I was reading an article about Columbus for my History Class and after reading it I was convinced that he is a self inflated megalomaniac consumed by Power and Status. The fact that he discovered the "America's" by accident does not make him the hero he is widely portrayed as today.

I remember a special a while back that the History Channel did on him. His past was hidden and there is contraversy on which country he was born in. They said he deliberately hid his past for some reason and never discussed it. He could have changed the spelling of his name, etc.
He was an entrepreneur that was successful at getting his enterprises financed. A rather daring person to say the least.

I don't know if he's exactly a hero, but I don't think he's as evil as some people (native American, mostly) make him out to be either, in that he didn't set out to introduce new diseases to the Indians.

Originally posted by Dan Fussell

He was an entrepreneur that was successful at getting his enterprises financed. A rather daring person to say the least.

I really really want to post the article.... but it is so long that I may only get to post parts of it.

Basicially what I got out of the article was that ok well hold on and I will type it out... ::laughs:: I really want to share it.

ok... I couldn't find the article... ::laughs:: My dog ate it...

Anyway. It said that Columbus was turned down a number of times untill he was able to convince a backer, by his eloquent use of Rhetoric, he also claimed to have a "Divine Vision" and having been led by God to spead Christanity to the natives. But however they couldn't convert they dubbed "Heathens" and made them slaves. Columbus himself admitted "The indians are the wealth of the land without them There would be no labour resources" And that is the only reason he took good care of them.

Columbus would not be the first to use fancy talk to persuade the person with the money to back him. On his first voyage, he intended to find a route to the far east, one that would be shorter than the voyage around Africa. On his second voyage, he set out to find out what lands were out there.
As far as who the megalomaniac was, Amerigo Vespucci was a much better example. He came back and the account of his voyage sold far better than Columbus's account. Vespucci reported finding giants with one eye, bare breasted amazons, and cannibals. Columbus stuck much closer to the truth. That's why it's called America. By the way, the Amazon River was named for the women Vespucci said lived there.

Columbus and his men tortured and enslaved the Native Americans, forcing them to dig for gold, and when they didn't find any they were beaten. The tribe of Indians on the island that Columbus first landed on were completely wiped out in about 100 years, some of them killed by the Europeans, others by disease, and still others who killed themselves rather than give up their dignity as slaves.

Originally posted by DarkFantasy96
Columbus and his men tortured and enslaved the Native Americans, forcing them to dig for gold, and when they didn't find any they were beaten. The tribe of Indians on the island that Columbus first landed on were completely wiped out in about 100 years, some of them killed by the Europeans, others by disease, and still others who killed themselves rather than give up their dignity as slaves.

Oooh...that is SO true!!!

When I lived in Germany, I met several native Germans that were discussing how tired they were about constantly being harassed by the world (mainly the US) about Hitler and the Second World War. Many people there believe that Columbus did the EXACT SAME THING that Hitler did, only he suceeded where Hitler failed. Columbus set out to wipe out the indians and sieze control over the Americas the same way that Hitler set out to wipe out the Jews and sieze control over europe. The only difference is that Columbus suceeded where Hitler failed. We condemn Hitler for the horrors he inflicted on the world, while at the same time celebrate Columbus and even made his name a National Holiday.

Even today, the Native Americans are amongst the most deprived people within the entire United States and suffer some of the worst living conditions in the nation! They truly have no reason to celebrate Columbus or anything that he either did or stands for, and in all honestly we shouldn't either. In fact we really should see him as an embarrasment if anything! :(

Originally posted by Dunkirk101
Columbus set out to wipe out the indians and sieze control over the Americas the same way that Hitler set out to wipe out the Jews and sieze control over europe.

He set out to find a trade route to India, I believe. As far as I know he wasn't even aware of the presence of (North American) Indians.

hmmmmm

well I think he is a false hero, and at the same time became a villain through happenstance. No, when he first got to america he did not know a thing about the rich culture of our aancestors. However, it's what he did with this knowledge of this new place that's brought him to villainy. He did not stay in america the first time he landed. He went BACK to get more money and more people. From this point and his greed and ego started the pace of the indians demise. A lot of poele I know blame it all on hime, however the whispers of a new laand did not reach his ears by accident, as there hd been others who had landed here, generations earlier. It's easy for us indians to blast that cursed Columbus, but in reality I doubt it was his intention. It just turns out that he got the ball rolling for a lot of european nations to feel they had the obligation to bring their culture to topple indigious heathen pagan ways. see: Australiaa, Hawaaii, Siberian people Africa etc etc, etc, .

I don't know I m kinda mixed, it IS really easy to hate that guy......

Wonders why, we have to label, tag and put everything in it's proper place when most of us can't keep our lawns mowed, dishes washed and kids in clean clothes. Anybody ever stop to think that life is what it is. Life 2oo yrs ago was based on a whole different standard than we have today. Colunbus was a man of courage who made mistakes as we all do, for that we should condemn him? Hell a 100 yrs from now other people will be condemning Bush for his war in Iraq and others will be saying He did what was right in his time. Let's quit labeling, tagging and judging, look at our past and learn from it, try to make the future better for all mankind

Evil is relative.

The Lion eats the Antelope: good for the lion evil for the antelope.

Neither.

PS - Imagineer, you are the best. You don't get nasty and I always learn something.

Originally posted by nightwind_wolf
Life 2oo yrs ago was based on a whole different standard than we have today. Colunbus was a man of courage who made mistakes as we all do, for that we should condemn him?

The best quote of the whole thread.
Columbus was not a hero either a villian. He was a business man. He thought he found the way to India from Spain without having to past by the hazard of the Middle-East, Afganisthan and Pakistan. No more no less. He found a new continent, he was lucky.
About killing natives, first of all Columbus did not have much to do it as he died before the continent was really conquered.
The Spaniards made an alliance with one of the native tribes to conquer the other tribes. Those tribes were not peace-lovers, living in eden type of guys, they were humans and have their own wars. The Spaniards took advantage of it and they were able to conquer most of the continent in that way.
About Christianity, at that time any European country took as given that if you were non-christian you were a barbarian no better than a slave. The only way the Indians had to become citizens of Castilla was to convert to Catholicism and at least to have the same right as the peasants had in Spain or in any other country in Europe (who were also exploided and owned by their landlords).
You should have some historic perspective befor judging the actions of someone who lived 500 years ago.

By the way, a study was made in Colombia about the mitacondrial DNA and the DNA of a sample of native Colombians. The male DNA was almost all European but the mitocondrial DNA (coming from the mother) was American native.

Originally posted by creetwins
[ From this point and his greed and ego started the pace of the indians demise.

I think this would sum it up greed and thinking he was better then another human. He did make slaves of the indians he may not have intended to introduce a disease but he did mean to introduce violence, and hate.

and we should stop making him a hero and FULLY give historical accounts to the kids in school. they need to know the truth so they don't make the same mistakes.
in one way or another columbus' mentality still runs the world today.


Originally posted by mad dog
I think this would sum it up greed and thinking he was better then another human. He did make slaves of the indians he may not have intended to introduce a disease but he did mean to introduce violence, and hate.

Originally posted by mad dog
I think this would sum it up greed and thinking he was better then another human. He did make slaves of the indians he may not have intended to introduce a disease but he did mean to introduce violence, and hate.

He was not better or worst than any other European explorer of his time. I don't know how they teach you history but my teachers told me the good and the bad things of all parties.
He did mean to introduce violence and hate? He was a conquerer and he did the same than any other, the same than British, Dutch, Portuguese...ones.
I have to repeat myself, the Indians were not a bunch of peaceful, bucolic tribes, they had war and brutality before any European contacted them. They fight Spaniards, British, Frenchs and Portuguese, but also depending on the circunstances they became their allies.

Originally posted by ivan
]and we should stop making him a hero and FULLY give historical accounts to the kids in school. they need to know the truth so they don't make the same mistakes.
in one way or another columbus' mentality still runs the world today.

Wouldn't that be nice teach the kids facts not opinions :). If they get the facts then they can form their own opinions.

Originally posted by Teddy
He was not better or worst than any other European explorer of his time.

so that makes it allright, monkey see monkey do.

I don't know how they teach you history but my teachers told me the good and the bad things of all parties.

My schooling was along time ago but all we were taught was what a hero this guy was. I do believe schooling is getting better but it still has room for improvement.


I have to repeat myself, the Indians were not a bunch of peaceful, bucolic tribes, they had war and brutality before any European contacted them. They fight Spaniards, British, Frenchs and Portuguese, but also depending on the circunstances they became their allies.

I never said the indians all lived in peace, but what fighting they did was on their land with people from their land. They became allies because they were told lies, they thought if they helped they might get better treatment, boy was that a joke. They fought to defend their way of life, lets not forget others came knocking on their door it wasn't the other way around.

I have to somewhat agree with the post about Columbus being like Hitler. He saw a group of people that could not defend themselfs and he used and abused them to get his own fame and fortune.

Originally posted by mad dog
I never said the indians all lived in peace, but what fighting they did was on their land with people from their land. They became allies because they were told lies, they thought if they helped they might get better treatment, boy was that a joke. They fought to defend their way of life, lets not forget others came knocking on their door it wasn't the other way around.

I have to somewhat agree with the post about Columbus being like Hitler. He saw a group of people that could not defend themselfs and he used and abused them to get his own fame and fortune.

The Indians were not fighting on their land with people from their land. They were fighting among tribes and they looked at them the same way French looked at an invasion from Germany or any other country. They were from the same race but not the same nation or even culture. They were very different tribes of Indians, some were relatively peaceful, others were cannibals and other made human sacrifices and they didn't think of themselves as a one united Indian people.

And about comparing Hitler and Columbus, besides Columbus didn't get much fortune out of his discovery, the Spanish crown did, not a single man. Anyhow, you might think the same about the Mayflower and all the pilgrims/English (from that time til General Carter) coming to the new world as they did the same to the North-Americans Indians, even worse the Spaniards used them as slaved workers (as they used their own peasants back in Spain) but at least they didn't systematicaly slaught them as it was done in North-America. And you can see how many Indians are left in each side of the continent.

Originally posted by Teddy
The Indians were not fighting on their land with people from their land. They were fighting among tribes and they looked at them the same way French looked at an invasion from Germany or any other country. They were from the same race but not the same nation or even culture. They were very different tribes of Indians, some were relatively peaceful, others were cannibals and other made human sacrifices and they didn't think of themselves as a one united Indian people.

.


when you talk about another culture do not generalize as you are taught in school, the media, and by a dominate culture. there was some cannibalism in VERY few tribes, and most was ritualized cannibalism. like eating the heart of an enemy. there are only 3 "tribes" in the entire western hemisphere that practiced human sacrifice, 2 were of "civilized" cultures like the incas and aztecs. one was the pawnee. people did fight, but you have to remember in "tribal" "primitive" cultures you can not waste all your time fighting. there is food to be concerned with. modernization frees people up for longer and more widespread warfare that "civilization" gives you. before euros got here, i severely doubt a whole lot of war actually went on.

Originally posted by ivan
when you talk about another culture do not generalize as you are taught in school, the media, and by a dominate culture.

My sister has a master in South-American culture so I did not get the information from the media or 6th grade teachers.
The cannibalism was, in fact, ritual but it does not make it better because they thought it pleased their gods, the same thing would applied with human sacrifices, althought these ones were also used as a punishment to slaves and prisioners of war.
Just read some of the precolumbian history and paragraphs as the following:
"Coxcoxtli instructed the Mexica:
"You may take no prisoners -
just bring me an ear
from each warrior you kill.
We will supply no weapons.
Use what you have,
whether it be knives or sticks or rocks
or your own bare hands."
The Mexica, armed with stone knives,
returned from the fighting
with bag after bag of Xoximilcan ears
and heaped them around
Coxcoxtli's throne."
There were some codex which were discovered by Europeans or given by natives about the history of their people. When they had to fight (for religion, resources..), they did it as any other nation in the world.
There were no better nor worst than Europeans only because they were living in America, or they were less advance technologically speaking or they were "living" in contact with nature. I just don't get those bucolic tales. If the American natives would have had the chance to reach Europe and conquered Europe for their own profit, they would have done the same we (Europeans) did 500 years ago.
I don't excuse what some Europeans did to the American natives, but I don't believe they were living like Adan and Eve in the Eden.

Originally posted by Teddy

I don't excuse what some Europeans did to the American natives, but I don't believe they were living like Adan and Eve in the Eden.

of course not, perfection does not exist. but "primitive" cultures do not have the time or resources for all out war, like "civilizations" do. and "civilizations" i include such as aztecs, incas, etc.. i haven't seen any civilization as being perfect. they all have the tendency of domianting other cultures for it's own benefit without leaving things in fair trade, etc..
thinking of ndns going to europe and doing the same thing can never be proven, but to do so would require a "civilization", and thus domiantion and inclusion or destruction of those who stand in the way.

Originally posted by ivan
thinking of ndns going to europe and doing the same thing can never be proven, but to do so would require a "civilization", and thus domiantion and inclusion or destruction of those who stand in the way.

Have you heard about the Flowers Wars of the Aztecs? Read about it and afterwards you tell me if they weren't a true " civilization" or better to say un-civilization.
The mayas were a more pacific people but eventually they were dominated by other natives.

Originally posted by Teddy
Have you heard about the Flowers Wars of the Aztecs? Read about it and afterwards you tell me if they weren't a true " civilization" or better to say un-civilization.
The mayas were a more pacific people but eventually they were dominated by other natives.


i didn't say aztecs and such were NOT a civilization. they were a civilization in all aspects. recents studies show that the aztecs were already in decline just as the euros were beginning to march in. civilizations ability to conquer is limited by their technology. although almost no one will admit it, but there was a civilization in the americas that had trade routes from south america all they way into northern north america. why do you think so much art of the "moundbuilders" looks an awful like that out of central america? about those times is when a lot of vegetables got spread out of central and south america. potaotes, beans, maize, squashes, etc..

Speaking purely from an American Indian standpoint, Columbus was a murderer. Even if he didn't commit the acts directly, he was responsible for them. It was mentioned that in a centuries time, the native population of Hispanola was all but wiped out. It's true. People were tortured, enslaved, forcibly converted, raped, murdered. From that time, to present day, it's estimated that 150 million indians were killed through warfare, disease, mistreatment, etc. That makes it the worst act of genocide in history. In the early 1900's, it ceased to be politically expedient for the US government to continue it's campaign of genocide and ethnic cleansing, so they sought out other methods. They stopped dealing with the tribes in a nation-to-nation format, and started treating them like conquered people, which they were n't, for the most part. My own tribe, the Cherokee, had set up their own country, with it's own borders, laws, education system, etc. In 1887, Senator Henry Dawes told Congress that "The Cherokee Nation has not a pauper, every family has a home, and the Government owes not a dollar." In the end, that system, which should have been studied further, was obliterated when the government passed the Dawes Act, and dissolved the Cherokee Nation's soveriegnty. What followed was a campaign of cultural and political genocide. Boarding schools were opened, and the children were taken. The parents were told that they would be starved out if they didn't allow the government to take their children. At the boarding schools, which were run by christian missionaries and funded by the government, the children were forced to wear european clothing, take christian names, forbidden to speak their own languages or practice their own cultures. The punishments for breaking such rules were severe, resulting in beatings, and torture. CHildren were beaten, raped, even murdered. Their only crime was being born Indian. Nothing more than that. This practice continued on into the 60's. It's sad to say.

So if the Indians were real assholes they deserve to be exterminated by Europeans.

The antelope hates the lion. The lion isn't wrong for being a lion, but the antelope would step on a lion cub's head if it had the chance.

Same deal. Europeans are very bloodthirsty and they kicked the shit out of the whole planet. The get props for being so efficient but those of us who they stepped on are not happy about it.

here's a site that may clear some things up.

http://www.indianz.com/board/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=13294

Checked...about right. I find it interesting as well how people try to conveniently forget about the genocide that pervades all of American History.

Originally posted by Txn8ive
Checked...about right. I find it interesting as well how people try to conveniently forget about the genocide that pervades all of American History.

and if they do recognize it, it is in a trivial way.

It's gotten to the point where I'm convicned that the general American public, with exceptions of course, really don't even care what happens to Indians. Because of Federal Policy, there are people in this country who live in 3rd world conditions. These are people who're living on borrowed time after 45. When taken with the fact that their ancestors, and mine, lived to see more than double that life expectancy, you can see what kind of damage has been done.

Originally posted by Txn8ive
It's gotten to the point where I'm convicned that the general American public, with exceptions of course, really don't even care what happens to Indians. Because of Federal Policy, there are people in this country who live in 3rd world conditions. These are people who're living on borrowed time after 45. When taken with the fact that their ancestors, and mine, lived to see more than double that life expectancy, you can see what kind of damage has been done.

of course if they did the epople would be aware that the government had broken the treaties, not the ndns, and people would be aware of the provisions in the constitution that covers that issue. if it is broken it is vull and void so the u.s. government is "ruling" over land it has no legal right to do so.
but ndn peoples should stop blaming "white" people for everything. you eventually have to do something on your own. i grew up in the second poorest county in amerika (at the time) and had to leave or i would have ended up on total welfar, a drunk, or dealing drugs etc to survive. i'm still "poor" but i do for myself and my family as much as possible.

There is a huge part of this land that is being occupied by the US government due to either broken or fraudulent treaties.

As for your point about blaming all of our problems on the govt., you've kinda highlighted the worst part of our problem, and our biggest predicament.

It's like this, reservation Indians face an horrific choice. It goes like this. To tribal people, whether they're American Indians, Africans, Asians, Alaskan Natives, or Pacific Islanders, there isn't a thing in the world more important than the institutions of family, tradition, and community. Without such things, we cease to be who and what we are. Plain and simple. Here's where the choice comes in. You see, Federal Policy dictates that any industry on the Reservations have to be established through the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Because of this, and many other reasons, there are zero industries to be found on any of the reservations. Therefore, not much by way of local job base. As for the casions, there aren't many on the reservations, and of those that do exist, too few are succesful, much less beneficial to the people living on the rez. To get a clearer picture, I recommend you read two anthologies. I stumbled across them by accident, and loved them both. The first is called, "Of Earth and Elders". Most excellent, the authors touch on many of the problems we face today. The other one is called "Genocide of the Mind". It underscores the identity crisis that Urban Indians face, and the authors there certainly hit on a lot of major issues. But, I digress. I believe that I was dicussing the horrific choice rez indians face. Now, they can stick around, take the good with the bad, of which there's no shortage. Meaning, they can accept that the people around them are in such spiritual pain that they can only find a limited number of solutions. They can accept the abject poverty, and rampant crime rates, or they can relocate to an urban area, in the hopes of finding a job. Now, one must consider the repurcussions involved with the decision to relocate. First and foremost, the government wins in that situation. They want the land, and any possible resources. If the tribes were to leave the reservations, then the government can do what they want. Call it a final and desperate stand. Second, that person has removed themselves from their community, family, and traditions. They've thrown themselves into a totally alien environment, complete with a spiritual quagmire. Sure, they might have a bit more money, but they'll not have the support of their family, community, or traditions. If they're lucky, they might be able to use the internet to, at least for a few hours, keep that sense of community. Fortunately, some cities actually do have Indian Community Centers. I know that NYC does have one. The problem becomes then, is one of the tribes represented in that Center yours? To the average American, I know that question doesn't make much sense. To us though, it's the million dollar question. Each tribe has it's own culture, it's own traditions, language, religion, stories, etc. In a room full of Lakotas, a Cherokee would still feel somewhat alone.

So, you can see where your point about moving elsewhere is greeted with the same tension generated by a minefield complete with an unreliable map. Neither option has favorable results. Move one way, you can decend into a morass of alcoholism, drug abuse, violence and death. Move the other, you can do the same thing, but with more money.;) Do you see what I'm saying, Ivan?

Originally posted by Txn8ive
Do you see what I'm saying, Ivan?

yes i do. and you have to do something to survive until the governemtn and the amerikan people realize that those monies (rent and royalties) doled out to the individual tribes people is a paltry sum compared to what should be PAID UP in FULL to date to the people. billions of those dollars have "disappeared". now the government wants to make many tribes null and void, and some tribal members non-ndn by manipulating the tribes government in one way or another. if the money was paid in full to date, the ndn people could do alot for themselves, but you have to do something until then. maybe use the rez as a retirement community until things change.

"now the government wants to make many tribes null and void, and some tribal members non-ndn by manipulating the tribes government in one way or another."

Not a single surprise there. Are you aware that American Indians are the ONLY ethnic group in the US required to carry ID proving that we are what we say we are? To become citizens of our tribes, we have to apply with the BIA for a card known as a CDIB (Certificate to Degree of Indian Blood). We actually have to prove that we're of Indian decent. Even then, there are blood quantum limits. You can't have less than a certain percentage, and still get a CDIB. With the BIA, if I'm not mistaken, the limit is 1/8. If you're 1/16 or less, you do not get to legally call yourself an Indian. Some of us have said, "To hell with it", and by-passed the BIA alltogether. I belong to a group known as the Southeastern Kituwah Nation. Our sole purpose is the preservation of our culture, language, and traditions by forming a Traditional band. We don't have federal recognition because we've opted not to bother with them. We don't need them to tell us who and what we are. Nor do we feel that we need their permission. We got along just fine for thousands of years without them.

"maybe use the rez as a retirement community until things change"

No way. We have great respect for our elders. They possess a great deal of knowledge and experience that they have to pass on to the next generation. They can't do that sitting on the rez, while the next generation is is in some inner city sum needing what those elders have more than ever. It would destroy us that much quicker. Too much knowledge has been lost already. We can ill-afford to lose anymore. Also, as I mentioned, they're living in 3rd world conditions on those reservations. In some of them, especially in the Dakotas, they have extremely harsh winters that are daunting for the able bodied. Without their younger relatives around to help, those poor elders would surely freeze to death trying to collect the wood necessary to keep warm. Do you see where we've been placed. Right in the middle of Damned if you Do, Damned if you Don't. The pressure caused by that situation is part of the reason why so many turn to drink and drugs.

i know ALL of this.
i am part ndn but i do not call myself of the tribe my ancestors were from. it would be pointless. since how you see the world and yourself is tied up in the language, culture, etc.. my family never passed down the language, and only a few cultural traits. thus i am an appalachain who has his own way evolved out of my own past history.
even if you have to leave the rez or area you are from you can still hold onto who you are by keeping the language, and culture. survival.
i couldn't care less about the lakota guy who calls himself lakota but does not know his language. if he doesn't know the language, he obviously has no connection to his culture.



Originally posted by Txn8ive
"now the government wants to make many tribes null and void, and some tribal members non-ndn by manipulating the tribes government in one way or another."

Not a single surprise there. Are you aware that American Indians are the ONLY ethnic group in the US required to carry ID proving that we are what we say we are? To become citizens of our tribes, we have to apply with the BIA for a card known as a CDIB (Certificate to Degree of Indian Blood). We actually have to prove that we're of Indian decent. Even then, there are blood quantum limits. You can't have less than a certain percentage, and still get a CDIB. With the BIA, if I'm not mistaken, the limit is 1/8. If you're 1/16 or less, you do not get to legally call yourself an Indian. Some of us have said, "To hell with it", and by-passed the BIA alltogether. I belong to a group known as the Southeastern Kituwah Nation. Our sole purpose is the preservation of our culture, language, and traditions by forming a Traditional band. We don't have federal recognition because we've opted not to bother with them. We don't need them to tell us who and what we are. Nor do we feel that we need their permission. We got along just fine for thousands of years without them.

"maybe use the rez as a retirement community until things change"

No way. We have great respect for our elders. They possess a great deal of knowledge and experience that they have to pass on to the next generation. They can't do that sitting on the rez, while the next generation is is in some inner city sum needing what those elders have more than ever. It would destroy us that much quicker. Too much knowledge has been lost already. We can ill-afford to lose anymore. Also, as I mentioned, they're living in 3rd world conditions on those reservations. In some of them, especially in the Dakotas, they have extremely harsh winters that are daunting for the able bodied. Without their younger relatives around to help, those poor elders would surely freeze to death trying to collect the wood necessary to keep warm. Do you see where we've been placed. Right in the middle of Damned if you Do, Damned if you Don't. The pressure caused by that situation is part of the reason why so many turn to drink and drugs.

Ivan,

I was brought up non-Traditional. I'm the first to be Traditional in my family, in over 4 generations. I'm also the first to speak the language, to any degree of fluency, in over 4 generations. Couple that with the fact that I am self-taught, in the Cherokee language, it doesn't seem to be too bad of an accomplishment. What I do know, I am in the process of passing on to my children.

Your suggestion that one can still keep their language and culture, even after leaving, is only partially accurate. First off, modern American societal ways are much like the Christian version of God. It's jealous, precluding all other ways. "You're in America now, you should speak English." That's a sentiment I hear all the time. Now, because my father's family is Mexican, I grew up speaking both English and Spanish. By the time I was 6, I was completely fluent in both languages, despite my father's best efforts. He was a proponent of the before mentioned philosophy, and forbade me from learning Spanish until I'd first mastered English. I learned both at the same time. He wasn't aware of studies that have shown children are capable of learning multiple languages simaltaniously. He also wasn't aware of the studies showing that bilingual children tend to do better in subjects like math. If he'd known, I'm sure my immersion in Spanish would have been missing the element of terror that it did have.

Today, I can barely manage a basic conversation in Spanish. Of course, I've taken Spanish courses in High School and College, which is the only reason why I have any degree of proficiency at all. The last time I spoke to my paternal grandmother, one of my cousins had to translate the mojority of the conversation. I was 19. When I was 9, my parents divorced. Because my father was the abusive, boozing, bastard that he was, my mother got sole custody. No one in her family speaks Spanish. The dominant language in her family is English. Over the course of 10 years, I went from being completely fluent to barely competent.

As a child, I was surrounded by Mexican culture. Dia de los Muertos was celebrated right along side Holloween. Las Posadas, along side Christmas. In my schools, we celebrated Cinco de Mayo, learned Mexican stories right along side the European ones that are standard fare. For example, La Llorona was told right along side the Legend of Sleepy Hollow, during the Holloween season. Today, I've retained the story of La Llorona, and some understanding of Dia de Los Muertos. Otherwise, I know nothing of Mexican culture.

My point is this, to avoid forgetting one's own culture and language, one must be constantly surrounded by it. That's how places like NYC's Chinatown came about. I was removed from my Mexican roots, and completely immersed in my American ones. As a consequence, I forgot what it means to be a Mexican. I know that today, and often times listening to Latin music makes my blood race, and my eyes fill with tears.

When I say that leaving the rez will annhialate our cultures, I'm speaking from experience. I should also point out that the Tejana singer Selina was "Mexican-American". Her command of Spanish was shaky. Fortunately, she was able to handle herself with such poise that a reporter from a Mexican newspaper called her "Una artista de los pueblos." An artist of the people.

i completely understand what you are saying. and kudos to you for doing what you are doing. it is hard to do that in todays world.
people make sacrifices everyday to survive. and if someone is willing to stay on a rez and deal with that situation, then they should be commended for it. and admired. but it would help if all those who do make the sacrifice and leave a rez to get an education, should go back and help out.
i find that the biggest enemy for any culture today, if you want to look at it that way, is pop culture. we are assaulted by it daily from the time we get up, while we drive to work, and before we go to bed. people are lured by all the bullshit it offers. a friend told me once, an ndn from canada, that "wal-mart has done more to destroy our culture than any gun or bottle could ever do". and i have to agree with him.

It isn't unheard of for young adults to leave the rez, so that they may go to college. Many of them do come back, and use what they've learned to benefit their people. However, there aren't enough of themm coming back because, jobwise, there isn't much to come back to. In the long run, some of the reservations are hemorraging young people at an alarming rate. Now, some of the tribes have taken steps to handle their problems. I don't remember which nation it is, but it's one from the Northwest. Their solution to the drug problem is to kick out anyone convicted of dealing or possessing. If a member of their Nation is caught and convicted, they're banished. It's not permanent, and they can petition for readmitance at a later date, but they have to prove that they're clean and on the straight and narrow.

Many of the reservations also offer alcohol and drug treatment services. There are positive steps being taken, so the situation isn't totally hopeless, only bordering on impossible. It's going to take some time because the wound is still very raw, kept that way by the government's apparent lack of concern with regards to what happens to us. ANWR is a prime example of that.

Because of this, and many other reasons, there are zero industries to be found on any of the reservations. The government tried to give the shittiest land to the indians in the hope of stealing the bigger side of the pie. Then once they got wind that there was something valuable on the reservations the government removed them with force to an even more desolate and shitty place.

Way back, in AZ a coal company got about 50% of the Hopi reservation which split the remaining land in half. Bastards.

I love some of the stuff AIM has done.

Originally posted by 500lbguerilla
I love some of the stuff AIM has done.

yes aim WAS good, but now seem to be nothing more than a group that sends out communicates. the spirit of the 60's and 70's in your face protest , take it to the streets, etc. has gone by the way side. just as all have done. maybe those who were willing to take the risks of jail etc., have just gotten old, and the youth just aren't willing enough anymore.

I think that AIM has, for the most part, adapted to world events. The type of protests that they engaged in during the 70's are no longer necessary today, though activism is still necessary. They've changed with the times, which to me shows that they're gonna be around for awhile.;) Back then, it was our freedom from oppresion. Now, it's our freedom from the Washington Redskins, and all of the other stupid mascots out there that are used to make caricatures out of us. It's also protecting our sacred lands from a government that's no less greedy. There are other ways to fight. Sometimes, I do find myself wondering why it is we fight at all. Then I see my kids, and I remember that this world's not mine. It's theirs, and I'd like it to be in better shape than it was when it was handed down to me.

Originally posted by Txn8ive
Now, it's our freedom from the Washington Redskins, and all of the other stupid mascots out there that are used to make caricatures out of us.
That's okay, have you seen my "people" on Notre Dame sweatshirts and Lucky Charms boxes? Yikes.

Do you think the new Casino Culture is offensive?

Originally posted by Brooks
That's okay, have you seen my "people" on Notre Dame sweatshirts and Lucky Charms boxes? Yikes.

Do you think the new Casino Culture is offensive?


amerika, the land where people do anything to make a buck.

casino culture does not benefit most of the people in general. most of the money lines the pockets of the few. nothing's changed.

Originally posted by Brooks
That's okay, have you seen my "people" on Notre Dame sweatshirts and Lucky Charms boxes? Yikes.

Do you think the new Casino Culture is offensive?

Brooks,

As to Notre Dame, if I'm not mistaken, when it was founded the school's student body was primarily Irish Catholic. If the mascot's representative of the student body, not that it is now, I don't think it counts. About the Lucky Charms, you're absolutely right.

As to casinos, they're offensive in the fact that they were supposed to help The People. Out of all of the casinos in operation, very few are successful. Of those that're successful, only one benefits the people that it's supposed to benefit.(i.e.-not the Tribal Govt.) In other words, much like the lottery, it isn't helping any but a precious few, and that is what's so offensive about it.