It Is Time To Upset Your Status Quo

"Anytime anyone upsets the status quo
you're stabbed in the back
by the so called liberal hos.
I know this much,
this much I know,
people are dying
It's time to go!"

--Black 47 from their song "It's Time to Go!"

Shusli and I had a very interesting weekend. Seeing Derrick Jensen again was great. I'd like to get some time to just sit and BS with him. He is an awesome, clear minded fella.

Sunday, Shusli and I went to a panel at the Econvergence conference about "Radical Sustainability." John Zerzan, Judy BlueHorse Skelton, Frodo Okulam, and A. C. Keefer were supposed to be the speakers, but Zerzan didn't show up and Urban Scout took his place. Shusli and I went specifically to see John Zerzan because of the BS he is spreading about Derrick Jensen. John has taken out of context what Derrick said about laws. Oddly, when you listen to John and read the transcript of what Derrick actually said, it is easy to realize that John Zerzan is either deliberately lying or at the very least distorting the facts. I've seen his comments on Youtube and read the actual transcript of what Derrick said, thanks to Shusli.

I hate it when people NARROW the path to saving the world to ONE ideal because it makes all others out as not being helpful. John Zerzan has stated that one CANNOT be anti-civilization unless you are an "anarcho-primitivist," and he is one. What he seems to believe is that there is ONE path to the salvation of the world and he is on it and if you aren't, you are pro-civilization. WRONG ANSWER! In my opinion, we all have our own tools to use in the salvation of the world. Are we brave enough to dig them out and use them? What will it take to get us to that point?

I'm not sure why Zerzan is saying these things. It suggests jealousy. It suggests he is upset with Derrick for getting more attention than him. This happens when folk consider themselves more important than their message.

Shusli informed me that Zerzan made a post on Indy Media stating he was not invited to the Econvergence. [I don't read Indy Media because they censor. They claim not to, but Shusli and I both as well as many others have been censored on that site.] I've heard that John was not initially invited, maybe due to an oversight. John brought this discrepancy to the eyes of the Econvergence organizers. So he was invited to speak on the panel of "Radical Sustainability." He didn't show.

I've heard of the good works of Judy Blue Horse Skelton. She is well known and has done much to help the people according to the vast amount of word of mouth I heard about her. I liked most of what she said except for two things. Judy was talking about indigenous lifeways and stated that Derrick Jensen called these "magical thinking." In discussions with Shusli afterward, who has read more of his work than I, we could not think of ANY time Derrick spoke of indigenous lifeways as magical thinking. Derrick has been more supportive of indigenous lifeways as a non-Indian than any other person I know of or have met. Even more so than some Indians I know as. I have NO idea where that came from.

Judy also mentioned that Mother Earth will take care of herself. In a discussion with Shusli afterward, she told me that was actually the "Gaia Theory." That mother earth, when tired of us, will scrape us off and begin anew. I have two problems with this. It gives a carte blanche rape and destruction excuse to coporations as they will be scraped off at sometime so they might as well get all they can. Another thing is that the extinct species are not gonna come back after we get scraped off. The salmon are not going to magically reappear after we get scraped off.

One fella stated "we all know Derrick Jensen is a great divider." This is a blanket statement designed to legitimize the speakers comments without any question. It gives the look of legitimacy without actual content. I have never heard Derrick state nor insinuate that he wants to divide us. I have never heard him attack folk on a personal level. I have never heard him say anything in a separatist form. I have never heard him be divisive and have never read any of his work as divisive. I have never heard him state that his way is the only way. Where did this come from other than to mis-inform and divide the people?; to be exactly what he claims Derrick is. Plus, it is rather presumptive, arrogant, and imperialist, in my opinion, to assume that we all think like he does.

One woman stated she believes that civilization can continue in its current form without using violence. Does she think the Nigerians are gonna give up the oil they want to stay in the earth and are willing to fight to keep there? That resource will have to be taken by force so we can continue to drive cars.

One fella stated that we are all the corporations and goverment etc., and therefore must Love them and treat them with respect because they are like us. WRONG ANSWER! Two women in the back didn't identify with that and neither did Shusli and I. It is like saying that since you are a participant in your rape by being there to be raped, you are just like the rapist and must Love and respect your rapist. No! You must kill your rapist, in my opinion. Stop them by "any means necessary."

Listening to these liberals wax on about how they want to continue to live the same privileged existence without making any changes that might inconvenience them made me shut off after a while. We left when one woman stated that the Dalai Lama was violent because he ate meat (did I mention I hate imperialist vegans?). I do agree that the Dalai Lama is violent, but because he was a slaver. The Lama system in Tibet practiced a rather brutal form of slavery. Peace Love and Joy just sells better than slaves to the public that has little idea of the history of such folk. But the holier than thou vegans are willing to tell us how it is rather than ally and discuss with us how to save the world. After Sunday, Shusli and I both have come to realize that we have a long way to go. There are few people we are willing to ally with.

At home, Shusli brought to my attention that some white folks are taking it upon themselves to redefine what is and isn't indigenous on the Derrick Jensen Forum. When Shusli and Derrick offer a different point of view, these folk whom you'd think would be more intelligent, close their minds. I have a theory about this:

When the current war with Iraq was started, I was working at Boydstun Metal Works. I told my boss my objections to the war the next morning. I had been speaking out against the impending war since the day I had started working there three months previous. My boss told me she believed that every living Iraqi should be killed because SHE WAS SCARED! She didn't have anything to be scared of. The Iraqi's did and still do. For her own peace of mind she was willing to let others commit genocide against the Iraqi people so she could sleep better at night. Not so America could sleep better, her family, her friends...just her. I was fired later that afternoon.

Many white folk are TERRIFIED of being treated like the rest of us or like they know we have been. We had genocide and many other crimes committed against us so many white folk can enjoy they privileges they now have. What if they face genocide? What if they face racism? What if they get treated like second class citizens? More to the point: WHAT IF THEY LOSE ANY OF THEIR ILL GOTTEN PRIVILEGES?! "WHAT ABOUT ME?"

Many white folk also feel guilt. So many hundreds of white folks have told me such. Many even telling me they don't want to feel guilty. My therapist told me I cannot control the feelings of others. I am not making you feel guilty, you are. Guilt is an excuse to do nothing. Get off your lazy white ass and do something for the people. Don't leave it up to me, Shusli, Derrick, or anyone else to tell you what to do. FIGURE IT OUT!

There are some common offensive and racist techniques used mostly by liberals to legitimize their occupation of our land. Here are a few:

In dealing with Indians, white folk know they don't have a leg to stand on. Their privilege is gained through an occupation of our land, as well as other unpleasant activities to the lesser privileged. The occupation came through genocide. They suck the resources out of the land to create their civilization. They continue to oppress the indigenous. They can't slaughter us like in the good old days, so they take it upon themselves to redefine who we are so they can legitimize their illegal and occupation of our land.

White folk say they are indigenous to Europe. Being indigenous, they tell us they stand on equal footing with us Indians as to having a right to occupy our land. This is stated to dismiss out of hand that Indians were here to begin with. They simply win the argument and no further discussion is needed. As Indians we have an ancient relationship with this land. Our ancestors were here since time immemorial. Why don't white folk head on back to Europe if that is how they truly feel and reoccupy their own land?

The United States Signed some 800 treaties with Indian nations. Article six, section two of the U.S. constitution states treaties are the supreme law of the land. Treaties are contracts between nations. You may have signed a contract to buy a car on payments. What happens when you don't live up to your contract? The conditions return to what they were prior to the signing of the agreement and your car gets reposessed. The U.S. violated ALL treaties signed with the Indian nations. Even according to your own laws this is OUR land.

White folk like to say that according to science, Indians came from China 11,000 years ago, thus Indians are not indigenous to this land. They dismiss out of hand what Indians have to say about this because Indians are perceived as inferior. If you walk up to someone and tell them how it is and don't discuss it with them, in my opinion, you see them as inferior. Vine Deloria, Jr., wrote a book exposing the Fantasy that is American archaeology/anthropology in its view of Indians. It is titled "Red Earth, White Lies." What he shows in that book will disturb all you who believe in the science religion. Archaeology/anthropology is treated more like a religion than a science. Vine talks about sites that were over 150,000 years old, but since they didn't fit the hierarchical structure of the alleged scientific knowledge, these scientists were dismissed to an extent and the sites buried, as it were. Vine also points out that there is no basis, NONE, for the Bering Land Sea Bridge crossing. Are you getting scared your fantasies may crumble?

White folk like to state all life originated in Africa, thus the only people who are really indigenous are blacks who are still in Africa. Again, read "Red Earth, White Lies," and question the science religion. Besides, all that crap doesn't mean that you can keep your ill gotten privilege. You'll have to come up with a more comprehensive argument than that.

It is also argued that the Jews used their Indigenousness in Israel to regain the occupation of their land base and look at the horrible things they are doing. Israel is a nation for two other reasons than Jewishness. Christian fundamentalists had tried for at least 150 years to get the Jews back to Israel in order to bring about Armageddon. As well, the U.S. needed a military might that wasn't their own to help control the Middle East and the flow of oil. Here in the U.S., they just take our resources because we have no military might nor is it helpful for them to supply us with one. The nation of Israel should indeed face justice for their crimes, but so should all the other nation states, like the U.S. for what they have done to Indians past and present.

Archaeology/anthropology was founded on the racist principles of proving white folk to be the master race.

My theory is thus:

Many white folk, those that practice defining what is and isn't Indian in ANY FORM, do so because they need to feel comfort within their own privilege because they are scared and or feel guilt. They are scared of being treated the same (in whole or in part) as the others and or losing any of their privileges (especially the latter). Instead of talking with Indians and working with Indians, it is easier to redefine what is and isn't Indian to suit their own desires.

They feel guilty, which is based in Christian dogma, whether or not they are Christian. They feel guilty for what has happened to Indians and thus want to feel comfort from that guilt. Instead of talking with Indians and working with Indians, it is easier to redefine what is and isn't Indian to suit their own desires.

Let me make it perfectly clear to all non-indigenous who practice defining who and what is indigenous...YOU HAVE NO RIGHT! Do not believe we think the same way you do. How ARROGANT! Because your people did and do what they do does NOT mean we would do the same to you. We are not you! Face that fact! Work with us! Stop working against us!

Since you give yourself the power to define what is and isn't indigenous, do we Indians get the power to define who and what you are?