15 November 2012

Trail of Tears – Driven West




Driven West: Andrew Jackson and the Trail of Tears by A.J. Langguth, 2010, Excerpts

1829: President Andrew Jackson Speech to Congress

“Surrounded by the whites with their arts of civilization, which by destroying the resources of the savage doom him to weakness and decay, the fate of the Mohegan, the Narragansett, and the Delaware is fast over-taking the Choctow, the Cherokee, and the Creek. That this fate surely awaits them if they remain within the limits of the States does not admit of doubt.

I informed the Indians inhabiting parts of Georgia and Alabama that their attempt to establish an independent government would not be countenanced by the Executive of the United States, and advised them to emigrate beyond the Mississippi or submit to the laws of those Sates.”

1830: Emboldened by President Jackson’s speech, Georgia’s legislators decided to finish off Cherokee resistance once and for all. They passed the Cherokee Code, which annexed most of Cherokee territory to five neighboring white counties and declared Cherokee law within those areas null and void. The code banned all Cherokee meetings, and any Cherokee who resisted Jackson’s removal policy could be arrested and jailed. The code also forbade Cherokees from testifying against white men or prospecting for gold on the formerly Cherokee territory. All previous contracts between Indians and whites were nullified unless two white men agreed to vouch for their validity.

1838: General Scott had drawn up a logistical plan for collecting the Cherokees. Troops would seek out Indians from North Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, and Alabama. Before his arrival, the federal government had built twenty-three military stockades throughout the Cherokee Nation. He told his men to seize Cherokee women and children first since they would serve as hostages for bringing in their men to the stockades.

Georgians were following the troops as they rounded up the Cherokees and confiscating their possessions and livestock. Before the Cherokees could be led away, they saw their houses stripped bare and set on fire. Marauders were digging up graves to make off with any silver jewelry that might have been buried with a Cherokee corpse.

Cherokees were arrested and not allowed to gather up their clothes before they were herded away like cattle. As they went, Scott’s soldiers were whooping and bellowing like cattle. At Ross’s Landing, some Cherokees had refused to go board for the river crossing. “The soldiers rushed in,” according to one letter to the newspaper,” and drove the devoted victims into the boats regardless of their cries and agonies. In this cruel work the most painful separations of families occurred. Children were sent off and parents left.”

A Baptist preacher sent a report from Tennessee to his church magazine. “The Cherokees are nearly all prisoners. The poor captive, in a state of distressing agitation, his weeping wife almost frantic with terror, surrounded by a group of crying, terrified children, without a friend to speak a consoling word, is in a poor condition to make a good disposition of his property, and in most cases is stripped of the whole, at one blow.” Cherokees with a comfortable living only a few days before had been reduced to abject poverty.

Protests were reaching a pitch that General Scott could no longer ignore, although he continued to absolve his troops. He claimed that the Indians themselves were to blame for their plight since, instead of obeying his orders, they were clinging to false hopes.






War of 1812 - Turning Point




Lies My Teacher Told Me by James Loewen, 1995, Excerpts

The most important cause of the War of 1812 was land – Spanish land [Florida], British land [Canada], but most of all Indian land. The War of 1812 cannot be understood so long as its Indian origin is obscured. Whites along the frontier wanted the war, and along the frontier most of the war was fought, beginning in November 1811 with Harrison’s attack on the Shawnees and allied tribes in Indiana, called the Battle of Tippecanoe. The United States fought five of the seven major land battles of the War of 1812 primarily against the Native Americans. One reason the War of 1812 was so unpopular in New England was that New Englanders saw it as a naked attempt by slave owners to appropriate Indian land.

The result of the War of 1812 was the loss of part of our history. After 1815 Indians could no longer play what sociologists call the role of conflict partner so Americans forgot that Indians had ever been significant in our history. Even terminology changed: until 1815 the word Americans had generally been used to refer to Native Americans; after 1815 it meant European Americans.

From 1815 on, instead of spreading democracy, we exported the ideology of white supremacy. Gradually we sought American hegemony over Mexico, the Philippines, much of the Caribbean basin, and, indirectly, over other nations. Although European nations professed to be shocked by our actions on the western frontier, before long they were emulating us. British exterminated the Tasmanian aborigines; Germany pursued total war against Namibia. Hitler admired our concentration camps for Indians in the west and often praised to his inner circle the efficiency of America’s extermination – by starvation and even combat as the model for his extermination of Jews and Gypsies.

In 1823 Chief Justice John Marshall of the United States Supreme Court decreed that Cherokees had certain rights to their land in Georgia by dint of their “occupancy’ but whites had superior rights owing to their “discovery.” How Indians managed to occupy Georgia without having previously discovered it Marshall neglected to explain.



14 November 2012

Native American Indian Wars




Lies My Teacher Told Me by James Loewen, 1995, Excerpts

War with the Indians started in Acoma, now New Mexico, in 1599, when a Spanish leader avenged the death of his brother by enslaving most of the villagers and chopping off one foot of all males over 25 years of age. It spread to the Southeast where, because of fierce and implacable Indian resistance, the Spanish were unable to colonize Florida for over a hundred years.

The Indian-white wars that dominated our history from 1762 to 1815 and were of considerable importance until 1890 have disappeared from our national memory. General Sherman – who is notorious for having said, “The only good Indian is a dead Indian” – understood. “We took away their country and their means of support, and it was for this and against this they made war,” he wrote. “Could anyone expect less?”

Our history is full of wars with Native American nations. For almost two hundred years, almost continuous warfare raged on the America continent, its conflict more threatening than any the nation was to face again. Indian warfare absorbed 80 percent of the entire federal budget during George Washington’s administration and dogged his successors for a century as a major issue and expense. 



Zimbabwe Blood Diamonds



Zimbabwe's Marange diamond fields 'plundered'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-20305537
13 Nov 2012
At least $2bn (£1.25bn) worth of diamonds has been stolen from Zimbabwe, campaign group Partnership Africa Canada (PAC) has alleged. The "theft" at the Marange fields had enriched Zimbabwean officials, international gem dealers and criminals, the PAC report said. The industry's global watchdog body, the Kimberley Process, lifted a ban on Zimbabwean diamond sales in 2011, with the backing of the US and European Union. The ban was imposed in 2009 following reports that Zimbabwean military officials were benefiting from the diamond trade and there had been killings and human rights abuses at the Marange fields.

Zimbabwe government may 'close without diamond money'
14 Mar 2012
Zimbabwe's government could "close" unless projected diamond revenues start to flow into the treasury, Finance Minister Tendai Biti has warned. He said the mines ministry had informed him that no diamond auctions had been held this year. The mines ministry is controlled by Zanu-PF - and correspondents say the party is seen to be profiting from the diamond sector since a ban on Zimbabwe diamonds was lifted by the industry watchdog. After a decade of steep decline the economy is slowly recovering, but it remains fragile and tensions are rising again. With unemployment at 80%, the country's tax and revenue base remains extremely low. 

Marange diamond field: Zimbabwe torture camp discovered
08 Aug 2011
A torture camp run by Zimbabwe's security forces is operating in the country's rich Marange diamond fields, BBC Panorama has found. The program heard from recent victims who told of severe beatings and sexual assault. The main torture camp uncovered by the program is known locally as "Diamond Base". Witnesses said it is a remote collection of military tents, with an outdoor razor wire enclosure where the prisoners are kept. It is near an area known as Zengeni in Marange, said to be one of the world's most significant diamond fields. The claims come as the European Union pushes to let some banned diamonds from the country led by President Robert Mugabe back onto world markets.

Israeli diamond trader banned for 'blood diamond' link
29 Dec 2010
An Israeli diamond trader has been expelled from the Israel Diamond Exchange after he was suspected of smuggling "blood diamonds" into Israel. David Vardi was arrested in connection with a consignment of $140,000 (£92,000) of Zimbabwean stones, whose exports the Kimberley Process bans. Israel is the current chairman of the Kimberley Process.

Zimbabwe arrests six diamond mining officials
04 Nov 2010
Zimbabwean police have arrested six directors of two diamond mining corporations on suspicion of fraudulently obtaining a license. The officials work for the Zimbabwe Mining Development Corporation and Canadile Miners, state media reported. They are suspected of fraudulently obtaining a license to mine the controversial Marange fields, in the east of the country. Marange is mired in controversy over legal issues and abuse by the military. The Kimberley Process, a global certification scheme meant to prevent trade in "blood diamonds", has limited sales from Marange after its investigation found soldiers had beaten villagers to force them to mine the gems. "Blood diamonds" are rough diamonds used by rebel groups or their allies to finance wars and conflicts.

Zimbabwe diamonds sale under way
11 Aug 2010
Zimbabwe has held the first sale of diamonds from its Marange fields since the body overseeing the trade in "blood diamonds" lifted a ban. The Kimberley Process had suspended the diamond exports in November in response to allegations of atrocities committed by the military at Marange. But last month, it ruled that abuses had ceased and said Zimbabwe could resume limited exports. The diamonds from the Marange field could generate $1.7bn (£1.1bn) a year.

Deadlock over Zimbabwe 'blood diamond' trade
25 Jun 2010
The organization that controls the international diamond trade has failed to agree whether Zimbabwe should be allowed to resume diamond sales. Following talks in Israel, members of the Kimberley Process said discussions had been "clouded" by the arrest in Zimbabwe of a human rights activist. Farai Maguwu had alleged that forced labor was being used to develop Zimbabwe's new Marange diamond field. Zimbabwe has accused the West of trying to hold back its economic development.

Zimbabwe diamond sales ban urged
02 Nov 2009
Zimbabwe is facing calls to be suspended from the international diamond trade following allegations of brutality by its soldiers. Rights groups are lobbying members of the Kimberley Process, the body which regulates the trade in rough diamonds, to halt exports from Zimbabwe. Activists say soldiers killed about 200 people at a diamond field. Human Rights Watch said the police and army have turned what was a peaceful area into a "nightmare of lawlessness and horrific violence". Activists say local people are now being forced to search for diamonds, with all the profit being taken by Zanu-PF. The government denies the claims.

Zimbabwe army 'runs diamond mine'
26 Jun 2009
Lobby group Human Rights Watch has accused Zimbabwe's army of using forced labour, including children, to mine diamonds in the east of the country. On the face of it, the military takeover was an attempt to seize control from unlicensed miners, the lobby group says. But in reality it was a systematic attempt to enable key army units, whose support President Mugabe needed following June's elections, to have access to riches, Human Rights Watch says.



Enslaving Native Americans




Lies My Teacher Told Me by James Loewen, 1995, Excerpts

The Europeans’ enslavement of Native Americans has a long history. Textbooks used in elementary schools tell that Ponce de Leon went to Florida to seek the mythical fountain of youth; they do not say that his main business was to capture slaves for Hispaniola.

In New England, Indian slavery led directly to African slavery: the first blacks imported there, in 1638, were brought from the West Indies to be exchanged for Native Americans from Connecticut. On the eve of the New York City slave rebellion of 1712, in which Native and African slaves united, about one in four was enslaved and one slave was Indian. A 1730 census of South Kingston, RI, showed 935 whites, 333 African slaves, and 223 Native American slaves.

The center of Native American slavery, like African American slavery, was South Carolina. Its population in 1708 included 3,960 free whites, 4,100 African slaves, 1,400 Indian slaves, and 120 indentured servants, presumably white. These numbers do not reflect the magnitude of Native slavery, however, because they omit the export trade. From Carolina, as from New England, colonists sent Indian slaves [who might escape] to the West Indies [where they could never escape], in exchange for black slaves. Charleston shipped more than 10,000 Natives in chains to the West Indies in one year!

Intensified warfare and the slave trade rendered stable settlements no longer safe, helping to de-agriculturize Native Americans. To avoid being targets for capture, Indians abandoned their cornfields and their villages and began to live in smaller settlements from which they could more easily escape to he woods.  Ultimately, they had to trade with Europeans even for food. As Europeans learned from Natives what to grow and how to grow it, they became less dependent upon Indians and Indian technology, while Indians became more dependent upon Europeans and European technology. Thus what worked for the Native Americans in the short run worked against them in the long run. In the long run, it was Indians who were enslaved, Indians who died, Indian technology that was lost, and Indian cultures that fell apart. By the time the pitiful remnants of tribes converted to Christianity and joined the Puritans’ “praying Indian towns,” they did so in response to an invading culture.