Do we really owe the Indians anything?

Do we really owe the Indians anything?

Am I really out of line saying we only “stole” land that they had busily “stolen” from each other for centuries before and after Columbus?

For example, the Aztecs and Incans robbed all their neighbors. They didn’t have big countries, they had classic empires of vassel states.

And what of the French and Indian War? Weren’t all sides out for spoils of land?

And even if we broke treaties getting Dover’s plot from the Delawares, do the current people alive on both sides have any inate Right to any land at all? Do we still enforce the treaties Napoleon made during his glory days? Or Stalin? Do we decide Chechnya’s fate that way? Wasn’t our country founded on saying the treaties that created the colonies were all just so much fading parchment?

[Note: I’m part Ojibway. That doesn’t affect my opinion’s validity, but it’s only fair to point out before I ask you to answer. I have no intention of trying for a gotcha later.]

Shouldn’t there be a statute of limitations on undoing battles won and lost. How far back do you go? Up to Columbus? Then why not one generation further back, and one more, and one more?

Yes, absolutely. Welcome UpperUS. One of my first posts on this board was calling for a staute of limitations on historical claims such as by Indians or African-Americans. I think 100 years is a nice round figure, so anything which happened prior to 1900 is water under the bridge.

The way I look at it, is if it happened to you then you have the right to complain about it. If it happened to your ancestors and they’re dead then tough badookies.

Knowing full well this will tick some people off but…

We won…didn’t we? Why would we owe them if we won.

I realize the morality argument is about to come into play, but is it realistic to attempt to apply 20th or 21st century(that’s another discussion) morals to 18th and 19th century actions. Or even earlier. We run around as a country apologizing for our past and trying to kiss the boo-boo and make it better. Hey, we did some despicable things, I realize that, but we have learned to be a little more civil and humanitarian. God knows we are still working on it.

In incredibly simplified terms, the general rule throughout history has been that if I kicked your ass I don’t have to give you anything back until you kick my ass or you get a bunch of your buddies to kick my ass.

The problem is that the government signed treaties (generally broken prior to recent years) that made certain promises in perpetuity. These treaties meant less fighting. The tribes honored their part, the U.S. government did not.

Now the government is trying to honor the treaties, giving only what the government said it “owed” in the first place.

So, what’s the statute of limitations on “forever”?

Bucky

I believe that we owe the surviving Native population of North America the same rights and freedoms for self determination as every law abiding legal resident and citizen has. No more, no less. In Canada most natives have access to free University education and course books. I think there is a lodging gratuity as well but I’m not sure. Living on the reservation the natives pay no Fed or Provincial income tax on any goods or services. There are no tarriffs placed on them with regards to importing goods such as tobacco and alcohol. In this day and age, I think it’s a sweet deal they have but a little out of sorts with the rest of the population of Canada. Quite a few non Native Canadians feel it’s all too much of a freebie at this point.

How about “until the next generation gets hold of it?”

Treaties that bind future generations don’t hold a lot of weight when those generations get into power unless there is a clear advantage to keeping them. When an alliance or treaty becomes impractical, nations abandon them. It shouldn’t work that way, but it does.

Do I, personally, feel like I owe somebody for the “sins of my fathers?” Nope. Sorry my grandad beat up yours, but that was then, this is now, and this is just the way it is.

We don’t owe anyone anything.

Christ almighty, yes we owe them!

The “settlers” come in, decimate their poulation with diseases and greed, repeatedly lie and break treaties, steal their land and then oh-so-generously give them tiny reservations on crappy land than no one else wants. How are they supposed to live? Conditions on some of the reservations are little better than third-world. Some of them have no running water, electricity or telephones. They have a high illiteracy rate. Building a casino is sometimes the only way they can survive economically, and that’s just sad.

A couple of years ago, my mother was in a protest. Developers were planning to build a golf course over Native American burial grounds. A golf course! Over a graveyard! How disrespectful can you get? But this sort of thing is common, unfortunately. We routinely dig up their graves, and keep the contents in boxes in the storage rooms of museums. The tribes have years of lawsuits ahead to get their great-great grandfather’s bones back.

So, yes we owe them. We’ve treated them abominably for generations. Tax breaks just won’t cut it. We need a series of programs that would help them get back on their feet as a people. It’s not a matter of “kissing a boo-boo”. We took away their economic viability in the first place. It’s only right that we help them get it back.

The problem I have with the “Things were bad, but now it’s all in the past.” argument is that it is not in the past. Black and Red people are still living with the ramifications of the atrocities that were commited against their ancestors. While many Whites would like to forget this, Black and Red people cannot.

There can be no justice for these crimes of the past. However, accepting the victims of them into our hearts is possible. Accepting the descendants of the victims, and their cultural ideas, fully into our society could establish justice for them, at least.

Let’s see, before whitey got here you had tribes living off the land, dying of infection wit a lifespan of about 25. Now they have indoor plumbing, roads, dental care, antibiotics, anti-viral meds, telephones etc. It hasn’t been ALL bad.

And there is not one person alinve who is not the member of some group that had it’s land taken and its people killed by some other group. If the Indians had been white, no one would have had a problem with what happened. It would just have been another war.

But now with “cultural diversity” and the perverse belief that everyone is superior to whites, it has become an attrocity. Anyone who wants to give land back, why don’t you let them have * your* house?

It was a war. We won. Treaties mean nothing.

If they get back land, I want MY land back from Russia.

This assumtion is incorrect. Americans of the 13th century had longer lifespans than Europeans. The great epidemics of the Old World were unknown to the Americas. This changed, of course, when the populations came into contact.

Also, I am not sure what you mean by “living off the land”, but if you are implying that the Natives were not agriculturists, then you are wrong again. More than 1/2 of the crops eaten today were developed in the Americas. Developed by Natives.

It is true that there is not one person alive who is not the member of some group that had it’s land taken and its people killed by some other group. There are people, however, who are not living as second class citizens because of these events. I would guess that Mr. Zambezi is 1 of these people. As am I.

I would recommend thinking of “cultural diversity” as the perverse belief that other ways of doing things are not automaticly inferior.

YOUR word may be meaningless. I place some value on mine.

PEACE

Nope, I knew about the agriculture.

As for life span with no antibiotics, no dental hygiene, and hostile tribes, I imagine that the it was a tad shorter than it is now. I was comparing their life span then vs. now. I never compared them to the white who, if you recall, did not have antibiotics in the 17th 18th and 19th centuries.

My point is that few if any NA’s would likely choose to live the life of their anscestors at this point.

My word to you now is one thing. If we are trying to kill each other, it is another. Let’s not forget that many of the tribes would not have minded completely wiping out the whites.

And my point is that the execrable conditions of reservations today (high suicide rate, high alcoholism rate, low per capita income, low literacy rate) are a direct result of the injustices practiced upon those ancestors.

The playing field ain’t level.

The same thing, by the way, goes for the ghettoization of the urban black population. There’s a clear line of causality from the failure of Reconstruction to today’s urban poverty, crime, and drug use. Our collective failure to appreciate that causality has prompted attitudes of social Darwinism and casual racism (a higher proportion of blacks live in poverty than whites; therefore, blacks must be inferior to whites) that only perpetuate the problem.

For those of you who think we owe the Indians, I have a question: What do you propose we give them? Cash? Land? Should we pressure companies to give them jobs for which they are less than ideal, like we do with Blacks? Do you propose we leave and let them have the country to themselves?

I would recommend thinking of “cultural diversity” as the perverse belief that other ways of doing things are not automaticly inferior.

So would I. It’s just that our society is infested with PC nazis who use that term to perpetuate the notion, as Mr. Zambezi mentioned, that everyone is superior to whites.

And you’d have concrete examples of this, right? You can show, for example, that more Americans think everyone is superior to whites than think that whites are superior to everyone? 'Cos otherwise, I’d have to classify it as one of the more ludicrous things I’ve ever heard.

And in answer to this question (with respect to both black people and Native Americans), I’d suggest that we invest resources in revitalizing the urban infrastructure. I’d suggest we explore treatment for drug users, rather than incarceration. I’d suggest we lay a better foundation for rural education. I’d suggest we stop paying American farmers not to grow crops while people here are starving. Most of all, I’d suggest we address the fact that certain inequalities have been institutionalized in this society, and that it’s time to start doing something about it.

Read the newspaper, dude.

Here in Washington State, the Makah tribe has been creating a serious political ruckus over the last year or so by insisting on their tribal right to hunt gray whales.

The spectacle has been perversely amusing:

The Indians, and the liberals on their side, are asserting their right to hunt. They’ve been going out into the Sound in a canoe and throwing harpoons at whales, and have actually killed a couple. (No outboard motors or harpoon guns, mind you.)

The environmental liberals oppose all whaling, and have been protesting at the Makah’s reservation, and harassing the whaling canoe. One woman was just injured doing this; she zoomed her jet-ski in at the canoe, and when she spun to zoom away, she was run over by the Coast Guard boat that was protecting the Indians.

And the conservatives, who believe in neither Indian rights nor environmental concerns, are similarly fighting with each other, but on the other side of the issue: Some want to let the whales get killed, and some want to prevent the Indians from doing anything under past treaties.

Me, I don’t know what to make of it, and I apologize for the semi-hijack. (Actually, now that I think about it, I’d better start a new GD thread for this.)

The point is, many Native Americans are very much interested in reclaiming their historical way of life. What has the white man brought? Television, antibiotics, motorcars (eventually), and hard liquor. A lot of Indians I know (I’m part Cherokee, and my best friend is fullblood from a tribe in Oregon) would gladly get rid of the white man’s trappings, good or bad, to go back to a more straightforward traditional existence.

As far as what happened historically, I don’t want to let anyone underestimate the magnitude of the genocide that stains the American flag. What happened in Kosovo, in Rwanda, even what happened to the Jews under the Nazis – none of these approaches the scope of what was done in North America.

Estimates as to indigenous populations range all over the map, from 15 million up to 50 million. I’m no anthropologist, so I can’t credit any particular argument, but even if we stay on the low side, the point remains. The current native population in North America is in the neighborhood of 1 million (again, estimates vary).

Now, it’s virtually impossible to make a straight-line calculation between a population in the year 1500 and now, but you can’t ignore the precipitous drop. One way or another, since the Europeans landed, millions upon millions of the indigenous people were simply exterminated.

Even 50 years after the Holocaust, people are starting to forget about that inhumanity, or treat it with nonchalance or even derision. The attitudes displayed by those on this board who say “we don’t owe ‘em nothin’” are unsurprising, given that the Indian Holocaust started in 1492 and ended 100 years ago.

What do we owe? Monetarily, specifically, how do you attach a dollar value to the horror? I don’t think you can. To simply say “to the victor goes the spoils, fuck 'em if they lost” is to show the worst kind of Middle-Ages selfishness. But I don’t hold with the other end of the spectrum, that says all white people living today should move back to Europe and leave the land to its original inhabitants, or any of those other reductio ad absurdum arguments.

But consider: If you own land in, say, Seattle, especially waterfront land, you should be aware that it was stolen from its original residents. That means 100% of the value in the land that you own has been handed down over the generations from a past theft. That value had to come from somewhere, and if you look to the depressed reservations, with their high rates of alcoholism and suicide, their low standards of living and literacy, you’ll see where the value of your land was stolen from.

Exactly right. This isn’t history we’re talking about, some abstraction from the past. This is a pattern that began in the past and is still continuing today.

Given that, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to cut the Red Man a little slack.

Occam wrote:

Even if we borrowed 50 bucks from them last Tuesday?

When I suggest laying a foundation for rural (and urban) education, it’s in the context of reasserting a commitment to education in general. For everyone. Just so nobody claims I think “everybody is superior to whites” (sheesh), or that minorities are the only ones suffering from this country’s skewed priorities with regards to its youth.

Second, I said that “certain inequalities have been institutionalized in this society.” I misspoke. What I meant was that certain inequities have been institutionalized in this society. Just so nobody claims I think etcetera etcetera.