Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States
An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States
An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States
Audiobook10 hours

An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States

Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

4.5/5

()

About this audiobook

Today in the United States, there are more than five hundred federally recognized Indigenous nations comprising nearly three million people, descendants of the fifteen million native people who once inhabited this land. The centuries-long genocidal program of the U.S. settler-colonial regimen has largely been omitted from history.


Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz adroitly challenges the founding myth of the United States and shows how policy against the indigenous peoples was colonialist and designed to seize the territories of the original inhabitants, displacing or eliminating them. And as Dunbar-Ortiz reveals, this policy was praised in popular culture and in the highest offices of government and the military.


Spanning more than four hundred years, this classic bottom-up peoples' history radically reframes U.S. history and explodes the silences that have haunted our national narrative.
LanguageEnglish
Release dateNov 18, 2014
ISBN9781494577056
An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States
Author

Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz

Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz grew up in rural Oklahoma, a child of landless farmers. As a veteran of the Sixties revolution, she has been involved in movements against the Vietnam War and imperialism, union organizing, and was one of the founders of the Women’s Liberation Movement in the late 1960s. Since 1973, she has worked with Indigenous communities for sovereignty and land rights and helped build the international Indigenous movement. A historian, writer, and professor emeritus in Native American Studies at California State University, she is author of many Indigenous related books and articles, including Roots of Resistance: A History of Land Tenure in New Mexico and The Great Sioux Nation, as well as a memoir trilogy: Red Dirt: Growing Up Okie; Outlaw Woman: A Memoir of the War Years, 1960–1975; and Blood on the Border: A Memoir of the Contra War.

Related to An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States

Related audiobooks

Ethnic Studies For You

View More

Related articles

Reviews for An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States

Rating: 4.289625391354467 out of 5 stars
4.5/5

347 ratings29 reviews

What did you think?

Tap to rate

Review must be at least 10 words

  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    Excellent high level view of the topic. It saddens me how many reviewers are complaining of "bias" or "an agenda" in this book since the author specifically explains she is looking to counter the existing bias in Western history texts that aims at alleviating guilt about colonizing and decimating native populations.

    2 people found this helpful

  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    This is an ambitious book about a huge topic, and Dunbar-Ortiz has a difficult time doing justice to her subject in such a short volume. This isn't really a history of indigenous people. This is a history of what white Europeans did (and are still doing) to indigenous people. More white people are named, and more of their actions described, than indigenous individuals. Dunbar-Ortiz's main thesis is that the long slow genocide of Native Americans is the defining characteristic of the United States, and has served as the inspiration for many aspects of American culture, and has provided the template for American colonialism abroad (Vietnam, Iraq, etc.). Buried in there is her secondary thesis that Native Americans have survived despite 500 years of systematic destruction of their people and culture, but unfortunately she doesn't have much time to discuss how they have managed to do this.This book is a merciless condemnation of the history of the United States. Dunbar-Ortiz does not hold back in criticizing American colonialism. For example, in discussing how much the quest for gold was a driving force in colonization, she says "The systems of colonization were modern and rational, but its ideological basis was madness."This book is part of a series called ReVisioning American History for Young People. I would think that in a book aimed at a young audience, Dunbar-Ortiz doesn't explain more of the basic definitions and characteristics of colonialism. I think this is another effect of trying to fit a lot of information into a small volume - I really wish she had been given free reign to do justice to her subject.Despite all of these criticisms (which I think are probably a result of the publisher's restrictions, not Dunbar-Ortiz's skill), this is a devastating and important book, and I think all Americans should read it or at least be aware of its narrative.

    2 people found this helpful

  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz is a fantastic writer, and this is most certainly her magnum opus. If I ever teach US history, this would be required reading.

    1 person found this helpful

  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    This book was an informative, albeit heartbreaking overview of the atrocity experienced by my ancestors and relatives. Its informed perspective gives the reader a complete understanding of U.S. foreign policy, at last contextualized with the scope of the sin that inspired the Holocaust. I thank everyone for making hearing this truth possible, and the author for research well-done.

    1 person found this helpful

  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    Ge?ngageerde historische geschiedschrijving heeft het voordeel van de duidelijkheid, op voorwaarde dat de auteur aangeeft waar hij of zij voor staat. Dat is zeker het geval met Dunbar-Ortiz. Ze is zelf van Indiaanse afkomst, en was de voorbije decennia actief in de Pan-Indiaanse beweging. Van bij het begin van het boek geeft ze aan wat haar rode draad is: namelijk dat de strijd tegen de inheemse naties in Noord-Amerika ingegeven is door een imperialisme en een racisme dat in de Westerse cultuur al van bij de Romeinen ingebakken zit; en specifiek dat de strijd tegen de inheemse naties (de indianenvolken dus) in wat later de Verenigde Staten werd, zowel bij de Britten (kolonisatoren) als vooral bij de Amerikaanse staat (vanaf 1776) een bewuste genocidale politiek was gericht op complete uitroeiing, cf p 2 : ?The history of the United States is a history of settler colonialism?the founding of a state based on the ideology of white supremacy, the widespread practice of African slavery, and a policy of genocide and land theft.?Ik ga me hier niet wagen aan een bespreking ten gronde of die beschuldiging van genocide in dit geval terecht is of niet. Ik wil alleen aanstippen dat het echt niet echt is om dit begrip, dat pas in de 20ste eeuw echt gemunt werd (op basis van de Holocaust), ook voor voorgaande perioden te gaan gebruiken; denk alleen al maar aan de discussie over de Armeense genocide. Dunbar-Ortiz argumenteert dat de strijd tegen de inheemse naties een wel bewuste poging was om die indiaanse volkeren volledig van de kaart te vegen. Ze haalt tal van citaten aan van Amerikaanse presidenten (met uiteraard Andrew Jackson voorop, maar ook Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt?) en bevelhebbers van het Amerikaanse leger die dit lijken te onderbouwen. Nogmaals, ik ben niet in staat om dit ten gronde te beoordelen. Dat de verdrijving van Indiaanse volkeren van hun grond en hun behandeling daarna allesbehalve netjes verliep en alle schijn heeft van een fundamenteel onrechtvaardig historisch proces, lijkt me een vaststaand feit. Of je daarvoor de beladen term genocide mag gebruiken, is een andere zaak.Laten we dan even kijken naar Dunbar-Ortiz? betoogtrant. Die is uiteraard ge?ngageerd en dus erg gericht op het stofferen van de eigen these. Nergens in dit boek worden elementen aangehaald die op andere inzichten kunnen wijzen, of die de eigen these op zijn minst nuanceren, integendeel. Neem bijvoorbeeld de pre-Columbiaanse periode: hier verzet Dunbar-Ortiz hemel en aarde om aan te tonen dat de inheemse volkeren in heel Amerika een bijna paradijselijk bestaan leden, met een overvloed aan eten, in harmonie met hun habitat en omringende volkeren enz; op verschillende plaatsen haalt ze Charles Mann aan, wat al erg bedenkelijk mag heten. Ik heb verschillende pogingen gedaan om bepaalde historische feiten die ze aanhaalt in haar betoog over de oorlog van de Verenigde Staten tegen de Indianen te checken, en regelmatig blijkt dat haar verhaal op zijn minst selectief te noemen is. De rol van Kit Carson in de ?Long March of the Navajos? 1866 bijvoorbeeld wordt als bijzonder wreedaardig voorgesteld, terwijl ik in tal van andere werken een veel genuanceerder verhaal lees. En zo kan ik nog een tijdje doorgaan. Dunbar-Ortiz maakt er ook een punt van om voortdurend parallellen te trekken met het Amerikaanse optreden in de wereld, vandaag en in de recente geschiedenis. Zo haalt ze regelmatig de oorlog in Vietnam en Afghanistan aan. Vanuit haar stelling dat het Amerikaanse imperialisme inherent verbonden is met de genocidale politiek ten aanzien van de indianen is dat nog te begrijpen. Maar ze gaat hier zo ver in dat haar verhaal bij wijlen meer leest als een doorlichting van de Amerikaanse buitenlandse politiek dan een werk over de geschiedenis van de Verenigde Staten door de ogen van de Indianen.Eenzijdigheid is wat dit werk op alle vlakken parten speelt. Zo is het opvallend hoe weinig Indiaanse bronnen de auteur aanhaalt. We krijgen ook weinig zicht op de organisatie van het Indiaanse verzet, en welke interne dynamieken er aan de kant van de indiaanse volkeren speelde. Bovendien is het historisch relaas bij wijlen erg warrig en zijn er regelmatig manifeste slordigheden. Neen, de ge?ngageerde geschiedschrijving is met dit werk zeker niet gediend.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    A crucial and devastating book. One that shows us the uncomfortable and terrible history of colonization, imperialism and dispossession of indigenous people of North America and abroad.

    This is a book I had to take breaks from every hour or so, but dared not to stop. Because until we can come to understand the terrible truth, we will never be able to build a hopeful future.

  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Good informational an would read again to catch things I may have missed.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    A lawyer reviews some of the pertinent church state decisions, and visits the areas where they happened. Although this is a valuable book, the author treats some things a bit superficially, including his discussion of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) which he thinks is a good thing. One wonders if his opinion on that has changed since the recent decision in the Hobby Lobby case? He also buys into the idea that it was unanimous, which means he didn't research it thoroughly enough to understand the strange maneuvers that were used to get it passed at all. In addition, he does what is one of the most annoying things in these sorts of books - he spends a couple of hours visiting with people, and decides that everyone is likable, and poo-poos the fears of those of us who live daily with these surroundings. He also presents a very superficial - and inaccurate - view of history when he states that without the churches, there would have been no abolitionist movement, no civil rights movement, etc. While there were churches and religious people involved, this totally ignores the very real participation and leadership of non-believers, and fails to acknowledge that many saw these as "atheist" movements. The book itself is written in a snarky, half-serious vein that is fun at times and at times becomes a bit off-putting. Some great analogies - check out the Texas longhorns analogy to the Ten Commandments monuments. All in all, a mixed bag, and therefore not a good starting point for someone really interested in these cases.

    1 person found this helpful

  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    This is a very important book. It needs to be read by many who come to it with an open heart and mind. She does catalog the sins and their basis for how the United States got to where we are today.
    Unfortunately she damages her credibility and the book's usefulness by providing a slanted view and glossing over facts that moderate her picture of events. The story is bad enough without yielding to the urge to 'Photoshop' facts so every 'white' person had only the vilest of motives. I hope this book inspires many people to work for a better future history of the United States.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    This book wasn't really what I was hoping for when I picked it up. I thought it would be an in-depth look of the stories behind some of the landmark cases involving the separation of church and state. Instead this was more of a amusing overview of the law concerning freedom of religion that included a few interviews with people involved in some of the cases. While the author is good at explaining the constitutional law aspects of different cases and is definitely amusing, I felt he spent too much time doing this. I've already taken con law and didn't really care about the legal issues, I wanted to know more about the stories behind the cases. So while others might find this book more enjoyable, I was disappointed.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    Very thorough treatment of the treatment of Native Americans by Europeans and then, more specifically, the country of the United Stares. From today’s perspective, it is nothing short of eye opening and gives one pause when we think about how we got to where we are. Can’t deny that the book becomes tedious in its one- size-fits-all bias against the US and, those of European heritage.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    I knew it would be going in, but this was a tough read. She makes a compelling case for genocide. I look at news stories about Indians differently after reading this book.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    A look at U.S. history from an indigenous point of view turns everything you've learned on its head. How many people died on the altar of "manifest destiny"? The U.S. fomented its own genocide of its native population. Any hostilities the colonists and later the settlers experienced was due to impinging on land that wasn't theirs. It's the white settlers who killed women and children. Its the U.S. military who used the lessons of warfare against indigenous populations and applied them to other populations around the world to become an imperial power. The over-militarization of our society now is still apparent.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    American history, as traditionally taught, teaches of the US’s “manifest destiny” and of many ensuing conflicts with natives on the Western frontier. A few ugly scenarios are often mentioned, but systematic genocide, on the order of Hitler or Stalin, is not described. However, from the perspective of these indigenous peoples, that’s exactly what happened as the United States attempted to destroy their entire culture. It’s this story from this perspective that Dunbar-Ortiz attempts to tell in this history of the American behemoth.This book is unabashedly told from a perspective, and the reader has to get used to it. It’s not told from the perspective of an “objective historian,” but instead makes moral judgments on history. It borders at times on telling a story about the “good” indigenous peoples against “bad” white settlers. It uses present-day terms to judge this history, terms that were inscribed in the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights, in 1948. While I agree that genocide tragically occurred, I find it a bit unfair to judge prior centuries’ decisions from ethical standards of a more recent day.Dunbar-Ortiz’s history unapologetically makes recommendations that go hand-in-hand with the American political left. She does not attempt to moderate these views in the least or to bring them into dialogue with more neoconservative voices. Rather, she sees the neoconservative voices as the enemy to be overcome. And she makes a pretty good case from history as to why these voices are the enemy. The starkness in her tone is one often heard in wartime, and being from an indigenous background herself, she explains the hostility very clearly.That said, she does a fairly good job of sticking to the facts, facts often overlooked in US education. She is not careful on some fronts – like with her overblown (but debated) statement that there were 100 million indigenous people in modern America before Columbus. Still, she gives us an understanding of why indigenous Americans are distrustful of federal and state governments. To some, like my wife, former US president Andrew Jackson will always be a genocidal leader on the order of Stalin or Hitler for the Trail of Tears. Dunbar-Ortiz’s examination clearly shows why.This book was written before the Trump era, and some of its analysis in then-contemporary events reflects that. It seems embroiled in the left-versus-right era of the George W. Bush and Barack Obama years, rather than in populist white nationalism. Nonetheless, it shows where the nationalist sentiments that Trump unearthed came from historically. White Christian nationalism has a long history in the United States, particularly on the frontier where it kept “law and order.” Dunbar-Ortiz shows that there isn’t anything new here, and her voice has relevance even in a new paradigm. Thinking readers of all sorts can benefit from wrestling with her respective that represents a significant segment of the US populace.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    A valuable guide to a more authentic version of the American story.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    An understandably angry (and therefore somewhat repetitive) history of the US from indigenous viewpoints, focusing on the genocides and settler colonialism that were core to the founding and never stopped. Among other things, Dunbar-Ortiz highlights that Sherman’s March was merely the application of tactics used against indigenous people against white Southerners, and that the military term “in-country” is actually shortened from “Indian Country,” highlighting the extent to which the US military remains organized around the founding concept of going to other people’s lands and telling them what to do. The actors here are indigenous fighters/activists and settler oppressors; when laws change in favor of indigenous communities they are just passive-voice changed, and it would have been a stronger book if it explained why settler legal systems would ever do this (similar to Derrick Bell’s theory of interest group convergence, which explains why some whites support some anti-white supremacy initiatives).
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    This is a textbook example of what a textbook for a course in "What Your Teachers Never Taught You About Native Americans" would be. The focus on the "Doctrine of Discovery", which served as the justification for stealing and profiting from the confiscation and sales of tribal lands, is sobering. Another revelation is the creation of the "Rangers", the Indian fighters who were the forebearers of our modern military - "In Country", a/k/a Indian Country, as used in Vietnam to indicate anti-guerilla warfare against the inhabitants of the land. The relationship of Indian people to their lands and to the animals they managed was never as owners, but as stewards and protectors. The continued oppressive activities, including the theft of children and their placement into boarding schools (similar to the Magdelene Laundries of Ireland), are horrifying, and reparations equal to the level of harm done are difficult to imagine. My reading and discussions of this book were sponsored by the Social Justice Book Club hosted by Brad McKenna of the Wilmington Memorial Library.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    This should be compulsory reading for every American. Its so true that the winner writes history and the loser is forgotten.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    This was more a history of the abuses Europeans and the subsequent US government committed on the people already living here than a a history of those people. If you want to know about THEM, you need to read something else.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    Odd book. I thoroughly enjoyed the perspective the book offers, yet I believe the author is a bit loose with facts and interpretations. Nearly every page had something to fact check (e.g., meaning of the term redskin or the circumstances behind Sitting Bull’s death) and because of the abbreviated style of her prose, she does not always come out looking her best. A controversial declaration should be accompanied by an explanation of sorts. Also, the book is loaded with redundancy, yet still satisfying. Imagine how good it could be if the author could’ve jumped off her soapbox for a bit! Finished 27.02.20.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    A good primer that covers much of the long history of invasion against indigenous people. The biggest downside is that the breadth of coverage comes at the cost of depth, leaving it to feel more like an overview.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    This author wrote a book political harangue, not a history. Her facts are incorrect and she uses some facts not relative to the subject to prove her point. In the last third of the book, the harangue intensifies and the story ceases to be about history of the Indian people and more about a left leaning view of US current events. I suppose that, whether one enjoys this book will depend on ones politics. However, if you want to know more about the title subject, history of Indigenous People, read something else.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    "An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States" (2015) is part of Beacon Press's "ReVisioning American History" series along with A Disability History of the United States (2012) and A Queer History of the United States (2011). It is probably safe to assume that all of those titles and works are inspired by Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States (1980). I am giving this 5 stars as an important recording of history that is not otherwise admitted to, although the indigenous peoples' history here is more of a catalogue of the various broken treaties and genocidal massacres & relocations carried by various U.S. State and Federal governments and settler mercenaries and armies. i.e. you are not going to learn a lot about actual indigenous peoples' history here except for how they were impacted by the gradual western movement of the expanding colonial state. Even though it is not all inclusive it is still an important step in the process. The author's overall theme seems to be more the "American Way of War" and how it was honed in the suppression of the indigenous peoples of the Americas and was then exported throughout the world in hundreds of other colonial enterprises as early as African incursions in the First Barbary War of 1801-05 (i.e. the "Shores of Tripoli") through to Afghanistan/Iraq/Syria in the 2000's.The reference section provides a wide-ranging listing of sources to expand your reading on the subject, many of which are from the last decade. Early sources are often few, but both Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee: An Indian History of the American West (1970) by Dee Brown and Custer Died For Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto (1970) by Vine Deloria Jr. are included.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    I received my copy as an Early Reviewer, but sadly did not get to finish it until recently. (Grad school slows us all down.) I have to say, it was a breath of fresh air in the sense of doing a backwards version of US history than most of us are given in high school; I've read similar history books doing the same with Latinos. In some ways I do wish it was a little more even-handed; portraying Europeans as mostly bloodthirsty ignores plenty of people who happily integrated into native society, as well as others who did not try to eliminate the tribes, and to be frank, the indigenous tribes, once motivated, were not always kind either. Portraying one side as the Noble Savage in some ways, and the other as the Evil European doesn't help the narrative. However, that isn't to say this book isn't necessary, or at least a good means of understanding that American history did not start at Jamestown. (It didn't even start at St. Augustine.)
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    Geëngageerde historische geschiedschrijving heeft het voordeel van de duidelijkheid, op voorwaarde dat de auteur aangeeft waar hij of zij voor staat. Dat is zeker het geval met Dunbar-Ortiz. Ze is zelf van Indiaanse afkomst, en was de voorbije decennia actief in de Pan-Indiaanse beweging. Van bij het begin van het boek geeft ze aan wat haar rode draad is: namelijk dat de strijd tegen de inheemse naties in Noord-Amerika ingegeven is door een imperialisme en een racisme dat in de Westerse cultuur al van bij de Romeinen ingebakken zit; en specifiek dat de strijd tegen de inheemse naties (de indianenvolken dus) in wat later de Verenigde Staten werd, zowel bij de Britten (kolonisatoren) als vooral bij de Amerikaanse staat (vanaf 1776) een bewuste genocidale politiek was gericht op complete uitroeiing, cf p 2 : “The history of the United States is a history of settler colonialism—the founding of a state based on the ideology of white supremacy, the widespread practice of African slavery, and a policy of genocide and land theft.”Ik ga me hier niet wagen aan een bespreking ten gronde of die beschuldiging van genocide in dit geval terecht is of niet. Ik wil alleen aanstippen dat het echt niet echt is om dit begrip, dat pas in de 20ste eeuw echt gemunt werd (op basis van de Holocaust), ook voor voorgaande perioden te gaan gebruiken; denk alleen al maar aan de discussie over de Armeense genocide. Dunbar-Ortiz argumenteert dat de strijd tegen de inheemse naties een wel bewuste poging was om die indiaanse volkeren volledig van de kaart te vegen. Ze haalt tal van citaten aan van Amerikaanse presidenten (met uiteraard Andrew Jackson voorop, maar ook Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt…) en bevelhebbers van het Amerikaanse leger die dit lijken te onderbouwen. Nogmaals, ik ben niet in staat om dit ten gronde te beoordelen. Dat de verdrijving van Indiaanse volkeren van hun grond en hun behandeling daarna allesbehalve netjes verliep en alle schijn heeft van een fundamenteel onrechtvaardig historisch proces, lijkt me een vaststaand feit. Of je daarvoor de beladen term genocide mag gebruiken, is een andere zaak.Laten we dan even kijken naar Dunbar-Ortiz’ betoogtrant. Die is uiteraard geëngageerd en dus erg gericht op het stofferen van de eigen these. Nergens in dit boek worden elementen aangehaald die op andere inzichten kunnen wijzen, of die de eigen these op zijn minst nuanceren, integendeel. Neem bijvoorbeeld de pre-Columbiaanse periode: hier verzet Dunbar-Ortiz hemel en aarde om aan te tonen dat de inheemse volkeren in heel Amerika een bijna paradijselijk bestaan leden, met een overvloed aan eten, in harmonie met hun habitat en omringende volkeren enz; op verschillende plaatsen haalt ze Charles Mann aan, wat al erg bedenkelijk mag heten. Ik heb verschillende pogingen gedaan om bepaalde historische feiten die ze aanhaalt in haar betoog over de oorlog van de Verenigde Staten tegen de Indianen te checken, en regelmatig blijkt dat haar verhaal op zijn minst selectief te noemen is. De rol van Kit Carson in de “Long March of the Navajos” 1866 bijvoorbeeld wordt als bijzonder wreedaardig voorgesteld, terwijl ik in tal van andere werken een veel genuanceerder verhaal lees. En zo kan ik nog een tijdje doorgaan. Dunbar-Ortiz maakt er ook een punt van om voortdurend parallellen te trekken met het Amerikaanse optreden in de wereld, vandaag en in de recente geschiedenis. Zo haalt ze regelmatig de oorlog in Vietnam en Afghanistan aan. Vanuit haar stelling dat het Amerikaanse imperialisme inherent verbonden is met de genocidale politiek ten aanzien van de indianen is dat nog te begrijpen. Maar ze gaat hier zo ver in dat haar verhaal bij wijlen meer leest als een doorlichting van de Amerikaanse buitenlandse politiek dan een werk over de geschiedenis van de Verenigde Staten door de ogen van de Indianen.Eenzijdigheid is wat dit werk op alle vlakken parten speelt. Zo is het opvallend hoe weinig Indiaanse bronnen de auteur aanhaalt. We krijgen ook weinig zicht op de organisatie van het Indiaanse verzet, en welke interne dynamieken er aan de kant van de indiaanse volkeren speelde. Bovendien is het historisch relaas bij wijlen erg warrig en zijn er regelmatig manifeste slordigheden. Neen, de geëngageerde geschiedschrijving is met dit werk zeker niet gediend.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    The author sucessfuly establishes that each of the separate Native IndianPeoples were colonized and deposed of their territories as distinct peoples, at least bordering on genocde and "settler colonialism". "Free" land attracted European settlers, reinforced by the "Columbus Myth" and the questionable "Doctrine of Discovery" that the indigenous inhabitants lost their natural rights to their land after Eurpeans arrived and claimed their lands. She points out that such "settler colonialism" was basically a genocidal policy. She sets forth that that America was not a "New World". Indigenous peoples of the Americas had cultivated an agriculture based on corn (which does not grow wild) and had vegetarian diets supplemented by wild figs, fowl, and 4 legged animals. She also contends that the Americas (including North America, Central America and South America were densely populated and actively traded with each other. Thus, "North America in 1492 was not a virgin wilderness". A chapter entitled "Bloody Footprints" establishes the first introduction of "Scalping"as a lucrative commercial practice for which colonist mercenaries were paid per scalp. Stunningly, George Washington's orders regarding the destruction of the Iroquois stated:"You will not by any means, listen to any overture of peace before the total ruin of their settlements is effected .....Our future will be in their inability to injure us .....and in the terror with which the severity of the chastisement they receive will inspire them."I My college history courses covered the expansion of the American, colonies Westward to the Mississippi River, but I was not prepared for the detailed history in chapter 5 covering the withdrawal of the British from their 13 colonies & the subsequent use of "what were essentially vicious killers to terrorize the region thereby annexing land that could be sold to settlers". The author describes in the colonists as conducting "counterinsurgent warfare and ethic cleansing targeting Indigenous civilians". In chapter 6, she describes Andew Jacksonas " ... an influential Tennessee land speculator , politician, and wealthy owner of a slaveworked plantation ....." Thoughout her book she effectively uses current modern adjectives to describe, i.e. "....the final solution for the Indigenous peoples ...." Chapter Six is entitled "The Last Of The Mohicans ..." her subtitles are"Career Building Through Genocide" & "The Mythical Foundation Of Settler Patriotism". She unapologetically disputes standard American Historical terminology normally defined simply as "Westward Expansion". She states "Democracy, equality,and equal rights do not fit well with dominance of one race by another, much less with genocide, settler colonialism, and empire." Chapter Seven quotes Walt Whitman: "The nigger, like the Injun, will be eliminated; it is the law of the races, history ....A superior grade of rats come and then all the minor rats are cleared out." Also covered are the American invasion and colonization of Northern Mexico & California. Chapter Eight covers "Indian Country", with sub-titles such as "Lincoln's 'Free Soil' for Settlers" and "The Genocidal Army of the West"; as well covering the Homestead Act ,the Morrill Act & the Pacific Railroad Act.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    I read this book twice and enjoyed it both times. So why twice? It isn't difficult or abstract or even a translation. The first time I read it I think I was distracted by the confusion and anger I felt at the plight of Native Americans -though this is not exactly news to me - and kept thinking about and visualizing the history so that the text blurred and I was stunned. The second time was more straightforward and I was able to appreciate the unusual narrative approach and the personal feel that this disarming book provides. Much to think about here -though rather than read it for a third time I will start looking more deeply at the fine bibliography and suggestions for further reading..
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    This was one of the most difficult books for me to ever have read. I was hoping to appreciate a new framework for understanding US history from a Native American's perspective, but I seem to have run into a collection of notes that have some interesting and some outlandish things to say. I stayed with it because I think it should be somewhat difficult to understand history from a different political perspective. I simply found so many judgements that I may be sympathetic to but that I found arrived at without persuasive logic.

    I hope to keep reading in this area as the Native American dispossession and genocide involved in US history is obvious and yet difficult to grasp what it means to understand and see it clearly.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    I received an Advance Reading Copy of this work via Goodreads Giveaways.

    Dunbar-Ortiz presents an articulate, detailed, and fascinating presentation of Indigenous history from the perspective of Native Americans. Though somewhat short, the book tells a variety of historical stories from Native sources, with a primary focus on the late 15th Century to the modern day.

    Dunbar-Ortiz's work will be a must read for students of anthropology and Native American history. She expertly weaves various treaties, historical events, documents, and quotes into a narrative of Native interpretation of recent history, which is unique in the field (which often relies upon Western sources). A very authentic work of history and anthropology.

    There were a few parts that I did not agree with and had a difficult time reading, notably areas outside of Native American history (the Crusades, Barbary Wars, Global War on Terrorism) and public health (treatment of disease and population health), which I felt were presented in an excessively simplified and pointed way. Being outside of the scope of the work, I felt that Dunbar-Ortiz only focused on excessive generalizations of these areas to fit her narrative, and seemed awkward/did not really fit. Additionally, she offers a brief aside to the Virginia Tech Massacre, which was particularly clunky and unnecessary, and quite off-putting. Other than the Virginia Tech comment, the additional comments fall under something of 'mission creep', where her topic is expanded in a series of asides in interesting yet irrelevant and sometimes biased/possibly inaccurate descriptions of history - which is made distracting by the otherwise detailed and articulate nature of most of her work. The Virginia Tech comments (only 1-2 pages maximum) were just 100% unnecessary - they serve no purpose and will only confuse/anger/turn off readers to what otherwise is a fascinating read.

    3/5 for a strong representation of Native American history through their own words and experiences, with some marks off for an oversimplification and unnecessary inclusion of extraneous topics.