© 2009 by Michael Swickard, Ph.D.
“I am a red man. If the Great Spirit had desired me to be a white man he would have made me so in the first place… We are poor, but we are free. No white man controls our footsteps.” – Purportedly said by a famous Hunkpapa Lakota Native American
For a nation so full of the promise of human rights at its founding, I despair at the misery still endemic to our nation. It is not the misery of those of African-American heritage that still festers within our souls as much as it is the native populations.
In no way do I diminish the shame of our slave history. Still, most slave decedents are better off for their citizenship in our country despite the terrible things their ancestors endured. Not so with our native populations. They are not better off today than 200 years ago.
President Thomas Jefferson, to his great shame, was unable to grapple with slavery because he was unwilling to divest his interests. He was also unable to get his “all men created equal” mind around Native Americans. Sadly, Americans today are unwilling to deal with Native Americans, though race relations have greatly improved.
Sort of sovereign
I have been thinking of this because of three recent newspaper articles. The first mentioned several tribes crossed by the Albuquerque-to-Santa Fe Rail Runner Express commuter train who have insisted that travelers not take photographs while on their reservations.
A second article concerns the human remains of a famous Apache leader. Since it is culturally insensitive to mention the name of Native American deceased, I will refrain. This man died in Oklahoma and was buried there. Recently, decedents wanted him exhumed and returned to New Mexico. Another group of decedents do not want this done. How will this be arbitrated?
Finally, there are newspaper concerns that illegal aliens will not avail themselves to be counted by census workers because they fear discovery and deportation. Why is the census counting foreign nationals for the constitutional purpose of Congressional apportionment?
These three issues point out where our government leaders are not settling serious issues of ambiguity in our lands. In the case of Native Americans, they are sort of sovereign, which to me is like being sort of pregnant — not possible.
If they’re sovereign…
If Native Americans are sovereign, does that mean they can control travel across their land? Can they tell Google Earth to blank out their lands? Can they tell us to not overfly their lands or be the final authority on who gets exhumed? Do they have voting rights in their own sovereign country and ours?
If they are sovereign then they can do anything any other nation does and we have no say in their affairs. If not, then we are all equal Americans, neither superior nor inferior to anyone else in the nation. Also, in that case Native Americans would have no special powers on their lands to gamble or sell without collecting taxes.
More so, if we convey sovereignty upon a group of people within our borders, how do we establish who is Native American, given mixed marriages? Further, how do we arbitrate ownership of the land since the current residents are just the most recent people on the land where, for untold generations, the weaker were pushed off by stronger Native Americans?
Importantly, when the United States of America made treaties with Native American tribes, those tribes were not located within the then borders of our nation. Once those tribes were assimilated into our nation, the treaties became void because the U.S. government cannot make a treaty with itself. Or, if the treaties are considered still valid, then that provides de facto support for the claim of Native American sovereignty.
Making Americans or perpetuating a myth?
Regardless, it is culturally insensitive to assume a nomadic tribe is located in one location. But that is not the worst cultural offense.
We have tried to impose our system of thinking upon another culture where those notions are not present. Specifically, the idea of land ownership or even the idea of someone speaking for all of the tribe is not supported in many tribes. These tribes had no way of absorbing into their cultural setting our European-centric thinking.
The issue in front of us today is whether it is American to sequester citizens on reservations through arbitrary means. Are we making Americans of these people or are we perpetuating the myth that these people are sovereign upon their land? In fact, are they sovereign?
We really need to get a handle on this question regardless of the outcome. I am ready to live with paying a toll on Highway 70 to cross the Apache lands near Ruidoso if there is a ruling that the Apache Nation is a sovereign nation. Or, require all laws to be applied equally if not.
People who are here illegally
Finally, this sovereign issue connects with our having non-citizens being given standing in our country equal to citizens when they are counted by the census. I do not think this was our founding fathers’ vision for the census to apportion Congress.
It would seem counting sovereign citizens of another country, be that Native American tribes or people from Mexico, is not the intent of the Constitution. It would also appear that our leaders are continuing the ambiguity by not settling these issues definitively.
We need unambiguous leadership on the questions of Native American sovereignty and illegal alien American census rights.
Swickard is a weekly columnist for this site. You can reach him at michael@swickard.com.