Return To The Black Hills

They soon received about 32 million acres of land in Oklahoma. Jackson soon after the act relocated 10,000 members of the 5 tribe. The Cherokees tried to sue the government because they have adapted well to the "white culture" and now is being moved to a different location. Unfortunately because they were just Native Americans they had no legal standing in the court. They were forced to move and when the refused the event Trail of Tears occurred.

It is a sad and angry time for the Cherokee people, but we mustn’t fight back any longer, instead I believe it is best to follow Major Ridge to the new home awaiting us in the West. Our stance in court against the Indian Removal Act has been ignored due to the threat of mutiny the Southern States are mustering up against the Federal Government. John C. Calhoun has challenged Federal Law for his state’s own interest and ultimately at our cost due to the fact that our land was used as a bribe in order to stop the continuation of the mutinous movement of the South. President Andrew Jackson, the man we fought the Creek Tribe so bravely against has selfishly turned his back on our people and our rights to our old beautiful land. Our Chief John Ross

In 1874, Custer led an army expedition to the Black Hills of present-day South Dakota, a sacred property of the Lakota-Sioux Nation, which was recognized under the Sioux Treaty of 1868. There, Custer and his men found a great amount of gold, and when President Grant and the US administration offered to buy the area, the Lakota-Sioux nation refused to sell due to its holiness in their culture. Two years later, the

Because of this, a section of the Sac Fox tribe broke from the Oklahoma group. They are not a federally recognized tribe because there are multiple state and federal laws involving recognizing Native American tribes, including multiple tribal treaties that must be referenced. According to Tony, it is extremely complicated and difficult to do. So, while they are still officially part of the Sac Fox tribe, they are completely independent of each other, only sharing a similar name. Several members purchased acreage in southern Missouri, which was designated as their new tribal land. Tony said this land is lived on and managed by tribal leaders, which maintain it for tribal meetings.

There has always been a big debate on whether the Cherokee Indians should have or should not have been removed from the land they resided on. Although the common consensus of the whites was for removal, and for the Cherokees it was against removal, there were some individuals on each side that disagreed with their groups’ decision. The Cherokee Indians should have been removed from their homeland because the Cherokees would not have been able to survive on their own with the way they were living, they would not have been able to exist amidst a white population, and if they were removed, the whites would have helped them create a new and prosperous civilization.

When comparing two works of literature it is always best to have a firm understanding of how each author expresses their thoughts and emotions through the stories they tell. In comparing Ernest Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants” and David Foster Wallace’s “Good People” you get a different sense as to how each author conveys their thoughts of the very difficult and often taboo topic of abortion. Both stories are different in plot, conclusion, and construction, although they share common artistic similarities, including the large use of physical surroundings and metaphors. When comparing and contrasting stories of similar writings it is important to pick up on the subtle literary ways an author is able to convey their thoughts.

On may 28, 1830 the Indian Removal Act was passed by the congress and was signed by the current president at the time Andrew Jackson. The Indian Removal Act authorized the president to grant unsettled lands west of Mississippi in exchange for the Native Americans land. This forced Native American tribes to march their way west of Mississippi. Some tribes left in peace but most of the tribes resisted. In 1835 the agreement to, Treaty Of New Echota allowed Jackson to order Cherokee removal. Some Cherokee leaders signed the treaty and left but people under the leadership Chief John Ross resisted until they were forced to move to a new location 1838. Their forced journey to their new location was called the Trail Of Tears. Ever since, Native Americans have been living in reservation lands and the government has taken notice but don’t know if they should give them land or money. The government should be giving Native Americans land instead of money because the reservation lands are not

I totally agree with you Jacob that we could have handled the situation a lot better than what we did. However, the land was theirs at first the right thing to do is to allow them to keep their land and make fair trades with them for their land instead. Only then if the Indians do not come to an agreement about the land. We should federal troops step in and attempt to persuade them into trading the land for basic life

The Treaty of Echota gave up all the indian land east of the Mississippi for 5 million dollars. The Cherokee would receive land in the Indian Territory. They were also promised things they would lose including livestock, tools, and other

The Cherokee people were forced out of their land because of the settler’s greed for everything and anything the land had to offer. Many Cherokee even embraced the “civilization program,” abandoning their own beliefs so that they may be accepted by white settlers. Unfortunately for the Cherokee though, the settlers would never accept them as an equal citizen. A quote from historian Richard White says it very well, “The Cherokee are probably the most tragic instance of what could have succeeded in American Indian policy and didn’t. All these things that Americans would proudly see as the hallmarks of civilization are going to the West by Indian people. They do everything they were asked except one thing. What the Cherokees ultimately

Native Americans should have their land is because, they have their ancestors souls are there.. Also they remember their history on the land.The best way for the United States for make up for injustices is to return land to Native American

In 1838, the Cherokee Indian Removal Act forced Cherokee and Creek Indians out of Georgia on a 5,045 mile walk all the way to the farthest west land that the United States had at the time, Oklahoma[1]. This event is now known as The Trail of Tears known for the many tears shed by the Indians that had to travel on the trail. The main reason for their removal from the premises was because of the gold that was discovered in the land of the now Hall County or Dahlonega. People have their opinions on whether the Creek and Cherokee should have been removed, to be honest, I am on the fence about this topic. I can recognize the great injustice that was made to the Indians but I also see that this action allowed for growth in Georgia and its economy, which contributed to growth for the United States as a whole. If I had to choose, I would say that the Cherokee Indians should not have been removed from their territory. For one, they were settled in their land before the english came and were in a way civilized. Two, the Indian Removal Act should never have been approved and was invalid for a few reasons. And finally, it was immoral to remove them from their land and didn't have any right to do so.

Every day people make decisions that affect their future lives. What makes a right decision? What may be right to some may be wrong to others. Right and wrong decisions are objective and vary among each individual. “Hills Like White Elephants,” by Ernest Hemingway, portrays the idea of decision making between two characters in a valley in Spain as they wait for a train to arrive. Jig, the protagonist, attempts to make a crucial change in her life by making the right decision, although her flaws, including indecisiveness, prevent her from taking action in her decision. Jig and the American have had a romantic relationship for quite a while and now their future together is in jeopardy. The two of them are having a conversation on whether or not Jig should get an abortion. The man is trying to convince the woman to do something she is hesitant to do. Hemingway uses metaphors and symbolism to express their feelings and decision-making.

A quote by Joseph Goebbels goes as ‘propaganda works best when those who are being manipulated are confident they are acting on their own will.’ The poster presented follows the alliances and rebellions of the first world war. Through the use of the salient German flag, reference and association is presented so that it is made clear about whom this poster is in favor of, consequently the American flag plastered on the crouched soldiers refers to whom they are and what country they are associated with. The same is done with the swastika symbol placed on the helmet of the upright soldier associating him with the German nation. The body positioning and language of the cowered American soldiers creates an ambience of inferiority and oppression whereas the confident stance of the

Second, the theme between these two stories are also on opposite spectrums. In “Hills Like White Elephants” the theme is that the couple, the American man and the girl, can not communicate well with each other, it is more of just talking and not really listening to what the other has to say. An instance of this occurring in “Hills Like White Elephants” is when the man articulates to the girl “We can have everything” (Hemingway, 125) and the girl says to him “No, we can’t” (Hemingway, 125) referring to how he has not made any real indication of wanting to be with her except in that moment, creating the illusion of disaster if a child were to grow up in this type of environment. However, in “The Grasshopper and The Bell Cricket” the theme that