Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Michael Medved :: Townhall.com Columnist
First Americans, First Ecologists?
by Michael Medved
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Political correctness portrays untamed America before European invasion as a natural paradise, where Indians maintained an exquisite ecological balance, living in a harmonious, idyllic relationship to the natural world. According to conventional wisdom, this pre-Columbian Eden flourished for peaceful millenia until brutal disuprtion by thoughtless, menacing and mercenary white colonists. Stewart Udall, one-time Arizona Congressman and later Secretary of the Interior for President Kennedy, became an early advocate of this point of view in his influential 1973 article, “Indians: First Americans, First Ecologists,” urging modern citizens to follow the native example of treating the landscape with love and respect.

Udall’s arguments received powerful support from the popularization of the moving speech of Chief Seattle, the Duwamish elder who addressed a meeting in 1854 in the raw settlement in Washington Territory that ultimately took his name. “Every part of this earth is sacred to my people,” Seattle supposedly told his listeners. “Every shining pine needle, every sandy shore, every mist in the dark woods, every clearing and humming insect is holy in the memory and experience of my people.” Later, the aged sage assaulted the insensitive ways of the new arrivals. “There is no quiet place in the white man’s cities,” he lamented. “The clatter only seems to insult the ears…I’ve seen a thousand rotting buffaloes on the prairie, left by the white man who shot them from a train.”

Actually, it’s unlikely that Chief Seattle ever saw even a single buffalo, either rotting or otherwise, or ever looked at a train for that matter, since buffalo never lived in his verdant corner of the Pacific Northwest, and railroads (along with “the clatter” of white the man’s cities) only arrived several decades after the alleged speech. His poetic remarks (immortalized in a bestselling children’s book, “Brother Eagle, Sister Sky”) represent an internationally influential hoax-- a more or less whole-cloth invention by a screenwriter named Ted Perry for a now-forgotten 1972 TV documentary, based very, very loosely on an account in a Seattle newspaper (twenty years after the kindly chief’s death) of a real talk he may (or may not) have delivered in his largely indecipherable native language to the drenched but respectful pioneers.

In the same era that school kids learned to memorize the bogus words of Chief Seattle, another aged Indian emerged in the pop culture with the sacred purpose of protecting the North American environment, and cementing the widespread image of Indians as eternal guardians of the sacred landscape. In 1971, a brilliant “Keep America Beautiful” public service announcement offered an eloquent plea for ecological consciousness, with the tag line “people start pollution; people can stop it.” The commercial showed garbage thrown from a speeding car landing at the moccasined feet of an elderly native in traditional garb who looks toward the camera with a fat, glistening tear flowing down his weather-beaten cheek. The actor featured in the commercial, a Hollywood veteran with the marvelous name “Iron Eyes Cody,” became famous for those few seconds of video, which easily overshadowed his more than 200 films (including Indian roles in “The Big Trail” with John Wayne (1930), “A Man Called Horse” with Richard Harris (1970) and many more. Iron Eyes became an impassioned advocate for Native American causes and a regular on TV talk shows before his death at age 95 in 1999. Only with his obituaries did the truth emerge about the cherished Native American symbol “Iron Eyes Cody” – whose parents (Antonio De Corti and Francesco Salpietra) both immigrated to the United States from Sicily, and possessed no hint of Indian blood.

The cherished notion of Indians as ecologically enlightened protectors of the natural order actually carries no more authenticity than Chief Seattle’s ruminations on rotting buffalo or the purportedly Cherokee identity of the Sicilian-American “Iron Eyes Cody.” In a densely researched 1999 monograph from Britain's Institute of Economic Affairs (“Wild in the Woods: The Myth of the Eco-Savage”) Robert Whelan blasts the popular but puerile proposition that before 1492, Native Americans lived as blissful stewards of pristine environments they cherished and protected .

The truth is that native peoples, like all other aboriginal societies on the planet, did anything and everything to their surroundings that might help them to survive. "There is now a very considerable body of research," Robert Whelan writes, "which demonstrates conclusively that the Indians made a massive impact on their environment before the arrival of the white man, and that much of this impact was damaging and showed no conception of a conservation ethic."

For example, to hunter-gatherers who lived in temporary structures, trees constituted an impediment that separated them from the animals they wanted to eat. As forests grow, "The open savanna that once supported bison, elk, deer, antelope, beaver, bears, birds and wolves becomes the closed boreal forest inhabited by squirrels, ravens, and pine martens, but little else." So naturally, the Indians (particularly on the Eastern Seaboard) did whatever they could to get rid of the leafy interlopers. Early white settlers expressed surprise to see vast tracts of forest deliberately wiped out: "The Savages are accustomed to set fire of the Country in all places where they come, and to burne it twize a year, vixe at the spring and the fall of the leafe," recorded the Puritan Thomas Morton (an outspoken admirer of the Indians) in 1637. Lewis and Clark reported in their 1805 diaries that "Indians in the Rocky Mountains would set trees alight as after dinner entertainment; the huge trees would explode like Roman candles in the night." In response to a 1992 earth summit, BL Turner and Karl Butzer researched the environmental impact of Native Americans, and found that "Deforestation in the Americas was probably greater before the Columbian encounter than it was for several centuries thereafter."

In fact, in their pursuit of succulent suppers, Indians did a great deal of collateral damage, even driving some species extinct. In 1998, our family accepted an invitation to spend a few days at an historic Wyoming ranch where the couple that owned it took us on an unforgettable tour of their property. They brought us to a red-earth outcropping that rose like a wedge from the surrounding terrain. "This was an Indian Buffalo Run," they explained. The local tribes developed a means to frighten huge herds of buffalo and to direct their stampede —right off the edge of the cliff into a heap of meat more than a hundred feet below. There, awaiting tribesmen could collect as much of the carcasses as they could eat and preserve. They left the rest to rot, creating a mountain of bones still visible (and formidable) below us.

In 1989, the Vore family donated a similar Buffalo Jump to the University of Wyoming, and scholars have been poring over the scene ever since. In the 1970s, during construction of Interstate Highway 90, "less than 10 percent of the site was unearthed at that time, but the analysis revealed at least 20 bone layers which extend about 100 feet across the sink hole and nearly 25 feet down." Because the bones had been preserved by annual layers of sediment called varves, scientists can precisely date the Indians' feasts, and easily glean information about artifacts, weather, and their dining habits.

Shepard Krech III, professor of Anthropology and Environmental Studies at Brown University, describes the Olsen-Chubbuck buffalo run excavation in southern Colorado where, five thousand years ago, two hundred bison "of a species one-third larger than today's" produced 50,000 pounds of meat—and a total waste of the 25% of animals squashed in the bottom of the heap. "Archaeologists who excavated the site found skeletons massed on twisted skeletons, wedged in massive piles against piles and against the steep banks of the narrow gulch. The event probably happened in a flash."

Tribes displayed neither tidiness nor restraint in harvesting various animals for food. University of Utah archaeologist Jack M. Broughton spent seven years sifting through the bird bones in a Native American dump near San Francisco Bay. "From 2,600 to at least 700 years ago," a University press release announces, "native people hunted some species to local extinction," and the animals only rebounded when the Indians became decimated by disease. Broughton's earlier research on Indians' quest for "anything big and juicy" turned up similar fates for fish such as sturgeon, as well as local varieties of elk, deer, geese, and ducks.

Anthropologist Paul S. Martin of the University of Arizona thinks the arrival of the first peoples to North America in prehistoric times meant the end for several big animals: "The basic facts are clear. People established themselves, colonized and spread into the New World at least by 11,000 years ago, if not earlier. And, at this time, large animals—camels, and extinct species of horses, ground sloths, saber-tooth cats, in addition to mammoths and mastodons, and a dozen or two dozen more genera of large animals—all go extinct at roughly the same time."

Calvin Martin, in his fascinating Keepers of the Game: Indian-Animal Relationships in the Fur Trade, explains that Northeastern Native Americans (Objiwa, Hurons, Micmac, League Iroquois, Cree, Montagnais) developed religions that ascribed spiritual powers to all animals, including beavers, and held that each creature existed in a sphere parallel to that of man. The process of hunting, then, became far more than the physical mechanics of trapping and killing, but involved a spiritual interchange of consent and mutual respect. After fur trading began, when natives began to perish in great numbers due to disease, Indians assumed the beaver were exacting retribution against the humans for the plundering of their pelts—leading to the conclusion that the natives could protect themselves only by securing the rodents' elimination. "By 1635, for example, the Huron in the Lake Simcoe area had reduced their stock of beaver to the point where Father Paul LeJeune, the Jesuit, could flatly declare they had none," Martin writes. In a matter of several years, the beaver had been slaughtered to near extinction, as well as moose and other furbearers. Martin concludes, "The game which by all accounts had been initially so plentiful was now being systematically exterminated by the Indians themselves" with a desperate, cultic, religious fervor.

The baseless myth of indigenous peoples living in respectful balance with their natural surroundings and making no mark on the space they inhabited for thousands of years plays an important role in most allegations of Indian genocide, because it reinforces the image of Natve Americans as childlike innocents, no more capable of protecting themselves than the noble beasts they supposedly revered. This vision supports an image of explorers and colonists as intruders, despoilers and mass killers, with nothing to offer the pure, proud peoples of the New World except for disease and exploitation, corruption and decadence, and feeds the toxic argument that Americans should feel guilty about the very origins of our civilization.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Michael Medved's daily syndicated radio talk show reaches one of the largest national audiences every weekday between 3 and 6 PM, Eastern Time. Michael Medved is the author of eleven books, including the bestsellers What Really Happened to the Class of '65?, Hollywood vs. America, Right Turns and, most recently, The Ten Big Lies About America.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Michael Medved's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Nothing new
But, it needs to be repeated. By the way, the locals actually went to war and enslaved each other too.

I remember in School.....
that they taught us that the famed Buffalo Bill drove cattle off cliffs to feed the laborers building the trans-continental railroad. It was not mentioned (that I remember anyway) that he might have learned this little trick from the indians.

In fact there are so many things that were left out in the elementary school ciriculum.

The terminology is wrong, too
I'd go further than Medved: It also makes no sense to call American Indians "the first Americans." The land wasn't sensibly "America" in a meaningful way until the Europeans arrived and brought their version of culture to it.

Some of the Stone-Age peoples who inhabited the Western Hemisphere before the Europeans arrived referred to the land mass as "Turtle Island." So it might make sense to call these peoples "Turtle Islanders." But "Americans"? No.

Tree Huggers?
Where we used to live in Oregon the Indians who went through the area burned the forests as they hunted to flush the game. You might call them the first "clear burners". Of course when my relatives see any logging on any hill or mountain they lament the loss of the trees to the evil loggers. They don't appreciate the history lesson on tree toasting for food for some reason.

Facts Don't Matter
The crying Indian was actually Sicillian? Priceless. Unfortunately, that and the other facts presented in this article will only be pooh-poohed by the illuminati who "just know" that western civilization is a scourge on Mother Gaia. I would not be surprised to hear one of these twits respond to being informed that Native Americans actually killed large numbers of animals so they could have something to eat by sayinf "Why didn't they just go to McDonalds?"

History
There is a great series of books entitled: "The Politically Incorrect Guide to...." of which there are many subjects. One of them is US History.

What we were taught, and were not taught... will "make blood shoot out of your eyes" thanks to Glenn Beck for the quote.

Woolly Mammoth
Ask a woolly mammoth about how ecological the first Americans are- if you can find one.

Cody shot the buffalo!!
He carried a Sharps Model 1871 single shot rifle which he called Loocretzia Borgia. He was a paid bison hunter who fed the work crews. With several thousand workers to feed he basically had to shoot a few bison at a time so the meat that wasn't immediately eaten could be salted or turned into jerky. I know the Sharps well, I used to shoot one in .45-120-550 Paper Patch. I also love PIG books. The Politically correct guides to the South and Hunting should be required reading in middle schools.

-Ray
NRA Life Member

the uses of science.
It is interesting to find Mr Medved has finally found a use for the sciences of our past; archeological dating etc.
Perhaps as a distinguished fellow of the 'Discovery Institute' he could bring these observations to the attention of Mr Dembski et al.

So what? The Indians killed for food.
What is the point of the article. That Indians killed more than they ate? That they killed species into extinction? That Hollywood used a an actor to portray a role that moved people to stop throwing their trash out the window?

Wow, the insight of Mr. Medved.

The influx of Europeans did transform this country and it did so in a positive manner. But the Indians were ruthlessly murdered and lied to. Yes, the Indians also ruthlessly murdered the settlers. We would too if someone tried to take our country.

So as some of my friends say "Get over your feelings of persecution and paranoia and get on to the next problem." Usually we are discussing the 2000 election.

Another Eco-Myth
In the house of cards world of the Gaia worshipping Eco-Pagan another cherished myth appears to be busted.
I am a fervent conservationist and a former Sierra Clubber but the watermelon enviro's (green on the outside, Red on the inside) hijacked the environmental movement in the mid 70's so I left.
3 interesting books: Eco-Freaks by John Berlau, Eco-Imperialism by Paul Driessen(Co-Founder of GreenPeace) and The Really Inconvenient Truths by Iain Murray.









Last Americans, not First
Paul in MT is right. Since Congress didn't pass the Indian Citizenship Act until 1924 (in thanks to the great effort of Indians in WWI) it is more proper to say they were the Last Americans or Most Recent Americans.
Certainly there were plenty of Indians who were already citizens at that time but that act granted citizenship to those who weren't .

And as for those "Native" Americans
Surprise! A substantial portion of them were descended from tribes of nomads who came from Siberia across a no-longer-above-water land bridge at the Bering Straits some 12,000 years ago. Once here, they began doing what they had done "back home"- namely, following the herds of local herbivores and slaughtering them en masse.

Within a thousand years, they had expanded south to Central America. There, they ran into the Olmec and Toltec peoples (ancestors of the Inca and Maya), and all parties promptly and enthusiastically went to war against each other. The (outnumbered) northern interlopers managed a stand-off due to having something their southern enemies didn't- namely, the fearsome Asiatic composite bow. (Clubs with obsidian flakes used as "swords" are no match for powerful ranged weapons with high rates of fire.)

The biggest single group of the "invaders" would later hold sway over most of the Southwest. They are today known by the name given them by their neighbors, the Comanche; Apache- which means "enemy people".

So much for "peaceful indigenous peoples".


cheers

eon

Now look at the Amazon

The Indians of South America are burning and clearcutting the Amazon River forests to plant crops.

Same story, different century.

Yes, Medved, But The Point Is.........?
I suppose that it is good that Medved is helping us to learn about the cool indians. With the disturbing amount and degree of talk about McShame, Obamamama, and ex-Hillary, it is, in fact, time to clear the air (no pun intended, cappers and traders). We finally learn that it was the Indians that ruined the country, allowing all of the illegals, leaving open the borders, not drilling, and selling our souls and country to the towel heads and chinks in the name of free trade. Medved, terrific discovery!

Medved is right!
I actually arrived at this conclusion some time ago, that indian were being used by environmentalists to push the agenda forward.

Here is the story that did it for me...

When I was a teenager, we visited a national park that had an "archaeological dig" of an ancient indian encampment. The ranger lectured for a long time about how the "indians used every part of everything they killed." She went on breathlessly about how they were the first ecologists. I noticed an odd pit dug up, that had strange bits and pieces of bone, pottery, and other identifiables. I asked what it was and was told it was...

"their garbage pit."

A light went on, even in my 17 year-old head... why did the ultimate recyclers, the first ecologists need a garbage pit?"

The park ranger got very mad when I pointed out the inconsistency.

Hypocrisy of Sierra Club
fayettebill's comments about Sierra Club reminded me that a little research several years ago revealed this group of fervent enviros does not oppose illegal immigration into this country and actually endorses it.

One would think any group wanting to protect the land and natural resources would be opposed to a mass influx of people coming here only to make a buck and having no love or loyalty to the country. If you want a good example of what people do to property that is not their own, you should become a landlord or go into the business of renting cars.

As it turns out, Sierra Club has a strict policy of NOT opposing illegal immigration because the liberals running the group now put politics over the environment.


























Indians good, European Americans bad
I think you will find the source of the condemnation of western civilization in America in the Kremlin. This is part of the communist propaganda campain to demoralize the west.

When I was in high school I saw the movie "Soldier Blue" at the drive in. I have since learned that the movie was made by the Kremlin along with several other similar films.

Conservation vs Environmentalism
While I think that environmentalists go way to far, and I think Gore-Bull Warming is a load of hogwash, I nevertheless am in favor of preserving natural beauty wherever possible.

In California, the mountains frame our cities, which are situated in the valleys below. They are rugged and beautiful, and remind me of my family's pioneer heritage.

During the past 10 years, some of the housing tract developers have started using a technique where they chop off the top 1/3 of a mountain in order to make it easier to put down a rowof houses.

Of course, the old way is to cut the lot of each house one at a time, in a stair-step manner. This maintains the shape of the mountain, and when the landscaping grows in, leaves the mountain looking as beautiful as before.

The buzz cutting of the hill disregards the homeowners below, who bought their home because of the mountain view. It lowers the value of the homes below.

This is an example of the way that progress makes itself unwelcome in communities across the land.

I believe that businesses have the right to do most things they want with their properties, but I also believe that they have a moral obligation to be considerate of their neighbors.

I think that many business owners hurt the conservative cause when they make an ugly mess while making a living. Mines and oil fields do not have to be hideous scars on the land, if they are planned well.

If we want to be allowed to drill in Anwr, the corporations should demonstrate a love for the land, and consideration for their neighbors, which I feel is as important as love of country.

I think that domestic drilling would have more support across the country if the citizens felt confident that Anwr would be a showplace of care for the land.

Medved rehashes old news
Medved's article is a pathetic rehash of tired old news and one-sided speculation masquerading as science.

Everyone in Indian country knows about Iron Eyes Cody and the phony Chief Seattle speech. No one has touted them since the 1970s.

Controlled burns are a valid ecological tool, as our Forest Service is beginning to understand.

The buffalo runs sound dramatic, but they had nothing to do with the near-extinction of the species.

Critics have lambasted Shepard Krech's book "The Ecological Indian." See http://www.bluecorncomics.com/prager.htm for one example.

Scientists have developed several "megafauna extinction" theories more plausible than Paul Martin's.

Relying on prejudiced white priests to document "devilish" Indian cultures is flatly ridiculous.

"Local" extinction isn't the same as extinction. Only non-Indians have eradicated entire species permanently.

Etc.

In praise of Pioneers
The Lefties are always painting an ugly picture of American Pioneers.

I remember when we admired the Indian Fighters: Davy Crockett, Daniel Boone and the like.

But now we are politically correct, and we supposed to feel guilty for the way we treated Indians. What about the way that the Indians treated us?

Yes, we had a war, and the European immigrants won. Should every nation that ever won a war feel guilty?

And what about this notion that the native people didn't believe that they owned the land? If they didn't selfishly feel their group owned everything in sight, why did they object so much to settlers who built their little cabins in the middle of nowhere and tried to eek out a living from the land?

The truth is that they objected to us the way we object to the influx of illegal Mexican immigrants.

Why is it that I never hear the Lefties calling them jingoistic xenophobes?

Indians are human...
that is why they did things such as buffalo runs. This type of hunting kills a good number of animals that are not consumed as food. All humans pollute by todays standards. To blame everything on the evil white man is inappropriate.

Rob
Random setting of fire or the clear cutting and torching as used in the Amazon is not a "controlled" burn, and the USFS has learned (Los Alamos, NM) thta it not always the best approach.

then "The buffalo runs sound dramatic, but they had nothing to do with the near-extinction of the species." Nothing, I doubt. Had to be a contrubuting factor at the least.

and if you think all of the Native Americans are blood brothers loving each other, pleas go to the Hopi or Zuni reservations and announce that you are Navajo.


Injuns
To be completely politically incorrect (and lovin' it!), the misnomered "indians" were stone-age tribesmen who hadn't even invented the wheel or metal. They had no written language and were in constant internecine warfare with neighboring tribes.

Indians today have severe problems with alcohol, yet it's sold in convenience stores. I travel through their "reservations", especially in northwest New Mexico. Anywhere I stop, there are indian panhandlers. Many express a contempt for the white man, ignoring the fact that their lives today are based on their own behavior, not on the pioneers in the 19th century.

I have no sympathy for them, only contempt and disgust. They learned their behavior, as blacks and hispanics have done, because of white liberal guilt.

Any rational person will take responsibility for his/her behavior. Not so American "minorities" who whine constantly about long-dead white people. I'm tired of it.

LOL, I have been saying this
for years. In fact, nearly everything you see on TV or hyped by the media as the "sacred green" is absolute BS.

Man the Cultivator
Today's self-appointed environmentalist views modern man as a Destroyer and ignores his much more important role as a Cultivator. Primitive man was always on the verge of starvation. Whereas modern America feeds 300 million souls and has enough left over to nourish many more. More varieties of plant life can be found in an average American neighborhood than anywhere in the wilderness.

The noble savage
I thought we were done with all this "noble savage" nonsense that was in vogue in the 70s. The idea that primitive man lived in a state of harmony with the environment and cared deeeeeply about nature. Primitive man was just that...primitive. He was focused 24/7 on food/shelter/war and was oblivious to nature. IMO this whole "noble savage" concept is just a reflection of the modern romantic's dissatisfaction with life, and craving for utopia. But, I guess backward looking utopianists are preferable to the forward looking type (eg marxists).

Sorry Rob
This is not "old news" to me. Though I know them to be a warring people, (I'm married to an Okie who is part Cherokee), I was not aware of their bad ecological behaviour. I also did not know about the phony Indian with the big tear.

This just reinforces my position that I can't believe anything any liberal says. BTW this whole "Sainted Indian" construct is a grandchild of Rousseau's "Noble Savage" fiction.

Right on!
Michael, thank you for documenting what I knew from hear-say!

Already published in Discover in 1980's
in an article by (staunch evolutionist) Jared Diamond.

Discover, owned by Time, is quite liberal--only proving the point!

As a Part Indian ...
I grew up around Indian families and listened to a lot of their stories. There were no ecology considerations. They were too concerned about where their next meal was coming from.

The ecology angle started about 1960 via the Boy Scouts of America. When the Boy Scouts were first set up by Baden Powell from England, he was in North Africa with the military. The Boy Scouts he set up were part of the military and did the scouting for the military to locate enemy forces. But when the Americans decided to adopt the program, they did not want the American Boy Scouts to be part of the military. As a program to interest boys, they decided to emphasis American Indian culture. They went to the reservations to find the old Indians who had grown up in the original culture. The old Indians were more than happy to teach some of their culture since their own children weren't interested in learning it.

Part Indian 2
In about 1960 culture became an important part of the United States. The Indians joined this interest. But all the elderly Indians who had known their culture had died. The only group that had any knowledge of the Indian culture was the Boy Scouts. The Indians went to the Boy Scouts and asked to learn. The Boy Scouts were happy to teach.

But the idea of ecology was also rising during this time. The Indian groups learned and adopted the culture of their forefathers - and also the beliefs of the Boy Scouts that interested them such as taking care of the land, leaving no trash, etc. The Circle of Life was just beginning to emerge as well, brought primarily from Africa, which the Indians also adopted. Some of the things that the Boy Scouts used, such as the Talking Feather, were developed by Cub Scout mothers to control a group of boys but the Indians now use it and insist that it was used by them originally in conferences. Many true Indian cultures were once isolated to individual tribes but are now adopted by all Indian tribes such as the Eagle Dance. Ribbon shirts, now popular, were actually reservation shirts that were dressed up by adding small pieces of ribbon and were not part of the original Indian culture prior to white man arriving. My great-grandmothers, Iroquois and Cherokee, told me that the only reason buffalo existed when white men appeared was that the Indians couldn't get to them until the white men introduced the horse. They told me that once the Indians had the horses, it would have been less than fifty more years before the buffalo would have been wiped out by the Indians.

So the present Indian culture is actually a merging of several cultures, both Indian, white man, and old and new. The present culture is a good one - but should not be taken as original.

Unregenerated
man is capable of anything, has done everything, and no tribe, people, or group is excepted. Harmony is what you get with tuned instruments. Past that, forget it.

100% correct
Great article. This was one thing that shocked me in doing research on the Iroquois and related semi-settled tribes in the Eastern Woodlands. They would build a palisaded village--sometimes with up to three rows of sharpened tree-trunks surrounding it--and then farm the surrounding area. They had no notion of crop rotation, so they would just farm the area until it wouldn't produce any more and hunt the surrounding game to extinction. At that point, they would burn the village down, pick up their stuff and move someplace else.

Theirs was an intriguing and dangerous life, but they were hardly stewards of the environment. That's just another myth created by the left to make ignorant Americans feel bad.


indians
So, you want to know how the indians are doing? Now and at any time in their past and presant, just visit any reservation and look. They have'nt changed except for the fact of all the bleeding hearts that make our government support them. If you think the indians build all their casinos with their own money, I've got a bridge I want to sell you, very good price.

American Indians
Our ancestors were not fools. They killed the savages for good reason. They fouled their camp and moved to a new place to foul that too. They had no idea of property, and would steal what they could. The men only hunted, and the women were slaves. They loved war, which is why their numbers were never greater than the land would feed (they killed each other off). We brought diseases to them for which they had no immunity, and this killed more of them than all their wars, and more than were killed by fighting with the white man. They were a plague to the white man until their numbers were reduced. They still cost the taxpayers plenty, except for those who have oil and other mineral subsidies. They are allowed to live from gambling houses on their reservations in many places, while this activity is denied to others.
There was never anything nobel in the American Indian, and it still is true today. When given the choice to integrate, many prefer to live on their reservations on whatever they can with the help of government.

For Comparison
One has to look at the Maori in New Zealand. Another 'unspoiled' people who exterminated species. One has to look at their garbage heaps to see the further back one goes, the more rich the food chain was.

Hunter gatherer cultures care not about future, they are concerned about now and their empty stomachs. As another poster has pointed out, the noble Native American is a myth that is descended from Rousseau's 'noble savage' concept. Sounds nice and romantic, but not based in actual reality.

Gray Owl is right.
When the white man first arrived in the Eastern U.S. they found Indians just starting to cultivate. That was because there wasn't enough game to feed them. I've seen reports that say there are over 20 times as many white tail deer, for instance, today than there was when Columbus found the West Indies. The Cherokee had huge plantations (and slaves). They were driven to Arkansas and Oklahoma because the white men (President Andrew Jackson's buds) wanted their plantations for themselves.

Re: In Praise of Pioneers
I agree completely.
Liberals think that the rich should give up some of their wealth to help the poor. People don't think of it in these terms, but in 15th century, the wealthiest people on earth were lived in North America. No, they didn't look rich, but here was a small number of people claiming ownership of a vast continent full of resources. Shouldn't liberals be happy that those resources have been distributed to a larger portion of the worlds population? If I owned a million acres of fertile farmland that was not being farmed, and 100 other people were starving and had no land to farm, wouldn't most liberal want to take away my land?

To Rob...
Rob writes: "Relying on prejudiced white priests to document "devilish" Indian cultures is flatly ridiculous."

Uh, without those accounts from "prejudiced white priests", we'd have almost no documentary evidence about the Indian nations during the first contact period.

It's laughable that you'd call these priests prejudiced. They were often the greatest defenders of the Indians. They lived among them, learned their language, appreciated their culture, and yes, even loved them and gave their lives for them.

St. Isaac Jogues is the classic example. He was headed for a mission post in Huron country in 1642 when his party was ambushed and he was taken captive by the Mohawks. After enduring extreme torture (his fingers were bitten off) and witnessing the torture and death of some of his comrades, Jogues managed to escape to the Dutch settlements and ultimately back to France.

Three years later, Jogues was back in Canada. A provisional peace had been established between the Hurons and the Iroquois and Jogues volunteered to return to the site of his torture to act as an ambassador and missionary to the Mohawks. Unfortunately, the peace was short lived(not unusual) and Jogues basically walked into a hostile village where he was killed.

Read about him and about the other North American Martyrs before passing judgment on "prejudiced white priests."

Tree Huggers are SO STUPID
That they think Yogi Bear is a Documentary.

Question:
When the Indians used the buffalo runs to harvest game, did they have horses that they could ride alongside buffalo and shot at indididual ones tieh their - did they have bows and arrows then?

If the liberals in CA would allow clearing woodlands and controlled burns, every forest fire would

I saw one study that there were no famines until the hunter-gatherers settled down and started farming. They couldn't just move on to the next area for food.

Thank you Michael

Thank you Michael.
Terrific work!
I just posted the following on Huffington.
Up till yesterday - I was NOT a McCain supporter.
Today I am.
What changed my mind?
He changed his mind... regards drilling.
Finally.
At last.
A person of influence “gets it” and boldly goes against the propagandized fads promoted by the lawsuits of science void eco-fascists.
It’s not easy being a bunch quitter. That’s why most aren’t.
People by nature, are so in want of “belonging,” they dare not venture out with original ideas and positions.
They opt instead, to blindly shuffle along with the herd.
Barack’s ideas are nothing more than embellished regurgitations of former congresswoman Pat Schroeder’s sing songs. His ideas are neither fresh or sound, and are too rooted in socialism.
Finally! At last! McCain listened to solid science, proven technology and sound economics, grew a backbone then changed his course accordingly.
He’s became a true bunch quitter: “A hard-working, honest, kind individual who is visionary in his or her pursuit to build, take risks, and LEAD; an independent thinker and doer who doesn’t run with the crowd/herd,” and I really, really, really...like that!
If Barack follows suit, then my decision will shift accordingly. BUT - he’d have to drop that creepy socialism nonsense! I don’t think his financiers would allow that.
This morning’s grocery store polls now show - that this “drilling” action by McCain, popped him ahead of Obama.
In spite of the doomsayer and future slayer rants, this will bode equally as well for them... as those they hate.

Indian ecologists
Thank Mr Medved for setting people straight on the plundering and degradation of this Country before the Wonderfull and delightsome people from the other side of the World arrived here.
He must be a direct descendant of the Author who penned "The Wizard of OZ".These Fairy Tales that the Immigrants tell are truly fantastic to read and believe.

As it turns out...
...we're all human. What a surprise!

Sincere thanks to Mr. Medved. Check out "The Black Robe". A more balanced depiction of our predecessors here on this continent.

Evil white man
Several weeks ago I was coming out of a big discount store and crossed paths with a young white man, possibly in his late 20s. With him was a white boy about 8 years old. I was stunned to hear the man tell the boy, among other things, "white people kill Indians". I wish I had summoned the courage to say what I said under my breath "brilliant"! The 'man' (idiot actually) is teaching the boy to hate himself. It is terrifying to think about what the future holds with that kind of insanity being taught. I pray for the children who are being abused by the self-hate philosophy. Now self-hate is good for you? Twisted!

Uncontrolled fishing
The indians are allowed to fish with gill nets in the rivers of the northwest with no limits or control in the name of 'subsistence rights'. Commercial and sport fishing by others is strictly controlled while the indians decimate the salmon and steelhead populations with no oversight.

Kennewick Man--white first American?
During the Clinton administration a 12,000 year old skeleton was discovered in the Pacific Northwest that showed Caucasian traits (American Indians are Asians). In other words, here was an ancient white man who possibly predated the peoples we now call American Indians.

This discovery had the potential to eliminate Indian claims of being the "first Americans," so the Clinton administration went along with a plot to quickly bury this evidence that white men had been first in the Americas. The government poured concrete over the discovery site to prevent further evidence from being found, and aided local Indian tribes in claiming the bones which they planned to quickly rebury as a "sacred ancestor" that no white men had any business disturbing.

The skeleton would indeed have been quickly buried or destroyed and lost, had not a group of scientists sued the Corps of Engineers (on whose land the skeleton had been found, and had control of it) sued the government to prevent reburial. While the suit was in progress, only Indians were permitted access to the bones, and parts of the skeleton disappeared after each visit.

Goggle "Kennewick Man" for all the details. I don't know what the status of the skeleton is at present, but I don't think it has been given to the Indian tribes yet.

Another early skeleton found in similar circumstances, a female nicknamed "Beulah," was quickly reburied and lost, owing to Congress passing laws that give modern Indian tribes possession of all ancient skeletons discovered in North America. These politically correct laws have killed the study of archaeology in North America, which is why American archaeologists mostly go overseas to work.

NEVER call them "Iroquois"!!
They are called Haughdenosaunee which means People of the Long House. The French took a Huron ethnic slur aimed at the Five Nations and altered the spelling to flow in their language. It translates roughly as "snakes". The Adirondack Mountains are another example. Adirondacks is a corruption of another regional name meaning "bark eaters" or burrowing beetles, an insect pest.

-Ray
NRA Life Member

Tribal instinct
All forms of leftist thought are a form of tribalism. Communism, socialism, fascism, environmentalism, and racism all seek to put aside individuality in favor of a "group identity", ie a tribe.

This is why they insist that natives hold fast to their traditions, as they mock us for holding fast to ours.

Tribalism is the worst possible form of government, yet there seems to be this basic human instinct to strive for it. Can anyone explain this to me?

Medved
Sadly, you have developed such skill for stating the irrelevant. Who cares whether American Indians (who, by the way, differed widely in their outlooks and practices - not all people with darker skin think and act the same) were ecologically minded? What do you think the population differences were between then and now, do you really think that Native American practices created the same ecological problems that we see today?

What difference does any of this make to anybody?

rvb8
"Perhaps as a distinguished fellow of the 'Discovery Institute' he could bring these observations to the attention of Mr Dembski et al."

LOL. Yes, considering Medved's role in the Seattle Discovery Institute, we certainly should show some reverence for his grasp of "science" and history!

Medved Ravings
Tribe is derived from Tribunial and of European origin.As far as I can tell no aboriginal group ever called themselves(a) "TRIBE".Usually they used their own language to call themselves "The People". Therefore there is no such thing as "Tribalism".

devery
Indigenous Americans gave the white man tobacco, coffee, sugar, and couple previously unknown venerial diseases. So you got even.

Devery
Nobody hates you or yours. But the fact remains that if Indian (or aboriginal) culture was so superior, how is it there are no major or even minor inventions that may be attributed to it? Why could the Indians not survive, if their culture was indeed the "fittest"? What exactly was so wonderful about living on a permanent campout, scrounging an existence from whatever was at hand and using leaves for toilet paper?

The Indians were not immune from the same things that affect us all. We did nothing to them that they didn't do also to each other. Plagues, war, famine, drought, slavery, human sacrifice, territorial disputes; no society escapes. Where there are people, there are problems.

That your life is what it is, is nobody's choice but yours. Do not blame the posters on this board for your problems. This is America, and you don't have to be poor or live poorly if you don't want to.

My dad's maternal grandmother (my great-grandmother) was I believe full Chippewa. But thanks, I enjoy my modern home and the opportunity to do more with my life than gather wood and scrape hides.

clever?
Tobacco was shared in a respectful way. Whites turned it into a way to get rich. (Suprise, suprise.) They added chemicals to addict the consumer and, 'by darn, it's their God given blue blooded American right' to capitalize regardless of human life or health.

Coffee? Sugar? These are not the same as small pox.

VD? If that white man didn't rape that young Indian girl and give her that disease she wouldn't have had it. Then the next white man that raped her wouldn't have got it either. I don't belive your VD-to-get-even-story.

This shouldn't be about getting even. (it isn't, for me) This should be about learning the truth about our past and moving forward in racial relationships. That doesn't mean you have to marry your daughter to the first Indian you see but, like that kid on 'Skins' said, 'it's a good day for the race' what race? 'The human race.'

ed
The origins of a word have no bearing on whether its use is apt. Neither does the fact that the object does not use the word to describe themselves.

Larry Craig doesn't call himself a "homosexual", but it doesn't change the fact that he is one.

devery
You are a racist. Get help.

Alive?
Hate is alive and well, don't fool yourself.

Does a culture have to be set on that linear scale with each culture assigned a spot so that we have white culture at one end and Indian culture somewhere down below? Or can we have culture without comparing them? If I were to rate cultures I wouldn't use inventions as the measuring stick. I think yours came up with some ghastly inventions and some good ones that have negative results.

Indians have survived genocide. My writing to you today is proof.

What was so good about life before whites came here? EVERYTHING!

Indians were not excluded from some of the human behaviors that are frowned upon, no doubt. But please don't compare the slavery that you brought to the Indian version of slavery. Ask any black man and he should be able to let you know they aren't the same.

I ain't blaming anyone for anything. Who said I am poor?

You believe she was Chippewa? That is telling. You don't even know anything about her. Indians hold family tight. If you were Indian you'd know more about your Great-Gma.

You have more to do then get wood and scrape hides, huh? Like what? Drink coffee, drive your Subaru, and look down your nose at everyone?

Tribe ?

ed
Location: MN

Reply # 56
"TRIBE".Usually they used their own language to call themselves "The People". Therefore there is no such thing as "Tribalism"." What a lame argument! TRIBALISM 1. tribal consciousness and loyalty; esp : exaltation above other groups.. strong in-group loyalty. ... No matter what they named it they practiced it. There are NO "native-American" people in the Americas! We ALL came from other lands. That is a made up POLITICAL term.

clever?
Sticks and stones...

Laterz
Gotta go. It was fun.

Don't forget to hug an Indian if you see one and tell him thank you for taking such good care of the earth for you and your grandkids.(smiles, winks)

First Americans, First Ecologists
Working among native Americans both in the U.S. and abroad has convinced me that they have little concern for their environment. Actually, concern for the environment comes only with very sophisicated civilization. We see that even in the settling of the West. The first couple hundred years saw little concern. This concern for ecology is a fairly recent thing. But, in Mexico, the Indians burned whole forests just to have fertilizer for their bean crop. When they could get it they used dynamite to kill fish. And, they killed the small deer almost to extinction. Here in the U.S. their homes are often cluttered with a lot of junk. This was an excellent article. Jim Hollingsworth check out our web site at Idahoans For Hollingsworth Jim Hollingsworth

Proof
"Indians have survived genocide. My writing to you today is proof"....No it is proof you learned something at the "white man's" school. Everybody has had hard times somewhere in their past...GET OVER IT. That was THEN, this is NOW.

There appears to be some kind of
misconception here. The intent of the article and the followup posts is not to attack native americans. It is to debunk another one of these eco-myths that the left likes to spread.

As for requiring a "sophisticated" society before concern for the invironment crops up, if you change that to wealthy society you would be more accurate. A person whose bellybutton is sticking to their backbone is not going to give two hoots and a holler about the eco-sh*t. He just wants his next meal.

You will note that the majority of the eco-noise comes from wealthy and upper class idiots with plenty of time and money on their hands.

Greetings! How!
Myths abound in all cultures. If you were born in the US you are a native American. Let shake hands and not come out fighting. Its not hard to see a lot of emotions are tied to the myths built up over the years about precolumbian peoples of the now called Americas. There is an bit of truth in most myths but they are still blown out of proportion. Have respect for on another please, name calling is very childish and out of place in any forum.

Who
"Who wrote this article? Me? Did I initiate this conversation, uncle?" Yes , when you post here you open the conversation to EVERYONE.Genocide: the diliberate and systematic DESTRUCTION of a racial,political or cultural group. How do you survive that ? Oh, and you are right about Arkansas, you would NOT like it here. Please stay away.

haha, we're SO hurt by you rednecks
Of course you were there to witness all of it.

This is the most redneck bunch of CRAP I've ever heard- what happened did you lose your life savings at an Indian owned casino?
Indian haters have a new voice in the US, and his name is Michael Medved.

Smearing Natives
This article as usual takes it back in the other direction from Noble Savage to Dirty good for nothing savage. Natives have been co-opted by Non-Native groups (usually Americans of Euro descent) to make their own points. Natives like all human beings alter their habitat to best suit them, but I guarantee that they were interested in not completely fouling the area they lived in as it provided food, medicine, and shelter for them and their children. Was life here in North America a utopia? By no means. They like all humans had to deal with warfare, disease/famine, and family issues like we do today. There were more than 500 distinct Tribal entities in North America alone, with distinct philosophies and cultures so be careful when trying to fit all Native North Americans into a box. A lot of plants here in the pacific northwest are dependent on fire to sprout and with the modern smokey the bear policy are at risk of going extinct due to the lack of fire. Also if you went to camp sites that were inhabited by tribes here along the Columbia River you'd find piles of salmon bones, did that mean that the Tribes killed all of the salmon? No these fish are still hanging around, is it little coincidence that they just recently like late 1800's have been endangered (same time of euro american settlement)? I'm of Pioneer and Native American descents but I understand better than most folks that people came here from the East Coast and Europe to exploit the natural resources to depletion. This is and always has been a way to get rich quick and easy.

I don't think this was Indian hating
The fact that Indians (Wow, can we use that word?) didn't appear to be environmentally sensitive is probably because of the abundance of resources here.

The early industrialists also found this abundance of resources and didn't seem to be overly concerned with the environment. One of the above posts got it right; it is modern man with the knowledge and technological advances of our times that is able to best protect the environment.

Sadly, it took government intervention too often to get the business world to co-operate. Nonetheless, this is our only viable spaceship, so let's take care of it.

1491
Much of this thread is a rehash of the two prevalent cultural myths. The noble savage of Rousseau (who was wrong about so much) and the useless savage. Neither is true. Read 1491 for a more nuanced view.

Our vision of Indians are clouded by what we think more than by the evidence. Like the rest of us they did what they needed to do to survive. Its neither noble nor dastardly.

The Point?
As I read the article I struggled with the purpose, UNTIL I reached the end. Now I get it, just another attempt to justify the horrible past. I can't begin to tell you all that is wrong with the views of this article.

Here's a link to the book

DISASTER BABY

.....The Lone Rangers final words ...

....."Tonto we're surrounded by hostile Indians"

....."What do you mean "we" white man" ...hahahaha .....COLOSSUS

Uncle?
How did we survive genocide? By the grace of kmookumpts. We knew the land and were able to hide, fight, and survive because we are meant to be here. We are your ugly reminder. That's why there is so much venom and vile against us. Right Uncle?

Logic? Where did it go? I'll tell you what gets me. This Medved thinks he should point out three pieces of evidence that Indians were not good to the earth 1) Chief Seattle speech 2) Iron Eyes Cody-non-Indian crying 3) piles of buffalo bones. He points this out because he wants everyone to know that Indians are-never will be-and never were ANY good. So he wants us to believe we had this country trashed over here so we shouldn't get any say in anything environmental. It was so bad over here that most of the world flooded to this land. Indians treated the first whites as humans and fed them and gave them places to live. The pristine condition of the land that the first whites found has been documented. Don't deny that fact. My people have been in this same area for more then 15,000 years. Your scientists have proved that. How could we live here so long if we were so bad to the environment? (ANSWER THAT MEDVED!)Your people have been here less than 500. Look at the damage caused in those meager 500 years. Most of it has occured within your lifetimes, the last 50 years. Don't go and blame it on your ancestors, cuz it was you!

Oh, Unc, trust, you won't find me in Arkansas. Just keep your tooth over there and I'll keep my place clean over here.

Lore
nofirstname
Location: ND.....Truth hurts huh. EVERYTHING Medved wrote was TRUE. -- the noble savage is a joke, not the savage part just the noble part. Want to see something pathetic ? Go to a Pow-wow (LOL) and watch the Indians jump up and down in their MADE IN CHINA BEADS AND WHITEMAN'S CLOTH. Manifest Destiny was a good thing.Anyone born and living in this GREAT country is a Native of America. Native American is a POLITICAL term. I'll be riding to Sturgis this Aug. (over 20 years now) look me up. I'm the Proud, Redneck AMERICAN with the long red braids.Real Indian lore is lost,what is left is Boy Scout lore and liberal Hollywood crap.

Truth
Indians survived by taking handouts from the white man.

American Indians
There is no justification for what we did to the Indians. They were treated shabbily. But, your points about the myths that surround Indian cultures as gentle and stewards of the planet are well founded.

I only scanned the posting on this thread, so forgive me if I duplicate other comments.

Most Indian tribes were belligerent and vigorously defended their territory and righted perceived wrongs. Slavery and slave trading was considered one of the traditional spoils from victories.

For example, Alaskan Tlingit Indians, sometimes accompanied by Russian traders, are known to have traveled as far south as Humboldt Bay on slave raids against coastal Indians as recent as the early 20th Century.

African Americans are not the only ethnic group that suffered from slavery on this Continent.


Devery
Name one culture that has never been eventually conquered or has not simply faded from the scene, or has not faced challenges. Speaking of survival, I'd bet you could find a few elderly Jewish folks with tattoos on their wrists, if you cared to. Survival isn't unique to your people, you see.

As the Indian culture stands now, the best thing to do would be to eliminate the reservations and insist upon assimilation. The only reason we still have reservations is because of liberal guilt, not because of genuine need. It's nothing more than a patronizing gesture, and personally I hope you've more pride than to live on one of those hellholes.

I never said you yourself were poor. I'm sorry you took it that way. But plainly, you are living poorly in attitude. The past is past and this is the 21st century. Nobody gets to go back-and who would want to?

As to my great g'ma, I never knew her but through hearing only a little about her from my oldest brother-who I also never knew until I was a teenager. So family is irrelevant here-I only was making the point that a lot of us have aboriginal blood in our backgrounds. It's only interesting as a historical note, it is not really relevant to life today.

Red Headed Uncle
You are illusioned. You call the Indians savage when it was the Indians that were the victims of the most heinous crimes that man has EVER committed.

You are lost. You poke fun at Indians for maintaining some of the culture that you stole yet you have ZERO culture, unless you claim cable TV, internet, fast food, and ZZ Top as your culture. Where's the spirituality?

You are confused. In one sentence you claim, Anyone born and living in this great country is a Native of America and then turn around and say Native American is a political term. You don't even know what you are trying to say.

Look you up? I don't want to know you, or see you, or smell you (remember, I know you are from Arkansas). That won't happen. You probably have nothing interesting going on in your life except your Harley but everytime you trick some dumb chick into staggering to your pad she bolts as soon as she can smell the stench from your lizards, dogs, and self.

Term
"African-Americans" Another POLITICAL term. There are NO Africans that are American. If someome moved from America to Africa would they be American-African ? (LOL)

Not all slavery is the same!
The treatment of slaves by Indians and Whites cannot and should not be compared. Don't be stupid. Indian slaves could marry into the tribe, they had say, they were treated like humans. Yall treated blacks as inferior beings and it took a whole lot of your own science and religion to understand that black people are human beings too and they should be treated the way you want to be treated. The Golden Rule was ignored by yall for a long time.

Uncle Gene
You forgot to mention that Africa is a CONTINENT, not a country!

Therefore, we'd be speaking of a Rhodesian-American, or vice versa, or however it is supposed to be termed....

LOL real hard! :)

AliveInHim?
I take it from your handle you think you are religious, right? Just another hypocrite.

1st I never said mine was the only people/culture ever to survive genocide, did I?

2nd You have no idea how strong that word 'assimilation' is to Indians. Indians don't want to assimilate, we never did. We had to because we were forced to. If you had a clue about Indian people you wouldn't have said that.

3rd You say I am poor in attitude. As you look down your nose. You have no idea what it is like to be an Indian in this country. Remember that we have been the enemy of the state. Now we have this medved claiming we were not good to the earth/environment. We are constantly under attack and have been ever since people like you came over here. Not all whites are like you though. There are many that are level headed, respectful, and kind. You thinkkk I should respond in a sophisticated manner but your culture is not mine. I am not a priss. I don't act like a snob. I don't live in the burbs and I ain't white. So what you see as poor attitude is actually reality. My attitude is good to those that deserve it. Remember, respect is earned.

Let me leave you with some real words: Judge not, lest ye be judged. You claim to be AliveInHim yet you will cast the first stone with a 2x4 in your eye.

Devery
And it was and remains a peculiar fact that it was white folks who ended slavery in the West. When did the aboriginals abolish it-and some of them had black slaves too, I might add? Not even the Founders were enamoured of the practice (and in fact made the slave trade illegal not long after colonization; after that all slaves were born here) though they were certainly products of the culture of those days.

Further, the slave trade was far heavier in the Caribbean Islands and South America than it ever was even at its height here.

Native
"You are confused. In one sentence you claim, Anyone born and living in this great country is a Native of America and then turn around and say Native American is a political term." Are you really that thick ? When used the way American Indians use it the term is political. Oh, I might add that your put-downs are lame and no class.I was posting to nofirstname about Sturgis NOT you. If I did meet you I could sit down and talk without calling you little childish names. I don't think you could do that.

Logic
Using your logic would not the same hold true for those who called themselves African-American ? I don't care if there is a planet called Africa you are either an AMERICAN or an African not both ! Talk about splitting hairs to be PC .

Alive...
You just gave me reason to ignore you. I now know you have nothing smart to say. The founders had slaves. Most of the empires that stand today have roots in slave trade. Nothing was worse then the slave conditions here.

You are SHUNNED

Slavery
devery
Location: OR

Reply # 85
Date: Jun 18, 2008 - 6:50 PM EST Subject: Not all slavery is the same! Slavery is slavery, is slavery....No matter how you cut it, it is WRONG.

Uncle...
Most people think that when you refer to an American you are talking about white people. This should not be a suprise given that all the heroes in elementary, jr high, and high school history books are white. African American is another term for blacks. They were forcibly removed from Africa and brought to America. They can call themselves whatever they want. If you want to be called the proud redneck american then they can be African-American, agreed?

Devery
You might take those words of Christ more to heart yourself since you presume to judge and lump me in with the "conquerors". Nobody here did anything to you or your ancestors, every one of whom are dead and will stay that way regardless of cause. If you're successful in your career etc., great. I'm glad for you or anyone else who succeeds-and I don't care what color your skin is. Nowhere else in the world do people-including you-have the chance to work hard and make it as is possible here. This is America, and nobody needs to live poorly if he doesn't want to. However, let's see how willing you really are to leave all that and go back to the hunter-gatherer hand-to-mouth existence of your ancestors, since you don't feel you should have to assimilate. Having a paying job and all that goes with it is, after all, a very large part of American culture, and if you don't want to be part of what you see as the white man's way of life then discard the computer, sell your stuff and go live in a tipi. Let's just see how much more native you really are than the rest of us.


Your attitude of perpetual grievance because of the past is both silly and unhealthy.

Agree
"If you want to be called the proud redneck american then they can be African-American, agreed?".... You can call yourself anything you want, but that does not make it true. I really AM a Proud,Redneck American, Patriot, Veteran, Tax-payer,Voter,Landowner(600 acres with a river) I don't know many Blacks that are African.

Devery's Hate
This fellow is just another consumate anti-white racist -- which by their standards is just okie dokie. Of course, in the subject line I've purposely used one of the popular leftist buzzwords, the naughty four-lettered "H" word used to bludgeon Anglo-Europeans into silence.

The article simply demolishes the Rouseauian lie about "nobel savages" that is cannon fodder for the cultural Marxists. IMO this utopian vision of Amerindians basically strips them of their humanity just as thoroughly as calling them all "dirty savages". Neither is helpful.

As for slavery, it is still happening, buster. There's a bustling trade in slaves all over the world. A slave is a slave. Devery tries to shore-up the sinking Titanic of White Guilt. The jig is up and these guys don't like it.

I wonder how all of those WHITE Eastern European girls (mainly Ukrainian)feel about their latter-day sexual slavery? And, of course, the very word "slave" is where we get our word "SLAVIC" -- namely the Eastern European peoples who were harvested by Arab Muslims for slavery during the Middle Ages (which is why they got the name called "Slavs").

As long as victimhood and entitlement run rampant, the score will only be settled via the old ethic of "an eye for an eye". What "minorities" want these days is revenge, not justice. And their Marxist handlers are more than happy to accomodate this sort of useful idiotism.

FOLLOW THAT BISON
The plains indian was a successful hunter on foot for generations. start a prarie fire and the bison would stampede into a trap, arroyo, cliff, box canyon. with the advent of the horse and then the rifle, the indian was a more successful hunter. the demise of the bison was at hand years before the trains.

and if your camp became unbearable due to rotting food excrement, ancient indian kitchen middens are still discernable, it is time to move on.

middens are up and down the pacific coast. piles of fish bone, trash, tools, and on.

by the shores of gichi gummi (sic),

no herd follower was concerned with environmental issues in africa, europe, asia, n or s america. just the kill and food. similar life styles.
the eastern indians set the forest afire to drive out game for an easier hunt.
i would have done the same.

adios,
Jarvey
Lancaster, Mexifornia
dial 1 for english
friday is che day baby.

All Races have been Slaves
This is getting down right silly reading who was the most enslaved race or all races .
Slaves built The Aztec Stone and Sun God Killing Alters from other tribes , the Great Wall of China , The Primides , The Jews by the Romans and Greeks , The Christians feed to the Lions , The Slaves of Africans Chiefs for Thousands of years then Sold to Slave Traders . The Irish and Scott's to England ,The South Americans and MEXICO to Spain , Portugal , The Dutch . The Jews to Hitler . The Russians to Stalin Prisons . Don't forget the Moslems controlled all of Europe and ASIA and they had Millions of Slaves . Here is the test . What race has been the most enslaved since Time began ? Well guess what ..... It was the White Race .

Why is this racist?
Michael Medved is only talking about reality. The reality is that Native Americans were people, just like anyone else. They weren't saints and they weren't demons, they were people.

Some Indian tribes were hunter/gatherers, some were farmers, some were a mix. Some treated their women very well (I believe the Iroquois gave their women an equal voice) while others treated their women like slaves. Some Indians were honorable, others were not. Some enslaved fellow tribes and also blacks and whites.

Just like the white man hunted some animals to extinction, so did the Native Americans. We are all human beings, we all share the same foibles. It's not racist to point this out.

Assuming every word Medved says is...
true, so what?

Are we supposed to feel better about ourselves because some of us care marginally more about the environment than the indians did?

Are we supposed to feel less guilty about polluting the planet?

Was displacing the indians from their lands a noble thing to do?

I don't get it. What's the point?

pablo st. cruz pretty well sums it up in post #10

For Uncle Gene, #64
A song exerpt verifies "we all have hard times in our past"

"I guess we've all had hard times, and no time is ever wasted,
Might as well be grateful for the sorrow we have tasted,
In the end we all find out that we are in good company..."

The Point is that Enviro-extremists Lie
They constantly describe the earth in religious terms and human beings as if we were alien invaders. Their goal is to reverse the industrial revolution and the technology that has made it possible to spend one's time as an activist rather than working from morning to sundown eking out a bare survival.

Perry White writes:

"Are we supposed to feel less guilty about polluting the planet?"

Of course we should pollute less, consume less space and do more with the resources we use, but feeling guilty is not something we should do. It's unhealthy, for one thing, since we bear no responsibility for what past generations did, and it ignores the great advances we have made that have fed the world, reduced our wasteful ways and made life better in many ways for mankind.

I refuse to feel guilty about the criticisms from Environmentalists, because they don't give a hoot about me or my family. They would gladly destroy my rights for the sake of their own pseudo-religion. I will try to pollute less, litter less, and be more efficient, but I refuse to accept the destruction of our economy on the basis of a bunch of suspect computer models and agenda driven junk science.


deadpan
Thanks for a thoughtful, civilized reply.

Vic and Shefali
and others have stated it very well:

It's not about bashing the Native Americans; it's not about bashing the Europeans that came after.

It's about the fact that no group of people on this planet is PERFECT and without fault.

Devery thought he gotcha'd AliveinHim on that one, but he didn't and Alive definitely got him back: He/She who is without sin, cast the first stone.

And NONE OF US CAN CAST ONE, much as the group wanting to stone the adulteress dropped their stones and walked away.

The ultimate point of the article is this: STOP POINTING FINGERS ABOUT THE PAST. Yes, we have cultural, social, economic, etc. problems that of course stem from our past. And, guess what, EVERYBODY ON THIS PLANET HAS BEEN A VICTIM OR THE OPPRESSOR AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER. But we have to leave our behinds in the . . . Sorry, we have to leave our past behind us and weed out what the problems are and find a way to solve them that doesn't involve the BLAME GAME, which is highly unproductive.

And like many of you said, preservation and conservation is fine, but that's not what the Enviro-crazies want. I used to be a "tree hugger" type until I discovered that little inconvenient truth.

Just like all of the Indians were not peace-loving, hippie-type people. That is just stating a fact; it's not a judgment.

So, let's all hold hands and sing "Kumbaya" already.

:)

Cheers.

Where do you get this stuff?
ReCon-USMC: "Don't forget the Moslems controlled all of Europe... "

In what history book did you learn that?

Who taught you this stuff?
Chris: "And, of course, the very word "slave" is where we get our word "SLAVIC" -- namely the Eastern European peoples who were harvested by Arab Muslims for slavery during the Middle Ages (which is why they got the name called "Slavs")."

The people in what is today Russia, Ukraine, Poland, and the Czech and Slovak Republics were never under any Arab rule. Neither were the Balkan Slavs (Croatians, Serbians, and Bulgarians), because they were under the Ottoman Empire, which was Turkish, not Arab.

my prior post deleted...interesting...
Perhaps it was because I said that Medved's rantings on the subject were simply a contemporary example of bad-mouthing others to make oneself feel better - in regard to American Indians - people who think like Medved need all the dressing they can get to try to detract from the fact that the Euros conquered and maintain their hold on this continent by lying, theft, and murder. Nothing has changed. The only difference between the Nazi's and Americans is that Nazi's lost their war. No matter how many white lies have been told and institutionalized over the last 500 years - the truth remains the truth - even though people like Medved continue to try to cover it up.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.