What must we do to protect our White culture?

[jefferiah]

Was it the constant intercene warfare you admired, or the cannibalism? The casual brutality? The torture? What precisely about the native culture did you admire so?

The warfare was neither constant nor anywhere as brutal as modern civilized warfare. There was no cannibalism in NA native culture. Torture and casual brutality did not exist anywhere to the degree it is found in modern civilized states, even Canada.

What did i admire? I admire the respect they showed for the earth. I admired the skill they had to live in the wild with almost no predation. I admired their sustainability. I admired their sense of kinship with the land and with their tribes. I admired their total lack of crime. I admire their sense of time. I admire their lack of totalitarian expansion and exploitation. There are really so many things to admire about the native way of life.

Modern civilization? I cant think of much that i admire at all.

Andrew

Lol. Why are you online then?

[AndrewL]

Was it the constant intercene warfare you admired, or the cannibalism? The casual brutality? The torture? What precisely about the native culture did you admire so?

The warfare was neither constant nor anywhere as brutal as modern civilized warfare. There was no cannibalism in NA native culture. Torture and casual brutality did not exist anywhere to the degree it is found in modern civilized states, even Canada.

What did i admire? I admire the respect they showed for the earth. I admired the skill they had to live in the wild with almost no predation. I admired their sustainability. I admired their sense of kinship with the land and with their tribes. I admired their total lack of crime. I admire their sense of time. I admire their lack of totalitarian expansion and exploitation. There are really so many things to admire about the native way of life.

Modern civilization? I cant think of much that i admire at all.

Andrew

Lol. Why are you online then?

Im civilized. Do you also ask a crack addict why he does crack?

Andrew

[jefferiah]

But honestly Andrew I understand where you are coming from. The Old Ways are good in a lot of ways. And deep down everyone knows that. You know kinship with the Earth, in the days before towering casinos and all that. But I doubt many people would trade their tarred network to the grocery store and the hospital for a simpler life. But what does this have to do with White People. White People did not have cars then either. They do now, but so do natives. I am not into white pride or anything, but I am not going to move over and apologize cuz I am white, either.

The problem with multiculturalism is that it doesnt promote culture all round...it is getting to a point where it makes the predominant culture out to be the bad guy, and rather than respecting the diversity we have people crying they are offended. So we have Kirpans in schools, and a kid in Tennessee who is not allowed to bring his unsharpened Bible to read at recess.

[Leafless]

You are right the Whites have imposed on the Aboriginal culture in the same manner the British have imposed their will on France and subsequently conquered France on the 'Plains of Abraham'.

Culturally speaking all Canadians, Quebecers, Aboriginals and immigrants should have been initially given no other option than to conform to a single Canadian culture or go your separate ways.

A single Canadian culture? Why? What value is that? And if its singular why does it have to be christian? How would you have given no other option to them? Would you have killed them if they refused to conform (as our european ancestors in fact did in some cases). The forcing of native children into european christian schools is one of the most shameful aspects of our history.

I don't know why you think european christian culture is so great. Perhaps its better than some. But I'm personally far more impressed by the native culture we exterminated than i am by what we replaced it with.

Andrew

A single Canadian culture would make it a lot easier for government to focus on common problems of the land rather continually be involved with extremely divisive political and competitive cultural issues that is the cause of major problems with national unity and the primary cause of social unrest.

You ask why a single culture has to be Christian.

There are traditions that stem from Christianity a religion this country was founded on, including laws and morals and back then in 1867, yes, the European culture.

But I really don't know why you zero in or dwell on religion when there are other important cultural aspects in our capitalistic freer society that are a major part of Canadian culture including consumerism and materialism that over shadow the religious side of Christianity in this country, so religion is not the major factor that is is the base of Canadian culture.

Television alone and its associated programing relating to drama, fiction, sports, speciality channels forms an important part of Canadian culture as does McDonald's and all sorts of other fast food outlets. Its should be easy to understand there are many aspects to Canadian culture.

You ask why I think the European culture is so great.

There is no European culture in Canada outside of what Quebec does partly emulating the lifestyles and mannerisms of France. Outside of this all the other provinces adhere to our Western culture whereas U.S culture has greatly influenced Canadian culture.

Canada and the U.S. are born from the same mother, Britain.

You say you are more impressed by the native culture we exterminated.

I don't think the Whites destroyed the native culture but their culture simply became obsolete with natives not advancing with complications arising from this.

It is a complex situation but I don't think the answer is for government to move modern society into the bush.

Natives can make their choices like anyone else.

[jefferiah]

Was it the constant intercene warfare you admired, or the cannibalism? The casual brutality? The torture? What precisely about the native culture did you admire so?

The warfare was neither constant nor anywhere as brutal as modern civilized warfare. There was no cannibalism in NA native culture. Torture and casual brutality did not exist anywhere to the degree it is found in modern civilized states, even Canada.

What did i admire? I admire the respect they showed for the earth. I admired the skill they had to live in the wild with almost no predation. I admired their sustainability. I admired their sense of kinship with the land and with their tribes. I admired their total lack of crime. I admire their sense of time. I admire their lack of totalitarian expansion and exploitation. There are really so many things to admire about the native way of life.

Modern civilization? I cant think of much that i admire at all.

Andrew

Lol. Why are you online then?

Im civilized. Do you also ask a crack addict why he does crack?

Andrew

Are you writing a letter every time you make a post?

[jefferiah]

Do you sign your grocery lists?

[ScottSA]

Was it the constant intercene warfare you admired, or the cannibalism? The casual brutality? The torture? What precisely about the native culture did you admire so?

The warfare was neither constant nor anywhere as brutal as modern civilized warfare. There was no cannibalism in NA native culture. Torture and casual brutality did not exist anywhere to the degree it is found in modern civilized states, even Canada.

What did i admire? I admire the respect they showed for the earth. I admired the skill they had to live in the wild with almost no predation. I admired their sustainability. I admired their sense of kinship with the land and with their tribes. I admired their total lack of crime. I admire their sense of time. I admire their lack of totalitarian expansion and exploitation. There are really so many things to admire about the native way of life.

Modern civilization? I cant think of much that i admire at all.

Andrew

How old are you? They showed respect for the earth because they didn't have chainsaws or an economic system to benefit from knocking down trees if they did. Hand them a tract of forest and a chainsaw today and watch what happens. They also respected the earth because stoneage medicine doesn't do real well at keeping populations in a state of growth, so there was never any pressure on the land. Even the practise of driving whole herds of buffalo over cliffs to harvest a few livers wasn't enough to depopulate the buffalo herds. Indians had to get their hands on rifles before that happened.

The warfare was indeed constant, and so was the slavery. They weren't too kind to Jesuits either, and it is strongly suspected that they learned all about skinning people alive long before the Jesuits showed up. Please show me an instance in modern canada of someone being flayed alive by the state. You can't? What about publicly being burnt alive? Not much of that around since the 14th century either, I reckon. Do you have the slightest idea of what you are talking about or does this all come from Mary Poppins and the 7 braves?

[AndrewL]

A single Canadian culture would make it a lot easier for government to focus on common problems of the land rather continually be involved with extremely divisive political and competitive cultural issues that is the cause of major problems with national unity and the primary cause of social unrest.

That may be so. But that is not the world we live in. To accomplish what you want would lead to massive problems of division and social unrest, far more than we see today in Canada.

You ask why a single culture has to be Christian.

There are traditions that stem from Christianity a religion this country was founded on, including laws and morals and back then in 1867, yes, the European culture.

Our laws mainly come from British common law, and common sense - it changes with the times. Our morals don't come from Christianity at all. Have you read the bible? Can you imagine the horror we would live in if our morals came from Christianity? Thankfully our morals have changed with the times. Not enough though. Still plenty of changing to do. And i hope for the sake of sanity we don't look at any Abrahamic religions to discover the new morals we will need to deal with the world we are currently destroying.

But I really don't know why you zero in or dwell on religion when there are other important cultural aspects in our capitalistic freer society that are a major part of Canadian culture including consumerism and materialism that over shadow the religious side of Christianity in this country, so religion is not the major factor that is is the base of Canadian culture.

Capitalism has its benefits and drawbacks, but it is hardly unique to Canada, christians, or white people. Consumerism, inseparable as it is from capitalism, is a rather shallow and disgusting part of our culture. Given the unsustainable nature of moder capitalism, im sure it has to be radically modified in favor of something far more realistic and less consumerist anyway.

Television alone and its associated programing relating to drama, fiction, sports, speciality channels forms an important part of Canadian culture as does McDonald's and all sorts of other fast food outlets. Its should be easy to understand there are many aspects to Canadian culture.

Ughhh... I shun both. If that is our culture i think we should dismantle the entire country immediately.

You ask why I think the European culture is so great.

There is no European culture in Canada outside of what Quebec does partly emulating the lifestyles and mannerisms of France. Outside of this all the other provinces adhere to our Western culture whereas U.S culture has greatly influenced Canadian culture.

Canada and the U.S. are born from the same mother, Britain.

I only see two master cultures. Civilized and tribal. All civilized cultures are the same to me. Tribal cultures are diverse, dynamic, vibrant, spiritually potent, and above all, sustainable. I prefer the latter to the mind numbing stupidity and hate-filled brutality of civilization.

You say you are more impressed by the native culture we exterminated.

I don't think the Whites destroyed the native culture but their culture simply became obsolete with natives not advancing with complications arising from this.

It is a complex situation but I don't think the answer is for government to move modern society into the bush.

Natives can make their choices like anyone else.

I agree we cant move back. But we can certainly take the good from tribalism (in canada we would rely mainly on the native tradition) and move forward with it. Failing that i can only hope civilization dies off before civilization makes this planet unlivable.

Andrew

Edited July 11, 2007 by AndrewL

[Argus]

Was it the constant intercene warfare you admired, or the cannibalism? The casual brutality? The torture? What precisely about the native culture did you admire so?

The warfare was neither constant nor anywhere as brutal as modern civilized warfare. There was no cannibalism in NA native culture. Torture and casual brutality did not exist anywhere to the degree it is found in modern civilized states, even Canada.

Please. Most of the tribes were extremely hostile to one another, and wars and raiding were constant among them. You pie in the sky liberals like to focus on one or two native cultures and obstinately ignore, not only their many flaws, but the worse flaws of all the others. Casual brutality didn't exist? You know this because..... ? The natives were barbarians, savages. Why is it people seem to have little difficulty calling our own ancestors barbarians, but can't seem to wrap their bleeding hearts around the fact the natives were no better? And in some cases were worse?

What did i admire? I admire the respect they showed for the earth. I admired the skill they had to live in the wild with almost no predation. I admired their sustainability. I admired their sense of kinship with the land and with their tribes. I admired their total lack of crime. I admire their sense of time. I admire their lack of totalitarian expansion and exploitation. There are really so many things to admire about the native way of life.

Modern civilization? I cant think of much that i admire at all.

Andrew

How about a life span that exceeds 30? You think working fourteen hour days and a hand to mouth existence were so much fun? You think freezing your balls off in the winter were a delight? Trying to chop and heat ice for water was a jolly chore? Dying of what are now minor illnesses, or watching your babies die with no idea what's wrong with them is culturally uplifting? The natives might not have harmed the land much but that was largely because they couldn't. They had neither the weaponry nor the knowhow to exploit the land well enough to derive the kind of creature comforts we take for granted and you would never want to do without. No, there wasn't much crime in your typical native village, nor in your typical European village either - then or now. But jam people together in an anonymous big city and guess what happens? Well, you can ask all the natives in Canadian prisons.

Edited July 11, 2007 by Argus

[jefferiah]

Was it last year that they found the remains of a body in Washington state that was dated to 9000 years ago? The discoverers determined that the man was probably Caucasian due to the structure of the skull and it appeared as if he had died from some sort of attack. He was later deemed a Native American (politically correct gesture) much to the dismay and protest of the archaelogists who discovered him. I wonder why white people in Washington State aren't making land claims?

[jefferiah]

Let's not forget the possibility of claiming the air space above that land as well and charging for cell phones signals passing through it.

[cybercoma]

Who gives a crap what life was like "back then" for the native people of Canada. The fact remains, immigrants came to this country and dramatically changed the culture. This country is its immigrants and will always be its immigrants, regardless of their colours.

Edited July 11, 2007 by cybercoma

[Argus]

Who gives a crap what life was like "back then" for the native people of Canada. The fact remains, immigrants came to this country and dramatically changed the culture. This country is its immigrants and will always be its immigrants, regardless of their colours.

Yes, but what kind of a country will it be? Does that depend on whether we take in lots of immigrants from China as opposed to lots of immigrants from the middle east?

Edited July 11, 2007 by Argus

[Bonam]

Yes, but what kind of a country will it be? Does that depend on whether we take in lots of immigrants from China as opposed to lots of immigrants from the middle east?

Obviously.

[cybercoma]

Yes, but what kind of a country will it be? Does that depend on whether we take in lots of immigrants from China as opposed to lots of immigrants from the middle east?

As long as some of them open great restaurants, I can't complain. What are you afraid of happening?

[ScottSA]

Yes, but what kind of a country will it be? Does that depend on whether we take in lots of immigrants from China as opposed to lots of immigrants from the middle east?

As long as some of them open great restaurants, I can't complain. What are you afraid of happening?

I'm personally afraid of the same thing happening here as has happened in every other multicultural society everywhere and always in history. But hey, that's just me.

[RB]

Simple question.

What must White Canadians do to protect our White cultural and Christian associated traditions, that have been ravished or undermined by Quebec culture, Aboriginal culture and immigrants and their imposing cultures?

Canadian streets are now full of ethnic foreigners, our hospitals are full of Islamic Muslim doctors and stores full of ethnic help and our English language being attacked by forces of government to impose the French language.

I don't believe that you have as much as lost your culture that you need to protect it - whites have their ideology that they carry about and practice and it is protected.

You have to admit that you are feeling this way because you are simply out numbered hence overwhelm

[AndrewL]

But honestly Andrew I understand where you are coming from. The Old Ways are good in a lot of ways. And deep down everyone knows that. You know kinship with the Earth, in the days before towering casinos and all that. But I doubt many people would trade their tarred network to the grocery store and the hospital for a simpler life.

Its unsustainable to live the way we do. If we dont choose to live much simpler, we will eventually force a collapse. And because we did not choose to forge a more realistic society when we had the chance, the suffering and conflict will be horrific.

But what does this have to do with White People. White People did not have cars then either. They do now, but so do natives. I am not into white pride or anything, but I am not going to move over and apologize cuz I am white, either.

Its got absolutely nothing to do with white people. Its just the totalitarianism of civilization that is not going to work.

The problem with multiculturalism is that it doesnt promote culture all round...it is getting to a point where it makes the predominant culture out to be the bad guy, and rather than respecting the diversity we have people crying they are offended. So we have Kirpans in schools, and a kid in Tennessee who is not allowed to bring his unsharpened Bible to read at recess.

The problem is not that multiculturalism doesn't promote culture. The problem is that there is no such thing as multicultaralism in a civilized state. A muslim who moves to Canada is just as civilized as any christian european settler. They share all the same roots.

Civilization only pushes one culture - totalitarian agriculture and gluttonous consumerism. That is our culture at its most fundamental state. We may give lip service to multiculturalism but in actuality we suppress and destroy divergent cultures whenever we come in contact with them.

Andrew

[Bonam]

Its unsustainable to live the way we do. If we dont choose to live much simpler, we will eventually force a collapse. And because we did not choose to forge a more realistic society when we had the chance, the suffering and conflict will be horrific.

With our current technology, it's not sustainable for 7 billion people to live on Earth, period. The answer to the lack of sustainability is not reversion to the past, nor the extermination of about 6 out of those 7 billion. Rather, as population grows, the only way to keep up is through progress. Advanced energy sources, higher density food production methods, relocation of heavy industry off-world, exploitation of other planetary bodies for minerals, colonization of other planets, etc.

Its got absolutely nothing to do with white people. Its just the totalitarianism of civilization that is not going to work.

Civilized and uncivilized cultures used to exist side by side in the same world, and used to compete with one another. The ones that worked better won.

totalitarian agriculture

Care to elaborate on what "totalitarian agriculture" means?

[AndrewL]

They showed respect for the earth because they didn't have chainsaws or an economic system to benefit from knocking down trees if they did. Hand them a tract of forest and a chainsaw today and watch what happens.

They had respect for the earth because they were intelligent enough to recognize that the earth is what fed them.

They also respected the earth because stoneage medicine doesn't do real well at keeping populations in a state of growth, so there was never any pressure on the land.

They did not overpopulate because they did not build permanent settlements and produce more food than they needed. At the time of European contact, the plains indians were considered the healthiest and longest living people known to the settlers. They only began to die young and in large numbers through European disease and genocide.

Even the practice of driving whole herds of buffalo over cliffs to harvest a few livers wasn't enough to depopulate the buffalo herds. Indians had to get their hands on rifles before that happened.

The european occupiers purposely tried to eradicate the buffalo in order to stop the natives from continuing their hunter gatherer lifestyle. They did not 'almost' go extinct because the white man gave them rifles.

The warfare was indeed constant, and so was the slavery.

It was not really even warfare so much as very low level retaliation and raids. Tribal warfare did of course take place sporadically between tribes at certain times, but it was nowhere near as brutal, inhumane, and destructive as it is with the 'civilized'.

They certainly did not practice slavery. They were not full-time agriculturalists, they were mainly hunter gatherers. They has absolutely no use at all for slavery. But they most definitely became slaves when the European invaders arrived. Slavery was introduced by civilization in order to grow large crops.

They weren't too kind to Jesuits either, and it is strongly suspected that they learned all about skinning people alive long before the Jesuits showed up.

The Jesuits tried to convert the natives to Christianity and 'civilize' them. What right did they have to interfere in this culture? Jesuits were merely another in a long line of religious imperialists and colonialists. It was tremendously immoral for them to twist and pervert a perfectly viable culture that existed contentedly for thousands of years. I can hardly blame the natives for attacking any of the settlers who tried to eradicate their culture. That is self-defense by any definition.

Please show me an instance in modern canada of someone being flayed alive by the state. You can't? What about publicly being burnt alive? Not much of that around since the 14th century either, I reckon.

Thankfully i cant. But it is irrelevant anyway. Im in no way suggesting we replicate every single facet of indigenous life, or even most of it for that matter. Im saying we can look towards what we know about how they lived in a sustainable way and we can adopt those types of techniques to go forth. (we will have to at some point for sure, the sooner the better i say). This certainly means radical changes to the way society works now, but i see no reason to continue on as we currently do. Our current way of life is far too stupid to continue pursuing.

Do you have the slightest idea of what you are talking about or does this all come from Mary Poppins and the 7 braves?

Obviously im far more versed on this subject than the common misconceptions and myths you tried to pass off as knowledge.

Andrew

[AndrewL]

With our current technology, it's not sustainable for 7 billion people to live on Earth, period. The answer to the lack of sustainability is not reversion to the past, nor the extermination of about 6 out of those 7 billion. Rather, as population grows, the only way to keep up is through progress. Advanced energy sources, higher density food production methods, relocation of heavy industry off-world, exploitation of other planetary bodies for minerals, colonization of other planets, etc.

Not reversion to the past. But it certainly means we adopt the same sort of subsistence techniques. It worked for hundred of thousands of years. That means it will continue to work long after civilization consumes itself.

If we don't adopt a new culture, billions of people will absolutely be exterminated through increased famine, widespread ecocide, and modern warfare. This will happen as resources that currently do feed ~6 billion people begin to dwindle along with our fossil fuels.

I find your star trek type scenario a bit too much fantasy and not enough reality. Perhaps if humans were less selfish and more cooperative, more realistic with how we treat each other and the energy subsidy we found in oil, gas, and coal we would have a shot at that. But we are not, and i see no reason to think we will do anything with our resources but horde it for personal gain and constant war for profit and resources.

Perhaps some civilizations out there found a way to escape this planet and exploit and destroy others, and perhaps we will as well one day. I think first we have to figure out how to live sane and rational lives, then after we do that we can see about the stars and planets. But it seems to me we would quickly just consume this solar system in a few thousand years and end up on the same path we are now. As far as physics is concerned the rest of the universe is pretty much untouchable.

Civilized and uncivilized cultures used to exist side by side in the same world, and used to compete with one another. The ones that worked better won.

No they did not. The civilized eventually gets around to annihilating any tribal cultures that refuse to give up their land to energy development and agriculture. This is still happening today in many parts of the world. Even in Canada. The Inuit culture will soon be a thing of the past as we warm the globe and develop the arctic for more and more resources to 'feed our habit'.

Care to elaborate on what "totalitarian agriculture" means?

Yes. Its when people first became full time farmers in the fertile crescent of the ME ~10 000 years ago. They eventually expanded and continued to expand into all corners of the earth. The European invaders and occupiers of the Americas are the result. As are all civilized peoples. This is totalitarian agriculture. It essentially means you lock up the food, force people into labor, and then make them pay for the food. You continue to grow and force other cultures to adopt your culture so that you can become more and more powerful. This is literally what happened, in a general sense. And it still happens today. Eventually there will be no place on earth where people can live truly free lives. And then soon after we will realize that we consumed the planet for no good reason at all.

Andrew

Edited July 11, 2007 by AndrewL

[AndrewL]

Please. Most of the tribes were extremely hostile to one another, and wars and raiding were constant among them.

Not near as constant as the daily and brutal violence we witness in our culture. And never near as violent and horrible as wars fought between the civilized.

You pie in the sky liberals like to focus on one or two native cultures and obstinately ignore, not only their many flaws, but the worse flaws of all the others.

I dont see what the political spectrum has to do with this. But anyway, sure they had flaws. The reason im focusing on the good stuff is because that would be what we need to adopt. We certainly dont need to adopt the bad stuff.

Casual brutality didn't exist? You know this because..... ? The natives were barbarians, savages.

Not according to any anthropological study or their own history. Where did you get this myth? From fairy tales and christians?

Why is it people seem to have little difficulty calling our own ancestors barbarians, but can't seem to wrap their bleeding hearts around the fact the natives were no better? And in some cases were worse?

Where do you this from? The term barbarian was what Romans and Greeks called the germanic tribes that eventually became us civilized folk. The term is just an ancient form of the racist and derogatory terms we used to describe our victims. It made us feel better about slaughtering them. Its sort of how some people refer to all muslims as terrorists and fascists. Or americans as war mongers and scoundrels. Its always more myth than reality.

Sure the natives had violence in them, just as the germanic tribes did. Just as the romans and greeks were violent, as are all civilized peoples. The difference of course is inthe type of violence and wars, and for what purpose. Tribal warfare between natives never resulted in the extermination of another tribe. It was never used to wipe out entire peoples. (until they tried to organize and wipe out the european occupiers, but who could blame them, as the occupiers were engaged in that very same thing)

How about a life span that exceeds 30? You think working fourteen hour days and a hand to mouth existence were so much fun? You think freezing your balls off in the winter were a delight? Trying to chop and heat ice for water was a jolly chore? Dying of what are now minor illnesses, or watching your babies die with no idea what's wrong with them is culturally uplifting? The natives might not have harmed the land much but that was largely because they couldn't. They had neither the weaponry nor the knowhow to exploit the land well enough to derive the kind of creature comforts we take for granted and you would never want to do without. No, there wasn't much crime in your typical native village, nor in your typical European village either - then or now. But jam people together in an anonymous big city and guess what happens? Well, you can ask all the natives in Canadian prisons.

Again, the anthropological record tells an entirely different story. They had far more leisure time than we do. They lived quite healthy, if only slightly shorter than us now. They had effective ways to deal with the elements.

Sure they had illnesses and watched their babioes die. As people still do. But it was the Europeans who brought the most awful diseases. There was even an episode where the natives were deliberately given blankets infected with small pox in order to kill them and make them suffer horribly.

And of course civilization has introduced its own horrible cancers and other diseases. Not to mention hazards and multibillion dollar criminal enterprises, and daily violence that victimize us all, especially children.

Regardless, it is not my desire to give up all the good that science has given us. Only the bad, while at the same time we adopt a more sustainable pattern of living and we immediately stop destroying everything around us before it is too late. This is not pie in the sky liberalism, this is absolutely necessary to ensure our continued survival.

The point is not to go back take up every facet of ancient indigeneous life. The point is to understand how they lived and survived off the land for thousands of years so that we can move forward with sanity into a realistic and far more healthy life.

Andrew

[AndrewL]

Was it last year that they found the remains of a body in Washington state that was dated to 9000 years ago? The discoverers determined that the man was probably Caucasian due to the structure of the skull and it appeared as if he had died from some sort of attack. He was later deemed a Native American (politically correct gesture) much to the dismay and protest of the archaelogists who discovered him. I wonder why white people in Washington State aren't making land claims?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennewick_Man

Andrew

[BornAlbertan]

I wish there was some law against immigrants winning the lottery

[ScottSA]

Andrew gets to be the first one on my ignore list. I simply cannot abide the unadulterated pap and hogwash he seems to have picked up in some first year university class in aboriginal studies or some other fairy tale class...