Analysis of Defining the ‘American Indian’ by Haig A. Bosmajian
“One of the first important acts of an oppressor is to define the oppressed victims he intends to jail or eradicate so that they will be looked upon as creatures warranting suppression and in some cases separation and annihilation” (Bosmajian 347). The writer, Haig A. Bosmajian, begins his essay with these words in “Defining the ‘American Indian’: A Case Study in the Language of Suppression.” In his essay, which targets mainstream Americans, he attempts to show his readers how language has been used in American history to “justify” the oppression of the American Indians. The use of language that he discusses here is redefinition, in which the American Indians were renamed in accordance with the oppressors’ perception of them (Bosmajian 347). He points out the natural-religious, political-cultural, and legal redefinitions imposed upon them as the basis of his essay (Bosmajian 348). Through the use of various techniques, including historical accounts, examples, and choice of evidence, Bosmajian creates an effective argument to show how language has been manipulated for unjust acts.
In the natural-religious redefinition, Bosmajian supports his argument with the eyewitness account of Bartolome de las Casas. He describes how the various original inhabitants of America were given a new name when the Europeans arrived. They were all placed under the label: “savages” and “barbarians” (Bosmajian 348). In the eyewitness account, Bartolome de las Casas provides a terribly grotesque image of the acts done to the American Indians. “Overrunning Cities and Villages, where they...
... middle of paper ...
... By discussing the natural-religious, political-cultural, and the legal redefinitions, Bosmajian seeks to convince the readers of the impact that redefinition has on the American Indians. This redefinition, he declares, allows oppressors to think that their acts of oppression are justified (Bosmajian 347-348). He creates a strongly supported argument through the abundant use of rhetorical techniques, such as historical accounts and examples. In the end, he hopes that readers will look to “identify the decadence in our language, the silly words and expressions which have been used to justify oppression of varying degrees” and eradicate them (Bosmajian 347).
Work Cited
Bosmajian, Haig A, “Defining the ‘American Indian’: A Case Study in the Language of
Suppression.” Exploring Language. 8th ed. Ed. Gary Goshgarian. New York: Longman, 1998. 347-354.
In a lively account filled that is with personal accounts and the voices of people that were in the past left out of the historical armament, Ronald Takaki proffers us a new perspective of America’s envisioned past. Mr. Takaki confronts and disputes the Anglo-centric historical point of view. This dispute and confrontation is started in the within the seventeenth-century arrival of the colonists from England as witnessed by the Powhatan Indians of Virginia and the Wamapanoag Indians from the Massachusetts area. From there, Mr. Takaki turns our attention to several different cultures and how they had been affected by North America. The English colonists had brought the African people with force to the Atlantic coasts of America. The Irish women that sought to facilitate their need to work in factory settings and maids for our towns. The Chinese who migrated with ideas of a golden mountain and the Japanese who came and labored in the cane fields of Hawaii and on the farms of California. The Jewish people that fled from shtetls of Russia and created new urban communities here. The Latinos who crossed the border had come in search of the mythic and fabulous life El Norte.
... “ the majority of [Native Americans] turned to the invaders’ cultures and religious for empowerment, knowledge and skills with which to sustain native identities and values in other guises” , many of them stilled called themselves “true people” by keeping their native names (116-117).
The Indian Removal Act drove thousands of natives off their tribal lands and forced them west to new reservations. Then again, there are those who defend Jackson's decision stating that Indian removal was necessary for the advancement of the United States. However, the cost and way of removing the natives was brutal and cruel. The opposition fails to recognize the fact that Jackson’s removal act had promised the natives payment, food, and protection for their cooperation, but Jackson fails to deliver any of these promises. Furthermore, in “Indian removal,” an article from the Public Broadcasting Service, a description of the removal of the Cherokee nation is given.
Talking Back to Civilization: Indian Voices from the Progressive Era edited by Frederick E. Hoxie is a book which begins with an introduction into the life of Charles Eastman and a brief overview of the history of Native Americans and their fight for justice and equal rights, it then continues by describing the different ways and avenues of speaking for Indian rights and what the activists did. This leads logically into the primary sources which “talk back” to the society which had overrun their own. The primary sources immerse the reader into another way of thinking and cause them to realize what our societal growth and even foundation has caused to those who were the true natives. The primary sources also expand on the main themes of the book which are outlines in the introduction. They are first and most importantly talking back to the “pale faces”, Indian education, religion, American Indian policy, the image of the Indians presented in America. The other chapters in the book further expanded on these ideas. These themes will be further discussed in the following chapters along with a review of this
Churchill claims that during the 1970s, the U.S. government carried out a "counterinsurgency war against the American Indian Movement" (Churchill 219) and their objective was to oppress and halt the American Indian Movement's ability to "pursue an agenda of Indian treaty rights, land recovery, and national sovereignty in North America" (Churchill 219) making them a target of negative propaganda and oppression. I believe that Churchill's claims are valid and deserve merit due to the fact that he supports his claims with evidence and refers to reliable authorities and sources. He also cites specific examples, uses valid numbers, statistics and facts to support his thesis and claims. I will also be using several outside sources, including the book Prison Writings written by Leonard Peltier to strengthen my position.
It is evident that the Native Americans were unfairly removed from their homeland because the Europeans settlers saw them as savages not worthy to live among them. The Native Americans responded to their cruelty with pleads of desperation. These pleads of desperation were annoyed and instead excuses of doing what’s “best” for them both proceeded.
All in all, the treatment of the American Indian during the expansion westward was cruel and harsh. Thus, A Century of Dishonor conveys the truth about the frontier more so than the frontier thesis. Additionally, the common beliefs about the old west are founded in lies and deception. The despair that comes with knowing that people will continue to believe in these false ideas is epitomized by Terrell’s statement, “Perhaps nothing will ever penetrate the haze of puerile romance with which writers unfaithful to their profession and to themselves have surrounded the westerner who made a living in the saddle” (Terrell 182).
American Indians once lived a prosperous and full life, relying on the bounty of land and nature. Colonization by white settlers disrupted this peaceful existence, uprooting tribes from their land and forcing them to assimilate to new cultural and religion views. Years of mistreatment and abuse led to the organization of the American Indian Movement to fight for their rights and liberty. Through the AIM, Indians attempted to gain recognition and spread knowledge of their culture and heritage to American citizens in order to attain a place in society. Leaders of the AIM created a manifesto of change in 1972 which listed goals they wanted to meet under three broad categories: economic, social and political. While the AIM was organized in response to the lack of basic rights and oppressive nature of the US government, their goals have yet to be met with any long term success.
Pages one to sixty- nine in Indian From The Inside: Native American Philosophy and Cultural Renewal by Dennis McPherson and J. Douglas Rabb, provides the beginning of an in-depth analysis of Native American cultural philosophy. It also states the ways in which western perspective has played a role in our understanding of Native American culture and similarities between Western culture and Native American culture. The section of reading can be divided into three lenses. The first section focus is on the theoretical understanding of self in respect to the space around us. The second section provides a historical background into the relationship between Native Americans and British colonial power. The last section focus is on the affiliation of otherworldliness that exist between
In his essay, “The Indians’ Old World,” Neal Salisbury examined a recent shift in the telling of Native American history in North America. Until recently, much of American history, as it pertains to Native Americans; either focused on the decimation of their societies or excluded them completely from the discussion (Salisbury 25). Salisbury also contends that American history did not simply begin with the arrival of Europeans. This event was an episode of a long path towards America’s development (Salisbury 25). In pre-colonial America, Native Americans were not primitive savages, rather a developing people that possessed extraordinary skill in agriculture, hunting, and building and exhibited elaborate cultural and religious structures.
Nevertheless, in the author’s note, Dunbar-Ortiz promises to provide a unique perspective that she did not gain from secondary texts, sources, or even her own formal education but rather from outside the academy. Furthermore, in her introduction, she claims her work to “be a history of the United States from an Indigenous peoples’ perspective but there is no such thing as a collective Indigenous peoples’ perspective (13).” She states in the next paragraph that her focus is to discuss the colonist settler state, but the previous statement raises flags for how and why she attempts to write it through an Indigenous perspective. Dunbar-Ortiz appears to anchor herself in this Indian identity but at the same time raises question about Indigenous perspective. Dunbar-Ortiz must be careful not to assume that just because her mother was “most likely Cherokee,” her voice automatically resonates and serves as an Indigenous perspective. These confusing and contradictory statements do raise interesting questions about Indigenous identity that Dunbar-Ortiz should have further examined. Are
In Thomas King’s novel, The Inconvenient Indian, the story of North America’s history is discussed from his original viewpoint and perspective. In his first chapter, “Forgetting Columbus,” he voices his opinion about how he feel towards the way white people have told America’s history and portraying it as an adventurous tale of triumph, strength and freedom. King hunts down the evidence needed to reveal more facts on the controversial relationship between the whites and natives and how it has affected the culture of Americans. Mainly untangling the confusion between the idea of Native Americans being savages and whites constantly reigning in glory. He exposes the truth about how Native Americans were treated and how their actual stories were
of Native American Culture as a Means of Reform,” American Indian Quarterly 26, no. 1
All men are created equal (Declaration of Independence). Yet, the Native Americans continue their fight for decades since colonization. There is a constant struggle to urge for equality from William Apess in his 1833 essay, An Indian’s Looking-Glass for the White Man. In modern day, the fight continues after his lifetime. Equality and freedom is the goal for most Native Americans. Although securing the rights of the Native Americans are progressing, it is slow. Therefore, the inequality continues at a faster pace, as opposed to major changes that would impact the Native Americans positively. Throughout history, they are exploited for their land and natural resources and severely underfunded. As a matter of fact, the common theme seems to be that the Native Americans are continuously suppressed by the “superior race”, which showcases the prevalent thoughts in America. William Apess and
Author and Indian Activist, Vine Deloria makes compelling statements in chapters 1 and 5 of his Indiana Manifesto, “Custer Died For Your Sins.” Although published in 1969 this work lays important historical ground work for understanding the plight of the Indian. Written during the turbulent civil rights movement, Deloria makes many comparisons to the Black plight in the United States. He condemns the contemporary views toward Indians widely help by Whites. He argues that Indians are wrongly seen through the historical lens of a pipe smoking, bow and arrow wielding savage. Deloria views the oppressors and conquerors of the Indian mainly in the form of the United States federal government and Christian missionaries. The author’s overall thesis is that whites view Indians the way they want to see them which is not based in reality. The behavior of whites towards Indians reflects this false perception in law, culture and public awareness.