Can we discuss native Americans and the "noble savage"...

Can we discuss native Americans and the "noble savage"? I'm a tiny bit Cherokee but I am kinda sick of hearing about the noble dindu nuffin native american.

Other urls found in this thread:

amazon.com/Empire-Summer-Moon-Comanches-Powerful/dp/1416591060).
youtube.com/watch?v=H1y_0NfhF9c
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

We got shitloads of natives up here, burger.
What do you want to know?

pic. a story of native conflict resolution without interference from the wyatt man

Whatever you say, Pocahontas

how much out of 56% cherokee are you le burger?

They're no different to anyone else. Many weren't noble at all, they were savages without honour, happy to do the white man's dirty work for a few dollars

read all first contact journal lit you can find - that is where you will learn a bit.
Hernado de soto, de vaca, Cortez etc
Empire of the summer moon was a good one I read on the Comanche a few months ago (amazon.com/Empire-Summer-Moon-Comanches-Powerful/dp/1416591060). The noble savage is a myth

also have cherokee ancestry. Ancestory settled down with the white man, converted and generally lived happy.
While the plains indians were more violent by and large that dose not mean forest indians did not fight. The cherokee were actually one of the few large tribes to have actual settlements. Basically, by the time the English arrives the native Americans were in something of a inbetween period after a collapse but before a rebuilding. There is evidence of larger civlizations in Appalachia and even westward with the cliffside towns. Like stonework earthen ditches roads. At some point we very well could have been as high as the Mayan or Incan. There have always been semi-nomadic hunter gatherers but they originally were more of a supporting factor to a larger society.

>Tfw Pocahontas is literally in my fucking family tree on Ancestry

Not directly descended from her, nor am I part Amerindian, but she's in my family tree. lol

Yeah, I used to like Indians but im getting sick of their wining and the Liberals wining on their behalf. I think we need to abolish the reserves and for them to be Americans again.

indians are the least of your people's problems man

youtube.com/watch?v=H1y_0NfhF9c

Is your last name warren?

You killed them all why should you even care?

We're going to be wining so much that we will get tired of wining

Of course, user

>I think we need to abolish the reserves

Thats where all the deep underground military bases are, the reserves are a convenient legal buffer... not going to happen

From what I understand they were more or less brutal, disgusting savages on par with Africans.

Never heard this. Fuck.

>I'm a tiny bit Cherokee
Sure you are, pocahontas

Fuck you beat me to it. I don't know I thought it wouldn't be here yet

There may have been a few hippy faggot tribes who were similar to the modern idealized image of the noble savage who lives in perfect harmony with his surroundings and treated women as equals with men, but nobody knows what they were called outside of the archeology/anthropology departments of the universities because they were all genocided by the bad motherfuckers that have football teams and weapons of war named after them today (Seminole, Apache, etc).

I grew up in the east st louis area, near the Cahokia Mounds, and last I took my wife to the museum while I was visiting family. I hadn't been to this museum in since I was in high school about 20 years ago. I noticed all kinds of oddities that slipped past me back then, This is coming from memory so maybe I have this backwards, but there was an exhibit that explained that the Cahokia tribe, who the mounds are named after, were NOT the ones who built them, it was the Mississippians, but they completely gloss over what caused the transition. The exhibit literally just said "One day it was the Cahokians, then it was the Mississippians, moving on!"

Consider that area that we're talking about was very ideal for a human settlement. It was prime real estate: massive river valley, and the river has a distinct hook that creates massive fertile areas when it floods. This was one of the largest cities in the world during its peak under the Mississippians, larger than London was at that time, and that would only be possible if the conditions were ideal for the relatively primitive agriculture tech available to them. So what possible reason would there be for the Cahokians to just decide to move one day and hand it all over to this Mississippian tribe from the north? They are very specific that change happened in a VERY short time. I think the only logical answer is that the Mississippians either slaughtered those fuckers or they left for fear of an impending slaughter.

again from memory, correct if wrong pls.

ok I just checked wikipedia and I may have reversed the chronology of who was there first. The Mississippians built the mounds, but the Cahokians lived there when europeans first arrive, hence the name. The wiki article gives no mention to the overnight shift from cahokian to mississippian, but the museum exhibit was pretty clear that the archeological record just shows an instant switch: one day it was a mississippian settlement, then suddenly its cahokian. It really seemed like the museum wanted to avoid any implication that Natives were capable of massive genocide.

They do have a nice recreation of a typical mississippian menstruation hut. Based Mississippians tolerate foolishness from bleeding harpies.

edgy virgin detected. OP can go suck dick and explain how it's not gay.

Native americans were like when you watch star trek and see some rinky dinky ship the size of a VW beetle decide to start firing on the enterprise. The people on the little ship didn't know the capabilities of the white men in the ship. They thought they could do what they wanted and get away with it, killing the white man, raping the women and children. They came to a gunfight armed with sticks and flint and they got forever BTFO and captain kirk fucked their women.

This it's the typical historical lie that rests on nothing but wild speculation and very doubtful accounts.

All this claims that natives were ultra violent savages, but when the europeans arrived they were few in numbers yet they didn't got massacred, instead they were well received, they were given lands for very cheap, they were instructed in the new world food and crops.

It was a misfortune that the plague killed them all and the remaining natives were persecuted an exterminated by the never ending greed of the europeans.

Don't believe me?

Mapuches weren't so kind to immigrants and they killed them, simple as that.

From what I recall most of native american history was like that. It just becomes harder to pin down because most (if not all tribes) didnt write shit down. I mean I just want to throw this out there, the natives were buying weapons and allying themselves with various european powers so they could murder their neighbors.

>We had to kill them they asked for it themselves.