Jump to content
Unexplained Mysteries uses cookies. By using the site you consent to our use of cookies as per our Cookie Policy.
Close X
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Hawkin

Native Americans getting a raw deal

41 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

odas
On 18/04/2018 at 7:32 PM, papageorge1 said:

You make some good points that I do agree with. Only point I was making that you didn't quite address is that if you are following a culture that doesn't value western materialism in the same way then you can't point to a  comparison of material position as a sign that you have gotten a raw deal.

But anyway, I liked your reply.

Thank you Paps. I understand what you mean too. The situation is very complex in this matter. Just out of couriosity: what if the USA had one or maybe more states added, somehow, where the indigious population could come together, govern, plan, execute descisions and be a valuable member of the federation? I know it is a bit sci fi but not impossible. I believe it would lift their status up, preserve their identity and at the same time intergrate in the western "materialistc" point of views. Together instead byside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
papageorge1
55 minutes ago, odas said:

Thank you Paps. I understand what you mean too. The situation is very complex in this matter. Just out of couriosity: what if the USA had one or maybe more states added, somehow, where the indigious population could come together, govern, plan, execute descisions and be a valuable member of the federation? I know it is a bit sci fi but not impossible. I believe it would lift their status up, preserve their identity and at the same time intergrate in the western "materialistc" point of views. Together instead byside.

Hasn't Canada tried something like that with Nunavut? I heard a cutesy word play by conservative white Canadians that they want 'none of it'.

Now as for your hypothetical question about the U.S. theoretically adding Indigenous governed states. Well, I like some of your thinking behind this, but I see problems too. America is founded on the principle of 'E Pluribus Unum', Latin for 'One People From Many' (we even stamp that on our money). These new states would have to allow free movement of all American people in and out of the state without regard to ethnic ancestry. And it also must allow for equal democratic voting rights for all its citizens with no consideration of ethnic ancestry. These states would have to follow all Federal Law and state and local laws would be democratically decided by its citizens. So, I don't in the end see these new states as being much different from the rest, but perhaps still holding more regional/ethnic culture, but the pull of the dominant culture will still likely be prevalent.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myles
4 hours ago, odas said:

 Just out of couriosity: what if the USA had one or maybe more states added, somehow, where the indigious population could come together, govern, plan, execute descisions and be a valuable member of the federation? I know it is a bit sci fi but not impossible. I believe it would lift their status up, preserve their identity and at the same time intergrate in the western "materialistc" point of views. Together instead byside.

I don't think that would work.   Seems pretty racist to me.  A step backwards in fact.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
4 hours ago, odas said:

Just out of couriosity: what if the USA had one or maybe more states added, somehow, where the indigious population could come together, govern, plan, execute descisions and be a valuable member of the federation? I know it is a bit sci fi but not impossible. I believe it would lift their status up, preserve their identity and at the same time intergrate in the western "materialistc" point of views. Together instead byside.

We already kind of have that in the US. They're called Tribal Reservations. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_reservation

Quote

An Indian reservation is a legal designation for an area of land managed by a federally recognized Native American tribe under the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs rather than the state governments of the United States in which they are physically located. Each of the 326[1] Indian reservations in the United States is associated with a particular Native American nation.

I'm by no means an expert in this area but I don't think this system has worked out exceptionally well for the indigenous folks. 

That being said the indigenous folks in AK have a sweetheart of a deal in terms of finances and benefits from oil revenues and of course we know of those groups who have capitalized on the financial incentives of Casinos (even if that is really an exchange of sort when you start looking at the results) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odas
1 hour ago, Myles said:

I don't think that would work.   Seems pretty racist to me.  A step backwards in fact.  

Sorry you feel that way but I can see that my wording and poor explaining of my thought could lead to your understanding. 

What I mean ( trying to answer you, Papa and farmer at the same time) is to get rid of reservations. That was a bad idea in the first place. To form a state, a part of the federation, where native americans have more say on how to deal with resources, culture and tradition. At the same time opening factories.....lower the unemployment rate. And, as said before by Paps, have free movement of all Americans.

Tough to explain for me but what I am trying to say that reservations are racist in the first place. They divide and not unite. It is difficult and complex but there must be a better way then reserves.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odas
1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

We already kind of have that in the US. They're called Tribal Reservations. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_reservation

I'm by no means an expert in this area but I don't think this system has worked out exceptionally well for the indigenous folks. 

That being said the indigenous folks in AK have a sweetheart of a deal in terms of finances and benefits from oil revenues and of course we know of those groups who have capitalized on the financial incentives of Casinos (even if that is really an exchange of sort when you start looking at the results) 

I understand but it is and can not always be about money. There is so much more in a persons or nations happiness then money.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, odas said:

I understand but it is and can not always be about money. There is so much more in a persons or nations happiness then money.

Its funny that you say that because I had originally typed " That being said the indigenous folks in AK have a sweetheart of a deal in terms of finances and benefits from oil revenues and their culture is still a trainwreck" but couldn't quite find better verbiage so I decided to just drop that angle.  

You're right there are a myriad of factors involved when such disparate cultures collide like that and money does not solve everything. 

Edited by Farmer77
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odas
1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

Its funny that you say that because I had originally typed " That being said the indigenous folks in AK have a sweetheart of a deal in terms of finances and benefits from oil revenues and their culture is still a trainwreck" but couldn't quite find better verbiage so I decided to just drop that angle.  

You're right there are a myriad of factors involved when such disparate cultures collide like that and money does not solve everything. 

Sometimes I think I have a seemingly good idea but the lack of wording does not reflect it.

That said, in all, I think there was much progress made in the couple of last decades. Nunavut is actualy a good example of my thoughts but still not quiet what I have in mind. Step forward for sure.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
1 hour ago, odas said:

Sometimes I think I have a seemingly good idea but the lack of wording does not reflect it.

That said, in all, I think there was much progress made in the couple of last decades. Nunavut is actualy a good example of my thoughts but still not quiet what I have in mind. Step forward for sure.

Nunavut was a step in the right direction. Self determination with a say in what goes on..

Not perfect by any means, but it's better than what was before.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa

Some Indians call us whites the dominant culture, its about more than money. Being a white guy, my opinion is only based on what I have seen and friends I have known.

Consider not being able to practice your own religion on you own land, subject to arrest for singing or praying.  Do you know that it was not until 1993 that the dominant culture decided it was permissible for Indians to have freedom of religion?  I am not talking about peyote ceremonies or contraband substances, I am talking about singing old sings and praying old prayers.

Consider having your children forcibly taken from you and sent to a boarding school where kids are punished for speaking their own language.  If that sounds familiar to you, the English  learned that technique by trying it on the Highlanders and the Irish before bringing it to America..

Consider being stuck on a small chunk of land that might not even be your heritage with no work, only handouts.  What do you think that does to dignity?

Diseases of civilization like diabetes and alcoholism, why are Indians so susceptible?  They ancestors grew up in a world without alcohol, little sugar, not a plethora of excess calories.  Indian metabolism is more efficient at incorporating sugars and alcohol and more sensitive to their effects, It is a lot to contend with.

Why don't they just move off the rez, get jobs and merge with society?  Many do just that.  If you read your early history, we owe parts of our Declaration of Independence and chunks of our Constitution to the Iroquois Confederacy among others.  It didn't protect them much.

I think the idea that Indians are playing the victim card is a bit distorted.  They are finding their voice, just like other minorities, Women, Blacks, Hispanic, Asians.  They are not whining and asking for handouts, they are standing up  and saying "Enough..We will forgive you and get along just fine, but we will not put up with the notion that you are better than us.". 

So maybe an answer to your question Papageorge is that the past doesn't go away until everybody is treated as equals in the present.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle
24 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Consider not being able to practice your own religion on you own land, subject to arrest for singing or praying.  Do you know that it was not until 1993 that the dominant culture decided it was permissible for Indians to have freedom of religion?  I am not talking about peyote ceremonies or contraband substances, I am talking about singing old sings and praying old prayers.

Could you site the statute or any examples of that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
6 hours ago, Michelle said:

Could you site the statute or any examples of that?

They did have laws against us practicing our beliefs and speaking our language. The started to ignore them in the 60s but didn't officially rescind them until the 90s. Me thinks....

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
6 hours ago, Michelle said:

Could you site the statute or any examples of that?

Sorry, 1978

http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~rfrey/329AIRFA.htm

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lightly

I'm completely disgusted and ashamed of the way the natives in this entire hemisphere have been treated. .....basically killed off by the millions...with the remaining numbers shoved out of the way of the invading European hordes.

It's all happened blindingly fast and is still being covered up and swept under the rugs as quickly as possible.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alaric
Posted (edited)

Russell Means (the AIM activist) gave a series of talks before he died about how he saw the US federal government taking the policies and structures of control that were used on Indians and rolling them out to the rest of the nation.

 

 

Edited by Alaric

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lightly

I guess I got carried away in my post above...  It didn't all happen "blindingly fast".. It was a centuries long process.

The destruction of the N. American cultures with the settling of the Western interior and the squeezing of the people into more remote regions in the mountains and periphery did go incredibly fast though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.