The U.S. government's motive for its approach to treaties with Indigenous Americans can be inferred as a desire for land acquisition and control, as well as the assimilation of Native American cultures into mainstream American society.
Evidence to support this inference includes:
1. Land acquisition and control: Throughout U.S. history, treaties with Indigenous Americans often resulted in the cession of land to the government. The U.S. government sought to expand its territory and gain control over valuable resources, pushing Native American tribes onto reservations or forcibly removing them from their ancestral lands.
2. Assimilation policies: The U.S. government implemented policies such as the Indian Removal Act of 1830 and the Dawes Act of 1887, which aimed to assimilate Native Americans into mainstream American society. These policies sought to eradicate Native American cultural practices, promote Western education, and encourage Native Americans to adopt European-American lifestyles and values.
3. Violation of treaties: Despite signing treaties with Native American tribes, the U.S. government frequently violated these agreements, often due to changing political or economic interests. This pattern of broken promises further supports the inference that the government's motive was primarily focused on its own interests rather than the well-being and autonomy of Indigenous Americans.
It's important to note that the motives and actions of the U.S. government were complex and varied over time, and not all treaties or interactions followed the same patterns. However, the evidence provided supports the inference that the U.S. government's approach to treaties with Indigenous Americans was driven by land acquisition, control, and assimilation.
