As of yet unpublished Letter to Star Tribune

February 24, 2008

Historic Fort Snelling is, first and foremost, an icon of American imperialism. In fact, it is Minnesota’s first and longest-lasting monumental icon to American imperialism, imposed on the landscape since 1819. Built of stone and mortar, Americans intended for this structure to last, a seemingly permanent and gigantic reminder that Dakota homeland was in the predatory sights of the U.S. government. Fort Snelling allowed the U.S. government to establish dominance in the region and open the floodgates for white invasion of Dakota lands.

However, what Minnesotans must remember is that the fort that stands there now is not the original Fort Snelling, rather it is a replica of Fort Snelling restored to its 1820s condition. When the fort crumbled before in the 20th century, Minnesotan’s rallied to its defense and support, raising the millions of dollars necessary to resuscitate their beloved icon. Now, the replica fort is crumbling again and the Minnesota Historical Society is asking Minnesotans to spend another $24.8 million to refortify this icon of imperialism.

Nina Archabal and the Minnesota Historical Society are the fort’s defenders and champions (Feb. 17, 2008 letter, “Fort Snelling: Should its history be told?”). It is no surprise that their exorbitant request comes during the Sesquicentennial year, when Minnesotans are asked to take pride in the state’s history. Archibal calls on us to support the renovations so that she and her staff can begin to tell a more “inclusive” story of the fort, recognizing that they have failed miserably to include, for example, the effect of the fort on Dakota people and homeland. Archabal tells us that she believes “we cannot transcend the past until we know it and have learned from it.” Yet, even now she does not mention such things as “imperialism,” “colonialism,” “genocide,” “ethnic cleansing,” or “concentration camp,” which are all part of that fort’s legacy.

In the 21st century, are Minnesotans really prepared to refortify this icon of American imperialism? It would be far more educational to all Minnesotans if we rejected the renovation of the fort and invested instead in dismantling this symbol of domination, thereby conveying the message that in our day, on our watch, we do not want symbols of oppression standing on these lands. It is time to take down the fort.

Waziyatawin, Ph.D.