The style of 19th century has been used for a more authentic feel. Written as an opponent of the relocation.
But Why, Andrew?
When our ancestors first moved to this beloved land we now call home, they thought of it as a new start for life – a land of equal rights for everyone, without any exceptions. It was a dream which was, unfortunately, not very long-lived. This noble objective was abruptly shattered as soon as the first black slaves were deported from Africa. From there on, the situation has steadily worsened and even hit rock bottom eighteen years ago.
In 1830, the President of the United States signed the ruthless statute called the Indian Removal Act. This set the heading for the next few years, at least in terms of dealing with the Indians. Although Andrew Jackson might have guessed what his vigorous signature was to bring to the indigenous inhabitants of the Free Land, he had no intention of stopping it – on the contrary – he was all for it! What followed was a period of persecution, abduction and discrimination of Native Americans. Although at first more lenient means of Indian removal, including assimilation and voluntary emigration were used, it was soon realized that this policy did not yield the anticipated results.
Thus, already in 1830, the first tribes of the Choctaw nation were relocated to the east. They were the only ones willing to relocate without any resistance. The next ones were the Seminole Indians, who decided to fight for their right to inhabit their indigenous lands. This brought about a death toll of 1000 Indians, and only about 3000 of the tribesmen reaching the destination in Oklahoma. In 1834 the Creek Indians were forced to leave. They were also unwilling to give up without a fight – the outcome was a devastating death toll of 20% of the Indians. Next were the Cherokees, who were ordered at gunpoint to relocate. A total of 4000 of them passed away on the treacherous journey. Lastly, in 1837, an agreement was signed with the Chickasaw nation which stated that the US government would monetarily support the tribesmen for a year after the deportation. This mass deportation and murder has sparked a number of conflicts and controversies and has been called the Trail of Tears for its atrocious and hateful nature towards the natives, also for its enormous death toll caused by the famine and diseases that spread during the 1000-mile venture.
I would like to express my deepest contempt towards the extremely hostile actions against the Indians. After all, we are the so-called guests here – they have been living here for thousands of years and we, brutal savages, decide to march in and slaughter, oppress and discriminate the hapless people – despicable! How would you feel if a guest came to your house and, having seen monetary value in your house, decided to kick you out? Would you let that happen to you?
To conclude this semi-encyclopaedic and semi-deliberative editorial, I must put forth the idea that what President Andrew Jackson did was morally and ethically erroneous, right to the bone. I am more than sure that the aboriginal inhabitants of our fair country would have managed to peacefully live and work side by side with us, the newcomers, and could have formed a strong and mutually beneficial alliance. This all begs the question: why did Andrew do it? Out of sheer jealousy, hate, greed or something vastly different?
Only time may tell…
Currently there are no comments related to "Analysis of The Westward Expansion and Indian Removal Act in Newspaper Article Form". You have a special honor to be the first commenter. Thanks!
Welcome to Authspot, the spot for creative writing.
Read some stories and poems, and be sure to subscribe to our feed!