Native American Conflict Theories

There are many reasons that the Europeans and the Native Americans didn’t get along. In the works that I have examined and read throughout this module, the relationship amongst these two groups had not been a good one from the beginning. The main reason for conflict between the Europeans and the Native Americans, it seems, was the Europeans greed and desire for land and power.

It has been 186 years since the Indian Removal Act was passed by Congress during Andrew Jackson’s presidency. The way other people view Native Americans, particularly the Choctaws and Chickasaws, has changed drastically over time; but how has that changed the way Native Americans view themselves. I plan to explore what it meant to be Native American at the time of Indian Removal and compare it to what it is believed to mean to be Native American today. I plan to look at the cultural attitude that was in place at the time of removal and how the Native Americans reacted and compare it to modern day opinion.

Within the Native culture and the Colonial cultures in North America, there are confusion, misjudging, assumptions and conflicts among the two.

“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.

Andrew Jackson, The United States seventh president, was possibly one of the worst human beings to be president and treated the Native Indians horribly. He, was a bully and used his position to get acts and petitions like the Indian Removal Act passed, to help push Native Indians around so he could get his own way. The Indian Removal Act in and of itself seemingly doesn’t contain that much power, however it was all the power Jackson needed. The circumstances of Jackson’s character and the debates surrounding the Act also lend and interesting lens to examine what Jackson intentions were. When looking at Jackson and how he managed to relocate the Native it becomes substantially more integral to examine all the documents with a wide scope to see how he even managed the relocation of Natives.

Historically, the people of the United States and the Native tribes couldn’t live together, they fought because the two sides competed for superiority. The United States Government sought to put an end to the violent clashes with the American people and the Natives tribes. A resolution was the Indian Removal Act, with this, the United States became safer, wealthier, and stronger; And the Natives, which they saw as inferior, would leave. This Act wasn’t easy for the Native tribes, they left the land their ancestors had built them, and experienced a long road ahead of them to rebuild again.

The colonisation of North America by the Europeans became one of the most crucial points for the native North Americans. The differing experiences of contact between both cultures had overwhelmingly disastrous impacts on the normal way of life. From such contact arose the issue of land disputes, in turn resulting in massacres and frontier wars which could have otherwise been unnecessary. The factors stated above provide a suitable stimulus for a discussion in regards to the varying encounters of the Indigenous North Americans.

"Their bows and arrows were no match for the Europeans' firearms, and their bodies could not defend against the foreign diseases" (DiBacco, 1995).

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 prominent historians argue a clash between culture and religious philosophy was the primary cause of conflict between European settlers in North America and Native Americans. However, a closer analysis of American history suggests otherwise. While a clash in cultures and religious differences did exist, the European domination of Native Americans was primarily fueled by European economic motivations, a desire for valuable natural resources and a craving to expand the American colonial system. Due to this, the conflict was inevitable.

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

Typically American culture views the United States actions towards Native Americans as justified for many reasons. There are three major sociological perspectives, and all of them can be applied to the Native American conflict one way or another. The first of these perspectives is the functionalist perspective, and it’s simple when you just think about it from the outside. However, as go deeper realize that it’s not as

Native Americans have felt distress from societal and governmental interactions for hundreds of years. American Indian protests against these pressures date back to the colonial period. Broken treaties, removal policies, acculturation, and assimilation have scarred the indigenous societies of the United States. These policies and the continued oppression of the native communities produced an atmosphere of heightened tension. Governmental pressure for assimilation and their apparent aim to destroy cultures, communities, and identities through policies gave the native people a reason to fight. The unanticipated consequence was the subsequent creation of a pan-American Indian identity

Robert V. Remini argues that Andrew Jackson’s Indian Removal Act of 1830 was socially motivated by humanitarian impulses, and that Jackson’s actions where driven by the desire to save the culture and populace of the Native

For more than 300 years, since the days of Christopher Columbus and the Spanish Government, an attempt of genocide of the Native American Indian has existed. From mass brutal murders and destruction by Spanish and American armies, to self-annihilation through suicide, homicide, and alcohol induced deaths brought about because of failed internal colonialism and white racial framing. Early Explores used Indigenous inhabitants upon first arriving to the America’s to survive the New World and once they adapted, internal colonialism began with attempts to convert the Indians to Christianity, repressing their values and way of life, forcing them into slavery, and nearly exterminating an entire culture from existence.