e the name (Rich 3). These vicpeople who learned how to fight battles in both court anknew how to read and write the legal system, interrsemiotics, generate public opinion, form publics,

1). Considering geographerthat gentrifying inner-city neighborhoods like this one (Over-thnew frontier"-the site of increasing white "settlement" to the dages" who l

opulations on this land. On thasite should be read and taught not in separation from other ghistories, rhetorics, and struggles of African-Americans and ogroups, women, sexual minorities, the disabled, and still otherwriting instruction in the powerful context

6). Thus, the logic Kennedy employs in his study might lead some tothe conclusion that a writing Indian is no Indian a

oy of others" (124). Rather than repreereignty here is the ability to assert oneself renewed-in the prpeople's right to rebuild, its demand to exist a

ifferently even today. "In almoLytle write, "the concern of the Indians was the preservationsuccessful perpetuation of life, land rights, community, andeignty in this regard is concerned not only with political probut with a whole way of life. Non-Indian reductions of Indianguments for "self-governance"--that is, for a degree of local fimodeled after western governmental systems--obscures themphasis. "Self-government is not an Indian idea:'" write Deloin the minds of non-Indians who have reduced the traditiongovernance is certainly the work of a state but not necessarirequires something more. However, while self-governancethe whole part and parcel of sovereignty, it nonetheless re"I believe that the future of our nations is singularly dependgovern:' writes Robert B. Porter. "If we can do this, then allloss of language and culture, the need for economic stabilittribal sovereignty-can then be addressed and, hopefully, resneed, then, is an understanding of the twin pillars of sovegovern and the affirmation of peoplehood. For without selAmerica, the people fragment into a destructive and chaoticthe people, there is no one left to govern an

Thus conceived, Haudenosaunee sovereignty is probably besof a people to exist and enter into agreements with otherof promoting, not suppressing, local cultures and traditioncommon political project-in this case, the nob

affairs." Namely, "Cherokees believedhad the responsibility for maintaining cosmic order by respemaintaining b

ofldentity, Manuel Castells defines nations asstructed in people's minds and collective memory by the shaical projects," adding a political dimension to a sense oanalysis, nations, with or without states, tend to be organtural material of peoples-for example, language-and the Firno exception (

ans (Prucha, Treaereign" to "ward'," from "nation" to "tribe:' and from "treaty" tof Indian national sovereignty can be credited in part to a rhewriting by white powers, and from that point on, much of theignty has nit-picked, albeit powerfully,

137), counting coup on t

x 136). Pic-ture these children withdrawing into their blankets with a curious new technology,concealing their texts from each other and the teacher until just the right moment,then emerging from their blankets proud and eager to share the fruits of the

Canadian authorities were unwilling to budge on two key pillars:the supremacy of Canadian sovereignty over Indigenous sovereignties andcapitalist modes of production

These logics are codified through discourses and conventions about ownershipand the nation, illustrating ‘inextricable connections between white possessivelogics, race, and the founding of nation-states’ (Moreton-Robinson, 2015, p.xiii). The subjugation of Indigenous sovereignty, therefore, becomes anextension of perpetual Indigenous dispossession and reaffirmation of settlerownership and control.

For example, Mark Rifkin (2012) suggests thatfocusing on Indigenous erotics provides a space to develop alternative visionsof sovereignty and peoplehood.

third space of sovereignty, white patriarchal sovereignty, andsovereignty of the soul

Alfred’s warning is two-fold: first, sovereignty is a Westernconcept and, thus, it is unlikely Indigenous peoples can build a liberationmovement around an idea so deeply ensconced in Western thought. Onecould, of course, point to Audre Lorde’s (1984, p. 112) assertion, ‘The master’stools will never dismantle the master’s house [...] they may allow us temporarilyto beat him at his own game, but they will never enable us to bring aboutgenuine change’

Further, scholars of InternationalRelations and law suggest the current global order is structured upon ananarchical system of sovereign states that are independent and equal. Inresponse, others have argued that sovereignty is in decline or damaged, asevident by multi-state configurations like the European Union and the rise ofglobalization which has seen significant power move to multi-nationalcorporations (Robinson, 2004). Sheryl Lightfoot (2016) has argued the globalIndigenous rights movement is subtly changing global politics by articulating adefinition of self-determination by peoples that does not necessarily manifest inthe creation of a territorially defined, independent state.

‘Where sovereignties are nestedand embedded, one proliferates at the other’s expense; the United States andCanada can only come into political being because of Indigenousdispossession’

That is, even in the most militarily powerful Nation-state in theworld, Indigenous nations prevent the United States from achieving perfectsovereignty in a conventional sense—supreme and exclusive authority in adefined territory.

The Racial Contract seeks to account for the way things are and how they cameto be that way—the descriptive—as well as the way they should be—thenormative—since indeed one of the complaints about white political philosophyis precisely its otherworldliness, its ignoring of basic political realities.

one has to be comfortable with existing inthe space between what is and what is possible, or what we refer to as the in-between space of Indigenous sovereignties

generosity–dependence relationship

The Taku Wakan is a spirit and it is four kinds and it is called TakuWakan because it is akin to the Wakan Tanka. The Wakan Tankaand the Taku Wakan may be all called Taku Wakan because theyare all akin to each other. When a prayer is made to Wakan Tanka,it is made to Taku Wakan also.6

Their interrelationships formed thetemplate for human interactions, such that “human relationships—parents and children, grandparents and grandchildren, brothersand sisters, husbands and wives—were reflections of these greater,more fundamental relationships established by the wakan beings.”6

With the aims of supplant-ing thióšpaye ties and communal responsibilities among Dakhóta, aswell as breaking up community landholdings, they preached salva-tion along with ideals of national citizenship and individual propertyownership.

Newspaper ads in Minnesota newspapers featuredadvertisements, trumpeting that some of these photos “had reachedcollections in Europe” and were selling in St. Paul galleries “at NewYork prices.”2

thióšpayeethics

One must obey kinship rules; one must be a good relative.

All the warriors got together and they went into the townand boy, they destroyed everything, cleaned that place just flat.

I guess he just dropped it so it broke, and hejust shot him. And they said that’s what started that war.

She also described divi-sions among Dakhóta who had intermarried with whites and howmany mixed families were forced into an impossible choice of takingsides.

учИлсяна пятёрки

му́дрый

инициати́вный

доброжела́тельный