What do Americans think of Native Indians?

HomeCheese said:
Let's be real, most of us don't know any or know only a few native Americans. There are very few of them left. I spent a month on a reservation near where I lived and did some consulting with a few Native American Health Centers. I have lots of respect for their culture and what they have gone through. They are people like the rest of us.

I was in Montana of business in the mid 90's and took a tour of Little Big Horn and Custer's last stand. It's hard not to feel happy for the victory for the Native Americans. If I remember correctly it was their largest victory in all the conflicts they had with the US killing something like 180 soldiers. I believe the US troops saw the native's women and children off in the distance and decided to attack them and hold them as ransom against the men. As they were riding towards them they stumbled into the men and were all of the sudden trapped into a fight and lost. The troops had guns and many of the natives had bow and arrows.

On a side note, we always thought my ex wife was part Mexican - It even says Mexico on her birth certificate. Turns out she and my kids are part Apache. Hell yeah.
Click to expand...

If think I recall excavations determining that the Natives has Sharps carbines, which were technologically superior to the armament of Custer’s men. Could be wrong.
 
I always wonder what their societies were like before the small pocks epidemics that wiped like over 90% of them out. In south America too. The two continents basically experienced an apocalyptic event with those disease outbreaks and the Europeans later arrived in a post apocalyptic world a couple gens later.
 
I’m not saying it’s right what happened to their land, but groups of people have displaced each other by force all through history. We took the land from natives, who took it from the group before them. Also America is the best thing to ever happen to the Indians. Can you imagine if Europeans hadn’t landed here? The natives had no technology and they would not have developed any. North America would be no different than Africa today. Undeveloped and run by warlords, one guy who has a gun can rule you because you don’t have anything but a stick to fight with.
 
JonnyRingo84 said:
right.

50%-90% of all natives in north and south america were killed mostly from running across the diseased pigs that conquistadors left behind in the 1500's. pigs swept across the continents like a wildfire...an animal new to the western hemisphere, as so many were from the old world. the vast majority of natives died never even knowing that whites existed. the stereotypical native on horseback didnt even exist until the 1600's, when horses were brought back to the continent from europeans.

the fighting and ethnic cleansing was real too, sort of.

as far as "wiping out" native populations with violence....that is fiction. cortes never would have had a shot in hell in defeating the aztecs, even with guns, had it not been for disease. he had to flee at one point and return after 3 years with more men. when he came back, most of tenochtitlan was dead. even still, they gave cortes allllll he could handle.

people were slaughtered by whites. babies even. but not ALL whites, and not in numbers high enough to make a dent in overall native pop. from columbus' first day on the beach, there were ALWAYS factions of euros that wanted to treat the natives well, and those that wanted to rape, kill, and or push them out. those factions would exist in our own US govt until the early 20th century.
Click to expand...



tenor.gif
 
A lot of this is about perspective -we know our own history, so hindsite is easier to judge. Some of the tribes people feel bad for now erased the names of the tribes before them. Hard to feel bad for someone you don’t even know about. Like someone said earlier in the thread -today we don’t truly know the beasts we really are, and always have been.


This period of ‘judgement’ and ‘enlightenment’ a lot of us lucky enough to be born 1st world reside in currently is just a grain of sand in an endless desert of human history.
 
They are fine.

The Indian tribes out west were a little darker than the Indians from the east.

But like everyone else on the planet they got lighter over the years by having white ancestors.
 
Have to admit everytime i write the word Indian i have wondered if it was ok to do so.
A couple of years back i was listening to a speech by someone about repirations for blacks in America. The speaker, who was black himself, mentioned that some Native tribes had African slaves. I'd never heard of that before, or since actually, is it factually correct, anyone know?
 
The Hash Slinging Slasher said:
I’m not saying it’s right what happened to their land, but groups of people have displaced each other by force all through history. We took the land from natives, who took it from the group before them. Also America is the best thing to ever happen to the Indians. Can you imagine if Europeans hadn’t landed here? The natives had no technology and they would not have developed any. North America would be no different than Africa today. Undeveloped and run by warlords, one guy who has a gun can rule you because you don’t have anything but a stick to fight with.
Click to expand...

not all natives were the same. you're talking about 2 continents of people. some of them were murderous savages like the mongols or the hun. others were so peaceful we havent even found weapons when their villages and cities are excavated. so no, not everyone has killed and murdered for their place in the world.

the europeans landing caused the worst plague in human history, so no, it wasnt the best thing that ever happened to them.

the aztec, inca, and mississippian empires had technology comparable to that of the old world. they didnt have guns, or steel, but thats because they didnt have the domesticable animals that helped you create such things back then. tenochtitlan was larger than any euro city at the time, and better organized.

africa is completely different. the animals, parasites, diseases, and climate throughout much of africa make it impossible to create new york city or tokyo there, even if everyone who lives there is albert einstein. not to mention the fact that nearly all of those countries only gained their independence from colonizers in the 1950s lol. thyeve only been countries less than a century. give them a f'ing chance to develop. would have been a totally different situation in north and south america. stop pulling nonsense out of your ass.
 
squeezewax said:
Have to admit everytime i write the word Indian i have wondered if it was ok to do so.
A couple of years back i was listening to a speech by someone about repirations for blacks in America. The speaker, who was black himself, mentioned that some Native tribes had African slaves. I'd never heard of that before, or since actually, is it factually correct, anyone know?
Click to expand...

many natives own the title "indian" now. some will correctly point out, that any person born in the USA is a "native american." so "american indian" distinguishes them from other americans. however, some are understandably not cool with "indian" since they arent from F'ing india or the indies lol.

there were like 3 indians that owned slaves lol. african slaves, that is. the cherokee were basically told to assimilate and be white, otherwise theyd be a block to progress, and be moved out of the southeast usa. so then they assimilated. some owned slaves. businesses. homes. banks. then whites got pissed that they owned things, and pushed them out anyway ("trail of tears"). some native groups like the aztec were famous for owning slaves, but they enslaved other natives, not africans. then there were groups that thought slavery immoral, just like any other large groups of people in the world.
 
lowlife said:
Your "sisters" have a deep manly voice? I shudder to consider that family tree lol.
Click to expand...

No, I mean you crying about people other than your own that have a hard time. The down trodden and all that.
 
I am of the belief that some of the groups that cropped up after the indigenious apocalypse by disease were groups similar to the gangs in the mad max series of films. But instead of crazy cars they had horses and they probably wrecked havoc on the more peaceful tribes.
 
lowlife said:
What you attempted is not conversation, yes indeed you are a retard. Carry on simpleton.
Click to expand...

I assume you’re Caucasian and an American , would you have preferred if the Indians had won?
 
Gambler500 said:
I assume you’re Caucasian and an American , would you have preferred if the Indians had won?
Click to expand...
Oh lawd now the retard is making assumptions lol..stop embarrassing yourself, you tried to insult me and failed miserably. Not sure why you want shit with me but you're wasting your time, go to sleep buddeh tommorows a new day.
 
squeezewax said:
In general, how are American Indians viewed by society?
Also are there common misconceptions about them?
Are they looked down upon?
What percentage of the population are Indian?

I just finished watching a documentary about Custer and the battle at Little Bighorn and it was very good too. One thing i noticed from the show was the Indians i saw in old black n white photos from that time period were quite dark skinned, yet whenever i've seen a modern day Indian on a programme their skin has been a lot lighter. Why would that be? I suppose different tribes from various parts of the country have their own skin hue, is it that?
Click to expand...
Fuck Custer....POS...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,786
Messages
55,516,941
Members
174,806
Latest member
hardscarf

Share this page

Back
Top