Manifest Destiny and European Colonialism

By far the most famous artwork of Manifest Destiny is a painting called America’s Progress. It shows a woman who represents the United States going west into the darkness from the considerably brighter east while laying telegraph wires, a symbol of America’s technological dominance. All around the painting are also visible American settlers who are plowing the land (see right foreground), delivering mail via the Pony express (see the center of the painting), and building a railroad (see middle ground right). However, the most revealing aspect of this painting is the Native American Indians who are running away to attempt to stay in the darkness. This symbolizes the widely-held belief that Native Americans were not civilized and would not appreciate American ideals or be able to integrate into our society.

In 1825, Henry Clay, an outspoken American senator from Kentucky,  argued in a debate with John Quincy Adams that, “They [Native Americans] are destined to extinction. … Their disappearance from the human family would be no great loss to the world.”[i] This idea laid much of the groundwork for the American ideology of expanding west, at least if you peel back the trappings of what Americans meant to do. When the Americans began expanding west, they either practiced forced removal or killed off the natives because, according to the American settlers, the Natives were not using the land to its “full potential.”[ii] It is important to note that many Americans did not believe that the Indians were somehow less than the white man, but rather that the Indians could and would eventually join American society after they were civilized.[iii] After all, how could a nation that prides itself on being so new and unique oppress in just the same way as the Europeans had been doing for decades?[iv] However, as is often the case with Europeans or their descendants, the Americans, regardless of their intentions, ultimately significantly worsened the natives’ lives post-expansion. The American conquest of the natives was dressed differently than other Western Nation’s colonization, but the action itself was the same. Any indication otherwise is only because of the monumental economic success America has experienced since the turn of the 20th century, which has helped to uplift native peoples.

The extensive colonization by the European nations first began in 1550, after the establishment of the first Spanish and Portuguese settlements in America. By the year 1822, European countries controlled nearly 45% of the world, having at one point or another conquered 80% of the world.[v] To examine the effect of Europe on conquered nations so that we can compare it with America’s effect on the natives, it is helpful to examine the British colonization of India. By 1822, nearly the entire coastline of India was controlled by the British. In 1857, India was completely overthrown by the British and became a puppet state.[vi] The British raj, the new government, levied a series of harsh customs duties that ranged from an initial 10% to an eventual 5% on all goods either imported or exported from India.[vii] Additionally, the British imported opium to India, addicting part of its population.[viii] Additionally, all railroad construction, military bases, and government buildings were owned, operated, or built by the British, so when they left, the Indians could not expand those industries as fast as say, China was able to.[ix] So in sum, the British undoubtedly had a negative impact on India, and by no means is India an exception; in fact, most historians agree that in nearly all conquered nations, similar effects occurred.[x]

With this basic understanding of how the European nations treated their colonies, it is possible to examine and compare America’s impact on the Native Americans. Firstly, the Americans took their land in much the same way the British did; by simply conquering it.[xi] Even worse than the British, the Americans also forced the Native Americans off their land, sending them eastward in a phenomenon called the Trail of Tears.[xii] When America reached the East Coast, they could not send the Native Americans westward anymore so, they set up reservations on American soil. Soon after, the native peoples were forbidden from leaving said reservations. [xiii] In an additional tragedy against humanity, the Native American population within the current-day American landmass declined from more than 20 million to a low of fewer than 1.5 million in 1625. This all undoubtably hurt the Native American economy much worse than Britain did to India. So, who had a worse effect on their conquered land? I posit that the Americans did, at least in the short term.

However, the politicians of the day mostly disagreed with the sentiment of hurting Native Americans. Thomas Jefferson claimed that the Native Americans were no different in mind or soul than the Americans.[xiv] He only thought, as was a common belief, that the Indians only needed to be civilized.[xv] In fact, the Americans expected to one day integrate the Indians into their society.[xvi] This begs the question though, why did America do so badly when its intentions were so noble? I posit that it was because the average American didn’t actually care particularly one way or another. It was simply the path of least resistance to push the Native Americans away and pledge to integrate them later. America demonstrated this by kicking Native Americans off their traditional lands while pledging to give large sums of money and food. However, the Americans rarely actually made good on this promise, leading to an immense amount of pain and death among the Native American population.

The American conquest of the Native American’s land was at best equal to European colonialism and in some ways even worse. Based on the way Britain colonized India, a fairly standard case, it is easy to see that the British had a large effect on the nations they conquered. By contrast, by examining how the Americans treated their natives, it is easy to conclude that they were significantly more deadly. It also seems clear that the Americans didn’t ever intend to integrate the Native American societies; rather, they just chose the easiest path.

[i]https://books.google.com/books?id=6AHD9VEp5DsC&pg=PA30&lpg=PA30&dq=%E2%80%9CTheir+disappearance+from+the+human+family+would+be+no+great+loss+to+the+world.%E2%80%9D+%E2%80%95+Henry+Clay&source=bl&ots=iiMAWZbNzU&sig=ACfU3U0dO2XViaDojN1ZaAjqFeKeUD3eLA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi78pfX6fnvAhUEGs0KHd3wAxIQ6AEwCXoECAYQAw#v=onepage&q=%E2%80%9CTheir%20disappearance%20from%20the%20human%20family%20would%20be%20no%20great%20loss%20to%20the%20world.%E2%80%9D%20%E2%80%95%20Henry%20Clay&f=false PP. 30

[ii] https://americanexperience.si.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Manifest-Destiny-and-Indian-Removal.pdf

[iii] Id.

[iv] WIKIPEDIA : https://web.archive.org/web/20041016015009/http:/www.newhumanist.com/md4.html

[v] https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/why-did-western-europe-dominate-globe-47696

[vi] https://www.britannica.com/event/British-raj

[vii] Id.

[viii] Id.

[ix] Id.

[x] https://taylorbarrett2018.wordpress.com/2016/04/01/was-european-colonization-a-positive-or-negative-force-in-the-world/

[xi] https://www.history.com/topics/westward-expansion/westward-expansion

[xii] https://www.history.com/topics/native-american-history/native-american-timeline

[xiii] Id.

[xiv] https://americanexperience.si.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Manifest-Destiny-and-Indian-Removal.pdf

[xv] Id.

[xvi]  WIKIPEAD: https://books.google.com/books?id=1N-sAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA62#v=onepage&q&f=false