From: eisimps@cie.uoregon.edu (Eileen Simpson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Theories on Columbus-bashing and Compassion Fascism
Date: 11 Oct 92 22:54:40 GMT
Organization: University of Oregon Campus Information Exchange

In article <70803@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt7994a@prism.gatech.EDU (ORMOND,SEAN PATRICK) writes:
>In Denver, a Columbus Day Parade was cancelled after threats by 
>Indians and their sympathetic(pathetic?) supporters, who called it a 
>celebration of 500 years of racism and genocide.

I think that if you take an objective view of Columbus' actions after he
discovered the 'New World' and note how many native peoples did not survive
his deliberate acts (we will leave out disease since it apparently was not
used as a deliberate device to execute the locals), the native peoples have
as much right to challenge you view of Columbus as the Jews have to
challenge a celebration of anyone who organized a pogrom.

The Indian wars ended in the US in the late 19th century.  I know of no
legitimate historian who challenges the view that these wars were
genocidal.  I have personally seen a selection of texts from the early 20th
century that were overtly racist.  (Whites of Mediterranian or Slavic
ancestry were lesser forms of whites, too.)  

Seems to me that the history of racism and genocide is well-documented, and
the issue is what do we do about it now?

>In Berkeley, CA, Columbus Day is now officially "Indigenous Peoples 
>Day".  I guess you would expect this sort of "compassion fascism" 
>from a place like Berkeley, but that doesn't make it any less 
>obscene.  Note they are no longer Indians, but "indigenous 
>peoples".  Maybe we could just call them "Indi-Americans".

Huh?  Why does this upset you?  Oh, I see the answer to that in your later
portion of this post.  As for this specific topic:  people get to call
themselves what they want to.  The right to state one's own name is
powerful and when you resist it and insist on your right to use a name that
*we* gave *them* you are objecting to a threat to your power, not to any
inherently obscene action on their part.  Berkley is going to go to an
extreme, but you don't have to let it get to you so.

>While there are many more people who will celebrate Columbus rather 
>than protest him, the radicals always seem to get the press.  I'd 
>love to hear how many of these protesters are enjoying their life in 
>this modern American country.  Of course, if you listen to the 
>press, none of us are, but realistically speaking how many of them 
>enjoy their dozen+ cable channels, their luxury automobiles, 
>ELECTRICITY?  How many of them pay taxes, vote for officials, and 
>slurp up government hand-outs?  How many would trade it for a teepee 
>on the plains and a life of hugging trees and talking to flowers?
>Just another example of the hypocrisy from the radical left!

You know, this whole section is both a weak effort declare everyone who
doesn't agree with your rose-colored view of Columbus a radical leftist;
and an incredibly shallow view of American culture.  I would be offended if
I heard a real, genuine radical speak of American culture and cite the
trash you find so compelling. I mean, let's kill 20 million people so our
decendants can have a wide selection of television stations!  Come off it,
fella.  Is this the best you can do?  (Your description of Plains culture
is both inaccurate and racist, in my opinion.)

>Any theories on why these people are so intent on revising history 
>so as to reflect poorly on the roots of white America?  

Are you really that ignorant of your facts that you think people are
revising history?  History contains events that are shameful.
Americans and Spaniards waged genocidal war against native peoples.  The
Spanish stole the indigenous peoples blind.  Welcome to the real world.

What people *do* with the facts as they actually occurred is what is
important.  If your power or feelings of personal adequacy depend on denial
of reality, that is your problem, and you weaken this nation far more than
the radicals who would run it down.  Attitudes like yours prevent taking
effective and compassionate action in the present because your ego and need
for power can't handle seeing the truth.

>Will this
>solve any of our contemporary problems?  Guilt is, without a doubt, 
>a significant factor behind white support for many radical minority 
>causes - "White Guilt Syndrome" exists.  I think the answer lies 
>somewhere in the ironic parallel between this attempt to damage and 
>demean white heritage, while promoting and glorifying the heritage 
>of minority groups.  It's unfortunate that many minorities have been 
>steadfastly convinced that they cannot rise up until the majority is 
>pulled down.

So here we have it.  You are afraid.  Your power feels threatened.  You
cannot even imagine an alternative to guilt.  Sounds like this is a
statement of your reality--the best you can do with information that isn't
sugar-coated and "nice."  It is not the only option available for accurate
information.  How you expect to solve any problem when you can't look at
its root causes, is beyond me.

You play win-lose. If other people feel good about themselves, you feel put
down.  That is not an automatic event based in reality, it is how you see
things.  Anytime you want to do the work on yourself, you can feel good
about your heritage without lieing about it.  What you don't get to do is
feel "special" in a way that demeans other human beings.  If you aren't a
closet racist, this shouldn't be a problem.

Welcome to life on Planet Earth:  none of our ancestors were saints.  Few
of us live in places where we were invited by the people already living
there.  The question is what are we going to do about it, and where do we
go from here.  A number of us do without the guilt and don't have to live
in denial to do it.

>-- 
>Sean P. Ormond
>Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
>uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt7994a
>Internet: gt7994a@prism.gatech.edu
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre