2.The three of these platforms have a wide range of views on poverty and the best course of action to eliminate poverty for good or at least get people on their feet. For starters, The gospel of Wealth written by Andrew Carnegie takes the viewpoint of the Wealthiest men in America. In his writings, he makes sure to explain that the reason that people are homeless and on the street is because they lack a good work ethic. The wealthy men are, “skilled and intelligent,” and view that being in “Poverty is a kind of character flaw.” Though he clearly does not feel sorry for these people because he believes it is deserved, the main point of the gospel is that the Wealthy should give back to the people. Carnegie doesn’t believe in splurging on one’s …show more content…
They believe in the, “Survival of the fittest'' meaning that only the people best suited for life survive. They believe in no interference whatsoever especially when it comes to government assistance. However, this system is no longer relevant because it didn't work. It did nothing to get people off of the streets. This is where populism was created which is an extreme version of Carnegie’s Gospel of wealth. They take the side of the poor, homeless, and hopeless Americans and they promise to rid the U.S. of poverty. The most contrasting difference between Populism and the other two is that they attempt to glorify the poor, making them equal to the “Elites'’ as they call them. They make the elites the enemy and scold them for sitting on their wealth showing them that their fellow Americans are rotting on the street. They also push the government to set aside a large portion of funds for the homeless and less fortunate because they need it more. This system can't run in a long term scenario because of the strain it puts on the budget and leaves other things …show more content…
The Dawes Act of 1887 and Native American boarding schools created a totally different approach toward Native Americans. In the years previous to the Dawes Act, Native Americanswere viewed as the enemy with countless tussles between the native people and the newcomers. It was what seemed to be endless fighting and the end tally of dead Native Americans coming out to be 56 million. Finally, the government had enough and forced the native people onto reservations, cutting their land to a fraction of what it once was. This however was not the end goal for the U.S. because they wanted to assimilate these people into American society, washing away their traditions and culture. In 1887 the U.S. passed the Dawes Act. This new act allows the president to chop up reservations into individual sized plots, in turn eliminating the tribe lifestyle. This is also around the time that Native American boarding schools began to pop up. The sole goal of these schools was to break the tradition and culture from these American children. This is one of the main reasons that very few people know how to speak traditional Native American because these children were being taught english. Once the Elders died, no one knew how to speak the ancient dialect. The only reason that Native Americans became assimilated was because they had to prove that they were not savages and could retain their land. These people did all they could to retain what was left of their land, even forgoing their culture for
Congress passed the Dawes Allotment Act in 1887, its purpose was to teach the Natives the farming methods and the American values of individualism as well as private property rather than collectively owned land in order to assimilate the Natives. This act is seen as the most assimilative and ruined tribal functions culturally and economically with the entire allotment process (O’Brien 77). The act divided reservation lands amongst individual people and families in order for them to farm and raise livestock. Each head of a household would obtain about 160 acres and individuals who were over the age of eighteen would get 80 acres, while all others would receive 40 acres of land, but any surplus land would go to settlers.
For this essay, the question under investigation is: “To what extent did the Dawes General Allotment Act of 1887 impact Native American Tribes and their culture?” The number of tribes impacted by this act is too vast for us to investigate them all, so the focus of this research question will be on the Five Civilized Tribes to make the subject less broad. Lifestyles of the Native Americans in the Five Civilized Tribes before and after the Dawes Act will be investigated to get a better understanding of the life and cultural changes these people endured. The impacts include the splitting up of land and the redistribution of the land to individual tribe members, and the introduction of "white culture," such as farming, to the Native Americans.
The depth of hostility felt by many white Americans toward the Indians was very aggressive in my opinion. I personally do not understand why they were so cruel to the Native Americans when the Indians were there first. I understand the concept that they needed to have sustainability and needs, but I think the white Americans did it the wrong way. Next, I think the main goal of the Dawes Severalty Act of 1887 was to compromise and share the land equally with the Indians.
The Dawes Act, which is also known as the General Allotment Act is how Congress distributed land to Native Americans in Oklahoma back in the late 1800s. It was passed February 8, 1887. The Dawes Act got its name from Congressman Henry Dawes. Dawes believed in civilizing powers of private property. Dawes also believed to be civilized was to wear civilized clothes, cultivate the ground, live in houses, send children to school, drink whiskey and own property.
However, this did not mean they were able to keep their land the way you might expect, and, is in fact, perhaps, one of the monstrous legislatives we have ever given to Natives. This act demolished, already identified boundaries, broke tribes apart as communal units, and threatened the cultural aspects of each tribe. This act applied to all Native American tribes, except: the Cherokee, Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Seminole, Osage, Miami, Sac, Fox, Peoria, and Seneca nations. This act, was actually named for Massachusetts Congressman Henry Dawes, who claimed that private property had the power to civilize, even the most basic brutes, and according to Dawes, the very act of being civilized, was to “wear civilized clothes, cultivate the ground, live in houses, ride in Studebaker wagons, send children to school, drink whiskey (and) own property.” Under the Dawes Act, the allotted persons would hold the land for 25 years; consequently, the land would then go to the individuals who had held that chunk of land or to their heirs, in which they would gain the title of American Citizen.
Dawes Severalty Act De Juan Evans-Taylor Humboldt State University Abstract The Dawes Act of 1887, some of the time alluded to as the Dawes Severalty Act of 1887 or the General Allotment Act, was marked into law on January 8, 1887, by US President Grover Cleveland. This was approved by the president to appropriate and redistribute tribal grounds in the American West. It expressly tried to crush the social union of Indian tribes and to along these lines dispose of the rest of the remnants of Indian culture and society. Just by repudiating their own customs, it was accepted, could the Indians at any point turn out to be genuinely "American."
In the 1800’s, America only favored the white man, and did not favor African-American, or Native Americans. America favored big business and the “Americanized” white man. The Dawes Act was made in hopes to Americanize the American-Indians, so they would fit in more with the white man. The idea of the Dawes Act had good intentions but ultimately it did not work out the way the government was hoping. The Dawes Act was to break up the Indian reservations and give them their own land, so the Indians could start farming, to civilize them.
More indians tribes were destroyed during war with the whites, and since the Native Americans did not have as much technology, food, and medicine as the whites, they lost a lot of warriors. Many Native Americans would leave their tribes in search for food only to be confronted and ambushed by white soldiers. Some Native Americans chose to surrender rather than to be moved to a different location. After the Indian and American War, the General Allotment Act was passed, also known as The Dawes Act of 1887. The Dawes Act granted Native Americans land allotments.
The Dawes Act had a negative effect on American Indians, as it ended their shared holding of property, which gave them a home and a spot in the tribe. The land granted to most of the Native Americans was not adequate for profitable capability. Most allotment land,
In contrast, The Survival of the Fittest, written by Herbert Spencer, was aimed toward a larger population. While both sources promote the idea of individualism, the difference in their purpose and ideas of individualism highlights the fundamentally different values and beliefs both sources represent. In the Gospel of Wealth, Carnegie says, “The millionaire will be but a trustee for the poor; entrusted for a season with a great part of the increased wealth of the community but administering it for the community far better than it could or would have done for itself” (The Gospel of Wealth). This excerpt shows that, for Carnegie, individualism means using one’s wealth and resources to serve the greater good and support those around us rather than simply pursuing oneself. While on the other hand, Spencer believes that the concept of survival of the fittest naturally occurs within society, “It favors the multiplication of those worst fitted for existence, and, by consequence, hinders the multiplication of those best fitted for existence—leaving, as it does, less room for them” (The Survival of the Fittest).
In this text, he makes a valid argument as to why the rich should administer their own wealth unto those with less fortune. He begins his argument by explaining how wealth has revolutionized the United States. Carnegie mentions how the Sioux chief's wigwam was similar in appearance when compared to the huts of those inferior to him, and then compares this to the differences in economic classes of the 1800s. Carnegie later states how the very definition of wealth has changed throughout the years, where the poorest farmer of the 1860s owns more luxuries than the landlord of just a few years prior. Carnegie includes these two facts because he wants to show how much society has progressed throughout the last few hundred years.
First of all, Native Americans were settled on a hotbed of natural resources which included oil and precious metals such as silver and gold. There was also much fertile land that would entice farmers and frontiersmen to move out west. On this land there was so much potential economic opportunity for farmers, cattle drivers, miners and many other occupations. The government developed the popular public misconception that the indians were misusing the land and that Americans had the right to take advantage of the opportunities that lie in the west. These ideas led to the Dawes Severalty Act of 1887 which authorized encroachment of Indian lands by the US government in order to divide up reservations and control Indian activity.
Underpinnings and Effectiveness of Carnegie’s “Gospel of Wealth” In Andrew Carnegie’s “Gospel of Wealth”, Carnegie proposed a system of which he thought was best to dispose of “surplus wealth” through progress of the nation. Carnegie wanted to create opportunities for people “lift themselves up” rather than directly give money to these people. This was because he considered that giving money to these people would be “improper spending”.
The Allotment Act The Dawes Act and its supporters sang a very similar tune to southerners who justified slavery as their patriarchal and christian duty. The Dawes Act allowed the President of the United States to survey the reservations Indians lived on and allot its land to heads of households, single persons over eighteen, and to orphans. This meant that the President went into reservations and redistributed the land, upsetting the system Native Americans had previously. Slave owners of the Antebellum South believed that the Black men and women needed to be enslaved, for they could not function without a patriarchal master. Westerners too saw the Native Americans as inferior, and felt that they had to help the tribal people be free of
Throughout the 19th century Native Americans were treated far less than respectful by the United States’ government. This was the time when the United States wanted to expand and grow rapidly as a land, and to achieve this goal, the Native Americans were “pushed” westward. It was a memorable and tricky time in the Natives’ history, and the US government made many treatments with the Native Americans, making big changes on the Indian nation. Native Americans wanted to live peacefully with the white men, but the result of treatments and agreements was not quite peaceful. This precedent of mistreatment of minorities began with Andrew Jackson’s indian removal policies to the tribes of Oklahoma (specifically the Cherokee indians) in 1829 because of the lack of respect given to the indians during the removal laws.