Who's the Savage?

This essay, about the racialization of savagery, reminded me of the essay entitled, Columbus, the Indians, and human progress. It reminded me of that because, in both stories it tells of the genocide of a “savage” race. It hints at the idea that England was superior, that English was the only civil language. It shows us how ethnocentric English society was. When they walked into another society, they assumed everyone was lazy, idle and unwilling to work, and like “beasts”. This angle is crazy, because animals are not lazy. They work for their food, take care of their young, and are one with nature.
In both “new worlds” the Irish and the Indians were considered savage by the English because of their race, and location. Since the Indians and the Irish look different than the English, it put a strain on the explorers to accept them. When people look different than you, there is an automatic judgment, and stereotype placed on them. In this case, they did not know what to think, and being extremely selfish, they decided that the peoples were an obstacle, and then decided it was their duty to overcome this obstacle. This was not the fault of the people being killed. They had been born in a different place, and thereby born into a different culture. These “savages” were more open minded about different cultures than the English were, and did not attack first, and think second. At one point, the English were taking Irish heads, and claiming them as trophies, everyday. They used terror to control the Irish, the same as a dictator. Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, are modern day terrorists, and Sir Humphrey Gilbert was a terrorist then. What they did to the Irish, could definitely be considered worse than some of the terrorist activities that have happened lately. They killed so many people, that they created open spaces. The worst part is that during this tragedy, they had the audacity to say that they were doing good “Christian” things. The English were also saying that they had a “God-given responsibility” to reform the savage nation. I am sure that no Christian would wish genocide on a group of people, ever. Christianity has not changed that much, but the people have. Overall, the author was exposing the extreme ethnocentrism of the English, to the point where they could not see that they were committing terrorism, and crime. The English seriously thought that they were helping the Indians, and the Irish, by killing them, and stopping the “waste” of the land.

Stigmatization: Growing? or Declining?

The fact that we have stigmas in our society goes against what we claim to be. We, being Americans, claim to be a melting pot of all societies, where all can succeed. When in fact, different people have different chances of succeeding, simply because of the first impression that is conveyed. Stigmas are becoming more metaphorical as the times go on. In Greece, the originator of stigmas, signs were cut or burnt into the body, and everyone had the same stigmas. In today’s society, situations. If I were to show up for a job interview in a t-shirt and jeans, I may not get the job because of my appearance. This is a stigma that this country agrees with, and may have parallels with the stigmatic ideas, but it is a bias nonetheless. In Greece stigmas identified master status’. They revealed social class, criminal record, and ultimately the fact that those people should be shunned. As these people are shunned, they become objects. They are not treated as people, with brains. They are “slaves”, “criminals”, and overall part of a misfit group. Today, “women”, “whites”, “blacks”, “Indians”, “Asians”, “Latinos”, “Arabs”,and “Mexicans”, are some of the groups that have been treated as objects. These groups not only bring bias, but at the same time, incorrectly identify groups for what they are. The “white” groups included the “arab” group 20 years ago. As they are incorrectly identified, they are also viewed as a problem. People don’t believe that those in the group can succeed like those who aren’t stigmatized. When told to the same tasks, they are expected to do worse, and at best equal. When someone who is stigmatized rises up above all others, only then are they respected. And then, only that one person really receive respect, and is considered a sort of mutant from a group of losers, that made it out ok. Traits that are specific to each and every human being are overlooked when someone is identified in a certain group. For instance, a stereotype of the “black” group, is that all blacks are on welfare, and are that way, because they are incapable of keeping a job. Even worse its assumed that those who are on welfare have no self control, and are a weight on all of society. Overall these stigmas are wrong. We have created the stigmas that tear us apart. The only way to eliminate these stigmas, would be to continually cast down discrimination, and to teach our kids to do the same.

Columbus, the Indians, and Human Progress

In American currency, a coin has two sides. Likewise in every story, there are two equally important yet different sides. Both sides represent the same event or monetary value, but they are not the same. In the case of Christopher Columbus, he has an encounter with the Arawak Indians. We know the story of Christopher Columbus, but what about the Indians? How can we incorporate them into history without changing everything?
One major problem that historians face is that they side with the winner of the battle, and may stray from an accurate depiction of what actually happened. In the story of the Indians and Columbus there are two distinct sides and unfortunately one side is overrepresented. I have been in school for 12 and half years, and had never learned the magnitude of the near genocide that Columbus enacted on the Indians. I had always known that it wasn’t as pretty as I was told, but I didn’t realize that he reduced a population of ten million people, down to one million. To make things worse, he continually lied to the king for extra resources. All of this was an atrocity, but still, the Columbus side of the coin is overrepresented, and taught to students everyday. Why do we side with Columbus? Why don’t we argue that the world would have been better off without Columbus? Why do we continue to lie to ourselves about who “found” America?
Christopher Columbus is taught as the man who “discovered America”. Yet, it is impossible to find something that someone has already found. If a scientist were to find a cure to cancer that had been in use for years, he would not get credit for the vaccine yet a man “found” land that had been in use for years, and is now considered a hero. Also, he wasn’t looking for America; he was looking for India, and claimed that he had found it! Large oversights such as these should be avoided, and as a people, Americans should incorporate all sides of the story. Although it is impossible to tell a one hundred percent unbiased story, we should do our best to treat our stories like we treat our coins. Always have both sides represented equally; this would in turn lead to a less biased society, and a more truthful one. If we are supposed to be a melting pot, we should at least be able to tell accurate stories to our children.

Getting To Know Me

Hi, my name is Nathaniel Merritt. I'm a freshman majoring in Management Information Systems. The name of my major is very long, but not complicated, its basically a mix between computer science, and general business. I love computers, but I also love communicating with other people on a daily baisis. I hope that this career plan allows me to achieve my goals.