Because Chinese immigrants are not the CCP. Nor are Germans n***s.
I’m getting this information from the links I provided you, of the Cherokee National History.
‘Cherokee Nation asked the Supreme Court to recognize them as a foreign nation that is not subject of US jurisdiction while providing them legal and military protection from the state of Georgia. U.S. Supreme Court recognized them as a State but not a foreign State.’
So you’re ignoring the fact a US court ruled that an organized communicative People, were not in fact a ‘foreign state’ and thus were subject to Georgian Law over their own Soverignty?
The great majority of the Nation’s members remained in the east, refusing to abandon their ancestral homelands despite the best efforts of the United States lure them to the Arkansas Territory. By 1827, as a result of further cessions confirmed in a 1819 treaty, most of the Nation’s remaining lands were located in Georgia. Starting in this year, the part of the Nation which remained in the east, led by Principal Chief John Ross, entered into a multi-year struggle with the state of Georgia to remain in and protect their aboriginal homelands from Georgia’s efforts to take over Cherokee country in that state. In 1827, the Cherokee Nation adopted a written Constitution modeled on that of the United States, to which Georgia responded the following year by declaring the Cherokee government abolished and its citizens subject to the laws of Georgia. The Cherokees replied by filing suit in the Supreme Court of the United States challenging these actions.
This case, Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831), ended with a majority of the Court deciding that the Court had no original jurisdiction under Article III of the U.S. Constitution to hear the suit because the Nation was not a foreign State, a requirement for such original jurisdiction cases in the Supreme Court, but was instead a “domestic dependent nation.” The Court therefore dismissed the case without considering whether Georgia’s actions were lawful. The following year, the Cherokee Nation supported a case filed in the Supreme Court by Samuel Worcester, a missionary and U.S. Postmaster residing in the Cherokee Nation who had been imprisoned under Georgia law for residing in the Nation’s limits without a state license. That case, Worcester v. Georgia (1832), was a victory for the Cherokee Nation. The Court held that Georgia had no power to impose its laws in the Cherokee Nation. Nevertheless, the determination of then-President Andrew Jackson to remove the Cherokees and other southeastern Indian nations from their aboriginal territories resulted in the 1835 Treaty of New Echota. The Cherokees who signed that treaty lacked authority to do so under Cherokee Nation law, but nevertheless purported to agree, on behalf of the Nation, to relinquish the Cherokee Nation’s lands east of the Mississippi and to remove to the Reservation west of the Mississippi, where the Nation could exercise the right to govern itself, among other rights, privileges, and assurances.
Forced Removal, Internal Conflict, and Reunification
Because the vast majority of Cherokee people refused to voluntarily abandon their ancestral homelands despite the Treaty of New Echota, the United States, in 1838, deployed troops under General Winfield Scott to forcibly round up the Cherokee people into relocation camps and from there remove them overland to the Reservation west of the Mississippi on what would come to be known as the Trail of Tears. Some 4,000 Cherokees who were forcibly removed from their homes (about one-fourth of the population) perished in camps or along the Trail of Tears.
The Bill and case you also cited states:
Under the promised “patronage and good neighbourhood” of the United States, a portion of the people of the nation have become civilized Christians and agriculturists, and the bill alleges that, in these respects, they are willing to submit to a comparison with their white brethren around them.
An act to add the territory lying within this State and occupied by the Cherokee Indians, to the counties of Carroll, De Kalb, Gwinett, Hall, and Habersham, and to extend the laws of this State over the same, and for other purposes."
That afterwards, to-wit in the year 1829, the Legislature of the said State of Georgia passed another act, which received the assent of the Governor on the 19th December of that year, entitled,
“An act to add the territory lying within the chartered limits of Georgia, now in the occupancy of the Cherokee Indians, to the counties of Carroll, De Kalb, Gwinett, Hall, and Habersham, and to extend the laws of this State over the same, and to annul all laws and ordinances made by the Cherokee Nation of Indians, and to provide for the compensation of officers serving legal processes in said territory, and to regulate the testimony of Indians, and to repeal the ninth section of the Act of 1828 on this subject.”
The effect of these laws, and their purposes, are stated to be to parcel out the territory of the Cherokees; to extend all the laws of Georgia over the same; to abolish the Cherokee laws, and to deprive the Cherokees of the protection of their laws;
to prevent them, as individuals, from enrolling for emigration, under the penalty of indictment before the State courts of Georgia; to make it murder in the officers of the Cherokee government to inflict the sentence of death in conformity with the Cherokee laws, subjecting them all to indictment therefor, and death by hanging; extending the jurisdiction of the justices of the peace of Georgia into the Cherokee territory, and authorising the calling out of the militia of Georgia to enforce the process; and finally, declaring that no Indian, or descendant of any Indian, residing within the Cherokee Nation of Indians shall be deemed a competent witness in any court of the State of Georgia, in which a white person may be a party, except such white person resides within the said nation.
“when they had reduced their territory into as small a compass as their own convenience would bear, and they then accordingly resolved to cede no more.”
The bill proceeds to refer to the act of Congress of 1830 entitled “An act to provide for an exchange of lands with the Indians residing in any of the States or territories, and for their removal west of the Mississippi.”
Need I say more? Because the sources you stated prove my point. Cultural Assimilation policy, violation of Treaties, socialist dependancy under nationalistic assimilation. Forced removal, ethnic cleansing, assimilation policy.
I don’t insist on paying for foreigner education. My tax dollars are thrown everywhere, they don’t need to be there too.
I insist that the US needs NO official language or culture, regardless of the standardization of the language used for the construction of legislation which has been upheld in court. Cultural assimilation policy is the ‘too far’ in unifcation efforts. It also is not a matter of whose fault, all of those people are dead, but the solutions lie right ahead of us.
These people still live in political and sovereign limbo under socialist dependency oppression, without representation. Our acknowledgement of the past prevents it from repeating in the future, our education of an acceptance of our mistakes will help us right the wrongs, not punish the responsible.
Unity and independence is a tightrope we must walk together.
How is an English requirement for emigration, and a constitution test not enough assimilation? Otherwise we need stronger border policy, not further assimilation policy.
(at a place of business). I know many who have had that type of encounter. Just because you have not experienced it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. We have enabled to this point.