I don't have a problem with "framing". What the post author and I have a problem with is revisionist history.
Denying that the tribes participated in slavery also denied another fact, one the author was trying to get across but that you missed: Some of us can trace our ancestry back to those slave holding tribes. Myself, I have living cousins on the Choctaw Rez that my mom is still in contact with, as they are on her side of the family.
Erasing and revising history also erases people like me from their history, which is the main complaint behind that post.
I did mention that point. I think you, me, and the Twitter poster are largely in agreement and maybe I'm nitpicking. Maybe cause Twitter isn't the best way to share things like this.
But to reiterate, revionist history is not okay and it's important to be able to discuss native/slave relationships and their descendants openly and honestly. I guess I'm finding it odd to not even really discuss settler influence, but again, maybe I'm nitpicking
I don't have a problem with "framing". What the post author and I have a problem with is revisionist history.
Denying that the tribes participated in slavery also denied another fact, one the author was trying to get across but that you missed: Some of us can trace our ancestry back to those slave holding tribes. Myself, I have living cousins on the Choctaw Rez that my mom is still in contact with, as they are on her side of the family.
Erasing and revising history also erases people like me from their history, which is the main complaint behind that post.
I did mention that point. I think you, me, and the Twitter poster are largely in agreement and maybe I'm nitpicking. Maybe cause Twitter isn't the best way to share things like this.
But to reiterate, revionist history is not okay and it's important to be able to discuss native/slave relationships and their descendants openly and honestly. I guess I'm finding it odd to not even really discuss settler influence, but again, maybe I'm nitpicking