Physical and Cultural Genocide Policy Toward Native Americans Essay

The aboriginal inhabitants suffered greatly due to the European colonization of North America. Their way of life was irreversibly altered in a short amount of time. Various circumstances contributed to the changes, including land loss, sickness, enforcement of laws that contradicted their culture, and much more. However, physical and cultural genocide aimed at seizing Indigenous lands and suppressing resistance and assimilation policy for civilizing the new European peoples made the Native Americans revolt even more furiously.

The government of the United States felt that for its prosperity and safety, it needed to eliminate all the Native Americans from its territory. The US government also pursued a physical elimination policy to extinguish indigenous Americans and create space for commercial interests and settlers. For example, the geographical factor played a role in the settlers’ expansion. Native Americans controlled vast swaths of profitable farmland with rich floodplains and grasslands, which were perceived as desired lands by the whites¹. Later, the administration introduced a cultural assimilation policy to reduce the chances of warfare. As such, President Chester A. Arthur’ presented his policy regarding the Native Americans, in which he proposed to civilize them to stop the ever-emerging bloodshed². Thus, the US government pursued a two-pronged policy of physical and cultural genocide toward Native Americans to acquire their lands and, later, to suppress their resistance.

Americans perceived Euro-American culture as superior to Native American culture from the early days of their independence from Britain. For example, Thomas Morton, an early colonist in North America, in his passages on the Native Americans, referred to them as savages. Moreover, he believed that they had some resemblance to the devil³. Such a view indicates that Euro-Americans perceived the Indigenous people as strange, foreign, and separate from what was known about cultures. Later, even while Native Americans served as crucial trading partners, scouts, and allies against foreign countries, American settlers and government officials frequently labeled them savages⁴. This rhetoric might have resulted in the opinion that the assimilation of American Indians was crucial even though other ethnic minorities were segregated. The US government planned to civilize the Native Americans and gravitate them toward white American culture.

Nevertheless, the Native Americans were left angry, traumatized, and resentful, and their cultures were destroyed. The physical and cultural genocide of the Native Americans imposed by the US government was met with solid resistance in various forms, such as armed conflict, civil disobedience, and peaceful protests. For instance, a portion of the Nez Percé tribe from the Pacific Northwest opposed being relocated to a reservation and tried to escape to Canada but was chased, assaulted, and ordered to return by the US Cavalry⁵. Chief Joseph, the head of the tribe, expressed his belief that Native Americans should change and move further despite his defeat. Moreover, the Indigenous population resisted forced assimilation in schools, specifically when force was used to suppress their religious beliefs⁶. Thus, violence toward Native Americans made resistance a necessity and a moral obligation.

To conclude, the US government’s two-pronged policy of physical and cultural genocide was performed first to gain access to spaces that geographically aid in farming and then to suppress the Native Americans’ partisans. Further, the idea of the assimilation of Indian Americans might be partially caused by the American settlers’ perception of the lack of civilization among the tribes. Nevertheless, the native people of America fought against US troops and the government aiming to exterminate them and their culture.

Footnotes

1. Bennett, Ethan, Michelle Cassidy, Jonathan Grandage, Gregg Lightfoot, Jose Juan Perez Melendez, Jessica Moore, Nick Roland, et al. “Manifest Destiny” In The American Yawp, edited by Joseph Locke and Ben Wright. Stanford, SA: Stanford University Press, 2018. Web.
2. The American Yawp Reader. “Chester A. Arthur on American Indian Policy (1881).” The American Yawp Reader. Web.
3. The American Yawp Reader. “Thomas Morton Reflects on Indians in New England, 1637.” The American Yawp Reader. Web.
4. Clark, Justin, Adam Costanzo, Stephanie Gamble, Dale Kretz, Julie Richter, Bryan Rindfleisch, Angela Riotto, et al. “The Early Republic.” In The American Yawp, edited by Joseph Locke and Ben Wright. Stanford, SA: Stanford University Press, 2018. Web.
5. The American Yawp Reader. “Chief Joseph on Indian Affairs (1877, 1879).” The American Yawp Reader. Web.
6. Brand, Lauren, Carole Butcher, Josh Garrett-Davis, Tracey Hanshew, Lindsay Stallones Marshall, Nick Roland, David Schley, et al. “Conquering the West.” In The American Yawp, edited by Joseph Locke and Ben Wright. Stanford, SA: Stanford University Press, 2018. Web.