The Indian Removal Act was Used by the U.S. Government to Commit Ethnic Cleansing
The Indian Removal Act stated that the president could force tribes to relocate in exchange for a “grant” of western territory where white settlers did not yet live [...]
On May 28, 1830, President Andrew Jackson signed the Indian Removal Act into law. The United States government had always used treaties as a ruse to expel Native nations from their ancestral lands, but this major federal legislation was the first that, on its face, soundly rejected tribal sovereignty and Native rights.
The Indian Removal Act stated that the president could force tribes to relocate in exchange for a “grant” of western territory where white settlers did not yet live. (No matter that the western land might already be occupied by other tribes.) This became carte blanche for the U.S. government to commit ethnic cleansing.
Prior to the act’s passage, Jackson championed the idea of not only relocating Native nations, but utterly exterminating them. Nicknamed “the Indian Fighter,” Jackson led some of the bloodiest slaughters of Indigenous people in the Americas before he became president. At the Battle of Horseshoe Bend, he and his men massacred between 850-1,000 Red Sticks, insurgent Creek (Muscogee) tribesmen who carried red ceremonial war clubs. Jackson’s soldiers tallied the dead by cutting off their noses. It was also reported that they flayed flesh from the dead and used it to make bridle reins for their horses. And some 300 Creek women and children were taken prisoner. Due to Jackson’s grisly campaign, only four months later the Creeks signed the Treaty of Fort Jackson, a document that forced them to relinquish 23 million acres of their territory and waterways. But that still wasn’t enough to satisfy Jackson.
The Indian Removal Act promised that the government would negotiate with Native nations for land exchanges and that some tribes would receive payment. There was one big problem with this law, however; “the Five Civilized Tribes” that lived in the southeast — the Chickasaw, Choctaw, Seminole, Cherokee, and Creek — did not want to leave. Why would they? The land that came to be called Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Missouri, Kentucky, North Carolina, and Tennessee had been tended and cared for by their ancestors for millennia. It was their home.
But President Jackson wasn’t concerned with respecting Native sovereignty. If tribes wouldn’t bargain with his administration and leave “the Cotton Kingdom” peacefully, he would relocate them by force.
Jackson had public support too. States were passing their own laws to steal Native lands. In Worcesterv.Georgia (1832), the U.S. Supreme Court went so far as to uphold treaty law, affirmed tribal sovereignty, and objected to Georgia’s attempt to redraw tribal boundaries. But after the ruling, Jackson mocked the authority of the highest court in the land and let it be known that the the decision would not be enforced. The president, whose oath of office was to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, set out to do the opposite.
Upon the signing of the Indian Removal Act, there were approximately 125,000 Indigenous people living in the southeastern United States. Over 46,000 of them were forced to abandon everything they knew and walk to Oklahoma, at times under the point of a gun.
The Choctaw (Chahta) were the first to be taken, after the U.S. Army threatened to invade their lands. In the winter of 1831, some were bound in chains and marched double file to Oklahoma “Indian Territory.” They had no food or supplies, and thousands of Choctaw men, women, and children died along the way.
In 1836, the Creeks who had survived the Red Stick slaughter were driven out of their homelands. About 15,000 Creeks began the journey; some 3,500 of them did not live to see Oklahoma.
In 1837, the Chickasaw signed the Treaty of Doaksville, but were forcibly removed thereafter, told they must resettle with the Choctaw.
A few self-appointed leaders of the Cherokee (Tsalagi) Nation said they would leave their land east of the Mississippi for $5 million, in an agreement called the Treaty of New Echota — but all Cherokee did not agree with it. Thousands of tribe members signed a petition stating that the treaty was not an act of the Cherokee Nation, including the nation’s principal chief, John Ross. Congress ignored them.
In 1838, President Martin Van Buren sent 7,000 soldiers to forcibly remove the Cherokee people from their ancestral lands. Cherokee men, women, and children were imprisoned in stockades as local white settlers looted their homes and stole their personal belongings. More than 5,000 Cherokee people died of disease, exhaustion, exposure, and starvation on the march west. This act of genocide is known as the Trail of Tears.
For seven years, the Seminole fought against their removal from present-day Florida, in the Second Seminole War. The First Seminole War had been waged between the Seminole and colonial forces led by — you guessed it — Andrew Jackson.
The federal government promised Native nations that Oklahoma Indian Territory would remain theirs forever. They broke that promise too.
The Trail of Tears may be the best known example of the U.S. government forcibly removing Native nations from their homelands, but this pattern continued through the 19th century. In 1864, more than 8,500 Navajo (Diné) were forced to march between 250-450 miles to the Bosque Redondo Reservation, where they were held prisoner. About 200 perished from starvation and exposure on the way. In 1877, the Ponca were pushed out of their homelands and forced to relocate more than 500 miles away to Oklahoma. The Tribe had never warred with the United States, and about a third of its small population died.
The Northern Cheyenne were also forced to move from their ancestral territory in Montana to present-day Oklahoma. Conditions on the reservation were reportedly unbearable, so about 350 of them, following chiefs Little Wolf and Dull Knife, decided to leave; 149 were captured and taken to Fort Robinson in Nebraska. They were eventually taken prisoner, where they were refused food, water, and fuel for warmth. On January 9, 1879, they escaped, but 80 women and children were quickly recaptured; others ran for weeks in the bitter cold, malnourished and bone-weary. On January 22, soldiers caught up to them. Altogether, 64 Northern Cheyenne were murdered. They were just trying to go home.
My own ancestors, the Oceti Sakowin Dakota of the Great Sioux Nation, were exiled from their homelands after the Dakota War of 1862. Unilaterally, the government broke the treaties it had forged with us, stole our land, withheld our rations, and was starving us to death. When we defended our rights, the government hanged 38 of our warriors in the largest mass execution in U.S. history, imprisoned us, put a bounty on our scalps, and banished us from the state of Minnesota. In fact, there is still a law on the books that technically keeps us from owning land in that state.
These stories are horrific, and there are many more throughout history just like them, in the United States and abroad. Such is the scourge of settler colonialism — when “large numbers of settlers claim land and become the majority,” attempting “to engineer the disappearance of the original inhabitants everywhere except in nostalgia,” as historian Nancy Shoemaker put it.
The spirit of the Indian Removal Act is still alive, but now it takes the form of environmental racism, where Indigenous peoples and people of color are forced to go without potable water and to endure pollution and fossil fuel projects that encroach on their territory without their consent. Its essence is embodied in voter suppression laws that take our voices away at the ballot box, and by the government’s refusal to fulfill its treaty and trust obligations, keeping Native nations perpetually impoverished.
Settler colonialism is the opposite of democracy. Forcibly displacing Native people from their land will always be wrong, in the U.S. and all over the world.
Originally published on 2021-05-28
About the author: Ruth Hopkins, a Dakota/Lakota Sioux writer, biologist, attorney, and former tribal judge, on the legacy of the Indian Removal Act.
Origins of images: Facebook, Twitter, Wikimedia, Wikipedia, Flickr, Google, Imageinjection, Public Domain & Pinterest.
Read our Disclaimer/LegalStatement!
DonatetoSupportUs
We would like to ask you to consider a small donation to help our team keep working. We accept no advertising and rely only on you, our readers, to keep us digging the truth on history, global politics, and international relations.
Origins of images: Facebook, Twitter, Wikimedia, Wikipedia, Flickr, Google, Imageinjection, Public Domain & Pinterest.Read our Disclaimer/Legal Statement!Donate to Support UsWe would like to ask you to consider a small donation to help our team keep working. We accept no advertising and rely only on you, our readers, to keep us digging the truth on history, global politics and international relations.SaveSaveSave
IntroductionSome have tried to debunk the view that the West implicitly or explicitly promised Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not expand east after German reunification and dissolution of the Warsaw Pact). These claims are misleading and obfuscate the historical record of at least a clear understanding, if not promise that there should be no NATO expansion eastward in any way, shape or form. At the very least the West made a implied commitment not to expand NATO east. It is more precise to say, however, that the West gave an explicit verbal, that is, unwritten guarantee not to ...
Abstract: This article investigates the Russian foreign politics at the region of the Balkan Peninsula after the dissolution of the Soviet Union at the time of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) World Order in relation to the Pan-Slavic ideals of intra-Slavic solidarity, reciprocity and brotherhood. The particular stresses are put on four main research topics: 1. The Pan-Slavism and Russia; 2. Relations between pro-Western and pro-Orthodox approaches of the Russian national interests on Russia’s domestic political scene; 3. Different attitudes towards the Balkans in Russia; and 4. Historical ties and future perspectives between Russia and the Serbs. A research ...
NATO in 2008According to Israeli Intelligence News SourceThis article was first published in September 2014. Can we believe Hollande and Cameron? Evidence confirms that NATO is behind the recruitment of “jihadist terrorists While NATO leaders in Newport Wales [September 2014] debate the Atlantic Alliance’s role “in containing a mounting militant threat in the Middle East”, it is worth recalling that in 2011 at the outset of the war in Syria, NATO became actively involved in the recruitment of Islamic fighters. Reminiscent of the enlistment of the Mujahideen to wage the CIA’s jihad (holy war) in the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war, ...
Origins of images: Facebook, Twitter, Wikimedia, Wikipedia, Flickr, Google, Imageinjection, Public Domain & Pinterest.Read our Disclaimer/Legal Statement!Donate to Support UsWe would like to ask you to consider a small donation to help our team keep working. We accept no advertising and rely only on you, our readers, to keep us digging the truth on history, global politics and international relations.[wpedon id="4696" align="left"]
There have been at least two countries in Europe in recent history that undertook ‘anti-terrorist’ military operations against ‘separatists’, but got two very different reactions from the Western elite.The government of European country A launches what it calls an‘anti-terrorist’ military operation against ‘separatists’ in one part of the country. We see pictures on Western television of people’s homes being shelled and lots of people fleeing. The US and UK and other NATO powers fiercely condemn the actions of the government of country A and accuse it of carrying out ‘genocide’ and ’ethnic cleansing’ and say that there is an urgent ...
American torture is back in the news again as Gina Haspel, President Donald Trump’s pick to head the Central Intelligence Agency, prepares for what could be a rocky Senate confirmation hearing with some tough questions about her role overseeing a secret torture prison in Thailand and destroying tapes of brutal detainee interrogation sessions.Haspel’s nomination, and to a lesser degree her earlier appointment as deputy CIA director, reopened what more well-meaning observers, including torture survivor Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), have called “one of the darkest chapters” in US history, the so-called “enhanced interrogation” abuse of men, women and children caught up ...
Aleppo has become synonymous with destruction and “Syrian state-generated” violence among those whose perception of the situation in the war-torn nation is contained within the prism of mainstream media narratives.The NATO-aligned media maintains a tight grip on information coming out of this beleaguered city, ensuring that whatever comes out is tailored to meet State Department requirements and advocacy for regime change. The propaganda mill churns out familiar tales of chemical weapons, siege, starvation, and bombs targeting civilians–all of which are attributed to the Syrian government and military, with little variation on this theme.The purpose of this photo essay and my ...
The International Criminal Court (ICC) was established to prosecute culpable individuals for crimes of war, against humanity and genocide.Its mandate calls for “end(ing) impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of concern.”US and Israeli officials are guilty of the highest of high crimes. Yet none of their officials ever were held accountable – not by their own courts or the ICC.The international body operates on the principle of complementarity. It can only prosecute when governments won’t or can’t – even against officials of non ICC-member countries like America and Israel.On December 31, 2000, Bill Clinton signed the Rome Statute ...
What has happened is that NATO provides cover for these transgressions of the United States government’s policy. In other words, it absolutely legitimizes what effectively is NATO aggression. Moreover, what one needs to bear in mind and what one needs to be mindful about is the fact that in Western Europe you no longer have rulers with the independence of Charles de Gaulle.It seems that Washington, and we can use Washington, America and NATO interchangeably because NATO is dominated by the United States. It is a command structure, which ultimately is based on American military power and American military precedence. ...
A quick review of Ukraine, Zbig’s Grand Chessboard – How the West Was Checkmated is simple – this amazing work should be in everyone’s reading library. Anyone who cares to understand the situation of what has happened, and is happening in Ukraine needs to read this book. It covers the history of the dissolution of the USSR, the resulting creation of Ukraine, and the history of the U.S.’ attempts through various government and non-government organizations (e.g. Soros) towards the first failed colour revolution (Orange, 2004), then on towards the second attempt resulting in the successful installation of the noenazi puppet ...
The United States the use of force against the sovereign state of Syria is a prima facie violation of international law. It is an act of aggression against the UN Member State in violation of the Charter of the United Nations. It therefore gives Syria the right to react in self-defense or a legal justification for the use of force and it gives any other United Nations Member State the right to act in collective self-defense and to support Syrian action against the US This is the basic understanding of the international legal consequences of the United States use of ...
The American media specializes in fake news. Indeed, since the Clinton regime the American media has produced nothing but fake news. Do you remember the illegal US bombing and destruction of Yugoslavia? Do you remember “war criminal” Slobodan Milosevic, the Serbian president branded “the butcher of the Balkans,” who was compared to Hitler until Hillary passed the title on to the President of Russia? Milosevic, not Bill Clinton, was arrested and placed on trial at the International Criminal Tribunal. He died in prison, some say murdered, before he was cleared of charges by the International Criminal Tribunal. http://www.globalresearch.ca/milosevic-and-the-destruction-of-yugoslavia-unpleasant-truths-no-one-wants-to-know/5540873 Do you ...
When I saw the media in Serbia reporting about Donald Trump’s alleged condemnation of the 1999 NATO attack on then-Yugoslavia, also known as the Kosovo War, I shrugged it off as disinformation. Most of them, I’m sad to say, are almost entirely dedicated to gaslighting the general populace, and as likely to spread confusion and cognitive dissonance as actual news.It turns out that Donald Trump did talk to Larry King about Kosovo – but everyone is leaving out that this took place in October 1999. That is sort of important, though: by that point, the Serbian province had been “liberated” ...
For over 65 years, since the establishment of the State of Israel at the behest of the then American Zionist lobby, its successor has ensured that billions of US dollars in aid, grants, loans, guarantees, tax exemptions and ‘deals’ are funneled to the Israeli Treasury Secretary in order to give the satellite state an unprecedented economic and military advantage over any other country in the Middle East or Europe. All paid for by an unwitting American taxpayer.The total amount is sufficiently mind-boggling that it is impossible to quantify. The current monies and ‘aid’ that flow openly from the US to ...
The Working Group for the Chapter 35 of the Serbian National Convention on the European Union (EU) has called for the authorities in Serbia and Kosovo to create a cooperation to reduce the spread of the coronavirus pandemic.“We witness the coronavirus pandemic (COVID19) representing a great danger everywhere in the world and the health systems increasingly burdened with the number of infected patients. The pandemic has shown that the spread of the disease goes beyond borders, national and ethnic origin or religion of the affected, and can only be combatted through joint action, cooperation and solidarity. Cooperation is necessary primarily ...
Here it is, that time of year (the fourth Thursday in November) when we are all beseeched to consider “what we are thankful for.” This invitation to a mass cultural ritual targets everyone regardless of race, creed or sex (or these days, gender). The conformity of thought it reinforces does not discriminate among such superficial characteristics; it goes way deeper. The fundamentals (literally, the foundational elements) of the “American” mind are laid each year at this time.Those fundamentals hold that we are a strong, brave, resourceful people – whether by our evolved nature or by the grant of a deity ...
In regard to international relations (IR), power is understood as the ability of state or other political actors to impose its own control or influence over other state(s) or other political actors, or at least to influence the outcome of events on the local, regional or global level. Power politics as a phenomena has two dimensions: internal and external. The internal dimension is applied in the inner policy of the state and the external in the foreign affairs or outside of the home politics. The powerfulness of a state depends on its real independence or sovereignty from outside influence on ...
The role of Jewish figures and that of the State of Israel in the Ukrainian crisis has not gone unnoticed considering that this community represents less than 1 percent of the population. However, a secret report in the hands of the Netanyahu administration confirms that Ashkenazi Jews do not originate from the Levant, but are the descendants of the Khazars. This little-known population founded a Jewish empire in the tenth century on the banks of the Black Sea. Therefore, some Zionists see in Ukraine a possible second Israel.The Times of Israel, an independent Israeli newspaper that counts among its staff ...
The magazine is covering the research gaps uncovered by global Western hoax mainstream media platforms and academic teaching & research institutions.
This is an alternative information & academic research digest platform with the purpose to offer an alternative “another side of the truth”.
The magazine is independent, private, and free of any influence by any institution, organization, government, or pressure group. URL: www.global-politics.eu
