From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Wed Nov 17 2004 - 14:00:43 GMT
Arlo,
Your long post revealed a number of assumptions you apparently hold dear:
> I ask this because there are plenty of primary sources that reveal the
> military was involved with distributing pox blankets, that Indians who
> tried to assimilate were systematically robbed of their land so that white
> land owners could have it (court records indicate a clear trend to deny
> representation and protection of the law to Indian land owners in the
> Northeast), that Indians were forced to deathmarch from their lands in the
> east to the territories. In Haiti the situation was more immediately
> devastating for the natives. Are you suggesting, that these primary sources
> be withheld and not made a part of the teaching of history because they are
> the natural processes by which one culture dominates another?
Assumption 1: Primary sources are accurate.
Assumption 2. Indians were land owners.
> Indeed, it is this "feel good" nationalism that is at the root of the
> current discourse problems in American politics. It is the ingrained need
> to view history as a "we're always right" and "they're always wrong"
> mentality. It is what has undermined criticism in this country to make it
> "traitorous". It is why no one seems to care about our despicable actions
> in the Middle East leading up to the current situation, only their
> despicable actions. Even my saying this in the current setting will likely
> lead you to believe I place ALL blame on "the white man". I don't, but you
> and the "feel good" nationalism crowd seem unable to distinguish critical
> historical argumentation from advancing one side over the other. This whole
> Indian debate proves that. Like Mark said, its not about the accuracy of
> numbers, its about the accuracy of the primary sources that reveal the
> events as they unfolded. But here the whole thing has treaded water on the
> myth that by proposing this, we are somehow favoring (1) a utopic native
> myth, or (2) a hatred of white men.
Assumption 3. Nationalism (patriotism) is evil.
Assumption 4. The U.S. is responsible for Islamic terrorism.
> So let me restate. Yes, we should teach the reality that Indians were not
> utopic noble savages, that they made war with each other, dashed their
> rivals heads on rocks, claimed the women of conquered tribes, etc. But we
> should also teach that we used the military to distribute pox infected
> blankets, that we used the military to enforce long deathmarches to move
> the native populations out of land desired by whites, that Indians who did
> try to assimilate were denied protection and representation.
Assumption 5. Today's children are responsible for the actions of their
fathers and forefathers.
> The clashing of cultures, as Mel suggested, is a historical given. It is
> happening at present (hegemony and war). But being able to critically
> assess these clashes, to be critical of both sides and not demand a
> nationalistically or ideologically revised account of this clash is what
> everyone I know in academia favors.
Assumption 6. "Critical thinking" is good -- defined as finding faults and
emphasizing the negatives, especially in regards to the U.S.
> With Indians or Iraqis, you response seems to favor a view of white
> american interests as being wholly moral, above reproach and noble and just
> in its actions. The "other" is always seen as inferior, violent, brutish
> and less culturally advanced. You also seem to favor the notion that
> America is morally justified in its hegemony as it is superior and
> favorable to all other cultures and societies. Am I wrong to infer this?
Assumption 7: No culture is superior to another.
> Of course. I wouldn't be here if I thought otherwise. But, as I think Ian
> repsonded, we should avoid the teaching of the MOQ as dogma, or as if all
> other metaphysical approaches are "wrong".
Assumption 8. No metaphysics is superior to another.
> Won't be easy, that's for sure. Like I said, I belive critical thinking and
> cross-cultural competence to be two keys in this regard.
Assumption 9. Multiculturalism (respect all cultures no matter how
backward or barbaric) is a cure-all for the world's problems.
> Careful, Chuck. You are on the verge of challenge "feel good" heroification
> of "the founders". Certainly we can dismiss these "lies" about Washington
> as part of the "liberal agenda" to make white men feel guilty. ;-)
> On to Evolution...
Assumption 10: A person has a duty to do as he says. Otherwise, what he
says should be ridiculed and ignored.
If any of these interpretations of your underlying assumptions are grossly
in error, I'd be happy to be corrected.
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 17 2004 - 14:09:25 GMT