|
|
Post by wolfgang911 on Aug 1, 2009 15:32:48 GMT -6
Well your feeling of superiority even shows that you have to build your arguments by blaming the reading/writing skills of your virtual opponents. Just like your schoolish layout in 15 points (DC school!).
If you like to underline the inferior english of your palls here, if you wish to continue this post in fluent french, dutch or german just say so : you have shown litteracy and name dropping in just 1 language & culture untill now which is pretty poor.
As you did not even get my bridge (to you!) between braveheart society - scotts the movie and braveheart society - lakota of moses brings plenty, it is no use countering all the other 15 dumb points you develop.
Anyway you're a complete ignorant of plains indians : they had no justice, no death penalty, no prison, no chief authority, no wealth accummation, tiospayes formed and split as free as fish in the ocean.
Your blabla on the alpha males holds more in money ruled modern america then in an indian lodge where coexcercity was vital.
If you think we're free of alpha male domination today you're pretty ignorant. Laws and money makes any nerd (the b male) capable ruling an estate, whilst in other times a chief had to be the bravest and the wisest. It could not be elsewise as it was natural selection, no safety net. They could not be mean to hold their tribe together or alpha dominant, people would just leave. The status lakota warriors were after was only girls, free lakota girls, free of choice, young warriors lining up waiting for a favor : no slaves. Their brave deeds stole the hearts of the pretty and their family and that was about it. Rock and roll.
Most of the countries in 2009 have fake democracy or none and are ruled by cruel alpha males. Your inconsistency damns indian society but admits today's planet. It is just no argument.
Your other argument that if you get robbed once OK but not the 347th time etc.. is pretty childish also as you know very well that there were as many tribes and peoples as experiences. So every tribe had to do it's experience all over again, with english, french, spanish invadors, hoping for the best, as they had no choice to the west it was occupied anyway.
Anyway I countered all your arguments to portray indians as an inferior society don't hold :
showing that sadism or woman treatment was worse elsewhere any place any tribe any country in that period even today (which you admit in answer above),
so it is intellectually false to condemn indians for that reason.
The difference between you and I can not be argumented as indeed I have an eye for beauty and moral which I believe in and you not, considering it a myth.
What do you do here anyway?
You don't like custer and you don't like indians??
Don't be to hard on yourself!
Further you refuse to answer to the ecological question and the short timespan of your favorite superior society which still has to proof if it is capable to build that spaceship to save humanity in time from their sadistic torture of the earth. You can not sell the air you breathe, the land you walk on. The first Al Gore's were red. Yep, wisedom does not come from litterature ;D
Neither from wolfgang who quotes only some stupid ol' indians, some alpha males like sitting bull, chief joseph or seattle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 1, 2009 19:42:35 GMT -6
Never claimed superiority in anything, Wolf. Finished third grade, coward, never served in the military. If that's superiority than things have changed since childhood.
I'm not good in many languages, but were I to engage in a posting to a message board in one, I'd spend time making sure the translation was good so it didn't waste people's time by forcing them to try and figure out what in the world I was asking or talking about.
You completely get things wrong, and I don't name drop at all. If so, provide one example. Nobody underlines the inferior English of posters beyond the posters themselves. It's not a grammar class, it's being unable to convey, coherently, any point at all.
The god awful movie Braveheart is of no interest to me, is far from accurate, and not history. It has nothing to do with the supposed Braveheart society among the Sioux.
You can pretend to be more knowledgeable about plains Indians than I, I'm no authority. But when you say "they had no justice, no death penalty, no prison, no chief authority, no wealth accummation, tiospayes formed and split as free as fish in the ocean" you curse them worse than you say I have. They had no justice? Really. In any case, as I've said forever, they were just another nomadic bunch of people who had lost the ability to build permanent structures (like prisons), had no need of money, and could neither record their history nor remember it very well. And, they originally cast the elderly aside if they couldn't keep up (like everyone else), and that's a death penalty. Think of it like Wisconsin. If Wisconsin didn't have a hunting season with 'accidents' the state would have to have a court system. Lotta issues settled in hunting season up there.
You say they had no central authority (some did) and yet use the word "chief."
That you've noticed the conflict over the defintion of alpha males in a modern society is encouraging, but doesn't negate my points about the plains Indians.
I make no argument about being robbed, but betrayal. And because they had no record keeping or ability to share info with other tribes (no writing, nor reading) they didn't realize till too late what the 'treaties' did. But the chiefs who signed were often rewarded, and that short term benefit was all that mattered to them. There was no 'divide and conquer', the tribes betrayed each other with zest. They were always divided and paid the penalty.
You make the contention I imply the Indians are worse than other people. On the contrary, I make a point of saying the opposite. It's just part of the civilization process, and the Scots went through it not long before, as I said. The Scots had an inferior culture to the British, and the clans could not unite, and they sold each other out to the Brits easy enough.
The Southern states of the Confederacy had similar issues, and would not share, and were a pain to Davis and the government because they wouldn't grant power to the central government. Their Congress generally was drunk. They had to become just like the government they had rebelled against to survive. They wouldn't do it, had their own religious 'awakening' at the end that was as stupid as the Ghost Dance. They make a big deal out of cavalier concerns for women and the Cause, but really it was all an excuse for guys to take positions of power by force. They failed the cause and their 'civilization' that wasn't gone with the wind but had rotted by the cess pit.
I don't condemn Indians at all. I only point out their culture was inferior to the Europeans and Americans for the reasons I repeat endlessly.
Indians burned the prairies and forests for spring grass. They drove buffalo and game off cliffs and could not use all they killed. As we know in Colorado, the cliff dwellers, the Anasazi, were there because they'd burned and cut down all the forests about them, and those peaceful pueblos were forts to protect themselves from, it seems, each other. They apparently engaged in cannabilism as well at need. Just like everyone else, everywhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by desertpossum on Aug 1, 2009 20:10:08 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by conz on Aug 2, 2009 9:18:28 GMT -6
There were certainly a few Indians that spoke Spanish, French, and/or English fairly well. And the emerging new race of "half breeds" that almost all spoke two or more languages.
I also think that many, if not most, Indians were multi-lingual in several Indian languages.
As a whole, the people of the Western plains were probably more multi-lingual than the people who live there today are. <g>
Clair
|
|
|
|
Post by wolfgang911 on Aug 2, 2009 17:02:16 GMT -6
I don't condemn Indians at all. I only point out their culture was inferior to the Europeans and Americans for the reasons I repeat endlessly. Indians burned the prairies and forests for spring grass. They drove buffalo and game off cliffs and could not use all they killed. As we know in Colorado, the cliff dwellers, the Anasazi, were there because they'd burned and cut down all the forests about them, and those peaceful pueblos were forts to protect themselves from, it seems, each other. They apparently engaged in cannabilism as well at need. Just like everyone else, everywhere. I don't understand what you're saying here. Spring grass? So what? Good idea. Cliff dwellers? Did you ever hear about the 10.000.0000 cows killed unnecessecarily just for the fear of bovine disease in europe or the 50.0000000 chickens burned alive in great britain? You add useless exemples to the earlier arguments of the "indians are inferior"- list that you could not defend (women slavery, sadism) and i hope you will stop repeating indeed, as they are countered. By your way of measuring : do you think the chinese are superior to tibethans because they outrule them? Are muslims in the middle east superior to christians because they winn back country after country? etc etc It is especially your superior / inferior qualification that makes your judgement suck. It is the same angle of view as conz by the way. I believe in difference not in superiority. And beauty which is absolute. Some cultures are winners but lack style. Just like the one you're sitting in. And the plain indians definitely knew beauty. DC i'm glad you have as much a hard time reading my posts, as you're the most difficult one to spell for me ever since I dropped in. Always hoping for your posts to improve my english! The sioux had their name from the french by the way. |
|
|
|
Post by wolfgang911 on Aug 2, 2009 17:18:19 GMT -6
and could neither record their history nor remember it very well. And, they originally cast the elderly aside if they couldn't keep up (like everyone else), and that's a death penalty. Well it jumps from one tree to another here. All weird exemples to portray em nicely. Any american can not remember more of his own countries histories as the average indian from his tribe through a wintercount. A waniyeti wowapi held one event a year for 150 or 200 years, which is more than any student can tell of the US history. For the elder : the plain indians had the most healthy lifestyle and very old were many. What would you preferr : when you're time is up to have it done fast after an exciting life, assuming your fate and your burden to the whole tribe, or get locked up to a senile house and sit and rott with alzheimer all alone for 10 to 20 years? Think of this in the future when you're there ;D You might think"f what the hell am i doing here, wish i'd be an indian out on the plains"  DC can we get over this and try to state one nice thing about the NA culture. I'll say something nice about custer in the mean time : nice hair cut and nice jacket! possum cool video and welcome here |
|
|
|
Post by HinTamaheca on Aug 3, 2009 5:43:53 GMT -6
Quite an interesting thread.  |
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Aug 3, 2009 6:39:20 GMT -6
Enough Wolfie you must not realize how silly your posts are in English."The difference between you and I can not be argumented" True I think the most important point you have made is "I don't understand what you're saying here."
What do mean by "Cliff dwellers?" You don't who they are or what?
"Any american can not remember more of his own countries histories as the average indian from his tribe through a wintercount." So that would imply that an American historian could be put up against an average Indian in what kind of test? Do you think information is shared equally between male and female among Indians? Or is there discrimination of information based upon sex.
What are things that you believe a plains Indian chose not to do based upon ecological concerns?
Did they chose not to use an introduced species that would bring about the end of the buffalo hunting era?
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
|
Post by wolfgang911 on Aug 3, 2009 9:18:40 GMT -6
[quote author=darkcloud board=theories thread=2892 post=67054 time=1249177355] In any case, as I've said forever, they were just another nomadic bunch of people who had lost the ability to build permanent structures (like prisons), had no need of money, and could neither record their history nor remember it very well. [/quote][/size][/size] did not record their history... OK thanks I'm just working my way through 'the year the stars fell" lakota winter counts at the smithsonian, I will throw it away, saves me time, thanks. ;D AZ I'm just reacting here. Don't mingle if you can't follow my skirmish here with DC, and I can understand as we have gone a little astray (hey who spoke about Zulus, Scotts, zoroaster, wisconsin hunters, etc ). You might think all my arguments silly : vice versa are my thoughts towards your clan.  But the difference in layout should not hide that the philosophical question we have here is "can we say one culture is superior to the other"? This is already hard to swallow for an european, but it get's worse if the argument you use to proof your statement is : "the winner is always superior" Well yes this is the silly resume of wolfgang what conz and dc and you think : 1 culture had to go as it was inferior. Sorry for the cliff dweller-driver mix up, as DC wrote the 2 in breath, my posting is now and then a little too fast for U and me... We've already gone through the horse argument. Est. 30.000.000 buffalo would survive on an est. 100.000 predators, even on horseback, as long as they did not trade whiskey for hides at least. Hidden translation of AZ's thougth = we had to finish the job before they did it themselves anyway = another excuse. We've already gone through this, I'll leave temporarily the defense of the indian camp at LBH to others. Hin' join in! |
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 3, 2009 9:27:00 GMT -6
Wolf,
It takes an exceptional mind to think I agree with conz. In reality, it's you and conz who have the same childish point of view, just wearing different colored team shirts.
The major difference between you and I is this. You think it terms of cultures - assuming you know what that word actually means - being equal, merely with different plusses and minuses. I say that cultures' primary goal is to survive, and the ones that don't were inferior to those that took over. That a culture makes superior gem jewelry does not equal out their devotion to macho and worship of the dubious male brain which had failed to both protect and advance their lives and consigned their people to perpetual war to deflect the spare time for the civvies to realize that.
That's what scares the Taliban and most archaic Islamic rulers, like Iran. They've already lost the culture war.
Cultural conquest doesn't require force, by the way, and sometimes the loser of the war ends up the cultural winner. Rome and Britain are good examples, because even those that whipped them in combat ended up trying to mimic their glories. India hired their last British Raj ruler. Mountbatten, to help Nehru for a year or so after they had won independence. Pretty obvious.
Disney and Coke and all that were everywhere long before GI's showed up. The world's people have spent the last half century trying to live like Americans. The US had already won the culture war with inferior civilizations, not because of a damned mouse and carbonated battery acid but because we allowed individuals to make money and prosper exclusive of a government by appealing to the tastes of the people, and adapting to them and giving them what they liked. I'd imagine a cold Coke was like manna to, say, the Bedoin Arabs after a week in the desert, and they'd have regard for whoever made it.
Native Americans latched on to European clothing, blankets, metal products, weapons, horse, horse tack, and - yes - booze with unseemly haste. Why? Because they were better and more plentiful than their own. We don't know how long the Sioux and Cheyenne had the horse in number, but not much over a century and a half by the time of Custer. The Sioux were woodland Indians up north, which did not allow much need or contact with the horse or access to the bison, both of which needed grass. Yet, listening to the supposed long time 'myths', you'd think the horse and bison appeared with them at the behest of the Great Spirit, so necessary to their then current life were both. They themselves had no idea how long they'd had the horse. It was a foggy tale to them.
Romanticizing cultural 'losers' does nobody any good. Not the Lost Cause Confederates (who ignored their greatest product, Lee, who told them God had made his choice and it was over), nor the Irish, nor the Scots, nor anyone. The devotion to cavalier/hussar/Man on Horseback/Chief With War Bonnet nonsense got a lot of people killed pointlessly right through WW II. The whole business of a Heroic Death worship is NOT a plus, because it's putting personal vanity above actual need, like winning a fight or war on behalf of the people supposedly the warrior's first concern. It's stupid whether held by the retro activists for Native Americans, and it's stupid for the Custerphiles.
Speaking of which, AZ is blistering the Custerphiles on the other board, as each map appears, Benteen looks pretty good. conz, of course, is now pretending his view was always like that. Won't admit error there or here (Has he yet admitted his summation of Slim Buttes was utterly bogus? No? Shocking.....)
|
|
|
|
Post by conz on Aug 3, 2009 17:18:18 GMT -6
(Has he yet admitted his summation of Slim Buttes was utterly bogus? No? Shocking.....) So what part do you believe to be bogus? If you point it out, I will admit error. But I don't see where I erred... I'm ready to be enlightened... OR... You admit that it is you who are in error, and that Conz is right, as usual... Clair |
|
|
|
Post by markland on Aug 4, 2009 1:28:44 GMT -6
"...Conz is right, as usual.."
Since you are a serving National Guardsman, I won't ask what dope you have been smoking but...despite your original posts and your defenses of your contention that NCOs had trained horses to become arrow dodging horses, having, for some strange reason, been deleted (by whom I'm not speculating) you have been wrong numerous times on this board. You have been obfuscating your "oops" posts by posting numerous BS and blow-hard posts, changing your original "thought" hoping that the inadequate search mechanism would miss you.
Give me a date and time to be at KCI (unless it is the date of the Green Day concert) and I will be there to say the same to your face.
Clair, with all due respect, I know some guys at the Combined Arms Center and, frankly, you are nowhere near their knowledge on modern warfare excepting tanks and Kursk-type Hussar charges.
And we know what I think of Hussars.
Billy
|
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Aug 4, 2009 9:22:16 GMT -6
He's been housekeeping, has he? Hadn't noticed. In a world of hard drives and easy page saves, a dubious endeavor.
If he's so sensitive about his numerous errors here, what does he do to cover up his undoubted errors elsewhere? Where people's lives are at stake, for example.
|
|
|
|
Post by conz on Aug 4, 2009 9:33:10 GMT -6
Both of you are wrong.
First, I have never deleted a single post of mine. If those are gone, somebody's been messing with this board.
I stand by my original contention that y'all seem to be too thickheaded to understand...that NCOs did all kinds of things not in any manual to prepare their horses to withstand the stresses of combat. I did not put it above some enterprising NCO to try to train his horses to withstand arrow fire.
I never said they actually DID such a thing, but I won't count it out, either...I'm SURE some tried. It isn't that hard to do.
The "dodging arrows" thing is separate...it involves officers who acquire horses that prance about a lot, and encourage them to do so, because it makes them harder targets for sharpshooters, be they firing rifles or arrows. At least one officer in the Civil War conjectured that Custer was one of these officers, and I've seen it mentioned about other officers as well in various wars. That was always my "dodging" point, then and now, and it has never changed.
If either of you think otherwise, you are in error. Get a grip.
I understand modern and earlier warfare at least as well, and probably better, than most of the officers at CAC, even those senior to me. I'll stand by that, as well, in any tactics debate. I could teach them a few things, I'm sure. And a couple of them up there might teach me a thing or two, as well...there are a couple talented Colonels and history professors up there. But not many.
You two should listen to me more instead of fighting me all the time...you might learn something. Half the time you are so quick to jump to wrong assumptions and get glued to that with blinders on, that you fail to understand the pertinent and useful points.
So get off your high horses, and get into the mud with me an learn something. I have certainly learned a few things from Billy...I doubt he has learned anything from me, though...he seems to refuse to.
DC has nothing to offer that I can find, at least relevant to LBH. But I'm still looking forward to something.
In the meantime, he can enlighten us as to why he thinks anything I said about Slim Buttes was wrong.
Clair
|
|
|
|
Post by wolfgang911 on Aug 5, 2009 14:33:44 GMT -6
That's what scares the Taliban and most archaic Islamic rulers, like Iran. They've already lost the culture war. yeah right  what a bogus In a year or 2 the US will bail out leaving a mess and that everything will be as before. For centuries. You're pretty satified of your own belonging to a future "inferior" civilisation that will dissapear as it will not know how to adapt to declining ressources. Now you mix up culture and civilisation. And you state that a higher 'culture" will always win. Bull. You have no idea what will happen on this planet in 20 years and how many will have acces to your american dream. At this moment only 10% is living on your standard economically and politically. The world is a mess following the ideas of coke and disney leaving trillions in bidonvilles in between cultures with no future. The whole world is turning away from your civilised ideas of coke and disney. In south america, europe, asia, middle east, can't really say that the US ideas are worshipped, on the contrary. Ask anyone in Germany or France what they think of american culture : you will hear a pride for their own european cultural identity and contempt for everything US, with you theoretic supremacy you are FARE OUT smoking man!. Tribes all over the world are getting back dignity and are not vanishing as fast as we thought they would. They have noticed, just like the NDN in 1880 that their future life in the slamjunk would be worse then stay out in the forest. Luckily you had a black president to save temporarily some of the splittering crystal. In my opinion the green movement will take over your views. Global. The world will have to adapt to ecological and durable restrained growth. And those views are closer to .... the native american indian expr'essed 150 years ago then the self satisified DC ;DMost great philisophies and enlightening ideas came from europe. I can't tell anything original coming from the states except for the empty "get rich no limits" message, which is the bogus that will bring your highly qualified civilisation to and end. Get a little modesty in your statements before writing pamphlets mister knows everything. I certainly am in doubt and do not state surperiority of nothing. Claiming at this moment of world crisis and ecologic disasters that you are in a superior winning society is just as idiot as the conquistadors seeing goldfields in texas. I think it is cool to discuss with fierce opponents but if the participators are so immodest that they can not even imagine ever being wrong and it is just to be right or wrong. In my outside newbee opinion Conz and DC have the same point of view on white superiority on NDN culture. Except for the timing of custer and benteen etc (and who cares about such details) I dunno where you differ. If Conz is hiding his wrongs, you do pretty well yourself when you jump to other subjects when you have been proven bogus on women slavery, sadism among plains NDN. Please state again your points on the previous pages and publish your findings on american tribes  Anyway we're not here i thought to crush another. But if this is board is such a childish game, schoolyard level of you're right you're wrong I'm not interested in this thread and move to the more civilised posts. You will be quiet among pro army lovers at the LBH. A little silent for a battle won by.... heyaheheyaayeh! |
|
