Re: The Indian question

This is an archived post from the old bulletin board. For new posts, see the forum.

Posted by Simeon ( on May 07, 2002 at 11:02:06:

In Reply to: The Indian question posted by Vincent on May 06, 2002 at 17:08:15:


>> First of all, it's not at all clear that any of the Indian
groups WERE the first immigrants. More and more evidence of ancient
Caucasian inhabitants in the Americas is being discovered. It seems
increasingly likely that proto-Indians swamped Caucasian predecessors
in much the same way that Asiatics swamped the Ainu of Japan. <<

There is no evidence of any "swamping" nor of any Caucasian predecessors
in the way Caucasian is traditionally used to mean "Northern European."
There may have been earlier inhabitants of the Americas, but they
resembled more the Ainu, aboriginal Australians, and other groups than
any Europeans. Instead of being "swamped", it is more likely that
they intermarried with other groups. The swamping occurred post-1492.
For all the silliness of that argument, the Caucasians were not the
first inhabitants of Europe, either.

>> In any case, my argument is not based on historical rights, but on
the needs of my people right now. <<

Who are "your people"? My people are the entire human race, and one
of their greatest needs is to learn to live together with their own
diversity and variations. So, my argument is also based on the needs
of my people right now.

>> Rights belong to those who are capable of enforcing them,
everything else is just talk. <<

What a frightening world you must live in. Rights belong to everyone,
regardless of their ability to enforce them. In fact, those who have
the ability to enforce rights ought to enforce everyone's rights, not
merely their own. Those who enforce their own rights without regard
to anyone else's well-being end up only defeating themselves in the
end. Nazis. Bolsheviks. Colonial England. Colonial France. It's
only when we stand up for the rights of all that society progresses.
That's one of the founding beliefs of the US, however imperfectly it's
been practiced throughout history.

Social Darwinism is dead. Live with it.

>> Life is not aimed at moral "fairness" but eternal biological
struggle, which rewards those who are willing to do what is
necessary to preserve their kind. <<

Yes. And what is necessary to preserve our kind is tolerance and
respect for diversity. "Our kind" is the human race. We are not in
competition with one another - we are the same species. In nature,
you find species supporting their own kind against other species.
Humanity can't seem to figure that out, and always imagines that some
of our own kind are the enemy. Thank you for making the important
point that we need to to "what is necessary to preserve [our] kind",
as that is exactly what Baha'is are doing, and exactly what diversity
and respect of others is!

How does respecting diversity threaten your preservation? The only
attitude that threatens anyone's "preservation" is the attitude of
exclusion and division. Inclusion is not a threat to anything but
our own self-importance and prejudice.


this topic is closed - post at