I was in a bar the other day, talking to a friend about Texas pioneering days...

[mikeofaustin]

In my local watering hole, talking to a friend about Texas pioneering days... and other things, Jim Bowie, the Alamo, etc, when I get to a topic about spanish missions, gold and the 'civilizing of native indians'. This hispanic guy a few chairs over raised his voice and said "Watch what you say about indians, because I'm one of them". Now, nothing negative was said about the indians, but this idiot obviously felt he needed to 'warn me'. I simply told my friend, "I'm going outside to smoke. I'll see ya later".

[stefen]

Smart move.

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Lets see. Civilization brought them smallpox, television, taxes and the two party political system.

Lucky he didn't just quietly bust a chair over your head.

[WV Hillbilly]

No give firewater to injun .

[mikeofaustin]

Lets see. Civilization brought them smallpox, television, taxes and the two party political system.

Lucky he didn't just quietly bust a chair over your head.

The guy was half my size. But, because of my friendship with the staff, I'll probably ask them to kicked him out, because he's "starting fights", if he does anything else.

If he were a civil person, I would be more than happy to discuss history with him. But, he looked like a half wit and probably doesn't know the first thing about his ancestors (or maybe he does, considering his initial defensiveness).

I used to date a half hispanic / half native indian. Very pretty women, but there was a 'switch' that got turned on when she drank. She was a totally different person, with every curse word in the book coming out, saying the worst things just to try and start a fight. I always wondering, if the old wives tales are true about the 'firewater' effect.

[bill gent]

RULE # 1 NEVER TALK TO A DRUNK
RULE # 2 NEVER TALK TO A DRUNK
RULE #3 IF RULE #2 FAILS SEE RULE # 1

[oldplacesnofinds]

I would have kept talking and never gave him a second thought. I can't stand people who think that way.

[Tom_in_CA]

This topic has interested me, because I'm a docent at the Carmel Mission, CA. We were told, during the docent training process, that occasionally, tourists have come in asking questions about the "torture of indians", or making snide remarks about how white man facilitated in destroying the indian's culture, etc... As if to put the docent on the defense that, like somehow the church (afterall, this is a church/mission) were evil in their treatment of indians, and worse yet, under color of God, the church, etc... Like, the insinuation might be: "Sheesk, WHAT hypocrites! Why did we mess with their affairs, enslave them, etc... right? And worse yet, do it in the name of the church! How dare we!! You docents and the whole church and white culture should be ashamed of themselves. Harrumpph! " (ok, I exaggerate a bit, but if tone and attitude could talk, I've sensed just this!)

I actually overheard a lady, who .... looking at a statue of Father Serra (who founded several of the 21 missions here in CA), make some comment like "there's the guy who enslaved and tortured the indians" blah blah

So I did some research into the topic, and found some interesting moderating information. Let's start with whether or not the indians were un-civilized to begin with. I guess your indian in the bar (and the politically correct types who tour our mission) would have you believe that indians were just peace-loving, innocent as the pure-driven snow, etc.. eh? Truth is indians warred against each other constantly, as recorded in early explorer's writings. "Scalping" existed long before the White man got here. So they were as prone to war, violence, etc... as any culture or race of people in the world is. Early explorers were aghast that some indians sacrificed their babies live, in the course of their religion or culture or for whatever reason. Hmmm, no problem there, eh? Women were treated like property or cattle. Traded back and forth between indian men. Hmm, what would feminism think of that today? I can go on and on with proofs and accounts like this.

The missions here were a cooporate concern of both church and state. So, while yes, the state had a vested economic interest in establishing a toe-hold of civilization, the priests also had a sincere vested interest in spreading the gospel, which they genuinely believed in. Once communities got started, yes, everyone contributed. No one who voluntarily commited themself to mission life, just got to sit around and enjoy the fruits of other's labors (gee, fancy that). Communal contribution was expected. You had a job to do, as did everyone! If you didn't contribute, you were not going to live there and continue to get freebies. Call that slavery? Sure, if you want. And yes, punishment for theft (indians were rampant thieves, this is no secret to historical accounts!) was punished swiftly. So too was it punished for white settlers. In other words, coorporal punishment was par for offences, for all of society at that time in history. The padres themselves practiced forms of denial, poverty, self-punishment, etc... But what gets passed on by the politically correct? Images or citations of indians in stocks. Nevermind the context of what had happened, and how society (both secular and church) worked at that time.

And as for diseases, NO ONE knew what was going on. Europeans had no ill-will, and the science of all that was unknown, or just un-folding at best. We know NOW, looking back, why the epidemics occured. But who knew at that time? I mean, heck, what we were all to do? Remain in Europe and never set foot here?

Indian activists and raving liberals are probably too brainwashed to see the light, but there it is. With that said, it is probably true that they can point to some injustice that was not correct on the part of White man. No doubt, we too, are not and were not "pure and the wind-driven snow". But to say it's all the "evil white man" is not historically correct. There's my rant

[Kentucky Kache]

This topic has interested me, because I'm a docent at the Carmel Mission, CA. We were told, during the docent training process, that occasionally, tourists have come in asking questions about the "torture of indians", or making snide remarks about how white man facilitated in destroying the indian's culture, etc... As if to put the docent on the defense that, like somehow the church (afterall, this is a church/mission) were evil in their treatment of indians, and worse yet, under color of God, the church, etc... Like, the insinuation might be: "Sheesk, WHAT hypocrites! Why did we mess with their affairs, enslave them, etc... right? And worse yet, do it in the name of the church! How dare we!! You docents and the whole church and white culture should be ashamed of themselves. Harrumpph! " (ok, I exaggerate a bit, but if tone and attitude could talk, I've sensed just this!)

I actually overheard a lady, who .... looking at a statue of Father Serra (who founded several of the 21 missions here in CA), make some comment like "there's the guy who enslaved and tortured the indians" blah blah

So I did some research into the topic, and found some interesting moderating information. Let's start with whether or not the indians were un-civilized to begin with. I guess your indian in the bar (and the politically correct types who tour our mission) would have you believe that indians were just peace-loving, innocent as the pure-driven snow, etc.. eh? Truth is indians warred against each other constantly, as recorded in early explorer's writings. "Scalping" existed long before the White man got here. So they were as prone to war, violence, etc... as any culture or race of people in the world is. Early explorers were aghast that some indians sacrificed their babies live, in the course of their religion or culture or for whatever reason. Hmmm, no problem there, eh? Women were treated like property or cattle. Traded back and forth between indian men. Hmm, what would feminism think of that today? I can go on and on with proofs and accounts like this.

The missions here were a cooporate concern of both church and state. So, while yes, the state had a vested economic interest in establishing a toe-hold of civilization, the priests also had a sincere vested interest in spreading the gospel, which they genuinely believed in. Once communities got started, yes, everyone contributed. No one who voluntarily commited themself to mission life, just got to sit around and enjoy the fruits of other's labors (gee, fancy that). Communal contribution was expected. You had a job to do, as did everyone! If you didn't contribute, you were not going to live there and continue to get freebies. Call that slavery? Sure, if you want. And yes, punishment for theft (indians were rampant thieves, this is no secret to historical accounts!) was punished swiftly. So too was it punished for white settlers. In other words, coorporal punishment was par for offences, for all of society at that time in history. The padres themselves practiced forms of denial, poverty, self-punishment, etc... But what gets passed on by the politically correct? Images or citations of indians in stocks. Nevermind the context of what had happened, and how society (both secular and church) worked at that time.

And as for diseases, NO ONE knew what was going on. Europeans had no ill-will, and the science of all that was unknown, or just un-folding at best. We know NOW, looking back, why the epidemics occured. But who knew at that time? I mean, heck, what we were all to do? Remain in Europe and never set foot here?

Indian activists and raving liberals are probably too brainwashed to see the light, but there it is. With that said, it is probably true that they can point to some injustice that was not correct on the part of White man. No doubt, we too, are not and were not "pure and the wind-driven snow". But to say it's all the "evil white man" is not historically correct. There's my rant

Are you referring to the Native Americans who's homeland was stolen?

[EDDE]

Lets see. Civilization brought them smallpox, television, taxes and the two party political system.

Lucky he didn't just quietly bust a chair over your head.

my sentiments also

[EDDE]

After unsuccessful efforts at colonization, the Dutch Parliament chartered the "West India Company," a national-joint stock company that would organize and oversee all Dutch ventures in the Western Hemisphere. Sponsored by the West India Company, 30 families arrived in North America in 1624, establishing a settlement on present-day Manhattan. Much like English colonists in Virginia, however, the Dutch settlers did not take much of an interest in agriculture, and focused on the more lucrative fur trade. In 1626, Director General Peter Minuit arrived in Manhattan, charged by the West India Company with the task of administering the struggling colony. Minuit "purchased" Manhattan Island from Native American Indians for the now legendary price of 60 guilders, formally established New Amsterdam, and consolidated and strengthened a fort located far up the Hudson River, named Fort Orange. The colony grew slowly, as settlers, responding to generous land-grant and trade policies, slowly spread north up the Hudson River.


the term purchase is relevant to "todays" terms
back then it was a done deal

[Tom_in_CA]

Hey Edde, I like that I guess no one can say that Manhattan Island was "stolen", eh?

Jbot: you say: "Are you referring to the Native Americans who's homeland was stolen?" I suggest that you trace your lineage back to whatever country you are from. Then move there, so as to assage your conscience. If your roots are European, go back to Europe, so that you will not be condoning this theft. If you are a native American indian, fine, stay here. In fact, just go live wherever you choose, and simply tell the current owners it was stolen from you and your ancestors. They will be sure to understand, and give their house to you.

I don't know what we can do about new worlds being conquered by people 500 yrs. ago. But for right now, that's unfortunately the way it is. If someone here, now, really wants to object, they are welcome to leave I suppose.

[gnewt]

I would like to make a statement here as I see it and as it was passed on to me by people who wanted to live in peace.
Not all the land was stolen by the white man, it was taken by the self made Generals, the crooked judges and sold to them by crooked Indians that didn't own it in the first place and that is where the crooked Judges came in.
The trail of tears has been so distorted, by everyone, we may never know all the truth because we have so many bleeding hearts on both sides that only tell one side. Remember we had two groups of Indians, those that wanted to live in peace with whites and those, many that did not own land wanted to go west and form a government and have land. That "wagon" train was run by bureaucrats, enough said. Blame was put on the whites for all the problems.
Some of my ancestors chose the trail of tears, some chose to be American, same with the Cherokee,Choctaw and Creek. They chose to be American and the failure of the trail and placing of the blame, many reverted back where they are today on the reservations in the Eastern States.
The Tribes that went west ended up in a beautiful state, as you can see with some of Fossis beautiful pictures, he is like a fisherman casting a lure out there and has a lot of us hooked.LOL
My GGG Father chose to be both, weird, he retired from the Army and drew a pension, he was a district chief and mediated problems among the Nation. He is on the Okla Flag with his whip, he was close with the Choctaws and was buried in the Choctaw Nation at 106 or 108 near Eagle Town, OK
What do you white people call the trail of tears your people were on going West?
My friends, we cannot blame all of our ancestors on what happened to the Indians, Americans and the Whites in the past, only the renegades, thieves, savages, crooked judges, self made Generals can take that dishonor.
I am an American like the other Military, Vets , and retirees on here, God bless em, we got a lot on here. We have a lot of others with the same mind set, be American first. I say to the Indians, Whites and all the others STOP the blame game. I'm not guilty!!!! You're not either!!!!!!!! Gnewt

[Kentucky Kache]

If the government chooses to build a road that will run through your property, or maybe they just want the land for a wildlife preserve, they will TAKE your land. True, they'll make you an offer, but it will be an offer you CAN'T refuse, literally. It's an old habit they got into a few hundred years back. It's one thing to say we have to live with it. That's true, we do have to live with it, but we don't have to pretend that nothing happened and that we are the blessed ones that God chosen to conquer the world. It's a pretty easy thing for us to live with, until it happens to us.

Tom, if everyone who complains should leave the country, you might want to be careful. It sounds to me like you're not too happy. Hey, maybe we can share a seat on the plane.

[rebelLT]

HMMMMMMMM. I just checked through my records and it seems I have NEVER owned a slave, persecuted anyone (OK, maybe in grade school), “Stole” land from anyone, infected them with disease, hanged anyone from a tree, or denied anyone the right to vote or own property Etc Etc. Etc.……. Now………Lets talk about persecution. WHO is persecuting WHOM? If any of you have done the above to another person go find every person of that group and grovel at their feet and kiss their @ss because I will not. I AM proud of who I am and will NOT be bullied by idiots. Use your brains and turn of you televisions.

[EDDE]

What do you white people call the trail of tears your people were on going West?
Gnewt

WOW
great point
the people out east who couldnt get good land or an opportunity and a good living/wage.
they went west on their own trail of tears.Gnwet,i commend you for making a very good posting! 8)

[Kentucky Kache]

HMMMMMMMM. I just checked through my records and it seems I have NEVER owned a slave, persecuted anyone (OK, maybe in grade school), “Stole” land from anyone, infected them with disease, hanged anyone from a tree, or denied anyone the right to vote or own property Etc Etc. Etc.……. Now………Lets talk about persecution. WHO is persecuting WHOM? If any of you have done the above to another person go find every person of that group and grovel at their feet and kiss their @ss because I will not. I AM proud of who I am and will NOT be bullied by idiots. Use your brains and turn of you televisions.

YOU haven't done these things, but your country has. Can you deny that?
It has nothing to do with television, it's about what happened to a nation of people who wasn't bothering anyone. Believe it or not, like it or not, there IS a reckoning.
What would you find if you were native American and checked through your records?Oh, that's right, you don't have to think about that, you don't live on a reservation.

[Kentucky Kache]

What do you white people call the trail of tears your people were on going West?

You mean that one where we were forced by the Indians?
Come on, you can do better than that.

[gnewt]

JBot, Evidently you didn't understand my post. I said nothing about anyone forcing the white people on their trail of tears, they did it on the desire to settle on some land of their own, it was a dream, and for some it was a nightmare.
A lot of the native Americans had the same dream, land and self governed nation.
They wanted to get away from the people that sided with the thieves that were selling their land to the white man and the crooked white Judges that were helping.
Jackson took several million acres from the Allies that helped him defeat the Creeks at Horseshoe Bend. He said this was a penalty on the Creeks for the war they started with him. The Chickasaw and Choctaw helped Jackson and when it was over he took seven million acres and much of it belonged to the two nations that helped him. When you get a Self made Gen that paid his men and all that publicity, it put him in the white house as a hero.
There was an Indian that ran a bar on the Alabama/Georgia line that was selling land that he didn't own and a crooked Judge was probably taking a bribe, for ruling in favor of that fat Creek Indian. By the way he was selling Creek land.
The Creek Chief was half white, they had many renegades that robbed from the Choctaw, burned crops and stole supplies, the Chickasaws lost a village near Talladega. These were some tough times for everyone. The whites lost a lot too, however records they keep don't reflect it.
If you have a problem with this post I can remove it. It would be dumb of me not to take it off if no one can understand what I try to say , I have trouble. Gnewt

[Kentucky Kache]

I was being sarcastic when I said that about the Indians forcing the whites. Everyone seems to want to deny the truth about our history. No matter how it makes us look, It is our history and it doesn't change anything to deny it.
I don't want you to delete your post, we should stand for what we believe.
My point was, though whites may have had many hardships on their journeys west, that is in no way equal to the way the US government treated the natives.