Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

sofa king

(10,857 posts)
38. Yep, even the term "Indian" is contentious.
Sun May 6, 2012, 09:46 AM
May 2012

There are at least three major groups of Native Americans: American Indians, who primarily live and control territory in the Lower 48, Alaska Native Corporations and Villages, most of which have much less sovereignty thanks to Alaska being created a state during the Termination Era; and other native peoples including Native Hawaiians, who have little to no status as sovereign entities.

Then if you go back to American Indians, it gets even worse. California Indian tribes have a reduced set of rights thanks to some evil legislation that culled their power a hundred years ago; Oklahoma tribes have similarly reduced rights. Many tribes from the east coast, having pre-existed the United States within the original 13 colonies, were left for the individual states to deal with, and many of them are still not federally recognized at all, but still retain a tenuous relationship with their parent state and even hold state-protected "reservations." One or two of those entities even retain treaty rights, even though they are not officially "tribes."

"Indian" therefore has a potentially different legal definition from that of "Native American;" Indians signed treaties and have guaranteed rights; Native Americans, not so much. It used to be easy to spot which tribal bills were written by Democrats, and which were written by Republicans, because the Republican bills were always harmful and always had "Native American" in the title--specifically because the GOP has been trying for 20 years to use the "Native American" legal term as an anchor so that they can one day push it over the side and drag Indian tribes with it.

But I'm not kidding at all about us all being Indians now. The Republicans figured out how to steal your pensions and your homes by stealing Indian trust funds and land (No, really! One of the GOP's favorite tactics was to issue reservation land to individual Indians in fee, then wreck the economy on the reservation, raise property taxes, and steal their homes, just like Bush did to the rest of us). They're going to steal your Social Security like that, too (and have already tried), and any other potentially valuable resource to which we are entitled or control.

When those of you reading this lose all that, if you haven't already, just remind yourself that standing up to protect the tribes was the way you could have protected yourself. But now, you're fucked, because none of us gave enough of a damn to protect our most vulnerable people.

The fleet slowed down for its slowest ship, and now we're all dead in the water.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

That we were meant to exist as part of nature annabanana May 2012 #1
Yet those "noble savages" still killed off the Megafauna. Odin2005 May 2012 #4
Yep. That said, what was done to them was - at least - in the same league. Posteritatis May 2012 #6
Oh, I agree completely. Odin2005 May 2012 #10
Yet, the concurrent megafauna die-off in Europe is attributed to climate Mabus May 2012 #16
+1 4th law of robotics May 2012 #17
5 paras. Baitball Blogger May 2012 #2
More needs to be done, for sure. Vattel May 2012 #3
K&R. Odin2005 May 2012 #5
A biased result castnet55 May 2012 #7
Uh, Yeah....... alittlelark May 2012 #9
+1 yellerpup May 2012 #12
"Do we as a society continue to pour in millions of dollars as we have in the war on poverty?" bemildred May 2012 #13
Biased, or informed? sofa king May 2012 #19
Cobell vs Salazar Settlement - a "win" for the Obama Administration PufPuf23 May 2012 #41
so we should only pay attention to studies by white people? Enrique May 2012 #32
+1000 n/t ProfessionalLeftist May 2012 #33
K&R DeSwiss May 2012 #8
My favorite. yellerpup May 2012 #11
K&R! countryjake May 2012 #14
Let's give them something big like gigantic valuable tracts of land. limpyhobbler May 2012 #15
Farcical nonsense Ron Obvious May 2012 #18
Gee, are the Nomans in power now? lunatica May 2012 #20
The Normans stayed Ron Obvious May 2012 #21
LOL! lunatica May 2012 #22
Thanks Ron Obvious May 2012 #23
Did the King of England treat with the Normans? sofa king May 2012 #24
What difference does it make? Ron Obvious May 2012 #25
I've heard of Kennewick man, have you heard of the Ainu? azurnoir May 2012 #27
I've heard of them... Ron Obvious May 2012 #31
Yes, but few of them promised to pay for it. sofa king May 2012 #34
Did the Norman King treat with the English? ieoeja May 2012 #42
here is the difference -assimilation in fact the very form of English you now speak and write in is azurnoir May 2012 #29
Of course Ron Obvious May 2012 #30
Assimilation is not a legal defense for the U.S. sofa king May 2012 #35
OK Ron Obvious May 2012 #36
Yep, even the term "Indian" is contentious. sofa king May 2012 #38
Very informative Ron Obvious May 2012 #39
Is Ghadaffy still listed on the board of human rights commission ? may3rd May 2012 #26
Resistance is futile? AnOhioan May 2012 #37
The Firesign Theatre used this as one of the core themes in one of their best albums slackmaster May 2012 #28
i can sort of see where..... rppper May 2012 #40
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»U.S. must heal native peo...»Reply #38