Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
bmk1245

Aborigines

98 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Desertrat56
Posted (edited)
On 6/16/2019 at 9:09 AM, Piney said:

There has been a revival of Shamanism in Central Asia and the Yeniseian Peoples are working with their brother's the Dine'(Apache-Navajo-Athapaskans). My people are also working with other tribes whose North Woods culture was the same at one time. I personally helped with the revival of Shamanism among the Turkic groups. 

 

I find it interesting that you include the apache and navajo in the same group.  The navajo are related to the alaskan athabaskans but the apache are not.  I grew up with both and they are not friends and neither consider the apache Dine' as far as I can tell.  In fact apache is the word for enemy in either navajo or some other tribe further east.  I don't think the navajo volunteered to be guides for the spaniards but some of the pueblo people did in order to keep track of what they were up to. It may have been acoma who considered the apache enemies and they may have been the ones who gave that name to the euopeans (spainiards) and being stupid europeans with no consciousness or concern of how tribes and pueblos interacted with each other decided that was the name to use.  I used to know that name the apache call themselves but I can't remember it now.

Edited by Desertrat56

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Piney
1 minute ago, Desertrat56 said:

  The navajo are related to the alaskan athabaskans but the apache are not. 

Yes they are. They are all Dine' I studied the linguistics and archaeology

A  volcano went off in Alaska and a group of the Dine migrated down to become the Proto-Apache/Navajo. 

During the 70s the Athabaskans would have nothing to do with neither on the Powwow Circuit because they called them "The Cowards who Ran"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
6 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

I find it interesting that you include the apache and navajo in the same group.  The navajo are related to the alaskan athabaskans but the apache are not.  I grew up with both and they are not friends and neither consider the apache Dine' as far as I can tell.  In fact apache is the word for enemy in either navajo or some other tribe further east.  I don't think the navajo volunteered to be guides for the spaniards but some of the pueblo people did in order to keep track of what they were up to. It may have been acoma who considered the apache enemies.  I used to know that name the apache call themselves but I can't remember it now.

http://www.native-languages.org/definitions/dine.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
3 minutes ago, Piney said:

So I looked up wikipedia, which is not always accurate but it did mention Onate as the one who got the name apache from the Zuni.  The Zuni are the ones then who considered the apache enemy.  It also said that the apche and navajo are related distantly.  Something the ones I grew up with would have never acknowledged.  The Zuni are a pueblo just south of the Acoma pueblo and they are the ones who figured out that the Spaniards were theives and murders.  They put them in their place once and that is when the King of Spain sent his warrior priests, so now all the pueblos are catholics with native roots, which makes for some very interesting spring & winter ceremonies.  Once when I was stationed in GA and it was christmas time I was in the barracks watching a catholic service filmed in the Albuquerque church with native dances.  It was amazing to me that it was televised and I felt homesick.  Then people watching it with me started complaining and being so upset that a christian church was being used in such a way.  They were idiots as far as I was concerned and they were also all from the east where they think the oldest church in the U.S. is 300 years old.  That church was built before 1700.  And it is in the U.S.  (People from New Mexico get a lot of "wow your english is really good." when we go east of the mississippi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
13 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

It also said that the apche and navajo are related distantly. 

One Apache curator at NMAI always claims "the Apache were always in the Southwest". Many Apache and Navajo archaeologists claim the same. All of us Non-Dine know the truth but don't argue with them. They literally came out of the North and ate the Ancestral Pueblos  so they have a "genocide denial" issue. :wacko:

16 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

all the pueblos are catholics with native roots, which makes for some very interesting spring & winter ceremonies.  Once when I was stationed in GA and it was christmas time I was in the barracks watching a catholic service filmed in the Albuquerque church with native dances.  It was amazing to me that it was televised and I felt homesick.  Then people watching it with me started complaining and being so upset that a christian church was being used in such a way. 

The Christian side of my tribe always has Northern Straight, Grass and Jingle Dress dancers in their church services. The Lakota-Dakota do the same. Sounds like there was some real small minded asses there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
34 minutes ago, Piney said:

One Apache curator at NMAI always claims "the Apache were always in the Southwest". Many Apache and Navajo archaeologists claim the same. All of us Non-Dine know the truth but don't argue with them. They literally came out of the North and ate the Ancestral Pueblos  so they have a "genocide denial" issue. :wacko:

The Christian side of my tribe always has Northern Straight, Grass and Jingle Dress dancers in their church services. The Lakota-Dakota do the same. Sounds like there was some real small minded asses there. 

Ignorant is what they were.  Just think how ego centric it is to brag about their town having the oldest church in the U.S. and that church is barely 300 years old.  They were not taught anything about the Spanish invasion in th 1500's through the 1700's or later.   California, New Mexico, Arizona were settled by Spaniards before Jamestown and before the missing Roanoke colony.  That's why it chaps me when people whose ancestors have been in the U.S. Southwest for 500 years, (before mexico was a country) are called Mexicans.  I call them on if they are living in this area, and word gets out, don't use the word "mexican" around her unless you mean literally from mexico.  :lol:

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
4 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Ignorant is what they were.  Just think how ego centric it is to brag about their town having the oldest church in the U.S. and that church is barely 300 years old.  They were not taught anything about the Spanish invasion in th 1500's through the 1700's or later.   California, New Mexico, Arizona were settled by Spaniards before Jamestown and before the missing Roanoke colony.  That's why it chaps me when people whose ancestors have been in the U.S. Southwest for 500 years, (before mexico was a country) are called Mexicans.  I call them on if they are living in this area, and word gets out, don't use the word "mexican" around her unless you mean literally from mexico.  :lol:

When the rednecks around here start complaining about people speaking Spanish and say they should "speak American", I tell them "What? It was the first European language spoken here!" 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
16 minutes ago, Piney said:

When the rednecks around here start complaining about people speaking Spanish and say they should "speak American", I tell them "What? It was the first European language spoken here!" 

 

There was a joke going around here about a woman in line at a grocery store talking on the phone.  The man behind her was getting bothered and when she hung up he told her "You need to quit talking spanish, you are in america, so you should talk english or go back to Mexico."  She replied "I was speaking Navajo and if you want to hear english go back to england."    The really stupid thing is he didn't even know where spanish came from or that Mexico is part of America, like Canada.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
11 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

There was a joke going around here about a woman in line at a grocery store talking on the phone.  The man behind her was getting bothered and when she hung up he told her "You need to quit talking spanish, you are in america, so you should talk english or go back to Mexico."  She replied "I was speaking Navajo and if you want to hear english go back to england."    The really stupid thing is he didn't even know where spanish came from or that Mexico is part of America, like Canada.

My son's mother and I experienced something similar when we were speaking Unami. :lol:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
15 hours ago, openozy said:

I know at least one was sent here for having sex with a pig(true),you have to do that now to get off charges.

Rumour has it he ended up running against LBJ.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
openozy
4 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

if you want to hear english go back to england.

Funny thing is some of my pommy mates are barely illegible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
openozy
1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

Rumour has it he ended up running against LBJ.

Good he didn't win,he would have banned pork products.I couldn't live without pork crackling.Maybe I'm related with my lust for pork lol.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
14 hours ago, openozy said:

Funny thing is some of my pommy mates are barely illegible.

You should try to have a conversation with some of the people I met from Rhode Island.  They complimented me on my english and I thought they were hinting they wanted lessons as they were barely understandable 50 % of the time, the rest everyone just pretended like they didn't say anything.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
18 hours ago, openozy said:

Good he didn't win,he would have banned pork products.I couldn't live without pork crackling.Maybe I'm related with my lust for pork lol.

LBJ and the idea his opponent was Driving Miss Daisy Down to the Piggly-Wiggly was one of favourite urban myths.

https://masscommons.wordpress.com/2012/03/15/fear-loathing-on-the-campaign-trail-make-them-deny-it/

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
openozy
6 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

LBJ and the idea his opponent was Driving Miss Daisy Down to the Piggly-Wiggly was one of favourite urban myths.

https://masscommons.wordpress.com/2012/03/15/fear-loathing-on-the-campaign-trail-make-them-deny-it/

WTH, At least I feel better about me and my monkey.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spud the mackem
On ‎24‎/‎06‎/‎2019 at 7:11 PM, Desertrat56 said:

He got credit because the English took it over, just like the english take credit for a lot of stuff in the US that happened before their time.  It's that roman empire attitude that no one is civilized until they came along.

The first POTUS was a chap from England ,called George Washington , perhaps you would rather have had a French ,German or Spaniard . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek
10 minutes ago, spud the mackem said:

The first POTUS was a chap from England ,called George Washington , perhaps you would rather have had a French ,German or Spaniard . 

it would not matter to us.  it is not their nationality, but their ideas.  idk what is the problem you got with  French ,German or Spaniard . do not project it on us

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
18 minutes ago, spud the mackem said:

The first POTUS was a chap from England ,called George Washington , perhaps you would rather have had a French ,German or Spaniard . 

The Germans weren't involved much in colonization.  I live in a part of the U.S. where the Spaniards put down roots and were undisturbed by the English for a few hundred years. They were no better, they just had a smaller empire.

You take offense when none is offered and that is your problem.  Then English are and were the secular arm of the Roman Empire.  The catholic church is the religious arm and until Henry the 8th they were the same entity.  But not much changed with old Henry, the religion was the same, just a new name and an allowance for the king to divorce his wife. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Smoke aLot
On 6/19/2019 at 12:05 PM, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

An official apology that was at best an exercise in what we these days call “virtue signalling”. 

It's easier to admit and offer apology to something which is finished story, so to say. It did felt sincere because of language used in that apology. Like what happened to native Americans - in culture it is admitted for most part because it is also finished story and acknowledgment of wrongdoings can not change situation on the field.

Aborigines mostly asked for pieces of land which was hard to even access and get to, being in desert areas far from population and industrial centers, that's how i see it but i might be very wrong about this.

Some conflicts of today are also shrouded in mystery but when those conflicts end it won't be hard for the wining side to admit everything wrong which happened because, again, it doesn't change situation on the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats
17 minutes ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

It's easier to admit and offer apology to something which is finished story, so to say. It did felt sincere because of language used in that apology. Like what happened to native Americans - in culture it is admitted for most part because it is also finished story and acknowledgment of wrongdoings can not change situation on the field.

Aborigines mostly asked for pieces of land which was hard to even access and get to, being in desert areas far from population and industrial centers, that's how i see it but i might be very wrong about this.

Some conflicts of today are also shrouded in mystery but when those conflicts end it won't be hard for the wining side to admit everything wrong which happened because, again, it doesn't change situation on the field.

It was utterly insincere as as soon as the air left Rudd's lungs his government did precisely nothing to change how the Indigenous community is treated by the government. It went on to continue to do nothing. Gillard's government changed nothing. Rudd's government after that changed nothing. Neither did Abbot, Turnbull or whatshisface we have now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spud the mackem
On ‎27‎/‎06‎/‎2019 at 6:14 PM, aztek said:

it would not matter to us.  it is not their nationality, but their ideas.  idk what is the problem you got with  French ,German or Spaniard . do not project it on us

I have no problem with French German or Spaniards , who were all part of the first colonisation of America , don't you jump to conclusions where none are meant . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
openozy

Living now in Western NSW I think aboriginals still get persecuted by some of the backward,redneck locals,They have little chance of getting work to better their lives.Growing up in Sydney its a different story with them integrating with everyone else.TheHillbillies need to change their attitude to the indigenous people because they are not going anyware.I think too close breeding in the little towns by whites has caused them to be violent,as seen in captive animal populations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Smoke aLot
On 6/28/2019 at 12:47 PM, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

It was utterly insincere as as soon as the air left Rudd's lungs his government did precisely nothing to change how the Indigenous community is treated by the government. It went on to continue to do nothing. Gillard's government changed nothing. Rudd's government after that changed nothing. Neither did Abbot, Turnbull or whatshisface we have now.

That's sad. It was not problem to officially support some Aborigines who wanted to claim land in remote areas while more important legal things were never worked on?

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.