MovieChat Forums > News of the World (2020) Discussion > Interesting that there is not a single c...

Interesting that there is not a single case of settlers kidnapped ...


by native Americans that wanted to go back to white society after they lived with the "Indians" for a while. Indians at this time were freer, their governments were more democratic, they have better warmer shelters, they had a higher calorie diet, and they were happier.

I guess that is why the white men had to try to kill them and drive them into the infertile areas of land. This could be an interesting story, but I am getting a bit tired of that same Tom Hanks face and voice. Can't Hollywood give some other people a chance to act?

reply

That's a very definitive statement but leaving that aside, perhaps they didn't want to go back because of the scorn/prejudice/judgement they knew that's have to face. So not so much prefer to stay with the Native Americans as unable to return?

reply

Perhaps? Why don't you read about it and quit being so defensive?

reply

Just exploring the topic - don't think I've got anything to be defensive about - at least in this case. But it's been a while since I read anything around this slice of history - I'll see what the local library has to offer.

reply

Try 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus.
There is a lot of new research and history that show just how vicious the white settlers were. The latest I have read about was the California Mission system and how they treated the Native Americans. We Americans have been fed generations of lies to justify our history. It's too bad how so many people are unable to conceive that things were not as they were told.

reply

How do you know that? What books, articles, etc. document your claim? I am not doubting you; I just like documentation. especially when I see such an absolute claim.

reply

This pretty much destroys his credibility! I'd say tribal upbringing is more cult like.

"Indians at this time were freer, their governments were more democratic, they have better warmer shelters, they had a higher calorie diet, and they were happier."

reply

Documentation should exist if the claims are true.

reply

Here's what historian T.R. Fehrenbach says about health and quality of life among the Comanches, one of the most prominent and successful of the North American tribes. This is from a book considered one of the best sources on the Comanche way of life.


"However, the People had physical bodies inherently no different from modern men and women, and if they had been hardened by adversity, they were still vulnerable to all of mankind’s ills. Hunger, constant exposure, and an utter lack of sanitation took terrible tolls. The People died easily from pneumonia during the winter snows. They suffered hideously from rheumatism as they began to age, and at all ages they were ravaged by intestinal disease. Living in the open made them arthritic, and blindness was not uncommon. Pursuing a rough, dangerous existence, in which a thorn scratch could prove fatal, they perished quickly from wounds, snake bites, and badly broken bones."


From "The Comanches" by T. Fehrenbach.

reply

Say it isn't so, dude! They lived nobly with nature and had idyllic lives! Talked to the wolves and all that jazz!

reply

Seriously, though, they were much more in tune with the rhythms of nature than we were...

Women had difficulty in conceiving, and infection killed many in childbirth. The awful exposure and constant hunger and labor turned Comanche women into crones at twenty-five, while the men’s powers frequently failed by thirty. The vast majority of the People who reached the age of forty already carried the seeds and signs of imminent death, although the People, like most Asian stock, did not turn gray.

Mercifully, few grew old. The image the Comanche had of old age was malevolent, for there was no place for a female who could not work or keep up, or for a pain-wracked, dim-eyed hunter who could not take the trail. There was no way for the People to prepare for old age. Life was such that most died young, but suicide and euthanasia were widespread throughout the bands. A man or woman who could no longer make the march, or who would starve before the thaws, walked off to die in privacy like a proud animal. The obviously fatally ill were usually abandoned to their fate, partly out of sheer pragmatism, partly out of fear of the hostile spirits believed to surround the stricken or unfortunate. The deformed were destroyed; women caught in incest were executed; twins were killed because they appeared to be unnatural; in bad times, and in very ancient times, girl infants were exposed to die in the wilderness. The People showed very little concern for such anticipated death. The Comanche knew man had little time upon the earth.

reply

Not sure where you came up with the nonsense about the Comanches being one of the most prominent and successful... They were a splinter group of the Shoshone that only reached about 10,000 in numbers during the times of the old west. They lived a nomadic life, compare that to a say the Cherokee which number more than twice that at the same time... and that had a written language while the Comanche were reliant on passing information down orally. So when you have a book that starts with such bullshit, it brings into question everything else in your little piece.

As for people dying from scratches and broken bones, this was the 19th century the same thing applied to everyone during that time period.

reply

LOL! I think you need to read a few books on Native history and not just rely on stories that your grandma, who was a Cherokee Princess, told you.

The Comanche ruled the southern plains and much of Northern Mexico. They drove out the Apache from Texas and basically held Spanish settlements in the area hostage for over a hundred years. Until the United States Army entered the picture, the Comanche were unmatched for military prowess and domination of such a wide territory. Try reading this book for a better picture. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3304956-the-comanche-empire

The Cherokees' accomplishments, other than being among the most successful at adapting to White ways, were negligible compared to those of the Comanche. They offered very little resistance and in no way earned the fear and respect of their neighbors in the way the Comanche did.

Don't type out of ignorance, because you'll only embarrass yourself.

reply

I think you should stop getting your information about American Indians from Euro-trash authors. What they say about American Indians makes as much sense as what a Mongolian might say about the Aztecs. If you had a clue you would stop babbling about Comanches simply because you heard them mentioned in an episode of Gunsmoke.

reply

Your ignorance has been demonstrated so completely that there is no point whatsoever in continuing to humor you with replies. You know little to nothing about the topic and you have no grasp of history. Adios, amoeba!

reply

Well put.

reply

Interesting that OP didn't give any evidence of any ramblings.

SHOCKING.

reply

Not so if you are familiar with his/her ramblings.

reply

OP's statement is utter history-denying bullshit of the first magnitude. Did that nonsense come from some Zinn-spouting idiot professor at a waste-of-money university, or is it just a figment of dementia-ravaged imagination?

reply

Like most, if not all, examples of Leftist 'knowledge' it is based on what they feel things ought to be rather than what is.

reply

Most, if not all, right wing "knowledge" is garbage spouted by uneducated morons who think they've got the world all figured out when in reality they don't have a clue - and are too damn stupid to realize it.

reply

No. It's fact, as opposed to Leftist "knowledge" which is based on feeling.

reply

Got it backward. It's not people on the left who are anti-fact. We don't pretend climate change is a hoax, claim covid-19 doesn't exist or that masks do nothing, make up nonsense about dead people voting or vast illogical conspiracies to avoid a simple conclusion (ever heard of Occam's Razor?). So on and so forth.

Every righty I've ever met argues based on emotion - mostly anger and a sense of grievance. Time and time again I've laid out in detail why I take a certain position on something, hoping maybe this once I'll get a rational two way discussion, but no. Always deflection and distraction. Name calling and projection. The one thing you'll never get is a straight answer to a simple question. Every response is something other than that.

reply

Anyone can see that the Left's entire ideology is based upon wish-fulfillment and magical thinking. You can utter all the rebuttals you want, but the truth is out there for anyone to see.

reply

Allow me to quote myself:

Always deflection and distraction. Name calling and projection. The one thing you'll never get is a straight answer to a simple question. Every response is something other than that.


Thank you for proving my point. 😳

reply

You're pointless, so unfortunately that cannot be proven. Maybe instead of crying about how people shut down your trolling, you ought to examine yourself.

reply

There is a point within the pointlessness, wherein lies the true point that reveals the secrets of the universe itself.

Hey ... at least my babbling sounds deep and profound. Yours just sounds like babbling.

reply

"We don't pretend climate change is a hoax, claim covid-19 doesn't exist or that masks do nothing"

Belief in anthropogenic climate change is ideologically driven, quasi-religious pseudoscience. Masks have been proven ineffective at both containing and repelling viruses by numerous unbiased scientific studies. Unfortunately, mask-wearing has become politicized and turned into yet another religious cult that the science-denying left embraces.

reply

Sorry. I happen to be a scientist myself, I'm familiar with the evidence, and nothing you just said is even close to correct. Science illiteracy is a major problem in the US. Our 21st century technological civilization simply can't afford the kind of ignorance that leads people to express such views, oppose action on climate change, refuse to follow basic safety precautions needed to save lives in a pandemic, shun vaccines based on debunked conspiracy theories and junk science, etc.

There hasn't been an actual debate over the reality of man-made climate change for decades now. Not in the scientific community. What we have had is a concerted, well funded disinformation campaign by the fossil fuel industry, reminiscent of the one mounted by Big Tobacco to discredit the smoking-cancer link. We don't have the luxury of patronizing deniers any longer. Fortunately people who think like you constitute a rapidly shrinking minority. I'm sorry you believe right wing propaganda, but that's your problem. The rest of the world is moving on without you.

reply

I am also a scientist, but in biology, not climate research. I agree that science illiteracy is a big problem, but scientists tend to make this worse by mixing ideology and science. In biology this tends to happen with evolution, and now with gender ideology. The no-platforming of scientists and doctors who question the "consensus" on controversial topics tends to, rightly, foster distrust of science by laypersons. If I did not have insider knowledge, I would not trust scientists either. Since I do have insider knowledge, I know when to trust what I'm told is the scientific consensus, and when powerful ideologues have co-opted the narrative and used it for political ends.

reply

Thank you for correcting the disinformation agent above.

It always bothers me when people say "I'm a scientist and the bullcrap spouted by the fakestream media is true!"

I work as a rater for one of the companies hired to censor information across all of social media, and I can't even name the amount of times that legitimate scientists who have called out the COVID plandemic have been censored for not going along with the Left's wacky consensus.

As mentioned above, unbiased studies showing mask effectiveness for airborne transmission as mostly negligible have been completely hidden and/or removed by search engines like Google and Bing (and any drive-by readers curious about what I'm talking about can read the research for themselves here: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.30.20047217v2
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20049528v1.full.pdf
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2749214)

The whole climate change thing has also taken on a nasty effect on our industries, much to the detriment of our blue collar workers, with nary any equal or effective job replacements in sight.

It's pretty obvious the climate change talk is agenda driven, and I wouldn't even care so much if it didn't have such a negative impact on the industries of hard working individuals who are basically being told they are going to be put out of work for predictions that haven't quite borne out based on some of the most preposterous claims made over the last 20 years.

I think more people would be on-board with the Left's aggressive climate change rhetoric if their solutions weren't always reduced to welfare states and government control via technocratic corporatocracies.

reply

You forgot to mention the pedophile ring and the lizard people. If you stick to science, you have to mention all the facts.

reply

Rachel Plummer was one.

reply

I don't know about not a single case, but I agree it is interesting and could be explored more.

reply

Bitter at all? Yeah, there were plenty of kidnappings, etc. It's well documented, and many movies have it as a plot point (Dances With Wolves). I can imagine that many were children and adopted into their tribes, other were adults that were kidnapped and used by the tribe for various reasons.

Regardless of politics, it's an ignorant statement.

reply

Bitter and ignorant ... thanks. The fact is I've done a lot of research and reading into American and New World history. A bitter person is the one would you show up and shit all over the place adding nothing to the discussion and just name calling. You don't know what you are talking about.

reply

Than you must have missed all the prime sources. Simple as that.

reply

Maybe you are the one who missed it since I don't see any quotes, links or citations or a single argument, simple BS, bitter retorts.

reply

Entering a new response for visibility sake. A simple search on google can show far too many links to share individually, so I'll just post the general search. It's not scholary in the strictest sense, but there's far too much second and third party information there to dispute.

"Woman captured by indians"

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sxsrf=ALeKk000WsqFMQ39a2NEPl0eX5zSHqIC9w%3A1613056526601&source=hp&ei=DkolYPezIsiz0PEP9aS3oAw&iflsig=AINFCbYAAAAAYCVYHskfVjQqNWKo4mi0xmgHDkmrKXou&q=women+captured+by+indians&oq=women+captured+by+indians&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BwgjEOoCECc6BAgjECdQpBlY-DVgzzdoAXAAeACAAUyIAcQGkgECMTKYAQCgAQKgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6sAEK&sclient=gws-wiz&ved=0ahUKEwj38pLqj-LuAhXIGTQIHXXSDcQQ4dUDCAk&uact=5

"Women kidnapped by indians"

https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk029onitZKFeYdTmTM1x8ppR5c6SHg%3A1613056497678&source=hp&ei=8UklYMvFJue90PEPoYiJmA4&iflsig=AINFCbYAAAAAYCVYAXuIdG1HYie5u7z-awb3IluwWzQP&q=women+kidnapped+by+indians&oq=women+kidnapped+by+indians&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BwgjEOoCECc6BAgjECc6CAgAELEDEIMBOgsILhCxAxDHARCjAjoOCC4QsQMQgwEQxwEQowI6BQgAELEDOgUILhCxAzoCCAA6CAguEMcBEKMCOgIILjoECAAQCjoECC4QCjoFCAAQhgNQ4g1Y90Fg8UNoAXAAeACAAWqIAa4NkgEEMjUuMZgBAKABAaoBB2d3cy13aXqwAQo&sclient=gws-wiz&ved=0ahUKEwiLgq3cj-LuAhXnHjQIHSFEAuMQ4dUDCAk&uact=5

"Children captured by indians"

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sxsrf=ALeKk01QKuU-5ys71jN4AqB9b7aF8hsBTw%3A1613056534320&ei=FkolYPn4EvnR0PEPk5OloAM&q=children+captured+by+indians&oq=children+captured+by+indians&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BwgAEEcQsANQqPUIWM7-CGDZhQloAnACeAGAAaUBiAHRBpIBAzguMpgBAKABAaoBB2d3cy13aXrIAQjAAQE&sclient=gws-wiz&ved=0ahUKEwj52-vtj-LuAhX5KDQIHZNJCTQQ4dUDCAw&uact=5

reply