Resolution backs Civil War memorial in St. Paul park

The Minnesota House gave a jump-start to the Minnesota Boys of '61 on Thursday. A resolution declaring the House's solidarity with the nonprofit group's effort to build a memorial to the state's Civil War soldiers was introduced on the floor, with Reps. Read more
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

“'Raising Saint Paul'”

Since: Mar 11

Saint Paul

#1 Apr 15, 2011
This is a magnificent site waiting for something special. Perhaps it will not take five years to reach their fundraising goal.
62crank

Saint Paul, MN

#2 Apr 15, 2011
Will there be a memorial also somewhere to the women, children and old people some of the "boys of '61" rounded up in 1862-63 and herded into concentration camps around Ft. Snelling, where many died from exposure, disease and benign neglect? Just wondering.
White Buffalo

Saint Paul, MN

#3 Apr 15, 2011
62crank wrote:
Will there be a memorial also somewhere to the women, children and old people some of the "boys of '61" rounded up in 1862-63 and herded into concentration camps around Ft. Snelling, where many died from exposure, disease and benign neglect? Just wondering.
If the Union didn't survive we would all be living in teepees and starving on the prairie fighting over food.
62crank

Saint Paul, MN

#4 Apr 15, 2011
White Buffalo wrote:
<quoted text>
If the Union didn't survive we would all be living in teepees and starving on the prairie fighting over food.
And if some of the "boys of '61" hadn't been marched west to, among other things, attack women, children and old people, the residents of Minnesota (where a great-great-grandfather of mine herded his family and livestock into an improvised stockade in August and September 1862) and Iowa (where another great-great-grandfather of mine farmed before and after fighting in the Civil War) would never have allowed so many of them to march east and south to help the Union survive. So the women, children and old people died to save the Union, too.
Rice Streeter

Saint Paul, MN

#5 Apr 15, 2011
62crank wrote:
<quoted text>
And if some of the "boys of '61" hadn't been marched west to, among other things, attack women, children and old people, the residents of Minnesota (where a great-great-grandfather of mine herded his family and livestock into an improvised stockade in August and September 1862) and Iowa (where another great-great-grandfather of mine farmed before and after fighting in the Civil War) would never have allowed so many of them to march east and south to help the Union survive. So the women, children and old people died to save the Union, too.
You're right they do desreve a memorial. The mistreatment of those people and the largest mass execution in American history where 39 (I believe) men were hanged in Mankato is a black spot in our history that should never be forgotten.
The boys of '61 were not in Minnesota in '62 but were ot east fighting the Civil War where the next year on July 2 these 262 heroes defended a place called "Cemetary Ridge" in Gettysburg Pa. and only 47 came home. The author Shelby Foote Said"it is very neccessary, if you're going to understand the American character in the twentieth century, to learn abot thin enormous catastrophe in the nineteenth century". I believe this, and I think it applies to the mistreatment of the natives as well.
plymouth rock

Saint Paul, MN

#6 Apr 15, 2011
Rice Streeter wrote:
<quoted text>
You're right they do desreve a memorial. The mistreatment of those people and the largest mass execution in American history where 39 (I believe) men were hanged in Mankato is a black spot in our history that should never be forgotten.
The boys of '61 were not in Minnesota in '62 but were ot east fighting the Civil War where the next year on July 2 these 262 heroes defended a place called "Cemetary Ridge" in Gettysburg Pa. and only 47 came home. The author Shelby Foote Said"it is very neccessary, if you're going to understand the American character in the twentieth century, to learn abot thin enormous catastrophe in the nineteenth century". I believe this, and I think it applies to the mistreatment of the natives as well.
Tell that to all the white settlers that were mistreated since the start of colonization. It went both ways.
62crank

Saint Paul, MN

#7 Apr 15, 2011
plymouth rock wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell that to all the white settlers that were mistreated since the start of colonization. It went both ways.
Indeed, the violence did go both ways; however, the invasions and treaty violations went mostly one way.

Soldiers from the 4th and 5th Minnesota, regiments that distinguished themselves in many later Civil War battles, fought against the Dakota in '62.
Little Crow

Saint Paul, MN

#8 Apr 15, 2011
62crank wrote:
<quoted text>
Indeed, the violence did go both ways; however, the invasions and treaty violations went mostly one way.
Soldiers from the 4th and 5th Minnesota, regiments that distinguished themselves in many later Civil War battles, fought against the Dakota in '62.
Didn't Darwin teach you about "survival of the fittest"? Remember, most of this happened before Karl Marx.

The Dakota and the Chippewa were killing each other long before the white man got here.
62crank

Saint Paul, MN

#9 Apr 15, 2011
Little Crow wrote:
<quoted text>
Didn't Darwin teach you about "survival of the fittest"? Remember, most of this happened before Karl Marx.
The Dakota and the Chippewa were killing each other long before the white man got here.
So if I'm "fittest" it would be right for me to take the land my neighbor lives on? Or since the North and the South "were killing each other" it was OK for you, Little Crow, to attack the settlers? I don't find that in Darwin or Marx. Hobbes or Rand, maybe.

I don't recall saying anything about relations between native groups or implying that any group of natives or settlers was "fittest" or more ethical than any other. Just that Minnesota's Civil War history includes some things less noble than heroic exploits on distant battlefields to preserve the Union and/or free the slaves.

Since: Apr 11

Minneapolis, MN

#10 Apr 15, 2011
Folks - history is a touchy thing. Let's be sure to keep it civil and dispassionate, in as much as we can. We are into the sesquicentennial of our national fratricide – there will be a LOT of discussion/debate about the causes and outcomes of that event. Many in the South will have a very different view of it. Next year will be the sesquicentennial of the 1862 “Dakota War,” and all of its carnage and depredations – on both sides. It is the history of our country and our state, and nothing is going to change it. Nothing is going to “make it go away.” Here’s my view on a few things – without hurling bricks at anyone: 1) There are people who are good, kind, noble and caring. 2) There are people who are evil, mean, vicious and heartless. 3) Numbers 1 and 2 cut across race, ethnicity, culture, continents and time. 4) The policy of the U.S. government towards Indians was genocide – of the people in general, of the culture(s) specifically. It is a blot of everlasting shame on the history of the United States of America. 5) I do not believe in unending collective guilt. All Germans throughout time are not guilty and responsible for the Holocaust; all British people throughout time are not guilty and responsible for what was done to Ireland for 900 years; all people of European heritage in America today are not guilty and responsible for what was done to North America’s native people in past generations; all Indian people of North America today are not guilty and responsible for what was done to white people in the Minnesota River Valley in the late summer of 1862, or anywhere else in North America throughout the 18th and 19th centuries. 6) People have a fundamental human right to defend themselves, their families and their homes from intruders/attackers – including killing the intruders/attackers. That said – the monument in question is for the purpose of honoring and recognizing Minnesota citizens who were engaged in the preservation of their country, their state, and their homes. It is in no way honoring the murder or overall genocide of innocent people.
WrongMan

Saint Paul, MN

#11 Apr 15, 2011
MinnMan wrote:
Nothing is going to “make it go away.”
You never heard of perpetual reparations?
WrongMan

Saint Paul, MN

#12 Apr 15, 2011
MinnMan wrote:
4) The policy of the U.S. government towards Indians was genocide – of the people in general, of the culture(s) specifically.
And WHY was that? Be specific.
WrongMan

Saint Paul, MN

#13 Apr 15, 2011
MinnMan wrote:
6) People have a fundamental human right to defend themselves, their families and their homes from intruders/attackers – including killing the intruders/attackers.
Which was being done during that time by both sides.
WrongMan

Saint Paul, MN

#14 Apr 15, 2011
MinnMan wrote:
It is in no way honoring the murder or overall genocide of innocent people.
Who says it was GENOCIDE of innocent people? YOU?

Be specific.
artur

Albuquerque, NM

#15 Apr 15, 2011
Finally a good use of money.
62crank

Minneapolis, MN

#16 Apr 15, 2011
After considerable study and reflection, my view is that the U.S. government explicitly rejected a policy of genocide against the native peoples of this country -- for the wrong reasons. Read the contemporary reports of the Indian Bureau. The argument was that genocide would have been too expensive as well as risked the good name of the nation in Europe.

I'm not calling for a memorial to the women, children and old people who died in Minnesota in 1862 and afterward to help preserve the Union at the same site as the memorial to the "boys of '61," just that there should be one somewhere, say at Ft. Snelling where so many died of benign neglect in concentration camps.
WrongMan

Saint Paul, MN

#17 Apr 15, 2011
62crank wrote:
After considerable study and reflection, my view is that the U.S. government explicitly rejected a policy of genocide against the native peoples of this country -- for the wrong reasons. Read the contemporary reports of the Indian Bureau. The argument was that genocide would have been too expensive as well as risked the good name of the nation in Europe.
I'm not calling for a memorial to the women, children and old people who died in Minnesota in 1862 and afterward to help preserve the Union at the same site as the memorial to the "boys of '61," just that there should be one somewhere, say at Ft. Snelling where so many died of benign neglect in concentration camps.
Thanks for taking the effort to research 'some' of the history.
I agree with your newer assessment of the time period and there should be some type of Memorial for Native Am. at Ft. Snelling.

As a gentle reminder some of the northern Union troops weren't treated that well at Andersonville (Camp Sumter) which was relative for the time period.

Since: Apr 11

Minneapolis, MN

#18 Apr 16, 2011
“WrongMan”: I am new to posting on the Pi-Press site, so I’m not familiar with people’s “handles” when posting. If I inadvertently created a variation on your posting-name by choosing “MinnMan,” my apologies.
If, on the other hand, you created “WrongMan” because of the name I chose for my inaugural posting … I’m flattered. I was attempting something benign and generic for a name. I was indicating that I’m just a “fellow traveler on Spaceship Earth, in a corner called Minnesota.”
In response to your questions:
1)I’m aware of the terms “perpetual” and “reparations”– and it’s clear what a combination of those terms would mean. I’m not certain of its relevance to my posting, though. I indicated that what happened in our past cannot be changed and will never “go away.” Reparations of any kind won’t change that. I assume it makes the aggrieved party feel better – but some things can’t be “fixed,” even by a legal ruling. I’m not aware of any legal rulings that give Indians “perpetual reparations,” but it’s not something I’ve researched, either.
2)It was not my intention to present a multi-page treatise on the subject, complete with documentation, endnotes, bibliography, etc. It’s a web posting to a news story, after all. I made it clear that what I posted was “… my view …” That said: I have been a student of history for many years, and even have an award-winning book on Minnesota in the Civil War to my credit. The posting might be “my view,” but it is not an uninformed view. The U.S. gov’t might have decided that actually having a written policy of genocide, a la Hitler’s “Final Solution,” might be too expensive and create “bad press,” BUT the on-the-ground policy was no different: Chivington and the Sand Creek Massacre in Colorado; Custer at the Washita in what became my home state of Oklahoma; the concentration camp created below Ft. Snelling; attitudes and orders written by many military officers, as well political leaders on the federal and state level; killing the buffalo to near extinction; the reservation system and forced dependence on the U.S. gov’t for food, etc.; broken treaties,“Indian Schools” that forced the children to “dress white,” wear short hair, and only speak English; the overall attempt to kill native languages and other aspects of their religion and culture.
[I need to break this into 2 postings]

Since: Apr 11

Minneapolis, MN

#19 Apr 16, 2011
[continuation]

3)I indicate, clearly, that depredations were done by both sides. It makes your posting “was being done at that time by both sides” redundant.
4)Regarding your posting:“Who says it was GENOCIDE of innocent people? YOU? Be specific.” Being specific …“innocent” was not a good word choice.“Innocent” is a pretty big word/concept – legally, morally, ethically, etc. Without hashing that out – which could take endless chunks of cyberspace - can anyone make a legitimate case for genocide of an entire people, whether they are “guilty” or “innocent” of any specific thing? We’re talking the extermination of an entire people when using the word “genocide.” I’ll grant this – there were “guilty” of not being white, and of being in the way of white expansion. That was the reason for the genocide. So I guess, given the reason for it – they weren’t “innocent.” You ask “Who says … YOU?” Well, yes – clearly I do in my posting. One reads, studies, researchers, takes classes, listens to some lectures, forms an opinion based on those things and, in this instance, states that opinion. I am well aware that this is a contentious issue among scholars and historians. What was done clearly fits the definition of “genocide,” coined in 1944, as it reads in the United Nations’ 1948 “Convention on Genocide” documents.
5)As to the mistreatment of Union troops at Andersonville: it’s a thin argument on your part to make the statement that Union troops were starved and mistreated, so why not Indians, too? It wasn’t Indians holding the Union troops at Andersonville, so there’s not even a tit-for-tat comparison to be made. Your statement is no more relevant than a comparison with the treatment of Confederate prisoners at Elmira. One thing does come to mind, though. On his Reading Gaol (jail) experience, Oscar Wilde is quoted as saying,“Sir, if this is the way Queen Victoria treats her prisoners, she doesn’t deserve to have any.” I think we could all agree that any government entity that is going to hold prisoners, or in any other way take-on the upkeep and well-being of a person or people (i.e.: the reservation system), that entity has a moral and ethical obligation to not starve, abuse or mistreat their charges. They need to provide adequate food, shelter and clothing. Yes, supply logistics were tough back then – as was government cash-flow because of the Civil War. Even considering that, it doesn't excuse the conditions for the Indians during the rest of the 19th century.

Since: Apr 11

Minneapolis, MN

#20 Apr 16, 2011
“WrongMan”: I am new to posting on the Pi-Press site, so I’m not familiar with people’s “handles” when posting. If I inadvertently created a variation on your posting-name by choosing “MinnMan,” my apologies. If, on the other hand, you created “WrongMan” because of the name I chose for my inaugural posting … I’m flattered. I was attempting something benign and generic for a name. I was indicating that I’m just a “fellow traveler on Spaceship Earth, in a corner called Minnesota.”
In response to your questions:
1) I’m aware of the terms “perpetual” and “reparations”– and it’s clear what a combination of those terms would mean. I’m not certain of its relevance to my posting, though. I indicated that what happened in our past cannot be changed and will never “go away.” Reparations of any kind won’t change that. I assume it makes the aggrieved party feel better – but some things can’t be “fixed,” even by a legal ruling. I’m not aware of any legal rulings that give Indians “perpetual reparations,” but it’s not something I’ve researched, either.
2) It was not my intention to present a multi-page treatise on the subject, complete with documentation, endnotes, bibliography, etc. It’s a web posting to a news story, after all. I made it clear that what I posted was “… my view …” That said: I have been a student of history for many years, and even have an award-winning book on Minnesota in the Civil War to my credit. The posting might be “my view,” but it is not an uninformed view. The U.S. gov’t might have decided that actually having a written policy of genocide, a la Hitler’s “Final Solution,” might be too expensive and create “bad press,” BUT the on-the-ground policy was no different: Chivington and the Sand Creek Massacre in Colorado; Custer at the Washita in what became my home state of Oklahoma; the concentration camp created below Ft. Snelling; attitudes and orders written by many military officers, as well political leaders on the federal and state level; driving the buffalo to near extinction; the reservation system and forced dependence on the U.S. gov’t for food, etc.; broken treaties,“Indian Schools” that forced the children to “dress white,” wear short hair, and only speak English; the overall attempt to kill native languages and other aspects of their religion and culture.
[breaking posting into 2 parts]

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Shakopee Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Minnesota Gardens Opening in Chaska Mar 17 mngardens 1
Why upgrade to LED lighting Mar 3 Snoop 3
News Shakopee Residents Asked to Approve High School... Jan '15 Eleese Elise 1
Local Politics Do you approve of John J. Schmitt as Mayor? Oct '14 Carl Jones 1
News Bayer CropScience expands SeedGrowth Centers (Sep '14) Sep '14 your time has come 1
News Bayer CropScience expands Bayer SeedGrowth Centers (Aug '14) Aug '14 oriental stink dick 1
News Prison sentence for notable defense attorney Sa... (May '11) Jan '14 Sangelia 16
Shakopee Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Shakopee People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]