Was it the militant actions of the Native Americans or the work of the government that
improved civil rights up to 1992? (begin 1865)
Between 1865 and 1992, civil rights and the aims of the Native Americans had changed. In the
beginning, the civil rights that Native Americans aimed for were to be left alone by the federal
government and not be forced to become citizens and be subjected to voting and paying taxes.
They also wanted to freely practise their tribal customs and religion as well as keeping their
land. However, further along the period, Native American civil rights started to look different.
They continued their efforts for them to freely practice their customs and religions and keep
their land but as more Native Americans assimilated into American culture, they desired civil
rights such as citizenship and the vote. One of the ways they aimed to achieve these rights was
through militancy. Native American militancy was the use of confrontational or violent methods
to gain support towards the improvement of their civil rights. Overall, it was the work of the
government that effectively improved civil rights as the militant actions of the Native Americans
remained limited until around the 1960s.
Throughout this period, Native American land was a heavily disputed matter. In terms of Native
Americans recovering their stolen tribal land, not much militant action was taken until Johnson’s
reversal of the policy of termination in 1968 and the beginning of the American Indian
Movement. This no longer restricted Native American actions to improve their civil rights. The
organisation of AIM was due to the belief that traditional Indian activism wasn’t working, which
lead to a series of confrontational campaigns that drew attention to what was known as Red
Power. One of the first examples of militant actions by Native Americans was the Siege of
Alcatraz in 1969. The Siege of Alcatraz was when Native Americans from all tribes occupied the
deserted land of Alcatraz and demanded the return of the island. Although the siege did not
achieve its aims, it drew the attention of the nation through the media as well as challenging the
federal government. However, the militant actions of Red Power that followed Alcatraz didn’t
have a similar impact on the improvement on civil rights. Rather than militant action from
Native Americans improving their civil rights, the use of the law was much more effective. The
introduction of the Native American Rights Fund and the success of the Oneida v Oneida case
highlighted how the going through the law rather than using militancy was more effective in
recovering land. In returning land, the government took action much earlier during the period.
The first attempt by the government to return some land back to Native Americans was through
the 1887 Dawes Act. However the allotment policy associated with the Dawes act proved
ineffective in improving civil rights for Native Americans as they lost more land than they gained.
Not much more action was taken by the government in terms of returning land until the 1934
Indian Reorganization Act. This act ended the allotment policy, returned unallocated land back
to the tribes and prevented the sales of Native American land to individual buyers. This work by
the government led to Native Americans recovering a lot of tribal land by 1992. Militant actions
by the Native Americans only brough attention to their loss of tribal land however it was the
work of the government which physically returned land to them.
In regards to the Native Americans retaining the right to practice tribal customs, their militant
actions were limited. The policy of assimilation restricted the Native Americans from taking
action as they were being forced to give up their customs and religious freedom. A militant
action Native Americans took to improve their civil rights and gain the right to practice tribal
customs was the Occupation of Mount Rushmore in 1971. This was a was a deliberate attempt
improved civil rights up to 1992? (begin 1865)
Between 1865 and 1992, civil rights and the aims of the Native Americans had changed. In the
beginning, the civil rights that Native Americans aimed for were to be left alone by the federal
government and not be forced to become citizens and be subjected to voting and paying taxes.
They also wanted to freely practise their tribal customs and religion as well as keeping their
land. However, further along the period, Native American civil rights started to look different.
They continued their efforts for them to freely practice their customs and religions and keep
their land but as more Native Americans assimilated into American culture, they desired civil
rights such as citizenship and the vote. One of the ways they aimed to achieve these rights was
through militancy. Native American militancy was the use of confrontational or violent methods
to gain support towards the improvement of their civil rights. Overall, it was the work of the
government that effectively improved civil rights as the militant actions of the Native Americans
remained limited until around the 1960s.
Throughout this period, Native American land was a heavily disputed matter. In terms of Native
Americans recovering their stolen tribal land, not much militant action was taken until Johnson’s
reversal of the policy of termination in 1968 and the beginning of the American Indian
Movement. This no longer restricted Native American actions to improve their civil rights. The
organisation of AIM was due to the belief that traditional Indian activism wasn’t working, which
lead to a series of confrontational campaigns that drew attention to what was known as Red
Power. One of the first examples of militant actions by Native Americans was the Siege of
Alcatraz in 1969. The Siege of Alcatraz was when Native Americans from all tribes occupied the
deserted land of Alcatraz and demanded the return of the island. Although the siege did not
achieve its aims, it drew the attention of the nation through the media as well as challenging the
federal government. However, the militant actions of Red Power that followed Alcatraz didn’t
have a similar impact on the improvement on civil rights. Rather than militant action from
Native Americans improving their civil rights, the use of the law was much more effective. The
introduction of the Native American Rights Fund and the success of the Oneida v Oneida case
highlighted how the going through the law rather than using militancy was more effective in
recovering land. In returning land, the government took action much earlier during the period.
The first attempt by the government to return some land back to Native Americans was through
the 1887 Dawes Act. However the allotment policy associated with the Dawes act proved
ineffective in improving civil rights for Native Americans as they lost more land than they gained.
Not much more action was taken by the government in terms of returning land until the 1934
Indian Reorganization Act. This act ended the allotment policy, returned unallocated land back
to the tribes and prevented the sales of Native American land to individual buyers. This work by
the government led to Native Americans recovering a lot of tribal land by 1992. Militant actions
by the Native Americans only brough attention to their loss of tribal land however it was the
work of the government which physically returned land to them.
In regards to the Native Americans retaining the right to practice tribal customs, their militant
actions were limited. The policy of assimilation restricted the Native Americans from taking
action as they were being forced to give up their customs and religious freedom. A militant
action Native Americans took to improve their civil rights and gain the right to practice tribal
customs was the Occupation of Mount Rushmore in 1971. This was a was a deliberate attempt
