I was born in America but English was not my first Language... English was forced upon me

There's something to be said for the gall of native americans.

Here's the fact, Apache, fought other tribes, and drove them out of certain areas, they did it over every conceivable reason, including getting access to resources that the other tribe had and they wanted.

Here's the fact, nothing new happened when the europeans arrived, the only difference between what had been in the past, and what became the new reality, is that the Europeans was a new enemy.

The Natives lost, and like they would have done to another tribe they beat, the loser gets to move on or stay and die.

Sorry to say, but the fact is that the natives were outgunned, outmanned, and out maneuvered.

You lost... sorry to be the one to remind you of that little basic fact.

reply to post by LowDrag


that's the most ignorant racist comment I've read in years...
but since your education is lacking rather than sink to your level I chose to take the high road and try to educate you instead
Here is a link to the PBS Special After the Mayflower
start there to learn a bit of uncensored history then while there look up the rest of the "We Shall Remain" series

Yes, just like the lefties. When facts don't work, call someone ignorant and racist.

Fact. There is hardly any border in existence that hasn't been set by conquest and war.

This is just one more example of it.

It's time that the "natives" joined the nation and started paying some taxes.

I find it interesting that you said you went to school with another red, and a mexican, and you speak some spanish. You dont see Mexicans as Native Americans as well? Many of them show obvious native american features from the southern peoples. I understand mexicans culture has absorbed spanish culture into their own culture of mixes, but they still show physical features of native americans, some still kept some of their culture intact.

I myself am Puerto Rican, I look white mostly, but I dont have arrayan features, i get mistaken for greek or italian for some reason- but I have always believed it was from the mixture of the taino tribes that once lived (and some say still do exist) on the island. Especially considering my dad looks like a tanned arab and my mom looks white and my sister looks a tanned egyptian and I look like a white greek.

I like to blast music that rap about revolution, and some music tracks talk about the evils of the europeans, and how they destroyed latin america, created us, then looked at us like we were alien to them. But I have become very torn, because I dont look taino (atleast I dont think so), so then I suspect that maybe I was part of the "enemy". That i was pointing the finger at them when my blood might have forged the hand of those who started it all when they arrived from spain. I think that a more radical thinker of such beliefs would group ME as the conquerors, the evils of the european powers who took their lands and destroyed their cultures. So this does become a very conflicting state of mind for myself.

reply to post by ammocase



Even among US ndns... we all look different. With my tribe half of us are in the US and half are in Canada.. you can get dual citizenship. Funny thing, those imaginary invisible border lines. For example, I ( a SIksika) dont look anything lke an Apache, and an Apache doesnt look much like a Creek. I definitely dont look like a mexican or an Eskimo. We're all different peoples, and the Mexicans are just NDNs.. North American Indians. Even among our many tribes there are biases and derogatory things.. some are called pie faces, some are slopers, some are snakes.. and its all based off of the fact that we all look different, have different cultures and spirituality between the many tribes.

Saying all of that, I find it funny you feel you look like "the enemy" and this troubles you. Who exactly is "the enemy" and what do they look like? White skin? Seems to me "the enemy" is long gone physically and was never a "race".. it was an ideology. It was an oppressive religious crusade. The "enemy" is still here, but it manifests differently. Truth is .. we are all pretty much in the same boat these days.. some worse or better than others, but we all are on a sinking ship I married a white guy and have 3 1/2 white kids. There is no color of the enemy, my friend. The enemy is ignorance ( see above poser) and oppressive ideologies.

Originally posted by LowDrag
Yes, just like the lefties. When facts don't work, call someone ignorant and racist.

Fact. There is hardly any border in existence that hasn't been set by conquest and war.

This is just one more example of it.

It's time that the "natives" joined the nation and started paying some taxes.

No taxes? ROFL!! I bet you cash I pay more taxes than you and paid for my own education with no white helping hand or tribal grant. Educate yourself before you spout nonsense with a sock account. Yeah, "natives" dont pay taxes.. I freaking WISH. DaddyB is an ex marine and my rez born father was a marine.. seems they paid taxes too. Im a DAR and my rez born ancestors/relatives fought in the Revolutionary war and every war up to the present nonsense. SHeesh.. I figure you can read... its time to educate yourself. Here sweetheart, Ill help you out.
www.google.com...

reply to post by ammocase


to answer your question I have to draw on a history lesson...
remember it was Spain who discovered the new world... long before the pilgrims first set foot on this continent Spanish explorers and settlers were already moving in... making homes and new lives for themselves... in my part of the world it was the Spanish who coexisted with us... Spanish became our common language... obviously if you wanted to get by in my part of the world, shop trade work... you had better be able to speak Spanish.... that goes for the Anglos who later moved in... other wise they get tagged as outsiders and it can be pretty hard to get by as an outsider...

When I said my friend was a Mexican girl, she was with no slander intended... she came to the states with her parents after an earthquake in central Mexico destroyed their family home... not only did we welcome them with open arms she was like a sister to me... used to tease and beat on my like a sis too...

to us these terms are more a thing of endearment... There go's Jake... he's a good red boy.... meaning he honors his elders and family traditions... it only becomes a slant when racist's turn it into slander, Damn red skin... get out of my store... it's not the word in and of itself that's offencive... it's the intent and meaning that turn those innocent phrases into hurtful remarks...

Lots of people are proud to be called Mexican and I am proud to call them friends, even family... I'm proud to be red and I have a ton of stories about how hard that can be... but if I could go back and change my life.... there is nothing I wouldn't do different... well... maybe dare to kiss that gal from 6th grade who asked me too... everything else is golden

reply to post by Advantage


remember... some people spew hate from behind the safety of their computers wanting to get a rise out of you... don't let them win... be the bigger person... pave the way for all good people to follow... as for the jerks of this world... one word of advice... Karma ....

Originally posted by Advantage
reply to post by ammocase

 

Even among US ndns... we all look different. With my tribe half of us are in the US and half are in Canada.. you can get dual citizenship. Funny thing, those imaginary invisible border lines. For example, I ( a SIksika) dont look anything lke an Apache, and an Apache doesnt look much like a Creek. I definitely dont look like a mexican or an Eskimo. We're all different peoples, and the Mexicans are just NDNs.. North American Indians. Even among our many tribes there are biases and derogatory things.. some are called pie faces, some are slopers, some are snakes.. and its all based off of the fact that we all look different, have different cultures and spirituality between the many tribes.

Saying all of that, I find it funny you feel you look like "the enemy" and this troubles you. Who exactly is "the enemy" and what do they look like? White skin? Seems to me "the enemy" is long gone physically and was never a "race".. it was an ideology. It was an oppressive religious crusade. The "enemy" is still here, but it manifests differently. Truth is .. we are all pretty much in the same boat these days.. some worse or better than others, but we all are on a sinking ship

I married a white guy and have 3 1/2 white kids. There is no color of the enemy, my friend. The enemy is ignorance ( see above poser) and oppressive ideologies.

edit on 22-6-2011 by Advantage because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-6-2011 by Advantage because: (no reason given)

When I mentioned "evils" it was more in general to the past history. I never said nor mentioned anything about now in modern times except how I wonder if my bloodline were the ones supporting the destruction of other peoples cultures. And to go even further you can say there is no race- you can track the cacausian to the point where it met in central asia with the peoples that would become the >Asians>Native Americans due to dna tracking.

Race to me is all a social division. Now there are light-skinned peoples who werent accepted in the "fold of white america" and now are. So its a social economic thing that can go completely off course in discussion.

As far as when it comes to latin america and how it relates to the experience of the natives in america, many of the native peoples did not perish also. They still exist. You can see the aztecs and the incas still walking in their lands. I dont know much about these countries politics, but I dont recall mexico and peru having land set aside from them, which is unfortunate- since many of them still kept many parts of their culture intact. In puerto rico, there were the taino tribes, who some people claim came from the incas in south america. The Tainos went as far as florida when they traversed the carribean, even reaching south carolina. To this day people who claim to be taino get no land or even recognition to their existence. The Tainos were very peaceful, and never resisted the Spanish (at first until they were being forced into slavery and killed), yet the Spanish infected them with stds when they raped them, burned them alive, and forced them into slave labor. So, in response to another poster, not all peoples were savages and got an "eye for an eye" when they were controlled and murdered.

reply to post by HisMajesty

This online English vocabulary tool will help you to Enhance your vocabulary with meaning and all words definitions english.wordinn.com...

Why is it that every time someone of white European descent tells it like it is he becomes a racist? When the Euros hit the scene back then they met alot of tribes that where fighting amongst themselves, they joined in on the action and won, plan and simple. If the Indians would have had the chance to overcome the other tribes and the whites they would have done the same. It just strikes me as strange that people think that the Native Indian tribes were just sitting around singing give peace a chance and then the whites came and massacred them. Now how in the world is this a "racist" statement? These are the facts..Every time the facts are brought up the liberal/marxists go nuts and start the name calling.

reply to post by Mr. Toodles


Sounds fair enough. If us American folks go to other countries, we are forced to learn their language or suffer the consequences of not being able to communicate. No one caters to us. Why should a "primarily" english speaking nation cater to others?

No one caters to you? I'm from Puerto Rico, have you ever been to San Juan the capital? Guaynabo, now called Guaynabo city? Almost everything is in english now, tourists expect you to speak english...in my own country.
I know americans living in Puerto Rico that DON'T speak spanish. Even the senate has tried to make english the "official" language of the island. Congress says PR won't be a state until EVERYONE speaks english here and/or any american can function here as on any other state. Good luck. It's always good to learn other languages but only if you want to. True english is the lingua franca of the world, but that doesn't mean we have to forget all others.

Just in case: I learned english watching T.V.
I live in PR
No I dont want to be the 51st state, thanks but no thanks
No im not anti-american

Paz y amor.

Originally posted by DaddyBare
reply to post by ammocase

 

to answer your question I have to draw on a history lesson...
remember it was Spain who discovered the new world... long before the pilgrims first set foot on this continent Spanish explorers and settlers were already moving in... making homes and new lives for themselves... in my part of the world it was the Spanish who coexisted with us... Spanish became our common language... obviously if you wanted to get by in my part of the world, shop trade work... you had better be able to speak Spanish.... that goes for the Anglos who later moved in... other wise they get tagged as outsiders and it can be pretty hard to get by as an outsider...

So your'e not pissed about having to speak Spanish?

Originally posted by DaddyBare
reply to post by ammocase

 

but if I could go back and change my life.... there is nothing I wouldn't do different... well... maybe dare to kiss that gal from 6th grade who asked me too... everything else is golden

edit on 23-6-2011 by DaddyBare because: (no reason given)

Then what are you complaining about? Get out of my ATS.

reply to post by jam321


I lived in the White Mountains of Arizona for 35 yrs.When leaving my ranch, a truck entered with a man driving asking if I was lost. I then asked him the same. He said that this was his peoples land and he wanted to show his son around.That he was Navajo and this was his peoples land. Unfortunately, he was drunk and spoiling for a fight. I then told him that I wasnt around 100 yrs ago and that this was my property now and please leave. But I had been writing a song about the legend of the blue horse with the navajo, which I related to him" When the blue horse flies you better ride Navajo ,cuz Coyote waits on the other sde so you better ride Navajo. He reeled back as though I had hit him and started to cry. He got in his truck saying his son didnt know about the blue horse and he would leave. I realize this strays from the topic a wee bit but do you know about the blue horse?

reply to post by havok


I feel I'm pretty qualified to chime in here since bilingual education was the major emphasis of my MA in linguistics.

First fact: On the planet Earth, there are more bilingual people (people who speak at least two languages) than there are monolingual people (speakers of just one language).

Bilingual education is not a liberal agenda. Bilingual education has two basic purposes:

1. To educate native and non-native speakers in two (or more) languages that may or may not be their heritage languages, but are present in their general vicinity due to minority, co-official, or otherwise recognized languages spoken there.

2. To educate immigrant children in the de facto or de juris official language of a region or nation so that those children can receive scaffolding in subjects that are not language related (math, history, science) but are nonetheless dependent on the language as the medium of instruction.

Number 1 is the case in, for example, Canada, where dual immersion programs are used to make sure Anglos learn French and Quebecois learn English - at the same time - in the same classrooms. In other words, the whole gaggle of students attend the same classes, Anglos and Quebecois learning all sorts of subjects in French and then others in English. This type of method does not exist in the US except for some state-of-the-art private institutions and a hand-full of public school districts in heavy immigrant areas with access, influence and foresight. You will also find such education in countries with regional languages, such as Basque and Catalan in Spain. Also, in nations that are bilingual or multilingual by default, such as Switzerland, Belgium or Singapore. Or in former European colonies where indigenous languages or Creoles are still the home language, even if the European norm is officially recognized (Haiti, Philippines, Paraguay, South Africa). However, typically, due to lack of prestige - because of linguistic elitism - there is a lack of funding in many of these nations for mother tongue initiatives.

Number 2 is the case with any country that has immigration, including Brazil, Sweden, Australia, the UK, France, Canada and of course, the US. In this case, how bilingual education is approached depends on the country in question. For example, in Brazil, Japanese immigration throughout the 20th century was met with no public support of bilingual education and the Japanese communities themselves set up Japanese schools for children to attend in addition to the Portuguese education they received in public schools. For cultural reasons, the Japanese government still funds these schools in Brazil, and Peru if I'm not mistaken, where the Japanese minorities are highest in Latin America.

In the US, bilingual education has been seen as a one-sided issue and typically only concerning Spanish. However, it should be pointed out that in many parts of the Southwest and West, Spanish is a native language and has been for many centuries now. It is incidental that immigration from Latin American countries has brought a larger Spanish-speaking demographic to places like Southern California, Colorado, Chicago, New York, North Carolina and South Florida. In either case, the approach is still tipped in one direction.

The best way to approach bilingual education is to make it mandatory for all school districts, the language being based on the demographic. Thus, you could expect the following:

Los Angeles --> Spanish/English, Korean/English, Farsi/English, etc.
San Francisco --> Spanish/English, Mandarin/English, etc.
Dearborn, MI, --> Arabic/English,
Flagstaff, AZ, --> Navajo/English or Hopi/English
Hawaii --> Hawaiian/English or Chinese/English
South Florida --> Spanish/English, Haitian Creole/English, Portuguese/English
Boston --> Portuguese/English
Upstate New York or New England --> French/English
Minneapolis --> Amharic/English
Chicago --> Polish/English, etc.

There is no reason for this not to be done. This would provide more jobs for more teachers. This would produce more well-rounded bilingual children in the US. The US could become a nation of multilingual people.

And, what should really get you conservatives on board...this type of well-rounded, meaningful instruction in two languages will produce fluent English speakers, so English can and will still be the main, de facto official language of the US.

At the moment, not doing this, we are still met with the obstacle of 33% high school graduation rates among hispanics and latinos, unable to navigate professional English and not literate in Spanish, having been appropriately schooled in neither language, they are essentially low-skilled bilinguals with no real literacy and they are a huge chunk of our population, in some places they couldn't really be considered a minority. And again, that is just the Spanish-speakers.

Regarding the OP, I could go on and on about how Native Americans were poorly treated in the US, Canada and Latin America. They still tend to live in poverty and their native languages are constantly under attack through poorly run education programs that do not address language effectively. In Mexico alone, other than Nahuatl (the language of the Aztecs) and certain dialects of Maya, most indigenous languages are poised to go extinct in the next generation (or they are effectively there).

The worst is that when you lose a language, you lose a way of categorizing and viewing the world. And in the case of most Native American languages, which are not or have never been written, you simply cannot get them back.

reply to post by discharged77


Minor inter- and intra-ethnic skirmishes and all out genocide may seem easy to compare on the surface. I think, however, that under closer scrutiny, it becomes apparent that they are not the same at all.

For the Apache and the Hopi to have a dispute over hunting areas on some occasion, or for the Iroquois to have some occasional conflict once in a generation or so, or for the Tlingit to squabble with other nearby tribes for whale hunting is all quite different than a massive invasion of a third party that did not discriminate and never stopped the assault.

The Europeans were just as factional in pre- and post-Roman times as the Native Americans were prior to European colonization. To make the argument that the genocide perpetrated by the Europeans can be justified because there was no absolute peace in the Americas is ridiculous.

reply to post by chardonnay


Navajo's tell lots of stories about the blue hourse...they think of the sun as a deity riding his blue horse across the sky... the shade of blue being turquoise of course... it's a black cardinal horse for we Apache BTW

reply to post by Sphota


Well since your a MA here's a little fact about dying languages for ya...
there are about 5000 Jicarilla Apache but out of that number just over 300 still speak it fluently... we all victims of the public school systems

Originally posted by Sphota
For the Apache and the Hopi to have a dispute over hunting areas on some occasion, or for the Iroquois to have some occasional conflict once in a generation or so, or for the Tlingit to squabble with other nearby tribes for whale hunting is all quite different than a massive invasion of a third party that did not discriminate and never stopped the assault.

Not quite so cut and dried...the southern Iroquois did actually do a number on their northern cousins...Huron, Petun, Neutral, etc, but it may be argued that that particular conflict was promoted by the fur trade...ie Europeans. It may also be argued that the British equipped the League Iroquois with enough whiskey and guns to pursue a traditional animosity with more efficient means.

Also...those conflicts might be considered as equivalent to the European incursions when scale is taken into account, though actual 'ownership' of the land is a western concept. All just to say that humans are humans, and no race innately more 'noble' than any other. There is no easy answer.

To make the argument that the genocide perpetrated by the Europeans can be justified because there was no absolute peace in the Americas is ridiculous.

I wholeheartedly agree.

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


Of course things are different when you have a common enemy...
Take a look at what happened in the Long Walk
Navajos and Apache forced off their tribal lands and made to march to a settlement camp... Oh you bet there was trouble ... Apache and Navajo were not known to be the best of friends....Still thanks to oppression they learned to put aside their differences, worked together and yes once they had enough of the white mans hospitality... simply walked back to where they came from... permission to return was given only after everyone had split BTW