discussion 2

 Discussion Question -- Consider indigenous peoples, native to the land we call America, and their beliefs of lands and natural elements as sacred gifts to all. Contrast this to the European notion of land ownership, which made the buying and selling of land a part of their colonization of indigenous peoples and discuss how these ideologies clash. What does Tecumseh appeal to and how does his plea connect with the politics Trodd mentions in the introduction? 

300 words

peer 1 post

     Tecumseh was part of the native people that lived here where we call America. The Indians were the first people to settle here and call this land theirs. When Europeans started migrating over to America, they thought that they had the rights to this land regardless of the people that already lived here. 

            Tecumseh states “No tribe has the right to sell, even to each other, much less strangers”. Tecumseh preaches that all this land should be free to everyone because the higher power provided it and it should not belong to one person. He Europeans thought they could just push the Indians out of their home territory by purchasing it from them. Europeans came from a different part of the world where it is customary per say to pay for things that you want and that everything has a price. The natives were aware of there ways and I believe this is why they clashed in their different beliefs. 

            I think that Tecumseh and trod connect with politics in the way that they both wanted to fight in what they believed in. They both had the right to fight for what they believed in, both instances they had good arguments and they were both being mistreated. There were protest writers in the natives days and it has continued throughout history. In the introduction it says “Protest writers also try to close the gap between blueprint and reality, between what should be and what it”. This point proves to be true for both Tecumseh and Trodd. Tecumseh believes that all land should be free for all and shouldn’t be sold, whereas Europeans are doing want they want and selling the land to the Natives who already lived there to get them to move out. 

peer 2

The article states “Sell a country! Why not sell the air, the great sea, as well as the earth? Did not the Great Spirit make them all for use of his children”? Those questions show how indigenous people view nature, and natural resources. They don’t view them as items with monetary value. Instead they view them as gifts from the Great Spirit who made them for his children. They were made for people to use, free of charge. This way of thinking was quite a contrast to the thinking of European nations. To them everything has its price it’s just a matter of finding out what the price is. The settlers were not even offering fair value, “the Treaty of Fort Wayne ceded 3 million acres of land for less than two cents an acre”. When one group feels as though natural resources are priceless and another group has engaged in price gouging for centuries, there will be conflict between the two groups.

Tecumseh tried to appeal to as many tribes as he could. He wanted to unite the tribes against a “common aggressor”. Settlers were trying to take the lands of Indians. Another example of this is the “Trail of Tears” and everything surrounding it. It’s another example of settlers taking land from Indians. Tecumseh also tried to appeal to the settlers through religion, Christianity to be specific. He knew that he couldn’t appeal to their sense of decency or code of honor. So instead of wasting time going in that direction, he did the next best thing. He appealed to their sense of religion by “asking the white audience to recall Christ’s suffering, making Harrison the Pontius Pilate of Indian removal". He was comparing himself to Jesus Christ and gather favor for his side of the debate. 

I find it interesting how “Tecumseh kept pushing Harrison to the edge of his seat until he protested”. It was a visual representation of what settlers were doing to Indians.