The Latest

Apr 16, 2014 / 141 notes
otipemsiw:

assangistan:

MUST SEE
via hick-ups:

A photograph from the 1870’s showing tens of thousands of bison skulls. They were mass slaughtered by the U.S. Army to make room for cattle and force Native American tribes into starvation.


[bolding mine]
Mass slaughter of buffalo and bison took place in Canadian territory as well, and was part of a deliberate campaign to break Indigenous resistance to (further) settler incursions onto Native land and the railroad.  The removal of the buffalo also meant that when it came time to sign treaties, the Canadian government could more or less set any terms it saw fit and Indigenous leaders basically had to comply with them or their people would freeze and starve (that’s if gov officials even bothered to translate the actual terms of the treaty at all).
The “disappearance” of the buffalo is narrativized as part of a larger myth surrounding the “disappearing Indian” whose absence clears the land for the incoming white pioneers to take their place.  The murder, destruction, slaughter of bison and buffalo was a tactic essential to the genocidal colonial project. 
Apr 16, 2014 / 25,071 notes

otipemsiw:

assangistan:

MUST SEE

via hick-ups:

A photograph from the 1870’s showing tens of thousands of bison skulls. They were mass slaughtered by the U.S. Army to make room for cattle and force Native American tribes into starvation.

[bolding mine]

Mass slaughter of buffalo and bison took place in Canadian territory as well, and was part of a deliberate campaign to break Indigenous resistance to (further) settler incursions onto Native land and the railroad.  The removal of the buffalo also meant that when it came time to sign treaties, the Canadian government could more or less set any terms it saw fit and Indigenous leaders basically had to comply with them or their people would freeze and starve (that’s if gov officials even bothered to translate the actual terms of the treaty at all).

The “disappearance” of the buffalo is narrativized as part of a larger myth surrounding the “disappearing Indian” whose absence clears the land for the incoming white pioneers to take their place.  The murder, destruction, slaughter of bison and buffalo was a tactic essential to the genocidal colonial project. 

(via cuntofdoom)

Apr 16, 2014 / 98,966 notes

egobus:

image

me as a teacher tbh

(via dutchster)

Apr 16, 2014 / 17,358 notes

methhomework:

jerkidiot:

hit the showers boys

why is that one guy making out with it

(via d0nn0)

Do people in most of Oceania live in tiny confined spaces? The answer is yes if one believes what certain social scientists are saying. But the idea of smallness is relative; it depends on what is included and excluded in any calculation of size. When those who hail from continents, or islands adjacent to continents-and the vast majority of human beings live in these regions-when they see a Polynesian or Micronesian island they naturally pronounce it small or tiny. Their calculation is based entirely on the extent of the land surfaces they see.

But if we look at the myths, legends, and oral traditions, and the cosmologies of the peoples of Oceania, it becomes evident that they did not conceive of their world in such microscopic proportions. Their universe comprised not only land surfaces, but the surrounding ocean as far as they could traverse and exploit it, the underworld with its fire-controlling and earth-shaking denizens, and the heavens above with their hierarchies of powerful gods and named stars and constellations that people could count on to guide their ways across the seas. Their world was anything but tiny. They thought big and recounted their deeds in epic proportions. One legendary Oceanic athlete was so powerful that during a competition he threw his javelin with such force that it pierced the horizon and disappeared until that night when it was seen streaking across the sky like a meteor. Every now and then it reappears to remind people of the mighty deed. And as far as I’m concerned it is still out there, near Jupiter or somewhere. That was the first rocket ever sent into space. Islanders today still relish exaggerating things out of all proportion. Smallness is a state of mind.

There is a world of difference between viewing the Pacific as “islands in a far sea” and as “a sea of islands.” The first emphasizes dry surfaces in a vast ocean far from the centers of power. Focusing in this way stresses the smallness and remoteness of the islands. The second is a more holistic perspective in which things are seen in the totality of their relationships. I return to this point later. Continental men, namely Europeans, on entering the Pacific after crossing huge expanses of ocean, introduced the view of “islands in a far sea.” From this perspective the islands are tiny, isolated dots in a vast ocean. Later on, continental men-Europeans and Americans-drew imaginary lines across the sea, making the colonial boundaries that confined ocean peoples to tiny spaces for the first time. These boundaries today define the island states and territories of the Pacific. I have just used the term ocean peoples because our ancestors, who had lived in the Pacific for over two thousand years, viewed their world as “a sea of islands” rather than as “islands in the sea.” This may be seen in a common categorization of people, as exemplified in Tonga by the inhabitants of the main, capital, island, who used to refer to their compatriots from the rest of the archipelago not so much as “people from outer islands” as social scientists would say, but as kakai mei tahi or just tahi ‘people from the sea’. This characterization reveals the underlying assumption that the sea is home to such people.

The difference between the two perspectives is reflected in the two terms used for our region: Pacific Islands and Oceania. The first term, Pacific Islands, is the prevailing one used everywhere; it denotes small areas of land sitting atop submerged reefs or seamounts. Hardly any anglophone economist, consultancy expert, government planner, or development banker in the region, uses the term Oceania, perhaps because it sounds grand and somewhat romantic, and may denote something so vast that it would compel them to a drastic review of their perspectives and policies. The French and other Europeans use the term Oceania to an extent that English speakers, apart from the much-maligned anthropologists and a few other sea-struck scholars, have not. It may not be coincidental that Australia, New Zealand, and the United States, anglophone all, have far greater interests in the Pacific and how it is perceived than have the distant European nations.

Our Sea of Islands, Epeli Hau’ofa

this essay is life changing.

(via kawahineaihonua)

(via cuntofdoom)

Apr 16, 2014 / 196 notes
Apr 16, 2014 / 41,932 notes

nonomella:

my chinese students really love english profanity because they dont get in trouble for it

i try to just ignore it so they don’t get a reaction and keep using it

but today during a creative writing exercise, a character was arguing with a dragon, and the kids needed to decide what the character would yell

this one kid raises his hand and calmly submits his suggestion of “f*ck you, you foolish dragon motherf*cker”

i dont know its just 

its difficult not to react to that

(via idfrickleyourfrackle)

Apr 16, 2014 / 116,665 notes

dannerzz:

okay josh

(via idfrickleyourfrackle)

Apr 16, 2014 / 115,460 notes
Apr 16, 2014 / 40,180 notes
Apr 16, 2014 / 38,640 notes

evaunit08:

nosdrinker:

post your best mosh gifs

image

(via niggavevo)

Apr 16, 2014 / 354 notes
Apr 16, 2014 / 68,376 notes

Anonymous asked: You should draw a puma wearing puma shoes.

iguanamouth:

image

image

image

image

image

Apr 16, 2014 / 176,969 notes
Apr 16, 2014 / 53,276 notes

cheredyles:

Look at this!!! LOOK AT THIS! Spread this shit like wildfire! Safe Trek!

(via idfrickleyourfrackle)

ofools:

sweet, both eyes done
Apr 16, 2014 / 1,077 notes

ofools:

sweet, both eyes done

(via idfrickleyourfrackle)