Are Native Americans Considered Foreigners in America?

Originally posted by HelenConway

I would like to say that you cannot have selective compassion - it should be there for all or it is not there.

If you have an open heart IMO you cannot discriminate between men or even fail to feel compassion for the animals.

The English who were sent to Australia - have my complete compassion, they did not chose to be shipped to a foreign land for stealing a loaf of bread or killing a rabbit because they were hungry.

Many many of them died in prisons in NSW and Tasmania .. they did not want to leave their homes and families.

Helen let me clarify for you. I do have compassion for all prisoners as I have been through the joke called a justice system here in America.

Understand I can relate more with the Aboriginals who would suffer the same fate as the Natives of North America.

I know what I am addressing will be viewed as a controversial subject, but it has to be said.

Inside I do see everyone as my brother and sister. We all breathe the same air and bleed the same color and enter and leave this world the same. This is all the more reason why this should be addressed.

Why do we allow this to continuously happen throughout history?

Originally posted by loveguy

Past tense; when considering native tribes who shared the land that no one owned.

This is not entirely accurate. There was certainly a kind of land ownership among the native tribes and frequent bouts of violence to control said territories. The English settlers however brought with them the idea of individual property ownership and exclusive control of the resources therein.

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck

Still is current my sister is an anthropologists she has worked on the crow creek massacre and other native sights as well as in Chavin, Peru. There is still much debate on who was here and when.



More recent...


Video

reply to post by IntrinsicMotivation

Well I guessed as much

This is why IMO

Because we [humanity] have been brutalised and cut off from the life force.

Many have closed hearts and cannot feel the life in others .. animal, mineral and plant.

They / we are indoctrinated / forced to replace harmony with the system - enforced by the controllers, who IMO are very disconnected from the life force.

It is the oldest story in the book - the only thing that changes is the names, the names of the people, the names of the peoples.

Humanity is insane by and large - there is a huge schism between what we were born to be and what we actually are.

Originally posted by KeliOnyx

Originally posted by loveguy

Past tense; when considering native tribes who shared the land that no one owned.

This is not entirely accurate. There was certainly a kind of land ownership among the native tribes and frequent bouts of violence to control said territories. The English settlers however brought with them the idea of individual property ownership and exclusive control of the resources therein.

I believe that they called it “Manifest Destiny”

Originally posted by ParanoidAmerican
reply to post by IntrinsicMotivation

 

More and more evidence is being found that is showing that "Native Americans" are not and were not the first to this region. I would argue that where in time do we draw the line 10k or 20k years ago? For example Kennewick Man reported to be Caucasian as well as others in the SW. Even how the first people got here is in doubt now.

Who Were The First Americans?

edit on 29-5-2013 by ParanoidAmerican because: (no reason given)

Did the founding fathers take the land from the Kennewick people? Were the Kennewick people driven onto reservations and systematically denied the assistance promised to them by the great white father after the buffalo were killed and left to rot on the plains so the settlers could take what they wanted without losing their hair?

Oh wait, that's not exactly how it happened either.

By the late 1840s the homestead proposal attracted politicians who brought the subject before Congress, the most prominent being Andrew Johnson of Tennessee. Until this time the government had auctioned off public lands to the highest bidder, thereby allowing speculators to buy vast tracts of land and hold it off the market until the price rose so they could make handsome profits. The small farmer was effectively excluded from such land sales.

www.enotes.com...

The little people were the elite's bulldozers. Clear the land of red devils for the elites and then give it to them for "safekeeping".

Originally posted by ParanoidAmerican
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck

 

Still is current my sister is an anthropologists she has worked on the crow creek massacre and other native sights as well as in Chavin, Peru. There is still much debate on who was here and when.

But Clovis is toast, the Beringia superhiway is no longer the only route...and Kenniwick Man was not Caucasian.

Originally posted by loveguy
Land of the free home of the brave...

Past tense; when considering native tribes who shared the land that no one owned.

Do they like turkey on a day they try to forget?
Turkey helps us fall back asleep, comfort food?

Actually, I was really surprised on my first Thanksgiving out on the Navajo Reservation to find that they actually celebrated the holiday. When I expressed my confusion because I expected it to be a holiday that they regretted or, as you put it--would rather forget, I was told that it was the one holiday that they actually understood very well and was closest to their own beliefs of being thankful for everything they had. They just chose to adapt it as their own celebration and not necessarily one including pilgrims. Had the turkey, stuffing, mashed potatoes and gravy, unusually cooked yams (don't ask lol), corn, and fry bread. Had to make food for about 30 because coworkers, extended family, and friends were bound to stop by. Go figure, eh?

That said, thank you for this thread, OP. After living out there on the rez for almost a decade, I ended up becoming the white lady that other whites came to to find out what it was like to live out there and answer questions or correct mistaken assumptions for years. Based on all those dialogues, I think part of the reason why they may be less associated with America is simply because there hasn't been a whole lot of emphasis on the history of Native Americans in schools. I know my daughter (half Nat Am) had a learning module on different tribes in the 4th grade but for decades,learning about the tribes was a higher education thing outside of learning about the "pilgrims and indians" around every turkey day. To add to it, a good portion of Nat Am still live on the reservations. The tribal customs, practices and languages, if still extant, are not something that we can generally go into some part of town to experience. It's not a Chinatown. Most of the time, we'd have to drive out of the way for miles to see them and because the tribal worldview can be drastically different from the general worldview of European Americans, there is a massive chasm of difference between the two groups. Hence, the tribes would seem foreign and unfamiliar to many European Americans when in reality and in technicality, we are the foreigners. Hopefully made sense there.

Originally posted by KeliOnyx

Originally posted by loveguy

Past tense; when considering native tribes who shared the land that no one owned.

This is not entirely accurate. There was certainly a kind of land ownership among the native tribes and frequent bouts of violence to control said territories. The English settlers however brought with them the idea of individual property ownership and exclusive control of the resources therein.

Is that an accurate statement though ?

Common land was still common in england in the 1500s and 1600s.

In fact land enclosure en masse did not occur in England until th e late 1700s / early 1800s - hence the great move from the country to the newly built/ populated cities.

I know the common myth perpetuates the idea of the wicked English ' owning ' land whereas the American Indians - had no concept of land ownership.

In English social and economic history, enclosure or inclosure[1] is the process which ends traditional rights such as mowing meadows for hay, or grazing livestock on common land formerly held in the open field system.

Once enclosed, these uses of the land become restricted to the owner, and it ceases to be land for commons.

In England and Wales the term is also used for the process that ended the ancient system of arable farming in open fields.

Under enclosure, such land is fenced (enclosed) and deeded or entitled to one or more owners. The process of enclosure began to be a widespread feature of the English agricultural landscape during the 16th century.

By the 19th century, unenclosed commons had become largely restricted to rough pasture in mountainous areas and to relatively small parts of the lowlands.

en.wikipedia.org... [ i know it is wiki but it is referenced if you are interested]

However - I am not sure this is entirely accurate.

The rulers may have had a fierce need to acquire land - I doubt this was the case with the common people.

I do know that they were allocated land by the govt. However the truth is the govt was doling out land that often was taken.

Originally posted by HelenConway
reply to post by IntrinsicMotivation

 

Because we humanity has been brutalised and cut off from the life force.

Many have closed hearts and cannot feel the life in others .. animal, mineral and plant.

They / we are indoctrinated / forced to replace harmony with the system - enforced by the controllers, who IMO are very disconnected from the life force.

It is the oldest story in the book - the only thing that changes is the names, the names of the people, the names of the peoples.

I gave your post a star. I feel what you are saying. To combat this, learn the game. Social Engineering, study sociology and psychology, this is what they use. Study Edward Bernays contribution to the modern art of public relations and propaganda.

If you have looked into him then I need not explain. My term paper in Social Psychology was on this man. Here goes the opening paragraph from his 1928 book titled “Propoganda.”

THE conscious and intelligent manipulation of the
organized habits and opinions of the masses is an
important element in democratic society. Those who
manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute
an invisible government which is the true ruling
power of our country.

But the game is deeper than studying those fields; you must study history as well as the laws and understand the language of the law.

I have a year and a half to go until I complete my bachelors in Psychology, then applying for a Juris Doctorate (Law Degree). I know it will take some time but I have already been studying Law on my own for the last 7 years.

I am doing what I can to try to make a difference without violence.

reply to post by frazzle


No you are right the native population at that time likely drove out the first settlers and history repeated itself. Now if you want to talk about the practices used for taking over a nation look to Spain for brutality. Other Europeans were civil compared to them. I don't claim that what white Europeans did was right in anyway, but we know now that there were others here before Columbus, before the Vikings, and before our Native populace.

reply to post by IntrinsicMotivation

How did things get this way?

Such interest is defined like you said by the barriers that exist. They have been erected to keep information about the true history of the numerous peoples that were here before Columbus "discovered" America. Like it didn't even exist before the Europeans "found it". That is the first barrier. School education.

The second is a million "Cowboy and Indian" movies and TV shows that fed us biased information when we were growing up in the 60's in America.

I mean growing up in white, middle class America. Children's toys were repeating rifles, six guns, and knives. We emulated John Wayne and slew the "savages". Nobody wanted to be the Indians and the cowboys always won.

Since we didn't talk about the Natives much in school and all the history lessons that were imparted were one sided, it was easy to let that information vacuum be filled with John Wayne slaughtering the "Heathens" or "Red skins" or "cut throats".

It was a barrage from all angles on our young formative minds. School, TV, Toy Marketing, etc.

If you want to ask your self why over the Millennia, European "Explorers" found it their mandate or "Manifest Destiny" to conquer people everywhere they went and reduce them to slavery until starved or tortured to death...

You Tell Me

Spanish: Caribbean, Central and South America, when they got to these places they immediately destroyed whatever culture and religion that existed replacing it with their twisted fantasies under pain of death by gruesome means. Then they put them to work in the fields or mines until they all died. Then they imported black slaves from Africa and thats why the Caribbean is mostly African Lineage to this day. The Incas, Aztec, and Mayan people were decimated in the name of God and Gold (interchangeable).

English: Ruled over India and we won't go into that, enslaved millions to the Opium Poppy in China. (guess where the money to buy the Crown Jewels came from?)

The French: They still "colonize" parts of Africa to this day. Recently Mali, NIger and others feed their vast appetite for Uranium to run their Nuclear Power Plants.

You've heard of the "Dutch" East Indies?

Don't even get me started on The Crusades...

When the Europeans weren't fighting each other and creating "Dark Ages" and "Middle Ages" they were busy conquering other countries all round the world. They genocided the native populations and imported slaves to replace them.

In the US we did the very same thing. We decimated the natives, "inherited" the land, "imported" slaves, then killed each other when we got bored in the American Civil War.

After things settled here we went right back to conquering other countries or at least meddling in their affairs right on up to the present day.

Is it over yet? Can we just ask the White Devils to stand down, go home and take a long break from this madness?

You tell me.

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


Don't know what you mean on the first two...but...and We will never know if Kennewick was Caucasian for sure because we allowed them to claim him, we only have the observation and documents from those who have seen the remains and they both claim he had Caucasoid features. ""From head to toe, the bones were largely intact. The skeleton was that of a man, middle-aged at death, with Caucasian features, judging by skull measurements. Imbedded in the pelvis was a spearhead made of rock.""

reply to post by HelenConway


Really thats not true? Cause it sounds to me like you are looking for a whole class of people to point blame at. You know what they say about pointing fingers right? When you point one you have three pointing back at ya.

My family fought in the revolutionary war against the brits. But since you care so much, I am also partly native american as all sides did not fight along side the British all though many did. Get your facts straight sister.

reply to post by IntrinsicMotivation


About the Native American's fighting for the Europeans, those were the children that were taken from their dead parent's, put into catholic boarding schools and brainwashed. It was as simple as that.

Also it's interesting what Columbus said about the First Nations, he said that they were the most friendliest, most intelligent and freest people he has ever met, then he proceeded to kill everyone, instead of creating a trade network and learning their pure way of life.

Now to a few posts about the Spanish not knowing what they were going find here, oh they knew, and they came prepared. Every time a treaty was made, it was a trap, and the treaty's were always broken. European powers were afraid of the Natives and their way of life, because it gave humans freedom to live off the land in peace without being owned by anyone, Romans can't have such a way of life, that would take the Vatican's power away from them.

But there is a lot people don't know, there were Native's living off the land just like the First Nations all over the world, and they were all killed by people that wanted to control and legislate everyone's life's.
But nobody remember's them, and when they are mentioned they are insulted, being called lazy drunks and many other ridiculous things, tragic.

Murderers and thieves came and took EVERYTHING from truly free people, and those butchers call Natives savages, propaganda working at it's best since thousands of years ago. And yeah the same thing is happening now, Europeans haven't changed their tactics for thousands of years, the U.S military is just an extension of their program.

reply to post by IntrinsicMotivation


That is fantastic - and you are obviously working very hard.

I am older then you - so maybe more cynical, but I although I am tempted to study more, [ if I can get funding]

I realise that the more I know through study - the truth is the more I come to realise that I know nothing.

Most of what we are taught and told is such complete rubbish - but I agree we do need it, if we want to work within the current system.

However - I do love history and it shows me that as a species we are damn slow to learn.

I am fascinated by the earth and I know she is a living being and that we are abusing her - and all her children [ not just humans]. It breaks my heart.

reply to post by txinfidel


what is not true ??? I do not know what post you are replying too ?
My family also fought in the revolutionary wars !
and please don't 'sister' me ...

Originally posted by KeliOnyx

Originally posted by loveguy

Past tense; when considering native tribes who shared the land that no one owned.

This is not entirely accurate. There was certainly a kind of land ownership among the native tribes and frequent bouts of violence to control said territories. The English settlers however brought with them the idea of individual property ownership and exclusive control of the resources therein.

Very true, there were 500 Nations on this land, and each respected the other's, since in their religion humans never left the garden of Eden, each Nation had a rightful home in which they thrived in.

Originally posted by WhiteAlice

Actually, I was really surprised on my first Thanksgiving out on the Navajo Reservation to find that they actually celebrated the holiday. When I expressed my confusion because I expected it to be a holiday that they regretted or, as you put it--would rather forget, I was told that it was the one holiday that they actually understood very well and was closest to their own beliefs of being thankful for everything they had. They just chose to adapt it as their own celebration and not necessarily one including pilgrims.

In 2003 I met some Navajo’s at a Powwow at the Puyallup tribe in Washington and was offered a chance to go and apply my framing skills building homes in Arizona. We stayed in an off the grid type location called Grey Mountain close to the Navajo Reservation where homes were powered by generators and you had to go to a well to pump water.

I spent a lot of time on the Navajo reservation and it saddened me to know that this is America where we send billions in foreign aid yet have people who live in such conditions.

I will say that I enjoyed the natural beauty of the sunrise against the red rocks there as well as never seeing such a clear view of the stars since I was there.

reply to post by HelenConway


Sorry I confused your post with the op. But still goes.

The Brits convinced many tribes to fight alongside them. Though many also sided with the patriots and some remained neutral. It is not rocket science and also is why Canada has alot of native Americans and native american traditions.