We all studied Texas History as a required course in school. I looked up to see which states require a state history along with national history, and was surprised to find that all of them do. How our states come to be is so important to us, they require we learn about it for as long as we spend learning about our country's history. What do you do, then, when your state has a less-than-ideal history to teach?
As a student in this proud state, a lot of our history was focused around the Alamo. We watched movies about it in school; in fact, the battle at the Alamo was so interesting, even to people outside of Texas, that Ron Howard made a movie about it that grossed $28 million, and it is shown in every 7th grader's history class in our great state each year. We recently took the kids to tour through it and I spent a good deal of my time there, pondering the interesting situation we find ourselves in these days. I couldn't help but be perplexed at how we took the state away from Mexico after being allowed to immigrate here in the 19th century, bringing slaves with us (which was against the law in Mexico at the time), and then fought the Mexican army to win our independence. Now, those same Mexicans who immigrate here are the illegals, and we have a fortress held open as a tourist attraction that thousands visit each year, to celebrate Texas independence and fortitude during the Texas Revolution.
Slavery in Texas isn't discussed as broadly as other southern states. In fact, when I think about the "Deep South," in terms of slavery, we often forget to include Texas in regard to national discussions. As a 7th grader listening to Texas history, you remember what you want to remember, and what is consistently reinforced in your mind. After recent review of Texas history and what the Alamo truly represented, I was surprised to find out the role that slavery played into the Texas Revolution and the fight against Mexico during that time. Texas was an outlying territory to Mexico, one that was hard to govern because of its' size and sparse population of Mexican citizens. In 1821, Mexico won its' independence from Spain and found it difficult to control the territory. In an attempt to populate the territory in 1829, Mexico allowed organized immigration from America to Texas, during which time (irony of ironies), Anglos ended up outnumbering Mexicans, 30,000 to 8,000. Along with these 30,000 Anglos, they brought with them slaves. At that time, slavery was illegal under Mexican law, yet in an effort to protect their land from continued attacks from Comanches and encourage people to come who could help with that goal, they allowed a one year reprieve, allowing US immigrants to bring slaves with them, with the understanding that all slaves would be freed in 1830. To circumvent this requirement, slave-owning Anglo immigrants changed their slaves' status to "indentured servants." In 1830, here was an estimated 5,000 "indentured servants" in the territory of Texas. Mexico started becoming very nervous about America's intentions with regard to Texas, fearful that they would attempt to annex it into the colonies. The Mexican government began imposing laws upon the newly immigrated citizens, angering both Anglos and Mexicans alike. This, coupled with the immigrants viewpoint on owning slaves and coveting their independence, led to the Texas Revolution, which included several battles fought over a period of years, culminating with the successful stand at the Battle of the Alamo.
The Alamo and the figureheads we celebrate in Texas are rife with the importance of slaves to the American immigrants way of life. James Bowie, for example, was a slave smuggler, who would break the law to import slaves into the Galveston area. And yet, we go there and pay homage to the Alamo, purchasing "Bowie Knives," celebrating our courage during that battle, a battle in which we are outrageously outnumbered, with little to no resources or weapons. "Remember the Alamo!" is put on every coffee mug, baseball cap and shot glass in the gift shop, with an image of the front of the building on all the merchandise.
Needless to say, the Alamo is of central importance to our culture and history in Texas. The question I pose today is: what would we do in Texas if any of the descendants of those "indentured servants (slaves)," or Mexican-Americans, found the Alamo offensive and a reminder of the horrible culture at that time and what the Alamo represents, beyond simple pride in our state's history? What if a motion was made to tear it down to help appease this group of people? I honestly don't know what Texans would do, but I can tell you, it would be a heck of a fight.
Now, let's put that in terms of this statue: Robert E. Lee was a central figure to the south in the civil war. Obviously the leader of the Confederate army, I am guessing he is looked at with disdain because of his support of the south's right to own slaves and the fight he gave to keep it that way. What if I told you that he was initially against the civil war? What if I told you his first and strongest argument was to keep the country united, no matter what? What if I told you that more important to him than supporting slavery, he was fighting for the states' rights to govern themselves how they saw fit? In fact, he and another central figure to our national history had a lot in common - Abraham Lincoln. They both felt that keeping the country united was priority number 1, as a divided country would lead to consequences we couldn't yet fathom. However, Lee was pressured into commanding the army, and out of loyalty to his southern heritage, accepted the job. To many, Lee is a symbol of bravery and sacrifice. To others, he was the man responsible for keeping thousands enslaved.
Was Lee a hero? Was Lee a villain? I'm not here to make that argument. I'm not here to argue for or against men in our history and their decision making during a very different time. What I am here to argue is that slavery and its' affect on many states in our country is of central importance to our history as the United States of America. Our history in this regard, though embarrassing, is still our history. Taking down statues, tearing down monuments, even removing flags, will not change the past. What those artifacts do, however, is pay homage to certain figureheads and incidences which cause great strife in the lives of those negatively affected by it. On one hand, descendants of Texas revolutionaries and protectors of the Confederacy, want to remember their ancestors' sacrifice of life during a very volatile time in our nation's history. On the other hand, they were defending their right to enslave a race of people, and the very presence of remnants of that time and the respect paid to them is a continued reminder of how things came to be the way they are, and unfortunately, how they continue to be. Instead of being a reminder of the fundamental right for the states to have the ability to govern themselves, the statue is a stain on the city of Charlottesville, a vile depiction of the enslavement of many. Is it because history isn't being taught without bias? Or is it because history isn't simply a fact-based recounting of a minute by minute timeline, but rather looked back on very differently by each person's perspective by which it has affected them and their ancestors. Each event in history has an incalculable number of perspectives, each person gazing upon the events of the past from a lens as unique as people on the Earth. No matter what we do, no one is actually able to walk a mile in a person's shoes to understand how these things make them feel. What we do now, is expect others to respond with our own individual and society's viewpoints of right and wrong, the society's culturally accepted sense of morality. White supremacy is wrong, period. That's the message. It's vile and ignorant, and supporting these monuments is sending a message to all of the world that these people still feel the same way their ancestors' felt back then. But how do you support your history, when your history is offensive and ugly? How do you pay respect to it without glorifying it? The correct answer to that question involves the expectation that human beings are all ultimately decent, capable of teaching their children restraint and common sense, capable of being critical thinkers able to use their intelligence to discern right from wrong. Unfortunately, the human race is not full of people like this, rather it is spotted with those who are ignorant and unable to understand how their actions affect everyone else in society, or more importantly, understand but simply do not care. Sometimes, those people, though the minority, are the loudest and the most vile, and yet get the most attention. There is a community full of people looking to do the right thing, fighting against a smattering of those who will die defending their right to glorify the past. Herein lies the continued battle we continue to fight in this country, as a result of our actions - conflict and strife.
I will remember the Alamo - but I will remember it differently as I did before. With new eyes and a perspective of actual research, done on my own, rather than just accepting what I've been taught. I'll look on it as an important part of my personal history in Texas, with a varied and complex history, not just a symbol of courage in the face of all odds. At least this way, the events of Charlottesville serve a purpose to change one individuals way of thinking.
Comments