Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
The Cherokee removal from the Eastern part to the West lands near the Mississippi River is often considered a deplorable period in American history. Tracing the Jackson’s unjust police against the Indian Era and selfish and mercantile plans of the white Americans, moral and ethical principles were simply withdrawn for achieving the benefits of invaders and ignoring the rights of indigenous people. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the Cherokee nation became a serious political and economical issue that could have generated a rigid opposition to the government. On the one hand, the disputes centered on the power of state and national governments, as well as the advent of Gold Rush period, would have produced much more serious losses to the Cherokees if they had stayed on their native lands. On the other hand, the Native Americans could have united their forces to raise movements against President Jackson’s exterminating policy. Taking into account, the inborn leadership skill of the Cherokees, as well as their awareness of their cultural and social responsibilities, the Cherokee should have reunited their powers to confront the Invaders and stand for their rights.
The Cherokee nation had a well-structured and organized society with strong moral and ethical principles. Their affiliation to the clans enabled the population to keep their community in harmony. This structure significantly differed from those represented by the white Americans whose mentality and cultural traditions did not have deep historical and ideological roots. To support this idea, Purdue and Green write, “Leadership in a Cherokee community, in fact, rest with a person who inspire followers rather than someone born to office” (1). Hence, the arrival of Europeans introduced imbalance to the Cherokee community due to the diseases that the newcomers brought to the new land. Nevertheless, the native population was positively disposed to the Europeans believing that they would strike the balance between the native and non-native population. Their strong and deep philosophy and experience in protecting their communities and fighting for their clans can be a strong platform for resisting the Indian Act in 1830.
Aside from personal qualities and extreme affiliation to their culture, the Cherokee nation had enough grounds and potential to resist the discriminative policy of the American government initiated in 1830. Specifically, the Europeans explained that the failure of the “educational” program that would “civilize” the Cherokee nation was closely associated with racial rather than with cultural issues. As a result, the removal policy toward the Eastern lands was viewed as the most reasonable and beneficial for the government. Ignorance of the rights of the indigenous people and “new pattern of racist thought reject the idea that Indians could ever be fully “civilized” and…one cannot change through education characteristics determined by race” (Perdue and Green 15). In this respect, greater awareness of the human rights and stronger adherence to the equality principles for treating population could have helped Cherokee people exterminate the discriminative policy of Jackson’s government.
Despite the strong emphasis that the European placed on the problem of cultural and social accommodation, the actual reason for the exterminating policy was disguised within the problem of land. According to Purdue and Green, extremely enhanced demand for the Indian land, along with the idea of racial rather than cultural “deficiency” of the Cherokee population generated the atmosphere of great tension (16). However, neither of these reasons was grounded enough for invading the lands and exterminating the indigenous population. Certainly, the fact that the Cherokee was not an independent nation and did not have rights to sell the lands, the rights of equality and freedom were far more significant under these circumstances.
However, focusing on the Cherokee’s constitution of 1927, the native inhabitants could have redirected the course of history and have taken advantage of the governmental manipulations. At this point, John Ross, the main leader of the anti-governmental movement could have refocused the attention of the Native Americans on the actual purpose of the government to encourage the Cherokee to oppose the removal of the population. Alternatively, the loss of connection to the land could mean loss of cultural and social affiliation to the indigenous community, which was not typical of the Indian Nation. Hence, the government’s intention to conquer the lands and assimilate the indigenous population was not guided by genuine purposes to improve the life of the indigenous people, but by aspiration to encroach the lands that would bring financial benefits.
In order to defense the removal policy, Jackson heavily relied on the necessity to solve the debate with Georgia in terms of their sovereign rights over the Cherokees. To make the policy more transparent, the newly elected President considered the removal as the best “to protect Indian from the deleterious effects of exposure to American frontier settlers” (Perdue and Green 18-19). Such a narrow interpretation of the constitution did not satisfy either of the parties and generated even more confrontation between the Europeans and the Indian nation. At this point, the Cherokee would won the confrontation, but for the small number of people wishing to coalesce. Hence, John Ross should have foreseen the possibility of concluding the Treaty of New Echota because the government relied heavily on the lands. Lack of awareness and disguised policy of the Jackson policy added up to the defeat of the Cherokee nation.
Certainly, the unfair policy of the Jackson administration would have exterminated the population of the Eastern land if they had remained under the strong oppression of the government. In the pursuit of fertile lands and desire to dominate of the indigenous land triggered the government re-interpret the existing laws and ignore all the treaties favoring the Cherokee rights. Because not of all Cherokees opposed the movement, the lands were occupied by the European invaders. In this respect, a multi-facet overview of all circumstances, approaches, and governmental strategies provides a better picture of alternative possibilities to preserve the native land for the Cherokee’s population.
With regard to the above presented arguments and evidence, the Cherokee people had enough potential to maintain their power on the Eastern lands and preserve their cultural affiliation. To prove the ideas, specific emphasis should be placed on evaluating the Cherokee’s societal structure and their strong relation to the clan structure. Greater interest in personal rights would hamper the encroachment and withdraw the policy of “civilizing” the Indian nation. Jackson administration could resist the strength of collaborative efforts of the indigenous if they had united their powers. Despite the significant losses of the Cherokee population, the Eastern lands could have been preserved if the population had introduced a straightforward and consistent policy against the governmental manipulation, which would be the best way for preserving the nation.
Works Cited
Perdue, Theda, and Michael D. Green. The Cherokee Removal: A Brief History with Documents. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2005. Print.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.