Some Indian merchants had realized that these trades were unfair so only sold good furs for what they believed was goo manufactured goods. Though there weren’t disputes between the French and the Indians, land disputes would break out between the Indians over hunting grounds. This trade made for a far less stressful relation between the French and the indigenous people of the ‘New World’. Trade did have its faults for the Indians. Disease brought with the French quickly killed many Natives because they didn’t have any immunes built up.
In 1607, a boat from England arrived in the New World. This boat was full of men who hoped they could make a profit of the Americas. The English comforted their consciences on the belief that everything they did in the colonies was for the benefit of the natives. They believed that as Englishmen they had a right to claim the New World as theirs. The English believed that the Native Americans were not making the land yield enough fruit and this perceived shortcoming caused the natives to forfeit their right to the land.
“Savages”: An Unmerited Misnomer During the colonist era, Indians were prejudiced, treated unjustly and discriminated. They were called savages because their customs differed from those of the Europeans, when at times they proved to be exactly the opposite. Indians were patient, understanding, and very civil, sometimes showing more courtesy than the Europeans themselves. However, because their culture and beliefs diverged from European customs, Indians were labeled as a lesser race and treated unfairly. In his essay, “Remarks Concerning the Savages of North America”, Benjamin Franklin defends the idea of Indian civility in a very persuasive manner with the use of several rhetorical strategies.
These differences were deep rooted; so deep rooted in fact that even during the foundation of their country during the Revolution, troops in the North and South distrusted each other even more than they distrusted the British. Joseph Plumb Martin, a soldier during the War of Independence stated in his memoirs “Myself, I’d rather be fighting with a tribe of Indians than with these Southerners. I mean they’re foreigners; they can’t hardly speak English.” (2). In the four score and twenty years since the end of the revolution, the differences between the north and south had become far more profound. No longer was it just a different dialect; they held opposing ideologies, economies, institutions and religious beliefs, even differing mannerisms.
The Irish did have a resource that free American Americans lacked: an ability to organize and a penchant for violence honed through 200 years of clandestine resistance to British occupation of Ireland. In order to gain acceptance into mainstream American society, Irish immigrants embraced American racism as a way of establishing its whiteness and engaged African Americans in street violence that usually ended with the Irish victorious. Since Irish immigrants at times were viewed as inferior to African Americans, especially in New Orleans where Irish workers performed tasks such as dock building deemed dangerous to slaves. The rationale was that if a slave was injured or killed, his owner would have to be compensated. If an Irish labor was killed, another would just as quickly take his place.
Before the American Revolution, life was simple and in fact very boring because of the way England was treating them; governing them even though they were not in England. It was definite at that point that life was not going to get any easier unless the colonists stood up and did something about it. In earlier times, when colonists first arrived in North America, life was already hard. They were still under British law and had other natural obstacles to overcome. They had no decent terrain to grow crops and the Native Americans were hostile to some colonists.
Similarly Source K exhibits the hatred Ulster Unionists felt towards Home Rule as they ‘would resort to force’ to ensure their prosperity was not compromised by a terrorists wishes to become independent. The media displayed negative views to Parnell also, Source R indicates how publications like The Times linked Parnell to Fenianism, ‘series of articles on ‘Parnelism and Crime’. Being associated with Parnell made Gladstone’s struggle for Home Rule harder, perhaps the reasons the 1886 Bill failed both houses but the 1893 Bill made it through Common’s as Parnell’s involvement in Home Rule had dramatically decreased in the years beforehand. The split in the Liberal party meant internally the party had opposition indicating that while divided amongst themselves there was no chance to defeat the conservative dominated House of Lords. Overall numerous factors contributed to the downfall of both Bills but the main reason inevitably was the immediate rejection to the Bill by the Conservatives as it opposed what they believed so neither Parnell or Gladstone could
“Race Cleansing in America” Peter Quinn Article Review 2.1 In Peter Quinn’s article, “Race cleansing in America”, he states that it was against the law for the mentally retarded, or the “feeble-minded” (Quinn, 82) to produce offspring. These people were looked down upon as criminals to society who should not bring into being a second generation of themselves. Quinn’s theory: the feeble-minded were weak and the rich, as well as society, stepped all over them. Sterilization was the method that was introduced to end “imbeciles” (Quinn, 82), which would lead to a greater America. “It is better for all the world,” Justice Holmes asserted in Buck v. Bell, “if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind.
Social problems like these are treated in such a way that they leave viewers with the impression that they are caused by something innate within Aboriginal people, rather than by colonial impositions. These ideas are always presented as "common sense", and fail to address social or historical contexts, encouraging the wider community to adopt a shallow and bigoted view of Indigenous issues. This ideology of Indigenous Australians being a savage, much like a wild animal, leads some white settlers into the belief that they could be treated as such. In a letter to the editor in The Australian, Wednesday 20 June 1827, the author notes "It is said that the natives have become so very troublesome, that many persons have resolved to poison them", the comment’s tone suggests the white settlers likened them to pests. Furthermore, the linking of Aboriginals to animals is evident as the writer warns against the government “humanising and conciliating the savage tribes” as it would have dire consequences for the white
Business actually put up signs that stated Irish decent need not apply. Because of this discrimination, they were forced to take jobs that were considered to be disdainful by Americans. They were referred to as “white niggers” (Kinsella, 2008). Environmental justices issues; Irish immigrants faced environmental justice issues because of their forced segregation. Upon arriving in America, they were deluged by men who grabbed them and their belongings and escorted them to tenement housing.