[colleeng47]

Originally Posted by nmnita

Colleen, I do not think that is or was his point, I think just the opposite, he is upset with those who get benefits regardless of how little native American blood they have. When we were in NM we saw so much of this, it wasn't funny.

I am not saying native Americans didn't get a bum deal, anymore than I would claim slavery was fair, but there comes a time when it is healthier to move forward, not drell on what was. what happened 200 years ago is over, what happens now and in the future is what counts.

Nita

I never understood the concept of being concerned with what someone else is getting. If I'm not eligible for something, then I'm not eligible. Why would I care what other people are getting?

And why is it that historically the group who vanquished the other group seems to be the ones who want to "move forward, not dwell on what was?"

[karibear]

Originally Posted by colleeng47

I never understood the concept of being concerned with what someone else is getting. If I'm not eligible for something, then I'm not eligible. Why would I care what other people are getting?

And why is it that historically the group who vanquished the other group seems to be the ones who want to "move forward, not dwell on what was?"

For the most part, I agree with you. However, in my case, it was rather annoying, to say the least, to see someone with a lesser blood quantum than mine get her entire education as a lawyer paid for by the tribe, and after passing the bar, I don't think she ever even used it other than as a way to read contracts.

IMO, the ones who most vehemently want to 'move forward' - the 'that was then, this is now' crowd - are the ones who aren't particularly proud of the ways in which they won. It's important to remember where we come from, otherwise we have no idea where we are going - and we end up going in circles, repeating the same mistakes over and over again.

[colleeng47]

Originally Posted by karibear

IMO, the ones who most vehemently want to 'move forward' - the 'that was then, this is now' crowd - are the ones who aren't particularly proud of the ways in which they won. It's important to remember where we come from, otherwise we have no idea where we are going - and we end up going in circles, repeating the same mistakes over and over again.

Amen.

[Goodpasture]

Originally Posted by nmnita

I am not saying native Americans didn't get a bum deal, anymore than I would claim slavery was fair, but there comes a time when it is healthier to move forward, not drell on what was. what happened 200 years ago is over, what happens now and in the future is what counts.

So "as long as the wind blows and the grass grows" has a statute of limitations?

[BigOkie]

Originally Posted by karibear

For the most part, I agree with you. However, in my case, it was rather annoying, to say the least, to see someone with a lesser blood quantum than mine get her entire education as a lawyer paid for by the tribe, and after passing the bar, I don't think she ever even used it other than as a way to read contracts.

IMO, the ones who most vehemently want to 'move forward' - the 'that was then, this is now' crowd - are the ones who aren't particularly proud of the ways in which they won. It's important to remember where we come from, otherwise we have no idea where we are going - and we end up going in circles, repeating the same mistakes over and over again.

This is exactly my point. The only reason I'm not on the Dawes Rolls is because my great-great grandmother who was full blood Cherokee Indian did not live in Oklahoma at the time of the dispersements, so therefore she had no claim to lands here, and thus she was not enrolled in the books. So, while she was a full blood Cherokee Indian, she was never given a right or claim to land here.

While that might sound petty on my part to some, I look at people whom I know have a much lower 'quantum' than I and hear of them talking about going to Claremore or Tahlequah and getting all their medical needs taken care of for little to no cost, knowing I pay 200 dollars a month in medical insurance and still have a 10 percent copay for the most part.

It just feels unfair, is my point.

[karibear]

Originally Posted by BigOkie

This is exactly my point. The only reason I'm not on the Dawes Rolls is because my great-great grandmother who was full blood Cherokee Indian did not live in Oklahoma at the time of the dispersements, so therefore she had no claim to lands here, and thus she was not enrolled in the books. So, while she was a full blood Cherokee Indian, she was never given a right or claim to land here.

While that might sound petty on my part to some, I look at people whom I know have a much lower 'quantum' than I and hear of them talking about going to Claremore or Tahlequah and getting all their medical needs taken care of for little to no cost, knowing I pay 200 dollars a month in medical insurance and still have a 10 percent copay for the most part.

It just feels unfair, is my point.

No one ever said life was going to be fair, it's just what you make of it.

But it's an interesting thought. My father always told us we were Apache, but long after he died, one of his brothers said he thought we were Cherokee. I have no idea, I've just been used to being a particular combination of heritages all my life. However, the family was from OK, so they may well be on Dawes, but they never claimed to be Indian - according to my uncle, it was 'socially unacceptable' at that time, and considering what they all did and where they were all educated, I can certainly see his point. But if they were on Dawes, it would turn out that Farmer Ray, who played pro baseball for the St Louis Browns, would most likely have been the first of the professional Indian athletes.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by colleeng47

I never understood the concept of being concerned with what someone else is getting. If I'm not eligible for something, then I'm not eligible. Why would I care what other people are getting?

And why is it that historically the group who vanquished the other group seems to be the ones who want to "move forward, not dwell on what was?"

Because dwelling on something that can not be changed is unhealthy.
Karibear, I am not certain your statement about those who want to move forward are not proud of how they got where they are is true or fair. I know in my case, I do not feel this way, I do feel that we can try and understand but we can't go back in history. There are many things that happened "yesterday" on all sides that we would be shocked at if we knew all the details, but we don't. We could debate this for ever. You gave the example of someone getting an education and not using it, this is an example of what I am talking about. I might say you are being unfair, what she did with her education has nothing to do with you. I only say this, to try and point out, things don't always go our way. by the way, could I ask why I am being taken apart, I have never said the native Americans were fairly or not fairly treated or that I resented anything they may be given now. ..I only got on this thread to try and explain to someone why Indian casinos are allowed.

Nita

[colleeng47]

Originally Posted by nmnita

Because dwelling on something that can not be changed is unhealthy.
I only say this, to try and point out, things don't always go our way. by the way, could I ask why I am being taken apart, I have never said the native Americans were fairly or not fairly treated or that I resented anything they may be given now. ..I only got on this thread to try and explain to someone why Indian casinos are allowed.

Nita

I agree that dwelling on something that cannot be changed is unhealthy, but remembering the treatment of the Indians, slavery, and Hitler's dance through time helps us to not repeat some horrendous situations.

On another note, I'm sorry you feel like you were being taken apart. That was certainly not my intention. I thought we were having a lively discussion where some of us didn't agree. If you felt that way, I apologize.

[karibear]

Originally Posted by nmnita

Because dwelling on something that can not be changed is unhealthy.
Karibear, I am not certain your statement about those who want to move forward are not proud of how they got where they are is true or fair. I know in my case, I do not feel this way, I do feel that we can try and understand but we can't go back in history. There are many things that happened "yesterday" on all sides that we would be shocked at if we knew all the details, but we don't. We could debate this for ever. You gave the example of someone getting an education and not using it, this is an example of what I am talking about. I might say you are being unfair, what she did with her education has nothing to do with you. I only say this, to try and point out, things don't always go our way. by the way, could I ask why I am being taken apart, I have never said the native Americans were fairly or not fairly treated or that I resented anything they may be given now. ..I only got on this thread to try and explain to someone why Indian casinos are allowed.

Nita

My comment wasn't particularly pointed at you, I've known quite a few people who refused to acknowlege their own errors in judgment and actions, who were most adament about 'that was then, this is now, and we have to go on from here' - one in particular was a mental health professional who was fairly consistent in misdiagnosing the children she worked with. Whenever the situation blew up in her face, she'd just shrug and say 'well, we just have to go on from here.' Right. And the kids were the ones who suffered the consequences of her ineptitude. If you turn to European history, you'll find that history books are nearly always written by the winners, and they have no problem with rewriting what happened to suit them. Some of the 'conquered' people have long memories, though, just look at Ireland.

But there is also a difference between remembering who/what we are and where we came from, and obsessing about it to the exclusion of the here and now. Obsessing isn't healthy in any way, shape, or form.

But it has always fascinated me, how slightingly and casual a lot of whites speak about 'scalping' - like the casinos are a new way of scalping the whites. It was actually white Europeans, as I recall, who created the emphasis on scalping, during the French and Indian Wars the French were paying for every scalp they got. And all the whites who think anyone who isn't white is second-rate, while conveniently forgetting that those skyscapers they are so proud of in their modern cities most probably used Mohawks as iron workers in the construction. They are some of the finest high steel workers in the world. And a lot of the 'yesterdays' we can't go back in history and change aren't things that happened hundreds of years ago, they happened just a few decades ago. I'd recommend reading some of the books written on the struggles of the '60's and '70's - the first one I came across was Custer Died for Your Sins, I think that's the one that got me hooked.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by colleeng47

I agree that dwelling on something that cannot be changed is unhealthy, but remembering the treatment of the Indians, slavery, and Hitler's dance through time helps us to not repeat some horrendous situations.

On another note, I'm sorry you feel like you were being taken apart. That was certainly not my intention. I thought we were having a lively discussion where some of us didn't agree. If you felt that way, I apologize.

I do agree with you: Mentioning HItler, we were able (I won's say lucky) to visit Auschwitz while visiting our daughter in Poland a few years ago. It is a day I will never forget. Remembering the past and trying to see these things never happen again is one thing, thinking we can change what happened is quite another. I really should not have directed my comments to you as much as someone else. You are right, it is a lively and interesting debate.

Nita