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.
The American aristocracy want inequality of rights, with two basic polar-opposite classes: the ‘elite’, with themselves at the top of everything, and everybody else below them, as subjects to be ruled by them, in such ways as they (themselves, and their fellow ‘elite’) can agree to do. They are convinced that they have earned their high status, in one way or another, and they compete ferociously amongst themselves, to rise even higher within the aristocracy.Many of the aristocrats think that they are ‘elite’ because they are the richest; many think instead that the ‘elite’ are the smartest or the most ...
Unless Syria will simply hand its most heavily pro-jihadist province, Idlib, to adjoining Turkey, which claims to have 30,000 troops there and is planning to add 20,000 more, World War III will probably happen soon, and here is why:Russia’s troops are in Syria at the invitation of Syria’s Government and they have provided crucial assistance to restore the Government’s control over areas that the jihadists (sometimes called “Radical Islamic Terrorists” or otherwise) had seized. Consequently, unlike the Turks and the Americans, who are invaders of Syria, Russia is instead a defender of Syria, and is committed to doing there only ...
Radio “Liberty” has always been a propaganda ministry. Formerly its propaganda was directed against the Soviet Union. Today it is directed against distinguished Americans who are known and respected for their allegiance to the truth.Radio Liberty’s latest target is an American scholar who is far more widely respected than Radio Liberty. Like everything else in Washington, the two-bit propaganda ministry is carried away by hubris and a mistaken opinion of its own importance.A Radio Liberty non-entity named Carl Schreck, of whom no one has ever heard has declared America’s most distinguished Russian scholar, Stephen Cohen, to be “a Putin apologist.”Stephen ...
“The earthly Kingdom is for earthly people, but the heavenly Kingdom is forever” Serbian national epic about the Kosovo Battle against the Ottoman Turks in 1389[1]The American gangsters and the destruction of ex-YugoslaviaSouth-East Europe, and especially the Balkan Peninsula as the main part of it, have traditionally been the object of numerous geopolitical, geostrategic and publicist analyses, as well as the subject of debates among the Balkan, European and global experts in international relations. The new Iron Curtain between western and eastern Europe was not the end of the Balkan’s importance for the US administration and the NATO as well. At ...
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 2015 dataOrigins 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"]SaveSave
Having already violated every tenet of international law in its proxy jihadist war against Syria, including the seizure of one-third of the country, the United States invoked a Non-Law, a Law That Never Was, to justify its missile strikes against fictitious “chemical warfare” facilities. Syrian President Assad “kills his own people,” said Trump, leader of the nation whose police kill more of its “own people” than any country except (fellow white settler state) Brazil, and whose prisons entomb one-quarter of all the world’s inmates. (One out of every eight prisoners on the planet is an African American.)On the Saturday morning ...
The problem is America’s global hegemony comes with insistence on maintaining military and economic dominance right in China’s backyard.To avoid a violent militaristic clash with China, or another cold war rivalry, the United States should pursue a simple solution: give up its empire.Americans fear that China’s rapid economic growth will slowly translate into a more expansive and assertive foreign policy that will inevitably result in a war with the US. Harvard Professor Graham Allison has found: “in 12 of 16 cases in the past 500 years when a rising power challenged a ruling power, the outcome was war.” Chicago University scholar John ...
The Ruling Class Reserve TagOne of the many irritating things about the dominant United States corporate media is the way it repeatedly discovers anew things that are not remotely novel. Take its recent discovery that Donald Trump isn’t really the swamp-draining populist working class champion he pretended to be on the campaign trail.The evidence for this “news” is solid enough. His cabinet and top advisor circle has been chock full of ruling class swamp creatures like former Goldman Sachs President Gary Cohn (top economic adviser), longtime top Goldman Sachs partner and top executive Steve Mnuchin (Secretary of the Treasury), and ...
Crimea’s breakaway from Ukraine and rejoining Russia is treated in the US-and-allied world as being justification for the explosive re-emergence in 2014 of America’s Cold War NATO alliance as being a restored war against Russia; and, so, whether or not that ‘justification’ is truthful is the paramount geopolitical issue in our era; and it will therefore be discussed and (via the links here) documented in this article.Though international law is generally an unenforced mess that is interpretable far more by partisanship than by any clearly applicable principles, the US Government does quite blatantly violate it on a routine basis, by ...
“A battle lost or won is easily described, understood, and appreciated, but the moral growth of a great nation requires reflection, as well as observation, to appreciate it”. – Frederick Douglass (former slave who would later become a great American statesman and diplomat)It has always been an utmost necessity to exercise caution when reading the historical accounts of great periods that threatened to change the course of the world. As is widely recognised though not reflected upon enough, ‘history is written by the victors’, and if this be indeed the truth, than we must be aware of what lens we ...
Today, Memorial Day, Americans across the land will hear the same message: that U.S. soldiers who have died in America’s foreign wars and foreign interventions have done so in the defense of our rights and freedoms. It is a message that will be heard in sporting events, memorial services, airports, churches, and everywhere else that Memorial Day is being commemorated.There is one big thing wrong, however. It’s a lie. None of those soldiers died protecting our rights and freedoms. That’s because our rights and freedoms were never being threatened by the enemy forces that killed those soldiers.Let’s work our way ...
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 ...
Тhe world is at a dangerous crossroads. The United States and its allies have launched a military adventure which threatens the future of humanity. Major military and covert intelligence operations are being undertaken simultaneously in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, Central Asia and the Far East. The US-NATO military agenda combines both major theater operations as well as covert actions geared towards destabilizing sovereign states.America’s hegemonic project is to destabilize and destroy countries through acts of war, covert operations in support of terrorist organizations, regime change and economic warfare. The latter includes the imposition of deadly macro-economic reforms ...
Here are before-and-after pictures, at https://twitter.com/MAL0mt/status/701077438525263873/photo/1, of what the U.S. government has achieved, in the Middle East:What’s especially interesting there, is that in all of these missions, except for Iraq, the U.S. was doing it with the key participation of the Saud family, the royals who own Saudi Arabia, and who are the world’s largest buyers of American weaponry. Since Barack Obama came into the White House, the operations — Libya, Yemen, and Syria — have been, to a large extent, joint operations with the Sauds. ‘We’ are now working more closely with ‘our’ ‘friends’, even than ‘we’ were under George W. Bush.As President Obama instructed his military, ...
Americans are outraged by allegations that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an intelligence service to hack email accounts of the Democratic National Committee. How inexpressibly heinous that one country, Russia, would try to influence elections in another sovereign country, in this case the United States! How unprecedented! How diabolical! How uniquely Russian!In response, the Obama administration has expelled Russian diplomats, hinted at economic sanctions, and promised further retaliation using America’s “world-class arsenal of cyber weapons.” (NYT Dec. 16, 2016) Obama’s Republican opponents, for their part, have demanded “rocks” instead of Obama’s “pebbles.”But does the USA meddle in the presidential elections ...
The Six Day War of June 1967, a series of battles fought by the armed forces of the state of Israel against a combination of Arab armies, is one of manifold significance. From a military standpoint, it presented a model strategy of how to prosecute and win a war waged on several fronts.The stunning victory also created a sense of euphoria among communities in the Jewish Diaspora: Among American Jews, a segment of Jewry David Ben Gurion viewed with disdain because of their failure to migrate en masse to Israel, a new sense of commitment in both emotional and financial ...
Paris vs. DonbassOrigins 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"]Save
Author’s Introduction and UpdateFirst published by GR on June 14, 2014, updated in August 2014, this article reveals how the US and its allies facilitated the incursion of Islamic State (ISIS) convoys into Iraq in June 2014 prior to the onset of the counter-terrorism bombing campaign launched by Obama in August 2014. It is worth recalling the history of the initial incursion of ISIS forces (Summer 2014) and the timeline extending from the occupation of Mosul in Summer of 2014 which was covertly supported by the US, to the “Liberation” of Mosul three years later which was also supported by ...
Andrew Bacevich has written a series of books on the topic of U.S. imperialism and U.S. military power. His latest work, America’s War for the Greater Middle East [the GME War] is the latest in this series and as with the previous works is clearly written and logically presented. It covers more narrowly than the previous works the military aspects of U.S. military endeavours in the Middle East (greater – as in including East Africa and Afghanistan et al). Generally he succeeds well and this work is a good ‘primer’ for anyone interested in a quick historical overview of U.S. ...
