In my travels through comments sections over the years I have run across people who have mentioned the treatment by the United States of the people who lived in this land before European settlement. Their comments were full of anger and reproach, and for the most part rightly so. In the annals of history there have been many people whose abilities and value as human beings have been swept aside. So I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge what is perhaps a little known, but vital, contribution made by a people whose lives were turned upside down. Without it our nation would not be what it is today.
The Six Nations
In North America at that time, they took an ember, they took a light from our fire, and they carried that over and they lighted their own fire and they made their own nation. They lighted this great fire, and that was a great light at that time of peace.
Seminole Wind
Cherokee People
47 comments:
"Their comments were full of anger and reproach, and for the most
part rightly so."
How ya figure ‘rightly so’ ?
Just to pick a few other nationalities I happen to know look in… I don't see any move on behalf of the Swedes to give Stockholm back to their remnant indigenous people. The Arabs certainly have no intention of retreating en mass back to the Arabian peninsula. Italians generally shed no tears over the Etruscans.
How ya figure ‘rightly so’ ?
I was speaking about the history of broken promises and relocation. The violence that transpired during the time period was something both sides were guilty of.
Other people's of the world must look at the history of their own countries and be the judge. If they can do that then they certainly can look at others as well. If not then, as one might suppose, hypocrisy is their lot in life. They leave themselves open to being ignored. :)
Huh! Does no good to take an airbase in Syria. Not if we decide to start swooping there. :)
"…the history of broken promises and relocation…"
Ah, that. The rich and powerful have been abrogating treaties and contracts, interstate and intrastate, with the poor and not not powerful since Adam and Eve wandered out of the Garden. Those people whom you deem ’rightly’ angry and reproachful are usually counting on you not knowing too much about their own national histories (good chance their histories have been airbrushed for them at home); and probably also counting on you not noticing they don't hold anybody else to the standard they hope to inflict upon the U.S.A.
I think it was a good thing to displace the Injuns and break those treaties with them.
Either that's sarcasm or Petes has been at the Guinness...:)
Good song, Marcus.
... counting on you not noticing they don't hold anybody else to the standard they hope to inflict upon the U.S.A.
Oh no, I definitely notice we seem to be held to a higher standard. We make a good punching bag, I guess. *sigh*
"Either that's sarcasm or Petes has been at the Guinness...:) "
Moi? :)
Oh no, just following the logic of some earlier comments -- if anyone in any of the several countries of my ancestry going back thousands of years has ever done anything bad, then I'm not allowed be reproachful at the treatment of native Americans. It must therefore not be an objectively bad thing, but dependent on the unadulterated perfection of the critic. Since it's not bad, it must be good. So, those Injuns clearly got what was comin' to them. Anyone who says otherwise is a hypocrite.
Pete, about Swedens housing bubble:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/25/sweden-election-debt-idUSL5N0QS2X820140825
I do wonder when it will pop. I don't think it can wait much longer now. Prices are insane especially in Stockholm.
Marcus, I get a queasy feeling in the pit of my stomach thinking about it, it's so similar to how our bubble popped. It's also similar to the price levels at which our bubble popped.
You would think someone would look at the insanity, and call a halt. But all the different vested interests pull in different directions.
The government doesn't want the domestic economy to suffer, because that translates directly into lost votes. But any measure that either curbs house prices or takes more tax money out of people's pockets has that effect. Our main governing party was on its third successive term in office at the time of the bust. They had tried to cool house prices once, around 2000, but in the election year budget of 2001 they reversed those changes for obvious political reasons. We got six more years of price increases before the inevitable happened.
People who own property want the price increases to continue, of course. I don't know if it's the case in Sweden -- can people borrow more against the equity in their property? Here, we called them top-up mortgages. I think it was HELOC in the States (home equity line of credit). It meant that when the crash happened, it should have only wiped out the equity of people who bought after a certain year, but because people kept withdrawing their equity, a much larger cohort was affected. All that equity withdrawal which was being spent into the economy was cut off almost overnight, as were all the property transaction taxes flowing to the exchequer.
Those not yet "on the property ladder" would like prices to be lower. But, of course, they don't want LTV ratios or mortgage terms to be reduced because it lowers their effective spending power. And yet these are the counter-cyclical measures that the goverment must introduce to cool the market.
The upshot is that even when the vested interests can see that the train track up ahead comes to an end at the edge of a precipice, they keep stoking the boiler until the last second. Soothing voices in their heads whisper that the impending disaster might yet be somehow avoided. But it never is.
Interesting post Pete. As I have said before we have a serious housing shortage that also plays a part, second homes or investment homes are very rare. I am not so sure though what mitigating effect this will have when the bubble pops. One would think it would decrease the magnitude of the price-fall, since people can't really offload the house they live in in a panic like they could with additional property.
Pete: "People who own property want the price increases to continue, of course."
That is the gut feeling sure. But even for many who do own property it's a false wish. Say you're starting out in a small home and will one day want to change it for a bigger one (move up on the property ladder). Then even if you feel good when the price of your current home increase in value that other more expensive property increases in value even more. Making the gulf between them wider.
Pete: "I don't know if it's the case in Sweden -- can people borrow more against the equity in their property?"
Yes, but it's been scaled back dramatically in recent years. Now the banks are reluctant to top you up above 75% of the estimated value and will refuse above 85%.
5-6 years ago you could really use the house as a cash machine. Not only to borrow more for improvents to it but for holidays, cars and whatnot. Some, too many I think, did just that.
Pete: "All that equity withdrawal which was being spent into the economy was cut off almost overnight"
I believe we've already been through that phase without a crash to trigger it. To be fair we have had some new regulation come into effect without which the situation for sure would've been even worse.
That's the near impossible task once the situation is out of hand: impose regulation to try to limit the bubble without the regulation becoming the trigger of a crash (the second option might have been better but no one wants to make that decision and have their name on it).
Pete: "Those not yet "on the property ladder" would like prices to be lower. But, of course, they don't want LTV ratios or mortgage terms to be reduced because it lowers their effective spending power."
Here many, especially the young, are locked out of the market completely due to the recent 15% down payment requirement. Well off parents that can put the money down or draw it from their own equity seems to be the salvation for a few. If you don't have that - well saving up those 15% can take a long, long time.
And with precious few rental untits around we see more and more people 25+ living at home with their parents for lack of any options.
Here's another article Pete:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-24/swedish-debt-cap-may-be-relaxed-as-social-democrats-reveal-plans.html
Two things strike me. #1 When international newspapers starts to churn out articcles about our "bubble" it probably is a bubble in its late stages.
#2 The comments on the soon-to-be Finance Minister who probably knows things are not as they hould but with an election in two weeks can't very well come out and promise cost increases to indebted money-slaves.
Another point:
Our 30% "tax rebate" for lenders is and was always a direct gift from the tax payers via the state to the banks. Nothing else. NOTHING else. I serves no one but lenders (except for the lucky ones who bought before the rebate was in place and saw their equity rocket once it was in place - they gained too).
People buy property and take on loans based on what they think they can afford. They may be stupid or savvy or whatever but the loan-costs plus the running costs almost anyone uses as a basis for what the can afford. Even dumb sods can do this math for the short run.
So - the tax deductions mean they can afford more. So they buy more expensive homes (or rather homes become more expenisve because of supply and demand rules).
The entire stock of loans increase because the government subsidize 30% of the interest costs. Which goes directly to the banks. People think they save it, but they don't. If the 30% rebate was not in place the prices would be lower.
The banks are the only winners. If the rebate was not in place prices, and thus loans, would be lower. The only profiteers with this scheme are the banks who can lend more money and get more in interest payments. 70% from lenders, 30% from the state.
With the rebate not in place they'd have to settle for 100% from the lender, and that would correspond only to those 70% he pays today - becaus that's what he can afford.
Also the bigger the loan the longer the bank can lock people into debt servitude. The state subsidize the interest payment but does NOT subsidize any payments on the debt itself. Higher prices, larger loans, longer periods for the debt-slaves to untangle themselves.
It's a fucking scam! But one we are sold into and can't get out of.
I'm saying this as a right of centre believer in market economy - the banks and their bought politicians are a fucking menace!
I see in that last post I confuse lender and borrower a few times. I hope ya'll can still understand the reasoning.
...dependent on the unadulterated perfection of the critic.
No, not perfection on the part of the critic, but the ability of the critic to not only critique others but also to critique him or her self. This applies to everyone. Our government did manage to finally acknowledge the contribution made by the people of the six nations. Took them awhile but they did manage it.
5-6 years ago you could really use the house as a cash machine. Not only to borrow more for improvents to it but for holidays, cars and whatnot. Some, too many I think, did just that.
Also the bigger the loan the longer the bank can lock people into debt servitude.
But is it really the banks or us? We can blame the banks all we want for the easy credit, to the point of out right fraud, yes. But ultimately we are the ones who are signing on the bottom line, willing to sell ourselves for fancy cars, homes or luxurious vacations. It's called living beyond our means and has been at the root of much of our economic maladies. At some point the chickens always come home to roost.
Right now we are actually enjoying a much improved economy here. The low point after the crash was March 2009. We saw improvement in 2013 and it has continued on. Minnesota might have benefited more so than other states for being next door to North Dakota. It was a safety valve for people looking for work in the rough times. Now it is more of a employee swallowing black hole, leaving us with some shortages of workers.
But the housing market has come back very strongly. Construction has picked up quite a bit. So it's been about 4 years since the low point to the start of the recovery.
We do still have the issue of many jobs that are being created are lower paying. But they did finally enact a raise in the minimum wage beginning in Aug. 2014 to $8.00 an hour. It will gradually raise to $9.50 in 2016. Not great but better than nothing.
"Took them awhile but they did manage it."
Still got Andrew Jackson's face on the $20 bill, though. White folks rumblin’ ‘round ‘mongst themselves ‘bout the name of a football team, and yet there's ol’ Andy Jackson's face, still starin’ out at us from the $20 bill. One of these days they may get around to fixing that.
An American was killed in Syria while fighting for ISIS. He was born and raised in Minnesota, but had moved to California. I am starting to feel a little concerned about my state's reputation here. Between this guy and the Somali's going back to fight in Somalia we are going to get a bad reputation. *sigh*
How to drive ISIS out of Syria.
We live in a bubble and we didn't even know it.
Quick catch-up after a break:
Marcus, re: Swedish housing market ... agree with all your points. I still don't think you look as bad as Ireland immediately pre-crash, but not pretty all the same.
[Lynnette]: "No, not perfection on the part of the critic, but the ability of the critic to not only critique others but also to critique him or her self."
I mostly disagree with this. There would be few voices raised against the evils in the world if the critic and/or their country had to have an unblemished record. (Lee's original gripe was not even about imperfect critics, but critics who came from countries with a less than perfect record). It would mean the USA (and everyone in it) would have no justification for criticising IS's genocidal tendencies in Iraq for example. I believe all right-thinking people from anywhere will be critical of IS, and be entirely justified in their stance. Likewise, some of the treatment of native Americans was objectively horrendous, regardless of who is saying it.
[Lynnette]: "We live in a bubble and we didn't even know it."
Slightly sensational article with a few inaccuracies. We did know it, and have done for decades. Galaxies in general are littered with supernova bubbles. It's thought to be one of the primary causes that trigger gravitational collapse of gas clouds to form new stars. Our local bubble is neighboured by several other superbubbles that we specifically know about, but they undoubtedly pervade the whole interstellar medium. Million degree temperatures in bubble walls sound sensational too, but they are misleading. If you stuck a thermometer up there you wouldn't measure anything -- there isn't enough material to warm your thermometer by conduction. Supernova explosions create shock fronts in the interstellar medium which form these bubble walls. The excited gas has very high molecular speeds but you'd need an awful lot of it to boil an egg, let alone toast your buns :)
"Lee's original gripe was not even about imperfect critics…"
Lee's original comment was directed to the idea that the customary critics were ‘rightly’ angry and reproachful about American offenses, and all too often only about American offenses. The fate of indigenous people was similar everywhere the technologically superior Europeans happened to land, from China in the east to the Americas, both north and south, to the west, and everywhere in between. Wanna talk ‘bout European massacres of the natives--Africa holds the title by an order of magnitude. South America probably comes in second.
However, they don't either one have much of a movie industry to romanticize the role of the noble savages in the national myth.
Europe's past transgressions doesn't makes the USA's go away.
No. But, if one can find out where the critical European is situated (and not just Europeans either), and bring up their very own transgressions, the critics usually go away real fast. Don't wanna talk ‘bout it no more. ‘Cause the idea they want to promote is that the industrial age European habit of stompin’ on indigenous people wherever they could be stomped on was a peculiarly American sin. They don't wanna hear that it's not. They generally shut up and go ‘way real fast.
And, just by the way, as far as the Hollywood movie history of the old American West goes. The real native peoples of the plains considered the Sioux and the Cheyenne (the usual role models for the noble savages in the movies) to be every bit as much foreign invaders as the white folks and generally more cruel. The locals were often all too happy to see bluecoated American soldiers takin’ on their newly arrived overlords. Often scouted for and fought with the American soldiers.
[Lee C]: "... the idea they want to promote is that the industrial age European habit of stompin’ on indigenous people wherever they could be stomped on was a peculiarly American sin."
That seems a rather sweeping generalisation.
Yes, it is. It was meant to be just such.
I was going to say implausible too, but then I suppose the context in which the OP introduces it makes it less so.
I was gonna say it's not even all that ‘sweeping’, but then we'd be potentially arguing judgment calls with fairly vague criteria, and I'm not much interested in doin’ that.
Russians on "vacation"
Or just lost?
Seriously?
Congratulations to Angelina and Brad on their recent marriage, btw. :)
There would be few voices raised against the evils in the world if the critic and/or their country had to have an unblemished record.
I didn't say they had to have an unblemished record. They just have to understand that they themselves are also fallible. Indeed, I can't think of anyone in this world who is perfect, including myself. So if I am going to criticize others I should be able to look at my own faults.
But do you really think someone who criticises IS in Iraq/Syria has to examine their conscience before they declare it to be repugnant? I don't. I'd prefer if everyone on the planet, including all the hypocrites, condemned them.
And I would point out that if they condemn ISIS but grant a pass to Hamas they are allies of convenience and not of conscience.
Allies of convenience are still convenient.
Not always.
I hear ISIS waterboarded 4 american prisoners including Foley.
I wonder: is it torture when the bad guys do it? Or is it an OK interrogation technique for them as well?
*sigh*
You know Petes will just delete that, don't you, Z? Whenever he gets around to stopping by that is.
M,
That is something you will have to ask Cheney & Rumsfeld.
The Americans who are wandering around a war zone have to understand the risks they take, M. And what is happening in the ME is a war.
I'd prefer if everyone on the planet, including all the hypocrites, condemned them.
I agree 100% with you on that Petes.
Zeyad,
You do understand that even 3,000 years ago people were using religion to manipulate people? So what was prophesied back then is questionable?
Even gold and diamonds won't help if climate change makes life on earth uninhabitable, btw. You're better off learning how to farm.
[Lynnette]: "The Americans who are wandering around a war zone have to understand the risks they take, M. And what is happening in the ME is a war."
Even in war there are supposed to be laws about humane treatment of prisoners. I know with the appalling crimes against humanity we've seen in recent years it's almost never even mentioned anymore. But I don't think the USA did itself any favours by justifying waterboarding as a legitimate interrogation tool. Not that I think IS and its like would pay any heed to Americans trying to take the moral high ground, but it's the principle of the thing.
I have never said that my country was perfect, Petes. I said I understood why they did what they did. Anyway, what is done is done, there is no going back.
ISIS indoctrination
And as the radical Islamist group strengthens its hold on this huge swath of land in the heart of the Middle East, it is cramming its warped ideas into minds that are often too young to understand.
Post a Comment