Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category


Chris Mato Nunpaby Chris Mato Nunpa, PhD
retired Associate Professor of History at Southwest Minnesota State University and author of the upcoming (Sept. 2019) The Great Evil: Genocide, the Bible, and the Indigenous People of the United States

 

One hundred and fifty-six years ago, on November 07-13, 1862, 1,700 Dakota People, primarily women, children and elders, were force-marched 150 miles from the Morton & Redwood Falls area in southwestern Minnesota to a concentration camp at Ft. Snelling, near the Twin Cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis. The cold weather that we [in Minnesota] have been experiencing during this November reminds us, the descendants of the survivors, of this act of Genocide perpetrated by the State of Minnesota, the military, and its Euro-Minnesotan citizenry.

Dozens upon dozens of Dakota People were murdered – shot and killed, or bayoneted, or frozen or starved to death on this march! One of my grandmothers was stabbed in the stomach by a saber-wielding white soldier on horseback. Her “sin” was not understanding an order given by a white soldier in a foreign language, English. A friend of mine (now deceased) had a grandmother who was shot and killed because her “sin” was needing to relieve herself, for modesty’s sake, in the woods, along the forced-march route. We know not how many of our women were raped and murdered along the way, and we know not how many of our elders and children who lagged behind because of age, sickness or physical weakness, were shot and killed.

The commander of the troops who enforced the march was a Colonel William Rainey Marshall, who later became a governor of Minnesota, and he has a street in St. Paul, a county in northwestern Minnesota, and a town in southwestern Minnesota, named after him – Marshall! Colonel William Rainey Marshall was a Genocidaire, a perpetrator of Genocide. Forced marches are what Genocidaires do. Forced Marches are genocide, as I learned this from other Genocide scholars when I belonged to the International Association of Genocide Scholars.

The savage cry of “Extermination or Removal” was uttered many times, publicly, even in a speech to the state legislature, by the then-Minnesota Governor, Alexander Ramsey. He was referring to the extermination of the Dakota People of Minnesota, and the removal of the Dakota People from our own Dakota homelands, Mini Sota Makoce, ”Land Where the Waters Reflect the Skies.” In an atrocity six months prior to the November forced march, on May 04, 1863, “Removal” was authorized by the Minnesota state legislature, and 1,300 Dakota women, children and elders were forced from our homelands.

The forced march of 150 miles and the forcible removal were just two of a number of genocidal acts, and various crimes against humanity, perpetrated by the State of Minnesota and its Euro-Minnesotan citizenry, on the Dakota People of Minnesota. However, the State of Minnesota, the Minnesota Ghoul Society (aka the Minnesota Historical Society), and white academia continue to suppress the truth about what was done to the Dakota People of Minnesota and who did it.

We need the help of our white allies and supporters, and the help of other Indigenous Peoples, to help us Dakota People of Minnesota in our struggle to have the truth told! After 156 years (since 1862), it is time for truth-telling!! Namayahunpi kin he nina piwada! “Your listening to me is greatly appreciated!” Ho, he hecetu do! “Yes, it is so!”


Randolph Bourne

“War is the health of the state. . . . In your reaction to an imagined attack on your country or an insult to its government, you draw closer to the herd for protection, you conform in word and deed, and you insist vehemently that everybody else shall think, speak, and act together. And you fix your adoring gaze upon the State, with a truly filial look, as upon the Father of the flock. . . . A people at war have become in the most literal sense obedient, respectful, trustful children again, full of that naive faith in the all-wisdom and all-power of the adult who takes care of them, imposes his mild but necessary rule upon them and in whom they lose their responsibility and anxieties. In this recrudescence of the child, there is great comfort and a certain influx of power. On most people the strain of being an independent adult weighs heavily.”

–Randolph Bourne, The State (1918)


“I should think judging by his ostentation, his absence of good taste [that obviously] he was eaten with vanity and ambition and his only measure of success was in terms of dollars and influence. . . . It must be a terrible thing to have to keep telling the world how great you are and to want so badly to achieve what is really impossible. We have much to fear from these people, but in a sense, I think, they are tragic.”

–Zina Worley, quoted by Pope Brock in his highly entertaining nonfiction book, Charlatan

Worley was not referring to Donald Trump, but rather to “Dr.” John Brinkley, a quack who exploited and and oft-times mutilated and killed the desperate and gullible who came to him for help. Brinkley became a multi-millionaire through sale of grossly overpriced ineffective (e.g., colored water) and outright harmful patent medicines, and through unnecessary, harmful operations intended mostly to restore male “virility.” Those operations included the implanting of goat testicles in human scrotums.

John R. Brinkley

Brinkley’s similarities with Donald Trump are striking: both preyed on the gullible and desperate; both were fascist sympathizers; both constantly bragged about themselves; both lied incessantly; both claimed to represent and be the voice of the common man — Brinkley nearly won the governorship of Kansas in 1930 and 1932; both had vulgar taste and indulged in ostentatious displays of wealth; both sometimes stiffed those who did work for them; and the one was brought down by a dogged, principled investigator, and, one hopes, the other soon will be. (There are other similarities, but these are the ones that immediately come to mind.)

The primary difference between the two men, other than working in different fields of fraud, was that Brinkley came from a very poor background and Trump was a trust-fund baby who received over $400 million from his slumlord dad.

 

 


Margaret Atwood

“Watch out for the leaders . . . and the led, then the tyrants and the slaves.

Then the massacres. That’s how it always goes.”

–“Crake” in Margaret Atwood’s Oryx and Crake

* * *


* * *

MAGAbomber’s van

* * *

Some of Trump’s “very fine people”

 


(From Twitter. And for once, no comment — the image speaks for itself.)

 


Well, it’s official. Donald J. Trump, entitled trust-fund kid ($400+ million) and utter parasite, has just announced that he wants to reinstate his family-separation policy in order to terrorize (there’s no other word for it) already-traumatized immigrants fleeing desperate conditions.

In terms of domestic politics, the bad news is that approximately one-third of Americans are vicious, racist (“family values”) authoritarians goose-stepping behind the Glorious Leader, and they’ll enthusiastically support Dear Leader’s new exercise in state terrorism.

The good news is that two-thirds of us aren’t that bad.

Get out and vote on November 6.

 


This goes nearly a decade back, but I find it disgusting and revealing that one of the most obvious and profound truths ever uttered by a politician was met with near-universal ridicule. I’m referring to a statement of the bleeding obvious spoken by someone I otherwise despise: Donald Rumsfeld. That the left ridiculed him for speaking the truth in a somewhat awkward manner speaks more to the willful ignorance and maliciousness of much of the left than to Rumsfeld. Here’s a more concise paraphrase of Rumsfeld’s statement:

“There are known knowns, known unknowns, and unknown unknowns.”

Who in their right mind could disagree with this? What Rumsfeld very obviously meant, especially given the context of his statement, was that there are known threats, threats of which we’re aware of but of which we know no details. and threats we’re not even aware of.

Again, who could disagree with any of this? If you think about it, Rumsfeld was more than obviously correct. But the MSNBC (corporate-Democrat) “left” seized on the awkward wording and ridiculed Rumsfeld for it.

This speaks almost entirely to their bankruptcy of ideas and shameful desire to ridicule opponents. Rumsfeld is a liar and war criminal, but this is what they seized on? Please.

That’s utterly appalling. Let’s leave deliberate misinterpretation of statements, deliberate misrepresentation of reality, and deliberate seizing on trivialities to those on the right. We shouldn’t stoop to engaging in any of it.