Protecting a Lie: Pete Hegseth's Massacre at Wounded Knee

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

By Rich Wandschneider
-

In 1971, when Alvin Josephy wrote about the “Custer Myth” for Life Magazine, he included a photo of the mass burial at Wounded Knee in 1890, committed by the next generation of Custer’s 7th Cavalry. In a recent issue of Native News Online, Levi Rickert wrote about Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s decision to NOT rescind the Medals of Honor awarded to 20 members of that cavalry unit for their actions in the 1890 massacre.

Indians had lobbied long and hard for a truth telling of the event and rescinding the medals of honor. They’d made progress. In 1990, on the 100th anniversary of the massacre, Congress passed a resolution expressing “deep regret” to the descendants of those killed at Wounded Knee. And there was hope that those Medals of Honor would go away.

With the Secretary of Defense’s decision, Rickert writes that Hegseth was not erasing woke politics and preserving real history, as he claimed, but “protecting a lie.”

“That lie — that what happened at Wounded Knee was a battle deserving of the nation’s highest military recognition — has been told for over 130 years. But Native Americans know the truth. It wasn’t a battle. It was a massacre. And it remains one of the most painful, unresolved wounds in American history.

https://www.postalley.org/2025/10/14/protecting-a-lie-pete-hegseths-massacre-at-wounded-knee/

[Bernardo de La Paz]

1. It's "Indigenous" or "First Nations". They get to call themselves "Indians" if they want and sometimes do.

Like how I (can't) won't say the n-word referring to African Americans but they can call themselves what they want, sometimes with the n-word.

[Ilikepurple]

4. Name wise, I don't think there is any agreement amongst Indigenous Americans.

In my experience most native Americans do flinch to varying degrees when a non indigenous, non familiar person uses “Indians”, but it doesn’t generally cut to the degree as the n-word does for African Americans. It might for First Nations members in Canada, as their experiences of marginalization may be different. Regrettably, there are worse slurs natives experience through their lives in America.
We are technically still “Indians” according to the US government. See Title 25 of the United States Code (simply titled Indians) or how 574 tribal entities by virtue of being federally recognized Indian Tribes are eligible for funding by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The issue as to what to refer to indigenous Americans, as the preferences vary. I’m not sure how many natives on this side of the boarder like “First Nations” as it’s seen by some as a Canadian thing. We are, after all, Americans also. Of course, I think you are right that non natives should generally not use the term “Indian” and tread gingerly when they do. I think “Native American” and “Indigenous American” are generally safe at this point, even if they sound clumsy to both native and non native ears.
Also, thanks Ocelot, for getting us back on topic. Erasing or altering native and colonial history is a big issue with indigenous people in the Americas. Like many marginalized groups, our point of view has been essentially erased in established history and present affairs. Some historians, activist, politicians, and journalists have fought to get the stories out, but this administration is undoing any progress made in unraveling the myth of American infallibility. I think many of us feel unseen and undervalued correcting historical events to include our perspective helps make us feel seen and of value. The choice not to rescind the medals continues a history of minimizing the value of native lives.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

6. Good observations. . . . . nt

[Igel]

5. I've found that context is important.

When the Indian Gaming Initiative was up and going in CA, the supporters and advocates had no trouble adopting "Indian" and pretty much never "Native American" (and certainly not "Indigenous American" or whatever). "Indian" tropes were also commonplace.

Why?

Because it alienated people that might feel sorry but weren't necessarily progressive. It wasn't antagonistic. It let people think warm fuzzy thoughts about John Wayne westerns and the Lone Ranger and Ke-mo sah-bee. It was asking, please; not demanding reparations.

I suspect that "Indian" is better for persuading those who might not be prone to agree to just "get to yes" while "Native American" is more used by those who want to feel good about arguing.

Just a completely anecdotal hunch based in a limited subset of remembered, observed examples, with all the biases and gaps inherent in that 'data set'.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

7. Likewise, good observations. . . . nt

[Ocelot II]

2. Wounded Knee was no more a battle than My Lai.

Maybe Kegbreath will give William Calley a poshumous MoH.

[2naSalit]

3. K&R