Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know of many of the injustices done to indians-I don't live in a vacuum-to accuse me of such things without knowing me is non-sense. This is the typical BS one lives with when one wants to talk about something, especially a so called minority-and on a philosophy thread of all places. This is merely an attempt to shut my free speech off by marginalization-to make me seem ignorant. And then inflate your knowledge as authoritative (my wife is part Shawnee-what ever you do, don't call her Pawnee) , last I heard indians were still human beings so they are still in the universal category of human and subject to the same structuring of BS as every other member of that category.
<snip of a bunch of stuff for brevity>
Wow, I've never read such a bunch of garbage this long in quite some time. But thanks for using paragraphs for a change.
So let me get this straight...it's our own fault that our cultures were taken from us. O...I...C. We failed to just take this "new information" and just accept it. Let's see, as compared to Christianity, Islam is "new information". Just how did Christian Europe react to that? How come they did not just welcome the Ottomans with open arms? Why did the Spanish Catholics seem to have this real problem with the Moors? Just how is modern Christianity reacting to Islam? Why are white people, especially Christians, not just adopting this "new information" and getting with the program? That's what you suggested that the native people of this country should do. Wow.
I also gleaned from your nonsense that those of us who chose to maintain what is left of our cultures are "living museums" and "living a fiction" and "remaining primitives"? Sitting Bull was the last NDN to know what an authentic NDN was...really? Obviously you are one of those who think we are some relic of the past and do not REALLY exist anymore. You could not be more wrong. Also in the same note....Sitting Bull was a Lakota. The concept on "Indian" is in y'alls head. We are Comanches, Lakotas, Navajos, etc. That Lakota can only speak for Lakotas and then not even all of them.
Ya know, there are many, actually most of us, who are modern people yet retain our culture...or at least what's left of it. I have a masters degree in Computer Information Systems and am a Network Design Engineer for a major corporation, yet still dance our dances, speak our language and even practice our beliefs. How is that being a "living museum"?
All cultures evolve. Why is it you still believe in your man-god Jesus, but no longer have jousting tournaments or keep serfs (though it could be said that this Congress and President are determined to make serfs of us - but that is another topic)? Why is is that many who believe in the man-god Jesus also work with and in technology? Hmm, probably the same reason many NDN people still retain native beliefs, yet no longer walk around in buckskins or go on the buffalo hunt and can design your TCP/IP network over a fiber backbone. "Living Museum" and "primitive" - indeed.
Just so you know, I am enrolled in my tribe and not some wannabe hack thin blood. I just have to wonder how many real NDN people you actually know...not many I suspect. Try getting to know some and you will see that your little hypothesis is just so much drivel.
BTW, being "part" NDN doesn't make one an NDN. This is always the mantra of those who are either trying to fit in with NDN people or they use it justify their own anti-native sentiments. Claiming Shawnee is number three in the most popular tribes claimed by white people - Cherokee and Blackfoot being #1 and #2 respectively. We are generally not impressed with these claims.
Last edited by Fullback32; 03-12-2010 at 12:58 PM..
Let me dig this hole a little deeper-and we will see if the censor lets it past-at least this place could describe the categories it uses and provide primers for our opinions to fit them-I was assaulted and prejudged, I should be able to defend myself. On a compassion discussion, my sympathies side with the abused (even the poor abused christian-I am not biased as these threads seem to go here, after all many christians have been killed too and displaced). But in thought, one wants to arrive at what may be considered the true-this is a philosophical thread; I have compassion for no one in the pursuit of the idea. If I pre-load the thought with compassion, it directs the thought, and determines the conclusion (try building an airplane that way or define logic), compassion and outrage has its place, but philosophy used to be termed science, and has its methods, some would do well to find these and not look like philosophical fools-my detractors have no explanations except outrage, and I am the paranoid one-remarkable! One can feel much, but the idea, pushed by them is emotionalism, and the conclusion is blurred. One wants to threaten me by forcing one's religion on me and seeing how I like it-great philosophy!!!! And all the while I was in a thought on reason, individual liberty and the information age. I gather the opinion that rules here is that the tribe is greater than the person; therefore, the universal, mind, is not really a universal, but now the accidental characteristics have now become the universal, and mind, well, its in a lurch, evidently all people don't have minds-although the indians will not let me in with these new universals-how odd. One deconstructs my thoughts; not with other thoughts-just mindless critique, and about my poor grammar and sociopathic ways-that will get us closer! Do christian missionaries destroy culture? Yes, Bravo!! The clear answer is in, we can move on to other deep understandings and condemn and maybe outlaw that "tribe", but its ok, the tribe may kill these people to keep from hearing them. But maybe there is still someone out there who would like a better understanding to such a question and will pursue the idea and let all the hysteria mongers go about their business.
I don't care if your an indian, atheist, christian, have prayer beads, or still live in a tee pee. Your personal proclivities have to do with what? Nice bio. Be a littl philosophical. How is a person converted? Answer that? What is the science of the mind? The individual? Actually the indian structure has to do with what? How does a culture self critique and why do some members leave? What is the nature of information? Why should some be limited to access information and who gets to pull the strings? So you all are saying an indian, as an individual, has no personal right for choice-the tribe will think for him? That is tyranny. Information is information and it displaces other information -is this not so? The dynamics of flight that is current most likely replaced the dynamics a hundred years, same in medicine, everywhere; or has indian wisdom and such just stagnated? Indians still believe only what they thought thousands of years ago? Some culture you are presenting!
-Now, "what is left of it" (the culture)----did I not say this?
-"cultures evolve"-----did I not indicate this?
-did I not not justify violence?
-sorry about not representing you all particularly rather than just generalize, there is a space problem here and my not being particularly interested in the indian makeup-course you do not particularize the christian, there are many tribe in it-we are even there
-did I not distinguish between a forced false conversion and a genuine one? Did I not say, theoretically, one can only convert one's self? So, by the theory (systems sociological theory), does not one hear and then convert oneself, so whose fault is it? One has to deny access to the hearing to prevent it, then is that not a reversed force conversion?
Man o man-no wonder thought is is a rare commodity
I don't care if your an indian, atheist, christian, have prayer beads, or still live in a tee pee. Your personal proclivities have to do with what? Nice bio. Be a littl philosophical. How is a person converted? Answer that? What is the science of the mind? The individual? Actually the indian structure has to do with what? How does a culture self critique and why do some members leave? What is the nature of information? Why should some be limited to access information and who gets to pull the strings? So you all are saying an indian, as an individual, has no personal right for choice-the tribe will think for him? That is tyranny. Information is information and it displaces other information -is this not so? The dynamics of flight that is current most likely replaced the dynamics a hundred years, same in medicine, everywhere; or has indian wisdom and such just stagnated? Indians still believe only what they thought thousands of years ago? Some culture you are presenting
Not in the least. In my Nation, there is little to no "group think". There are tribal members who are traditionalists....there are those who are Native American Church members...there are those who are Christians of all different flavors....there are those who are agnostic/atheist. If nothing else, in the Comanche Nation (I can speak for no other) there was nothing one could really point to and say "that is Comanche" in terms of religious expression. We have very little in the way of communal ceremonies in contrast to othe Nations. Each person was and is free follow the Creator as they choose to do so and no Comanche will criticize another for it and will not attempt to convert another. This is a key difference in Comanche culture versus white culture when it comes to Christianity. Yet we can all come together at the dance. This is because, in general, we do not believe there is only one path to the Creator.
Your premise that one can only choose to convert simply is not true. You have to have heard of the NDN boarding schools, yes? Children were separated from the elders of their nation and forced via punishment to learn English and Christianity. These children, separated from the elders who are the keepers of the culture, had no choice in this matter. Human psychology being what it is compelled the forced conversion. Others, such as myself, resist. Some Indians were forced to convert at the point of the gun. While this conversion was often for show and they did not cpnvert in their hearts, they were adults who could make that decision. The children, however, had no choice and this is where your premise falls apart.
allen, let me explain to you why I have such feelings against Christian missionaries and I can only speak for myself but at the same time I speak from my family. I am a Tsalagi (not Cherokee) Elder of my family, I am known as Gvnega Tawodi by my people and I am old enough to remember my great grandmother who when she passed away she was 107 years old, she and her mother and father and siblings and aunt and uncles and cousins were forcibly put upon the Trail of Tears, she lost a sister an aunt and uncle and two cousins on that trail, how do I know this, because she told me so. She was also forcibly removed from her family by good Christian missionaries and put into a school to be taught the way of the Christian, she could not speak her own native language and she could not practice her own culture and if she did she was punished for it and was beaten, how do I knows this, she showed me the scars upon her back as she received from these good Christian missionaries, when she was old enough she ran away from the Christian missionary school and was able to rejoin her family who by then had moved back to their ancient land in the Smoky Mountains and family members are still there to this day. My family's story is one of many through out the Tsalagi people.
Now I ask you allen, how would you feel if another religious organization took over this country and took your children away from you and put them in schools and told them they could no longer practiced the Christian religion or speak your English-language and were forcibly told that they had to worship the God of Islam and had to speak only Arabic, by good Islamic missionaries. You say you were a missionary at one time and went in and build septic systems and water systems for native people in Africa but at the same time you built churches and schools and tried to convert them to Christianity. Why was it necessary to build the churches and schools to try to convert them to your religion, why not just build the sewer systems and water systems just to help them?
Sorry, theoretically, the psychic system is a closed/open system. It is open to its environment, to the disturbances that are produced there, but the environment is composed of all other systems and are distinct from it (there are other theories as well-I like this one). The indoctrination is the disturbance, but the psychic system has to accept it and filters it (and, of course, this involve interpretation and meanings), that is why even among tribal individuals there are differences as well as between tribes of the same category-Blackfoot, Pawnee, etc. Yes, for lack of information, the mind has fewer choices, especially in children. That is why education is so broad now. But, if an indian school only feeds indian information to the child, it has only those selections for choice (I used Sitting Bull to posit the "authentic" indian, as one who lives like one-this could allow whites and blacks access to tribal citizenship-this, of course is not possible now because of modernity, and the indian has to modify his self description, as their children want to become aircraft designers, business owners and such: the children need information that displaces Sitting Bull's narrow description). If at a church school, the indian child is taught stuff that is not indian, and the indian is hidden, the child's mind will not have indian stuff to select from. This "whites" the child, not by force, but by limited selections-the psychic system can not be forced. This is a crime done to children in any situation as far as I am concerned. The individual is greater than the whole, and the mind is the universal, that equalizes us all and create the truly free associated society. You being indian, and me being white, are the accidental characteristics; no one asked us before time if it was alright, and yet the whole world abuses each other primarily on a passing characteristic. This interests me, not about the indian, but the concepts. People attempting to force others to conform to their way-no matter who and all groups do this, internally and externally; even the christian, and needs to be explored without the drama. Philosophy is philosophy, and indian grievances is something else and has a more effective place.
This is how one has a culture, by limiting the available information, but if it is too limited in a rapidly changing world, the culture is in trouble if exposed to it, to avoid that, the culture needs to be isolated, that is why I used the living museum expression-I derived that from ethnographers that attempt to hide newly found tribes from the outside world. I just think those individuals have a right to know whats out there, and a scientist has no right to withhold it from the tribe; the individuals of the tribe, of course, should have the right to be what they want, without being disturbed if they so choose, and individuals within should have the right to leave or stay, but their children should also have the right to know when they get older. I can not do anything about the past-it has moved into the unchanging.
Do not get me wrong, my sympathies are with you. Injustice really angers me especially against children. I played with a blackfoot kid and visited his home several times. His parents did not like me cause I was white-I did not understand this as we were just playmates-I do now and understand their hatred of me-that is ok. His parents would have been one generation from the hostilities I believe. Despite their dislike of me, they did not prevent their kid from playing with me. This fact exposed their kid to outside information-me and my family as part of his environment. This was information his mind had to filter and that he would not have had, had he been tucked away in the mountains of S Dakota-how he was affected I do not know, but it was outside information that his parents risked, as it may have displaced some of his already given knowledge. What I know now, I wish I knew where he was-to see the outcome. But, to know something in thought, I have to put my personal feeling aside. One can say christians are evil and leave it at that, it is a free country. I want to know more and it is not the historical except how the historical may impact the idea.
Why missionaries attempt to convert is because their god told them to-what else can they do? For starters, they could have loved their neighbors, as it also says. They failed here. They maybe could not have coveted. They failed there. I can bring more, but one sees the point. Why did they attempt to get rid of your culture? There were probably many reasons and I don't know the half-superiority, power hungry people, greed for government money, etc, some I assume did their best and truly cared-theories with children were different then; one, in study not malice, may want to search stuff out like that-I am not too interested there, a master thesis in education or sociology, perhaps for someone. But all these things, these reasons, and excuses mask a larger abstract idea floating around (of course, these musings would not be much use to your grandmother), that I am interested in theoretically, and all these excuses and such are mere occasions to get at it. Again an ethics thread, christian introspection, studies of the mass killings of protestants by catholics in europe, etc, probably can deal with this stuff, but it is not my stop. The forces involved in such activities are though.
The country wanted to fill up, and a bison culture had to go, farmers were coming, and as an indian said here or quoted a chief, something to the effect that land was not owned. The european culture has a thing about title to land, so it assumed it was free for the taking. I do not judge this here, as this is cultural differences, in ethics, maybe different. I used the technology trip of some of the chiefs to illustrate poor self critique. Had the indians been in possession of a little more info on technique, as they were wined and dined around washington, they may have thought differently about what the US was capable of, and what could be transferred to the west. I was not saying they were dumb savages-others brought that in. They attempted to stab a monitor-ironclad-with their knives, and did not believe they were armored, as iron did not float, they assumed these heavy boats could not go out west, but they neglected the technology that could be transferred. More information here may have resulted in a very different outcome, resulted in better understanding of the situation by the indians; however, as I remember this history, this was one incident that caused the chiefs to decide to keep up with the hostilities-a techno indian, may have expanded the discussion amongst them. True or not, the story illustrates the point of self critique within a culture-any culture.
Asking me a question like you did does not advance the idea. In a discussion at Mcdonalds, or in an ethic discussion, or in a discussion to win me over and support a cause-that has a place. Our family was the Mcdonalds of Scotland and the other clan pushed us out-I can't remember them off hand. I assume we, the clan, lost it all. I never have been to africa-I assume then you mean me in the broad category of christian-I don't think christians like me either, I would prefer that you speak of me as an individual rather than categorizing me-I can not account for their activities and have no control over them. However, I assure you, I am working with an african, editing his college papers, for free, and I do not try to brain wash him-his problems are just that. Indians now can practice what they want-I assume, or at least as most of us. So do what ever knocks you out. But don't deny anyone their rights either, we have all done enough of that.
ptsum, you are opening a can of worms. It was not only Christians that came from Europe and some of those who claimed that they were Christian did not act in a christ-like manner. But on the other side there was also natives who acted in very agressive ways too (even tribe leaders who acted greedily against their own people).
I agree it would have been wonderful if the two cultures would have worked together, but unfortunately both sides had issues that prevented this from happening.
The conquers came here to find new lands and riches and they came as Christians.... They came from Christian Europe and they had the Christian religion. The majority of the problems came from Christians in the beginning and throughout this countries history of settlement. A sad sad history........... One who is of European descent I am not proud of...
Ptsum is a wise person and I read the words written and they are true.
Well my grandson married a full Indian, or nearly full, and they had a baby. Just think, an Indian boy with some of ol' me in him, hahah. I am a proud great grand dad now.
Secondly...they can still keep their culture...unless it involves idolatry.
'They can keep their culture, as long as they do it my way'.
Yes, I think missionaries destroy cultures, and have done since the first days of European presence in the Americas.
It seems to be predicated on the idea that 'they' are somehow misguided and need to be taught the 'correct' way to believe. That's using faith as a weapon, and I don't hold to that.
Faith should be a *true choice*, not a forced 'or-else' situation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
