Sharing Is Caring: The American Government Was Neither

After the Civil War, America found itself with a new goal: settling. And when gold was discovered in the Midwest, the incentive for settling became a lot shinier (literally). As we all know, when Christopher Columbus sailed the ocean blue, that chunk of land he mistakenly found himself upon was not uninhabited. And now, along with the weight of factoring newly freed slaves into society, America also had to deal with these horrible tribes they found taking up their new living space. Let’s just say Americans did not believe in the first come, first gets-to-stay-in-their-homes policy.

ABC-CLIO Federal Native American Policies Visual.
In the events detailed above, it's clear the settlers and American government
never respected the Native Americans and the land they had owned long
before the settlers came along.

Native Americans: Intention vs. Actions

The government has never been a fan of sharing, and that was true back when they were first settling the country. Many leaders looked at natives as a “barrier to civilization”. In an ABC-Clio video, my class and I learned about Henry Pratt, an American white man who was strongly opposed to the Native American lifestyle. He established schools for the children of tribes in an effort to “kill the Indian”. Pratt believed in order to save the man, the Indian inside of him must be killed. Another day in class we read the Dawes Act of 1887, a document clearly establishing white superiority, allowing them to control the lives of the Native Americans and where those lives could take place. The document ends by saying, “with consent of a majority of the adult male members of said tribe”. This means whites were not technically given the right to abuse Native Americans or force them out of their established living spaces without their consent. Did this stop us? Does it ever?? We continued removing and forcing these tribes out of their homes. The Dawes Act may have provided a safety around the Natives, protecting their tribes by requiring their consent, but this was not enforced and, from the looks of what I’ve seen, the government didn’t make any effort to protect the rights they said they would. In a more specific turn of events, the Second Treaty of Laramie in 1868, officially granted the Dakota territory west of the Missouri River to the tribes. Although this land was declared property of the tribes, this stopped no one, as settlers continued their way onto the Native Americans’ territories.

Buffalo Soldiers: Intention vs. Actions

An image from the PBS video we watched in class.
Buffalo soldiers were thrown onto the toughest terrain. Given only horses to
travel with, soldiers often ended up walking because riding horseback on such
terrain was dangerous. 

Buffalo soldiers were African American soldiers previously on the side of the Union in the Civil War who had decided to continue fighting for the American military. We learned in the ABC-Clio video that from the very start, these soldiers were not considered to be on the same tier as other soldiers. They were stationed in the roughest terrain; locations other soldiers refused to work in. The buffalo is an animal that can provide food as well as clothing to its hunter—this is more than can be said of the American government’s actions toward the Buffalo soldiers. Buffalo soldiers were not only sent through the rough terrain, but they were expected to civilize it, setting up railroads, telegraph lines, and to map the unknown territories. These soldiers shouldn’t have been sent blindly into questionable locations to begin with, let alone be forced to work in them for weeks at a time. In a PBS Video we watched in class, it was clear that no matter where these soldiers were stationed, they were never treated with the respect they deserved. When they were sent into already civilized locations, it wasn’t much better. There were significant prejudices against blacks even after slaves had been freed. They didn’t have the authority they needed to watch over established cities and towns because the people inhabiting these locations couldn’t see a black man as someone of authority. Whether in uncharted territories or established cities, Buffalo soldiers weren’t treated the way they deserved.

A Purposefully Impossible Intent

Looking at the documents from this time regarding Natives and Buffalo Soldiers, the government never stated that these peoples should be treated differently. They demanded that a tribe’s consent must be given before anything is done and that Buffalo soldiers would protect the country much like any other soldiers. Unfortunately, these ideas were not enforced. I believe that the government knew these intentions wouldn’t bode well for the tribes and soldiers. Tribes were removed with ease because the government showed no enforcement of the protection they gave to the tribes. And in terms of the Buffalo Soldiers, the government never established the authority they needed to succeed. The government may have said these groups should receive equal treatment, but they never enforced it, and because of that these groups were always at a disadvantage. 

Almost A Robin Hood: Stealing From The Middle To Give To The Poor

After the civil war, America needed to repair not only their homes, but also their economy. This took the power of innovators, now referred to as Captains of Industry. Some of these groundbreaking men consisted of Andrew Carnegie, J.P Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, and many others. Although these men worked effortlessly to bring an era of innovation alive, it’s debatable whether or not they were had a positive effect on America. Positive—because they brought in funds and work ethics which helped to inspired Americans towards a brighter future. Negative—because they showed little appreciation to their employees who helped to bring their ideas alive. Now the question is which of these effected Americans more?

Wow! These guys are great!

In class we watched an ABC Clio video which gave us an overview of the unit. Splitting into groups to take notes on a specific aspect of the video (main ideas, key people, important events, or essential terms) we got a general understanding of the success of these Captains of Industry. After the video we read through bios of Carnegie and Rockelfeller which went into the specifics of their industry. By the end of their careers, both men had made mass donations to charitable organizations bettering America after the war. They put the money they had worked hard to earn towards helping the poor. John D. Rockefeller in an interview with William Hoster, quoted in God's Gold (1932) by John T. Flynn, said, “I believe it is my duty to make money and still more money and to use the money I make for the good of my fellow man.” Throughout one of the toughest times in American history, The Great Depression, these men strived to make a life for themselves and provide for others. With their understanding of materials people couldn’t live without, Rockefeller working with oil industries and Carnegie producing steel, they set up businesses that would strive even in the toughest conditions. But were they using their power for good?

Maybe not so much…

"Forty-Millionaire Carnegie in his Great Double Role," The
 Saturday Globe, 9 July 1892; from David P. Demares.
To the right Carnegie gives money to charitable organizations,
to the left he lowers the wages of his employees. 

Watching the video recap of Carnegie and Rockefeller’s successes may have left us in awe of their drive and effective business tactics, but when we took a closer look at primary soures from this time period, we realized they may not have been the superheroes America needed. In a comic strip pictured to the left, it’s clear Carnegie was not as generous to his workers as he was to charities and other organizations. Carnegie may have been a saint towards those who were at a disadvantage compared to the rest of society, but during The Great Depression, the “rest of society” wasn’t at much of an advantage to begin with. Carnegie helped the lowest classes by donating his mass of wealth, but his employees’ unfair wages didn’t help the middle class with their own problems. Seeing as the middle class makes up a majority of society and that the economy was hurting during this time, a focus should’ve been put on the middle class. If they had received the wages and support Carnegie and Rockefeller were giving to the lowest classes, they would’ve been perpetuated into bettering their financial situations and stabilizing the economy for all classes. These captain of industry were, without a doubt, helping some parts of society, but it wasn’t the part of society that needed the most help at this time.

They were the best the Great Depression had to offer

Although these guys may not have given their workers a ticket to a bright and glorious future, they gave their workers something; which was more than most businesses were doing during this time. Most corporations were either firing the majority of their staff or shutting down the business altogether. Carnegie and Rockefeller at least gave their workers a steady income, even if that income wasn’t the best it could be. Given the circumstances of America’s economy during this time, the captains of industry provided their employees with more than most businesses: a stable job, and for that I believe they had a positive impact on America.