Americanization
Enoch Zenger
Chris Case History 2200
December 12, 2011
Since the founding of Jamestown, immigrants arriving in America have struggled and faced numerous obstacles to be accepted and considered an "American". What do you believe describes/defines the "Americanization " process? In your response consider specific acts or legislation and how these might have marginalized or included certain groups, did the acts or legislation change over time to exclude or include different groups, what aspects of cultural identity were sacrificed to be considered an "American" and cite specific nationalities to support your position.
To become an American; the dream of millions and perhaps even billions around the world, past and present. The thought of becoming recognized as belonging to the most powerful and free nation on earth is a compelling reason to sacrifice cultural identity, give up beliefs, attempt to assimilate, and even fight for chance to take part in the "American Dream". What defines the Americanization process and how does one become American? Both questions can be answered with one resounding word; land. If you are able to acquire land, and call it your own, you have passed the test, and "Americanized yourself". Several events and acts of legislation in our nation's history show proof of this fact.
Since colonian times, immigrants have made it a point that to be favored in the "power structure" one must own land. The thirteen colonies required by law that one own land in order to vote or hold a public office, and that requirement hasn't changed (Chris Case, History 2200 Notes, pg. 1). Colonials pushed the issue constantly that owning and acquiring land is what made one successful and "American". They even went so far as to push Natives, those who were here first, off of their land in order to satisfy their insatiable desire for more land (Case, pg. 6). Such legislative acts as the 1785 Treaty of Peace, which was designed to give land to Cherokee tribes were violated, and furthermore, cases such as Johnson vs M'intosh in 1823 favored Europeans and the "Discovery Doctrine"; meaning that if they discovered the land, regardless of whether Indians were already occupying it, they had the right to claim ownership because Indians were "unable to own land" (Case, pg. 6). Such discrimination against Indians was unfair. Whites were fiercely aggressive in their pursuit of land. Since the beginning their had been a "Cultural Confrontation" between "Native Americans and Europeans". The whites intended solely to "use the wilderness...(and) to convert nature into property..." (Olsen. Ethnic Dimensions in American History, pg.17). The whites had no respect and held no regard for the land that was "sacred" to Indians, they wanted it only for themselves leading to the greatest issue and "most important environmental conflict between Native Americans and Europeans" (Olsen, pg. 17). And despite the Indians attempts to resist the invasion, namely led by the Pequots and the Tuscaroras, they were forced to sell land and be removed from their environment (Olsen, pgs. 20, 22, 23). This was a huge sacrifice; their culture was bring ripped away. The "Native" Americans weren't so native anymore, they were pushed out. The competitive desire for land had driven immigrants to the point of hostile take over. Their need to "live the American Dream" and own land, overwhelmed them, and drove them to violence in order to obtain their wishes.
The dream of owning land continued with the further immigration of such nationalities as the Germans and Irish. They relished the thought of acquiring land, for they had never been allowed, especially Germans, to own land in their native countries (Olsen, pgs 27, 29, 33). They were convinced that the best way to seize attention and be recognized as Americans was to obtain land, and to fend for themselves. We see again, that the desire to have land prevails over all else in the process of becoming Americanized.
So the ensuing decades showed no variance in the craving to own earth. Attempts at being "humane" to Native Americans never succeeded. More legislative acts such as the Treaty of Fort Stanwix, designed to give Cherokees guaranteed and protected land, were quickly violated due to the "wave of settlers pouring across the Appalachians" (Olsen, pg. 55). White settlers always were favored in the eyes of the government, even if a document had been put in place to try and protect Indian land. Whites couldn't get enough of the land, so they sought to take more and more from Indians, and were almost never turned down. Treaties were abandoned in order to give them the "quick fix" they desired. They had to have more land, they had to become more American.
Further legislative acts such as Railroad Land Grants, the Homestead Act of 1862, Timber and Culture Act of 1873, and the Timber and Stone Act of 1878 violated former treaties that had intended to protect Indian Land in the west (Case, pg. 7). These new acts gave incoming white settlers first priority to obtain the land they desired. They could buy these 160 acre plots of land at cheap prices, forcing the Natives out. Hundreds of millions of acres were stolen from the Indians in order to help whites "Americanize" themselves (Case, pg. 8).
Indians were not the only nationality to be cheated of the "Americanization process". Blacks were also discriminated against, and were withheld from the opportunities that would have catapulted them upward in the power structure. They weren't allowed to purchase land, or when they were granted the chance, whites made it nearly impossible to do so. During the Reconstruction of the 1870's that occurred after the Civil War, blacks were supposed to be able to purchase land, but struggled to do so because of the racism that was incurred by white soldiers in the South (Olsen, pg. 99). With such heavy opposition being heaped upon them, the blacks stood no chance to fulfill their "American dream" and Americanize themselves.
The latter end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century showed to be even more taxing for Indians. New legislation was passed that reduced their owndership of land from 38 million to only 2 million acres in the West under the Dawes Severalty Act (Case, pg. 14). Futhermore, the Omnibus Indian Act allowed the government to underpay Indians significantly for remaining land, and the Bursum Act stole land from Indians and gave it to white settlers who had simply squatted on the land (Case, pg. 14 and Olsen, pg. 189). How could nationalities of dark-skin origin ever hope to acquire or maintain land and thereby become apart of the "Americanization process"? The whites were taking the spotlight for themselves and ensuring that only they were allowed to live the American dream. They kept the land for themselves.
To further illustrate nationalities that were denied access to land in the United States, we turn to the Jews. Although they faced a struggle in agreeing one with another (referring to German and European Jews) they did hope to effectively establish "Zionism" in the U.S. They believed that they were an elect people, favored of God, and should be granted land in the Americas to fulfill their "prophetic heritage and dream" (Olsen, pg. 152). They desired to establish their cultural beliefs (although such beliefs varied between the two Jewish parties) in the American community. However, as they attempted to do so, they met opposition. They faced a, "point of contention in the American Jewish community" that further marginalized them and restricted them from owning land because their religion was non-christian and they would live in a community "divided by class...still concerned about the secularizing effects of American life..." (Olsen, pg. 153). They wanted to implement their ideals here in the U.S. but met opposition in doing so, and struggled to obtain communities in which to peacefully and succesfully acculturate and Americanize themselves. Here we see yet another nationality whose dreams of living a happy life in America were decimated because of racism and the selfishness of white-Protestants who controlled the land and communities of America; the keys to assimilation and Americanization.
On the West coast, we find Japanese immigrants who desired to become apart of America, but who faced severe oppositing. They were hit with such legislation as exclusion acts, immigration quotas, and immigration restrictions which prevented them from taking full advantage of the American dream (Case, pgs 12, 13). They were manipulated and forced from their land with violence, arsen, and murder in order that whites could maintain their dominance of the region (Olsen, pgs. 161, 162). Such discrimination is absurd and the polar opposite of the American dream that is (supposedly) promised to all peoples. We see, yet again, that you must be white-Protestant in order to take advantage of the Americanization process of having your own land.
In the Southwest with Mexicans residing in California, New Mexico, and Texas, we see more issues regarding land. They were forcefully removed from land with violence, cheated sales, and deceit in order for whites to occupy the region (Olsen, pgs. 206-212). So many nationalities were excluded from the opporutnity of living out the Americanization process simply because their skin color was not accepted by the consensus of Americans. Those of dark-skin origins were never given the chance to Americanize via owning land, because they were forced from their land to accommodate those whites who thought themselves superior and better fitted to use the land to an agricultural and business advantage. We see with so many examples that the key point or issue that defined you as an accepted, successful, recognized American was that of how much land you owned, how you used that land, or your ability to acquire and maintain land. Land was undoubtedly the focal point in the Americanization process.
In the Southwest with Mexicans residing in California, New Mexico, and Texas, we see more issues regarding land. They were forcefully removed from land with violence, cheated sales, and deceit in order for whites to occupy the region (Olsen, pgs. 206-212). So many nationalities were excluded from the opporutnity of living out the Americanization process simply because their skin color was not accepted by the consensus of Americans. Those of dark-skin origins were never given the chance to Americanize via owning land, because they were forced from their land to accommodate those whites who thought themselves superior and better fitted to use the land to an agricultural and business advantage. We see with so many examples that the key point or issue that defined you as an accepted, successful, recognized American was that of how much land you owned, how you used that land, or your ability to acquire and maintain land. Land was undoubtedly the focal point in the Americanization process.
Although later in the 20th century the United States government sought to restore and restitute wrongs that were carried out against Indians regarding the illegal seizure of land, fair compensation to this day still has not been paid, and never will be. Thousands of Indians were massacred in the name Americanization so that whites could have the land they desired. Natives were constantly forced from their land, manipulated, cheated, lied to, wronged, and abused in order that others could have their way. Even when Indians attempted to convert to Christianity and listen to the Protestant missionaries, dress according to white standards, attend Protestant-run schools, establish legal codes, have a written system, build homes, raise livestock commercially, establishing a political system, and so on and so forth, thereby sacrificing their cultural identity (Olsen, pgs. 56, 57, 190), it still wasn't enough to guarantee them sucess and acceptance. They were still disrespected. And although money has been paid, tribal authority "restored", and minimal amounts of land and reservations have been "granted" to the Indians in recent years (Olsen, pgs. 308-310, 312 and Case, pg. 20), none of it can fully repay the irreversable damage that was done over several centuries. Even today we see that those of Indian or Hispanic, or even African dissent still struggle to succeed in the economy, obtain favorable living conditions and excel in society. Most of these problems stem from another issue, that of lack of education.
Education is an evolving "Americanization process". Since the late 19th century up until the present day, education has been stressed as important and vital in order to succeed in the modern economy and job-world. However because this process evolved much later than that of land ownership, its weight doesn't hold as much persuasive power. We see with such legislative acts as Sipuel vs. Oklahoma Board of Regents of 1948, Sweatt vs Painter of 1950, and Brown vs. Board of Education of 1954 that discriminaton existed against blacks and other ethnicities regarding their acceptance into academic institutions (Case, pg. 18). Even though these court cases demanded equal treatment in educational pursuits, discrimination still continued. So in another aspect of the "Americanization process" we see that you are treated based on your skin-color, not on intelligence or citizenship.
Discrimination persists even today as we see the power structure that was presented in colonial times continue to rear its ugly face at victims like those illiterate in English being taken advantage of in contractual agreements and foreclosure lawsuits in California and Nevada (Michael Martinez, California, Nevada Form Alliance to Crack Down on Foreclosure Fraud, CNN, Cable News Network. December 6.2011. CNN.com), brining up yet again the relevance of land ownership. Regardless of whether or not you gave up cultural traditions, or converted to the religion that was most tolerated, it still wasn't enough to guarantee successful assimilation and Americanization. If you're not skin-color-and-culturally/ethnically-tolerated, living the American dream of owning your own plot of land and building your "dream home" as a result of academic and professional success, fulfilling the "Americanization process", you've failed to Americanize.
Since colonian times, immigrants have made it a point that to be favored in the "power structure" one must own land. The thirteen colonies required by law that one own land in order to vote or hold a public office, and that requirement hasn't changed (Chris Case, History 2200 Notes, pg. 1). Colonials pushed the issue constantly that owning and acquiring land is what made one successful and "American". They even went so far as to push Natives, those who were here first, off of their land in order to satisfy their insatiable desire for more land (Case, pg. 6). Such legislative acts as the 1785 Treaty of Peace, which was designed to give land to Cherokee tribes were violated, and furthermore, cases such as Johnson vs M'intosh in 1823 favored Europeans and the "Discovery Doctrine"; meaning that if they discovered the land, regardless of whether Indians were already occupying it, they had the right to claim ownership because Indians were "unable to own land" (Case, pg. 6). Such discrimination against Indians was unfair. Whites were fiercely aggressive in their pursuit of land. Since the beginning their had been a "Cultural Confrontation" between "Native Americans and Europeans". The whites intended solely to "use the wilderness...(and) to convert nature into property..." (Olsen. Ethnic Dimensions in American History, pg.17). The whites had no respect and held no regard for the land that was "sacred" to Indians, they wanted it only for themselves leading to the greatest issue and "most important environmental conflict between Native Americans and Europeans" (Olsen, pg. 17). And despite the Indians attempts to resist the invasion, namely led by the Pequots and the Tuscaroras, they were forced to sell land and be removed from their environment (Olsen, pgs. 20, 22, 23). This was a huge sacrifice; their culture was bring ripped away. The "Native" Americans weren't so native anymore, they were pushed out. The competitive desire for land had driven immigrants to the point of hostile take over. Their need to "live the American Dream" and own land, overwhelmed them, and drove them to violence in order to obtain their wishes.
The dream of owning land continued with the further immigration of such nationalities as the Germans and Irish. They relished the thought of acquiring land, for they had never been allowed, especially Germans, to own land in their native countries (Olsen, pgs 27, 29, 33). They were convinced that the best way to seize attention and be recognized as Americans was to obtain land, and to fend for themselves. We see again, that the desire to have land prevails over all else in the process of becoming Americanized.
So the ensuing decades showed no variance in the craving to own earth. Attempts at being "humane" to Native Americans never succeeded. More legislative acts such as the Treaty of Fort Stanwix, designed to give Cherokees guaranteed and protected land, were quickly violated due to the "wave of settlers pouring across the Appalachians" (Olsen, pg. 55). White settlers always were favored in the eyes of the government, even if a document had been put in place to try and protect Indian land. Whites couldn't get enough of the land, so they sought to take more and more from Indians, and were almost never turned down. Treaties were abandoned in order to give them the "quick fix" they desired. They had to have more land, they had to become more American.
Further legislative acts such as Railroad Land Grants, the Homestead Act of 1862, Timber and Culture Act of 1873, and the Timber and Stone Act of 1878 violated former treaties that had intended to protect Indian Land in the west (Case, pg. 7). These new acts gave incoming white settlers first priority to obtain the land they desired. They could buy these 160 acre plots of land at cheap prices, forcing the Natives out. Hundreds of millions of acres were stolen from the Indians in order to help whites "Americanize" themselves (Case, pg. 8).
Indians were not the only nationality to be cheated of the "Americanization process". Blacks were also discriminated against, and were withheld from the opportunities that would have catapulted them upward in the power structure. They weren't allowed to purchase land, or when they were granted the chance, whites made it nearly impossible to do so. During the Reconstruction of the 1870's that occurred after the Civil War, blacks were supposed to be able to purchase land, but struggled to do so because of the racism that was incurred by white soldiers in the South (Olsen, pg. 99). With such heavy opposition being heaped upon them, the blacks stood no chance to fulfill their "American dream" and Americanize themselves.
The latter end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century showed to be even more taxing for Indians. New legislation was passed that reduced their owndership of land from 38 million to only 2 million acres in the West under the Dawes Severalty Act (Case, pg. 14). Futhermore, the Omnibus Indian Act allowed the government to underpay Indians significantly for remaining land, and the Bursum Act stole land from Indians and gave it to white settlers who had simply squatted on the land (Case, pg. 14 and Olsen, pg. 189). How could nationalities of dark-skin origin ever hope to acquire or maintain land and thereby become apart of the "Americanization process"? The whites were taking the spotlight for themselves and ensuring that only they were allowed to live the American dream. They kept the land for themselves.
To further illustrate nationalities that were denied access to land in the United States, we turn to the Jews. Although they faced a struggle in agreeing one with another (referring to German and European Jews) they did hope to effectively establish "Zionism" in the U.S. They believed that they were an elect people, favored of God, and should be granted land in the Americas to fulfill their "prophetic heritage and dream" (Olsen, pg. 152). They desired to establish their cultural beliefs (although such beliefs varied between the two Jewish parties) in the American community. However, as they attempted to do so, they met opposition. They faced a, "point of contention in the American Jewish community" that further marginalized them and restricted them from owning land because their religion was non-christian and they would live in a community "divided by class...still concerned about the secularizing effects of American life..." (Olsen, pg. 153). They wanted to implement their ideals here in the U.S. but met opposition in doing so, and struggled to obtain communities in which to peacefully and succesfully acculturate and Americanize themselves. Here we see yet another nationality whose dreams of living a happy life in America were decimated because of racism and the selfishness of white-Protestants who controlled the land and communities of America; the keys to assimilation and Americanization.
On the West coast, we find Japanese immigrants who desired to become apart of America, but who faced severe oppositing. They were hit with such legislation as exclusion acts, immigration quotas, and immigration restrictions which prevented them from taking full advantage of the American dream (Case, pgs 12, 13). They were manipulated and forced from their land with violence, arsen, and murder in order that whites could maintain their dominance of the region (Olsen, pgs. 161, 162). Such discrimination is absurd and the polar opposite of the American dream that is (supposedly) promised to all peoples. We see, yet again, that you must be white-Protestant in order to take advantage of the Americanization process of having your own land.
In the Southwest with Mexicans residing in California, New Mexico, and Texas, we see more issues regarding land. They were forcefully removed from land with violence, cheated sales, and deceit in order for whites to occupy the region (Olsen, pgs. 206-212). So many nationalities were excluded from the opporutnity of living out the Americanization process simply because their skin color was not accepted by the consensus of Americans. Those of dark-skin origins were never given the chance to Americanize via owning land, because they were forced from their land to accommodate those whites who thought themselves superior and better fitted to use the land to an agricultural and business advantage. We see with so many examples that the key point or issue that defined you as an accepted, successful, recognized American was that of how much land you owned, how you used that land, or your ability to acquire and maintain land. Land was undoubtedly the focal point in the Americanization process.
In the Southwest with Mexicans residing in California, New Mexico, and Texas, we see more issues regarding land. They were forcefully removed from land with violence, cheated sales, and deceit in order for whites to occupy the region (Olsen, pgs. 206-212). So many nationalities were excluded from the opporutnity of living out the Americanization process simply because their skin color was not accepted by the consensus of Americans. Those of dark-skin origins were never given the chance to Americanize via owning land, because they were forced from their land to accommodate those whites who thought themselves superior and better fitted to use the land to an agricultural and business advantage. We see with so many examples that the key point or issue that defined you as an accepted, successful, recognized American was that of how much land you owned, how you used that land, or your ability to acquire and maintain land. Land was undoubtedly the focal point in the Americanization process.
Although later in the 20th century the United States government sought to restore and restitute wrongs that were carried out against Indians regarding the illegal seizure of land, fair compensation to this day still has not been paid, and never will be. Thousands of Indians were massacred in the name Americanization so that whites could have the land they desired. Natives were constantly forced from their land, manipulated, cheated, lied to, wronged, and abused in order that others could have their way. Even when Indians attempted to convert to Christianity and listen to the Protestant missionaries, dress according to white standards, attend Protestant-run schools, establish legal codes, have a written system, build homes, raise livestock commercially, establishing a political system, and so on and so forth, thereby sacrificing their cultural identity (Olsen, pgs. 56, 57, 190), it still wasn't enough to guarantee them sucess and acceptance. They were still disrespected. And although money has been paid, tribal authority "restored", and minimal amounts of land and reservations have been "granted" to the Indians in recent years (Olsen, pgs. 308-310, 312 and Case, pg. 20), none of it can fully repay the irreversable damage that was done over several centuries. Even today we see that those of Indian or Hispanic, or even African dissent still struggle to succeed in the economy, obtain favorable living conditions and excel in society. Most of these problems stem from another issue, that of lack of education.
Education is an evolving "Americanization process". Since the late 19th century up until the present day, education has been stressed as important and vital in order to succeed in the modern economy and job-world. However because this process evolved much later than that of land ownership, its weight doesn't hold as much persuasive power. We see with such legislative acts as Sipuel vs. Oklahoma Board of Regents of 1948, Sweatt vs Painter of 1950, and Brown vs. Board of Education of 1954 that discriminaton existed against blacks and other ethnicities regarding their acceptance into academic institutions (Case, pg. 18). Even though these court cases demanded equal treatment in educational pursuits, discrimination still continued. So in another aspect of the "Americanization process" we see that you are treated based on your skin-color, not on intelligence or citizenship.
Discrimination persists even today as we see the power structure that was presented in colonial times continue to rear its ugly face at victims like those illiterate in English being taken advantage of in contractual agreements and foreclosure lawsuits in California and Nevada (Michael Martinez, California, Nevada Form Alliance to Crack Down on Foreclosure Fraud, CNN, Cable News Network. December 6.2011. CNN.com), brining up yet again the relevance of land ownership. Regardless of whether or not you gave up cultural traditions, or converted to the religion that was most tolerated, it still wasn't enough to guarantee successful assimilation and Americanization. If you're not skin-color-and-culturally/ethnically-tolerated, living the American dream of owning your own plot of land and building your "dream home" as a result of academic and professional success, fulfilling the "Americanization process", you've failed to Americanize.