[PEN-L:356] Re: Apology

["Rosser Jr, John Barkley" <rosserjb@xxxxxxx>]

     Well, I lied.  I said I wouldn't post on this anymore,
but...  a few points:
     1)  To the extent it was directed at me, I accept
Jim's apology.  I deeply respect his position and support
what he has been and is doing.  I almost did not make my
original post out of trepidation of his reaction.  But,
then, if you can't take strong arguments from someone you
respect, you might as well hang it up.
     2)  I thank Lou P. for posting the stuff on the Makah
practices.  Based on that I have no problem with what they
are doing, although I am a bit skeptical about the claim
that they need whale meat in their diet for health reasons.
     3)  I had originally raised the issue with regard to
the Inuit and the bowhead, not the Makah and the gray
whale.  The difference between the two is significant.  The
Makah are hunting a non-endangered species with over 22,000
around, using a clearly sustainable plan.  The Inuit are
hunting an endangered species, although if they stick to
only one every two years that is probably not going to be
fatal.  But, I find it disturbing that they are claiming
that there are more than do ecologists (700 vs 500).
     4)  I certainly am concerned about any group that is
"endangered."  I support their efforts to maintain or
revive their endangered cultural practices.  And we might
note that in the case of whaling we are talking about a
revival, not a preservation of an ongoing practice.
     5)  Here let me possibly make Jim run for his prozac
again, but I do think that when traditional cultural
practices are revived, those doing so should take care to
understand how the world has changed.  Thus, it is tragic
that Euro-American capitalism has wiped out many cultures
and species and has endangered many others.  Tribes seeking
to revive an old practice do need to think about the new
circumstances.  It would appear that the Makah have done so
in their planned whaling activities.  It is less clear that
the Inuit have done so.  One can have a right to do
something and choose not to do it.
     I can certainly imagine cultural practices of various
traditional peoples that have disappeared that few would
support being revived, although fortunately I do not see
the more egregious of such being proposed by anybody.  But,
I would warn that the arguments that have been given about
cultural survival could be made in defense of some really
indefensible things.  Hopefully this will not come to pass.
     6) In the meantime, Jim is correct.  The shoe is
clearly on the foot of the dominant society/culture to
respect and support the survival of minority cultures now.
Barkley Rosser
On Tue, 28 Jul 1998 17:53:22 PST8PDT James Michael Craven
<cravjm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> To All:
>
> I haven't been on pen-l for awhile and then what do I do, come on
> with some intemperate language. To Barkley Rosser et al my words were
> not directed at you personally as I am familiar with your work which
> is very progressive and needed; my intemperate words were directed at concepts.
>
> Please understand that for people on the brink of extinction, not
> even sure of even how much of  what is left of the culture is even
> authentic, saying "besides cultural issues, what other reason could
> there be for hunting whales...that alone is enough; but indeed there
> is more.
>
> We see the imperialist systems that have built their empires and
> wealth on plunder of the environment and people now saying to the
> poor countries "Think Green and industrialize carefully and take care
> of Mother Earth; we see the Nations who have raped the oceans and have
> brought certain whales to the brink of extinction now sanctimoniously
> talking to Indian Nations who have whaled for thousands of years
> (Nations suffering horrible diseases as a result of being forced on to
> non-traditional diets for which they are not culturally or
> genetically suited) that taking a few whales threatens the species;
> We see rich nations, who have violated and abrogated every treaty all
> of a sudden so concerned about adherence to international treaties
> that Indian nations were given no consultation on or even invited to
> sign--as the sovereign nations they are as guaranteed by those
> treaties with the rich nations that have been summarily abrogated;
>
> But again, I should temper some of my language and anger as I am sure
> all who raise their points of view feel equally passionate and often
> their blood boils with some of my positions.
>
> Jim Craven
>
>  James Craven
>  Dept. of Economics,Clark College
>  1800 E. McLoughlin Blvd. Vancouver, WA. 98663
>  jcraven@xxxxxxxxx; Tel: (360) 992-2283 Fax: 992-2863
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Hitler's concept of concentration camps as well as the practicality
> of genocide owed much, so he claimed, to his studies of English and
> United States history. He admired the camps for Boer prisoners in
> South Africa and for the Indians in the Wild West; and often praised
> to his inner circle the efficiency of America's extermination--by
> starvation and uneven combat--of the 'Red Savages' who could not be
> tamed by captivity." ("Adolf Hitler" by John Toland, p. 702)
>
> "Set the blood-quantum at one-quarter, hold to it as a rigid
> definition of Indians, let intermarriage proceed...and eventually
> Indians will be defined out of existence. When that happens,the
> federal government will finally be freed from its persistent
> Indian problem." (Patricia Nelson Limerick, "The Legacy of
> Conquest: The Unbroken Past of the American West" p338)
>
> *My Employer  has no association with My Private and Protected Opinion*
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

--
Rosser Jr, John Barkley
rosserjb@xxxxxxx