The United States got civilization from European immigrants who settled there, but before their settlement, tribes of indigenous people occupied the lands. European immigrants referred to them as Indies and later labeled as inhabitants. The native Americans occupied most of the lands in the North of America and much of the confrontations with the European Immigrants was due to the land that the native Americans occupied an at the beginning of the nineteenth century the Government had claimed the land in the North that originally belonged to Native Americans. Red cloud and Zitkala-Sa were both Native Indians with different perspectives about their tribe’s confrontations with the American Government. Red cloud a soldier and who waged war against American forces against the invasion of their land, Zitkala-Sa was an educationist playing a role of bridging the two communities together and an activist (Quijano, 2000).
Red Cloud a Sioux chief viewed and a political leader in the tribe believed that the U.S government was doing unjust by taking over their ancestral land. Red cloud fought bravely to defend the lands that originally belonged to the Sioux tribe. The leader was unsuccessful in his mission of fighting the white society. Red Cloud was the first Native American to wage war to the U.S government. The Red Cloud led the establishment of the Bozeman Trail. Zitakla-Sa, on the other hand, was not a political leader or a warrior. She was one of the few Native Americans to have acquired knowledge through Education; she went up against her mother’s wishes to join college. It is the education and knowledge she acquired that saw her have a different perspective on the confrontations with the U.S government and the white society. She played an activist role and she acted as a bridge builder between the two cultures. She publicly expressed her feelings in writing; while in contrast, Red cloud expressed his feelings in a combat and war, feelings regarding injustices by the white society that brought sufferings for her people (Quijano, 2000).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The two Native Americans had the same mission and vision; they both wanted the injustices to end. Both Red cloud and Zitakla-Sa’s intention was to address the issue that they were facing. The white society had forcefully settled in lands belonged to Native Americans and had taken possession over them. Even though the government established the Bureau of Indian Affairs, it was faced with corruption that would later benefit the white society. In a sharp comparison, the two Native Americans had been vocal in different ways on how to stop and address the issue of injustices among its people. Both Red cloud and Zitakla-Sa were leaders and wanted the best for their fellow tribesmen. Red cloud was political leader and warrior: Zitakla-Sa was a leader and an activist who founded the National Council of American Indians. She was also elected as the Secretary of the American Indians (Quijano, 2000).
Perspective from the Washington D.C represented by President required that all Native Americans should be fully assimilated into American Society and follows the White man’s ways. Benjamin Harrison a Presbyterian Church leader could grant Native Americans citizenship if they would fully abandon their religious beliefs and follow Christianity. The Wovoka religion that was common among Native Americans would then lead to a massacre that saw 40 men and 200 women and children being murdered by Army Troops, who justified the deaths that the Indians were under a strange religious hallucination (Quijano, 2000).
Conclusively the Native Americans did not succeed in what they had hoped to achieve. Through their leaders, both Red cloud and Zitakla- Sa had hoped to get justice and reclaim their land back and at some point end the oppression that the white society had handed them. In later years though, the Native Americans were all awarded citizenship and were no longer inhabitants.
References
Quijano, A. (2000). Coloniality of Power and Eurocentrism in Latin America. International Sociology, 15, 215-232.
