Thanksgiving: Do Native Americans give thanks?

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,412
1,668
113
One of the number of tragedies about the US gaining its independence from Britain is the welfare of the Native Americans after that independence. Under British rule, the Native Americans were protected and well-treated. But after the British left and America gained its independence, the Americans then spread west, adding more territory to their fledgling nation by taking over the lands that the Native Americans have occupied for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Many of the states now in the Union that didn't get their independence from Britain (only 13 US states gained their independence from Britain) were added to the Union after taking over Indian lands in one of the largest genocides in human history. So it's a pity the British left North America.

Do Native Americans give thanks?

Posted by Damian Lanigan on 22 Nov 2007
Tags: USA, Thanksgiving, Native Americans, Wamapanoag
The Telegraph

Today is Thanksgiving in America. All over the land people will over-eat, watch football and come to the conclusion that Uncle Walter is nowhere near as much fun as he thinks he is.


The Queen greets Native Americans in Virginia earlier this year


Some Native Americans treat the holiday as a day of mourning. This reaction is understandable.

The story of the Wamapanoag tribe and the Pilgrims in Plymouth Massachusetts is compelling and sad: the Pilgrims, in late 1621 close to destitution, were taught how to cultivate local crops, catch fish and generally take care of themselves by the locals.

However, the success of the community that ensued meant that more and more Europeans came to the area, and the Wampanoags were driven off their territory. In 1675, some of the younger members made a series of attacks on white immigrants at Swansea and the tribe was nearly exterminated by the settlers' reprisals. Today there are about 3000 of the tribe left, mostly on a reservation on Martha's Vineyard.

All over America this story was repeated in different forms for a couple of centuries. Even if we find it hard to allow the use of the term 'genocide' to their story, there is no doubt that Native Americans are amply justified in their grievances. So what would be an appropriate response to tomorrow's holiday? I really don't know. But those of us who now live a life of relative prosperity and peace in this country certainly should give thanks to the Wampanoags.

telegraph.co.uk
******************************************************************




The National Day of Mourning



On Thanksgiving Day, many Native Americans and their supporters gather at the top of Coles Hill, overlooking Plymouth Rock, for the "National Day of Mourning."

The first National Day of Mourning was held in 1970. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts invited Wampanoag leader Frank James to deliver a speech. When the text of Mr. James' speech, a powerful statement of anger at the history of oppression of the Native people of America, became known before the event, the Commonwealth "disinvited" him. That silencing of a strong and honest Native voice led to the convening of the National Day of Mourning.


The historical event we know today as the "First Thanksgiving" was a harvest festival held in 1621 by the Pilgrims and their Native American neighbors and allies. It has acquired significance beyond the bare historical facts. Thanksgiving has become a much broader symbol of the entirety of the American experience. Many find this a cause for rejoicing. The dissenting view of Native Americans, who have suffered the theft of their lands and the destruction of their traditional way of life at the hands of the American nation, is equally valid.


To some, the "First Thanksgiving" presents a distorted picture of the history of relations between the European colonists and their descendants and the Native People. The total emphasis is placed on the respect that existed between the Wampanoags led by the sachem Massasoit and the first generation of Pilgrims in Plymouth, while the long history of subsequent violence and discrimination suffered by Native People across America is nowhere represented.
To others, the event shines forth as an example of the respect that was possible once, if only for the brief span of a single generation in a single place, between two different cultures and as a vision of what may again be possible someday among people of goodwill.
History is not a set of "truths" to be memorized, history is an ongoing process of interpretation and learning. The true richness and depth of history come from multiplicity and complexity, from debate and disagreement and dialogue.


There is room for more than one history; there is room for many voices.

http://www.holidays.net/thanksgiving/mourn.htm
 

s243a

Council Member
Mar 9, 2007
1,352
15
38
Calgary
You really believe that the colonist treated the Native American’s while during British rule?
 

DurkaDurka

Internet Lawyer
Mar 15, 2006
10,385
129
63
Toronto
Those are some pretty grand statements you made there Blackleaf, Britain wasn't kind to the natives when they arrived. Are you into the beers already BL? I think you need to clear the mist from your beer goggles.
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
Why on Earth would they? My guess is the sight of Mayflower should have been the first There Goes the Neighbourhood Day.

Beaver pelts for off-white serge blankets with black, green red and yellow stripes wasn't really a good trade - but it was much better than booze, residential schools and a Word that kept changing with every administration. Britain wasn't any better with North America's First Nations than it was with the Zulus, the Indians, the Chinese, the Aboriginals, the South Africans.... Britain was out for Britain First - just the same as Spain, France and Holland.

Woof!
 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,844
93
48
Britain wasn't any better with North America's First Nations than it was with the Zulus, the Indians, the Chinese, the Aboriginals, the South Africans.... Britain was out for Britain First
Bloody WASP's. Imagine the world without them.
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
65
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
``Under British rule, the Native Americans were protected and well-treated.``


Seneca (New York) and several Algonquin (New England) tribes fought against the British during the Revolutionary War as did Catawba (Carolinas). They did so because they had been ruthlessly exploited by the British.

During the War of 1812, several Ohio Valley tribes (who initially declared neutrality) sided with the British. But after a while it became evident that they, too, were being exploited and sided with the USA versus the invaders. American historians have not written much about this but it played a siginificant role in turning the tide of battle.


 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
65
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
``One of the number of tragedies about the US gaining its independence from Britain``


This has got to be one of the most comical lines in all of human history.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
95
48
USA
You've got to love Blackleaf's "hit and runs". Do you think he would have the stomach to face off against both Canadians and Americans? Heck we have so much fun bashing each other here that any interlooper wanting a piece would get buried!
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
95
48
USA
"But after the British left and America gained its independence, the Americans then spread west, adding more territory to their fledgling nation by taking over the lands that the Native Americans have occupied for hundreds, if not thousands, of years."

Yes because we all know all of the lands that were settled by the British were completely unoccupied by Native Americans. New England, Virginia, New York, the Carolinas, etc.... no Native Americans to be found.

Get back here Blackleaf and take your medicine.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Ya we "Injun's" were so much better off under British rule...:roll:

Nothing like ignoring thousands of pages of historical facts. ;-)