*** THE DOCTRINE OF DISCOVERY *** Have you ever wondered what it was like for indigenous people to be discovered by civilized europeans? * * * -- THE DAUGHTERS OF THE DEVIL (part one of two) By Amin Falaq According to history, as taught in the west, Christopher Columbus discovered America in 1492. The logic of this is illusive because we know that no European people would accept that, the Aztecs, the Maya, the Inca or any of the Original Tribes of this land, had discovered Europe, if they were to have sailed to a populated Europe and established a history that gave them credit for discovering it. We are taught, though, that Columbus came to a land that was already occupied; and, the history is written to say that he discovered that land? Though much can be written of how ridiculous that really is, I will have to do that in a future writing, because it would seem that the people that were here when he got here were the ones who had discovered this land.. The issue at hand here is the document called the MANIFEST DESTINY, the sperm for the birth of one of the devil’s daughters. The ideas contained in the Manifest Destiny are rooted in the (approximate) 579 writings of several popes in what is commonly called Papal Bulls, but their collective doctrine is the Doctrine of Discovery, which is the source of Manifest Destiny. The term Manifest Destiny was coined in 1845 by Newspaper columnist, John O’ Sullivan, in his article “Annexation” written for the July–August 1845 issue of the Democratic Review. The Manifest Destiny is the thinking that promoted, and justified, the wanton slaughter of the original tribes such as, the Aztecs; the Maya; and the Incas of the land; they claimed Columbus to have discovered. The connection was begun 40 years prior to Columbus’ voyage. Pope Nicholas decreed a Papal Bull regarding King Alfonso V of Portugal. It was titled: Romanus Pontifex. Its contents were that all non-Christians anywhere in the world were enemies to the Church and should be warred upon. These wars included colonizing defeated nations and taking all rights to their lands and the natural resources of the lands. King Alfonso, following the directions of Pope Nicholas, captured the defeated Saracens, pagans and Muslims, confiscated their land and property. The Portuguese following this papal decree expanded the arm of the church by colonizing the western coast of Africa and trafficking African slaves, all in the name if Christ. This is the attitude of Columbus in his voyages. By the original Tribes of this land were not being Christian, he was authorized by the Papal Bull of Pope Nicholas to judge their lands as “discovered” and take them. Upon his return he was given more authority by the Inter Cetera which was the Papal Bull issued by Pope Alexander VI in 1493, granted Spain the right to ownership of the lands which Columbus “discovered”. In the process of all of this “discovering” and conquering, some of the most uncivilized and inhuman acts of genocide was inflicted upon the original inhabitants of the lands now being taken, by claiming these lands to have been discovered by Columbus. Behind all of this was the authority allotted to the invaders by the Papal Bull decrees of the church. These documents were referred to and recited as justification for the inhuman slaughter of the original tribes and the brutal colonization of their lands. Based on these Christian writings, which even included, as in the “Law of Nations”, that Christian Nations had a biblical established divine right to establish their rule and use for themselves of the lands of all non-Christians. This religious attitude of establishing full authority of the people and land of non-Christians was enacted into American law in 1823 as the legal act to totally deprive the original people of this land any rights over themselves or their land. America was established based on the idea that the invaders had a God-given right to this land and that those who had been living on it for generations were to be removed or slaughtered and it was all justified according to the Christian doctrines and beliefs. A little over a hundred years later that same process would be fulfilled with different documents and a different religion. Modern Zionism began in 1561 when Yasef Nasi advocated the resettlement of the Jewish people from the lands of Tiberias and Safed to the lands of Palestine. patch/illinois/joliet/the-daughters-of-the-devil-part-one-of-two * * * -- Doctrine of Discovery? Whats that? Papal Bulls of the 15th century gave Christian explorers the right to claim lands they discovered and lay claim to those lands for their Christian Monarchs. Any land that was not inhabited by Christians was available to be discovered, claimed, and exploited. If the pagan inhabitants could be converted, they might be spared. If not, they could be enslaved or killed. The Discovery Doctrine is a concept of public international law expounded by the United States Supreme Court in a series of decisions, intially in Johnson v. MIntosh in 1823. The doctrine was Chief Justice John Marshalls explanation of the way in which colonial powers laid claim to newly discovered lands during the Age of Discovery. Under it, title to newly discovered lands lay with the government whose subjects discovered new territory. The doctrine has been primarily used to support decisions invalidating or ignoring aboriginal possession of land in favor of colonial or post-colonial governments. John Marshall, who is most credited with describing the doctrine, did not voice wholehearted support of the doctrine even while using it to justify judicial decisions. He pointed to the doctrine as simple fact, looking at the possession-takings which had been supported by it as things which had occurred and had to be recognized. The supposedly inferior character of native cultures was a reason for the doctrine having been used, but whether or not that was justified was not relevant for Marshall. This Doctrine governs United States Indian Law today and has been cited as recently as 2005 in the decision City Of Sherrill V. Oneida Indian Nation Of N.Y. doctrineofdiscovery.org/ * * * -- What is the Doctrine of Discovery? Why Should It Be Repudiated? For thousands of years, Indigenous Peoples lived free in their territories in the Western Hemisphere. When European monarchies invasively arrived in the Western Hemisphere in the fifteenth, sixteenth, and later centuries, during the so-called Age of Discovery, they claimed the lands, territories, and resources of the Indigenous Peoples, asserting that the monarchies had a right to appropriate on behalf of Christendom. The monarchies’ claims of a Christian dominion (dominance) over Indigenous Peoples and their lands served them pragmatically to fend off competing monarchies and to de-legitimate the long-established autonomous indigenous peoples’ governments. The Doctrine of Discovery is a key premise for non-Indigenous government claims to legitimacy on and sovereignty over Indigenous lands and territories. It is used in particular by former British colonies, specifically, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United States of America. ... nyym.org/?q=doc_of_disc_factsheet * * * -- Five Hundred Years of Injustice: The Legacy of Fifteenth Century Religious Prejudice by Steve Newcomb When Christopher Columbus first set foot on the white sands of Guanahani island, he performed a ceremony to take possession of the land for the king and queen of Spain, acting under the international laws of Western Christendom. Although the story of Columbus discovery has taken on mythological proportions in most of the Western world, few people are aware that his act of possession was based on a religious doctrine now known in history as the Doctrine of Discovery. Even fewer people realize that today - five centuries later - the United States government still uses this archaic Judeo-Christian doctrine to deny the rights of Native American Indians. ... ili.nativeweb.org/sdrm_art.html * * * -- Discovery doctrine The Discovery doctrine is a concept of public international law expounded by the United States Supreme Court in a series of decisions, most notably Johnson v. MIntosh in 1823. Chief Justice John Marshall justified the way in which colonial powers laid claim to lands belonging to sovereign indigenous nations during the Age of Discovery. Under it, title to lands lay with the government whose subjects explored and occupied a territory whose inhabitants were not subjects of a European Christian monarch. The doctrine has been primarily used to support decisions invalidating or ignoring aboriginal possession of land in favor of colonial or post-colonial governments. The 1823 case was the result of collusive lawsuits where land speculators worked together to make claims to achieve a desired result.[1][2] John Marshall explained the Courts reasoning. The decision has been the subject of a number of law review articles and has come under increased scrutiny by modern legal theorists. ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_doctrine * * * -- A Concept of Native Title by Leroy Littlebear the single most important decision is St. Catherine’s Milling and Lumber Co. v. The Queen[6], handed down by the Privy Council. The Council held “that the tenure of the Indians as a personal and usufructuary right, dependent on the goodwill of the sovereign”; that there has been all along vested in the Crown a substantial and paramount estate, underlying the Indian’s title, which became a plenum, dominium whenever that title was surrendered or otherwise extinguished”. In other words, the British Crown, prior to the discovery of North America, has always had title to the lands in North America in an a priori sense. The result of the St. Catherine’s Milling and Lumber Co. case is that the British, by simply setting foot on North America and planting a rag attached to a pole on the shores, acquired the title to Indian lands. This ritual, i.e. the coming ashore and the planting of a flag and the claiming of the land for the Monarch, is sometimes referred to as Discovery. The Doctrine of Discovery is one justification for claiming fee simple title to lands in North America. But the doctrine has been abused, misconstrued, and misinterpreted by the white man. Chief Justice Marshall of the United States Supreme Court, and one of the first to use the Concept or Discovery in his decisions, said in the Johnson and Graham’s lessee v. Mc’Intosh case[7] that discovery was a doctrine meant to apply to the European powers for their own orderly conduct in dealing with the aboriginal people of North America. Hence, discovery was not meant to apply to the Indians. It was not meant to mean fee simple ownership. To the contrary discovery can be analogized to a ‘business franchise’. Just as a business franchise gives exclusive rights to the owner of the franchise to enter into business relations with people, within the geographic area of the franchise, discovery was meant to give a European power which came to the shores of North America the exclusive right to deal with the Indians whose territory covered or included the particular area discovered by a European power. A right to deal with people certainly does not give ownership to their property. doctrineofdiscoveryforum.blogspot/2013/11/a-concept-of-native-title-by-leroy_25.html * * * -- Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues Eleventh Session 3rd & 4th Meetings (AM & PM) ‘Doctrine of Discovery’, Used for Centuries to Justify Seizure of Indigenous Land, Subjugate Peoples, Must Be Repudiated by United Nations, Permanent Forum Told Speakers Call for Mechanism to Investigate Historical Land Claims; Also Holds Dialogue on Land Use and Participatory Mechanisms in Arctic The Doctrine of Discovery had been used for centuries to expropriate indigenous lands and facilitate their transfer to colonizing or dominating nations, speakers in the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues stressed today, urging the expert body to study the creation of a special mechanism, under United Nations auspices, to investigate historical land claims. Those forceful calls came amid continued debate on this year’s special theme: the enduring impact of the Discovery Doctrine on indigenous peoples and the right to redress for past conquests covered under articles 28 and 37 of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Throughout the day, representatives of indigenous groups, Governments and United Nations funds, agencies and programmes aired their views on the need to more justly reflect indigenous rights and freedoms in national constitutions and other comprehensive agreements. Indigenous and native peoples spoke out against continued use of the internationally recognized principle of “terra nullius” — which describes land belonging to no one but that could, in some cases, be acquired through occupation — as well as anachronistic norms, like the Regalian Doctrine, under which private land title emanates from the Spanish crown. Such principles were based on racist, unscientific assumptions, many said, and could not be used by States to justify the “theft” of native lands, territories or natural resources. ... un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/hr5088.doc.htm * * * -- DISMANTLING THE DOCTRINE OF DISCOVERY - International Conference Conference Document: Declaration Abya Yala media.wix/ugd/3a8566_ce79cec1391d857dfb4cd24a24afcf46.pdf In April of 2013. hundreds of activists, scholars, artists, and community leaders contributed to the Dismantling the Doctrine of Discovery Conference. Here you will find a summary of the event and information about current interventions and related work being done throughout Abya Yala. What is the Doctrine? The Doctrine of Discovery is a concept in which the Vatican and all of Christiandom declared that colonial governments could take legal possession of any land or peoples they discovered. This notion has been used to justify the dispossession and genocide of Indigenous Peoples ever since. dismantlingdoctrineofdiscovery.org/ * * * Walter Echo Hawk Presentation - International Seminar on the Doctrine of Discovery Presentation topic: Johnson v. MIntosh & the Doctrine of Discovery in the United States - Impacts upon Federal Indian Law; and the Future of the Doctrine under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples https://youtube/watch?v=e70J1a0IXno * * *
Posted on: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 19:35:14 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015