Mexico honors Indians, US doesn't

Want to know the difference between a country that honors Indians and a country that "honors" them? Consider these tidbits from "Following Cortés:  Path to Conquest" in the October 1984 National Geographic:Modern Mexico, emphasizing its Indian heritage, has raised no official memorials to Cortés.And:[T]he high peak known as La Malinche ... is the only monument in Mexico to Cortés's remarkable interpreter, considered a traitor by many Mexicans today.Comment:  The United States is covered in monuments to Columbus, conquerors such as Juan de Oñate, the Pilgrims, missionaries such as Junipero Serra, and unnamed pioneers and frontiersmen. In other words, the people who invaded America to promote their god and take its resources.

We also memorialize the good Indians who helped them: Squanto, Pocahontas, Massasoit, Sacagawea, et al. And we lamely explain how they did good by creating a "synthesis" of cultures--as if Indians gained something by being conquered.

In Mexico, the same kinds of people are considered villains and traitors. I don't know if the Mexicans have any monuments to Columbus, but the lack of monuments to Cortés is telling. These people honor Indians in reality, not as fictional characters fit only to serve as movie props and sports logos.

For more on the subject, see Best Indian Monuments to Topple.

Below:  An Indian "honored" to be on a statue of "America" in New York City, even if he's cowering behind her throne.