It's race based because it makes "Indian" land different than mine or yours. I can't govern myself on my land and decide to open a casino based solely on my race. It's a race based law any way you want to slice it.
Native Americans are a series of sovereign nations within America. Kind of like the Kurds would prefer in Iraq (one way to look at it). It's a cultural distinction, a lands distinction, not really a racial one.
There's a lot more to their traditional way of life than religious ceremonies.
Exactly and your quote on land was my point as well. Just because they are practicing old religious ceremonies doesn't mean they are doing great and well off as anybody. IMO the sense of a traditional Native American person's idea of "making it" or "doing fine for themselves" isn't the having money from Casinos and owning the Hard Rock Cafe. But I could be wrong.
"She knows there is no success like failure
And that failure's no success at all."
"Don't ya think its sometimes wise not to grow up."
"Cause life ain't nothing but a good groove
A good mixed tape to put you in the right mood."
who are you bsing? the indians practice their ancestoral ways as much; if not more than any other people. i lend them buffalo pelts for their winter religious ceremony and give them buffalo toes for another religious ceremony.
Who are you bsing? That's wonderful that you lend buffalo pelts and buffalo toes for religious ceremonies but honestly if you look back and research Native American culture for the last three centuries and US government policies to assimilate, separate, assimilate, separate, alcohol, casinos, etc... I don't understand how you can say they are doing well. Please... and I didn't even throw in the massacres, disease, and brainwashing.
"She knows there is no success like failure
And that failure's no success at all."
"Don't ya think its sometimes wise not to grow up."
"Cause life ain't nothing but a good groove
A good mixed tape to put you in the right mood."
My wife is currently reading 1491, by Charles Mann. Pre-contact natives had full-on civilizations ... They engineered crops, they developed the land in ways that were probably superior to those used by Dark Age Europeans. Some native cities had running water, at least down in central/South America.
This "noble savage" living off the land, in harmony with nature business is by and large an inaccurate stereotype.
Maybe you should try reading the book yourself. You may then learn that these full-on civilizations were civilizations that kept their relationship with their natural environment, and based almost every aspect of their lives - religious, artistic, agricultural - on this relationship.
Just as the Ancient Egyptians did before them, these civilizations were largely shamanic/animist in nature, and they lived in balance with the world around them, despite of their technological sophistication.
However, the north American Indians were largely nomadic people and there were no cities to speak of north of the Rio Grande.
i'm not saying they have it good but deffinately better than a lot of americans living in campers because they can't find work.
.
Well you see now thats the point - these "people" you are referring to ARE Americans - infact - they are Native Americans. Surely they should be entitled to the same rights that are given you - whose ancestors began life in a foreign country. Yes they should expect the SAME rights atleast, if not more. Putting them into reservations and supplementing them with a monthly check does not amount to privlidge, its actually quite barbaric, but thats for another day
How can you own land? I don't believe in the concept. Land can only be taken and possessed. Who had the land before the "native" Americans?
That's exactly what the Indians themselves believed. They've been forced to adopt the white mans ways in this respect though - if only for their own survival, but also in order to preserve the land that they deemed to be sacred.
That's exactly what the Indians themselves believed. They've been forced to adopt the white mans ways in this respect though - if only for their own survival, but also in order to preserve the land that they deemed to be sacred.
But then shouldn't they let the people who possessed the land prior to them have it back as well?
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
If we're talking about North American Indians here, then what prior people are you referring to?
Probably not many! I suppose it's possible that someone might have been here before them.
But you can project this theory to other places in the world as well. Should everyone return possession of all lands to the peoples who had them first?
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Probably not many! I suppose it's possible that someone might have been here before them.
But you can project this theory to other places in the world as well. Should everyone return possession of all lands to the peoples who had them first?
It's relative. And with regard to the subject at hand, it's still relevant. We're talking about history within a framework of approx 100 years.
read "bury my heart at wounded knee" by Dee Alexander Brown and "The Great Sioux Nation" by Roxanne Dunbar Ortiz.
Another good one, at least as historical text, "The Sioux Uprising of 1862."
And another "Airlift to Wounded Knee" which drew me to the conclusion that what they were after wasn't going to happen in they way they envisioned it at the time.
No, it really isn't. It is a reality enforced by law. You are free to ignore reality, that is not my concern.
I really do see where you're coming from, and love the response a couple of replies up, but what happens to that deed if the government that makes and enforces thhelaw that upholds your bought property rights, collapses, dies, changes, is ran out of existence? Will that piece of paper keep the hordes away? Just a thought. Governments, sytems, die all the time...
And taking jeffs deed as a metaphor for the native indians...for those who think the natives of any country have a right to claim back land they think is theirs, how far back in time do we go? Though jeff may sell his deed next week, or lose it due to finaincial struggle etc, will his descendants be able to claim that property as their own? The natives lost that land in war, in battle, by being behind technologically to the tribe (yes the 'white man') that came knocking.
And seeing as its pretty much accepted (creationist believers aside) that mankind evolved out of africa a million years ago, and only landed in North America 11,000 years ago, do I have the right to go to Africa and stake a claim for the land there? Do the Native American indians have the right to go back to Alaska (12,000 yrs ago) and Siberia (20,000) and stake a claim, seeing as that is where they came from??
Comments
Native Americans are a series of sovereign nations within America. Kind of like the Kurds would prefer in Iraq (one way to look at it). It's a cultural distinction, a lands distinction, not really a racial one.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Exactly and your quote on land was my point as well. Just because they are practicing old religious ceremonies doesn't mean they are doing great and well off as anybody. IMO the sense of a traditional Native American person's idea of "making it" or "doing fine for themselves" isn't the having money from Casinos and owning the Hard Rock Cafe. But I could be wrong.
And that failure's no success at all."
"Don't ya think its sometimes wise not to grow up."
"Cause life ain't nothing but a good groove
A good mixed tape to put you in the right mood."
Who are you bsing? That's wonderful that you lend buffalo pelts and buffalo toes for religious ceremonies but honestly if you look back and research Native American culture for the last three centuries and US government policies to assimilate, separate, assimilate, separate, alcohol, casinos, etc... I don't understand how you can say they are doing well. Please... and I didn't even throw in the massacres, disease, and brainwashing.
And that failure's no success at all."
"Don't ya think its sometimes wise not to grow up."
"Cause life ain't nothing but a good groove
A good mixed tape to put you in the right mood."
Maybe you should try reading the book yourself. You may then learn that these full-on civilizations were civilizations that kept their relationship with their natural environment, and based almost every aspect of their lives - religious, artistic, agricultural - on this relationship.
Just as the Ancient Egyptians did before them, these civilizations were largely shamanic/animist in nature, and they lived in balance with the world around them, despite of their technological sophistication.
However, the north American Indians were largely nomadic people and there were no cities to speak of north of the Rio Grande.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Well you see now thats the point - these "people" you are referring to ARE Americans - infact - they are Native Americans. Surely they should be entitled to the same rights that are given you - whose ancestors began life in a foreign country. Yes they should expect the SAME rights atleast, if not more. Putting them into reservations and supplementing them with a monthly check does not amount to privlidge, its actually quite barbaric, but thats for another day
That's exactly what the Indians themselves believed. They've been forced to adopt the white mans ways in this respect though - if only for their own survival, but also in order to preserve the land that they deemed to be sacred.
But then shouldn't they let the people who possessed the land prior to them have it back as well?
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
If we're talking about North American Indians here, then what prior people are you referring to?
Probably not many! I suppose it's possible that someone might have been here before them.
But you can project this theory to other places in the world as well. Should everyone return possession of all lands to the peoples who had them first?
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
It's relative. And with regard to the subject at hand, it's still relevant. We're talking about history within a framework of approx 100 years.
Take my hand, my child of love
Come step inside my tears
Swim the magic ocean,
I've been crying all these years
Another good one, at least as historical text, "The Sioux Uprising of 1862."
And another "Airlift to Wounded Knee" which drew me to the conclusion that what they were after wasn't going to happen in they way they envisioned it at the time.
And a great movie, written by Thomas Berger,
"Little Big Man"
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
+1000000
Both great books
A nice in-between-word, I think, is "stewardship". (Of the land).
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
I own land. I bought it. I hold the deed. You may not believe in the concept, but it is fully enforcable by law here.
You are only a steward, the ownership is an illusion.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
No, it really isn't. It is a reality enforced by law. You are free to ignore reality, that is not my concern.
Well, by "law" you mean what? So, this parcel is in your name for a period of years, and then you die.
You are a steward.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
I really do see where you're coming from, and love the response a couple of replies up, but what happens to that deed if the government that makes and enforces thhelaw that upholds your bought property rights, collapses, dies, changes, is ran out of existence? Will that piece of paper keep the hordes away? Just a thought. Governments, sytems, die all the time...
And taking jeffs deed as a metaphor for the native indians...for those who think the natives of any country have a right to claim back land they think is theirs, how far back in time do we go? Though jeff may sell his deed next week, or lose it due to finaincial struggle etc, will his descendants be able to claim that property as their own? The natives lost that land in war, in battle, by being behind technologically to the tribe (yes the 'white man') that came knocking.
And seeing as its pretty much accepted (creationist believers aside) that mankind evolved out of africa a million years ago, and only landed in North America 11,000 years ago, do I have the right to go to Africa and stake a claim for the land there? Do the Native American indians have the right to go back to Alaska (12,000 yrs ago) and Siberia (20,000) and stake a claim, seeing as that is where they came from??
http://thedesiremachine.blogspot.com/