The Battle of Little Big Horn

After the battle, of course, American soldiers carried out a counter atttack on Native American, finally destoryed the resisitance of the Native. But this battle had a positive influence to the native. It encourage them to resist the American, although the way  of resistance might be changed, not  throught the military way.This battle gave prestige and glory to the native people9even other tribes would be encourged0, helped them to hold their identity ,their tradition. It was because of this battle, they felt proud of themselves, proud to be Native American, descendents of Crazy horse and Sitting Bull. The spirit of Crazy horse and sitting Bull would still alive. And this kind of spirit, helped Native american continuous to fight, to take back their rights from USim 60s and 70s of the 20 th century.A book about the civil right movement of the Native is called the spirit of the Crazy horse. this is the evidence. In the long run, nomatter the battle of little big horn brke out or not, white would occupy the whole continent, but the victory of this battle gave dignity , even a sense of nationalist feeeling to the Native people, they still proud of their own ethnic. And this kind of ethnical dignity was so important, led them still preserve their own culture, then own ethnic group would not be absorbed by the white. later, when the time comes, the same kinf of proud and degnity, helped them to struggle and take back their own rights. little Big Horn was a light house, encourged The Native people to hold their identity and fight for this identity.Us could not eliminate the whole ethnic group, but if native people felt shame of the own identity, abonding their own culture and identity,they would be eliminated. the importance of this battle was that, it was an instrument to unite and encourage the Native eople, led them to stand and to struggle.Jewish people  could be United by their religion, Native American could be united by the victory of the Little Big Hron.

You may ask, how come of other Native tribes be encouraged by this battle. I think it was because in 20 century, the traditional tribal system had be broken . All tribes were facing the Us governemnt.so a sense of nationalist feeling among the Native epeople had been aroused. a pan native movement had been formed,people from all tribes joined together to carry out the movement(e.g.long march from California to Washington), the victory in Little Big horn WAS REGRADED AS a victory of THE ENTIRE NATIVE PEOPLlE. What is your opinion?

 

Actually, in Custers battle, not all of the american units perished. everyone under the command of CUster who got stuck on that hill of his perished, but major colonel Reno was able to keep the rest of the troops alive long enough for extraction and retreat.

Not just anger but a scapegoat for aggressive national policies. Flamboyant Custer from Monroe had his eye on politics. In his race to further establish his name he ran haphazzardly into the united Indian tribes at Little Big Horn. He is not all to blame.  Reno and Benteen had not clearly followed orders in their purssuit of Indian camps. Still an overconfident Custer had over inflated his sense of self and was partially justified in his pursuit of the war. Up till then the Indians had not confronted whole US regiments nor beat them.

Originally posted by Mangudai Originally posted by ulrich von hutten this battle was only a small event in the history of the war to exterminate the native americans. we remind this moment as one of the few glorious ticks ,cause victories of the native americans were so rarly. The policy of the US goverment in the post-civil war era was not to exterminate all native americans as often claimed, but to force them into reservations. Brutal  - yes indeed - but not a calculated genocide compared to that of i.g. the extermination of the Tasmanians Then native victories weren't rare - the native americans only fought when they had a chance to win and prevailed in countless of smaller battles. On the contrary, the native americans arely had any decisive military defeats

come on , the aim of the the poltics of the us -goverment in the second half
of the 19th century was to exterminate all kinds of resistance against the
colonization- poltics . the us army did this with the help of the settlers of all nations very efficient. the only thing the indians could do ,was to do pinpricks (?) against the supplie of the army ,the treks and minor important military bases. there was no realistic chance to be  succesful .
or was the methodical exterminatin of the buffalos something else but a fine way to destroy the life resources of the native americans ?

Originally posted by tommy Of course the hunting of Buffalos might hit the Native American , but not all,only of the tribes in  Great plain.We cannot say that the tribes of the Pacific coast, southwest?(this I am not totally sure) , or eastern woodland be influenced by that. It is because meat of the buffalos was not  the main source of food  of this tribes.

Other campaigns were carried out to deal with western tribes such as the Nez Pierce. One of my ancestors took part in that campaign, and I have cousins who lease farmland on the current Nez Pierce reserve.

 That I agree.Diseases and wars had already killed a lot of Native american.The changing of the environment also harmed them . But when the white hunted the buffalo in the Great plain, those tribes became so angry,I think there was another reason apart from fearing of losting tyhe main source of food supply. I think Buffalo was a cultural and religious symbol to these tribes, although they killed buffalo,they respect this kind of animal.After hunting, they would carry out ceremonry to honor the dead animal. The hunting of buffalo by the white meant the violation and destruction of Native values and beliefs,so they were angry. And losting of the buffalo had a great psychological impact on Native American.

Originally posted by Laelius   Efforts of the US government were directed principally aimed at the destruction of Native culture, not the population.  Claims of genocide are backed entirely by speculation and are baseless.

constant repeats of vindications  of the proceeding of the us goverment are not indicated.- destruction of culture ,not the population- that's splitting hairs. ask the succession of the survivors of this lucky population , that are living in lousy reservations.