At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
native americans had to sacrifice a bunch of land to the US and life was generally just harder.
families and tribes were seperated, resources were being taken away from them only because of the US's selfishness.
At the start of the twentieth century there were approximately 250,000 Native Americans in the USA – just 0.3 per cent of the population – most living on reservations where they exercised a limited degree of self-government. During the course of the nineteenth century they had been deprived of much of their land by forced removal westwards, by a succession of treaties (which were often not honoured by the white authorities) and by military defeat by the USA as it expanded its control over the American West. In 1831 the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Marshall, had attempted to define their status. He declared that Indian tribes were ‘domestic dependent nations’ whose ‘relation to the United States resembles that of a ward to his guardian’. Marshall was, in effect, recognising that America’s Indians are unique in that, unlike any other minority, they are both separate nations and part of the United States. This helps to explain why relations between the federal government and the Native Americans have been so troubled. A guardian prepares his ward for adult independence, and so Marshall’s judgement implies that US policy should aim to assimilate Native Americans into mainstream US culture. But a guardian also protects and nurtures a ward until adulthood is achieved, and therefore Marshall also suggests that the federal government has a special obligation to care for its Native American population. As a result, federal policy towards Native Americans has lurched back and forth, sometimes aiming for assimilation and, at other times, recognising its responsibility for assisting Indian development. What complicates the story further is that (again, unlike other minorities seeking recognition of their civil rights) Indians have possessed some valuable reservation land and resources over which white Americans have cast envious eyes. Much of this was subsequently lost and, as a result, the history of Native Americans is often presented as a morality tale. White Americans, headed by the federal government, were the ‘bad guys’, cheating Indians out of their land and resources. Native Americans were the ‘good guys’, attempting to maintain a traditional way of life much more in harmony with nature and the environment than the rampant capitalism of white America, but powerless to defend their interests. Only twice, according to this narrative, did the federal government redeem itself: firstly during the Indian New Deal from 1933 to 1945, and secondly in the final decades of the century when Congress belatedly attempted to redress some Native American grievances. There is a lot of truth in this summary, but it is also simplistic. There is no doubt that Native Americans suffered enormously at the hands of white Americans, but federal Indian policy was shaped as much by paternalism, however misguided, as by white greed. Nor were Indians simply passive victims of white Americans’ actions. Their responses to federal policies, white Americans’ actions and the fundamental economic, social and political changes of the twentieth century were varied and divisive. These tensions and cross-currents are clearly evident in the history of the Indian New Deal and the policy of termination that replaced it in the late 1940s and 1950s. Native American history in the mid-twentieth century was much more than a simple story of good and evil, and it raises important questions (still unanswered today) about the status of Native Americans in modern US society. - See more at: http://www.historytoday.com/andrew-boxer/native-americans-and-federal-government#sthash.Po1cVuTI.dpuf
read that whole thing XD
the anwser is right their
that's quite an essay you got there lmao
oh no theirs a website
the link is their
is that pic from call of dudy or untill dawn?
call of duty
thot so lol
hoping to get cod ghosts and cod advanced warfare for christmas
i have both xD
no fair u have xbox one
im a girl btw and yes
yay thx for the medal
and go friend me on xbox one bloody77 i play minecaft
i dont have any other games
i have xenovers to and destiney
do ya have minecraft
no i never rely likted it but iv never played it lol i might just to see how bad it is
yea im here
how old are ya
oh ok im 12 in a half
5bp is my real name dont ask why but it stand for somthing i love!
want to know wut it stands 4?
hold on brb afk for a cupal min
@5BP heres my fav song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgKAFK5djSk
i like this song but heer let me get mine up for you
thats my 2ed fav song
wait ive heard that song before
avreone has lol il put on mai fav
here i got something for ya https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCC28WvxY2_e3Czp_HyLC9tQ/videos
WILL MEDAL HELP 5B Which were results of the construction of the transcontinental railroad? Choose all answers that are correct. A. The railroad opened new markets for agricultural products from the Great Plains. B. Native Americans frequently raided camps and killed thousands of railroad workers. C. Hard-working Chinese tracklayers were treated with new respect by their supervisors. D. Completion of the railroad helped unite the country and heal the wounds of the Civil War.
the ri sub lol il put on mine
ok i subed
thanks do ya like the name?