John Collier and the Indian New Deal Essay

At first, it came as a surprise to me that there are still many tribes who are trying to become federally recognized and colonize land again just like before to continue their culture and identity. By now, I would had imagined that the Native Americans are at peace and can continue their traditions. However, I have come to discover that Natives Americans are still fighting for social justice when they have existed here way before Christopher Columbus discovered their land and called them, Indians. The impact that these social justice issues has on me is that the issues in which Native Americans face cannot be entirely solved. It is an impossible action to fix.

In 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed John Collier Commissioner of Indian Affairs. Collier was a longtime advocate for native rights. Collier called for the Dawes Act to be repealed, insisting “that minority groups must be permitted cultural autonomy and political self-determination analogous to the legal rights of municipal or county governments.” As commissioner, Collier was the principle architect of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, otherwise known as the Indian New Deal. The IRA ended allotment and appropriate funds to purchase more land for native communities, establish a credit fund for improvements, and provide educational opportunities.

There has been much documentation on the plight of Native Americans throughout the beginnings of this nation. In spite of the attempts by the early government of the United States, the culture of many Native American tribes has survived and even flourished. The Dawes Severalty Act of 1887 is just one of many examples of how our government attempted to wipe out Native American culture. This paper will discuss the Dawes Act, particularly the time leading up to the act, the act itself, and finally its failure. By understanding the past failures in the treatment of a particular race of people, the government can learn how to protect the rights of all people, especially in a day and age of cultural diversity.

In 1886 during a speech in New York future President Teddy Roosevelt said; “I don't go so far as to think that the only good Indians are dead Indians, but I believe nine out of every ten are, and I shouldn't like to inquire too closely into the case of the tenth.” Though this was over 250 years after Jamestown and almost four decades after the Trail of Tears Teddy Roosevelt’s attitude toward Native Americans in the late 19th Century seems to have changed little from many of those men and women who first colonized America. After hundreds of years of violence, discrimination and forced assimilation the Native American culture remains endangered and continues to suffer from higher rates of poverty and social distress than any other minority

The encouragement of farming and redistribution of land posed challenges for indigenous people to express their culture. In 1881, Chester A. Arthur said in his message to the Congress that “[m]any of [Native Americans] realize the fact that their hunting days are over” and urged them to “engage at once in agricultural pursuits”. Arthur undermined indigenous culture by discouraging the way Native Americans used land. The Dawes Severalty Act of 1887 also overlooked indigenous culture by distributing land to individual Native Americans, which contradicted their custom of collective landholding; indigenous people had to begin farming as a result of receiving a third of land they originally had. This neglecting of a fundamental facet of indigenous culture disconnected Native

“I fought through the civil war and have seen men shot to pieces and slaughtered by thousands, but the Cherokee removal was the cruelest work I ever knew”, remarked a Georgia soldier who had participated in the removal of Indian Natives during the mid-1800’s. As a result of the Indian Removal Act, Indian natives have been perceived as mistreated and cheated throughout history. The Indian Removal Act was passed during the presidency of Andrew Jackson on May 28, 1830. This act granted authorization to the president to exchange unsettled lands west of Mississippi for Indian lands residing in state borders. Initially, the Indian Removal Act of 1830 was passed to expand the Southern United State for farmland and to aid the government in furthering our development as a nation. With this plan in mind, the government provided money to establish districts in the west of the Mississippi River for the Indian natives, ensured trade and exchange in those districts, allowed Native Indian tribes to be compensated for the cost of their removal and the improvements of their homesteads, and also pay one years’ worth subsistence to those Native Indians who relocated to the west.

The Indian Nations lost nearly half their land due to the Reconstruction treaties of 1866, which required the land lost to be used for resettlement of more Indian tribes. Indian populations within Indian Territory did not change much from 1865 to 1900, but the non- Indian populations soon outnumbered the Indian populations six to one (Baird and Goble, p 126). Lane – Pomeroy Plan pushed by the Kansas representatives, James Lane and Samuel Pomeroy, to pressure the Federal government to remove more Indians to Indian Territory (Baird and Goble, p 131). The Homesteading movement increased pressure to relocate Indians to Indian Territory to open up more lands in surrounding states for settlement. Upwards to 15,000 Indians were relocated to Indian Territory during the Second Trail of Tears (Baird and Goble, p 131). The increased diversity between Indian tribes and the growing non-Indian population created a tension for Indians to maintain control of Indian Territory, which grew worse as the territory edged closer to statehood.

When most people hear of Native Americans, they cannot help but think of elaborate headdresses, red skinned warriors, and lively dancing. Although these aspects of Native American culture are fascinating, more important is where they fare in our society 's past and present. Restrictive laws and acts such as the Indian Removal Act, the Indian Reorganization Act, Fort Laramie treaties, and the Trail of Tears forced Native Americans from their lands. When settlers and the American government saw the resistance of Native Americans to forced assimilation, they resorted to racial discrimination and relocation to reservations. This history of discrimination has fueled calls for the United States government to pay reparations and the return of Native Americans to their indigenous lands.

Many historians argue that the Indian Removal Act was not justified. “Members of Congress argued that Jackson violated the Constitution by refusing to enforce treaties that guaranteed Indian land rights.” (Cheathem, 452). In 1791, America signed a treaty with the Cherokees with the intent on “civilizing” them into the traditions of America. By the 1820’s, most Cherokees were “living in log cabins instead of houses made

“The Indian presence precipitated the formation of an American identity” (Axtell 992). Ostracized by numerous citizens of the United States today, this quote epitomizes Axtell’s beliefs of the Indians contributing to our society. Unfortunately, Native Americans’ roles in history are often categorized as insignificant or trivial, when in actuality the Indians contributed greatly to Colonial America, in ways the ordinary person would have never deliberated. James Axtell discusses these ways, as well as what Colonial America may have looked like without the Indians’ presence. Throughout his article, his thesis stands clear by his persistence of alteration the Native Americans had on our nation. James Axtell’s bias delightfully enhances his thesis, he provides a copious amount of evidence establishing how Native Americans contributed critically to the Colonial culture, and he considers America as exceptional – largely due to the Native Americans.

The Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, also known as the Wheeler Howard Act or the IRA, had a major impact on the everyday lives of Native American Tribes that were scattered across the United states. The Indian Reorganization Act provided the means and tools for tribes to form their own governments and constitutions. The IRA stopped the general allotment act that was put into effect by the Dawes of 1887. The Indian Reorganization Act granted the Secretary of Interior a tremendous amount of power over Native American affairs ranging from land, livestock, employment, government, etc. According to the reorganization plan, after a tribe or nation voted to accept the IRA, it would draw up a constitution and bylaws, submit it to a referendum,

A summary comparison of views regarding the Indian Removal Act of 1830, Was it an act of humanitarianism intended to help and save the Native American culture from the white settlers, as Robert V. Remini has argued? Or was his intent to destroy the tribal culture and to get rid of the Native Americans, as Anthony F.C Wallace has argued?

The Great Depression challenged all Americans, regardless of ethnicity. The Indian New Deal was spearheaded by John Collier, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Collier was an advocate for Indian communities and supported the repeal of the Dawes Act and policies such as forced assimilation. He believed in autonomy for tribes and advocated cultural pluralism, in which minority groups participate fully in the dominant society, yet maintain their cultural identities. Collier was instrumental in ending the loss of Indian land and

Talking Back to Civilization , edited by Frederick E. Hoxie, is a compilation of excerpts from speeches, articles, and texts written by various American Indian authors and scholars from the 1890s to the 1920s. As a whole, the pieces provide a rough testimony of the American Indian during a period when conflict over land and resources, cultural stereotypes, and national policies caused tensions between Native American Indians and Euro-American reformers. This paper will attempt to sum up the plight of the American Indian during this period in American history.

In 1830, congress passed The Indian Removal Act, which became a law 2 days later by President Andrew Jackson. The law was to reach a fairly, voluntarily, and peacefully agreement for the Indians to move. It didn’t permit the president to persuade them unwillingly to give up their land by using force. But, “President Jackson and his government