Race, Lies & the Texas Revolution - History Reaction
Vložit
- čas přidán 23. 06. 2023
- What do we really teach seventh graders about Stephen F. Austin? Have historians ignored Lorenzo de Zavala?
Dr. Sam Haynes of U.T. Arlington has his opinions and evidence. Michelle has hers. You're cordially invited to decide which you think is more accurate.
If you'd like to watch the full lectures used in this video, they can be found in the following places:
Grapevine Historical Society, uploaded 03/27/2023
• Grapevine Historical S...
Highland Park United Methodist Church at Hall of State, uploaded 06/08/2023
• Rejebian Series Presen...
SMU Center for Presidential Studies, uploaded 11/03/2022
• Unsettled Land: From R...
Lone Star College - Kingwood, uploaded 11/21/2022
• Sam Haynes - Should We...
Id always raise eyebrows whenever I opined that racism was not as rampant and institutionalized in Texas history as modern lecturists theorized. You seldom hear of the thousands of normal interactions and relations that occurred in Texas history. We only hear the bad and those are often blown way out of proportion.
It is unpopular to talk about neighbors helping neighbors, and people generally behaving with decency to each other. To do so is labeled as “downplaying racism.” Divisive history written by activist historians helps nobody.
@@texashistorytrust I think one of the best ways to get rid of racism is to downplay it without forgetting those who were lost as a result of bigotry and hate. That’s a hard task but the memories of those who suffered under the yoke of oppression deserve the truth to be told. It’s easy to scapegoat and makes a fascinating yarn, but the truth is always in the middle IMHO. I had a grand old uncle who was extrajudicially executed by Rangers; he was a tequilero or bootlegger during prohibition. He understood the risks involved and no quarter would be given to him. He lived and died by the code. He had an Anglo cohort who was also dispatched with him. Border justice was color blind IMO, or as Cpt. McNally said “there are two types of people - law abiding and outlaws.” Color didn’t play the role history portrays IMHO.
Violent eras, like the Mexican Revolution, saw intra and interracial violence on both sides of the border compounded by so many factions and acts of retaliation. There were corrupt Anglo judges/sheriffs and corrupt Mexican-American officials who served a master other than justice. I wonder which kind of judge would have tried your grand uncle had he not been handled by the Rangers in that way. I hate to hear of his death but your rational perspective on these subjects is laudable and much appreciated.
Absolutely fantastic presentation Michelle!!!❤
Did he just say Zavakla was a minor factor in the run up to the revolution then said Zavalla was an extreemly important figure in the revolution?
He kinda did! Austin, Austin, Austin!
So my Texas history book didnt discuss Santa Anna, Pancho Villia, Juneteenth, the Karankawa and Comanche? The gouchos? I always thought it did? Ill have to check that LOL and how many pages in Texas History should be devoted to Mexico who claimed to own this lans from 1821 till 1836 in a book that spans prehistoric times to today?
Oh it did. You weren’t hallucinating. Texas history in 7th grade is supposed to provide an overview, like most history classes. It’s wild that these professors expect the textbooks to dwell on the subjects they favor when there’s no time to dwell on much of anything.
another great video! subscribed :)
Welcome aboard, GuitarMan!
Another interesting video. I read Soldiers of Misfortune when I got out of the army in 1990, but Haynes did not impress me as a historical writer. There was so much omission and lost potential with that thin book. He has written a few others since. I've never seen people flock to buy them, so his revisionist bent does not seem to be working in his historiography.
I would like Michelle to make a video explaining how is it possible that up until recently a few years ago literally no Hispanics owned anything...
They were here for hundreds of years before the anglos!
What happened to their businesses, banks, ranches, land, etc? Did they just give it awayfor free or sell at the same time? Lol😂
They were swindled, robbed by greedy Anglo texians, The same as Mexico 🇲🇽 was also robbed. They take the land then they tell you to leave or lynched you!
Should she make a video about the Spanish and the land the controlled. Then about the glorious Mexican revolution that took Mexico from the Spanish? Because that video would probably mention the fact that after the war the Mexican govt. Claimed all Spanish land in north America even though they did not control it, inhabit it, govern it, developed it, or protect and patrol it. The same is true for California. Did Mexico also inherit the Phillipenes and Cuba? No. Because they did not possess it or occupy it in any other way except to say hay we beat the Spanish so we own everything the spanish owned from Yucatan to Oregon just by saying so. After the American revolution the US didn't get Canada and India from the British? Why? Because it was not controlled or settled by the US. The Mexican govt. had to get settlers from the US to populate the state. As in there were few Mexicans here mainly because of the Comanche who Mexico wanted ZERO trouble with.
Thank You again for standing up for real Texas History....I went to college with a young Lady who's parents were both decended from the Old 300 German
Families who founded both New Braunfels and Fredricksburg and whose decendance still prosper in the Hill Country of Texas today. I made a mistake years ago and went to a book signing of this guy
and I couldn't resist challenging this revisionist
he couldn't even answer my questions but rather
danced all other directions
instead. T.R. Fehrenbach is still the Father Of Texas History and he is also decended from the Old 300
and like U a trueful Patriot
Thanks Again Dear Keep up the Great Work !.........
God Bless Texas
Well said. I'd echo much on what was said here on gratitude for the past and the tendency of academics to transpose current racial politics on past figures and then pretend like their academics rather than activists. That being said, the public knowledge on the conflict between those who wanted to stay a part of Mexico under the Federalist system and those who wanted independence is one that merits greater public attention as well as De Zavala's role both as a Mexican political thinker as well as the Texan Vice President. Giving a spotlight to a figure like Zavala is warranted but the way social constructionists go about always goes beyond the primary sources to engage in polarizing tropes for ill defined ends.
Agree wholeheartedly. The problem with "public knowledge" is the same with "kids don't learn ____." You can lead a horse to water, but he likely won't drink still, boring water. An exploration of Zavala's thoughts on American culture, democracy, etc. as presented in his travelogue may be a good vehicle to bring more attention to him. You may see that here soon. Stay tuned.
I have seen similar bull shit about the 'black Mozart'. Great to see another angel of truth combatting the post modern lies. Keep it up, the camera loves you. Greetings from holland across the pond.
Howdy to you in Holland. You are too kind, Lucas! The transition from written content to video content has been tough, so your encouragement is deeply appreciated.
Thank you for your take on real Texas history. You are very amazingly educated!!
Thank you for taking twenty minutes out of your day to slog through it!
In relation to the study and teaching of Texas History, Sam Haynes is an embarrassment, but sadly there are others. Michelle has once again done impressive work in producing this video.
Hey Tex! Yes, there are so very many others. They hold an absolute supermajority in our universities and historical associations.
Great work? Lol...
Truth is, white men stole everything from Mexican Americans that had lived in Texas for hundreds of years...
And they wrote the history after that...
when i was getting my history degree (around 2000), revisionist history was not the only history being taught but it was the trendy, flashy thing and it was inescapable. Over the years it has gotten more and more political with an even bigger bent toward supposed unheard voices. which is fine. but the implication is more and more often that the voices have been HIDDEN. for racist and classist reasons. which is not fine. you cannot blame a writer/historian for not writing ALL the history with all the voices. But again, it's the trendy read of academic and historical events. at this point i just roll my eyes
The most recent video on the channel is about exactly this - the progression from Great Man history to the activist history that's been en vogue for a few decades now. How can a historian writing in 2023, citing two generations of historians who studied the same "hidden" history before them claim that it's hidden? If the public doesn't know about a subject/group after decades of publications on the subject, that seems like a failure on the part of the writers.
Question for you: circa 2000, would your advisor or any/all of your professors think that a social call to action at the end of a scholarly journal article was appropriate? Or was striving for objectivity still a thing?
@@texashistorytrust no it had not reached that level of subjectivity and social justice yet at the time but I had mostly liberal professors so I could understand how that came about. I was getting a literature degree at the same time and the same thing was happening in that field but, in the same way, the stage was being set for a similar obvious turn to scholarship as disguise for propaganda and impetus for social activism. I would never have seen intersectionalism coming back then though. we were still doing normal historical study but it was with a more social history and "bottom up" perspective to the events and stories. objectivity was still the rule
There was saber rattling in favor of New Social History/bottom-up in Texas in 1989-91. Implementing it was how Texas would catch up with California (ha!) intellectually and be prepared for the 21st century. So our major universities imported people with ed pedigrees from the UC system and UW-Madison…and here we are at critical mass. Your degree seems to have fallen midway into the wide critical turn.
@@texashistorytrust yes probably because I was at a very small Lutheran college that seemed to keep that sort of thing at bay. I remember some profs moving on top bigger schools with glee. Obviously they were going to somewhere "better"
Now my feed is flooded with classical guitar. Reading hate comments to Grieg is a weird experience but not entirely unpleasant.
Great work. Thank you
He was one of the founding fathers of the Republic of Texas.
Presume you mean Zavala and yes, he was. Also a great champion of federalism and chronicler of democracy in the early United States.
Excellent discussion on how some historians want to bend the truth to rewrite history to their own views. That is not history it is editorial and those authors should not be described as historians.
From a 8th generation Texan, I Absolutely Loved this!
She's write and wrong on this: Jenkins wrote a total of 12 different Texas reference work:
1) 10 volume in Papers of Texas Revolution
2) 2 additional volumes after that with separate names
PTR was specifically the topic of Haynes’ talk. Jenkins didn’t “write” it. And he wrote many more than two additional books, before and after PTR was published. Nice try, though!
@@texashistorytrust Jenkins didn't write what? Explain your response. And make a video on what happened to all the lands, business, wealthy Mexican American families that were stolen of everything in Texas if you have time...( I know you won't ) ...
@@texashistorytrust I am not a historian. I simply got my info from several simple sources. But I am not going to make a big deal about the number of volumes. I will however make a big case about the rampant discrimination that the Tejanos faced. Even today there's rampant racism against Hispanics in Texas. But you will never admit it
@@FLAC2023 That's your problem. Simpletons seek simple sources. How about you cite one of them? (I know you won't). Looking at late 19th and early 20th century cadastral maps of any county west of the Colorado would be enough to show you land was not stolen from Mexican Americans (but you won't do that either.)
Didn't write PTR...the subject of the video you're commenting on. Try to keep up. We don't take requests from randos on the internet. Sketch out a script. Cite your sources, not your feelings...and send it on in. (I know you won't)
Amazing! American Indians have a whole chapter in Texas History. For clarification, it's not actually a whole chapter about American Indians, it's more about American Indians as a vehicle to commend more white heroism. White Heroism in most of history is the annihilation and subjugation of other races to feed the avarice of white men. There were over 50 tribes of American Indians in Texas, I suppose Ms. Haas believes it's progress enough that they were at least mentioned as a vehicle for white heroism in the 2016 books. This woman has attempted to erase slave narratives from the history of plantations but says "you don't need to apply a destructive brush to one group to elevate the one you've written about." She should take her own advice. Perhaps a destructive brush wouldn't be taken if a firmer stroke of reality was added to the fairytale stories of white heroism that are persistently being sold by "historians" such as herself.
If this Sam Haynes character would have tried to teach Texas History to my 7th. grade class his way, this was back in the mid '70s. He would have been fired as soon as parents found out of the lies he is spouting.
I lived in North Harris County which is where Houston is the County Seat. My School district had strict guidelines to go by, so l know he wouldn't stand a chance with his dribble nowadays, back in that era.
It might have been helpful to read the book. Of course, then it wouldn't have fit the narrative of your organization.
While I'm flattered that you created a CZcams account just to leave a sigh and a comment, I'm confused. If my audience read Dr. Sam's book as I have, would "chapter after chapter" about Austin magically appear in textbooks? Would the index to PTR be different? How does anyone reading Unsettled Land make his claims more true?
As an example, Zavala is central to the story of the Texas Republic. Haynes is the first to provide clear evidence of his role in the Texas story (worked closely with SFA on the constitution and his relationship with Santa Anna plays a key role in the Texans defeating the Mexican army. As much as the right wants to make this a battle between white/others, that is not Haynes’ argument. Ignoring the importance and actions of key figures simply because of their race is divisive. I took the time to leave my comment because your narrative completely misses the mark of his book. (I created a channel to leave a comment, not a YT account. I think all Texans would benefit from less biased commentary.)
Yes, Zavala is an incredible figure in Texas history. This video says nothing to the contrary, nor is it a review of Sam's book. It's about the claims he makes when he's out promoting it. If you have a problem with divisive language, have you reached out to Sam about his "white alpha males?"
you're cute