BS: Columbus Day Fiasco

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Gary T
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 05:03 PM

It occurs to me that the image kat mentioned of "stone age" may suffer from its own misconceptions. In an academic sense, it essentially means having not progressed into metallurgy, meaning stone tools were the state of the art. In a sociological sense, we probably know very little of prehistoric culture, having only artifacts and a few pieces of artwork to go on. There have been "modern" stone age cultures found, mostly in remote islands, and of course they, like the Native American cultures, are more advanced than the popular cartoonish notions of "cavemen" that most of us have been exposed to. I would give Ely and Carlin the benefit of the doubt in using this term--I doubt they meant the American Indians were brutish "caveman" types.

Still, I think kat has a point in mentioning that most U.S. schoolchildren got a very simplistic and generally one-sided introduction to Native Americans, and most U.S. citizens probably haven't learned a whole lot more than what they were taught in school about it. I do question the implication that they chose the stone age life--what else did they have to choose from? They may have chosen to reject or avoid European culture, but I'll bet that if iron age technology were available to them without the Euro-culture, they would have embraced it without hesitation.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 05:33 PM

There are some mysterious things about Columbus. Here's an article that suggests that Christopher Columbus (or Cristóbal Colón, as he called himself) may have been a descendant of Spanish Jews.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 05:44 PM

I made reference which didn't carry through clearly. Thanks GaryT for your kind way of pointing this out.

I did not mean that NA tribes opted to live in a "stone age" way. What I mean and should have said much more clearly, is that what some people, in modern times, might consider to be *stone age*, is what others choose to live. And in this I am referring to a wide range of people, including the survivalist who chooses to live in a treehouse in Alaska (seen on tv last night!), with no running water, electricity etc. to certain tribes in South America who are losing their fight against "modernity" through usurpation of their lands and exposure to the "outside" world which they eschew.

You are right, Gary, there are some different interpretations of "stone age." What I have just described above, IMO, would better be referred to as "primitive."

Anyway, I am sure everyone just ran around with braids, and beads, and flowers in their hair, and a wreath of knickaknick(sp) wafting round their heads....yep, the original stoned age, fer sure!**BG**

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 06:08 PM

Terms like "stone-age" are relics of a grossly oversimplified pseudo-scientific paradigm in which there was a built-in technological sequence through whom all human societies passed - old stone age/new stone age/bronze age/iron age. Really that's just an inversion of the old Roman idea of there being an Age of Gold, followed by an Age of Iron and so forth, going down to a decadent Age of Clay.

Whereas it was a lot more complex than that, and the kind of things that get made out of iron are only one part of what is significant about a culture - even in terms of "cultural artifacts", it's just as significant to know whether a people are skilled at weaving or pottery or making things out of wood. But of course those kind of things don't survive in the ground so long. Nor do poems and songs and stories and music.

The pity is that the Vikings didn't take root, which would have enabled the two cultures to adjust to each other in a more equal and leisurely fashion. Or that the French didn't beat the English in the 18th Century, which might well have had, to some measure, a similar effect.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: sophocleese
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 06:23 PM

Anybody read Farley Mowat's Book The Farfarers? In it he postulates trading between the American peoples and the northwestern British (pictish? I can't remember) people as much as 1500 years ago. The Vikings followed them in order to take over their settlements and trading(sacking) opportunities. An interesting idea that needs a lot more research.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Haruo
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 06:23 PM

Kinni-kinnick is one way of putting it.
Liland

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 06:39 PM

Thanks, Liland, it just didn't look right no matter what way I tried it!

There is an interesting place in Connecticut called the Gungywamp, which I have hiked through with a long-time member of the Gungywamp Society. It is a fascinating place with what some believe to be evidence if just such contact as Sophocleese mentions. If you scroll down on their page you will see more about it.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 06:39 PM

KO dokie Kat...

When I used the term stone age I was speaking strictly about the level of technology....someone mentioned the book 'Guns, Germs, and Steel' which offers a number of reasons why the Indians didn't progress any farther with their technology. I wasn't trying to imply that they were not culturally sophisticated or very clever in making do with what they had.

As far as 'cave men' go, I see no reason to believe that the people that made the paintings at Lascoux (sp?) didn't have a sophisticated culture and society.

Kat said..."As for PC, modern morality, equity, etc it is no mystery to the Mudcat that I am liberal, believe in being ethically conscious, work on human rights"

Well, we should have some interesting discussions. In the interests of full disclosure I should point out that my wife says that politically, I reside somewhere to the right of Atilla the Hun *G*. I don't know about being ethically conscious, but I do try to be consciously ethical.

Oh, and for the people who are wondering why Columbus called the local indigenous personell Indians instead of Chinese.....well he wasn't really shooting for China, he wanted to get to the 'Spice Islands', ie. the East Indies.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 06:47 PM

>>>>>>>Or that the French didn't beat the English in the 18th Century, which might well have had, to some measure, a similar effect. <<<<<<<

Ya' think? Given France's colonial record in Indochina and the West Indies and Northern Africa, I would be surprised if there were any Indians left at all....

You might be right about the Vikings though....it would be an interesting exercise in alternative history.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 07:21 PM

Yeah - but the French seem to have hit it off better in North America with the locals than the English did.

All the colonial powers have been pretty disastrous for the people they landed on, but the English speakers seem to have been the ones with the most genocidal impact, going in for extermination rather than exploitation.

I don't put that down to any inbuilt wickedness, it's how the culture and the economics worked out in a particular historical time.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Margo
Date: 09 Oct 00 - 07:29 PM

Kat, I'm very interested in the evidence that Franklin drew from an indian constitution. I've read a lot of Franklin and about Franklin, and somehow I've missed that. Could you direct me to the book or article that talks about that? I'd really like to look at it... Thanks, Margo

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 12:10 AM

Whoa, Carlin... What do you mean about Attila? I'm one of his direct descendants, and I find your (and your wife's) comments implying that he anything but a fun-loving steppe-hippy to be VERY offensive. >;)

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 12:32 AM

Margo, as soon as I find that book I mentioned which had the two side by side I will send you the info. I've moved books here and there in this house and now find that I will have to pack them all up as we are moving to a different house, SO, hopefully I will find it. I can also ask a couple of other people who might remember the reference. Sorry I don't have it off the top of my head.

Carlin,if you go into the permathread at the top of all threads, entitled Mudcat FAQs, you will find some Classic Threads listed. You may find them of interest. I don't know if the one called "There's nothing wrong with PC-PC& Proud of it" is included, but that is THE discussion in which Rick Fielding suggested ethnically conscious and it got distilled to ethically conscious. It is a term I use a lot, esp, since you Atilla types usurped PC and made it into such a dirty word.**BG** (**BG**=**BIG GRIN**, by the way)

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: BlueJay
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 01:24 AM

Kat, I have to agree with LEF's title to this thread, ie Fiasco. I think it's been a fiasco for years. I'm just glad nobody got hurt. Now I have no Native American or Italian blood, that I know of. But I think the Parade organizers left the protesters with no choice except to protest after they reneged on the mediated agreement to drop the Columbus reference.
From what I've read, though, the parade organizers acted too hastily in that agreement, and had Hell to pay in the Italian community, hence their reversal.

I see both sides. I lived a long time in and near Northwest Denver, which still maintains a strong Italian presence, though not like it used to be. Gaetano's, Valenti's etc, the restaurants are still thriving. I think understand Italian Pride.

I'm not sure Columbus is the best choice to celebrate, however. He did bring unwanted violence and disease to the Carribean. And if you believe the papers, he was considered to be a failure in his own time, as he did not return from his three or four voyages with the ship filled with gold, as hoped. He died in obscurity.

For me, the ultimate irony of it all: I got a nice fat check on Saturday. All atwitter, I drove 60 miles to my bank on Monday, only to discover it was closed for Columbus Day! Expletives deleted, BlueJay

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 08:37 AM

Lepus!!!!

Having a conservative outlook doesn't preclude you from being a fun-loving type that likes to party.....it just means you pay for your own booze and you don't expect anyone else to clean up after you. ;p

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 08:46 AM

Kat!!!!

So, ethically conscious is the politically correct term for political correctness, eh?

You do realize that if we keep adding euphemisms to the language, one day it will reach critical mass and collapse in upon itself. It will become a black hole so powerful, not even satire can escape! *G*

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 10:19 AM

I stand by my statement that Columbus proved the world was round. Of course the ancient Egyptians knew that, but, they wer'nt europeans, so, they didnt count. Secondly, I do blame this foolishness on what is being taught. Too many people stop learning the day they leave school. If I were Italian, I would be too embarassed to march in that silly parade. They have much to be proud of...Columbus is not one of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: mousethief
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 02:11 PM

Columbus' second exposition to the new world saw him arriving with a fleet of seventeen ships, 1,200 men and a promise of 10 percent of the profits. They went from island to island taking captives along the way. The word spread among the natives about Europeans, so when Columbus came upon their villages, they were empty. The men Columbus had left behind were killed in retaliation for their brutal activities. Columbus captured more natives, men, women and children and began to ship them back to Spain. The Europeans brought disease with them as well, infecting the population with diseases such as smallpox. Columbus, for his part, felt that he was acting in the interests of God. "Let us in the name of the Holy Trinity go on sending all the slaves that can be sold."

But too many died in captivity. So Columbus forced the natives to bring him gold instead, and those that didn't bring their quota of gold had their hands chopped off. When they fled, the Spaniards hunted them down and killed the Indians and within two short years, half of the 250,000 population was dead. The Arawaks were driven into forced labor where many more died and it became so bad that women murdered their young rather than turn them over to Columbus. Bartholomew de Las Casas chronicled the genocide. He described the Arawak society as fair to women, rural, without commerce and peaceful. Total control by the European invaders meant total tyranny. Columbus' men sliced the natives with their blades for fun. Once, de Las Casas wrote, "two of these so called Christians met two Indian boys one day, each carrying a parrot, and beheaded the boys for fun." Men and women were sent to the mines where they worked until they died. Women became so tired that they had no milk for their infants and they died along with their infants. Between 1494 and 1508, over three million died at the hands of Columbus. "Who in future generations will believe this? I myself writing as a knowledgeable eyewitness can hardly believe it myself," said de Las Casas.

Thus, began the history of relations between the people of America and Columbus. Is it too much to ask why we celebrate this? Do you think we should have a Hitler day? Of course not! Columbus was a mass murderer who has had many of the great historians from Harvard singing his praises. There are many Italians who deserve our praise, what about a Da Vinci day? Surely, we can do better than Columbus.

Sources: Howard Zinn, A People's History of the United States

-----

Alex
O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 04:14 PM

The truth will out.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: DougR
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 07:49 PM

Carlin: That's a pretty good description of a conservative.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 07:55 PM

"That's a pretty good description of a conservative" - I take it you mean "a black hole so powerful, not even satire can escape!" Harsh but true enough.

Except that "conservative" just means someone who think things are good enough that they'll get worse if they are changed, and as I've said before, it's my dream to live in a place and time where that would describe me.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,Albamist
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 08:18 PM

Who was this Columbus guy anyway? Everyone knows, or should, that the North American continent was visited by a fleet led by one Prince Henry Sinclair, Lord of the Orkneys. Columbus is believed to have used charts previously mapped out by Zeno who was on this expedition. One of the knights who accompanied Sinclair was Sir James Gunn, he died and is buried in Westford Ma. So America was "discovered" by none other than the Scots. Look that up in yer Funk & Wagnells

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 08:23 PM

OK time for the truth about good old Chris...the reason he gets all this credit is not for his real accomplishments, but, because Italian Americans vote in large blocks. Why not a Galileo day? Or a DiVinchi day? Hell, we might as well have a Mussolini day! he did no more damage to the Ethiopians in 1936.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 08:53 PM

Ouch! Kat if you can find where I used the term "ethnically conscious" I'd be amazed! First of all it makes no sense whatsoever, and if I DID write that, it was my biggest typo of the year. "Ethically conscious" (which is what I THINK I said in the first place) seems like an OK term for showing courtesy to others, but in general I worry about ANY terms we use to lump different situations into a handy category.

Just 'cause I had too much time on my hands yesterday, I started thinking about ALL the holidays we celebrate. Do you realize that VERY convincing arguements could be made that NONE of the folks being honoured, really deserve to be. Not saying that the arguements pro and con wouldn't sink to pretty low levels at time...but there'd be supporters on both sides.

I'd go for "Pete Seeger" day...but a lotta folks would complain that he was a Commie, so forget it.

Woody Guthrie Day would be nice....but how 'bout all those children (and first wife) he left to fend for themselves?

Many people decry Martin Luther King day because of his promiscuity.

Victoria Day was probably NEVER very popular with the millions who felt under the thumb of the British Empire.

Mickey Mantle (my hero) Day, would be popular with a lot of folks, but can you imagine how angry the people who've dealt with (and lost loved ones to) alcoholism would feel?

I know that there is a movement afoot in the States to name a holiday after Ronald Reagan....can you imagine the outrage from about 50% of the country?

Nope, to me Columbus was an early intrepid explorer, no more no less.

Rick

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,Albamist
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 10:33 PM

Margo,

The U.S. constitution is based on The Declaration of Arbroath 1320 in which the Scots nobles pleaded with the pope of the day to support them in their bid for freedom against the oppression of the English.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,albamist
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 10:44 PM

To McGrath of Harlow, At the risk of appearing to argue the case for English colonialism, let me say that you are mistaken in your assertion that the english speaking colonizers were genocidal in their administrations of their colonies. While they were certainly no angels and were self serving, when compared to the other European nations ( Portugal, France, Belgium, Germany )who colonized Africa, Britain left their former colonies with the infrastuctures still in place for those colonies to develop democratic states. In most cases good transportation systems and education systems were also a couple of the benefits from having been exploited by the Brits.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 11:32 PM

Rick, my apologies!! Your phrase was "ethically correct" in this posting: (Bert's CRS is spreading!)

Subject: RE: PC is NOT a dirty word!Proud to be PC!
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 27-Sep-99 - 01:44 PM

Bravo Jon W. Well put and historically accurate. I think Kat's mention of the language deficiencies make a lot of sense as well. New words (or phrases) are not that hard to throw out on to the playing field. I should know as "blue clicky thing" haunts me to this day. From now on I'm going to try and use the term "ethically correct" (EC) wherever I can. It accurately represents how I feel and appears not to be stigmatized as yet.

Rick

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: DougR
Date: 10 Oct 00 - 11:50 PM

Rick: Sure glad you did't pick on Santa Claus! I would think that old guy would be pretty well accepted as a role model, even if the official holiday is not named for him.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 12:25 AM

Excellent post Rick!!!!! It ain't what Columbus did after he got here that is celebrated on Columbus Day....it is the simple fact that he got here at all. Sure the Vikings may have got here before him....and there is actually some evidence that the Chinese may have made it across the Pacific to S America....but they weren't talkin'. After Columbus found the joint, it stayed found (I think that is a Frank Sinatra qoute).

McGrath!!!!

"..."That's a pretty good description of a conservative" - I take it you mean "a black hole so powerful, not even satire can escape!"...."

No Sir!!! (or ma'am...I honestly don't know) That would be Rosie O'Donnell you are thinking of and she is as liberal as they come.

Also it wasn't the British Victory in the 7 years War that sealed the fate of the Indians, as much as the colonists' victory in the Revolution. The British tended to regard natives as another people to be incorporated into the Empire....the American settlers looked upon them as another part of the landscape that needed to be cleared off to plant crops.

While I am at it....a conservative is someone who believes in individual liberty and freedom. In the last century we were called liberals.....

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 12:58 AM

Actually Doug, Santa is getting a pretty bad rap lately too. Lots of history crapping on the old boy. And what about the Easter Bunny? Promiscuity incarnate....and all those little children.

I think we need a holiday for everyone of the "Humor Challenged" folks who take the world so seriously. Man, it'd be GREAT!!!! We could have a SHITLOAD of parades, I tell ya' that........

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,truckerdave
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 02:07 AM

Well, you know this was a pretty good place until all you guys came over and killed all the buffalo and stole the land. But we got you back after all. We showed you how to smoke tobacco.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 08:47 AM

Carlin, it is not a matter of the Vikings "May" have gotten here first. There is proof that they did. Now, if they had raped the natives, stole their land and given them diseases, they would be celebrated with parades!

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 11:42 AM

Ok, the Vikings got here first....but....

"Now, if they had raped the natives, stole their land and given them diseases, they would be celebrated with parades!"

Really! What makes you think they didn't do any of those things? Or , to put it another way, why do you think they would have treated the Indians any differently than they treated the inhabitants of Lindesfarne, or the Slavs in Russia, or the Eskimos in Greenland....or just about anyone else they ever came into contact with?

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 01:41 PM

becauise there is no recorded history of their actions on this continent. We have nothing to go on.More than likely, they did, but without records, its conjecture.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,John Leeder
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 01:46 PM

A minor point, but I'm more comfortable using the term "Indians" since I was reminded that there was no nation called "India" in Columbus's time, and Europeans used the term "Indian" for anybody who lived east of the Indus River. Columbus thought he'd reached Asia, so it was perfectly reasonable that the people he met would be "Indians". The term stuck, and the people who came after haven't been able to come up with a catchy alternative that's been widely adopted.

In Canada, the term "First Nations" is gaining popularity, and to me is less ambiguous than "Native" (since, as someone above pointed out, anyone who was born here is a "native"). The French term "nations authochthones" is a neat phrase, but the English word "autochtonic" might be a bit cumbersome for some...

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,John Leeder
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 01:57 PM

Make that "autochthonic".

According to the only stories we have about the Scandinavians in North America (they weren't really "Vikings" at that point), they traded with the natives, and fought with them. Sometimes the natives started the fights, and sometimes they won. The Scandinavians didn't get close enough to rape anybody that we know of, and weren't around long enough to steal anybody's land. Maybe they would have if they'd stayed around, and maybe they did inadvertently pass on diseases, but this is purely speculative.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: DougR
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 02:58 PM

Well, then Kendall, my friend, I suppose it would be conjecture on both of your parts, right?

Carlin: you like to live dangerously don't you? Admitting you're a conservative? Shocking! You're not a republican though, right?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 03:02 PM

not sure I follow you Doug. the part about the Morsemen beig here 500 years before Columbus is not conjecture. It has been proven by respected archeologsts.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: katlaughing
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 03:20 PM

John Leeder,

Thank you for the reminder of the term "First Nations." I had forgotten it and it has not caught on here in the States as much. I much prefer it.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 04:32 PM

Kendall....I concede the Vikings made it to NA before Columbus...the speculation resides in the question of how they interacted with the Indians. Given the Vikings record dealing with other societies, I figure they would have slaughtered raped and enslaved the Indians at the drop of a hat (or helmet). You seem to give them the benefit of the doubt because we don't have any hard historical record. But either assumption is conjecture....

DougR, I am a registered Libertarian....I think they have some very naive and foolish views on foreign policy....but for the most part, their views on how the government should be run are pretty close to mine. Where I really fall out with the Republicans is the drug war nonsense....

All that having been said, I am probably voting for Bush this year. I live in FL and right now it is a pretty tight race. If things open up and Bush looks like a clear winner in the state I will vote for Harry Browne....but I have too many family members and people I care about in the military to stand around and let Algore become president without a fight. He ain't gonna get FL's electoral votes because of me.....

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 04:34 PM

DRAT!!!!!
That should have been a BR in the html tag....not B....whoops....

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: DougR
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 04:47 PM

I was referring to your comment about the Vikings, Kendall.

Predictions are for a very close race in Arizona too.

I admire a lot about the Libertarian's philosophy, myself. Certainly much more than the Democrats.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: GUEST,John Leeder
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 04:55 PM

Kat, another interesting trend here is that groups are starting to be called by their real names. Previously they were called by the names their neighbours called them (the Europeans having met the said neighbours first), and often those names were not complimentary (e.g., "Eskimo", a Dené word, means "people who eat raw meat" or something similar -- their name for themselves is "Inuit"). Either that, or the Europeans couldn't pronounce the name, so made something up (e.g., "Huron").

In this locality, people who used to be called "Blackfoot" are now called "Siksika", people who used to be called "Sarcee" are now "Tsu'tina" (I hope I spelled that right), the "Bloods" are "Kainai", and the "Stoneys" are "Lakoda" (yes, they're Siouxans -- it's a form of "Dakota").

If only symbolically, it's a gesture of respect.

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 04:55 PM

I take it you are both in favor of a bloated military? Thats corporate welfare at its worst. Doug, your own Sec. of Defense, Bill Cohen (republican) says Bush is wrong, that our forces are totally up to any job that comes up. What more do you want?

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: kendall
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 04:55 PM

I take it you are both in favor of a bloated military? Thats corporate welfare at its worst. Doug, your own Sec. of Defense, Bill Cohen (republican) says Bush is wrong, that our forces are totally up to any job that comes up. What more do you want?

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Penny S.
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 05:28 PM

Something that impressed me about the cultural level of the inhabitants of the large continent to the west when the whites arrived came from putting together two separate pieces of botanical information. One was a newcoined name for the plant we call plantain, arrived as a weed with Europeans, was in at least one tribe's nomenclature something like "White Man's Footstep" or "Footmark" (I can't be wholly sure about the detail): the meaning I recall, because it referred not only to the way the new plant spread where Europeans went, but also to the way it marked paths and heavily trodden areas. Not only was there sophistication of observation, though. A long time after I heard that, I heard a medicine man describing the use of plantain in medicine. That means that, after the Europeans arrived, there was active investigation of the effects of plants of which there could be no ancestral knowledge. That's "civilised".

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 05:39 PM

Lately there have been a couple of EXTREMELY heated situations going on in Canada. Native fishing rights in the Maritimes is one, and transporting Toronto's garbage (by contract) to Northern Ontario is another. Interestingly all the Toronto papers have begun actually identifying natives by their actual TRIBAL NAMES! And get this! They're spelling them the way the Natives do. I'd seen the name "Mic-Mac" for years, but the tribe always spelled it "Mq'maq". During the current troubles The Toronto Star is spelling it that way too. That's some kind of progress. Nuthin' wrong (or politically correct in a silly way) with showing those folks a little respect. 'Fraid they're gonna lose though, just not enough political clout.

Rick

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 05:47 PM

Kendall, DougR
If you want I can explain right here why the US needs a minimum of 12 operational carriers and their airgroups (this is assuming we don't make any new commitments....the 12 are required just to support what we are already committed too). I can also explain why using the Army for 'nation building' (isn't that a lovely way of referring to occupation troops) is not a good idea. I am even prepared to talk about why at least 3, and maybe 4, of the Army's divisions are unfit for combat.

This would involve a major veering away from the topic of this thread (although one would think that the history of the Indian's contact with the Europeans would give anyone pause to consider the virtues of military R&D). If you would care to take this discussion Here I would be happy to wade into it with the broadaxe swinging...

Kendall, just pop in say hi, and post why you think everything is just hunky-dory with the armed forces.....

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 08:46 PM

"You are mistaken in your assertion that the english speaking colonizers were genocidal in their administrations of their colonies." (GUEST Albamist)

Well, they were in America and Australia. All the colonial nations were brutal in all kind of ways. But the English speakers were the ones who succeeded in displacing and virtually wiping out the previous inhabitants of two continents.

"Also it wasn't the British Victory in the 7 years War that sealed the fate of the Indians, as much as the colonists' victory in the Revolution." True Carlin - but if the French hadn't been beaten I can't see how there'd ever have been a revolution at that time anyway, followed by an explosive expansion across the continent that, while "democratic", was in effect genocidal for the original inhabitants..

Subject: RE: BS: Columbus Day Fiasco
From: Carlin
Date: 11 Oct 00 - 10:52 PM

If the colonists weren't willing to be ruled by a British King (who was at least restrained somewhat by Parliament) they would never have tolerated the Bourbon absolute monarchy. If anything a French victory would have led to the US being founded a generation early.