History Professor Denies Native Genocide: Native Student Disagreed, Claims Expelled from Course

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by bradl, Sep 8, 2015.

  1. bradl macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #1
    Well, I doubt this will get much traction here, because it doesn't contain any of the following:

    Guns
    Gay Marriage
    Refugees
    Immigration
    Iran
    Nuclear Weapons
    Trump

    Nope.. none of that in this article! But I hope you do read it, because if what is claimed is true, we have some serious issues with people in teaching positions ignoring our history, rewriting it to fit their mold, or worse (read: bigotry, racism). This isn't a "to the victor goes the spoils" issue, as there were previous claims and admissions that what indeed happened was true, so this could be indicative of a much bigger problem on our hands. Denying one's history is a huge problem, regardless of who you are, where you are from, or what your bloodlines are.

    This happened basically in my own backyard (Sacramento State Univ. is roughly 7 miles from where I live), and local news picked this up. Like I said, have a read and thanks for reading, even though this isn't as volatile a subject as those above.

    http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwo...native-student-disagrees-gets-expelled-course

    Local news picked this up as well.

    http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2015...te-over-genocide-got-her-kicked-out-of-class/

    BL.
     
  2. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #2
    guns were used in that genocide, I am sure plenty became refugees and genocide was the effect of unregulated mass immigration.

    would that give you the traction you need?
     
  3. bradl thread starter macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #3
    No Trump. :p

    BL.
     
  4. BoxerGT2.5 macrumors 68000

    BoxerGT2.5

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #4
    Cliff notes: A jewish professor and a native american get into a game of "who's is bigger" in regards to Genocide.
     
  5. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #5
    What do you mean, no "Immigration", because it seems to me the immigrants were the ones doing that genocide thing. Maybe that is why some Americans are leery of immigrants.
     
  6. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #6
    He could have an ancestor there :p
     
  7. shinji macrumors 65816

    shinji

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    #7
    Was she kicked out because of her opinion or because she was so disruptive in making her case? This is a 19-year-old we're talking about.
     
  8. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #8
    Just like Europe is leery of refugees?
     
  9. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #9
    “I had zero support from anybody in the classroom,” says Johnson. “All of the research I had done was very traumatizing - to read about babies being slammed into rocks being held from their ankles, to hear of people being lit on fire while they were still alive, to hear of them being disemboweled, and having their arms and hands chopped off .”

    “I know these things are true. I have been told about them personally from my great-grand parents and grandparents and my mother who was in boarding school.”


    Humans in history are pretty brutal no matter who or where you're from. I don't think anyone is trying to re-write history here but what the **** are we supposed to do about it now? Stand up in class and tell the prof he's wrong? That won't get you very far.
     
  10. bradl thread starter macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #10
    From how the events appear to have occurred, he excused everyone out of the room, then told her that he doesn't care what type of scholarship she may have or if she has any affiliation with the university, but that she was completely expelled from his class. She did take this up with him after class, but to have the entire class told that they weren't going to "use the word 'genocide', because it makes them all look guilty" is egregiously misleading at the least, and outright misrepresenting and rewriting history at its worst.

    This did start on Wednesday, where she didn't say anything after he made the comment about not using the word 'genocide'. Instead, she did do her research on the Iroquois Confederacy and Portuguese expeditions. As she presented that to him, that's when the belligerence came.

    She basically didn't have a chance to say anything, as he talked over her the entire time.

    Again, this is all according to her, though there were other people in the class, taking both sides in the matter. The University did stand up and say that the professor has no authority to expel her from his or any other class, so that is a good thing. But apparently someone did have a stick up their craw if they didn't want to acknowledge the fact that this could have been genocide.

    BL.
     
  11. bradl thread starter macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #11
    Yes. Tell the professor he is wrong, as the only thing we can do is learn from our history so we don't make the same mistake again. You can't do that if the real truth in the history is buried and covered over just so people don't want to seem or feel guilty. Both Germany and Japan have handled their wrongdoings in WW2 with a fair amount of dignity and class, so there is no reason to be too proud of ourselves here in the US to deny that.

    BL.
     
  12. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #12
    On one hand, it does get annoying when someone gets pedantic (even in a more personal case like this) over a specific point and stalls the class. After the hour (or two) is over, you wonder why you wasted such a nice day to listen to the professor and student go back and forth on a minor point.

    On the other hand, I always thought that universities are for learning and discussion and it was annoying to be shut down in class when you were trying to engage in a point that you found relevant or important. Even worse are the professors who act like tin-pot dictators.

    The worst, though, is that those types of professors are found on the left and right. How will posters here figure out where to line up?
     
  13. bradl thread starter macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #13
    I'm assuming you are talking about the political Left and Right, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

    I would think that political ideologies shouldn't really make a difference at this point, as we are talking about what occurred in our nation's past. Again, this isn't a "to the victor goes the spoils" issue, because there are documented events of what occurred, so there can be no denying any such actions in our country's history. When you have that presented to you, political ideologies really don't matter.

    I remember a time in my high school history class where we were going over the Lincoln assassination. We happened to have in our class a lady by the name of Tanis Mudd. her family was directly descended from Dr. Samuel Mudd, the doctor who conspired in the assassination, and treated the broken leg of John Wilkes Booth. Seeing the documents that had been passed through their family on him, everyone in the class agreed that it did give great perspective into his side of the events, and not just the good guys chasing down the bad guys and dealing with the conspirators of the assassination.

    Yes, they knew and admitted that their ancestor was wrong, and their family definitely acknowledged it. They don't cover it up, but they knew that Dr. Mudd was wrong. There is no harm done in acknowledging it, and does more good than harm with covering it up or burying it.

    At this point, good guys and bad guys don't matter, as long as the truth is told, so everyone on both sides of the matter learn from it and not make the same mistake again.

    BL.
     
  14. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #14


    Certain words: "genocide"; "holocaust" etc. now seem to be laden with political and societal weight far beyond their original definition.

    So I can certainly understand how any sort of discussion relating to the five-hundred odd year history of Native American people's conflict with Europeans could devolve into the sort of heated exchange detailed in the story.

    I believe it certainly is possible that the instructor acted improperly in censuring the Native-American student. It is also possible that the manner in which the student raised her objections in class was disruptive.

    One thing I do believe: It is the right, and the responsibility, of university instructors to establish the syllabus, the reading list, and examination criteria for the courses they teach. Student questions, discussion, and indeed challenges to the facts and opinions expressed in both course readings and lectures are an integral, and cherished, part of academic tradition.

    Where the line between healthy academic debate and disruptive behavior lies, I don't know. And quite what the facts of this particular incident are is not at all clear.
     
  15. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #15
    I don't see how he could consider it anything but genocide, but I'm not a history prof.
     
  16. bradl thread starter macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #16
    I don't see how a history professor could be so closeminded to not accept even the possibility that there could be more to the events than what he only knows and teaches. It's foolish to think that you and only you could be the only source of information in any field. One may know some, one may know most, but no-one knows all, and it is foolish and immature to believe that someone else can't contribute to the subject, especially if they are part of that subject.

    BL.
     
  17. jerwin macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #17
    If you read the serious reviews of 1491, you might get a sense of that the use of the term genocide in this context is contraversial. There's far more evidence for the Nazi genocide, (in part because they kept good records) and as a result, holocaust denial is regarded as a deliberate attempt to distort history.

    That's not the case here. In fact it might be argued that use of such loaded language distorts the practice of gathering and interpreting evidence.
     
  18. Populism, Sep 8, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2015

    Populism macrumors regular

    Populism

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2014
    #18
    Based on what I've read here, the professor was in the wrong. And way so.

    Curious though. Do you think is there any room for error or hyperbole or exaggeration or attention-seeking on the side of her which steered some of this story?
     
  19. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #19
    According to this update, Sac State's History department has tweeted that she's not disenrolled.

    Sidenote: as a member of a Cal State university's marketing department, this is exactly the kind of story you'd hate to see your college affiliated with. I'm sure that administrators and the department are working the professor over pretty well. I also have no doubt that the student played some roll in this. However, the student will (rightfully) not be blamed as much as the professor, and her actions won't reflect negatively on the institution while his will.
     
  20. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #20
    fat shaming are we?
    /s.

    to her, it is personal, a few articles mentioned the students being against her, where is video when you need it? bunch of kids with cell phones & no video of this?
     
  21. bradl, Sep 8, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2015

    bradl thread starter macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #21
    The students weren't being against her per se, but saying that she should remain quiet because it's a class and the professor should always be assumed to be right and the student wrong; just by reference to the student/teacher role everyone is in.

    Additionally, those that were against her also told her to take it up with the instructor after class. That was mentioned in both the ICTMN and CBS articles.

    Additionally, according to the university newspaper, they are investigating this, so I'm sure that both sides of this will be revealed.

    However, I think that anyone would take it personally if someone was denying that what you saw with your own eyes over numerous years wasn't true because he doesn't want others to feel guilty about it. Again, written documentation of the events contradict his story, and he couldn't take being contradicted - again, all assuming that her side of the claim is completely true.

    I do have to say that I am rather impressed that that news sites across the political spectrum are reporting the same story without any changes to the events that occurred. Breitbart, Al Jazeera, Addicting Info, Current, ICTMN, Fox, and CBS are all reporting the same story.

    BL.
     
  22. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #22
    Because the teacher is the teacher, I think the teacher gets the last word. But, at the same time, it sounds like this guy has a rather thin skin. I would guess that some bored student must have pulled out their cell phone and started recording. Perhaps we can all watch and judge.

    Reading the profs mind, he was probably thinking, "It wasn't all genocide." I mean, it wasn't generally accepted how diseases actually spread until the middle of the 19th century. (Even now, a lot of anti-vaccine people don't get it.) You can't really call what happened to the tribes of the Canadian north woods "genocide", for example, when they died of smallpox-- the nearest white immigrants were hundreds and hundreds of miles away, and, had no idea how diseases spread. On the other hand, starting with Columbus, some of it was genocide, and, the student was correct about that. It seems a pity that the argument was so severe when the teacher and student probably agreed on most of the basic facts.

    It sounds like they were largely in agreement. It sounds more like a personality clash than a clash over the events.

    Certainly the Nazi genocides are an example of something that was driven by genocidal goals and policies.

    What happened to Native Americans was, in part, genocide, in part, indifference, in part, greed, and in part, ignorance. Often in history things have multiple causes. I'm not sure if the prof tried to explain that or not. It could be that he missed a real opportunity to get a great term paper; instead he alienated a student. I'm not sure whose fault it was.
     
  23. 556fmjoe macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2014
    #23
    The term is better suited for specific instances rather than cases as broad as this. It works better for something like the Holocaust or the Holodomor where there was a clear plan from the start to wipe out a population and that plan was carried out by a particular group of people in a short time. It doesn't really describe the entire issue in the Americas spread out over 400 years or so. There were cases of genocide in there, but it's far more complicated than that and we lose a lot of important lessons when the whole thing is just passed off as simply "genocide".
     
  24. Solomani macrumors 68030

    Solomani

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Location:
    Alberto, Canado
    #24
    Also consider the European diseases factor. A vast number of Native tribes were wiped out by the introduction of diseases from the Old World. Sure, we could put indirect blame upon Europeans introducing the diseases to the Native Americans, hence resulting in their death via diseases (which they had zero immunity to). But the civil and inter-cultural spreading of germs…. is hardly a conventional notion of genocide.

    Plus in the 16th century, the colonists did not have microscopes, they had no clue about microbes and germ theory. Although Anton von Leeuwenhoek came shortly after (but no one took him seriously for many more decades).
     
  25. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #25
    I respectfully disagree.

    Genocide describes the result: killing and oppression, rather then any particular method that achieves those results. I wouldn't expect genocide to look the same in early, uncharted America, versus 20th century Europe. The circumstances are just too vastly different.
     

Share This Page