Cherokee Land Pros And Cons

The American government is going to take Cherokee land by any means possible, especially in Georgia. At this time, the United States is still expanding their territory and so they want the land that legally belongs to the Cherokee, even if it requires breaking laws. The main debate is over the Cherokee’s deciding which path offers the best chance of survival for the Cherokee in the early 1800’s: staying in their original territory or removal to the west. The best option, in regards to survival, is removal to the west. Some may disagree on the fact that the land legally belongs to the Cherokee but the best chance they have is to get away from the American government. The Cherokee would not thrive in a white society. If they stay they will be forced under white laws and their nation would have fallen into ruins. Elias Boudinot, a member of the Cherokee, says “We believe that our people cannot exist in the middle of a white population.”(Elias Boudinot) When he says this, he means that if the Cherokee are forced to live in a white society, their lives would completely change, and not for the better. It is clear that after controlling the Cherokee land, the power-hungry Americans will not allow the Cherokee to live how they want. The Cherokee are not accustomed to living the life of a white man and would subsequently not be able to adapt quickly …show more content…
This is reliable because it was compiled from various primary Cherokee sources. Corroboration was used between the two mandated sources to provide an accurate historical standpoint. The primary Cherokee sources are the most reliable because they are composed by those who were living amongst the suffering people.The Cherokee’s best path for survival is removal to the West because in doing so, they are away from the U.S government, so they can retain old laws and create new ones. They can also grow and prosper as a nation and not have to worry about being kicked out of their own