The monument to the Indians in Russia.

[USViking]

Today, reading American media, and saw an interesting report. In USA take place collecting donations for the installation of the monument to the "(now independent): Unknown the Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Belorus, Ukrainians, Moldavians, Georgians, Armenians, Azerbaijani, Kazakh, Turkmen, Uzbek, Tadzik, Kirghiz; (now still not independent): Chechen, Ingush, Dagestani, Tatars, Avars, Bashkirs, and dozens of others who died defending their homeland." Monument are going to install in front of the Russian Embassy. What do you think about this idea? And is there such a monument in the Russia?

 

[jag2594]

There should be no such thing as racial guilt. A man is responsible only for his wrongdoings as well as collect his laurels for his good deeds. They aren't transferrable.

A man is also conditioned by his ancestors.

 

[jag2594]

I would rather talk about sins that America is committing right now, not ones for which nobody alive today has any personal responsibility. Like, the crap we pulled invading Iraq and what, if any, responsibility we have for Afghanistan's future. If we are going to talk about the sins of the nations, lets talk about stuff that is relevant today. That is, stuff that is happening today. There is plenty to talk about right there already.

Their is a reason why Native Americans are dying at the average of 54. Its easy to feel apathy for someone who doesn't come from the same ancestry.

 

[Dezaad]

Their is a reason why Native Americans are dying at the average of 54. Its easy to feel apathy for someone who doesn't come from the same ancestry.

I don't mind talking about the plight of Native Americans, and I feel bad for them. I think work needs to be done, and I support ongoing work as well as creative problem solving toward it. I just don't feel guilty, and I don't care to talk about racial guilt, because I am not responsible for it. You get that there is a difference between feeling compassion and feeling racial guilt, right?

 

[jag2594]

I don't mind talking about the plight of Native Americans, and I feel bad for them. I think work needs to be done, and I support ongoing work as well as creative problem solving toward it. I just don't feel guilty, and I don't care to talk about racial guilt, because I am not responsible for it. You get that there is a difference between feeling compassion and feeling racial guilt, right?

Yes nothing can be done about the past, only the future.

 

[Dezaad]

Yes nothing can be done about the past, only the future.

Well that is true too, but doesn't address my point. It seemed that you practically accused me of apathy because I think racial guilt is stupid. You are apparently dropping that line of thinking?

 

[jag2594]

Well that is true too, but doesn't address my point. It seemed that you practically accused me of apathy because I think racial guilt is stupid. You are apparently dropping that line of thinking?

No, because you said you felt sympathetic. So by acknowledging it shows that white people were the cause of it. I don't know if white people feel guilty, I am not white. But compensation and other privileges are deserve to people who were discriminated against. I think capitalism is the root cause of hatred Racism and hate crimes. Slavery was about money, racism against immigrants is about paying low wages.

 

[Bodi]

We should build some monuments for them here...

 

[Dezaad]

No, because you said you felt sympathetic. So by acknowledging it shows that white people were the cause of it. I don't know if white people feel guilty, I am not white. But compensation and other privileges are deserve to people who were discriminated against. I think capitalism is the root cause of hatred Racism and hate crimes. Slavery was about money, racism against immigrants is about paying low wages.

To people who were discriminated against and paid for by who?? Not me. I didn't discriminate against their ancestors, and neither did my ancestors who weren't even in America yet. Sorry, they are not entitled to my assistance based on their race and mine. And as far as I am concerned, ancestry only counts if you can figure out who still has ill gotten gains in their family estates. There is no collective race benefit or punishment. Guilt is an individual thing, not a racial thing.

As for lending a helping hand to lift them up and paid for by tax dollars, I absolutely support it. Based on compassion, and as an investment in a prosperous society, and nothing more.

 

[jag2594]

To people who were discriminated against and paid for by who?? Not me. I didn't discriminate against their ancestors, and neither did my ancestors who weren't even in America yet. Sorry, they are not entitled to my assistance based on their race and mine. And as far as I am concerned, ancestry only counts if you can figure out who still has ill gotten gains in their family estates. There is no collective race benefit or punishment. Guilt is an individual thing, not a racial thing.

As for lending a helping hand to lift them up and paid for by tax dollars, I absolutely support it. Based on compassion, and as an investment in a prosperous society, and nothing more.

Yea I agree with you. Not those who didn't do anything wrong. But those who's previous generations did. Again I agree and sorry for the misunderstanding.

 

[Rainman05]

A man is also conditioned by his ancestors.

Yes, in the world he lives in, but he is not accountable for any of the deeds. You grow up in the house your parents make for you. You live the life they can afford to give you. But you are not accountable for their successes or failures in life, their good deeds or the crimes.

 

[jag2594]

Yes, in the world he lives in, but he is not accountable for any of the deeds. You grow up in the house your parents make for you. You live the life they can afford to give you. But you are not accountable for their successes or failures in life, their good deeds or the crimes.

You can be conditioned by your parents thinking from generations. If you grew up in a racist house hold, there is a possibility that you will discriminate. A family economic status is usually passed on, If it wasn't then the vanderbilt, rockefeller and carnegie wouldn't still be rich. If your ancestors stole from them, and you stilled had that property or/and land. That is stealing.

 

[Rainman05]

You can be conditioned by your parents thinking from generations. If you grew up in a racist house hold, there is a possibility that you will discriminate. A family economic status is usually passed on, If it wasn't then the vanderbilt, rockefeller and carnegie wouldn't still be rich. If your ancestors stole from them, and you stilled had that property or/and land. That is stealing.

No it's not. And nobody stole anything from the native americans if that's where you're going at.

 

[jag2594]

No it's not. And nobody stole anything from the native americans if that's where you're going at.

And African Americans were not force into slavery? Listen, they stole their land and slaughter millions of Native Americans. The whites are the real illegals, if you related to someone who benefitted from stealing from the Natives then thats not yours.

Andrew JAckson ever heard of him.

 

[Rainman05]

And African Americans were not force into slavery? Listen, they stole their land and slaughter millions of Native Americans. The whites are the real illegals, if you related to someone who benefitted from stealing from the Natives then thats not yours.

Andrew JAckson ever heard of him.

No, it's not theft. And no, whites aren't the 'real' illegals. And while there were war crimes, war is not really a war crime. And while Europeans were the most advanced and civilized people, they didn't know microbiology when they landed on the shores of america. Thankfully now we do and countless diseases that were fatal hundreds of years ago are now curable, all thanks to western civilization. And when given the choice to adopt the methods and tools brought by progress, the native americans decided not to advance themselves with knowledge, just arm themselves guns. Guns to kill each other and to kill the Europeans. Trying to make things one-sided in history is a fools' errant buddy.

They didn't even adopt irrigation and advanced agriculture to start founding large settlements and show signs of a occupied land.

 

[jag2594]

No, it's not theft. And no, whites aren't the 'real' illegals. And while there were war crimes, war is not really a war crime. And while Europeans were the most advanced and civilized people, they didn't know microbiology when they landed on the shores of america. Thankfully now we do and countless diseases that were fatal hundreds of years ago are now curable, all thanks to western civilization. And when given the choice to adopt the methods and tools brought by progress, the native americans decided not to advance themselves with knowledge, just arm themselves guns. Guns to kill each other and to kill the Europeans. Trying to make things one-sided in history is a fools' errant buddy.

They didn't even adopt irrigation and advanced agriculture to start founding large settlements and show signs of a occupied land.

Every heard of andrew jackson, probably not.

the white were only advance with weapons, nothing more. The native american culture is better than the whites, they did not want to adopt some silly while religion. They understood how to work the land. The importance of trees and clean water. They are the ones who help the whites to survive, if they didn't we wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

[Rainman05]

Every heard of andrew jackson, probably not.

the white were only advance with weapons, nothing more. The native american culture is better than the whites, they did not want to adopt some silly while religion. They understood how to work the land. The importance of trees and clean water. They are the ones who help the whites to survive, if they didn't we wouldn't be having this conversation.

What?

The arts: literature. The native americans didn't even have written language. Music of all kinds, both vocal and with the use of advanced instruments. Museums filled with paintings. Sculptures. Monuments.

The sciences: natural sciences. Mathematics. Chemistry. Physics. Geology and so much more. Agriculture. Metallurgy.

Written laws. Schools. diverse forms of government. Civil rights and liberties.

The native americans didn't even have the wheel. The wheel. An invention 90% of the world outside of the americas had for milleniums. There were just a few tribes that had some form of primitive agriculture in the Virginia area, the rest, hunter gatherers, something people in the rest of the world stopped being for 12000 years.

This is the truth. You can choose to ignore it all you want. Call it theft and whatever, but you're wrong.

 

[Fisher]

What?

The arts: literature. The native americans didn't even have written language. Music of all kinds, both vocal and with the use of advanced instruments. Museums filled with paintings. Sculptures. Monuments.

The sciences: natural sciences. Mathematics. Chemistry. Physics. Geology and so much more. Agriculture. Metallurgy.

Written laws. Schools. diverse forms of government. Civil rights and liberties.

The native americans didn't even have the wheel. The wheel. An invention 90% of the world outside of the americas had for milleniums. There were just a few tribes that had some form of primitive agriculture in the Virginia area, the rest, hunter gatherers, something people in the rest of the world stopped being for 12000 years.

This is the truth. You can choose to ignore it all you want. Call it theft and whatever, but you're wrong.

So your basic argument is that Native Americans were inferior because they had a non-European culture?

I have recently seen somewhere that there was an estimated high of 100,000,000 native americans. I cannot vouche for that number, but I can tell you that I think you are totally underestimating Native American presence in the US before whitey showed up.

 

[Rainman05]

So your basic argument is that Native Americans were inferior because they had a non-European culture?

I have recently seen somewhere that there was an estimated high of 100,000,000 native americans. I cannot vouche for that number, but I can tell you that I think you are totally underestimating Native American presence in the US before whitey showed up.

No, my basic argument is that native american culture was pretty underdeveloped as opposed to the rest of the world, not just European culture. it wasn't even on par with 12000BC when the first agricultural settlements started in minor asia. The civilizations that existed in 2000 BC, the Babylonians, the Egyptians, the Britons, the Chinesse, etc, were lightyears away from what the native americans had when Columbus came to the americas. And the European civilization of the columbus era was like it was on a whole different planet.

I read that article in wikipedia too. And it was done recently, by people like you. Apologists... and suprarealists. People who romanticize about the past and then wish it so badly it was reality that they defy the facts.
At best there were 18mil and that's being at the peak of generosity. Most likely the peak of native americans were around 6-10mil.

The only thing they were interested in was guns because guns was what enabled them to live the life they liked. They could hunt better with guns. They could kill each other better and massacre each other better. And that's all they cared for. They had no ambition to built cities and promote science and culture. They couldn't even write because they had no written alphabet, just an oral tradition. So therefore, if the Europeans who went there hadn't had the good grace to catalogue and write about them, put them in history, we wouldn't have known anything about them today. Not how they lived. Not how they spoke. Not what they wear. Not nothing. Because they themselves had pretty much no means of displaying that and passing it down other than cave paintings and oral tradition. Which is pathetic even by XVth century standard worldwide.

 

[Captain Adverse]

I was going to avoid this thread because I have little respect for the OP and consider most of his threads less than valid and unworthy of response. However after reading some of the member's hypocritical justifications for treating Natives as red-headed step children I had to speak up. Before I do that I might as well correct the OP. There ARE Native American memorials and monuments, including the Crazy Horse Memorial: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crazy_Horse_Memorial

Well, there's where monument fails: the indians weren't fighting for their country.

Correction. The (Native American) Indians WERE ACTUALLY fighting for THEIR country. What the hell do you think they were fighting for; the fun of it? Perhaps you meant that they were not fighting for OUR country, so we don't need to honor them in any way.

To people who were discriminated against and paid for by who?? Not me. I didn't discriminate against their ancestors, and neither did my ancestors who weren't even in America yet. Sorry, they are not entitled to my assistance based on their race and mine. And as far as I am concerned, ancestry only counts if you can figure out who still has ill gotten gains in their family estates. There is no collective race benefit or punishment. Guilt is an individual thing, not a racial thing.

As for lending a helping hand to lift them up and paid for by tax dollars, I absolutely support it. Based on compassion, and as an investment in a prosperous society, and nothing more.

Are you standing on American soil? Do you own property on American soil? Before doing either have you gotten permission from the actual owners, the natives who occupied virgin territory before the arrival of whoever slaughtered them for it?

In our society we have laws that prevent the ownership of, or the transfer of ownership by sale of, stolen property. It does not even matter if you have a bill of sale showing you paid good money for stolen property; if found it must be returned to the original owner.

Every plot of land on this continent belonged to a particular tribe prior to the advent of western invasions. None was ever honestly purchased; natives never understood the concept. All land was the communal property of the entire tribe and could not be "owned" by one person. Instead, they were just killed off one way or another. The Federal government dishonored almost every single treaty, and then simply declared the lands taken were "American property."

The real problem is that the U.S.A failed to fully "conquer" the land. The Feds were remiss in leaving tribal groupings alive and placing them on "semi-autonomous reservations." In effect, Native American tribes (the few that have not faced genocidal extinction) are legaly recognized as NATIONS with dual citizenship. Those that are still in existence have a rightful claim to all their old tribal lands, lands that were stolen from them. This is the only reason people like you have compassion; you recognize piracy and villainy occurred and you still feel a debt is owed because the victims are still around to complain. Otherwise you would give about as much thought to the issue as the homeless you walk past any day of the week.

I'm not even going to respond to the less than factual stereotyping that our peer Rainman05 posted in #44. I'm just too appalled by it.

 

[Fisher]

No, my basic argument is that native american culture was pretty underdeveloped as opposed to the rest of the world, not just European culture. it wasn't even on par with 12000BC when the first agricultural settlements started in minor asia. The civilizations that existed in 2000 BC, the Babylonians, the Egyptians, the Britons, the Chinesse, etc, were lightyears away from what the native americans had when Columbus came to the americas. And the European civilization of the columbus era was like it was on a whole different planet.

I read that article in wikipedia too. And it was done recently, by people like you. Apologists... and suprarealists. People who romanticize about the past and then wish it so badly it was reality that they defy the facts.
At best there were 18mil and that's being at the peak of generosity. Most likely the peak of native americans were around 6-10mil.

The only thing they were interested in was guns because guns was what enabled them to live the life they liked. They could hunt better with guns. They could kill each other better and massacre each other better. And that's all they cared for. They had no ambition to built cities and promote science and culture. They couldn't even write because they had no written alphabet, just an oral tradition. So therefore, if the Europeans who went there hadn't had the good grace to catalogue and write about them, put them in history, we wouldn't have known anything about them today. Not how they lived. Not how they spoke. Not what they wear. Not nothing. Because they themselves had pretty much no means of displaying that and passing it down other than cave paintings and oral tradition. Which is pathetic even by XVth century standard worldwide.

Well, clearly you don't know the meaning of apologists, but that not withstanding, most of the great advancements in civilization in Europe can be traced directly back to those darned old Chinese people that we don't want coming to our country because we are better than them.

 

[Rainman05]

Well, clearly you don't know the meaning of apologists, but that not withstanding, most of the great advancements in civilization in Europe can be traced directly back to those darned old Chinese people that we don't want coming to our country because we are better than them.

I don't think this is true. The only way you can justify it is by talking about the Silk Road and that's insufficient.

Inventions aren't a single draw. People invent things in parrarel at different times in different places without any influence from one another by observing the natural world.

 

[Captain Adverse]

No, it's not theft. And no, whites aren't the 'real' illegals... And when given the choice to adopt the methods and tools brought by progress, the native americans decided not to advance themselves with knowledge, just arm themselves guns. Guns to kill each other and to kill the Europeans. Trying to make things one-sided in history is a fools' errant buddy.

They didn't even adopt irrigation and advanced agriculture to start founding large settlements and show signs of a occupied land.

How little you know of what you speak.

If I sold YOU a firearm could you make another one from scratch? I don’t mean after buying a kit from some dealer, I mean build one completely on your own? As in smelt the ore, mold the metal, shape and bore the barrel, construct a trigger mechanism? Construct all the other parts all by yourself? I highly doubt it, and you would still need all the technological skills and manufacturing infrastructure to do it. You think the whites gave that to the Natives when they sold firearms to them?

As for your agriculture comments?

The Cherokee in Georgia had received recognition of their semiautonomous status in a federal treaty in 1791. They become farmers, ranchers, and cotton producers. They developed their own constitution, built roads and churches, developed a successful educational system, and owned slaves. The Cherokee also refused to sell their highly prized and fertile lands to whites. So President Andrew Jackson, under his Indian Removal Act of 1830, kicked them out to the Indian Territory (present day Oklahoma) and let whites take over their lands.

Prior to that there were the Pueblos (Hopi, Zuni, etc.) who were farmers, dug wells, built permanent housing structures, engaged in trade, and also began sheep herding after encountering the Spanish. The Navaho picked up these skills after contacting the Pueblos. All but sheep-herding occurred well-before any white men arrived in their territories.

The Iroquois Nation was organized sometime between 1100 A.D. and 1450 A.D., well-before any white men came to North America. They also farmed and had a highly organized system of government. Their Constitution had significant influence on the creation of our own.

All tribes had art, crafts, songs, and often acted more civilized than European invaders. You do know that “scalping” was introduced by Europeans right? It wasn’t a Native American invention.

I'd like to say I am surprised at your slanted view of history in attempts to justify how current Americans "don't owe" native peoples anything, but I'm not. It's similar to the selfish and short-sighted attitude many Conservatives have about "private enterprise." Having a right to w/e because "we earned it" (by ruthlessly taking from or exploiting others) and its "ours." Then acting with moral outrage when others use the same tactics to deprive them of "what's theirs." Laughable.

 

[Grand Mal]

No, my basic argument is that native american culture was pretty underdeveloped as opposed to the rest of the world, not just European culture. it wasn't even on par with 12000BC when the first agricultural settlements started in minor asia. The civilizations that existed in 2000 BC, the Babylonians, the Egyptians, the Britons, the Chinesse, etc, were lightyears away from what the native americans had when Columbus came to the americas. And the European civilization of the columbus era was like it was on a whole different planet.

I read that article in wikipedia too. And it was done recently, by people like you. Apologists... and suprarealists. People who romanticize about the past and then wish it so badly it was reality that they defy the facts.
At best there were 18mil and that's being at the peak of generosity. Most likely the peak of native americans were around 6-10mil.

The only thing they were interested in was guns because guns was what enabled them to live the life they liked. They could hunt better with guns. They could kill each other better and massacre each other better. And that's all they cared for. They had no ambition to built cities and promote science and culture. They couldn't even write because they had no written alphabet, just an oral tradition. So therefore, if the Europeans who went there hadn't had the good grace to catalogue and write about them, put them in history, we wouldn't have known anything about them today. Not how they lived. Not how they spoke. Not what they wear. Not nothing. Because they themselves had pretty much no means of displaying that and passing it down other than cave paintings and oral tradition. Which is pathetic even by XVth century standard worldwide.

When white people first showed up here, on the west coast of Canada, the native population might well have been the richest, most cultured people in the world. Villages of a few hundreds could support artists to a degree that cities of hundreds of thousands can't today. There's a couple of inlets on Vancouver Island where they learned to gather those tooth-shaped shells called 'dentalia' from deep water and trade routes brought those shells across North America. There's villages on the Queen Charlotte Islands (Haida Gwaii) built of huge longhouses made of whole cedar logs and rows of tall totem poles along the beach, all abandoned. The average seaman on Cap't Cook's ship could never have hoped to live so well.
What's technology got to do with it?

 

[Rainman05]

When white people first showed up here, on the west coast of Canada, the native population might well have been the richest, most cultured people in the world. Villages of a few hundreds could support artists to a degree that cities of hundreds of thousands can't today. There's a couple of inlets on Vancouver Island where they learned to gather those tooth-shaped shells called 'dentalia' from deep water and trade routes brought those shells across North America. There's villages on the Queen Charlotte Islands (Haida Gwaii) built of huge longhouses made of whole cedar logs and rows of tall totem poles along the beach, all abandoned. The average seaman on Cap't Cook's ship could never have hoped to live so well.
What's technology got to do with it?

No.And also, we aren't discussing the inuits from Canada. But the native american tribes.