A government was established in which people were elected into upper house and lower house, however the governors rarely made an appearance. Their independance meant that they had a wider franchise so they could pass useful acts to benefit themselves. Lack of communication was a major issue between the two, as Britain was over 3000 miles away. This meant that it was extremely difficult for Britain to have any involvement with the colonies, which resulted to salutary neglect. It could be argued that salutary neglect weakened the relationship, however the colonist's may have enjoyed this freedom to do what they wanted and make there own decisions.
Over time these natives and Europeans developed good and bad relationships. Most of the bad ones occurred, because there was little respect between the two cultures. The Europeans came into this new land not to make friends with the natives, but
Native people were guerilla warriors, but wasn’t quite as advanced as the European military. The military made Europeans impermeable to the native people that resulted in success of colonization of the
What was the difference between the Native Americans and the Europeans? One valued life more than the other. When the Europeans first intruded upon American territory, it was apparent that the Native Americans weren't sure what to think to such an intrusion. Of course, compared to when the Spanish encountered the Aztec and Inca empires, it was quite a subtle experience. The Native Americans had never been exposed to any world but their own.
In accounts over the years, it seems more commonly accepted that this was simply misunderstanding, due to Europeans not being exceptionally open minded to a foreign culture. “The discovery of the Americas did not begin with Christopher Columbus. It began thousands of years earlier, when human beings first crossed into the new continents and began to people them.” (Brinkley) It seems that respect for this statement wasn't expressed very diplomatically by some European settlers. I find this common thread of misunderstanding throughout accounts to be a quite chilling reflection of the situation's actuality. Is this directly connected to the misunderstanding which led to the slaughter of many?
* Paul Rusesabagina said in a lecture that the film was "less violent" than the actual genocide, claiming that "you couldn't invite someone to watch the real thing." A work is historically accurate when it accurately depicts the time period of the setting, as well as major events in the right sequence. Fictional characters can be used to help describe the historical event, but they can’t be the sole reason for any occurrence. Early European colonists favoured the Tutsis because they had lighter skin, therefore they were given more opportunities in big businesses/government than Hutus. Physical attributes and level of intelligence differentiated the two tribes.
Some characters in literature are not given proper names. By not naming the characters in books, it depersonalizes the actions of the individuals, and generalizes them to all Native Americans. Here are three ways in which the Native American culture has been portrayed stereotypically. "First, culture may be depicted as inferior to the white culture. "(Norton, 533) The attitude that Native Americans were "saved" by the Anglo-Saxon culture, Depicts their own as being inferior.
Spanish Conquest DBQ In the late 1400’s Spanish explorers traveled to the New World in search of three things: God, glory, and gold. The attitudes towards Amerindians were all very different, some felt like they were superior towards them, some felt pity, and some didn’t even know what was going on. The Spaniards went into the New World believing their actions were okay, and that religion justified their poor treatment on the Amerindians. On the other hand, there were some Spaniards who viewed the treatment of the Indians on a first-hand account, and believed that it was inappropriate. Spain tried to cover up what they were doing by lying to the public, making it seem like they were helping the Indians.
The Revolution held no promise for the Native Americans. Territorial expansion was one problem Native Americans faced during this time. Indians began to incorporate European tradition in their lives and relied somewhat on the American economy. Native Americans attempted to retain their identity in spite of the Revolution's promise of a changed nation. The social effects of the American Revolution proved to be somewhat advantageous to African and female Americans.
The Indians have achieved their dream, but the Europeans did not and they wanted to ruin the Indians so they could achieve theirs. Anyone can attain their dream. There are right and wrong ways to do