• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

"The only good Indian is a dead one". To what extent can this statement be seen as an accurate summary of the philosophy of the white American in the second half of the century?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

"The only good Indian is a dead one". To what extent can this statement be seen as an accurate summary of the philosophy of the white American in the second half of the century? This essay will discuss the above statement and look at the views of the white American and whether they agreed with this statement. The background of their relationships with each other will be examined and how the two cultures clashed over time. The views of the government, army and settlers will be discussed in detail. I will look at their relationships with the American Indians, along with the conflicts faced between them and why these conflicts arose. I will define the white societies perception of the word `dead' and whether it meant the death of a culture, or the genocide of a whole nation. I will conclude whether the statement is an accurate summary of the Americans in the second half of the century and were there ant white Americans who had other views. The statement "the only good Indian is a dead one" was uttered by an army officer named general Sheridan in 187?. After the civil war, he played an important role in Indian affairs by placing then in reservations in the later part of the 19^th century. When a Native American chief surrendered to the general, he used the words `good Indian', so the army would know he meant no harm. ...read more.

Middle

This angered the Indians more and soon the army had to take control of the problems occurring. The government did see the native Indians as dead. After years of trying to civilize them, through schools, polices and religion. The government eventually gave up and wanted them out of American culture for good. They did this in many ways. By aggressive polices and by the force of the army. The government saw the Indians as a dead culture and nation and were a nucease to the Americans and not only showed them predigests but also discriminated them for being different and acted in racial ways explaining their reasons every time to ease their conscience. Whatever the government were thinking, the army would act it out. We know this through the sources and accounts. After the civil war many of the army were posted in fort to keep an eye on the west and to protect whites from the Indians. The army playing a huge part in keeping order when the peace policy of putting them on reservations came about as it was there job to make sure they went on this land otherwise their would be trouble. The army were responsible for destroying many tribes way of life and threatening them till they obeyed them. The army during this time saw the Indians in two groups. The Indians in the reservation as good and the Indians not as hostile. ...read more.

Conclusion

Whether they wanted them sprightly dead or just dead culture. In this essay I have looked at the relationships between the cultures and the white Americans views of the native American. The majority of the Americans in the later part of the century did see the Indian as dead. Although it was more the death of their culture rather then the death of a whole nation . when the Indians refuse the American way of life was the reason of the white Americans hatred for them and it can be seen that they were racist towards the Indians. We seen this through the government and the harshness of some of the polices produced. The American people felt that it was their right to behave lie this mainly because of the American ideology of manifest destiny and the constitution. The army showed great hostility towards the Indian and it can be argued as to way it got worse after the civil war when many army officers did not have much to do so turned their attention to the tribes in the great plains. The reformers did not share this hatred with the army and the people experiencing the hostility in the west and had a different view of the word dead Indian. Although they had good intentions to stop the conflicts they wanted the same thing as with the army and the government the death of the American Indian. So yes this was the view of the white Americans in the later part of the century, and maybe it still is. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE History Projects section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE History Projects essays

  1. To what extent can historians be objective?

    Edward Carr believes that a personal interpretation of the basic facts is central to historical enquiry, and part of what he terms the "dialogue between the past and the present". To Carr, history cannot make progress without this interactive dialogue.

  2. To what extent were Stalins economic policies successful?

    In 1937 the target for electricity was 38.0 thousand million kilowatts but Russia only managed 36.2, the target for coal in million tons was 125.5 but only 128 was accomplished, oil missed its target by 16.5 million ton and pig iron missed its by 1.50.

  1. What were the causes of Indian Independencein 1947, and was partition inevitable?

    However, one may argue that this was not the case; by this point independence was so inevitable that two hated countries would even temporarily join together since they both had common interests, and that this was an exception to the general hatred between Muslims and Hindus.

  2. To what extent wasBritain Romanised

    By 50 AD, there were about 50,000 Romans living in Britain; as they were accustomed to living in towns, as they had done on continental Rome, new towns were built in Britain to house them. The towns were also built as a means of maintaining control of Britain: the new

  1. In what ways were the lives of children on the home front affected by ...

    However there was another way people died. The Blitz (1940-41 and 1942-43) was a time when all techniques developed during the phoney war came to good use. Some positive and negative effects were not knowing the seriousness of war and the building of shelters. Many children played games during this time , not knowing the seriousness of

  2. Beliefs of the Plain Indians

    (Extracts from The American West, Susan Willoughby). In some other tribes the young braves suffered further pain by enduring their fingers and toes being cut off. The ritual ended when the Medicine Man decided that it was complete. "The next day the dancing began, and those who were going to

  1. Charles the first was completely responsible for the civil war- to what extent is ...

    be the leader, this gives Charles full power, this disturbs the parliament because they are also greedy for power. This is a political, religious and personal cause. Between 1628 and 1629 Parliament only allow Charles money for 1 year, parliament do this so that Charles the first could call parliament yearly.

  2. 'Law and Order in the American West'

    As railroads developed further and stretched further west, this development gave rise to new cow towns such as Dodge City and Newton. However this westward expansion attracted more speculators than settlers. Mining towns or rather 'camps' rapidly sprung up around alleged mining sites.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work