through his powerful writings, most notably “Common Sense”, an incendiary pamphlet advocating independence. An advocate of liberalism,
he outlined his political philosophy in “Rights Of Man”
“Among the most detestable
villains in history, you could not find one worse than Moses. Here is an order, attributed to 'God' to
butcher the boys, to massacre the mothers and to debauch and rape the
daughters. I would not dare so dishonor my Creator's name by (attaching) it to
this filthy book (the Bible).”
“It is the duty of every true
Deist to vindicate the moral justice of God against the evils of the Bible.”
“Accustom a people to believe
that priests and clergy can forgive sins...and you will have sins in
abundance.”
“The Christian church has set
up a religion of pomp and revenue in pretended imitation of a person (Jesus)
who lived a life of poverty.”
“I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish
church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the
Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of...Each of those churches
accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all."
James Madison: Fourth President and father of the
Constitution, was not religious in any conventional sense. Madison objected to
state-supported chaplains in Congress and to the exemption of churches from
taxation. He wrote: “Religion and government will both exist in greater purity,
the less they are mixed together.”
"Religious
bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble
enterprise."
"During
almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on
trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and
indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both,
superstition, bigotry and persecution."
“What
influence, in fact, have Christian ecclesiastical establishments had on civil
society? In many instances, they have
been upholding the thrones of political tyranny. In no instance have they been
seen as the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wished to
subvert the public liberty have found in the clergy convenient auxiliaries. A
just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate liberty, does not need the
clergy.”
George Washington, the first
President of the United States, never declared himself a Christian according to
contemporary reports or in any of his voluminous correspondence. Washington
championed the cause of freedom from religious intolerance and compulsion. When
John Murray (a Universalist who denied the existence of hell) was invited to
become an army chaplain, the other chaplains petitioned Washington for his
dismissal. Instead, Washington gave him the appointment. On his deathbed,
Washington uttered no words of a religious nature and did not call for a
clergyman to attend.
Ethan Allen, whose capture of Fort Ticonderoga while commanding the
Green
Mountain Boys helped inspire Congress and the country to pursue
the War of Independence, said,
"That Jesus Christ was
not God is evidence from his own words. Allen noted that he was generally
"denominated a Deist, the reality of which I never disputed, being
conscious that I am no Christian."
When Allen married Fanny Buchanan, he stopped his own wedding ceremony
when the judge asked him if he promised, "to live with Fanny Buchanan
agreeable to the laws of God." Allen refused to answer until the judge
agreed that the God referred to was the God of Nature, and the laws those
"written in the great book of nature."
Benjamin Franklin, delegate to the
Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention. Inventor, Philosopher,
Statesman.
”As to Jesus of Nazareth, my Opinion of whom you particularly desire, I
think the System of Morals and his Religion...has received various corrupting
Changes, and I have, with most of the present dissenters in England, some
doubts as to his Divinity; tho' it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having
never studied it, and think it needless to busy myself with it now, when I
expect soon an opportunity of knowing the Truth with less trouble." He died a month later, and historians
consider him, like so many great Americans of his time, to be a Deist, not a
Christian.
No one categorically disputes
the faith of the Founding Fathers. To speak of inalienable Rights being endowed
by a Creator certainly shows sensitivity to our spiritual selves. What is
surprising is that fundamentalist Christians think the Founding Fathers' faith
had anything to do with the Bible. Without exception, the faith of our Founding
Fathers was deist, not theist. It was
best expressed earlier in the Declaration of Independence, when they spoke of
"the Laws of Nature" and of "Nature's God." The assertion
expressed by Barbara Martin (see quote at chapter head), and other
ultra-patriotic fundamentalist Christians is fabricated from myth, but lends
itself perfectly to the way “White Men think”.
Essay Twelve
BlueWolf & Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Creating A Storybook Nation
“Fiction parted from fact at
the very beginning…all nations like to celebrate their origins, but the birth
of our nations makes a particularly compelling story...Our story...is simple
yet grand. Its plotline is easy to
follow: American colonists resisted British oppression, fought a war, achieved
independence, and established their own government. Within this straightforward structure we embellish as we
please...” “In fact most of the stories were created up to one hundred years
after the events they supposedly depict. These stories, invented long ago,
persist in our textbooks and popular histories despite advances in recent
scholarship that disprove their authenticity.”
“Why do we cling to these yarns?
“...They give us a collective identity, make good stories, we think they
are patriotic.” “…they help define us as a people”, and “highlight a shared
sense of past.” “Today, our texts tell
us, the United States is the leader of the Free World—the most powerful nation
on earth…Our very existence as the world’s only superpower appears to make all
of American history worthwhile…(our) stories work because they clarify and
vindicate who we are—but they also conceal who we don’t wish to be.” “This
invented past...paints a flattering self-portrait of our nation. We pose before the mirror in our finest
attire.” Celebrating” what we think it
means to be an American. We make our
country perfect—if not now, at least in the mythic past—and through the
comforting thought of an ideal America, we fix our bearings.” “Only by ignoring
what actually happened, can we tell the story we want to hear.”
Ray Raphael
As
we have discovered, the title of James Loewen‘s book, “Lies Our Teacher Told
Us” is apropos to much of what we have been taught regarding American History.
We
have seen the reality of Columbus, the fable of American family and social
superiority, the misinformation relating to
Indigenous achievements, contributions, and levels of sophistication and
civilization. We have learned the true
origins of the concepts and structures of democratic systems, and of the ideals
of individual and social liberty. But the creation of the “American Myth” is by
far the most pervasive, persuasive, and calculated of modern national
histories.
The story of America is one
of the most enduring pieces of fiction in western history, aside from the
mythology of Christianity. The public
education system insures that everyone is indoctrinated into the correct
symbolism, highlights, sound bites, and memorable events that create this
collective vision of our past. This is by no means an unintentional
occurrence. Even in 1790, Noah Webster
wrote, “Every child in America...should rehearse the history of his country; he
should lisp the praise of Liberty and of those illustrious heroes and statesmen
who have wrought a revolution in his favor.”
Ray Raphael writes, “Daily,
politicians invoke “our founders” in support of some cause totally foreign to
the American experience of the late eighteenth century. They place the past—...a past they
imagine—in service of a political present.”
As is true with most history
predating the 20th century, the history of the revolutionary period
was largely kept orally and passed “word of mouth” through the communities and
cities of the thirteen Colonies. Since
it was not the tradition of American social structure to have a severely
disciplined oral tradition, as was the case with Native Indigenous oral
record-keeping, the stories were soft gold, to be hammered and shaped to the
pleasure and intent of the storyteller.
These stories gathered
detail as time progressed, without the obstruction of fact-checking or
compulsory bibliography. As Raphael
puts it, “Divested of any need for documentation, it went freely wherever it
wanted.” “The visual arts...gave the past a place in the present...these
artistic forms allowed for leeway in interpretation...Subsequent generations...
used these images to shape a collective “memory” of the revolution...
Creatively, if not accurately, we have fashioned a past we would like to have
had.”
“ These stories, invented long ago, persist
in our textbooks and popular histories despite advances in recent scholarship
that disprove their authenticity.”
The
first of the “myths” we’ll examine here begin as a precursor to the
Revolutionary War.
Samuel
Adams was not the charismatic leader of the Boston Rebellion or Tea Party as we
have been led to believe. Neither is he
the author of the words enshrined on the official seal of the town of
Lexington, “What A Glorious Morning For America.” This is another fabrication.
While Adams may have been a supporter of the sovereignty of people, he
was never a revolutionary, and did not propose the overthrow of the crown or a
restructuring of the social order.
Around 1860, supporters of the
preservation of the Union needed a new revolutionary period hero. Henry Wadsworth Longfellow provided one,
Paul Revere. Unfortunately, the facts
surrounding the life and ride of Paul Revere do not follow the storyline
outlined in Longfellow’s poem. Revere
was known, even after the War primarily as a successful silversmith. The correct details are that he was asked to
make the ride to inform Sam Adams and John Hancock that a number of British
were coming their way—but it was only a total of nine soldiers! He personally saw only two but nevertheless
arrived in Lexington to complete his mission.
There was no ride to the Old North Church in Boston, no hanging of
lanterns, no “one if by land, two if by sea.”—and he wasn’t the only one asked
to make the ride. William Dawes rode an
alternate route. What we aren’t told is
that, after warning Adams and Hancock, Revere continued on to carry his message
to Concord and was captured by the British.
The bad old British threatened to blow his brains out, but then only
took his horse and released him. Revere
would later write that he was very shaken, as he had “never before faced danger
like this.” A poet named as Eb Stiles
started immortalizing the stories that sprang up after the event, two decades
later, but when Revere died in 1818 no mention of the ride was included in his
obituary. The distortions of
Longfellow’s poem immortalized him for something his contemporaries did not
recognize— those inaccuracies “are not incidental, they are the very reasons
the story has endured for almost a century and one half.” (Rapheal)
History texts and even
scholars came to rely heavily on Longfellow’s imagination, even adding to it
and embellishing it. Texts in 1888,
1923, 1935, and 1946 relied heavily on the “facts” provided in the poem. In 1891, the prominent historian, John Fiske
got his information from the poem. All
current history textbooks at every level of American schools still include the
story of the ride, even after David Fischer’s “Paul Revere’s Ride” laid the
errors to rest in 1994.
A number of the lasting
quotes we remember from Thomas Jefferson’s draft of the Declaration Of
Independence actually come, almost verbatim, from George Mason’s “Draft Of The
Virginia Declaration Of Rights.”
Mason’s draft appeared in the Pennsylvania Gazette on June 12, 1776,
five days before Jefferson was appointed to a drafting committee for the
national declaration. Here is only one
of Mason’s highlights. “That all men are born equally free and independent, and
have certain inherent natural rights, among which are the enjoyment of life and
liberty, with the means of acquiring property, and possessing and obtaining
happiness and safety.”
More than ninety of these
declarations preceded the national one.
While Jefferson may indeed have polished and perfected the prose, the
ideals were not his own, but were floating in the air of Indigenous
America. Jefferson’s name remained
unattached to the Declaration Of Independence until the 1790’s. In the 1800’s Jefferson and John Adams
argued about who should receive the accolades for creating the document. Jefferson won.
In the mid 1800’s, all the
fifty-six signers were venerated but that number was just too great to fit into
established mythmaking so it was condensed to the “Founding Fathers.” As Raphael
says, “Adoration for the Founders has evolved with the times.” In
truth, the Founding Fathers were openly contemptuous of their fellow citizens
Congress voted
for Independence on July 2nd, 1776.
The true Independence of America should be celebrated on July 2nd,
the date it was actually declared. The
Declaration of Independence, as a document, was approved on July 4th,
but only
John Hancock signed the Declaration on that date. (Actually, this is in dispute
as well.) That following spring (after
the July 2nd ratification), the committee that printed the official
Congressional Journal fabricated an entry for July 4th of the
previous summer as the date Independence was declared. The fake entry included a fictive signing by
the delegates on the 4th, omitting the July 19th date (when New York delegates
finally assented), as well as August 2nd, the first date other
delegates signed. Fourteen of the
delegates purported to have signed on July 4th were not even present
on that date. The July 4th
signing was perhaps the first American manufactured media event, “consciously
designed to produce a sort of “overnight antiquity”.” Historian Gary Wills
writes, “The Fourth includes celebration of some things that happened on
different days and of some things that did not happen at all.” Even Congress ignored those dates
until after the Revolution. Sometimes
after that, a holiday was declared, sometimes not. The Fourth Of July was totally ignored in 1787. However, within ten more years, the
Fourth of July was being celebrated as a political holy day, “the Sabbath of
our freedom”. Yet, it was
hardly a day of unity. Many times the
fiercest divisions of the populace were celebrated and expounded upon on this
date. The parties held separate
celebrations and it was a day where Americans might “most likely come to blows”
over their differing opinions and political philosophies.
Patrick Henry never
addressed Congress with the long soliloquy ending with the words, “Give me
Liberty, or give me Death!” He spoke
eloquently, to be sure, but the text of his remarks is unknown. William Wirt composed the words Henry is
known for in 1817, for his book, “Sketches Of The Life And Character Of Patrick
Henry.” In 1815, Wirt confided to a
friend, “And then, to make the matter worse, from 1763 to 1789…not one of his
speeches lives in print, writing, or memory.”
Some have said that Wirt learned the text from St. George Tucker, though
Tucker himself wrote, “In vain should I attempt to give any idea of his
speech.” Wirt was the author of another
reconfiguring of Henry’s speeches, notably the one where he finished with, “If
this be treason, make the most of it.”
Yet, a first person account of Henry’s reaction was quite different. In that version, Henry apologized not once,
but twice, for his words and actions.
Ray Raphael writes, “Oratory was crucial to the creation of American
nationalism.” (However) “Hawkish
oratory, taken at face value, is little more than military recruitment. Noble
sentiments lead impressionable boys and young men to offer up their lives in
service to their nation or cause. This
danger intensifies when the orator pumps up the words of another, as with Wirt
and Henry. Patriots of the early
Republic sanctified their nationalism and expansionism by appealing to the
hallowed tradition of the Revolution.”
A contemporary history text
makes complete use of Wirt’s creation without even a credit. Raphael writes about this type of history
making, “Imagine, in our own times, the task of trying to recreate the words of
a speech delivered forty-two years ago if we had no written record?” The words might have been stirring, the
emotions fresh in our minds—but what would we remember of the exact way it was
said or what other remarks might have been made? Even if notes had been made, unless the writer went home at once
and recomposed the speech—how much of the original would be lost? As writers, we know how quickly thoughts,
phrases, and the exact expression of ideas can be lost. Even when they are of our own creation!
Few women were included in
the mythmaking but Betsy Ross and Molly Pritchard were two that were. Unfortunately, Betsy Ross never sewed an
American flag and Molly Pritchard never existed at all.
In 1836, poet and essayist,
Ralph Waldo Emerson, created the myth of the shot heard round the world. But the real shot was fired at Concord, not
at Lexington, and it was fired by Americans.
At Lexington, no one even knows who fired the first shots, but the war
itself certainly began almost six months before when patriot militiamen ganged
up on unarmed British officials and took control of power throughout
Massachusetts (except for Boston).
“The Massachusetts
Revolution of 1774 was the most popular uprising in the Nation’s history, the
only one to remove existing political authority…It is rarely mentioned even in
passing, and is never included in the core narrative of our Nation’s
birth. It remains an anonymous
revolution because it did not excite the martial imagination of future American
patriots. It was a non-violent
revolution, accomplished by an overwhelming mass movement of people who not
only preached public sovereignty, but practiced it as well. It had no charismatic, self-promoting
leaders, but was a true example of democratic revolution.” “These rebels ran
their revolution like a mobilized town meeting.” (Raphael)
Anther
myth celebrated today in film and text is the supposed existence of Patriotic
slaves, and their willing participation in the Revolutionary War. While they did participate, it was mostly on
the side of the British. The Americans
allowed free blacks to enlist, but slaves were always banned from serving. Southern society would have collapsed had
the slaves left to fight. Raphael observes, “Slaves were seen as an
embarrassment to a republican army fighting in the name of freedom.” “During
the war, southern white patriots united in opposition to the diabolical designs
of the British, who threatened the very roots of their society by offering
freedom to the slaves. After the war,
the institution of slavery solidified.” “The notion that blacks and white
pulled together in the wake of the Revolution (a la “The Patriot”) to “build a
whole new world” is no more than a self-serving fantasy.”
The myth of the heroic
soldier suffering at Valley Forge is also an enduring one. At the beginning of 1775, all sorts of
people showed up to fight but by the end of 1775, most of them had returned
home and the war was left to be fought by hired guns. The Continental army was formed of boys out for adventure, free
Blacks, Indians, or White men without property or jobs. Civilians of the time feared any standing
army and after the war, for a while, the common American populace looked down
most of those who had served. The
Continental Army was closer to a European army in the type of its soldier than
today’s patriots would like to believe.
Ill prepared to support an army,
Congress was responsible for the lack of supplies at Valley Forge. The soldiers turned to raiding their fellow
American homes and farms in the surrounding countryside for supplies. Farmers
were so upset they threatened not to plant new crops. Washington allowed the practice, calling it “foraging” rather
than pillaging, and it occurred “at the point of bayonet.” Eight to ten troops deserted every night
despite the fact the weather was mild.
Washington reported that “a dangerous mutiny…had been repressed with
difficulty.” He feared a “general mutiny and dispersion.” These mutinies, desertions, and abuses of
the local population stimulated Washington, and later Congress, to appropriate
at least some of the badly needed monies for provisions and supplies.
A terrible winter did occur
two years after Valley Forge at Morristown, but the discontent and maltreatment
of America’s first army lasted eight years. Morristown had too many problems to
make a memorial myth. The army was
there for four years and the hard winter was only during the second. Additionally, the largest mutiny occurred at
Morristown and that doesn’t make for good storytelling. The winter at Valley Forge was an effective
propaganda event due to the death toll from camp diseases, and its proximity on
the timeline to the “victory” at Saratoga.
The tale of Valley Forge served to suppress the truth of what actually
happened at Morristown.
It wasn’t until 1805 and
1807 that the mythical story of Valley Forge began to be accepted as history.
After thirty years, the despised soldiers were now recreated as heroes. A May 1812 Virginia magazine suggested that
the soil of Valley Forge be sanctified, and in 1818 veterans groups called on
the memory of Valley Forge to obtain, for the first time, pensions for
Revolutionary war vets. 1822 and 1823 histories included the story and in 1848,
a newspaper changed the date of the “Hard Winter of 1780”, pushing it back two
years to coincide with Valley Forge. By 1876, the story of loyal, suffering,
and silent soldiers—prepared to die for the cause of freedom—had become an
integral part of the mythical Revolutionary war. The truth is that the soldiers complained, revolted, mutinied,
and deserted in large numbers when their “government “ refused to give them the
basic tools for survival. “They made
their needs known and stood up for their rights…There is no shame in this,
although we (historians) have acted as if there is.” (Raphael)
The
next early American myth is that the revolutionary war ended at Yorktown. Indeed, had the British not been fighting
the French, Spanish, Asian Indians (in India), and Dutch simultaneously on many
fronts, the war quite possibly would not have been won at all. David had not slain Goliath, as our
historians would have us believe. The
truth is that Britain grew tired of its global war in the West Indies, northern
Europe, the Mediterranean, South Africa, India, the East Indies, and the
thirteen colonies in America. Even
so, Britain maintained a sizable presence along the coast. Revolutionary historians understood that the
war carried on for a year and one half after Yorktown. Historians of the 1800’s “forgot” that
reality and created their own. Mason
Weems, the creator of the Washington Cherry Tree myth, also contributed to this
“forgetting.” In 1833, Noah Webster added
to the national impression that the war ended at Yorktown. It was a basic narrative device, the basic
premise of a favored story—that patriots were able to overthrow the mightiest
empire on earth because their cause was so noble. In 2002, at a social studies textbook convention, not a single
book recounted Washington and King George III’s vow to fight on after Yorktown,
the persistence of civil war in the south, or additional British conflicts
around the globe. Every book confirms
the idea that Cornwallis surrendered for all British forces rather than the
fraction he really represented.
“By ignoring the global context, simplified histories contribute
to the illusion that American history is somehow removed from world history,
and, indirectly, that Americans themselves are over and above everyone else…But
war stories with simple, happy endings are suspect, for they fuel the dangerous
notion that wars provide simple solutions.” (Raphael)
Another
premium myth of American History has been the portrayal of any American enemy
as brutal American violence is always
seen in the context of retaliation.
This perception fueled the
destruction of Indigenous Peoples, and rationalized policies of genocide,
expansionism, imperialism, and violence within and without the American
experiment. It started with the
villainization of the British, even though the first atrocities of the
Revolutionary War were actually American-to-American.
“Starting through the decades following the
Revolution and continuing through much of the nineteenth century, writers and
orators concealed the naked truth of a bloody civil war behind glamorous tales
conjured from mere shreds of evidence.” (Raphael)
The Revolutionary War was in part, the
first American Civil War. In South
Carolina, over 103 battles were fought between Americans with no British in
sight. The British Army, dressed
predominantly in green, not red, included so many homegrown soldiers they were
considered “the Regulars” by colonists, not foreigners. The terrible atrocities committed against
one another, Whig and Tory, was what made the Revolutionary War a true
revolution. Domestic conflicts,
colonist against colonist, assumed gigantic proportions in the South, and were
seen as well in the North. However, by
the mid 1800’s, the “revolutionary civil conflict” had been eliminated from the
story. George Bancroft stated the new,
whitewashed historical perspective most clearly. He wrote that British leaders were “the most brutal of mankind,”
while Americans were “incapable of imitating precedents of barbarity.” That perception accompanied America’s view
of Indigenous Natives and their last ditch struggle to save their own
homeland. Only the savages were capable
of brutality and slaughter. America was
simply defending itself, and fulfilling God’s will. Since those days, we’ve had our My Lai, our Abu Graib, our
Haditha. As Rapheal writes, “Feel-good
morality tales, in which good guys can do no wrong, and the bad guys can do no
right, are far from harmless. They feed the notion that one side, inspired by
righteousness, possess the right to kill…Justice is achieved through
killing…Alternative scenarios are written out of the script…Tales of the
American Revolution, based on the simple opposition of good and evil, delude us
into believing that the cycle of revenge will finally come to a halt—after
we’ve had the last word.”
In his
review of thirteen elementary, middle, and high school texts, Ray Raphael found
no discussions of “pan-Indian resistance to white expansion in the wake of the
Revolutionary War.”
“ Indians
reappear in later chapters, which describe their rearguard, desperate struggles
for survival in the nineteenth century—but nary a word at the critical moment
of our nation’s founding, when Indian claims to their homeland were bypassed
and the land passed out to white settlers. Again, this would interfere with the
basic storyline: after “we” won the Revolution, we were free to move west and
expand. Current texts fail to see the full impact of the Revolution on Indians
because they choose not to treat it as a war of conquest… Americans today would
like to imagine kinder, gentler beginnings for their nation—but in fact, the
patriots were neither kind nor gentle to Indians whose occupied lands they
coveted.”
John Vanderlyn’s painting in
1804, The Death Of Jane McRae, contributed to the complete forgetting of the
equality once enjoyed by Indigenous Americans in the minds of their new
“guests.” Though McRae’s killers were never identified, the painting of a
scantily clad but voluptuous white woman being accosted by two well built, but
obviously savage Natives, contributed to the “forgetting.” The incident had occurred in 1777 and had
been used to rally patriots against Indians fighting loyal to a Crown that had
forbid American expansion beyond the Appalachian Mountains. The war with Indians loyal to Britain had
extended well beyond the end of the Revolutionary War as Native Peoples
struggled to maintain their control of lands included in America’s plans for
westward expansion. Racial hatreds were
sparked by paintings like Vanderlyn’s and the accompanying nineteenth century
schoolbooks instructing students that Indians “listened to the cries of their
victims with pleasure”, their “delight was in cruelty”, “a “diabolical thirst
for blood”, and the “lust of murderous deeds.”
These attitudes prevailed into the twentieth century. Even today, the Revolutionary War period for
Native history is off-limits.
“Because this was our
founding moment, it defines who we are as a nation…To portray Revolutionaries
as the oppressors of Native Americans (as well as Blacks) would appear to
contradict the basic storyline: (white) patriots were the ones being oppressed,
and so they rebelled.” (Raphael)
As is obvious from our
continual quoting and references, Ray Raphael’s grasp of the importance of
these myths and the resulting platitudes, attitudes, and collective imaginings
regarding the formation of America are to be admired. Among historians, the willingness to reveal falsehood and deceit
within the national memory is a daunting and sometimes dangerous task. We can only thank our Native ancestors for
their contribution to the formation of a state in which these revelations are
not fatal in consequence.
In the
1800’s, the mythology regarding the American Revolution began to define who
Americans were—at least in their own minds.
The concept of popular sovereignty, embraced wholeheartedly by all of
the Colonies in their “Declaration of Independence” was subverted into an
arrogance that virtually crowed with doctrines of supremacy. The real accomplishment of the Revolution,
that every citizenry of every Nation should have a right to self-rule was
replaced by a childish—“we’re better than you are”—even as we thumbed our noses
at the rest of the world and immediately began meddling in their attempts at
establishing self-rule (through similar revolutions), to protect our interests.
This romantic “Founding
Mythology” was carefully grafted onto the Nation’s consciousness by the end of
the nineteenth century. The concept of
War as a maturing and noble enterprise grew like a scab over the forgotten
festering of the first great American civil conflict. Instead of glorifying the ultimate unification as the result of
the sacrifices and successes of the entire American society, only individual
achievements were highlighted and remembered.
Ray Raphael writes, “…Like
rumors, the tales are too good not to be told.
They are carefully crafted to fit a time-tested mold. Successful western stories feature heroes
and heroines, clear plotlines and happy endings.” “Based on important elements of Western storytelling, they engage
and excite and please. They portray America’s birth as a fanciful affair, not a
serious threat to established authority…These tales, when masquerading as
history, are bound to deceive. Heroes and heroines are marshaled forth to
represent people who are common, not special…yet the language we use belies our
intent. We describe our heroes as “giants” or “larger than life.” Good does battle
against evil...wise men prevail over fools.” ”American revolutionaries...were
better and wiser than decadent Europeans”, “outnumbered colonists overcame a
Goliath” and “the war ended happily with the birth of the U.S.”
Here we
find the perceptive thrust of much of Raphael’s important book. It follows from the hereditary monarchies of
Europe and perpetuates itself insidiously throughout American history. It can be easily identified in the
contemporary phrase—“the head of the organization.” This “head” represents the pinnacle of authority. In Europe, it is the King or Queen. In America, the President. In the military, the General. In a corporation, the CEO. Everywhere the descendants of Europe have
needed, desired, looked for, and demanded—a head man, a chief. Leaders sprout from the soil of the
populace, not as rootless trees but sharing the synergism of the whole. When they are represented as being set apart
from the common people, history becomes the property of the “leaders” and the
People are disenfranchised, their contributions and support minimalized. As Raphael writes, “The model itself
contradicts the avowed aim of the Revolutionaries: government must proceed from
the bottom up, from citizens to their chosen representatives. Writers make
their stories flow by featuring a handful of active agents, but they do not
present a very democratic view of the founding of our nation, and they do not
accurately depict the way historical movements actually function.”
We find
this throughout the history of American Indians in this country. Only a few names are remembered, mostly
warriors who had the temerity to challenge the American military, and who
gained a grudging admiration for their militancy. But as Kent Nerburn observes in his fascinating book, Chief
Joseph & The Flight Of The Nez Perce, “White culture had elevated him
(Joseph) to heroic, even iconic, status—while effectively expunging the Nez
Perce people themselves from the national historical consciousness. This sort of hero worship fit perfectly with
the American penchant for glorifying the individual, but it stood in direct
opposition to the fundamental Native belief that the group is more important
than any individual member.” Nerburn
reports a conversation with a Nez Perce member who said, “What people don’t
realize is that in that flight…Joseph (began) as a bit player. He just took charge at the end because the
other chiefs were gone…But you look at the history books, it’s all about
Joseph’s journey, Joseph’s retreat…”
America
does not owe its founding to the work of an elite cadre, an exceptional junta,
as the Founding Fathers are often portrayed.
Their elevation to “greatness“ contributed to a patriotic fervor that
eventually undermined the essential principles of popular sovereignty gained
through the blood, sacrifice, and participation of ordinary people
Raphael
observes, “Worse yet, by encouraging veneration of a handful of revered
personalities, these tales promoted a passive civic model. They taught
Americans to rally behind their leaders, not to participate actively in
self-governance, as they did during the Revolution.”
Since the
advent of compulsory public education, these poetic narratives that outline the
highlights of the founding of America have found their way into the ears of
every school child to be parroted at every opportunity. In the twentieth century this “creation” of
history, as much through ignorance as design, has continued. A perfect example of this has been the
elements of myth that have come to surround one of America’s favorite
presidents—Abraham Lincoln.
The next time you hear someone
attribute these quotes to Lincoln—stand up and correct them.
"You can fool all of
the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you
cannot fool all of the people all of the time."
"The strength of the nation lies
in the homes of its people."
"To sin by silence,
when they should protest, makes cowards of men."
"There's no honorable
way to kill, no gentle way to destroy. There's nothing good in war except its
ending."
"You cannot strengthen
the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot help small men by tearing down big
men. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.''
The assertion that Lincoln
was not responsible for these quotes has not been made by a radical leftwing
revisionist intent on destroying America’s historical pride in its Civil War
President. Rather it is the Illinois
Historic Preservation Agency in the name of intellectual and scholarly
honesty. “Lincoln may have said a lot
in his time—things we still hear today on everything from lighthearted TV
commercial jingles to serious speeches by public officials—but he didn't say
all the things that are credited to him.” (Associated Press)
"It's simply Lincoln's
own status as a cultural exemplar that make these spurious quotations seem
credible," Rodney Davis, co-director of the Lincoln Studies Center at Knox
College in Galesburg. "He seems to
provide validation for just about anything anybody wants to have validated, and
if you can't find a Lincoln quote, you make one up."
So where did these quotes
come from if not from President Lincoln?
"You can fool all of
the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you
cannot fool all of the people all of the time."
This was thought to be part
of a speech Lincoln gave in September 1858 in Clinton, Illinois, but the line
is not included in the text that was printed in the local newspaper. It was
attributed to Lincoln in 1910 when two people remembered hearing him say it in
1856—54 years later.
"The strength of the
nation lies in the homes of its people."
This is widely quoted on the
Web sites of homebuilders and real estate agents, but Lincoln never uttered it.
However, in August 1928, President Herbert Hoover said something close:
"The foundation of American life rests upon the home and the family."
“To sin by silence, when
they should protest, makes cowards of men."
Douglas MacArthur credited
this to Lincoln in a 1950 speech after his release as commander of the United
Nations forces in Korea. It is actually a line from a poem by Ella Wheeler
Wilcox.
"There's no honorable
way to kill, no gentle way to destroy. There's nothing good in war except its
ending."
An actor playing Abraham
Lincoln in an episode of “Star Trek” said this.
"You
cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot help small men
by tearing down big men. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.''
These are
three of the famous "Ten Cannots" with which Lincoln has been
incorrectly credited even as recently as 1992, when President Ronald Reagan
quoted these lines in a speech before the Republican National Convention. Who
did write the "Ten Cannots"?
The Rev. William J.H. Boetcker, a Presbyterian clergyman, wrote those
words in 1916.
When men at
the highest levels of leadership quote American history incorrectly, we can see
how easily those who listen intently to their discussions on other issues may
take on the misperceptions, and even outright lies, offered to them. The two centuries that have followed the
tumultuous times of the American Revolution have given ample time for the myths
to become “reality’. Ray Raphael
states, “We’ve created perfect stories for a perfect America—but the stories
are not driven by facts. Although
getting history wrong is bad enough, it has further consequences. Our view of history shapes our perceptions
of political processes… the achievements of these people will never adequately
reflect the dynamics of group processes...Stories tell us that s few special
people forged American freedom, and for their efforts, we should be forever
grateful. This misrepresents, and even
contradicts, the spirit of the American Revolution…the collective, political
participation of ordinary citizens.”
“This is a powerful message…those who get it, like the people of the
American Revolution, will be able to challenge abusive authority and take
control of their destinies.”
Americans like
to think of themselves and their experiment as unique. In some ways that is true. But we are not so different from the rest of
the world as we would like to believe.
Americans have proven themselves just as capable of genocide, moral
outrages, and persecutions as any other country. We have shown excellence in corruption and interference,
sometimes violently, in the affairs of others.
We brag about our successes and our freedoms, yet condemn other Nations
for their pride and similar arrogance.
As Loren Baritz points out, “Americans think they’re not only superior
but that the rest of the world wants to become like them.” This is indeed a “unique” point of
view. It fits in perfectly with our
picture of how “White Men think”.
Essay Thirteen BlueWolf
& Lupe'/Shirts N' Skins
Taking The Red Pill
(More Enduring Myths)
This essay continues our
exploration of cherished American myths, discussing how the miracle of writing
often preserves and encourages errors and misinformation; preserving the status
quo and protecting a point of view rather than pursuing clarity and
understanding. We end with a
discussion of how those myths encourage the continuation of the way “White Men
think”, along with our appraisal of some of the dangers inherent in this
perspective.
"Our
contemporary western society, in spite of its material, intellectual and
political progress, is increasingly less conducive to mental health, and tends
to undermine the inner security, happiness, reason, and the capacity for love
in the individual...who pays...with increasing mental sickness and with despair
hidden under a frantic drive for work and so-called pleasure.
Dr. Erich Fromm
“Experiments have shown that simply repeating
a false statement over and over leads people to believe that it is true. Likewise, when we repeatedly think or talk
about a past experience, we tend to become increasingly confident that we are
recalling it accurately.”
Daniel L Schacter
Vine Deloria Jr. once
described history as: "a series of events, circumstances, facts, theories,
or personalities, which break down under closer scrutiny but which, by artifice
or design, are covered up and given an academic status that is simply accepted
by historians (or publishers) and which, after time, becomes accepted as
fact." We like to say
that, for many human beings, it is time that validates a belief, rather than
the belief's innately trustworthy or truthful nature.
Satayana said, "History is always written wrong,
and needs to be re-written". As
Deloria pointed out, since most historians' expertise is in only one period or
event, in any compilation of subjects, errors will occur. Rather than examining all new evidence or information
on the subjects in a compilation, most compilers will simply take what has
previously been recorded and re-issue it.
So, an error made in one century may be perpetuated in succeeding ones.
Americans have even created their own myths about
myths. Often we find that the authors
of previous periods took extreme liberties with the truth and often creatively
constructed their own.
Washington Irvine is to be held accountable for the
long-standing belief that Europeans in the days of Columbus perceived the world
as flat rather than round, and that it was Columbus who expounded upon, and
demonstrated, the truth. But the
knowledge of the shape of our earth has existed since ancient times and was common
knowledge to any educated person of the day.
So, in effect, Irving created a myth that gave birth to a second myth,
that Columbus "discovered" something, and that that discovery made
him more than the mercenary, murderer, and despicable man he was. In reality, new research indicates that even
Basque sailors may have preceded Columbus voyage, giving lie to the idea that
the Americas’ were unknown and uncharted.
Of course, all of these myths have a purpose to
them. They make one person, race, or
culture seem greater or more knowledgeable, while portraying another as weaker,
inferior, or more ignorant. Recorded
history is full of important unrecorded secrets. There have been many personal, political, or religious
institutional agendas which have obscured, covered up, or intentionally failed
to identify important events, personalities, or groups, which have in fact,
significantly affected the history of their time. Some of this is due to the secret, or controversial nature of
those events and societies. As an
example, if we examine the history of Europe we notice that the influences of
Nostradamus, the Knights Templar, the Rosicrucian’s, and the Freemasons have
all been relegated by historians to inconsequential and irrelevant fringe aberrations. In point of fact, "mainstream"
European history cannot be properly understood in context without at least a
general recognition of their importance and the impact of their particular
doctrines, theologies, and ideals, on the cultures of the time. Traditional academic research techniques
must needs deny their importance simply because not enough information exists
to make a sound conventional analysis—so they are just left out.
In much the same way, Traditional knowledge passed down orally
through our Native generations is deemed lacking in documented information,
disallowing conventional analysis, and causing the oral histories of our
Nations to remain virtually unconsidered in any (scientifically accepted)
historical context—even though the disciplines of memory and exact recitation
have been vigorously adhered to.
Charles Wohlforth wrote in
his book, The Whale And The Supercomputer, that in 1977, the International
Whaling Communication ordered the Inupiat whale hunt stopped in Barrow, Alaska,
when government scientists predicted the extinction of the bowhead whale.
Scientific estimates of the population were a meager 1300. Inupiat Elders insisted that the whale
populations were more plentiful than that, and were healthy and increasing.
John Craighead George was the man who became responsible for a new whale head
count. Elders explained why the
government’s statistics were wrong. Scientists had a grudging respect for the
Inupiat’s practical knowledge of the ice, but considered the people lacking in
a fundamental understanding of their practical expertise. This is the same bias we observed in our
chapter on world science, where modern western scientists gave other cultures
credit for discoveries but denied that they had any real understanding of the
underlying mechanics of their finds. George himself remained skeptical. “We
weren’t sitting on a thousand years of traditional knowledge, and we frankly
were taught we were scientists and we were doing stuff scientifically,
carefully, and the other information was anecdotal.” By 1985, George and his team had the facts to re-estimate the
whales at six times the previous numbers.
A byproduct discovery was that the whale’s life spans were between 130
to 150 years of age, with one living well over 200. By 2002, the official number had grown to ten thousand. “The
Natives were vindicated,” George said. “They were right. They were right about all these things.” As Wohlforth observed, “Researchers…had to
accept that there was another valid way of knowing complex facts about the
environment.” A second incident
strengthened that perception. Oil
industry explorers want to use loud sonar sounding to measure seismic readings
on the seabed. Scientist insisted that
whales would be affected at a distance of four miles—Inupiat Elders asserted
that the distances would be found to be much greater than that. Eventually, them distance was proven to be
twelve miles or more.
Wohlforth says that George
was convinced that the Inupiat skill of observation and collective
communication was the key to their vast storehouse of environmental
knowledge. Wohlforth personally
observed that the communities seemed to share information all the time. Inupiat
were expert observers capable of processing an enormous data set for making
useful decisions. George “compared the community to a giant machine gathering
and crunching data.” He said, “They’re taking in massive amounts of data and
processing it like a computer.”
Responsible science needs collaboration and an interdisciplinary
approach. So many scientists rush to publish their facts and findings that
their only hope of keeping up is to pursue a narrow specialization in their
field. Responsible scientific development requires a context within the human
connection, a community to share and contribute to the advancement of the
work.
Americans, being a new Nation, have continually created
their own original myths as they progressed in time. For example, George Washington's cherry tree, wooden teeth, and
starving military at Valley Forge have long been exposed as historically
false. Yet, many Americans, and
American history texts, cling to them religiously. Veneration of the Flag, the Betsy Ross myth, and the false
history of the Liberty Bell both began late in the Country's short
history. Truth takes a long time to
filter in through the barriers of myth, especially in a written history. Just as painters, authors, and
later—filmmakers were the culprits responsible for creating many of these
myths; one of the most enduring perpetuators of American myth is the
educational textbook system. Looking
for standardized, sanitized, and non-controversial accounts, the compilers and
publishers rarely examine the issues to see if new information is
available. Should they discover newer
historical versions, they are loath to make significant changes that wipe the
board clean, presenting new facts.
While scholars may be radically changing their views and perceptions of
the past, publishers, and pseudo-historians remain largely ignorant of their
efforts.
Worship
of the American Flag is strictly a modern development. The original Founding Fathers and
Constitutional Congress needed a flag only for identification during naval
battles. In Congress, discussion of the
flag was described as a “trifling business which ought not to engross the
attention of the House…” Many of the
flags of the period, even after the adoption of a standard symbol, were
different. Even a year after its
adoption, Ben Franklin and John Adams described it as having thirteen stripes
of red, white, and blue. No land battle
of the revolutionary war was ever fought under an American Flag. Only one Naval battle was fought with the
standard present. Not until the
Mexican-American War was the standard raised.
The U.S. Marines did not adopt the flag until 1876, and the U.S. Calvary
did not carry it until 1877. No
American Flag accompanied Custer to the Battle at Greasy Grass. Schools didn’t fly the flag until
1890. Pledging allegiance didn’t come
about until 1892. The original flag
salute was remarkably like the Nazi salutation, and did not begin until 1898.
(It was changed to a hand over the heart during WWII.) There was no Flag Day until 1916. The flag code was not approved by Congress
until 1942 and not adopted into Federal Law until 1976.
American Flag Rituals were not
developed until the late 1800’s when fearful Americans decided that the
immigrant hordes needed rituals and symbols to identify with, and swear loyalty
to. Ironically today, it the descendants
of those same feared immigrants who are most vocal in their support of the Flag
as a symbol of patriotism, not realizing that the rituals were designed as a
measure to control and manipulate their ancestor’s loyalty.
The original Flag was created as
a modification of the Union Jack.
Contrary to the Boy Scout Handbook, the creators of the Flag did not
attribute any particular meaning to the colors, stars, or stripes.
The concept that
laissez-faire capitalism and business is a traditional institution in the U.S.
is another significant myth. American
business has a long history of asking for help from the government and getting
it. The nineteenth century is rich with
examples of government aid to business.
Early business was dependent on government aid. Huge land grants and protective tariffs were
given out freely. Though it goes
against conservative ideals, early nineteenth century state governments owned
and operated myriad businesses. Arms
factories have always been a lucrative favorite of the Federal Government. A clear majority of early American leaders
believed in vigorous government action.
Arthur Schlesinger Jr. concluded that the Founding Father’s legacy “was
rather a blend of public and private initiative known in our own day as a mixed
economy.” Jefferson’s distrust of
central government authority never prevented him from proposing social
improvements. He actively involved the
government in promotion of science, education, and transportation.
The
early farmer not only welcomed government aid, but demanded it. The government has always been there to aid
American business in need. The only
time that a laissez-faire economy has come close to existence in the U.S. was
after the Civil War. The 1887
Interstate Commerce Act, the 1890 Sherman Anti-Trust Act, and Teddy Roosevelt’s
1907 intervention ended the experiment during a financial panic. Roosevelt announced, “Every man holds his
property subject to the general right of the community to regulate it to
whatever degree the public welfare may require it.” Even today however, American businessmen cannot give up their
cherished romantic myth that “businessmen stand alone.”
Long have our Peoples endured the myths and legends
created about us by American historians, scientists, and the entertainment
industry. Number One at the top of big
myths is the story of our one Bering Strait migration over a land bridge
between Asia and Alaska. Every day more
and more evidence is presented that brings these "facts" into
dispute, yet every day it is presented as indisputable scientific history in
the classrooms of America. While some
of our northern-most Cousins may, or may not be related to Asian Indigenous
Peoples, there is no proof yet that determines whether they went from here-to-there
or vice versa. In at least one Native
Nation we know, singers still remember the songs they sang to the dinosaurs.
One of the
distinguishing features of any kind of science is that truth changes as rapidly
and predictably as the Earth herself.
What is indisputable today becomes laughable tomorrow, only to become
indisputable again! Recently discovered
archaeological sites have caused a significant re-evaluation of the
"land-bridge" theories.
Indians have been here many thousands of years more than scientists had
previously believed. This challenges
the timeline they have created for their "migration" theories, among
other things.
None of our creation myths speak of a land bridge, though often journeys
are mentioned. Vine Deloria Jr. wrote
eloquently on this subject in his book, Red Earth, White Lies. He also discussed the topics of evolutionary
timelines and evolutionary theory, as well as the supposed destruction of the
mega-fauna by our ancestral relatives. Even with the atlatl, Natives had no
reason to wipe out the mega-fauna of the continent, and as all homicide
detectives acknowledge, motive is the name of the game.
Deloria points
out that American science loves these theories because they fulfill a desire to
justify the Anglo-American migration here, at the expense of Indigenous Peoples
and the environment, by asserting that "others" before them committed
similar acts of migration and destruction.
These pretensions arise from the same state of mind that causes
contemporary Americans to raise their flags in pride, reveling in the glories
of American heritage and history, while allowing them to overlook the moral
turpitude's and wrongdoings committed by those same historical figures and
government.
This selective memory in patriotism (and science) is
driven by a convenient fatalism about the nature of man and government, which
accepts all the "glory" as important and relevant, while discarding
immoral improprieties, genocide, and oral history as inconsequential by-products
of the time. Is that unjust? "Yes." Is that unfortunate?
"Certainly." Yet our
textbooks and educational system, not to mention our “good old boy” societies
of science and politics, continue to consider any facts that do not support
their pretentious point of view as irrelevant, easily refutable, or
historically relegated to the fixed and immutable past, otherwise known as
Manifest Destiny.
American myths accomplish their purpose of providing the
American people with a simplified historical past, perspective, and identity so
that they will remain true to Anglo-Saxon ethics of puritan Protestantism,
economic avarice, and technological manifest destiny. That identity, now generously offered to other American ethnic
groups and Third World Peoples, has at its heart a premise that man holds, or
should hold, absolute dominion over the earth and all its life forms. That belief has previously been most
successfully promulgated by Roman Catholic colonization throughout the
world. Those who hold to that premise
are still convinced that it gives them a right to obscure the true facts of the
past in order to specifically focus on their "superior" culture and
its supposed achievements.
What if we were
to discover that some Peoples migrated from this continent to others rather
than the other way around? What if
there were movements back and forth over the millennia? Why should we not feel unified pride and
excitement in the knowledge than Human Beings from all over the world have made
astonishing journeys? Why must we hold
to the belief that only Anglo-Europeans were capable of such feats, or that
somehow their accomplishments were more meaningful?
The answer lies
in the continuing war for people's minds.
A war is being waged to keep people convinced that this is the world's
first advanced civilization, and that European-American technological advances
evidence superiority to any previous cultural and technological
accomplishments. This supposed superiority
is used to justify and validate any action taken that resulted (or continues to
result), in the destruction of Indigenous Peoples and natural resources.
For Native Peoples, these myths represent a
premeditated effort to convince new generations to view our treaties as
outdated, and our tribal sovereignty as discriminatory politics in favor of one
specialized type of citizen. Some of
the descendants of the original Anglo-Saxon Americans don't like the idea of
anyone having an advantage among them, especially antagonists whom they believe
they have already conquered. With
written history whitewashing the past and watering down the immoral and racist
heritage of their ancestors, some Anglo-American citizens will feel less and
less inclined to honor what is left of the commitments of their grandfathers.
These institutionalized educational falsehoods represent a dangerous attack on
our Nations.
Until we begin to write, and teach, our own versions of
history, our children will continue to be educated to subjective versions
created to justify the North American Holocaust, salve the consciences of
succeeding generations, and promote a continuing push for dominion over the
earth at any cost. While colonials term
this “revisionist history”, the necessity to write other versions of our past
is a necessary and important contribution to a society that would see itself as
moral, responsible, honorable, just, and free.
There is power in the truth. Healing power. Should
mainstream America, and its government, ever break free of a blind acceptance
of its myths about science, technology, and history—the possibility of healing
will increase. There is a sickness all
around us. It is a sickness born of
selfishness, greed, and abuse. People
recognize deep in their hearts that our civilized systems are corrupt and
destructive, despite their pretensions.
Having progressed to a point of awareness that acknowledges racism,
pollution, hatred, and violence as undesirable traits, our inability to break
free of their constraints is causing a spiritual illness throughout the
civilized modern world. It can only get
worse.
We hope that as more Indian historians, scholars, and
teachers master the arts of English and contemporary education, we will begin
challenging the legends and stereotypes that American science and academia have
presented, unchallenged, for a century or more.
History is not
one of those sacrosanct areas we should tiptoe around. We should be ferociously analyzing and
detailing our differences in order to keep our view of the past as accurate as
possible, for all Americans to cherish, with liberty and justice for all.
Essay Fourteen
BlueWolf & Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Nations Lost, Peoples Scorned
The
viewpoint of historians is never fixed.
It always changes with time and circumstance. That does not mean that it always gets clearer or more
accurate. There are times when the
reality of the past becomes obscured by the pretensions of the present. This happened in America. It started when colonialism began its
phenomenal spurt of growth, and the good intentions and alliances of the
Founding Fathers had to be tossed aside to serve the economic interests of the
burgeoning Nation. By the early
1800's, the American perception of Native peoples and culture had flip-flopped
from respectful and admiring to disdainful and downright mean. Undoubtedly the plight of Nations destroyed
by disease, dislocation and violence had caused the character of many Natives
to appear destitute and pitiful, but this reversal was more the product of an
intentional public campaign to prepare Americans for the upcoming genocidal
policies of the next one hundred years, than of any organic shift of
opinion. The national character of
America, as evidenced by the historical evidence, was never admirable. Americans of all ethnic and racial
backgrounds were discriminated against in 19th century America. In the next
three chapters we'll see how writers, poets, novelists, artists, politicians,
historians and scientists all contributed their expertise to whitewashing the
past and creating a new racial, social, political and historical profile. We'll contrast two of the premier historians
of that time period in their observations—namely Edward Curtis and Jacob
Abbott. In the end, the emperor
(history), definitely got new clothes!
"The invaders
anticipated, correctly, that other Europeans would question the morality of
their enterprise. They therefore
(prepared)...quantities of propaganda to overpower their own countrymen's
scruples. The propaganda eventually took standard form as an ideology with
conventional assumptions and semantics.
We live with it still."
Francis Jennings
At the end
of the 1700’s, Europeans tired of war, revolution, and discussions of liberty,
turned their eyes toward maritime reports coming from the South Pacific. They refocused their attention away from the
“paradise of liberty” toward a “paradise of sensuality.” American intellectuals were free to forget
the history of their fathers and to create their own.
The Founding Fathers never
imagined a time during which the Native Nations of America would not be equally
treated with, as Sovereign Nations. The
immense size of the nation alone precluded any vision of that future. Even though Presidents immediately set out
to expand the U.S. land base through treaties, these treaties were thought to
have been honorably made by all.
While many Eastern Nations had suffered continual loss of lands and
sovereignty during conflicts between the British and French, abrogation of
Colonial treaties started slowly. The
Founding Fathers believed strongly in the sanctity of treaties, as evidenced by
this statement to the British Crown from the Congress of the United States,
April 13, 1787, and unanimously accepted:
" ...When therefore a
treaty is constitutionally made, ratified and published by us, it immediately
becomes binding on the whole nation, and superadded to the laws of the land...
Treaties derive their obligation from being compacts between the sovereign of
this and the sovereign of another nation; ... surely the treaties so formed are
not afterwards to be subject to such alterations as this or that state
legislature may think expedient to make. ... Were the legislatures to possess
and to exercise such power, we should soon be involved as a nation, in anarchy
and confusion at home ...Contracts
between nations, like contracts between individuals, should be faithfully
executed, even though the sword in the one case, and the law in the other, did
not compel it. Honest nations, like
honest men, require no constraint to do justice; and though impunity and the
necessity of affairs may sometimes afford temptations to pare down contracts to
the measure of convenience, yet it is never done but at the expense of that
esteem, and confidence, and credit which are of infinitely more worth than all
the momentary advantages which such expedients can extort. ... Be pleased, sir,
to lay this letter before the legislature of your Nation. We flatter ourselves
they will concur with us in opinion...that the most honorable way of delivering
ourselves from the embarrassment of mistakes, is fairly to correct them!"
Those stirring and admirable
words lost their power when it came to the demands of economics and
progress. Almost as soon as he said no
harm would be done to the Native peoples by the government of the United
States, Thomas Jefferson was breaking treaties and attempting to negotiate new
ones with the Choctaw Nation and others.
The press of immigration was overwhelming. Conflicts between Eastern Tribes
and the Colonies were too numerous to record.
George Washington’s administration spent eighty percent of its
entire federal budget on military conflicts with Native Tribes. Both France and England continued treating
with the Tribes, pressing them to oppose colonial expansion and trade. Many Tribes were more inclined to deal with
Monarchies whose interests were primarily in trade than the Colonists who
coveted everything they saw.
Though Democracy was a general concept idealized by
some Founding Fathers, its practical application among men bred under dominant
monarchies was difficult. There were
differences in the new Colonial government relating to foreign policy. The French Revolution created a furor of
divisiveness as Jefferson and his group supported the French People, in
principle, while Adam's Federalists saw any attack of the status quo and
disturbing of the upper classes of ownership as dangerous.
When the people of Haiti, having witnessed the success
of the Colonials and inspired by their ideals, attempted to claim their freedom
from France, Washington loaned the French Colonials hundreds of thousands of
dollars to suppress their "revolt".
The ideology of the upper class had become the ideology of the whole
society. In an interesting twist,
Jefferson’s Democratic Republicans, who are viewed today as the liberals and
idealists of that time, became the party of white racism and slavery for one
hundred years.
Ironically, John
Adams, Federalist to the core, supported the Haitian revolution! Jefferson’s Presidency pulled back from the
idealism of earlier years when he demonstrated his true colors and reversed the
policies of Adams, secretly encouraging the French to retake Haiti. Our early official support of slavery in
Cuba and South America led to policies of oppression and imperialism that have
grown and matured even into the twentieth century. From the days of the very first Presidency, The U.S. has resisted
the democratic liberation of every state comprised of Black or Brown Indigenous
populations.
Despite Federal policy, the rest of America was settling
into the reality of a scintillating mixture of races and cultures. The eastern Mid-West Ohio of America in 1794
was amazingly multicultural, with at least six individual Native Nations mixing
with British and French Traders, and both White and Black Americans. For holidays, they observed Mardi Gras, St
Patrick’s Day, the Queen’s Birthday, as well as Native Ceremonial
Holidays. The colonists, especially
those in rural areas, openly adopted Native life-ways and culture. In the nineteenth century, all Americans
knew of the Native contributions to medicine.
Fully sixty percent of all medicines patented in the U.S. were marketed
bearing Native images and/or names.
The War of 1812 must be understood as the turning point
at which Native Nations began to lose the respect and admiration they had
garnered during the first three hundred years of contact with Europeans. Driven by slaveholders, who coveted Native
lands and desired to move the refuge of Indian Nations out of reach of runaway
slaves, most of the major conflicts of that war occurred between the U.S. and
Native Nations. The British, in
exchange for a United States guarantee to leave Canada to them, gave up all
their alliances and aid to their former Indian allies and a major international
conflict was reduced to local or regional struggles. Without British aid, Native Nations were no longer regarded by
the American public as a bonafide conflict partner, and Americans began the
process of forgetting that Indians had ever been an important part of history
as Sovereign Nations. Author Karen Kupperman
observed this process in Virginia after an Indian defeat at the hands of
colonists in the 1640s. “ It was the ultimate powerlessness of the Indians, not
their racial inferiority, which made it possible to see them as people without
rights.”
A quick glance at many historical figures,
starting with Columbus and including Washington and others, shows that while
the Native Nations were strong and powerful, holding their lands and rights and
living much as they had for centuries, opinions of them were well-formed, even
admired. However, once they lost this
power and were rendered harmless, destitute, or oppressed—opinion flip-flopped
and they were subsequently described in less-than-human terms. This was a turning point in the record
keeping of American history. Historians
began to toy with the myth that if Native peoples had only desired
acculturation into early American society, much of the bloodshed and social
violence could have been avoided.
Early Colonists
knew better.
The
Massachusetts Legislature passed a law in 1789 making it a capital offence to
teach an Indigenous person to read and write because they recognized Native
abilities and felt threatened by them!
Cherokee Tribal officials petitioned the Jefferson White House to make
their people citizens of the new Republic, to no avail. Indians, though admirable in some regards,
were too intelligent and dangerous to be members of the club.
One of the great
myths that began in the early 1800’s, and echoed time and time again into the
twentieth century, was that if only Natives had been interested in farming
everything would have been okay.
Textbooks told us that the western migration (forced exodus), of Tribes
occurred to enable white farmers to till the soil and cultivate crops. Actually, whites had been burning Native
cornfields since 1622, and we’ve already listed the contributions of Native
agriculture to the world. It was
necessary to the rationalization of the conquest that Native Peoples be
portrayed as largely nomadic, and the picture of large civilized agrarian based
towns and villages did not fit the portrait historians intended to paint when
depicting inferior and uncivilized races.
From 1815 on, Americans lived, breathed, and exported
the ideology of white supremacy. Since
that time, the first obsession of this Nation has been the superiority or
inferiority of racial characteristics.
The invention of the cotton gin made slavery infinitely more profitable,
and the 1830’s saw many different forms of the Trail Of Tears as Native peoples
were moved west to make way for the expansion of slave based white southern
agriculture. Racism began to develop
its own ideology and justify its profits and practices from those ideals.
Both the Seminole Uprisings, in 1816 and 1835, as well
as the Texas War for Independence from Mexico were fought for, and against,
slavery. In Florida, slaveholders
demanded the U.S. annex Florida from Spain’s holdings, and the Seminole Wars
were fought attempting to recover escaped slaves who had become members of the
Creek and other Native Nations.
The Texans fought for their independence so that they
could pass the slavery law they wanted, baring all free Blacks from Texas. Even the war with Mexico was fought largely
to satisfy slaveholders desires to create larger and larger buffer lands
between themselves and the “free” areas slaves might be tempted to try and
escape to.
In 1830, an anti-Irish Catholic political party was
formed and a period of intense hatred and violence against Catholics and other
Europeans minorities ensued. Adding
fuel to the fire was the immigration of Germans, who managed to retain their
language and keep to themselves while bringing their education and labor
skills. Their purchase of lands and
business successes only served to further infuriate the "Original
Americans" intent on preserving the “purity” of America from outsiders.
The Irish Potato Blight and the resulting famine of
1845-49 caused the immigration of more than a million Irish Catholics over the
next thirty years. This only
contributed to the anti-Catholic sentiments of the times. Fired by centuries of oppression by
Englishmen, they harbored an intense hatred of Protestantism. The fact that they were also poor,
illiterate, and unskilled did nothing to help their assimilation into
Protestant America. The Irish Catholics inhabited the first slums in the cities
of America.
For those few non-Indians who tried to take the time to
understand, the larger myths and outright lies that were to become standard history
in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries had not yet been written. Some of them spoke up; trying to stem the
tide of racism and Euro-centric religion.
One of those was George Catlin.
It is immediately evident from his letters that knowledge of the great
plagues of the 1500 and 1600's had already passed from mainstream history—a
testament to how quickly great civilizations can pass away and be forgotten.
From the Letters of George Catlin, circa 1832-1833
"The Indians of North America were originally the
undisputed owners of the soil, and got their title to their lands from the
Great Spirit who created them on it, were once a happy and flourishing people,
enjoying all the comforts and luxuries of life which they knew of, and
consequently cared for: were sixteen million in numbers; and sent that number
of daily prayers to the Almighty, and thanks for his goodness and
protection. Their country was entered
by white men, but a few hundred years since; and thirty million of these are
now scuffling for the goods and luxuries of life, over the bones and ashes of
twelve million of red men; six millions of whom have fallen victims of the
small-pox, and the remainder to the sword, the bayonet and whiskey; all of
which means have been visited on them by acquisitive white men; and by white
men, also, whose forefathers were welcomed and embraced in the land where the
poor Indian met and fed them with "ears of green corn and with
pemmican."
"The reader, then... should forget many theories he
has read in the books of Indian barbarities, of wanton butcheries and murders;
and divest himself, as far as possible of the deadly prejudices which he has
carried from childhood, against this most unfortunate and most abused part of
his race of fellow-man."
"So great and unfortunate are the disparities
between savage and civil, in numbers, in weapons, and defenses, in enterprise,
craft and education, that the former is almost universally the sufferer either
in peace or in war; and not less so after his pipe and tomahawk have retired to
the grave with him, and his character is left to be entered upon the pages of
history, and that justice done to his memory... by his enemy."
"The very use of the word savage, as it is applied
in its general sense, I am inclined to believe is an abuse of the word and the
people to whom it is applied. The word,
in its true definition, means no more than wild, or wild man; and a wild man
may have been endowed by his Maker with all the humane and noble traits that
inhabit the heart of a tame man. Our ignorance and dread or fear of these
people, therefore, has given a new definition to the adjective; and nearly the
whole civilized world apply the word savage, as expressive of the most ferocious,
cruel, and murderous character than can be described."
"As evidence of the hospitality of these people,
and also of their honesty and honor, there will be found recorded many striking
images in the following pages. And
also, as an offset to these, many evidences of the dark and cruel, as well as
ignorant and disgusting excesses of American passions, unrestrained by the
influences of laws and Christianity."
"I have roamed about during seven or eight years,
visiting and associating with some forty-eight Tribes, over two thirds of this
Nation, and with some three or four hundred thousand souls under an almost
infinite variety of circumstances; and from the very many and decided voluntary
acts of their hospitality and kindness, I feel bound to pronounce them, by
nature, a kind and hospitable people. I
have been welcomed in their country, and treated to the best they could give
me, without any charges made for my board; they have often escorted me through
their enemies' country at some hazard to their own lives, and aided me in
passing mountains and rivers with awkward baggage; and under all of these
circumstances of exposure, no Indian ever betrayed me, struck me a blow, or
stole from me a shilling's worth of my property. This is saying a great deal in favor of the virtues of these
people when it is borne in mind that there is no law in their land to punish a
man for theft, that locks and keys are not known, that no commandments have
ever been divulged amongst them; nor can any human retribution fall upon the
head of a thief, save the disgrace which attaches as a stigma to his character
in the eyes of his people about him."
"Thus, in all these little communities, in the
absence of all systems of jurisprudence, I have beheld peace and happiness and
quiet, reigning supreme, for which even kings and emperors might envy
them. I have seen rights and virtue
protected, and wrongs redressed. I have
formed warm and enduring attachments to men which I do not wish to forget, who
have brought me near to their hearts, and in our final separation have embraced
me in their arms and commended me and my affairs to the keeping of the Great
Spirit."
"For the above reasons, the reader will forgive me
for swelling so long on the justness of the claims of these people; and for my
occasional expressions of sadness, when my heart bleeds for the fate that
awaits the remainder of their unlucky race; which may be outlived by the rocks,
by the beasts, and even birds and reptiles of the country they live in, --set
upon by their fellow-man, whose cupidity may fix no bounds to the Indian's
earthly calamity, short of the grave."
"The traders, in addition to the terror they carry
at the muzzles of their guns, as well as by whiskey and the small-pox, are
continually arming tribe after tribe with firearms; who are able thereby, to
bring their unsuspecting enemies into unequal combats, where they are slain by
the thousands, and who have no way to heal the awful wound but by arming
themselves in return, and reeking their vengeance on their defenseless enemies.
In this wholesale way, and by whiskey and disease, tribe after tribe sink their
heads and lose their better, proudest half, before the next wave of
civilization flows on to see or learn anything definite about them.
"In the Indian communities, where there is no law of
the land or custom denominating it a vice to drink whiskey, and to get drunk;
and where the poor Indian meets whiskey tendered to him by white men, he thinks
it no harm to drink to excess, and will lie drunk as long as he can raise the
means to pay for it. He becomes a
beggar for whiskey, and begs until he disgusts the honest pioneer who becomes
his neighbor; and then, and not before, gets the name of the "poor, degraded,
naked, and drunken Indian...."
"This system of whiskey and (fur) trade, and the
small-pox, have been the great and wholesale destroyers of these people, from
the Atlantic Coast to where they are now found. And no one but God knows where the voracity of the former will
stop, short of the acquisition of everything that is desirable to money-making
man in the Indian's country."
"I have found these people kind, honorable and
endowed with every feeling of parental, filial, and conjugal affection that is
met in our communities. I have found them moral and religious: and I am bound
to give them credit for their zeal in their modes of worship. I fearlessly assert to the world, (and I
defy contradiction), that the North American Indian is everywhere, in his
native state, a highly moral and religious being, endowed by his Maker, with an
intuitive knowledge of some great Author of his being and the Universe... The most striking fact amongst the North
American Indians is that of their worshipping the Great Spirit instead of a
plurality of gods, as ancient pagans and heathens did---they appeal to the
Great Spirit and know of no mediator, either personal or symbolical. I am bound to say that I never saw any other
people of any color, who spend so much of their lives in humbling themselves
before, and worshipping, the Great Spirit."
"For the Christian, there is enough, I am sure, in
the character, condition and history of these unfortunate people to engage his
sympathies,
For the Nation, there is an unrequited account of sin
and injustice that sooner or later will call for national retribution, and for
the American citizens, who live, everywhere proud of their growing wealth and
their luxuries, over the bones of these poor fellows, who have surrendered
their hunting grounds and their lives to the enjoyment of their cruel
dispossessors, there is a lingering terror to appear and stand with guilt's
shivering conviction, amidst the myriad ranks of accusing spirits that are sure
to rise in their own fields at the final day of resurrection!"
Contrast these opinions with those recorded about three
decades later by Jacob Abbott in his section on Aboriginal history for his
American History series.
"The American Aborigines have been generally
considered by mankind as a stern, taciturn, immovable, unfeeling, and yet
shrewd and cunning people... The prevailing testimony, especially in respect to
those tribes that dwelt on the Atlantic coast at the time of the first
settlement of the country, represents them as exceedingly grave and stolid in
all their deportment, and possessing very little sensibility of any kind."
"The aboriginal inhabitants of the country were of races
formed with constitutions, both physical and mental, adapting them to obtain
their livelihood by fishing and the chase...The Caucasian race...is endowed
with constitutions adapting them to gain their livelihood by agriculture,
commerce, and the manufacturing arts...Under these circumstances it was an
inevitable, and as much in fulfillment of the designs of divine Providence,
that the old races should be supplanted by the new"
"We must
suppose, then, that there is a great and permanent difference in the physical
and intellectual constitution of the different races. ...We may rightfully recognize and act upon our superiority to
them in the social arrangements which we make, but we are bound in doing so to
consider them as under our protection, and to guard their rights and provide
for their welfare and happiness faithfully, honestly, and with feelings of
sincere good will."
"The extreme taciturnity of the Indians was one
of their most striking characteristics.
But talkativeness is the result of a peculiar mental organization,
leading to a lively and rapid flow of ideas, ardent sensibilities, and a quick
and ready action of the nerves and muscles are connected with the organs of
speech. It would seen that the Indian
children manifest from their earliest infancy the same low degree of
sensibility, giving them the power of bearing without inconvenience, or at
least without pain, what would be intolerable to the children of another race,
which characterizes their fathers and mothers. The children seldom cry. They
remain patient, strapped upon their board, looking quietly about, and content
apparently with existence alone; while a white child of the same age is endowed
with powers of observation and with mental instincts and propensities so
sensitive and active that it craves the incessant occupation of its faculties,
and scarcely ever intermits his restless activity."
"The Indians have been accused of treating their
women as slaves, and there is no doubt that the women were always held by them
in a state of very complete and absolute subordination to the men."
"But what ever we may think of the intellectual
inferiority of the Indian race, the slowness of their progress in the arts of
life was not due wholly to that cause. There are two great essential elements
without which civilization can never make any rapid progress, or attain to any
great height, in any nation. These two elements are iron, and the art of
writing. With the possession of iron to make implements and tools, one man, it
is found, can produce the food of ten, thus leaving the other four of the half
of the community that we may suppose to be able-bodied, to be employed in other
occupations. It is in consequence of
this release of so large a portion of the community from the labor of procuring
food, through the aid afforded by iron, that arts and inventions arise.
Again, with the art of writing, the progress made in
each separate generation is recorded, and thus the goal attained in one age
becomes the starting point in the next. It follows from this art a race that
possesses the art of writing may be decisively progressive, but one which is
without that art can only be so in a very limited degree. In this latter case
the greatest part of what any one genius discovers or learns dies with him, and
the next genius that arises must commence the work anew. Thus the nation, even
if it is always rising, is always sinking back again to where it was before.
Nothing but the art of writing, to provide each generation with the means of
recording what it has discovered, will enable it to keep its hold and go on
continually ascending."
"With the coming of the
Europeans...The result was that new and higher forms were introduced from the
old world superseding and displacing the inferior and more imperfect ones which
before had possession of the new... Changes corresponding to these have taken
place on a vast scale in the vegetable kingdom. Multitudes of plants that were
introduced into America by the European colonists, either accidentally or by
design,
It is well that this should be so. Such changes are in
fulfillment of the beneficent designs formed by the author of nature for the
gradual improvement of the condition of the earth, and the advancement of it,
in respect to its occupants, from lower to higher and nobler forms of
life."
" It might at first be supposed that when a
superior and an inferior race were brought thus together upon the same
territory, a process of amalgamation would have set in, by which, in the end,
they would gradually be melted into one; but there are very deep-seated causes
operating in all such cases to prevent such a union. In the first place, the
mental and physical constitution of the Indian fits him specially for wandering
as a hunter through the woods, and gaining his subsistence by the chase, and
for no other mode of life. These qualities are innate and permanent. The whole history of the Indian tribes and
of the almost fruitless attempts that have been made to civilize them, and
induce them to live like white men, proves this quite conclusively. Missions
were established among the Indians of New England for the purpose of
instructing them in the arts of European life and in the truths of
Christianity, and though for a time very remarkable results were produced, no
radical or lasting change was usually effected. As soon as the external support
to this new state of things, and in a certain sense unnatural, was withdrawn,
everything slowly but irresistibly sank back into its former condition,
educating Indian Young men in the New England colleges, when their prescribed
course was finished, and they were left at liberty, very soon turned away from
the arts and refinements of life and have gone back into the woods, and relapsed
hopelessly into their former condition.
There are remnants of many of the ancient tribes
existing at the present day in various parts of our country, but they live by
themselves, a marked and separate race, with nothing changed except the external
circumstances by which they are surrounded... and where they have every
opportunity to observe the conveniences and the comforts which civilization
affords, but no kindling desire is awakened in their minds to imitate or share
them. Silent, patient, impassible, they witness the advance of the mighty wave
which sweeps on so irresistibly over and around them, apparently without any
regret for the past, or any emotion, either of hope or fear, in respect to the
future."
"There are descendants from Indians residing in
certain portions of the Southern States that have adopted a settled mode of
life, and have attained to a considerable degree of refinement and
civilizations, but in general, even among these, the degree in which they
manifest the capacities of the Caucasian race corresponds very nearly to the
proportion of Caucasian blood that flows in their veins."
"The Feeling of Repulsion That Exists Between the
Different Races of Man Not Necessarily a Prejudice." "That peculiar
feeling of repulsion which is seen universally in operation between the
different races of men, and makes them mutually disinclined to live together in
intimate domestic and social relations, is not, as is sometimes supposed,
necessarily a prejudice. It results, as has already been intimated, from a wise
and beneficent law of nature -- one in universal operation throughout the whole
animal world -- the object of which is to preserve the distinction of species,
and to maintain the purity, and secure the advancement, of the higher and
nobler races of men. It is an instinctive principle implanted in the nature of
every living being which draws him from those that are unlike himself in their
physical conformation, and toward those that resemble him. In the case of varieties, like those seen in
the different races of men, the repulsive instinct by means of which nature
intends to keep them separate from each other, in respect to the propagation of
their kind, is less strong, but it is none the less real, and the design with
which it has been implanted is beneficent in the highest degree. Thus the
amalgamation of the Indian race with the Caucasian race coming to the new world
from Europe, would have been against nature, and the instinctive principle,
both in the heart of the Indian and of the white man, which leads each to love,
and to seek domestic and social union with, those of their own race, and to
avoid such union with those of the other, was one wisely implanted in the heart
by the great author of nature, and one which both races were accordingly bound
to obey. "
These
perspectives clearly indicate how perceptions of Native people changed with the
times in the nineteenth century. The
latter, expressed by a respectable historian of the age, reflects clearly many
of the basic assumptions and beliefs that dictate how “White Men think”, and
they are clearly heard—in cleverly concealed or openly overt arguments—today.
Essay Fifteen
BlueWolf & Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Ingenious
Contrivances And The Great Forgetting
What
beliefs lie at the root of the radically new perceptions Americans embraced
during the nineteenth century? The
historians of the period were definitely proud of their new technological
achievements, even to the point of profound arrogance. Science engaged in a quest to explain the
preconceived notion that there must be some innate superiority in the European
race to account for such accomplishments.
In order to present a coherent picture for rationalizing the conquest it
was necessary to “forget” history. As we
promised in the previous chapter’s introduction, we’ll continue our wide-eyed
journey through the re-making of American History.
"But what
ever we may think of the intellectual inferiority of the Indian race...The
Caucasian race, which was introduced from Europe, is endowed with constitutions
adapting them to gain their livelihood by agriculture, commerce, and the
manufacturing arts..." "There
is doubtless more real invention exercised, and a greater number of new and
ingenious contrivances originated and perfected every single year, in any one
of ten thousand machine shops and manufactories now in operation in America,
than the Indians can produce as the result of the accumulated efforts of all
the generations of their race, from their earliest arrival upon these shores to
the present time. Under these
circumstances it was an inevitable, and as much in fulfillment of the designs
of divine Providence, that the old races should be supplanted by the new. With the coming of the Europeans, the
result was that new and higher forms were introduced from the Old World
superseding and displacing the inferior and more imperfect ones that before had
possession of the new. It is well that
this should be so. Such changes are in fulfillment of the beneficent designs
formed by the author of nature for the gradual improvement of the condition of
the earth, and the advancement of it, in respect to its occupants, from lower
to higher and nobler forms of life."
Jacob Abbott
Old Jacob Abbott
just about said it all. His texts contain a supposedly thorough
examination of this Divine "natural phenomena" of the improvement of
the New World precipitated by the European invasion, but most of it simply
proves the extent of the historical ignorance and racist philosophy of the
"educated" Americans of his time.
Having
conveniently misplaced the knowledge, experiences, and history of more than
three centuries of contact with Native Nations, one of the more interesting
revelations of Abbott's work is that Americans of the mid 1800’s knew
significantly less about their own history and the history of Native Peoples
than their ancestors of one hundred years earlier. They were actually becoming more ignorant by the decade!
One of the
contributing factors to the downward spiral of the American perception of
Native Peoples, were the incredibly popular dime novels of the period. Almost every literate person read them, and
for a while, the most lucrative and popular genre in America was the “Captive”
series. The plots always centered on
the capture and abuse of white Americans, usually women or children, by savage
Natives. These stories were so widely
read as to be compared to the romantic novelettes of our time, and did more to
shape the nineteenth century public's impression of Indians than any other
source of information. Even the
twentieth century classic, "The Last Of The Mohicans", utilized it as
a main ingredient to its plot. Numerous
painters added their wares to the buffet of lies, presenting skillful
portrayals of pale American females, bursting at the bodice, surrounded by
healthy young statuesque heathens, preparing to violently savage them, body and
soul.
Despite all the racial and cultural superiority
bullshit to be found in Abbott's "definitive" work, in our minds the
most telling refrain of all is the consistent return to one example as the
relevant proof of the superiority of everything European. That "proof" is a subjective value
that interprets the rapid invention of great numbers of ingenious contrivances
as a cornerstone ideal to their matrix of superiority. Despite our admission that western
civilization has indeed accomplished marvels with the ingenious contrivances of
science and technology, we believe the jury is still out on whether or not the
ultimate result of that progress will be for the greater good or ultimate
destruction of mankind and the earth.
The second most
interesting attitude espoused by Abbott is the condescending way he discusses
everything Native, and his insistence in putting a "Divine" seal on
its demise. The Founding Fathers and
ancestors of nineteenth century Americans had significant respect for the
Native peoples as Nations. They were
treated with the same equality and deference as European Nations. It wasn't until the end of the War Of 1812,
in 1815, that the word American, previously used to describe only Native
peoples, was usurped to describe the citizens of the United States. Once the Native peoples were seen as
"defeated" there was no reason to attribute their destitution and
degradation to anything but a natural inclination toward bestial behavior and a
“divine plan” for improving the earth.
The importance and necessity of the last great evidence
of civilization touted by Abbott—the advancement of writing—is one of the
supposed pillars of civilization.
However, having a written language did nothing to preserve the integrity
of history or enlighten the Americans of the nineteenth century, and writing
may have, in fact, done more damage to American society (except where it
records the techniques of developing ingenious contrivances), than those
contrivances themselves.
We argue that
western civilization has been more twisted and tormented by record keeping and
writing than any other of its supposed "advancements." What would history have done without
Hitler’s Mein Kampf, or Marx’s Communist Manifesto, or any other books read by
young impressionable minds that have perpetrated tragedies upon the world? It is entirely possible that more arguments
and aggressive violence have been perpetrated upon the modern world due to
disagreements about the written word, and to its interpretations, than any
other element of civilization. We
aren’t book burners by nature, we’re just unconvinced that the advantages of
the written word are necessary to the human condition to be content and
prosperous. Perhaps if we didn’t revere
them and put so much stock in their “truthfulness”, we could enjoy their beauty
and stimulation without difficulty. We
imagine that it was the proliferation of the first Bibles in western civilization
that created such a reverence for the printed word.
Within Abbott's "history" are many of the
precepts adopted by mainstream Americans as the basis of their social, racial,
cultural, and religious prejudices for the twentieth century. Indeed, many of these ideals still exist in
a significant proportion of the American citizenry. Much of it has been institutionalized in history texts—or in our
school textbooks. But the worst was yet
to come.
Essay Sixteen
BlueWolf & Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
The Truly Ugly American
We set the reader up for
this chapter in the last introduction, but an additional word is needed. The national character was established in
this period, as were many more of the basic American myths. Most Americans still believe them
today. It was during these times, and
continuing through the early 20th century, that the American public turned
ugly. Those that maintained their moral
character stood silently by, and were, in the end, just as guilty of the myriad
outrages, catastrophes, and holocausts that befell the Indigenous peoples as
those that committed them. However, it
was the institutional leaders and the national press that pushed the ugliness
and encouraged it. Though they
developed countless rationalizations for their ideals and behaviors, in
retrospect they encouraged hatred, racism, and genocide at an unprecedented
rate for this period of "modern civilization". Many of the myths of the Great Expansion and
the old West are still perpetuated today.
Hollywood took this period and romanticized it in the 20th century,
further cementing the myths into the national psyche. This was also the time of beginning for the concept of the
American “melting pot”. Politically,
the foundations for the unspoken, covert foreign policies of the U.S.
Government were developed during this time.
Even in the twenty-first century, Americans remain largely ignorant of
the actions and effects of their government at home and around the world during
the last century and one-quarter.
"I don't go
so far as to think that the only good Indians are dead Indians,
but I believe nine out of ten
are, and I shouldn't inquire too closely into the case of the tenth. The most
vicious cowboy has more moral principle than the average Indian."
Theodore Roosevelt
"...The cold, hard fact remains that the Indians were
ruthlessly destroyed in California.
This
was accomplished, not only directly by the most brutal class of settler, but
through
the acquiescence (of) all the decent people
who did not care enough to be outraged
about what was taking place."
William B. Secrest
"Tradition Is The Enemy
Of Progress".
Sign at the Haskell Indian Boarding School, Kansas 1884
During the period,
1853-1856, the U.S. gained 174 million acres of land through 52 treaties—all of
which were eventually broken.
At The Great
Centennial Exhibition of 1876, there were "four hundred and fifty acres of
newly cleared and asphalted grounds dedicated to the physical embodiment of
American virtue and American progress, which in most people's minds were one
and the same." (William Dean Howell)
Roughly one-fifth of the entire American population visited the
Exhibition to take in the mechanical wonders designed to display the country's
industrial vigor. Atlantic Monthly
Editor, Howells wrote, "It is in these things of iron and steel that the
national genius most freely speaks, for the present America is voluble in the
strong metals and their infinite uses."
America was being shaped in a new image.
The economic Panic of 1873 had caused the
sharpest downturn in American financial history, leaving three million out of
work and eighteen thousand failed businesses. Economic depression still
lingered three years later, as Grant's presidency reeled from repeated
Washington political scandals. One of
these (scandals) involved the wife of the Secretary of War receiving kickbacks
from the operator of the Fort Sill Indian reservation supply post. Such posts were highly lucrative and sought
after.
The Railroads
pushed for, and received, corporate recognition as "persons" and the
western population increased dramatically from less than a million non-Indians
in 1870, to more than 2.5 million in 1880.
The
"Frontier Violence Myth" is well established in Hollywood lore. The real statistics belie the myth. During the most homicidal year in Dodge
City’s history, 1878, only five people lost their lives. In Deadwood, during its worst year—four
people died. In Tombstone—five people
were killed. In fact, during the whole
period between 1870 and 1885, only forty-five deaths occurred by shooting in
all the cow towns of the West. The
portrayal of rugged individualism in Hollywood’s western heroes was not
encouraged in the Old West. Conformity
was the prized commodity. Uniqueness or
eccentricity was more likely to bring scorn, or worse, on the individual. Many of the cherished institutions of the
West were actually fly-by-night operations.
One example of this was the famous Pony Express, which lasted only
nineteen months, from April 1860 to October 1861. Despite the short-lived institutions we remember, the actual longevity
of the Frontier lasted much longer than most Americans think. More land was homesteaded in 1910 than at
any other time in America’s history.
Despite the fact that cooperation had been the rule
rather than the exception during the westward migration of settlers, few
Americans know that of the 250,000 white and black settlers that journeyed
across the plains in the twenty years from 1840 to 1860—only 362 pioneers were
killed in battles with Indians—an average of eighteen per year. 426 Indians lost their lives. Exaggerations in the eastern press, coupled
with the accounts of Native Tribes last ditch attempts to resist relocation and
defeat, led to countless small press editions detailing vicious and
unpremeditated murders and attacks on defenseless frontier women and
children. As is the case today, these
accounts, both in the private and public press, shaped public opinion to a
degree never before anticipated. Between those who decried government and
military treatment of Native people and those wishing that a policy of genocide
be embraced, Native peoples were unanimously considered a dying breed, evidence
of a passed time, to be herded onto their respective reservations—and
forgotten.
By 1871, the Commissioner of Indian Affairs,
Francis Walker described Indians as “beneath morality.” And continued, “When dealing with savage
men, as with savage beasts, no question of national honor can arise.” Any action “is solely a question of
expediency.”
It was at this point
that James Loewen writes, “cognitive dissonance destroyed our national
idealism." Public opinion became
vicious toward every ethnic group tainted by some imaginary inferiority.
Around 1878, the President
ordered that the responsibility for native Nations should be shifted from the
Department Of The Army to various religious groups. Within the next few years,
the idea of boarding schools for Native children and teens was proposed. The Kansas institution at Haskell was one of
the first Native boarding schools built in 1884 to train Native children to
become "productive members of a greater society". The military school environment was utilized
because it was believed that Indians had inherent discipline problems. The strict system was supposed to redirect
student loyalties from home to a new family—the school environment.
Others put forward a different
solution. Newspaper editors openly
called for
genocide. Frank L. Baum, author of "The Wizard of
Oz", wrote in his paper in 1891,
"The
Pioneer has before declared that our only safety depends upon the total
extermination of the
Indians." He continued,
"Having wronged them for centuries we had better, in order to protect our
civilization, follow it up by one more wrong and wipe these untamed and
untamable creatures from the face of the earth."
In California,
the eighteen treaties the Tribes thought they had signed with the Federal
government had not been ratified by Congress and had been placed under a
long-term Congressional Order of Secrecy.
The governor placed a bounty on Indian heads and scalps with over a
million dollars being paid out.
Children were bartered and sold as sexual slaves. Local newspapers regularly called for the
extermination of the Tribes. In the 1860's and 1870’s, the third wave of disease
swept through the Native Californian communities. William Secrest wrote, (the White)"Californians of the
mid-1800's were conditioned to their attitudes the same way that modern
Americans are. They were accustomed to their elected leaders, particularly the
Governor, talking about the inevitable need to "exterminate" the
Indians. Respected officials of all kinds referred to them as the
"degraded and filthy redskins", as if that were their natural state,
rather the one that civilization had brought them to. Finally, the press completed the assault of indoctrination by
continually using derogatory terms and racist remarks when writing about them
in their articles and editorials. This
onslaught by the leading citizens of the State, gave an aura of respectability
and justification to the small group of citizens indulging themselves in
participating in the most horrific criminal behaviors mankind can exhibit.”
“None can underestimate the effect of the word "exterminate" upon a
populace generally lacking in morals.
The word was repeated endlessly and made its indelible mark on the
psyche of Californians. Non-Indian
immigrants to the North American continent from the beginning had eagerly
accepted its premise. Charles Darwin
and others encouraged and foisted the idea that it was simply predestined that
the Indigenous Peoples of these lands should be doomed to extinction. The ideal was accepted by some as a tragic
and hopeless inevitability, and by all as a genuine and divine natural
law."
When the U.S. failed to guarantee the rights of Black
Americans in 1877, a long dark night of racism for all Peoples of color was
ushered in, culminating in the darkest period between 1890 and 1920.
This was the period when the American Experiment created
another unique phenomena—segregation.
The physical separation of Black (Indian, Asian, Mexican, etc.) people
from society was accomplished at every level of contact. Indeed, one of America’s most successful
ideological exports has been our system of segregation. Countries like South Africa, Bermuda, and
colonial areas in Asia successfully instituted similar practices in the
twentieth century.
The events of this time created another series of
generations with collective amnesia. By
1960, everyone had forgotten that Jackie Robinson was not the first Black
player to play professional baseball.
Blacks played in the league regularly until they were forced out in
1889. The Kentucky Derby eliminated
Black jockeys in 1911 after they had won fifteen of the first twenty-eight
Derbies. Every aspect of American culture, from education to entertainment,
media, music, textbooks, and politics were inundated with the ideals of white
supremacy. The legislature and Supreme
Court were in support of these ideals, as were Presidents like Grover
Cleveland, who won by vowing not to support Black civil rights. Woodrow Wilson actually segregated the
Federal Government and Warren G. Harding was inducted into the Ku Klux Klan at
a White House Ceremony.
However, racial
prejudice was not the only prejudice Anglo-Americans had a taste for. The truth
is, after the time of the Founding Fathers, America has never welcomed
immigrants. The actions of heroic Nuns during the Civil War had provided a thirty-year
respite for Catholics, at least until 1887, when new immigrations of Italians
and Eastern Europeans revitalized religious prejudice. In the latter 19th century, when
immigrants from southern and eastern Europe emigrated to the U.S., the
"Good Old Boys" of America reacted as if they had been invaded by
criminals. By 1910, southern and
eastern Europeans faced the threat of mass sterilization and a popular book of
the time, endorsed by Theodore Roosevelt, actually suggested that the state had
a moral imperative to put undesirable immigrants to death. Of the twenty million immigrants between
1820 and 1900, as many as five million felt unwelcome enough to return to their
homelands!
The American
Protective Association created a national hysteria in 1893 when it announced
that the Pope had called on Catholics to exterminate the Protestant population
of America on St Ignatius Day. Of
course, they were discredited when the day passed uneventfully, but the message
had been heard by a new generation. In
the period of 1915—1925, the Ku Klux Klan took up their agenda and was joined
by the more than two million Americans who signed up on an anti-Catholic
platform.
From the last
days of the civil war through the late 1800's, American leaders had sought to
unite powerful individuals who could hold the political and economic reins of
the country. They understood that they
needed a segment of the populace to feel united in history, as well as common
purpose. It was at this zenith of
racial hatred and bigotry that many of the enduring myths of American history
were composed. The concept of exalting
the American "melting pot" of races is very recent. The Founding Fathers and colonists through
the middle 19th century self identified themselves as one unified
people—as John Jay wrote—“descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same
language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of
government, very similar in their manners and customs.” But this view came more from an exclusion of
other races and peoples than from any amalgamation of identities. This idea however, defied the actual
demographic statistics that showed that other cultures had a significant
influence in the country’s development.
The United States has always been a multicultural Nation. In 1790, three out of five people in America
were not of English origin and two of five were not English speaking. Nevertheless, Americans held to their concept
of a single cultural America, finally espousing publicly, and in twentieth century
school textbooks, the theory of the melting pot (as long as those
"melting" peoples voluntarily remolded themselves into the image that
John Jay described). The conditions of
assimilation required that one become an anglophile, accepting all the myths of
America, forgiving all its faults and actions, while making a commitment to
patriotism, and consumerism.
The history texts designed to educate early twentieth
century American students were created to paint a picture of the uninterrupted march
of an exemplary society, continually improving and progressing to engender a
feeling of optimism and patriotism in that student body. Since few people of color had access to
education, the concept of a “single” culture and a “single” people became an
ingrained part of the way “White Men think”.
The result of contemporary education through its
curriculum and textbooks has been to pander to a Euro-centric view of the past
that pretends students are not intelligent enough to handle the “real
history”. It is also has shown a
stubborn unwillingness to admit that America is, and has always been, a
multicultural Nation. Unfortunately for
our students, it has never admitted that the social culture actually regressed
during the 19th and early-to-middle 20th centuries, and
that an innate guilt, prejudice, and self-imposed ignorance allowed the
creation of false histories and myths built primarily upon racism and arrogant
pretensions.
For Natives in America, the time of isolation was at
hand. To the average American in 1900,
the Indian Nations were gone, exiled to worthless reservations, or impressed
into military or religious encampments such as boarding schools. The issues of
slavery that had been seemingly decided by the civil war and the brief racial
renaissance that followed had been resurrected to exhibit a degree of hatred
far exceeding any previous bigotry. In
general, this “return to ignorance” was true of most of the American public’s
education regarding the major issues and historical events of the preceding
five hundred years. It resulted in a
myopic, tunnel vision view of history, corrupted by ignorance and intentional
amnesia, whitewashed and revised as necessary to put forward a nationalistic
agenda that was, and is still, morally ambiguous at best.
To tell the true story of this Nation, and to put it up
beside all the other Nations and civilizations of history (both modern and
ancient), would empower our citizens with a valuable historical perspective,
and show them that it is just as possible for a society to regress as
progress.
Perhaps much of
the apathy and disenfranchisement Americans feel today is a product of the
conflicts and contradictions between the assurances of their high school
history and government classes that "each vote counts", and that our
standard of living is improving, alongside equality and opportunity. Yet, for the average citizen, they see
evidence to the contrary. As the media
attempts to distract us with advertising and economic assurances, interspersed
with regular announcements of new scientific discoveries, the average American
finds themselves fearfully contemplating the future.
A true presentation of our
history might better prepare our inheritors for the messes we will surely leave
for them to solve. They will understand
that though each generation has its trials and tests, its advances and
failings—if history is honest, the power of people to be bold, creative, and
courageous can go a long way toward solutions. Knowing that, they may be more likely to try.
The
myths regarding American leaders, particularly Presidents, are sacrosanct. Yet, the truth paints a clearer picture of
the elements of gray in an otherwise black and white history. Nowhere are the dichotomies of personal
belief and political expedience more evident than in the history of Abraham
Lincoln. Despite the story in our high
school history texts, Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation was only good in the
rebellious states where Lincoln had no authority. He was in no way an abolitionist and openly supported the
execution of John Brown. When the
antislavery editor, Elijah Lovejoy was murdered by a pro-slavery mob, Lincoln
joked about it in a speech in Worchester, Massachusetts. He told the audience, "I have heard you
have abolitionists here. We have a few
in Illinois and we shot one the other day." Lincoln once said during a political debate, “I am not, nor have
I ever been in favor of bringing about the social or political equality of the
white and black races—that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of making
voters or jurors of Negroes.” He was
also guilty of the hanging deaths of more than a few innocent Santee Sioux at
Christmas to appease the families of a few murdered Americans.
To paraphrase
James Loewen, one of the great lessons of history is that even exceptional
individuals are torn and haunted by the issues of their time. Despite Lincoln’s statements above, he did
move forward on a resolution of the issue of slavery (though many believe that
his ultimate concerns were economically motivated). Nevertheless, generations later, the "accepted"
historical view of Lincoln inspired students on another continent to push for
their own recognition of human rights in Tiananmen Square in China. Ho Chi Minh died with a copy of the
biography of John Brown on his desk.
Anti-Communists in East Germany sang “We Shall Overcome” at their secret
meetings. American heroes are
plentiful, especially among those Peoples who have suffered the most. Interestingly, many of the peoples who
revere our heroes are themselves portrayed as the "enemies" of
America!
Many of the
"real" heroes of America have been forgotten or excluded from the
American Myth. All the famous Native
leaders who exemplified the American ideals of service to one's country and
sacrifice for freedom and liberty are given a line or two in history and
identified as losers rather than the heroes they were. All the slaves that revolted against the
inhuman and barbaric practice of slavery and the many Whites that helped them
were true heroes in their time, yet you find few of their names exalted in the
books, statues, and busts that decorate our Nations capitals. That they were all human beings, with human
failings in imperfect systems, make their efforts seem that much more
heroic. To tell the truth about their
trials, failings, and doubts does not belittle their heroism.
If there is no other reason to tell the truth, it is
this: to tell the truth about the Revolutionary Civil War, the Indigenous
American Holocaust, or the tradition and realities of slavery, does not
diminish the sacrifices and efforts of those who took action or spoke out
against those horrors. Outspoken citizens
are the true heroes of time, not Presidents, Generals, or even the common
silent majority. This truth emphasizes
the reality that good and decent people can be misled, can be encouraged to be
silent, and can stand by and let the worst be done—all in the name of high
ideals and religious or patriotic fervor.
It is one of the main dangers presented by nationalism and patriotism in
a modern world—and one of the most important lessons history can teach us.
Today,
the question of why Americans are being vilified in many areas of the world is
being asked. Many of the answers are
easily available by examining this period of American history. The ugliness of the late 19th and
20th centuries has continued and been evidenced around the world by
our political, economic, and military policies. Racism, arrogance, anglophilia, and a misguided belief in
American moral, social, and political superiority are not particularly easy
traits to hide. Mix in a large quantity
of Hollywood good guy-white hat, bad guy-black hat romanticism to cover up our
bullying, threats, and military coercion when things don't go our way (or we
need your resources, or one of our corporations needs your cooperation) and you
have a great recipe for an Ugly American.
The sad thing is that most Americans are so inured to these kind of
condescending attitudes they don't even recognize them when they see them. Historical myopia has become an American
Way, and is the foundation of how “White Men think”.
Essay Seventeen BlueWolf
& Lupe /Shirts N' Skins
The Origins Of Science Myth
Something
we always hear from enthusiastic Euro-centrists is their contention that one of
the reasons this European civilization is so superior is because of the
advances of science and technologies that originated there. Real historians are now exploding the myth
that science is almost entirely Western in origin. By western here, we mean Europe, Greece, and Post Colombian North
America. The myth, originating in
Germany, is just part of the Euro-centric glamorization of accomplishments
which has consumed American society since the middle of the 19th century. Generally it is believed that science
originated in Greece about 600-146 BC, when the Greeks gave it over to the
Romans and it hibernated until the Renaissance in Europe, circa 1500. This is known as the “Greek Miracle”. The belief that Peoples from India, Egypt,
Mesopotamia, sub-Saharan Africa, China, The Americas, and elsewhere developed
fire and then sat around twiddling their thumbs, waiting for Greek magicians to
conjure up modern science ranks up there with the tooth fairy. Equally astonishing is the belief that no
science was conducted from the Greek end to the time of Copernicus—a mere 1500
years. The only concession to
non-European cultures has been a patronizing credit to Islam, which made them
the scribes, translators, and caretakers who kept science alive until its
rightful heirs could rediscover it.
This chapter focuses on bestowing credit for the sciences and technology
on the world communities previously ignored and uncelebrated.
Western science is what it is because it was founded
upon the best ideas, data, and equipment gathered from other cultures. There is no shame in this, except when one
pretends that the previous work, the foundation, is somehow less important than
the roof, or pinnacle achievements resulting from that foundation.
The Greeks openly acknowledged that their culture
had arisen from the result of Egyptian colonization. Europeans, during the renaissance, accepted that Egypt was the
cradle of civilization until the 18th century, when Christians began
worrying about the influences of Egyptian pantheism. The first Aryan racists—Locke, Hume, and others—
created their Aryan model in
the first half of the nineteenth century.
They rewrote history to deny the existence of the Egyptian settlements,
and as anti-Semitism grew, further denied Phoenician cultural influences. The passing of time refined the Aryan model
to establish Greece as distinctly European.
This myth has
never been stronger than today. Of the
ninety-six most important scientific achievements in recorded history (noted in
Science magazine 1-14-2000), only two were attributed to non-white, non-western
scientists! The first was the invention
of zero in India, and the second the astronomical evaluations of the Maya and
Hindus, AD 1000. As we have come to
expect, the East Indians were only given credit for discerning the symbol, not actually
understanding the concept of zero, while the Mayans and Hindus were stripped of
their scientific achievement by the assertion that their find was for
agricultural and religious purposes only.
Science proclaimed that, “Prior to 600 BC… phenomena were explained
within the context of magic, religion and experiences", ignoring two
thousand years of discovery. The
perception that Indigenous peoples, due to their ignorance of strictly
empirical methods, are incapable of making thoroughly rational and explicit
observations to gain complex understandings of the workings of their
environment still exists in modern science today. In reality, most Indigenous peoples were more observant than
their modern scientific counterparts, and their relationship as an organic
body—with its multi-generational information storage capacity—created an
organic computer organism fully capable of making intuitive and scientific
leaps in understanding their environment.
Charles
Wohlforth describes just such a situation in his book The Whale And The
Supercomputer. He writes that in 1977, the
International Whaling Communication, ordered the Inupiat whale hunt stopped
when government scientists predicted the extinction of the bowhead whale.
Science estimates of the population were a meager 1300. Inupiat Elders insisted that the whale
populations were more plentiful than that, and were healthy and
increasing. John Craighead George was
the man who became responsible for a new whale head count. Elders explained why the government’s
statistics were wrong. Scientists had a grudging respect for the Inupiat’s
practical knowledge of the ice, but considered the people lacking in a
fundamental understanding of the core principles of their practical expertise. George himself remained skeptical. “We
weren’t sitting on a thousand years of traditional knowledge, and we frankly
were taught we were scientists and we were doing stuff scientifically,
carefully, and the other information was anecdotal.” By 1985, George and his team had completed their scientific
recount and were forced to re-estimate the whales at six times the previous
number. A byproduct discovery was that
the whale’s life spans were between 130 to 150 years old, with one living well
past 200. By 2002, the official number had grown to ten thousand. “The Natives
were vindicated,” George said. “They were right. They were right about all these things.” As Wohlforth observed, “Researchers…had to
accept that there was another valid way of knowing complex facts about the
environment.” A second incident
strengthened that perception. When oil
industry explorers wanted to use loud sonar sounding to measure seismic
readings on the seabed, their scientists insisted that the whales would be
affected at only a distance of up to four miles. Inupiat Elders asserted that the distances would be found to be
much greater than that. Eventually, the
distance was proven to be twelve miles or more. Wohlforth says that George was
convinced that the Inupiat skill of observation and collective communication
was the key to their vast storehouse of environmental knowledge. Wohlforth personally observed that the
communities seemed to share information all the time. Inupiat were expert
observers capable of processing an enormous data set for making useful
decisions. George “compared the community to a giant machine gathering and
crunching data.” He said, “They’re taking in massive amounts of data and
processing it like a computer.”
Science in Europe has a much
longer history than that which dates to early Greece. If one wishes to be informed from an honest historical
perspective, it is only necessary to read, in the Greek, Herodotus, and other
ancient Greeks who properly give credit where credit is due. Aristotle, for one, honorably credited Egypt
with developing the mathematical sciences.
Francis Bacon
said that three inventions marked the beginning of the modern
world. All three: gunpowder, the magnetic compass, and paper and
printing, came from China! Bacon
himself wrote that inventions from China created the Modern World.
At the time, that Science gave Guttenberg credit for the
invention of the printing press, Chinese and Korean publishers had been using
their machines for two centuries, and books had been published and printed for more
than five hundred years. Some Chinese
collectors had as many as 50,000 volumes in their libraries.
Western
scholars, eager to preserve their pre-supposed scientific dominance have
consistently changed the rules when faced with the tide of undeniable
evidence. Indian physics, they insist,
is meaningless because, though accurate, it was abstract with no empirical
data. Then they turn right around and
insist that the Babylonian and Egyptian scientists, who used their discoveries,
were simply to be considered unsophisticated craftsmen.
As time passes, the
Western scientific establishment is forced to make acknowledgements of
correction in its propaganda. Western
scholars once refused to accept that ancient Black Ethiopians had a number
system, asserting they were too primitive and unsophisticated. Closer examination using modern chemical
techniques discovered that ancient letters to Greeks from Ethiopians used
specific inks, as distinctly African in origin as the numbers found in the
letters that they were supposed to be
too primitive to comprehend.
To dispel the
Euro-centricity of scientific discovery, mathematics and physics are an
excellent place to start. Rather than
providing a history of each name mentioned in this history, we refer the reader
to Dick Teresi's book, "Lost Discoveries", our source for many of the
facts for this chapter. Advanced
civilizations have occurred time and time again throughout recorded and
unrecorded history. As more and more
exploration of the ocean floor is undertaken, we are certain many more
civilizations will be discovered that may challenge our ideas of even our
present state of advancement. One fact
should be obvious--the present state of scientific and technological advancement
owes its successes, not to a few European Greeks, Italians, Germans, English,
Spanish and French inventors, scientists, and mathematicians--but to a legion
of minds that encompassed the Earth.
The
recent utilization and plagiarizing of the world’s inventive and scientific
disciplines has created a civilization that, above all else, prizes
"ingenious devices" of every nature. These single-minded pursuits,
particularly in the areas of advanced weaponry, energy, medicine, industry, and
technology have contributed to the world's knowledge. However, it is not the science, math, technology, industry, or
invention that represent the significance of the European contribution. Rather, it is the unintended consequence of
using slavery, colonialism, and militarism to identify, develop and ravage the
world’s natural resources that has allowed those disciplines to proceed so
quickly as to force feed the present philosophy of growth, progress, and
technological fanaticism to the world.
The rush to progress and develop industrially and technologically has
come, not from any altruistic desire to serve the interests of humanity, but to
enhance and serve the goals of profit and power. We have yet to travel far enough down the timeline of the future
to know whether this fledgling civilization will survive its "ingenious
devices".
For
an extensive and interesting review of scientific advancements around the
world, check out the information in our
Index, A4.
Essay Eighteen BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
An American Debt To The Land
Once
society progressed beyond the concept of “divine destiny”, it was necessary to
concoct other evidence and rationalizations for why the United States has
achieved such a significant level of technological, political, and military
dominance as the world’s foremost superpower. The myth that has emerged is that it was the combination of the
intellectual genius of the Founding Fathers and their organization of the
American government, the innate superiority of laisse-faire capitalism, and the
moral and social superiority of the American culture and its values. In this essay, we seek to debunk this idea
and point to the real reasons behind America’s successes—primarily the
extraordinary abundance of natural resources and a willingness to exploit them
to exhaustion. That abundance of
resources has led modern civilization in the West to an excess of wealth,
convenience, and physical comforts.
Those comforts are now largely taken for granted by most Americans as an
almost natural right—to the point of gross excess. Disregard for waste and unnecessary plenty has led to a decline
in many of the “good” qualities inherent in American society. This callous disregard for the “source” of
all these resources here and around the world—namely, the Earth—has led to
unexpected consequences in our environment and in the psyche of the civilized
world.
"Written
history is always a sweet dream to the victor, a nightmare to the
vanquished!"
Amoshi
The idea that
this Nation was founded by a group of intellectually and morally superior
Founding Fathers has been a cornerstone of public education since Americans
began attending schools. Though they
were wealthy and successful men of strong character, who envisioned a need for
change, they were just men. And while
they may have been men of character, the majority of their compatriots
represented the dregs of European society.
Criminals, outcasts, and people of the lowest (or strangest) moral and
ethical standards made up much of the flood that swept into this country from
abroad.
Those Fathers were certainly aware of the public
sentiment that swept the Colonies identifying the King (and the English) as the
Anti-Christ, and viewing this new "promised" land and times as the
biblical fulfillment of Revelation.
While not necessarily subscribing to this view themselves, the Founding
Fathers used the popular fictions of “Divine Will” and “the Holy Elect” to push
forward their convictions and ideals with all the prejudices of the times. Even Jefferson, who expressed doubts and
fears in his private journals, was a stalwart believer in what was to become
the foundation of Manifest Destiny.
But was it the
system of government they created that has produced such a great and powerful
Nation? Certainly, that is what we are
educated to believe. We are taught that these "visionaries" were so
forward thinking that they put together a "cannot fail" order of
government (supported by God Himself), responsible for the wealth and comforts
many Americans enjoy today.
Actually, we
perceive that the real reasons have nothing to do with men, social order,
politics, government, or ideals.
The land carried
America on her back. All the successes
of this Nation are due, not to the greatness of the character of its peoples,
but to the rich and abundant natural resources and varied geographies of the
land. All the necessities of life were
to be found so abundantly that the efforts and organizations of any people
would have been successful, for a time.
Nowhere on earth were to be found richer qualities than this land
possessed. Its rich soil, game, natural
shrubs, forests, medicinal herbs, grasslands, pure and abundant waters, oceans
and harbors, rivers, and minerals were its treasure. If not for these, America's future greatness, viewed primarily as
a product of men's ideals, would never have been achieved.
Take those same Founding Fathers and send them across
the ocean to discover a country with the properties and resources of a land
such as Ireland, Vietnam, India—all beautiful lands but lacking the varied
climate, topography, geography, geology, and abundant natural resources of the
Americas—and the american experiment in martial power, material wealth, and
consumerism (with its by-product freedoms), would find itself only as developed
as the resources available for exploitation.
Historians point to a freedom of choice and action, to
the spirit of industry, to free enterprise and capitalistic fervor, but how
could any of these "ideals" feed, clothe, house, or enrich their
peoples if the essential natural resources and necessities were not immediately
available to be procured—leaving those men with sufficient time to pursue more
profitable endeavors? America exploded
as a power because, for almost two centuries, it was able to grow and expand
without taxing its huge base of resources.
In support of these arguments, we present a list of the Land's
contribution, not only to America, but the World.
Bruce Johansen's quotes bear repeating. "Almost half (to two-thirds) of the
world's domesticated crops, including the staples corn and white potatoes, were
first cultivated by American Indians.
Aside from corn, and white potatoes, Indians also contributed manioc,
sweet potatoes, squash, peanuts, peppers, pumpkins, tomatoes, pineapples, the
avocado, cacao (chocolate), chicle (a constituent of chewing gum), several
varieties of beans, and at least seventy other domesticated food
plants."
North and South
American Indians utilized over 260 wild herbs, cultivated almost 400 additional
cooking ingredients, 300 different varieties of corn, and over 200 varieties of
peppers. Almost all the cotton grown in
the United States was derived from varieties originally cultivated by
Indians. Rubber was another resource
contributed by Indigenous Americans. Several American Indian medicines became
popular additions to Euro-American Medicine. These included quinine, laxatives,
as well as several dozen other drugs and herbal medicines. Quinine remains the most effective medicine
with which to combat the effects of malaria worldwide.
Technology
demanded other resources—trees; varying hardwoods and soft, hemp, minerals;
copper, iron, gold, silver, sources of power; coal, oil, water—the list goes on
and on. Each part of America
contributed more resources to the pot—and the government and business leaders
pursued their harvests and expansions ruthlessly. (Eventually, the U.S. expanded its catalog of potential resource
sites around the world and many of the world’s Indigenous populations have
suffered horribly at the hands of American corporate greed or their own
governments in service to American business or military interests.)
Only now (after five hundred years of occupation), where
artificial systems for delivering necessities having almost completely replaced
natural ones, have some of those resources begun to fail. Only in the last few
generations has the common U.S. citizenry begun to notice that these resources
might be limited and non-renewable. Coincidentally—with the prospect of failing
national resources has come the spectre of America falling on the list of
dominant economic powers.
Look deeper into American society and you will find that
the result of having such enormous natural resources not only provided a
significant portion of the population with the necessities basic to a
comfortable life, it contributed to a reputation for “generosity”. When normal, balanced people have what they
need, and perhaps even a little more, they are more apt to be generous, and
more likely extend themselves in the aid of others. This cannot be attributed to any moral superiority but is simply
what the Creator's children naturally and responsibly feel compelled to do for
one another.
As average Americans became more wealthy and
comfortable, the supposed "guiding" precepts of Christian generosity
caused them to begin to re-examine the plight of their more unfortunate
neighbors, usually foreign. But as
James Loewen observed, "Today Americans believe, as part of our political
understanding of the world, that we are the most generous nation on earth in
terms of foreign aide, overlooking the fact that the net dollar flow from
almost every Third World nation runs toward the United States."
The commitment of
Roman-Christian Europeans to anything beyond their personal families' wealth
and comfort has long been suspect. They have an almost genetic fear that they
better get what they can because whatever it is, it’ll be gone soon. Of course, that was true for the peasants of
Europe for centuries. So today, with
resources running dry, some Americans are more concerned with finding (and
controlling) what remains of these limited resources on our continent to
maintain the status quo for the present generation, than making any significant
commitment to developing new and renewable resources for generations to come.
They are also content to remain ignorant as to how globalization, from which
they benefit directly, is ravaging the resources of other Nations while
impoverishing or keeping those People's poor.
North
American First Nations valued the land, accepting it as a relative—a living
being with identity. With the belief
that the Earth is alive, comes the knowledge that it is the land that gives us
our Power, not human institutions, or ideals.
The concept that natural resources represent elements that are intended
to be exploited is a commonly held modern belief. They ask—what sense does it make to metals in the ground, if it
cannot be dug up and used? What sense
is it to allow natural elements to lie fallow and unused? The answer was in the first few sentences of
this paragraph. To modern man, the
earth is a non-living being.
It has processes that interact and relate, but they are perceived to be
without consciousness, so they are, in effect, building blocks for man to use
indiscriminately. Indians see the
metals and other elements of the natural world as a part of the body of a cognizant,
living being. Therefore, just as corpuscles are elements of our blood, and
bones and organs necessary components of our bodies, the elements of the earth
are not to be irresponsibly utilized, and to remove them weakens the integrity
of the organism. It is no mystery as
to why we are so far apart in our philosophies that neither side can perceive
reality in the others point of view.
A popular author, Richard Preston, in his book, The
Hot Zone, has hypothesized that many of the dangerous new
viruses, as well as HIV, may be the Rain Forest's way of fighting back against
an overpopulating and unresponsive natural enemy—Human Beings. We think he may be right.
We hope to encourage a return to the balanced principles
of stewardship and harmonious relationship to the Earth and her resources. Our prophecies tell us that if we neglect to
respect the Earth and her power, our lack of humility will result in our
destruction. While being grateful for
our present plenty, we should be mindful that our gratitude should be directed
primarily at the land. To encourage
respect and stewardship as our highest priority may give us an opportunity to
survive another millennium.
Essay Nineteen BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N Skins
Pathology of A Diseased Civilization
We
could start this essay examining controversial topics: global warming,
political tyranny, religious fanaticism, etc., but there are more pressing
issues at hand. The current industrial civilization considers itself an elegant
experiment in progress and stability.
In reality, it has become a lunatic that defecates near its own bed and
demands the obedience of its subjects in a headlong rush toward global
suicide. America has been proceeding on
that path for nearly two centuries.
Here is evidence of some of the assaults that have been made on three of
the most basic elements necessary to our survival—water, soil, and DNA.
Let's begin with
water.
Much of the
world is already experiencing a crisis obtaining potable water. Human beings are essentially animalized
water. If we pour water into ourselves,
it immediately becomes us. It moves, it
thinks, and it forgets that it is water.
98.25 percent of the world's water is saline. Of the remaining 1.75 %, eighty percent is frozen. That means that less than 1/3 of 1 percent
of all the drinking water in the world is available to all the life that needs
fresh water to survive. No new water is
being produced. Supplies are finite. The frozen areas have been shown to be
melting at exponentially increasing rates.
Currently, human toxins and practices have poisoned a significant amount
of that available water. In the U.S.,
50 % of our drinking water is from underground aquifers that are being pumped
dry or poisoned from waste seepage.
Those aquifers took 100,000 years to create. They cannot be replaced.
Technocrats
insist that science will find a way to de-salinize the oceans for our use, and
according to the latest developments this may, indeed, be possible. Meanwhile, however, local governments can't afford
to fill the potholes in our streets, let alone balance the federal, state and
local budgets. So desalinization plants
may be another generation from significantly being able to aid ocean bordering
nations, and could contribute very little help to the landlocked ones.
It is estimated that by
2015, many countries will face severe water shortages, and in a generation,
more than fifty to seventy percent of the world’s people will not have access
to clean water. In fifty years, whole
countries may be completely depopulated by the total absence of drinkable
water. The glacier that provides all of the drinking water to Peru has shrunk
by one quarter in the last decade. When
it is gone, there will be no water for that Nation, except through
desalinization.
Seventy percent of the water used worldwide is used for
agriculture. As groundwater is exploited,
water tables in parts of China, India, West Asia, the former Soviet Union and
the western United States are dropping.
Meanwhile, global corporations have moved to privatize water in the
poorest nations of the earth to profit from the crisis. Global water consumption rose six
fold between 1900 and 1995—more than double the rate of population growth—and
goes on growing as farming, industry and domestic demand all increase. The UN-backed World Commission on Water
estimated in 2000 that an additional $100 billion dollars a year would be
needed to tackle water scarcity worldwide..
In response to this crisis,
what are the clearly defined goals of the technological leaders, their
governments, and financial institutions?
There are none. While the U.N.
sets the minimum water usage per person at fifty liters, Europeans are using between
225 and 400 liters per day. Americans
average an astounding 600 liters a day. Human beings
cannot ignore our shared responsibility of insuring adequate basic water
resources for humanity.
How about soil?
It has taken
about 100,000 years to build the world's topsoil. Due to the giant shift in agriculture and population growth over
the last 5000 years, fifty percent of the world's topsoil is gone. In twenty years, 30% more will have blown
away. That is eighty percent of the
world's arable soil, gone forever.
There have been positive discoveries that could redevelop soils. Pre-Columbian Indigenous Americans in
Bolivia have been found to have engineered a soil composite that may accelerate
the development of arable soil and regenerate overused or abused soil. However, so far, no one has come forward
showing the slightest interest in actually paying for its production, and
usable results are not to be gained overnight.
As for the present, North and South America have been devastated. Six billion tons of soil is lost per year in
the U.S. During the Cold War, a Soviet
scientist once recommended that the Soviets stop the arms race because he
estimated that in 100 years the U.S. could no longer grow enough food to
survive due to the depletion of soils.
In Asia, 20 billion tons are now being lost annually. Millions of children starve to death
annually despite the accomplishments of our great and modern industrial
civilization. Apologists blame that on
economies and boundaries and transportation problems—but in a few generations
that will no longer be the case.
Changing weather patterns may increase the problem. Third world countries are encouraged to grow
cash crops, harvest resources, or develop industrially to pay back their
international debts rather than grow food to feed their peoples. In the face of deforestation, development,
progress, and lack of necessities (like water), 10,000 distinct and
irreplaceable species are lost every year.
The loss is permanent. What
could be a better indicator of the sanity of a civilization than its desire and
commitment to protect the very resources essential to its survival?
Still not
convinced? Let's talk DNA.
The
architectural elegance of DNA, the genetic material of the planet, is evidence
of the vulnerable quality of creation.
All of the DNA molecules of all the humans who have ever lived would fit
into one teardrop. That is, 80 billion molecules in a teardrop. Everything that will happen to the future of
human beings on this planet depends on the quality and protection of that
teardrop. War on Terror? Here is the real Terror!
There are 264
million tons of hazardous waste spread liberally around the U.S. each year in
the form of 70,000 (mostly untested) chemicals and their by-products. To these,
add 1000 more untested chemicals each year.
DNA contains the information and intelligence at the
root of an organism. It is known that
chemicals can enter the body, and go straight to the cells, attaching
themselves and disrupting, modifying, mutating or destroying that information
and intelligence. This damage cannot be
altered and will be part of the human species forever. Some defects can be carried, only to show up
in later generations. Serious birth defects in humans alone have doubled in the
last twenty-five years. The worst
effects are not expected to appear for another ten to twenty years. We will spend billions to fight a war on
terror yet to come, and only pennies to fight the daily poisoning of our
children and the chemical threat to the DNA of our species. Where is the
responsibility to be found in the capitalistic fervor that drives these
companies to gamble with the future of our species?
The economic
systems developed on the principle of an endless compulsion to growth are
obsolete and must be abandoned immediately for systems which demand society be
outfitted with artifacts that last centuries, not days or months (unless they
are biodegradeable). Systems that judge their success by GNP must be outlawed
and replaced with systems that operate on renewable resources; recycling
non-renewables at 100%, and producing no more waste than a local region can
dispose of naturally. The U.S., in
order to survive, must cut production and use of resources at a minimum of 50%.
Third world debt must be forgiven outright or
traded for the establishment of wilderness systems. The present economic
structures are based on a process that begins with the depletion of finite
resources, proceeds to the manufacturing of disposable products which
immediately begin to depreciate in value and quality, ending with their
disposal as non-renewable wastes which are beyond the natural capacity of the
earth to dissipate. Sanity? No.
Common sense even? Negative.
Each instant,
one million new faces appear on the earth—representing many species and forms.
Primary human bonds, which connect families and provide roles that incorporate
citizens of all ages into familial relationships, have been replaced with the
secondary commercial bonds of consumerism.
The vanity and arrogance of creating and expanding the role of
potentially deadly toxins and weapons points—not to a healthy society, culture,
or civilization—but to a scorched psyche that has become resistant and
maladaptive, even sinister.
The new
revelations of quantum science and universal cosmologies demand that those who
believe in technology commit to a new understanding of the Universe as one
entity; inter-connected, inter-reliant, and inter-related in every way. To separate humanity from this cosmology
will result in a continued insanity that will bring about nothing less than the
extinction or discontent of our species.
Scholars have
long lamented the destruction of the library at Alexandria at the hands of
barbarians who burned the manuscripts to heat their bath water because they
were unable to grasp the beauty they cast into the flame. Those who discount
these warnings have only to examine themselves in a mirror to see the faces of
those barbarians.
Source for some of this material was gathered from a book by Dr. Brian
Swimme. See book list.
Essay Twenty
BlueWolf/Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
The Modern Pandora's Box, What Do We Really Know?
The Internet, cloning, gene-splicing, new viruses, robotics
and nano-technology--comprise the brave new world of the 21st century. But despite the promise and glossy sheen of
advanced technologies, our world civilization and the exported ideologies of
progress, industrialization, and technology only serve to hide evidence of a
deeper social deterioration. We have
all the earmarks of a disintegrating culture.
Aldous Huxley, in his book Brave New World Revisited wrote, "Sociologists and
psychologists have written at length about the price that Western civilization
has had to pay, and will go on paying, for technological progress." Our
entertainment focuses on violence, sex, and death, while our society demands
that we attempt to legislate safety and civility, further and further eroding
personal freedoms. Drug testing, gun
control, hate crime legislation and feeble environmental protection laws are
superficial attempts to regulate a culture going mad—frantically trying to
legislate morals, family stability, common values, and purpose. Our people feel less assured that our
children and grandchildren will enjoy the same lifestyle and benefits we have
enjoyed—and rightfully so. Americans,
and other First World countries have lived significantly beyond our means for
many decades. It is only reasonable to
expect that we cannot continue to use finite resources at the same rate
indefinitely, or that a fat and overindulgent society can maintain high
standards of mental, physical and spiritual health. A deteriorating world power does not fall overnight; it is a
slow, laborious, and painful process.
Nevertheless, the signs are there.
People report being less content, more fearful, and increasingly
stressed by their environment and expectations about their future. Of course, the distractions presented by
modern first-world life are many and varied, disguising—like a good makeup—the
malaise and unhappiness that pervades the population. This is especially irritating to the descendants of those
Indigenous Peoples who were assured that the Anglo Saxon Christian
"replacements" for Indian culture, spirituality, and social order
were superior to our own! It all starts
with our abandoning the spiritual precepts that gave our ancestors their
bearings in a constantly changing world.
These spiritual values began with the precept that the land, air, and
water, were given as gifts from our Creator and to barter, sell, or destroy
these gifts lead to inevitable and certain consequences—notably a loss of
direction and lack of contentment in the evolution of our lives. This degradation in the quality of our lives
comes from the glorification of the box of science and technology in service to
economic avarice rather than philosophical idealism. Inside the box is our
Pandora. Here are some of her features.
"It may seem dangerous to tinker with
nature without knowing the long-term effects, but without the threat of
environmental disaster caused by the short-sighted unbalancing of natural
forces, how are we to bring about positive change in the world around us? Modern science has a long, proven track
record of correcting the mistakes it inadvertently unleashes on the world. I'm confident that if the worst ever came to
pass, science would find some way to fix it.
That's what science does. People
shouldn't see man-made global disasters as a bad thing. They should see them as
scientific breakthroughs waiting to happen."
Texas A&M Mad Scientist
Be
skeptical. Question everything. Search for someone who's been there. If you don’t know it to be true
personally—don’t form an opinion that affects others’ lives. This is especially
true in politics, war, science, technology, economics, and religion.”
Amafo
It never fails
to amaze us how easily we have gone from understanding our
dependence on, and relationship
with, the natural world, to putting all our faith and support on the
superficially constructed systems of civilization. Much of this has to do with the short historical perspective
people have today, and with the arrogant way we view our creative ability. There is also the Roman-influenced
Judeo-Christian belief in the superiority of the human being as a species,
accompanied by a maniacal, almost
martial desire to conquer and control our environment. The Nez Perce
Medicine man, Toohoolhoolzote, may have expressed our perception best when, in
his chiding of General Howard’s insistence that the Nez Perce go the
reservation, he answered that the Earth was mother and one did not go about
changing her to suit selfish and shortsighted needs. Nevertheless, that is how ‘White men think”.
While we
were growing up, and while the nuclear weapons race was threatening the peace
of the world, the application of nuclear power as an energy source was be
touted by all “First World” nations as a solution to our energy needs. What to do with the potent and everlasting
problem of nuclear waste products from these facilities was blown off as an
unimportant sideline to the discussion.
On April 2, 1986 the future of nuclear power as a fuel source should
have been decided. The Chernobyl
nuclear plant at Pripyat, Ukraine suffered a massive accident during a
safety systems test. Through accidental operator errors, a sudden power surge
resulted in a violent explosion which virtually destroyed the reactor. The Battle of Cheronobyl had begun. Fires from the
graphite moderator and other material broke out in the building and contributed
to a widespread and prolonged release of radioactive materials into the
environment. Over 800,000 soviet citizens were affected by, or participated
directly, in the Battle of Chernobyl.
Of the six hundred thousand soldiers brought in as “liquidators”, over
20,000 have already perished and fully one-half are ill with the effects of
radiation. Altogether, over twenty-five thousand Russian citizens were lost. At one time, shortly after the accident, it
was feared that a further meltdown of burning materials into a pool of standing
water beneath the reactor could have rendered Europe uninhabitable. A significant amount of the fissionable
material is still a threat today. The
authorities constructed a “sarcophagus”
over the entire facility, but only built it to last thirty years. Today, they have to construct another
structure over the top of the previous one.
Roentgens at the base of the sarcophagus after thirty years measure at
200 R. Three hours at this location
would provide any human with a lethal dose.
The decrease of contamination levels from now on will be mainly due to
radioactive decay and radioactive cesium will be present for approximately 300 years. It is estimated that the half-life of the
remaining plutonium will be between 300,000 and 400,000 years. Environmental effects, long-term, cannot be
predicted.
“The scale and severity of the Chernobyl accident had not
been foreseen and took most national authorities responsible for public health
and emergency preparedness by surprise. The intervention criteria and
procedures existing in most countries were not adequate for dealing with an
accident of such scale and provided little help in decision making concerning
the choice and adoption of protective measures.” (International Atomic Energy Agency/World Health
Organization)
Sound
familiar? Remember the U.S. response to
Hurricane Katrina! Despite assurances,
technology is not completely predictable or safe. If we decide, as a people, that we’re willing to risk the
dangers, then we deserve what we get.
However, the U.S. and other “First World” governments—led by their
curious scientists and doctors—have a substantial track record of risking their
citizens lives when it suits them.
Eileen
Wellsome, in her book “The Plutonium Files: America's Secret Medical
Experiments in the Cold War", detailed unspeakable scientific trials
conducted by the U.S. government that reduced thousands of American men, women,
and even children to nameless specimens. She won the Pulitzer Prize bringing to
light the extreme nature of America’s “responsible concern” for it citizens
when she documented the U.S. government’s program to knowingly expose thousands
of human Guinea pigs with radiation poisoning.
In her first publication, she identified eighteen Americans who had
plutonium injected directly into their bloodstream. Later, she documented a
gruesome plot that spanned thirty years, where American doctors and scientists
working with the US atomic weapons program, exposed thousands of unwilling and
unknowing Americans to radiation poisoning to study its effects. For years, the experiments by the U.S.
government and the identities of their human guinea pigs were covered up. In an incident at a Massachusetts school,
seventy-three disabled children were spoon-fed oatmeal laced with radioactive
isotopes. In an upstate New York hospital, an eighteen-year-old woman,
believing she was being treated for a pituitary disorder, was injected with
plutonium. At a Tennessee clinic, 829 pregnant women were served "vitamin
cocktails" containing radioactive iron, as part of their regular
treatment. Though some have refuted the
long-term effects of some of these tests, and questioned the authenticity of
Wellsome’s journalism— secret programs of experimentation by the government on
unsuspecting people have a long and well-documented history. Native women remember the unauthorized
sterilizations they endured in the mid twentieth century in American clinics.
These were
not acts of terrorism by fanatic terrorists or even common criminals, but by
nationalistic patriotic trusted officials.
While the U.S. is quick to condemn attacks by individuals or
unaffiliated organizations, it is reluctant to identify those that commit acts
of terror in the name of national security, for fear of having to reveal its
own terrorisms. Some critics will say
that that was in the past and that we do not do that kind of thing
anymore. But in our experience, what
the U.S. did yesterday, it is entirely capable of doing today. Lying and cover-ups are business as
usual. Why, if faced with a
moneymaking endeavor that represents progress or some misguided concept of
national security, would they balk at risking our lives now, when they have
never demonstrated a repugnance to arbitrarily killing or sickening us if it is
in what they convince themselves is the Nation’s best interests?
We must also inquire
into the ethics of the doctors and scientists that participated in this
tragedy? Even today, with all the
information out in the open, the AMA hasn’t been willing to come out and
publicly condemn the previously described experiments. Curiosity didn’t just kill the cat—it
appears that if the circumstances warrant it, we’re all expendable. Western civilization has sought to insulate
and compartmentalize every aspect of its technological and scientific
achievements. Scientists are allowed,
even encouraged, to pursue specialized and isolated experiments devoid of
concern for ethics or application—denying any interdisciplinary approach to
understanding the implications and effect their research and development will
have on the world outside their vacuum of perfect discovery. Be assured though, that someone is keeping
track of these efforts and putting the pieces together—either for economic,
military, or political reasons. Our
sense of right and wrong requires the consideration of ethics and morals by the
teachers responsible for educating the minds of our children, yet we ask
nothing of the scientists that risk the life, health, and longevity of our
species and the planet every damn day!
It is this
childish fascination with being at the center of everything that causes science
to imagine our world as a plaything, to be altered and manipulated at
will. Pure scientists play with their
advanced technological toys, experimenting with the building blocks of life
with an enthusiastic naiveté towards discovery, showing no more concern about
the result of their actions than a three year-old with Tinker Toys*.
Genetic
engineering is the latest game. In September,
2001, scientists discovered genetically engineered (GE) corn at fifteen
locations in the state of Oaxaca, deep in southern Mexico, a country that has outlawed
the commercial use of all genetically engineered crops. No one knows how it got there. The remote region of Oaxaca where the
illegal GE corn was discovered is considered the heartland of corn diversity in
the world. Scientists had hoped to keep
Oaxaca's rich diversity of corn uncontaminated by GE strains because Oaxaca
retains the wealth of genetic varieties developed during 5500 years of
Indigenous corn cultivation. Scientists now say that aggressive forms of GE
corn, let loose in Oaxaca, may drive native species to extinction, causing the
loss of irreplaceable cultivars.
It is unclear whether the GE corn was carried deep into Mexico by birds,
or was intentionally spread there by corporations or governments promoting GE
crops. All genetically engineered
varieties of corn are owned and patented by transnational corporations. In the U.S., genetically engineered corn has
been grown commercially since 1996 and twenty-six percent of all U.S. corn acreage
is now genetically engineered. The only legal way to acquire such seeds is to
purchase them from the corporation holding the patent. Such patents are called
"intellectual property" and their enforcement under international law
has been a major goal of "free trade" agreements in recent years. The
World Trade Organization (WTO) contains strict protections for Trade Related
Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs), and patented forms of life, such as GE
crops, are explicitly covered by TRIPs.
Under WTO rules, national governments are required to protect the
intellectual property rights of corporations. In the U.S. and Canada, farmers
have complained that they have become victims of gene drift, or genetic
pollution, as GE crops have drifted across property lines, contaminating non-GE
crops with patented GE varieties.
Today's GE crops can't guarantee that farmers won't save seeds.
Corporations’ intent on preventing seed saving must hire agents. Such monitoring is expensive. To avoid the
need for monitoring, and to gain 100 percent control over farmers, the GE
corporations have developed a new technology—terminator genes. Terminator genes
prevent a crop from reproducing itself unless certain "protector"
chemicals are applied to the crop. Any farmer using terminator seeds must buy
the "protector" chemicals each year. As terminator technology spreads
around the world, it will end Indigenous agriculture and much of our
biodiversity as well. An estimated 1.4 billion Indigenous people currently grow
their own crops for subsistence worldwide.
In many instances, their land is being eyed for corporate
"development" and GE crop technology offers a legal way to separate
Indigenous people from their land.
Genetic drift of GE crops to
non-GE fields has, in fact, been well documented and even the GE corporations
and their regulators in government acknowledge that it is a serious problem.
Now, however, Monsanto, a leading supplier of GE seeds, has cleverly turned the
tables on the alleged victims of genetic pollution by suing them for stealing
Monsanto's patented genes. The first case that came to trial, in
Canada in 2001, found Monsanto suing Percy Schmeiser, an organic farmer who had
complained of genetic pollution.
Monsanto charged that, after forty years of growing crops organically,
Mr. Schmeiser had a change of heart and decided to raise a genetically
engineered crop by stealing Monsanto's patented genes. Monsanto won, and
Schmeiser was ordered to pay with an entire years crop and the loss of all his
years of selective canola seed breeding.
Schmeiser eventually lost in the Canadian Supreme Court by a 5-4
ruling. With this important victory in
the bank, Monsanto now has similar lawsuits pending against farmers in North
Dakota, South Dakota, Indiana, and Louisiana.
Thus farmers that fall victim to genetic pollution may find themselves
sued for violating the intellectual property right of a corporation and be
forced to compensate the genetic polluter.
Farmers who purchase GE
seeds sign contracts requiring, under penalty of law, that they not save seed
from one crop to the next. Thus, farmers who employ GE seeds must purchase new
seed year after year, making them dependent upon whatever transnational
corporation owns the patent. Farmers who can't afford to buy seed each year
will simply not be allowed to grow a crop. In free-market societies, such
displaced farmers are free to move to a city where they are free to be
unemployed.
There
is an ongoing controversial debate as to whether modern technology and
civilization is causing world temperatures to rise. Scientists and politicians may argue about the cause, but not
the effect. Bruce Johansen wrote, in
October 2001, “The global climate change is severely impacting the Inuit of the
Arctic. Swallows, sand flies, and
robins now migrate into the Arctic. The
permafrost has begun to melt and mosquitoes and beetles, unknown a generation
ago, are now a common sight. Seals and
bears are suffering noticeably. Polar
bears are 90 to 220 pounds lighter than they used to be thirty years ago. Unpredictable storms and thinner ice make
hunting conditions far more dangerous than they used to be. Some villages are literally melting into the
sea. The University of Alaska has
published data which shows recent summer mean temperatures to be five degrees
warmer, and winter temperatures ten degrees higher than historical records
show.”
Scientists
believed, only a few years ago, that it would take hundreds or even thousands
of years for pesticides to percolate into the ocean of pure water known as the
Ogallala Aquifer that supplies drinking water to millions of Americans in eight
states. They have already been detected.
Bill Andrews, chief of studies for the U.S. Geological Survey in
Oklahoma City said, “The aquifer is more susceptible than we ever thought it
was.”
How many more of these kinds
of scientific errors can we afford?
Take
the basic computer chip. Tokyo
researchers have found that in order to produce each chip, 700 times its weight
in waste must also be produced. In
comparison, the relationship for waste in production of an automobile is only 1
to 2. The average computer is typically
two to three years compared to the car.
Today, in the Far East, many computer manufacturers and governments
contract for huge waste disposal sites for electronic wastes, dumping hazardous
and non-biodegradable materials. Local
environments have already had their health, water, and soil contaminated by
those pollutants and waste products.
It is a mistaken
view that these scientists, or at least those who fund them, do not have a
clear idea of how new technologies may be used and misused. Governments and corporations who invest
millions, or billions, in a new technology have certainly thoroughly examined
all the possible scenarios of use, positive or negative. Yet, public debate is swept aside by
rhetoric and hype, always putting forth the advantages, and never thoroughly
discussing the potential problems. The
ensuing public silence lends a tacit approval to their endeavors.
John Sulston wrote in his book, "The Common
Thread", about the politics that entered the race to decode the human
genome. "It was not," he said, "as I fondly imagined at the
beginning, simply a matter of sequencing the human genome and making the data
available. This was naive. I'd thought
of the Human Genome Project as being an uncluttered and altruistic activity,
but found instead that others viewed it as a stepping stone on the route to
commercial profit or political power."
"I was forced to realize that in our society one can get into
trouble for giving away something that can make money. I began to notice parallel tragedies
unfolding..." "The commercial and competitive pressures on academics
today are alarming. And if academics
are not independent, who will be society's impartial experts?" "The
big transnational corporations are now more powerful than many
governments. Their strength is apparent
everywhere we turn, and especially in their collective lobbying in the capitals
of rich nations." "This
international fellowship (of science) is threatened when people try to walk
both sides of the line, mingling scientific contribution with profit-making
activity. The two do not mix
well." "The truth is that
companies don't have to behave ethically... In our overly PR-conscious society,
there is little questioning of a smooth presentation. Half truth that is branded with a recognized name and laminated
to cover the cracks is rated more highly than unvarnished fact." Sulston continues, "In the commercial
world this is absolutely necessary to maximize their profits. Individual selfishness is held up as the
best way to advance civilization.
Through the process of globalization these beliefs are being exported to
the world as a whole, making it not only less just, but less safe. Nations, too, are unable to take sensible
collective decisions when the only rules we know for bargaining are those of
competitive greed." "What I
found...was that nobody knew what was going on—or didn't believe it. And I reflected on the power of public
relations. Those who can afford
expensive PR usually get their way—or at least, exert influence beyond what is
justified. Once a point of view has
taken hold in the public imagination, it's extremely hard to offset it."
"It brought home to me forcefully that the strength of the industrial
lobby in Washington means that no public servant can make statements that imply
criticism of a commercial company".
It's time we got
real about this world full of experts, expert panels, scientists, and
studies. What do we really know—beyond
that which we are told? How much of our
world-view is garnered third or fourth hand?
All we really know is what we have experienced personally in our
lives. We can "adopt" facts,
information, ideas, theories, and scientific evidence—(gossip)—until the cows
come home. Some of it will prove true,
the rest will lie in piles in the pastures.
This "age of information" could better be called the "age
of commercial and intellectual promotions". There are multi-national promotional firms who will put together
a panel of experts to prove anything you want them to. You’ll read it in the
newspaper or see it on the evening news—they guarantee it! Scientists are as susceptible to payoffs for
slanted studies as these PR firms.
Sarah Boseley, of the Guardian, wrote a Feb.
2002 story exposing a scandal involving scientists taking large sums of money
from pharmaceutical companies to sign their names to articles they hadn’t
written, endorsing new medicinal drugs.
Declines in State and Federal funding has left scientists in a financial
void which makes some of them susceptible to fraudulent offers from drug
companies to fund or commission their work.
This has given the industry unprecedented control over data. In many cases the doctors endorsing the
products have not seen the raw data at all, only the compiled tables in papers
drafted by employees or commercial agencies.
Two fields especially beset by this form of ghostwriting are psychiatry
and cardiology. The
race to acquire a place in the limited budgets and grant processes at
Universities and Foundations has eliminated the purity and impartiality of
studies.
Corporate science poses a theory and then attempts to
prove or disprove it according to an agenda.
"Junk Science" doesn't just exist in fringe environmental
groups but permeates every field and issue today. Why? Because many years
ago it was determined that the broadcast media could shape, alter, and
determine public opinion. If you have a
reason to “prove” something, you can find an expert to support your cause.
That's why we all have such firm and unalterable
opinions about everything; if your ideas don’t match mine it means your sources
must be less reliable! The ability to
have a discerning and equitable discussion of issues has been rendered
impossible. By having access to sources
guaranteed to support every opinion, compromise and consensus are made
difficult or impossible to achieve.
Proponents for technological civilization have
lied. It has long been an American myth
that we are leading the rest of the world toward a better life. However, our interests have served us in a
way the Third World can never expect.
With 5% of the population, we use more than 30% of the available
industrial resources. To raise the
standards of the world to our level we would have to speed up the harvest of
these resources six times annually, or find six new planets to plunder.
Americans enjoy the most comfortable and convenient
living standards worldwide—but we have achieved that success through the
systematic pursuit of any technological resource without regard to the cost in
human life or environmental balance. Progress is an insatiable monster that can
never achieve fulfillment. Technologists assert that new discoveries will save
us before the finite resources of Earth are exhausted. These are the kind of people who buy lotto
tickets thinking they have a good chance of winning!
The truth is that we have created a world of fantasy that pretends that
we can continue this lifestyle indefinitely.
The myth of our own genius has overwhelmed our common sense. That is
because western civilization does not think ahead beyond a generation or two.
As we sit comfortably in a world of plenty, remember that 75 percent of the
rest of the world is lacking nutritious food, shelter, or a safe place to
sleep. We could help them but our
system of economics and corporate profit (which controls science), will never
allow it to happen. Indigenous people
of the world are looking ahead toward seventh generations on end. Count your
blessings. Some future seventh
generation will face the reality. What will be our legacy to them?
To deny the impermanence of any civilization is to deny
history, and to assume that ours will be an exception is pure arrogance. But the multi-headed monster we have created
from curiosity and avarice is not easily controlled. Our civilizations, and especially those who continue to profit by
its development and expansion, rationalize the immoral and destructive
by-products of technology under the pretense that our monoculture of
consumerism represents the ultimate expression of evolution: the final
flowering of Man. Conversely, they
continue to represent Native or Indigenous societies as being on a lower rung
of the evolutionary ladder; obsolete and stubbornly in the way. Though everyone seems to take their claims
at face value, we know, through the words of our ancestors, that our
"primitive" Peoples lived well, had little want, and a significant
amount of leisure time.
At this point, we'd like to interject a piece of humor
and trivia that will, nevertheless, point out that progress is more of an
organic monster than any planned one.
It has to do with the historical evolution of transportation.
The US standard railroad gauge
(distance between the rails) is 4 feet, 8.5 inches. That's a exceedingly odd number.
Why was that gauge used? Because
that's the way they built them in England, and English expatriates built the US
Railroads. Why did the English build
them like that? Because the first rail
lines were built by the same people who built the pre-railroad tramways, and
that's the gauge they used. Why did
"they" use that gauge then?
Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools
that they used for building wagons, which used that wheel spacing. Okay!
Why did the wagons have that particular odd wheel spacing? Well, if they tried to use any other
spacing, the wagon wheels would break on some of the old, long distance roads
in England, because that's the spacing of the wheel ruts.
So, who built those old rutted roads?
Imperial Rome built the first long distance roads in Europe (and
England), for their legions. The roads
have been used ever since. And the ruts
in the roads? Roman war chariots formed
the initial ruts, which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their
wagon wheels. Since the chariots were
made for Imperial Rome, they were alike in the matter of wheel spacing.
The United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches is
derived from the original specifications for an Imperial Roman war chariot—proving
once again, that bureaucracies are eternal!
So the next time you are handed a specification, and wonder what horse's
ass came up with it, you may be exactly right, because those Imperial Roman war
chariots—which affected transportation specifications for centuries—were made
just wide enough to accommodate the back ends of two war horses.
Now the twist to the story...
There is an interesting extension to the story about railroad gauges and
horses' behinds. When we see a Space
Shuttle sitting on its launch pad, there are two big booster rockets attached
to the sides of the main fuel tank.
These are solid rocket boosters, or SRBs. The SRBs are made by Thiokol at their factory at Utah. The
engineers who designed the SRBs might have preferred to make them a bit fatter,
but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch
site. The railroad line from the
factory happens to run through a tunnel in the mountains. The SRBs had to fit through that
tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider
than the railroad track, and the railroad track is about as wide as two horses'
behinds.
So a major Space Shuttle design feature of what is arguably the worlds
most advanced transportation system was determined over two thousand years ago
by the width of a horse's ass!
Every new discovery and advancement is publicized as
evidence of the superiority of the present civilization. The media have become complicit in the
struggle to convince everyone that technology is always good and that each new
discovery that aids healing, decreases labor, improves safety, or drives
the engine of economic growth is simply another step toward a world of complete
safety, comfort, ease, luxury, and eventual immortality. Just as the world at the beginning of the
previous century prophesized a technological and scientific utopia without
hunger, sickness, or want—today's corporate or governmental giants will
everyone to believe that science will solve every problem, especially those it
creates along the way. The final myth
put forward regarding technology is that it is the Switzerland of progress,
where the agenda is apolitical and in-service to mankind. In reality, those who pay for the research
and development of technological advances (and this includes many of the
research scientists themselves), do have personal or corporate agendas-social,
political, economic, and otherwise.
They know exactly which direction their "developments" will
push society at large, and individuals in particular.
The complexities of greater technological advancement
will demand that society and civilization contract and centralize. To "protect" public safety and potentially
harmful use of new technologies (and investments), police and military control
must become more invasive and nationally, or internationally, controlled.
Indigenous People never talked a lot about freedom but
our inherently democratic forms of government, centered around community
controlled economics and environmental harmony, supported individual
freedoms. By contrast, those that
speak for progress and technology propagandize about freedoms while actually
promoting a consumer driven mono-cultural sterility. That sterility will eventually allow those who direct the
consumer culture to require an autocratic centralization of every aspect of
culture, society, and politics.
Until the mistakes and miscalculations of our culture
of waste and irresponsible technological growth compound to take new and horrendous
tolls on our species or our world, science will continue to delve recklessly
into projects civilization is ill prepared to utilize or control. And those who live for no other reason than
to horde wealth and power will continue to take those projects and loose them
upon us.
Here is an all-too-real example. In July of 2000, scientists tinkering with a
newly developed soy hybrid found that they had created a by-product fungus that
had the potential to wipe out ninety-eight percent of the world's soybean crop
and potentially devastate the entire world's plant life and ecological balance.
Then, only ten months later, they created a solution. Zovirex-10 kills the fungus dead! Unfortunately, some scientists claim that if Zovirex-10 were to
seep into the groundwater, it would kill off seventy percent of fish and
aquatic plant life, poison thirty-five percent of the human population, and
raise the temperature of the sea by seven degrees. That’s some solution!
Dr. Nathan Oberst, the Texas
A&M scientist responsible for Zovirex-10, made the enlightened comment
quoted at the beginning of this essay. It was he that downplayed the dangers of
Zovirex-10, essentially saying that we need to take these risks for the sake of
science and that science will always save us in the end. According to Oberst, flawed and dangerous
technological advances have helped broaden understanding in all fields of
science. "Just think about the
hydrogen bomb, not only was it a tremendous breakthrough in physics, it broadened
our knowledge of everything from radiation containment to bomb-shelter
construction to hair loss. Science has been coming up with breakthrough after
breakthrough to fix the problems that the H-bomb has created. (Except for
radioactive waste by-products) Without the H-bomb, we would know significantly
less about the potential problems associated with the H-bomb."
He finished with
this bolt of lightning.
"People shouldn't see man-made global
disasters as a bad thing. They should see them as scientific breakthroughs
waiting to happen."
We have to find
a way to make our objections public, and challenge the belief that technology
is a roller-coaster that cannot be stopped.
We know there are alternatives to the insanity of the point of view
expressed above. The average human
being has a better grasp of reality than many of our most creative
scientists. But the average
man-on-the-street, and certainly the average Indian, does not believe that
voicing their opinion will do much good.
It will require a significant amount of political power to restrain
science from its headlong rush toward oblivion, as it might also require a
significant amount of individual sacrifice and discomfort for us to learn to
live again in a world shifting gears toward a more natural way of life.
Essay Twenty-One BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
GRIN Technology And The Civilized Perspective
Advanced
technologies present even more challenges to a society that is perhaps less
informed about the past, the present, and the potential of the future than at
any time since the national forgetting occurred in the 1800’s. In addition to the challenges facing us
from abusive technologies and practices, we face an unknown future of radical
and almost instantaneous technological change.
In Joel Garreau’s book, Radical Evolution, he discusses GRIN
technologies and the evolutionary scenarios predicted by a number of
professionals in the GRIN fields. GRIN
represents the technologies of genetics, robotics, information, and
nanotechnology. The book postulates
that rapid advances in these technologies will ultimately lead to the
availability of enhancements for humanity, and that the graphed curve of these
advances will continue to accelerate change to an almost vertical rate,
resulting in the possibility of a “singularity”—an event that will push
humanity significantly up the ladder of evolution. Garreau interviews leaders in these fields that predict three
ultimate scenarios resulting from these advances. They are; the Heaven Scenario—where humanity leaps forward on the
evolutionary scale to solve all the major problems facing the planet, the Hell
Scenario—where any one of the disaster scenarios played out on cable TV, plus a
myriad of others created by the GRIN technologies themselves could lead to a
destruction of humanity as a species or the planet itself; and the Prevail
Scenario—where humanity muddles on, stepping forward and back in our
predictably unpredictable manner, capable of making good decisions or bad
according to our dominant motives, ultimately responsible for the end result of
whether these technologies serve us or become our master. Garreau brings to light any number of
important issues humanity will face in the coming blitz of technological
advancement, making a strong case for the “roller coaster we can’t get off”
view of scientific achievement. We’ll
examine some of those considerations but as part of our review of the
perceptions of modern civilization, we’ll also examine some of the “embedded
assumptions” each of these scientists, including the author, make in coming to
their view of the future.
“Four
interrelated, intertwining technologies are cranking up to modify human
nature…Call them the GRIN technologies…These four advances are intermingling
and feeding on one another, and they are collectively creating a curve of
change unlike anything we humans have ever seen.”
Joel Garreau
“My
thesis is that in just twenty years the boundary between fantasy and reality
will be rent asunder.”
Rodney Brooks
(MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab Director)
“The
next frontier is our own selves.”
Gregory Stock (UCLA School Of Medicine)
“Technological
progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal.”
Albert Einstein 1917
“We
shall…be henceforth free to make our species what we wish it to be. The battle will indeed be won. But who,
precisely, will have won it? For the power
of Man to make himself what he pleases means, as we have seen, the power of
some men to make other men what they please.
C.S. Lewis
1944
The GRIN
technologies are the centerpiece of future military interests, as might be
expected. Defense researchers are simultaneously working on pain-blocking
vaccines, accelerated healing using near-infrared spectrum light,
stopping bleeding using simple brain power or nano-magnets, re-growing body
parts or organs (even entire humans), eliminating the need for sleep, defeating
bacteria and viruses before they take hold in the body, creating superhuman
strength by genetically growing muscle and creating robotic exo-skeletons,
enhancing metabolic ability so as to decrease food consumption, adding brain
implants that increase memory capacity, create the capacity for total recall
and photographic memory, etc., and integrating mind and machine to realize
sensory, analytical, and decision-making enhancements. That’s just a sampling of Defense Department
research projects. Now multiply that by
a myriad other organizations, corporations, disciplines, educational facilities
and scientists worldwide who have their own agendas for rapid progress in these
areas and we begin to see the rate at which potential change could occur.
This
brings us to a discussion of the “Curve” approaching a “Singularity”. While the Singularity is, at this point, a
theoretical event, the Curve is a measurable phenomenon
Gordon E. Moore,
a founder of Intel, started the discussion in 1965 when he predicted that the
rate of complexity in semiconductor components for computers would double every
ten years. A Cal-tech professor, Calvin
Meade, dubbed the claim, Moore’s Law, and it has since come to represent the
basic belief of the computer industry worldwide—only now it states that the
power of information technology will double every eighteen months. By the year 2002, the twenty-seventh
doubling had occurred, representing an increase in computational power of over
one hundred million times. This exponential
change represents a startling statistic and can only be represented on a graph
by a curve that turns vertical, straight up.
Breakthroughs in
computer technology are creating breakthroughs in biology and genetic
engineering. Soon, your own doctor may
be able to take a tissue sample, determine your ailment, and specifically
tailor your treatment to your personal genetic makeup. There are many
Frankenstein-like applications for moving genes around like blocks of Legos*,
including engineering changes in how our bodies look and function at the most
basic levels, the concept of developing computers that can simulate human brain
power, and the idea that there one day may be multiple breeds of human beings,
engineered to their own (or someone else’s) specifications.
Advances in robotics will
blur the lines between human and machine as machine parts are implanted and
blended with the flesh. Cyborgs are
definitely in the mix, as are intelligent machines that effectively simulate
human action, behavior, and decision-making.
Nanotechnology works at the
atomic and sub-atomic level, creating machines or materials with entirely new
properties by arranging atoms and molecules in original and newly creative
ways. Coupled with the science of genetic engineering there seems to be no end
to the imagination driven potential of these technologies in changing our
world.
Some of the technologies being pursued beyond
these are almost too far-fetched to conceive yet they may be upon us before we
have time to truly understand them.
This is the nature of the
Curve that some scientists predict for the next twenty to forty years—a time of
change so rapid and so radical that we will have hardly enough time to even
imagine that change before we will be confronted with additional changes. Without discussing the potential results to
the earth and humanity from these spiraling technologies, we agree that,
barring catastrophe, it will happen.
For example, only a few short years ago there was no Internet, and no
cell phones. Today, the entire world is
using one or both technologies, even in some of the most rural and poverty
stricken countries of the world.
Joel Garreau writes not only
of the physical revolution that will, and is, taking place around us—he
examines the mental, ethical, moral, and ideological changes that will need
resolution as we go forward into this brave new world. A simple example might be the stress
generated by coming to depend on some of these technologies, like computers
etc. and our physical and emotional reaction to their mechanical failure. For writers, who depend on a computer to
record and edit their manuscripts, the horrific despair felt at losing a
chapter or a whole project can be emotionally shattering. So we can anticipate a whole new range of physical,
emotional, and psychological ailments and addictions related to these
technologies.
Garreau says, “The Curve
warps our sense of past and future…By the arithmetic of the Curve, however, the
last twenty years is not so much a guide to the next twenty years. It is a guide to the next eight. Similarly, the last fifty years is not a
guide to the next fifty years; it is rather a guide to the next decade and a
half…The Curve implies one of the all-time changes in the rules.”
This change in all the rules
is described by those who believe in its inevitability as—the “Singularity”.
Vernor Vinge, a novelist and
former professor in the Department of Mathematics and Computer Science at San
Diego State, writes, “…we are on the edge of change comparable to the rise of
human intelligence on earth.” The
Singularity has been described by Garreau as similar to the context of math and
physics singularities; ”the points where everything stops making sense.” Stephen Hawking describes it like this, “At
this singularity the laws of science and our ability to predict the future
would break down.” Those who believe
that the Singularity is coming realize that, as Garreau says, “The critical
element…is that it is fundamentally out of control…it will be like wildfire.”
Garreau says that the scientists expecting
the first occurrence of the Singularity will be looking for an “ultra
intelligent critter.” Vinge postulates
that would lead to “an intelligence explosion.”
There are those in the
scientific community who do not believe that the Singularity will occur. Of those who do, there are two groups—those
who believe it will generate something positive for humanity and its
evolution—and those who believe it will end in ultimate catastrophe. Among those who believe it is inevitable,
they share one embedded assumption (according to Garreau). “The only event that can alter this path is
a cataclysm that will ruin civilization.”
Garreau’s description of
what he describes as “The Heaven Scenario” basically quotes a Washington policy
document entitled, Converging Technologies For Improving Human Performance,
which Garreau reports concludes: “The twenty-first century could end in world
peace, universal prosperity, and evolution to a higher level of compassion and
accomplishment…that humanity would become like a single, distributed and
interconnected ‘brain.’”
So finally, we arrive at one
of the first talking points we’d like to examine. It’s found in Garreau’s description of “The Heaven
Scenario”. As we promised in the essay
introduction, it is the embedded assumptions we’ll take issue with. The embedded assumption of “The Heaven
Scenario” is that “Technology Drives History”.
This is a reprise of the quote from the Matrix movie in the first
essay. “Throughout human history we
have depended on machines…” We first
dispute the word history—as it is used here—as a very Euro-centric concept,
focusing only on western history and ignoring those of all other civilizations. History, as it is currently presented in
Western countries, represents a very limited, biased, and agenda oriented
fiction. Technology has risen and
fallen with numerous civilizations.
Different technologies have dominated previous civilizations, and we are
certain that numerous technologies and civilizations presently unidentified to
our “recorded” history have existed. We
might be okay with the phrase that “Technology and contemporary science have
contributed to the direction of the history of contemporary western
civilization.” But history, as it is presently
written, is more concerned with individuals and events that contribute to the
larger morality play generated to assuage public concerns and promote
consumerism and progress as world philosophies than it is with historical
fact..
Garreau’s “Hell” Scenario is
much more in line with Native prophecies, which predict a journey into the
whirlwind unless the Singularity generates an immediate evolution in the human
heart and our treatment of the Earth and our fellow humanity.
Essay Twenty-Two BlueWolf
& Lupe'/Shirts N' Skins
Genocide By TV
(The Murder Of Minds)
Since
w began this book, the Web has come into its own in the lives of many of the
World’s citizens. We do not have the
expertise to know whether the problems we examine in this essay are applicable
to the web or video-game environments but we are reasonably sure that some of
them could be similar. Nevertheless,
the rapid development of information technologies presents a plethora of new
problems and potential disasters for our people. On the other hand, the tide may be irresistible and we may need
to resort to a simple moderation of reliance on these technologies,
simultaneously attempting to provide alternate experiences for our
grandchildren in order to preserve the values we cherish. One thing is for certain, barring a
catastrophe to civilization, our descendants will, no doubt, find themselves fully
immersed in future technologies we cannot begin to imagine. Will they have the opportunity to sit by the
campfire and imagine what reflects there; to hear the heartbeat of the drum, as
well as experiencing the screens of their computers and neural implants? Each family must decide—that is a power we
must retain.
If there is one
threat to American Indian culture, spirituality, and social life that we have
the power to control in our lives, it is the overwhelmingly destructive
influence of television (and perhaps, video games, and information
technology). The primary strength of
tribal peoples is our “gathering”, our constant interpersonal contact, and our
relationships. The individual isolation
promoted by these technologies may be the single greatest threat to tribal
survival we face.
Forget for a
moment the fact that there is almost no programming, except for nature and
natural world shows, that support, directly or indirectly, Indigenous mores,
values, family relationships, or spiritual responsibility. Forget that Corporate America commercials
vie for our complete attention and submission to enforce and coerce their
demand for parasitic consumerism.
Forget that the glossing over of issues that threaten our survival as a
species is now accomplished through the glitz and glamour of a myriad of media
productions resulting in an information overload that diminishes the urgency
some of these issues deserve; creating in the populace a widespread feeling of
overwhelming impotence when it comes to decision-making and real solutions. Forget
also that the fields of technology are so broad and comprehensive that change
appears as unstoppable as tsunami; carrying us toward what the power elite
would like us to believe will be a brave new world of peace, plenty, and
fun—without any real demonstrable signs to evidence that progress. Forget all that and just look at the medium,
which is the message.
The power of television to create a commonly accepted
soup of thought, culture, and lifestyle has evidenced itself in only a few
decades. The dreams of television's
"potential" were overwhelmed by the power of the corporate and
Federal governments (big business and defense), who immediately commandeered
the medium into the service of their needs and whims.
Jerry Mander,
our major source for much of the information in the opinions
expressed in this, as well as the last essay, makes
these points in his book, Four Arguments For The Elimination Of
Television.
He describes how TV isolates people in an artificial
information environment. The process of
moving edited images through a passive human brain is significantly different
than the process of active information gathering. We become, in essence, non-cognitive receivers. But television is not static. It is an aggressive and parasitic mechanism
that enters the mind as an external environment and is assimilated to create an
internal mental environment. It is a
technological drug; a mechanical methamphetamine that accelerates the nervous
system. With quick changing images, sound
effects, and music to enhance emotional involvement, it stimulates an impulse
to react to the artificial visual stimulus presented on the small screen. Since the body and mind recognize that any
actual reaction would be inappropriate, the impulse to react is
suppressed. A repetition of this
reaction-impulse-suppression results in stored energy. If the television is turned off, children
will often exhibit frantic or disorganized behavior as their nervous systems
begin to try to adapt to a slower, less stimulating environment. Anyone who watches TV regularly experiences
an altered reality where time speeds up, dramatization increases emotional
reaction, and a return to non-TV environment causes anxiety and/or nervousness. We become used to these aberrant feelings
and find it difficult to remain calm, to read or be taught, to relate to
others, or to feel comfortable with nature.
On the other hand, we feel perfectly at ease with forms of advanced
technology that encourage speed and provide large amounts of audio or visual
stimulus.
To feel a part
of the natural world requires calm, patience, and an acceptance of the pace at
which natural events occur. It is no
wonder that TV-raised children sometimes show no interest in oral tradition, in
walks, gardening, doing chores, or just playing outside. Those types of activities do not offer the
same immediate and continually changing sensory gratification that TV, video
games, and other forms of visual media offer.
Non-TV kids are forced into creating activity. They usually go through a cycle of boredom
that demands a creative response, to which they find an acceptable outlet. TV is a mood-altering drug that provides
early training in the acceptance of other kinds of escape-oriented drugs. We believe it is as much of a building block
for drug dependency as it is for consumerism.
TV also homogenizes those who watch it. Viewers begin to exhibit the same types of
thought processes, imagine the same imagery, and experience the same contextual
reality. It represents a type of
cultural cloning mechanism that reorganizes family and community life around
its own mono-cultural messages and advertising strategies.
Market researchers conduct surveys on children in
shopping malls—organizing focus groups for children 2-3 years old. These studies are translated into television
advertising. Artwork is analyzed. Children and cultural anthropologists are
hired and sent into homes, schools, restaurants, and stores to observe and talk
to children. They study children's
dreams and fantasy lives. Children's
clubs are heavily utilized in information gathering and research to better
facilitate more effective media advertising.
The internet has become a huge source of information to help companies
design media strategies to encourage children to become active consumers. In 1978, the FCC attempted to ban children's
advertising directed at children ages 7 and under. When the lobbies for the Association of Broadcasters, Toy
Manufacturers, and National Advertisers objected, Reagan's administration
killed the ban.
In Indigenous communities, television's effects are
devastating. The glamorization of
values and behaviors poisonous to Indian morals and ethics is inevitable, as is
the constant rhetoric and hype of consumerism.
Cooperation, sharing, and non-materialism are foreign to the
corporations that run the networks.
Here are some of the more visible effects (as outlined by Mander) that
occurred in Northern Indigenous communities only a few months after their first
exposure to television.
People lost interest in hearing and telling the stories
of oral tradition that teach the People how to live.
They were less inclined to speak their own languages,
replacing them with English slang.
Elders lost their position and status due to youth
oriented programming and advertising.
Self-esteem was diminished due to formulas that define
beauty in appearance, shape, and form.
Habits like drinking and smoking were reinforced as
romantic and acceptable.
People visited each other less, and were less
communicative.
Kids didn't play as much, either alone or
together.
Young people began to resent having to do menial and
time-consuming chores.
Children were not as creative and tended to think in
TV-like images or relate to TV characters.
Children became used to sit-and-absorb learning and were
not as interested in Native forms of teaching that required repetition to
acquire proficiency and retention.
People began to use the programs they watched as
discussion items, especially as it became a central force in their lives.
People begin imagining that they had the same problems
and desires portrayed by the characters they saw on TV. Eventually that became true.
One of the most
important things we can do for our youth is to eliminate, or severely curtail,
their access to TV. Indoors—reading,
music, artwork, or crafts are the most creative and stimulating physically
semi-passive activities we can participate in.
But any activity that causes youths to stimulate their
imagination, or create their own outlets for expression, are superior to
passive receptive stimulation. Activity is the most desirable state we would
hope for our children, be it inside or out.
Oral tradition
is incredibly powerful. The environment
and context of oral tradition stimulates all the senses. Our old people were our TVs, reflecting and
presenting the past, present, and future—in an entertaining, disciplined
way. Through oral tradition, we
attained intimacy, affection, and respect.
Children developed their imaginations, their self-identity, and their
sense of worth listening to their Ancient Ones relate stories that conveyed the
People's Ways in a natural teaching environment.
In the absence of television, we could see significant
improvement in the culture in only a few years. For those of us who cry about solutions being too complex, here
is a relatively simple idea. It is one
that is easy to envision, but difficult to achieve. Aldous Huxley observed generations ago, "A society, most of
whose members spend a great part of their time, not on the spot—not here and
now and in the calculable future but somewhere else, in the irrelevant other
worlds of sports and soap opera, of mythology and metaphysical fantasy—will
find it hard to resist the encroachments of those who manipulate and control
it."
Can we live without TV—without video games—without
computers? Its probably too late to
answer yes. This begs the question—how
can we survive these new technologies and remain tribal peoples? The answer lies at the heart of one of our
strongest traditions. Gathering. Outside.
Essay Twenty-Three BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Healthy Foods Or
Eating Ourselves To Death
"If we eat
McDonald's hamburgers and potatoes for a 1000 years, we will become taller, our
skin will become white, and our hair will be blonde."
Dan Fuyita (who brought McD's to
Japan)
"We have
found out...that we cannot trust some people who are non-conformists... The
organization cannot trust the individual; the individual must trust the
organization. This (business) is rat
eat rat, dog eat dog. I'll kill 'em and
I'm gonna kill 'em before they kill me.
You're talking about the American Way of the survival of the fittest.
Ray Kroc, Founder--McDonalds
"...It's the law of the Universe that the
strong shall survive and the weak must fall by the way, and I don't give a damn
what idealistic plan is cooked up—nothing can change that."
Walt Disney
A survey of
American children found that 96 % could recognize Ronald McDonald—only Santa
Claus scored higher.
Eric Schlosser
The largest
chain restaurants in the U.S. have given a handful of corporations’
unprecedented power over the Nation's prepared food supply. All of these outfits have one
requirement—uniformity. The need for
uniformity has destroyed the once highly skilled, highly paid meatpacking
industry. Large corporations now employ
armies of poor transient immigrants to do their meat packing in one of the most
dangerous jobs in America.
Most of the founders of these large food supply and
preparation corporations have a long history of opposing regulation and
government interference. They tout the
free enterprise system and vigorously oppose anything they consider
socialistic, yet they are not above relying on federal funds to keep their
businesses afloat. But the nature of
their enterprises are as colonially minded as other major corporations. They want nothing less than to control the
food of the world. To do that they must
create an unnatural addiction to those foods.
To that purpose, they have relied on decades of scientific research and
technological advances. Today, they
stand at the threshold of success.
Many of the prepared foods that a majority of Americans
use consistently are essentially tasteless.
The tastes we have come to love are manufactured, described as natural
and artificial flavors in chemical plants, and added to basic flavorless
stock. One single plant in the mid-west
supplies virtually the entire industry with colors, tastes and smells. Essentially every flavor has been
artificially produced and "improved" to satisfy and gratify the palate. Wholly natural foods may seem bland and
tasteless by comparison, even less satisfying, particularly after one gets used
to these Frankensteins of the food world.
This is the result of the scientific quantification of decades of
research and development in creating foods and tastes that the people cannot,
and will not, do without.
Flavors are created through enzyme reactions, fungal
cultures, and tissue cultures. To
demonstrate, one company chars sawdust and captures the airborne aroma with
water, bottling it as a "natural smoke flavor" and marketing it to at
least two of the country's main burger chains.
The color in a leading pink grapefruit juice and strawberry yogurt is
made from the desiccated bodies of insects and larvae dried and ground into a
pigment.
On the shelves of the flavor super warehouses, you can
find bottles containing the taste of fresh cherries, black olives, sautéed
onions, shrimp, and grilled hamburgers.
A narrow strip of white paper can carry the smell of butter, meat
flavor, French fries, popcorn, marshmallows, bananas, strawberries, fresh cut
grass, or human perspiration.
An artificially flavored strawberry milkshake may
contain as many as 350 chemicals to achieve the smell and as many as 48
chemicals to create that great strawberry taste!
Creating a smell requires much smaller chemical
amounts. The smell of bell pepper can
be artificially created at only .02 parts per billion. One drop of the liquid could give the odor
to five average swimming pools.
Color also can be added in very small chemical amounts.
The major fast food chains color soft drinks, salads, dressings, cookies,
condiments, sandwich buns, and chicken dishes.
Research has even been conducted on the way foods feel
in the mouth. It has been established
that this influences the perception of flavor.
This "feel" can be adjusted in three ways with various fats,
gums, starches, emulsifiers, and stabilizers.
So the next time you eat at a restaurant, you may
wonder if the flavors, colors, and smells of the food you're eating comes from
the food itself, or a collection of bottles from a flavor manufacturing plant.
The next concern relates to the animals being
slaughtered for your plate. Imagine the
image of a deer or buffalo, fattened on natural grazing and clean water, being
brought down by a respectful hunter (who honors the spirit) and carefully
butchered on the spot for immediate use, utilizing every part—as our ancestors
did. Now switch to a large beef
corporation plant where, until 1997, almost everything the animals consumed was
the ground unconsumed parts of their own kind. It was beef cannibalizing beef.
After 1997, the government decided that was wrong and now the beef
typically eat the leftovers of horses, pigs, poultry, cattle blood, gelatin,
tallow and restaurant plate waste.
There are no restrictions on what can be fed to poultry or pigs.
To this date only 1/4 of the feed is labeled, 1/5 had
no method of preventing cross feed contamination to occur, and 1/10 did not
know of the ban at all. Mad cow
disease, anyone?
This says nothing of the easing of guidelines and
restrictions on how animals are slaughtered.
Anyone who has personally witnessed the corporate execution of beef becomes,
at least temporarily, a vegetarian.
In foreign countries, American flavors and advertising
are showing their addictive qualities.
1/2 of Australia's 9 to 10 year olds answered yes to the statement that
Ronald McDonald knew what kids should eat.
In Beijing, primary school children recognized Ronald's image and said
they "liked "Uncle" McDonald because he was funny, gentle, and
understood children's hearts."
McDonalds had their favorite foods, and Coca Cola was their favorite
drink. McDonalds now has stores in 120
countries around the world. There is
even one at the site of the Nazi death camp, Dachau, in Germany.
We know that our original diets gave us exactly what we
needed. But for many generations that
has not been the case. Early foodstuffs
from reservation agencies were chosen specifically to reduce our strength and
adversely affect our health. Even
today, we are familiar with the unhealthy government commodities many of our
people rely on. With diabetes cutting a
wide swath through Native Peoples: sugar, white flour, chemicalized tobacco, fast
food, soda pop, and bad fats have taken a terrible toll. Eating healthy takes a lot of effort if one
wants to eat naturally. Many of our
lifestyles do not allow us the time to manage a garden or the space to grow
one.
This is a problem not unlike TV. With the grocery stores full of processed
and prepared foods, we must expend extra monies to feed our children healthy
foods. We are so habitually tied to chemical
smells, flavors, and textures that only extensive education—and a strong
will—can free us.
The
epidemic of obesity that exists in the First World should be a warning to those
who disagree with all of our other perceptions. Any civilization that demonstrates so little concern for its
basic health and ability to survive in natural circumstances deserves whatever
it gets. Obesity is not just a physical
problem but reflects a mental, spiritual, and psychological imbalance. Over and above the chemically induced
addictions our food suppliers are responsible for, people are using food as a
distraction, as a cure for boredom, as a reward, as a substitute for love and
companionship, as a cure for nervousness and discontent—all evidence of serious
imbalances in our physical and mental lives.
There is some
light at the end of the tunnel. In our
area, small organic ranchers of beef and buffalo are springing up all
over. Good meat is becoming
available. Canada has some huge natural
grazing bison ranches. Some have
suggested a national Great Plains Park to be located in the huge areas of the
plains that have been abandoned or become unfit for agriculture, where buffalo
can run free again.
In
many areas, some of our traditional foods still flourish—perhaps not in an
abundance to feed everyone but enough to feed those who make the effort to
gather and prepare them. Farmers
markets have become popular and typically offer organic vegetables and fruits
in many communities.
But it ain't
McD's! We'll have to get used to
natural tastes again, and allow time spent in preparing food. Our children could be recovering their
health again in a generation, but witnessing the mountainous piles of soda cans
we're just starting to recycle on nearly every rez—we've got a long way to go.
Much of the info
for this chapter came from Eric Schlosser's book. See Book List
Essay Twenty-Four BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Apology and Reconciliation, As Long As Grass Grows
The
Creator gave this land to Indian people for all time. In the same way that you find Anglo farmers in America's
heartland teaching their grandchildren the concept of stewardship of the land,
refuting ownership, and practicing love of the earth with extended family
support, Indians never claimed the land as property. The bounty of the Earth, as a living body and spirit, is to be
shared and caretaken with responsibility and affection. There is no moral, legal, or punitive reason
that can justify the destruction of a world, a race, or a way of life. One may look at factors which seem to point
to the inevitability of such actions, but that does not make them right or
dissolve the burden of responsibility from the shoulders of those who made the
decisions and carried them out. Neither does it shield those who continue to
profit, benefit, and be comfortable from responsibility for those actions.
“And these indigenous come
to say no, that the land is mother, it is the depository of culture, that
history lives here, and the dead live here; absolutely absurd things that
cannot be entered on any computer and that are not listed on a stock exchange.
And there is no way to convince them to be good, to learn to think right, they
simply do not want to.” “…they
do not want to stop being indigenous… Their struggle is to be recognized as
Indian peoples, that their right to exist is recognized, without having to turn
into other people…”
Sub-Commandante Marcos, Zapatista leader
American Indian legal affairs have always been in a state
of chaos as the conscience of the country (and the courts), sense a duty to
morality and fair play causing a re-evaluation of the Marshall assumption that
Manifest Destiny's legal justification can come from the simple power of
violence and intimidation. The present administration may seek a return to
those policies, but the American people, as a whole, can sense the morality of
the American Indian cause. If the
actions of the past can be rationalized as legal and binding simply because
someone has the power of numbers and force to maintain power, then anyone may
burn houses, kill pets, rape mothers and daughters, salt fields, raze
businesses, and murder families with utter impunity, forever—provided they can
withstand the victims attempts to suffer a different legality, or morality,
upon them. I can hear people saying
that this kind of behavior has been practiced in every culture, time and time
again, all over the world. However, for
a Nation that pretends to be firmly lodged on the high ground of morality, the
hypocrisy is evident.
"Might makes right" has been the underlying
philosophy of the American legal system no matter what idealistic rhetoric is
employed in the Constitution or Bill of Rights simply because that is the
foundation upon which this country was established.
A certain recognition and legality must be given to the
proposition that the bounty of the land, with its resources and rich provisions,
entitles its Indigenous Peoples to an ongoing benefit for the use of, and
profit from, those resources. The
United States should pay an ongoing price for the profits and benefits all its
citizens now enjoy, which were gained at the expense of our Sovereign Nations,
and from the confiscation of these lands, lives, and property—in
perpetuity. (Or at least as long as
grass grows and water flows.) Our
Nations were gifted this land, not only for the generations born, but for all
those to follow.
Why should
Americans pay for use of these resources when they were bought and paid for in
blood? Here is the answer. It is because their government and
businesses have managed them poorly, and have destroyed a great deal of the
inheritance of the generations to come!
The damages to the Earth alone demand that payment, and if it will, in
some way, contribute to American Indians recapturing our spirit, and the spirit
of the land we love, then the price will be well paid.
We've got a solution.
Give us back the land! Extend
our land bases by putting federal lands under our control. Make us the managers
of the BLM and Federal Parks and Recreation Lands. Give us control of the wild
lands and wilderness areas. Put all
unused military lands in our trusts.
It’s a start.
Bartolome' De Las Cases, in his
treatise to the Church defending Indians rights to land, property, and life,
made an interesting prophecy that is relevant to this essay. He said, while
discussing Sepulveda's justification of Spanish atrocities; "I considered
also that these opinions of his will spread throughout all the nations of the
world…the savage and firmly rooted practice of seizing what belongs to others
and increasing one's property by shedding human blood...”
In one way or
another, every movement by Western colonial powers, now global corporate
powers, has utilized some measure of murder, force, or threat of intimidation
to take the resources of Indigenous peoples around the world. After a few generations, their descendants
wash their hands in Pilate's bowl, and declare themselves innocent, all the
while continuing to benefit from the lands and resources taken. Then they have
the audacity to look confused when Indigenous Peoples demand, under national
and international law, a redress of grievances and right to participate as
compensation for the crimes and thefts committed in the name of existing
governments.
Indians get sick
of Americans asking why they should be held responsible for the past or why,
today, they should be held responsible for the welfare of Indians beyond what
every American citizen is entitled to.
Here, once and for all, we're going to try to paint a picture they can
see.
The America of today is not the America of the Founding
Fathers, even though many Americans are descended from arrogant, middleclass
Anglo-Saxon white men who believed themselves racially, culturally, morally,
and spiritually superior to any plant, animal, or human being on this planet.
In founding this Nation, they defined a citizen by
three characteristics. A citizen was
culturally and racially Anglo-Saxon. They were Protestant Christians, and they
were male. The politics, doctrines,
attitudes, and viewpoint of America descended from their lineage. Only recently has it been expanded to
include female, multi-racial, multi-cultural, multi-national, and
multi-spiritual citizens.
The reality of "Give me your tired and your
poor" was another myth created in the mid-20th century. When non-Crown "white" people
began immigrating to this country in the late 1800s they didn't quality for the
exclusive club that existed here. They
were relegated to a secondary citizenship, looked down upon, and discriminated
against. Irish, Italians, Germans, Hungarians,
Romanians, and Russians might as well have been Indians for all the
opportunities they were given and the cold welcome they received. Many of them had to enlist in the American
military to survive and ended up fighting Indians across the West. In many remote outposts, a majority of
American soldiers could not speak English.
Today, many of their descendants deign to look past the treatment of
their own ancestors and have adopted many of the perceptions of original
Anglo-Saxon Europeans toward American Indians.
They developed the same prejudices as their fellow Crown-European
neighbors, buying into the same doctrines and attitudes. You do not have to go to South Dakota or
Mississippi to find lasting examples of those attitudes—they exist everywhere.
As the United States grows ethnically and culturally,
the boundaries of citizenship expand.
Americans have come to view their system as setting the standard for freedom
and decency in the world. They have
repeatedly asked other Nations, notably Germany, Russia, Japan, Cambodia, (and
more recently, Bosnia, Afghanistan, and Iraq), to recognize and acknowledge the
atrocities and immoral acts committed by their former leaders. Some of these crimes were committed a number
of generations ago. Where is the line
to be drawn?
Indeed, if a modern Nation encroaches on another,
confiscates its lands, kills or subjugates its Peoples, and enforces alien
precepts on the inhabitants, Americans are often the first to stand up and cry
foul. We see ourselves as champions of
freedom and tolerance, and immediately condemn these types of actions as
illegal and immoral.
Why then, when we turn our eyes to the past, do so many
of our fellow citizens gloss over the actions of our ancestors and justify them
as timely and acceptable?
If it is immoral now, it was immoral then. Morality and truth do not change with time.
They are constant.
Are the Jews asked to forget the Holocaust because it is
half a century past? Will they be asked
to forget in another hundred years? Our
Nations lost much, much more.
Though we cannot reach back and change history or alter
the actions and attitudes of our ancestors, we can recognize and admit their
wrongdoing. In addition, if we have
benefited from those illegal and immoral actions, do we not have an obligation
to render an apology to their victims?
There has never been a National media-carried
prime-time public apology for what Americans, in the name of the United States,
did to the original inhabitants of this country. In fact, many Americans do not feel that this is even necessary
or appropriate. They do not see
themselves as an extension of their Government, and many believe that time and
circumstance demanded the actions taken during those fateful days. We disagree.
The fact that racism, religious intolerance, and an
attitude of racial and moral superiority permeated the minds and attitudes of
some 18th, 19th, and 20th century Americans does
not mean that it dominated, or dominates, the minds of all. Many Americans wrote publicly about
genocide, immoral acts, illegal actions, inhumane treatment, and the
confiscation of our lands during those times.
Some of our most vociferous allies were the generals and military men
that had secured America's victory.
That their outcries were ignored in favor of progress and the
accumulation of material wealth is not all that different from what is being
put forward today. It is, in fact, the
very reason many Americans feel disenfranchised and powerless to affect change
within their systems of representation.
Most Americans would support a proclamation of apology
and reconciliation if it did not directly and individually indict them with responsibility
for the actions and attitudes of their forefathers. They would understand that
the system and government of America requires that each American carry some
responsibility for the actions taken, on their behalf, in their name, and for
their benefit. We asked the German
people to shoulder the responsibility for the reign of Hitler's mad government,
why is this so different? We may not
have had the despotic reign of a madman to blame it on, but in reality, the
body counts, excluding the Russian front, were similar. In California alone, it is estimated that
perhaps ten million Indians died. But
this is not the point of this essay. The point is reconciliation and apology.
In the
mid-1950s, it became apparent to politicians that the century old policies that
pushed American Indians toward assimilating into the mainstream culture had
failed. They answered that failure,
where the absence of treaty would allow, with another doomed
policy—Termination. It was believed
that by taking away government recognition of Indian status, Indians would be
forced to assimilate. However, the
government has always failed to realize the truth about American Indians. Most Natives, unlike Black African slaves,
were not removed from our homelands to another continent, nor were our families
ever completely divided and dispersed.
Despite our terrible losses of Spirit, culture, and life, the tribal
extended-family relationships were preserved.
We did however; experience the post-traumatic stress
across the generations since those times.
Vietnam vets suffered the agony of asking "why" in the face of
little popular support and so much personal loss. American Indians have asked
themselves for generations why their culture, spiritual life, and Peoples
should have been considered so invalid and worthless as to be swept away
without afterthought or apology, by a Nation that declares its moral and
political history to be superior to any other system in the world.
We have heard the argument, descended from old
attitudes, that we are responsible for our own misery. "If only you would accept your lot and
assimilate...accept the American dream.”
This is similar to the Spaniards carrying the Papal Bulls to the
Indigenous Peoples of Mexico saying, "Accept our religions, our beliefs,
and our authority over you or we will destroy you—and it will be all your
fault!"
Many Americans have never fully grasped the power of
our commitment to our Peoples and the Earth.
As long as we retain even a small portion of our land and a few
Relatives, we will retain our individuality as Nations. Despite the fact that
the reality of our sovereignty as Nations is in the ever-changing circus-like
atmosphere of the American legal system, Natives still believe our nations to
be sovereign. Our Grandparents have
continued to pass the stories of what took place down to each generation, so
they have remained fresh and powerful in our minds while they have become
blurred and insignificant in the minds of many Americans.
Our visionary Grandfathers specifically warned us of
what was to come and told us that the outcome of our struggles would not be
known for seven generations. They said
that even though we would appear to disappear and be defeated, we should not
give up hope. The seventh generation
has been born and though we see pockets of defeat among us, we see blankets of
victory. Though we see many of our
people have traded in their love of community, culture and spiritual commitment
for American values of materialism and separatism—nevertheless many of our
languages, much of our culture, and plenty of our spirit and love for the Earth
and Our Creator still flourishes. We have survived.
Indians have always seen their individual actions in
the larger perspective of how the whole community functions. Our spirituality, culture, and actions are
carried on the shoulders of the entire Nation.
We are a People who use Ceremony to formally recognize our commitments
and responsibilities to this world.
Therefore, we continue to grieve for Our Old Ones, those past and
present spirits who have been told the stories and lived the tragedy their entire
lives.
A November (1876) issue of the Omaha Herald summed up
the cause of their sorrow with this piece of editorial: "Several ladies passed through the
cars... American Horse's papoose was a chubby, sturdy little beggar, and when
one of the ladies spoke to him, he set up a tremendous wail, just as natural
and lifelike as if he were Human."
These Elders endured, and are still enduring, a lifetime
of being told their
Grandparents were “almost human”;
that their languages were primitive, their cultures were ignorant and underdeveloped,
and their spiritual beliefs were devilish and paganistic. We know they wonder, in their hardy but
sorrowful souls, why this had to be?
Why were so many were lost and so much destroyed? It hurts us to see them pass away wondering
why! It is time to give them, if not an
answer, then an apology. They need an
assurance that their world was beautiful and that their mothers and fathers are
to be respected and admired for their sacrifices.
For those Americans who lost loved ones in the
struggles, they must remind themselves that it was the doctrine of Manifest
Destiny that called for that blood, not the fault of freedom loving Peoples
resisting the theft of their homeland and destruction of their way of life.
The Preamble of the Constitution of the United States
begins with the words, "WE, the People." If America is indeed formed of WE, then those who benefited the
most share a burden of responsibility for the past. Not for the attitudes and actions of ancestors, but for recognition
of the destruction of an entire continent of Nations without due process (the
Law of the Land), and without regard for their rights, liberties, and freedom
as Human Beings.
It is time for
National, State and local apologies to be made, so reconciliation may follow
and healing begin, for the benefit of all of our children.
Essay Twenty-Five BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
The Politricks Of
Consent
Patrick Holm
Hogan writes, “One of the sacred cows of capitalist democracy is that the views
of its citizens are heard, considered, and lent power through the election
process. Most Americans realize that
elections have very little to do with major decision-making and policy-making,
but the illusion of participation and effect is a crucial part of the continued
ratification and consent which the American people authorize in the
implementation of policies.” “ The election “voice” of the American public is limited
to a narrow set of options. Though high
school textbooks and political rhetoric extol the virtues of the power of the
individual in government, the system allows virtually no room for consideration
of those opinions except where it allows the acceptance and consent for
predominant mainstream views. ”Thomas
Jefferson said, "If a nation
expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be...
The people cannot be safe without information.
Where the press is free, and every 'man' able to read, all is
safe." Of course, Jefferson himself recognized that the media
was capable of being dishonest when he uttered the phrase, applicable to every
media in our own time--"Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a
newspaper." More than fifty percent of all the news
Americans get on TV, radio, and print through the commercial media is either
filtered through, or provided by, hired consumer relation firms representing
the interests of corporate or government entities. 100 billion dollars a year is spent on generating such
"news". Provided free to news
hub sources, it is replacing the time-honored system of investigative
newsgathering. It is produced to be
indistinguishable from bonafide news reports.
Democracy depends on honest and critical journalism to provide our populace with the information
to make informed decisions on issues critical to our lives and future. As
multi-national corporate interests now control more and more mainstream media
outlets, it become easier and easier to "shape" the opinions of the
American Public.
“The great
masses of the people in the very bottom of their hearts tend to be corrupted
rather than consciously or purposely evil…therefore, in view of the primitive
simplicity of their minds, they more easily fall a victim to a big lie than to
a little one…”
Adolf Hitler
“None are more hopelessly
enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
The modern press, radio, television, and cinema are an
indifferent power, serving as often as a weapon for dictators as it is an
indispensable tool in the survival of democracy. In our priority business system, media outlets for the free
expression of opinion must also bear the costs of competition and profitability
in democratic environments, thereby coming under an economic censorship that
is, in effect, as limiting as the political censorship endured under
totalitarian regimes. But the press also participates in a third type of
propaganda—unfamiliar in Jefferson's time—one that indulges neither truth nor
falsehood but operates specifically to enhance the unreal and the irrelevant.
This is the media of distraction.
Prior to the evolution of mass media, the distractions of European
everyday life were limited to special events and holidays, or Holy Days. Books were not plentiful and literacy
uncommon. To find a western society as
distracted as today's, one must return to Rome in its glory days, however even
those times did not offer the nonstop proliferation of irrelevant information
and demanding distractions offered by the contemporary multi-media world. Like the social distractions utilized in
Huxley's book, "Brave New World" (feelies, soma), media critics say
that this media overload, however innocently it may have come about, is being
used as instruments of policy for the purpose of preventing people from paying
too much attention to the realities of social and political situations all over
the globe, and particularly in highly mechanized highly technological
countries.
Big Tobacco and Big Chemical are examples of how a lack of
information at the popular level has allowed corporations to act in total
opposition, with legislative support, to the best interests of the public. As in the case with Big Tobacco, as soon as
enough of the citizenry became enraged at the consequences, the corporate
powers backed off and sought new areas of the world to exploit. But make no mistake, this was not democracy
or a newly discovered corporate concern for our health at work, this was a
bottom-line business decision at the highest corporate levels.
Today, President Bush Jr. has replaced the former
byword of manifest destiny, "Progress", with a politically correct,
fuzzy-warm call to the siren song of global "Democracy". Never mind that much of the Third World does
not have the cultural, political, or economic tools to implement democracy, our
leaders seem to imagine that just the aura of the word by itself should be
enough to achieve our every melodramatic, big screen, Technicolor, white hat,
good guy, God's on our side, colonialistic, nation-building desire!
As Aldous Huxley said in 1958, "No people that pass
abruptly from a state of subservience under the power of a despot to the
completely unfamiliar state of political independence can be said to have a
fair chance of making democratic institutions work. No people in a precarious
economic condition has a fair chance of being able to govern itself
democratically."
The masters of "spin" have taken the following
quotes, Hitler's prescription for power, and implemented them. "All effective propaganda must be
confined to a few bare necessities, and then must be expressed in a few
stereotyped formulas."
"...Only constant repetition will finally succeed in imprinting an
idea upon the memory of a crowd."
"...The propagandist should express a "systematically
one-sided attitude towards every problem that has to be dealt with."
"The demagogic propagandist must therefore be consistently dogmatic. All his statements are made without
qualification. There are no grays in his picture of the world, everything is
either diabolically black or celestially white. He must never admit that he might be wrong or that people with a
different point of view might be even partially right. Opponents should not be argued with, they
should be attacked, shouted down...or liquidated."
How many times have you heard the media repetition of
simple and similar words or phrases, faithfully reprinted in the press—the war
on terrorism—weapons of mass destruction—collateral damage—democracy?
The last, democracy, in the non-Indigenous U.S has
always been a distant promise; idolized, idealized, and unrealized. During the original days of the Union, it
was less a republic of representation than it was an absence of government in
the lives of citizens. The government
in rural or wilderness America existed pretty much to register land claims,
titles, mining claims, and other resource-related record keeping. As cities grew, government regulated and
aided businesses by defining the strata of society and small pockets of working
democracy organically provided services and authority to white American
families. The government maintained the
military and made treaties with Native Nations as well as foreign ones. Those circumstances continued until the
early 1800's push for eastern industrialization, at which time economic
interests got hot and the "representation" of the people took on new
significance. Progress and democracy
have been consistently used as unifying symbols to build a nationalistic fervor
and give unrelated peoples—with uncommon pasts, dissimilar values, and separate
individual and collective goals—an idealistic theme to assuring them that they
control their imaginary power. At the
same time, the peoples are encouraged to escalate their efforts to gather the
resources and provide the services necessary to enhance business and corporate
institutions, stratifying the population.
The most obvious component of ideology is belief. The first function of ideology is to foster
a sense that the current system is right, that it is beneficial, and that the
alternatives are threatening. Consent
from the public is crucially dependent not only on what specific views are held
to be true, but also what views are considered possible, and what viable
alternatives might exist. Ideologies
that depend on consent exist by encouraging positive beliefs and influencing
debate to exclude other beliefs from consideration or discussion. Today, mass media can appear to be open and
free to different viewpoint while systematically framing its information and
debate to exclude problematic views.
Someone who inherently trusts the state and its institutions has a sense
of history and viewpoint that supports that trust, and any subsequent actions
or events are examined only in the context of their predefined beliefs.
A specific example would be the Amherst survey, where
Americans were asked to estimate the number of Vietnamese casualties in the
Vietnam War. The median estimate was
100,000, though more than 2 million lost their lives. Erroneous beliefs like these contribute to a system of beliefs
that promote other erroneous concepts such as modern war becoming more humane,
and that only a few Iraqi's died in pre-Gulf War II sanctions.
It is easy to see how only a few supporting events can
create a pattern which eventually becomes a system of beliefs supportive of one
viewpoint and unable to consider the possibility of another. It becomes a domino theory of beliefs, if one
falls, so do the rest. Few people are balanced
enough to be able to face a constant reordering of their beliefs and the values
that result from having a consistently open mind.
Consider the modern views of social systems. Capitalism and democracy are seen as virtual
equivalents. Communism and socialism
are seen as sub categories of totalitarianism.
Social organizations must be classified into these categories simply
because no others are being proposed.
Social democracy, micro capitalist democracy, benevolent
totalitarianism, and tribal consensualism are unrecognized (or misunderstood),
and are excluded from consideration.
Alternative views are immediately classified as unrealistic or utopian
(unrealistic). Once an option has been
labeled utopian, it has suffered the kiss of death. Social vision is a developing concept for adaptation and
evolution in social organization, but there is little place for such a concept
in the black and white beliefs that provide the social consent necessary to
continue on the present path of forced progress and unrestrained technological
development.
Religion plays a large part in the politics of
consent. Though there have been notable
exceptions, the ideological function of religion is most often consensual. Religions that encourage participants to
detach themselves from the world, or aim beyond this world, offer primary
belief systems that lend themselves easily to the politics of consent. Walter Rodney noted that the role of
Christianity in the colonial dominance of Africa was "primarily to
preserve the social relations of colonialism, as an extension of the role it
played in preserving the social relations of capitalism in Europe—the church
preached humility, docility, and acceptance—preach(ed) turning the other cheek
in the face of exploitation" (ostensibly to guarantee them a better place
in the next world).
In addition, religious views that receive the support
of the "Power Elite" invariably end up supporting those in a position
of power. The ability to succeed in pressuring
a religion to alter or reinterpret its belief systems to rationalize and
justify the actions and intent of the powerful is a primary ingredient in
obtaining the consent of the people.
Structural limitations on available information are built into our
educational environments. Important
political and philosophical traditions from India, China, Japan, the Arab
world, and even the Indigenous Americas are largely ignored in Euro-centric
American institutions of higher education.
The argument is that translated textbooks do not exist or are
unavailable, however there are many examples of qualified professors already
“in country”. If asked, these scholars
say they would have no trouble providing text materials to accompany their
courses, if they were ever approached to teach such courses. The truth is that American education has one
purpose; to indoctrinate American students with the ideologies and patented
beliefs that perpetuate and define the American Mythology, and compliment the
culture of consent.
Confusing semantics and metaphors of indirection are another tool used
within the media market to foster consent.
Military information is rife with this vocabulary of misdirection. Bombing a target becomes acquiring an
asset. The death of civilians becomes
collateral damage. The killing of
thousands of enemy combatants is bloodlessly transformed into accomplishing
military degradation. War is changed,
via descriptive language, from a bloody, horrific carnage into a clinical, antiseptic,
and primarily material technological struggle.
Contemporary political administrations have become masters of the
misleading metaphor. Besides relying on
the proven techniques of dehumanizing or demonizing personalities or nations, consistent
repetition of sound bites utilizing memorable metaphors has become the primary
weapon in mobilizing public consent for political policy.
When leaders say we are engaged in pursuing or pushing back a
particularly nasty foreign leader, they are careful not to mention that this
actually means we will conduct a full-scale military assault on the general
population and infrastructure to accomplish our objectives. By directing our attention, through metaphor
and language, toward a single individual or small group we tend to simplify our
imagination of the event to small scale
and forget that war touches every citizen, every animal, every plant,
and every natural resource that comes within its reach. The recent war provides a perfect example. The statement was made; “if Iraq does use
chemical weapons it will simply bring down more air attacks on Saddam Hussein’s
head.” The natural inclination is to
imagine bombs raining down on Saddam’s head rather than to acknowledge that
these air attacks will undoubtedly rain down on the heads of many innocent
people as well. The recent Israeli
attacks on Hezbollah were originally described as an attempt to recover two
kidnapped soldiers. Only after the
images of dead Lebanese innocents began appearing in the media did Israel admit
that their primary purpose was to destroy Hexbollah’ military capability.
It is has become an American
tradition to utilize the process of over-simplification and conflict
personalization for the purpose of rationalizing violent behavior so as the
purify the collective conscience of any feeling of responsibility or
wrongdoing, should innocents suffer at our hands. Transferring all of the blame for any subsequent consequences
from the victor to the victim has long been a European strategy. Since the Church issued the first Papal
Bull, putting responsibility for slavery and death fully upon the shoulders of
those who might even contemplate resistance to Church authority, western
governments have made it a point to identify someone they could point to in
order to transfer blame and responsibility for the tragic events we have been
party to.
Fundamental beliefs are a primary component of
public consent. In America, the
education system, mass media, and entertainment industry are the primary
educators. Family beliefs are still
passed from generation to generation, but their dominance and influence is
directly in proportion to the amount of supporting, or conflicting, beliefs inundating
them from outside sources. As an
example of the power of these outside influences, one need only ask everyday
Americans what they know of the Indigenous Peoples that once inhabited these
shores. The bulk of their knowledge
comes from movies, accented by news reports, magazines or newspaper
accounts. Most of their historical
information comes from film or television, with a slight bit coming from
distantly remembered high school texts.
Contemporary knowledge comes from the news, or if they reside in an area
of Native population, personal contact and anecdote. Despite these sources, the average person is woefully ignorant of
the subject. Most of that knowledge is
comprised of myth, stereotypes, exaggerations, lies, and fiction. If this is the case when determining their
knowledge of a local and national history (where the information is readily
available to anyone), how much can they be expected to know or understand about
geographical areas, cultures, societies, populations, governments, and issues
totally foreign to them?
Fundamental beliefs, no matter
how they are acquired, are the most stubborn and tenacious of all our cherished
ideals. When presented with
conflicting opinions, events, or evidence, people have been shown to
unconsciously misperceive or misremember the information and events in support
of their previously dominant beliefs.
Stereotypes, bigotry, fanaticism, and other forms of severely biased
opinions always originate within the fundamental belief system.
An interesting component of fundamental beliefs is that almost everyone
holds contradictory ones. This happens
as new information is evaluated that, though it conflicts with fundamental
beliefs, is recognized to have some currently accepted value or truth. Typically, these beliefs are confined and
utilized only in a narrow and limited context, but it is possible to find them
coming to the front in general opinions.
The default belief is, of course, the fundamental one, but either may
serve to be the one expressed in any given situation. An example of this might be the commonly held American opinion
that politicians are generally evasive, two-faced, untrustworthy, greedy, and
manipulative yet those same Americans may accept, without reservation or
qualification, a current administration, government, or individual politician’s
policies or statements. An example
might be to ask Americans whether they trust their government to tell the
truth. A large percentage might say
no. Yet if the question were rephrased
to ask if those same people trusted Administration policies, the same group
might answer yes.
This is common in the
American population. A polite
conversation might uncover numerous opinions between those conversing that are
in complete agreement, yet those same people may be deeply supportive of
opposing political parties whose policies are in direct contradiction to
informally agreed upon positions.
Another necessary element in establishing public consent for the
prevailing viewpoint is the establishment of a hierarchy of expertise. This structure of expertise is necessary to
validate specific opinions and give them additional weight to establish the
authority of those offering the ideals.
The experts often define the context and structure of discussions
examining alternative or dissenting viewpoint around contentious issues. Experts are usually the successful and loyal
products of some systemic hierarchy, who have a vested interest in the survival
and continuation of the institutions that have rewarded them with identification
in support of their authority. They are
neither impartial nor neutral when it comes to making a decision that rebukes,
contradicts, or indicts the institutions and dominant opinions of their
profession.
The vast majority of experts employed by the mass media, the government,
or the larger corporate institutions are themselves government officials,
former government officials, scientists on the payroll, or members of
government or corporately bankrolled think tanks. In contrast, the mass media hardly ever portrays dissidents,
revolutionaries, demonstrators, or non-mainstream political party candidates as
experts, even though their education or experience may far surpass that of
those representing the opposition.
The system of expertise is often used to disenfranchise or disempower
the public on contentious issues. By
confining the debate to a narrow technical scope, or by focusing on broad
issues the public can be convinced that the problem is beyond their technical,
economic, political understanding. If
they can be convinced that the necessary knowledge or information is
inaccessible, they can be coerced into allowing the “experts” to decide. If this happens often enough, the public may
become disenchanted, passive, lethargic, and apathetic regarding larger
national and international issues, bowing to whatever interests and powers can
sway the Washington bureaucrats and powerbrokers.
As we mentioned before, film, television, and
the visual media have become important tools in influencing and developing
national public opinion. With so many
different cultural, ethnic, and socially distinct groups voicing identical
opinions on so many diverse and unrelated topics, their power is indisputable.
Fictitious drama, presented as fact, will often fix in the minds of the
public certain images that cannot be expelled, even by contradictory facts.
American history students often refer to movies they have seen when asked to
relate what they know about historical events such as World War Two, the
Vietnam conflict, and the assassination of JFK, the Apollo Lunar Landing, and
many fictitious biographical stories.
They often have misperceptions and false opinions generated by totally
fabricated facts and “history”. Racial
and cultural stereotypes are created, changed, and recreated generation to
generation. White hats and black hat
change heads. Revenge and vigilantism
in film is romanticized and encourages at least a subconscious disregard for
values and principles endorsed publicly, while acting as a surreptitious
conduit for consent should the US decide to act unilaterally to play out a good
guy, bad guy scenario. By dehumanizing
an adversary, and with a subconscious acceptance that violence can solve
anything, Americans have become the most dangerous people on earth.
With television prevalent now all over the world, life mimics the visual
arts. Many people learn how to react to
life’s problems and events through their passive acceptance of what they see on
TV. Subliminal advertising and
influence is becoming subtler and more powerful. When it comes to influencing the public to give their consent to
the policies of mainstream politics and corporate economics, visual media will
dominate the future.
Social classes
have existed in the Americans since the very beginning of the U.S. when the
Federalists argued that the constitution should protect the landowner and
businessman first and the common citizen second. The history of the labor movements in America only take up a few
pages in the typical high school text.
The oligarchy’s view that people are poor due to their own failings is
still widely believed, even to today.
President Woodrow Wilson’s recommendation said it best. “We want one class of persons to have a
liberal education, and we want another class of persons, a very much larger
class of necessity in every society, to forego the privilege of a liberal
education and fit themselves to perform specific difficult manual tasks.”
American
educational success and opportunity is generally thought of as one that rewards
the merits of academic achievement, however most research has shown that real
educational opportunity is class oriented and works to sustain and preserve
that class system. It is the same in
business. The rags to riches story gets
the press, while a huge percent of the executives and financiers come from
upper-middle to upper class families.
The power of the “land of opportunity” myth is similar to that of the
present day lotto contests run by nearly every state. If the media continually report the big winners of these contests
people begin to feel that the odds are indeed in their favor. They begin to believe they have a
chance. It’s the same with the concept
of opportunity. As long as a few make
it, those who control the game will be sure to publicize their success to
encourage the belief that those achievements are an everyday occurrence.
No one pays attention to the real statistics or
research that demonstrates the mythology.
This is another area where a working knowledge of the real historical
facts of our Nation would be useful.
Despite the myth that entrepreneurs are the backbone of American
business, only one American in thirteen owns their own business, compared to
one in eight in Europe, in societies that are viewed as semi-socialist in
comparison. In most of the Industrial
Nations, comparisons of economic equality generally rank the U.S. last, or almost
last. The arguments among historians
and social scientists as to when this class stratification of American Society
began to become so clearly defined rages on, as do the philosophical debates as
to why it has occurred at all. But one
thing is sure. The rich are getting
richer, the poor are getting poorer, and the number of poor is growing
astronomically. The textbooks are hard
pressed to report these truths. Their
primary task is to support America, the Hero.
To report that one percent of the population holds more than forty
percent of the wealth would be to suggest the traditionally accepted view that
the other ninety-nine percent are lazy, ignorant, unmotivated, or a combination
of all three.
Our Indigenous Peoples have experienced, repeatedly,
how the promise is skewed, and the rule of law, even the Constitution, is
interpreted and altered as needed...
It is time for the American People to forget the
semantics of political debate and settle down to the question of
responsibilities. If we wish our
elected representatives to be primarily responsible for our best interests,
then we need to recognize the difference between responsible local capitalism
and the uncontrolled menace of the national and global large business and
corporate elite. The corporate legal
status as "persons" and their obvious ability to manipulate the
decision-making processes of our elected representatives makes them the enemy
of any realistic attempt at democracy.
These are the most dangerous terrorists we face today. Erich Fromm's
statement about the mental health of today's civilization also speaks to
democratic freedoms. He said these
millions of abnormally normal people still cherish "the illusion of
individuality but their conformity is developing into uniformity. Uniformity and freedom are incompatible, as
are uniformity and mental health. The
difficulty with ordering large civilizations is that there are no strict
guidelines as to how much organization is necessary. Too little and unrelated citizens, lacking powerful unifying
ethics and purpose, become lawless and anarchistic. Too much and individual creativity is suppressed or inhibited,
leading to stagnation or despotism.
Liberty arises and has meaning only within a self-regulating community
of freely co-operating individuals but the demands of economics and order in
large populations often co-opt the values of the people so that they settle for
comfort and distractions instead of freedom."
We need to separate business from government and
realize that the two longest living democracies in recorded history have, as
their core priorities, the real interests of families and the common good of
the people at large. Humans need to be
safe from invaders, have clean healthy food and water, live in an unpolluted
environment, have access to shelter, health care, and protection from
environmental extremes, provide aide to the needy and weak, and provide a voice
to all who would speak. These are the
first and only priorities of government and democracy.
The examples of actual working democracies have only
existed on the backs of tribal or familial matriarchal societies. Most of the non-tribal republics or representative
experiments have ultimately failed in short periods because they could only
foster economic success through patriarchal militaristic campaigns of conquest.
The meaning of the word democracy does not contain an
endorsement of only one brand of economics, religion, or political system—its
meaning is simple and direct. It
describes a People, or their representatives, acting in concert to make
decisions in the best interests of the whole People. If it does not mean that, nobody needs it.
Much of the info on the elements of consent in this chapter was
gathered from Patrick Colm Hogan's book.
H.W, Brand's article in Sept 03 Atlantic Monthly was also utilized as
well as the work of Aldous Huxley. See
book and source list.
Essay Twenty-Six BlueWolf & Lupe'/Shirts N'
Skins
A Society Behind Bars
American moral
values, particularly those relating to property, ownership, and descendant
European property law, have always been peculiarly twisted. A person of color who steals a hundred
dollars from a CEO's wallet will certainly be charged with grand larceny and
receive a stiff prison tenure, while that same CEO may swindle his shareowners
out of millions of dollars and walk away with a slap on the hand. Obviously America, despite its cast as an
equal opportunity incarcerator, has developed a social strata or economic cast
system that is offended by the poor criminal and entertained by the wealthy one.
This may have changed slightly since Enron and Ken Lay laid waste to the
pensions of thousands of workers, but it is unquestionable that the statistics
bear out the implication that some are favored, some are not. Additionally, our penal system, like our
educational system, has become an institution in its own right. As an institution, it is now concerned with
protecting the rights of its employees and serving its own perpetuation as an
employer and an institution. In fact,
it is that very self-awareness; that protection of its interests and an
instinct for self-preservation that has replaced the original reason for it to
exist at all. Rather than being an
instrument that serves society, the convicts it houses, and the need for an
exploration of new policies and techniques designed to reduce recidivism and
crime—the institution has turned inward and has come to depend on recidivism
and crime for its very existence. In
California, the union for penal employees is one of the strongest in the state. What reason do they have for playing any part
in reducing crime or incarcerations statewide? The administrative block
represents millions of dollars in salaries, pensions, etc. As with all institutions, there comes a time
when the walls have hardened, and the preservation of the status quo for its administrators,
employees, and politicians become more important than the reason it was founded
in the first place. While some might argue that incarcerations are its intended
goal, we think that in an intelligent and creative society, the search for a just
and effective method for reducing the number of our citizens behind bars should
be the main goal of our entire judicial system—including the penal
industry. In the U.S., incarceration of
American citizens has led to a voracious and cannibalistic system, feeding
itself and looking to its own survival at the expense of those it was intended
to serve.
“Since midyear 2004, the total incarcerated population has increased
2.6%”. In 2005, the Federal prison system was operating at 40% above rated
capacity.
At midyear 2005,
the Nation's prisons and jails incarcerated 2,186,230 persons. The 2005
incarceration rate for the Nation included one out of every 135 citizens.
Paige M. Harrison and Allen J. Beck, Ph.D. BJS Statisticians
Special protections are offered
for those types of ownership that are crucial to the American economic class
system. In fact, the framers of the Constitution intended it to be so. This is a legal doctrine defined,
not by common sense, but by an arbitrary decision made to protect the interests
of those that Aldous Huxley called the "Power Elite". It is surely the byproduct of centuries of
royalty, professing the philosophy that those favored by God are intended to be
the elite, while those below that station are certainly responsible for their
own misery.
Both liberals
and conservatives tend to picture the common criminal as either poor, of color,
or both, despite statistics that show white-collar crime to be significantly
more violent and costly to the society.
The FBI counts the costs of burglary and theft at about 4 billion
annually. White-collar corporate crime
estimates are put at 200 billion—fifty times more. Yet, the FBI does not even characterize pollution, procurement
fraud, financial fraud, public corruption, and occupational homicide as crimes
committed against society.
The definition
of homicide is another instance where western civilization has
"decided" to qualify and rationalize the taking of human life in
order to stratify the society.
Interpersonal homicide is severely prosecuted while large-scale direct
murder is declared a monopoly of the state and generally permitted, even
glorified. The U.S. street felony
homicide rate is at estimated at about 24,000 a year, while during the first
Iraqi conflict more than 50,000 innocent civilians perished in only six weeks,
not counting the hundreds of thousands of indirect deaths and hundreds of
thousands of dead Iraqi soldiers.
Americans grimace and blanch at the terrible tragedy of a local homicide
and don't bat at eye at the sight of hundreds of mangled children in a
state-supported conflict.
These legal
"decisions" have come to be regarded as so natural to our citizenry
that they are no longer recognized as the product of "choices" with
systemic social results. They guide an
individual’s thought toward qualifying murder inconsistently. The killing of innocents is no longer
automatically considered murder. It is
a classic case of legal stratification influencing public consent. The elite who drive the engine of the industry
of war have once again created a buffer of legalese that puts them out of the
reach of law and allows the abuse of innocents without accountability.
This is
especially useful to the "Power Elite" when it comes to indirect
homicide. Indirect homicide occurs as a
product of the intentional or unintentional abrogation of responsible behavior
resulting in hazardous conditions that cause the predictable death of innocent
citizenry. More than twice the numbers
of deaths occur from occupational hazards such as black lung, asbestosis, etc.,
than die of street homicide each year.
A CEO murdered by a disgruntled employee would undoubtedly result in a
criminal prosecution for murder. However, that same CEO might ignore safety
concerns and warnings, resulting in employee deaths, with relative
impunity. The company might suffer some
fines or civil suits but a murder charge against him would most certainly never
be filed. Despite his knowledge and
choice in the matter, intent and premeditation could never be established under
the law. Since the creation of the
Occupational Safety and Health Act over 250,000 people have died on the job,
but only four people have been held accountable and done time for violations.
For generations
corporations have utilized manipulation and conditioning through advertising to
sell consumers products known to be severely detrimental to their health. Big tobacco is an example that is finally
getting noticed by the population but only after causing twenty times more
deaths each year than street homicides.
Furthermore, the approximately fifty billion dollars drained from the
national economy annually in the resulting health crises has only recently been
getting national attention. As another
example, the automobile industry's legislative privilege, which blocked for
years the inclusion of air bags in vehicles, undoubtedly resulted in many
thousands of preventable deaths in vehicle accidents. Both of these examples illustrate the "decisions" made,
and then incorporated into legal concepts, to protect business at all costs—to
make the "bottom line" more sacrosanct than the life of
citizens.
In the U.S. today, more than 50% of those
behind bars are non-violent drug offenders.
American Indians know why. It
is, after all, a product of the American Way, which is, at its root, a religion
of class.
Books by Aldous Huxley and Patrick Colm Hogan were significant sources
for this essay.
Essay
Twenty-Seven BlueWolf &
Lupe’/Shirts N’ Skins
The Baron's Garbage
One of the favorite criticisms of Native people locally (at
least among those that express opinions publicly), has to do with non-Indian
dissatisfaction in the way that Native dwellings and properties are
maintained. The topic of garbage,
relating surreptitiously to the old myth of Natives being slovenly or dirty,
always generates a great sense of satisfaction in those Americans who like
their defeated enemies to stay defeated.
Their resentment against Native people taking their place in American
society can only be expressed in a covert manner, lest they be branded with the
“R” word. (racist) There are many
reasons for why this becomes such a hot button issue, but at the most basic
level it is a matter of values—traditional values, learned values, and
transplanted values. European
descendants are more often consumed with appearances rather than
realities. Appearances, in some cases,
were all they had. It matters not to
them that the garbage they dispose of is on the land “somewhere”—just as long
as it is not on the land immediately adjacent to where they reside or
travel. Landfills are generally located
in out of the way places, like reservations once were. Out of sight, out of mind. European descendants are also much more
familiar with the effects of non-degradable garbage, whereas Native people in
our area have only about three generations under their belt that have dealt
with objects that did not degrade naturally.
It is a timely discussion, but one that should be proceeded with a
discussion of life ways, values, priorities. In reality, refuse of all kinds
threatens to overwhelm many Third World nations battling the same issues of
poverty, ignorance and priorities many Native Nations face today.
"Most values are
learned, not ingrained—and are culturally or socially specific."
Amafo
Since it has been a subject
for discussion in our local community—let's examine why some people assume that
the value of neatness, tidiness, and or orderliness is natural to the whole
human family—when, in actuality, it is not.
For many Indigenous Tribal
Peoples the world over, there was no separation between the natural world and
their own. The two were identical. The food they ate, clothes they fashioned,
tools they designed, houses they built, refuse they discarded, and bodies they
buried were cut from the same cloth. In essence, there was no refuse, because
every natural organism found purpose in living, dying, and decomposing. This is
not to imply that they did not have intrinsic values when it came to disposing
of human wastes or other unsanitary, and perhaps harmful, waste products.
Native people had specific guidelines for the disposal of such wastes. However,
there was no need for external tidiness because they either had traditional
methods of disposing of physical wastes in fire, water, and earth or there was
no distinction between what they constructed and utilized and what they threw
away. When the Native peoples of this
land were thrust onto the small concentration camps and military bases of the
19th century, they gradually encountered the products of Europeans
who had, for almost a century, become accustomed to lifestyles and technologies
that created mountains of non-biodegradable garbage.
The Europeans, long
familiarity with the handling, transporting, and disposing of such wastes in
the filth encrusted streets of their Native Europe, developed extended cultural
values in their newly developing cities and towns that placed a higher priority
on neat and tidy environments. In Europe, this had been the provenance only of
the rich nobility; normal people could not be concerned with such lofty values.
In America, everyone could be his own baron. However, even this took awhile.
Study the history of New York and other Eastern Cities in the late 1800's and
you'll find plenty of disgusting testaments to the unkempt and waste covered
streets of the day.
Nevertheless, Europeans
slowly developed a point of view that held a high value for neatness, tidiness,
order, and the separation of garbage from their immediate vicinity. Much of
this was pushed forward by the snobbish upper class who were offended by
natural sights and smells and sought to isolate themselves in every way from
the natural environment. Their point of view was seconded by the social,
religious, and scientific beliefs of the preceding centuries that contended
that nature was raw, savage, unkempt, disorderly, untidy and smelly—while
civilization should be orderly and tidy and at least make an attempt to isolate
or mitigate disagreeable odors, natural or manmade. As the economy developed, the economics of consumerism (and the
packaging industry) created more refuse and Europeans naturally came to
recognize the potential threat to their health and welfare from poor sanitation
and mountains of garbage, particularly in cities and ports where rats
congregated in their own nations.
On the reservation, Native
peoples were isolated from the rest of society; first by force, then by
economy, then by social status and racism, then by an stubborn resistance to
assimilation. That isolation kept them from seeing any change in the world.
They still viewed themselves and everything they had, including the things they
got from the whites, as being part of their natural wholly related world. Just
as they had tossed buffalo or salmon bones from their houses to decompose in
the yard, they tossed the sugar, flour, lard, and salt pork containers. Later
it became automobiles, tires, plastic bags, and soda pop containers. No one
ever mentioned it might take a thousand years for these things to become part
of the earth.
As
for the value of neat and tidy: in the Indigenous natural world neat and tidy
was whatever one wanted it to be. Native peoples did not have eight centuries
of the Church telling them the natural world was evil, and nature their enemy.
Neither did they have the example of French, English and Spanish nobility to
show them manicured grounds around castles and palaces. Their natural engineering was specific to
improving their economy rather than their social status. There were no
manicured English lawns and close cropped garden hedges because Native people
had no desire to separate themselves from nature. How could they? They were
part of it. There could not be a
separation, if there were—they would cease to exist!
Therefore,
the value of neat, ordered, and tidy never occurred to Native people— it was as
alien a concept as owning the land.
Besides, Natives were fully occupied resisting the devastation of a
beautiful and valuable world. That resistance has continued even until today,
filling Native minds, hearts, and time with pain, sorrow, anger, and a stubborn
reluctance to avoid becoming like their conquerors. Tidiness aside, only
recently have the Native people come into enough contact with the English
language and modern social values to recognize that the refuse from this
society does not go away. If they want to play the American game, they must
accept the majority values when it comes to garbage, but it's tough to change
inherent priorities. Until gaming, there never was enough money in the family
budget to justify spending it to haul garbage from one place to another just to
reduce offending other people's sensibilities. And besides, who had a truck
that ran to haul it? Who could afford gas for dump runs when they had no money
for clothing, even food?
It's not about pride or
dignity. It's about learned values. Native people never had garbage—they just
had things they were not using anymore. Sometimes tradition demanded that it be
disposed of in a particular way—sometimes not. The concept of garbage is
European and it is a fairly recently developed concept at that. Natives have
always had common sense. When you think about it, hauling garbage from one spot
on the earth to another, just to get it out of view, is a rather nonsensical
endeavor. Certainly, it seems a waste of resources—especially if resources are
at a premium. After all, the waste does not decompose faster at the landfill.
It doesn't become any less toxic. It doesn't take up any less space. It is just
not on the Baron's property or roadway anymore—so it doesn't offend his
delicate sensibilities. Many Barons have even been able to forget where their
refuse goes, or that it even exists at all! This relieves them of any feeling
of responsibility for its end. Ultimately, the reason is because a Baron
doesn't value anything that doesn't belong to him. So the land at the landfill
is less important than the lands he owns, or transverses, in his daily life. He
has cut his ties with the garbage dump. Only his lands matter, and the Baron
has always been as impatient with the imposition of his will and values on the
serfs, as he has in maintaining the perceived value of the lands he controls.
Natives still cannot get
past seeing all the land as the same. All the land is still our land. To put
garbage in any one place is the same as piling it in our yard. In the end, there are still those of our
people who have not been educated enough in the learned values of American
mainstream culture to have developed the same priorities. They have yet to
become Barons. Garbage, for them, is below the visible line of priorities. Only
time can change that.
Essay Twenty-Eight BlueWolf &
Lupe’/Shirts N’ Skins
A Myth Of Ages
The
more I read the words of Jesus (at least those words that biblical scholars I
respect think he may have spoken), the more I see in him a kinship with the
respected Ancestors of our people who were able to contrast the wild and free
days of their youth with the developing civilization around them. Jesus lived in similar times. The world was changing. Roman and Greek civilizations were
physically imposing their civilization and political theories everywhere. They viewed the Hebrews as inferior peoples
to be controlled and used. The Hebrews
were no longer nomadic tribes. There
were no actual Jews, as we know them today.
Hebrew spiritual institutions had become corrupt and hypocritical,
adhering to dogma and ritual without constraint. Roman law was interfering more and more in Peoples lives. Taxes and a burgeoning city-state, dependant
on rural relationship economies, had created new classes among the Peoples.
Neighboring
peoples were suspicious and often violent towards one another. Roads were unsafe, with robberies and
assaults. Splinter sects with extreme
spiritual ideals withdrew into the wilderness.
Humans no longer lived in natural tribal and environmental
conditions. People were gradually
becoming estranged from the natural world.
Most people of the time had become afraid of the wilderness and saw
civilization as a positive step. People resisted change. The upper middle classes were satisfied with
their safe and generally comfortable lives.
In Judea, for the average citizen, as long as you weren't aligned with
Zealots or revolutionaries, life was acceptable. Nevertheless, with Rome pushing its complete demand for control
relentlessly down the throats of the people, rebellions had become common. Enter an Indian named Jesus, and Indigenous
to the area. Charismatic and genuine,
he stepped forward to offer his vision of earth and the "imperial rule of
the Father", or the "Kingdom of God". He described a wild and crazy view of spirituality and man's
relationship to the world. He suggested
the lack of contentment found in mindless consumerism and materialism. He encouraged a ideological separation from
the conservative and established conventions of religion, economics, law,
politics, dress codes, mores, and class distinctions that pervaded the
region. He spoke in parables and
aphorisms, using rural agrarian terms, avoiding explicit language and laundry
list directives. He consorted with the lowest classes of citizens, seeming to
prefer their company to the conservative middle classes or intellectuals. His metaphors and parables were full of the
natural world and the celebration of life. He spoke of baking bread, of
parties, of weddings, of mustard growing in the fields, of birds, of grapes, of
the harvest, and of families. He found
order in the difficulties of life, and chaos in the staid and conventional
beliefs of the time. He saw the world
everyone believed in as deceptive and false. Ordinary people claimed they could
see no other reality, but he saw that belief as a purposeful obscuring of the
truth.
Today's world is
similar. People cannot even envision a
world without the comforts, technologies, and provisions that we have
today. They do not even think of
it. Though we make no claim to
understanding the mind of Jesus, when we question the civilization and point to
its exploitive and demeaning nature, people either discount our criticisms as
completely absurd or clamor for more. I
think this is what the Visionary from Nazareth must have experienced as well,
even from his own family. For the
ordinary person in that ancient world, life was supposed to be solid, stable,
and unchanging in its motion. For Jesus,
that perception was simply a false reality, like a dream. Beneath it, he could perceive the natural
domain of God. One had only to wake up
to it, to be included in its wonders.
His vision caused him to be regarded by many as deluded, possibly even
demented. Traditional Indigenous
Peoples are often characterized similarly when they resist or criticize the
Civilized World. There are a few people
who can accept the fact that the constructions of man are temporary, that the
balance of the earth is fragile, and that the natural kingdom of God is
eternal. Jesus could, that’s what made
him dangerous as a revolutionary—to the Romans, even to the Power Elite among
his own people. That’s what got him
killed. Jesus was an Indian.
"Gods imperial rule will not come by watching
for it. It will not be said, "Look, here it is", or "Look, there
it is". Rather, the Father's
imperial rule is spread about the earth, and people don't see it."
(Thomas 113: 2-4)
"You won't be able to
see the coming of God's imperial rule. People are not going to be able to say,
"Look, here it is", or "Over there." On the contrary, God'
imperial rule is right there in your presence."
(Luke 17:20-21)
"It is unthinkable, in view of
the parables and aphorisms, that Jesus said many of the things he is purported
to have said. He certainly did not make
claims for himself. To have done so
would have been to contradict his fundamental disdain for arrogance and
hypocrisy and run counter to his rhetorical strategies, such as the reversal of
roles so common in his parables... Furthermore, he seems not to have been given
to summary judgment of others... Since he was not an eschatological prophet
like John the Baptist and since he was not a moralist, he probably did not call
for the repentance of others in view of some impending judgments... All of this
makes it very unlikely that Jesus would have predicted his own death and
resurrection."
Robert Funk,
Biblical Scholar and author
“Studies
of the Jesus tradition within the new testament, which spans decades only and
not generations and which is the cherished property of only a
minority…would…fall within the realm of oral testimony and not oral tradition.”
Oivind Anderson
“We possess no
single word of Jesus and no single story of Jesus, no matter how incontestably
genuine they may be, which do not contain at the same time the confession of
the believing congregation, or at least are embedded therein. This makes the
search after the bare facts of history difficult and to a large extent futile.”
Gunther Bornkamm
“It is
time that validates and legitimizes the ideals of men and their cherished
systems of belief. In awe of the
shortness of our mortality, mankind has assumed that any belief that withstands
the ravages of time must needs be greater than ourselves. Thus, it is validated
by its durability—and requires no additional subjection to considered
dispute.”
Amoshi
Some biblical
scholars have suggested that the Gospel Of Thomas can be understood by taking a
Gnostic point of view. It is my
contention that the sayings may also be understood by one who agrees with the
unconventional perception of the existing civilization as unnatural,
exploitive, deceptive, and resistant to the natural truths and relationships of
the world.
Many Indigenous
People have this view of the present civilization. Most of the scholars looking to understand Jesus are typically
products of the descendant Greco-Roman-Christian civilization. They do not even question the qualities and
nature of western technocratic civilization.
To consider the abandonment of that technology and the accepted
covenants of today’s progressive civilization would be unthinkable. It was the same in Jesus day. Not even his family was able to grasp where
adherence to the principles he taught might lead. Civilization would collapse.
Nakedness would offend everyone.
Since it would have been impossible for him to envision everyone
suddenly accepting his teachings, and since he certainly knew that there was a
sizable group of citizens unhappy and unsatisfied with their lives, he focused
his teachings on offering the most exaggerated and understandable resistance to
the conventions of the day.
Sometimes,
rather than encouraging disobedience or revolution, he advocated using sarcastic
humor or unexpected acts to point out the foolish and unequal conventions of
the time. However, taken as a complete
philosophy, action upon his teachings would result in the collapse of
civilization. We think his
"Kingdom of God" was merely his way of saying—the natural world of
the Creator.
We don't pretend to know exactly what that means, except
that it implies relationships between every inhabitant and material in
existence, an understanding of the resources we share to live, and a gratitude
and appreciation for the grandeur and beauty of the essence of creation and of
our lives—a cosmology of relationship and respect.
Jesus was not waiting for the end of the world. For him, the Kingdom of God was already
present. The change had already taken
place. It was not a change related to
geography, or politics, but one of relationship. He did not need to cite
prophecy, or announce a day or an hour. One had to cast off their habitual
perceptions to recognize it. If one has
eyes, let him see. If one has ears, let him hear.
Once this Hebrew Visionary had altered his
perception of reality, there was no going back. There was no need for an apocalypse, an Armageddon—the change
could (and can), only occur in the hearts and minds of human beings.
Being unable to
perceive the passing of their accustomed world and accept the new one he
proposed, those left behind after his death could only reconcile his teachings
if they were placed in the context of what was yet to come. Time allowed for the creation of the
necessary myths and constructs to cement that view into a definite dogma. The Kingdom of God was postponed, called on
account of rain. Waiting for it has become an important part of the institution
of both Christianity and the Church.
If people
are first imbued with a fear of death and damnation, and if they have been
conditioned through dogma and ritual to believe they are habitually sinful, and
if they are then delivered by a Messiah that had personally conquered their
greatest fear, and if through that sacrifice they are promised an eventual
salvation (without the guarantee of it occurring in their lifetime), might
those very classes then be inclined to accept whatever misery they encountered
and to endure it? Insuring that the
control of the Power Elite be
preserved?
This myth
has worked very well in the classed societies of the world. Even in free and intellectually modern
nations, people who believe the promise are more likely to forego any kind of
action and endure the status quo.
Therefore, instead of being a catalyst for the action demanded by the
historical Jesus, the mythical Christ allows the world to exist as it is. Millions of children are taught the
anti-Jesus view that that the world is evil and the kingdom of God is yet to
come. The promise of eternal reward is
an effective, convenient, and utterly unscrupulous way to keep the masses in
line. To pretend that it evolved
naturally, as a divine consequence of providence is, at least in our minds,
unlikely.
We're
not sure how many Native People will read this. Many don't read at all and even fewer will be able to make it
through our tendency to overuse the English language. But the tentacles of Christendom have reached far and wide, and
it is our hope that we can do our small part to dispel the myths and legends
held dear by so many millions.
We are not biblical scholars, and as so, this will not
be a particularly scholarly essay. We
will make use of, and quote extensively, the works of prominent biblical
scholars who are not mired in the need to perpetuate the visions and agendas of
the Churches, be they Protestant, Catholic, or Evangelical.
We
should also state that we offer no allegiance to any of the three violent, and
patriarchal religions of the Middle East.
Each has its beautiful tenants, perverted and marred by fanatical
interpretations resulting in a seemingly unending dedication to causing the
violent suffering of innocents.
The reasons for this essay
are simple. It is our belief that
Indigenous Peoples have adopted and sustained the precepts of Christianity
without a thorough and fundamental examination of its creation and history. Knowing how difficult it is for Indigenous people
to bring themselves to question what has been handed down by ancestors, we feel
compelled to point out that this is different than the questioning of oral
traditions, creation stories, and value stories of old. This was a revolutionary sect of faith,
hijacked, and reconstructed into a cult of dogma, founded almost exclusively in
a long-time development of the written word and not as a contemporary oral
tradition. Our relatives, living in
those times of extreme sorrow, suffering, and duress, surely questioned the
validity of their cherished beliefs and traditions in the face of the hardships
endured, and saw similarities in the symbols and dramatic events described in
the White Man’s book.
The Missionaries living
among them took full advantage of these moments of weakness to offer a new way,
pointing to the changing face of the world and the obvious ending of the
ancient Indigenous ways of life. Seeing
an apparent end to all they knew caused an understandable desire among some of
the Peoples to embrace the "new " way, which included Paul's vision
of the mission of Joshua ben Joseph—a vision that had been faithlessly adapted
and expanded upon for more than ten centuries by the Roman Catholic
Church. Any translation of the New
Testament narrative into Indigenous language, complete with its rich imagery,
numerology, symbolism, and manifestations of power, surely caught the
imaginations of suffering people looking at a doomed and rapidly disappearing
way of life. The Power of the Old Way
seemed to be passing, so the Power of the New Way, and its earthly
representatives—the missionaries and Churches—seemed a natural replacement.
However, looking back, we
see how misled our People were—in every respect. Not only has the imagined superiority of the transplanted
European culture, social forms, values, and purpose disintegrated in the
twentieth century, but we now find that modern biblical scholars have
discovered serious flaws in the facts and presentation of the narrative that
comprised the religion many of our ancestors accepted on blind faith as their
conqueror's proof of the power of a "civilized" God. With many Indigenous Peoples clamoring to
recapture the "old values and traditions", and with Christianity
providing so little real comfort for so many of our People, we believe it is
time to re-examine the history, foundation, and subsequent Institution of
Christianity.
It is not our intention to
destroy faith. It is our intention to
exalt truth. One of the truths that we
hope to "exalt" is that Native religions were, and are, just as valid
an expression of the great and spiritual mystery of our lives as those
transplanted religions we have come to accept as the "only way". For Indigenous people, still rooted to the
earth and all their relations, this will not be a revelation, but a
justification of our continued resistance to a fanciful and purposely distorted
myth. The true story of Jesus has never been revealed to us. We only accepted what we were told by those
who accepted what they were told, generation upon generation, and century upon
century. However, it was not a story
recounted within the confines of a strict and disciplined oral tradition. It was a colorful but dogmatic story of
fiction. Very seldom were any of its
"missionaries" educated in the history and facts of their particular
interpretation, let alone the overall institutional picture. A select few within the inner circle of a
violent, manipulative, and exploitive Roman Catholic Church, along with its
rebellious and willful Protestant children, jealously guarded those facts. Inspired by twentieth century discoveries of
ancient parchments, scrolls, and texts, and new “gospels”, current biblical
scholars have continued to piece together what real events may have attended
the beginnings of this powerful, yet obscure, religion. This certainly should
be our quest as well, for if our peoples have been led down a questionable
road—some of us would like to know where that road began, and why we should
trust in where we have been told it is going!
There may, or may not be enough information here to make that judgment,
but we think we have posed enough questions and made enough controversial
statements to begin the discussion so that it may be pursued to an informed
choice.
To those who believe in the Divine Inspiration of Scripture
and in the Visions of Paul and John we say this: When a religion insists on having the sole authority to determine
what is divinely inspired, and when it also demands the sole authority to
validate the Visions of men and women (labeling some as divine conduits and
others as crackpots), then that belief has rudely imposed itself upon our
world! We resent the implication that
we cannot be divinely inspired except within the contexts prescribed by
Christian experience, or that our Visions are not as sacred as those of unknown
men who lived two thousand years ago.
This is the result of an arbitrary decision to abandon the continual
search for truth, and follow the staid, safe, and convenient path, rutted and
worn by the countless feet of other sheep.
Who is to say that the Creator of All Things has not divinely inspired
us to write this book? We believe that
the Christian religion, descended from the God of Abraham, has offended that
God in creating an idol of his messenger.
By creating that idol, in opposition to the commandments of that God,
and by failing to present his message honestly, without editing and pretentious
additions, the religion of Christianity has brought incomprehensible suffering,
even the reality of hellfire in this life, to the Indigenous Peoples around the
world. To this day, the myths are still
adhered to, the idol is still worshipped, and the true message—one that
threatens the very institutions that pretend to worship it—of that dangerous visionary
mystic Indian named Jesus—echoes unheard.
For more on this subject, see A5 in the
Information Index
Essay Twenty-Nine BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
The New Rome
The
superficial bright and shiny skin of our progressive technological civilization
cracked under the harsh reality of these times to expose its true festering
underbelly on Sept 11, 2001. America, a
country supposedly founded under the grace of a supreme deity and seemingly
protected by His divine power, fell victim to a force of terror utilizing and
attacking the very symbols of its supposedly great accomplishments in the
twentieth century. For many Americans,
September 11th was proof that the 21st Century ushered in a new and
terrifying time where nothing is sacrosanct and no one is safe. In reality, the rest of the world has been
living under those conditions for quite some time. The United States, assured of its supremacy, both politically and
ideologically, has carried the policies of manifest destiny forward on the
global economic front for decades, assuming the mantle of judge and jury on
every matter of individual freedoms, perceived injustice, and supposed
tyranny. Every Traditional religious,
political and socio/ethnic national group abroad has grown fearful that we will
find some element or resource that we desire in their region and subvert them
to obtain it. Indigenous groups have
been the primary victims of America’s drive to globalize the world in order to
secure the rapidly expiring finite resources necessary to economic and
multi-national corporate interests. The
“benefits” of globalization have included many of the same benefits early
Indigenous Americans secured at the hands of the colonists and their
descendants. We have generated a list
of ideas that might turn the tide on these contemporary depredations in the
essay below.
“The
American mind…is, politically, so deeply formed that to liberate it would
involve uncommon, and as yet perhaps undiscovered, philosophical and surgical
skill. The great majority of Americans,
even the most cynical—who need no convincing that the words that come out of a
politician’s mouth are a blend of mis-, dis- and non-information, and should
always carry a veracity health warning—appear to lose their critical faculties
when confronted by “our boys who are risking their lives”. If love is blind, patriotism has lost all
five senses.”
William Blum
“…Money is
the state religion of the West. We pray
to it every waking minute—and we're gonna make damned sure every last human on
earth gets down on their knees with us.
All our wars are wars of religion.”
“Anyone out there with
information on those algorithms in the English language that make its native
speakers so self-righteous, or indeed on the psycho-pathology of crusading in
general, give me a ring...”
John Burdett
“Civilization and profits go
hand in hand.”
President Calvin Coolidge
"Traditionally
we have always been a republic governed entirely by money."
Gore Vidal
"What is
good for General Motors, is good for America."
Charles Wilson, President of General Motors,
"I spent
most of my time being a high-class muscle man for big business, for Wall Street
and for the bankers. In short, I was a
racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I
helped make Mexico safe for American oil interests in 1914. Made in Haiti and Cuba a decent place for
the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in."
General Smedley Butler, former
Commanding General, US Marine Corp.
"Every
society...involves contradictions between precepts and practices. This is
obvious in predominantly Christian countries such as the United States, where
Jesus injunction to divest oneself of riches has been perverted into an
imperative for the accumulation of wealth, and where the central precept of
nonviolence has been twisted into jingoistic militarism..."
Patrick Colm Hogan
"Today Americans
believe as part of our political understanding of the world that we are the
most generous nation on earth in terms of foreign aide, overlooking the fact
that the net dollar flow from almost every Third World nation runs toward the
United States."
James Loewen
Today, the
interests of business are so entrenched in our government and the economy of
that government, that the interests of government and business are identical.
John Sulston writes "The big transnational corporations are now more powerful
than many governments. Their strength
is apparent everywhere we turn, and especially in their collective lobbying in
the capitals of rich nations. Maybe
we're moving towards a world where national governments, elected or otherwise,
no longer count. The warning signs are
there."
We know it, we talk about
it, but we can’t envision changing it.
As an example of this kind of pulling the covers over our heads at the
highest levels of our government we find that, in 1975, the covert nature of
many U.S. foreign policy actions came to the attention of a committee headed by
Congressman Otis Pike, (R/NY).
Congressman Pike commented publicly that the report was available to any
Congressional leader as long as he or she observed the top-secret nature of the
information. Pike added that he didn’t
think many would want to read it. When
asked why, Pike replied that it was his assessment that his congressional
comrades probably felt it was better not to know! Pike said, “There are too many things that embarrass Americans
in that report.” “In this…
situation…they are asked to believe that their country has been evil. And nobody wants to believe that.”
Our 18th century descendant
Roman-Anglo-Christian perceptions of the outside world have led us into taking
on the role of world policeman, confidant, banker, confessor, and professor to
every undeveloped struggling Third World country within our reach with
resources or strategic characteristics deemed important to our interests. Recently, we have extended that to any
country we can militarily push around.
Our strategy of keeping a strong military for defense has now turned
into a strategy of using our military to aggressively protect any American
interest deemed appropriate around the world.
And while we may decry the horrific consequences of the immoral acts of
the recent past we must accept the responsibility for having done our part to
teach the rest of the world just how to perform such acts.
For those
Americans naive enough to wonder what we have done to engender such hatred and
labels, we must remind them that while our purposes may or may not be
altruistic, we are the great “meddler”.
Our economic favors are usually only bestowed on that small segment of
the population in a direct position to help us control or access the resources
we desire. In the Middle East, our
development of their petroleum makes a few vulgarly rich while giving the
remaining populations—wallowing in poverty and envy or attempting to hold on to
traditional ways—a genuine reason for despising us.
Globally, we are known to do “whatever it takes”, utilizing our
vast resources of economic power and military might, overtly or covertly, to
support our interests.
The U.S. presently has military bases in Belgium, Germany, Greece,
Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, and Britain. We have significant military presence in
Japan, the Philippines, Bermuda, Egypt, Iceland, Korea, Panama, Cuba, Saudi
Arabia, Kuwait, Afghanistan, and Iraq. This does not include our many
contingents of advisers in South America, our two bases in Australia, the bases
in our Territories, nor our covert operations worldwide. Neither does it
include allies like Canada.
The US has fought over 100 undeclared wars, overt and
covert since 1950. Over two hundred and
fifty distinctly named unilateral military operations have been mounted in
Second and Third World countries since 1947, occurring in almost every area of
the globe. These are military operations only and do not include covert
operations (like the CIA operations in Chile) or "adviser assisted"
operations.
“In 1973 the
people of Chile watched in a horror similar to our own, as their capitol
building was bombed, their elected President assassinated, and their friends
and families herded into the National Stadium and other detention centers, then
battered and killed by the thousands. U.S. Agency files more than establish the
deep involvement and responsibility of the CIA for the Pinochet coup and its
violent aftermath.
The CIA is also
responsible for the bloody 1954 coup in Guatemala and the frightening
repression that followed. The United Nations Truth Commission report of 1999
severely criticized our intelligence community for its close collaboration with
and support for the Guatemalan military throughout its counter-insurgency
campaign. The army was found responsible for some 93% of the war crimes, which
included the torture, murder, and “disappearance” of some 200,000 civilians and
the massacre of some 660 Mayan villages.
The U.N. also ruled that the army was guilty of genocide, the same army
our CIA had chosen to train and aid as its close friend and partner. These
actions were not taken to protect American lives from terrorists, but rather,
to coldly guard our cash flow.”(*J. Harbury)
The late 1950s CIA assassinations of Patrice
Lumumba in the Congo, and our support of the swindling despot Joseph Mobutu,
represent two more horrific involvements that resulted in whole Nations
suffering as a direct result of our covert policies.
The “War On Drugs” is by far the largest
international conspiracy to affect the policies of foreign nations for purposes
other than the one so obviously stated. Another far-reaching conglomerate goal,
the pursuit of intensely profitable and heretofore unavailable fossil fuels
utilizes much of the covert support offered by US intelligence agencies and
black ops groups, often without the knowledge or consent of those who we
suppose to be representing the “People” of the United States. It has been well documented by former
military and government personnel as to how far covert national groups are
willing to go in their support of terrorists and thugs to further “our”
economic or political agendas abroad.
Author William Blum, in his
book, Rogue State, lists four imperatives that have served as the underlying
principle behind so much of the United States global foreign policy in the
twentieth and twenty-first centuries.
The first imperative is that of continuing a policy of Manifest Destiny
in the form of globalization, specifically as those globalization effort s aide
American trans-national corporations.
Globalization, in the form
it is presented to Third World governments, is described as the method by which
First World corporations and financial entities such as the World Bank, will
help them form capitalist economies amidst democratic societies. Unfortunately, the myth is sold without
substance to back it up. What modern
economists do not take into account is the unequal nature in which raw
materials, particularly those necessary to modernization and industrialization,
are distributed around the globe—as well as the impatient nature of humanity
waiting for the blessings of civilization to provide them the same wonders that
the First World enjoys.
The First World has
successfully achieved their success through the great wealth bequeathed to
those nations primarily by the Americas.
It was a semi-organic development of philosophy accompanied by the right
technological developments aligned with the availability of raw materials and
resources. Any change in the evolution
of these philosophies, technologies, or resource availabilities would have
doomed the experiment to failure.
Corporate raiders now push
their agendas into countries devoid of resources, but with some supposed
strategic value—romancing them with pie-in-the-sky promises. Even where we have no physical presence, our
wealth is seductive and the dream of progress overwhelming. The result of the
philosophy of progress unchecked can be devastating.
The Aral
Sea is all but dead. Once, two pristine
rivers, the Syr Darya and the Amu Darya, fed twenty-four species of fish that
swam in its waters. The push for progress, particularly agribusiness, gave no
thought to whether or not the resources of the area precluded such economic
ventures. They simply looked across the
ocean at the First World, and threw caution and reason to the wind. After all, isn’t this how civilization
works—economics first, conservation as an afterthought? At one time, the sea
level dropped by a meter per year, exposing thousands of kilometers of sea
floor. The two great rivers, diverted
for irrigation devoted to cotton production, soon failed to make it to the
sea. The dry edges of the seabed became
a contaminated wasteland of chemical defoliants and pesticides from cotton
field runoff. Tuberculosis claimed
thousands of lives each year. Anemia, cancers, birth defects, and liver, kidney
and respiratory ailments consumed the children. None of the five Nations contributing to the debacle had the
political will to solve the problem.
Business is king. But the
long-term effects on the area, especially relating to its ability to support
human life, are dramatic.
“In the past, the Aral
reduced the effects of cold winds from Siberia and lowered the summer
heat. The loss of Sea has led to a
dryer and shorter summer in the region, and longer and colder winters. The
vegetative season has been reduced to 170 days. The pasture productivity has
decreased by a half, and meadow vegetation destruction has decreased meadow
productivity ten times. On the shores of the Aral Sea, precipitation was
reduced several times. High evaporation
is marked while air moisture is reduced by ten percent. Air temperature during
winters has fallen, and summer temperatures have increased. Frequent occurrence of long dust storms and
ground winds is characteristic.
The dying off of the Aral
Sea resulted in two different kinds of desertification. One from the newly
dried seabed, and the other from the artificial water logging of irrigated
lands. As a result, a new desert "Aralkum" appeared in the center of
the great deserts. It is comprised of a solid salt marsh consisting of finely
dispersed sea deposits and remnants of mineral deposits, washed in from
irrigated fields.
Pollution
is increased because the Aral Sea is located along a powerful air stream
running from west to east. It contributes to aerosol transference into upper
layers and fast spread in the atmosphere of the Earth. That is why traces of
pesticides from the Aral region were found in the blood of penguins in the
Antarctic, and typical Aral dust has been found on Greenland's glaciers, in
Norway's forests, and Byelorussia's fields, all situated thousands of
kilometers away from Central Asia.
One of the
dangerous consequences of the dying Aral Sea, is the increasing degradation of
mountainous glaciers of the Himalayas, Pamir, Tien-Shan, and Altay, feeding the
SyrDarya and AmuDarya. The increase of dust on glacier surfaces and
mineralization of precipitation on them is leading toward an intensive melting
of those glaciers. At present, 1081 glaciers have disappeared in the
Pamir-Altay area , 71 glaciers in the Zaili Alatau area, and the volume of glaciers
in Akshirak has been sharply reduced. This is a dangerous process for a dry
region, because in Central Asia, mountainous glaciers are the only ancient
remaining storage of fresh water supply.”**
The other
result of globalization occurs in countries that have significant resources
necessary to technology and progress. Here, the multi-national
corporations—conspicuously absent from nations with no resources—approach the
existing leadership with assurances that acceptance of this open-handed
approach will benefit, or insure their longevity as leaders (as well as their
personal offshore accounts). If the
leaders are open to these offers it becomes business as usual—World Bank loans
are assured, etc. If not, the
leadership is subverted, murdered, or opposition coups are staged. This is just the way it is done. South American countries have suffered this
American corporate meddling in their affairs for years. John Pilger documented the fall of
Indonesia’s Sukarno in his book, The New Rulers of the World. Here is basic gist of what happened
there.
Under Achmed Sukarno, who
had led Indonesia since the end of Dutch colonial rule, the nation was
practically debt free. He had thrown out the World Bank, limited the power of
the oil companies, and publicly refused all the American loan offers. Pressures from the Americans to play
economic ball were immense. Sukarno
wanted good relations, but had his own ideas for Indonesia’s economy. He was a Populist, the founder of modern
Indonesia and leader of a non-aligned movement of developing countries. He hoped to forge an original “third way”
between the competing superpowers representing capitalism and communism. In 1955, he convened the Asia-Africa
Conference, which presented the following principles:
Respect for fundamental human rights and the
UN Charter.
Respect for the sovereignty and territorial
integrity of all nations.
The recognition of the equality of all
peoples.
The settlement of disputes by peaceful means.
Sukarno was both a democrat
and a demagogue. He encouraged mass
trade unions, as well as peasant, women’s, and cultural movements. He tolerated the communist PKI as a
counterweight to the army, which, having been trained by the Japanese during
WWII operated within their own mythology as being the true guardians of the
Nation. Australian historian Harold
Crouch characterized the PKI of the time as being not so much a revolutionary
party as an organization defending the interests of the poor within the existing
system. He believed that it was the PKI’s
popularity that alarmed the Americans, rather than any potential for armed
insurgency.
The region produces 85% of the world’s rubber, 45% of the tin, 65% of
the copra and 23% of the chromium ore.
There are, or were, significant reserves of copper, nickel, bauxite and
hardwood tropical forests.
In 1962, British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan and President John
Kennedy agreed to ‘liquidate President Sukarno, depending on the situation and
available opportunities’ according to a declassified CIA memorandum. In 1963
Sukarno accused British commercial interests of forming the Malaysian
Federation to further their own interests.
The British responded in 1964, with their Foreign Office calling for the
‘defense’ of western interests in Southeast Asia, ‘a major producer of
essential commodities’. In 1965—1966,
General Suharto, the military commander of Jakarta, exploited an internecine
struggle for power to blame the killing of six army generals on the PKI and
communists in Indonesia. As it turned
out, none of the plotting officers were communists, but the climate of
anti-communism in the West gave Suharto allies in the media and backrooms of
power. An unprecedented bloodbath
ensued. It is estimated that from
500,000 to a million Indonesians lost their lives.
During Suharto’s thirty-year dictatorship, global capital flowed freely
into Indonesia in huge amounts. The
World Bank alone poured in 30 billion dollars. Western politicians exalted
Suharto for bringing stability and sensible economic values to the region even
as he went about systematically exterminating anyone who opposed him. All knew Suharto’s barbarism. Approximately one third of the populations
of East Timor, over 200,000 people, were eliminated by Suharto’s military
machine. Gabriel Kolco, a historian,
wrote, “the ‘final solution’ to the communist problem in Indonesia ranks as a
crime of the same type as the Nazis perpetrated.” The CIA reported, “in terms of numbers killed, the massacres rank
as one of the worst mass murders of the twentieth century.” In 1990, the CIA’s collaboration in the
murders was revealed when it was discovered that US intelligence had actually
compiled the lists of names of many thousands of communists who were
subsequently eliminated by Suharto’s regime.
In 1965, the US Ambassador, Marshall Green, cabled Washington on how the
US could “shape developments to our advantage.” Propaganda should be based on ‘[spreading] the story of the PKI’s
guilt, treachery, and brutality.’ During the height of the massacres, Green
assured Suharto, “The U.S. is generally sympathetic with and admiring of what
the army is doing.” As it turned out,
the Indonesian “Solution” was utilized as a model seven years later when the
CIA ran a coup in Chile to remove Salvador Allende, forging a supposed leftist
document purporting a plot to murder Chilean military officials. In Vietnam, Operation Phoenix is said to
have been formulated from the “lessons” learned in Indonesia.
Meanwhile, the U.S .Press characterized the massacres as “the West’s
best news in Asia” and “a gleam of light in Asia”. Visiting in the U.S., Australian Prime Minister Holt said, “with
500,000 to a million communist sympathizers knocked off, I think its safe to
say a reorientation will take place.”
Despite a highly organized western propaganda campaign to portray the
evil communists as getting what they deserved, the truth was more
personal. Entire villages of largely
non-political families were marched away to their deaths. Just as Pol Pot exterminated the educated
and professional classes in Cambodia, Suharto eliminated entire classes of
“suspected” communists—primarily teachers, students, civil servants, and
peasant farmers.
In 1967, the corporate giants Sukarno had held at bay during his regime
divided the ‘great prize’ up. The
Time-Life Corporation sponsored a three-day conference in Geneva that
determined the corporate takeover of Indonesia. On the second day, the Indonesian economy was divided up, sector-by-sector. All the corporate giants were there, from
the oil companies to the banks.
American, Japanese, and French firms got the hardwood forests of
Sumatra. The Freeport Company got the
copper in West Papua. An American and
European consortium got the nickel.
Alcoa got most of the bauxite.
Actual control of the economy was virtually turned over to the IMF and
World Bank. A Copely Corporation report
hailed the conquest, ‘[In Indonesia] the deeply rooted American concepts of
free enterprise and Yankee ingenuity are finding new forms of expression. Moreover, the profit potential fairly
staggers the imagination.’ In addition,
in 1967, millions of dollars in World Bank loans, previously disallowed by
Sukarno, found their way into Indonesia.
Millions of those dollars went straight into the hands of Suharto and
his cohorts.
Thirty years later, the
World Bank admits to having lost ten billion dollars in Indonesia. Since Suharto’s fall, a significant body of
evidence has come to light exposing the ‘moderate regime’ and the ‘communist
carnage’ of 1965--66. Plundered by the
Dutch and the corporate global economy, the formerly solvent nation has a
national debt of 262 billion dollars, 170% of its GDP—a debt that can never be
paid. The foreign factories are still
there--The Gap, Nike, Addidas, Rebock—surrounded by squalid labor camps where
thousands of workers work 36 hour shifts, earning a dollar a day. 36 million Indonesians are unemployed. Faced with overflowing sewage and polluted
water, half the daily wage is spent on drinking water. Disease is rampant and increasing. The formerly self-sustaining rural
agriculture has all but disappeared, wiped out by a system of cash cropping
devised by the World Bank. The skyline of Jakarta is primarily empty banks and
unfinished buildings. You can still find areas that serve the children and
cronies of Suharto—as they control what is left of all that remains of the
wealth of Indonesia—but on the distant skyline of the camps, the skeletal
remains of deserted skyscrapers present apocalyptic silhouettes--the price of
globalization for those who are not on the ‘consuming’ end of the system. *
Between
these two examples, the reader can clearly see the precipice toward which the
drive of globalization and the ideals of progress are pushing resource rich,
and resource poor Nations. In neither
circumstance can they ever hope to achieve the standard of living of the
west. They possess only a piece of the
puzzle necessary for successful technological development. They have the will perhaps, perhaps even
some industrial elements, but typically they have neither the political history
or the necessary geography and resources to succeed.
The second imperative serves
the interests of politically cash rich contributors in Washington, namely the
defense contractors that supply the world, both friend and foe, with military
munitions, hardware, and earth, land, and sea delivery vehicles. The third and fourth imperatives echo the
neo-conservative philosophy that America has the right to prevent any Nation
from achieving a competitive status with the U.S. as a superpower, and to
engage in nation-building where possible to recreate the world in America’s
image, denying any society or Nation the opportunity to develop and demonstrate
any viable alternative to global capitalistic American supremacy. We proudly put forward the concept of free
enterprise while aiding economic and political terrorism the world over. As a result, the common foreign citizen is
often left hating our comparatively wealthy guts for supporting tyrannical
forces of terror and coercion; pouring money and military resources into the
pockets of their well-to-do, self-serving, upper class leaders in exchange for
corporate-friendly policies and laws.
Meanwhile, their citizens are getting pumped full of the same TV
commercial propaganda for consumerism and cultural homogenization that we are.
The question
“what do we do about terrorists” should lead us first to the mirror—to examine
the dirty laundry of not only our distant but our recent past. Our commitment to this technological and
economic homogenization of the world (that so many traditional peoples object
to) is what engenders so much resentment.
Traditional people do not automatically assume that the world is a better
place for this technological, consumerist, and predominantly Christian-led
civilization. It is arguable whether
the supposed advances we have created have improved the quality of our lives. It is certain that it has not led, for a
greater part of the world, to a safer, more contented, and comfortable life.
Only people who
lead relatively safe and “civilized” lives of plenty have the time and energy
to intellectually debate the finer points of our condition. In the wealthy areas of the world, there is
always talk of the social, political, and spiritual evolution of our
species. Elsewhere, the world is
consumed by the realities of a dangerous and insecure future, compounded by the
lack of peace and necessities in their daily life. Many whole cities resemble the aftermath in New York, where
people live in daily fear, and have for years.
We have been led down this dangerous path of elitism
and supposed security by wealthy conglomerate corporations and entities selling
consumerism as the God of the 21st century.
Aided by the premeditated utilization of world television to further the
willy-nilly global expansion of an international commerce wholly dependant on
finite, and therefore extremely profitable resources, they pursue their goals
ruthlessly, using covert entities to maintain their powerful grip on the throat
of the world.
The civilization is sick at its very center. We have only begun to see the tip of this
iceberg. Technology has far more terrible
weapons waiting on the near horizon than airplanes. And there are many more Osama bin Ladens waiting in the wings.
If the People
of America want immediate solutions—here are some proposals.
1) End
the international war on drugs and coincidentally, the U.S Prison Industry, and
put the
money into compassionate treatment and
rehabilitation;
2) End our commitment to further exploration
and development of fossil fuels and put significant monies toward research and
development of renewable energy;
3) Support commercial-free public broadcasting
forums as immediate alternatives to commercial media outlets (especially TV and
radio);
4) Demand that all overseas corporate interests
be responsive first to the interests of Native Indigenous National Peoples,
before they can go forward with the exploitation of natural resources.
5) Demand that
corporations legal identities be returned to the status of artificial entities,
do not allow them the rights of personhood, as they are not natural persons.
6) Immediately
forgive the foreign debt of every Nation, and jumpstart the world economy.
For those who insist this is
not feasible, we suggest they learn to live with events like the World Trade
Center catastrophe, as the rest of the world has, and expect these kind of
events to touch each of us (who haven’t been already), in a very personal way.
Terrorism is a tide that cannot be turned without
embracing the responsibility to endure sacrifice and make radical changes in
our world economic view. There must be
a deliberate end to covert political and economic strategies that offend our
moral and ethical values. Finally, we
must come to a common perception of where we are heading as a world
community. As the tsunami of terrorism
rises higher above us, the necessity of identifying common values and goals
becomes absolute.
*-- Info from John Pilger,
The New Rulers Of The World, see Book
List
**-- Tertiary source for the
Aral Sea info
http://enrin.grida.no/aral/aralsea/english/about/region.htm
http://enrin.grida.no/aral/aralsea/english/arsea/arsea.htm#2
Essay Thirty
Bluewolf & Lupe’/Shirts N Skins
Dangerous Semantics (And The Element Of
Violence)
The
twenty-first century has created a whole new language for our leaders to
exploit us with. The primary new terms
of terrorist, terrorism, war on terrorism, etc., begin from a false premise. The semantics of these terms have taken on
new definitions and applied as a weapon in the war for minds and hearts. Who is a terrorist? What is a terrorist? How can such a war be prosecuted
successfully? As usual, the semantics
are arbitrarily applied by national entities to define whatever opposing group
or individual nationalistic states they seek to destroy or conspire to control.
Unfortunately, the technological advances set to occur in the next few decades
will render these First, Second, and Third World nationalistic forces
ineffective and impotent against the one emotion humanity cannot
suppress—revenge. The empowerment of
individuals in this new age of terrorism will result in an uncontrollable and
exponential increase in worldwide violence unless humanity can embrace the one
weapon at its disposal against the impulse for revenge. Forgiveness and rational compensation. We have a solution, but will our nature
allow us to embrace it?
Terrorism: “The unlawful use
of force or violence committed by a group or individual, who has some
connection to a foreign power or whose activities transcend national
boundaries, against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government,
the civil population or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social
objections.”
Federal
Bureau Of Investigation
“America cherishes her
enemies. Without enemies, she is a
nation without purpose and direction.”
William Blum
“The whole aim of practical
politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence, clamorous to be led to
safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them
imaginary.”
H. L. Mencken, 1920
Our government has kept us
in a perpetual state of fear—kept us in a continual stampede of patriotic
fervor—with the cry of grave national emergency. Always there has been some terrible evil…to gobble us up if we
did not blindly rally behind it …yet, in retrospect, these disasters never seem
to have been quite real.”
Gen.
Douglas MacArthur 1957
"For
fifty years we have supported too many tyrants, overthrown too many democratic
governments, and wasted too much of our own money in other peoples civil wars
to pretend that we're just helping out all those poor little folks around the
world who love freedom and democracy just like we do."
Gore Vidal
“When
terrorists attack, they’re terrorizing.
When we attack, we’re retaliating.
When they respond to our retaliation with further attacks, they’re
terrorizing again. When we respond with
further attacks, we’re retaliating again.”
Norman
Solomon, media critic
Revenge seems a natural human reaction to
deliberate and unnecessary violence.
Native people discerned the effect that revenge could have upon a
society at large and went to great pains to diffuse these tragedies. In the Choctaw Nation, a family determined
to be responsible for the death in another family might be expected to provide
compensation, even going so far as to deliver one of its own members
voluntarily to be executed. This
terrible choice for reconciliation was considered a necessary sacrifice to
mitigate the effects of unaddressed wrongdoing.
The politics of defining
terrorism in a media age is a muddy business.
If one goes by the FBI definition quoted above, almost any internal
movement that utilizes violence or economic coercion could qualify. Certainly American foreign policy over the
last one hundred years would tread heavily into this territory. The thirteen original colonies and the
Founding Fathers would fall under those guidelines. Most of the world’s bonifide revolutions have received some sort
of external aide or even been planned and executed by elements in exile. Our perception of the events we experienced
in Native America during the 1970’s would definitely qualify us as terrorists. We respected tribal boundaries, not national
ones—and even today the boundaries we observe relate more to cultural or
traditional lands and geophysical barriers that they do the imaginary lines
flown over by pieces of cloth flags.
Of
course, we remember the century of conflict where Indigenous Americans were the
“terrorists”. Decades where, following
the Stars and Stripes, the American military along with vigilante marauders
marched in “retaliation” for supposed outrages and indiscriminately massacred
our Elders, women, and children. We do
not find it so hard to believe the “reports” in other conflicts that American
soldiers have indulged themselves in these kinds of behaviors today. Every conflict has its lingo of hatred and
de-humanizing semantics. Redskins,
Prairie Niggers, Diggers, Krauts, Japs, Wogs, Chinks, Slant-eyes, Gooks, Towel
Heads, Sand Niggers, Haijis, Habibs, etc.
At the same time, we certainly don’t mean to imply that Americans have
any monopoly on this type of behavior.
Almost every conflict engenders the same semantics of hate and horrible
outrages from all parties involved, but Americans have this picture of
themselves being above all this ugliness—and that picture is painted falsely.
The
defining moment for the new definition of terrorist or terrorism came on
September eleventh, 2001. While other
countries (even the U.S.), had been experiencing similar attacks for decades,
the United States administration leaped at the opportunity to change the
game. It wasn’t just that the attack
was so successful at bringing down a powerful symbol, demonstrating our
vulnerability, and killing a multinational group of people—it was an
opportunity to leapfrog into a new age of neo-conservative machiavellian
politics. It was an opportunity to
define new terms and demonstrate new methods—nation building, pre-emptive
warfare, and the identification of a mystery enemy against whom an unending
conflict could be waged to hide the economic, political and social agendas of
our ‘power elite”.
For fifty years
the American government and corporate America has held hands in supporting
countless terrorists and insurrections to promote our own international
interests. Under the guise of political
and economic idealism we have assassinated leaders, supplied monies, weapons,
and advisors to train “ thugs” to pursue their goals while furthering our
own. The death and destruction of these
acts has accumulated far more victims than recent days but attracts less
attention because we have utilized less sophisticated methods, no less brutal
in their results than airplanes and jet fuel.
We provide cash, weapons, and training to soldiers of fortune in Mexico
to murder and terrorize Indians who initially wanted nothing more than the
right to plant communal plots of corn.
Then we bristle when those Indians organize and begin to retaliate,
labeling them insurgents in their own land.
Always we view those helping to further our interests as patriots, and
those opposing us as terrorists. We
stay out of struggles between European whites, as in Ireland, yet involve
ourselves immediately if non-Christian peoples are involved—as in
Serbia/Bosnia/Croatia, or South/Middle Americas, Africa, or the Far and Middle
East.
Only a week
before the World Trade Center's destruction, we offered our former allies
against the Soviets in Afghanistan (the vehemently anti-American Taliban),
forty three million dollars to declare opium farms (one of the few remaining
cash crops available to devastated Afghani farmers) to be “against the will of
God”. Ostensibly, this was in support
of anti-drug efforts—in reality we were desperately trying to pave the way for
our large corporate interests in the Chechen oilfields, and the pipeline that
must eventually pass through Afghanistan.
When they refused the pipeline. We declared them terrorists and took
over the country without any thought as to how the country would be governed or
developed. We didn’t care—we had the
pipeline. Iraq was simply the next
domino to fall in a game created before Bush was even elected President. Today,
the Taliban is again gaining strength—and Iraq is proving to be a quagmire not
unlike Vietnam.
We have
dedicated ourselves to the political positions of the Israelis against every
other regime in the area, right or wrong—allowing them many of the same
atrocities and abuses against Palestine and Lebanon that once caused them to
seek the creation of a Nation of their own.
We have
stationed troops in the lands considered Holy to Islam (supporting the ruthless
dictatorship of the Royal Family of Saud), then act surprised when Usama bin
Laden (who began fighting the Soviets at age twenty-one with U.S. training,
supplies and support), is harbored and supported by the Tribal Chieftains he
fought beside, utilizing his fortune and risking his life on their behalf. Where once we considered him a valuable ally
and patriot, he now has become a malignant, evil, cancer of a terrorist. That transformation is easily explained away
as being a simple product of misguided fanaticism.
To blame September
11th and world terrorism solely on fatalistic fundamental fanatic
Islamists is too expedient and convenient to be acceptable. Though it may turn out to be partly true, it
is also the most hoped for answer to the question of culpability. Americans love having an evil enemy or
empire to war against almost as much as fanatic Arabs love to teach their
children about the “Great Satan” America, the Babylon of the modern world.
When I was young, we all knew that many of the Nazi
war criminals from World War Two had immigrated to Argentina and other
countries in South America. Books and
movies celebrated the “nazi hunters” that tried to track them down in those
foreign and somehow morally bankrupt “socialist” countries. The U.S. has now taken over that role and
is acting as host to some of the most horrific murderers and monsters from the
late twentieth century. Here are some
of the names of those who have basked under the free skies of America, exempt
from justice. General Jose Guillermo
Garcia of El Salvador, General Eugenio Vides Casanova, also of Salvador, From Haiti, Luckner Cambronne, Lt. Col. Paul Samuel Jeremie, General
Prosper Avril, Col. Carl Dorelien, Emmanuel Constant, Maj Gen Jean-Claude
Duperval, and Ernst Prud’homme,
Armando Fernandez Larios of Chile,.
Michael Townley and Admiral Jorge Enrico of Argentina, two members of
the Honduras Death Squad from the 1980’s.
Kebassa Negawa of Ethiopia, Sintong Panjaitan of Indonesia, Thiounn
Prasith of Pol pot’s Cambodia, and Gen.
Mansour Moharari of Iran. Twenty former
South Vietnamese officers who admitted to torture and human rights violations,
and finally, a number of Yugoslavian’s accused of war crimes. The U.S. has also helped “place” other
criminals in countries where they cannot be prosecuted, notably Gen Raoul
Cedras, Jean-Claude Duvalier, and Joseph Michel Francois—all Haitians.
Our
government condone all this even as it declares, “give terrorists no support,
no sanctuary”.
What
is it that, in the mind of our government, keeps these men from being defined
as terrorists? It is their
nationalism. Our government despises
anyone other than multinational corporations for being multi or non-national. Any force or group that represents a truly
international coalition is dangerous to American interests. That’s why the U.S. consistently votes
against any recognition of Indigenous rights worldwide, because Indigenous
peoples feel a relationship that transcends national borders. It is also why the United States opposes the
United Nations on so many issues and votes—portraying that body as being a tool
of Third World and anti-capitalist entities. (Ignoring the concept of democracy
in the U.N., where we might actually lose a democratic vote!)
The underlying morality of
American policy can be discovered in a number of United Nations resolutions
voted on in 1982 and 1983. The tremendous number of no votes offered by the
U.S. on political issue resolutions can be debated, but these particular
resolutions were for a declaration that education, work, health care, proper
nourishment, and national development should be classed as human rights. Of course the U.S. voted no, despite a
surprisingly similar description found in the Bill Of Rights, Declaration of
Independence—something about “the pursuit of happiness”… As recently as 1996, the U.S., responding to
the World Food Summit’s affirmation of the “right of everyone to have access to
safe and nutritious food”, said that the United States does not recognize a
“right to food” for human beings but did champion “free trade” as the key to
ending poverty at the root of hunger.
When countries with large populations of starving people see these kinds
of statements, how must they view us?
The
phenomenon of modern terrorism is much more than a demonstration of religious,
social, or political discontent and aggression. More than anything, it is an individual reaction to personal
tragedy. The leaders of those
organizations identified with a global terrorist conspiracy could not summon
most of the suicide warriors to their cause without the events of tragedy those
soldiers have witnessed, and a personal, rather than ideological, need for
revenge. Revenge is the mother of terrorism.
Americans don’t understand it, because—except for the military families
who have lost loved ones in the conflict—the realities of collateral damage are
not revealed to us, in the media or in our immediate environment. When one watches Arabic, Shiite, and Sunni
representative television, seeing the repetitive images of the disembodied arm
of a child, a dismembered pregnant woman, a buried family—one is viscerally
affected. These images are not to be
found in the Western media. Middle
Eastern people have, by and large, witnessed some act of terror or destruction
personally. Americans have not. The driving force of revenge is the primary
supplier of warm bodies for terrorism and we indulgently continue to provide
fuel for that war in the form of accepting collateral damage unequivocally.
Nationalistic agendas do not
take into account the new age dawning.
This new age is not one of organized military conflict but of the power
of the individual to make his/her own agenda—one whose sole purpose is
revenge—the center of a horrifying attack on innocent civilians. In twenty years, one chemist, biologist, or
engineer will be able to construct genetic, biological, chemical, explosive or
yet-to-be-determined WMD’s that will be capable of destroying or depopulating
entire geophysical areas—and nationally organized military powers will be
ineffective and virtually powerless against them. Of course, the powers that be will continue to propose the myth
that these are organized groups that can be defeated, but in the end, these
individuals will discover their most effective power will be found in avoiding
traditional structures of organization and ally themselves in loose knit cells,
requiring little contact and emphasizing unilateral individual action—actions
that simply cannot be deterred by armies, generals, or politicians. Bill Joy, the cofounder of Sun Microsystems
writes, “Most dangerously, for the first time, these accidents and abuses are
widely within the reach of individuals or small groups.” Joel Garreau continues, “…one bright but
embittered loner or one dissident grad student intent on martyrdom could—in a
decent biological lab, for example—unleash more death than ever dreamed of in
nuclear scenarios.”
Revenge does not have a
social, political, or ideological agenda.
It can be deterred by only one weapon—the weapon of forgiveness and
reconciliation. Unless we can force the
leaders of nations, these imaginary bordered fiefdoms, to consider this type of
blanket negotiation on these conflicts, the power elite will lead us further
and further down the road toward oblivion.
Essay Thirty-One
Bluewolf & Lupe’/Shirts N Skins
American Future
We aren’t clairvoyant,
and we can’t tell the future, but we can see the writing on the wall.
“You are a ramshackle
collection of coincidences held together by a desperate and irrational
clinging, there is no center at all, everything depends on everything else,
your body depends on the environment, your thoughts depend on whatever junk
floats in from the media, your emotions are largely from the reptilian end of
your DNA, your intellect is a chemical computer that can't add up a zillionth
as fast as a pocket calculator, and even your best side is a superficial piece
of social programming that will fall apart as soon as your spouse leaves with
the kids and the money in the joint account, or the economy starts to fail and
you get the sack, or you get conscripted into some idiot's war, or they give
you the news about your brain tumor. To name this amorphous mass of self-pity,
vanity and despair self is not only the height of hubris, it is also proof that
we are above all a delusional species.”
John Burdett
It
is priorities that we need to be concerned with. What values do we cherish?
Do our spiritual beliefs truly guide our actions? If technology is indeed approaching a
singularity, or continues at an ever-increasing rate of change, then we need to
establish a priority of values toward which that technology should first be
committed. If it turns out that our
values are so different and so incompatible that we cannot find common
ground—then there will be no consensus of priorities to concentrate on, no
compromises to be agreed upon, and we will move ever closer to the whirlwind.
We
propose values that reflect a perspective that since the Earth and our Creator
provided food, clean water, shelter, medicine, and relationship for all
humankind, science, technology, and the organizations of men should direct
their efforts towards providing those same basic requirements for all human
beings first—before our attentions are diverted toward any other goals.
All
science and technology should be tasked first with providing a statement of
responsibility similar to an environmental impact report, on all new research
and technologies. Discussions should
take place on how to address the inevitable abuses and misapplications of
technologies to provide a head start in dealing with problems that are sure to
occur. The preservation of our
environment and the basic quality of soil, water, DNA, and other elements
necessary to our survival should be of the highest priority.
As
an example of how changes in priorities could significantly shift the elements
of world security and power, we’d like to speak for a biodiesel expert we know
who claims that if he was appointed as U.S. energy czar, he could have the
United States completely weaned off of fossil fuels for transportation—thus
eliminating our dependence on foreign oil—in less than a decade. Of course, he goes on, the price of a gallon
of fuel would not return to the days of yore, but all the money would remain
here rather than filling the pockets of many of our declared enemies. It would also take a New Deal-like
commitment to spend the same off-budget amounts of money we’re currently
spending in Iraq. We think that the
U.S., as world leader, should demonstrate that leadership and pioneer the new
industry of green alternative energy and fuels. Our targets for exportation of these new technologies should be
India and China. Once the Middle East
is relieved of the strain of being the corporate and strategic “center of the
earth”, and the American need for presence in the region is reduced or
eliminated, we might even see the added benefit of a reduction of hatred toward
the U.S. and the west in general. For
sure, we would experience the benefit of an enormous economic growth in new and
innovative fields of green energy and its attendant technologies. It could be an elegant solution to a
seemingly insolvable problem providing Americans were willing to endure some
temporary sacrifices in our indulgent and wasteful lifestyles.
Despite
our recent suggestions to the contrary, we think the roller coaster cannot be
stopped. Too many people have been sold
the goods. They desire the easy life;
with technologies that spark their interests and makes them feel they are on a
worthwhile journey toward improving the human condition (or their own personal
wealth). Americans, full of themselves
and their old myths, will continue to hold on, by tooth-and-nail if necessary,
to their perception of themselves as a world leader and power. Neoconservatives will continue to push for
military solutions to any slip in our world standing and authority. However, as John Trudell says, simply having
the authority and will to use physical violence does not equate with
power. People and nature will always
hold the true power. India and China
have the bulk of the people. Their
economies and direction will drive the twenty-first century. Whether they can be convinced that a change
in the imperatives of “progress at any price” is necessary for the common good
depends on how efficiently the global economic corporate machine can
indoctrinate them into giving up their eastern philosophies and bringing them
into to line with the way “White Men” think.
If they can be convinced that technology, progress, and the pursuit of
wealth will lead to a “heaven on earth”, or if their leaders can be tempted to
join the “global elite”, it is our opinion that the world will not find balance
or contentment, and the whirlwind will continue to spin on humanity’s horizon.
And so, we end up back where we
began—talking about another popular movie made by the Wachowski brothers. “V For Vendetta” repeats many of the themes
we have echoed here. It examines the
use of fear as a tactic of control for people who fear death, discomfort, and
even change. It looks closely at the
potential of governments to create their own “events” in order to spin the
public’s reaction into a relinquishment of freedoms. It peers into the abyss of
the undefeatable and uncontrollable violence of revenge, especially when it is
considered just. It is interesting to
note that though one of the most popular themes in modern entertainment around
the world, and particularly in American movies, is the theme of righteous
revenge; Western civilization seems unable to comprehend that emotion in other
peoples.
In the movie V for Vendetta,
the character “V” tells the populace that they have only to look in the mirror
to find those responsible for their predicament. If we take his advice, what would the citizens of our superior
western civilization, now a world civilization, see? In the First World, we would see ever more chronically obese
people, half of which can’t sleep at night and are dependant on a medicine
cabinet full of anti-depressants, alcohol, illicit drugs, sex, entertainments,
consumerism, materialism, and institutional religion—combined with an unnatural
addiction to comfort and technology they would do almost anything to preserve.
We would not see contented people.
Where are the polls that dare to ask how many people feel their lives
are rewarding and satisfying? What
polls reveal whether our view of the future is positive and hopeful? What are the true characteristics of this
wondrous civilization? In the end,
perhaps our ingenious devices will be all that we have left.
There are those who tell us
that if we do not love our country, we should leave. They make the mistake of equating the word country with the word
nation. We would never leave our
country simply because someone questions our loyalty to a nation. We love this country. By and large, the individuals of all races
gathered here are good and decent people, generous and compassionate. As a group however, most of us take on a
different persona—one that we’ve been taught.
It is a carefully prepared formula of perception that closely resembles
the Wachowski Brother’s Matrix in that one is born to it, and is regarded as a
traitor of sorts if one challenges its myths and philosophies. We know that our “red pill” perceptions will
not go over well among many caught in that Matrix. For them, there is nothing wrong with progress and the American
Dream—personal wealth, lavish comforts, abundant toys, and entertainments. These are civilization’s automatons—the
people that Morpheus would not have attempted to free from the Matrix. They simply could not survive without
it. To be truthful, in the end, we too
(the authors) are children of this civilization. As “V” says in the movie, ” I do, like many of you appreciate the
comforts of the everyday routine, the security of the familiar, the tranquility
of repetition…” Though we are indeed grateful for these blessings, we think
there will be a price to be paid for our indulgences. As V says, “I know you were afraid… there were a myriad of
problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common
sense…fear got the best of you. ”
In these times of terror, we
need a warrior’s heart—not one prone to violence, but one resistant to the
perils of run-away fear. In the end, we
understand that another bit of dialogue from that movie applies to our time. “Fairness, justice, and freedom are more
than words—they are perspectives…” If it is true that “Words will always retain
their power”—we will stand our ground and declare, without fear—these words are
ours.
Volume Two
Skins
This series of essays
concerns Native issues and a limited amount of contemporary Indigenous
history. In keeping with Native values,
we won’t attempt to coddle or coerce our readers into reading these essays by
providing introductions or precursory summaries.
You’ll either read them or
you won’t.
Essay Thirty-Two BlueWolf
& Lupe/ Shirts N' Skins
A History Of Isolation
"Several ladies passed
through the cars...American Horse's papoose was a chubby, sturdy little beggar,
and when one of the ladies spoke to him, he set up a tremendous wail, just as
natural and lifelike as if he were Human."
Omaha Herald, 1876
We’re going to jump around a
little, get wild, make some generalizations, and not worry about timeline
continuity for this essay. Since we
never intended to tell the entire history of American Indians in America, we
hope our Native readers won’t be too disturbed about the lapses or gaps in the
story.
For some Indians, early days
on the rez (reservation), in the late 19th and very early 20th
centuries, weren't so bad. They were
decidedly better than not knowing from moment to moment when they might next be
attacked by soldiers, militia, or vigilantes. Eastern Tribes, having suffered a
long relationship with various European ethnic colonial groups were in various
stages of assimilation. Southeastern
Tribes had suffered the Removal to Indian Country and California Tribes were
still reeling from thinking they had treaties and then having their lands
stolen from under them and bounties placed on their heads. Plains Tribes were trying to get used to
sitting in one place and existing on government rations, as were Southwest and
Northwest Indians. Though still dealing
with the after effects of starvation, disease, and shock, reservation Tribes
settled into a routine of taking government supplied commodities, hunting game
or fishing (where possible), growing vegetable gardens, raising stock animals,
and enjoying their remaining families and social ties.
In many state courts of the late 1700 to
mid-1800’s, the names of Tribal members had first been recorded to deter them
from owning land, marrying, voting, becoming jurors, etc.—but the push for a
major enrollment of Indians was for the allotment rolls in the late
1800's. The government was forcing
Tribes to divide their reservations or accept small parcels to be registered to
individual families. It was a time for
signing everyone up, the two Dawes Rolls being an example of carding and
cataloging whole Tribes of Native people.
It was at this time that the naming and renaming of Indians was
needed. Except for those already
assimilated, descended from, or married into white families, Natives did not
have surnames that identified their lineages.
It was time to give Indians names that could be used to identify
descendants down the line, ostensibly so property could be recorded and passed
down to relatives. This is where
Natives got many of the names we live with today.
Christian missionaries
continued to consolidate their efforts to convert the Nations, especially after
1878, when the President gave control of the reservations to different Christian Denominations. Presbyterians, Roman Catholics,
Episcopalians, Congregationalists,
Methodists, Mennonites, and the Church Of God, all sought to save the eternal
souls of the Natives. In their rush to
convert the reservation Peoples, they continued to implement and increase the
policy of sending Indian children off to boarding schools to facilitate their
"civilizing."
In the
late 1800’s and early 1900’s, the federal government sought to encourage that
“civilizing” by banning Native spiritual ceremonies. In 1882, Commissioner of Indian Affairs Hiram Price expressed his
opinion I a letter stateing, "There is no good reason why an Indian should
be permitted to indulge in practices which are alike repugnant to common
decency and morality. The preservation of good order on reservations demands of
me active measures be taken to discourage—and if possible, put a stop—to the
demoralizing influence of heathenish rites.”
The Government immediately sought to create a wave of public opinion
against Native religious dances by emphasizing the important of dancing as a
precurer to war. Violators of the
government ban were punished under regulations known as “Indian offenses”.
Dancers and participants were jailed and rations were withheld from their
families. Even use of the Pipe and the
sweat lodge were denied. For some the
bans lasted until 1933, but Indian people were persecuted even into the
1960’s. (All freedoms were not returned
until 1978 under the passage of the American Indian Religious Freedom Act.)
In March of 1891, Congress enacted a compulsory education law that
was to, "...secure the attendance of Indian children of suitable age and
health at schools established and maintained for their education." (Read
"brainwashing".) These
contract-schools, built by the government and supported by the Church, put
forward the concept that continuing to allow Indians their pagan ways and
beliefs would corrupt the children and cause their socialization to be
retarded. Many relocated, orphaned, or
stolen kids were already encamped at similar schools. In an 1893 editorial, Harpers Magazine wrote about the
Sioux, "...the churches and
religious societies have certainly quenched the fires of barbarism in the
Indian children.... The disappearance of blanket and breech-cloth, long hair
and highly painted faces, is a sign that the Sioux has succumbed to a stronger
civilization, and with his old customs have fallen his old gods."
The Government decrees (pushed by military and Christian leaders), had
made important tribal and ceremonial
spiritual gatherings illegal. Many
Traditionals ignored these laws, being forced to conduct their activities in
secret, and this “renegade” or “hostile” activity caused some internal
conflicts to arise within the Tribes, who still feared for their safety.
As World War I began, on the isolated lands of their reservations (and
former reservations), the Indian Nations found themselves carefully scrutinized
on the one hand—to prevent participation in illegal spiritual activities—and thoroughly
ignored on the other.
Over 12,000 American Indians volunteered to serve in the United States
military in World War I, nearly a decade before they became U.S. citizens. Approximately 600 Oklahoma Indians, mostly
Choctaw and Cherokee, saw action in France and these soldiers were widely
recognized, not only for their contributions in battle but as the first of the
fabled code-talkers. Due to the secrecy
that shrouded the code-talkers legacy, it is not commonly known that many
Tribes were included in these operations, resulting in many Code-talking
veterans of both the first and second World Wars.
These Indian men soon learned to blend into the landscape of the U.S.
military machine and became accepted as valuable comrades-in-arms. It is an interesting fact that throughout
the military campaigns of this century, Natives, once identified, have been
consistently given some of the more dangerous assignments as scouts and point-men
because of the Anglo fantasy that they have some inherent gift for those type
of missions.
The Code-talker successes also provided a lesson to contemporary Natives
about resistance to assimilation.
Code-talkers from the Choctaw, Comanche, Navajo, Creek, Hopi, Menominee,
and Ojibwa nations contributed to the WW1 & 2 efforts. Most of the Code-talkers of both wars were
boarding school educated. As students,
they were humiliated and physically punished for speaking their languages. Many resisted and disobeyed, risking
punishment by speaking together secretly.
Then, in an ultimate irony, the government came to them asking that they
create a code from the very languages that they had been forbidden to speak! In
the end, the fact that they resisted assimilation contributed significantly to
an American victory.
The training and natural comradery of combatants contributed to a sense
of pride and patriotism in their service, and Native vets returned home, to
once again be considered nonessential third-class non-citizens.
If we jump ahead for a moment and
discuss World War II vets as well, we find a callous abandonment by the very
Government they sacrificed for. The treatment of the Code-talkers is a sore
point with their contemporary relatives.
Forbidden by secrecy to discuss their roles in the war (even with
family), for decades afterward, many of the Code-talkers of WWII were
responsible for creating and developing the code themselves. They are credited, by most military historians,
of being directly responsible for the taking of Iwo Jima and the entire Pacific
Theatre. This resulted in the eventual
launching of the military’s ultimate solution, Fat Man and Little Boy (the two
nuclear weapons unleashed on the innocent populations of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki). Yet, they have been denied medical care and basic veteran’s
benefits, even into the 21st century!
Continuing hostility, racism, and resentment kept Indians from
associating with most of their neighboring Anglo communities. As the next few decades passed, alcoholism
dependency increased and racism reinforced reservation stereotypes and
isolation. No one in American society
was prepared to welcome our ancestors into the melting pot as long as they
maintained their tribal affiliations and clung to their reservations. Not much has been written about these times
because it doesn't have the romance and color of the previous centuries of
tribal history. Many of the Tribes themselves
have little collective memory of those days.
For eight decades or more, the Indian Nations lived as forgotten
Peoples, isolated and alone.
Essay
Thirty-Three BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N Skins
Lost Generation
“When
a pattern of culture is shattered, a people lose their vital spark.”
William N Fenton
They were the in-betweens. Too
young to remember the free days and too oppressed to see hope. Even into the late-20th century most grew up
dirt poor, using outhouses, living without running water, electricity, or jobs,
and having little contact with the outside world—not even a radio or telephone.
Generations had passed since
the Tribes had been able to live completely from the land. Reservation Indians had the abundance of
necessities disappear and their local economies fall far below what we think of
today as poverty.
The blessings of citizenship and the reorganization of tribal
governments in the 1920’s and 1930’s were only token gestures of conciliation,
concealing a broader plan to complete the destruction of traditionally
democratic Indian governments and to continue the elimination of their land
bases through another round of individual allotment programs.
Beloved children were forced to leave their families and homes to attend
the military or religious run boarding schools. Some were not allowed to return to their homes for years.
Original language was disallowed and punishments for speaking it were
severe. Strict military disciplines were
observed. The food provided was often
poorly prepared and malnutrition and sickness were common. Many children died. Inadequate records were kept and families
were denied visits to sick children or access to their graves. Denied their language, clothing, natural
foods, song, dance, and forms of worship, these young people were forced to
alter their appearance and conform to new and unfamiliar standards. Reminded
daily that they were ignorant heathens, and that old ways must be forsaken,
many of them grew up confused and despondent, often turning to alcohol or
converting to Christianity (or both), when they returned to their Nations.
Others Natives rebelled, secretly speaking in Traditional tongues, risking the
certain punishment that resulted if they were discovered. Some merely ran away and returned to their
families, to be hidden or sent away to other relatives.
At most of these “training facilities”, the demand to accept and
practice Christianity was non-negotiable, but for most, the religion provided
little comfort from the poverty and despair which filled their lives. Most of these schools were actually military
training establishments intended to “create productive members of a greater
society.” The military discipline was
thought to be appropriate given the popular belief that Native children had
inherent discipline problems. It was hoped that these strict systems, which
sought to replace every aspect of Native life, would cause a shift in student
loyalties leading to a disintegration of the old tribal ties when they finally
went home. The brainwashing succeeded
not in a transfer of loyalty, but in a predictable confusion of identity.
Burdened with an irrelevant and alien knowledge, many of these cultural
refugees returned carrying the parasites of self-hatred and contempt for their
own people. A sign at one of these
boarding schools, circa early 1900’s, said it all. “Tradition Is The Enemy Of Progress”.
World War II saw a new generation of Indians enlisting in the military. It was viewed on reservations as merely the
continuance of the warrior tradition.
44,000 American Indians, out of a total Native American population of
less than 350,000, served with distinction between 1941 and 1945 in both
European and Pacific theaters of war.
More than 40,000 Indian people left their reservations to work in
ordnance depots, factories, and other war industries. American Indians also
invested more than $50 million in war bonds, and contributed generously to the
Red Cross and the Army and Navy Relief societies. Seventeen million dollars of those bonds were purchased with
lease and allocation monies. The tribes
also donated food, minerals, rangelands, resources, and reservation lands for
bombing runs and artillery ranges. Ironically,
one fourth of the Japanese American citizens interred were held on reservation
lands. This statistic is amazing considering Natives were among the poorest
people in the Nation. One third of all
eligible Native men, 18 to 50, served.
The October 24, 1942 Saturday Evening Post put it in perspective when it
proclaimed, “We would not need the selective service if all volunteered like
Indians…”
As previously mentioned, these servicemen and women came into direct
contact with mainstream America, and in that brief period of time many of our
fathers returned home believing that they had finally become Americans. Their hopes were again shattered as the
stereotypes of Hollywood prevailed and they returned to life at home still
considered "ignorant” second-class
citizens, incapable of handling their own affairs. These were the days of Ira Hayes, a Pima who gained at least a
momentary fame for having been one of Marines who was photographed raising the
flag on Iwo Jima . Hayes died a lonely
alcoholic. Were it not for Johnny
Cash’s song about him (The Ballad Of Ira Hayes, Bitter Tears), a decade or so
later, the world might have forgotten him altogether. But he was not the only one.
Hollywood rushed to cash in on a new interest and nostalgia about the
wild west, and Indians were, once and for all, stamped into the molds that
still shape our image worldwide as romanticized painted savages in beads and
feathers—horses, war-whoops, teepees, and all.
The Nations drew further into themselves. Reverse racism and internal isolation developed to the point
where anything that represented the outside world was viewed with suspicion and
a guilt-ridden yearning. Yet, we honored our Vets and flew the American Flag
with a bitter pride. Traditionals
continued speaking their languages, performing the Ceremonies (once again
legal), and praying as they had for millennia. However, by this time many
Indians were convinced the old ways and days were gone. There was nothing left from those times they
could recognize except for the racism that still controlled their lives from
Washington. Though they wanted what
Americans had, flew the flag, and watched the world around them speed up and
change, they still were not convinced that they should become Americans.
Whole families turned to alcohol.
It became a new tradition along with ready-made cigarette smoking,
jeans, and cowboy boots.
1950’s America tried termination.
Tribal governments and Bands were officially disbanded and
dissolved. Tribal lands held in trust
or in common were divided into allotment-like parcels between the
families. Tribal aide programs were
dissolved and since it was recognized that few opportunities to find work
existed in their poverty-stricken communities, many Natives were offered the
“opportunity” to relocate to urban areas where it was thought they would
encounter greater success (and assimilation).
The relocation programs developed into a nation wide attempt to force
Indians to leave the reservation to go to the cities. Many of the young women found their way into government clinics
where they signed papers they could not understand and were sterilized without
their knowledge. In the cities they did
not find opportunity, they found what the blacks and other minorities already
faced—more poverty and more racism.
Some returned to the rez, but many did not. They huddled in Indin-town, frequenting their own bars and
marking their territory. The drive and
ambition that most Anglo-Americans seemed born with was missing and they viewed
the outside world with suspicion and hostility. The off-rez world remained a foreign and inhospitable place.
It seemed that Indians, no matter where they were,
lived in a bubble. It was a vacuum that
witnessed the everyday passing of old values, ethics, language, ceremony, and
viewpoint—but allowed virtually nothing to enter and replace what was being
lost. Only the sterile and unpleasant
economic realities of poverty and suffering seemed real. Families isolated together for generations
developed the natural strains, feuds, and conflicts that too much familiarity
and lack of freedom foment. Another
generation passed, and in some Tribes, these difficulties festered until family
members didn't speak to each other and the tribal circles were broken. Epidemic levels of dependency on alcohol
continued to sweep through entire families.
Many of the smaller unchanging reservation or urban environments saw an
almost complete loss of language, values, discipline, spirituality and
knowledge of the past. Dependence on
the Tribe was replaced by dependence on the BIA and the US government. Respect diminished between family members
and generations grew apart, without common purpose, hope, or ideals. They learned to want what most white people
had—they wanted not to want.
Instead of viewing the elderly as the Keepers of
Tradition and Wisdom, the Elders now began to be seen simply as used-up old
people. With Traditional forms of government
dispersed, leaders began to be suspected of having ulterior motives, and of
being untrustworthy and selfish. Many
of them had characters that justified these suspicions.
Progressives began looking down on their own people, especially those
Traditionals who stubbornly wanted to
preserve everything they could of their remaining land bases, spiritual life,
and culture. Even in the poverty and
squalor of the times, these Progressives believed the Old Ways to be dead and
tried to be like other Americans. True
tribal relationships were often broken, though every Nation had those enclaves
of individual families whose strength of character and will were unconquerable.
They maintained language and culture while many of their relatives tried to
forget they were Indian. Other
Nations, with large or isolated reservations (or strongly organized Traditional
governments), had managed to remain semi-protected from the encroachment of
American values and progress.
Denial of racial heritage was frequent.
Often those with lighter skin denied their Indian heritage, especially
in the south and southwest. Who wanted
to admit they had a "colored" ancestor in the woodpile? These who could pass as White began to deny
their Red, considering that heritage ignorant and uncivilized. Some assimilated southern Native families
used to say, as recently as 1960, "at least our side of the family ain't
colored Indians!" In some states,
legislation allowed that it only took one eighth of Indian ancestry to place one
in the non-white category. This
affected people’s voting eligibility, ability to own land, get married, serve
as a juror, or even be a legal American citizen. There were legal, economic, and social advantages to being
"White".
The isolation, deprivation, and brainwashing of the preceding decades
had almost reached its climax.
Spirituality was replaced with religion, and that religion offered
little day-to-day comfort. Most
Traditional spirituality was inseparable from the actions and thought of
everyday life. The power and “spirit” of life was inherent in every action and
interaction, including a relationship to the earth and other life. But European-American religion was centered
on a book and specifically raised Humans above their surroundings with a
forward-looking myth of hope and deliverance.
It gave man dominion over the earth and all its creatures. This seemed to justify the apparent power
the white man had—from his weapons to his strong resistance to disease, his
ability to tolerate alcohol, his endless populations, and architectural
monstrosities, etc.
In the oratory of the time, it is evident that many Traditionals
recognized the White religion as a system of rationalization and justification
for individual actions rather than a holistic system to facilitate balance and
harmony common to most Native spiritual thought. However, it did feature a dramatic and appealing story with some
familiar symbols for lost peoples to grab onto. A significant number of families lost the social interaction,
oral traditions, and parenting values that had been passed generation to
generation within the circle of the family.
Christianity offered an appealing fable of hope but provided little concrete
and understandable relevant guidance or solace for the daily problems Natives
faced. The refugee cycle of children
growing up on their own, with little guidance or direction, began. Beginning after World War One and
accelerating after World War Two, many Natives joined the lost generations. Deprived of their families, their culture,
and their Spirit, they were able to teach the children—nothing.
It is important to note that there were exceptions to this description.
To generalize about the individual experiences of the Tribes is relatively
impossible. Each area of the country
had its own experiences and realities, some profoundly different and
extraordinary. Many Tribes and
individual families were able to keep their centers intact. Unfortunately, a
significant number of our Peoples were affected by the policies that
contributed to the scenario described above.
One need only travel from rez to rez, rancheria to rancheria, city to
city, to find the common denominators that have contributed to our tribal
problems with drug and alcohol dependency, violence and abuse, incest and
suicide, tribal corruption and nepotism, and a disruption of basic Traditional
values.
Essay Thirty-Four BlueWolf & Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
A New Beginning
“From a
small island in the great western ocean, a wave swept back across the land,
restoring the power and pride of the Indian Nations”
Amoshi
For many of us, renewal
started at a most unlikely place—an abandoned federal maximum-security prison
on Alcatraz Island in the San Francisco Bay.
An obscure statute allowing Natives to occupy abandoned military
facilities for educational purposes was discovered, and in 1970, a group
calling themselves “Indians Of All Tribes” took the “Rock” intending to
establish a Native educational facility.
The government was shocked, and responded with a John Wayne-like
reaction. The media picked up the story
and the “All –Tribes” defiance encouraged others to reconsider their
capitulations and re-establish their pursuit of Native agendas and initiatives,
particularly examining treaties and loss of lands and fishing rights.. That began a Movement that sparked a rebirth
of pride and power for Indigenous Peoples who had suffered a continuing crisis
of identity on reservations, rancherias, and in urban ghettos.
The press called it “the occupation of Alcatraz”. Traditional people called it a fulfillment
of Prophecy, a public affirmation of survival, and a push for greater
recognition for the rights of Indigenous Nations. Young people called it Red Power, or “The Movement”, and saw it
as the beginning of an opportunity to recapture our identity, lands, treaty
rights, and common purpose.
Certain place names
developed symbolic importance to the Movement.
Alcatraz was about education and culture. Pit River was the site of a different kind of struggle—the struggle
for lands illegally taken. The State of
California attempted to pay all the California Tribes a meager forty-seven
cents an acre for lands taken illegally.
Corporate giants like PG&E, Boise Cascade, Burlington Northern, and
others owned much of the Achumawi (Pit River) land. In an attempt to
re-establish their land claims, the Tribe purposefully challenged the trespass
statutes and the case found its way into court. The court would not allow the issue of ownership to be litigated
and charges were eventually dropped.
However, national attention had been drawn to the issue of Indian land
claims. At Frank’s Landing, in southern
Washington St., another struggle began to take place—this one mostly about
racism and fishing rights. Native
fishermen on the Nisqually River were pitted against sport fishermen in the
area, attempting to assert the Northern Indians right to hunt and fish as
guaranteed by the 1854 Treaty of Medicine Creek. It was there that members of the Quillayute, Nisqually and
Muckleshoot tribes, among others, defied state laws by dipping their nets into
the river to harvest salmon. Violence occurred and life was lost.
Drawing on a long tradition of intertribal gatherings of leaders
and elders for the discussion of important issues, the word went out to invite
the nations to a Traditional Unity Convention held in the Tulalip Nation in
Washington State (summer 1970). It was
there that many of us heard a national call to action and unity expressed and
affirmed by Elders from over thirty-four Native Nations.
Red Pride swept across the land like a wave, guided by the gentle hands
of Elders, pushed by the angry wind of youth, to begin a process of
regeneration of Spirit and a renewal of purpose for all Indian Peoples.
Richard Oakes, and others of the Indians of All-Tribes movement,
suffered a number of personal tragedies and sacrifices there, ultimately making
their efforts all the more heroic and meaningful to those who came after. They should be remembered and honored for
the part they played in the fulfillment of that prophecy of healing. Their strength of commitment led others to
stand for their lands and rights in California and Washington—at Puyallup, Pit
River, Middletown, DQU—and again at Wounded Knee—eventually extending all over
North America. Suddenly, we were warriors
again, proud of our identity and our heritage, and willing to take risks for
our beliefs. The Traditional Movement embodied a belief that the land was at
the center of our strengths and should be protected and guarded from
exploitation. Language and cultural
heritage were recognized as the primary source of unity available to struggling
Tribes. Spiritual belief and commitment
were put forward as the source of our Power and the reason for our survival. As warriors, we were asked to support the
Traditional People in their local attempts to hold their own against
assimilated tribal councils and groups who did not share a commitment to those
values.
At the same time, along with the All-Tribes Skins, there emerged a
Minneapolis-based group calling themselves AIM, the American Indian
Movement. These new Warrior Societies
proved completely loyal to the Traditional viewpoint, whether they understood
what that meant or not. Demonstrations,
takeovers, and media blitzes highlighted the times culminating, but not ending,
in AIM's leadership and participation at Wounded Knee Two and during the Long
Walk. Wounded Knee was a South Dakota
Lakota local conflict between Progressives and Traditionals, which progressed
to a continual state of violence. A short
description of those events will be made later in this text. The Long Walk and Trail Of Broken Treaties
were attempts to draw attention to the legal and social inequities of
Washington’s relationship with Native Nations and the Bureau Of Indian Affairs
complicity in defrauding and disenfranchising tribal governments, as well as a
general incompetence in handling the affairs of Native Tribes and citizens.
There was plenty of violence, frustration, disharmony, and ignorance
accompanying those turbulent times—but these problems always accompany the
turning points of history. There was
also a sense of extended family, cooperation, common purpose, power,
relationship, culture, and tradition that filled our minds, hearts, and spirits
with hope. Among the Elders were men
and women who had grown up steeped in Tradition. They had been prepared and taught in the old way by Elders who
still remembered the free days and ways of their youth. Some of them carried Power. If you were lucky you got to know them,
spend time with them, and see the effects of their Power on the natural world.
The familiarity, unity, and respect that was shared in those times was
exhilarating to those who had grown up surrounded by despair and dependency, or
by denial and ignorance. What fine
examples they were!
It was a time of wonder and
awakening. It was also a time for the
Road. We began to move about the land
freely again. Rediscovering our
connection to the Earth, bodies were put into motion. For the first time many young urban or dispossessed Natives were
exposed to Tribal cultures, intact and relatively undisturbed. Spokesmen for the Hopi and Six Nations
traveled coast to coast to speak of their prophecies and the need for a return
to traditional values and spiritual beliefs.
People began to consider the natural organization of the circle of the
family, with its respect for the importance of Elders and children. Landless Indians were given an opportunity
to once again feel responsible as keepers of the land.
Naïve and innocent, many of those who were rediscovering their identity
were thoroughly unprepared for the resistance they often experienced at the
hands of their own People. It was a
shock for urban Indians to discover that their Tribes were divided over issues
like leasing lands for mineral rights.
The vehemence of the divisions was disturbing and disconcerting. It was a counterpoint to the feeling of
unity encountered at Traditional gatherings.
Despite the internal conflicts, everyone was realistic about how the
Federal Government would respond to this new Pride. Federal Law Enforcement considered us subversive and immediately
descended on Indian gatherings en masse.
With guns slung low on their hips, they were all John Wayne, swaggering
among the families of mothers and fathers, children and grandparents. We realized then that they knew nothing
about us except what they had seen in the movies and on TV. And they were afraid! Afraid of what they didn't know or couldn't
understand about us—afraid of our "savage" potential. We smelled their fear. Red Power was real!
Others have detailed the specific history of those days, so we will
not. Let it be said only that we are
proud to have shared those times with our Elders, our brothers and sisters, and
our families.
Alcatraz was not an island!
Alcatraz was a joining together—and a renewal.
Essay Thirty-Five BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Divided—Traditional Vs Progressive
After Alacatrz, the buzz of
the "Movement" polarized communities. The labels Traditional and Progressive were coined. To understand what these two terms represent
we need to understand, in a general way, the processes of original tribal
leadership and government.
Traditional leadership was often based on service and the inherent
qualities, talents, and character of those who most effectively provided that
service. So the best hunters were
often followed or depended on to lead the hunt. The most daring and resourceful warriors were given the
opportunity, by the power of their ability, to lead during battle. The most visionary and spiritually oriented
people were expected to oversee the spiritual welfare and ceremonial life of
the Peoples. The most proven and
effective healers were expected to provide their Power and skills to care for
the sick and injured. Native abilities,
talents, and superior character rewarded and encouraged.
As always, with human beings, the intricacy of social politics sometimes
puts the wrong person in charge at the wrong time, but by and large, many true
democracies existed in the pre-Columbus Americas. An example of these might be the Councils that enforced the Great
Law of the Six Nations, guided the Choctaw Confederacy, or sustained the
Mississippian Civilization during its 5000 years. Felix Cohen wrote, "It is out of a rich Indian democratic
tradition that the distinctive political ideals of American life emerged. Politically, there was nothing in the
Empires and Kingdoms of Europe in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries to
parallel the democratic constitution of the Iroquois Confederacy, with its
provisions for initiative, referendum and recall, and its suffrage for women as
well as for men."
One of the unique characteristics common to many different Nations was
the right of an individual to follow the leader of choice based on a "what
have you done for me lately" approach to service. Though leaders did have a certain status
among the people--that status was never guaranteed to last. Even though respect might endure, should a
better and more effective leader demonstrate his or her abilities, the People
could "change horses" at will.
Often decisions were made by
groups of leaders reaching consensus, rather than by one individual making a
solitary choice. This confused
Europeans, who were used to appointing, electing, or being forced to accept one
man as their spokesman or leader. Most
of the unintentional misunderstandings that occurred during treaty making
happened because Americans were looking in vain for one "Chief," when
in fact, the power resided in the hands of a group of leaders directly
responsible to their People. Of course
as time went on the U.S. Government became aware of this and used it as a tool
against the Peoples to illegally obtain treaty signatures to steal lands and
resources they knew would never be given up intentionally by the Nations.
After George Washington declared the first policy of "assimilating"
Indians into the mainstream society through an inter-breeding of the races, the
job of pushing assimilation was taken over by missionaries and organized
religion. Nevertheless it was the reaction to the corruption of the Department
of the Army's individual Indian Agencies that pushed for a reorganizing of the
"savages" into more malleable political entities—that could be
watched over (and controlled) more effectively. In the early 1900’s, the American Government began looking for a
way to introduce their own brand of "democracy" to the Tribes.
Though some Tribes received the outlines of the American plan in 1927,
it was the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 that provided for the formation of
tribal constitution—with governments comprised of general councils of the
enrolled tribal memberships, along with quorums, parliamentary procedures,
tribal chairmen, secretaries, treasurers, organized meetings, elections and
voting.
The push to enroll tribal
members came with the Reorganization Act, ostensibly to establish official
membership lists for voting purposes. During all of these registration attempts
some people were left off these lists intentionally, some refused to register
out of fear or as a sign of continuing resistance, nevertheless these lists
became the basis of official tribal membership. Knowing that the diehard Traditional peoples (and much of the
common membership) would shun or ignore this foreign approach to governing
themselves, the Federal Government sought to establish governing bodies more
sympathetic to assimilation and Progressive thinking. Smaller Tribal Councils came into being. We have come to see
clearly, in the last few decades, how government employees and unscrupulous leaders
would eventually misuse this formula for tribal re-organization.
As decades passed, some Indians were drawn to the Council positions
offered by the BIA (Bureau of Indian Affairs).
It was gainful employment, close to home, and it had advantages beyond a
paycheck. These "leaders"
often involved themselves for the same reasons many American political figures
do, not because they have innate talents or special abilities to serve the
People, but simply to gain influence, power, economic profit, or special status
for themselves and their families.
To be fair, those early Tribal Council pioneers probably did not enter
into their positions with these questionable goals in mind, but to attempt to
help their families out of poverty.
Perhaps some of the old-time values for serving the people
remained. Nevertheless, the 1934
Reorganization Act precipitated numerous intra-tribal conflicts, though it was
still to be decades before the right conditions would exist for significant
economic exploitation of the Tribes through these new
"governments." In fact, it
was the 1950 and 1960’s Tribal
Councils that were often comprised of members or descendants of the lost
generation. Lacking the values of a Traditional upbringing, these fully assimilated Natives were completely
taken with the consumer ethic of mainstream America. Primarily interested in success and security, Progressives lacked
any commitment to Traditional values and even considered those values ignorant
and outdated. Thoroughly convinced that
they should assimilate and share in the American dream, they took advantage of
the Traditional’s reluctance to become involved, and through tribal
“elections”—became the federally recognized representatives of their
Tribes. This served the interests of
the BIA perfectly. As Tribal Chairmen,
Councils, or Chiefs—they were in perfect position to commit Tribes to
relationships with non-Indian lawyers and the large corporations that were
discovering vast quantities of valuable resources on heretofore “worthless”
Indian lands. The Tribal leaders often
received under-the-table payoffs or “kickbacks” for successfully negotiated
agreements. These assimilated
American’s, as important tribal leaders , despised the Traditionals for holding
onto what they (the leaders) regarded as obsolete social, spiritual, and cultural practices. They relished their
new power to be a VIP.
Rather than creating true democratic representation for Tribes, to
replace their traditional consensual democracies, the 1934 tribal government
Constitutions saddled them with a system that depended on government social and
economic programs.
If the general memberships
of the Tribes had fully understood the principles of the Indian Reorganization
Act, and had immersed themselves in the process of General Council
decision-making from the outset, the form might have been effective, but
culturally the Tribes were not ready for an American kind of government.
Traditional suspicion and lack of participation (plus the missing checks and
balances that attempt to make the American process equitable) accomplished a
contradictory result. Rather than
encouraging tribal members to participate in the General Council process, it
caused them to shun or ignore it, leaving the government-to-government
interaction and decision-making solely to the small Tribal Councils,
Chiefs, or Tribal Chairmen.
The U.S. Government and Corporations finally had those single
"chiefs" they'd always been looking for with the recognized authority
(at least by the BIA), to push and approve any program and proposal regarding
tribal lands and resources. With so
much money involved—fraud, corruption, graft, and nepotism within the Tribes
was bound to occur. The pie-in-the-sky
promises of corporations like Peabody Coal sounded wonderful on paper. Strip-mine Black Mesa in the Four Corners
area, powder the coal, pump up water from the aquifers, and send it all through
a pipeline to make electricity for the west. The Tribes would make big bucks. Traditionals foresaw that a future water and
energy crisis might severely tax not only their precious resources, but their
unity—causing them enormous inner turmoil and political strain. However, with the usual shortsightedness of
American Progress, Progressive leaders, with generations of poverty under their
belts, were easy targets.
In the late 1960’s, and particularly after Alcatraz, Traditional
protests of proposed land leases and concessions to mineral and resource
mega-corporations publicized one of the fundamental differences between the
Progressives and the Traditionals.
Traditionals believed the land to be Sacred. Traditionals were for protecting their resources, not exploiting
them. They were for preserving
language, ceremony, and tradition—not discarding them. Also, since they refused to involve
themselves in the "puppet" governments they despised, they had no
real power to effect change except through public demonstration, civil
disobedience, protest, and media publicity.
Progressives wanted "economic progress." Their ideas about what they did, or did not
believe were obscured by their adamant acceptance of Government programs and
"economic" issues. Since the
Government (i.e. BIA federal law enforcement) stood behind the
"recognized" Tribal Councils, bitter and often violent confrontations
between Traditionals and Progressive tribal police and Federal Agents occurred.
These conflicts led to deep divisions between the two groups. Political and vindictive murder, rape, and
assault were commonplace in the 1970’s—especially where morally bankrupt
federally recognized "leaders" held total power over their Nations
and their lands. Even the 1973
occupation of Wounded Knee in South Dakota, which centered around the alleged
misconduct of a tribal chairmen and his Progressive government did not solve
the poor system of government most Indian Nations endure, though quite a few
people lost their lives in the effort.
Many Tribes today are still in the grip of criminals or carpetbaggers who
manipulate these obsolete and ineffective systems for their own gain. A few Nations have managed, with educated
and responsible leadership, to benefit their Peoples. Other Tribes are ignorantly racing to diminish the power of their
general memberships by rewriting their constitutions and placing that power in
the hands of fewer and fewer, often unqualified, "leaders."
The Dream that was born innocent at Alcatraz, came into its adulthood
during these times. The Movement
suffered the death, loss, and imprisonment of many of our brothers and
sisters. The repercussions of the
killing of the two FBI Agents, Williams and Coler, at the Jumping Bull's
compound on the Pine Ridge Reservation in 1975, echo around the Nation even
now, more than three decades later.
Leonard Peltier, though almost universally recognized as innocent of the
charges he was convicted of, still sits in prison as of this writing; a victim
of a corrupt law enforcement agency (the FBI), and the war that existed in
those times. (This same agency of
misfits and low-lifes has only recently been given broad powers to undermine
the Constitution and infringe on the rights of citizens again.)
The U. S. Government and the American people have never accepted that
the various local conflicts of the 1970’s were simply a continuation of the
Indian Wars against the United States and not just isolated events perpetrated
by activists and dissidents. As
evidenced by solemn Treaty agreements, we have never stopped believing in the
Sovereignty of our Nations.
At Pine Ridge, hostility and fear ran high. Those who talk about how the Agents were executed, forget that
the FBI had previously, and callously, ignored the violence on the Rez.
No warfare conventions had ever applied to Federal/Indian conflicts of
the past and none existed there. Armed
Federal Agents entered a
Sovereign Nation, knowing that there was a similarly armed group of Indians
near there (as well as a camp full of Elders, women, and children), purportedly
to pursue an unknown person, in an unconfirmed vehicle, who had stolen a pair
of cowboy boots! It was an ill-advised, if not foolhardy act to begin
with. The Feds were well aware of the
fear they evoked in the people of this area.
Few remember that an Indian, Joe Stuntz, was also killed in the gunfire
that followed, and that these Agents were not the only Federal Law Enforcement
Agents on the reservation at the time.
Fifteen minutes after the firefight the area was literally swarming with agents, including
helicopters. Fear and violence were
directing the actions of both sides. Eventually, even though his two
"accomplices" were exonerated of any crime, and despite proven
Government tampering and intimidation, Leonard was chosen to be the
"sacrificial goat" to fulfill the FBI need for someone (guilty or
not), to pay for the murders of their two comrades. But no one was ever held accountable for the killing of Joe
Stuntz.
Similarly, though emotions regarding the American Indian Movement occupation
of Wounded Knee still run deep and divided in the local Lakota population,
Indians definitely sacrificed a greater number of lives in the conflict and no
one has ever been prosecuted for those murders.
The lines between Progressive and Traditional have blurred over
time. Many Nations still labor under
the yoke of unresponsive or unrepresentative leadership. Tribes continue to have their resources
exploited and their trust monies unaccounted for. Whistleblower Dave Henry's
revealing book, "Stealing From Indians," details his firing by the
BIA after his discovery of a multitude of accounting errors and questionable
practices resulting in billions of missing Indian trust fund dollars--a result
of government mismanagement, fraud, and corruption involving both Tribal and
Federal government employees. Legal
action to force the Secretary of the Interior and the Chief of the BIA to admit
the mismanagement, if not the outright theft of billions of dollars of Indian
trust monies continues today. (Google Cobell to find out the latest info on the
web.)
For a while, the government
was "losing", contaminating, or destroying boxes of evidence and
being threatened with contempt by the Federal Judge appointed to the case. All this is a direct result of the
Reorganization Act and the consolidating power of Progressive tribal councils
who failed to demand accurate BIA accounting of funds because they were
ignorant dupes, or active participants, in the theft. Today the Government acknowledges the exact amounts missing may
never be known, and a settlement offer is in the wind.
Most of those who
were once committed to Traditional ideals still hold to that commitment. AIM is still around, as are many of the
Warrior Societies, but the focus and unity of the Traditional Movement has
diminished nationally. Fortunately, the
awareness of the importance of what is being lost culturally within individual
Nations has increased. Even
Progressives are spouting Traditional rhetoric. Meanwhile some Traditionals, at least superficially, approve of
the meager economic benefits being experienced by gaming Tribes. The
viciousness of the struggle between Traditional values and Progressive
economics has lessened, and in some places, there is even a spirit of
cooperation toward both ideals.
However, as time counts forward, there has been a lessening of the
cooperative spirit, a jaded satisfaction with the trappings of newly found
wealth, and a loss of the feeling of imperative necessity that the Nations
continue to push for treaty recognitions, land claims, and real
sovereignty. Ultimately we must ask
whether the Spirits of the missing in action, the murdered, and the imprisoned
who paid with their lives or freedom will be respected and remembered as they
should. Because we loved them, we hope
a new generation of Red Power Children will emerge to follow in their
tracks.
Essay Thirty-Six BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N Skins
Crossing Tribal Boundaries
In the 1970s, Alcatraz and
the efforts of the All-Tribes Movement encouraged Indians all over the
continent to come together and find common ground. Traditional Elders agreed unity was a prerequisite to preparations
of the Nations for the difficulties foreseen ahead. Unity Conventions and
Gatherings were held. At these
Gatherings, representatives of the Hopi and Six Nations Peoples continued to
reveal and compare the prophecies of their Nations. These prophecies had common themes—Indians should not become too
dependent on the modern world. We were
encouraged to remember our original responsibilities and relationships to the
land and each other. We were told to
always teach our coming generations that the world can change at any time, and
that it is always purified when the misdeeds of men become too great for the
Creator and Mother Earth to tolerate.
Today much of what was said then has been forgotten, but in our minds,
their call to unity has never diminished.
Some call it
Pan-Indianism. We prefer to think of it
as an expression of a visible and intentional attempt at Inter-Tribal
Unity. Once our spiritual life was to
be found in everything we did. A sense
of magic and mystery filled our lives and we believed that anything was
possible. We did not separate the
sacred from the mundane. Power was
everywhere. We shared a love for our
families and had a long time tradition of respect for the circle of the family
and the role each member played within it.
Now, though alcohol, poverty, and grief weaken us, we recognize that the
Creator has given each of our Peoples specific Ceremony and Ritual to keep our
Balance. We share the all-important
ideal of "Respect." Indeed,
we share many things. Just as the Pipe
of Red Stone crosses the boundaries of Nations as a Sacred symbol, as sign
language once fostered international communication, and as the Ghost Dance
brought Peoples together in hope and prayer, so do today's inter-tribal forms
unite the vastly different Indigenous Nations that inhabit this land. At one
time, we were as different from one another as the Europeans—English from
Spanish, French from German, Basque from Portuguese, etc. We had different languages, different
stories, and different cultures.
It is first in our minds to
acknowledge that those of us who still have the opportunity to learn our
language and oral traditions are obligated to preserve those original and
distinct qualities of our Nations.
But for those Indians who cannot, there exists a desire to learn
Traditional methods of dealing with the daily events of our lives, as
well as a desire to pass to the children essences of what made our cultures and
values different from the dominant society of today. The shared experiences of
subjugation, imprisonment, isolation, poverty, dependence, and survival have
forged us into Nations that should be obsessed with preserving culture. Some
Tribes still remember their languages and speak them, performing their ancient
Ceremonies and Rituals to fulfill their obligations to the Creator. Others have lost almost everything of what
they once were.
Today, we believe everyone benefits from the All-Tribes Spirit. Moreover, especially for the thousands of
unenrolled, separated, or unknowns that live away from their Original
Peoples—that spirit may be all that remains of the ties to their heritage. Shared ways give them an opportunity to
maintain their spiritual balance and harmony, to feel their Indian
extended-family strength, and to help pass on Traditional values and culture to
their children. They may not be active members of a specific tribe, but they
are "in-support", and that is important.
Despite the fears of some that this cross-cultural sharing will open the
floodgates to wannabes and opportunists, we believe Indians are smarter than
that. They can easily recognize the
genuine from the bogus. For those who
slip by, unless they demonstrate the desire to profit or gain recognition, what
harm will they do?
A greater threat to our Peoples is that we will allow materialism and
consumerism to usurp our values, causing us to slowly and surely give up
speaking our languages, holding to our lands, supporting our families, dancing
and singing, performing our ceremonial duties, honoring our older ones,
introducing our newborn, caring for those who pass away, and teaching our youth
the discipline and values of our Elders.
We must qualify our endorsement of this
"unity". Just because ways
may be shared does not mean we believe they may be adapted or altered
indiscriminately. In regard to
spiritual form and ceremony for example; one does not simply “decide” to be a
Ceremonial Leader or Instructor. There
is a protocol and a correct way for these things to come about. This is one of the differences between
Traditional Indians and those who have adopted methods that are more
modern. Not every Indian can carry a
Pipe, instruct a Sun Dance, or pour water in a sweat lodge. First you are chosen, then prepared, then
instructed, then authorized (and there may be limitations to your
authorization.) We're generalizing of
course, all Nations have their own ways, but our family believes that it is
primarily through oral tradition that our ceremonies and rituals are taught and
preserved, not by reading, or writing books.
To understand the bond between us that crosses Tribal boundaries, one
has only to visit large inter-tribal gatherings, spiritual ceremonies, or unity
conventions. The feeling of extended
family is ever present. These
gatherings have been occurring from times even before Europeans came to our
shores. Our greatest victories against
our opponents occur when we act together in unison for a common purpose.
There are still Indians who believe that their Tribe is the only
one. Similarly, there are those who
judge each and every person by their color of skin or tribal affiliation. While we agree that preserving specific
tribal languages, identities, and culture is of paramount importance, we also
believe that many of our old family prejudices must be discarded so that the
unnecessary divisions between us will disappear.
To share what we hold
in common between our Nations is an important step toward the unity that will
make us a power that cannot be ignored.
Unlike those superficial symbols of Hollywood, to which we have been
compared and subjected, we hope to fulfill the prayers of those Elders, now
gone, who wished only that our Nations endure.
Essay Thirty-Seven BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N Skins
Wannabes And Unrecognized Indians
During the 1970s there were
many people attracted to the Movement.
Enrolled and Federally recognized Indians, unenrolled and unrecognized
Indians, "white" people who wanted to help and hang out, and
"white" people who wanted to reverse assimilate and magically become
Indian. Both enrolled, and unenrolled
Indians came from all over. Some had
grown up on the Rez, some in the city, some entirely separated from their
culture and Tribe. Many mixed-bloods
whose parents or grandparents had left their original Peoples began
rediscovering their heritage with the publicity that Alcatraz and the Movement
drew nationally. Children, stolen at
birth from their Indian parents and placed in Christian foster homes, sought
their identity. Everyone with a family
story about an Indian in their background began the search. Some were rewarded with verifiable ancestry,
and some found the stories to be false or without proof. It continues today.
Many of these began believing they were Cherokee, the most familiar
tribal name, with five hundred years of Indian-European interbreeding. George Washington ordered this policy of
intentional interbreeding to weaken the strong Eastern Tribes.
One could almost always expect that a mixed-blood, (in this case someone
with Indian and European or Black heritage), who knew nothing about Indians but
claimed some heritage, would find a Cherokee Princess or Grandmother in their
"roots." It became a joke
among other Indians, much to the chagrin of those who really were descended
from that great Nation.
Many of the "stolen" ones discovered themselves—mixed-bloods
and full bloods alike. They began their
search not only for a personal ethnic identity, but for a cultural and
spiritual one as well.
Friendly "white" people, who knew Traditionals, joined the
struggle intent on helping. Often they
failed to ask if their help was wanted.
Well-meaning, but in the way, they were generally tolerated and allowed
to remain.
Many young white, who knew nothing of the Nations, but were continuing
the hippie quest for new life-ways to fill up their dull, meaningless, and
spiritually bankrupt lives, descended on the Movement hoping to find the
romantic and noble people depicted by Hollywood. Attracted by the warm, extended-Indian-family feeling, they
stayed to help financially with transportation, gas, money, and supplies, often
with a tenacious and fanatic support.
Some had to be told when it was time for them to go home.
A few of these people, with a fabled Indian hiding in the woodpile of
their past, made no attempt to verify their ancestry. They simply gave themselves a colorful name, picked out a Tribe,
and became instant Indians. These
people earned the label Wannabe. They
are not to be confused with mixed bloods of a known or verifiable lineage, no
matter how ignorant of their Indian heritage these descendants might be. Wannabes were, and are, people who have
fraudulently attempted to infiltrate a Tribe or community, establishing an
identity without a real relationship or attachment to their original people.
Typically, their actions are defined by furthering their own cause. They "become" Indians for money,
prestige, novelty, attention, or just the simple dramatic fulfillment of
play-acting out their childhood cowboy-and-indian fantasy.
At the bottom of the barrel, we must not forget the
"plants." These despised ones
infiltrated the Movement to provide information or intelligence to those who
opposed us. Fortunately, the Doug
Durhams of the past were, for the most part, quickly exposed. (Douglas Durham
was a non-Indian FBI plant, who infiltrated AIM and was eventually
exposed.)
Wannabes persist today, some with more than a decade of pretending under
their belts. Often they claim to carry
Medicine, to be healers or teachers, craftsmen or artists, and continue to
perform, lecture, or offer their wares for profit without participating in the
life of their Original Peoples, or without having any real connection with
local Indigenous Peoples. Occasionally one may find a real disenfranchised
Indian in this group as well.
Wannabes continue to be the subject of hot debate among Original
Peoples, especially with the Federal Government getting deeper into the soup of
who is, and who is not, federally recognized.
Add to this the rapid intermarriage of Indian and non-Indian, with the
inevitable dilution of blood quantum, and the problem grows. According to some estimates, by the year 2070
less than one tenth of a percent of American Indians will be able to call themselves
full blood. With the individual Tribes
setting different standards for membership, even excluding many
"real" Indians from verifiable tribal affiliation, the guidelines to
identify who is and who is not, grow more and more confused. Federal census figures indicate more and
more Americans are identifying themselves as, at least part, Native
American. This causes some concern for
those Tribes who are still significantly dependent on census figures to define
government programs and allocation money.
Who is, and who is not a Wannabe has always been a subject for
argument. Some Indians consider anyone
of mixed-blood, that doesn't look ethnically Indian enough for them, a
Wannabe. (Whatever “that picture” looks
like!) Some require a specific lack of
blood quantum to qualify. To others it
is a lack of verifiable ancestry and familiarity with Indian culture. Whatever the answer, it is of obvious
concern to the Nations. Certainly there
have been cases where Wannabes have seriously offended Indigenous Peoples, but
then, on occasion, so have bonifide Indians.
Occasionally Wannabes have reaped economic benefits that might otherwise
have gone to Indians, and in some cases they have been a downright embarrassment,
but we wonder if they have ever contributed problematically to any of the more
serious and important issues of tribal sovereignty, inter-tribal unity,
economic, social, or political self-determination. Other than misrepresentation, or being a general annoyance, we
fail to see how they encourage government dependency, or affect the self-esteem
of our youth, or inhibit our ability to preserve language, culture,
spirituality, and traditional values.
We think we'll always have Wannabes.
Our cultures, spiritual heritage, and histories are too rich not to be a
magnet for the lost and unfulfilled in this Society. Too many non-Indians today are searching, and with an Anglo-Roman
heritage of borrowing gods and plagiarizing ideals, it should not be surprising
that they look our way. There are bound
to be those who believe they can simply pick and chose their ethnic
identity. Most of them are harmless.
Fortunately, we are always gathering new relatives among those Indians
who have been lost, separated, or who are just now discovering their true
heritage. Too many of us have come down one of those roads to judge
them too harshly. Providing they search
quietly, respectfully, and with humility, their companionship and loyalty can
only make our Nations stronger.
Essay Thirty-Eight BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N Skins
Blood Quantum
This is one of the most
contentious issues being discussed in Indian Country. All Tribes who participate in the government-to-government
relationship with the U.S. must establish guidelines for tribal membership in
order to define the limits of who is, or is not, eligible for the programs,
benefits (real or imagined), and decision-making processes necessary to
maintain that relationship.
Blood quantum originated as a way to define who was Anglo-Saxon (white)
and who was not. As far back as the 1700’s,
Anglos were setting up standards for ethnic membership in their exclusive
club. Sometimes a mere 1/8th mixture of
some other racial group (like Indian or Black) would disqualify you. Belonging to the club meant you could vote;
marry a "white" man or woman, own property, etc. There were substantial economic benefits to
being a recognized, and legal, "white" person.
Though blood quantum and percentage of heritage was important from the
first contacts with Anglo settlers, formal tribal enrollments generally began
with the allotment programs in the 1800’s.
Needing a system in which the title registration, transfer of property,
and legal tribal lineage could be cleanly and easily recorded required, first,
a process of translation and renaming of individuals. Tribal agencies and boarding schools were given the task of
recording the names of tribal members.
These names, which are currently carried by Natives, reflect the
different processes that were used to provide these records. Blood quantum was not really an issue
during the creation of these rolls, and the importance of becoming a “member”
was never entirely and clearly explained to the Peoples. Many Indians resented
and feared enrollment and refused to participate, even light-skinned ones. However, it soon became apparent that in
order to share in the division of reservation properties into individual family
allotments, enrollment was important.
When the decisions to break up tribal lands into allotments began, even
non-Native Whites and Blacks, found their way onto tribal rolls. Later, as federal programs for Indians were
allocated by Congress, the BIA decided that one-fourth was a sufficient
percentage to render one an Indian.
Often that became a standard for enrollment, although today the amounts
vary widely among "recognized" Tribes. The official establishment dates of enrollment change from Tribe
to Tribe. Some of the rolls were established
in the late 1800s, while others were determined in the 1920s, 30s, 50s, 60's and
70s. New standards are being debated,
revised and changed even as we write this.
Tribes being newly recognized today are, at this very moment,
establishing these "lists."
As long as Indians lived in poverty and isolation, except for allotment,
formal membership was a relatively unimportant issue. Members and non-members living side-by-side were most often
relatives. Treaty agreements included
government responsibilities to administer Native Tribal resources, lands, lease
agreements, healthcare, and even monies.
Tribes were not considered capable of handling their own financial
affairs, so the Army and the BIA administered payments and accounts. As Indians started receiving the trickle
down benefits of trust payments and claims settlements, and the Government
began funding tribal social programs with grants and legislated monies, the
issue heated up and enrollments took on greater and greater significance. But it was not until Indian Gaming hit the scene
in the 1990’s that the fires surrounding membership began to blaze out of
control, with new enrollment efforts and standards being set (to include or
exclude people from the process).
Suddenly it worked both ways.
Natives who had never before taken an interest in their Tribe climbed
out of the woodwork with their hands outstretched for their share of
profits. Enrollment numbers boomed as
people "re-established" their relationships to their Tribes. Often these "outsiders" were more
educated and assimilated than their cousins who had stayed on the Rez, and in
many places, they have taken over as business and council leaders.
Today, bookstore owners and genealogy
groups are being besieged by people looking for the "lost" proof of
verifiable Indian heritage. Resentment and tribal family quarrels and divisions
have increased. Instead of focusing on
the Tribe as a living entity, many Indians have copied the American anti-values
of an individual or family group acting solely on its own behalf and for its
own benefit. Enrollment records are
scrutinized and irregularities seized upon to exclude members or terminate
their membership. In some places,
records are doctored or forged to provide, or deny proof of enrollment. Enrollment, and the tribal right to
participation, is being used internally as a weapon. Qualifying quantum amounts vary significantly from Tribe to
Tribe. In some Tribes you have to be a
full blood, in others half. In some,
you can have miniscule blood quantum as long as you can verify relationship to
an originally enrolled member of the past.
Accepting the premise that it is a good thing to be enrolled, those
hardest hit by blood quantum requirements are not the feared wannabes or low
blood-percentage mixed-bloods, but those Indians who have mixed-Indian heritage. Many full bloods today are descended from
more than one Tribe, yet they are unable to enroll because they are unable to
fulfill the quantum requirements of either Tribe. People who have more than two tribal heritages are in even more
trouble. We know of several full bloods
who've had to register with a Tribe whose quantum requirements are low, even
though their quantum in that Tribe is insignificant compared with their quantum
in their primary Tribe. Within those
Tribes, they do not qualify for enrollment and tribal participation!
Despite the extremely varied and confused requirements adopted by
Federally Recognized Nations, we still support their right to make those
decisions for themselves. We are
repulsed, however, by those who use them as a weapon against their own people
and divide their Tribes and families into warring factions like dogs tearing at
a carcass, each trying to get a bigger share.
In some places Indians who moved away during Termination, Relocation,
boarding school, or out of economic necessity, are presently unable to return
unless their names appear on some recent or newly reorganized enrollment
list. Many families are now divided by
archaic restrictions or purposely constructed restraints to their
enrollment. In one highly publicized
case, Indians from a particular Tribe who were not on the "approved"
rolls were denied visiting rights to Tribal lands that contained the Tribal
grounds where their relatives were buried!
Of course, some Indians are busy warning those Tribes who adopt ever
higher quantum requirements that they may eventually quantum themselves into a
state where the Federal government has an excuse to declare them non-existent,
(a situation that has already taken place).
Others complain that low requirements simply further dilute the ethnic
and racial heritage of Indigenous People, encouraging those who have no ties
to, or knowledge of, their peoples to "cash in" on membership.
Whether a person who is one-three-hundred-and-sixty-second Indian can be
considered along with someone of a quarter or half is one of the hottest and
most contentious of our current debates.
The answer would seem to be apparent, but it is not. The question of whether knowledge of
culture, practice of original life-ways, involvement in spiritual ceremony or
ritual, participation in social life, etc., should be considered as evidence of
tribal participation, and whether that constitutes "belonging" is
frequently asked. Ultimately, the
answers will be determined by those who have the necessity to determine
it—those Federally Recognized Tribes with money, federal grants, programs, and
political issues at stake.
It is our hopes that all the
Federally Recognized Tribes will examine these issues closely and over time
determine the best course for their Nations, keeping Sovereignty and Tribal
relationships equally in mind. One
would hope that there will always be a place for those who do find themselves,
for one reason or another, excluded, but who have the blood or the relationship
to continue the fight to be a part of their Peoples. It is not necessary for everyone to be enrolled, to share in the
profits or decision-making that comes with federal recognition. It is, however, necessary for the Nations to
continue to recognize social, spiritual, and cultural involvement as an
important and unifying force in the true (not federally determined) factors
that construct, and perpetuate, tribal identity.
Essay Thirty-Nine BlueWolf & Lupe'/ Shirts N Skins
Leadership
(Indigenous)“Power...means
prestige translated into action…no one ordered anyone else around. Issues were argued to consensus, and if
agreement was not reached, the matter was dropped. Even when the chiefs attained “one mind,” an appeal was made to
the people to comply. Those who
disagreed simple went their own way.”
William N. Fenton
In days past, we looked
first to our complete survival. We had to have mothers, hunters, warriors, spokesmen, peacemakers,
decision-makers, singers, and clowns—the elements of society and culture. In each of those honorable pursuits, there
were those who excelled, those with natural ability. Indigenous People often utilized the merit concept of
leadership.
Hunters, fighters, scouts, planners, speakers, or storytellers, were
recognized by the People for their abilities, and were followed because of
those abilities. They were natural
leaders. If they lost those abilities, or dishonored their positions, people
simply refused to follow them anymore.
From earlier essays we remember that Thomas Jefferson observed, "Their
leaders influence them by their character alone; they follow, or not, as they
please him whose character for wisdom or war they have the highest
opinion." Moreover, there was
always room for more than one leader.
This system of merit leadership did not always demand superior character
or virtue. Depending on the role to be
performed, functional skills, as in hunting or war leadership, were to be
considered first. The Peoples
recognized that different types of leadership demanded different
qualities. It was not a “one size fits
all” requirement. Spiritual or
political leaders and healers with personal power were often held to higher
standards of character, determined by their social accomplishments and their
abilities to uphold the People's trust and interests. Those who possessed a charismatic personality, command of
language, or uniquely persuasive ability could go far only if they were
respected first for their integrity and honesty.
Before the European occupation, there was no need for leadership to be
rigid and defined beyond the formal structures of Nations. For many Tribes the concept of leadership
was as fluid and as changeable as the People. Benjamin Franklin recognized this
when he wrote of Indigenous leadership, "The Persuasion of Men
distinguished by Reputation of Wisdom is the only means by which others are
govern'd or rather led." No one was locked into a relationship of
leadership or constituency that could not be easily changed.
Here is a quote from an unknown Native that adds to this observation.
"You talk of loyalty,
but we are loyal--to our families, our Societies, and our People. We have no loyalty to individual men as
leaders, they lead because of their character and talents and power. The General says our lack of loyalty weakens
him, but if his leadership were true, all people would follow him
naturally. I think this is just another
word the White Man uses to turn wolves into sheep. The White Men claim loyalty to their Great Father, yet they fight
among themselves and few of them have an equal voice. Among us, every man has the same voice. If we step in behind one of our own, it is because of what they
can achieve for the People. If someone with greater power arises, we are free
to follow. Loyalty follows from
achievement and service, not because it is appointed or demanded. We are not dogs whimpering at the feet of
their masters, we are free men—we are wolves."
Many of the Nations functioned in the truest democratic sense and
governed themselves by unanimous consent in councils deciding as a group rather
than as individuals. When pressed for time they knew who to look to, but no one
was bound to follow, and each spoke for him or herself. Spokesmen or representative councils were
carefully chosen to represent the People in specific issues but few had
permanently chosen people authorized to speak and decide on any issue. Everyone had a choice to agree or disagree. Certainly respected men and women carried a
certain power in the deliberations and in final important decisions, but
positions of leadership usually dealt mostly with serious or emergency issues
related to the physical or social survival of the People as a group. Individual problems always took a backseat
to those faced by the Nation. Everyone
agreed that that was the way it should be and we survived and thrived.
Europeans, accustomed to centuries of dealing with royalty and their
appointed representatives, were unable to comprehend societies organized under
an envelope of leadership that did not have specifically recognized individual
spokesmen. In their desire to
manipulate the Nations, they consistently attempted to force Nations to put
forth individuals to represent our "interests" in peace and treaty
negotiations. It took the Indigenous
Nations many more years before Natives realized that their entire Nations were
supposed to be bound by the promises of individuals chosen to negotiate for
peace or treaty. This realization
ultimately brought about a change in the concepts of Native leadership and
caused them to take on different qualities.
Even many of the so-called "chiefs", did not understand the
concept of singular representative leadership the Europeans demanded. Used to taking the time to talk things out,
they were not prepared to make the quick decisions required of readily
accessible spokesmen.
Anglo-Americans had not been organized in a tribal way for
centuries. Their newly organized
democratic principles belied a principal belief in a pursuit of individual
success that superceded any true belief that the entire people's basic needs
come before individual wealth. This
modern thinking pattern is analytical and not synergistic. It does not consider the whole, but focuses
only on its individual parts, with the human being the principle character
around which all other life makes obeisance.
As John Trudell has pointed out in his lectures, the Patriarchal
Societies of the Three Desert Tribes of the Middle East, and their fragmented
descendants, have never had a cosmology that allowed for a unity and
relationship between life forms and the planet. Instead, they view the human species as the crowning achievement
of Creation, the manifestation (albeit flawed), of the Creator. These views are the antithesis of tribal
thought and arrogantly seek to fragment, compartmentalize, and subjugate life
rather than recognizing the universe as a single interrelated, interdependent
entity. Instead of relying on a context
of relationship and co-dependence to find one’s place, civilized men place
distinctions on separate events, and each of their thoughts exist independently
and separate from the whole. What has
this to do with leadership?
Everything. This tendency to
focus on the “parts” of life result in an overstatement and lack of subtlety in
dealing with day to day events. Out of this flagrant and analytically divided
perception, an individual's economic status becomes his defining
characteristic, and wealth defines the new royalty. Those that put themselves up to be "chosen" as leaders
are often not the most qualified, the most honorable, or even the most
trustworthy. Americans rarely
investigate their potential leader's achievements thoroughly enough to
effectively evaluate a potential candidate's qualifications, ability and
philosophy. They settle for his words
and media hype. But words cannot hold
honor, nor demand loyalty, nor serve the needs of the People. American standards for leadership have come
to be judged by how well a person serves the personal enrichment of those
supporting his election, and the individual fortunes of his immediate
circle.
In some Nations, Native spiritual and political leaders, while respected
and honored, were often expected to embrace poverty or hold themselves apart
from others by observing a higher standard of morality and ethics. They held a
position of sacrifice, which they fulfilled with a single-minded commitment to
the Nation. In the 1700’s, the
writer/statesman Cadwallader Colden commented on these ideals, which we think
warrant repeating. "Their Great
Men, both Sachems [civil chiefs] and captains [warchiefs] are generally poorer
than the common people, for they affect to give away and distribute all the
Presents or Plunder they get in their Treaties or War, so as to leave nothing
for themselves. If they should be once suspected of selfishness, they would
grow mean in the opinion of their Country-men, and would consequently lose
their authority."
The American leader is often paid for his service, is able to accept
gifts, and is even expected to increase his personal wealth and stature,
providing it be done discreetly. Though
it is publicly proclaimed that our leaders adhere to moral and ethical
standards, the opposite is often the case. Despite flowery rhetoric and
promises, their actions often speak more as a tribute to greed,
self-aggrandizement, lust for power, and individual/corporate
self-gratification, than to service, morality, and equitable decision-making.
Here we come to a middle
ground. The old physical ways relating
to our day-to-day survival have passed, but the challenge to survive as Nations
is still with us. There will always be
Apaches, and Pomos, and Mohawks. There will always be people who can say they
are racially Indian. But there may not
always be an Apache language, a Pomo culture, or a Mohawk Tribe on Mohawk
lands. These can be lost!
We have faced generations of being told what to do. Many of our "leaders" during the last
ten decades were functionally powerless. Some were simply puppets of the Feds.
When we were forced onto the Reservation with all our decisions being made by
the Army or the BIA. All the natural
and meritorious things that our leaders used to do for the People faded away as
they merged into the nondescript abstractions of American political
gamesmanship. What was there left for a
"leader'" to do? This is not
to say that no "leaders" survived during those difficult times, but
the role and realities of leadership changed.
To steal a quote from a popular novel, (the title of which we do not
know!),
"... When the entire
surface of the earth is changed, there is nothing to do but live on it as it
is. We cannot camp by the shore of a lake if it is now a creek. We cannot
follow a trail the earth has swallowed up. We cannot eat buffalo that died in
the time of our grandfathers."
We must make for ourselves new trails, find new buffalo (or bring them
back), and integrate the old with new.
Some of our People in the preceding generations became convinced that
the Indian Way was dead and that to survive they had to become Americans. For these People, the belief that "the
Tribe comes first" died. Many of
their descendents today think only of themselves and of their immediate
families. That way of thinking is a
threat to the survival of the Nations.
If the Tribal way of thinking dies, our Tribes will cease to be Tribes.
Fortunately, there were family leaders who did not give up the vision of
the past. They are the true
survivors. They pointed the way
forward, looking to make connections between the Old Ways and the New. They know that our Ceremonies and Dances are
not just "performances" for tourists but are the "life" of
the People. Today's leaders work toward
making the surviving “old ways” real and relevant so that young people can feel
both a connection to the world they live in, and to the ancient world from
which they are descended.
Some of our Nations today are being governed fairly and
effectively. Others are not. We think there are some crucial questions
about leadership that must be asked.
Those Nations that have answered these questions are already advancing
or implementing their solutions.
1. Must we continue to use the
obsolete forms of government almost all of us have been using? Can we effectively govern through councils
and consensus groups, without elected leaders, or are our social relationships
too fragile? Should the People choose
their leaders by consensus or must prospective leaders continue to put
themselves forward to be chosen by a divisive and easily corrupted majority
vote, the way US politicians do?
3. Should Nations separate
their councils of leadership from their business councils so that conflicts of
interest can be avoided and competent outside business people hired if they do
not exist within the Tribe?
4. Should Elders or Traditional
councils be utilized and empowered to effectively safeguard tribal lands and
resources, as well as the social, cultural, and spiritual integrity of the
people by holding the authority to advise tribal, or business councils, of
decisions that are potentially destructive to that integrity?
Despite the appearance of apathy on important issues, Indian People
still expect to be involved in the decision-making of their Tribe or Band. We hope that those who are not taking an
active part can be re-involved through tribal acceptance of more traditional
forms of government or just naturally through the development of a more
comprehensive sovereign authority. We
think it is natural during peace, or in the absence of genuine necessity, for
people to let their leaders govern without involving themselves too deeply in
the process. However, it is the method
of communication we choose, and the regular free flow of discussion between the
people that will allow a true representation of the People's opinions to
emerge. Still, in times of crisis,
great leaders have always taken risks and run at the fringe of the People's
approval to innovate and bring about great and beneficial change.
Many Indians today are still holding to the old values of not putting
oneself forward, or speaking up. It is
our opinion that these are fairly new post war traditions that have only become
accepted since our warriors, male and female, lost confidence and feared
government reprisals for straight talk. Where are the warrior days of publicly
recounting one’s accomplishments so that they can be publicly honored and the
entire people may take pride and credit for them? This is in sharp contrast to the “hold ‘em down, keep them back” ethic
publicly utilized on many reservations and in many communities by fearful,
jealous relatives. If sovereignty is to
be preserved and augmented, leaders must not be afraid to suggest new ideas to
the People. They must risk criticism
and believe that these ideas will be fairly examined and that priorities will
be made of the most important issues.
Confidence in leaders will bring back the influence of the general
council, and this will contribute to an increase in the pool of new leaders.
With a healthy distrust for "the few leading the many", we are
challenged to organize Councils that represent the people's voice and put
tribal needs in front. If we continue
to value those who can transform words into deeds, with vision and experience,
then we will have leaders in the Traditional sense of the word. As ceremony is
the soul of the People, and relationships are the heart of the People, so
leadership is the mind of the People.
Without it, our Nations will continue mired in the sticky mud of
ineffective and outmoded government.
Essay Forty
BlueWolf & Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Twentieth Century Decision-Making
“The
Iroquois had long done things in common, and having reached one mind, they
act. It was abandoning this principle
of unanimity, (Reverend Asher) Wright thought, which led directly to the loss
of their lands. Scattered on
reservations, they were dealt with separately and were forced to act
independently of each other… Life on
the reservation was a new ball game with new rules.”
William Fenton
"The (Seneca) ability
to speak with “one voice, one mind, one heart,” was what contributed to the
power of the confederacy—and it was not
“until their councils were divided by bribery and Whiskey… and they
adopted majority rule, that their power declined.”
Asher Wright, according to William
Fenton
As described previously, the
U.S. Government has always needed specific representatives of Indian Tribes,
i.e. "chiefs", to act as formal representatives of their People. If they could not find someone who seemed to
fit that bill, they just picked someone who seemed to have some status or
recognition. In the early decades of
the last century, when it became apparent that at least some of the Tribes
would survive, and sensing that they would soon have to be made citizens, the
government began looking at other methods of centralizing Indian political
organization.
In the late 1920’s, in order to further "civilize the savages",
a sample constitution was drafted and present to Tribes. It featured a General Council (the People),
an elected tribal chairman as spokesperson, and a tribal secretary for keeping
track of meetings and decisions.
Suggestions for determining who was eligible for membership, and what
the guidelines for voting might be, were included. Thirty percent of the eligible voters became the original
guideline for a Council quorum for decision-making. Suggestions for frequency
of council meetings, elections, and other procedures were detailed.
After the IRA (Indian Reorganization Act), was enacted in 1934, these
sample constitutions were accepted by virtually every Tribe recognized by the
Federal Government. In their simplistic
form, these constitutions were as close to approximating Traditional
governments as European thinking could get.
The People, or general council, retained almost complete autonomy and
nowhere was the tribal chairman given any more than a spokesman-like
position. With the People in close
proximity to each other, or in almost daily contact, the thirty percent figure
for conducting business seemed reasonable.
Though most of the Nations adopted these constitutions, the structure
was still too formal and foreign for the Nations to accept. Besides, what power
could any kind of government have when every economic, political, and social
aspect of tribal life was still under the direct scrutiny (and control) of the
Dept of the Interior, the BIA, or the Army? Remember that at no time have the
Nations had control of their decision-making processes or monies without the
review and approval of one of those agencies until recently.
When it was determined that reservation lands and allotments held
billions of dollars of mineral, water, and grazing rights, getting hands on
those rights became a big business as the BIA and corrupt tribal governments schemed
on how to enrich their own interests at the expense of the Nations. The BIA had already found that the magic
thirty-percent quorum for business decisions could be manipulated or even
ignored to get decisions favorable to the government. It was at this time that some Traditionals began to question how
a U.S. government agency—loyal first to the U.S. government—could be given the
responsibility to act as the representative of the interests of the Tribes
without generating a conflict of interest.
The Supreme Court has never adequately
resolved this legal question. Many
times the United States has pretended to represent the interests of the Tribes
against itself, but seldom has it upheld its obligation. One of the more famous examples is where the
U.S. offered the Nevada Temoak Shoshone a monetary settlement for their
lands. When the Shoshone refused, the
Government declared that since it was also representing the Tribe it could
accept the money on their behalf and closed the case. Recently, the Shoshones have filed suit again to regain their
lands.
A vital revision of tribal
constitutions, instituting the safeguards that provide checks and balances to
the power of Councils and Chairmen, was (and still is), desperately needed, but
ignored, in Washington. In some places
constitutions are ignored, meetings are held and conducted illegally—ignoring
designated quorums and procedures. Tribal membership voting rolls are
manipulated, and illegal decisions enforced.
Even convicted criminals have held powerful tribal positions. Members who buck the system within these
types of governments are assaulted, intimidated, coerced, bought-off, even
stripped of their tribal memberships, while Councils and Chairmen get fat off
the new Mecca of gaming monies.
Additionally, tribal members are often offered money to attend and vote
at important meetings, especially where constitutions are being rewritten—to
legitimize, and enforce this system of tribal council invulnerability. Councils are declaring vital economic tribal
records confidential, disallowing public view of enrollment lists, and
protecting their interests under the guise of tribal "security" or
"confidentiality". The
catchword of the 1990’s, "sovereignty", is being used to keep
government agencies from interfering in tribal corruption now termed
"self-determination". The BIA
and Department of the Interior decline to involve themselves in intra-tribal
squabbles, and prefer to overlook local problems and disturbances. Even though we hate to see sovereignty used
this way, this policy of non-interference is probably for the best. Especially since in the few places where the
Government has been forced to intervene, the contradictory and convoluted
status of Federal Indian Law almost always causes the BIA to support the
criminal governments to the bitter end, denying Traditional constituents any
proper or legal standing within the Nations.
There are places where the system works, due to a selfless or powerful
leadership, cooperation, or greater tribal involvement, but the potential for
abuse is still there. Hopefully, these
Nations will continue to make the process work, even within these limited and
outdated forms. There are also a few
places where Tribes have successfully replaced their systems with more
traditional forms, or at the very least, new representative constitutions. Whether or not they will achieve balance has
yet to be seen.
We do not mean to take issue with the need for a real and legally
defined sovereignty, however we believe that the Federal Government must also
allow Tribes to reorganize their governments to provide safeguards against
corruption and criminal behavior.
Finding new ways to involve everyone that wants a say in representative
government is also important. Of
course, it has always been a conflict of interest for the U.S. On the one hand, they have envisioned
themselves our guardian, at the same time representing the huge corporate
interests that wish to profit from our resources or otherwise benefit from our
special status. We all believe that
sovereignty should not be used as a weapon, but a solution will not come from
outside interference or regulation.
Only by breaking down these outdated tribal council systems and
utilizing more traditional forms and methods for decision-making can the
Nations protect the rights of their members and benefit from a more
traditional, and functional, representation.
The other solution is to model the governments more closely to the
American system with equal but separate councils to balance and uphold the
equitable distribution of power.
Essay Forty-One
BlueWolf & Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Consensus
Voting is an exercise that
puts people in competition to accumulate a majority to authorize any
decision. This is inherently weak
because it does not demand that the circle of voters do their best to serve the
interests of everyone through conciliation and compromise to facilitate a
decision.
Modern governments representing huge constituencies have difficulty
reconciling their relationships to each other and become individually
self-serving. But anytime we take the
easy way out in our decision-making processes, allowing arbitrarily some voices
more power than others, we diminish our ability to equitably serve the whole
People.
Voting works in a system where the individual's interests are considered
paramount but the individual's powers are limited. In Traditional government, the service and interests of the
People are paramount but the individual's power is exalted.
One is a shadow of democracy, while the other stands full in the sun.
The first calls individuals to find like minds to pit themselves against those
who disagree in order to "defeat" them at the polls—while the second
requires cooperation and genuine concern for everyone's voice to come to
unanimous consensus so that a decision can be reached. One is a quick and final,
fast-food approach to government, while the other takes time, effort,
determination and genuine respect for opposing views to achieve a gourmet type
representation.
In today's world you can guess which type is the one most favored,
especially by business. Progress and
the accumulation of wealth demand a quick and final decision-making
process. Unfortunately, quick and easy
decisions are often the wrong ones.
Many Americans are not easily convinced that a slow and steady hand
makes for a trustworthy mount—they'd rather break 'em quick, and if they don't
ride easy, sell ‘em for dog food and get another.
However, sacrifice and well
thought out decisions are the only way we will clean up this earth, reformulate
our governments, an achieve real sovereignty.
The following paragraphs
detail how hypothetical consensus governments might work. They do not necessarily reflect the views or
traditions of Indian people. Still, a number of Tribes, who still have
Traditional governments, intact utilize many of these principles.
Consensus means unanimous
decision. Consensus can work for small
or large Nations. Here is an example of
how it works.
For large Tribes, there must
be smaller organized groups to begin with. These may consist of individual bands,
families, clans, councils, towns, or other types of natural organization. These small groups meet on an issue. They discuss it until their general
consensus is known If they can reach no
consensus, the issue is dropped or brought up again after some time has passed
to see how the needs or issues change.
This commitment to resolution limits contentious behavior and promotes a
feeling of participatory decision-making that is amenable to compromise and
equitable solutions. Though some
disagreement may still exist, compromise and reconciliation is often reached
anyway.
Young adults have the same
voice as Elders but allow Elders' views to carry opinion. Why? Because Natives value the opinions of
Elders, and because young people know their time will come and are confident
that their opinions are respected.
In large Nations, smaller
councils may send a representative or spokesman to larger councils that consist
of appointed, honored, and respected leaders.
If a Tribe is small, the council may consist of all the adult
members. If it is a serious issue, one
that has involved a lot of criticisms, contentious accusations, or general
disagreement, care is taken to represent all voices. No decision is reached without consensus. This is real democracy at work.
We think there must be at least four pre-existing conditions for
consensus decision-making to be effective and representative:
1. The People must share a commitment to similar spiritual principles
that encourage everyone to be on their best behavior to ensure peace and
respectful social interaction.
2. The People must show respect
for their Elders and each voice that is represented in the Council.
3. The People must believe that
Tribal interests supercede any personal benefits gained by decision and they
must have enough relationship to still be a viable Tribal organization.
4. The People must respect and
stand by the consensus decisions of the Council without undermining its
decisions.
For crisis decision-making,
each council has those people trusted to be the most honorable and
knowledgeable about the nature of the crisis.
In certain cases, they are pre-chosen to act in these times. If it is an issue of threat, some Indigenous
Peoples had pre-designated leaders to declare war, negotiate or mediate
conflicts or decide on pressing issues related to the survival of the People.
Today, survival may be
construed to apply to spiritual, cultural, social, or economic situations
having a profound impact on the present or future well-being of the People as
determined by the Elders and accepted natural leaders.
The gathering of general
councils, whether they are of appointed representatives or the entire Nation,
is an important part of consensus. It
is much harder for people to lie or deceive each other face to face. A sense of community is the only thing that
can unify opposing forces. Humanizing
the discussion and de-personalizing the conflicts can achieve this. Indians have become used to interpersonal
conflicts, but deep down they don't want meetings with parliamentary process,
and chairmen banging on podiums!
Consensus can only become reality when People share in
each other’s lives. When families eat
together, children play together, people dance and sing together, powwow
together, pray together, and giveaway—these people share the common bonds that
allow them to make important decisions together. It is through these kinds of gatherings that fractured and
divided Peoples can be healed.
So, coming to your Rez
today: The Traveling Indigenous Gourmet, NewTime-OldTime Dance-Time Prize
Competition, Traditional Rock and Roll-Country-Rap-49er, Consensus Government,
Spiritual Unity and Friendship PowWow.
Transportation can be arranged.
It's an idea.
Essay Forty-Two BlueWolf
& Lupe/ Shirts N' Skins
Resources And National Unity
Tribal governments are
obsessed, and rightfully so, with the ideals and realities of tribal
sovereignty under the watchful eye of the U.S. Government. We should, by Constitutional rights, have
almost unlimited sovereignty in a real sense.
Unfortunately, the policies of Manifest Destiny allowed for changing the
rules of Constitutional law at the whims of historical convenience. So sovereignty, while a virtuous ideal,
presents a two-edged sword. Sovereignty
can be misused. It can be used as a
political or personal weapon. It can be
used to abandon the principle of stewardship of the land and misuse or abuse
natural resources for profit, and it can become tyrannical and arrogant if not
used responsibly. Our assertion is that
the U.S. should no longer legislate the conditions of our sovereignty, except
to expand our rights and powers, and representatives of the Tribal Nations
themselves should handle any abuses of sovereignty. A National Native Court has been proposed that could represent a
new legal confederacy to uphold individual Native rights and oversee government
infringement on Tribal National rights.
We support this proposal
Here
is a letter we wrote that further describes our opinions regarding the history
and issues of sovereignty.
“On
the issue of Native Sovereignty and Tribal Rights to determining
citizenry, we have always viewed this whole issue as a double-edged
sword. First the government provides us all with the blueprints for
setting up our tribal governments in a half-hearted model of their own so that
the maximum amount of corruption and manipulation can occur, then sets
blood quantum or other standards to determine early eligibility—(Dawes Rolls,
etc), knowing that our peoples, unsophisticated in these respects, will
simply continue to modify these constitutions (with the help of non-Indian
lawyers) to destroy the individual rights of their own tribal members and
solidify the power of families and cliques within tribal societies for their
own power, greed, or aggrandizement—further weakening our Nations and making
them more susceptible to US influence and manipulation Then the
government and BIA opts out and starts talking sovereignty again after
they have ensured that tribal governments are set up in the least effective way
possible for supporting tribal unity and Native rights, in the hope we'll tear
ourselves up internally or legislate ourselves out of existence. Right
now, that policy is coming to fruition. In our area, gaming tribal
councils are effectively setting enrollment standards that will ensure
that in thirty years only a small number of their present enrollee's
descendants will qualify for tribal membership, effectively regulating
themselves out of existence. This is just another government ploy to
destroy our Tribes. No one's doing the basic math on intermarriage and
quantum requirements for these Tribes, they are just seeing the dollar
signs in the short term. In addition, here in California, Tribal Councils
are busy dis-enrolling members at will because of vindictive personal
disputes, a desire to increase per cap payments, or gaming profits—any old
reason they can think of. The abused tribal members have no recourse—the
BIA won't hear their arguments because of Tribal sovereignty and a no
interference policy. Now, without roll numbers—they no longer qualify for
tribal health, college scholarships, etc. Who is speaking for
them? What recourse do they have? With no National Indian Court to
hear their arguments, they're up shit creek. They've been wiped out
by the half-assed Tribal Sovereignty the US has so thoughtfully granted us and
are no longer legally Indian. This is unprecedented. To say that
our "elected officials" should have the complete power to regulate
who is, and who isn't, a member is to deny the changes that have come about in
our tribal governments and social institutions in the last
centuries. Can we make international treaties? Raise our own armies
for our own defense? Regulate our boundaries as other Nations do? Do
we have complete control or jurisdiction over our lands and
resources? Are our laws and regulations enforced on immigrants or
tourists in our Nations? Sovereign nations have these rights. We do
not. The myth of Tribal Sovereignty and government-to-government
relationships is a smokescreen to destroy us. If we are faced with
abandoning traditional government, mediation, and consensus—to adopt
manipulative popular elected governments similar to the US, we'll need
to develop some protective checks and balances for our
members--including an impartial judiciary to regulate and insure members rights.
Every Tribe should have a right to say who is a member. However, what is a
Tribe? In the old days, it was all of the people, and one family or group
could not say you didn't belong. If the people accepted you—you were one
of them—it wasn’t decide by a Tribal Council that can manipulate the general
council into an up or down vote to terminate you as an Indian! In the
60's and 70's—the legal definition of Indian was, "A person having origin
in any of the original Peoples of North America, or who maintains tribal
affiliation or who is recognized by tribal members as attached to the
community." This was a perfectly good scenario as long as we
were poor with few prospects for profit. As the business of being
Indian has become more profitable, and Indians started coming out of the
woodwork--the standards have tightened. Its easy to see how
assimilation is affecting us-- with so many of our economies depending on
government grants and programs it is money that determines the importance of
strictly defining who is, and who is not, an Indian. Forget for a moment
that that same government has lost or stolen billions of dollars of Indian
money. For gaming Tribes it's more about how much profit can be made, smaller
rolls mean more money for recognized members. Additionally,
that ones who control those member definitions are able to manipulate them
for their own benefit. To say that tribal councils are representative of
their nations at large is like saying the present administration is representative
of the opinions of all Americans. It just ain't so!
Representative American government has always been a sleight of hand
democracy. We know how much we can trust the U.S., do we really think
governments formed to mimic theirs will be any more trustworthy?
The kind of sovereignty we have
today is a token sovereignty, overseen, but not legally defined, by a third
party. It is a most dangerous and
tentative situation. It allows for a
third party (like the BIA) to control who it determines to be the legal and
designated representatives of each Tribe, while excusing that same third party
from acting when tyrannical or abusive forces manipulate tribal governments, or
attack tribal members.
Natives all know what I mean. To
clarify for others, let us describe a situation a very large tribe found itself
in, in the last decade.
A legally elected Tribal Chairman held an iron hand over the Tribe. He accused of defrauding the Tribe of
millions, of sexually assaulting women in the Tribal Office, etc. He declared all Tribal records to be
confidential including the Tribal Voting Rolls. In subsequent elections he refused to disclose the names of
tribal members eligible to vote to his competitors, arrested those who
attempted to leaflet or promote their campaigns, etc. Attempts were made to legally recall him but his control over the
tribal courts and police was extensive.
Opposition leaders organized their own court supporters and took over
the Tribal Offices. Separate Tribal
Court Officials issued conflicting decisions.
Opposition Leaders went to the BIA and were told that since he was still
the federally recognized Chairman, and he had not requested their involvement,
the BIA could not intervene. Privately,
they were told the BIA would not involve themselves in a political Tribal
struggle, despite the fact that BIA law enforcement could be used by the
existing Chairman to quell illegal disturbances. Fortunately, the issue resolved itself without significant
violence, but this is an example where a third party authorizes a governing
body but refuses to intervene when that body is proven to be abusing its
authority and serving its own interests.
As long as the Tribes themselves do not have absolute control over their
legal and recognized representatives we will continue to see violations of
constitutions, individual rights, misuse of resources, etc. Today the BIA can avoid involvement simply
by pretending it does not want to involve itself in the "internal"
and "sovereign" affairs of tribal government--or it can jump in with
law enforcement personnel to "aide" the "legal tribal
government."
It is our opinion that we need a confederacy of some type, or at
least a National Indian Supreme Court, to organize our Nations into a powerful
and unified force. First and foremost,
it would tie Indians into something universal representing all the Indigenous
People of this land. It would add to
our identity. Though we define
ourselves by Tribe or Band, this way we could have both a local and national
identity. This body could also
represent those Indians who are not members of Tribes—urban Indians, relocated
Indians, unenrolled Indians. It would
not give these people a voice in the affairs of Sovereign Nations but would
allow them to participate in programs that would serve the Unified Nations.
A Confederacy could develop national media programs to promote cultural
awareness and encourage diversity within unity. It could honor the accomplishments of our youth, statesmen, and
artists, coordinate health and dependency programs, institute trade agreements
between Nations, develop tribal resource guides, oversee trust accounts,
represent the Nations in world organizations, and develop economic programs
between Tribes.
Of course, there have been, and still
are, organizations that exist to accomplish some of those ends, but some of
today's smaller non-treaty gaming Tribes are often at odds with the larger
land-based Tribes over priorities and issues of importance. To the smaller Tribes, issues related to
gaming and economics come first. For
the large land based Tribes, more immediate concerns may be about health care,
roads, law enforcement, resources, or other land-based issues.
Often the small successful gaming Tribe has much more money to spend
politically than the larger land based Tribes.
Naturally, larger Tribes are concerned that money might buy a greater
representation in any Confederacy or Court proposed. But representation is crucial to the integrity of any
decision-making body, and members—not money—should define the issues. To insure equal representation would be a
great challenge. Nevertheless, if it could be achieved
equitably, the benefits for all Tribes would be enormous.
This Confederacy, or Unified Court,
could formulate responsible precepts regarding the use of natural resources in
Tribal profit-making ventures, and protect and preserve undeveloped lands for
future generations. It could push for a
process, separate from the BIA, to help Tribes with the purchase of additional
tribal lands and applications to place these lands into Tribal trusts. It could
oversee government accounts of the use, harvest, or withdrawal of Indian
resources by outside parties for profit, and manage and keep private accounts
of Indian trusts and settlements. A
National Indian Supreme Court could develop legal arguments supporting Indian
causes specifically in rebuttal, or in compliment to U.S. Higher Courts. This court could mediate inter-Tribal suits,
disagreements, and disputes of sovereignty, individual rights, etc. Most importantly, it would attempt to take
all those previously mentioned topics out of government hands, once and for
all.
Indians must find ways to deal with our
internal problems legally, outside of American courts. We must decide now that sovereignty will not
be used as a tool to allow corrupt or greedy Tribal Governments to ravage and
pollute our environment and natural resources.
The resources of the Earth are not placed here for the profiteering of
individual Tribes, families, or members--but to assure that the generations
unborn will have the necessities of life.
Hopefully, Indian Nations will someday see a reason to look out from the
limited boundaries of their lands and see a potential for larger
organization. We envision a time when
we will have our own Land Management Councils to oversee the proper care of
resources, and a national Supreme Court, or Council of Elders, who will stand
for the Nation’s unborn children above the individual pursuits of Tribes and
their members. At that time, our
Confederacy may finally have the power to preserve our individual sovereignty
against the fickle whims of the U.S. Government.
Essay Forty-Three BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Materialism
Most human beings have some
desire for material possessions, especially those with children or families to
care for. It's a natural instinct to
provide for one's family: to be as comfortable as possible, and to live free of
want.
Indigenous Peoples did not develop community relationships that
permanently stripped the earth of resources.
They had common limitations on how much they could acquire materially
and still be able to function. The
reality of difficult and time-consuming labor necessary to creating any
beautiful or valuable object placed another limitation on the number of those
objects one might hope to acquire in a lifetime. In most tribal societies, materialism was more a matter of
possessing enough functional items to make the daily work life flow as smoothly
as possible than it was acquiring an unnecessarily ponderous amount of
extras. We'd like to repeat Bruce
Johansen's observation that, “(Ben)
Franklin used examples from Indian societies rather explicitly to illustrate
his conception of property and its role in society: ‘All property, indeed, except the savage's temporary cabin, his
bow, his matchcoat and other little Acquisitions absolutely necessary for his
Subsistence, seems to me to be the creature of public Convention. Hence, the public has the rights of
regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of
limiting the quantity and uses of it.
All the property that is necessary to a man is his natural Right, which
none may justly deprive him of, but all Property superfluous to such Purposes
is the property of the Public who, by their Laws have created it and who may,
by other Laws dispose of it’.”
Of course, there were items that were considered personal property and
delineated status or wealth; planting acreage, horses, etc. But often the concept of the giveaway or
potlatch in these societies was a countering social influence to the attraction
of selfish accumulation of wealth. That
is not to say that no societies amassed material wealth, certainly the
Meso-American cultures allowed for great concentrations of wealth. But by-and-large, most Northern American Tribes,
lacking wagons and beasts of burden, did not accumulate much more than they
could carry away at any one time.
Franklin wrote, regarding the Indian view of the American distribution
of wealth, "The Care and Labour of
providing for Artificial and Fashionable Wants, the sight of so many rich
wallowing in Superfluous plenty, whereby so many are kept poor and distressed
for Want,..all contrive to disgust them [Indians] with what we call civil
Society."
Native Nations had concepts of wealth and power, but
determined them differently than Europeans.
Since the invasion and holocaust, American Indians have had
neither. Poverty became a way of life
for generations. Some were able to
escape, usually by leaving their Peoples and blending or assimilating with
non-Indian communities, while the "darker" communities were trapped
by racism and lack of opportunity.
It is an interesting observation that while some poor people are able to
keep their morals, ethics, and values—even when they have nothing else to
sustain them—others give them up completely, seemingly without a fight. Among our Nations, certain individuals of
character were able to continue to pass on to succeeding generations their ideals
of spirituality and morality, while others failed.
Today, many members of our communities suffer from loneliness and
lack any belief that comforts them or gives them hope. It is a crisis of values made even more
serious by the sudden appearance of the gaming issue. Instead of spiritual leaders rising up to give us back the power
and mystery missing in our lives, we now have investors promising riches beyond
our wildest dreams. And for many
Natives, the word "riches" doesn't mean much. One Grandfather we know says that "too many
of us don't really know the difference between the power of holding a thousand
dollars and the power of holding one hundred thousand, or even a
million."
While enormous sums slip from our mouths easily in council meetings, we
are still poor people in our minds and cannot grasp the fact that there is a
difference between enough, and too much, money. Rather than settling for enough, and debating the best ways to
serve the People's interests, many of our leaders get caught up in the business
of enormous dreams and lose sight of the day to day functional use of the
smaller sums that actually makes its way into our tribal coffers.
We do not think this situation will last long. Many of our younger people have begun to educate themselves in
business and law. Before long, we will
be able to run our casinos and businesses professionally without the help of
outsiders. Unfortunately, many Tribal
Human Resource Offices are ignoring these qualified Natives to hire
“outsiders”. Sometimes this is done
simply to protect the interests of the present administrators or Council,
sometimes it is to hide corruption and fraud, sometimes its just family
politics. But the question of importance is not just when will we utilize our
best Native leaders, lawyers, and
educated young people to help us make our way out of poverty, but what will we
have become when we get there?
All poor people with sudden wealth are especially prone to the sad and
divisive selfishness of greed. You see
examples of this disease everywhere.
Only a spiritual reawakening can save people from that sickness.
We have not yet seen Indian Casino management, Business Councils, or
Tribal Councils take a fully supportive role in the spiritual and social growth
of the tribes they represent. There may
be some who have, and to them we offer apology. Some may question whether that should be their role or
responsibility, but it is our contention that they are in a position of power
and are therefore required by Traditional ethics to provide that support.
Those who are in a position to lead, or to provide a focus and center,
should do so. The excitement of this
new time should promulgate projects and gatherings that bring people together,
encouraging them to attend spiritual, social, and cultural events. We think Tribal leaders, even gaming
leaders, should be responsible for more than money and jobs. It is an idealistic point of view, but we
think they have a unique opportunity to become a center and a fire that serves
unity--not just the usual American demand for materialistic gratification.
For those Indians who have lost their center, we do not pretend to
understand how people can recapture values, ethics, and morals. Either they are planted in youth and flower
in adulthood, or they do not. We do
know that if we begin sharing again, and if we gather again to pray, it will be
a good first step.
Essay Forty-Four BlueWolf
& Lupe/Shirts N' Skins
Discipline
"The fool
does what makes himself feel good.
The wise man does
what makes him feel good about himself."
Grandpa
It is our understanding that
the Nations all had their own particular method for maintaining discipline and
order within their Peoples. There were
warrior societies, and bear doctors, and dog soldiers and sub chiefs, all who
acted in the interests of their nation, sometimes at the direction of their
Elders and Leaders. Rather than discuss
the methods or processes of how these decisions came to be made, and how they
were enacted, we are more concerned with the fact that they dealt specifically with
the occasional exception to the rule in Indian society. What we mean by this is simple; the behavior of individuals was efficiently
modified by their relationship to the Tribe.
Ben Franklin wrote, "All their Government is by Counsel of the
Sages; there is no Force, there are no Prisons, no officers to compel
Obedience, or inflict Punishment."
Rules and regulations were kept to a minimum. Order was kept through social pressures, public humiliation, and
embarrassment. Occasionally, in a
dangerous or important situation there were forms of corporal punishment. Even capital execution.
However, as Thomas Jefferson put it, "Public opinion is in the
place of law, and restrains morals as powerfully as laws ever did
anywhere".
George Catlin observed, "...there is no law in their land to punish
a man for theft, that locks and keys are not known, that no commandments have
ever been divulged amongst them; nor can any human retribution fall upon the
head of a thief, save the disgrace which attaches as a stigma to his character
in the eyes of his people about him."
Individuals rarely considered being anything but what they were—one of
the People. They cared what their
relatives, friends, and neighbors thought and were inclined to go along with
the consensus decisions. If they
disagreed, they simply did not participate.
There was little reason for the children to be disciplined. They learned by watching the example of
their older peers what was to be expected of them, especially in difficult and
dangerous situations. Beyond that, they learned early on that there was a time
for self-restraint and a time to be free and unrestrained—a perfect environment
for children.
When there was a need for discipline, many of the Peoples used fear of
the unknown or superstitions to keep discipline and reasonable control. Extreme cases of disorder were dealt with by
those mentioned in the first paragraph of this essay, but these were
exceptions, and few and far between.
John Trudell talks about the holocaust of
the influx of the three violent, patriarchal religions of the Middle East
sweeping in to replace the "mother" as the center of Tribal Life. This opinion is at the center of one of the
root problems of western civilization.
These religions had, as a cornerstone of their faiths, a belief in a
purposeful, and vengeful, God who owned everything. As a group of Jehovah's witnesses asked us the other day,
"Do you believe man was given dominion over the Earth by God?"
We think Traditional Indigenous people would answer
emphatically—No!" Those Middle
Eastern cultures were harsh, dominating, and authoritative. No wonder their main export to the world has
been violence!
Europeans, being primitive, did not have the unified social organization
that Indians had, so they maintained discipline and order by threat of
violence. Biblical admonitions to
"use the rod" authorized corporal punishment, and however out of
favor it has fallen in today's world, it was, and is, an effective method of
disciplining children in the absence of commonly held social constraints.
When the social organizations of our Peoples were disrupted, and in many
places dissolved, quite a few of our Grandfathers and Grandmothers adopted the
European methods of punishment. Many of
us grew up fearing corporal discipline.
And it worked! It certainly wasn't
the traditional Indian Way, but that Way required a social unit that each
individual was proud to belong to, and motivated to remain a part of. It also required the old stories and fears
that were part of our Traditional worldview.
As the tribes began to break down into individual families, there was
less of the old social structure to be responsible to, and fewer of the old
perceptions to help discipline the young.
Something had to take its place and our Grandparents chose a method they
knew their children would understand, the fear of pain.
Don't get us wrong—any discipline is better than none. Just ask any fifth grade teacher who lives
in a state where social restraint doesn’t exist, corporal punishment has been
disallowed and parental guidance is non-existent, how you can reach boys who
have no fear, no guidance, and no discipline in their lives. Where old-time Indians used stories of
monsters and spirits to keep their children from the dangers of the night, and
our grandparents used the switch or the belt, many of today's grandparents and
parents have nothing. There are just
too many one-parent, dysfunctional, dependent, poverty-stricken families where
self-discipline or parental discipline has become an ideal of the past. If
there is one thing Indians know about, it's how easily one of us can wind up in
prison.
Indigenous life two
centuries ago required a different type of discipline based on a natural and
immediately responsive world. In
today's modern setting, self control, restraint, and self-discipline are
necessary tools for survival. How do we re-establish discipline as a society,
as individuals, as Tribes? It begins at
home, but relatives and tribal members must share some responsibility for the
discipline and order of our children.
On the other hand—maybe we should just stay the way we are!
Essay Forty-Five BlueWolf & Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Indintity
We never question someone's
claim to be Indian no matter what they "look" like. We've known plenty of mixed-bloods, with
European features, who were important members of their Tribes, as well as
enough full-bloods who were a total loss.
Both were Indian.
Despite the objections of some,
however, it does come down to ancestry and blood. In what portions we cannot say, but each Tribe or Nation surely
has the right to determine those guidelines for it when it comes to membership,
the sharing of decision-making, and in the economics of the Tribe. We also know that to many Indians, the
question of identity is simply answered by racial characteristics. Those with brown skin of varying degree,
dark hair, and eyes, have no problem defining them. To many, the other
attributes of culture, religion, and heritage are not significant factors. They know that they will be Indian no matter
what type of life they live, what religion they follow, what government they
give their loyalty to, and what values they practice. Nothing can separate them from being Indian, because it is so
apparent and visible it simply cannot be taken away. This is the Indian that is defined by race. In our lives that still has meaning. But what about the future—nut brown
bleaching to latte’? It’s
happening. Beloved blond haired, blue
eyed tribal members are being born everyday to loving Indian parents and
grandparents. Ask those blond grandchildren in twenty years if they’re
Indian—we’ll find out how important race will be then.
We know from experience
that the attributes of history, culture, and socialization are important, if
only to the strict Traditionals, who are fighting to preserve every bit of the
cherished past, and to those mixed-bloods who stand in two worlds. Since the latter's racial identity can be
called into question, the reality of what they know of their culture, how they
live, who they associate with, and what they believe, becomes significant,
almost all-important.
We would hope that the rules made by Tribal governments always have
allowable exceptions. Those fullbloods,
half one Nation and half another, who are unable to enroll in either Tribe and
are denied legal status as an Indian, might be the first to argue against blood
quantum as a final determination on Indintity.
For those who are unenrolled, life goes on. They live their lives, perform ceremonies, pray, sing, dance, and
live as they have always done, knowing that identity can not be
legislated. Though they are not able
to participate in tribal politics or economics, they still stand in support of
their families and Federally Recognized relatives. The fact they are not enrolled does not affect their commitments
to our Peoples and Nations. They too,
are still Indians.
Because Federal Recognition is a
prerequisite in the quest for sovereignty, the issues of blood quantum and
membership will remain important. Legal
Tribal memberships, enrollment, and recognition are necessary to sustain the
government-to-government relationships demanded by Treaties and Compact
agreements which insure the preservation and control of tribal land bases,
self-government, and full accountability for the management of trusts and
resources.
Fortunately, enrolled or unenrolled, recognized or unknown, we are still
a force in this Nation. Though there
will always be threats and attempts to take away what we have fought for so
long to regain, more and more we are represented by our own in the halls of
government, in the courtroom, and on the street.
The true issues of identity rise from within. What of our past will be preserved to be made meaningful to the
generations of tomorrow? And not just
in ways that will make our children feel special when they dance at powwows,
but ways that make them feel good about themselves—ways that encourage
integrity, honesty, morality and leadership.
We need to recapture the ideals that will stretch their imagination and
challenge them to reclaim the world that claims to have conquered them, all the
while retaining what we cherish of our past.
First, we must break the bonds of stereotypes. Not only those put upon us from the outside (like mascots and
Hollywood images), but those from the inside that enslave us to dependency on
drugs and alcohol, drive us abuse our spouses or children, and push us toward
materialism at the expense of our Spirits.
It reaches deep into our children.
The outside stereotypes have power over them, creating the false image
that we are of the past, that our cultures and traditions are dead. They recognize those outdated Hollywood
images as Indian, sometimes even before they recognize the bonifide ways of
their true culture. These stereotypes
hurt them by miss-shaping their identity.
With some parents having third, or even fourth generation addictions,
many young people have come to consider that behavior
"Traditional". Where extended
families are broken and many single parent/grandparent families are raising
children—the circle of family balance is lost.
We must end the generations of isolationism. We cannot achieve our goals for our grandchildren by continuing
to pretend that isolation separates us from the "white" world and
helps us retain our Way.
At the Unity Gathering In Tulalip, a group of young Warriors stood with
some Anglos waiting for the caravan of Traditional Elders from the East Coast
and Canada to arrive. Dressed in suits
and ties, they pulled up and got out of their vehicles. The shock on some faces was evident. I heard grumbling. "This can't be
them!" How could a Traditional
dress so conservatively? It was obvious
it shook up a number of preconceived ideas of reality. Later, these same Elders, entered the
Longhouse dressed in
Traditional clothing, fluently speaking their
languages, relaxed and at ease with themselves. These Traditionals were able to sustain everything they had been
taught as youths and still participate powerfully, and effectively, in the
modern world. They believed in
education, in being bilingual, and in mastering whatever skills they needed to
take care of their families and Nations.
Only those who feel unsure of their own identity are threatened by, or
shun, the outside world.
Some of the present Tribal Council Chairmen and their Council Members
would be well served to take a lesson from these men and women. These are Indians who would never think to
perform ceremony or healing without adequate authorized preparation, neither
would they presume to act as leaders or businessmen on behalf of their Tribes
without similar skills preparation and education.
Today, in the rush to place our own people in positions of power,
authority, and influence, we find that many of us are simply not prepared,
educated, motivated, or interested enough to study and develop the skills to be
effective at our positions. Those who
do have the education and training are often ignored.
We all have developed an
understandable, but limiting, racism toward Anglo people and the outside
world. This is evidenced by the
increase in gang activity on reservations where the influence of other minority
cultures is strong. Instead of becoming
Warriors for their People, they "create" their own Warrior Societies
in a Black or Chicano image and isolate themselves even further from the
world. Meanwhile those who choose to
participate in the Institution of Public Education are forced to embrace a
system that emphasizes only European contributions, accomplishments, and
history—alienating them as well.
Fortunately, more and more clean and
sober Indian men and women are taking the risks to teach, by example, the
values of respect, morality, honesty, integrity, and relationship. Unfortunately, many of those who do provide
these examples go unrecognized, gaining no special respect among their
People. In that case, the young see no
advantage to following the Good Path.
One of our son’s saw some
youngsters, under twelve, throwing rocks at an old man on the Rez. When they stepped in to admonish them, they
were cursed at and spat upon, all this while these children’s parent sat in the
Casino, gambling.
An Elder we know, commenting on a tribal council plan to construct a
reservation gymnasium for adult volleyball and hoop leagues, scoffed and said,
"What we really need is a Daycare Center where someone—anyone—will help
teach our children values and discipline!" This isn't only an Indian problem, it is pervasive in modern
society.
Americans forced us to give up our culture, our religion, our social
structure, and our forms of self-government with the assurance that they had
superior values and life-ways that would guarantee our generations a better
life. Now they are finding out how shallow and weak their basic institutions
are. Moreover, the whole country is
reaping a whirlwind of violence, selfishness, and shallow, fragmented purpose.
The problem of quality formation and strengthening of self-identity
among Indians is unique. It is a
problem of blending the past with the present; of finding a balance between
what is remembered and perceived as having been our most cherished and powerful
attributes, and the necessity of coping with what we have become in a modern
world after more than a century of external and internally imposed
captivity. Few remember the old days
and Ways and that Vision is becoming more and more clouded with time. What we preserve of our past in the next
generation will be what lasts
of those times, while what we have endured
since then has created unique and difficult problems for us to solve.
Blood quantum and racial heritage will not guarantee lasting cultural,
social, or spiritual identity. We hope
our future will consist of the best of our past and the best of our present
cultures. If not, our unique and
original identity will fade, and though we may retain our special government
status, we will eventually blend into the American melting pot of cultureless
people. Then, committed to the gods of
progress, technology, and consumerism, we will become a part of that faceless
crowd of lost humanity that is the modern civilized human, unbalanced and
alone. Our great grandchildren deserve
better.
Essay
Forty-Six BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Dependency
One of the first
"gifts" bestowed on Indians from Europeans was alcohol. It was quickly determined that our tolerance
for liquor was zero and we could easily be influenced and taken advantage of
under its influence. White flour and
sugar followed. The former helped
diminish our Spirit, while the latter destroyed our health. Both were accepted by our Peoples to take
the place of absent necessities in their lives. The cash cropping of tobacco caused us to adopt the European
penchant for casual smoking. With time,
and tuberculosis, came the drug codeine.
The 1970’s and 80’s brought marijuana, psychedelics, and cocaine, along
with paint thinners, spray paints, glues, and other hardware store drugs. With the 1990’s came crank,
methamphetamine. Diabetes and suicide
shadow us wherever we go.
Other kinds of dependencies swallowed us as well. We came to count on governments programs,
projects, grants, and awards. We looked
eagerly for settlements or per capita payments. We got into the business of being Indians, looking at tribal
council positions as jobs rather than service to the People. We attend tribal
meetings for the attendance checks handed out rather than any true interest to
participate. Casinos and gaming have
added to the mix.
Though Casinos may be seen by many to be an easy way out of poverty and
despair—solitary gambling may also be the last golden carrot put before us to
coerce us into assimilating with a promise of plenty. Native people have always loved to gamble, but in our past we did
it together—with singing, and laughter, and communication. It was a community event. Now we often sit isolated and alone, huddled
in front of a machine. If we can resist
the divisive and selfish interests of greed, perhaps we will defeat this new
challenge to our unity and use our promised (but as yet unseen) wealth to
economically rebuild our Nations. It
will not be easy; already we see families and tribes divided by the tyranny of
greed.
Many of our young cannot see farther than the reservation. They have come to believe that their
necessities will be provided without any effort on their part. They have come to be content with their
poverty and dream of "easy" money.
It has gone past the time where we mourn the great agricultural
civilizations that were ours. Our
children know nothing of those days.
Their lives have had more to do with dependency than freedom. And while we leave the solutions of
addiction, violence, and dependency to those who must rekindle the faith,
discipline, and values to defeat these enemies (and to the Creator whose hears
our prayers), we believe that a simple acceptance of the labor life requires is
a large step toward rehabilitation.
We must find ways to build prestige
and recognition for those who attempt to provide for their families. Indians love to dance, and we love to dance
our old dances. The problem is that the
"reasons" we did those dances have often become unattached to our
present lifestyles. This can be
remedied if the dance for the hunt becomes the dance for hunting knowledge or a
job. The honor dance becomes a dance
for graduating school, getting married, or an important achievement. Dances that mark the season, or fulfill
traditional obligations, can still do so effectively, maintaining our natural
ties and providing reasons to gather and celebrate thankfully, our unity and
survival.
Indians are never afraid of hard work if it fits into the context of
their life and passions. Traditional
life ways were very demanding physically.
To track, kill, carry, butcher, and dress any large animal is not an
easy labor; neither was planting, harvesting, tanning, sewing, cooking,
etc. Even our art, crafts, and music
required craftsman who labored to make our lives beautiful. To live naturally was not labor free. Our lives were filled with difficult and
dangerous tasks that were performed without resentment. But the new habits of waiting for commodities
or per capita checks are difficult to break, and only time will give our young
the same satisfaction with their work that they get from giving their all in a
basketball or softball game. Of course
many of our youth have already adapted, but we know pockets where there has
been, as of yet, no movement. Fresh
from our original way of life, the modern types of labor offered us were
unacceptable, but today we understand that whatever labor we engage in can be
healthy and meaningful.
Dependency can be broken with activity and purpose. Sacrifice and commitment to giving up our
bad habits will generate people who, by their example, may fulfill the old-time
qualities that encourage others. It
begins with men and women pledging themselves again to their People and to the
Creator.
Essay Forty-Seven BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Sacred Tobacco
Tobacco is something almost
all Indians share in common. Many natural varieties were harvested and numerous
mixtures of native tobacco and herbs were used. Tobacco itself was an indispensable ceremonial item. The leaves were offered to open fires, or
placed upon the Earth, or given to the winds.
Old accounts even mention uses of it as an aide to exuding poisons from
the pores, but we are unfamiliar as to how that was accomplished. Commonly, it was used in a smoking mixture
but was mixed with others herbs, barks, or berries. The Smoke and its properties were sacramental. Though some casual use was accepted in
differing degrees among different Tribes, the spiritual awareness that
permeated every aspect of Traditional life insured that proper respect and
attention be paid to its use. In
addition, the amount of exercise natural to everyday life acted as a countering
influence to the detrimental effects of smoking in young to middle-aged
people. However, Elders warned of those
detrimental effects even then.
Casual abuse and addiction to commercially prepared tobacco products run
deep in the Indian psyche and in our communities. Use of cigarettes has trickled down to even our elementary-age
school children and, at one time, almost every Indian smoked. It is easy to see how this Traditional form
was converted to profit the tobacco companies through causal use. Since the consequences have only recently
come to public attention, we should expect an epidemic of tobacco-related
health problems in our elder generations.
If not for the many other ways Indians die, we would probably be seeing
higher statistics already.
Today, a number of Indian groups have launched tobacco education
programs while still providing naturally grown tobacco for ceremonial use. They encourage a respect for this Holy herb,
and recognition of the dangers that come with abusing a Sacred herb. It is a formidable task. It seems almost anti-Indian to be
anti-smoking, especially when it's compounded by the economic benefits of being
able to sell untaxed tobacco on many reservations, a situation that many Nations
are taking advantage of.
Traditionally, it is a matter of respect. Tobacco has a powerful Spirit that, if abused, will turn on those
who disrespect it and wreck havoc in their lives. It is the same for all Medicine abused. Indians know that better than anyone does. To make the choice for creation or
destruction has always occupied the minds of our Elders. We can see how we got
to this place, and are just now beginning the process of changing ingrained
habits and viewpoints to reflect a more Traditional attitude. No Pipe Carrier would think of using
marijuana in the Pipe, yet even our most respected young leaders think nothing
of casually rolling tobacco or smoking ready-mades. Generations have formed these attitudes. It is a matter of education,
and time. As with every great change,
some must choose to be the examples of that change in order that others might
see strength in their abstinence and follow their lead.
We begin with our children. A
program of education using posters and other visual aids is a beginning, but
only children witnessing an example will achieve success. When mothers and fathers, brothers and
sisters, uncles and aunts, grandmothers and grandfathers begin giving up casual
smoking in Respect, and when social pressures within the Tribes turn from
support of casual tobacco use to a more Traditional view, then we can feel good
about our efforts.
Essay Forty-Eight BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Indian Money
Many Americans believe that
every year the government gives enormous chunks of (taxpayer's) money to each
tribal member in the U.S. for no other reason than that they're an enrolled
Indian. It is a misunderstanding that
stands in the way of Americans recognizing and accepting responsibility for our
holocaust. They are unaware that
circumstances everywhere in Indian country are remarkably different. Some Tribes own their lands in concert. Some have each parcel deeded individually,
and some are a mixture of the two. Some
live on checkerboards of Indian land, government land, and property owned by
private non-Indian citizens.
In many places, monies and
programs are part of treaty agreements that may be in perpetuity, or they may
be settlements for lands or resources ceded in the past or present. They may be use-payments for grazing, timber
rights, agricultural use, water, or mineral rights. They may be trust payments held in trust by the government for
individuals or Tribes. They may be
allocations or monies granted as compensation for the fact that treaties were
broken or never ratified.
It must be pointed out that most American Indian Tribes never held the
right, or opportunity, to prove they could manage their own monies until the
first gaming compacts were ratified. In
a few cases, the BIA has previously allowed sufficiently organized Tribes to
attempt business ventures, but always under the careful eyes of the Department
of the Interior. If Indians did have
money, they had to apply to the government and go through bureaucratic gymnastics
to get it.
We explain to people that much of our long standing distrust for the BIA
stems from the legacy of corrupt Indian Agents leasing allotment parcels to
cattle barons, stealing rations from starving peoples, and bootlegging
alcohol. Indian trust monies have
existed since the early days, but the Departments of the Army and the Interior
determined that Indians were incapable of handling or managing their
monies. Knowing they had trust money,
yet never being able to get their hands on it, has frustrated dirt-poor Indians
for decades. And then there are the
hundreds, maybe thousands, who have trust accounts and don't even know it!
Recently, a suit by Indians against the BIA for the loss and
mismanagement of billions of dollars of Indian Trust Monies has vindicated Dave
Henry, the accountant hired by the government to provide a general accounting
of the trust fund situation at a Montana Agency years ago. He was the first to expose the
mismanagement, poor handling of accounts, and outright theft by BIA officials
and others. In his book, "Stealing
From Indians", Henry goes into specific detail to show how this monumental
swindle took place. He was subsequently
fired as a whistleblower and to this day maintains his hopes that he will be
reinstated with back pay under whistleblower protection statutes, and that the
billions of dollars will be repaid.
Unfortunately, he has found out that when it comes to Indian matters, laws
can be ignored, rules broken, and issues of trust and integrity
disregarded.
As we mentioned before, the
suit to find the money determined by the United States Office of General
Accounting to be missing from Bureau of Indian Affairs fund accounts continues. The new multi-million dollar computer
tracking system built to streamline the process has been determined to be
monumental failure (at taxpayers expense), and legal battles drag on. But this suit represents only a drop in the
bucket of monies, lost, swindled, fraudulently used, stolen, or mismanaged over
the last 150 years. Some estimate the
actual figure at well over a hundred to a hundred and fifty billion dollars—a
considerable sum for people who, in many places, still don't have telephone service
or indoor plumbing! Dave Henry
originally estimated the figure at fifty billion over twenty years ago! We doubt that much of that money will ever
be recouped.
There are places where Indians have received large sums for settlements
or disbursements, but they were not always U.S. taxpayer monies. Despite the beliefs of many Americans, the
Government is not paying out "guilt money". The U.S. government has never spent a dime on Indians that it did
not have to. Any social programs that
are currently paid for by the American public are a direct result of the legal
responsibility assumed by the government pursuant to treaty rights, settlement
dispensations, resource trusts, or moral necessity.
The latter is especially true in California where, by 1850, the State
Government had learned that federal treaties need not be ratified and the lands
of peaceful Peoples could be easily taken without much loss of life. The policy was to first make the treaties,
so the local Indians thought they were protected, and then Congress (under
pressure from the States) would fail to ratify them. Of course, no one would inform the Indians of this and the
decisions would be place under a Congressional Act of Secrecy for more than
fifty years. Remaining Indian lands
were obtained (stolen) during the 1950s policy of Termination. Whatever the State of California and the
Federal Government does for these Indians can never be enough to pay for the
suffering they endured and the sacrifices they were forced to make.
In fact, the benefits Americans have received from the illegal and
immoral confiscation of our rights, lands, and lives can never be measured or
compensated for in economic ways.
Happily, we can report that some small progress toward self-sufficiency
is being made. Two eastern Tribes, made
vulgarly rich through gaming, recently returned all Federal monies asking that
they be redistributed to poorer Tribes.
Other Tribes have successfully spread out into legitimate businesses
other than gaming and are finally able to provide many good services for their
People. Some claim that Traditional
spirituality, culture, and values are being sacrificed for such advances, but
the minds of people who are formed from generations of poverty and suffering
rarely turn first toward philosophical issues.
We are beginning to find Indian money; hopefully, we will not lose what
is more important along with that discovery.
Essay Forty-Nine Bluewolf & Lupe'/ Shirts N'
Skins
Outside Help
Many people want to help
Native Peoples. While we may have
given our readers the impression that America is, and always has been, against
Natives—this impression is certainly false.
Many non-Indians, almost from the first day that Anglo-Europeans landed
on these shores, have seen a value in our ways and have wanted to help. The problem is that they usually want to
help on their own terms and by their own methods. This approach never works with Indians. Even if they get by a natural distrust of their motives, they are
handicapped by a complete lack of understanding of how things get done in
Indian Country.
Granted, times are changing, and in many places Indians are becoming
more and more familiar (and open) to historically European systems of
organization and decision-making, but in just as many places you will still
find a slower-time, word of mouth, get-there-when-we-get-there way of
life.
Rather than trying to explain to anyone what Indians think, we think it
better to simply caution anyone who wants to "help out", to ask
themselves first whether or not they have been asked for that help. To jump in
uninvited, with preconceived ideas about the relevance and effect of that
“help”, with an expectation to be a part of the decision-making process is not
only guaranteed to cause problems, it is disrespectful. Indians are not looking for outsiders to
solve their problems. The real problems
in Indian Country must be solved from within.
Generally, Indians are in need of the same things poor people around the
world are in need of: firewood, propane or natural gas, housing, food, blankets
and new clothing, transportation, gasoline, money for necessities, etc. We are not in need of outside guidance or
leadership, organizational strategists, group leaders, spiritual advisors,
rags, or remnants. We are occasionally
in need of laborers, truck drivers (with trucks), grant writers, teachers,
doctors, health professionals, lawyers, etc., if we can't get our own.
The first rule when offering anyone help is to ask—have they asked for
it? The second rule is to find out
exactly what is needed, and when. There are Indian organizations and media
people who keep track of such things, or one could always call specific Tribal
Council/Business Offices to inquire about what is needed. Please don't go uninvited with brainstorms
about how to make Native lives better or casual inquiries about helping out
with expectations of being enthusiastically received. If Indians think they need your help, they'll ask you. Moreover, if you show up and no one actually
tells you to leave, but you find yourself being ignored—take the hint. These are times when Indians must step up
and help themselves. Your economic
support may or may not be requested.
Don't be afraid to ask, just don't be offended if you are politely
refused.
Essay Fifty BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Cracking Our Bones
(Cultural Appropriation and Exploitation)
Culture is like building the
perfect soup. First, you start with the
water and dog—excuse us—meat, and then you add the other ingredients.
The water and meat are your heritage, your economic status, social
status, personal freedom, education, as well as your grasp of language and
ability to use it effectively. These
are the base ingredients to the soup of your life. The spices and flavorings
are the ritual forms, culture, spiritual life, and philosophies that bring the
soup into balance and harmony.
In past times, the base and flavorings were not always a matter of
choice, but of necessity. Life provided
you the base and flavorings according to the continent, race, religion, and
social order you were born into.
On this continent, the flavor was Tribal. It exalted the freedom of the individual in service to the
People. It enforced its precepts by the
power of social pride. Its sense of
beauty, art, oratory, language, and personal freedom was unsurpassed. It was not perfect, but it was perfectly
suited to this Land.
In the late 1960’s, many modern youth were looking to escape what they
perceived as a materialistic, hypocritical, exploitive, authoritative, and
repressive approach to life, as evidenced by the obvious disintegration of
their parents' dreams. While spouting
the wondrous qualities of the "democratic system", three major contemporary
leaders had been assassinated within a decade, and a number of controversial
and costly wars begun.
Americans. These are the
children of plenty. They are not afraid
of deprivation, lack of education, homeless nights, or even temporary
violence. One does not fear what one
does not know. Those of the 1960's
feared sterility, stagnation, closed-mindedness, rigid authority, and rich
bastards who didn't mind that there were neighbors starving only a few miles
away.
Some of them took to the road to see if they could make it alone. They lived with hunger and homelessness and
found they could stand both with a little company and some good weed. The Beatles had publicized an attitude of
looking outside one's own heritage and upbringing with their adoption and
practice of East Indian Philosophy.
The eyes of American youth began restlessly searching the horizon for
"another way".
It was about this time that the American Indian Movement members began
building their first fires in Minneapolis and the Indians of All-Tribes
Movement began. Alcatraz Island became
a national headline along with Pit River, Franks Landing, and the Traditional
Hopi dispute with Peabody Coal.
Suddenly Indians were in the news!
Those questing for answers began to look our way.
Americans are always amazed when they hear Indians are uncomfortable
with more than a casual outside interest in our cultures, particularly our
Sacred Life and Ritual. Non-Indians
often perceive their personal interests to be harmless, and are surprised that
their motives are questioned.
To begin to understand, you have to look at the “meat” American culture
uses beneath all its borrowed flavorings.
American tradition has always pretended to exalt the freedom of the
individual, but the pretense of their being in service to one another exists
only so long as their personal interests are not affected. These "interests" may not only be
financial, they may have just as much to do with gaining community status or
recognition, personal development, or spiritual growth. And they want it now! They deeply resent anyone who tells them
something they do not want to hear.
Deep down they harbor the same feeling of superiority and arrogance in
these matters as did their Puritan relatives.
Of course, they can always find a slippery-tongue way to convince
themselves of their own arguments. This
is a part of their "soup".
As a group, the present generations are well educated and spoiled,
having not recently suffered any war on their own soil, violent social
upheaval, or disruption in necessities or services. They usually have a good grasp of language and sincerely believe
in their quest for whatever "Holy Grail" they seek.
Some Indians object outright to non-Indian participation in Sacred Ceremonials. Most feel the decision should be left to the
particular Ceremonial Leader or Elder.
But all object to those who appropriate these forms for profit or
spiritual trophy hunting.
It is not about skin color. It
is about identity, and maintaining the purity and validity of very private and
personal social, cultural, and spiritual mores. The first threat is from those who would exploit and exhibit
rituals and ceremonies for monetary gain, or a desire for recognition or
status. It is not so much a threat as
an insult--and Indians are deeply offended.
However, we do understand that it is very, very American.
New Age concepts and books have further stripped original Indigenous
spirituality of its humanity, dehumanizing and reconstructing it to become part
of a homogenous worldview. This
reconstruction sanitizes any "offensive" smell, taste, sound, or
sight from the message by lifting it from the environments of remnant Indigenous
peoples, and rendering it safe, deodorized, and easy to understand.
Eager, full-bellied "searchers", with time on their hands and
a penchant for the comfortable study and effortless absorption of supposed
"ancient knowledge, are drawn to these texts. But the average uninformed reader may be drawn in as well. People who consider fraudulent narratives
harmless, embracing "the message", are like “hunters” who prefer to
buy their meat from the counter. They
prefer to remain aloof from the realities of the environment of the message,
and ignorant of the responsibilities carried by the butcher who must inevitably
wash the blood and guts from his hands.
To go to the actual present day environments of Indigenous peoples
involves an element of danger, of risk, and certainly—of discomfort. Potential students would have to become
part of the Nations to be taught in a traditional way. That infers commitment, patience, and a
substantial amount of time. It is so
much more convenient to skip all that and sit in an easy chair with a book,
imagining one’s self to be "studying" the authentic ways, vicariously
soaking up the knowledge and spirituality of Indigenous Heritage.
Indigenous spirituality cannot be separated from culture. It cannot be
removed from its environment. It is a
part of the People. To understand it,
one must be part of the People. This is
why unrelated spiritual hunters always come away with only misunderstood pieces
of a puzzle. There are no individual
truths to be found in Indigenous Tribal knowledge; the truths are social,
shared, and intimately part of the whole animate body of the People.
Western civilization has done its best to isolate modern man from his
environment, his culture, his social relationships, and shared secrets. For this reason, the truths of Indigenous
knowledge and spirit will remain inaccessible to him unless he, or she,
approaches it with "respect".
Many new-age authors rationalize modern "learning" by implying
that the true Indigenous peoples have vanished and are now represented by only
a few wandering "teachers”.
This present day western concept, i.e. that experience can be gained
without actually having an experience, comes from a belief that the written
word can endow men with an experience of truth—a concept that is entirely alien
to Indigenous Peoples around the world.
Indigenous knowledge, and oral tradition, is effective because it
utilizes concepts which are familiar in the day-to-day life of the People, and
because it occurs in the environment of its foundation. To be taught ancient
ways around a night fire, with stars overhead, sparks flirting with the wind,
the smell of smoke and sweat and earth, the sound of familiar voices, and the
feel of relationship and belonging—is a portion of the message that cannot be
experienced through text or imagination.
Of course, that was the romantic version. After all, in real life it might be daylight and hot as a
pistol—no air-conditioning. On the
other hand, it might be cold as an iceberg, with you standing so close to the
fire that your eyebrows are singed, your toes cooked, and your backside frozen
like a slab of beef in the freezer.
Without the environment of the teaching, what is recorded of the message
is only a shadow of itself.
Western civilization takes its knowledge from what it thinks it
understands about the world. Its perceptions are formed not from its own
experiences but from someone else's perceptions of someone else's perceptions
of someone else's experiences and on and on....
With a continuing colonial spirit—arrogant, greedy, lazy, contemptuous,
and impersonal—many present day authors attempt to imply that they have been
privy to these experiences. By pretending authenticity and relationship, they
ravage, plunder, and disrespect the true perspective while incorrectly
glorifying what they what they perceive to be the essence of Indigenous
spiritual life and culture, all the while adapting it to their own purposes of
profit.
Western pundits point to all
the accomplishments that civilization has achieved for its subjects, ascribing
the successes in great part to the accumulation of written knowledge and
wisdom. If that is so, why then is
there a new age movement at all? Why
was this great experiment unable to convey, through its accumulated published
works, a message of truth that is spiritually satisfying to its children? Why
is there such a great exodus from Christian movements toward Indigenous and
otherwise "uncivilized" ancient understanding, if the methods and
accumulated wisdom of civilization is superior? Why do our school children murder their fellows? Why do millions starve in a world capable of
feeding them? Where is this supposed
superiority?
Could it be that the whole pyramid of civilization has gotten so high,
that only those who are not looking up, but down can see the crumbling fraud of
its foundation? It is as if all of
mankind is on a ladder; with the leaders daily constructing rungs that reach
higher and higher into the firmament, while the lower rungs are rotting. They constantly exhort us not to look down
but to look to technology and the future as they furiously struggle to draw our
attention away from the crumbling structure beneath us.
Why would anyone do this?
Because many of them suppose that by climbing higher and higher, we will
someday eliminate the need for those original foundations, and reach a level of
achievement where man will evolve beyond the ladder. Others, with their accumulated wealth, count on their private
jets to whisk them away should the ladder begin to fall.
It is the last way in which Indigenous peoples can be exploited. Everything else is familiar.
Our foods, natural resources, and lands have been taken or altered so
they will no longer support the ancient ways of life. Our names have been appropriated for usable nouns. Our images
have been used for entertainment, our arts copied and sold as novelties or
antiquities, even our bones dug up as objects of study or curiosity. Why should
our most sacred ceremonies and spiritual concepts be free from this continued
onslaught from the children of Colonialism, Manifest Destiny, and progress? Moreover, who says they must be represented
accurately or respectfully? After all,
this is the final frontier of colonization. The scavengers have picked over our
bones long enough. Now their children
are intent on devouring our minds and spirits-because, as the price of their
ancestor’s conquest, they have lost their own.
There is another threat to our culture that is less offensive but more
insidious. Indians are very shy when
confronted by non-Indians. Many
mixed-bloods have learned to walk carefully if they want to participate fully
and be influential in their Tribes—so for those non-Indians looking to adopt or
participate in ceremony or ritual, the questions and problems are complex. Primarily it is an issue of respect. If one respects a culture enough to want to
adopt its most sacred forms, then one should also have enough respect to
support age-old methods of teaching and learning these forms. The treasure of Traditional forms of passing
on (and authorizing) Ritual and Ceremony protect the integrity of these rituals
within an oral tradition.
In many places, first among the "rules" of ceremonial life is
that a candidate for teaching does not choose it for himself but is instead
chosen. These people have
characteristics and endowments recognized by Elders, or have had some special
power bestowed on them by the Creator.
Some are born to it. For some,
it is hereditary. Others grow into
it. Unlike many of the Christian
ministers of the world, few Indians personally recognize and accept a
"call" based simply on their own isolated initiative.
In Traditional education, the method and environment of the presentation
are important attributes of the message.
The simple memorization of chants, the physical preparations, or
gestures of ceremony, etc., are only forms that constitute a part of the
discipline of commitment. The entire
experience and environment of the teaching provides a greater understanding of
the purpose of ceremony beyond the disciplined mastery of ritual. In addition, that experience does not end,
as it does in a classroom, but continues throughout the life of the person.
To show this kind of respect for our forms of learning requires an
element of time and commitment that is certainly a stumbling block in the way
of an outsider learning and using our rituals and ceremony for their personal
spiritual benefit.
It is our opinion that a number of conditions should exist for those who
would take on these responsibilities.
First, they should have a People to
serve. Then they should travel to the
"Teachers" who will help them gather this knowledge and Power. This will probably be a place of poverty and
violence. Certainly, it will be a
considerably different environment than the preferred New-Age routine of
sitting quietly on a comfortable rock with a book about shamanism or American
Indian ceremonies. These persons should
be able to answer the question of how they determined they were ready for this
knowledge or why they should possess it at all! Ultimately they might have to suffer the disappointment of
learning they are not suitable for this role, something that a book will never
tell you.
Finally, these persons should be warned. Those who carry, or participate in these powerful forms are in
constant danger that the consequences of abuse will be visible in their
lives. These students should be
suitably awed by their responsibility.
They should understand the implications of the word "Sacred"
and understand our concern that the Power of these forms, misunderstood,
misapplied, or misused, can cause more harm than good. Most modern people know little of this
Power, except for faith healers and what is conjured up in Hollywood and horror
novels.
Lastly, our potential candidates
should consider the most controversial and volatile question. Why should they even consider it in the
first place? What gives them the right
and authority knowing that many Indians resent it?
Why do we resent it? We hate the
idea that the descendants of those who turned our "soup" into a
mixture of mud and blood and shit, should be so empty and free as to want from
us now what was once taken away, and even made illegal! Our generations have been asked (or forced)
for a century, even up to recent days, to turn away from these ways as inferior
and ungodly. Now that some of us have
finally acquiesced, here come latter-day Americans wishing to learn those same
inferior and paganistic spiritual forms!
This is the "soup" that we
have left in our bowl. Today it is
easier for the descendants of former enemies to consider our ancient ways
spiritually and culturally valid than it is for some of our own peoples. The opportunity to appropriate or exploit
our sacred ways, no matter how well intentioned, creates a violent resentment
among peoples who have trouble getting their own relatives to embrace their
original cultural and spiritual heritages
So what's the answer for the non-Indian looking for personal meaning and
spiritual growth, with a specific interest in Indian ways? Unless they have been brought into a circle
of Indians and included in their life, we say, "Stick with a book." They should adapt it to their own uses. However, they should not advertise, or
represent it, as Indian. They should
use it carefully, praying always for their protection, and for those they
love. In the end, they should not delude
themselves into thinking the knowledge makes them Indian.
There is only one way to be authorized to learn, teach, or practice
Ceremony and Ritual. That is by being
one of the People. There is only one
reason to learn or teach Ceremony or Ritual: that is to be committed in service
to a People for a lifetime. Not for
status, recognition, profit, or individual spiritual enlightenment, but because
Power has chosen them, and it is their responsibility—with all that that
entails.
If these words stick in their craw of those who are looking to crack our
bones for the marrow they are missing, we ask them to reconsider. Their motives may have less to do with
Spirituality and Respect, the fundamental principles of American Indian life
and culture, and more to do with furthering their own individual purposes, however
altruistic they may insist them to be.
Essay
Fifty-One
BlueWolf & Lupe'/Shirts N' Skins
Blacks, Black Indians, And Black White-men
We've read a number of
writers who like to lump together the Black and Indian experiences with regard
to similar experiences with captivity, racism, and poverty--to make a point
about the futility of resisting assimilation in today's world. Their point makes much of supposed African
American successes in overcoming the obstacles that kept them from becoming
modern Black "White" people.
This has always been the standard by which progress toward civilization
is judged. History books are quick to
point favorably to Indian tribes that made early conversions to American
culture, government, religion and other "civilized" behaviors while
pointedly ignoring or romanticizing the "wild" or patriotic
"savages" that resisted any such acceptance of civilized ways.
It is the same on the
African continent where English and Dutch colonialism caused many Indigenous
Africans to lose their ties to the land and assimilate. Of course economic issues, overpopulation,
and the destruction of natural resources has effectively destroyed many African
people’s ability to utilize natural systems for survival, as it has here in the
U.S.
Unfortunately, any comparison of the Black and Indian experience in the
Americas is misguided and pointless.
Here we distinguish between Black Indians and Black White People. Black Indians are proud of their
mixed-ancestry, as they should be.
Their loyalties include their tribal affiliation. But except where Blacks
and Indians intermarried, or have been adopted into Tribes, Black People have
had a different experience than Indians in the Americas.
The history of Black slavery in America
is full of myth and distortion. Everyone thinks the Colonists waited until the
Civil War to address the issue. But the Colony of Georgia was the first to
outlaw the institution of slavery in 1735.
In 1777, the British Crown ordered “an end to the immigration of all
Blacks, free and slave.” The second Continental Congress in 1776 resolved that
“no slaves be imported into any of the Thirteen United Colonies”, but later
reaffirmed slavery as national policy by refusing to outlaw it as an
institution.
Opposition to slavery was
not confined to the North. More
anti-slavery groups existed in the South than in the North. The Virginia Abolitionists lost their bid to
outlaw slavery in the Virginia Legislature in 1832 by only 11 votes. Blacks did not endure their slavery without
protest. At least three times, in 1800,
1822, and 1831, Blacks conspired to overthrow their oppressors in imaginative
large-scale rebellions.
Both Blacks and Indians were enslaved
at the beginning, and both revolted when the opportunity presented itself. The major difference was that most Blacks
were separated from similar tribal members, while most Indians (held on the
continent) still had some contact with their lands and peoples. Despite the fact that, after the Civil War,
freed Blacks dropped into the same levels of poverty and isolation into which
Indians eventually languished, they had already had over 100 years of living as
an integral, albeit unwilling, part of the dominant culture. By being separated from their lands and any
contact with their former culture and tribes, after the passing of the first
few generations, Black slaves had no choice but to assimilate or perish. The Shoshones of Nevada remember well the
Black Calvary units assigned to destroy them.
The Mexican Indian was faced with much the same choice under the
Spaniards and their Papal Bulls. No
bones were made about the results of their choices. Convert, and do not resist, or die. Fortunately, a few of them resisted and survived. For a while, they still had their land.
Despite the American Black insistence that they have a distinct culture
within the dominant culture, like the Mexican-American population, only a
little of their lifestyle or culture shows Native roots. Though they might wish it otherwise, they
are culturally predominantly European
For African Americans, after a few generations of separation from their
homelands, the old knowledge derived from that contact seemed irrelevant and
was discarded in the face of their new reality. Loss of language was another big factor in the loss of identity
and culture. Losing contact with their
lands and languages was instrumental in the loss of oral tradition, and
ultimately, African culture.
After many generations of
captivity, the Civil War caught Blacks severely unprepared for freedom. Black
families had been divided up, or came over from their homelands as separated
individuals from the start. They had no
recourse but to utilize the values, economics, and ideals of their owners and
peers as they attempted to reorganized their families and bring the social ties
of slave life into a “free” life.
Indians knew where they stood from the beginning. Those who survived
were often placed together on poor, but familiar, soil. While there were
instances of relocation and forced marches away from traditional lands, many
Tribes eventually returned to their general areas. This is not to make light of the connection each Nation felt
with their specific “Creator-endowed” lands, but it was not the same as being
removed to another hemisphere. We
previously made much of these relocations as being a turning point in the
temporary dissolution of Tribes, but the socializing factors of blood relationship
still remained and the circle of most Indian families survived,
semi-intact.
A significant difference in
the two experiences was that while the U.S. Government instituted very direct
policies to force Natives to give up their languages and culture, the isolation
of Black Americans, many from different African Tribes or Nations, caused
language and social customs to disappear within only a few generations. The U.S. government made a colonizing error
in allowing most Native families and Tribes to remain together on the
land. Believing that a military victory
and boarding school education were all that was necessary to destroy our ties
to the Earth and each other, they assumed that eventually we would recognize
their "superior" culture for what it was, and become like them. After all, it was destiny and God's
will. What we have of our past has
survived because of their arrogance.
Slightly off-topic to this essay, but important, is our observation that
one of the many vices we inherited from the Americans, was bigotry and racism
directed specifically at Black People.
Many Tribes originally utilized war captives as slaves, but it was not a
racial issue. Eventually those slaves
were adopted. Unfortunately as many of
our People's adopted Anglo ways, they incorporated the institutions of Black
slavery into their changing lifestyles.
The Civil War severely affected southern Native peoples. All across America, on almost every
reservation we have observed continuing racism toward Black people. Typically, we believe these kinds of
prejudices can only be eliminated by time, through the passing of
generations.
Contemporary issues
affecting Black Indians have forced us to include our opinions on this
issue. Our view is that we should, at
every opportunity, value the decisions made by our ancestors. If they thought it right and proper to adopt
or include members of other races into the nations, it is not our place to drag
new (or old) prejudices into the issues.
To strip members of membership today, who are descendants of those who
were once accepted and participated fully, and loyally, in their Nations, is
wrong. The individual Nations must
decide, but if they arbitrarily exclude the descendants of those their honored
ancestors once called brother and sister, we hope those ancestors will forgive
them.
As for Black White people, they have every right to be proud of their
accomplishments and survival. To
compare their experiences with that of Indians, however, is not of any
value. Most people don't even know that
there were still "free" Apaches in the 1960s. Except for Black
Indians, or recent immigrants, for all intent and purpose, a majority of Black
Americans have willingly, or unwillingly, assimilated.
Essay Fifty-Two BlueWolf
&Lupe’/ Shirts N' Skins
Mexica, South Of An Imaginary Line
"I had a Comanche
mother and an Irish father. But I'm
Comanche. I'm not Irish....
Blood
runs the heart. The heart knows what it
is.
LaDonna Harris, Comanche.
La Raza Cosmica is a conqueror's myth.
Unless Mexican descendants are pureblood Spanish European, to call
themselves Hispanic or Latino is to make a mockery of the original Indigenous
Peoples who were murdered resisting the Spaniards, and all those since who have
been killed, enslaved, or assimilated.
Hispanic people are from Spain, or have Spanish ancestors. A Latino is a descendant of Europeans
(Portuguese, Spaniards, and French) in Latin America. They are generally racist against Indigenous People. If you are a Mexican national, or descended
from them but not pure European, had you traveled anywhere in Europe, America,
or Mexico one hundred years ago, your "mixed" ancestry would have
marked you clearly as "inferior" and you would not have been accepted
as an equal. Your identity is either
Euro-Spanish or Indigenous Mexica (Meh-shee-cah). Hispanic and Latino are media terms that manipulate the truth to
further separate you from your Indigenous heritage. Some choose to be both, which North of the border, would be tantamount
to choose the conqueror's side. The
drive to become "white" and deny or diminish Mexica or Indigenous
heritage was even more important in Mexico and South America than it was in the
U.S. There were no Indian-brown-skinned
Spaniards. Racism still hangs on in
many "mixed-blood" Mexican families in the United States, and
certainly below the border. Until
recently, to be identified as Indio/Mexica is to be inferior. Yet those Original Peoples built pyramids,
cities, and performed great feats of engineering. They developed an agriculture that gave the world chocolate,
chili, tomatoes, vanilla, and many other foods. They developed the mathematical concept of zero and the decimal
point. They invented the most accurate
calendar in the world. They had great
cities that were, at that time, the largest cities in the world. That their
people have forgotten four thousand years of Anahuac civilization, culture, and
accomplishments due to an insignificant five hundred years of subjugation is a
testament to the cruelty and thoroughly destructive effects of Spanish
colonization.
We hear of the proud identity of the Hispanic Community. But this is largely a creation of
politicians looking for an edge with the more than twenty American groups that
speak Spanish, many of which are unrelated culturally.
Like many other North American Indians, there's not much left to set
Indigenous descendant Mexicans apart from Anglo-American communities, except
for language and a few holidays or celebrations. Where are the original and authentic traits passed down from
their Indigenous ancestors?
The adoption of Spanish culture is no different than the adoption of an
Anglo Saxon one. Today most American
Chicanos accept their Spanish-Indian duality as a unique mestizaje that defines
their identity. This is a phenomenon of successful colonization. Even those Mexicans who are of "mixed-blood" are no different
racially than a similarly mixed Scotch-Irish/ Choctaw American Indian. They are, actually, just a Spanish/ Mexica
(Tribal name) Indian. Do they choose to search for, or follow their Indigenous
identity or do they accept only the language, religion, customs, and culture of
their conqueror?
To clarify even more, let's look at Filipinos. They have Spanish
surnames and some have some Spanish blood, but they don't call themselves
Hispanic. They speak English but that doesn't make them English or British.
Where do the actual differences exhibit themselves? In their minds, .they are committed to being Filipino first.
Mexica Heritage. It can't be
escaped. It can be denied, ignored, or
downplayed, but Indigenous heritage is the single factor that separates Mexican
people of color from Europeans--above or below the border.
The conquerors brought an entirely new culture and forced it down the
throats of a People who resisted for decades, until the Church fabricated the
legend of the Brown Virgin of Guadalupe.
The conversion of millions of Mexica Indians into Roman Catholics was
aided by a story, widely circulated by the Spanish Catholics. It was said that an Aztec Indian Franciscan
neophyte named Juan Diego witnessed the appearance of the Virgin Mary in
December 1531. The Virgin left her
image on his cloak. However,
surprisingly enough, the Virgin had the exact features and skin-color--not of a
Hebrew woman--but of a Mexica one! And
the Church just happened to be built on the exact spot of ground Sacred to
Teotenantzin, the Traditional "Mother of Gods". Convenient.
This event is at the root of
Mexico's national identity and contemporary faith, and was the final blow of
Colonialism. Now the only
"spirituality" many will accept today is an institutionalized and
organized European-descended faith.
You see the efforts to
preserve the Vision of a predominantly European culture all over Mexican and
"Latin" TV. People of
European descent control the Spanish and English language media. Sometimes you can watch for hours without
seeing a "brown" Hispanic. It
is still not completely acceptable to be Indian (although today, certain strides
forward are being taken). Above the
border, in the United States, the media and government herd those with Mexican
heritage into an acceptance of Hispanic/Latino labels. Perhaps among the older people, these old
ways of thinking cannot be changed. But
the young can be educated to new realities.
The fact that their Indigenous identity and old ways are unknown, and
their heritage obscured, should not keep them from searching, and finding it
again.
The names Tarascan, Azteca, Maya, Otomi, Tarahumara, Olmeca, etc., need
to be heard once more, spoken with dignity and pride. The Spaniards were excellent conquerors but they did not fully
succeed. Our brother spends much of the
year traveling among Indigenous Mexica, representing our Society. Many of these peoples still have their
language and customs. Some of the
groups of Indians from even further south have done a much better job of
keeping their identity separate from their colonizers. Even when they come to this country, they
still identify themselves as Indians in census accountings.
The mixing and inter-marriage of Indigenous Mexican immigrants and
American Indians is raising the understanding that to be Indian is a
"good" thing. Also recent
political events in Mexico give us hope that the previous policies of enforced
assimilation will be corrected by Constitutional Amendments designed to protect
Indigenous cultures and Peoples from similar attacks. So if you are from Mexican, Central, or South American heritage,
with brown skin or "mixed-blood"—remember—you are Indigenous. Neither
the English nor Spanish language is your original language. Your relatives need
your support. Anahuac y Axtlan: Libre y
Mexica!
We acknowledge Olin Tezcatlipoca’s essay as the source of much of this
material.
Essay Fifty-Three BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Abortion or Right To Life (A Natural Perspective)
"When
the (buffalo) cows sense we're gonna have a real hard winter, they'll often
abort their calves. It's just their way
to make sure they survive to be able to bear new calves the next year."
Fred F, Canadian Buffalo Rancher
In the natural world, animals
abort their babies not because they do not have feelings for their young, but
because they intuitively know that to keep the child endangers not only the
child’s future but also the mother and larger family.
Human beings, absorbed in this temporary but overwhelming fantasy called
civilization—argue, demonstrate, legislate and commit murder to celebrate the
sanctity of an unborn child. Separated from the natural and spiritual worlds,
these people usually live in well-fed, comfortable Nations with plenty of spare
time for armchair philosophy and media bytes.
They naturally take the survival of the species for granted, because
they have accepted that human beings have successfully achieved "dominion
over nature."
If they understood the fragile position we hold as a species on a
changing planet, they might be a bit more grounded in reality. In addition, if they truly believed the
religions of their historical fathers, they would admit to the everlasting
nature of spirit and accept that there is no death. An unborn child denied life today, will, just like the buffalo
calf, surely find a time to be born.
Those who cry for the sacred but deny the transitory nature of the
universe actually expose the real nature of their discontent. They are afraid of death, unsure of their
spiritual immortality, and resent the pain of loss that juxtaposes the joy of
gain.
In their haste to find a scapegoat for their fear, they forget the
40,000 children who die each day of hunger and ignore the cries of children
suffering abject poverty, illness, abuse, and degradation. Unable, or unwilling, to demand that their
technological masters solve the efforts to sustain life for future generations
without sacrificing finite resources or depleting the natural systems beyond
their natural limits, they contribute to the very real threat to all life
unborn. Safe in their mythical
righteousness, they callously disregard modern science's discovery that the
universe is indeed one interrelated and interdependent organism and continue to
embrace the barbaric, wasteful, and destructive blind beast of progress.
Stories of women subjecting themselves to multiple abortions out of
irresponsibility or amoral character are fabricated. Each mother mourns the loss of a conceived child beyond the
understanding of an unrelated bystander. Indigenous Nations recognize that it
is the mothers, not the children, who are the guardians and repositories of our
future. The children are beloved, but the Mothers are Sacred.
Spirit is eternal—in rock, water, tree, star, animal, human. Death, like life, is necessary to Creation
and is filled with motion and transition.
The building blocks of the Universe rearrange themselves
constantly. No fear, no blame, no loss. Birth and death are twins that will not be
denied their time.
Now that we two men have expounded on a subject that should only be
discussed and decided on by our women, we'll take our medicine, shut up, and
wait for our punishment!
Essay Fifty-Four BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Blood And Balance
The recent issue of whether
or not traditional life-ways (such as the Makah hunting of whale) should be
allowed to be continued in a "civilized" world is important to all
Indigenous Peoples.
The Makah Nation, like the Inupiat of Alaska and other seaside Nations,
is aware of the binding thread between the whale, the ocean, and themselves. They know that civilization has damaged the
balance, and that the number of whales has been significantly reduced. Nevertheless, their Elders know what can be
sustained and what is needed. That is
why they will not attempt to harvest beyond what can be used in a given
season. That is why their hunt is
acceptable; it is within the boundaries of traditional thought, balance, and
harmony.
The individual and group skills, attributes, and unity necessary to
become proficient at preserving and utilizing any First Nation's traditional
methods of providing necessities for its People are of incalculable value.
Beyond the skills and techniques, the shared preparations, creation of tools,
concentration and disciplines, are the nurturing social and communal
relationships that facilitate the art, music, dance and culture that accompany
and support these physical acts of survival.
The entire ritual of the hunt is a much more important event than what
is often perceived to be (in today's world), an unnecessary killing.
For the Makah, the special relationship and bond achieved between whale,
water, and human—and the lessons derived from the recognition and understanding
of sacrifice, death, and purpose in a world of blood and beating hearts—are not
to be found in any modern social or educational institution. These traditional forms emphasize
relationship, balance, and a blending of life and death into a complex and
richly intertwined reality of the natural world.
It is an Old Way, but not an outdated or valueless way. It is still true to the Peoples who were
given it by the Creator, tying the physical and spiritual world together where
formulae religions fail. It preserves
an essence of the greatness of Nations who clearly understand the role of human
beings in the natural world—and of the inter-reliant relationships we share
with all our relatives on this Grandmother Earth.
It is these acts of taking life for our survival that teach us the
precious sacrifices all mortal beings ultimately make toward the preservation
of our world. Life on this earth is not
lived without experiencing pain and death. From this we learn why we have the
obligation to always be grateful, and respectful, of Life.
For those Safeway Indians and Eco-freaks intent on their narrow
views regarding the balance and harmony of life and death, these ways have no
meaning. They do not understand the
reason for such a bloody kind of life because they have been closeted from the
natural world. By being brought up in
a media society that uses violence to entertain but not educate, these people
have been convinced that the tenuous and fragile systems that provide modern
civilization with necessities, are guaranteed us forever. They relegate these life-ways to a dead
past, believing in the superiority and endurance of modern systems. Should those tenuous threads of civilization
ever be broken, those who have maintained some connection to original life-ways
will be glad they did.
Western civilization has always casually
discounted the social organizations of the animal and plant nations. Naturally connected observation led
Indigenous Peoples to have no doubt that these other Nations were to be honored
and respected as having an equal role in the balance necessary to ecological
harmony. We are blood beings, relatives
to the other Nations who share eating and being eaten. It is a wholesome circle. However, modern culture has gone to great
lengths to insulate its citizens from the smells, sights, and sounds that
remind us our relatives are suffering and sacrificing themselves for us. None of these sacrifices are willingly
endured. The Creator does not ask that
from any of us. Nevertheless, this does
not mean that taking life for food is unnatural, simply because we fight to
survive. We have been taught that if we
have the correct spirit in our minds and hearts, being grateful and mindful of
our relatives' sacrifices, we fulfill our responsibility to the Creator and to
our Relations. Our children learn the
first reality of this world—everything passes away. In this way, at our ending—when it is our time to feed the
grass—we understand the balance and are comforted.
Essay Fifty-Five BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Picking Up The Medicine
Medicine. Like "respect", this is an English
word that, when applied to Indians, has multiple meanings. One signifies carrying Power. That Power may be an ability to exert an
unusual influence over the natural world.
It may reflect an ability to heal with the mind or a specifically
directed ritual, or have a special knowledge of specific natural plants,
minerals, rocks, or other forms of life that aide in the healing process. It may evidence itself in a visionary or
prophetic ability. It is not something
one chooses to have or searches for in a usual manner. It is a gift from the Creator, a natural
selection process beyond our comprehension.
Indians view power differently.
Some see it as an extension of the creative (or destructive)
processes. Some give it no face,
believing it to be derived of neither good nor evil but simply an expression of
itself, as it exists in the Universe.
New-age meanings extend it to people of knowledge, people of great
personality, or people who assume the roles of spiritual leadership or healer,
not because they experience any mysterious or Indigenous relationship to these
forces, but simply from their own strong personal desire to do so. That's not the way we think it happens.
Of our two families, as far as we know, only one carried Power. Much of our experience with this issue comes
from knowing a few men who did (or do) carry it, their families, and others
descended from families with a Tradition of Medicine or Power in them.
Power is frightening. If
misused, or abused, it can wreck terrible havoc in one's life and on the lives
of loved ones. During the 1960’s and
70’s there still existed a number of men famous for their Power, and an equal
number not so famous. Many of their
children, who might normally have been expected to step forward and carry that
same Medicine, were too intimidated by the examples they had seen of those who
had been unable to carry it cleanly, and who had suffered the
consequences. Alcoholism, lust, pride,
arrogance, and materialism are all temptations constantly assailing all
humanity, and those who carry Medicine are not exempt from those
temptations. A heavy toll is exacted
from those who fail to respect their own Power and its Source. Fear, self-doubt, and lack of commitment cut
into those who should have been next to pick up that Traditional Way and they
chose not to burden themselves with the responsibility.
For People who live by oral tradition, and who learn by doing—any
interruption in the sequence of participating generations causes a serious loss
of knowledge, and reduces the number of spokesmen for the Creator that carry
Power in service to the People. Men
like this do not decide to follow these paths arbitrarily. It is something they are given, or born to,
or chosen for. The lost generations
significantly reduced the pool of eligible and
capable candidates to the point where
knowledgeable Elders have been choosing to allow some traditional rituals to be
lost rather than teaching someone whose character or preparation is inadequate
for carrying those responsibilities for the People.
We do not pretend to know what should be done to renew this aspect of
our strength. Hopefully, in each
generation there will be a few who will take up this hard road, though it is
becoming more and more difficult to explain to young people how beautiful and
powerful these Old Ones were. They
rarely get to experience an example of those miraculous influences over the
natural world that some of our people possessed. Their lack of familiarity with these kinds of influences is
dangerous. We fear they may be too
easily influenced by some selfish or evil one stepping forward with Power,
never realizing that even those who carry Medicine and do extraordinary things
are still just human beings, with all the faults and foibles of a common
person.
The virtues of discipline, commitment, service, and self-sacrifice are
important in any age, but particularly now, with so much at stake.
We urge those who may be chosen, or whom the Spirits call, or who are
from a hereditary family, to "pick it up". There is no greater sacrifice you can make—for the Earth, and for
your People.
Essay Fifty-Six BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Warrior Societies In A Modern World
There are a number of
contemporary Tribes whose traditional Warrior Societies are still active. Others have lost that part of their
culture. However, that loss, and the
proliferation of urban environments, has not ended the need for them. Make no mistake, it is a very human
need-especially for young men (and women as well). The violence regularly reported in the press and evidence of gang
behavior throughout modern society and across cultural boundaries only serves to
punctuate, and validate, our point of view.
The contemporary view that gangs are a response to poverty, lack of
privilege, opportunity, boredom, and diminished self-esteem is wrong. There is a natural reason why these
gangs/societies exist and have existed since the human family began.
Men and women have always formed bonds and alliances beyond their
immediate families. There are bonds between hunters, between warriors, between
planters or gatherers, between mothers, between fathers, between families and
family members, between old people, young people, young and old people, between
healers and spiritual leaders, etc. Often these alliances were reflected in our
forms of social organization and government.
It was undoubtedly recognized by our earliest ancestors that these
alliances made them stronger, as individuals and as united Peoples. Even within American culture, the mainstream
entertainment media has always emphasized the bonds between soldiers,
prisoners, husbands, wives, and children--even gangs, criminal organizations,
and ethnic groups. We have the Lions
Club, the Kiwanis, the Elk’s Club, Sewing circles, Choirs, Theatre, etc. All of them come together for fellowship,
support, social interaction, and sense of additional meaning in their
lives. Some of these groups are mixed
sex; some are only open to men or women.
The phenomena of young people getting together is not unusual or
outrageous.
It is our belief that in the years of growth toward maturity the increase
in bodily strength, a need for mental and physical activity, and a fluctuating
emotional balance, pushes every generation to test its limits, to flaunt its
mortality, measure its resiliency, and search for day-to-day excitement. Obviously, the culture of a People
determines the type of activities and viewpoint that structures the outlet for
that expression. In the natural world
those outlets for young men often involved militaristic training with its
attendant tests of bravery and skill, or the rigorous, and often dangerous,
pursuits of hunting, horse-stealing, sports, gambling, game-playing, etc.. Historically, the fighting warrior ethic has
always been necessary to foster the attributes of bravery, courage, and
sacrifice needed by Indigenous Peoples (and perhaps all peoples) to defend
their lives and lands.
It is commonly thought that only recently have the city gangs stretched
their tentacles over the civilized world.
In fact, if you look closely throughout history you will find these
types of groups flourishing in every part of the world, even in rural areas,
throughout time. They exhibit
differences of course. Their symbols
change; their mannerisms and methods of initiation, their inclusion or
exclusion of women members, as well as their specific goals and values, but
these are more the peripheral paraphernalia of their bonding. Though certainly
of concern to the modern sociologist or criminologist viewing contemporary
societies, these external forms have nothing to do with the need for, or true
intent, of the bond.
Once one accepts that this is not an aberrant or unnatural
behavior, it is easier to get at the basic elements of why many of our present
gang/societies exhibit misguided and inappropriate behavior.
First, though it has become common to blame Society for all our ills—in
this case the shoe fits. Over the last
three to four generations, the average extended, and even nuclear, American
family has become non-existent.
Families have separated, divorced, moved away, and generally ignored any
of the reasons for maintaining larger unified families in their search for the
American Dream. Sometimes emotional or
intellectual conflicts have further divided those families that are still
located in one general area. We see
this on many reservations and rancherias where family feuds and arguments have
festered over generations to the point where members who live only a short
distance from each other have little or no daily personal contact, by choice.
Anglo-American culture, while pretending unity with such catchwords as
"the silent majority" etc., has been steadily deteriorating in common
purpose since the Second World War.
Values, once thought to be universally accepted, are now hard to
find. Pockets of the "Christian
Majority" still exist, but even their family values have splintered and
become more and more subjective within each individual family. Ethics and values no longer spring from a
central source. Mainstream religious
practice, once responsible for formulating this part of the Anglo-Saxon culture
through knowledge of the Bible, or interpretation by priest or minister, has
become significantly less devout. Even
where these values have been preserved, a desire for material affluence and
individual self-gratification is dominant.
Minorities are faced with the same problems. Denied their original cultures and force-fed Anglo-Saxon
religion, culture, and government—they are left in the vacuum as the mythical
American culture and society disintegrates around them. TV has stepped in to take the place of
teacher, spiritual advisor, father, mother, grandfather, and grandmother for
many of our youth. The programming is
predominantly devoid of common ethics, and misrepresents the successful
accumulation of material wealth as being easy and within everyone's grasp. While watching the glorification of
affluence and immediate self-gratification, young minds are inundated with a
Roman selection of entertainment. Violence, sex, and death are routinely, and
repetitively, presented in a romantic or dramatic fashion, becoming
personalized with familiar looking characters and emotionally stimulating
contemporary music.
Since urban society still has a natural need for social/emotional
relationships and bonds, but finds them developed in an alien and unnatural
setting, it is only understandable that their outlets of expression would be as
corrupt and unnatural as the environment itself. The breakdown of universal Indigenous unity by our unbalanced
technologically civilized society has created a unique but familiar
phenomena—that of the disillusioned and rebellious young adult. Indigenous peoples have no experience with
this, as there was no reason for this alienation to occur. It is a direct result of the propaganda
espoused by the present civilization's anti-culture that purports to be
accessible to all, while actually furthering only the specific interests of a
few. Young people are taught to believe
in wealth and self-power, in romantic and hedonistic reward. Then when they find it to be an illusory
promise or unattainable reality, they rebel at the hypocritical nature of their
world and become angry. To clearly
identify the source of their motivation, and their eventual disillusionment
with a false and fanciful indoctrination, (with its attendant realization of
failure) is not rocket science, just common sense.
This is our view of why our modern warrior societies (gangs) exhibit the
anger, and anti-social behavior they do.
There is no People, no Society, that can be as clearly identified as
their own. It looks like everyone for
himself or herself. They have no
important role to play and no people to serve.
So they serve themselves and their brothers/sisters toward the only
goals they have been taught to value—military power, accumulation of material
wealth, and self-gratification.
Though their methods may be questionable, much of their organization and
inter-society ethics is Traditional.
They usually emphasize loyalty, courage, and self-sacrifice. They adhere to rules, regulations, and the
expectations of their society. They
participate willingly in the rituals of initiation. They recognize and empower systems of leadership and
government. Since older members are
often the leaders, they follow a time-honored system of respect for age and
experience. In every way except one,
their bonding follows the Traditional attributes of warrior societies. That one deviation is that the society
exists for itself and does not play a role of importance within a people. A similar parallel may be the Samurai
societies of feudal Japan who once fought together for Lords who commanded
their loyalty, but who suddenly found themselves obsolete and dissolved into Samurai
ronin, warrior/soldier/outlaws, pursuing their own individual goals.
Every individual, and especially young people, have a need to see their
initiatives, commitments, sacrifices, and accomplishments recognized and valued
by the community. If the community
shuns them, they will strike back in anger and frustration. They must have an outlet for their
expression. If the community does not
provide one, they will find their own.
We do not purport to be experts in any academic science studying these
matters--but we do understand the need to have brothers/sisters, to have a
formal commitment to them, and to work together toward a common purpose. We recognize these needs in ourselves and
see them as universal. As young
men/women it was, and is, a necessity in our lives. Without it we might have ended up in prison, in despair or
dependence, and most certainly we would have felt alienated and alone. Today, as older men we know that without our
brothers/sisters we would feel we had missed a great undertaking, a powerful and
purposeful event in our lives. We can
see how the generations after us, who have not formed these bonds, drift alone
and unconnected through their lives without the stabilizing influences of
society and commitment, brotherhood, and bond.
What can be done? First, it must
be acknowledge that words are a weak substitute for example. Few minds can be reached with words. We could talk all day about teaching the
Traditional history of gang/societies, what the differences are now, the
concepts of service and unity, etc., etc., but we find that we have different
values and priorities, different language and symbols, different perceptions
and world view, than our younger generations.
What may appear clear to us may be cloudy to them. They may not even take the time to examine
or hear what we have to say. Some of
their minds are too full of their own thoughts to have room for ours. They are content to express their own
views, their own assertions. It is part
of that natural hormonal push to become a dominant individual. That is the crux of the problem. They are too full of the moment to be guided
by the future. They cannot be stopped,
slowed down, or detained for even a moment without becoming restless. Theirs is a time for action. So every solution proposed, every teaching
considered, must be surrounded, and accentuated by activity.
Indigenous life had no "problem" teenagers because the society
in place around them presented plenty of roles and opportunities that were full
of activity, danger, excitement, and intrigue.
However, all of that dangerous and exciting activity was centered on
protecting, preserving, and participating in the Nation and the society.
The first and most important decision is next. Do you break up the gang/society and deal with its individuals as
mainstream America demands-- seeing no purpose for such organizations? Or do you take a Traditional approach,
ascribing value to such groups and dealing with them as viable social
organizations to be re-directed not destroyed?
You can't take a chicken and put it back in the egg. We can't just load our youth into a
classroom, preach and teach and lecture to their already overflowing minds, and
expect them to be "converted" to a new perspective. That would be a form of brainwashing
anyway. We have to go with what is
real—and that recognizes that they are a product of their environment, the
people they know, the media influences they have been indoctrinated with, and
the peers they are bound to. Every
solution we entertain to bring their societies into balance must face this
reality. Just as some people think that
bringing back culture and language should begin with our very young children,
we believe most of our efforts should probably be directed, not at the current
gang members, but at their younger siblings.
For those young people struggling now we can't always take the direct
approach. First, we must demonstrate to
them that we think it is worth our time and effort to involve ourselves with
them. We have seen many a would-be
counselor consumed by the sound of his own words, in love with his own story,
lecturing for hours to deaf ears. It
doesn't take young people very long to discern that this type of
"teacher" is more involved with the effort of what he is doing, than
with the effect of his teaching. They
aren't stupid and recognize his motives to be false. So first, there must be some other relationship developed than
just teacher/student. Kids get lectured
at all the time. Sharing food and
entertainment with individuals and groups is part of the gathering way we all
need to personalize our relationships, build trust, and show genuine affection
for one another.
On the Rez there is a need to develop both individual and group
relationships. Gangs/societies do not
have to be dissolved to be redirected.
We think a great mistake is made when these groups are broken down, and
forced to relate as individuals. It is
different in the big cities where the lure of big and easy money is one of the
primary draws of gang membership. On
the Rez, joining usually has more to do with brotherhood, power, and identity
than money. So, get them together. Let them have the strength of numbers. What can be determined from viewing them in
the group is valuable. We find out who
the leaders are, the followers, the doers, the thinkers, the clowns. This is important to a strategy to bring the
group forward to a more balanced and acceptable behavior. Every society's dynamics revolve around the
characters and relationships of its members.
It is important that their value as a group be established, and
acknowledged, in a historical context.
They must be assured that it is a good thing they've done, no matter
what bad or inappropriate tangents they might have pursued. This could be the first time anyone has
ever complemented their decision to join a gang, and they may be confused or
even resentful. The next step is to
convince them they are valuable, and that they have a purpose and importance
within the community. Identifying the
specific services they could provide for the community is one of the creative
challenges that must be determined prior to counseling. If a role for the gang/society doesn't
exist—one must be created. The society
must be given a ready-made place of respect, with all the responsibilities and
attendant expectations that implies.
It is difficult to expound on unity where there is no unity. These are the very things that caused
gang/societies to seek each other out in the first place. In reality, there are many places where “the
People”, as a communal group, don't exist anymore. In these locations, there may be no common purpose, no shared
value, and no pride. Nevertheless, it's our belief that people are brought
together by being together. Whatever
reason can be created to call people together to eat, share ideas, make
decisions, or be entertained is worthwhile.
After all, unity is achieved, or dissolved, more through personality and
affection, or the lack of it, than through lecturing or education. Education is made meaningless by a
dysfunctional and unaffectionate society or culture. No teaching or motivation to learning can be achieved without an
investment of personality and genuine concern.
Risks are part of the process.
We know we don't have the answers, but neither do we believe the myth
that gangs are an aberrant and dangerous nuisance, to be destroyed at all
costs.
It is true that many of them will continue to be destructive, but at
least we can be honest with our own children.
Warrior societies/gangs are honest and forthright associations of people
trying to make sense of their lives in an unnatural and destructive environment
surrounded by a hypocritical and equally disturbed society. Our answer is not to destroy them but to
attempt to redirect their behavior by empowering them, giving them status and
advantage as important and useful organizations, rewarding their commitment and
courage, giving them a place in the community and a reason to serve.
Essay Fifty-Seven BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Original Learning And Language
Language is a mirror of the mind.
The words and phrases we use reflect the way we see our world. The greater mastery we have of our language,
the clearer we are able to express how we feel, what we see, and what we think
about it all. People with different
languages see life from different perspectives. They have different ways of responding to what they
experience. Their views of reality may
even be radically different. English,
Spanish, and French interpretations of how our Indian ancestors lived, how they
thought, and what they believed, could never represent the true picture of what
it was. The differences in spiritual
tradition and institutional values of commerce and classism insured that the
European languages had no similarity in perceptual organization to the many
languages of Indigenous America.
In Charles Wohlforth’s book,
The Whale and the Supercomputer, he describes the complex nature of the Inupiat
language. “The very structure of
Inupiat helps deal with situations in a unique environment”. Speakers are able to communicate information
about the environment and events even with an absence of reference points. One
word describes a something above, has a length less than three times its width,
is visible an stationary, and is an equal distance between the speaker and
listener. Such a complex and nuanced
language is common to peoples with great observational capacities but is
incomprehensible to peoples used to looking past their surroundings. (At the
same time, Wohlforth explodes the myth that, at least among the Inupiat, there
are not one hundred words for snow!)
Not only does the difficulty of misinterpretation and distortion exist,
but many of our Peoples had no interest in saying what they really thought to
these foreign men, no matter how peaceful and interested they seemed. Much of what was important in our lives was
not to be spoken of. There were secret
and personal things that were simply not to be revealed, to anyone.
Similarly, in the matters of Power—personal, spiritual, medicinal, or
otherwise—there were almost universally accepted taboos against revealing
anything. Outsiders always have a hard
time understanding the personal privacy required by Native people when it comes
to their most basic knowledge. Some kinds of information are just too personal
to be casually shared or revealed.
Revealing knowledge can diminish it.
Some information is cultural, brimming with emotion and the intimacy of
relationship. Still, it was the
European way to press for an answer.
Often the answers given had nothing to do with any real attempt at a
reply and were purely frivolous, sarcastic, or humorous in a way the Europeans
could not understand. Sometimes, out
of embarrassment, we simply feigned ignorance or lack of comprehension. In California, during one of the ill-fated
treaty negotiations, an interpreter quoted a headman who was asked whether he
believed in a supreme being as saying, "Why ask us poor people, surely you
must know." The interpreter
believed that the headman was saying, "We are so ignorant, and you are so
knowledgeable, why ask us? Surely you
must know." He further commented
that this supported his belief that the Indians had no spiritual beliefs, and
were too ignorant and uncivilized to conceive of complex spiritual or
philosophical concepts. In all
likelihood, the headman was making fun of the negotiator, using humor to cover
his discomfort at being asked such a personal and unanswerable question. Our point is that almost everything specific
written about Indian people—our history, culture, religious beliefs,
etc.—should be closely examined and questioned as to its veracity. Including this book!
The preservation of language is one of the most important steps any
Nation can take toward the true preservation
of culture and life-ways. For many of
us, the opportunity is quickly passing.
Some linguistics people predict that all but about twenty of our
languages will be lost in the next generation. Many first-language fluent Elders are passing away. There are a number of Nations left whose
language is still viable and dominant.
Hopefully, their success will encourage others to try, and the
importance of these belated attempts at language preservation not be underestimated. Only in Peoples who are first-language
fluent do the true ancient perceptions survive. Those of us who are "English-firsts" must muddle
through as best we can with what we have seen and been taught by those who have
preceded us. We will never completely
grasp how our early relatives thought and viewed the world. We must look for our own understanding and
pray that we have captured some of the flavor and meaning of our past. This does not invalidate our beliefs, our
values, or our perceptions--it only serves as a reminder of how fragile culture
and life-ways are.
Many of our Grandfathers never asked if we wanted to learn something,
although there were those specifically singled out to be taught. More often, they waited until we respectfully
approached them, to learn by watching.
Sometimes, to obtain special instruction, a gift of some sort was
expected. In certain Tribes, they made
us wait or assigned us menial chores to perform before finally allowing us to
"watch". Often they did not
explain what they were doing or what we were to do, they just did it in a
manner that we could observe clearly.
We copied their actions, memorized the songs, prayers, gestures, or
accompanying words, and they corrected us until we did it right. Neither did they always explain
"why" we were doing something, what it meant, or why we were doing it
just that way. And if we asked, they'd
just say, "That's just how we do it", or "That's how it's
done." And it didn't do any good
to ask further. If they wanted to tell
you they did, but only when they were ready.
The Inupiat of Barrow,
Alaska, demonstrated the relationship, respect, and pecking order of their
culture in an example described by Charles Wohlforth. It was during a session of boat building and repairing in the
Traditional Room at the Inupiat Heritage Center in Barrow, Alaska. A few of the older men gave instructions to
the senior crewman, most nearing forty and they hastened to comply. Men in their
twenties, though skilled, worked under the direct supervision of the
Elders—paying close attention to their directions. Teenage boys stood silently around the edges of the room waiting
to be given a task—even one as menial as going out for firewood or supplies. When asked, they responded immediately.
They accepted this without complaint because they had respect, and
wanted to learn "our" Way, not "my" way. One of the great problems we face today in
the education of our children is that, for generations, many have abandoned
those Traditional teaching methods. Our
children, having grown up in a fast food world with instant media and constant
sensory gratification, are unprepared to take the time to learn in this manner. In the absence of patience, respect, and a
burning desire (or circumstantial necessity) to learn, they lose interest and
motivation quickly. They do not see the
value of the long run, preferring the short sprint.
So, we must ask ourselves—can we restore this type of teacher/student
relationship? Is it important to do
so? If not, what do we replace it with
that is a reflection of our values and Traditions? Do we wait for them to mature, hoping they will eventually come
to us? Do we write it down so it will
be available to whoever looks for it?
How do we encourage them to identify with values and beliefs not
familiar to them or instilled in them since birth? Should ancient knowledge be allowed to pass away as obsolete if
no one steps-up to learn it in a Traditional way?
Despite our agreement on the value of common ideals and culture as a
force for Unity expressed in a previous essay, this does not mean that we
support the homogenizing of Nations.
Wherever language, customs, social forms, and spiritual traditions can
be accurately preserved, they must! We
should support in every way any People actively attempting to preserve their
rich and unique identity—and that starts with language.
Relatives, if you speak your language fluently, we urge you to be a
teacher of it as well. Pass it on to
whomever you can, especially the young.
If you once were fluent, work at being so again. We ask this of you on behalf of those who
have completely lost, for all time, the chance to truly understand how their
ancestors viewed the world.
One Elder we know is one of the very
last to speak his language. His people
pay lip service to his gift, occasionally asking if he'd teach them, saying
they want to learn, but never following through. The years pass quickly, soon he will too. The children of his Tribe will have forever
lost their chance to enjoy that language, with its smooth cadence and
inflection, glottal stops and unspoken vowels, gruff consonants and lilting
beautiful phrasing, to say nothing of its unique meaning and perceptions.
Original language is the cornerstone of Tribal Identity. Lose it and,
generation after generation, the tide of
assimilation is hard to resist.
For those who are confined to thinking in English--and this is quite a
number of us today—there is another great challenge to be faced. While we are trying to learn our Tribal
languages, we need to insure that our English-first children have mastered the
one they will use most often. English
is a language made more difficult by its melting-pot assembly of
vocabulary. Individual words hold the
key to meaning, and context, though important, has few of the complexities we
find in original Indian languages where meaning can be defined by tonal
inflection, order, gender, relationship in time, etc.
In order to be effective in using and understanding English, vocabulary
is the key. Everything else is
secondary. In order to develop English
vocabulary, you must read. The
development of the language makes this a requirement to mastering it. Unfortunately, this is something that few
Indians do. There aren't many young
people who see a reason or motivation for doing it. They think it has something to do with Anglo education and are
unaware that the mastery of language, oral or written, is essential in
developing the brain. Many of them have
physical limitations or disabilities that, unless recognized, interfere with
learning to read. Those that are
successful reading often have difficulty finding anything interesting that they
can relate to. There is a genuine need
for Indian writers to fill that void with books and articles that young (and
old) Indians can relate to—books that will echo our People’s feelings and
interests.
There are many factors that have contributed to a situation where so
many Indian People are simply unable to deal with the paperwork and
organization of the modern world. But
one stands out. Indians were taught
visually rather than verbally. Verbal
language skills test low among many Indians, while visual skills are high. This may account for some Indians having
difficulties with academic subjects that depend on verbal learning skills.
Personally, in each of our families, we were taught a love of language
and reading. We read at an early age.
We came to loved reading. This
led to writing. It is also true that we missed out on a lot of traditional
teaching because our families had changed perspectives. We got to travel the land, hunt, and fish,
but not so often that we became experts.
We had to teach ourselves those skills later in life. Yet, despite our
fascination with the written word, none of our children are expert readers, and
none of them read for pleasure. We say
this to illustrate a point. Much of
what we want to achieve, value, and hope to preserve is not going to be
accomplished for our people by writing it down or publishing books. We do it here in the hope that those Indians
who do read will find some idea or concept useful to them—but unless there is a
turnaround in the reading and learning habits of Indian people, all the
published solutions, suggested ideas, and innovations are going to have to be
presented to them either through another media (our own), or orally and
personally. Perhaps this is as it
should be. Perhaps we have lost more than we gained through our
achievements. We may never know.
From
a traditional standpoint, the discussion is moot. Traditional knowledge and values cannot be learned from a
book. A traditional mentor recognized
that natural pride, in the face of Nature’s power, could be a dangerous
thing. So the mentor let the student
try and fail—making sure he did not provide them with too much information to
create overconfidence and arrogance.
Once pride was replaced by humility, it was possible to get a feel for
the world and how it really works. The
mentor was only a guide—nature was the real teacher. Touching and doing are the Native tools for learning—words often
get in the way.
The mixture of methods may be our key to the future. We need to identify what types of knowledge
must be conveyed in the old “touch and do” way, and what information is better
learned in the academic fashion. Both
are important—the first to our identity, and the second to our survival in the
modern information age.
The first method can only
survive through the continuation of family relationship. The second method relates almost entirely to
literacy. Most Natives have only
partial functional literacy. One problem of partial functional illiteracy in
English is that the person never develops vocabulary and language skills to be
able to express themselves beyond a superficial and rudimentary level.
If our peoples were illiterate in English but fluent in their original
languages, there would be no problem.
However, many of our people have lost their original language and never
been able to replace it effectively to the point our ancestors were at in their
ability to understand and express complex concepts. A young Indian man we know has literally cried at his inability
to clearly express his thoughts and feelings.
For him, it is a prison, almost like being mute. Neither is he able to grasp complicated
ideas or directions. It affects his
perception of himself and the world around him. It affects his ability to appreciate himself, to develop his own
original opinions and make up his own mind as to what he believes. He is easily influenced by anyone who can
twists words well. He does not have the
ability to discern with his mind, only with his emotions.
We cannot just shake our heads when it comes to our young people and
their English education. We define
education as the simple ability to understand the world around you and have the
tools to be able to teach yourself what you need or want to know. Hopefully, as we recapture our original
languages, we will someday produce educational materials in our Indigenous
tongues. However, our children must be
fluent in some language, and that implies having a command or mastery of that
language. To guarantee our future we
believe our Nations should push for fluency and/or literacy in multiple
languages. Most of our
great-great-grandfathers could speak two, three, or even four languages.
From looking at the many new programs springing up throughout the
Nations, we have renewed hope. From the
information available it is apparent that while Indigenous languages can be
learned by English-first adults, it is much easier accomplished among children
as young as two or three. They learn
more quickly than adults and, if immersed in the language, will retain it
easily. Immersion camps, schools, and
classes are growing rapidly. This
dedication to teaching original language will ultimately give us a better
command of English as well. The mastery of language insures healthy mind—minds
that can visualize problems, intuitively create solutions, and draw
immeasurable beauty from the depths of our hearts.
Essay Fifty-Eight BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Elder Islands
There are places in Indian
country where the Elders are like islands.
No one goes to them to ask them the questions they have answers
for. No one brings them the gifts they
need to feel useful. Sometimes they
even go hungry or freeze to death from cold.
Young people, desiring knowledge, are afraid of them. Afraid to hear
what they do not want to hear—afraid to ask
too much, or too little, afraid of showing their ignorance or their
arrogance.
Sometimes they are citicized for not jumping in to lead. Often they are tired, they need to be asked,
and escorted, and cared for—in many ways, like children. They simply do not have the energy to deal
with controversy, difficulties, or misunderstandings. They’re willing to help—but they prefer not to exert too much energy
doing it. Not only that, but they have
their own lives to lead as well, with things they want to do and schedules they
want to keep or keep open. They’d like
to see a little bit of enthusiasm from their own people. So these Islands wait. Seeing the desperation around them, feeling
the loss and isolation, they are unable to take their place as spiritual
leaders due to family squabbles or Progressive ideals. Many of their sons and daughters grew up in
the lost days when Traditional values and connections were believed to be old
fashioned or obsolete. Now, after years
of hating themselves, that generation has found a new niche in the business of
being Indian. The job of chairman or councilman, with its prestige and economic
perks, has turned their self-importance into arrogance. They no longer need their Elders, and fear
outright the recriminations that might come from the lips of those who remember
leaders that served the best interests of their people because that was what a
leader was expected to do, and not because it was a paycheck with status.
When we visit these Islands, they are often despondent, openly critical
of their own, and less than hopeful about the future. Of course, they realize the full extent of what's been lost, while
we only glimpse the past through family stories and written accounts of our
histories.
We wish for the power to gather everyone together to listen to their
stories, hear their wisdom, and soak up what they represent of the past, but
that is because we understand the value of their place in the circle.
It is our prayer that these Islands will soon be rejoined with their
families, and recognized for the treasures they are, while they still grace us
with their presence.
Essay Fifty-Nine
BlueWolf & Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Respect
Of all the words that
Traditional People favor, this is the one used the most. It implies many things: values, morality,
character, compassion, commitment, relationship, and more that is unspoken, but
understood. We think it is the
foundation of Traditional Life.
It begins with family and extended family, blossoming from an
understanding of the importance of each generation's contribution to the
Peoples needs—physical, mental, and spiritual.
By acknowledging the importance of each relationship—elder to child,
child to provider, provider to elder, etc.—the balance of relatives maintain a
civil and structured harmony.
The role each age group plays in the
People's life, with all its complex and interactive relationships and
responsibilities, demands there be a formal process of recognizing,
approaching, and acknowledging the contributions of each age group and relative. Indians speak in terms of those
relationships. Personal names were
seldom used, and even today the words which identify relationship within the
family structure--aunt, uncle, cousin, brother, sister, grandmother,
grandfather, husband, wife—are often used in place of common names. This is a
measure of respect descended from the days when personal names were often
unspoken, having greater meaning than the simple
identification tags Europeans placed upon
themselves. A name had Power. To respect that power and the individual who
utilized it, our words for expressing relationship were used instead.
Respect extends into relationships in other ways: One does not touch
another person or their belongings without
invitation. One does not walk in the space between someone and the fire without
acknowledgement. One offers only a clean Pipe to another to smoke. One knows that sometimes it is appropriate
to be silent and sometimes it is appropriate to speak. One knows when a gift is necessary to
accompany a request.
These are simple examples of how respect allows for compassion,
civility, authority, and relationship to maintain order and balance in our
lives—and while specific forms may be distinct and individual to each Nation,
the concepts are universal. Respect
comes from the value we place upon each other's gifts, contributions, and place
in our lives. It comes from our
gratitude for each other and from our love and desire for harmony.
Native communities have often been derided for being so accepting of
their dysfunctional members. But
traditional Native communities—founded on strict policies of personal
independence, autonomous decision-making within families, and truly democratic
leadership—depended on cooperation, compromise, and consensus for their very
survival. Indeed, during the holocaust
period we find numerous examples where hardheaded societies or individuals
bucked the carefully nurtured system of conventions that required consensus,
only to hamstring the decision–making abilities of the people at large,
resulting in terrible tragedies to them all. The glue that holds Native people
together is respect—and respect is not to be earned, as in western society, but
is to be given freely. The community will provide shelter and sanctuary for all
but the most dangerous and violent of its members. Western society has always dolled out its respect to members
according to their wealth, importance, productivity, and appearance—but that
acceptance is always temporary and conditional. Any misstep and you’re
out! Western tradition asserts that
one’s effort determines results. All
shortcomings and failures are blamed on the individual. Native communities are more
compassionate. They still believe they
need every member, no matter what problems they might have, to remain a strong
community. This is the radical
difference that still exists between tribal communities and the isolated
individuals of western society. Western
society does not need the individual. The individual is expendable. Tribal communities may subtly criticize,
they may even talk behind one’s back—but in the end, they cherish and give
respect to every member.
Respect is learned by
example. Many of our young People do
not even know what it means. It has a
much broader and more encompassing meaning than that of the one used by
Americans today. See how some of us
yell at one another—adult to child, teenager to adult, employer to employee,
teacher to student, adult to elder, and on and on? Rudeness has become the rule.
The cliché says that respect must be earned. We believe respect must be given. These ideals are as far apart as the oceans that touch our
eastern and western shores. Rude and
divisive behavior threatens to drown our attempts at building the fire of
harmony.
Respect is the Power that
keeps the circle of the family from splintering into individuals, weak and
alone.
Essay Sixty BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Family Extended
We often hear American
politicians talking about families and family values, but they have constructed
a society that does its best to splinter and alienate families from one
another. Glorifying individuality in service
to its own needs, as opposed to those of a People, demands that families pursue
separate and unconnected goals. While
some ethnic groups still manage to hold on to the supportive structures of
extended families, by and large, the American Nation has lost its relationship,
purpose, and compassion for each other.
The circle of the family is the essence of tribal life, necessary in
times where survival is a day-to-day business, and procuring the necessities of
life requires the cooperation of every individual to insure success. The modern circle of the family carries
even a more expansive responsibility—as important as ever in these more
convenient times.
Human beings acquire experience, perspective, wisdom, and Power if they
age in a balanced and harmonious manner.
Elders carry history, spirituality, ritual, custom, tradition, language,
and a natural desire to pass these on.
They live to perpetuate what they have come to love to the
children. The children and teen-agers
provide curiosity, entertainment, energy, innocence, and eagerness for
life. Our older providers give us
stability, protection, procreation, comfort, culture, and activity in our
lives. Babies are to love, hold, and
cherish. These four parts of the circle
together give our lives meaning.
To break the circle and deprive the family of any one of these quarters
diminishes the family in every way. Together, the family benefits from every
experience, and every activity. Each
shared moment adds to its strength.
When anthropologists finally ask why Indians survived the holocaust here
in America, the answer will be simple.
The greater tribal family is a powerful and tenacious force from which
parts can be killed, separated, and isolated—but when tied to the land and
centuries of Tradition, it does not die.
This is especially true for a culture that considers all life related
and familial. Our families extend
beyond this world—backward, forward, and beyond.
Today we are in danger of finally losing those relationships as the
combined forces of time and circumstance force us to choose paths that conflict
with our connections to our lands and tribal relationships. Many of our people have lost compassion for
each other, even within individual families.
It is the result of so many years of suffering, so much lost with so
little taken in replacement. Dependency
has turned our minds inward and we still prefer not to venture out beyond the
protective borders of our isolation.
Every Indian still feels, and is aware of, these relationships. We talk about valuing our Elders and we
still love our children. We are not so
far away from our past. For those
relationships to be restored we have only to find excuses to gather and
share. It will not be easy, and it will
require a little imagination. Perhaps
some adoption between tribes will be necessary so that groups divided may still
find circles where they can be accepted.
Indians don't like to think outside their tribal affiliation and in many
places it won't be necessary—but for Tribes who are broken beyond repair,
someone must choose to gather them in.
If not their own, then someone outside.
New blood never hurt any tribe, and common ground between Indians is
easy to find.
The real challenge is to keep our families together. We have to resist putting away our Elders,
like so many modern and civilized people do, and farming out our children. Home schooling or Indian run schools will
help. A greater dependency on each
other is fundamental to our success. If
we rebuild our trust in true tribal relationships, our family circles will
strengthen on their own. Our Nations
depend on it.
Essay Sixty-One
BlueWolf & Lupe'/ Shirt N' Skins
To Be Or Not To Be (Suicide)
"Death! There is no
death--only a change of worlds!"
Seattle
“To
fight to live—that is the most honorable battle!”
Amoshi
On a small Rez, in March of 2000, four youths under 16 year old
committed suicide. More have tried
since then. All over North and South
America, Indigenous people are losing themselves to this crisis of
hopelessness. Some say that it is a
traditional end for Indigenous People—but that is of little solace to grieving
families. Two of our Nephews have gone
that that way.
We recognize that words don't do our Peoples much good. For most of us, books are dead. But suicide is not painless, and with the
highest suicide rate in the world, we felt it necessary to write a short essay
for our children, in the hopes that even one would read—and be saved.
For everyone the pain, sorrow, uncertainty, tragedy, frustration, and
disappointment of this life cause us to question our reason for living and the
importance of our existence. When these doubts come upon us, we should consider
these questions:
If we are to develop courage and strength of
character--
must we not live in an environment of
hardship and disappointment?
If we are to serve life and each other--
must we not encounter inequalities, both in
humankind and in nature?
If we are to have hope--
must we not also be confronted with
insecurity and uncertainty?
If we are to have faith--
must not our minds seem to know less than we
can believe?
If we are to love truth--
must not error and falsehood also be
possible?
If we are to have ideals--
must we not struggle in a world of
inconsistent beauty and goodness, so that we are forced to search for what is
better and more beautiful?
If we are to be loyal--
must there not be the possibility of betrayal
and desertion?
If we are to be unselfish--
must we not forego the personal temptation to
be honored and recognized?
If we are to embrace good--
must we not resist the temptation to choose
gratification above conscience?
If we are to be content--
must there not exist also the possibility of
pain and suffering?
Our Old Ones reassured us
that there is a next world, and that some form of our life continues after
death. Since we owe all that we have to
their wisdom, we trust that their Vision is truthful. They braved the ending of a world, and did not give up. If for no other reason than to honor their
sacrifices, we should fight to live.
Be comforted.
Essay Sixty-Two
BlueWolf & Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Indian Man/Indian Woman
We are losing count of the
times we have been asked (mostly by liberated non-Indian women) to explain why
Indians accepted, and still cling to, separate roles for men and women in
Traditional society.
Why they don't ask Indian women, instead of us, has always been
puzzling. We expect that they are
looking for a way to tie us into the "sexist pig" cliché, believing
Anglo historical reports of Indian women saddled, like beasts of burden, with
the supposed drudgery of Indigenous life, over-burdened and ill-appreciated.
The division of labor was a circumstance that evolved in a natural and
similar way for most Indigenous peoples around the world. That the "life" of the People (its
childbearing women), should be kept in a protected and secure location is a
natural response to the dangers of a natural environment. The assertion that they were treated by
their husbands and fathers as "beasts of burden" is only another of
those Anglo myths that seek to advance the belief that Indians were primitive
peoples, with no real understanding of advanced social concepts—more like
cavemen than civilized human beings.
Indians revere their women. They
were, and are, the future of our Nations.
Additionally, the belief that Indians had to spend every waking moment
slavishly laboring to keep themselves from squalor is false. The economic systems of Indigenous peoples
lean toward producing only what they need, and except in preparation for the
winter season, do not seek to create or acquire exorbitant surpluses. Indeed, Marshall Sahlins, in his book, Stone
Age Economics, cites a study by Frederick McCarthy and Margaret McArthur which
shows that Australian Aborigine community member males labored an average three
hours and forty-four minutes a day, while the women averaged three hours and
forty five. A Dobe Bushman in Africa,
according to Richard Lee, averaged only two hours and nine minutes a day! Lee states, "A woman gathers in one day
enough food to feed her family for three days, and spends the rest of her time
in camp, doing embroidery, visiting other camps, or entertaining
visitors.” Daily
routines..."occupy only one to three hours of her time."
The Indian Nations must have had similar routines and amounts of leisure
time as evidenced by Ben Franklin's observation; "Having few artificial Wants, they [Indians] have abundance
of Leisure for Improvement by Conversation. Our laborious Manner of Life, compared
with theirs, they esteem slavish and base... "
Undoubtedly this differently structured life was ultimately the cause
for the reticence shown by Indigenous Americans to adopt the daily work habits
of Anglo-Saxon Americans. It certainly
contributed to the idea that Indians were lazy and unmotivated, especially when
they refused to spend the hours and hours necessary to pursue more civilized
activities.
Most of our Nations were Matriarchal.
The true power of the Tribes rested in the hands of the Elder men and
women, but often it was the Elder women who had the final say. Occasionally that power was exercised behind
the scenes and in private, but many Nations held places of honor for them in
Council.
Arthur C. Parker wrote, (circa 1900),
"Here, then, we find the right of popular nomination, the right of
recall and of woman suffrage flourishing in the old America of the Red Man
centuries before it became the clamor of the new America of the white invader.
Who now shall call the Indians savages?"
An unsigned contemporary manuscript in the New York State Library
reported that, "Indeed, every
possession of the man except his horse & his rifle belong to the woman
after marriage; she takes care of their Money and Gives it to her husband as
she thinks his necessities require it."
And it continued, "The
truth is that Women are treated in a much more respectful manner than in
England & that they possess a very superior power; this is to be attributed
in a very great measure to their system of Education."
Ben Franklin wrote,
"The women...are the Records of the Council... who take exact notice of
what passes and imprint it in their Memories, to communicate it to their
Children."
Only in the last few generations, with dependency taking such a heavy
toll on our family circles, have roles been obscured. As Indians assimilate, they lose sight of the true and underlying
reasons behind the familial separation of women and men.
It is again a matter of mystery and Power. We feel uncomfortable discussing this, (not because of our
opinions), but because it is neither our responsibility, nor our place. However, with the help of our Elder Women we
will attempt to give you a clearer view of this Power, so as to clarify
misunderstandings and incorrect perceptions about these issues.
A man does not touch the sacred objects of a woman and vice-versa. This
has nothing to do with a value of gender but is instead an expression of the
underlying energies of male and female—which are complementary but not always
equal or similar. Though this may at first appear to be some sort of new-age
rhetoric, it is instead, an ancient understanding of the forces of mystery and
power that are inherent parts of the natural world.
The separation of menstruating women from the society of men is more
than just ancient wives tales perpetuated to suppress women and exalt the
male. It has nothing to do with
impurities of blood, or an uncleanliness of blood, or imperfection in the
female. Rather it is a time when the
female's Power is at its zenith, as her cleansing cycle renews her
life-creating abilities.
The attributes of individual power wax and wane for both men and
women. Our Elders recognized the
necessity for these separations and taught us the appropriate actions to take
for the protection and strength of the entire People. Though some more modern Indians scoff at these Old Ways, our
families trust the wisdom of those who came before us and try to hold on to
them. That is all we will say about
that.
The associations and societies of brothers, and sisters, are planks that
serve to strengthen the foundation of our social and familial
relationships. Bonds between men, and
bonds between women, hold the People together in times of tragedy or suffering,
particularly when male-to-female unity may be weakened by the periods of
inevitable separation inherent in the natural world. Competition for the affection of a man or woman can be a divisive
influence on a community. The bonds of
brothers and sisters temper these conflicts.
In the end, Tribal survival is dependent on these relationships, defined
and accentuated by male and female Powers, separate yet complimentary.
Essay Sixty-Three BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Commitment To Morality
"Goodness does not
thrive in the absence of evil.
Selfishness, small vices, and jealousies dominate mankind in those times. True goodness only emerges in the threat and
presence of Shadow—nestling in the crook of its arm, whispering in its ear,
until the Shadow goes mad and men relinquish their fears to cry once more for
compassion and the creative spirit."
Amoshi
When many people hear the word
morality, they immediately think of sexual conduct, or the personal behavior of
an individual. Indigenous people often
see morality as a communal trait. It
involves the global perspective of the people.
Western civilization began with the colonial conquests of Rome, with
economic and political power as its prime directive. Roman Catholic traditions drove forward the conquest for greed
disguised in the cloak of religion.
European colonialists, specifically those of England, Holland, Spain,
France, and Germany, carried on this tradition of seeking to enrich themselves
utilizing the shield and conveyances of religion. In America, the concepts of manifest destiny mirrored these
traditions of spiritual deceit, pretending a social, political, and spiritual
superiority while conducting its own holy war against millions of Natives.
These blueprints have since been drawn upon by countless despots and
dictators looking for methods and rationalizations to openly condone their
programs of genocide and pillaging of the earth. Today these models are openly used to bully and coerce resource
rich nations into allowing a handful of powerful international criminals access
to those resources. We benefit from
this horror by continuing to allow our modern gods of comfort and convenience
to supercede our spiritual values and morality. By relegating morality to individual standards, it relieves us of
any group responsibility for the horrors being perpetrated upon the world. Technological civilization, and its deity,
Progress, are in the process of demanding the allegiance of every world citizen
and enlisting every malleable mind to their ends. But the fruits of that
civilization, which once promised to be so sweet, have soured as of late. The foremost societies in this quest plunge
into cycles of inner turmoil and violence. In America, even our children dream
of murder. We pretend that we can
safely continue this lifestyle indefinitely while 75 percent of the rest of the
world is lacking nutritious food, shelter, or a safe place to sleep. It is a
myth that there are enough resources for the rest of the world to share our
standard of living. Even if the entire
world were to model their political and economic systems after ours this could
not be accomplished without finding six more earth's to plunder. This is what the current crisis is really
centered around. Those who despoil not only humanity, but the life of the earth
will continue to be visited by the plagues of moral bankruptcy. Our families and our children will be the
targets of our own transgressions. This was a seed planted at the beginning of
this nation in soil soaked with the blood and dreams of indigenous peoples. Even today, across the world new blood soaks
the ground. The fabric of civilization
must be torn and re-sewed with a new moral perspective.
Morality relates not only to the actions of human beings toward other
humans but toward the entire planet. In
the Indigenous world, the earth is a living being. Every physical form upon it is comprised of the same elements
moving and interacting. Earth, fire,
air, water, rocks, trees, animals, and human beings are built from the same
blocks. All these forms share this
inner life for differing purposes in our global family. The rock does not speak because that is not
its purpose. Indigenous people do not
ascribe to humanity any superiority or greater value than our environment—because
we could not sustain our lives separate from it. If we depend on it, how can we be superior to it? To be very
frank, some of our Elders predicted these circumstances a century ago because
they recognized the selfish belief that considers humanity to be the preferred
species of the earth rather than as an integral equal part of the whole.
We are asked to possess three characteristics: respect
for Creation, responsibility to act in the best interests of Creation, and
gratitude for that Creation. Indigenous
people revere Creation. It is all
Sacred. We view death as a natural
process. Just as we eat, so we are
eaten—and give back our spirits to Creation. We know that the basic elements of
creation are everlasting and cannot die.
No guilt—no blame. As the
volcano pours its lava into the villages below, we are assured that someday
flowers will sprout in the enriched soil of that destruction. That is what separates natural violence from
the violence of men. Natural violence will
always result in new creation. However, the horrors men put upon each other do
not guarantee that from those horrors new flowers of great beauty will
sprout. There is a difference between
the mysterious order and purpose of natural destruction in Creation and the
willful and calculated violence of human beings purposely destroying the very
relationships that should give their life meaning, purpose, and joy. Amoshi says that it is the fear of death,
the fear of judgment, the fear of loss, and the very selfish fear of personal
extinction that leads men to evil.
In our family, we think that it is part of man's purpose to search for a
balance between fate and choice. Those who have chosen war and conflict will
not be convinced or changed. My Pomo
friend, Clayton Duncan, says an Elder once told him that Americans are—“the
people of ruin, everything they touch they ruin—that has become their
purpose.” In America, one would expect
that people would be overwhelmed with gratitude for our many blessings and
overflow with compassion. For our leaders to act with attitudes of arrogance,
superiority, and a willingness to exercise a violent spirit can only lead to
our losing these blessings. We cannot expect to move away from revenge and
violence toward morality and gratitude until we acknowledge the absence of the
sacred in this modern path—until, once again, we revere Creation. Meaningful change can only be led by people
who demand that the moral principles of our spiritual heritages be applied
without compromise to the principles of the republic. Lip service and rhetoric only increase the danger.
We don’t have to possess exactly the same perspectives and beliefs, only
to agree that our goal is not to loose unnecessary and unjustified evils upon
the world merely to preserve a standard of living that will be impossible for
the rest of the world ever to share.
The noise we make must be heard above elections, above sound bites,
above negotiations—even above the bombs.
Essay Sixty-Four BlueWolf & Lupe'/Shirts N' Skins
Renewal
We're gonna do a little
preaching here. (As if we haven't
already!)
Once, the oldest grandparent down to the smallest child on this
continent were filled with Spirit. They
saw magic and mystery everywhere in the natural world. They demonstrated their reverence for life
in every act they performed, and in every word they said. Spirituality was not a religious activity
limited to attending church services or reading from a book. It permeated their
life, guiding their every decision and action.
Every moment they were aware of their spiritual responsibility to the
Earth, to each other, and to themselves.
With awe and wonder they lived their life, full of the awareness that
the Powers were observing every thing they said, thought, and did. In many locations, it is impossible to find
distinctions between social and spiritual interaction. All singing, music, and dance were
expressions of the Sacred. Some Tribes
did develop some separation between the two, but reverence was a pervasive
spirit encompassing the Nations.
Today, much of that sense of magic and mystery has been lost. Institutional Christianity, for the most
part, has failed to adequately fill the spiritual void left by the loss of our
old beliefs. The bible story does not
view the world in the same way. Its
limits magic to only those events it recognizes as part of its own doctrine,
and by conforming only to its institutionally accepted translations—dogmatizes
the mystery of life. For all the
discussions and finite assertions we have presented here on politics, social
issues, dependency, preservation of culture, economic progress, unity, etc.,
the only real solution we have faith in is the renewal of true spirituality in
our lives.
Anglo-Saxon Puritan Christianity has often failed to provide comfort for
our People. For those who have fully
embraced it, that approach to God seems to emphasizes only an individual
relationship with the Creator. We
perceive original Indigenous spirituality to be community based, emphasizing a
continual expression of gratitude and wonder for the mystery of life. It does not focus on sin and punishment, but
on beauty and renewal. We are immersed
in it. It is not a once a week
affair. Appreciating the Earth and
celebrating our relationships together make up a large part of the earthly
responsibility we share. It binds us
and gives us a unified purpose. Without
that sharing, the word "Tribe" loses its meaning and we only pick at
the bones of these other issues.
The one identifying characteristic, other than our racial and ethnic
identity, that sets us apart from the modern and civilized Peoples of the world
is that, from generation to generation, we share binding ties in the passing of
spiritual life and responsibility within the circle of our families. Those "ties" imply a group
spirituality that provides an opportunity to share love, hope, faith,
sacrifice, and commitment for each and every member of the Tribe. These ties are the cornerstones of a
Nation. They include all the moral and
ethical teachings and values we cherish.
The Hopi prophecy may express it best.
Do we choose the road of the Creator or the road that leads into the
whirlwind? It is our opinion that
there is a purpose to life greater than gathering wealth, power, fame, or
glory. It is in the life of the
People--in praying and fulfilling ceremonial obligations that teach children or
grandchildren our cherished beliefs. No
matter what religion we profess, first and foremost among our Nations there
must be a continuous expression of gratitude.
The world is a beautiful but dangerous place. Our environment is always changing. No civilization is guaranteed forever. A genuine and comforting belief in the Powers and the Creator can
give us a rock to cling to when the world shakes and we are afraid. But to remain hopeful, to appreciate this
gift of life, and to be ever thankful—that is our family Tradition.
Essay Sixty-Five BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Relationship And Balance
Relationship is another key
to Tribal survival. Some Elders have
likened it to the glue that holds the Universe together. The philosophy of maintaining balance in a
world filled with difficulty and pain is based on recognizing and being
responsible to the interconnected reliance between all life, and our Earth, as
well as the spirit world, and Our Creator.
Relationship is more than just emotional attachment; it is an
understanding of the dependencies we share.
Deciduous trees do not drop leaves just before winter simply because
their genetic code calls for it. They
drop them to lay down a protective covering mulch for the more fragile plants
beneath them, and to provide enrichment for the soil in the spring. Little birds sit on the backs of rhinos,
whispering warnings and eating their pests.
Acacia trees use the wind to tell their neighbors of leaf-eaters on the
way. Carnivores and herbivores take
life in order to survive, whether green-growing or blood-being. These sacrifices to each other, animal to
human, plant to animal, plant to human, must all be viewed within the context
of interconnected Nations supporting each other in the quest for life. Death is a natural occurrence, a termination
of physical presence only. It does not
imply the loss of any spirit or energy other than a transformation from one
form to another. The Creator, in
maintaining the balance of this world, gives human beings a special
status. By being gifted the ability to
perceive beauty and harmony we are obligated to be grateful, to recognize the
sacrifices of those who give their lives for our well-being, and to care take
our Grandmother Earth, who is the source of everything physical in our lives.
Just as the tree does not consider why it drops its leaves,
conservation, and balance was never an ideal that was consciously discussed or
perceived by Tribal Peoples. It was
ingrained in our way of life. Our Old
Ones shared a sense of belonging to their world. They had an affection for rocks, trees, plants, animals, earth,
water, rain and Spirit that went far beyond a conscious spoken affinity or
altruistic New Age babble about relationship or communication with other forms
of life.
Phrases of our generation like "loving the land" and
"being one with the earth" imply an intellectual understanding of the
natural principles of balance and harmony, but are often more romantic
yearnings than a true subjective emotional attachment.
Relationship implies kinship, support, responsibility, and
commitment. It would be incorrect to
imply that every tribal member from our past was a sterling example of
intellectual purity and pristine ecological practice. We were human beings, and like any other Peoples, we had our
faults and imperfections. But it is
also true that we shared a common view of ourselves as an integral part of our
surroundings, neither inferior, nor superior to the Earth and all the other
forms of life we share her with.
The power of that philosophy sustained our relatives through the loss of
their world. It is only in the last few
generations that our Peoples have begun to lose their direct tie to the land,
and see our balance erode farther and farther away. One attribute of that philosophy is the ability to sense our
relationship with the Universe and its Powers, and to feel a true sense of
belonging in our world. It is a feeling
of relationship that goes beyond "human", to encompass all life, and
to extend the definition of life beyond animate objects. When one has a solid grip on that balance,
one is never alone in the world.
No matter what problems human beings have between each other, our
relationships with our "other" relatives can provide strength,
comfort, and consolation. Communication
with these relatives does not imply a form of direct conversation. A simple knowledge of their attributes,
characteristics, and properties contributes to a bond of relationship that
transcends speech.
In our constant quest for inner and outer harmony, the Earth, and our
other non-human relations provide consistent lessons in how life should be
pursued and lived. We strive to be as
fulfilled as the rock or the tree, accepting what we are given without
complaint and relentlessly holding to what we are, pursuing our lives until we
pass on to the next reality.
Because our minds grasp
these concepts and we can communicate them to our young through action and
language, we have a responsibility to uphold the position of leadership we have
enjoyed for many thousands of years as the dominant species. We define dominant as having the power to
disrupt or destroy the natural order, and do not imply a superior spiritual,
intellectual, or physical importance.
Whether or not the Creator Mystery intends that we should continue this "leadership"
is unknown, but what is certain is that many human beings have lost their
connection to stewardship of the land and emotional attachment to the natural
world. Many of our children do not even
know that such a relationship is supposed to exist. They have no "feeling" for the land, or their
relatives. It is dead to them. Today, many of us do not even have common
affection for our human relatives!
It is not a condition easily changed.
Change begins with consistent vocal and public demonstrations of
gratitude, and with education to the real underlying powers of our
ancestors. History, heritage, culture,
and ceremony, infused with the attributes of gratitude and recognized
relationship, can gift back to our children their natural ability to find
peace, balance, and harmony in a tragic and difficult world.
Once we did not have to speak of our relationships to each other and our
Earth. We did not need to speak for
ecology and frugality, or of waste and pollution. We did not need to speak for our relatives, the trees, plants,
animals, rocks, or for the purity of water and air. We did not have to voice our affection for all our relatives
because it was a natural feeling. But
the world has changed, and perhaps it is time that we speak openly of such
things, to retake our place as a protector of these lands.
The abrogation of our responsibility toward maintaining the balance of
our world has led humankind to the door of destruction. Prophecy is real, carved in rock, protected
by original caretakers. Though yearly
Dances of Renewal continue, human beings must choose the path of balance,
harmony, peace, relationship, and gratitude—or continue toward the
Whirlwind.
We fear that the majority of us are choosing poorly.
Essay Sixty-Six BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Values, Virtue, And Behavior
The values of our Peoples
occasionally reflected different perspectives, but they were conveyed in the
same manner. Oral heritage; stories,
songs, and ritual all sought to instill in our young a common view of the world
and our relationships to it and to each other.
In many places, leaders were expected to exhort the people daily in the
morals and good behavior expected of them.
Certain people lived according to these values and were singled out and
pointed to as examples of living virtue. Often they became the Great Ones of
their Nations, but that did not guarantee their economic fortune. Since generosity and sacrifice were among
those virtues, these "examples" often gave everything of themselves
and lived in poverty. Sometimes it was
even expected of them, as evidence of their virtue.
Honesty, integrity, honor, bravery, self-discipline, sacrifice, generosity,
modesty, humility, family kinship, sharing, cooperation, humor, compassion,
avoidance of conflict, respect for elders, nature and each other, gratitude,
and an abiding spirituality were all deemed virtues of higher character.
Talking
about Native values can be a slippery slope to controversy. Values, methods of transmitting values, and
resulting behavior can vary from Nation to Nation, Band to Band, Family to
Family. Any attempt to generalize about
these values in order to create a pan-Indian perspective, must be seen as what
it is—an attempt to “begin” a discussion of the issues. Native people are often reluctant to discuss
such personal and important issues in a public forum—if at all. Why then should we push the issue and create
a written discussion or record? This is
important because for at least two and one half centuries, western civilization
has judged Native values to be inferior and have demanded we replace them with
Judeo-Christian ones. Despite these attempts, Native people have resisted
abandoning their traditional values to assimilation. The need to interact on a daily basis with educators, law
enforcement, social servants, health workers, etc., has resulted in those
entities forming misguided observations and judgments regarding Native behavior
based on western standards of value and action. With little understanding of
Native values, motivation, and perceptions—these misinterpretations continue to
cause problems for twenty-first century Natives.
Throughout
the last six hundreds years, Europeans and their descendants have been
examining, and making judgments, about Native culture and behavior. Due to a natural Indian reticence to discuss
personal, cultural, spiritual, or family beliefs and issues, western society
has been forced to rely on their own opinions as to why Native people respond
and act the way they do. Hence we have
some of the more familiar terms and racial epithets that have come to symbolize
and stereotype the Native character: lazy, shiftless, no account, stoic,
backward, ignorant, unresponsive, unemotional, uncaring, permissive, dull,
listless, humorless, uncooperative, withdrawn, silent, slow, unorganized,
irresponsible, etc.
Values
are more than moral guidelines; religious commandments, public laws, or social
constraints. Values may be simple modes
of behavior that dictate our responses and reactions to the elements and
personalities in our environment. They
form the fabric of our cultural reality.
They establish the basis for our perceptions of the world around us and
of ourselves. Values often reflect the
learned behavior of many generations, and are exhibited unconsciously in
physical behavior. These perceptions
are rarely passed through verbal expression but are learned through
observation. Because of this, values become so ingrained that people are
unaware that their judgments and perceptions are being guided by their personal
experiences. The potential for
misinterpreting the motivations and behavior of others is high when conflicting
value systems interact.
Many Native people still
enjoy at least a semblance of tribal life.
Reservations and rancherias, once prisons and concentration camps, have
acted as insulating environments where extended family relationships and safe
environments still contribute to the passing of traditional values. Native
people will often prefer to stay within those boundaries, venturing forth only
when necessary, except when attending other Native events or environments. This reticence to experience or participate
in non-Indian environments and society is the result of generations of racism
and negative criticism. Indians have
endured generations of people telling them how their ways are inferior, how
they must change, what they should and should not do, how they should and
should not act, what is good or bad for them, etc., etc. Well meaning crusaders
pummel them with unwanted advice, praise, or criticism. As you will see in our
discussion of traditional values, this is hard for Natives to endure and they
avoid the experience at all cost.
In discussing values, we
must admit the partial success of assimilation, with a resulting adoption of
formerly unfamiliar values, particularly since World War Two. Many of the members of those early and
middle twentieth century generations were convinced by the dominant society
that the old ways were limiting, even harmful to their children’s opportunities
and chance for contentment in the modern world. Nevertheless, some of the more traditional families did developed
the ability to operate successfully with two sets of values, within both modern
and traditional society. They balanced
the needs and expectations of both worlds.
Perhaps this is the trail we need to take.
Native communities will have
to answer the question individually as to whether it would be beneficial, or
not, to have internal discussions about native values and behavior—but there is
no question that educating non-Indian communities, especially institutions
which serve or affect Native lives, will have beneficial results. Correcting the misinterpretations and false
perceptions regarding the behavior and interaction of Native students and
members in a modern setting might do much to relieve the tensions and
frustrations Indians have in dealing with modern institutions and society on a
daily basis. Certainly, understanding
is better than ignorance, and since it is obvious that many Native families and
communities are continuing to pass on traditional values, it seems prudent to
make all our neighbors aware of the differences between us
I would like to acknowledge one of the first
(and best) attempts to address this issue.
Primarily for educators, the 1982 volume, “The American Indian:
Yesterday, Today, & Tomorrow”—produced by the California Department Of
Education, remains a timely, and definitive resource on this issue.
Because
we are only partially finished with our preparation of the pamphlet relating to
Native values, we will publish only a portion of that publication here. If readers have a further interest in this
subject, they may find a copy of the finished project online at www.
Anoliscircle.com
“Being an Indian
is not a problem,
being Indian in a
non-Indian world can be.”
In
a multi-cultural environment, the concept of the melting pot only goes so far. While acknowledging the dominance of
Anglo-American language, religion, history, and culture, we must also remain
acutely aware of the continued immigration of new cultures and perceptions into
the mainstream. In the case of this
document, we are continuing the long overdue effort of educating the mainstream
into the oldest and hardiest cultural perceptions in this hemisphere. The danger of not knowing, or making an
attempt to know, the different cultures around us poses a danger to the more
vulnerable and powerless within our society.
Culturally learned values play a part in every judgment and perception
we make about the actions, behavior, and beliefs of our neighbors.
Here
is a case in point.
Law
enforcement officials often rely on the value of establishing the honesty and
forthrightness of a person by observing their body language and behavior. But upon whose standards of behavior do they
base their observations? Many officers
will tell you that if a suspect does not, or cannot, hold to direct eye contact
during questioning, their conduct demonstrates insincerity at the very least,
or a more overt dishonesty and suspicious behavior. But what happens when they are faced with an American Indian who
has been taught that to hold a direct gaze is at best rude, and at
worst—purposely disrespectful? Without that knowledge, the Indian has been
placed at a serious disadvantage.
These
kinds of misjudgments happen frequently between Native people and the
mainstream institutions they must interact with. The next few paragraphs will illustrate this point.
A
social worker, observing a Northern California Native woman walking on the
street with her young children, observed the woman walking ahead of them a
number of yards, seemingly disinterested in their progress. “Look at her,” she said, “she doesn’t care
about her children at all!” What that
worker didn’t know, being unfamiliar with California history, was that many
Native women, generations before, developed that habit in protection of their
children. During the time that
California mercenaries and slave traders were stealing children for the
southern California slave markets, it became a necessary habit for Native women
to walk significantly ahead of their children—often leaving them in
hiding—until the safety of their course was confirmed. That behavior became an ingrained habit and
eventually evolved into learned behavior.
While not a “value” in the traditional sense of the word, it was still passed
down and learned by successive generations of mothers. When informed of this fact, the social
worker reacted by saying, “Well, doesn’t she realize how dangerous it is
today?” Once again, a reply was
necessary. This woman lived on a local rancheria. The small insular communities found on most California rancherias
are typically safer from predators than elsewhere. Part of that relates to extended family and tribal relationships
that become immediately conscious of strangers or dangerous members in their
midst. The predators from within are
generally watched carefully or forced off-rancheria, as are unidentified
strangers. The safety of the rancheria did not require the vigilance that
off-rancheria society requires. The woman rarely ventured out of that familiar
and secure environment. She had yet to
learn the necessity for changing her ingrained behavior. Simply to tell her it was dangerous would
not be enough. Like many Native people,
abstract information is not enough.
Concrete examples would be necessary.
Remind her of a child run over in the street or point to an example of a
child stolen in a local store and she might begin to think about it. But the ingrained habits would remain and
unless she had a personal experience which caused her to consistently and
consciously change her behavior, she would most probably continue to walk ahead
of her children on the street.
In the previous paragraph,
we have discovered three or four important characteristics, or “values” . The woman’s walking habits are traditionally
learned behavior. Her preference for staying within the familiar, insular, and
safe community of the rancheria is common.
Many Indians, faced with the reality or memory of racism or danger from
outside, prefer to stay where the experiences and attitudes of people are
familiar. They don’t want to risk
appearing out-of-step with Anglo neighbors. They may be embarrassed by the fact
they don’t own a car or have a driver’s license. They may not read or speak as well as others. There are so many
reasons for their fear and reticence about venturing beyond the safety of
rancheria life, that some people don’t even want to leave for a reason as
simple as going to the store for food.
As far as helping her
“understand” why she had to change her behavior, which the social worker
suggested was necessary, I pointed out that she would undoubtedly have
difficulty making her point. Many
Natives have significant difficulty and reticence in processing advice or criticism
from an outside source, particularly if that advice is presented as a verbally
abstract opinion that she might not be able to tie to a concrete experience in
her life.
Understanding the Native
woman’s behavior actually requires a knowledge of historically ingrained
physical habits, present day emotional perceptions of security, methods of
learning as applied to developing new behaviors, and understanding the Native
response to criticism or advice from non-Native sources.
The same
social worker commented on how another Native woman allowed her children to
“run wild” in a local grocery store.
She was appalled at the “lack of discipline” the woman allowed them
without immediate correction, criticism or punishment. It took more than forty-five minutes to
“educate” her about the myriad number of value differences involved in her
“judgment” of the woman’s behavior.
Native
people traditionally have a wholly different view of childrearing. The Native approach is relatively
non-verbal, relying on allowing the children to to grow through experiential
and exploratory learning rather than through verbal direction, rules, and
constraints. Children are allowed to
endure the consequences of their actions rather than be criticized or punished. Harsh criticism and punishment is considered
damaging to a child’s psyche. Native
children are rarely struck or physically reprimanded. Since Native people are not overly verbal, raised voices are a
new phenomena in childrearing.
Expressions and body language might be used to convey criticism. If a direct criticism needs to be made,
another relative is often expected to participate. Since children are given as
much respect and importance in the community as adults, their autonomy is
seldom challenged and they are allowed to mature more quickly with few of the
restraints non-Indian children endure.
Public praise or criticism is considered rude, as are rapid responses
and judgments. A high degree of
tolerance is practiced and children are given, what seems to many Anglo
outsiders, an inordinate and excessive amount of freedom. The Native woman, in the situation described
by the social worker, was simply exhibiting a time honored traditional value of
quiet, silent, self-restrained behavior--even in the face of her children’s
“misbehaving”. In reality, she probably
did not even consider their behavior inappropriate, not having experienced all
the time honored European values of behavior that determine what is appropriate
and what is not Indian people often
cannot grasp what all the fuss is about.
The children are just finding their way. What’s the problem?
Our next
example demonstrates how damaging stereotypes have become to Native adults,
teens, and children.
Recently, a local community
was engaged in a controversy about whether the school mascot should be
changed. One of the arguments for
keeping the name “Indians” was the perception that Indian people had always
been fierce and effective warriors—which the writer considered an appropriate
image for the mock battles of high school athletics. The author of that argument felt it was an honor for Native
peoples to be remembered for what he considered one of their more admirable
traits. The fact that California Tribes
were not known for a war-like disposition did not dissuade him from his
opinion.
Unfortunately, Hollywood has firmly grafted the image of a noble
but warlike and savage nature onto the shoulders of all of the Native
Nations. Indians grow up with little of
their own history in school textbooks, and almost all that history deals with
the glorification of war carrying through the Indian Wars of the nineteenth
century. Every stereotype they see
reinforces the perception that Native men were warriors of violence. Our roles as responsible fathers, statesmen,
and peacemakers are rarely mentioned.
The insular nature of
rancheria and reservation life over the last five generations has resulted in a
delay of social progress, at least as it applies to understanding and
participating in the modern world.
While Native people may be up to date in their style of dress, knowledge
of contemporary music, etc., attitudes regarding what contemporary society
regards as appropriate behavior may lag as much as a full generation. Here is the case in point.
Having grown up with the
self-image of a stereotypical Native “warrior”, adolescent boys and young men,
(even girls and women) believe they must be tough and ready—even eager—to
fight. The difficulties of establishing
their Native identity and self-image in a world where those values are
continually undermined, may imbue them with low-esteem, even self-hatred. They are told by teachers, counselors,
social workers, and others how they should act, what their goals and
expectations should be, how they should prepare for the future, etc. without
any regard for the way in which their ingrained values conflict with those
admonitions and advice. They become
confused and angry. The society of the
rancheria and reservation, lagging behind the modern social environment, still
accepts a modicum of violence in its young men in the way that American society
did in the 1950’s and early 1960’s. No
one thought much about it in those days.
Boys, teenagers, and even men—fought occasionally. It was no big deal.
Jump forward into the
twenty-first century where even minor violence in society is no longer
tolerated. A young Native man gets into
a fight in town. He is arrested for
assault and put on probation. The
judge, having no knowledge or interest in the special conditions and values
that exist in contemporary Native society; and being unaware of the
debilitating effects of stereotyping and generations of horrendous post
traumatic stress syndrome on Native teens and young people—does not require him
to attend crisis counseling, anger management, cultural awareness or identity
development classes. Consequently, the
young man gets in trouble a second time and is summarily sentenced to five
years in prison. A fairly responsible
and intelligent, but troubled and confused young man is placed in a closed
environment with violent and hardened criminals. When he returns to the rancheria, toughness has become his
permanent persona, and he may be perceived by his younger peers as having
achieved something important by his incarceration. He becomes a role model of sorts, and the circle of violence and
stereotyping continues. One has only to
look at the statistics of how many Native people go to prison to see the
correlation.
Teachers, health workers,
and social service providers probably face the most difficult task of becoming
educated to the difference in values and culturally specific behaviors
exhibited by Native people in conflict with the mainstream.
My daughter told me how difficult it was for
her in a speech class where the instructor demanded that they debate each other
on contemporary issues. After our
discussion of the paper I was preparing, she came to an understanding of why
she had so much difficulty in living up to her instructors expectations. Obviously, the instructor had little
knowledge of Native values or culture.
Educators, along with Native
students, face a mountain of problems resulting directly from conflicting
cultural values and behavior differences in the current educational
environment. Natives, recognizing a
cultural conflict of values, have even abandoned the pursuit of educational
degrees, often with only a dissertation to write. They become uncomfortable with even the idea of having a
degree. They perceive the pursuit to
reflect a lack of humility—they don’t want to be experts, better or smarter
than anyone else.
This is where we have chosen to end this portion of the publication due
to its incompletion.
Essay Sixty-Seven BlueWolf
& Lupe'/ Shirts N' Skins
Appearances, And Assimilation
The majority of Europeans who came to our shores were folk predisposed
to judging things at face value.
Obsessed with image and appearance, and convinced absolutely of their
moral, social, cultural, and spiritual superiority, they could not see beyond
their perceptions of primitivism and savagery they imagined must be the
attributes of people who lived so simply and close to nature.
Modesty is a good example. While
Indian Nations had their own precepts of what comprised modesty, Europeans had
specific christianized principles when it came to exhibition of the body and
its form. They had no interest in
examining our cultures further to see if our worldview might portray the value
of modesty in a different way. They
simply assumed that modesty did not exist among us.
Generally, they immediately perceived this way every aspect of our
cultures. Foregoing a closer
examination, their racist and arrogant examination found little virtue in such
a repugnant civilization.
There were exceptions to this.
Some Europeans, not bound so intently to their bigoted views, were able
to discern the wonder, beauty, and integrity of our world and wrote on it
extensively.
George Catlin, though still holding fast to European perceptions,
acknowledged this when he wrote, "I am fully convinced, from a long
familiarity with these people, that the Indian's misfortune has consisted
chiefly in our ignorance of their true native character and disposition, which
has always caused us to hold them at a distrustful distance, inducing us to
look upon them in no other light than that of a hostile foe...."
For the most part, Europeans ignored Catlin and his views as romantic
yearnings to escape the consequence of being a European in the New World, with
its entire attendant Puritanism and narrow ideals.
The Native concept of time has always given Europeans fits. As Historian William Fenton observes,
British, French, Dutch and Colonial Officials “suffered the delays of Indian
delegations arriving for meetings on their own time, and they chafed at the
deliberateness with which Indians conducted affairs. Indians were never in a hurry.
They would arrive “in so many moons,” “when the corn is knee high,”
“when bark is ready to peel for canoes”,” “when the leaves turn,” or “when we
get done hunting”—concepts that were important to them but too vague and
uncertain for gentlemen attuned to a calendar.” It was a foregone conclusion that treaty making could not be
accomplished during hunting seasons, or ceremonial times. Even in contemporary times, Native people
have a difficult time adjusting their schedules to the clock.
The concept of Termination,
brought to fruition in 1959, was California's legislated attempt to assimilate
Indians into mainstream America. It,
along with every other plan, was doomed to failure from the outset. If Indians were going to forget the past and
join the American dream, it would have occurred decades ago. But most Americans still do not realize the
extent to which Indians have maintained their separate values and unified
resistance to joining the descendants of their destroyers. Neither do they understand that while we
have lived alongside our American neighbors for generations, little of that
outside culture, except for its hard surface veneer, has crept in to fill the
empty spaces where Traditional and cultural forms once conveyed the vital
ideals of the Nations.
Until gaming thrust Tribes into a continual spotlight, the American
people still preferred to picture Indians as celluloid caricatures. It is only recently that Americans have
shown any interest in how Indians live today.
They have preferred to look upon our garbage-strewn reservations with
the self-satisfaction at having been right in their perceptions of us as filthy
and lazy savages.
With gaming, and the entrance of Nations into the economic reality of
the American political marketplace, the populace has begun to stand up and take
notice of Indians and their condition.
Since the average non-Indian mistakenly hold the view that the government
subsidizes our every endeavor with taxpayer's monies, or that Casinos provide
every Tribe or Band with unlimited capital, they are outraged that their newly
noticed "neighbors" should continue to have piles of garbage around
their houses or participate in the American Democratic process by making
multi-million dollar contributions to politicians and propositions that favor
us! We are now labeled as "special interest" groups, despite
our "Government to Government" relationships with the United States.
Americans still don't understand that we are separate nations and governments
inside their borders.
All morals, values, and perspectives are learned, and passed from
generation to generation. Natives
cannot fathom that it might be a perversion of the democratic processes to
attempt to influence government with capital contributions, especially since
we've seen so much money thrown at decisions that have conflicted with our best
interests in the past. It may turn out
to be the ultimate irony, that the powers who subjugated and despised us for so
long may have given us the tools and the experiential knowledge to become major
powers in state and federal government.
While one culture may view a behavior as repugnant, and see that
perception as merely exhibiting common sense, another, with completely
different worldviews, may have a different perspective. Again, we turn to Catlin (looking beyond his
obviously stereotypical European attitudes).
"In the Indian communities, where there is no law of the land or
custom denominating it a vice to drink whiskey and to get drunk; where the poor
Indian meets whiskey tendered to him by white men, to whom he has come to
consider wiser than himself, by nature of superior wealth, weapons
and numbers, and to whom he naturally looks
for example; he thinks it no harm to drink to excess, and will lie drunk as
long as he can raise the means to pay for it."
Here's another example. Drop a
large amount of money on any poor people and you will seldom find them doing
anything with it but spending it as fast as they can. The handling of money is a skill that must be learned and adapted
to the values and priorities a people deem important. So if these skills have not been learned, and the Indian order of
values and priorities differ from those Americans possess, how can Americans
expect that the results will approximate what they themselves would prefer?
Indians are socially, culturally, and spiritually in a time of great
transition and development. Among many
Tribes, the loss of oral tradition (as a transmitter of morals and values), has
resulted in a number of generations having lost basic teachings. Tribes and leaders are struggling to find
methods to restore Traditional values mixed with those assimilated from the
surrounding society. It is a difficult
task, especially given the fact that the surrounding society has few commonly
practiced values, other than accumulating material objects, and even fewer
ideals generated from spiritual beliefs.
Materialistic individual pursuits are in direct conflict with
Traditional Indian values and ideals, which held spiritual responsibility as a
priority, not an afterthought. Though
we may have lost, or forgotten, many of our original forms—nevertheless there
are unspoken and emotionally recognized values and perspectives which are still
familiar to us and remembered by our Peoples.
Our world is much larger in scope than modern men, and includes the
world of Spirit—of unseen Power—that requires a greater understanding of the
universe than that of our apparently simple physical reality. Though there are many of us who are no
longer cognizant of that world, Indigenous perspective has taken on a larger
and more important global significance with the need for healing and preserving
our world for the generations to come.
The reasons for our continued separatism, our search for identity, and
our demand for sovereignty, is not simply a calculated drive to reap monetary
benefits free of taxation, etc., but is a deeper and more meaningful desire to
"hold-our-horses" on further assimilation until we can redefine who
we are, what we believe, and in what direction we desire our future to proceed.
It bothers many Americans that we have not come to accept ourselves as
simply one of them. They still ascribe
to their original belief that their way is superior, and was validated by their
violent victories over our Nations.
They are just as misinformed (or uninformed) about our People's values,
and perspectives, as were their grandparents.
We are confident that we can restore the morals, values, and ideals of
our Tribes to reflect at least a balance of traditional and modern perspective.
We may be citizens, but we have dual citizenship. America is deeply in need of new ideals and imaginative
solutions. If only our fellow Americans
were to give in to that reality and allow us to heal, educate, and restore
ourselves, the union of our cultures and ideals would be much stronger than our
simple assimilation into the mainstream.
As for Native's, we are assured that wounds, though deep, will heal. We
believe that is what our ancestors and relatives have suffered and sacrificed
for. Their world was lost, but not in vain. We are intent on sharing this new one
coming, together.
Essay Sixty-Eight BlueWolf
& Lupe’/Shirts N’ Skins
Euro-American Independence Day 2003
Of course, Natives have a
different perspective of this day. For
many decades, the term American referred to the Indigenous Peoples of the
Americas. While the descendants of the
oppressed Peoples of Europe have a reason to celebrate their independence, to
ask the survivors of the American holocaust to share in this celebration is a
bit twisted.
Yet, most Indians do
celebrate Independence Day, with a curious mixture of pride and pathos. The processes of American education and
entertainment have always called for the victims of the American experiment to
make the sacrifice of forgetting, while until recently, the victors have
conveniently whitewashed, ignored, denied or forgotten all the terrible and
significant injustices performed by their heroic forefathers (as well as recent
fathers!). It's human nature, we
suppose, for the victors of any conflict to glorify themselves, but we think
it's also the nature of true and Indigenous cultures to resist any forgetting
of their defeat. To forget that is to
dishonor those who sacrificed and gave their lives for us, and our right to
freedom and cultural preservation.
Forget the past and let's go forward has been the cry of the last
century. But beneath the promise of
that statement is a lie, because it is not "us" they want to go
forward—it is a mirror of themselves and the demands of assimilation. Their cry to “forget and go forward” means
to become like them—you know the old saying—kill the Indian and save the Man.
Natives are torn—overwhelmed
by their indoctrination into the perception of superiority that surrounds the
American experiment and the patriotism it demands—so they serve proudly in the
Armed Forces at a rate well beyond their ethnic percentage. At home, they see the government constantly attempting
to undermine the strength and vitality of a sovereignty guaranteed by the
American Constitution. They are forced
to accept and serve a government that is both ally and enemy.
In carving up the planet,
the global power elite believes in ownership above all else. They know that world opinion has grown
beyond the direct ownership of human beings but they have found that human
beings can be enslaved without bills of sale.
If you own the land, the water, and the means to sustenance—if you
create a system of empowerment that disenfranchises all who do not accept the
rushing wind of progress—if you suppress, discredit and discourage every
conversation that discusses the possibility of alternatives—if you utilize a
world media to extol the advances of civilization while failing to admit that
its benefits can only be experienced by a select few—if you talk about morality
and responsibility out of the side of your mouth while waging war or
tyrannizing your peoples, exhausting natural resources and utilizing unproven
or dangerous technology—you control the modern world. Modern people are enslaved by addicting theologies, ideologies,
and technologies that result in shrinking freedoms and greater sociopathic
behavior. But for most of us, to allow
ourselves to be awakened to the plight of the real world is almost too
much. The horrors are so many, and so
real, that it is difficult to resist re-immersing oneself in the distractions
and sensory delights of the technological age.
For some freed men and women, being faced with the full brunt of the
terrifying wave of reality only leads to suicide and violence. Others of us have been activists all of our
lives. By whatever means, we have grown
up outside the real matrix of the twentieth century. Our hatred and loathing for the myths and lies that persuade so
many drives us to write and speak for an new perceptual reality. As John Trudell says, if we use our
collective intelligence consciously and coherently—as often as possible—we may,
in the long run of time, make a difference.
Technological civilization, and its deity, Progress (now
Democracy), is in the process of demanding the allegiance of every world
citizen and enlisting every malleable mind to their ends. However, the fruits
of that civilization, which once promised to be so sweet, have soured as of
late as the foremost societies in this quest plunge into cycles of inner
turmoil and violence. In America, even children dream of indiscriminant murder.
We pretend that we can safely continue this lifestyle indefinitely while the
rest of the world is lacking nutritious food, shelter, or a safe place to
sleep. This is what the current crisis
is really centered around. Those who despoil not only humanity but the life of
the earth, will continue to be visited by the plagues of moral bankruptcy. Our families and our children will be the
targets of our own transgressions. This was a seed planted at the beginning of
this nation in soil soaked with the blood and dreams of Indigenous
peoples. Even today, across the world,
new blood soaks the ground.
We know that the basic elements of creation are everlasting and
cannot die. That's why Natives have
always been honorable warriors. But
it is also necessary to realize that, as Woody Gutherie sang, “mean things are
happening in this world”. There are bad
guys and sociopaths leading governments everywhere. Even here in the good old
U.S.of A. Some would argue that George
Bush is a bigger threat to world peace and plenty than Osama Bin Laden. Who is to judge? Both might be found to be decent to their families and pets. Both believe in their divine mission. Bad guys are not always inherently
evil—sometimes they just make bad decisions and cause others to do bad
things. We will always have them,
attempting to live out their warped visions, controlling and destroying
people’s lives and contentment. Those
of us who seek to develop plans for peace and ways to better society, have to
agree on how we plan to deal with these twisted men. To simply appeal to them to do what we think is right is
ridiculous. People are expected to
exercise their unified power to control despots, tyrants, and oligarchies—but
the specter of “collateral damage” forces us to reassess our methods and
solutions.. Unfortunately, the record
of modern people for demonstrating their power and getting involved isn’t very
good. That is left up to politicians,
militants, activists, and terrorists.
To change our perceptual
reality we need a revolution in thought; a questioning and reevaluation of
everything we have been taught about the past, the present, and the
future. In every earthly garden there
are always deeply rooted weeds that desire to dominate, which cannot be removed
at the surface. This modern garden is
filled with deeply rooted selfish, stubborn, and fanatically opinionated
weeds. The Earth is calling for a deep
turning of the soil of this civilization.
What will be the nature of the spade?
For a preliminary summing up, check out the
information index, A6
Essay Sixty-Nine BlueWolf & Lupe'/Shirts N" Skins
Last Words
“Forked tongues sip from an
empty cup, dipped until all springs run dry. A past of lies, served with formal
sterling, make the taste of our defeat so much more bitter—now we know exactly
what was lost.”
Amoshi
Since
every day that passes stirs new thoughts and observations—actually finishing a
book of essays like this is difficult.
A
lot has happened in the world since we began these writings. 9-11, the Wars in the Middle East, and the
abridgement of freedoms at home through the Patriot Act (and its yet to be
enacted ugly stepsister), have created a climate of fear not unlike the early
1950's. Fortunately we have had the
sixty's and seventies since then, and the establishment of the Office of
Homeland Security, the agenda of the New American Century, and the push toward
increased racism and racial profiling has raised enough eyebrows and provoked
enough controversy to at least slow our headlong plunge toward a global
colonial crusade in the name of democracy. .
Racism
and attitudes of social and cultural imperialism and superiority have followed
a cyclical pattern in the U.S. over the last 188 years. As the circle of U.S. wagons expands to take
in "acceptable" minorities, the qualifications to enter that circle
remain the same. Where once the circle
formed only for the benefit of English descendants, it has opened to take in
most of the remaining European Nations, some Blacks, Mexicans, Indians,
Chinese, Japanese, and lately--other Asians, Middle Eastern and South American
immigrants as well. Of course all must
tow the party line, work almost exclusively for their own interests and wealth,
disavow former cultures and lifeways, enter the mainstream consumer society,
and not rock the boat for any of the original white European partygoers.
Horatio Alger was a name we
recognized but didn’t know anything about.
Michael Moore’s chapter “Horatio Alger Must Die”, from his book, “Dude,
Where’s My Country?” was another step forward in our coming to grips with how
“White men think”. Alger was a novelist
of the American Dark Ages of the late 1800s, who wrote rags to riches stories
and captivated American audiences with the “promise” of being wealthy and privileged—a
throwback to nobility and dreams of being Princes, Princesses, Kings and
Queens. The message was that anyone
could make it big. State lotteries and
Native Casinos have proven how deeply ingrained this myth is in the minds of
Americans. Not only that, they will
fight tooth and nail to defend the rich fat cats who keep the oligarchy in
power, even when they themselves have a hard time paying the bills and buying
food or getting necessary medical care!
The idea of being rich is pretty much an American phenomenon. Other nations and their citizens dream of
having the necessities, and if they’re really lucky—a paid vacation. Wealthy Europeans pay up to 65% of their
income in taxes. American CEO’s earn
411 times the average of their blue collar workers, yet the U.S. citizenry
won’t even demand severe punishment for criminal CEO’s who destroy the pensions
and life savings of their shareholders and employees. As Moore says, Americans drank the Kool-Aid. They don’t want to do anything that might
jeopardize their moola when they make it rich!
He points out how the average worker was intentionally misled and
encouraged to make investments during periods where the Power Elite knew that
things were headed down the tubes. And
those Power Elite laughed all the way to their Swiss bank accounts. The system is rigged like slot machines,
letting just enough people win the rags to riches prize to make every else
think they can win it too--if they just keep playing. But, like the illusion of democracy, the truth is that they know
what cards you are holding and they control the deck. Get smart. Don’t go
along. Be militant and join the four to
ten percent who are screaming at the top of our lungs—all humans need food,
water, shelter, medical treatment, and the opportunity to share in the arts and
humanities of family and culture. These
inalienable rights should be guaranteed to all the world’s citizens first, then
if there’s anything left over, the fat cats can fight over it.
We recently heard a leading progressive
professional and lecturer ask the question why our reaction to 9-11 precluded
any solution other than violent reprisal.
He pointed out a similar event that occurred when the IRA almost
entirely decimated the leading British conservatives a few years ago. The British responded by beginning
negotiations, realizing that reprisals would only escalate the violence. The answer is surprisingly simple. Since the sixties exposed the hypocrisy of
American political machinations, and the civil rights movement drove America
into a cathartic moral and ethical crisis, Americans are loathe to bomb their
ancestors. If the IRA had been
responsible for 9-11, there would have been few calls for war against the
entire Irish Republic.
Since the Korean War, the U.
S. has relentlessly directed campaigns against people of color or ethnicity
that do not have significant representation at home. In the Americas, Spanish-speaking people have always been targets
for American business and colonial interests because they are brown. The Far East, the Philippines, and Indonesia
have been targets of expansion because they are Asian, and the Middle East is
today's lucky winner in our next global campaigns to carry truth, justice, and
the American Way to every corner of the globe—primarily because they are Arab
or Muslim, and the old time enemy of Mother Europe and Christendom.
Just ask an American soldier
what they call the Iraqis. All the Iraqis!
We bet that it will mean the same thing as Gook did to GI.'s in
Vietnam. All wars have those
names. But it might be interesting to
correlate the names we had for those we were willing to kill in the past, and
see just when and why those names lost their public acceptability. Natives remember the American soldier and
vigilantes names for us. That's why
Native People must keep their eyes open and noses to the wind. You never know
when the wind will shift and we may be the enemy again.
One
last thing, for all Natives younger than fifty to ponder. Before Alcatraz and
The Red Power Movement, before people died and guns were fired, before we
learned to use the press to our advantage—there were no discussions of
government-to-government relations between Indian Nations and the U.S.
Government. There were no assurances or
guarantees of Sovereignty. There was no
breaking free of the BIA. Our Peoples
were hanging on by thin and weakening thread.
It was the efforts, and sacrifices, of free, mobile young people and
Traditional Elders that resulted in all the good things that have happened in
Indian Country over the last four decades.
Never underestimate the influence of an occupation, a demonstration, or
a show of civil disobedience. A call to
violence is always the last resort. The
time is coming when we may need the Red Power Movement again. Don't worry about appeasing tribal councils
or progressives, they always jump on board late. This time we may be called
domestic terrorists and the price of resistance may be even higher than before. We pray that young people find the determination
to carry on the struggle for though it has been more than a century since the
last Indian Nations were overwhelmed militarily; if you look around you’ll see
that we were never truly defeated. The
great names of our warriors and statesmen are still remembered, and we are
adding new names to the list. In your
heart, remember the names—and if your tradition allows it—speak them out loud
to the new babies. Give them those old
names so.
It’s a good day to live, it’s a good day to
die. Red Power forever.
August 28, 2006
Book and Source
List
Aldous Huxley Brave New World Revisited
Harry Lopez The Rediscovery Of North America
Eric Schlosser Fastfood Nation
Dick Teresi Lost Discoveries: Ancient Roots Of Modern Science
Martin Garbus Courting Disaster
Brian Swimme Canticle To The Cosmos
James Lowen Lies My Teacher Told Me
Vine Deloria God Is Red
Vine Deloria Red Earth, White Lies
Vine Deloria & Daniel Wildcat Place And Power
John Trudell DNA, Descendant Now Ancestor
Jerry Mander In The Absence Of The Sacred
Jerry Mander 4 Arguments For The Elimination Of TV
Peter BlueCloud Alcatraz Is Not An Island
John Sulston The Common Thread
Chester Starr A History Of The Ancient World
Patrick Colm Hogan The Culture Of Conformism
Jacob Abbot Aboriginal History, American History Vol 1
Hartzell Spence The Story Of America's Religions
Bartolome' De Las Casas In Defense Of The Indians Translation: Stafford Poole
Bartolome De Las Casas The Devastation Of The Indies Translation: Herma Briffault
Introduction: Bill Donovan
Dave Henry Stealing From Indians
George Catlin Letters 1832 to 1833
Cadwallader Colden History of the Five Indian Nations Depending on the Province of
New York in America, 1727
Cadwallader Colden History Of The Five Indian Nations, 1747
Felix Cohen Handbook Of Federal Indian Law
Bruce E.
Johansen Forgotten Founders:
Benjamin Franklin, The Iroquois...
Bruce E.
Johansen Native America And The
Evolution Of Democracy
Bruce E.
Johansen Debating Democracy;
Native American Legacy Of Freedom 1998
Gore Vidal Perpetual War For
Perpetual Peace
Gore Vidal The Last Empire
Gore Vidal Dreaming War
Dale F. Lott American Bison
William B. Secrest When the Great Spirit Died
H. W Brands "Founders Chic" The Atlantic Monthly Sept 2003
Deborah Small with Maggie Jaffe "1492 What Is It Like To Be
Discovered?' (extracts from Christopher Columbus' Journal) 'Medieval Source
Book' published at http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/columbus1.html
Cathy Ross, Mary Robertson, Chuck Larsen, and
Roger Fernandes
“Teaching About Thanksgiving” Tacoma School District 1986
Francis Jennings The Invasion Of New England
E. B. O'Callaghan, ea., John R. Brodhead,
esq., Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the State of New York
(Albany: Weed Parsons & Co., 1855), Vol. VI, p. 741
John Ferling Adams & Jefferson
2004 Oxford University Press
John Burdett, Bankok Tattoo, Alfred Knopf, NY 2005
Ray Raphael, Founding Myths, The New Press,
NY 2004
John Pilger New Rulers Of The World
Martin Garbus Courting Disaster
Robert Baer Sleeping With the Devil May 2003, Atlantic Monthly
Thom Hartmann Unequal Protection
Charles C. Mann “1491”, March 2002,
Atlantic Monthly
Russell Thornton American Indian Holocaust And Survival
Richard Shenkman Legends, Lies & Cherished Myths Of American History 1988 Harper & Row
Richard Shenkman I Love Paul Revere, Whether He Rode Or Not 1991
Harper Perennial
Michael Moore Dude, Where Is My Country? 2003 Warner Books
Robert W Funk Honest To Jesus
1996 Polebridge Press
Robert W Funk A Credible Jesus
2002 Polebridge Press
Oivind Anderson Jesus and the Oral Gospel Tradition
John Dominic Crossan The Birth Of Christianity Harper San Francisco 1998
Elizabeth Loftus Memory
Daniel L Schacter Searching for Memory
Peter Brown The Rise Of
Western Christendom
Gunther Bornkamm Jesus of Nazareth
Leslie C Tihany A History Of Middle Europe
Popol Vuh
Translation: Adrian Recinos
English version: Delia Goetz & Sylvanus Morley
Peter Phillips and Project Censored Censored 2003
Suzan Shown Harjo Introduction: Mending
The Circle AIRORF, New York
John E. Remsburg Six Historic Americans, letter to William Short Jefferson
Thomas Paine The Age of Reason pp. 8,9 (Republished 1984, Prometheus
Books, Buffalo, NY)
Paul F. Boller Jr George
Washington and Religion
pp. 16, 87, 88, 108, 113, 121, 127 (1963, Southern Methodist University
Press, Dallas, TX)
Peter Shaw
The Character of John Adams pp. 17 (1976, North Carolina Press,
Chapel Hill, NC) Quoting a letter by JA
to Charles Cushing Oct 19, 1756, and John Adams
Newsweek
Edited by James Peabody A Biography
in his Own Words, pp. 403
(1973, New York, NY) Quoting letter by John Adams to Jefferson
April 19, 1817, and in reference to the treaty,
Alf Mapp Jr., Thomas Jefferson, Passionate
Pilgrim pp. 311 (1991,
Madison Books, Lanham, MD) quoting letter by Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Benjamin
Waterhouse, June, 1814.
Thomas Jefferson (letter to J. Adams, April 11,1823)
Virginia Moore The Madisons , P. 43 (1979, McGraw-Hill Co. New York,
NY) quoting a letter by JM to William Bradford April 1, 1774,
Newsweek
edited by Joseph Gardner James Madison, A Biography in his Own Words
(1974, Newsweek, New York, NY) Quoting
Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments by JM, June 1785.
G. Adolph Koch Religion of the
American Enlightenment
pp. 40 (1968, Thomas Crowell Co., New York, NY.) quoting preface of
American Heritage Press Inc Reason, the Only Oracle of Man pp. 352 (1985, American Heritage Press, Inc., New York, NY.)
American Heritage Press Inc. A Sense
of History pp.103
(1985, American Heritage Press, Inc., New York, NY.)
Newsweek
edited by Thomas Fleming Benjamin Franklin, A Biography in his Own Words, pp. 404, (1972, Newsweek, New York, NY)
quoting letter by Ben Franklin to Ezra Stiles,
March 9, 1790.
H.G. Wells
Outline of History
Robert B. Pickering Collier Deputy Director for Collections and
Education, Buffalo Bill Historical Center
George M. Fredrickson Racism
(A Short History)
William N. Fenton The Great Law Of The Longhouse
University Of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Okla.
Alex Kirby Planet Under Pressure
BBC News Online Series
William Blum Rogue State Common
Courage Press, 2000 Monroe, Maine
Eileen Welsome, "The Plutonium Files: America's Secret Medical Experiments
in the Cold War."
Kent Nerburn Chief Joeseph & The Flight Of The Nez Perce HarperCollins 2005
Roy Morris Jr. Fraud Of The Century
2003 Simon & Shuster
Joel Garreau Radical Revolution
Charles Wohlforth TheWhale and the Supercomputer
2004 North Point Press
We admit to utilizing over twenty primary
source in the preparation of these essays, however knowing that many of these
sources might not agree with all of our perceptions we feel it would be
disrespectful to mention their names—thereby opening them up to unjustified
criticisms.
Index Of Extra
Information and Essay Material
A1
Pre-Conquest America
The information presented in
the next paragraphs has been gathered from prominent archaeologists and
anthropologists local to the regions described. The information is interesting and informative but since we did not
consult with the descendants of the peoples described directly we cannot be
sure of the accuracy of any of the dates or opinions expressed about their
ancestors.
Pre-Inca & Inca
“Six earth-and-rock mounds
rise out of the windswept desert of the Supe Valley near the coast of
Peru. Dune-like and immense, they
appear to be nature's handiwork, forlorn outposts in an arid region squeezed
between the Pacific Ocean and the folds of the Andean Cordillera. But looks
deceive. These are human-made pyramids, and compelling new evidence indicates
they are the remains of a city that flourished nearly 5,000 years ago. The
ruins, which have been carbon dated to some 100 years before the Great
Pyramid at Giza, make it one of the oldest
urban centers in the Americas and among the most ancient in the entire world.
What has amazed
archaeologists is not just the age but the complexity and scope of Caral. The architecture of Pirámide Mayor alone
covers an area nearly the size of four football fields and is 60 feet tall. Inside is a large sunken amphitheater, which
could have held many hundreds of people during civic or religious events. Eventually Caral would spawn 17 other
pyramid complexes scattered across the 35-square-mile area of the Supe Valley.”
(AP Release)
Cotton appeared to be their
main trade item, and nets of cotton fiber were discovered many many miles from
Caral—evidence of a considerable commerce with distant peoples. “But based on
Caral's size and scope, archaeologists believe that it is indeed, the mother
city of the Incan civilization.”
“Around 200 AD, the
highlands of South America witnessed the rise of the Tiahuanaco culture (200
AD), based in the Collao region (which covered parts of modern-day Bolivia and
Chile). The Tiahuanaco were to bequeath a legacy of agricultural terracing and
the management of a variety of ecological zones.”
“The Nazca culture (300 AD)
were able to tame the coastal desert by bringing water through underground
aqueducts. They carved out vast geometric and animal figures on the desert
floor, a series of symbols believed to form part of an agricultural calendar
which even today baffles researchers.”
Also in the highlands, “both
the Tiwanaku (Tiahuanaco) culture, near Lake Titicaca in Bolivia, and the Wari
(Huari) culture, near the present-day city of Ayacucho, developed large urban
settlements and wide-ranging state systems between A.D. 500 and A.D. 1000. The
Wari culture (600 AD) introduced urban settlements in the Ayacucho area and
expanded its influence across the Andes.”
“Chimú were the great
city-builders of pre-Inca civilization. As a loose confederation of cities
scattered along the coast of northern Peru and southern Ecuador, the Chimú
flourished from about 1150 to 1450. Their capital was at Chan Chan outside of
modern-day Trujillo. The largest pre-Hispanic city in South America at the
time, Chan Chan had 100,000 inhabitants.
Its twenty square kilometers of precisely symmetrical design was
surrounded by a lush garden oasis intricately irrigated from the Río Moche
several kilometers away.”
Mayan
Considered the
“grandparents” of many Tribes, the Mayans were prominently established in 1000
BC. Their civilization is said to have
endured for 2000 years, reaching its Zenith in 7th to 10th Century
AD in Copan in Honduras. We’ll examine
the advanced state of their civilization in another essay.
Anastazi
There is a growing suspicion
that the entire southwest was once part of a great system that included the
25,000 square mile San Juan River drainage system. Pueblo Bonito, the largest of the monuments, had 660 circular
rooms. It contains more than 50 million finely cut blocks of sand stone. 150
other great houses were discovered in the San Juan Basin, covering four states:
Utah, Colorado, Arizona, and New Mexico and encompass an area of 1000s of
square miles. Even in the desolate Chaco Canyon in northern New Mexico there is
abundant evidence that as many as 6,000 to 10,000 ancient native Americans
lived and worshiped there at one time. The remains of elaborate buildings--some
as high as four stories and containing 800 rooms--indicate the location was
used for rituals and ceremonies. Extensive villages were also built nearby.
NASA
archaeologist Tom Seaver uncovered the huge Pueblo road system. The roads are straight as an arrow and were
built without beasts of burden or the wheel!
In the Americas, extensive
cultural empires were established through the exchange of “symbolic goods.” The relationship between Meso-America and the Anastazi culture is
well documented even considering the problem of monumental distances to
transportation, communication, and the overall poverty of the societies
involved. Nevertheless, relationships of contact between women, goods,
knowledge, and the circulation of specialists proved that even symbolic goods
might contribute to the establishment of extensive cultural empires.
Cahokia (Mississipian)
Cahokia, in southwest
Illinois, was, in its day, the largest and most influential settlement north of
Mexico. Henry Brackenridge, speaking of Cahokia, 1810, found a great mound
larger than the Pyramid at Giza, surrounded by more than one hundred smaller
mounds covering a five square mile area.
Its influence extended from the Gulf Coast to the Great Lakes, and from
the Atlantic coast to Oklahoma. About
4,000 of the roughly 20,000 individual mounds of this widespread Mississippian
civilization have survived agriculture and construction in Wisconsin
alone. Other “great” mounds exist in
Alabama, Mississippi, and other southeastern states. The textile industry in
Mississippian culture was advanced, as were the social city-states, with high
walled settlements, moats, and advanced soci-ceremonial structures, organizations,
and governments.
Here are snips of an 1860
document about an area near the eastern Great Plains of the U.S. The first section is entitled,
"Unquestionable Antiquity of Many of the Mounds".
"Although
many of the mounds now found may be of comparatively modern date, there are
some which, like those on the Ohio and the other western rivers, bear
incontestable evidence of great antiquity in the immense trees that are found
growing upon them. There are live oaks standing upon some of these tumuli of
such size that they are estimated to be six or seven hundred years old. This
would carry back the date of the mound to a period two or three centuries
anterior to the time of Columbus."
"Ancient Fields"
"There are also in
certain parts of the prairies marks of ancient corn fields, of every great
size, and extending over the country for a hundred and fifty miles. The land in
these fields lies in ridges, like those always seen in a corn field that is
left, after the corn is harvested, to grass itself over, without being leveled
by the plough and harrow. These ridges are so regular, and confined so strictly
to circumscribed and well defined fields--fields, too, occupying situations
exactly suitable for the cultivation of corn--as to leave no room for doubt in
respect to the nature of them. They are very ancient too, as is proved by the
trees often found standing upon them. Some persons, in examining these fields,
once caused an oak tree to be cut down which was growing in one of them, and on
counting the layers of wood they found that the tree was three hundred and
twenty-five years old. This carries the time when the fields were cultivated
far beyond the settlement of the country by Europeans; and inasmuch as no
Indian tribes have been known, since the coming of Europeans; to cultivate the
ground so extensively, it is supposed that these fields denote that in ancient
times there existed a more numerous and civilized population over all this
region than exists at the present day.
"The Copper Mines"
"This opinion is
confirmed by certain indications that are observed in the Lake Superior copper
region. Ancient mines are found here with traces of former workings that are on
a scale fare beyond the capacity of the Indians of the present day. Accordingly, as might naturally be expected,
copper implements and ornaments have been, from time immemorial, very much in
use among all the Indian tribes. But at the period of the discovery of America,
and since that time, the supply of copper for these purposes was obtained almost
entirely from specimens found near the surface of the ground. There is no
evidence of any systematic or extended workings of the mines within a period of
several centuries; but there is abundant evidence that before that time, as is
shown by the age of the trees growing over the old excavations, mining
operations in this region were carried
on upon a very considerable scale.
The miners of the present
day frequently come to old trenches, half filled in and grassed over, and with
immense trees growing in them, at the bottom of which, when they dig them out
anew, they find remains of the ancient works. They come down, when digging in
such places, to great masses of copper blocked up on skids of wood which have
been preserved from decay by lying all the time in water, with marks of fire
upon them, and broken tools lying all around. Trees have been found growing
over ancient works in these mines with five hundred concentric layers of wood
in them, proving that the excavations and the works carried on in them were
finally abandoned at least five hundred years ago."
"Conclusion" "On the whole, there is abundant
evidence in these ancient remains that this continent has been inhabited by the
ancestors of the present Indian races for a very long period. It is, moreover,
generally supposed that in former times the population was far more numerous,
and that the nations composing it were far more advanced in civilization than
those found in possession of the country when the Europeans first visited these
shores."
A2
NDN Legalities
As Columbus was rapidly
depopulating the islands of Haiti and Jamaica, the Catholic Church, looking to
rationalize the slaughter issued the "Requirement" of 1513. This "appeal" was to be read to
any Indigenous populations before any hostilities could commence. (edited)
" ...Wherefore we
require you acknowledge the Church as the ruler of the world. If you do not do
this we shall enter your country and make war against you and subject you to
the yoke of the Church. We shall take
you, your wives, your children and shall make slaves of them, selling and
disposing of them as Their Highnesses shall command; we shall take away your
goods and do you all the mischief and damage we can and we protest that the
deaths and losses which shall accrue from this are your fault!"
Professor Peter deErrico
believes these Papal Bulls form the underlying fabric of modern U.S. law as it
relates to Native Americans. He asserts
that Supreme Court Justice (John) Marshall borrowed from the Papal Bulls the
essential legalisms needed for State power over Indigenous Nations--Johnson Vs
McIntosh. Native Americans have been
denied their rights under Federal Law from 1823 until today--because they were
not originally Christian. Since Johnson
Vs McIntosh has never been overruled, the legal foundations for U.S.
Sovereignty over Indigenous Nations has remained "Christian
Discovery", concealed by the insertion of the word "European" for the word "Christian"
in subsequent history and law books.
The "age of discovery" became the "age of European
expansion". Even Marshall admitted
the doctrine was an "extravagant...pretension", which "may be
opposed to natural right" but "these claims have been established and
maintained...by the sword."
(deErrico)
A3
A Short Biography
of Bartolome’ De Las Casas
Las Casas first trip to the
Americas was in 1502. He was
eighteen. In 1512, he became the first
ordained priest of the “new world”. In
1514 he freed his Native slaves and began vigorously interceding on their
behalf with local authorities. Soon he
was challenging the entire system of encomienda, started by Columbus. Despite his powerful and influential
enemies, in 1520 he was granted a hearing by Charles the First of Spain to
defend his point of view. He was
supported by the public pronouncements of Antonio De Montesinos (the first
Spanish Citizen to denounce the treatment of Native Indigenous Peoples in
America), and the Bishop of Darien, Juan Quevedo.
Charles the First was swayed
by Las Casas argument and agreed that the Indies should not be governed by
force of arms. Enforcing his decree was
another matter. Pope Paul III’s 1537
Papal Bull, Sublimis Deus, proclaimed that American Indians were rational
beings with souls and their lives and property should be protected. In 1542, the Neyes Nuevas (New Laws) forbade
Native slavery and attempted to put forward a plan to squeeze out the
encomienda system within a generation.
Las Casas oral reading of his book, “The Devastation Of the
Indies”, to the Royal Court was influential in getting the Neyes Nuevas. The New Laws started a revolt in the
Americas by angry encomenderos. When
Charles V revoked key statues of the New Laws, Las Casas went on the offensive
and refused absolution to Spaniards who refused to free their slaves or pay
restitution. He issued a “confessor”
manual for Priests that reiterated his refusal for absolution. This created a public outrage. De Las Casas claimed that all the wealth was
ill-gotten and invalidated Spanish claims.
This struck at the very basis of Spain’s legitimacy in the New World and
got Las Casas immediately recalled by the Council Of The Indies. This led to
the 1550 showdown with Sepulveda.ordered by Charles V. Las Casas once again proved his argument but
the Court refused to publicly affirm his position. In 1552, he published
“The Devastation Of The Indies” without prior approval of the
Inquisition. Its publication seriously
undermined the Spanish moral claim to the Americas. Immediately translated into other European languages, it became a
weapon of those other nations against the Spanish Empires’ claims in the
“Indies”. His prestige protected him
from official punishment even though he was accused of Treason on two
continents. He later completed his two largest works; the anthropological
Apologetica Historica, and his three volume, Historia de las Indias. Both works sought to disprove the Spanish
view of themselves as superior the Indigenous Americans. He remained an advocate for Indian Rights
until his death in 1566.
A4
Early
Science And Technology Around The World
Indians, Babylonians, and
Egyptians used Pythagorean triplets to establish right angles in their
construction,
Babylonians developed a
place value system and the Pythagorean Theorem fifteen hundred years before
Pythagorus.
The Mesopotamians kept
extensive tables of squares in 2000 BC.
In China, Li Hui calculated
the value for Pi in 200 AD. Fu His’s
diagrams correspond to Liebnix’s binary mode of arithmetic.
Algebra is an Arabic word
meaning “compulsion”, compelling the unknown, “X”, to a numerical value. They also developed decimal fractions.
The Egyptians were familiar
with Pi and could calculate the volume of a cylinder long before the
Greeks. They also developed the concept
of the lowest common denominator and a fraction table that required 28,000
calculations to compile.
The Hindu Rig-Veda asserted
the law of gravity twenty-four centuries before Isaac Newton. The Gwailor Numerals 0-9 were invented in
India 500 AD. Indians had basic
mathematics, algebra, indices, logarithms, trigonometry, and nascent forms of
calculus centuries before Liebniz.
Indians calculated the Earth’s age as 4.3 billion years in 500 AD, a
number that wasn’t arrived at in the modern world until the twentieth
century. East Indians and Mayans developed
zero and negative numbers a thousand years before Europeans. The Indians understood that the sun was at
the center of the solar system and gravity held the solar system together two
centuries before Pythagorus. Arabic numerals were first developed in India.
Ibn al Shartir (1350 AD) was
responsible for writing down two important theorems discovered by other Muslims
that allowed Copernicus to revolutionize astronomy by repairing the flawed
mathematics of the Ptolemaic systems.
One theorem was devised by Nasir al Din al Tusi and the other by Muayyad
al Din al Urdi. Copernicus avoided
crediting them because Muslims were not popular in 11th Century Europe. The new math of the Copernicus Revolution
began in Islamic, not Europeans minds.
Sumerians used sophisticated
algebraic expressions to solve problems of food distribution and supplies in
1800 BC.
No where is there more phony
information than in the area of technology.
The wheel, the stirrup, moveable type, and metallurgy all came from
lands foreign to Europe. Sumerians
started textile industries working wool into cloth, and flax into linen. They had a modern canal irrigation
system. The first freestanding glass
was produced around 2500 BC in both Mesopotamia and Egypt. The Sumerians began writing around 3500
BC. Their tablets record poetry,
lullabies, and records of property, animals, medicinal plants, astronomical
events, and account ledgers. They
devised a standard of weights for business and ran a huge import/export system
by land and sea. In 300 BC their architecture was both sophisticated and enduring. Some of their structures exist today. The Hittites smelted iron and developed gear
and axle military machines in 1600 BC.
Assyrians built roads and had an effective postal system in 700 BC. Nebuchaneezer, the Babylonian King, built
the Hanging Gardens of Babylon. The
roof had a base of lead covered with brick and asphalt. The garden was watered by screwlike lifts,
which brought up water from the Euphrates 700 years before Archimedes. Floating water mills and turban wheels with
mounted millstones were used throughout Eurasia. Europe didn’t have anything similar until the mid-12th century.
One of the common criticisms
of these types of accounts is that they were discoveries simply related to
necessity, and did not reflect a purposeful attempt to advance civilization
through scientific discovery. Yet while
Europe was in the Dark Ages, the Islamic Middle East had advanced engineering
technologies and encouraged the pure science that was responsible for the development
of mirrors, incremental weights, surveying, hydraulics, military technology and
navigation. Devises for providing hot
and cold running water, dredging, oil lamps, elaborate fountains, suction pipes
and the earliest use of a crank as part of a machine were all credited to the
Banu Musa brothers.
Many of the basic building
blocks of European technology originated in the Middle Eastern River valley
civilizations. Islam's central location
between Europe, Africa, and Asia allowed it to acquire Indian and Chinese
inventions as well as improve on Egyptian/Greek technology.
Much has been made of the
fact that while the Native Americas had a number of advanced civilizations;
Mississippian, Mayan, Olmec, Toltec, Incan and Azteca, none of them developed
the wheel. Of course it is hardly
mentioned that there were no domestic animals capable of pulling such a
vehicle! Yet they were the worlds
greatest crop cultivators and plant breeders. Meso-American agriculture was
used to support huge populations. Between 450-650 AD, Teotihuacan had between
150,000-300,000 citizens and was among a handful of the largest cities in the
world.
The agricultural impact of
the Americas on Europe was enormous and the crops were considered
miraculous. Three fifths of the world's
agricultural crops were first cultivated in the Americas. Europeans, used to famine and hunger, were
overwhelmed by the variety of plants available to them.
Accounts of
Conquistadors in the early 16th century Americas described their amazement at
the variety of types of spun and woven cloth, the indoor plumbing facilities,
sewers, running water, individual housing, huge open markets (offering foods
from a thousand miles distant), clean streets, botanical gardens, and the
preponderance of free time the people seemed to have for family, music,
artistry and craftsmanship, ceremony, dance, and gaming.
Among the Maya, writing and
books complimented their complex calendar system of astronomical events and
sophisticated mathematical computations.
Cortes took Aztec ballplayers
to Europe in 1528. The Toltec-Maya Ball
Court has walls 27 feet high. The
playing field is 181 yards long and 75 yards wide. The acoustics of the stadium are so perfect that one can clearly
hear a voice from one end to the other, almost two football fields away
The vulcanization of rubber
was achieved by 1600, 239 years before Goodyear. In analyzing the raw latex and vine juice used traditionally,
nuclear magnetic resonance spectography revealed unidentified plasticizers had
somehow been eliminated in the process allowing the natural polymers to link, a
process exactly the same as the one utilized today. This allowed rubber with specific elasticities to be created by
the Olmecs, Aztecs, and Mayans. There
was solid rubber, hollow rubber, and rubber bands of all sizes, shapes, widths
and thickness. They also had obsidian
blades, which microscopic examinations reveal to have been the sharpest blades
in the world, sharper than modern surgical steel. Modern surgeons are just now beginning to experiment with
obsidian scalpels. In the year 1 AD, the Roman, Galen, taught 130
complicated and dangerous surgeries to contemporary physicians utilizing
precisely the same techniques used today.
The Incan road system is
12,000 miles long and comparable only to the Romans as a pre-modern
transportation network. The Pueblo road system also covers hundreds of miles,
as straight as an arrow.
The Andes contain
approximately 1.5 million acres of small terraced gardens. Also, Andean farmers
were the first to freeze dry vegetables, freeze drying potatoes. Each June for
at least the last four centuries, farmers in 12 mountain villages in Peru and
Bolivia follow a ritual that Westerners might think odd, if not crazy. Late
each night for about a week, the farmers observe the stars in the Pleiades
constellation, which is low on the horizon to the northeast. If they appear big
and bright, the farmers know to plant their potato crop at the usual time four
months later. But if the stars are dim, the usual planting will be delayed for
several weeks. Now Western researchers have applied the scientific method to
this seeming madness. Poring over reams of satellite data on cloud cover and
water vapor, Professor Benjamin Orlove, an anthropologist at the University of
California at Davis, and colleagues have discovered that these star-gazing
farmers are accurate long-range weather forecasters. High wisps of cirrus
clouds dim the stars in El Nino years, which brings reduced rainfall to that
part of the Andes. In such drought conditions, it makes sense to plant potatoes
as late as possible. Orlove's work, which was reported in January in the
British journal Nature, is just the latest example of Indigenous or traditional
knowledge that has been found to have a sound scientific basis. In agriculture,
nutrition, medicine and other fields, modern research is showing why people
maintain their traditions
At Windover Bog, in Florida,
over 170 individuals were found fifty generations of the same family group.
Glen Doren from Florida State University directed the dig. Dated at 7,210 BP (Before Present), the
Windover people lived in permanent settlements. They had a sophisticated understanding of healing techniques and
they wore finely woven cloth just as we do today! Four kinds of close twining, one kind of open twining, and one
type of plaiting can be seen in the mats, bags, and basketry recovered from the
site. Clothing woven by the inhabitants of Windover Bog on looms included hoods
and burial shrouds, as well as some fitted clothing and many rectangular or
squarish clothing articles. Seven
weaving techniques were discovered, all requiring a loom to accomplish the
weave. Children were buried lovingly
with toys. An atlatl hook was found, as
well as a gourd or seed not found anywhere except in Central or South
America. The elderly were found to be
at least sixty years old and there was significant evidence that they cared for
their sick and infirm in an advanced and caring way.
Medicinal advancements were
common to the Americas. Imagine the reaction of the Aztec’s, already familiar
with the use of antibiotics, watching the Spaniards praying and pouring hot oil
on their wounds!
Indigenous South America
also recognized quinine as a cure for malaria.
15% of the total plant life
on earth exists in the Amazon Basin. 16,000 species have been identified as
being used by the Indigenous Peoples for their healing properties. Stimulants, purgatives, and even monoamine
oxidase inhibitors were known.
Medicines were used as muscle relaxants, anesthetics, and fever
reducers, as well as for mental illness, fungal infections, nervousness,
menstrual aids, and external healing.
Even today’s search for
medicines for AIDS has yielded greater results when searchers consulted
knowledgeable Medicine People first. It
is now acknowledged that the state of Pre-Columbian medicine was significantly
more advanced in the Americans than in Europe at the time and life expectancy
was significantly longer.
European Americans depended so heavily on Native medicinal knowledge and
remedies that when bottled and prepared medicinal products were introduced as
consumer products they invariably had Native names or pictures on their
labels. This continued until the
mid-1800s, assuring consumers that they were indeed purchasing a useful and
effective product.
The Far East far outstripped
the rest of the world in the development of technology. China was a treasure
trove of invention. In addition to
those inventions and technologies previously mentioned, the Chinese first
developed cast iron, porcelain, ship sternpost rudders, canal lock gates, horse
stirrups and harnesses, fishing reels, hot air balloons, the seismograph,
whiskey, gimbals, umbrellas, crank handles, kites, mechanical clocks, sprocket
chains and chain drives, paper money, the iron plow and the seed drill.
In 1040, the first Chinese
formulae for gunpowder were published and used in making incendiary arrows,
bullets, catapult bombs, and hand grenades.
Later, the flame-thrower or fire-spear was developed. In 1288, iron barrels utilizing high nitrate
gunpowder and projectiles were developed.
The Chinese went on to make guns that shot lead balls the size of coins,
led pellets, flames and poison. 36
barrel “cartwheel” guns, mortars and bombs followed soon thereafter. By the mid-1200’s poison bombs, gas, and
fire-oil were created and by 1277, they created land mines.
These devices began to
trickle into Europe by 1300. The
revolutions of Knights, brought about by the European importation of the Chinese
stirrup, were soon being blown to bits by gunpowder and its byproducts.
Metallurgy and metal
manufacturing were a major part of the Chinese military institution. The Sung’s "million man army"
almost literally ate up iron and steel.
William Kelly’s bringing
four Chinese steel experts to Kentucky in 1845 preceded the Bessemer process of
refining steel products. They taught
him the process they had used for 2000 years.
The Hau Nan Tzu, published in 120 BC, described the process of removing
carbon from cast iron by blowing oxygen on it, a technique surprisingly similar
to Bessemer’s “discovery”. The Chinese
also used the Siemens process in 500 AD--it was called the Ch’iwu Huai Wen
process.
As early as the first
century AD, the Chinese constructed suspension bridges, using chains of wrought
iron. It was 1809 before a similar one
was created in the west.
The first completely printed
book was completed in China in 868 AD. The Chinese made large print runs for
ordinary books, even calendars and horoscopes.
Having been writing since 2000 BC, the oldest Chinese paper is from
Shensi Province and was made between 140 and 87 BC. It was created from pounded hemp. The Chinese used paper for clothing, shoes, and toilet paper
(which amazed Europeans). Paper reached
India by 700 AD and Islamic Nations by 800 AD.
The Arabs jealously guarded the secret for a time, selling Europeans
paper at a hefty profit. It was the
Italians who finally brought paper manufacturing to Europe in the 13th Century.
As previously mentioned,
when Guttenberg first set his Bible to print, Chinese libraries already held
editions of books over 550 years old.
Between 1680 and 1730, Inuit
paddling kayaks showed up off the Orkney Islands of northern Scotland, and once
in Aberdeen.
The Chinese were
also responsible for maritime advances, inventing fore and aft rigging, the
lateen sail, the sternpost rudder, and watertight bulkheads. While Columbus was trying to get support for
his adventure, Chen Ho sent to India and East Africa fleets of Chinese vessels
armed with cannons and manned by many thousands of sailors and passengers. Were it not for the Eurocentric nature of
our history, Chen Ho might be regarded as the first and greatest of the maritime
explorers.
The Chinese had
toothpaste at a time when Europeans barely had teeth! Mathematics and astronomical calculations were also known in
China. Liu Hui calculated the value of
Pi in 200 AD. Eclipses were recorded
and dated as far back as 1400-1200 BC.
4th Century Chinese (as well as 13th Century Arabs) recognized the use
of fossils to study history while 17th Century Oxford faculty members taught
that fossils were false clues left by the Devil to deceive man. The K’ao Kung Chi, in 1100 BC, set down
quantitative chemical analysis not more than 5% off from modern day
analysis. Mohist physicists set down
the law of motion in 300 BC, 2000 years before Newton. The Shu-Ching, 2700 BC, stated that matter
was composed of distinct and separate elements 1700 years before
Empedocles. It also hypothesized that
sunbeams were comprised of particles, a hypothesis later put forward by
Einstein and Planc. The creation
stories of Egypt, India and China all began with a “Big Bang”. In 500 BC, the Chinese developed their first
antibiotic--from soybean curd. Chinese
alchemists were empirically familiar with the conservation of mass 1500 years
before Lavoisier. Wei Po Yang’s
Unification Of Three Principles, written around 140 AD, describes an experiment
similar to the cinnabar-mercury-sulfur reaction. But it was the vessel described that was important. It is used for melting and subliming
different metals and is, at once, similar and more complex than Lavoisier’s
pelican.
Advanced
technologies are not the sole property of today’s modern civilization. Even in 3000 BC, a large technologically
advanced civilization existed in India.
Well-organized cities utilized terra cotta ceramics and exhibited a huge
trade industry. Uniform buildings had
hidden drains, toilets and sewers, bathing rooms in each house. Municipal drainage systems featured
earthenware drainpipes joined with asphalt.
A5
More On
Xianity
In a 2002 paper entitled
"As Rabbis Face Facts, Bible Tales Are Wilting", Michael Massing
wrote this: "Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor
did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never
occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David,
far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was
more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide
a rallying point for a fledgling nation.”
Such startling and controversial statements Massing attributes to the
product of findings by archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over
the last twenty five year. The findings
have gained wide acceptance among many non-Orthodox rabbis, yet there has been
no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss them with the laity—until
now.
The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5
million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new Torah and
commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years. Called "Etz
Hayim" ("Tree of Life" in Hebrew), it offers an interpretation
that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology, philology,
anthropology, and the study of ancient cultures. To the editors who worked on
the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts ever to introduce into the religious
mainstream a view of the Bible as a human rather than divine document.
"When I grew up in Brooklyn, congregants were not sophisticated
about anything," said Rabbi Harold Kushner, the author of "When Bad
Things Happen to Good People" and a co-editor of the new book.
"Today, they are very sophisticated and well read about psychology,
literature, and history, but they are locked in a childish version of the
Bible."
"Etz Hayim," compiled by David Lieber of the University of Judaism
in Los Angeles, seeks to change that.
It offers the standard Hebrew text, a parallel English translation
(edited by Chaim Potok, best known as the author of "The Chosen"), a
page-by-page exegesis, periodic commentaries on Jewish practice and, at the
end, forty-one essays by prominent rabbis and scholars on topics ranging from
the Torah scroll and dietary laws to ecology and eschatology.
These essays, perused during uninspired sermons or Torah readings at
Sabbath services, will no doubt surprise many congregants. For instance, an
essay on Ancient Near Eastern Mythology," by Robert Wexler, president of
the University of Judaism in Los Angeles, states that on the basis of modern
scholarship, it seems unlikely that the story of Genesis originated in
Palestine. More likely, Mr. Wexler says, it arose in Mesopotamia, the influence
of which is most apparent in the story of the Flood, which probably grew out of
the periodic overflowing of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The story of Noah,
Mr. Wexler adds, was probably borrowed from the Mesopotamian epic Gilgamesh.
Equally striking for many readers will be the essay "Biblical
Archaeology," by Lee I. Levine, a professor at the Hebrew University in
Jerusalem. "There is no reference in Egyptian sources to Israel's sojourn
in that country," he writes, "and the evidence that does exist is
negligible and indirect." The few indirect pieces of evidence, like the
use of Egyptian names, he adds, "are far from adequate to corroborate the
historicity of the biblical account." Similarly ambiguous, Mr. Levine
writes, is the evidence of the conquest and settlement of Canaan, the ancient
name for the area including Israel. Excavations showing that Jericho was
unwalled and uninhabited, he says, "Clearly seem to contradict the violent
and complete conquest portrayed in the Book of Joshua. "What's more”, he
says, there is an "almost total absence of archaeological evidence"
backing up the Bible's grand descriptions of the Jerusalem of David and
Solomon.
The notion that the Bible is not
literally true "is more or less settled and understood among most
Conservative rabbis," observed David Wolpe, a rabbi at Sinai Temple in Los
Angeles and a contributor to "Etz Hayim." However, some congregants,
he said, “may not like the stark airing of it.” Last Passover, in a sermon to
2,200 congregants at his synagogue, Rabbi Wolpe frankly said that
"virtually every modern archaeologist" agrees "that the way the
Bible describes the Exodus is not the way that it happened, if it happened at
all." The rabbi offered what he called a "litany of disillusion"
about the narrative, including contradictions, improbabilities, chronological
lapses, and the absence of corroborating evidence. In fact, he said, archaeologists
digging in the Sinai have "found no trace of the tribes of Israel—not one
shard of pottery."
Before the introduction of "Etz Hayim," the Conservative
movement relied on the Torah commentary of Joseph Hertz, the chief rabbi of the
British Commonwealth. By 1936, when it was issued, the Hebrew Bible had come
under intense scrutiny from scholars like Julius Wellhausen of Germany, who
raised many questions about the text's authorship and accuracy. Hertz, working
in an era of rampant anti-Semitism and of Christian efforts to demonstrate the
inferiority of the "Old" Testament to the "New," dismissed
all doubts about the integrity of the text.
Maintaining that no people would have invented for themselves so
"disgraceful" a past as that of being slaves in a foreign land, he
wrote, "of all Oriental chronicles, it is only the Biblical annals that
deserve the name of history."
The Hertz approach had little competition until 1981, when the Union of
American Hebrew Congregations, the official arm of Reform Judaism, published
its own Torah commentary. Edited by Rabbi Gunther Plaut, it took note of the
growing body of archaeological and textual evidence that called the accuracy of
the biblical account into question. The "tales" of Genesis, it flatly
stated, were a mix of "myth, legend, distant memory and search for
origins, bound together by the strands of a central theological concept."
However, Exodus, it insisted, belonged in “the realm of history.” While there
are scholars who consider the Exodus story to be "folk tales," the
commentary observed, "this is a minority view." Twenty years later, the weight of scholarly
evidence questioning the Exodus narrative had become so great that the minority
view has become the majority one.
Not among Orthodox Jews, however. They continue to regard the Torah as
the divine and immutable word of God. Their most widely used Torah commentary,
known as the Stone Edition (1993), declares in its introduction "that
every letter and word of the Torah was given to Moses by God."
Lawrence Schiffman, a professor at New York University and an Orthodox
Jew, said that most of the questions about the "Etz Hayim" Bible's
accuracy had been tucked away discreetly in the back. "The average
synagogue-goer is never going to look there," he said. Since the fall,
more than 100,000 copies have been sold. Eventually, it is expected to become
the standard Bible in the nation's 760 Conservative synagogues."
We
think that some of this should have been apparent from the beginning. As far as the Exodus goes, what were all
those thousands of former Hebrew slaves doing for seventy years in an
wilderness of land that they probably could have walked end to end in a few
weeks? Where did they wander all that
time? We’re they crawling back and
forth from water to water, revisiting the same locations over and over? Or perhaps they just walked in circles for
three generations. Check out the nomadic
movements of Plains Tribes, or perhaps the Nez Perce annual trek to buffalo
country, and compare the size of the areas involved. This will give you an idea of the ridiculous nature of the story.
Just as devout Hebrews are
unlikely to easily give up on 2000 years of deep-seated beliefs, so the New
Testament community is unwilling to take the discoveries and opinions of it's
biblical scholars to heart.
We define a biblical scholar as someone who is knowledgeable in the
original languages of the region in which Jesus was born, lived, and
perished. These would include the
languages of Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek.
There should also exist a general knowledge of Latin and some ability to
work in Coptic, Syriac, Ethiopic, Arabic, Armenian, Slavic, and Gothic. The
difficulties inherent in the translation of New Testament Greek make it as much
art as science. There are the single Greek words with multiple meanings
understood only in the context they are spoken. This is very similar to Indigenous language where there are immense
difficulties in English translation because the word meaning changes with an
environment or context, so one word may have many meanings. (This is why our code-talkers were so
effective in World Wars One and Two.)
Then there are also the "troublesome terms"—those that are
difficult to immediately translate, especially when they occur together or in
groups. There are also the problems of
grammar, dated cultural or social meaning, and ambiguity. One begins to see that to possess any
understanding of the texts, particularly Greek, which comprise the New
Testament, one must have a thorough scholarship in the field of language.
Scholars of this subject should also have adequate methodological
skills, along with a willingness to wade through the documents, commentaries,
and books that hold the keys to understanding this controversial and
contentious subject.
Additionally they should be
acquainted with the ancient texts and archaeological data, as well as
possessing a working knowledge of the history, culture, and social movements of
the time. This kind of research takes not only in-depth expertise but students
willing to cross disciplines to communicate with others.
We have respect for the
followers of Jesus. We have neither respect, nor faith in, the constituents of
the Institution of Christianity or those who base their faith in Divine
Scripture. It is our contention that
the scripture is neither divine, nor divinely inspired, but is a contrived and
purposeful creation of men's minds and talents. As a literary document, it ranks with the best, though few
critics have examined it in this light.
As a valid historical document, it is nearly useless.
We do not dispute that the
reality of Joshua, son of Joseph, and his Vision, may be much more profound and
useful to the spiritual mind than the arbitrary, distorted, fanciful, and
designed creations of those who have ignored the message to deify the
messenger. Indeed, his idolization is
the reason that we believe Christianity has been a greater source of evil and
violence in the world than peace and good.
The purposeful idolization and bastardization of his mission and his
message have, very simply, offended God.
The Church, and all its
descendant forms, has prophesized their own purposes in the creation of an
Adversary. To have an Adversary lends
any belief or tenet a validity it did not previously possess. However,
Christianity has always been its own Adversary, even as it has usually been
adversarial to the Indigenous Peoples of the world and the Living Earth.
If one pursues an understanding of the mysterious
teachings of that Great Seer, one is immediately transported beyond the
boundaries of the modern and civilized world, and is returned to the mystical
and mysterious teachings of the Tribes of the Earth, the real human
beings. The quest of Christianity has
been to remove that mystery, to render the spiritual world into a mundane and
individualistic dogma that refuses to accept the encircling nature of a true
and binding faith, to be shared and exalted by every essential atom of
Creation.
Certainly there are Christians who have discovered the
essentiality of his message, but it is hidden in a morass of myth, conjecture,
misdirection, and the outright corruption of oral history. Even the Early Third Century Church
Designates recognized the lack of cohesiveness and continuity in the old scraps
of historical record that had survived the centuries and dutifully worked to
shore it up the best they could.
Ultimately the Church discouraged, outside its own formal structure, any
factual inquiry into the almost non-existent record of that time. What is
remembered of the true story and message of Jesus was tossed out, and replaced
with a fanciful new tale intended to support the deification of the storyteller
and fulfill the visions of others. This
depiction of Jesus as divine personality, rather than divine human conduit was,
and is, a great loss to the spiritual development of humanity. What is particularly sad about this is that
none of the peripheral characters that have defined the "new" message
and story (I am speaking primarily of Paul and the early and middle millennium
Roman Catholic Fathers) had even an inkling of the true visionary message and
power of their Master. Overcome with their own ideals and Visions they have,
like overzealous editors, dominated and overwhelmed the testament of a true
visionary with their own prejudices, platitudes, plagiarisms, and purposes.
Having never witnessed the message firsthand, they preferred to create a Vision
beyond man. With virtually no biography
and little record of the messenger's exact oral testimony, they decided to work
around history and created a fictitious narrative. It began with a Virgin conception, muddled through a conflicted
but compelling soap opera of commitment, mysterious teachings, developing
relationships, politics, controversy, betrayal, and execution, to finally
culminate in the ultimate fantasy of a mortal species—a return from the
grave.
As we previously stated, the institutional Christian
story, from the Immaculate Conception to the Risen Savior, is a purposefully
constructed fairy tale, with components capable of enticing any human being
with its wonderful and miraculous, though disconnected and contradictory,
narrative.
Its longevity has
given it an almost mythical quality that goes far beyond the story. Its
validity has become unquestionable, and its tenets sacrosanct. But what has
come to represent the Institution of Christianity is more the product of human
frailty, gullibility, and need for absolution than it is a proof of
divinity.
Until recently, American Indians have been recalcitrant
in accepting many of the European conqueror’s ways except for this compelling
narrative of names, numbers, symbols, and miracles. In many ways, the story
closely resembles some of our Traditional beliefs. It was easy to accept.
Yet, often as not, it has given us none of the comfort or life
affirmation of our former beliefs, and has become a divisive force within some of
our Nations. It hardly encourages
respect for the mysterious nature of true spirit, preferring that spirit be
quantified by scripture. It also
encourages a lack of respect and relationship for the natural world by raising
Man to a favored prominence above his environment in the eyes of the
Creator. It is purely a Patriarchal
vision, as opposed to the Traditional Matriarchal Indigenous view. In its institutional arrogance, it seeks to
create an exclusive faith, which demands a fear of judgment and mortality, and
a distrust of anyone who peers too intently at its beginnings.
Many of our Nations have our own ceremonies of sacrifice
and renewal, some remarkably similar to the final suffering of the Nazarene.
But we are not forced by a vengeful populace or a contentious politician to
endure physical sacrifice for the renewal of the world and our peoples—as in
the Sun Dance. We choose it willingly,
and are grateful to be able to offer ourselves in that way. Those who condemn us say that when we do it,
it is an example of our barbaric and savage natures. Yet, when a Hebrew tribesman raised to God status is forced to
endure it, his sacrifice becomes a compelling necessity for our purification
and an example of the ultimate proof of his Divinity.
The Myth Of Ages is not composed of the Rock we all were
led to believe, but is instead an example of man’s vanity and
corruptibility. There will be those
who accuse us of every sacrilege, of heretical and devious intent, perhaps even
satanic influence. That is what was
said of our honorable and innocent ancestors.
To be compared to them, in any way, would be an honor.
Most Christians have established lines
of defense against any criticism of the scriptures. In the discussion of a literal point, they may change to a
general, or non-literal and symbolic view.
If confronted with the latter, they may reverse to the former. They may jump sources and quote different or
unrelated passages to reinforce their beliefs, or become mystical and draw away
from the texts entirely into personal revelations. In the end though, if one questions too closely the divinity and
accuracy of the biblical record, they resort to their final line of
defense—faith in the Holy Spirit for enlightenment. Of course the Holy Spirit never contradicts what they themselves
have decided to believe, and always supports their point of view. Since the Holy Spirit is a metaphysical
reality, it provides an unassailable
vantage from which its undeniable veracity validates any understanding or
interpretation they may have regarding the scriptures divinity. Their personal contact and relationship
with God and Christ assures them of the truth, end of discussion.
If one continues the argument, pointing out the possibility that they
would not accept this method of debate in any other discussion of relevant
events or activities, they turn away.
It is this unwillingness to critically examine the history and oral
tradition of the time, especially in the absence of significant primary
sources, which causes critical biblical scholarship to remain a fringe element
of the religion. The compilation of
sources, which did not occur until many years after the death of Jesus and the
direct descendants who knew him, creates an unacceptable gap in the typical
evolution of oral tradition. It brings
into question the validity and trustworthy nature of the subsequently written
historical records. If this history had
evolved solely out of Hebrew culture, despite its many factions and contending
groups, as a product of Hebrew and Aramaic, we might have more faith in the
reliability of its sources. But with
many of the first surviving written texts composed in Hebrew and Greek, we immediately
wonder how much of the oral tradition could have survived intact. In addition, the philosophical, theological,
and institutional instability of those times engendered new thought among
Greeks, Romans, and Hebrews living in close proximity to one another. This would have contributed to the accounts
being varied and contradictory.
We
know that the earthly Jesus did not attract the widespread attention and great
following that would have made him more than a local phenomenon. His career did not attract the attention of
scholars out his immediate area until Paul began his crusade to validate his
personal vision. Even in the gospels,
Jesus’ own family reportedly expressed concerns and doubt over his public
message. He addressed this topic
specifically himself. We may surmise by
this that the general population of that section of the world was not overly
impressed with what they heard about him second hand. Certainly the power of his personality and the distinct and
mystical nature of his message wrought significant effect on those who heard
him speak or came to be in his presence.
But the absence of written accounts during his ministry indicates that
he was more a man of the geography and culture of Judea, and did not receive
widespread attention or acclaim, except from those touched by his personality
and an intimate contact with his message.
It is only in the 1960's and 70's that the stories of Jesus going to
other lands, making intercontinental pilgrimages, and the like began to
circulate. There is no empirical or
historical evidence, backed up by even fragmentary scrolls or sources that
validate these supposed "historical" additions to the gospel
story. The fact that his teachings and
the events of his life were carried orally, and did not attract much Greek or
Roman comment (until long after his death), demands that we view his ministry
as a localized event. Therefore, he
must have been relatively fundamental and devout in an institutionally Judaic
manner in his personal life. The
existing record shows (after his death, and before Paul first spoke of about
his Vision of Divine Portent), that the direct line of Jesus’ students
continued to practice fundamental Judaism mixed with some of their master’s
"new ideas". Many Hebrews were
dissatisfied and disenchanted with the stranglehold of institutional Judaism
and the priestly hierarchy Jesus preached against, so it is understandable that
the followers of James and Peter were considered revolutionary and even
subversive to middle-class Hebrews under a dangerous Roman occupation.
Although some twenty plus gospels have survived, either in whole or in
part, from the first three centuries of that era, only four were eventually
included in the New Testament. The earliest tiny scraps of papyrus fragments
are from a copy of the Gospel of John and the Egerton Gospel and can be dated
no earlier than about one hundred years after Jesus' death. The earliest
substantial physical evidence for the gospels comes from the end of the second
century C.E., about 170 years after Jesus' demise. In the absence of hard
information, scholars theorize that the New Testament gospels were composed
during the last quarter of the first century by third-generation authors on the
basis of folk memories preserved in stories that had circulated by word of
mouth (and perhaps a few tattered lists of remembered sayings) for decades. The
oral stories the four evangelists recorded had been shaped, reshaped,
augmented, and edited by numerous storytellers for a half-century or more
before achieving their final written forms. Scholars also believe that written
collections of sayings ascribed to Jesus had appeared perhaps as early as two
decades after his execution. One such mysterious and controversial collection,
known as the Sayings Gospel Q, may have been used to fill out, within the
revised gospels of Matthew and Luke, what could not be copied and corrected
from the earlier manuscript of Mark. In
revising Mark, and with very little new or more reliable information to assist
them, the authors of Matthew and Luke borrowed extensively from oral sayings,
purportedly taken from Q. However, no fragment of Q has yet been
discovered. Its existence can only be
supposed. The discovery of the Gospel
of Thomas, as well as other documents, offers more indication that sayings
records were compiled but the amount of corroborating information represents
only a small piece of the story as suggested by the four gospels. The written
synoptic gospels and other accounts and letters were then copied and recopied,
modified, corrected, and augmented for the next century or more before reaching
the physical state in which the scholars of the third century found them.
The cornerstones of the
Roman Catholic Faith were constructed from Paul’s writings and subsequent
additions made by the Church scholars of the first ten centuries. Most of the Greeks and Romans of the period
got their personal Christian education, not from the historical Jesus of the
period, but in the divine and mystical Vision of Divine Portent, introduced by
Paul. Their interest was in bringing
Christianity into mainstream Greco- Roman culture. To make it acceptable to Gentiles, they needed to vilify Jesus'
fundamentally Hebrew supporters in order to shape the message into a completely
different form from Judaism. Some of
the first writings, composed generations after his death, were from non-Hebrew
sources, intent on exonerating the Roman Empire for his execution.
Despite Nero's vendetta
against them, Roman Christians were absolutely convinced their
"picture" of Jesus was accurate, and would survive the political
battles of the day. But they had little
interest in the historical Jesus because it caused them to brush too closely
against the sides of Judaism, and Hebrew culture.
As the centuries passed, and with so little historical information to
work with, biblical Scholars recognized that even the four canonical gospels
contained significantly contradictory material. So they set about homogenizing it in a way that would present as
much a cohesive set of documents as could be achieved under the
circumstances. Since the story had
become much larger than the historical facts at its center, those facts were
diminished to the point where they took on an almost poetic nature. They became
child-like in their simplicity and rather than causing more critical
controversy, had the opposite effect, simplifying the story to mythical
proportions—giving it the spice of purity and innocence, magnifying the quality
and effect of its profound imagery and prose. Over the next centuries, the
Church had the minds, the methods, and the time to refine the story (and expand
it), into the magnificent Technicolor epic we have today.
The world thought it knew for centuries, without a qualifying doubt,
that the earth was the center of the universe.
The truth of that myth was resisted until it could no longer be
denied. But religion is not science,
and the myths of Christianity will undoubted prevail far into the future. Even with the discovery of new documents,
the scholars placed in charge of deciphering and translating the ancient texts
found at Qumram and Nag Hammadi had still not released their findings, even
after almost fifty years. The reasons
are not because they have not made significant progress in their endeavors but
because they are under great pressure not to rock the institutional Christian
boat. Since their livelihoods often
spring from the support of those same institutions, they are reluctant to put
their careers on the line and offer controversial evidence that may expose the
myths or enlighten the search for truth.
The emotional turmoil and crisis inherent in the search for the message
of Jesus, and the mysteries inherent in that quest are simply too great for the
average Christian to endure. Therefore, the arguments will continue. Scholarship will be condemned as lacking the
appropriate “Holy Spirit” to accurately decipher divinely inspired scriptures,
and the search for the historical Jesus and his message will be described as
unnecessary and irrelevant.
Modern Christians do not use the word heretic much today to
describe those of us who challenge their most cherished traditions, but in
their hearts and minds, confronted with the weaknesses of their dogma, they think
it.
Indigenous People's oral
traditions, unperverted by outside influences and constant over generations,
seemed to remain united in the common purpose of survival without developing
overly complicated theological or political tribal philosophies. Though our histories may contain elements of
conflict, forced migration, change of sustaining resources, and even violent
upheaval due to natural or outside forces--nevertheless the foundations and
historical context of our basic beliefs, traditions, ethics, and social
structures underwent little alteration for centuries. There is ample evidence to indicate that this is an accurate
description of the rule, rather than the exception, for Indigenous Peoples
around the globe.
The development of the Pharisee and Sadducee as intellectual classes,
and the formalization of Rabbinical posts, fragmented the
elder--provider--student--child balance that made up the family structure of
Hebrew tribal/familial society. The
evolution of stagnant and structured patriarchal households, dependent on trade
and commerce, resulted in an influx of foreign ideas and language that began,
insidiously, to affect Hebrew oral traditions.
A rapidly changing world-view, along with an expectation of Messianic
occurrences, began to divide the People.
This resulted in theological rifts that manifested in the Teacher of
Righteousness and his followers, the community at Qumran, the Essenes, the
Zealots, the tragedy at Masada, crucifiction of political prisoners, and the
final Roman solution--destruction of the Temple.
Whether or not the Tribes were formerly nomadic or simply evolved in
Palestine, and whether or not there ever existed a sense of tribal or familial
unity is subject to debate.
Nevertheless, one sees clearly in the confusion, conflicts,
contradictions and fragmentation inherent in the Gospel accounts that oral
tradition had broken down in the traditional sense. Instead of representing the People's record, these
"stories" had clearly become a tool for expressing a pointed and specific
perception of events with little of the historical "furniture" in
place. Rather than representing the
united view of common record and purpose of a People, as true oral heritage
invariably does, the Gospels put forward a narrow, self-supporting narrative of
singular speeches or events without real regard for oratorical precision or
chronological order. Despite the fact
that there must be some truth to at least a fraction of the commentary and
action described in those testaments, the general story remains unbelievable in
the basic context of tribal social life.
Examining the story of Jesus' birth, even in the context of a cold and
disinterested ancient Palestine, it is hard to accept that any non-local
travelers through the village of Bethlehem would not be instantly noticed and
immediately become a topic of gossip, especially if the woman were as pregnant
as Mary obviously was. Even if they
entered the village late at night, the night watch or village dogs would
observe the commotion of their movement.
Hospitality is common among even formerly tribal peoples. Are we to believe there was no hospitality
to be found there, that simply no one could be found that would give up their
room or bed?
For arguments' sake, we will assume that the Hebrew people had no dogs,
did not have anyone on watch, lived entirely isolated from one another, went to
bed early, showed absolutely no interest in strangers, and were cold-hearted to
the core.
Now there was a magnificent star said to be shining like a beacon from
the heavens. The Hebrews, having once
(we are told) been a nomadic desert people, certainly looked skyward. The entire city, devoid of neon billboards
and electric street lights, would have noticed any brilliant star, light in the
sky, or any other unusual atmospheric event, and would undoubtedly have been
engaged in major discussions on its significance. Similarly, the arrival of the three "foreigners",
Kings, or Wise Men would have engendered great excitement and discussion in at
least a small portion the general populace. If this had happened in the
Americas, Natives would have been rushing in to see the Wise Men and there
would have been great feasts. The guys
probably wouldn't have gone home for at least a year!
Again, for argument's sake, we will assume that Hebrews never looked at
the sky, or that giant stars or comets were a familiar sight in Palestine, and
that the Wise Men crept in secretly, going undiscovered, or at least generating
very little interest among the locals.
Next, among tribal peoples (and women in general), the presence of a new
baby would spark the interest of every woman in the camp and they would be
rushing to visit and meet the new mother.
More important, if anyone had mentioned the subject of virgin birth in
Indigenous America, the news would undoubtedly travel far and wide on the
moccasin telegraph, especially if there was Divine Conception involved. Though some might offer a skeptical comment,
the mother's word would be accepted fairly universally and it would be a given
that that child would be observed, cared for, prepared, protected, taught and
coddled for the rest of its natural life by the entire known world! Within a month, the birth would be common knowledge
among all the Tribes of the continent, and even enemies would give the child
protection and respect. Great and
wonderful things would be expected.
Here again we must needs backtrack and suppose that the Hebrew women
cared little about new birth, or that the family was left virtually to
themselves, and that either the people were too jaded to be affected by stories
of divine birth or that the nature of Mary's conception was not mentioned. Either she was Joseph's wife or she
wasn't. If she wasn't, it was
outrageously out of character for a single Hebrew woman to be traveling
unchaparoned in the company of a man not her husband. If Joseph was, in fact, her husband, the idea of her being a
virgin is farfetched indeed Remember
too, that Jesus' Hebrew name was Joshua ben Joseph. Joshua, son of Joseph.
So, at least in name, everyone thought Joesph was Jesus' father.
So let's assume for convenience that it was never mentioned to the
Bethlehem populace that Mary was a virgin and the birth Divine. The three Kings
were just on holiday and the bright star was just God playing around in the
heavens. Nevertheless, eventually the family returned to their home, Jerusalem,
to be surrounded by their own People eager to hear the tale of their travels,
and all the details of the birth, as is usual among even formerly Tribal
Peoples. There is no mention of any
Divine order or exhortation to keep the circumstances and facts of the birth
secret, so one would assume that these details would now be revealed, at least
to relatives and intimate family members.
Again, the facts surrounding her marriage and virginity remain very
convoluted. If she was not married, and
a virgin, to be traveling unchaperoned with Joseph, even if betrothed, would be
incomprehensible. Yet if she were
married, and still a virgin, that might be even more incomprehensible. If we are to assume that she spoke of her
immaculate conception, then it's apparent that everyone disbelieved her
assertion of divinity for there appears to have been no special training or
treatment for this divine child. And
everyone called him Joseph's, not God's, son.
On the other hand, if she didn't tell anyone but her immediate family,
it seems logical that at least they might have expected the public ministry of
Jesus, and it seems certain that his mother, father, and siblings would have
been aware of his divine mission. But
they seemed as surprised by his miracles, and outraged by his ministry, as many
others were. Only if she had never mentioned the Divine Conception to anyone
would this be believable. Finally, at least one of the gospels speaks plainly
of the disbelief of his mother and family.
His mother was unconvinced! How
could this be? After all, she knew he
was a Sacred Person. Had she forgotten
who his father was? This, in concert
with the story of the Nativity, rings patently false and casts suspicion on
both accounts. Mary would surely have
not denied her son any attributes or abilities knowing full well the origin of
his birth. Neither would any member of
his direct family, no matter how skeptical they might be--doubt his mission.
If only some of the unusual
behaviors we attributed to the local Hebrew People of the area existed, and
they behaved as even formerly tribal people are wont to do, then the whole
countryside would have known of the Sacred Child become a Man. His ministry would have surprised no one and
few would have denied the source of his Power.
They might have been surprised at his message, but not the manner in
which it was conveyed. The concept of
Divine elements fathering human children was commonplace in the tradition of
the area. Indeed, the unusual would have been expected.
If we go the other way and
assume that Mary and Joseph told no one, then we might begin to understand the
context into which the story eventually emerges. However, given human nature, especially tribal social nature, we
think this beyond the pale of acceptable probability.
What can be deduced then from these Gospel facts? Either the account of the family's reaction
was totally and tacitly untrue, or the story of Nativity and the Virgin Birth
is itself untrue. There is more tribal
social evidence to support the latter.
The mere fact that they both exist in texts derived from descendant oral
tradition lends them a dual credibility and discreditation. The fact that both accounts have been
preserved, not only by the early Church but throughout Gospel history, points to
a painfully obvious conclusion that oral tradition as it typically exists among
Indigenous societies (a rigorous and fastidious preservation of rote memory
recitation of formalized socio/historical data), no longer existed. If this is true, little of that which was
recorded, generations after the fact and often third or fourth hand, can be
expected to preserve the manner, presentation, and body of the narrative story
accepted by millions of twenty-first century human beings as Divine Word.
Tribal
social dynamics, relationships, and action, as they pertain to the preservation
and accuracy of oral history and tradition, is one of the least studied and
understood mechanisms of recorded world history. Western Roman-descendant
historians have always relegated oral tradition to a backseat (or trunk)
position in relation to written accounts.
Here is a perfect example of how written accounts, recorded from a
corrupt and unsubstantiated oral history, have altered, and even dictated, the
events of the future for centuries upon centuries. It is a testament to how far human beings can go (when they move
away from Indigenous social structures) toward trying to preserve (for all
time), a Word or Belief that—even in its false, premeditated and perverted
message—bestows upon them a fragile and uncomfortable immortality.
If we throw out all the scholarship regarding the translations, and look
just at the gospels themselves, it becomes painfully obvious that these events
have been separated and isolated from the realities of social and cultural
life. They are events captured in a
bubble. Though they describe the
interaction of peoples, actually very little of the natural actions and
reactions of tribal, or formerly tribal, peoples can be found in the
stories. Today, our reactions to such
ancient stories are to artificially create the life around them, rather than to
see them emerge from the natural culture of the times. We draw the nativity as
we imagine it to be, color the portrait of Jesus with Anglo features, and make
the pictures fit the story. Those who
know the real archeological and cultural reality of the times can see the
problems. The behavior of human beings
over the centuries is constant. People
react no differently to similar events now, than they did two thousand years
ago. People gossip, people talk, people
love new babies, people are intrigued by sacred events, people notice unusual
atmospheric or geological happenings, people notice strangers in small or
ethnic communities—and though the stories may have small differences, they
remain intact and follow human nature consistently. When we look at these events in this light, many of the
circumstances and actions of the gospel events simply do not ring true. But many of those gospel stories are similar to myths
and legends that predate Jesus.
Many of our friends are the
descendants of generations of Christians, or the students of generations of
Christians. No matter how far the
religion may have progressed since the Dark Ages, the concepts of sin and atonement,
of Armageddon and judgment, have done their damage. The fear of death, and of consequences, has caused more evil in
the world than a dark Adversary ever dreamed of. Religious fanaticism, particularly the kind that has come from
the three main religions descended from the desert tribes of Abraham, have
condemned millions of innocents to a violent environment, full of hatred and
the need for revenge. That they should
feel the necessity of a savior, or prophet, to deliver them from this hellish
existence is understandable. And for
many Indigenous Peoples, the symbol of a man offering the sacrifice of his own
flesh is a familiar and comforting tradition.
Even those enlightened Christians, who study Greek translations and
comprehend the knowable truth about the mission of Jesus, are caught in the
natural human desire for mysticism and fall back on the contention that one
must have "the holy spirit" to have any understanding of the truth
regarding these issues. They bristle at
the word scholar, or scholarly, and quickly point out that it was the Roman
Catholic scholars, or English Scholars that put together the tarnished but
still used collections of translated scripture.
But we do not live in the past, and though science in
every discipline certainly pretends a greater understanding than it actually
possesses, nevertheless the discoveries in this century can, and do, shed new
light on the recorded texts of Jesus' time.
No longer is it necessary to rely solely on the sixteen centuries of
previous translations and commentaries.
Scholars today, prepared with the linguistic, historical, and
archaeological tools to examine the evidence of these newly discovered scrolls,
can gain a new and clearer understanding of the context and culture in which
the original texts might have been composed.
More important than what they find, may be the understanding of what
cannot be found. Certain historical
information may be determined to have been permanently lost to us. In addition, that information was no more available
to the “scholars” of the third century than it is to those of the
twenty-first. In that way, we begin to
understand that someone filled in the gaps!
Indeed, the texts found at Nag Hammadi and Qumran are the closest thing
to primary documents that exist. And by
comparing the texts of the scrolls with the descendant literature we are often
able to determine where it was added to, altered, or changed, and for what
purpose.
Obviously many of the changes, deletions, alterations, and rewrites were
necessary to cover up the fact that not much specific knowledge was actually
known about the historical Jesus or his message, three hundred years after his
death. Oral tradition within the disintegrated
Tribes of Judea no longer had the discipline to maintain memorization and oral
recitation necessary to preserve the exact and unaltered word of this
Messenger. There were no printing
presses and each book or document usually existed as one copy. Only very
occasionally was a scribe commissioned to make multiple copies. Much of what was created was written in
personal letters. None of the oral
stories, or sayings, was written down for at least a generation after Jesus'
death, and certainly, they were not as accurate or complete as when they had
first been related.
The history of the method of recording
writings in the west goes like this.
Until 300 AD everything was created on scrolls of parchment and other
materials. In 300, the first bound codi
began to replace the scroll. Until 600
AD, it was common practice to run all the words together without spacing,
punctuation, or paragraphs. After 600,
the words began to be separated from one another. About 700 AD, the AD dates began to be added to manuscripts and
writings. Around 800 AD the texts
received punctuation and paragraph separation begun. Uniform scripts also
became common.
Here is an easy way to
understand what the original compilers of the Bible (and their church
descendants) had to work with.
Instead of the public addresses and actions of one man,
lets take the far reaching and world shattering events of World War Two. Let us imagine for a moment, that a similar
world exists as that of the Palestine of Jesus time. World War II has just ended.
There is no radio, no telegraph, no telephones, no TV. There are no printing presses, newspapers,
magazines, books, or other print media.
Few people can read, and even fewer write. News is carried by word of mouth, on foot. Fathers tell sons their stories. A few
letters are written. Sons tell their
sons, and gradually a few begin to record some of the stories they are told,
but only a few copies exist. The stories
continue generation to generation, losing parts, becoming simpler and simpler.
Only the most expressive and captivating comments survive. Copies of what few written records exist are
now copied again, with no one observing whether the copies have been faithfully
rendered. Many are probably lost, as
there is no library or central point for their collection. This gradual loss of
information continues for two hundred years, until finally, a group who makes
the study of World War Two their primary goal, begins to compile a list of the
few remaining scraps of sayings, letters, and documents. Of course this group
wishes, first and foremost, to determine which information supports their
particular view of the War and the events which immediately followed
after. They decide that many of the
documents are incomplete, or written by fools, or incorrectly copied, or are
obvious forgeries or the fanciful creations of demented minds. They studiously retranslate and compile the
remaining documents into one volume.
The ones considered invalid or not up to the standards they agree upon,
are simply left out. Years pass. Certain groups voice their objections to the
compilation, citing the obvious bias of the compiling organization,
specifically condemning their decisions not to include some, or all, the
documents available at the time. The
compiling group condemns those criticizing their final decisions as heretics,
obviously bent on destroying the historical credibility and significance of
their mission. They declare their
volume to be divinely inspired, and any other to be adversarial to the nature
of their mission. Many centuries pass
with more translations, editions, and additional commentary added to the
original. Almost all the scraps of
original documents are now lost, even the originals of the first compilations
created in the third century following the events. The divinity of the compilation or scriptures becomes
unquestionable. For a time, torture and
death are a possible consequence to anyone who questions too closely the
origins of the material or the nature of the accepted message. The original group has institutionalized
itself. Gradually, groups breakaway and
these groups form other groups--all using basically the same compilation to
study—but finding different meanings and viewpoint within them.
Given these conditions, sixteen centuries later, what could we know to
be certain and indisputable fact, regarding World War Two? Even if we were to go back in time to the
first writings we would find that a significant number of generations had
passed with only a smattering of letters and sayings. Mostly, we would have only the most basic and stripped down
stories of generations past. How
accurate an overview might we have of the conflict? It is easy to see that what we know of the times, the message,
and the mission of the man named Jesus, is more what we have been told by
others, who know no more today (and probably less) than was known even forty
years after his death, than is indisputably fact. Rather than accept nineteen centuries of distorted and muddied
history, why not freshly re-examine what remains of the scraps originally used,
and the newly discovered ones, to renew our search for the historical Jesus and
our understanding of his message? My
friends would answer that there is no reason to renew the search for Jesus or
his message. God has provided a
divinely inspired document that accomplishes that very purpose. The Bible.
Obviously, our World War Two analogy was not a very
good one. Jesus was one individual
personality, living in a small geographical area. In addition, he had two committed groups of followers after his
death. He had his brother, and the
fundamental Hebrew following, who had known him in life, and described his
ascendancy into heaven in terms of validating his message and teachings. But this group was virtually destroyed
within thirty-five years of Jesus death, along with the Roman destruction of
the Temple. He also had those followers
who accepted the Vision of Paul, which dealt very little with his historical
life and message and presented a Hellenistic and Zoroastrian view of the world
and its spiritual forces. It offered a
new message, to all who would accept it, and made its own new declarations,
promises, and predictions, that would endure two millennia. But we still would have the problems of a
distinct lack of methods to preserve the oral tradition that described the
specific actions, exhortations, and message of Jesus to subsequent
generations. Most of what has survived
comes, not from those who knew him—the followers of James and Peter, nor from
the few letters of Paul—but from a purposely-contrived compilation and
elaboration, created almost two centuries later. Was it based on the factual
presentation of the life and message of Jesus?
Not a chance. Recent discoveries
of Thomas and other sayings gospels may be our best bet to getting close to his
word.
Regarding the Bible, we have trouble seeing, with the
convoluted and questionable history of this document, how anyone could consider
it divinely inspired. If not for the
self-imposed ignorance of the Christian communities, we would expect a grand
rush to re-evaluate scriptural validity, and a joyous acceptance of a chance
for a new search, and a new interpretation of the message of Jesus.
It is the discovery of truth that should cause one to have the Holy
Spirit. To be filled with the
"spirit" before one has even begun the study seems a bit like putting
the cart before the horse. One should
not have to believe to begin the search.
Of course the truth is that every Christian accepts what they were
taught about the scripture's being divinely inspired. Even the most avant garde Christian accepts this as a fundamental
precept of Christianity. This
conveniently precludes any need to search for the historical Jesus, or any need
to look in a new place for the message Jesus had to offer the People of his
time. That work, having already been
done by others, allows for a lifetime of study, reading and rereading the same
previously accepted and formulated dogmas. It is an easy and convenient
religion. One only has to read a
book. It's all there, everything you
need to know about life, love, the Creator, nature, death, religion. Perfect
for the modern world of fast life and artificially constructed systems of
survival. One needs no time consuming
years of preparation and experience to understand the nature of all
things. Simply read the book, and you
have an immediate spiritual understanding.
Of course, if you are mystically, academically, abstractly, or
intellectually inclined—there are plenty of parables, miracles, and mysteries
to keep you busy for the rest of your life.
Some point to this as proof of its divine nature, its intrigue, and
accessibility to all. But you have only
to look around to find any number of people who fixate on a certain book or
idea and let it direct their lives.
Indeed, there are as many examples of other books and dogma being used
as the cornerstones of living as there are leaves on a tree.
In our opinion, what has caused the
Bible to endure is its soap opera like nature.
It has everything—heroes, villains, mystery, power, miracles, intrigue,
politics, ethics, morality, loyalty, betrayal, despair, triumph, and
humor—every element of good fiction, or life.
The way the most popular version is compiled and broken down, in
numbered sections, with the King's Good Shakespearean English to lend it
dramatic appeal (and Sir Lawrence Olivier's voice) makes for an authoritatively
sounding, entertaining, and convenient, study guide.
There seem to be as many radically different Xian opinions as stars in
the sky. Everywhere splinter churches,
avant-garde Christian meetings, and fiercely independent worshippers—who take
no part in the institutional religion and have varying ideas as to who Jesus
was, what he said, or what he represents, discuss what they believe about
him. Unfortunately, they almost all
have one thing in common.
Language. They do not speak
Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek and are generally content to take relatively ancient
translated works as the source for their scriptural studies. If you are an Indian and you talk about
times before Columbus, people say you are talking ancient times. But when we discuss a translation of the
Bible that predates Columbus by hundreds of years, suddenly the timeline
compresses and we lose track of the centuries.
While Indigenous history is termed ancient because it seems
inaccessible, European history is considered recent because it has been textually
recorded.
As far as the Holy Spirit is concerned, who determines who has it and
who does not? In the past it was
determined that those who put together the Bible were "divinely
inspired", while the guys down the road who argued for the inclusion of
other texts were not. Who authorized
that point of view? Obviously those who
put the compilation together!
Yahweh has not seen fit to find a more contemporary Moses to chisel any
new stone tablets, even though Charlton Heston was available. Though people have been having Visions
continually since the beginning of time, except for Sitting Bull's prediction
of Custer's demise, and Crazy Horse's vision of the modern world, the only ones
considered valid by the Christian community were those of John and Paul,
centuries before the Beatles.
A6
More Myths and Synergisms
The truth has never been
allowed here. Only bits and pieces of
freedom and justice have been made available to select groups of the population
and the bloody face of continued colonialism peaks out from behind the masks
our leaders wear. It is their last gasp
to hold to the imaginary vision placed in their minds by their forefathers, but
even they will not admit to knowing the secret. Behind the scenes, America has never been guided by an honorable
vision. It is true that there have been
many honorable men and honorable women, but the guiding forces have always
reflected classes of privilege, institutions of personal greed, and an
unquenchable thirst for power disguised as progress.
The power elite has
manipulated their spirituality to allow them to justify whatever vice they
desire as the will of the Creator. They
have put aside their faith, resurrecting it only to assure themselves they
still adhere to the value of conscience.
The United States, as
empires go, has most certainly not been the worst—but it's up there on the
list. If not for the painters, poets,
and authors that created all the basic symbols American patriotism relies on,
the American experiment might not be a house built of myth. Let’s recap some of that mythology. “The greatest cities of the millennium
were in the Americas, not Europe. The
first consensual democracies were in the America's six hundred years before the
constitution of the US was drafted.
Medicine, mathematics, engineering, and agriculture were flourishing in
the Americas while Europe was suffering in the dark ages. There were more
people in North America than in all of Europe until European diseases destroyed
up to 95 percent of the humanity that resided here. The Americas were not wild empty lands when the second wave of
Europeans hit in the 1500's, but a charnel house of death. When the Nina,
Pinta, and Santa Marie arrived, the coastlands of America were not wild
untended fallow forests but heavily developed agricultural areas with a
decimated and dying population.
American families of the 16th and 17th century
were just as broken and dysfunctional as today. Divorce was just as high.
Preachers asked their flocks not to become too close to their children. Elders were opening ridiculed and rebelled
against. The extended family was
non-existent. Only immigrants from the
Old Countries, forced to live together due to abject poverty, recreated the
extended family in America. When the American
Revolution began it was a rebellion unsupported by 70 % of the colonists. Besty Ross did not sew the first American
flag. There never was a cherry tree and
George Washington did not have wooden teeth.
The men at Valley Forge were not starving nor were they freezing to
death--Washington used that story to cajole Congress into giving him more money
for the war effort. The Liberty Bell
was nowhere near Philadelphia during the inauguration of the country. Native treaties did not last as long as the
winds blow and the waters flow. The
Gulf Of Tonkin Incident, which began the Vietnam War, never happened—one of us
was there. The forces of Saddam Hussein
were not poised at the border of Saudi Arabia before the war in Kuwait. The media and journalists of the nation have
never been unbiased and neutral. The
last election was not the first time a President has been appointed, rather
than elected to that position. Racism
and inequality have not been proceeding on an orderly path toward
extinction. Globalization will not
raise the stand of living worldwide.
Chemicals and nuclear technologies will not insure the safety and
stability of our planet. These are only a handful of the myths America has
incorporated into her current quilt of nationalism.
Natives did not develop the
phrase “forked tongue” to describe American politicians and businessmen for no
reason. The US has supported ten times as many dictators and terrorists to
serve the interests of corporate capitalism than it has genuinely fought for
democratic principles in the world.
They destroyed the world of countless Native Nations in the belief that
their race, culture, ethics, industry, and religion were superior. European-descended civilization has promised
that industry, science and technology will result in a more peaceful, bountiful,
happy, and healthy world. Yet, every
day we see evidence of a decline in the quality of life and environment
worldwide.
The wealth that has made us all fat and complacent comes from the
incredible bounty of the American geography and the willingness of our leaders
to ruthlessly pursue resources over the world necessary to our benefit. We are a modern empire, whose glorification
of comfort and greed dominates our culture so that our citizens turn to sex,
violence and entertainment for their comfort—an empire whose consumer ethic has
turned into a system that produces unconscionable excesses and uncontrollable
and dangerous wastes while children worldwide die of starvation every single
day.
This is the reason that we are revered and envied, as well as hated and
despised, by the populations of the world.
Those who dream they have a chance to achieve our wealth, or ride on our
coat tails, support us. Those who
realize they do not have the resources to ever have what we have, or who do not
wish too—oppose us.
But this is our land and in
the long run of time we see that this government and this civilization are
simply a thin temporary veneer drawn over the landscape. The bones of my
relatives will be the grass long after the United States has passed into history. We love the land and while we continue to
honor any veteran who has put him or herself in harms way—we know that the land
and its people, even its soldiers, are not the government, nor are they its
symbols.
Those who demand obedience to patriotism are indistinguishable from
other empires that flourished calling for the sacrifice of their young. It is a
call for the preservation of corrupt and self-perpetuating systems that treat
human beings, (and the earth), as if they are less important than patriotic
rhetoric and unrealized ideals. Ideals
serve humanity in unified consensual action, not in speechmaking.