Indians are evil


all of them, thats what the cohen brothers taught me in this film, what a bunch of fegits

reply

triggered by coens

reply

[deleted]

No. He means Coens. A SJW who doesn't know what he's talking about. What a surprise.

reply

cohen is the real name (i know it's misspelled coen in real life), also i am not a social justice warrior i am just showing you that you are stupid lol

reply

Ooooo. I'm stupid, says the illiterate. Here's your sign.

reply

its cool chilone, not everyone can be as stupid as you, go learn some hebrew you antisemite lol

reply

Keep digging your hole. Antisemite? You know nothing.

reply

look up cohen then you might know, that you didn't know

reply

Dude, how they choose to spell their OWN names is up to them. Reading into it is ridiculous. By the way, the translations are IDEAS of how to spell something in another language. Example: While Huáng is the pinyin romanization of the word, it may also be romanised as Hwang, Huong, Houang, Hoang, Wong, Waan, Wan, Waon, Hwong, Vong, Hung, Hong, Bong, Eng, Ng, Uy, Wee, Oi, Oei, Oey, Ooi, Oof, Ong, or Ung due to pronunciations of the word in different dialects and languages.

reply

oy vey, we just discussed without any productive outcome.i blame you cholone

reply

You are one of the majority who engages in conversation, not do discuss but to wait for your turn to talk, without considering what the other participant(s) say/said.

reply

Sure, but they make great naan, and dal, and biryani, and tikka masala, and korma... /s

reply

that is very true even chris columbus knew that.

reply

..and grilled Tandoori chicken :P

reply

Good grief!

reply

Are you implying that Indians never attacked a wagon train of settlers as seen in the film?

reply

Modern Liberal apologists tend to willfully ignore the many unpleasant things the Indians did, or claim they were justified. Check out this necklace made by the Cheyenne tribe. The pendants are dried human fingers. Inside the little bags are dried human testicles. Also, among many tribes, the scalps of women and children were more highly valued as they proved a warrior had penetrated into the heart of the enemies' home.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/2f/e3/97/2fe3976e81db12ca184110296a66fc22.jpg

The modern POV is that all Indians were these elf-like wise, peaceful beings in harmony with nature and defenseless against the universally evil, murderous white man. I sometimes wish that these SJWs would suddenly find themselves all alone with their families at night out on the 1850s Texas prairie in a sod house or a wagon, shivering in fear at every owl hoot or coyote yelp.

The cavalry did commit some atrocities, true, but these were done in retaliation for similar events. Sand Creek, for example, was triggered by the murder and sexual mutilation of several pioneer families shortly before the Sand Creek Massacre.

reply

yes not all indians were peaceful loving creatures, but hey they were genocided my retarded friends, how do you respond to that? put on your maga hat and fap to this

reply

Just another example of a more powerful culture replacing a weaker one. Many Indian tribes did the same to other tribes. The Comanche, Sioux and Iroquois terrorized and drove dozens of weaker nations off their lands. Archaeologists have found pits brimming with skeletons that show signs of cannibalism in the Southwest. Aztecs sacrificed thousands daily in bloody rituals.

If the Indian tribes had the technological knowhow to build ships and guns before the Europeans, you can bet they would have come to Europe and been even more ruthless than the Europeans were to them.

Indians have genocided many of their own groups themselves. They do not have a monopoly on victimhood any more than whites have a monopoly on victimizing.

reply

And by the way, if you want to talk about racism, the Indians were world-class champs at that. Virtually every single tribal name means something like "The True Human Beings" or "The Real People" in their own language and they all believed their own tribe were the only real humans and all the other tribes were just pathetic sub-humans who were closer to animals.

reply

yes but you genocided them, you are trying to justify mass murder, try that with the shoah (holocaust), i think in germany you can go to jail for that. never go that route please.

reply

Pardon me? How did "I" genocide the Indians? The last major armed conflict against the Indians happened in 1890. Nobody living on Earth at that point in time is still alive. Nobody had anything to do with that but dead people over 100 years ago. Even my ancestors had nothing to do with the Indian wars. One great-great Uncle on my Mom's side went out west and lived among the Sioux for a while in the 1880s but as far as I know he never killed anyone in his life. On my Dad's side, everyone was in Italy.

You Liberals constantly rage against generalization and racism, yet you love to blame white people living today for things that happened to long-dead generations and events that were basically kill-or-be-killed situations. To you, every White person of the 2010s might as well be a member of Hitler's SS or a whip-wielding slave owner from the 1850s.

How do you rationalize such hypocrisy?

reply

first of all i am not a liberal, i am not even living in the usa, i know its hard to imagine there is a world beyond america and the binary system of liberals and republicans. i know you like genocide now, i get it, and you might like how israel treats the palestinians? just keep defending your own stupidity, then using a simple binary system of liberals and republicans to explain a very complex issue. dude you went full retard, never go full retard.

reply

You're spouting tropes about European's stereotypes of America and misguided altered history and you say I went full retard? Sure thing, Trollstein.

reply

nobody is talking about stereotypes, again you are oversimplifying a very complex subject.

reply

On the contrary, it's you who are oversimplifying the subject with your Indians as victims leftist dogma.

reply

yes of course, a leftist dogma, no need to discuss any more, you brain works on a binary system, can't be changed.

reply

I don't read anything you have written that indicates you are doing anything other than thumping the traditional leftist screed regarding the innocent natives and the evil Europeans.

You leave me nothing else to work with BUT a binary system.

reply

please explain how the Europeans weren't evil. They invaded their territory, destroyed and uprooted their homes and culture, introduced firewater which further ruined their way of life, raped and pillaged, and put them on reservations which were basically hellholes. Everything the Indians did in response to this was understandable, if not justifiable. The natives were far more innocent in comparison. Smaller, fringe tribes may've been war mongering (no similar to gangs or outlaws during the Wild West days, even today for that matter) but that doesn't change the fact that the vast majority were peaceful indian tribes who lived in harmony with nature and had a beautiful and rich culture that was subsequently destroyed under the banner of fur trade.

reply

StannisTheMannis said: "Smaller, fringe tribes may've been war mongering (no similar to gangs or outlaws during the Wild West days, even today for that matter) but that doesn't change the fact that the vast majority were peaceful indian tribes who lived in harmony with nature and had a beautiful and rich culture that was subsequently destroyed under the banner of fur trade."

Um... The largest, most powerful tribes were the most warlike. Do some research on the Sioux (Lakota), Iroquois, Comanche, Blackfoot, Apache. You will find that the biggest tribes that held the largest amounts of territory were ALWAYS the most warlike. They were merciless to their enemies and drove entire tribes off their lands and forced them to move far away. Warfare was an integral part of most tribes' cultures, especially the powerful ones. War was how a man advanced his station in life. War was the business of the Indian tribes.

The historical truth was basically the exact opposite of what you said. Sorry, but it's ridiculous to debate someone with such a basic misunderstanding of the subject.

And how can you see some poor white pioneer family trying to carve out a living on the vast, open plains by honest hard work, who gets slaughtered by painted warriors out for scalps and loot as "evil"?

Here is part of the account of Rachel Plummer, who was captured by the Comanche at a time when Whites were basically isolated, powerless settlers on the Texas plains with little or no military might to back them up:

" During the horrendous northern trek, Rachel never had anything to wear on her feet, and snow covered the ground. They made her work most of the night, and with very little sleep, was forced to continue the trek during the day.
In October, she gave birth to her second child--she was pregnant when captured. The Indians had become less hostile and allowed her to keep her baby with her. However, when the baby was about six weeks old, the Indians decided he took too much of her work time, and so one morning they entered her hut and snatched him from her arms.
One large male caught hold of him by the throat and holding him out so his little body dangled, he squeezed until the little one appeared to be dead.
"I tried with all my feeble strength to retrieve him, but others held me down. They threw the babe up into the air and let him fall on the frozen ground, apparently dead. They gave him back to me, and I saw a small sign of life. I washed the blood from his face, but when they saw that he had a little life left, they took him again."

In essence, they tied a rope around the child's neck and drew its naked body through the prickly pears. To shorten the details, I will conclude this part by saying they did this repeatedly until his little body was torn to shreds. They brought his body and threw it in Rachel's lap.
It was then that she gave her captives a miniscule amount of silent praise, because they left her alone long enough to grieve a while, dig a hole, and bury her baby. By this time, she had no tears left.
"I sat down and gazed with joy upon the resting place of my infant. I rejoiced that it had passed from the sufferings and sorrows of this world."

http://sweetheartsofthewest.blogspot.com/2014/05/rachel-parker-plummer-tragic-comanche.html

reply

I pretty much agree with most of what you’re saying, but you’d have a lot more credibility if you left off the labels. It’s entirely possible to be liberal and agree with you just like it’s possible to be conservative and have the opinion the white man committed genocide against noble savages.

reply

"Just another example of a more powerful culture replacing a weaker one. Many Indian tribes did the same to other tribes...If the Indian tribes had the technological..."

Typical robber logic! I hope you don't choke on your thanksgiving turkey.



reply

Zeesha, where is your outrage over incidents like these:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_Canyon "The massacre occurred when a large Oglala/Brulé Sioux war party of over 1,500 warriors led by Two Strike, Little Wound, and Spotted Tail attacked a band of Pawnee during their summer buffalo hunt. In the ensuing rout more than 75–100 Pawnees were killed, men with mostly women and children, the victims suffering mutilation and some set on fire."

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2000/09/anasazi-ate-their-enemies "It's no secret that prehistoric Indians in the Southwest killed, butchered, and cooked their enemies. But now a team has evidence for what many have suspected. A dried hunk of human excrement, or coprolite, proves that the Anasazi ate human bodies as well, although a handful of critics are unswayed."

It's not robber logic, it's the way of history. You're very naive if you think otherwise. The Aztec, the Comanche, the Sioux, the Iroquois... All those tribes practiced genocidal warfare and drove other peoples off their lands and killed them mercilessly. It was only natural that one day they would face a stronger people who would do to them what they had done to others. And did you know that Cortez's Conquistadores, the French and the British and the US military all received a great deal of help from the tribes that had been displaced by those powerful hostile tribes?

BTW, Thanksgiving turkey was delicious! Thanks for asking.




reply

Where is my outrage? -- Where is your conscience?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_of_indigenous_peoples
From the colonial period of the early 1500s through the twentieth century, the indigenous peoples of the Americas have experienced massacres, torture, terror, sexual abuse, systematic military occupations, removals of Indigenous peoples from their ancestral territories, forced removal of Native American children to military-like boarding schools, allotment, and a policy of termination.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trail_of_Tears
Between 1830 and 1850, U.S. government forcibly relocated Native American peoples from their ancestral homelands to the west. Relocated peoples suffered from exposure, disease, and starvation while en route to their new designated reserve, and approximately 8700–17000 died before reaching their destinations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand_Creek_massacre
In 1864, a 675-man force of Colorado U.S. Volunteer Cavalry attacked and destroyed a village of Cheyenne and Arapaho people in southeastern Colorado Territory, killing and mutilating an estimated 70–500 Native Americans, about two-thirds of whom were women and children.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Genocide
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mendocino_War
Between 1846 and 1873, European Americans are estimated to have killed outright some 4,500 to 16,000 California Native Americans, particularly during the Gold Rush.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wounded_Knee_Massacre
The 7th Cavalry massacred around 300 Lakota Sioux after disarmed them. 90 men and 200 women and children were killed, 51 were wounded (4 men and 47 women and children, some of whom died later), at Wounded Knee on December 29, 1890.

"It's not robber logic, it's the way of history."

Yes, it is robber logic. Throughout history, most invader use it. That doesn't make it legitimate.

reply

Life sucks, deal with it. If the Indians were more prepared, they would have done the same to Europeans. Big fish eat little fish. It's the way of the world and you can cry about it all you want, but it is part of all forms of life.

reply

Again, typical robber logic. What else do you think German and Japanese in WWII told themselves while they were killing millions of others?
Keep spewing this kind of crap, whynotwriteme. Apparently you couldn't get what the last tale is about. Well then, here is the core from the first tale for you:
https://s15.directupload.net/images/181202/ut5zi42e.jpg

reply

Germany and Japan lost and were punished very harshly. You're just as strongly in favor of Indian genocide as anyone else, you've just picked different Indians.

reply

Really? Thrillhouse. Can't you even tell who invaded who?

reply

"Throughout history, most invader use it. That doesn't make it legitimate."

Actually, yes, it does.

History belongs to the victors.

White man > American Indian

History proves it.

reply

"White man > American Indian"

Interesting, Kingswood. Can you also tell us in your opinion: White person + Non-white person = ?

reply

Depends, who has the gun and who has the bow-and-arrow?

reply

So, you are implying: White person + Non-white person = Son-of-a-gun
No other better outcome?

reply

Who lived on the land first?

reply

Some weak Indian tribe that was eventually kicked off the land by another more powerful Indian tribe.

reply

They actually weren’t Indian. Indians live in Asia.

reply

Wow! Thanks for the tip.

reply

Not at all. The Coen Bros. did even a bigger number on deconstructing the Bullshit Mythos of American expansion into the West with their portrayal of American idealism driven by cartoonish self-righteousness. I laugh at the INCEL RW losers who think that this affair praises their imagined accomplishments of their imagined ancestors.

reply

The biggest slap in the face in this movie was directed against the entertainment industry, in the "Meal Ticket" segment. I found very little in the way of criticism of the pioneer spirit.

I doubt the Coens would have devoted so much of their career to the frontier culture of America if they held it in such scorn.

And even if they WERE lampooning the pioneer spirit... The fact that so many take it as a tribute would indicate that the Coens were failing in their efforts.

reply

Scorn? Their films that take place in the American West are a good mix of tongue in cheek dark humor and gritty realism not portrayed in even earlier Neo-Westerns by Sergio Leone and Clint Eastwood. Also, if you're referring to movies like True Grit and No Country for Old Men, both of those are not their original stories and both movies follow the original novels very closely.

That being said, I don't think they portray pioneer culture with the rosy-tinted glasses you seem to think they do.

reply

Their ancestors and imagined??? So they don't actually exist?

reply

Romanticized depictions of the past. It's a very common practice

reply

Not evil. An enemy - that's all.

reply

Jesus stop be ofended by everything the movie is told from the perspective of cowboys of course indians are villains

Stop acting like movies have the obligation of be documentaries this was a fun movie not the coens best but a really good one

reply