Through these images and language choice, the speaker makes an ethical appeal: many Native American in modern society already live in poverty and suffering, and having a mascot called the Redskins only adds insult and shame to their lives. After American colonists took what belongs to them, the narrator calls out to the audience to at least give Native Americans one small thing: the name of a mascot. Native Americans have sustained a longstanding sense of pride and dignity. Through an emotional appeal, the images and footage of children present hope for change. The ad presents the possibility that the Washington Redskins mascot can change, continuing this deep pride and
Carlos Montezuma was a Chicago physician who was known for his strident perspective on tribal issues. He wanted Indian’s to share the same freedoms Americans had, in order to fight for the nation. “a nation which would not grant citizenship to Indians should not expect Native Americans to sacrifice their lives to defend it.” (Page 125) Montezuma created his own newsletter called Wassaja. He felt that if Indians wanted to go into war then they had every right to, but not to be forced into being a soldier. He believed that the Indians did not belong, and were just floating around.
In 1993, Scott Russell Sanders responds to an essay written by Salman Rushdie, to counteract the idea of “people who transplant themselves in ideas rather than places.” Sanders provides the American public with acknowledgements of counter-arguments, historical references, and patriotic appeals to convey his message that “movement is inherently good” isn’t as it seems from Rushdie’s point of view. Sanders respects Rushdie’s views on migration and uses them to strengthen his argument through countering Rushdie’s views. Sanders cites Rushdie’s claim that “migrants must, of necessity, make a new imaginative relationship with the world, because of the loss of familiar habitats” (47-50). Sanders acknowledges Rushdie’s view on migrants opening up to new ideas due to them leaving their homelands. Sanders counters the argument by stating that “migrants often pack up their visions and values with the rest of their baggage and carry them along” (50-52).
William Llyod Garrison is probably the one white abolitionist that everyone will remember, and I really like how Garrison justified Turner’s rebellion. He claimed that it’s only normal for the Africans Americans to be angry and “uncivilized” when they were treated as if they were objects, and it would be hypocritical for people accuse them for their angers. Based on this justification, I see Garrison more as a humanitarian, rather than a diplomat. In the long quote by Garrison, he questioned why the Constitution did not abolish slavery if the Constitution was supposedly the “scared” doctrine that forms the basis of the United States of America. Because I see Garrison more as a humanitarian than a diplomat, I understand why the Constitution
Petalesharo’s writing reflected the treatment of Native Americans during the 1800s. Being a Native American himself, Petalesharo was able to give perspective on a point in history typically viewed from a white man’s opinion. The excerpt “Petalesharo” explains how the Native American was able “to prevent young women captured by other tribes from being sacrificed”, making Petalesharo well liked by the Americans (588). Petalesharo gave the “Speech of the Pawnee Chief” infront of Americans to convey the differences between Native Americans and Americans through emotion, logic, and credibility, which showed how the two groups will never be the same, but still can coexist in the world together. Expectantly, Petalesharo discussed how the colonization
When the Indians and the Europeans encountered one another, social and environmental changes spurred, in which the colonists, for the most part, benefitted, while the Indians suffered by being subjected to inferiority and death. The natives of North America got the short end of the peace pipe once colonists from Europe began to settle in their land. A common misconception today is that, the Indians were always territorial and non-welcoming, but they in fact wanted to live in harmony with the colonists. An early 18th century map created by the Catawba Indians represented "an Indian bid to incorporate the newcomers into a native nexus of diplomacy and trade in the hope that the colonists could learn how to coexist in a shared land." (Alan Taylor page 4) On the
Perhaps if Las Casas could tell us why he fought for the rights of the Indians, he would simply say that he saw Jesus in those people. Maybe there wasn’t a philosophical structure to guiding his argumentation. Is it possible that he just wanted to follow his heart? In conclusion, Bartolome de Las Casas became a advocate for the rights of Indians by living among them and working with them in the New World. The Hundred Years War, along with The Black Death, bot dramatically changed the relations between France and England, which were the two most powerful countries during the Medieval era.
One of Thomas Paine’s most famous writings, “Common Sense”, helped inspire the colonists to fight for their freedom against Britain. The colonists of America were treated unfairly by the British government. “Common Sense” explained how they shouldn’t be treated like the way they were and used quotes from the Bile to connect with the people( who were mostly religious at the time). He made people question the authority the British had over them. One thing “Common Sense” pointed out was how unfairly the colonists were being treated.”To say, they will never attempt it again is idle and visionary, we thought so at the repeal of the stamp-act, yet a year or two undeceived us…”(Paine, Common Sense) This quote explains how the British were forcing
The book challenges Americans and how they treat American Values. The book exposed the truth of the white race and how they treated the black race. Throughout the novel white Americans did not value equality or progress and change. In Black Like Me whites did not believe in having a society the ideally treats everyone equally. When John Howard Griffin gets a ride from a white hunter, he tells him “I’ll tell you how it is here.
“We do not want riches. We want peace and love.” War Chief Red Cloud, Oglala Lakota Sioux. The early European settlers were only interested in trade and riches and could care less about peace and love, which is the main reason why American Indians were mistreated so badly in the past. Although American Indians shouldn't blame the people of today for their mistreatment of the past, the frustration American Indian’s feel about their mistreatment of the past is valid. What happened in the past attempted genocide of American Indians including the elimination of many American Indians, the discrimination it started and the forced movement from their original land to reservations proves the ignorance of America’s past and the ignorance it brought
The Indian Removal Act In the beginning, The United States recognized Indian tribes as separate nations of people entitled to their own lands that could only be obtained from them through treaties. Due to inexorable pressures of expansion, settlement, and commerce, however, treaties made with good intentions were often perceived as unsustainable within just a few years. The Indians felt betrayed and frequently reacted with violence when land promised to them forever was taken away. For the most part, however, they directed their energies toward maintaining their tribal identity while living in the new order. The United States under the leadership of President Andrew Jackson dealt with settling the Indians the most humane possible way, for
In December 7, 1829, Jackson sent a letter to Congress and it shows that he was democratic in some area, but not in other area. The letter was about the Native Americans and Indian Removal which was caused by white settlers who wanted Native Americans’ lands. Jackson strongly supported white settlers and decided to force Native Americans to move to the west. He claimed in the letter that Native Americans should move to the west and if they remain they must be subject to their laws. Because Jackson wanted to benefit his people who supported him, he caused Native Americans trouble and eventually killed them by moving them forcefully.
Captain Campbell felt uneasy about the new rules and laws the British had put into place, knowing that this might upset the Native Americans. As tension grew there was talk of how the French and the Spanish were going to unite to push the British out of North America. This talk had gotten many Indians to prepare for war and to choose sides of the war that might become. Chief Pontiac had felt that he must stay loyal to the French who had shown him generosity and kindness. He felt that the French had better ties to his people and would ultimately be better to his people than the British.
He expected to display the history from the viewpoint of the normal natives, rather than from the point of view of understudies of history or government authorities. "Zinn 's rule purpose behind making his book is...not to be supportive of the executioners, however to uncover understanding into the side of the distinctive people and social orders who were slighted or eradicated from history lessons. So to speak, Zinn needs to relate the account of the underdog, the men and women who have been concealed amidst the talked and made expressions out of others." As showed by Zinn, diverse books portray Columbus as pretty much a brilliant character who was conquer enough to trek towards peculiar waters, taking a risk with his life to go into the
His strong nationalism is only focusing about the power America can get by doing what every other country may be doing, imperializing. Obama on the other hand, focuses on why it isn’t a good idea, and explains the effects it may have, and why overall it isn’t the best thing for our country. Imperializing can lead to unnecessary wars, which could have been avoided; something Beveridge didn’t even consider since he has different goals of what the outcomes of imperializing should be than the realistic results that could actually occur due to his strong