In Cheyenne River American Indian Joseph Brings Plenty’s article Save Wounded Knee (2013) asserts that American Indian Reservations all over the country are in danger of becoming nothing but a real-estate transaction, leaving behind all of the rich culture that once thrived over the Oglala land. Plenty supports his claim with the use of pathos. He goes to explain the horrors of bloodshed of the soldiers of the United States Army’s Seventh Cavalry in the winter of 1890, explaining that the soldiers open fired with their machine guns on to the Lakota. He adds that 150-300 Lakota people died as a result of this massacre. Brings Plenty’s purpose is to explain why the Wounded Knee land should be saved from being sold off.
The Long, Bitter Trail: Andrew Jackson and the Indians written by Anthony F.C. Wallace is the story of the Native Americans being forced to move west in America in the 19th century. Wallace begins by introducing the desire for Native American land in the U.S. and ends with the aftermath of the Removal Policy and the legacy that still lives today. The book is organized into four chapters; The Changing Worlds of the Native Americans, The Conflict over Federal Indian Policy, The Removal Act, and The Trail of Tears.
In “Wrong assumptions,” Art Cullen, an editor of The Storm Lake Times, disputed Gov. Terry Branstad’s strategy to resolve the problems of polluted landscapes and contaminated water in Des Moines, Iowa. As a citizen of Iowa, Cullen is concern about the effects the controversy might influence not only his daily life but also the residents and community. Despite Cullen commending Branstad’s efforts to solving this conflict, Cullen points out that there were flaws in Branstad’s plan by stating in the article that “We have a few problems with the assumptions (Cullen, para 2).” In addition, Cullen suggested that the foremost solution would be using the Clean Water Act as the main point to how they will resolve their complications in the most fashionable
In the article “Abuse of Power: Andrew Jackson and the Indian Removal Act of 1830,” the author, Alfred A. Cave, writes about President Jackson’s abuse of power. He is arguing that Jackson abused his power when he was enforcing the Indian Removal Act. He argues that Jackson broke guarantees he made to the Indians. He uses a political methodology and uses secondary sources.
Paul Galley an accomplished environmentalist enters the controversial debate about Hydrofracking in New York, with his article “Hydrofracking: A bad Bet for the Environment and the Economy” published in the Huffington Post on January 05, 2012. Galley states “Net-Net, fracking is simply bad bet” fracking poses serious risk to New Yorkers. Galley, president of Hudson Riverkeeper has worked for over twenty-five years to protect the environment and support local communities, as a non-profit, public official and educator. This piece continues his devotion to protection of the Hudson River, and the drinking water supply of New Yorkers. Galley effectively convinces his audience through his use of appeals to pathos and logos that hydrofracking will have negative impacts on New Yorkers.
1. General William Tecumseh Sherman said to "Run them down, starve them out". 2. Richard H. Pratt created the Indian "re-education policy. 3.
The Mississippi’s water is provided by the Atchafalaya, in fact it is said that if the Old River Control System had not been built then the Atchafalaya would have already broken through to the Mississippi River and taken over. Because the Mississippi is such a useful body of water it is important that the Corps do not allow this to happen. Transportation is highly dependable on the Mississippi;
How does the text fit into historical movements? Well in Andrew Jackson Speech to Congress on Indian Removal the story stated “ During the fall and winter of 1838 and 1839, the cherokees were forcibly moved west by the United States government”. I think that Andrew Jackson created his own revolution there when he got all the Indians out the south because the way he felt about the indians was very stereotypically. Once Congress passed the action he then knew his task was completed. This is something I’m not muddle on, this is something I am certain about.
During the early to mid 1800s, the colonization of “Indians” and subordination of “women’s rights in the American society,” was very essential to those in authority. They were perceived as a mere means to an end by promises of a better life in exchange for “land and work.” Although locals complied, those in offices took advantage by using antagonistic tactics in achieving wealth, power, and ownership. However, these actions lead to “The First Seminole War, The Monroe Doctrine, Andrew Jackson’s leadership, The Indian Removal Act, The California Gold Rush, The Seneca Falls Convention, and the Birth of the Republican Party.” Although some Americans have been perceived as heroes, their actions have said otherwise about their character.
The Indians believed that since they were a part of the United States they should be entitled to protection under its laws, but since this was not working they were left with another choice, and decided to take action against the Indian Removal Act and Georgia. Being very cultured and knowledgeable in the ways of the white man and their laws they decided to use Georgia’s strategy of law against in a “fight fire with fire” sort of sense to join the Cherokee Nation in suing the state of Georgia in a case that would eventually go all the way to the Supreme Court. The Indians had also decided to insult to injury by hiring the former attorney general under Adams and Monroe, William Wirt. Jackson had showed his disdain of this action by commenting “The course of Wirt has truly been wicked” (Remini 242). This comment also shows the betrayal Jackson felt knowing that a fellow American was hindering the inevitable expansion of the United States and removal of the Indians.
Andrew Jackson was the first person to be elected as a member of the senate and later elected president of the United States. He was a man of many contradictions who had little formal education. Jackson claimed he was a “people’s” champion, yet he excluded many, especially the Indians, from the country’s democracy calling them “savages”. (Schwartz, Lecture 19). With the exclusion of the Indians followed Jackson being a forceful proponent of Indian Removal.
Andrew Jackson, in his “Address on Indian Removal” speech, argues that his Act, which relocates Native Americans in the South East, is ultimately beneficial for both the United States and the Indians. To slowly degrade the opinions congressmen have on the Indians and conjure sympathetic emotions, Jackson uses derogatory words which further diminish the little respect congressmen have for the Native Americans. For example, almost every paragraph contains the word “savage” which connotes incivility, barbarism, and stupidity. The use of “savage” allows Jackson to imply that America is better than the “red men” and should decide their fate in order to protect them. Furthermore, towards the end of the second paragraph Jackson uses words like “retard,”
As Kitson (2009) notes, "the hydropower projects, in many ways, represented a new form of colonization, as indigenous peoples were excluded from the decision-making process and bore the brunt of the social and environmental impacts of the dams" (p. 630). This lack of consultation and collaboration with Native American communities during the planning and approval of hydropower projects has been a significant challenge in mitigating their impacts. In fact, as Deloria and Lytle (2011) explain, "the United States government, which had a trust responsibility to protect tribal lands and resources, had approved the dam without consulting the tribal nations that would be most affected by it" (p.
Throughout the book we discover the life of a young man who "learned to fear and hate Indians from an early age," Jackson always remembered his childhood. When the Native Americans joined with the British to wage war against the Americans it was clear that "In his mind, and the minds of most frontiersman, the Indians were just used by powers like Britian to gain an advantage over the American colonists. Remini thinks Jackson is at fault for his desire to speed up the process of moving Natives. " He lacked patience, and by his pressure to move things along quickly he caused unspeakable cruelties to innocent people who deserved better from a nation that prided itself on its commitment to justice and equality."
This source has significant value to historians but, like any other source, has its limitations. Andrew Jackson’s motivation to remove the Cherokee from their homeland originated from an avid persona to benefit the Americans. The speech analyzes Jackson’s motivation, and specific plans to remove the Cherokee. In consideration of the speech being written in 1830, the audience can learn how Jackson was rather harsh towards the natives in order to benefit himself and others. This is evident with Andrew Jackson’s actions and his presumptions of the Natives.
