Remember a noble cause in creating Plaza memorial
Ihave some concerns about the “CHART Next Steps Resolution,” a plan of action regarding the disposition of the Soldiers’ Monument. The Soldiers’ Monument was erected by official action of the New Mexico Territorial Legislature in 1866. Nevertheless, several of the “whereases” in this resolution unilaterally proceed to declare what amounts to be the city of Santa Fe’s authority over the Soldiers’ Monument. One could argue that because of this monument’s origin, the state also has legal standing in this matter. More important, because of its historic nature, all New Mexicans have a vested interest in what these “next steps” should be.
Why then did this resolution ignore the CHART — Culture, History, Art, Reconciliation and Truth — recommendation to engage “the diverse citizenry of the city and county of Santa Fe and the four Pueblo nations located in Santa Fe County as well as the Navajo and Mescalero Apache tribes, and other Indigenous communities” as a means to reach a final resolution about the monument?
And, despite the fact that another “whereas” acknowledges the CHART committee’s finding that the two most favored options revealed by their second survey were to: (a) “Replace what’s left of the monument with something else” and, (b) “Restore the monument with its original signage and add language that encourages it to be fully understood and assessed,” this resolution arbitrarily chose “to mend, redesign, and/or reframe the obelisk.”
I participated in several of the CHART activities, including the community solutions table. After reading some of the survey comments by Native Americans and, upon reflecting on the heart-felt account of a Native American member of our table, I believe if the monument is restored, at the very least, it should include an updated set of plaques. Those should reflect the full perspective of all the key groups involved, including the atrocities perpetrated upon the Native peoples.
The CHART experience has made it clear to me that to our Native brothers and sisters, the offensive nature of the monument goes way beyond its literal reference to them as “savage Indians” to it symbolizing the Manifest Destiny policies utilized by those leveraging the power of the U.S. government to exploit, subjugate and exterminate these people to advance their own political and economic agendas. That said, labeling the Indians as savages while committing atrocities on them at Wounded Knee, Sand Creek and the Long Walk is hypocritical, to say the least.
Lastly, it should be emphasized that the original purpose of the monument in 1866 was to memorialize the New Mexicans who gave their lives in defense of the Union and their territory against those in the Confederate states who would turn their backs on their country to preserve the institution of slavery. Two years later, in 1868, a new Territorial Legislature amended the original act to also memorialize those who lost their lives in the Indian Wars, giving rise to the “savage Indians” panel.
A distinction should be made between one cause that was noble and the other, a federally enforced subjugation of a people. So, one way or another, those New Mexicans who lost their lives in the battles of Valverde and Glorieta should be memorialized.