• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Dr. MLK, Jr. and Native American rights

Sgt. Pepper

All you need is love.
"Our nation was born in genocide when it embraced the doctrine that the original American, the Indian, was an inferior race. Even before there were large numbers of Negroes on our shores, the scar of racial hatred had already disfigured colonial society. From the sixteenth century forward, blood flowed in battles of racial supremacy. We are perhaps the only nation which tried as a matter of national policy to wipe its indigenous population. Moreover, we elevated that tragic experience into a noble crusade. Indeed, even today we have not permitted ourselves to reject or to feel remorse for this shameful episode. Our literature, our films, our drama, our folklore all exalt it." - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (Dr. Martin Luther King Jr: Our Nation was Born in Genocide)

As we remember Dr. King, I think it's important to remember that his immeasurable contributions to civil rights extended beyond African-Americans. He also fought for the civil rights and equality of Native Americans. As someone who is descended from the Cherokee and Choctaw Nations, I would like to honor Dr. King today by remembering that he inspired a deeper focus on how the history of oppression has affected all people of color in America and his legacy lives on in those who continue to seek equality.

☮ and ❤
Sgt. Pepper

Dr. King spoke out against the genocide of Native Americans
 
Last edited:

We Never Know

No Slack
"Our nation was born in genocide when it embraced the doctrine that the original American, the Indian, was an inferior race. Even before there were large numbers of Negroes on our shores, the scar of racial hatred had already disfigured colonial society. From the sixteenth century forward, blood flowed in battles of racial supremacy. We are perhaps the only nation which tried as a matter of national policy to wipe its indigenous population. Moreover, we elevated that tragic experience into a noble crusade. Indeed, even today we have not permitted ourselves to reject or to feel remorse for this shameful episode. Our literature, our films, our drama, our folklore all exalt it." - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (Dr. Martin Luther King Jr: Our Nation was Born in Genocide)

As we remember Dr. King, I think it's important to remember that his immeasurable contributions to civil rights extended beyond African-Americans. He also fought for the civil rights and equality of Native Americans. As someone who is descended from the Cherokee and Choctaw Nations, I would like to honor Dr. King today by remembering that he inspired a deeper focus on how the history of oppression has affected all people of color in America and his legacy lives on in those who continue to seek equality.

☮ and ❤
Sgt. Pepper

Dr. King spoke out against the genocide of Native Americans

In my opinion Native Americans weren't an inferior race, they were an inferior adversary because of weapons.
 

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
In my opinion Native Americans weren't an inferior race, they were an inferior adversary because of weapons.

This isn't entirely accurate either. The Natives of America held their own for over 400 years of colonization, starting with Hernan Cortes in the 1400's.

It wasn't technological superiority or germs that did them in. But the duplicitous governments of Spanish and British rule, follows by Americans (The French were here doing it to, but their colonization was a bit less awful, but not by much).

Edit: Read this book of you get a chance.
IMG_20220120_212116.jpg
 

We Never Know

No Slack
This isn't entirely accurate either. The Natives of America held their own for over 400 years of colonization, starting with Hernan Cortes in the 1400's.

It wasn't technological superiority or germs that did them in. But the duplicitous governments of Spanish and British rule, follows by Americans (The French were here doing it to, but their colonization was a bit less awful, but not by much).

Edit: Read this book of you get a chance.
View attachment 59254

Yep I was referring to the time when fire arms and germs were used against them.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
This isn't entirely accurate either. The Natives of America held their own for over 400 years of colonization, starting with Hernan Cortes in the 1400's.

It wasn't technological superiority or germs that did them in. But the duplicitous governments of Spanish and British rule, follows by Americans (The French were here doing it to, but their colonization was a bit less awful, but not by much).
That depends on the time frame and area we're talking about. Cortez's and Pizzarro's technological advantages were negligible, with the instability of the Aztec and Incan empires (due to, in part, climate change) arguably a much more decisive factor.

If we're talking about the United States applying their military might to massacre Native populations or drive them from their land in order to steal it, the organizational, logistical and technological disparity in military power is a lot more pronounced, and e.g. access to modern firearms was a lot more restricted for many indigenous nations than it was for the US Army or even US-backed militias.

The American duplicity and blatant disregard for its own treaties with indigenous nations is arguably a symptom of US military might (and, of course, strong economic and political incentives to not treat the native populations as people to begin with). The original European settlers were in some areas rather more willing to peacefully trade with their Native neighbours - not because they were not duplicitous or power hungry, but because, there wasn't a whole lot of firepower the Europeans could have drawn on in the early years of colonization.

e.g. in the first Jamestown colony, the Powhattan confederation treated the Europeans very much like one would have expected them to treat a potentially useful, potentially dangerous ally that needed to be cultivated with e.g. food shipments. (Fun fact: Apparently, the failure of the first Jamestown colony was in part predicated on European settlers, rather than building up a colony they were going to profit very little from, simply sodding off to go live with the Powhattan tribes, where their skills and tools were probably valued considerably more than by the early colonial administration.)
 
Top