Question about America : genocide

[Xenomorgue]

First off there was no "genocide" of the native American people. Unfortunately, of the ones that died 99% were from diseases that that Europeans brought to this continent. Only about 1% died from bullets in battle.

I don't think that is true. Please provide a link to reliable source to support your claim.

I live in Arizona by the way. 33% of which is sovereign Indian nation. That's right, they have their own nation within ours and they already recieve special payments and favors that I don't.

Favors...? A few weeks ago there was an hour long documentary on Belgian television about the Navaho reservation. It was depressing to see the living conditions. Even worse is that federal government has granted permission (against the wishes of the Navaho people) for open uranium mining. The toxic dust pollutes the air and the water of the wells. As a result there are many cases of cancer among the Navaho people.

And if you believe some historians [I don't] the Indians walked across a land bridge and settled here...

Genetically Native Americans are similar to Siberian people. So in the scientific community there is little doubt that the people spread from Asia to America.

.....so they're not even from here.

Now what is this supposed to mean!?!? Native Americans settled about 20,000 years ago on the then unpopulated American continent. Are you saying this is insufficient to support the claim that the Native Americans are/were the rightful owners of the land?

And they sure as hell weren't doing anything to develope what was here.

Do you mean that there is an obligation for stone age people to develop the land in accordance with European standards, and on failure to do so these people can be killed and their land seized in the name of progress?

Thank God the Europeans came here and created this Nation.

If there is a benevolent God, I don't think that He is too pleased that genocide is being justified in His name. The first commandment is: Thou shall not kill.

[Xenomorgue]

Finally, while BushCo's activities get most of the press, there are many Americans who do not support the Iraqi invasion, the use of torture, or any other activities this administration is involved in which violate our Constitutional rights or the human rights of others.

That it is not much of revelation. In every country, from Cuba to Venezuela to Russia and China, you will find people who disagree with the policies of their government.

Criticism of those policies is well placed; blanket condemnation of the people of this nation is not.

Now you are moving away from a discussion of morals and politics --i.e. content-- to Political Correctness --i.e. style and semantics.

I think that is unfair. This is an internet forum, where people from different parts of the world can discuss all kinds of matters. Often not in their first language. That is not a problem, usually the message still comes across. "Porn company X is awful." That is not criticism of the people who work there, it simply means the poster does not like the products of company X. People use generalizations all the time. At ADT where you, Hardware, have been a moderator for some years, many examples of crude generalizations and blanket condemnations can be found. "The French are cowards", "Palestinians are terrorists", "muslims are evil" etc. Hardware, what was your role as a moderator? Did you have concerns and if so, what did you do?

Now about this thread. Please note that my criticism is directed:
(1) First and foremost against US governments, past and present, for causing immense suffering and for denying responsibility.
(2) Secondly against all the high ranked people (politicians, the military, lawyers, secret service staff) who carry out these policies and who give legal protection to all those involved.
(3) Thirdly against the government in my country (Netherlands) and the rest of the EU, for turning a blind eye to these violations (e.g. the rendition and imprisonment of foreigners on European soil), for staying silent on Guantanamo and for participating in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

As you see, that is very different from a "blanket condemnation" of the American people. However, I do think that it is permitted and relevant to ask WHY the majority of the American people have opinions and political views that leads them to: elect and re-elect Bush and co; support current human rights violations; be indifferent about past injustices.

[Priapus]

My two cents:

Yes, what happened to the aboriginal peoples of North & South America is a grand-scale example of the near eradication of one civilization by another. That's what happens in history when a technologically superior, aggressive civilization confronts another. The story of the Indians in the US is indeed a great shame and the major tragedy of this nation (along with slavery).

Yes, they were inexorably and at times systematically dispossessed of their land from the 17th thru the 19th centuries; yes there were countless massacres; yes they've been left to languish on the reservations. (The stoy is much more complex and varied as to time and place but we'll try tokeep it simple for now.) But first of all you must have historical perspective. The standards of civilization become quite different as one goes back in time. Contemporary morality and historical explanation are two equally valid, but very different ways of understanding the world. Intelligent people, like Xeno, know there's more than one way to skin a cat.

First of all, let's not overlook what the Spanish, French, British & others accomplished in this hemisphere before there was even a US. Do they owe compensation as well? What is the statue of limitations on genocide? In fact, I would not characterize this long, complex story as a genocide in the modern sense, because it was not carried out as a systematic, closely coordinated plan as by the Nazis. That's why characterizing the Armenian massacres is so contentious. Ethnic cleansing or genocide? -- you make the call. Is the Turkish government liable for events that transpired in a completely different state almost a century ago? (I dont think so. But they should definately get over their chauvinism, recognize historical facts and stop surpressing the Kurds. They should be confident enough of their nationhood that they dont need to be in denial anymore about the ethnic and cultural diversity of modern Turkey.) But people are naturally very sensitive about their shortcomings, and dont take kindly to outsiders like the EU or US telling them how to evaluate their own history. Let me say the worst about my own family, but if someone else gives them any shit, they'll make me steaming mad!

And how long must Germany bear the guilt of the Nazi regime? To the fourth generation? My ancestors, the Irish, suffered centuries of oppression under the British, and the wounds are still not healed. Where's my compensation? Am I, the descendant of oppressed immigrants, myself somehow personally responsible for the oppression of aboriginal Americans or contemporary Iraqis? Maybe not, but such tragic episodes do makes me feel ashamed of this country and of humanity. I might claim some portion of this nation's collective guilt, but that's my cross to bear. Nobody's innocent; we all have blood on on our hands and we've all suffered. None of us need to be told off by someone who doesn't also claim a share in our communal experience.

Just a few other comparable cases. If anyone thinks Australia or New Zealand have done any better by their native peoples, they'd do well to check the facts. The eradication of the aborigines of Tasmania is a dismal story indeed. What happened to the Hottentots and others when the Dutch settled South Africa? There are hundreds of examples from the European colonial period alone. I dont hear any mea culpas from the Belgians these days about the massive atrocities perpetrated in the Congo. That country and most of the continent are still reeling from the legacy of European exploitation. Why do people prefer to tell others to clean up their act, when they have piles of shit in their own backyard?

As Walter Benjamin famously put it: "There is no document of civilization which is not at the same time a document of barbarism." Like it or not America is an extension of European civilization, and we all have a share in the same legacy, the good and the bad. Imperialism & ethnic cleansing are a nasty business, but i don't think America has exercised any historical monopoly therein. It's this country's misfortune to be on the dominant world power these days while Europe has the good fortune to be a post-imperial super-state whose society maybe evolving into something more rational, more humane.

In fact, the US used to be respected by colonized peoples (at least outside the Western Hemisphere) earlier in this century for its opposition to British & French imperialism. But we Americans have squandered whatever goodwill we had left after Vietnam in this ongoing Middle East debacle. It may well rank as the third great tragedy in American history. Yeah, we've been bad actors abroad, especially since American hegemony was established after WWII. But this neo-con cabal which took over and hoodwinked the nation have exploited America's position of power for the own diabolic purposes. How did Bush get elected? How does any figurehead get put in place?. Cheney & the gang installed him as part of their conspiracy to fulfill the Nixonian imperial project and the Reaganite vision of an Americanized world. Power follows its own ruthless logic and imperial power is the most unwieldy force in politics. It is hardly restrainable by the best intended considerations of responsibility and humanitarianism. One may attempt to combat it by establishing an alternative basis of power, but the logic remains the same. Only by subverting the paradigm, a negative dialectic if you will, can despair be staved off for another moment. (I'm not trying to be cryptic, just a small existential lapsus calami.)

By the way, I think Xeno betrays typically European romantic notions about America's Indian experience. First, concepts like "ownership of the land" in the European legal sense did not exist among America's aboriginal population, which made it so easy to rip them off in the first place. Hitler was a great student of cultural cleansing, and he admired the North American example because he saw in it a policy of expropriation and eradication, yielding a "pure" dominant race, as opposed to the Mestizo caste which came to dominate in the Spanish colonies. Despite what Hitler thought, there's been a long history of intermarriage between natives and settlers in North America. It's not so easy to document, but it's often the case that conquered peoples are not so much exterminated as absorbed. How do you think all those Quebecois bachelors propagated themselves without any nice French-e-Girls around?. If the pioneers had to resort to porno instead of squaws out in the frontier zone, i reckon the American population would have a very different genetic basis. Consider the case of the Germans and the Slavs, as many of our central European members would acknowledge is anything but cut and dry. Hitler was very wrong indeed.

The Indians who managed to retain their tribal status are indeed but a remnant. But you seem to be good with figures, Xeno, so why don't you collect some estimates and do the math. Populations of both Indians and settlers were quite small by today's standards back in the pre-industrial era. But it's not really about the numbers in the end. The problem that confronts us today involves something recently diagnosed as "collective trauma", which occurs when a people are stripped of the content of their cultural identity over generations without recourse to either assimilation or
their own heritage as a living tradition. This trauma is the social disease which you've seen in that documentary on the Navajos. These people dont need mere handouts from the government (casinos are just a gravy train for the tribe intended to serve the state and exploit the weak). But they do need the means to effect some sort of cultural renewal within the reality that is 21st century America. Or would you prefer that we descendants of immigrants just pack it all up, give back the land to its rightful owners and return to Europe (or wherever else our ancestors came from)? How would the Euro-mensch feel about taking in a few hundred million needy returnees? And you think it's crowded now!

I have neither the time, the inclination nor the expertise to assemble a coherent explication of American Indian history. Why dont you, Xeno, if you really care about the subject, have a look, for starts, at the brilliant historical trilogy collectively known as The Covenant Chain by Francis Jennings (The Invasion of America; The Ambiguous Iroqouis Empire; Empire of Fortune). This will take you through the the Seven Years War, known as the French and Indian Wars in American history. Then you can start to investigate those revered Cowboys and Indians of the West, so Romantically portrayed in the works of Karl May.

(Please accept my observations, put them in your clay peace-pipe and smoke it up, Dutch Boy! I dont need to provide any footnote citations to disabuse you of your heartfelt, but misguided crusade to call America to task for its crimes against humanity. Your clearly obsessed, so why dont you come to the states and set up your tepee out on the reservation and lead the braves to their long overdo revenge. Then you can go liberate the Arabs from the Yankee yoke, Lawrence of the the Polderland!)

(By way of further ad hominem venting let me tell you about a friend, an old man of Dutch citizenship living in New England. He still receives a generous compensation stipend from the Dutch govt for what happened to him and his family during the occupation. Bravo! Well-done! Still, he has nothing but contempt for the Dutch people. I personally love the Netherlands and have spent quite a bit of time there and have no real interest in attacking you or your people. I dont think you have a clue what "political correctness" means since you're way of thinking reflects the most abject, holier-than-thou sort of PC bullshit. So please, Mijnheer van Xenophobe, get off your high horse, spare me your well-known Dutch "tolerance" and grind your Indian hatchet elsewhere!)

This debate is really just symptomatic of current divergences between American and European political values, but please remember there are plenty of fair-minded, descent people in every country. Let's rise above it and try to become citizens of the world.

Let me finally add that, upon reviewing what had been written, Hardware really said most of what needed in rebuttal to X's screed. And in all fairness, X-man himself makes several valid points and many facts, but their presentation is utterly tendentious and his conclusions utterly fatuous. This is at least what i've attempted to demonstrate here.

Sorry, i kind of got my back up there, but it's soooo easy to criticize the US for real and supposed crimes and misdemeanors. It's clear that there's some latent resentment lurking behind such hollow America bashing. I wont say that's exactly the case with you Xeno; I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that your motives are pure and unbiased. We are actually mostly in agreement on the substantiative political issues of the day. America is fucked up for sure, but it's simple-minded to blame it for everything that ails humanity these days. That's the same trap that the Arabs fall into when they blame the Israelis for all their woes. Hopefully, the American people will demonstrate some resilience this Fall and get an administration that can undo some of the damage. If not, I'm emigrating to Europe.

Free the fools! -- Porno rules!

There, i've had my say, so i'll step down from my "brothel soapbox".

[Xenomorgue]

I would not characterize this long, complex story as a genocide in the modern sense, because it was not carried out as a systematic, closely coordinated plan as by the Nazis.

I disagree. It is the result that counts, not the method. And as a result of westward expansion the Native American population was reduced by a factor 50. I call that genocide. And so does Simon Wiesenthal. The fact that the process was long, means that successive governments could have changed their policies, but they chose not to do so.

There's been a long history of intermarriage between natives and settlers in North America. It's not so easy to document, but it's often the case that conquered peoples are not so much exterminated as absorbed.

So tell me, what percentage of the modern (white) population in the USA has Native Americans in their genealogy, say 1/16 or more in terms of DNA? I expect that percentage to be very low.

How long must Germany bear the guilt of the Nazi regime?

Germany has clearly and unambiguously distanced itself from Nazism. German leaders have apologized on numerous occasions for the shameful policies of that era. By contrast America still thinks westward expansion was right. American leaders have not apologized over the Indian removal policies.

[Billbo]

It's ironic- as one with Cherokee blood- that a European would be accusing the U.S. of things like genocide and torture. Remember that essentally all of the images from Abu Grave were from pornographic websites- the editor from the U.K.'s Daily Mirror was fired for using fake images! Remember too that all interrogations today are done with drugs. Never is "torture" used at all. It's a smokescreen. I ask you, if one can give a drug to an enemy that makes the enemy want to tell everything he knows about his terrorist organization, and then not remember anything after that session, wouldn't you prefer that to using a club or a rubber hose?

The 1940s first generation drugs were crude, such as scopolamine (yes, the motion sickness drug, but in higher doses) and sodium pentathol (the dental pain killer, also in higher doses). They've made some incredible improvements. Many common anesthetics can be used, too, for this purpose and prevent the interrogee from remembering a thing.

Under Article 3 of the combined Geneva Conventions, a person taken on the battlefield with a weapon who is not in uniform is required to be shot as a spy. It's not an option. As such, the Coalition Forces did break International Law as they captured them instead.

Besides, Guantanamo is closing, despite its obvious utility in saving your sorry behinds from a multitude of terror plots that were in the works. On average since 2001, a terror cell per day was broken. That is several thousand. With camps just like Guantanamo in British Gibraltar, Spain and several other European nations, isn't it just like Europe to be hypocritical. Look it up. They exist today.

Actually, the U.S. has gone to absurd lengths to admit guilt about the Indians, despite the absurdity of trying to apologize for diseases brought by Europeans and for actions of ancestors 150 years dead. All tribes have sovereignty. No tribesman is required to work. No tribesman is required to obey any sort of law on the reservation except a few federal laws.

Unfortunately, this has lead to a completely self-centered way of life for most tribes. They usually don't bother get an education, although they have incredible options not available to anyone else. They usually don't make a living, since they don't have to. They usually are extremely hard on the environment, often hunting or fishing species to extinction, such as the green sturgeon or spring chinook of the Klamath River basin. Frequently, they will violate international treaties when it comes to hunting whales such as the grey whale in Alaska.

The greatest irony is that, archeologically speaking, they represent the second and possibly even the THIRD great migration to North America. The first was the Clovis Culture. There is evidence of a second group and the third is the modern Indian tribes. The Clovis Culture, interestingly enough, was identical to the Solutrians of Southern Europe, probably coming here by boat from Italy or Southern France.


It's also ironic that Germany has been steadfastly supporting a "palestinian" state. That is straight from National Socialism or Nazism. Arafat, and indeed, most of Hamas and Fatah/PLO's leadership are unabashed admirers of Hitler, and have said so in speeches and writings. Remember that 88% of the land that Israel was to get- empty rock that they bought from the Turks in the 1800s- was given illegally to the Hashemites and the Egyptians, Iraqis, and other Arab groups in the 1940s with the written contract with Faisal and Faruk that no further land would be required. This- what is now Jordan, which is 85% Palestinian, who have no say in the Hashemite dominated government there- was to be the land for the Egyptians, Syrians, Iraqis and others that Arafat renamed "Palestinians" in 1962. If the Jews hadn't bought the land when it was empty of people, then it might be reasonable to divide it up. If the Palestinians had lived there prior to the Jews buying the malarial swamps of the Jordan Valley from the Turks and terraforming it, it might be reasonable to give them yet another state. If the Palestinians hadn't done more than 10,000 attacks from Oslo's signing to 2000, and several thousand since then, it might be reasonable to give them another homeland. As it is, the whole thing is a scam to get rid of Israel, the only democracy in the middle east.

[Billbo]

Spaniard DeSoto writes of requiring 3 full days to cross an area of croplands of the Indians. More than 120km of corn, bean and vegetable fields. No Indians present. Empty villages. Probably disease.

But you know what? All this is crap.

The only group that has any need to apologize is the group that actually does the wrong to someone.

It is morally wrong to demand an apology for wrongs done to an ancestor from someone else. Period.

Some of my relatives took part in the Trail of Tears. Should I ask for redress? NO. Some fought for the Union against slavery. Should I ask for rewards for them? NO. This is NOW. The question is not whether I feel bad or good about the past. The question is how I treat others today.

The past is past. Make the future a good one.

Get a life.

[Xenomorgue]

The only group that has any need to apologize is the group that actually does the wrong to someone. It is morally wrong to demand an apology for wrongs done to an ancestor from someone else.

It is essential to distinguish between the wrongful actions committed by individuals and those by permanent or nearly-permanent organizations like banks, insurance companies and governments. If your grandfather once wronged my grandfather, then it is obviously meaningless for me to hold a grudge. However if a permanent organization has profited in the past [and hence reaps the benefits in the present!] by wrongfully confiscating the property from your grandfather, then redress is certainly possible. The US government and courts have recognized this principle, and in fact applied it to WW2, both in the case of slave labor in the German war industry, and in cases of paintings confiscated from Jewish collectors. The problem is of course that the US government refuses to apply the principle to its own shameful actions.

The question is not whether I feel bad or good about the past. The question is how I treat others today. The past is past. This is NOW. Make the future a good one.

Can you please tell me how your theory of "the past is past and this is NOW" applies to everyday crime and punishment? The USA has the reputation of being a vindictive society. People are sentenced to 20 years in prison for relatively minor offences. If a minor crime was committed 20 years ago then (the past is past!) why should the perpetrator still be punished today (this is NOW!) ?

I would also like to know how your theory applies to international affairs, i.e. wars of aggression, confiscated territories, human rights violations etc. Just this week Radovan Karadzic was transported to the prison in Scheveningen (Netherlands), where he will be charged for serious crimes committed during the Bosnian war (1992-1995). So the events took place more then a decade ago. Should he be held accountable? The past is past.... What about Iraq and Afghanistan? Many people around the globe think that Bush and Blair should be held accountable. And what about Chechnya? Tibet? The Vietnam war with all the carpet bombing, the napalm, where people are still suffering negative effects on their health from the toxic defoliant Agent Orange?

[priapos]

I would not characterize this long, complex story as a genocide in the modern sense, because it was not carried out as a systematic, closely coordinated plan as by the Nazis.

I disagree. It is the result that counts, not the method. And as a result of westward expansion the Native American population was reduced by a factor 50. I call that genocide. And so does Simon Wiesenthal. The fact that the process was long, means that successive governments could have changed their policies, but they chose not to do so.

The colonization of the eastern seaboard of N America by EUROPEANS & their African slaves & the subsequent expansion westward is the very stuff of human history. Such episodes have been occurring repeatedly since the Cro-Magnons supplanted the Neanderthals.

What happened to the Sorbs, the Wends, the Prussians and other Slavic and Baltic peoples during the German expansion eastward in the later Middle Ages? Was this a genocide? Does Germany owe the remnant of the Sorbs reparations?

What happened to the Celtic peoples of western Europe? The Byzantines of Anatolia? The indigenous peoples of the Cape province of South Africa, Surinam or even Aruba?

What about the various Turkic and Siberian peoples who disappeared or were reduced during the Russian expansion eastwards? What will be the ultimate fate of the Chechens and other Caucasian peoples? Is this ethnic cleansing or what?

What about the Han Chinese penchant for absorbing all non-Han groups in greater China? Where are the Manchurians today? Will the Tibetans be next?

What will be the fate of the remnants of the Aramaean & Berber peoples living in various Arab states? Doesn't the Arab League owe them?

Look at Israel/Palestine. Xeno, why dont you ask Herr Wiesenthal if that's not ethnic cleansing, just a little more prolonged & effective than what the Serbs attempted to perpetrate in Bosnia? Ask him about the fate of the Canaanites of ancient Judea & Israel while you're at it.

Of course all these episodes involved absorption as well as extermination, to a greater or lesser extent. But whose gonna sort out all the DNA at this point? Just to prove who the victors (the guilty) and the vanquished (the victims) were? Would this be a fruitful exercise for some grand World Court of History? You could set it up in the Hague and preside, self-annointed "Human Rights Advocate", who fails to understand the exigencies of history. Why dont you go pick on the Sudanese instead of the Americans for a change? There's a genocide going on there even as we debate what happened hundreds of years ago.

[Xenomorgue]

Why dont you ask Herr Wiesenthal if that's not ethnic cleansing?

Sigh. You don't get it. Simon Wiesenthal (1908-2005) understood very well that there has been a lot of bloodshed in human history. He knew that anti-semitism had been in Europe for a long time. And he knew that the nazis got the idea of Lebensraum (territorial expansion at the expense of inferior races) from the American conquest, and the idea of concentration camps from the British (South-Africa). However, he still considered the Germans fully responsible for their own actions.

Which is exactly the opposite of the American view. Americans have declared themselves "good people" who live in the best country in the world, given to them personally by God. However the fact remains that the land actually belonged to Indians who had to be coerced in dying in large numbers. An inconvenient fact which can not be accepted by the average American and therefore it must be twisted. The Indians did not claim ownership of their lands (how convenient); they were demons (so kill them is not against the bible); they died from diseases; they stood in the way of progress; manifest destiny; it happened a long time ago, bla bla bla.

Anno 2008 almost every German denounces the WW2 Holocaust, while most Americans have not the slightest regret over the Native American genocide. Simon Wiesenthal would be dismayed but not surprised.

[priapos]

Well since you can speak so authoritatively about what the average American thinks & feels, i wont bother to try to restate my opinions about this ordisabuse you of your precious insights. Your aim, thru stereotyping & tendentious accusations, is a blanket condemnation of Americans as a people. You just seethe with resentment (re-sentiment). It all sounds somehow familiar to me. Collective guilt results in collective blame from one Xenomorgue. Yeah, we're some pretty bad motha-fuckas over here, socio-paths every one of us -- no conscience, no remorse.

I wonder, if the Germans hadn't had their nation reduced to rubble, would they be such "good" Europeans as they doubtless are today? What did the "average" German feel about the "Jewish Question" in 1940? You use your selective moralizing about history and responsibility simply to pursue your agenda of reducing Americans to some sort of ethically sub-human species. Well i may be a small simian, but your worldview is warped & twisted by an almost monomaniacal need to blame Americans for all the worlds' ills.

[Xenomorgue]

Proposition: "Most Americans have not the slightest regret over the genocide of the Native American people."

Either the statement is TRUE. In which case it makes perfect sense to call this a character flaw of American society. A deliberate blindness to the more unpleasant facts about the founding of the USA.

Or the statement is FALSE. In that case one should be able to point to monuments, museums, ceremonies etc to commemorate the immense tragedy that unfolded not so very long ago.

[Toffeeman]

Proposition: "Most Japanese have not the slightest regret over the mass ill treatment of British prisoners of war during the second world war."

Either the statement is TRUE. In which case it makes perfect sense to call this a character flaw of Japanese society. A deliberate blindness to the more unpleasant facts about the recent Japanese history.

Or the statement is FALSE. In that case one should be able to point to monuments, museums, ceremonies etc to commemorate the immense tragedy that unfolded not so very long ago.

We could go on for ever..................

[Xenomorgue]

Fair enough, Toffeeman. But on reflection most people will probably acknowledge that there are profound differences between Japan (aftermath of the WW2 atrocities) and the USA (after solving its "Indian problem").

Japanese camp commanders were held accountable in tribunals; they were tried, convicted and punished. The Japanese political system was forced to change radically. Japanese leaders have formally apologized over human rights abuses and the matter of compensation has been settled in treaties.

And best of all. Modern Japan is not deeply involved in human rights abuses; neither is it claiming moral leadership of the world, nor lecturing other countries on how to behave.

P.S. I do hope Japan stops its whaling industry.