Header Image


Op-Ed Column

Thanks Taking and Dinner for Two

by David Yeagley · November 26, 2009 · 55 Comments ·

The white man was the first guest at the Indian’s table, if uninvited. What white people say about American Indians is therefore more important than what anyone else says. If Indians must consider anyone outside our own tribes, it should be the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant. This is the one people with whom we have to do. The others make only a dark, dreadful drone of discontent, a hackneyed hounding from an international consortium of degenerate racists. Today we would honor the strength of the great ‘pale-face’ who first shared our fare.

The English also shared their thoughts about Indians from the beginning. These historical impressions have not changed, even three centuries later. The WASP defined the Indian image—like a historical ‘Kodak moment.’ This image affects the way the Indian relates to the white man even today.

Indians can think positively even about tragedy. Here is a wonderfully stylized “Chickasaw Removal” jacket, woven and designed by Margaret Roach Wheeler (Chickasaw), commemorating the great walk from the Southern woodlands to Oklahoma, in the 1830’s. The Indian spirit is still strong, in all ways.

The Indian let the white man set the table manners. The Englishman was apparently unwilling or unable to accommodate any other. The Indian hero, gracious as he always was to visitors, if uninvited, indulged the white man. The Indian spirit was grand. It could afford the foreigner’s neurosis.

But consider the English reaction to this Indian behavior. The Englishman’s soul was divided asunder.

Cadwallader Colden, a Scot (born in Ireland) was a “British” governor in New York in the 1760’s. In the colonies since the 1710, the physician Colden made reports to leaders of the entire English province. He wrote to Governor William Burnet, later publishing reports of 1727 and 1747. The reports were called The History of the Five Indian Nations Depending on the Province of New York in America. He addresses the five nations the French had previously identified: the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, and Seneca nations—essentially, the Iroquois Confederation.

Colden reveals the fundamental, classic double mind with which the civilized, English Christian regarded the Indian. The Indian was both superior and inferior—equal to the most noble of the world, and yet crippled by vice.

“The Five Nations are a poor Barbarous People, under the darkest Ignorance, and yet a bright and noble Genius shines thro’ these black Clouds. None of the greatest Roman Hero’s have discovered a greater Love to their Country, or a greater Contempt of Death than these Barbarians have done, when Life and Liberty came in Competition. Indeed, I think our Indians have out-done the Romans in this particular.”

Then Colden singles out the vice of “revenge” as the Indian’s dominant crippling disposition, and chides the English Christian for failing to change it.

“These Infidels…are become worse than they were before they knew us. Instead of Virtues we have only taught them Vices, that they were entirely free of before that time.”

Colden renders further, detailed accounts of Indians and comments:

“These Stories may seem incredible to many, but will not appear to be Improbable to those who know how extremely Revengeful the Indians naturally are. That they every day undertake the greatest Fatigues, the longest Journeys, and the greatest Dangers, to gratifie that Devouring Passion, which seems to gnaw at their Souls, and gives them no ease until it is satisfied. All Barbarous Nations have been observed to be Revengful and Cruel, and certain Consequences of an unbounded Revenge, as the Curbing of these Passions is the happy effect of being Civilized.”

This Colden says, as the English brutalized their own in the name of their inglorious system of law—for the early likes of which Shakespeare fancied the killing of all lawyers! Thus saith the Butcher, in King Henry the Sixth (Second Part, IV, ii).

But Colden can’t concede such noble law to Indians. “Justice” in the Indian has to be “revenge.” Law is vice.

So the Englishman sees himself in the Indian, if acknowledging only the half.

The Englishman met his match in the Indian. It was ironic, but fortuitous. No other guest would rightly have sat at the Indian’s table. The Englishman alone was worthy. If the noble savage is forever in “darkest Ignorance,” it is well that he share it with other nobles. The white man is equally proud, strong, and blind to himself, whose philosophical objectivity never exempts him from the same error he espies in others.

The Indian intuitively recognized that from the beginning. Strength knows strength. The Englishman just seemed a bit more wordy when it came to articulating his own, (a ‘legal’ trait which has finally weakened him somewhat).

But we rightfully presume his thanks. And he’s still a great sportster, even right after dinner.

Posted by David Yeagley · November 26, 2009 · 9:57 am CT · ·

Tags: American Indians · American Patriotism · Christianity · Op-Ed Columns · Politics · Race · Religion · Thanksgiving · White Race

Read More Op-Ed Columns »

55 responses so far ↓

  • 1 David Yeagley // Nov 29, 2009 at 10:03 pm   

    Thank you KJ. Let’s hope some people can adjust to new truths.

    Anti-semites I know wish that I were capable of that myself!

  • 2 Awen // Nov 29, 2009 at 10:44 pm   

    There should be trust; they had a tough history together. Those Iroquois were serious expansionists, a century of warfare, driving off or killing everything in their path, including a lot of French and later, English too. The Jesuits kept records of their own martyrs, of course when the Huron villages got hit in the 1640’s. The Erie were completely wiped out; all we have left is that name.

    What did you think, keyboard jockey, of that fuss about the body bags sent to Canadian reservations as a response to requests for flu kits? A simple slip-up or a bit of an insult?
    Chiefs furious after body bags sent to reserves

  • 3 Walksthrough // Nov 29, 2009 at 11:01 pm   

    From 36: A Judeo-Christian set of ethics is […] about not resisting evil, seeing others as fellow ‘children of God,’ forgiving injuries instead of avenging them, abolishing cultural and racial boundaries in order to collect more souls for the faith. It is Communism at its purest.”

    This is actually a liberal’s definition of Judeo-Christian. OT Jews did not learn this from the Law. This fits the Social Gospel (which is heresy) just fine. The closest association to genuine Christianity is that we are not to avenge ourselves, God takes care of vengeance. But in the mind of the liberal, such a God is rejected.

    36, cont’d: “I think here is where we find the real seeds of liberalism rather than in the rejection of organized religion. The general failure of American conservatives to take this into serious consideration and their continued coddling of church leaders is at least as much a threat to American cultural identity as our open borders have been.”

    The seeds of liberalism are borne by the rejection of Christ, not religion. Religion is stuffed with liberals today, and as a result is faltering before its users and enemies. America is a pluralistic society; *that* is American culture, not liberalism, and therefore Christianity is not a threat to the culture, but liberalism certainly is. Liberalism will cheerfully deliver us into the great maw of our enemies even as we simper before them. This is neither the Law nor Christ who fulfilled the Law.

    The Bible says, the wicked flee when no man pursueth, but the righteous are bold as a lion.

    The liberals flee before our enemies without a single direct engagement (Russia, Iran), the conservatives consider that freedom isn’t free, and prepare for war.

    The Bible says, the slothful say, there is a lion without, I shall be slain in the streets. Liberals, spot on.

  • 4 keyboard jockey // Nov 30, 2009 at 10:45 am   


    I think that’s what you can expect from an over grown government bureaucracy.

    How much do you want to bet some government worker on one end of the request couldn’t fill out the order “requisition” for flu kits? This is logistics. Are they rationing the flu kits in Canada? I am not sure body bags wasn’t a clerical error? Someone at the government level will investigate and find out. If all the requisitions they deal with are for medical supplies it seems to me someone would know the difference between flu kits and body bags. They were not having something new thrown at them to figure out. For example, no one was ordering hibachis or helicopters….

    Here in America there was a dust up over Wall Street Bankers, getting the H1N1 vaccine before everyone else. Turns out the H1N1 vaccine is in short supply here in our country.

    Goldman Sachs Received H1N1 Vaccine Before Several Hospitals (GS)

  • 5 David Yeagley // Dec 1, 2009 at 11:28 am   

    KJ, I just wanted to say, I don’t know “AWEN.” She is new here. She clearly presumes an omniscience which makes any meaningful exchange unlikely. There is a good deal of information to be shared, indeed, but she tends to offer it randomly, pertinent or not.

    I try to keep an open commnet form, as well as the 90-some Bad Eagle forums. This is the home page, and sometimes people never visit any other part of but here.

    For instance, we have health/science/medicine/ type forums under our Forum button at the top of our home page. Conversations there are not filed away so quickly. Some are quite lengthy, and worthy. Your flu-shot issue here is most intriguing!

You must log in to post a comment.