>>>> Note, I said: One possible reason that both native americans AND blacks (then slaves) were treated so badly for so long is that both largely sided with the British in the war of independence. -- Simon
The reason for our disagreement lies between the emphasis you place on one part of your statement and mine on what is, to me, the other (most important part) of it.
While you may think I did, I never took issue with the fact that there were instances when Natives and Africans sided with the Brits. Natives played one side against the other since neither side was interested in the continuation of the Natives as a people. When the opportunity arose, Blacks sided with the British because they naively pinned their hopes of freedom and equality on the benevolence and good-will of the Brits.
Natives did so much more frequently than Blacks as even your source points out, owing to the fact that, for the most part, Africans simply didn't have the opportunity to sign up for the opposing side. After all... they were kinda busy at the time, growing tobacco and picking cotton on the nice little farms where they lived scattered all over the South.
The problem with your statement is what it alleges; that support on the part of a very few Natives and Blacks had a sweeping impact on their numbers as a whole. Your statement seems to make the general statement that throughout their history, Natives and Blacks were subjected to genocide and otherwise mistreated because some Natives and Blacks sided with the Brits. That's absurd.
As I said already, a century and a half before the Revolutionary War, slavery commenced in 1620 when a Dutch vessel arrived at Jamestown with the first of several million Africans. It's preposterous to say that those slaves or any who lived here for the next 150 years were mistreated because of their activities in a war that hadn't yet occured.
Even when it came, Natives and Africans who did side with the "enemy" had minimal involvement in the War and little impact on its outcome. So, it's absurd to say that the genocide of Natives throughout the New World (including all those tribes out West that didn't know brits from buffaloes) and the harsh treatment of slaves throughout the South who had nothing to do with the War was due to their war-time involvement. Natives and Africans who had nothing to do with the War were and have been among the most harshly affected by mistreatment at the hands of Europeans. The participation on the part of a handful of their number has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the way Natives and Blacks have been treated since.
Rebels and Red Coats - Native Americans & Blacks in the American Revolution
by Simon 69 Replies latest jw friends
-
teejay
-
plmkrzy
And as for fighting a civil war "to end slavery"? Please tell me you're joking! Ending slavery was used as a tool in the war by the Yankees to weaken the Confederate south who relied on them. It was not the reason for fighting the war.
I thought is was for votes? lol!
But I personally think it is more along the lines of another comment, "once the wheels get rolling, their hard to stop".
I think that people are creatures of conditioned behavior on rolling wheels. There is no logical reason why people treat each other badly based on ethnicity but people do and if we look at our own histories we can see a lot of it is based on conditioning. Learned behavior. Those who fight against "learned" behavior are usually the ones who make the biggest contributions to society.
off subject a little bit... If anyone hasn't seen the movie "Windtalkers", it is a sleeper and I can't say if it is true to life or not but it is a pretty interesting flick if you're in to war movies. It has a good storyline and is well acted out. It's about the role-played by the Navajo in the war, or better yet, how the Navajo were used along with Marines to fight the war.
-
teejay
>>>> Some say the war was fought because of "States Rights" and not because of slavery. However, the main thing the southern States wanted in their "States Rights" was to continue slavery; Interestingly, Abraham Lincoln's... main concern was keeping the Union together ... [stating] at the beginning of the war that if he could keep the Union together without freeing the slaves, he would do it. -- Mary
Mary,
That was an excellent, not to mention concise, overview of the reason for the Civil War (as I've studied it). Technically, and only technically, the CW was not about slavery. -
Abaddon
This is fun...
I do think Simon proves his point admirably, i.e., that his assertion was not absurd. That's different from it being PROVED though.
I personally think that the treatment of blacks lagging behind most of Europe, and the treatment of Native Americans, WAS at least in part religiously influenced. I will deal with whether this is STILL a reason later in my post.
Those who have studied American history will be aware of the term 'Divine Mandate', the popular belief that god had given the West to the white man. This gave a sheen of respectability to the greed-inspired ethnic cleansing carried out by the US government. This is an established historical fact; the USA effectively claimed they had the divine right to kill 'indians'.
Likewise, the standard 'Ham justification', and the fact that even in the New Testament slavery is approved of, helped keep slavery and attitudes towards blacks fixed when compared to most of Europe. Religion was one of the reasons that drove people to emigrate to America, and it is scarse surprising that a culture partially founded to allow people the freedom to pursue their particular interpretation of scripture proved to be one reluctant to revise its beliefs, especially profitable ones;
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USASreligion.htm
http://www.oup-usa.org/isbn/0195142799.html
So, both slavery and the ethnic cleansing of the west were influenced by religious beliefs of the time -beliefs which lagged behind Europe.
Are those same factors to blame for continuing attitudes?
If people think that blaming religion is a bit weak, think on this.
Statistics by the Pew Institute, in yesterdays Guardian, showed the following about American's today;
- 94% believe in God
- 86% in miracles
- 89% in heaven
- 73% in hell and the devil
- 44% believe God gave Israel to the Jews
- 36% believe the state of Israel is part of the fulfilment of Biblical prophecy relating to the second coming
- 48% believe the USA has special protection from God.
Add to this that the still strident opinions held by many Americans on various subjects such as homosexuality and abortion (which are far less heated issues in most of Europe, and are not the subject of such religious polarisation) are STILL dictated by religious belief, and you can see how strong an influence it still has in the USA today; the above statistics show the USA has more in common with Pakistan than with most of Europe with regard to religious belief!
Obviously no mainstream church today preaches such against the American Indians or supports slavery or discrimination against black. But if anyone thinks that religious practise is easily shaken off, look at the tree in the corner of your living room this Christmas, and the bunny rabbits and chick decorating anything to do with Easter, let alone the eggs.
These are inoffensive things carried on downstream in history for hundreds of years, even thousands, after their true meaning disappears.
Can we convince ourselves that the bigotry inculturated into our great, great grandparents by religion is going to be completely absent in the society that exists today?
I can't, for one...
Look at the mixed race marriages aroiund you... oh, well, if you are in the USA, that's a lot harder, isn't it? Us Europeans marry people of a different colur far more often - although obviously this can be due to racist attitudes in the black community as well as the white, or influenced by parents considering the attitudes a mixed race child would face in the USA even today.
There were several thousand blacks in Georgan London; by the time of the 'Windrush', and the great immigration from the Carribean of the '50's and '60's into England, they had disappeared. How? Because they got so mixed they looked as white as their neighbours - and this with the attitudes of two hundred years ago!
Quite why race is still such an issue in the USA don't know - the religious bigotry of yesteryear can only explain so much. But when three of the most powerful black people in the USA confirm they received the benefits of affirmative action, and wouldn't be where they are today without it...
... well, it would worry the hell out of me.
This post seeks to discuss problems with society in the US in an adult fashion. Americans are free to discuss other societies shortcomings. It is gladly acknowledged that the USA is a wonderful place full of lovely people and it is the hope of the poster they will deal with the thoughts discussed in this post instead of taking things personally (and proving how nationalistic Americans can be) and humming hail to the chief and telling us how wonderful America is and how unfair it is it gets picked on. This is a dull argument at the best of times and one completely impossible to do anything about with the current topic of discussion. To emphasise, the UK had slavery and did nasty things to native peoples, no one is saying we didn't, hell, my great great great great great great great great great grandfather was Sir John Hawkins, who stared the shipping of slaves to the West Indies from Africa, and the return trip to the UK carrying produce and silver, so the guilt of the UK when compaerd to the USA is not the issue; it's why there are still such issues in the USA today.
-
DannyBear
Tj,
If my memory serves me right, African slavery was very alive in the Caribbean islands long before arriving on the shores of the US.
It came to America based upon Abaddon's reasons above and the new market created by the tabacco/cotton farmers of the south.
Danny
-
teenyuck
Abaddon, I agree wholeheartedly with what you wrote. The stats, I am sure are true. Those are very powerful points. That religion is important in *most* Americans lives and minds is startling and frightening. I know some very ardent Catholics....they really are scarry they way they carry on about God and such....
Can we convince ourselves that the bigotry inculturated into our great, great grandparents by religion is going to be completely absent in the society that exists today?
I can't, for one...
I cannot either. All I can do is treat people how I want to be treated. Fairly and decently. I don't know what else to do or how else I can make up for what I did not do or pay for sins I did not commit.
My relatives were peasants on the Polish/Russian side. They came over here between 1890-1914. My Swedish side came over 1918-1925.
Why should I feel guilty for the way other white people have acted? I personally have never tried to be hurtful or rude or discriminatory. I have never been in a position to offer a job, loan, or anything else that would impact someone's life.
What is an average person to do?
-
teenyuck
I must add:
The weird thing is that the only religious people/great grandparents I had were the JWs. My Swedish grandfather never went to church. Neither did his Irish wife. My Polish great grandmother on the other side (the one who was not the evil slave) never got into religion. My other Polish great grandparents were JWs... both were annointed. She became an evil slave and he stayed the course til death.
Out of 4 great grandparents and 4 grandparents that were alive when I was a kid and I *knew* growing up, only 1 ended up with any religion at all. The great grandfather on my mothers side who ended up being an annoited JW....the rest seemingly were godless. I guess that's where I got it....
-
teejay
Excellent post, Abaddon. As usual.
IMO, you have targeted the underlying reason why Europeans have been so keen on mistreating all other (non-European) peoples, whether they be Natives, Africans, Mexicans, Japanese, Chinese... whatever.
Manifest Destiny lay at the heart of westward expansion -- a deeply instilled feeling of entitlement that Europeans were superior to all other people and, more importantly, that they had/have a divine mandate to go and do what they did, whatever the cost to any who stood in their way.
Unfortunately, dangerous delusions such as this persist. For proof, all one needs to do is hear/read any number of the statements that President Bush has publicly made since 9-11, generally with widespread approval from too-many Americans. Religious references to "evildoers" and "crusades" while invoking god's hand in the matter points to the fact that on a very conscious level, these people not only believe that god is real, but that they are doing that one's stated will. That's why it's impossible for me to see meaningful difference between Bush and Bin Laden. They both sing the exact same song, only in different languages.
-
nilfun
There are lots of interesting stories of post-revolution
American indians including a 1,200 mile trek one group
made to try to reach British Canada, only to be caught 40
miles from the border. The transcript of the surrender speach
made by the chief is very moving and you can hear the anguish
as he describes how tired they are of being hunted and seeing
their children cold and starving.Yes, a very moving speech. Here it is for those who may have not had a chance to read it yet:
I am tired of fighting. Our chiefs are killed.
Looking Glass is dead. Toohulhulsote is dead.
The old men are all dead. It is the young men who
say yes or no. He who led the young men is dead.
It is cold and we have no blankets.
The little children are freezing to death. My people,
some of them, have run away to the hills and have
no blankets, no food. No one knows where they
are--perhaps freezing to death. I want to have time
to look for my children and see how many I can find.
Maybe I shall find them among the dead.
Hear me, my chiefs. I am tired. My heart is sick
and sad. From where the sun now stands, I will
fight no more forever.-Hin-mah-too-yah-lat-kekt (Thunder Rolling Down the Mountain)
-
Double Edge
Then we have the Indians that were not so enamored with the British.... those that the British made slaves:
"By the late years of the seventeenth century, caravans of Indian slaves were making their way from the Carolina backcountry to forts on the coast just as caravans of African slaves were doing on the African continent. Once in Charleston, the captives were loaded on ships for the "middle passage" to the West Indies or other colonies such as New Amsterdam or New England. 82 Many of the Indian slaves were kept at home and worked on the plantations of South Carolina; by 1708, the number of Indian slaves in the Carolinas was nearly half that of African slaves. 83 The slave traders of the Carolinas engaged in successful slaving among the Westo, the Tuscarora, the Yamasee, and ultimately the Cherokee.
Though history may record these encounters as "Indian wars," the "wars" were simply Native American responses to the slaving operations of the English and their Shawnee allies. In three years of slaving operations against the Westo Indians, all but fifty of the nation were reduced to slavery or killed. 84 The English and the Shawnee reached far out into the Spanish Empire in the South; some 10,000 to 12,000 Timicuas, Guales, and Apalachees were taken to Charleston and sold into slavery to be shipped throughout the vast English empire. When the Shawnees grew sick of their mercenary occupation and dissolved their trading partnership with the English, South Carolina Governor John Archdale established a policy of "thinning the barbarous Indian natives." By 1710, the Shawnees had gone the way of the Westo. 85
When the Tuscarora Indians of North Carolina rebelled against being driven from their land, they were met by a force of thirty English settlers and five hundred Yamasee warriors led by Colonel John Barnwell. After King Hancock of the Tuscarora signed a treaty, Barnwell and his men seized a number of Tuscarora as slaves. The Tuscarora considered this a breach of the treaty and continued the war. In 1713, another group of settlers and one thousand Indian allies (including 200 Cherokee) led by Colonel James Moore, veteran of the Shawnee slaving raids in Florida, routed the Tuscarora. The four hundred Tuscarora who survived the battle were sold into slavery at ten pound sterling each to finance the campaign. 86
In 1715, the Yamasee rebelled against British degradation, maltreatment, and exploitation. The English had begun to seize Yamasee women and children for the slave market in payment of debts that the Indians had assumed in their relationship with the English. William Anews, missionary to the Mohawks for the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, reported to his superiors that the English were "abusing the Indians with drink and then cheate them in Trading with them and Stealing Even their Children away and carry them off to other places and sell them for slaves." 87 Charles Craven, then Governor of South Carolina, organized the militia and set out against the Yamasee; four hundred Yamasee were either killed or taken to Charleston to be sold into slavery. The nation was almost exterminated; what survivors there were fled to Florida to live among the Spanish missionaries. 88 "