"Manifest Destiny" - John Gast
This is my favorite painting of all time. I have tried to find a copy for my house but I cant find a wall big enough for the size I want…
It’s called “Manifest Destiny” and was painted by John Gast in 1872. The term manifest destiny refers to the religious belief that the United States was to expand from the Atlantic to the Pacific in the name of God. It was believed that this beautiful land was given to the early settlers by God and it should be used to glorify Him. This was one of the biggest reasons we are what we are today. The strong conviction by our leaders that God was on their side, gave them the strength and motivation to expand and grow as a country.
When Gast painted this historical picture, he wanted to show the numerous different types of expansion that were going on in America at the time. If you look closely you can see the Atlantic ocean on one side and the Pacific on the other. The Union Pacific is heading west with a Pony Express rider, a Wells Fargo wagon, hunters, farmers, wagon trains, beaver hunters (mountain men), and of course and half naked “angel”carrying the telegraph line with a Bible in her hand. As you can see in the left corner of the painting, the Indians and the buffalo are also moving west (and looking quite worried).
While you are scanning the painting, notice the colors used… As I mentioned above, this painting is called “Manifest Destiny”… Where is God in this picture? As the angel floats across the landscape, she is bringing light to the darker part of the country (the west), while leaving the east bright. This is to symbolize all the religious groups moving west with their version of “religion” and bringing “light” to dark places (with the help of technology).
As you know, most religious groups (and non-religious groups) do this today. They believe their religion or lack of religion (which is really just a religion called – atheism or sometimes agnosticism.. look up the definition of religion and tell me if you disagree) is the right way and they love to tell people about it. No wonder we fight so much! When you believe that there is no God, you think every one else that belives there is a God is wrong and should know the truth. Obviously this goes both ways. However you look at it, the idea of “Manifest Destiny” helped push the United States west.
I love how this painting captures so many aspects of the westward movement. I had a History teacher at Arizona State University that did two whole lectures on this painting alone. It is such an amazing snapshot of where our country was at in the mid to late 1800′s.
Take a look at the painting and let me know what you think in the comment section bellow. Should we (America) try to get away from our religious past? What would that look like in government? If Atheism is technically a religion (if you don’t agree tell me why?) , how do we void our government of religion completely?
Michael, I have enjoyed reading your first couple of blogs, so keep em coming.
I think points can be made either way as to whether or not atheism is a religion. It really depends on how you view atheism. If you see it as an institution whos members follow the same moral and ethical guidelines, then yes, it is a religion. If you see atheism as simply individuals who do not understand or do not think there is any reason to believe in a god, then no, it isn’t. I tend to argue more towards the second point here. I myself, do not find any reason to believe in a god, nor have I found one shred of evidence in my brief 25 years of existence that there is one. You can label someone like myself as an “atheist” or “agnostic” or “non-believer”, but in the end, it doesn’t matter because the labels only exist in relation to your own beliefs.
Say for example that I, along with a few billion others, believe that the universe was created by a pink unicorn with magical powers. (Sorry not very creative, I know) You, for very obvious reasons would think this is ridiculous and would not be required to follow any of the supposed teachings of this magical unicorn. You, Michael, would not bear the burden of proof to disprove that this magical unicorn exists, in the very same way that I do not bear the burden of proof to disprove your claims of God’s existence.
According to the logic that atheism is a religion, you not believing in this unicorn would make you a part of an unchosen religion that you wanted nothing to do with in the first place. This new religion would then pit you against the unicorn believers in a lifelong debate of issues that simply cannot be proven or disproven by our current intellectual capacities. Could you imagine how frustrated you would feel to be in that position?
I say all of this with sincere respect to your own personal beliefs, and I look forward to your response.
Brian,
Thanks for your comment! I love it. I agree with you about the pink unicorn.
A wile back I took a World Religions class at ASU where we had to define religion. Most people said the obvious “a group of people that believe in a God or Gods”. Our teacher then pointed out that the the word “religion” come from the Latin word “religare”. This word come from “rely”. It was used to describe somebody who relied on their belief system. If this is the true meaning of the word, then we all “rely” on our own beliefs. If you don’t believe their is a God then you live your life a certain way. You reason differently. You make different decisions about life and how to live it based on our belief systems. Maybe Im wrong but I think most people do this… Right? (again, I’m not being sarcastic)
Now, I am in no way saying that you are wrong to call yourself a non- religous person. I agree with you completly, what does that even mean in relation to your own beliefs? Its just a “word” as far as Im concerned. I personally wouldn’t care if I was labeled part of the non-unicorn-believing religion. Or any other religion for that matter. I am a Christian now and most of my friends are not. I am labeled the “christian” all the time and I am most often the minority but in all honesty it doesn’t bug me…
My point in the story is that “faith” and “religion” has has been a huge part of our (America’s) past. This is both a good thing (for endurance and perseverance) and a bad thing (for the obvious reasons, war, slavery, etc.)
Thanks for posting Brian. I totally respect your beliefs and your point of view. Keep it coming!
“This new religion would then pit you against the unicorn believers in a lifelong debate of issues that simply cannot be proven or disproven by our current intellectual capacities. Could you imagine how frustrated you would feel to be in that position?”
So you are saying that the concept of God cannot be proven or disproven by our current intellectual capacities, yet you are willing to say be an atheist – which is to say you KNOW there is no God because there is no evidence – when you deny you have to intellectual capacity to recognize or analyze such evidence if it were before you???
Strange.
Strange.
I expect nothing less from an anonymous poster.
Atheists do not KNOW for certain that there isn’t a god, and most do not make this claim. Atheism is simply the rejection of the belief of God, or other deities, not that they may exist. However, not unlike politics, there are always extremists. In the case of atheism, these are considered “strong atheists”, and their beliefs are not in line with the average atheist.
Please, do some research, and bring something a little more productive to the table next time.
I feel a bit silly in saying all of this, because it ignores the main point I was trying to make with my first response. That is that I am only an atheist in the eyes of believers. The term atheist couldn’t mean less to me. I’m assuming you’re a believer, but at the same time, an atheist with respect to many other belief systems. Does this mean that you know for certain that these beliefs are untrue? Absolutely not. It simply means that it doesn’t make sense to you, and you have insufficient evidence to belief they are true.
I think my unicorn example explains this clearly.
I didn’t see any small pox laced blankets, dead chinese railroad workers, trail of tears victims, plains strewn with rotting bison carcases etc, etc it your favorite painting. what’s up with that?
Haha, ya Gast definitely left out those parts. Its funny how some parts are left out of historical art. When you study Spanish art for instance, the Spanish paint completely different pictures about there surroundings than the Mayans did in the same time frame.
The reason I still really like this picture is because I choose to remember the good things from our past and not the bad. There are definitely things I could focus on that make America look like crap (recently and in our past) but there is something beautiful about this painting. Thanks for your post!
BTW, the diseased blankets being spread is a myth. It simply never happened, yet is taught as fact by anti-american teachers who pass it on to students.
Brian,
You make some very good and empathic comments about religious tolerance and I commend you for them. Worldwide, humanity would be better off with such views. If we all could respect the views of others, if we could stand in their shoes for a bit, we could all be better, larger, more informed people.
However, I wonder how we would have felt if we were those “poor savage Indians” fleeing from the advancement of the westward surge? This picture is indeed an accurate portrayal of Manifest Destiny in every sense. It is a picture of the rationalization of genocide, of brutal rape of nature, and the colors of historical Christianity. Please don’t get me wrong for I suppose I am Christian as I believe in God…but then again all religious ideologies center around a deity.
As shown in this picture, the Euro-Americans had little regard for anything on the left as they felt the light came from the right, from them. What we sometimes don’t realize is the image that was created to justify this and the basis of that created imagery. Greed. Euro-Americans killed off 80 million people in the name of greed. Add the millions that the “hero” Columbus murdered and the 50 million killed in Central and South America, and we have a whopping 200 million murdered humans, humans who owned the land, humans who occupied the land for 20,000 years, survived there, lived in spiritual harmony with nature; 200 million murders all in the name of “saving the savage by converting or eradication”, 200 million murders of innocent humans predicated on Greed.
Please adhere to your notion of tolerance and look at the picture in the true meaning of it; not of the glorious saviors from the light, but look at it from the darkness, from the death and destruction. Looking at it from the darkness, the light blinds us to the real facts.
Duane