People, please remember that current estimates of the number of CIVILIAN deaths in the Middle East range from about 150,000 to OVER 500,000. Yeah, this is so-called "collateral damage", but the point is that it IS very hypocritical for one group to cast stones on another if the other group is guilty, also.
There are only a few groups that have NOT been responsible for mass killing at one time or another. The only ones that come to mind are the pacifist Amish, Quakers and Mennonites. (And, yes, I realize that these groups are all Christian.) Can anyone list any others?
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 56009434 All those you cite have blood on their hands.
*Quakers participated in cultural genocide against Indians
Few Swedes know that the wars of extermination against American Indians were followed by "cultural genocide": a strong campaign to erase the culture and society of the Indians. Quakers and other Christian groups took part in this.
Almost every effort was made to make the Indians feel that their culture was worthless, and that they had to "become white". At the same time, they were not allowed into white society and met with much racism.
One of the worst parts of this campaign was to take Indian children away from their families and send them to boarding schools, often far away from their tribe and relatives. Here, they were at the mercy of grown-ups who all were usually white. They were told from the start that their identity was no good. Often, they were punished if they spoke their own language. They were forced to cut their hair, which can be compared to forcing Swedish boys to wear skirts.
Quakers ran boarding schools too.
Lost her spirit at a Quaker school
At the age of eight, the girl Zitkala-Sa met Quaker missionaries who had come to the reservation where she lived. They were recruiting students for a boarding school, and she went with them.
One of the first days she and all the other new kids had their hair cut forcibly. Zitkala-Sa tried to hide, but she was found and strapped to a chair. Then, her braids fell. In her own words: "Then I lost my spirit."
Later in life, Zitkala-Sa regained her spirit. She became a famous and very important author and activist for Native American rights.
Quakers ran reservations
At the centre of Quaker involvement was a decision by President Grant 1869 to let the Quakers run several Indian reservations. "If you can make Quakers of the Indians, it will take the fight out of them".
At this time, there were hardly any white people who stood up for the Indian's right to their own culture. There were quite a few "philanthropists" who wanted to defend the Indians, but only from being physically exterminated. Even the philanthropists wanted to "civilize" the Indians and make them into whites.
Grant's policy was sometimes called the "Peace Policy" and sometimes called the "Quaker Policy", which indicates the degree of Quaker involvement. Later, other Christian groups were put in charge of reservations as well. After about ten years, the Quakers withdrew from the management of reservations.
The intent was to "civilize"
Lawrie Tatum, one of the Quakers who were given the position as agent (meaning he was in charge of a reservation) writes that every Quaker who went to work on these reservations wanted to "civilize" the Indians.
Here is a quote from Sonja Keohane, a non-Indian:
'This "activity" of saving Indians was cloaked in language that on first blush seems to have been done with "good intentions."
The Quakers and other Christian groups were the moving force behind organizations such as the "Friends of Indians", "Indian Rights Association" and the "National Indian Association."
Yes, these folks were alarmed at the "condition" of Native people, victims of the devastation wrought by whites. Their response was to "Americanize" Indians.
These "good Intentions" had the effect of continued genocide. The boarding schools kidnapped children and prohibited the speaking of Native language. The children were forced to shed their identity by wearing uniforms and wearing their hair in a "white" way.' (end of quote)
"Kill the Indian and save the man"
This policy is often described with the phrase "Kill the Indian and save the man".
Sonja Keohane continues:
"As for Quaker involvement was very pervasive at this time with the Indian education issue. The famous "Lake Mohonk Conferences" were held at the home of and at the invitation of a prominent Quaker and member of the Board of Indian Commissioners named Albert K. Smiley. Invited were the influential and the wealthy to discuss the "Indian Question." The group eventually called themselves "Friends of the Indian" and were one of the most influential forces among the reformers. Both Charles J. Rhoads, Indian Commissioner for 1929-34 and his assistant J. Henry Scattergood were both well known Quakers. Rhoads was a Philadelphian and had communication with Pratt. < [
link to www.amphilsoc.org]
(Pratt is usually described as the founder of the boarding school system, and the person who coined the phrase "Kill the Indian and save the man".)
Viewed the Indians as inferiors
The Quakers were in charge of the reservations for several Indian tribes, among others the Comanches, Kiowas, Pawnees, Otos and Omahas.
Here is a quote from the book "With Good Intentions: Quaker Work Among the Pawnee, Otos, and Omahas in the 1870's" by Clyde Milner II.
(The Hicksites is one of the main branches of American Quakerism. They handled some of the reservations.)
'True to the egalitarianism of the Inner Light, the Hicksite administration would view the Indians of Nebraska as spiritual equals and not press for conversion to Quakerism.(...) In all other ways, however, the Hicksites would view the Indians as cultural inferiors, as wards under their care, who must assimilate the values of the white man in order to survive. Ultimately the Quakers assumed that "civilization" for the Indians did not imply a middle ground of acculturation where some white ways might be accepted. Instead the Quakers expected an eventual cultural conversion through assimilation.(...) These actions, in turn, meant the attempted break-up of Indian social and political organization.'
continued: [
link to geijer.nu]