The Treaty That Forced the Cherokee People from Their Homelands Goes on View

Post by mieseratte » Tue, Apr 30, 2019, 2:09 PM UTC

yonaguska wrote: post #38

codedokode wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the way, why did Southern states import slaves from Africa instead of enslaving local people?

It was too difficult, since it was easy for locals that knew the land to just run away and take refuge with other tribes. In Florida, some black slaves notoriously ran away and joined the Seminoles, a tribe that led a pretty notable resistance for sovereignty. This is a simplification, another big factor would have been the fact that many tribes had already established themselves as political entities, expect the fiv…

Post by erikpukinskis » Tue, Apr 30, 2019, 3:39 PM UTC

abtinf wrote: post #13

erikpukinskis wrote: post #11

It seems clear to me that the treaty violates the U.S. Constitution and as such, the property in question still belongs to the Cherokee People. It may take some time for the Supreme Court eventually to rule on the matter, but the current property "owners" are criminal trespassers in my view.

> the treaty violates the U.S. Constitution I am not a constitutional law expert, but I believe that under article 6 section 2 (the supremacy clause) treaties are held to be equal to the constitution. Thus, there is a very high bar for a treaty to by nullified based on contradicting the constitution. There is very little case law on this, and I believe the only instance in which an international executive agreement (…

Post by erikpukinskis » Tue, Apr 30, 2019, 3:46 PM UTC

300bps wrote: post #52

erikpukinskis wrote: post #11

It seems clear to me that the treaty violates the U.S. Constitution and as such, the property in question still belongs to the Cherokee People. It may take some time for the Supreme Court eventually to rule on the matter, but the current property "owners" are criminal trespassers in my view.

“Adverse possession” laws would likely be triggered even if the treaties were invalidated. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_possession

Post by erikpukinskis » Tue, Apr 30, 2019, 3:53 PM UTC

jacobolus wrote: post #15

toasterlovin wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A good model would probably be one of the central or South American countries. Mexico would probably be a good model for the northern states and Brazil would probably be a good model for the southern states (due to the large degree of African ancestry in its population). In Mexico there was a high degree of mixture between Europeans and indigenous and current day Mexico has a socio-economic gradient that roughy follo…

In Mexico rural indigenous peasants were treated as subhuman garbage. White landowners pretty much did what they liked: murder, rape, theft, kidnapping, forced labor, mass-murder, destruction of whole villages, forced relocation, ... Within living memory, indigenous people would have their property stolen or destroyed by Spanish-speaking thugs with no legal recourse, would be forced into labor, would be murdered or r…

Post by steve76 » Tue, Apr 30, 2019, 4:23 PM UTC

crumpets wrote: post #36

williamstein wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are still millions of native Americans today, some full blood. Go visit the rez. Their culture is beautiful.

Not really the same thing. Most are just a shell of their former culture and independence. It’s similar to native Hawaiians. Despite significant effort, that culture is being drowned by tourists and the massive non-native population influencing them. Sure, you can celebrate the culture and the language, but it doesn’t even begin to give you a glimpse of what it could have been without European invasions.