Ok, so hopeful I am going to be able to better explain what I crashed and burned on talking about two classes ago which was a comment I said about Marger creating a bias or speaking with a bias. When I read the chapter on Native Americans I could not help to think about how terrible their conditions in early America was. And I agree that some Whites irrationally justified Native Americans removal by labeling them as savage. But, I also want to mention my word “some” in contrast to how Marger addresses the concept. Marger comments that, “However positive some characterizations of American Indians were, the dominant white view was always one of inferiority.” (157) This is a complete generalization. It is true that a majority of whites did indeed feel Indians were inferior, but not everyone did. That’s like implying that because I am white, I therefore receive all the benefits of the dominant groups resources, which again is untrue. Marger should have said “a majority” or “a lot of whites.” The first day of class I was in some ways called out for “generalizing,” though what I said was just a misspeak and meant no offense to anyone. Generalizing is saying something like “the dominant white view was always.” Not to mention, Marger brings up the Indian Removal Act. Yes, the Act was ridiculous and did terrible things to the Indians people. But, Marger in no way mentions the fact that when voted upon, the Indian Removal Act was almost a split decision. There were many, many people fighting for the Indians during the time. Look at William Penn. He argued the Act was a violation of human rights. Maybe some people in the class wont like what I am saying, and I am sorry if I am being offensive at all, but I cant live with the fact, especially as a future teacher, that only one side of the argument is being shown. White guys in early America were for less of a better term were jerks, but my point is that if we build a narrative where they are only shown as jerks, a bias is created.
Also, Sam and Justin I enjoyed your lessons and I think you guys did a good job, thank you for highlighting things that people need to be aware of.
Let me weigh in here. Is saying that "the dominant white view was one of inferiority" different from saying "all whites viewed Indians as inferior"? It seems as though Marger is stating what the most prevalent view of Indians was, as opposed to saying that everyone espoused and supported this viewpoint. Given the historical phases of white/Indian relations that Marger outlines, coupled with the fact that the government's attitude towards Indians was historically one of assimilation or annihilation, it seems as though there is ample historical evidence to substantiate the claim that the majority viewpoint was one of Indian inferiority. Certainly there were members of the dominant group that were more sympathetic to Indian concerns--for example, Marger discusses John Collier--however, the historical record seems to clearly demonstrate that such individuals were in the minority. I hope this helps to clarify what Marger is getting at.
ReplyDelete