Re: Amerind an offensive term (was: Early Amerind assimilation
Thomas L. Billings (itsd1@teleport.com)
Tue, 06 Aug 1996 00:44:26 -0800
In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960804194732.394D-100000@lonestar.jpl.utsa.edu>,
"Stephen W. Russell" <srussell@lonestar.jpl.utsa.edu> wrote:
> Gosh Tom, I can't tell you how much it hurts my feelings that you find
> nativist politics degenerate.
Please reread my post. NOWHERE did I say that nativist politics were
degenerate.
I said:
"The development of nativist politics (which this thread has now
degenerated into completely) through the academic socialist milieu has
left it with many features deeply unattractive to many of us who value
their own personal freedom. "
Indeed that sentence was only supportive to the last one:
"I seriously doubt this thread has much more to offer sci.anthropology."
>Why the surprise? What is more political than people wanting to control
their own story?
Exactly my point, take it to the nativist and the political newsgroups, if
that's the case.
<story of Coronado, of no relevance to anything I said, snipped>
> Yup, control of the terms of discourse can be very political, no
question. And, yes, our traditions hold a lot in >common--particularly
land--which you are used to holding as an individual.
Which I hold not at all, and have no interest in holding. I'm more
interested in opening other avenues to resources for humans. (see my sig.)
>
> Got another guy on this thread telling us that technology makes him above
> nature's laws and therefore superior and now you want to tell us that a
> system based on greed is more rational and more reliable and therefore
> superior.
Again quoting from my post, instead of Russel's imagination:
"The development of nativist politics (which this thread has now
degenerated into completely) through the academic socialist milieu has
left it with many features deeply unattractive to many of us who value
their own personal freedom."
Freedom, and the autonomy leveraged by personal property, are hardly
identical to greed, except in the overheated imagination of the academic
socialists, who gave the world so much of an example of non-"greedy" land
use, in accord with "nature's laws", in the Socialist Bloc during the last
50 years, right?
> But, like all Indians still in the resistance mode, I will still try to
> control the terms of discourse to my advantage. With all your guns, all
> your technology, and Adam Smith's invisible hand weighing in on your
> side, surely you can spare a few words?
You can live in whatever "mode" you please sir, for all I care!
As I noted above, I really would like to see something like an
anthropological science being discussed in sci.anthropology. I know it
can be done. I've seen Eric, Mary Beth, and others do just that rather
nicely on many occaisions.
The politicization of discussion in many science disciplines throughout
academia is what has raised the vulnerability of all sciences, to the
growing political power of the scriptural literalists. Only occaisional
mention of that danger is made in this newsgroup. That is my concern
here, as much as anything.
Many in my own area are currently willing to watch as the "social science"
disciplines get the chop. Having been disparaged so often from that
quarter, they assume that, to quote one friend, "Forty years in the
wilderness should slim the fat off them very nicely". While, at the same
time, they believe that the scriptural literalists won't touch say,
cosmology, astrophysics, space astronomy, and spaceflight technology
itself.
Of course, these and other areas of inquiry threaten the scriptural
literalists as much or more than anything Eric, Stephen, Mary Beth, or
Xina will ever write, here or elsewhere. They will be targeted by the
scriptural literalists eventually, and that WILL affect my own dreams, and
my own work, and quite directly. Please don't make that happen any faster
by immolating this and other scientific disciplines in an
academic/political "Alamo".(to use a "hegemonic" analogy)
If you're interested in anthropological science, then please do speak of
that in the networks devoted to that science, as this one is. Please
refrain from weakening the focus on scientific enquiry with political
fulminations. Make it hard for the boys on the House Science Committee
staff to butcher the NSF directorates concerned with this and related
fields. Why? Because sure as death and taxes, they'll be coming after me
and the fields I work with next!
So, how about discussing Anthropology in sci.anthropology?
Regards,
Tom Billings
--
Institute for Teleoperated Space Development
itsd1@teleport.com(Tom Billings)
ITSD's web site is at, http://www.teleport.com/~itsd1/index.html
|