lot of it isn't as well. There are a lot of things that could be done within their own community, but a lot fo the time it seems they are turning their back on their options.
I see this as just another example of this in action.
Keep in mind that my own ancestors felt Ireland was very special, and they had a very deep spiritual connection too the land their forefathers had worked for generations, but they still chose to leave to make things better for themselves and their families. NA's aren't the only people who have had to adapt their lifestyles in the modern world.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
