Introduction
Choosing to support Proposition 17 to create and erect a bronze statue on the lawn of the state capitol is a recognition of respect and honor to those who have made a memorable impact on the development of America. Through this step, modern society can acknowledge the sacrifices made by the pioneers and indigenous community to make it what it is now. Therefore, my position does not agree with the opposing side, which is against the monument’s construction.
Argument in Support of Proposition 17
The opposing puts forward the argument that the conquest of the American West led to a deterioration in the lives of the indigenous people. The author cites the death of many American Indians and their overpopulation in territories where it was impossible to exist (U.S. Census Bureau 638). Further, it led to the spread of diseases such as smallpox, which also contributed to the death of many people (The Story Of… Smallpox). There is a logical and historical justification for this argument. The author also uses such rhetoric as ad hominem, which indirectly indicates that those who support the initiative to build the monument lack an understanding of history and empathy for the people who suffered from the pioneers of the country.
Conclusion
The erection of the bronze statue on the lawn of the state capitol as a monument provides an opportunity to recognize the sacrifices made on both sides. The monument does not deny the consequences that the expansion in the west of the country has led to; it is an awareness of the losses and difficulties faced by the people living there. Based on this knowledge, people can honor the memory of all those involved in this process, and the monument will become a reminder of these victims for many years to come.
Works Cited
“The Story Of… Smallpox – and other Deadly Eurasian Germs,” PBS, no date. Web.
U.S. Census Bureau. “Indian Wars, Their Cost, and Civil Expenditures.” Report on Indians Taxed and Indians Not Taxed in the United States. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1890, pp. 637-638.