I understand now. Thanks for clarifying for me.
Sampiro, just like the white mentality, doesn’t descend from just any old Muscogee but of course has this greatgreatgrandpa who was the most powerful war chief. Didn’t you know that the tribal council is at all times more powerful than any field marshal, general, or war chief?
Hey, yanno how many Muscogees it takes to go to a powwow?
Three
One to stir the pickup and two to push it.
Now go back under your rock and learn to respect laws against robbing graves. BTW, the Bering Strait saga has been debunked decades ago. Nice try but no cigar.
Sorry, meant to say “steer” – bad keyboard
Okay, first: Do you have a site for the debunking of the bering strait.
Second: What were you talking about then?
Third: I’m not trying to win a cigar, I’m curious.
maybe you can get to this after the holidays…
-Some cultures have laws and taboos against women driving cars. I think those are counterproductive also.
typical… matters of sacredness become ‘counterproductive’ when they interfere with someone’s curiosities.
what is sacred to you, anything? maybe some south american culture wants to learn some things about america at the turn of the century. can they dig up your grandparents?
-I don’t particular want to find any individual ethnicity, but I would love to find out more about prehistoric N.A. than we currently know. Sociolinguistics and oral traditions can only tell so much of the story.
much of that was known, and to some degree still is but isn’t spoken about to many people, earlier on. but they made sure to wipe out as much of that as they could. so, i don’t see how america has done anything to deserve answers they wiped out along with many of the people who held them now.
-The fact you’re sending this message into cyberspace rather than via smoke signals or a knot tied in a quipu and written in English rather than a native language might imply to some that “our” civilization rubbed off a bit on you.
the fact that you stated that as you did demonstrates that you have the tendency to believe that only whites contributed to such technology and should have the sole rights to claim it. that’s a stupid and generally backward argument, bereft of equal consideration and knowledge of what you’re speaking on.
of course ‘your’ culture has rubbed off on many natives. that’s been a part of colonization, and few have been able to escape it. they made sure of that. if it was so great though, why’d they have to force it on us? that wasn’t even a relevant point to have made anyway. i’m not sure what you were getting at. puma’s point was, since you’re in our neck of the woods, and especially since we have accepted (at least in many instances) many of your customs, you should at least respect some of ours; especially those we are most sensitive about. you are still in our lands.
-In fact, whether or not Indian cultures would even qualify as civilization would depend strictly upon which tribe/nation you’re a part of as the word civilization, since, as we’ve established you like semantics, is used academically to refer to a literate culture with elements of urban organization, and not all Indian cultures had these criteria.
ideals of european ‘civilization’ are only relevant in europe. you are subject to our versions of the same here. your definitions do not reign supreme as if god handed them out to you solely.
to us, not bathing daily (many whites may have bathed only a few times a year, if that), not respecting others’ laws when you are guests, enslavement of people, claiming ownership of land, breaking promises, valuing profit above the health and lives of people etc. were not exactly marks of comity, among other things.
in ways, even the most primitive of tribes were more civil than some aspects of our society today. you are confusing certain ideas with true civilization.
-Let me add that I honestly don’t believe in Indian inferiority: I believe Europeans were more advanced technologically due to many factors that were happenso
even with cultural diffusion among the civilizations of the ‘old world’ which europeans benefited greatly by, technology was more or less the same by comparison. however, indians were more technologically advanced in certain fields nonetheless: agriculture, botany, pharmacology, medicine, astronomy… mathematics and masonry were fairly similar, though there were certain masonry techniques that can only be duplicated by state of the art machines now indians were doing several hundred years ago… weaponry is really only the thing that would qualify in regards to europeans being more technologically advanced, and had it not been for other civilizations in other parts of the globe, they may not have even had that.
so, what were you saying again about being more technologically advanced?
-However, I don’t think that people of predominantly non-native blood qualify as guests in “your neck of the woods” when they’re more than a 100:1 majority.
oh… i see. so maybe i’ll gather a couple hundred of us and we’ll head over to your house, and, since we’ll vastly outnumber you and yours, we’ll no longer be guests. is that how it works then?
-And incidentally, am I the only one who saw the irony that those with small amounts of Indian blood aren’t counted by jac and Puma Claw as “true Indians”
neither of us said that. c’mon, stop making sh*t up fella. it’s old
speaking for myself, those with minimal blood are not ‘indian,’ per se, racially, but in a cultural sense, i have no qualms with that with those who are deserving of that. my people had some black warriors before and many white ones, including a white chief here or there, and we didn’t look at these as whites or blacks. we of course could see they were, but a sawaanwa was a sawaanwa to us, black white midget unicorn dandelion, whatever.
so again you try to speak for me and end up on the wrong side of things. eventually you should learn something from trying to pull sh*t like that as some kind of an argument.
-when the blonde & blue eyed or black chiefs of the 18th and 19th centuries were legendary? (One of my own ancestors, William Weatherford, known also as Red Eagle, was the most powerful war chief in the recorded history of the Alabama Creeks- he had red hair, blue eyes, and more Scottish blood than Indian,
see, this is part of the problem with people who play up their little bit of indian blood as if it actually meant anything in any given situation… if you’re not trying to use it as leverage in a conversation like this, as if those drops of blood provided some amount of understanding of the people you could only receive by growing up knowing that, then you’re claiming to be the descendent of someone well-known and famous; either princess somebody or chief something or other. no one cares, and nothing other than being culturally down gives your scant traces of indian blood any leverage in a conversation, rendering it essentially meaningless to the dialogue. yet it comes up everytime. it’s a mere convenience to some of you people, nothing more, and we certainly aren’t impressed.
PumaClaw: What links are you talking about? I looked over the whole first page, and the only links you offered didn’t have anything to do with smallpox.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PumaClaw *
**Sampiro, just like the white mentality, doesn’t descend from just any old Muscogee but of course has this greatgreatgrandpa who was the most powerful war chief. **
Uh, dude- I can prove my descent from Weatherford AND I can prove his leadership clout among the Muscogees. The only chief possibly more important was his maternal uncle Alexander McGillivrary. The fact that I waited until this late in the thread to even mention the connection would I think evidence the fact that I don’t identify as Indian.
As far as denigrating the “white mentality”, fuck you for the racist reactionary fanatical asshat that you are.
**Didn’t you know that the tribal council is at all times more powerful than any field marshal, general, or war chief? **
On SURVIVOR THAILAND, maybe, but in case you’ve never been in the military I’ll have to advise you on something: it’s a bit difficult to convene a meeting in the middle of a battle, so they have these guys called “leaders” and when they tell you to do something, it’s considered proper etiquette to do it. Now any other day of the year you can disagree with them, call them a fat Mama’s boy to their face in fact, but during battle if you don’t do what they say they can get really pissy and it wounds their inner child, so you go along with them. This is who Weatherford was- like Cincinattus in Roman history, he was a farmer and inconsequential fellow in peace, but had dictatorial powers on the battlefield, not that I think for a moment that you didn’t already know this.
Now go back under your rock and learn to respect laws against robbing graves.
Get off your cross, Chief Whines-Like-a-Bitch.* There’s a bit of difference in studying the remains of 9,500 year old skeletons that can illuminate a totally lost period of history and digging up Geronimo and selling him to tourists.
** BTW, the Bering Strait saga has been debunked decades ago. **
“Bullshit” is an ugly word, but one that sometimes has no peer. What is your cite, please? Something peer reviewed and recent would be nice. And any answer to the effect of “I don’t have to post a citation to what’s common knowledge” will be taken as an admission that you don’t know what you’re talking about.
*If you can invoke racist rhetoric against whites, I can return fire- no 38th Parallels here, dude.)
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by jac *
**maybe you can get to this after the holidays…[/B[
Actually, I’m not as computerless as I thought I’d be.
matters of sacredness become ‘counterproductive’ when they interfere with someone’s curiosities.
Amen.
what is sacred to you, anything?
Knowledge.
** maybe some south american culture wants to learn some things about america at the turn of the century. can they dig up your grandparents?**
My grandparents have been dead for twenty years. I have absolutely no further use for them. I do not associate the embalmed bits of skin, bone, and hair that lie in ridiculously expensive boxes in concrete vaults with the people that I loved- I really think that sitting in Grandpa’s lap these days would probably have lost something from when he was alive.
So my answer to the question “if the exhumation of your grandparents could somehow help expand knowledge tremendously, would you allow it?” is an unqualified “yes!”. I’d crack the slab myself if need be. My own body I’m leaving to science as I think it will benefit my fellow humans one helluva lot more good being harvested for usable organs or cut up by medical students than it ever will decomposing in the water table.
But let’s get real and stop being so sensationalistic: NOBODY is talking about digging up your grandparents, my grandparents, or anybody elses. We’re talking about unidentified remains that might be (but probably aren’t) the bones of your great-great-great-great-great
-great-great-great-great-great-great
-great-great-great-great-great-great-
great-great-grandparents, and that’s no exaggeration. And as I said, I have Indian ancestral lines- they could well be MY grandparents, who knows? As I’ve said before I certainly have no problem with archaeological digs in England and Ireland, where the majority of my ancestors came from, or the experiments conducted on Otzi, who since I have Alpine ancestry could well be a relative and in fact considering the limited gene pool probably is.
There are digs in Africa that have unearthed bones of women believed to be direct ancestresses of every living human in this world. Whose taboos and religious customs should we go with here, incidentally? What of the Iberian Neanderthal digs which in the past decade evidenced that everything we know about the relations of Neanderthals to homo sapiens sapiens is in error- they did interbreed and they did live in daily contact- should we ignore this because some Neanderthal totem may be offended?
Riddle me this: Will you concede that 6,000 year old graves may contribute to the understanding of a time and a people? And will you concede that by leaving them where they are they accomplish nothing and bring no real relief or comfort to anybody? Why would you deny your “grandparents” the right to be of use rather than just slowly biodegrade, even the nutrients that could nourish the soil now gone from their remains?
** so, i don’t see how america has done anything to deserve answers they wiped out along with many of the people who held them now.**
Any library you go to will have books on ancient Sumerians, the Shanidar cave dwellers, the Chou Dynasty, etc… Do you feel your ancestors don’t deserve posterity? It’s that sentiment that dehumanizes them and minimizes the Indian movement today.
the fact that you stated that as you did demonstrates that you have the tendency to believe that only whites contributed to such technology and should have the sole rights to claim it.
Number 1: Show me the word “white” anywhere in there.
Number 2: I guarantee you that I know a lot more about the history of information technologies than you do; I in fact wrote my dissertation on the subject. I can almost guarantee that I can name more non-whites who contributed off the top of my head than you have ever heard of. The comment was combating an insinuation that aboriginal civilizations are intrinsically superior to “white” civilzation without any attempt at backing said comment up.
if it was so great though, why’d they have to force it on us?
Indians were incredibly enthusiastic trade partners and you know it. Nobody forced chickens, textiles, manufactured goods, firearms, or anything else on them- they couldn’t buy them fast enough.
Are you familiar with the history of the Irish, incidentally? My own ancestors were forced to adapt to English language and ways more recently than the majority of the American Indians had to adjust to European ways, and then they were driven starving from their homeland. The first rule of history is that shit happens- you fight against it as hard as you can, if you can’t win against it then you learn to survive it, and you accept the new reality and move on.
puma’s point was, since you’re in our neck of the woods, and especially since we have accepted (at least in many instances) many of your customs, you should at least respect some of ours
That’s not what Puma said. Go back and re-read it, this time without the spin.
you are still in our lands.
That is an at best academic point. You’re mourning for a lost limb that is never going to grow back.
ideals of european ‘civilization’ are only relevant in europe.
The clinical definition of civilization is universally applicable. Indian cultures that qualified included, of course, the Aztecs, Mayans, Incans, etc… Moundbuilders built towns but didn’t develop writing.
This isn’t picking on you: most of my European ancestors weren’t literate or urban either.
your definitions do not reign supreme as if god handed them out to you solely.
I specified quite clearly I was referring to the academic definition of civilization, not the vernacular one. I honestly don’t know where you get that I accused Indians of not bathing.
even with cultural diffusion among the civilizations of the ‘old world’ which europeans benefited greatly by, technology was more or less the same by comparison.
Really? Explain the conquest of Atahuallpa to me again, please.
I don’t think it’s the least bit politically incorrect to give the nod to European technology. Weaponry, shipbuilding, armor manufactury, metallurgy, architecture, glassmaking, etc etc etc- you can’t seriously claim that the aborigones could compete with this.
however, indians were more technologically advanced in certain fields nonetheless: agriculture, botany, pharmacology, medicine, astronomy…
Agriculture- maybe. Botany, pharmacology- I don’t know enough on them to argue. Medicine- absolutely correct. Astronomy- that’s an area that makes me hate the conquistadores almost as much as for what they inflicted on the people- the gods alone know what all went up in flames as “heretical”- it was a New World Alexandria.
mathematics and masonry were fairly similar
Have you seen photographs of domes, per chance? Arched pendentives? Buttresses? Meso-American masonry was impressive, but not as advanced.
so, what were you saying again about being more technologically advanced?
That Europe was. I stand on my statement.
**oh… i see. so maybe i’ll gather a couple hundred of us and we’ll head over to your house, and, since we’ll vastly outnumber you and yours, we’ll no longer be guests. is that how it works then? **
If you remained their 400 years, I think it’d be pretty safe to say that any claims made by my vastly outnumbered descendants would be empty.
neither of us said that. c’mon, stop making sh*t up fella. it’s old
Do a CONTROL+F for “twinkie” and “wannabe”. You’re the liar here.
see, this is part of the problem with people who play up their little bit of indian blood as if it actually meant anything in any given situation…
I freely stated that it is trivial. I do not now nor will I ever identify culturally as a Muscogee. To use it for leverage is to stoop to an emotional argument.
either princess somebody or chief something or other.
As I said, I can prove descent. The fact he was a mico is incidental. Frankly, I don’t much care for him: he led his people into a hopeless war and died of alcoholism. I’m truly not romanticizing the connection.
VARIOUS SNIPPIAGE:
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Sampiro *
**
I don’t have much to add Sampiro; I don’t think Puma cares about being a racist. I’ve decided to drop the issue with him, because I felt as though I was yelling at a wall. I did want to say that you aren’t the only one who feels that the racist rhetoric is way overblown (you probably don’t need my support, but I give it to you none the less).
Thanks, Meatros. I don’t see any reason in staying in this debate either as I don’t even know what I’m arguing against.
-Thanks, Meatros. I don’t see any reason in staying in this debate either as I don’t even know what I’m arguing against.
that was evident as soon as you started running your mouth.
Hmm. Quite the trainwreck.
Just in the interest of the Straight Dope. I will point out that the following statements all contain or imply errors of fact (which is contrary to the concept of the Straight Dope):
The K of C has nothing to do with “Italians” and was founded in Connecticut by a group composed mostly of Irish-American immigrants and their descendants. That clearly racist and inflammatory remark regarding Italian immigrants and the Mafia are a sign of pure ignorance.
While chattel slavery and the importaion of slaves from Africa is clearly a shameful act of European-based or -descended culture, the implication that only “whites” would engage in slavery is clearly false, as the slavery practiced by the Natchez, Iroquois, (and Inca and Aztec), and numerous other indigenous cultures demonstrates.
While the Bering Strait only theory has been quite thoroughly challenged over the course of the last twenty years, a claim that it was debunked “decades” ago is simply false. None of the recent archaeological explorations have yet disproven that the Bering Strait was a significant entrance to the Americas and the alternative hypotheses, while growing in strength in each recent year, have still offered no conclusive proofs to overthrow it.
(And, of course, the silly claim, earlier, that the Hessians were somehow nothing but POWs would have been a real surprise to Duke Carl Wilhelm Ferdinand of Brunswick who was paid £7 4s. 4.5 p for each of the mercenaries he sent out to fight at Saratoga to say nothing of the surprise of Colonel Johann Rall, at Trenton, who thought that he was leading his own troops rather than British POWs.)
Thanks Tomndebb for answering my question.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by jac *
**that was evident as soon as you started running your mouth. **
Actually, I’ve been literate long enough that I no longer move my mouth when typing.
The comment is not a confession of ignorance on a subject matter but on your failure to make a clear thesis other than “white people are evil while all things good are Indian”.
-The comment is not a confession of ignorance on a subject matter but on your failure to make a clear thesis other than “white people are evil while all things good are Indian”.
you didn’t have to make a confession, your words said enough. they just did again as well, seeing as how you can decipher a person’s intent no better than that. but then part of me knows you’re twisting those words into that because you don’t have much of an argument other than tossing around some ad hominem trash.
-what is sacred to you, anything?
Knowledge.
then why do you do all you can not to listen to things that obviously make you uncomfortable if you seek and value knowledge? i guess even that isn’t sacred to you, seeing how you do what you can to filter it.
-My grandparents have been dead for twenty years. I have absolutely no further use for them. I do not associate the embalmed bits of skin, bone, and hair that lie in ridiculously expensive boxes in concrete vaults with the people that I loved- I really think that sitting in Grandpa’s lap these days would probably have lost something from when he was alive.
but you see, again, other people feel differently about the deceased. even the long dead. why is their way of thinking any worse than yours? in the end of it, these are american indian remains, and american indians should have the say-so regarding what happens to them. or do you think you own even our ancestors, too?
-Riddle me this: Will you concede that 6,000 year old graves may contribute to the understanding of a time and a people?
they may. but the price is too high, and so is not worth it. only to people who think your way. and again, yours is not the only acceptable way to think, especially when we’re talking about indian remains.
-And will you concede that by leaving them where they are they accomplish nothing and bring no real relief or comfort to anybody?
of course i wouldn’t. have you not been listening at all? to many of us this is a sacrilege of sorts, so our comfort comes in leaving well enough enough alone. to disinter them in the name of scientific curiosity many think would accomplish less. that’s what’s wrong with some people; they refuse to see anything beyond themselves. there are definitely cultural remifactions, but perhaps spiritual ones as well. and both are more important than someone’s curiosities.
-Why would you deny your “grandparents” the right to be of use rather than just slowly biodegrade, even the nutrients that could nourish the soil now gone from their remains?
i think it’s more a question of why you wouldn’t allow my ‘grandparents’ to lie in peace?
unless they can find the cure to cancer lying in the bones of those long past, leave them be. i don’t consider being dug up and taken out of the places your people placed you in and held ceremonies over you for to be stored in a cardboard box somewhere and left ‘put to use.’ that’s a sick kind of thought there. anything they might be able to find anyway is still only anthropological conjecture. it does more harm than good. but not to you though, 'cause you don’t care.
-Any library you go to will have books on ancient Sumerians, the Shanidar cave dwellers, the Chou Dynasty, etc… Do you feel your ancestors don’t deserve posterity? It’s that sentiment that dehumanizes them and minimizes the Indian movement today.
i am my ancestor’s posterity… it is the belief that the white man has to save our cultures and memories from dying out that dehumanizes us and minimizes the indian movement today, not me respecting now ancient customs of tranquility for the dead.
you think the arrogance of you telling telling a native what a native should and shouldn’t do as a native to honor his people helps? it is your belief that you must come and save us from ourselves that minimizes us. what do you know?
-Number 1: Show me the word “white” anywhere in there.
when you show me where i’ve stated half the shit you’ve attributed to me, you may ask for clarification on something i believe you implied. but keep ignoring those things. it’s workin’ well for ya.
you also happened to exclude natives however, so, if you didn’t indeed mean white, i’m sure you had in mind others, right? just not native americans though. nope. natives could never have contributed anything to computer technology or the american vernacular, even though 2200 native words have been included in that lexicon.
-Number 2: I guarantee you that I know a lot more about the history of information technologies than you do;
then why did you exclude natives from being allowed to engage in it without somehow being true to their people? do you think we can only be as such if we live the way we had in 1625?
-The comment was combating an insinuation that aboriginal civilizations are intrinsically superior to “white” civilzation without any attempt at backing said comment up.
you read into things what you will
-Indians were incredibly enthusiastic trade partners and you know it.
i wasn’t talking about being trade partners, and you know it. i was talking about outlawing indian cultures, customs, religions, languages, and forcing european ones on top of those. explain why they had to force those things if they were so superior. go ahead i’ll wait
-puma’s point was, since you’re in our neck of the woods, and especially since we have accepted (at least in many instances) many of your customs, you should at least respect some of ours
That’s not what Puma said. Go back and re-read it, this time without the spin.
you put the spin on it. hell, you do it with me for every contention you can’t address fairly other than to make up something about how you read into a comment something that wasn’t even implied. usually something about calling natives saintly, whites evil, and so on. why do you do that, because you can? that’s always a good excuse
-you are still in our lands.
That is an at best academic point. You’re mourning for a lost limb that is never going to grow back.
i couldn’t explain this to you if i desperately even wanted to. you’re under the impression that having title to a piece of property reigns supreme because those are the laws you grew up believing, and indeed those are the ones we have to abide by. but could you even concede there might be something more intrinsic than that behind the facade of establishing ownership by a piece of paper… something deeper than that, if you will? i’m not holding out hope, but understand at the same time, i’m not operating on the same standards you are when i make a statement like that, so, judging it on anything less than that won’t make it anymore lucid. it’s like trying to understand the concept of infinie space when you’re whole life everything you’ve known has had boundaries.
-The clinical definition of civilization is universally applicable. Indian cultures that qualified included, of course, the Aztecs, Mayans, Incans, etc… Moundbuilders built towns but didn’t develop writing.
This isn’t picking on you: most of my European ancestors weren’t literate or urban either.
still, i would perhaps consider some of those europeans ‘civilized’ all the same. many times there were no more culturally and socially advanced peoples than rural-based indian tribes, or toher similar groups worldwide. their lack of writing, use of the wheel, and so on i don’t think detracts from that at all. they are far superior in other ways that would detract greatly from others considered ‘civilized’ because they were grouped together in larger areas… i’m just saying you need to think beyond what you’re given sometimes. in instances like these though, i don’t think you want to.
-I specified quite clearly I was referring to the academic definition of civilization, not the vernacular one. I honestly don’t know where you get that I accused Indians of not bathing.
you didn’t get what i was saying then, because i never accused you of that. if you asked for clarification of things you didn’t get more often instead of drawing conclusions, we could probably avoid a lot of the bullsh*t, like imagining particular insenuations in peoples’ posts.
fine then. if your academic definition of civilization is acceptable, then my academic and legal definition of genocide should have been regarded the same way.
-Really? Explain the conquest of Atahuallpa to me again, please.
I don’t think it’s the least bit politically incorrect to give the nod to European technology. Weaponry, shipbuilding, armor manufactury, metallurgy, architecture, glassmaking, etc etc etc- you can’t seriously claim that the aborigones could compete with this.
glassmaking?.. anyway, weaponry, yes. shipbuilding? not necessarily. the natives of the caribbean were excellent navigators and shipbuilders. they were the ones who had to repair columbus’ ship(s?) even. architecture, no. fairly even. there’s no way you could reasonably argue one way or the other. if you want to try, let’s go. metallurgy… ok, i’ll give you that one. armor just goes along with that somewhat though, so, don’t try to sneak a few in on the coattails of others.
-Agriculture- maybe. Botany, pharmacology- I don’t know enough on them to argue. Medicine- absolutely correct. Astronomy- that’s an area that makes me hate the conquistadores almost as much as for what they inflicted on the people- the gods alone know what all went up in flames as “heretical”- it was a New World Alexandria.
ok… throw all these in though to the argument, and what do you come out with? all in all, technology was fairly even, some areas on each side of course being more advanced than the others. it’s called ‘averaging’ though.
-mathematics and masonry were fairly similar
Have you seen photographs of domes, per chance? Arched pendentives? Buttresses? Meso-American masonry was impressive, but not as advanced.
i think you need to delve deeper into it then, and not just meso-american arhcitecture. if it wasn’t that impressive though, why did the spaniards, who were well-travelled, marvel at tenochtitlan when they arrived as if they’d never seen anything like it? maybe it’s because they hadn’t.
-If you remained their 400 years, I think it’d be pretty safe to say that any claims made by my vastly outnumbered descendants would be empty.
is that how ‘civilized’ jurisprudence works then?
-Do a CONTROL+F for “twinkie” and “wannabe”. You’re the liar here.
show me where i said any of that, and you can call me a liar all you like. go ahead
-As I said, I can prove descent. The fact he was a mico is incidental. Frankly, I don’t much care for him: he led his people into a hopeless war and died of alcoholism. I’m truly not romanticizing the connection.
then why would you mention him? to validate your opinions somewhat? they should be able to stand on their own.
Uh, jac? Could you please avail yourself of the vB “quote” function or use some other more distinctive method of quoting other posters. I’m not sure that I am successfully identifying your comments within your posts. (This is especially true when it appears that you are quoting a two-person exchange from earlier in the thread.) Thanks.
-Uh, dude- I can prove my descent from Weatherford AND I can prove his leadership clout among the Muscogees. The only chief possibly more important was his maternal uncle Alexander McGillivrary.
you mean to tell me in the history of alabama nations tied to the creek confederacy, this guy was the greatest?.. how do you know?
-The fact that I waited until this late in the thread to even mention the connection would I think evidence the fact that I don’t identify as Indian.
that wasn’t the issue. that you felt the need to mention him at all is what’s at issue.
-Didn’t you know that the tribal council is at all times more powerful than any field marshal, general, or war chief?
On SURVIVOR THAILAND, maybe, but in case you’ve never been in the military I’ll have to advise you on something: it’s a bit difficult to convene a meeting in the middle of a battle, so they have these guys called “leaders” and when they tell you to do something, it’s considered proper etiquette to do it. Now any other day of the year you can disagree with them, call them a fat Mama’s boy to their face in fact, but during battle if you don’t do what they say they can get really pissy and it wounds their inner child, so you go along with them. This is who Weatherford was- like Cincinattus in Roman history, he was a farmer and inconsequential fellow in peace, but had dictatorial powers on the battlefield, not that I think for a moment that you didn’t already know this.
we aren’t speaking of the miltary here, where even they need permission for combat from the united states ‘council.’ and that’s what puma was getting at. you have no idea the power of tribal councils, yet you mocked the idea nonetheless. so let me tell you some things you should know: warrior chiefs have great powers on the field of battle, but even then not as great as you imagine. the concepts of individual indian sovereignty, captives taken, revenge for clans and family, different tribal customs and so on interfere sometimes with a chief’s discretion in ways that diminish his authority somewhat, and the chief understands these unwritten laws. warriors can do things soldiers in the u.s. army may get court-martialed for. the chief is not a dictator.
but that wasn’t even the main point, just a sidenote. the main point here revolves around the illustration i just made of how even the u.s. military operates, where it draws its powers from. you see, while a chief wields great influence, it is the tribal councils most of the time who have the greatest say. so, while he may be powerful in battle, he cannot get there unless the council oks it in the first place… so, you see where the greatest power lies.
-Get off your cross, Chief Whines-Like-a-Bitch.* There’s a bit of difference in studying the remains of 9,500 year old skeletons that can illuminate a totally lost period of history and digging up Geronimo and selling him to tourists.
or digging him up and using his skull in some freakish college secret society ritual. yeah
to many though, remains are remains, and 9,500 year old bones are worthy of no less respect than 95 year old ones.
-*If you can invoke racist rhetoric against whites, I can return fire- no 38th Parallels here, dude.)
yet when you return that kind of fire, you’re machine-gunning these little bigot bullets all over the place, hitting everyone else as well as your intended target. that makes you so much better than whatever you imagine puma’ to be.
-Uh, jac? Could you please avail yourself of the vB “quote” function or use some other more distinctive method of quoting other posters. I’m not sure that I am successfully identifying your comments within your posts. (This is especially true when it appears that you are quoting a two-person exchange from earlier in the thread.) Thanks.
i’d rather not, but maybe i can highlight them or something. i always place a dash next to others’ comments, but some i’ve placed them next to ones i made prior and none to the other person’s response (for context in case they forgot certain points), then commented, so i could see how that could be confusing. but i’ll try something else maybe. i’d rather not have to deal with using the quote function.
jac wrote:
I’d be awfully cautious about relying too heavily on Ward Churchill for factual information. If you’ll recall, you also told us he cited Knights of the Horseshoe as one of his sources in his discussion of the Battle of Horseshoe Bend (Alabama). In fact, Knights of the Horseshoe has nothing at all to do with that battle, and is in fact a novel set in old Virginia.
Based on that revelation, one has to wonder if Churchill is in the habit of making hysterical assertions without worrying too much about the underlying facts. If you were correct when you said he cited Knights of the Horseshoe as a source on the Creek War, then it appears he may be falsifying citations.