“It’s not about what identity you claim,” TallBear said. “It’s about who claims you.”
Isn't this an insanely dangerous way of thinking? Like how does this apply to other facets of your identity like your sexuality? Only you can know you, truly, right? Or is this only in relation to your race and not your full identity.
would boast that they had Native American heritage
Am I the only one that feels as though this obsession with trying to claim native american heritage is extremely strange? Maybe it's because I am not Caucasian myself and my ancestry is rather unambiguous but to me it seems crazy to want to claim something like this for no tangible benefit.
jury awarded him â§.million in compensatory damages and âmillion in punitive damages (Nelson ).
Why was the payout so high?
. e St.Regis Mohawk have denied that the traÚcking is widespread and do not like the characterization portraying members of their nation.
I wonder if these drug issues are actually true, how do we talk about them without bringing race into it at all. I think the answer is to call out individuals, without generalizing. Also, I think its important we focus on evidence.
. e media provided only minimal coverage of the protests
Its crazy how much the media could control the narrative, especially before the internet and social media really became super popular.
However, added factors of racism and white privilege must be looked at to understand the unique position of Indian gaming in the United States.
Honestly, I'd like to think this wasn't racist in nature but rather people just doing it for economic gain. I think it is important we are careful of just saying everybody and everything is racist when there is no evidence that it actually wasn't just greed and economically driven.
e FBI refuted these statements and has testiÌed that it has not detected major incursions by organized crime into Indian gaming around the country. (
Its funny because he himself had said that the FBI was amazing so we should trust them.
Currently, the Rincon Band of Luiseno is one of the most successful gaming tribes in the state of California and operates a Harrah’s Casino Resort. ey have diversiÌed their economic development to include businesses other than casinos
Its good to see that they were able to come back. Casino's truly can be amazing money makers.
pointing out that since California had a state- run lottery, gambling—“as a matter of public policy”—was not illegal and that therefore the authority California was attempting to assert was civil and regulatory, r
This is an interesting comparison between California's lottery and Indian gaming. Both are used to help provide funds for that "government body" and so should be treated equally.
His “evidence” is anecdotal at best and, at worst, a dangerously racist viewpoint that characterizes most gaming tribes, and deÌnitely the most successful, as greedy, law-bending criminals
This reminds me of the talk that Trump had about Indian Gaming that we watched in class on Thursday.
in some cases are still engaged in a constant struggle to exert their tribal sovereignty.
In this case is it because of the different rules for each state? Either way, I thought that once something gets settled in a higher court wouldn't apply to that state as precedent will take charge?
What kind of books would she have in common with me, a college graduate?
I hate the tone in her voice here. Its so condescending, even if it really just is a comment on the state of affairs..
he isn’t blood. And for me, right now, blood is all that matters
This says a lot about the Authors priorities. As someone else pointed out, this isn't about the culture she might have lost, this is about her. Who her family is and her blood.
can’t do that. I don’t know the life you’ve led. My mom raised me not to pass judgment. I cannot judge you.”She cries openly then. I know we share the same pain, she and I. It’s just called different names. Hers is a shame of relinquishment; mine is the hurt of abandonment. Both are two sides of the same adoption coin.
Here, you can see the regret with Vic, and the author's resentment at the whole situation.
brown eyes briefly met my own
Another reference to their similarities.
Had my reaction been so visible?
I can't help but feel like the feelings here were more than just the visible features, and something to do with her feelings about the activities themselves and her feeling disassociated with Vic.
Vic pulled her thin coat closer to her chest as she hunched over, protecting herself against the cold that wasn’t intimidated by the nearby fire.
This is written so well
Out of her eight surviving children, three of us had been removed from the home by social workers in 1960. I was the only one who had not returned.
I wonder what the reason was for taking the children from that home. Also, what is the basis for returning the child and when do they refuse return them?
We ask for justice, and not from the muzzle of an M-16 rifle.
This line really hurts because it shows how far they have been pushed by the injustices in their lives. They ask only that they are treated fairly.
America has a moral obli-gation before the eyes of all the world to undo the many wrongs inflicted upon our Indian peoples; upon Indians of All Tribes.
I feel as though these moral obligations went basically ignored for a long time, and now who knows if the majority of people still feel as though there still is that obligation. Its almost as if it all got ignored.
Many potential leaders have fallen by the wayside because they have allowed themselves, or were forced by oth-ers, to become so involved in the intricacies of bureaucracy that their basic goals were forgotten.
This is actually a really big point. There are actually quite a few times we see this reflected even in today's politics. With our senators making us promises that they might actually believe, but the idea gets lost once they reach DC with all the of the bureaucracies.
self-determination
This was essentially a support for people to have determination over their own governance and other decisions that would be impacting their lives.
If our people misbehave, send the parties concerned out, but let those that conduct themselves respect-fully be free to come and go
Crazy how basic of a request this is and that in today's age there are still times where this does not happen in people's minds where they will extrapolate onto a whole group of people from a few peoples actions.
We were shocked when the Jews were discriminated against in Ger-many. Stories were told of public places having signs, “No Jews Allowed.”
Since this was in a war time with Germany, this parallel must have really hit home with people since they saw themselves to be the good guys, so how could they be doing something that they are fighting against overseas.
“No Natives Allowed.”
Was the racism against natives this blatant around the US or was it especially bad in Alaska? If it was this blatant everywhere, I am surprised We don't hear more about it.
With support from Governor Earnest Gruening, a grassroots movement ulti-mately led the territorial legislature to adopt an Anti-Discrimination Act in February 1945
I wonder if the governor's support was instrumental to the success of the movement or if it would have succeeded even without him.
Double Victory against fascism abroad and racism at home as much as any com-munity in the United States.
It seems as though fighting the war or getting ready to, might have provided a strong incentive for natives to want to push against racism within the US because they realized that if they were going to die the same as any other citizen for their country, they should be treated the same as any other citizen.
We therefore pray Congress to give us a chance to present our cases to a committee of Congress, to any court, or to the Secretary of the Interior. We know that we can establish our rights, and we are only asking for just and fair treatment.
Even here at the end they aren't even asking for their rights directly. Merely the opportunity to be heard. It really makes me feel as though these people were "free" but not truly seen as equal humans that deserved respect.
Said com-missioners, in ascertaining the identity of the freedmen entitled to share under this decree, shall accept what is known as the authenticated Cherokee roll, the same being on file in the office of the Secretary of the Interior, having been furnished to him, and purporting to have been taken by the Cherokee Nation in 1880, for the purpose of showing the number of freedmen entitled at that time to citizenship in said nation ***and their descendants.”
Was there external pressure to exclude the freemen? Or was there some other reason for this denial?
Many indigenous peoples practiced captive taking and slavery prior to con-tact with Europe.
This is pretty surprising to me, I guess I have not learned much about the practices of the native people before the Europeans came. How did they decide who were going to be slaves and who wouldn't?
Despite its shortcomings, the Cherokee Female Seminary and its counterpart, the male seminary, were unquestionably the catalysts for the prosperity of many Cherokee women, men, and their families.
This is true, for better or for worse for their culture, these schools did enable people to "succeed" in the changing world. I just wonder if the costs were too high.
The female seminarians had no problem in using their femininity as a lever to attract attention.
Was this also to do with the fact that there was a different view on women's place in society as something lower than men and so it was okay to exploit femininity to draw attention. Would an egalitarian culture do the same?
While our neighboring Tribes and Nations are pressing forward in the pursuit of knowledge, let not the Cherokee ... be second in the race." The last thing his tribe needed, he warned the seminarians, was "lazy and useless men" and "slouchy and slip· shod women.1
Here it looks as though the competition with other tribes was also a fairly important factor with wanting to become whiter in culture as fast as possible.
Many of the girls came from slaveholding families, yet the issue of slavery was not mentioned in any issues of Wreath of Cherokee Rose Buds nor in any of the female students' or teachers' memoirs.
Considering the times, I wonder if it is purposeful that there was no mention of slaves, or if these families truly did not even think about these slaves often enough to ever consider writing anything about them.
My complexion does not prevent me from acquiring knowledge and being useful hereafter
Here we can see a split between someone who is a full-blood and yet is pro education, but still trying emphasize that she is no better or worse for her skin color.
One instructor, Kate O'Donald Ringland, later recalled that in regard to seminary philosophy, "anything 'white' was ideal"; an alumna remembers learning in primary grades that the "white way was the only acceptable way."
As we had talked about in class this is a clear attack on Native culture and is all part of the efforts to erase Cherokee culture all together. It is sad to see members of one's own culture fighting against the culture itself.
The Cherokee National Council was controlled by progressive, educated, mixed-blood tribesmen, many of whom subscribed to the value system of the upper-class antebellum South.
How are the members of this council put in place in a way that all of them ended up being in support of education and progressiveness?
They did want to remain Cherokees, but they strove to be "white Cherokees."
What did it mean to be a Cherokee then if they were not interested in retaining Cherokee values? Was it just about having that blood?
Ironically, the latter believed themselves to "more" Cherokee and therefore in a higher "cultural class" than the former.
I wonder if one of these came before the other. Is it possible that at first, more traditional Cherokee did not consider themselves higher class than the educated Cherokee, but that opinion came after as a defense or response to the educated Cherokee believing themselves to be higher class. I suppose it is also possible that it happened in the reverse order.
police-man came to us and said: “I was not sent here, but I came for your good to tell you what I have heard— that they are going to arrest you two.
What motivation could there be for this? I wonder why the author did not write about questioning the motives of the policeman given his reference to foreigners being untrustworthy before.
But the people agreed to this.
If this is referring to the Native people, then I wonder if the agreement was one that came at great coercion or if the people agreed to it to avoid confrontation so agreed to it quickly. Perhaps there was an even higher motive behind the acceptance.
But could we believe anything the Wasichus ever said to us?
This really hits home how much distrust there was between the author and the foreigners. This was after there was any hope of reconciliation for sure.
Later, I heard that the Brules were dancing over east of us; and then I heard that Big Foot’s people were dancing on the Good River reservation; also that Kicking Bear had gone to Sitting Bull’s camp on Grand River, and that the people were dancing there too.
I feel like the Author here is trying to show how word would spread in pieces and slowly over time from different places all around them. Not dissimilar to how a fire (the idea) would spread across the lands.