Alaskan Politics (statewide and nationwide) (Anchorage, Metlakatla: attorneys, area, interior)

[icarian]

Originally Posted by arctichomesteader

I see no reason why those who were here beforehand should be force to assimilate into a different culture against their wills.

I agree...to include not voting if THEY so choose. If the State wants to use its funds for special interests (yep, the Native Corporations are special), then have at it (paying for all the assorted languages in a state, etc). Federal? Not hardly.

[RayinAK]

I was born overseas, and became a naturalized American in my early years, later serving in the military from which I retired in the early '90s. It's my belief that English should in fact be the official language, and also that at least with Alaska and other American Natives, provisions should be made so that the information on the ballots be clearly explained (or translated) long before elections take place, and only if needed.

[Grannysroost]

Originally Posted by RayinAK

I was born overseas, and became a naturalized American in my early years, later serving in the military from which I retired in the early '90s. It's my belief that English should in fact be the official language, and also that at least with Alaska and other American Natives, provisions should be made so that the information on the ballots be clearly explained (or translated) long before elections take place, and only if needed.

Ray - have to agree, even though I don't want to. I really appreciate native culture, whether in the -48 or up here, but not sure if fortunately or not Alaska became part of the US. I have a son in the army that was in El Paso, TX a few years ago and in order to get a PT job at a gas station to be paid pretty much minimum wage, had to be bilingual, because of the illegals. I firmly believe every culture no matter who having their language, but think there should be a national language, or I did when I lived down there, now when here am torn on that...but the kids should probably be learning both English and the native here. My point is having a German, bilingual daughter-in-law, raised in Germany...speaks both and feels so guilty that their girls do not know much German..so cannot communicate well with her family...

[RayinAK]

Originally Posted by Grannysroost

Ray - have to agree, even though I don't want to. I really appreciate native culture, whether in the -48 or up here, but not sure if fortunately or not Alaska became part of the US. I have a son in the army that was in El Paso, TX a few years ago and in order to get a PT job at a gas station to be paid pretty much minimum wage, had to be bilingual, because of the illegals. I firmly believe every culture no matter who having their language, but think there should be a national language, or I did when I lived down there, now when here am torn on that...but the kids should probably be learning both English and the native here. My point is having a German, bilingual daughter-in-law, raised in Germany...speaks both and feels so guilty that their girls do not know much German..so cannot communicate well with her family...

Very true. It's the same in Florida, where only those who speak Spanish have the first chance to land a job. In this case, immigrants from Spanish speaking countries are given a priority over Any US Native, and over any other US citizen.

[starlite9]

Originally Posted by Floyd_Davidson

Because you can't.


I have. Actually I recently donated my original copy, as well as my 1970 reprint, of Bancroft's "History of Alaska" to the Tuzzy Consortium Library here in Barrow.

You should try reading that, just as a start.

You should borrow it back, you need to actually read it.

The problem is that I am very familiar with that history, and clearly you aren't. You stated that they fought over languages, which is patently ridiculous.

Could you be more specific about just who the Ruskies were "terrified" of? Who would that be, the women and children of Sitka that they bombarded with cannon? (Cannon bought from an American sea captain who had some that were left over from the American Revolution, were used in 1804 to avenge a Tlinget victory a couple years before.)

The Tlingit victory! Wow, you do realize that the Tlingit's were pretty good warriors. That is the reason the Russians had "Forts" with walls and cannons. They were terrified of the Tlingits because they were fearless fighters that rowed war canoes as far South as Calif. for centuries to raid other Indian settlements to steal women and children to bring back home for slaves.

The Russians first came to the Aleutians and Western Alaska and during most of the 1700's killed, raped and enslaved mainly the Aleut's that were the Indians of that area. They were forced to hunt Sea Otters and seals to the point of extinction for the Russians to ship back to Russia.

After they moved to Southeast Alaska expecting to do the same thing to the Indians there, they ran into a bit of a problem, the Tlingit's and Haida Indians were not quite the same soft spoken folks as the Aleut's were. They were as fierce of a Warrior as any of the American Indians were. They even had armor made of wood strips that the musket bullets of the Russians would bounce off of along with full helmets, which again, terrified the Russians in Battle.

When Alexander Baranof established Sitka in 1799, he was called back to Russia, and when he returned in a few years, he found that the Tlingits had wiped out the first settlement 100%. The "shelling" you refer to, was in response to that Tlingit victory. The Russians did retake the Sitka site back, but at a heavy cost to themselves and the Tlingits retreated up into the mountains and disappeared to the other side of the Island. The Russians would not venture outside of the rebuilt "Fort" area, because they tended not to return.... until "they" established a truce with the Tlingits.

Haven't you been embarassed already when it comes to making such statements about a history that you don't know? Or did you forget?

I am embarrassed for you making statements that you clearly don't know the answers to. Oh, and they are spelled T-l-i-n-g-i-t... not with an "e"

The Alaskan Natives were warriors in their own right and have a lot to be proud of, and at times did fight each other because they spoke different languages in different areas.

[Grannysroost]

Some informative reading about Alaskan history, language, natives, non-natives, etc....

Alaska Natives at the Time of the Invasions

[Floyd_Davidson]

Originally Posted by starlite9

The Tlingit victory! Wow, you do realize that the Tlingit's were pretty good warriors.

Nobody has disparaged the Tlingit as warriers, but the "victory" was against a grand total of about 2 dozen Russians and a larger number of Aleuts. Not exactly a strategic event, or even significant given the several hundreds of Tlingit warriers available.

That is the reason the Russians had "Forts" with walls and cannons. They were terrified of the Tlingits

They were seriously annoyed that relations with the Tlingit people were not better, but "terrified" is a ridiculous description.

mainly the Aleut's that were the Indians of that area.

Aleuts are not Indians.

which again, terrified the Russians in Battle.

Again, that cannot be sustantiated. The Tlingit clan from Sitka attacked a trading post when most of the Russians were gone. They killed all of the (few) Russians and Aleuts they could, and ran off the others. Baranov then methodically rounded up the necessary military force and, without any apparent trace of the terror you claim, attacted and totally defeated a numerically superior force of over 800 warriers. Baranov's force was made up almost entirely of Aleuts (500) plus perhaps 50 sailors (and 14 cannon) on the sloop Neva. (Note that these are the meek and not nearly so fierce Aleuts you have mentioned previously.)

The Russians did retake the Sitka site back, but at a heavy cost to themselves and the Tlingits retreated up into the mountains and disappeared to the other side of the Island. The Russians would not venture outside of the rebuilt "Fort" area, because they tended not to return.... until "they" established a truce with the Tlingits.

It was at a rather low cost to the Russians (and very high for the Tlingit). The notion that they would not venture out of the fort is pure fiction of course. They never did totally patch up their differences with the Tlingit, but they clearly continued to occupy and run their business from Sitka for 6 more decades.

I am embarrassed for you making statements that you clearly don't know the answers to. Oh, and they are spelled T-l-i-n-g-i-t... not with an "e"

Your distortions are not valid history, and are just as lame as spelling flames.

The Alaskan Natives were warriors in their own right and have a lot to be proud of, and at times did fight each other because they spoke different languages in different areas.

You cannot find a single instance of Alaska Native people fighting "because they spoke different languages". That is an armchair anthopologist's fabrication typical of your commentary.

In fact, most pitched battles in Alaska's history were between people who spoke the same language.

[Siouxcia]

Originally Posted by arctichomesteader

I see no reason why those who were here beforehand should be force to assimilate into a different culture against their wills.

I totally agree!

[Siouxcia]

Originally Posted by Grannysroost

...had to be bilingual, because of the illegals....

There may be many illegals in the Southwest but not all whose first language is Spanish are illegals. I'm a fourth generation American of Mexican descent (born and raised in Chicago) but my ancesters had lived in Southern Texas for several generations before it became the United States of America. Because Mexican-Americans choose to speak Spanish doesn't make them illegals.

Because of the 'melting pot' of American, I don't look like any specific nationality except, I don't look Caucasian. Years ago when I was a student and working as a nurse's aide, a patient with a strong accent, asked me 'What are you?'. I knew what he meant but answered, 'I'm a woman.' He said, 'No! What are you.' I told him I was Mexican-American. He told me "You talk real good for a Mexican.' I asked what he was and he said Norwegian. I told him he spoke very well for a Norwegian. He was insulted.

I agree we should all speak a common language. What bothers me, is the assumption that because some of us aren't Caucasian and some of us have a first language that isn't English, we're considered 'illegals'. I have ancesters who helped the first Europeans off their boats but I'm considered more un-American than a second generation European.

Hmmm, go figure!

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by Siouxcia

There may be many illegals in the Southwest but not all whose first language is Spanish are illegals. I'm a fourth generation American of Mexican descent (born and raised in Chicago) but my ancesters had lived in Southern Texas for several generations before it became the United States of America. Because Mexican-Americans choose to speak Spanish doesn't make them illegals.

Because of the 'melting pot' of American, I don't look like any specific nationality except, I don't look Caucasian. Years ago when I was a student and working as a nurse's aide, a patient with a strong accent, asked me 'What are you?'. I knew what he meant but answered, 'I'm a woman.' He said, 'No! What are you.' I told him I was Mexican-American. He told me "You talk real good for a Mexican.' I asked what he was and he said Norwegian. I told him he spoke very well for a Norwegian. He was insulted.

I agree we should all speak a common language. What bothers me, is the assumption that because some of us aren't Caucasian and some of us have a first language that isn't English, we're considered 'illegals'. I have ancesters who helped the first Europeans off their boats but I'm considered more un-American than a second generation European.

Hmmm, go figure!

I think you are lumping too many of us together. We do not think everyone with an accent is an illegal. We spent many years in NM, believe me, those of Spanish decent and many were Spanish as well as many Mexican, here legally disliked the influx of illegals more than some caucasions. Like you, the families had been in America as many or more years than some of our families.

that being said, I will always maintain, anyone living in America should speak English. BTW whoever said English is not our officail language, you are right. It was voted on 2 years ago, needed to pass by 2/3 majority and 33 voted not to make it the official language. I also will always feel if you are an American citizen you should speak English and ballots should be printed in English only. My view and I will spick with it.

Nita