Native Americans Inevitable

Kevin Kenny and Cynthia J. Van Zandt debated “Was Conflict Between Europeans and Native Americans Inevitable?” Kevin Kenny argued that yes, conflict between Europeans and Native Americans was inevitable. He built his case by highlighting the clashing definitions of land ownership between English colonists and Native Americans. He recounted the founding of Pennsylvania, the peaceful intentions of the colonists, and yet the inevitable conflict that occurred as a result of the clashing views of land ownership. Cynthia J. Van Zandt argued that conflict between Europeans and Native Americans was not inevitable. She argued her point by recounting successful trade alliances between the Native Americans and English colonists. Zandt argued that the
He explained that William Penn viewed his colony as a “holy experiment,’ and Penn specifically referred to it as the “Peaceable Kingdom.” (Kevin Kenny, p. 55) Penn wanted Christians and Indians to live together in harmony. (Kevin Kenny, p. 55) Kenny proved that although Penn sought peace, the colony of Pennsylvania relied upon colonial foundations. The charter for Pennsylvania itself reflected European ideology. (Kevin Kenny, p. 55) William Penn viewed land as something that could be privately owned, whereas Native Americans viewed land as communal. (Kevin Kenny, p. 55) Kenny explained that Penn’s need for land exceeded his desire for peace, and that from the earliest stage of Pennsylvania, before any physical disputes with the Native Americans, his holy experiment never took root. (Kevin Kenny, p. 55) The colony moved from this false hope of William Penn, to the Paxton Boys using outright violence toward the Native Americans as their sale tactic. (Kevin Kenny, p. 57) By the time of the American Revolution the Paxton Boys’ brutality became commonplace. (Kevin Kenny, p. 57) The Paxton Boys eventually died in combat in 1778, but they left a custom of behavior that continued. (Kevin Kenny, p. 59) Kenny showed that from the foundation of Pennsylvania, the gateway to the West, there would be unavoidable conflict between the Native Americans and European
Trade alliances did not prevent conflict from beginning. Zandt avoided answering the question of conflict inevitability, by diverting the attention to the Europeans’ struggle for dominance. Zandt asked if the conflict was the result of a power struggle. She attempted to answer the question by asking another question. She did not claim that conflict was avoidable, which would have answered the question, but she posed a different explanation for the conflict. Zandt did not disprove the damages of clashing cultural ideology with any evidence. Although a power struggle contributed to the conflict, the historical disputes arose over land ownership. Kevin Kenny very clearly proved that the contradictory ideologies between the Native Americans and the Europeans would produce inevitable conflict. Conflict commonly occurs when one’s belief cannot be achieved unless interfering with the belief of others. The Europeans’ belief in personal land ownership opposed the Native Americans’ belief in tribal trusts, and interfered with the order of the New World. Both ideologies could not maintain their preferences in the New World harmoniously. Only one group could achieve their ideology, and this is when disputes became commonplace, with the defenses of cultural