Scholars of the Holocaust have been able to take two fundamental axioms for granted—
that the Shoah is a historical fact, and that it was an extraordinary mass-murder that
took place in the modern era—despite denial by so-called "revisionists," mainly old
Nazis, neo-Nazis, antisemites, and cranks. For the most part scholars have received
an attentive hearing concerning their histories of and their explanations for the Shoah.
In contrast, writers concerned with documenting and explaining the unprecedented
and extraordinary demographic collapse, genocide, and cultural destruction of millions
of native Americans from 1492 to the present have not been granted the same
credibility and respect.
Basic facts about the destruction are still debated, as well as the culpability of
the Europeans whose conquest of the New World set the stage for the disaster. How
many natives were there when the Europeans arrived? If there were over a hundred
million Indians—as some recent scholarship suggests—what happened to them and
to their descendants? Did they perish mainly from epidemics like smallpox, cholera,
and bubonic plague that were brought to the New World by the Europeans, or were
they massacred by gold-seeking conquistadores and land-hungry colonists for whom
natives were nothing more than "heathen savages?" If plagues killed off most natives,
what responsibility should be borne by the Europeans? At some point—even without
a germ theory of disease—the colonists must have understood that their very presence
was lethal to the natives. What happened then? Did the Europeans withdraw in
horror at what they had done, even if unintentionally, or did they welcome the mass
death of the natives and see it as providential, God´s will facilitating the conquest of
the New World by destroying its indigenous inhabitants?
Ward Churchill, a professor of American Indian studies at the University of
Colorado at Boulder, is a scholar-activist who has been a member of the American
Indian Movement. His previous publications have included Fantasies of the Master
270 Holocaust and Cenocide Studies
Race, Struggle for the Land, Since Predator Came, and From a Native Son. His
main thesis in this ambitious but ironically titled book is that Native Americans were
the clear victims of a process of genocide that commenced with Columbus´s landing
in the New World and has not ceased to this day. His work recapitulates that of
David Stannard s American Holocaust—Stannard wrote the preface to this volume—
although Churchill goes beyond Stannard in some important ways.1
His book is divided into nine chapters. The first three deal with the problem of
denial of the Native American genocide. The next three recapitulate its history, starting
with Columbus, and bring the story to 1996. Genocidal policies were carried out
recently by national armies against native populations in Guatemala and El Salvador,
with, Churchill argues, the United States´ connivance. Indigenous peoples are still
being massacred in Paraguay, Brazil, Columbia, and Venezuela, presumably because
Indians are in the path of "civilization" and "development." The seventh chapter argues
that Native Americans in the United States form an exploited "internal colony"
whose territories have been wantonly used for nuclear testing, disregarding the health
and well-being of the indigenous people. The last two chapters concern the United
States´ long unwillingness, from 1948 to 1988, to ratify the Genocide Convention; the
final chapter also attempts to reformulate the definition of genocide and the Genocide
Convention by making cultural destruction an explicit part of the definition.

http://hgs.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/14/2/270.pdf

You are doing nicely, eh Tami, blaming others whilst shutting your eyes for your own mistakes (and worse)? Go on, boy, go on. It´s funny to read with what you spend your time.

the Native American Genocide carried out by the European christians constitutes the biggest ethnic cleansing throughout the history, and it`s not recognized by any of the Christian countries today.

that`s exactly what Im trying to say. why do you christians ignore the native american genocide?

 Do we all? Have you spoken to all of us? Good boy.

I`m talking about the christian countries, not you.

Tami, are you implying that Christians believe that Indians gave up their land without any objections? That they weren´t exterminated, forced to live in reservations? That Christians are proud to have wiped out thousands of people? I may be mistaken but all people know it´s a fact that it was genoicide. I think the US government runs programmes to support local culture and to make up for what happened to the Native Americans.

And who should be to blame? I mean, which countries? As I suppose you know it wasn´t one country that conquered America. Moreover, those countries differed in their official religions so it´s hard to blame one denomination and/or the religious motivation of the genoicide. Do you think that if Muslims of thet time were clever enough to discover America they´d make friends with the natives?

I´m not sure what your point is...

 Ok. Tell me, when will Turkey admit the Armenian case?

when Armenia admits the Turkish genocide.

ok Trudy when will America and your country recognize the native American genocide?

I`m just asking when the christian countries will recognize this genocide? is it too complicated?

 I can´t talk for the US, I´m not American. As far as I know we did, like we admitted slavery practice in the 19th century. Thus......

and I asked you which countries you meant

as far as you know?

any proof?

when did your government officially recognize the native american genocide?

I´m not sure about Poland´s activity with colonisation of America. Or is it a list of countries with Christian majorities?

The Tribunal rejected the claim to recognise it as genoicide because what happened didn´t fit into the definition. First of all, it was a clash of cultures deadly to one, not an organised action with an extermination plan. I have no idea why the Tribunal gave such a sentence, I don´t really think it should matter that the invaders were from different nations and different religions. Wiping out almost the whole civilisation must be genoicide. But then, wouldn´t all wars, all border changes be classified as genoicide?

What I don´t get is why you insist on making it a religious thing. The countries you quote above share Christian roots but their denominations differ to a great extend. thus it is impossible for them to take responsibility for one another as all have different "headquarters" institutions and management.

But I agree that what happened in Americas and Australia should be called genoicide

you`re struggling to find out why I picked these countries?

These christian countries are the ones who have recognized the so called armenian genocide.

Yet, none of them recognize the Native American Genocide?

can you tell me why?

Poland is not a Christian country It´s secular although Catholicism is the predominant religion. And yes, I can tell you why they didn´t recognise the NAG - because the Tribunal decided it wasn´t genoicide. It is as simple as that. I disagree with it and probably so do you (for different reasons but still), but it´s not up to us to decide.

ahahhaha yea, if it`s not a christian country, then Turkey is not a muslim country. is it a coincidence that almost all of the countries who recognize the so called armenian genocide are christian countries and that none of these christian countries recognize the Native American Genocide?

why can`t you admit for once that it`s because of the christian hypocrisy?

As an American (and a person of Cherokee and Comanche heritage) I actually I think Tami has a point.  I believe that the US should officially recognize what happened to Natives as genocide, especially if we expect others to take the same stand against other atrocities.   (That said, I do believe it is a bit ridiculous to go back hundreds of years and apologize for the error of the ways of your forefathers.... and lets not forget that the Natives would have a lot of apologizing to do too!!!)

What I do not agree with is the distinction that is made of Christian vs. Muslim.  It does not matter what the religions involved are......genocide is genocide is genocide!

I also hope that Tami will now also denounce genocide as well.................ball is yours Tam´s! 

That´s exactly what I´ve been trying to tell Tami (but for the "As an American" part).  I personally feel it should be considered genocide full stop

As for why those countries recognised the Armenian genocide and not the Norther American one, i may only guess that The Tribunal´s decision was crucial - how to find a culprit with so many countries and religions involved? How to prove there was a plan of extermination? Who was behind it? What institutions? Let´s not forget that the idea of genocide was coined in the 20th century, roughly400 years after the discovery of America. Tami blames Christianity but it wasn´t a religious slaughter - it was the land and the resources that were of primary interest to Europe

Tamiki, why are you so predictable? You seem to be a bitter man, and your bitterness is blinding you and you end up accusing the wrong bunch of people. You are almost becoming the kind of person that you criticize.

 I know DD but I thought I would just add an American voice to it.  I´m sure he won´t listen to me either but then that will just show what he is really about won´t it.

 Almost? 

what "tribunal" are you talking about dd? the so called armenian genocide is recognized by the votes of polticians in each country. so what "tribunal" is this?

will you answer my question gg? I`m repeating it

is it a coincidence that almost all of the countries who recognize the so called armenian genocide are christian countries and that none of these christian countries recognize the Native American Genocide?

is it a coincidence?

 Coincidence Tami, that you use the words ´so called´ when talking about the Armenian Genocide and not when talking about the Native American Genocide? Eh?

yes I will call it a so called genocide untill the christians recognize the Turkish genocide. if there is an armenian genocide, there is a Turkish genocide too. and if you want to ignore one, I have a right to ignore the other one.

so will you answer my question. I asked a simple question and it seems that none of you can handle it. you want me to repeat the question one more time?

 Gee Tam, thanks for recognizing my power and greatness but I don´t feel comfortable speaking for all Christian countries. 

 You can´t read?  Your American education is failing you it seems.  I think your questions have been sufficently answered.  

I responded to you.  DD responded to you.  Trudy responded to you.  The problem is that you aren´t getting the answer YOU want.  What a tragedy. 

I´ve wasted enough time with you....once again you have bored me beyond words.   I hope one day you will come up with something new and intelligent to say and not just the same-old-same-old.  Until then...........ohhhhh dear, I feel another Tami-induced yawn coming on! 

what`s the answer? either I missed something or you think responding to a post automatically means an answer.

You want me to repeat my question?

 A little autistic honey? Repeating the same thing can be a psychological failure.

not being able to answer a question in a debate is a sign of failure too.

 Not being able to recognize that no one here can answer your rhethorical question is a sign that you are just trying...once again...to stir up your crap. 

You can go on all you like Tami but until you actually want to engage in a discussion instead of trying to prove a point....any response to you is worthless and I for one, will not play along.  

thanks for admitting that gg

 I already told you that.   If you would pay attention and stop your stupid games. 

Nobody here is a representative of their government, therefore, no one here can speak on behalf of their government.  Now go on and blow bubbles somewhere else. 

Bye Tami....it´s been a real bore.

ok gg, calm down. losing a debate is not the end of the world.

Excellent article.  Ward Churchill´s work is respected in the Native American community.  Thank you for copying and posting it here. 

"The Rocky Mountain News, in 2005, published a genealogy of Churchill, and reported "no evidence of a single Indian ancestor" [of Churchill´s]. The News reports that both of Churchill´s birth parents are listed as white on the 1930 census, as are all of his other known ancestors on previous censuses and other official documents.[27] The Denver Post´s genealogical investigation resulted in the same conclusion."

It was actually not at all unusual to NOT register a Native American as Indian, but register them as white, that way territorial claimes were eliminated.  It´s an old trick that is still going on.  Actually there are many tribes aren´t even recognized today.

Yes, it is undeniably a great tragedy.  Is there anyone who truly does not recognize it?  The issue is, what can be done about it?  At the very least, a great sense of shame should be felt by all......and yes it was because they were not Christians that such actions were felt to have been justified.  Who knows what knowledge was lost  by the destruction of the codices?

 If it makes your teensy head feel better darling then you can go ahead and think that I lost....but to lose a debate, there has to BE a debate. 

You admitted you asked a rhetorical question.  That is no debate....you just want to push buttons.  Too bad for you that you really aren´t accomplishing what you want.  Perhaps if you had something worthy to say.............but I won´t hold my breath for that. 

don`t assume everyone recognizes the native American genocide.Also we are talking about governments not individuals, and no government recognizes the Native American Genocide.

here is the comment of an American about the issue

WE dont need to "make a deal" We arent equivilant to Turkey. We are US. If thats hypocritical, so what. I never understood liberals fetishizing hypocrisy. Most everyone is a hypocrite at one time or another. AS for the American Indians, i subscribe to Manifest Destiny. There were savages and we needed to expand and they wouldnt submit. End of story.

http://fray.slate.com/discuss/forums/thread/2641056.aspx

Tami, like GG´s already told you it´s not a debate. You had all your questiones answered but still you don´t see the answer. Ok, I´ll talk as simply as I can:

1. We, bed westerners GG, Trudy, DD, feel that it should be recognised but we can´t decide for our countries. In our countries there are many people who feel like us

2. Tribunal is a body that reviews claims of genocide deciding which acts fall for this category and which don´t. Each claim had its own tribunal that compared the claim to the definition

3. Christian countires, as you call them, in Europe and the US are countries that share a similar history, political attitude and economy. Since the tribunal they called decided it wasn´t genocide, they voted like they did. Why Russia and south America voted the same way - I have no idea. You can hardly consider Russia an ally of western policies.

4. You were trying to present western world as a bunch of hypocrites who stick together against non-Christians. It is so naive that only a child could fall for it. You consider religion to be the cause but it´s just one of the culturasl aspects that these countries share. And it wasn´t the motive for the conquest of America. I´m sure you remember that the "bed Christian western tribunal" recognised the genocide of Muslims in Bosnia - against the Christian Serbs. How does this fall into your bias against Christian countries?

The bottom line is, you´re wrong as usual. Yawn.

None of these crap you wrote gives an answer to my question. so according to you the so called armenian genocide is a real genocide but the American Native genocide which is the biggest genocide of the whole history is not. that`s what your chrisrian countries suggest, and we must believe that its just a coincidence that all of these countries are christian. why do I have to believe this lie? cause even you dont.

when did the christian "tribunal" recognize the Bosnian genocide?

The UN´s highest court has cleared Serbia of direct responsibility for genocide during the 1990s Bosnian war.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6395791.stm

and I`m asking again, what "tribunal" are you talking about? give me a source proving that there have been a court decision proving the so called armenian genocide.

Bladibladibla - Anyone knows what the weather will be tomorrow?

still looking for the proof of recognition Trudy?

 Anyone talking? I hear an annoying buzz but no words that make sense.

Can´t you google tami? Buyurun

And you find what Tribunal is in Wikipaedia

And I have answered your question but you´re too obsessed with your point of view to understand that

It doesn´t matter to you that non-Christian Jews were recognised as victims of genocide and so were Muslims. It is all a Christian conspiracy to you

I told you a few times why the tribunal didn´t recognise the NA genocide - too many countries, too many reasons, the conquest was not to kill Indians but a territorial war, yet you still foam at the mouth. Calm down. Whom do you want to try next? The Roman Empire? Persians?

I know reason doesn´t appeal to you but it might be useful to have a look at the definition of DEBATE and learn how to use it.

You posted a question -"Is it a coincidence that Christian countries refuted The Native American Genocide" - 3 people answered you and you didn´t like the answer so you proclaimed yourself a winner in the debate.

Look up the definition to see it was not a debate but mere answering your question

i wasn`t looking for the definition of genocide dd. will you give me a link for that imaginary "tribunal" of the socalled armenian genocide or not?

However, in line with a majority of legal scholars, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) have ruled that, in order for actions to be deemed genocide, there must be physical or biological destruction of a protected group and a specific intent to commit such destruction

Countries recognizing the Bosnian Genocide

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

.....

Countries recognizing the so called armenian genocide

yes and their answer was

"yes it`s a coinsidence"  

but we all know that it`s not a coincidence but the disgusting christian hpocrisy

actually it`s us who has to ask that question to you. but why try the roman empire when there is muslim Ottoman Empire, eh?

...

Translation please.

See Forum Rules nr.3:  http://www.turkishclass.com/tc/TurkishClassRulesAndTerms.php 

Tami, I don´t get it - we read the same things and learn totally different things. I told you to google, you´d have come up with institutions that examine and decide on war crimes and genocide. Try googling Permanent People´s Tribunal for a start or go through the genocide definition in Wiki, it´s not THAT complicated

And since when are we discussing Armenian Genocide? I thought we were talking about Native Americans. Isn´t it their justice you´re after? I replied to your doubts about the decision being fair and I think I said enough. I can´t comment on the Armenian Genocide as I am neither interested in the subject nor informed enough to have my own opinion as to whether it is true or not.

Alpha posted something similiar awhile back..but I can´t find it.    It turned out to be a long heated  discussion as well, so I´m thinking maybe it got deleted.

 What doesn´t turn into a long heated discussion around here?  If I started a thread about how blue the sky was, some body would find some way to argue about it. 

In any case, I have some Native American friends (my best friend is Chickasaw) and I have been lucky enough to be invited to some of their celebrations.  I am always moved by their outlook on life and the simplicity of their beliefs.  We have so much to learn from these people.  It is a shame that we can´t just open our eyes to the wealth of wisdom we are so fortunate to have here in the US.