Māori Portraits Offer a Window into New Zealand’s Colonial History

Māori Portraits Offer a Window into New Zealand’s Colonial History @Auckartgal https://t.co/LJqxuf0sEA

— hyperallergic (@hyperallergic) February 13, 2017
Gottfried Lindauer’s portraits present a collective history of colonial New Zealand, capturing individual identities in a time of great social change and upheaval.

Source: Māori Portraits Offer a Window into New Zealand’s Colonial History

Pequot in New Zealand | Signing The Treaty of Waitangi | New Zealand history | Native Land Court

By Lara Trace Hentz

When I was editor of the Pequot Times in Connecticut, we had a visit from a Maori woman descended from Peter George. It was fascinating to meet her!

Here is a look at this interesting and devastating history…

 

Illustration of whalemen by Francis Allyn Olmsted. Gen MSS Vol 151, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Yale University.

A Pequot in New Zealand?

Geomap: Peter George, Mashantucket Pequot Whaler

This story map is about Peter George, an American Indian whaleman, citizen of the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe, and part of a whaling and seafaring dynasty that emerged from the Mashantucket Pequot Reservation in second half of the eighteenth century.

Peter was born in 1805, in the midst of social, political, and religious upheaval, and knew at an early age that there was little opportunity for the Pequots who remained on the tiny reservation in southeastern Connecticut. ,Like his father, uncle, and old brother, Peter went to New London and found work as a mariner. Peter’s seafaring career began by the time he was twenty-one years old and continued until he was nearly fifty.  He was on eight known whaling voyages, bringing him to whaling grounds of the Falkland Islands, sometimes refered to as the ”Brazil Banks,” the south Atlantic, or “East Cape” of New Zealand, and the Pacific Ocean.

Between his voyages, Peter married twice, had children, built a house, and was involved in tribal affairs. Later in his life he was called “Captain” Peter George, an acknowledgement of a life spent at sea. Peter died at his home on the reservation in the summer of 1861 at the age of 56.

Story Chapters

  1. 1. 1805 – Peter George, Son of Peter and Polly
  2. 2. 1819 – “As Long as Wood Grows and the Water Runs”
  3. 3. 1826 – False Accusations
  4. 4. 1827 – The Port of New London
  5. 5. 1832 – Work and Marriage
  6. 6. 1831-1833 – Dirty Work
  7. 7. 1832-1833 – Whaling Off the Coast of New Zealand
  8. 8. 1833-1834 – At Home on Mashantucket
  9. 9. 1834 – Return to the Sea on the Ship Neptune
  10. 10. 1839-1842 – Incidents On A Whaling Voyage
  11. 11. 1848-1852 – Falkland Islands and New Goods from a Deserter
  12. 12. 1849-1852 – The Giants of Patagonia
  13. 13. 1856 – Pequot Land Sale
  14. 14. 1857 – Suing the Overseer for Tribal Membership
  15. 15. 1861 – Peter’s Death
  16. 16. 1913 – Peter’s Legacy

Printable Version

Peter George, Mashantucket Pequot Whaler

Chapter 1

Peter George, Son of Peter and Polly

1805; Mashantucket, CT

In 1805, Polly Apes George, the wife of Peter George, gave birth to their second son, Peter. At the time of young Peter’s birth, several Pequot families had just finished their move to Brothertown, New York as part of a religious migration. Peter’s father (also Peter) and uncle, Benjamin George, who were considered among the “Cheifs and Councellors” of the Pequot Tribe, remained at Mashantucket with their families.  Providing for their families was challenging as reservation lands continued to shrink.  There were opportunities off the reservation and most Pequot men, including elder Peter and Benjamin, went to New London to find work as mariners.

Chapter 2

“As Long as Wood Grows and the Water Runs”

1819; Old State House, Hartford, CT

After several Pequot leaders removed to Brothertown, the State of Connecticut appointed overseers began to manage the affairs of the tribe, as Indian people were widely viewed by whites as unable to do so.  Though in practice earlier, the system was formalized in 1821.  These men were required to manage the rent of tribal land, the accounting of provisons and other necessities allocated to tribal members, and to maintain a list of tribal member names.  Problems with the white overseers at Mashantucket led to a string of petitions by members of the Pequot Tribe to remove corrupt and opportunistic men as their “guardians” and replace them with more honorable people.

 

Chapter 3

False Accusations

1826; New London, CT – Courthouse

While his brother Peleg was away (possibly at sea), Peter was accused of an adulterous relationship with his brother’s wife, Lucretia.  The complaint was brought by a member of one of the families renting Pequot land.  A warrant was issued and Peter was arrested and brought before the local justice of the peace.  Several in the Pequot communicty served as witnesses in the case and Peter was eventually found “Not Guilty in manner and Form as is alleged.”  It is unclear what precipitated this false accusation, but many of the overseers and neighbors of the Pequot engaged in retaliatory activities following Pequot complaints to the General Assembly.  In one instance, an outgoing overseer provided a list of people in the tribe and all members of the Goerge family were excluded.

Chapter 4

The Port of New London

1827; New London, CT Waterfrong

New London’s whaling fleet grew rapidly during the 1820’s and signing on board of a whaler meant good pay for a successful voyage.  Peter was already considered a “seaman” by the time he departed for his first known whaling voyage in October 1827 aboard the ship Friends.  He was about 5’7 1/2″ tall and identified by various customs officals as “dark,” “yellow,” and “Indian.”  Working on a whaler was physically demanding.  In port, preparation involved loading ballast and stocking the ship with supplies for the hunt as well as the food and water necessary for long periods of time at sea.  At sea, men climbed rigging to raise and lower sails, maintaining and repairing sails, ropes, and deck areas.  Although there is no record of Peter’s official position, we know from records that his brother was a cooper. Might Peter have also held this position?

The image above shows a scrimshawed sperm whale tooth, carved with image of the ship Friends.  Script below sea reads: “Friends of New London Chaseing Whales.”

 

Chapter 5

Work and Marriage

1832; “North Groton” / Ledyard

On May 2, 1832, Peter George married Lucy Fagins, an Eastern Pequot from North Stonington.  On that same day he boarded the ship Palladium of New London, bound for the East Cape (New Zealand).  This situation was a typical one for whaling wives and families as fathers, husbands, brothers and sons often left home for months and even years.

Chapter 6

Dirty Work

1831-1833; Off the Coast of New Zealand

Although we do not know exactly what Peter’s position was on the ship Palladium, we do know that whaling was dangerous and dirty work.  Peter most likely joined the rest of the crew in small whaleboats like the model pictured. The crew would chase the whale and use a harpoon and killing lance to capture and eventually kill it.  The whale would then be towed back to the ship, where it was “cut in” and “tried out.”  The oil rentered from the whale was an importnant source of lighting in the 19th Century.

Chapter 7

Whaling Off the Coast of New Zealand

1832-1833; Off the Coast of New Zealand

This was Peter’s second voyage on the Palladium as it returned to the East Cape whaling grounds off the coast of New Zealand.  Peter left New London this time with a familiar face, that of his cousin Solomon Apes.  Only a few vessels had noted this particular destination prior to the Palladium visits.  This time period coincided with increased European and American interaction with and settlement amongst the Maori tribes of New Zealand.  By 1840, the Treaty of Waitangi (New Zealand’s founding document) had been crafted, which quickly resulted in escalating tension over land rights.

The year before the treaty was signed, Elisha Apes (Solomon’s brother), a crew member of the New London whaler Ann Maria, mutinied off the coast of New Zealand over the captain’s abuse of the ship’s boy.  Eventually, an agreement was made and Apes put ashore at Port Otago.  Soon after, he married a local Ngai Tahu woman and they had many children. Apes and his children were active in Maori land claims and some were well known sheep shearers and shore whalers. Most of Apes’ decendants remain in New Zealand to this day.

Apes never left New Zealand, but did his whaling relatives ever visit?

Chapter 8

At Home on Mashantucket

1833-1834; Off Shewville Road, Mashantucket, CT

Peter remained at Mashantucket for nearly two and a half years and was noted in a December 1833 tribal census — “age 28, part white.”  During his stay, he planned to build a house, but for unknown reasons, he sold the timber intended for that purpose.  Eventually, in early 1834, the tribal overseer commissioned a house to be built for Peter in the northwestern part of the Mashantucket Pequot Reservation.

Chapter 9

Return to the Sea on the Ship Neptune

1834; South Atlantic Ocean

In June 1834, Peter returned to sea – fittingly – aboard the ship Neptune of New London on a whaling voyage to the South Atlantic.  Peter’s cousin, Elisha Apes, as well as Isaac Hazard (a Narragansett Indian) and Thomas Smith (a Mohegan Indian) were also aboard the nearly two-year voyage.  Soon after his departure, a daughter, Lucy Ann George was born.

Chapter 10

Incidents On A Whaling Voyage

1839-1842; Galapagos Islands

By age 34, Peter was a seasoned whaleman having been on at least five whaling voyages.  For eight years, he would only be on the land between voyages for a total of thirteen months.  It is clear that the sea had become home.  During this time, in October 1839, he joined the crew of the bark ship North America of New London along with George Cotrell (also Mashantucket Pequot), and John Uncas (a Mohegan).  Headed to the Pacific Ocean, the voyage would last for two and a half years.

On this voyage was a young Yale graduate, Francis Allyn Olmsted – a passenger and observer- on his way to a warmer Pacific climate to relieve a chronic illness.  Olmstead kept a journal on board that he later published in 1841 as “Incidents on a Whaling Voyage.”

Peter and his crewmates would have seen or participated in nearly everything that Olmsted recorded and illustrated, including the sea chanties Ho, Ho, and Up She Rises and Nancy Fanana.  (To hear these songs, look for the two chanties on side bar, under Related Resources.)

Chapter 11

Falkland Islands and New Goods from a Deserter

1848-1852; Falkland Islands

On November 3, 1848, Peter George was among the crew of the ship Hudson with his nephew, Amos W. George, and Peter Babcock (Mashantucket Pequot), as it departed Mystic.  Marine journals report that the Hudson was bound for the Falkland Islands on a whaling voyage.  Though no crew list or logbook has been located for this voyage, other documents inform us of events that took place on board the vessel.

A little more than a year into the voyage, one of the crewmembers deserted the vessel, leaving behind all of his belongings.  Subsequently, an auction of his possessions was conducted and a list created as “An Account of Articles Sold At Auction Belonging to J.M. Oat – Found After his Disertion, December 30th 1849.”  The items purchased by Peter George were one duck frock and a dictionary; by Amos George, one pair duck pants, one pair of boots, one flint, and a lot of books and tracts; by Peter Babcock, one vest, one pair of duck pants, one flannel shirt, twenty four heads of tobacco and one bottle.

Chapter 12

The Giants of Patagonia

1849-1852; Puerto San Julian, Argentina

Later in the voyage, while at “Port Santa Cruz” (now Puerto San Julian, Santa Cruz Province, Argentina) with its “tender,” schooner Washington, the ship Hudson welcomed aboard for nearly a month, Benjamin F. Bourne.  Bourne, who was a mate aboard the New Bedford schooner John Allyne earlier in 1849, had just escaped 97 days of captivity with the Indians of Patagonia.  The accounts he shared with the crew of the Hudson soon made it into wider newspaper circulation around the Atlantic.  His account was such a sensation that in 1853, he published a book about his experiences called The Giants of Patagonia.

This was Peter’s last confirmed voyage.  He may have been on part of another voyage on the ship Kensington out of New Bedford, and his absence between May 1853 and January 1855, might suggest such a scenario.  He was also on town expense in Groton for unknown reasons, so he may have taken ill after his return on the Hudson.

Chapter 13

Pequot Land Sale

1856; Mashantucket, CT

In 1855, the Connecticut General Assembly appointed a committee to investigate the condition of the “Pequot Indians of Ledyard.”  They reported that there were but thirteen tribal members, living in five houses dispersed across some 900 acres:  mostly females – “some quite aged” while others “had chosen Negroes for companions.”

The committee reported that “it is not presumption to suppose, judging from the past, that they will soon become extinct” and recommended that some 700 acres of Mashantucket be surveyed, subdivided, and sold at public auction, with the proceeds going into a fund for tribal support.  The remaining 179 acres would be designated as a “reservation for the use and benefit of Indians.”  The General Assembly passed an act in June 1855, authorizing the land sale.  Pequots, including “Capt. Peter George,” twice submitted a petition to the General Assembly protesting Connecticut’s illegal sale of tribal land.

Chapter 14

Suing the Overseer for Tribal Membership

1857; Courthouse, New London, CT

After the Pequot Land Sale, some tribal families were denied rights as citizens of Mashantucket and prevented from accessing tribal resources.  Outraged, tribal members sued the overseer in April 1857 for the acknowledgement of their rights.  Peter George, his sister Sally George Babcock, and her children were among the plantiffs.  Following testimony in which they provided a genealogical history of their family, the New London Superior Court resolved the suit in their favor.

This was significant, as access to tribal resources mattered more than ever.  Now in his 50s, Peter was aging, and after many years at sea, he had returned to the land.  Living on the land and no longer earning a seaman’s lay must have been somewhat foreign to Peter.  He was now cohabitating with another Pequot, Caroline Wheeler, and after the court case, began to recieve the benefits of tribal resources including access to cash for necessities, meat, potatoes, and dairy products in the winter, and seed corn, beans, and guano for fertilizer in the spring for planting.  Clothing, supplies and shoes were also provided.

Chapter 15

Peter’s Death

1861; Tribal Cemetery, Mashantucket, CT

At the outbreak of the Civil War in early 1861, many Pequots were still whaling in the Pacific Ocean.  At home, Peter was sick.  On Febrary 6th, a doctor went to the reservation “for attendance and medicine for Peter George.”  In late May, the tribal overseer visited him.  By August 4th, Peter died.  He was 56 years old.  Caroline’s daughter, Jane Wheeler, went “to Norwich after Coffin for Peter and notifying friends” of his death.  Though no marked stone identifies his burial location, Peter was likely interred at the tribal burying ground known as “Peter’s Hill Cemetery.”

Chapter 16

Peter’s Legacy

1913; Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History

In 1913, Yale Peabody Museum anthropologist, George Grant MacCurdy, visited the Pequots at Mashantucket.  While there, he purchased from Jane Wheeler a whalebone handled knife.  Who made this knife?  Did Jane inherit the knife from her mother and Peter?  Did it come from another Pequot whaleman?  What other objects did Pequot whalemen like Peter leave behind?

Perhaps the whalebone handled knife went along with stories like this:

“My grandmother [Elizabeth George Plouffe] would tell us stories about how Pequots at one time were whalers, and this was even during the time the reservation was there and they used to come down here to Mystic and they used to go aboard the old whaling ships, like the Charles W. Morgan . . . and they would go out to sea.  Sometimes they would be gone for three, six months and sometimes a year at a time.  And then the Pequots would come back and they would (in the area after they’d finished their whaling voyage and then come back to the reservation), they would go back to the house, because it was the center of activity.  And in those days they called the old house “the beehive.”  And they would come back with their stories, and my grandmother said she could remember some of these stories from the time when she was a child, that her mother [Martha Hoxie] used to tell her because her mother was a child at that time.  Martha Hoxie used to tell my grandmother how that when she was a kid when the men would come back from the whaling voyages and sometimes, well, oftentimes they’d bring back their bottles with ’em, and they would sit around jawing about their experiences, they’d get a little tipsy.  And they’d get started getting a little loud and my great-grandmother, Martha Hoxie, would get a little nervous because she was a kid at the time, about their being loud and whatnot and she would run underneath her mother’s [Jane Wheeler] hoop skirt and hide.  That was her place of refuge.” – Richard A. “Skip” Hayward, 1995

Related Resources

Historical Background:  The Treaty of Waitangi (Māori: Tiriti o Waitangi) is a treaty first signed on 6 February 1840 by representatives of the British Crown and various Māori chiefs from the North Island of New Zealand. It resulted in the declaration of British sovereignty over New Zealand by Lieutenant Governor William Hobson in May 1840.

Interactive reproduction of the 1840 Waikato-Manukau copy of the Treaty of Waitangi

SEE: Waikato-Manukau treaty copy | NZHistory, New Zealand history online

Those who explained the treaty to Māori generally stressed the advantages of bringing British settlers under the control of the Crown, which some chiefs had been asking for since 1831. They played down the impact of the British acquisition of sovereignty and its likely consequences for Māori. Missionary assurances that the treaty would be of benefit to Māori probably helped to overcome the caution of many chiefs. Some chiefs, especially in Northland, saw the treaty as a sacred bond or covenant directly between themselves and Queen Victoria. Many who signed were devout Christians who made no distinction between the Crown and the teachings of Christianity. Many Māori had clear expectations of how they would benefit.  A sharing of authority would enhance chiefly mana. The country would be protected from acquisition by other foreign powers. A kawana (governor) would control Europeans, especially those buying land, who were causing trouble in some areas. The treaty would bring settlement, and with it both more markets for essential Māori services and desired trade goods.

Some chiefs realised that change was inevitable. The clock could not be turned back; the treaty was a way into the future.

Source: Signing the treaty – Treaty signatories and signing locations | NZHistory, New Zealand history online

Native Land Court created, 30 October 1865

Native Land Court at Ahipara (Alexander Turnbull Library, 1/2-026780; F)

 

The Native Land Court was one of the key products of the 1865 Native Lands Act. It provided for the conversion of traditional communal landholdings into individual titles, making it easier for Pākehā to purchase Māori land.

Coming little more than a year after the Waikato War, this legislation was to achieve what many believed had not been accomplished on the battlefield – acquiring the land necessary to satisfy an insatiable settler appetite. The operations of the Land Court affected Māori more than those of any other colonial institution. When old rivalries were played out in court, the ultimate beneficiaries were Pākehā.  Historian Judith Binney described the Native Lands Act as an ‘act of war’.

The Court was required to name no more than 10 owners, regardless of the size of a block.  All other tribal members were effectively dispossessed.  The newly designated owners held their lands individually, not communally as part of (or trustees for) a tribal group.  They could manage it, and sell it, as individuals and for their own benefit.

The first chief judge of the Court, Francis Fenton, maintained that judgements could only be based on evidence before the Court – so all claimants had to attend, whether they wanted to or not. Many Māori racked up large legal bills as a consequence. Those coming from out of town also faced the costs of food and accommodation. Lawyers, shopkeepers, surveyors and the like granted Māori credit while they awaited the outcome of their case. These expenses forced many Māori to sell the land they had been defending in order to settle their debts.

This process of alienating Māori land concerned some settler politicians. Former Attorney-General Henry Sewell had protested against the government’s policy of confiscating the land of Māori deemed to be ‘in rebellion’. Back in office in 1865, he asserted that the Native Land Court was designed to:

destroy if possible, the principle of communism which ran through the whole of their institutions, upon which their social system was based, and which stood as a barrier in the way of all attempts to amalgamate the Native race into our own social and political system.

Māori landholdings declined dramatically in the late 19th century. Between 1870 and 1892, 2 million ha of Māori land was transferred to Pākehā ownership. Whereas at the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 Māori owned almost all of the North Island, by 1892 they owned little more than a third, and a quarter of this was leased to Pākehā. Another 1.2 million ha of Māori land would be sold by 1900.

Source

I am also sharing another post of Maori photos… and an art exhibit about this.

Bonkers for BUNKERS: Doomsday Prep for the Super-Rich | Paraguay Compounds?

The swimming pool at Larry Hall’s Survival Condo Project. These days, when North Korea tests a bomb, Hall can expect an uptick in phone inquiries about space in the complex.

(New Yorker excerpt) …On a cool evening in early November, I rented a car in Wichita, Kansas, and drove north from the city through slanting sunlight, across the suburbs and out beyond the last shopping center, where the horizon settles into farmland. After a couple of hours, just before the town of Concordia, I headed west, down a dirt track flanked by corn and soybean fields, winding through darkness until my lights settled on a large steel gate. A guard, dressed in camouflage, held a semiautomatic rifle.

He ushered me through, and, in the darkness, I could see the outline of a vast concrete dome, with a metal blast door partly ajar. I was greeted by Larry Hall, the C.E.O. of the Survival Condo Project, a fifteen-story luxury apartment complex built in an underground Atlas missile silo. The facility housed a nuclear warhead from 1961 to 1965, when it was decommissioned. At a site conceived for the Soviet nuclear threat, Hall has erected a defense against the fears of a new era. “It’s true relaxation for the ultra-wealthy,” he said. “They can come out here, they know there are armed guards outside. The kids can run around.”

We stopped in a condo. Nine-foot ceilings, Wolf range, gas fireplace. “This guy wanted to have a fireplace from his home state”—Connecticut—“so he shipped me the granite,” Hall said. Another owner, with a home in Bermuda, ordered the walls of his bunker-condo painted in island pastels—orange, green, yellow—but, in close quarters, he found it oppressive. His decorator had to come fix it.

That night, I slept in a guest room appointed with a wet bar and handsome wood cabinets, but no video windows. It was eerily silent, and felt like sleeping in a well-furnished submarine.

A dental chair in the Survival Condo Project’s “medical wing,” which also contains a hospital bed and a procedure table. Among the residents, Hall said, “we’ve got two doctors and a dentist.”
An armed guard stands at the entrance of the Survival Condo Project, a former missile silo north of Wichita, Kansas, that has been converted into luxury apartments for people worried about the crackup of civilization.

In the first seven days after Donald Trump’s election, 13,401 Americans registered with New Zealand’s immigration authorities, the first official step toward seeking residency—more than seventeen times the usual rate.  The New Zealand Herald reported the surge beneath the headline “Trump Apocalypse.”

YOU MUST READ: Doomsday Prep for the Super-Rich – The New Yorker

Texas’s Trident Lakes is the latest entry in a booming market for luxury bunkers.

Source: The Luxury Doomsday Bunkers of Texas’s Trident Lakes – The Atlantic

AND THIS:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“…We are clearly living in dangerous and changing times that the uninformed will never understand until the threats are evident.  We cannot predict, but we can prepare,’ the company said in a statement to MailOnline. The biggest facility is in Germany – Europa One – and is ‘one of the most fortified and massive underground survival shelters on Earth, deep below a limestone mountain’ and ‘safely secured from the general public, behind sealed and secured walls, gates and blast doors’.

…Journalist Lynn Parramore visited the facility in Indiana, US – and reported the gigantic bunker was like walking into a hotel, describing it as the ‘Ritz Carlton of doomsday shelters’. The cheapest of the bunkers will set you back $35,000, while the most delux costs up to $3 million.  The state of the art facilities also include a hospital, and armed guards on duty to keep the 99 percent from breaking into the hideaway.  To avoid a Lord of the Flies scenario, the designers have also implemented a handbook that outlines by laws for the bunkered community….” (Top photo of Europa)

READ: World’s super-rich are buying luxury underground bunkers to avoid natural disasters | Daily Mail Online

Freedom anywhere in the World? Check out Turkey File: Alan’s brilliant blog

By LT

I have been wanting to post about bunkers a long time.  My good blog buddy Dan who blogs at TUBULARSOCK (see my interview) has his own virtual bunker tour.  It got me thinking.

I want to let you all know I’m NOT going bonkers for bunkers. Yet it haunts my sleep. I would not be any good in one… Claustrophobic? That would be me.

But a compound might work! Above-ground would be good, right?!

Many years ago, my aunt in Aurora Illinois told me she’d heard that the BUSH dynasty had a ranch aka compound in Paraguay, next door to the late Rev. Sun Myung Moon (former Head of the Moonies). I’d heard the southern hemisphere would be best to relocate on the globe if our planet took a big revolving turn.

Why Paraguay?  Here’s some fun facts about Paraguay.

Then it’s reported everywhere but here in America:

Bush Family Buy Up Guarani Aquifer | Watching America

Jun 18, 2015 – In 2005 and 2006, during the dynastic presidency of George W. Bush, the Bush family acquired a total of 121,407 hectares in Chaco, Paraguay, …

Former President George H.W. Bush’s Family Bought 300,000 Acres on South America’s and World’s Largest Aquifer, Acuifero Guaraní

… astonishingly large land purchases (298,840 acres, to be exact) by the Bush family in 2005 and 2006.  In 2006, while on a trip to Paraguay for the United Nation’s children’s group UNICEF, Jenna Bush (daughter of former President George W. Bush and granddaughter of former President George H.W. Bush) reportedly bought 98,840 acres of land in Chaco, Paraguay, near the Triple Frontier (Bolivia, Brazil, and Paraguay). This land is said to be near the 200,000 acres purchased by her grandfather, George H.W. Bush, in 2005.

So the Bush people want their compound to be above “WATER” which some might call the new “gold.” What? Are they planning to sell water to Texas or to the world?

WAIT! Didn’t the Nazis relocate to South America?… “…Paraguay…where Simon Weisenthal famously hunted down Nazi fugitives?  The story gets wierder….”

So we’ve got panic in the rich who are relocating to Paraguay and New Zealand or buying bunkers in Kansas, Texas and Indiana plus the chaos that it’s getting even weirder with Trump at the helm.  Some guy has his helicopter gassed, ready to evacuate?

… the elite are prepping and have been for years.

Last month Eric Trump took a business trip to Uruguay (costing us taxpayers almost $100,000. The US State Dept. paid for the hotel bills.)

What do they know that we don’t?

Adoption Experiment: Breaking the Spirit

The modern process of breaking the spirit of an expectant mother for the purpose of stealing her infant, reminds me of that old film taken by Hitler’s doctors of their own medical experiments, whereby they left a parent locked alone in a room with their baby, but without food or drink. They watched and filmed through a one-way mirror as the adult victim unraveled. It only took a couple of days for the adults to crack completely. In the same way a vulnerable expectant woman is easy pickings for the public and its press. The North American press behaves just like Hitler’s doctors, carrying out goulash experiments on defenseless victim mothers, who are unable to fight back or protect themselves. The North American press appears to be in love with adoption. Or maybe in love with the wash of money always associated with slavery?  -Joss Shawyer, Death by Adoption

3eee0-nurse-ocalBy Lara/Trace

I just watched a movie THE KILLING ROOM about human experimentation (torture) and how MK Ultra was a top-secret government program that manipulated and murdered unsuspecting men and women civilians who thought they’d earn a few easy bucks by being a lab rat for a few hours. Their psychological destruction reminded me of what Hitler did, mentioned above by adoption activist and author Joss Shawyer.

If governments in the world can conduct this kind of experiment, breaking the spirit of innocent unsuspecting people, they can literally do anything and get away with it. They will deny the experiment as they are trained to be cunning manipulators. Their programs are kept sealed and secret.

For me, I imagined I was so courageous to write my memoir, only to find out that something is still burning in me, so much that I needed to take a break from writing to just sit and think a spell, etc.  Ten years ago writing my memoir I actually wrote the words: “Adoption is an experiment (referring to torture).” How? Adoptees like me are forced to live an illusion our entire life and accept our new identity as truth. The Stockholm Syndrome happens when we accept our adoption (abductions) and defend the adopters and what they did.   Adoption was a cunning way to break our spirit and split us into pieces, aka Split Feathers.

It’s disturbing to read how adoptive parents are still counting on Stockholm Syndrome to keep adoptees a grateful bunch by defending adoption, even defending adoptive parents.  I cringe at the slick propaganda of the happy “well-adjusted” adoptee in the mainstream press, on adoptive parents blogs and in too many movies.  Apparently the Adoption Police silenced adoptees successfully, forcing us into that gratitude attitude and complacency expected of us, having been “saved” by adoption.

I just returned from Ontario where my co-editor and author Patricia Busbee met two contributor-adoptees who wrote in Two Worlds and we gave a panel presentation on the effects of adoption. We told our stories.  We cried openly.  Earlier in the day, we spoke to college students who read the anthology Two Worlds and heard their reactions: they had no idea this happened to First Nations and American Indian adoptees and were not taught anything about this in any school or in any history class.

One of the adoptees Michael who spoke on our panel, looked around the room, and said “I know where 5 percent of adoptees are…where are the other 95%?”  Canada’s 60s Scoop is said to have removed 20,000+ babies and children from their First Nations families.  I know that many adoptees felt alone, isolated, tortured, and some even committed suicide.

It was a secret that the US and Canadian governments used adoption as a tool of cultural genocide, to manipulate our minds as adoptees, to erase our ancestry, to ultimately destroy our connection to our tribes and relatives and remove us from tribal rolls. They sealed our files, that way we’d never know.

Researching Stockholm Syndrome, I found the website by adoption activist Joss Shawyer. She is so articulate, and passionate, I want to share some of her writing here from 2004:

We are mothers who lost our babies to the adoption industry in both closed adoptions and “open” adoptions. We were exiled from our babies NOT because we were proven unfit, but because we were vulnerable (young, single, sick, or poor), and lied-to and coerced by social workers, doctors, lawyers, maternity homes, and churches: brokers that made money from selling our babies to a market driven by “consumer” demand.  Silenced for decades by shame and guilt, we suffered alone with our grief, believing we were the only ones. Now we find we are not alone – there are many others of us who did not surrender by choice. And if there is only one option, there is not a choice. Reunited with our children, we now see first-hand the pain that adoption caused them.  They told us we’d forget. They told us to “get over it,” “put it behind us,” and “get on with our lives.” They tell our children we “gave them away.


On Amazon: REVIEW OF DEATH BY ADOPTION

The Truth A Customer [2004]

Finally — finally after years of seeing this book referenced I own a copy. And it was worth the search. Shawyer’s honest and compassionate look at adoption through the eyes of an astute, woman-friendly observer, is a stunner.
Social workers and doctors made a mistake when they targeted Shawyer and her twin babies for adoption fodder.  She was not frightened by these “adoption police” who have destroyed millions and millions of perfectly good real families in the last 50+ years.  Shawyer resisted their date-rape style abuse.  She describes vividly how the mother targeted for adoption keeps saying “no” to the suggestion of adoption for her child yet the social workers and doctors who have singled her out as fair game keep saying “yes.”  Ultimately, they simply whisk away the newborn for baby-crazed infertiles and tell the mother who complains that it is her fault that she didn’t stop them.  When this trickery was tried on Shawyer, she found the shaming and cult-like brainwashing tactics ludicrous, was able to fight off the attacks, and walked out of the hospital with her babies as God intended.
Ever since, she has stood up for mothers and their precious babies.  She documents well the terrible suffering of adoption’s victims, the unresolvable grief and post-truamatic stress disorder–ruined lives.  After writing Death by Adoption, Shawyer was instrumental in the dismantling of the mean and shameful practice in New Zealand.
I was shocked to look in the front of Death By Adoption and see it was written 25 years ago. One suspects that Shawyer must be dismayed that after all these years with the horrors of adoption well-documented, it seems to be business as usual in the US for these appalling human rights violations.

As someone who was rejected by my mother when I attempted reunion, I believe my mother must have suffered the same Stockholm Syndrome I had. We were supposed to forget and move forward as if nothing happened…. Adoption broke her spirit too.  Adoption really was an experiment… Lara/Trace

What you should know: Doctrine of Discovery

Nederlands: Paus Nicolas V oil on panel 1612-1616
Nederlands: Paus Nicolas V oil on panel 1612-1616 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Volume 2, Issue #11, American Logo newsletter by Bill Annett

We are not descended from men who kept silent.  -Edward R. Murrow

Ask an average American (or Canadian): “What is the Doctrine of Discovery?” You’re likely to get a blank stare, an uncomfortable pause, the changing of the conversation to politics or rock stars, or perhaps the stuttered response: “You mean like Dr. Oz?”

And yet the DoD, as it is referred to by academics, unsuccessful politicians, native people and others on the receiving end, is a basic legal assumption, born of Holy Writ and therefore both sanctified and legal, 500 years ago, when the sun rotated around the European world and the earth was flat. Was it just a naïve part of that past, that ignorant and illiterate peasant flotsam of Western Europe, and now long forgotten?

Hell, no. That incredible, inhuman law, mindset and modus operandiis still alive and well, solidly embedded in the ubiquitous practice of governing law. And where? Today, it dominates, subtly but pervasively as a daily fact of life, over 1.5 million people in Canada, three million in the U.S., six million in Mexico and a massive population in the rest of the Hemisphere, as well as in Australia, New Zealand and large swatches of Southeast Asia and Oceania. Perhaps 400 million people in total, more than the entire U.S. population.

What is it and how did it get its start?

Pope Nicholas V, on the 18th of June, 1452, stamped his bulla, or papal seal, on the bottom of a document, a papal bull known as Dum Diversas. Dumb indeed, but with enormous ramifications.

Actually, Pope Nicholas V was a builder, and like Hitler’s autobahns in  the Thirties, he repaired infrastructure such as aqueducts destroyed during the collapse of the Roman Empire. That construction, as a matter of  fact, was analogous to the Roman Church’s succeeding the Roman Empire as the confluence and tributary conveying the brutality of empire masquerading as civility and Christian humanism.

But Nicholas is best remembered for his political balancing act between the Portuguese king and the threat of the Ottoman Empire. One element was the papal bull Dum Diversas, which granted Portugal  “full and free power”:

 to invade, search out, capture, and subjugate the Saracens and pagans and any other unbelievers and enemies of Christ wherever they may be… and to reduce their persons into perpetual slavery.

A follow-up document, Romanus Pontifex, allowed that same empire to seize for itself the lands of any non-Christians they encountered. The Doctrine of Discovery was established.

After Columbus’s “discovered”  the New World, (although indigenous people had practised Occupy Turtle Island for some 10,000 years) Pope Alexander VI in 1493 issued another bit of papal bull known as Inter Caetera, commanding Spain

to instruct the aforesaid inhabitants and residents and dwellers therein in the Catholic faith, and train them in good morals…”

opening the way for Catholic missions to conquer everything and anybody in the new world, except for the newly arrived Portuguese.

England quickly got into the act four years later, when King Henry VII granted John Cabot rights to possess all lands in the New World not already claimed by Portugal and Spain. In return, John Cabot, like an obedient Mafia soldier, wet the beak of his king with 20% of the total take. All of which not only legitimized but commanded the enslavement, pillaging and killing of millions of indigenous peoples all over the world. The toll (as we palefaces like to journalize) so far for the Western Hemisphere alone totals around 100 million people. According to one academic, (Anthony Hall of the University of Lethbridge) “the greatest re-engineering of a civilization in history.”

Does the DoD still live? One early Supreme Court case, Johnson v. M’Intosh in 1823, according to Robert Miller,* resolved a tribal land dispute, ruling that Native American land is inalienable. They cited the Doctrine of Discovery, which stated that Christian Europeans owned all land explored and claimed, and in any event, only the federal government could buy land occupied by Native Americans, meaning that the federal government could therefore pretty much name its own price.

Supreme Court cases as recent as 1973 and 1990 have used the Doctrine of Discovery to delimit native rights to prosecute any individuals on their lands for crimes. In 2005, certain tribes were denied sovereignty and the ability to repurchase traditional land previously held.

Apparently, Euro-Americans possessed the only valid religions, civilizations, governments, laws, and cultures, and Providence intended these people and their institutions to dominate the North American continent. The human, governmental, and property rights of Native Americans were almost totally disregarded as Discovery and then Manifest Destiny directed the United States’ expansion. Under Manifest Destiny it was ‘clear’ that God wanted Indians to get out of the way of American progress.”

In other words, a significant part of  American political practice blindly follows the Doctrine of Discovery, that ancient tossing off of political intervention by the Roman church we all accept whether we want to or not. (It’s part of of the Holy Church’s Concordat with all civilized nations.) American acceptance of this Doctrine is a modern world atrocity that parallels a universe of conflicting opinion, often denied, pernicious in its global fact. Slavery, war, genocide are all facts that flow from this medieval nonsense. It defined the treatment of the world’s indigenous people that remains today in all but the most enlightened societies. It has even – in a minor key – warped our confusion about immigration, notably the migration of indigenous peoples in the Americas, many of whom are in constant flux (perennially fluxed) and on the move because U.S. policy vis-a-vis Latin America has delimited economic opportunity.

Professor Miller has delineated and compared the Doctrine’s effects as well as practice in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, England, New Zealand, Portugal, Spain and (of course) the United States.

*The International Law of Colonialism: A Comparative Analysis, Robett J. Miller, Lewis & Clark Law Review

Today’s Spotlight: Atami Village, New Zealand

By John Robb
Today’s resilient community in the spotlight is Atamai Village. It’s a new, semi-rural developed community located in the northern part of New Zealand’s South Island. Here’s a well done video they made. (please watch!)
 
Atamai Village Area

What We Can Learn From Atamai

So, what can we learn from Atamai? Atamai has done a couple of things that make them interesting to us:

  • A village approach and vision.
  • An incubator for promoting local business development.
  • A way to reduce transportation expenses.

The Village Approach

Here’s an example of how they describe themselves (the best part is the bullet list at the bottom). It’s an interesting way to think about resilient communities that departs from intentional/communal, communal, or strictly commercial approaches.

A village is a settlement where people move from the privacy and separateness of their individual homes and families to their daily exchanges with others – all within the village and its environs. These are exchanges for basic needs such as food and other goods, social exchanges of support and mutual interest, cultural exchanges for fun and enjoyment, exchanges where projects are planned and carried out with others, a place where goods and services are exchanged to the benefit of both parties.

Village life is filled with opportunities for exchanges with a deeper texture, where the depth and breadth of relationships is enriching at many levels; where the joys and tribulations of a full life are felt and shared. Village life involves a sense of place and connectedness – to the land and the people – where relationships to both are rich and mutually sustaining.

A village operates on a human scale:

  • where people know the land and each other
  • where that knowledge translates into caring and support for both
  • where people pay attention to the local because they depend on it for their well-being
  • where there is a connection to the broader world, but where that connection is based on fair exchange rather than dependency.

Local Business Incubation

Another goal of Atamai is to foster the development of local work as a supplement to the global telecommuters that are moving there. The community’s goal is to enable 60% of the residents to obtain their livelihoods in the community or the immediate environs.

To accomplish this, they built a business incubator to grow local businesses, many of which will get their start supplying the community with products and services. Here’s a list of the services the community is offering via their incubator:

  • Agricultural land
  • Infrastructure
  • Some machinery available
  • Internet access
  • Accounting help
  • Website design
  • Shared marketing efforts
  • Shared sales channels
  • A ready market within the village

Reduced Transportation

One of the goals of Atamai is to reduce the vulnerability of the community’s residents to ever increasing gasoline prices and potentially limited future availability.

That’s smart. For example, in the US we already squander 5.3% of our income on gasoline and each family bears the expense of owning and insuring almost 2 cars. Atamai’s goal is to reduce gasoline expense to 1/5 of current needs and one vehicle for every four families (or 1/8 of the current vehicle expense).

Here’s how they are doing it:

  • Help people find local work and make global telecommutes easy.
  • Go car free. Atamai’s transportation grid is limited to pedestrians, bicycles, and electric scooters (vehicles can gain entry in an emergency).
  • Share transportation needs. A community run car share service and mini-bus to the nearby town means that residents might be able to ditch car ownership, and the expenses it entails, entirely.

Your always interested in new ways to improve our future guide, JOHN ROBB

I am so impressed with this village and imagine an entire planet so enterprising and sustainable… Lara/Trace