DOCSLIB.ORG

Ing September 11: Ward Churchill, Frame Contestation, and Media Hegemony Erika G

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ing September 11: Ward Churchill, Frame Contestation, and Media Hegemony Erika G Grand Valley State University ScholarWorks@GVSU Peer Reviewed Articles Political Science and International Relations 4-2008 Imag(in)ing September 11: Ward Churchill, Frame Contestation, and Media Hegemony Erika G. King Grand Valley State University, [email protected] Mary deYoung Grand Valley State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/pls_articles Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation King, Erika G. and deYoung, Mary, "Imag(in)ing September 11: Ward Churchill, Frame Contestation, and Media Hegemony" (2008). Peer Reviewed Articles. 5. https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/pls_articles/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Political Science and International Relations at ScholarWorks@GVSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Peer Reviewed Articles by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@GVSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Journal of Communication Inquiry Volume 32 Number 2 April 2008 123-139 ©2008 Sage Publications Imag(in)ing September 11 10.1177/0196859907311670 http://jci.sagepub.com Ward Churchill, Frame Contestation, hosted at and Media Hegemony http://online.sagepub.com Erika G. King Mary deYoung Grand Valley State University This study analyzes the Denver Post’s reportage on the frame contest between the dom- inant narrative of the September 11 terrorist attacks set out by President Bush and a challenge to that narrative in an Internet essay by Professor Ward Churchill. The authors find that by refusing to interrogate Churchill’s sociopolitical argument, reduc- ing it to the offensive rhetorical trope “little Eichmanns” he used to describe the victims of the attacks, and pillorying Churchill as a person and scholar, the Post assured his counterframe would not achieve parity with the dominant frame. The authors interpret this as an example of media hegemony and situate the Post’s coverage within a crisis of hegemony that left the “sacred core” of the Bush frame—American innocence and moral exceptionalism—vulnerable to contestation. Because the Churchill counterframe flagrantly transgressed that “sacred core,” it became the irresistible target of media hegemony strategies by the Denver Post. Keywords: counterframe; frame contestation; media hegemony; September 11 ter- rorist attacks; Ward Churchill n September 11, 2001, three hijacked commercial airliners slammed into the OU.S. Pentagon and the twin towers of the World Trade Center; a fourth airliner, reportedly headed for the White House, crashed in a Pennsylvania field. The images of September 11—exploding airliners piloted by shadowy terrorists, dead and dying people, emergency personnel racing to the scenes, spectators running for their lives when buildings collapsed—are certainly, as the old saying goes, worth a thousand words. But just exactly what words are used to construct the meaning of this horrific event, and by whom they are spoken, written, and repeated, not only “frame” the event but also reveal something of interest about the working of power. In this article, we analyze the “frame contest” (Entman, 2003, 2004) between the dominant narrative of the September 11 attacks set out by President Bush in a speech to the nation just hours after the event and a challenge to that narrative in the form of an essay titled “Some People Push Back: On the Justice of Roosting Chickens,” by University of Colorado ethnic studies professor and Indian activist Ward Churchill, dis- covered on the Internet more than 3 years after the attacks. We are particularly interested 123 Downloaded from jci.sagepub.com at GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIV LIB on June 5, 2013 124 Journal of Communication Inquiry in how the Denver Post, as an exemplar of the mainstream media, represented both the counterframe and its author, why the newspaper reacted as it did, and what the conse- quences of that reaction to the outcome of the frame contest are. Our analysis is informed by the media hegemony thesis. Briefly stated, hegemony refers to “the process by which ruling elites secure consent to the established politi- cal order through the production and diffusion of meanings and values” (Carragee & Roefs, 2004, pp. 221-222). The media are essential to that process in two ways. First, as one of an array of “cultural workers,” in Gramsci’s (1971) sense of the term, the media can reproduce, represent, and renew dominant meanings and values or, in the terms of this present article, a dominant frame to a variety of different audiences but with the single goal of securing their “consent” to that dominant frame, that is, their acceptance of it as “common sense.” Second, because hegemony can be resisted, altered, and challenged, the media serve as a site for frame contests (Artz & Murphy, 2000; Condit, 1994; Gitlin, 2003). Although not without its critics (Altheide, 1984; Carragee, 1993; Mumby, 1997), the media hegemony thesis, with its emphasis on the working of power, provides the most robust explanation for both how and why the Denver Post represented and reacted to the Churchill counterframe in the manner it did. Framing September 11 The official frame of the September 11 attacks came within hours of the events themselves. In a brief address to the nation that evening, President Bush portrayed the attacks as “evil, despicable acts of terror” that resulted in the mass murder of thousands of innocent civilians. He declared that Americans were targeted for being “the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world.” And he went on to warn, “No one will keep that light from shining....None of us will ever forget this day, yet we go forward to defend freedom and all that is good and just in this world.” Asking for prayers for all affected by the horrific attacks, President Bush asserted that America, its friends and allies, and all those who want peace and security in the world “will stand together to win the war against terrorism” (Bush, 2001a). In another statement the following morning, the president declared, The deliberate and deadly attacks which were carried out yesterday against our coun- try were more than acts of terror. They were acts of war. This will require our country to unite in steadfast determination and resolve. Freedom and democracy are under attack....The United States of America will use all our resources to conquer this enemy....This battle will take time and resolve. But make no mistake about it: we will win....This will be a monumental struggle of good versus evil. But good will prevail. (Bush, 2001b) Downloaded from jci.sagepub.com at GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIV LIB on June 5, 2013 King, deYoung / Imag(in)ing September 11 125 The Bush frame of the September 11 attacks, according to Entman (2003), defines a problematic effect (the death of thousands of civilians in an act of war), its cause (the unprovoked and unwarranted acts of terrorists), a moral judgment (struggle of good versus evil), and a remedy (war against terrorism). Anker (2005) fleshed out the frame and argued that it presents a compelling melodramatic story line of villainy, victimization, and vengeance by reducing the event and its resolution to a Manichean battle of right versus wrong, morality versus immorality, and, in Bush’s starkly polarized characterization, good versus evil. This melodramatic plot line fur- thermore constructs an American national identity “that establishes its own moral virtue through victimization and heroic restitution” (p. 25); in short, its “sacrilising language” (Jackson, 2005, p. 35) forges a moral community, unsullied by immoral- ity or evil and unified by shared values and the practices of freedom and democracy. Attacked precisely because of this constructed moral exceptionalism, this powerful victim, in the Bush frame, has no choice but retribution through engaging the evil “other” in war (Coe, Domke, Graham, John, & Pickard, 2004; Domke, 2004; Hutcheson, Domke, Billeaudreaux, & Garland, 2004; Karim, 2002; Silberstein, 2002; Waisbord, 2002). Central to the melodrama of the Bush frame are the casualties of the attacks and what their victimization represents. In characterizing them as ordinary people who were engaged in the routines of everyday life on that fateful day, he not only stressed their absolute moral innocence but also, in doing so, underscored the risk for all ordi- nary Americans. In the Bush frame, the innocent victims of the September 11 attacks represent and symbolize each and every American as well as the moral community that is America (Lule, 2002). The hegemony of the Bush frame was ensured by its uncritical repetition by politicians on both sides of the aisle, military leaders, non-administrative elites, and the mass media over the months after the September 11 attacks (Domke, 2004; Entman, 2003, 2004; Jackson, 2005; Kellner, 2002; McChesney, 2002; Norris, Kern, & Just, 2002). The wave of patriotism, indeed of nationalism, that followed the attacks gives face validity to the Bush frame’s success in securing public consent. Public opinion polls taken over those months showed an unprecedented level of approval for President Bush, a robust optimism that the nation would be successful in its newly declared “war on terrorism,” and an emphatic expression of support of the “American values” of liberty, freedom, and equality (Huddy, Khatib, & Capelos, 2002). Over the ensuing year and a half, Bush would draw on this initial reservoir of consent to expand the war on terrorism from skirmishes in the mountains of Afghanistan in search of the diabolical mastermind of the September 11 attacks, Osama bin Laden, to an indefinite battle against an “axis of evil” in Iraq, the home- land of a more familiar nemesis, Saddam Hussein. Bush’s strategy of linking Saddam Hussein, weapons of mass destruction, and the threat of more terrorist attacks on American soil to his frame of the September 11 Downloaded from jci.sagepub.com at GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIV LIB on June 5, 2013 126 Journal of Communication Inquiry attacks crafted a persuasive justification for a war in Iraq that garnered much initial political and public support (Entman, 2004).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Academic Freedom” Adria Battaglia
    Back to Volume Five Contents Opportunities of Our Own Making: The Struggle for “Academic Freedom” Adria Battaglia Abstract This essay examines David Horowitz’s “Academic Freedom” campaign, specifically exploring how “academic freedom,” a narrative that appears alongside “free speech” discourse frequently since September 11, 2001, can be understood as a site of struggle, a privileged label that grants legitimacy to those controlling it. This analysis includes public debates, interviews, and blog postings spanning the 2003 launch of Horowitz’s campaign, discussions of the proposed legislation in 2007, and his publication in 2009 of One-Party Classroom. By exposing the various ways Horowitz’s campaign is framed in the media by interested parties, I demonstrate how the link between “academic freedom” and “free speech” becomes a rhetorical strategy by which we can gain political and economic legitimacy. A recent Harvard study indicates that many young people have yet to become involved in politics not because they are uninterested, but because they have yet to be given the opportunity. —“The 15th Biannual Youth Survey on Politics and Public Service,” Institute of Politics at Harvard University, 2008 On March 4, 2010, young people were given an opportunity. After months of organizing, “hundreds of thousands took part in what was the largest day of coordinated student protest in years.” 1 College and university campuses across the United States became sites of marches, strikes, teach-ins, and walkouts. The “Day of Action” was organized by the California Coordinating Committee in the hopes of AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom 2 Volume Five becoming “an historic turning point in the struggle against the cuts, layoffs, fee hikes, and the re-segregation of public education.”2 Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman describes the scenes across the nation: At the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, police used pepper spray to break up a student protest organized by Students for a Democratic Society.
    [Show full text]
  • From a Native
    From a Native Son Selected Essays in Indigenism, 1985–1995, Second Edition Ward Churchill • Introduction by Howard Zinn From a Native Son was the first volume of acclaimed American Indian Movement activist-intellectual Ward Churchill’s essays in indigenism, selected from material written during the decade 1985–1995. Presented here in a new revised edition that includes four additional pieces, three of them previously unpublished, the book illuminates Churchill’s early development of the themes with which he has, in the words of Noam Chomsky, “carved out a special place for himself in de- fending the rights of oppressed people, and exposing the dark side of past and current history, often forgotten, marginalized, or suppressed.” Topics addressed include the European conquest and colonization of the Americas, including the genocidal record of Christopher Columbus, the sys- tematic “clearing” and resettlement of American Indian territories by the United States and its antecedents, academic subterfuges designed to deny or disguise the extent of Indian land rights, radioactive contamination of Indian reservations by energy corporations, government-sponsored death squads used to “neutral- ize” the native struggle on the Pine Ridge Reservation during the mid-1970s, the ongoing dehumanization of American Indians in literature, cinema, and by SUBJECT CATEGORY their portrayal as sports team mascots, issues of Indian identity and the expro- History-U.S./Native American Studies priation of indigenous spiritual traditions, the negative effects of “postmodern- ism” upon understandings of contemporary circumstances of native people, PRICE the false promise of marxism in terms of indigenous liberation, and what, from $24.95 an indigenist standpoint, the genuine decolonization of North America might look like.
    [Show full text]
  • Ur-Fascism and Neo-Fascism
    The Journal of International Relations, Peace Studies, and Development Volume 5 Issue 1 The Journal of International Relations, Article 2 Peace Studies, and Development 2019 Ur-Fascism and Neo-Fascism Andrew Johnson Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.arcadia.edu/agsjournal Recommended Citation Andrew Johnson (2019) "Ur-Fascism and Neo-Fascism," The Journal of International Relations, Peace Studies, and Development: Vol. 5 : Iss. 1 , Article 2. Available at: https://scholarworks.arcadia.edu/agsjournal/vol5/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@Arcadia. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Journal of International Relations, Peace Studies, and Development by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@Arcadia. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Journal of International Relations, Peace and Development Studies A publication by Arcadia University and the American Graduate School in Paris Ur-Fascism and Neo-Fascism Andrew Johnson Abstract: Fascism was once a momentous and imperative subject of study, but as the memory of atrocity faded there has been a lessening of stakes and a forgetting of its previous import. The election of Donald J. Trump, along with the Brexit referendum, growing support for economic nationalism, and a global rise of authoritarian populists, has revitalized the “fascism question,” both by scholars and the general public. The reemergence (and electoral successes) of far-right ideological partisans threatens the neoliberal consensus, challenging received wisdom within political science. The dominant approach within international political economy failed to predict escalating political opposition to global capitalism. A prescient exception is the heterodox scholar William Robinson, who had warned his readers of emergent 21st century fascism.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Cointelpro 101 and Speaker Panel
    Laura Whitehorn Harold Taylor Claude Marks Ward Churchill is a former member of the is a former member of the is the Executive Director is a former professor and Weather Underground and Black Panther Party and and Founder of the Free- chair of the Department of SDS and is a former political the San Francisco 8 and is a dom Archives and a former Ethnic Studies at the Uni- prisoner. She is currently a torture survivor and former political prisoner. versity of Colorado. He is senior editor at POZ Maga- political prisoner. a Native American activist zine. In 2010, she edited and author of numerous The War Before: The Collected texts, including Agents of Works of Safiya Bukhari. Repression: The FBI’s Secret Wars Against the Black Pan- ther Party and the American Indian Movement and A Lit- tle Matter of Genocide. FRIDAY • April 1 SATURDAY • April 2 Dauer Hall 215, UF Campus Alachua County Downtown Library 9:30 AM: UF Social Justice Roundtable Headquarters, 401 East University Avenue, with Claude Marks, Laura Whitehorn, Gainesville, Florida Harold Taylor, and Ward Churchill 12 PM: Screening of Cointelpro 101 and Speaker Panel FRIDAY • April 1 Civic Media Center, 433 South Main Street, Gainesville, Florida 12 PM: Brown Bag Screening of Cointelpro 101 snacks & coffee provided, but feel free to bring a lunch For more information visit www.english.ufl.edu Free and Open to the Public • Sponsored by the Depart- 1:30 PM: Claude Marks ment of English • Cosponsored by Alachua County Li- 2:15 PM: Harold Taylor brary District, Samuel Proctor Oral History Program, International Socialist Organization 3 PM: Laura Whitehorn 4:15 PM: Ward Churchill 10th Annual American Studies Symposium.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Discourse and the Economy of Racialization in the Workplace Terry Smith
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law American University Law Review Volume 57 | Issue 3 Article 1 2008 Speaking Against Norms: Public Discourse and the Economy of Racialization in the Workplace Terry Smith Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/aulr Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the Labor and Employment Law Commons Recommended Citation Smith, Terry. “Speaking Against Norms: Public Discourse and the Economy of Racialization in the Workplace.” American University Law Review 57, no.3 (February, 2008): 523- 584. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in American University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Speaking Against Norms: Public Discourse and the Economy of Racialization in the Workplace Abstract Free speech controversies erupt from reactions to outlier voices, and these voices are often those of subordinated citizens such as racial minorities. Employing the tools of narrative, interviews with litigants and subjects, and interdisciplinary analysis of case law, Professor Terry Smith probes whether the social inequality of government employees of color affects the rigor of the First Amendment protection afforded their speech. Professor Smith argues that all public sector employees lack sufficient protection because their speech typically does not receive the highest constitutional scrutiny and because of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Garcetti v.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Ward Churchill, a Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1492 to the Present
    CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture ISSN 1481-4374 Purdue University Press ©Purdue University Volume 1 (1999) Issue 1 Article 5 Review of Ward Churchill, A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1492 to the Present A. Claire Brandabur Yarmouk University Follow this and additional works at: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/clcweb Part of the Comparative Literature Commons, and the Critical and Cultural Studies Commons Dedicated to the dissemination of scholarly and professional information, Purdue University Press selects, develops, and distributes quality resources in several key subject areas for which its parent university is famous, including business, technology, health, veterinary medicine, and other selected disciplines in the humanities and sciences. CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture, the peer-reviewed, full-text, and open-access learned journal in the humanities and social sciences, publishes new scholarship following tenets of the discipline of comparative literature and the field of cultural studies designated as "comparative cultural studies." Publications in the journal are indexed in the Annual Bibliography of English Language and Literature (Chadwyck-Healey), the Arts and Humanities Citation Index (Thomson Reuters ISI), the Humanities Index (Wilson), Humanities International Complete (EBSCO), the International Bibliography of the Modern Language Association of America, and Scopus (Elsevier). The journal is affiliated with the Purdue University Press monograph series of Books in Comparative Cultural Studies. Contact: <[email protected]> Recommended Citation Brandabur, A. Claire. "Review of Ward Churchill, A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1492 to the Present." CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 1.1 (1999): <https://doi.org/10.7771/ 1481-4374.1004> This text has been double-blind peer reviewed by 2+1 experts in the field.
    [Show full text]
  • Sleepwalker: Arendt, Thoughtlessness, and the Question of Little Eichmanns
    SLEEPWALKER: ARENDT, THOUGHTLESSNESS, AND THE QUESTION OF LITTLE EICHMANNS Larry Busk “There are no dangerous thoughts; thinking itself is dangerous.”1 “Thinking…is political by implication”2 In 2005, a gale of controversy erupted over an essay penned by Ward Churchill, professor of ethnic studies at The University of Colorado, entitled “Some People Push Back: Reflections on the Justice of Roosting Chickens.” The essay, written on September 11th 2001 and expanded into a book in 2003, concerns the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. In it, Churchill argues that the attacks are best understood as a predictable response to American imperial practices; its title is a reference to Malcolm X’s comment after the assassination of JFK—“the chickens have finally come home to roost.”3 The (delayed)4 controversy was not centered specifically around these claims, however. Reactions to the essay focused exclusively on a single passage in which Churchill characterizes some of the victims of 9/11 as “little Eichmanns,” referring to the convicted Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann, and, implicitly, to Hannah Arendt’s 1963 work Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (the term “little Eichmann” is borrowed from John Zerzan,5 though its attribution to the WTC victims is original). In fact, as Fritch et al. point out,6 virtually no commentator quoted anything from the piece except these two words. The outrage and calumny that followed the exposure of the essay flowed directly 1 Hannah Arendt, “Thinking and Moral Considerations,” in Social Research 38, no. 3 (1971), 435. 2 Arendt, The Life of the Mind (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1977), 192.
    [Show full text]
  • The Plagiarism Charges Against Ward Churchill
    The Plagiarism Charges Against Ward Churchill Tom Mayer Department of Sociology University of Colorado at Boulder The research misconduct charges against Ward Churchill are of two general kinds: charges of faulty research and charges of plagiarism. The faulty research accusations have been largely discredited through the efforts of professors Eric Cheyfitz, Michael Yellow Bird, David Stannard, Huanani-Kay Trask, James Craven, Ruth Hsu, and others. These independent scholars, all of whom are intimately familiar with Native American history and culture, have shown that the Report of the Investigative Committee (henceforth called Report) finding Churchill guilty of research misconduct contains numerous errors of omission and commission. The Report improperly converts legitimate scholarly controversies into indictments of the positions taken by Professor Churchill. In this essay I will argue that the three plagiarism charges discussed in the Report are also without compelling force. Significantly, all these charges pertain to Churchill’s work as an intellectual within the broad but fractured movement to emancipate indigenous people. None of the papers accused of plagiarism were written for the purpose of building an academic career. This is important because the norms of authorship within the social movement context differ substantially from those within the academic domain. All three plagiarism charges refer to publications that are now fourteen or more years old. Although various persons hostile to Professor Churchill (e.g. John LaVelle, see section two below) have circulated rumors of misconduct for at least a decade, no action was taken against Churchill until he became a political pariah (through the exercise of free speech). On the contrary, prior to his persecution for lack of mandatory patriotism, Churchill was honored as a valuable member of the University of Colorado faculty.
    [Show full text]
  • Parsing the Plagiary Scandals in History and Law
    The University of New Hampshire Law Review Volume 5 Number 3 Pierce Law Review Article 3 June 2009 Parsing the Plagiary Scandals in History and Law Arthur Austin Case Western Reserve University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/unh_lr Part of the Higher Education Commons, History Commons, Other Communication Commons, and the Other Rhetoric and Composition Commons Repository Citation Arthur Austin, Parsing the Plagiary Scandals in History and Law, 5 Pierce L. Rev. 367 (2007), available at http://scholars.unh.edu/unh_lr/vol5/iss3/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of New Hampshire – Franklin Pierce School of Law at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in The University of New Hampshire Law Review by an authorized editor of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Parsing the Plagiary Scandals in History and Law ARTHUR AUSTIN ∗ I. INTRODUCTION In 2002 the history of History was scandal. The narrative started when a Pulitzer Prize winning professor was caught foisting bogus Vietnam War exploits as background for classroom discussion.1 His fantasy lapse pref- aced a more serious irregularity—the author of the Bancroft Prize book award was accused of falsifying key research documents.2 The award was rescinded. The year reached a crescendo with two plagiarism cases “that shook the history profession to its core.”3 Stephen Ambrose and Doris Kearns Goodwin were “crossover” celeb- rities: esteemed academics—Pulitzer winners—with careers embellished by a public intellectual reputation.
    [Show full text]
  • Report No. 354/20 , Petition 1582-13
    OEA/Ser.L/V/II REPORT No. 354 /20 Doc. 372 24 November 2020 PETITION 1582- 13 Original: English REPORT ON ADMISSIBILITY WARD CHURCHILL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Approved electronically by the Commission on November 24, 2020. Cite as: IACHR, Report No. 354/20 , Petition 1582-13. Admissibility. Ward Churchill. United States of America. November 24, 2020. www.iachr.org I. INFORMATION ABOUT THE PETITION Petitioner: Human Rights Research Fund Alleged victim: Ward Churchill Respondent State: United States of America1 Article I (life and personal security), Article II (equality), Article IV (freedom of expression), Article V (honor and reputation), Article XIII (culture), Article XIV (employment), Article XVII Rights invoked: (basic civil rights), Article XVIII (judicial protection), Article XXIII (property), and Article XXVI (due process) of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man2 II. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE IACHR3 Filing of the petition: September 30, 2013 Notification of the petition to the April 24, 2019 State: State’s first response: July 24, 2019 Additional observations from the November 4, 2019 petitioner: Notification of the possible archiving November 1, 2018 of the petition: Petitioner’s response to the notification regarding the possible November 2, 2018 archiving of the petition: III. COMPETENCE Competence Ratione personae: Yes Competence Ratione loci: Yes Competence Ratione temporis: Yes Yes, American Declaration (ratification of the OAS Charter on Competence Ratione materiae: June 19, 1951) IV. DUPLICATION OF PROCEDURES
    [Show full text]
  • Significant Resources on the Quincentennial
    Significant Resources On the Quincentennial Editors THE FOLLOWING IS A DESCRIPTION OF SEVERAL RESOURCES THAT WE FOUND particularly useful in our reading about thequincentennial. For an ex? cellent, comprehensive list of references see Dangerous Memories: Invasion and Resistance Since 1492 published by the Chicago Religious Task Force on Central America (see below), the 7992 International Directory and Resource Guide published by the South and Meso American Indian Informa? tion Center (SAIIC), and Rethinking Columbus (see ad in this issue of Social Justice). American Indian Program,Northeast Indian Quarterly, 300 Caldwell Hall, Cornell University Ithaca,New York 14853. ? This journal addresses both traditional and contemporary Indian issues, in? cluding education, culture, history, linguistics, tribal law, toxic waste, and women's issues. The publication includes poetry, artwork, photography, fic? tion,book reviews, and nonfiction works. For the last few years, themagazine has published outstanding material focusing on theQuincentennial. Chicago Religious Task Force on Central America, Dangerous Memories: Invasion and Resistance Since 1492. Chicago, Illinois, 1991,272 pages. ? This book is an essential resource that challenges readers to examine their knowledge and assumptions about history. The beautifully designed book in? cludes graphics, primary documents, and commentary divided into fourmajor sections: Invasion, Resistance, Culture, and Teaching Strategies. The last sec? tion is a comprehensive directory of organizations and publications focusing on theQuincentennial and Native American history. To order, write or call: 59 E. Van Buren, Suite 1400, Chicago, IL 60605; 312-663-4398. Susanna Hecht and Alexander Cockburn, The Fate of the Forest: Developers, Destroyers and Defenders of theAmazon. New York: Harper Perennial, 1990.
    [Show full text]
  • Native American Resistance Movements
    Dramatizing Native American Resistance Movements Introduction There is a long and inspiring history of Native American resistance to the European invasion, occupation, and desecration of their lands—within the many strands of Indigenous resistance throughout the entire landmass of North, Central, and South America. This resistance continues. In connection with the film, this activity gives students a chance to learn more about some of the more recent events in this history—those that took place in the 1960s and 1970s. Before students begin, and depending on their educational background and how non-European-centered and progressive it has been, you may want to make at least these essential points, expanding and having open discussion on them as you wish and as time allows: • Despite what textbooks often say or imply, and despite what Buffy Sainte-Marie has most accurately termed “the genocide basic to this country’s birth,” diverse nations of Native Americans are still very much here. The verbs to use are in the present tense! • Native American resistance has occurred throughout the centuries and continues at present. • Indigenous nations/tribes are diverse, with different languages, traditions, and cultures. • The resurgence of the 1960s and 1970s represented a new degree of unity, as new organizations, protests, occupations, and various acts of sovereignty took place all over the country. As the film shows, these actions were brutally repressed, with many deaths and injuries. At the same time, they inspired a revived national and international consciousness among Native peoples and their impact remains strong. The struggle for the freedom of Leonard Peltier, as stated in the film, has grown, and symbolizes this ongoing resistance.
    [Show full text]