Thanks for watching! Please consider supporting the channel by buying merch: teespring.com/stores/the-cynical-historian Or by donating to my Patreon: www.patreon.com/CynicalHistorian Click "read more" for corrections and bibliography. First, here are some related videos: Playlist of stuff related to my original scholarly work: ru-vid.com/group/PLjnwpaclU4wUSSIUw8fPp1SjwFxOj3wD2 Death of the Western Genre: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-x6zD1sjnClM.html Bookclub livestreams: ru-vid.com/group/PLjnwpaclU4wWayDJTnpm4ONOS5Mkk8N9k US Army exploration: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-kFGAAdx1kg0.html Film accuracy limits: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Ek88jgEsXgA.html Political polarization: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-i-E14o6Do9Y.html Butch and Sundance review: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-iYu1E8idqO0.html Hostiles review: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE--hNPovai-2k.html *[reserved for Errata]* Here is my dissertation: Joseph Hall-Patton, "Great Excitement: Violent Incorporations of the American Southwest," dissertation, University of New Mexico, 2023. digitalrepository.unm.edu/hist_etds/341/
A well done video on the legacy of the Wild West. I still enjoy the Wild West stories form the myth but I’ll admit that in REALITY, this country needs to properly deal with the consequences. I don’t see liberal politicians ACTIVELY challenging the myth, I don’t see leaders calling to attention the legacy of violence wrought on the west and demanding change. For example, for a country that prides itself on citizenship, the Indian question and never been resolved. Are Indians true citizens? No I don’t view Congress as granting citizenship as anything really positive; just one attempt to assimilate. Has any president t argued that “listen the Native American is A PART of U.S. they represent something we’ve never gotten rid of-our need for conquest. But let’s change that. Let’s make the Native American a fully realized sovereign nation, let’s stop using reservations, let’s be as environmentally friend as possible. Let’s stop using state and federal governments to use violence to solve issues we must stop using religious/ezceptionalsim/ and individualism to justify why we do or don’t do stuff..” As you pointed out, the violence never left. In the 1860a-1930s, Mexicans faced serious violence by the state and federal government. All part of the nadir. Years later, the borders remain highly dangerous and Hispanic citizens pointed out that Trump’s rhetoric would cause similar violence their families faced years before. Then the mass shooting in El Paso occurred.
TY for the video! In support of the idea that the US American frontier is not fully represented by "The Wild West," I submit that Miami was not founded until 1896 because it wasn't until then that it was accessible by the railroad, and could only be reached by boat or by walking along the beach path. Further south in Florida would not be reached until years later, with Key West unreachable by roadway until the 1930's. Furthermore, roughly 10% of the land is still in dispute with one of the three Seminole nations, which has yet to settle their dispute with Uncle Sam in the 200 years since the Traty of Moultrie Creek (IIRC). While I'm posting, I also have to voice my support for the previous post by@@bradhorowitz2765
@@MarcillaSmith appreciate the support. Oh Miami! What a fascinatingly dumb get also hopeful place you are! (Admittedly I’m citing that viewpoint from Dan le betsrd show). That’s actually quite interesting to know that Miami and key west are “newer cities”. Considering the current state of Florida, it would not be a bad idea to resolve the treaty disputes. For starters it could reduce local/U.S. federal oversight on territories-thus no need to increase expenditures from the taxing population. Two, it would be a positive agreement to essentially respect Indian treaty rights and to help continue granting more protection and recognition. Three, by granting natives their rights through their treatises, it could mean a positive impact on the community (less crime, better health, more money, eco-friendly, less poverty). Admittedly that’s assuming all parties are going to be looking at their contents best interests. But I think the evidence speaks for itself.
@@bradhorowitz2765 It's an odd situation. Considering the circumstances, they might have it worked about as best they can. It seems ultimately intractable for the foreseeable future. I'm going from memory here, so some of this will be off, but most of the land is a part of Big Cypress National Forest. So the forest service allows them to live and move between their chickee villages, as they have for thousands of years, and continues to manage the land. The Original Council of the Miccosukkee-Simanolee Indians, as I believe they're called, is only about 100-200 people, so there's no way they could manage all of the land, considering parts include cities as large as Fort Myers. The US Supreme Court has awarded them like $600 Million, but they aren't interested in the money, they want to refuse to give up their rights to it. But I think there's a mutual understanding that they can't manage all of the land even within the preserve, considering the amount of development around it. They lead a very traditional lifestyle, even refusing to use the written version of their language developed by the "Big Tribe" of the Seminoles. OTOH, they will occasionally venture into the land occupied by the "Newcomers" in order to do construction or other work, and even purchase some modern conveniences.
While watching a Family Feud compilation, one of the survey question was "what's your fantasy job if you lived in the old West" and it made me wonder if the "Wild West" as portrayed in the media (filled with saloons full of violent gambling and womanizing drunken cowboys ready for a duel at any moment, among other clichés) was anything like the actual West in the 1800s. It prompted me to do a "myth of the wild west" Google search, and it's how I found this video.
@@jzen1455 I'm under the impression that the frontier was the place where malign, antisocial people often went, though? ...You know, basically because in other locations, they'd go to jail.
Julius Caesar doing the exact same thing in Gaul proves that humanity hasnt changed too much. The story of the frontier and the mythology of civilization and savages that happen to be in the way of progress is amazingly similar.
Caesar had at least some minor historical excuses for his genocidal "pacification methods", though: The Romans lost, over the cause of several 100 years, on their own territory indeed hundreds of thousands of people to roaming tribes, and had thus suffered in result several national traumata . - That said, the Romans were also the first who truly mastered the field of diplomatic legitimation for war; it were invariably their enemies who started it. 😆
Caesar’s passage across Gaul was an unreal exercise in pacification. Search all you like through American history, you won’t find a parallel to the battle of Alesia, or to the mass amputations in Trans-Alpine Gaul. Even the most brutal Indian war falls short of the Helvetii campaign.
The native American tribes committed genocide on each other, there's nothing new, it's just the Europeans had more advanced technology so they were more successful.
in his defense, he did bring lots of Gallic nobles into senates, and Gallic population didn’t shrink that much as the Indians, they were integrated into Roman empire. Indians never did.
A very interesting movie from my country, argentina, is The Last Indian Attack (el ultimo malon) from 1918 depicting a mocovi uprising that happened in santa fe in 1904 as a consecuence of the destitution of the natives and which ended with a shootout with some villagers. The movie was made by a socialist director and is simpathetic to the plight of the mocovi people.
I looked up the movie you mentioned and I noticed the Wikipedia article was available in only two languages; Spanish and Welsh, with the latter likely written by a Welsh Argentine. The diversity of your country is amazing!@@ill232
Mexico even had a full out war that ended up in ethnic cleansing and slavery for the defeated Yaquis until the post revolutionary governments recognized their sovereignty.
Yes, but never at the scale the US did, not even close. Plus, nobody was thrown into reservations or forced to march to new lands, and plus, they didn't dissapear like they did in the US, in a lot of countries most of the population is half-native, and a lot of the cuisine and some cultural aspects were inherited from the natives. This did not happen in the US, in which the culture and cuisine is almost entirely white, not to mention the people.
I find it fascinating how nations tend to define their identity by their least populated regions and least influential eras: my own Norway does this too. Our identity is based in remote corners of fjords and mountains during the stagnant era after the napoleonic wars and before the great societal changes that came past 1884. While the US defines itself in the era between the civil war and the progressive era in the states and territories with the least population and least political influence.
Hmmm... I can't speak for Norway, but that's a bit of a generalization of America. Many Americans define the US by the decade immediately following independence and the first 10 constitutional amendments. Many Americans do in fact subscribe to the Western frontier myth. Interestingly, most Black Americans (I'm Black) view America and its definition as a whole: Founding Slavery Several attempts at civil rights during enslavement (Dred Scott Supreme Court decision etcetera) The Civil War The Reconstruction (or as we call it some version of 40 acres and broken promises) WW1 The Great Depression WW2 Civil Rights and Unrest era The Backslide (or as we call it Nixon leading to Reagan) The Clinton years 9/11 The Obama years The Backlash (Donald Trump years and Jan. 6th) This isn't to say Black people are more honest or in tune with reality. More like reality had us by the throat and made itself impossible to ignore. A long way to say people try to take what they view as the most triumphant and least problematic time to define themselves. Edit; I forgot to say: A long way to say people try to take what they view as the most triumphant and least problematic time to define themselves. However, America is too broad and varied to generally say _______ is how we all define ourselves. Even my statement on how Black Americans view ourselves is too much of a generalization as many of us receive the same cookie cutter history education as the Western frontier or Founding Fathers myth believers.
Yeah. Borderlands history has been an interesting inverse of that - like practitioners acknowledge that they're dealing with the margins of sovereignty, yet somehow that informs the whole
@@john2g1 Yeah I was probably brushing with big strokes, your experience might vary from the main narratives. Norwegian history also looks very different if one is Sami/Qven/Forest Finn/Jewish/immigrant in the "More like reality had us by the throat and made itself impossible to ignore" way as you put it. Thanks for bringing the perspective.
I don't think Britain does this, but it does romanticise eras of being nationally isolated. People still reference the "nation of shopkeepers" which was a Napoleonic phrase from the era of the Continental blockade, forgetting the series of alliances Britain was in to oppose democracy. Then the major reference was the Battle of Britain when the country was isolated in its fight against the Nazis, apart from exiled soldiers from Europe and the whole empire that it mobilised to do so and recieved continuous American aid. Now we're under the strain of Brexit that can be blamed on the EU not giving in to every demand from whoever is Prime Minister this year. Children of Men really captured the whole Britain Bravely Soldiering On myth well.
After reading the "Blood Meridian" I now can't watch any older films like those from John Wayne because they are just so detached from reality. Always appreciate your work!
kinda amusing, when I think about some of the modern complaints about the works of Karl May. See, May was a 19th century german author of, among other things, adventure stories. In foreign lands. Which he never visited and mainly knew about based on the books he read in the prison library. (You can actually follow the routes in those novels on maps, he did that pretty well). His two most famous works? THe Orient Cycle, taking place in the ottoman Empire... and the Winnetou novels (and their respective "side works")... in the American frontier. THe Main character is an idealized version of May himself (though he did become more like his character later in life). He got many things wrong, but one thing to note: The vast majority of indigenous characters in the USA are constantly portrayed as victims of white expansion. Rather impressive for a 19th century author who based the stuff on books he'd read. ANd people complain about his writing, again, 19th century guy who came up with the stuff based on the literature he'd read while incarcerated.
@@undertakernumberone1 thanks for sharing, never heard of this guy before but this sounds like a must read, I wonder what set him apart from other Western writers during that time. Maybe his nationality?
@@juggernaut1133 Well, for one he is (at least once his works really found their formula) amusingly a pretty pacifistic writer, and rather religious (in the sense of, say, justifying to spare someone because he is a christian). And his work being primarily german, he is more well known there and, i think in eastern europe. CHarlie/Kara Ben Nemsi (His names in the west and in the ottoman empire, next to his western nom de guerre, "Old SHatterhand") in the vast majority of cases prefers to spare his enemies, even if he knows that they'll most likely be trouble later on. The character "Winnetou" for which 3, well, 4 but the fourth is a distant sequel, is named is an Apache chief which he befriends and becomes the blood brother off. (and a hwole lot of the stuff can be, in a modern PoV, be interpreted quite homoerotically...) I again repeat: He didn't write out of experience or anything. He read while incarcerated and went fantasy from there. So a whole lot of it is hogwash from a historical POV, and other stuff is "bad" from a modern day PoV. I enjoy the stories as a whole still. I think at least some of the novels might be available in englsih on Amazon for Kindle? But the issue is finding good translations... May's writing developed from the anonymous first-person observer-narrator (for example Der Gitano, 1875) to a narrator with heroic skills and equipment, to a fully formed first-person narrator-hero.[citation needed] With few exceptions, May had not visited the places he described, but he compensated successfully for his lack of direct experience through a combination of creativity, imagination, and documentary sources including maps, travel accounts and guidebooks, as well as anthropological and linguistic studies. The work of writers such as James Fenimore Cooper, Gabriel Ferry, Friedrich Gerstäcker, Balduin Möllhausen and Mayne Reid served as his models.[citation needed] Non-dogmatic Christian values play an important role in May's works. Some of the characters are described as being of German, particularly Saxon, origins. In a letter to a young Jew who intended to become a Christian after reading May's books, May advised him first to understand his own religion, which he described as holy and exalted, until he was experienced enough to choose.[11] May's writing developed from the anonymous first-person observer-narrator (for example Der Gitano, 1875) to a narrator with heroic skills and equipment, to a fully formed first-person narrator-hero.[citation needed] With few exceptions, May had not visited the places he described, but he compensated successfully for his lack of direct experience through a combination of creativity, imagination, and documentary sources including maps, travel accounts and guidebooks, as well as anthropological and linguistic studies. The work of writers such as James Fenimore Cooper, Gabriel Ferry, Friedrich Gerstäcker, Balduin Möllhausen and Mayne Reid served as his models.[citation needed] Non-dogmatic Christian values play an important role in May's works. Some of the characters are described as being of German, particularly Saxon, origins. In a letter to a young Jew who intended to become a Christian after reading May's books, May advised him first to understand his own religion, which he described as holy and exalted, until he was experienced enough to choose.[11] Trivia: Despite May's pacifism and (depending on the book and still steeped in the views of his day) actually somewhat anti-racist writing (like, say, in a story which takes place a few years after the Civil War, the Ku-Klux Klan,including former slave overseers, is a bunch of villains and there are black characters who from a modern day poV wouldn't fly but, considering hte period they are from, are more than just a flat stock character... And despite that, he was greatly admired by a certain austrian dictator...
“War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner.”- Judge Holden from Cormac McCarthy’s blood meridian. The deeper I have gone into US history, the more I have come to realize that Blood Meridian is the most realistic depiction of Manifest Destiny.
This is really interesting. You're the second limp wristed smooth brain I have seen talking about Blood Meridian and how it's the greatest and most true to life western ever written. What is it specifically about this book that makes you r*tards think this, I'm curious?
The inclusion of clips from _Blazing Saddles_ is funny since, of course, that movie was a thorough takedown of all those tropes (as well as being a Reconstruction Western, a genre I'd like to see more of)
In the pilot episode for Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, "Emissary," Doctor Bashir, in his naive joy at being stationed at the outpost that is Deep Space Nine talks about how it is great to be working on the frontier, possibly performing medicine in the thick of it, seeing the great wonders of space exploration. Major Kira, the Bajoran resistance fighter turned first officer gives a brilliant diatribe where she says how the natives are truly a "friendly" folk and that it is "wonderful" to be on the so-called "frontier." Even though the show was obviously not set during the American Industrial Revolution Era, rather in the lands of science fiction, it was clear from this part of the episode that the showrunners were trying to make some smart jabs against Frederick Jackosn Turner, his acolytes, and those in the entertainment industry that furthered the mythos of the American Frontier. This is particularly further proven when one takes into consideration that the main setting for the entire show is the station and the planet of Bajor, where the people fought a 20-year occupation by the Cardassian Empire using whatever means were at their disposal, much like the Native American nations that confronted the United States, the Haitian Revolution, the Vietnam Conflicts, and other notable populist uprisings in our world's history.
I don't know that I'd call Vietnam a populist uprising since it was a proxy war that would have been dealt with far better if the outside had left both North and South alone.
My late father lived long enough to see the invasion of Iraq in 2003. I had been against the invasion and he was positive about it, saying that George W Bush was a John Wayne type of character. I protested that John Wayne played fictional characters but he would have none of it.
“Yes, our belief in rugged individualism derives from white supremacist validating imperialism” wow. Well said sir. Understanding American mythology is very important to challenging the very dangerous idea of nationalist self exceptionalism (aka fascism). Thanks!! Love your work!
Something that's so, SO underrepresented about the Wild West is the accents. The overwhelming majority of white people in the Old West would have had East Coast accents, or else various European ones. As for those jolly bar girls that we see in so many old Westerns? Many of them were European migrant women who got tricked into thinking they were going to be maids or nannies, then got beaten and r*ped until they agreed to be prostitutes. The real Al Swearengen was much, MUCH nastier than Deadwood makes him out to be.
IT WAS ENTERTAINMENT.... It was NEVER meant to be a real historical docudrama. Put down your iPhone and your Starbucks and stop making a big deal about this stuff. This isn't history.
True but the fact remains that media very much influences how people see history and define their nation's place in the world. Media should make a better effort to be more accurate to the eras they cover and not romanticize them or propagate harmful myths about the era.@@JM7284
@@JM7284No it wasn't just entertainment... people believed these films depicted a true history...my grandfather & other older men I knew would in some ways mimic Clint Eastwood & John Wayne. These dudes were like the definition of masculinity to a lot of older men...talk to them.
@@jermainewatsonsr314 It is/was 100% entertainment. And here we are years and years later able to sit back and pick apart and trash things that were made before we were born not truly understanding them. As for people mimicing and believing this stuff...so what? Why is that a big deal? Oh yeah...the war on toxic masculinity. Lol. Well maybe I should go get a manipedi and frost my tips and get some organic free range gluten free hand moisturizer? You're wound up because "people believed"? People believe CNN and Fox News...doesn't mean anything in the scheme of things.
I think a lot of people forget about places like Fort Smith Arkansas and the Indian Territory of Oklahoma. If people also took the time to read the journals of people who lived there and things like old newspapers they'd also have a more realistic vision of those time and places. I've told this story before, I had a history teacher who always asserted that the "wild west" last until good two way communication(police radios and dependable telephones) and laws were changed to make it easier to pursue criminals which wasn't until right before World War 2 and I often see her point
I always found cowboy/western movies boring and obnoxious as a kid. As an adult who understands way more what they're about, and what they represent, I find them vile (and still boring and obnoxious). The fact that both Reagan and Wayne are now in the history books as being real life scumbags, the *vile* part hits especially hard.
Two phrases I cannot stand: 'American Exceptionalism' and 'Manifest Destiny'. They're lies some of us want to perpetuate, which they think abrogates any guilt or responsibility for our two original sins: the genocide of Native Peoples, and slavery. We tell ourselves 'pretty stories', because the truth would somehow diminish us in our own eyes. This, too, is false. Accountability can help begin understanding, repentance, and to promote national maturity.
This is a fascinating take on the West. My area of concentration is the plains Indian wars if you want to call it that. But I am sort of famidear with the Southwest during that same period of time. I cannot disagree with what you say. Extremely well presented and thought out. You should be very, very proud of this video.
Quentin Tarantino called Django Unchained a “Southern” BTW. It’s not a Western, but it uses some of those tropes. I find the various Range Wars and Blood feuds that happened out West to be fascinating as well.
Forced Indian removal was also still a thing in what was considered the "wild west". People often forget/never been taught that it wasn't just tribes east of the Mississippi River. These were forced marches at gunpoint via the United States military that effectively amounted to literal death marches. Thousands died in these marches. That is never shown in the erroneous myth of the "wild west". The "western frontier" was the staging ground for the continuation of native ethnic cleansing from the east. All under the guise of civilization and liberty.
The hardest thing for a lot of people in the UK after Brexit was realising that the British Empire no longer existed, and the rest of the world was generally quite pleased about that.
As a German, I can relate to the difficulty of coming to terms with unpleasant aspects of one's history. The attitude I found most useful is this: we should explore and accept these aspects of our history as being part of our identity, unpleasant as they might be, but the present should not be bound by it, neither in a positive or negative way. We should do what we consider right today, but simply because it is right, not as some form of atonement for a past in whose making we - the present generation - did not have a hand. The main reason why controversy arises around these things is because they're instrumentalized for the politics of the present. For instance, the simple act of framing a measure for improving the lives of ethnic minorities as "reparations" would turn me from a supporter to an opponent.
But Germany did pay reparations to many that suffered under the Nazi regime. I do not have the complete details, but my Polish Grandparents received payments from Germany. It was my understanding that this was related to the forced labor my grandparents were subjected to. Germany has done much work to actively confront its troubling legacy in the 20th century. America angrily refuses to do this. Much scholarship has already been done to calculate the dollar amount that slave labor would have cost if paid for. The research includes detailed calculations of the greater economics of wealth gained from slave labor and land acquisitions from the native populations. When one looks at the stark differences that exist within communities that are the descendants of enslaved people and displaced natives, talk of reparations is not unreasonable or purely political. Unless you consider the actions Germany took after WWII to compensate victims and recognize its central role in that victimization to be political. I'd be surprised if you see it that way. It is a matter of justice and course correction. Keeping skeletons in the closet without acknowledgment and corrective action is not healthy. Can we agree on that?
@@lemuzyka That was done up to the 1990s, and it was paid to the victims, they could legitimately claim damages. Not going to lose myself in the details of that, because my more general point is that you can't continue this indefinitely through time. If you refuse to let events recede into history and don't let them cease to affect the present, you'll end up with things like that case in 2015, where descendants of Spanish Moors tried to sue the Spanish government for the deportation of their ancestors in the 16th century. As I see it, now in 2023, we're done with WWII with regard to reparations, and America should consider itself done with anything that happened up to 1945 as well. There is legacy, yes, but ask yourself: when would you stop? In criminal law, statutes of limitation exist for a reason. They should exist between nations and other historically relevant collectives, too, because at some point digging up old skeletons is not worth the strife it causes any more.
@@Asankeket So as you stated, the victims of Germany's war crimes were paid. What is more, is that Germany has continued to take a stance in the world that accounts for what Naziism was and did. I see Germany's accommodation of Middle Eastern/Syrian refugees as a legacy of that. Certainly, the hesitance to be involved with supplying arms to Ukraine is another. It is also my understanding that German schoolchildren are fully educated about the horrors of the Nazi era. America, on the contrary, has never made an accounting. America has in fact created mythologies as opposed to reflective conversations about painful history. This includes the "Wild West" as well as the Confederate apologist "Lost Cause". These false apologist narratives have served to perpetuate the original transgressions of slavery and Native genocide. I am not sure if you, as a German, truly understand the incredible disparity that exists in America concerning wealth, health, incarceration, trauma, mortality, etc. that is correlated with race. So this is not about dragging up grievances that are generations old. This is directly related to the original sin. The American slave system was built over 250 years with all of the social constructs that supported it. Native genocide went on much longer than that. We are about 160 years removed from slavery, perhaps 120-100 years removed from the Native genocide. Yet the social constructs remain. The systems remain. Addressing these continued inequities requires an active stance, not a passive framework of "water under the bridge". If the former worked, then America's problems would not be. As a white American, I will also argue that modern generations of white Americans benefit from the barbarous privileges of their ancestors. The fact that white Americans find it so intolerable to speak of these horrible historical realities tells of the coddled image we learn of ourselves. Our Black and Brown fellow citizens grow up feeling fear, shame, and then outrage at living with the ostensible status of second-class citizens. I am a second-generation American and I am solidly middle class. My Polish grandparents worked so hard for that status, but they were also lucky enough to be white. My black and brown friends, whose ancestors have been in this country for many hundreds of years more than my own family still have not acquired the generational family wealth that mine has. This is not an accident or a representation of the personal failings of black and brown Americans. It speaks to America's willful amnesia, mythologizing, and a continued commitment to white supremacist systems. America has the largest imprisoned population in the world. It is majority black, descendants of enslaved people. Reparations I tell you.
@Asankeket there will always be strife with injustices. We are not like yall. We will continue to work towards what we believe. Not everyone stands up for justice. When people feel like they are on top they behave similar to what you believe.
It occurs to me while watching your video how Southern history and Western history really blend together seamlessly, particularly when you bring up how Davy Crockett fits outside of the traditional narrow definition of "the Old West," even though he was king of the frontier... when the frontier was "the Old Southwest" (Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, etc.) in the 1810-1840 period, more or less. Is the Trail of Tears a Southern story, or a Western story? It's both. Is the mysterious murder of Meriwether Lewis a Southern story, or a Western story? It's both. Is Andrew Jackson's dueling a Southern story, or a Western story? It's both. Perhaps this is more evident in Texas.
Well that purely depends on your definition of "West." If you're referring to frontier history, then everywhere has that. If you're referring to West of the 100th meridian, then none of that is at all similar whatsoever. Perspective matters
The overlap is because the “West” has always been primarily populated by, and characterized by, mainly Southern migrants. The stories are similar because the people are essentially the same. At least during the time period the stories were being born. The exception to this being California, which always had a separate story of its own.
As a non-American, its so fascinating to me to read about the reality behind this myth that the USA has projected to the rest of the world for generations.
Love this video Mark. I was fortunate to have a great professor who taught me a lot of this and I’m glad to revisit a lot of it through your videos. Also, as someone who’s family came as immigrants to the west, it had nothing to do with individualism and what I find funny is that at least in my area of the Great Plains, both are strangely played up. I grew up in a community founded by Czech immigrants who came in large groups and were linked by region and religion as well as ethnicity. Their settlements were on land gifted by the railroads and already cleared of natives and in a sense there was no need to be a rugged individualist. This is why on some level people in my town emphasize community spirit. Yet even with this, they’ll play up individual farmers and such who tamed the land and made it civilized even though there was always civilization there as the Pawnee had settlements in my area of Nebraska. So I guess I find it interesting in how in my area, the western myth holds strong even if they emphasize the community aspect and how much the old country feeling still is present. It’s cognitive dissonance at its finest.
I think there's a mistake in here that people often miss about history. Shining a light on the horrors of a certain period does not dispel the ideology that comes about from it's myth. You can meet an avowed nationalist that believes in total American national supremacy (in a racist connotation or not) that understands Americas history accurately, and they will still celebrate the wild west, call it the wild west and advocate for wild west tropes. Even embracing that horror as just a fact of what must happen to make something great. The truth does not stop nationalism and neither does a lie. It's like any other ideology. It can bend to reality just as much as any other can even to where it matches up with reality perfectly.
Yes, at the end of the day, American individualism helps push America toward moral progress and away from racism. Even though that individualism has many racist facets to it, completely demonizing it means that you lose the thing that pushed America toward moral progress.
I just so happened to pick the Frontier Myth subject as the main subject for my final in my Mythology Class (Yes it counts). This video is gonna help me out enormously.
@CynicalHistorian If you have any other good book recommendations in addition to the ones listed in the video I could pull through that would be great. I'm lacking a good book source.
@CynicalHistorian The only books I've used so far is Blood Meridian and Under the Feet of Jesus. I'm essentially clogged up with Articles and Readings I've found online and I wanna use something different.
This is very well done. Your integration of your thesis and many other videos is excellent. Having grown up on westerns at the movies, wishing to be like the brave cavalry men in those movies, then being thrust unknowingly into a more modern cavalry attempting to push the 'wild west' process into that far Asian country (re: so much use there of the term for free fire zones, or just sometimes outside the wire, as 'Indian country'), I will confirm that the Wild West /Frontier myth is dead. However, the violence continues and expands with antagonists of criminals, unknowing youth, and self-defending citizens all caught in a cycle that 'the gun projects power so I will use it'. A simplification of course. I am reading about former Justice Douglas (a hero, so to speak, of mine) in 'Citizen Justice'. Even though he pushed conservation I see elements in him that reflected belief in the Wild West/Frontier myth. But perhaps I think I perceive a flaw in his character, as I am sure he had many, even though I admired his beliefs and actions so much.
I went to New Mexico State University. I'm curious about history, and so I researched who the streets were named after. I found out Sam Steel Way was named after the first would be graduate of the university from the late 1880's. Unfortunately, he was shot to death before he could graduate, which just seemed so stereotypically fitting for the school.
Have you seen 'The Cursed?' The original title would have been called 'Eight for Silver,' but studio intervention gave it that generic title out of fear (risk/reward). You should check it out. It might be worth a dive. I feel a lot of research went into the setting.
As a child, I found a old book at a yard sale about a dog, and bought it. It was written in the 1880's. It started out with a preface about how Americans did not, and never would, love the wilderness! It then followed the journey of a lost dog through the West, including a horrible scene where two white men who had befriended the dog where staying at a Native American camp. They described the people who granted them hospitiaity as "brutes with a look of savage stupidity" and seemed to have trouble not laughing at them. The climax came when a "squaw" stopped beating her small child long enough to grab the dog by the hind leg had hold him over the fire to singe off his fur to eat him! Of course "our heros" intervened. Though it was about 1970 and attitudes were different, I was totally disgusted by the portrayal.
Great job! I live in Sierra Vista, never Tombstone. I'm a photographer. I grew up in Utah. I've studied Western History, Bernard Devoto wrote how the individualism was a myth. Look at Mormons and their United Order. It took communities and the help of others to survive in the West.
I would like to see more movies and TV shows that talk about the Chinese Exclusion Act and the expulsion of the Asians from the West. I live in a state that was 40% Chinese before the Exclusion Act and is now at like 1%. The small town I'm in is still listed as a "Sundown Town" because of their violence against Chinese in the years after the declaration. No one talks about it! I think it's a big topic that could get a lot more attention.
@@CynicalHistorian - You're right. I was off by 10%. Idaho was nearly 30% Chinese in the 1870 census. Now, most of the Chinese influence in the small towns is found in their dirt, small pieces of broken pottery.
Your analysis of the "American Progress" illustration is very good, pointing out details I have not noticed over decades of familiarity with the Manifest Destiny symbol. I make videos about the worst part of the California Trail, the Forty-Mile Desert. This is a section with a grave for every mile. Walking and flying over the Via Dolorosa of the West has given my historical imagination a sense of the horror and heroism of these pioneers. Standing on the trail, my historical imagination feels the presence of these people. I wonder what kind of a person would chance this death march, this Jornada del Muerto. The reality on the ground tempers my academic postmodern critiques of the settlers.
Something that should be noted is that while the whole individualism thing is rose tinted and forgets the governments role, homesteaders weren't exactly living easy. Free land didn't work itself and all, and thats probably where a lot of the appeal comes from. It makes it easier to paint a hard shitty life of farming in the middle of nowhere as something to celebrate. That seems a pretty common trend with American exceptionalism is that its helping to cope with pretty terrible circumstances, and we see that still today with the bulk of people espousing these ideas also being completely devastated by poverty. While it doesn't excuse what these ideas go on to fuel, at the same time I think its important to remember that we don't need to forget the humans just because they're largely opposed politically.
Question: The American part of my family came to what was later the US in the 1600's. Family tradition says that the Jewish ancestors came as individuals (not communities) from places like France that restricted Jewish immigration to the colonies and that they hid their Jewishness until they got to America. Since the frontier myth so strongly emphasized Christianity, what was the status of Jews, especially those without a community to support and protect them?
I dunno, I think it might make more sense to let people call it that and use it as an opportunity to explain all of this background, rather than trying to police their language
This is great! I'm going to use it in my class to wrap up the Westward Expansion unit. I think it's a great way for my Dual Credit Juniors to practice for the Long Essay Question on the AP test. Thank you so much!
This makes me think of de Tocqueville, Democracy in America. He described a contradiction in 1840s American culture, that between individualism and community. 25 years ago in my anthropology dissertation, this conflict was a big explanatory model for my analysis. Individualism leaves so many of us out. Oh, and you can't have good anthropology without good history, and day I say you. can't have good history without a little bit of anthropology?
I like this work. When I was young I was in the clutches of the far right, fundamentalist, christians having been placed in a 'Segregation Academy" in about 1970. They were completely crazy. One cool thing was that I got to go to a special school for future christo fascist activists, preachers, lawyers and legislators in Colorado for two months of the summer. One of the instructors had been an actual range riding cowboy in the early 20th C. It was all effectively over but there were still those rugged individuals out there. Which was where I learned that was a myth. He said it was nonsense that a single man could effectively do anything. You needed friends and neighbors. He also said that the notion that towns were lawless and guys walked around with side arms was bull. Maybe in the beginning of a town things were sketchy but with development of governance almost every town forbade carrying loaded weapons around. In fact he said every town he went to had rules to leave your side arms and ammunition at either the mayors office, the sheriff's office or the local church. People knew guys would come to town, get liguored up and get in fights. They considered these 'gun control' measures common sense. Our minds have closed in America. Our myths are stronger than the truths. Until we can come to terms with reality our trajectory is downward.
Would recommand reading The Gold of The Black Hills by Alfred Szklarski but I dunno if it is available in english translation. Anyway these book series is written from Native Amercian Tribes perspective and influenced by authors own experience fighting for life and independance. Not a documentary but adventure books...read them as a kid.
This was a very informative video and it had my my undivided attention for its entire runtime (even the cat part because that was adorable). You really did a good job at explaining the link between the constructed Wild West and how it glorified American exceptionalism by presenting a glorified idea of violence that obscures the typical imperialist motivations that were no different from brutal European colonialism in other parts. I can't wait to read your dissertation after I finally get some free time to do so.
As usual, an excellent discussion that is at once informational and entertaining. I hope you can make a career from your scholarship. I also truly admire your courage. It's a terrible time to pursue a PhD. in any field of the humanities. Have you considered that your interest in the history of violence in the US might lend itself to teaching at a law school, with only a minimal shift of focus (and maybe the addition of a JD)? PS: I'm not only an old fart long sick over the disintegration of academia, I'm also a donor to your Patreon. Keep up the good work.
Imagine calling yourself “self made” while stealing literally everything from others and forcing people to do YOUR labor. Although the “Western” informed a large part of American identity and one I really enjoy…I’ve never once lost sight of the brutality. I can admire the self determination while being critical of the sheer ignorance and hypocrisy in that pursuit. As a black American who loves this genre, I have no choice but to compartmentalize.
Sounds like compartmentalizing other people's myths is your MO; so desperate to seek a pre-approved "cool identity" for yourself, you volunteer as inferior status. You even refer to yourself as "blackshogun". Has it ever occured to you that Blackshogun is the _'identity construction'_ equivalent of a _weave_ ? "Blackshogun" is literally an _asian hair weave_ for your identity.
This is a very interesting topic and one that I have thought about a lot. Every nation has myths. European Christian culture was influenced greatly by ancient myths from the Greeks and Hebrews. Columbus is not an important historical figure because he discovered America. There were probably others, like the Vikings, who came before him. What makes Columbus important is that his discovery led to a massive movement of Europeans to these "new lands" and the world was dramatically changed. Disease killed many indigenous people and weakened their power., while thousands of Europeans came across the Atlantic to take advantage of the opportunity this afforded them. All but a small percentage of people living in the United States and Canada are descendants of people who came from elsewhere, with European whites being predominant. For more than 400 years the myths and values of Europeans have been the core of American culture. It is disingenuous for those of us with European roots to think that we have not benefited from the cruel history of European conquest of indigenous people, who came to be called Indians. It is easy to condemn our ancestors who were not as enlightened as we are. Shame on them for escaping poverty, wars and lack of opportunity in their homelands to settle land that, in their view, was free and not being used for agriculture, forestry or mining. One of the chief myths in American history is that the dispossession of Indian lands took place only in the so-called "Wild West." That is because European colonists and their progeny pretty much wiped out or displaced the native people who lived in lands east of the Mississippi. Living in New York or Boston with the modern conveniences of the 19th century, Easterners could self-righteously criticize government treatment of Indians. Easterners could afford to take a romantic view of western settlement since the "Indian problem" in the east had been solved long before they were born. The western myth was largely created by eastern pulp fiction writers and enhanced further by Wild West shows. Movies later created total inventions like the quick draw gun fight and the cavalry heroically arriving with bugles sounding to save beleaguered settlers. As for crime in the old West, sure you can cherry pick some places where there was a lot of violence like New Mexico inn the 1870s and 1880s. Boom towns like Dodge City, Deadwood and Tombstone all experienced murders, drunken bar fights and shootings during their most tumultuous years. But very few other places in the vast region of the western territories and states had such high levels of violence. The movies created the myth that everyone in the west wore a gun and that stagecoach robberies and other crimes were common. But the goal of settlers in and around frontier towns was to develop civilized communities. They hired marshals and voted for county sheriffs. Very few people carried guns for good reasons--- they were heavy, awkward things to carry while you did farm work, they were expensive, and for the most part guns were not needed. Almost every western town had ordinances prohibiting carrying firearms in public. Yet today, more than a century after the time when people might have reasonably feared Indians and bandits on the rampage, lawmakers in many states have done away with reasonable restrictions on owning and carrying a gun. Far more people have been killed in mass shootings in recent years than were ever killed in old West gun battles. Before we criticize those who "won the west," maybe we should think a little bit about how people a century from now are going to look at our failure to protect citizens and even children at school from gun violence.
I was in wholesale supply that was sporting a 4x6 movie poster of John Wayne in combat gear looking brave . When I asked the guy waiting on me who the guy on the poster was , he told me it was a WW2 hero that was also his coworkers hero . I didn’t have the heart to tell him the truth…..
I can understand some hesitancy to use the term Wild West, but I don’t think it’s wrong to use it in a casual setting. With modern sentiments, plenty of people still use the term Wild West, and they aren’t trying to insinuate that it was okay to displace natives.
Given your work and this video, would it be accurate to conceptualize a frontier period as moving dynamically much in the same way that “fronts” in military conflict move? In other words: I seem to be gathering that the American Frontier period (as defined here) is better understood as a fluid thing and focusing on any one time or place comes with the caveat that it’s just a snapshot.
You guys got your idea of how to deal with the aboriginals from us just look at Neville the devil and his schools and the parallels of Carlisle’s Indian schools
However, the English treated the Irish very nearly as badly. The Irish were defeated in detail, as were Native Americans. Having ancestors on both sides of that affair makes broad generalizations difficult. Calling that racism is as difficult as calling German-Slav relations racism in the modern sense (I have ancestors on both sides of that, too).
So a couple of things: Race is a social construct a completely made up thing based without scientific merit on skin color, features, and loosely ancestral area of origin In modern colloquial terms calling something "racist" is to say that thing is based without scientific merit on a group of people from another group with differong ethnicities Those two things explained I can say the was American attacks on the indigenous populations were racist in every definition of the word. The violence was groups of people separated by ethnicity. Additionally, specifically White Americans were labeled as the Caucasian race and the indigenous Americans were newly invented Indian race. I have seen other terms like Redman race, but keep in mind this is all unscientific made up BS. A long way to say English on Irish violence was ethnic (and often religious) violence just like in the Americas. However, if we're going to use the word racist American violence clearly fits the definition.
@@john2g1 What I am saying is that “race” is a post facto rationale for what was already being done.. There is what is called the Rumplestiltskin effect in some fields, that hanging a name on something makes it go away like the malign fairy in Grimm’s fairy tale. Earlier rationales were that Indians or Blacks were not Christians, but that got indefensible.
@@tomhalla426 I read your original comment after reading your response... What I said still applies. You're saying that modern people are applying post-facto rationale. I'm saying it is exactly what it is. I don't care why the English defeated the Irish. Land, a king's ego, a peasant class, national security... All of this could have been a part of the rationale. Regardless of the reasoning for England's conquest and oppression of Ireland it was ethnic violence. Regardless of the reasoning for the United States of America's conquest and oppression of every non-citizen living in what is now the United States of America; the conquest itself WAS racist. I don't know what is in your mind, but I'm trying to explain that you're accidentally (I hope) doing a thing that bad faith actors do. Take the Nazis... I can list a bunch of reasons as to why the German government and people targeted Jews. However, regardless of the reasoning the action was racist. Today we associate racism and racist with evil and a lack of intelligence (two unambiguously bad words). So bad faith actors will say "It wasn't racism or anti-religion. The Jews formed their own society in Germany and caused harm to the post WW1 economy."
@@john2g1 I think you misunderstand me. Hanging a name on some event does not explain it. Were the Mongols racist when they conquered the Chinese, Arabs, Turks, etc? Now, the NSDAP was operating on an explicitly racist version of socialism, for “aryans” only. They did believe they were the Herrenvolk. Southern US slaveholders were using the notion of “race” as an ex post facto rationale for what society they had, as that sort of excuse was a product of the early 19th Century. Supposing Spanish conquistadors were motivated by “white supremacy” is intersectional verbiage and an anachronism.
@@tomhalla426 Ah okay so perhaps we are not that far apart, but I would definitely say we have different views on events. No, the Mongolian Khans were not racist, because they attempted to conquer everyone including their fellow Khans. Also, the Khans lacked (to the best of my knowledge) the "our people and culture are inherently better" views of the Romans. The Spanish conquistadors implemented a system of female rape and male subordination, sterilization, and execution for the purpose of making the native population less shocking to future Spanish settlers... Smells quite racist, but oh yeah in order to distinguish true Spaniards from mixed ethnicities the Spanish literally wrote a racist book giving us terms like mulatto. ^^I don't see that as intersectional verbiage, nor is that how I would use intersectionality at all. That is just good old fashioned racism: a system of hierarchy and control based on the unscientific social construct of race.
I'd definitely argue a western film is defined by tropes rather than when and where it takes place. Logan and No Country for Old Men are westerns inspite of not having the right locations/times.
Loved this and now I’m a new subscriber. It’s so refreshing to hearing real history and not having to pay big money to be able to learn . Thank you for educating us!
Do you think we can tell stories “for love of the myth” while still knowing better? I enjoy the romance of John Wayne films and the common western tropes that don’t actually have much basis in reality. Reality is always more rich and complex than the narratives or myths we tell, and maybe there is some benefit to be gained through promulgating “stories we tell ourselves about who we are” if they inspire us to do great things or be better people. Or maybe just for the sheer sake of enjoying a good story of good guys vs bad guys and winning the heart of a maiden set in a familiar setting that harkens to a better time we can escape into.
In 20+ years of discussing this when it comes up, I've seen many people react defensively because they equate an examination of American exceptionalism's roots in conquest as an attack on them personally. There's serious cognitive dissonance that people don't want to confront. It's hard to accept that the environment you have done your sincere best to live, work, and prosper in is predicated on centuries-old injustices. YOU didn't commit those injustices, and this smart-a$$ guy is now telling you that basically your whole world has been built on injustices older than you. (Not coincidentally, I hear similar pushback when gender, race, and socioeconomic inequalities come up as well) Easier to just call the critical person un-American, shooting the messenger bearing bad tidings. How has German culture come to terms with its WW II legacy? Has it? As an American on the outside looking in, I feel like they've generally done much more work on themselves in this regard than Americans have, for our respective historical wrongdoings. :D For decades, I've felt that Americans won't ever be able to respect or treat with other people equally at either the macro geopolitical scale or micro individual level until we get the hell over our mythical exceptionalism.
The term “The Civilizing Process” is a more mechanical, less sexy version of Manifest Destiny, yet delivers a clearer picture of what happened back then
Cypher, I’m interested in how you think we should consider the Frontier period in history as Americans today. You’ve talked about the Frontier in many videos, but only briefly dwelled on this topic. I think we obviously need to consider the displacement and violence against Natives and other groups to be atrocious. However, does that taint the Frontier Periods of these states that the only proper stories are those of reprisal against the Frontier, or can we have stories that celebrate certain individuals or events while still holding atrocity in its proper context?
Of course, one can celebrate the good things in this period, the good men and women (who didn't think Indians deserved to be thrown out of their homes) one can celebrate those who weren't connected to Indian removal. There are good and bad things everywhere
II would like to challenge the idea that the motivation for "conquering the west" was only due to power-hungry monarchs and their vassals. It seems that poverty and land exhaustion in Europe were equally significant motivating factors. The purpose of this assertion is to counteract the potential accusation of a "liberal agenda" by those on the right who often feel aggrieved and outraged. While it is true that great harm was inflicted upon Native Americans, it is also true that many of the settlers did not come with the intention to conquer or kill; they simply sought a place to live and raise a family.
