[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Greetings:

I thought I would write to ask if anyone has read "Black Elk Speaks". I just bought the book on my Nook Reader, since I had a $5.00 gift card from Barnes and Noble, and it was only $10.99. So I saved a bit of money, and its a subject (Native American theology and philosophy) that I have always found interesting.

I was curious to find out if anybody had any opinions of the book. Anyway, let me know. I am curious to see what people think, if anything. I wasn't sure whether to put this in Literature or in Religion. I decided on Religion given the topic matter, but if the Censors move it, that's fine with me.

[Jura-Glenlivet]

Probably one of the most moving books i have ever read

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Probably one of the most moving books i have ever read

What was it that moved you, if you don't mind my asking?

[Jura-Glenlivet]

It's hard to say without resorting to cliche and it must have been about twenty years back, but as you know it is a first hand account of the end of the Sioux as a proper nation, and Black Elk's journey to becoming a holy man of his people at this juncture.
I have just got the book down and had a quick look and the prose is spare and poetic, going through The little Big Horn, Ghost dances and Wounded Knee.
Profoundly sad but uplifting in a way, read it, I shall most likely do so again now you have brought it up.
(just a few cliches!)

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Well, thank you. I eventually intend to get as many books on Black Elk as can be found on Nook/Kindle. My family is part Native (not Sioux, but still part Native; Cherokee and Mohawk, to be precise). I am Jewish, but my family isn't TOTALLY Jewish. There is some admixture going on.  I live in Iowa, and of course, the Sioux (various tribes of them) are big in this area. Black Elk was Ogalala Sioux, at least that is how it was written then. Today I think it might be spelled "Oglala". I'm not certain. I have also seen him listed as Lakota. Ogalalas might be a subgrouping of the Lakotas, which are themselves a subgrouping of the Sioux. Its been a LONG time since I studied this in the one course that I learned about it in college. I don't really remember too much. This book should update my knowledge a bit.

Although I am NOT by any definition of the word a liberal human being, and generally my attitude toward minorities is to tell them to shut it and get moving in life rather than complain about past abuses, even I shall admit that the Natives have a legitimate right to be very unhappy with the shit end of stick they've been handed. Even today, they can't get a fair deal. When the Navajo Reservation in Arizona is at 75% unemployment, you have to admit that that is fucking criminal. I mean, I know, there are many problems in the Native community, alcohol being one of the worst, but still, 75 fucking percent? Why hasn't there been action on that?!

That shit just infuriates me. If any group of people deserves any kind of justice at all, its Natives. I'll stand for them. I might not for any other whiny little bitch that should just shut it and move on with life, and that includes even some Jews that like to take the eternal victim role (most of us don't, but there are some that do), but the Natives deserve for people to stand with them.

[Rama Set]

Well, thank you. I eventually intend to get as many books on Black Elk as can be found on Nook/Kindle. My family is part Native (not Sioux, but still part Native; Cherokee and Mohawk, to be precise). I am Jewish, but my family isn't TOTALLY Jewish. There is some admixture going on.  I live in Iowa, and of course, the Sioux (various tribes of them) are big in this area. Black Elk was Ogalala Sioux, at least that is how it was written then. Today I think it might be spelled "Oglala". I'm not certain. I have also seen him listed as Lakota. Ogalalas might be a subgrouping of the Lakotas, which are themselves a subgrouping of the Sioux. Its been a LONG time since I studied this in the one course that I learned about it in college. I don't really remember too much. This book should update my knowledge a bit.

Although I am NOT by any definition of the word a liberal human being, and generally my attitude toward minorities is to tell them to shut it and get moving in life rather than complain about past abuses, even I shall admit that the Natives have a legitimate right to be very unhappy with the shit end of stick they've been handed. Even today, they can't get a fair deal. When the Navajo Reservation in Arizona is at 75% unemployment, you have to admit that that is fucking criminal. I mean, I know, there are many problems in the Native community, alcohol being one of the worst, but still, 75 fucking percent? Why hasn't there been action on that?!

That shit just infuriates me. If any group of people deserves any kind of justice at all, its Natives. I'll stand for them. I might not for any other whiny little bitch that should just shut it and move on with life, and that includes even some Jews that like to take the eternal victim role (most of us don't, but there are some that do), but the Natives deserve for people to stand with them.

How do you propose employing natives on reservation?  By a reservations very nature it defies attempts to infringe on it's sovereignty.  I feel for the plight of the Native American, but they also fought for the separation which is now the source of the unemployment and easy solutions are not present.  Especially when chiefs often co-opt their tribes resources for their own personal enrichment.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Well, thank you. I eventually intend to get as many books on Black Elk as can be found on Nook/Kindle. My family is part Native (not Sioux, but still part Native; Cherokee and Mohawk, to be precise). I am Jewish, but my family isn't TOTALLY Jewish. There is some admixture going on.  I live in Iowa, and of course, the Sioux (various tribes of them) are big in this area. Black Elk was Ogalala Sioux, at least that is how it was written then. Today I think it might be spelled "Oglala". I'm not certain. I have also seen him listed as Lakota. Ogalalas might be a subgrouping of the Lakotas, which are themselves a subgrouping of the Sioux. Its been a LONG time since I studied this in the one course that I learned about it in college. I don't really remember too much. This book should update my knowledge a bit.

Although I am NOT by any definition of the word a liberal human being, and generally my attitude toward minorities is to tell them to shut it and get moving in life rather than complain about past abuses, even I shall admit that the Natives have a legitimate right to be very unhappy with the shit end of stick they've been handed. Even today, they can't get a fair deal. When the Navajo Reservation in Arizona is at 75% unemployment, you have to admit that that is fucking criminal. I mean, I know, there are many problems in the Native community, alcohol being one of the worst, but still, 75 fucking percent? Why hasn't there been action on that?!

That shit just infuriates me. If any group of people deserves any kind of justice at all, its Natives. I'll stand for them. I might not for any other whiny little bitch that should just shut it and move on with life, and that includes even some Jews that like to take the eternal victim role (most of us don't, but there are some that do), but the Natives deserve for people to stand with them.

How do you propose employing natives on reservation?  By a reservations very nature it defies attempts to infringe on it's sovereignty.  I feel for the plight of the Native American, but they also fought for the separation which is now the source of the unemployment and easy solutions are not present.  Especially when chiefs often co-opt their tribes resources for their own personal enrichment.

Well, RAMA, I won't dispute that you have a valid point. There is a shit-ton of hypocrisy going on in many of the Tribes. Obviously, they need to do some internal house-cleaning. And yes, it may be necessary for some persons to leave "the res" to find work, and return to live (ie commute). But, to be fair, they were given the shittiest land available, that no white person wanted. It's hard to work on "the res" because the land isn't worth a damned thing. That was the first injustice. So, what can be done? Well, I don't know. If I did, I would run for office.

But surely in our 21st Century, something can be done by minds wiser than my own. But 75% unemployment is simply inexcusable and should not be tolerated, by the Tribes themselves or by the rest of us.

[Jura-Glenlivet]

At the begining when he sets out to tell his story, he says;

"But now that I can see it all as from a lonely hilltop, i know it was the story of a mighty vision given to a man too weak to use it; of a holy tree that should have flourished in a peoples heart with flowers and singing birds, and now it is withered; and of a peoples dream that died in a bloody snow.

I don't believe there is a answer, or a way back. For everything good done there seems to be a hundred Wounded Knees, Black Elk felt he had failed his nation, it was humanities failure.
There is no idyllic time, his people were as warlike as any other and were caught by history, but I do believe (in the words of a song); we took the wrong step years ago.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Well, I shan't dispute you there. There was a failure. A sad, brutal failure. It's just too damn bad that people paid a vicious price for it.

[Rama Set]

Well, thank you. I eventually intend to get as many books on Black Elk as can be found on Nook/Kindle. My family is part Native (not Sioux, but still part Native; Cherokee and Mohawk, to be precise). I am Jewish, but my family isn't TOTALLY Jewish. There is some admixture going on.  I live in Iowa, and of course, the Sioux (various tribes of them) are big in this area. Black Elk was Ogalala Sioux, at least that is how it was written then. Today I think it might be spelled "Oglala". I'm not certain. I have also seen him listed as Lakota. Ogalalas might be a subgrouping of the Lakotas, which are themselves a subgrouping of the Sioux. Its been a LONG time since I studied this in the one course that I learned about it in college. I don't really remember too much. This book should update my knowledge a bit.

Although I am NOT by any definition of the word a liberal human being, and generally my attitude toward minorities is to tell them to shut it and get moving in life rather than complain about past abuses, even I shall admit that the Natives have a legitimate right to be very unhappy with the shit end of stick they've been handed. Even today, they can't get a fair deal. When the Navajo Reservation in Arizona is at 75% unemployment, you have to admit that that is fucking criminal. I mean, I know, there are many problems in the Native community, alcohol being one of the worst, but still, 75 fucking percent? Why hasn't there been action on that?!

That shit just infuriates me. If any group of people deserves any kind of justice at all, its Natives. I'll stand for them. I might not for any other whiny little bitch that should just shut it and move on with life, and that includes even some Jews that like to take the eternal victim role (most of us don't, but there are some that do), but the Natives deserve for people to stand with them.

How do you propose employing natives on reservation?  By a reservations very nature it defies attempts to infringe on it's sovereignty.  I feel for the plight of the Native American, but they also fought for the separation which is now the source of the unemployment and easy solutions are not present.  Especially when chiefs often co-opt their tribes resources for their own personal enrichment.

Well, RAMA, I won't dispute that you have a valid point. There is a shit-ton of hypocrisy going on in many of the Tribes. Obviously, they need to do some internal house-cleaning. And yes, it may be necessary for some persons to leave "the res" to find work, and return to live (ie commute). But, to be fair, they were given the shittiest land available, that no white person wanted. It's hard to work on "the res" because the land isn't worth a damned thing. That was the first injustice. So, what can be done? Well, I don't know. If I did, I would run for office.

But surely in our 21st Century, something can be done by minds wiser than my own. But 75% unemployment is simply inexcusable and should not be tolerated, by the Tribes themselves or by the rest of us.

What are the differences between native Americans and Palestinians?

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

Easy. Natives didn't steal the land in the first place. The "Palestinians" are Arabs. The Jews are native to the Land. Especially as there aren't any Canaanites left. And Natives don't generally enjoy blowing shit up.

[Rama Set]

Easy. Natives didn't steal the land in the first place.

Natives frequently took land from one another.

The "Palestinians" are Arabs. The Jews are native to the Land.

Not even the Torah claims that.

Especially as there aren't any Canaanites left.

Canaanites are the natives, glad we agree.

And Natives don't generally enjoy blowing shit up.

They certainly retaliated against Europeans. Why the whitewashing?
[/quote]

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

No one disputes that Natives took land from each other.  But they didn't take it from other people, and Whites actually took it from them.

I never said that the Torah claimed Jews were native to the Land. But the Canaanites were destroyed by G-d's order. Ergo, Jews may be taken as the natives of the Land.

The Natives fought wars with the Europeans and lost. But today, they are not generally killing European civilians, or even the Army. So the analogy is a poor one at best.

[Rama Set]

No one disputes that Natives took land from each other.  But they didn't take it from other people, and Whites actually took it from them.

I assume by "other people" you mean people from outside the Americas?  I am not sure what that proves though. The nations that were warlike conquered when they had the opportunity.

I never said that the Torah claimed Jews were native to the Land. But the Canaanites were destroyed by G-d's order. Ergo, Jews may be taken as the natives of the Land.

Regardless of God ordering it or not, the Jews are not native to that land by definition.

The Natives fought wars with the Europeans and lost. But today, they are not generally killing European civilians, or even the Army. So the analogy is a poor one at best.

So following that logic if the Palestinians stopped fighting they would be more entitled to the lands the Jews conquered.

[Yaakov ben Avraham]

What it comes down to is the following, to wit:

1. If the "Palestinians" were to put down their guns, there would be a peaceful situation and two states, Israel and Palestine.

2. If Israel put down its guns in the current situation, there would be no Israel. Hamas has made that clear. Even the PA, which CLAIMS otherwise, teaches its children out of textbooks that don't show a map of "Palestine" with Israel marked on it. Israel, although there are extremists, in general does show maps indicating the "Occupied Territories".