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.
Personally, I don't feel the least dam' bit guilty.
DH shared some of his genealogy with me today; his great-grandfather and a couple of cousins were at Little Big Horn - on the winning side. He then went on to recreate the Cherokee war canoes into flat-bottomed boats that plied up and down rivers from the SE to the Mississippi and Missouri. He became a very wealthy Indian war chief - he also murdered someone who walked into his store and p'ed him off, and owned slaves. He didn't give a dam' about being an Indian - he knew how to make money and raise hell. Oh, and by marriage, he became related to a direct descendant of Robert the Bruce, King of Scotland. He bought property all over, too, and died very wealthy - and his son, DH's grandfather, continued the trade and shipping empire his dad started. According to his son, my father in law, he was married 8 times - and had two children by each wife - none of whom knows the others.
Those who cry out about "the poor natives, we took their land from them" read too many politically-correct treatises. People who live in times of upheaval adapt and prosper - or die. Our family - historically - prospers. And if you're reading this, so did yours - whether you want to admit it or not.
"Those who cry out about "the poor natives, we took their land from them" read too many politically-correct treatises. People who live in times of upheaval adapt and prosper - or die."
While I understand that you are saying "survival of the fittest", there are aspects of that axiom that don't work, and other aspects that are pretty ugly.
The bulk of the native Americans died from disease. Simply put, before the arrival of Europeans, they lived relatively "clean" lives and didn't generate many opportunities for diseases. The Europeans, OTOH, live in squalor and filth and repeatedly paid for their sins by having plagues and die-offs until the survivors had immunities and hyper-active immune systems. When they made contact with the native Americans, it had nothing whatsoever to do with adapting or anything that could be done consciously, death occurred because of a history of nastiness and filth had an advantage over another civilization.
The Cherokee did "play the game" and got kicked out of their lands anyway. The Seminole were more effective in just melting into the swamps than "adapting."
The games of power care not a whit about culture. At the conclusion of the War of 1812, the native Americans were supposed to - by treaty and general agreement - have their own country between Canada and the U.S.. It obviously never happened. In the 1980s, the Cree were largely scrawed out of their lands in Canada because of Canadian Hydro. Jews in Germany who continued to try to "adapt and prosper" found themselves in concentration camps or doing forced labor.
This all relates back to the original post. The Syrian people are caught in power games. Iran wants a Shi ite Syria, Putin wants to sell arms and have a friendly neighbor. The Saudis want a Sunni Syria, and the U.S. wants to break any alliance it might have with Iran, and to some extent, Russia. The chances of the power struggle escalating beyond the current theatre of war are not great. The Syrians, Cree, Cherokee, Seminole, Jews in Germany, all have been played as pawns.
The chances of Russia, China, and the U.S. entering into overt major conflict remain slim when economic warfare is so much more rewarding.
Personally, I don't feel the least dam' bit guilty.
...
...
Those who cry out about "the poor natives, we took their land from them" read too many politically-correct treatises. People who live in times of upheaval adapt and prosper - or die. Our family - historically - prospers. And if you're reading this, so did yours - whether you want to admit it or not.
Personally, I don't feel the least dam' bit guilty.
Those who cry out about "the poor natives, we took their land from them" read too many politically-correct treatises. People who live in times of upheaval adapt and prosper - or die. Our family - historically - prospers. And if you're reading this, so did yours - whether you want to admit it or not.
First, let me say that I normally agree with SCGranny, but we part company here. I don't feel personally guilty either, but historically it is true that the European-descended rulers of the U.S. did indeed take the natives' land from them on a massive scale, and that statement has nothing to do with being politically correct. (I abhor being politically correct.)
Your fascinating story about your husband's great-great-grandfather (or should there be one more "great" in there?) represents an exception. He is to be admired for his ability to adapt and succeed. But my point is that he was one individual and you are on shaky ground when you suggest historical generalizations based on the tale of one individual, however remarkable.
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,297 posts, read 14,166,733 times
Reputation: 8105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_Muz
Sorry I am still lost....... Middle Eastern as Huron, Cree, Sauk and Fox...... right???
I think she meant ME as in Saudi Arabian or Syrian. In my opinion, Cherokees have some Middle Eastern and European genes because they've screwed around with those peoples. Haven't you ever noticed that practically everyone who claims indian heritage says they're part Cherokee? They got around a bit during those long migrations, I guess.
No, Escort Rider, I beg to differ; if you want to talk about generalizations, it is pointing out one segment in history (or any other segment) and saying "as a whole, they suffered". Guess what? Everyone suffers; whether it's Braveheart at the hands of Robert the Bruce and the English, the africans who were sold by their african brothers to the eeeevil white traders into slavery, the indentured servants who were forced into virtual slavery for their passage overseas, the criminals who were deported to Austrailia, the people who suffered under barbarian rule or Papish idolatry and corruption of the Catholic Church, the innocents who were accused and destroyed under The Inquisition or the Salem witch trials, the poor folk who suffered under the Romans or... the list goes on and on throughout history. All groups - black, white, Asian, African, Muslim and Christian alike have suffered... it is the individuals who survive who matter, not the ones who quit, or who died. Survival is a skill - whether it is fighting, or hiding, bowing down and scraping until a better day for revolution comes, or grabbing ahold of whatever's available and prospering against all odds.
On a self-sufficiency and preparedness forum, the ones who matter will be the ones who can adapt and survive - even prosper - in the worst of times, not merely give lip service to surviving, or fantasizing about their ability to do so, as an academic exercise - until whatever calamity befalls them.
No, Escort Rider, I beg to differ; if you want to talk about generalizations, it is pointing out one segment in history (or any other segment) and saying "as a whole, they suffered". Guess what? Everyone suffers; whether it's Braveheart at the hands of Robert the Bruce and the English, the africans who were sold by their african brothers to the eeeevil white traders into slavery, the indentured servants who were forced into virtual slavery for their passage overseas, the criminals who were deported to Austrailia, the people who suffered under barbarian rule or Papish idolatry and corruption of the Catholic Church, the innocents who were accused and destroyed under The Inquisition or the Salem witch trials, the poor folk who suffered under the Romans or... the list goes on and on throughout history. All groups - black, white, Asian, African, Muslim and Christian alike have suffered... it is the individuals who survive who matter, not the ones who quit, or who died. Survival is a skill - whether it is fighting, or hiding, bowing down and scraping until a better day for revolution comes, or grabbing ahold of whatever's available and prospering against all odds.
On a self-sufficiency and preparedness forum, the ones who matter will be the ones who can adapt and survive - even prosper - in the worst of times, not merely give lip service to surviving, or fantasizing about their ability to do so, as an academic exercise - until whatever calamity befalls them.
What a narrow field of vision you have.
Slaughtering the Indians was like shooting pigeons. They were technologically centuries behind the Europeans, were less in numbers and had no resistance to the multitude of diseases brought onto them. Heck even with all these white people coming over and taking everything (land, food...), many of them still acted friendly.
A lot of Native indians ended up fighting for this country in WW2 and other subsequent wars. Why, is beyond me. Not to mention all them "famous" Indians who saved the settler's bacon in different times by offering food and water and shelter and guiding them to riches. You did not mention those examples?
Anyways, by your logic bullying in school is OK on a general scale since the few individuals who fight back will survive, who gives a damn for the rest of them who end up with ruined lives.
Or according to you, having an oppressive government is OK so long as they don't touch your 60 acres in Nebraska. If they come down to your property and bomb it with an F-18 (which is the equivalent of picking out the Indians with a long range repeating rifle when all they had was bows and arrows) - it is your fault for not owning an anti-aircraft system.... You just couldn't adapt fast enough and and build your own at home.
"One segment in history"? The WHOLE history of United States from discovery up to 1970s (Pine Ridge Wounded Knee Incident) is full of abuse of Native tribes, massacres and land grabs. Heck, there are treaties that owe huge amounts of land to tribes that the govt just will not own up to, instead the people are stuck in court for decades asking for what is rightfully theirs. Spreading tuberculosis via blankets? Shooting women and children and parading their heads on the streets of Denver? Mercilessly wiping out the buffalo? Etc. etc. The Native cultural and physical wipeout was systematic and for what? Gold, land...
Funny thing is the Europeans did it formally under the pretext that the Natives were the savages. Hah. I would think whatever happened to the Natives was savage, at the hands of their Christian "superiors" from Europe. You know, your ancestors whom you disown now.
Sad thing is we have not learned anything from our history (as witnessed by the stuff you wrote here - finding one example of a man and trying to generalize it to the whole people). I think you can just openly say you don't give a damn about what happened to the Indians. That's fine. Not everyone cares for things on a grander scale, some people just care about themselves, their bellies etc. But I think it is dishonest to try and find explanations and distort things the way you do.
Closing thread because no one seems interested in staying on topic. This isn't the correct sub-forum for political and global financial arguments and conspiracies.
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.
