English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

In the 19th century, the incessant Westward expansion of the United States incrementally compelled large numbers of Native Americans to resettle further west, often by force, almost always reluctantly. Under President Andrew Jackson, Congress passed the Indian Removal Act of 1830, which authorized the President to conduct treaties to exchange Native American land east of the Mississippi River for lands west of the river. As many as 100,000 Native Americans eventually relocated in the West as a result of this Indian Removal policy. In theory, relocation was supposed to be voluntary (and many Native Americans did remain in the East), but in practice great pressure was put on Native American leaders to sign removal treaties. Arguably the most egregious violation of the stated intention of the removal policy was the Treaty of New Echota, which was signed by a dissident faction of Cherokees, but not the elected leadership. The treaty was brutally enforced by President Martin Van Buren, which resulted in the deaths of an estimated 4,000 Cherokees (mostly from disease) on the Trail of Tears.

2006-11-07 15:46:36 · 10 answers · asked by howdoyou k 2 in Politics & Government Immigration

10 answers

Surley the point of the question is not to keep going over the past, but to query the right of the US to deny to others what it has asserted for itself, that is freedom of movement to other countries.

It is ridiculous to assert that there were no laws, therefore everything was legal. All societies have rules of behaviour. The settlers simply declared their own rights over the land, and increasingly denied any rights to the Natives as they got stronger.

Of course the past can't be undone, and the Indians were not pure and innocent; and today's Mexicans are in part descended from similar settlers.

But we could try to accept that there is nothing new about migration, and that immigrants are motivated by the same human desires that inspired the Pilgrim Fathers.

2006-11-07 21:03:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

The very first people were settlers as there were no immigration laws to enforce. The Natives welcomed the new people. The expansion West by the US caused a lot of heartache, death, and destruction. However, even before the US expanded west, the Natives were subjected to the white man and his ways... just check into history and find out about the Spanish looking for gold, not a pleasant experience for the Native.

Then if you go far back enough, even the Natives were settlers from possibly over the land from Russia and down into Alaska and outward from there. So ALL of us in the Americas could be considered immigrants or settlers. But it is now time to move forward, the past cannot be changed and none of us alive today caused the problems. However, we can work together to insure that those problems do not happen again. For instance, Native Americans have played key roles during many of our wars. They are extremely patriotic and the US owes them a debt of gratitude for their service.

2006-11-07 19:47:44 · answer #2 · answered by msfyrebyrd 4 · 0 0

It is legal. The indian people were not nations, and the U.S. is a nation was then and is now. Them not being a nation, they do not have the right to claim that lan, thus making the treaties they signed with the U.S. invalid. Its a mean trick, but th U.S. had to keep indians settled down, and when the indians figured all this out they had to be forced down by military.

2006-11-07 16:01:27 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I've read alot of stories about those days, and from most accounts the Indians attacked the white settlers not the other way around. It was these attacks that lead to the Indian removal act. One can debate their right to defend "their" lands, except that most indians did not believe or understand the notion of land "ownership".

2006-11-07 15:51:24 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No laws then, so they were "settlers", immigrants, not "Illegal" since there were NO laws, yet.

You do realize this is the 21st century, 2006. You must try to bring yourself out of the past. We now have laws that say you must come into our country legally or face deportation. Those laws were passed by the very people who built this country.

2006-11-07 15:49:10 · answer #5 · answered by rebelflag4usa 2 · 0 2

Neither, because "legal" is a word that comes from the fact that there are in fact "laws." If there aren't any laws, you're just an immigrant. There were no laws, so they were neither legal or illegal.

2006-11-08 12:59:30 · answer #6 · answered by Leroy Johnson 5 · 0 0

it was obviously inhumane and brutal. And no, not all native tribes were offensive. Many peaceful tribes were also treated in the same harsh manner.

And come on, lets be honest. The "settlers" were probably racist.

2006-11-07 18:33:32 · answer #7 · answered by MSM 1 · 0 1

Every country has these laws. Immigrants are best to come here legally then no one can question it. Their lack of language skills mainly hurts them.When they come here illegally it hurts everyone including themselves.

2006-11-07 19:46:49 · answer #8 · answered by primamaria04 5 · 0 0

Blah, Blah, Blah !!! The native Americans of this country are just that. "AMERICANS". Are you a member of the President Chavez fan club? If so, go be by his side traitor.

2006-11-07 19:27:20 · answer #9 · answered by White Knight 3 · 0 1

Were your parents siblings, or just first cousins?

2006-11-08 00:35:12 · answer #10 · answered by Yak Rider 4 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers