From: gt7994a@prism.gatech.EDU (ORMOND,SEAN PATRICK)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Theories on Columbus-bashing and Compassion Fascism
Date: 12 Oct 92 04:25:29 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <1992Oct11.225440.5713@nntp.uoregon.edu> eisimps@cie.uoregon.edu (Eileen Simpson) writes:
>Berkley is going to go to an
>extreme, but you don't have to let it get to you so.

If you think it GOT to me so, then I was negligent in omitting my smileys.
Hell, that sort of stuff is par for the course at Berkeley - I think it's
pretty funny, actually.  Regarding a people's right to call themselves
what they will, we're in 110% agreement.  I, however, view it as a feeble
attempt to draw attention and build esteem.  Now, you could argue that if
your agenda is to change traditional views, then a logical first step
would be to change your name - a name to which those views are attached.
That's a rational argument, but I just can't say, "We're not Indians,
we're Indigenous People!" without laughing.

>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.)

Did you really believe my portrayal of the Plains culture (running around
hugging trees and talking to flowers) was intended to be completely
accurate?  Do the words "Smiley impaired" mean anything to you?  It was
a poke at the liberal tactic of portraying the Natives as peace-loving,
"one-with-the-earth" forest fairies.  If you're going to paint a picture,
you ought to finish it (oh, damn - I'm starting to sound like Ross Perot).
I think you missed my question, though.  Would you prefer it if Columbus 
had never set foot in America?  Someone would've landed here eventually,
you know?  Let's assume no one ever landed here - would this continent
have evolved into the great nation it is today under the leadership of
such primatives?  Would you prefer to live the life of a native American,
or a Modern one?  Some would say the former...I would say "be my guest".
Contrary to what the environmentalist tell you, there's a hell of a lot of
forest land left - more, I might add, than when Columbus arrived!  If you
should feel the call of the wild, cancel your cable subscription, load up
at your local sporting goods store, and go be one with Mother Earth.  I,
for one, prefer that to remain an OPTION, and not a necessity.

Let's assume that the Natives started to dress themselves and walk upright,
while the Europeans were still covered with fur.  Let's further assume that
they built ships and sent explorers around the world.  How charitable do
you think they would be to "Native Europeans"?  Hmmm...?  

Another point - this one requires a few givens.  First, I would argue that
man, all men, are a part of nature; as much as a blade of grass or a tree
in a forest.  You might also compare us to a hurricane or forest fire.
Secondly, two words: natural selection (or, for the layman: shit happens!).
I view our invasion of this continent - and I don't deny it was an invasion -
as a technologically superior race expanding its borders at the expense of
a primitive, inferior people.  Wars happened back then (and today) and
there was no such thing as a RIGHT to land.  If you couldn't defend your
land and someone took it from you...well, such is nature.  The resulting
extermination of the natives was a natural, inevitable event and is no
more offensive to me than the extinction of the dinosaurs.  All things pass.
This particular event, however, did lay the framework for what is 
arguably the greatest country in the world, and as such is worthy of
positive recognition.

>Welcome to the real world.

Glad to be here! :-)

>So here we have it.  You are afraid.  Your power feels threatened.

I feel that the life I've come to know and love is clearly threatened.
It's not SERIOUSLY threatened, but it's clearly under assault.  Not only
by history revisionists, but by modern SOLUTIONS such as quota bills
and Affirmative Action programs.  I've always believed if you work hard
and excel, you'll be justly rewarded.  The last two private companies I
worked for engaged in BLATANT reverse discrimination, and yes, this
bothers me.  It means that it doesn't matter if I graduate with a 4.0,
high SATs, and strong recommendations - if I don't fit the current
sex/race requirements, I don't get hired.  I know what you're going to
say, and I would respond that two wrongs don't make a right.  I'm currently
looking at an application for employment.  At the top it reads, "Affirmative
Action Employer".  At the bottom it reads, "...does not discriminate in
hiring...on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, sex...".  Does this
not strike you as odd?

>How you expect to solve any problem when you can't look at
>its root causes, is beyond me.

Exactly what problem is it that we are trying to solve by bashing a 
national hero?  Also, if you want to talk about avoiding the "root causes"
of a problem, you have to look no further than the black race in America.

>The question is what are we going to do about it, and where do we
>go from here. 

I should think that would be obvious!  I, for one, am going to pack my
bags, tear down my house, and go back to Ireland where I belong.  I
would strongly urge anyone reading this to do the same.

-- 
Sean P. Ormond
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Clinton '92 - "Read my lips: NEW TAXES"
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,talk.bizarre