That is if you take clever in conjunction with subterfuge being a positive thing. The Devil is also clever...and treacherous if you like a Biblical reference. I question that winning at all cost doesn't have a payback, like trying to get away with as many fouls as possible in a sports endeavor. The end justifies the means until the means are scrutinized and inherent evils are unearthed. Cleverness is much too often the "talent" to disguise these evils. It's up to each of us to try and look through the facade of idealism to the true nature of the beast. There are ideologues on both sides but which one is the most dangerous? Would anyone care to smile at a native American today or just don't look into their eyes? Incidentally, I voted for them to operate casinos in California. Bedamned the Vegas corporate operatives who still harbor gangsters in their midst.
(Humbly ambles away to clean the silver in my "Ivory Tower.")
LW
Put whatever spin on it you want ----it's still the real world. You are very adept at taking the high ground. Let's take this to another thread----I don't want to be accused of hi-jacking this thread. Since you occupy the high ground I'll follow you.
Splitting sounds okay but I've exhausted what I have to say about it at this time -- I was pointing out that how one feels about the past and the present concerning native Americans, or for that matter, African Americans and slavery defines where they are politically.
Lightwizard
<Survival of the fittest? Social Darwinism, hey. More like survival of the cleverest, the more adept at subterfuge with more fire power to back it up?>
True. But isn't that the way of the world. We can stand in the corner and go tsk,tsk. But man being what he is will always act on the premise that might makes right. There is nothing new under the sun.
That I saw, no one brought up the abhorent policy of "Manifest Destiny" which is now being resurrected in the Middle East by the current administration.
This is all I have on the subject because it makes my blood boil and I have absolutely no tolerance for this absolute intolerance. It is pure evil!
This topic is split from here:
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2044
My apologies if some of the postings are a little hard to follow; that's the nature of splitting a topic.
I find that USAs foreign policy has been all too manifest destiny for my liking. I keep voting...
Thanks Jespah!
LW
Ah---come on back LW---it won't be nearly as much fun without you. Since you brought it up, let's compare the Native American situation to the African American situation. i.e., do you think we should first buy back all of the USA from the Native Americans and then turn around a buy it again from the African Americans.
Is it necessary to think only in terms of money? That was the problem then, that is the problem now. What native Americans would most like, I think, is to be respected, something it is obvious that you don't do.
Piffka
How can you speak for Native Americans----are you one? Where did I show disrespect for them?
One truth, Indians did not have a concept of "LAND". This is European. They thought that they were getting something for nothing. In Oklahoma when the first oilwells were discovered, the Indians were given a bottle of whiskey for their land rights. They couldn't fathom a concept of "LAND" - they knew what whiskey was.
This was a known con game - Phillips Petroleum plus a few others evolved out of this felonious con game.
Piffka
How can you speak for Native Americans? Are you one? Please quote where I was disrespectfull of Native Americans.
sand creek masacre
in sept of 1864 Chief Black Kettle and his band of about 600 Cheyenne and Arapaho natives surrendered at Ft Lyon in Colorado and were told to go to sand creek and camp there awaiting further instructions, and so they did hanging american and white flags on their tepee's. the young men when off hunting to feed there families but Governor John Evans wanted that land to entice settlers so he ordered Chivingtion with his Colorado Militiamen 700 strong and mostly drunk to get rid of those indians. When Chivingtion arrived at Sand Creek and found only women, children and old people, he saw an opportunity and he took it. "THEY WERE SCALPED, THEIR BRAINS KNOCKED OUT; THE MEN USED THEIR KNIVES, RIPPED OPEN WOMEN, CLUBBED LITTLE CHILDREN, KNOCKED THEM IN THE HEAD WITH THEIR RIFLE BUTTS, BEAT THEIR BRAINS OUT, MUTILATED THEIR BODIES IN EVERY SENSE OF THE WORD." By the end of the one-sided battle as many as 200 Indians, more than half women and children, had been killed and mutilated.
While the Sand Creek Massacre outraged easterners, it seemed to please many people in Colorado Territory. Chivington later appeared on a Denver stage where he regaled delighted audiences with his war stories and displayed 100 Indian scalps, including the pubic hairs of women.
only 2 weeks ago the monument celebrating Chivington's success in protecting white settlers was removed from the Capitol Bldg in Denver. This is an example of Manifest Destiny, of "civilization overcoming savages". kinda makes you wonder just who the savages are. just my opinion, i might be wrong.
Whoops
Piffka
You interpret my words wrong---I won't play your game.
BillW
Actually, I don't know. And I don't know of a source, proving that "the Indians did not a concept of land. This is European."
I do know, however, that this was said by the Spanish, Portuguese, English, Dutch, and French crowns controlled the granting of land, normally through each colony's government, but sometimes through agents, proprietors, companies, or partnerships.
(These were the people, btw, who settled in America before the USA were established.)
Perception, this is no game. I am absolutely serious. The settlers and indian fighters were wrong, very wrong. Until people such as yourself can understand that, we will always be on opposite sides of any fence there is.
Piffka, what alternative to settlement do you propose as not 'wrong'? Has there ever been a right way?
