ipl-logo

Analysis Of Andrew Jackson's Speech On American Indian Removal

710 Words3 Pages

One being forced out of the only home they ever knew, only for the gain of their oppressors is extremely harsh. In 1830, president Andrew Jackson formulated a cruel plan to do this, announcing his goals to the nation. He believed that all natives were savages, and worth less than white men. Jackson’s speech on American Indian removal possesses several flaws, as he neglects the fact that the Indians were there first, fails to empathize with the native population as he plans to forcibly remove them, and is morally incorrect in his judgement of the Native Americans.

Essentially, it is important to note that all white “civilized” people were immigrants into America, and the people who were truly here first were the American Indians. Considering this, one must believe that they should have rights to the land over the American States’ rule. Jackson states that, “And is it supposed that the wandering savage has a stronger attachment to his home than the settled, civilized Christian?” This is unfair because the Natives are people too, and Jackson …show more content…

Although the natives lead different lives than the stereotypical Christian American citizen, it does not give the United States government the right to strip them of their homeland and resources. The aborigines have a vast set of lore that many of are unaware of. It is wrong of Jackson to assume that one must be Christian in order to be civilized. Jackson claims that the natives, upon settling westward, will have access to countless benefits provided by the government. However, disregarding the natives’ religion, culture, and way of life does exactly the opposite. Uprooting them in this way creates a vicious cycle of oppression; this would not only be just a temporary solution, but also would harbor future problems to

Show More
Related
170 Words | 1 Pages

The Indian Removal Act authorized Jackson to give the Indians land west of the Mississippi in exchange for their land in the states, but could not force them to leave. He violated and broke commitments that he even negotiated with them. He tried to bribe the Indians and even threatened some of them. Alfred Cave organizes his article thematically and is trying to prove

Read More
1071 Words | 5 Pages

His views regarding the Indians were distorted by his absolute loathe towards them, creating a toxic environment for the Natives. Due to the constant requests and suggestions to relocate the Indians west of the Mississippi River, a dry place seemingly uninhabitable for farm life, Andrew passed the “Indian Removal Act” which remunerated the “Five Civilized Tribes,” the Creek, Chickasaw, Seminole, Cherokee, and Choctaw to abandon their lands and move west of the Mississippi. Although this may sound fair, paying the tribes to migrate someplace else, the lands that they were given was much too unsuitable for the sustainability of crops and the conditions they had to endure during their journey west were absolutely sickening. Some tribes accepted the policy, whereas the Cherokee was defiant against the unethical policies, stating that the policy did not apply to them as they were a separate and independent nation with their own individual laws. Jackson, being the tyrant he is, ignores the Cherokees’ statements and continues to enforce the policy, even though the Supreme Court had already settled on a final ruling.

Read More
1434 Words | 6 Pages

In the article by Anthony F. C. Wallace, “The Hunger for Indian Land in Andrew Jackson’s America,” the reasons for America's need for Indian land is discussed. The purpose of this article is to explain the Indian removal that occurred under Andrew Jackson’s presidency. The thesis of this essay states that Americans kicked the Natives off of their land to fulfill a selfish desire to expand the cotton industry.           The first point Wallace uses to support his thesis is how Jackson’s financial interest in the land affected the removal of Natives.

Read More
178 Words | 1 Pages

Indian Removal policy The Indian removal act is the act called for the government to negotiate treaties that would make the Native Americans to relocate west. Andrew Jackson had supported a law of moving all the Native Americans to the West of the Mississippi. Andrew Jackson thought that the government had the right to regulate where Native Americans Were allowed to live. To solve this problem Andrew Jackson asked the Congress to make a Law that would make Native Americans either move west or to submit to state laws.(Jackson's Removal Policy) Andrew Jackson grew up really hating the Indians and grew up having the skull of Indians.

Read More
738 Words | 3 Pages

In President Jackson’s message to Congress, he wrote of wanting to remove the Indian’s from their land for the purpose of increasing the land of the Whites. He wrote this letter as if he was doing the Native’s a favor in paying for them to move and giving them land to live on. It was as if the Indian’s were given the opportunity of a lifetime, and they should take this opportunity for their own good. President Jackson wrote: Can it be cruel in this Government

Read More
480 Words | 2 Pages

Although this act was harsh, to some it overshadows the good that Jackson did. In the source: Letter from Elias Boudinot, Cherokee Indian, Elias says, “Removal, then, is the only remedy, the only practical remedy. Our people may finally rise from their very ashes, to become prosperous and happy, and a credit to our race.” The quote is from a Cherokee Indian agreeing that the removal might be the best thing for the Native Americans. Andrew Jackson is a hero because he worked to bring more democracy to the

Read More
468 Words | 2 Pages

Throughout the early 19th century, changing politics and an evolving society in America impacted all classes of people, specifically the white working class. Jacksonian Democratic ideals was influenced by the working class, and the white working class benefited from President Jackson’s decisions. During the year of Jackson’s presidential election, the Workies, which consisted of working men, wanted to protect individuals who earned money from arduous labor, but failed to make payments punctually. Jacksonian Democrats realized the Workies language was valuable in the fact that beliefs of the Workies group echoed through Jackson’s party.

Read More
1302 Words | 6 Pages

This is undemocratic because they had the right as a sovereign nation to their own property Before the Trail of Tears, the Native Americans were “[taken] to enormous stockades built for [them] out in the open, which were growing very cold as November arrived. [The Native Americans] had only the clothes on [their] backs when captured, and the prison camps offered no barrier to the biting elements other than their perimeter walls and [their] own bodies (13 Dwyer). They were treated as vermin, given very little and no care shown as to whether or not they would die. Jackson is shown to be very undemocratic because he did not take into account that these are living people. He instead, acted as though they were nothing but a problem to be dealt with in his eyes.

Read More
1003 Words | 5 Pages

Native Americans at the time were quite violent towards white settlers, invading and burning down their settlers. “He claimed, after the invasion, that his action stemmed in no way from a desire to extend the territorial limits of the United States but was instead a preventative measure against further Indian violence against whites.” This quote tells us that Jackson himself said that he was in no way trying to expand the United States, All of his actions in Florida of invading Indian villages was simply to protect U.S. citizens against violence from Native Americans. Even though some of Jackson’s actions were questionable at first, they were all for the good of the American

Read More
865 Words | 4 Pages

Andrew Jackson’s sentiment towards the Native Americans was certainly not a kind one. Manifest destiny was a popular belief among Americans, including Jackson, and he would go to the extent of forcing Native Americans out of their homes to reach their “ordained goal”. He believed in the expansion of southern slavery which is why he pushed for removing the Indians west of the Mississippi, which makes it the more disgraceful. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 said that it will allow American government to offer in-state territories to the Indian’s for their western land. This wasn’t the case when the U.S. went in and drove the Indians out by force.

Read More
1737 Words | 7 Pages

He believed Jackson needed a reality check. The Indians were there first, it was their land. He force the Natives to move away from their homeland, with brute force. He believes Jackson could not justify his actions just because it was for America’s benefit. He also stated Jackson refused to listen to many people, and he refused to let Indians live.

Read More
784 Words | 4 Pages

The government tried to force assimilation on Native Americans as well as an attempt to “kill the indian, save the man.” These ideas and policies are similar to those popular during the presidency of Andrew Jackson. Jackson developed a sense of ‘paternalism’ towards indians and believed he was saving them by forcing them to live out west of the Mississippi river away from white culture. The difference was that Jackson did not believe in assimilation of indians into white culture, he believed they should be kept separate. With the help of the Federal government removing indians from land west of the Mississippi, Americans were

Read More
903 Words | 4 Pages

Many people, including some historians, portray Andrew Jackson as an “Indian Hater.” Jackson frequently fought against Native Americans, but why did he fight these people? In Pruchas article she talked about many different ways Jackson fought against Native Americans and what his reasoning was. In 1808, Jackson had believed there were a group of settlers that were killed by the creeks. He believed that Great Britain ordered the creeks to come over and kill the settlers.

Read More
265 Words | 2 Pages

There is a saying in Africa, “Don’t make decisions about us, without us!” Andrew Jackson did not talk to the Indians before he made a bad decision which cost the lives of 4,000 Indians and dislocated 46,000 others. At the same time, the settlers weren’t happy with the Indian Removal Act process, it was too slow for them. “The policy was enacted with remarkable speed, but not fast enough to satisfy whites in the South and Southwest.” (p.331) Jackson's Democracy was always cast for the benefit of white men, it didn't even include white

Read More
374 Words | 2 Pages

He achieved this by purposely neglecting the true horrors behind the removal of the Indians. Andrew Jackson portrayed the Native Americans as less than equal. The purpose of Jackson's speech was to justify his motives in moving the natives and to also convince congress that it was both beneficial to the Natives and the Americans. The source has value because it gives some insight into Jackson’s effort behind his motivation. Based on his purpose of speech, it can be learned that the relationship between the Natives and Americans was only beneficial for certain necessities.

Read More

More about Analysis Of Andrew Jackson's Speech On American Indian Removal

Related Topics

Open Document