Indian Removal Dbq Essay

Looking back on history, there is no doubt that the Indian Removal Act, leading to the “Trail of Tears” was a harsh unnecessary decision that costed many people their lives. Although is it easy to make that assumption today, in 1830 when the Act was being debated and thought up of, it was thought to help the country and the Indians both thrive more than they would without the Act. In 1830 the relocation of the Indians in the Indian Act removal was justified by the appeal and benefits to both Indians and Americans and the lack of common practices between the two. In Jackson’s words, he very well argues that the Indians relocating is engaging to not only America but the Indians as well. In this he claims that it benefits America by “advancing rapidly in population, wealth, and power”. These three ideas give Jackson’s argument a good backbone for him to ,therefore, claim

When arguing against the Act they claim that the Indians are “getting better” and “there is still room for improvement”. When stating their arguments there is no firm course of action that they argue. Instead they seem to contradict themselves by mentioning the uncommon beliefs between the two cultures and then claiming the Indians can improve. They do this in many cases with the womens attire, polygamy, and education. They again do not speak of the Indians as a whole yet as a few examples of Indians who have changed. When disputing data they claim that certain amounts of churches obtain Indians who are willing to change their culture. Although this is good for the country it does not speak of all the Indians and therefore you can not assume that all Indians are willing to change as other have done. Their argument is that the Indians are improving, yet there is no promise from the Indians or forced by the Americans that the Indians indeed will change for what they see as the