The Question of Land and Treaties, 3
objectively settle. Who has the strongest claim to the use of the land? It is true that the United States in 1877 did force the Sioux Nation into giving up over 7 million acres of prime real estate, and that this action was in direct violation of the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty. However, it is also important to remember that the Sioux themselves displaced the Cheyenne and Kiowa tribes from the Black Hills when they were pushed westward across the great plains by their enemies, the Ojibwa. It is also important to keep in mind that Sioux war tribes were deliberately violating the terms of the Fort Laramie treaty as well in years prior, taking their hunting and warbands out beyond the lands which were guaranteed by the treaty and purposefully antagonizing the U.S. government. From one perspective, the attitude of 'might makes right' is a principle which not only benefitted the American culture with the taking of the Black Hills, but one which also benefitted the Sioux when they first took the Black Hills from the tribes which had been present previously. If you view the Black Hills as a spoil of war, then the question of land is decided by technological and tactical superiority on the battlefield, in which case the only crime of the United States lay in emerging victorious.
However, this viewpoint leaves much to be desired from the standpoint of post-civil rights era social sensibilities. The establishment of Mount Rushmore as a "Shrine of Democracy" and a memorial tribute to the lofty ideals of patriotic rhetoric clashes directly with the concept of deciding right and wrong through the use of violence. The deliberate violation of treaties also undermines our ability to look at Mount Rushmore with unstained national pride. Even worse is the constant
<<< Prev 1 2 3 4 Next >>>