The link I provided explains the recent events involving the Dakota Access Pipeline situation. This situation involved an issue between a Native American reservation in North Dakota and the federal government. The link explains how those who live on the reservation feel about the assembly of the pipeline. Those who live here argued against the project because of potential risks it could bring.
This link connects to the article involving the Transcontinental Railroad because of the similarities in the issues the two projects caused. The railroad was taking over Native American lands and although the events that occurred because of the railroad were more serious, the Sand Creek Massacre for example, similarities are still presented. One of these similarities include the installation of a government initiative on Native land. Whether it be a railroad or a pipeline, Native people were in opposition to these events and the government found, or is trying to find ways around it. The pipeline brings potential risks that could involve water contamination and also damage sacred burial sites, while the railroad resulted in a loss of Native American lands.
As far as my insight on the pipeline issue, I would try to come to an agreement about location and try to cut down on the potential risks that it would cause, such as the water contamination risk. This provides new personal insight on the provided text about the railroad. My thoughts on the assembly of the railroad are that it was a good thing to happen because of the advancements it brought to us as a country, but it could have been gone about in a different way. It could have been located in different places so Native lands weren't so heavily depended on. These issues bring a similar thought to my head; they are good initiatives, but there are definitely different ways that the government could/can address them.
This is an interesting thing to think about. Looking back, the transcontinental railroad generally seems like it was a great thing for our economy and the development of our nation, but just like the Dakota Pipeline it was made despite opposition from Native Americans. I think my mind's moral divide occurs in the fact that the transcontinental railroad was the first public transportation across our nation. It was a new idea and a new way of travel. The Dakota Access Pipeline on the other hand is a dated method of energy production, and building it is comparable to building a new transcontinental railroad alongside a highway full of Google's self-driving cars. I believe we should be looking towards new and innovative technologies, rather than depleting every last resource we can find. Especially when it requires the destruction of natural land.
ReplyDelete