Native America

First of all, would someone give me the definition of conquering? To kill a gracious host normally doesn’t qualify as a victory. To write a gadzillion agreements and break them all unilaterally is also not considered a victory. For a military to slaughter off women and children is usually also not viewed as conquering.
Sampiro, your poor grasp on history is appalling. Kill or be killed? Nobody was killing the immigrants until they started the offensive. We sure as heck didn’t run into the US to kill people there, the whites came to Arizona to attack us, and Arizona was not a state back then. I think if you run a few historical facts logically through your mind, you’ll realize that your snide remarks are ludicrous. BTW, the Cherokee (as well as several other nations) were quite assimilated and sure as hey didn’t kill or rape anybody when Jackson decided to send them on their deadly march. You might try your local community classes and learn real history, aaye? Your entire view of the world is sick, to say the least.
Maetros, look at your earlier post. You asked me for a definition of “white” and I told you that this is completely unnecessary since the white people here themselves established who’s white and who isn’t. So, for you to question a standard definition of white, caucasian, is ludicrous.
Monstro, I wasn’t attacking you. I merely made a statement. It seems that the posters on this board are so belligerent that they are completely unable to have a simple, factual conversation without transfering their own hostility into the posts they’re reading. Maybe if you re-read this entire thread, you’ll catch it.
Some of the people on this board have no clue as to what the term “genocide” really means, others just don’t want to hear what I have to say. It’s not that what I’m saying is incorrect, far from it, it’s merely inconvenient and uncomfortable. And what is worse, none of the things I mentioned have ever changed to this day.
Let me leave you with a quote from one of your own people:

“There is no such thing as an ‘innocent bystander’ who ‘… just happens to witness’ genocide and crimes against humanity. They are as guilty as the active participants in these heinous and diabolical crimes.” [R.H. Jackson, Chief Prosecutor, USA, Nuremberg Tribunal, Opening Statement, 1945.]

He was qouting a line from a television show. You do a LOT of assuming and it’s getting quite tiring. If you question someone’s knowledge, then do just that, but don’t insult people. That just get’s them on the defensive and any point you make will be drowned out by reactionary rhetoric.

Also, about conquering:From http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=conquering
con·quered, con·quer·ing, con·quers
v. tr.
To defeat or subdue by force, especially by force of arms.
To gain or secure control of by or as if by force of arms: scientists battling to conquer disease; a singer who conquered the operatic world.
To overcome or surmount by physical, mental, or moral force: I finally conquered my fear of heights. See Synonyms at defeat.

To conquer someone does not have to be a noble thing. To brutally slaughter a people is also not an American invention. Unfortunately this is the way of things. Is it right? No.

I am by no means justifying the early American’s, but you act as though the Native Americans were total saints. They weren’t. Were they bad enough to be exterminated? No of course not. Is the early treatment by early Americans cause to villify the entire “white” race? No of course not.

I still can’t believe you are standing by your dehumanizing rhetoric. The “white” people whom you’ve qouted as defining whites are either: dead, or racists. How does this help your point? What if I were to show you studies that concluded their was no such thing as race, that the lines between races are arbitrary at best? Did you know Caucasian also applies to people of the Caucasiod mountains? They can be tan to dark brown. Does this qualify as “white” to you? Don’t preach to me about who’s “white” or not. It’s inflammatory at best, down right racist at worse.

Is this what you consider factual? I wonder why some of us may be hostile. Could it be that you are using racist rhetoric and generalizations? Could it be that you are assuming WAY to much about everyone here. You know, A LOT more people would be on your side if you kept the racist shit out of your posts.

What’s this suppose to mean? Another snide attack. Step down from your pedestal.

Caucasions

More about what is referred to as “caucasions”

Do races exist?

Here are some recent discussions on the subject:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=134163&highlight=race+exist

And more race info:
http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm

OK, so what does a culture consist of? What is this one dominant white culture (a.k.a. baloney) you refer to? Are you talking about culture as portrayed on TV or in politics or laws or what? Is there a core system of knowledge, of beliefs, values, learned behaviour among whites? Can you describe some aspects of it and show how it comes into conflict with your culture (if I may presume to ask you to represent your culture, whatever you consider it to be)?

I’m asking these questions seriously. There are groups of self-identified white people whose culture seems foreign (even baffling) to me, though I call myself white as well. However, I may not have enough perspective to see how we all fit into a single, dominant culture.

rivulus

-Nobody responsible for the policies of genocide against American indians is alive anymore.

this makes the mistake of believing that genocide against native peoples ended long ago. it hasn’t.

-SO wheN IndianS kilL rapE torturE anD maiM they’rE jusT demonstratinG lesseR humaN traitS, buT EuropeanS dO iT ouT oF aN intrinsiC eviL?

it becomes a problem to engage in discussion when one side is constantly searching for ways of reading too much into what’s actually being said and running with it like a verbal 100 yard dash.

even worse is when they do this and then attribute to you as if you believe it, let alone implied as much.

please raise the level of dialogue around here, all right sampiro? it’d be appreciated.

-And it’s hard to mount an attack when I’m not sure what you’re arguing. Are you trying to state that Indians got a raw deal? Or that genocide is generally a bad thing? Both of those are provocative statements, I’ll concede, but I think they’ve been fairly well proven by now.

the point of all this is to address those who don’t believe the u.s. and prior colonial powers in the u.s. proper committed genocide against the native inhabitants.

i don’t remember the rest of my last post to you except to make mention of the fact that you do not need to toss a non-argument in the mix here as it’s neither relevant nor pertinent. that’s what you attempted with the whole "natives could be mean, too’ spiel. enough. i see that sh!t everytime this discussion comes up, and i’m curious about the mindstate of the people attempting to use it to subvert the dialogue. i just want to know where in our argument you see us making that point though… could you please point it out for me? no one’s been able to yet, yet they’ll throw it up everytime.

instead of assuming too much, maybe you should take the time to ask others to clarify their positions. you’ll be surprised sometimes because it often doesn’t match perception.

-Are you arguing for reparations? More Indian appreciation? What?
It’s done. Those robbed are now dead. The nation’s guilt is acknowledged. Nothing’s changing hands. Get over it.

‘get over it’… that’s another one.

i won’t get over anything until the dominant culture ‘gets over’ this idea that they can continue sweeping all the problems they’ve caused native peoples under the rug and creating new ones. pretty easy for you to tell native people to get over something you don’t have to feel the repercussions of.

get over this idea you have that you do not have to be bothered to hear what makes your ears uncomfortable. you are not so privileged.

-I am by no means justifying the early American’s, but you act as though the Native Americans were total saints. They weren’t.

and stop acting like anytime something’s said about the invaders, those doing the talking are implying indians were something saintly. you have no idea how offensive that tactic is. you do not need to explain an indian’s history to an indian, nor to humanize an indian to an indian. it’s not indians that have had trouble with issues of amerindian humanity or history.

can we have a discussion once about genocide here without someone desperatly trying to detract from that? i don’t hear anyone who’s considered a reasonable person take away from the suffering of those in the european holocaust by saying something like “well, the jews weren’t exactly saints either.” do you see how insane that is? yet it can be done to native people and no one thinks anything of it… i don’t know what else to say on that. i’m just tired of it.

The problem I see here is that people on this board want to mount an attack, as Sampiro said. Obviously, these people have no debating skills and know even less about the art of polite conversation. They just want to attack whatever one says or attack what they think one says or attack something that’s not even remotely being said.
For example, who said anything about reparations? Oh, and no, no US president has ever offered a formal apology, so no, the wrongs have not been officially acknowledged.
I also don’t recall that I ever said I wanted anything. If I wanted something, I sure as heck wouldn’t pose my requests or demands before a pile of uneducated, belligerent cyber jockeys. Why should I? I’d go to my attorney who’d in turn would contact someone who matters, right?
As for an intelligent discussion, that’s obviously unheard of on this board. In fact, I didn’t even pronounce judgment over white people here…
As for white or caucasian being a racist term, I suggest they tell that to the government since they use that on their official forms all the time. So, if these terms are racist, then the government must be awfully racist still. Or is someone here simply ducking out of a discussion? BTW, Meatros, that’s caucasian.
As for all these wrong-doers being dead, yeah right. If the people had read the links I offered, they’d know that all these people can’t possibly be already dead.

And your use of the derogatory and racist term “apple” tells me all I need to know about you.

It’s a shame you came here for no purpose other than wrecking a train.

To whom are you addressing that last post, Lib?

This was the only time I said anything about Native Americans being “total saints”. I am not using that “tactic”. I agree that it trivializes the issue a little, and I admit that now. I have also admitted that the treatment of the Indians has been horrendous. Read all of my posts. I think their is a good discussion to be had about Native Americans. I’m just upset about the rhetoric going on here.

I understand your point, and I repeat, I was NOT trying to justify the early Americans who took part in the atrocity. That’s why I said “I am by no means justifying the early American’s”.

The problem is your rhetoric. Once the racism is out of it, I will have no cause for concern. I’ve told you one hundred times now and you keep assuming I have different motives. You are insulting and degrading and you don’t realize it. “obviously” indeed. Grow up.

Get off your pedestal, you have consistently used offensive language and disingenious debating tactics. You aren’t discussing things in a rational light. I won’t speak for any other poster, but I have no problem with reperations for the atrocities committed. I don’t think a current US president has the right to apologize for the horrendous treatment, but I would not be opposed to him doing so. You are so full of yourself. “Uneducated, belligerent cyber jockeys”-you sound like a college kid with a cause.

Yes, you did pronounce judgement over “white” people. Now you are shifting the blame from yourself to the government? Did you read ANY of my links? You are trying to bring to light the racism that the Native Americans received, yet you are being racist yourself. That’s hypocritical. As I have repeatedly said, a dozen times, you do have a good topic, but please take the racial rhetoric out of it. I think I’d agree with most of your points, for what it’s worth, everything that you said that excludes race, I feel has been pretty good. For that matter if you exchanged “white” for some early Americans, or specific Americans, I wouldn’t have a problem with you at all.

My apologies for the ambiguity. This post

was directed at PumaClaw.

Probably me. I did not want this to happen. I think there is a legitimate debate here. Maybe I’m the only one who is offended with Puma’s hypocritical inflammatory words, her baseless assumptions, and superiority complex.

PumaClaw said, “I also don’t recall that I ever said I wanted anything. If I wanted something, I sure as heck wouldn’t pose my requests or demands before a pile of uneducated, belligerent cyber jockeys. Why should I? I’d go to my attorney who’d in turn would contact someone who matters, right?”

I’ve been reading this thread for a couple days now. PumaClaw, it appears that you’re very pissed off (and rightly so). But this is a discussion (note: I did not say debate. In my opinion, there’s not much to debate) – not a court of law. Nobody has argued against your position that Native Americans were given a raw deal, over and over again. Your racist statements are getting you nowhere in this discussion. If you want something more than that, contact your attorney.

Durn you, Sampiro, for pre-empting me with regards to BTVS (That particular ep was rerun in Chicago last Sat.)

Meanwhile, this thread was worth reading to the last page for this gem:

Bwahahaha! I’d say we’d better believe this fella when he says he has no interest in assimilation!

Let’s see where else our gracious OP has made his presence known on these boards. Hmmm. I’d call him a one-trick pony, but I fear he’d assume that was some kind of a racist insult.

Hey, PumaClaw. This thread seems to have got off on the wrong foot and got worse. There is by the way, a thread in the BBQ Pit (where inhabitants of this board go to make uncivil comments) complaining about what’s gone on here: see A history lesson with PumaClaw. You haven’t much experience with this board and your impressions so far seem to have led you to be pretty defensive and dismissive. May I invite you to draw breath before drawing any conclusions about us or continuing to post in the same way you have posted in this thread (which might well lead us to draw unfavorable conclusions about you)?

I think if you do draw breath and have a bit of a look around you will find that most people here are open to all sorts of views, but tend to get really snarky when confronted with someone whose anger - righteous or not - hasn’t been calmed to the point where they are able to engage with people who don’t (yet) agree with them.

Are you prepared to say things in a way that will be heard? I hope so, because if you’re not, you’re wasting your time. If you are, you can influence some pretty smart people and discover much you didn’t know.

PumaClaw wrote:

Jamestown, Virginia was the first permanent English colony in America. It was also the locale of the first recorded genocidal act between English settlers and Indians.

Unfortunately for PumClaw’s argument, the genocidal attack was perpetrated by the Indians, against the settlers.

On March 22, 1622, Powhatan Indians attacked the Jamestown colonists with the intent of eradicating them. From the linked site:

This was not the last genocidal attack by Indians against English-speaking settlers in America, and it quite possibly was not the first. (Settlers of the earlier Roanoke colony in North Carolina vanished under mysterious circumstances, and may also have been the victims of massacre.)

jac wrote (addressing another poster):

Why does the subject come up? Because folks like you and PumaClaw would like to peddle the (racist) myth that only whites committed “genocidal” acts, when in fact “genocide” (using the broad definition of the term you favor) was a two-way street. It just turned out that Europeans (and the germs they inadvertently brought with them) were better-equipped for the task.

It must be frustrating for you when folks introduce facts into the debate which undermine your implicit argument that white people (and white people alone) are intrinsically evil.