It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: veracity
No, you misread. What I was saying is that the mythos of Indian "spirituality" was largely a Hollywood construct that put butts in seats. Those butts were fascinated by portrayal of mystical spirituality in absence of a Christian God.
I've got history (both personal and family) in Indian country... while not all of it is BS, a lot of this "at peace, one with nature" business is total smoke and vapor. They were survivalists, not spiritualists. And warring between the tribes wasn't "a few bad apples" it was their way of life. The Comanche, Apaches, Sioux, Cherokee, the Ojibwe... all would have sooner cut another warrior's head off than have a sit down talk of peace and nature with them. The Anasazi chopped down every tree in Chaco Canyon to build their communities... these trees never came back. Lookup a potlatch sometime... the tribes who celebrated it tended to turn them into parties of oppulence and wanton waste... and this was long before the "white man" came to America to teach them of such foreign concepts. Most of the virtues attributed to the tribes in relation to their "in harmony with nature" claims can also be directly attributed to ANY settler who pushed a wagon west into the pioneer lands. Those settlers used all the parts of the animals they killed too, they also used seasonal clues to tell them when to plant and when to harvest, they did what was needed to survive.
I'm not throwing hate on the Indians here. I'm simply saying that society has romanticized the Indians of old to mythical status when, in reality, they were just other humans who's crap stunk just like everyone else's did.
originally posted by: veracity
originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: veracity
Now how is it you know that is the opinion of "most" Americans? By your own admission you don't travel, or not much, so how is it you have such a learned opinion on what "most" Americans think?
I just know what is bs and what is factual
originally posted by: veracity
Is this what you believe Native Americans to be like?
"If we're identifying that much trauma, many were dying a violent death," said Kohler. The study also offers new clues to the mysterious depopulation of the northern Southwest, from a population of about 40,000 people in the mid-1200s to 0 in 30 years
"Contra leftist anthropologists who celebrate the noble savage," the Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker wrote in 2007, "quantitative body counts—such as the proportion of prehistoric skeletons with ax marks and embedded arrowheads or the proportion of men in a contemporary foraging tribe who die at the hands of other men—suggest that pre-state societies were far more violent than our own."
The recently accumulated evidence, however, refutes this concept of ecological nobility. Precontact Indians were not "ecosystem men"; they were not just another species of animal, largely incapable of altering the environment, who therefore lived within the "ecological limitations of their home area." Paleobiologists, archaeologists, and botanists are coming to believe that most tropical forests have been severely altered by human activities before European contact. Evidence of vast fires in the northern Amazonian forests and of the apparently anthropogenic origins of large areas of forest in eastern Amazonial suggests that before 1500, humans had tremendously affected the virgin forest, with ensuing impacts on plant and animal species. These people behaved as humans do now : they did whatever they had to to feed themselves and their families.
It is also important to establish that the practices of the Iroquois were more than the exaggeration and hearsay of excitable Frenchmen. The Iroquois surely performed torture upon war captives; many European settlers viewed first-hand the mutilated body-parts of war captives. However, there has been some doubt in the current century that cannibalism was really practiced by the Iroquois. Anthropologist W. Arens proposed in 1979 that there were no first-hand accounts of flesh eating among the Native Americans, and thus no solid proof for cannibalism. This controversial view has been refuted since, for there is indeed ample evidence in The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents alone to prove Arens’s thesis wrong. With this assertion in mind, it is now possible to inquire why the Native Americans performed these appalling acts.
they were one with the land and a very peaceful people
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: veracity
results come from what you call " looks". Caring how other countries perceive us is actually not all all caring about how we "look". Its expanding your mind to take in what others perceive as faults and finding a way to improve. An extremely intelligent person knows they always have something to learn, and know they do not "know it all" (thinking you know it all is actually what lower intelligent people do). Learning from others is one sure way to expand and become better.
Obama was very intelligent, its not surprising he cared what other countries thought about America.
Results do not come how other countries perceive you. Most of the time those people, like the majority of people throughout the world, know America through media, advertisements, movies, but have never travelled there nor even talked to any Americans. Their perception is derived from propaganda. Their perception is false.
originally posted by: veracity
a reply to: burdman30ott6
Native Americans were violent...yes. I do NOT disagree with that.
If your family and neighborhood were being attacked, raped, pillaged... wouldnt you be violent?
They fought back...for survival.
In 4th grade playground terms...the Whites killed first