[Agnes Heep]

Thats why I want to wretch when either some self-important Indian 'spokesman/woman' or environmentral wacko uses/attaches the term "American Indian" synonymously with "higher environmental conciousness" implying that the 'noble savage' was somehow better.

Not that the Indians didn't have their good points, but they were most definitely not the "noble savages" the PC crowd and the Indian activists make them out to be. For my part, I'm fed up with that type, just as I'm fed up with gay activism!

[DoctorMichael]

We ALL want to romanticize about things. I just try NOT to let my imagination over-ride my rational side.

....... Not that the Indians didn't have their good points ........

I will freely admit that I would love to have been one of the mountain men like Jim Bridger in the 1820-50's (even before the first settlers started migrating out there). There IS something alluring about America during that time period for me.

;-)

[El Gato]

Not that the Indians didn't have their good points, but they were most definitely not the "noble savages" the PC crowd and the Indian activists make them out to be

And to make blanket statements about how "Indians" were before the Europeans came is pretty silly. There was lots of variation. From near stone age hunter gathers, to agriculuralists. From very loose tribes made up of still smaller family groups, to large Confederacies with governmental structures nearly as sophisiticated as anything in Europe.

The one thing they had in common is that they never had an industrial revolution, and were pretty low tech.