"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
Just because the conflict was mainly focused on land doesn't mean there wasn't racial division. It would have been considered largely unacceptable to uproot a white community, but it was done commonly to Native Americans, and it was considered acceptable by many, even after they converted to Christianity, which the five "civilized" tribes had done.There were massacres, murders and battles in the early days of this country, but they were on both sides. The Indians massacred Anne Hutchinson and her children, and they massacred the residents of Deerfield MA. These are just a few examples. They didn't, I think, commit those acts out of racism towards the white people. They did it out of defense. The white people did the same thing to them, but not because of racism; they wanted the land and they felt they were inferior not because they were red skinned, but because they called them "heathens" (non Christians). Just like all of the Indians who died from disease, which I think was most of them, weren't intentionally killed. The English didn't plan that. Granted they didn't care that it happened, but it wasn't intentional.
I wasn't aware of the part about citizenship; could you provide a link for that? I was also under the impression that the tribes moved by the Trail of Tears had already converted to Christianity. (see link)The Trail of Tears was a terrible thing to do, but I again think that was motivated by a desire for their land, not out of racism. It was also in the 1830s so this was a nation already, unlike in the 1600s when it wasn't. They allowed the ones who wanted to stay behind to do so, with the proviso that they fully assimilated. If I remember right, they even granted citizenship to those who stayed behind. That again all smacks of "our land, our country, if you want to be here, be one of us". If they were truly racist, they wouldn't have allowed the ones who wanted to stay to remain behind, and they certainly wouldn't have granted citizenship.
Of course, I'm neither 400 years old nor 200 years old so I don't know for sure, just know what I learned.
Five Civilized Tribes ***
I don't think anyone ever polled on use of the word 'Chink', so it must be A-OK!
Many Trump supporters have lots of problems, and those deplorables are bringing those problems to us. They’re racists. They’re misogynists. They’re islamophobic. They're xenophobes and homophobes. And some, I assume, are good people.
redskin: definition of redskin in Oxford dictionary (American English) (US)
Redskin - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Redskin | Define Redskin at Dictionary.com
You are correct that originally, Native Americans referred to themselves as redskins, but the term gradually became offensive in the 19th century, as outlined in the second link.
I certain wont trust some inbreed hillbilly who probably still hides his children from black people, to have some valid point to make on this matter.
Neither do i trust you in that regard to have anything to say on this that is of any worth, unless you are a native American.