Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2017 June 18

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Miscellaneous desk
< June 17 << May | June | Jul >> Current desk >
Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.


June 18[edit]

How many treaties with Native Americans has the United States broken?[edit]

The book, 'Custer Died for Your Sins," states that the United States has broken over 400 treaties with Native Americans. Thanks! 75.148.101.22 (talk) 22:40, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Our article is at List_of_United_States_treaties and there are lots of references to follow up on. Matt Deres (talk) 12:58, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This is a hard question to answer because it assumes that there is universal agreement on what it means to break a treaty. While there are instances in which the U.S. clearly broke a treaty, there are others where it depends on how you read the treaty. For example, what does "west of the Appalachians" mean? Then, you also have treaties signed that were not represented properly. At best, those are broken promises, not broken treaties, but it makes sense that some view them as broken treaties. In the end, the count of broken treaties is a matter of opinion. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 18:03, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The "instances in which the U.S. clearly broke a treaty" must provide a lower bound. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 19:44, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Another "grey" case is where a subsequent treaty (possibly a result of a war) superseded the first. If the new treaty was "signed under duress", it could be argued that the original, more generous treaty should still be in force. StuRat (talk) 19:55, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is an exhibit at a Smithsonian museum [1] that features many original (broken) treaty documents. Unfortunately you have to pay for a full catalogue of items in the exhibition. NPR says "More than 370 ratified treaties have helped the U.S. expand its territory and led to many broken promises made to American Indians." SemanticMantis (talk) 14:51, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That wishy-washy language makes it hard to nail down if a specific treaty has been broken. If I promise you something verbally and then we sign a treaty for something else, then I broke my promise, but the treaty is not broken. Broken promises were common. But, it wasn't just the U.S. government. When it best suited the government to treat a group as individuals, they did that. When it best suited the government to treat one person as the head and decision maker for a group, they did that. So, if we have a treaty between me and a large group including you, then I pick one person in that group and ask, "Can you make a decision for the group?" He says, "Yes. I can." Then, I work with him to change the treaty. In my opinion, I didn't break the treaty, but since you weren't part of the decision making process, you see it as breaking the treaty. More wishy-washy language. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 17:17, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, probably because NPR also knows this is hard to put an exact count on too. Mainly I wanted to put out some actual references on the topic, rather than provide OP with (yet another) list of people earnestly discussing the question and how it is hard to specify and hard to answer, without anyone providing references.
Honestly, I don't know the book OP mentions, it's probably a fairly reliable source on its own, though if it had good footnotes and references, they'd probably not be asking here. This book [2] may be a good resource, it discusses Trail_of_Broken_Treaties and land agreements between the feds and natives up to about 1985. I don't think there's going to be a reliable list online saying "here are 327 specific treaties explicitly and clearly broken by the USA". If anyone wants to help OP further, I respectfully suggest that finding good books and reliable sources is the best way. I think that we've already done a great job at pointing out why this question is subtle and complicated, and that there probably won't be an easy and obvious reliable answer. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:29, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest, SM, that the relevant distinction is not "specific treaties explicitly and clearly broken by the USA", but "specific treaties unilaterally and clearly in bad faith broken by the USA". μηδείς (talk) 02:28, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • There were plenty of cases of outright confiscation or abrogation by the US. The problem area you run into from the Indian side is where an attack on settlers, (whether real, as pretense, or by impersonators) was used as grounds for saying the Indians broke the treaty. A large number of the 400 treaties number will fall under that second category. μηδείς (talk) 20:41, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Lisa Simpson: "My favorite Rose Bowl Parade float is the Native American one, where all the paper flowers are made up of shredded, broken treaties." StuRat (talk) 01:21, 22 June 2017 (UTC) [reply]
From this website, and which James Whitmore used to cite in his one-man show as Will Rogers: "[President Andrew Jackson] sent the Indians to Oklahoma. They had a treaty that said, 'You shall have this land as long as grass grows and water flows.' It was not only a good rhyme but looked like a good treaty, and it was till they struck oil. Then the Government took it away from us again. They said the treaty only refers to 'Water and Grass; it don't say anything about oil'... Now they have moved the Indians [again] and they settled the whole thing by putting them on land where the grass won't grow and the water won't flow." ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:04, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]