In the Land of the Free

This has got to be one of the saddest stories I've ever read. One of the things that really bothers me about these stories is that we don't learn about these types of events growing up. Of course the U.S isn't going to make sure that the truth about how minority groups were treated makes it into the curriculum but these stories just prove how much is kept from us. From Kindergarten we think that Europeans came over and became best friends with the Indians and we both share information and products and we all get along and sit down together for the Thanksgiving feast. Slavery is brought up but is usually a very short chapter and is moved away from very quickly. The only real horrific event that I learned about in my public school was the Holocaust but that was in Europe and NOT the U.S so I guess it's okay to share other country's dirty laundry just not ours. Later down the road we realize that Europeans came to the "New World" and shoved the Indians out after taking everything away, raping their women, and destroying their villages. We focus more on slavery and exactly what was done, how it worked, and the horrible ways African Americans were treated and forced to live. Then we learn even more about the Holocaust and more in-depth stories and that the U.S government knew about the events of the Holocaust but didn't take action as soon as they could have. So we grow up thinking how nice it is to be from a country that is so humane and so kind to others but then we get stories like this and are once again proven wrong. I just wish that stories like this didn't have to wait until college because I think the truth should be told at the youngest age possible (but also taking maturity into mind). Though I do think the U.S is a great country and I'm proud to be born and raised here, it isn't fair to pretend that past Americans didn't do anything wrong and that our country has a perfect history.

In your public school did you learn the true stories about settlement/slavery/immigration/the Holocaust or did you hear the fairy tale stories like I did? Also, to relate back to the story, why do you think it was so important for immigration officials to take children away from their immigrant parents?

Defining Racism

     I really did love reading this. This definition of racism really exposes just how prominent racism continues to be in today's day in age. No beating around the bush. This is how the world is. THERE IS NO DENYING THIS. How quickly I was to learn stereotypes at such a young age. As far back as I can recall in my childhood, I associated Native Americans with the same sort of characteristics as the preschoolers in the experiment. They, along with myself had unknowingly been exposed to these stereotypical traits from a young age. Feathers, beads, bows & arrows, and of course the term “indian giver” just to name a few, were typical associations I made. Although I was able to pick up on these things, I never really saw myself as “stereotyping” a cultural group. In fact, I wasn’t entirely able to see myself as part of the group, or felt as though I could completely “fit in”, despite being white. I did often feel like a minority, and this was because I wasn’t raised Christian like the majority of school children in my area. Religion, just like race, can put you outside the group. Being raised Jewish meant understanding a bit of what it’s like to have other prejudices against you. I also learned this early on, as many students tended to see being jewish as some sort of “joke” or laughable matter in some cases. I’m assuming this not only has to do with society, but what they pick up from their parents. When parents make jokes about certain groups, or stereotypes, children are easily influenced. Although many people don’t find jokes as serious acts of racism, all jokes dealing with stereotypes have that underlying hint of degradation. I often wished that I could share the same religion as the majority of the kids, because being one of the few non-christian students made me feel like maybe Judaism wasn’t as “good”.

I read somewhere a while back that an experiment was done in which black girls and white girls were put into a room and asked to choose a doll to play with. There were black and white versions of the dolls, however, both the white girls and the black girls preferred to play with the white dolls. Why do you think this is? Does it have something to do with racism itself, or perhaps another impression put onto children of minority groups at a young age, such as not being “good” enough?

Information to those who would remove to America..

As an international student I was interesting in the reading of Benjamin Franklin's pamphlet, which was addressed for people in Europe to clarify the endless rumors and cliche about America being the land of dreams and fantasy. He addresses such an idea in his writing “Information to Those Who Would Remove to America” as part of his explanation of American culture and society to a European audience. I really like this quote and I think, he stated the "ugly truth": "The Truth is, that though there are in that Country few People so miserable as the Poor of Europe, there are also very few that in Europe would be called rich; it is rather a general happy Mediocrity that prevails."  

He thought that the European society has social classes and cultural distinctions for its citizens compare to America and there is no such thing as upper and middle class. 

Is there any difference between Europe and America in nowadays, thinking about social classes and statuses?

Why wasn't this in the 3rd grade play?

In An Indian's Looking Glass and What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July? both authors address their minority's oppression. Douglas uses rhetorical questions, powerful language such as "the mournful wails of millions [in chains]", and the admittance that his voice of reason will not be heard by the slave owners to emphasize the egregious wrongs happening in America. Apess expresses disgust at the systems which keep resources from the American Indian people and ultimately drive them to alcoholism and prostitution. They address white oppression in an outright way I did not know existed so strongly in the writings of the time because they weren't widely talked about in my schools. Even the writings of a very well discussed founding father expressed distaste with the lack of opportunity and equality in America. This, along with the other two texts show an intense dissatisfaction with the reality of the "American  Dream" that we, to this day, do not read about in our grammar school textbooks.

Why do you think that we are not exposed to these perceptions of America in our early education?

Crevecoeur's What is an American

The melting pot metaphor is quickly growing into a dated idea in United States. In his essay What is an American, Crevecoeur supports the idea of America, at the time, as a melting pot and may show why the idea was so popular. In his essay he states that many of the foreigners that came over to American married people of different nationalities. This mixing of cultures blurred the line between the different nationalities Crevecoeur writes "I could point out to you a family whose grandfather was an Englishman, whose wife was Dutch, whose son married a French woman, and whose present four sons have now four wives of different nations. He is an American." In his opinion an American is someone of a mixed heritage. I don't think that an American has to be someone of a mixed heritage anymore. I was born Bosnia but was raised in the United States. I feel much more American than I do a Bosnian. At the same time being Bosnian is also a huge part of who I am. I don't believe that being American can be defined as being one thing or another anymore. In our current society being American can mean many things to many people so it is impossible to have one concrete definition of an American.


Why do you think that the melting pot metaphor is not prevalent in our current society, and why may it have been a valid idea in the 1780's when Crevecoeur wrote this essay.

An Indian's Looking Glass

An Indian's Looking Glass was this week's reading that impacted my thoughts the most.  How horrible they were treated just because they weren't "white" and they looked different from the Europeans that came and intruded into their land anyway.  One of the quotes that made me think, "why do humans feel the need to be better than others?" was this one: "Another reason is because those men who are Agents, many of them are unfaithful and care not whether the Indians live or die, they are much imposed upon by their neighbors, who have no principle." This made me think of the issues still going on today such as some people believing that gay people are different than the "normal" human being, therefore they cannot have the same rights are heterosexual people.  Also, the issues of immigration. For example, some Americans look down on immigrants because they might have a different skin color and may have different features than the average white American person.  And this is exactly what happened to the Native Americans and now this land is barely even theirs too.   How hateful can we be towards each other just because we may look different?? After all, we do all have the same insides!

So I ask you: How do you treat people that look different from you?

Frederick Douglass Speech

I have always known that Frederick Douglass was a self-made man that literally started at the bottom of the barrel, a slave to be exact, was later given opportunities to make something of himself, and he then more than capitalized on these opportunities.  As he continued his education and made connections throughout the North, he came to realize that he was meant for something more than an "ordinary" freed slave, but to become a leader against the entire institution of slavery.  His efforts earned him great respect, and conversely fear, from those that he came to influence, and at one point he even had a one on one discussion over slavery with Abraham Lincoln himself.  In this speech that he gave on July 5th, 1852, he makes the assertion that the celebration is not meant for slaves or indentured servants, but for those that owned slaves and everyone else that was free.  At the end of the speech he says that the fact that slaves are far more likely to be legally executed than whites demonstrates that whites view blacks as fully realized human beings.  As a reader in the 21st century, who believes this is a valid conclusion?

What to the slave ( And the Native American and everyone else in the mix) is the Fourth of July?

                The fourth of July is a day that signifies liberty and justice within many Americans, but the question arises as to whether or not the same feeling resonates within every person residing in the “Land of The Free.”  Fredrick Douglass’s speech What to the Slave is the Fourth of July notes his discontent for the historically marked day. “This Fourth of July is yours, not mine.” To the slave, decedents of the slave, or any other oppressed group in America, what exactly would the significance of the Fourth of July be? Sure had the British not of given the United States its independence the country would not be in existence today, but when the founding fathers created the land and laws we live in today, all but one group was excluded. For the Native American who was stripped of their homeland, dignity, and respect what would be the significance of a day that is meant to represent freedom? I feel as though for a large group of people in the country, the supposed day of liberty only brings feelings of contempt.  Given that I am a first generation American to parents of African descent I always appreciated the holiday but never felt as though I could relate to its true significance. Now my question for you is, do you feel the significance of the Fourth of July or is it just another day of the year?

An Indian’s Looking Glass for the White Man

I really like the way the speaker is frankly calling out white men on the way they act with everything. They treat their women as property and silence them when they want to speak; they don’t care about other cultures as people and could uncaringly kill other people without a second thought about it. I like that the speaker sticks up for the women even though they are white women because they are both oppressed in similar ways. But I think my favorite part is the way the speaker uses Christianity to prove a point against white men. The Bible says that we should love everyone equally as brothers and sisters (seemingly without regards to ethnicity, gender, or sexuality). Basically the speaker is saying “well if you’re such a great Christian then why don’t you see me as equal to you?” and I think this is a great question for them to pose. So for discussion, do you think the Indians sympathized with white women and were sort of on the same side as them because they were both being silenced or do you think they still held some grudge against the white women because they were still of the white race?

Link to F D's full speech

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=162

Appealing to Religious Morality: Comparing Douglass’s “What to a Slave is the Fouth of July” and Apess’s “An Indian’s Looking-Glass for the White Man”

 After reading both texts, I noticed a theme emerging. Both Douglass and Apess found it necessary to appeal to moralistic sensibilities when making an argument for the oppressed and their desire to have a voice and be treated equally. Appealing to the higher power that you both claim to serve equalizes you. This highlights the effort to find common ground and build upon it. It is a good start. And it helps the argument for equality when one can point to the passages the oppressors claim to abide by and state, “Hey what you do to me goes against everything we’ve been taught by you”. Can’t claim a moral high ground or religious piety when you commit an egregious act with full knowledge of how contrary it is to God’s word. As Douglass states:

 

“Americans! your republican politics, not less than your republican religion, are flagrantly inconsistent.”  

I find it still rings true today. The America that we tout today- "Land of the free, home of the brave” where "everyone has an equal opportunity,” that America ceased to exist ages ago. As e.e. cumming's poem highlighted, these are mere concepts and phrases now, talked of as lofty ideals, but the reality for many people, especially people of color, remains constantly imbalanced, and more often than not, religion is used as a crutch to defend blatant ignorance and hatred, instead of eradicating those issues.

Questions: Both Frederick Douglas and William Apess utilize religious teachings as a way to rebuke hypocrisy and demand equality and freedom for people of color. Are there any other arguments that could have been used to confront the oppressive mindset of white Americans? Would they have been as effective?

EDIT: I have fixed the link below. Apologies for any inconvenience.

P.S. You can read/download "Indian Nullification of the Unconstitutional Laws of Massachusetts Relative to the Marshpee Tribe
Or, the Pretended Riot Explained" by William Apess here.

Crevecoeur believes that religion, particularly Christianity goes hand in hand with civility and manners.  I think that civilization is necessary for Christianity, but Christianity is not necessarily an aspect of civility.  There is a resounding belief in the readings that Christianity is not compatible with incivility, particularly racism.  How does everyone feel about racism and incivility in relation to Christianity, both the actual beliefs and the practice of it?

Franklin vs. Apess

I read Benjamin Franklin's piece first and at first found it inspiring. He speaks about several ideas that America was built upon. His quote, "...America, where people do not inquire concerning a stranger, what is he? but, what can he do? If he has any useful art, he is welcome; and if he exercises it, and behaves well, he will be respected by all who know him," was one that really spoke to me. That is the idea that fostered hope for many people searching for a place where they would be able to live, relatively well off, off their skills and trade. However, I next read William Apess' piece and realized Franklin's words as somewhat hypocritical. Apess writes well and makes a clear and rational argument against the racial discrimination in America. He says, "I know that many say that they are willing, perhaps the majority of the people, that we should enjoy our rights and privileges as they do. If so, I would ask, Why are we not protected in our persons and property throughout the Union?" He calls this injustice. I would have to strongly agree with him. While Benjamin Franklin was undoubtedly intelligent and a huge part of our country's early history, he also carried with him the racial prejudice of the time. He, and many others like him, claimed that the most important thing in America was working hard and adding to the young country's growth. However, basic human rights were refused to all people of color and women. If you weren't a white male then did your skills not exist? Apess also says, "Now I will ask if the Indians are not called the most ingenious people among us. And are they not said to men of talents?" I just found it interesting that talents from anyone not meeting the criteria (white male) were ignored and shunned.

What kind of racial prejudices regarding skills do you still see in the United States today?

history vs myth

Word after word my mind drifts.  The font is so tiny and my eyes squint further and further to relief.  Then, much to my surprise, I turn to the Iroquois Creation Story.  While the text tells us there are twenty-five different versions, Cusick's version intrigued me most.  In the introduction, the writer asserts, "With its monsters and supernatural events, Cusik's account of the Iroquois creation story cannot help but strike us as myth, yet he calls his work a history, one that will lead in time to the establishment of the Iroquois Confederacy" (18).  This statement inspired a great debate in my mind between the idea of myth vs. history.  Naturally, I turned to the internet and good ol' dictionary.com.  The first definition regarding history explains the term as the branch of knowledge dealing with past events.  Myth boils down to a definition of any invented story, idea, or concept.  Obviously, history and myth as concepts expand far beyond the limited boundaries of these definitions.  However, the conflict between these two terms got me thinking; who determines what is history and what is myth? Can any of us actually make that decision?  In the eyes of the Iroquois people, their creation story is the basis of all life; this story is their history.  But, to outsiders such as ourselves, the story becomes mere myth.  Does even the use of the word myth rather than history carry the connotation of Indian inferiority?  Are we outsiders saying that your creation story is full of "monsters and supernatural events" (18) and therefore cannot be true.  It is pure myth.  History is often regarded as objective but nothing is objective.  Everything is documented with some level of perspective and/or manipulation whether consciously or subconsciously.  Christians would shit themselves if the Bible was labeled myth yet for other cultures our vocabulary is reduced to but the one word.  After quite a stream of conscious, I step back and wonder, does the label of myth vs history really have such great implications or is a word just a word.  You tell me. 

Native American Origins and their Looking Glass

Whenever I read any story about Native American's history, especially ones that have been passed down over centuries, I really am amazed about how imaginative they are. The Iroquois Creation Story paints a beautiful picture of how they believe they were created. It was so cool how everything fit into place and how it did remind me of the Creation Story from the Bible. After I read this story that made me feel closer to that culture I read William Apess' An Indian's Looking-Glass for White Men and I got so disappointed by what has happened to the Native Americans by white people. This definitely put me in perspective of how horrible people who think they have power can be. It pained me to read when he was asking "I would ask if there cannot be as good feelings and principles under a red skin as there can be under a white. And let me ask: Did not this bad principle that we who are red children have had to suffer so much as we have?" These lines have spoke out to me so much because there should be no reason for someone to think that they are better than someone else because of skin color.

If you saw someone bullying someone of another race what would you do?

Frederick Douglas and Helen Pitts

I found in Fredrick Douglas' introduction that "Douglas was accused in the black press of betraying his race by marrying his white former secretary Helen Pitts..." to be very interesting. He had been fighting for the rights of African American people to be equals. The black press saying that he betrayed his race though sets the two races still apart from each other. The whole point of being equal is that both races are treated the same and can interact with each other without problems. By frowning on his marriage to a white woman they were taking back what they were fighting for a bit, at least that is how I see it. Did you guys get the same feeling from that I did?

How about now, do you think that people still have this idea that you are betraying your own race to be in an relationship with someone of another race?

Franklin's "Information to Those Who Would Remove to America" and the American Dream

It is interesting to compare Douglass's "What to the Slave is the Fourth of July" with Franklin's "Information to Those Who Would Remove to America" because it highlights the lack of awareness, or blind denial of, prejudice in America. Franklin writes:

"Strangers are welcome, because there is room enough for them all,  and therefore the old inhabitants are not jealous of them, so that they have no need of the patronage of great men; and every one will enjoy securely the profits of his industry."

First, Franklin believes that everyone is welcome in America, but this is often not the case. There is a long history of xenophobia in America. In the earlier days, this was particularly against the Irish and the Native Americans. Second, in line with what we could call the "American Dream," he claims that anyone can become anything one chooses if one works hard. Franklin claims that there are opportunities and education available to all. However, as Douglass well knew, slaves were not free to make any real choices about their lives because they were considered nothing more than property. The "American Dream" is completely denied to them along with their freedom, their families, their wages, and their safety. Also, women were not considered people and held only slightly more power than slaves. While Franklin claims that America is open to all, he really means all white men.

How else are Franklin's and Douglass's ideas about America in conflict? Are they similar in any way? Based on the text, do you think Franklin choosing to ignore disenfranchised groups or is he blinded by his privilege and ethnocentrism?

Complexity of Identity

In Tatum's essay, the line that stood out to me was,"You know," he concluded, "if I had my eyes closed, I wouldn't have known it was a Black Woman speaking." I can't count how many times I was told that I didn't sound black or that I "talked/acted like a white person" by my white and black peers. Even my family has said this to me (on my mother's side who are all from the south). When I was younger, I tried to prove my blackness to people, until I realized that they were being either racist or internally oppressed. They gave me the white girl identity because my mannerisms were either "too much like white folk" or not black enough. I didn't talk like a black person, like the things that Black people are supposed to like, I liked too many things that White people liked, and did things that white people do. I remember when one of my White friends said that I didn't act like a black person, I said, "Well since you're an expert, what do black people act like?" When he tried to answer he realized that what he was about to say was either really racist or really ignorant. Most likely both. When a Black girl on my softball team told that I acted like a white person, I asked her, "Well how do I act like black?" She realized she didn't really have an answer or she didn't know what to say.

Has anyone ever been in this situation? Why do you think people say things like this? Who told them what makes a Black person, what makes a White person, what makes an Asian person, etc?