Who Should Be on the Next Mount Rushmore?

The iconic monument of Mount Rushmore, carved into the faces of four American presidents, has been a symbol of American history and patriotism for decades. Yet, the question of who should be on the next Mount Rushmore

has sparked intense debate, particularly in light of historical injustices towards American Indian tribes. This article explores the perspective of the Shoshone, Salish, Kootani, Crow, Mandan, Arikara, and Lakota tribes, as well as the complex legacy of Mount Rushmore.

Historical Context and Controversy

The Black Hills, a sacred land for the Lakota people, have long been at the center of controversy. American Indian tribes, such as the Shoshone, Salish, Kootani, Crow, Mandan, Arikara, and Lakota, have lived around the Black Hills for centuries, considering it a sanctuary called "The Heart of Everything That Is." A pivotal point in history was the 1868 Treaty of Laramie, which reserved the Black Hills for the Lakota people, known as the Teton Sioux. This agreement was soon breached by the discovery of gold, leading to US prospectors and the US Government forcibly taking over the region. The Lakota resistance, led by figures such as Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse, was met with violence, culminating in the Government's official confiscation of the lands by 1877.

The Present Debate

Today, the debate around Mount Rushmore is not merely about its historical figures but about justice and the recognition of the Lakota people's rights. Some argue that the monument should be left as is, pointing to its historical significance and the national monument status. However, a significant portion of the public, including Native American leaders, advocates for the monument to be changed or the land to be returned.

Proposals for Change

One proposal suggests the faces be replaced with those of significant historical figures from American Indian tribes. Figures such as Crazy Horse, Sitting Bull, Touch the Clouds, and Black Elk are often mentioned. These leaders played crucial roles in resisting the forced dispossession of their lands. Another radical proposal is to completely destroy the monument and return the land to the Lakota people, adhering to the Treaty of Fort Laramie 1868.

Alternative Proposals

In light of the ongoing debates, some suggest alternative solutions, such as carving additional faces onto the monument, which may not be feasible due to space constraints. For instance, one idea is to incorporate the figure of a dog, symbolizing the contributions of dogs in American history. This proposal reflects a broader call to reconsider the traditional standards by which historical figures are judged and honored.

Conclusion and Call to Action

As the debate continues, it is clear that Mount Rushmore represents more than just carved faces; it is a symbol of historical and cultural significance. Whether the monument is left as is, replaced, or destroyed and the land returned, the decision should be made thoughtfully, considering the voices of all stakeholders, particularly the American Indian tribes who have a direct connection to the land and its history.

Keywords: Mount Rushmore, Lakota People, Indian Tribes