Underground Knowledge — A discussion group discussion
MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS
>
Native American nations no better than Third World countries?
date
newest »
newest »
Lance wrote: "This topic was inspired by fellow Undergrounder Israel Morrow’s post in the thread titled Why Are Third World Countries So Poor? The following excerpt has been lifted verbatim from that post:“Imp..."
Part of the problem seems to be that when an Iron Age people come into contact with Stone Age people, the latter usually don't fare very well. Was bringing western civilization a blessing or curse to the Stone Age tribes?
Since the Native tribes still hadn't invented the wheel when the white man arrived I suppose they found it to be a big help in daily life.
The Natives were unable to work with iron or other metals yet so I suppose upon being introduced to iron pots and pans and tools, when trading with the white man they probably found them a big help too.
Being unable to weave cloth they wore animal skins for clothing and they adapted well to wearing cotton clothing when it was introduced.
So if the Native people would prefer to live in the same manner as they once did before being introduced to Western civilization I think they should be allowed to do so. I really doubt they would wish to do this though.
``Laurie wrote: "Lance wrote: "This topic was inspired by fellow Undergrounder Israel Morrow’s post in the thread titled Why Are Third World Countries So Poor? The following excerpt has been lifted verbatim from th..."Not sure that helps the discussion Laurie. I know indigenous peoples the world over have been impacted upon by (so-called) civilization, but I'm specifically interested in the status of Native Americans in the 21st Century.
Having never visited Mainland USA, my view of Native Americans has no doubt been colored by the diet of Westerns I was brought up on.
I think we have one or two Native Americans in the group. Would love to hear from them...
I too have no real knowledge of native Americans, but it may be worth reminding people that the concept of "the noble savage" wiped back by Europeans may not be the whole story. For example, in New Zealand there is a certain amount of breast-beating about the poor treatment the Maori got, but it tends to be overlooked that before the official colonization, there was European contact that led to the rarely-mentioned in politically correct circles musket wars. Some Maori got muskets by trading and set about sorting out previous grievances. Prior to this they had their territorial and tribal wars and used their victims as protein sources. I am not saying the colonisers were perfect - they weren't, and greed once again got in the way, but what was there before was not exactly paradise.
"I am not saying the colonisers were perfect - they weren't, and greed once again got in the way, but what was there before was not exactly paradise."Very true Ian and this is usually overlooked in the debate.
True also regarding Maori and muskets. When Maoris got their hands on the weapons of the white man, a quarter of the Maori race perish during the Musket Wars between tribes. Those who couldn't afford muskets soon quickly themselves up Shit Creek without a paddle, as we say Down Under, and whole tribes were wiped out. Bloody days.
The Native American history and current situation is different again, if my understanding is correct. Any input from American Undergrounders would be appreciated.
Ian wrote: "I too have no real knowledge of native Americans, but it may be worth reminding people that the concept of "the noble savage" wiped back by Europeans may not be the whole story. For example, in New..."Now that you mention it Ian, some American Indian tribes such as the Iroquois engaged in eating their enemies after killing them.
Lance wrote: "``Laurie wrote: "Lance wrote: "This topic was inspired by fellow Undergrounder Israel Morrow’s post in the thread titled Why Are Third World Countries So Poor? The following excerpt has been lifted..."I appreciate your comments Lance, but as a student of American history I wanted to present the whole picture. Since my comments are true historical fact I believe they do bring 'something' to the conversation, even if real history isn't always politically correct.
By understanding the past of the American Indians, pre Columbus, I believe we can better understand their development and adapting to Western Civilization in the present day.
African Americans came to the USA with literally nothing but their birthday suit but have adapted extremely well to western civilization; while the American Indians have not been as successful. I would like to understand why too.
A hypothesis for why the American Indians have not done so well - they were given reservations and encouraged to continue in their tribal ways. So they did. There is no easy answer to this problem. In NZ the Maori were encouraged to go to European schools and merge, but I doubt their elders saw the point. The net result is they have advanced, some a lot better than others, but some have merely been attracted to gangs and they comprise a far too great fraction of the prison population. It probably wasn't helped by the fact that in the 1950s during periods of construction, huge money could be made driving bulldozers or in the meat works. There is no good answer as to how to bring such tribes that have been on the wrong side of colonization wars, but some ways are better than others. The African Americans had the one advantage of not having a tribal structure to get in their way.
``Laurie wrote: "Lance wrote: "``Laurie wrote: "Lance wrote: "This topic was inspired by fellow Undergrounder Israel Morrow’s post in the thread titled Why Are Third World Countries So Poor? The following excerpt h..."Let me see how I may assist you in understanding Native American people. First I wonder what you are basing your assumption on that Native American people have not adapted to "Western Civilization" well? Why don't we start there? I understand you have read some books but have you actually spent some time on tribal lands?
Lance wrote: ""I am not saying the colonisers were perfect - they weren't, and greed once again got in the way, but what was there before was not exactly paradise."Very true Ian and this is usually overlooked ..."
The issue in what you both are saying is by looking at the different values of the culture you are speaking of. Why is one man's dream suppose to be the dream of another man? Who imposed themselves on whom? I think this would be a good place to begin this discussion rather than make assumptions on what many I have seen on here have no real knowledge of.
I agree Regina, it is not up to us to say any one group of people on Earth has failed or succeeded. We are all mere mortals, with about as much awareness of the Universe as ants it seems! In fact, sometimes I think those ants are superior philosophers :)
Regina wrote: "``Laurie wrote: "Lance wrote: "``Laurie wrote: "Lance wrote: "This topic was inspired by fellow Undergrounder Israel Morrow’s post in the thread titled Why Are Third World Countries So Poor? The fo..."I suggest you read all of the comments on this topic so that you will understand the proper context of my comments. Thank you.
Regina wrote: "Lance wrote: ""I am not saying the colonisers were perfect - they weren't, and greed once again got in the way, but what was there before was not exactly paradise."Very true Ian and this is usual..."
As I stated above, if the American Indian tribes wish to live the same lifestyle as they did pre-Columbus and as a stone age people without benefit of modern medicine/electricity/plumbing and other conveniences we take for granted, I have no problem with that at all.
In fact, it's their God given right to live in any manner they please.
Laurie, they do indeed have the right to live how they like, however, they must also accept there is a price to pay for some choices. The problem arises when a choice is made and they grizzle about the consequences. On the other hand, there is the issue as to whether they really had a choice. If they did not, then the complaints are fair.
Ian wrote: "A hypothesis for why the American Indians have not done so well - they were given reservations and encouraged to continue in their tribal ways. So they did. There is no easy answer to this problem...."Thank you for your response Ian. Around the turn of the last century Indian children were made to go to government schools which proved to be highly unpopular, especially since they had to board at the schools as well. I'm not sure if education is still mandatory though. Maybe Regina could tell us more about this subject.
Another factor for the appalling poverty is the lack of industrial jobs in their area, which would help create a middle class.
The Industrial Revolution didn't come to the American south until the turn of the last century with the advent of air conditioning. Prior to that there wasn't a southern middle class either.
Industrial jobs began leaving the north and moving south since the dirt poor southern farmer would work for less money than their middle class, northern, fellow Americans. Southerners wouldn't unionize either since they were desperate for jobs.
It wasn't until the aftermath of WW2 that the standard of living improved vastly in the south with the creation of a middle class with good factory jobs and health insurance.
Now all the factory jobs are being shipped to Mexico and China, which is destroying the middle class. This might explain why President Trump won the election since he was the ONLY candidate that stated he would change onerous regulations that caused industrial jobs to leave in the first place.
All other Presidential candidates pretended the loss of industrial jobs wasn't causing problems for the everyday American.
Yes, if the people have to live where there is little opportunity, they are not going to develop. Is there any sign Trump is bringing back industry?
``Laurie wrote: "Lance wrote: "``Laurie wrote: "Lance wrote: "This topic was inspired by fellow Undergrounder Israel Morrow’s post in the thread titled Why Are Third World Countries So Poor? The following excerpt h..."Fair comment thanks Laurie. As NZ's Maori have adapted so well under colonization, I can't fully understand from afar why the Native Americans have comparatively struggled to adapt by comparison. At least that's my perception.
Many comments I would like to reply to. Hope this doesn't get too confusing...First, credentials. I am not Native, but I have known several Native friends, particularly in Alaska, which does not have a reservation system. I have also traveled through reservations, and I'm not kidding when I say they are the worst land in the continent. Beyond that, I've read numerous books by Native authors, from the classic Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee to modern memoirs like Fifty Miles From Tomorrow. In my book, Gods of the Flesh, my most cited source was Vine Deloria Jr.'s God is Red, a book about Native religions.
For those who think Natives have been given a decent share of human rights, here is one of many facts to consider: Freedom of religion is a constitutional right in America, but it was illegal for Native Americans to practice their religions until 1978. They were also forced to attend government boarding schools where they were forbidden to speak their own languages, and an appalling number were sexually abused. This is recent history; I believe the last boarding school closed in the 90s. Even today, the Bureau of Indian Affairs forbids Natives to move off the reservations for job opportunities. I could go on, but hopefully you get the idea. There's a reason Adolf Hitler praised the reservations as models for his concentration camps, and there's a reason the AIM movement chose Alcatraz as a symbol of the reservation system.
I said that Native Nations have become like Third World Countries, although that is not the fault of the Natives. Actually, the American government classifies them as "domestic dependent nations," as if they were our children, not the survivors of our conquests. Whether they are self-governing is debatable: The extent to which they are allowed to govern themselves is engineered by the BIA to favor American interests. For example, they are barely capable of preventing American oil and resource mining on their lands (for which they receive little or no compensation), but they also cannot bring Americans to court for the number rapes and murders committed virtually every day by outsiders on the reservations.
As for Native Americans having a primitive or savage culture, that is an egregious lie. They were certainly no more primitive than Europeans at the time their wars began: Most of Europe's technology (including firearms) came from trade with foreign nations, and the colonists were so morally bankrupt they dug up Native graves in Virginia to cannibalize the remains. But mudslinging never gets us anywhere, so consider the beauty of Native cultures.
Many Native societies were based on agriculture, and if you doubt how advanced they were, consider how many of the foods you eat were invented by Natives: potatoes, corn, peanuts, chilis, most beans, watermelons, and many more. As for their garments, they certainly did know how to weave and sew, although furs were an obvious choice for many: And I would challenge anyone to make a more beautiful or efficient parka than they make in Alaska.
To truly understand the potential that has been wasted, contrast Native Americans of the "Lower 48" to Alaska Natives. President Nixon negotiated a reasonably fair deal in the Alaska Native Land Claims Settlement Act, allowing Native communities to keep a sizeable portion of traditional lands and to form major corporations. Alaska Natives have still faced a great deal of disease, racism and violence (A man recently confessed to strangling and masturbating on a Native woman and was pardoned by the judge). Some have been forcibly confined to villages which are literally collapsing due to permafrost melt. And their hunting rights are severely restricted so that most can neither hunt nor afford decent food (A can of fruit in northern Alaska may cost more than $10). Despite all of that, the Native corporations have extended operations all over the country, and there are a number of university programs revitilizing Native languages and culture. Remember, these are groups that were living "primitive" lifestyles, with little or no outside contact, less than a century ago. My argument is that Native Americans are fully capable of both preserving their cultures and becoming key players in the global economy, but in more cases than not, they have been utterly prevented from doing so.
I have read several Native authors, from the present and distant past, who would agree that in some ways their quality of life has improved--but all are clear in saying, modern conveniences are not a fair exchange for the destruction of everything that makes a culture. The overall quality of life, in other words, has declined tremendously, and in fact the life expectancy is staggeringly low. At Pine Ridge, for example, Native life expectancy is on par with countries ravaged by AIDS.
I don't know enough to comment on the American "indians", but if what Israel says is even half true, it is a terrible indictment. We all know they got the worst land for agriculture, but if they can't even keep the mineral wealth, then they are really forked. It also appears that US justice is not all their TV programs make out.
Lance wrote: "This topic was inspired by fellow Undergrounder Israel Morrow’s post in the thread titled Why Are Third World Countries So Poor? The following excerpt has been lifted verbatim from that post:“Imp..."
I don't think they would likely wish to (live the same lifestyle ...etc) either. But deciding whether they were ultimately better off or not before colonization (or similarly deciding how much better or worse off they were by any measure that might be feasible to make) has a lot more variables involved than what indigenous people would choose. My goodness, the depths of anthropological, sociological, psychological and other 'ogicals that would need to be plumbed to get anything approaching an answer on this question... I wouldn't touch it for sure :)
I would add, (almost incidentally as there is so much to explore on such topics that I would not consider my experiences make me in any way well-informed) that I have spent some time with indigenous people. What at first seems a simple question ("of course they would be better off") becomes a lot more complex over time. In my experience. But I am sure indigenous peoples can be very different and I have no experience of North American indigenous peoples at all.
Israel wrote: "Many comments I would like to reply to. Hope this doesn't get too confusing...First, credentials. I am not Native, but I have known several Native friends, particularly in Alaska, which does not ..."
The plight of North America's First Nations people incl. the Native Americans is even worse than I imagined if what you say is accurate. And most of the fault, it seems, lies with the US Govt. and governing authorities.
To play devil's advocate for a moment, I've just Googled "Native American success stories" and 164,000,000 results came up! Even if half them are exaggerated or invented, that leaves a lot of success stories out there.
Just as I'd like to know if Native American nations are no better than Third World countries, I'm keen to hear some success stories. I know there must be some.
Lance wrote: "Israel wrote: "Many comments I would like to reply to. Hope this doesn't get too confusing...First, credentials. I am not Native, but I have known several Native friends, particularly in Alaska, ..."
Check out Quanah Parker, first Commanche millionaire rancher.
Ian wrote: "Yes, if the people have to live where there is little opportunity, they are not going to develop. Is there any sign Trump is bringing back industry?"Been away from Goodreads a few days so sorry for not answering sooner. I believe tariffs will work to bring back industrial jobs to America, as well as the regulatory red tape that the Trump administration has overturned. It won't be overnight that's for sure but then the problem wasn't created overnight in the first place.
Israel wrote: "Many comments I would like to reply to. Hope this doesn't get too confusing...First, credentials. I am not Native, but I have known several Native friends, particularly in Alaska, which does not ..."
Thank you for your excellent comments Israel.
You say you have travelled to many reservations and found them to be on some of the worst land in the USA. But the Natives lived on these same appalling lands prior to the arrival of white people so we can only conclude that they faced the same struggles then as they do now on the same land.
What you deem to be human rights abuses, by forcing Native children to go to school, learn to read and write and receive an education - the same human rights abuses are still on-going in the USA for children of ALL races.
Do you suggest that children not be educated then if it makes them unhappy? I would've been a very happy child running wild all day long instead of going to school but thankfully my parents and our government forced me to attend school whether I wanted to or not.
As far as forbidding Natives from practicing their religion; if such religion permits human sacrifice and cannibalism do you still think that such religious rights should be permitted?
After all, when the black slaves arrived in America they weren't allowed to continue their African religion of Voodoo either, for obvious reasons. Instead, they adapted to Christianity remarkably well and consider their lives blessed by being Christians.
Why has the Black race been able to adapt to Western Civilization and now live vastly improved lives over the ones they led upon their first arrival while the Native American have not?
As far as the Bureau of Indian Affairs forbidding them from leaving the reservation I'm not sure this is correct so please tell me where I can find out more about this. The reason is I've met many Natives that don't live on reservations so obviously if they want to leave they can. I'm thinking they might lose certainly tribal monetary benefits perhaps if they do leave? Otherwise, as far as I know they can move around the USA and live anywhere they want to as so many now do. They are also allowed to serve in the armed forces the same as any other American.
Could you please assist me by telling me where you read that Natives can not bring charges against any other Americans that might kill or rape them? Otherwise I can assure you that nobody is allowed to kill or rape anybody else in the USA, including the wild west, without being arrested on put on trial,
You said that Native reservations are similar to 3rd world countries but as I said above, this is the manner in which they have always lived, both pre and post Columbus. All efforts the government has made to improve their standard of living such as mandatory school attendance, you accuse of violating their basic human rights. You can not have it both ways Israel.
So in order to discover why the Natives on reservations are living lives little better than a 3rd world country, you will have to explore further avenues than it's all because of evil white men.
Ian wrote: "I don't know enough to comment on the American "indians", but if what Israel says is even half true, it is a terrible indictment. We all know they got the worst land for agriculture, but if they ca..."No, it's not even half true Ian.
Scire wrote: "Lance wrote: "This topic was inspired by fellow Undergrounder Israel Morrow’s post in the thread titled Why Are Third World Countries So Poor? The following excerpt has been lifted verbatim from th..."Let's face it, would the 3rd World be trying their best to immigrate to the lst World countries if they didn't think it would be a massive improvement over their present lifestyle?
I think it is also worth mentioning that forcing the children to learn English is not exactly a crime. If, in the future, they want to do something other than live on the reservation, they need English. Language is a tool to communicate, and it is important to have access to the language that is most used. In science, even the Chinese publish in English, not because they think it is better language or that they are forced to, but because they want people to read what they have written. It might seem unfair, but it is true.
Ian wrote: "I think it is also worth mentioning that forcing the children to learn English is not exactly a crime. If, in the future, they want to do something other than live on the reservation, they need Eng..."It's just plain common sense as well :D
Why are you anti the Voodoo religion, Laurie? What do you know about Voodoo? I mean you said African slaves were not allowed to practice Voodoo in America "for obvious reasons"What are those obvious reasons?
``Laurie wrote: "Israel wrote: "Many comments I would like to reply to. Hope this doesn't get too confusing...First, credentials. I am not Native, but I have known several Native friends, particularly in Alaska, ..."
Laurie, you mention "the Natives lived on these same appalling lands prior to the arrival of white people so we can only conclude that they faced the same struggles then as they do now on the same land." - I think it's fair to say today they'd been consigned to relatively tiny portions of the territories they once roamed free in, and I bet the best of those lands have since been cherry-picked by the prevailing authorities.
We need more Native Americans commenting in this thread...
Lance wrote: "``Laurie wrote: "Israel wrote: "Many comments I would like to reply to. Hope this doesn't get too confusing...First, credentials. I am not Native, but I have known several Native friends, particu..."
Now you're just nitpicking Lance :D
Since you are so concerned for our Natives would you be so kind as to research exactly how many acres of land each tribe claimed as their own and what portion of those acres these tribes still own.
I would also appreciate if you could research for me (I'm kind of busy right now) what worth these acres hold as in farming or ranching or mining concerns.
In order to properly discuss these matters we probably need to deal in exact facts and figures.
I don't doubt that life on these lands was horribly difficult pre Columbus. But at least now they have electricity, plumbing, medical care and warm houses. Our government is very generous to poor folks and the unemployed are entitled to food, housing and income free of charge from the American tax payers.
I believe you are from Australia right? I'd be interested to learn what is being done for the poor Aboriginals there. Thanks for your help.
James wrote: "Why are you anti the Voodoo religion, Laurie? What do you know about Voodoo? I mean you said African slaves were not allowed to practice Voodoo in America "for obvious reasons"What are those obvi..."
What do you care if I'm anti-Voodoo or not? A busy man like you probably has more important things to worry about than my Voodoo views :D
James wrote: "We need more Native Americans commenting in this thread..."
I'm part Cherokee James. The Scots-Irish that settled in the south were given free land for their service after the Revolutionary war.
They were mostly young and unmarried and would take up housekeeping with a Native woman since they were the only women around. So most southerners also have Indian heritage, myself included. This probably explains the southern man's ferocity in battle such as WW1 Sgt. Alvin York.
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/e...
I think the Voodoo religion is very misunderstood (as are many non-organized religions of native peoples). So I'm just trying to sense if you're coming at all this subject of Native Americans, including references to native peoples, from a religious perspective perhaps? A Christiancentric worldview, maybe? Or am I wrong? I've only had time to partly read this long thread for now, so possibly I'm missing something, but I'm not sure it's so easy to make definitive comments about large groups of people or entire entire ethnicities.
And I still think we need more Native Americans commenting in this thread :)
“Imperialism can have devastating and lasting effects on the psyche of entire cultures. Take a look, for example, at the Native American nations within America's borders. Many of them could be described as Third World countries--but how did they end up this way? For centuries, their leaders were killed; their communities were forced off every good patch of land in the continent; their possessions were stolen, confiscated or destroyed; they were forbidden to practice their religion and arts, and even forbidden to speak their own languages; their people were raped and brutalized, and their destitute communities purposefully flooded with drugs and alcohol from American markets. Today, people complain that there are scholarships and jobs available for the lazy, ungrateful Natives--but have you seen the reservations? If every family you knew had someone who had been driven into poverty and alcoholism, if every family you knew had someone who had been kidnapped, raped or murdered--could you simply lift yourself out of that situation? Would a college degree and a good job really change things for you? Would you want to be part of the world that did this to *your* world?”
As the above thread title suggests, I’d like to know how did Native American nations end up no better than Third World countries, and what, if anything, are the politicians and legislators doing to improve the lot of their First Nations citizens?
I know here in NZ there are genuine moves afoot to improve the lot of our First Nations people, the Maoris, and to address the injustices of the past, and, to a lesser extent, there are similar initiatives ‘across the ditch’ in Australia. But what’s happening in the USA and what does the future hold for its First Nations people?
To read Israel’s original post in its entirety go to: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...