And now:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

the following was posted to the First nations list and is reposted here by permission 
of the author.  thank you to David Rider..:)
------------------------------------------
I sat in the office of the History prof, no longer
chair of the department, who teaches US
History at Xavier. He'd been away and I covered
his class while he was gone last week. We
talked about my lecture. I was telling him about
Virginia Governor Berkeley who settled the
question long debated there - whether to
exterminate or enslave Indians - by a compromise:
Kill all the men and ship the women and children
to the Caribbean as slaves. That way, they
covered the expenses of colonization by the
money earned from slaves.

Same thing in New England, although there they
were a bit more smug about it, always dreaming
up clever ways of justifying "war" with Indians.
Still, they shipped the survivors to the islands and
paid for their colonization by the money earned
from slavery.

I told the prof about Hatuey's refusal of heaven
because there were christians there. I told him
that the dead bodies in Tenochitlan were so
thick - 40,000 killed in a single day - you had
to walk on them to go about in the city, then
the largest non-Asian city in the world.

He asked me "when" enslavement of Indians was
outlawed here. I said it depends on where the
"here" is. In Louisiana, it happened in 1763
when the Spanish took over. But I told him the
"why" question was more important: Indian
slaves, accompanied by African slaves, were
noted for their resistance against the colonial
government when they ditched the plantation
and made a run for it.They essentially started
their own little towns - called "maroon" towns -
with fellow African runaways and raided the
settlers' livestock, burned homes, and raised
hell. So it was finally decided to stop using
Indian slaves here, but ship them to the
Indies for money they could use for African
slaves, who would have a tougher time making
it on their own in the Louisiana swamps.

Finally, the history prof said to me: David, this
is very interesting. Why don't they put that in
the history books. Ah, I said, because somewhere
down the line, someone doesn't want our students
to know this stuff. Either the guys who write the
books, or the guys who taught them in grad school,
or the guys who taught the guys who taught the
guys...They want our students to believe
in American justice and goodness, expansion
with honor, all that stuff that makes people proud
to be American.

I don't know what it was, but this man I spoke with
seemed to change today while I was with him.
Maybe I'm wrong. I've had plenty of talks with him,
I've guest lectured for him for years. He has heard
me speak in the classroom and at public forums.
But something struck home with him today, i
think. i certainly hope so. He had a look of helplessness
that you don't find on the face of professors often.
He had a look that told me America was even worse
than he had imagined when he immigrated here
from Bangla Desh. He had a look that gave me
hope that he believes it is his duty to tell the truth
in history class, instead of the white-washed rubble
they can in history textbooks like the nuclear waste
they can and ship to some Indian reservation out west...

dave 
Reprinted under the Fair Use http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html doctrine 
of international copyright law.
            &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
           Tsonkwadiyonrat (We are ONE Spirit)
                      Unenh onhwa' Awayaton
                   http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/       
            UPDATES: CAMP JUSTICE             
http://shell.webbernet.net/~ishgooda/oglala/
            &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
                              

Reply via email to