Our second to last lesson of the year is studying Native Americans and Buffalo soldiers and how the federal government impacted their lives. The essential question for this lesson is, “Were federal policies towards Native Americans and buffalo soldiers intentionally discriminatory or well intentioned?” Buffalo Soldiers were African American Cavalry soldiers. They served in the Indian Wars and the Spanish American War. We were split into small groups and each group was assigned a topic that they would keep track of throughout the lesson. My group’s topic was the main ideas of this lesson. Then, to obtain a general overview of the topic, we watched several videos on ABC Clio and took notes. After these videos, we then watched a video specifically on the Buffalo Soldiers in New Mexico that explained the challenges Buffalo soldiers experienced. Each group then read through documents and took notes, where necessary, to support their topic. After we finished completing the research for this lesson, we then created forty multiple choice questions that will appear on our final exam. The government established some laws and acts that helped the Native Americans and Buffalo soldiers, but they also acted discriminately towards Native Americans and Buffalo soldiers. There were some federal policies towards Native Americans and buffalo soldiers that were well intentioned, but there were also many policies that were intentionally discriminatory.
The Native Americans lived in the West and lived peaceful, safe lives without the interference of whites. To learn more about Native Americans and buffalo soldiers each group read "American Indians, Buffalo Soldiers, and Westward-bound Whites: Mounting Tensions on the American Frontier" and took notes. The United States had also allowed blacks to become soldiers, with the creation of United States Colored troops and the six regiments of African American troops, which included four infantry, two cavalry, and approximately one thousand men who became to be known as buffalo soldiers. The Federal Government originally treated Native Americans nicely, but when the westward expansions and gold rush occurred, the government started acting very violently towards the Native Americans. In Helen Hunt Jackson: A Century of Dishonor, 1881, the following is stated, “These Indians found themselves of a sudden surround by and caught up in the great influx of gold-seeking settlers, as helpless creatures on a shore are caught up in a tidal wave.” The technique of total war was used to wipe out tribes.. The government removed buffalo, which was the major source of food, clothing, and tools for the Native Americans. This resulted in devastation for the Native Americans. Native americans were forced to move to a smaller territory during the westward expansion so that the Americans could have more land. They were also forced to farm in difficult land, which made matters even worse since they weren’t very comfortable with farming techniques in the first place. The Native Americans tried to negotiate with the government, coming up with ideas that would benefit both sides, but the government persisted with their own benefits in mind. Whites did not want to be told what to do by blacks. These greedy actions, made by the government, show that the federal policies were turning into being intentionally discriminatory. In wars, white men always made the first aggression on blacks, such as Buffalo soldiers, which demonstrates extreme discrimination. In 1830, Andrew Jackson initiates the system of Indian Removal, which causes hundreds of deaths of Indians. This action, made by the controversial president, demonstrates how violent and greedy the government was acting. Although these actions were beyond discriminatory, there were some federal policies that were well intentioned. The government implemented schools for Native Americans. Although this idea was well intentioned at first, it then turned into an institution for whites to “americanize” natives, which shows that some of the federal policies were discriminatory. More well intentioned acts followed, starting with the signing of the Second Treaty of Fort Laramie in 1868. This treaty states that Indians will have the Dakota territory. This was a well intentioned policy. The government also worked hard to make African Americans citizens so that they could be protected by the government, but these rights “must protect them till then in every night and particular in which our laws protect other “persons” who are not citizens. The government is trying to establish laws for African American, but they were not considering them citizens at the same time. Another well intentioned policy made by the federal government was the Dawes Act of 1887, which we read about in excerpt from the Dawes Act, 1887. This act granted the right to Indians to have land and citizenship if, they were willing to become farmers or sharecroppers and change to American culture. This Act was regarded as the most significant piece of federal legislation related to the land rights of Native Americans. This act started off well intentioned, but because it states that the Indians must convert to American culture, it translates into an act of discrimination.
This is an image of Buffalo soldiers from the following source. This image was also seen in the video on Buffalo Soldiers that we watched in class.
Although learning about this lesson was intriguing, it was also painful to see how harsh Americans were towards Native Americans and Buffalo Soldiers. Federal policies that were implemented on Native Americans and Buffalo Soldiers were sometimes well intentioned at first, but then evolved into being discriminatory. I think that this is still seen today. The government, as well as many white people, try to ensure equality among all races, but our society will always be tainted with discrimination and racism.
This lesson is the first of three lessons where as a class we will divide into groups, analyze documents, and then come up with a total of forty multiple choice questions that will appear on our final exam. This lesson focused on John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie, along with their effects on the common worker in America after the Civil War. After discussing as a class, we decided on the following essential question, “How did the actions of monopolistic leaders, such as Rockefeller and Carnegie, affect the common worker?” A monopolistic leader is a leader who has control over an industry, according to this definition. This definition is similar to that of a monopoly, which is when a single corporation controls all of a product of industry.We divided ourselves into five groups, assigning each group a topic to research, my group’s start was the main ideas of the lesson. To familiarize ourselves with our topics, we watched several videos on ABC Clio as a class while taking notes. After we finished watching these videos, we then split into groups and took notes on each of our topics. After everyone had finished analyzing the documents and watching the videos, we then came up with eight multiple choice questions that went on with each of our topics. After we completed this part of the lesson we felt that we could answer the essential question. The actions of monopolistic leaders, such as Rockefeller and Carnegie affected the common worker in both positive and negative ways.
Rockefeller affected the common worker in mostly positive ways, but in a few negative ways, too. Rockefeller was an entrepreneur. An entrepreneur is a person who organizes and operates a business or businesses, taking on greater than normal financial risks in order to do so. To learn more about Rockefeller each group read the “John D. Rockefeller Biography.” He helped create the American petroleum industry and donated millions of dollars towards the advancement of education, medicine, and science, thus characterizing him as a philanthropist. In the 1870s Rockefeller formed the Standard Oil Company of Ohio, which wiped out almost all rival oil businesses due to his smart business tactics, reduction in prices, and negotiating with people. In 1880, the Standard Oil company managed to secure a monopoly over oil refining and transportation and thus became one of the largest corporations in the United States. Although this was a good business move, he cost the jobs of many people in other oil businesses, thus affecting the common worker negatively. During this time, Rockefeller was being criticized by the public, who thought his actions were based off of greed. To counter this, Rockefeller donated money to charities and schools. He even established a medical research center and the Rockefeller Foundation, which went towards helping eliminate yellow fever. Although Rockefeller donated all of this money, he was considered the wealthiest man in American history. He had more money than the financial government had at the time. In an interview William Hoster, which is quoted God’s Gold (1932) by John T. Flynn, Rockefeller says, “I believe the power to make money is a gift of God...to be developed and used to the best of our ability for the good of mankind. Having been endowed with the gift I possess, I believe it is my duty to make money and still more money and to use the money I make for the good of my fellow man according to the dictates of my conscience.” Rockefeller positively affected the common worker by donating money to help medicine, education, and science, but he also negatively affected the common worker by taking away people’s jobs who worked at other oil companies than his own.
Andrew Carnegie was similar to Rockefeller in that he affected the common workers positively and negatively. To learn more about Carnegie, we read the“Andrew Carnegie Bio.” Carnegie was once poor, but then he become one of the wealthiest men in the world, demonstrating a “rags to riches” type of story. He became wealthy by gaining power in the U.S. steel industry. He also used vertical integration, which was a system in which a company’s supply chain is controlled by that company. This allowed him to control raw materials, transportation, and distribution within in the steel industry, managing every stage of the production process from beginning to end. Similar to Rockefeller, Carnegie was also a philanthropist and he to donated millions of dollars to medicine, education, and science. He also donated money to create libraries and promote world peace. Carnegie also demonstrated the idea of gospel of wealth which is defined as the moral obligation to use wealth for public good. However, although this quality of him was beneficial to the common worker, in the year of 1892 there was homestead strike of Carnegie's homestead mill. The strike, which we learned about by watching the Homestead Strike Video, revealed Carnegie’s plan to destroy the iron and steel worker’s union, which resulted in a public outcry. His reputation was ruined by this outcry as seen in the Editorial in the St. Louis Post Dispatch, early August, 1892. This editorial declares the following about Carnegie, “Three months ago Andrew Carnegie was a man to be envied. Today he is an object of mingled pity and contempt. In the estimation of nine-tenths of the thinking people on both sides of the ocean he has not only given the lie to all his ascendants, but confessed a moral coward…” The Homestead Strike showed how Carnegie negatively affected the common worker. When the depression hit the United States in 1893, Carnegie used the depression to his advantage and acquired land to connect the steel producing center to the northwest water routes. This also demonstrates how Carnegie negatively impacted the common worker.
I think that Rockefeller and Carnegie both positively and negatively affected the common worker. We see this pro and con relationship in political and business figures all the time. For example, some would say President Obama has helped everyone by establishing Obama Care, while others would argue that the economic crisis that our country suffered through during his leadership negatively overshadowed any improvements to our healthcare system . I enjoyed reading the documents for this lesson in my groups and taking notes in a Google Doc with my entire class. I felt this was an effective way of learning. Both Rockefeller and Carnegie were leaders of the industrial growth and for the most part liked by the public.
