Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Unilaterally Withdrawing from Treaties

1

Is this a publicity stunt? I can't be bothered to read and understand what's going on. I'm not sure if I should be excited that they have the balls/ovaries to do this, or what.

Posted by Tizzle | December 21, 2007 8:25 AM
2

that's AWESOME. rock on, lakota.

Posted by kim | December 21, 2007 8:27 AM
3

14 hours between slog postings? please recruit some slog writers who don't disappear during the holidays and who are up in the middle of the night.

Posted by stinkbug | December 21, 2007 8:29 AM
4

Can they take part of Southern California, too? I'd love to join 'em, but those states are just too freakin' cold!

Posted by Original Andrew | December 21, 2007 8:29 AM
5

Can I go with them?

Posted by heywhatsit | December 21, 2007 8:29 AM
6

I think the Spokane and Coeur d'Alene tribes need to do this in order to claim Idaho. It's pretty far from the traditional Lakota lands for them to be interested.

Posted by Matt from Denver | December 21, 2007 8:29 AM
7

In two hours, the President will announce a preemptive strike to defend Americans from the "threat within our borders." In six months, he will request 30 billion for continued prosecution as Afghanistan funds run dry again.

Sorry, I'm a little cynical this early in the day.

Posted by sociallytangent | December 21, 2007 8:32 AM
8

I think the Lakotas would do the right thing with Larry Craig.

I'm with Original Andrew. If the Chumash decide to do the same thing on the California coast I'll be spending my days gathering acorns, surfing, and weaving baskets just north of Goleta.

Posted by Rain Monkey | December 21, 2007 8:36 AM
9

As cool as it sounds, I'm pretty sure I've read that this guy doesn't in any way legally represent the tribe. It's essentially the equivalent of your next door neighbor getting fed up, stomping over to the mayor's house, and banging on his window while yelling that you're taking your house and seceding from the county.

Posted by balloftwine | December 21, 2007 8:42 AM
10

Now I have that Paul Revere and the Raiders song stuck in my head...

Posted by Hernandez | December 21, 2007 8:44 AM
11

The natives were always cooler than the cowboys.

Posted by Mr. Poe | December 21, 2007 8:47 AM
12

the lakota are idiots. they will still be unclean, backwards, and alcoholic with or without their own nation.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 8:50 AM
13

i agree @2

as an aside, i'm here in smalltown funland on the banks of scuzzy Maryland Potomac River. Staying w/ friend who works their City Hall. Well, Her admin asst is named Fakota! which rhymes with Lakota! pretty nifty!

but really, it's hard to be happy about anything at this time. the Crocodile closing is the saddest news all year, all time, for all of the country. i'm trying to get the word out, and hopefully KIRO has streaming broadband, because Megan and that thing you call editor I'm sure will say stuff that;'s drjfem,poe; Requiem; swear burn Crocodile Burn!Hollywood Burn Crocodile Effigy Burn!~!!

Posted by groeot | December 21, 2007 8:51 AM
14

1. Yes remove those 5 states plus Idaho and Montana which are over-represented in the Senate (and Electoral Coll.) then re-allocate their 14 Senators to 7 new States:

DC, LA, Chicago, Manhattan/Bronx, Brooklyn/Queens, Bay Area and Houston.

2. Why? We need to "protect" those urban/diverse areas from the "tyranny of the majority" -- the majority of conservative, non-diverse, over-represented, farm states.

3. Then we can end the war, get health care, and easily ahve new treaties with the Lakotas that are fair (restoring lands, restoring bison habitat, etc.).

Posted by unPC | December 21, 2007 8:59 AM
15

Would anyone notice if these states were gone?

Posted by Mahtli69 | December 21, 2007 9:03 AM
16

Wow, Bellevue Ave @12, that's some nasty racist talk -- WTF? You can't be THAT ignorant of the history of indigenous people on this continent, can you?

Posted by Irena | December 21, 2007 9:03 AM
17

@13 groeot:
Condolences/suggestion for Md./Potomac blues:

try the 4 mile hike on Billy Goat Trail on ricky gorge alonside the river. IT connects Olde Angler's Inn w/ Great Falls of the Potomac. Return via C&O canal towpath & Widewater. Have drinks at Inn.

Posted by Cleve | December 21, 2007 9:06 AM
18

Good point, @14! It is utterly ridiculous that the two Dakotas (combined population around 1.3 million) have twice as many Senators as California (population around 37 million).

Posted by Mahtli69 | December 21, 2007 9:07 AM
19

Whoa. The Lakota better have better WMDs than those magic shirts last time around.

Whyoming is Cheney country. And it has oil in it.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | December 21, 2007 9:07 AM
20

@18
PS - Not that more Diane Feinstein's would do any good.

Posted by Mahtli69 | December 21, 2007 9:08 AM
21

@17 Nice.
I'll "look"into it, as we have no reservations for the next 3 nights and running out of friends. Family can suffice, but I hate leaning on them. Hopefully your info checks out. We did bring our tents however just in case. Cheers.

Posted by groeot | December 21, 2007 9:12 AM
22

first of all, fuck you to everyone trying to sell off thoe midwestern states--my family has lived in three of those states for years. The country would be at a great loss if those states went bye-bye, even though your hipster asses have never set foot in Big Sky country

And the states wouldn't be going away anway. portions of those states make up the reservations the Lakota nation lives on.

as to the the issue itself, i don't see this as happening as Casino revenue and government checks are the only $ keeping the reservations going.the US better drop all funding immediately if the Lakota decide to go rogue. Sure they could get little revenue from the US for using the water rights on the reservation, but we should the charge the Lakota for all the infrastructure we've built into the new nation (i.e roads, pipelines for utilities, etc).

not all the Lakota want to do this. a few groups have alread spoken up and said their communities won't do a thing with this movement.

Posted by ddv | December 21, 2007 9:14 AM
23

Next years Strangercrombie $$$ should go towards getting the Lakota WMDs.

Posted by Mr. Poe | December 21, 2007 9:16 AM
24

irena, you can't be that ignorant of the fact that they suffer much higher infant mortality rates, much higher rates of tuberculosis, much shorter life expectancy, and much higher rates of alcoholism than any other group in north america. that right there shows me they are backwards for refusing to leave a place that is doomed, unclean for all the disease and death they have, and alcoholic for the fact that 8 out of 10 of them are alcoholics. Who cares about their history. those that dwell on a crappy past don't have much of a future.

regardless as an independent nation they would still have a shit economy and would still have health problems. the idea that they can fix themselves at this point is laughable.

get with the program or get off the dole.

@18, that is what the house of reps is for idiot. did you take a government class or are you dense?

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 9:20 AM
25

@22 If those areas became independent, what would the rest of us be at a great loss to do?

Posted by elenchos | December 21, 2007 9:24 AM
26

good luck with your seccession.

might i remind the lakota that america is run by a sociopath who thinks god tells him who to kill?

Posted by max solomon | December 21, 2007 9:28 AM
27

also fuck any "noble savage" crap. the natives would have raped the land if they had the tools and the gumption. mass buffalo kills, deforestation, irrigational follies, all happened with natives running the show before whitey showed up and showed them how to really fuck things up.

don't patronize and pigeonhole a people into something they never were and never will be.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 9:28 AM
28

Bellevue Ave @ 24 and 27,

Wow. Unexpected Racist Tirade of the Day. Are you mourning the loss of Tom Tancredo from the presidential campaign?

Just why exactly do you suppose that they have all of those problems? Do you think the US Government's theft of their lands and systematic genocide of their people might have something to do with it? Could it be that generations of institutionalized racism and charming attitudes like yours might contribute to their poverty and marginalization just an itsy bit.

It's called empathy and compassion, dude. You oughtta try it.

Posted by Original Andrew | December 21, 2007 9:37 AM
29

Wow Bellevue you're ruining all my hippy history here in just a few seconds.
I was totally into the Indians and saving trees and the dreamer religion of the Nez Pierce many moons ago. : ) They were all my heroes.
I had a huge poster of Chief Dan George on my wall in high school.
Today I couldn't even tell why I had him hanging on my wall and I don't much about any of it anymore.

Posted by mj | December 21, 2007 9:38 AM
30

@28

Hey Original Andrew, have you ever been on a reservation, have you ever worked retail near a reservation when they get their monthly checks. have you seen first hand how they don't want to do anything for themselves other than how they lost their land?

Native Americans might be one of the only native people in history that wasn't forced to integrate with the conquering people or wiped off the map. "whitey" has given them more than enough help--they just refuse to try. time to move on people.

Posted by hhhmmmm | December 21, 2007 9:40 AM
31

Russell Means is an attention whore jackass. You should note that the Lakota are not with him, he's just doing the same thing as he's done before.

Posted by chunkstyle | December 21, 2007 9:41 AM
32

FU Bellevue. I looooooooove taking historical biology/ecology lessons from an ignorant, racist, republican (redundant three words I know).

Love your economic and health care analysis as well.

Tell us all how the indigenous people have kept you down.


Posted by cw | December 21, 2007 9:43 AM
33

If you grew up there, ddv, how come you're calling it the Midwest? It's not the Midwest. Illinois is the Midwest. These are Great Plains states.

If you read Ian Frazier on the subject, you'd know that a lot of the drunks on the Lakota reservation are just waiting for the white people to leave. Ten years, a hundred years, a thousand years, it's all the same to them.

Posted by Fnarf | December 21, 2007 9:44 AM
34

@24 -
Re: alcoholism and diseases among Native Americans - this has less to do with quality of healthcare, and more to do with the fact that they lived in isolation on this continent for about 10,000 years before Europeans showed up. If anything, modern healthcare will doom them to this cycle forever. Things which would kill a young person a few hundred years ago, preventing reproduction and promoting resistance to disease, no longer does. Just moving the tribe to New York City isn't going to solve the problem.

And, I know what the House of Reps is for, fucktard. But, bills must pass through both the House and Senate before they become law, which gives piss-ant rural states without any people de facto veto power over just about everything. I know the Senate is supposed to prevent the opposite from occurring (i.e. urban population centers dominating rural areas), but it is not balanced now. I mean, does there really need to be two Dakotas?

Posted by Mahtli69 | December 21, 2007 9:49 AM
35

Bellevue Ave, how am I being patronizing? And where did I invoke the myth of the "noble savage"?

Your comments are ignorant and racist. On behalf of my indigenous friends and family members, fuck you. Go back to history class, you loser.

Posted by Irena | December 21, 2007 9:49 AM
36

@ 30,


Actually, yes I have. I was born in New Mexico and raised in Arkansas near the border with Oklahoma. One of my good friends from college is Native American.


Your point?

Posted by Original Andrew | December 21, 2007 9:51 AM
37

Right, Bellevue - all that resource raping was positively RUINING this land before the "white man" showed up, because, as everyone knows, all them red men were waiting for were plows, rifles, axes, whisky, and a little Yankee ambition before embarking on their quest to decimate the lands they'd been living on quite comfortably (albeit in a state of abject primitivism) for 16 or 17,000 years.

I'm not one to jump on the "noble savage" bandwagon, but to equate the subsistence-level activities of approximately 15 mm Native Americans living in North America at around the time of "The Corps of Discovery" mission with the activities of the millions of Whites who subsequently migrated westward is not only ludicrous, it's a shallow a straw man argument, and racist to boot.

Ass-Alisquetuwo

Posted by COMTE | December 21, 2007 9:52 AM
38

I've heard for a fact that that "using all parts of the buffalo" thing is bogus.

they had no use for buffalo snout, at all.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | December 21, 2007 9:55 AM
39

ORiginal Andrew

How is it racist to point out facts about a people? Black people have higher instances of diabetes and hypertension, therefore they shouldn't be eating fried chicken and drinking kool aid.

Natives have higher instances of alcoholism therefore they shouldnt drink themselves to death. If they have higher instances of TB they should move to places that have better sanitation and medical facilities.

Blaming institutional racism for a group's problems is a copout.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 9:56 AM
40

@ Mr. Poe: You just like the natives cause they wore less clothes. ;)

Posted by Original Monique | December 21, 2007 9:57 AM
41

@33
~Fnarf

i grew up in MT, which i know is not part of the midwest, but borders two midwestern states. I also lived in MN and ND, and my wife is from SD, all residents of which claim to be from the midwest.

the good folks from around the world who keep up the "midwest" entry at wikipedia also claim that all the states mentioned in the Lakota claim except MT and WY are in the midwest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midwest

And i grew up 45 minutes from the Crow nation, i don't need Ian Frazier to tell me anything about the lives of Native Americans. i've lived, worked, studied, and treated them all my life.

Posted by ddv | December 21, 2007 9:59 AM
42

@39

Your good college friend was native american. good for you and good for him. all native americans (even 1/16th blood i believe) get free college at any state run school. yet how many actually go to college? they can leave the reservation any time they want, but how many do? if it is such a bad, isolated, unhealthy place and they have a variety of options to "get out and get better" why don't they? or why don't they work to make the reservations a better place? I heard a reservation in South Dakota has recently banned alcohol on the reservation to help out. but now the DUI as skyrocketing as everyone just drives over the border into Nebraska or Iowa to get booze.

Posted by For Andrew | December 21, 2007 10:04 AM
43

@40

Actually, I just like them because of GBV's obsession with them. If it weren't for that, I'd be with Bellevue Ave on this one.

I'm shallow. Wut?!

Posted by Mr. Poe | December 21, 2007 10:04 AM
44

Comte, I wasn't implying that natives did it on the scale or with the destruction of whitey but they weren't some kind of mythical stewards of the land that went around watering ents either. in fact i said they didn't if they had the tools and the drive to they would have done so.

Irena, I'm sorry that you, your friends, your family won't stop drinking, won't move off the res, think and independent nation will improve their lives. Cause it won't.

If they tried to break away the U.S. should use the old staples of warfare; small pox, syphilis, and booze to bring them back into the fold.

And for everyone; I'm sorry that pointing out how natives weren't as bad as whitey in destroying the environment is somehow racist to you. you PC seattlites are just falling over yourselves to tell me to fuck off and that i'm racist just like i expected

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 10:07 AM
45

This will end the same way the Branch-Davidians' existence ended :(

Posted by Gomez | December 21, 2007 10:18 AM
46

Gomez, We can only HOPE it will end that way.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 10:21 AM
47

For all of the ostensibly progressive politics that this area is known for, when it comes to Indians, the white folks in the PNW might as well be wearing white sheets and pointy caps. Compare attitudes here to those in that bastion of hick-dom, Oklahoma, and I'd say that the PNW's got a hell of a long way to go. Seriously.

Posted by JW | December 21, 2007 10:25 AM
48

stop saying 'whitey' bellevue ave. you sound fucking ridiculous.
people aren't upset because your being unPC, they are upset because your childishly over-simplified analysis of a complicated problem is both arrogant and stupid.

Posted by douglas | December 21, 2007 10:29 AM
49

I don't care about sounding ridiculous, arrogant or stupid. I like saying whitey ever since I heard Sly say it.

the simple analysis holds. having your own nation doesnt change the fact that your nation would still be as crappy as haiti, maybe even worse since there is no infrastructure on a res. it doesnt change the fact that natives have problems that could be solved but that would require them leaving the res for greener pastures.

Look at many other ethnic groups, hell, look at black people. they are doing way better than natives and I would say that as a people they have had it worse.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 10:34 AM
50

Bellevue Ave, you fool. You're taking this particular issue -- which not all natives agree with by a long shot -- and using to to make blanket condemnations of indigenous people. That's called racism.

You really need to get educated about this issue before spouting off offensive crap like this. Considering all the privileges YOU have, you have no excuse for such appalling ignorance.

Posted by Irena | December 21, 2007 10:41 AM
51

Hi Bellevue Ave,

Most Native American groups are genetically predisposed to very intense alcoholism. People who are genetically predisposed to alcoholism and have access to alcohol become alcoholics. It has nothing to do with laziness.

Regarding moving out of the res, think about how difficult this is. People have lived geographically and culturally isolated in reservations for generations. How easy do you think it would be for you to move INTO the res? Sure, you could probably afford a house there, but how would you get a job? How would you meet anyone? How would you even begin to understand the culture?

Until you "move out" of your culture and into another (the res, black hiphop culture, seasonal worker immigrant culture, etc.), please stop telling other people how easy it is. It usually takes generations for even rich immigrant families to integrate into American culture.

Posted by jamier | December 21, 2007 10:43 AM
52

On the one hand, as much as Native Americans have been dealt repeated crappy hands by the US government in the past, I don't see how the proposed solution (withdrawal and independence) really solves the problem brought forward by this activist (poverty). On the other, it's not like cause and effect have ever stopped the Bush administration.

Posted by Beguine | December 21, 2007 10:44 AM
53

The Seminoles,Cherokee,Blackfoot, bla bla bla might not be backwards, unclean, and alcoholic but certainly the Lakota are based on the appalling rates of disease, death and alcoholism among them and the seeming lack of desire to do anything about that.

PErhaps Irena you need to take a look in the mirror to see why having the victim mentality will always make you a victim - in your own mind.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 10:46 AM
54

Bellevue Ave @ 49,

I hope that you don't actually believe the piss-ignorant rants you've posted, and that this is some kind of Ann Coulter-style performance art--'cause your stock is falling fast...

Posted by Original Andrew | December 21, 2007 10:47 AM
55

I've done a little research on this lately and I don't think Russell Means (an American Indian Movement activist who's been active on the Pine Ridge Reservation and elsewhere for more than thirty years, having notably participated in the Trial of Broken Promises march on Washington and the 1973 Wounded Knee occupation) can do this.

The Lakota's lands were guaranteed to them by the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868. That treaty can only be changed or abrogated with the permission three-quarters of all male tribe members. That's the reason why large chunks of South Dakota and Wyoming still belong to the Lakota. (Treaties, like the US Constitution, trump any law that says anything to the contrary.)

But the sword cuts both ways. Unless Russell Means has 75% of male Lakota behind him, he CAN'T withdraw from the treaty.

Posted by Adam Hunault | December 21, 2007 10:48 AM
56

Hey Bellevue Ave, I'm glad you expected to be told to fuck off and be called a racist, because you know what? You deserve it, you racist simpleton.

FUCK OFF!

Posted by K X One | December 21, 2007 10:48 AM
57

Its questionable wether Rusell and some of the old AIM folks represent the tribe. I highly doubt that most of the tribe takes this seriously. But as usual the thinly veiled racism of some sloggers goes out for a ride.

For the record, the last great american indian uprising was destroyed when big foot's band were killed at wounded knee by what clearly appears to be Bellevue Avenue's anscenstors. Clearly had he been alive, he would have gladly killed one of the many children killed by his anscestors because in his mind theyre all destined to be homeless alcoholics and the invasion and pillage of their lands had nothing to do with their current status.

Russell Means is all over the map, like I said, last time I saw him he was "wondering bear" on Curb your enthusiasm, and at times he can be a bit loony. But the Lakotas did get screwed by these treaties. That is a fact, to deny it is simple idiocy. And no, the Lakotas have no interest in taking Larry Craig and other indian haters. Theyre yours. Theyre a product of puritanical white america.

This "withdrawal" obviously is not going to work, because the economics just arent there, its a statement as to the pillage of the indian lands. It is funny to see the anscestors of Custer on this thread come out the woodwork. Just like the Pine ridge wounded knee uprising, it is a statement that all is not forgotten. It is a statement of the violation of the treaties which started in the 1800's when the US opened the black hills to homesteaders.

What happened in the Black hills and in the indian lands was genocide. The trail of tears was a fact, the removal of entire tribes to less hospitable lands was a fact, you can not denny it The so called indian wars were nothing more than massacres of entire villages, including women and children and elderly. Plain and simple. You can joke and say you had nothing to do with it and that alcohol and disease has nothing to do with you. Fine. But at the end of the day, youre still a douche bag.

Posted by SeMe | December 21, 2007 10:48 AM
58
also fuck any "noble savage" crap. the natives would have raped the land if they had the tools and the gumption. mass buffalo kills, deforestation, irrigational follies, all happened with natives running the show before whitey showed up and showed them how to really fuck things up.

"The Savages are Truly Noble"

Kinda long, but a good read.

Posted by shitbrain | December 21, 2007 10:51 AM
59

@42:

Lots of misinformation there:

According to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, in order to qualify for Native American Status, an individual must meet the following criteria:

- Be 1/4-1/2 Native-American blood at a minimum.

- Live on or near trust lands/reservations.

- Be on a tribal roll recognized by the federal government.

- Trace ancestry back three generations.

- Be approved by BIA officials.

While most state colleges do offer a Native American Tuition Waiver, the qualifications for such are somewhat more stringent than you have been led to believe. In order to qualify, a student must meet one of the three following criteria:

- be of 1/2 or more Indian blood

- be a member of a federally-recognized tribe

- be a direct descendent of a tribal member who lived on a reservation prior to June 1, 1934 (the date the Indian Reorganization Act went into effect.)

Posted by COMTE | December 21, 2007 10:54 AM
60

jamier, i didn't say they were lazy because they arent. they are severe alcoholics which interferes enough with their life that things are really bad where they live.

also, I didnt say it was easy. this is a problem on the face of it. Everyone wants some stupid "easy" solution. I'm sorry that for natives to break the cycle of hardship they will have to do things that don't come "easy" to them. Nothing that was ever worth doing was "easy". I'm sick and tired of having to make things easy, or if things aren't easy people shouldn't do them.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 10:55 AM
61

For Andrew: 'All native americans (even 1/16th blood i believe) get free college at any state run school. yet how many actually go to college?'
-----
This is just a fucking ignorant statement on EVERY level. It hurts my head to have to try to untangle such idiotic statements. Do your fucking homework people.

There are intelligent arguments by native and non-native people regarding the positives AND negatives of the reservation system, federal policy towards native peoples, treaties, sovereignty, health care, etc.... Instead, I get a bunch of douche bag comments that are race-baiting and mean spirited.

Oh, and Bellevue, Fuck you again. I would looooove to have this discussion face to face with you.


Posted by cw | December 21, 2007 10:56 AM
62

@49 i didn't say you sound stupid and arrogant, i said your analysis IS stupid and arrogant, you see?
there are way more factors to be considered than what your willing to think about, much like the child you seem to be.

Posted by douglas | December 21, 2007 10:59 AM
63

Also, qualification for tribal memberships may vary somewhat, but the general rule is 1/8 blood (so, for example because my great-great grandfather was a full-blooded Cherokee, AND was listed on the "Dawes Roll" - a census taken in the early 20th Century of native peoples living in NE Oklahoma - my mother qualifies as a card-carrying member of the Oklahoma Cherokee Nation, but I don't.)

Posted by COMTE | December 21, 2007 11:05 AM
64

Yeah SeMe, I would have rounded up all natives, and drowned them in a inflatable pool of bourbon...

Killing people is wrong. Natives are not destined to have problems. It is a product of the reservation and the inability of natives to integrate, whether by will of their own, or fear of whitey hurting their feelings once they leave. All the problems that a reservation faces is the inability to take accountability for the place they live and to subsist on the government dole.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 11:06 AM
65

@53,

You do realize that Native Americans can't metabolize alcohol the same way that the rest of us can. That's why so many of them are alcoholics, not because of some sort of moral failing.

@52,

I don't see how the proposed solution (withdrawal and independence) really solves the problem brought forward by this activist (poverty).

You're right, withdrawing is no guarantee of improvement in the lives of the Lakota. However, I'd like evidence of anything the Bureau of Indian Affairs has done that has actually helped Native Americans. Most of the U.S. government's and BIA's policies have actively hurt Native Americans, most were intended to hurt them, and the few policies that had good intentions failed miserably. Native Americans might as well be given the opportunity to look after themselves. They can't do any worse than we've done.

@51,

Regarding moving out of the res, think about how difficult this is. People have lived geographically and culturally isolated in reservations for generations.

That also explains why rural poverty in general is a tough nut to crack. Are Appalachian hillbillies simply lazy because they're trapped in a cycle of poverty and isolation that's virtually impossible to break out of? I wonder if Bellevue Ave views impoverished whites with as much contempt as he views impoverished Native Americans.

@44,

And for everyone; I'm sorry that pointing out how natives weren't as bad as whitey in destroying the environment is somehow racist to you

Bullshit. In at least two comments, you have actively wished death to the Lakota for having the temerity to complain about how they have been treated and how they are still treated by the U.S. government and by white Americans.

By the way, Native American women are more likely than any other ethnic group to be raped. You wanna know who's responsible for most of that raping? White men.

Take your racist superiority complex and shove it.

@30,

Native Americans might be one of the only native people in history that wasn't forced to integrate with the conquering people or wiped off the map.

Right, except for Australian Aborigines who are at least as bad off, if not worse off, than Native Americans. Idiot.

Posted by keshmeshi | December 21, 2007 11:06 AM
66

Thanks for the fact checking Comte. i don't argue (or care much about) the details of the requirements. did your research indicate how many people that qualify actually take advantage of the deal to get an education?

for CW at 61, So i was misguided in my fraction. i apologize. now can you please explain why it is an ignorant statement on EVERY level to question why more people don't take advantage of the free education the "oppressors" are giving them? feel free to put whatever criteria you see fit to qualify somebody for the deal, i'm more interested in why those who qualify don't participate.

Posted by for 59 | December 21, 2007 11:07 AM
67

bellevue, any truth in your arguments is lost because of the antagonistic and seemingly racist way you present your ideas. in other words, it seems like you are trying to get a reaction based on your attitude more than the content of your posts. it might be interesting to discuss the content, but that seems unlikely...

Posted by infrequent | December 21, 2007 11:07 AM
68

Bellevue Ave gets off on hearing himself spout self-righteous bullshit. The more you engage him, the more you prolong his orgasm.

Posted by over it | December 21, 2007 11:08 AM
69

douglas, enumerate the factors for me. break it all down for my little child mind.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 11:09 AM
70

@64,

All the problems that a reservation faces is the inability to take accountability for the place they live and to subsist on the government dole.

You know what? You really are a stupid motherfucker.

By announcing an intention to secede from the United States, these activists want to get off the government dole, you fucking nitwit. They think they would be better off without us. What about that don't you understand?

I suppose I can't expect better from someone who goes apeshit anytime Mudede has the temerity to express an opinion, no matter what that opinion is.

Posted by keshmeshi | December 21, 2007 11:11 AM
71

Keshmeshi, i know everyone's blood is boiling in this post, but i believe in your haste to rip into a different point of view you forgot to actually read the entire message in context.

the line you quoted includes the words, "might be one of the only"... this is a speculative statement that includes the possibility for a small group of other examples to still fit within the bounds of the statement.

So the ONE example you gave me i do not dispute and would mere add that to the list. Please read all the words before you call people idiots--it doesn't really help the debate.

Posted by for keshmeshi | December 21, 2007 11:14 AM
72

@66:

I have no idea how many actual NA's take advantage of tuition waivers - I was just going on my own recollection of the qualifications for NA's when I applied to grad school, which was refreshed recently when I was speaking with a cousin, who just went through the same process when applying to WSU.

Posted by COMTE | December 21, 2007 11:17 AM
73

Bellevue Ave - you've made your genocide-loving, racist ignorant points, now please go back to chanting "White Power!" with David Duke and shut the fuck up. You are a herpe on the lip of humanity.

Posted by Raven | December 21, 2007 11:27 AM
74

Well, I don't care what Wikipedia says, the Dakotas are not in the Midwest; they're in the Great Plains. That 4-region map of the US is baloney; there are more than four regions in the US. Any division that shows Steubenville, OH in the same region as Williston, ND -- or El Paso, TX in the same region as Dover, DE -- is useless.

Bellevue Ave is correct in identifying a raft of social problems in Indian groups. He's insanely wrong in finding the source of those problems in moral failings. His analysis is willfully ignorant; for one thing, there aren't any "Indians" -- there are only tribes, which have little to do with each other. Any attempt to understand the first peoples without grasping this most basic fact -- that Lakota and Blackfeet and Salish and Pueblo and so on don't share much of anything culturally, linquistically, economically, ecologically, or in relation to their dealings with white people -- is just spouting off knee-jerk racism.

Even the parts of his argument that CAN be defended are wrong when they stem from willful stupidity. It is true: some Indians were bloodsoaked; some wree thieving; some were devastating to the land (though not in the ways white people are); some Indians are today drunks; and so forth. It is also true that understanding Indians today as mother-earth-respecting, animal-spirit-worshipping saints in feathered hats whose Garden of Eden was senselessly destroyed by evil corporate white people -- hippies, basically -- is just as stupid as calling them all shiftless drunks. Their cultures were -- and are -- complex.

It is also true that the integration of Indians into American culture has been a woeful business. Anyone who thinks that Indians have advantages not available to white people would benefit by a trip to see a typical reservation school. You can argue that segregation onto reservations is contributing to the poverty that makes wide-spread success impossible. Bellevue Ave isn't making that argument very well, though.

Posted by Fnarf | December 21, 2007 11:27 AM
75

@65

I realize there is the predisposition and it isn't a moral failing. Except well, IT IS! IF you know that alcoholism is so prevalent in your race DONT FUCKING DRINK! IF you know something is bad for you, and you do it anyway, in spite of everything around you, then you fail!

If you are black don't eat a lot of sugar and salt because your bodies can't handle it!

If you are white don't eat attempt to eat ethinc food and complain because your fragile little tastebuds can't handle the spiciness.

Don't you see the dichotomy here;

"Natives have the predisposition to become severe alcoholics if they drink."
"Natives aren't destined to be alcoholics."

The only thing that prevents Natives from becoming alcoholics is either luck or willpower to not drink and I don't believe in luck.

as for native women being raped by and large by white men, what is your point? that white people still victimize natives? if natives werent such easy targets (by living in isolation, away from the law) for stupid white men who don't have any sense of right or wrong maybe they wouldn't be raped wholesale like candians clubbing harp baby seals.

@61 if you had this discussion face to face with me you'd probably punch me. you just had a nicer way of saying it.

@67 yes, I am trying to stir the pot, but I also believe most of what I say. Leaving the U.S. doesnt fix the lack of any basic economic value on a res, it doesnt fix alcoholism, it doesnt fix disease, it doesnt fix anything. history has nothing to do with the fact that the future without the U.S would most likely be a nightmare worse than the current. take away all federal funding for hospitals and a place like browning, montana will have no hospitals or ambulences. reservations offer so little in the way of economic interest, convincing anyone to provided basic services there would be hard to do. I can view the whole reservation carving up as one the most horrible things we've done as a nation but for christ sake, if you have a bad hand dealt to you, sometimes you fold em.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 11:28 AM
76

For 59: for many indians (not all), you answered the question with your own statement (your use of 'oppressor", not mine): acceptance of western values are anathema to indigenous cultural and religious values. So based on that statement, some opt out of higher ed. from state schools. Many have bad memories of parents and grandparents being in the boarding school system.

There are 29+? tribal established colleges in this country where students can get mostly AA, AS degrees, and a few BA,BS degrees.

Blood quantum is a policy for indian extinction (and was established for this very reason). As sovereign governments, tribes decide the membership/citizenship requirements of its people.

A rarely mentioned fact: most tribes do not have complete control of their tribal lands. Ever heard of the Allotment Act? Most tribes are a patchwork of tribal controlled and non-indian held lands. Try making long-term, sustainable economic and political decisions under this criteria. It's nearly impossible.

Posted by cw | December 21, 2007 11:29 AM
77

@70

1. I want them off the dole
2. I don't believe that simply seceding from the nation is going to A. get them off the dole(they will just suck down international aid like a can of beer) B. make their lives any better. C. make them any more accountable.
3. I want natives to be a part of our nation and to feel like americans and I don't believe that is possible if they continue to live in isolation from the rest of america. if they think the way of improvement is through divisiveness.

anyway, I think its cute you came up with a pet name for me - "stupid motherfucker"

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 11:37 AM
78

@76, if it is nearly impossible perhaps it is time to stop trying to do the nearly impossible.

maybe it's because i am a patchwork of several eastern and north european cultures that I just don't identify or value the preservation of culture when it seems to be a handicap on the health, safety and happiness of people.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 11:43 AM
79

@73

I don't believe in racial superiority. I don't think natives are lazy, stupid, permadrunk, useless, etc etc. I don't think we should have ever done some of the tactless crap our country has done.

I think the natives are in a bad environmental situation (a black hole of poverty) and they need to work hard to get out of it. simply cutting off the only thing helping them now won't work.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 11:49 AM
80

@Bellevue Ave (all comments):

Dude, Bro....this is just a thought.

You are a white male. You honestly can't begin to comprehend what it's like to acutally be discriminated against or deal with institutionalized rascism. Like, at all. You can see it, and maybe sympathize, but you really have no goddamn clue what people go through everyday, and how soul crushing it is.

As a woman, I am faced with sexism everyday. No matter how much I know on a subject, at least 7 out of 10 men will not believe me when I say or suggest something. As soon as some man says it, then it must be right, you know...a dude said it.

As a minority, I can't even imagine how hard it would be. I am white, so I have no goddamn clue what they face everyday of their life. But I can tell you, the *few* times I have actually seen it, it breaks my heart. I see their souls just smashed each time, and they deal with it everyday. Same with gay people. I mean shit, they can't even hold hands with their loved ones down the street withouth dealing with horribleness! WTF???!?!

I understand that you aren't trying to sound/be rascist. I understand that you think people need to take responsibility for their actions and integrate. I can easily see what arguments you could use for other minorities.

But the fact remains, its like this. If we all start at the same place (same IQ, same place growing up, etc) as a white man you start at 0, women start at -10, minorities -20. Now, as an Native American, they start at -30. AT LEAST. So if we work as hard as you, we are still -10 to -30 behind you. Now imagine that generation after generation. Sure, some have done ok, but that is because they are 30% better than you, and only on equal footing because of it.

Seriously, Bellevue. You really can't truely understand. Best to stay quite on this subject.

Posted by Original Monique | December 21, 2007 11:52 AM
81

I would venture a guess that there are as many white alcoholics as there are native alcoholics. Not that that has shit to do with a discussion of sovereignty.
This entire action looks like a protest against the declination of the U.S. to sign the UN resolution recognizing the rights of indigenous people, since he picked the Bolivian embassy to announce it; Evo Morales was pretty vocal about that in the US media.

Posted by bronkitis | December 21, 2007 11:56 AM
82

#12
Racist much? wow- Merry Fucking xmas WASP.

Posted by Betty | December 21, 2007 11:57 AM
83

bah! I will not stay quiet on the subject. The fact that it is harder for natives doesnt mean they should just give up. Like I said, anything worth doing isn't easy. If natives have to work harder, then that is what they have to do. We can provide more opportunities for them, but we can't force them into opportunity.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 11:59 AM
84

@82, I'm only a W and I'd rather celebrate jewish holidays.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 12:01 PM
85

I don't know why I am bothering with this as I am sick as a dog right now, but...

Bellevue,

1. The reservations were the white colonizer's idea, not the Indians'.

2. When First Nations people (or Native American--whatever) work to celebrate, preserve, and perpetuate their culture, their health, safety, and happiness IMPROVES. The handicap is white people who historically have not and still do not value that culture. White people like you.

3. That YOU, with all your hateful vitriol against them, dare to accuse native people of moral failings is astonishing.

Posted by Irena | December 21, 2007 12:04 PM
86

see, bellevue, you go to far with this: they will just suck down international aid like a can of beer

it's funny, you want them to stop taking handouts, you want them to do something difficult to change their position.

so a leader suggests doing something difficult that will cause them to stop taking handouts (from you) and might change their position. and you criticize them for it.

the status quo isn't working, so, yeah, they need to try something else. even if it isn't succeeding, perhaps this will foster discussion that will lead to a better idea. and it's not just assimilation, it's how they are to do this when faced with people who stereotype them as weak, alcoholic, indians.

Posted by infrequent | December 21, 2007 12:06 PM
87

bellevue is not well informed on the subject and though he probably thinks that he's being helpful by being all tough love this, and truth of the matter that; his ideas are not helpful at all, and it's not like the kind of things he's spouting haven't been tried, they have, it was called the "Indian Termination Policy", here's a quote about its effects.

"Many scholars believe that the termination policy had devastating effects on tribal autonomy, culture and economic welfare. The lands belonging to the Native Americans, rich in resources, were taken over by the federal government. The termination policy had disastrous effects on the Menominee tribe (located in Wisconsin) and the Klamath tribes (located in Oregon), forcing many members of the tribes onto public assistance rolls."

a better form tribal autonomy is starting to happen, but some people like bellevue ave are stuck thinking with the old stereotypes and prejudices and like to talk a load of crap.

Posted by manynames | December 21, 2007 12:13 PM
88

you're right, it is dichotomous. I think the idea of getting off the dole is better done working with the U.S than working against it. I think the hard decision they need to make is whether to stay in a blackhole of poverty or move to a place where they have better opportunity. not the hard decision of giving up gov monehy and staying on the res and still having little opportunity

btw the res system sucks so why maintain it? we screwed over natives with it.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 12:17 PM
89

SWEEEEEEEET!

Posted by Will in Seattle | December 21, 2007 12:26 PM
90

@65- I confess I don't know enough about the Bureau of Indian Affairs to comment on that. Can you give any examples of things the Bureau has done in the last 50 years, say, that have been harmful (well-intentioned or not)? I'm always happy to have new information. (I hope that doesn't sound like I'm trying to be snide; I'm genuinely ignorant on the subject)

I would argue, regardless, that a new political system is unlikely to create wealth. It seems to me what is needed to generate wealth in this case is likely to be attracting a larger population, preferably one involved in information or technology (tech firms, research facilities, etc.) Perhaps this could be done more easily as an independent state, but that does not seem likely to me. I think I would look at this more favorably if it were either accompanied by a proposed economic development plan, or if the cited reason for proposing withdrawal were a more directly social/political one.

Posted by Beguine | December 21, 2007 12:26 PM
91

"If natives have to work harder, then that is what they have to do."

You grossly underestimate the difficulty of doing that. It's got nothing to do with "willpower" (neither does alcoholism, ultimately).

When you have an entrenched culture of failure, moving out of failure becomes impossible for more than a few. Reservation Indians grow up in a culture where many of them have never seen their parents work, let alone be successful -- or their grandparents, or their great-grandparents, or most of the other adults in their community. This is mind-destroying and soul-destroying.

YOU couldn't do it. If you grew up in those conditions, YOU would be a shiftless street alcoholic too. You are forgetting the massive advantage you have, and how deeply rooted it is in your life.

And if they want to pull themselves up and go to school, they are faced with ludicrously inadequate schools with almost no funding. You talk about "the dole" as if it provides an adequate equivalent to rich white schools, but it doesn't come anywhere near that. Especially when you consider the level of special (and very expensive) needs that almost all of the students have. Reservation educational opportunities are comparable to the most impoverished nations on earth.

Bear in mind these conditions were imposed on them. They are not their own failings in the face of opportunity. The reservations were chosen precisely BECAUSE they are not amenable to modern development, and their populations likewise were chosen for characteristics that made, and still make today, them unsuitable for modern American life -- their skin and culture, which white folks didn't and don't like.

Seceding from the US isn't the answer, and no one seriously believes it is -- not even Russell Means. What he is doing is trying to draw attention to a difficult problem that people are ignoring, which is little pockets of Chad and Mali dotting the landscape of the richest nation in the history of the world. He's not got a solution -- but you don't either. You're further away than he is.

The reservation system is a failure, yes, you are right about that. But your uninformed knee-jerk response, prompted by deeper internalized antagonisms than you realize, is worse. Casual racism causes as much damage as racism with intent. You are basically advocating the drowning of witches, which is as primitive a viewpoint as any held by the tribal people you're appalled by.

The more you read about the Indians in the US, the more difficult it is to hold simplistic views. This goes both ways. I suggest you try.

Posted by Fnarf | December 21, 2007 12:41 PM
92

so fnarf, they have no control over their lives at this point, do they? at what point does the hardness of living a bad situation that ultimately leads to self destruction move from "natives arent destined to be drunk, jobless, hopeless cases" to "even though that is what most of them become anyway".

I'm appalled that the situation of the res has gone on as long as it has.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 12:49 PM
93

point of interest:
It's a common misconception about benefits given to tribal members as being welfare or the "dole", when in fact most of those are payments for land(mining rights, logging rights, or water rights etc.) held in trust for the tribe by banks and backed by the Federal Govt. Now thats not to say some members do not get some form state or federal aid as well, like the other ethnicities including whites some get these on a needs basis.

Posted by manynames | December 21, 2007 1:13 PM
94

Come on, Monique. I'm a white male, and although gay, I understand discrimination. You learn that regardless of your skin color. You learn it on the playground, you learn it in middle school, High School, etc.

Why must everybody always think that discrimination looks at skin color and heritage?

I discriminate against Republicans. I'm a bigot. I know that. I am okay with that. If you don't like it, you can discriminate against me. Let us fill our hearts with hate this very Christmas, and go to the bars, get drunk, and beat the living shit out of each other.

Amen.

Posted by Mr. Poe | December 21, 2007 1:22 PM
95

I can agree to the Mr. Poe.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 1:26 PM
96

Fnarf, that was very well said.

Poe, you're not making any sense...

Posted by Irena | December 21, 2007 1:27 PM
97

Yes I am. Everybody experiences discrimination.

Posted by Mr. Poe | December 21, 2007 1:41 PM
98

Up here in Canada we have many native tribes. They face the same discrimination, poverty, and opression as amarican natives.

However what is different in Canada is we did not systematically kill natives that crossed our path (though our last residential school did not close until the 1980s). There was no trail of tears, and there is better education about these issues.

When I travel in the states I am often surprised by the lack of education about native affairs. I mean... Andrew Jackson is still shown on currency and celebrated as an American hero.

It really bothers me that both Canadians and Americans have the gall to blame first nations people for all their social and cultural problems when until the last 20 years or so there were almost no attempts to rectify the damage done to their culture and way of life. Only attempts to brush them to the side in the hope they would disappear.

Posted by Cinders | December 21, 2007 2:07 PM
99

But, Bellevue Ave, what do you have besides "I'm appalled, here in front of my computer in my attractive suit and tie"?

I'm asking seriously because your point of view -- what I am tempted to call "thoughtful racism" -- demands a serious response, unlike the "only good Indian" kind.

I think the reasons for problems among Indians are a thousand times more complex than you make them out to be, and the nature of what is being done now is too. It's that kind of glibness that is trying hard to sound like concern but really to a practiced ear sounds more like "fuck 'em, they can't be helped, why throw good money after bad". Which ultimately sounds like the doors to gas ovens.

"This isn't working very well" is NOT the same thing as "we shouldn't try anything", which is what you're saying. Indians are not "them", they are part of us. Indian culture is OUR culture too, more than fucking St. Patrick's Day. Their poverty is OUR poverty.

Posted by Fnarf | December 21, 2007 2:14 PM
100

Hey, speak for yourself Fnarf - I'm both Irish AND (missed it by THIS much) Native American!

Posted by COMTE | December 21, 2007 2:34 PM
101

fnarf, saying that natives should go kick rocks is not the same as throwing them in ovens, and never will be, no matter how much you grease the slippery slope with your eloquence.

Can we do more to help natives? undoubtedly.
Should we do more to help natives?
I don't see a good reason to do so.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 3:00 PM
102

But Poe, that kind of generalizing obscures the complexity of the problem. Are you saying we're all equal, then?

(And by the way, this was the line that didn't make sense:
"I'm a white male, and although gay, I understand discrimination.")

Posted by Irena | December 21, 2007 3:08 PM
103

SeMe @57 writes one of the more thoughtful and constructive posts here, but I can't resist pointing out:

It is funny to see the anscestors of Custer on this thread come out the woodwork.

Now that really would be a funny thing to see.

Posted by lostboy | December 21, 2007 3:19 PM
104

To me saying somebody can't express what they think just because of who they are is, at best, a weak argument.

Anyone should be allowed to use their reason and the facts at hand to come to a conclusion. If they are wrong, it shouldn't be hard to demonstrate they are wrong on the merits. Why resort to saying they have no right to speak because of who you are and who they are? If white men really are so clueless about discrimination, then it should be easy work for a minority to point out all of their mistakes.

Otherwise, white men could say that minorities have no right to criticize the actions of those in power, since after all, what experience do they have of being in charge? Until they know what it feels like to run the world, they should shut up. That would not fly, I hope.

Posted by elenchos | December 21, 2007 3:22 PM
105

"I don't see a good reason to do so."

so the Govt owning up to its' end of treaty obligations isn't a good reason. o.k. sure.

when these treaties were enacted it was in good faith, the U.S Govt. has consistantly broke or otherwise undermined the intent and purpose of these agreements. This is proven and demonstrable.

but here is the other thing, people think these dumb injuns just signed away everything, they were not as dumb as what you've been lead to believe, they were very astute negotiators and retained many rights in those treaties, but you seem to want to blame them and cast moral aspersions on them for having the temerity to ask the u.s to live up its' to end of the bargain.

and this is all 101 level stuff; you really need to learn more about the subject before spouting off...

Posted by manynames | December 21, 2007 3:24 PM
106

minorites: you aren't white men, so you don't know what is like to be told you are discriminating when applying the same ethos that exists among white males to other groups. you don't know what guilt is. you blah blah blah.

minorities need to dialogue with their white male opressors so we don't just throw all of you down a well without thought. we need to be reminded daily of how oue ancestors ruined the collective future of every minority for the next thousand years.

it is telling when the entire identity of a person comes from how they were screwed over by white men. lacking that identity is empowering.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 3:25 PM
107

Bellevue, you don't see a good reason to stop harming native people and to start treating them with fairness and respect?

You really don't see a good reason why our governments ought to do that?

Do you even understand what "treating native people with fairness and respect" means?

Posted by Irena | December 21, 2007 3:25 PM
108

Bellevue you idiot, your argument has devolved into straw man attacks and meaningless generalizations. I'm done with you. You're hopeless.

Posted by Irena | December 21, 2007 3:33 PM
109

@102

Yeah I screwed up, I meant to say being gay has nothing to do with my (first) experiences with "discrimination".

I'm not actually trying to make any points in here. I'm drinking beer in my cube and jacking comments off like I always do. It's best to ignore me.

Posted by Mr. Poe | December 21, 2007 3:38 PM
110

not really.

maybe natives need better lawyers to work for them.
anyone that believes the treaties were made in good faith is naïve beyond belief.

anyway im headed off to new york. I hope all the native failure apologists go out to the res this christmas and donate some time and cheer.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 3:39 PM
111

not really.

maybe natives need better lawyers to work for them.
anyone that believes the treaties were made in good faith is naïve beyond belief.

anyway im headed off to new york. I hope all the native failure apologists go out to the res this christmas and donate some time and cheer.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 3:45 PM
112

"it is telling when the entire identity of a person comes from how they were screwed over by white men. lacking that identity is empowering.

yeah, lets blame the one who got screwed over. sort of like those women whose clothing is too revealing are just asking to be raped, I guess. No mention of the person who commits the crime. Convenient that.

and hey while were at it, I'll trade my oppression for your guilt any day. but hey, you'd probably just take 'em both and my land and horses too. It's never enough for you, is it whitey? Ya gotta have it all.

Posted by manynames | December 21, 2007 3:55 PM
113

You keep talking like you think the red man is getting all this undeserved largesse from the white man, BA. But that's bullshit; Indians get LESS than their fair share of America. EVERYONE has the right to decent schooling, and we pay huge sums to educate white kids, not just kids in the cities but rural kids in remote areas where the schools are the biggest economic engine in the county -- sort of like the reservation, in fact. Indians get less, much less.

This is typical Republican rhetoric, going back to Reagan's "welfare queens". But the reality is, and always has been, that welfare and poor relief of all kinds has always been a tiny portion of government spending, most of which goes to the comparatively affluent. Indians are no different.

Posted by Fnarf | December 21, 2007 4:47 PM
114

no, natives are getting shafted, then and now. boohoo.

fnarf, you know why natives get shafted on schools. property taxes.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 5:43 PM
115

"not really.
maybe natives need better lawyers to work for them.
anyone that believes the treaties were made in good faith is naïve beyond belief.
anyway im headed off to new york. I hope all the native failure apologists go out to the res this christmas and donate some time and cheer."


one last thing, many tribes today have some of the best lawyers money can buy, people very good on land, water, timber rights etc..., does that mean they are now, or have been in the past well represented, thats up to debate, some indians have a very well placed mistrust for lawyers...no matter how well paid.

oh and yeah, if you're going to Manhattan, remember it is an island "bought" through deceit and malicious intent, and one that was long occupied by natives before europeans even thought of their explotation of the continent. oh yeah, good cheer to you as well, paleface oppressor.

Posted by manynames | December 21, 2007 6:09 PM
116

muahahahaha, I AM PALEFACE OPPRESSOR, VISITING THE HOME OF PALEFACE OPPRESSION! MUAHAHAHAHAHA!

this calls for some metallica

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 21, 2007 6:18 PM
117

I used to think Irena was really, really hot. Now I think she's really really smart and really, really hot.

Think I'll go take a cold shower.

This whole conversation is really interesting. I've found that even liberals reflexively treat Indians like little children. I first saw this in MN in "progressive" DFL politics. At the height of the PC era, 1992, when people couldn't jump fast enough to embrace Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon, the storage of nuclear waste came up in MN. Local Lakota tribes wanted to use their lands. Democrats were as hostile as Republicans to the idea- treaty rights be damned.

See, everybody likes little brown people when they're in big Hollywood movies scored by James Horner and John Williams. But when those little brown people actually demand to be treated like human beings and have their wishes considered, and all hell breaks lose. Even among "progressives."

It doesn't matter what you want for native peoples. What matters is what they want, and what they entitled to in the (few remaining) intact treaties.

(One final point: geography buffs? At the time of the arival of the white man, most Dakota lived in MN, having been pushed out of WI recently by the Ojibwa. "Dakota" reservations in ND and SD are a mix of Dakota, Lakota and other affiliated peoples. The Dakota were and are a Midwestern people who retreated on the Great Plains in a sadly unsuccessful attempt to avoid the white man.)

Posted by Big Sven | December 21, 2007 6:20 PM
118

"VISITING THE HOME OF PALEFACE OPPRESSION!"

remember, one of the homes of paleface oppression.

us indianz do have a sense of humor about it all..

Posted by manynames | December 21, 2007 7:09 PM
119

"fnarf, you know why natives get shafted on schools. property taxes."

Oh, OK. As long as there's a REASON.

So, BA, you think their poverty makes the crapness of their lives appropriate, and you think treaties are for suckers, and the ones that haven't been broken yet should be. How does that make you different than Gen. Custer himself? I guess because you're not going to go out and kill 'em yourself, huh?

Posted by Fnarf | December 21, 2007 7:35 PM
120

I should be paying you for all the words you are stuffing my mouth.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 22, 2007 6:30 AM
121

@117 - "This whole conversation is really interesting."

Are you sure you didn't post this in the wrong thread? Because all I've seen are a bunch of very well-off people talking about those less fortunate than themselves. Emphasis on the word "talking" there, mind you.

Everybody participating in this righteous slugfest, on all sides, will be dead in 20-50 years. And not a single view or opinion they have or have expressed will have had one iota of effect on any of it.

So there's your Merry fucking Christmas, tossers. So get fat, get drunk, and shut the hell up already.

Posted by Scrooge McDuck | December 22, 2007 6:39 AM
122

Big Sven, you totally get a kiss under the mistletoe for that one! XOXOXO

Posted by Irena | December 22, 2007 12:10 PM
123

I should be paying you for all the words you are stuffing my mouth.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | December 22, 2007 2:54 PM
124

(Blush.)

Posted by Big Sven | December 22, 2007 7:50 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).