It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
Repost
I have no sympathy for anyone Terence, but I am in possession of the facts, you are not and choose to believe the reasons for extinction of many tribes of peoples (is somehow because they are “not kind”).
Many cowboy & frontier “historians” have been shown to be liars and telling wonderful tales of the nice christian white people who “made” this country.
The library of COngress and National Geographic society and many other organizations safeguard the Original documents that tell a different tale than the whitewashed 1800s-1930s versions where people did not want to accept their responsibility.
Posted by: Lota [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 12, 2005 06:55 PM
you know that great revered historian Samuel ELiot Morison? Well he is actually related to me, and he like many “historians” were shown later to have not used facts in their interpretation of history. It doesn’t make Morison a “bad” person, but he mislead many with his interpretations because he was either in not possession of orginal transcripts (indian treaties etc & translated Columbus diaries) or he ignored them.
In this country, many untrue foundations of history were described by the “rulers” about indians, blacks, jews and women. If you want the facts you go to the original sources.
It is very telling to look at French and German “history” books written from 1928-1945–a number of facists leaning/nazi sympathizers completely rewrote history and had millions “buying” it.
I don’t read “history” books, I get source materials. Your taxes pay for it, you can get a copy f just about anything form the Library of Congress including some very telling court cases involving Indian massacres and Calvary etc
One of the best cases is the Inquiry to the Sand Creek Massacre. CNN carried an excerpt of it for awhile.
And as far as renaming the Seminoles–why should their be a sports team named after a group of people?–how about the New York Jews complete with a demeaning caricature of a Jewish guy (like they do for an indian on the Cleveland Indians)?
Florida can pick a bird or some other symbol of the state.
I, personally, would be tickled by the New York Jews… J-E-W-S, Jews, Jews, Jews!!!
But only until I heard the first drunk guy mumble under his breath, “fuckin’ kikes.”
At least the Seminoles are the name of a local tribe. The Indians and Braves are less specific, thus more questionable choices, methinks.
It’s ironic that the indian tribes are into casinos when the worst stereotying in the modern era is of the alcoholic indian. Free drinks, anyone?
Lots of unhappy compromises in our lives every day, ethically and politically.
You can’t serve alcohol at the casinos in my state. And my alma mater changed its nickname from the Warriors to something really bland and lame 10 years ago, even though no one was complaining about the name at the time.
I highly recommend the Atom & His Package song called “If You Own the Washington Redskins, You’re a Cock.” It’s actually not a vulgar song (they don’t say “cock” in the actual lyrics), and it’s a pretty funny/accurate, to my mind, rebuke of those who dislike potential name changes.
And, Dave, it includes the potential team name “the New York Jews”!
Hey Stella, did you go to Marquette?
Although name-changing is an entirely different issue than ignorance of American history. Or is it?
Atom And His Package – If You Own the Washington Redskins You’re a Cock Lyrics
I like sports
There are some things I force myself to miss
like I never met an athlete I like in hockey
in Texas when it comes to native American nickname teams
Even within the contents of sports it’s awful and mean
and you’ll go wah wah wah you’re so PC
and i will say hey wait my my my how have the table turns to be a fucking prick is a desirable trait
while we’re on the subject of changing team names there’s no jazz in Utah
and few lakes in LA just this once give me the
benefit of the doubt the bulls became the wizards to pilots get out
and you’ll go wa wa wa you’re so PC
and i will say hey wait remind me again how it came to be
that being a stupid american is a desirable trait
wouldn’t that be offensive if we cheered
“rah rah rah for the Carolina negros with a beat box chair and a big boom afro”
the Minnesota Vikings became the New York kikes with dollar bills on their helmets
cause thats what they’re like ya know
Aom: Wat about the St.Angles padres ain’ that the same thing as for Christians as defending you?
When there’s a jesus Christ mascot shooting crucifixes
they nail to a cross dieing to save the team you’ll be right, you’ll be right
but until then you’re not right so what’s your take on Washington redskins
what’s your take on the Cleveland Indians
what’s your take on Washington redskins what’s your take on the Cleveland Indians
Yes, Eric, I sure did.
it isn’t an unhappy compromise Dave, casinos are one of the few ways they can make money in the desert since most tribes were moved to desert areas (most tribes weren’t originally desert dwellers). There’s nothing else one can do to raise money–some ecotourism has been a big help however.
Even the Hopi were moved off “guaranteed” land a few years ago becasue the government found the biggest ever plutonium reserve under it–once again ripped off. And we all know what plutonium is used for.
ALmost all reservations are in very poor land (animal husbandry and farming are pretty much out) , and fisheries aren’t decent either, so if you live on rez, there isn’t much to do and the isolation is extreme and education poor. They are the worst ghettos in the country. AT least in the inner city there are a ton of things to do that are free, and the public schools have a lot of good programs now–I went to opera, ballet, NBA & MLB games at my inner city (70% on aid) school. I had a very well-educated cultured childhood, compared to rural folks, and Indians are the most rural, where they get F/A and have little to do. Sherman Alexie is a great writer about stuff like that. Smoke SIgnals was very good, albeit sanitized look at the Rez.
And if the New York Jews were the Yankees or Mets team name, sure enough the bigots would come out and blame the Jews for losing streaks, the ecomony and damn near everything else when the drinking starts.
By the way David I am not PC or I wouldn’t like Dave Chappelle so much.
But I do think there’s a limit towards letting a mass population stereotype a group for which they understand/know little, so it would be a good idea to get rid of the Indian stuff in baseball where tribal councils object.
I haven’t heard much objection to the Black Hawks (there may be some) because Black Hawk was very respected in the midwest.
Cleveland Indians is just downright offensive.
It may the best or only avialable form of income production, Lota… but it is still a compromise.
I don’t really think the analogy to selling drugs to get out of the ghetto or stripping to pay for college is accurate… but they are in the same family… and maybe just as true for the people feeling compelled to take action in a desperate situation.
yeah it’s a compromise but I hardly compare it to drugs…Casinos are legal in many states, drug dealing is not.
You went to Marquette Stella? YOU SUCK.
My picture made the front page of the SPort section several newspapers, including Chicago Tribune for you MoFos in Marquette who beat up my NCAA team.
The ref had to throw 2 of your brutal farmgirls out of the match.
Evil violent sports Hos of Marquette.
Stella, that’s a funny coincidence– I’m on staff at Marquette. In fact, I’m typing this from my desk here on the third floor of Marquette Hall.
Small world.
Wow. That’s crazy. Small world indeed. To be completely honest Lota, and no offense to you Eric, I didn’t like Marquette at all and wish that I had gone elsewhere. I am not a fan of their sports teams.
Well Stella’s Boy, then your life will be spared.
Thank you. That is a relief. I’m not quite ready to check out yet.
Rodney King would be so happy to see this!
Stella, no offense taken: I was never a student, have never been interested in the sports, and couldn’t care less about the nickname brouhaha this past summer. I work here because the paycheck’s good.
As far as Native American nicknames go, including the Marquette Warriors: I think, as with all issues of political correctness, there is a middle ground where all reasonable people can be happy. And the most extreme sides, who happen are always the most vocal, are not on it.
Rodney King?
ANyway Stella, it is fitting that you grovel for your life since I went to a Vastly Superior Jesuit institution. You are spared (I have waved my hand in dispensation).
I wonder what Malick will do–be existentialist and stand back and do a human nature study on the scrapper John Smith and the Indians or what.
Eric
if the middle ground includes removing caricatures and mascots, then most would be happy–a warrior can be anybody/any culture right?
Sometimes if the history has alot of negativity, sometimes it’s just a good idea to change a name for a “fresh” start.
I think a name thats after a group should be embraced. If I was Indian, the Redskins would be my team. I’m Jewish so if they had a New York Accountants I’d be happy.
except Redskin is derogatory, and accountants isn’t.
Lota, I can see both sides of the issue. I don’t even think Native American names and mascots necessarily need to be changed– just separated from certain offensive stereotypes.
Sometimes, as you said, the damage is done and the memory lasts. A fresh start with a new name can be the best thing for all.
There is nothing inherently wrong with naming a team after a group of people. It can be done without being offensive.
Whining about history and things that happend 400 years ago is tiresome. Especially when all these people want is money. Too bad they weren’t more PC people like you Lota back then. Then we would all be working for wampum. It is alright to feel bad for them. But if you think they weren’t out to destroy the white men then you’re not doing your research. No matter what all the revisionists Left leaning movies tell us. Don’t watch Into the West. Watch Deadwood.
The point is that Malicks film will still be a boring, plotless, self indulgent mess.
If I went to Marquette I would be equally upset. What is wrong with Warriors? What is wrong with Braves? Now if the team name said “Drunk and Lazy” then we would have a problem.
They’re much bigger things to worry about in life. Like how does Rob Schneider have a career?
Dave said something about the stereotype of the alcoholic Indian. That’s one that goes way, way back. Not sure if it was a stereotype back then, but records from the eighteenth century are filled with descriptions of drunken Indians. Like guns and germs, alcohol was something unknown from the Old World which had pernicious consequences for the inhabitants of the New.
As for the rest, nothing’s been said here on either side that is at all illuminating. The same arguments that have been repeated for years have been reiterated here. As Malick’s film approaches, you can be sure they will surface again. Hopefully, his movie will be able to elevate the debate. (I am dubious it will.) And it could use some elevation. You have no idea how shrill and rebarbative it can be. And I don’t mean here, I mean in academia. The posters have been civil. Kudos for that.
Is the name “Indians” itself offensive, or merely the image of logo Chief Wahoo?
Terence, you clearly know very little of the facts by choice–they are there, but like many white people before you, facts were ignored so white people could feel better about the land they stole. There is no left or right about it, facts are facts. There were so many more white people than indians, the indians would not have “won” anyway.
they were so outnumbered it was only a matter of time before force and brutality won out–force and brutality is how Europeans seem to handle conflict up until the present day, where more people have died in World War I & II and their aftermath(starvation etc) than all the wars in Africa or Asia.
The cleveland logo is bad news, but I wonder if a group of guys trying to beat another group of guys should be calling themselves after a nationality anyway. Or maybe it should change to fit the mix of people…The Cleveland Afro-Ukie-Irish or something.
There so much else that signifies Ohio, “Indians” just doesn’t seem to fit anyway.
“If you want the facts you go to the original sources.” If only it worked that way.
There are a lot of people who think Daniel Snyder, who owns the Washington Redskins, is a cock. But it has nothing to do with anything in the song.
Lota, human nature is what it is. Europeans are not necessarily more murderous than the Africans and the Asians. They simply developed more effective killing technologies.
I’m not going to wander down the ridiculous “all cultures are equal” path, because they’re not. But labeling Europeans as history’s villians is as simplistic as labeling Native Americans history’s lazy drunks.
I’m not meaning to harp on you, because it seems your head is on straight. But again, there’s a fair middle ground here, somewhere between you and Terence.
Political Correctness takes their stands way WAY too far. It is not a way to live. I’m a New Yorker so should I have a problem with a team named the Yankees if I am offended? Thats what it seems to me like some PC people are saying.
“There were so many more white people than indians.” That very much depends on *when* you are talking about. It was definitely not true in 1607, when Malick’s film takes place. By that time, though, much of the Indian population of South America had been decimated by contact with Europeans, mostly through disease. And by 1607, Europeans had already been in the Americas for twelve decades. You have to keep in mind that the events of the 1800s in the US–which is what I think you guys are talking about–occurred in the fourth century of native-European interaction. What happened to the Indians in the US is only a small segment of a much larger tale, a segment which does not come along until well into the second half.
i forgot that the indians were all peaceful people and wanted to live in harmony with everyone in the world. smoke their peace pipes and say wisdom to all travellers. i totally forgot that.
I forgot that all white men just wanted to trade goods with the indians and share the land with them, harmoniously living side by side, roasting smores and sharing tales around a campfire.
The Europeans were more murderous in North America Eric–they won. 95% of indians are gone and millions of Africans enslaved that’s the history. I didn’t say Indians were ‘better’ but in that overall conflict over a 200 year period what does it look like to you? The Indians were the better behaved or they would be running things.
Again–it’s a fact more Euros have killed other people–with their technologies as you state. The H bomb was developed in Europe and the neutron bomb (which kils people leaving buildings intact) in the US.
More importantly–what will be done with the future.
A nice reparation would be to teach history by the facts, not what makes people feel better.
That goes for the holocaust and every other issue that makes people squeamish.
Blackcloud–the numbers of Indians compared to the overcrowded/populated Europeans overall was quite low.
I understand what you are saying, but the best adjusted numbers that all the archy people and demogrphics people can come up with is that Europeans Still outnumbered, overall, indians about 10:1 or 20:1, simply becasue as big as the US is, Indian families often had 1-2 kids, and no more. They didn’t tend to live beyond their means. The bigger problem was that Indians tended to cluster and be somewhat isolated from each other so as “invasions” increased, groups of 100-1000 could be taken out by disease or outright killing without other tribes knowing for quite a long time, which really marked the first 100 years or so.
Cabeza de Vaca is a good movie, and little seen movie, for addresing some of the earlier “invasion” strategies.
actually ur wrong stella. the european white men wanted the land for themselves and they wanted to live and prosper away from europe. u don’t know about history do u?
Lota, do you mean the number of Europeans in Europe vs. the number of natives in America? I interpreted your comment to mean there were more Europeans in American than natives. That’s why I said that depends on when you’re talking about. Looks like I misread it. Sorry.
Wow. I thought the sarcasm was laid on pretty thick. Apparently not.
The botton line is that the Natives were here first. You can’t really fault them for being violent or ruthless in their defense of their land.
After they were physically defeated, the White Man made numerous promises that were broken, and they’ve been moved from place to place all over this country.
I don’t know that any amount of apologizing or liberal hand-wringing will ever be enough. What happened on this continent (and South America) may be the biggest atrocity in world history. The only positive thing you can say is that at least the tribes up here still survive, unlike the Mayans, Aztecs, and Incans.
Thank God we won. That is all I can say. I wouldn’t want to be living on a parcel of land in the Dakotas watching my drunk father all day long.
Look, I agree that the Europeans committed atrocities in the name of cultural imperialism in North America and elsewhere. They gave the Native Americans much worse than they got. Believe me, I’ve read my Howard Zinn.
I’m just saying that things are more complicated than “red man good, white man bad.” I probably agree with you more than not. But I’m interested in discussion, and wouldn’t expect to get very far with certain people I really disagree with around here, who shall remain unnamed.
yeah sorry Blackcloud–I meant the # of Europeans period–becasue as they\Europeans died in the US from ships sinking, disease, fights amongst themselves and with Indians etc, they were being replaced first 10 fold, then 100fold etc until the late 1700s when the Euro powers that be realised it would be a good place to send prisoners, unwanted persons and slaves (indentured servents/debtors). Europe unloaded a huge number of people pretty fast in islolated spots.
They also were “landing” in isolated spots along the east coast and indians were being taken out in groups without the knowledge going any further. Many tribes died out completely in the early stages.
erics right. a few comments here aren’t going to enlighten anything. it is what it is. u can’t sit back in 2005 in ur affluent life and comment on what people did back in 1700 to survive and live. two different times. if they ran into people like lota back then they’d have scalped her. both whites and reds. it was still 200 yrs before women even got a chance to cast a ballot, remember.
i know what you mean Lazarus, but most of the tribes have died out–many wiped out within the 1st 100 years.
Whereever there was the frenzied finding of any gold, the tribes were wiped out.
When Indians were trying to appease many of the war leaders come over to the east coast, they couldn’t understand the Europeans frantic obsession with GOLD. They showed them so many things, trying to barter for their lives and some piece of land etc., but often were killed in anger. the leaders that came over were ordered to bring back silver and gold, period, and they thought the Indians were lying.
in south AMerica and certain isolated spots there was gold, but most places the gold was the buffalo, the moose or the corn/peppers. agricultural good etc. That went over poorly.
No, I really want to hear more from Lota on how the white man ruined the world and ruined the environment and ruined a whole race of people and made the world a terrible place to live. It is thoroughly entertaining stuff that you really need to read to believe.
Bruce, isn’t that a little extreme? Lota never said any of that. Can’t a person recognize history without implying that all white men are evil?
I didn’t say anything of the kind Bruce, even though it seems you would like me to.
If you want to read more, read the diary of Christopher Columbus for a start.
What happend Stella’s Boy to you recognizing sarcasm??? Ha. I guess its different strokes for different folks when you need to attack someone.
The Injuns should have developed some weapons and fought back. At least they’ll always have the memory of Custer. That is something to look at.
No need to apologize, Lota. Simple misunderstanding, easily cleared up.
By the way, population estimates for the New World in 1492 vary wildly, to put it mildly. Some put it at under 10 million, and some over 100 million. (William Denevan, “The Native Population of the Americas in 1492,” 2nd. ed.) As you can imagine, this is one of the most controversial, if not the most controversial, aspect of the study of the discovery of the Americas. I don’t know of a comparable figure for Europe.
For those interested, this article by Charles Mann from The Atlantic summarizes much of the debate about the population of the New World.
http://cogweb.ucla.edu/Chumash/Population.html
They didn’t have wars for land before 1492? That was the first time they invaded countries for land, treasure, richies, prestige? Really?
They weren’t happy about Custer either I read, even though many thought it was deserved.
My g-grandfather joined the Cavalry, as many Indians did. They figured if they were in the Cavalry the Cavalry wouldn’t attack Indian settlements anymore. Didn’t always work,and they refused to kill anybody which didn;t make them popular.
Very few people white or anything else wanted the tit for tat massacres…didn;t help anyone, and becasue of numbers, the Indians were wiped out.
Not sure how to decipher/un-ironize that previous BiBob comment.
The victors write the history books. Everybody was warlike. The question today is, do we continue to act like our warlike ancestors or can we move forward?
Lota you are just speaking for yourself right now not how they spoke back then. You wouldn’t want tit for tat because you are anti war. But around that time it is pretty safe to say everyone wanted the Indians destroyed especially for there savage attacks on the regular folks. Back then we didn’t have or they were not as vocal anti war, dove crowd. Back then we either won or we lost. There wasn’t debate about process, about how it’ll make everyone feel.
Believe it or not, since NAtional Geographic society is Map crazy, they had some of the best data on demogrpahics and treaties going WAY back.
They (NGS)estimate the numbers, if you include the Caribbean islands closest to the US which also had the same origins of Indigenous people, numbers between 25-40 million–that’s Canada, US and Caribe, not including central and south AMerica,( which had many more surivivors due to the remoteness of many regions.)
jeff u can’t move forward and become peaceful and become more enlightened if ur enemy won’t. u can have great intentions and be noble but if ur enemy won’t then u have to battle it out. i know the peace first crowd here find that hard to fathom. but ur protection and ur well being are at stake. good intentions and nobility and wanting to give everyone a hug doesn’t work sometimes. ask the islamics. u can’t even sit down at a peace table with these people. their leaders won’t even leave caves to talk to their followers.
After all the clutter and the BS here, I am still upset about my Seminoles almost getting taken away by the PC factions of the NCAA. Very upset. Go Noles!!
Bruce, you’re oversimplifying a very complex historical situation. Sure, people were threatened by the Indians, but the Indians were attacking because they had been threatened too. History is not a binary right/wrong won/lost process, and the debates you don’t care for are a sign of progress.
Bob, I don’t fully disagree with you. But there’s a right way to do things and a wrong way. It’s America’s historical shame that we have often not done the right thing, like breaking as many treaties with the Indian nations, herding them into camps, etc.
So, we should have let the Indians attack us because they felt threatened? We should have given them half of the land as a matter of goodwill? That is the problem with todays man. Always apologizing for something you had nothing to do with and that happend hundreds of years ago. Is your guilt that bad?
Lota, if I recall correctly, NGS included a map like that in an issue of NG some time ago. I think I have it sitting in a box somewhere.
Someone mentioned Howard Zinn? He’s not all he’s cracked up to be.
http://www.dissentmagazine.org/menutest/articles/wi04/kazin.htm
The Seminoles have nothing on the Gators. Oh no. Am I making Alligators offended?
every country has done things they’re not fully proud of. but at the time it was the right thing to do. hindsight is 20-20. even going back to the roman age. the world slowly evolves. standards and mores change with the times. for better or for worse. one thing that will always remain is survival. so don’t feel guilty. the american indians have become part of american life and a part of us. they vote, the run for office, the join the military, they pay taxes, run businesses, play sports.
Quoting Bruce: “We should have given them half of the land as a matter of goodwill?”
And what half of the land was ours to give?
Bruce, I know your comment was meant in fun, but it’s actually exactly why, I imagine, some people object to these team names. You’re implying that the idea of renaming the Gators (to avoid offending alligators) is about as stupid as the idea of renaming a team so as not to offend actual human beings. It sounds sort of like you’re equating the two. “Oh, the American Indians want to be treated with a scrap of respect… what’s next, *animals*??”
Back in that day and age land was as is today a valued commodity. Back then though they didn’t have UN’s or things like that. They had military might and they used it to get the land. In a perfect dream world is it ok? No its wrong to take things and use force. But this world ain’t perfect. That is the way it was. Accept it and move on. This is coming from a guy whose ancestors were taken on a boat from Africa and forced into slavery. You can’t be bitter. You live life and try to improve.
Terms like Redskins, Seminoles, Braves, etc are to me now embracing Native American life and their struggles. Not like you see any team names like “Detroit Wussies” or “New Orleans addicts” or “Tampa Bay Sissies”. It is honoring them by naming a team after them. I’m still hoping for a Jewish named team but then half the country would hate them just on principle.
I don’t really think there’s a lot of honor in “redskins” — the “honor” argument can be made for the Braves or the Seminoles, but it’s hard for me to really buy a defense of “redskins.” If you created a likable, tough, and resourceful Mexican character, and then called him Senor Wetback, would it be OK?
“at the time it was the right thing to do”
Really Bob?
At the time…was it the right thing to enslave Africans?
At the time…was it the right thing to have indentured servants and months before their date of liberation change the date to a year in advance because the “owner” knew the servant couldn’t read the debtors contract (illiteracy was rife in the US until this century)?
At the time…was it right in the 1940s to herd Asians into camps in California and take all their property and their freedom even though most were US citizens, just because they were Japanese? One of my college teachers parents[US citizens of Japanese descent lost their 300 acre vinyard in Northern California–they were homeless for 8 years.
At the time things seem right to cowardly men (and women) who sit and do nothing and turn a blind eye while people are persecuted.
I am sure there were many French, Germans and Hungarians etc who thought it was the right thing to do at the time, to herd Jews, gypsies etc to camps, because someone directly profited.
There is no “at the time it was the right thing to do” those actions are always wrong, it just what people say when they don;t want to deal with or accept the fact that wrong was done in their name, or for their financial gain.
There are plenty of grandchildren of French collaborators who are inheriting jewelry, art, other valuables stolen from Jews they shopped to the Nazis. It was wrong and it still is wrong–whether stuff like that happens in Europe, US Africa or Asia.
Evil prospers because good men do nothing or whatever the saying is, is all too true.
So after taking the continent away from them and killing most of them off, we’re now telling Native Americans that the offense they take at tomahawk-chopping Braves fans is our way of “honoring” them and “embracing” their culture?
The war’s been over for decades, and we still can’t concede something as insignificant as a few sports teams’ nicknames.
You Liberal PC people really make me die of laughter.
Everyone should kiss and makeup and there should be no war.
Where do you people get off trying to explain the actions of humans from 500 years ago? Seems a little arrogant to say the least.
Lota, how is that soapbox living in that Ivory Tower??? Is it comfy? The air conditioning ok?
Way to contribute to the discussion Mary Z. Your insights are so illuminating and provocative. Now settle down and take a joke Mary.
This is one group that shouldn’t be discussing Native Americans and the European settlers. We got the PC brigade advocating giving hugs and giving back land and we got the other side ready to exterminate the rest of the drunkard Injuns. I see some balance.
Tonto is the only cool Indian. He knew how to give it to the Lone Ranger.
I really am loving this exchange… there are real disagreements that touch people to the core… but with a few smart-ass digressions, it has remained civil and I think, intellectually stimulating.
Even accusing Lota of being in an ivory tower, though I disagree, is a valid claim. And no doubt, PETA will go after animal names.
Good – if movie free – thread.
Just to set Blu’s mind at ease, my recent Florida State alumni newsletter had two color pictures of the university president meeting with the Seminole tribal council, at which time the Seminoles re-affirmed their historic support of FSU’s team name. There are a number of scholarships for Seminole tribe members and reciprocal activities on campus and in Seminole areas.
Now back to the movies.
If the Indians had won the war, would we have seen the Lone Ranger as an Indian and Tonto as a White man? Deep thoughts.
I’m glad to see that those arguing in defense of people’s actions hundreds of years ago have taken moral relativism as the basis of their argument. Don’t get me wrong, I like it.
Deep thoughts with Jack Handy… err Sanchez.
I can’t think of any Canadian sports teams or universities using Aboriginal names.
But Aboriginals were as brutalized as they were in the U.S.. I wonder what the percentage is of Aboriginals who are Christian? Conquer and convert.
Sanchez, if the Indians had won, I doubt tv would have ever been invented.
Lota, why aren’t you upset about the over 1million Germans and Italian Americans who were also interned or declared enemies of America during WWII? No one seems to give a shit about them. I guess because once people find out about that they feel less bad about the Japanese. BTW the largest Japanese population was in Hawaii and none of them were ever interned.
Also, they had alcohol in Mexico and (I think) Peru, what they didn’t have was the wheel.
I don’t think over 1 million German or Italian Americans were interned. Only 120,000 Japanese-Americans were put in camps. Are you sure about that number?
It’s what I’ve read. It could easily be wrong, but I’ve read it in more than one place.
Hmmm… I just looked this up and found this random link which seems to imply that all the numbers are rather politicized.
“According to a 1948 government report on wartime internment, 56 percent of all non-renunciant internees (14,426 of 25,655) were Europeans and European-Americans
Hmmm… this is from the Congressional Record or so it claims:
“Most Americans are probably unaware that during World War II, the
U.S. Government designated more than 600,000 Italian-born and 300,000
German-born U.S. resident aliens and their families as “enemy
aliens.”
Approximately 11,000 ethnic Germans, 3,200 ethnic Italians, and
scores of Bulgarians, Hungarians, Romanians or other European Americans
living in America were taken from their homes and placed in internment
camps. Some even remained interned for up to 3 years after the war
ended. Unknown numbers of German Americans, Italian Americans, and
other Europeans Americans had their property confiscated or their
travel restricted, or lived under curfews.”
I hate how html doesn’t work:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2004/s012804.html
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=6&url=http%3A//www.foitimes.com/internment/fallon2.htm&ei=aEn9QuH_DbfYsAGUuZHuDg
What does it mean to be designated ‘enemy aliens’? Were they aware of this? That would be a funny letter to get in the mail.
For all we know, the government is still doing that kind of thing. In fact, they almost certainly are.
advocating giving hugs and giving back land Mark?
I haven’t advocated anything except attempting a correct understanding of facts.
And I wish I could live in an Ivory Tower, believe me I would prefer not to know what Real Life is like i know it all too well, I am surprised I am alive. I have had to make unpleasant moral decisions that cost me dearly financially–in order to be honest. A number of people I worked with are in prison for not being honest (one of the bigger corruption trials in the USA), so i am glad I never took a bribe or bribed anyone, and it wasn’t easy to do with the huge temptations I was exposed to (and then the death threats I got).
Just think if George Washington or Thomas Jefferson, who had real power, went against the flow and advocated going against the corrupt practices of slavery and murder–what a good example it would be for the hundreds of years to come –it means something when Leaders take a stand–the rest will follow or get rooted out eventually. It also would have cost this country less money–maintaining war & slavery & corruption aint cheap.
The suckiness of Life on this planet is only improved by people saying and doing something when they know something is wrong.
“Among them was Arthur D. Jacobs, an American-born son of German immigrants. Jacobs’ father was rounded up in Brooklyn and sent to a temporary internment camp on Ellis Island in late 1944 after his name inexplicably showed up on a Nazi Party list. Though Jacobs later learned that the case against his father was weak, the entire family was resettled at the Crystal City, Texas, internment camp, where he and other ethnic German internees lived side-by-side with ethnic Japanese internees. In January 1946, Jacobs and his family were repatriated to Germany. Just 12 years old, Jacobs was separated from his parents and brother and briefly confined in a German prison called Hohenasperg.
After a harrowing bureaucratic nightmare, he and an older brother, both U.S. citizens, were returned to the United States more than a year later without their parents. Jacobs enlisted in the Air Force and served honorably until 1973, when he left the military to embark on a distinguished business and academic career. He now resides in Tempe, Ariz.
Jacobs has dedicated his retirement years to dispelling politically correct myths about the World War II internment. After President Reagan signed a reparations law in August 1988 that awarded nearly $1.65 billion in restitution to ethnic Japanese interned or evacuated from the West Coast, Jacobs went to court. Motivated not by financial gain but by the drive for historical accuracy, Jacobs argued pointedly that the reparations law unconstitutionally discriminated against internees of European descent in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. Jacobs’ lawsuit was fiercely opposed by every major Japanese-American leader and group in the country. The D.C. Court of Appeals ruled against him, and in October 1992, the U.S. Supreme Court refused without comment to hear Jacobs’ appeal.”
Check it out. No restitution for your unjust imprisonment! Why? Because you’re white, silly!
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/michellemalkin/mm20040811.shtml
Lota you’re a do gooder. It is not a bad thing to be. You have a good heart. But its not in reality. You’re getting upset and on edge about things that happend centuries ago. I know you feel bad for these people. But changing the Washington Redskins to the Washington Bluebloods isn’t going to change history.
They lost. Victors write history. Perks of doing battle.
Lindenen
why would you assume I don;t care about other groups of people? The assumptions people make on this blog are unreal. I didn;t have tome to make a list and we were speaking of Indians first, the same principals apply to anyone not in power, doesn’t it.
Over 100,000 people were interred in the US during world war II most were Asian–a percentage were Japanese.
there are revisionists who make that number bigger and revisionists who make it smaller. It doesn’t look like you are referencing a Library of Congress document. If you had referenced a govt document or a Full transcript of those arrested (the Library has everything, I’ve seen it–it’s hundreds of pages). In California there was county by country “reporting”.
Newspaper articles on anything are selective reporting, people really need to go to court & govt documents which are dry and boring but they tell much more information.
The interment camps, any and all of the them, and the medical personnel that surveyed them, all have records.
Just because the victors write the history doesn’t make it a good thing. Joe, you seem to be the one writing from an Ivory Tower of content privilege.
I am a realist. I live in reality. I don’t sit upon a tower and comment on what is so bad and wrong in the world. Woooo is me and the terrible Americans. We are such bad people. We deserve to go to hell because the Indians lost their land to explorers and the stronger Europeans. Boo Hooooo. No. Sorry. Thats not me. Lucky for civilization you guys weren’t in charge in 1500 or we wouldn’t be here and I don’t think we’d be commenting on the qualities of lame flicks like Jeepers Creepers.
Your problem, Joe, is that you seem to have decided that it’s not worth studying history to learn from the past. You would rather have everyone shut up and not disturb your sense of propriety, your elitist view that you are the consummation of history.
by the way–being designated an enemy alien is bad enough, most people designated that weren’t interred or imprisoned. Many thousands were unfairly deported, then killed in europe (camps).
One would hope this country has learned from invasion, slavery and atrocities during world war II, but sometimes I don;t think so. Indians were still be forcibly repatriated into the 1980s, and many who were wrongfully imprisoned or had stuff confiscated in past wars etc. didn’t have their stuff, job or land given back. Not just white people Lindenen–almost no one of any color was compensated. Only the very wealthy folks or their descendents can afford the litigation (some have won in Europe recently re. WWII confiscations).
This debate reminds me of a question I had on my field exam in the history of colonial and revolutionary America. I don’t remember the exact wording, and I don’t have the exam in front of me (I’m on the road), but the gist of it was, given all the costs in the colonization of America [might have been founding of the US], was it worth it. Did the costs outweigh the benefits? Something like that. That is a very hard question to answer. I certainly don’t have one. If any truth depends on your point of view, this is one.
Lota asks us to ponder what would have happened “if George Washington or Thomas Jefferson, who had real power, went against the flow and advocated going against the corrupt practices of slavery and murder–what a good example it would be for the hundreds of years to come.” They did set a good example, but not a perfect one. Both were certainly aware of the evils of slavery, and both were opposed to it. (Albeit GW far more than TJ, who is a debate in his own right. At any rate, GW at least had the grace to free his slaves in his will. TJ didn’t even go that far.) They and their brethren faced very hard choices when it came to establishing their little Republic in the middle of nowhere. They did the best they could, and for the most part got it right. But they also condoned things which even from the standards of their own times were considered shameful. We shouldn’t treat them as fools. They were perfectly aware of what they were doing. They averted their eyes and held their noses–and did it anyway. They kicked the can down the road, in the hope that the longer it endured the stronger would grow the Union they had made so that it could survive the reckoning with itself they all knew had to come. They made a choice that preserving the Union was the most important thing. Slavery would have to be dealt with later, when the Republic was ready for it. Which it was not in 1787. There is much to disagree with in their choices, but one thing cannot be gainsaid–slavery is gone, but the Union is still here.
Therefore, Lota, I must respectfully disagree when you say that “It also would have cost this country less money–maintaining war & slavery & corruption aint cheap.” It would not have been cheap at all, for it is quite likely that had the attempt been made to eradicate slavery at this country’s birth, not only would this country not exist as we know it, but it would not have been born at all.
Reparations has little to do with right and wrong in the eyes of the courts, and has everything to do with an organized class action suit. If you have and organized group of litigants suing on a single issue you may win, if you sue as an individual you have a snowball chance in hell. has F-all to do with color.
The Japanese as a group were targeted, they sued as a group in order to keep their case very specific to the reason they were imprisoned. It doesn’t mean they bore any ill will towards any other individuals interred or imprisoned in various parts of the country–they may not have known much about it anyway. There were two wars going on at once (Europe & Pacific) and people were not necessarily targeted under the exact same legislation–some Germans were jailed as “communists” and some as “nazis”. It would be hard for the Japanese to widen their specific Class case without weakening it, in the view of the courts. If the Germans had a class action case they would get somewhere since being charged as a Nazi or as a communist was very different in the view of the Courts than the racial reasons Asians were jailed for, even though it’s part of the same ignorance. You have to make a case from the way the Courts will judge it if you want to win, even if you are morally in the right.
Nah Jeff my problem is people today who can’t accept the past and can’t accept being American that they’ll do anything they can to run from it. Anything they can to explain the actions of the people that lived here 5 centuries ago. They’ll apologize for everything bad thats been done because they feel bad. It’s a terrible way to live. I feel bad for you. Do you ever enjoy life or is that a dumb question to the guy who loves Jeepers Creepers?
“Not just white people Lindenen–almost no one of any color was compensated. “
Did you even read what I quoted? They did compensate the Japanese who were victimized, but practically laughed at the Europeans who were victimized. They wouldn’t even recognize their victimization. In fact, in much of our recent dealings with Native Americans, it seems like we have been trying to compensate them for the horrors they suffered. The compensation may be half-assed and incompetent, but it seems like we’ve spent the last thirty or so years trying and apologizing over and over again. BTW, I suspect that if a gigantic uranium haul was found under my house the government would come for my house too. Nowadays Native Americans aren’t the only ones the law on eminent domain is victimizing. And we have the Supreme Court and greedy developers and politicians to thank for much of it.
“by the way–being designated an enemy alien is bad enough, most people designated that weren’t interred or imprisoned. Many thousands were unfairly deported, then killed in europe (camps).”
So a camp in Europe doesn’t count as internment or imprisonment? Where’d they send them? Camp Le Chippewa?
Also, I didn’t say I was referencing a Library of Congress document. I was referencing part of the Congressional Record. “Congressional Record: January 28, 2004 (Senate) Page S308-S309 UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST–S. 1691 Mr. FEINGOLD.
I assume if you go investigate the matter you’ll find Mr. Feingold’s comments on record in the Senate. Now maybe the Library of COngress keeps those records. This would certainly make sense, wouldn’t it? But I never even claimed to be referencing actual Library of Congress documents. Do they even have that stuff online? It would certainly be wonderful if they did.
Also, blackcloud’s correct in his post, slavery is America’s original sin. America wouldn’t have been born without it.
“Just because the victors write the history doesn’t make it a good thing.” No, but it does not necessarily make it a bad thing, either. I am reminded of something the great West German historian Hans-Ulrich Wehler wrote: “Fortunately the losers, who among so many historians of every day life occupy the centre of the stage, were not the historical victors.” Wehler was criticizing a tendency among certain of his colleagues to glorify and idealize those who occupied the very lowest strata of society. People among whom, at least in the German context, the most benighted of attitudes (xenophobia, antisemitism) ran rampant.
Wehler’s point was that you have to be very careful about doing what might be called “loser history,” as there are cases when those who lost desrved to. Sometimes, the weight of history and morality are against the defeated and with their vanquishers. Anyone decrying the notion that “history is written by the victors” has to consider what some history might be like if it were written by the losers, if they had been victors. In other words, there are times when the fact that history is written by the victors is not only not a bad thing, but is instead a very good thing indeed.
Blackcloud–
Many things were built for free for 200yrs plus so yes on the face of it, it seems cheaper as you say.
Much of the money made by slavery was concentrated in very few people–it wasn’t public savings. The majority of the white people in the deep south were so dirt poor they competed with black folks post civil war for the same crap land and crap jobs.
If all the money from slavery in the south, and railroads (many CHinese) in the west came into government coffers yeah of course it would be cheaper for the country as a government if we had slavery up even to the present day, but with money made off unpaid labor being concentrated in so few private hands up to the 1920s I wonder if that is true. The high cost of public health and welfare in the last 60 years paying for the post-Civil war poverty which really has never ended completely, and just the huge amount of money put into the military for over a hundred years since the military was used to keep a lid on things from Indian uprisings to maintaining segregation etc.
The treasury costs from the 1800s onward seem considerable in trying to keep the lid on the whole nefarious systems, whereas money coming into the government coffers from it seemed to be much less–that’s all I’m saying. It’s not like slave-owners or railroad owners paid much in taxes! I t just looked like from money coming into the treasury, compared to money coming out, that it Cost more than it Earned on paper.
I think it’s pretty telling where “joefitz84” and his ilk are coming from when he writes: “the Indians lost their land to explorers and the stronger Europeans.” Which is true, if you just conveniently ignore the last 150 years of US History in regards to US/Native relations. All the forced marches, all the treaty breaks, the massacres, the deliberate starvation, the use of biological weapons (infected blankets anyone?) and the refusal to even pay what is owed by those treaties still in effect.
I’m another would-be writer who has been researching the late 1800’s for the last few years for a screenplay (damn you David Milch for getting there first)and it becomes very clear very fast that this country has just completely fucked over the Indians every time they got between us and land/wealth. There’s a line in the book The Pelican Brief when the lefty supreme court judge says “And the Indian? Give’em whatever the hell they want.” I’d have to agree with that.
I don’t have any romantic ideas about Native Americans, even though Cherokee blood flows through my veins courtesy of my father (my grand dad looks like he walked off the reservation in old photos). Many tribes were just as venal and violent as any other cultures. Some waged wars for all the same reasons the rest of the world does (food, land, power). They enslaved each other. There is growing evidence that it was they who killed off all the wonderful Ice Age animals like the mammoth, so they all didn’t live in perfect harmony with nature. Which is why it gets sticky if you start playing the who-wronged-who-first game.
But to think that the suffering of our Native populations is a thing of the past, that it doesn’t have anything to do with this country today is beyond naive and suggests willful ignorance. Like those people Chris Rock mocks who seem downright proud of their stupidity.
JoeFitz, your arguments are weak and without merit. Keep throwing a 4-year old horror movie back at me, it really makes you look smarter. More handsome, too.
Lota, I was not clear. I was not saying that the existence of slavery made things cheaper because things were done via the coerced labor of slaves, and hence there were no wage costs, thus making things “free.”
My point was that if the attempt had been made to eradicate slavery 1787, this country would not exist as we know it because it would not have existed at all. The South would have walked and it would have ended right there. No Constitution, no 13 states, no Union, nothing. Two distinct countries at least, if not more. Everything would have fallen apart right then and there, and the Revolution would have failed, and everything been for nothing. The South was quite clear about this–get rid of slavery, and you get rid of us. As I said, the Founders decided that preserving the Union, and thus winning the peace, was the most important thing.
You are right, Lota, the costs of allowing slavery to persist as long as it did were quite high. My point is that the costs of not allowing it to persist as long as it did, and especially of nipping it in the bud, would have been incalculably higher.
I didn’t say anything of the kind that you imply Lindenen. The Japanese took successful suit–it doesn’t mean that others don;t have a case. If you quoted a Federal Case than it is logged. Most very old Library of Congress documents aren’t online or the copies are poor. Many staff were laid off in 1981-1984 so they are very understaffed, and many documents are very fragile–so you get a copy of a copy (when you request them) so the orginals don’t have to be disturbed and sometimes it takes 6-8 weeks to get a request filled. Most of the directories are online. The SUpreme court archives and sessions of Congressional record (alot of Indian and WWII interment decisions and discussions and laws in that-very good and complete verbatum stuff).
I said people were sometimes sent back to camps in Europe meaning the concentration camps.
just because I didn;t give a rundown of every nationality doesn’t mean there were similar or the same abuses of other groups or that individual cases don’t have validity–but it is almost impossible to win as an individual.
At the same time, one shouldn;t denigrate the japanese for winning a reparations/compensation case–it sets a good precedent.
If you get thrown out of your house for uranium/plutonium, you likely won’t win. But if your entire community does you might.
blackcloud–i see what you mean. But it may be incalculable a cost period. I still think this country would exist becasue the population spill over in Europe was dire–millions would have come anyway. The population explosion in Europe was extreme after 1800.
It just would have taken a lot longer to get the monetary clout (and most presidents & cabinet members were from that backgroud) without the free labor.
this country would exist as it has become without slavery, but not as fast and maybe with fewer social problems coming back to bite the government in the ass.
“There is growing evidence that it was they who killed off all the wonderful Ice Age animals like the mammoth, so they all didn’t live in perfect harmony with nature.”
Mr Batty, many animals were in low abundance and at the time of the impending ice age mammoths and many other animals of the time were entering an evolutionary bottleneck–there were too few to support the number of people living and there is alot of DNA evidence for that. those animals were heading towards extinction (weren’t reproducing and young weren’t surviving to reproduce due to the swift climatic changes making it inhospitable) and more than a few tribes went extinct as well.
You make it sound like they hopped into a hummer and were knocking down sabre toothed tigers for points! Okay I know you didn;t mean that…Indians have never been “noble” about the environmanet but utilitarian as they had to be. Some tribes only allowed max 1-2 kid per family so the tribe wouldn’t grow beyond its means.
Servitude had little use for most tribes–it was too costly if you were a nomadic or a seasonal migratory group. Different in the hierarchical societies in south america where it was more common.
But it wouldn’t be “this country,” Lota. It could be something similar, maybe very similar. Or it could be something quite unlike. But it would not be the same. It could not. Change one thing and there is no telling what would change. But it would change, for the greater or the lesser. Either way, “this country” would be something else entirely.
yeah it would be something else, sure anything changed inhistory changes the future.
but i still think it would be essentially the same, but maybe not such extremes (good AND bad? dunno) becasue the history would not be as extreme. Maybe more like Australia?
Re: natives hunting the wooly mammoth to extinction. The theory that the Pleistocene extinction of megafauna in North America was caused by what is known as the “prehistoric overkill” has long been the dominant one. It has been challenged recently, with climatic change being fingered as the likely culprit.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/06/010608081621.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/10/011025072315.htm
“there were too few to support the number of people living”
Who said they had to support anyone? You make it seem like it’s the animals fault for not realizing the Pan Pacific landbridge make them just another item on the Pleistocene menu for New Arrivals From Asia.
But my original point was that not all lived even an utilitarian lifestyle. Some tribes learned the hard way.
“How do movies deal with Black America or other ethnicities? Are we anywhere closer to agreeing on any “truth” than we were when John Wayne rode tall?”
Dave’s original musing:
I think things are always improving on the color/ethnic front becasue I am an optimist–Smoke Signals, Love and Basketball, the increase in interest/acceptance of foreign-made foreign- culture movies (even though some of them play into stereotypes).
There are some really great movies giving some insight to cultural baggage as it occurs here and sometimes abroad (like Ang Lee’s Eat, drink, man, woman–very good). With the endless suburban stuff that seems to come out, it never feels like enough, but there is real progress.
SMoke signals made alot fo Rez-dwelling folks very happy. It was sanitized (compared to the book it was based on) but not to the point of being a lie of a story.
And Mr ROY–
animals were just items on a menu–most tribes weren’t vegetarian and competed with the top predators.
“Maybe more like Australia?” Maybe. Although in some respects, Oz is even further behind in dealing with its treatment of native peoples than the US is.
So more like Canada, perhaps. Or New Zealand? But those countries have problems in this regard, too. Maybe not as big as the US, but vexing and painful nonetheless. I guess there’s just no avoiding it.
I suppose that is why, even though I’m a historian, I’ve always been more interested in the future. There is no changing the past. But we can change the future–into whatever we like. For ill, but also for good. It’s up to us. A daunting prospect indeed. Whether humanity embraces it or recoils from it, that is what makes all the difference.
p.s. I think it’s very nice that we’ve been able to conduct this conversation raising our voices, so to speak. Thanks!
are you in Australia Blackcloud?
I liked the song by Midnight oil–‘how can you sleep when the bed is burning’, indeed.
The big bald-headed dude ran for office under Labour didn’t he? But I can’t remember if he was a decent candidate or not. Labour has had some of the worst and best over the last 25 yrs.
Maybe the Australian problems don;t seem as entrenched because it is a less-populated country, but i suppose since the Aboriginals weren’t ‘wiped’ out folks have to be ‘reckoned with’ and can make a cohesive case whereas in the US, tribal nations as a unit are gone from most of the Eastern half of the US and almost no one lives “as they used to”. Since moving back to the US I hear about zip re. Ausl or NZ whereas their issues got alot of press in Europe.
I read that book Walkabout when I was little, very upsetting. Movie was good too.
Sadly, Lota, I’ve never even been to Australia, let alone there now. 🙁 I chuckled when you asked, because a few weeks ago you had me as “Italian” because I knew who Joe Dimaggio and Frank Sinatra were. I’d like to say I’m a man of many parts; I’d also like to say I’m wealthy. But neither would be true.
Anyway, you’re right, Peter Garrett did run for the Australian Parliament on the Labor Party (they spell it without the “u” for some reason) ticket and he won. He’s mostly there for environmental issues. Not sure where he stands on aboriginal questions. It’s been a while since I’ve read anything about them, and what little I know was gleaned from reading Oz papers online. They tend to bubble up from time to time, same as in this country. As for New Zealand, the biggest issue lately (last I checked) was whether or not the natural resources sections of the Treaty of Waitangi extend to the electromagnetic spectrum. I imagine that’s still far from resolution.
I think Native Americans would say they have no more been “wiped out” than the aborigines (boy, Lota, you’ve hit all the hotspots in Amerindian history, do you have a degree in it?). But you make an excellent point about the absence of Indians from the Eastern US. Totally spot on. I remember my utter amazement when I read James Merrell’s “Into the American Woods,” a history of Native-European relations in 18th-century PA. Just the fact that there were Indians in PA was mind blowing, since they have zero presence here now. It was like seeing something anew; it was a different state from the one I knew. Indians were all over PA 250 years ago, and now they’re gone. They were all over the East, but for historical reasons they are now associated almost completely with the West and the frontier in the American imagination. It’s a whole aspect of our history that’s been forgotten. As they say, out of sight . . .
Which is funny, since there are Indian place names all over the place, at least here in the southeastern part of PA. Heck, I went to a high school with an Indian mascot. I’m still not sure what I think about that. Alas, that’s one of the few tangible reminders that there were once natives to go along with the names they’ve left behind.
American Indians seem to feel like they have been ‘wiped out’ in the sense of quasi-assimilation and the forced moves were to environments so different they couldn’t live by their old way of life anyway (for east coast to midwest orginating Indians).
I heard it once compared to house negroes (west coast/desert indians) to the field negroes(east and central indians) in terms how they fared down the road, historically and economically.
And the National Geographic thing–I remember Scientific American, I think referred to the collections being made more available and completed for the first time in ~1990. I think National Geographic was refferring to all of the acreage in the entire US and at what time is was “pre-European settlement” when it was under treaty and what happened to further subdivision of the land and treaties (each time it was changed apparently the govt ordered a new map to be made, which then is archived–so NGS has a record of it). I think they had evidence for millions of acres that were confiscated Illegally meaning there was no agreed treaty and the federal and state govts just had new maps drawn up!
Historical depiction of indians (if you haven’t read them already): Stephen Meader’s adventure stories especially River of the Wolves and The Seminole Trail. Fascinating Noble savage stuff written inte 1940s-1950s I think, with an interesting twist–His books were like mini-reparations. Another great author to read is Evelyn Sibley Lampman’s young adult books.
Lota,
We all get it. You are ashamed of your ancestors and mine and everyone elses actions founding this great country. Now relax. No one cares if you feel like a guilty person. Why don’t you donate your time to the Indian Reservations or something? Relieve the guilt that consumes you.
That was cheap, presumptive and uncalled for, A21.
I agree, Angelus. You’re clearly the one who feels guilty here and wants to quiet Lota because her words disturb you.
Somehow, Lota doesn’t strike me as being Ward Churchill in disguise.
Lota wasn’t entirely sure of her ancestry until she was genotyped (and found out how interesting I am), and is not ashamed of anything. I logged enough hours as a volunteer to never feel guilty again, don’t you worry about me.
and definitely not Ward Churchill.
Lota definately supports Ward Churchill.
And how would you know that PandaBear?
Did Lota just third person herself?
Yes Lota did third person herself (the shock! the horror!), isn’t it fun? now all I need is a “manservant”. I wish Javier Bardem would oblige.
I don’t really like Ward Churchill’s manner or choice of words, and if I taught ethnic studies I would do it cultural-centric not politico-centric so facts don’t get as tainted by opinions.
Listening to Lota’s Ward Churchhill type rants is becoming a total bore. I don’t think she even believes half the stuff coming out of her mouth now.
Nowhere near as boring as someone who insults other people and puts words in their mouth and generally acts like a jerk.
Like you? Do tell.
Hearing someone consistently rail against everything this country is and what its about gets extremely tedious after two days. Now shes pulling at straws. When you get compared to the likes of Ward Churchill its time to maybe step back and process it.
But you agree with most of Wards teachings though right? Ward is a grade A, certified wack job. Exhibit A for abolishing tenure.
Labeling me as “ward churchill” doesn’t make me Ward Churchill, although I notice some people on this blog delight in labeling as a method of trying to stymie conversation, perhaps it’s best to Stymie yourself as my friend Archie used to say.
I don’t share many of Ward Churchill’s views, which you would know if you knew anything about Ward Churchill to start with. I got into quite a heated argument with him about 12 years ago, we have little in common. In fact Panda Bear your manner of speaking suits Ward better than mine ever could.
WHo’s railing ‘against everything this country is’? Nonsense–I have done so much for this country I could give you a long list buddy, and everything I’ve done was for FREE.
What have you done for your country you love so well Panda? Please tell me what you have done–I am dying to know how much I suck compared to You. Talk is cheap–if you love your country you get off your backside and do something about it instead of just talk–so enlighten me.
And what straws am I pulling at? More nonsense. But i clearly gives you emotional release.
I’d like to stymie all this talk and get back to movies. Stymie away, Ward Jr.
Sanchez where on this page have you talked about movies?–nowhere. Dave said he liked the discussion earlier on and it’s his blog.
by theway–Dave posed this question about movies–
“How do movies deal with Black America or other ethnicities? Are we anywhere closer to agreeing on any “truth” than we were when John Wayne rode tall?”
so…you wanna talk only movies, fine–what about Dave’s question?
I don’t mind the conversation going in different directions… I do mind when Poster A feels the need to tell Poster B what what Poster B thinks. I am fine with any conversation that, for the most part, asserts a position rather than tears someone else down. (The positions of others are fair game.)
Angelus21 was, I think, wrong about attacking Lota… but telling him that he is the one who is guilty doesn’t thrill me either.
At the same time, no one is forcing anyone to keep reading posts. People get bored with threads every day. Once you say you think Lota is too PC and her strong position on this issue is making you uncomfortable and/or bored, there is not a lot of reason to keep engaging, is there? Offering her opposing ideas might make her consider her position. But accusing her of stuff isn’t going to do anything but create a fight.
This metaphor works in every post.
I do love the diversity of opinion in here… but after dealing with you-know-who for the last 48 hours, I am exhausted with the “I have to be right and for me to be right you have to be wrong” stuff.
But I am not in charge of any of you.