Reader responds to rebuttals; another angered at ASUN
Ethnocentric logic
stresses material
aspects of culture
It scares the hell out of me to know
people like Jack Lovell (DN, April
17) are still around. It’s 1990, but
these graduates from the John Wayne
School of Native American Studies
still believe Indians were better off
after being subjugated and stripped of
their identity by white Euro-Ameri
cans. This ethnocentric logic tends to
cloud the truth by emphasizing only
the material aspects of culture rather
than culture itself.
People like Jack Lovell often con
fuse the word “inferior” with “dif
ferent.” At the time of white contact
in 1541, Native Americans had adapted
quite successfully to their environ
ment considering their level of tech
nology. At first, white influx was
slow. Indians acquired horses and guns
and incorporated them into their cul
ture over a period of time.
That flood of white invaders never
stopped though, and they brought other
“gifts” with them like diseases which
absolutely devastated many tribes.
Don’t forget the bison, either. They
were the most important part of Na
tive American culture and subsistence
and were nearly extinguished by white
Euro-American hunters. This left
Indians verv vulnerable, hut never
“inferior.” As for being militarily
inferior, I think George Armstrong
Custer would disagree.
If reservations were originally
created to help Native Americans
maintain their culture, that concept
didn’t last for more than five minutes.
The white government would gener
ally look for the worst land available
and stick some Indians on it to get
them out of the way. There, each
“family unit” would be given some
land to farm and be forced to act like
white people. The concept of a reser
vation was an idea whose time has
never come.
Finally, Lovell seems to suggest
that Indian hardships of today are
entirely their own fault, and if they’d
just act like white people, things would
be great. It isn’t that easy. Any idiot
can sec the material aspects of a cul
ture. Sure, Native Americans have
taken on some characteristics of white
material culture (televisions, cars, bars
— whoopie), but who could forsake
generations of tradition, beliefs and
religion just to be something he or she
isn’t? I can’t just snap my fingers and
say “I’m an Indian;” there’s more to
it than that.
As for government aid to Native
Americans in college, don’t you think
the United States Government owes
it to them after repressing them for so
many years? It seems to me the very
least they can do. How can anyone in
their right mind call it racism?
By the way, “Little Big Man” is
one hell of a film.
Keith Richter
sophomore
anthropology
Reader’s points
massacred by
novice rebuttals
When I wrote in last week about
the Indians (DN, April 17), I had
hoped to provoke a little intelligent
discussion about the topic. What I got
was neither a discussion nor intelli
gent. Instead, 1 received a volley of
labels and epithets and an amateur
analysis. I will just repeat a few of my
points that were massacred by the
attempted rebuttal.
Nowhere in my letter did I state
that the Indians deserved to be con
quered. I said that they were con
quered. For proof, I stale the Indians
no longer control the affairs of North
America. The means by which they
were defeated may have included the
violations ofmany treaties but treach
ery always has been and always will
be a tactic in warfare.
As for them standing in tiic path of
progress, that was the topic of Bran
don Loomis’ (DN, April 9) column.
1 said nothing about that. I said that
reservations are a stupid idea and
implied that they are a bastion of
apathy and stagnation. I freely admit
that this may have changed by now
but it is the impression that I received
when I last visited the reservation.
When did I say that it was all right
to wipe out Native American culture,
language, history or tribes? That In
dians were “primitive savages?” That
their ability to fight justified their
treatment by European settlers? Not
once in my letter did I touch on any of
those topics. Brad Whitaker and Brad
Moncrief (DN, April 19) have the au
dacity to label me ignorant when they
evidently lack the skills to read and
comprehend a simple letter. In my
opinion, this casts quite a large shadow
of doubt on the accuracy of their other
criticisms.
As for my “most blatant expres
sion of ignorance,” I continue to
believe that scholarships based on
skm coior are an expression of ra
cism. What do language, religion,
history, traditions and beliefs have to
do with it? The scholarship applies to
people of Native American ancestry,
period. Not Indians who live on the
reservation, or speak native languages,
or follow the native religions or tradi
tions. A scholarship for that purpose
would be understandable; however,
the present scholarship is a farce.
The problem that Loomis referred
to in his article was one in Wisconsin.
The treaty with the Indians had a
clause allowing them to have subsis
tence fishing. The Indians arc using
gill nets to decimate the lish popula
tions. The fish come from hatcheries
supported by fishing licenses. Did the
Indians’ culture include the extermi
nation of entire marine populations?
No. They are using it as an excuse and
that is where my problem lies. The
Indians arc using all the modem equip
ment that they can. That is just fine.
However, they arc using the treaties
to gain rights above and beyond those
of all other Americans. A right given
to only one race and denied to all
others is repugnant to me, regardless
of the reason.
The Indians may not wish to hop in
the melting pot, but that ref usal should
not grant them special rights. The
Polish neighborhoods of Chicago and
the Chinatowns of large cities retain
both their cultures and their languages
without additional rights such as those
provided for the Indians. I fail to see
the difference in their plights.
In conclusion, although a joint letter
from a poet and a pseudo-scientist
was quite amusing, especially the
numerous assaults on stands that I
never stated or defended, I hope that
futuic rebuttals have a bit more rea
soning behind them. The mere fact
that you dislike my stand docs not
decrease its validity, nor docs label
ing me a bigot (Moncricf’s and
Whitaker’s implication) refute my
logic.
Jack Lovell
senior
engineering
w 1 • *
Indian drug use
wrong, despite
religious reasons
I just had to write this letter after
reading the DN editorial on April 18.
It argued that the recent Supreme
Court decision regarding the Indians’
use of the drug peyote was wrong. I
beg to differ.
Do you think that if I claimed LSD
or cocaine use was a part of my reli
gion, I would be granted special per
mission to manufacture it for that
use? I seriously doubt it. If a particu
lar drug is illegal, it should be illegal
for everyone, regardless of religion or
ethnic background.
If the Court had decided in favor of
the Indians in this case, they would
have granted a particular group of
people special privileges that the rest
of us do not have, simply because of
their religious beliefs. As far as I am
concerned, that would be discrimina
tion against those of us who do not
follow those beliefs, and that would
be unfair.
Andrew Meyer
sophomore
pre-med
Director thanks
lecture listeners,
event supporters
I wish to thank the students, fac
ulty and friends of the university for
their support of the numerous events
surrounding the visit of Jacques Der
rida to our campus last week. They
thoroughly defeated the obnoxious
opinion that our community is unin
terested in philosophy or its prob
lems.
More than 400 people attended
Derrida’s lecture. Despite the over
heated room and the complexity of
the talk, almost everyone stayed.
Derrida’s long career has been founded
on the assumption that learning and
questioning can go hand in hand rather
than fist to fist. It was inspiring to see
so many people share at least that
much with his work, and so many
willing to hear him before reaching
conclusions about his thought and
r
purposes.
Derrida’s visit brought together
many parts of our university to think
about the role of violence in our cen
tury and in our everyday language.
Whatever his impression on us, he
was gratified to find so many of us
gathered to give these topics their
attention.
To all who came to listen and
inquire, I offer my thanks. For those
who did not, 400 people can tell you
what you missed.
Willis G. Regier
director
University of Nebraska Press
Student's insight
could give ASUN
valuable benefits
How can ASUN feel like they are
a responsible unit of government for
the university when they open up a
senate seat and don ’ t check out who is
eligible for such a position?
I mean the situation with Sandy
Haughton, the junior business major
that in a fair election won the newly .
opened senate seat for the Division of
Continuing Studies. Haughton was
later informed she could not serve as
senator because she only carried six
credit hours rather than the required
12. Most students in the Division of
Continuing Studies can’t manage 12
hours plus a full-time job or a load of
kids. What is ASUN saying to these
students? They don ’t count in student
government?
If ASUN wants to be responsible,
they should let Haughton - a respon
sible person that handles a full-time
job and school — be a senator. She
could only provide valuable insight,
and ASUN can finally move forward.
Neil A. Michaud
UNL graduate
Before you step
out into the
make sure you re
ov red!
It's tough to be caught in between:
No longer covered by your family's
health insurance plan, and not yet
covered by an employer's group
health plan.
That's why Blue Cross and Blue Shield
of Nebraska offers TempCare: Quality
health care coverage for people with
temporary coverage needs. TempCare
covers you for up to 12 months.
The plan features your choice of $250
or $500 calendar year deductible;
80% coinsurance; $ 1,000 out-of
pocket calendar year maximum after
the deductible; and a $ 1,000,000
maximum.
If you're about to fall into the twilight
zone of health care coverage, call
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of
Nebraska and ask us about TempCare.
It just might be the smartest thing
you've done since you came to
school.
I--—-1
For more information
about TempCare,
fill out this coupon and send it in, or
! call Toll-Free 1 -800-642-8014.
I I
l l
« Name
i i
i i
Address_
i i
i i
i i
i-i
i i
! City_ j
i i
| State_ZIP_ !
i i
Phone_
| Mail to: 7261 Mercy Road, Omaha, NE 68124 j
Attention: Marketing
