Advertisement
A-hey, all my relations!
The following comments come from pages 32, 35-38 of _Wasase: indigenous pathways of action and freedom_ by Taiaiake Alfred a Kanienkeha (Mohawk) depth-charger, (published 2005 by broadview press). The book is an articulation of the idea of *decolonizing* ourselves (with an emphasis on indigenous folks in canada) from the mentality that colonizes indigenous peoples globally, both in exterior and interior ways. Tho Taiaiake doesn't go much into the idea of *settlers* (or long-colonized indigenous folks originally from other portions of Mom Earth) also taking up these ways of seeing and being, he does touch on the idea here and there, and keeps doors open to all whom are moved to participate.
To Note:
i want to share these in case anyone may be inclined to such a discussion, or want to be possibly inspired in their own inclined paths of resistance. You can hear Taiaiake speak on his website videos and read various indigenous, resurgent-oriented depth speakings here: www.wasase.org Notably i am *not* indigenous (to this side of mOm Earth), yet i feel a deep comradery with folks who speak their hearts, and practice decolonizing ways; a way i myself am practicing (to mostly isolated extents, so far) and finding meaning where meaning has seemed nonexistent.
Feel free to join in and point out what you may see as any blindspots in my thinking!
Taiaiake (herein called "You") said, page 32:
"European languages, [Leroy Little Bear] explains, centre on nouns and are concerned with naming things, ascribing traits, and making judgements."
--
i note how such facilitates the machinery of colonization, how such reflects the fundamentally "in formation" society, the chain-of-command/hierarchical structure that keeps the bottom line (which most of we settlers practice ignoring and denying until we cannot avoid it any longer).
You said, page 35:
If non-indigenous readers are capable of listening...
--
i say we usually stumble upon such due to the pervasiveness of thought control not only from the state/business nexus, but also vanguard control desires of those engaged in so-called "alternative" political endeavors.
You said:
Onkwehonwe have always fought for survival against imperialism and its drive to annihilate our existence.
--
i figure you're speaking of indigenous people, generally, so i want to add that *so do we settlers*! We have always fought, except our fighting has largely, in my view, been atomized and unarticulated, drawing on intuitive rebellion rather than radical consciousness. We no longer have the memories you have, yet everywhere kids "rebell" and are thus labeled "attention deficit disordered" or "oppositional defiant disordered" (re: via the DSM IV, *the* oft quite unscientific psychiatrick bible); and everywhere workers get drunk out of their minds; and so on.
You speak of "self-termination" movement, page 36
--
Is this a formal movement, or informal? i know of various indigenous friends who are caught up in this informally (so it seems to me). It sounds pervasive in a formal way in canada...is there evidence of this formality elsewhere? Can you give me any examples i can look into?
You mention "...the Settlers...", page 37:
Why not articulate/demystify further and better say what you mean, at least sometimes? Like: *the formalized formation* we are tooled and manipulated into participating, or otherwise going along with, while our settler politics systematically *DOES NOT* pay any attention to these things (and R.D. Laing's idea called "the meta game" continues unabated).
Am i making sense to you here at all? i'm wanting to identify and at the same time demystify the situation, and bring out the truth that we settlers are *more* than this categorization; by saying that, by allowing for grey areas in the language used, more of us may (?) feel free to speak our privated-away "opinions" and avoid the familiar habit to entrench ourselves in "settler" identities.
Do you see what i'm getting at here?
You say, page 37:
"...I am with the warriors who want to beat the beast...and teach it to behave."
--
Me, i wanna radically "kiss"/massage and art it (when i'm forced to experience it, that is), as an enchanted "prince" of radicalized, non-passive, depth peace, and turn it from its present form and back into its original heart (re: kidhood heart, before the FEAR enfortressed entrenched beliefs). (recall the euro story of "the frog prince")
You say, page 37:
"It is because [young people's] identities, their cultures, and their rights are under attack by a racist government."
--
Why not attempt to demystify this more deeply? Because i see (and i recall you also saying, later in the book) that racism is only one card played in *the severely alienated mentality of statecraft*. Why not say something like this? (i figure you're trying to reach out to those whom have been so mobilized around that word, yet still, don't you think it makes more sense to more deeply demystify?)
You said, page 38:
"Some people may find it shocking and absurd for me to suggest that an Onkwehonwe community is a kind of war zone. But anyone who has actually lived on a reserve will agree with this tragic analogy on some level."
--
i see varying levels of war truths (i.e. usually covert, such as deployed via the social "sciences") THROUGHOUT "civilized" societies across the spectrum!!
Shall i back this "shocking and absurd" notion up for you, or do you already see what i'm saying?
And i want to say that i think this is a way to speak to we settlers! And find our commonalities!
Well, i'll stop for now (okay with you if i go chapter by chapter, and keep things short?).
to radical's radical sanity!
cosmic-ly crazy mutt
www.angelfire.com/folk/magixn...ggindex.html
The following comments come from pages 32, 35-38 of _Wasase: indigenous pathways of action and freedom_ by Taiaiake Alfred a Kanienkeha (Mohawk) depth-charger, (published 2005 by broadview press). The book is an articulation of the idea of *decolonizing* ourselves (with an emphasis on indigenous folks in canada) from the mentality that colonizes indigenous peoples globally, both in exterior and interior ways. Tho Taiaiake doesn't go much into the idea of *settlers* (or long-colonized indigenous folks originally from other portions of Mom Earth) also taking up these ways of seeing and being, he does touch on the idea here and there, and keeps doors open to all whom are moved to participate.
To Note:
i want to share these in case anyone may be inclined to such a discussion, or want to be possibly inspired in their own inclined paths of resistance. You can hear Taiaiake speak on his website videos and read various indigenous, resurgent-oriented depth speakings here: www.wasase.org Notably i am *not* indigenous (to this side of mOm Earth), yet i feel a deep comradery with folks who speak their hearts, and practice decolonizing ways; a way i myself am practicing (to mostly isolated extents, so far) and finding meaning where meaning has seemed nonexistent.
Feel free to join in and point out what you may see as any blindspots in my thinking!
Taiaiake (herein called "You") said, page 32:
"European languages, [Leroy Little Bear] explains, centre on nouns and are concerned with naming things, ascribing traits, and making judgements."
--
i note how such facilitates the machinery of colonization, how such reflects the fundamentally "in formation" society, the chain-of-command/hierarchical structure that keeps the bottom line (which most of we settlers practice ignoring and denying until we cannot avoid it any longer).
You said, page 35:
If non-indigenous readers are capable of listening...
--
i say we usually stumble upon such due to the pervasiveness of thought control not only from the state/business nexus, but also vanguard control desires of those engaged in so-called "alternative" political endeavors.
You said:
Onkwehonwe have always fought for survival against imperialism and its drive to annihilate our existence.
--
i figure you're speaking of indigenous people, generally, so i want to add that *so do we settlers*! We have always fought, except our fighting has largely, in my view, been atomized and unarticulated, drawing on intuitive rebellion rather than radical consciousness. We no longer have the memories you have, yet everywhere kids "rebell" and are thus labeled "attention deficit disordered" or "oppositional defiant disordered" (re: via the DSM IV, *the* oft quite unscientific psychiatrick bible); and everywhere workers get drunk out of their minds; and so on.
You speak of "self-termination" movement, page 36
--
Is this a formal movement, or informal? i know of various indigenous friends who are caught up in this informally (so it seems to me). It sounds pervasive in a formal way in canada...is there evidence of this formality elsewhere? Can you give me any examples i can look into?
You mention "...the Settlers...", page 37:
Why not articulate/demystify further and better say what you mean, at least sometimes? Like: *the formalized formation* we are tooled and manipulated into participating, or otherwise going along with, while our settler politics systematically *DOES NOT* pay any attention to these things (and R.D. Laing's idea called "the meta game" continues unabated).
Am i making sense to you here at all? i'm wanting to identify and at the same time demystify the situation, and bring out the truth that we settlers are *more* than this categorization; by saying that, by allowing for grey areas in the language used, more of us may (?) feel free to speak our privated-away "opinions" and avoid the familiar habit to entrench ourselves in "settler" identities.
Do you see what i'm getting at here?
You say, page 37:
"...I am with the warriors who want to beat the beast...and teach it to behave."
--
Me, i wanna radically "kiss"/massage and art it (when i'm forced to experience it, that is), as an enchanted "prince" of radicalized, non-passive, depth peace, and turn it from its present form and back into its original heart (re: kidhood heart, before the FEAR enfortressed entrenched beliefs). (recall the euro story of "the frog prince")
You say, page 37:
"It is because [young people's] identities, their cultures, and their rights are under attack by a racist government."
--
Why not attempt to demystify this more deeply? Because i see (and i recall you also saying, later in the book) that racism is only one card played in *the severely alienated mentality of statecraft*. Why not say something like this? (i figure you're trying to reach out to those whom have been so mobilized around that word, yet still, don't you think it makes more sense to more deeply demystify?)
You said, page 38:
"Some people may find it shocking and absurd for me to suggest that an Onkwehonwe community is a kind of war zone. But anyone who has actually lived on a reserve will agree with this tragic analogy on some level."
--
i see varying levels of war truths (i.e. usually covert, such as deployed via the social "sciences") THROUGHOUT "civilized" societies across the spectrum!!
Shall i back this "shocking and absurd" notion up for you, or do you already see what i'm saying?
And i want to say that i think this is a way to speak to we settlers! And find our commonalities!
Well, i'll stop for now (okay with you if i go chapter by chapter, and keep things short?).
to radical's radical sanity!
cosmic-ly crazy mutt
www.angelfire.com/folk/magixn...ggindex.html
posted by:
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
