American Indians: Peaceful Victims or Perpetrators of Genocide?
GeekBoy
Peaceful Victims or Perpetrators of Genocide?
by Bill Wilson
Almost daily, self-appointed "victims" decry us pale skins for uncountable
"atrocities" we have allegedly committed against the darker breeds of
humanity.
It's hard to be a white person these days. Like the Jews in Nazi Germany,
it seems we have become the scapegoats for the world's ills. Almost daily
self-appointed "victims" decry us pale skins for the uncountable
"atrocities" we have allegedly committed against the darker breeds of
humanity. One of the most virulent of these accusing groups has been
militant American Indians, who never tire of blaming the "white European
invaders" for their woes.
Movies such as Dances With Wolves and The Conquest of Paradise, as well
as documentary series such as How The West Was Lost, reinforce this message,
portraying the early pioneers as vicious racist killers and plunderers.
Countless websites spread one layer of guilt after another on Caucasians.
One in particular claims that Indians were "hunted as animals. stalked by a
perverse enemy who lay in wait everywhere your [Indian] family walked."1
Guilt-ridden whites have bought into this propaganda, and openly proclaim
that they are the cause of so-called "hate crimes," ignoring the fact that
the majority of such offenses are committed against whites, not by them.2
When news of assaults on whites by African-Americans and others surface,
apologists for the criminals quickly blame "classism" or other social
factors as the real cause of the incidents.3
Rarely is mention made of European-American contributions to the welfare of
their "victims," such as penicillin, electricity, and indoor plumbing.
The result of all this fervor has been the demonization of the white
race. Leftist radicals are now calling for an end to the very concept of
"whiteness" as the only solution to the problem of racism.4 Whining
"therapists" demand that sports teams like the Atlanta Braves change their
names to avoid offending Native people.5 European settlement of the New
World is seen as the root of environmental destruction and Indian poverty
(rarely is mention made of European-American contributions to the welfare of
their "victims," such as penicillin, electricity and indoor plumbing). And
underlying all of this righteous outrage is the primary claim of the Indian:
"We were here first. You came and forcibly took what we peacefully settled
thousands of years ago."
Unfortunately for the PC camp, recent evidence has challenged this
long-standing claim. Groundbreaking archeological discoveries have shown
that the people we commonly refer to as "Native Americans" were not the
first to reach the Americas. What is more disturbing for their claim of
victimhood is additional evidence that their "settlement" of the New World
was anything but peaceful. Research of human remains as well as ancient cave
art supports a disturbing thesis: The Indians found human inhabitants
already residing in the Americas when they first arrived. Their solution to
this problem was simple and direct: They massacred these earlier settlers
and took their land.
The ancestors of the so-called "Native Americans" took possession of the New
World by a brutal mission of genocidal conquest.
Such findings are vitally important for contemporary discussions of race
relations. How could disgruntled Indians continue to agitate against whites
for forcibly taking their land, when they resorted to the same actions
themselves? It would be blatantly hypocritical to do so. But this is what
the evidence shows: The ancestors of the so-called "Native Americans" took
possession of the New World by a brutal mission of genocidal conquest.
Most of us were probably taught the traditional theory of human migration
to the Americas. It postulates that the first settlers were Asiatics who
crossed a land bridge connecting Siberia and Alaska nearly twelve thousand
years ago, when the Ice Age was still in full swing. Finding an ice-free
corridor through Northern Canada, they migrated further and further south
over the centuries, following herds of animal prey. Archaeologists refer to
these pioneers as the Clovis people, after the town of Clovis, New Mexico,
where spear points were found in 1932 that were likely used to hunt
mammoths. It is from these Clovis people that modern "Native" Americans are
descended.
It has long been believed that these were the first Homo sapiens to
arrive in the Americas. This idea was first suggested by Jose de Acosta, a
Jesuit missionary who lived in the 1500s, after he traveled to South America
and met the natives. For decades this thesis appeared unassailable.
Archaeology seemed to show beyond a doubt that they were the first people to
walk the New World.6
Many authorities now believe that humans first walked here as long as forty
thousand years ago.
Discoveries of skeletal remains in both North and South America in the
last several years have shattered this thesis, however. Many authorities now
believe that humans first walked here as long as forty thousand years ago.
Evidence for this comes from sites scattered across the eastern United
States as well as South America. For example, Al Goodyear, an archaeologist
with the University of South Carolina, recently discovered tools buried in a
site near the Savannah River, which clearly predate the arrival of the
Clovis people. Similar findings have been made in Cactus Hill, Virginia,
Meadowcraft Rockshelter in western Pennsylvania, Monte Verde in Chile, as
well as Brazil. Artifacts have been found in areas now covered by the waters
of the Pacific Ocean.7 Remains of an individual known as the Kennewick Man,
which were found on the shores of the Columbia River in 1996 in Washington
state, have been shown to be over nine thousand years old. Many scientists
believe that this person may have been Polynesian or even European in
origin, and wish to conduct DNA tests to find out. (Interestingly, local
Native Americans oppose the tests, and demand that the remains be turned
over to them for burial.)8
Of particular significance is a group of archaeological findings in
Brazil, around the area of Serra De Capivara. There scientists have found
cave paintings which predate the last Ice Age. In addition they unearthed a
number of well-preserved skulls from this time period. One is that of a
young lady, whom researchers have named Lucia, or Lucy. They used a CAT scan
to reconstruct her facial features from her remains. Then a forensic artist,
Richard Neave from the UK's Manchester University, recreated the appearance
of her face. The results were shocking. Rather than being Mongoloid, it has
all the characteristics of being Negroid. It most closely resembles the
faces of the natives of Australia, the Aborigines. These people left Africa
about one hundred thousand years ago. It is believed by Walter Neaves, an
archaeologist at the University of Sâo Paulo in Brazil, as well as Grahame
Walsh, an expert in ancient Australian rock art, that aboriginal people
actually made trans-Pacific journeys to the Americas prior to the arrival of
the Clovis people.9
Drawings of boats by ancient aboriginal artists support this thesis. They
are shown as having a very high prow. Such an innovation would have been
unnecessary in calm inland waters, but absolutely essential to an ocean
journey.10 (By the way, the contention that primitive people in small,
simple craft could not have crossed the ocean is demonstrably false. In
1969, European researcher and adventurer Thor Heyerdahl crossed the Atlantic
in a boat made from papyrus reeds, a journey of 3,300 nautical miles.)11
Unlike contemporary Indians, these fossilized remains bear no resemblance
to modern Mongoloid people. That fact is vitally important to the point of
this article. Genetic and other testing long ago proved that the Cherokees,
Navajo, Creek, and other tribes are descendants of Asian population
groups.12 In light of recent evidence, their claims to be the "original"
Americans rests on faulty ground indeed.
Even more disturbing for the PC crowd is what the rock art of these
"Australian Americans" record. Cave paintings made at the same time that
Asiatic people begin to appear in the region show scenes that are radically
different from those made prior to their arrival. Images of serene and
playful village life give way to drawings of executions, warfare and
outright slaughter, scenes that only appear after the arrival of the
Asiatics. These drawings correspond to discoveries of skulls in the fossil
record that for the first time show Mongoloid characteristics.
The inference is clear: When the Asians began to arrive in the area, they
began a bloody and violent crusade against the people already living there.
This genocidal campaign continued until the aboriginal people disappeared
from the fossil record. From nine thousand to seven thousand years ago the
skeletal remains shifted from being exclusively Negroid to exclusively
Mongoloid. Combined with the bloody scenes appearing in the cave paintings
at the time, the fossil records reveal a disturbing fact: The true first
Americans were wiped out by the people who now claim that title.13
What we know of "Native" American history reveals a series of what today
would be called human rights atrocities.
These findings drive the final nail in the coffin of the image of Indians
cultivated by the politically correct. These people are not the gentle
lovers of the land films such as Pocahontas would have one believe. What we
know of "Native" American history reveals a series of what today would be
called human rights atrocities. The ancient Aztecs practiced human
sacrifice. Tribes in the Northwest, as well as the Iroquois people,
practiced slavery. Others were cannibals.14 Many were abusive to their wives
and children. Inter-tribal warfare was common. The author has visited and
camped on Blood Mountain in northern Georgia, named after a vicious battle
fought there centuries ago between the Creek and Cherokees. When examined in
the light of the evidence, any moral superiority attributed to the
pre-Columbus inhabitants of these shores is revealed as fiction.
Whites as a group are no more deserving of condemnation for their history
than darker-skinned people are.
Does all this mean that the brutal and inexcusable treatment handed out
to the Indians by some white people did not occur? Of course not. Caucasians
are as guilty of sins against humanity as any other breed of human being.
The point, however, is this: Whites as a group are no more deserving of
condemnation for their history than darker-skinned people are. After all,
the most often cited "crime" of European Americans, slavery, was actually a
cooperative enterprise between black African warlords and white slave
traders.15 White people did not begin slavery, but they did end it. For this
we receive no credit in the eyes of our accusers.
Intolerance, brutality and genocidal tendencies are the common lot of
humanity.
For the sake of real harmony, these facts need to be recognized by all of
those seeking a dialogue about racial issues. Caucasians have been vilified
for too long as the primary agents of hatred and oppression. Intolerance,
brutality and genocidal tendencies are the common lot of humanity. By
acknowledging this as our mutual heritage, all peoples may finally be able
to engage in constructive discussion on matters of race. Until then, we pale
skins will likely continue to wallow in oceans of undeserved guilt.
Endnotes
1. "Redskin: A Hate Word Defined," www.ichildren.org/redskin.hate.htm
2. "Attorney General Reno Helps Demonize European Americans and Promotes
Divisiveness," article at website of the European American Issues Forum,
www.eaif.org/chron11.htm
3. "Assaults on Va. Students Raise Hate-Crime Debate," The Philadelphia
Inquirer, pg. A21, March 17, 2001.
4. "The Point Is Not to Interpret Whiteness But to Abolish It," from
website of Race Traitor, www.postfun.com/racetraitor/features/thepoint.html
5. "Indian Psychologists Support Retiring of Offensive Team Mascots,"
from website of The APA Monitor, www.apa.org/monitor/apr99/mascot.html
6. "Who Were The First Americans?" from the website of Scientific
American, www.sciam.com/2000/0900nemecek.html
7. Ibid.
8. "Skeleton Fuels Row Over Americans' Origins," from the web site of the
BBC, http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_602000/602793.stm.
9. "First Americans Were Australians," from BBC website,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_430000/430944.stm
10. Ibid.
11. www.gonorway.no/go/heyerdahl.html
12. "American Indians," article from World Book Encyclopedia, 2002.
13. "First Americans Were Australians," from BBC website,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_602000/602703.stm
14. "American Indians," article from World Book Encyclopedia, 2002.
15. Buchanan, Patrick J., The Death of the West (St. Martin's Press, New
York, NY, 2002), pg. 220.