Bias and Blind Teaching

While attending the University of Washington I took the Environmental Studies series, and during one of the 200 level classes we read a research paper about pre-contact Pacific Northwest Native population. The paper basically said that pre-contact population estimates were skewed because European disease had spread through traditional trade routes ahead of European explorers. So when explorers first arrived what they saw was a population that was already decimated by a wave of disease. It was previously thought that explorers arrived when Natives were inland for the season.

I was really excited to be reading about this subject and thought that our class was discussing it to open our eyes to anthropology and question the conservative/status quo population theories. Then it was time to discuss the paper during our class time with the teaching assistants. Their goal was to have us ask ourselves what our own biases were while reading this paper and their example was to tell us that 'scholars' had rejected or refuted the author's findings because they felt that he held a bias in favor of Pacific Northwest Native people. They claimed that Natives had something to gain by proving that their populations were bigger than previously thought and the author's work couldn't be trusted if he was 'Native friendly'.

I raised my hand and told the teaching assistants that I'm Native and I thought the article was interesting and it's science so why can't we believe it? The T.A. gave me a look and said 'well, you're Native so you have a bias, too. Don't you?'.

I was appalled that we were given this great opportunity to turn the way that pre-contact population was viewed around but instead we were told to be careful to believe what we read because the author might be biased. Why did the example have to involve a Native issue?

(I have a lot of theories and analysis that I could give but I've run out of steam with my thoughts tonight and will have to edit and say more later. I've got more stories of anti-Native teaching at UW to add, too.)

Manifest Destiny

This isn't going to be a history lesson or a very scholarly discussion about where the idea of Manifest Destiny came from. I think that the Wikipedia entry is fine if that's what you want to learn about. What I want to talk about is what lies below the thin layer of political correctness that tries to cover everything, from what we are taught in public school to the wiki entry.

So, let's get this out of the way. The concept of Manifest Destiny is the purest form of racism that you can find. There are cutesy descriptions of what it means but the way I see it, Manifest Destiny is the idea that Europeans were favored by God and God's invisible hands cleared the way for European settlers.

I have to admit that my interpretation of the term is based on my experieance of learning about the term in high school. I think that I was in the 9th grade and had just moved from Iqaluit in Canada, so if it was something that was covered in a previous history lesson I missed it. The way that I remember it being described was American settlers wanted to move westward but there were always struggles with Native groups. Native American immune systems are incompatible with European 'herd' diseases. The invisible hand of Divinity was clearing the land ahead of settlers. I made my own connection to conclude that settlers believed that God favored them and wanted them to inhabit America and He showed His favoritism by killing the Natives for them.

I was frustrated and appalled that people would believe that God favored one race over another. (I was raised to believe that God loved all of mankind equally.) There was no outlet for my frustration because there was no class discussion of what was really going on. We simply moved on to the next topic.

And so I remained in a fog of confusion over what was really bothering me about this concept. For many years I couldn't understand why it annoyed me so much. Because the concept was explained in vague terms and covered up with just enough political correctness junk to mask the real meaning.

I think that there are many ethical implications for teaching the concept of Manifest Destiny in this way. This is the best example of history being written by the winners. It's a form of brainwashing and it creates a culture of sub-conscious racism. It penetrates so many facets of American culture and I cringe every time that it is thoughtlessly mentioned in movies and television.

What happens is that well-meaning and kind people, who would never have overtly racist thoughts or behavior, end up saying subtle racist phrases. When I try to explain my ideas I am responded with 'well, isn't that what happened?' and 'don't call me racist!'. (I have a very hard time explaining where I am coming from and it's very frustrating. I even worry that what I am saying here won't be understood.)

So here is the discussion on theology that we can't avoid. I don't believe that there is anyone that can prove to me that God created a ranking system based on the color of a person's skin. Even if you aren't religious, prove me wrong with science. There is no inherent difference between races, we are all the same. Why would God want to kill millions (I will have to talk about pre-Columbian population in another entry) of his children? I believe that what happened was a test for both Natives and Europeans. It's unfortunate that most Europeans interpreted susceptibility to disease as a sign of their superiority and used the knowledge of lack of immunity against Natives. It's also unfortunate that Natives allow history to be taught in this way.

No, God did not favor Europeans and gave them America from east to west coast. And I'm not saying that anyone is racist for using unconscious racist phrases. It's just a product of the way that history is taught in public schools and it needs to change. Educate yourself, stop and ask yourself if this widespread idea is ethical, and teach your children to read between the lines and ask questions for themselves.

Introduction

This is a place for me to type out my thoughts on various issues and topics relating to the Native American experience. I am Inupiaq and was born in Nome, Alaska and lived there until I was about eight years-old. My favorite, and most influential, places to live were with other tribes. These included my hometown - site of a gold rush and one of the few 'wet' Native villages; Mobridge, South Dakota - where Kevin Locke taught me to count on my ribs and pray in sign language; Iqaluit, Baffin Island - before the Canadian government gave the land back to the Inuit, I was allowed to take Inuit classes until middle school; and Neah Bay, Washington - where I went to high school and didn't fully embrace the culture until I went on a Canoe Journey with my brother, also the site of 'controversy' as the tribe fights to begin hunting whale again. From these places I take many lessons and am grateful for the opportunity to have grown up with Native people. I attended the University of Washington and intend on finishing my degree within their Program on the Environment. I found a Native community within UW as well, and that is where I found my passion for Native issues. For the time being I am a stay-at-home mother of two and I am unsure how quickly each essay will be finished. Forgive me if my words seem jumbled and trailing, the best time for me to type is late at night right before bed (and sometimes beyond my normal bedtime).

The first essay I would like to write will be about Manifest Destiny, and there is the inspiration for this blog's title. I enjoy learning from others and welcome comments and ideas and I hope that my readers have an open mind for what I have to say.

Quyanna!