into the west

[Krusher]

Originally posted by eskimo2
I went to high school with Irene Bedard:



She was also the voice and image basis for the animated film Pocahontas.

eskimo

Russell Means has a part in this series also.

[eskimo2]

So Lazs,

When you look at this time in history, how do you feel about the Native Americans?  Do you think that they were pretty much all the same; or did some tribes behave in a more civilized manor?  Would you say that you feel contempt for them?  Do you admire them in anyway?  If so, for what?  Do you think that the United States and its citizens treated them appropriately?  Or do you see a mix of appropriate and in appropriate treatment?

eskimo

[lazs2]

eskimo... I see that there were a lot of differences between the tribes.  there were also a lot of similarities in their civilization and progress.   their archetecture, medicine, tools, clothing  and warcraft were all about the same from tribe to tribe.   This means that their progress, or lack thereof was about the same even tho many tribes were thousands of miles away from each other.

Admire?  I don't know.. they were good at woodscraft but then... that was pretty much their entire universe.   Little tough on the women anmd kids though and... It leaves you open to getting your butt kicked.  I don't know... little things I am sure... tell you what.... name a few and I will tell you if I admire that or not... overall tho.. no...

I don't think that we treated them any worse than they treated each other or us... we just did it  a thousand times more efficiently.  Indians were in Mexico and Canada too..  They ain't moving around like gypsies in tents in those countries either.  I would say that in some cases the whites involved behaved extremely badly... very inappropriate.. I would say that indians also... for whatever reason... acted in ways that were beyond barbaric... ways that would make anyones blood run cold these days.  

dred... never broke a treaty?  Well... I don't know about that.. will research it but.. you are aware that it was difficult for the Whites to tell just exactly what band of savages was slaughtering their people and often attributed the savagery of one group to another.   Indians could not tell the difference in whites either.

The decline and the destruction of the indians was inevitable.

lazs

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by Krusher
Russell Means has a part in this series also.

So did Garry Bussy.  Small part though.  Caught epp 1 last night, I have to say it was impressive to say the least.

[Toad]

Dred, you ever find any substantiation of your "germ warfare" claim? Other than Amherst?

[Hangtime]

Toad, I doubt that anybody's ever gonna find a 'smoking gun' that could convict Amherst of anything beyond consipracy to commit genocide by todays judical standards. Would make for an interesting mock trial..

On the other hand, his mention of it clearly indicates that the British were familiar with the effect smallpox had on the tribes, and how to easily transmit it for maximum effect.

Further, just about every place whites made contact with the indians during the first 100 years or so of colonization, diseases decimated the indians.. intentional? Probably not. Inevitable, yup.

Did the indians get a square deal? Nope.. not by our standards. By their standards? Yah, I'd say so. Both 'sides' were less than civilized in restitution for deeds. In Indian vs Indian confrontations, the losing tribe got on average a lot worse deal than Tribes vs the US Government confrontations.

Treaty's? A treaty is just the manisfestation of Diplomacy. And in the case of Indian Affairs, diplomacy was just the art of saying 'Nice Injun, here's some tobacco, booze and blankets..' while the white governments of the time looked for a way to kick 'em into oblivion.

Outcome? black eye for the Racist White American Government. A pretty decent break on taxes and land for the descendents of the Tribes today. Descendants of African American slaves in the US envy the deal.. they wish they could be so 'favored'... '40 acres and a mule' not withstanding. (time limit's up for blacks, indians by birth inherit the indian nation's grants and privledges)

Does 'white america' today 'owe' the indians?

Cripes.. now THERE''S a hot debate; and you can bet the indignant howls from both sides will be loud and long should any change of status-quo be forthcoming..

[Airhead]

Originally posted by Hangtime


Does 'white america' today 'owe' the indians?

 

All we owe the Indians is for white America to keep thier word pertaining to thier soverignity over those lands seded to them by treaty or negotiation. Let's not be Indian givers here, OK?

[Hangtime]

Originally posted by Airhead
All we owe the Indians is for white America to keep thier word pertaining to thier soverignity over those lands seded to them by treaty or negotiation. Let's not be Indian givers here, OK?

Absolutely agreed, here. No beef with that whosoever.

One has to wonder tho.. considering our national record for sticking to treaties just how golden the promises from washington really are.

[Sandman]

I think I'll try to find a torrent for it.

[lazs2]

airhead... I have no problem with honoring any treaty made a hundred or more years ago involving the indians.   If they are indeed a soverign country tho... then they should be left alone.   If a white commits a crime there then it should not be a U.S crime and if they want him they have to extradite him.  they should not be hooked up to our roads or power or infrastructure without paying and... they should not be subject to health laws for their establishments or any other regulations.

They shouldn't cost us a cent.  the roads going to their reservations should be toll roads and they should have to have visas to visit the U.S.

lazs

[DREDIOCK]

Originally posted by Toad
Dred, you ever find any substantiation of your "germ warfare" claim? Other than Amherst?

In all honesty I only did a breif search and so far, no.
And again in honesty thats what I've always heard so I just assumed it to be true

But he did brag about doing so no?
So it wouldnt surprise me if he did.
 I mean that sort of thing your either going to keep hush hush or boast about doing it depending on your ego.
  I think it unlikely that someone would boast of doing such a thing if they didnt really do it. Particularly if they are in a well recognised leadership role.

LOL its not like bragging about the big fish you didnt really catch.

[rpm]

Originally posted by lazs2
airhead... I have no problem with honoring any treaty made a hundred or more years ago involving the indians.   If they are indeed a soverign country tho... then they should be left alone.   If a white commits a crime there then it should not be a U.S crime and if they want him they have to extradite him.  they should not be hooked up to our roads or power or infrastructure without paying and... they should not be subject to health laws for their establishments or any other regulations.

They shouldn't cost us a cent.  the roads going to their reservations should be toll roads and they should have to have visas to visit the U.S.

lazs

Just an FYI. I know for a fact that the Navajo nation pays for all their road construction, not the US. I used to work for Duininck Brothers, a major national highway construction company. They had to set up a seperate division with partial Native American ownership to be able to bid on Navajo highway projects. I worked on one of those projects in the Navajo nation at Crownpoint, NM. They are indeed a seperate nation with their own police force and judicial system.

[Toad]

Amherst did suggest it and apparently one of his Colonels did it. I think that's been proven through correspondence.

That's not really the question. The question is "Did anyone else do it?" or maybe "Was it Official British (later US) policy?" or even "Can we show it was deliberately done by any other white-eyes?"

One thing to remember is that at the time smallpox was a big killer. An Englishman, Jenner, developed the first vaccine in 1796; by 1800 only about 100,000 people had been vaccinated worldwide.

It spread easily and rapidly in those days. If they were to practice "germ warfare" what was the planto keep the disease confined to the "enemy" without it spreading to allied tribes or even white settlements?

I even ran across one reference that indicated In 1882, the US government spent $1430.35 for vaccine for Indian tribes. Not nearly enough but still shows an intent to vaccinate them. The full reference is in a medical site that is passworded though.

Just saying that the "germ warfare" charge has been around a long time. There's that old saying "where's there's smoke there's fire"; I'd at least like to see some spark other than Amherst which happened before the US even existed.

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Heh. come and try to take my land from me and I'd have become a peace loving red hippie too just like them.

And the White man did slaugheter em.
in more ways then one.
Including intentionally selling them blankets contaminated with the Small Pox Virus (germ warfare)

During the French and Indian Wars, blankets from smallpox patients were given to native Indian populations by British soldiers, with subsequent epidemics killing up to 50% of affected tribes.

Karaya

[Thrawn]

The Six Nations: Oldest Living Participatory Democracy on Earth

 
http://www.ratical.org/many_worlds/6Nations/