Abstract
ABSTRACT From 1871 to 1876, the US Congress debated whether to prohibit commercial hunters from slaughtering the American bison. Although Congress passed a ban, President Ulysses S. Grant refused to sign it into law. In this article, I rhetorically analyze the Bison Protection Debate, arguing that it evidences Congress’ attempt to subordinate Plains Indians by passing a conservation law. To support my argument, I show how congressional leaders rhetorically constructed bison as a spatial synecdoche for the Great Plains, tying the species’ fate to the success of Grant’s Peace Policy in this region. While most predicted the bison’s protection would benefit Grant’s Peace Policy, a select few predicted otherwise. In the ensuing debate, clashing synecdochic argumentation empowered congressional leaders to apprehend the future of Native/US relations on the Great Plains and plan for permanent settlement. As a result, the Bison Protection Debate reveals that Congress attempted to use the bison’s protection, not just its extermination, for reasons of settler colonialism. Recognizing this point is crucial for ethically remembering the genocidal politics surrounding the bison’s near extinction in the nineteenth century.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call