I am currently having an interesting set of discussions on Facebook.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

There's one group of people (they show up through one specific FB friend's page and conversations) with whom I am having very cross words. The details aren't important, especially because I don't want any of the substantive issues brought up here. Suffice it to say that some of them have strong opinions about certain things that I don't necessarily agree with. And in the middle of those disagreements, we have agreements and connections. It's really quite fascinating.

It's a lot like how here, I might clash with someone on one topic, and on another topic we are all peace and joy. What's different about the FB conversation is that it will look something like this:

other person: You are an idiot and have no idea what you are talking about.
me: I am not an idiot and please consider this: (specifics aren't important here)
other person: brings up something posted a while back.
me: Wow, that's interesting and thank you for posting.
other person: You are welcome
other person: You are completely wrong about (something that had been discussed in the interim).

I'm totally fascinated by the back and forth that occurs.

[dawg day]

1. Some people don't want to learn.

Some avoid hearing what contradicts what they believe. You sound so patient!

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

2. I think I am, but the other people in the discussion

do not feel the same way. Because I don't want to go into specifics, I know you can't truly judge. It may well be that they are right and I am wrong.

I will just say this: the discussion/argument is revolving around race/indigenous peoples issues. I am white, not indigenous, and it's highly possible I truly am missing the point of what they are saying.

I did point out earlier today that spending so much time and energy being angry about these things does not accomplish anything. I was accused of hiding behind White Privilege, which I'm willing to acknowledge may well be true. But I'll add this: One of the things I've learned in my life is that if you spend energy in one place, you don't have that energy to spend elsewhere. So if you are spending a lot of energy being angry about what was done to your people (and yes, you are correct, those terrible things really were done to your people) then you have no energy left to achieve something positive.

I'm 100% Irish, in that all four of my grandparents came from Ireland. I suppose I could spend a lot of time being angry about the Famine and what happened to my ancestors back then, but I don't. Yeah, it was terrible. But it was 175 years ago and I want to work on things that matter in the present day.

And I will NOT take blame for what people completely unrelated to me did to the people who were on this continent before Europeans arrived. I won't. And if you try to make me take blame, then we will part ways. Otherwise, I get to hold your ancestors responsible for what happened to my ancestors.

[wnylib]

3. Wow. I can see why there is such disagreement

between you on this topic. I remember hearing people say similar things about and to AA's during the civil rights movement. "My ancestors were immigrants and they had it hard, too, so get over it."

Sometimes the anger is not wasted energy, but the fuel that pushes people to action in handling or resolving situations, or in maintaning some dignity and self respect in the midst of daily, chronic belittlement in ways you might not be aware of.

Here are some differences in individual, family, and cultural experiences and outlook when comparing descendants of white immigrants to descendants of the original inhabitants.

The majority of white immigrants came here voluntarily. Even indentured servsnts and prisoners eventually got their freedom -- in their own lifetimes, not centuries later like AA's. Enslaved Native people (there were many) escaped if they were able, but many died of their treatment. Huge numbers of enslaved Natives were shipped to the Caribbean cane fields in trade for "seasoned" AA slaves. Quite often wars were waged intentionally to capture Native people for the slsve trade. Tribes wete threatened with anihilation themselves.if they did not cooperate against other tribes. (One readon why tbe Tuscarora moved north to join the Iroquois League). Diaries and letters of white colonists and pioneers mention these practices.

White immigrants carried their cultural customs with them, maintained contact with their homeland and relatives when possible, and were able to assimilate fully. Their "otherness" faded. Even among Europeans of other nations, there were enough similarities of customs, history, religions, governing types, and general lifestyles to find some common grounds. On religion, Judaism was an exception to the similarities, and they faced their own persistent descrimination, but even in that case, through the Xtian OT, and common European background, there were similarities with other European immigrants that did not exist between European and Native people.

European Americans have a homeland, even generations later, to look to for ancestral identity if they choose, and to visit, to trace records in. Native people's homelands (with a few exceptions) no longer exist. There is no place to go to for cherished sites like Europeans do in visiting the Eiffel tower, Unter den Linden in BerIin, monasteries and pubs in Irelsnd, etc. For Native people, supermarkets, shopping malls, housing developments now occupy their cherished historicsl and religious sites.

(Continued -- it"s a long story.)

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

4. Thank you.

Your comments help me, and help me understand where I am going wrong. I do understand a lot of the basics, such as white immigrants (my family) coming here voluntarily, as compared to indentured servants and prisoners. African Americans, that is to say slaves, are a completely different category.

Sometimes I try to imagine what this country might be like if somehow chattel slavery had not happened. If we'd had voluntary immigrants from Africa the same way we had voluntary immigrants from Europe. Just think. Every one who came here came here because they wanted to. Yeah, they'd have suffered in various ways. Each new immigrant group was discriminated against and had to fight against that discrimination, but each and every immigrant group did that. Except for the involuntary immigrants, African Americans. And of course the indigenous peoples already here aren't even a consideration. Unfortunately.

[wnylib]

5. The purpose of these lengthy posts is only to

show the differences in experiences and perspectives. between.Native and non Native people in order to further understanding. It is NOT to accuse or blame anyone for past events. This should probably be in the NA forum.

European immigrants faced various forms of discrimination. My German immigrant grandparents arrived as very young children before WW1 and WW2, but were harrassed, spit on.and had stones thrown at them during those wars.

Native people faced government-sponsored anihilation, both physical and cultural. Hardly the same thing as discrmination that immigrant.groups faced. Governments paid bounties for scalps of Native people, including women and children, .before.and after reservations were established. Graft by missionaries and federal agents with food and supplies for people forced into reservation dependency caused Native.people to sneak off the reservation to hunt, risking death for supporting their families.

President Jackson defied a SCOTUS ruling in order to.carry out the Trail of Tears relocation if 5 Native nations. He is one of Trump's heroes.

By the later 1800's, physical annihilation was replaced with cultural destruction. Some.Native people coopersted with the government boarding schools in the hope it would help their children. Most did not. Their children were kidnapped, from age 5 to 16. The children were placed hundreds and thousands of.miles away from their homes and seprated from others of their own tribal nation. This was not in the distant past. Those schools existed into the 1970's.

Amnesty Internstionsl collected first hand reports from survivors of those schools. They were run by churches of various denominations in the US and Canada. There was almost no oversight. The "teachers" were low paid locals with no training, or nuns and.priests in RC schools. The subjects were English, basic arithmetic, Xtianity, and the inferiority of Native cultures and customs. Medicines and doctors were rarely seen. Native languages, clothing, and customs were forbidden. Contact with family was restricted and monitored.

Punishments for Native language use or customs were severe and sometimes fatal, e.g. standing naked outdoors in sub zero temperatures, kneeling for 24 hours on bare wooden floors without food, locked in closets for 48 hours without food or bathroom breaks. Physical and sexual abuse were rampant. Children were passed around in pedophile rings among clergy. Children were rented out to local farmers and businesses for labor to "learn a trade" e.g. cleaning horse stalls, doing laundry. The money went into the pickets of teachers and administrators.

Sick children were not excused from work and many died. They were buried anonymously on school property and reported as runaways. After "graduation" they did not fit in anywhere. Whites would not accept them for assimilation. Families and tribes were foreign to them and they had been taught to be ashamed if their heritage.

Some did well in schools that were a little better. Some became famous, like Jim Thorpe. Some lived by the prostitution they learned at school. Others drowned their isolation, grief, and abuse in alcohol and drugs. A few assimilated back into their tribal nations. They raised families, handicapped by their experiences but determined to do better by their children.

[wnylib]

6. The point of this history is to show how and why

Native people have different perspectives than white Europesn immigrant descendants.

Native people's overall perspective on life, religious customs and social structures differed considerably from Europeans when Europeans arrived. This was partly due to a greater reliance on nature, but also to having evolved separately in the Americas, with very limited to no contact beyond their continents.

Their history after the arrival of Europeans has been one of massive sociological and cultural disruption, with limited means of replacement and restructuring. Their survival is a testimony to their strength and endurance.

It was illegal into the middle of the 20th century for Native people to practice their religions, especially in group gatherings. But cleverly devised activities enabled them to preserve traditions in disguise. They now revive and evolve their languages and customs openly, with adaptations to present circumstances. They run their own schools, have cultural centers and clinics, get degrees, and live on or off reservations by choice.

There are still problems with poverty and the effects of past experiences on social structure and social problems. Native people have been citizens of the US since 1924.

They still deal with problems of discrimination and hostility (especially when they achieve financial and other successes). Non-Native people often refer to Native people in past terms, as if they do not exist in the present, or their identities and societies have not evolved or changed in 500 years. Outsiders try to tell them what their identity should be or how they should live.

The days of anthropologists and archaeologists.robbing Native graves, often recent ones, in order to measure craniums to support inferiority theories are gone, thanks to passage of the Native American Graves and. Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). But many people still consider them inferior. And Native people have justifiable mistrust of "studies" about them, especiallt by non Natives.

Their numbers are greatly reduced from the past so.they don't have the political clout of some larger minority groups.

It's not surprising that there is anger and some animosity from Native people that still exists today. It would be surprising if there wasn't. There is so much misinformation or just lack of information about them. They get tired if dealing with it.

But my experience with them (mostly local Seneca and other Iroquoian people in Seneca territory) has been that they are thoughtful, considerate and open to discussing their culture and history with non Native people. They have a dry, teasing sense of humor. As a senior citizen, I especially appreciate their respect for elders in many ways, both large and small. They have a strong sense of community and of consideration for others. Like most Native people, they appreciate being respected and listened to.

I do not feel responsible for things that happened in the past. But I do feel responsible in the present for learning to see and understand a perspective outside of my own.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

8. Thank you for your insight and perspective.

I do recognize that truly terrible things have been perpetuated on the original inhabitants of this continent. And I'm pretty sure that since I have not suffered from those terrible things, there's a lot I don't get. But I do feel that moving on is essential. It doesn't mean you simply "get over" the horrors that were perpetrated, but it does mean that you focus yourself and your energies towards the future.

What makes me so very crazy about one specific FB poster is the constant SHOUTING she engages in. She has no clue (and this is my perspective) that such anger, resentment, and negativity has any impact on her life. It does. Dare I point out that she has many health issues? Dare I suggest that there's a connection here? Were I to attempt to post this notion on FB she would commence shouting at me at great length, telling me I don't understand, I'm not indigenous (oh, and can I possibly bring up here that her physical appearance does not at all suggest indigenous ancestry? No? Her skin is as pale as mine, and all four of my grandparents came from Ireland. She claims Cherokee descent, and when I asked what band it was as if I'd asked her to describe in detail her sex life. Why is asking what band so fraught? What am I missing here?) and I know there is a lot I cannot begin to understand.

But here's the thing. I live in New Mexico. A lot of people I cross paths with here are Native American. I'm used to seeing them everywhere, know what they look like, hear their accents, and generally really, really like them. So I have limited patience with someone who is as white in appearance as I am, who claims Native American descent, who says she's Cherokee (really?) and gets incredibly offended when I want more details and who rants and yells all the time on FB about the atrocities perpetrated on her people and who (so far as I can figure out) thinks that people like me should simply leave this continent. What exactly am I missing?

You said your experience with local Seneca and Iroquoian people is that they are thoughtful, considerate, and open to discussion. This person is none of the above. Just angry and wants me to somehow make up for all the genuinely terrible things that happened to her ancestors. And I truly piss her off because I refuse to take responsibility for what those completely unrelated to me did to her ancestors long before my grandparents arrived in this country. I'm sorry, but I and they had nothing to do with it, and while I really am genuinely sorry about what happened to your tribe, I won't let you blame me for those things.

Oh, and if we (meaning we white people) all leave tomorrow, you'll be truly fucked, because collectively you will not have the skills nor the manpower to do much of anything.

[Sherman A1]

7. My experiences with Facebook "Discussions"

are to simply walk away. Minds will not be changed despite an abundance of factual information or logic. If it works for you, have at it but I simply find them an exercise in futility and will not waste any time on them.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

9. Absolutely.

I do try to walk away, and I've engaged this person far less than my posts would indicate.