Knowledge is power : $b A view of the productive forces of modern society and the results of labor, capital and skill. — John Shaqi
Knowledge is power : $b A view of the productive forces of modern society and the results of labor, capital and skill.Knight, Charles
Philosophy
Knowledge is power : $b A view of the productive forces of modern society and the results of labor, capital and skill.
Knight, Charles
Industrial arts; Industries
But this wise and humane arrangement of the United States has not wholly
removed the Indians from the wide regions of North America. In the
Hudson's Bay territories the life which Tanner described still goes
forward. The wants of civilized society--the desire to possess the
earth--have transported the Indians from the banks of the Ohio to the
lands watered by the Arkansas. The opposite principle has retained them
on the shores of Hudson's Bay. They are wanted there as hunters, and are
not encouraged as cultivators. They are kept out of the pale of
civilization, and not received within it. The rude industry of the
Hudson's Bay Indians is stimulated by the luxury of Europe into an
employ which would cease to exist if the people became civilized. If
agriculture were introduced amongst them--if they were to grow corn and
keep domestic animals--they would cease to be hunters of foxes and
martens, because their wants would be much better supplied by other
modes of labour, involving less suffering and less uncertainty. As it
is, the traders, who want skins, do not think of giving the Indians
tools to work the ground, and seeds to put in it, and cows and sheep to
breed other cows and sheep. They avail themselves of the uncivilized
state of these poor tribes, to render them the principal agents in the
manufacture of fur, to supply the luxuries of another hemisphere. But
still the exchange which the hunters carry on with the European traders,
imperfect as it is in all cases, and unjust as it is in many, is better
for the Indians than no exchange; although we fear that ardent spirits
take away from the Indians the greater number of the advantages which
would otherwise remain with them as exchangers. If the Indians had no
skins to give to Europe, Europe would have no blankets and ammunition to
give to them. They would obtain their food and clothing by the use of
the bow alone. They would live entirely from hand to mouth. They would
have no motive for accumulation, because there would be no exchanges;
and they would consequently be even poorer and more helpless than they
are now as exchangers of skins. They are suffering from the effects of
small accumulations and imperfect exchange; but these are far better
than no accumulation and no exchange. If the course of their industry
were to be changed by perfect appropriation--if they were consequently
to become cultivators and manufacturers, instead of wanderers in the
woods to hunt for wild and noxious animals--they would, in the course of
years, have abundance of profitable labour, because they would have
abundance of capital. This is the better lot of the tribes with whom the
government of the United States has made a far nobler treaty than Penn
made with his Indians. As it is, their accumulations are so small, that
they cannot proceed with their own uncertain labour of hunting without
an advance of capital on the part of the traders; and thus, even in
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account