The thesis of chapter two, “Drawing the Color Line” of Zinn’s book is that out of all the countries in the world ours, America, is the most obsessed with a persons race. If a person is not English or “white” they are not Americans and are/where subject to ridicule, racism and slavery.
Zinn’s main idea here is racism, even though it was never called racism back in the 17th century, it was just hatred towards people of a different background. The colonists in Virginia started the whole idea of slavery, when they started dieing off because they were unable to keep themselves alive during times of hardship. The Indians had taught the colonists how to grow tobacco, so they could make profit and export it, but because of their population the colonists could not enslave them as Columbus had done. For a hundred years the blacks in Africa had been labeled slaves so it was only natural to import them and use them as their own slaves. American slavery was the worst of all the other countries because of the Americans dire want of profit and the fact that they degraded a slave to not even feel human. The rule was that the whites are masters and the blacks are slaves. Being unable to take care of themselves with just the land at their hands the colonists were desperate for help. Well, the Indians were out of the question and the whites were to hard to control to even bother with it, what other choice did they have but blacks. There was a plethora of them in the Americas now and they were very easy to control, so again, it was only natural to enslave them. The colonists became very fearful that the slaves would rebel since the runaways in 1640. The thought they had to keep their labor where it was, was to exert everything they had in their power against the slaves. The colonists only other fear was that the disgruntled colonists would join forces with the black slaves and try to gain control.
Personally I don’t feel that Zinns position in the chapter affects what he is trying to argue. Zinn is simply saying that America is governed by racism and he gives supporting evidence on that. What he says throughout the chapter is factual, taken from books and actual people. I feel that no matter what side Zinn was on he would argue the same way, maybe omitting or adding just a few things to the story, as so many of us do in our stories.
I feel like this chapter educated me on the fact why so many people are still racist, because I firmly believe that if our ancestors hadn’t been so racist back in the 17th century, we wouldn’t be today. And the majority of us say we are not racist, but everyone is a little bit prejudiced, at least, if not racist.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Takaki journal 1
In our reading, chapter two of Ronald Takaki’s A Different Mirror, Takaki is comparing a Shakespeare play, The Tempest, to what actually happened with the colonists and Indians/natives in Virginia and New England.
Similarly to our first reading by Howard Zinn, Takaki uses the word stranger to describe the Europeans form the Indians’ point of view. Starting off Takaki talks about when the Europeans reached Massachusetts Bay. The natives were repulsed by what came off of the “walking island,” white men with hair all over them but still thought them godly.
Then Takaki begins his comparison with The Tempest and the real story of what happened in New England and Virginia. All the more intelligent audience members knew that this wasn’t just a play; but a “metaphor for English expansion into America”. Never before has an Indian character been utilized until The Tempest. The play is to help us understand more of what happened as it was set in the New World, and as timing may have it, The Tempest was first performed just after the English had gone to Ireland. A character in the play, Caliban, reminded them greatly of the Irish; savages. The English thought the Irish were lazy, slovenly bums, to put in more modern words. The Irish could not own land or wear English apparel and most certainly could not wed any of the colonizers. It was to be the “English over the Irish.” With in four years there were almost no Irish left which meant that the land was free for the English to settle on. With all the violence and prejudices the English forced upon the Irish, they even beheaded them and used their heads to, in way, line the paths to their tents, as we would with lights to our homes in today’s world. But, for the English all this horror was their right, so they could teach the Irish the ways of the English. With all the feelings of savagery towards them, the English really did think that the Irish could be taught to be civil.
Following the invasion of Ireland was the invasion of Virginia. Here there were Indians and like the Irish were “savages” to the English colonizers. However the colonizers have had seen Indians before, Christopher Columbus had brought them to England and they were sold as slaves. The colonizers themselves were non-too-ashamed of kidnapping the Indians just as Columbus had. Just as Caliban in The Tempest had been seen as “other” so were the Indians. Although Caliban was thought to be what Europeans were like when there was little development, he, and same as the Indians, lived his life for his passions, specifically sexuality. But, to the colonizers to be civilized meant to deny all of the “natural” things about themselves, seeing themselves as Prospero, of The Tempest did, a mind not a body. The colonizers were to be just like Prospero and teach Caliban, the Powhatan Indians, to be civilized and speak their language. The unprepared colonizers started dieing off but the Powhatans came to rescue and feed the remaining few. When more colonizers arrived and they too became famished, they started to steal the Indian’s food and began destroying their villages in violent rampages. After the colonizers took over the majority of the Powhatan land, because it was unused and wasted the Powhatans brought it upon them to kill the colonizers. It was the deaths of the colonizers that actually gave them the right to the land. Again, like the Irish, the English thought the Indians could be taught civilization.
When the colonizers had made it to New England they had decided that the Indians could no longer be taught to be civil and that they were just born that way. The colonizers basically dehumanized the Indians as devils. When disease had struck the Indians and killed them off by the thousands, the colonizers saw it as God was allowing them to take the land.
Soon the colonizers began to realize that the savagery from Ireland, Virginia and New England were all different; one simply of consent, another of culture and one of racism. Finally a slight relief for the Indians, Thomas Jefferson had decided that both white people and Indians, if born on the land, were Americans. But, Jefferson was not opposed to removing, by any means necessary, Indians that continued to be hostile. They were to be civilized or they would be removed/ killed. In order to be civil the Indians were forced to become farmers. Jefferson was very contradictory in his words, he said that we all are Americans but it was the Indians own fault for all the hardships they encountered and their land was legally transferred to the English. The acceptance that Jefferson had started for the Indians was really a way to get them to surrender their land to the English, but still wanted to save the Indians.
Takakis telling of this story kind of ridicules Thomas Jefferson because he was so contradictory. He wanted to save them, but he also wanted their land and ultimately wanted the Indian’s out of his territory. I pretty much agree with what Takaki is saying, because you can’t want freedom for someone just so they will forgo their land to you in the end. That is not freedom; it is just as bad as killing and then taking the land.
Actually after reading this I feel slightly disgusted, I am just in awe that all of this violence was the only way, or thought to be the only way for America to evolve. I knew of some of the violence and the prejudices but I have never had it all laid out in front of me like that. I am Irish and I realize what kinds of hardships my ancestors had to endure but I have never really read it before and it gave me a new perspective on the racism that still exists today.
Similarly to our first reading by Howard Zinn, Takaki uses the word stranger to describe the Europeans form the Indians’ point of view. Starting off Takaki talks about when the Europeans reached Massachusetts Bay. The natives were repulsed by what came off of the “walking island,” white men with hair all over them but still thought them godly.
Then Takaki begins his comparison with The Tempest and the real story of what happened in New England and Virginia. All the more intelligent audience members knew that this wasn’t just a play; but a “metaphor for English expansion into America”. Never before has an Indian character been utilized until The Tempest. The play is to help us understand more of what happened as it was set in the New World, and as timing may have it, The Tempest was first performed just after the English had gone to Ireland. A character in the play, Caliban, reminded them greatly of the Irish; savages. The English thought the Irish were lazy, slovenly bums, to put in more modern words. The Irish could not own land or wear English apparel and most certainly could not wed any of the colonizers. It was to be the “English over the Irish.” With in four years there were almost no Irish left which meant that the land was free for the English to settle on. With all the violence and prejudices the English forced upon the Irish, they even beheaded them and used their heads to, in way, line the paths to their tents, as we would with lights to our homes in today’s world. But, for the English all this horror was their right, so they could teach the Irish the ways of the English. With all the feelings of savagery towards them, the English really did think that the Irish could be taught to be civil.
Following the invasion of Ireland was the invasion of Virginia. Here there were Indians and like the Irish were “savages” to the English colonizers. However the colonizers have had seen Indians before, Christopher Columbus had brought them to England and they were sold as slaves. The colonizers themselves were non-too-ashamed of kidnapping the Indians just as Columbus had. Just as Caliban in The Tempest had been seen as “other” so were the Indians. Although Caliban was thought to be what Europeans were like when there was little development, he, and same as the Indians, lived his life for his passions, specifically sexuality. But, to the colonizers to be civilized meant to deny all of the “natural” things about themselves, seeing themselves as Prospero, of The Tempest did, a mind not a body. The colonizers were to be just like Prospero and teach Caliban, the Powhatan Indians, to be civilized and speak their language. The unprepared colonizers started dieing off but the Powhatans came to rescue and feed the remaining few. When more colonizers arrived and they too became famished, they started to steal the Indian’s food and began destroying their villages in violent rampages. After the colonizers took over the majority of the Powhatan land, because it was unused and wasted the Powhatans brought it upon them to kill the colonizers. It was the deaths of the colonizers that actually gave them the right to the land. Again, like the Irish, the English thought the Indians could be taught civilization.
When the colonizers had made it to New England they had decided that the Indians could no longer be taught to be civil and that they were just born that way. The colonizers basically dehumanized the Indians as devils. When disease had struck the Indians and killed them off by the thousands, the colonizers saw it as God was allowing them to take the land.
Soon the colonizers began to realize that the savagery from Ireland, Virginia and New England were all different; one simply of consent, another of culture and one of racism. Finally a slight relief for the Indians, Thomas Jefferson had decided that both white people and Indians, if born on the land, were Americans. But, Jefferson was not opposed to removing, by any means necessary, Indians that continued to be hostile. They were to be civilized or they would be removed/ killed. In order to be civil the Indians were forced to become farmers. Jefferson was very contradictory in his words, he said that we all are Americans but it was the Indians own fault for all the hardships they encountered and their land was legally transferred to the English. The acceptance that Jefferson had started for the Indians was really a way to get them to surrender their land to the English, but still wanted to save the Indians.
Takakis telling of this story kind of ridicules Thomas Jefferson because he was so contradictory. He wanted to save them, but he also wanted their land and ultimately wanted the Indian’s out of his territory. I pretty much agree with what Takaki is saying, because you can’t want freedom for someone just so they will forgo their land to you in the end. That is not freedom; it is just as bad as killing and then taking the land.
Actually after reading this I feel slightly disgusted, I am just in awe that all of this violence was the only way, or thought to be the only way for America to evolve. I knew of some of the violence and the prejudices but I have never had it all laid out in front of me like that. I am Irish and I realize what kinds of hardships my ancestors had to endure but I have never really read it before and it gave me a new perspective on the racism that still exists today.
Zinn journal 1
Howard Zinn’s thesis in chapter one of “A People’s History of the United States” is that even though he was made out to be such a great explorer, Christopher Columbus was a malicious butcher. As we all learned in elementary school, Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492, it is not until later we learn that he is in fact one of the worlds first men to start genocide, later Hitler would be the more widely known genocidal maniac.
Through out the chapter Zinn talks about the history of the Arawak’s, the people Columbus killed. He teaches us all about them. Before Columbus discovered the Americas the Arawak people had gotten along just fine. They knew how to spin and weave and they had food, that was all they needed and if there was something they needed everyone shared their possessions. The whole thing that sparked Columbus to practically kill off the whole Arawak race or enslave them, small gold earrings that they wore. When Columbus didn’t like what he found he then forced anyone over the age of fourteen to hunt for gold, and if they didn’t find any their hands were cut off and then they bled to death. The Arawaks even started mass suicides to protect themselves from being killed for not finding any gold. All of this death occurred simply because Columbus wanted to please the King and Queen. Then only way to do this was by filling the ships with gold and since there was none; he opted for the next best thing, slaves that can be resold once back to Europe.
Continuing on, Zinn states that there is no way that we could ever punish Columbus for what he did and we shouldn’t try. Zinn just wants the acceptance for actions such as this not to be so easy, even if it is a necessary event for progress to occur. He also wants us to know that, the preceding views on such events are coming from the people that run our country. Zinn states that he, unlike the majority takes the side of the victim, in this case the Arawaks but does not grieve for them.
I feel that all of the author’s arguments are valid, and from what I have learned about Christopher Columbus everything Zinn has stated is true. With the given information, I don’t feel that any other conclusion can be made. Columbus was a malicious butcher; no matter what way you look at the information that stays true. I don’t think that Zinn’s position affected his argument; at least not to the point that he would lie to his readers. As stated earlier he tends to tell the story from the victims point of view, but he was still stating facts.
I really enjoyed this article, as weird as that may sound. I had known about the genocide that Columbus inflicted but have never had a chance to read it from the victims, Arawaks, point of view. Every story seems to justify what Columbus did and I liked the fact that Zinn, neither denounced or justified it. It was nice to see the story from the other side, not just what King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella wanted us to know.
Through out the chapter Zinn talks about the history of the Arawak’s, the people Columbus killed. He teaches us all about them. Before Columbus discovered the Americas the Arawak people had gotten along just fine. They knew how to spin and weave and they had food, that was all they needed and if there was something they needed everyone shared their possessions. The whole thing that sparked Columbus to practically kill off the whole Arawak race or enslave them, small gold earrings that they wore. When Columbus didn’t like what he found he then forced anyone over the age of fourteen to hunt for gold, and if they didn’t find any their hands were cut off and then they bled to death. The Arawaks even started mass suicides to protect themselves from being killed for not finding any gold. All of this death occurred simply because Columbus wanted to please the King and Queen. Then only way to do this was by filling the ships with gold and since there was none; he opted for the next best thing, slaves that can be resold once back to Europe.
Continuing on, Zinn states that there is no way that we could ever punish Columbus for what he did and we shouldn’t try. Zinn just wants the acceptance for actions such as this not to be so easy, even if it is a necessary event for progress to occur. He also wants us to know that, the preceding views on such events are coming from the people that run our country. Zinn states that he, unlike the majority takes the side of the victim, in this case the Arawaks but does not grieve for them.
I feel that all of the author’s arguments are valid, and from what I have learned about Christopher Columbus everything Zinn has stated is true. With the given information, I don’t feel that any other conclusion can be made. Columbus was a malicious butcher; no matter what way you look at the information that stays true. I don’t think that Zinn’s position affected his argument; at least not to the point that he would lie to his readers. As stated earlier he tends to tell the story from the victims point of view, but he was still stating facts.
I really enjoyed this article, as weird as that may sound. I had known about the genocide that Columbus inflicted but have never had a chance to read it from the victims, Arawaks, point of view. Every story seems to justify what Columbus did and I liked the fact that Zinn, neither denounced or justified it. It was nice to see the story from the other side, not just what King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella wanted us to know.
Introduction
Hi Im Gina Moulton. Im a junior interior design student. I am always busy working on some kind of project, so i never sleep lol.
I am from Toledo. I live with my boyfriend, here, and absolutly love it, but sometimes it's easier living on campus.
I have a kitty named Logan here with me, at my grandparents' I have two kitties. Missy, who loves everyone and always thinks your playing when all you want to do is pet her. And Pumpkin, who's afraid of her own shadow and only comes out around us.
I like to cook. I am very creative. I love the Food Network. I really miss cable, we dont watch enough t.v to buy it.
I like to watch football, hockey and yes Nascar. although I don't have any favorites really. Well except for Dale Jr.-nascar driver, for those of you that don't know.
I am obsessive-compulsive and am always cleaning or organizing. Which is why I think I want to be an interior designer.
Well if you think of anything else you want to know, just ask!!
o I tried posting a picture too, but it did not work
I am from Toledo. I live with my boyfriend, here, and absolutly love it, but sometimes it's easier living on campus.
I have a kitty named Logan here with me, at my grandparents' I have two kitties. Missy, who loves everyone and always thinks your playing when all you want to do is pet her. And Pumpkin, who's afraid of her own shadow and only comes out around us.
I like to cook. I am very creative. I love the Food Network. I really miss cable, we dont watch enough t.v to buy it.
I like to watch football, hockey and yes Nascar. although I don't have any favorites really. Well except for Dale Jr.-nascar driver, for those of you that don't know.
I am obsessive-compulsive and am always cleaning or organizing. Which is why I think I want to be an interior designer.
Well if you think of anything else you want to know, just ask!!
o I tried posting a picture too, but it did not work
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)