I happened to visit the President Lyndon Johnson Museum in Austin during the recent Thanksgiving holidays. I was keen on witnessing exhibits about the civil rights movement but something caught my eye specifically. It was the special sports section which had wonderful exhibits detailing racial prejudices against African American and Native American sportsmen in the ‘Jim Crow’ or the segregation era. The walls were donned by awe-inspiring pictures of legendary track and field athletes like Jesse Owens, heavyweight boxers like Jack Johnson, Olympic champion James “Jim” Francis Thorpe and many more.

It was here that I came across a rather impudent quote from Richard Henry Pratt. It goes: “kill the Indian but save the man”. Paradoxical as it may have been, but what intrigued me was the mere fact that I knew what he meant, perhaps a little too well. Being born in a country which was colonized for the better part of the last millennium obviously gives you some perspective on colonization; not only on the geographical boundaries and the economy of the country, but also on the psyche of the people of the civilization, the latter obviously less tangible than the former. However, I claim my complete ignorance about Pratt before my visit to the museum, I’d never heard about the man; nevertheless, I was going to find out.

In 1879, Captain Richard Pratt became the founder of the Indian Industrial School at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, a boarding school meant for Native American children. Native American children, mostly in their teens, were forcefully and deceitfully recruited from various Indian tribes. There, they were imparted lessons in English language, history, Mathematics, Music and Christianity among other things. The students at Carlisle were asked to pick or were assigned English names, their braids were cut off, they were made to wear western military-uniform-like clothes and even punished for speaking their native tongue. After coming in contact with the Europeans many students died of various illnesses and infections too, and in many cases even the news of the demise of their children did not make it to their parents. The boarding school went on to become a model of sorts to bring the Native American people into the mainstream society dominated by white Euro-American settlers and ‘civilize’ them. Today, it stands as an epitome of forced assimilation of the Native American population which stripped them of their culture, heritage and value system; and tore apart what was left of their communities . Let us now talk about the foundational thoughts and vile genocidal notions that gave way to such ‘path breaking’ institutions where intellectual colonialism was being practiced if not perfected. But first, let’s look at the events that preceded Pratt’s advent.

In the mid-19th century as many European settlers arrived on the eastern shores of America, there were quite obviously skirmishes between the natives and the white colonizers for land and other resources. As a hastily put forth solution to this problem, a proposal to create ‘colonies’ or ‘reservations’ for the Native Americans to the west of the River Mississippi, was adopted, as coexistence of two different racial communities was deemed nearly impossible. There was indeed resistance to such ‘reservations’ which led to several wars; but in the end, it suffices to say that the native tribes lost, acceded and settled for reservations. I am tempted to argue that the native tribal peoples might have felt like how millions in the Indian subcontinent felt during partition - leaving behind their homes and communities and crossing over into distant lands! Reservations still meant that each tribe could own their own land, have communities of their own, practice their customs and traditions, self-govern and run their own courts of law. And quite evidently this vestigial autonomy they held onto after all that they had endured had to simply go as well! Why? Because there were more lands to be won, properties to be owned, businesses to be established by the encroaching settlers, more savage souls to be ‘saved’ and ‘civilized’. So, the farce of assimilation of Native Americans into the mainstream white American society or ‘civilizing’ them was played out. This was done by the Federal Legislatures like The Dawes Act of 1887.

Richard Pratt was vocal against the idea of reservations for Native Americans and the Dawes Act. Although Dawes Act was thought to encourage individual enterprise among the natives by breaking up the tribes as a social unit, agriculture based on the western model and help facilitated sale of land to white settlers. Pratt thought it was ineffective in the larger scheme of things as the natives stuck to their old ways and their communities remained closely knit. In a speech he made at the Nineteenth Annual Conference of Charities and Correction (1892), he brings forth to notice the 5 tribes viz. Cherokees, Choctaws, Chickasaws, Creeks, and Seminoles, which were deemed civilized and hence not subjected to the Dawes Act, had tribal schools. Despite being labelled civilized they had no intentions to become part of the United States. As a solution, he advocated the need of western education of the tribal children and argued that tribal schools prevented the assimilation of the natives with the American society. They managed to remain fairly isolated from the mainstream American society by protecting their lands. However, their privileges were taken away by the amendment to Dawes Act known as Curtis Act in 1898. He refers to the idea of slavery as “horrible” but then brazenly goes on to say that it was a blessing in disguise since the African Americans lived amongst the people of “higher race” which enabled them to become civilized.He opines that in a stark contrast to African American people the United States Government had alienated the natives by restricting their association with the English speaking civilized white people. Pratt shows utter contempt for the culture of the Native American tribes and describes their language as savage and their customs as mere superstitions and goes on to say that the mission will remain incomplete until the last remaining localities of the nation submit to their doctrines, both national and religious and to the ‘biblical principles of brotherhood of man and fatherhood of God’. You might be wondering what the connection between Pratt and the sports section at LBJ Museum is. Wa-Tho-Huk, who was later known as James France Thorpe went on to become the first Native American to bag an Olympic gold medal; he studied at Carlisle.

I can’t help myself but draw parallels between Pratt and Thomas Macaulay who also dismissed Indian literature and languages to be of lower standards in comparison with English and emphasized the need for western education to ‘civilize’ people of the India. His disdain for Sanskrit in particular is also well known. It is fascinating to see the vast similarities in the modus operandi of these individuals applied in distant continents. But, it also makes me wonder how there can be such coherence in thought where an ugly sense of racial, religious and intellectual superiority masquerades as benevolence and humility before ultimately manifesting as justification for the cultural genocide of an entire race! One might argue that this school of thought was prevalent at the height of European imperialism and is not relevant anymore.Then, why is the same MO still evident in the proselytizing activities witnessed in remote villages of India and Africa? Why are evangelists like John Chau still stubbornly pursuing this mission which does not even give concessions to tribes like the Sentinelese who choose to remain isolated from the rest of the world? Chau’s demise at the hands of the Sentinelese is very unfortunate but did his actions and total disregard for the Indian laws not stem out of a false sense of superiority of his beliefs in his God?

In context to India, I do not know whether we should revel in the fact that the Hindu civilization is continuing to flourish even after assaults on our territorial integrity, sovereignty, and on our culture and traditions, or to mourn the fact that even today we are losing ground - religiously, culturally and politically, slowly but steadily, to well-funded and organized foreign adversaries. I do not know if Pratt was more successful than Macaulay or if the people of the Indian subcontinent were more resolute than the Native Americans in withstanding persecution . But perhaps there is a greater need to bring together all cultural and religious entities which practice polytheism and/or are non-exclusive faiths; faiths  which do not stop at mere tolerance but go on to show mutual respect and acceptance of people with beliefs different than their own, solely in the interest of self-preservation, and help people of those cultures.This, I feel is more effective since it attempts to unify the other fragmented side to counter the present and the future Pratts and Macaulays of the world; and perhaps India can pave the way to make this conglomeration possible.