Patrick Elliott wrote:
> In article <481### [at] hotmailcom>, a_l### [at] hotmailcom 
> says...
>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 20:27:51 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, it's shrinking, but I don't know how rapdily, particularly here in 
>>> the intermountain west.  But to solve the "problem" of past conquest 
>>> today isn't an easy one to answer, because you can't make things like 
>>> they were in the 1400's - and I don't think current tribe members would 
>>> think that was a solution.
>>>
>>> I think there's a fine line between acknowledging the past and exploiting 
>>> the sins of the past.  Is it appropriate to continue to pay reparations 
>>> to the Native Americans today for something that started 700 years ago?  
>> 700?
>>> I honestly can't say I know the answer to that question.  My instinct is 
>>> to say "you have the same opportunities today as everyone else here", 
>> That only applies if they want to live the same rat race as non native 
>> americans (if that is the negation of native americans).
>> If they want to live more or less like they did a millenium ago you 
>> might argue that the non natives should not make that impossible.
> Yeah. Most of them want to live like the ones directly across the street 
> from where I grew up.. Three things they had in common:
> 
> 1. They lived off government hand outs.
> 2. They never maintained anything they got from the government, figuring 
> if they broke their car, windows, walls, doors, etc., the government 
> could be called to fix it.
> 3. They, one year, got all pissed off about something, started working 
> towards a war path, and only stopped when the local sheriff pointed out 
> that the neighbors across the street from them where all armed, and they 
> wouldn't have a tribe left to get pissed off at the government with, if 
> they decided to cross the street and start hurting people.
> 
> There seem to be three types:
> 
> 1. The ones that "will" live in the rat race, because they know damn 
> well that sitting on their ass and doing jack shit isn't going to get 
> them any place.
> 
> 2. The ones that milk the government and every treaty they can dig up 
> from some place to screw white people, while not doing jack shit for 
> themselves, then blame both for why they don't have anything.
> 
> 3. The ones that really do want to go back to "traditional ways", and 
> basically refuse most help, won't be part of modern society, and think 
> that being part of that society will destroy them, somehow "more" than 
> what the first two groups have done.
> 
> Well, OK, there are obviously exceptions within the individual tribes, 
> but this is generally what you end up seeing. They are destroying 
> themselves, and we keep kissing their asses, on the stupid presumption 
> that we "owe" the modern, gutless, ethicless, worthless, descendants 
> what their ancestors **actually** deserved. Want to help them? Give all 
> the land, money, etc. to the ones that are not assholes, then let the 
> rest do something useful with their lives. But then, I may be biased, 
> given the particular bunch of morons I lived across from.
> 
Yes, you are. More in tone than in observation. One other way to look at 
it is that there is a confusion of inheritance of culture and 
inheritance of genes. While it is worthwhile to preserve the culture, 
not everybody that has the genes is part of that culture. Especially the 
ones that have nearly no culture at all, and that preserve what is left 
in ethanol.
Your three types are worldwide. There are several tribes trying to live 
a traditional way of life in this modern madness and there are those 
that do nothing and blame everything on others. My sister was a few 
years ago in Cameroon and she was supposed (and subtly forced) to pay 
for the food of everybody she met because she was from Europe and, well, 
you know, slavery and such.
One other thing: the three types are actually at least six, because it 
is all about a clash of two cultures and you forgot to take the culture 
that ends on top into consideration. The remaining ones are: 3b) winning 
group basically goes on undisturbed. 1b) Cultures get mixed and 2b) 
winning group takes most of the culture over from the defeated (I think 
I remember there were case where that happened but can't remember 
which). And there is also the situation that no group actually wins totally.

Post a reply to this message