Historical Overview of Native American-White American Relations

  At the time of European contact with the Native Americans, all Indian nations had the power of sovereignty, that is, the power to self-rule. There was interaction between the tribes that formed alliances and trade agreements. After the British settlements occurred, many Indian nations viewed and interacted with these settlements as another sovereign nation to be traded with. The British perspective, however, was different from the Native perspective. The British colonists attempted to purchase Indian lands. When such offers were refused, the colonists squatted on these territories. The British claimed that they could use the land more profitably than the Indians and threatened that the Indians would be forcibly moved if they did not leave on their own will. The British also forced assimilation on the Natives by “allowing” the Indians presence if they absorbed British culture and Christianity. Finally, if the British found the Indian resistance to their more subtle methods were too strong; they claimed the right to wage war. In the era of first contact, during the 15^th Century; The Doctrine of Discovery was practiced. This essentially was the practice of believing that the land in North American belonged to white, Catholic Europeans and the Native Americans only had the right to occupy it. After the U.S. won independence from England, the U.S. government claimed ownership of all Native American lands west of the Appalachian Mountains. The U.S., however passed a few laws defending the rights of Indian land and their civil rights. Such a law was the “Northwest Ordinance of 1787”. However, in three important court cases that placed Indian interests versus White American interests, the court rules against the Indians. These decisions were based on the philosophy of the Doctrine of Discovery, which essentially meant that the land never belonged to the Native Americans; it belonged to the Whites. These three court cases are: Johnson v. M’Intosh (1823), Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831) and Worcester v. Georgia (1832). Thus, the U.S. government slowly kept chipping away at the sovereignty of the Indians which they once claimed to support. The federal policies passed between the late 1700s and the late 1800s caused the majority of Indian lands to be dispossessed. By the beginning of the 20^th Century, Indian lands were limited to reservations. Initially, the Indians were overruled by force and strategy and in the 1800s, the Indians were overruled by political policy that was fueled by egocentric religious entitlement. In the 20^th Century, the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 granted U.S. citizenship and voting rights to all Native Americans. Although this law may seem just, it was likely set forth to further assimilate Indians into White American culture. The 1934 Indian Reorganization Act gave Indians the rights to live and worship in their traditional manner; allowed tribes to obtain federal loans; allowed appropriation of Indian lands; and promoted tribal self-government. About 25,000 Indians served in the U.S. armed forces in World War II (American Indian Issues, n.d.). After World War II, certain laws were passed to give Native Americans more rights. Perhaps the government felt there was less of a threat of an Indian revolt. In addition, the social trend in the 20^th century was that of taking steps towards equality.  In 1975, the Indian Self-Determination and Educational Assistance Act were passed. This law gave Indians the right to participate in the Government and in the education of the Native people. The Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 gave the tribal court jurisdiction over Indian children living on reservations. Since the 1960s Indian activists have strove to make positive changes politically and socially. One such activist group is the American Indian Movement (AIM). Subsequently, the ultimate goal for the Indian nations has been to gain greater sovereignty over tribal matters. Even though there is a long way to go, the tide now seems to be turning. The source of this article was a webpage that is maintained by Dr. Gayle Olson-Raymer of Humboldt State University in California. I think its purpose is to promote awareness of the current condition and history of Native Americans. Its goal is most likely to help the Indian culture obtain justice. The quote “Tribes are no longer on the defensive- they are on the offensive” (American Indian Issues, n.d.), although not blatantly supportive of the Native cause, shows a sense of impending justice with this statement. This article was likely chosen for this course because of the accurate historical summary. The laws passed and pivotal court cases mentioned above were examples of this. The information I have read in this article has not changed my opinion; it has given me a clear historical overview of the progression of Indian-settler relations. It has shown how the Indians were taken over, systematically oppressed until the turning point in the mid 20^th Century. Overall, it gives me some hope that there will be justice for the Native Americans one day.


Resouces:  (N.A.). (n.d.). Historical Overview. American Indian Issues. Humboldt State University. Retrieved March 3, 2016 from:http://americanindiantah.com/history/nar_19thcenturyrelations.html