Quick: The Ethnic Group Most Disproportionately Represented in the Military is...
Didn't know this one. Would never have guessed this one. But the ethnic group most disproportionately represented in the US military is Native Americans. Native Americans make up barely one percent of the population, but 1.6% of our military forces.
Why even bother with this bit of trivia? Two reasons:
Today - November 28th, 2008 - is Native American Heritage Day. A day set aside by federal legislation to "honor the contributions American Indians have made to the United States."
Contributions like, you know, losing their land so we could have a nation.
If you had zero idea that today was a special day, don't get panicky and self-conscious. The legislation creating the day was only signed last month and only covers 2008.
Insult to injury. An afterthought that's not even an annual afterthought.
Tribal reps, however, are pushing to make the day a regular calendar event. Though, probably not the day after Thanksgiving as Thanksgiving's like a big, flipped middle finger to a lot of Native Americans.
And reason #2 that I bring up the stat about Native Americans serving in the military? It's another opportunity to remind people that, ironically, it seems those most historically disenfranchised by the government often have the least reluctance to step up and serve their country. Blacks. Japanese-Americans. Gays. When it comes to fighting for freedom, those who are willing to fight should not be limited by our bigotry. Only rewarded with our gratitude.
No, you didn't know about Native American Heritage Day - neither did I - and it might not be around next year. But while it's on our minds, and while we're giving thanks for those willing to protect our country, let's take a moment to recall the sacrifices past and present of Native Americans.
For more perspective visit That Minority Thing.com
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Hi John, good article; And thanks Huffington for providing front page real estate for a group that gets little to no press in our media.
Though, I want to correct one thing for your readers John: the joint resolution recently passed by congress in fact makes Native American Heritage Day a permanent day of observation. I copied the relevant article below:
(7) " designation of the Friday following Thanksgiving of each year as Native American Heritage Day will underscore the government
Nice post. I'm black and Cherokee.
What's the point of this day anyway? To make another half-hearted attempt to "apologize"? There will never be a worthy apology for what was done to us. Perhaps my Cherokee family that was not totally assimilated are satisfied with their tax free status and want the government to leave them alone before somebody organizes a huge retro lawsuit or something. What an insult. One day to recognize natives and its not even continuing next year. How pathetic is this country sometimes.
European Americans would do well to learn from the Elders of the Indian Nations. They believe that their God is "Grandfather" who teaches us to honor the earth and everything in it, and that earth is "mother earth" who gives sustenance necessary to human life. A Hopi Elder says that our bodies are made up of almost 90% water, therefore we must replinish that water with clean water or we will contaminate our bodies' own life support. They believe that storms, floods, fires are Mother Earth's way of cleansing herself in order to keep nuturing us, and when she can no longer cleanse herself, we will die out. They belive that Mother Earth is losing that effort.
Yes. We would do well to respect the teachings and listen to the wisdom of these Elders. We are part of the whole; everything is connected and we are not separate from the wind, from the water or from the other creatures who share our Mother Earth.
It's amazing how native religious traditions offer explanations for how the world works that are so closely aligned with contemporary scientific laws and theories. Like all religion, they have their lore and fables based on the images that surrounded them, but their fusion of ecology and spirituality is truly fascinating, if not shamefully underappreciated.
John, how about a column about the excessive coverage on cable news channels of the events in Mumbai where about 150 people have died versus the near lack of coverage of the 100's of thousands of people killed in Darfur. I mean, in Darfur, 150 dead is done before brunch, daily. What possesses these news outlets to make the Mumbai trajedy such a wall to wall coverage event anyway? Is it obsession with anything terrorist? Is it just more of making terrorism a billion times more deadly than it really it is so the Republicans and Bush can crow ever louder about their "perceptions" about what is more important and a top priority. Gawd, it's no longer sex sells, it's terrorism sells.
You are correct. They way to get Darfur on the news is to get some white people to go over there and get themselves killed alongside the locals. Then it would be on the news, or maybe a white American teenaged girl can go to Darfur and then go missing - it would get wall-to-wall coverage on the networks.
Ya know, it's unfortunate that you may be right. The American media certainly values the lives of White Americans more than other Americans.
Well partly it is the viewer's attention span. Mumbai is new. Darfur has been going on for years. There are still lots of people dying in Iraq on a day to day basis as well as Afghanistan.
The main problem is that a new breaking story is easy to cover, especially when there is a single perpetrator. However, providing a proper in depth analysis of an ongoing conflict involving history, governments and treaties (such as the messy stuff going on between North and South Sudan being spilled out into Darfur) just has trouble being fit into a 24 hour news cycle. Add to that the fact that viewers may (heaven forbid) become concerned and start to demand action on behalf of the repressed and it is just far less trouble for politicians if the masses don't really know what is going on.
Thank you for letting us in on the secret, Mr. Ridley. I, too, did not hear the fanfare and declarations. As far as I know, there has never been a true heartfelt declaration about or to the Native Peoples from the U.S. Government other Manifest Destiny.
You are right on about the way some of us feel about Thanksgiving.
Thank you John.
As a veteran, I appreciate the true value of military service and regard it as an indicator of citizenship of the highest caliber. I heartily concur that those most historically disenfranchised by this country are often the least reluctant to answer the call to arms. I regularly point this out to the students in my Civics classes.
This seeming paradox also speaks volumes about the compelling power of the professed ideals of this nation and the categorical imperative that all who claim the title patriot spare no effort to hasten the day when these ideals describe not merely an inspiring vision, but a practical reality.
Thanks again.
As Rick Bolanos pointed out in his speech to the Democratic Party state convention in 2004, his father was an immigrant from Mexico. He hated Mexico since he had NO opportunity nor rights there. He built a great life and raised his family in the USA and was VERY grateful for that opportunity. So when his sons came of age for the military, he sent them since he felt that his family OWED the USA for the good life he had built here. That is NO paradox, you just have to know some real Americans who came here from other horrible places.
Thank you John.
As a veteran, I appreciate the true value of military service and regard it as an indicator of citizenship of the highest caliber. I most heartily concur that the most historically disenfranchised by this country or often the least reluctant to answer the call to arms. I regularly point this out to my students in Civics class.
This seeming paradox also speaks volumes about the compelling power of the professed ideals of this nation and the categorical imperative that all whom claim the title patriot spare no effort to hasten the day when these ideals describe not merely an inspiring vision, but a practical reality.
Thanks again.
"Contributions like, you know, losing their land so we could have a nation."
Yep. A nation, America, populated by A BUNCH OF IMMIGRANTS to Native American land.
We're ALL a bunch of goddamn IMMIGRANTS, people!
So next time you and I bitch about "immigrants", just stand in front of a mirror and do it!
I see you have a problem understanding immigant and ILLEGAL immigrant. My ancestors were LEGAL immigrants and PAID for the land that they used. Remember that the Dutch paid $24 for Manhattan. The British DID steal it from the Dutch. I guess you think that ALL the immigrants stole the land since some did. I guess you don't think that WE have ANY right to say who may or may not come here. Any criminal, drug dealer, virtually anybody has a RIGHT to be here, RIGHT?
But outide those initial colonies the land was simply conquered with no payment offered - and your reference to English theft of Manhattan indicates that conquest=theft. Then there's the Mississipi purchase (it's illegal to buy stolen property btw), and of course the invasion of Texas etc.
So everyone, by your own definitions, outside the original colonies is an ILLEGAL immigrant.
Does it count as repression if people WANT to be in the military? Recruiters in Northern New York regularly go up to the Mohawk land, most of which is north of the Canadian border, a distinction without a lot of meaning to the Mohawk. Whether they live in "Canada" or the "United States," a lot of Mohawk youth eagerly sign up for the military because they consider it part of their tradition. A fair number of the militant Warrior group at Akwesasne, Ganienkeh and Kanasatake are veterans of the US military. And it's not just the Mohawk -- Lori Piestawa, the first American woman killed in combat, was Hopi. I also met a holyman from Penticton, BC, who wore his Ranger patch and (Vietnam era) medals on his breechclout -- it was part of who he was.
I'm a believer in sovereignty and I'm very sympathetic to the lousy hand Indians have been dealt in this country. But I don't think their presence in the military is an indicator of oppression. Indians have turned out in large numbers for service as warriors for years, in part because they consider it a cultural tradition, in part because they tend to be rural people sign up more regularly than their city cousins and in part because those who do acknowledge the US are pretty conservative.
It is absolutely an expression of their culture. And, yes. It counts!!!
Why do you assume that enlistments are driven by some moral imperative? Could it be that there are portionally more Native Americans in the military than their representation of the national population because the military offers them one of the few opportunities to economically and socially advance? Have these census data fluctuated over time? Generally, aren't most of the enlisted ranks filled from the lower classes, regardless of race, ethnicity or gender? What is the percentage of Native Americans in the officer corps? What percentage of the enlistments come from tribes with a casino versus those without a casino?
Casinos? The high rates of Native American enlistment in the armed forces goes back to before Native Americans were given U.S. citizenship in the 1920s, which predates the development of tribal casino gaming by decades.
Precisely. I am trying to suggest that economics may be another factor for the proportional represenation in the military.
John, my dad served under MacArthur in the Pacific since he could read, write and speak Japanese fluently, while the rest of his siblings and parents languished in concentration camps. I also served, under Westmoreland, in Vietnam. That's two generations of combat soldiers. It's because we wanted to prove a point, that America was worth putting our lives on the line for.
That's a hell of a lot more than a lot of the louts who spout their drivel in these forums while they haven't done a doggone thing for this country except take up space.
As a fellow Vietnam era veteran, I could not agree more. I am also a long time liberal who gets sick and tired of hearing crap from idiots who "know" only one thing, that the US is BAD, all others are GOOD.
One point six percent? How is that so disproportional? I get the main point of people willing to step up who have the least to gain by it, but what is the rest of the make-up? Are blacks, whites and hispanics not ethnic groups? Just trying to get some context and perspective on this number. Thank you.
I think his point was the disproportion based on the full make-up of the American population. As he stated, Native Americans account for 1% of the total population and 1.6% of the military. That is disproportional relative to other ethnic groups.
How can an indian lose land they never claimed to own, or believed could be owned?
Maybe their legal system is different!
Oh, well, that makes it all right then.
P.S. - Shall we talk about how Mormons apparently are responsible for the passing of prop 8 in CA for marriage to be between one man and one woman when, until recently, and still in some quarters, the Mormon position was one man and any number of nubile young women...
Out of curiosity, did you forget the sarchasm tag?
Oh so the terrible things America did to get the land the Native Americans were on was okay right since their concept of land was different than ours?
so it's your to claim, right?
Check out the movies WINDTALKERS and FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS.
Good post John.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
