The white settlers were not justified in taking native American land. Before the white settlers came along native American tribes were scattered across what we call the united states today. The white settlers had no right to claim the land as their own and violently force their ways onto the native Americans. The lecture states “Indians were forced to walk hundreds of miles to lands across the Mississippi river. On the journey many died of hunger, exhaustion, and disease” to show an example of what the white settlers brought upon the native Americans. The lecture also states “treaties with the Indians were continuously broken because of land fever assisted by the homestead act the gold rush in California and the Mexican American war” and it
Cronon raises the question of the belief or disbelief of the Indian’s rights to the land. The Europeans believed the way Indians used the land was unacceptable seeing as how the Indians wasted the natural resources the land had. However, Indians didn’t waste the natural resources and wealth of the land but instead used it differently, which the Europeans failed to see. The political and economical life of the Indians needed to be known to grasp the use of the land, “Personal good could be replaced, and their accumulation made little sense for ecological reasons of mobility,” (Cronon, 62).
In the fourth chapter titled “Native Reactions to the invasion of America” in the book, “Beyond 1492: Encounters in Colonial North America, the author James Axtell shares with us an essay he wrote and shared at a conference at Vanderbilt University. Historical accounts are followed beginning at the arrival of explorers and settlers until the 1700’s with various Native tribes in North America. Axtell’s goal is to educate us on the multitude of ways Native Americas reacted during various periods of colonization, and the various methods that the Native Americans perished. Axtell also educates us in his essay on the ways that Native Americans tried to ultimately prevent their extinction at any cost. Overall, the authors intent is to educate us
One can list the boons of western expansion — more opportunities for innovation; trains; more land for the colonists; increased trade opportunities, in both products and transportation, but none of these benefitted natives. In fact, they harmed Amerinds, pushing them to the brink of total extinction, and seemed to soil everything in nature that they had nurtured. "My heart feels like bursting; I feel sorry," Santana, the Chief of the Kiowa, said of the changes wrought by the foreigners (document G). They had every right and more to feel hurt, as Westward Expansion and the outstandingly poor treatment of natives contributed the largest, but most under-discussed, genocides in the Common Era, if not history. At least 100 million North or South American natives were killed by white or European settlers, according to the Smithsonian, whether from battle, pestilence, dislodging, or some other tribulation. There was really no way for the natives to win. This persecution lasted several decades. "In 1862, President Abraham Lincoln signed into effect the Homestead Act, which gave 160 acres west of the Mississippi, to any man who was willing to farm it," Northern Arizona University reported. Even the beloved sixteenth president contributed to the auctioning off of land that was not the US's to give away. Through increments of 160 acres, the natives' possession of land was chipped away,
Unfortunately, this great relationship that was built between the natives and the colonists of mutual respect and gain was coming to a screeching halt. In the start of the 1830s, the United States government began to realize it’s newfound strength and stability. It was decided that the nation had new and growing needs and aspirations, one of these being the idea of “Manifest Destiny”. Its continuous growth in population began to require much more resources and ultimately, land. The government started off as simply bargaining and persuading the Indian tribes to push west from their homeland. The Indians began to disagree and peacefully object and fight back. The United States government then felt they had no other option but to use force. In Indian Removal Act was signed by Andrew Jackson on May 18, 1830. This ultimately resulted in the relocation of the Eastern tribes out west, even as far as to the edge of the Great Plains. A copy of this act is laid out for you in the book, Th...
...convince us Indians that our removal was necessary and beneficial. In my eyes, the agreement only benefited Andrew Jackson. It is apparent that Jackson neglected to realize how the Indian Removal act would affect us Indians. When is the government justified in forcibly removing people from the land they occupy? If you were a Native American, how would you have respond to Jackson? These questions need to be taken into consideration when determining whether or not Jackson was justified. After carefully examining these questions and considering both the pros and cons of this act, I’m sure you would agree that the removal of Native Americans was not justified under the administration of Andrew Jackson. Jackson was not able to see the damaging consequences of the Indian removal act because of his restricted perspective.
These advocates expected the Native Americans to leave their lands voluntarily. With the promise for land west of the Mississippi there would be no limits to the tribe’s choice of government, assistance, relocation and protection. Jefferson believed that the Indians’ failures were theirs to own and they needed to depend on themselves alone to become numerous and great people. He encouraged them to take the new land and cultivate it, build a home, and leave it to his children. He was failing to tell them that they really didn’t have much of a choice. Boudinot determined that many of the Cherokee people would leave their land if the true state of their condition was made known to them. They were left with only two real alternatives, one to live under the white man’s law or to be forcibly removed to another country. However some American’s worried about the future of the Native Americans. John Ross’s letter to president Jackson believed it was the white man’s duty to relieve the Indians from their suffering. This could only be accomplished by allowing the Native Americans to obtain their land in Georgia under the rights and privileges as free men. Nevertheless no great lands good for farming would be given to the Native Americans and Jackson would sign the Indian removal act. This act would allow the government to exchange fertile land for land in the west, where they would forcibly relocate the Indian
With hope that they could even out an agreement with the Government during the progressive era Indian continued to practice their religious beliefs and peacefully protest while waiting for their propositions to be respected. During Roosevelt’s presidency, a tribe leader who went by as No Shirt traveled to the capital to confront them about the mistreatment government had been doing to his people. Roosevelt refused to see him but instead wrote a letter implying his philosophical theory on the approach the natives should take “if the red people would prosper, they must follow the mode of life which has made the white people so strong, and that is only right that the white people should show the red people what to do and how to live right”.1 Roosevelt continued to dismiss his policies with the Indians and encouraged them to just conform into the white’s life style. The destruction of their acres of land kept being taken over by the whites, which also meant the destruction of their cultural backgrounds. Natives attempted to strain from the white’s ideology of living, they continued to attempt with the idea of making acts with the government to protect their land however they never seemed successfully. As their land later became white’s new territory, Indians were “forced to accept an ‘agreement’” by complying to change their approach on life style.2 Oklahoma was one of last places Natives had still identity of their own, it wasn’t shortly after that they were taken over and “broken by whites”, the union at the time didn’t see the destruction of Indian tribes as a “product of broken promises but as a triumph for American civilization”.3 The anger and disrespect that Native tribes felt has yet been forgotten, white supremacy was growing during the time of their invasion and the governments corruption only aid their ego doing absolutely nothing for the Indians.
The whites took the Native American children with the purpose to assimilate the children to the white culture. They would force all the native children to choose white names, cut their hair like a white man or woman, and gave them a strict schedule to follow along, they were also not allowed to speak their native language or else they would be punished heavily. Even though this action was for a good purpose, the white people ended up killing many of the Native children, which broke the promise they had made to the children’s parents back at the reservation. These events had occurred because the whites had the power to control the children to do, and follow the ways of the whites.
History repeated itself, and the colonists took over the Native Americans land, forcefully. On page 37 paragraph 1 of The American Pageant it states, “In 1707 the Savannah Indians decided to end their alliance with the Carolinians and to migrate to the backcountry of Maryland and Pennsylvania, where a new colony founded by Quakers under William Penn promised better relations between whites and Indian. But the Carolinians determined to ‘thin’ the Savannahs before they could depart. A series of bloody raids all but annihilated the Indian tribes of coastal Carolina by 1710.” Here the cruelty of Jamestown is magnified, because this particular group of Indians simply wanted to leave and live a better life, but the Carolinians couldn’t allow it and instead reacted but attacking them for no real reason, truly showing the things learned in Jamestown. From the same textbook page 39 paragraph 9 stated, “These colonies were in some degree expansionary. ‘Soil butchery’ by excessive tobacco growing drove settlers westward, and the long, lazy rivers invited penetration of the continent-and continuing confrontation with Native Americans.” The colonies have progressed a lot since Jamestown, the main drive is still money though the people are also focused on obtaining more land, which will lead to more money, but things are still the same as well, in the sense that the colonists will do anything to get the land they
The Indians thought of land very differently to the white man. The land was sacred, there was no ownership, and it was created by the great spirit. They could not sell their land to others, whereas the white people could fence off the land which belonged to them, and sell it freely to whoever they wanted. The Europeans didn't think that the Indians were using the land properly, so in their eyes, they were doing a good favour to the earth. To the Indians, the land was more valuable than the money that the white man had brought with him, even though it didn't belong to them.
“Pontiac, chief of the Ottawa Indians, is trying to take Detroit, and the neighboring Indian groups join in and help. They have become disenchanted with the French, plus the French aren’t really there anymore. They hate the English. They want their land back. Starting to succeed and the British negotiate and reach a settlement. In order to keep Pontiac happy, no settlement allowed in the Frontier region. An imaginary line is drawn down the Appalachian Mountains, colonist cannot cross it. This doesn’t last long, in 1768 & 1770, Colonists work with the Iroquois and Cherokee and succeed in pushing back the line and send in surveyors. Colonists begin to settle. So, despite this line, colonists push west anyway” (Griffin, PP4, 9/16/15). During the Revolutionary War, “Native Americans fought for both sides, but mostly for the British, thought they stood to be treated more fairly by British than colonists. Those that fought against the colonists were specifically targeted to be destroyed during battles. There were no Native American representatives at the treaty meetings at the end of the war” (Griffin, PP8, 9/21/15). Even the Native American’s thought of their women, because they believed “an American victory would have tragic consequences: their social roles would be dramatically changed and their power within their communities diminished” (Berkin,
The movement westward during the late 1800’s created new tensions among already strained relations with current Native American inhabitants. Their lands, which were guaranteed to them via treaty with the United States, were now beginning to be intruded upon by the massive influx of people migrating from the east. This intrusion was not taken too kindly, as Native American lands had already been significantly reduced due to previous westward conquest. Growing resentment for the federal government’s Reservation movement could be felt among the native population. One Kiowa chief’s thoughts on this matter summarize the general feeling of the native populace. “All the land south of the Arkansas belongs to the Kiowas and Comanches, and I don’t want to give away any of it” (Edwards, 203). His words, “I don’t want to give away any of it”, seemed to a mantra among the Native Americans, and this thought would resound among them as the mounting tensions reached breaking point.
The generalization that, “The decision of the Jackson administration to remove the Cherokee Indians to lands west of the Mississippi River in the 1830s was more a reformulation of the national policy that had been in effect since the 1790s than a change in that policy,” is valid. Ever since the American people arrived at the New World they have continually driven the Native Americans out of their native lands. Many people wanted to contribute to this removal of the Cherokees and their society. Knox proposed a “civilization” of the Indians. President Monroe continued Knox’s plan by developing ways to rid of the Indians, claiming it would be beneficial to all. Andrew Jackson ultimately fulfilled the plan. First of all, the map [Document A] indicates the relationship between time, land, and policies, which affected the Indians. The Indian Tribes have been forced to give up their land as early as the 1720s. Between the years of 1721 and 1785, the Colonial and Confederation treaties forced the Indians to give up huge portions of their land. During Washington's, Monroe's, and Jefferson's administration, more and more Indian land was being commandeered by the colonists. The Washington administration signed the Treaty of Holston and other supplements between the time periods of 1791 until 1798 that made the Native Americans give up more of their homeland land. The administrations during the 1790's to the 1830's had gradually acquired more and more land from the Cherokee Indians. Jackson followed that precedent by the acquisition of more Cherokee lands. In later years, those speaking on behalf of the United States government believed that teaching the Indians how to live a more civilized life would only benefit them. Rather than only thinking of benefiting the Indians, we were also trying to benefit ourselves. We were looking to acquire the Indians’ land. In a letter to George Washington, Knox says we should first is to destroy the Indians with an army, and the second is to make peace with them. The Indian Trade and Intercourse Act of 1793 began to put Knox’s plan into effect. The federal government’s promise of supplying the Indians with animals, agricultural tool...
The best way for the United States to make up for injustices is to return land to Native American group . .today i will be talking about how the indian should get their land back rather than money.one reason why i think they should get land rather than money is that they will probably wouldnt use it for useful things. Native american were here first and if they had their land they will have the natural resources to survive.