Skip to content

Month: September 2020

Margot Roussels Blog Post 9/28

After reading Chapter 9, Slavery Without Submission, Emancipation Without Freedom and watching the video, I began to realize how different the story of the Civil War is from what is told. Firstly, Abraham Lincoln is painted as the great emancipator who tirelessly fought against slavery when in actuality in the beginning, he repeatedly said he was not going to take slavery away from the south just prevent its growth. Moreover, for many of the first few years of the war he refused to make the battle about slavery instead he was just fighting to keep the union together. This made me wonder if he should get all the praise that he does. Although, he did always retain that his personal views were against slavery, but he would do whatever was best for the nation.

Another thing that really struck me from the reading is that the southerners were confused when their slaves were not loyal to them. I honestly found these accounts hilarious because the slave owners were consistently surprised when their slaves deserted to the “enemy” meaning the north. This just shows how deeply engrained slave culture was into the society that these people could not even see the cruelty that happened every day and why it was wrong. Zinn told us that it was estimated about 1/5 enslaved people ran away to the north and helped by doing the most grueling parts of army work like digging trenches.

3 Comments

Podcast Episode 10

Leadership and the Humanities Podcast
Episode 10: The Civil War

If we think back to 1776 and the conflict between the delegates from the north versus the delegates from the south over slavery—specifically, in the musical, between Adams and Routledge—it seems rather surprising that they didn’t recognize the conflict as the potential powder keg it actually was. On a political level…

Visit Blackboard/Podcasts to listen.

Download here for 10.30 class.

Download here for 12.00 class.

24 Comments

Blog Post 5 (9/22)

In chapter 7 “As Long as Grass Grows or Water Runs” of Zinn’s book the author focuses on describing how indigenous people of colonial America were mistreated through the westward expansion. I was always aware of how badly indigenous people struggled as America was always described to me as “the stolen native land”. Western immigrants and Andrew Jackson did horrifying murders and were disturbing to me. However, what I am really shocked about was not the struggle of the indigenous people but to see how lots of Americans are not aware of this part of the history as a lot of Americans believe that westward expansion was one of the best things that happened and they still view Jackson as a great president. 

Jackson supported the cultural belief of the manifest destiny which implanted the idea that American settlers are more superior and were destined to expand the lands and move North towards Canada and Florida. Jackson was described to be a “land speculator, slave trader, and the most aggressive enemy of the Indians”. He killed many people and justified it by the idea that Americans were biologically more fit to live in these lands than the indigenous people; he wanted to completely remove the natives from this land. Such actions had an effect that lasted until nowadays in terms of associating indigenous people with negative stereotypes and not recognizing native tribes or giving them their rights. 

4 Comments

Blog Post 9/22

In As Long as Grass Grows or Water Runs, Zinn focuses on the perpetual mistreatment of Native Americans in the United States.  Andrew Jackson wanted to expand westward as the idea of manifest destiny started to burn through the hearts and minds of the American people.  While many Americans have long believed that westward expansion was glorious, Zinn explains how that is not the case.  Under Jackson and Van Buren, “Seventy thousand Indians east of the Mississippi were forced westward.”  While Jackson is celebrated as a great president by some, many are now changing their tone on Jackson because of the mistreatment of Native Americans.

 Jackson’s mistreatment of Native Americans can likely be attributed to a mixture of racism as well as American imperialism.  One of his main arguments was that Native Americans just weren’t fit for American culture.  For example in a speech Jackson said,  “They have neither the intelligence, the industry, the moral habits, nor the desire of improvement which are essential to any favorable change in their condition. Established in the midst of another and a superior race, and without appreciating the causes of their inferiority or seeking to control them, they must necessarily yield to the force of circumstances and ere long disappear.”  Jackson’s goal was always to make America the best country it could be, no matter the human cost.  His utter disregard for human life is outright horrifying to me, and he committed a genocide out of greed.

6 Comments

Andrew Jackson v Native American Legacy Blog Post

What would our world look like today without the American Destiny expansion dream of our nation’s early leaders was a perpetual question I asked myself during this reading of Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States, As Long as the Grass Grows or Water Runs. Although I know that Indigenous people suffered extensively and incomprehensibly at the hands of the Western immigrants and conquerors, Andrew Jackson’s time period, in particular, seems like an extremely disturbing aspect of American history that is almost unaccounted for in history textbooks nation-wide. 

Although expansion started with Jefferson and the Louisiana Purchase, Jackson fueled the idea that the people of the United States have the right to expand into areas like Florida, Canada, and farther west because they are biologically superior and more advanced. Jefferson pushed into Native American culture more subtly by allowing people to move into known Native land with the facade of helping them adjust to the progressing capitalist economy and giving them the option to move elsewhere. This competition lifestyle is completely different from the communal lifestyle typical of most tribes that had worked for the past 15,000 to 20,000 years. Andrew Jackson conquered, stomped, and killed as many Native American lives and connections to cultures as possible, with his highlight being the Battle of Horseshoe Bend and conquest of parts of Florida. Jackson had more overt goals compared to Jefferson and wanted to remove Native Americans completely. In almost every situation, tribes were betrayed by either a promise, a treaty, a company, a leader, or a government in an effort to force simulation of “typical American life” or to make money. Why is this truth of American history not discussed in our textbooks? Does this silence connect to the pro-white, hero bias historians have to further American nationalism, or is there another motive? What can we change about how the legacy of Andrew Jackson is taught in order to include more information about the different native tribes and their struggle/resistance from the 1800s to the present day?

Jackson’s senseless and constant use of force in interactions changed the country’s perception of Native Americans and stained their possible future by instilling many false stereotypes/myths and integrating incorrect judgments. Although there has been some legislation to raise Indigenous people up in society and government, these laws have had minimal effects until the 1990s and early 2000s. Many tribes were not even recognized until two years ago, which means that there is still a distinct separation of human rights applied to Native American people. For blacks in America, the perception of equality (as Blacks at the time were still not legally or socially equal) in America began when aspects of Black culture began becoming popular in “pop-culture”. Even though the idea behind this can be slightly problematic as one culture is definitely not defined by its effect on another and are equally valid and acceptable, integration creates normalization. At what point in our future could parts of Native American culture like music, casual dress (not cultural dress), or ideas, be integrated into mainstream culture? Would more Native American pieces in pop-culture help change federal laws to aid their advancement in society? Personally, I think it would definitely help and would bring more attention to the voices of Indigenous people. At what point could we see an end of Jackson’s enforced ideas about Native Americans in the 19th century in the 21st century?

5 Comments

Henry Groves’ Blog Post 9/23/2020

In Zinn’s Chapter, “As Long as Grass Grows or Water Runs”, he talks about the Indian Removal Act as Andrew Jackson’s influence in it. Like the other chapters, a history that I thought I knew has a cruel twist to it. I was taught about the Indian Removal Act and how the US government wanted to grow which led to the forceful removal of the Indians. The US wanted to expand and be able to produce more agriculture and have bigger civilizations, which required the Indians to move westward.

The really surprising part about this chapter is the description of Andrew Jackson. I was never really taught about Andrew Jackson in school and I always remember questioning why he is on the 20 dollar bill. The vague teachings of him led to me thinking that he did something worth getting recognized for and created this image of Jackson as a good person. Zinn does a great job in this chapter making Jackson look to be the opposite of this. Zinn goes on and mentions how he, Jackson, was one of the biggest enemies to the Indians while being a terrible leader with treating his soldiers terribly. Jackson, who has been vaguly remembered as the guy on the 20 dollar bill, is actually another hero that the history books made up. Zinn greatly emphasizes that Jackson persited on removing Indians westward even after most of them had already fled or been killed. Jackson used policies to take the blame of Indian displacement and death off his hands. In this chapter, Zinn gives another prime example of how the history that schooling systems teach its students, focuses on vague stories about “heroes”, like Andrew Jackson and Christopher Columbus, that do not grasp nearly the full history of what happened.

6 Comments

The Great American Indian Story

In today’s readings, Zinn’s history of the early to middle nineteenth century from the Native American perspective informs the Roanhorse piece, allowing the symbolism of the story to be more deeply understood. The main character of Roanhorse’s “Welcome to Your Authentic Indian Experience,” works as a virtual spiritual leader. In this imagined job, Jesse Turnblatt pretends to be a barely-literate, Indian spiritual leader who provides customers (referred to as tourists) with an “authentic” Indian, spiritual experience entailing vast nature, costumes, long hair, and spirit animals. Indeed, this is what the character known as White Wolf looks for when he makes an appointment with Jesse. Despite initial doubts about the experience, White Wolf eventually warms up to Jesse and the two become friends. However, after about a month of friendship, Jesse gets sick and White Wolf steals his job, wife, and eventually house. 

Jesse’s character arch is not a simple tragedy; rather, his story ironically provides himself with the authentic Indian experience that White Wolf originally sought. White Wolf — a pale, brown haired, white male — represents the Anglo-Saxon settlers of North America. After a timid, failed attempt at settling into the landscape (Roanoke), the settlers were welcomed by Native Americans as traders. Likewise, White Wolf is initially timid and helpless before Jesse welcomes him and gifts him his nickname. However, after the two fraternize, things start to go poorly for Jesse in a similar fashion to the Native Americans of history. Indeed, Jesse soon finds himself sick like many Native American communities did after the arrival of Anglo-Saxon settlers. Additionally, White Wolf stealing Jesse’s job, wife, and house is analogous to the confiscation of Native American lands under the Indian Removal Act. Indeed, this is why Roanhorse’s piece begins with the quote from Sherman Alexie: “In the Great American Indian novel, when it is finally written, all of the white people will be Indians and all of the Indians will be ghosts.” In this story, a white man steals a Native American’s life because that is the “authentic” Indian experience he asked for. Meanwhile, Jesse, the Native American, watches his life fade away as he becomes a ghost in his own home. 

The reason the quintessential American Indian story should end this way is deeply rooted in the history and proven by America’s response to that history. While white Americans enjoy the fruits of Native American lands, they also choose to forget the painful history of Native Americans in this country, thus subjecting them to ghost status.

5 Comments

9/23 Post

Chapter seven of Zinn’s book pertains to the atrocities committed by Andrew Jackson in response to Indian Tribes being in the way of American expansion.  This is yet again another example of how so many history books see the past through tinted lenses.  Up until today I saw Andrew Jackson as a positive figure in American history that contributed to the expansion and progression of America.  Andrew Jackson is even on the twenty dollar bill!  I see Andrew Jackson’s face almost everyday, and I am just now learning that he killed thousands of Native Americans for an indecent cause.  There were many Native Amercians that were ready to assimilate and coexist with the expanding Americans, yet Andrew Jackson still encouraged Americans to essentially take land and kick the Native Americans out.  I find it very interesting how each of Zinn’s chapters have connections to each other, and they all share a common theme of inequality and injustice.  

 

Andrew Jackson blatantly killed and pushed the Native American tribes away from the territory they previously held, yet these parts of American history are oftentimes pushed aside.  This chapter from Zinn’s book, and every chapter prior to this one has collectively brought me to a conclusion.  The American education system must be reformed to have a more balanced teaching of American history.  We learned all about how bad Nazi Germany was, and all about the atrocities committed by Stalin, yet America is seen as a morally and ethically superior country in many aspects.  I would question who is pushing for America to be seen in such a positive light, and why is this misinterpretation of history happening?  Is America better off now that its citizens feel the country is morally superior?  I genuinely do not know why the teachings of American history are so flawed, but I believe education reform in America is of the utmost importance.

6 Comments

Zinn Chapter 7

Chapter seven in Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States, “As Long as Grass Grows or Water Runs,” focuses on US expansion westward and its effect on the Native Americans that inhabited the land. I think it is fairly safe to say that we have learned about the tragedy that was westward expansion in our more mature history classes. From the Louisiana Purchase to the Trail of Tears, and every battle in between, the indigenous people of what is now the United States suffered. Zinn also discusses how various tribes had various fates, such as the Creek people of Georgia, Mississippi and Alabama or Cherokee tribe, which was pushed all the way to Oklahoma via the Trail of Tears. 

 

Growing up in Wisconsin, which has the 23rd largest Native American population (1.6%), the remains of indigenous culture are very present. Many names of towns, parks, counties and bodies of water are derived from Native American words. Even the word “Wisconsin” has Native roots, as it is the French version of the word “Meskonsing,” which more or less means “river running through a red place.” I grew up on land owned by the Oneida tribe. The tribe’s presence is strongly felt in Green Bay, with casinos, country clubs, herbal shops, and even a gate named for it at Lambeau Field. While the tribe has its own police force, school system, government, etc, it is closely tied with the city. However, one can’t help but think what could have been if the Oneida tribe had not been pushed from upstate New York all the way to northeast Wisconsin. Was there a better way to have shared the land with its original inhabitants? We can’t know the answer, and we can’t rewrite the past, but we can honor it and learn from it.

5 Comments

Blog Post 9/21/20

Chapter 7 of Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States, we see yet another first hand account of the brutality of culture and social class in America, specifically early America. As a past chapter taught us, the colonists decision to revolt against Britain was a decision made by the few, at the expense of the many, and for benefit of one single demographic and economically affluent group, the land owning white male. The reason I reference this is because we see the same narrative in this chapter. We see the same social group, the powerful white men, driving out a demographic that had every right to inhabit the land that they did. Native Americans during this time occupied large regions west of the Appalachian mountains. Once Jefferson was elected he drove them out of their native land to help cater to the westward moving Americans. While this moment in time was powerful and without question a horrible act, I want to connect this behavior to a more current affair.

In a similar fashion, African Americans once free, were driven into inter-cities and areas that had poor access to essential needs such as fresh food. This is a result of many things, but perhaps most importantly, the reflection of the segregation and oppression that this demographic and race has faced since their arrival in America. My question to you all is who is at fault for this? Is it people like Thomas Jefferson? A man that taught modern day Americans that this behavior was acceptable. Or is it the people of today that haven’t done what is needed to change this narrative and this reality for black and other minority Americans?

 

 

4 Comments

Mia Slaunwhite 9/23/2020

In Howard Zinn’s Chapter “As Long as Grass Grows or Water Runs” we are introduced to Andrew Jackson, an American Hero” … Well, reading all about what Andrew Jackson had ‘accomplished’ before becoming president scares me. How many more presidents have been considered hero’s for killing off Indians? This seems to me to be an idea of ‘being American’ of course some people thought this was outrageous and yes, some people agreed that killing the Indians and pushing them out is totally the right thing to do.

Wanting to know a little more about how Jackson’s history is told; I looked up ‘Andrew Jackson U.S. history’. From there I found a link to www.biography.com and it states that Jackson is “known as the people’s president”. One thing is for sure, from what I know about Jackson from Zinn’s chapter how is he a people’s president… Maybe it was the white elite men who were his people. This brings up a lot of clashes with classes and gender gaps. The article also states that Jackson “instituted policies that resulted in forced migration of Native Americans” (biograohy.com). The Indians still alive probably figured that if they don’t get out, they have a very good chance of being killed just like the other 800.

This is just another example of how history is taught in a skewed way. Maybe one day we will start writing history books and teaching history in a way that does not just idolize white males.

 

4 Comments

9/23/20 Blog Post

Reading Zinn’s chapter, “As Long as Grass Grows or Water Runs” was extremely enlightening and upsetting at the same time. This chapter again left me questioning everything I had learned previously. In this chapter Zinn goes into great detail about American and Indian relations in the 1800s. Zinn discusses the evil/selfishness that was the American government. The government and prominent figures such as President Andrew Jackson supported the “Indian Removal” because it, “was necessary for the opening of the vast American lands to agriculture, to commerce, to markets, to money, to the development of the modern capitalist economy.” (126) This indian removal consisted of the use of force to drive native tribes from their home lands. This created great suffering, loss of a huge amount of Indian lives, and the destruction of Indian ways of life/culture/and traditions. The American government continuously oppressed, lied to, and endangered the indian population of America. This disgusts me. Even when tribes would attempt to assimilate to “white” American culture the government still took advantage and harmed them. I never knew the extent of government wrongdoing until reading this chapter. “ The leading books on the Jacksonian period, written by respected historians…do not mention Jackson’s Indian policy, but there is much talk in them of tariffs, banking, political parties, political rhetoric. If you look through high school textbooks and elementary school school textbooks in American history you will find Jackson the frontiersman, soldier, democrat, man of the people-not Jackson the slaverholder, land speculator, executioner of dissident soldiers, exterminator of Indians.” (130) This quote struck a chord in me. This whole chapter left me with many questions. Why is it that our history teaches a figure like Jackson in this way? Does it have to do with American patriotism? Why are we unable to teach American failures and wrongdoings? Why could we just not have a peaceful relationship with the Indian tribes who were settled long before the white Americans? 

 

4 Comments

9/23 Isa Keetley

Reading Ch.7 of PHUS I was most surprised when learning about Andrew Jackson. In elementary, middle, and high school, I never learned much more than that he was a president that fought and led bravely in the War of 1812. Was Andrew Jackson just another one of the “American Myths” that I learned growing up? Never did I learn of the atrocities he committed against the Native Americans. Not only did Jackson pass the Indian Removal Act, but in Florida he lied to them, killed, manipulated, and ordered villages to be destroyed when they did not agree with his terms and conditions. 

Another idea Zinn brought up that I found to be most interesting was “tribal disintegration”. I had never heard of the term in relation to tribes, but it fits perfectly. The Americans at the time could not always fight the Native Americans, thus they employed other tactics, such as killing game so that there were food shortages, influencing them with whiskey, and smaller military attacks. Of course the Natives had no chance of winning if the Americans were slowly starving them, getting them drunk, and then attacking them. Zinn also repeats the term “Indian Removal,” a more harsh way of saying, what I was taught growing up- expansion. In order to expand, the Native Americans needed to be removed from the territory because there was no chance that the white people would live with them, because they were “savages,” “uncivilized,” and “violent”. I think the unwillingness of the Americans to live amongst shows how scared and intimidated they really were by them. 

In terms of the short story, Welcome to Your Authentic Indian Experience, I thought it was very interesting how the idea of a VR “experience” was something people paid for to go on a spiritual journey. I feel like this is disrespectful to Native Americans, because vision quests are so sacred and the idea of people who may not necessarily come from Native American descent capitalizing off of them seems wrong. The main character changing his last name from Turnblatt to Trueblood was what made me consider this. It seemed like he was trying to sell something false and foreign to him. And in the end, this caught up to him.

4 Comments

Blog post M. Childress 9/23

In today’s reading, Howard Zinn highlights a specific example of a person who’ s story and character has been told in a way that is not entirely accurate, Andrew Jackson. On page 130, Zinn describes the way in which in most historical textbooks, Jackson is characterized as being a “frontiersman, solider, democrat, and man of the people”, then draws the comparison of another fitting description of Jackson being a “slaveholder, land speculator, executioner of dissident soldiers, and exterminator of Indians”. It goes back to the common point that we refer back to so frequently in this class: the victors get to tell their story and we tend to accept it, and pass it along. What about the other side of the story though? In this case, it is the native American populations. Furthermore, as mentioned in the podcast, grouping all native Americans together is not necessarily the best thing to do, because they were not all the same, the did not share the exact same beliefs, actions, or specific experiences. However, the thing that I will unite them under, is the immense oppression by white settlers. This extortion of native populations is shown beautifully in the reading “Welcome to your authentic Indian experience”. Trueblood (the main character) is victim to a series of events that turn his world upside down. First, “white wold” (coincidentally named), seems to be down and wanting something more out of his experience. Trueblood, representing the Native population, invites him to become friends, goes to a bar, and spends time with White wolf. However, White wolf turns around, steals Trueblood’s wife, home, job, and sanity in the blink of an eye. Furthermore, he makes Trueblood feel ashamed and guilty of his actions and identity. These tactics are so cunning and sly that native populations were blindsided, as such greed is not prevalent in the majority of their cultures. In his farewell to his home, Blackhawk says that “he (the white man) would be put to death and eaten up by the wolves (based on their behavior)” (Zinn 131). 

What I am most interested in talking about though is the extent to which the native American’s stories have been silenced. Black and female rights movements have taken place and moved somewhat in the right direction towards progress, but is continuing to offer native tribes (relatively) small amounts of money, and letting them govern by their own rules in their own small reservations enough for the widespread pain and horror that was brought upon them? To be pushed further and further away from their own lands, and have “the white man warm himself before the Indian’s Fire” (Zinn 135), is nothing short of widespread, large scale robbery. 

Lastly, I think it is interesting to go back to the point of comparisons of superiority and inferiority. Colonists assumed that they were superior to the native people because they had superior weapons and were Christian. They hoped that “Indians will cast off their savage habits and become an interesting, civilized, and Christian community” (Zinn 140). That obviously did not happen. but the podcast and Zinn both discuss ways in natives were far superior, in terms of lack of greed and selfishness, respect and connection to the Earth, and unity among the tribes. Before this class, I would have assumed that the colonizers had good motives behind their conquest, but the more we read the more I realize their motives were far more selfish and greedy, with insufficient excuses as support. 

1 Comment

Elina Bhagwat Blog Post 9/23

After reading Zinn’s chapter “As Long as Grass Grows or Water Runs,” I realized how much information was left out of my history classes in high school. I remember learning about the Trail of Tears and how Jackson forced Native Americans out of their land. However, we never discussed what the motives for each side of the arguments were. On one side, the Native Americans were the first people on their land and therefore the land belonged to them. For this reason, the white settlers should be removed and boundaries should remain how they were created by the Native Americans. The other side argues that removing Native Americans from their land will create more opportunity for the economy and agriculture to expand. While we focused on the first perspective in high school, a perspective that I agree with, this chapter has confirmed the importance of being informed of every perspective. The fact Zinn mentions that some tribes were willing to adopt the white settler’s civilization in order to live in peace really surprised me. I knew that several tribes were against violence but I didn’t realize that some were likely to give into the white settlers’ wishes. However, after reading the rest of the chapter and understanding that friendships between the settlers and natives formed, it became evident that Native Americans felt pressures from the government much more than they did from certain other white settlers.

Similar to the concepts discussed during the American Revolution chapters, laws and acts that are passed might not necessarily represent the sentiments of the common person. Jackson, a white wealthy man and political elite, wanted to encourage settlers to move onto Native American land through formal legislation such as the Indian Trade and Intercourse Act which asserted that all treaty-making and negotiation between tribes and settlers are under the control of the federal government. This law applied to the Native American territories and pushed many tribes west as they had limited control over the governmental power over them. Additionally, the Removal Bill gave Native Americans no say but stated that Native Americans who did not move west would have no protection under the government. Zinn explained how this issue was very polarized between Northern and Southern sentiments. This is fairly comparable to modern day politics. A lot of issues have two partisan sides and people tend to form views based on their party affiliation. In the same sense, northerners shared similar sentiments and southerners shared similar sentiments.

Another idea that stood out to me was how some Native American tribes slowly started to own slaves and resemble the societies of the white settlers. I drew a connection between this idea expressed in Zinn’s chapter and the writing by Roanhorse. The main character in the story, Jesse, seemed embarrassed of his culture while also being protective of preserving his heritage. In Zinn’s chapter, the Native Americans changed their society maybe to appeal to the white settler’s way of living. This is similar to how Jesse was forced to change how he portrayed his Native American culture in order to appeal to the stereotypes that tourists expected. This brings me to the idea that minorities or people of color are seen as exotic and therefore are prone to having their cultures appropriated or forced to alter their cultural traditions in order to be seen as more exotic. This was shown when Jesse had to speak in the “best broken English accent” that he could or when he changed the name from “Pale Crow” to “White Wolf.” This contributes to false ideas of history and culture because tourists are getting an altered and exaggerated enactment of a culture.

1 Comment

9/23 Tommy Bennett

In Rebecca Roanhorse’s “Welcome to Your Authentic Indian Culture”, the reader gets to see what the worst of cultural appropriation and commercialization could turn out to be.  A future is pictured where, using virtual reality, tourists are able to get an authentic Native American experience in exchange for money. The character of White Wolf is an extended metaphor for the way that white people exploit other communities’ cultures. While at first White Wolf merely seems to be a friendly stranger who wants to learn about Indigenous American’s culture, by the end of the story he has robbed the protagonist, Jesse Turnblatt, of everything. When white people enter into another culture’s space and assume parts of it as their own without experiencing any of the true hardship that comes with being a part of the group, it leaves true members of the culture stripped of their identity and sense of self as the protagonist is at the end of the story.

This fictional reading was made even more interesting by chapter 7: “As Long A Grass Grows Or Water Runs” in APHOTUS.  In this chapter, we learn about Andrew Jackson’s strategies of displacing indigenous people to further benefit white America. The chapter discusses how Jackson was hailed as an incredible leader in part for his military actions against indigenous tribes as well as how, as president, he supported Georgia’s right to remove the Cherokee tribe from its land in spite of the fact that the Cherokee helped him in an earlier battle against the Creek tribe. The history of the interactions between white and indigenous people is an unbelievable cruel one, which makes Roanhorse’s statement against cultural appropriation in her fictional story more powerful. As the cultural group that has directly caused much of the indigenous people’s suffering, it is even more inappropriate for white people to now adopt that culture as their own.

 

Leave a Comment

Welcome to Your Authentic Experience – 9/23

Reading the short story, Welcome to Your Authentic Indian Experience, felt like something out of a Black Mirror episode. Not many assigned readings I have had in the past have actually captivated me like this one did, while also touching on a very relevant and serious topic in today’s society.

The plot of this story is told in a second person POV, which is an incredible tactic to make the reader internalize every emotion the main character is experiencing with the author constantly saying “you” while describe what the character is going through. The main character is Jesse Turnblatt, but goes by Jesse Trueblood instead to sound more “native” for the virtual reality company he works for. This company provides a virtual reality experience of live as a Native to rich white people. Jesse is an indigenios Native American but is forced to learn a type of fake realness the white people want that coincides with the Native live that Hollywood movies illustrate.

Jesse ultimately losing his job as he lets his guard down and describes his true life of a Native to a white man who claims he is Cherokee, but in reality only has one Cherokee relative, portrays the concept that America tends to only romanticize the Native culture that fits in their media-based stereotype, not any true culture told from actual Natives.

It is painful to read how Jesse accepts this appropriation of his culture, just so he can keep his job and support himself financially. Jesse experiences cognitive dissonance because he knows this isn’t the real him. The corporate world in America can truly make people lose their self-dignitity and self-identity simply for one to maintain their jobs.

This story also reminds me of the recent social movement to start banning offensive mascots from sports-teams and schools that appropriate Native American cultures, as well as other non-dominant cultures in America. It angers me to think about how Native American’s must have felt seeing sports teams like the Washington Redskins, and school mascots that resemble Native Americans (a recent example is Winchester High School in Massachussets replacing their Sachem mascot) appropriate their culture with no respect. There is a fine line between appreciating another culture and appropriating it, and I hope America learns the difference (and if you don’t know the difference then just don’t do it!!)

1 Comment

Sophia Picozzi Blog Post 9/23

While reading chapter 7 of A People’s History of the United States I couldn’t help but recognize the direct parallels or connections between the removal of Native Americans and both slavery and later housing segregation of African Americans throughout American history. Zinn stated that the main forces behind the removal of the Native Americans were not the poor white frontiersmen, but from big businesses and the federal government collectively. In fact, the frontiersmen and the natives bonded over common problems and lived in friendship and peace. This made me recall in earlier chapters how slaves, white servants, poor whites, and freed slaves formed friendships and even marriages in colonial America and how these relationships were only broken up by the racially charged language of the elites and the federal government. This is a blatant repetition in American history and unfortunately, the poor whites didn’t learn from the past and were used yet again as a pawn to advance the selfish economic desires of the rich. I also noticed parallels between the perseverance and fighting spirit of both the slaves and the Native Americans when they were experiencing brutal conditions. The bravery and determination that these two ostracised groups embodied are almost unbelievable given how horribly they were repeatedly treated by the most powerful agents in the nation.

Another parallel that is worth exploring is the role of “de jure” practices throughout American history. In this chapter, it is clear that the government, and most specifically Presidents Andrew Jackson and Thomas Jefferson, led the initiatives to remove the natives from their own land and try to assimilate them into American society. This is an example of “de jure” practices where the government played an instrumental role in ostracising and obliterating the culture and livelihoods of the Native Americans. The government and the minority that was the Southern elites overpowered the North and the beliefs of whites across America to further their own needs through forced legal action. They basically coerced the nation into agreeing with their views and removing the Native Americans. It should be noted, however, that even though there was backlash against these actions, the American people knowingly let these injustices take place because they weren’t the ones who were mostly affected by it. Racially charged de jure practices can also be seen in housing segregation throughout the 19th and 20th centuries where the government implemented public housing that perpetuated ideals of segregation regardless of the views of the American people. Even in racially integrated communities where whites and blacks lived in harmony, the government implemented segregated housing units while claiming that they were simply maintaining the status quo. They used manipulative language, which is also seen in the removal of the Native Americans, to insist that they were doing the right thing and that their actions were motivated by the overall good of the people, especially the racial minorities. This dangerous language is what aided the government to pereptuate racist idealogies and divisions with “de facto” reforms targeted at both Native Americans and African Americans.

2 Comments

Olivia Cosco 9/23 blog post

Chapter 7 of Peoples History of the United States was very interesting to me in the sense that I had never really read about president Andrew Jackson in that light before. While I have learned in history that he passed the Indian Removal Act, the way this was played out was horrifying to read about. Zinn portrayed the cruelty that was used to move out Indians. In fact, it was actually their land that they were being forced to leave. They were marginalized and even killed in order for white people to settle on their land. In the episode 9 podcast, Dr. Bezio discusses the fact that we must accept that we will never know the full truth and every single detail to history. While this may be true, reading Zinn’s chapter made me wonder why history teaches us to characterize Andrew Jackson as a hero, when in fact, the horrifying details of his Indian Removal Act are know. I wish we learned more about these truths rather than being taught the glorified version.

The short story, Welcome to Your Authentic Indian Experience was also very interesting to me. I felt that this story tied both the podcast and Zinn’s chapter together by giving us a personal experience. In this story, Jesse essentially has everything in his life taken from him by other people. He comes back to work after being sick, only to find out he was replaced by someone better. After finding this out, getting into a fight at the bar, and waking up realizing his wife was probably very angry, Jesse goes home to find out that the “White Wolf” had talked to his wife who decided she wanted Jesse out. Essentially, his wife was also taken from him. To me, this story portrayed the way that white people took Indigenous people’s land from them in the 1830’s. It was their land first, the same way it was Jesse’s job and wife first.

2 Comments

Kathrine Yeaw Blog Post 9/23

The reading in A People’s History of the United States, I was less surprised as I have been in past chapters. The reason for this could be because I’ve learned a lot about Indian Removal and the horrible things that happened on both sides. While I say I’ve learned about it, one of the most important parts (if not the most important) of the Indian removal is the role of Andrew Jackson, which I didn’t really know about until senior year of high school. Before that, I only knew him as the president who passed the Indian Removal Act, which in itself is already horrible. But, learning about the truly inhuman things he did or thought was normal for these Indians was shocking. The main reason for this shock was because, as Zinn says, he was “a national hero”. He was someone that was respected, and he was someone people looked up to, yet he did some really horrible things. I know now most people disagree with Jackson’s actions and do not like him, but was it the same when he was living? Although, Zinn mentions how Northerners were opposed to Indian Removal, so clearly some realized the horrible things Jackson wanted. What surprised me was how the Northerners eventually stopped caring, preoccupied with their own issues. 

Just like most other chapters in this book, it does not put the US in a very positive light, or at least who were supposed to be the leaders and representatives of the country. This chapter made me realize once again that there are so many things to not be very proud of in our history. Although, it also reminds me of how important it is to stand up for what we believe in and fight back when we need to. It makes me think back to the last chapter about women, because my life is different today because of a few women who spoke up, when they knew something was wrong. For the Indians, there seems as though there was no right thing to do, except try to speak up. If they signed the treaties and agreed to leave, the treaties were broken or they died while leaving, and if they tried to fight back, they lost their land and once again died. In this story, the oppressed didn’t gain anything back, the same way women and slaves eventually did. Like Zinn says in the first sentence “Indians were the most foreign, the most exterior”, which was in part the reason for being pushed out, because as history shows, we fear and push out things/people that are different from us.

1 Comment