Villains by Perception

[strangeagain]

Out of intense curiousity, can any one relate how Indians define villainy amongst themselves and others? And are there any notable Indian villains that have been reported from within the tribes?
As with all things, there are good and bad, but every Indian I read up on comes out "good". Are historians just jerking around with political correctness or do Indians have no definition for villainy?

Do Indians report any nasty tribe leaders within their realm or do they hold back on speaking the negative of fellow tribesmen?
Are historians sitting on any documents of Indians speaking ill of each other? Surely, if we have heroics like Geronimo, then we need villains SOMEWHERE, so where can I find the bad ones if they are mentioned at all?

Forgive me if I'm looking for dirt, but I want to know how they reason and distinguish.

Strange

[Tricia]

Certainly there were meanies in Indian culture--most likely they were ostrasized by their band. But there wasn't no jails or anything, needless to say. But you have to remember that us NDNs look at all kinds of things with a different perspective, including crime.

Enemies? Certainly the idiot who betrayed Crazy Horse was wicked to the core--seeking personal gain and favour from the US gubment. If CSS had his own way, not only would the Dog Soldiers be hung, but every other Indian as well.

As for my gang, we have had some mighty creepy tribal leaders. Although he made his fame as a code talker, Peter MacDonald was clearly scraping from the tribe's finances ... and he did serve time for his crimes. But he had his supporters as well--kinda like a Bill Clinton with red blood. And Russel Means is infamous on the Navajo for beating his girlfriend in her trailer whilst claiming Tribal Court could not try him because he wasn't Navajo. Jerk. He's a fire breathing AIM activist when it suits him, but doesn't own up to his wrongs. And he is wrong a whole lot.

Also if you're interested, watch the movie Skins. That is a very interesting look at the dilemna of crime on the Res; it also has a lot of references to Custer ... and Graham Green is wonderful. The lack of employment opportunities--I believe the Pine Ridge Sioux have an unemployment rate of at least 17%--and the abject poverty can turn even the most honest tribal member into something they never thought they'd become.

Hope that kinda helps.
--t.

[strangeagain]

I'll remember that, thanks for the movie recommendation!

I'll still have to look around for some specific villains, but that was definitely useful. I touched on this subject with the "Apache Law" thread.

Thanks!

Strange One

[Treasuredude]

ricemclean said:

I believe the Pine Ridge Sioux have an unemployment rate of at least 17%

I think it's closer to 35%. 60% below poverty line. Lots and lots of problems there -- high suicide rates, poor health care, and the list goes on.

[gocav76]

Treasuredude, Don't they have any casinos?

[harpskiddie]

Strange That You Should Have Asked That:

Anent bad guys of the NDN persuasion or heritage: There are, in the third sub-basement of the National Archives in Washington, DofC, six standard-sized file boxes stacked neatly in the southwest corner. If you ask nicely, and fill out the appropriate search forms [and sign away the rights to your third-born child], a custodian will escort you and show you the way. After donning white cotton gloves, so as not to get any of the ickiness on your hands, the custodian/assistant curator/docent will carefully open each box in succession [if you can handle it after reading some of the contents of the first one].

Each box contains a wealth of research material accumulated by ethnographers, historians, soldiers and, yes, NDNs, concerning the bad deeds, sociopathic behavior and general crap perpetrated against members of the white race and even other NDNs by some of the creepiest characters ever to have walked the earth. You'll love it!!

It is inflammatory material, and not for the faint of heart. One should probably work out for a few weeks before going, since a weak stomach would spoil the whole experience. You might contact David Cornut [custerwest at the Little Bighorn Associates message boards - Google] and see if the two of you could get together to share expenses on a trip to Washington. Or maybe he would subsidize your own trip, if you promised to share the results with him. He is also very, very interested in the same type of subject matter as you are, and, like you, is a devoted Custer disciple.

I think you should go, and soon.

Gordie
MC

[gocav76]

Sorry Gordie, I just wanted to know if any casinos were located on the reservations.

[Treasuredude]

There is one casino there that I know of -- Prairie Wind Casino.

216.245.184.23/prairiewind/.

The casino is nothing special. It is also hurt by it's proximity to Deadwood which is loaded with casinos and restaurants.

[gocav76]

Thanks Treasuredude, I've never been to a casino or reservation-so I was curious.

[harpskiddie]

The post wasn't meant for you, Larry. Despite being rather old, I am not yet sterile, er um senile. It was meant for Strange, again. I thought that you might have noticed the salutation.

Seriously though, and for your general information, not all reservations have casinos, and some are so small and isolated that there would be no point in anyone financing such a venture. It is the same in Canada as in the U.S. We have reserves so far out in the middle of nowhere that there is no possibility of gainful employment in the area, so that the inhabitants live on the "largesse" stipulated by treaty. Since there is no hope and no jobs, the young people either turn to something to kill the pain and the brain, or move to the big city only to find themselves mostly on the fringes of society, and still generally not considered employable, and so they wind up with the others of the same category - living on the streets, trying to get by somehow, eventually getting to the point that they just don't care anymore.

That's not every one of them, of course, and maybe not even the majority of them; but it is far too commonly their lot, and one of the real disgraces of today.

In Canada, to their credit, the Federal and Provincial governments in many provinces are negotiating new treaties with the First Nations peoples, which see the people actually receiving title to traditional hunting lands [or payment in lieu, when return is not feasible],establishment of traditional hunting and fishing rights, development and logging rights and etc etc etc. The lands, of course, may still be rather remote, but are natural extensions of the reserves, so that there is no displacement of the people.

Sometimes the treaty lands are within municipal boundaries - parts of Vancouver are reserve lands, and some of that land has been developed for residential purposes [or, in one instance, a golf course], the developments being financed by outside builders and the building lots being leased rather than freehold. One of the bands in northern B.C., instead of taking a short-term view, developed an industrial park, invited local businesses to relocate to a tax-free haven, and has been so successful that they have started development of a small shopping mall. The store sites have been pre-leased. The band has also started their own truck-logging operation on their own lands and has leased some of it for other small loggers to operate upon. If they had a casino, the only patrons would be some of the band members and some of the few thousand residents of the small settlements outside the reserve. It wouldn't last long.

Meanwhile, the band has provided employment for virtually anyone who wants to work. Formerly "incorrigible" problem-makers have either straightened out and joined in the festivities, or have drifted away to wherever, the way they would have.

Gordie

PS There are many casinos on reservations throughout the U.S. [Washington state has several, and half the boxing shows seem to be coming from NDN-owned casinos]. Same in Canada, although to a lesser degree [smaller population, don't you know]. There are a couple in B.C.

[gocav76]

Gordie, Check your private messages

[markland]

strangeagain said:

Out of intense curiousity, can any one relate how Indians define villainy amongst themselves and others? And are there any notable Indian villains that have been reported from within the tribes?
As with all things, there are good and bad, but every Indian I read up on comes out "good". Are historians just jerking around with political correctness or do Indians have no definition for villainy?

Do Indians report any nasty tribe leaders within their realm or do they hold back on speaking the negative of fellow tribesmen?
Are historians sitting on any documents of Indians speaking ill of each other? Surely, if we have heroics like Geronimo, then we need villains SOMEWHERE, so where can I find the bad ones if they are mentioned at all?

Forgive me if I'm looking for dirt, but I want to know how they reason and distinguish.

Strange

Just guessing but I think that you will find more Apache speaking badly about Geronimo than positively.

Geronimo was a wantabe.

Yes his band killed innocent civilians and lured dumbass troops into ambushes but if the government had not cut off the Apache home-brew, Geronimo would have died a drunk on the reservation unless he got in the mood to kill someone.

Billy

[ladonna]

Gee! was kind of shocked by that statement.

Anyway, Crimes like murder of another member
and Rape were dealt by banishment or death.
The family members of the individual would either
by right take the first born child of the murders or
another family member from the murder to replace
the one murdered. The family would have the right
to kill him.

Rape was crime that was punished by death,
the family member would kill the person who
done the deed and bury him upside down.
His family would have to give gifts to the victum.

We had many people who commited crime but the way it was dealt with was different.

The government did not like the way we dealt with crime so they made the Major Crimes Act-- Ex parte Crow Dog,
In August 1881, Crow Dog, “belonging to” the Brule Sioux Band, killed Spotted Tail, who signed the treaty of 1868 as the principal Chief of the Brule Sioux. “The killing,” according to court records, “took place at their agency upon the Great Sioux Indian reservation, in the first judicial district of Dakota Territory.” Crow Dog was convicted of murder by the district court of Dakota territory, and sentenced to death.

The people honored Crow Dog for the death but the government said it was a crime.

Rain-in-Face killed Dr. Honzinger and others accompanying him for trespassing on the land of the Lakotas. He was considered
a hero to his people. Rain-in-the-Face, Hunkpapa, was arrested
for killing two civilians under clouded circumstances on Sioux treaty lands. A military detachment under the command of Captain George Yates arrested a Sioux warrior, Rain-in-the-Face, at Standing Rock Agency. They claim that Rain In the Face had murdered two civilians, Dr. Honzinger and Mr. Baliran, over
a year before. He escaped to fight another day.

Brave Bear did many crimes aganist people and considered
a bad man by the people and non-indians.

If a person done any of these deed his name was never spoke again and his spirit would NOT be remembered.

[crzhrs]

Good and bad in all races. Simple as that!

Each culture has it's own way of dealing with those who go against the norm.

[strangeagain]

The Apache's have bad things to say about Geronimo because his battles were sometimes fought to the very last man and he had high warrior casualties ( I'm referencing his own statements from his autobiography).
And Markland's last comments of my hero are utter rubbish to the highest degree. Geronimo has personally taken out high ranking officers, high as mexican generals, with his daring and greatness. He has been the very last man standing, as I stated above, when rubbing out the enemy and driving his warriors to the utmost potential.
His stands against the mexicans are legendary and our government should have praised him for it. Given our history in warring with Mexico throughout so many years, what kind of nation were we to side with them?

As far as I'm concerned, any one with a beef against Geronimo is simply ticked off at the fact that he was so cooperative with the U.S. and converted to Christianity and was very fascinated with our ways of life. Shame on them. Look at the man's face, few other warriors have that magnificent scowl, we are highly blessed to have photos of such one as him.
He was "the one who yawns", and he'll yawn at any one of those shrimpy Sioux if he ever had to face them.

The U.S. imprisoned a great warrior with no quarrel toward America. He was treated like a fugitive, and for no good reason at all.

Without question, Geronimo is no villain to me, but by perception, I guess it may be so.
A "wantabe", he is not. I would dare any wimpy historian to look him in the face with that statement.
Teddy Roosevelt had a comment about critics and commentators, its easy to comment and criticize, its harder to be a great man yourself, and more worthwhile. It is my intense laughter and delight to find any history person trying to say less of so many great men. Even Napoleon could easily slice us all to death better than what we'd want to admit, no matter how short he is.
And I erupt in giggles when I think of all the historians that step forth to say "every one was shorter back in the old days". Food for thought to them, almost every king of England and President of the United States, have been around six footers with mostly few exceptions. And don't get me started on the Russian Czars, Peter the Great was a big stick man at 6'7", with detailed and beautiful paintings.

I bet that most historians didn't know that 20" biceps were around before steroids. I have a collection of photographs of old time turn of the century athletes, I pattern my bodybuilding on them and I can bend steel with my bare hands. I can show you photos of Georg Hackenschmidt or some other Russian bodybuilders from 1900 to 1920 (and times before that) who put Arnold Schwarzenegger to shame ( and I mean that. I boasted innaccurately of myself before, but these gents are 100% better quality than Arnie).
I can show 7 footers who'd cradled 300 pounds beneath each arm, these things are photographed, recorded, and recorded again. Size and strength and power is not to be doubted, the foolish ones who do are the same ones who get hooked on drugs and deny us perspective of the athletes of yesteryear.

Old time baseball players are magnificent, each one had a secret edge and training technique of their own. For every excess and drunken gluttony that Babe Ruth had, he also had secrets to combat every ailment. Big Fur coats full of pocket money would weigh him down just as Blackbeard would weigh himself with his bandolier of 17 pistols and 2 swords. Ruth would have special hunting trips where he'd get the forces of nature behind him. No matter how strong, axes and sledgehammers are special weights because they are longated and take a special kind of grace. I can lift three hundred pounds, but even I was humbled upon my first touch of a big hammer!
Ruth would also eat plenty of onions to combat ailments, and he'd offer them to the elderly as "cold killers". Ruth was more than a blubbery eyed ball player, he was fit very often and had a pair of rippling calves and arms and chest. I suggest many of the interesting pictures of him, you'd be surprised how many people have no idea what Ruth REALLY looks like.

I bet Custer had plenty of ripple too, you can see it right through the uniform, he also had that onion secret too, thanks to what I've read around here.
My sickly mother eats plenty of onion too, that keeps her around longer and really fights her mild case of Lupus. Ruth's experiences helped save her life and continue to be a blessing to her.
You can't get that from modern athletes, none of them have that secret innovation.