babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » Terrorism? No. Self-defence.

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Terrorism? No. Self-defence.
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 13 October 2004 12:07 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The mother's breast milk supply had dried up due to stress and lack of nourishment, and her six-month-old infant had become dehydrated. The ICRC was able to provide them with an emergency food package, but only after several hours of coordination with the Israelis, and even then they were shot at says Nasr.

Gazans face starvation

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
kukuchai
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6215

posted 13 October 2004 02:50 AM      Profile for kukuchai        Edit/Delete Post
The word "genocide" comes to mind.
From: Earth | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 13 October 2004 02:56 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So does "barbarism". It certainly is barbaric to prevent a nursing woman from being able to nurse her child.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
kukuchai
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6215

posted 13 October 2004 03:05 AM      Profile for kukuchai        Edit/Delete Post
Depriving civilians of the necessities of life is genocide. You don't have to hack them to pieces with a machete for it to be genocide. Creating a situation where there is the potential for famine is a form of genocide. Depriving people of food and water while bulldozing their homes, without warning, is barbaric beyond words, yet the world remains silent. "When they came for the Palestinians, I remained silent because I wasn't a Palestinian; ..."
From: Earth | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
aa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5228

posted 13 October 2004 04:44 AM      Profile for aa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And so is sending First Nation children to residential schools. I once attended a lecture by Ward Churchill at Concordia, in which he mentioned that Canada doesn't fully endorse the international definition of genocide, which would also include the policy attempted with the residential schools.

On Palestine, Israeli sociologist and historian Baruch Kimmerling has come up with a compelling study of "politicide" towards the Palestinians. Its an interesting book, and a good background on Sharon.


From: montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
BleedingHeart
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3292

posted 13 October 2004 11:02 AM      Profile for BleedingHeart   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
While many of the policies Canada or the British Empire pursued against the first nations could be considered as genocide, trying to give the children an education, no matter how misguided is not the same as gassing people or systemicly starving them.

quote:
Originally posted by aa:
And so is sending First Nation children to residential schools. I once attended a lecture by Ward Churchill at Concordia, in which he mentioned that Canada doesn't fully endorse the international definition of genocide, which would also include the policy attempted with the residential schools.



From: Kickin' and a gougin' in the mud and the blood and the beer | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
periyar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7061

posted 13 October 2004 11:08 AM      Profile for periyar   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
wow- do you not live in canada? Have you not noticed the devastating legacy that residential schools have had and continue to have on First Nations families?
I guess your heart bleeds selectively.

From: toronto | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
aRoused
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1962

posted 13 October 2004 11:21 AM      Profile for aRoused     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Welcome, periyar.

It's a subtle distinction, but I feel a clear one: residential schooling was carried out 'with the best of intentions' in the context of a widespread belief that First Nations societies were inevitably going to become extinct. Given that, reeducation was seen as the best option. Now we know different.

I'd like to think that no one, and especially no one around this board, would argue that starving refugees in Gaza is being done with 'the best of intentions'.


From: The King's Royal Burgh of Eoforwich | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
kukuchai
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6215

posted 13 October 2004 12:09 PM      Profile for kukuchai        Edit/Delete Post
In my mind there is a similarity between the Pals and the First Nations people. The degree of abuse is, of course, quite different because we don't go in and bulldoze their houses.

Otherwise, both groups are enclosed in either a refugee camp or a reserve; fenced off; segregated; lacking in proper healthcare, education, etc. In the past, starvation was present among the First Nations, notably in the Fort Qu'Appelle region of Saskatchewan.

Both groups had their land, their livelihood, their way of life taken from them and given to others.

When you do that to a people and then humiliate and denigrate them, keep them from holding good jobs, keep them poor, keep them down, generation after generation without hope of a future which is accessible to others -- is that not a slow, painful, torturous genocide?

Really, when you think about it, what right did the Europeans have to come here and forcefully take all this land from the people? A mere 100 years ago our Native people roamed free, drank from the streams, picked berries without fences to stop them, hunted the buffalo without a license, fished without a license.

100 years later, the streams are polluted, the buffalo are pretty well gone, the air is rank, natural ecosystems have been destroyed all over, pipelines and gas lines and highways mar the landscape.

100 years to destroy everything. 100 years of living on reserves and being treated as second class citizens. And in Palestine, 60 years of refugee camps and now starvation; 60 years of being treated like dogs, worse than dogs, on their own land, in their own country.

Some days I'm ashamed to be a member of the human race.


From: Earth | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Black Dog
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2776

posted 13 October 2004 12:12 PM      Profile for Black Dog   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It's a subtle distinction, but I feel a clear one: residential schooling was carried out 'with the best of intentions' in the context of a widespread belief that First Nations societies were inevitably going to become extinct. Given that, reeducation was seen as the best option. Now we know different.

My understanding is that residential schools were an insturment of the policy of assimilation which was based not on the assumption that Native cultures would become extinct, but upon making them so.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 13 October 2004 12:25 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think that is correct.

It is also fair to note that the government of South Africa studied the Canadian and Australian systems of reserves when instituting apartheid. And Israel studied the apartheid system.

Repression like life is a circle.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
periyar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7061

posted 13 October 2004 02:58 PM      Profile for periyar   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The whole phrase 'best of intentions' is hard to swallow when you look at the history and current relations between settlers and first nations. I mean, I think I hear an underlying assumption that bad things were done to Native peoples by Europeans- they realized the error of their ways and decided to help by assimilation-

I personally don't believe that assimilation policies were benevelant. How can anyone rationalize that tearing children away from their parents and placing them in an evnrironment where they were sexually, physically abused, made to relinquish their identity etc- I mean really, would the state have done this to the general white population? Absolutely not - because they viewed white people as human beings with autonomy and a sense of valid culture and identity. Clearly Native peoples were viewed as subhuman. Its no different today when we look at what's happening with Native struggles for self-determination and basic human rights- most well kown- e.g. Dudley George.


From: toronto | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
aa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5228

posted 13 October 2004 03:27 PM      Profile for aa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I read an account of a residential school, in which the headmaster would show young "pupils" two different paintings. One of them would show First Nation children being led to Hell, and the other white children being led to heaven. The idea was :speaking your native tongue would lead you to hell.

It was genocide, allright. And what practioners of genocide have not claimed "the best of intentions?" Hegel explained the genocide of First Nations as an effect of the advance of the "World Spirit", while Hitler, reffering to the genocide of Natives in in North America, something that he really admired the white settlers for, claimed that his genocide was in the best interests of a harmonious world order.


From: montreal | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
kukuchai
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6215

posted 13 October 2004 03:32 PM      Profile for kukuchai        Edit/Delete Post
It's too bad because we were all once indigenous people of the world; the indigenous people of the world actually hold the key to world harmony -- they are more in tune with nature, they flow with the seasons, they are in tune with the spirit and with the natural healing powers of the earth. Instead of destroying them, we should be learning from them.
From: Earth | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 13 October 2004 04:01 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
A mere 100 years ago our Native people roamed free, drank from the streams, picked berries without fences to stop them, hunted the buffalo without a license, fished without a license.

What was the population back then? A few hundred thousand, at best? I'm sure we could return to the good old days no problem if we didn't mind kicking about 98% of Canadians the hell out. Failing that, I can't really see 30,000,000 of us drinking from a stream.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
BleedingHeart
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3292

posted 13 October 2004 04:15 PM      Profile for BleedingHeart   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No the fact that they are dark skinned, poor and live in isolated areas of the country not to mention that Canada is still a pretty racist country is responsible for most of their problems.

Most of the residential schools were closed over a generation ago.

quote:
Originally posted by periyar:
wow- do you not live in canada? Have you not noticed the devastating legacy that residential schools have had and continue to have on First Nations families?
I guess your heart bleeds selectively.


From: Kickin' and a gougin' in the mud and the blood and the beer | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
periyar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7061

posted 13 October 2004 11:25 PM      Profile for periyar   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Bleeding heart- most were closed in the 1970's and the last one closed in the mid 1990's. That means there are many adults walking around with scars from this experience. Do you seriously think that the abuse and attacks on their culture left no lasting impact on themselves and future generations. You are shortsighted. I think you live in some fantasy land of the Great White Father.
From: toronto | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 13 October 2004 11:35 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
In the context of the present debate, while it is clear that the Canadian government treated its native peoples horribly, the fact is that a great amount of the worst aspects of the Canadian imperialist venture have ended. And in fact institutions like the Anglican Church are being forecd to compensate its vicims. It is likely the Church will go bankrupt in doing so.

What is going on in is Gaza is happening now. And Canadian abuses in the past do not excuse Israeli ones today. Sorry.

If they did, and by the same logic, I could simply wave my atrocity wand and justify everything done to the natives of Canada by the representative of the Queen by saying: Well look at what Hitler did to the Gypsies.

Canada, is not at this time engaging in policies of armed occupation that are tantamount to deliberate starving of its native people, even if they have done so in the past. Israel is doing so now.

Nice try.

The late Rodney Bobiwash, world renowned Missisagi-Canadian human rights activist, made explicit comparisons between the struggle of indiginous persons in Canada and the struggle of the Palestinians.

[ 13 October 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
periyar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7061

posted 13 October 2004 11:48 PM      Profile for periyar   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I appreciate that this is thread drift and I actually am very engaged in the importatnt issues regarding the Palestinian struggle- so i apologize for taking the discussion in a different direction. It was not some calculated ploy on my part.
I will make one last comment. I think you can make your point without minimizing the struggles of First Nations peoples. Every time they stand up and fight the Canadian state- they are met with a whole spectrum of aggressive reactions which have also resulted in deaths. I am a mental health worker and have seen first hand what the residential schools have done to Naitve communities today, in the present. I don't think that it should be dismissed as something we no longer need to think and act upon.

From: toronto | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 13 October 2004 11:55 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Absolutely. I agree.

There has been some psychological analysis of the relationship between suicide bombing and depression. I think there is also some parallel between the suicidal aspects of the Ghost Shirt society (and there own belief in their imortality) and the Hamas and Islamic Jihad Suicide bombers.

Throughout the colonial period there have been occaisions where societies under attack by overwhellmingly superior military powers adopted suicidal modes of resistance. There was a similar movement to the Ghost Shirt Society in South Africa, against the British.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
aRoused
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1962

posted 14 October 2004 07:04 AM      Profile for aRoused     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
One could write an entire book on this (I stopped my reply yesterday at about eight paragraphs and went home instead). Briefly summarized:

The assimilation/extinction question is a chicken-and-egg question. Social Darwinist beliefs of the day suggested that 'inferior' First Nations would become extinct due to competing with 'superior' Euro-Canadian culture. So reeducation and assimilation was seen as a noble goal given that extinction after starving to death through 'idleness' and 'wastefulness' was seen as the only other possible outcome. In that context, residential schooling was done 'with the best of intentions'. Intentions that were based on ignorance and misinformation.

To lay all the blame for the various social and cultural disruptions that Euro-Canadian expansion and colonization brought about in First Nations from the 1600s to the present day at the door of Euro-Canadians is to completely remove any agency, any possibility of action from First Nations people of the time. It is to say 'They were passive victims/recipients of the dominant culture, and no matter what they did, the end result would have been the same'. En Francais: Ils se sont laisses faire. Nothing could be further from the truth, and to make this kind of claim is a continuation of the same mindset that led to residential schooling: the mindset that the 'poor ignorant savage' can't change, can't adapt, can't make any free-willed decisions about his or her life, and so we mighty Europeans must make those decisions for them. It simultaneously lumps all First Nations peoples into a single homogeneous block, denying the individual actions of conscious persons, both First Nations and Euro-Canadian, throughout history, engaged in a struggle to make a living during a period of radical cultural changes to both groups.

To get back on track, this is also the mindset articulated when we speak of 'the Palestinians' as a monolithic group that 'has to react' to Sharon going to the Temple Mount, or to IDF incursions into the Gaza strip. The party with the dominant power is presented as holding all the cards, and the weaker is presented as acting as if on rails, predestined to react just thus and so, and ignoring the very real conscious decisions by individuals that led to that overall impression of group action.


From: The King's Royal Burgh of Eoforwich | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Agent 204
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4668

posted 14 October 2004 03:53 PM      Profile for Agent 204   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Absolutely. I agree.

There has been some psychological analysis of the relationship between suicide bombing and depression. I think there is also some parallel between the suicidal aspects of the Ghost Shirt society (and there own belief in their imortality) and the Hamas and Islamic Jihad Suicide bombers.


I don't know who the Ghost Shirt Society were, but the connection between depression and suicide bombing makes sense. Strangely, though, I've heard it denied by at least one American terrorism pundit who's been interviewed on CBC. This guy seemed to be claiming that the suicide bombers generally were not depressed.


From: home of the Guess Who | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 14 October 2004 03:59 PM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by aRoused:

To lay all the blame for the various social and cultural disruptions that Euro-Canadian expansion and colonization brought about in First Nations from the 1600s to the present day at the door of Euro-Canadians is to completely remove any agency, any possibility of action from First Nations people of the time. It is to say 'They were passive victims/recipients of the dominant culture, and no matter what they did, the end result would have been the same'. En Francais: Ils se sont laisses faire. Nothing could be further from the truth, and to make this kind of claim is a continuation of the same mindset that led to residential schooling: the mindset that the 'poor ignorant savage' can't change, can't adapt, can't make any free-willed decisions about his or her life, and so we mighty Europeans must make those decisions for them. It simultaneously lumps all First Nations peoples into a single homogeneous block, denying the individual actions of conscious persons, both First Nations and Euro-Canadian, throughout history, engaged in a struggle to make a living during a period of radical cultural changes to both groups.


The biggest advantage to dumping such an approach is to bolster our own misguided belief that we are conscious, and can intentionally will more than the most simple, basic processes. Yes indeed, to deny them their sentience, we would need to deny our sentience and accept that much of what we do is completely accidental - i.e. a result of a coincidence of internal and external forces completely beyond our 'conscious' control. But we aren't ready to admit that we aren't in control, and that things 'just happen' to us according to all kinds of laws and conditions that begin and end entirely of their own accord. Admitting such would be to strip ourselves of our greatest delusion about ourselves. And we wouldn't want that.

[ 14 October 2004: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]


From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 14 October 2004 04:59 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I don't know who the Ghost Shirt Society were, but the connection between depression and suicide bombing makes sense. Strangely, though, I've heard it denied by at least one American terrorism pundit who's been interviewed on CBC. This guy seemed to be claiming that the suicide bombers generally were not depressed.


I don't know (sic) either. Yet....


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 14 October 2004 05:16 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Ghost Shirt - suicide bomber comparison does not really work. The Ghost Dance was a mystical movement in the 1890s, after the Sioux defeat, with their culture and economy in ruins. Some warriors went into battle believing their shirts had the power to deflect bullets. It did not work. They were not suicidal but were deluded.

What really bugs me is people who argue that Osama is a rich kid and so doesn't fit the profile of a suicide bomber; of course, like GWB, he sends other people to do the dying.


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Agent 204
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4668

posted 14 October 2004 05:22 PM      Profile for Agent 204   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The guy I heard wasn't talking about Osama, he was talking about the people who actually do it. I don't know how he reached his conclusions, though.
From: home of the Guess Who | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 14 October 2004 05:39 PM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Contrarian:
The Ghost Shirt - suicide bomber comparison does not really work. The Ghost Dance was a mystical movement in the 1890s, after the Sioux defeat, with their culture and economy in ruins. Some warriors went into battle believing their shirts had the power to deflect bullets. It did not work. They were not suicidal but were deluded.

Really? I guess they really were ignorant natives afterall?


From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 14 October 2004 05:52 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The Ghost Shirt - suicide bomber comparison does not really work. The Ghost Dance was a mystical movement in the 1890s, after the Sioux defeat, with their culture and economy in ruins. Some warriors went into battle believing their shirts had the power to deflect bullets. It did not work. They were not suicidal but were deluded.

It is the evolution of spirtual cult where the person is invested with inate invincibility. The religious suicide bomber's person is protected by their Martyrdom. What is more invincible than imortality?

I am not sure that Sioux society even had a religious system that included 'imortality' as an option. But the sailent feature that links both is that the person (not necessarilly the corporeal person) is made invincible through spiritual means.

Hopelessly outgunned both groups can be seen to retreating into the realm of religion (in the sense that spirtuality, magic and mysticism are all facets of the same phenomena) as a last resort tactic against an overwhellming enemy.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 14 October 2004 06:08 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by B.L. Zeebub LLD:
Really? I guess they really were ignorant natives afterall?

Well there were some deluded people who happened to be native.

quote:
...While many tribes of Plains Indians wore the ghost shirts and partook of the dance, only the Lakota believed that the clothing would protect them from the bullets of the white man -- an assertion that was made in response to the dancers feared intrusion by U.S. soldiers. This was an idea which agitated the government agents, who, rather than realizing the defensive nature of the ghost shirts, viewed them as symbols of aggression...

Link

Cue ball, you have a point.

quote:
A Lakota Sioux described the Ghost Dance:
"They danced without rest, on and on...Occasionally someone thoroughly exhausted and dizzy fell unconscious into the center and lay there "dead"...After a while, many lay about in that condition. They were now "dead" and seeing their dear ones...The visions...ended the same way, like a chorus describing a great encampment of all the Dakotas who had ever died, where...there was no sorrow but only joy, where relatives thronged out with happy laughter...The people went on and on and could not stop, day or night, hoping...to get a vision of their own dead...And so I suppose the authorities did think they were crazy - but they were not. They were only terribly unhappy."

[ 14 October 2004: Message edited by: Contrarian ]


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 14 October 2004 06:15 PM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Contrarian:

[ 14 October 2004: Message edited by: Contrarian ]


An uncited assertion of some academic....hmmm...well I guess I should believe it then!

Good enough - the Lakota Indians actually believed their ghost shirts would fend off bullets!

All it took was a URL and I'm a believer!


From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 14 October 2004 06:20 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So what is your point, exactly?

Do your own search of '"ghost dance" shirts'; google produced 3400 hits. Remember that these shirts are in museums, so there is a fair bit of interest in explaining what they are about.

Read Dee Brown's Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee.


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 14 October 2004 06:26 PM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Contrarian:
[QB]So what is your point, exactly?

Do your own search of '"ghost dance" shirts'; google produced 3400 hits. Remember that these shirts are in museums, so there is a fair bit of interest in explaining what they are about.


Which means the explanation that the people wearing them really believed that they would stop bullets must be true. Anyone seen any eyewitness testimony to this effect?


From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 14 October 2004 06:39 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Lord of the Flies:
Find this book: McGregor, James. The Wounded Knee Massacre Rapid City, South Dakota: Fenwyn Press, 1940. Indian oral traditions about the events described.

Let us know what you find out.


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 14 October 2004 06:47 PM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No.
From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 14 October 2004 07:37 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Its a pity. I think you guys should have this discussion. It is quite interesting. It it not at all impossible that some of the claims made by anthropologist about the Ghost Shirts Society are myth created by the interlocution of the anthropolgists themselves.

I'd like to see more.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 14 October 2004 08:03 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Ghost Dance thing also sounds very similar to the whole Boxer Rebellion deal.
(about which I know little, but I have the vague impression that it involved martial artists of a colonized people believing their chi or whatnot would make them invulnerable to bullets. Like the Ghost Dance people, they were wrong, although in the case of the Chinese they got all their turf back from the colonizers eventually)

From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 14 October 2004 08:24 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I have the impression that B.L. Zeebub LLD started by assuming that I was just making a racist comment about deluded natives. Any people can suffer from religious delusions leading to death; remember Jonestown? And that UFO group in the US? And many more?

As I mentioned, because some shirts are in museums, the story explaining them is widely known; also the Wounded Knee massacre, which resulted from US fears about the Ghost Dance, is a famous event. There is also much published literature about the Sioux.

I don't know whether the story about the bullet-proof shirts is based on eye-witness testimony from Sioux survivors; Kicking Bear is specifically mentioned as having made this claim. The book of oral history published in 1940 could be a source; there were also reports made by government soon after the massacre and anthropologists were active at the time.

As you may notice, I've changed my own assumption that warriors rushed into battle wearing the shirts; they seem to have been worn more as a desperate hope of protection, and it was the US army that rushed into battle apparently out of fear of what they considered "crazy" natives [remember, the Sioux had defeated Custer in 1876.] I was influenced by the images in a film made, I think, by native groups in Alberta.

Anyway, B.L. Zeebub, I am not aware of anyone knowledgeable casting doubt on the bullet-proof belief; if you are, then cite them. Put up or shut up.


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 14 October 2004 08:36 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This area gets controversial because one person who has written about millenial movements among defeated peoples is Tom Flanagan; who has argued that Louis Riel was a self-described messianic leader, etc. While Riel's writing [which Flanagan appears to have actually done research on] appear to be pretty nutty; I don't know how well the rest of Flanagan's theory stands up. For all I know the Metis didn't give a hoot about his religion but valued his ability to speak and write and negotiate in French and English. [Not my area of specialization ] Louis'David' Riel: Prophet of the New World by flanagan 1979

[ 14 October 2004: Message edited by: Contrarian ]


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
B.L. Zeebub LLD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6914

posted 14 October 2004 10:37 PM      Profile for B.L. Zeebub LLD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No.
From: A Devil of an Advocate | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 14 October 2004 11:34 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Father Morice has documented a lot of the First Nations peoples histories in western Canada. He received an honourary degree from the University of Saskatchewan for his work. Personally, I feel he is a much better resource than Tom Flanagan, who was busy re-writing history with our tax dollars. Moreover, Father Morice
was much closer to events occuring than Tom Flanagan is today.

This is a link to the UoS:

Racial Oppression Planned


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 15 October 2004 12:26 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
remind, your link is to the Anglican Church site with an article about residential schools by JR Miller. It's a good link and has good links listed, but I don't think it's the one you intended to make.
From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca