OKCPS Banned Land Run

[bombermwc]

We did land runs as 3rd graders at my school in Mid-Del. It was a chance for us to get out there and touch history a bit. We wouldn't have otherwise learned about rolling pin tosses or cow chip tosses. There's something about making that mad dash with your friends and your wagon that helps you understand it. And knowing the playground, you knew exactly where you wanted to stake your claim.

That being said, looking back, I realize that we missed a LOT of the point. We weren't told we were taking land from someone else. We weren't told that people killed each other over the land. We were taught about some women being there on their own, so that's a good thing. We weren't really told about Boomers or Sooners, although having someone go early could have been a lesson opportunity as everyone else looked and say "Hey!!!!". All we really did was break out our cowboy gear and eat a sack lunch on the playground. But what it was, was a good opportunity to take the classroom outside and do some hands on. And hey, it was 3rd grade. No one is going to tell the whole story to a bunch of 3rd graders, and a bunch of 3rd graders 1) aren't going to get it and 2)won't care.

Like oh so many things, don't take an elementary school thing and blow it out of proportion to something it really isn't. You no more teach the whole Land Run experience to 3rd graders than you teach the adult's version of the Bible to 3rd graders. Some things have to be re-worded or changed a bit so a 3rd grader even understand it.

[hoya]

I think I was in 5th grade when we did the 100th anniversary Land Run thing at school. I think they used a whistle instead of a starter pistol, but like bombermwc said, waiting for that sound and then running out across the playground to grab a little flag and stake your claim helped you understand it. I still remember that clearly today.

And not to diminish the fact that we took the land away from the Indians, but that's not really any different from the rest of the country.

[Just the facts]

And not to diminish the fact that we took the land away from the Indians, but that's not really any different from the rest of the country.

Indians btw who took it from other Indians, or are we to believe that Indians all lived together as one big happy family. When are The Sioux going to offer their casino earnings as reparations for killing, slaughtering, and raping other tribes?

[hoya]

Yeah, you can't really just lump "Indians" and "white people" together into two groups. My ancestors weren't involved in the Land Run. They came to Oklahoma later. And I'm sure the Chickasaw don't want to be blamed for the Aztecs tearing people's hearts out on top of a ziggurat.

[OKCisOK4me]

Maybe they can film "Last of the Unassigned Lands" and call upon Daniel Day Lewis to be the main character...

[jn1780]

The same age group we are talking about also believes in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Learning the truths about history is part of growing up. The causes of the Revolutionary war, Civil war, World War 1 and 2 are also oversimplified and its something students don't really get deep into until high school or college.

The land run did allow many people to achieve their dreams that didn't directly screw over Native Americans and State of Oklahoma of course wouldn't be around to today. I guess teachers could tell their students after the reenactment that there Great Great Grandparents were really jerks.

[jerrywall]

Yeah, you can't really just lump "Indians" and "white people" together into two groups. My ancestors weren't involved in the Land Run. They came to Oklahoma later. And I'm sure the Chickasaw don't want to be blamed for the Aztecs tearing people's hearts out on top of a ziggurat.

My family DID take part in the land runs (we/they settled here in the Cherokee Strip land run, and we still some of the land and the dugout), and I still don't feel guilty.

[hoya]

My family DID take part in the land runs (we/they settled here in the Cherokee Strip land run, and we still some of the land and the dugout), and I still don't feel guilty.

You shouldn't. Even if you take the position that the Land Run was wrong, you didn't have any part in it. Some other person over a century ago did it.

[Just the facts]

Well I don't know about you guys but I am still pissed that the Romans built a wall across England that cut off the supply route to my ancestors and the UN made it a UNESCO World Heritage Site as if it was some great accomplishment that should be honored. I say President Obama - help tear down what is left of that wall. [/sarc]

[Teo9969]

Sorry to be a jerk, but if you're going to correct someone, you probably ought to do it correctly...

Why do you hate the English language so much? You are killing it!

I count three separate verb tenses in your first sentence alone.

I am being -- This is the present participle. This is present progressive with a passive voice construction

OKCPS has announced -- This is the past tense. Present perfect

that it will -- This is future.

banned -- Now we are back to past tense. this is a typo that was supposed to be "ban" to complete the "will + bare infinitive" construction

And you are most certainly allowed to use more than one tense in a sentence, as you have demonstrated correctly yourself in this thread.

[dankrutka]

So... there seems to be agreement now in the thread that (a) history is pure relativism and historians make up whatever they want so who cares what's taught, (b) kids don't really remember details so who cares what they learn, and (c) my family didn't steal land so why should I feel "guilty."

I liked the earlier part of this thread where the consensus seemed to center around regardless of whether a Land Run reenactment took place that teachers must teach the Land Runs in an accurate historical context that addresses the varying causes, perspectives, and consequences associated those events. We don't learn about the tragedies in our history (which there is plenty of this associated with the Land Runs) so people will feel "guilty" today, we learn about it so we can learn from mistakes, tell stories of injustice so they are not simply justified or rationalized today, and to make a better society. The Native experiences in this state is full of a lot of tragedy that should be understood so no Native (or otherwise informed) students have to go home and ask their parents, "Why is the Land Run a fun, celebration when you told me it caused our ancestors so much pain?" In the end, this is about being historically accurate... I don't think that is too much to ask.

[Midtowner]

Many Native Americans had no cultural concept of land ownership, therefore lands being "unassigned" didn't really mean much to some tribes.

The issue is complex, and deserves more discussion than most schools give it. However, the Native American way of life was definitely impacted. And for many, it was not in their interest.

This article gives a brief account from a Native American standpoint: April 22 marks anniversary of Oklahoma Land Run

History is replete with conquered peoples. Good on Natives that they have their own viewpoint, but just because they didn't believe land could be owned didn't make it so. And to be fair, I'd challenge you to find a single tribe which still believes land cannot be owned.

As far as the land run participants were concerned, this was land bought fair and square from the French, was lost by the tribes as part of their punishment for picking the wrong side in the Civil War, and was now being settled. We need not treat conquered peoples with such kid gloves. They are free to view this as something unfortunate, but for the many people who participated, many themselves conquered and marginalized minorities (the Irish), this was a great opportunity.

It's also part of Oklahoma's legend--the great landrun. It's an act which we can be proud of. I visit most cities in the world and there are hundreds, sometimes thousands of year-old things still in existence. To think that someone as near in time as my great grandmother came to this state when there was almost no human habitation whatsoever and that those people built the whole damn thing is something we can be proud of, not ashamed of.

[Just the facts]

History is replete with conquered peoples. Good on Natives that they have their own viewpoint, but just because they didn't believe land could be owned didn't make it so. And to be fair, I'd challenge you to find a single tribe which still believes land cannot be owned.

As far as the land run participants were concerned, this was land bought fair and square from the French, was lost by the tribes as part of their punishment for picking the wrong side in the Civil War, and was now being settled. We need not treat conquered peoples with such kid gloves. They are free to view this as something unfortunate, but for the many people who participated, many themselves conquered and marginalized minorities (the Irish), this was a great opportunity.

It's also part of Oklahoma's legend--the great landrun. It's an act which we can be proud of. I visit most cities in the world and there are hundreds, sometimes thousands of year-old things still in existence. To think that someone as near in time as my great grandmother came to this state when there was almost no human habitation whatsoever and that those people built the whole damn thing is something we can be proud of, not ashamed of.

I'm proud to be American-American.

[dankrutka]

History is replete with conquered peoples. Good on Natives that they have their own viewpoint, but just because they didn't believe land could be owned didn't make it so.

This is exactly what the people who stole their land said.

To think that someone as near in time as my great grandmother came to this state when there was almost no human habitation whatsoever and that those people built the whole damn thing is something we can be proud of, not ashamed of.

Again, it's not about "guilt" or "shame," it's about learning from all parts of history - the good, the bad, the ugly. There are many things to be proud of in Oklahoma's history. And there are absolute injustices that should cause us to consider how we can prevent such things in the future.

Of course history is complex, but by just saying, "hey, you know what, some Indians probably had their land stolen and their communities destroyed, but you know what, I love Oklahoma so I don't think we should worry about it" is to rationalize and justify what was done.

I have a distinct feeling that a lot of people in this thread haven't read the works of Angie Debo and how children were conned by businessmen just doing business. I love Oklahoma. There are many amazing people in the history of the state. There were many people who participated in the Land Run who found a unique opportunity to prosper (see Far and Away for cinematic version of that tale), but diverse Native perspectives must be heard, understood, and honored.

[hoya]

This is exactly what the people who stole their land said.

And they were right. They were very successful in taking land from the Indians. So?

Again, it's not about "guilt" or "shame," it's about learning from all parts of history - the good, the bad, the ugly. There are many things to be proud of in Oklahoma's history. And there are absolute injustices that should cause us to consider how we can prevent such things in the future.

And grade school is not the time to get into that. Grade school kids are too young to understand the complexities of history. When I was in high school we were doing good if people understood that Hitler did not rule Germany in World War One. This subject is something that should be addressed in high school or college.

I have a distinct feeling that a lot of people in this thread haven't read the works of Angie Debo and how children were conned by businessmen just doing business.

I've read a lot of history books. Not hers, but a lot. There are a lot of people who got a raw deal in history. Native Americans are not alone in that.

but diverse Native perspectives must be heard, understood, and honored.

I disagree. We are under no obligation to honor the perspective of anyone else. People have a right to their own perspectives, but we also have a right to completely disregard them.

Did the Indians get screwed over pretty badly? Yes. Those tribes were part of a long list of societies who were on the losing end of cultural conflict throughout history. Many descendants of those tribes today still identify with their old cultures. I understand that. Should schools be sensitive to racial minorities when teaching American history? Probably so. But I remember that our history classes, even back in the 80s, would make some mention of the plight of the Indian tribes. But at the end of the day, they are really no different than any other group who lost a war and had their territory taken.

[dankrutka]

And they were right. They were very successful in taking land from the Indians. So?

It was unjust. We should care about injustice, if for no other reason, because living in a more just society provides us all more security. Martin Luther King makes a far better case for this than me in "Letter from a Birmingham Jail." And, this is particularly relevant because most of the injustices perpetrated against Native peoples were considered legal.

And grade school is not the time to get into that. Grade school kids are too young to understand the complexities of history. When I was in high school we were doing good if people understood that Hitler did not rule Germany in World War One. This subject is something that should be addressed in high school or college.

Just because your school experiences had low standards does not mean that we should continue that policy. Young kids deal with what is fair/unfair, right/wrong everyday. They are the same questions adults wrestle with but in different ways. Responsible teachers can teach about any topic in an age appropriate way. I work with educators who do this everyday in their classroom. You do not teach 1st graders about genocide, but you can teach them lessons that allow them to think about right/wrong in ways that are at the essence of these issues. For example, instead of teaching 1st graders lies or myths via a whitewashed history of Columbus' encounters with the Arawaks, you could sing THIS SONG with them and help them develop an understanding of the different and diverse Native cultures that existed in the Americas. This is a big shift from just telling Columbus' perspective, which, by the way, is an important part of an accurate history too.

I've read a lot of history books. Not hers, but a lot. There are a lot of people who got a raw deal in history. Native Americans are not alone in that.

You're just deflecting. If someone in your family was murdered, would you say, "oh well, lots of people get murdered." You do not have to engage in this discussion, but it is the topic of this thread and one that is part of Oklahoma's state history, which is required to be taught in schools.

I disagree. We are under no obligation to honor the perspective of anyone else. People have a right to their own perspectives, but we also have a right to completely disregard them.

If you want to live in a society where people "completely disregard" others then keep fighting for that. I guess I'm more into learning from others and living together (including you, hoyasooner - and I have learned a lot from you on this board), because, in the end, what else is our work but to leave the earth a little better than we found it. Since you seem to be making a case FOR indifference towards others, here's Elie Wiesel's "The Perils of Indifference." Again, he is far more eloquent than me.

But at the end of the day, they are really no different than any other group who lost a war and had their territory taken.

Yes. Lots of groups have faced injustice and it was never okay. I certainly am concerned with lots of contemporary and historical issues of injustice. This is one of them.

Again, my basic point is that we should teach history accurately, which means including Native perspectives in any pedagogy concerning Land Runs. You really wouldn't think there would be a lot of opponents to that proposition, but I guess that's what message boards are for. I actually think it's too narrow of a response by OKCPS to outright ban Land Runs in schools because these can look dramatically different depending on the teacher.

[Midtowner]

This is exactly what the people who stole their land said.

"Stole" is such a loaded word. There were treaties signed. Of course, those treaties were signed under a modicum of duress, but nevertheless, the tribes chose to flee rather than fight. Other indigenous peoples like the picts were not so lucky. They were pretty well completely exterminated. Territory in the grand scheme of things only belongs to you if you can defend it. The tribes don't have a claim to their lands just because they found it first, their tribes were valid only so much as they as sovereigns could defend their territory. Badly outgunned, they chose to relocate.

And then they decided to cast their lot with the Confederacy. When you violate the treaties you sign and the aggrieved party has the ability to completely wipe you out of existence, bad things happen. Considering each of the tribes only lost a little territory, things could have been much worse... and probably would have been much worse if we knew at the time where the oil was and how valuable it would become 50 years later.

Again, it's not about "guilt" or "shame," it's about learning from all parts of history - the good, the bad, the ugly. There are many things to be proud of in Oklahoma's history. And there are absolute injustices that should cause us to consider how we can prevent such things in the future.

I know.. right? Did you see Avatar? We STILL hadn't learned about how to treat indigenous people.

Of course history is complex, but by just saying, "hey, you know what, some Indians probably had their land stolen and their communities destroyed, but you know what, I love Oklahoma so I don't think we should worry about it" is to rationalize and justify what was done.

It's perfectly acceptable. I have Irish heritage. I don't grouse about my ancestors being nearly exterminated by the English and actually having to flee their homeland because the choice was to flee or die. What was done to my people is not something I think very much about at all.

[Swake]

So much white entitlement in this thread.

Pretty sad.

[Rover]

Don't know if I am more disgusted with the ignorance displayed in this thread, or just the insensitivity,

[OKCisOK4me]

Justin Timberlake said it best, "cry me a river...".

[dankrutka]

Justin Timberlake said it best, "cry me a river...".

Justin Timberlake was talking about breaking up with Britney Spears, not the attempted, systematic destruction of tribal communities. But, we get it, you don't care about Native peoples or their histories. That's clear. But there's really no need to keep posting simply to antagonize those who do.

[jn1780]

Might as well ban Independence Day too while their at. Only fair right? That event had far more reaching consequences to Native Americans than the land run. The British getting in the way of the colonies western expansion is an often overlooked reason for the revolutionary war.

[Just the facts]

So let me ask dankrutka - if it was 100% up to you what would you like to see done? How would you right the wrongs of history?

[bombermwc]

Well this thing turned bad really quick, didn't it? I'm just going to back out of this one now.....wow.....

[Edgar]

Keep the land run reenactments, just make it real. Have the darker skinned students cower off to the side as bands of poor impoverished natives wondering just how their going to survive now.
Land run celebrations all need to got the way of Columbus Day celebrations. The natives don't find the history quaint. quit erecting monumnens and depictions on public works. Did Mary Fallin tickle anyone else with her speech at the RNC touting the land run as proof people don't need any help from government to thrive. immaculate stupidity