Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Jeremy T. Fox" <fox@****.EDU>
Subject: NAN Population: Myths and Fantasies
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 1995 19:45:09 -0500
Robert Watkins wrote:

> No... the concentration camps the Amerindians were in were not the
> extermination camps the Nazis used. By and large, not many died in the
> concentration camps, and FASA makes it clear in the various histories that
> their numbers were practically untouched compared to the hideous losses
> inflicted by the waves of VITAS.

But during this time period, they probaly weren't having too many
children, at least nothing that would increase their population by fifty
times.

> >> and have had several
> >> years of relative peace.

>> About thirty, or one generation.

> Two... The second one is just starting.

Well, say there are 100 Indians. They all pair off and each have 5
children. So now there are 350 Indians. The next generation then pairs
off and each have five children. There are now 975 Indians. That is
"only" 1000% of the original figure, not 5000%, which the population
figures state. So it would take still another generation to get the
population figures in the NAN.

This model has several flaws:

No one dies.

Everyone gets married and has five children. It is a common observation
that with increasing wealth people have less children. Since the NAN
nations (at least Pueblo) seem to be rolling in the dough, their
population shouldn't be growing at even this rate.

No countries in the real world grow at this pace.

> You're using a two-generation definition of aboriginality... the NAN is
> using an infinite-generation definition (which means if you can show you
> had ONE full-blooded ancestor, even if that was 10,000 years ago (slight
> exagerration) you can get in). That really changes the rules. Not to
> mention the large numbers of "pinkskin" tribes in the more open states.

There are anything but large numbers of pinkskin tribes. I think they are
maybe 1 or 2% in the Salish-Shidhe, and about nowhere else. There are the
Mormons in the Ute, but they are confined to only one city.

I feel that the SR literature makes in clear that all the populations of
the NAN nations are not just white people playing some sort of con game.
I remember many mentions of skin color (I think the Pueblo section in the
Denver sourcebook is a good example of this) and how it is different for
Anglos and Indians.

Also, the NAN section on the Ute nation mentions how the Indians went and
committed atrocities against non-Indians before the latter cleared out of
Nevada. Excuse me, if the populations of Indians were just a bunch of
whites, would they go and kill all their buddies? I think not. And what
about the hostilities of the Sioux towards Americans? Would that be
natural for a bunch of Indian imposters?

Remember, the US government already has that 1/16th test to determine
whether or not anyone is an Indian. I don't see how you could go back any
further than that.


> Well, I assume you're using a two-generation definition... I remember
> noting that once as the government standard when I was looking into it.

Any other standard would make the NAN nations indistinguishable from the
USA. In fact, the NAN nations would be almost entirely WASP's (White
Anglo-Saxon Protestants) because other groups weren't really around
(except for blacks, I guess) to intermingle with the "true" Indians.

My favorite part about the whole NAN nonsense is aparently Iceland has
been taken over by Eskimos! It is now part of the Trans-Polar Aleut
nation. Also, that same rediculous Indian state has this huge, 500,000
people large, city up in the Artic wastes somewhere. Sure... Well, maybe
they renamed Anchorage, though that doesn't explain where all the people
came from.

Jeremy T. Fox Baker College
fox@****.edu Rice University
(713) 630-8024 6320 S. Main St.
Student Computer Consultant Houston TX, 77005
Message no. 2
From: Robert Watkins <bob@**.NTU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: NAN Population: Myths and Fantasies
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 1995 12:43:57 +0930
Jeremy T. Fox wrote:
>
> Robert Watkins wrote:
>
> > No... the concentration camps the Amerindians were in were not the
> > extermination camps the Nazis used. By and large, not many died in the
> > concentration camps, and FASA makes it clear in the various histories that
> > their numbers were practically untouched compared to the hideous losses
> > inflicted by the waves of VITAS.
>
> But during this time period, they probaly weren't having too many
> children, at least nothing that would increase their population by fifty
> times.
>
How long do you think they were there?? Howling Coyete led them out within
a year.
>
> > Well, I assume you're using a two-generation definition... I remember
> > noting that once as the government standard when I was looking into it.
>
> Any other standard would make the NAN nations indistinguishable from the
> USA. In fact, the NAN nations would be almost entirely WASP's (White
> Anglo-Saxon Protestants) because other groups weren't really around
> (except for blacks, I guess) to intermingle with the "true" Indians.
>

Tell me about it... We use a FIVE generation definition of aboriginality in
Australia, and it gets ridiculous. On the other hand, the expanded
population is something like 20 times the size of the full-blooded
population.

--
Robert Watkins bob@**.ntu.edu.au
Real Programmers never work 9 to 5. If any real programmers
are around at 9 am, it's because they were up all night.
*** Finger me for my geek code ***

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about NAN Population: Myths and Fantasies, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.