DO you think what happened to the american indians was ok?

[nicholasair]

I know christians tried to force American Indian children into christian schools and into white peoples clothes. I think there were mistakes made when interacting with this group of people. Reperations are a way to pay back for the land taken and lives lost.

[DavidMcK]

You can't pay back dead people.

[BaalChatzaf]

You can't pay back dead people.

What about their heirs?

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Selene]

What about only the progeny of the blood lines that did the damage?

My people were farming and breaking rocks in Northern Italy.

Adam

[ginny]

Nicholasair, since you asked the question, do I assume you know sometime about the subject? Have you read up on the pros and cons? The fact is, contrary to orthodox objectivist beliefs, I don't believe everything is black and white. When it comes to the indians, the initial settles and their first "hosts" actually got along very well out of sheer necessity. The whites had no idea how to survive in this strange land, and the indians loved all the goodies the white man brought with him. They lived and worked in harmony. (You should read the story of Squanto, a multilingual continental-sophisticated indian who acquired quite high-brow european tastes. I love the story.) In order to communicate better, the whites allowed indians (I have not read that the indians were forced) to attend Harvard University to learn to read and write. Yes, in the early 16nth century, we had all these Harvard educated indians walking around.) So far, so good. After a few generations, the white men learned to survive on their own and branched out west. They no longer needed the indians and stopped living in harmony. By then, this was the white man's land, too.

So, who is right? Actually, I'm not sure. I don't blame the whites for wanting to enjoy the bounties of what had become their new land. I also understand the general grumpiness of the indians at this point.

It's not all black and white, Nicholas. If the subject really interests you, maybe be you should get a couple of books, read up, and see if you can form some kind of opinion. You'll still have questions, but they'll be more specific.

[BaalChatzaf]

What about only the progeny of the blood lines that did the damage?

My people were farming and breaking rocks in Northern Italy.

Adam

My people were still hiding from the Cossacks when Wounded Knee went down. I ain't paying a cent.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[ginny]

Cute, Baal. Your bank account is safe. I suspect my people were up to pretty barbaric acts during the period, but not against Indians. So, I, too, am not paying. Show of well-manicured hands - would all members of the Daughters of the American Revolution please stand up? We'd like a word with you.

Ginny

[galtgulch]

Cute, Baal. Your bank account is safe. I suspect my people were up to pretty barbaric acts during the period, but not against Indians. So, I, too, am not paying. Show of well-manicured hands - would all members of the Daughters of the American Revolution please stand up? We'd like a word with you.

Ginny

Unfortunately I have no idea what my ancestors were doing for a living before they fled the draft in Russia. I know one of my grandfathers did work as a laborer digging the subway in lower Manhattan. I think Indians were able to pay the same as anyone else to ride the subway. My recollection is that it cost just a nickel when I was a child, then a dime and then a fifteen cent token back in the good old days.

I believe this country was wall to wall Indian occupied when the first settlers arrived. I believe Ayn Rand said that they were all tribal with no respect for individual rights or titles to property suggesting it was all right to crowd them off the lands they inhabited. It was a shameful exercise and it is a wonder any of them survived to this day.

I expect that Bernanke would just print up a few more notes to buy them off. Sometimes it seems we are close to a collapse at least of our currency with concomitant loss of our liberty. Its a good thing that the antidote is known.

gulch

[ginny]

Baal, the problem with Rand's statement that whites were justified because the Indians had no property rights is that back a few hundred years, I don't think many countries had leases and contracts of property. A man settled a piece of available land, built a house or shanty and called it his own. Royalty did own land, and parceled it out like bubble gum to whomever they wanted. No paperwork involved. So property rights weren't exactly black and white.

Ginny

Edited August 3, 2009 by ginny

[Christopher]

What happened to the Indians in many instances was horrendous. Some tokenesque actions were made towards integration, but my history classes never seemed to give enough evidence that there was mutual trade for what was taken away from the Native Americans.

Regarding Indian reparations:

My first reaction is that the victims (and the perpetrators) are all dead, so reparations today are stealing unjustly from those that own and giving to those that never earned. And the people who they're stealing from are stereotyped (I didn't live here when the Indians were abused, but I'm white and that's enough).

The logic above seems pretty obvious to me. But then, there are cases where there is a potential legitimate argument for reparations. For example, assets are inherited generation to generation within a family. Some assets were, however, partially the product of theft from another family hundreds of years ago. Those historically-stolen assets, therefore, should still be lawfully owned by the victimized family.

However, (aside from statute of limitations) we can see that this argument suffers from the fact that asset life over time also has production value, might have been liquidated and lost in a previous bankruptcy, etc. In other words, the true value is unknown. Further, it's impossible to hold through time the crimes of previous generations and make dues for those through today's generations. Since those that inherit are not the original legitimate owners of yesterday's production, they cannot claim ownership to anything. This is my true view. Even if a father lost land through theft, the theft was a crime against the father, not the son. To assume that it is also a crime against the son is to assume that the son had some claim to ownership of the father's production, and that is just B.S.

[ginny]

Christopher, you undoubtedly right about the Indians not receiving fair trade from whites. Unfortunately, that's the way of conquest. The better people (in this case, better armed) will win. Conquest of people has been going on for thousands of years. Yes, I sometimes feel for the conquered people. However, what would happen if all conquered people on the plant were to demand restitution? They lost. That's life, sometimes. Lucky for us, WE are here now. As for the tactics used some bad whites, that's a different issue than if the land can belong to the whites. Not all conquerors wore white gloves.

Has anyone considered that without contact with whites, maybe the Indians would still be illiterate hunter/nomads these days? I don't know, but maybe. Switching the subject to blacks and the horrors of slavery and what America owes them, I had discussion some time back with a few black women. I claimed that considering how horrible things are throughout most of Africa, with famine, drought, war, children killing people, unbelievable poverty, etc., blacks who are here because their ancestors were brought here as slaves probably should breathe a sign of relief that they are not living there. Even their ancestors, although slaves, had it better than so many blacks in Africa today. At least, the owners needed to keep them alive with food and water. This is not to be interpreted as support of slavery, btw. The black women I said that to actually laughed. "We know, Ginny. We know." They made it clear that my point of view wasn't exactly novel to them.

[galtgulch]

Christopher, you undoubtedly right about the Indians not receiving fair trade from whites. Unfortunately, that's the way of conquest. The better people (in this case, better armed) will win. Conquest of people has been going on for thousands of years. Yes, I sometimes feel for the conquered people. However, what would happen if all conquered people on the plant were to demand restitution? They lost. That's life, sometimes. Lucky for us, WE are here now. As for the tactics used some bad whites, that's a different issue than if the land can belong to the whites. Not all conquerors wore white gloves.

Has anyone considered that without contact with whites, maybe the Indians would still be illiterate hunter/nomads these days? I don't know, but maybe. Switching the subject to blacks and the horrors of slavery and what America owes them, I had discussion some time back with a few black women. I claimed that considering how horrible things are throughout most of Africa, with famine, drought, war, children killing people, unbelievable poverty, etc., blacks who are here because their ancestors were brought here as slaves probably should breathe a sign of relief that they are not living there. Even their ancestors, although slaves, had it better than so many blacks in Africa today. At least, the owners needed to keep them alive with food and water. This is not to be interpreted as support of slavery, btw. The black women I said that to actually laughed. "We know, Ginny. We know." They made it clear that my point of view wasn't exactly novel to them.

Ginny,

I agree with you regarding this discussion. However the discussion strikes me as being so far from what we ought to be concerned about given what is going on in our country today that it is frustrating to me. Of course I am referring to the direction Obama and company are taking us. I remain hopeful that his attempt to expand the power of government into so many areas of our lives will fall short. Not only because his power grab is unconstitutional but because he and those who think like him do not appear to realize just how wrong their ideas are and how awful their implementation would be for all of us. Of course there would be beneficiaries who might benefit in the short run in some respect but I think we all know that our nation would not prosper but would decline economically with widespread suffering in all spheres if the government attempted to involve itself in health care, education, energy and whatever else.

Those who pay taxes these days and whose businesses are regulated with mandates and other forms of coercion are todays victims of government enslavement. We are in a fight for our very lives and for our freedom which are in jeopardy and you guys and gals are talking about how the native Americans were treated hundreds of years ago and how previous generations of African American blacks were enslaved in a manner which makes our complaints about being enslaved because we have to pay taxes pale by comparison.

www.campaignforliberty.com 191,900 At least these C4L folks are obviously actively recruiting fellow citizens to the cause. They appear to be more focused in this endeavor while the Objectivists are rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic with the exception of those who are active in the C4L movement.

gulch

Edited August 3, 2009 by galtgulch

[nicholasair]

I like the link. I have read about the side of the american indians. I need to read more about both sides.

Christopher, you undoubtedly right about the Indians not receiving fair trade from whites. Unfortunately, that's the way of conquest. The better people (in this case, better armed) will win. Conquest of people has been going on for thousands of years. Yes, I sometimes feel for the conquered people. However, what would happen if all conquered people on the plant were to demand restitution? They lost. That's life, sometimes. Lucky for us, WE are here now. As for the tactics used some bad whites, that's a different issue than if the land can belong to the whites. Not all conquerors wore white gloves.

Has anyone considered that without contact with whites, maybe the Indians would still be illiterate hunter/nomads these days? I don't know, but maybe. Switching the subject to blacks and the horrors of slavery and what America owes them, I had discussion some time back with a few black women. I claimed that considering how horrible things are throughout most of Africa, with famine, drought, war, children killing people, unbelievable poverty, etc., blacks who are here because their ancestors were brought here as slaves probably should breathe a sign of relief that they are not living there. Even their ancestors, although slaves, had it better than so many blacks in Africa today. At least, the owners needed to keep them alive with food and water. This is not to be interpreted as support of slavery, btw. The black women I said that to actually laughed. "We know, Ginny. We know." They made it clear that my point of view wasn't exactly novel to them.

Ginny,

I agree with you regarding this discussion. However the discussion strikes me as being so far from what we ought to be concerned about given what is going on in our country today that it is frustrating to me. Of course I am referring to the direction Obama and company are taking us. I remain hopeful that his attempt to expand the power of government into so many areas of our lives will fall short. Not only because his power grab is unconstitutional but because he and those who think like him do not appear to realize just how wrong their ideas are and how awful their implementation would be for all of us. Of course there would be beneficiaries who might benefit in the short run in some respect but I think we all know that our nation would not prosper but would decline economically with widespread suffering in all spheres if the government attempted to involve itself in health care, education, energy and whatever else.

Those who pay taxes these days and whose businesses are regulated with mandates and other forms of coercion are todays victims of government enslavement. We are in a fight for our very lives and for our freedom which are in jeopardy and you guys and gals are talking about how the native Americans were treated hundreds of years ago and how previous generations of African American blacks were enslaved in a manner which makes our complaints about being enslaved because we have to pay taxes pale by comparison.

www.campaignforliberty.com 191,900 At least these C4L folks are obviously actively recruiting fellow citizens to the cause. They appear to be more focused in this endeavor while the Objectivists are rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic with the exception of those who are active in the C4L movement.

gulch

[Selene]

Christopher, you undoubtedly right about the Indians not receiving fair trade from whites. Unfortunately, that's the way of conquest. The better people (in this case, better armed) will win. Conquest of people has been going on for thousands of years. Yes, I sometimes feel for the conquered people. However, what would happen if all conquered people on the plant were to demand restitution? They lost. That's life, sometimes. Lucky for us, WE are here now. As for the tactics used some bad whites, that's a different issue than if the land can belong to the whites. Not all conquerors wore white gloves.

Has anyone considered that without contact with whites, maybe the Indians would still be illiterate hunter/nomads these days? I don't know, but maybe. Switching the subject to blacks and the horrors of slavery and what America owes them, I had discussion some time back with a few black women. I claimed that considering how horrible things are throughout most of Africa, with famine, drought, war, children killing people, unbelievable poverty, etc., blacks who are here because their ancestors were brought here as slaves probably should breathe a sign of relief that they are not living there. Even their ancestors, although slaves, had it better than so many blacks in Africa today. At least, the owners needed to keep them alive with food and water. This is not to be interpreted as support of slavery, btw. The black women I said that to actually laughed. "We know, Ginny. We know." They made it clear that my point of view wasn't exactly novel to them.

Ginny,

I agree with you regarding this discussion. However the discussion strikes me as being so far from what we ought to be concerned about given what is going on in our country today that it is frustrating to me. Of course I am referring to the direction Obama and company are taking us. I remain hopeful that his attempt to expand the power of government into so many areas of our lives will fall short. Not only because his power grab is unconstitutional but because he and those who think like him do not appear to realize just how wrong their ideas are and how awful their implementation would be for all of us. Of course there would be beneficiaries who might benefit in the short run in some respect but I think we all know that our nation would not prosper but would decline economically with widespread suffering in all spheres if the government attempted to involve itself in health care, education, energy and whatever else.

Those who pay taxes these days and whose businesses are regulated with mandates and other forms of coercion are todays victims of government enslavement. We are in a fight for our very lives and for our freedom which are in jeopardy and you guys and gals are talking about how the native Americans were treated hundreds of years ago and how previous generations of African American blacks were enslaved in a manner which makes our complaints about being enslaved because we have to pay taxes pale by comparison.

www.campaignforliberty.com 191,900 At least these C4L folks are obviously actively recruiting fellow citizens to the cause. They appear to be more focused in this endeavor while the Objectivists are rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic with the exception of those who are active in the C4L movement.

gulch

Gulch:

Do you mean the victims like all of us who continue to give him their tacit sanction?

Adam

[Christopher]

Obama would make a great CEO. He's all about action, action, action. Unfortunately for us, the best governments are inactive, Inactive, INACTIVE!

[Brant Gaede]

Before the white man came indian tribes displaced indian tribes. I suggest they pay each other off first to demonstrate moral good will and to set an example before heading to Washington.

--Brant

Edited August 3, 2009 by Brant Gaede