When someone says "native American" do they mean Mexican? or Hawaiian?

Humans are the virus of planet earth. Humans have swallowed up the earth and may well destroy themselves as the waste keeps on growing. Humans need to be wiped out.

The Aztecs and Mayans were conquered by the Spanish Conquistadors who practically decimated these cultures with the Europeans diseases they carried with them from which the American natives had no immunity. These Spanish Conquistadors married the Aztec and Mayan womens and thus we have the Mexicans.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Europeans and Indians had the same natural life span when they first came together. We know this from burial remains. Indians also had better teeth because they did not eat sugar. Some of the most gruesome early "modern" birth techniques were invented by white "doctors" in their efforts to discredit traditional midwives. I would take a 18thc Indian midwife over a white 18thc white doctor any day.

Our fore fathers admired the Indian system of nations (on the east coast) and looked to emulate the structure in the design of state hood.

Old growth forest is difficult to burn. New growth forest, with it's messy undergrowth, goes up like a tinderbox. You know nothing of forest management and believe me - I do. I sometimes even get paid to teach about it.

What ever makes you think their life was ugly? Because they never used a fast food drive thru or their children didn't suffer from asthma? Maybe you don't like the fact that they hunted and fished all day instead of stuffing themselves in a suit and tie to commute in traffic to earn bread money. They certainly weren't subject to whims of some corporate boss who controls your living, your retirement and your healthcare.

I think white people are far more enslaved by the world they have created than any Indian would have been in the world in which he lived.

By the way, I'm a damn good hunter-gatherer. I'm my own boss and I live in one of the few beautifully preserved areas in the northeast. I'm sure I live more like an Indian than you and I'm glad for it.

3 Replies

@Green Witch,

Well Green Witch I am sure you have no books or electronic or advance medical care or? Hmm you are on the internet what a strange hunter gathers you are indeed!!!!!

You used some form of magic to replace hundred of year of technology development and tie into the internet without electronic or power sources or using a technology foundation that generations of evil white men had produce? You are a witch indeed.

You get on the internet without even metal tools!!!!!!

Please feel free to live in a real tribal system where females are view as trade goods and by the way the so call civilize tribes on the East Coast copy our form of government along with our then technology including the printing press and metal working not the other way around.

0 Replies

@talk72000,

Yes talk7200 the Spanish did destroy a lovely culture that enjoy human sacrifices and torturing their enemies to the point that a hand few of Spanish solders was able to find plenty of support from the neighboring tribes that was a little sick of having their young virgin women heart ripped out to the gods.

0 Replies

@Green Witch,

Here is a quote from Robert Heinlein.

There are hidden contradictions in the minds of people who "love Nature" while deploring the "artificialities" with which "Man has spoiled 'Nature'". The obvious contradiction lies in their choice of words, which imply that Man and his artifacts are not part of "Nature" -- but beavers and their dams are. But the contradictions go deeper than this prima-facie absurdity. In declaring his love for a beaver dam (erected by beavers for beavers' purposes) and his hatred for dams erected by men (for the purposes of men) the "Naturist" reveals his hatred for his own race -- i.e., his own self-hatred. In the case of "Naturists" such self-hatred is understandable; they are such a sorry lot. But hatred is too strong an emotion to feel toward them; pity and contempt are the most they rate. As for me, willy-nilly I am a man, not a beaver, and H. sapiens is the only race I have or can have. Fortunately for me, I like being part of a race made up of men and women -- it strikes me as a fine arrangement and perfectly "natural". Believe it or not, there were "Naturists" who opposed the first flight to old Earth's Moon as being "unnatural" and a "despoiling of Nature".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0 Replies

@Green Witch,

Quote:

Old growth forest is difficult to burn. New growth forest, with it's messy undergrowth, goes up like a tinderbox. You know nothing of forest management and believe me - I do. I sometimes even get paid to teach about it.

You don't seem to know too damned much about slash and burn agriculture. The point is precisely to burn off the undergrowth so that domesticates can be planted instead--it isn't about burning down the forest. To get full-grown trees out of their way, they girdled them, and waited for them to die. They weren't stupid, you know.

Your claims about "Indian system of nations" is absurd, but more laughable is your claim about their "system" being emulated. Got some examples of that?

1 Reply

@boomerang,

boomerang wrote:

That was the question Mo asked me tonight.

"Uhhhh.... well.... America is both a country and a continent...." said I.... "So Mexicans would be Native Americans and Hawaii became a state of the country America in 1959 so uhhhhh..... I guess that Hawaiian natives would be Native Americans..... but since it wasn't part of America until then I..... uhhhhh...... well.....and.... uhhhh...... Canada.... it is part of the continent America sooooo....... Could you give me some context?"

It turns out he was talking about American Indian tribes.

But I think it is very interesting the way he phrased the question.

Interesting and perplexing.

I don't think he's wrong.

But I'm not sure he's right.

How, exactly, is "Native American" defined?

Thanks!

I am DEFINED as a native American
because I was born in NEW YORK and that is part of America.
David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

was born in NEW YORK and that is part of America
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OmsigDavid if you are from New York City I would question that for example at the start of the civil war NYC threaten to declare itself an open port as it did not wish to loss the cotton trade<grin>.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta of course Green Witch does not know what she is talking about! She is surrounded with all the benefits of a high technology life style and declaring she is a hunter/gather!

The founding father used the early stages of the Rome Republic as one of their main role models not local Indian tribes.

Of course to give credit where credit is due the Five civilize tribes did adopt our form of government and even developed a written language so they could create newspapers and books in their own language. Unlike Green Witch they saw the benefits of technology.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Much of what you refer to is a part of the contemporary political myth of the noble savage living in a ecological harmony with their environment. The remark about some raiding is laughable when one considers what the Iroquois Confederacy, alone, did to their Amerindian neighbors and farther afield in the 17th century. They slaughtered about 70% of the Hurons, wiped out the "Cat People" (we only know they once existed because of Jesuit records--they were gone before French priests could contact them to learn of their language and culture), slaughtered tens of thousands of Potawatomi, Outagamie, Ottawa and Illinois (Illiniwek), including wiping out the Tamaroa sept of the Illinois completely.

I'm not whitewashing what Europeans did, but i'm not ready to condemn it out of hand, either. It is complete historical horseshit to make the Amerindians into some kind of hapless victim and the white folks as eternally evil practitioners of genocide.

I do not think the beef with white folks has anything to do with wars between Indian tribes, from an ethical standpoint. Sort of like Europeans fighting wars in the 18th century.

But as long as you brought up the thought of "white folks as eternally evil practitioners of genocide," you may be on to something. It might just be a matter of degree, and scope. White folks having a wanderlust of sorts seem to be the only group that has killed all over the globe to gain land, gold, etc. The Americas may only be one or two chapters of that prediliction. Now, I am not saying it is genetic; however, there is a theory that Scandanavians may be very peaceful today, since a millenium ago the war-like genes came to the rest of Europe via the Vikings. The peaceful Scandanavians stayed home.

Now if one would like to correlate the propensity for avaricious war and European genes one should not expect to get published widely. Politically incorrect in a world that is trying to get along in more or less a peaceful manner.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

was born in NEW YORK and that is part of America
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OmsigDavid if you are from New York City I would question that for example
at the start of the civil war NYC threaten to declare itself an open port
as it did not wish to loss the cotton trade<grin>.

SO WHAT ?
There 's no problem with that.
Being a native American
is NOT dependent upon beating another region into submission
nor into unwilling membership in the USA.
Indeed, in its ratification of the US Constitution,
NY, among some other states, reserved its right to withdraw.

From the US National Archives:
00/04/17 NY Instrument of Ratification of the Constitution

Record Group 11, The National Archives, Washington, DC

“ That the powers of government may be reassumed by the people
whensoever it shall become necessary to their happinesss ....

That the People have a right to keep and bear Arms;
that a well regulated Militia, including the body of the People
capable of bearing Arms,
is the proper, natural and safe defence of a free State;
That the Militia should not be subject to Martial Law, except in time of
War, Rebellion or Insurrection."
THEN: Be it known that We the People of the State of New York, Incorporated in
statehood under the Authority of The Constitution of the United States of America
by the New York Instrument of Ratification, thus are graced by the
full benefits and liberties predicated under that document; or we are made
and held captive under Unlawful Powers to which Under God we cannot, must
not, and do not submit.”

0 Replies

When the states were deciding whether to join the USA,
thay 'd have been a lot more reluctant
if thay 'd been informed that (like the Mafia)
u can get in, but there is no way out again; its like a prison.

That was not a selling point for ratification.
Thay did not put that into the Federalist Papers.

David

0 Replies

@Foofie,

Foofie wrote:

Setanta wrote:

Much of what you refer to is a part of the contemporary political myth of the noble savage living in a ecological harmony with their environment. The remark about some raiding is laughable when one considers what the Iroquois Confederacy, alone, did to their Amerindian neighbors and farther afield in the 17th century. They slaughtered about 70% of the Hurons, wiped out the "Cat People" (we only know they once existed because of Jesuit records--they were gone before French priests could contact them to learn of their language and culture), slaughtered tens of thousands of Potawatomi, Outagamie, Ottawa and Illinois (Illiniwek), including wiping out the Tamaroa sept of the Illinois completely.

I'm not whitewashing what Europeans did, but i'm not ready to condemn it out of hand, either. It is complete historical horseshit to make the Amerindians into some kind of hapless victim and the white folks as eternally evil practitioners of genocide.

I do not think the beef with white folks has anything to do with wars between Indian tribes, from an ethical standpoint. Sort of like Europeans fighting wars in the 18th century.

But as long as you brought up the thought of "white folks as eternally evil practitioners of genocide," you may be on to something. It might just be a matter of degree, and scope. White folks having a wanderlust of sorts seem to be the only group that has killed all over the globe to gain land, gold, etc. The Americas may only be one or two chapters of that prediliction. Now, I am not saying it is genetic; however, there is a theory that Scandanavians may be very peaceful today, since a millenium ago the war-like genes came to the rest of Europe via the Vikings. The peaceful Scandanavians stayed home.

Now if one would like to correlate the propensity for avaricious war and European genes one should not expect to get published widely. Politically incorrect in a world that is trying to get along in more or less a peaceful manner.

I guess the Chinese and Japs never did anything remotely like that.

David

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

There is an interesting book who complete title and author my mind is not coming up with on the subject of why in his opinion it was the Europeans who spread out all over the world instead of some other group..

The title have Germ,guns.........in it. Ok a fast google seach the title is Germs guns and steal by a Mr. Diamond. I am not sure I completely agree with it but it is an interesting read.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

I guess the Chinese and Japs never did anything remotely like that.

Certainly not on the scale that the US has done and definitely not on the continuin basis that the US has done.

1 Reply

@JTT,

You do not know a great deal of world history do you!

0 Replies

I have a bias towards green witch's points, but also quickly get what set is saying.

As far as terms of address, they've changed over my decades, sometimes within, oh, it seemed a month. I will be glad to call people what they prefer and listen to why they prefer it.

In the meantime, I'm a Los Angeles native.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

That is to say, I think of LA native - sort of rare in my early days, or considered so, what with all the newcomers - as a whole different bag of beans than being born native american, or indian - especially in the LA region, with that local tribe rather wiped out (forget the name, starts with C) Amerind makes sense to me, but I'm no anthropologist.

1 Reply

Would, of course, like to hear what JL, who is an anthropologist, and Fbaezer have to say on all this.

0 Replies

@ossobuco,

I'm sorry about my memory - it isn't in all clear, and would that it were, more. I did read Carey McWilliams 'Island on the Land', about California, formative in my understanding of my area, but it was a pass through, what with sixty plus hours to the work school week.

I won't promote it or defend it, but it was a waker upper for me.

1 Reply

When someone says "native American" do they mean Mexican? or Hawaiian?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know