"Not So Peaceful": Good Video on Truth About the American Indians

[JoeB131]

What did your great grandmother tell you about Rich Joe Vaughn, the leader of the Cherokee Nation that took 200 slaves, right back up the Trail of Tears? What did she tell, about how the Cherokee Nation established Black Codes, expelled all Freedmen, and how their major form of income at the time came from tracking down and capturing escaped slaves? What did she tell you about how Vaughn used slave labor to construct ports along the Mississippi River down to the top of Louisiana where the Choctaw took over? What did your great grandmother tell you about the Cherokee Nation Slave Revolt of 1842?

Not sure why you think that somehow makes the genocide that was the Trail of Tears okay.

60,000 Native Americans ethnically cleansed and 16,000 killed.

 

[Leo123]

From time to time, we see threads that paint the American Indians as peaceful, blameless, innocent victims of broken promises, brutality, persecution, and even genocide at the hands of whites in the 18th and 19th centuries. As I've argued before, the truth of the matter is much more complicated than this simplistic liberal narrative. Far more Indians were killed by other Indians than were ever killed by whites, and there were plenty of times when the Indians were the ones who violated treaties with whites.

The other day I came across an informative, balanced video by Ken LaCorte titled Not So Peaceful: What They Don't Teach You About Native Americans. I've added a link to this video to my Custer's Last Stand website. LaCorte doesn't whitewash white crimes against Indians, but he provides much-needed balance by discussing the crimes of the Indians against fellow Indians and against whites. Here's the link to the video:

I really like LaCorte's You Tube channel!!! He's the real deal.

 

[Bitterhook]

Not sure why you think that somehow makes the genocide that was the Trail of Tears okay.

60,000 Native Americans ethnically cleansed and 16,000 killed.

Are you implying your great grandmother didn't tell you anything about what I asked, or just making an irrelevant observation in regard to nothing I ever suggested?

 

[Leo123]

To be honest, yes, the Indians sported much violence in their social behavior, but remember too that the Indians were basically a neolithic stone age people.

The European settlers were about 10,000 years ahead of them on the social and technological spectrum.

So, it is a little disingenuous for anyone to directly compare Indian violence towards invaders and settler violence.

The Indians were outclassed weapon wise as well. They had to steal guns once they figured out how they worked. To be fair though, America was not a cohesive country and, at the time, tribes were fighting each other so it was easier to take certain ones out and even pit one against the other. Today, we would do well to remember what happened to the Indians in that regard.

 

[Leo123]

Well if you do know about those bad things your Country did and still excuse or whitewash them then that is even worse, we still have people here in the UK who think the British Empire was a force for good like the Salvation army.

As I recall, the British were colonizers and somewhat mild compared to past warriors. In the past, tribes got together to fight other tribes and the Monguls would conquer a country, kill the men and the older boys, train the younger boys to be warriors and rape the women and girls.

 

[AZrailwhale]

The Indians were outclassed weapon wise as well. They had to steal guns once they figured out how they worked. To be fair though, America was not a cohesive country and, at the time, tribes were fighting each other so it was easier to take certain ones out and even pit one against the other. Today, we would do well to remember what happened to the Indians in that regard.

Actually until the whites went to breechloading rifles, Indian bows actually outgunned the muzzle loading muskets and rifles. A decent bowman could launch at least ten shafts a minute where a muzzle loader was lucky to get two off AND had to be loaded standing up (at least that’s what I’ve read, but I’m not sure I believe it). Quantity has a quality all its own.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

From time to time, we see threads that paint the American Indians as peaceful, blameless, innocent victims of broken promises, brutality, persecution, and even genocide at the hands of whites in the 18th and 19th centuries. As I've argued before, the truth of the matter is much more complicated than this simplistic liberal narrative. Far more Indians were killed by other Indians than were ever killed by whites, and there were plenty of times when the Indians were the ones who violated treaties with whites.

The other day I came across an informative, balanced video by Ken LaCorte titled Not So Peaceful: What They Don't Teach You About Native Americans. I've added a link to this video to my Custer's Last Stand website. LaCorte doesn't whitewash white crimes against Indians, but he provides much-needed balance by discussing the crimes of the Indians against fellow Indians and against whites. Here's the link to the video:

Clearly the Indians were too peaceful and should have immediately murdered every white man that set foot on their land.

 

[JoeB131]

Are you implying your great grandmother didn't tell you anything about what I asked, or just making an irrelevant observation in regard to nothing I ever suggested?

Since she had been dead for years before I was born, it would have been difficult for her to tell me anything.

 

[Bitterhook]

Since she had been dead for years before I was born, it would have been difficult for her to tell me anything.

I am positive that you are the one that indicated that she would "like to have a word", and in which case I was wondering what she might have told you. I didn't assume that meant she was dead, and you were just talking out of your ass.

 

[JoeB131]

I am positive that you are the one that indicated that she would "like to have a word", and in which case I was wondering what she might have told you. I didn't assume that meant she was dead, and you were just talking out of your ass.

Since you are new here, I'm going to let you off with a warning. Attacking family members is against the rules, and you'll have a very short career here if you keep that kind of nonsense up.

 

[Bitterhook]

Since you are new here, I'm going to let you off with a warning. Attacking family members is against the rules, and you'll have a very short career here if you keep that kind of nonsense up.

You don't have to 'let me' nothing, and you can take your warning and stuff it up your ass. I did not bring up your family, was not disrespectful to you or your great grandmother and simply asked a few questions in regard to what she may have passed on to you about the Cherokee Culture and the practices of the Cherokee Nation. However, I am in no way obligated to humor your silliness.

 

[JoeB131]

You don't have to 'let me' nothing, and you can take your warning and stuff it up your ass. I did not bring up your family, was not disrespectful to you or your great grandmother and simply asked a few questions in regard to what she may have passed on to you about the Cherokee Culture and the practices of the Cherokee Nation. However, I am in no way obligated to humor your silliness.

Nice knowing you, buddy.

 

[gipper]

I've got a degree in history, thanks. If you showed up at a university spewing the kind of crankery you are engaging in, they'd show you the door.



You mean other than Ascle-Lorraine? I'm pretty sure he wanted that back.



No, the war wasn't good, but America did well by participating in it because they put a stop to German and Japanese GENOCIDE.



Gee, I hope you don't have a job at the rape crisis center, telling those women they had it coming.

A degree in history is meaningless, because you were taught the establishment narrative. Not the truth.

No war is ever good and nothing that results from war is ever good.

War is a scam. Certainly you learned in history class WAR IS THE HEALTH OF THE STATE. Well..of course you weren’t taught that. You were taught WWII was the good war. Lol. Proving what you learned was statist propaganda.

 

[JoeB131]

A degree in history is meaningless, because you were taught the establishment narrative. Not the truth.

No war is ever good and nothing that results from war is ever good.

War is a scam. Certainly you learned in history class WAR IS THE HEALTH OF THE STATE. Well..of course you weren’t taught that. You were taught WWII was the good war. Lol. Proving what you learned was statist propaganda.

Again, the war was good because the alternative was worse. Hitler was not some peace guy who then went on to systematically exterminate 12 million people.

 

[Bitterhook]

Nice knowing you, buddy.

For some reason I don't think you mean that, but whatever and get the message not to take you seriously.

 

[Bitterhook]

A degree in history is meaningless, because you were taught the establishment narrative. Not the truth.

No war is ever good and nothing that results from war is ever good.

War is a scam. Certainly you learned in history class WAR IS THE HEALTH OF THE STATE. Well..of course you weren’t taught that. You were taught WWII was the good war. Lol. Proving what you learned was statist propaganda.

Absolutely, there is nothing good about war. Unfortunately, we haven't been able to get everyone to figure that out since the beginning of time.

 

[gipper]

Absolutely, there is nothing good about war. Unfortunately, we haven't been able to get everyone to figure that out since the beginning of time.

Particularly the elite who benefit greatly from war.

 

[Concerned American]

I always ask LIBs how did the Indians mark thier land and who did they buy it from !

They were in a constant state of war until the EURO's showed up...giving them a comon enemy.

I attended school in NM and AZ and we were exposed to a lot of the history of interactions between the many tribes--the different factions of Apache as well as the Zuni, Hopi, Pima, Navajo, Paiute as well as many others that escape my old memory. The interactions between tribes weren't much different than the interactions between different gov'ts today.

 

[Bitterhook]

Particularly the elite who benefit greatly from war.

It really doesn't matter exactly how the profit is measured, because war is always fought for profit in one form or another. It could monetary gain, it could be land, it could cultural dominance, or even security with the ability to prosper, and in just about any circumstance the elite tend to gain the most at the cost of whatever tragedy occurs.

 

[gipper]

Again, the war was good because the alternative was worse. Hitler was not some peace guy who then went on to systematically exterminate 12 million people.

War is never good.

Your opinion is based on the establishment narrative. You think because you were taught…that Hitler would have conquered the world if not stopped. This is dumb. Germany had no ability to conquer the world nor did Japan. So, your conclusion the war was good because the alternative was worse, is completely ignorant.

The US should never have been in the war. Had FDR not provoked Japan, Pearl Harbor never happens. Germany then never declares war on the US. War avoided.