,
17 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
1/ July 13 is the anniversary of the 1787 Northwest Ordinance. Historians love to celebrate the NW Ordinance. In THE PIONEERS David McCullough says it "stands alongside the Magna Carta and the Declaration of Independence as a bold assertion of the rights of the individual." 
2/ But before we celebrate the Northwest Ordinance, we should take a hard look at what it say about the continent’s Native people.
3/ Article 3 of the NW Ordinance promises that the “utmost good faith shall always be observed towards the Indians.” Sounds good, right?
4/ Article 3 also says that Indians’ “lands and property shall never be taken from them without their consent; and, in their property, rights, and liberty, they shall never be invaded or disturbed, unless in just and lawful wars authorized by Congress.”
5/ McCullough (p. 29) quotes Article 3 approvingly. How kind the United States was to Indians! It pledged “utmost good faith”! We would only take their land with their consent! And, if there was ever war (how in the world would this ever happen?), it would be “just and lawful”!
6/ Like lots of other historians, McCullough doesn’t think too hard about what’s going on here. He takes U.S. professions at face value and moves on. Let’s look at the Northwest Ordinance’s “just and lawful wars” clause in action.
7/ When the NW Ordinance was passed, the United States was trying to get the lands of Indian nations in Ohio (part of the Ordinance’s Northwest Territory).
8/ The United States acquired Native nations’ lands by using shady tactics to get a minority of Native leaders to "consent" to treaties ceding their lands. The U.S. saw these treaties as demonstrations of “utmost good faith.”
9/ Most Native leaders did not think these treaties showed “utmost good faith.” For good reason, they thought the treaties were illegitimate. When settlers invaded their lands, Indians claimed a right of self defense and formed a confederacy to resist.
10/ The United States declared that resisting Indians had rejected “utmost good faith” and so were subject to “just and lawful war.” What kind of war did American leaders think was “just and lawful?” Answer: genocidal war.
11/ How do we know American leaders intended genocidal war? Because they said so. Henry Knox, Secretary of War, called for the “extirpation” of resisting Indians, a synonym for extermination (i.e., genocide). George Washington approved.
12/ In 1790, 1791, and 1794, the United States sent armies against the Native confederation. The intention of these armies was to surprise Native communities and kill large numbers of their inhabitants, including non-combatants. In other words, genocidal massacre.
13/ Despite their intentions, U.S. armies seldom achieved massacre. But sometimes they did achieve surprise and when they did they killed men, women, and children alike.
14/ The clearest example of a genocidal massacre in the Northwest Territory occurred in early August 1832 during the Black Hawk War at the place where the Bad Axe River empties into the Mississippi in southwestern Wisconsin.
15/ As Sauk Indians tried to flee pursuing U.S. troops by crossing the Mississippi, troops intercepted them and fired on everyone they could.
16/ An armed steamship named THE WARRIOR lobbed cannon fire on makeshift rafts. The U.S. Army killed 250 people at Bad Axe, many non-combatants.
17/ The Bad Axe massacre made clear the meaning of the “just and lawful war” clause of the Northwest Ordinance. The massacre was a terrible injustice. But according to the U.S., it was lawful to slaughter Indians if they did not submit. Should we celebrate genocide? /end
