18 February 2017 Words carry enormous weight and power. They have been used throughout history to take away agency and power away from people. They have been used to dehumanize, to oppress and to subjugate. This colonizing power of words is encapsulated by the use of the ‘N-word’ by the colonizer of the Americas. What was once a harmless word was turned into a racial slur used to dehumanize and ridicule a group of people becauseof their race. Words can be violent. They can open wounds that are still healing and they can inflict great pain when used to refer to an entire group of people. It is important to understand the history behind such language. It is also important to understand how our identities …show more content…
Indeed many of the early leaders of the US have expressed such sentiments in their writings. In his autobiography Benjamin Franklin wrote ‘“If it be the design of Providence to extirpate these Savages in order to make room for cultivators of the Earth, it seems not improbable that rum may be the appointed means.’ In the 1823 case Johnson v. M’Intosh Chief Justice John Marshall officially incorporated the Discovery Doctrine into US law. The Discovery Doctrine was the idea that because Christian European colonizers had took control of the lands now under the US after ‘discovering’ them, the US state had sole claim to the lands that belonged to the Indigenous peoples while the Indigenous nations only had the right to occupancy. The language that John Marshall used in this case was the following;
“The tribes of Indians inhabiting this country were fierce savages, whose occupations was war, and whose subsistence was drawn chiefly from the forest… That law which regulates, and ought to regulate in general, the relations between the conqueror and conquered was incapable of application to a people under such circumstances… Discovery gave an exclusive right to extinguish the Indian title of occupancy, either by purchase or by conquest.”
In ‘The Winning of the West Vol. 2’, Theodore Roosevelt, 26th President of the United States wrote;
“The settler and
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
The debate over the legality of sovereignty and acquired lands from the native Americans, specifically the Cherokee, has long been debated. The issues involved have included treaties, land sold, and the right of the Government to physically enforce their rules on Indian land "sovereignty". This paper will examine the strategy used by the Federal Governments, the State Governments as well as those of the Cherokee Indians. The three-way relationship as well as the issues will examine how the interpretation of the Constitution changed society prior to the year of 1840.
Nations of dependent Indians, against their will, under color of law, are driven from their homes into the wilderness. You cannot explain it; you cannot reason it away.... Our friends will view this measure with sorrow, and our enemies alone
As a rule, the Native Americans are perhaps the most overlooked sector of the population of the colonies. This war completely varied their knowledge of their land and its value. “We know our lands have now become more valuable,” (Document B). No more would they be fooled by
The crown depicted the Indians as intractable, only to find that settlers resorted to violence against the Indians precisely because of their supposed intractability. Indigenous peoples, for their part, fought among themselves and against advancing settlers. All groups sought to “territorialize” their societies to secure themselves against competitors. In the final chapters, Langfur extends and qualifies this complicated story. In the later eighteenth century, settler pressures grew, stressing crown policies and threatening indigenous social orders, until all-out war broke out after 1808. For Langfur this was no Manichean battle between European invaders and indigenous victims. To a dominant narrative of violence he juxtaposes a “parallel history of cooperation” among Europeans, Africans, and Indians, and he concludes that war itself must be understood in terms of “the relationship of cooperative enemies.”
But [she] didn’t ‘hear’ it until it was said by a small pair of lips that had already learned it could be a way to humiliate [her]” (Naylor, 411). This not only supports the fact that the boy had been taught or heard this word by someone older like a parent, but it is also sad that a nine-year-old had to be taught that such a nasty, ugly word was created to make her and people like her feel ashamed and embarrassed to be black, or that are worth less as human beings, which is absolutely false. That is why slurs are created though, to make groups of people feel less “human”. This essay explored the most infamous slur against the black community. The fact that slurs like this are prevalent in today's society is extremely upsetting and wrong. There are plenty of racial slurs that are so casually used today, it makes one's stomach ache in distress. Ableist slurs are even less reprimanded, a high school student walking through the hall will hear the r-word too many times to count during the course of a day. Just as commonly used are homophobic and anti-LGBT slurs. A high school student will hear the f-slur and the q-slur plenty of times, and even more will “that’s so gay” or “you’re so gay” be whipped from the mouth of students without a second thought. It’s disheartening.
During the end of the nineteenth century, the United States had formed policies which reduced land allotted to Native Americans. By enforcing these laws as well as Anglo-American ideals, the United States compromised indigenous people’s culture and ability to thrive in its society.
The existence of the Indian nations as distinct independent communities within the limits of the United States seems to be drawing to a close.... You are aware that our Brethren, the Choctaws, Chickasaws and Creeks of the South have severally disposed of their country to the United States and that a portion of our own Tribe have also emigrated West of the Mississippi--but that the largest portion of our Nation still remain firmly upon our ancient domain....Our position there may be compared to a solitary tree in an open space, where all the forest trees around have been prostrated by a furious
Growing up in the west, Jackson “fought Indians as a militia officer” (Tindall 331) and considered the removal of Indians his primary presidential priority (Tindall 333). In his statement regarding the Indian Removal Act of 1830, he argues that removal is necessary as it “puts an end to all possible danger of collision” between Indian tribes and the American slaves and reasons that removing Indians could potential lead to Indians “cast[ing] off their savage habits and becom[ing]n interesting, civilized, and Christian community” (Jackson). The basis of this argument relies entirely on whether the Indians were a savage and uncivilized community that posed a direct threat to the American government. Primarily, Dale Van Every, an American writer, argues that the “forces that led to removal did not come ... from the poor white frontiersmen who were the neighbors of the Indians. They came from industrialization … and the greed of businessmen” (Zinn 136). The tribes, therefore, did not pose threats to neighboring Americans but were rather simply an obstacle to the rapidly expanding American. Secondarily, many Native American tribes had actually become increasingly civilized (or increasingly American) by the passing of the act. A good example of a Native American tribe whose advancements were discredited by biased
This brief essay considers the struggle of Indians and the U.S. government in the 1830s to resolve conflicts over land acquisition and the scope and nature of Indian rights under treaties.
The word nigger is crucial to understanding our history. Some argue that the word is always attributed with the nation’s past blunders such as discrimination and slavery and for that reason it should be banned. For example, the article ____ states that the word “has long conjured images of lynchings, oppression, bigotry, and discrimination” (OBAMA). Although this is true, these images are necessary in describing our country’s background. Without the use of this word to do so, it would be impossible to understand the extent of prejudice that this country had present
However, the historical significance of the word nigger is deeply rooted in American History. For example, Kennedy’s book presents historical examples of nigger in its most pejorative context: “Michael Jordan was suspended from school for hitting a white girl who called him a nigger” and “Tiger Woods was tied up in kindergarten by his older schoolmates who called him nigger” (Kennedy 22). It is precisely because of this history that many African Americans are in favor of banning the word from the English language. Although the historical significance of the word nigger often triggers deep-rooted hostility in the African Americans, it has also progressively evolved into a term of endearment in the modern day African American culture. Consequently, a fine line exists between past and present definitions of the word nigger that opens up the possibility of misinterpretation and the potential of further damage.
“The Word “Nigga” Is Only for Slaves and Sambos” was written by Rob Nelson and first published in a university newspaper in North Carolina. Later on, the article was so meaningful that it was re-published in the academic journal, the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education. In the article “The Word “Nigga” is only for Slaves and Sambos”, Rob Nelson uses ethos, logos, and especially skillful pathos appeals based on the history of slavery and the illustration about the future of African American, to prove why he thinks the “N-word” is not acceptable. By using ethical argument and those clever appeals, Rob Nelson definitely persuades his young African American audience.
Looking throughout the overwhelming events the American Revolution had on everyone involved, allows us to examine how the governments’ policies toward the Indians changed over time. It shows how the policy changes effected the Indians as well as the Americans’, their attitudes toward each other as the American’s pushed westward and the Indians resisted. Then the actions on both sides which lead up to the final removal of all Indians to west of the Mississippi in 1830’s.
Between 1790 and 1920 it was a tough time for the Indians. During that period Native Americans were forced to convert to the European-American Culture. Their whole life changed, the way of living, religion, and especially their children’s future. It was wrong of Americans to convert natives into a different society that they saw fit and not letting them express their own culture and treating them as an unworthy society.
Certain words and phrases are often used by communities to collectively define the group of people they belong to. The n-word in particular has had a long history with a load of heavy baggage that has ties with slavery, oppression, and racial inequality. In the past century or so, African-Americans have been turning this word around to define represent them in a more positive manner, simply through accepting the term as their own. Gloria Naylor highlights the usage of the word by black people to represent a cultural identity. She explains how “they transformed ‘nigger’ to signify the varied and complex human