This just in -
See post on the NMAI page about the recent natural disaster in Oklahoma:
http://blog.nmai.si.edu/main/2013/05/oklahoma_tornado_relief.html
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Friday, May 10, 2013
Picture of the Day
Here's a glimpse at the distribution of where Native American peoples live today:
Source: Censusscope.org
Note: The authors of this blog do not take credit for the above image.
Thursday, May 9, 2013
Recent Sports Illustrated Poll Suggests People Support Redskins Name
Despite all the recent news and criticism surrounding the Washington Redskins mascot, a recent sports illustrated poll suggests that people favor the name. Any thoughts/comments on the recent poll?
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130502/washington-redskins-nickname.ap/
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130502/washington-redskins-nickname.ap/
The team's nickname has faced a new barrage of criticism for being offensive to Native Americans. Local leaders and pundits have called for a name change. Opponents have launched a legal challenge intended to deny the team federal trademark protection. A bill introduced in Congress in March would do the same, though it appears unlikely to pass.
But a new Associated Press-GfK poll shows that nationally, "Redskins" still enjoys wide support. Nearly four in five Americans don't think the team should change its name, the survey found. Only 11 percent think it should be changed, while 8 percent weren't sure and 2 percent didn't answer.
Although 79 percent favor keeping the name, that does represent a 10 percentage point drop from the last national poll on the subject, conducted in 1992 by The Washington Post and ABC News just before the team won its most recent Super Bowl. Then, 89 percent said the name should not be changed, and 7 percent said it should.
The AP-GfK poll was conducted from April 11-15. It included interviews with 1,004 adults on both land lines and cellphones. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.9 percentage points.
Several poll respondents told The AP that they did not consider the name offensive and cited tradition in arguing that it shouldn't change.
Tuesday, May 7, 2013
Native Americans in the Vatican.....What!
It is interesting to see how much impact the Native American community has made on the European community even so long ago when so little was known. So from the 1400's to today the Native Americans made an impact in lives of outsiders and essentially form that time until today they have been disregarded and treated as outsiders in society. It is interesting to see how the roots trace back.
http://www.salon.com/2013/05/07/first_western_painting_of_native_americans_discovered_at_the_vatican_partner/singleton/
http://www.salon.com/2013/05/07/first_western_painting_of_native_americans_discovered_at_the_vatican_partner/singleton/
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
This billboard is obviously causing some controversy and I think it appalling that the pro gun lobby would post this. In essence is mocks the notion that the Native Americans were taken care of by the United States. Furthermore it take the picture of a stereotypical Native American dress and uses that instead of taking a picture tat actually shows the poverty that these people live in. Why not take images from Pine View reservation, oh wait that would only detract from their gun message and take away from the fact that the entire nation has turned its back on a group of citizens. It should be noted that there author of this sign has decided not to be named. I would ask the question, did they do this becasue they new the ad was appalling to Native Americans? I would guess that over the idea that they were worried about their stance on guns.
Its seems strange that too this day we still mock this population, there would be a billboard of African Americans saying "turn in your guns we will take care of you" and depicting slavery. That is insensitive, so how it this any different?
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/30/us/colorado-gun-billboard/index.html
Comment from one of our readers
This comment was sent to us from a reader. What do you think, do you agree? (Discuss!)
"In response to your COMM project:
"In response to your COMM project:
Republican Democracy vs. Indians
In Jefferson’s republican civilization, homogeneity and thus Christian-based virtue was valued above all else. While it may have been the Native American’s land that put them in the path of white imperialism, it was ultimately their otherness that made their very existence irreconcilable with the society created by our founding fathers. Because Jefferson’s government was a republican democracy, heterogeneity threatened to impede the advancement of public interest. Laws and values have to be universally applicable to all members of a society; therefore, the culturally different Indians were simply barred from this society all together. This outcome significantly differed from the one that befell blacks, for whom whites felt a sense of paternalism. The blacks could be integrated into society, albeit as second-class citizen, due in great part to their lack of sovereignty. Native Americans, on the other hand, had their own modes of law and order that were completely different from the European and American models. Therefore, they posed a threat to republican democracy of early America.
In Jefferson’s republican civilization, homogeneity and thus Christian-based virtue was valued above all else. While it may have been the Native American’s land that put them in the path of white imperialism, it was ultimately their otherness that made their very existence irreconcilable with the society created by our founding fathers. Because Jefferson’s government was a republican democracy, heterogeneity threatened to impede the advancement of public interest. Laws and values have to be universally applicable to all members of a society; therefore, the culturally different Indians were simply barred from this society all together. This outcome significantly differed from the one that befell blacks, for whom whites felt a sense of paternalism. The blacks could be integrated into society, albeit as second-class citizen, due in great part to their lack of sovereignty. Native Americans, on the other hand, had their own modes of law and order that were completely different from the European and American models. Therefore, they posed a threat to republican democracy of early America.
The extemporary reason for the clash between the Native Americans and white settlers was land disputes. With the invention of the cotton gin, plantations began to engulf the frontier lands surrounding them. As expansion continued, the Indians were pushed further and further west. This explanation, however, fails to address the question of integration. The answer to this is simple; Indians are too different (or at least perceived as such). The Indians were seen as uncivilized savages who knew nothing of Republican Virtue. Under this code of conduct, individuals were expected to be sober and productive members of society. They were expected to behave like civilized, proper folk. Republican Virtue was essential to the success of Jefferson’s democracy. Jefferson believed that the biggest threat to any republic is licentiousness. In this way he drew from the Greek and Roman models of effective governing. For Jefferson this virtue was embodied by the image of the yeoman farmer. Yeomen were hardworking non-slave holding farmers. They were the cornerstones of Jefferson’s democracy. Native Americans, on the other hand, had their own value system that was rooted behind centuries of tradition. Jefferson’s society looked contemptuously upon the Pagan practices of Native Americans. The introduction of the savage Indians threatened to undermine the values that the society was built on. The only way to reconcile Native Americans with the ways of the Yeoman would be for them to give up their culture and act “civilized”. Putting aside the issue of cultural clashes, the very structure of a republican democracy favors homogeneity.
In a republican democracy the entire population is represented by a much smaller subsection of society. For this form of rule to be effective, the interests of the aggregate have to be represented by members of the government. If the population is too diverse, a government risks one of two outcomes. Firstly, if there are groups not being represented, a government risks rebellion and dissent. The second outcome is a smoke screen of political ideals. In the second outcome, the interests of minority groups sideline the interests of the majority. Furthermore, the constitution purports the goal of universal equality. The terms of citizenship are universally applicable to citizens. However, it is never implied that anyone can be a citizen. In order to ensure that laws and values can be universal, the population must be homogenous. In the case of Native Americans, the ideals of the constitution would not serve their interests. If integrated as they were, Native Americans would either threaten the very fabric of the constitution or be ignored by its representation. Although many minority groups were abandoned by the constitution, the Native Americans were in a class of their own. Their history in the US significantly differed from that of the blacks. White Americans felt a sense of paternalism towards black Americans. Being black was seen as an affliction that individuals should not be blamed for. In addition, the blacks were introduced to Americas as slaves; thus, they lacked sovereignty. This made it easy to integrate them into the republican civilization, albeit as second-class citizens. Blacks could be impressed with the Republican Values of their masters. In this way the idea of equality for all citizens was quickly warped into the concept of making all citizens the same. For these reasons, Indians as Indians could not be integrated into society. But what if the image and economic ideals of Native American’s changed?
As is evident in our modern society, different cultural groups can cohabitate as long as their goals and interests are aligned. In Jefferson’s era the biggest impediment to cohabitation was the perceived otherness of the Indians. If Indians were to become a part of the nation, their public image must be changed. While his society regarded Indians as inherently different, Jefferson himself publicly attempted to change popular opinion. He waged a campaign to “publicize the image of the Indian hunter as the forerunner of the yeoman republican.” If society viewed Native Americans as virtuous and hard working, they could be tolerated in the new democracy of America. Jefferson also touted his plan to educate Native Americans on republican and economic values in return for agricultural training. Despite the public claims of Jefferson, however, his administration never had more than fifteen thousand dollars devoted to Native American matters. In addition, his rebranding of Indians as forerunners of the yeomen did little to change public sentiment. Effectively, the public message of Jefferson provided a curtain, behind which speculators and settlers could continue to expel Native Americans over minor disputes. In this way Jefferson’s republican dispensation, “not to destroy but to fulfill,” was never fully applied to Indians. It is unclear whether Jefferson believed in his own public rebranding of Indians, or if it was merely for show.
In a government in which the interests of the many are represented by the few, homogeneity in the population is essential. This was the case in Jefferson’s fledgling democracy. However, the existence of Indians posed a threat to this homogeny. They were simply too different at the time from the rest of the American population. They governed themselves in a completely foreign way from the colonial settlers. In addition, their savage image directly contrasted with the values that were emphasized by Jefferson. Given the stark contrast between the Indians and the American settlers, it seems unlikely that they could live peacefully in a republican democracy. However, if the Indians changed their cultural and economic values they may have been able to integrate into American society."
Washington Redtails?
Article from earlier this morning: It explains a resolution that D.C. Council member David Grosso is preparing to introduce that suggest the Washington Redskins change their name, possible to the Washington Redtails.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/dc-council-may-push-washington-redskins-into-washington-redtails/2013/04/30/456cb72c-b1a7-11e2-bbf2-a6f9e9d79e19_story.html
Thanks to Megan Kowalski and AISU member Chemia Kimberly for the article.
Monday, April 29, 2013
Say NO to Voter ID Laws Infringing on Native American Rights
Voter Identification laws are an often discussion topic in the political sphere. To give some background information, Voter ID checks are for voting purposes in elections. It requires an individual to have some form of ID, like a drivers license, in order to cast a vote every other November when we head to the polls. To be concise, there are essentially two sides to this debate. One side argues that Voter ID laws are necessary to prevent fraudulent voting in elections. The other side argues that Voter ID laws disproportionately (and adversely) affect certain demographics, like minorities or the elderly, on the basis that those groups are less likely to have ID's like driver licenses. This side argues that as a result, those groups are discouraged from going out to vote, thus impeding the democratic process of elections.
This isn't a political blog so I'm not going to talk about the pros and cons of Voter ID laws as a whole or evaluate the accuracy of the claims that voter fraud is a rampant issue in need of Voter ID laws to remedy. What I want to talk about, obviously, is how this issue of Voter ID laws affects Native Americans and their citizenship rights and civil liberties.
Native Americans are a group frequently targeted by these Voter ID laws and are one of the groups that may be less likely to have one of the valid forms of ID that increasingly stricter Voter ID laws require. North Carolina recently passed new Voter ID laws. For most of the legislative process, lawmakers had deemed Tribal ID's as unacceptable and not up to par with their idea of a valid form of ID. It was not until the final round of revisions that lawmakers acquiesced to the demands of one lawmaker and decided to reinstate Tribal ID's an acceptable form of identification. Some people may argue that since there is only one federally recognized Native American tribe in North Carolina, it should not be a big deal if the Tribal ID's of that one tribe are no longer viewed as acceptable. However, I would vehemently oppose that claim, because that type of thinking not only marginalizes and belittles the rights of Native Americans, but it also destroys the very principles of a democratic society.
Democracy is strong because it is the voice of all the people in a land expressing their opinions. Democracy is strong because every single person is free to vote for the cause and candidate he or she supports. This freedom is what keeps people from feeling oppressed. Therefore, it should be the governments job to ensure that every group, like Native Americans, are given an easy path to expressing their democratic ideals. I applaud the North Carolina lawmakers who passed the bill tacking on Tribal ID's as a valid form of ID. However, it should never gave gotten to the point where not counting those types of ID's was actually a potential part of the law. The excuse of it not being a big deal since there is only one federally recognized tribe in North Carolina is also ridiculous if you think about it. If we aren't paving the way for every person to be able to easily vote then we're hindering the democratic process. It is only as strong as its weakest link, so every effort should be made to include even the smallest groups of people.
In contrast to the final results of what happened in North Carolina, I want to shed light on what's currently taking place in North Dakota. In the "Peace Garden State", where 5.4% of its population is Native American, a bill is making its way through the state legislature that would - you guessed it - make it harder for Native Americans to express their right to vote at the ballot box. This is happening right after a Congressman from North Dakota went on a disturbing rant against one of the state's Native American tribes. 5.4% of a state's population is actually a large amount, although it may seem like a small single-digit number. Again, I want to bring up the fact that democracy is made strongest by everyone participating. When viewed from that perspective, I hope you see why this is actually a big deal.
North Dakota Native Americans are rightfully ready to fight this injustice. There is talk of how this bill would violate federal provisions in the Federal Voting Rights Act that allows for the use of Tribal ID's as an acceptable form of ID. That aspect highlights the obvious legal issues involved in restricting voter access. Apart from that legal aspect, however, is the more important issue of ensuring the Native Americans have access to the same citizenship rights and civil liberties that all groups do. It should not be due to a legal technicality that this bill isn't allowed to pass. It should be because of citizen outrage and intrinsic values of democracy instilled in the lawmakers of North Dakota.
Next time you express your right to vote, I want you to think about this post. For most of you reading this, you probably will have few problems, if any, going through the voting process. But remember, for some, it is not that easy. Through your awareness of issues like these, make sure that you're voting for officials who support equal access to voting to ALL people in America, not just some. It is the politicians who believe fully in the democratic process that should be representing this nation.
This isn't a political blog so I'm not going to talk about the pros and cons of Voter ID laws as a whole or evaluate the accuracy of the claims that voter fraud is a rampant issue in need of Voter ID laws to remedy. What I want to talk about, obviously, is how this issue of Voter ID laws affects Native Americans and their citizenship rights and civil liberties.
Native Americans are a group frequently targeted by these Voter ID laws and are one of the groups that may be less likely to have one of the valid forms of ID that increasingly stricter Voter ID laws require. North Carolina recently passed new Voter ID laws. For most of the legislative process, lawmakers had deemed Tribal ID's as unacceptable and not up to par with their idea of a valid form of ID. It was not until the final round of revisions that lawmakers acquiesced to the demands of one lawmaker and decided to reinstate Tribal ID's an acceptable form of identification. Some people may argue that since there is only one federally recognized Native American tribe in North Carolina, it should not be a big deal if the Tribal ID's of that one tribe are no longer viewed as acceptable. However, I would vehemently oppose that claim, because that type of thinking not only marginalizes and belittles the rights of Native Americans, but it also destroys the very principles of a democratic society.
Democracy is strong because it is the voice of all the people in a land expressing their opinions. Democracy is strong because every single person is free to vote for the cause and candidate he or she supports. This freedom is what keeps people from feeling oppressed. Therefore, it should be the governments job to ensure that every group, like Native Americans, are given an easy path to expressing their democratic ideals. I applaud the North Carolina lawmakers who passed the bill tacking on Tribal ID's as a valid form of ID. However, it should never gave gotten to the point where not counting those types of ID's was actually a potential part of the law. The excuse of it not being a big deal since there is only one federally recognized tribe in North Carolina is also ridiculous if you think about it. If we aren't paving the way for every person to be able to easily vote then we're hindering the democratic process. It is only as strong as its weakest link, so every effort should be made to include even the smallest groups of people.
In contrast to the final results of what happened in North Carolina, I want to shed light on what's currently taking place in North Dakota. In the "Peace Garden State", where 5.4% of its population is Native American, a bill is making its way through the state legislature that would - you guessed it - make it harder for Native Americans to express their right to vote at the ballot box. This is happening right after a Congressman from North Dakota went on a disturbing rant against one of the state's Native American tribes. 5.4% of a state's population is actually a large amount, although it may seem like a small single-digit number. Again, I want to bring up the fact that democracy is made strongest by everyone participating. When viewed from that perspective, I hope you see why this is actually a big deal.
North Dakota Native Americans are rightfully ready to fight this injustice. There is talk of how this bill would violate federal provisions in the Federal Voting Rights Act that allows for the use of Tribal ID's as an acceptable form of ID. That aspect highlights the obvious legal issues involved in restricting voter access. Apart from that legal aspect, however, is the more important issue of ensuring the Native Americans have access to the same citizenship rights and civil liberties that all groups do. It should not be due to a legal technicality that this bill isn't allowed to pass. It should be because of citizen outrage and intrinsic values of democracy instilled in the lawmakers of North Dakota.
Next time you express your right to vote, I want you to think about this post. For most of you reading this, you probably will have few problems, if any, going through the voting process. But remember, for some, it is not that easy. Through your awareness of issues like these, make sure that you're voting for officials who support equal access to voting to ALL people in America, not just some. It is the politicians who believe fully in the democratic process that should be representing this nation.
Sunday, April 28, 2013
Saturday, April 27, 2013
Friday, April 26, 2013
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Wednesday, April 24, 2013
Native American Rights Fund supports changing name of Washington, D.C. football team name
The name "Redskin" is considered a derogatory term by Indians and non-Indians alike, and has been compared to using the "N-word" in reference to African Americans.
The Native American Rights Fund is one of the many groups who've been vocal in trying to change the name of the football team that plays in Washington, D.C. (I would like to avoid using the actual word, since it is highly offensive to many indigenous people.) Here is an article from the Indian Country Today Media Network about the NARF's position on this issue, and why "racially or culturally disparaging federal trademarks" are damaging to the American people and society as a whole.
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/03/26/native-american-rights-fund-applauds-sponsors-proposed-offensive-redskins-trademark
The Native American Rights Fund is one of the many groups who've been vocal in trying to change the name of the football team that plays in Washington, D.C. (I would like to avoid using the actual word, since it is highly offensive to many indigenous people.) Here is an article from the Indian Country Today Media Network about the NARF's position on this issue, and why "racially or culturally disparaging federal trademarks" are damaging to the American people and society as a whole.
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/03/26/native-american-rights-fund-applauds-sponsors-proposed-offensive-redskins-trademark
"DoSomething" about Racism Against Native Americans!
The organization DoSomething.org has an ongoing campaign and portion of their site dedicated to eliminating prejudices against Native Americans. Learn more and how to get involved here.
Native News Network - "Connecting Native American Voices"
We found this excellent resource called Native News Network, which serves as an online news forum connecting Indigenous people around the nation (and world). It allows Native Americans to learn about what's going on in other tribes, thus helping to strengthen inter-tribal relations and work towards common goals. Check out the website here: http://www.nativenewsnetwork.com/index.html
National Preservation Institute - Resources
Here you will find information from the National Preservation Institute on seminars they've hosted focusing on Native American Cultural Resource Management and Preservation: http://www.npi.org/taxonomy/term/6
37 Years and Still Waiting for so-called American Justice
This is the story of Native American Activist Leonard Peltier. In the mid 1970's he was accused of murdering two FBI agents who were searching the Native American reservation where he was residing. Numerous doubts surround the series of events that took place next, but the result was 2 FBI agents dead and charges pointing at Peltier.
Where does the rights part come into this? Right in the evidence that convicted him. The car that allegedly shot at the FBI agents was described by multiple witnesses as being a red truck, while Peltier drove a station wagon not of that color. Three people who testified against Peltier later said that the FBI tied them to chairs and coerced them to make certain statements. The jury wasn't allowed to hear that there were other cases in which the FBI tampered with witnesses. The gun allegedly used by Peltier didn't match up with the bullet casings found at the scene of the crime. Even the Parole Commission now states that there is a lack of any evidence of Peltier contributing to the murders.
The 37th anniversary of Peltier's conviction recently passed us by. For most of you, it probably came and went as it always had; without a thought. I know you're asking why you should care about someone who lives far away and has no ties to you. Well, the thing is, Peltier represents more than just one person. He represents the nationwide indigenous struggle for rights and respect. In a nation that prides itself on its judicial system, how can we let this stand? Numerous Presidents have come and gone and not pardoned him, while at the same time pardoning men who have done much worse deeds, considering that to many, Peltier never did anything wrong. People always say that something is only as strong as its weakest link. This too is true for our justice system. It is only as credible and just as its most unjust case.
Like I said, Peltier is a symbol to many of the fight for Native American rights. There are some out there who claim that if he was a white man, for instance, that this never would have happened because more people would care enough to bring more attention to this injustice. I cannot measure the truth to that claim, but I can state that more can be done to help him. I could say things like "pretend your in his shoes" or "pretend that was your father it had happened to" and sure, those things would resonate with you briefly, but then fade into the background of our busy days.
Instead, I challenge you to take the initiative to do some research of your own on this case. Learn more about it and converse about it with your friends and family. Enlightened discourse like that is how you spread the word of injustices like this. This is something that should matter to all of us. This is our justice system. These are our civil rights and liberties. Equal protection of the law is deserved by everyone in these United States. Think about how this story motivates you to ensure that injustices like these cease to occur going forward.
Where does the rights part come into this? Right in the evidence that convicted him. The car that allegedly shot at the FBI agents was described by multiple witnesses as being a red truck, while Peltier drove a station wagon not of that color. Three people who testified against Peltier later said that the FBI tied them to chairs and coerced them to make certain statements. The jury wasn't allowed to hear that there were other cases in which the FBI tampered with witnesses. The gun allegedly used by Peltier didn't match up with the bullet casings found at the scene of the crime. Even the Parole Commission now states that there is a lack of any evidence of Peltier contributing to the murders.
The 37th anniversary of Peltier's conviction recently passed us by. For most of you, it probably came and went as it always had; without a thought. I know you're asking why you should care about someone who lives far away and has no ties to you. Well, the thing is, Peltier represents more than just one person. He represents the nationwide indigenous struggle for rights and respect. In a nation that prides itself on its judicial system, how can we let this stand? Numerous Presidents have come and gone and not pardoned him, while at the same time pardoning men who have done much worse deeds, considering that to many, Peltier never did anything wrong. People always say that something is only as strong as its weakest link. This too is true for our justice system. It is only as credible and just as its most unjust case.
Like I said, Peltier is a symbol to many of the fight for Native American rights. There are some out there who claim that if he was a white man, for instance, that this never would have happened because more people would care enough to bring more attention to this injustice. I cannot measure the truth to that claim, but I can state that more can be done to help him. I could say things like "pretend your in his shoes" or "pretend that was your father it had happened to" and sure, those things would resonate with you briefly, but then fade into the background of our busy days.
Instead, I challenge you to take the initiative to do some research of your own on this case. Learn more about it and converse about it with your friends and family. Enlightened discourse like that is how you spread the word of injustices like this. This is something that should matter to all of us. This is our justice system. These are our civil rights and liberties. Equal protection of the law is deserved by everyone in these United States. Think about how this story motivates you to ensure that injustices like these cease to occur going forward.
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
Oregon Board of Education Joins Native American Rights Debate
http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/index.ssf/2013/04/goe_in_oregons_native_american.html
The Oregon Board of Education recently banned all Native American nicknames, mascots and imagery from the state's K-12 schools. The ban is scheduled to take full effect in 2017. Article discusses the right/wrong nicknames at various throughout the state of Oregon. Key quote "No matter the policy, there is no reasonable excuse in the 21st century for the Washington Redskins. Can you imagine the Yellowskins? The Blackskins?"
The Oregon Board of Education recently banned all Native American nicknames, mascots and imagery from the state's K-12 schools. The ban is scheduled to take full effect in 2017. Article discusses the right/wrong nicknames at various throughout the state of Oregon. Key quote "No matter the policy, there is no reasonable excuse in the 21st century for the Washington Redskins. Can you imagine the Yellowskins? The Blackskins?"
Thursday, April 18, 2013
To save endangered languages, Native American tribes turn to tech
To save endangered languages, Native American tribes turn to tech
This article is fascinating is that the Native American population must protect the little identity that they have. Given the fact that there is so little coverage on this segment of the population, many do not know how far they have been pushed to the fridges of society. It brings great pleasure and sadness that they must turn to tech becasue so they have are so dedicated to preserving their language and culture, but society still ends up causing Native Americans to not have much to hold on too that related to their history. Fortunately, the Native American Community is so dedicated they will adapt.
This article is fascinating is that the Native American population must protect the little identity that they have. Given the fact that there is so little coverage on this segment of the population, many do not know how far they have been pushed to the fridges of society. It brings great pleasure and sadness that they must turn to tech becasue so they have are so dedicated to preserving their language and culture, but society still ends up causing Native Americans to not have much to hold on too that related to their history. Fortunately, the Native American Community is so dedicated they will adapt.
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Video: Native Americans Living in Desperate Poverty
From RT News:
Published on Jun 15, 2012
The Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in southwestern South Dakota is the poorest reservation in the United States. Nearly half of its nearly 30,000 residents live below the poverty level, and life expectancy is among the lowest in the Western world. Housing at Pine Ridge was the worst seen by UN Special Rapporteur for Housing Raquel Rolnik in her recent tour of the United States.
Oglala Sioux tribe president Theresa Two Bulls says about 80 percent of the people who live on the reservation are unemployed. Even those looking for work find that there are few jobs available to them. There are a few outreach organizations as well as a Subway sandwich shop.
Oglala Sioux tribe president Theresa Two Bulls says about 80 percent of the people who live on the reservation are unemployed. Even those looking for work find that there are few jobs available to them. There are a few outreach organizations as well as a Subway sandwich shop.
Video: Property Rights, American Indians and Reservation Socialism
From The CATO Institute:
Dr. Amy Sturgis gives a lecture on property rights and other citizenship and humanitarian issues facing Native Americans today.
Amy H. Sturgis earned her Ph.D. in Intellectual History from Vanderbilt University. Her primary fields includeScience Fiction/Fantasy Studies and Native American Studies. Sturgis is author of four books on Native American and U.S. history as well as dozens of scholarly and mainstream book chapters, articles, and presentations onhistorical and speculative fiction topics. She has edited five books on sciencefiction and fantasy subjects. In 2006, Sturgis was honored with the Imperishable Flame Award for Achievement in Tolkien/Inklings Scholarship. Sturgis spoke at Cato University on August 2, 2012.
Monday, April 15, 2013
Whaling and Native American Rights
A lot of time individuals chose to blog about how Native Americans are being marginalized because they're not being given equal rights that non-Native Americans enjoy. For this blog post, I would like to take a different approach and blog about rights that are solely reserved for Native Americans. It's not something we often think about, but as a sovereign people, there are some rights that exclusively Native Americans are entitled to. They are entitled to these rights that others are not given because these rights are long-established and fundamental to their way of life, many of which are tied to Native American spiritual customs.
The right at the center of this blog post is the fundamental spiritual Native American practice of whaling. This practice has recently garnered media attention across the nation because of efforts by a group called Sea Shepherds. Sea Shepherds is animal conservation group focused on protecting marine animal rights. The purpose of this blog post will be to offer insight into the Native American side of this issue, a side that you might not have considered or heard before. My hope is that it enlightens you to critically think about this issue with the knowledge of the other, and lesser known, side of the debate.
Whales are of course a beloved species to many people, moreover, some whales species are designated as endangered species. Organizations like the Sea Shepherds are celebrated because they give a voice to creatures that cannot defend themselves. At the same time, while respecting the rights of marine animals, which is certainly a worthy cause, we must also look to the rights of Native Americans. To some Native Americans, the whale is sacred; they use parts of whales for clothing, rituals, gifts, customs, money, food, etc. It is an extensive list. They pay tribute to and respect the beauty and strength of whales. Yes, they hunt whales, but they respect and honor the whales as an integral part of their cultural foundation.
There is a clear conflict here. Protecting marine life versus protecting long-standing customs. I'm not going to tell you what to value, that is for you to decide. Many people approach this issue and automatically want to side with the preservers against the killers. But there is so much more to the issue then that. That is what I'm trying to get at.
This opens up to a broader theme about civil liberties and rights for Native Americans. Oftentimes, with the cultural differences that many of us find ourselves in compared to Native Americans, it is hard for us to see this other side. It is hard sometimes to see things from the perspective of a group of people that we do not know as much about. The issue of whaling is a complicated issue to discuss, but we must keep in mind the factors driving different people's stances. The point of this post isn't just to talk about whaling rights though. It's to discuss how when reading about issues facing Native Americans, you need to keep in mind what important cultural influences might factor into the debate. Keeping an open mind to the cultural practices of Native Americans is important to ensuring their fair right to civil liberties and what citizenship means to them.
So next time you come across an issue involving Native Americans, be sure to do your research and keep in mind any complicated cultural factors that might be at play.
The right at the center of this blog post is the fundamental spiritual Native American practice of whaling. This practice has recently garnered media attention across the nation because of efforts by a group called Sea Shepherds. Sea Shepherds is animal conservation group focused on protecting marine animal rights. The purpose of this blog post will be to offer insight into the Native American side of this issue, a side that you might not have considered or heard before. My hope is that it enlightens you to critically think about this issue with the knowledge of the other, and lesser known, side of the debate.
Whales are of course a beloved species to many people, moreover, some whales species are designated as endangered species. Organizations like the Sea Shepherds are celebrated because they give a voice to creatures that cannot defend themselves. At the same time, while respecting the rights of marine animals, which is certainly a worthy cause, we must also look to the rights of Native Americans. To some Native Americans, the whale is sacred; they use parts of whales for clothing, rituals, gifts, customs, money, food, etc. It is an extensive list. They pay tribute to and respect the beauty and strength of whales. Yes, they hunt whales, but they respect and honor the whales as an integral part of their cultural foundation.
There is a clear conflict here. Protecting marine life versus protecting long-standing customs. I'm not going to tell you what to value, that is for you to decide. Many people approach this issue and automatically want to side with the preservers against the killers. But there is so much more to the issue then that. That is what I'm trying to get at.
This opens up to a broader theme about civil liberties and rights for Native Americans. Oftentimes, with the cultural differences that many of us find ourselves in compared to Native Americans, it is hard for us to see this other side. It is hard sometimes to see things from the perspective of a group of people that we do not know as much about. The issue of whaling is a complicated issue to discuss, but we must keep in mind the factors driving different people's stances. The point of this post isn't just to talk about whaling rights though. It's to discuss how when reading about issues facing Native Americans, you need to keep in mind what important cultural influences might factor into the debate. Keeping an open mind to the cultural practices of Native Americans is important to ensuring their fair right to civil liberties and what citizenship means to them.
So next time you come across an issue involving Native Americans, be sure to do your research and keep in mind any complicated cultural factors that might be at play.
Respecting Non-Western Sacred Objects: An A:shiwi Ahayu:da (Zuni war god), the Museum of the American Indian–Heye Foundation, and the Museum of Modern Art
From the Smithsonian's NMAI blog:
Respecting Non-Western Sacred Objects: An A:shiwi Ahayu:da (Zuni war god), the Museum of the American Indian–Heye Foundation, and the Museum of Modern Art
http://blog.nmai.si.edu/main/2013/04/respecting-non-western-sacred-objects.html
This piece discusses Native American artifacts and how they should be respected as belonging to their rightful owner. However, these works of art and crafts have become highly valued in the world of fine art, and currently there are Native American artifacts for sale or auction around the world. Many of these were taken without permission and which hold special significance to the people whom they were taken from. Furthermore, this piece addresses some of the misconceptions Westerners hold about Native American art, and how portraying these artifacts incorrectly is disrespectful and can harm the traditions of these cultures.
Respecting Non-Western Sacred Objects: An A:shiwi Ahayu:da (Zuni war god), the Museum of the American Indian–Heye Foundation, and the Museum of Modern Art
http://blog.nmai.si.edu/main/2013/04/respecting-non-western-sacred-objects.html
This piece discusses Native American artifacts and how they should be respected as belonging to their rightful owner. However, these works of art and crafts have become highly valued in the world of fine art, and currently there are Native American artifacts for sale or auction around the world. Many of these were taken without permission and which hold special significance to the people whom they were taken from. Furthermore, this piece addresses some of the misconceptions Westerners hold about Native American art, and how portraying these artifacts incorrectly is disrespectful and can harm the traditions of these cultures.
'Trail of Hope' aims to bring message
Reservations struggling to build new homes as a result of federal budget cute:
'Trail of Hope' aims to bring message
To Learn More about the "Trail of Hope for Indian Housing", visit their Facebook page at: https://www.facebook.com/
'Trail of Hope' aims to bring message
To Learn More about the "Trail of Hope for Indian Housing", visit their Facebook page at: https://www.facebook.com/
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Protecting Water Rights is Key for Native American Tribes
Wyoming Public Media this past Tuesday:
http://wyomingpublicmedia.org/post/native-american-leader-says-protecting-water-rights-key-tribes
http://wyomingpublicmedia.org/post/native-american-leader-says-protecting-water-rights-key-tribes
Friday, April 5, 2013
Resources from Native American Rights Fund
From NARF website: "Founded in 1970, the Native American Rights Fund (NARF) is the oldest and largest nonprofit law firm dedicated to asserting and defending the rights of Indian tribes, organizations and individuals nationwide.
NARF's practice is concentrated in five key areas: the preservation of tribal existence; the protection of tribal natural resources; the promotion of Native American human rights; the accountability of governments to Native Americans; and the development of Indian law and educating the public about Indian rights, laws, and issues.
Our work depends solely upon the generosity of donors like you. Please make a secure online donation today."
visit http://www.narf.org/
NARF's practice is concentrated in five key areas: the preservation of tribal existence; the protection of tribal natural resources; the promotion of Native American human rights; the accountability of governments to Native Americans; and the development of Indian law and educating the public about Indian rights, laws, and issues.
Our work depends solely upon the generosity of donors like you. Please make a secure online donation today."
visit http://www.narf.org/
Thursday, April 4, 2013
Native American Themed Sports Teams: Change Your Offensive Names
To me, citizenship entitles us to give and receive equal respect.
This blog will discuss issues that relate to citizenship rights and liberties of Native Americans. An interesting topic that I would like to blog about first is the issue of offensive nicknames and mascots in professional and collegiate sports. My hopes are that after reading this blog, you will be more aware of the racism involved in some of these sports team names and as a result, be more conscious of your use of those terms.
Sports in America date back to the 1800's, so this is not a new issue facing society. So this begs the question, how has society allowed this issue to continue for so long? Well, a partial explanation for that is that some people see no issue here at all. There are two sides to the debate on using offensive Native American names in sports. Some argue that names, such as the Washington Redskins, Atlanta Braves, or Cleveland Indians are actually a tribute to Native American history, while others argue the exact opposite, with the former term being the most contentious.
For the sake argument, let's just focus on the Washington Redskins, since that team name draws the most controversy of any of the current sports teams. Is it a racist name? Does it pay tribute to Native Americans, or does it insult and offend them? To start, let's take a look at its origins. Originally, the Washington Redskins were owned by George Preston Marshall, known to be a racist himself, and the team was given this name in 1933. Marshall always refused to answer whether the name had anything to do with racism, but it's worth noting that he also refused to integrate any African-Americans with his all-white team in the 1950's. That's the origins of the name, but it's unknown to what extent, if any, of those origins are rooted in malicious racism.
What we do know is where Native Americans stand today on the issue, and one Suzan Shown Harjo, now aged 67, stands vehemently against it. She likens the use of the term "redskin" to being as offensive to her and her fellow Native Americans as the n-word is to African-Americans. This statement might come as a surprise to some who have never thought twice about cheering for their favorite respective sports team. And if this is you, you're not a bad person, you might innocently just not have been aware that it offends Native Americans so seriously. I myself have always thought the term 'redskin' to be an offensive word but the way Harjo framed it with respect to another offensive word to another race really struck a chord with me on how truly offensive its use is.
Today in 2013 it is definitively impossible to imagine a collegiate or professional sports team with a nickname that involves an offensive word to a group of people like African-Americans. Think of all of the offensive words that were once, or are unfortunately still used by some people in reference to them; it would be outrageous for any team to name themselves after one of those words, at least in my opinion. The reason I can't imagine any of them is because those words are so vulgarly offensive to so many people. But why should we treat Native Americans any different?
Is it because there are less of them in America? Is because they haven't been as vocal as other marginalized groups have been throughout U.S. history? Is it because it's always been this way? Or because these sports teams are too popular to have to undergo a massive re-branding? Regardless of the answer to those questions, certainly none of them should factor into not giving them equal respect and treatment
Equal respect and treatment. That's what this issue seems to be about to me. It pains me to read about in our history books the way various marginalized groups have been treated here in the U.S. throughout history. Especially for the Native Americans, they're guilty of nothing except being in the wrong place at the wrong time. This nation has come so far in terms of respecting others, but there is still work to be done, and this issue looms large as an obstacle to the finish line.
Harjo feels the same way, she said, "The Washington team - it's the king of the mountain, when this one goes, others will." (Harjo refuses to even say the name of the Washington team, because it's so offensive to Native Americans like her).
So what can be done? Well by you, actually, a lot. First of all, you can play your role in spreading awareness about this vulgarity of some sports team's names. Perhaps you were unaware that these team names offend people before now, and that's okay; what's important is how you act now with this knowledge. If you agree that these names are offensive, simply stop using them. Refer to teams as the Cleveland team, or the Washington football team. That's an easy step anyone can do. If you feel so inclined, spread the story of Suzan Harjo when you feel it appropriately comes up in a conversation involving any of these sports teams. There are about 900 sports teams (high school, collegiate, professional, etc) in America right now that use Native American names in them, so chances are, one will come up in a sports conversation relatively soon
You can also get involved through legislation. This past March, a bill was introduced to Congress that would ban the term "redskin" being used in a trademark. If the bill passes, it would ban Washington from using the name in any capacity. So contact your representative and let them know that you support the passing of this bill, I know I will.
You may not know any Native Americans in your life and this issue might not seem to affect you in any way, whatsoever. But just because an issue doesn't directly affect you doesn't mean you should be ignorant or complacent that it is gravely offensive to some. These nicknames do not pay homage or tribute to Native Americans, they teach nothing about their real culture and history.
So next time you hear someone talking about a sports team with a Native American nickname, in your mind, replace that team name with a term used to offend other minority groups, like African-Americans, Hispanics, or homosexuals. I bet you wouldn't use any of those offensive word to refer to a sports team, so why use that one?
It's something to think about. Let's have respect for all people in this nation. That's what being an American citizen is. It's just as much about giving respect to others as it is getting respect from others. You might not be a Native American, but if you except people to respect you and your culture, then you should give that respect to people of other cultures.
-Mike C
This blog will discuss issues that relate to citizenship rights and liberties of Native Americans. An interesting topic that I would like to blog about first is the issue of offensive nicknames and mascots in professional and collegiate sports. My hopes are that after reading this blog, you will be more aware of the racism involved in some of these sports team names and as a result, be more conscious of your use of those terms.
Sports in America date back to the 1800's, so this is not a new issue facing society. So this begs the question, how has society allowed this issue to continue for so long? Well, a partial explanation for that is that some people see no issue here at all. There are two sides to the debate on using offensive Native American names in sports. Some argue that names, such as the Washington Redskins, Atlanta Braves, or Cleveland Indians are actually a tribute to Native American history, while others argue the exact opposite, with the former term being the most contentious.
For the sake argument, let's just focus on the Washington Redskins, since that team name draws the most controversy of any of the current sports teams. Is it a racist name? Does it pay tribute to Native Americans, or does it insult and offend them? To start, let's take a look at its origins. Originally, the Washington Redskins were owned by George Preston Marshall, known to be a racist himself, and the team was given this name in 1933. Marshall always refused to answer whether the name had anything to do with racism, but it's worth noting that he also refused to integrate any African-Americans with his all-white team in the 1950's. That's the origins of the name, but it's unknown to what extent, if any, of those origins are rooted in malicious racism.
What we do know is where Native Americans stand today on the issue, and one Suzan Shown Harjo, now aged 67, stands vehemently against it. She likens the use of the term "redskin" to being as offensive to her and her fellow Native Americans as the n-word is to African-Americans. This statement might come as a surprise to some who have never thought twice about cheering for their favorite respective sports team. And if this is you, you're not a bad person, you might innocently just not have been aware that it offends Native Americans so seriously. I myself have always thought the term 'redskin' to be an offensive word but the way Harjo framed it with respect to another offensive word to another race really struck a chord with me on how truly offensive its use is.
Today in 2013 it is definitively impossible to imagine a collegiate or professional sports team with a nickname that involves an offensive word to a group of people like African-Americans. Think of all of the offensive words that were once, or are unfortunately still used by some people in reference to them; it would be outrageous for any team to name themselves after one of those words, at least in my opinion. The reason I can't imagine any of them is because those words are so vulgarly offensive to so many people. But why should we treat Native Americans any different?
Is it because there are less of them in America? Is because they haven't been as vocal as other marginalized groups have been throughout U.S. history? Is it because it's always been this way? Or because these sports teams are too popular to have to undergo a massive re-branding? Regardless of the answer to those questions, certainly none of them should factor into not giving them equal respect and treatment
Equal respect and treatment. That's what this issue seems to be about to me. It pains me to read about in our history books the way various marginalized groups have been treated here in the U.S. throughout history. Especially for the Native Americans, they're guilty of nothing except being in the wrong place at the wrong time. This nation has come so far in terms of respecting others, but there is still work to be done, and this issue looms large as an obstacle to the finish line.
Harjo feels the same way, she said, "The Washington team - it's the king of the mountain, when this one goes, others will." (Harjo refuses to even say the name of the Washington team, because it's so offensive to Native Americans like her).
So what can be done? Well by you, actually, a lot. First of all, you can play your role in spreading awareness about this vulgarity of some sports team's names. Perhaps you were unaware that these team names offend people before now, and that's okay; what's important is how you act now with this knowledge. If you agree that these names are offensive, simply stop using them. Refer to teams as the Cleveland team, or the Washington football team. That's an easy step anyone can do. If you feel so inclined, spread the story of Suzan Harjo when you feel it appropriately comes up in a conversation involving any of these sports teams. There are about 900 sports teams (high school, collegiate, professional, etc) in America right now that use Native American names in them, so chances are, one will come up in a sports conversation relatively soon
You can also get involved through legislation. This past March, a bill was introduced to Congress that would ban the term "redskin" being used in a trademark. If the bill passes, it would ban Washington from using the name in any capacity. So contact your representative and let them know that you support the passing of this bill, I know I will.
You may not know any Native Americans in your life and this issue might not seem to affect you in any way, whatsoever. But just because an issue doesn't directly affect you doesn't mean you should be ignorant or complacent that it is gravely offensive to some. These nicknames do not pay homage or tribute to Native Americans, they teach nothing about their real culture and history.
So next time you hear someone talking about a sports team with a Native American nickname, in your mind, replace that team name with a term used to offend other minority groups, like African-Americans, Hispanics, or homosexuals. I bet you wouldn't use any of those offensive word to refer to a sports team, so why use that one?
It's something to think about. Let's have respect for all people in this nation. That's what being an American citizen is. It's just as much about giving respect to others as it is getting respect from others. You might not be a Native American, but if you except people to respect you and your culture, then you should give that respect to people of other cultures.
-Mike C
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)