Download e-book THE HORROR OF WHITE DEATH: A NEO-NATIVE MYTH

Contents:

6 Ridiculous Lies You Believe About the Founding of America

Korean mythology

Jews arent the only people on the planet. Your specific intent to destroy in whole or in part fails to be met since the Nazis were not targeting a specific people There were many laws that were targeted against all political parties the nazis did not like, against communists, against intellectuals who spoke out.

For every instance of Nuremburg Laws, one can find secret laws like those currently being used against dissidents and Muslims in the US that target other groups. The argument that the Nazis committed genocide because they were targeting a group loosely described as all "inferior peoples" is intriguing. The US was targeting "communists" by the way You actually demonstrated perfectly how you imbue your own ideology on the definition when you talk about your interpretation of the genocide convention and the way you construe it.

I have explained how the concept of genocide includes cultural genocide, while the narrow definition of specific intent eliminates nearly all instances of genocide through its legal requirements. I only point out the flaws in the argument and inherent biases. If you choose to take that ideological stance, cool, but know that it only applies to your reality, not law as it exists or functions in terms of universal human rights.

You do not appear to understand that generosity, the importance of sharing, was a widespread and important cultural value among aboriginal peoples; and that to them the greed displayed by Europeans was a strange and distasteful character trait. Instead of starting with the assumption that European cultures were superior, you need an accurate understanding of European and aboriginal cultures so that you can compare the two without resorting to cultural triumphalism; and so that you can understand the relations between a particular European culture and a particular aboriginal culture.

A generalisation would be that Frenchmen showed more respect toward the aboriginal people they knew than Englishmen did, for example. Different countries had different experieinces; Canada mostly avoided having Indian wars on the prairies, mainly for reasons of geography. It was a fur frontier instead of a farming frontier, leading to cooperation in the fur trade instead of competition for land.

The priaire tribes suffered the loss of the buffalo and settled on reserves before the Canadian prairies were settled for farming; they were settled later because they were colder than the US plains and so had a shorter growing season. Then you can look at the people in terms of their culture; for instance they may have been willing to share the land with Europeans, but then found the Europeans were not willing to reciprocate. Closely tied with the culture of a particular group would be their adaptation to their particular environment; and their activities of hunting, fishing, farming or trading.

Many cultures were seriously damaged by the epidemics of smallpox and other diseases, but also by other environmental disasters, such as the disappearance of the buffalo. Another environmental factor may in fact be the most important one; that they were simply out-numbered. As for "invaders from Siberia", oh please!

Are you trying to imply that they invaded and took the land from some other group? The Lost Tribes of Israel? Would you care to list the "many cultural superiorities held by the equally diversified array of European settlers"? I seem to have struck an important nerve here which is just as well. I never suggested that the indigenous peoples of North America were a "homogenous society.

If you imagine that there were no such "weaknesses" and to suggest they were "too kind" or "too generous" to outsiders is really hilarious and quite deceptive then you are forced to identify the "strengths" of the invaders. Whichever route you chose, the key question that must be answered is how and why did the Europeans succeed in colonizing North America and how and why were the indigenous peoples unable to stop them? There were many cultural superiorities held by the equally diversified array of European settlers and to acknowledge them is not racism, but historical accuracy.

Your closing question is partially agreeable, but I would simply revise it to read "what cultural and historical factors prevented the aboriginal peoples from taking over their lands? Shall we refer to them as "Sibero-Americans? You need to distinguish between different tribes in different regions at different times; they were not all nomadic; their economies depended on different factors; and some were more military than others. To view them as a homogeneous society begets useless generalisations; at worst it approaches racism.

Furthermore, over four centuries, the aboriginal and invading societies all changed and adapted to circumstances and to each other. The phrase "key cultural weaknesses among indigenous American tribes" also is a problem; would you ask what the key "cultural superiorities" of the European invaders[aka settlers] were? It is a loaded question which assumes the superiority of the invading group. For instance you would be unlikely to answer that question by saying the worst cultural weakness of the aboriginal peoples was their generosity and helpfulness.

When the first Europeans came, instead of allowing them to die from their ignorance of how to survive in the harsh conditions of the New World, the aboriginal people traded with them, allowed them to stay, provided food and taught them the skills they needed to survive. So is generosity a cultural weakness? And what kind of cultural weakness abuses generosity? A less loaded question would be "Why did aboriginal peoples not prevent Europeans from taking over their land?

My God, you question it? Europeans used conventional weapons, including machine guns Gatling guns at Wounded Knee, biological agents intentional use of small pox, measles , and chemical weapons alcohol over a period of years to obliterate an entire race of people from two continents. We displaced Native Americans, invaded their ancestral lands, destroyed their cultures, and waged continuing wars of extermination against them as late as the thirties as late Mexican soldiers would take Yaqui indian and Apache infants by their feet, swing them full-force against boulders to smash their heads.

They've never recovered from the culture shock, many still die, from sadness or horror I suspect. And you ask that a question? Remember that mush of European innovation stemmed from need and commercial competition. Better sails meant faster ships, which means cheaper transport. The Indians were no less technical, but in a manor that fit their own environment. For example, the Indians moved and relocated entire villages with such speed, it is rather remarkable, and the efficiency with which they constructed their housing, and utilized their kill certainly did not fail to impress various European authors of the time.

Thus was the nature of their isolated environment that they could not have taken gun powder from the Chinese, and since horses are not indigenous to their land, warfare had to do without a Calvary. Again, European military skills developed with need. Thus did European generals study the greats of the 30 Years War, the Greats studied the Romans, the Romans studied the Greeks, and so forth.

Those are all vitally important factors, Adam. It also seems that a relative lack of technical innovations and apparent inferiority in terms of military know-how worked against Indian societies as well. Their lack of political unity and general absence of large centralized states perhaps reflected their nomadic and pastoral mode of production which, in turn, militated against forming a common front.

Jon - turn off that TV this minute or no pie for you. Is an intention subjective and in the mind of the actor, or is it embedded in the act and its consequences, or both? How do we deal with the Irqouis and the Sullivan-Clinoton Campaign of ? My map at www. I wonder what Messrs. Lewy, Pettit and all others who feel passionately but must now parse away would make of President Washington's orders to his generals: The immediate objects are the total destruction and devastation of their settlements, and the capture of as many prisoners of every age and sex as possible.

It will be essential to ruin their crops now in the ground and prevent their planting more. I would recommend, that some post in the center of the Indian Country, should be occupied with all expedition, with a sufficient quantity of provisions whence parties should be detached to lay waste all the settlements around, with instructions to do it in the most effectual manner, that the country may not be merely overrun, but destroyed.

Hmmmm, a good question. Aside from the fact that they were defenseless from European disease, I would speculate on the following 3: I admit that this is not cultural, but I do believe that it is significant. If the Native Americans were able to unite early on and create some defensive perimeter early on, and if they had the weapons capacity to enforce it, it is possible that their fate would have been very different.

Since early colonization was either settlements or commercial enterprises, such an obstacle would likely have made the New World too costly to exploit. Adam, I could not agree more with you. To Chris, If we cannot distinguish one thing from another, then we know neither thing. The fact that the term was used precisely to refer to what happened to the Jews is of relevance to the discussion.

My argument is that the term genocide was coined to describe the murder of the Jews, it was defined with this act in mind, and it means what it says, which is to say, "committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group as such. They did not target specific peoples for any other reason than they were not Aryans Certainly, everything that I have read, from Christopher Browning to Daniel Goldhagen, among others, demonstrates that of all of the groups that the Nazis murdered, of which there were many, the Jews were the only people whose annihilation was actively propagated by every tool of the state remember the Nurenberg Laws?

You may believe whatever you like about the Holocaust, but you are mistaken to assume that your analysis is an interpretation that is subscribed to by most mainstream Holocaust scholars. I like that definition precisely because it is conceptually useful as a tool to analyze and distinguish different forms of mass murder. By eliminating the intent portion, genocide is no longer any different from many other mass murders, and thus is conceptually useless.

Why have the term at all? Why not argue, as some have already pointed out, that the flu epidemic of is equivalent in every meaningful way as Saddam Hussein gassing the Kurds, again save for numbers.

Because I believe that making some distinctions between deaths is important, this is why I cannot simply ignore a fundamental passage of the definition. The Civil War now becomes genocide, as does every war ever fought between 2 cultures. Do you have any evidence that the American intention in Vietnam was to eradicate the Vietnamese people in the same way as the Nazis wanted to eradicate the Jews?

As for the Armenians, you may very well be correct, they were the victims of genocide, and they do not need to rewrite the definition to prove it. Furthermore, extermination is not the same thing as mass deportation, and thankfully, we have the language to delineate the differences. Could I not charge you with the same thing?

Could I not argue that you only want to broaden the definition so that you can use the term for political and ideological reasons, perhaps to use against Israel, or the United States? This is why definitions are so important. Indeed, I would argue that those such as yourself who do broaden definitions already have voided any value in terms such as Nazi, racism, Hitler, genocide, and ethnic cleaning.

6 Ridiculous Lies You Believe About the Founding of America

Immigrants lead plunge in U. See Latino in America: Nice way to kick off the Trail of Tears. Here is why intellectuals, philosophers, artists, poets, are so important to our wellbeing. When the battle was over, the Pequots had suffered several hundred dead, perhaps as many as of these being women and children. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Yet, the eighth head, which is the wisest, warns his brethren about the folly of such an act and volunteers to go through first to ensure that all is well.

Once everything becomes these things, nothing does. Would someone care to identify the three key cultural weaknesses among indigenous American tribes that contributed significantly to their defeat and demise at the hands of western European settlers? I mean in addition to what scientists would term their "epidemiological weakness" derived from their historical isolation, a factor not found for instance among most indigenous peoples in sub-Saharan Africa.

I think that the end result will be that the law is unable to distinguish the merely awful e. And, in that ethnic cleansing is to genocide more or less like arson is to murder, would it not be better to create a crime of ethnic cleansing? In that way, the two crimes remain what they are, two different things. It is one thing to say that genocide may include ethnic cleansing.

A chair may have an armrest but an armrest does not usually qualify as a chair. In my language, a chair with an armrest is a species of chair. Also, in my language, that does not make the armrest qualify as a chair. In other words, your usage is really a misuse of language. Your language lumps all these bad acts - some worse than others - into one word. Which is to say, your language, were it to gain dictionary acceptance, would rob the language of the ability to make certain distinctions now made by people of reasonable intelligence. How should we understand the position taken by the UN and certain international tribunals that ethnic cleansing is a genocidal act?

I would agree that genocide is often accompanied by ethnic cleansing. How does your point even address my comment? Which is to say, whether or not International tribunals, the UN and some courts believe it reasonable to eliminate the distinction between ethnic cleansing and genocide, the fact remains that such entities are destroying real distinctions and, as a result, I asserted and continue to assert help those interested in spreading hatred.

Jacobson says, brutes, filled with hatred, yoke together unlikes. Surely, you understand this rather serious concern. A number of instances of ethnic cleansing have been expressly approved by the International Community. Of particular relevance is the ethnic cleansing of Christians from Turkey into Greece and the ethnic cleansing of Muslims from Greece into Turkey. Does that, on your view of the law, make the International community guilty of genocide? If not, why not? Why does the reason behind the coining of the term "genocide" have any relevance? Is it not the application of the term and not why it was coined?

The fact that the term was coined to describe the slaughter of the Jews is unrelated to the legal definition as articulated in the Genocide Convention. The academic who coined the term included cultural genocide and what is now known as ethnic cleansing in his definition. The point I was making was that the narrow interpretation of the genocide convention that is put forth above excludes even the Nazi intentions. It is not an interpretation of history In legal terms, the requirement of specific intent is not fulfilled.

So you are absolutely right to state that the term was created to describe Nazi atrocities not just against Jews My respect for the law is for its development and ability to change. The reason of tribunals and their justices overcomes the self interested nation state politics of those parties that defined genocide out of existence when articulating the original convention. Genocide per se can hardly be found if you insist on the narrow specific intent requirement. So either way, you lose the argument unless you take a politically and ideologically biased position.

I know law is beyond you and you disregard it at your peril William Wood in described the Pequots as being "a stately, warlike people, of whom I never heard any misdemeanor, but that they were just and equal in their dealings, not treacherous either to their countrymen or English, requiters of courtesies, affable towards the English. When the Pequots refused to comply with the demands of the Massachusetts Bay Colony for the surrender of the guilty and other forms of indemnification, a punitive expedition was led against them by John Endecott, the first resident governor of the colony.

Two seperate incident provoked the war. The fist was the killing of Capt. John Stone and his crew in Stone and his party were "colonists" but not of Massachusetts Bay, but rather Virginia, which is why Massachusetts Bay took no action when it occurred. Nearly a year later Massachusetts Bay reversed its postion when the Pequots approached them about an alliance and demanded they hand over Stone's killers.

The Pequot envoys said they would try to comply but warned they had no authority to do so. The matter was dropped. The second murder was that of John Oldham and his crew two years later in So, prior to Endecott's expedition, the Pequots had never killed an English colonist from Massachusetts Bay or Connecticut. So why were they attacked by Endecott's troops? My own research suggests it was because they were seen as weak and getting weaker, and the English saw the opportunity to take action before the Pequots did something desperate--a sort of 17th-century "failed state.

Ben, Surely World War II was an obsenity and the murder of others along with the Jews is rather important to know about and understand. I do not quarrel with what you say one wit. However, the central role which Judeophobia played in Nazi ideology and the special effort made, unlike with all others except, to some extent, the Roma, to eradicate all traces of the Jewish people - to make it as if they had never existed -, makes understanding the Shoah as a separate thing rather important.

In such a time, it is necessary - dare I say critical - to re-double our efforts to understand a past version of eliminationist Judeophobia and to combat it. And, note, I do not take anything away from the 60 million people killed in WWII or the millions of civilians who perished with the Jews. I merely say it is important to understand motivations behind such an outrage.

And, since Judeophobia was quite central to Nazism, as it is today to the far left, European elites and Islamists, we need to heed obvious warning signs that are very, very troubling. Adam, I apologize for my presumptuous language. It isn't my intent to minimize the suffering of Jews under Nazi oppression. My statement reflects only my personal perception of how many of today's Jews look back on the Holocaust. In public school I always heard the six million figure cited and learned a great deal about the Jewish experience in the death camps. This was horrifying enough, but it was only much later that I became aware of the full magnitude of the Holocaust.

The Einsatzgruppen massacred an estimated 2. To be sure, Nazis such as Himmler always prioritized Jews for liquidation, but non-Jewish deaths reached genocide proportions as well. As for blacks and racism, the Reparations crowd has certainly laid claim to American slavery as the most villanous act ever perpetrated in human history. The issue really, really is the effort by some to wed unlikes, thus blurring the distinctions which distinguish us from savages.

Such is, as Jacobson notes, a sure sign that hatred is brewing. And, it is a sure sign of the troubling ideology that permeates some "intellectuals" these days. Why a lawyer cum "scholar" would deliberately wed unlikes is beyond me since, in fact, legal analysis involves the making of careful distinctions, not the blurring of distinctions. After all, murder is not the same thing as segregation. And genocide is not the same thing as ethnic cleansing no matter what some statute might erroneously suggest - or, as is more likely the case, be misinterpreted even by some court to mean.

Ignore such significant language and you fundamentally alter the meaning of the term. It is as true with genocide as with any other word in the English language. The Nazis were not primarily targeting Jews They were not killing Jews specifically because they were Jewish Communists, Slavs, Homosexuals, Catholics, etc. No one ever simply went around arbitrarily murdering Catholics. Gypsies, perhaps would far better meet the criteria for genocide. The murder of Jews was unique precisely because they were targeted as a group, even to the detriment of the Nazi war machine.

Neither the French, the Italians, nor the Japanese were Aryan but they were not the victim of a Nazi genocide. Under your narrow definition, genocide very rarely exists. What happened in Rwanda and Yugoslavia do not even qualify. I am curious as to why you would believe that Rwanda and Yugoslavia would not be included in the conventional definition. The fact that others want to include in the definition anyone and everyone they wish does not change the definition. You may call what is happening to the Palestinians, for example, genocide, you may also call it Apartheid, slavery, Holocaust, ethnic cleansing, racism, terrorism, chauvinism, ethnocentrism, sexism, Darwinism, or you may even call it a table, chair, car, or baloney sandwich.

However, all of these words have actual definitions that the English speaking world generally accepts and uses. The fact that you would dramatically change the definition does not change this. For the record, by the way, I actually disagree with the authors conclusions. I believe that Native Americans were indeed the victims of genocide, based on the conventional definition of the term. I believe that there was in fact the knowing attempt to exterminate Native peoples and cultures. This can be seen in their treatment as well as in the massive popularity of sending Indian children to white schools to eradicate their native culture.

Again, I stress, no alteration of the definition need be made. As an analogy, consider the fact that Black group also actively try to prevent other groups from claiming that the history of racism in this country effected, say, the Irish or Catholics in the exact same way as it effected blacks. The fact suggest that the Holocaust was uniquely targeted towards Jews, and perhaps Gypsies as well. Chris, Driving people from their homes is certainly a terrible thing.

No doubt about it. At the same time, if you wish to opine that "ethnic cleansing" is "genocide," such is an abuse of language - no matter what statute you refer to -. These genocides are the real thing. I leave you with this quote from an article by Howard Jacobson, the great British writer, as the quote is directed at your abuse or, perhaps, deconstruction of the English language. It is simply that one thing is not another thing. When next there is an attempt first to slander and then to wipe out a whole people, to burn away every trace of them and their beliefs from the face of the earth, to make it as though they never were and to ensure they never will be again, Jews will accept that Holocaust is the word.

This is not a species of scholasticism, verbal fastidiousness for its own sake. If we do not properly describe what a thing is like and not like, we do not know what it is. It is in the nature of hatred not to know what a thing is like and not to care. Which is why we say that hatred is blind. Indeed, one of the signs that hatred is being brewed, in an individual or a community, is the deliberate wedding of like to unlike. Brutes yoke unlikes together in haste, enjoying that surge in emotional violence that blurring all distinctions brings. Here is why intellectuals, philosophers, artists, poets, are so important to our wellbeing.

By exploring the ways things are different, however much they may sometimes look the same, by showing us how and why a thing became the thing it is and not another thing, they help still the undifferentiated violence of the furious and embittered. Little by little, they bring the calm of distinctness and individuality back into our lives. You would do well to explore how ethnic cleansing and genocide are different.

It would do you, in particular, a lot of good. And it would also do you a lot of good to consider that the effort to join that which is different allows hatred to brew. And that, frankly, is the opposite of what law is supposed to be about.

Elfman Medley!
6 Ridiculous Lies You Believe About the Founding of America | www.farmersmarketmusic.com;
Were American Indians the Victims of Genocide? | History News Network;
Korean mythology - Wikipedia!

Chris, Thanks for your refreshing insights. While I stand by much of what I said, you were right to rebuke a few of my more nasty comments. I have no idea how Indians would have felt had the white settlers been the ones who died out; that was a cheap shot on my part--very ethnocentric. Additionally, I agree that the whites did initiate the saga of blood-letting between the two peoples as John Smith in Jamestown and the Pequot War of the Puritans demonstrates, but we must remember that the colonists were often in survival mode, so they took desperate measures from time to time.

I would add that the goodwill you speak of among the Indians often disguised ulterior motives. When the English arrived at Jamestown, Chief Powhatan was attempting to subdue the various tribes around the Tidewater region. He saw the English, and especially their metal instruments, as a potential ally in his larger war. As for the definitional debate, I do consider the Nazi Holocaust a genocide of the worst sort. Hitler was not simply trying to create a master race, but annihilate supposedly "inferior" races. One can never dismiss the racial component in Nazi thinking.

Now, I think that today's Jews have taken over the Holocaust as an event that happened only to them, but having lost six million there is no denying the centrality of Jews in the Final Solution. Why you even object to who is posting is odd, unless you also object to the legion of media lightweights who waste America's time with their loquacity. Having said this, I do admit that my commentary is often inconsistent.

I oscillate between being a proud patriot, who defends this country and its many strides toward progress, and an indignant Christian, who is often disgusted by the mean-spirited policies of American government and the lack of genuine love for neighbor. In the end, I pray that I come down on the side of religious faith and not secular allegiance, hence my admiration for those such as yourself who can see beyond national boundaries and elevate compassion for the international community above their own pig trough.

There have been several articles pubished on the topic, and I just published a quite lengthy one. Let me know if you would like the cites. The definition depends on whether you look at the legal history and development, or whether you choose to stick with a political and ideological definition. Those who choose to suit their own individual beliefs will be bound to mention that, according to a strict and narrow reading of the genocide convention, specific intent is required.

Have You Heard of Hachishakusama?! The Japanese Slenderman Story Time // Something Scary - Snarled

I have no qualms with that interpretation You do realise that, under your definition of the term, the Nazi slaughtering of Jews, Communists, Homosexuals, etc, does not fit the definition of genocide? THus is the idiotic and tortured logic of your position. It is how the US is able to say that what happened in Vietnam was not genocide and Israel and China are able to say that they are not committing genocide This is the nature of cultural genocide.

I know that ideologues such as yourselves are oh so much wiser than those of us who actually practice international law and have immersed ourselves in the topic, so please, in your omnipotence, explain to us humble professionals of the craft what your ideology dictates that we define the term as. Why don;t you actually look at the negotiation documents and commentaries that accompany the Genocide Convention There have been many scholarly articles, including my own, written on the topic.

Ethnic cleansing is considered part of genocide I know this does not matter to ideological scholars such as yourselves who are oh so much more brilliant than any of us practitioners What is any war other than a clash in ideologies or conflict over resources? Did anyone notice that the Native Americans were here initially and were invaded upon by the settlers? Hence the reason why we focus on the victims and not the intent of the perpetrators!!!

It is simply foolish to accept the idea that Native Americans were not slaughtered in a variety of ways for a variety of reasons. Dubya comes on the tube and announces they hate us for our freedoms. We are a country full of brainwashed fools, with good people here and there. I can't help but wonder if these same people lamenting the colonization of America drive cars or use electricity? Look at all the tribe wars. The mentality back then was we have arrived from Prussia, France or where ever to rap, pillage, and kill Native Americans so the NAs can be force off the land. It was pure greed supported by racist justifications.

People talk about the horrors committed by other countries against their people yet these same horrors committed in this country are ignored. Doesn't anyone know — or at least wonder — what drove tribes who were traditionally enemies to join together to attack Custer? Why does society ignore the fact that in the 's, our troops surrounded and murdered men, women, children for doing a dance that the government ruled illegal?

This continued until the 's. I see society go balistic about conditions in other countries yet remain silent about our own dirty not-so-well-kept secret. Reading most of these postings show not only the ignorance but the desire to ignore the issues — that are continuing — rather than to take a stand. To those who are interested in learning the truth — take classes at colleges. Raven, you are absolutely correct. The postings of most people here show they are like the majority, hateful and clearly not understanding that when war comes to our land again, they could very well be the losers.

They had their differences but they also had an uncanny ability to get along just fine. In fact, they got along more than they fought. As long as they respected each other which they mostly did, nothing really happened. The physical place where I live was considered sacred ground where tribes considered it taboo to fight over or on. Multiple tribes lived here and buried their dead here.

Just last week, a grave was found here that first examinations suggest it's over years old. Some guy found it in his yard installing a water line living in the middle of the downtown area. They don't even know what tribe it belongs too because so many lived here. I sympathize with the Native Americans, but as a professor of history, realize that its history And than a few hundred years later, it would happen all over again. Even the Spanish were taken over by the Moors for hundreds of years until they were able to rise up and finally defeat the Moors.

The native american's tried to do the same, but failed. Eventually they integrated, same as most other cultures historically speaking. Its nothing new or unique to Native American's. In fact, the Native American's would enslave, murder, and rape neighboring tribes to steal their lands What the Spanish did in the Americas wasn't any different than what native american's were literally already doing to each other for thousands of years.

Um — take your head out of the sand and open your eyes. The "games" continue today. So this is about history — this is about today's time — ths is about the future unless people wake up and insist the Government do right by the Natives. The Canadians have started — when will the US start? Like I said, its all history. Native American's were awarded reservations and gaming rights.

My family comes from a country that was taken over by the Roman empire, the Ottomans, and later the Germans and finally the Soviets. All of our land was taken and ancestors were killed, but its just history and I don't expect anything in return, just like the Native Americans shouldn't. Raven, the US will not, the government will not even admit it has driven all Americans, our country, our economies, our lives, into the ground. Much less for some ethnic cleansing that took place hundreds of years ago.

Why can't the Germans lift a monument to their world war 2 dead? If we enjoy thanksgiving based on how the white settlers took advantage of the native population I don't why the Germans should not celebrate the invasion of France during WW2. Find me a European or American colonists that massacered an Indian tribe a hundred and fifty years ago and we'll prosecute them the same as finding a living person that actually helped to kill off the Jews. And news flash, the Germans don't want to celebrate that history.

Amadeo, The lack of basic logic and common sense in your writing is truly extraordinary to behold. You've just cemented the general view of Nazi sympathizers and present-day Nazis as ignorant, hate-filled losers even further. AGuest9, yourself along with many posters here must be the last remaining Neanderthalls. Ignorant, mouth breathing relic of the past Prof, you are spot-on despite the race-card ravings cess-pitting this blog. What tribes did to each other sometimes in alliance with whites definitely rivals what Europeans did to them.

You're killing me, "professor". Stop abusing the poor apostrophe, please; it did nothing to you. You claim to be a professor and don't have basic writing skills? You sound educated, but miss the point. As long as we have Thanksgiving with the myth of this country starting out pure with Native imagery in it showing a true friendship; the truth of genocide will continue to slap one in the face.

Japanese mythology

See the truth and don't deny the true nature of the beginnings of this country. I believe that human history is a lesson to be learned and not forgotten, all of it! The Native Americans want something from us, I am not sure what, but I don't want to go backwards in time and have to hunt for food. Today it is a grocery store away. Everyone, today, must come to the realization times and things change. NO one group is perfect, even if they think they are, that's their problem.

I leave the perfecting of the human spirit to God not man. As a black man I see the results of the past mistakes made by American politics and people. I refuse to live in the past, my family has invested a lot into America and I'm going to give it to my grandchildren. Enjoy the fruits of this society!! What we want is for the Government to do the following: Honor the treaties; make a formal apology for the murders and crimes committed against us; to provide help in saving our cultures that they have tried to wipe out; for the citizens in this country to acknowledge the crimes committed against us.

There is more but what I have listed is a good start. One culture's celebration can be another culture's suffering, even if it is masked Native Americans are a conquered people. It happened way before I was born, and my ancestors won. Many civilizations have been wiped out by invaders that beat them. History has passed by the American Indian, and they were on the losing side. Oh I can't believe you people. You seriously want me to sympathize with Native Americans because their great great great great grandfather couldn't protect his land?

I'm thankful for my family, right to religion, place in society and the ability to speak freely what is on my mind. For that can't we have 1 holiday that is not dissected and put in to "PC" terminology over events that happend centuries ago? There's not a single "Native American" in which can recollect any events that happened in that time period.

While your at it CNN lets go ahead and start listing all the genocides and wars that have taken place over the last years. I'm sure there are families in the United States who are still mourning the Civil War losses and hold contemp and ill will towards the North or South. C'mon as callous as it may sound it happened centuries ago, the "Native Americans" of today are not personally affected Nada, if it involves anything illegal.

Right to speak freely? You'd better wake up. If someone came to America begged for help from your people and afterwards stabbed you in the back, when would you stop crying about it? A Spanish fort and city. Spain colonized North America. That's why Florida is a Spanish word Not completely true, a British officer gave the Indians blankets, he knew had smallpox in them. This took place in the now New York area. His reason was to reduce the population so they could expand and not return to Europe. Biological warfare at its finest!!

The modern holiday we celebrate is a moment of shared thanks for family, friends and any blessings we've encountered. It's not a moment to celebrate the Pilgrim "invasion," nor is it an opportunity to berate ourselves or get angry with shame and regret about events that occurred years ago. Can there be just ONE frigging holiday where some group doesn't try to make another group feel lower than dung? Well — perhaps that will occur when this country steps up and acknowledges the crimes committed against Natives and the Government finally honors the treaties.

Well, if the Delawares want the Poconos back, they can have them. First, you'll have to kick out the commuters and drug dealers from NYC. Oh, wait, it didn't belong to the Delawares — the Iroquois and the Mohawk "made women of them" and moved them there to protect the southern area of the Confederacy from the Lenape and the Susquehannock. Nor were the various tribes invited to this territory. They invaded a natural area that could have been left alone.

No one is all victim nor all invader. The Pilgrims were oppressed in their home country as well. It is more complicated than that. America is again reminded of our partial genocide of the aboriginals. A timeless lesson continues to be re-taught with each new reminder of this past shortcomings. The day the wheel wasn't invented in the Western Hemisphere should be the Native American day of morning. Thank you for this thought provoking piece, I will be teaching my children a more real perspective of this misunderstood holiday. As the American identity changes we will be there to report it.

In America is a venue for creative and timely sharing of news that explores who we are. Reach us at inamerica cnn. Ad with multiracial family causes stir. How MLK became an angry black man. Racial incidents shake Oberlin college. The original Harlem shake. Braves reject 'screaming Indian' logo. Remembering Rosa Parks at Offensive or just fun? Unseen world of abuse. It's immigration, stupid, say Latino voters in NV.

Faces impacted by new immigration policy. Inaugural poet Richard Blanco. Immigrants lead plunge in U. Meet Ole Miss' first black homecoming queen. Couple combats war, PTSD together. What happened after I came out. What you don't know about Latinos in America. Is she or isn't she, Native American? More people identify as mixed race. American Muslims, 11 years later. No one at top has it all. House apology for exclusionary law. Story of second generation. The Rosa Parks you don't know. Why I became a U.

I am black in America. See all Black in America stories. Racial tension again tests Texas town. African-American women and fat? This 18th century illustration of the first Thanksgiving didn't depict reality, many Native Americans say. Thanksgiving is some Native Americans' 'Day of Mourning' For many Americans, Thanksgiving means turkey with all the fixings, spending time with family, and being grateful for the blessings of the year.

December 2, at 1: November 29, at 6: Peikovianii What about the earlier migration of Aboriginals that were hunted to extermination by the invading Native Americans? November 27, at 2: CPW Very interested in where you found this info. November 30, at 6: Is that why they support Israel at all cost to control the middle east? November 26, at Nitalynn Reminds me of the Saw, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. November 25, at 2: Kathy I agree with your insightful comment completely.

November 25, at 5: November 25, at 3: Or if you're mourning, because Dallas won A Sorry, but the indians are no more credible than the pilgrims. EricKuma Your still paying taxes to pay for the crimes. So get a clue. November 25, at 1: Texan You think that way because your "history" was created by white people with a vested interest in you believing in their version of "history".

November 25, at 6: Julian Alien You are correct Sir. December 5, at Jinkeun Pang I think that human histories was created by power and winners of past. March 1, at You are very cute but very nieve. Please take a look at that November 23, at 9: November 27, at Pretty ugly stuff all in all November 23, at 9: A If you want to argue facts, let's start with the one that says Texas has the highest highschool dropout rate in the country. Joseph A, the high school drop out rate in Texas is high because the education system is more challenging.

November 28, at 1: Southerner01 This article seems weird to me,because I never learned that thanksgiving was about the colonists having a great harvest and inviting indians to celebrate. Barada I learned it the same way as you our here in California back in the '50s. Dougerino Yes, that's the version that I learned in Seattle in the s. Amy I also learned that the Pilgrims were starving and the Natives shared and that was early 90's. Ana Yes, I learned it that way also and it makes common sense since the Pilgrims actually were not sure where they were going and it took months to get to their final destination, out of food, water etc.

Truthbeetold I see a lot of white supremacy on this stream- and to all things regarding Natives. Texan Well said, Trutheetold. Amy We shun the Germans? I didn't know that, guess I need to toss out the BMW. November 23, at 9: Native Guy Is Banjo Boy your dad? Missy I refuse to turn Thanksgiving into a Day of Mourning in my family. Well Said Very well said. Native Guy You must be inline at Walchart.

LOL November 25, at 1: Native Guy You must be inline at Walmart. A You must be inline at the casino November 25, at 1: Native Guy Nada, enjoying the winter at home. A Good, me too. Happy Thanksgiving November 25, at 1: Arick You seem to think that land changing hands by force is a concept invented by America. November 27, at 9: Native Guy I wish I did. You should be grateful they don't s c a l p you November 25, at 1: Maxxron Only ignorant, uneducated "Americans" believe that it was the Pilgrims that shared their "bounty" with the Natives.

We are all humans, we are all equal. No more, no less. Native Guy Right on! Happy Holidays and blessings to your family! Maxxron And that's why you're an "American" and I'm an American. YOu should be s c a l p e d November 25, at 1: Southerner01 Horsesmouth, you cannot simultaneously attack Apache for taking the Anglo view on thanksgiving, then say that "god will judge you'" since the native Americans didn't believe that.

Don Thanksgiving is giving thanks for what ever we have to offer thanks for. November 25, at Pauline If you stare at a black hole, you will likely fall into the hole and be lost. JoltinJoe I clicked to CNN this evening to specifically see what they would publish in the spirit of "today's holiday is the source of all things bad", and that white men should be ashamed of themselves.

The Dude Long ago history Get over it and move on Native Guy We will never get over it! But, have a good holiday with your family and friends. Southerner01 So what specifically, did any person living in America today, do to oppress or harm any native American? Janie I have to agree. Native Guy Your numbers are way off. Kim The numbers I found on line for the population prior to the settlements are as follows.

November 25, at 4: Alex Sad how most of you know nothing about history. Under the bridge I know all sorts of things about history. Pman Alex, as I read some of the ignorant posts of others, I have to agree with you completely Justin typical ignorant americans eh? Bryant Malone Your exactly right. AW I'd call that a "superior weapon"; germ warfare is a type of weaponry. November 24, at Turtleguy Amazing how those wars just "happen" without anyone attacking anyone else to kick them out of their ancestral lands.

Native guy You are a true monkey a distant cousin to humans. This land was stolen from the Indians. Nothing is black and white and I really don't see why we all cant recognize and accept and celebrate Thanksgiving in all its complex facets. Aunti The actual first Thanksgiving was proclaimed 56 years after the landing at Plymouth Rock, and so it had nothing to do with the Pilgrims.

Brian They're a news agency, they're not blaming anybody they're presenting an alternative view that some people have. Repent while you still can, November 24, at ARBB It is horrible that it happened but can I say that in the last 20 years, whatever the natives have suffered is their own fault. Russell There is a lot of would've and could've. UtahProf "No one feels guilty about this old crap anymore. GC1CEO Recognizing that colonization and human existence period usually results in the destruction of one people or melting them into the culture with superior technology at least keeps us honest.

Thanksgiving is some Native Americans' 'Day of Mourning' – In America - www.farmersmarketmusic.com Blogs?
Were American Indians the Victims of Genocide?;
Japanese mythology - Wikipedia!
.
Thank You Father.

Fact Its not you fault. So lighten up and stop thinking its a personal attack November 24, at Fact The fact of the matter is that we killed off a whole race of people. This was the real holocaust November 24, at BigRed I believe the term is ethnic cleansing.

Fact I stand corrected November 24, at Fact Oh why its so easy as to take advantage of others faults and not take the blame. What a noble thing to do November 24, at Todd West Kinda like what the government does now? Yeager And I should feel bad about something I myself didn't do. BigRed Europeans came to this continent and formed villages while being attacked by native peoples, and perishing from the elements and from disease.

Mark I love Native people — from lakota, cherokee, inuit, maori, fijians, caribs, andean, arawaks, australian aborignees, papau new guineans, andaman islander india , masai, twa, bantu,khoisan, etc, etc. Pointless1 Surely no different than our society today. Brian An inability to adapt to changing situations, no internal leadership and lack of communication with fellow members, yeah sounds like congress.

Observer Brian, "no internal leadership"? NorCalMojo People really sit around and whine about this on Thanksgiving? Paul Of course they do. Now that OWS has failed, they need to complain about something. Waaah Didn't all this happen years ago? Dangun's story was recorded in two documents from the 13th century A. Dangun's grandfather, Hwan-in, was the "Lord of Heaven," while his father, Hwan-ung, descended to earth and founded a society on the Korean peninsula.

In some versions of the myth, his society is located on Mount Taebaeksan , and in other versions it is located on Mount Paektu. When a bear and a tiger came to Hwan-ung asking to be made human, he gave them each a bundle of sacred food to eat and told them to stay in a cave for days, after which time they would become human. While the tiger gave up, the bear followed Hwang-ung's directions and was turned into a human woman named Ungnyeo.

Ungnyeo mated with Hwang-ung and gave birth to Dangun. Dangun ruled Gojoseon for 1, years before becoming a mountain god called a sansin. The son, Namu Doryeong, survived a flood by floating on the tree. He first saved a colony of ants from the flood, then a swarm of mosquitoes, until he had saved all the animals of the world. Namu Doryeong finally saved a young human boy, despite the tree's advice against it.

After the flood, Namu Doryeong met an older woman and her two daughters on Mt. Baekdu , where they had been safe from the flood. The woman told Namu Doryeong if he won a contest, he could have her daughter's hand in marriage.

Recommended For Your Pleasure

Korean mythology are the stories passed down by word of mouth over thousands of years on the Korean Peninsula and only written down in historical times. These stories serve as creation myths about the world and origin myths . Gangrim Doryeong became the death god, who reaps dead souls and brings them to the. Japanese mythology embraces Shinto and Buddhist traditions as well as agriculturally-based Ōkuninushi helps the white hare; Princess Suseri In the Japanese creation myth, the first deities which came into existence, appearing at Izanagi lamented the death of Izanami and undertook a journey to Yomi ("the.

Namu Doryeong won the contest with the aid of a swarm of ants, who turned out to be the very ants that Namu Doryeong had saved during the flood. The hero Gangrim Doryeong is ordered to capture Yeomra, King of the Underworld, by his king Kimchiwonnim in order to discover the reason for the mysterious deaths of the three sons of Gwayanggaxi. With help from Munsin , the door god, and Jowangsin , the kitchen god, Gangrim Doryeong captures Yeomra. After testing Gangrim Doryeong's wisdom, Yeomra tells Kimchiwonnim that the mysterious deaths are because the three sons are actually the three princes of Beomul, who were murdered by Gwayanggaxi.

They chose to be reborn as Gwayanggaxi's sons to take revenge on their killers. Gangrim Doryeong became the death god, who reaps dead souls and brings them to the underworld. Barigongju or Baridegi Hangul: In the story, the princess' parents abandon her because they are unable to have a son, and she is their seventh daughter. Years later, the princess' parents became ill, and she travels to the underworld to find the elixir of life. With it, she revives her parents and becomes a goddess who guides the souls of the dead from earth to heaven. After being seduced by a monk , her brothers threatened to kill her for bringing dishonor to their family.

She hid in a cave, where she gave birth and was later freed by her mother, a shaman from heaven. Sonnimgut is a myth about the 53 smallpox gods, called the Sonnimne, who lived in China. However, the Sonnimne wanted to live in Korea, so the beautiful goddess Gaxi Sonnim, lead three of the Sonnimne there.

However, they could not cross the Yalu River. One day, a ferryman said that the three gods could cross the Yalu on his boat if Gaxi Sonnim made love to him. Gaxi Sonnim severed the ferryman's head with a dagger and then gave smallpox to the ferryman's seven sons, killing the eldest six. The seventh son survived, though he was disabled. Then, they crossed the Yalu on the ferryman's boat. When the gods reached Seoul , they attempted to sleep in the house of the rich Kim Jangja, but were refused. Instead, they slept in the shack of the kind crone , Nogo Halmi.

After blessing Nogo Halmi's granddaughter with longevity and good luck, the trio headed towards Kim Jangja's mansion. Kim Jangja hid his son Cheolhyeon in a high mountain, and burned peppers on every street because pepper was said to drive away the Sonnimne. The Sonnimne attacked Cheolhyeon, first luring him out of the mountain then whipping him. The Sonnimne pierced silver needles in Cheolhyeon's joints, and finally, Kim Jangja promised to have a sacrifice made for the Sonnimne. However, the promise was false, and the angered Sonnimne killed Cheolhyon, and took him as the fifty-fourth Sonnimne.

When the Sonnimne were returning to China, they found that Nogo Halmi lived in Kim Jangja's mansion with her granddaughter and son-in-law, while Kim Jangja lived as a sick beggar in Nogo Halmi's shack. When Cheolhyeon cried out at this situation, the Sonnimne gave Kim Jangja some money and cured his sickness. Cheolhyeon then joined the Sonnimne. This refers to Jacheongbi's independence, self-reliance, and strong will to do whatever is necessary to achieve a goal.

THE HORROR OF WHITE DEATH: A NEO-NATIVE MYTH

Korean mythology

Navigation menu

6 Ridiculous Lies You Believe About the Founding of America

Japanese mythology

Recommended For Your Pleasure

Related Stories