Another Stereotype of the Month entry:
Another Stereotype of the Month entry:
The Rise of Tribal Opportunism in America
By Jim Marino, Esq., 5/30/2006 8:28:04 PM
Given the fact that liberal politicians are stepping all over themselves to tout cultural diversity we cannot be surprised at the rise of groups, tribes, bands or communities looking for an advantage over others. These folks see an opportunity in asserting cultural diversity particularly if it can be based on sympathy and playing the victim of some historical injustices to remote cultural ancestors.
In California we have Indian tribes of 1, 2 and 3 people. One of the three person "tribes" is the Valley Miwoks. As a recognized non-casino tribe they receive one million dollars ($1,000,000) a year from the fund paid for by the other casino gambling tribes. That's not all. They then received over four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000) in federal grant monies last year alone, for "tribal government", "tribal economic development", "tribal housing", etc. So we have three people who get over $1,400,000 before they do a thing. Recently two of them teamed up to kick the third out of the tribe and cut off his share of the pot of gold, and yes, they are trying to find a backer and a site to build another gambling casino. (we already have 61 here in California now).
So if the Akaka Bill should pass then it won't be just the Aztlan movement challenging the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. There will be several "tribes" of Mexican and Latino peoples laying claim to vast areas of the Southwest including California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas even part of Utah and Colorado. (The Arapaho Indians have recently claimed the Northern half of the State of Colorado but they are willing to give up that claim if they can get 500 Acres near the Denver Airport for a casino) I can hear it now, "the Guadalajara band of Mixtec Indians" or the Sonora Band of Toltecs" etc.
How long before we see a Bill in Congress for the Restoration of the Creole Nation in the Southeastern United States? Can this folly be limited to Inuit Eskimo and Aleut tribes, Hawaiians and Indians ( there are 600+ Native American Indian tribes NOW) ? Under current federal recognition processes the sky is the limit. The BIA, the agency charged with making recognition determinations entitling recognized "tribes to federal welfare and other benefits, is heavily dominated by Indian descendant employees and bureaucrats.
The answer is to stop this absurdity and take away the economic advantage of claiming some obscure tribal status and eliminate the current political obsession with "cultural diversity" as if it were an objective. We are one culture, the AMERICAN CULTURE which is comprised of dozens of ethnic cultures, who are all free to preserve their particular cultural traditions and customs amongst their families and communities.
That is the essence of American culture, a democracy which allows the freedom to carry on such traditions. It does not permit separatism by any group that thinks that they can be a "Sovereign Nation" within this nation, and be immune from the laws and taxes everyone else must abide by. There are no such sovereign nations, not even Indian Tribes which are, for the most part, dependent cultural enclaves that have maintained separations from the economic, cultural and political system of this country largely because the tribal governments of Indian tribes draw their powers from being the conduit of federal welfare and who control and manage those revenues that the tribes generate from the lands they control, which now includes casino gambling income, and these governments do so largely without any checks and balances.
Tribal governments do not want to give up that power base so to preserve it they disguise their true motives by speaking of needing "sovereignty" and sovereign immunity for the preservation of Native Culture and tradition, as if anyone in modern America would, or for that matter has any desire to, take that away from them.
Thus the only thing Native American tribes have become under flawed federal Indian policies are dependent enclaves supported by non-Indian taxpayers, and ruled in many cases by dynasties and families that control their enrolled members, often ruthlessly, and those members have no legal rights nor any effective means to oust these governments. Under current federal law, the determination of who is or is not a member of any tribe is exclusively the prerogative of THE TRIBAL GOVERNMENT with no recourse in any such dispute except to that same government. Sovereign immunity has allowed these systems to persevere.
Do we need more "tribes" of this nature? Do the residents of Hawaii want a separate "Nation of Hawaiians" above the laws and taxes that every ther resident of Hawaii must abide by? One percent (1%) Hawaiian blood is enough under the Akaka Bill even though the other 99 % could be Russian, Chinese ancestry or, ironically, American, (at least for 2 or 3 generations).
The time to put an end to this absurd tribal renaissance in America has long since past because it is clearly not being utilized to preserve historic "cultural traditions" as often claimed, but rather it is no more than an attempt to evade the many laws which apply to everyone indiscriminately and the taxes that we are all obligated to pay for the public services and infrastructure we all use.
Jim Marino, Esq. is a resident of Santa Barbara, CA
Rob's reply
>> These folks see an opportunity in asserting cultural diversity particularly if it can be based on sympathy and playing the victim of some historical injustices to remote cultural ancestors. <<
The injustices aren't remote to Indians. The Indian Wars happened to some of their grandparents. The boarding school tragedy and termination fiasco happened their parents and them. Women were sterilized recently enough that they're still of child-bearing age.
>> In California we have Indian tribes of 1, 2 and 3 people. <<
We have one or two tribes like that. The vast majority of California's tribes have hundreds or thousands of members.
>> So we have three people who get over $1,400,000 before they do a thing. <<
They've done a thing. They've survived the federal and state government's genocidal attempts to destroy them. Would Marino be complaining less if Americans hadn't almost destroyed this tribe? If the tribe still owned its historic homeland and was developing and profiting from it?
No, clearly. We can tell that by the way he attacks every tribe, not just the small ones. He's raising the usual right-wing smokescreen: describing the worst case as if it's typical of tribes today.
>> So if the Akaka Bill should pass then it won't be just the Aztlan movement challenging the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. <<
The Aztlan movement is a fringe group that has no clout whatsoever.
>> There will be several "tribes" of Mexican and Latino peoples laying claim to vast areas of the Southwest including California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas even part of Utah and Colorado. <<
No, there won't be. This is a straw-man argument.
Sen. Daniel Inouye addressed this point in an article titled Criticism of Akaka Bill Is Outrageous. From the Hawaii Reporter, 6/9/06:
Claims that this bill will establish a precedent for the recognition of tribal status for Amish or Hassidic Jews or other groups are ridiculous. It is just another attempt to scare the citizens of America. Congress has the authority to recognize government-to-government relations with the aboriginal, indigenous people because of their preexisting sovereignty over the lands because of European contact. None of these other groups are preexisting sovereigns who exercised such authority.
Nor will this result in a government for the Hispanics who lived in Texas before it became a republic in 1836, or for descendants of the French citizens before the Louisiana Purchase. Again, these citizens are not aboriginal, indigenous people who exercised sovereignty before Western contact. While Congress has used its plenary authority to recognize the aboriginal, indigenous people who reside in these former territories, Congress has never attempted to recognize the non-aboriginal, non-indigenous people as a government nor will it. We are not creating a precedent here.
>> The Arapaho Indians have recently claimed the Northern half of the State of Colorado but they are willing to give up that claim if they can get 500 Acres near the Denver Airport for a casino <<
This claim is by a legitimate, federally recognized nation of American Indians, not one of Marino's made-up "tribes." Marino is pretending that he's given us an example of a phony tribe, but he hasn't.
In any case, this Arapaho claim is probably going nowhere. Indians can claim whatever they want, but unless Congress and the courts support them, they can't win.
>> How long before we see a Bill in Congress for the Restoration of the Creole Nation in the Southeastern United States? <<
Um, infinity? Another straw-man argument.
>> Can this folly be limited to Inuit Eskimo and Aleut tribes, Hawaiians and Indians <<
Yes. It can and will be, since these are the only groups who had sovereign nations before the US took them over.
>> there are 600+ Native American Indian tribes NOW <<
Wrong. The number is still in the 560 range.
>> Under current federal recognition processes the sky is the limit. <<
Under current federal recognition processes, it's difficult if not impossible to get recognized as a tribe.
>> The BIA, the agency charged with making recognition determinations entitling recognized "tribes to federal welfare and other benefits, is heavily dominated by Indian descendant employees and bureaucrats. <<
And yet, the BIA turns down more applications than it approves. I guess those Indian employees and bureaucrats are fair and just.
>> We are one culture, the AMERICAN CULTURE which is comprised of dozens of ethnic cultures, who are all free to preserve their particular cultural traditions and customs amongst their families and communities. <<
I'd love to see Marino define exactly what that one American culture consists of. No doubt he can't, since he immediately contradicts himself. If the one culture is actually dozens of cultures, it isn't one culture.
See Multiculturalism Defined for more on the subject.
Tribes only think they're sovereign?
>> It does not permit separatism by any group that thinks that they can be a "Sovereign Nation" within this nation, and be immune from the laws and taxes everyone else must abide by. <<
It permits a tribe that's federally recognized to operate as a semi-sovereign government. That's in the Constitution as interpreted by the courts. Read it and learn.
See The Facts About Tribal Sovereignty for more on the subject.
>> There are no such sovereign nations, not even Indian Tribes which are, for the most part, dependent cultural enclaves that have maintained separations from the economic, cultural and political system <<
Like tribes, states are also dependent on the federal government. So what? Does this mean we should abolish the states?
Ho-hum. See The "Outdated" Reservation System for a rebuttal of this tired claim.
>> Tribal governments do not want to give up that power base so to preserve it they disguise their true motives by speaking of needing "sovereignty" and sovereign immunity for the preservation of Native Culture and tradition, as if anyone in modern America would, or for that matter has any desire to, take that away from them. <<
Are you kidding? Modern Americans have tried countless times to take Native cultures and traditions from Native people. The long lists of New Agers and wannabes are just the most recent examples of that.
>> Thus the only thing Native American tribes have become under flawed federal Indian policies are dependent enclaves supported by non-Indian taxpayers <<
Ho-hum. See Indians as Welfare Recipients for a rebuttal of this tired claim.
>> ruled in many cases by dynasties and families that control their enrolled members, often ruthlessly, and those members have no legal rights nor any effective means to oust these governments <<
"Ruthlessly"? You mean like savages? Stereotype alert!
Tribal members have several ways to oust bad governments. They can appeal to the Dept. of the Interior, which oversees tribal elections and approves of tribal governments. They can inform the Dept. of Justice of any illegal activity going on. Or they can vote them out in the next election.
>> The time to put an end to this absurd tribal renaissance in America has long since past because it is clearly not being utilized to preserve historic "cultural traditions" as often claimed <<
"Clearly"? Based on what evidence? None in this screed, obviously.
Marino thinks there are 600 tribes. How many of these achieved recognition since 1988? Because these are the only ones Marino can claim were formed because of gaming. And how many achieved recognition before 1988, when lucrative Indian casinos were definitely not an issue?
I'll tell you the answer that Marino fails to give. The answer is 20: 20 tribes recognized since 1988. That means at least 540 tribes existed before 1988.
You can be sure that all these tribes are concerned with preserving their cultural traditions. Why? Because they've existed for centuries. Because they have preserved their cultural traditions despite the onslaught of mainstream culture. Because they had no other reason—no ulterior motive—for staying together in the face of unrelenting oppression and prejudice.
Let's do the math for Marino. Using his numbers, 580 of 600 existed before the passage of IGRA in 1988, or 96%. You can imagine why Marino didn't report this calculation.
Using actual numbers, 543 of 563 tribes existed before the passage of IGRA. That's still a whopping 96%. Thus, the vast majority of tribes have a legitimate reason to continue existing and preserving their cultural traditions.
So Marino is fantasizing that 4% of the tribes constitute the whole problem and the rest basically don't exist. Shame on him for writing such tripe and the right-wing Hawaii Reporter for printing it. But what can you expect from conservation fanatics who are trying to remake our multicultural nation in their image?
|
. . . |
|
All material © copyright its original owners, except where noted.
Original text and pictures © copyright 2007 by Robert Schmidt.
Copyrighted material is posted under the Fair Use provision of the Copyright Act,
which allows copying for nonprofit educational uses including criticism and commentary.
Comments sent to the publisher become the property of Blue Corn Comics
and may be used in other postings without permission.