prejudice against Indians (Native Americans)

being part Indian myself.(black foot my oma war 1/2) and having seen how Ira Hayes (no count drunken Indian) was treated by the people of the USA (wemisticashiw, white people) I am greatly amazed that we can show on the silver screen how prejudice so ingrained and overflowed our society as to call him "chief" talk about his "wig-wam" refuse him service or accomodations. and he was the man on the end of the flag raising whose hand has left the pole. though I am not a Marine but an Army puke , I really think that the corps and everyone else made sure that he stayed a drunk

 

I found these two articles about him to be of quite stark contrast - not so much because of what is mentioned, but rather what is not mentioned, in the second article:
<http://www.thegoldweb.com/voices/irahayes.htm>
<http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/irahayes.htm>

 

There was a huge kafuffle in Calidonia (about three hours drive or so from my place...I think) about Native lands. They claimed a mile on either side of some river for a length of like 50 miles or something. They threatened to get voilent and a guy I know said they should have....then the military and RCMP would get involved. He lives in the area.

The local Canadian Tire has lost thousands of dollars worth of inventory because the Natives just take whatever they need.

I think it got solved but I wouldn't be surprised if it started again.

At least in Canada, they complain a lot about the Federal government taking thier land and not giving them enought money....but a lot of them are on welfare and won't get off thier butts. At least we won't take some American tourists (this has nothing agaisnt Americans but jerks like this aren't good for PR) plan into action: give 'em smallpox infected blankets (Yeah, the person I heard that off wanted to kill the guy right there and then)

 

There are a few examples of highly decorated Natives in the Canadian armed forces none that I can call of the top of my head by there are some.

 

Hmm..not sure what you are getting at. I haven't seen the Eastwood film yet.
Why blame the Corps for his alcoholism or the American people for that matter? I don't think that everyone who faces discrimination turns to alcoholism. AFAIK it is well established that Indian people have a genetic predisposition towards alcoholism and it can't all be blamed on despair over discrimination.
From what I have read of Hayes he would reveal when drunk that he felt that he was unworthy to have received the MOH and to be considered a hero. Perhaps that had something to do with why he drank himself to death.

 

Indians were not genocided by civilised men, but from European fugitives prisoners and getaways. Until the great migration to the west, the american nation comprized of criminals and people who whould normally be treated like them

 

What? every person who went there was a criminal? I really don't think that's true. What you have posted is merely opinion and can be taken as an attack on our members from Canada or the USA.

I am looking forward to their rebuttals of this, as they will do it far better than I can.

 

Gosh funny hearing that from and Englishman, whose commentators at every test match take great care to outline the fact that Australia is an island of convicts

Seriously now, upon the suject of Indian discrimination, A South African once told me in casual conversation that the only reason Apratheid was NOT prevaelnt in Australia was because the colonists killed off all the natives beforehand... I am sure this is true because not only do Aboriginals make up a suspiciously small portion of our population, but it seems we do not have half as much historic or political interest Aboriginal culture as America do to their native population... Hell, I don't remember learning about it in school, all we learnt about was Britain Britain Britain Co-incidence? Or something more?

 

I didn't say that EVERY one was a criminal! I just said that the majority of the population was like them! Remember that a popular criminals' sentence was to be sailors on govermental ships. For example, most of Colombus crew were such! Other criminals were treated like slaves and therefore mounted ships that sailed across the Atlantic Ocean. Last, potential fortune hunters colonised the first settlements in search for gold, others for slavery etc

 

Who you calling English? I'd watch that or I'll sic some of my relatives down there on you , funnily enough not one of them was transported.

Also being sewrious, I seem to recall a "bounty" being paid some time in the 1800s' for every aborigine. Just as in America a bounty was paid for every Indian scalp - I don't recall wether that was originated by the Spanish, French or British/Americans.

PS you can keep the Ashes - cricket is boring

 

You should actually read some history before you try to educate others. Your comments are insulting and inaccurate. The vast majority of American colonists were not comprised of prisoners and criminals.

 

I'm going to back Grieg on this one. That statement is wildly inaccurate. You would do well to read a little bit about US/North American history prior to making any further comments like that.

I won't deny that many of the original colonists and explorers came looking to make their fortunes. That does not make them criminals.

 

Should I read the books that they teach you in school? I don't think they will be very accurate... I have a close friend at Chicago and he says that most of the history they are theacing you is from a wrong point of view.

 

I'm not sure how you can justify calling e.g. large parts of the entire population of Ireland criminals.

Many people travelled to the 'new world' because living conditions in their home countries were very poor. One example is the Irish potato famine, which forced many Irish families to flee Ireland or starve.

I think you are confusing Australia and the US.

Bashing the US because of slavery is wrong too. Brazil was a far greater taker of black slaves than the US, and many western European countries made fortunes using slaves in their colonies.

 

I think you are right to act like this... I was refering to the period before 1650 AD. OK now? No offense to any people! Then, Christian, I was not refering to American slavery, but European criminals who served as slaves. Buccaneers, pirates, corsairs, all of them made early America as their home

 

The majority of the early American colonists came from England for commercial reasons, religious reasons and a desire to start over in a "new world". Later, the Netherlands, Spain, France, Germany and Ireland provided large numbers of immigrants. The pirates and buccaneers you erroneously refer to as making up the majority of American colonists were based mainly in the Carribean and were relatively small in number.
The European slaves you refer to didn't exist. Did you perhaps mean indentured servants? Indentured servants normally signed a contract to labor for a certain number of years in exchange for passage to America. They weren't criminals but were poor and trying to improve their lot in life.
Many were indentured to serve as apprentices in trades like blacksmithing so that at the end of their contract they possessed a marketable skill.

Before I go to the trouble of posting sources that refute your remarks perhaps you can tell us which books you read that convinced you that the majority of early Americans were criminals?

 

I am the real Zeratul. I was unaware that my brother was using my account. Sorry for the inconvinience. If you don't want the posts written by him in this topic to be viewable, you can erase them.

 

There was a 2-hour piece on the History Channel last night titled "The Flag Raisers of Iwo."
It was narrated by Gene Hackman... an ex-Marine himself.

At one point, in discussing Ira Hayes, it was explained that when the "survivors" were returned to "The States" their money was no-good. Everyone wanted to buy (MANY) drinks for these lads, and Ira got his fair-share. He--and the others--felt that the "heroes" were buried at Iwo, and they were very uncomfortable about their new-found celebrity.

Ira Hayes was prone to having a drinking problem as it were, though it is questionable whether this was due to his "Native American" background or not. He ultimately died of exposure in Arizona after a night of drinking and card-playing in 1953. It might have been that he lost too many buddies, and saw too-many horrors at Iwo, as he was never quite the same man when he returned. Being honored as a War-Hero was a label he could not adjust to in peacetime.

It also underscored the vital nature of the 7th War Bond Drive they were a part of. The USA was going broke, and they raised something like 25 BILLION dollars from this tour. The American people were also very tired of war after 4 years, and these fine young-men were instrumental in reassuring the American public we were winning the war.

Sadly, by the time they had identified the participants, most were already dead on Iwo.

Tim

 

The post was edited and changed 1750 to 1650. I will point out for the sake of accuracy that the European population of the American colonies prior to 1650 was too small to have any meaningful effect on overall population paterns occurring later. For instance the population in 1620 was estimated at 2300 and in 1630 it was 4600. Even by 1650 the population of the entire North American colonies was about 50,000.

 

The colony (now state) of Georgia was established to help relieve the overcrowded debtors prisons in England. That does not mean that every colonist who lived in Georgia was a debtor or a criminal.

Let's not forget that the Native Americans had very bloody wars between themselves and held grudges for a long time.