adolf hitler, i mean andrew jackson\'s
 

face is on our currency. in school we learn about the good things he did to make our country stronger and how he was going to hang his VP from the first tree he could find, and the teacher will also read the small paragraph at the buttom with talks about his negative actions against the indians (it leaves out some of the more cute tidbits like how he used to wear clothing made from the indians bodies, etc)

...just thought its interesting, someone talked about how if hitler won wwii then he'd be a hero, i guess its more or less true. the winners will always rewrite history to be more favorable in their eyes. just take a look at the BS taught in our school system about history.

Re: adolf hitler, i mean andrew jackson\'s
 

Schools teach little kids of lot of bullshit about US history. Like how the pilgrims came over and befriended the Native Americans, etc.

I think the worst lie is that Columbus discovered America. First of all, considering that Vikings most likely were there hundreds of years earlier, it's factually inaccurate to say Columbus got there first.

More importantly it's hard to say someone "discovered" a continent that was already full of indigenous people. Columbus and his men nearly wiped out an entire race of people, yet he has a holiday named after him. This would be like Europe celebrating Adolf Hitler Day, and that is no exaggeration.

In Defence of Andrew Jackson
 

Andrew Jackson was an American War Hero when the young USA needed military victories against England who was attacking US ships and arming savage, warmingering indians to murder US settlers.

It is true Jackson was an Indian killer and a very successful indian killer. But the indians he killed were not exactly dalai-lama-peacenik-hippie indians. These were vicious savages who had no qualms about committing genocide on the innocent. These indians murdered many USA settlers. Jackson's primary target was the Creek Indians. This was a tribe who culture celebrated war and killing. Unfortunately for the Creeks, Jackson was a better killer than they were. Other indian tribes that were victims of the Creeks murderous rampages were probably pretty happy that the Creeks were on the receiving end of Jackson's fury. Call it KARMA. Andrew Jackson was an AVENGING ANGEL that brought biblical poetic justice to evil men (yes, even indians are capable of being evil). His tactics were violent but tribes like the Creeks did not deserve leniency. I have read the history of the Creek tribe and believe me they don't deserve anyones tears...... Jackson also went after the Seminoles in Florida. The Seminoles were making raids from Spanish Florida and killing American settlers. Britain was arming the Seminoles and Jackson invaded Florida to extract a little payback. Later the Seminoles were moved to Oklahoma with other indian tribes in the infamous "Trail of Tears". I am certainly NOT saying Jackson could not be savage in his methods but it is rather one-sided not to include the context which motivated his actions. On a side note, the Seminoles became one of the most respected tribes in their new home in Oklahoma.

As for using indian skin for clothing, my first instinct is to say this is bull****. Feel free to provide evidence backing this up. And by evidence I mean research from someone with a PhD in American History. Not a self-hating American blog-fest.

Re: In Defence of Andrew Jackson
 

Damn Injuns' deserved to be almost completely wiped off the planet!

Re: adolf hitler, i mean andrew jackson\'s
 

[ QUOTE ]
Columbus and his men nearly wiped out an entire race of people, yet he has a holiday named after him. This would be like Europe celebrating Adolf Hitler Day, and that is no exaggeration.


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, it is an exaggeration, and you're stupid if you can't see why. Columbus was a bastard, but surely you don't believe he intended for smallpox to kill the vast majority of the Native American population. Given that he did not understand the germ theory of disease, or immunity, it's hard to see how he could have.

Furthermore, it's hard to see how the Native American population could have avoided being decimated by a massive smallpox epidemic. Eventually Europeans were going to "find" the New World and interact with the Indians. BAM, epidemic.

Re: In Defence of Andrew Jackson
 

There were many indian tribes that were wrongly brutalized. The Creek tribe does not belong in this group.

Re: adolf hitler, i mean andrew jackson\'s
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Columbus and his men nearly wiped out an entire race of people, yet he has a holiday named after him. This would be like Europe celebrating Adolf Hitler Day, and that is no exaggeration.


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, it is an exaggeration, and you're stupid if you can't see why. Columbus was a bastard, but surely you don't believe he intended for smallpox to kill the vast majority of the Native American population. Given that he did not understand the germ theory of disease, or immunity, it's hard to see how he could have.

Furthermore, it's hard to see how the Native American population could have avoided being decimated by a massive smallpox epidemic. Eventually Europeans were going to "find" the New World and interact with the Indians. BAM, epidemic.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a good point. However, one shouldn't forget that the white man's treatment of the natives left a few things to be desired. The fact that disease would have eventually decimated them doesn't negate the fact that they were also horribly mistreated and forcibly removed from their land.

Re: In Defence of Andrew Jackson
 

Damn SAVAGES! Vicious savages at that.

"That those tribes can not exist surrounded by our settlements and in continual contact with our citizens is certain. They have neither the intelligence, the industry, the moral habits, nor the desire of improvement which are essential to any favorable change in their condition. Established in the midst of another and a superior race, and without appreciating the causes of their inferiority or seeking to control them, they must necessarily yield to the force of circumstances and ere long disappear."

"What good man would prefer a country covered with forests and ranged by a few thousand savages to our extensive Republic, studded with cities, towns, and prosperous farms embellished with all the improvements which art can devise or industry execute, occupied by more than 12,000,000 happy people, and filled with all the blessings of liberty, civilization and religion?"

It was disgusting then when Andrew Jackson said these things. It is disgusting now when others agree with them.

Re: adolf hitler, i mean andrew jackson\'s
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is a good point. However, one shouldn't forget that the white man's treatment of the natives left a few things to be desired. The fact that disease would have eventually decimated them doesn't negate the fact that they were also horribly mistreated and forcibly removed from their land.


[/ QUOTE ]

I wholeheartedly agree. My only point was that when people compare Columbus to Hitler, they're either seriously overcondemning the former or undercondemning the latter.

Re: In Defence of Andrew Jackson
 

Later the Seminoles were moved to Oklahoma with other indian tribes in the infamous "Trail of Tears"

So its ok that "other" indian tribes got lumped in here, cause your man Jackson got the job done? Lets see, 1000 mile journey, in the winter, without adequete clothing/food at the point of a gun- but hey, jackson was a war hero so thats just fine, we forget about his atrocities there after. I mean Saddam was a goddamn hero in Iraq when the Ba'ath party managed to drive out the occupying british. If only people would remember that before they judge him and his regime.