Do you know about the Trail of Tears? (google it if need be)

[ultimate777]

What do you think would have happened if Andrew Jackson's Indian Removal Policy had never even come close to being put thru?

[RickD]

Please post link for reference.

[ultimate777]

Please post link for reference.

You don't know how?

[ultimate777]

Please post link for reference.

Here's one.

http://www.ushistory.org/us/24f.asp

[ultimate777]

Please post link for reference.

Here's more. Don't you think people know how to get the thrill of discovery for themselves?

http://www.bing.com/search?q=trail+of+t ... QBLH&ghc=1

[B. W.]

What do you think would have happened if Andrew Jackson's Indian Removal Policy had never even come close to being put thru?

It would have been much better for the First Nations People if never enacted...

http://www.cherokeemuseum.org/era/trail-of-tears/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Removal_Act

http://www.mountvernon.org/digital-ency ... an-policy/

Looking at events from 1776 - thru 1830 regarding First Nation Peoples and Later Policy of George Washington toward Native peoples cannot be judge by the cultural standards of modern America today. To do so is to ignore truth.

It is a complicated issue to study but basically the some tribes of Native Peoples helped the settlers as they arrived in this country and others sought, according to their culture raid and attack settlers. Settlers had no idea of who or that the native cultures were warlike amongst themselves. If one tribe help the settlers, the tribes enemies thought the settlers were allies with their enemies. So they attacked, often dressed as members of a friendly tribe.

Native warfare amongst themselves was just as brutal as European warfare. Natives wiped out each others villages, killed the men, women, and children or took a number of women and children for their own. They took crops, weapons, daily implements used for village life as their own. The tortured their prisoners and some tribes even ate the raw heart of their most hated enemy. The Eastern Tribes formed confederations, or nations, for protection and thus were in the first stages of nation/state building om a stone age level. Some tribes were not at that level the further west as one went past the Mississippi river.

Midst this mess came the European settlers who were just as brutal albeit, with better weapons. However, not all settlers were brutal and many befriended Native tribes and they got along and both acculturated segments of each others ways and thus blended together. That was the policy of George Washington and the US until 1830.

However, due the French and Indian war and the Revolutionary war, where the natives we forced into war by Europeans for land, brutality wrought more brutality upon each side. With this, thoughts of revenge and the inability to trust was established between natives and Europeans that was exploited by profiteers on both sides. Natives thought, for example, if you take my opposing native enemies lands, our tribe will be left alone, so deals and treaties came and went and were broken by both sides.

Both sides were both equally guilty, equally brutal, and things simply spiraled out of control. Over time, in some areas healthy acculturation naturally ensued between settlers and natives. That idea, natural assimilation to each other that was not forced or coerced was the norm in peaceful areas. That became the idea for Native policy but you also had folks with a ax of revenge to grid screw this all up. Andrew Jackson was one such person.

Andrew Jackson was Grand Master of the Grand Masonic Lodge of Tennessee from 1822- 1824. He had connections to pay back for landing the presidency. http://204.3.136.66/web/journal-files/I ... demott.htm

Thus taking Native land was one of the means for this ends. There is much more but for here:

I am only over simplifying these things for the readers to get a grasp of history so one does not fall victim to think that only Europeans were evil. You had folks on all sides who were and each act brutality fed prejudices on both sides and fueled atrocities on both sides. In other words, it was a mixed up crazy time in history when events spun out of control so that death, theft, ruin was the tragic result.

Midst this back drop there were people on both sides who gelled together and got along. If that would have continued, things would have been peacefully different for both sides...

Again, the human sin nature is always exposed in history as well as today. Look at Hilary Clinton's pay for play schemes and email scandals and lies.

Look at the Iran deal and Iran now embolden, Russia and China coalition in the Middle East, North Korea receiving the okay to build a nuclear reactor by the Clinton's (1990's) who now launched an ICBM from a submarine... Rise of Islam which seeks world domination...

Corruption in politics and exploiting people to eliminate whole populations by another group is still in vogue today...

Wake up America...
-
-
-

[RickD]

B. W. is right that the way groups of people got and possessed land back then, was to forcibly drive out whoever was inhabiting the land. Before Jackson drove the Indians out, those Indians probably drove out whoever was there before them. And they probably drove out whoever was there before them. It's just the way it was done. Was it right? Certainly not if we look through 21st century glasses.

[Jac3510]

What do you think would have happened if Andrew Jackson's Indian Removal Policy had never even come close to being put thru?

There's no way to know. It was too long ago and too large of a change to guess what alternate history would have unfolded had it never happened. Obviously it was wrong, one of the many atrocities committed by human beings over the course of our sad history.

May I ask the motivation of the question?

[ultimate777]

What do you think would have happened if Andrew Jackson's Indian Removal Policy had never even come close to being put thru?

There's no way to know. It was too long ago and too large of a change to guess what alternate history would have unfolded had it never happened. Obviously it was wrong, one of the many atrocities committed by human beings over the course of our sad history.

May I ask the motivation of the question?

I was kind of wondering if the Cherokees especially had not been driven out where would they be and what would they be doing. Considering the Cherokees rare assimilation would the area have been more prosperous or less than it became in real life if they stayed? Was long term peace with the whites possible?

[Jac3510]

Then my answer remains. There's absolutely no way to know how to answer that. At best you could say, "Gosh, I hope so!" But absolutely no way to know either way.

[JButler]

Its impossible to answer the question. But I think there would have been more war between native Indians and white settlers if the Indian population had not been moved west.

Just knowing people and history there comes a point where you assimilate with the new population or you tolerate it to a point then revolt to drive them out. A study of Rome's conquests over other people is a great example of this.