Based on the Kosovo precedent, I formally recognize the independence of the Lakota Nation from the American Occupation. :1orglaugh :thumb:
http://www.zimbio.com/Lakota+Independence
You go guys!
JT
Printable View
Based on the Kosovo precedent, I formally recognize the independence of the Lakota Nation from the American Occupation. :1orglaugh :thumb:
http://www.zimbio.com/Lakota+Independence
You go guys!
JT
Good luck to them, because they will need it, especially with the US government, the various state and local governments, and the various pissed-off European-American neighbours, especially in South Dakota, all gunning for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackie T.
What's going on in South Dakota specifically?Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald Rilea
JT
Just the usual sort of racism and assorted bullshit(harassment by local law enforcement types, what-not), especially, so it seems to me, around the Black Hills-Pine Ridge Reservation areas.
BTW, found out via a Google search I did a little while back, that the Lakota actually declared independence on 21st December of last year.
Am enclosing the link to the topic search I did for you all to see for yourselves.
http://www.google.com/search?q=lakot...ient=firefox-a
Yeah, I got a bulletin from an old p-rock friend when they did. I just find this moment to be apropros to recognize the new nation :1orglaugh . I think they'll hang in there.:thumb:Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald Rilea
JT
We can only hope.
we talked about this before, but it wasn't Officially Sanctioned by OEC until now. ;)
haha :p: I'm going back to OEC on all my pros too, ironically. The cat is the star in this house :thumb:Quote:
Originally Posted by Morning Glory
OEC
I wonder what would police do here if I decided to proclaim my ghetto independent :D
so, when will this actually be official?
this a joke isnt?
pissed-off European-American neighbours... Or might more sane neighbours.
Don't entirely know for sure, though, since in fact the Lakota declared their independence a little over two months ago, and, if anything serious has come of it since then, I haven't heard of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacchus88
.As for the pissed-off European-American neighbours, particularly in South Dakota, being more sane than the Lakota, that's open to debate as relations between them and the Lakota have never been very good, and there is a fair amount of anti-Native American racism, of a kind that's almost extinct in the rest of the US, that still goes on there.
Also, considering that, prior to 1876, and the discovery of gold by European-American prospectors in the Black Hills region of South Dakota, the US government and the Lakota made a treaty in which the Black Hills, which were sacred land to the Lakota and a number of other neighbouring Native American tribes which reserved that area for the Lakota.
No sooner than was gold discovered there, then a flood of prospectors, merchants, prostitutes and all the other sorts of humanity associated with a boomtown, came into the area, all quite illegally, thank you very much, and planted themselves right there, in violation of that very treaty.
Now, one might think that the US Army would have taken steps to eject these illegal, treaty-breaking immigrants from the Black Hills, and prevent any more of them from going in there.
Nope.
Instead, the US Army launched a campaign against the Lakota and Oglala Sioux, who, along with the Blackfeet Indians, would hand it a great defeat on the afternoon of 25th June, 1876, when Colonel George Armstrong Custer and over 200 of his men were surrounded and killed to a man at the Little Bighorn.
That's just one of the many instances in which Europeans and European-Americans came onto Native lands, occupied them and engaged in armed conflicts with Native American peoples, many times in violation of treaties made between those peoples and the various European and US governments, and, after inflicting heavy enough damage on those peoples, took the land.
Talk about illegal immigration gone berserk!!!!
If anyone has a "right" to be pissed-off about anything, I would say that the various Native American peoples would have, far more than others, including Yours Truly.
Their lands were taken, sometimes by treaty, but more often by force of arms, they were essentially herded onto reservations, Christianity was essentially forced down their throats, and there was a whole campaign, until well into the 20th Century, to turn the remaining Native American peoples into "copper-colored white men".
Native students attending Bureau of Indian Affairs-run schools were prohibited from speaking their native languages while at school, and were punished if they did.
There was a very active campaign made by the American government to "civilise" and "Americanise" Native Americans, and it hasn't been until roughly the last thirty-odd years or so, that Native Americans have been able to re-discover their cultures, languages and religions without hindrance from the Bureau of Indian Affairs or anyone else.
From what very little I've read about the proposals made by the Lakota Sioux when they declared independence, the only one mentioned was that those people living in the areas claimed by the Lakota wouldn't have to pay taxes if they became Lakota citizens.
If they didn't, they would.
Mind you, unfair taxation's a son-of-a-bitching tactic to pull.
But, compared to outright land theft, warfare, and attempted linguistic, cultural and religious anihillation, I'd say that a bit of unfair taxation's pretty tame by comparison.
The Lakota haven't, as far as I know, said that they'd be kicking their European-American neighbours out, and forcibly taking their land and possessions.
There may be some individual Lakota who might feel that way, and that would make them, if they were to do those, no better than the ancestors of their European-American neighbours, who were a bunch of thieves.
Some might say that the description I just gave is a bit harsh. But, what should one call people who displace others from their land????
Now, as to whether Lakota independence can practically be carried out is another matter altogether, and it was within that context I mentioned the pissed-off European-American neighbours, as they are, and would be, just one of a number of different institutions and groups with whom the Lakota would have to come to some sort of agreement, to be able to make Lakota independence actually work.
I'd be willing to say that I'll bet that there are some individual Lakota who probably aren't wild about the idea of Lakota independence, for reasons of their own, and there are probably other Native American groups in the area claimed by the Lakota who'd have some problems with it, and would like a say in the matter.
Their interests and wishes will have to taken into account, too, and all sides should at least try their damnedest not to indulge in inflammatory rhetoric or actions, especially violent ones, that will just harden feelings all around, and make greater amounts of violence likelier.
Finally, there's yet another interpretation to this, and that's it could be a publicity stunt by Russell Means, one of the most prominent American Indian Movement(AIM)activists of the 1970's to get back into the headlines, while calling attention to the on-going social and economic problems in Lakota Sioux country.
Who knows???
As for me, well, am gonna read more about it, and get back to y'all on it at some future date.
Mr. Means has always been very good at the publicity stuntness. I always hope that it is, in some small manner, his way to call attention to the plight of the Lakota.
When I heard about this 'declaration', I was SO proud. Its the most lovely and idealistic sentiment I can think of, even for a people for whom idealism and attention to plight will do little to help.
I think its a WILD shame that even to this day and age, that the Government and Whites are getting away with abusing the Lakota nation.
Sigh. </activist>
I am going to say away from this topic... Because ill come off looking like Ass, but going head anyway.
Donald, I see your point....European and US governments, and, after inflicting heavy enough damage on those peoples, took the land. Thats being very General but true, just another part of conquest. Roman, Greece, Persia....that what it is conquest. As soon as Europe set her eyes on the North American the time of Natives was over.
Nothing will come of this it nothing but talk....It all about control, as southern we had chance we took it. Yes, we were punished for wanting independence. I hope they are ready to dish it out and take what will come. In one from or another....
I can only note the ironies here. I believe the United States is becoming (and should be) a post-"racial" society based on a renaissance creed of diversity and merit. This reinforces a lesson to me. People who supported Ukrainian Independence must be those who condemn separatism in Ukraine. Those are squabbles amongst indo-european people. This is a bit more serious. For me, it is simply a chance to research and understand the plight of Lakota.
Why does any European nation squabble amongst themselves. It should be united front those who would tear Culture and History of the European People. Should feel love for ones nation and pride and instead ripping it apart. Try to build a better future for everyone not just your faction. Just because you want to feel better. Maybe I am looking for World, isnt there anymore. HRE... Byzantines.... sign... we can not even work together to protect europe . My Honor is Loyalty
I am rambling... sorry
No problem. You seem like a decent guy. I'll tell you flat out: You are looking for something that doesn't exist. There is a creed begun by the renaissance in western civilization that can be redeemed. It is, however, post-ethnic and racial. It has to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacchus88