From: HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: What does Malcolm X mean to you
Date: 11 Jan 1993 09:27:11 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

In article <1993Jan9.032858.17580@midway.uchicago.edu>,
thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) bites back
>In article <1if5v0INNsn4@morrow.stanford.edu> HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels) writes:
>I was responding to a poster that mentioned how perfect
>the Indians were.  That's as much of a myth as the one about
>Columbus being a great discoverer.
.
.
I never said they were perfect either.  But their stewardship of the
earth has had a better record than ours.

 >This
>>was a religious ceremony.  They believed blood kept them in harmony
>>with the Universe. You want me to talk about Christ? the burnt
>>offerings of the Israelites?
>
>Which burnt offerings of the Israelites consisted of human sacrifice?
>I daresay the slaughtering of an ox is at a bit different level in the
>moral hierarchy than the massacre of thousands of people.
.
.
Well, babe.  How do you know that Jehovah wanted just burnt oxen?
It may have graduated from human sacrifice!
.
I mean, look at that number with Abraham and Isaac. It may have been
a test in those patriarchal times, but who knows what kind of other
meaning it may have had.
.
And I still say, look at Christ.  The Eucharest, pray tell.  I used
to chew the body and drink the blood of the Saviour in my other
existence as a Catholic.  Give me a break.  The Native Americans
were certainly not perfect, but sheesh, at least they were
straightforward.

>>human sacrifice in the ancient European tradition?
>
>Please clarify.
.
.
From what I understand, the ancient Britons and Celts did a little
of that kind of sacrifice.  If I am wrong, I stand corrected.

>>Whereas the white guys shelled out 60 million souls in Africa for
>>the slave trade and consigned almost that amount of Natives to
>>oblivion in the Americas.
>
>I'd like to see some documentation for the 60 million figure,
.
.
As recently as the late 1980s, the author Toni Morrison, in the
opening pages of her book, "Beloved" dedicates her book to the 60
million or more black people who died in the slave trade.  Of course
this includes those who were eaten by sharks and died from disease
and ill use on the way and afterwards.
.
I know for a fact that Toni does research on her books.  My girl
would not lie.  I've heard upwards to 30-60 million African lives
were lost, as well as 30 million Indian peoples.

>
>Given that there weren't 60 million people in the Americas,
.
.
Wrong.  I said 60 million Africans.

>that the vast majority of them died of diseases that they would
>have died of had the Western Europeans been the most peaceful of
>people, I suggest that the Europeans weren't quite as culpable
>for the death of aboriginal American culture as you suggest.
.
.
Bullshit.  These guys were chump change.

>>Then again, the Native Americans didn't use race as a criterion for
>>killing...or would you care to document this one, too?
>
>No, the Native Americans were equal opportunity killers.  Just ask
>the Hurons, or any number of other tribes completely wiped out by
>brethren aboriginal Americans.
.
.
My original objection stands.  Did they use race as a criterion for
killing?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american,soc.culture.asian.american