The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
The Erasure of American Indians
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the New York Times:

Cleveland’s Baseball Team Will Drop Its Indians Team Name

The decision comes amid a wider push for sports teams to stop using Native American names and imagery as team names and mascots.

Native Americans continue to be culturally marginalized in a 21st Century America that has grown bored with them. America used to celebrate its proud Indian heritage, but now we appear to be embarrassed by them. Hence, sports teams that were named in honor of their masculine ferocity are having their names memoryholed.

Part of what is going on is of course the rewriting of the American past in line with today’s anti-white racist mythology. It is assumed that any white reference to Indians in the past must have been demeaning, when in reality whites, once they were free of the danger of being scalped by Indian raiders, quickly began to mythologize Indians as a worthy foe.

Another aspect is that white admiration for Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved, makes the long submission of the black man look bad.

And I wonder if the push to remove memories of America’s rich Indian legacy is being done in part in deference to the rising and already vastly more influential New Indians?

 
Hide 307 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Whites also began to appreciate American Indians when they joined up with the US Armed Forces.

    Sgt. York for one and my late brother in law who was a Marine sniper in Vietnam for another.

    • Replies: @Rich
    @Whitehall

    Alvin York was of English and Scots-Irish heritage.

    Replies: @Colin Wright

    , @ATate
    @Whitehall

    When I was in the Marines I was part of a detail that did a 9/11 dedication at Willamette National Cemetery. After we completed the dedication we had to head back to the van. We got out of there pretty quick. There were 4 NA Marine veterans (Vietnam Vets) that followed almost at a jog, we didn't know they were coming up behind us but they thanked us for the dedication and talked for a bit. Cool as fuck. Warriors.

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal

    , @Richard B
    @Whitehall


    Whites also began to appreciate American Indians when they joined up with the US Armed Forces.
     
    But the real appreciation of American Indians was as a source of SWPL above all else, in fact their drug of choice, ie; mood-altering through self-righteousness. Or, guaranteed, consequence-free virtue.

    And, though such people never tire of getting high, as it were, they do get tired of what it is they're getting high on. For this reason, the American Indian high was replaced by Blacks, which provided a much, well, it was the herion of virtue signalling.


    Native Americans continue to be culturally marginalized in a 21st Century America that has grown bored with them. America used to celebrate its proud Indian heritage, but now we appear to be embarrassed by them.
     
    Since George Floyd represented the peak high, what is said above in the quote on American Indians will soon apply to blacks. In fact, though no one will say it, it's already happening. But after blacks then what? Nothing, of course.

    SWPL doesn't matter anymore now that Whites are being cancelled.

    , @Jake
    @Whitehall

    You are correct, as long as you mean before WW1 and Sergeant York. Tennesseans came back from the Creek War speaking very highly of the Cherokee who fought with them and respectfully of the Creeks they defeated. The same Tennesseans came back from New Orleans with great contempt for the British officers and very little respect for the British regulars.

    , @Juvenalis
    @Whitehall

    American Indians also fought against the US Armed Forces for the CS Armed Forces.

    Robert E. Lee surrendered to Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox on April 9, 1865. Cherokee Chief General Stand Watie (Indian name “Degataga” meaning “Stands Firm”) and Cherokee Mounted Rifles regiment fought on; Watie was the last Confederate General to surrender on June 23.

    Cherokee Nation, Choctaw Nation, Chickasaw Nation, Muskogee Creek Nation, Seminole Nation, Osage Indians...all allies of the Confederacy, forming the fearsome Indian Cavalry of the Confederate Armed Forces.



    The only 'Person of Color' to attain rank of General in US Civil War, either North or South, Brigadier General Stand Watie and Cherokee Confederate veterans went to their graves flying Confederate battle flags proud of their service to the CSA.
    ...
    On a "find your roots" show, black actor Don Cheadle learned his ancestors were slaves owned not by whites but far crueler masters: Chickasaw Indians in Oklahoma territory. Native Americans refused to free their slaves even after the war; the White Man forced Indians to later give up their slaves in separate harsh US treaty terms.

    Still, unlike White Americans, Native American tribal nations made no attempt to extend citizenship and equality to the new black 'freedmen' in their midst.

    Also, amid the Summer of George, NY Times “1619 Project” conspiracy theorist Nikole Hannah-Jones tweeted then deleted to note 'Native Americans brought their Black slaves with them to do all the work on the “Trail of Tears”'...

  2. …once they were free of the danger of being scalped by Indian raiders, quickly began to mythologize Indians as a worthy foe.

    Indeed

    [MORE]

    Apache

    Black Hawk

    Chinook

    Iroquois

    Kiowa

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Then there are the Piper G/A aircraft:

    Comanche
    Dakota
    Cherokee
    Saratoga
    Seminole
    Navajo
    Chieftain (bigger Navajo)
    Seneca
    Aztec

    Long ago an airline pilot who wrote a book about his experience related that they called the lower altitudes in the busy airspace (say, coming into LAX) "Indian Country". That was no slur, but just a comment on all the G/A aircraft that were buzzing around back in the day, a good proportion of them Pipers.

    Replies: @Mike Zwick, @WriterAnon

    , @mmack
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Fiat/Chrysler will have to rename two popular Jeep models:

    https://www.jeep.com/bmo.cherokee.2021.html#/models/2021/cherokee

    https://www.jeep.com/grand-cherokee.html

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Anonymous

    , @Federalist
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/51/56/72/51567276114f81ebb4d3ab5f908ee6e2.png

    The crossed arrows of the branch insignia of US Army Special Forces come from the insignia worn by the Army's Indian scouts.

    The arrowhead of the patch signifies the skills of the American Indian in which Special Forces soldiers are trained.

    , @J1234
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Mythologizing danger is a pretty common human pathos. A large number of team names are derived from fear, or fear overcome: Cyclones, Hurricanes, Bears, Bruins, Panthers, Bengals, Buccaneers, Raiders, Lions. There's even a Keelhaulers. The historic Vikings and Pirates produced more fear in Europeans than pride. Of course, there's an admiration for all of those things, but it may be derivative of the fear.

    I like all of those names better than names such as Beavers, Ravens and even Badgers (as fierce as they are) and certainly my home state's Cornhuskers, as they don't exactly conjure up fearful images. I really dislike team names like Jazz, Twins and Nuggets, which have very little to do with danger or bravery.

    Replies: @Dube

  3. • Replies: @Paleo Liberal
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    Back when this song came out, I used to ride in my parents’ car on numerous trips through eastern Oklahoma. We heard this song on the car radio quite frequently. Years afterwards the eastern OK radio stations had this song on the play list.

    Replies: @ganderson

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    Written by John D Loudermilk, who claimed he was held hostage on a reservation until he wrote a song about them. He was a notorious tale-teller, so take that with a grain of red Georgia dirt. Which Jemima tells me can be quite tasty.

    , @Charon
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    I always thought that song was called "Indian Reservation."

    Replies: @ScarletNumber

  4. Before the Indians go off into the darkness, they may be able to hire some clever lawyers to litigate havoc on half the country. The McGirt v. Oklahoma case caused only a brief splash over the summer with headlines about giving away half the country before it was lost in the noise. That is an overstatement, but the tribes could cause deep disruptions. Historically, they can be bought off with increasingly large monetary settlements, but maybe some desperate and militant tribe members can use the decision and liberal guilt to secure jurisdiction over valuable property in blue states before it is too late.

    • Replies: @bomag
    @william munny


    ...may be able to hire some clever lawyers to litigate havoc on half the country
     
    It is a pretty robust legal industry now.

    Our liberal courts are plenty agreeable to handing out money, hunting rights, and Kennewick man; but I don't see much actual land title being changed.
    , @Mr. Anon
    @william munny


    Before the Indians go off into the darkness, they may be able to hire some clever lawyers to litigate havoc on half the country.
     
    Maybe they could demand reparations from recent immigrants and their enablers. Or demand to be given title to all that rural land that the super wealthy are reportedly buying up.

    https://www.axios.com/billionaires-ranches-american-west-farmers-land-ownership-d09ea827-ccde-4c17-afcd-994d7fd95322.html
  5. How long until the Boy Scouts eliminate “The Order of the Arrow,” as their elite designation? Or have they already?

    Will the Army stop naming helicopters after Indian tribes?

    • Replies: @tyrone
    @Diversity Heretic

    Aren't the Boy Scouts bankrupt?….oh don't worry they can sell off Philmont…. order of the arrow is the least of their problems.

    Replies: @Wency

    , @Joe Paluka
    @Diversity Heretic

    I think too many boys received the "order of the arrow" from their scoutmasters so they just want to forget about their time there.

    Replies: @additionalMike

    , @Farenheit
    @Diversity Heretic

    Some time back, I read the abridged Journal of Lewis and Clark as they trekked across the northern plains headed to the Pacific.

    Their recurring theme of the Indians they encountered were of half starved beggars, who would steal anything they could from the expedition. It wasn't until they got to the Pacific Northwest that they finally came across Indians that had enough food, salmon principally. They were not impressed.

    On a side note, Captain Lewis brought his slave "York" on the trip, so he needs to be cancelled, his body exhumed, burned, and his ashes scattered!!

    , @Paul Jolliffe
    @Diversity Heretic

    Not to mention that the U.S. Armed Forces will have to stop using “Bent Spear” and “Broken Arrow” to denote incidents involving nuclear bombs, including “accidental or unexplained detonation” . . .

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_Damascus_Titan_missile_explosion

    (As a longtime I-Steve commentator, I relish the chance to work the Cold War into anything!)

    , @Dissident
    @Diversity Heretic


    How long until the Boy Scouts eliminate “The Order of the Arrow,” as their elite designation? Or have they already?
     
    Wait, you mean the Boy Scouts that after resisting for as much as decades, finally, within the past decade, submitted to the demands of the sodomy lobby to reverse longtime policy-- first by accepting avowed sexual deviants as scouts, and then, a little later, even as scoutmasters? The once-venerable organization whose name forms the initialism BSA? Having upended its founding principles and made a mockery out of the morally straight clause in its membership oath, Buggery Scouts of America seemed, at that point, as if it might have been more apt. Such an appellation may have since, however, been rendered obsolete. Boy Scouts of America certainly has. For as Mr. Sailer has noted, what's left of the entity still calling itself that has now renounced and rescinded its former, shamefully sexist, misogynist, cis-hetero-normative policy of restricting membership to those presumed to possess a male member, i.e., those whom we call boys children and adolescents who were transphobically assigned the (toxic) male gender at birth.

    If that "Boy Scouts" is the one you were inquiring about, wouldn't your question be rather moot at this point?

    Related photo after break
    http://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/boy-scouts-keep-morally-straight-e1390217273290.jpeg
  6. Also, Indians (feather) owned slaves, including BLACK ones.

    • Agree: HammerJack
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Redneck farmer

    As indeed many freemen blacks did. The most famous one in Louisiana having 60 or so and repeatedly in trouble with the law for cruelty.

    " I know the mind of the African. "

    Replies: @ganderson

    , @syonredux
    @Redneck farmer


    Also, Indians (feather) owned slaves, including BLACK ones.
     
    Yup. That's something that Don Cheadle learned when he appeared on FINDING YOUR ROOTS:



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5YEKPiNwu0
    , @RegretLeft
    @Redneck farmer

    Harriet Martineau was an English writer who traveled in the USA - in the 1830s - about the same time as de Tocqueville; almost every page of her "Society in America" reflects her vicious hatred of slavery.

    She spoke with many enslaved African and reported that they very much preferred to be sold to Indians as opposed to whites. The Indians provided living accommodations nearly equal to those they enjoyed themselves and demanded considerably less work output.

    Replies: @black sea

  7. Also. There’s a state nearby called Indiana. Seriously!

    Aaaaand about ten thousand other place names to fix. Before you know it, we’ll run out of Negro Saints like Floyd and Trayvon and will have to resort to naming things after Al Jolson and Eddie Cantor.

    • Agree: Stick
    • LOL: Bardon Kaldian
    • Replies: @Stick
    @HammerJack

    Indiana's capitol is Indianapolis. This is where the NCAA headquarters are located and their only mission is to destroy any college sports program that has an Indian mascot or team name. Bothering to check up on the athletes 'academic qualifications' to play seems the last thing they are concerned with. Being Woke is a great excuse for not doing your job.

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal, @Reg Cæsar

    , @Prester John
    @HammerJack

    Would it make the snowflakes happy if the Cleveland and Washington baseball and football teams changed their name to the "(Cleveland/Washington) Native Americans?"

  8. Back before America started deifying presidents.

    • Replies: @Eustace Tilley (not)
    @Another Canadian

    A Centennial deification
    Of 1909 fabrication
    Of as crafty a god
    As e'er rose from the sod
    Of what had once been a free nation.

    , @HammerJack
    @Another Canadian

    I actually think the chief on the $5 bill is very compelling. Posted here:


    https://www.unz.com/isteve/nominative-determinism-hunter-s-bidens-fear-and-loathing-in-palm-springs/#comment-4343451

    Since you're Canadian: were amerinds ever on canuck money?

  9. After the threat of wild Scottish highlander cattle rustlers was neutralized, WASPs started romanticizing them for their fierceness and bravery. My grandmother and great grandmother were particularly enamored with our Scottish ancestry even though we have much more English ancestry.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @BCB232

    Here's T.B. Macaulay's wonderful chapter on changing English attitudes toward Scottish Highlanders:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/diversity-before-diversity-thomas/

    Replies: @BCB232

    , @Clyde
    @BCB232


    After the threat of wild Scottish highlander cattle rustlers was neutralized, WASPs started romanticizing them for their fierceness and bravery. My grandmother and great grandmother were particularly enamored with our Scottish ancestry even though we have much more English ancestry.
     
    Many years ago a Scots woman was bragging that the English would come to battle mounted on horses. The Scots warriors were on foot, they would drag the English off their horses. The Scots were poor so did not have many horses to spare for battle.
    , @znon
    @BCB232

    Interesting to compare that to the fate of the Irish, to be enslaved and reviled for 400 years and to survive and win independence, rather than the native Scot highlander clans, most of whom like the Amerindians, are barely surviving as a shadow or are alive only in legend.

    Replies: @John Up North

  10. Try not to lose sight of the fact that American Indians were Stone Age barbarians who openly worshipped Satan. This is obvious from Aztec Temples to Iroquois ritual cannibalism. They may have been worthy foes as fighters, but their societies were saturated with pure evil from top to bottom. Feel free to read on the Comanches as a primer. (And really, It’s a decision of the people of Cleveland what to name their teams.)

    Even so, I doubt they are one tenth as dangerous, or frankly, as evil, as these creatures erupting out of the Indian subcontinent. If were are to save our society, we will have to confront that unpleasant truth head on.

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @theMann

    theMann, best book, in my opinion, about the Comanches..."Empire of the Summer Moon." Hair raising, pun intented.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Cool Daddy Jimbo, @syonredux

    , @Muggles
    @theMann


    Try not to lose sight of the fact that American Indians were Stone Age barbarians who openly worshipped Satan. This is obvious from Aztec Temples to Iroquois ritual cannibalism. They may have been worthy foes as fighters, but their societies were saturated with pure evil from top to bottom. Feel free to read on the Comanches as a primer.
     
    Okay. This written by a presumable white guy (White!) who never read a single page of European history.

    Celts and most European tribes (as the Romans styled them) practiced what we might call paganism (not "Satan worship, since the NAs had no prior idea of 'Satan') and human sacrifice. Accounts of warrior societies there suggest they also practiced ritual eating of enemy body parts (usually the heart).

    The Comanches were no more "pure evil" than Huns or other barbarians and even so-called civilized groups like Greeks and Romans. Ancient behavior seems to be very similar in these respects. Carthaginians were said to practice child sacrifice (though evidence is sketchy) and even the Romans sacrificed slaves in early times (ashamed to admit it later though).

    Accounts of US military troopers 'savaging' Indian villages are very similar to Comanche behavior though didn't take slaves (too much trouble.) Many times old people, the sick, children and infants were killed and/or shot. Women raped, then often killed or "taken as mistresses" like Custer did.

    It is east to overlook pagan Druids and Vikings and others. Human behavior has nasty history. Not limited to any one tribe or group. The US even legalized the torture of certain terror prisoners.

    This isn't to defend NAs or anyone. But the Other is often just like Us. Like it or not.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @HammerJack, @Achmed E. Newman, @anonymous coward

  11. “Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved”

    I’ve read that Australian aborigines don’t like to be reminded that across the water in New Zealand the Maori similarly fought the British for 200 years, while the far more numerous Aborigines were quickly routed. I’ve not observed any hail-fellow-PoC feelings between Maori and Aborigine so there may be something to it.

    • Replies: @Hannah Katz
    @photondancer

    IQ might have had something to do with it. While the average Maori has an IQ in the 80s, and their leaders were probably even smarter, the average IQ of the Aborigines is closer to 60. Not the kind of building block a military needs in putting together a resistance.

    , @Old Prude
    @photondancer

    The Incas and Aztecs got rolled up pretty quick. Plains Indians were a lot more obstreperous. It’s a real shame busy bodies have been running around saying we are hurting their feelings with the Tomahawk Chop.

    Replies: @Hapalong Cassidy, @Achmed E. Newman

    , @syonredux
    @photondancer

    The Māori put up a decent fight:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_Wars

    , @Corn
    @photondancer


    I’ve not observed any hail-fellow-PoC feelings between Maori and Aborigine so there may be something to it.
     
    You bringing up inter-PoC relations jogged my memory. Does anyone know how American Indian tribes get along nowadays? I read of an incident once where a Seminole tribal leader, James Billie, was at some conference of American Indians. He got in an argument with a man from another tribe, and after much shouting from both parties Billie shouted, “You gave up! You gave up! We never did!!”.
    (The Seminole never signed a treaty with the US govt.)

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Anonymous

    , @sb
    @photondancer

    The Maoris saw themselves as one people with one language and were well aware that there was a big grasping world out there ( they had only been in previously non human populated New Zealand since our Middle Ages )

    Aborigines ,on the other hand , were many different competing clans always squabbling among themselves , speaking often very different languages , been in Australia tens of thousands of years with not much awareness that there was a world outside

    If whites hadn't come on the scene it may just have been just a matter of time before Maoris sailed over to Australia ( after all they had travelled to Norfolk Island between Australia and NZ ) and stayed for the readily available food sources ( eg kangaroos ) and killed off every aboriginal they came upon ( Chatham Island style )

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Steve Sailer, @syonredux, @Ed Case

    , @Perspective
    @photondancer

    The Aussie Aboriginal cousins, the Negritos, also suffered greatly during the Austronesian expansion. But this is not much talked about as it's not PC to discuss a non-European race dominating over another one:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito
    "The pre-Neolithic Negrito populations of Southeast Asia were largely replaced by the expansion of Southern East Eurasian populations, beginning about 5,000 years ago.[3]

    Historically they engaged in trade with the local population that eventually invaded their lands and were also often subjected to slave raids while also paying tributes to the local Southeast Asian rulers and kingdoms. Some Negrito pygmies from the southern forests were enslaved and exploited from AD 724 until modern times.[4] While some have lived in isolation others have become assimilated with the general local population."

    Replies: @photondancer

  12. Someone should also cancel the Red Hot Chili Peppers. “Fight Like a Brave” is clearly a hate song what with its suggestion that people culturally appropriate Native American ways.

    Iron Maiden’s “Run to the Hills” is also clearly mocking Natives. CANCEL!

  13. @BCB232
    After the threat of wild Scottish highlander cattle rustlers was neutralized, WASPs started romanticizing them for their fierceness and bravery. My grandmother and great grandmother were particularly enamored with our Scottish ancestry even though we have much more English ancestry.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Clyde, @znon

    Here’s T.B. Macaulay’s wonderful chapter on changing English attitudes toward Scottish Highlanders:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/diversity-before-diversity-thomas/

    • Replies: @BCB232
    @Steve Sailer

    @ Steve, I have to admit, I really like oatmeal (horse food to an Englishman).

  14. That about dot Indians vs feather Indians may be over 50% of the erasure.

    But, mythologized Indians had a peculiar place in American mythology: they were the Noble Savage. Now, deification of blacks leaves everyone with untouchable savages without any nobility.

    Plus, feather Indians were/are “almost” whites, physically as they may vary. And while many of them don’t give a hoot about white people, they despise blacks more than most whites.

    Finally, marriage patterns show they tend to intermarry with whites, so they are on the way to becoming whites.

    https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/01/29/us/20110130mixedrace.html?ref=us

    WM- white male
    WF- white female
    IM- Indian (feather) male
    IF- Indian (feather) female
    WHM- white Hispanic male
    WHF- white Hispanic female
    BM- black male
    BF- black female

    IM-WF: 45.5%
    IM-IF: 45.3%
    IM-WHF: 3.1%
    IM-BF: 0.9%

    IF-WM: 44.3%
    IF-IM: 43.4%
    IF-WHM: 3.0%
    IF-BM: 2.7%

    • Replies: @Walsh2
    @Bardon Kaldian

    No longer dot/feather - now casino/call center.

  15. Another aspect is that white admiration for Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved, makes the long submission of the black man look bad.

    Indians got vast reservations out the peace treaties. Today they enslave whitey with their casinos and no tax smoke shops. Buy a few cartons of your favorite ciggies and you are set for a while. You will be back there to gamble your money away, anyway.
    Blacks never got any reservations unless you want to count their enclaves in our major cities. You are right that American Indian saga makes blacks look weak. What has recently increased black status here and worldwide is their dominance in sports. music and entertainment. Whoever would have thought that the black NBA would be so popular in China? I’ll bet many in foreign countries think blacks are 40% of US population.

  16. It’s just another manifestation of anti-Nativism and abssimilation. However much their ancestors were more directly responsible for the ethnic cleansing, annihilation of most Native American peoples, the old stock still had by the 1920s a deep connection to the land and Native Americans were a part of that, they had become ethnic ‘Americans’. However much their first ancestors to step on North American soil would have been horrified of having Native American ancestry, by 1920 their descendants found it exciting to have a little, it became a part of their old stock WASP/Dutch identity in opposition to the great wave immigrants. (Somebody should check Liz Warren’s implicit antisemitic obsession with having just a little Native American ancestry!)

    From the great wave onward you have people with an ‘immigrant’ identity who define their identity in opposition to the native one (Since the ‘American’ people is already defined, you get the hyphenated identity) and get twitchy (To varying degrees for different ethnicities in 1920 and 2020) when people talk about Native Americans, the Mayflower etc. They want America to just be a place that nobody ‘owns’ for them and anybody else to exploit without any responsibility.

    And, to be fair, a lot of it, but not all, is the retrospective granting of some dignity, many of those mascots and chants aren’t made with much genuine respect for the peoples.

    • Agree: LondonBob
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Altai


    It’s just another manifestation of anti-Nativism and abssimilation.
     
    Bingo! Spot on Altai.

    American Indians are non-people now because they/their story is a rebuke to Jewish minoritarianism/"nation of immigrants"ism.

    -- "Natives" who are a minority?

    -- "Natives " who are oppressed ... "it does not compute, it does not compute!"

    -- Conquest and settlement not "immigration" is the American story.
    Bring up Indians, brings up their conquest. My old-stock ancestors were not "immigrants", they were conquerors, pioneers and settlers. They came, battled the existing people, beat them, took territory and built something great. It's not pretty, but it's a constant human norm. And it's what we had through the 19th century.

    ("Immigration", in contrast, is not the human norm. It's undesirable to let random people plop themselves down on your turf. And it's rare but for these middle-man minority types like Jews, Gypsies, overseas Chinese. No one loves it when they show up. And they are never good for any nation's long term development and survival.)

    -- Maybe immigration isn't good for the natives?
    But if you can't figure out the above and still think "nation of immigrants" ... think about the Indians story for a few seconds and a light may come on. "Hey maybe immigration doesn't work out so well for the natives!"


    The Indians entire story, their "oppressed minority" moral claim, is a flat out rebuke to immigrationism. So they had to be un-personed and erased.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Anonymous, @Anon99

  17. Back when five bucks was real money.

    • Replies: @restless94110
    @Another Canadian

    Hey, mate. There was no ethnic cleansing. That's a lie.

    There was a respect for the warring, murderous, savage Indians that had fought settlers for a few hundred years, like they had fought other tribes for a thousand years (or more) before.

    Americans like me, who are native Americans, like Indians are, were happy to name things after the brave murderous savage warriors that fought and were bested by the European settlers.

    Now, all of that kindness, all of that respect, is being destroyed by stupid white SJWs and moronic Indian activists.

    Steve is right: Indians are being marginalized even further by this disastrous drive to rename venerable teams that celebrated Indian bravery, courage and revolve. A huge majority of Indians do not want this and have no problem with team names, but it does not matter to this useful idiots.

    Your response shows a part of why this is happening. Repeating the lies of the new narrative. This makes it worse for Indians, and worse for the cohesiveness of American society as a whole.

    Signed,
    A White American Who Married A Native American (Choctaw) Now A Father, Grandfather, and Great Grandfather Of Mixed Breed Descendants.

    Replies: @Anonymous

  18. @BCB232
    After the threat of wild Scottish highlander cattle rustlers was neutralized, WASPs started romanticizing them for their fierceness and bravery. My grandmother and great grandmother were particularly enamored with our Scottish ancestry even though we have much more English ancestry.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Clyde, @znon

    After the threat of wild Scottish highlander cattle rustlers was neutralized, WASPs started romanticizing them for their fierceness and bravery. My grandmother and great grandmother were particularly enamored with our Scottish ancestry even though we have much more English ancestry.

    Many years ago a Scots woman was bragging that the English would come to battle mounted on horses. The Scots warriors were on foot, they would drag the English off their horses. The Scots were poor so did not have many horses to spare for battle.

  19. Anonymous[725] • Disclaimer says:

    Why should the ‘new Americans’ – that is the massive post 1965 third world wave immigration wave – give a damn about Amerindians?

    To them a cushy USA complete with hot and cold running water, central heating, two cars in the garage etc, is the norm. Handed to them on a plate. With typical tropical arrogance and entitlement, they think it is all their just due from the the hated white man who was chump enough to let them in. To them, the USA begins at at the cushy white man’s jet airliner which brought them in, and ends in generous white sap funded social security – and, oh, the ‘right’ to bring in the entire village. Everything else is bullshit.

    The fact that the territory of the USA had, literally, be fought for inch by inch, and central heating systems don’t sprung from the ground ready made, is lost on them. Why then, do you expect them to give a damn about wars in which their ancestors never fought?

  20. @photondancer
    "Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved"

    I've read that Australian aborigines don't like to be reminded that across the water in New Zealand the Maori similarly fought the British for 200 years, while the far more numerous Aborigines were quickly routed. I've not observed any hail-fellow-PoC feelings between Maori and Aborigine so there may be something to it.

    Replies: @Hannah Katz, @Old Prude, @syonredux, @Corn, @sb, @Perspective

    IQ might have had something to do with it. While the average Maori has an IQ in the 80s, and their leaders were probably even smarter, the average IQ of the Aborigines is closer to 60. Not the kind of building block a military needs in putting together a resistance.

  21. Of course the official reason for dropping the Indians name is out of respect for the Native Americans. I think your interpretation of this act as really an expression of boredom and impatience with Native concerns is interesting and possibly correct. It reminds me of your conspiracy theory that the plan to expand Section 8 housing to the suburbs, officially framed as a plan to help the marginalized, is just a plot to move incorrigible poor blacks off highly desirable real estate. How many more liberal and progressive causes are really fronts for something else? What is the real motivation behind World War T for instance?

    • Replies: @bomag
    @Jtgw


    How many more liberal and progressive causes are really fronts for something else?
     
    All of them.

    E.g., I heard someone make the case that Tier 2 EPA pollution regs met necessary pollution requirements; the move to Tier 4 Final added more crap to the air via added costs and unreliability. It was all a front to squeeze the fossil fuel industry.
    , @Anonymous
    @Jtgw

    Miscegenation, promotion of homosexuality, self harm, vice etc.

    No real mystery to any of that. Gain access to resources while weakening your enemy.

    , @Wilkey
    @Jtgw


    I think your interpretation of this act as really an expression of boredom and impatience with Native concerns is interesting and possibly correct.
     
    It’s mostly self-righteous leftists, usually the ones who also have no life, who feel the need to tell other people that they are bad evil racists. Even among leftists, the only ones who really care about it are the serious assholes.

    The problem with giving in to them is that they will never stop complaining about something. There is no end goal in mind - at least not one they’re willing to publicly proclaim. They are just angry at society and always want to be changing some supposed wrong, and always need to be calling other people racists.

    Replies: @Prester John

    , @J.Ross
    @Jtgw

    How many more liberal and progressive causes are really fronts for something else?

    All of them. The left is comprised of (1) completely immoral shameless liars and (2) university-educated morons who have not yet figured this out.

    What is the real motivation behind World War T for instance?

    As predicted in Uncle Ted's Parable of the Cabin Boy, it's a distraction from the megacorps destroying the standard of living, originally a mechanism to assassinate the original Occupy Wall Street.

    , @Robert Morgan
    @Jtgw

    I've long suspected that the push to eradicate tobacco smoking in the 1960's was actually aimed at transitioning to a marijuana culture- and this seems borne out by the recent decree in S.F. that you can't smoke tobacco in your own home, but dope is permitted. The resulting disaster to society is inescapable and obvious.

  22. @Diversity Heretic
    How long until the Boy Scouts eliminate "The Order of the Arrow," as their elite designation? Or have they already?

    Will the Army stop naming helicopters after Indian tribes?

    Replies: @tyrone, @Joe Paluka, @Farenheit, @Paul Jolliffe, @Dissident

    Aren’t the Boy Scouts bankrupt?….oh don’t worry they can sell off Philmont…. order of the arrow is the least of their problems.

    • Replies: @Wency
    @tyrone

    The national organization is bankrupt. As you suggest, it will sell some campgrounds to compensate the victim claims and then emerge from bankruptcy.

    From what I can see, the abuse claims basically amount to pederasty between married dads and teenage boys who must have had some gay inclinations. It's somewhat surprising to me that the total victory of the cultural left hasn't led to the age of consent being reduced to at least a more European level (15-16) in the US.

    Replies: @Dissident

  23. ..Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved, makes the long submission of the black man look bad.

    What about Mardi Gras Indians? They’re black but not really Indians.

    • Replies: @Ron Mexico
    @Federalist

    Where's the wall clock hanging around the neck? Looks like Flav.

    Replies: @Federalist

  24. “I wonder if the push to remove memories of America’s rich Indian legacy…”

    Already forgotten are the worthy foes of those magnificent savages, you know who I mean, c’mon man, those stunted, pasty-skinned people from across the ocean. Who were they, again? Didn’t they have some part in transforming a wild untamed continent into the endless mall it is today, where all the world’s people can come and have free stuff while they recapitulate the shithole they came from? And profit? don’t forget profit.

    I love how Joe Biden is a stand-in for the white race; doddering, forgetful, angry about something, what was that again? They’ll hide him for a day or two at a time, then a week, then a month… then the nation’s news-papers will get around to informing us that we have our first female asian black/female black asian/asian black female/black asian female/… anyway, new president!

    And we won’t have to speak of those pasty-skinned people again. Thank god.

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @Anon7

    Anon7, sometimes the "Agree" and the "LOL" button aren't enough. Nice comment.

    , @Expletive Deleted
    @Anon7

    Got the kids some videos for Christmas (that they and I will not be allowed to attend! Tree bought and everything).

    The Revenant (the slightly self-aggrandising account of (Scots-Irish, with an Orkney name) Hugh Glass's experiences in bafflingly non-comfy, non-welfare America).
    Tombstone (some drunk WASP men argue a bit about cards, cattle and even women. Mining occurs, offscreen. No welfare, send the hat round for the sick, like Doc).
    Moby Dick (some cold, damp, yet heroically sober men regret not packing extra dry socks. No coastguard helicopter piloted by godlike, Mary-Sue female POC's available. Some historical mistake, surely?).

    (also Hobbit-Man's colorised They Shall Not Grow Old, to help explain why they have only a handful of cousins, while the Desis and Africans they were compelled to go to school with have endless legions of the buggers).

    And for 'Er Indoors, the 2017 version of Little Women (apparently there was a bit of a war or something going on. Hope nobody "ethnic" or "indigenous" got hurt).

    Replies: @anon

  25. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    ...once they were free of the danger of being scalped by Indian raiders, quickly began to mythologize Indians as a worthy foe.
     
    Indeed



    https://wallpapercave.com/wp/wp1938147.jpg

    Apache

    https://crewdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Sikorsky-UH-60-Black-Hawk-2.jpeg

    Black Hawk

    https://www.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/uploads/2017/05/ch-47f.jpg

    Chinook


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ee/UH1_Huey_-_Fly_Navy_2017_(cropped).jpg/1200px-UH1_Huey_-_Fly_Navy_2017_(cropped).jpg

    Iroquois

    https://www.armyupress.army.mil/portals/7/nco-journal/images/Kiowa-5.jpg

    Kiowa

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @mmack, @Federalist, @J1234

    Then there are the Piper G/A aircraft:

    Comanche
    Dakota
    Cherokee
    Saratoga
    Seminole
    Navajo
    Chieftain (bigger Navajo)
    Seneca
    Aztec

    Long ago an airline pilot who wrote a book about his experience related that they called the lower altitudes in the busy airspace (say, coming into LAX) “Indian Country”. That was no slur, but just a comment on all the G/A aircraft that were buzzing around back in the day, a good proportion of them Pipers.

    • Replies: @Mike Zwick
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Not only airplanes: https://www.amtrak.com/southwest-chief-train

    , @WriterAnon
    @Achmed E. Newman

    That's also military aviation parlance for enemy airspace so I think maybe he heard a different pilot say it for that and made an assumption.

  26. One idea I thought about a long time ago was that the patriotic Constitutionalist Americans (like myself), the Oath Keepers, III%, etc. ought to try to make some deals with the modern Indian tribes against the US Gov’t Beast. After all, they are in some ways separate “nations”, per treaties and laws. Perhaps the Red Man could be persuaded to go on the war path again, but alongside the patriotic White Man against the Federal Beast.

    It was the Feds after all, with the continual broken treaties with the Indians, that made the problem even worse for them, as the White Man pushed across the land. (Granted, since you had a culture that understands property rights and built civilizations vs. one that didn’t, there wasn’t going to be any easy way out once the White Man landed in the New World.)

    • Replies: @bomag
    @Achmed E. Newman


    ...ought to try to make some deals with the modern Indian tribes against the US Gov’t Beast. After all, they are in some ways separate “nations”, per treaties and laws.
     
    The western tribes with which I'm familiar are a naturally conservative bunch, but they've been bought off by the welfare state.

    The numbers aren't there, only around 5 million in the US; that's two years immigration in today's world.

    And their sovereignty frees them from some state and local control, but they are still under federal regs.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    , @Russ
    @Achmed E. Newman


    One idea I thought about a long time ago was that the patriotic Constitutionalist Americans (like myself), the Oath Keepers, III%, etc. ought to try to make some deals with the modern Indian tribes against the US Gov’t Beast. After all, they are in some ways separate “nations”, per treaties and laws.
     
    Liking how you're thinking here.

    Certainly beats standing athwart history yelling Stop.
  27. In admiration of our “rising and already vastly more influential New Indians,” new blue bloods, I propose a professional cricket team:

    The Boston Brahmins

    Go Double B!

    • Replies: @Stebbing Heuer
    @Buzz Mohawk

    I was wondering recently when the rising number of sub-continental Indians in the US would lead to the creation of a competitive US cricket team.

    If you get your skates on you may join ahead of the Chinese.

  28. The Cleveland Patels. Doesn’t have quite the same ring.

  29. Atlanta Braves, Chicago Blackhawks, KC Chiefs. Which one will hold out the longest?

  30. OT, a new Law is discovered by Darren Beattie.

    https://niccolo.substack.com/p/the-zrich-interviews-darren-j-beattie

    … the Beattie Law of Canonical Inclusion which states that every canonical work contains at least one passage which would get a modern American academic fired“.

    (Here his example is Plato).

    • Replies: @Servant of Gla'aki
    @YetAnotherAnon


    OT, a new Law is discovered by Darren Beattie.

    https://niccolo.substack.com/p/the-zrich-interviews-darren-j-beattie
     
    I didn't realize Niccolo (and his ever-faithful companion, Donkey) had moved to Substack. Thanks for the tip, as it were.
  31. We can’t celebrate people who fought off serfdom given our near future.

  32. @william munny
    Before the Indians go off into the darkness, they may be able to hire some clever lawyers to litigate havoc on half the country. The McGirt v. Oklahoma case caused only a brief splash over the summer with headlines about giving away half the country before it was lost in the noise. That is an overstatement, but the tribes could cause deep disruptions. Historically, they can be bought off with increasingly large monetary settlements, but maybe some desperate and militant tribe members can use the decision and liberal guilt to secure jurisdiction over valuable property in blue states before it is too late.

    Replies: @bomag, @Mr. Anon

    …may be able to hire some clever lawyers to litigate havoc on half the country

    It is a pretty robust legal industry now.

    Our liberal courts are plenty agreeable to handing out money, hunting rights, and Kennewick man; but I don’t see much actual land title being changed.

  33. When drunken bongo thumping con men are the best recent optics you have, maybe you’d prefer to be allowed to slip into obscurity.

  34. @Jtgw
    Of course the official reason for dropping the Indians name is out of respect for the Native Americans. I think your interpretation of this act as really an expression of boredom and impatience with Native concerns is interesting and possibly correct. It reminds me of your conspiracy theory that the plan to expand Section 8 housing to the suburbs, officially framed as a plan to help the marginalized, is just a plot to move incorrigible poor blacks off highly desirable real estate. How many more liberal and progressive causes are really fronts for something else? What is the real motivation behind World War T for instance?

    Replies: @bomag, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @J.Ross, @Robert Morgan

    How many more liberal and progressive causes are really fronts for something else?

    All of them.

    E.g., I heard someone make the case that Tier 2 EPA pollution regs met necessary pollution requirements; the move to Tier 4 Final added more crap to the air via added costs and unreliability. It was all a front to squeeze the fossil fuel industry.

    • Agree: Rich
  35. @Redneck farmer
    Also, Indians (feather) owned slaves, including BLACK ones.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @syonredux, @RegretLeft

    As indeed many freemen blacks did. The most famous one in Louisiana having 60 or so and repeatedly in trouble with the law for cruelty.

    ” I know the mind of the African. ”

    • Replies: @ganderson
    @Anonymous

    "Negro cops are harder on their own"

    Replies: @HammerJack

  36. @Jtgw
    Of course the official reason for dropping the Indians name is out of respect for the Native Americans. I think your interpretation of this act as really an expression of boredom and impatience with Native concerns is interesting and possibly correct. It reminds me of your conspiracy theory that the plan to expand Section 8 housing to the suburbs, officially framed as a plan to help the marginalized, is just a plot to move incorrigible poor blacks off highly desirable real estate. How many more liberal and progressive causes are really fronts for something else? What is the real motivation behind World War T for instance?

    Replies: @bomag, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @J.Ross, @Robert Morgan

    Miscegenation, promotion of homosexuality, self harm, vice etc.

    No real mystery to any of that. Gain access to resources while weakening your enemy.

  37. @Achmed E. Newman
    One idea I thought about a long time ago was that the patriotic Constitutionalist Americans (like myself), the Oath Keepers, III%, etc. ought to try to make some deals with the modern Indian tribes against the US Gov't Beast. After all, they are in some ways separate "nations", per treaties and laws. Perhaps the Red Man could be persuaded to go on the war path again, but alongside the patriotic White Man against the Federal Beast.

    It was the Feds after all, with the continual broken treaties with the Indians, that made the problem even worse for them, as the White Man pushed across the land. (Granted, since you had a culture that understands property rights and built civilizations vs. one that didn't, there wasn't going to be any easy way out once the White Man landed in the New World.)

    Replies: @bomag, @Russ

    …ought to try to make some deals with the modern Indian tribes against the US Gov’t Beast. After all, they are in some ways separate “nations”, per treaties and laws.

    The western tribes with which I’m familiar are a naturally conservative bunch, but they’ve been bought off by the welfare state.

    The numbers aren’t there, only around 5 million in the US; that’s two years immigration in today’s world.

    And their sovereignty frees them from some state and local control, but they are still under federal regs.

    • Agree: HammerJack
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @bomag

    The Barona Creek golf course on an Indian reservation is one of the best courses in the San Diego area. It was built much more quickly than the typical California golf course because the Indians don't have to obey so many environmental regulations.

    Replies: @Wilkey

  38. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ0gobSHgIs

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal, @Reg Cæsar, @Charon

    Back when this song came out, I used to ride in my parents’ car on numerous trips through eastern Oklahoma. We heard this song on the car radio quite frequently. Years afterwards the eastern OK radio stations had this song on the play list.

    • Replies: @ganderson
    @Paleo Liberal

    I like this one- I sent an email to Granny Warren's campaign headquarters suggesting it as her "walk up" music. Oddly, I got no answer.

    https://youtu.be/0LByr0Qf4x8

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

  39. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    ...once they were free of the danger of being scalped by Indian raiders, quickly began to mythologize Indians as a worthy foe.
     
    Indeed



    https://wallpapercave.com/wp/wp1938147.jpg

    Apache

    https://crewdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Sikorsky-UH-60-Black-Hawk-2.jpeg

    Black Hawk

    https://www.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/uploads/2017/05/ch-47f.jpg

    Chinook


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ee/UH1_Huey_-_Fly_Navy_2017_(cropped).jpg/1200px-UH1_Huey_-_Fly_Navy_2017_(cropped).jpg

    Iroquois

    https://www.armyupress.army.mil/portals/7/nco-journal/images/Kiowa-5.jpg

    Kiowa

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @mmack, @Federalist, @J1234

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @mmack

    If we thought we were now entering the thermidor period of the Woke Revolution because Floyd/BLM scam had achieved its goal of ousting Bad Orange man in the White House, I guess we were wrong. The Woke Revolutionaries apparently won't be happy until every last name is changed and every statue toppled.

    The VAST VAST majority of American Indians and non Indians alike don't give a rats ass about baseball teams named the "Indians" or the "Redskins" or related nonsense like Aunt Jemima being on pancake boxes, but the cultural Marxist activists in the MSM knew that their relentless drumbeat about these contrived controversies would force capitulation at some point.
    The Fourth Estate embodied by the likes of CNN, the NY Times, NBC, Washington Post, et al now know that with their megaphones they can get whatever they want, including the cancelling of "offensive" corporate names and symbols because a handful of intellectuloids at Smith College or Columbia University, in their infinite wisdom, deemed them "hateful" and "offensive."

    , @Anonymous
    @mmack

    Well I guess were going to have to now re-name Massachusetts, Utah, Alabama and Kansas as well!! This has gotten so out-of-hand I don't even know where to begin.
    If most Americans still had brains and balls they would boycott these products, even just for a fixed period of time to send a message , because I realize that many of them really like products such as the "Jeep Grand Cherokee" "Gillette" razors and "Aunt Jemima" pancakes, so to swear off them permanently might be a sacrifice too far.

    I think most Americans could survive a month (or two) long boycott on buying things Gillette razors and Aunt Jemima pancakes and a year-long boycott on the new model caring whatever name they plan on using instead of Grand Cherokee. But Americans are so brain dead/brain washed, apathetic, and clueless that even a small temporary sacrifice might be too much.

    Replies: @Prosa123

  40. @HammerJack
    Also. There's a state nearby called Indiana. Seriously!

    Aaaaand about ten thousand other place names to fix. Before you know it, we'll run out of Negro Saints like Floyd and Trayvon and will have to resort to naming things after Al Jolson and Eddie Cantor.

    Replies: @Stick, @Prester John

    Indiana’s capitol is Indianapolis. This is where the NCAA headquarters are located and their only mission is to destroy any college sports program that has an Indian mascot or team name. Bothering to check up on the athletes ‘academic qualifications’ to play seems the last thing they are concerned with. Being Woke is a great excuse for not doing your job.

    • Replies: @Paleo Liberal
    @Stick

    Interesting tidbit.

    Indiana and Oklahoma mean about the same thing in different languages.

    Indianapolis and Oklahoma City mean about the same thing in different languages.

    I think Oklahoma means something like “land of the red man”

    Replies: @Desiderius

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Stick


    Indiana’s capitol is [in] Indianapolis.
     
    Where they still believe in science unlike, apparently, SCOTUS:


    In 'victory' for LGBTQ families, Supreme Court denies Indiana birth certificate case

    "They sued the state health commissioner and Tippecanoe County officials because county officials would not list both of them as parents on the birth certificate of their son, who Ruby conceived through artificial insemination."

    The Erasure of Dad. Like father, like son.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

  41. @bomag
    @Achmed E. Newman


    ...ought to try to make some deals with the modern Indian tribes against the US Gov’t Beast. After all, they are in some ways separate “nations”, per treaties and laws.
     
    The western tribes with which I'm familiar are a naturally conservative bunch, but they've been bought off by the welfare state.

    The numbers aren't there, only around 5 million in the US; that's two years immigration in today's world.

    And their sovereignty frees them from some state and local control, but they are still under federal regs.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    The Barona Creek golf course on an Indian reservation is one of the best courses in the San Diego area. It was built much more quickly than the typical California golf course because the Indians don’t have to obey so many environmental regulations.

    • Agree: Thoughts
    • Replies: @Wilkey
    @Steve Sailer

    In Utah, one Indian tribe once tried to turn their land - just 45 miles upwind of Salt Lake City - into a dumping site for all of the nation’s radioactive waste. The reservation in question is home to all of 31 people.

    Indian reservations in Utah can’t build casinos because Utah has no legalized form of gambling at all, so unless they’re fortunate enough to have large oil or mineral deposits, there aren’t many ways to make money off of it.

  42. Hail To The Redskins – they are atop the NFC Least and headed for the playoffs.

    • Replies: @GeneralRipper
    @Stick

    Any "white American man" who still watches college or professional sports (especially football) should probably check to see that he still has something down below besides a big hairy pussy.

    Not only that, "he" most certainly deserves the fate that awaits "him".

  43. In Western Canada, you have the interesting dynamic of having a large underclass of Natives living in the cities, such as Winnipeg, Regina, Edmonton, etc. That way, you get to see their drug use and alcoholism up close, thus diminishing their historical prestige in our eyes. I don’t think this dynamic really exists in the United States.

    In Eastern Canada – where there are less of them, more white admixture amongst the population and because they are largely confined to rural areas – Natives are treated more like sacred pets.

    • Replies: @jcd1974
    @Canadian Observer

    Very true.

    The people most sympathetic to Indians in Canada are the people with the least contact with Indians. While those who most dislike Indians usually have the misfortune of living near a reserve.

    Replies: @anon

    , @Servant of Gla'aki
    @Canadian Observer


    In Western Canada, you have the interesting dynamic of having a large underclass of Natives living in the cities, such as Winnipeg, Regina, Edmonton, etc. That way, you get to see their drug use and alcoholism up close, thus diminishing their historical prestige in our eyes. I don’t think this dynamic really exists in the United States.
     
    Probably the only thing like a real city in the USA where this phenomenon also exists, would be Rapid City, South Dakota.

    Replies: @Ray Huffman, @John Cunningham

    , @anon
    @Canadian Observer

    I don’t think this dynamic really exists in the United States.

    It exists, but since the US population is about 10x that of Canada it is not so visible. But there are US cities close enough to various Indian reservations such that the dynamic you describe is quite visible.

    , @Ganderson
    @Canadian Observer

    The Twin Cities has a substantial Indian population.

  44. Anon[356] • Disclaimer says:

    As far as I can tell, just as most Americans think woke is BS, but that never makes it into the major media, most Indians don’t care about Indian names for sports and college mascots and for products.

    What leads me to this conclustion is that there is usually a final-third mention in articles about Indian names where a token Indian is quoted as not caring. Also, in cases like the Land O Lakes Stalinist/Maoist “photoshopping” incident where the Indian disappeared from the package, you had the Indian descendant of the Indian graphic designer coming forward in the media complaining about the erasure of his grandfather’s work. This was a little embarassing to the narrative, but quickly was forgotten.

    So there is a squeaky wheel contingent of “good” Indians led around presumably by activist “white” members of another tribe making complaints and getting action.

    • Agree: bomag
  45. @Jtgw
    Of course the official reason for dropping the Indians name is out of respect for the Native Americans. I think your interpretation of this act as really an expression of boredom and impatience with Native concerns is interesting and possibly correct. It reminds me of your conspiracy theory that the plan to expand Section 8 housing to the suburbs, officially framed as a plan to help the marginalized, is just a plot to move incorrigible poor blacks off highly desirable real estate. How many more liberal and progressive causes are really fronts for something else? What is the real motivation behind World War T for instance?

    Replies: @bomag, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @J.Ross, @Robert Morgan

    I think your interpretation of this act as really an expression of boredom and impatience with Native concerns is interesting and possibly correct.

    It’s mostly self-righteous leftists, usually the ones who also have no life, who feel the need to tell other people that they are bad evil racists. Even among leftists, the only ones who really care about it are the serious assholes.

    The problem with giving in to them is that they will never stop complaining about something. There is no end goal in mind – at least not one they’re willing to publicly proclaim. They are just angry at society and always want to be changing some supposed wrong, and always need to be calling other people racists.

    • Replies: @Prester John
    @Wilkey

    Home run, Wilkey!!

    It never ceases to amaze how utterly ignorant and stupid the movers and shakers behind the Diversity Inclusion Equality racket really are. Is it a coincidence that the acronym is "DIE?"

  46. The narrative today is that America is rich not because it settled and developed a vast amount of land after fighting a multi-century low grade war with the original inhabitants of the continent, but by involuntary black labor up until the Civil War and then somehow looting the country’s poorest and least productive citizens to make everyone else orders of magnitude richer (not sure what kind of alchemy that is).

    Leaving HBD aside, the enthusiasm of progressives whites and blacks to inculcate the idea that the latter are The Biggest Losers and always will be guarantees black human capital will always be underdeveloped. A disproportionate share of the talented tenth is shunted into the diversity racket rather than actual productive work or business creation, and the valorization of black athletes and entertainers leads younger blacks to fantasize about making a living in realms in which the odds are vanishingly small rather than focusing on ordinary pursuits that could lead to a lower middle class stability.

    • Agree: Stick
    • Replies: @Stick
    @Arclight

    The Aristocrats always like very dependent and paranoid buffer people to defend their privilidge from the native Yoemen.

    , @Anonymous
    @Arclight

    How is the talented 1/10th doing in countries They control?

  47. I kinda see their point. To really honor someone, you put his name on some sort of dignified monument. A sports team — basically, fun and games — kinda trivializes the memory. Imagine Mohammad Atta’s home town named its local soccer team “FDNY”. I don’t think we’d like that.

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    @International Jew


    A sports team — basically, fun and games — kinda trivializes the memory.
     
    Not really. Vikings, Padres, 49ers, Celtics, Trailblazers, Cowboys, Patriots, Saints, etc. - these are all meant to honor the groups of people they are named for, not trivialize them.

    After the Indian names are gone the next names to go will be the ones that honor the “invaders” - any team name that honors people (all of them Northern European) who displaced the Indians. Bye bye, Trailblazers, 49ers, Cowboys, and Patriots. Christian names will probably go, as well - so no more Padres or Saints. It may be a while, but it will happen.

    Replies: @Joe Paluka, @International Jew

    , @Old Prude
    @International Jew

    Atta/FDNY.? That analogy has to be the product of a deeply strange mind. That’s out there, man.

  48. @Steve Sailer
    @bomag

    The Barona Creek golf course on an Indian reservation is one of the best courses in the San Diego area. It was built much more quickly than the typical California golf course because the Indians don't have to obey so many environmental regulations.

    Replies: @Wilkey

    In Utah, one Indian tribe once tried to turn their land – just 45 miles upwind of Salt Lake City – into a dumping site for all of the nation’s radioactive waste. The reservation in question is home to all of 31 people.

    Indian reservations in Utah can’t build casinos because Utah has no legalized form of gambling at all, so unless they’re fortunate enough to have large oil or mineral deposits, there aren’t many ways to make money off of it.

  49. @Whitehall
    Whites also began to appreciate American Indians when they joined up with the US Armed Forces.

    Sgt. York for one and my late brother in law who was a Marine sniper in Vietnam for another.

    Replies: @Rich, @ATate, @Richard B, @Jake, @Juvenalis

    Alvin York was of English and Scots-Irish heritage.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    @Rich

    'Alvin York was of English and Scots-Irish heritage.'

    But there's Ira Hayes. Maybe Whitehall got his war heroes mixed up.

  50. @Arclight
    The narrative today is that America is rich not because it settled and developed a vast amount of land after fighting a multi-century low grade war with the original inhabitants of the continent, but by involuntary black labor up until the Civil War and then somehow looting the country's poorest and least productive citizens to make everyone else orders of magnitude richer (not sure what kind of alchemy that is).

    Leaving HBD aside, the enthusiasm of progressives whites and blacks to inculcate the idea that the latter are The Biggest Losers and always will be guarantees black human capital will always be underdeveloped. A disproportionate share of the talented tenth is shunted into the diversity racket rather than actual productive work or business creation, and the valorization of black athletes and entertainers leads younger blacks to fantasize about making a living in realms in which the odds are vanishingly small rather than focusing on ordinary pursuits that could lead to a lower middle class stability.

    Replies: @Stick, @Anonymous

    The Aristocrats always like very dependent and paranoid buffer people to defend their privilidge from the native Yoemen.

  51. @Anonymous
    @Redneck farmer

    As indeed many freemen blacks did. The most famous one in Louisiana having 60 or so and repeatedly in trouble with the law for cruelty.

    " I know the mind of the African. "

    Replies: @ganderson

    “Negro cops are harder on their own”

    • Replies: @HammerJack
    @ganderson

    They're actually harder (more violent) with everyone, but the (Establishment) only takes note when their victims are their own kind.

  52. @Stick
    @HammerJack

    Indiana's capitol is Indianapolis. This is where the NCAA headquarters are located and their only mission is to destroy any college sports program that has an Indian mascot or team name. Bothering to check up on the athletes 'academic qualifications' to play seems the last thing they are concerned with. Being Woke is a great excuse for not doing your job.

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal, @Reg Cæsar

    Interesting tidbit.

    Indiana and Oklahoma mean about the same thing in different languages.

    Indianapolis and Oklahoma City mean about the same thing in different languages.

    I think Oklahoma means something like “land of the red man”

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @Paleo Liberal

    Gorsuch taking textualism to a new level.

  53. @Jtgw
    Of course the official reason for dropping the Indians name is out of respect for the Native Americans. I think your interpretation of this act as really an expression of boredom and impatience with Native concerns is interesting and possibly correct. It reminds me of your conspiracy theory that the plan to expand Section 8 housing to the suburbs, officially framed as a plan to help the marginalized, is just a plot to move incorrigible poor blacks off highly desirable real estate. How many more liberal and progressive causes are really fronts for something else? What is the real motivation behind World War T for instance?

    Replies: @bomag, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @J.Ross, @Robert Morgan

    How many more liberal and progressive causes are really fronts for something else?

    All of them. The left is comprised of (1) completely immoral shameless liars and (2) university-educated morons who have not yet figured this out.

    What is the real motivation behind World War T for instance?

    As predicted in Uncle Ted’s Parable of the Cabin Boy, it’s a distraction from the megacorps destroying the standard of living, originally a mechanism to assassinate the original Occupy Wall Street.

  54. @International Jew
    I kinda see their point. To really honor someone, you put his name on some sort of dignified monument. A sports team — basically, fun and games — kinda trivializes the memory. Imagine Mohammad Atta's home town named its local soccer team "FDNY". I don't think we'd like that.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Old Prude

    A sports team — basically, fun and games — kinda trivializes the memory.

    Not really. Vikings, Padres, 49ers, Celtics, Trailblazers, Cowboys, Patriots, Saints, etc. – these are all meant to honor the groups of people they are named for, not trivialize them.

    After the Indian names are gone the next names to go will be the ones that honor the “invaders” – any team name that honors people (all of them Northern European) who displaced the Indians. Bye bye, Trailblazers, 49ers, Cowboys, and Patriots. Christian names will probably go, as well – so no more Padres or Saints. It may be a while, but it will happen.

    • Agree: HammerJack
    • Replies: @Joe Paluka
    @Wilkey

    One good thing is coming out of it, the collapse of sports as a big business and people can hopefully become participants instead of 300 pound spectators.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    , @International Jew
    @Wilkey

    I agree with your second paragraph. It is just like the statue-destroying, where they started with Confederate generals but soon moved on to George Washington.

    I agree with your second paragraph too! But there's a critical distinction that needs to be made: Vikings and Cowboys weren't our victims.

    It comes down to a matter of hard feelings, of the sting of defeat. Americans haven't been in those shoes for a long time, if ever. So I have to ask you to use your imagination.

  55. The Cleveland baseball team should go back to an earlier name, the Cleveland Napoleons or Naps. They can have the emperor Napoleon dance every time the team hits a home run. Maybe Murat or Ney could join him.During the 7th inning stretch they can shoot a cannon at the crowd. The possibilities are endless.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @flyingtiger

    Or the Cleveland Bluebirds as they were before they obtained Napoleon Lajoie in 1903. The players objected to the name.

    Replies: @Jake

    , @syonredux
    @flyingtiger


    The Cleveland baseball team should go back to an earlier name, the Cleveland Napoleons or Naps.
     
    Just re-name all the teams with Amerind names, but make sure that the new names are European. For example, make the Braves the Knights, the Blackhawks the Caesars, the Indians the Spartans, etc. That way, both the Woke and the White Right will be happy. It'll be a win-win.

    Replies: @prosa123

  56. @Paleo Liberal
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    Back when this song came out, I used to ride in my parents’ car on numerous trips through eastern Oklahoma. We heard this song on the car radio quite frequently. Years afterwards the eastern OK radio stations had this song on the play list.

    Replies: @ganderson

    I like this one- I sent an email to Granny Warren’s campaign headquarters suggesting it as her “walk up” music. Oddly, I got no answer.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @ganderson

    Too Cherokist, perhaps, Mr. Ganderson? I'd have thought at least Fauxahontas' staffers would have brought this up to her and gotten back to you. Have you looked for a reply via smoke signals?

    Thanks for the old-timey tune.

  57. Never again will we see Jane Fonda doing the Braves’ tomahawk chop during the world series with the whole country watching. Who could have know those were the good old days?

    The Indians I know do not any of them give one shit regarding this “issue.”

  58. @william munny
    Before the Indians go off into the darkness, they may be able to hire some clever lawyers to litigate havoc on half the country. The McGirt v. Oklahoma case caused only a brief splash over the summer with headlines about giving away half the country before it was lost in the noise. That is an overstatement, but the tribes could cause deep disruptions. Historically, they can be bought off with increasingly large monetary settlements, but maybe some desperate and militant tribe members can use the decision and liberal guilt to secure jurisdiction over valuable property in blue states before it is too late.

    Replies: @bomag, @Mr. Anon

    Before the Indians go off into the darkness, they may be able to hire some clever lawyers to litigate havoc on half the country.

    Maybe they could demand reparations from recent immigrants and their enablers. Or demand to be given title to all that rural land that the super wealthy are reportedly buying up.

    https://www.axios.com/billionaires-ranches-american-west-farmers-land-ownership-d09ea827-ccde-4c17-afcd-994d7fd95322.html

  59. … when in reality whites, once they were free of the danger of being scalped by Indian raiders, quickly began to mythologize Indians as a worthy foe.

    Your grandpappy and sweet grandma engaging in fantasy just about killed us.

  60. @Bardon Kaldian
    That about dot Indians vs feather Indians may be over 50% of the erasure.

    But, mythologized Indians had a peculiar place in American mythology: they were the Noble Savage. Now, deification of blacks leaves everyone with untouchable savages without any nobility.

    Plus, feather Indians were/are "almost" whites, physically as they may vary. And while many of them don't give a hoot about white people, they despise blacks more than most whites.

    Finally, marriage patterns show they tend to intermarry with whites, so they are on the way to becoming whites.

    https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/01/29/us/20110130mixedrace.html?ref=us

    WM- white male
    WF- white female
    IM- Indian (feather) male
    IF- Indian (feather) female
    WHM- white Hispanic male
    WHF- white Hispanic female
    BM- black male
    BF- black female

    IM-WF: 45.5%
    IM-IF: 45.3%
    IM-WHF: 3.1%
    IM-BF: 0.9%

    IF-WM: 44.3%
    IF-IM: 43.4%
    IF-WHM: 3.0%
    IF-BM: 2.7%

    Replies: @Walsh2

    No longer dot/feather – now casino/call center.

    • LOL: Yawrate
  61. Indo>European

    Namaste

  62. @Paleo Liberal
    @Stick

    Interesting tidbit.

    Indiana and Oklahoma mean about the same thing in different languages.

    Indianapolis and Oklahoma City mean about the same thing in different languages.

    I think Oklahoma means something like “land of the red man”

    Replies: @Desiderius

    Gorsuch taking textualism to a new level.

  63. It is assumed that any white reference to Indians in the past must have been demeaning,

    I really don’t get the passive voice.

    It’s a small minority doing this. Are we afraid to name them? Too lazy?

    What is it?

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Desiderius

    It's the mainstream leftist view. No nuance. No historical awareness beyond that which a dim six year old could memorize. You know this.

    Replies: @Desiderius

  64. I believe you have Whites only motorcycle groups in America who allow redskins in as an exception.

    • Replies: @Pat Kittle
    @Gordo


    I believe you have Whites only motorcycle groups in America who allow redskins in as an exception.
     
    Whites only motorcycle groups in America also allow Indian motorcycles in as an exception.
    -- (https://www.indianmotorcycle.com/en-us/)
  65. Anonymous[524] • Disclaimer says:
    @mmack
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Fiat/Chrysler will have to rename two popular Jeep models:

    https://www.jeep.com/bmo.cherokee.2021.html#/models/2021/cherokee

    https://www.jeep.com/grand-cherokee.html

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Anonymous

    If we thought we were now entering the thermidor period of the Woke Revolution because Floyd/BLM scam had achieved its goal of ousting Bad Orange man in the White House, I guess we were wrong. The Woke Revolutionaries apparently won’t be happy until every last name is changed and every statue toppled.

    The VAST VAST majority of American Indians and non Indians alike don’t give a rats ass about baseball teams named the “Indians” or the “Redskins” or related nonsense like Aunt Jemima being on pancake boxes, but the cultural Marxist activists in the MSM knew that their relentless drumbeat about these contrived controversies would force capitulation at some point.
    The Fourth Estate embodied by the likes of CNN, the NY Times, NBC, Washington Post, et al now know that with their megaphones they can get whatever they want, including the cancelling of “offensive” corporate names and symbols because a handful of intellectuloids at Smith College or Columbia University, in their infinite wisdom, deemed them “hateful” and “offensive.”

  66. Anon[356] • Disclaimer says:

    OT

    Following some links from Jesse Singal’s Twitter account about recent uproars in the AI/ML field, I am starting to come to the conclusion that while everyone was distracted by blacks and Hispanics and their equity dust-ups, the below-the-radar infiltration of dot-Indians into American academia and high-tech business is going to end up being a much bigger problem. These people are crazy and vindictive, and like M2F trannies, they have the smarts to really cause damage to society using woke theory or whatever else suits their purposes.

    • Replies: @Joe Paluka
    @Anon

    The whole idea that this article was even written shows that Americans are obsessed with things that don't even matter. The names of sports teams! Nothing could be more nonsensical than sports or sports teams! It's silly entertainment, as important as the latest Kardashian butt implant. Millions of American men obsess over Tyrone's every verbal grunt and the colors of jerseys and logos. Hundreds of people are paid big bucks to discuss every aspect of every sports teams comings and goings and every doing. Millions of American men, who in the 1950's would've been reading Popular Mechanics or Popular Science and fixing, building or creating things are now challenged beyond their ability when asked to replace a light bulb or check their car's oil level. You ask them what Trayvon or Tyrone grunted last week, they'd be able to tell you immediately. No wonder the country's being taken over by dot Indians and Chinese.

    Replies: @JohnnyWalker123

    , @Servant of Gla'aki
    @Anon


    I am starting to come to the conclusion that while everyone was distracted by blacks and Hispanics and their equity dust-ups, the below-the-radar infiltration of dot-Indians into American academia and high-tech business is going to end up being a much bigger problem. These people are crazy and vindictive, and like M2F trannies, they have the smarts to really cause damage to society using woke theory or whatever else suits their purposes.
     
    That's an interesting perspective, but I wonder just how much race/ethnicity matters among the "woke". They all are required to have the precise same set of opinions...so what does it matter if Generic Intersectionalist Tyrant #3697 is a swarthy Hindoo, or a direct descendant of Increase Mather?

    I mean, if there were a White guy at the helm of Google, it's not like the Google Doodles would suddenly become MAGA-themed. "Woke" Whites are just as shitty as any other "woke" clone. They're all interchangeable cyphers, near as I can tell.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @Anonymous
    @Anon

    Unless you are in the corporate world you can't imagine how bad it is actually is. I live in the middle of nowhere and my town is now approximately 20% Indian because the Fortune 500 company that I work for is importing them as salaried employees by the thousands. A friend of mine told me that the local school district is approximately one-third Indian. This is one of the best school districts in the state.

    Replies: @Abolish_public_education

  67. About a year ago the Navajo tribe proposed buying the struggling Remington firearms company. It would have been an ideal match as the tribe would have been able to avoid or minimize much of the morass of federal licensing rules applicable to firearms manufacturers. It would have been an excellent cultural fit too, as like many other tribes the Navajo have very high gun ownership rates (hunting on reservations is far less restricted than elsewhere).
    Unfortunately, Covid-19 came along, and tribal members pointed out to their leadership that it would be a terrible idea to get involved in a major business transaction when their reservation was hit harder than almost anywhere else in the world. The deal fell through, and Remington ended up in the hands of some investment outfit that’s been vague about when or if it will resume production

    • Replies: @donut
    @Prosa123

    " (hunting on reservations is far less restricted than elsewhere)."

    A few years ago on my way back from Arizona I stopped at Fort Apache on the White Mountain Apache reservation . In the museum there was a map of the reservation and the White Mountain was marked as restricted to tribal members only . I asked the lady why and she told me that it was reserved for members of the tribe for hunting . It's a big chunk of the reservation BTW .

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal, @anon, @prosa123, @Muggles

  68. Anonymous[524] • Disclaimer says:
    @mmack
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Fiat/Chrysler will have to rename two popular Jeep models:

    https://www.jeep.com/bmo.cherokee.2021.html#/models/2021/cherokee

    https://www.jeep.com/grand-cherokee.html

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Anonymous

    Well I guess were going to have to now re-name Massachusetts, Utah, Alabama and Kansas as well!! This has gotten so out-of-hand I don’t even know where to begin.
    If most Americans still had brains and balls they would boycott these products, even just for a fixed period of time to send a message , because I realize that many of them really like products such as the “Jeep Grand Cherokee” “Gillette” razors and “Aunt Jemima” pancakes, so to swear off them permanently might be a sacrifice too far.

    I think most Americans could survive a month (or two) long boycott on buying things Gillette razors and Aunt Jemima pancakes and a year-long boycott on the new model caring whatever name they plan on using instead of Grand Cherokee. But Americans are so brain dead/brain washed, apathetic, and clueless that even a small temporary sacrifice might be too much.

    • Replies: @Prosa123
    @Anonymous

    What in the world is un-PC about Gillette razors? The name is from the company's founder King Gillette and is French Huguenot

    Replies: @Bill Jones

  69. When dey come for Monk Boudreaux and the Golden Eagles?

    Madi Cu Defayo!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISkiCzYF_tI&feature=youtu.be

    • Replies: @Federalist
    @rebunga


    Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved...
     

    Monk Boudreaux and the Golden Eagles
     
    We won't bow down.
  70. @flyingtiger
    The Cleveland baseball team should go back to an earlier name, the Cleveland Napoleons or Naps. They can have the emperor Napoleon dance every time the team hits a home run. Maybe Murat or Ney could join him.During the 7th inning stretch they can shoot a cannon at the crowd. The possibilities are endless.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @syonredux

    Or the Cleveland Bluebirds as they were before they obtained Napoleon Lajoie in 1903. The players objected to the name.

    • Replies: @Jake
    @Steve Sailer

    They should become the Cleveland Numinous Negroes.

  71. @Anonymous
    @mmack

    Well I guess were going to have to now re-name Massachusetts, Utah, Alabama and Kansas as well!! This has gotten so out-of-hand I don't even know where to begin.
    If most Americans still had brains and balls they would boycott these products, even just for a fixed period of time to send a message , because I realize that many of them really like products such as the "Jeep Grand Cherokee" "Gillette" razors and "Aunt Jemima" pancakes, so to swear off them permanently might be a sacrifice too far.

    I think most Americans could survive a month (or two) long boycott on buying things Gillette razors and Aunt Jemima pancakes and a year-long boycott on the new model caring whatever name they plan on using instead of Grand Cherokee. But Americans are so brain dead/brain washed, apathetic, and clueless that even a small temporary sacrifice might be too much.

    Replies: @Prosa123

    What in the world is un-PC about Gillette razors? The name is from the company’s founder King Gillette and is French Huguenot

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    @Prosa123

    Gillette arose in Anon's discussion about Boycotts. Gillette was widely boycotted a couple of years ago because some dipshit in their marketing department thought that the way to sell razors to White men was by preaching about toxic masculinity.

    That turns out not to be the case. I for one will not buy from them again.

    Replies: @MBlanc46

  72. anonymous[192] • Disclaimer says:

    There also isn’t much interest in the Wounded Knee massacre in 1890 when the Army killed 200 women and children. When Trump made his speech at Mount Rushmore during the summer, I never heard the media refer to the masscare even though the mass grave is less than 100 miles from Mount Rushmore.

  73. @Prosa123
    About a year ago the Navajo tribe proposed buying the struggling Remington firearms company. It would have been an ideal match as the tribe would have been able to avoid or minimize much of the morass of federal licensing rules applicable to firearms manufacturers. It would have been an excellent cultural fit too, as like many other tribes the Navajo have very high gun ownership rates (hunting on reservations is far less restricted than elsewhere).
    Unfortunately, Covid-19 came along, and tribal members pointed out to their leadership that it would be a terrible idea to get involved in a major business transaction when their reservation was hit harder than almost anywhere else in the world. The deal fell through, and Remington ended up in the hands of some investment outfit that's been vague about when or if it will resume production

    Replies: @donut

    ” (hunting on reservations is far less restricted than elsewhere).”

    A few years ago on my way back from Arizona I stopped at Fort Apache on the White Mountain Apache reservation . In the museum there was a map of the reservation and the White Mountain was marked as restricted to tribal members only . I asked the lady why and she told me that it was reserved for members of the tribe for hunting . It’s a big chunk of the reservation BTW .

    • Replies: @Paleo Liberal
    @donut

    I used to teach in a college in the NW that was close to an Indian reservation. Some of my students came from the Rez (all were mixed race). Some of my white students lived close to the Rez. One of my white students told me he wandered into the Rez during hunting season, and there were Indians patrolling the area to keep non-tribal members out of the Rez.

    Replies: @S. Anonyia

    , @anon
    @donut

    The White Mountain and San Carlos nation allow hunting and fishing for a fee. The White Mountains have multiple trout lakes. Deer, bear, elk and javelina are all legit game animals on that res. Part of the income for the nation, and a supply of jobs for tribal members, comes from hunting and fishing. Probably they developed this before the casino bill passed Congress.

    https://wmatoutdoor.org/

    Of course that's past tense, because the Coof showed up. Mostly everything is closed or otherwise messed up due to SARS-2. Apparently the nation has shut itself off from the world as much as possible - closed casinos, blocked a lot of roads, put up checkpoints on others.

    In time fishing and hunting will re-open on that res and others, for those who follow the rules. Trying to poach on Indian land...probably not a good idea.

    Replies: @stillCARealist, @Buffalo Joe

    , @prosa123
    @donut

    Many reservations sell hunting permits to non-members. In most cases a tribal guide is required, and especially for game such as moose and elk the cost is well into the four figures. Though that's not as bad as Alaska, where a week-long moose hunt can cost as much as a new car. Fun fact: even with the much higher transportation costs hunters who otherwise might have hunted in the Rocky Mountains or Alaska can find it cheaper to go to Africa, with the bonus of the world's greatest array of wildlife.

    , @Muggles
    @donut

    Yes, you can drive through a paved highway in the back of that big Apache reservation near White Mountain and see huge elk in the road.

    My sister who lives near there says they sell permits to outsiders for upwards of $15,000. Yes you need a guide, etc. But the place is teeming with elk. We nearly hit a giant one just driving at night down that road. Impressive.

    Indians aren't stupid. Also, they need a state hunting license (and game permit, when required) when hunting off rez lands.

    Even now, you don't mess with the Apaches. Other Indians know this too.

  74. @rebunga
    When dey come for Monk Boudreaux and the Golden Eagles?

    Madi Cu Defayo!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISkiCzYF_tI&feature=youtu.be

    Replies: @Federalist

    Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved…

    Monk Boudreaux and the Golden Eagles

    We won’t bow down.

  75. @Redneck farmer
    Also, Indians (feather) owned slaves, including BLACK ones.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @syonredux, @RegretLeft

    Also, Indians (feather) owned slaves, including BLACK ones.

    Yup. That’s something that Don Cheadle learned when he appeared on FINDING YOUR ROOTS:

  76. @Steve Sailer
    @BCB232

    Here's T.B. Macaulay's wonderful chapter on changing English attitudes toward Scottish Highlanders:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/diversity-before-diversity-thomas/

    Replies: @BCB232

    @ Steve, I have to admit, I really like oatmeal (horse food to an Englishman).

  77. @flyingtiger
    The Cleveland baseball team should go back to an earlier name, the Cleveland Napoleons or Naps. They can have the emperor Napoleon dance every time the team hits a home run. Maybe Murat or Ney could join him.During the 7th inning stretch they can shoot a cannon at the crowd. The possibilities are endless.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @syonredux

    The Cleveland baseball team should go back to an earlier name, the Cleveland Napoleons or Naps.

    Just re-name all the teams with Amerind names, but make sure that the new names are European. For example, make the Braves the Knights, the Blackhawks the Caesars, the Indians the Spartans, etc. That way, both the Woke and the White Right will be happy. It’ll be a win-win.

    • Replies: @prosa123
    @syonredux

    Just re-name all the teams with Amerind names, but make sure that the new names are European. For example, make the Braves the Knights, the Blackhawks the Caesars, the Indians the Spartans, etc.

    Spartans might be a troublesome name, as the orginal Spartans enjoyed Doing the Dirty Deed with young boys.

    Replies: @syonredux, @Farenheit

  78. I’m too distracted by the erasure of the people who invented the modern world, to notice..

  79. Of course, one of the biggest losers of mass migration to the US will be American Indians. If America belongs to the World, as the open border crowd claims, then any claim American Indians might have as the first human group in what is today the US is essentially nill.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Andy

    Indians exist because of white empathy. The time is coming when they will be confronted by, and completely in the hands of, people like Xi Jinping. The ones who can grovel or occupy a cubicle will do well enough and the ones who make trouble will no longer get a pardon from their ancestry.

    Replies: @Andy

    , @Corn
    @Andy


    If America belongs to the World, as the open border crowd claims
     
    I love that liberal legal logic.

    “America is stolen land, therefore it belongs to everyone.”

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @martin_2

  80. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    ...once they were free of the danger of being scalped by Indian raiders, quickly began to mythologize Indians as a worthy foe.
     
    Indeed



    https://wallpapercave.com/wp/wp1938147.jpg

    Apache

    https://crewdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Sikorsky-UH-60-Black-Hawk-2.jpeg

    Black Hawk

    https://www.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/uploads/2017/05/ch-47f.jpg

    Chinook


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ee/UH1_Huey_-_Fly_Navy_2017_(cropped).jpg/1200px-UH1_Huey_-_Fly_Navy_2017_(cropped).jpg

    Iroquois

    https://www.armyupress.army.mil/portals/7/nco-journal/images/Kiowa-5.jpg

    Kiowa

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @mmack, @Federalist, @J1234


    The crossed arrows of the branch insignia of US Army Special Forces come from the insignia worn by the Army’s Indian scouts.

    The arrowhead of the patch signifies the skills of the American Indian in which Special Forces soldiers are trained.

  81. @Whitehall
    Whites also began to appreciate American Indians when they joined up with the US Armed Forces.

    Sgt. York for one and my late brother in law who was a Marine sniper in Vietnam for another.

    Replies: @Rich, @ATate, @Richard B, @Jake, @Juvenalis

    When I was in the Marines I was part of a detail that did a 9/11 dedication at Willamette National Cemetery. After we completed the dedication we had to head back to the van. We got out of there pretty quick. There were 4 NA Marine veterans (Vietnam Vets) that followed almost at a jog, we didn’t know they were coming up behind us but they thanked us for the dedication and talked for a bit. Cool as fuck. Warriors.

    • Replies: @Paleo Liberal
    @ATate

    My son used to volunteer at a lot of pow wows. If you want to see what respect for veterans looks like, go to a pow wow. There are certain duties that can only be done by veterans, and sometimes dances for veterans only. Those dances are, of course, to honor the veterans.

    Replies: @Bill Jones

  82. @donut
    @Prosa123

    " (hunting on reservations is far less restricted than elsewhere)."

    A few years ago on my way back from Arizona I stopped at Fort Apache on the White Mountain Apache reservation . In the museum there was a map of the reservation and the White Mountain was marked as restricted to tribal members only . I asked the lady why and she told me that it was reserved for members of the tribe for hunting . It's a big chunk of the reservation BTW .

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal, @anon, @prosa123, @Muggles

    I used to teach in a college in the NW that was close to an Indian reservation. Some of my students came from the Rez (all were mixed race). Some of my white students lived close to the Rez. One of my white students told me he wandered into the Rez during hunting season, and there were Indians patrolling the area to keep non-tribal members out of the Rez.

    • Replies: @S. Anonyia
    @Paleo Liberal

    There is a reservation around here, though it is quite different than the ones out West. They are wealthy, and despite their claims of all having 1/4 blood quantum, they are so mixed race that they are ironically a tad blonder than the local whites.

    Replies: @Anonymous

  83. unless we find out this was due to some financial pressure campaign like the Redskins situation, i guess i’m wrong about billion dollar sports teams not voluntarily destroying their lucrative brands due to cultural marxist hysteria. i still don’t see universities ever doing this though.

    but note how the Washington Football Team was afraid to pick a new name – they realize anything they pick now, could already be unacceptable in only a few years.

  84. I am a mostly white enrolled member of an Indian nation.
    I can tell you:

    1. Opinions vary widely among Indians.
    2. It is considered culturally extremely offensive to speak for an Indian without express permission.

    I have run across Indians who were Redskins fans. Others hate all the mascot names.

    These are my opinions only. I do not speak for any other Indian.

    What I would like to see happen.

    Redskins: get rid of the name. It is a racial slur.

    Cleveland Indians: keep the name, get rid of Chief Wahoo. Devote team resources to promoting Indian culture. For example, the Packers are near a Rez and sometimes have Indians performing at halftime. The Tribe should do something similar perhaps in the 7th inning stretch.

    Atlanta Braves: keep the name. Get rid of the Tomahawk Chop. Invest in Indian culture.

    KC Chiefs: I would like to see them get to the Super Bowl and lose with time expiring from a Hail Mary pass by Aaron Rodgers. Hey, I’m a Packers fan. What can I say?

    • Thanks: Dissident
    • Replies: @pirelli
    @Paleo Liberal

    Thanks. Absent from Steve’s lamentation of the erasure of American Indians is any reference to what actual American Indians think about the topic. My impression was, just as you said, that opinions were somewhat divided, but on the whole favored getting rid of “Redskins” and mascots that amount to mocking caricatures.

  85. @Diversity Heretic
    How long until the Boy Scouts eliminate "The Order of the Arrow," as their elite designation? Or have they already?

    Will the Army stop naming helicopters after Indian tribes?

    Replies: @tyrone, @Joe Paluka, @Farenheit, @Paul Jolliffe, @Dissident

    I think too many boys received the “order of the arrow” from their scoutmasters so they just want to forget about their time there.

    • Replies: @additionalMike
    @Joe Paluka

    Mr. Paluka, do you have some facts to back that charge up or are you just pulling that out of your ass?

    Replies: @Joe Paluka

  86. Illinois is derived from an Indian name.

    Illinois was named after the Illinois River, which was named by French explorer René-Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle in an attempt to map the region’s many rivers and waterways.

    Illinois isn’t the version of the name; rather, it is the French pronunciation of the original word. The word Illinois is derived from the Native American word “iliniwok” or “illiniwek,” which literally means “best people”; it was used to refer to the 10 to 12 tribes found around the river. The entire state is named Best People, and that’s something of which to be proud! Illinois is full of the very best people in the Midwest.

    https://theculturetrip.com/north-america/usa/illinois/articles/this-is-how-illinois-got-its-name/

    I think we should rename it to Moron Land, because we are too stupid to vote for anyone by communist cosmopolitans.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Joe Stalin


    I think we should rename it to Moron Land, because we are too stupid to vote for anyone by communist cosmopolitans.
     
    Illinois is the only flagship university in the (traditional) Big Ten not named for its state's Civil War soldiers' nickname. Buckeye, Wolverine, Hoosier, Badger, Hawkeye, Gopher...

    Go, Suckers!


    https://www2.illinois.gov/dnr/education/Pages/WAFSucker.aspx

    "Curiously it has nothing to do with our penchant to elect governors who find their way to prison."

    https://chicagoist.com/2012/09/27/illinois_the_sucker_state.php

    https://assets.chicagoist.com/attachments/chicagoist_chuck/2012_9_26_suckerstate_map.jpg

    , @Paleo Liberal
    @Joe Stalin

    U of Illinois has permission from the Illini Nation to use that nickname.

    Similarly, the Florida Seminole Nation gave their permission to Florida State. The Oklahoma Seminole Nation did not, gets nothing from FSU and therefore objects to the team name.

    , @John Up North
    @Joe Stalin

    Spot on.

  87. @photondancer
    "Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved"

    I've read that Australian aborigines don't like to be reminded that across the water in New Zealand the Maori similarly fought the British for 200 years, while the far more numerous Aborigines were quickly routed. I've not observed any hail-fellow-PoC feelings between Maori and Aborigine so there may be something to it.

    Replies: @Hannah Katz, @Old Prude, @syonredux, @Corn, @sb, @Perspective

    The Incas and Aztecs got rolled up pretty quick. Plains Indians were a lot more obstreperous. It’s a real shame busy bodies have been running around saying we are hurting their feelings with the Tomahawk Chop.

    • Replies: @Hapalong Cassidy
    @Old Prude

    What happened to the Incas should elicit embarrassment from their ancestors. Pizarro conquered their mighty empire with less than 300 troops.

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @Old Prude

    In the big picture, the Indians in what's now the US were treated a lot better by the American settlers than were the Incas and Aztecs by the Spaniards. Maybe it was the gold and silver that the latter tribes had and the Spanish had the lust for. I can't for sure say it would have been any different if the Indians in the future N. American colonies had had gold and the English had come upon it.

    I'll tell you what, if you're gonna use gold and silver as furnishings and trappings for the Sun God's palace, like a bunch of clueless gay interior decorators, then you don't deserve the stuff anyway. A tribe of fools and their (REAL) money are soon parted, they say ... en Espanol.

    On the smaller scale, dealings with Indians were sometimes friendly but often pretty brutal in our neck of the woods. Due to the settlers of America being more hard-working, smarter, and more organized, we ended up with a rout here long-term, while down south it was more of an assimilation both ways.

    PS: Regarding the Plains Indians, I agree. I will recommend Empire of the Summer Moon too, along with Buffalo Joe.

    Replies: @Anonymous

  88. Some time back, I read the abridged Journal of Lewis and Clark as they trekked across the northern plains headed to the Pacific.

    Their recurring theme of the Indians they encountered were of half starved beggars, who would steal anything they could from the expedition. It wasn’t until they got to the Pacific Northwest that they finally came across Indians that had enough food, salmon principally. They were not impressed.

    On a side note, Captain Lewis brought his slave “York” on the trip, so he needs to be cancelled, his body exhumed, burned, and his ashes scattered!!

  89. @Diversity Heretic
    How long until the Boy Scouts eliminate "The Order of the Arrow," as their elite designation? Or have they already?

    Will the Army stop naming helicopters after Indian tribes?

    Replies: @tyrone, @Joe Paluka, @Farenheit, @Paul Jolliffe, @Dissident

    Some time back, I read the abridged Journal of Lewis and Clark as they trekked across the northern plains headed to the Pacific.

    Their recurring theme of the Indians they encountered were of half starved beggars, who would steal anything they could from the expedition. It wasn’t until they got to the Pacific Northwest that they finally came across Indians that had enough food, salmon principally. They were not impressed.

    On a side note, Captain Lewis brought his slave “York” on the trip, so he needs to be cancelled, his body exhumed, burned, and his ashes scattered!!

  90. How long until the Boy Scouts eliminate “The Order of the Arrow,” as their elite designation? Or have they already?

    Don’t forget Cub Scouts, who upon graduation receive their “Arrow of Light”.

  91. American Indians are sooooo yesterday.

    Currently the coolest kids are probably Transgenders and b/c of Kamala Harris, SE Asians.

    Haha, even Central and South American Indian immigrants are worshiped more today in the USA than North American Indian Citizens.

    Sad, really. I liked much about Native Americans, and was happy to honor them with coins, place names, sports teams, etc.

  92. @International Jew
    I kinda see their point. To really honor someone, you put his name on some sort of dignified monument. A sports team — basically, fun and games — kinda trivializes the memory. Imagine Mohammad Atta's home town named its local soccer team "FDNY". I don't think we'd like that.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Old Prude

    Atta/FDNY.? That analogy has to be the product of a deeply strange mind. That’s out there, man.

  93. @Anon
    OT

    Following some links from Jesse Singal's Twitter account about recent uproars in the AI/ML field, I am starting to come to the conclusion that while everyone was distracted by blacks and Hispanics and their equity dust-ups, the below-the-radar infiltration of dot-Indians into American academia and high-tech business is going to end up being a much bigger problem. These people are crazy and vindictive, and like M2F trannies, they have the smarts to really cause damage to society using woke theory or whatever else suits their purposes.

    Replies: @Joe Paluka, @Servant of Gla'aki, @Anonymous

    The whole idea that this article was even written shows that Americans are obsessed with things that don’t even matter. The names of sports teams! Nothing could be more nonsensical than sports or sports teams! It’s silly entertainment, as important as the latest Kardashian butt implant. Millions of American men obsess over Tyrone’s every verbal grunt and the colors of jerseys and logos. Hundreds of people are paid big bucks to discuss every aspect of every sports teams comings and goings and every doing. Millions of American men, who in the 1950’s would’ve been reading Popular Mechanics or Popular Science and fixing, building or creating things are now challenged beyond their ability when asked to replace a light bulb or check their car’s oil level. You ask them what Trayvon or Tyrone grunted last week, they’d be able to tell you immediately. No wonder the country’s being taken over by dot Indians and Chinese.

    • Troll: ScarletNumber
    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
    @Joe Paluka

    So true.

  94. @Wilkey
    @International Jew


    A sports team — basically, fun and games — kinda trivializes the memory.
     
    Not really. Vikings, Padres, 49ers, Celtics, Trailblazers, Cowboys, Patriots, Saints, etc. - these are all meant to honor the groups of people they are named for, not trivialize them.

    After the Indian names are gone the next names to go will be the ones that honor the “invaders” - any team name that honors people (all of them Northern European) who displaced the Indians. Bye bye, Trailblazers, 49ers, Cowboys, and Patriots. Christian names will probably go, as well - so no more Padres or Saints. It may be a while, but it will happen.

    Replies: @Joe Paluka, @International Jew

    One good thing is coming out of it, the collapse of sports as a big business and people can hopefully become participants instead of 300 pound spectators.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Joe Paluka


    One good thing is coming out of it, the collapse of sports as a big business and people can hopefully become participants instead of 300 pound spectators.
     
    We can dream ... but don't hold your breath.

    The NFL went all in knee-bending anti-white b.s. and i know Trump voting--not just voting but MAGA fan--white guys who still watch that crap.

    Hey, entertainment, whatever. But seriously buying your entertainment from people who are pissing on you ... but come to think of it, that's Hollyweird for the past 60 years.
  95. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ0gobSHgIs

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal, @Reg Cæsar, @Charon

    Written by John D Loudermilk, who claimed he was held hostage on a reservation until he wrote a song about them. He was a notorious tale-teller, so take that with a grain of red Georgia dirt. Which Jemima tells me can be quite tasty.

  96. anon[270] • Disclaimer says:
    @donut
    @Prosa123

    " (hunting on reservations is far less restricted than elsewhere)."

    A few years ago on my way back from Arizona I stopped at Fort Apache on the White Mountain Apache reservation . In the museum there was a map of the reservation and the White Mountain was marked as restricted to tribal members only . I asked the lady why and she told me that it was reserved for members of the tribe for hunting . It's a big chunk of the reservation BTW .

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal, @anon, @prosa123, @Muggles

    The White Mountain and San Carlos nation allow hunting and fishing for a fee. The White Mountains have multiple trout lakes. Deer, bear, elk and javelina are all legit game animals on that res. Part of the income for the nation, and a supply of jobs for tribal members, comes from hunting and fishing. Probably they developed this before the casino bill passed Congress.

    https://wmatoutdoor.org/

    Of course that’s past tense, because the Coof showed up. Mostly everything is closed or otherwise messed up due to SARS-2. Apparently the nation has shut itself off from the world as much as possible – closed casinos, blocked a lot of roads, put up checkpoints on others.

    In time fishing and hunting will re-open on that res and others, for those who follow the rules. Trying to poach on Indian land…probably not a good idea.

    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    @anon

    Why would anybody hunt javelina? If you shot one, would you just run as fast as possible the other direction? Those things are foul and live mostly on the garbage of suburbia. Gross.

    , @Buffalo Joe
    @anon

    TwoSevenZero, years ago I asked an Indian aquaintance if he was taking off work for the opening day of deer season. He laughed and said, "Everyday is open season on the res."

  97. @Joe Stalin
    Illinois is derived from an Indian name.

    Illinois was named after the Illinois River, which was named by French explorer René-Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle in an attempt to map the region’s many rivers and waterways.

    Illinois isn’t the version of the name; rather, it is the French pronunciation of the original word. The word Illinois is derived from the Native American word “iliniwok” or “illiniwek,” which literally means “best people”; it was used to refer to the 10 to 12 tribes found around the river. The entire state is named Best People, and that’s something of which to be proud! Illinois is full of the very best people in the Midwest.

    https://theculturetrip.com/north-america/usa/illinois/articles/this-is-how-illinois-got-its-name/
     
    I think we should rename it to Moron Land, because we are too stupid to vote for anyone by communist cosmopolitans.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Paleo Liberal, @John Up North

    I think we should rename it to Moron Land, because we are too stupid to vote for anyone by communist cosmopolitans.

    Illinois is the only flagship university in the (traditional) Big Ten not named for its state’s Civil War soldiers’ nickname. Buckeye, Wolverine, Hoosier, Badger, Hawkeye, Gopher…

    Go, Suckers!

    https://www2.illinois.gov/dnr/education/Pages/WAFSucker.aspx

    “Curiously it has nothing to do with our penchant to elect governors who find their way to prison.”

    https://chicagoist.com/2012/09/27/illinois_the_sucker_state.php

  98. @Another Canadian
    https://www.usacoinbook.com/us-coins/1908-s-indian-head-cent.jpg
    Back before America started deifying presidents.

    Replies: @Eustace Tilley (not), @HammerJack

    A Centennial deification
    Of 1909 fabrication
    Of as crafty a god
    As e’er rose from the sod
    Of what had once been a free nation.

  99. @Arclight
    The narrative today is that America is rich not because it settled and developed a vast amount of land after fighting a multi-century low grade war with the original inhabitants of the continent, but by involuntary black labor up until the Civil War and then somehow looting the country's poorest and least productive citizens to make everyone else orders of magnitude richer (not sure what kind of alchemy that is).

    Leaving HBD aside, the enthusiasm of progressives whites and blacks to inculcate the idea that the latter are The Biggest Losers and always will be guarantees black human capital will always be underdeveloped. A disproportionate share of the talented tenth is shunted into the diversity racket rather than actual productive work or business creation, and the valorization of black athletes and entertainers leads younger blacks to fantasize about making a living in realms in which the odds are vanishingly small rather than focusing on ordinary pursuits that could lead to a lower middle class stability.

    Replies: @Stick, @Anonymous

    How is the talented 1/10th doing in countries They control?

  100. @Altai
    It's just another manifestation of anti-Nativism and abssimilation. However much their ancestors were more directly responsible for the ethnic cleansing, annihilation of most Native American peoples, the old stock still had by the 1920s a deep connection to the land and Native Americans were a part of that, they had become ethnic 'Americans'. However much their first ancestors to step on North American soil would have been horrified of having Native American ancestry, by 1920 their descendants found it exciting to have a little, it became a part of their old stock WASP/Dutch identity in opposition to the great wave immigrants. (Somebody should check Liz Warren's implicit antisemitic obsession with having just a little Native American ancestry!)

    From the great wave onward you have people with an 'immigrant' identity who define their identity in opposition to the native one (Since the 'American' people is already defined, you get the hyphenated identity) and get twitchy (To varying degrees for different ethnicities in 1920 and 2020) when people talk about Native Americans, the Mayflower etc. They want America to just be a place that nobody 'owns' for them and anybody else to exploit without any responsibility.

    And, to be fair, a lot of it, but not all, is the retrospective granting of some dignity, many of those mascots and chants aren't made with much genuine respect for the peoples.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    It’s just another manifestation of anti-Nativism and abssimilation.

    Bingo! Spot on Altai.

    American Indians are non-people now because they/their story is a rebuke to Jewish minoritarianism/”nation of immigrants”ism.

    — “Natives” who are a minority?

    — “Natives ” who are oppressed … “it does not compute, it does not compute!”

    — Conquest and settlement not “immigration” is the American story.
    Bring up Indians, brings up their conquest. My old-stock ancestors were not “immigrants”, they were conquerors, pioneers and settlers. They came, battled the existing people, beat them, took territory and built something great. It’s not pretty, but it’s a constant human norm. And it’s what we had through the 19th century.

    (“Immigration”, in contrast, is not the human norm. It’s undesirable to let random people plop themselves down on your turf. And it’s rare but for these middle-man minority types like Jews, Gypsies, overseas Chinese. No one loves it when they show up. And they are never good for any nation’s long term development and survival.)

    — Maybe immigration isn’t good for the natives?
    But if you can’t figure out the above and still think “nation of immigrants” … think about the Indians story for a few seconds and a light may come on. “Hey maybe immigration doesn’t work out so well for the natives!”

    The Indians entire story, their “oppressed minority” moral claim, is a flat out rebuke to immigrationism. So they had to be un-personed and erased.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @AnotherDad

    That's the best explanation I've read yet.

    , @Anonymous
    @AnotherDad


    They came, battled the existing people, beat them, took territory and built something great.
     
    This mischaracterizes what happened. They arrived to the new land without malice toward any of the people they encountered. But they responded in kind when attacked or threatened.

    Relations between the settlers and the Indians were mostly peaceful in fact.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    , @Anon99
    @AnotherDad

    Oh please. The US was built by immigrants. When Europeans did it, it was a “human norm” but not when other groups do it. The US was the most prosperous nation so of course it attracted the most immigrants. When other nations catch up, don’t worry they will gladly stay away and save themselves from the scorn you heap on them. See, South Korea and Japan.

    https://www.infoplease.com/us/society-culture/race/immigrants-us-country-origin

    Replies: @Rosie, @AnotherDad

  101. @ATate
    @Whitehall

    When I was in the Marines I was part of a detail that did a 9/11 dedication at Willamette National Cemetery. After we completed the dedication we had to head back to the van. We got out of there pretty quick. There were 4 NA Marine veterans (Vietnam Vets) that followed almost at a jog, we didn't know they were coming up behind us but they thanked us for the dedication and talked for a bit. Cool as fuck. Warriors.

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal

    My son used to volunteer at a lot of pow wows. If you want to see what respect for veterans looks like, go to a pow wow. There are certain duties that can only be done by veterans, and sometimes dances for veterans only. Those dances are, of course, to honor the veterans.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    @Paleo Liberal

    The difference is that their veterans were defending their own peoples land rather than attacking and stealing other peoples lands.

  102. It is interesting that US sports teams all the way from the professional level down to the school level seem to have mandatory nicknames that often refer to animals such as bulldogs or wildcats, and occasionally to more feral types of humans, presumably because these species are valued for their fighting abilities.

    British professional soccer clubs started out in the late 19th century and never seemed to have adopted these names.

    Some, like Norwich City, are known as the Canaries, presumably because they play in yellow shirts. An interesting name is Plymouth Argyle, whose name comes, I think from the argyle pattern shirts they wear. Tottenham Hotspur is a famed name, but fans often call themselves the yids.

    Arsenal are named for proximity to the Woolwich Arsenal, but often abbreviated to The Arse.

    There are a few animal names around, for example Hull City have the nickname of the Tigers, or Derby County the Rams, but in general the ferocious sounding nicknames have never caught on.

    However for the most part clubs are just called United, betraying origins as a merger of one or more teams, or City or Town, or County, or sometimes Rovers.

    The spread of wild animal nicknames in the United States must have been very rapid, because it seems to be so universal.

    • Replies: @R.G. Camara
    @Jonathan Mason

    I think the Brits take pride in the fact that they never adopted mascots for their soccer teams. A few I've talked to say its an American thing.

    American mascotsism is an interesting phenomenon, and works with American consumerism. Teams can sell a lot of a merch to non-fans if the mascot is "cool" or "cute", i.e. when the old expansion Charlotte Hornets of the NBA first came out, their "cool" (for the time) team colors and their hornet basketball symbol was a big seller even to kids outside of Charlotte who never cheered for them.

    Interesting that older sports teams don't really have a mascot image even if they do have a name, e.g. the New York Yankees or Brooklyn Dodgers don't have any "Yankee" or "Dodger" mascot to sell to fans. Ditto with teams like the Montreal Canadians, Pittsburgh Steelers, New York Rangers, Boston Red Sox, LA Lakers, Cleveland Browns, etc.

    Mascot imagery seems to come from the 1960s and 1970s. I think that's when the Milwaukee Brewers added that guy who slides down when they hit a homerun and when the Vikings' helmets got their Viking mascot on the sidelines. Might be a Bill Veeck/Charlie Finley innovation that spread to other teams.

    Probably the American obsession with giving their teams mascots/names goes along with the rural American obsession with college football. It doesn't really make sense to an outsider, but when you're from here it just seems natural.

    , @RSDB
    @Jonathan Mason


    It is interesting that US sports teams … have … nicknames that ... refer to ... more feral types of humans

     

    The Washington Senators being a prime example.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

  103. @ganderson
    @Paleo Liberal

    I like this one- I sent an email to Granny Warren's campaign headquarters suggesting it as her "walk up" music. Oddly, I got no answer.

    https://youtu.be/0LByr0Qf4x8

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    Too Cherokist, perhaps, Mr. Ganderson? I’d have thought at least Fauxahontas’ staffers would have brought this up to her and gotten back to you. Have you looked for a reply via smoke signals?

    Thanks for the old-timey tune.

  104. Also, most Native American Indians aren’t far-left in their beliefs or voting, and don’t congregate in large numbers in big cities, where they could be assimilated. Instead, secure on their reservations, and now flush with cash from casinos, they tend to be patriotic.

    Heck, the big name Native Lefties all turn out to be either fraudsters who aren’t Native American (Ward Churchill, Elizabeth Warren) or else one-off crazies no one listens to (the guy who sicced himself on the Covington kids).

    Makes you wonder if a “reparation” system like this for blacks might work—clear out some lands in the South or Midwest or far West that have been emptied out, grant it to them in a reservation-type system where they get autonomy on many issues. Maybe they’d become a lot less trouble and a lot more patriotic and less left wing.

    Of course, I’d just send them back to Africa myself, so….

  105. Still popular with the sound currency crowd.

  106. @Joe Stalin
    Illinois is derived from an Indian name.

    Illinois was named after the Illinois River, which was named by French explorer René-Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle in an attempt to map the region’s many rivers and waterways.

    Illinois isn’t the version of the name; rather, it is the French pronunciation of the original word. The word Illinois is derived from the Native American word “iliniwok” or “illiniwek,” which literally means “best people”; it was used to refer to the 10 to 12 tribes found around the river. The entire state is named Best People, and that’s something of which to be proud! Illinois is full of the very best people in the Midwest.

    https://theculturetrip.com/north-america/usa/illinois/articles/this-is-how-illinois-got-its-name/
     
    I think we should rename it to Moron Land, because we are too stupid to vote for anyone by communist cosmopolitans.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Paleo Liberal, @John Up North

    U of Illinois has permission from the Illini Nation to use that nickname.

    Similarly, the Florida Seminole Nation gave their permission to Florida State. The Oklahoma Seminole Nation did not, gets nothing from FSU and therefore objects to the team name.

  107. @AnotherDad
    @Altai


    It’s just another manifestation of anti-Nativism and abssimilation.
     
    Bingo! Spot on Altai.

    American Indians are non-people now because they/their story is a rebuke to Jewish minoritarianism/"nation of immigrants"ism.

    -- "Natives" who are a minority?

    -- "Natives " who are oppressed ... "it does not compute, it does not compute!"

    -- Conquest and settlement not "immigration" is the American story.
    Bring up Indians, brings up their conquest. My old-stock ancestors were not "immigrants", they were conquerors, pioneers and settlers. They came, battled the existing people, beat them, took territory and built something great. It's not pretty, but it's a constant human norm. And it's what we had through the 19th century.

    ("Immigration", in contrast, is not the human norm. It's undesirable to let random people plop themselves down on your turf. And it's rare but for these middle-man minority types like Jews, Gypsies, overseas Chinese. No one loves it when they show up. And they are never good for any nation's long term development and survival.)

    -- Maybe immigration isn't good for the natives?
    But if you can't figure out the above and still think "nation of immigrants" ... think about the Indians story for a few seconds and a light may come on. "Hey maybe immigration doesn't work out so well for the natives!"


    The Indians entire story, their "oppressed minority" moral claim, is a flat out rebuke to immigrationism. So they had to be un-personed and erased.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Anonymous, @Anon99

    That’s the best explanation I’ve read yet.

  108. @donut
    @Prosa123

    " (hunting on reservations is far less restricted than elsewhere)."

    A few years ago on my way back from Arizona I stopped at Fort Apache on the White Mountain Apache reservation . In the museum there was a map of the reservation and the White Mountain was marked as restricted to tribal members only . I asked the lady why and she told me that it was reserved for members of the tribe for hunting . It's a big chunk of the reservation BTW .

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal, @anon, @prosa123, @Muggles

    Many reservations sell hunting permits to non-members. In most cases a tribal guide is required, and especially for game such as moose and elk the cost is well into the four figures. Though that’s not as bad as Alaska, where a week-long moose hunt can cost as much as a new car. Fun fact: even with the much higher transportation costs hunters who otherwise might have hunted in the Rocky Mountains or Alaska can find it cheaper to go to Africa, with the bonus of the world’s greatest array of wildlife.

  109. @Prosa123
    @Anonymous

    What in the world is un-PC about Gillette razors? The name is from the company's founder King Gillette and is French Huguenot

    Replies: @Bill Jones

    Gillette arose in Anon’s discussion about Boycotts. Gillette was widely boycotted a couple of years ago because some dipshit in their marketing department thought that the way to sell razors to White men was by preaching about toxic masculinity.

    That turns out not to be the case. I for one will not buy from them again.

    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    @Bill Jones

    After 50+ years of using Gillette products, I’m now using Schick.

  110. @Another Canadian
    Back when five bucks was real money.
    https://www.coinsonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/5Indian_000.jpg

    Replies: @restless94110

    Hey, mate. There was no ethnic cleansing. That’s a lie.

    There was a respect for the warring, murderous, savage Indians that had fought settlers for a few hundred years, like they had fought other tribes for a thousand years (or more) before.

    Americans like me, who are native Americans, like Indians are, were happy to name things after the brave murderous savage warriors that fought and were bested by the European settlers.

    Now, all of that kindness, all of that respect, is being destroyed by stupid white SJWs and moronic Indian activists.

    Steve is right: Indians are being marginalized even further by this disastrous drive to rename venerable teams that celebrated Indian bravery, courage and revolve. A huge majority of Indians do not want this and have no problem with team names, but it does not matter to this useful idiots.

    Your response shows a part of why this is happening. Repeating the lies of the new narrative. This makes it worse for Indians, and worse for the cohesiveness of American society as a whole.

    Signed,
    A White American Who Married A Native American (Choctaw) Now A Father, Grandfather, and Great Grandfather Of Mixed Breed Descendants.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @restless94110


    Americans like me, who are native Americans, like Indians are, were happy to name things after the brave murderous savage warriors that fought and were bested by the European settlers.

    Now, all of that kindness, all of that respect, is being destroyed by stupid white SJWs and moronic Indian activists.

    Steve is right: Indians are being marginalized even further by this disastrous drive to rename venerable teams that celebrated Indian bravery, courage and revolve.
     
    Good post. Do you see any parallels between the respect formerly given to the defeated Indians and that formerly given to defeated Southerners? And parallels between the place they were given in America’s heritage and identity?

    And are there any commonalities in the contemporary push to erase Southern symbols and history and the contemporary push to erase Indian symbols and history?

    Replies: @restless94110

  111. @Jonathan Mason
    It is interesting that US sports teams all the way from the professional level down to the school level seem to have mandatory nicknames that often refer to animals such as bulldogs or wildcats, and occasionally to more feral types of humans, presumably because these species are valued for their fighting abilities.

    British professional soccer clubs started out in the late 19th century and never seemed to have adopted these names.

    Some, like Norwich City, are known as the Canaries, presumably because they play in yellow shirts. An interesting name is Plymouth Argyle, whose name comes, I think from the argyle pattern shirts they wear. Tottenham Hotspur is a famed name, but fans often call themselves the yids.

    Arsenal are named for proximity to the Woolwich Arsenal, but often abbreviated to The Arse.

    There are a few animal names around, for example Hull City have the nickname of the Tigers, or Derby County the Rams, but in general the ferocious sounding nicknames have never caught on.

    However for the most part clubs are just called United, betraying origins as a merger of one or more teams, or City or Town, or County, or sometimes Rovers.

    The spread of wild animal nicknames in the United States must have been very rapid, because it seems to be so universal.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara, @RSDB

    I think the Brits take pride in the fact that they never adopted mascots for their soccer teams. A few I’ve talked to say its an American thing.

    American mascotsism is an interesting phenomenon, and works with American consumerism. Teams can sell a lot of a merch to non-fans if the mascot is “cool” or “cute”, i.e. when the old expansion Charlotte Hornets of the NBA first came out, their “cool” (for the time) team colors and their hornet basketball symbol was a big seller even to kids outside of Charlotte who never cheered for them.

    Interesting that older sports teams don’t really have a mascot image even if they do have a name, e.g. the New York Yankees or Brooklyn Dodgers don’t have any “Yankee” or “Dodger” mascot to sell to fans. Ditto with teams like the Montreal Canadians, Pittsburgh Steelers, New York Rangers, Boston Red Sox, LA Lakers, Cleveland Browns, etc.

    Mascot imagery seems to come from the 1960s and 1970s. I think that’s when the Milwaukee Brewers added that guy who slides down when they hit a homerun and when the Vikings’ helmets got their Viking mascot on the sidelines. Might be a Bill Veeck/Charlie Finley innovation that spread to other teams.

    Probably the American obsession with giving their teams mascots/names goes along with the rural American obsession with college football. It doesn’t really make sense to an outsider, but when you’re from here it just seems natural.

  112. @Whitehall
    Whites also began to appreciate American Indians when they joined up with the US Armed Forces.

    Sgt. York for one and my late brother in law who was a Marine sniper in Vietnam for another.

    Replies: @Rich, @ATate, @Richard B, @Jake, @Juvenalis

    Whites also began to appreciate American Indians when they joined up with the US Armed Forces.

    But the real appreciation of American Indians was as a source of SWPL above all else, in fact their drug of choice, ie; mood-altering through self-righteousness. Or, guaranteed, consequence-free virtue.

    And, though such people never tire of getting high, as it were, they do get tired of what it is they’re getting high on. For this reason, the American Indian high was replaced by Blacks, which provided a much, well, it was the herion of virtue signalling.

    Native Americans continue to be culturally marginalized in a 21st Century America that has grown bored with them. America used to celebrate its proud Indian heritage, but now we appear to be embarrassed by them.

    Since George Floyd represented the peak high, what is said above in the quote on American Indians will soon apply to blacks. In fact, though no one will say it, it’s already happening. But after blacks then what? Nothing, of course.

    SWPL doesn’t matter anymore now that Whites are being cancelled.

  113. @syonredux
    @flyingtiger


    The Cleveland baseball team should go back to an earlier name, the Cleveland Napoleons or Naps.
     
    Just re-name all the teams with Amerind names, but make sure that the new names are European. For example, make the Braves the Knights, the Blackhawks the Caesars, the Indians the Spartans, etc. That way, both the Woke and the White Right will be happy. It'll be a win-win.

    Replies: @prosa123

    Just re-name all the teams with Amerind names, but make sure that the new names are European. For example, make the Braves the Knights, the Blackhawks the Caesars, the Indians the Spartans, etc.

    Spartans might be a troublesome name, as the orginal Spartans enjoyed Doing the Dirty Deed with young boys.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @prosa123

    Nah. Naming a team the Spartans will be a win for the LGBTQ crowd. It'll be a three-fer (Amerinds, White Right, and the LGBTQs all win).

    , @Farenheit
    @prosa123


    Just re-name all the teams with Amerind names, but make sure that the new names are European. For example, make the Braves the Knights, the Blackhawks the Caesars, the Indians the Spartans, etc
     
    .

    If you want to get the SJW types in a snit, may I suggest "Panzer Grenadiers"?
  114. @Paleo Liberal
    @ATate

    My son used to volunteer at a lot of pow wows. If you want to see what respect for veterans looks like, go to a pow wow. There are certain duties that can only be done by veterans, and sometimes dances for veterans only. Those dances are, of course, to honor the veterans.

    Replies: @Bill Jones

    The difference is that their veterans were defending their own peoples land rather than attacking and stealing other peoples lands.

  115. @Joe Stalin
    Illinois is derived from an Indian name.

    Illinois was named after the Illinois River, which was named by French explorer René-Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle in an attempt to map the region’s many rivers and waterways.

    Illinois isn’t the version of the name; rather, it is the French pronunciation of the original word. The word Illinois is derived from the Native American word “iliniwok” or “illiniwek,” which literally means “best people”; it was used to refer to the 10 to 12 tribes found around the river. The entire state is named Best People, and that’s something of which to be proud! Illinois is full of the very best people in the Midwest.

    https://theculturetrip.com/north-america/usa/illinois/articles/this-is-how-illinois-got-its-name/
     
    I think we should rename it to Moron Land, because we are too stupid to vote for anyone by communist cosmopolitans.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Paleo Liberal, @John Up North

    Spot on.

  116. @Achmed E. Newman
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Then there are the Piper G/A aircraft:

    Comanche
    Dakota
    Cherokee
    Saratoga
    Seminole
    Navajo
    Chieftain (bigger Navajo)
    Seneca
    Aztec

    Long ago an airline pilot who wrote a book about his experience related that they called the lower altitudes in the busy airspace (say, coming into LAX) "Indian Country". That was no slur, but just a comment on all the G/A aircraft that were buzzing around back in the day, a good proportion of them Pipers.

    Replies: @Mike Zwick, @WriterAnon

  117. Cleveland can name its team the Blues, as opposed to Cincinnati’s Reds. It would be a subtle hint to the fact that liberals made the team change the name and that liberals are now the foe to fear. Or, they could just change the name to the Cleveland Steamers.

  118. @anon
    @donut

    The White Mountain and San Carlos nation allow hunting and fishing for a fee. The White Mountains have multiple trout lakes. Deer, bear, elk and javelina are all legit game animals on that res. Part of the income for the nation, and a supply of jobs for tribal members, comes from hunting and fishing. Probably they developed this before the casino bill passed Congress.

    https://wmatoutdoor.org/

    Of course that's past tense, because the Coof showed up. Mostly everything is closed or otherwise messed up due to SARS-2. Apparently the nation has shut itself off from the world as much as possible - closed casinos, blocked a lot of roads, put up checkpoints on others.

    In time fishing and hunting will re-open on that res and others, for those who follow the rules. Trying to poach on Indian land...probably not a good idea.

    Replies: @stillCARealist, @Buffalo Joe

    Why would anybody hunt javelina? If you shot one, would you just run as fast as possible the other direction? Those things are foul and live mostly on the garbage of suburbia. Gross.

  119. Another aspect is that white admiration for Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved, makes the long submission of the black man look bad.

    That’s curious. I never stopped to think about this. American Indians had more diginity.

  120. @prosa123
    @syonredux

    Just re-name all the teams with Amerind names, but make sure that the new names are European. For example, make the Braves the Knights, the Blackhawks the Caesars, the Indians the Spartans, etc.

    Spartans might be a troublesome name, as the orginal Spartans enjoyed Doing the Dirty Deed with young boys.

    Replies: @syonredux, @Farenheit

    Nah. Naming a team the Spartans will be a win for the LGBTQ crowd. It’ll be a three-fer (Amerinds, White Right, and the LGBTQs all win).

  121. @photondancer
    "Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved"

    I've read that Australian aborigines don't like to be reminded that across the water in New Zealand the Maori similarly fought the British for 200 years, while the far more numerous Aborigines were quickly routed. I've not observed any hail-fellow-PoC feelings between Maori and Aborigine so there may be something to it.

    Replies: @Hannah Katz, @Old Prude, @syonredux, @Corn, @sb, @Perspective

    The Māori put up a decent fight:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_Wars

  122. @Whitehall
    Whites also began to appreciate American Indians when they joined up with the US Armed Forces.

    Sgt. York for one and my late brother in law who was a Marine sniper in Vietnam for another.

    Replies: @Rich, @ATate, @Richard B, @Jake, @Juvenalis

    You are correct, as long as you mean before WW1 and Sergeant York. Tennesseans came back from the Creek War speaking very highly of the Cherokee who fought with them and respectfully of the Creeks they defeated. The same Tennesseans came back from New Orleans with great contempt for the British officers and very little respect for the British regulars.

  123. @Steve Sailer
    @flyingtiger

    Or the Cleveland Bluebirds as they were before they obtained Napoleon Lajoie in 1903. The players objected to the name.

    Replies: @Jake

    They should become the Cleveland Numinous Negroes.

  124. @BCB232
    After the threat of wild Scottish highlander cattle rustlers was neutralized, WASPs started romanticizing them for their fierceness and bravery. My grandmother and great grandmother were particularly enamored with our Scottish ancestry even though we have much more English ancestry.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Clyde, @znon

    Interesting to compare that to the fate of the Irish, to be enslaved and reviled for 400 years and to survive and win independence, rather than the native Scot highlander clans, most of whom like the Amerindians, are barely surviving as a shadow or are alive only in legend.

    • Replies: @John Up North
    @znon

    When I watch those PBS travel shows about Scotland's Highlands I'm always struck by the absence of a population or towns. The Highlands look very beautiful but empty. Where did the Gael go?

  125. Mr Sailer’s comments are precisely what I have been saying on this and other forums for ages. The Red Indian was always held in high esteem in my country, at least in popular culture. Red Indians were never the baddies in the Westerns I watched as a child. It was always good cowboys versus bad cowboys with the Red Indians helping the story along in some way. Sometimes the Red Indians were tricked or betrayed by the baddies. The Red Indians were portrayed as brave – to the point of recklessness, resourceful, honourable, blah blah blah.

    The Left don’t want Red Indians to feel any pride in their Race. They want the Red Indians to be as miserable and depressed as them. Hence they want them to be called “Native Americans” and not Red Indians, and to constantly remind them that they’re all a bunch of drunks and losers.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @martin_2


    The Left don’t want Red Indians to feel any pride in their Race.
     
    Are you sure about that? Why don’t they?

    They want the Red Indians to be as miserable and depressed as them. Hence they want them to be called “Native Americans” and not Red Indians.
     
    Why would being called Native Americans make them more depressed than calling them Red Indians?
  126. Anonymous[261] • Disclaimer says:

    Well, the wild Injun side of my family has a US military heritage going back to the late 1880s when one of my ancestors enlisted as a mounted scout with the 1st battalion of the 22nd Infantry at Fort Keogh, Montana. Since then, four generations in the US Navy, with the occasional black sheep Marine.
    I suppose this poster will soon be declared anathema and banished into the darkness:

    The most decorated enlisted man in Navy history was a wild Injun, winning the trifecta of heroism — Silver Star, Navy Cross, Medal of Honor:

    http://navylog.navymemorial.org/williams-james-12

    Four percent of Navy SEALs are American Indians and more Indians serve in the armed services, proportionally, than any other ethnic group.

    While there are some asshole “woke” Indians, which is not surprising, considering the times, no one, especially the lefties, pays much, if any, attention to them. As you say, they are kind of an embarrassment, having refused to be enslaved, fought with everything they had in every way they could to maintain their independence until they could fight no more.
    Most of us are normies, looking like a generic variety of whites, live off the rez, and may be your next door neighbor.
    Oh, yeah, we love our native land America and are proud to serve it. We can’t sing worth a damn, and dance worse than a white man, but you’ll find none better to stand beside you in a fight.

    • Replies: @Dube
    @Anonymous

    Oh, yeah, we love our native land America and are proud to serve it. We can’t sing worth a damn, and dance worse than a white man, but you’ll find none better to stand beside you in a fight.

    To illustrate, from the current Imprimis:
    https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/mystic-chords-memory-learning-american-story/

    Ely Parker was born in 1828 to Elizabeth and William Parker of the Tonawanda Seneca tribe of the Iroquois Confederacy in western New York. Parker became a leader in his tribe at a very young age. Trained as a civil engineer, he earned a reputation in that field. In 1857, when he was 29 years old, he moved to Galena, Illinois, as a civil engineer working for the Treasury Department, and there his life took a fateful turn.

    He became friends with a fellow named Ulysses S. Grant. In these years, Grant was an ex-Army officer working as a clerk in his father’s store. Parker later liked to tell the story of coming to Grant’s aid in a barroom fight in Galena, the two of them back to back, fighting their way out against practically all the other patrons. At about five feet eight inches and 200 pounds, the robust Parker referred to himself as a “Savage Jack Falstaff.”



    When the Civil War came on, Parker tried several times to join the Union Army as an engineer but was turned down because he was not a citizen. When he approached Secretary of State William Seward about a commission, he was told that the war was “an affair between white men,” that he should go home, and “we will settle our own troubles among ourselves without any Indian aid.”

    Eventually, with Grant’s endorsement, Parker received a commission, with the rank of captain, as Assistant Adjutant General for Volunteers. By late 1863, he had been transferred to Grant’s staff as Military Secretary. He soon became familiarly known as “the Indian at headquarters” and was promoted to lieutenant colonel and later to brigadier general. He may have saved Grant’s life or at least prevented his capture one dark night during the Wilderness Campaign in 1864, when Grant and his staff, unbeknownst to themselves, were riding into enemy lines.

    But Parker is rightly most remembered for something that happened in the parlor of a private residence in the village of Appomattox Court House on April 9, 1865.

    In the days preceding, Union armies had captured the city of Petersburg and the Confederate capital of Richmond. Grant and the Federal Army of the Potomac had put Confederate General Robert E. Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia in such a position that in the late afternoon of April 7, Grant, sitting on the verandah of his hotel headquarters in Farmville, said to a couple of his generals, “I have a great mind to summon Lee, to surrender.” He immediately wrote a letter respectfully inviting Lee to surrender and had it sent to him under a flag of truce. It took Lee a couple of days of desperate failed maneuvers to come around to the idea. But by the morning of April 9, Lee had concluded that “there is nothing left me to do but to go and see General Grant, and I would rather die a thousand deaths.”

    They agreed to meet in the village of Appomattox Court House to discuss terms.

    Grant had been riding hard for days on rough roads in rough weather. When he met Lee in the parlor of the brick house where they had arranged to meet, he had on dirty boots, “an old suit, without [his] sword, and without any distinguishing mark of rank, except the shoulder straps of a lieutenant general on a woolen blouse.” Lee was decked out from head to toe in all the military finery he had at his disposal.

    After introductions, and not much small talk, Lee asked Grant on what terms he would receive the surrender of Lee’s army. Grant told him that all officers and men would be “paroled and disqualified from taking up arms again until properly exchanged, and all arms, ammunition, and supplies were to be delivered up as captured property.” Lee said those were the terms he expected, and he asked Grant to commit them to writing, which Grant did, on the spot, and showed them to Lee.

    With minor revisions, Lee accepted, and Grant handed the document to his senior adjutant general, Theodore Bowers, to “put into ink.” This was a document that would effectively put an end to four years of devastating civil war. Bowers’ hands were so unsteady from nerves that he had to start over three or four times, going through several sheets of paper, in a failed effort to prepare a fair copy for the signatures of the generals.

    So Grant asked Ely Parker to do it, which he did, without trouble. This gave occasion for Lee and Parker to be introduced. When Lee recognized that Parker was an American Indian, he said, “I am glad to see one real American here.”

    Parker shook his hand and replied, “We are all Americans.”

    ***

    Replies: @Anonymous

  127. I’m all for it. Let’s go further and rename all cities, states, and geographical features with native language references. Replace with genderless English nomenclature to avoid cultural appropriation or offensive references. Mississippi River becomes “Big River.” Michigan becomes “Mitten.” We could have corporate sponsorships like the stadiums all do – Florida becomes “Depends,” Wisconsin becomes “Velveeta” for instance.

    We could employ the hordes of under-employed social science graduates to vet all the current names and come up with PC alternatives. Pay them UBI. What a great job for the hundreds of soon-to-be unemployed Trump fact checkers, amirite?

  128. @Joe Paluka
    @Anon

    The whole idea that this article was even written shows that Americans are obsessed with things that don't even matter. The names of sports teams! Nothing could be more nonsensical than sports or sports teams! It's silly entertainment, as important as the latest Kardashian butt implant. Millions of American men obsess over Tyrone's every verbal grunt and the colors of jerseys and logos. Hundreds of people are paid big bucks to discuss every aspect of every sports teams comings and goings and every doing. Millions of American men, who in the 1950's would've been reading Popular Mechanics or Popular Science and fixing, building or creating things are now challenged beyond their ability when asked to replace a light bulb or check their car's oil level. You ask them what Trayvon or Tyrone grunted last week, they'd be able to tell you immediately. No wonder the country's being taken over by dot Indians and Chinese.

    Replies: @JohnnyWalker123

    So true.

  129. @prosa123
    @syonredux

    Just re-name all the teams with Amerind names, but make sure that the new names are European. For example, make the Braves the Knights, the Blackhawks the Caesars, the Indians the Spartans, etc.

    Spartans might be a troublesome name, as the orginal Spartans enjoyed Doing the Dirty Deed with young boys.

    Replies: @syonredux, @Farenheit

    Just re-name all the teams with Amerind names, but make sure that the new names are European. For example, make the Braves the Knights, the Blackhawks the Caesars, the Indians the Spartans, etc

    .

    If you want to get the SJW types in a snit, may I suggest “Panzer Grenadiers”?

  130. Anonymous[659] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad
    @Altai


    It’s just another manifestation of anti-Nativism and abssimilation.
     
    Bingo! Spot on Altai.

    American Indians are non-people now because they/their story is a rebuke to Jewish minoritarianism/"nation of immigrants"ism.

    -- "Natives" who are a minority?

    -- "Natives " who are oppressed ... "it does not compute, it does not compute!"

    -- Conquest and settlement not "immigration" is the American story.
    Bring up Indians, brings up their conquest. My old-stock ancestors were not "immigrants", they were conquerors, pioneers and settlers. They came, battled the existing people, beat them, took territory and built something great. It's not pretty, but it's a constant human norm. And it's what we had through the 19th century.

    ("Immigration", in contrast, is not the human norm. It's undesirable to let random people plop themselves down on your turf. And it's rare but for these middle-man minority types like Jews, Gypsies, overseas Chinese. No one loves it when they show up. And they are never good for any nation's long term development and survival.)

    -- Maybe immigration isn't good for the natives?
    But if you can't figure out the above and still think "nation of immigrants" ... think about the Indians story for a few seconds and a light may come on. "Hey maybe immigration doesn't work out so well for the natives!"


    The Indians entire story, their "oppressed minority" moral claim, is a flat out rebuke to immigrationism. So they had to be un-personed and erased.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Anonymous, @Anon99

    They came, battled the existing people, beat them, took territory and built something great.

    This mischaracterizes what happened. They arrived to the new land without malice toward any of the people they encountered. But they responded in kind when attacked or threatened.

    Relations between the settlers and the Indians were mostly peaceful in fact.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Anonymous


    Relations between the settlers and the Indians were mostly peaceful in fact.
     
    Like the "mostly peaceful" protests!

    Actually i agree with you, the colonists didn't come with malice towards the Indians, nor any desire to do them harm. They were not doing some sort of Genghis Khan thing were they were specifically looking to rape and pillage what was there. (Or even glom onto the natives' good stuff, like today's immigrants to the West.)

    Rather, the settlers came for the land.

    But continually pushing into land that some other people occupy ... brings on conflict.

    The Indians were not wrong to attack some settlers who pushed into their lands, even though the settlers were "peaceful". One settler family may be fine. Maybe two, four, eight. But as the settlers keep coming ... your land, your hunting ground is gone, and you are pushed out and must fight with some other tribe to the West to survive.

    I don't think any intelligent white man should be whining about Indian behavior. Whites were at a higher civilizational level and so won. I'm a child of Western Christian civilization, and--as objectively as possible--think it is simply better, more interesting, more valuable, than any other. So i see the white victory as a good thing. (Without it i would not be here.) But that doesn't mean the Indians are "evil" or "bad" for resisting. They were trying to keep their way of life, their peoples, intact.


    This is fundamental: No matter what the attitude there is no "peaceful" or "harmless" "immigration" of different people into someone else's land. When the new people take it, it is lost to the people who have it. And the natives have a fundamental right to resist that ... by any means necessary.
  131. @Old Prude
    @photondancer

    The Incas and Aztecs got rolled up pretty quick. Plains Indians were a lot more obstreperous. It’s a real shame busy bodies have been running around saying we are hurting their feelings with the Tomahawk Chop.

    Replies: @Hapalong Cassidy, @Achmed E. Newman

    What happened to the Incas should elicit embarrassment from their ancestors. Pizarro conquered their mighty empire with less than 300 troops.

  132. @Stick
    Hail To The Redskins - they are atop the NFC Least and headed for the playoffs.

    Replies: @GeneralRipper

    Any “white American man” who still watches college or professional sports (especially football) should probably check to see that he still has something down below besides a big hairy pussy.

    Not only that, “he” most certainly deserves the fate that awaits “him”.

  133. @theMann
    Try not to lose sight of the fact that American Indians were Stone Age barbarians who openly worshipped Satan. This is obvious from Aztec Temples to Iroquois ritual cannibalism. They may have been worthy foes as fighters, but their societies were saturated with pure evil from top to bottom. Feel free to read on the Comanches as a primer. (And really, It's a decision of the people of Cleveland what to name their teams.)


    Even so, I doubt they are one tenth as dangerous, or frankly, as evil, as these creatures erupting out of the Indian subcontinent. If were are to save our society, we will have to confront that unpleasant truth head on.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Muggles

    theMann, best book, in my opinion, about the Comanches…”Empire of the Summer Moon.” Hair raising, pun intented.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Buffalo Joe

    I agree, Joe. Peak Stupidity has a 3-part review you may (or not) be interested in:

    Review of Empire of the Summer Moon - Sam Gwynne: Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    , @Cool Daddy Jimbo
    @Buffalo Joe

    I finished that a few months ago, after hearing a recommendation on a Joe Rogan podcast, of all places. Brutal. Just fucking brutal.

    , @syonredux
    @Buffalo Joe

    Yeah, the Comanche were an unpleasant bunch:


    On the return trip to Texas in early 1836, she was accompanied by her only brother, George Creath. After arriving at Columbia on the Brazos in February 1836, Sarah, her children, and George were met by John Hibbins. As they reached Rock Creek, six miles from a site known as Sweet Home and only fifteen miles from the Hibbinses’ home, thirteen Comanches attacked the party, killed Hibbins and George Creath, and captured Sarah and her children.
     

    As Indian captives, closely guarded, Sarah and her children were permitted little privacy or freedom. Even while they slept, two guards stayed with them. As the Comanches made their second camp with the captives, the little baby began crying, and one of the Comanches smashed its head against a nearby tree as Sarah looked on in horror.
     

    After they had traveled across the Colorado River, the Comanches permitted Sarah and her remaining son to sleep without the close guards. At night, while everyone else was sleeping, Sarah slipped out of the camp, although her escape meant leaving her son behind. She traveled in the river and brush and eventually happened upon a herd of cattle and followed them home to seek help. Her journey of only ten miles had taken her twenty-four hours. Using information given by Sarah, Capt. John J. Tumlinson, Jr., successfully led a group of Texas Rangers in a raid against the Indians and rescued the boy.
     
    https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/fhoat




    According to Swanson’s Cult of Glory, this was the Rangers’ first battle against the Comanche, and four Comanche were killed by the Rangers in their successful raid to recover the boy.

    Comanches as innocent victims of Anglo racism is a tough one to swallow…..
  134. @Anon7
    "I wonder if the push to remove memories of America’s rich Indian legacy..."

    Already forgotten are the worthy foes of those magnificent savages, you know who I mean, c'mon man, those stunted, pasty-skinned people from across the ocean. Who were they, again? Didn't they have some part in transforming a wild untamed continent into the endless mall it is today, where all the world's people can come and have free stuff while they recapitulate the shithole they came from? And profit? don't forget profit.

    I love how Joe Biden is a stand-in for the white race; doddering, forgetful, angry about something, what was that again? They'll hide him for a day or two at a time, then a week, then a month... then the nation's news-papers will get around to informing us that we have our first female asian black/female black asian/asian black female/black asian female/... anyway, new president!

    And we won't have to speak of those pasty-skinned people again. Thank god.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Expletive Deleted

    Anon7, sometimes the “Agree” and the “LOL” button aren’t enough. Nice comment.

  135. I knew at least a 100 Native Americans back in the day. Some were good workers, some weren’t, but I could say the same about any other ethnic group I worked with. Indians, however, were more stoic. They realized what the White settlers from across the ocean brought was better than anything they had. Oh, and before anyone mention diseases brought to these shores, there were diseases that went back across the ocean too. Something as simple as a steel needle and thread or matches were beyond imagination. Indians today still prefer the company of other NAs and that is why few leave the resevations. Also, I never heard anyone wish there wasn’t the Cleveland Indians, Atlanta Braves, Kansas City Chiefs or Chicago Blackhawks and squaw was never said to mean “c–t.” Whites still telling the Natives what they want or need or should feel. Now, to be sure, “Chief Yahoo” was an over the top caricature.

  136. @Old Prude
    @photondancer

    The Incas and Aztecs got rolled up pretty quick. Plains Indians were a lot more obstreperous. It’s a real shame busy bodies have been running around saying we are hurting their feelings with the Tomahawk Chop.

    Replies: @Hapalong Cassidy, @Achmed E. Newman

    In the big picture, the Indians in what’s now the US were treated a lot better by the American settlers than were the Incas and Aztecs by the Spaniards. Maybe it was the gold and silver that the latter tribes had and the Spanish had the lust for. I can’t for sure say it would have been any different if the Indians in the future N. American colonies had had gold and the English had come upon it.

    I’ll tell you what, if you’re gonna use gold and silver as furnishings and trappings for the Sun God’s palace, like a bunch of clueless gay interior decorators, then you don’t deserve the stuff anyway. A tribe of fools and their (REAL) money are soon parted, they say … en Espanol.

    On the smaller scale, dealings with Indians were sometimes friendly but often pretty brutal in our neck of the woods. Due to the settlers of America being more hard-working, smarter, and more organized, we ended up with a rout here long-term, while down south it was more of an assimilation both ways.

    PS: Regarding the Plains Indians, I agree. I will recommend Empire of the Summer Moon too, along with Buffalo Joe.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Achmed E. Newman


    In the big picture, the Indians in what’s now the US were treated a lot better by the American settlers than were the Incas and Aztecs by the Spaniards.
     
    The Indians were treated better by American settlers than they were by other Indians.
  137. The red line says it all.

    • Replies: @Veracitor
    @Twinkie

    The birthrate graph showing severe decline for Amerinds makes me sad.

    (I think all large "ethnic groups" in the USA have below-replacement birthrates now. The remaining sub-groups with high birthrates (Amish, Hasids, low-IQ Googles, ...) will likely furnish ever larger shares of the future population unless swamped by new immigrants and their offspring.)

    I theorize that the low birthrate is driving a lot of the craziness in our society. Here's my hand-wavy evo-psych theory: humans are adapted to the presence of children and a "normal" population ladder. When there are too few youngsters, that indicates a big problem like famine, plague, invasion, etc. People subconsciously react; they become anxious and increasingly willing to support proposed responses, including crazy ones (like the transgenderist campaign for the mutilation of children, which is sort of the modern equivalent of the Xhosa Cattle Killing of 1856).

    Of course there are plenty of opportunists who exploit the anxious state of the public to feather their own nests.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @photondancer, @Twinkie

  138. @Buffalo Joe
    @theMann

    theMann, best book, in my opinion, about the Comanches..."Empire of the Summer Moon." Hair raising, pun intented.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Cool Daddy Jimbo, @syonredux

    I agree, Joe. Peak Stupidity has a 3-part review you may (or not) be interested in:

    Review of Empire of the Summer Moon – Sam Gwynne: Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Ach, thank you, I actually have two copies of the book, one on the bookshelve and one I lend out. IEye opening and factual. Stay safe.

  139. @Jtgw
    Of course the official reason for dropping the Indians name is out of respect for the Native Americans. I think your interpretation of this act as really an expression of boredom and impatience with Native concerns is interesting and possibly correct. It reminds me of your conspiracy theory that the plan to expand Section 8 housing to the suburbs, officially framed as a plan to help the marginalized, is just a plot to move incorrigible poor blacks off highly desirable real estate. How many more liberal and progressive causes are really fronts for something else? What is the real motivation behind World War T for instance?

    Replies: @bomag, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @J.Ross, @Robert Morgan

    I’ve long suspected that the push to eradicate tobacco smoking in the 1960’s was actually aimed at transitioning to a marijuana culture- and this seems borne out by the recent decree in S.F. that you can’t smoke tobacco in your own home, but dope is permitted. The resulting disaster to society is inescapable and obvious.

  140. @theMann
    Try not to lose sight of the fact that American Indians were Stone Age barbarians who openly worshipped Satan. This is obvious from Aztec Temples to Iroquois ritual cannibalism. They may have been worthy foes as fighters, but their societies were saturated with pure evil from top to bottom. Feel free to read on the Comanches as a primer. (And really, It's a decision of the people of Cleveland what to name their teams.)


    Even so, I doubt they are one tenth as dangerous, or frankly, as evil, as these creatures erupting out of the Indian subcontinent. If were are to save our society, we will have to confront that unpleasant truth head on.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Muggles

    Try not to lose sight of the fact that American Indians were Stone Age barbarians who openly worshipped Satan. This is obvious from Aztec Temples to Iroquois ritual cannibalism. They may have been worthy foes as fighters, but their societies were saturated with pure evil from top to bottom. Feel free to read on the Comanches as a primer.

    Okay. This written by a presumable white guy (White!) who never read a single page of European history.

    Celts and most European tribes (as the Romans styled them) practiced what we might call paganism (not “Satan worship, since the NAs had no prior idea of ‘Satan’) and human sacrifice. Accounts of warrior societies there suggest they also practiced ritual eating of enemy body parts (usually the heart).

    The Comanches were no more “pure evil” than Huns or other barbarians and even so-called civilized groups like Greeks and Romans. Ancient behavior seems to be very similar in these respects. Carthaginians were said to practice child sacrifice (though evidence is sketchy) and even the Romans sacrificed slaves in early times (ashamed to admit it later though).

    Accounts of US military troopers ‘savaging’ Indian villages are very similar to Comanche behavior though didn’t take slaves (too much trouble.) Many times old people, the sick, children and infants were killed and/or shot. Women raped, then often killed or “taken as mistresses” like Custer did.

    It is east to overlook pagan Druids and Vikings and others. Human behavior has nasty history. Not limited to any one tribe or group. The US even legalized the torture of certain terror prisoners.

    This isn’t to defend NAs or anyone. But the Other is often just like Us. Like it or not.

    • Agree: S. Anonyia
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Muggles

    ... yeah, but we got better, and they didn't.

    , @HammerJack
    @Muggles

    Though your diversity-equality lecture is very au courant -- and all of us here are indebted to you for it -- I can't remember entire societies in Europe ever given to practices like those of the Aztecs and Toltecs. They seem to be in a class by themselves.

    Though granted the Empire of the Sun came close in the late 30s-early 40s.

    Replies: @Muggles, @John Up North

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @Muggles

    Muggles, along the lines of Mr. Ross's reply, I'll say this. The Indians were not like the Western man. They were never going to improve except though some fortuitous advances like the Comanche's (just as a big example) learning to ride/handle/wage war from horses like nobody else. These Indians lived like they'd always had for the most part. There was to be no civilization as we know it, not unless you wait for an evolutionary amount of time.

    There's freedom as none of us, even ancestors that came off the Mayflower could have ever known, in being a savage. However, the brutality of nature would never abate, since there was to be no improvement in their society. The Comanche man's whole purpose in life was to wage war and accumulate horses, and the horses would help in waging more war. That was it. There was not going to be an Indian Alexander Graham Bell or Isaac Newton, EVER.

    I hope you will read the book Buffalo Joe and I mentioned.

    Replies: @Muggles

    , @anonymous coward
    @Muggles


    ...since the NAs had no prior idea of ‘Satan’
     
    Oh sweet summer child!

    That said, you're right, all pagans of all human cultures were Satan worshippers.

    Replies: @Dube

  141. @Muggles
    @theMann


    Try not to lose sight of the fact that American Indians were Stone Age barbarians who openly worshipped Satan. This is obvious from Aztec Temples to Iroquois ritual cannibalism. They may have been worthy foes as fighters, but their societies were saturated with pure evil from top to bottom. Feel free to read on the Comanches as a primer.
     
    Okay. This written by a presumable white guy (White!) who never read a single page of European history.

    Celts and most European tribes (as the Romans styled them) practiced what we might call paganism (not "Satan worship, since the NAs had no prior idea of 'Satan') and human sacrifice. Accounts of warrior societies there suggest they also practiced ritual eating of enemy body parts (usually the heart).

    The Comanches were no more "pure evil" than Huns or other barbarians and even so-called civilized groups like Greeks and Romans. Ancient behavior seems to be very similar in these respects. Carthaginians were said to practice child sacrifice (though evidence is sketchy) and even the Romans sacrificed slaves in early times (ashamed to admit it later though).

    Accounts of US military troopers 'savaging' Indian villages are very similar to Comanche behavior though didn't take slaves (too much trouble.) Many times old people, the sick, children and infants were killed and/or shot. Women raped, then often killed or "taken as mistresses" like Custer did.

    It is east to overlook pagan Druids and Vikings and others. Human behavior has nasty history. Not limited to any one tribe or group. The US even legalized the torture of certain terror prisoners.

    This isn't to defend NAs or anyone. But the Other is often just like Us. Like it or not.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @HammerJack, @Achmed E. Newman, @anonymous coward

    … yeah, but we got better, and they didn’t.

  142. @Jonathan Mason
    It is interesting that US sports teams all the way from the professional level down to the school level seem to have mandatory nicknames that often refer to animals such as bulldogs or wildcats, and occasionally to more feral types of humans, presumably because these species are valued for their fighting abilities.

    British professional soccer clubs started out in the late 19th century and never seemed to have adopted these names.

    Some, like Norwich City, are known as the Canaries, presumably because they play in yellow shirts. An interesting name is Plymouth Argyle, whose name comes, I think from the argyle pattern shirts they wear. Tottenham Hotspur is a famed name, but fans often call themselves the yids.

    Arsenal are named for proximity to the Woolwich Arsenal, but often abbreviated to The Arse.

    There are a few animal names around, for example Hull City have the nickname of the Tigers, or Derby County the Rams, but in general the ferocious sounding nicknames have never caught on.

    However for the most part clubs are just called United, betraying origins as a merger of one or more teams, or City or Town, or County, or sometimes Rovers.

    The spread of wild animal nicknames in the United States must have been very rapid, because it seems to be so universal.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara, @RSDB

    It is interesting that US sports teams … have … nicknames that … refer to … more feral types of humans

    The Washington Senators being a prime example.

    • LOL: kaganovitch
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @RSDB

    AGREE! and LOL!

  143. @donut
    @Prosa123

    " (hunting on reservations is far less restricted than elsewhere)."

    A few years ago on my way back from Arizona I stopped at Fort Apache on the White Mountain Apache reservation . In the museum there was a map of the reservation and the White Mountain was marked as restricted to tribal members only . I asked the lady why and she told me that it was reserved for members of the tribe for hunting . It's a big chunk of the reservation BTW .

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal, @anon, @prosa123, @Muggles

    Yes, you can drive through a paved highway in the back of that big Apache reservation near White Mountain and see huge elk in the road.

    My sister who lives near there says they sell permits to outsiders for upwards of $15,000. Yes you need a guide, etc. But the place is teeming with elk. We nearly hit a giant one just driving at night down that road. Impressive.

    Indians aren’t stupid. Also, they need a state hunting license (and game permit, when required) when hunting off rez lands.

    Even now, you don’t mess with the Apaches. Other Indians know this too.

  144. @Andy
    Of course, one of the biggest losers of mass migration to the US will be American Indians. If America belongs to the World, as the open border crowd claims, then any claim American Indians might have as the first human group in what is today the US is essentially nill.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Corn

    Indians exist because of white empathy. The time is coming when they will be confronted by, and completely in the hands of, people like Xi Jinping. The ones who can grovel or occupy a cubicle will do well enough and the ones who make trouble will no longer get a pardon from their ancestry.

    • Replies: @Andy
    @J.Ross

    Actually I was talking about the Americas variety of Indians, so in a sense you are making my point (as well as Steve's) that Native Americans are being erased

  145. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Old Prude

    In the big picture, the Indians in what's now the US were treated a lot better by the American settlers than were the Incas and Aztecs by the Spaniards. Maybe it was the gold and silver that the latter tribes had and the Spanish had the lust for. I can't for sure say it would have been any different if the Indians in the future N. American colonies had had gold and the English had come upon it.

    I'll tell you what, if you're gonna use gold and silver as furnishings and trappings for the Sun God's palace, like a bunch of clueless gay interior decorators, then you don't deserve the stuff anyway. A tribe of fools and their (REAL) money are soon parted, they say ... en Espanol.

    On the smaller scale, dealings with Indians were sometimes friendly but often pretty brutal in our neck of the woods. Due to the settlers of America being more hard-working, smarter, and more organized, we ended up with a rout here long-term, while down south it was more of an assimilation both ways.

    PS: Regarding the Plains Indians, I agree. I will recommend Empire of the Summer Moon too, along with Buffalo Joe.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    In the big picture, the Indians in what’s now the US were treated a lot better by the American settlers than were the Incas and Aztecs by the Spaniards.

    The Indians were treated better by American settlers than they were by other Indians.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  146. As been suggested above, it is very odd (and sick) that the race and ethnicity obsessed neo Marxist ‘identity’ Left has decided (how? who?) to erase Amerinds from national culture.

    Almost none of the neo commies are Amerinds of course. Virtually zero. American Indians as a group are generally very Christian and conservative in values.

    So would any rational person think that forcing the removal of Indian names to be some kind of tribute or benefit to that group?

    Isn’t that what Armenians did to Turkish named things? And Nazis did to Jewish named places and things?

  147. @Buffalo Joe
    @theMann

    theMann, best book, in my opinion, about the Comanches..."Empire of the Summer Moon." Hair raising, pun intented.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Cool Daddy Jimbo, @syonredux

    I finished that a few months ago, after hearing a recommendation on a Joe Rogan podcast, of all places. Brutal. Just fucking brutal.

  148. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ0gobSHgIs

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal, @Reg Cæsar, @Charon

    I always thought that song was called “Indian Reservation.”

    • Replies: @ScarletNumber
    @Charon

    It is, but as was stated elsewhere, the song was written by John Loudermilk, even though it was popularized by Paul Revere (his actual first and middle names). In fact it was the Raiders' greatest hit. In any event sometimes songs are poorly titled and the public comes up with their own.

  149. @Paleo Liberal
    @donut

    I used to teach in a college in the NW that was close to an Indian reservation. Some of my students came from the Rez (all were mixed race). Some of my white students lived close to the Rez. One of my white students told me he wandered into the Rez during hunting season, and there were Indians patrolling the area to keep non-tribal members out of the Rez.

    Replies: @S. Anonyia

    There is a reservation around here, though it is quite different than the ones out West. They are wealthy, and despite their claims of all having 1/4 blood quantum, they are so mixed race that they are ironically a tad blonder than the local whites.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @S. Anonyia

    American Indians have been interbreeding with Europeans for a long time, hundreds of years at a minimum -- discounting things like the Solutrean hypothesis or population geneticist Pontus Skoglund's finding that someone with northern European ancestry is more closely related to native Americans than to southern Europeans. My ancestral line contains the American Indian family name Tangled Yellow Hair, which may imply a bit of interbreeding as well as that among the many things the Indian owes to the White man is the hair brush.

    Replies: @Anonymous

  150. @Canadian Observer
    In Western Canada, you have the interesting dynamic of having a large underclass of Natives living in the cities, such as Winnipeg, Regina, Edmonton, etc. That way, you get to see their drug use and alcoholism up close, thus diminishing their historical prestige in our eyes. I don’t think this dynamic really exists in the United States.

    In Eastern Canada - where there are less of them, more white admixture amongst the population and because they are largely confined to rural areas - Natives are treated more like sacred pets.

    Replies: @jcd1974, @Servant of Gla'aki, @anon, @Ganderson

    Very true.

    The people most sympathetic to Indians in Canada are the people with the least contact with Indians. While those who most dislike Indians usually have the misfortune of living near a reserve.

    • Replies: @anon
    @jcd1974

    What's so bad about them?

  151. @Buzz Mohawk
    In admiration of our "rising and already vastly more influential New Indians," new blue bloods, I propose a professional cricket team:

    The Boston Brahmins

    https://cdn.dribbble.com/users/5976/screenshots/3969696/bb-double-b-monogram-letter-mark-logo-design-symbol-by-alex-tass.png

    Go Double B!

    Replies: @Stebbing Heuer

    I was wondering recently when the rising number of sub-continental Indians in the US would lead to the creation of a competitive US cricket team.

    If you get your skates on you may join ahead of the Chinese.

  152. @ganderson
    @Anonymous

    "Negro cops are harder on their own"

    Replies: @HammerJack

    They’re actually harder (more violent) with everyone, but the (Establishment) only takes note when their victims are their own kind.

  153. @Another Canadian
    https://www.usacoinbook.com/us-coins/1908-s-indian-head-cent.jpg
    Back before America started deifying presidents.

    Replies: @Eustace Tilley (not), @HammerJack

    I actually think the chief on the $5 bill is very compelling. Posted here:

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/nominative-determinism-hunter-s-bidens-fear-and-loathing-in-palm-springs/#comment-4343451

    Since you’re Canadian: were amerinds ever on canuck money?

  154. @Muggles
    @theMann


    Try not to lose sight of the fact that American Indians were Stone Age barbarians who openly worshipped Satan. This is obvious from Aztec Temples to Iroquois ritual cannibalism. They may have been worthy foes as fighters, but their societies were saturated with pure evil from top to bottom. Feel free to read on the Comanches as a primer.
     
    Okay. This written by a presumable white guy (White!) who never read a single page of European history.

    Celts and most European tribes (as the Romans styled them) practiced what we might call paganism (not "Satan worship, since the NAs had no prior idea of 'Satan') and human sacrifice. Accounts of warrior societies there suggest they also practiced ritual eating of enemy body parts (usually the heart).

    The Comanches were no more "pure evil" than Huns or other barbarians and even so-called civilized groups like Greeks and Romans. Ancient behavior seems to be very similar in these respects. Carthaginians were said to practice child sacrifice (though evidence is sketchy) and even the Romans sacrificed slaves in early times (ashamed to admit it later though).

    Accounts of US military troopers 'savaging' Indian villages are very similar to Comanche behavior though didn't take slaves (too much trouble.) Many times old people, the sick, children and infants were killed and/or shot. Women raped, then often killed or "taken as mistresses" like Custer did.

    It is east to overlook pagan Druids and Vikings and others. Human behavior has nasty history. Not limited to any one tribe or group. The US even legalized the torture of certain terror prisoners.

    This isn't to defend NAs or anyone. But the Other is often just like Us. Like it or not.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @HammerJack, @Achmed E. Newman, @anonymous coward

    Though your diversity-equality lecture is very au courant — and all of us here are indebted to you for it — I can’t remember entire societies in Europe ever given to practices like those of the Aztecs and Toltecs. They seem to be in a class by themselves.

    Though granted the Empire of the Sun came close in the late 30s-early 40s.

    • Replies: @Muggles
    @HammerJack


    Though your diversity-equality lecture is very au courant — and all of us here are indebted to you for it — I can’t remember entire societies in Europe ever given to practices like those of the Aztecs and Toltecs. They seem to be in a class by themselves
     
    Yes my lecturing tendencies can fly out of control here. So much ignorance, so little time.

    You may be having memory problems, a la Biden.

    Seems like only yesterday that folks were up in arms about a German dictator invading neighbors, ruthlessly killing civilians and rounding up members of slightly different tribes. Work camps, soap factories, etc. Maybe you missed that lecture.

    Or further east in a country made up entirely of white people (White!) their leaders deliberately starved millions (though "industrialization was rapid!") and also rounded up millions and sent them to camps. No soap though. A few survived. The soap maker and the hunger games guy had a serious rumble. You may have missed that one too. Maybe those lectures are online.

    They "seem to be in a class by themselves" someone once opined.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Mr McKenna

    , @John Up North
    @HammerJack

    Check out Mel Gibson's film, Apocalypto. That movie was extremely graphic, detailing human sacrifice on the eve of the Spanish conquest of the New World. Great running through the jungle chase scene.

  155. The last Dance of Chief Illiniwek:

  156. @AnotherDad
    @Altai


    It’s just another manifestation of anti-Nativism and abssimilation.
     
    Bingo! Spot on Altai.

    American Indians are non-people now because they/their story is a rebuke to Jewish minoritarianism/"nation of immigrants"ism.

    -- "Natives" who are a minority?

    -- "Natives " who are oppressed ... "it does not compute, it does not compute!"

    -- Conquest and settlement not "immigration" is the American story.
    Bring up Indians, brings up their conquest. My old-stock ancestors were not "immigrants", they were conquerors, pioneers and settlers. They came, battled the existing people, beat them, took territory and built something great. It's not pretty, but it's a constant human norm. And it's what we had through the 19th century.

    ("Immigration", in contrast, is not the human norm. It's undesirable to let random people plop themselves down on your turf. And it's rare but for these middle-man minority types like Jews, Gypsies, overseas Chinese. No one loves it when they show up. And they are never good for any nation's long term development and survival.)

    -- Maybe immigration isn't good for the natives?
    But if you can't figure out the above and still think "nation of immigrants" ... think about the Indians story for a few seconds and a light may come on. "Hey maybe immigration doesn't work out so well for the natives!"


    The Indians entire story, their "oppressed minority" moral claim, is a flat out rebuke to immigrationism. So they had to be un-personed and erased.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Anonymous, @Anon99

    Oh please. The US was built by immigrants. When Europeans did it, it was a “human norm” but not when other groups do it. The US was the most prosperous nation so of course it attracted the most immigrants. When other nations catch up, don’t worry they will gladly stay away and save themselves from the scorn you heap on them. See, South Korea and Japan.

    https://www.infoplease.com/us/society-culture/race/immigrants-us-country-origin

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Anon99


    When other nations catch up
     
    Note the assumption that other nations will "catch up," as if progress were inevitable. I suppose he thinks decline is inconceivable.
    , @AnotherDad
    @Anon99


    Oh please. The US was built by immigrants.
     
    Oh please. This is beyond stupid.

    Replies: @Anon99

  157. @Stick
    @HammerJack

    Indiana's capitol is Indianapolis. This is where the NCAA headquarters are located and their only mission is to destroy any college sports program that has an Indian mascot or team name. Bothering to check up on the athletes 'academic qualifications' to play seems the last thing they are concerned with. Being Woke is a great excuse for not doing your job.

    Replies: @Paleo Liberal, @Reg Cæsar

    Indiana’s capitol is [in] Indianapolis.

    Where they still believe in science unlike, apparently, SCOTUS:

    In ‘victory’ for LGBTQ families, Supreme Court denies Indiana birth certificate case

    “They sued the state health commissioner and Tippecanoe County officials because county officials would not list both of them as parents on the birth certificate of their son, who Ruby conceived through artificial insemination.”

    The Erasure of Dad. Like father, like son.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Reg Cæsar


    Where they still believe in science unlike, apparently, SCOTUS:
     
    The relevant issue isn't science but that Indiana has a law.

    But if anyone thinks we have constitutional government, or federalism or self-government anymore, they aren't paying attention.

    Our "constitution" is minoritarianism and whatever the elite wants.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  158. There should be a working committee to form a platform for a populist working-and-middle-class party comprised explicitly of the ethnic interests of Europeans, Latinos and American Indians, with representatives of all groups on the committee and an intent to supplant the platform of the GOP. Panels, speeches, a final pamphlet of minutes and papers with a signed declaration. “The Little Bighorn Declaration”? That – would put the fear of God in the hearts of just the right people – just thinking of it would – even if the subversion never came to pass, just to hear that people were thinking about it – it would evoke a guttural sense of horror.

  159. @Muggles
    @theMann


    Try not to lose sight of the fact that American Indians were Stone Age barbarians who openly worshipped Satan. This is obvious from Aztec Temples to Iroquois ritual cannibalism. They may have been worthy foes as fighters, but their societies were saturated with pure evil from top to bottom. Feel free to read on the Comanches as a primer.
     
    Okay. This written by a presumable white guy (White!) who never read a single page of European history.

    Celts and most European tribes (as the Romans styled them) practiced what we might call paganism (not "Satan worship, since the NAs had no prior idea of 'Satan') and human sacrifice. Accounts of warrior societies there suggest they also practiced ritual eating of enemy body parts (usually the heart).

    The Comanches were no more "pure evil" than Huns or other barbarians and even so-called civilized groups like Greeks and Romans. Ancient behavior seems to be very similar in these respects. Carthaginians were said to practice child sacrifice (though evidence is sketchy) and even the Romans sacrificed slaves in early times (ashamed to admit it later though).

    Accounts of US military troopers 'savaging' Indian villages are very similar to Comanche behavior though didn't take slaves (too much trouble.) Many times old people, the sick, children and infants were killed and/or shot. Women raped, then often killed or "taken as mistresses" like Custer did.

    It is east to overlook pagan Druids and Vikings and others. Human behavior has nasty history. Not limited to any one tribe or group. The US even legalized the torture of certain terror prisoners.

    This isn't to defend NAs or anyone. But the Other is often just like Us. Like it or not.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @HammerJack, @Achmed E. Newman, @anonymous coward

    Muggles, along the lines of Mr. Ross’s reply, I’ll say this. The Indians were not like the Western man. They were never going to improve except though some fortuitous advances like the Comanche’s (just as a big example) learning to ride/handle/wage war from horses like nobody else. These Indians lived like they’d always had for the most part. There was to be no civilization as we know it, not unless you wait for an evolutionary amount of time.

    There’s freedom as none of us, even ancestors that came off the Mayflower could have ever known, in being a savage. However, the brutality of nature would never abate, since there was to be no improvement in their society. The Comanche man’s whole purpose in life was to wage war and accumulate horses, and the horses would help in waging more war. That was it. There was not going to be an Indian Alexander Graham Bell or Isaac Newton, EVER.

    I hope you will read the book Buffalo Joe and I mentioned.

    • Agree: Buffalo Joe
    • Replies: @Muggles
    @Achmed E. Newman


    I hope you will read the book Buffalo Joe and I mentioned.
     
    Yes I've read it. Also last year read Glenn Frankel's book The Searchers, The Making of an American Legend.

    While is is roughly 1/3 about making the famous John Wayne film about the Comanche children kidnapping, approximately half of it details the exact Texas history of this incident and what the survivors on both sides could recall. Based on published scholarly research. I was quite surprised at that, in the very detailed accounts from when it occurred to current day descendants. Most of what is taught about that in Texas schools is demonstrably false or not supported by contemporary witnesses.

    Comanches were only one of many Amerind tribes, a tiny minority. Others were even more feared, like Apaches, but both small in number.

    You seem to be conflating 3000 years of Western (European/Mediterranean/Middle Eastern) history of what by 1850 were hundreds of millions living there, to roughly 10 million indigenous inhabitants of N. America. To base your entire argument on one fairly small group in the middle of nowhere with the entire Amerind population is absurd. No one argues that natives lacked virtually all technology prior to European arrival. That doesn't mean they were any dumber than say, Vikings or Celts. That's an entirely separate story line.

    Nor given a fair comparison, were Amerinds any more (or less) savage than Europeans in comparably organized societies. Better technology just meant better, more efficient savagery. Not less.

    It might help if you actually knew some Indians. The morality of human behavior can't be judged by the level of their own technological progress. Indians could only scalp one enemy at a time. Today Euro Americans can wipe out entire continents with a push of a few buttons. Also scalp with far better knives!

    But the lecture on the proper view of humanity's moral development is slated for next month so...

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Achmed E. Newman, @Buffalo Joe

  160. @RSDB
    @Jonathan Mason


    It is interesting that US sports teams … have … nicknames that ... refer to ... more feral types of humans

     

    The Washington Senators being a prime example.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    AGREE! and LOL!

  161. @Joe Paluka
    @Wilkey

    One good thing is coming out of it, the collapse of sports as a big business and people can hopefully become participants instead of 300 pound spectators.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    One good thing is coming out of it, the collapse of sports as a big business and people can hopefully become participants instead of 300 pound spectators.

    We can dream … but don’t hold your breath.

    The NFL went all in knee-bending anti-white b.s. and i know Trump voting–not just voting but MAGA fan–white guys who still watch that crap.

    Hey, entertainment, whatever. But seriously buying your entertainment from people who are pissing on you … but come to think of it, that’s Hollyweird for the past 60 years.

  162. @photondancer
    "Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved"

    I've read that Australian aborigines don't like to be reminded that across the water in New Zealand the Maori similarly fought the British for 200 years, while the far more numerous Aborigines were quickly routed. I've not observed any hail-fellow-PoC feelings between Maori and Aborigine so there may be something to it.

    Replies: @Hannah Katz, @Old Prude, @syonredux, @Corn, @sb, @Perspective

    I’ve not observed any hail-fellow-PoC feelings between Maori and Aborigine so there may be something to it.

    You bringing up inter-PoC relations jogged my memory. Does anyone know how American Indian tribes get along nowadays? I read of an incident once where a Seminole tribal leader, James Billie, was at some conference of American Indians. He got in an argument with a man from another tribe, and after much shouting from both parties Billie shouted, “You gave up! You gave up! We never did!!”.
    (The Seminole never signed a treaty with the US govt.)

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @Corn

    Corn, I have a Seneca aquaintance who calls Mohawks 'savages'.

    , @Anonymous
    @Corn

    Do Europeans get along with each other? Do the Poles love the Russians? How about East Asians, are they all pals? Do the Koreans and the Japanese love each other? Gosh, how about the Virginians and the West Virginians? I saw a sign once that said "Keep Virginia Beautiful. Dump Your Trash in West Virginia!" Surely a sign of deep affection, no?

  163. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    ...once they were free of the danger of being scalped by Indian raiders, quickly began to mythologize Indians as a worthy foe.
     
    Indeed



    https://wallpapercave.com/wp/wp1938147.jpg

    Apache

    https://crewdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Sikorsky-UH-60-Black-Hawk-2.jpeg

    Black Hawk

    https://www.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/uploads/2017/05/ch-47f.jpg

    Chinook


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ee/UH1_Huey_-_Fly_Navy_2017_(cropped).jpg/1200px-UH1_Huey_-_Fly_Navy_2017_(cropped).jpg

    Iroquois

    https://www.armyupress.army.mil/portals/7/nco-journal/images/Kiowa-5.jpg

    Kiowa

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @mmack, @Federalist, @J1234

    Mythologizing danger is a pretty common human pathos. A large number of team names are derived from fear, or fear overcome: Cyclones, Hurricanes, Bears, Bruins, Panthers, Bengals, Buccaneers, Raiders, Lions. There’s even a Keelhaulers. The historic Vikings and Pirates produced more fear in Europeans than pride. Of course, there’s an admiration for all of those things, but it may be derivative of the fear.

    I like all of those names better than names such as Beavers, Ravens and even Badgers (as fierce as they are) and certainly my home state’s Cornhuskers, as they don’t exactly conjure up fearful images. I really dislike team names like Jazz, Twins and Nuggets, which have very little to do with danger or bravery.

    • Replies: @Dube
    @J1234

    I like all of those names better than names such as Beavers, Ravens and even Badgers (as fierce as they are) and certainly my home state’s Cornhuskers, as they don’t exactly conjure up fearful images.

    Cornhusking is honest work. And if honest work involves out-thinking, out-maneuvering, and pounding an opponent into the grass - well, all in a day's.

  164. Anonymous[261] • Disclaimer says:
    @S. Anonyia
    @Paleo Liberal

    There is a reservation around here, though it is quite different than the ones out West. They are wealthy, and despite their claims of all having 1/4 blood quantum, they are so mixed race that they are ironically a tad blonder than the local whites.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    American Indians have been interbreeding with Europeans for a long time, hundreds of years at a minimum — discounting things like the Solutrean hypothesis or population geneticist Pontus Skoglund’s finding that someone with northern European ancestry is more closely related to native Americans than to southern Europeans. My ancestral line contains the American Indian family name Tangled Yellow Hair, which may imply a bit of interbreeding as well as that among the many things the Indian owes to the White man is the hair brush.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Anonymous

    "A Danish-led international research team has mapped the hitherto oldest genome of an anatomically modern human: the genome of a boy buried at Mal’ta near Lake Baikal in south-central Siberia some 24,000 years ago.

    Surprisingly, the genetic material reveals that the boy was European, which means that a European culture reached all the way east to Lake Baikal.

    The really sensational news, however, is that a large proportion (about a third) of all living Native Americans are descendants of the Mal’ta people. In other words, Native Americans have partly European ancestry."

    https://sciencenordic.com/anthropology-archaeology-denmark/dna-links-native-americans-with-europeans/1393344

    "The 24,000-year-old remains of a young boy from the Siberian village of Mal’ta have added a new root to the family tree of indigenous Americans. While some of the New World's native ancestry clearly traces back to east Asia, the Mal’ta boy’s genome — the oldest known of any modern human — shows that up to one-third of that ancestry can be traced back to Europe.

    The results show that people related to western Eurasians had spread further east than anyone had suspected, and lived in Siberia during the coldest parts of the last Ice Age.

    'At some point in the past, a branch of east Asians and a branch of western Eurasians met each other and had sex a lot,' says palaeogeneticist Eske Willerslev at the University of Copenhagen, who led the sequencing of the boy’s genome. This mixing, he says, created Native Americans."

    https://www.nature.com/news/americas-natives-have-european-roots-1.14213

  165. @Buffalo Joe
    @theMann

    theMann, best book, in my opinion, about the Comanches..."Empire of the Summer Moon." Hair raising, pun intented.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Cool Daddy Jimbo, @syonredux

    Yeah, the Comanche were an unpleasant bunch:

    On the return trip to Texas in early 1836, she was accompanied by her only brother, George Creath. After arriving at Columbia on the Brazos in February 1836, Sarah, her children, and George were met by John Hibbins. As they reached Rock Creek, six miles from a site known as Sweet Home and only fifteen miles from the Hibbinses’ home, thirteen Comanches attacked the party, killed Hibbins and George Creath, and captured Sarah and her children.

    As Indian captives, closely guarded, Sarah and her children were permitted little privacy or freedom. Even while they slept, two guards stayed with them. As the Comanches made their second camp with the captives, the little baby began crying, and one of the Comanches smashed its head against a nearby tree as Sarah looked on in horror.

    After they had traveled across the Colorado River, the Comanches permitted Sarah and her remaining son to sleep without the close guards. At night, while everyone else was sleeping, Sarah slipped out of the camp, although her escape meant leaving her son behind. She traveled in the river and brush and eventually happened upon a herd of cattle and followed them home to seek help. Her journey of only ten miles had taken her twenty-four hours. Using information given by Sarah, Capt. John J. Tumlinson, Jr., successfully led a group of Texas Rangers in a raid against the Indians and rescued the boy.

    https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/fhoat

    According to Swanson’s Cult of Glory, this was the Rangers’ first battle against the Comanche, and four Comanche were killed by the Rangers in their successful raid to recover the boy.

    Comanches as innocent victims of Anglo racism is a tough one to swallow…..

    • Thanks: Buffalo Joe
  166. @Anonymous
    Well, the wild Injun side of my family has a US military heritage going back to the late 1880s when one of my ancestors enlisted as a mounted scout with the 1st battalion of the 22nd Infantry at Fort Keogh, Montana. Since then, four generations in the US Navy, with the occasional black sheep Marine.
    I suppose this poster will soon be declared anathema and banished into the darkness:

    https://i.imgur.com/jWTrNPK.jpg

    The most decorated enlisted man in Navy history was a wild Injun, winning the trifecta of heroism -- Silver Star, Navy Cross, Medal of Honor:

    http://navylog.navymemorial.org/williams-james-12

    Four percent of Navy SEALs are American Indians and more Indians serve in the armed services, proportionally, than any other ethnic group.

    While there are some asshole "woke" Indians, which is not surprising, considering the times, no one, especially the lefties, pays much, if any, attention to them. As you say, they are kind of an embarrassment, having refused to be enslaved, fought with everything they had in every way they could to maintain their independence until they could fight no more.
    Most of us are normies, looking like a generic variety of whites, live off the rez, and may be your next door neighbor.
    Oh, yeah, we love our native land America and are proud to serve it. We can't sing worth a damn, and dance worse than a white man, but you'll find none better to stand beside you in a fight.

    Replies: @Dube

    Oh, yeah, we love our native land America and are proud to serve it. We can’t sing worth a damn, and dance worse than a white man, but you’ll find none better to stand beside you in a fight.

    To illustrate, from the current Imprimis:
    https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/mystic-chords-memory-learning-american-story/

    Ely Parker was born in 1828 to Elizabeth and William Parker of the Tonawanda Seneca tribe of the Iroquois Confederacy in western New York. Parker became a leader in his tribe at a very young age. Trained as a civil engineer, he earned a reputation in that field. In 1857, when he was 29 years old, he moved to Galena, Illinois, as a civil engineer working for the Treasury Department, and there his life took a fateful turn.

    He became friends with a fellow named Ulysses S. Grant. In these years, Grant was an ex-Army officer working as a clerk in his father’s store. Parker later liked to tell the story of coming to Grant’s aid in a barroom fight in Galena, the two of them back to back, fighting their way out against practically all the other patrons. At about five feet eight inches and 200 pounds, the robust Parker referred to himself as a “Savage Jack Falstaff.”

    [MORE]

    When the Civil War came on, Parker tried several times to join the Union Army as an engineer but was turned down because he was not a citizen. When he approached Secretary of State William Seward about a commission, he was told that the war was “an affair between white men,” that he should go home, and “we will settle our own troubles among ourselves without any Indian aid.”

    Eventually, with Grant’s endorsement, Parker received a commission, with the rank of captain, as Assistant Adjutant General for Volunteers. By late 1863, he had been transferred to Grant’s staff as Military Secretary. He soon became familiarly known as “the Indian at headquarters” and was promoted to lieutenant colonel and later to brigadier general. He may have saved Grant’s life or at least prevented his capture one dark night during the Wilderness Campaign in 1864, when Grant and his staff, unbeknownst to themselves, were riding into enemy lines.

    But Parker is rightly most remembered for something that happened in the parlor of a private residence in the village of Appomattox Court House on April 9, 1865.

    In the days preceding, Union armies had captured the city of Petersburg and the Confederate capital of Richmond. Grant and the Federal Army of the Potomac had put Confederate General Robert E. Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia in such a position that in the late afternoon of April 7, Grant, sitting on the verandah of his hotel headquarters in Farmville, said to a couple of his generals, “I have a great mind to summon Lee, to surrender.” He immediately wrote a letter respectfully inviting Lee to surrender and had it sent to him under a flag of truce. It took Lee a couple of days of desperate failed maneuvers to come around to the idea. But by the morning of April 9, Lee had concluded that “there is nothing left me to do but to go and see General Grant, and I would rather die a thousand deaths.”

    They agreed to meet in the village of Appomattox Court House to discuss terms.

    Grant had been riding hard for days on rough roads in rough weather. When he met Lee in the parlor of the brick house where they had arranged to meet, he had on dirty boots, “an old suit, without [his] sword, and without any distinguishing mark of rank, except the shoulder straps of a lieutenant general on a woolen blouse.” Lee was decked out from head to toe in all the military finery he had at his disposal.

    After introductions, and not much small talk, Lee asked Grant on what terms he would receive the surrender of Lee’s army. Grant told him that all officers and men would be “paroled and disqualified from taking up arms again until properly exchanged, and all arms, ammunition, and supplies were to be delivered up as captured property.” Lee said those were the terms he expected, and he asked Grant to commit them to writing, which Grant did, on the spot, and showed them to Lee.

    With minor revisions, Lee accepted, and Grant handed the document to his senior adjutant general, Theodore Bowers, to “put into ink.” This was a document that would effectively put an end to four years of devastating civil war. Bowers’ hands were so unsteady from nerves that he had to start over three or four times, going through several sheets of paper, in a failed effort to prepare a fair copy for the signatures of the generals.

    So Grant asked Ely Parker to do it, which he did, without trouble. This gave occasion for Lee and Parker to be introduced. When Lee recognized that Parker was an American Indian, he said, “I am glad to see one real American here.”

    Parker shook his hand and replied, “We are all Americans.”

    ***

    • Thanks: Buffalo Joe
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Dube

    Thanks!

  167. @HammerJack
    @Muggles

    Though your diversity-equality lecture is very au courant -- and all of us here are indebted to you for it -- I can't remember entire societies in Europe ever given to practices like those of the Aztecs and Toltecs. They seem to be in a class by themselves.

    Though granted the Empire of the Sun came close in the late 30s-early 40s.

    Replies: @Muggles, @John Up North

    Though your diversity-equality lecture is very au courant — and all of us here are indebted to you for it — I can’t remember entire societies in Europe ever given to practices like those of the Aztecs and Toltecs. They seem to be in a class by themselves

    Yes my lecturing tendencies can fly out of control here. So much ignorance, so little time.

    You may be having memory problems, a la Biden.

    Seems like only yesterday that folks were up in arms about a German dictator invading neighbors, ruthlessly killing civilians and rounding up members of slightly different tribes. Work camps, soap factories, etc. Maybe you missed that lecture.

    Or further east in a country made up entirely of white people (White!) their leaders deliberately starved millions (though “industrialization was rapid!”) and also rounded up millions and sent them to camps. No soap though. A few survived. The soap maker and the hunger games guy had a serious rumble. You may have missed that one too. Maybe those lectures are online.

    They “seem to be in a class by themselves” someone once opined.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Muggles


    The soap maker and the hunger games guy had a serious rumble...

    They “seem to be in a class by themselves” someone once opined.
     
    Those two parties are gone. The Democrats, whose crimes both ante- and postdated theirs, are extant. The dustbin is waiting.
    , @Mr McKenna
    @Muggles

    Do you really believe that 'soap factory' BS? It's like a modern-day hate hoax: preposterous on its face. Even if it hadn't been completely debunked by now, does it stand to reason that the Nazis would wash with....nope, too stupid, I can't even pose the question.

    No one denied killing and even labor camps. The discussion related to bizarre sadistic rituals. Your reading comprehension needs a ton of work before you resume your one-man lecture tour.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

  168. @Andy
    Of course, one of the biggest losers of mass migration to the US will be American Indians. If America belongs to the World, as the open border crowd claims, then any claim American Indians might have as the first human group in what is today the US is essentially nill.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @Corn

    If America belongs to the World, as the open border crowd claims

    I love that liberal legal logic.

    “America is stolen land, therefore it belongs to everyone.”

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @Corn

    Corn, I was considering buying a Border Collie, but what would the proper PC name be? Open Access Collie?

    , @martin_2
    @Corn

    Mr Jared Taylor has a good retort to those that say that America was stolen from the Indians, therefore no one is an immigrant.

    Firstly, if you really believe it is stolen then the only moral thing for you to do is to return to your own country, since you are presently benefitting from a crime.

    Secondly, what right have you got to set immigration policy, since this land, as you say, does not belong to you! Surely the only ones entitled to decide who shall and who shall not live here are the original inhabitants, that is, the Red Indians.

  169. @YetAnotherAnon
    OT, a new Law is discovered by Darren Beattie.

    https://niccolo.substack.com/p/the-zrich-interviews-darren-j-beattie


    "... the Beattie Law of Canonical Inclusion which states that every canonical work contains at least one passage which would get a modern American academic fired".
     
    (Here his example is Plato).

    Replies: @Servant of Gla'aki

    OT, a new Law is discovered by Darren Beattie.

    https://niccolo.substack.com/p/the-zrich-interviews-darren-j-beattie

    I didn’t realize Niccolo (and his ever-faithful companion, Donkey) had moved to Substack. Thanks for the tip, as it were.

  170. Anonymous[310] • Disclaimer says:
    @restless94110
    @Another Canadian

    Hey, mate. There was no ethnic cleansing. That's a lie.

    There was a respect for the warring, murderous, savage Indians that had fought settlers for a few hundred years, like they had fought other tribes for a thousand years (or more) before.

    Americans like me, who are native Americans, like Indians are, were happy to name things after the brave murderous savage warriors that fought and were bested by the European settlers.

    Now, all of that kindness, all of that respect, is being destroyed by stupid white SJWs and moronic Indian activists.

    Steve is right: Indians are being marginalized even further by this disastrous drive to rename venerable teams that celebrated Indian bravery, courage and revolve. A huge majority of Indians do not want this and have no problem with team names, but it does not matter to this useful idiots.

    Your response shows a part of why this is happening. Repeating the lies of the new narrative. This makes it worse for Indians, and worse for the cohesiveness of American society as a whole.

    Signed,
    A White American Who Married A Native American (Choctaw) Now A Father, Grandfather, and Great Grandfather Of Mixed Breed Descendants.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Americans like me, who are native Americans, like Indians are, were happy to name things after the brave murderous savage warriors that fought and were bested by the European settlers.

    Now, all of that kindness, all of that respect, is being destroyed by stupid white SJWs and moronic Indian activists.

    Steve is right: Indians are being marginalized even further by this disastrous drive to rename venerable teams that celebrated Indian bravery, courage and revolve.

    Good post. Do you see any parallels between the respect formerly given to the defeated Indians and that formerly given to defeated Southerners? And parallels between the place they were given in America’s heritage and identity?

    And are there any commonalities in the contemporary push to erase Southern symbols and history and the contemporary push to erase Indian symbols and history?

    • Replies: @restless94110
    @Anonymous


    Do you see any parallels between the respect formerly given to the defeated Indians and that formerly given to defeated Southerners? And parallels between the place they were given in America’s heritage and identity?
     
    In my experience, growing up in California, I never did see much respect for Southerners. And, until the late late 60s the South was looked at as a place full of rednecks, chain gangs, of mean and narrow-minded people. I believed from first hand experience that that was by and large true.

    And it was reinforced by movies. Just the other day, I saw an old Alan Ladd Western where her comes with his young son to the North as the boy has ceased to speak due to hysterical laryngitis from seeing his mother murdered by the Union soldiers while Ladd was off fighting for the South. There is a ton of discrimination and anger thrown on the two in the town in the north that they land in and that makes up much of the film. I also checked out Vera Cruz (1951) where Gary Cooper is a Confederate colonel who has come to French-ruled Mexico to make enough money to repair his ruined plantation and is subjected to scorn and ridicule by the thug villains (Ernest Borgnine and Charles Bronson among them).

    You also have Easy Rider, which was a massive international hit with its portrayal of the dangerous South for long hairs in the late 60s. Very very scary scenes.

    But as Duane Alman said you only have to go to Modesto (California) to find rednecks. Many from the South came to all parts of California especially the Central Valley and Southern California. And many of those statues that are being torn down were erected in the early 20th century by the South as a kind of a statement: "we are proud of our segregation system:"

    But then all of that changed in a matter of just a few years. Southern bands like Lynard Skinard, The Alman Brothers, and others, and country bands like Alabama and dozens more started wearing their hair long and singing answers to Neil Young's Southern Man screed. Civil rights gave blacks more equality and things have proceeded from there.

    But to my mind there is still Southerner bashing going on and it's unjustified and uncalled for. So my reply is no. There were barriers to Indians assimilating into mainstream culture and then those barriers were lifted in the early 70s, but they still didn't and haven't. The team names reflected a respect but at arm's length. The South was always looked at as a backwater.

    In the years since, I have come to admire many things about Southerners, but I've never seen much of that arm's length respect that Indians got.

    And are there any commonalities in the contemporary push to erase Southern symbols and history and the contemporary push to erase Indian symbols and history?
     
    Both of these are misguided and coming from a faulty analysis of American history and American culture. For example, Robert E. Lee was a brilliant general who had fought in American wars. He only went for the South because he was loyal to his state. A deeper reading of the Civil War reveals that it had little to do with slavery thought that was one component.

    Even Abe Lincoln felt that the solution for freeing black slaves was to repatriate them back to Africa. And one of the largest slave owners was a Chctaw chieftain (guess my half-Choctaw daughter is going to have to pay reparations?).

    In the South, for decades the idea of justice was many times the lynch mob. Though 1800 blacks were lynhed, 1250 whites were, too. A man suspected credibly of rape, thievery, etc., was often summarily strung up. The idea that this was purely hateful with no cause and only racially based is without merit.

    Also keep in mind, the minstrel shows of those times featuring either whites in black face or blacks themselves were looked at as entertainment by whites not as being derisive; as being a release from the extraordinarily uptight customs and morés of White society. Blacks had license to be far freer in their ways than withes did and the shows allowed whites to exhale and get a contact high from it.

    All of these things are now looked upon by the ignorant fools as some kind of evil hateful plot.

    the Indians have been left out of this kind of thing. Steve's point was that by erasing even the names of sports teams from Indian names that you leave them out even further. They just are disappeared. In the 70s there were several feature films that had Indian actors in central roles (One Flew Over the Cookoo's Nest, another film made by Clint Eastwood,, several more). But these themes and roles have dried up,.

    On my first Facebook account almost 10 years ago, I had a few Indian friends, and I used to get real entangled up with my friend's friends and relatives, all Native American. I still have in my archives a long thread about the film Avatar which celebrates in my view tribal cultures but her friends felt insulted Indians. It looked to me like the older Indian women friends were in a constant state of anger and resentment and were quick to disqualify anyone who was not a redskin, and the young young men were in that stupid SJW analytical loopback which discounts every point of view except white man bad.

    I realized that both of those camps were stupidly erasing themselves.

    And you still see it. The recent commercial I saw on social media of frowny-faced Indians standing around breaking things because Thanksgiving? When Thanksgiving truly was a celebration by whites and the tribe where they landed--who were helped by the whites from the murderous neighboring tribes that had been terrorizing them for years.

    It's a perversion and it just makes Indians feel more and more isolated. Just like the perverted readings of event by the black race baitiers makes blacks feel more and more isolated.

    So no, the Indians have more in common with blacks in that regard. The Southerners stand alone.

    Replies: @John Up North

  171. @Muggles
    @HammerJack


    Though your diversity-equality lecture is very au courant — and all of us here are indebted to you for it — I can’t remember entire societies in Europe ever given to practices like those of the Aztecs and Toltecs. They seem to be in a class by themselves
     
    Yes my lecturing tendencies can fly out of control here. So much ignorance, so little time.

    You may be having memory problems, a la Biden.

    Seems like only yesterday that folks were up in arms about a German dictator invading neighbors, ruthlessly killing civilians and rounding up members of slightly different tribes. Work camps, soap factories, etc. Maybe you missed that lecture.

    Or further east in a country made up entirely of white people (White!) their leaders deliberately starved millions (though "industrialization was rapid!") and also rounded up millions and sent them to camps. No soap though. A few survived. The soap maker and the hunger games guy had a serious rumble. You may have missed that one too. Maybe those lectures are online.

    They "seem to be in a class by themselves" someone once opined.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Mr McKenna

    The soap maker and the hunger games guy had a serious rumble…

    They “seem to be in a class by themselves” someone once opined.

    Those two parties are gone. The Democrats, whose crimes both ante- and postdated theirs, are extant. The dustbin is waiting.

  172. Anonymous[261] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    @S. Anonyia

    American Indians have been interbreeding with Europeans for a long time, hundreds of years at a minimum -- discounting things like the Solutrean hypothesis or population geneticist Pontus Skoglund's finding that someone with northern European ancestry is more closely related to native Americans than to southern Europeans. My ancestral line contains the American Indian family name Tangled Yellow Hair, which may imply a bit of interbreeding as well as that among the many things the Indian owes to the White man is the hair brush.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    “A Danish-led international research team has mapped the hitherto oldest genome of an anatomically modern human: the genome of a boy buried at Mal’ta near Lake Baikal in south-central Siberia some 24,000 years ago.

    Surprisingly, the genetic material reveals that the boy was European, which means that a European culture reached all the way east to Lake Baikal.

    The really sensational news, however, is that a large proportion (about a third) of all living Native Americans are descendants of the Mal’ta people. In other words, Native Americans have partly European ancestry.”

    https://sciencenordic.com/anthropology-archaeology-denmark/dna-links-native-americans-with-europeans/1393344

    “The 24,000-year-old remains of a young boy from the Siberian village of Mal’ta have added a new root to the family tree of indigenous Americans. While some of the New World’s native ancestry clearly traces back to east Asia, the Mal’ta boy’s genome — the oldest known of any modern human — shows that up to one-third of that ancestry can be traced back to Europe.

    The results show that people related to western Eurasians had spread further east than anyone had suspected, and lived in Siberia during the coldest parts of the last Ice Age.

    ‘At some point in the past, a branch of east Asians and a branch of western Eurasians met each other and had sex a lot,’ says palaeogeneticist Eske Willerslev at the University of Copenhagen, who led the sequencing of the boy’s genome. This mixing, he says, created Native Americans.”

    https://www.nature.com/news/americas-natives-have-european-roots-1.14213

  173. Anonymous[310] • Disclaimer says:
    @martin_2
    Mr Sailer's comments are precisely what I have been saying on this and other forums for ages. The Red Indian was always held in high esteem in my country, at least in popular culture. Red Indians were never the baddies in the Westerns I watched as a child. It was always good cowboys versus bad cowboys with the Red Indians helping the story along in some way. Sometimes the Red Indians were tricked or betrayed by the baddies. The Red Indians were portrayed as brave - to the point of recklessness, resourceful, honourable, blah blah blah.

    The Left don't want Red Indians to feel any pride in their Race. They want the Red Indians to be as miserable and depressed as them. Hence they want them to be called "Native Americans" and not Red Indians, and to constantly remind them that they're all a bunch of drunks and losers.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    The Left don’t want Red Indians to feel any pride in their Race.

    Are you sure about that? Why don’t they?

    They want the Red Indians to be as miserable and depressed as them. Hence they want them to be called “Native Americans” and not Red Indians.

    Why would being called Native Americans make them more depressed than calling them Red Indians?

  174. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Muggles

    Muggles, along the lines of Mr. Ross's reply, I'll say this. The Indians were not like the Western man. They were never going to improve except though some fortuitous advances like the Comanche's (just as a big example) learning to ride/handle/wage war from horses like nobody else. These Indians lived like they'd always had for the most part. There was to be no civilization as we know it, not unless you wait for an evolutionary amount of time.

    There's freedom as none of us, even ancestors that came off the Mayflower could have ever known, in being a savage. However, the brutality of nature would never abate, since there was to be no improvement in their society. The Comanche man's whole purpose in life was to wage war and accumulate horses, and the horses would help in waging more war. That was it. There was not going to be an Indian Alexander Graham Bell or Isaac Newton, EVER.

    I hope you will read the book Buffalo Joe and I mentioned.

    Replies: @Muggles

    I hope you will read the book Buffalo Joe and I mentioned.

    Yes I’ve read it. Also last year read Glenn Frankel’s book The Searchers, The Making of an American Legend.

    While is is roughly 1/3 about making the famous John Wayne film about the Comanche children kidnapping, approximately half of it details the exact Texas history of this incident and what the survivors on both sides could recall. Based on published scholarly research. I was quite surprised at that, in the very detailed accounts from when it occurred to current day descendants. Most of what is taught about that in Texas schools is demonstrably false or not supported by contemporary witnesses.

    Comanches were only one of many Amerind tribes, a tiny minority. Others were even more feared, like Apaches, but both small in number.

    You seem to be conflating 3000 years of Western (European/Mediterranean/Middle Eastern) history of what by 1850 were hundreds of millions living there, to roughly 10 million indigenous inhabitants of N. America. To base your entire argument on one fairly small group in the middle of nowhere with the entire Amerind population is absurd. No one argues that natives lacked virtually all technology prior to European arrival. That doesn’t mean they were any dumber than say, Vikings or Celts. That’s an entirely separate story line.

    Nor given a fair comparison, were Amerinds any more (or less) savage than Europeans in comparably organized societies. Better technology just meant better, more efficient savagery. Not less.

    It might help if you actually knew some Indians. The morality of human behavior can’t be judged by the level of their own technological progress. Indians could only scalp one enemy at a time. Today Euro Americans can wipe out entire continents with a push of a few buttons. Also scalp with far better knives!

    But the lecture on the proper view of humanity’s moral development is slated for next month so…

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    @Muggles

    These are reconstructions of +2200 year old Celtic wagons:

    https://www.laits.utexas.edu/ironagecelts/images/vix/vix_wagon_reconstr.jpg

    https://www.thevintagenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Reconstruction-of-the-grave-good-cart-loaded-with-some-more-goods.-Part-of-the-grave-from-the-celtic-prince-in-Hochdorf-Germany.-Photo-Credit-640x480.jpg


    Celtic wagons were the first in the world to feature seamless iron tires, and wheels made from a single board, bent in to a hoop and fasted with a single joint. These are feats that most wheelwrights of the 18th and 19th centuries were incapable of performing (perhaps 5 people in the world can do this today). The Greeks and Romans learned how to make this type of wheel from Celts.


    They're also believed to have invented lye-based soap (as opposed to the earlier potash-based soap of the acient bear east), and taught Romans the very difficult art of wooden casking. An art that had been previously mastered by such organized societies as Egyptians and Mesopotamians.


    Please... Show me the Amerindians living at that level pre-1500s. That's not a jab at the Amerindians, but at the idea that Celts were violent because they weren't organized. They had in fact reached a very high level of sophistication.

    Replies: @Hereward

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @Muggles


    No one argues that natives lacked virtually all technology prior to European arrival. That doesn’t mean they were any dumber than say, Vikings or Celts.
     
    It does kind of mean that, yes. I've met some Indians in my time. I've got nothing against them. However, the experience of the 2 Canadian commenters jives with what a Canadian friend tells me who worked up in the north for a while (Manitoba, I think). Firewater is their worst enemy, I guess.
    , @Buffalo Joe
    @Muggles

    Mugs, the Comanches were fierce enough to drive the Apaches out of Texas. The Comanches met their match when the Texas Rangers realized that slaughtering the Comanches' horses was the way to eliminate them as a threat. I will ask my Seneca friend who refs in this area for Indian box lacrosse leagues if the teams have names or just geographical locations or sponsor names. Stay safe.

    Replies: @Muggles

  175. @Canadian Observer
    In Western Canada, you have the interesting dynamic of having a large underclass of Natives living in the cities, such as Winnipeg, Regina, Edmonton, etc. That way, you get to see their drug use and alcoholism up close, thus diminishing their historical prestige in our eyes. I don’t think this dynamic really exists in the United States.

    In Eastern Canada - where there are less of them, more white admixture amongst the population and because they are largely confined to rural areas - Natives are treated more like sacred pets.

    Replies: @jcd1974, @Servant of Gla'aki, @anon, @Ganderson

    In Western Canada, you have the interesting dynamic of having a large underclass of Natives living in the cities, such as Winnipeg, Regina, Edmonton, etc. That way, you get to see their drug use and alcoholism up close, thus diminishing their historical prestige in our eyes. I don’t think this dynamic really exists in the United States.

    Probably the only thing like a real city in the USA where this phenomenon also exists, would be Rapid City, South Dakota.

    • Replies: @Ray Huffman
    @Servant of Gla'aki

    I can see you've never been to Phoenix. (Denver is probably similar, although I have never been there.)

    , @John Cunningham
    @Servant of Gla'aki

    Alaska natives living in Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Juneau have a similar pattern.

  176. @Joe Paluka
    @Diversity Heretic

    I think too many boys received the "order of the arrow" from their scoutmasters so they just want to forget about their time there.

    Replies: @additionalMike

    Mr. Paluka, do you have some facts to back that charge up or are you just pulling that out of your ass?

    • Replies: @Joe Paluka
    @additionalMike

    https://news.yahoo.com/more-92-000-people-claim-230611141.html

    Is 92,000 victims enough or did they just make it up.

    Replies: @iDeplorable

  177. @Paleo Liberal
    I am a mostly white enrolled member of an Indian nation.
    I can tell you:

    1. Opinions vary widely among Indians.
    2. It is considered culturally extremely offensive to speak for an Indian without express permission.

    I have run across Indians who were Redskins fans. Others hate all the mascot names.

    These are my opinions only. I do not speak for any other Indian.

    What I would like to see happen.

    Redskins: get rid of the name. It is a racial slur.

    Cleveland Indians: keep the name, get rid of Chief Wahoo. Devote team resources to promoting Indian culture. For example, the Packers are near a Rez and sometimes have Indians performing at halftime. The Tribe should do something similar perhaps in the 7th inning stretch.

    Atlanta Braves: keep the name. Get rid of the Tomahawk Chop. Invest in Indian culture.

    KC Chiefs: I would like to see them get to the Super Bowl and lose with time expiring from a Hail Mary pass by Aaron Rodgers. Hey, I’m a Packers fan. What can I say?

    Replies: @pirelli

    Thanks. Absent from Steve’s lamentation of the erasure of American Indians is any reference to what actual American Indians think about the topic. My impression was, just as you said, that opinions were somewhat divided, but on the whole favored getting rid of “Redskins” and mascots that amount to mocking caricatures.

  178. @Anon99
    @AnotherDad

    Oh please. The US was built by immigrants. When Europeans did it, it was a “human norm” but not when other groups do it. The US was the most prosperous nation so of course it attracted the most immigrants. When other nations catch up, don’t worry they will gladly stay away and save themselves from the scorn you heap on them. See, South Korea and Japan.

    https://www.infoplease.com/us/society-culture/race/immigrants-us-country-origin

    Replies: @Rosie, @AnotherDad

    When other nations catch up

    Note the assumption that other nations will “catch up,” as if progress were inevitable. I suppose he thinks decline is inconceivable.

  179. @anon
    @donut

    The White Mountain and San Carlos nation allow hunting and fishing for a fee. The White Mountains have multiple trout lakes. Deer, bear, elk and javelina are all legit game animals on that res. Part of the income for the nation, and a supply of jobs for tribal members, comes from hunting and fishing. Probably they developed this before the casino bill passed Congress.

    https://wmatoutdoor.org/

    Of course that's past tense, because the Coof showed up. Mostly everything is closed or otherwise messed up due to SARS-2. Apparently the nation has shut itself off from the world as much as possible - closed casinos, blocked a lot of roads, put up checkpoints on others.

    In time fishing and hunting will re-open on that res and others, for those who follow the rules. Trying to poach on Indian land...probably not a good idea.

    Replies: @stillCARealist, @Buffalo Joe

    TwoSevenZero, years ago I asked an Indian aquaintance if he was taking off work for the opening day of deer season. He laughed and said, “Everyday is open season on the res.”

  180. @Muggles
    @Achmed E. Newman


    I hope you will read the book Buffalo Joe and I mentioned.
     
    Yes I've read it. Also last year read Glenn Frankel's book The Searchers, The Making of an American Legend.

    While is is roughly 1/3 about making the famous John Wayne film about the Comanche children kidnapping, approximately half of it details the exact Texas history of this incident and what the survivors on both sides could recall. Based on published scholarly research. I was quite surprised at that, in the very detailed accounts from when it occurred to current day descendants. Most of what is taught about that in Texas schools is demonstrably false or not supported by contemporary witnesses.

    Comanches were only one of many Amerind tribes, a tiny minority. Others were even more feared, like Apaches, but both small in number.

    You seem to be conflating 3000 years of Western (European/Mediterranean/Middle Eastern) history of what by 1850 were hundreds of millions living there, to roughly 10 million indigenous inhabitants of N. America. To base your entire argument on one fairly small group in the middle of nowhere with the entire Amerind population is absurd. No one argues that natives lacked virtually all technology prior to European arrival. That doesn't mean they were any dumber than say, Vikings or Celts. That's an entirely separate story line.

    Nor given a fair comparison, were Amerinds any more (or less) savage than Europeans in comparably organized societies. Better technology just meant better, more efficient savagery. Not less.

    It might help if you actually knew some Indians. The morality of human behavior can't be judged by the level of their own technological progress. Indians could only scalp one enemy at a time. Today Euro Americans can wipe out entire continents with a push of a few buttons. Also scalp with far better knives!

    But the lecture on the proper view of humanity's moral development is slated for next month so...

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Achmed E. Newman, @Buffalo Joe

    These are reconstructions of +2200 year old Celtic wagons:

    Celtic wagons were the first in the world to feature seamless iron tires, and wheels made from a single board, bent in to a hoop and fasted with a single joint. These are feats that most wheelwrights of the 18th and 19th centuries were incapable of performing (perhaps 5 people in the world can do this today). The Greeks and Romans learned how to make this type of wheel from Celts.

    They’re also believed to have invented lye-based soap (as opposed to the earlier potash-based soap of the acient bear east), and taught Romans the very difficult art of wooden casking. An art that had been previously mastered by such organized societies as Egyptians and Mesopotamians.

    Please… Show me the Amerindians living at that level pre-1500s. That’s not a jab at the Amerindians, but at the idea that Celts were violent because they weren’t organized. They had in fact reached a very high level of sophistication.

    • Replies: @Hereward
    @JohnPlywood

    The first picture is a reconstruction of the wagon from the Vix Grave. If I recall correctly, the wheel hubs were hollow bronze castings in which hardwood dowels were found. The dowels still bore traces of oil or fat. It seems they acted as lubricated roller bearings within the hubs.

  181. @Achmed E. Newman
    @Buffalo Joe

    I agree, Joe. Peak Stupidity has a 3-part review you may (or not) be interested in:

    Review of Empire of the Summer Moon - Sam Gwynne: Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    Ach, thank you, I actually have two copies of the book, one on the bookshelve and one I lend out. IEye opening and factual. Stay safe.

  182. @Anon
    OT

    Following some links from Jesse Singal's Twitter account about recent uproars in the AI/ML field, I am starting to come to the conclusion that while everyone was distracted by blacks and Hispanics and their equity dust-ups, the below-the-radar infiltration of dot-Indians into American academia and high-tech business is going to end up being a much bigger problem. These people are crazy and vindictive, and like M2F trannies, they have the smarts to really cause damage to society using woke theory or whatever else suits their purposes.

    Replies: @Joe Paluka, @Servant of Gla'aki, @Anonymous

    I am starting to come to the conclusion that while everyone was distracted by blacks and Hispanics and their equity dust-ups, the below-the-radar infiltration of dot-Indians into American academia and high-tech business is going to end up being a much bigger problem. These people are crazy and vindictive, and like M2F trannies, they have the smarts to really cause damage to society using woke theory or whatever else suits their purposes.

    That’s an interesting perspective, but I wonder just how much race/ethnicity matters among the “woke”. They all are required to have the precise same set of opinions…so what does it matter if Generic Intersectionalist Tyrant #3697 is a swarthy Hindoo, or a direct descendant of Increase Mather?

    I mean, if there were a White guy at the helm of Google, it’s not like the Google Doodles would suddenly become MAGA-themed. “Woke” Whites are just as shitty as any other “woke” clone. They’re all interchangeable cyphers, near as I can tell.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Servant of Gla'aki



    I am starting to come to the conclusion that while everyone was distracted by blacks and Hispanics and their equity dust-ups, the below-the-radar infiltration of dot-Indians into American academia and high-tech business is going to end up being a much bigger problem. These people are crazy and vindictive, and like M2F trannies, they have the smarts to really cause damage to society using woke theory or whatever else suits their purposes.
     
    That’s an interesting perspective, but I wonder just how much race/ethnicity matters among the “woke”. They all are required to have the precise same set of opinions.
     
    Many (not all) subcons embrace this nasty stuff with a certain malice or racial animus, probable borne of racial avarice and insecurity. They really have it in for Native American Whites.
  183. @Bill Jones
    @Prosa123

    Gillette arose in Anon's discussion about Boycotts. Gillette was widely boycotted a couple of years ago because some dipshit in their marketing department thought that the way to sell razors to White men was by preaching about toxic masculinity.

    That turns out not to be the case. I for one will not buy from them again.

    Replies: @MBlanc46

    After 50+ years of using Gillette products, I’m now using Schick.

  184. @Muggles
    @Achmed E. Newman


    I hope you will read the book Buffalo Joe and I mentioned.
     
    Yes I've read it. Also last year read Glenn Frankel's book The Searchers, The Making of an American Legend.

    While is is roughly 1/3 about making the famous John Wayne film about the Comanche children kidnapping, approximately half of it details the exact Texas history of this incident and what the survivors on both sides could recall. Based on published scholarly research. I was quite surprised at that, in the very detailed accounts from when it occurred to current day descendants. Most of what is taught about that in Texas schools is demonstrably false or not supported by contemporary witnesses.

    Comanches were only one of many Amerind tribes, a tiny minority. Others were even more feared, like Apaches, but both small in number.

    You seem to be conflating 3000 years of Western (European/Mediterranean/Middle Eastern) history of what by 1850 were hundreds of millions living there, to roughly 10 million indigenous inhabitants of N. America. To base your entire argument on one fairly small group in the middle of nowhere with the entire Amerind population is absurd. No one argues that natives lacked virtually all technology prior to European arrival. That doesn't mean they were any dumber than say, Vikings or Celts. That's an entirely separate story line.

    Nor given a fair comparison, were Amerinds any more (or less) savage than Europeans in comparably organized societies. Better technology just meant better, more efficient savagery. Not less.

    It might help if you actually knew some Indians. The morality of human behavior can't be judged by the level of their own technological progress. Indians could only scalp one enemy at a time. Today Euro Americans can wipe out entire continents with a push of a few buttons. Also scalp with far better knives!

    But the lecture on the proper view of humanity's moral development is slated for next month so...

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Achmed E. Newman, @Buffalo Joe

    No one argues that natives lacked virtually all technology prior to European arrival. That doesn’t mean they were any dumber than say, Vikings or Celts.

    It does kind of mean that, yes. I’ve met some Indians in my time. I’ve got nothing against them. However, the experience of the 2 Canadian commenters jives with what a Canadian friend tells me who worked up in the north for a while (Manitoba, I think). Firewater is their worst enemy, I guess.

  185. Anonymous[115] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    OT

    Following some links from Jesse Singal's Twitter account about recent uproars in the AI/ML field, I am starting to come to the conclusion that while everyone was distracted by blacks and Hispanics and their equity dust-ups, the below-the-radar infiltration of dot-Indians into American academia and high-tech business is going to end up being a much bigger problem. These people are crazy and vindictive, and like M2F trannies, they have the smarts to really cause damage to society using woke theory or whatever else suits their purposes.

    Replies: @Joe Paluka, @Servant of Gla'aki, @Anonymous

    Unless you are in the corporate world you can’t imagine how bad it is actually is. I live in the middle of nowhere and my town is now approximately 20% Indian because the Fortune 500 company that I work for is importing them as salaried employees by the thousands. A friend of mine told me that the local school district is approximately one-third Indian. This is one of the best school districts in the state.

    • Replies: @Abolish_public_education
    @Anonymous

    It’s unclear whether those schoolteachers are citizens.

    It really burns me up to hear US/state government workers talking with foreign accents. The welfare magnet.

    Be that worker a US citizen naturalized, native-born, or nth generation, his employment (i.e. tax leeching) really burns me up.

  186. @Reg Cæsar
    @Stick


    Indiana’s capitol is [in] Indianapolis.
     
    Where they still believe in science unlike, apparently, SCOTUS:


    In 'victory' for LGBTQ families, Supreme Court denies Indiana birth certificate case

    "They sued the state health commissioner and Tippecanoe County officials because county officials would not list both of them as parents on the birth certificate of their son, who Ruby conceived through artificial insemination."

    The Erasure of Dad. Like father, like son.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    Where they still believe in science unlike, apparently, SCOTUS:

    The relevant issue isn’t science but that Indiana has a law.

    But if anyone thinks we have constitutional government, or federalism or self-government anymore, they aren’t paying attention.

    Our “constitution” is minoritarianism and whatever the elite wants.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @AnotherDad


    The relevant issue isn’t science but that Indiana has a law.
     
    The law is based on biology. The decision is at war with it.
  187. @Twinkie
    https://hailtoyou.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/fertility19802013_b.png

    The red line says it all.

    Replies: @Veracitor

    The birthrate graph showing severe decline for Amerinds makes me sad.

    (I think all large “ethnic groups” in the USA have below-replacement birthrates now. The remaining sub-groups with high birthrates (Amish, Hasids, low-IQ Googles, …) will likely furnish ever larger shares of the future population unless swamped by new immigrants and their offspring.)

    I theorize that the low birthrate is driving a lot of the craziness in our society. Here’s my hand-wavy evo-psych theory: humans are adapted to the presence of children and a “normal” population ladder. When there are too few youngsters, that indicates a big problem like famine, plague, invasion, etc. People subconsciously react; they become anxious and increasingly willing to support proposed responses, including crazy ones (like the transgenderist campaign for the mutilation of children, which is sort of the modern equivalent of the Xhosa Cattle Killing of 1856).

    Of course there are plenty of opportunists who exploit the anxious state of the public to feather their own nests.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Veracitor


    I theorize that the low birthrate is driving a lot of the craziness in our society. Here’s my hand-wavy evo-psych theory: humans are adapted to the presence of children and a “normal” population ladder. ...
     
    Veracitor, i'm not sold with your specific theory, but i'm on board with the basic premise.

    I think there are two biggies:

    1) Young women divorced from normal the normal child bearing, nursing and nurturing they are designed for ... really are nuts. Their nuttiness is a huge part of "woke".

    and

    2) Everyone--young men especially, but everyone--is just more "unmoored". Unmoored from connection to the future, ergo the past. Life is no long connected--to past and future--and more a pointless hyper-personal and essentially meaningless drama.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    , @photondancer
    @Veracitor

    The book (and film) Children of Men has much the same idea. I think it's a hypothesis that merits some research.

    , @Twinkie
    @Veracitor


    When there are too few youngsters, that indicates a big problem like famine, plague, invasion, etc. People subconsciously react; they become anxious and increasingly willing to support proposed responses, including crazy ones (like the transgenderist campaign for the mutilation of children, which is sort of the modern equivalent of the Xhosa Cattle Killing of 1856).
     
    That's straight out of "Children of Men."

    https://youtu.be/2VT2apoX90o

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

  188. @Anon99
    @AnotherDad

    Oh please. The US was built by immigrants. When Europeans did it, it was a “human norm” but not when other groups do it. The US was the most prosperous nation so of course it attracted the most immigrants. When other nations catch up, don’t worry they will gladly stay away and save themselves from the scorn you heap on them. See, South Korea and Japan.

    https://www.infoplease.com/us/society-culture/race/immigrants-us-country-origin

    Replies: @Rosie, @AnotherDad

    Oh please. The US was built by immigrants.

    Oh please. This is beyond stupid.

    • Agree: William Badwhite
    • Replies: @Anon99
    @AnotherDad

    I guess you don’t consider Germans, Italians or the British as immigrants. Did you look at the link? They were the first and second wave of immigrants. I agree with you that Europeans laid the foundation for the US but they are immigrants nonetheless.

    Replies: @syonredux, @AnotherDad

  189. @Anonymous
    @AnotherDad


    They came, battled the existing people, beat them, took territory and built something great.
     
    This mischaracterizes what happened. They arrived to the new land without malice toward any of the people they encountered. But they responded in kind when attacked or threatened.

    Relations between the settlers and the Indians were mostly peaceful in fact.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    Relations between the settlers and the Indians were mostly peaceful in fact.

    Like the “mostly peaceful” protests!

    Actually i agree with you, the colonists didn’t come with malice towards the Indians, nor any desire to do them harm. They were not doing some sort of Genghis Khan thing were they were specifically looking to rape and pillage what was there. (Or even glom onto the natives’ good stuff, like today’s immigrants to the West.)

    Rather, the settlers came for the land.

    But continually pushing into land that some other people occupy … brings on conflict.

    The Indians were not wrong to attack some settlers who pushed into their lands, even though the settlers were “peaceful”. One settler family may be fine. Maybe two, four, eight. But as the settlers keep coming … your land, your hunting ground is gone, and you are pushed out and must fight with some other tribe to the West to survive.

    I don’t think any intelligent white man should be whining about Indian behavior. Whites were at a higher civilizational level and so won. I’m a child of Western Christian civilization, and–as objectively as possible–think it is simply better, more interesting, more valuable, than any other. So i see the white victory as a good thing. (Without it i would not be here.) But that doesn’t mean the Indians are “evil” or “bad” for resisting. They were trying to keep their way of life, their peoples, intact.

    This is fundamental: No matter what the attitude there is no “peaceful” or “harmless” “immigration” of different people into someone else’s land. When the new people take it, it is lost to the people who have it. And the natives have a fundamental right to resist that … by any means necessary.

  190. Particularly relevant episode of the radio version of Gunsmoke!:

    Renegade White (August 1952):

    Find below my transcription of selected portions of dialogue that I found particularly noteworthy and memorable.

    [ ~17:15-17:37:]
    [Spicer:] Come on, Wild Hog, let’s shoot him [i.e., U.S. Marshall Matt Dillon] and get it over with

    [Wild Hog, a Cheyenne Indian chief, referring to Dillon:] This is a man of much heart. I admire his courage. To stand with death on all sides and arrest a man. No, we will not kill him. Not yet.

    [Spicer:] But you can’t take him with us!

    [Wild Hog, calling for someone:] White Cloud?! Give him a horse. Come.

    [~ 18:17- 20:10:]

    [Dillon:] What are you doing with these Cheyennes here, anyway, Spicer?

    [Spicer:] I got a deal with Wild Hog, Marshall. A real good deal.

    [Dillon:] Is killing white men part of it?

    [Spicer, chuckling:] They don’t need any help there, Marshall. They like to kill white men.

    [Dillon:] Maybe they’ll kill you before they’re through. [continued after break]

    [MORE]

    [continued from break] [Spicer:] Nah uh, I’m too valuable to ’em. They like me.

    [Dillon:] No? Now, why would they like you?

    [Spicer:] Well, they didn’t at first. But I talked ’em into it, talked Wild Hog into it. He’s a smart fellow, that Indian. Saw right away what I could do for him, like buying those rifles.

    [Dillon:] What else did you do for him?

    [Spicer:] Well, I stopped those two riders with the horses, told ’em I was sick, got ’em off guard. Those Cheyennes were on ’em before they could move. It was real easy.

    [Dillon:] You’re kinda like a Judas sheep in a slaughter-pen, hah?

    [Spicer:] {chuckles} Yeah, that’s it, Marshall. Pay’s better, though. I got five-hundred dollars comin’, as soon we find a ranch or two to raid.

    [Dillon:] I see.

    [Spicer:] Pretty good deal, heh?

    [Dillon:] You know, I think a lot more of these Indians than I do of you, Spicer.

    [Spicer:] I don’t like that, Marshall.

    [Dillon:] At least they’ve got an argument on their side. But you’re just a renegade white.

    ~20:52- 25:48:

    [Wild Hog, to Dillon:] Country is greener already, better every mile.

    [Dillon:] Why have you been raiding so far south, Wild Hog, if you like this land better?

    [Wild Hog:] We are northern Cheyenne, Marshall, from the Big Horn Mountains. The army took us south to a reservation in the Oklahoma territory.

    [Dillon:] Ah, so that’s it!? You jumped your reservation, hah?

    [Wild Hog:] Why should we live in a hot, flat land that has no game?

    [Dillon:] But the army will be after you again. You’ve broken the law.

    [Wild Hog:] Whose law? Ours or yours?

    [Dillon:] Alright, Wild Hog. But the Indian has a law against murder. You’ve broken that twice that I know of.

    [Wild Hog:] Cheyenne does not speak of it as murder to kill his enemy.

    [Dillon:] Those cowboys weren’t your enemy, Wild Hog. They weren’t fighting you.

    [Wild Hog:] The army drove us from our home in the mountains. The army took our horses from us. We are going back home now on other horses, that’s all.

    [Dillon:] That doesn’t explain your killin’. Those men were peaceful.

    [Wild Hog:] Marshall, if I could, I would kill every white man in the country. But I cannot, the Indian nations cannot. The red man has always fled before the white man.

    [Dillon:] Those cowboys weren’t chasin’ you.

    [Wild Hog:] We needed their horses.

    [Dillon:] They didn’t even have a chance to fight; you tricked them.

    [Wild Hog:] Is it only the white man who is allowed to trick his enemy? I was young once, Marshall, but I have seen too much trickery, and lies, and destruction, and broken promises.

    [Dillon:] I’ll admit that’s happened, Wild Hog.

    But you know, not every man is a liar, and a killer.

    [Wild Hog:] {affirming Dillon’s statement} No; there are white men like you. And there are white men like Spicer.

    [Dillon:] Spicer. Tell me something, would you consider Ward Spicer guilty of murder?

    [Wild Hog:] The Indian is Spice’s enemy, not his own people. Therefore, it is murder.

    [Dillon:] Then you understand why it’s Spicer I came after, and not you.

    [Wild Hog:] Why not me, Marshall?

    [Dillon:] You’re the army’s problem, not mine.

    [Wild Hog:] I expect to fight the army many times before we reach the mountain.

    [Dillon:] Yeah.

    What, uh, what are your plans for me, Wild Hog?

    [Wild Hog:] I have been thinking,

    [Dillon:] Yeah?

    [Wild Hog:] I do not know yet.

    [Dillon:] But what about Spicer?

    [Wild Hog:] Spicer works for me, why should I think about him?

    [Dillon:] Then you’re not as smart as I figured.

    [Wild Hog:] Alright, Marshall. I do not trust Spicer. He is a traitor to his own people, and only for money. I have rifles now, and enough horses. I do not need Spicer.

    [Dillon:] Then you’re going to kill him?

    [Wild Hog:] Why not? He is only another white man.

    [Dillon:] You said yourself, you can’t kill all the white men.

    [Wild Hog:] If you were free, Marshall, you would take him back and let other white men kill him. What difference how he dies?

    [Dillon:] Makes a difference to me, Wild Hog. I’m a law man.

    [Wild Hog:] I may have to kill you too.

    [Dillon:] {slight chuckle} You’re a hard man to be friends with.

    [Wild Hog:] I will explain to you, Marshall. It matters little about any Indian. A few more winters and not many of my people will be alive. I do not complain of our fate; tribe follows tribe, nation follows nation. It is the law of nature. The white man’s turn to be defeated and to disappear will come, it is just a matter of time. And so we may be brothers after all, Marshall.

    [Dillon:] I’m not sure I believe all of that, Wild Hog.

    [Wild Hog:] Of course not.

    Still, I recognize you as a warrior among your people, as I am a warrior among mine.

    [Dillon:] Too bad we’re not on the same side.

    [Wild Hog:] As long as we are brave, and willing to die, it does not matter. I ride ahead now. You stay with the others.

    From the closing credits:

    Gunsmoke!, under the direction of Norman MacDonnell, stars <a title=”"William” href="William Conrad as Matt Dillon, US Marshall. Tonight's story was specially written for Gunsmoke by John Meston, with music composed and conducted by Rex Khoury. Featured in tonight’s cast were Harry Bartell [as “Ward Spicer”], Lawrence Dobkin [as “Wild Hog”], Herb Vigran and Jack Kruschen. Parley Baer is Chester, and Howard McNear is Doc.

    Some commentary of mine on William Conrad as well as Gunsmoke!:
    https://www.unz.com/isteve/robert-conrad-rip/#comment-3709850

    • Thanks: YetAnotherAnon
  191. @AnotherDad
    @Anon99


    Oh please. The US was built by immigrants.
     
    Oh please. This is beyond stupid.

    Replies: @Anon99

    I guess you don’t consider Germans, Italians or the British as immigrants. Did you look at the link? They were the first and second wave of immigrants. I agree with you that Europeans laid the foundation for the US but they are immigrants nonetheless.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Anon99


    . I agree with you that Europeans laid the foundation for the US but they are immigrants nonetheless.
     
    The English at Jamestown and Plymouth weren't immigrants; they were settlers.
    , @AnotherDad
    @Anon99


    I guess you don’t consider Germans, Italians or the British as immigrants. Did you look at the link? They were the first and second wave of immigrants. I agree with you that Europeans laid the foundation for the US but they are immigrants nonetheless.
     
    Immigrants like George Washington? Thomas Jefferson? John Adams? Benjamin Franklin?

    Immigrants like Daniel Boone? (LOL) Meriwether Lewis and William Clark? Andy Jackson? Zachary Taylor? John C. Fremont?

    Immigrants Robert and Cyrus McCormick? John Deere? Samuel Colt? Peter Cooper? Cornelius Vanderbilt? Theodore Judah? Grenville Dodge? Leland Stanford? Thomas Edison? George Westinghouse? John D. Rockefeller? Henry Ford? Wilbur and Orville Wright? Thomas J. Watson? Robert Goddard? John Bardeen? Walter Brattain? William Shockley?

    Anon99, you seemed confused either about America or what an immigrant is or both.

    America was in no sense build by "immigrants". (Other than, yeah, the builders ancestors weren't here a 1000 years ago.) There were some original settlers--not "immigrants". But America was conquered, created and built by Americans--in ethnic background broadly the Germanics, specifically led by the Anglos, with some Scottish and Irish Celtic blood thrown into the mix. Any immigrants pitching in on the "build" were overwhelming of that some ethnic stock, following on--sometimes adding to the conquest and settlement, mostly just building in.

    "Nation of immigrants" is simply yet another--predominantly Jewish--minoritarian lie. Propaganda in this case specifically designed to:
    -- blur distinctions amongst people--settlers, founders, natives, immigrants, foreigners
    -- denigrate the people who actually built America ("not invented here")
    -- delegitimate their accomplishments, in order to displace them from power
    -- destroy their particular American culture as normative
    -- balkanize America in order to weaken resistance and facilitate elite minoritarian control
    -- take away Americans rights to govern their own nation
    -- destroy Americans right to their nation

    Some people are really good at making noise and lying. That doesn't make their lies true.

    In basic point of fact, America--not just its "foundation" but "America" was already "built"--by Americans!--fully conquered, settled, institutions and industry in place, with the largest GDP and the most prosperous people in the world, before the "Great Wave" immigrants, like the Ashkenazi, ever showed up to glom on.

    And America is--or was--great, prosperous and free, not the least bit because of "immigrants", but for exactly the same reason that Canada, Australia, New Zealand are also pleasant, prosperous places: Anglo settlers encounter a good land inhabited by stone age tribals, conquer and settle it, building quality institutions, agriculture and industry that flow from their being intelligent, industrious, high-trust Western-Christian people.

    Replies: @Anon99, @Anon99, @Prester John, @Anon99, @Corvinus

  192. @Rich
    @Whitehall

    Alvin York was of English and Scots-Irish heritage.

    Replies: @Colin Wright

    ‘Alvin York was of English and Scots-Irish heritage.’

    But there’s Ira Hayes. Maybe Whitehall got his war heroes mixed up.

    • Agree: Rich
  193. @Muggles
    @HammerJack


    Though your diversity-equality lecture is very au courant — and all of us here are indebted to you for it — I can’t remember entire societies in Europe ever given to practices like those of the Aztecs and Toltecs. They seem to be in a class by themselves
     
    Yes my lecturing tendencies can fly out of control here. So much ignorance, so little time.

    You may be having memory problems, a la Biden.

    Seems like only yesterday that folks were up in arms about a German dictator invading neighbors, ruthlessly killing civilians and rounding up members of slightly different tribes. Work camps, soap factories, etc. Maybe you missed that lecture.

    Or further east in a country made up entirely of white people (White!) their leaders deliberately starved millions (though "industrialization was rapid!") and also rounded up millions and sent them to camps. No soap though. A few survived. The soap maker and the hunger games guy had a serious rumble. You may have missed that one too. Maybe those lectures are online.

    They "seem to be in a class by themselves" someone once opined.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Mr McKenna

    Do you really believe that ‘soap factory’ BS? It’s like a modern-day hate hoax: preposterous on its face. Even if it hadn’t been completely debunked by now, does it stand to reason that the Nazis would wash with….nope, too stupid, I can’t even pose the question.

    No one denied killing and even labor camps. The discussion related to bizarre sadistic rituals. Your reading comprehension needs a ton of work before you resume your one-man lecture tour.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @Mr McKenna

    I don't think it would be, technically-financially, worth the trouble. And chemical industry had much cheaper & more efficient ways of making soap.

    What, apart from tooth fillings etc., can one use dead human body for?

    Not much, I guess, even with more advanced technologies like in Soylent Green.....

  194. @Achmed E. Newman
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Then there are the Piper G/A aircraft:

    Comanche
    Dakota
    Cherokee
    Saratoga
    Seminole
    Navajo
    Chieftain (bigger Navajo)
    Seneca
    Aztec

    Long ago an airline pilot who wrote a book about his experience related that they called the lower altitudes in the busy airspace (say, coming into LAX) "Indian Country". That was no slur, but just a comment on all the G/A aircraft that were buzzing around back in the day, a good proportion of them Pipers.

    Replies: @Mike Zwick, @WriterAnon

    That’s also military aviation parlance for enemy airspace so I think maybe he heard a different pilot say it for that and made an assumption.

  195. @Wilkey
    @International Jew


    A sports team — basically, fun and games — kinda trivializes the memory.
     
    Not really. Vikings, Padres, 49ers, Celtics, Trailblazers, Cowboys, Patriots, Saints, etc. - these are all meant to honor the groups of people they are named for, not trivialize them.

    After the Indian names are gone the next names to go will be the ones that honor the “invaders” - any team name that honors people (all of them Northern European) who displaced the Indians. Bye bye, Trailblazers, 49ers, Cowboys, and Patriots. Christian names will probably go, as well - so no more Padres or Saints. It may be a while, but it will happen.

    Replies: @Joe Paluka, @International Jew

    I agree with your second paragraph. It is just like the statue-destroying, where they started with Confederate generals but soon moved on to George Washington.

    I agree with your second paragraph too! But there’s a critical distinction that needs to be made: Vikings and Cowboys weren’t our victims.

    It comes down to a matter of hard feelings, of the sting of defeat. Americans haven’t been in those shoes for a long time, if ever. So I have to ask you to use your imagination.

  196. @Veracitor
    @Twinkie

    The birthrate graph showing severe decline for Amerinds makes me sad.

    (I think all large "ethnic groups" in the USA have below-replacement birthrates now. The remaining sub-groups with high birthrates (Amish, Hasids, low-IQ Googles, ...) will likely furnish ever larger shares of the future population unless swamped by new immigrants and their offspring.)

    I theorize that the low birthrate is driving a lot of the craziness in our society. Here's my hand-wavy evo-psych theory: humans are adapted to the presence of children and a "normal" population ladder. When there are too few youngsters, that indicates a big problem like famine, plague, invasion, etc. People subconsciously react; they become anxious and increasingly willing to support proposed responses, including crazy ones (like the transgenderist campaign for the mutilation of children, which is sort of the modern equivalent of the Xhosa Cattle Killing of 1856).

    Of course there are plenty of opportunists who exploit the anxious state of the public to feather their own nests.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @photondancer, @Twinkie

    I theorize that the low birthrate is driving a lot of the craziness in our society. Here’s my hand-wavy evo-psych theory: humans are adapted to the presence of children and a “normal” population ladder. …

    Veracitor, i’m not sold with your specific theory, but i’m on board with the basic premise.

    I think there are two biggies:

    1) Young women divorced from normal the normal child bearing, nursing and nurturing they are designed for … really are nuts. Their nuttiness is a huge part of “woke”.

    and

    2) Everyone–young men especially, but everyone–is just more “unmoored”. Unmoored from connection to the future, ergo the past. Life is no long connected–to past and future–and more a pointless hyper-personal and essentially meaningless drama.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @AnotherDad


    Everyone–young men especially, but everyone–is just more “unmoored”. Unmoored from connection to the future, ergo the past. Life is no long connected–to past and future–and more a pointless hyper-personal and essentially meaningless drama.
     
    I agree there is a broad trend toward atomization in developed countries, but "everyone" is going too far.

    My Catholic parish is full of families with double digit numbers of children (it looks like a Secret Service officer convention in the parking lot, what with all the massive vehicles that can carry these big families). And many families are pretty tight (as happen when you attend daily Mass together, homeschool the kids together, etc.).

    And it's not just conservative or orthodox Catholics. Mormons are famously communitarian and make fantastic neighbors and community members (though things do get a bit weird for the non-Mormons when they are the majority and run the government).

    There are still pockets of those of us left (mostly religious) who still view society as "a partnership... between those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born."
  197. @Veracitor
    @Twinkie

    The birthrate graph showing severe decline for Amerinds makes me sad.

    (I think all large "ethnic groups" in the USA have below-replacement birthrates now. The remaining sub-groups with high birthrates (Amish, Hasids, low-IQ Googles, ...) will likely furnish ever larger shares of the future population unless swamped by new immigrants and their offspring.)

    I theorize that the low birthrate is driving a lot of the craziness in our society. Here's my hand-wavy evo-psych theory: humans are adapted to the presence of children and a "normal" population ladder. When there are too few youngsters, that indicates a big problem like famine, plague, invasion, etc. People subconsciously react; they become anxious and increasingly willing to support proposed responses, including crazy ones (like the transgenderist campaign for the mutilation of children, which is sort of the modern equivalent of the Xhosa Cattle Killing of 1856).

    Of course there are plenty of opportunists who exploit the anxious state of the public to feather their own nests.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @photondancer, @Twinkie

    The book (and film) Children of Men has much the same idea. I think it’s a hypothesis that merits some research.

  198. John Derbyshire addressed the plight of American Indians in a segment of his Radio Derb edition of March 18th, 2016. Below are some excerpts I had copied from the transcript.

    One of the great tragedies of history, repeated many times over, has been the fate of less-civilized people who have the misfortune to come into contact with more-civilized ones.
    […]
    American Indians the same, of course. As recently as the mid-20th century there were earnest projects, both public and private, to lift reservation Indians out of their alcoholism and despair, give them some education, get them off welfare. Those efforts have mostly faded away. For the vast majority of Americans, our Indian policy is: Out of sight, out of mind. We go from one year’s end to the next without thinking about Indians, except for the occasional casino joke.

    [MORE]

    It’s a story that’s been told a thousand times over, from the aborigines of Australia to the highland Scots.

    You belong to a people, with a territory, and a way of life that’s suited you and your people for generations. Then along comes some other people with way better technology, including military technology. Suddenly the way of life your people cherished for all those generations, without even really thinking about it — it was the way of life — suddenly it’s pointless. The gods have fled; you have no protection.

    A few of your people, the smartest ones, will cross over to live among the new people, as they live. Far more of you won’t or can’t do that. For these, there is no good solution — nothing to do but yield to drink, despair, suicide.

    ~ ~ ~
    Vintage photo from California Historical Society Collection, 1860-1960:
    Three Havasupai Indian boys bathing in the Havasu River [(Blue Water River)], ca.1900

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Dissident

    Native Americans were civilized, friend. They meet the checkboxes--they had art/architecture, spoke a language, had religion, developed an economy, and had political systems.

    Now, compared to Europeans, they were VIEWED as being "less civilized" or "uncivilized", especially from a technological standpoint. For the invaders, I mean colonists, indigenous people were just too different: their skin was dark, their languages were foreign, their world views and spiritual beliefs were beyond most white men’s comprehension.

    I mean, how dare Native Americans generally viewed land as to be shared and respected, not to be raped and pillaged. Damn those socialists! Now where is my treaty and firewater to seize by force, I mean legalize, the peaceful transfer of land into my possession?

    https://www.warpaths2peacepipes.com/native-american-indians/native-americans-land.htm


    The idea of an individual person having exclusive use of a particular piece of land was completely alien to Native Americans. The Native Americans fought, as communities, with other tribes over hunting rights to the territory. But the "right" to the land was very different from the legal terms understood by the white settlers who had known no other way than the nature of European individual ownership. The America Native Indians had no concept of "private property," as applied to the land. The accumulation of property was further discouraged by the tradition and custom followed in most tribes was to destroy all the belongings of the owner at his death.
     

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jack D

  199. @Servant of Gla'aki
    @Canadian Observer


    In Western Canada, you have the interesting dynamic of having a large underclass of Natives living in the cities, such as Winnipeg, Regina, Edmonton, etc. That way, you get to see their drug use and alcoholism up close, thus diminishing their historical prestige in our eyes. I don’t think this dynamic really exists in the United States.
     
    Probably the only thing like a real city in the USA where this phenomenon also exists, would be Rapid City, South Dakota.

    Replies: @Ray Huffman, @John Cunningham

    I can see you’ve never been to Phoenix. (Denver is probably similar, although I have never been there.)

  200. @Anon99
    @AnotherDad

    I guess you don’t consider Germans, Italians or the British as immigrants. Did you look at the link? They were the first and second wave of immigrants. I agree with you that Europeans laid the foundation for the US but they are immigrants nonetheless.

    Replies: @syonredux, @AnotherDad

    . I agree with you that Europeans laid the foundation for the US but they are immigrants nonetheless.

    The English at Jamestown and Plymouth weren’t immigrants; they were settlers.

  201. Lol like the African submission in South Africa and Zimbabwe. Whites are getting butchered and there is nothing you can do about it. Whites failed to colonize Africa due to the black man’s strength.

  202. @HammerJack
    @Muggles

    Though your diversity-equality lecture is very au courant -- and all of us here are indebted to you for it -- I can't remember entire societies in Europe ever given to practices like those of the Aztecs and Toltecs. They seem to be in a class by themselves.

    Though granted the Empire of the Sun came close in the late 30s-early 40s.

    Replies: @Muggles, @John Up North

    Check out Mel Gibson’s film, Apocalypto. That movie was extremely graphic, detailing human sacrifice on the eve of the Spanish conquest of the New World. Great running through the jungle chase scene.

  203. @additionalMike
    @Joe Paluka

    Mr. Paluka, do you have some facts to back that charge up or are you just pulling that out of your ass?

    Replies: @Joe Paluka

    https://news.yahoo.com/more-92-000-people-claim-230611141.html

    Is 92,000 victims enough or did they just make it up.

    • Replies: @iDeplorable
    @Joe Paluka


    Is 92,000 victims enough or did they just make it up.
     
    "92,700 people have now filed sex abuse claims against the Boy Scouts of America ahead of the Nov. 16 deadline set to demand damages"

    The words in bold should tell you something. As should the fact most Scoutmasters historically have been fathers of one or more of the Scouts.

    Grifters gonna grift.

    Also, shut up Reg UnCeasing Jabber Ceasar

    Replies: @Joe Paluka

  204. @photondancer
    "Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved"

    I've read that Australian aborigines don't like to be reminded that across the water in New Zealand the Maori similarly fought the British for 200 years, while the far more numerous Aborigines were quickly routed. I've not observed any hail-fellow-PoC feelings between Maori and Aborigine so there may be something to it.

    Replies: @Hannah Katz, @Old Prude, @syonredux, @Corn, @sb, @Perspective

    The Maoris saw themselves as one people with one language and were well aware that there was a big grasping world out there ( they had only been in previously non human populated New Zealand since our Middle Ages )

    Aborigines ,on the other hand , were many different competing clans always squabbling among themselves , speaking often very different languages , been in Australia tens of thousands of years with not much awareness that there was a world outside

    If whites hadn’t come on the scene it may just have been just a matter of time before Maoris sailed over to Australia ( after all they had travelled to Norfolk Island between Australia and NZ ) and stayed for the readily available food sources ( eg kangaroos ) and killed off every aboriginal they came upon ( Chatham Island style )

    • Agree: Bardon Kaldian
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @sb

    Based Maoris

    , @Steve Sailer
    @sb

    Why was Australia so seldom reached by ship from the rest of the world? It doesn't look as remote from civilization as New Zealand or even Madagascar, which was settled by Malay people, who aren't all that far from Australia. Why didn't the great sailors of the Polynesians get to Australia?

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Reg Cæsar, @photondancer, @Anonymous

    , @syonredux
    @sb

    Indeed. The Māori were rather unpleasant....


    In 1835 some displaced Ngāti Mutunga and Ngāti Tama, from the Taranaki region, but living in Wellington, invaded the Chathams. On 19 November 1835, the brig Lord Rodney, a hijacked[30] European ship, arrived carrying 500 Māori (men, women and children) with guns, clubs and axes, and loaded with 78 tonnes of potatoes for planting, followed by another load, by the same ship, of 400 more Māori on 5 December 1835. Before the second shipment of people arrived, the invaders killed a 12-year-old girl and hung her flesh on posts.[31] They proceeded to enslave some Moriori and kill and cannibalise others. With the arrival of the second group “parties of warriors armed with muskets, clubs and tomahawks, led by their chiefs, walked through Moriori tribal territories and settlements without warning, permission or greeting. If the districts were wanted by the invaders, they curtly informed the inhabitants that their land had been taken and the Moriori living there were now vassals.”
     

    A hui or council of Moriori elders was convened at the settlement called Te Awapatiki. Despite knowing of the Māori predilection for warfare, and despite the admonition by some of the elder chiefs that the principle of Nunuku was not appropriate now, two chiefs — Tapata and Torea — declared that “the law of Nunuku was not a strategy for survival, to be varied as conditions changed; it was a moral imperative.”[32] Although this council decided in favour of peace, the invading Māori inferred it was a prelude to war, as was common practice during the Musket Wars. This precipitated a massacre, most complete in the Waitangi area followed by an enslavement of the Moriori survivors.[33]
     

    A Moriori survivor recalled : “[The Māori] commenced to kill us like sheep…. [We] were terrified, fled to the bush, concealed ourselves in holes underground, and in any place to escape our enemies. It was of no avail; we were discovered and killed – men, women and children indiscriminately.” A Māori conqueror explained, “We took possession… in accordance with our customs and we caught all the people. Not one escaped…..” [34] The invaders ritually killed some 10% of the population, a ritual that included staking out women and children on the beach and leaving them to die in great pain over several days.[35]
     

    During the following enslavement the Māori invaders forbade the speaking of the Moriori language. They forced Moriori to desecrate their sacred sites by urinating and defecating on them.[35] Moriori were forbidden to marry Moriori or Māori, or to have children with each other. Which was different from the customary form of slavery practiced on mainland New Zealand.[36] However, many Moriori women had children by their Māori masters. A small number of Moriori women eventually married either Māori or European men. Some were taken from the Chathams and never returned. In 1842 a small party of Māori and their Moriori slaves migrated to the subantarctic Auckland Islands, surviving for some 20 years on sealing and flax growing.[37] Only 101 Moriori out of a population of about 2,000 were left alive by 1862.[38]
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moriori#Invasion_by_Taranaki_M%C4%81ori_(1835%E2
    , @Ed Case
    @sb

    Not a chance.
    Kangaroos aren't easy to hunt, the Australian forests are pretty barren of food, and all the Maori had were clubs and spears.
    The 1788 British settlement at Sydney Cove nearly failed several times, Sydney Harbour was fished out by 1790, and they were reduced to stealing food from the Abos until resupply ships arrived.
    The 1802 settlement at Sorrento [Vic.] failed and the colonists didn't return until 1834.
    Maori are contemptuous of Abos, particularly their women, but I can tell you from first hand observation in the old pubs of South Brisbane, one on one with fists a small Abo will badly beat a big Maori every time.

    Replies: @sb

  205. @Desiderius

    It is assumed that any white reference to Indians in the past must have been demeaning,
     
    I really don’t get the passive voice.

    It’s a small minority doing this. Are we afraid to name them? Too lazy?

    What is it?

    Replies: @AndrewR

    It’s the mainstream leftist view. No nuance. No historical awareness beyond that which a dim six year old could memorize. You know this.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @AndrewR

    The mainstream isn’t leftist. Steve isn’t talking about the leftists in any case. I think.

    The imprecision here is a problem. I think he’s trying to model the thinking of an average voter? If he put in the effort to use active voice he might avoid making statements that don’t hold up to scrutiny.

  206. @sb
    @photondancer

    The Maoris saw themselves as one people with one language and were well aware that there was a big grasping world out there ( they had only been in previously non human populated New Zealand since our Middle Ages )

    Aborigines ,on the other hand , were many different competing clans always squabbling among themselves , speaking often very different languages , been in Australia tens of thousands of years with not much awareness that there was a world outside

    If whites hadn't come on the scene it may just have been just a matter of time before Maoris sailed over to Australia ( after all they had travelled to Norfolk Island between Australia and NZ ) and stayed for the readily available food sources ( eg kangaroos ) and killed off every aboriginal they came upon ( Chatham Island style )

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Steve Sailer, @syonredux, @Ed Case

    Based Maoris

  207. @AnotherDad
    @Veracitor


    I theorize that the low birthrate is driving a lot of the craziness in our society. Here’s my hand-wavy evo-psych theory: humans are adapted to the presence of children and a “normal” population ladder. ...
     
    Veracitor, i'm not sold with your specific theory, but i'm on board with the basic premise.

    I think there are two biggies:

    1) Young women divorced from normal the normal child bearing, nursing and nurturing they are designed for ... really are nuts. Their nuttiness is a huge part of "woke".

    and

    2) Everyone--young men especially, but everyone--is just more "unmoored". Unmoored from connection to the future, ergo the past. Life is no long connected--to past and future--and more a pointless hyper-personal and essentially meaningless drama.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    Everyone–young men especially, but everyone–is just more “unmoored”. Unmoored from connection to the future, ergo the past. Life is no long connected–to past and future–and more a pointless hyper-personal and essentially meaningless drama.

    I agree there is a broad trend toward atomization in developed countries, but “everyone” is going too far.

    My Catholic parish is full of families with double digit numbers of children (it looks like a Secret Service officer convention in the parking lot, what with all the massive vehicles that can carry these big families). And many families are pretty tight (as happen when you attend daily Mass together, homeschool the kids together, etc.).

    And it’s not just conservative or orthodox Catholics. Mormons are famously communitarian and make fantastic neighbors and community members (though things do get a bit weird for the non-Mormons when they are the majority and run the government).

    There are still pockets of those of us left (mostly religious) who still view society as “a partnership… between those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born.”

  208. @Veracitor
    @Twinkie

    The birthrate graph showing severe decline for Amerinds makes me sad.

    (I think all large "ethnic groups" in the USA have below-replacement birthrates now. The remaining sub-groups with high birthrates (Amish, Hasids, low-IQ Googles, ...) will likely furnish ever larger shares of the future population unless swamped by new immigrants and their offspring.)

    I theorize that the low birthrate is driving a lot of the craziness in our society. Here's my hand-wavy evo-psych theory: humans are adapted to the presence of children and a "normal" population ladder. When there are too few youngsters, that indicates a big problem like famine, plague, invasion, etc. People subconsciously react; they become anxious and increasingly willing to support proposed responses, including crazy ones (like the transgenderist campaign for the mutilation of children, which is sort of the modern equivalent of the Xhosa Cattle Killing of 1856).

    Of course there are plenty of opportunists who exploit the anxious state of the public to feather their own nests.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @photondancer, @Twinkie

    When there are too few youngsters, that indicates a big problem like famine, plague, invasion, etc. People subconsciously react; they become anxious and increasingly willing to support proposed responses, including crazy ones (like the transgenderist campaign for the mutilation of children, which is sort of the modern equivalent of the Xhosa Cattle Killing of 1856).

    That’s straight out of “Children of Men.”

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @Twinkie

    And the baby girl is...black.

    Pass.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  209. @Mr McKenna
    @Muggles

    Do you really believe that 'soap factory' BS? It's like a modern-day hate hoax: preposterous on its face. Even if it hadn't been completely debunked by now, does it stand to reason that the Nazis would wash with....nope, too stupid, I can't even pose the question.

    No one denied killing and even labor camps. The discussion related to bizarre sadistic rituals. Your reading comprehension needs a ton of work before you resume your one-man lecture tour.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

    I don’t think it would be, technically-financially, worth the trouble. And chemical industry had much cheaper & more efficient ways of making soap.

    What, apart from tooth fillings etc., can one use dead human body for?

    Not much, I guess, even with more advanced technologies like in Soylent Green…..

  210. @Twinkie
    @Veracitor


    When there are too few youngsters, that indicates a big problem like famine, plague, invasion, etc. People subconsciously react; they become anxious and increasingly willing to support proposed responses, including crazy ones (like the transgenderist campaign for the mutilation of children, which is sort of the modern equivalent of the Xhosa Cattle Killing of 1856).
     
    That's straight out of "Children of Men."

    https://youtu.be/2VT2apoX90o

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

    And the baby girl is…black.

    Pass.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Bardon Kaldian

    The film was unintentionally prophetic. Or maybe it wasn’t so unintentional and Alfonso Cuaron is a genius.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @syonredux

  211. @Federalist
    https://render.fineartamerica.com/images/rendered/default/poster/8/10/break/images/artworkimages/medium/1/creole-wild-west-david-fields.jpg

    ..Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved, makes the long submission of the black man look bad.
     
    What about Mardi Gras Indians? They're black but not really Indians.

    Replies: @Ron Mexico

    Where’s the wall clock hanging around the neck? Looks like Flav.

    • Replies: @Federalist
    @Ron Mexico


    Where’s the wall clock hanging around the neck? Looks like Flav.
     
    I wouldn't go that far. Each year a Mardi Gras Indian will spend countless hours making a new "suit" by hand sewing feathers and thousands of tiny beads.
  212. @sb
    @photondancer

    The Maoris saw themselves as one people with one language and were well aware that there was a big grasping world out there ( they had only been in previously non human populated New Zealand since our Middle Ages )

    Aborigines ,on the other hand , were many different competing clans always squabbling among themselves , speaking often very different languages , been in Australia tens of thousands of years with not much awareness that there was a world outside

    If whites hadn't come on the scene it may just have been just a matter of time before Maoris sailed over to Australia ( after all they had travelled to Norfolk Island between Australia and NZ ) and stayed for the readily available food sources ( eg kangaroos ) and killed off every aboriginal they came upon ( Chatham Island style )

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Steve Sailer, @syonredux, @Ed Case

    Why was Australia so seldom reached by ship from the rest of the world? It doesn’t look as remote from civilization as New Zealand or even Madagascar, which was settled by Malay people, who aren’t all that far from Australia. Why didn’t the great sailors of the Polynesians get to Australia?

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Steve Sailer

    It has a great barrier reef.

    Replies: @Jack D, @William Badwhite

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Steve Sailer


    Why didn’t the great sailors of the Polynesians get to Australia?
     
    Perhaps they did, saw that the terrain sucked, and went on to New Zealand. Who wouldn't?

    (A: prisoners.)

    Australia is a hot Canada.

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @photondancer
    @Steve Sailer

    I don't think ocean currents allow for easy travel by canoe from New Zealand to Australia. Instead they swept the Polynesians out towards the Americas. Also, the waters around the south of Australia are notoriously rough.

    Replies: @Wency

    , @Anonymous
    @Steve Sailer

    We do know that northern Australia was visited by Indonesians by 1700, after the Dutch but before Cook. I thought I'd previously seen the year 1600, but not today. In any event, they were probably visiting for hundreds of years earlier.

    I thought that there was good evidence that the Maori visited Australia, but I can't find it.

    I think question should be more about colonization than visits.

  213. @Bardon Kaldian
    @Twinkie

    And the baby girl is...black.

    Pass.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    The film was unintentionally prophetic. Or maybe it wasn’t so unintentional and Alfonso Cuaron is a genius.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @Twinkie

    It isn't prophetic (in my opinion). On the contrary.

    , @syonredux
    @Twinkie

    Too Woke for my tastes. After all, Cuarón actually made a film where the human race is facing certain extinction, but the real problem is that the UK isn't letting in immigrants.....

  214. Anonymous[344] • Disclaimer says:
    @Servant of Gla'aki
    @Anon


    I am starting to come to the conclusion that while everyone was distracted by blacks and Hispanics and their equity dust-ups, the below-the-radar infiltration of dot-Indians into American academia and high-tech business is going to end up being a much bigger problem. These people are crazy and vindictive, and like M2F trannies, they have the smarts to really cause damage to society using woke theory or whatever else suits their purposes.
     
    That's an interesting perspective, but I wonder just how much race/ethnicity matters among the "woke". They all are required to have the precise same set of opinions...so what does it matter if Generic Intersectionalist Tyrant #3697 is a swarthy Hindoo, or a direct descendant of Increase Mather?

    I mean, if there were a White guy at the helm of Google, it's not like the Google Doodles would suddenly become MAGA-themed. "Woke" Whites are just as shitty as any other "woke" clone. They're all interchangeable cyphers, near as I can tell.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    I am starting to come to the conclusion that while everyone was distracted by blacks and Hispanics and their equity dust-ups, the below-the-radar infiltration of dot-Indians into American academia and high-tech business is going to end up being a much bigger problem. These people are crazy and vindictive, and like M2F trannies, they have the smarts to really cause damage to society using woke theory or whatever else suits their purposes.

    That’s an interesting perspective, but I wonder just how much race/ethnicity matters among the “woke”. They all are required to have the precise same set of opinions.

    Many (not all) subcons embrace this nasty stuff with a certain malice or racial animus, probable borne of racial avarice and insecurity. They really have it in for Native American Whites.

  215. @Servant of Gla'aki
    @Canadian Observer


    In Western Canada, you have the interesting dynamic of having a large underclass of Natives living in the cities, such as Winnipeg, Regina, Edmonton, etc. That way, you get to see their drug use and alcoholism up close, thus diminishing their historical prestige in our eyes. I don’t think this dynamic really exists in the United States.
     
    Probably the only thing like a real city in the USA where this phenomenon also exists, would be Rapid City, South Dakota.

    Replies: @Ray Huffman, @John Cunningham

    Alaska natives living in Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Juneau have a similar pattern.

  216. @Steve Sailer
    @sb

    Why was Australia so seldom reached by ship from the rest of the world? It doesn't look as remote from civilization as New Zealand or even Madagascar, which was settled by Malay people, who aren't all that far from Australia. Why didn't the great sailors of the Polynesians get to Australia?

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Reg Cæsar, @photondancer, @Anonymous

    It has a great barrier reef.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Jonathan Mason

    The Great Barrier Reef only protects the coast of Queensland, which leaves the other 7/8th of the coast unprotected including many protected harbors such as those of Sydney and Melbourne. Not to mention that the Polynesians travelled in canoes and were accustomed to navigating around the reefs of their native islands.

    The parts of Australia that are within easy traveling distance of inhabited places (e.g. the northern coast which is less than 100 miles from Papua New Guinea with lots of islands in between) are, to this day, sparsely populated because they don't have an attractive climate for humans. The fertile southeastern coast is, OTOH, 1,000 miles of open water from NZ.

    Probably the Maori would have gotten around to it but they hadn't reached the natural limits of NZ. Typically Polynesians would fill an island to the point of overpopulation and then the excess young males would get in a canoe and try to find another uninhabited island - this was high risk/high reward (no one knows what % of adventurers died but it was probably most of them) but excess males have little to lose anyway. Most Polynesian islands are pretty small but NZ is big and fertile and even with subsistence agriculture the pre-contact population of 100,000 did not challenge the Darwinian limits.

    Replies: @photondancer

    , @William Badwhite
    @Jonathan Mason

    I didn't opine on Steve's comment because I don't know why Australia wasn't visited by the Polynesians.

    It is interesting (and probably aggravating to some) that you also don't know, but choose to weigh in with an obviously wrong answer nonetheless.

    1) The Polynesians traveled in large canoes that didn't draw a lot of water and the reef wouldn't have been much of an obstacle.

    2) the great barrier reef is mostly along the northeast coast (what is today Queensland), while huge swaths of the continent such as all of what is now New South Wales and Victoria aren't affected by it.

  217. @photondancer
    "Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved"

    I've read that Australian aborigines don't like to be reminded that across the water in New Zealand the Maori similarly fought the British for 200 years, while the far more numerous Aborigines were quickly routed. I've not observed any hail-fellow-PoC feelings between Maori and Aborigine so there may be something to it.

    Replies: @Hannah Katz, @Old Prude, @syonredux, @Corn, @sb, @Perspective

    The Aussie Aboriginal cousins, the Negritos, also suffered greatly during the Austronesian expansion. But this is not much talked about as it’s not PC to discuss a non-European race dominating over another one:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito
    “The pre-Neolithic Negrito populations of Southeast Asia were largely replaced by the expansion of Southern East Eurasian populations, beginning about 5,000 years ago.[3]

    Historically they engaged in trade with the local population that eventually invaded their lands and were also often subjected to slave raids while also paying tributes to the local Southeast Asian rulers and kingdoms. Some Negrito pygmies from the southern forests were enslaved and exploited from AD 724 until modern times.[4] While some have lived in isolation others have become assimilated with the general local population.”

    • Replies: @photondancer
    @Perspective

    Thanks for the link. I used to be fairly well informed about the local region and it was good to be reacquainted with the details. As you say, this information tends to be suppressed in popular discourse.

  218. At the present time I am in Ecuador.

    I didn’t know much about Ecuador before I came here, but it appears to me that a very large proportion of the population, although whitish, have a mixture of native Andean American blood of some kind, and seem to be well integrated into the general culture.

    In fact even the blackish Ecuadorians from the northwestern part of the country, who are supposedly descended from shipwrecked slaves, seem to be culturally well very well assimilated in terms of language, dress, religion, etc.

    Perhaps the most problematic aspect of the United States is that the native Americans and African Americans do not seem to have been assimilated into the mainstream culture via intermarriage, and even to this day maintain their separate dialects and mores.

    Or maybe most of them actually are assimilated and have just become invisible like the descendants of Pocahontas.

    But what you don’t see is teams like the Chiefs and Indians having a fanatical following of native American fans.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Jonathan Mason

    CIA Factbook on Ecuador's racial stats:


    mestizo (mixed Amerindian and white) 71.9%, Montubio 7.4%, Amerindian 7%, white 6.1%, Afroecuadorian 4.3%, mulatto 1.9%, black 1%, other 0.4% (2010 est.)
     
    https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ec.html

    Pretty grim....
    , @danand
    @Jonathan Mason

    “At the present time I am in Ecuador.”

    Mr. Mason, came across this video from The New Yorker published on MSN a few days back. Follows a few native Ecuadorians on their quest to treat Covid-19. A few interesting bits. As with many, they voice some concern over being displaced over time:

    https://flic.kr/p/2khAmCR

    Their brewed remedy for Covid-19

    https://flic.kr/p/2khzRTR

    https://www.msn.com/en-my/video/other/fighting-covid-19-with-ancestral-wisdom-in-the-amazon/vi-BB1bR7iy

  219. Its all about eradicating American history.

  220. @Ron Mexico
    @Federalist

    Where's the wall clock hanging around the neck? Looks like Flav.

    Replies: @Federalist

    Where’s the wall clock hanging around the neck? Looks like Flav.

    I wouldn’t go that far. Each year a Mardi Gras Indian will spend countless hours making a new “suit” by hand sewing feathers and thousands of tiny beads.

  221. @tyrone
    @Diversity Heretic

    Aren't the Boy Scouts bankrupt?….oh don't worry they can sell off Philmont…. order of the arrow is the least of their problems.

    Replies: @Wency

    The national organization is bankrupt. As you suggest, it will sell some campgrounds to compensate the victim claims and then emerge from bankruptcy.

    From what I can see, the abuse claims basically amount to pederasty between married dads and teenage boys who must have had some gay inclinations. It’s somewhat surprising to me that the total victory of the cultural left hasn’t led to the age of consent being reduced to at least a more European level (15-16) in the US.

    • Replies: @Dissident
    @Wency


    It’s somewhat surprising to me that the total victory of the cultural left hasn’t led to the age of consent being reduced to at least a more European level (15-16) in the US.
     
    There certainly would appear to be inconsistency, perhaps even paradox in what you point-out. There has been a trend, though, for at least twenty or so years already, toward lowering the age-of-consent for homo contact in cases where it had been set higher than that for hetero. (If I recall and understood correctly, this was just recently done in California.) This very topic happens to be addressed specifically in the comment that is quoted in the past comment of mine that I link to toward the end of this reply.

    From what I can see, the abuse claims basically amount to pederasty between married dads and teenage boys who must have had some gay inclinations.
     
    To what, if any extent should such inclinations on the part of an adolescent be considered when judging a homoerotic relationship between him and an adult? (Whether from an ethical, moral, or legal perspective.)

    If one is convinced that (as the prevailing orthodoxy asserts) homosexuality is without exception both innate as well as immutable, then such proclivities in an adolescent could very well be be seen as mitigating or even vindicating completely the conduct of an adult who engages said adolescent in them. Intuition, logic and much evidence at least suggest, however, that (at least in some and likely many cases) the experiences and influences of an individual during the formative years of his childhood and adolescence, may very well affect how his sexuality ultimately forms.

    If one allows for that possibility, and accepts that no lifestyle based on homosexual ideals, norms and behavior can offer the wholesomeness, fulfillment or even sustainability that one based on traditional heterosexual ones can, then would it not necessarily follow that:

    When considering the moral, ethical or legal ramifications of any homoerotic relationship or instance of contact involving a minor, its potential to ultimately influence his identity or behavior in a direction other than a heteronormative one cannot be overlooked? And that such potential alone-- even in a case where all other concerns may have been eliminated or satisfactorily resolved-- may prove insurmountable?

    That's one of what may be categorized as two primary problems* that are posed by what we can broadly call intergenerational homoeroticism. (Here, specifically of the male variety, though much of the same or similar concerns may apply to their female counterpart as well.)

    (*That is, problems besides the most obvious objective ones, such as any case involving overt coercion or violence, as well as objections of a much more subjective nature, such as religious ones.)

    The other concerns the specific forms that the carnal intimacy in such a relationship may, and are most likely, to take. Here, I would refer the interested reader to the past post of mine linked here in which, together with the excerpted comment that mine was formatted as a reply to, is succinctly summarized the particularly predatory and even heinous aspects of pederasty as commonly understood and practiced.

    I then go on to present a hypothetical case, one that introduces for discussion a radically different model of intergenerational male homoerotic intimacy (still far more hypothetical and theoretical than reflective of any lived or witnessed actual experience)-- one that emphatically and unapologetically:
    - respects heteronormativity[1] as the irreplaceable ideal;
    - rejects, repudiates, and precludes the buggery and other sodomitic acts that are the very core of the prevailing model being dissented from
    - views the adolescent male not as a substitute for a female; not as an object to be used for mere carnal gratification, but as a precious, unique, wonderful, delightful, even magical creature to be cherished, protected and celebrated

    Bottom-line, executive summary concerning instances or relationships of erotic intimacy/sexual contact between a minor and an adult:

    It can reasonably be asserted as axiomatic that only when the initiative for any such contact clearly and eagerly taken by the minor can we ever even begin to consider the possibility of the defensibility of the conduct of the adult involved. Many would no doubt go farther and assert that even then, a responsible adult would be ethically/ socially/ civically/ morally (one or more of all of those) bound to invariably decline any such offer or initiative on the part of any minor. Such may be a valid position to maintain-- as long as it appears at least reasonably likely that the minor, denied his request by the adult, would not then go on to engage in behavior of equal or greater objectionability or concern with someone else. Only when considering the likelihood and implications of this possibility can one, in any given case of sexual contact or erotic intimacy between an adult and a minor, presume to fully and properly judge the behavior of the adult.

    [1] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/heteronormative

    noting or relating to behavior or attitudes consistent with traditional male or female gender roles and the assumption of heterosexuality as the norm
     
  222. @Diversity Heretic
    How long until the Boy Scouts eliminate "The Order of the Arrow," as their elite designation? Or have they already?

    Will the Army stop naming helicopters after Indian tribes?

    Replies: @tyrone, @Joe Paluka, @Farenheit, @Paul Jolliffe, @Dissident

    Not to mention that the U.S. Armed Forces will have to stop using “Bent Spear” and “Broken Arrow” to denote incidents involving nuclear bombs, including “accidental or unexplained detonation” . . .

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_Damascus_Titan_missile_explosion

    (As a longtime I-Steve commentator, I relish the chance to work the Cold War into anything!)

  223. @Twinkie
    @Bardon Kaldian

    The film was unintentionally prophetic. Or maybe it wasn’t so unintentional and Alfonso Cuaron is a genius.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @syonredux

    It isn’t prophetic (in my opinion). On the contrary.

  224. @Redneck farmer
    Also, Indians (feather) owned slaves, including BLACK ones.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @syonredux, @RegretLeft

    Harriet Martineau was an English writer who traveled in the USA – in the 1830s – about the same time as de Tocqueville; almost every page of her “Society in America” reflects her vicious hatred of slavery.

    She spoke with many enslaved African and reported that they very much preferred to be sold to Indians as opposed to whites. The Indians provided living accommodations nearly equal to those they enjoyed themselves and demanded considerably less work output.

    • Replies: @black sea
    @RegretLeft

    I guess she didn't speak with many slaves owned by Cherokee Chief James Vann:


    James Vann was particularly known for having an outrageous
    temper. The missionaries often recorded him as being drunk and taking out his aggression, rather violently, upon his slaves. After accusing Demos of slaughtering one of his oxen, for example, James Vann tied him up with chains and kept him at the house. After he released Demos back to Mother Vann, Vann continued to beat him on many occasions (Moravian Diary, Vann House, February 11 and March 15, 1807).
     
  225. @Twinkie
    @Bardon Kaldian

    The film was unintentionally prophetic. Or maybe it wasn’t so unintentional and Alfonso Cuaron is a genius.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @syonredux

    Too Woke for my tastes. After all, Cuarón actually made a film where the human race is facing certain extinction, but the real problem is that the UK isn’t letting in immigrants…..

  226. anon[237] • Disclaimer says:
    @Canadian Observer
    In Western Canada, you have the interesting dynamic of having a large underclass of Natives living in the cities, such as Winnipeg, Regina, Edmonton, etc. That way, you get to see their drug use and alcoholism up close, thus diminishing their historical prestige in our eyes. I don’t think this dynamic really exists in the United States.

    In Eastern Canada - where there are less of them, more white admixture amongst the population and because they are largely confined to rural areas - Natives are treated more like sacred pets.

    Replies: @jcd1974, @Servant of Gla'aki, @anon, @Ganderson

    I don’t think this dynamic really exists in the United States.

    It exists, but since the US population is about 10x that of Canada it is not so visible. But there are US cities close enough to various Indian reservations such that the dynamic you describe is quite visible.

  227. @sb
    @photondancer

    The Maoris saw themselves as one people with one language and were well aware that there was a big grasping world out there ( they had only been in previously non human populated New Zealand since our Middle Ages )

    Aborigines ,on the other hand , were many different competing clans always squabbling among themselves , speaking often very different languages , been in Australia tens of thousands of years with not much awareness that there was a world outside

    If whites hadn't come on the scene it may just have been just a matter of time before Maoris sailed over to Australia ( after all they had travelled to Norfolk Island between Australia and NZ ) and stayed for the readily available food sources ( eg kangaroos ) and killed off every aboriginal they came upon ( Chatham Island style )

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Steve Sailer, @syonredux, @Ed Case

    Indeed. The Māori were rather unpleasant….

    In 1835 some displaced Ngāti Mutunga and Ngāti Tama, from the Taranaki region, but living in Wellington, invaded the Chathams. On 19 November 1835, the brig Lord Rodney, a hijacked[30] European ship, arrived carrying 500 Māori (men, women and children) with guns, clubs and axes, and loaded with 78 tonnes of potatoes for planting, followed by another load, by the same ship, of 400 more Māori on 5 December 1835. Before the second shipment of people arrived, the invaders killed a 12-year-old girl and hung her flesh on posts.[31] They proceeded to enslave some Moriori and kill and cannibalise others. With the arrival of the second group “parties of warriors armed with muskets, clubs and tomahawks, led by their chiefs, walked through Moriori tribal territories and settlements without warning, permission or greeting. If the districts were wanted by the invaders, they curtly informed the inhabitants that their land had been taken and the Moriori living there were now vassals.”

    A hui or council of Moriori elders was convened at the settlement called Te Awapatiki. Despite knowing of the Māori predilection for warfare, and despite the admonition by some of the elder chiefs that the principle of Nunuku was not appropriate now, two chiefs — Tapata and Torea — declared that “the law of Nunuku was not a strategy for survival, to be varied as conditions changed; it was a moral imperative.”[32] Although this council decided in favour of peace, the invading Māori inferred it was a prelude to war, as was common practice during the Musket Wars. This precipitated a massacre, most complete in the Waitangi area followed by an enslavement of the Moriori survivors.[33]

    A Moriori survivor recalled : “[The Māori] commenced to kill us like sheep…. [We] were terrified, fled to the bush, concealed ourselves in holes underground, and in any place to escape our enemies. It was of no avail; we were discovered and killed – men, women and children indiscriminately.” A Māori conqueror explained, “We took possession… in accordance with our customs and we caught all the people. Not one escaped…..” [34] The invaders ritually killed some 10% of the population, a ritual that included staking out women and children on the beach and leaving them to die in great pain over several days.[35]

    During the following enslavement the Māori invaders forbade the speaking of the Moriori language. They forced Moriori to desecrate their sacred sites by urinating and defecating on them.[35] Moriori were forbidden to marry Moriori or Māori, or to have children with each other. Which was different from the customary form of slavery practiced on mainland New Zealand.[36] However, many Moriori women had children by their Māori masters. A small number of Moriori women eventually married either Māori or European men. Some were taken from the Chathams and never returned. In 1842 a small party of Māori and their Moriori slaves migrated to the subantarctic Auckland Islands, surviving for some 20 years on sealing and flax growing.[37] Only 101 Moriori out of a population of about 2,000 were left alive by 1862.[38]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moriori#Invasion_by_Taranaki_M%C4%81ori_(1835%E2

  228. @Jonathan Mason
    At the present time I am in Ecuador.

    I didn't know much about Ecuador before I came here, but it appears to me that a very large proportion of the population, although whitish, have a mixture of native Andean American blood of some kind, and seem to be well integrated into the general culture.

    In fact even the blackish Ecuadorians from the northwestern part of the country, who are supposedly descended from shipwrecked slaves, seem to be culturally well very well assimilated in terms of language, dress, religion, etc.

    Perhaps the most problematic aspect of the United States is that the native Americans and African Americans do not seem to have been assimilated into the mainstream culture via intermarriage, and even to this day maintain their separate dialects and mores.

    Or maybe most of them actually are assimilated and have just become invisible like the descendants of Pocahontas.

    But what you don't see is teams like the Chiefs and Indians having a fanatical following of native American fans.

    Replies: @syonredux, @danand

    CIA Factbook on Ecuador’s racial stats:

    mestizo (mixed Amerindian and white) 71.9%, Montubio 7.4%, Amerindian 7%, white 6.1%, Afroecuadorian 4.3%, mulatto 1.9%, black 1%, other 0.4% (2010 est.)

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ec.html

    Pretty grim….

  229. “America used to celebrate its proud Indian heritage, but now we appear to be embarrassed by them. Hence, sports teams that were named in honor of their masculine ferocity are having their names memoryholed.”

    LOL, Mr. Sailer. Had the Cleveland Indians or the Atlanta Braves not made mammon through its cartoonish mascots on hats and jerseys, or initiated “fan appreciation” salutes like the Tomahawk chop, we would be able to take your statement seriously.

    This is how it is done. Please do some NOTICING.

    https://unicomm.fsu.edu/messages/relationship-seminole-tribe-florida

    For more than seven decades, Florida State has worked closely, side by side, with the Seminole Tribe of Florida. The relationship, built on respect, is so mutually supportive that in 2005 the tribe — which rarely puts such things in writing — took an unprecedented, historic step with a public declaration of support. The Seminole Tribe invited the university president at that time, T.K. Wetherell, to Big Cypress Reservation to receive a written resolution from the Tribal Council affirming its enthusiastic support for the university’s use of the Seminole name, logos and images. Subsequently, Chief Jerry Haney of the Seminole Tribe of Oklahoma also publicly stated his support.

    The council’s action was recognition of Florida State’s continued collaboration with the tribe to 1) include prominent participation by tribal members in many of the university’s most meaningful events, and 2) seek advice and direction to ensure tribal imagery is authentic. The university continues to welcome these opportunities to expose our students, faculty, staff and alumni to the Seminoles’ history and traditions and reflects what we value as an institution — multiculturalism and diversity. In return, the Seminoles’ culture and lore are kept alive.

  230. @Dissident
    John Derbyshire addressed the plight of American Indians in a segment of his Radio Derb edition of March 18th, 2016. Below are some excerpts I had copied from the transcript.

    One of the great tragedies of history, repeated many times over, has been the fate of less-civilized people who have the misfortune to come into contact with more-civilized ones.
    [...]
    American Indians the same, of course. As recently as the mid-20th century there were earnest projects, both public and private, to lift reservation Indians out of their alcoholism and despair, give them some education, get them off welfare. Those efforts have mostly faded away. For the vast majority of Americans, our Indian policy is: Out of sight, out of mind. We go from one year's end to the next without thinking about Indians, except for the occasional casino joke.
     

    It's a story that's been told a thousand times over, from the aborigines of Australia to the highland Scots.

    You belong to a people, with a territory, and a way of life that's suited you and your people for generations. Then along comes some other people with way better technology, including military technology. Suddenly the way of life your people cherished for all those generations, without even really thinking about it — it was the way of life — suddenly it's pointless. The gods have fled; you have no protection.

    A few of your people, the smartest ones, will cross over to live among the new people, as they live. Far more of you won't or can't do that. For these, there is no good solution — nothing to do but yield to drink, despair, suicide.
     

    ~ ~ ~
    Vintage photo from California Historical Society Collection, 1860-1960:
    Three Havasupai Indian boys bathing in the Havasu River [(Blue Water River)], ca.1900

    Replies: @Corvinus

    Native Americans were civilized, friend. They meet the checkboxes–they had art/architecture, spoke a language, had religion, developed an economy, and had political systems.

    Now, compared to Europeans, they were VIEWED as being “less civilized” or “uncivilized”, especially from a technological standpoint. For the invaders, I mean colonists, indigenous people were just too different: their skin was dark, their languages were foreign, their world views and spiritual beliefs were beyond most white men’s comprehension.

    I mean, how dare Native Americans generally viewed land as to be shared and respected, not to be raped and pillaged. Damn those socialists! Now where is my treaty and firewater to seize by force, I mean legalize, the peaceful transfer of land into my possession?

    https://www.warpaths2peacepipes.com/native-american-indians/native-americans-land.htm

    The idea of an individual person having exclusive use of a particular piece of land was completely alien to Native Americans. The Native Americans fought, as communities, with other tribes over hunting rights to the territory. But the “right” to the land was very different from the legal terms understood by the white settlers who had known no other way than the nature of European individual ownership. The America Native Indians had no concept of “private property,” as applied to the land. The accumulation of property was further discouraged by the tradition and custom followed in most tribes was to destroy all the belongings of the owner at his death.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Corvinus


    Native Americans were civilized, friend. They meet the checkboxes–they had art/architecture, spoke a language, had religion, developed an economy, and had political systems.
     
    You left out agriculture! American Indians were excellent farmers and much of the planet's population today relies on the crops they developed. What would the world be like without corn (maize), potatoes and tomatoes, to name just three? Oh, and of course tobacco and cocaine!
    Amerindians developed the "three sisters" method of farming -- Planting squash to shade out weeds, beans to fixate nitrogen, and corn for the beans to climb. They rotated crops, used fertilizer, practiced no-till planting to preserve the soil from erosion and developed numerous varieties. For example, the Pawnee planted 10 varieties of maize, seven varieties of pumpkins and squashes, and eight varieties of beans. And while wheat and other grains in Europe averaged yields of two to ten seeds harvested for every one planted, corn yielded as high as one hundred grains for every seed planted.
    Indian villages were permanent and in the wooded east not all that different from what would have been found in medieval Europe. On the plains, dwelling were made of mud and often of quite substantial size. But after spring planting and fall harvest, the villages were left vacant as the whole tribe would leave to hunt buffalo, with no fear that crops would be stolen or the villages looted.

    A contemporary view of a Wichita village in Oklahoma c1850. Note the neat rows of a variety of crops -- corn, beans, squash, pumpkins:

    https://i.imgur.com/avXVy46.jpg

    , @Jack D
    @Corvinus


    Native Americans were civilized, friend. They meet the checkboxes–...spoke a language...
     
    Wow, this is a really low bar. Are there any humans, other than the mentally disabled, who don't speak a language?

    In Mexico, something close to what we would call "civilization" existed (cities, a calendar, a writing system, etc.) but based around a system of human sacrifice that was nothing short of satanic. In N. America, the tribes were basically living in the Stone Age.

    Under the "modern" way of thinking, no civilization is superior to any other civilization. Some ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual could believe them.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @Johann Ricke

  231. @Anon99
    @AnotherDad

    I guess you don’t consider Germans, Italians or the British as immigrants. Did you look at the link? They were the first and second wave of immigrants. I agree with you that Europeans laid the foundation for the US but they are immigrants nonetheless.

    Replies: @syonredux, @AnotherDad

    I guess you don’t consider Germans, Italians or the British as immigrants. Did you look at the link? They were the first and second wave of immigrants. I agree with you that Europeans laid the foundation for the US but they are immigrants nonetheless.

    Immigrants like George Washington? Thomas Jefferson? John Adams? Benjamin Franklin?

    Immigrants like Daniel Boone? (LOL) Meriwether Lewis and William Clark? Andy Jackson? Zachary Taylor? John C. Fremont?

    Immigrants Robert and Cyrus McCormick? John Deere? Samuel Colt? Peter Cooper? Cornelius Vanderbilt? Theodore Judah? Grenville Dodge? Leland Stanford? Thomas Edison? George Westinghouse? John D. Rockefeller? Henry Ford? Wilbur and Orville Wright? Thomas J. Watson? Robert Goddard? John Bardeen? Walter Brattain? William Shockley?

    Anon99, you seemed confused either about America or what an immigrant is or both.

    America was in no sense build by “immigrants”. (Other than, yeah, the builders ancestors weren’t here a 1000 years ago.) There were some original settlers–not “immigrants”. But America was conquered, created and built by Americans–in ethnic background broadly the Germanics, specifically led by the Anglos, with some Scottish and Irish Celtic blood thrown into the mix. Any immigrants pitching in on the “build” were overwhelming of that some ethnic stock, following on–sometimes adding to the conquest and settlement, mostly just building in.

    “Nation of immigrants” is simply yet another–predominantly Jewish–minoritarian lie. Propaganda in this case specifically designed to:
    — blur distinctions amongst people–settlers, founders, natives, immigrants, foreigners
    — denigrate the people who actually built America (“not invented here”)
    — delegitimate their accomplishments, in order to displace them from power
    — destroy their particular American culture as normative
    — balkanize America in order to weaken resistance and facilitate elite minoritarian control
    — take away Americans rights to govern their own nation
    — destroy Americans right to their nation

    Some people are really good at making noise and lying. That doesn’t make their lies true.

    In basic point of fact, America–not just its “foundation” but “America” was already “built”–by Americans!–fully conquered, settled, institutions and industry in place, with the largest GDP and the most prosperous people in the world, before the “Great Wave” immigrants, like the Ashkenazi, ever showed up to glom on.

    And America is–or was–great, prosperous and free, not the least bit because of “immigrants”, but for exactly the same reason that Canada, Australia, New Zealand are also pleasant, prosperous places: Anglo settlers encounter a good land inhabited by stone age tribals, conquer and settle it, building quality institutions, agriculture and industry that flow from their being intelligent, industrious, high-trust Western-Christian people.

    • Replies: @Anon99
    @AnotherDad

    I don’t consider those coming from the Mayflower as immigrants either. From the link, if we take the first wave of immigrants arriving in 1820 a lot of them were European. And do you argue they contributed nothing. In any case I’m just pointing out that your definition of immigrant is “non-white” which isn’t true.

    , @Anon99
    @AnotherDad

    I don’t consider those coming from the Mayflower as immigrants either. From the link, if we take the first wave of immigrants arriving in 1820 a lot of them were European. And do you argue they contributed nothing. In any case I’m just pointing out that your definition of immigrant is “non-white” which isn’t true.

    , @Prester John
    @AnotherDad

    +/-25 thousand years ago, what we call the Western Hemisphere was a howling wilderness, filled with wooly mammoths, buffalo, eohippi (ancestors of the horse), wolves, blah blah--there wasn't a homo sap to be found anywhere 'till they started crossing what was then called Beringia. Their descendants, so-called "Native Americans", were no more native to this hemisphere than were the descendants of Europeans.

    , @Anon99
    @AnotherDad

    I don’t consider those who landed from the Mayflower as immigrants either. If you look at the link I provided the first wave of immigration began in 1820. They were primarily of European descent. Are you saying they did not help build up the US? In any case, my point is your definition of immigrant means “non-white” which is not true.

    , @Corvinus
    @AnotherDad

    "Immigrants Robert and Cyrus McCormick? John Deere? Samuel Colt? Peter Cooper? Cornelius Vanderbilt? Theodore Judah? Grenville Dodge? Leland Stanford? Thomas Edison? George Westinghouse? John D. Rockefeller? Henry Ford? Wilbur and Orville Wright? Thomas J. Watson? Robert Goddard? John Bardeen? Walter Brattain? William Shockley?"

    Their parents or grandparents came here as immigrants, friend.

    "America was in no sense build by “immigrants”."

    To the contrary.



    I have never thought of immigration as a national menace. I believe the problem can best be met by scientific selection of the immigrant on the other side and the safe and sensible distribution here. We don’t appreciate the foreigner-- that’s the trouble with us. We don’t see much difference between the immigrant of today and the early immigrants. You look upon the incoming foreigner as a common mechanic, as a laborer, an artisan. Yet he has risen to the positions of preacher, doctor, officer, and even member of the Cabinet.

    Frederick A. Wallis, Commissioner of Immigration, March 23, 1921
     

    They [the Chinese] are a harmless race when white men either let them alone or treat them no worse than dogs, for they seldom think of resenting the vilest insults or the cruelest injuries. They are quiet, peaceable, free from drunkenness, and industrious as the day is long. So long as a Chinaman has strength to use his hands he needs no support from anybody; white men often complain of want of work, but a Chinaman offers no such complaint; he manages to find something to do.

    Mark Twain, Roughing It, (Chapter XIII, “The Gentle, Inoffensive Chinese”), 1871
     
    "Some people are really good at making noise and lying. That doesn’t make their lies true."

    Ironically, you are the epitome of this quotation.

    Pray tell, how did YOUR ancestors arrive here to the States?
  232. @Joe Paluka
    @additionalMike

    https://news.yahoo.com/more-92-000-people-claim-230611141.html

    Is 92,000 victims enough or did they just make it up.

    Replies: @iDeplorable

    Is 92,000 victims enough or did they just make it up.

    “92,700 people have now filed sex abuse claims against the Boy Scouts of America ahead of the Nov. 16 deadline set to demand damages

    The words in bold should tell you something. As should the fact most Scoutmasters historically have been fathers of one or more of the Scouts.

    Grifters gonna grift.

    Also, shut up Reg UnCeasing Jabber Ceasar

    • Replies: @Joe Paluka
    @iDeplorable

    I'm sure a lot of people see dollar signs in their eyes and they might not all be legitimate claims but that doesn't preclude the fact that such organizations were a pervert's playpen before adequate screening weeded them out.

  233. @Jonathan Mason
    At the present time I am in Ecuador.

    I didn't know much about Ecuador before I came here, but it appears to me that a very large proportion of the population, although whitish, have a mixture of native Andean American blood of some kind, and seem to be well integrated into the general culture.

    In fact even the blackish Ecuadorians from the northwestern part of the country, who are supposedly descended from shipwrecked slaves, seem to be culturally well very well assimilated in terms of language, dress, religion, etc.

    Perhaps the most problematic aspect of the United States is that the native Americans and African Americans do not seem to have been assimilated into the mainstream culture via intermarriage, and even to this day maintain their separate dialects and mores.

    Or maybe most of them actually are assimilated and have just become invisible like the descendants of Pocahontas.

    But what you don't see is teams like the Chiefs and Indians having a fanatical following of native American fans.

    Replies: @syonredux, @danand

    “At the present time I am in Ecuador.”

    Mr. Mason, came across this video from The New Yorker published on MSN a few days back. Follows a few native Ecuadorians on their quest to treat Covid-19. A few interesting bits. As with many, they voice some concern over being displaced over time:

    8F2B9E27-9A19-4895-BB19-A987656D73B0

    Their brewed remedy for Covid-19

    CDA6D861-ED88-46CA-88BF-F8B1D254E151

    https://www.msn.com/en-my/video/other/fighting-covid-19-with-ancestral-wisdom-in-the-amazon/vi-BB1bR7iy

  234. @AnotherDad
    @Anon99


    I guess you don’t consider Germans, Italians or the British as immigrants. Did you look at the link? They were the first and second wave of immigrants. I agree with you that Europeans laid the foundation for the US but they are immigrants nonetheless.
     
    Immigrants like George Washington? Thomas Jefferson? John Adams? Benjamin Franklin?

    Immigrants like Daniel Boone? (LOL) Meriwether Lewis and William Clark? Andy Jackson? Zachary Taylor? John C. Fremont?

    Immigrants Robert and Cyrus McCormick? John Deere? Samuel Colt? Peter Cooper? Cornelius Vanderbilt? Theodore Judah? Grenville Dodge? Leland Stanford? Thomas Edison? George Westinghouse? John D. Rockefeller? Henry Ford? Wilbur and Orville Wright? Thomas J. Watson? Robert Goddard? John Bardeen? Walter Brattain? William Shockley?

    Anon99, you seemed confused either about America or what an immigrant is or both.

    America was in no sense build by "immigrants". (Other than, yeah, the builders ancestors weren't here a 1000 years ago.) There were some original settlers--not "immigrants". But America was conquered, created and built by Americans--in ethnic background broadly the Germanics, specifically led by the Anglos, with some Scottish and Irish Celtic blood thrown into the mix. Any immigrants pitching in on the "build" were overwhelming of that some ethnic stock, following on--sometimes adding to the conquest and settlement, mostly just building in.

    "Nation of immigrants" is simply yet another--predominantly Jewish--minoritarian lie. Propaganda in this case specifically designed to:
    -- blur distinctions amongst people--settlers, founders, natives, immigrants, foreigners
    -- denigrate the people who actually built America ("not invented here")
    -- delegitimate their accomplishments, in order to displace them from power
    -- destroy their particular American culture as normative
    -- balkanize America in order to weaken resistance and facilitate elite minoritarian control
    -- take away Americans rights to govern their own nation
    -- destroy Americans right to their nation

    Some people are really good at making noise and lying. That doesn't make their lies true.

    In basic point of fact, America--not just its "foundation" but "America" was already "built"--by Americans!--fully conquered, settled, institutions and industry in place, with the largest GDP and the most prosperous people in the world, before the "Great Wave" immigrants, like the Ashkenazi, ever showed up to glom on.

    And America is--or was--great, prosperous and free, not the least bit because of "immigrants", but for exactly the same reason that Canada, Australia, New Zealand are also pleasant, prosperous places: Anglo settlers encounter a good land inhabited by stone age tribals, conquer and settle it, building quality institutions, agriculture and industry that flow from their being intelligent, industrious, high-trust Western-Christian people.

    Replies: @Anon99, @Anon99, @Prester John, @Anon99, @Corvinus

    I don’t consider those coming from the Mayflower as immigrants either. From the link, if we take the first wave of immigrants arriving in 1820 a lot of them were European. And do you argue they contributed nothing. In any case I’m just pointing out that your definition of immigrant is “non-white” which isn’t true.

  235. @AnotherDad
    @Anon99


    I guess you don’t consider Germans, Italians or the British as immigrants. Did you look at the link? They were the first and second wave of immigrants. I agree with you that Europeans laid the foundation for the US but they are immigrants nonetheless.
     
    Immigrants like George Washington? Thomas Jefferson? John Adams? Benjamin Franklin?

    Immigrants like Daniel Boone? (LOL) Meriwether Lewis and William Clark? Andy Jackson? Zachary Taylor? John C. Fremont?

    Immigrants Robert and Cyrus McCormick? John Deere? Samuel Colt? Peter Cooper? Cornelius Vanderbilt? Theodore Judah? Grenville Dodge? Leland Stanford? Thomas Edison? George Westinghouse? John D. Rockefeller? Henry Ford? Wilbur and Orville Wright? Thomas J. Watson? Robert Goddard? John Bardeen? Walter Brattain? William Shockley?

    Anon99, you seemed confused either about America or what an immigrant is or both.

    America was in no sense build by "immigrants". (Other than, yeah, the builders ancestors weren't here a 1000 years ago.) There were some original settlers--not "immigrants". But America was conquered, created and built by Americans--in ethnic background broadly the Germanics, specifically led by the Anglos, with some Scottish and Irish Celtic blood thrown into the mix. Any immigrants pitching in on the "build" were overwhelming of that some ethnic stock, following on--sometimes adding to the conquest and settlement, mostly just building in.

    "Nation of immigrants" is simply yet another--predominantly Jewish--minoritarian lie. Propaganda in this case specifically designed to:
    -- blur distinctions amongst people--settlers, founders, natives, immigrants, foreigners
    -- denigrate the people who actually built America ("not invented here")
    -- delegitimate their accomplishments, in order to displace them from power
    -- destroy their particular American culture as normative
    -- balkanize America in order to weaken resistance and facilitate elite minoritarian control
    -- take away Americans rights to govern their own nation
    -- destroy Americans right to their nation

    Some people are really good at making noise and lying. That doesn't make their lies true.

    In basic point of fact, America--not just its "foundation" but "America" was already "built"--by Americans!--fully conquered, settled, institutions and industry in place, with the largest GDP and the most prosperous people in the world, before the "Great Wave" immigrants, like the Ashkenazi, ever showed up to glom on.

    And America is--or was--great, prosperous and free, not the least bit because of "immigrants", but for exactly the same reason that Canada, Australia, New Zealand are also pleasant, prosperous places: Anglo settlers encounter a good land inhabited by stone age tribals, conquer and settle it, building quality institutions, agriculture and industry that flow from their being intelligent, industrious, high-trust Western-Christian people.

    Replies: @Anon99, @Anon99, @Prester John, @Anon99, @Corvinus

    I don’t consider those coming from the Mayflower as immigrants either. From the link, if we take the first wave of immigrants arriving in 1820 a lot of them were European. And do you argue they contributed nothing. In any case I’m just pointing out that your definition of immigrant is “non-white” which isn’t true.

  236. @Anonymous
    @restless94110


    Americans like me, who are native Americans, like Indians are, were happy to name things after the brave murderous savage warriors that fought and were bested by the European settlers.

    Now, all of that kindness, all of that respect, is being destroyed by stupid white SJWs and moronic Indian activists.

    Steve is right: Indians are being marginalized even further by this disastrous drive to rename venerable teams that celebrated Indian bravery, courage and revolve.
     
    Good post. Do you see any parallels between the respect formerly given to the defeated Indians and that formerly given to defeated Southerners? And parallels between the place they were given in America’s heritage and identity?

    And are there any commonalities in the contemporary push to erase Southern symbols and history and the contemporary push to erase Indian symbols and history?

    Replies: @restless94110

    Do you see any parallels between the respect formerly given to the defeated Indians and that formerly given to defeated Southerners? And parallels between the place they were given in America’s heritage and identity?

    In my experience, growing up in California, I never did see much respect for Southerners. And, until the late late 60s the South was looked at as a place full of rednecks, chain gangs, of mean and narrow-minded people. I believed from first hand experience that that was by and large true.

    And it was reinforced by movies. Just the other day, I saw an old Alan Ladd Western where her comes with his young son to the North as the boy has ceased to speak due to hysterical laryngitis from seeing his mother murdered by the Union soldiers while Ladd was off fighting for the South. There is a ton of discrimination and anger thrown on the two in the town in the north that they land in and that makes up much of the film. I also checked out Vera Cruz (1951) where Gary Cooper is a Confederate colonel who has come to French-ruled Mexico to make enough money to repair his ruined plantation and is subjected to scorn and ridicule by the thug villains (Ernest Borgnine and Charles Bronson among them).

    You also have Easy Rider, which was a massive international hit with its portrayal of the dangerous South for long hairs in the late 60s. Very very scary scenes.

    But as Duane Alman said you only have to go to Modesto (California) to find rednecks. Many from the South came to all parts of California especially the Central Valley and Southern California. And many of those statues that are being torn down were erected in the early 20th century by the South as a kind of a statement: “we are proud of our segregation system:”

    But then all of that changed in a matter of just a few years. Southern bands like Lynard Skinard, The Alman Brothers, and others, and country bands like Alabama and dozens more started wearing their hair long and singing answers to Neil Young’s Southern Man screed. Civil rights gave blacks more equality and things have proceeded from there.

    But to my mind there is still Southerner bashing going on and it’s unjustified and uncalled for. So my reply is no. There were barriers to Indians assimilating into mainstream culture and then those barriers were lifted in the early 70s, but they still didn’t and haven’t. The team names reflected a respect but at arm’s length. The South was always looked at as a backwater.

    In the years since, I have come to admire many things about Southerners, but I’ve never seen much of that arm’s length respect that Indians got.

    And are there any commonalities in the contemporary push to erase Southern symbols and history and the contemporary push to erase Indian symbols and history?

    Both of these are misguided and coming from a faulty analysis of American history and American culture. For example, Robert E. Lee was a brilliant general who had fought in American wars. He only went for the South because he was loyal to his state. A deeper reading of the Civil War reveals that it had little to do with slavery thought that was one component.

    Even Abe Lincoln felt that the solution for freeing black slaves was to repatriate them back to Africa. And one of the largest slave owners was a Chctaw chieftain (guess my half-Choctaw daughter is going to have to pay reparations?).

    In the South, for decades the idea of justice was many times the lynch mob. Though 1800 blacks were lynhed, 1250 whites were, too. A man suspected credibly of rape, thievery, etc., was often summarily strung up. The idea that this was purely hateful with no cause and only racially based is without merit.

    Also keep in mind, the minstrel shows of those times featuring either whites in black face or blacks themselves were looked at as entertainment by whites not as being derisive; as being a release from the extraordinarily uptight customs and morés of White society. Blacks had license to be far freer in their ways than withes did and the shows allowed whites to exhale and get a contact high from it.

    All of these things are now looked upon by the ignorant fools as some kind of evil hateful plot.

    the Indians have been left out of this kind of thing. Steve’s point was that by erasing even the names of sports teams from Indian names that you leave them out even further. They just are disappeared. In the 70s there were several feature films that had Indian actors in central roles (One Flew Over the Cookoo’s Nest, another film made by Clint Eastwood,, several more). But these themes and roles have dried up,.

    On my first Facebook account almost 10 years ago, I had a few Indian friends, and I used to get real entangled up with my friend’s friends and relatives, all Native American. I still have in my archives a long thread about the film Avatar which celebrates in my view tribal cultures but her friends felt insulted Indians. It looked to me like the older Indian women friends were in a constant state of anger and resentment and were quick to disqualify anyone who was not a redskin, and the young young men were in that stupid SJW analytical loopback which discounts every point of view except white man bad.

    I realized that both of those camps were stupidly erasing themselves.

    And you still see it. The recent commercial I saw on social media of frowny-faced Indians standing around breaking things because Thanksgiving? When Thanksgiving truly was a celebration by whites and the tribe where they landed–who were helped by the whites from the murderous neighboring tribes that had been terrorizing them for years.

    It’s a perversion and it just makes Indians feel more and more isolated. Just like the perverted readings of event by the black race baitiers makes blacks feel more and more isolated.

    So no, the Indians have more in common with blacks in that regard. The Southerners stand alone.

    • Replies: @John Up North
    @restless94110

    I've heard it said that the construction of the US Interstate Highway System in the 1950s was a pivotal event in finally joining the Southeast to the rest of the continental US in terms of culture and politics. What do you think?

    Replies: @black sea, @restless94110

  237. @Dube
    @Anonymous

    Oh, yeah, we love our native land America and are proud to serve it. We can’t sing worth a damn, and dance worse than a white man, but you’ll find none better to stand beside you in a fight.

    To illustrate, from the current Imprimis:
    https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/mystic-chords-memory-learning-american-story/

    Ely Parker was born in 1828 to Elizabeth and William Parker of the Tonawanda Seneca tribe of the Iroquois Confederacy in western New York. Parker became a leader in his tribe at a very young age. Trained as a civil engineer, he earned a reputation in that field. In 1857, when he was 29 years old, he moved to Galena, Illinois, as a civil engineer working for the Treasury Department, and there his life took a fateful turn.

    He became friends with a fellow named Ulysses S. Grant. In these years, Grant was an ex-Army officer working as a clerk in his father’s store. Parker later liked to tell the story of coming to Grant’s aid in a barroom fight in Galena, the two of them back to back, fighting their way out against practically all the other patrons. At about five feet eight inches and 200 pounds, the robust Parker referred to himself as a “Savage Jack Falstaff.”



    When the Civil War came on, Parker tried several times to join the Union Army as an engineer but was turned down because he was not a citizen. When he approached Secretary of State William Seward about a commission, he was told that the war was “an affair between white men,” that he should go home, and “we will settle our own troubles among ourselves without any Indian aid.”

    Eventually, with Grant’s endorsement, Parker received a commission, with the rank of captain, as Assistant Adjutant General for Volunteers. By late 1863, he had been transferred to Grant’s staff as Military Secretary. He soon became familiarly known as “the Indian at headquarters” and was promoted to lieutenant colonel and later to brigadier general. He may have saved Grant’s life or at least prevented his capture one dark night during the Wilderness Campaign in 1864, when Grant and his staff, unbeknownst to themselves, were riding into enemy lines.

    But Parker is rightly most remembered for something that happened in the parlor of a private residence in the village of Appomattox Court House on April 9, 1865.

    In the days preceding, Union armies had captured the city of Petersburg and the Confederate capital of Richmond. Grant and the Federal Army of the Potomac had put Confederate General Robert E. Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia in such a position that in the late afternoon of April 7, Grant, sitting on the verandah of his hotel headquarters in Farmville, said to a couple of his generals, “I have a great mind to summon Lee, to surrender.” He immediately wrote a letter respectfully inviting Lee to surrender and had it sent to him under a flag of truce. It took Lee a couple of days of desperate failed maneuvers to come around to the idea. But by the morning of April 9, Lee had concluded that “there is nothing left me to do but to go and see General Grant, and I would rather die a thousand deaths.”

    They agreed to meet in the village of Appomattox Court House to discuss terms.

    Grant had been riding hard for days on rough roads in rough weather. When he met Lee in the parlor of the brick house where they had arranged to meet, he had on dirty boots, “an old suit, without [his] sword, and without any distinguishing mark of rank, except the shoulder straps of a lieutenant general on a woolen blouse.” Lee was decked out from head to toe in all the military finery he had at his disposal.

    After introductions, and not much small talk, Lee asked Grant on what terms he would receive the surrender of Lee’s army. Grant told him that all officers and men would be “paroled and disqualified from taking up arms again until properly exchanged, and all arms, ammunition, and supplies were to be delivered up as captured property.” Lee said those were the terms he expected, and he asked Grant to commit them to writing, which Grant did, on the spot, and showed them to Lee.

    With minor revisions, Lee accepted, and Grant handed the document to his senior adjutant general, Theodore Bowers, to “put into ink.” This was a document that would effectively put an end to four years of devastating civil war. Bowers’ hands were so unsteady from nerves that he had to start over three or four times, going through several sheets of paper, in a failed effort to prepare a fair copy for the signatures of the generals.

    So Grant asked Ely Parker to do it, which he did, without trouble. This gave occasion for Lee and Parker to be introduced. When Lee recognized that Parker was an American Indian, he said, “I am glad to see one real American here.”

    Parker shook his hand and replied, “We are all Americans.”

    ***

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Thanks!

  238. @Wilkey
    @Jtgw


    I think your interpretation of this act as really an expression of boredom and impatience with Native concerns is interesting and possibly correct.
     
    It’s mostly self-righteous leftists, usually the ones who also have no life, who feel the need to tell other people that they are bad evil racists. Even among leftists, the only ones who really care about it are the serious assholes.

    The problem with giving in to them is that they will never stop complaining about something. There is no end goal in mind - at least not one they’re willing to publicly proclaim. They are just angry at society and always want to be changing some supposed wrong, and always need to be calling other people racists.

    Replies: @Prester John

    Home run, Wilkey!!

    It never ceases to amaze how utterly ignorant and stupid the movers and shakers behind the Diversity Inclusion Equality racket really are. Is it a coincidence that the acronym is “DIE?”

  239. @HammerJack
    Also. There's a state nearby called Indiana. Seriously!

    Aaaaand about ten thousand other place names to fix. Before you know it, we'll run out of Negro Saints like Floyd and Trayvon and will have to resort to naming things after Al Jolson and Eddie Cantor.

    Replies: @Stick, @Prester John

    Would it make the snowflakes happy if the Cleveland and Washington baseball and football teams changed their name to the “(Cleveland/Washington) Native Americans?”

  240. @sb
    @photondancer

    The Maoris saw themselves as one people with one language and were well aware that there was a big grasping world out there ( they had only been in previously non human populated New Zealand since our Middle Ages )

    Aborigines ,on the other hand , were many different competing clans always squabbling among themselves , speaking often very different languages , been in Australia tens of thousands of years with not much awareness that there was a world outside

    If whites hadn't come on the scene it may just have been just a matter of time before Maoris sailed over to Australia ( after all they had travelled to Norfolk Island between Australia and NZ ) and stayed for the readily available food sources ( eg kangaroos ) and killed off every aboriginal they came upon ( Chatham Island style )

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Steve Sailer, @syonredux, @Ed Case

    Not a chance.
    Kangaroos aren’t easy to hunt, the Australian forests are pretty barren of food, and all the Maori had were clubs and spears.
    The 1788 British settlement at Sydney Cove nearly failed several times, Sydney Harbour was fished out by 1790, and they were reduced to stealing food from the Abos until resupply ships arrived.
    The 1802 settlement at Sorrento [Vic.] failed and the colonists didn’t return until 1834.
    Maori are contemptuous of Abos, particularly their women, but I can tell you from first hand observation in the old pubs of South Brisbane, one on one with fists a small Abo will badly beat a big Maori every time.

    • Replies: @sb
    @Ed Case

    Australia would have looked like a stockyard full of meat compared with NZ
    The Maoris had eaten out a number of NZ bird species -no real native mammals there -and searched high and low for protein . I'm told koalas aren't so bad after you get over the eucalyptus taste

    I have heard South Brisbane had ( has ? ) some pretty rough bloodhouse pubs so maybe locals have an advantage . All I can say is that a nasty angry Maori scares me more than any abo(rigine)

    Replies: @Ed Case

  241. @AnotherDad
    @Anon99


    I guess you don’t consider Germans, Italians or the British as immigrants. Did you look at the link? They were the first and second wave of immigrants. I agree with you that Europeans laid the foundation for the US but they are immigrants nonetheless.
     
    Immigrants like George Washington? Thomas Jefferson? John Adams? Benjamin Franklin?

    Immigrants like Daniel Boone? (LOL) Meriwether Lewis and William Clark? Andy Jackson? Zachary Taylor? John C. Fremont?

    Immigrants Robert and Cyrus McCormick? John Deere? Samuel Colt? Peter Cooper? Cornelius Vanderbilt? Theodore Judah? Grenville Dodge? Leland Stanford? Thomas Edison? George Westinghouse? John D. Rockefeller? Henry Ford? Wilbur and Orville Wright? Thomas J. Watson? Robert Goddard? John Bardeen? Walter Brattain? William Shockley?

    Anon99, you seemed confused either about America or what an immigrant is or both.

    America was in no sense build by "immigrants". (Other than, yeah, the builders ancestors weren't here a 1000 years ago.) There were some original settlers--not "immigrants". But America was conquered, created and built by Americans--in ethnic background broadly the Germanics, specifically led by the Anglos, with some Scottish and Irish Celtic blood thrown into the mix. Any immigrants pitching in on the "build" were overwhelming of that some ethnic stock, following on--sometimes adding to the conquest and settlement, mostly just building in.

    "Nation of immigrants" is simply yet another--predominantly Jewish--minoritarian lie. Propaganda in this case specifically designed to:
    -- blur distinctions amongst people--settlers, founders, natives, immigrants, foreigners
    -- denigrate the people who actually built America ("not invented here")
    -- delegitimate their accomplishments, in order to displace them from power
    -- destroy their particular American culture as normative
    -- balkanize America in order to weaken resistance and facilitate elite minoritarian control
    -- take away Americans rights to govern their own nation
    -- destroy Americans right to their nation

    Some people are really good at making noise and lying. That doesn't make their lies true.

    In basic point of fact, America--not just its "foundation" but "America" was already "built"--by Americans!--fully conquered, settled, institutions and industry in place, with the largest GDP and the most prosperous people in the world, before the "Great Wave" immigrants, like the Ashkenazi, ever showed up to glom on.

    And America is--or was--great, prosperous and free, not the least bit because of "immigrants", but for exactly the same reason that Canada, Australia, New Zealand are also pleasant, prosperous places: Anglo settlers encounter a good land inhabited by stone age tribals, conquer and settle it, building quality institutions, agriculture and industry that flow from their being intelligent, industrious, high-trust Western-Christian people.

    Replies: @Anon99, @Anon99, @Prester John, @Anon99, @Corvinus

    +/-25 thousand years ago, what we call the Western Hemisphere was a howling wilderness, filled with wooly mammoths, buffalo, eohippi (ancestors of the horse), wolves, blah blah–there wasn’t a homo sap to be found anywhere ’till they started crossing what was then called Beringia. Their descendants, so-called “Native Americans”, were no more native to this hemisphere than were the descendants of Europeans.

  242. @Corn
    @photondancer


    I’ve not observed any hail-fellow-PoC feelings between Maori and Aborigine so there may be something to it.
     
    You bringing up inter-PoC relations jogged my memory. Does anyone know how American Indian tribes get along nowadays? I read of an incident once where a Seminole tribal leader, James Billie, was at some conference of American Indians. He got in an argument with a man from another tribe, and after much shouting from both parties Billie shouted, “You gave up! You gave up! We never did!!”.
    (The Seminole never signed a treaty with the US govt.)

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Anonymous

    Corn, I have a Seneca aquaintance who calls Mohawks ‘savages’.

  243. @Jonathan Mason
    @Steve Sailer

    It has a great barrier reef.

    Replies: @Jack D, @William Badwhite

    The Great Barrier Reef only protects the coast of Queensland, which leaves the other 7/8th of the coast unprotected including many protected harbors such as those of Sydney and Melbourne. Not to mention that the Polynesians travelled in canoes and were accustomed to navigating around the reefs of their native islands.

    The parts of Australia that are within easy traveling distance of inhabited places (e.g. the northern coast which is less than 100 miles from Papua New Guinea with lots of islands in between) are, to this day, sparsely populated because they don’t have an attractive climate for humans. The fertile southeastern coast is, OTOH, 1,000 miles of open water from NZ.

    Probably the Maori would have gotten around to it but they hadn’t reached the natural limits of NZ. Typically Polynesians would fill an island to the point of overpopulation and then the excess young males would get in a canoe and try to find another uninhabited island – this was high risk/high reward (no one knows what % of adventurers died but it was probably most of them) but excess males have little to lose anyway. Most Polynesian islands are pretty small but NZ is big and fertile and even with subsistence agriculture the pre-contact population of 100,000 did not challenge the Darwinian limits.

    • Replies: @photondancer
    @Jack D

    As per my other post, the ocean currents would be against them. The Maori are big blokes but paddling a canoe all that way against the East Australian current would probably be beyond them. The Polynesians preferred to go with the currents, not against them, and I'm not aware of any evidence they even knew Australia existed so they had no incentive to head west.

  244. @Corn
    @Andy


    If America belongs to the World, as the open border crowd claims
     
    I love that liberal legal logic.

    “America is stolen land, therefore it belongs to everyone.”

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @martin_2

    Corn, I was considering buying a Border Collie, but what would the proper PC name be? Open Access Collie?

    • LOL: Dissident, Corn
  245. @Muggles
    @Achmed E. Newman


    I hope you will read the book Buffalo Joe and I mentioned.
     
    Yes I've read it. Also last year read Glenn Frankel's book The Searchers, The Making of an American Legend.

    While is is roughly 1/3 about making the famous John Wayne film about the Comanche children kidnapping, approximately half of it details the exact Texas history of this incident and what the survivors on both sides could recall. Based on published scholarly research. I was quite surprised at that, in the very detailed accounts from when it occurred to current day descendants. Most of what is taught about that in Texas schools is demonstrably false or not supported by contemporary witnesses.

    Comanches were only one of many Amerind tribes, a tiny minority. Others were even more feared, like Apaches, but both small in number.

    You seem to be conflating 3000 years of Western (European/Mediterranean/Middle Eastern) history of what by 1850 were hundreds of millions living there, to roughly 10 million indigenous inhabitants of N. America. To base your entire argument on one fairly small group in the middle of nowhere with the entire Amerind population is absurd. No one argues that natives lacked virtually all technology prior to European arrival. That doesn't mean they were any dumber than say, Vikings or Celts. That's an entirely separate story line.

    Nor given a fair comparison, were Amerinds any more (or less) savage than Europeans in comparably organized societies. Better technology just meant better, more efficient savagery. Not less.

    It might help if you actually knew some Indians. The morality of human behavior can't be judged by the level of their own technological progress. Indians could only scalp one enemy at a time. Today Euro Americans can wipe out entire continents with a push of a few buttons. Also scalp with far better knives!

    But the lecture on the proper view of humanity's moral development is slated for next month so...

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Achmed E. Newman, @Buffalo Joe

    Mugs, the Comanches were fierce enough to drive the Apaches out of Texas. The Comanches met their match when the Texas Rangers realized that slaughtering the Comanches’ horses was the way to eliminate them as a threat. I will ask my Seneca friend who refs in this area for Indian box lacrosse leagues if the teams have names or just geographical locations or sponsor names. Stay safe.

    • Replies: @Muggles
    @Buffalo Joe


    I will ask my Seneca friend who refs in this area for Indian box lacrosse leagues if the teams have names or just geographical locations or sponsor names. Stay safe.
     
    "Apache" means "enemy" in Zuni and they were hated by other Indians. The Comanches were a much larger tribe and better horsemen, coming from the Plains and dependent upon buffalo. Apaches were known for having smaller bands and stealing horses from other Indians. They were extremely tough. Geronimo was chased down only because the US cavalry hired 5,000 Apache "scouts" from rival bands to track him down.

    Kit Carson managed to "pacify" the warlike, territorial Navajos in NM by raiding their settlements and destroying their crops. Starved them out. He was ordered to do so and they were forcibly relocated to the Pecos River area. Carson later successfully lobbied for them to return after many of them starved. While Carson didn't hate the Indians, the Navajos still haven't forgiven him.

    Yes, let your Seneca friend know that they can name their leagues and teams for famous white (White!) warriors or cities. The "Boston High Stickers" or "Stonewall Jack Warriors." They have my permission anyway. It's a two way street...

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

  246. Anonymous[163] • Disclaimer says:
    @Corvinus
    @Dissident

    Native Americans were civilized, friend. They meet the checkboxes--they had art/architecture, spoke a language, had religion, developed an economy, and had political systems.

    Now, compared to Europeans, they were VIEWED as being "less civilized" or "uncivilized", especially from a technological standpoint. For the invaders, I mean colonists, indigenous people were just too different: their skin was dark, their languages were foreign, their world views and spiritual beliefs were beyond most white men’s comprehension.

    I mean, how dare Native Americans generally viewed land as to be shared and respected, not to be raped and pillaged. Damn those socialists! Now where is my treaty and firewater to seize by force, I mean legalize, the peaceful transfer of land into my possession?

    https://www.warpaths2peacepipes.com/native-american-indians/native-americans-land.htm


    The idea of an individual person having exclusive use of a particular piece of land was completely alien to Native Americans. The Native Americans fought, as communities, with other tribes over hunting rights to the territory. But the "right" to the land was very different from the legal terms understood by the white settlers who had known no other way than the nature of European individual ownership. The America Native Indians had no concept of "private property," as applied to the land. The accumulation of property was further discouraged by the tradition and custom followed in most tribes was to destroy all the belongings of the owner at his death.
     

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jack D

    Native Americans were civilized, friend. They meet the checkboxes–they had art/architecture, spoke a language, had religion, developed an economy, and had political systems.

    You left out agriculture! American Indians were excellent farmers and much of the planet’s population today relies on the crops they developed. What would the world be like without corn (maize), potatoes and tomatoes, to name just three? Oh, and of course tobacco and cocaine!
    Amerindians developed the “three sisters” method of farming — Planting squash to shade out weeds, beans to fixate nitrogen, and corn for the beans to climb. They rotated crops, used fertilizer, practiced no-till planting to preserve the soil from erosion and developed numerous varieties. For example, the Pawnee planted 10 varieties of maize, seven varieties of pumpkins and squashes, and eight varieties of beans. And while wheat and other grains in Europe averaged yields of two to ten seeds harvested for every one planted, corn yielded as high as one hundred grains for every seed planted.
    Indian villages were permanent and in the wooded east not all that different from what would have been found in medieval Europe. On the plains, dwelling were made of mud and often of quite substantial size. But after spring planting and fall harvest, the villages were left vacant as the whole tribe would leave to hunt buffalo, with no fear that crops would be stolen or the villages looted.

    A contemporary view of a Wichita village in Oklahoma c1850. Note the neat rows of a variety of crops — corn, beans, squash, pumpkins:

  247. Anonymous[163] • Disclaimer says:
    @Corn
    @photondancer


    I’ve not observed any hail-fellow-PoC feelings between Maori and Aborigine so there may be something to it.
     
    You bringing up inter-PoC relations jogged my memory. Does anyone know how American Indian tribes get along nowadays? I read of an incident once where a Seminole tribal leader, James Billie, was at some conference of American Indians. He got in an argument with a man from another tribe, and after much shouting from both parties Billie shouted, “You gave up! You gave up! We never did!!”.
    (The Seminole never signed a treaty with the US govt.)

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Anonymous

    Do Europeans get along with each other? Do the Poles love the Russians? How about East Asians, are they all pals? Do the Koreans and the Japanese love each other? Gosh, how about the Virginians and the West Virginians? I saw a sign once that said “Keep Virginia Beautiful. Dump Your Trash in West Virginia!” Surely a sign of deep affection, no?

  248. @Corvinus
    @Dissident

    Native Americans were civilized, friend. They meet the checkboxes--they had art/architecture, spoke a language, had religion, developed an economy, and had political systems.

    Now, compared to Europeans, they were VIEWED as being "less civilized" or "uncivilized", especially from a technological standpoint. For the invaders, I mean colonists, indigenous people were just too different: their skin was dark, their languages were foreign, their world views and spiritual beliefs were beyond most white men’s comprehension.

    I mean, how dare Native Americans generally viewed land as to be shared and respected, not to be raped and pillaged. Damn those socialists! Now where is my treaty and firewater to seize by force, I mean legalize, the peaceful transfer of land into my possession?

    https://www.warpaths2peacepipes.com/native-american-indians/native-americans-land.htm


    The idea of an individual person having exclusive use of a particular piece of land was completely alien to Native Americans. The Native Americans fought, as communities, with other tribes over hunting rights to the territory. But the "right" to the land was very different from the legal terms understood by the white settlers who had known no other way than the nature of European individual ownership. The America Native Indians had no concept of "private property," as applied to the land. The accumulation of property was further discouraged by the tradition and custom followed in most tribes was to destroy all the belongings of the owner at his death.
     

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Jack D

    Native Americans were civilized, friend. They meet the checkboxes–…spoke a language…

    Wow, this is a really low bar. Are there any humans, other than the mentally disabled, who don’t speak a language?

    In Mexico, something close to what we would call “civilization” existed (cities, a calendar, a writing system, etc.) but based around a system of human sacrifice that was nothing short of satanic. In N. America, the tribes were basically living in the Stone Age.

    Under the “modern” way of thinking, no civilization is superior to any other civilization. Some ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual could believe them.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    @Jack D

    "Wow, this is a really low bar."

    Not a low bar in the least.

    "In Mexico, something close to what we would call “civilization” existed (cities, a calendar, a writing system, etc.) but based around a system of human sacrifice that was nothing short of satanic".

    No quotes needed for "civilization". The Aztecs ways of life met the criteria. Of course, that barbaric practice is ONE aspect of their society, which doesn't nuke their other accomplishments.

    "In N. America, the tribes were basically living in the Stone Age".

    From a technological standpoint, assuredly. But they met the criteria for civilization.

    "Under the “modern” way of thinking, no civilization is superior to any other civilization".

    Well, we know what happens when a group believes their civilization is superior, right?

    , @Johann Ricke
    @Jack D


    In Mexico, something close to what we would call “civilization” existed (cities, a calendar, a writing system, etc.) but based around a system of human sacrifice that was nothing short of satanic.
     
    In their defense, they merely took the traditional idea of killing their enemies one step further - they made sure nothing went to waste. Every region of the world has had population outrun available resources. Like everyone else, the nations in the pre-Columbian Americas fought wars with each other. Unlike everyone else, they made sure a perfectly good protein source was utilized in full rather than left to rot.

    https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/english/sacred-religious-and-cannibalistic-origins-pozole

    Only the elites got to partake of long pig. The hoi polloi had to settle for turkey. No leg of warrior for them.
  249. @AnotherDad
    @Anon99


    I guess you don’t consider Germans, Italians or the British as immigrants. Did you look at the link? They were the first and second wave of immigrants. I agree with you that Europeans laid the foundation for the US but they are immigrants nonetheless.
     
    Immigrants like George Washington? Thomas Jefferson? John Adams? Benjamin Franklin?

    Immigrants like Daniel Boone? (LOL) Meriwether Lewis and William Clark? Andy Jackson? Zachary Taylor? John C. Fremont?

    Immigrants Robert and Cyrus McCormick? John Deere? Samuel Colt? Peter Cooper? Cornelius Vanderbilt? Theodore Judah? Grenville Dodge? Leland Stanford? Thomas Edison? George Westinghouse? John D. Rockefeller? Henry Ford? Wilbur and Orville Wright? Thomas J. Watson? Robert Goddard? John Bardeen? Walter Brattain? William Shockley?

    Anon99, you seemed confused either about America or what an immigrant is or both.

    America was in no sense build by "immigrants". (Other than, yeah, the builders ancestors weren't here a 1000 years ago.) There were some original settlers--not "immigrants". But America was conquered, created and built by Americans--in ethnic background broadly the Germanics, specifically led by the Anglos, with some Scottish and Irish Celtic blood thrown into the mix. Any immigrants pitching in on the "build" were overwhelming of that some ethnic stock, following on--sometimes adding to the conquest and settlement, mostly just building in.

    "Nation of immigrants" is simply yet another--predominantly Jewish--minoritarian lie. Propaganda in this case specifically designed to:
    -- blur distinctions amongst people--settlers, founders, natives, immigrants, foreigners
    -- denigrate the people who actually built America ("not invented here")
    -- delegitimate their accomplishments, in order to displace them from power
    -- destroy their particular American culture as normative
    -- balkanize America in order to weaken resistance and facilitate elite minoritarian control
    -- take away Americans rights to govern their own nation
    -- destroy Americans right to their nation

    Some people are really good at making noise and lying. That doesn't make their lies true.

    In basic point of fact, America--not just its "foundation" but "America" was already "built"--by Americans!--fully conquered, settled, institutions and industry in place, with the largest GDP and the most prosperous people in the world, before the "Great Wave" immigrants, like the Ashkenazi, ever showed up to glom on.

    And America is--or was--great, prosperous and free, not the least bit because of "immigrants", but for exactly the same reason that Canada, Australia, New Zealand are also pleasant, prosperous places: Anglo settlers encounter a good land inhabited by stone age tribals, conquer and settle it, building quality institutions, agriculture and industry that flow from their being intelligent, industrious, high-trust Western-Christian people.

    Replies: @Anon99, @Anon99, @Prester John, @Anon99, @Corvinus

    I don’t consider those who landed from the Mayflower as immigrants either. If you look at the link I provided the first wave of immigration began in 1820. They were primarily of European descent. Are you saying they did not help build up the US? In any case, my point is your definition of immigrant means “non-white” which is not true.

  250. @AnotherDad
    @Anon99


    I guess you don’t consider Germans, Italians or the British as immigrants. Did you look at the link? They were the first and second wave of immigrants. I agree with you that Europeans laid the foundation for the US but they are immigrants nonetheless.
     
    Immigrants like George Washington? Thomas Jefferson? John Adams? Benjamin Franklin?

    Immigrants like Daniel Boone? (LOL) Meriwether Lewis and William Clark? Andy Jackson? Zachary Taylor? John C. Fremont?

    Immigrants Robert and Cyrus McCormick? John Deere? Samuel Colt? Peter Cooper? Cornelius Vanderbilt? Theodore Judah? Grenville Dodge? Leland Stanford? Thomas Edison? George Westinghouse? John D. Rockefeller? Henry Ford? Wilbur and Orville Wright? Thomas J. Watson? Robert Goddard? John Bardeen? Walter Brattain? William Shockley?

    Anon99, you seemed confused either about America or what an immigrant is or both.

    America was in no sense build by "immigrants". (Other than, yeah, the builders ancestors weren't here a 1000 years ago.) There were some original settlers--not "immigrants". But America was conquered, created and built by Americans--in ethnic background broadly the Germanics, specifically led by the Anglos, with some Scottish and Irish Celtic blood thrown into the mix. Any immigrants pitching in on the "build" were overwhelming of that some ethnic stock, following on--sometimes adding to the conquest and settlement, mostly just building in.

    "Nation of immigrants" is simply yet another--predominantly Jewish--minoritarian lie. Propaganda in this case specifically designed to:
    -- blur distinctions amongst people--settlers, founders, natives, immigrants, foreigners
    -- denigrate the people who actually built America ("not invented here")
    -- delegitimate their accomplishments, in order to displace them from power
    -- destroy their particular American culture as normative
    -- balkanize America in order to weaken resistance and facilitate elite minoritarian control
    -- take away Americans rights to govern their own nation
    -- destroy Americans right to their nation

    Some people are really good at making noise and lying. That doesn't make their lies true.

    In basic point of fact, America--not just its "foundation" but "America" was already "built"--by Americans!--fully conquered, settled, institutions and industry in place, with the largest GDP and the most prosperous people in the world, before the "Great Wave" immigrants, like the Ashkenazi, ever showed up to glom on.

    And America is--or was--great, prosperous and free, not the least bit because of "immigrants", but for exactly the same reason that Canada, Australia, New Zealand are also pleasant, prosperous places: Anglo settlers encounter a good land inhabited by stone age tribals, conquer and settle it, building quality institutions, agriculture and industry that flow from their being intelligent, industrious, high-trust Western-Christian people.

    Replies: @Anon99, @Anon99, @Prester John, @Anon99, @Corvinus

    “Immigrants Robert and Cyrus McCormick? John Deere? Samuel Colt? Peter Cooper? Cornelius Vanderbilt? Theodore Judah? Grenville Dodge? Leland Stanford? Thomas Edison? George Westinghouse? John D. Rockefeller? Henry Ford? Wilbur and Orville Wright? Thomas J. Watson? Robert Goddard? John Bardeen? Walter Brattain? William Shockley?”

    Their parents or grandparents came here as immigrants, friend.

    “America was in no sense build by “immigrants”.”

    To the contrary.

    I have never thought of immigration as a national menace. I believe the problem can best be met by scientific selection of the immigrant on the other side and the safe and sensible distribution here. We don’t appreciate the foreigner– that’s the trouble with us. We don’t see much difference between the immigrant of today and the early immigrants. You look upon the incoming foreigner as a common mechanic, as a laborer, an artisan. Yet he has risen to the positions of preacher, doctor, officer, and even member of the Cabinet.

    Frederick A. Wallis, Commissioner of Immigration, March 23, 1921

    They [the Chinese] are a harmless race when white men either let them alone or treat them no worse than dogs, for they seldom think of resenting the vilest insults or the cruelest injuries. They are quiet, peaceable, free from drunkenness, and industrious as the day is long. So long as a Chinaman has strength to use his hands he needs no support from anybody; white men often complain of want of work, but a Chinaman offers no such complaint; he manages to find something to do.

    Mark Twain, Roughing It, (Chapter XIII, “The Gentle, Inoffensive Chinese”), 1871

    “Some people are really good at making noise and lying. That doesn’t make their lies true.”

    Ironically, you are the epitome of this quotation.

    Pray tell, how did YOUR ancestors arrive here to the States?

  251. @Jack D
    @Corvinus


    Native Americans were civilized, friend. They meet the checkboxes–...spoke a language...
     
    Wow, this is a really low bar. Are there any humans, other than the mentally disabled, who don't speak a language?

    In Mexico, something close to what we would call "civilization" existed (cities, a calendar, a writing system, etc.) but based around a system of human sacrifice that was nothing short of satanic. In N. America, the tribes were basically living in the Stone Age.

    Under the "modern" way of thinking, no civilization is superior to any other civilization. Some ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual could believe them.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @Johann Ricke

    “Wow, this is a really low bar.”

    Not a low bar in the least.

    “In Mexico, something close to what we would call “civilization” existed (cities, a calendar, a writing system, etc.) but based around a system of human sacrifice that was nothing short of satanic”.

    No quotes needed for “civilization”. The Aztecs ways of life met the criteria. Of course, that barbaric practice is ONE aspect of their society, which doesn’t nuke their other accomplishments.

    “In N. America, the tribes were basically living in the Stone Age”.

    From a technological standpoint, assuredly. But they met the criteria for civilization.

    “Under the “modern” way of thinking, no civilization is superior to any other civilization”.

    Well, we know what happens when a group believes their civilization is superior, right?

  252. @Buffalo Joe
    @Muggles

    Mugs, the Comanches were fierce enough to drive the Apaches out of Texas. The Comanches met their match when the Texas Rangers realized that slaughtering the Comanches' horses was the way to eliminate them as a threat. I will ask my Seneca friend who refs in this area for Indian box lacrosse leagues if the teams have names or just geographical locations or sponsor names. Stay safe.

    Replies: @Muggles

    I will ask my Seneca friend who refs in this area for Indian box lacrosse leagues if the teams have names or just geographical locations or sponsor names. Stay safe.

    “Apache” means “enemy” in Zuni and they were hated by other Indians. The Comanches were a much larger tribe and better horsemen, coming from the Plains and dependent upon buffalo. Apaches were known for having smaller bands and stealing horses from other Indians. They were extremely tough. Geronimo was chased down only because the US cavalry hired 5,000 Apache “scouts” from rival bands to track him down.

    Kit Carson managed to “pacify” the warlike, territorial Navajos in NM by raiding their settlements and destroying their crops. Starved them out. He was ordered to do so and they were forcibly relocated to the Pecos River area. Carson later successfully lobbied for them to return after many of them starved. While Carson didn’t hate the Indians, the Navajos still haven’t forgiven him.

    Yes, let your Seneca friend know that they can name their leagues and teams for famous white (White!) warriors or cities. The “Boston High Stickers” or “Stonewall Jack Warriors.” They have my permission anyway. It’s a two way street…

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @Muggles

    Mugs, thanks for the reply...."Iroquois Immigrants" would be a great Indian team name and a fitting appropriation. Stay safe.

  253. @jcd1974
    @Canadian Observer

    Very true.

    The people most sympathetic to Indians in Canada are the people with the least contact with Indians. While those who most dislike Indians usually have the misfortune of living near a reserve.

    Replies: @anon

    What’s so bad about them?


  254. [MORE]

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    @MEH 0910

    https://twitter.com/StratOMatic/status/1339358407665602565

    https://twitter.com/StratOMatic/status/1339360711802310658
    https://twitter.com/StratOMatic/status/1339363713812484096
    https://twitter.com/StratOMatic/status/1339364846777856001
    https://twitter.com/StratOMatic/status/1339365821739622407
    https://twitter.com/StratOMatic/status/1339366837444874244

    Replies: @Colin Wright

    , @Steve Sailer
    @MEH 0910

    The Negro Baseball Leagues had plenty of Major League and even Hall of Fame quality players. Satchel Paige made his debut with the Cleveland Indians at age 42 and won Rookie of the Year honors.

    My one concern is that Negro League statistics are kind of chaotic, while Major League statistics are extremely regular and well-documented. Negro League teams only played maybe 60 games per year against other top flight Negro League teams, while playing many games barnstorming each year against local teams. And we're still missing quite a few box scores of even top flight games.

    Negro League playing conditions were kind of like the dead ball era in MLB: they couldn't afford to put a new ball in play often so scoring tended to be low.

  255. @J1234
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Mythologizing danger is a pretty common human pathos. A large number of team names are derived from fear, or fear overcome: Cyclones, Hurricanes, Bears, Bruins, Panthers, Bengals, Buccaneers, Raiders, Lions. There's even a Keelhaulers. The historic Vikings and Pirates produced more fear in Europeans than pride. Of course, there's an admiration for all of those things, but it may be derivative of the fear.

    I like all of those names better than names such as Beavers, Ravens and even Badgers (as fierce as they are) and certainly my home state's Cornhuskers, as they don't exactly conjure up fearful images. I really dislike team names like Jazz, Twins and Nuggets, which have very little to do with danger or bravery.

    Replies: @Dube

    I like all of those names better than names such as Beavers, Ravens and even Badgers (as fierce as they are) and certainly my home state’s Cornhuskers, as they don’t exactly conjure up fearful images.

    Cornhusking is honest work. And if honest work involves out-thinking, out-maneuvering, and pounding an opponent into the grass – well, all in a day’s.

  256. @Jack D
    @Corvinus


    Native Americans were civilized, friend. They meet the checkboxes–...spoke a language...
     
    Wow, this is a really low bar. Are there any humans, other than the mentally disabled, who don't speak a language?

    In Mexico, something close to what we would call "civilization" existed (cities, a calendar, a writing system, etc.) but based around a system of human sacrifice that was nothing short of satanic. In N. America, the tribes were basically living in the Stone Age.

    Under the "modern" way of thinking, no civilization is superior to any other civilization. Some ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual could believe them.

    Replies: @Corvinus, @Johann Ricke

    In Mexico, something close to what we would call “civilization” existed (cities, a calendar, a writing system, etc.) but based around a system of human sacrifice that was nothing short of satanic.

    In their defense, they merely took the traditional idea of killing their enemies one step further – they made sure nothing went to waste. Every region of the world has had population outrun available resources. Like everyone else, the nations in the pre-Columbian Americas fought wars with each other. Unlike everyone else, they made sure a perfectly good protein source was utilized in full rather than left to rot.

    https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/english/sacred-religious-and-cannibalistic-origins-pozole

    Only the elites got to partake of long pig. The hoi polloi had to settle for turkey. No leg of warrior for them.

  257. @Corn
    @Andy


    If America belongs to the World, as the open border crowd claims
     
    I love that liberal legal logic.

    “America is stolen land, therefore it belongs to everyone.”

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @martin_2

    Mr Jared Taylor has a good retort to those that say that America was stolen from the Indians, therefore no one is an immigrant.

    Firstly, if you really believe it is stolen then the only moral thing for you to do is to return to your own country, since you are presently benefitting from a crime.

    Secondly, what right have you got to set immigration policy, since this land, as you say, does not belong to you! Surely the only ones entitled to decide who shall and who shall not live here are the original inhabitants, that is, the Red Indians.

  258. @Jonathan Mason
    @Steve Sailer

    It has a great barrier reef.

    Replies: @Jack D, @William Badwhite

    I didn’t opine on Steve’s comment because I don’t know why Australia wasn’t visited by the Polynesians.

    It is interesting (and probably aggravating to some) that you also don’t know, but choose to weigh in with an obviously wrong answer nonetheless.

    1) The Polynesians traveled in large canoes that didn’t draw a lot of water and the reef wouldn’t have been much of an obstacle.

    2) the great barrier reef is mostly along the northeast coast (what is today Queensland), while huge swaths of the continent such as all of what is now New South Wales and Victoria aren’t affected by it.

  259. This is anecdotal but the few Natives I’ve met in my life have serious issues…..especially western Indians…..

    From what i saw obesity, substance abuse, severe mental health issues & other issues are serious challenges….these folks need serious govt help….

  260. Another aspect is that white admiration for Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved, makes the long submission of the black man look bad.

    That is really not fair. Indians were on their home turf. Africans were thousands of miles and across an ocean from home. Indians could escape and walk home, or if not home, find members of their ethnic group (‘tribe’). Indians would have been enslaved, at least to start, with members of their tribe. Africans were thrown together in a hodgepodge of languages. Indians were Stone Age mostly hunter-gatherers, Africans were Iron Age horticulturalists. So Indians could live off the land and make tools. Africans could have learned? Skip dinner tonight, sleep outdoors tonight, no sleeping bag or blankets allowed, skip breakfast tomorrow. Then go find a couple of rocks, maybe some sticks, and smack the rocks together until you have a spearhead, then lash the pointy rock to the end of the stick, and throw it. See how far it goes? I’ll tell you: not very far, and it probably won’t hit anything pointy-end first with the weight and momentum of the shaft driving it in. Not to mention, there is the far from home thing, so the Africans did not know what to hunt, how to hunt it in different seasons, or what and when to gather. Not to mention, the Africans escapees would have run into Indians, likely hostile ones, with nothing to trade and no language in common. Et cetera.

    The Indian slave would have been recently captured. Capture by enemies was something the Indians expected. An enslaved Indian’s spirit would not be broken,The African slaves had been through the horrors of the middle passage, which likely made slaving away on a farm seem pleasant in comparison, not to mention the post traumatic stress they likely had.

    Because of being at home and capable of living off the land, not to mention being raised raised to hunt and clash with other Indians, the escaped Indian was a danger to anyone who went hunting him.

    The Indians also were lazy slaves, and died readily. They had not been agricultural at all far very long, and did not take to toil. They were not genetically adapted to disease, and had no immunological memory of the slaver diseases, so even Indians who did not walk away weren’t alive long enough to be worth the cost of enslavement.

    Maybe Indians could have been made slaves under different conditions, but Africans were ‘pre-adapted’ to slavery, both genetically and culturally (that sounds really awful). Much like we only have a few domesticated animals, because it once a species was domesticated, it was easier and cheaper to use an already domesticated species than to domesticate one from scratch, once African slaves were available, trying to enslave Indians just wasn’t worthwhile.

    The Indians did not reproduce well in captivity. There were very few Indians born into slavery. After the first generation, slavery was the all the Africans slaves new, and they reproduced very well. Africans slaves were not bred by slave owners to be great athletes, contra black folk tales, but every environment causes selection, and if any traits that improved survival and reproduction under slavery were heritable, adaptation happened. I’m thinking that, if runaways usually died for the reasons cited above, then the slave population for selected for not escaping,

    I don’t think that not freeing themselves reflects particularly badly on African-Americans,

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Rob


    I don’t think that not freeing themselves reflects particularly badly on African-Americans
     
    The fatal flaw in your narrative is the premise that Africans were “oppressed” or badly off in American civilization. The truth is they lived far better than they would have lived (if they were not killed by other Africans) in Africa, and enjoyed a higher standard of living that most Europeans. The reason they didn’t “free themselves” was because they in general had little reason to.
  261. @Whitehall
    Whites also began to appreciate American Indians when they joined up with the US Armed Forces.

    Sgt. York for one and my late brother in law who was a Marine sniper in Vietnam for another.

    Replies: @Rich, @ATate, @Richard B, @Jake, @Juvenalis

    American Indians also fought against the US Armed Forces for the CS Armed Forces.

    Robert E. Lee surrendered to Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox on April 9, 1865. Cherokee Chief General Stand Watie (Indian name “Degataga” meaning “Stands Firm”) and Cherokee Mounted Rifles regiment fought on; Watie was the last Confederate General to surrender on June 23.

    Cherokee Nation, Choctaw Nation, Chickasaw Nation, Muskogee Creek Nation, Seminole Nation, Osage Indians…all allies of the Confederacy, forming the fearsome Indian Cavalry of the Confederate Armed Forces.



    The only ‘Person of Color’ to attain rank of General in US Civil War, either North or South, Brigadier General Stand Watie and Cherokee Confederate veterans went to their graves flying Confederate battle flags proud of their service to the CSA.

    On a “find your roots” show, black actor Don Cheadle learned his ancestors were slaves owned not by whites but far crueler masters: Chickasaw Indians in Oklahoma territory. Native Americans refused to free their slaves even after the war; the White Man forced Indians to later give up their slaves in separate harsh US treaty terms.

    Still, unlike White Americans, Native American tribal nations made no attempt to extend citizenship and equality to the new black ‘freedmen’ in their midst.

    Also, amid the Summer of George, NY Times “1619 Project” conspiracy theorist Nikole Hannah-Jones tweeted then deleted to note ‘Native Americans brought their Black slaves with them to do all the work on the “Trail of Tears”’…

  262. @Diversity Heretic
    How long until the Boy Scouts eliminate "The Order of the Arrow," as their elite designation? Or have they already?

    Will the Army stop naming helicopters after Indian tribes?

    Replies: @tyrone, @Joe Paluka, @Farenheit, @Paul Jolliffe, @Dissident

    How long until the Boy Scouts eliminate “The Order of the Arrow,” as their elite designation? Or have they already?

    Wait, you mean the Boy Scouts that after resisting for as much as decades, finally, within the past decade, submitted to the demands of the sodomy lobby to reverse longtime policy– first by accepting avowed sexual deviants as scouts, and then, a little later, even as scoutmasters? The once-venerable organization whose name forms the initialism BSA? Having upended its founding principles and made a mockery out of the morally straight clause in its membership oath, Buggery Scouts of America seemed, at that point, as if it might have been more apt. Such an appellation may have since, however, been rendered obsolete. Boy Scouts of America certainly has. For as Mr. Sailer has noted, what’s left of the entity still calling itself that has now renounced and rescinded its former, shamefully sexist, misogynist, cis-hetero-normative policy of restricting membership to those presumed to possess a male member, i.e., those whom we call boys children and adolescents who were transphobically assigned the (toxic) male gender at birth.

    If that “Boy Scouts” is the one you were inquiring about, wouldn’t your question be rather moot at this point?

    Related photo after break

    [MORE]

  263. @AnotherDad
    @Reg Cæsar


    Where they still believe in science unlike, apparently, SCOTUS:
     
    The relevant issue isn't science but that Indiana has a law.

    But if anyone thinks we have constitutional government, or federalism or self-government anymore, they aren't paying attention.

    Our "constitution" is minoritarianism and whatever the elite wants.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    The relevant issue isn’t science but that Indiana has a law.

    The law is based on biology. The decision is at war with it.

  264. @Steve Sailer
    @sb

    Why was Australia so seldom reached by ship from the rest of the world? It doesn't look as remote from civilization as New Zealand or even Madagascar, which was settled by Malay people, who aren't all that far from Australia. Why didn't the great sailors of the Polynesians get to Australia?

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Reg Cæsar, @photondancer, @Anonymous

    Why didn’t the great sailors of the Polynesians get to Australia?

    Perhaps they did, saw that the terrain sucked, and went on to New Zealand. Who wouldn’t?

    (A: prisoners.)

    Australia is a hot Canada.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Reg Cæsar


    Australia is a hot Canada.
     
    Maybe 80 or 90% of Australia is poorly suited for human habitation (either outright desert or rangeland that only supports sparse habitation (like parts of Texas) or otherwise unsuitable but the remaining 10 or 20% is more like California than Canada.

    Replies: @sb

  265. @AndrewR
    @Desiderius

    It's the mainstream leftist view. No nuance. No historical awareness beyond that which a dim six year old could memorize. You know this.

    Replies: @Desiderius

    The mainstream isn’t leftist. Steve isn’t talking about the leftists in any case. I think.

    The imprecision here is a problem. I think he’s trying to model the thinking of an average voter? If he put in the effort to use active voice he might avoid making statements that don’t hold up to scrutiny.

  266. Anonymous[389] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rob

    Another aspect is that white admiration for Indians, who fought the white man for 250 years and refused to be enslaved, makes the long submission of the black man look bad.
     
    That is really not fair. Indians were on their home turf. Africans were thousands of miles and across an ocean from home. Indians could escape and walk home, or if not home, find members of their ethnic group (‘tribe’). Indians would have been enslaved, at least to start, with members of their tribe. Africans were thrown together in a hodgepodge of languages. Indians were Stone Age mostly hunter-gatherers, Africans were Iron Age horticulturalists. So Indians could live off the land and make tools. Africans could have learned? Skip dinner tonight, sleep outdoors tonight, no sleeping bag or blankets allowed, skip breakfast tomorrow. Then go find a couple of rocks, maybe some sticks, and smack the rocks together until you have a spearhead, then lash the pointy rock to the end of the stick, and throw it. See how far it goes? I’ll tell you: not very far, and it probably won’t hit anything pointy-end first with the weight and momentum of the shaft driving it in. Not to mention, there is the far from home thing, so the Africans did not know what to hunt, how to hunt it in different seasons, or what and when to gather. Not to mention, the Africans escapees would have run into Indians, likely hostile ones, with nothing to trade and no language in common. Et cetera.

    The Indian slave would have been recently captured. Capture by enemies was something the Indians expected. An enslaved Indian’s spirit would not be broken,The African slaves had been through the horrors of the middle passage, which likely made slaving away on a farm seem pleasant in comparison, not to mention the post traumatic stress they likely had.

    Because of being at home and capable of living off the land, not to mention being raised raised to hunt and clash with other Indians, the escaped Indian was a danger to anyone who went hunting him.

    The Indians also were lazy slaves, and died readily. They had not been agricultural at all far very long, and did not take to toil. They were not genetically adapted to disease, and had no immunological memory of the slaver diseases, so even Indians who did not walk away weren’t alive long enough to be worth the cost of enslavement.

    Maybe Indians could have been made slaves under different conditions, but Africans were ‘pre-adapted’ to slavery, both genetically and culturally (that sounds really awful). Much like we only have a few domesticated animals, because it once a species was domesticated, it was easier and cheaper to use an already domesticated species than to domesticate one from scratch, once African slaves were available, trying to enslave Indians just wasn’t worthwhile.

    The Indians did not reproduce well in captivity. There were very few Indians born into slavery. After the first generation, slavery was the all the Africans slaves new, and they reproduced very well. Africans slaves were not bred by slave owners to be great athletes, contra black folk tales, but every environment causes selection, and if any traits that improved survival and reproduction under slavery were heritable, adaptation happened. I’m thinking that, if runaways usually died for the reasons cited above, then the slave population for selected for not escaping,

    I don’t think that not freeing themselves reflects particularly badly on African-Americans,

    Replies: @Anonymous

    I don’t think that not freeing themselves reflects particularly badly on African-Americans

    The fatal flaw in your narrative is the premise that Africans were “oppressed” or badly off in American civilization. The truth is they lived far better than they would have lived (if they were not killed by other Africans) in Africa, and enjoyed a higher standard of living that most Europeans. The reason they didn’t “free themselves” was because they in general had little reason to.

  267. @restless94110
    @Anonymous


    Do you see any parallels between the respect formerly given to the defeated Indians and that formerly given to defeated Southerners? And parallels between the place they were given in America’s heritage and identity?
     
    In my experience, growing up in California, I never did see much respect for Southerners. And, until the late late 60s the South was looked at as a place full of rednecks, chain gangs, of mean and narrow-minded people. I believed from first hand experience that that was by and large true.

    And it was reinforced by movies. Just the other day, I saw an old Alan Ladd Western where her comes with his young son to the North as the boy has ceased to speak due to hysterical laryngitis from seeing his mother murdered by the Union soldiers while Ladd was off fighting for the South. There is a ton of discrimination and anger thrown on the two in the town in the north that they land in and that makes up much of the film. I also checked out Vera Cruz (1951) where Gary Cooper is a Confederate colonel who has come to French-ruled Mexico to make enough money to repair his ruined plantation and is subjected to scorn and ridicule by the thug villains (Ernest Borgnine and Charles Bronson among them).

    You also have Easy Rider, which was a massive international hit with its portrayal of the dangerous South for long hairs in the late 60s. Very very scary scenes.

    But as Duane Alman said you only have to go to Modesto (California) to find rednecks. Many from the South came to all parts of California especially the Central Valley and Southern California. And many of those statues that are being torn down were erected in the early 20th century by the South as a kind of a statement: "we are proud of our segregation system:"

    But then all of that changed in a matter of just a few years. Southern bands like Lynard Skinard, The Alman Brothers, and others, and country bands like Alabama and dozens more started wearing their hair long and singing answers to Neil Young's Southern Man screed. Civil rights gave blacks more equality and things have proceeded from there.

    But to my mind there is still Southerner bashing going on and it's unjustified and uncalled for. So my reply is no. There were barriers to Indians assimilating into mainstream culture and then those barriers were lifted in the early 70s, but they still didn't and haven't. The team names reflected a respect but at arm's length. The South was always looked at as a backwater.

    In the years since, I have come to admire many things about Southerners, but I've never seen much of that arm's length respect that Indians got.

    And are there any commonalities in the contemporary push to erase Southern symbols and history and the contemporary push to erase Indian symbols and history?
     
    Both of these are misguided and coming from a faulty analysis of American history and American culture. For example, Robert E. Lee was a brilliant general who had fought in American wars. He only went for the South because he was loyal to his state. A deeper reading of the Civil War reveals that it had little to do with slavery thought that was one component.

    Even Abe Lincoln felt that the solution for freeing black slaves was to repatriate them back to Africa. And one of the largest slave owners was a Chctaw chieftain (guess my half-Choctaw daughter is going to have to pay reparations?).

    In the South, for decades the idea of justice was many times the lynch mob. Though 1800 blacks were lynhed, 1250 whites were, too. A man suspected credibly of rape, thievery, etc., was often summarily strung up. The idea that this was purely hateful with no cause and only racially based is without merit.

    Also keep in mind, the minstrel shows of those times featuring either whites in black face or blacks themselves were looked at as entertainment by whites not as being derisive; as being a release from the extraordinarily uptight customs and morés of White society. Blacks had license to be far freer in their ways than withes did and the shows allowed whites to exhale and get a contact high from it.

    All of these things are now looked upon by the ignorant fools as some kind of evil hateful plot.

    the Indians have been left out of this kind of thing. Steve's point was that by erasing even the names of sports teams from Indian names that you leave them out even further. They just are disappeared. In the 70s there were several feature films that had Indian actors in central roles (One Flew Over the Cookoo's Nest, another film made by Clint Eastwood,, several more). But these themes and roles have dried up,.

    On my first Facebook account almost 10 years ago, I had a few Indian friends, and I used to get real entangled up with my friend's friends and relatives, all Native American. I still have in my archives a long thread about the film Avatar which celebrates in my view tribal cultures but her friends felt insulted Indians. It looked to me like the older Indian women friends were in a constant state of anger and resentment and were quick to disqualify anyone who was not a redskin, and the young young men were in that stupid SJW analytical loopback which discounts every point of view except white man bad.

    I realized that both of those camps were stupidly erasing themselves.

    And you still see it. The recent commercial I saw on social media of frowny-faced Indians standing around breaking things because Thanksgiving? When Thanksgiving truly was a celebration by whites and the tribe where they landed--who were helped by the whites from the murderous neighboring tribes that had been terrorizing them for years.

    It's a perversion and it just makes Indians feel more and more isolated. Just like the perverted readings of event by the black race baitiers makes blacks feel more and more isolated.

    So no, the Indians have more in common with blacks in that regard. The Southerners stand alone.

    Replies: @John Up North

    I’ve heard it said that the construction of the US Interstate Highway System in the 1950s was a pivotal event in finally joining the Southeast to the rest of the continental US in terms of culture and politics. What do you think?

    • Replies: @black sea
    @John Up North

    I think the major factors were twofold:

    World War Two: Lots of young men from the South saw other parts of the country, and other parts of the world. Lots of young men from elsewhere mingled with Southerners for the first time. Military production brought increased industrialization to the South. Wars have the effect of binding disparate sub-groups into a national identity both by design and by simple human nature.

    Television: Self-explanatory.


    I'd guess that the Interstate Highway System made economic integration substantially easier, but I'd still put it way down the list of contributing factors.

    Replies: @John Up North

    , @restless94110
    @John Up North


    I’ve heard it said that the construction of the US Interstate Highway System in the 1950s was a pivotal event in finally joining the Southeast to the rest of the continental US in terms of culture and politics. What do you think?
     
    I would more say that it finally joined EVERY part of America. You can see lots of educationals (short films longer than commercials but shorter than documentaries that used to be played in schools and on television) of families motoring around the United States. I don't think interstate highways had a lot of effect. It was more what I said before: the changes in redneck culture brought about by rock and country artists, Bob Dylan, Johnny Cash, breakthroughs in civil rights and voter rights.

    That's what changed it.

    I will also add that a plethora of sitcoms came out in the 70s featuring black characters and this really did an enormous amount to familiarize the population with blacks. It normalized them, made them not the other as had been previous.

    In essence, the Southerners, the blacks, and even the Indians were coming together in the 70s (and even relations between men and women), and then?

    It flipped. In all those categories. It suddenly just exploded apart and away.

    It was like the Big Bang: Magnetic attraction to unity and then explosive repulsion. We are still seeing that repulsion. I think that means the society will self-destruct. I don't see anything that will stop it.

    The only thing that will,, will be when other countries spank us hard because we aren't doing anything anymore, making anything anymore, only just bickering. They will just fuck us up.

    Because we are weak because we are stupid because we care more about fake nonsense and other major countries don't play that. Because of our stupidity. Because of our hubris.

    We are doomed. Doomed to be spanked.
  268. @Anonymous
    @Anon

    Unless you are in the corporate world you can't imagine how bad it is actually is. I live in the middle of nowhere and my town is now approximately 20% Indian because the Fortune 500 company that I work for is importing them as salaried employees by the thousands. A friend of mine told me that the local school district is approximately one-third Indian. This is one of the best school districts in the state.

    Replies: @Abolish_public_education

    It’s unclear whether those schoolteachers are citizens.

    It really burns me up to hear US/state government workers talking with foreign accents. The welfare magnet.

    Be that worker a US citizen naturalized, native-born, or nth generation, his employment (i.e. tax leeching) really burns me up.

  269. @znon
    @BCB232

    Interesting to compare that to the fate of the Irish, to be enslaved and reviled for 400 years and to survive and win independence, rather than the native Scot highlander clans, most of whom like the Amerindians, are barely surviving as a shadow or are alive only in legend.

    Replies: @John Up North

    When I watch those PBS travel shows about Scotland’s Highlands I’m always struck by the absence of a population or towns. The Highlands look very beautiful but empty. Where did the Gael go?

  270. @Muggles
    @Buffalo Joe


    I will ask my Seneca friend who refs in this area for Indian box lacrosse leagues if the teams have names or just geographical locations or sponsor names. Stay safe.
     
    "Apache" means "enemy" in Zuni and they were hated by other Indians. The Comanches were a much larger tribe and better horsemen, coming from the Plains and dependent upon buffalo. Apaches were known for having smaller bands and stealing horses from other Indians. They were extremely tough. Geronimo was chased down only because the US cavalry hired 5,000 Apache "scouts" from rival bands to track him down.

    Kit Carson managed to "pacify" the warlike, territorial Navajos in NM by raiding their settlements and destroying their crops. Starved them out. He was ordered to do so and they were forcibly relocated to the Pecos River area. Carson later successfully lobbied for them to return after many of them starved. While Carson didn't hate the Indians, the Navajos still haven't forgiven him.

    Yes, let your Seneca friend know that they can name their leagues and teams for famous white (White!) warriors or cities. The "Boston High Stickers" or "Stonewall Jack Warriors." They have my permission anyway. It's a two way street...

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe

    Mugs, thanks for the reply….”Iroquois Immigrants” would be a great Indian team name and a fitting appropriation. Stay safe.

  271. @Reg Cæsar
    @Steve Sailer


    Why didn’t the great sailors of the Polynesians get to Australia?
     
    Perhaps they did, saw that the terrain sucked, and went on to New Zealand. Who wouldn't?

    (A: prisoners.)

    Australia is a hot Canada.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Australia is a hot Canada.

    Maybe 80 or 90% of Australia is poorly suited for human habitation (either outright desert or rangeland that only supports sparse habitation (like parts of Texas) or otherwise unsuitable but the remaining 10 or 20% is more like California than Canada.

    • Replies: @sb
    @Jack D

    Have you been to Australia -and travelled around ?

    Much of Australia is like the South West of the US -and yet that part of the US has large cities like Phoenix and Las Vegas although Americans talk about that region being pretty underpopulated .
    I've been told that Tucson and Alice Springs have very similar weather and climate by a former Tucson resident who relocated to the Alice ( plenty of Americans in that town )

    Certainly in my American travels I've been surprised as to how populated very desolate areas ( to my eye ) are
    The part of Australia which is well watered -between the Mountains and the Sea- is pretty large - maybe a few bigger European countries worth
    By the way New Zealand was British settled after Australia ( it was originally part of New South Wales )

  272. You people are idiots. You think that bombing the shit out of babies is better than bashing their heads against a tree in person. Even though bombing probably gets a much better kill total.

    I’d call you hypocrites but you know that already.

  273. Most Indians (Aztecs and Toltecs are outliers–compare the Inca, who sacrificed a little, but not any more than Europeans) lived peaceful, rich, opulent intelligent lives.

    Pre-1492.

    What you know of Indians is of the 10% remnant left after European diseases had their way with them. You have no idea about the other 90%. Because they were gone before the anthropologists could get to them. 50 million Indians lived in the Americas. Living vastly different and varied lives.

    Just one example. All the gene-splicing in the world can’t develop maize.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @obwandiyag


    All the gene-splicing in the world can’t develop maize.
     
    What do you mean?
  274. @JohnPlywood
    @Muggles

    These are reconstructions of +2200 year old Celtic wagons:

    https://www.laits.utexas.edu/ironagecelts/images/vix/vix_wagon_reconstr.jpg

    https://www.thevintagenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Reconstruction-of-the-grave-good-cart-loaded-with-some-more-goods.-Part-of-the-grave-from-the-celtic-prince-in-Hochdorf-Germany.-Photo-Credit-640x480.jpg


    Celtic wagons were the first in the world to feature seamless iron tires, and wheels made from a single board, bent in to a hoop and fasted with a single joint. These are feats that most wheelwrights of the 18th and 19th centuries were incapable of performing (perhaps 5 people in the world can do this today). The Greeks and Romans learned how to make this type of wheel from Celts.


    They're also believed to have invented lye-based soap (as opposed to the earlier potash-based soap of the acient bear east), and taught Romans the very difficult art of wooden casking. An art that had been previously mastered by such organized societies as Egyptians and Mesopotamians.


    Please... Show me the Amerindians living at that level pre-1500s. That's not a jab at the Amerindians, but at the idea that Celts were violent because they weren't organized. They had in fact reached a very high level of sophistication.

    Replies: @Hereward

    The first picture is a reconstruction of the wagon from the Vix Grave. If I recall correctly, the wheel hubs were hollow bronze castings in which hardwood dowels were found. The dowels still bore traces of oil or fat. It seems they acted as lubricated roller bearings within the hubs.

  275. @iDeplorable
    @Joe Paluka


    Is 92,000 victims enough or did they just make it up.
     
    "92,700 people have now filed sex abuse claims against the Boy Scouts of America ahead of the Nov. 16 deadline set to demand damages"

    The words in bold should tell you something. As should the fact most Scoutmasters historically have been fathers of one or more of the Scouts.

    Grifters gonna grift.

    Also, shut up Reg UnCeasing Jabber Ceasar

    Replies: @Joe Paluka

    I’m sure a lot of people see dollar signs in their eyes and they might not all be legitimate claims but that doesn’t preclude the fact that such organizations were a pervert’s playpen before adequate screening weeded them out.

  276. @Achmed E. Newman
    One idea I thought about a long time ago was that the patriotic Constitutionalist Americans (like myself), the Oath Keepers, III%, etc. ought to try to make some deals with the modern Indian tribes against the US Gov't Beast. After all, they are in some ways separate "nations", per treaties and laws. Perhaps the Red Man could be persuaded to go on the war path again, but alongside the patriotic White Man against the Federal Beast.

    It was the Feds after all, with the continual broken treaties with the Indians, that made the problem even worse for them, as the White Man pushed across the land. (Granted, since you had a culture that understands property rights and built civilizations vs. one that didn't, there wasn't going to be any easy way out once the White Man landed in the New World.)

    Replies: @bomag, @Russ

    One idea I thought about a long time ago was that the patriotic Constitutionalist Americans (like myself), the Oath Keepers, III%, etc. ought to try to make some deals with the modern Indian tribes against the US Gov’t Beast. After all, they are in some ways separate “nations”, per treaties and laws.

    Liking how you’re thinking here.

    Certainly beats standing athwart history yelling Stop.

  277. @MEH 0910
    https://twitter.com/lindseyadler/status/1339240198773858304

    https://twitter.com/MLB_PR/status/1339239227805065219

    https://twitter.com/MLB/status/1339247106104717312

    https://twitter.com/MLB/status/1339301027598700545

    Replies: @MEH 0910, @Steve Sailer


    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    @MEH 0910

    Curiously, this act of political correctness doesn't bother me at all...I suppose because it's actually deserved.

  278. @MEH 0910
    https://twitter.com/lindseyadler/status/1339240198773858304

    https://twitter.com/MLB_PR/status/1339239227805065219

    https://twitter.com/MLB/status/1339247106104717312

    https://twitter.com/MLB/status/1339301027598700545

    Replies: @MEH 0910, @Steve Sailer

    The Negro Baseball Leagues had plenty of Major League and even Hall of Fame quality players. Satchel Paige made his debut with the Cleveland Indians at age 42 and won Rookie of the Year honors.

    My one concern is that Negro League statistics are kind of chaotic, while Major League statistics are extremely regular and well-documented. Negro League teams only played maybe 60 games per year against other top flight Negro League teams, while playing many games barnstorming each year against local teams. And we’re still missing quite a few box scores of even top flight games.

    Negro League playing conditions were kind of like the dead ball era in MLB: they couldn’t afford to put a new ball in play often so scoring tended to be low.

  279. @RegretLeft
    @Redneck farmer

    Harriet Martineau was an English writer who traveled in the USA - in the 1830s - about the same time as de Tocqueville; almost every page of her "Society in America" reflects her vicious hatred of slavery.

    She spoke with many enslaved African and reported that they very much preferred to be sold to Indians as opposed to whites. The Indians provided living accommodations nearly equal to those they enjoyed themselves and demanded considerably less work output.

    Replies: @black sea

    I guess she didn’t speak with many slaves owned by Cherokee Chief James Vann:

    James Vann was particularly known for having an outrageous
    temper. The missionaries often recorded him as being drunk and taking out his aggression, rather violently, upon his slaves. After accusing Demos of slaughtering one of his oxen, for example, James Vann tied him up with chains and kept him at the house. After he released Demos back to Mother Vann, Vann continued to beat him on many occasions (Moravian Diary, Vann House, February 11 and March 15, 1807).

  280. @John Up North
    @restless94110

    I've heard it said that the construction of the US Interstate Highway System in the 1950s was a pivotal event in finally joining the Southeast to the rest of the continental US in terms of culture and politics. What do you think?

    Replies: @black sea, @restless94110

    I think the major factors were twofold:

    World War Two: Lots of young men from the South saw other parts of the country, and other parts of the world. Lots of young men from elsewhere mingled with Southerners for the first time. Military production brought increased industrialization to the South. Wars have the effect of binding disparate sub-groups into a national identity both by design and by simple human nature.

    Television: Self-explanatory.

    I’d guess that the Interstate Highway System made economic integration substantially easier, but I’d still put it way down the list of contributing factors.

    • Agree: restless94110
    • Replies: @John Up North
    @black sea

    Agreed

  281. @Jack D
    @Reg Cæsar


    Australia is a hot Canada.
     
    Maybe 80 or 90% of Australia is poorly suited for human habitation (either outright desert or rangeland that only supports sparse habitation (like parts of Texas) or otherwise unsuitable but the remaining 10 or 20% is more like California than Canada.

    Replies: @sb

    Have you been to Australia -and travelled around ?

    Much of Australia is like the South West of the US -and yet that part of the US has large cities like Phoenix and Las Vegas although Americans talk about that region being pretty underpopulated .
    I’ve been told that Tucson and Alice Springs have very similar weather and climate by a former Tucson resident who relocated to the Alice ( plenty of Americans in that town )

    Certainly in my American travels I’ve been surprised as to how populated very desolate areas ( to my eye ) are
    The part of Australia which is well watered -between the Mountains and the Sea- is pretty large – maybe a few bigger European countries worth
    By the way New Zealand was British settled after Australia ( it was originally part of New South Wales )

  282. @Ed Case
    @sb

    Not a chance.
    Kangaroos aren't easy to hunt, the Australian forests are pretty barren of food, and all the Maori had were clubs and spears.
    The 1788 British settlement at Sydney Cove nearly failed several times, Sydney Harbour was fished out by 1790, and they were reduced to stealing food from the Abos until resupply ships arrived.
    The 1802 settlement at Sorrento [Vic.] failed and the colonists didn't return until 1834.
    Maori are contemptuous of Abos, particularly their women, but I can tell you from first hand observation in the old pubs of South Brisbane, one on one with fists a small Abo will badly beat a big Maori every time.

    Replies: @sb

    Australia would have looked like a stockyard full of meat compared with NZ
    The Maoris had eaten out a number of NZ bird species -no real native mammals there -and searched high and low for protein . I’m told koalas aren’t so bad after you get over the eucalyptus taste

    I have heard South Brisbane had ( has ? ) some pretty rough bloodhouse pubs so maybe locals have an advantage . All I can say is that a nasty angry Maori scares me more than any abo(rigine)

    • Replies: @Ed Case
    @sb

    The First Settlers never saw a Koala until after they's crossed the Blue Mountains and discovered the Western Plains, that took 25 years.
    The coastal Abos had eaten them out long before.
    Australia's problem was that there's no fat on the native animals, so the Abos were in a constant search for Fat.
    The Maori solved that by eating people.
    South Brisbane's Stanley St pubs pubs are all gone, save for the Plough Inn and the Ship Inn, scene of many killings in years gone by.
    The Palace was a grand 3 story pub overlooking the river on the corner of Melbourne St,
    The Manhattan was in the middle of the block, and the Adelaide was on the corner of Russell St.
    The cops shut it down in 1973 due to the violence.
    Across the road was the Atlas, owned by an Abo named Bill Wockner.
    He had a boxing background, Abos were banned there.
    All save for the Atlas and the Plough Inn were infested by Abos.
    How that situation came about was when American Troops occupied Brisbane from January 1942.
    Jim Crow was enforced, black Servicemen had to stay south of the river and were forbidden to cross the Victoria Bridge
    Blacks and Abos took over the riverside pubs, and the Abos never left until the 80s when most of the area was demolished to make way for Expo 88.

  283. @Steve Sailer
    @sb

    Why was Australia so seldom reached by ship from the rest of the world? It doesn't look as remote from civilization as New Zealand or even Madagascar, which was settled by Malay people, who aren't all that far from Australia. Why didn't the great sailors of the Polynesians get to Australia?

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Reg Cæsar, @photondancer, @Anonymous

    I don’t think ocean currents allow for easy travel by canoe from New Zealand to Australia. Instead they swept the Polynesians out towards the Americas. Also, the waters around the south of Australia are notoriously rough.

    • Replies: @Wency
    @photondancer

    It's this. Add that Polynesians had only been on New Zealand for a few hundred years when Europeans arrived, so not as much time to explore, and not as much population pressure to migrate (especially because it was a vast land to fill compared to what they were used to).

    If by some chance they had discovered Australia, the existence of hostile locals would probably have kept them from returning with women to attempt a permanent colonization. We could perhaps imagine a male war party invading and taking local women, as the Maori probably could have bested the Aborigines in battle assuming rough parity in numbers. Though this sort of invasion isn't how Polynesians were accustomed to doing things.

  284. @Jack D
    @Jonathan Mason

    The Great Barrier Reef only protects the coast of Queensland, which leaves the other 7/8th of the coast unprotected including many protected harbors such as those of Sydney and Melbourne. Not to mention that the Polynesians travelled in canoes and were accustomed to navigating around the reefs of their native islands.

    The parts of Australia that are within easy traveling distance of inhabited places (e.g. the northern coast which is less than 100 miles from Papua New Guinea with lots of islands in between) are, to this day, sparsely populated because they don't have an attractive climate for humans. The fertile southeastern coast is, OTOH, 1,000 miles of open water from NZ.

    Probably the Maori would have gotten around to it but they hadn't reached the natural limits of NZ. Typically Polynesians would fill an island to the point of overpopulation and then the excess young males would get in a canoe and try to find another uninhabited island - this was high risk/high reward (no one knows what % of adventurers died but it was probably most of them) but excess males have little to lose anyway. Most Polynesian islands are pretty small but NZ is big and fertile and even with subsistence agriculture the pre-contact population of 100,000 did not challenge the Darwinian limits.

    Replies: @photondancer

    As per my other post, the ocean currents would be against them. The Maori are big blokes but paddling a canoe all that way against the East Australian current would probably be beyond them. The Polynesians preferred to go with the currents, not against them, and I’m not aware of any evidence they even knew Australia existed so they had no incentive to head west.

  285. @sb
    @Ed Case

    Australia would have looked like a stockyard full of meat compared with NZ
    The Maoris had eaten out a number of NZ bird species -no real native mammals there -and searched high and low for protein . I'm told koalas aren't so bad after you get over the eucalyptus taste

    I have heard South Brisbane had ( has ? ) some pretty rough bloodhouse pubs so maybe locals have an advantage . All I can say is that a nasty angry Maori scares me more than any abo(rigine)

    Replies: @Ed Case

    The First Settlers never saw a Koala until after they’s crossed the Blue Mountains and discovered the Western Plains, that took 25 years.
    The coastal Abos had eaten them out long before.
    Australia’s problem was that there’s no fat on the native animals, so the Abos were in a constant search for Fat.
    The Maori solved that by eating people.
    South Brisbane’s Stanley St pubs pubs are all gone, save for the Plough Inn and the Ship Inn, scene of many killings in years gone by.
    The Palace was a grand 3 story pub overlooking the river on the corner of Melbourne St,
    The Manhattan was in the middle of the block, and the Adelaide was on the corner of Russell St.
    The cops shut it down in 1973 due to the violence.
    Across the road was the Atlas, owned by an Abo named Bill Wockner.
    He had a boxing background, Abos were banned there.
    All save for the Atlas and the Plough Inn were infested by Abos.
    How that situation came about was when American Troops occupied Brisbane from January 1942.
    Jim Crow was enforced, black Servicemen had to stay south of the river and were forbidden to cross the Victoria Bridge
    Blacks and Abos took over the riverside pubs, and the Abos never left until the 80s when most of the area was demolished to make way for Expo 88.

  286. @Perspective
    @photondancer

    The Aussie Aboriginal cousins, the Negritos, also suffered greatly during the Austronesian expansion. But this is not much talked about as it's not PC to discuss a non-European race dominating over another one:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negrito
    "The pre-Neolithic Negrito populations of Southeast Asia were largely replaced by the expansion of Southern East Eurasian populations, beginning about 5,000 years ago.[3]

    Historically they engaged in trade with the local population that eventually invaded their lands and were also often subjected to slave raids while also paying tributes to the local Southeast Asian rulers and kingdoms. Some Negrito pygmies from the southern forests were enslaved and exploited from AD 724 until modern times.[4] While some have lived in isolation others have become assimilated with the general local population."

    Replies: @photondancer

    Thanks for the link. I used to be fairly well informed about the local region and it was good to be reacquainted with the details. As you say, this information tends to be suppressed in popular discourse.

  287. @Wency
    @tyrone

    The national organization is bankrupt. As you suggest, it will sell some campgrounds to compensate the victim claims and then emerge from bankruptcy.

    From what I can see, the abuse claims basically amount to pederasty between married dads and teenage boys who must have had some gay inclinations. It's somewhat surprising to me that the total victory of the cultural left hasn't led to the age of consent being reduced to at least a more European level (15-16) in the US.

    Replies: @Dissident

    It’s somewhat surprising to me that the total victory of the cultural left hasn’t led to the age of consent being reduced to at least a more European level (15-16) in the US.

    There certainly would appear to be inconsistency, perhaps even paradox in what you point-out. There has been a trend, though, for at least twenty or so years already, toward lowering the age-of-consent for homo contact in cases where it had been set higher than that for hetero. (If I recall and understood correctly, this was just recently done in California.) This very topic happens to be addressed specifically in the comment that is quoted in the past comment of mine that I link to toward the end of this reply.

    From what I can see, the abuse claims basically amount to pederasty between married dads and teenage boys who must have had some gay inclinations.

    To what, if any extent should such inclinations on the part of an adolescent be considered when judging a homoerotic relationship between him and an adult? (Whether from an ethical, moral, or legal perspective.)

    If one is convinced that (as the prevailing orthodoxy asserts) homosexuality is without exception both innate as well as immutable, then such proclivities in an adolescent could very well be be seen as mitigating or even vindicating completely the conduct of an adult who engages said adolescent in them. Intuition, logic and much evidence at least suggest, however, that (at least in some and likely many cases) the experiences and influences of an individual during the formative years of his childhood and adolescence,

    [MORE]
    may very well affect how his sexuality ultimately forms.

    If one allows for that possibility, and accepts that no lifestyle based on homosexual ideals, norms and behavior can offer the wholesomeness, fulfillment or even sustainability that one based on traditional heterosexual ones can, then would it not necessarily follow that:

    When considering the moral, ethical or legal ramifications of any homoerotic relationship or instance of contact involving a minor, its potential to ultimately influence his identity or behavior in a direction other than a heteronormative one cannot be overlooked? And that such potential alone– even in a case where all other concerns may have been eliminated or satisfactorily resolved– may prove insurmountable?

    That’s one of what may be categorized as two primary problems* that are posed by what we can broadly call intergenerational homoeroticism. (Here, specifically of the male variety, though much of the same or similar concerns may apply to their female counterpart as well.)

    (*That is, problems besides the most obvious objective ones, such as any case involving overt coercion or violence, as well as objections of a much more subjective nature, such as religious ones.)

    The other concerns the specific forms that the carnal intimacy in such a relationship may, and are most likely, to take. Here, I would refer the interested reader to the past post of mine linked here in which, together with the excerpted comment that mine was formatted as a reply to, is succinctly summarized the particularly predatory and even heinous aspects of pederasty as commonly understood and practiced.

    I then go on to present a hypothetical case, one that introduces for discussion a radically different model of intergenerational male homoerotic intimacy (still far more hypothetical and theoretical than reflective of any lived or witnessed actual experience)– one that emphatically and unapologetically:
    – respects heteronormativity[1] as the irreplaceable ideal;
    – rejects, repudiates, and precludes the buggery and other sodomitic acts that are the very core of the prevailing model being dissented from
    – views the adolescent male not as a substitute for a female; not as an object to be used for mere carnal gratification, but as a precious, unique, wonderful, delightful, even magical creature to be cherished, protected and celebrated

    Bottom-line, executive summary concerning instances or relationships of erotic intimacy/sexual contact between a minor and an adult:

    It can reasonably be asserted as axiomatic that only when the initiative for any such contact clearly and eagerly taken by the minor can we ever even begin to consider the possibility of the defensibility of the conduct of the adult involved. Many would no doubt go farther and assert that even then, a responsible adult would be ethically/ socially/ civically/ morally (one or more of all of those) bound to invariably decline any such offer or initiative on the part of any minor. Such may be a valid position to maintain– as long as it appears at least reasonably likely that the minor, denied his request by the adult, would not then go on to engage in behavior of equal or greater objectionability or concern with someone else. Only when considering the likelihood and implications of this possibility can one, in any given case of sexual contact or erotic intimacy between an adult and a minor, presume to fully and properly judge the behavior of the adult.

    [1] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/heteronormative

    noting or relating to behavior or attitudes consistent with traditional male or female gender roles and the assumption of heterosexuality as the norm

  288. @MEH 0910
    @MEH 0910

    https://twitter.com/StratOMatic/status/1339358407665602565

    https://twitter.com/StratOMatic/status/1339360711802310658
    https://twitter.com/StratOMatic/status/1339363713812484096
    https://twitter.com/StratOMatic/status/1339364846777856001
    https://twitter.com/StratOMatic/status/1339365821739622407
    https://twitter.com/StratOMatic/status/1339366837444874244

    Replies: @Colin Wright

    Curiously, this act of political correctness doesn’t bother me at all…I suppose because it’s actually deserved.

  289. @Charon
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    I always thought that song was called "Indian Reservation."

    Replies: @ScarletNumber

    It is, but as was stated elsewhere, the song was written by John Loudermilk, even though it was popularized by Paul Revere (his actual first and middle names). In fact it was the Raiders’ greatest hit. In any event sometimes songs are poorly titled and the public comes up with their own.

  290. @black sea
    @John Up North

    I think the major factors were twofold:

    World War Two: Lots of young men from the South saw other parts of the country, and other parts of the world. Lots of young men from elsewhere mingled with Southerners for the first time. Military production brought increased industrialization to the South. Wars have the effect of binding disparate sub-groups into a national identity both by design and by simple human nature.

    Television: Self-explanatory.


    I'd guess that the Interstate Highway System made economic integration substantially easier, but I'd still put it way down the list of contributing factors.

    Replies: @John Up North

    Agreed

  291. Anonymous[405] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer
    @sb

    Why was Australia so seldom reached by ship from the rest of the world? It doesn't look as remote from civilization as New Zealand or even Madagascar, which was settled by Malay people, who aren't all that far from Australia. Why didn't the great sailors of the Polynesians get to Australia?

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Reg Cæsar, @photondancer, @Anonymous

    We do know that northern Australia was visited by Indonesians by 1700, after the Dutch but before Cook. I thought I’d previously seen the year 1600, but not today. In any event, they were probably visiting for hundreds of years earlier.

    I thought that there was good evidence that the Maori visited Australia, but I can’t find it.

    I think question should be more about colonization than visits.

  292. @Muggles
    @theMann


    Try not to lose sight of the fact that American Indians were Stone Age barbarians who openly worshipped Satan. This is obvious from Aztec Temples to Iroquois ritual cannibalism. They may have been worthy foes as fighters, but their societies were saturated with pure evil from top to bottom. Feel free to read on the Comanches as a primer.
     
    Okay. This written by a presumable white guy (White!) who never read a single page of European history.

    Celts and most European tribes (as the Romans styled them) practiced what we might call paganism (not "Satan worship, since the NAs had no prior idea of 'Satan') and human sacrifice. Accounts of warrior societies there suggest they also practiced ritual eating of enemy body parts (usually the heart).

    The Comanches were no more "pure evil" than Huns or other barbarians and even so-called civilized groups like Greeks and Romans. Ancient behavior seems to be very similar in these respects. Carthaginians were said to practice child sacrifice (though evidence is sketchy) and even the Romans sacrificed slaves in early times (ashamed to admit it later though).

    Accounts of US military troopers 'savaging' Indian villages are very similar to Comanche behavior though didn't take slaves (too much trouble.) Many times old people, the sick, children and infants were killed and/or shot. Women raped, then often killed or "taken as mistresses" like Custer did.

    It is east to overlook pagan Druids and Vikings and others. Human behavior has nasty history. Not limited to any one tribe or group. The US even legalized the torture of certain terror prisoners.

    This isn't to defend NAs or anyone. But the Other is often just like Us. Like it or not.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @HammerJack, @Achmed E. Newman, @anonymous coward

    …since the NAs had no prior idea of ‘Satan’

    Oh sweet summer child!

    That said, you’re right, all pagans of all human cultures were Satan worshippers.

    • Replies: @Dube
    @anonymous coward

    ...all pagans of all human cultures were Satan worshippers.

    Is this something that they all knew to be the case?

    Have there been none who worshipped, in the description of Anselm, that being than which no greater can be conceived?

    Regarding American Indians, we hear of reverence toward the Great Spirit. Is there a Greater Spirit?

    Asking for a friend.

    Replies: @anonymous coward

  293. @John Up North
    @restless94110

    I've heard it said that the construction of the US Interstate Highway System in the 1950s was a pivotal event in finally joining the Southeast to the rest of the continental US in terms of culture and politics. What do you think?

    Replies: @black sea, @restless94110

    I’ve heard it said that the construction of the US Interstate Highway System in the 1950s was a pivotal event in finally joining the Southeast to the rest of the continental US in terms of culture and politics. What do you think?

    I would more say that it finally joined EVERY part of America. You can see lots of educationals (short films longer than commercials but shorter than documentaries that used to be played in schools and on television) of families motoring around the United States. I don’t think interstate highways had a lot of effect. It was more what I said before: the changes in redneck culture brought about by rock and country artists, Bob Dylan, Johnny Cash, breakthroughs in civil rights and voter rights.

    That’s what changed it.

    I will also add that a plethora of sitcoms came out in the 70s featuring black characters and this really did an enormous amount to familiarize the population with blacks. It normalized them, made them not the other as had been previous.

    In essence, the Southerners, the blacks, and even the Indians were coming together in the 70s (and even relations between men and women), and then?

    It flipped. In all those categories. It suddenly just exploded apart and away.

    It was like the Big Bang: Magnetic attraction to unity and then explosive repulsion. We are still seeing that repulsion. I think that means the society will self-destruct. I don’t see anything that will stop it.

    The only thing that will,, will be when other countries spank us hard because we aren’t doing anything anymore, making anything anymore, only just bickering. They will just fuck us up.

    Because we are weak because we are stupid because we care more about fake nonsense and other major countries don’t play that. Because of our stupidity. Because of our hubris.

    We are doomed. Doomed to be spanked.

  294. @photondancer
    @Steve Sailer

    I don't think ocean currents allow for easy travel by canoe from New Zealand to Australia. Instead they swept the Polynesians out towards the Americas. Also, the waters around the south of Australia are notoriously rough.

    Replies: @Wency

    It’s this. Add that Polynesians had only been on New Zealand for a few hundred years when Europeans arrived, so not as much time to explore, and not as much population pressure to migrate (especially because it was a vast land to fill compared to what they were used to).

    If by some chance they had discovered Australia, the existence of hostile locals would probably have kept them from returning with women to attempt a permanent colonization. We could perhaps imagine a male war party invading and taking local women, as the Maori probably could have bested the Aborigines in battle assuming rough parity in numbers. Though this sort of invasion isn’t how Polynesians were accustomed to doing things.

  295. @anonymous coward
    @Muggles


    ...since the NAs had no prior idea of ‘Satan’
     
    Oh sweet summer child!

    That said, you're right, all pagans of all human cultures were Satan worshippers.

    Replies: @Dube

    …all pagans of all human cultures were Satan worshippers.

    Is this something that they all knew to be the case?

    Have there been none who worshipped, in the description of Anselm, that being than which no greater can be conceived?

    Regarding American Indians, we hear of reverence toward the Great Spirit. Is there a Greater Spirit?

    Asking for a friend.

    • Replies: @anonymous coward
    @Dube


    Is this something that they all knew to be the case?
     
    Yes.

    Have there been none who worshipped, in the description of Anselm, that being than which no greater can be conceived?

     

    "Worshipped"? No. Acknowledged the existence of in some very abstract, rarefied sense - yes. But not worship.

    The point of paganism is the idea that God is remote and possibly uncaring, while demons and devils are right here and now, and can bestow concrete benefits upon those who are willing to make compromises.

    This is why Christianity is so immediately appealing to the pagan - it fits directly into the pagan world view and fixes its flaws.
  296. @obwandiyag
    Most Indians (Aztecs and Toltecs are outliers--compare the Inca, who sacrificed a little, but not any more than Europeans) lived peaceful, rich, opulent intelligent lives.

    Pre-1492.

    What you know of Indians is of the 10% remnant left after European diseases had their way with them. You have no idea about the other 90%. Because they were gone before the anthropologists could get to them. 50 million Indians lived in the Americas. Living vastly different and varied lives.

    Just one example. All the gene-splicing in the world can't develop maize.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    All the gene-splicing in the world can’t develop maize.

    What do you mean?

  297. Problems with identity of a prominent Canadian Indigenous Canadian actress and filmmaker tonight. “Prematurely claiming” as she says.

    https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5845310?__twitter_impression=true

  298. @Gordo
    I believe you have Whites only motorcycle groups in America who allow redskins in as an exception.

    Replies: @Pat Kittle

    I believe you have Whites only motorcycle groups in America who allow redskins in as an exception.

    Whites only motorcycle groups in America also allow Indian motorcycles in as an exception.
    — (https://www.indianmotorcycle.com/en-us/)

  299. @Anon7
    "I wonder if the push to remove memories of America’s rich Indian legacy..."

    Already forgotten are the worthy foes of those magnificent savages, you know who I mean, c'mon man, those stunted, pasty-skinned people from across the ocean. Who were they, again? Didn't they have some part in transforming a wild untamed continent into the endless mall it is today, where all the world's people can come and have free stuff while they recapitulate the shithole they came from? And profit? don't forget profit.

    I love how Joe Biden is a stand-in for the white race; doddering, forgetful, angry about something, what was that again? They'll hide him for a day or two at a time, then a week, then a month... then the nation's news-papers will get around to informing us that we have our first female asian black/female black asian/asian black female/black asian female/... anyway, new president!

    And we won't have to speak of those pasty-skinned people again. Thank god.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Expletive Deleted

    Got the kids some videos for Christmas (that they and I will not be allowed to attend! Tree bought and everything).

    The Revenant (the slightly self-aggrandising account of (Scots-Irish, with an Orkney name) Hugh Glass’s experiences in bafflingly non-comfy, non-welfare America).
    Tombstone (some drunk WASP men argue a bit about cards, cattle and even women. Mining occurs, offscreen. No welfare, send the hat round for the sick, like Doc).
    Moby Dick (some cold, damp, yet heroically sober men regret not packing extra dry socks. No coastguard helicopter piloted by godlike, Mary-Sue female POC’s available. Some historical mistake, surely?).

    (also Hobbit-Man’s colorised They Shall Not Grow Old, to help explain why they have only a handful of cousins, while the Desis and Africans they were compelled to go to school with have endless legions of the buggers).

    And for ‘Er Indoors, the 2017 version of Little Women (apparently there was a bit of a war or something going on. Hope nobody “ethnic” or “indigenous” got hurt).

    • Replies: @anon
    @Expletive Deleted

    Tombstone (some drunk WASP men argue a bit about cards, cattle and even women. Mining occurs, offscreen. No welfare, send the hat round for the sick, like Doc).

    If it's the 1990's one with Val Kilmer as Holliday, watching that flick is kinda like sitting around in a bar after closing, listening to a really old geezer telling lies stories while everyone else sits around drinking straight whisky. Because some of the dialog sounds like it came out of a dime novelist ghost writer who followed the old guys round in the 1920's; "My Story: The Way It Really Wuz".

    Or...maybe written some guy who tracked Holliday down in Glenwood Springs circa 1887 as he was dying of TB.

    Anyway, a lot of effort went into costumes and guns and horses and stuff to get authenticity. It's not bad, given that most of Tombstone is still standing and now a tourist trap. Some of the saloon buildings are basically unchanged to this day.

    IMO Kilmer completely steals the show and it's worth watching just for his performance. YMMV.

    If that flick appeals to your people, shop around for "The Outlaw Josie Wales". One of the few Westerns where Indians are played by Indians, and possibly the only one set in 1865.


    If you want a Current Year movie that isn't girly, Greyhound by Tom Hanks is still available to stream. A gang of men decide to sail across the Atlantic in iron boats, but other men in iron boats under the water try to stop them. Explosions result.

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted

  300. anon[380] • Disclaimer says:
    @Expletive Deleted
    @Anon7

    Got the kids some videos for Christmas (that they and I will not be allowed to attend! Tree bought and everything).

    The Revenant (the slightly self-aggrandising account of (Scots-Irish, with an Orkney name) Hugh Glass's experiences in bafflingly non-comfy, non-welfare America).
    Tombstone (some drunk WASP men argue a bit about cards, cattle and even women. Mining occurs, offscreen. No welfare, send the hat round for the sick, like Doc).
    Moby Dick (some cold, damp, yet heroically sober men regret not packing extra dry socks. No coastguard helicopter piloted by godlike, Mary-Sue female POC's available. Some historical mistake, surely?).

    (also Hobbit-Man's colorised They Shall Not Grow Old, to help explain why they have only a handful of cousins, while the Desis and Africans they were compelled to go to school with have endless legions of the buggers).

    And for 'Er Indoors, the 2017 version of Little Women (apparently there was a bit of a war or something going on. Hope nobody "ethnic" or "indigenous" got hurt).

    Replies: @anon

    Tombstone (some drunk WASP men argue a bit about cards, cattle and even women. Mining occurs, offscreen. No welfare, send the hat round for the sick, like Doc).

    If it’s the 1990’s one with Val Kilmer as Holliday, watching that flick is kinda like sitting around in a bar after closing, listening to a really old geezer telling lies stories while everyone else sits around drinking straight whisky. Because some of the dialog sounds like it came out of a dime novelist ghost writer who followed the old guys round in the 1920’s; “My Story: The Way It Really Wuz”.

    Or…maybe written some guy who tracked Holliday down in Glenwood Springs circa 1887 as he was dying of TB.

    Anyway, a lot of effort went into costumes and guns and horses and stuff to get authenticity. It’s not bad, given that most of Tombstone is still standing and now a tourist trap. Some of the saloon buildings are basically unchanged to this day.

    IMO Kilmer completely steals the show and it’s worth watching just for his performance. YMMV.

    If that flick appeals to your people, shop around for “The Outlaw Josie Wales”. One of the few Westerns where Indians are played by Indians, and possibly the only one set in 1865.

    If you want a Current Year movie that isn’t girly, Greyhound by Tom Hanks is still available to stream. A gang of men decide to sail across the Atlantic in iron boats, but other men in iron boats under the water try to stop them. Explosions result.

    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    @anon

    I guess most of the "facts" (including Ringo's end) came about from, as you say, yellow press myth makers and , more cogently, Earp's continued efforts to "keep our eyes on that brass ring, boys".

    Simply because he was slightly wanting in the brass department himself. Skint, and old. After the War (the Proper War, not some gay New World skirmish).

    J H Holliday was (like all of these mad piratical cunts, throughout the Old Empire, and the rebel colonies) a "Scots-Irish" twitchy little Prod.
    Those I2a2/R-L21 fellows, who, if you were to hacksaw their dried bones across would display "No surrender!" all the way down, like seaside rock candy.

    He later defected to his mother's papish superstitions, while Wyatt dumped his junkie-yet-aryan brothel-mistress Margy (when Ike Clanton, my hero, calls 'em "goddam' pimps!", he ain't lyin') and sniffed up to Ms Markus' butt-cleft.
    So Doc (who used to blast niggers that got onto his pa's property with both barrels) fell right out with Wyatt, as he detested the Chosen.

    tldr;
    American history is almost as complicated as British history, but with better hygiene and facial hair.

  301. @Dube
    @anonymous coward

    ...all pagans of all human cultures were Satan worshippers.

    Is this something that they all knew to be the case?

    Have there been none who worshipped, in the description of Anselm, that being than which no greater can be conceived?

    Regarding American Indians, we hear of reverence toward the Great Spirit. Is there a Greater Spirit?

    Asking for a friend.

    Replies: @anonymous coward

    Is this something that they all knew to be the case?

    Yes.

    Have there been none who worshipped, in the description of Anselm, that being than which no greater can be conceived?

    “Worshipped”? No. Acknowledged the existence of in some very abstract, rarefied sense – yes. But not worship.

    The point of paganism is the idea that God is remote and possibly uncaring, while demons and devils are right here and now, and can bestow concrete benefits upon those who are willing to make compromises.

    This is why Christianity is so immediately appealing to the pagan – it fits directly into the pagan world view and fixes its flaws.

  302. @anon
    @Expletive Deleted

    Tombstone (some drunk WASP men argue a bit about cards, cattle and even women. Mining occurs, offscreen. No welfare, send the hat round for the sick, like Doc).

    If it's the 1990's one with Val Kilmer as Holliday, watching that flick is kinda like sitting around in a bar after closing, listening to a really old geezer telling lies stories while everyone else sits around drinking straight whisky. Because some of the dialog sounds like it came out of a dime novelist ghost writer who followed the old guys round in the 1920's; "My Story: The Way It Really Wuz".

    Or...maybe written some guy who tracked Holliday down in Glenwood Springs circa 1887 as he was dying of TB.

    Anyway, a lot of effort went into costumes and guns and horses and stuff to get authenticity. It's not bad, given that most of Tombstone is still standing and now a tourist trap. Some of the saloon buildings are basically unchanged to this day.

    IMO Kilmer completely steals the show and it's worth watching just for his performance. YMMV.

    If that flick appeals to your people, shop around for "The Outlaw Josie Wales". One of the few Westerns where Indians are played by Indians, and possibly the only one set in 1865.


    If you want a Current Year movie that isn't girly, Greyhound by Tom Hanks is still available to stream. A gang of men decide to sail across the Atlantic in iron boats, but other men in iron boats under the water try to stop them. Explosions result.

    Replies: @Expletive Deleted

    I guess most of the “facts” (including Ringo’s end) came about from, as you say, yellow press myth makers and , more cogently, Earp’s continued efforts to “keep our eyes on that brass ring, boys”.

    Simply because he was slightly wanting in the brass department himself. Skint, and old. After the War (the Proper War, not some gay New World skirmish).

    J H Holliday was (like all of these mad piratical cunts, throughout the Old Empire, and the rebel colonies) a “Scots-Irish” twitchy little Prod.
    Those I2a2/R-L21 fellows, who, if you were to hacksaw their dried bones across would display “No surrender!” all the way down, like seaside rock candy.

    He later defected to his mother’s papish superstitions, while Wyatt dumped his junkie-yet-aryan brothel-mistress Margy (when Ike Clanton, my hero, calls ’em “goddam’ pimps!”, he ain’t lyin’) and sniffed up to Ms Markus’ butt-cleft.
    So Doc (who used to blast niggers that got onto his pa’s property with both barrels) fell right out with Wyatt, as he detested the Chosen.

    tldr;
    American history is almost as complicated as British history, but with better hygiene and facial hair.

  303. @Canadian Observer
    In Western Canada, you have the interesting dynamic of having a large underclass of Natives living in the cities, such as Winnipeg, Regina, Edmonton, etc. That way, you get to see their drug use and alcoholism up close, thus diminishing their historical prestige in our eyes. I don’t think this dynamic really exists in the United States.

    In Eastern Canada - where there are less of them, more white admixture amongst the population and because they are largely confined to rural areas - Natives are treated more like sacred pets.

    Replies: @jcd1974, @Servant of Gla'aki, @anon, @Ganderson

    The Twin Cities has a substantial Indian population.

  304. @J.Ross
    @Andy

    Indians exist because of white empathy. The time is coming when they will be confronted by, and completely in the hands of, people like Xi Jinping. The ones who can grovel or occupy a cubicle will do well enough and the ones who make trouble will no longer get a pardon from their ancestry.

    Replies: @Andy

    Actually I was talking about the Americas variety of Indians, so in a sense you are making my point (as well as Steve’s) that Native Americans are being erased

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?