I really enjoyed this video. The enthusiasm and empathy shown by Ranger Southern is fantastic. Thank you. Have also enjoyed the more detailed and descriptive videos by other Rangers but this one was a good contrast to those.
Ranger Southern is probably the best, most empathetic and knowledgeable presenter I've ever er seen. I loved this from start to finish and hope I might get to meet him one day.
@@tomsouthern8221 when I get the chance, to come over, I would be honoured to meet you. I read Stephen Ambroses' book about Custer & Crazy Horse and would love to have a chat and pick your brain!
Tom custer got his head Bashed in....they castrated him...they gutted him like a deer....and to top it all off... They gouged both his eyes out and scalped him... What a way to die 😱😱 It was all Custers fault 100% For the deaths of 225 soldiers, horses. Doctors and civilians....i am still stunned
Fantastic presentation. I’ve seen countless talks on the battle and this certainly ranks among the best I’ve seen on the native perspective. Well done.
@@tomsouthern8221 i imagine there has to be quite a few ghosts running around the battle area. Custer was foolish for not waiting for terry and gibbons....foolish for turning down 2 companies of the 2nd....foolish for being in such a hurry for glory.. Using the native americans as stepping stones for progress was despicable and personally he got what he deserved...the white man has destroyed everything he has ever came in contact with...
@@ericstevens8660 Eric, thank you very much for your comment.......foolish is maybe a very compassionate 'take' on Custer's moves/behavior/decisions. Certainly, I agree with your assessments. Something I think it's easy to overlook is that one of the results of his 'foolishness' is that not an insignificant number of native warriors were killed as well, adding to the toll of unnecessary lives wasted. Now, as for ghosts, I just don't know.....
@@tomsouthern8221 and by the way my mother was 1/2 cherokee..... THE U.S GOVERNMENT LIED AND CHEATED THE NATIVE AMERICANS...PEOPLE WANT TO OVERLOOK THAT AND YOU CAN NEVER OVERLOOK THAT FACT....AND IT IS GURANTEED FACT
shit hot!!! i am still believing in common sense and a half decent memory chip of 'modern' homo-sapien today after viewing this....most poignant when understood and wow!! with that remarkable (yet strangely lonely and non significantof backdrops) - blow my fucking mind baby!...hats off 2 all associated with the production of this vid!
Darren, thank you!!! The [and I love how you describe it], 'strangely lonely' backdrop is actually looking back up to 'Last Stand Hill', where the battle essentially ended. If you ever get to go to Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument you can go right to this spot from the parking lot!
There is a lot to unpack here. He gets a lot right, but some things wrong. Indians and property rights are problematic even from the standpoint of the Indians. The idea of owning land was foreign to them. How does one own land --- it's like owning the stars. No one owns it from their perspective. Indians were a transitory population following the food supply and clean water. Moreover, the Western view of property rights was to occupy the land profitably, to improve on it. This was essential form philosophers as different from Thomas Aquinas to David Hume. Frankly, any sophisticated and refined analysis of property rights can't depart from this definition in any significant measure. Everything else collapse unto itself. None of this justifies the idea that the buffalo should have been promiscuously slaughtered and pony herds randomly sacrificed or that a population that was unprovoking and essentially non-threatening should have been attacked by the U.S. military. Invoking Sherman and Sheridan is also unhelpful insofar as they were not moral philosophers or policy makers. They were warriors who did not fight with a gun in one hand and an ethic books in the other --- no matter how retrospectively we might be appalled with what happened. Regarding the battle itself his argument about Washita being about capturing noncombatants is clearly mistaken. Custer defeated the warriors at Washita --- he only used hostages after the battle was won and to make an escape from unknown villages that accumulated very quickly after killing Joel Elliot and 16 soldiers. The Indians at Washita did not surrender after Custer captured the women and children they just didn't attack. Custer's objective was to destroy the village and more specifically the warriors resolve to resist. Custer could have crossed the river at Ford B if he wanted --- but with Reno in retreat and Benteen nowhere is sight, Custer almost certainly used Ford B as a feint or a demonstration to draw the Indians toward him so that there wouldn't be a redux of Joel Elliott ten fold. He could not fight the entire village with 5 companies (that's why he didn't cross although he initially intended to) and hoped that Reno and Benteen could untie so that all 12 companies could combine never happened for reasons I will not go into in a post already too long. Finally, it's not true when he says that when two sets of people are put together that the result is that they prey upon each other. Not true in America --- despite some unhappy examples to the contrary, the United States is by far the most successful multicultural nation in the entire world ---- recognizing Americans not via bloodlines but ideals that resonate (though not always followed) in the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal .... ten years later the poem at the foot of Statue of Liberty as America being the beacon of the world (just 10 years after LBH) a refuge for the dispossessed, the persecuted ... the alienated is what is, and always has been, the essence of this great country, despite its moral errors that all other nations shared in although without embodying our virtues except later by imitation. That is about as far as a genocidal pretension as you can possible get and to argue otherwise is a disservice to facts and an unmitigated assault on the truth.
Custer Was Ignorant And Didn't Follow General Terry Orders And I'm So Glad Cause Terry Had Cannons And The Gattling Guns It Would Of Been A Massacre Not A Battle And Out Come Be Very Different
The United States did not pick on the native American. It has always been the policy to take what it wants. Look back when it wanted Canada, only bad luck and leadership prevented that. America had it's eye on Texas and supported the invasion by American settlers to Texas. Panama Canal, Cuba, the Philippines, etc. Trouble is it goes against what America stands for so the truth needs to be stretched to get public support.
There is literally no evidence supporting your Theory my friend the natives were brutally murdered raped diseased stoled off of dozens of times literally all kinds of evidence supporting my facts thats coming from someone who has native blood in me
@@brucecox5025 I never said the Indian nation wasn't subject to genocide. The elimination of the Indian nation was one or the results. The main cause was the United States wanted the land and resources. If no gold and the area was nothing but desert the Indians would not have been bothered. The same with other areas in the world. I also have Indian ancestors.
Grant did everything he could to work with the Indians & even offered them millions of dollars for the Black Hills & the Indians said no. Then they left the reservation & proceeded to murder the miners, surveyors & train track crews & settlers. Grant had no choice but to send the military to stop the killings & force the indians back onto the reservation. The problem is that the Indians believe that any land that they were on was theirs & of course they never paid a dime for any land that they called "theirs". The Indians did not sprout from the ground they migrated across the bearing straight from Asia, the are not native. The White man had just as much right to be here as the indians.
If The Government Ask To Sell Your Family And Give Up Your Kids And Wife Would You And If You Don't Sell By Certain Date We Will Kill You Would You Fight Or Give Up Your Family Thats What The Natives Believe It Was The Land Of There Ancestors And Family And Many Are Buried Or Died On Those Lands... I'm Glad They Never Sold Or Give Up Today The Black Hills Are Still Considered Sacred And Still Belong To The Sioux And Native People....
That’s not a ranger patch, the yellow outline around the patch and the big white letters across the top saying VOLUNTEER is the give away. If we could see the patch on his hat, we would see that it is a Friends of the Little Bighorn patch. Friends of the Little Bighorn is a 501(c) support organization founded under a Memorandum of Agreement with the Monument. Almost every Park and Monument has a similar organization. The Park Service uses them mainly to do things the Park Service can’t do because of policy, regulations, or lack of funding. So yeah your right, he isn’t Park Service, but he is officially associated with the Park Service. He is a Volunteer Interpreter wearing the uniform that all VIs at Little Bighorn wear. This year because of Covid restrictions and interpretation being deemed non-essential these guys are filling in the gap as best they can.
This presentation is horrible. I’ve been to the Custer Battlefield many times and really enjoyed the ranger talks. This one is abysmal by comparison. This guy is so overwhelmed by emotion that he isn’t interested in teaching history as much as he cares about being a social justice warrior. He literally comes to tears during this talk.
@@bobbilaval6171 there are several pre recorded ranger talks that are much better than this one. This talk isn’t intended to be factual. It’s intended to be an emotional one sided view. If he wants to give the Indian perspective , then why ignore the perspective of the Indians who fought for Custer. This battle was fought on Crow land and the Crows fought on the side of Custer. The Sioux had mistreated the Crow for generations. Constantly taking their land by force and pushing them further west. The land this village was on was Crow land, and the antelope being hunted was what the Crow depended on. The Sioux, Cheyenne and Arapaho treated the crow just as bad as the government treated them. Nobody likes to talk about that.
I disagree; what you have here is -admittedly, a very demonstrative- narrator. Yet... he is obviously very informed , and really cares about the entire sad 'episode' in western history . Yes, and it was a very shameful episode, -that of one group of people who beat down another because 'they are different'. And that's racism. Plain and simple.. So much for living "the Golden Rule" eh? NOT that the Sioux and Cheyenne didn't often commit similar depredations on other people as well -because they most certainly did. The real shame of it all however, is that ALL of these 18th century 'operators' were wrong. Every one of them a product, and a victim, of their time, and place. The narrator was focused on this one small window of time surrounding the Battle of Little Big Horn -as he should have been. A bit heavy on animation, perhaps, but he knows his history...and he provided many tidbits and details often missed by other narrators. And that's a good thing. He also included the important root causes of all the friction and strife leading up to the tragedy. I think he did a very informative job. Caring, and passion are not at all bad qualities to have. Qualities, that are sadly lacking with most people today. We should all strive to do better. Thank you for that sir.
@@joeblacke99 and the arikawa, and the shoshoni, and the mandan, dude is a living false dictonomy....just like AMERICAN POLITICS. It's not history, it's an ideology that discards it!!! Both sides simply confirm the other! There are many kumbaya hippies playing this tune, they have a false presumption of reality!
![NoCap - Yacht Party [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rm_lvDln8kE/mqdefault.jpg)
This is one of the greatest things I've seen on RUclips.
I really enjoyed this video. The enthusiasm and empathy shown by Ranger Southern is fantastic. Thank you.
Have also enjoyed the more detailed and descriptive videos by other Rangers but this one was a good contrast to those.
Thank you very much!
Ranger Southern is probably the best, most empathetic and knowledgeable presenter I've ever er seen. I loved this from start to finish and hope I might get to meet him one day.
Andrew, thank you so much, I really appreciate your feeling as you do.
@@tomsouthern8221 when I get the chance, to come over, I would be honoured to meet you. I read Stephen Ambroses' book about Custer & Crazy Horse and would love to have a chat and pick your brain!
@@andrewtaylor1671 Andrew, I'll look forward to the conversation:)
We were fortunate to have listened to Ranger Southern during our 2021 visit. He's an excellent educator!
Tom custer got his head Bashed in....they castrated him...they gutted him like a deer....and to top it all off...
They gouged both his eyes out and scalped him...
What a way to die 😱😱
It was all Custers fault 100%
For the deaths of 225 soldiers, horses. Doctors and civilians....i am still stunned
Fantastic presentation. I’ve seen countless talks on the battle and this certainly ranks among the best I’ve seen on the native perspective. Well done.
great lecture.....love the passion
I LOVE THIS CHANNEL !! ❤
Very good , thank you .
Very informative thank you . I hope to visit the site one day.
Thank you, Chris, and I hope you get to go there one day, too.
Thank you my friend. God bless you and all the fallen indians and us soldiers. Peace for the indian nations. Take care.
Jochen, thank you, brother.
Excellent
brilliant presentation
Well done ! thank you!
Thank you, Thomas!
Awsome man...u nock it outa the park dude!!
Kevin, thanks, brother......I love your comment!!!!!!
Great talk.
Very informative, great job
Thank you, sir!
Thank you for your courage.
Thank you Richard:)
@@tomsouthern8221 i imagine there has to be quite a few ghosts running around the battle area.
Custer was foolish for not waiting for terry and gibbons....foolish for turning down 2 companies of the 2nd....foolish for being in such a hurry for glory..
Using the native americans as stepping stones for progress was despicable and personally he got what he deserved...the white man has destroyed everything he has ever came in contact with...
@@ericstevens8660 Eric, thank you very much for your comment.......foolish is maybe a very compassionate 'take' on Custer's moves/behavior/decisions. Certainly, I agree with your assessments. Something I think it's easy to overlook is that one of the results of his 'foolishness' is that not an insignificant number of native warriors were killed as well, adding to the toll of unnecessary lives wasted. Now, as for ghosts, I just don't know.....
@@tomsouthern8221 and by the way my mother was 1/2 cherokee.....
THE U.S GOVERNMENT LIED AND CHEATED THE NATIVE AMERICANS...PEOPLE WANT TO OVERLOOK THAT
AND YOU CAN NEVER OVERLOOK THAT FACT....AND IT IS GURANTEED FACT
You are right, Eric.@@ericstevens8660
Well presented&informative👍
Dallas, thank you very much!
Tom we met last June 2022. I am the ancestor of little soldier don't know if you remember.
what happened at 11:30 min?
shit hot!!! i am still believing in common sense and a half decent memory chip of 'modern' homo-sapien today after viewing this....most poignant when understood and wow!! with that remarkable (yet strangely lonely and non significantof backdrops) - blow my fucking mind baby!...hats off 2 all associated with the production of this vid!
Darren, thank you!!! The [and I love how you describe it], 'strangely lonely' backdrop is actually looking back up to 'Last Stand Hill', where the battle essentially ended. If you ever get to go to Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument you can go right to this spot from the parking lot!
Hay bro good job 👏
Thanks, brother:)
There
There is a lot to unpack here. He gets a lot right, but some things wrong. Indians and property rights are problematic even from the standpoint of the Indians. The idea of owning land was foreign to them. How does one own land --- it's like owning the stars. No one owns it from their perspective. Indians were a transitory population following the food supply and clean water. Moreover, the Western view of property rights was to occupy the land profitably, to improve on it. This was essential form philosophers as different from Thomas Aquinas to David Hume. Frankly, any sophisticated and refined analysis of property rights can't depart from this definition in any significant measure. Everything else collapse unto itself. None of this justifies the idea that the buffalo should have been promiscuously slaughtered and pony herds randomly sacrificed or that a population that was unprovoking and essentially non-threatening should have been attacked by the U.S. military. Invoking Sherman and Sheridan is also unhelpful insofar as they were not moral philosophers or policy makers. They were warriors who did not fight with a gun in one hand and an ethic books in the other --- no matter how retrospectively we might be appalled with what happened. Regarding the battle itself his argument about Washita being about capturing noncombatants is clearly mistaken. Custer defeated the warriors at Washita --- he only used hostages after the battle was won and to make an escape from unknown villages that accumulated very quickly after killing Joel Elliot and 16 soldiers. The Indians at Washita did not surrender after Custer captured the women and children they just didn't attack. Custer's objective was to destroy the village and more specifically the warriors resolve to resist. Custer could have crossed the river at Ford B if he wanted --- but with Reno in retreat and Benteen nowhere is sight, Custer almost certainly used Ford B as a feint or a demonstration to draw the Indians toward him so that there wouldn't be a redux of Joel Elliott ten fold. He could not fight the entire village with 5 companies (that's why he didn't cross although he initially intended to) and hoped that Reno and Benteen could untie so that all 12 companies could combine never happened for reasons I will not go into in a post already too long. Finally, it's not true when he says that when two sets of people are put together that the result is that they prey upon each other. Not true in America --- despite some unhappy examples to the contrary, the United States is by far the most successful multicultural nation in the entire world ---- recognizing Americans not via bloodlines but ideals that resonate (though not always followed) in the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal .... ten years later the poem at the foot of Statue of Liberty as America being the beacon of the world (just 10 years after LBH) a refuge for the dispossessed, the persecuted ... the alienated is what is, and always has been, the essence of this great country, despite its moral errors that all other nations shared in although without embodying our virtues except later by imitation. That is about as far as a genocidal pretension as you can possible get and to argue otherwise is a disservice to facts and an unmitigated assault on the truth.
Phil Guarnieri Your long winded opinion has been duly noted...although not fully agreed with.
War chief (or harpist) kumbaya no red headed girl scalp here just protecting buffalo mantra.
Custer was betrayed.
Custer Was Ignorant And Didn't Follow General Terry Orders And I'm So Glad Cause Terry Had Cannons And The Gattling Guns It Would Of Been A Massacre Not A Battle And Out Come Be Very Different
I feel sorry for the Indians.
The United States did not pick on the native American. It has always been the policy to take what it wants. Look back when it wanted Canada, only bad luck and leadership prevented that. America had it's eye on Texas and supported the invasion by American settlers to Texas. Panama Canal, Cuba, the Philippines, etc. Trouble is it goes against what America stands for so the truth needs to be stretched to get public support.
There is literally no evidence supporting your Theory my friend the natives were brutally murdered raped diseased stoled off of dozens of times literally all kinds of evidence supporting my facts thats coming from someone who has native blood in me
@@brucecox5025 I never said the Indian nation wasn't subject to genocide. The elimination of the Indian nation was one or the results. The main cause was the United States wanted the land and resources. If no gold and the area was nothing but desert the Indians would not have been bothered. The same with other areas in the world. I also have Indian ancestors.
@@jeep146 well now we have a better understanding brother 🙏
Grant did everything he could to work with the Indians & even offered them millions of dollars for the Black Hills & the Indians said no. Then they left the reservation & proceeded to murder the miners, surveyors & train track crews & settlers. Grant had no choice but to send the military to stop the killings & force the indians back onto the reservation. The problem is that the Indians believe that any land that they were on was theirs & of course they never paid a dime for any land that they called "theirs". The Indians did not sprout from the ground they migrated across the bearing straight from Asia, the are not native. The White man had just as much right to be here as the indians.
If The Government Ask To Sell Your Family And Give Up Your Kids And Wife Would You And If You Don't Sell By Certain Date We Will Kill You Would You Fight Or Give Up Your Family Thats What The Natives Believe It Was The Land Of There Ancestors And Family And Many Are Buried Or Died On Those Lands... I'm Glad They Never Sold Or Give Up Today The Black Hills Are Still Considered Sacred And Still Belong To The Sioux And Native People....
Dip stick ,,all those people wanted to do was live life as they allways had.
@@Bullrider33Outdoors Thank you, William and Kevin:)
I don’t think this guy is even with Park Service. He bought a patch. This is really bad.
That’s not a ranger patch, the yellow outline around the patch and the big white letters across the top saying VOLUNTEER is the give away. If we could see the patch on his hat, we would see that it is a Friends of the Little Bighorn patch. Friends of the Little Bighorn is a 501(c) support organization founded under a Memorandum of Agreement with the Monument. Almost every Park and Monument has a similar organization. The Park Service uses them mainly to do things the Park Service can’t do because of policy, regulations, or lack of funding. So yeah your right, he isn’t Park Service, but he is officially associated with the Park Service. He is a Volunteer Interpreter wearing the uniform that all VIs at Little Bighorn wear. This year because of Covid restrictions and interpretation being deemed non-essential these guys are filling in the gap as best they can.
This presentation is horrible. I’ve been to the Custer Battlefield many times and really enjoyed the ranger talks. This one is abysmal by comparison. This guy is so overwhelmed by emotion that he isn’t interested in teaching history as much as he cares about being a social justice warrior. He literally comes to tears during this talk.
This year there isn’t any Ranger led talks because of covid restrictions. Friends of the Little Bighorn is filling in as best they can.
@@bobbilaval6171 there are several pre recorded ranger talks that are much better than this one. This talk isn’t intended to be factual. It’s intended to be an emotional one sided view.
If he wants to give the Indian perspective , then why ignore the perspective of the Indians who fought for Custer. This battle was fought on Crow land and the Crows fought on the side of Custer. The Sioux had mistreated the Crow for generations. Constantly taking their land by force and pushing them further west. The land this village was on was Crow land, and the antelope being hunted was what the Crow depended on. The Sioux, Cheyenne and Arapaho treated the crow just as bad as the government treated them. Nobody likes to talk about that.
I disagree; what you have here is -admittedly, a very demonstrative- narrator. Yet... he is obviously very informed , and really cares about the entire sad 'episode' in western history . Yes, and it was a very shameful episode, -that of one group of people who beat down another because 'they are different'. And that's racism. Plain and simple.. So much for living "the Golden Rule" eh? NOT that the Sioux and Cheyenne didn't often commit similar depredations on other people as well -because they most certainly did. The real shame of it all however, is that ALL of these 18th century 'operators' were wrong. Every one of them a product, and a victim, of their time, and place. The narrator was focused on this one small window of time surrounding the Battle of Little Big Horn -as he should have been. A bit heavy on animation, perhaps, but he knows his history...and he provided many tidbits and details often missed by other narrators. And that's a good thing. He also included the important root causes of all the friction and strife leading up to the tragedy.
I think he did a very informative job. Caring, and passion are not at all bad qualities to have. Qualities, that are sadly lacking with most people today. We should all strive to do better. Thank you for that sir.
@@jondough4227 Jon, I appreciate all that went into your comment, thanks for taking the time to do so!
@@joeblacke99 and the arikawa, and the shoshoni, and the mandan, dude is a living false dictonomy....just like AMERICAN POLITICS. It's not history, it's an ideology that discards it!!! Both sides simply confirm the other! There are many kumbaya hippies playing this tune, they have a false presumption of reality!