tv In Depth Roxanne Dunbar- Ortiz CSPAN November 12, 2021 4:02pm-6:02pm EST
published black eye for america. starts tonight 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2 and you can access our programs online at book tv network follow along on c-span now. >> next from a book tv's in-depth program historian and activist, outlaw women, indigenous peoples history the united states and recently published not a nation of immigrants. >> roxanne dunbar ortiz, i want to start our conversation today with a quote from your most recent book, not a nation of immigrants.n you writeup that claim the unitd states is a nation of immigrants is the benevolent version of u.s. nationals. what you mean by that? >> in the past, before that
terminology, a nation of immigrants arose, there was degradation of immigrants, hard processing, acceptance which still exists especially with chinese promote the first immigrationst law was exclusionf chinese so it's mainly about exclusion but the term, a nation of immigrants is very recent. i was surprised to find 1958, by john f. kennedy when he was senator and it seemed to me he was planning to run for president, he had a difficult
path because he is child of immigrants, irish and catholic. every president up until that time, his presidency had been either anglo or scott, irish and protestant so what he emphasizes in the book he published called a nation of immigrants, he emphasizes the great qualities aboutea the irish in particular and mainly about that but the terminology, i don't remember it when i was in graduate school in the 1960s, i don't remember the term having caught on yet. i think itt was multiculturalism
when the 1970s, 80s and 1990s in all of the textbooks and public schools and simply accept the term so i see it as a post-world war ii cold war competition with the soviet union to create a positive positive image, what people around the world were seen on television or black people being bloodied and beaten in this house, desegregation movement so the competition was not only weapons economics but also cultural in the soviet union and cuba were publicizing these
negative qualities so i think the nation of immigrants and immigration laws john f. kennedy initiated, he wasn't alive when it was finallyal passed, 1965 bt it did open up immigration for the first time to non- europeans immigration. there was this liberal pinch, it's the new nationalism but we also have fast developing nationalism that opposes that and does not want immigrants, people of color, a white republic so it's not uncontested. >> when we go back in history,
going back to the 1700s or so, were there open borders at that time into the united states? >> there were no immigration laws but there was a great deal of suspicion of some immigrants. not anglo or scott or germany but alexander hamilton was paranoid about french immigration during the french revolutionhe and these revolutionaries would infiltrate the united states and create ideas so during that time which hamilton was a major offer of
was presented so there was great suspicion of anyone who was not english-speaking or german or scandinavian but in the beginning it was pretty limited and of course only males and at first property owners could be citizens, but simple terms of this. >> roxanne dunbar ortiz, through out your historical text, use the phrase settler colonial, what you mean by that? >> settler colonialism is one kind of western european colonialism that started in the 15th century with the law of europe at the time of western
europe from the vatican, international law so it was a pronouncement and that law gave portable, portable wasn't really a state, monarch the right to invade, occupy africa and enslave all the people so that was the beginning of the transatlantic slave trade. it was only the main slave market but with columbus in 1492 commissioned by the monarchs of what would be sustained very
soon, after 1492, 1493 the same kind of people cave all of the western hemisphere to the spanish monarch. to do it and enslave all the people there. the notion of the discovery so the doctrine of the discovery became that law, so the law in the united states and western europe, it's still the law even now today this medieval is subscribing u.s. law through supreme court decisions made in the 1830s so colonialism is a
type of european colonialism that began at that time, it's already existed, the british were well practiced because for two centuries they colonized ireland and introduced settler colonialism, devised it to push out irish from the land they owned and to bring in anglo and stop settlers so this is how we get scott irish, which my father's family is dissented from and when they came and migrated to the united states, they came as seasoned settler colonialists. the cromwell lien.
established, this still exist today as contested territory under the british empire. these things are not just history but this was the first developed over the first couple of centuries and implemented that was then brought to north america and because of the first landings of the puritans, before that, jamestown and especially with jamestown which has always laid down in u.s. history to favor the truth and these mercenary johnce smith armed violent immediate taking of the land around jamestown and
pushing out the people very violently, they also found a product the native people, corn, squash, beans, the triad of american agriculture before but another item, tobacco which they used for medicinal purposes and ceremonies, they didn't get addicted to it but they started selling this and quickly became a prized commodity and western europe and everyone got to it so it never had low points, it only grew and grew so that i think was the formation in the british empire, this bridged land could
be appropriated for the native people who already developed the land and already over h agricultural led. they built roads all over the continent talking about the eastern seaboard and simply appropriated what already and pushing the people out so this was in part, possible because they already had the knowledge and mechanisms for doing that environment but developed as a program as a settler colonialism. it was replicated later and worked so well in the north american colonies canada, the
british holdings in canada applied later in new zealand and australia so these are the prototypes of settler colonialism. later in the 1700s, saw the success instead of looting and miningng the agriculture was successful in north america so the new colonies conquest in argentina what is now a reply, they used settler colonialism really genocidal in north america. >> you tell a story not a nation
of teaching and asking your students, what did the united states look like geographically during the colonial period? you say most include all of these. >> u.s. imperialism understate the colonies was developed, draw a quick map of what the united states looked like addicts founding and i don't care about comedy states because i put them off but most of them do draw that continental -- i grabbed it
from them immediately so they can't rethink it because it's the subconscience destiny that it was always to be but of course it wasn't always to be. it took more than 100 years of daily unrelenting warfare to mark across the continent invasion of mexico annexation of mexico so the continent was not sold out until 1890 which is the marker of the massacre in 1890 as the moment in which all native people were on, concentration camps guarded by
army basis that later became reservations. this is something that can simply be mapped but i don't think educators are telling this or showing that map but it is pervasive in the national consciousness of people in the unitedeo states, they see it as always havingee been that way. they immediately know they made a mistake and it can't be put it's a way of teaching, i have that as a child, i don't know but i'm sure i saw that the continental united states was just always what was.
>> when in your life did you start questioning the history? >> i was not in early boomer in that respect. i can't say s that i was. i grew up in rural oklahoma, not exactly where you might be exposed anything near what i have now but i think education is so important, higher education because that's when you possibly might bump in two some knowledge and usually do and that's why many people, white nationalists and evangelicals discourage higher education.
they are likely to lose but kick to knowledge so my first year of university was at the university of oklahoma and it was a period of desegregation, my last year of high school i went to a trade school, a public high school but happened to be the first high school, the first school in oklahoma to be integrated, the black high school to central high, not nearly as good a
school, the dunbar black school far better educationally so this was 1956, a couple of years after the sermon the important decision getting school so for the first time i was in community with black people and use everyday by white people slamming their lockers, breaking into their lockers actual fistfights, black students with naacp trained not to react, not to fight back, they were
dignified watching this, there was no way to avoid it happened in the hall and cafeteria, we all had to work, we had jobs so it's not like i was there the full day but i would observe these things and i was appalled and i think something in my upbringing, maybe even southern baptist or my family, my grandfather had been a member of the socialist party in oklahoma and my dad was very proud of his dad's i heard those stories in my grandfather fighting against the ku klux klan so i became quickly antiracist and i am
grateful for that experience because i'm not sure i would have had that experience that led me toe other things so the university of oklahoma, i met, fell in love and married the next year a young man was an architecture student his family were liberal and trade unionists in the mainas person who integrated in oklahoma so it was a completely different setting, i lived there for five years, four years before we moved to california so i got educated but none of us lived to understand,
big farmland but i didn't question any of i came to understand u.s. imperialism. the u.s. history classes which i also took because i took my dissertation on the border, i had to do both, they never talk about imperialism, they called it manifest destiny so i learned about the invasion of mexico which i have little knowledge of before and that led me on the
path in the direction of wanting to understand further infinite got involved and african-americanf studies so i learned a great deal from him and his idea of ethics studies involved in that movement so it was gradual but really outside ofts the university i was askedo be an b expert witness in a sovereignty case after 1973 and i had to do a lot of studying
because i had really done the border, the southwest and my dissertation was history of the year in new mexico from precolonial time to present so i was no expert on 1868, i knew about it because the american indian movement was very active but i wasn't a specialist, i didn't feel i qualified as an expert witness, i tried to refuse but gloria junior said you're probably a quickye study and took me an arm load of documents. i learned pretty fast but that experience at a two we carry,
all of these people from pine ridge and the reservation came down made an encampment along the missouri river it was an extraordinary learning experience listening to oral history of that treaty and learning needs native people i found that just there but "afterwards", everywhere they have this strong oral history and now the u history of the united states like no one else knows it from the view of their experience so in that book i tried to replicate that, everything i hadli learned throh oral history and they are not
always accurate with dates that give you a month a tip you off where you should go to look and fill it out and that was certainly the case so that was sort of my research process, that was 1974. >> professor dunbar-ortiz, before we leave and look at some of the other books, i want to finish our discussion with this book, but james baldwin quote you include in the conclusion, i love america more than any other country in the world and exactly for this reason, i insist upon the right to criticize that. is that your sentiment? >> no, in that paragraph i'm pondering why anyone, any u.s.
person who criticizes united states, or tell the truth about u.s. history has to swear their loyalty to the united states, it makes no sense to me. i don't love the united states, i don't know what that means. i love human beings, individuals i know and i can say i love certain foods or something but to love a nation, state, i don't understand patriotism. i think it is a recent thing in world history and a poison that creates wars and madness the division we have right now so
who's the greatest patriot so i was criticizing baldwin because i don't think he really meant that. i don't know, i can't read his mind but everything else he wrote hard to think that love is the first thing that would come to mind in his sentiments about the united states from his experience. i have nowhere near any experience like that but as historians, we have to tell the truth and i think we should subjective, we should not write the parler history, building up united states, balancing it with something good, historians need
to tell the truth about u.s. history. they do find when they study other countries, they have no limitations or apologies but when they get to their own country -- and i don't think it's true of other national historians, historians can be objective, british empire maybe the french are more likely united states but i was criticizing baldwin which i rarely do, i just felt bad, why did they have to say that? it's like an apology saying i have the right because i love the united states. i have thee duty, i don't know about the right but i have the duty as a historian to tell the truth. >> your 2014 book and indigenous peoples history of the unitedpl states won the 2015 american book award.
in that book, you look at the standard or commonplace historical eras including the colonial era, revolutionary war, jacksonian. , civil war and reconstruction, industrial revolution, imperialism, j world war i, depression, new deal, world war ii, the cold war, vietnam, how would you rewrite those? are those fair divisions for studyingytu history? >> in that t book, i debated wih myself talked with other colleagues how to reorder the
chronology of the united states to be more accurate but it's a lot to ask of people who take away the framework that exists so i pretty much works within the framework but also criticized it while inside of it. most historians, there are some changes now but up until thingst started changing a little bit after 9/11 the bush administration, invasions in afghanistan, historians think maybe the united states is imperialist but i say imperialist from the beginning, usually 1988 over seas invasione
taking hawaii, pacific islands and occupy philippines for 40 years, they make it. , and thus world war ii but united states was founded as a division of the british empire, nothing really changed in terms of goals. the goal of europe, western europe from early time, marco polar, overseas imperialism was to capture the wealth of china, and accession of china and founding fathers of the united states to get the pacific. they actually have maps in the
northwest ordinance which the continental congress developed before the constitution and faithful to the constitution, the northwest ordinance have maps in it, a plan to get to the pacific so they have lines drawn. at first, they were going to be separate sovereign, each state, massachusetts sovereign state, it wasn't yet federalized so they had massachusetts, a trough across the continent to the pacific ending up on the pacific, each state with its own territory that it would capture. of course the spanish were
holding all of that territory west of mississippi at that time so that wouldpi be the first thg to get rid of the spanish and go into northwest, not the pacific, itot referred to the first think they plan to conquer which was the ohio valley and i think this was the main reason for independence, the british proclamation of 1863 that forbade the british settlers from going over to appalachia and the ohio valley, they were already going in, daniel boone and others squatting on native people's land but also even george washington, he made his
fortune, he was going in with his militia, as a child, i always wondered why this man in fancy dress, the plantation was a surveyor, i had a cousin who was a surveyor and he was going around in the mud, i couldn't put it together but of course he didn't tromp around but he let his militia in two map unseeded plans and he made a fortune off selling these deeds and he wasn't the only one. many of the founders were holding beads that were noer god unless they could actually claim the land and make the property, ape proper so i think this was a
major cause. in the declaration, there is lots of fat about truth and being restrained and protecting the savages which are native americans, all of that is about the proclamation, the barrier putting so they not only forbade anyone going in the, the british sent redcoats to go bring people back and supposedly the colonial militia were supposed to be doing that, to but they all had an investment, or most of them had investment in taking that land so that is a major reason
so i call it being founded as an empire when your goal is to get to the pacific dominate china, that is called imperialism so i don't change theon order, the chronology that is the usual and i changed thehe argument of what happened. >> your book brings to mind the 1980 book, peoples of the united states, is not a fair comparison? spira i love the book that came out in 1980, i adopted it in my introductory history class, immediately. it was such a gift for students to have a readable poetic book
that just told the truth. so i left it. i got to know howard then in his other books and it's such a classic, a marker for change in the teaching of u.s. history but i did feel, it opens, like no other book at that time, a precolonial, mostly not very accurate information, if at all in u.s. historyry but he starts with genocide and victim moving first chapter simply had not
existed before so for the native students others teaching them native american history classes, it was unprecedented to have a book that started in that way if it goes up, it doesn't really deal with what happened during the civil war, the u.s. military didn't miss a beat and it's move across the country, they rounded up the navajo people that they could round up and marched them, a long walk were half of them died in a desert concentration camp for they were left until
after the civil war, the army went to minnesota to protect the scandinavians who haden common d forcibly were trying to force the farmers out, a war started so the army intervened and hard the largest mass hanging in history took place during theas civil war and resolve the dakota people the massacre that took place in the west, 394 people massacred. of course the genocidal act
against northern cheyenne and sand creek colorado so these don't appear in thehe civil war section of civil war writers, it also doesn't appear in his book. he does get back to the army and the rest the genocidal wars and deals with wounded knee massacre but it caps off the whole 20th century, nothing about native people until the 1960s with the red power movement. i used to ask him where the native people were, where they h hibernating or were they doing he would say to me, i don't know how to write that, you have to
do that. that's sort of what i decided to do, fill in howard's book to make it more complete but it's still a wonderful book in and of itself not only to be honored but everyone should read. if there's a young adult version that's available to young people. my indigenous peoples history in the united states is also a young adult version now. >> thanks for joining us on book tv today. this is our in-depth program we have one offer on to talk about this bodies of work. this month, historian, author
and activist, roxanne dunbar-ortiz. she started publishing books in 1997, red dirt, growing up o'keefe was her first, outlaw woman, indigenous peoples history of the united states came outhe in 2014 which won the american book award in 2015. all the real indians died off 20 other myths about native americans came outia in 2016. loaded, disarming history of the second amendment 2018th and her most recent which weum discussed, not a nation of immigrants, settler colonialism, white supremacy and history of seclusion came out this year. well, we want you to participate in this conversation with roxanne dunbar-ortiz, they're going to put the phone numbers up on the screen. 202 is the area code for all of
our phone numbers. we have a a third phone line for text messages only. sending a text, include your first name and your city as well. text messages only on that line. you can find us in e-mail. book tv at c-span.org and social media, instagram, facebook, twitter at bookbo tv, that's wht you need to remember. we will takeo your phone calls very shortly. you say your first book is growing up okey, what is an okie? >> used to be a term created for
refugees during the depression who came to california, a slur word and it was shunned, it was a fighting word in oklahoma. none of my family migrated at that time. my father was set only wealthy farmers could migrate because they had cars or trucks and we didn't. my dad was a tenant farmer didn't own land but he was hurt by it because there were no more small farmers to be a tenant or but that term was not at all use i think until merle haggard, his beloved in oklahoma, he's a
californian but so prolific and went heated, i think that really changed. by the time i wrote the memoir, i felt free to use the term okie. so that is s the origin of it, a swearword kind of turned around as pride. >> in the authors note indigenous people, you write my mother was part indian, most likely cherokee, wanted joplin, missouri. you conclude the paragraph by saying my mother was ashamed of being part indian and died of alcoholism.
>> yeah, i think i thought about that since i've published it. i think it's important that native identity the identified with a tribe because it's not a race, there's not really such thing as an indian, more than 3 300 different natives and communities so i never had ties with anything and pretty certain my mother was not cherokee, there is no tracing it so i think when i made that assessment at the time, i hadn't
given it enough thought but i very much doubt that and i certainly wouldn't call myself cherokee so my mother didn't die of alcoholism, she was not an alcoholic during my childhood and i was the youngest but she had a very a hard life. she was an orphan, her mother died when she was four and she shifted around, she had eight brothers and sisters and shifted around in families and was in a school hours in sort of more likely juvenile place and she was 15 when she met my dad was a
cowboy working on a ranch in the northeast and then he came back to the hometown where i was raised for his father both sides of his family settled in central oklahoma. they all left and moved to texas except him so they married when my father was 17 and my mother was 15, so young really kids. she'd been through a lot, she is a great mother to all of us, i was sickly and asthmatic but when everyone was grown up, she did start drinking. her father was irish, he'd been an alcoholic and she loved her
father but he was a jolly drunk. i never knew him but my brothers and sisters aboard. it can be generational but i think she got it from her irish father the alcoholism. >> let's hear from some of our viewers. missus s carl here in washington d.c. carl, go ahead with your question or comment. >> i want to thank you for your enlightening work. how does your work convey with the environment today we have with this critical race theory where they are trying to deny true history of america by saying white kids are being so
hurt by this critical race theory but no problem when i was in school teaching native americans powwow scalping people now white kids you got to be quiet for white kids, they try to hide the racial massacres, the wilmington massacre and native american massacre? >> i think we got the idea. professor? >> a very good question. i never thought i would live to see the day legislatures including my home state, oklahoma are making laws, forbidding the teaching critical race theory as if it was being taught in the first place in the schools. i think the one in oklahoma
reads that anything to criticize white people, but that's not really what critical race theory is. it's not a critique of white people at all or white ofividuals, it's a critique structures of o racism and thiss what they fear. they know better, they know it is structural, people are gover, there is something that links people together in a nation the united states was founded as a republic, there is just no way to deny it, it was founded as a
white republic, it was all white. alexander hamilton, part black at one time because he was caribbean but that didn't pan out but it's white republic so everything -- and already 200 years of history, white societies that became white republic a constitution written with the embedded in it. the protection of property, the main property was very important, taking land from native people and selling land but even more important, especially the time of the kingdom, simply slave bodies,
the greatest asset, greater than all other assets in the united states by 1840, simply the bodies, not counting unpaid labor so those are just facts, it's not what sizing any single living person or even living persons at the time, it's how the structure we inherited, we today have to deal with that is problematic, we see it right now with the filibuster, electoral college, all of these things were built in to exclude and keep control written into the
constitution extra voting power to the electoral college that it was by state, two senators for each state the amount of the populations. here i am in california, 40 million people and we have the same number of senators as south dakota, 150,000 people so that was purposeful because the states were less populated than the northern states so they have tremendous senatorial power so critical race theory takes out a part and explain it and then you can do with it what you wish. you can say i don't want to know the truth and ignore it or you
can say i have to learn more about that. no one is making you believe in something but it is the truth, there really are things true and are simply facts. them does not mean they are not tax. >> tony is calling in from california, you are on with historian roxanne dunbar-ortiz. >> the mexican american war in the western annexation, wasn't abraham lincoln against the war when he was in congress? they convinced him to go along because if america hadn't come out west, the british would have come down south from canada? they may have ended up helping the confederacy in the civil war
if america hadn't taken the west, it wouldn't have a drop in the old sort basically saved the mexican american war. >> any comments? >> i really looked at this, i actually have two chapters the 20th century but the storable chapter, the united states, as i said, they wanted to get to the pacific and they started sending spies spanish territory, accidentally getting arrested in colorado, spanish territory and being taken all the way to mexico city and of course they
were trained, they were mapmakers technically and they drew maps along the way. this was 1806, still spanish territory. the mexican revolution a couple of years later broke out, ten years or so mexico became independent in 1821. ... in 1821 they first the first trip was is an it was independent. they were gone in united states
had no role in it. the mexicans had a radical peasant revolution. it got hijacked but they remained a very volatile country and they had our revolution of the 20th century, 2 revolution that completely change the structure of the land. but i don't think from my studies, i know that on the invasion and occupation of mexico actually the best stories about the war is the official account which is on the internet so they have all kinds of different things they fill out who was forwarded to us against it. the only people i found who were
against it the transcendentalists was really a racial argument that they didn't want all of the brown people as citizens. they were trying to end next all of mexico. they didn't want more indians and so i think the level of the argument has nothing to do with all that strategic stuff than what would have happened to them in the future and they didn't know there was gold in california so that was the backtracking and projecting into the future but their actual arguments were all of the northerners who are becoming abolitionists and wanted to abolish they didn't know what to
do with the friedman once they made an argument f about that ad how to get rid of them so was the exactly and abolitionism except for a few absolutely dedicated black-and-white people seen as totally equal. i think you would the unique in that respect and we should honor him as being the arbiter the avatar of starting the civil war. i don't think any of them were against it strategically, that they wanted that territory but abolitionists did feel as if because of what was developing in texasas the that it would be, it could be that it would be
enforced power. the southern states would become confederacy when they formed and they wanted to take over all of central america and the caribbean as imperialists and as a union was so in the west they often were fighting and they were not integrated but they have their obvious fighting and the apaches in the navajos. i think the invasion of mexico it created a border that i discussed quite a bit in the new book that is in stable. it's a border that cuts through
not only ecology but native people who straddle the border and cannot easily communicate with each other. it is an artificial landmark that was taken by violence, by military violence. the treaty of annexation that is done under occupation. it was under occupation with the -- running wild in the raping women. it was a violent occupation and the gun to the head to sign that treaty. i also have a degree in
international human rights law. that isn't i illegal treaty so mexico it if it had any power and did not suffer from going to the world course anyway the united states would show a but it could be won by default. it reopened negotiations about the order and did somethinget about it because it's not going to get any better. it is a contesting border and it's a violent order and most people in the united states are totally unaware of the history of how it came to be. let's go you are watching booktv and this is our "in depth" program. one author and her body of work in their guest this month is roxanne dunbar-ortiz and we will continue our conversation with her in just a few minutes.
>> for me i have been working on the 2015 -- 2016 presidential campaign trying to put out the dream of selecting the first woman president in the united states and was really surprised in the aftermath of thataf election to see women's activism not only here in the united states but around the world. back to the 2017 women's march. it was not only here but it was on every continent and it was organized nationally. because of his rights in activism the program began to track them and we started to see not only an increase in the
number of women raising their voices starting with the women's march moving to the #me too movement which went global starting in october of 2017 and ultimately to an incredible rise in women's clinical issues in a gebroad range of countries from afghanistan to brazil to the middle east that would surprise you. i actually had the opportunity to find an iraqi with woman activist and survivor of human slavery at the council where she was advocating against discrimination and sexual abuse against the men and many began trading stories about this rise in this movement around the world but the stories were not being told in the american
media. so lucky for me we agreed to join together to write this together and took a journey ndaround the world. host the we are back live with roxanne dunbar-ortiz whose recent book is "outlaw woman". that's here from barbara in massachusetts. barbara please go ahead. >> caller: hi theater and high dr. dunbar-ortiz.
the history of your centric clooney was a man genocide and dr. ortiz book is sitting in my lap here the indigenous people of the united states taken out of where -- i really want to promote exterminate all the brutes as i know dr. ortiz will tell us more about it. if you go to amazon.com they are selling all threee of the books that are historical backstops for this extraordinary document which is four hoursis in a premiered april 7 and 8th on hbo and you are listening to thf founder of the facebook page the french around tech and i hope everyone after watching the documentary will come and join
the conversation there which is just taking off. police tell us how you got involved with ralph pac apakan have we reached out to you and finally it does want to say this is a documentary of the decade, not the documentary of 2021. it really is here to revolutionize the first historical record. let's go thank you barbara. roxanne dunbar-ortiz what is it? >> guest: it is exactly as she described. it is a paradigm and anything that's ever been on television. especially broad television, hbo. ralph peck has long been one of my favorite filmmakers and of course i didn't know him and i've ever met him and i never
expected it in my lifetime. he was my favorite filmmaker and one day i get a call from him and this was three years ago in the spring of 2018 and he told me about this and i knew his production company had optioned the book for a film. i thought you know it's a small film company, fine but i had no idea it was pack. he h started telling me about te idea he wanted to use my book. he had already done two other books from the great haitian historian.
and exterminate all the brutes the name of the book by a swedish writer that compares the genocide of colonialism a colonial genocide asci t a precr including the colonial genocide in southern africa to the holocaust. they already had the books he was working with and adapting and then he discovered my book and it was just before it came out in thee french edition in paris so was the english version. i was very excited but he said i also want to work with you
because the other two authors passed away so he asked me to work on the script of him. i worked on that for the next couple of years and that's what i've been doing. it's been a fantastic experience and then the april launch, i had stages and irious had seen the final but still actually seeing it in knowing that millions of people were watching it all over the world was just so exciting because it is about colonial genocide and militarism and it focuses on the united states and africa, the congo and also the caribbean.
so i agree the curriculum is being developed around it and we have a book of essays that expand upon the peace in the film but has taken other situations and looking at them and it should come out sometime next year. the project was on and as the caller said this is not just a 2021 project. it's going to be more important i think 10 or 20 years from now as a guide to how the world works and how colonial genocide. >> a situation ind the world tht exist today. let's go mike in lakeside, california goodd afternoon.
>> caller: good afternoon. i was fascinated with the discussion about the desire to go to china even as far back as the founding of the generation. here in california i saw the headline overnight that a pretty middle-class african-american family had some property in redondo manhattan beach which is a suburb of los angeles and they were just awarded theirndy land back that their family and justly lost in the oklahoma situation. i think it was in the 1920s, sometime around then and they just got their property back just yesterday that i wondered if you he would have heard about that or have any comments. a kind of relates to the whole expansion asho well so thank yo. let's go bruises each in
manhattan beach california padilla familiar california padilla familiar with that story? >> guest: yes. i'm in san francisco and i read the "l.a. times" so quite a story and my first thought was this is the tip of the iceberg. if that happened to one familyne like that in california there are many cases of this so i hope others come forward and make their claim and make it known now. d with generations past some living people now may not even know what happened to their forebears but i think we will hear more about this kind of thing of land just being taken not only from native people but from black people and their homes that they lose. it was a time.
the black community suffered the most of all with foreclosures having been talked into deeds and mortgages that they couldn't handle so great losses and people are still suffering from that. >> host: tulsa oklahoma, roxanne dunbar-ortiz is our guest. please go ahead. >> caller: it's an honor to speak with you. i'm unfamiliar with your work but i plan on reading as many as i can. i have a comment. earlier today allie bell j., i don't know if i can say what network but "msnbc," on the program he took a road trip to southri texas and a lot of peope whose families who have lived there for generations and they
were so kind to say the border we can cross the border. the border crossed us and they explained there is only the human race and the race hispanic or indigenous as cultural and ethnicity and i thought you might have enjoyed hearing what it is and my other question is "outlaw woman." i'm trying to find my cherokee ancestor and greetings from indian territory here in oklahoma. i'm curious if in your research if you knew anything about bell started. i'm wondering if my ancestors
hung out with them. just curious if you had run across those names. i know othercr researchers and historians here in tulsa are also looking. >> host: thank you very much. we should point out that "outlaw woman" is mostly about roxanne dunbar-ortiz and her journey and in fact i want to read to quote from that look. quote bidding for dan said feminists like me were giving the movement a bad name. i told betty that i thought losing her celebrity leadership position to women who are committed to collective action with no leader and that she wanted no more than two going to political office and ahead of corporation.on
she called me an anarchist. when did that conversation take place professor? >> guest: was in the green room before we went on a tv show together. she was a piece of work. i respect her more now since i'm more mature myself about what she did. as younger women we were very radical and not just betty but others were liberals. but i'd did repeat that, she lived to read it and was not happy with it. but she was a good person. back to the texas border i
actually saw thatua program mysf this morning. they do get up early evening california and it was important and i hope it gets to repeated interview with people on the side of the border in texas. they said they didn't cross the border and it should be open and i agree with that. as for belle star come it's interesting that the caller asked about that because that's a book i was working on when i was asked to write in indigenous people's history of the united states. since then i've written through the books and i still haven't gotten back to my belle star book but i do write in oklahoma. this is my a goose hero.
many people haven't heard of all-star but they have heard of jesse james usually and she ran with the jesse james gang. she was much younger but what they offert jesse james the younger brothers endless movies and they were all confederate. they were on the side of the confederacy and they were slave owners. once i learned that it wasn't until i movedd to california tht i actually learned that. jesse james and it was like a house of cards that jesse james was a confederate and they all work because they were living together. i haveaf a whole chapter on this in my book disarming the history
of the 2nd amendment if anyone's interested in reading more about the confederate gorillas that turned bandit and great heroes. but i hope to get back to writing the belle star book. the cherokee connection of belle star's daughter got pregnant by a cherokee boy but bell center to a place, i don't know where but a place where she gave birth and the child was taken from her and adopted out because the girl was only 15 years old. but it could have also been for the cherokees.
that's's the only connection i know with belle star. >> host: donna in maine please go ahead with your comment or question. >> caller: this is a wonderful program and thank you so much. i just finished the book about the osage indians in oklahoma nand how they were robbed of their lives. they were murdered actually soy that white people could get the rights to that oil and what was called an underground preservation. i wonder having grown up in oklahoma you must have heard about that. i wonder what lore you heard when you were growing up and what your special experience has
been regarding that? thanks a million. >> thanks for theud] question. that was a situation and i haven't read the book but i think it's very accurate from the reviews i've read and it's important to understand that there were murders and corruption that took place in oil and gas. and there was violence at the base of that development in oklahoma. in a small state like oklahoma which i think has 96 counties, where i grew up in canadian countyty in oklahoma city northwest of oklahoma city and the county seat is -- this is
the land of the plains people. the land where grew up had been taken away from thee southern cheyenne. they arere still there but the land was allotted in the late 19th century where they have a small tribal headquarters but they qaeda look comanche -- kiowa comanche in the area where i grew up. i never went to tulsa and didn't even know it existed when i was growing up. it's very provincial in oklahoma by sections of the state, central, southeast, southwest, northwest, northeast and people don't get much out of their counties much less several
counties away. i went to tulsa for the first time and only since i moved to california. it was a much more beautiful city than oklahoma city and it was so much more eastern city settled by a lot of entrepreneurs so it's a very different place than where i grew up which was more southern, southern baptist and more like the south. even though it's the plains and it gets out into the plains. so i didn't know anything and i had no knowledge or lower from thatt time. only what i have read and i had friends and i followed the writinghe of a new constitution.
i had an osage friend who is involved in writing it but that was very recent and i can't help you with any lore. >> host: cecilia's calling in from the pine ridge indian reservation in south dakota. cecilia you are on with roxanne dunbar-ortiz. >> caller: good morning roxanne. i just wanted to thank you for your book. yesterday on the banks of the missouri river overlooking a 52-foot image of a lakota woman. we celebrated by dedicating it to remind our women that they are powerful, they are awesome and they are the backbone of our
nation. roxanne this image to me is of the type for all indian women to uplift themselves and to learn more about their culture and learn more about the ceremonies and about their language but most importantly roxanne it's an image that we will use in south dakota tohe try to teach the whe people and remind them that it wasn't long ago, for centuries ago that their ancestors came to america to look for a better life. we have so much to share with their non-indigenous people to remind them that they too came from somewhere and that we are the owners of this great land and will we are sharing it.
i'm excited about this and i hope you know about it and the archetype so weakening gauge other women to be proud of who they are. let's go thank you for calling in. >> guest: thank you cecelia. i did know about the ceremony. it's just very exciting and i wish i could have been there to experience it. there is a lot of news now about missing and murdered native women. a catastrophic colonial issue is related to reservations being still under colonial federal
control so they aren't allowed to have a criminal investigation internally so it's like green lights flashing on the borders of reservations. it's free here. rape any woman that you want. come onto the reservation so it's a huge problem and they think deb haaland the secretary of interior when she was a congressperson took this up as a major issue for the women and it's only now getting publicized because of the murdered young woman from florida. people started saying well what about the black women and the native women and mexican women who are murdered? so thank you for your lifelong
work and the lakota. let's go with the text from jonathan in washington d.c.. he identifies as -- any rights to you you seem on the verge may be in the middle of pop-culture of political native renaissance. poet laureate helping with vaccinations and other social needs. deb haaland and he asks if he's overstating it or not and what do you think? >> yes it's very exciting. i see the groundwork that has been set for that for decades building up and it's the hard work of native people, the
environmental activism and students and native people have taken professorial positions at universities and have a presence there and speak out. people are learning and there have been events like the standing rock standoff and uprising that had been going on for six months before it was even publicized in did get a lot of attention around the world. also the campaign to do away with the washington teams slur
and other ball teams at every level around the country. place names are big in the news. with california renaming squaw valley in late tahoe and there are several towns named squaw valley in california that are now being debated and all over the country there are hundreds of towns that c use that word. there's there is one powerful thing about the native movement and it every grassroots level in the country there something that can be done. you don't have to go to a national march or whatever. you can really start a discussion. my basketball team called me an indian is that appropriate? i think that's the power of it.
it's the persistent work on the part of native people and also people waking up. the black lives matter movement and the red nation one of the preeminent native activist organizations. we saw last summer the statues coming down of the confederates and others in columbus coming down. i think we are beginning to have a new rainbow coalition and that includes white people. the rainbow coalition by the way included whites and migrants through chicago so it has to be all people working at the grassroots level because it's the national level of politics.
i think it's going to take cultural and social change to change the politics. let's go to in her book all the real indians are already died off which came out in 2016 roxanne dunbar-ortiz what are some of the myths about the indigenous population such they did not have a policy against native americans. most indians are on government welfare and indians were savage and warlike. any comments comment about some of those myths? >> my co-author gene whitaker the two of us together it's in the beacon press series so there
are several books about unions and arab tankoo repping us and immigrants taking our jobs so this one myths about native americans. it was very hard. we had to whittle it down from 100 when we got to 100 we said we better start whitling it down but we could have gone on because there probably no myth is sized people in the united states. the problem is people don't just say i'm an immigrant and i need to learn something. they think they already know things because there are so many
men so they believe the north american continent was very sparsely populated by roaming bands of people and instead eastern part of what is now the united states, one of the seven original agrarian civilizations. the nile and the euphrates in china. all at the same time agriculture came and so the idea there are sode many myths and the ideas coming to wilderness.
native people were everywhere on every square inch. they lived on the land that they also adapted the land to them and ecological ways. we have to learn again if it's going to survive. so the myth of the savage and the positive myth of the ecological indian and a spiritual person and the otherca side is the savage p but neither are what any human being is. so there's also the idea that all indians are alike and there isn't language called indian. of course there is many languages as there are native w people.
so the myth suite came up with were important ones and i think people reading that look will wince when they find, that's what i thought and that's not true. i mentioned the renaming of. their editors in the papers in california when they talk about squaw valley they thought it was the complementary determined that women liked being called. this is the ventriloquist of what native people like and what they don't like and maybe they'd find one person who said i had no problem with that but it
seems like it's only with native people that these myths are very hard to overcome with truth because there are so many of them and they are so jumbled together and it just kind of makes a person feel -- when i was teaching native american history i had students who said they should not feel guilty about anything because there's no reason why it they would have learned anything i'd be teaching them before. it wasn't in the textbooks and it wasn't in the curriculum. but now they can learn so it's very difficult i think to get over to large numbers ofs people but i think these movements, the wonderful thing about being part
of one and two were movement in the 60s is you learn very fast not necessarily with books but with manifestoes and with speeches and native people. it's an extraordinary moment. they don't always last those learning moments but they are very important for advancing and i think the backlash of the critical race theory is trying to reverse what people have learned last year. i think the cat is out of the thbag and people want to learn more. >> host: we have about 15 minutes left with their guest. kim is in the least gamma and you are on the air.
>> caller: yes professor dunbar-ortiz my question covers a subject that i haven't heard discussed yet this morning. during the second world war there was an i don't know if you want to call it internment but some sort ofom frustration of te japanese on the west coast driven by the fear of an invasion from japan and so forth. i was wondering have you run across this subject and have you done any writing oncr it? >> guest: there's a whole chapter in my new book "not a nation of immigrants" that
iincludes fundamentally they ae japanese but it's mostly in the united states. you can't tell one east from another. this is discrimination against japanese and southeast, everyone but japanese farmers started coming in the late 19th century and work in the fields with the agribusiness building up and they also went to hawaii. they were poor countries so they were a people needing to send remittances back to the rich
countries in order to help their families back home and their communities. but i do live in san francisco and of course i've long known in detail about the internment because i taught an ethnic studies and mike colleague colleen fonda chinese-american instrumental with others in developing angel island where were incarcerated before they could be led and gore were deported from there but the japanese-americans were interned. they mostly were by dan in the early 1940s recalled truck
farmers. they had small vegetable farms in the central valley and s most of the think 90% of the lettuce came from japanese farms so almost all of the vegetables and fruits that were raised in california at that time, they were called truck farmers because they truck them into the wcity and sold them and had opn markets. they were operated. it was pure racism and there's no getting around it. i documented in the look the statements that were made about them that they can't a trusted come can't be trusted and can't beru trusted and they lie and ty are supporting the fascist
government and they are probably lying so to stay safe we need to block them all up so they roundedo them up but they also took their land and their property and never have returned it. and the reparations was just a token thing and only for the people who directly experienced it and most of them had passed away by the time it was done. it hasn't been properly dealt with yet. the internment camps one was in california but they were mostly in desert regions in idaho in new mexico and there was one in fort sill in oklahoma and it was
a experience. there was barbed wire around them and armed soldiers just like a prison with towers and they were watched so was a period of time and i think it's very important and it reminded people, native people of their own incarcerations and that was really the playbook the government was using like 50 years before they were incarcerating native people and also introducing -- they were already citizens and theyy spoke english but they tried to assimilate them in a way and
change what they were teaching and teach them patriotism so kind of career education camp they made of these internment camps as well. >> host: before he run out of time we ask our authors to share some of t their favorite folks d what they are reading now. here is roxanne dunbar-ortiz's list which we call from a larger list that she sent us. jody bird that clip takes of colonialism michelle ross perot silent in the past, power and they production of history. ella baker and the black freedom movement, history is the future, dabo reynolds john brown
abolitionists prisoners of the american dream and mahmoud man danny. now he appears in some of your writing as well. guess who i've long been a great admirer of his. he's a professor at columbia university from uganda and he is published many books and he didn't excellent book on sudan that everyone should read. and not understanding what was happening with the north and the south buddy started working on colonialism a decade or so ago with speeches and articles and then publish this book on the
native settler which is just brilliant. he had asked me to blurb the book and i was on a panel discussing the book and we became friends. we haven't met in person and in his book and he is neither native nor settler uses my indigenous peoples history of the united states as one of the references. it's very unusual to deal with in the study of clooney alyssum for non-u.s. people so it's a row breakthrough in that sense because he is an african international and drinks u.s. settler colonialism to a much larger audience than before but he also deals with apartheid
south africa and palestine and colonialism. it's a very important but. >> host: want to show you some of the books that professor dunbar-ortiz is currently reading and they include haiti, intimacies, wayward, hun doer, immortality and samuel moyne's humane. william is in west palm beach florida. hello william. >> caller: thank you. can you recommend a book around monroe louisiana and if you have time comment on -- is that factored into the independence from britain?
>> guest: repeat the last part >> host: are you still with us? >> caller: yes. britain's fleet -- freed the slaves before the states. did we see the writing on the wall if you will and did it influence succession from prison? >> guest: thankn you. thank you for that question. i'm sorry i don't know any sources but i will definitely look them up. >> host: just as general sense where would you recommend peoplo go if they want to read about specific areas? is there a library or a site that is one of your go to sites collects >> guest: i think all you have to do is google the history of northern louisiana and you can
find articles and all but i did want to respond to the possibility of ending not just the trans-atlantic slave trade but the huge antislavery movement in britain that wanted to do just that. it definitely made the in the colonies very nervous. do believe i gave what i thought was the main reason the proclamation that limited expansion but they wanted to expand and host not only the south but wanted to expand. they had worn out the land with commercialized agriculture basically nonfood crops like cotton and indigo to stay
wealthy and to build the wealth and the british empire. they wanted to move into that rich land in the southeast where the civilized tribes were great agriculture list and take that land. i think the other reason and i would recommend reading gerald thhorne's work on this that definitely ending slavery was predominant that the british public and i think they were so afraid that the monarchy would do it but the revolution of the people in britain against slavery would win out and would just destroy the colonies
because remember in the north some had outlawed slavery already in new york but they were involved in the slave trade mostly the slave trade was based in places like rhode island and the ports on the atlantic coast in the northeast. everyone was compromised by slavery and headed interest in continuing it. and i also thinking keeping power in the southern states with the ownership of slaves of two-thirds rather than one and
two-thirds voting capacity and the electoral college that was formed. these were things that would protect the southern states. >> host: professor we will have to leave it there. we are out of time. very quickly roxanne dunbar-ortiz' books and memoirs "outlaw woman" and an indigenous peoples' history" which won the american book award in 2017 and all the real indians died off and myths about native americans and her most recent book "not a nation of immigrants" colonialism white supremacy and end theet history of erasure and inclusion. thank you for being our guests. >> thank you, peter.