Comments by "boz" (@BOZ_11) on "University Professors 'Celebrate' Oct. 7th TERRORIST ATTACK In Viral Video: Robby Soave" video.
-
6
-
6
-
Many of the treaty-defined reservations were for lands that were seen as undesirable by white settlers at the time. They tended to be resource-poor, remote, arid areas that could not sustain prosperous economies.
The US government and settlers still often violated boundaries, trespassed, extracted resources illegally, or later reneged through forced cessions of promised lands.
Native bands and tribes were concentrated together that had no collective history, leading to tension and difficulties establishing stable governments.
Promised annuities and provisions to help tribes adapt often went severely underfunded or were pocketed by corrupt Indian agents and middlemen.
The Dawes Act and other policies sought to break up tribal lands into individual household plots, with "surplus lands" then taken by settlers. This broke apart reservations.
Legislative restrictions made it increasingly difficult for tribes to govern themselves, control their resources, or conduct economic activities central to their culture like hunting.
Land allotment and dispersal of reservation lands to settlers through homesteading acts left tribes with a fraction of poorer quality lands.
So even lands "gifted" by treaties were still systematically stripped away, resources exploited, promises broken, and tribes left impoverished through poorly conceived government policies and continuous pressure for lands from settlers. The results were the same - devastated economies and endemic poverty on reservations.
5
-
Many of the treaty-defined reservations were for lands that were arid, resource-poor, remote, areas that could not sustain prosperous economies.
The US government and settlers violated boundaries, trespassed, extracted resources illegally, or later reneged through forced cessions of promised lands.
Native bands and tribes were concentrated together that had no collective history, leading to tension and difficulties establishing stable governments.
Promised annuities and provisions to help tribes adapt often went severely underfunded or were pocketed by corrupted Indian agents and middlemen.
The Dawes Act and other policies sought to break up tribal lands into individual household plots, with "surplus lands" then taken by settlers. This broke apart reservations.
Legislative restrictions made it increasingly difficult for tribes to govern themselves, control their resources, or conduct economic activities central to their culture like hunting.
Land allotment and dispersal of reservation lands to settlers through homesteading acts left tribes with a fraction of poorer quality lands.
So even lands "gifted" by treaties were still systematically stripped away, resources exploited, promises broken, and tribes left impoverished through poorly conceived government policies and continuous pressure for lands from settlers. The results were the same - devastated economies and endemic poverty on reservations.
4
-
Many of the treaty-defined reservations were for lands that were arid, resource-poor, remote, areas that could not sustain prosperous economies.
The US government and settlers violated boundaries, trespassed, extracted resources illegally, or later reneged through forced cessions of promised lands.
Native bands and tribes were concentrated together that had no collective history, leading to tension and difficulties establishing stable governments.
Promised annuities and provisions to help tribes adapt often went severely underfunded or were pocketed by corrupted Indian agents and middlemen.
The Dawes Act and other policies sought to break up tribal lands into individual household plots, with "surplus lands" then taken by settlers. This broke apart reservations.
Legislative restrictions made it increasingly difficult for tribes to govern themselves, control their resources, or conduct economic activities central to their culture like hunting.
Land allotment and dispersal of reservation lands to settlers through homesteading acts left tribes with a fraction of poorer quality lands.
So even lands "gifted" by treaties were still systematically stripped away, resources exploited, promises broken, and tribes left impoverished through poorly conceived government policies and continuous pressure for lands from settlers. The results were the same - devastated economies and endemic poverty on reservations.
3
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Marty234 Many of the treaty-defined reservations were for lands that were arid, resource-poor, remote, areas that could not sustain prosperous economies.
The US government and settlers violated boundaries, trespassed, extracted resources illegally, or later reneged through forced cessions of promised lands.
Native bands and tribes were concentrated together that had no collective history, leading to tension and difficulties establishing stable governments.
Promised annuities and provisions to help tribes adapt often went severely underfunded or were pocketed by corrupted Indian agents and middlemen.
The Dawes Act and other policies sought to break up tribal lands into individual household plots, with "surplus lands" then taken by settlers. This broke apart reservations.
Legislative restrictions made it increasingly difficult for tribes to govern themselves, control their resources, or conduct economic activities central to their culture like hunting.
Land allotment and dispersal of reservation lands to settlers through homesteading acts left tribes with a fraction of poorer quality lands.
So even lands "gifted" by treaties were still systematically stripped away, resources exploited, promises broken, and tribes left impoverished through poorly conceived government policies and continuous pressure for lands from settlers. The results were the same - devastated economies and endemic poverty on reservations.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@carzsirice4684 Many of the treaty-defined reservations were for lands that were arid, resource-poor, remote, areas that could not sustain prosperous economies.
The US government and settlers violated boundaries, trespassed, extracted resources illegally, or later reneged through forced cessions of promised lands.
Native bands and tribes were concentrated together that had no collective history, leading to tension and difficulties establishing stable governments.
Promised annuities and provisions to help tribes adapt often went severely underfunded or were pocketed by corrupted Indian agents and middlemen.
The Dawes Act and other policies sought to break up tribal lands into individual household plots, with "surplus lands" then taken by settlers. This broke apart reservations.
Legislative restrictions made it increasingly difficult for tribes to govern themselves, control their resources, or conduct economic activities central to their culture like hunting.
Land allotment and dispersal of reservation lands to settlers through homesteading acts left tribes with a fraction of poorer quality lands.
So even lands "gifted" by treaties were still systematically stripped away, resources exploited, promises broken, and tribes left impoverished through poorly conceived government policies and continuous pressure for lands from settlers. The results were the same - devastated economies and endemic poverty on reservations.
1
-
@JoeJoe-go4vd Many of the treaty-defined reservations were for lands that were arid, resource-poor, remote, areas that could not sustain prosperous economies.
The US government and settlers violated boundaries, trespassed, extracted resources illegally, or later reneged through forced cessions of promised lands.
Native bands and tribes were concentrated together that had no collective history, leading to tension and difficulties establishing stable governments.
Promised annuities and provisions to help tribes adapt often went severely underfunded or were pocketed by corrupted Indian agents and middlemen.
The Dawes Act and other policies sought to break up tribal lands into individual household plots, with "surplus lands" then taken by settlers. This broke apart reservations.
Legislative restrictions made it increasingly difficult for tribes to govern themselves, control their resources, or conduct economic activities central to their culture like hunting.
Land allotment and dispersal of reservation lands to settlers through homesteading acts left tribes with a fraction of poorer quality lands.
So even lands "gifted" by treaties were still systematically stripped away, resources exploited, promises broken, and tribes left impoverished through poorly conceived government policies and continuous pressure for lands from settlers. The results were the same - devastated economies and endemic poverty on reservations.
1
-
Many of the treaty-defined reservations were for lands that were seen as undesirable by white settlers at the time. They tended to be resource-poor, remote, arid areas that could not sustain prosperous economies.
The US government and settlers still often violated boundaries, trespassed, extracted resources illegally, or later reneged through forced cessions of promised lands.
Native bands and tribes were concentrated together that had no collective history, leading to tension and difficulties establishing stable governments.
Promised annuities and provisions to help tribes adapt often went severely underfunded or were pocketed by corrupt Indian agents and middlemen.
The Dawes Act and other policies sought to break up tribal lands into individual household plots, with "surplus lands" then taken by settlers. This broke apart reservations.
Legislative restrictions made it increasingly difficult for tribes to govern themselves, control their resources, or conduct economic activities central to their culture like hunting.
Land allotment and dispersal of reservation lands to settlers through homesteading acts left tribes with a fraction of poorer quality lands.
So even lands "gifted" by treaties were still systematically stripped away, resources exploited, promises broken, and tribes left impoverished through poorly conceived government policies and continuous pressure for lands from settlers. The results were the same - devastated economies and endemic poverty on reservations.
1
-
1
-
1