2006-12-07 03:32:57 · 16 answers · asked by green_womble 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
No they stole it from the Native Americans who lived there...
2006-12-07 03:36:53 · answer #1 · answered by Jo_Diva 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
In some cases yes, there is a story about Manhattan being traded for $24 of beads and trinkets.
But I have also heard that some Native Americans didn't have a sense that land could be owned by people. I have no idea how true this is, but thats whats out there.
Of course in most cases, they simply moved in and settled, whether they were wanted or not. Its another case of winner gets to take what they want and write the history too.
Coming from Europe as they did, where the opportunity to own land was very limited, it must have seemed an endless country to them with endless land to settle in.
2006-12-07 11:40:33 · answer #2 · answered by justa 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. Land was taken by mere possession and kept by force. In order to "protect" the europeans, Native Americans were forced to relocate to reservations (remember the Trail of Tears), and were allotted land that the europeans had deemed worthless. The Bureau of Indian affairs managed the assets of the Native Americans, their mismanagement is currently the subject of a pending lawsuit filed by the Federally Recognized tribes to recover over 2 billion dollars in lost property, assets, and monies that were mismanaged by the Federal government.
2006-12-07 11:50:32 · answer #3 · answered by dream_searcher_tx 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
in some cases they bought the land, not that it mattered because the Indians didn't understand the concept of ownership.
now that that's out of the way, the Indians were NOT the gentle men of the plains the public schools tell our kids about. the Apache, Huron,and others were warriors who ambushed their neighbors and stole their supplies while raping and pillaging just like the white is being accused of now. if it wasn't Europeans, it would have been Mexicans, or conquistadors, or Saddam Husein, or vikings or martians or somebody else. the Indians way of thinking was not sustainable.
2006-12-07 14:09:27 · answer #4 · answered by mastenawba 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
In some cases, such as New York. In other cases, the natives agreed to share the land without charging the settlers; an in other instances, the settlers took it by violence.
2006-12-07 12:47:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Didn't we buy Manhattan for $38 worth of beads! Can you name a country that has not conquered or been conquered? Funny how some mention the facts that whites held slaves and conquered? Did native Americans not war with other tribes, hold slaves, rape and kill, destroy one area and move on to the next? Do some reading!
2006-12-07 11:41:10 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes there were some purchases and shrewd trades but, most of the land was just occupied and annexed by the Govt. In essence, invaded and stolen.
2006-12-07 11:43:20 · answer #7 · answered by Ricky J. 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Are you asking about the 19th century migration? There were millions of square miles up for grabs with the homesteaders act. Didn't you see Far and Away with that celebrity couple Tom Cruise and what's her name?
2006-12-07 11:38:15 · answer #8 · answered by sixgun 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yep
Manhattan cost them $25 and some paste jewelery.
2006-12-07 12:48:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No they did what every other white man did all over the world. raped and killed women and children and made slaves of the men. Then just started to live on the land.
2006-12-07 11:41:52 · answer #10 · answered by conor210782 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I don't think anyone had a title on the land.
2006-12-07 11:48:38 · answer #11 · answered by ? 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋