Placed there by Charles Hewes for safekeeping, the transcript recalled Vaille’s dramatic death but had been excluded from the final publication of Hewes’ autobiographical journal. James Pickering speculated that the part had been removed due to the event’s delicacy, explaining that “Hewes’s decision not to include Kiener’s story in the draft of his journal intended for posterity had to do with his sensitivity to the controversy that had arisen following Agnes Vaille’s death about where responsibility lay — responsibility not only for Agnes’s death but for the death of the unfortunate Sortland as well.” This seems to be the most legitimate of explanations, however, the piece may have also been excluded due to Kiener’s sensitivity to Vaille’s
Exposing students to the real Whitewashing of American history impacts the lives of minorities and Native Americans. “Samantha Manchac is concerned about the new materials.” (lsensee 2015). History books aren’t showing the reality of things to students. History books want to hide what white people did to Africans, Native Americans and other ethnicities. “It’s an attempt to whitewash history.” (Isensee 2015).
One reason why the positives did not outweigh the negatives were the colonialists strategy of cultural domination. In the UCLA Journal of Undergraduate Research Volume four Issue two it states that natives were forbidden to speak in their native language. They were separated from their families and were placed in boarding schools. (2011) These were both methods of how the colonialist strategy dominator culture because it eradicated any trace of the original society. They also wanted to stop the growth of Native population.
“Peace cannot be achieved through violence, it can only be attained through understanding,” said Ralph Waldo Emerson, an American poet. In our society, many consider violence as mostly inappropriate and childish. The reason being is as humans we should be capable of discussing and compromising when an obstacle is present, however many argue that that is not an option in certain situations. We can look back at 1950s-1960s, where racism loomed over in the south aimed at mostly at American Americans. Boycotts and lynchings were a popular occurrence from town to town which both the state and federal government showed minimal efforts to prevent.
The symbolism and allegorical features of the film are both extremely vague and contradictory, making any one interpretation difficult to justify and easy to disprove. When interpreting a work as an allegory, it is always worth paying some attention to the intent of the writers, and the scriptwriters of High Noon intended to write it as an allegory for blacklisting. The easiest way to see this interpretation is to see Sheriff Kane as a victim of blacklisting. His fruitless search for help in fighting Miller symbolizes how alone those brought in front of the House of Un-American Activities were. Their former friends would not help them,
From reading the expertly-crafted novel, I feel that the word should not be taken out of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. I feel this way because there is a deep history and suffering that is behind the word, and taking it out of this novel is the equivalent of removing the word from American
Crisp says “I was stunned and disbelieving. The words seemed so unlike Houston.” Crisp believed that this speech he heard in its entirety in 1992 to be nothing like the man he grew up learning about in history as a child. He quotes Eugene C. Barker when questioning if the Revolution is the product of racial and political inheritances of the two sides, yet goes on to say this is not what he believes despite what others think. “It seemed to me that conflict between the two groups was not as much an immediate cause as it was an eventual consequence of Texas’s separation from Mexico.” (p. 41) Here you see Crisp laying out all the facts on this important date of the war, yet explaining to us his opinion of the matter and why it is that way. A few pages later (p. 49) he then walks us through his trail of documents he had followed to prove
It has also been demonstrated with equal certainty that without a timely anticipation of an provision against the dangers to which they are exposed, under causes which it will be difficult, if not impossible to control, their degradation and extermination will be inevitable” (Peters). While Indian removal as a policy was first envisioned by Thomas Jefferson, and structured by James Monroe, it was Andrew Jackson who fully realized removal, pushing the policy into law. Jackson had long been a supporter of removal. Prior to his presidency, he had commanded military forces in Georgia, Alabama, and Florida to crush Indian resistance to white expansion and settlement (Gates). He also negotiated several treaties in the 1810s and 1820s which deprive southern Indian tribes of their eastern land in exchange for land in the west (Moquin).
By not allowing students to develop their own ideas and receive the education they need and deserve, the entire society will suffer from an undereducated population. Anne Neal’s thesis can be applied to any courses taken at Brazosport College, or any college. If our government class was not allowed to learn about all the controversial subjects that government entails, we would all most likely leave the class knowing no more than when we began. The same goes for any course I take at Brazosport College. I am very open to learning about any controversial subject that is brought up through my college career, especially after watching Anne Neal’s speech on academic freedom.
The Birth of a Nation, by D.W. Griffith, in my belief, is a prime example of why the present world is so ignorant of the past. Because the techniques in the movie were so exceptional at the time, this misinterpretation of the reconstruction period was widespread. When the movie came out, I believe many people were not well enough informed to distinguish between the truth and the distorted. Due to stereotypes and misleading information, it could have been simple to portray African-Americans as distasteful, ill-mannered beings and, contrarily, the Ku Klux Klan as gallant protectors, resulting in the audience misconceiving the truth. As I watched The Birth of a Nation, I was able to compare the misconstrued idea of Reconstruction to what I read in chapter fifteen of our textbook, by Eric Foner.
Spencer Kersey 5/8/2016 7th Period Which side has the biggest BUT? First of all, to get this off my chest, I would like to allow the view of the argument to be known. The view that will be provided today is the obvious, but correct answer which is also known as the confederate view which says that seceding is 100% correct no matter what anyone says or thinks. As many know the topic of secession would have to be in the constitution for it to be wrong, but this isn’t the case. Before the constitution was made and put into commission there was the Articles of Confederation which was a very loose agreement that didn’t say anything about states from the Confederation seceding from it since it was more like a written and signed alliance between
All in all, you have to negotiate and come to the best most logical solution to keep everyone from killing each other. Everyone has their own opinions and views, but personally I believe that, the reason so many individuals believe that the flag is used as a symbol of hatred/ racism is because that’s what they have been taught and told their entire lives. History isn’t black and white, there are so many things that NO ONE knows the actual full blown truth behind. But instead of assuming and acting like we were there and know exactly what happened, maybe we should research and actually learn our history instead of turning nothing into something and causing more problems. Finally, no I do not believe that the flag is a symbol of hatred or racism, but I do believe that some individuals do believe that, that’s what the whole history of the flag is based on.
The author in this article argue the school board decision to stop using team names such as Chiefs or Indians, but will be permitted using names with no imagery involved such as Warriors. It seems that there are different views in how to use Native American representation. Supporters argue that no harm done in using these names, on the other hand opponents will argue that using these names is degrading the Native American culture. According to the author, many research’s asked the question, what does these names or mascots represent? The author point view shows that these mascots might bring more harm than good.