In \u201cSettler colonialism and the elimination of the native,\u201d Patrick Wolfe argues that genocide and the elimination of the American Native population through colonial settlement are inextricably linked, though are not always the same. Wolfe cites numerous examples in the article, such as the Holocaust and the creation of the Israeli state, but predominately structures his argument around the Indian Removal of the 1830s. During the presidency of Andrew Jackson, Indian tribes located in the Southeast United States were forcibly removed from their homes and ordered to relocate to the West, where federal territory was available for Indian reservations. Wolfe points out, however, that the removal was not mandatory\u2014Indians could remain in the Southeast if they completely assimilated into American society and abandoned their tribal identities. Indians who assimilated into the white, American ideal were subject to a sort of genocide, because retaining their property was dependent upon the loss of their \u201cIndigenous soul[s]\u201d (Wolfe 397).<\/p>\n
While I agree with Wolfe that the Indian Removal approached a genocide, I consider the term \u201ccultural genocide\u201d to be a more appropriate term for understanding the historical event and its implications. Indians who remained in the Southeast were not mass-murdered; therefore it would be unfair to label the Indian Removal as genocide equivalent to the Holocaust, in which six million Jews lost their lives. The forced annihilation of Native culture, however, must not be ignored as insignificant, justifiable, and forgivable. Therefore, I must completely disagree with one of my colleague\u2019s blog posts, \u201cNot Genocide.\u201d My colleague argued that the Indian Removal was probably \u201ca necessary evil,\u201d for which white Americans could not have understood \u201cthe impact any of their actions would have on the future.\u201d It is true that we cannot consider the Indian Removal from a modern-day context in which prejudices against Native peoples are politically incorrect. This does not mean, however, that the forced removal of Natives, which resulted in a loss of culture and a loss of lives, was a necessary and justifiable evil. The Indian Removal was just evil. Further, I do not believe that white Americans would have even cared to consider \u201cthe impact any of their actions would have on the future.\u201d The people who forced Indians to flee their homes at gunpoint, would not have worried about the long-term implications of their actions. In actuality, these people wholeheartedly believed in Natives\u2019 inferiority, and the only Natives who were not subject to removal were forced to reject their Indian identities. Thus, the Indian Removal was a cultural genocide, and its terribleness should not be undermined in historical study.<\/p>\n
Wolfe, Patrick. “Settler colonialism and the elimination of the native.”\u00a0Journal of Genocide Research\u00a0<\/em>8, no. 4 (December 2006): 387-409.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" In \u201cSettler colonialism and the elimination of the native,\u201d Patrick Wolfe argues that genocide and the elimination of the American Native population through colonial settlement are inextricably linked, though are not always the same. Wolfe cites numerous examples in the article, such as the Holocaust and the creation of the Israeli state, but predominately structures … <\/p>\n