The historical perspective in this documentary represents the Marxian school of thought. White men in the West were deceitful, foolish, greedy, morally weak. Native Americans and other minorities were all noble innocents, and perpetual victims.
As someone who holds a history degree, its not hard to see the bias that pervades this work. I'm also an American and a 4th generation Westerner, I'm proud of my heritage. I certainly don't feel guilty, and I believe guilt is one of the most useless of human emotions.
The makers of this film judge the 1800s with modern moral sensibilities. Consider what was going on around the world in the 19th Century. All of Latin America was being ruled by corrupt authoritarian regimes who were even more brutal in the treatment of Natives. There was no middle class or hope of a better life for 99% of the people.
The land grab in Africa by colonial European powers was is full swing, causing genocide and demise of once sovereign tribes. Africans were enslaving their own kind and selling them across the seas.
It was a brutal time in world history and a time of rapid change. The West was no different. I'm not saying the poor treatment of Natives and minorities was justifiable. It wasn't, but seen in proper historical context it is not far from the norm.
I understand the sensitivity shown to the Native-American experience. But, its way over blown. This documentary focuses heavily on the Native experience and Sitting Bull to the extent where it detracts from a thorough telling of the history of the West. History of the 1800s was defined by violence and change. While we can feel bad for the vanquished, its a fool's errand to obsess over them the way this documentary does.
Probably the most egregious part of this doc was the narrative about the Mexican American War. By all objective measures, Mexico had no real claim to the Southwest. They were trying to enforce land grants made by Spanish monarchs centuries ago. The Mexican government was already hopelessly corrupt. Both ethnic Mexican and White sellers in the American South West received no benefits from Mexico City. At the same time, good and services were being provided from America. Mexico had NO legitimate claims to the American South West. Despite the whining of groups like MECHA, ethic Mexicans in the American Southwest have a far better standard of living than their counterparts in today's Mexico.
This is the sort of revisionist history that has given us the social justice movement. When you corrupt history, you are sure to repeat its mistakes.
As someone who holds a history degree, its not hard to see the bias that pervades this work. I'm also an American and a 4th generation Westerner, I'm proud of my heritage. I certainly don't feel guilty, and I believe guilt is one of the most useless of human emotions.
The makers of this film judge the 1800s with modern moral sensibilities. Consider what was going on around the world in the 19th Century. All of Latin America was being ruled by corrupt authoritarian regimes who were even more brutal in the treatment of Natives. There was no middle class or hope of a better life for 99% of the people.
The land grab in Africa by colonial European powers was is full swing, causing genocide and demise of once sovereign tribes. Africans were enslaving their own kind and selling them across the seas.
It was a brutal time in world history and a time of rapid change. The West was no different. I'm not saying the poor treatment of Natives and minorities was justifiable. It wasn't, but seen in proper historical context it is not far from the norm.
I understand the sensitivity shown to the Native-American experience. But, its way over blown. This documentary focuses heavily on the Native experience and Sitting Bull to the extent where it detracts from a thorough telling of the history of the West. History of the 1800s was defined by violence and change. While we can feel bad for the vanquished, its a fool's errand to obsess over them the way this documentary does.
Probably the most egregious part of this doc was the narrative about the Mexican American War. By all objective measures, Mexico had no real claim to the Southwest. They were trying to enforce land grants made by Spanish monarchs centuries ago. The Mexican government was already hopelessly corrupt. Both ethnic Mexican and White sellers in the American South West received no benefits from Mexico City. At the same time, good and services were being provided from America. Mexico had NO legitimate claims to the American South West. Despite the whining of groups like MECHA, ethic Mexicans in the American Southwest have a far better standard of living than their counterparts in today's Mexico.
This is the sort of revisionist history that has given us the social justice movement. When you corrupt history, you are sure to repeat its mistakes.