The question of the rights of Native Americans in the Americas was not a new one when the Indian Removal Act of 1830 was passed. European colonial empires mostly chose the route of oppression. The United States of America, a new nation lacking precedent, had to decide the path it would take regarding the Native American. After nearly a half-century of discussion (of varying intensity) of the issue, the pressure to make a decision reached its peak, and in 1830 the United States determined to relocate the Native Americans to advance white society at any cost necessary. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 and the actions associated with it were in gross violation of the Constitution and the founding principles of the United States. Benefitting solely
…show more content…
Although his desire for an agrarian nation was strong, Jefferson’s compassion for the Native Americans continued the pattern of his predecessors. In a letter to William Henry Harrison, then governor of Indiana, Jefferson wrote: “Our system is to live in perpetual peace with the Indians, to cultivate an affectionate attachment from them, by everything just and liberal which we can do for them within... reason, and by giving them effectual protection against wrongs from our own people.” Prior to Jackson’s presidency, a model of parity with the Native American had begun to form, yet he replaced it with a policy of unfair treatment. The Act itself was not only a turnaround of the accepted interaction with Native Americans, but also, in terms of enforcement, a monumental moral failure on the part of the United States. Howard Zinn neatly summarizes the quantifiable consequences of Indian Removal: “In 1820, 120,000 Indians lived east of the Mississippi. By 1844, fewer than 30,000 were left.” The simple repetition of a statistic, however, cannot completely convey the true human cost of 1830s Indian Removal. Zinn describes the individual physical and emotional struggles of being forced West suffered by the Native …show more content…
The American Revolution and the corresponding fight for freedom from British rule was perhaps the single greatest example of this opposition. The first Americans declared their independence from Britain to free themselves from a ruler that was foreign and distant. The English Parliament could not effectively ascertain the needs of Americans, yet, without representation, many attempts to extract value were made, leading to the Revolution. With this in mind, the parallels between British oppression of Americans and American oppression of Native Americans become clear. The inherent hypocrisy was that while the United States was founded in opposition to a distant and unrelateable hegemon, it became just that in relation to the Native Americans. A nation founded through the disposal of a distant oppressor ought to not turn into one
Although his desire for an agrarian nation was strong, Jefferson’s compassion for the Native Americans continued the pattern of his predecessors. In a letter to William Henry Harrison, then governor of Indiana, Jefferson wrote: “Our system is to live in perpetual peace with the Indians, to cultivate an affectionate attachment from them, by everything just and liberal which we can do for them within... reason, and by giving them effectual protection against wrongs from our own people.” Prior to Jackson’s presidency, a model of parity with the Native American had begun to form, yet he replaced it with a policy of unfair treatment. The Act itself was not only a turnaround of the accepted interaction with Native Americans, but also, in terms of enforcement, a monumental moral failure on the part of the United States. Howard Zinn neatly summarizes the quantifiable consequences of Indian Removal: “In 1820, 120,000 Indians lived east of the Mississippi. By 1844, fewer than 30,000 were left.” The simple repetition of a statistic, however, cannot completely convey the true human cost of 1830s Indian Removal. Zinn describes the individual physical and emotional struggles of being forced West suffered by the Native …show more content…
The American Revolution and the corresponding fight for freedom from British rule was perhaps the single greatest example of this opposition. The first Americans declared their independence from Britain to free themselves from a ruler that was foreign and distant. The English Parliament could not effectively ascertain the needs of Americans, yet, without representation, many attempts to extract value were made, leading to the Revolution. With this in mind, the parallels between British oppression of Americans and American oppression of Native Americans become clear. The inherent hypocrisy was that while the United States was founded in opposition to a distant and unrelateable hegemon, it became just that in relation to the Native Americans. A nation founded through the disposal of a distant oppressor ought to not turn into one