Where does the current view of poor abused indigenous peoples come from?

[Another Random]

While I can't ignore the fact that colonization fucked up the lives of countless natives of multiple continents due to a mix of prejudice, religion, trickery and cruelty, it definitely feels like the BIPOC garbage is supposed to make us think that indigenous people were not only always oppressed but would live in greater harmony with each other than the colonizer white people did, to the point where acts like wars between tribes, ritual sacrifices, and cannibalism seem to be seen as taboo subjects to bring up because you're stereotyping them as evil people who therefore don't need help.

I don't really understand where this view comes from. Considering what we do know of their religions, how is it 'stereotyping' to believe that the Aztecs believed in sacrificing people for the sake of their beliefs, or that there were tribes who believed that eating warriors they captured would give them power? And it's not like they didn't know how to defend themselves before the Europeans arrived if they were fierce warriors, either.

 

[Meat Target]

Anti-white blood libel, Noble Savage mythology, and gullible white women who fall for their "exotic" "spiritual" experiences like peyote tripping, scorpions up the hoo-ha, and chugging Lysol to get drunk.

Simple as.

 

[Would]

Jewish Marxists who use useful losers of history and society like coloreds as beatsticks to induce guilt into the winners in order to destroy our society so they can somehow implement communism that surely won't fail.
IIRC they made this clear as far back as early 20th century by outright saying they would manipulate niggers into hating whitey by constantly reminding them of slavery and other prejudices, while promoting easily manipulated negroes into roles of power in society.

Whenever someone tells you that Nigger worship is founded in pinko shit, they're telling the truth.
None of this is about the abuse or mistreatment of anyone. Every race has fallen victim to it at one point and is not owed an apology for it. That is how nature is; the weak shall fall to the strong.

By the way, they don't want to fix the issue either. In fact, they will do anything they can to stop unity. The most recent example being the complete rejection and smear of the late 90s-00s as being an era where white/black-colored racial tensions hit an all-time low in America.

This is why communism is a lie and nothing but a vehicle for some dickhead to gain power. 'Class consciousness' is a lie; there is only power and those who wield it.

Black Lives Matter was the pinnacle of their attempts at infiltration, being a very successfful front.

Incidentally, this is also why despite pushing for 'everything whitey = bad', they push for racemixing at the same time.


You should have listened to these people.


Ultimately:

As long as niggers and coloreds are too stupid (or too short-sighted to think this colored worship will last the moment the reds achieve their victory) to see they're being used as pawns, this will not stop until we either erradicate communists, crush the black populace to <3%, or end the white race.
But since I think niggers are too stupid and beaners/muslims/chinks are too greedy and opportunistic, we have no chance at a true class consciousness against these people.

 

[Another Random]

Okay, but that's a different issue. I'm asking about indigenous ones, aka redskins, not darkskins.

 

[I (Don't) Have A Gun]

Having lived my entire life in Africa I can assure you the white has but a unbearable burden upon the melanated: running water, electricity, paved roads, healthcare beyond some dude in animals skins shouting at the sky. They simply can't run a functioning society at anything beyond a stone age level of technology and it's just unfair to even put them in a position where they have to try. Sure it funny the first couple of decades but lets face it at this point it's just become cruel.

I'm asking about indigenous ones

The indigenous around here are darkskins though...

 

[Would]

Okay, but that's a different issue. I'm asking about indigenous ones, aka redskins, not darkskins.

They're used and exploited in the same ways as well.
They don't care about helping Indigenous people. They care about using them as weapons to bash whitey, where every failed feather who's a drunken retard is ackshually the fault of whites via colonization and bringing them civilized manners.
If they cared, they'd be at the reservations teaching them to adapt and integrate into society, rather than gaslight them into blaming others for everything wrong with their lives.

 

[Insuficiencia renal]

White people love to buy/make up these beliefs, they will blame other races but these tendencies are only found within the European mindsets. Why do they do this is a great question, perhaps it is a quirk of the way their cultural expressions turned out, one that happens to be able to be commonly adopted by discourses of communistic origin. I believe European races are xenophiles the same way birds build nests, ants build anthills and bees build honeycombs.

 

[Judge Holden]

While I can't ignore the fact that colonization fucked up the lives of countless natives of multiple continents due to a mix of prejudice, religion, trickery and cruelty

Couple things to consider

1. There is precisely zero real difference between the super-duper evil colonization concept and basic mundane-ass conquest; i.e. shit that was the universal norm worldwide for tens of thousands of years until about a century ago​

2. Given the fact that all these natives were already subject to this aforementioned conquest by stronger neighbours, they were already long subject to prejudice, religion, trickery, and cruelty by local empires far less PR conscious than white euro empires​

3. Literally all of this shit was already inflicted on said white euros by their nonwhite neighbors over the centuries whenever white and non-white empires shared a border/sealane which is all happily ignored by the same retards perpetually wailing about how uniquely evil white empires were for conquering shit in the same timeframe.​

The shit european empires and their spinoffs did was the exact same shit everyone else on the planet was doing before and afterwards the moment they left the hunter-gatherer stage of civilisation, including the very people the european empires were conquering. Pretending there is some essential difference in morality when pajeet gets conquered and marginalised by barry compared to when pajeet got conquered and marginalised by rangeet or when pajeet conquered and marginalised sukdik-deepsheet is straight up and unironic White Mans Burden shit given how it holds white people and white cultures to an infinitely higher moral standard than non white people and non white cultures

 

[Weebburner]

dude we fucked em with nothing but trade before the thought of fully colonizing was even a thing. Atleast higher up north the french didnt want to colonize shit. They just wanted pelt n shit.

If mr redskin n feather became a fucking alcoholic and started beating his wife and child because of firewater isnt nobody fault but its own.

 

[Sexy Senior Citizen]

Okay, but that's a different issue. I'm asking about indigenous ones, aka redskins, not darkskins.

@Judge Holden's post is a large part of it. The other part is the myth of the "Noble Savage," which has been around for centuries.

 

[Moja Zemlja]

Noble savage idealism, its as simple as that.

 

[Rudolf's Friend]

Pretty much what everyone is saying in this thread, along with radical communist literature being taken as "Historical Truth". The most notable of this was the jew Anarcho-communist Howard Zinn's book A People's History of The United States that came out in the early 80s, which claimed that all of American history has been about oppressing the little guy and was where a lot of myths about our history such as the smallpox blanket theory originated from. It's a book that is filled with fallacies and yet it is pushed as historical fact and that's largely due to a wave of popularity it got in the late 90s when it was promoted by Matt Damon (who lived near and was reportedly groomed by Zinn) in the movie Good Will Hunting.

Luckily because of how long A People's History has been out for there have been many refutations of the book and it's fallacies that have come out over the years, the most notable being from Mary Grabar.

 

[Fapcop]

Pretty much what everyone is saying in this thread, along with radical communist literature being taken as "Historical Truth". The most notable of this was the jew Anarcho-communist Howard Zinn's book A People's History of The United States that came out in the early 80s, which claimed that all of American history has been about oppressing the little guy and was where a lot of myths about our history such as the smallpox blanket theory originated from. It's a book that is filled with fallacies and yet it is pushed as historical fact and that's largely due to a wave of popularity it got in the late 90s when it was promoted by Matt Damon (who lived near and was reportedly groomed by Zinn) in the movie Good Will Hunting.

Luckily because of how long A People's History has been out for there have been many refutations of the book and it's fallacies that have come out over the years, the most notable being from Mary Grabar.

One time I found myself arrested in a protest. (Young and dumb, many such cases.)

I shared a jail cell with some antifa guys from California and this stick like Jew communist (can’t remember if Trotskyist or Leninist, but red as fuck.) also from California who legit had that skeletal kinda build, that people whose only sustenance is obscure Marxist journals and Das Kapital get.

Anyways, they were discussing how to propagandize to people and the Über Bolshevik specifically mentioned Howard Zinn’s A Peoples History of the United States, as a great red pill.

 

[HyperboreanRightsActivist]

The colonial narrative has spiralled out of hand. People are no longer to see the frontier period for what it was: territorial conflict, resource competition, and cultural exchange. Instead, it has to be a grand myth of oppression and resistance, and I blame critical theory for this.

 

[Agamemnon Busmalis]

Because they apply what happened to some cultures to all of them. I also think they assume all indigenous peoples are "noble savages" and ignore the high level of social and economic complexity in some of these cultures that led to oppressive behaviors of their own.

All the Aztecs show is they were following the same development path as Eurasia, just limited in some ways due to circumstances outside their control. Tenochtitlan was exceptionally sophisticated in its urban planning and water supply, and at the time of the Spanish conquest was a pretty new establishment. About as old as Constantinople at the time the Western Empire fell.

 

[Blue Gem Kosher Queen]

IMO is connected to American Exceptionalism, as the descendants of the whites that fucked over the aboriginals realised all the fuckery their ancestors did and exercise penance by "respecting them", read hold them in a pedestal as ideas of what America could've been rather than real people. Most Americans can't name the "Five Civilized Tribes", do you really expect them to care about the rest?

If we try to imagine a nicer future, maybe one where Tecumseh manages to get his Confederation in the Midwest or one where Andrew Jackson decides to be loyal to the Cherokee soldiers that aided him in New Orleans, we may have a healthier American mindset but the reason it didn't happen was because it wasn't feasible at the time for it to happen. Could you imagine if the Midwest and Southeast had as much of "native flair" as the Southwest?

Most Americans, even the kind that only exist in the mind of Twitter users, still see Tecumseh, Wild Horse, Geronimo, Sitting Bull, among many others with reverence. Perhaps humbled that they happen to be in the side of history that "won", even if they themselves live in trailers and gibs. Aboriginal victories always have this mystic of being greater than those of the American army because of the limitations. Original Americans when rebelling represent the very essence of what the US of A is: freedom at any cost to its bitter consequences.

Juxtapose it with your modern day rez. All tribesmen have Christian names, some work with the government, the rez itself usually looks like shit because it was placed in the middle of nowhere and now they have streaming services and Internet. Hippie bullshit is hippie bullshit, the rez just looks like a big ranch with people that barely look 1/16 and could pass for Chakothay. Feeling bad about it is like lamenting that modern Scandinavians don't act like vikings anymore.

Indigenous Americans aren't as a demographic any better or worse than the rest but they are a more marketable and charismatic alternative to addressing their neighbors and relatives: the hillbillies.

 

[The Ugly One]

Luckily because of how long A People's History has been out for there have been many refutations of the book and it's fallacies that have come out over the years, the most notable being from Mary Grabar.

Doesn't matter, it's still used as a high school textbook.

 

[Unifier of Hispania]

Many people here are giving contrived and complex answers that appear to be deep, but are borderline conspiratorial. The true answer is relatively straightforward: Jean Jacques Rousseau and other Enlightenment Era intelectuals popularized the noble savage myth as a counterpoint to the authoritarian character of what was then considered civilized society. Since Rousseau was and still is very influential in left-wing circles, this idea became solidified.

The natives were fierce warriors, but their almost non-existent technologies and poor immune systems were no match to the Europeans.

 

[Rudolf's Friend]

Doesn't matter, it's still used as a high school textbook.

There were attempts to ban the book from public schools in Tennessee, but they went nowhere. It probably won't get banned unless a major drastic change happens.

Many people here are giving contrived and complex answers that appear to be deep, but are borderline conspiratorial. The true answer is relatively straightforward: Jean Jacques Rousseau and other Enlightenment Era intelectuals popularized the noble savage myth as a counterpoint to the authoritarian character of what was then considered civilized society. Since Rousseau was and still is very influential in left-wing circles, this idea became solidified.

Right but there had to be leftist intellectuals to push the narrative to those outside of leftist spheres. Zinn was one of those people alongside his fellow jewish traveler Eric Foner who is the main push behind the narrative that the Civil War was entirely about slavery and nothing else, that the American Civil War was a conflict of Good and Evil and not 2 morally gray sides which had heroes and enemies on both sides, and that the only reason Reconstruction failed was that they didn't do it hard enough (Zinn and other leftists were also pushing this narrative but Foner was the biggest voice of this as he mostly focuses on the Reconstruction era). Foner was also the one who started the push that Trump should be disqualified from running for President because of the 14th amendment after the J6 bullshit.

 

[The Ugly One]

There were attempts to ban the book from public schools in Tennessee, but they went nowhere. It probably won't get banned unless a major drastic change happens.

Tennessee is an R+23 state and still lets open Marxists run their school system. God, I hate conservatives.