Re The sovereignty of the Indian nations is a critical Native value [continuation]

NOTE BY HUNTER BEAR:  FEBRUARY 1 2009

Yesterday, I posted my piece "The sovereignty of the Indian nations in a critical Native value."  It went
initially to both the Marxist and the Redbadbear list -- and I then sent it to a few others.  My always good
friend, Sam Friedman, responded -- as always sharply in thought and well expressed, I responded etc.  I
think it's well worth posting Sam's comments and mine on the other lists which received my initial post.

[As a personal aside, I should add that, the other day [King Day], I spoke to a group here in Idaho on the
Southern Movement -- with some inclusion of the Native dimension -- and I did so for three straight hours
[including good questions.]  Not bad for someone whose second grade teachers tried to railroad him into an
institution for mentally challenged people simply because I never talked.  More to the point, that stint
and a number of other things are indicative of the fact that my now almost six year struggle with systemic
lupus sees my now outrunning That.  I mention this because most on all of these lists are aware of this long fight.

H.

SAM FRIEDMAN:

Hunter and I have discussed this issue before on these lists, and I am well
aware of his far superior depth of understanding of Native tribes and
cultures.

There seems to me to be a weakness in Hunter's argument--albeit a weakness that
might not seem to be of enormous immediate relevance--although one can hope.

Hunter's argument here is that the tribe is sovereign, and thus that US labor
laws should not apply.

Now in the USA or other countries, one of the implications of national
sovereignty (in theory--though not in practice) is that svereignty means that if
the workers of the country rise up and overthrow its government and economic
system, they have the right to do so.  (Of course, this right will be
challenged by international attacks, as happened in Hungary in 1956 and would
have happened in France in 1968 if the movement there had gone further--but, in
theory, these can be condemned in Hunter's approach as violations fo
sovereignty.)

However, in the current legal environment as the US government sees it, and most
if not all tribes accept, the US government is the ultimate sovereign with the
"responsibility" to maintain "order."  What this means in practice is that if
the workers or others in a tribe rise up to overthrow the tribal authorities due
to the way their social order mistreats poor and worker tribal members, US
forces (FBI or National Guard, probably) will intervene to maintain the power of
the employers and others.

Thus, from the viewpoint of the workers and of poor members of the tribe, it
seems to me that Hunter's approach here is in danger of meaning that the
approach he supports takes away any support local workers get from outside labor
victories yet reduce their actual power due to the existence of a legal order in
which the ultimate sovereignty is that of the USA.

I offer these thoughts in order to learn from the ensuing discussion.

best
sam

HUNTER GRAY:

To come to the point, Sam, you're trying to use a European [and I include the United States in that context]
urban/industrial theoretical approach -- in your case, Marxism -- as your primary analytical measure of
Native tribal sociology. And that will never work -- because there is a deep Grand Canyon of
socio-cultural difference between those two basic worlds . From the vantage point of Indian tribal
nations [each with its own distinctive culture but with many similarities], the United States [and
Canada] are literally other countries. [Certainly there has been some acculturation in many Native
settings vis-a-vis American culture, but there has Not been any assimilation by any stretch.] Native
American tribal nations and at least almost all of the people therein have certainly never accepted the
United States government as the "ultimate sovereign." 

A Native tribe is a Nation and it's also, in many respects, One Big Family where many are related, some way, by
blood or by marriage. [There are social mechanisms, such as clan systems, which exist, among other
reasons, to prevent incest.] The basic economic ethos of any Native tribal society is fundamentally
communalistic -- and, despite some material inequities, essentially classless [certainly very much
so, compared to the United States or comparable countries.] The basic social ethos is that of tribal
[mutual] responsibility: the group has an obligation to the individual as the individual does to the
group. If there should be a conflict, the tribe prevails but there are also clearly defined areas of
individual and family autonomy into which the tribe cannot intrude. It's worth mentioning that the
tribal ideal with respect to a good leader is one who serves his or her community rather than serving one's self.

Again, efforts to gauge and predict any Native tribal sociology by any European measure makes no sense.
These are two entirely different dimensions. 

Perhaps, as you suggest, the workers in what's called the United States will, some way and some time,
revolt. [Maybe they won't.] But whatever they may do or don't do in that regard, it'll be on the other side of
the deep socio-cultural canyon from all of the quite distinctive Native tribal nations.

Best, Hunter [Hunter Bear]

SAM FRIEDMAN:

I deeply appreciate this aspect of your analysis, Hunter, and I am sure that
there is much truth to it.  But I am not totally convinced for two reasons.
First, to the extent that casinos or other large-scale employment comes into a
native community, this tends to change relationships over time. The communal
gets strained when some folks are working long hours for little pay and others
are getting lots of money for doing nothing but accepting kickbacks, for
example.  So although I am sure that what you are saying reflects a lot of
native life, I am not sure that it is not changing.

The other reason is that we have all heard the same arguments before--which does
not mean that they are incorrect in this instance. But I remember all the
discussion of communal and tribal solidarity in many parts of Africa as being
much like what you are saying, and thus of African socialism as the answer to
capitalism, "Communism," and Marxist approaches. Again, I would say that the
last 50 to 60 years have shown that that view did not hold up for Africa very
long.

On the other hand, in the US and parts of Canada, many tribes have been fairly
resistant so far.  The question I am raising is, in part, whether that will
continue to be so.

HUNTER GRAY:

Thanks for your response, Sam.

Tribalism, of course, has very deep and very resilient roots -- and the loyalties of tribal people to their
tribal nations runs very deep and enduringly. I think this is globally true of the "Fourth World" -- the
tribal world. In this instance, I'm speaking only of our Native American situation. I understand that
this is essentially true in Siberia and "both Mongolias"-- the old "Soviet" Mongolia and that in the
bailiwick of China. I think it's pretty true of Africa as well -- though History there, and especially the
colonial dimension, has been different than that of the Western Hemisphere. But I have never been able to
visit those places and my knowledge is admittedly limited. Our Thomas of course is married to Mimie
[Yirengah] Chilinda of Zambia [you met them both when you were here in 2005]. Although Mimie's father,
Amos, is a university trained mining engineer, he and his family speak frequently of their tribal roots
and connections. The "indigenous" tribally based populations in many parts of the world -- including
much of this Hemisphere -- are often much, much larger numbers-wise than they are in the United States or
Canada. The reasons are many, including hundreds of years of genocide in America north of Mexico.

One of the most striking dimensions in the Native situation -- usually surprising to non-Indians -- is the
fact that, despite literally centuries of occupation by Europeans and Euro-Americans, the primary
commitment of a Native person is to his or her tribal nation and its culture. This holds very true whether
we're talking of, say, a relatively small reservation in northern Maine or a comparable reserve in
southeastern Canada -- where Natives have been "involved" with the Euros since the 1600s -- or the Hopis
and Navajos in the Southwest. It holds right here in this Idaho setting where the Shoshone/Bannock
reservation physically adjoins Pocatello. It also holds true, as far as that goes, for "urban Natives" --
of whom there are now many, but who very much indeed retain their primary tribal loyalties and commitment
in the midst of such places as Minneapolis and Winnipeg or the even tougher urban crucible of Chicago.

As I say, there has often been Native acculturation vis-a-vis United States and Canadian culture -- but
there has not been assimilation. This holds true for reservation/reserve situations and the urban setting.

And the socio-cultural divide is deep.

About five years ago, drawing from an interesting little survey our Chicago-based Native American
Community Organizational Training Center conducted in that metro area in the 1970s, I posted a short
piece which is now on our website: How Each Side Sees The Other Side: Native Views and Anglo Business Views.
It's well worth a look.

http://hunterbear.org/how_each_side_sees_the_other_sid.htm

Coming back to unions, it's much easier for unions to enter and work in a reservation setting if the context
involves "outside" corporations -- e.g., Peabody Coal on the Navajo reservation [and the United Mine
Workers.] But most "business" on reservations is tribally owned -- again, the very communalistic
context. This holds very true for the casinos which employ both Indian and often non-Indian workers. Even
here, of course, it could be possible for unions to eventually play a helpful role -- If the unions follow
some of the suggestions that I made in my basic piece on all of this: e.g., unions have to take the time to
learn at least the basics of the respective tribal culture involved, need to hire tribal people as
meaningful staff, need to talk honestly with tribal leaders and tribal people in general, need to move
slowly and sensitively, and not prattle about "Federal labor laws and regs."

Individual Native persons have played significant roles in essentially non-Native social justice
endeavors in "mainline America" or "mainline Canada" -- and many other Hemispheric settings. And, to
some extent, the reverse has been the case. But I have to say, in all candor, that only relatively few
non-Indians have supported -- in a culturally sensitive fashion -- Native causes.

As you know, Sam, I have personally worked in these situations for my entire life. I like to think of my
"Culture Hero" and ggg/grandfather, John Gray [Ignace Hatchiorauquasha], leader of the mostly Mohawk
[but with some St Francis Abenaki] band of fur hunters in this general part of the Rockies during the
earlier part of the 19th Century:

"His unusual ability to deal with the whites enhanced his stature as an
Iroquois chief. . .he stood out as a gifted leader of his people, understanding and following their ways in a
manner that would have been difficult for a white man. . . he not only explored the wilderness. . .he also
helped to bridge the cultural gap between Indians and whites during the years of the fur trade, even though
much of the time the Iroquois and white trappers did not get along together at all well , and the whites often
resented his position on the Indian side when there were differences in outlook. More than that, his
leadership of the Iroquois out of Ogden's camp, May 24, 1825, contributed substantially to the Hudson's
Bay Company adoption of competitive pricing that limited the expansion of the St. Louis fur trade in the
Oregon country." [Merle Wells, Idaho State Historical Society, on John Gray]

http://www.hunterbear.org/GRAY%20LANDS%20AND%20GRAY%20GHOSTS.htm

Anyway, all best, Sam -- on a cold morning.

Solidarity,

Hunter Gray [Hunter Bear]

HUNTER GRAY [HUNTER BEAR/JOHN R SALTER JR] Mi'kmaq /St. Francis
Abenaki/St. Regis Mohawk
Protected by Na´shdo´i´ba´i´
and Ohkwari'

Check out our Hunterbear website Directory http://hunterbear.org/directory.htm
[The site is dedicated to our one-half Bobcat, Cloudy Gray:
http://hunterbear.org/cloudy_gray.htm

I have always lived and worked in the Borderlands. 

In our Gray Hole, the ghosts often dance in the junipers and sage, on the
game trails, in the tributary canyons with the thick red maples, and on the
high windy ridges -- and they dance from within the very essence of our own
inner being. They do this especially when the bright night moon shines down
on the clean white snow that covers the valley and its surroundings.  Then
it is as bright as day -- but in an always soft and mysterious and
remembering way. [Hunter Bear]
_______________________________________________
Rad-Green mailing list
Rad-Green <at> lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green