I'm genuinely convinced that people fake interest in native american culture as a way of being sorry to their genocide or discrimination they fac...

I'm genuinely convinced that people fake interest in native american culture as a way of being sorry to their genocide or discrimination they faced by the us.
Civilization-wise they're one of the least interesting and culturally infantile ones out there.

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    people fake interest in natives because they want to be pagans but aren't edgy enough to be neo-pagans

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm legitimately interested because the history of my state only goes back a bit over four centuries, that's long by American standards, and the first 50 years or so were heavily defined by interaction with said natives.
    Just intrigued by peoples who lived in my neck of the woods, y'know?

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >I'm genuinely convinced that people fake interest in native american culture
    Dunno about the US, but here in Canada, I'd say that's true.
    There is this whole movement in government of welcoming and promoting indigenous knowledge and views of the world on equal grounds as western/european knowledge and views, but in practice, obviously that doesn't mean shit.

    >Civilization-wise they're one of the least interesting and culturally infantile ones out there.
    Two reasons for this I believe.
    1) They didn't have writing, at least not here in North America. Oral tradition can only go so far, and their precontact history is shrouded in mystery even for them, those living today.
    2) Low population and density. In North America, only a few millions, and that's on a huge territory.
    Back when Montreal's colony was getting attacked by Iroquois, apparently their whole culture, scattered from around there to Niagara Falls, was just 22k people.
    Nowadays that's just a small town with 2-3 highschools people go to.

    They were simply at a much earlier stage of human culture.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Dunno about the US, but here in Canada, I'd say that's true ... but in practice, obviously that doesn't mean shit.
      I think the weepy guilt over the indigenous is much more of a thing in Canada and with the ANZACs but it's not as much of a thing in the U.S., and I'm not really sure why, but personally I suspect it's a way to distinguish themselves from the U.S., because they're English-speaking allies, and they do it with this faux-progressivism but it's more of a performance. I also wonder if it's because the U.S. has promoted the indigenous history in a military context.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        blacks overshadow everything else in the states, thats why

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        blacks overshadow everything else in the states, thats why

        Indigenous people actually do have a cool history and many americans openly admire it

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Indigenous people actually do have a cool history and many americans openly admire it
          A solid number of "rednecks" too. My aunt and uncle + cousins who lived in a trailer when I was growing up had a Confederate flag and Native American stuff, dream catchers, and a print of Indian warriors on horseback in the living room. The aunt is a big The HU fan which she discovered on YouTube, she thinks that's the coolest thing ever. She's an old country white lady from Texas.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >I think the weepy guilt over the indigenous is much more of a thing in Canada
        This guy was cancelled because Idle No More protestors crashed a lecture he was giving and got him to say something dumb in defense of something he said half a decade before (that had nothing to do with Indian Affairs).

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Back when Montreal's colony was getting attacked by Iroquois, apparently their whole culture, scattered from around there to Niagara Falls, was just 22k people.

      tbf that's after disease decimated the population so they probably would have like 10x that amount if it weren't for new world diseases, still not a huge amount but not insignificant

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >They didn't have writing, at least not here in North America. Oral tradition can only go so far, and their precontact history is shrouded in mystery even for them, those living today.

      except Nunavut's language they got written shit but its incredibly strange, kinda cool tho.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They didn't have writing, moron. That was created in the late 1800s by Christian missionaries.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Back when Montreal's colony was getting attacked by Iroquois, apparently their whole culture, scattered from around there to Niagara Falls, was just 22k people.
      That's pretty wild, even my small suburb has about 30k people and could be walked from any end to any end in a day easily.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Dunno about the US, but here in Canada, I'd say that's true.
      Oh yeah that is definitely true for canada. The US natives actually put up a good show before they were defeated. Ours didn't do shit. There is nothing to be interested in unless you are the type of autist that likes the fur trade. The only remotely interesting "indigenous" Canadian figure was Louis Riel, and he was Metis, which literally means "mixed" French-Native

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah I see this and think its somewhat rooted in truth. But to say its a "fake" interest is foolish. As people do have a really real interest, although some are for sure for social credit points. Those without a real interest won't ever really do in depth research and look at both le good and bad.

      I agree with your points on civilization-wise and believe that's why Central/South American Natives stood out.

      I would argue in favor of the Aztecs (maybe Incas?). Although I only really know about the Aztecs. They had written accounts and a known relatively detailed history, more condensed population center as well as city-states around them, and by all means a more developed culture. Although you could argue the nature of the culture was ehh, it was still more "dense" if that makes sense. Which you could contribute to the written history. Even the Spanish themselves saw Tenochtitlan as impressive.

      While North American natives I can think of little about impressive cities or even structures. Totems? Burial mounds? Its not like a full city with a palace, temples, market districts, etc. Just seems less developed in terms of a fully developed civilization.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        NTA, the only thing I can personally think of is Cahokia. On the bright side, perhaps their cultures were more egalitarian as a result. The presence of things like palaces as you say seem to me really just to be displays of grandeur and wealth. Not saying they're bad, but there are disadvantages to civilization that being they tend to be unequal as a result of social stratification and hierarchal. Northern American indigenous is a topic I'm not deeply knowledgable about, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were comfortable in their lifestyle and didn't really have a need to develop a full civilization. It's simply a method of adaptation to the environment. It may not be as complex, but at the end of the day it may have been viable. Until it wasn't of course.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Never heard of it lemme look it up.
          >Perhaps their cultures were more egalitarian as a result.
          And yeah I would say for sure. Aztec society was heavily driven by the elite class. So it likely did play into that idea of wealth and grandeur.

          >It may not be as complex, but at the end of the day it may have been viable.
          True. I am assuming most Northern American indigenous communities were pretty spread out. So wars were likely at a minimum and tribes were pretty decentralized. Most were relatively nomadic right? Maybe it has to do with the feudal system? With the drive for resources? idk

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Aztecs lived in North America.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Ok. Mistyped. Still doesn't change my point.

          When I think of North American Natives I think of Iroquois and shit. Maybe Navajo.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      So instead of learning something riding this fake agenda based interest you decide to?

      Am curious cause I had to dodge the same with hitler

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I grew up in a rural area of the Piedmont region in Virginia. Our house was on 20 acres of land, about 15 of which was natural growth forest. In addition to finding old mason jars and discarded, rusted out iron wagon wheel rims I would also occasionally find arrowheads. I developed an interest in Virginia’s indians because relatively little is known about their culture, yet they used to hunt the same woods that I used to play around in as a child. The northernmost part of the Rappahannock river flowed through a part of our property and I’m pretty sure there was at least a temporary indian settlement on it just based off the old maps I’ve been able to find.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Thats pretty cool anon. You’ve got a real piece of history there.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >nobody likes history, it's just another front in le culture war
    so true /misc/sister

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      But I mean, what history? It was literally just a bunch of tribes, sitting in tents, hunting, killing each other here and there. They didn’t build anything, write anything down, make any advances in science, technology, medicine etc. I’m not trying to be a dick here, but seriously, what history?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        first part of your post applies to every group in history ever. second part is just lazy bait.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They are interesting. Two continents of less-developed, isolated cultures, untouched by the technological/cultural/religious developments of the old world and continuing on their own branches, trying to adapt, resist invasion and assimilation by more advanced cultures. If you don't find that interesting, I'm not sure what you would find interesting.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >untouched by the technological/cultural/religious developments of the old world and continuing on their own branches, trying to adapt, resist invasion and assimilation by more advanced cultures
      exactly. many fail to understand indians in a wider frame, isolating them into brief flashes of folkloric culture (plains horse riders, aztecs, iruquois, the noble savage, etc.) pre-columbian times should be tied into the mainstream narrative.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ? I’m American and I love nature, I often think about the people who used to live in relative harmony with nature on the ground I walk only a few hundred years ago. Neolithic people just a few generations ago in the beautiful nature I traverse all the time.
    I’m especially struck by them surviving New England winters with just longhouses and huts, and clothes they made.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The Indians were a bunch of murdering, gang-raping savages. The only genocides that happened to them were the ones they did on each other. White people tried to get along with them but they attacked whites so whites were forced to defend themselves.

      Always question narratives that try to make you feel guilty for being white.

      two faces of man

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The Indians were a bunch of murdering, gang-raping savages. The only genocides that happened to them were the ones they did on each other. White people tried to get along with them but they attacked whites so whites were forced to defend themselves.

    Always question narratives that try to make you feel guilty for being white.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What does that matter if the interest is mainly shallow and often lumps all those different peoples and cultures under the umbrella of "Indian/Native"? I'm interested in orientals because of katanas and fried rice but none of that is out of guilt, respect, or acute understanding of their culture

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Their way of living is KINO

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Go hunting with the fellow Indians, fishing, abundance of nature. And get to bang your wife under the starlit sky.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm part of the Ute community, we dont care about our culture except using it as a way to farm weed and make a comfy living selling it to whites. Also, most of us dont care about the whole genocide spiel.

    But still, Black person culture and history is worse than ours so i'll find solace in that lol

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I literally have a Cheyenne best friend. Idgaf about “muh colonialism” or nothing like that. The past is the past.

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Explain the German obsession with native Americans then

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      East Germany did in fact use it for propaganda purposes and jabs at the Big Bad USA
      Right Wing Germans projected their fantasies of what Aryan prehistory was like on to the Indians. Noble warrior savages living like wildmen and shit.

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I think there are absolutely some people with a genuine interest in Native history and culture, but obviously people who get mad at you for saying "wendigo" and shit like that are just trying to fulfill their own savior complexes.

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm interested explicitly because I don't feel guilty actually, but ofc mine is the rarer take.
    I find the Comanche very interesting, particularly because their whole lifestyle is a monumental middle finger to what college liberal types consider to be "good and moral". The Comanche were full time carnivores, practiced slavery, raped women for fun, tortured, murdered, were patriarchal, etc. It's like peering into Man in his "natural state of being": a terrifying warlord on horseback, living free under the open sky, and terrorizing all those who oppose him.
    I don't think there's any red blooded Texan male who doesn't harbor some level of manly respect to the Comanche. Even if you acknowledge their wanton brutality and the fact that they had to be put down violently, there's this lingering sense of mourning for that insane lifestyle of a steppe warrior which they lived.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Because it's interesting. It happened right underneath my feet. I've been to peublo ruins and seen those cliff houses and old trails. The pottery, etc. I take a special interest because I grew up near it and that's really it. Plus what he said.

      The survivalist aspect is cool too. Surviving New England winters, the near waterless southwest, the humidity of Florida and Texas with lifestyle and technological adaptation, no matter how primitive in comparison to their conqeurers. It's very interesting.

      That and, you know. Defeat you enemies but remember their names.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      utah, connecticut and oklahoma are seemingly displaced

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Except the Comanches were not Native Americans or even a tribe. They were what use to be called half-breeds. A mix of various European- Mexican-Native Americans. No real language of their own and generally unwelcome everywhere. Look up The Great Pueblo Revolt circa AD 1650s.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Are you high? They were natives, Comanche is a studied language and we know they originated in the Wyoming region and migrated southwards after domesticating horses.
        Having half breed members is irrelevant, the Iroquois and Algonquians were filled with half-whites by the 1700s.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    gay

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >he can't enjoy native american culture because of an underlying sense of guilt

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's the same thing with the Australian Aboriginals
    People pretend that their grug tier civilization was interesting.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      no offense to Australia but Native Americans mog Aboriginals by a longshot. Aztecs, Mayans, Incans, Iroquois, Navajo, etc. are genuinely cool shit

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    On some level we graincucks do yearn for and romanticise the hunter gatherer lifestyle. Red indians exemplify it in opposition to white America, which is the greatest embodiment of modernity, and of course they were recent enough to have shaped some part of our history and popular memory, unlike our own hunter gatherer ancestors, who are far too ancient to be meaningfully connected to us today and only really came into the public consciousness in the late Victorian period.

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The vast majority of Native American tribes and cultures really isn't that interesting
    >Teepees
    >feather hats
    >fur clothes
    boring
    There is the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico that had urbanized dwellings but not enough people seem to care about them either

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >I'm genuinely convinced that people fake interest in native american culture as a way of being sorry to their genocide or discrimination they faced by the us.
    >Civilization-wise they're one of the least interesting and culturally infantile ones out there.

    Hard truth. I began looking into various native cultures out of pure curiosity for whatever it was I had missed, not growing up around any tribes. Very few are interesting. Not to say all, obviously, but many natives, particularly in Canada and the US, because that’s what I’m familiar with, are boring.

    Before anyone disagrees, remember there are countless tribes all belonging to different ethnolinguistic clusters with different histories, a majority of tribes are nothing like the legendary ones you were taught about in 1st Grade like the Ojibwe, Iroquoian (Mohawk, Seneca, Onandaga, etc.), and Navajo. Think of it just as you would the Old World. Everyone is interested in the Romans, Chinese, Persians, but nobody is interested in shitty irrelevant hunter-gathers who existed in some isolated corner of Siberia for 1000 years, never contributed anything to history, and had a grand total of like 15,000 people at their peak

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Perfect summary of it there. The bulk of Native Americans are very boring for the same reason that random Germanic tribes in 200 AD are incredibly boring. Nobody really cares about that much about the Cherusci, Marcommani, Chatti, etc. because they really are just the punching bags for Rome.
      Comanche fame came from being tough warriors, but who the frick cares about the Osage? If you didn't put up a fight you were kinda irrelevant

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    My general feeling is when a White communist or liberal goes on and on about it, I just roll my eyes and move on with my day. I really don't care. Literally just repeating some Stalin era talking point
    >Oh yea, you say we gulaged millions of people
    >But what about when you killed the Indians?
    What about it is what I think, they don't really fricking care about it. Do they care about Hutus and Tutsis? Frick no, it's irrelevant and no one gives a damn. It's only ever used by communists and liberals to b***h.

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't know, Pacific Northwest stuff looks pretty cool.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah but it is the corner that nobody thinks about

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        People in the Pacific Northwest do.

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's interesting dawg. We caught a bunch of stone age/chalcolithic societies right on the even of their development, got the barest tantalizing glimpse of a world entirely separate from the rest. i'd likewise love to know what happened in the middle east and europe for the several thousand years in which there were urban societies but no writing, but there's nothing left of it other than painted skulls, gene flows, and post holes.

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Can only speak as a Leaf but yeah the white guilt thing is 100% true. Lot of people trying to take a slice of the native pie up here now, lot of white chicks LARPing as "Metis" or 1/256th proud Mikmaq whatever the frick. Don't know about down in the States but a lot of my profs in university would go hard into that "Indigenous ways of knowing" shit as if its equal to the usual university standard. They would never make us learn the Eightfold Path or the Catholic Catechism in the same vein, but when it comes to natives we're supposed to revere their amazing mystical connection with the earth.

    Its a shame because a lot of history there is actually interesting and its mostly not native peoples but middle aged white women in the ivory tower wanting to sleep better on their $200k a year tenure job as "one of the good ones" while the speakers they bring in that are actually Indigenous are reasonable and normal people who aren't doing some phony fetishistic worship.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I stand by my belief that often the most "normal" appreciators of Native American History are the ones who aren't overly sappy and soap boxy about it, i.e not White guilt motivation.
      When reading about the Comanche Wars from the perspective of old school Texans (i.e pretty conservative guys), they're very much straightforward and blunt about it all, but there's a certain masculine respect and understanding, they see "eye to eye" if that makes any sense. Instead of droning on about native people being these unique mystical cultures they are acknowledged in a very matter of fact manner: brutal, bloody, violent, but skilled and free warriors who lived their lives according to their own code and their own morality. The Comanche were terrifying murderers, they were bandits, they were rapists, they were torturers, but even the most genuinely racist Texas Ranger has to bow his head in respect to their horsemanship and their fighting prowess. They are held up alongside the Mongols, Tatars, Huns, etc. Fearsome, terrifying, bloody people who commanded respect.
      At the risk of sounding too "redpill" type, I think there's a genuine gap between male and female views of these things. Men, for whatever reason, will nod in respect to the most brutal warrior as long as he can win and fight hard. Instead of projecting this hippy dippy peace and love ideal onto them, we see manhood in its most untamed and its most natural state of being, with all the flaws and virtues it carries.

  26. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's the opposite for me, I think pre-columbian American societies are some of the most interesting ones

  27. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Compared to most civilizations, the natives of northenr america might just have been the most peaceful people in human history.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *