Dbq Indian Removal Act

985 Words2 Pages

The Indian Removal Act was a very controversial decision made in 1830 that had many short-term and long-lasting effects on America. The United States wanted to expand its borders, but there was a problem. There were still many Native American tribes spread throughout the land the U.S. wanted, so they had to devise a way to get the land from them as peacefully as possible. In the end, it wasn’t as peaceful as they’d like. Discussed in the next few paragraphs is the purpose, effects, and rationale of this troubling act. To begin, the purpose of the Indian Removal Act was to relocate the Natives in the area from their lands to reservations. White settlers wanted to expand further and pressured the government to do something to make these tribes …show more content…

It was the Battle of Horseshoe Bend (Office of a Historian 1), where Andrew Jackson led his troops to defeat the Creek tribe. With Andrew’s victory, he forced the Creek to sign the first of 9 other treaties regarding the removal of Indians (Office of a Historian 1). Only a few other tribes decided to fight before they were indefinitely overpowered and forced to move. No matter what strategy the Native Americans tried, the white settlers took over their lands and the Natives eventually all moved onto these reservations out west. The short-term or immediate effect that this act had was the Native Americans having to leave everything they had known and all their possessions. They left houses, supplies, and all their livestock to make the journey. Another effect was when they got to this new land, they had to rebuild everything and adapt to the new terrain. One example is the Cherokee tribe being pushed towards new territory in Arkansas, where they had trouble with flooding of their crops and many other harsh conditions (Kidwell 4). Long-term effects of the Indian Removal Act are the preservation of culture and the results of the Trail of …show more content…

Over ten thousand Native Americans were relocated to areas in modern-day Oklahoma, and around 15,000 died along the way (Irvine 1). I agree that descendants of Native Americans could be compensated because it was their ancestors who had to endure all of the hardships and the trauma that trickled down to the current generations of Native Americans and sparked feelings of unjustness. At the other end, I could see why it wouldn’t make sense to give reparations to said descendants, since it happened over 200 years ago. But since we cannot go back in time to provide proper reparations for the ones who suffered firsthand, we could try to make it better for the remaining displaced descendants still living in tribes or on reserves. They are trying to protect and keep their culture and way of life alive, even after generations of hardships and relocation. These brutal events and struggles their ancestors have gone through have shaped the history of their people and are still just as important to their descendants. The Indian Removal Act has had long-lasting effects on the tribes and our country, whether they are good or bad, it is still a very controversial

More about Dbq Indian Removal Act

Open Document