People's History Of The US By Zinn Essay

PAGES
2
WORDS
642
Cite

¶ … People's History of the U.S. By Zinn The responses to the Indian removal campaign were as diverse as the tribes themselves. Some fought, some surrendered, and within some tribes, they did both. For one tribe, the Creek, there were those that chose to fight Andrew Jackson's troops and protect their land. In some cases, this involved aggressive attacks against U.S. encampments. Others within the Creek Nation chose to cooperate with U.S. troops, lured by the promise of friendly relations if they should comply. As such, they joined Jackson's forces in battle against their fellow tribe members. They were rewarded, after the U.S. massacre, with seizure of their land. Some Native American groups chose to sign treaties with the government and believed that they would be relocated to areas that were more secure. This was rarely true, and as a result indigenous people were shuttled from one place to another, often far from their home territory. Compromises...

...

In general, the history of indigenous-white relations is a story of oppression and mistreatment. While a lot of violence occurred on both sides of the several Indian-U.S. government wars, there is little question that the government were the aggressors in their relentless removal campaign. Before this removal campaign, however, white settlers had to rely upon the Natives' knowledge of the land upon which they were now making a home. This reliance created peace. But once the itch of capitalism set in and the use of land for mass farming was necessary, relations changed. Speckled Snake felt, in short, that the white man was a father, who had been nourished by the Indians' kindness and now became large and powerful. He went on to say that the "father" only wanted his "sons" to stay away now, while he swallowed up the resources of the land. In a certain sense, he is correct. The white man…

Sources Used in Documents:

2. In general, the history of indigenous-white relations is a story of oppression and mistreatment. While a lot of violence occurred on both sides of the several Indian-U.S. government wars, there is little question that the government were the aggressors in their relentless removal campaign. Before this removal campaign, however, white settlers had to rely upon the Natives' knowledge of the land upon which they were now making a home. This reliance created peace. But once the itch of capitalism set in and the use of land for mass farming was necessary, relations changed. Speckled Snake felt, in short, that the white man was a father, who had been nourished by the Indians' kindness and now became large and powerful. He went on to say that the "father" only wanted his "sons" to stay away now, while he swallowed up the resources of the land. In a certain sense, he is correct. The white man did become great on the back of the Indian, but had grown more powerful and was using that power to move the Indian further and further afield.

3. The negotiations between the U.S. And the First Nations were more or less one-sided in favor of the government. Some of the treaties may have seemed kind, but on closer look changed the culture and fabric of the Indian lifestyle, eroding their power. One example is Jackson's 1814 treaty which created individual ownership of land, as the Indians had shared a more communal attitude toward the Earth and this created competition. Other treaties were simply ways to make Indian removal official and did not provide for any advantages to the Native people. They gave over land to the government upon threat of violence if the Natives resisted. Even more of an insult than the general unfairness of the treaties was the fact that the government did not always abide by them.

4. American foreign policy is marked by imperialism and paternalism and these are the same attitudes that were exhibited toward the Indians. Because of raw greed, the government chose to subject the Native people to actions that were not in their best interest (in this case, removal from their land). In cases when they resisted, the government declared war. Often, this was couched in a claim of self-defense. This happens even today, when the U.S.'s business interests (particularly in the hunt for oil) lead them to foreign nations to try to conquer foreign people. Beyond this, the government generally has an interest in the assimilation of foreign people into the American way of life. Democracy, capitalism, and materialism are promoted. The Natives who thrived did so only because they chose to go into business, to run their own farms, and to govern themselves to the extent they were allowed. These actions all ran counter to their old lifestyle.


Cite this Document:

"People's History Of The US By Zinn" (2011, April 02) Retrieved April 20, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/people-history-of-the-us-by-zinn-120242

"People's History Of The US By Zinn" 02 April 2011. Web.20 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/people-history-of-the-us-by-zinn-120242>

"People's History Of The US By Zinn", 02 April 2011, Accessed.20 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/people-history-of-the-us-by-zinn-120242

Related Documents

History As Art The past is not real, nor tangible. We cannot revisit the past as we are forever placed here, in the eternal now to navigate our existence. History provides our imaginations with concepts and ideas that allow us to seemingly describe the past. It must be remembered and heavily emphasized that history is in fact an art. It is not a science and it has no capability of being

Zinn Why does Zinn disagree with the interpretation that history books say the U.S. constitution creates a neutral level playing fields where one can prove their worth & any inequality in wealth is not due to unfair rules but to unequal abilities. Be specific & give examples. Zinn's portrayal of pre-revolutionary America differs substantially from the more widely accepted accounts of history. Zinn showed how many of the founding fathers of this

While most history textbooks tell stories from the perspective of the wealthy and powerful, Zinn shows how things happened from the perspective of the powerless. For example, in Chapter 3: "Persons of Mean and Vile Condition," the author focuses on poor whites, blacks, and Native Americans, and their "unfair treatment by the wealthier classes," (50). Zinn also demonstrates throughout a People's History of the United States how racism and

Zinn's a People's History of the U.S. Should the U.S. apologize for slavery and its legacy? Who benefits if the U.S. doesn't apologize? It is difficult to determine the answer to such a polarizing question. Some argue that slavery has been a form of life since the beginning of mankind and that if the African-American community is apologized to, then the Jewish people who were slaves should get apologies too. They argue

If any of them was found without a token he was either murdered or had his hands severed to die more slowly in front of his community to serve as a warning against defying Columbus's orders. Perhaps the greatest irony in these atrocities is that the Spaniards (and the other European explorers) all sailed flying the flags of Christianity and that they referred to themselves as "civilized" and the native

gamut of subjects related to American history. The underlying themes of the course included race, class, gender, and power. Books such as Lies My Teacher Told Me and Zinn's People's History of the United States present a more rounded overview and analysis of historical events than what is typically offered in public school textbooks or in popular media. Modern resources ranging from newspaper and magazine articles to film and