muley69

Lady forge: I think most of your points have already been addressed. Your analogy placing federal susbsidized programs for higher education with indian entitlement programs is laughable. By your reasoning I suppose you would agree that the 1800's cattle food programs were a good think for indians. There is a world of difference between dependancy and assistance. Unless somebody has a new and different arguement that sheds more light on this subject, this will be my last post on this thread.

Lady Forge

Tell that to the person whom has become dependent on assistance.......The two go hand in hand.... you offer assistance and they come back depending on it to be there for them again.Do you think that it only plagues the Native American Indians.... Think about it when you watch the person in line at the store paying for food with food stamps... When a young person goes to apply for school Grants they depend on those federal grant programs to assist in paying for their college education. I know the U of I was more than a little freaked when the Governor wanted to pull 14 million dollars in funding assistance to the school... they depended on that assistance.
As for you assumeing to know what my reasonings are is way off mark .... How could you know ...are you me?.... No you only assume.
You profess to know that the Indians are lacking Morality, Hope and Pride ... how could you know this is what we think and feel unless you are an Native American Indian... what you have Professed is only your opinion you have formed ... Or was it done by living as an Native American Indian????????????
As for being laughable ............. Well your ignorance is your bliss.
Until you have walked in our shoes and lived in our shoes ....dont profess to know what is best for us, or to assume to know what we feel... just because you learned it from a book..... pull your nose out of the book and take a walk in the real world with your eyes open.
DONE with this .... Have a nice day.

huntingheck69

Very nicely put lady forge and lets just hope this post is over. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BOWHUNTER TIPS, PICS OR HUNTING STORIES, IT HAS GONE WAY OFF TOPIC FOR THIS FORUM. HAPPY HUNTING TO ALL.

muley69

Where in any of my post did I say that this only plagues indians? I am staying in-line with the subject at hand, of course it applies to others.

Re-read my post, I am merily following your line of reasoning and taking it to it's ultimate conclusion.


Again, by following your reasoning, one must be something in order to evaluate it or comment upon it. Therefore you cannot comment on the war unless you are a soldier, you cannot comment on the U of I unless you are a university admisnistrator. Secondly, as evidenced by your own post, you are less then 1/2 indian, thus, you are more non-indian then indian yet you chose to speak on their behalf? And enough with the "we" comments, I know an awful lot of indians who hate the reservation systems and the current indian culture.


Finally, we both agree on something.


Now this I find a little suspicious. Have you even read my post? I have been on, visited, recreated, and worked on several reservations across the west. My father in law lives on the Blackfeet rez, and my good freinds from Wolfpoint live on the Ft. Peck, and by the way, the Ft. Peck freinds both graduated from the Salish/Kootinia College and are 1/4 Flathead.


[/quote]
You have my absolute promise that this is my last post on this thread. You get the last word if you chose....you have a wonderful day.

krueger

If the issues i raise were already adressed i'm asking anyone to please respond regardless.
I probably joined this thread a little late but i extremely disagree with muley69 and i fail to see the vast majority of logic behind his arguements and what they are based on.
If the native americans didnt believe in land ownership then how could they steal property from one another? Did they put up fences and NO TRESPASSING signs? And on the other hand if they did own thier lands apart other tribes; how did they signify boundaries without "god forbiding them being captured by the other tribes"?
PLEASE inform me on how native americans are LUCKY that we "conquered" them and thier lands. Where is there any information that would even hint they are or were lucky. Or even that other nations would have exterminated them. One more thing who are we (im asking about the ones who con*****ed indians), I pretty sure America is the melting pot of the world, was it one nationality that conquerred the native americans. Native Americans being lucky is the most propostirous and ridiculous claim that i have read out of all these post.
What countries are you talking about where the ancestors aren't native to those lands, such as Americans aren't to america?
IMO i do not believe to have a single legitimate statement i ALL of your posts (muley69). I think this because you have not cited a single academic resourse for any of your ludicris statements. I think you also used your degree as a sort of defense mechanicism hoping that nobody would contest you? I THINK YOU ARE MAKING ALOT OF YOUR FACTS UP. You cant argue the blue because it is my own personal opinion.
I believe you are trying to drag the topic of pre-european native americans into present tense native americans where you have utilized tangled rherotic, which has most to accept your assumptions in logic. I am not trying to make this into a fight and i know it reads offensively but i too am being blunt. If you or anyone can provide me with one reason how the Native Americans were lucky and not completely screwed by the US GOVT, then i will completely withdrawn my post and apoligise for the inconvience. Also please tell me these academic resources that back up your statements.

muley69

I feel I am constantly being drug back to this thread to defend myself. I lamented responding because I had promised not to continue this subject. I am spending to much time rehashing the same points. It is obvious to me the many of you simply haven't read the entire thread. It is also obvious to me that many of you post bits and pieces that frankly, are hard to understand. I cannot possible respond to every point, every poster makes. I have responded to this post, only because of the passionate nature of krueger's reply. Additionally, it is nearly impossible to fully explore this topic by posting replys back and forth. In my opinion, there are really three issue's here: 1. Pre-european tribal conservation, 2. The white mans role with reguard to indian land issues, and 3. The current state of the indian reservation/culture. Somehow, we are all arguing these three togather, and that is a difficult task.
Krueger, I appreciate your input and concern, however, also keep in mind that opinions are the norm in a internet forum environment, and everybody is entitled to their own. It is hypocritcal to say that somebody is just giving their opinion, while at the same time you are giving yours. Finally, at the expense of sounding redudant, I realllllly wish I had never brought my educational background into the subject. Apparrently, some of you feel this was lording education. I stated earlier, education is NOT a barometer for human worth. Some on the brightest people I know never even graduated high school, and I love them all the same.
Finally, I have spent too much time on this thread. I no longer see any value in continuing this discussion. I will not digress into petty arguing and name calling. By all means continue this discussion if you want, but I will no longer be apart of it. Thank you all for your insights and thoughts, see ya on a different thread.

mjqood0

krueger:

I too have posted in this thread, but due to all the negative posts about having a debate here, I have refrained. However, your last statement brings up simply more questions.

All "academic resources" were written by someone who either had first hand experience, or read other "academic resources". It has gotten to the point that I really have a hard time believing one side of any argument being thrown around in the academic world any more. Simply put, most everything is based on an opinion. While this opinion may correctly reflect the truth, it is still an opinion. Saying there are drug problems in a large city like New York is an opinion. It is widely believed, but still opinion. Think about it. We are assuming that the word "problem" means the same for all. With a discussion point like drug abuse, it is easy to get a majority to stand on one side of the line. With a discussion point like this thread has brought out, the line is far closer to the median of human beliefs.

Some will argue that the Native Americans have been treated really good! Lots of monitary incentives (education discounts), the ability to have casinos in states which don't support gambling (Michigan for one -- until Detroit), less restrictions on hunting / fishing. This sounds like good treatment to me!

But there is another side of the argument. We "Stole" their land! We confined the poor Natives of this country to land reservations. We took away their freedom and forced them to change to the new "American" way! Wow. The US Government looks horrible.

(Yes, I know. These are very basic arguments and overly simplified. I was simply trying to make a point)

And at the end of the day, both of the above statements are true. My belief is somewhere in the middle. What happened to the Native American's back in colonial times, and during the forming of our country was wrong. What the government is doing to them now is wrong. I don't necessarly agree with the past, but we are supposed to be "One Nation..." and while they may not have choosen this path for their native lands, they live here now. Just like you and I. I think all citizens should be treated equally. Extra incentive programs are not necessarly good. I'm not sure welfare is such a good idea in it's current state either. I think reforms need to be made. But really, that is neither here nor there.

For the most part, this thread was debating a current issue in our society. I think if all parties involved enjoyed the debate (if not, they should have left long ago), and were trying to be civil to each other, why should we condemn them? Academic arguments bear little relevance to first hand experience, and I believe it is safe to say that both muley and katbones have at least some first hand experience.

I will concede that this thread may be in the wrong topic (political may have been better), but why do so many people here get nasty when one shares their personal views? Most likely someone here will flame me for the beliefs put forth in this post. Fine by me. Some people have very stong views on specific topics. Also fine by me. But when people disagree, let them discuss their points. While they may come to no resolution, or agree to disagree, others may learn a great deal. Just don't get nasty when people don't agree. I'm not talking to anyone in specific -- just the general populus of this board. Not everyone is like you or I. Thank God for that....

Katbones

I suppose i could do the Jerry Springer type of closing on this very fine debate, but in reality i would only bore all involved. Alas, as we all slip and slide thru the time stream, lets remember our forepersons with reverence. Thank you and goodnight.