Analysis: Why Our History Textbooks Are A Lie

This section highlights that history has created a false narrative depicting the natives as a victimized people, which they were to some extent but only in the fashion that they did not possess the same technology for warfare, immunity of communal diseases transmitted, and they were not anticipating combat. All other factors considered, the natives stood to be a potential threat. In regards to knowledge obtained by Spaniards prior to arrival and knowledge gained from observation, it would be remiss had they not prepared for battle. This argument is not to be misconstrued in approving their actions; I do recognize colonization as an evil for both the reasons employed and its damaging effects, but rather to change the narrative surrounding that of the native people. While they did experience a tragedy, I feel that it is erroneous to write them into history as being incompetent resulting from their

In the article Hello Columbus: America was No Paradise in 1492, by Robert Royal, Royal argued that Native Americans, along with Columbus, are portrayed wrongly in society today, from schools to media.

Chapter one of Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States discusses the differences between the culture and attitudes of the Europeans and the Native Americans. It further describes how the Europeans came to the New World and committed genocide against the Native Americans in order to get land and gold from them, which displayed the cruelty and greed of the European explorers coming to the Americas. However, many historians consider these actions by the European Conquistadors to be necessary in order for human progress to occur, but Zinn argues whether human progress needed all of these barbaric actions. He talks about how history has had many important details left out of many events and believes that it is important for history to be seen for all that happened. For example, Zinn writes, “To emphasize the heroism of Columbus and his successors as navigators and discoverers, and to de-emphasize their genocide, is not a technical necessity but an ideological choice. It serves- unwittingly-to justify what was done.” (Zinn) This quotation shows how Zinn emphasizes how this brutality was not a necessity but it is a choice on how it should be interpreted. Zinn also talks about Hernando Cortes’ time with the Aztec Empire. In the text, Zinn writes, “Cortes then began his march of death from town to town, using deception, turning Aztec against

In the 1950s and 1960s, the historians that are mentioned, believed that colonist ideals were at the heart of the

Nicholas D. Kristof once stated, “You will be judged in years to come by how you responded to genocide on your watch.” Seeing what people have done in history, it's simply easy to say that Kristof is right. He also hits a little close to home because genocide is like dirty dishes. Everyone knows about it, but just try to ignore them, until someone else does something about it. Let it stink up the kitchen, let it get moldy.

Not taking to learn or understand where things originate from and not taking the time de-colonize these false facts can continue to produce these colonial viewpoints. Therefore, the whitewashing of Native American race has clustered our view on their history and who they actually were and the misrepresentation has been shown through many films, books and other sources.

Textbooks today should have more of what was in texts centuries ago. I feel Fitzgerald’s analysis on American history is correct; they don’t have nearly as much useful information as they did in the past. Children should know the importance of World War II, the Revolutionary War and why the Berlin wall came down. Children should have current events on what’s going on in American today, and know the importance and discuss the significance of each of them.

When a central power comes in and dominates the surrounding land and people it is referred to as colonization. In some cases it can lead to a positive outcome but more so than not it has a negative repercussion. In “Heart of Darkness,” “The Powwow at the End of the World,” and “Heritage,” both the colonizer and the colonized experience negative consequences that force them to change their views on the world.

　　　　In American Colonies, Alan Taylor argues that the story of American colonization has been overly exclusive and biased.[ Taylor,

In Columbus, the Indians, and Human Progress by Howard Zinn, the author wrote about the history of conquests and the significance of them. The author switched between the stories of conquests in North and South Americas and his idea about history. As Zinn added ideas of history and how it should be interpreted by people, the stories of the natives became easier to understand from both the european side and the native side. In one of the author’s comments about conquerors and conquered, he wrote “it is the job of thinking people (...) not to be on the side of the executioner” (page 10). I agree with this idea that history should not be seen only from the point of view of the side with power. As mentioned in the text, most historical references

Western Civilization did not begin with the Colonization of the new world; rather, transformed into something more, something greater. When the respective explorers saw land for the first time in the new world they knew little of what was to come in the future decades. They had no idea the controversy they would create; Howard Zinn's “Columbus, the Indians, and Human Progress” and Dinesh D’Souza’s “Two Cheers for Colonialism”, represent that controversy perfectly. The future of the Human Race was not solidated through the peaceful trading of goods within single nations. It was solidated through man’s natural drive for greatness and thirst for power. Colonialism is not the weapon for destroying civilizations; it is the key to progress.

Before the years of the United States as we know it, before the Civil War or the American Revolution, back when explorer Christopher Columbus of Spain had taken his voyage over to North America, the “New World”, the British and Spanish, among others, had begun to lose faith in, and loyalty to, their rulers, the Spanish and British monarchs, known as the Crowns, due to the excessive taxation, the lack of religious freedom, and the shortage of wealth and minerals. It was then that they set out to the New World to colonize it, obtain the necessary goods, and live there with pride. The Spanish and British colonists relocated to the New World, North America, in search of improved living conditions, and in rebellion against their respective countries’ policies imposed by their monarchs. The colonizations had first taken place shortly after Christopher Columbus’ voyage to the New World in 1492, at which point the colonists had realized the sheer opportunity that lied before them. They did not flock to North America for all of the same reasons, however; in fact, many of their incentives differed considerably from those of the colonists of the other country, and many of them had undergone different experiences while residing in the New World. Specifically, both of them had encountered the native American population, along with settlements of the Spanish and French. Moreover, while colonizing different parts of North America, they had utilized the natives, and later Africans,

We see in history a common theme; history is told by the victor. The aggressor enters the scene; takes control of the group who was there before, and oppresses them. Typically associated with stealing wealth, pillaging, and plundering. Some things have changed though these events still happen today. However in today’s society oppression is strongly viewed as distasteful. We seem to think we have grown more accepting of even our own citizens. All they ask is for reparations.

But, here’s the truth Pilgrims weren’t the first settlers the Natives were. How come many schools don’t teach the start of our nation from the Natives perspective? Sure we learn a little about them but it’s a single story. The sad truth is that students aren’t educated in the culture and story of the Natives. Take for example a couple weeks ago in class, Mrs. Missfield showed the class a couple of pictures of Cahokia. Little did anyone know (except for Eduardo) that this area was in Saint Louis not in South America. The fact that over thirty students had no idea and were astonished to see that Cahokia is close by and not in a far away land shows the missing connection we have with that part of our history. There is still lost culture, stories, languages, people, art, and voices that we still haven’t found/explored at the twenty first century. I believe part of the reason why teachers start with the pilgrims and don’t go into much

Studying history is a wonderful way of becoming less ignorant. Ignorance of other peoples and cultures and created the european attitude of superiority that characterized early colonization of the Americans and later imperialism. In the debates between Las Casas and Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda, we can see ideas that created and are informed by some of the horrible concepts of imperialism, such as eugenics and natural slavery. These debates arose after Las Casas took a moral objection to the treatment of the native population on the island of Hispaniola and returned to Rome to begin an effort to end the encomienda system. (Bartolomé de Las Casas debates) This system granted conquistadors and and number of slaves in exchange for his service as a soldier or official. (Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda) Las Casas argued that the encomiendas were unlawful and that it was “impossible for them [the conquest of the Indies] not to be, tyrannies, unjust and iniquitous.” (Bartolomé de Las Casas.)