History

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Andrew Petto: "Pete Wilson and the Statue of Liberty"
• Previous message: Cameron Laird: "ethnonyms"

Recently some of us have been debating an issue orgininally brought by me.
Somehow I had actually not envisioned my request for information on
historical Native Americans as burgeoning into a debate at the hands of RJ
and others. (I suppose I should have, eh? <g>) Anyhow, now that it's a
debate, I might as well weigh in with some thoughts . . .

"Shouldn't a people's history be in the hands of that people?" RJ (I believe)
asked, though not in those specific words.

The answer, IMHO, is no. History is not "had." History is not in
*anybody's* hands -- or at least it shouldn't be. History is absolute -- it
is not subjective or relative. What happened happened, period. History
should not be in the hands of the victors *or* the losers. History is
history is history. Facts are facts. Truth is truth.

This is not to say that some peole do not, nor that some groups are not more
likely to, distort the facts and truths of history. They do and they are.

I simply have a gut-level problem with people discussing history as belonging
to anyone.

Nick---

--
Nick Corduan                 "...there is as much dignity in tilling
     at                       a field as in writing a poem."
(nickc@iquest.net)                           --Booker T. Washington

• Next message: Andrew Petto: "Pete Wilson and the Statue of Liberty"
• Previous message: Cameron Laird: "ethnonyms"