# The Culture Wars' New Front: U.S. History Classes in Texas (WSJ Article) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 14, 2009, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050 "2009-07-14T22:10:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/61 "2009-07-15T17:40:37Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Well, here’s the test from _Lemon v. Kurtzman_ (there is some doubt about its ongoing validity, but it’s what we have for now): > > 1. The government’s action must have a secular legislative purpose; > 2. The government’s action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion; > 3. The government’s action must not result in an “excessive government entanglement” with religion. > > Can we imagine a curriculum that “present[s] Christianity as an overall force for good” that meets these? Maybe. I can’t see how the stated goal to “clearly present Christianity as an overall force for good” can be reconciled with the second prong. Nor the first. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/62 "2009-07-15T17:42:54Z")
History is an interpretation of the past based primarily on written sources. It is entirely possible for many people to look at the same sources of information and reasonably come up with different conclusions. There’s just no objective way to tell history and you’re always going to be biased according to some. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/63 "2009-07-15T17:51:25Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > And why not? After all, they were busy stealing it from each other when the Europeans first arrived anyway. White brother wasn’t playing a new game. He just played the old game better, and red brother didn’t have a problem with the game until he lost. > > Obviously it isn’t only Christians who are guilty of simple minded moralizing and putting a spin on history. Well, the thing is that the US told them that the treaties they signed with the white man were going to be respected. That is, until gold or the real value of the territory they had was discovered. I would agree that if we had just go ahead and take it you would be correct, but one can not ignore that US law and treaties means that not all was done playing with “the old rules” ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/64 "2009-07-15T17:52:50Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > -The benefits of civilization teh missionaries brought and them attempting to protect the Indians from violence and removals. Ah yes, the white man’s burden of civilizing the savages. :rolleyes: > [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > -True but very minor compared to the discrimnation in Europe. All our Founding Fathers were tolerant of Catholics and Jews. Gosh, we’re better than the people who beat Jews and drove them out of town periodically. I have higher standards than that. Also, the men who created the Articles of Confederation and Constitution were not all tolerant of Jews and Catholics, and even if they had been, plenty after them weren’t.True > [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > -Outside of gay marriage and Don’t Ask Don’t Tell very minor. I’m sure Matthew Shepard will be happy to hear that what happened to him was minor. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/65 "2009-07-15T17:59:23Z")
> [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > Ah yes, the white man’s burden of civilizing the savages. :rolleyes: Well I don’t think most American Indians would want to go back to where they were five hundred years ago. > [@](#): > > Gosh, we’re better than the people who beat Jews and drove them out of town periodically. I have higher standards than that. Also, the men who created the Articles of Confederation and Constitution were not all tolerant of Jews and Catholics, and even if they had been, plenty after them weren’t.True They were as many were not Christians but Deists. For instance Washington showed great tolerance: [QUOTE=Wikipedia] His support of religious toleration Washington held that all religions, and nearly all religious practices, were beneficial to humans. On some occasions, such as during the Constitutional Convention, he attended Presbyterian, Catholic, and Friends Sunday services. Washington was an early supporter of religious toleration and freedom of religion. In 1775, he ordered that his troops not show anti-Catholic sentiments by burning the pope in effigy on Guy Fawkes Night.[32] When hiring workmen for Mount Vernon, he wrote to his agent, “If they be good workmen, they may be from Asia, Africa, or Europe; they may be Mohammedans (Muslims), Jews, or Christians of any sect, or they may be Atheists.”[16] [/QUOTE] > [@](#): > > I’m sure Matthew Shepard will be happy to hear that what happened to him was minor. Hate crimes unfortunately will always happen. But for instance the US is not a racist country although there still are racially motivated hate crimes. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/66 "2009-07-15T18:09:11Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > Well I don’t think most American Indians would want to go back to where they were five hundred years ago. So kind of you to make that decision for them. Also, that’s a false dichotomy. > [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > They were as many were not Christians but Deists. For instance Washington showed great tolerance: Many, maybe. All, no chance. > [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > Hate crimes unfortunately will always happen. But for instance the US is not a racist country although there still are racially motivated hate crimes. So in other words, your claim that there is only minor anti-gay discrimination is false. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/67 "2009-07-15T18:11:52Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > And why not? After all, they were busy stealing it from each other when the Europeans first arrived anyway. White brother wasn’t playing a new game. He just played the old game better, and red brother didn’t have a problem with the game until he lost. > > Obviously it isn’t only Christians who are guilty of simple minded moralizing and putting a spin on history. Right. In my High School we were never taught the Native American tradition of raiding another tribe and stealing their women, children and artisans to swell their ranks. We were not taught that this was done also to the white people who resented that practice dearly. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/68 "2009-07-15T18:14:19Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Well, the thing is that the US told them that the treaties they signed with the white man were going to be respected. > > That is, until gold or the real value of the territory they had was discovered. > > I would agree that if we had just go ahead and take it you would be correct, but one can not ignore that US law and treaties means that not all was done playing with “the old rules” Neither can one ignore the fact that the Indians took those treaties every bit as lightly as the United States did, and that the tribes happily allied themselves with whites against other tribes. Sooner or later, the Indians of North and South America were going to collide with the more sophisticated, complex societies of the Old World. If it had not been Europeans, it would probably have been Asians, and I am immensely skeptical that the results would have been greatly different. It was a foregone conclusion. And that is why I consider it simple-minded moralizing to speak of the white man “stealing the land.” ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/69 "2009-07-15T18:14:20Z")
> [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > So in other words, your claim that there is only minor anti-gay discrimination is false. Two words for you to look up. Anecdote Outlier The fact that you recognize Matthew Shephard’s name should be a clue to you as to how uncommon it is. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/70 "2009-07-15T18:27:57Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Two words for you to look up. > > Anecdote > > Outlier So are you also contending that anti-gay violence is not a big deal? > [@mswas](#): > > The fact that you recognize Matthew Shephard’s name should be a clue to you as to how uncommon it is. No, it’s a clue that his murder was the catalyst for a new push for gay rights. What happened to him was not all that unusual, but it was tragic. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/71 "2009-07-15T18:29:34Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Neither can one ignore the fact that the Indians took those treaties every bit as lightly as the United States did, Cite? And yes, I am serious, in case you’re incredulous about that. > [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > and that the tribes happily allied themselves with whites against other tribes. Which merely indicates that Indians were and are not one monolithic bloc, and anyone with half a brain should know that. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/72 "2009-07-15T18:30:17Z")
As for the OP. We know that Rev. Marshall, preaches that Watergate, the Vietnam War and Hurricane Katrina were God’s judgments on the nation’s sexual immorality. So what about the other members of the board of education that want to change the curriculum? David Barton, is the founder of WallBuilders: > **[Wallbuilders](https://www.peoplefor.org/rightwingwatch/organizations/wallbuilders)** > [@](#): > > History > > ``` > * WallBuilders emerged out of Barton's own research into a supposed correlation between the banning of prayer in public schools and a rise in alcohol consumption and crime rates. Despite the fact that Barton is not a historian and that his educational background is limited to a "Bachelor of Arts degree from Oral Roberts University and an Honorary Doctorate of Letters from Pensacola Christian College," his work has been embraced by Right and hailed by the likes of James Dobson and Jerry Falwell. > * The name "Wallbuilders" was taken from the book of Nehemiah in the Old Testament: "the nation of Israel rallied together in a grassroots movement to help rebuild the walls of Jerusalem and thus restore stability, safety, and a promising future to that great city. We have chosen this historical concept of 'rebuilding the walls' to represent allegorically the call for citizen involvement in rebuilding our nation's foundations." > > ``` > > Quotes > > Sen. Bill Frist once praised Barton for his “detailed research into the religious heritage of our nation.” > > Sen. Sam Brownback stated that Barton’s “research provides the philosophical underpinning for a lot of the Republican effort in the country today — bringing God back into the public square.” > > In 1995, Republican Senator\* Arlen Specter wrote in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy that many of Barton’s arguments “range from the technical to the absurd” and that they “proceed from flawed and highly selective readings of both text and history.” Specter went on to state that Barton’s “pseudoscholarship would hardly be worth discussing, let alone disproving, were it not for the fact that it is taken so very seriously by so many people.” \*Now a democrat, but here is another reason why he is not a republican now, he had a mind of his own. Daniel Dreisbach by contrast is not a “Wall Builder” but a fellow that in essence argues that the wall between church and state should be removed. [http://www.heritage.org/research/politicalphilosophy/fp6.cfm](http://www.heritage.org/research/politicalphilosophy/fp6.cfm) Needless to say, I disagree with Mr. Dreishbach. [http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/cs/blcsm\_sep\_danbury.htm](http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/cs/blcsm_sep_danbury.htm) > [@](#): > > Some have argued that his letter to the Danbury Baptists had no connection to the First Amendment at all, yet that is clearly false because Jefferson precedes his “wall of separation” phrase with an obvious quote of the First Amendment. Others have tried to argue that it was written to appease opponents who had labeled him an “atheist” and that the letter was not meant to have any larger political meaning. > > But this would not be consistent with Jefferson’s past political history. An excellent example of why would be his tireless efforts to eliminate the compulsory funding of established churches in his native Virginia. The final 1786 Act for Establishing Religious Freedom read in part that: > > …no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burdened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions of belief… > > This is exactly what the Danbury Baptists wanted for themselves - an end to repression on account of their religious beliefs. It is also what is accomplished when religious beliefs are not promoted or supported by the government. If anything, his letter could be viewed as a mild expression of his views, because an FBI analysis of portions scratched out from the original draft show that Jefferson had originally written about a “wall of eternal separation” [emphasis added]. > > Finally, it has also been argued that Jefferson’s opinion about separating church and state have no relevance because he wasn’t around when the Constitution was written. This ignores the fact that Jefferson was in constant contact with Madison, who is largely responsible for the development of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and that the two of them had long worked together to create greater religious liberty in Virginia. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/73 "2009-07-15T18:35:05Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Neither can one ignore the fact that the Indians took those treaties every bit as lightly as the United States did, and that the tribes happily allied themselves with whites against other tribes. Uh uh. Just try to pass that excuse on a modern court of law. > [@](#): > > Sooner or later, the Indians of North and South America were going to collide with the more sophisticated, complex societies of the Old World. If it had not been Europeans, it would probably have been Asians, and I am immensely skeptical that the results would have been greatly different. It was a foregone conclusion. And that is why I consider it simple-minded moralizing to speak of the white man “stealing the land.” And sooner or later one can not continue using excuses from the past to continue injustice. As soon as legal treaties entered the picture one can not just go ahead and justify the stealing of the land because Indians were robbing each other in the past. \*\*That \*\*is simpleminded. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/74 "2009-07-15T18:37:06Z")
> [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > So are you also contending that anti-gay violence is not a big deal? Yeah pretty much. You don’t hear about people being murdered for being gay very often. Sure people get picked on in school for it, and that’s unfortunate but I bet that’s not as prevalent now as in the past. > [@](#): > > No, it’s a clue that his murder was the catalyst for a new push for gay rights. What happened to him was not all that unusual, but it was tragic. Oh? Then you shouldn’t have any trouble giving me 5 examples that happened in the last 12 months then. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/75 "2009-07-15T18:42:23Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Uh uh. Just try to pass that excuse on a modern court of law. > And sooner or later one can not continue using excuses from the past to continue injustice. As soon as legal treaties entered the picture one can not just go ahead and justify the stealing of the land because Indians were robbing each other in the past. \*\*That \*\*is simpleminded. You ignored the part where I said the Indians broke the treaties just as readily as the United States. To paraphrase H.G. Wells, was the red man such an apostle of mercy as to complain if the white man warred in a similar spirit? Trying to impose simplistic moral principles on a complex history is what is simple minded. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/76 "2009-07-15T18:47:03Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Yeah pretty much. You don’t hear about people being murdered for being gay very often. Sure people get picked on in school for it, and that’s unfortunate but I bet that’s not as prevalent now as in the past. > > Oh? Then you shouldn’t have any trouble giving me 5 examples that happened in the last 12 months then. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31390167/ns/us\_news-crime\_and\_courts/](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31390167/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/) > [@](#): > > NEW YORK - The number of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people killed in bias-motivated incidents increased by 28 percent in 2008 compared to a year ago, according to a national coalition of advocacy groups. > > Last year’s 29 killings was the highest recorded by the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs since 1999, when it documented the same number of slayings, according to a report released Tuesday by the coalition. > > “What we’re also seeing, more disturbingly, is the increase in the severity of violence,” said Sharon Stapel, executive director of the New York City Anti-Violence Project, which coordinates coalition. [http://74.125.155.132/u/ncavp?q=cache:bHuvXMredpEJ:www.ncavp.org/common/document\_files/Reports/2008%2520HV%2520Report%2520smaller%2520file.pdf+gay+violence+2008&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&ie=UTF-8](http://74.125.155.132/u/ncavp?q=cache:bHuvXMredpEJ:www.ncavp.org/common/document_files/Reports/2008%2520HV%2520Report%2520smaller%2520file.pdf+gay+violence+2008&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&ie=UTF-8) > [@](#): > > NCAVP identified the following key findings and trends. > > 2008, with 29 total murders, has the highest number of deaths since 1999, and > an increase of 28% from 2007. > Of the total injuries reported in 2008, 216 (46%) were classified as ―serious,‖ > meaning that the injury required medical attention. > Reports of abusive treatment by law enforcement increased significantly be- > tween 2007 and 2008: > ° Reports of physical abuse at the hands of law enforcement increased > 150%, from 10 in 2007 to 25 in 2008. > ° One hundred forty-three cases (73%) of reports received bias classifica- > tion by law enforcement - an increase over the 35% in 2007. > ° Fifty three cases (27%) were refused bias classification by law enforce > ment in 2008. > Reports of sexual assault rose 48% (from 94 to 138), continuing a three year > trend of marked increases in reports of hate-motivated sexual violence. > Bias violence from strangers climbed 36%. > Weapons use during the commission of a hate crime increased significantly; at > least 382 out of the total 1,677 incidents (23%) involved weapons use in 2008. > The biggest increases in weapons use occurred in the ―other‖ category (+34%) > and the ―bottles/bricks/rocks‖ category (+49%) ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/77 "2009-07-15T18:52:27Z")
Interesting, how does that correspond to the rate of hate crimes against other groups? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/78 "2009-07-15T18:52:54Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > You ignored the part where I said the Indians broke the treaties just as readily as the United States. To paraphrase H.G. Wells, was the red man such an apostle of mercy as to complain if the white man warred in a similar spirit? Trying to impose simplistic moral principles on a complex history is what is simple minded. I’m not ignoring it, while there were cases like you describe it, it is more simpleminded to just said that \*\*that \*\*is enough to dismiss a treaty when in many occasions tribes had very little control of their members, the invaders had more power and then the tacit support of the authorities to get rid of the Indians. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/79 "2009-07-15T18:53:53Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I couldn’t agree more. Especially when it comes to the founding. Let kids learn, for instance, what Jefferson really believed, and not let them be stuck with the cartoonish icon of him being an atheist or anti-religionist, or even a secularist. It’s simply a lie that has been—and is—perpetuated by many on the left. > > (For the record, I don’t practice any religion.) Do you think that the average kid coming out of a high school history class today (especially in Texas) thinks Jefferson was an atheist or that Jefferson was a solid Christian? Do you think they learn that the Baptists in Virginia were one of the biggest proponents of separation of church and state? Do you think they learn about _The Age of Reason_ and how Madison supported Paine? I’ve never heard anyone claim that Jefferson was an atheist, except in the way that Teddy Roosevelt said Paine was an atheist - in the sense of not being Christian without the excuse of being Jewish. (Paine clearly said that he wasn’t an atheist either.) Do you think that these guidelines would be used to teach the truth about the Founding Fathers, or to make it sound like they were all good Christians? ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2009, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050/80 "2009-07-15T18:55:44Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > I’m not ignoring it, while there were cases like you describe it, it is more simpleminded to just said that \*\*that \*\*is enough to dismiss a treaty when in many occasions tribes had very little control of their members, the invaders had more power and then the tacit support of the authorities to get rid of the Indians. Tribes having little control over their members is highly relevant to the enforcement of a treaty. If I sign a treaty with Joe am I obligated to keep it if Sam and Vince say, “He doesn’t speak for me?”, this is part of what is at issue with non-state terrorists. It’s a problem as old as the nation-state. The nation-state has the apparatus to enforce its citizens to abide by a treaty if it wants. If it makes a treaty with a tribe then it is treating that tribe as a sovereignty unto itself. If that tribe doesn’t actually have sovereignty over it’s people then the treaty from both ends is rather meaningless. You are essentially saying that the Indians should have gotten a pass simply because they were disorganized and their signing of a treaty was essentially worthless because there was no unity amongst the people in the tribe. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-culture-wars-new-front-u-s-history-classes-in-texas-wsj-article/503050.md?page=5)