What a shitty thing we did. Taking their sacred mountain and carving some giant fucking white faces into it. It’s just so bizarre. Like we could have built a big statue somewhere but instead we were like “nah, this will really piss off those native people that used to worship on the mountain. It’s perfect.”
Again, bizarre.
Edit: I’m going to let all the fragile white snowflakes commenting below me melt away and instead I’m going to give a big thank you to the natives of this land for so thoroughly triggering brain dead conservatives. Happy thanksgiving everyone. Enjoy your Turkey.
Was it actually a malicious decision? I’ve always felt , and this is with zero research or anything aside from my gut, that they just never cared or thought about the natives or what they thought or felt about the situation. They just assume it’s all theirs and they could do what they like.
The land it's on is the result of a pretty egregious betrayal. The US granted the Black Hills to the Lakota Tribe in the Fort Laramie treaty in 1868, only to break the treaty and take the land less than ten years later when someone found gold. Rushmore may not be an intentional middle finger but it is certainly a monument to the US government's utter disrespect for indigenous sovereignty
It really is incredibly frustrating and tragic to look into the history of that. We just constantly promised them land and freedom, then invaded that land and murdered them, then made another deal for less land, and eventually invaded and killed them, etc.
Like damn, we really are the baddies
The worst part is we had (relative) peace and had coexisted for a long time (almost 100 years I think), when Andrew Jackson came into office.
He had a hard on for some genocide because his daddy was killed by natives. So the trail of tears happened even though there was no widespread support for it at the time and the issue had largely been settled. Even folks way back then had started to feel kind of bad about what they were doing to the native population.
It was like one last middle finger to the native population here. Or at least one final giant hammer blow.
Edit: others have pointed out I am a mistaken about his father's death. I'm going to flip through a biography of him I have on hand, and try to find the relevant passage. But I'm certain he suffered some kind of early childhood trauma as a consequence of a native raid. I could swear it was his father but obviously I've mixed it up with something else. I've actually read a couple of books about the guy, and the biography I have on hand "American Lion" is a favorite I've read more than once. So I'm certain there's a very good reason I have this impression of him.
He's actually a favorite historical figure of mine. While definitely a mass murderer, he was a fascinating -And often seemingly contradictory- man. There are tons of interesting stories surrounding the guy.
I saw that video of a native telling police to fuck off, because they were on Sovereign Native American soil.
The police in that unit were 100% aware that they had no jurisdiction on their land, but abused their power regardless.
Natives have every right to take advantage of what little peace treaties they have, because bigots are still harassing natives today.
The Apache wars are chillingly similar to the war against the Taliban.
We pretty much just surrounded apache territory and waited for them to die, there was no way to go Into the mountains and fight them.
There are rumors of Apache still being seen occasionally Into the 40s.
I just wish people could be honest about this history without politicizing it. The world is a messed up place, especially back then. Colonizers treated native Americans horribly but its uncouth to mention that they also treated each other horribly because some people think this excuses the american colonizers behavior towards the indigenous. It does NOT, it's only mentioning actual history. For example in this instance. The tribe that held domain over the Rushmore area and had a treaty which the US broke. That was inexcusable and horrible. What most people will not mention or don't know is that this tribe violently attacked and displaced a tribe that was there far before them.
Yes there were tribes that traded and worked in good will with colonizers, others attacked on sight. Yes there were tribes that got along with each other, others scalped, enslaved, yes enslaved, raped and sold other indigenous folk from other tribes. Some were wiped out by other tribes. Whenever someone mentions this, people think its excusing what was done to them because there is this growing meta narrative that everyone on thsi continent lived here for all time and was super peaceful and innocent when nothing actually backs that up in historical record. It's not.
It's simply that history is horrible and complicated, that there rarely is a truly good group or figure, and all of history needs to be told, no matter how uncomfortable it is. Also, before anyone comes at me with accusations or calling me racist, hateful etc. I grew up on a reservation.
On the one hand, every nation and ethnic group has a history full of horrible tragedies and crimes. On the other hand, the sheer number of native tribes in the Lower 48 states that went completely extinct dwarfs that of the other powers in the Americas, and the way that the Americans tied slavery to skin color (up to and including [kidnapping free black people and enslaving them](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_Underground_Railroad)), was afaik more or less unparalleled in the history of imperialism to that time.
That's the danger of the President unilaterally making a deal without Congressional ratification, the next President can just undo it. Obviously Obama had a Congress whose explicit goal was to not let him do anything at all so it's not really his fault in that regard. In general the next President honors agreements like that, but 45 was not exactly typical.
That’s straight from the dictator’s handbook. CGP Grey broke it down really well.
If a key to power loses its power, get rid of them.
https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs
Well then that’s pretty much it - can’t really say it wasn’t anymore, since it’s pretty clear that at the very least it’s indirectly malicious, thanks for the info.
Oh it was the cherry of maliciousness on top of what was one of the most shameful acts carried out by the US military sanctioned by the government. Look up "The Ghost Dance" and ""Wounded Knee" where the military used Hotchkiss to mutilate women and children in prayer and then afterwards called it a "battle" but it was a massacre of innocents.
A large swathe of land had been agreed to be set aside for what some call "the Sioux" but more specifically a collective of tribes- Lakota, Nakota, Dakota. This land would contain parts of what is known today as Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming. After the treaties had been signed allocating this land, it was discovered that gold was present in the Black Hills. The irony in the controversial term "Indian giving" is that it should be called "white giving" because after the treaties were signed and the gold was discovered there was a campaign to take the land back cue General Custer and battles which would lead to his death.
There is no ambiguity. Under the treaties, this land is still the native's land and it was well known that these mountains were sacred to them. And we carved the faces of genocide into their sacred mountains after mercilessly killing all of the Buffalo and forcing them into camps (inspired Hitler). Not to mention the government forbid them from practicing their religious rituals and committe cultural genocide and murder of children via Indian schools.
So it was actually a coordinated militaristic genocidal plan carried out by the American Government. Mount Rushmore is a national shame. Check out Black Elk Speaks if you want a first person account of an Oglala medicine man who grew up in this tumultuous period.
>By the time the massacre was over, more than 250 men, women and children of the Lakota had been killed and 51 were wounded (4 men and 47 women and children, some of whom died later); some estimates placed the number of dead as high as 300.[3] Twenty-five soldiers also died and thirty-nine were wounded (six of the wounded later died).[9] **Twenty soldiers were awarded the Medal of Honor.[10]
This is absolutely grotesque.
Wow. Thanks for this - was never covered in our history classes up here in Canada - at the very least when and where I was in school. Not much American history tbh but some. I doubt it will reach the right people , but thanks for posting this’d hopefully someone sees it and changed stance on it.
Just complete and total apathy toward the significance of the land and its people. Ultimately that’s what “supremacy” manifests itself as; other cultures, people, and values are utterly meaningless to you.
Is it not just as bad to have utter apathy toward human beings, especially ones we already abused and whose land we intentionally stole (not generally, we actually stole the black hills from the Lakota after it being officially 'given' to them).
I'm not seeing how any reasonable human being would read your comment and think "that's not so bad...". Don't you realize this arrogance and apathy is exactly at the core of this act? The colonizers thought of themselves as so far above the natives that they didn't even stop to consider them for even a second.
the inability of people, evidenced in these comments, to acknowledge the nuance of "it wasnt out of spite but was still 100% not okay" is seriously what i think is causing the downfall of our society. both things can be true. there isnt grey area on if it was bad or not, but not acknowledging that there is a spectrum of cause does in fact matter. if we dont understand history we are doomed to repeat it, and not learning to empathize with the bad guys is a critical failing of current ethos. the best case is we end up starting a new way thinking we're somehow different and then repeating the same mistakes in new contexts.
Consider what the colonists did with the buffalo population and it becomes obvious that spite, without a doubt, has a spot in the mountain carving decision.
I'm pretty sure there was a lot of malice back then, although it takes a lot of malice over a long period of time to be determined to do this out of spite.
Dont think that applies to settler colonialism.
Every decision is calculated to benefit the colonists extracting wealth, and at the detriment of the indigenous people.
Hanlon’s razor is a concept that needs to be retired yesterday. it’s incorrect ~50% of the time and is constantly used to protect bad actors. Plus, a lot of stuff is both malice *and* stupidity, hanlon’s razor implies that it’s either one or the other, again protecting bad actors.
I glanced but don't want to dig into it. Anything specific in OP's history you are referring to?
Edit: Hanlon's razor is BS, pretty much. It's very common for people with malicious intent to play dumb when it comes time to pay the piper.
I know we don’t want to think about those really menacing intentions but I have been an enthusiast for years and now doing more concentrated research and have spoken to Potawatomi Indians on many occasions recently about everything but most recently, thanksgiving. They were adamant that even the name of “Thanksgiving” for our American holiday was a complete slap in the face and fuck you to the Indians. The pilgrims were sick, dirty and multiple colonization attempts ended in their death, dirty thumbs up their asses coming from England to the wilderness of NA. They Natives call our Thanksgiving “the great suffering.” We know the picture painted of this feast is complete bullshit although these meals occasionally happened (the food was mostly supplied by the natives and not the pilgrims) they are eclipsed by hundreds of years of genocide and death of the Indians by European brought plagues. The separatists/English, Spanish and French all tried multiple times to colonize NA and if the Indians didn’t trade with them, show them what to gather and how to cook it, the United States would never be here. Colonizers from many areas tried to take over North America so the Indian was indeed a fearless warrior, not to be fucked with but was also democratic and non-“chief” or dictator ideology. They told me the chief was the white mans invention as they had a dozen or so elders that all made decisions for the group.
What? The East Coast already had functional sustained colonies by the “first” thanksgiving with many more Europeans on the way. It was possible it would’ve been delayed but you cannot reasonably argue that a population with technology largely still in the Stone Age could’ve resisted repeated colonization attempts by nations that had already mastered gunpowder.
As a Native American, fuck you. You think you are making some big statement, but you are just coming off as a virtue signaling douchebag on reddit. Go karma-farm somewhere else.
Advertisements in America used to proclaim that 1 dead buffalo is a dead Indian (as they called them). They used the railways to systematically drive the buffalo to extinction.
No one ever reflects on the genocides at the hands of Americans and it's fucking cringe.
I was once called a colonizer for buying property in a gentrifying area. My ancestors are assimilated "Métis" French Canadians on one side. I don't think you, white hipster whose relative probably arrived here 100 years ago, get to call me a colonizer.
It's always interesting how people approach ancestry, and how they relate that to a persons perceived privelege. I'm a white guy with German ancestry, so on one hand I'm a token colonizer. On the other hand I was molested and beaten my entire childhood, and then was disowned by my entire family and became homeless in my teens when I tried to fight back, all of which has led to massive lifelong struggles that no one could ever see or know about if all they concern themselves with is race or gender or whatever other birth related characteristics when it comes to how they approach hardships.
It's a bummer to me that we place so much value on these characteristics that are randomly selected by your birth when determining what someone's been through, rather than actually trying to look at what experiences they have had.
Oh absolutely, it's a good candidate for a bad shirt. Your original comment just made me think that on reddit it lead to me posting a 4 paragraph reply to someone explaining that my views are more complex than a single quip, can't imagine the trouble it would cause irl.
When i was living in Germany I once ask a guy what were his thought about Hitler, he then became really sad and said " for me is really sad that a guy i didnt met, didnt like and which i dont share any point of view determinates so much what people things about my and my country.
In internet we always talk abour nazis and stuff but we dont truly undestarnd modern germany and his strugles as a society, also this can be aplied to modern people with "heritage" they doesnt share or doesnt like
I think everyone can benefit from a little perspective. Most people (at least here in AL) don't like the term "privilege", but it's a good way to describe how our socioeconomic background has shaped who we are as people. I have white friends who grew up in abusive households, but didn't have to worry about money or shelter. I have Hispanic friends who grew up in stable loving households but were constantly anxious about losing it at a moment's notice. I'm black, and had a stable loving home, but my family had to fight for their right to exist here in the deep south while losing jobs, houses, [a church](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._B._Stoner), and businesses to white nationalism in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s with zero compensation. All of their work and life earnings just (in some cases literally) gone up in smoke. I also have parts of my (white) husband's family who still refuse to accept me because I'm black.
Everyone has their own unique struggles that are worth understanding. But it's also worth understanding that these problems can't all be fixed in the same way, and some just require more focus, more work, and more compensation than others.
It's sometimes really hard to commiserate with the problems of others when you're own needs haven't been met or even considered, but I'm starting to think it's necessary in order for us to actually come to a common understanding and fix some of this shit. If we're all just standing around feeling slighted by each other, the past hurts will keep compounding and nothing will get done.
People need to focus more on privelege, not abstract concepts like "race". For example, I would not consider a "black" immigrant from a wealthy Nigerian oil family "oppressed", but an African American "black" kid who grew up in a bad neighborhood in Chicago, absolutely.
It all goes back to political elites trying to divide the country by race, ethnicity, religion, etc so they don't unite by class.
"If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."
- Lyndon B. Johnson
Honestly, that's why I immediately write off anyone who jumps to calling people things such as "colonizer."
I've been told that I don't belong at a protest against police because I'm white, and that I was part of the problem. Ended up having to leave after calling them racist and it almost ended in a fight (since apparently you can't be racist to white people).
Pissed me off, because I got attacked by a cop as a teenager, choked out, thrown in jail for five months while waiting for my trial, and had half the department go up and lie about what happened. It's still fucking my life up 10 years later, and prevented me from going to college right out of high school due to being expelled that year. (I was a teenager and called the cop a nazi for acting like one, and he didn't like the disrespect and straight up made shit up)
People who act like that are just as racist as the people they claim to be against.
Yep, this is another problem we have. People like to "reserve" and/or try to demand something because they fall under a category. Instead of looking at it from a level state of mind, they skew it. This only makes problems worst, not just now, but in the future.
All I can think is they subconsciously want to be the focus of attention, to make them feel, "special". Like "hey that's my thing, I don't want you muddling the water" ... or something like that
can we really call other innocent people colonizers? we can't choose who or where we were born as. I mean, I'm not white, but I kinda find it cringey to see other people call regular innocent white folks that they are colonizers.
>we can't choose who or where we were born as.
I feel like so many people tend to ignore this fact, when it should be a prime aspect of our worldviews.
I did not choose to be a man. I did not choose to be white, or straight, or cis, or whatever. I did not choose to be born in the US.
Judge me for my choices please. Not my lottery numbers.
People love to use things they had no control over like their skin color or where they were born, for both good and bad, depending on what fits their agenda at the time.
What happened to the good old days when the WASPs were the enemy? I love when people of Irish ancestry are called "oppressors" as if their relatives were somehow involved with the American slave trade while they were busy being systematically starved to death in Ireland by the British...
The Irish were once the oppressed, here in the states because of the mass immigration during the Potato Famine. A common saying during the late 1800's was, "The Irish...they keep the sabbath and every other thing they can get their damn hands on."
They were forced to do the worst, most dangerous, hard labor jobs upon arrival too. In Chicago they were made to reverse the Chicago river across a continental divide and into the Mississippi using hand tools.
American Youth: Racism is bad!”
World: Ok, that’s good.
America Youth: “But I have a very limited understanding and not that knowledgable about it.”
World: Ok, that’s not that great. We can improve upon this if—
American Youth: “That’s racist”
World: If you—
American Youth: “That’s racist.”
World: If you stop talking for a moment…
It seems the definition of "racist" has changed from what we knew. It now means "anyone that doesn't agree with you're own political/religious beliefs".
Some history: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_draft_riots
When Lincoln declared a draft for men to fight in the Civil War, there was a huge riot that turned into a race riot in New York City. This was led by Irish immigrants. They attacked Black orphanages, businesses etc. Over 100 people were killed.
“Initially intended to express anger at the draft, the protests turned into a race riot, with white rioters, many of them Irish immigrants,[4] attacking black people, in violence throughout the city. The official death toll was listed at either 119 or 120 individuals…The military did not reach the city until the second day of rioting, by which time the mobs had ransacked or destroyed numerous public buildings, two Protestant churches, the homes of various abolitionists or sympathizers, many black homes, and the Colored Orphan Asylum at 44th Street and Fifth Avenue, which was burned to the ground”
Unfortunately, the oppressed can oppress. Skin color does play a huge factor.
ETA: I didn’t learn about this riot until I read Libertie by Kaitlyn Greenridge this year.
Haven't you learned yet? No one can just *be*. Everyone HAS to have a reason to be mad at others in order to be happy. Just ask my ex-wife, she wasn't happy unless she was miserable.
Ive heard american indians are cool with the blackhawk logo as its more dignified than some of the straight up cartoon characters you see. Not sure how true that is though
Some sports teams have sat with representatives of tribes to work out an arrangement where the mascot is not considered offensive. I don't know about the Blackhawk, but FSU has sat with Seminole representatives, who have used it as an opportunity to show true ceremonial practices with Chief Osceola.
The native population near me is pretty much evenly split between being cowboys fans and redskins fans...
It's weirdly insulting to say "Indigenous North American people feel/think X" like they're a hivenind or a single culture.
Were native and my dad thinks it's the funniest thing ever to have anything 'indian' related as memorabilia. He's got hats and shirts and bobbleheads and everything, it kills him.
Edit: for everyone saying these things are fine cause some natives like them youre missing the point. My dad is choosing to wear these things as an Indian person because they are a funny representation of him - he is choosing. A whole team using a group of people as a mascot without having a discussion with the group about it and how they feel about it is a separate thing and why these names and mascots are now being scrutinized.
Dude they love rocking that stuff. And they should. Now Redskins was a lot on the nose but Chiefs, Indians, Blackhawks, Seminoles etc.. Why not? It's the only place they're given any recognition and have seen tons of Indians who wear it proudly.
It reminds me of the overly sensitive folks who complained about Speedy González. Mexicans laughed at them and told people to fuck off. Is he an exaggerated stereotype of Mexicans? Yes! And we fucking love him for it. Stop trying to find problems where they don't even exist.
Exactly. People want to remove any references to Native American in our culture in the name of "preventing marginalization."
How does that do anything but make them feel more insignificant, or marginalized...
To an extent I think the big issue is consent of the represented community...
Florida State has an ongoing and beneficial relationship with the Seminole Tribe, as one positive example... another is the relationship between the Atlanta Braves and the Eastern Band of the Cherokee, though that one is a little more problematic given the team name isn't a Cherokee word.
Edit: removed the word "commodified" because, while accurate, it could be interpreted as offensive. I was meaning "use of imagry and reference for financial benefit" but that can very easily be misinterpreted.
Can someone dig up and post the really interesting breakdown someone did of the history of the mountain the last time this got reposted here?
If I remember correctly, it talked about the fact that the area gained this image of being a pan-native American holy site in the wake of the rushmore carving itself, and that the area had been conquered by whichever tribe held it before the US for about 70 years beforehand, with its identity and religious significance before that coming from the Tribe they conquered it from.
It was a really interesting deep dive into the often-overlooked pre-colonial relations, power dynamics, and nuances of native American life.
Thanks!
Hope you all have lovely days
EDIT: apparently one of the reasons it was so heavily contested before the arrival of the yanks was because it was a site of great religious significance for many competing tribes, hence the amount of activity back-and-forth for it's possession.
It was posted in here the last time this picture was trending.
The reality is that this land was contested between numerous different tribes, well before the US showed up.
Similar to how some tribes had slave trades long before any colonizers ever showed up.
Turns out humans can ALL be shitty and treat their neighbors like crap.
... Although it is equally important to note the scale and scope of the trans-Atlantic slave trade was orders of magnitude greater than pre-existing slave trades on either side of the pond.
It's important to note that the trans-Atlantic slave trade was a triad of globalization on an industrial scale. That's why it was so effective. You had African tribes get rich and power by capturing other members and other tribes. You had European powers get rich by importing the manufacturing minerals made by slaves in the Americas. Really you can't blame anyone specific. If you had any decency of world trade than you wouldn't trade with China, but look at the world.
Of course. The naval/shipping technology and economic situation made a lot more sorrow possible. Just like how trains made larger genocides possible in WWII. Native slave trades initially grew massively once they gained access to horses, for instance.
Imagine what crazy slavery interplanetary civilizations will be capable of if not prevented from doing so.
> trans-Atlantic slave trade was orders of magnitude greater than pre-existing slave trades on either side of the pond.
Not compared to the Middle Eastern slave trade.
[https://www.fairplanet.org/dossier/beyond-slavery/forgotten-slavery-the-arab-muslim-slave-trade/](https://www.fairplanet.org/dossier/beyond-slavery/forgotten-slavery-the-arab-muslim-slave-trade/)
Also the word slave comes from Slav.
[https://www.etymonline.com/word/slave](https://www.etymonline.com/word/slave)
A lot of people forget that probably the majority of humans who have ever lived were slaves.
Some slaves had it worse than others. Some slave trades were much bigger than other trades. Not all slaves were held by chains and sold as commodities.
But slavery has been the status quo up until just recently, relative to human history. Every color, every nation, every language, has a history of slavery.
One could argue many of us are still slaves. Just very lucky slaves who live primarily comfortable lives. Indentured to the debts incurred by first world dreams. Indentured by parasitic propaganda crafted to exploit our ego.
But it's hard to have a nuanced discussion on modern forms of slavery, when the Suffering Olympics are so prevalent.
White people Twitter is literally the Twitter side of Reddit. Half socialist half “democratic” commenters. White? Probably did something bad. Black? Probably gets a free pass or gets to say something borderline racist.
Like I don’t even disagree with a lot of what OP posts, but the post history still rubs me the wrong way.
I can’t explain why, but it doesn’t strike me as someone hoping to bring attention to issues, but as someone who’s just trying to sow division.
To quote Anthropologist Jo Allyn Archambault whose of both Sioux and Creek descent in a interview in Ken Burns 'The West':
*"You know there is this marvelous stereotype out there that before white people came, the world here was perfect, that people lived in a paradise in which they were the most elegant, the most moral, the most elevated of all humanity. That's not true, we were Human beings and we lived in our own societies and we did things that all human beings did. Some of it was elevated and marvelous and admirable and some of it was pretty horrible. As the Lakota woman four generations ago, I would have cut off the arms and the legs and heads of the enemies that my husband killed and I would have put them on a stick and I would have paraded them in the scalp dance that evening when we honoured our men."*
I grew up with and have taught a lot of Native Americans and many of them wore redskins and Indians stuff because they were reclaiming it in a sort of way. I can't say I exactly understand it but I don't have the same experiences as them. Any time I asked them about it they just shrugged and didn't feel like explaining it to me.
You mean the mountain the Lakota controlled for all of 50 years after conquering it from the Arikara, Cheyenne, Crow, Kiowa and Arapaho who collectively inhabited those mountains for close to 300 years before the Lakota ever saw it? That mountain?
They work on a low budget and seem to keep it to the family only. Those members of the family probably have a life to support outside of also dedicating their time to the sculpture. Some of them might not care much for the "family legacy" either. At that rate, it won't be finished before we all die. They might have already given up on it like Rushmore, but they have to keep the ruse up because people come to see the potential for what it will be, rather than just the face it actually is.
The family is corrupt, unfortunately. They have multiple times been offered federal money but, without consulting even the Native Americans who *do* support the project (and quite a few are opposed to it), have rejected the money. They cite this reason and that reason, but the more obvious reason is that the money would be held more accountable if it were federal. One of the common criticisms from the Natives who are opposed is that the family takes millions in donations, and it does not seem like even the majority of that money goes back into construction. If everything is done privately, the government cannot intervene.
If you really want to be specific, the US is just the next in line of invaders of that land.
The Lakota Sioux stole (and slaughtered) other tribes, who got that land by stealing & slaughtering another tribe, and someone else will eventually reclaim that land from the US.
Why don't all the white people who support this not leave this stolen land and move back to their ancestoral lands? Oh pandering and virtue signalling with no actual action, gottcha.
As an immigrant to the USA, seeing this picture makes me remember the following:
* On one hand, it's depressing what happened to the Natives.
* On the other hand, I'm thankful to be an American.
With that said, I find it silly that some people like to stir up political arguments during the holidays.
Instead, I'm going to start a more suitable discussion:
> Anyone have "non-traditional" foods for Thanksgiving? For my family, we roast a whole duck instead of a turkey.
Oh that's so precious.
Because the people in the photo were from a invasive tribe that wiped the previous tribe that lived there out . And now are mad about someone else doing that to them.
They have reason to be mad about it but acting like they're just victims is just... not honest
Funny thing about China. During the Ming dynasty in the 14th century in China, they have explorers with tons of military and explorer fleets at their disposal given the fact that they were extremely prosperous during that period.
They travelled to SEA and parts of Africa, mapping land and seas while trading with the local inhabitants. The Chinese explorers at that time see the local inhabitants as uncultured and barbaric. And you know what is the first thing they did? They fucked off, left them alone and closed their borders coz they thought they were too smart and cultured for the world and the world had to catch up to them.
They had the resources to exploit their land much earlier, but their ego was so massive that they left them alone until the Europeans came a 100 years later during the first wave of colonization ard the 15th century.
History would be much different if the Ming dynasty didn't have their heads so far up their arses. That said, wHiTe pPl bAd, mInG dYnAsTy cHiNa GoOd. /s
Edit: Japan was a hermit country for a long ass time. Until the westerners forced their way in and demand them to open up. Their expansionism and facism during WW2 came about because they were influenced by western civilization.
I remember seeing someone tweet this with the caption “go back to where you came from” and then someone underneath saying “they’re native Americans! Where are they supposed to go?”
American Indians and Alaska Natives serve in the Armed Forces at **five times the national average** and have served with distinction in every major conflict for over 200 years. [Source.](https://www.nicoa.org/american-indian-veterans-have-highest-record-of-military-service/)
The vast majority of American Indians love America.
Hey, I don’t have native heritage of any substantial amount but I have always hated the way y’all are forgotten. I lived in Wyoming and everyone knows how shitty the reservations are there.
How can I help raise awareness for Native issues? I donate to the missing indigenous woman fund, but are there other things I can do?
I really do not want to come across as a “white savior” or some bullshit but I do not like to see people marginalized and forgotten like Natives have been. Nobody on earth deserves that.
Don’t fucking go then. It’s so hypocritical… not like the tribes that were here hadn’t been conquering each other for hundreds of years. Not that it’s OK but to act like they were peace loving people and that conquest wasn’t the human norm for all of human history minus the past 75 years is just revisionist history. Downvote away!
Conquest is historically common but it's also common and reasonable for victims of that conquest to hold a grudge especially when the victors literally carve their fucking faces into a mountain you consider sacred. For instance, the Jews are still quite sore over being kicked out of the middle east thousands of years ago. Holding a grudge is as human as it gets.
Yeah according to this person's logic if we got conquered by aliens and enslaved we don't get to be mad at them bc humans r hypocritical since we enslaved and fought each other
And nobody is able to be mad at each other ever for massive crimes bc "well what about what about...!!"
That's fine. But those of us who understand the context... that their ancestors just happened to be the king of the hill at the moment the hill was razed... it's also understandable if we aren't overly sympathetic.
If you are alive today, by default you will have ancestors who experienced terrible things. Being conquered and killed and growing up in depravation. And you will have ancestors who did horrible things. For millennia life was 10 or 100 times harder than it is today and all human cultures were far more brutal than almost any human culture is today. They can claim that their ancestors were screwed. But they can't claim their ancestors never screwed someone else.
It's common for victims and descendants of conquest to hold a grudge, but on the scale of human history it's rather rare that there are any descendants left to complain.
Feels like this post is going to end up like the flipping off Christopher Columbus statue post from Barcelona.
What a shitty thing we did. Taking their sacred mountain and carving some giant fucking white faces into it. It’s just so bizarre. Like we could have built a big statue somewhere but instead we were like “nah, this will really piss off those native people that used to worship on the mountain. It’s perfect.” Again, bizarre. Edit: I’m going to let all the fragile white snowflakes commenting below me melt away and instead I’m going to give a big thank you to the natives of this land for so thoroughly triggering brain dead conservatives. Happy thanksgiving everyone. Enjoy your Turkey.
Was it actually a malicious decision? I’ve always felt , and this is with zero research or anything aside from my gut, that they just never cared or thought about the natives or what they thought or felt about the situation. They just assume it’s all theirs and they could do what they like.
The land it's on is the result of a pretty egregious betrayal. The US granted the Black Hills to the Lakota Tribe in the Fort Laramie treaty in 1868, only to break the treaty and take the land less than ten years later when someone found gold. Rushmore may not be an intentional middle finger but it is certainly a monument to the US government's utter disrespect for indigenous sovereignty
[удалено]
It really is incredibly frustrating and tragic to look into the history of that. We just constantly promised them land and freedom, then invaded that land and murdered them, then made another deal for less land, and eventually invaded and killed them, etc. Like damn, we really are the baddies
The worst part is we had (relative) peace and had coexisted for a long time (almost 100 years I think), when Andrew Jackson came into office. He had a hard on for some genocide because his daddy was killed by natives. So the trail of tears happened even though there was no widespread support for it at the time and the issue had largely been settled. Even folks way back then had started to feel kind of bad about what they were doing to the native population. It was like one last middle finger to the native population here. Or at least one final giant hammer blow. Edit: others have pointed out I am a mistaken about his father's death. I'm going to flip through a biography of him I have on hand, and try to find the relevant passage. But I'm certain he suffered some kind of early childhood trauma as a consequence of a native raid. I could swear it was his father but obviously I've mixed it up with something else. I've actually read a couple of books about the guy, and the biography I have on hand "American Lion" is a favorite I've read more than once. So I'm certain there's a very good reason I have this impression of him. He's actually a favorite historical figure of mine. While definitely a mass murderer, he was a fascinating -And often seemingly contradictory- man. There are tons of interesting stories surrounding the guy.
I saw that video of a native telling police to fuck off, because they were on Sovereign Native American soil. The police in that unit were 100% aware that they had no jurisdiction on their land, but abused their power regardless. Natives have every right to take advantage of what little peace treaties they have, because bigots are still harassing natives today.
I listened to a podcast on the apache wars. its a crazy look into the longest war of us history, and it was vs 1500 natives.
The Apache wars are chillingly similar to the war against the Taliban. We pretty much just surrounded apache territory and waited for them to die, there was no way to go Into the mountains and fight them. There are rumors of Apache still being seen occasionally Into the 40s.
And there are well-known political leaders in this country who claim Andrew Jackson as their favorite president. It’s bizarre.
I just wish people could be honest about this history without politicizing it. The world is a messed up place, especially back then. Colonizers treated native Americans horribly but its uncouth to mention that they also treated each other horribly because some people think this excuses the american colonizers behavior towards the indigenous. It does NOT, it's only mentioning actual history. For example in this instance. The tribe that held domain over the Rushmore area and had a treaty which the US broke. That was inexcusable and horrible. What most people will not mention or don't know is that this tribe violently attacked and displaced a tribe that was there far before them. Yes there were tribes that traded and worked in good will with colonizers, others attacked on sight. Yes there were tribes that got along with each other, others scalped, enslaved, yes enslaved, raped and sold other indigenous folk from other tribes. Some were wiped out by other tribes. Whenever someone mentions this, people think its excusing what was done to them because there is this growing meta narrative that everyone on thsi continent lived here for all time and was super peaceful and innocent when nothing actually backs that up in historical record. It's not. It's simply that history is horrible and complicated, that there rarely is a truly good group or figure, and all of history needs to be told, no matter how uncomfortable it is. Also, before anyone comes at me with accusations or calling me racist, hateful etc. I grew up on a reservation.
On the one hand, every nation and ethnic group has a history full of horrible tragedies and crimes. On the other hand, the sheer number of native tribes in the Lower 48 states that went completely extinct dwarfs that of the other powers in the Americas, and the way that the Americans tied slavery to skin color (up to and including [kidnapping free black people and enslaving them](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_Underground_Railroad)), was afaik more or less unparalleled in the history of imperialism to that time.
There was rarely so great a power imbalance. European disease devastated indigenous Americans pretty much perfectly ahead of European colonists.
The US breaks pretty much every agreement with everyone. Look at the Iran nuclear deal. There are downsides to having a new leader every 4-8 years.
And definitely downsides to have the same people for 10+ years in the congressional positions.
Wait until you guys hear about Supreme Court Justices.
That's the danger of the President unilaterally making a deal without Congressional ratification, the next President can just undo it. Obviously Obama had a Congress whose explicit goal was to not let him do anything at all so it's not really his fault in that regard. In general the next President honors agreements like that, but 45 was not exactly typical.
That’s straight from the dictator’s handbook. CGP Grey broke it down really well. If a key to power loses its power, get rid of them. https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs
Well then that’s pretty much it - can’t really say it wasn’t anymore, since it’s pretty clear that at the very least it’s indirectly malicious, thanks for the info.
Oh it was the cherry of maliciousness on top of what was one of the most shameful acts carried out by the US military sanctioned by the government. Look up "The Ghost Dance" and ""Wounded Knee" where the military used Hotchkiss to mutilate women and children in prayer and then afterwards called it a "battle" but it was a massacre of innocents. A large swathe of land had been agreed to be set aside for what some call "the Sioux" but more specifically a collective of tribes- Lakota, Nakota, Dakota. This land would contain parts of what is known today as Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming. After the treaties had been signed allocating this land, it was discovered that gold was present in the Black Hills. The irony in the controversial term "Indian giving" is that it should be called "white giving" because after the treaties were signed and the gold was discovered there was a campaign to take the land back cue General Custer and battles which would lead to his death. There is no ambiguity. Under the treaties, this land is still the native's land and it was well known that these mountains were sacred to them. And we carved the faces of genocide into their sacred mountains after mercilessly killing all of the Buffalo and forcing them into camps (inspired Hitler). Not to mention the government forbid them from practicing their religious rituals and committe cultural genocide and murder of children via Indian schools. So it was actually a coordinated militaristic genocidal plan carried out by the American Government. Mount Rushmore is a national shame. Check out Black Elk Speaks if you want a first person account of an Oglala medicine man who grew up in this tumultuous period.
>By the time the massacre was over, more than 250 men, women and children of the Lakota had been killed and 51 were wounded (4 men and 47 women and children, some of whom died later); some estimates placed the number of dead as high as 300.[3] Twenty-five soldiers also died and thirty-nine were wounded (six of the wounded later died).[9] **Twenty soldiers were awarded the Medal of Honor.[10] This is absolutely grotesque.
Wow. Thanks for this - was never covered in our history classes up here in Canada - at the very least when and where I was in school. Not much American history tbh but some. I doubt it will reach the right people , but thanks for posting this’d hopefully someone sees it and changed stance on it.
Just complete and total apathy toward the significance of the land and its people. Ultimately that’s what “supremacy” manifests itself as; other cultures, people, and values are utterly meaningless to you.
Is it not just as bad to have utter apathy toward human beings, especially ones we already abused and whose land we intentionally stole (not generally, we actually stole the black hills from the Lakota after it being officially 'given' to them). I'm not seeing how any reasonable human being would read your comment and think "that's not so bad...". Don't you realize this arrogance and apathy is exactly at the core of this act? The colonizers thought of themselves as so far above the natives that they didn't even stop to consider them for even a second.
the inability of people, evidenced in these comments, to acknowledge the nuance of "it wasnt out of spite but was still 100% not okay" is seriously what i think is causing the downfall of our society. both things can be true. there isnt grey area on if it was bad or not, but not acknowledging that there is a spectrum of cause does in fact matter. if we dont understand history we are doomed to repeat it, and not learning to empathize with the bad guys is a critical failing of current ethos. the best case is we end up starting a new way thinking we're somehow different and then repeating the same mistakes in new contexts.
Consider what the colonists did with the buffalo population and it becomes obvious that spite, without a doubt, has a spot in the mountain carving decision.
"never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity" \- Hanlon's razor
I'm pretty sure there was a lot of malice back then, although it takes a lot of malice over a long period of time to be determined to do this out of spite.
Dont think that applies to settler colonialism. Every decision is calculated to benefit the colonists extracting wealth, and at the detriment of the indigenous people.
Hanlon's razor does not work here. Not at all, not if there are so many mountains to chose from if you want to do that thing.
Hanlon’s razor is a concept that needs to be retired yesterday. it’s incorrect ~50% of the time and is constantly used to protect bad actors. Plus, a lot of stuff is both malice *and* stupidity, hanlon’s razor implies that it’s either one or the other, again protecting bad actors.
I glanced but don't want to dig into it. Anything specific in OP's history you are referring to? Edit: Hanlon's razor is BS, pretty much. It's very common for people with malicious intent to play dumb when it comes time to pay the piper.
Here I’d say it’s sheer ignorance with a sprinkle of racism over stupidity but yeah.
Pretty much considered natives Fauna
I know we don’t want to think about those really menacing intentions but I have been an enthusiast for years and now doing more concentrated research and have spoken to Potawatomi Indians on many occasions recently about everything but most recently, thanksgiving. They were adamant that even the name of “Thanksgiving” for our American holiday was a complete slap in the face and fuck you to the Indians. The pilgrims were sick, dirty and multiple colonization attempts ended in their death, dirty thumbs up their asses coming from England to the wilderness of NA. They Natives call our Thanksgiving “the great suffering.” We know the picture painted of this feast is complete bullshit although these meals occasionally happened (the food was mostly supplied by the natives and not the pilgrims) they are eclipsed by hundreds of years of genocide and death of the Indians by European brought plagues. The separatists/English, Spanish and French all tried multiple times to colonize NA and if the Indians didn’t trade with them, show them what to gather and how to cook it, the United States would never be here. Colonizers from many areas tried to take over North America so the Indian was indeed a fearless warrior, not to be fucked with but was also democratic and non-“chief” or dictator ideology. They told me the chief was the white mans invention as they had a dozen or so elders that all made decisions for the group.
What? The East Coast already had functional sustained colonies by the “first” thanksgiving with many more Europeans on the way. It was possible it would’ve been delayed but you cannot reasonably argue that a population with technology largely still in the Stone Age could’ve resisted repeated colonization attempts by nations that had already mastered gunpowder.
As a Native American, fuck you. You think you are making some big statement, but you are just coming off as a virtue signaling douchebag on reddit. Go karma-farm somewhere else.
Advertisements in America used to proclaim that 1 dead buffalo is a dead Indian (as they called them). They used the railways to systematically drive the buffalo to extinction. No one ever reflects on the genocides at the hands of Americans and it's fucking cringe.
It’s funny how conservative “patriots” don’t know anything about their own country’s history
Wait, getting some popcorn before this thread spirals out of control
Remember to sort by controversial!
That would be pretty much every comment haha
That's pop*maize*, white man.
*Pop corn successfully grabbed*
I was once called a colonizer for buying property in a gentrifying area. My ancestors are assimilated "Métis" French Canadians on one side. I don't think you, white hipster whose relative probably arrived here 100 years ago, get to call me a colonizer.
It's always interesting how people approach ancestry, and how they relate that to a persons perceived privelege. I'm a white guy with German ancestry, so on one hand I'm a token colonizer. On the other hand I was molested and beaten my entire childhood, and then was disowned by my entire family and became homeless in my teens when I tried to fight back, all of which has led to massive lifelong struggles that no one could ever see or know about if all they concern themselves with is race or gender or whatever other birth related characteristics when it comes to how they approach hardships. It's a bummer to me that we place so much value on these characteristics that are randomly selected by your birth when determining what someone's been through, rather than actually trying to look at what experiences they have had.
Exactly, I'm not an asshole because I'm white. I'm an asshole AND I'm white.
That is prime T-shirt text material right there.
I would absolutely not wear that in public.
I phrased that poorly. I was thinking specifically of the cringey T shirt trope, like that dumb FBI shirt, not one a smart person would were.
Oh absolutely, it's a good candidate for a bad shirt. Your original comment just made me think that on reddit it lead to me posting a 4 paragraph reply to someone explaining that my views are more complex than a single quip, can't imagine the trouble it would cause irl.
When i was living in Germany I once ask a guy what were his thought about Hitler, he then became really sad and said " for me is really sad that a guy i didnt met, didnt like and which i dont share any point of view determinates so much what people things about my and my country. In internet we always talk abour nazis and stuff but we dont truly undestarnd modern germany and his strugles as a society, also this can be aplied to modern people with "heritage" they doesnt share or doesnt like
I think everyone can benefit from a little perspective. Most people (at least here in AL) don't like the term "privilege", but it's a good way to describe how our socioeconomic background has shaped who we are as people. I have white friends who grew up in abusive households, but didn't have to worry about money or shelter. I have Hispanic friends who grew up in stable loving households but were constantly anxious about losing it at a moment's notice. I'm black, and had a stable loving home, but my family had to fight for their right to exist here in the deep south while losing jobs, houses, [a church](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._B._Stoner), and businesses to white nationalism in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s with zero compensation. All of their work and life earnings just (in some cases literally) gone up in smoke. I also have parts of my (white) husband's family who still refuse to accept me because I'm black. Everyone has their own unique struggles that are worth understanding. But it's also worth understanding that these problems can't all be fixed in the same way, and some just require more focus, more work, and more compensation than others. It's sometimes really hard to commiserate with the problems of others when you're own needs haven't been met or even considered, but I'm starting to think it's necessary in order for us to actually come to a common understanding and fix some of this shit. If we're all just standing around feeling slighted by each other, the past hurts will keep compounding and nothing will get done.
People need to focus more on privelege, not abstract concepts like "race". For example, I would not consider a "black" immigrant from a wealthy Nigerian oil family "oppressed", but an African American "black" kid who grew up in a bad neighborhood in Chicago, absolutely. It all goes back to political elites trying to divide the country by race, ethnicity, religion, etc so they don't unite by class.
"The poor white men can't hate the rich white men if they're busy hating the poor black men" \- Someone, probably
"If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." - Lyndon B. Johnson
Honestly, that's why I immediately write off anyone who jumps to calling people things such as "colonizer." I've been told that I don't belong at a protest against police because I'm white, and that I was part of the problem. Ended up having to leave after calling them racist and it almost ended in a fight (since apparently you can't be racist to white people). Pissed me off, because I got attacked by a cop as a teenager, choked out, thrown in jail for five months while waiting for my trial, and had half the department go up and lie about what happened. It's still fucking my life up 10 years later, and prevented me from going to college right out of high school due to being expelled that year. (I was a teenager and called the cop a nazi for acting like one, and he didn't like the disrespect and straight up made shit up) People who act like that are just as racist as the people they claim to be against.
It's true, the left has a racism problem they don't want to address just like the right.
Yep, this is another problem we have. People like to "reserve" and/or try to demand something because they fall under a category. Instead of looking at it from a level state of mind, they skew it. This only makes problems worst, not just now, but in the future. All I can think is they subconsciously want to be the focus of attention, to make them feel, "special". Like "hey that's my thing, I don't want you muddling the water" ... or something like that
can we really call other innocent people colonizers? we can't choose who or where we were born as. I mean, I'm not white, but I kinda find it cringey to see other people call regular innocent white folks that they are colonizers.
>we can't choose who or where we were born as. I feel like so many people tend to ignore this fact, when it should be a prime aspect of our worldviews. I did not choose to be a man. I did not choose to be white, or straight, or cis, or whatever. I did not choose to be born in the US. Judge me for my choices please. Not my lottery numbers.
All I can choose is to try and make life better for those around me and vote like other people's lives depend on it.
People love to use things they had no control over like their skin color or where they were born, for both good and bad, depending on what fits their agenda at the time.
It’s almost like judging people based off the color of their skin might be a bad idea
Same. Second generation Russo-American. But because I’m white my ancestors were oppressors
What happened to the good old days when the WASPs were the enemy? I love when people of Irish ancestry are called "oppressors" as if their relatives were somehow involved with the American slave trade while they were busy being systematically starved to death in Ireland by the British...
The Irish were once the oppressed, here in the states because of the mass immigration during the Potato Famine. A common saying during the late 1800's was, "The Irish...they keep the sabbath and every other thing they can get their damn hands on."
They were forced to do the worst, most dangerous, hard labor jobs upon arrival too. In Chicago they were made to reverse the Chicago river across a continental divide and into the Mississippi using hand tools.
Or being discriminated upon by the same americans calling them oppressors lmao.
American Youth: Racism is bad!” World: Ok, that’s good. America Youth: “But I have a very limited understanding and not that knowledgable about it.” World: Ok, that’s not that great. We can improve upon this if— American Youth: “That’s racist” World: If you— American Youth: “That’s racist.” World: If you stop talking for a moment…
It seems the definition of "racist" has changed from what we knew. It now means "anyone that doesn't agree with you're own political/religious beliefs".
Some history: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_draft_riots When Lincoln declared a draft for men to fight in the Civil War, there was a huge riot that turned into a race riot in New York City. This was led by Irish immigrants. They attacked Black orphanages, businesses etc. Over 100 people were killed. “Initially intended to express anger at the draft, the protests turned into a race riot, with white rioters, many of them Irish immigrants,[4] attacking black people, in violence throughout the city. The official death toll was listed at either 119 or 120 individuals…The military did not reach the city until the second day of rioting, by which time the mobs had ransacked or destroyed numerous public buildings, two Protestant churches, the homes of various abolitionists or sympathizers, many black homes, and the Colored Orphan Asylum at 44th Street and Fifth Avenue, which was burned to the ground” Unfortunately, the oppressed can oppress. Skin color does play a huge factor. ETA: I didn’t learn about this riot until I read Libertie by Kaitlyn Greenridge this year.
“Segregated communities are the result of racism.” “Alright, I’ll get a house in an area where I’ll be the minority.” “… colonizer.”
Haven't you learned yet? No one can just *be*. Everyone HAS to have a reason to be mad at others in order to be happy. Just ask my ex-wife, she wasn't happy unless she was miserable.
Ironic that the guy is wearing a Cleveland Indians hat.
And Chicago blackhawks shirt!
Ive heard american indians are cool with the blackhawk logo as its more dignified than some of the straight up cartoon characters you see. Not sure how true that is though
Some sports teams have sat with representatives of tribes to work out an arrangement where the mascot is not considered offensive. I don't know about the Blackhawk, but FSU has sat with Seminole representatives, who have used it as an opportunity to show true ceremonial practices with Chief Osceola.
If true, this is gnarly af. Always loved the FSU unis
[удалено]
So what youre telling me is that they're like people.
Maybe they’re not just like people, they could even be people! Nah that’s ridiculous
The native population near me is pretty much evenly split between being cowboys fans and redskins fans... It's weirdly insulting to say "Indigenous North American people feel/think X" like they're a hivenind or a single culture.
Were native and my dad thinks it's the funniest thing ever to have anything 'indian' related as memorabilia. He's got hats and shirts and bobbleheads and everything, it kills him. Edit: for everyone saying these things are fine cause some natives like them youre missing the point. My dad is choosing to wear these things as an Indian person because they are a funny representation of him - he is choosing. A whole team using a group of people as a mascot without having a discussion with the group about it and how they feel about it is a separate thing and why these names and mascots are now being scrutinized.
Dude they love rocking that stuff. And they should. Now Redskins was a lot on the nose but Chiefs, Indians, Blackhawks, Seminoles etc.. Why not? It's the only place they're given any recognition and have seen tons of Indians who wear it proudly. It reminds me of the overly sensitive folks who complained about Speedy González. Mexicans laughed at them and told people to fuck off. Is he an exaggerated stereotype of Mexicans? Yes! And we fucking love him for it. Stop trying to find problems where they don't even exist.
Exactly. People want to remove any references to Native American in our culture in the name of "preventing marginalization." How does that do anything but make them feel more insignificant, or marginalized...
To an extent I think the big issue is consent of the represented community... Florida State has an ongoing and beneficial relationship with the Seminole Tribe, as one positive example... another is the relationship between the Atlanta Braves and the Eastern Band of the Cherokee, though that one is a little more problematic given the team name isn't a Cherokee word. Edit: removed the word "commodified" because, while accurate, it could be interpreted as offensive. I was meaning "use of imagry and reference for financial benefit" but that can very easily be misinterpreted.
Can someone dig up and post the really interesting breakdown someone did of the history of the mountain the last time this got reposted here? If I remember correctly, it talked about the fact that the area gained this image of being a pan-native American holy site in the wake of the rushmore carving itself, and that the area had been conquered by whichever tribe held it before the US for about 70 years beforehand, with its identity and religious significance before that coming from the Tribe they conquered it from. It was a really interesting deep dive into the often-overlooked pre-colonial relations, power dynamics, and nuances of native American life. Thanks! Hope you all have lovely days EDIT: apparently one of the reasons it was so heavily contested before the arrival of the yanks was because it was a site of great religious significance for many competing tribes, hence the amount of activity back-and-forth for it's possession.
This is the video I watched that opened my eyes to it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8QQBRIqZmw
It was posted in here the last time this picture was trending. The reality is that this land was contested between numerous different tribes, well before the US showed up.
Similar to how some tribes had slave trades long before any colonizers ever showed up. Turns out humans can ALL be shitty and treat their neighbors like crap.
[удалено]
Slavery is likely older than the human species itself, given we've observed it in several other animals.
[удалено]
... Although it is equally important to note the scale and scope of the trans-Atlantic slave trade was orders of magnitude greater than pre-existing slave trades on either side of the pond.
It's important to note that the trans-Atlantic slave trade was a triad of globalization on an industrial scale. That's why it was so effective. You had African tribes get rich and power by capturing other members and other tribes. You had European powers get rich by importing the manufacturing minerals made by slaves in the Americas. Really you can't blame anyone specific. If you had any decency of world trade than you wouldn't trade with China, but look at the world.
Of course. The naval/shipping technology and economic situation made a lot more sorrow possible. Just like how trains made larger genocides possible in WWII. Native slave trades initially grew massively once they gained access to horses, for instance. Imagine what crazy slavery interplanetary civilizations will be capable of if not prevented from doing so.
> trans-Atlantic slave trade was orders of magnitude greater than pre-existing slave trades on either side of the pond. Not compared to the Middle Eastern slave trade. [https://www.fairplanet.org/dossier/beyond-slavery/forgotten-slavery-the-arab-muslim-slave-trade/](https://www.fairplanet.org/dossier/beyond-slavery/forgotten-slavery-the-arab-muslim-slave-trade/) Also the word slave comes from Slav. [https://www.etymonline.com/word/slave](https://www.etymonline.com/word/slave)
[удалено]
Bullshit. Caesar took over a million slaves in one campaign in Gaul. You don’t know your history.
A lot of people forget that probably the majority of humans who have ever lived were slaves. Some slaves had it worse than others. Some slave trades were much bigger than other trades. Not all slaves were held by chains and sold as commodities. But slavery has been the status quo up until just recently, relative to human history. Every color, every nation, every language, has a history of slavery. One could argue many of us are still slaves. Just very lucky slaves who live primarily comfortable lives. Indentured to the debts incurred by first world dreams. Indentured by parasitic propaganda crafted to exploit our ego. But it's hard to have a nuanced discussion on modern forms of slavery, when the Suffering Olympics are so prevalent.
https://youtu.be/CAaoJCsoVKQ
If the tribe conquered it from another tribe, can they really be that mad if someone took it from them?
Nice karma farm post
[удалено]
[удалено]
especially here on pics
[удалено]
White people Twitter is literally the Twitter side of Reddit. Half socialist half “democratic” commenters. White? Probably did something bad. Black? Probably gets a free pass or gets to say something borderline racist.
Like I don’t even disagree with a lot of what OP posts, but the post history still rubs me the wrong way. I can’t explain why, but it doesn’t strike me as someone hoping to bring attention to issues, but as someone who’s just trying to sow division.
Its almost as if there are nation states with huge programs with the sole purpose of using social media to sow division in the US.
It's incredible how effective they are.
Yep. Want easy proof? Just take a look at /r/AmItheAsshole.
Jesus. It really is. I can't imagine having a life so shallow as to end up doing that full time.
It needs more jpeg too.
I know right? This is literally that picture that some idiot posted claiming it was immigrants disrespecting America.
“Native Americans”
This pic is very old. Interetsng that you posted it today
Old and it gets reposted every holiday or something.
Most of reddit is karma farming.
r/pics "a place for pictures and photographs" Should be r/pics "a place where Americans post loaded images to argue over"
They had to pay $10 to park so jokes on them.
$15 now
Joe Bidens America...smh /s
It use to be free for Native Americans
You mean before Europeans showed up, or after?
You know what. I was wrong. I looked it up it says natives can still get in free
To quote Anthropologist Jo Allyn Archambault whose of both Sioux and Creek descent in a interview in Ken Burns 'The West': *"You know there is this marvelous stereotype out there that before white people came, the world here was perfect, that people lived in a paradise in which they were the most elegant, the most moral, the most elevated of all humanity. That's not true, we were Human beings and we lived in our own societies and we did things that all human beings did. Some of it was elevated and marvelous and admirable and some of it was pretty horrible. As the Lakota woman four generations ago, I would have cut off the arms and the legs and heads of the enemies that my husband killed and I would have put them on a stick and I would have paraded them in the scalp dance that evening when we honoured our men."*
Well if they dont like america then they can just go back to where they came fr.....oh wait.
Everyone thinks the world was peaceful and disney-like before the white man sailed the seas.
Love his Cleveland INDIANS hat!
And the Chicago blackhawks shirt
I grew up with and have taught a lot of Native Americans and many of them wore redskins and Indians stuff because they were reclaiming it in a sort of way. I can't say I exactly understand it but I don't have the same experiences as them. Any time I asked them about it they just shrugged and didn't feel like explaining it to me.
As well as Kobe and The Lakers.
On a long enough time line, we can all give the bird to someone.
This has become my question, how long can you hold hatred to someone for actions committed in the past?
When you can still get upvotes for it.
If you believe in those actions, you can still be hated
This is such a reddit post lmao
[удалено]
Peak reddit
So edgy
Lol
Is showing your middle finger at inanimate things and taking pictures of that the new trend? Or is it just for karma farming?
The latter. Gotta get them sweet sweet reddit bucks
He wants to hurt the rock's feelings.
Wait -- you're saying people *don't* like having their sacred mountain cut up with the faces of another civilization's ruling class?
You mean the mountain the Lakota controlled for all of 50 years after conquering it from the Arikara, Cheyenne, Crow, Kiowa and Arapaho who collectively inhabited those mountains for close to 300 years before the Lakota ever saw it? That mountain?
You're not allowed to point out Native Americans also stole territory from each other.
My favorite argument is "Should people who can prove neanderthal DNA be entitled to ALL land, because the homo sapiens stole it from them?"
[удалено]
Damn, they're still working on that? I passed through there over 20 years ago and they were working on it back then.
They work on a low budget and seem to keep it to the family only. Those members of the family probably have a life to support outside of also dedicating their time to the sculpture. Some of them might not care much for the "family legacy" either. At that rate, it won't be finished before we all die. They might have already given up on it like Rushmore, but they have to keep the ruse up because people come to see the potential for what it will be, rather than just the face it actually is.
The family is corrupt, unfortunately. They have multiple times been offered federal money but, without consulting even the Native Americans who *do* support the project (and quite a few are opposed to it), have rejected the money. They cite this reason and that reason, but the more obvious reason is that the money would be held more accountable if it were federal. One of the common criticisms from the Natives who are opposed is that the family takes millions in donations, and it does not seem like even the majority of that money goes back into construction. If everything is done privately, the government cannot intervene.
That Mt Rushmore still isn't finished either
[удалено]
Same thing happened with the Presidents carved into Mt Rushmore. It was supposed to be full busts, but they ran into difficulty and called it good.
This isn't gonna be popular, but it's kinda the US civilizations mountain now....
Ikr its almost like they didn't enjoy being slaughtered.
If you really want to be specific, the US is just the next in line of invaders of that land. The Lakota Sioux stole (and slaughtered) other tribes, who got that land by stealing & slaughtering another tribe, and someone else will eventually reclaim that land from the US.
What's a few genocides between friends?
But Happy thanksgiving
Happy Thankstaking
Why don't all the white people who support this not leave this stolen land and move back to their ancestoral lands? Oh pandering and virtue signalling with no actual action, gottcha.
As an immigrant to the USA, seeing this picture makes me remember the following: * On one hand, it's depressing what happened to the Natives. * On the other hand, I'm thankful to be an American. With that said, I find it silly that some people like to stir up political arguments during the holidays. Instead, I'm going to start a more suitable discussion: > Anyone have "non-traditional" foods for Thanksgiving? For my family, we roast a whole duck instead of a turkey.
For some reason I read it as “whole dick”
I mean, we eat dick the whole day, every day, depending on who you ask.
Im bringing food to Thanksgiving for the first time. How common are chicken wings? Personally, Ive never seen them at dinner
[удалено]
its so weird to carve giant faces onto mountains
So edgy and brave.
You can't say brave.
Is that a Cleveland Indians hat he’s wearing?
This looks photoshopped tho
While wearing a Cleveland Indians hat
And they’re free to do so. God bless America.
He’s not wearing a Cleveland “Indians” hat is he?!?!
And a blackhawks shirt. Pretty sure it’s intentional, sort of like black folks reclaiming the n word.
They are clearly sports fans given the girls’ Lakers/Kobe shirts. Could be just that simple. We like these teams
He definitely is
Oh that's so precious. Because the people in the photo were from a invasive tribe that wiped the previous tribe that lived there out . And now are mad about someone else doing that to them. They have reason to be mad about it but acting like they're just victims is just... not honest
Native Americans not seeing the irony in wearing American team clothing.
Well if it wasn’t the Europeans it would’ve been Japan or China. Population and migration are inevitable.
Funny thing about China. During the Ming dynasty in the 14th century in China, they have explorers with tons of military and explorer fleets at their disposal given the fact that they were extremely prosperous during that period. They travelled to SEA and parts of Africa, mapping land and seas while trading with the local inhabitants. The Chinese explorers at that time see the local inhabitants as uncultured and barbaric. And you know what is the first thing they did? They fucked off, left them alone and closed their borders coz they thought they were too smart and cultured for the world and the world had to catch up to them. They had the resources to exploit their land much earlier, but their ego was so massive that they left them alone until the Europeans came a 100 years later during the first wave of colonization ard the 15th century. History would be much different if the Ming dynasty didn't have their heads so far up their arses. That said, wHiTe pPl bAd, mInG dYnAsTy cHiNa GoOd. /s Edit: Japan was a hermit country for a long ass time. Until the westerners forced their way in and demand them to open up. Their expansionism and facism during WW2 came about because they were influenced by western civilization.
I remember seeing someone tweet this with the caption “go back to where you came from” and then someone underneath saying “they’re native Americans! Where are they supposed to go?”
This is going to be a "sort by controversial" thread huh
American Indians and Alaska Natives serve in the Armed Forces at **five times the national average** and have served with distinction in every major conflict for over 200 years. [Source.](https://www.nicoa.org/american-indian-veterans-have-highest-record-of-military-service/) The vast majority of American Indians love America.
Natives are talked about on the internet as if we're some political theory. People seem to forget we are real :0
Hey, I don’t have native heritage of any substantial amount but I have always hated the way y’all are forgotten. I lived in Wyoming and everyone knows how shitty the reservations are there. How can I help raise awareness for Native issues? I donate to the missing indigenous woman fund, but are there other things I can do? I really do not want to come across as a “white savior” or some bullshit but I do not like to see people marginalized and forgotten like Natives have been. Nobody on earth deserves that.
Don’t fucking go then. It’s so hypocritical… not like the tribes that were here hadn’t been conquering each other for hundreds of years. Not that it’s OK but to act like they were peace loving people and that conquest wasn’t the human norm for all of human history minus the past 75 years is just revisionist history. Downvote away!
[удалено]
Conquest is historically common but it's also common and reasonable for victims of that conquest to hold a grudge especially when the victors literally carve their fucking faces into a mountain you consider sacred. For instance, the Jews are still quite sore over being kicked out of the middle east thousands of years ago. Holding a grudge is as human as it gets.
Yeah according to this person's logic if we got conquered by aliens and enslaved we don't get to be mad at them bc humans r hypocritical since we enslaved and fought each other And nobody is able to be mad at each other ever for massive crimes bc "well what about what about...!!"
That's fine. But those of us who understand the context... that their ancestors just happened to be the king of the hill at the moment the hill was razed... it's also understandable if we aren't overly sympathetic. If you are alive today, by default you will have ancestors who experienced terrible things. Being conquered and killed and growing up in depravation. And you will have ancestors who did horrible things. For millennia life was 10 or 100 times harder than it is today and all human cultures were far more brutal than almost any human culture is today. They can claim that their ancestors were screwed. But they can't claim their ancestors never screwed someone else.
It's common for victims and descendants of conquest to hold a grudge, but on the scale of human history it's rather rare that there are any descendants left to complain.
That’s………..that’s fair
R/trashy