Is America witnessing a battle between good and evil?

[The Sushi Bandit]

Or is it is a mighty struggle between the Christo-Fascists and the Atheo-Anarchists. Everyone else is caught in the middle or they dont give a shit.

As for me, count me as an Atheo-Anarchist!

[NYCGirl]

1. No, the world isn't as black and white as all that. The wingnuts just

aren't very good at nuance.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

2. They seemed to think so when they were eradicating native

Americans back in the day...



This picture, The Trail of Tears, was painted by Robert Lindneux in 1942. It commemorates the suffering of the Cherokee people under forced removal. If any depictions of the "Trail of Tears" were created at the time of the march, they have not survived.


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4p2959.html
Early in the 19th century, while the rapidly-growing United States expanded into the lower South, white settlers faced what they considered an obstacle. This area was home to the Cherokee, Creek, Choctaw, Chicasaw and Seminole nations. These Indian nations, in the view of the settlers and many other white Americans, were standing in the way of progress. Eager for land to raise cotton, the settlers pressured the federal government to acquire Indian territory.

Andrew Jackson, from Tennessee, was a forceful proponent of Indian removal. In 1814 he commanded the U.S. military forces that defeated a faction of the Creek nation. In their defeat, the Creeks lost 22 million acres of land in southern Georgia and central Alabama. The U.S. acquired more land in 1818 when, spurred in part by the motivation to punish the Seminoles for their practice of harboring fugitive slaves, Jackson's troops invaded Spanish Florida.

From 1814 to 1824, Jackson was instrumental in negotiating nine out of eleven treaties which divested the southern tribes of their eastern lands in exchange for lands in the west. The tribes agreed to the treaties for strategic reasons. They wanted to appease the government in the hopes of retaining some of their land, and they wanted to protect themselves from white harassment. As a result of the treaties, the United States gained control over three-quarters of Alabama and Florida, as well as parts of Georgia, Tennessee, Mississippi, Kentucky and North Carolina. This was a period of voluntary Indian migration, however, and only a small number of Creeks, Cherokee and Choctaws actually moved to the new lands.

In 1823 the Supreme Court handed down a decision which stated that Indians could occupy lands within the United States, but could not hold title to those lands. This was because their "right of occupancy" was subordinate to the United States' "right of discovery." In response to the great threat this posed, the Creeks, Cherokee, and Chicasaw instituted policies of restricting land sales to the government. They wanted to protect what remained of their land before it was too late.

[Warpy]

4. Thanks for the history lesson. Around here, the Pueblos

were the only tribes to unite in this hemisphere and succeed in eradicating colonists from their land for nearly two decades. They allowed them back in only as a stabilizing force and when they promised to display better manners.

The revolution was accomplished with a piece of string with knots in it. As runners went from Pueblo to Pueblo, a knot was untied each day. When all the knots were untied, the Pueblos rose up in unison and drove the Spanish out.

The history of this region is fascinating.

[tabasco]

3. It sure feels that way to me.

A large number of Americans are unable to recognize the true nature of the republican party.

[Odin2005]

5. There is no such thing as being entirely black and white.

The world is too complex for a simple demarcation into good an evil.

[stepnw1f]

6. yeah actually

generally folks that support this man are bad people. Bad to the core....

[loves_dulcinea]

7. more like hypocrites and a more honest segment

the posts regarding native blood are a breath of fresh air.

i am from s. tex. all of my family was born in tex, my parents, my grandparents. their parents were born in the region that became texas.
Jose Antonio Navarro was spearheading a drive to secede from mexico and form a republic before S.F. Austin began importing his land grabbing rabble.
i wish i had a nickel for every time i have been asked by some ignorant bastard if my parents came from the "other side".
i once endured constant references to the king ranch and what a beautiful stretch of land that it was, and how magnificent it was. i finally told the man in a quiet voice about how the governor had the rangers burn out the families that refused to vacate that magnificent land. i then felt ashamed of myself, of my forebears.

f*ck it. maybe that makes me racist. i tend to make friends based upon whether they help me in my work, any race, any culture. i forgive, but i don't forget.

[and-justice-for-all]

8. NO....

What we are witnessing is a Cultural War that was created by Theocractic Nationalist! Total bullshit!

[annabanana]

9. woof.. What about Christo-Anarchists?

or atheo-fascists
(. . .sitting here wondering what THAT would look like)

[Jack Rabbit]

10. Leave that kind of rhetoric to Bush and his bubbahs. please

No, we are witnessing a sharp political struggle between very human factions with very different ideas of how the world works. While I will agree that Bush is a post-fascist, I don't think the Democrats are so saintly that by their defeating him it will herald a heaven on earth.

[loves_dulcinea]

11. i know myself well.

if Jesus came to flesh, and i began to follow, i would not be long in finding something to bitch about.
god forbid he should run as a rethug.