Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser-machine
Member: 6052
Joined: Feb 26 2004

The 'Beaver wars' were also caused in part by the search for new hunting grounds to supply a new foreign market in furs. The Algonkian Cree are now seen as having the most sustainable fur trade in the world. They quickly adapted and learned IOW. Most of the recorded population movement during historical times was due to pressure from White settlement (increased warfare) and the accompaning clearance of forests and game. Unlike New World myths the Bible also says 'be fruitful and mutiply' and 'hold dominion over the Earth' which is still interpretted by many true believers as a licence to take what they will. 'God will provide' others are smugly told. When Aboriginal people today see the changes in climate most seem to worry about it and argue that we can still alter course; when fundamentalist Christians see it they celebrate the coming demise of homosexuals, socialists and Muslims. My point is theres no real comparison in either sense, the New World still had a far more diverse and healthy environment after 11 to 25,000 years of Amerindian habitation than it does after a mere 150 to 500 years of Ours. Blame it on high tech if you prefer but the pro-development creed still revolves around Judeo-Christian, Greco-Roman ideals of industry, individual wealth and infinite growth and power. Those are not traditional Native values.

[ 04 August 2006: Message edited by: EriKtheHalfaRed ]


Clayoquot to be logged?! By: West Coast Greeny (40 replies) August 2, 2006 - 8:47pm
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 7:36pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 7:13pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 6:55pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 6:48pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 6:21pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 6:12pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 5:58pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 20 2006 - 5:39pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 13 2006 - 11:00pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 13 2006 - 6:02pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 13 2006 - 1:17am)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 13 2006 - 12:38am)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 7 2006 - 11:17pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 7 2006 - 11:04pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 7 2006 - 10:34am)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 7 2006 - 10:22am)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 6 2006 - 9:16pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 6 2006 - 5:47pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 9:44pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 8:11pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 8:07pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 7:58pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 6:44pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 5:27pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 5:07pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 4:20pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 4:07pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 4:00pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 4 2006 - 12:18pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 3 2006 - 7:13pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 3 2006 - 6:43pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 3 2006 - 2:38pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 3 2006 - 1:54pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 2 2006 - 9:19pm)
  • Re: Clayoquot to be logged?! By: (Aug 2 2006 - 8:47pm)