Capitalism is the great unifier. To capital, there is nothing but a striving for comfort and power. Many have debated upon the detriments of capital– there are many– but in capital the only way to divide people by group is if greed demands it. Slavery was not a product of racism, no, it caused it. Bigotries towards immigrants are merely believed as a strict following of financial status quo. So when one sees divide of groups or unification, often in a capitalist society this is because the free market demands it. The fur trade did not demand divide. It demanded unity. Therefore, it was the fur trade that stood as a middle ground. Yes, the European colonizers wished for dominance but the free market demanded trading on Indigenous ground. Causing conflict would not benefit the Europeans, the Indigenous groups involved in the fur trade made created the fur objects and skinned creatures for the Europeans. It was financially most logical to avoid conflict and trade or buy straight from the Indigenous groups. With the birth of the American revolution and the War of 1812, this dynamic was thrown into imbalance. A battle was fought between Europeans for (among many other and more important things) the financial dominance that came with connection to the Indigenous fur traders. River systems on the Canadian and American border led to the drawing of lines. Fiance, fur, and connection thereof was the primary concern of those who considered the implications of land. The map of different tribes from 1801 made clear that the concern was not the tribes themselves, nor their customs, but what they could offer. Groups were separated into, for example, “Beaver Indians,” rather than whatever tribe they actually were. This makes clear what I have been saying hitherto; Following Indigenous customs on their ground was a practical concern, not an altruistic one. Wanting to, for lack of a better term, suck up to the Indigenous groups, to gain favor over the British, French, Americans, Spanish, or any other competitor was the main goal. If, for example, an American is extra kind to an Indigenous tribe that sells fox pelts, then that tribe is more likely to trade with the Americans over, say, the Spanish. Morality was not a concern. As we will see later in class, the second it was not financially beneficial to be peaceful, peace met a quick end.