Cultural Understandings of Conflict and Modes of Conflict Resolution – the Philosophy of “Compromise” as Exemplified by the Relationship of the Indigenous Peoples of the United States with the American Government

Abstract

The study provides an interdisciplinary analysis of the philosophy of compromise and the mechanisms of its resolution using the example of the relationship between the indigenous peoples of the United States and the American government. The paper traces the history of early interactions between Europeans and North American indigenous peoples, which were initially partnerships. However, as the number of colonists increased and the demand for land grew, disputes escalated. Fearing the outbreak of larger-scale conflicts that could escalate into open warfare, the US government attempted to negotiate with the various tribes, often resulting in the signing of treaties. The author examines the evolution of the US government’s policy, which, over time, shifted from a trade and alliance relationship to abusive and hypocritical actions aimed at taking land from indigenous peoples. Although the treaties formally recognized the sovereignty of the tribes, in reality they served as tools for the colonizers to take over their lands. These documents defined boundaries and land use rights, and also obliged the Indians to support the US military. Many of these agreements were made under pressure, leading to numerous negative consequences for indigenous peoples, including the loss of lands, resources and forced attempts to assimilate to European norms, resulting in acts of genocide in the long term. To this day, many of these treaties remain in force, and contemporary Native American communities continue to struggle to comply with their provisions. These treaties form the basis of numerous claims to land rights, hunting, fishing and access to natural resources. These documents are also a testament to the philosophy of life of indigenous communities. Nowadays, thanks to increased legal awareness, Native Americans consistently remind the government of the need to respect these treaties, which were often not the result of negotiation but imposed conditions that indigenous peoples had to agree to in order to survive.