| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - All my heroes
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


All my heroes

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: All my heroes
    Posted: 14 Jun 2014 at 17:19
A picture says more than a thousand words...
A point of view from the antipodes
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4933
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Jun 2014 at 07:38
Pinguin:
So, after lambasting the US quite thoroughly in other threads, you now count the Norte Americano Indios as your heroes!
 
Unfortunately for the Indigenous North Americans, the white invaders eventually outnumbered the Indians and their armaments were far superior to the Indians.
 
All may have been well if the cowboys hadn't killed them back!
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
caldrail View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Rushey Platt
Status: Offline
Points: 1078
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote caldrail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Jun 2014 at 12:14
I think the subject is a little more complex than a simple "who's the bad guy" contest. There were good and bad individuals on both sides. The Indians of the reservations were often treated very badly by those agents supplying them, and on the other side, Apache indians often had a very negative opinion of Geronimo, who I notice was escorted by a US cavalry unit in custody, and eventually refused a return to Arizona, for fear the locals would commit violence against him.On the one hand you have people like Chief Joseph, whose quest for Canadian freedom won him respect from all sides, like Quanah Parker, who entered American politics as a representative of his people, compared to the accounts of some less noble characters who simply liked excitement and violence and saw the other side as an excuse to vent those motives. After all, much of the conflict was driven by greed and the appropriation of land, combined with an inherent conflict between a developing european-derived culture and a diverse stone age culture who already occupied the real estate.
http://www.unrv.com/forum/blog/31-caldrails-blog/
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Jun 2014 at 14:08
Well, I remember when I was young that this fascist actor John Wayne convinced the world killing Indians in mass was just fine. Afterwards, he tried to do the same with the Vietnamese during the Vietnam war but the threats of bombing the movie theaters keep the public out of his right wing genocidal movies.

Today the world has changed a bit, after discovering that American Indians are human beings.
The picture just turn around the argument of old times when the cowboys were the good people and the Indians the evils in the background.
A point of view from the antipodes
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Jun 2014 at 14:15
Originally posted by caldrail caldrail wrote:

After all, much of the conflict was driven by greed and the appropriation of land, combined with an inherent conflict between a developing european-derived culture and a diverse stone age culture who already occupied the real estate.


Although I agree with most what you say, it is the last paragraph what called my attention because it has a mistake. The Indians only had a "stone-age" culture after the arrival of the first settlers. The culture of the Indians the cowboys new was totally different the one at contact. For instance, the Apaches rode horses, had metal knives and riffles. Some of them even read the newspapers. Even more, many natives had some European blood in their veins. Even more interesting, Custer was defeated because native had at that moment better rifles than the U.S. army! Confused

Finally, although I am not certain if the natives that confronted the whites had metallurgy, it is clear that the people of Cahokia did have metal working, and so they weren't in the "stone age".
A point of view from the antipodes
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4933
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Jun 2014 at 15:41
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Well, I remember when I was young that this fascist actor John Wayne convinced the world killing Indians in mass was just fine. Afterwards, he tried to do the same with the Vietnamese during the Vietnam war but the threats of bombing the movie theaters keep the public out of his right wing genocidal movies.

Today the world has changed a bit, after discovering that American Indians are human beings.
The picture just turn around the argument of old times when the cowboys were the good people and the Indians the evils in the background.
Who back there buddy.
 
Firstly, John Wayne didn't star in many movies in which the massacre of Indians was a feature.
 
Secondly, John Wayne was every boys hero in my younger day, and not to be trifled with.
 
Thirdly, you've missed the point entirely with your reference to the Viet Nam War. It was a simply update of previous war films in which he'd appeared. I didn't hear of any threats to bomb movie theatres.
 
Regardless of what the movies makers intended back in those days, I think they in fact portrayed the Americans as murderous thieves hell bent in depriving the Indians of the food supply (Buffalo) and their lands. When the Indians had been subdued, they then turned on each other in greed to own the biggest and best farmlands-to the detriment of the small holders.
 
 
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Jun 2014 at 15:58
Well, perhaps you are right. Instead of attacking John Wayne, perhaps the perfect target is John Ford and its manifest destiny filmed on western movies
A point of view from the antipodes
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4933
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Jun 2014 at 16:01
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Well, perhaps you are right. Instead of attacking John Wayne, perhaps the perfect target is John Ford and its manifest destiny filmed on western movies
 
Who's John Ford?
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Jun 2014 at 16:18
John Ford was a movie maker.
A point of view from the antipodes
Back to Top
Panther View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 20 Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 4577
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Panther Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Jun 2014 at 09:13
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:



Today the world has changed a bit, after discovering that American Indians are human beings.
The picture just turn around the argument of old times when the cowboys were the good people and the Indians the evils in the background.


And i am here to tell you to watch out for that pendulum when it comes back your way.
Back to Top
Panther View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 20 Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 4577
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Panther Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Jun 2014 at 09:45
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:



Although I agree with most what you say, it is the last paragraph what called my attention because it has a mistake. The Indians only had a "stone-age" culture after the arrival of the first settlers. The culture of the Indians the cowboys new was totally different the one at contact. For instance, the Apaches rode horses, had metal knives and riffles. Some of them even read the newspapers. Even more, many natives had some European blood in their veins. Even more interesting, Custer was defeated because native had at that moment better rifles than the U.S. army! Confused

Finally, although I am not certain if the natives that confronted the whites had metallurgy, it is clear that the people of Cahokia did have metal working, and so they weren't in the "stone age".


He's not slandering natives. It is only his opinion pinguin, like your reply to him is. Deal with it as such.
 And he isn't as wrong as you believe. I am not specifically talking about the east or west coast natives, but plains Indians like the Apaches, Comanches or Sioux who lived their lives like they hadn't even started the stone age. They were basically nomads, hunter gathers, traders and occasionally warriors. However, that doesn't take away from his point that the Northern natives still lived their lives in the stone age period. There is little proof from that i have read that they were familiar with metal working.


Civilization in the North was not on par with the more complex societies of the Incas, Aztecs or Mayas. From what i have read and it's not a whole lot on this subject, my guess is they were an age or two behind their southern counterparts. That is if we can say that natives of the south were  just beginning to start a bronze age, but without the bronze. Wink er.... Wacko never mind. Anyways... i do think the Southern natives had a basic understanding of metal work, especially the Aztecs. Now if i can just recall which of my ancient history books i got this from?

This might make a interesting topic for another thread if it hasn't already been raised?

Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Jun 2014 at 10:14
Panther:
The point about "stone-age" peoples may be true at contact (circa 1600), but by the time of the expansion to the west (2 centuries later) natives not only have horses but also trade metal. For instance, as I said before, in the battle with Custer, natives had better rifles than the U.S. Army.
A point of view from the antipodes
Back to Top
caldrail View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Rushey Platt
Status: Offline
Points: 1078
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote caldrail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Jun 2014 at 10:55
@Pinguin

The native Americans were a stone age culture. A fairly diverse one it must be said - there wer big differences between eastern tribes, plains indians, pueblo dwelling indians, digger indians, and so forth. That doesn't mean they were unaffected by contact with settlers - the introduction of the horse by the Spanish created a whole genre of native American culture that became a stereotype of the Hollywood movie industry. However, those tribes adopting a semi-nomadic existence as horse-riding warriors and hunters were still essentially 'stone age', because they did not have the ability to extract and work metals, and simply traded or stole metal goods and weaponry from the settlers.

Whilst I stress the 'stone age', please don't believe that makes them 'unsophisticated'. The native Americans themselves, despite their tribal culture and limitations of development caused by lifestyle and enviroment, were still able to survive in an enviroment that most of would struggle to last more than a few days, even if we had a shootin' iron to hand (but then you'll only have so much ammo anyway).

Relations with the white man were always going to be strained. The massacre of Jamestown happened because a couple of indians wandered into town to see what these white men were doing, just out of curiosity. An unscrupulous trader gave them booze for some items they had, the indians quickly got blind steaming drunk, and in an unfortunate argument, hit a settler over the head and killed him in a spasm of rage. The two indians were hanged as murderers, and the outraged tribe then decided it was time for justice. And so it escalated.

My reading of period literature and correspondence from the AWI leaves a very broad range of behaviours in my mind. On the one hand, there were adventurers for whom the indian prsented merely a challenge to be overcome. There's suggestion of indians travelling to a white settlement in order to trade and shot dead simply because the gun owner responsible simply saw him as an enemy tribesman, oblivious to the idea that the approach was peqaceful.

Yet in some cases the relationship was very worjkable. There's mention in the AWI of people whose homes and farms were destroyed sought shelter with the Iroquois. No fear, no account of betrayal or barbarity, jst an example of frontier humanitarianism. Of course many frontiersmen and exploeres took native women as brides, although in fairness, white women very rarely became brides of indians unless they'd been taken as prisoners first.

The relationship between European settler and native American is a complex subject.
http://www.unrv.com/forum/blog/31-caldrails-blog/
Back to Top
Panther View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 20 Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 4577
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Panther Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Jun 2014 at 12:52
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Panther:
The point about "stone-age" peoples may be true at contact (circa 1600), but by the time of the expansion to the west (2 centuries later) natives not only have horses but also trade metal. For instance, as I said before, in the battle with Custer, natives had better rifles than the U.S. Army.


I don't doubt they had some sort of access to metal by the 19th century. But i have not once come across anything to suggest that they were knowledgeable in using the combination of metal, iron, copper, brass and ect... to set up an industrial business like a armory to make weapons such as guns or cannons. Therefore.... any weapons such as repeating rifles or a six shooter they had in their possession was a sure bet most of the natives got it through trade, or for the more hostile tribes sanctioned by the US government, theft or the unprincipled white traders that couldn't care less who they sold too.

I am sorry Pinguin but your example of the natives using repeating rifles & six shooters against the US Army at little big horn is suggestive only of the natives being shrewd traders who knew a good deal when they saw one, versus the stinginess of the US quartermasters department thinking single shot rifles and a six shooter were sufficient for the US Calvary on the plains. Little big horn was a wake up call for Washington D.C., the military's quartermaster department and Fort commanders on the plains that the hostile natives were gaining more and more access to superior weaponry equal to and in some instances superior to what US troopers were regularly assigned. 

Well, that... and Indian tactics were clearly superior to the tactics Custer naively adopted, which is, he divided his already meager forces in the face of superior numbers and charged stupidly into Native encampments with out waiting on his better armed infantry support.


Edited by Panther - 16 Jun 2014 at 12:54
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Jun 2014 at 02:28
Nobody said Natives had industrial technology. At that time, that was in possession of the English only and his former colony the U.S.

I just was pointing the term "stone-age" people is not only fuzzy but even offensive. As if the cowboys that won the west were had more knowledge for instance, giving the fact most of them were illiterate.
In fact, the white of culture had few reason to move from the industrialized east of the U.S.



Edited by pinguin - 17 Jun 2014 at 02:29
A point of view from the antipodes
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4933
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Jun 2014 at 03:18
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Nobody said Natives had industrial technology. At that time, that was in possession of the English only and his former colony the U.S.

I just was pointing the term "stone-age" people is not only fuzzy but even offensive. As if the cowboys that won the west were had more knowledge for instance, giving the fact most of them were illiterate.
In fact, the white of culture had few reason to move from the industrialized east of the U.S.

Different cultures advanced in different aspects at different rates, and dare I say it, depending on the frequency of contact with other cultures.
 
I don't think the term "Stone Age" is, or is intended to be offensive, it merely describes a time and culture. For example, the Australian Aborigines are said to have left Africa at least 60,000 YBP, and are believed to be the first wave of the OoA migrations. Their culture was very, very basic at the time of white settlement. The Ameroindians are believed to have left Africa much later, possibly loitered around Beringia for up to 10,000 years, before moving southwards into the Americas. They were more advanced than the Australian Aborigines would ever be, but are still considered by some to be Stone Age people.
 
Quote As if the cowboys that won the west were had more knowledge for instance, giving the fact most of them were illiterate.
 
Nevertheless, they were from a much more advanced culture.
 
Quote In fact, the white of culture had few reason to move from the industrialized east of the U.S.
 
Well, yes they did:
 
  • Basic curiosity.
  • Land for the expanding population to farm;
  • Gold;
  • Climatic conditions.
You've heard the old saying, "The grass is always greener on the other side of the hill"?
 
 
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Jun 2014 at 03:47
A small correction there. In the Americas, not all the natives were at the "stone age". Peruvians were at the "bronze age" and had an advanced metallurgy. By contrast, the most advanced civilization of the Americas who where the Mayans, who had math and writing among other cultural achievements, were in the stone age as much as any other Mesoamerican civilization.
A point of view from the antipodes
Back to Top
Panther View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 20 Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 4577
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Panther Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Jun 2014 at 04:45
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Nobody said Natives had industrial technology.


That was the allusion of your comment and that was how i interpreted it.

Quote
I just was pointing the term "stone-age" people is not only fuzzy but even offensive. As if the cowboys that won the west were had more knowledge for instance, giving the fact most of them were illiterate.


Well, that is because the natives, especially in north  America were still living in the stone age.  And the cowboys didn't win the west, they were often part of it's problem, especially after cattle drives and getting paid. Saloon towns throughout the West were horribly noisy affairs at those times. And yes, quite a lot of them were illiterate. Those few that weren't went on to be trail bosses or owner of their own cattle ranches.


Quote
In fact, the white of culture had few reason to move from the industrialized east of the U.S.


I would be interested in hearing why you think this?
Back to Top
Panther View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 20 Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 4577
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Panther Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Jun 2014 at 04:47
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

A small correction there. In the Americas, not all the natives were at the "stone age". Peruvians were at the "bronze age" and had an advanced metallurgy. By contrast, the most advanced civilization of the Americas who where the Mayans, who had math and writing among other cultural achievements, were in the stone age as much as any other Mesoamerican civilization.


Well, yes. That is basically what i have been saying. I thought you were reading my posts.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4933
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Jun 2014 at 05:09
Panther wrote to Pinguin:
Quote Well, yes. That is basically what I have been saying. I thought you were reading my posts.
 
Reading is one thing.
 
Understanding is another thing.
 
Being able to reconcile fact with ones own beliefs is quite another.
 
I would have thought that Pinguin, being so steadfastly South American would have chosen a Mayan or an Incan, or even an Aztec for his hero worship, rather than a "Norte Americano".
 
 
 
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
caldrail View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Rushey Platt
Status: Offline
Points: 1078
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote caldrail Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Jun 2014 at 11:10
Quote I just was pointing the term "stone-age" people is not only fuzzy but even offensive.

it isn't fuzzy. It's an assessment of their tool making capacity. If you think the idea of being 'stone-age' is offensive, then I would have to say you need to drop the romaticism and the rose tinted glasses. It's not a term of abuse, nor did I apply the term abusivel;y, and the whole reason for seeing the term as offensive is basically ignorance, connected with the brutish image of our ancestors portrayed by victorian sensibilities. In short, stop being so sensitive. Historically the native Americans of the frontier days were a stone age society influenced by european settlement. In some cases, such as the cherokee alphabet and newspaper, a good thing perhaps? In many cases, defintely not. After all, as I pointed out, the glorious imagery of the plains indians and their nomadic warrior/hunter lifestyle were only possible after the Spanish brought the horse to the continent. Then again - those native Americans were quick to make good use of the horse when they found them. One tribe stated that "We lost the corn" after riding horses - they had literally decided that agriculture (which evidently they had developed to at least subsistence level), was too much effort and horses a better bet - besides being much more agreeable to the human psyche. Notice also that one tribe named the horse "Four Dogs", which demonstrates firstly how the native peoples were getting their stuff around without horses, and also the relative value of logistical effort a horse could potentially provide on the frontier.
http://www.unrv.com/forum/blog/31-caldrails-blog/
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2014 at 03:13
It is fuzzy and absurd because it doesn't correlate with the level of advancement of a society. For example, the Toltecs had a society rooted in the trade of obsidian... a volcanic glass or in other terms a simple "stone". Toltecs were indeed a very advanced society of the so called "stone-age". The same can be said about Mayans.

On the other hand natives of Peru, the Inuit (in the Americas), the mongols and most tribes of Eurasia and Africa had knowledge of metalworking... but weren't at level of Mayans or Toltecs in culture, civil society or technology.

Choosing a stone as a "marker of advancement" is naive. It could easily be said, for example, that that rubber marks advanced or simple civilizations, or gunpowder, or paper, or concrete, etc. Why to chose just metals to qualify the advancement of societies is blind.


A point of view from the antipodes
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2014 at 03:35
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

I would have thought that Pinguin, being so steadfastly South American would have chosen a Mayan or an Incan, or even an Aztec for his hero worship, rather than a "Norte Americano".
 

First Mayan and Aztec aren't South American. Mayan is North and Central American and Aztec is North American. Second, I admire North American Natives as much as the rest of Amerindians of the New World. And third, all my heroes killed Cowboys, Vaqueros or whatever came partially or fully from abroad. Wink
A point of view from the antipodes
Back to Top
Panther View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 20 Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 4577
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Panther Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2014 at 07:12
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

I would have thought that Pinguin, being so steadfastly South American would have chosen a Mayan or an Incan, or even an Aztec for his hero worship, rather than a "Norte Americano".
 

First Mayan and Aztec aren't South American. Mayan is North and Central American and Aztec is North American.


I guess it is all relative on where a person lives. The Mayans and Aztecs were  Central American civilizations, but to an Inca or yourself, they might have been considered Northerners. But to me, they are south of me, so.... Being either Southern or Central civilizations seems to be interchangeable with me.

Quote
Second, I admire North American Natives as much as the rest of Amerindians of the New World. And third, all my heroes killed Cowboys, Vaqueros or whatever came partially or fully from abroad. Wink


Well pinguin, this is where you and I disagree. I do repeatedly find heroic qualities are often exhibited by anyone from anywhere with no special reservation of valor being confined to any one specific ethnicity, regardless of the issue that drives it. People do good and bad things. American natives were just as often as vile, brutal, cruel and evil with not only whites, but also towards other native tribes. That was just the way life was back then.
Back to Top
Captain Vancouver View Drop Down
Council Member
Council Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Location: Vancouver Isle
Status: Offline
Points: 2160
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Captain Vancouver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2014 at 16:00
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Nobody said Natives had industrial technology. At that time, that was in possession of the English only and his former colony the U.S.

I just was pointing the term "stone-age" people is not only fuzzy but even offensive. As if the cowboys that won the west were had more knowledge for instance, giving the fact most of them were illiterate.
In fact, the white of culture had few reason to move from the industrialized east of the U.S.


Whites had every reason to go west, as one of the biggest land grabs in history was afoot, and fortunes were being made, at the expense of aboriginals.

To be fair though, one of the reasons this was so was because of the glaring gap between the tribal culture of aboriginals, and the industrial culture of Europe. There was nothing fuzzy about this. Aboriginals were often astounded at the inventions of whites, and sought possession of such things for themselves. Racial views of whites at the times allowed for exploitation that today we would consider unsavory.

Romanticizing primitive peoples usually come up against the uncomfortable fact that life could be pretty grim for them, in comparison to the comfortable existence we have today, sitting about sipping coffee, and quoting from the accumulated knowledge of history. Violence, torture, slavery, and death were often no more than a stone's throw away (no pun intended).
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2014 at 02:43
We won to Spain 2-0!!!! Let me celebrate!!! At last we Indians won!!
A point of view from the antipodes
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4933
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2014 at 03:48
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

We won to Spain 2-0!!!! Let me celebrate!!! At last we Indians won!!
 
A convenient time to go off topic, but I think you can see that some of us disagree with your train of thought, which I think has derailed.Smile
 
I find in unpalatable that one would hero worship people simply on the basis that they had killed other people.
 
To iconise troops who have gone into battle in order save a way of life or to defend their countrys values is one thing, but purely on the basis that they killed people-never!
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2014 at 04:24
Please, don't be an hypocrite, friend.
In the pre-political correctness age white people used to say "the only good Indian is the dead Indian!!!" and things like that. You must understand the poster is a joke.
A point of view from the antipodes
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4933
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2014 at 04:31
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Please, don't be an hypocrite, friend.
In the pre-political correctness age white people used to say "the only good Indian is the dead Indian!!!" and things like that. You must understand the poster is a joke.
 
OK, but your sense of humour is sometimes a little difficult for me to comprehend.
 
But I agree with your comment about Indians, when I was young, the saying was "The only good Pom (Englishman) is a dead Pom, and if you find a good one, shoot him before he turns bad."
 
And this from the mouths of people with English ancestry!
 
Of course it was meant as a joke, but these days it wouldn't be seen as such.
 
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
Captain Vancouver View Drop Down
Council Member
Council Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Location: Vancouver Isle
Status: Offline
Points: 2160
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Captain Vancouver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jun 2014 at 05:39
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

We won to Spain 2-0!!!! Let me celebrate!!! At last we Indians won!!

Yep, but they still have all your silver and gold.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.