Let’s see:
Olohne, Cherokkee, Ishi, Sacajewa, etc.
They don’t teach this anymore?
All of it or just some of it? This part?
In the colonies the war was called the French and Indian War. Both the French and the British colonists were helped by their Indian allies. An ally is a friend in a war. The British army and British colonists were helped by the Iroquois Indians.
America’s First Immigrants.
So, when does this victimhood expire?
Oh, I see. It isn’t ever going to expire. 2000 years from now, there will still be special privileges and rewards for descendents of Indians, and those who claim to be.
If there’s a USA in 2000 years!
The white man brought freedom and other natural rights, science, capitalism, limited government, and other virtues and requirements of life proper to a rational being. In this context, the passage of time washes away past injustice if they are willing to participate in it.
The Modoc war is worth studying.
Or died by diseases introduced by Europeans . . .
As if they never died from diseases before Europeans showed up. How very scientific. Before Europeans arrived, they lived forever.
Hello, my name is Christopher. Would you like to sample my smallpox? Or would you like some Black Plague today?
I guess the indians will object when their story of slaughtering other tribes is being reported instead of the living in harmony with each other and nature BS.
It’s about time the tribes speak up to teach their history.
Do it now, before all the learned Elders have died off or been brainwashed by the mis-education systems of today’s America.
The LGBT’s and the Islamists are not going to welcome the competition for those Govt. funded propaganda mills.
This is a widespread lie and revisionist propaganda that needs to die. The natives were never "enslaved". They weren't bought and sold; they weren't forced to come to live on the missions; and they didn't become anyone's property.
When the missioners were sent to California by the Spanish Crown, their charge was to introduce the natives to Christianity, and to make them civilized citizens so that they could adapt to Spanish rule. They were invited to live on the mission lands, but once they were accepted they were bound to obey the rules of the community.
Spain, which had just recently emerged from a 700 year war to take back it's country from the Moslems, was still a feudal society where there was a very strict hierarchical structure with peasants at the bottom and royalty at the top (in California the governing officials represented the Crown-- thus they were called "viceroys"). So basically, the Indians in California were treated no worse (or better) than those of the same social status in Spain.
Corrections or Clarifications Needed...
1. “the [California] missions marked the beginning of colonization in California” —NOT. The (known) beginning of colonization in California was the invasion of the Asiatic colonists, since termed “native Americans,” to be followed several thousand years later by the invasion of the European colonists from Spain...
2. “died of diseases introduced by the (Spanish) colonists...” NOT QUITE. The diseases did kill many, yes indeed ... but the word choice in the textbook is so poor as to be slanted. The disease germs were carried, unknowingly for the most part, by the Spanish (whose population had developed immunological resistance to those particular pathogens, since same were commonplace in Europe). The germs were not intentionally bottled up and brought over and then forcibly injected into the previous-colonists... which the technical term “introduced by” could easily (deliberately?) imply in the children’s minds. This unfortunate interpretation is made even more likely by including the “introduced by” term (correct in a technical journal, yes) in the same sentence as “killed by” (referring to deliberate violent acts). There were some deliberate violent acts, yes, and these should be included in the lesson. But, most of the deaths were by the disease pathogens (carried unintentionally), and this should be made clear, too.
In short, I believe the socalled “native’ history should be taught. But, it needs to be taught clearly and correctly and using terminology that is as free of (intentional or not) misunderstanding as possible. IN short, a clean, honest history lesson (insofar as possible) not a slanted political polemic.
They probably won’t mention all the wars started by Native Americans massacring settlers and colonists.
I don’t have a problem with that, as long as the whole story is taught objectively....I know...that’ll last part there, will be the fly in the ointment.
Can’t teach our founding any longer.
They can try to convince our little children how vile and corrupt our first citizens were, and of course every White person since.
Why are we putting up with this?
California history is just that, not going back in history forever. That being said, California was the worst in treatment of American Indians and others. And they look down upon southerners, so smugly.
Disclaimer: I’m a native Californian and Cherokee. I have no stake in this battle.
The Injuns lost. They have no say.
I am in favor of including the history of the local and regional American Indians in studies of local and regional history. I am also in favor of teaching that history accurately, and depicting those cultures as they were, not as some kind of “Noble Savages.” The difficulty in doing so is in the source material. Pre-literate peoples don’t have a history, as modern, literate civilizations understand the term. They have legends, myths, sagas and eddas, passed on orally. Even after the great civilizations developed writing it took a while for them to develop history; at first they just copied down their oral traditions. The next steps were/are to collect these oral traditions and try to edit them into some kind of coherent account, and to start recording reports of events as soon after they happen as possible, and based on the testimony of living persons who were there when it happened. And that is still not history, as we would understand the term.
Somebody should tell them there’s no such thing as Native Americans as they mean it.
Everybody is a descendant of an immigrant.
Just an argument over when they got here.
About how they’re really Asians and anyone born here is a native American?