118 Matching Annotations
  1. Dec 2020
    1. Under IGRA, tribal governments are obligated to invest 100 percent of net gaming revenues in ways that improve tribal welfare. The law requires that net revenues be used for five primary purposes

      Do they think this is fair?? are they in agreement with this?

  2. Nov 2020
    1. The simple definition of blood quantum is the amount of “Indian blood” an individual possesses. It is a fraction of blood that is derived going back to the original enrollees of a tribe who were counted on Census rolls

      It is kind of interesting how we somewhat have this today but in a positive way. How people can get scholarships and grants for having Native heritage.

    1. The Government of the United States desires peace, and its honor is hereby pledged to keep it.

      I think they try to do this but they don't really care about keeping peace especially with the Natives

    1. This gave tribes the right to manage or control Indian Health Service programs. Native nations have taken over many IHS facilities and have started their own health services.

      Amazing!! Keep the government out of it and leave it to the individual and their immediate community!

    2. accused of sterilizing at least 25 percent of Native women between the ages of 15 and 44.

      I've heard about this and this angers me beyond belief. This is unethical, immoral, and completely a crime against women.

    3. protection for Native families from the abuses that had led to this crisis of Native child welfare.

      Finally some action! These children deserved to be with their parents.

    4. They noted the poor living and sanitary conditions on reservations, inadequate diets, which resulted in higher rates of diseases (especially tuberculosis and trachoma), and higher infant and general mortality rates than the larger population.

      Of course living conditions caused these diseases. They didn't care enough to make sure that people were taken care of.

    1. icultural), and girls as domestics. Apprenticeships essentially meant that young girls or boys would work with white families. By working in subordinate positions, they were viewed as being productive members of society (integrated to an extent, in the lowest, most marginalized positions). 

      To teach them the "right way" to do things

    2. ues that while allotment had the potential to divide Cherokee families,

      absolutely, because if some family members wanted to do it and some didn't. Then that can create a huge family divide.

    1. s treaty shall be obligatory on the contracting parties as soon as the same shall be ratified by the President and Senate of the United Sta

      so does this mean that they are officially apart of the US??

    1. We’d Rather Fish than be on Welfare

      absolutely, welfare can be a way for the government to control a group of people. If people NEED to rely on the government, its a way for power.

    2. Fishing Rights in the Pacific Northwest

      When visiting Spokane, Washington, there are memorials and stories all around recognizing this. I'm glad I got to see this to pay tribute to Natives who are not typically recognized.

    3. RA aimed to protect Native people’s religions and lifestyles in a radical shift away from assimilation policies, and represented an open admission that the Dawes Act was a mistake

      This is so important because this was a first step to Natives first amendment right. Freedom of religion and lifestyle is crucial for independence.

    4. government agents also attempted to officially define and designate who tribal members were.

      As long as you know who people are, it is easy to know the threat and monitor it. It is all about dominion, control, and power. This is so disgusting.

    5. Allotment required the cataloguing and segmenting of both families and land

      This doesn't surprise me at all. Another way for families to be monitored and tracked. This is a very obvious means of control.

  3. Oct 2020
    1. t, which included a number of felonies that the bill said now the federal government is going to step in and prosecute certain felonies that happen in Indian Country.

      What was the point of this? To take back some power they had given up?

    2. — have viewed Native women as less that human, as rape- able: people that are, you know, non- people; people that didn’t matter; people that needed to be done away with. Part of that colonial project, Native women have consistently, over the last five hundred years, seen very high rates of rape.

      Rape rates for Native women are disgustingly staggering. I don't understand how the rates got so high and how no one stopped it

    1. e Creek insisted on this additional protection when negotiating the Treaty of 1833, and in fact received a land patent pursuant to that treaty some 19 years later.

      So did this patent mean nothing legally??

    2. d: “They [the federal government] do not deny any of our rights under treaty, but say they will go to the people themselves and confer with them and urge upon them the necessity of a change in their present condition, and upon their refusal will force a change upon them.”

      Once again, the US saying one thing and doing another. They put the "correct" thing in writing so they could be protected legally but went behind their backs to do what they wanted.

    1. Capitalism has never been opposed to resistance or protest; much to the contrary, it has actually been driven by them.

      This is a great summary for capitalism. Ebbs and flows with the times.

    2. pen to God’s salva-tion and grace

      So this must have been the reasoning settlers gave to assimilate Natives, because they were saving them and offering them the opportunity for salvation.

    3. his story is very well known: federal authorities removed Indian children from their homes and families and sent them to harsh institutions far away, where they had their mouths washed out with soap for speaking their languages and had even worse forms of abuse inflicted upon them.

      This is so horrible. I can't even imagine being punished for being who you are. There is definitely an advantage for speaking more than one language, but this is absolutely the wrong way to teach bilingualism.

    4. perfect correspondence in the current ideology of corporate capital and the world market. The ideology of the world market has always been the anti-foundational and anti-essentialist discourse par excellence. Circulation, mobility, diversity, and mixture are its very

      Its very interesting to me that we find this ideal today. People truly emphasize the free market which originated with trade.

    5. The most problematic aspect of a modern/traditional distinction is, of course, its binary-oppositional character: that is, those things we identify as modern can often be discovered in what we call the traditional, and vice vers

      I had no idea this was a common ideal. I didn't realize this was a bidirectional relationship. I don't really understand how this would work though? Doesn't it mean that trends can be recycled??

    6. The assimilation period was espe-cially bad, as Natives lived on reservations run like refugee camps and children were no longer being raised in their communities but in boarding schools. (Truly, a community without any children can be a dangerous and volatile place.)

      I will never understand how this was condoned and allowed. This is disgusting that we treated human beings like this.

    7. which required Indian people to abandon communal lands for the adoption of new individual allotments: “private property.”

      Did they get to own this private property??

    8. nuities” (including monies, agricultural implements, education, black-smiths, and assistance with paying off debts owed to traders), and these promises resulted in the arrival of new technologies, cultural practices, beliefs, and ways of living

      Could this have helped the Natives in advancements of society?? Could they have benefitted from this??

    1. For ferries, bridges and causeways, three thousand dollars, provided that the same shall become the property of the UnitedStates.For the payment of certain judgments obtained against the chiefs eight thousand !ve hundred and seventy dollars.For losses for which they suppose the United States responsible, seven thousand seven hundred and ten dollars.For the payment of improvements under the treaty of 1826 one thousand dollars.The three following annuities shall be paid for life.To Tuske-hew-haw-Cusetaw two hundred dollars.To the Blind Uchu King one hundred dollars.To Neah Mico one hundred dollars.

      I am guessing this was just used to be able to keep control

    1. President Barack Obama shakes hands with Lisa Marie Iyotte (Lakota) at the signing of the Tribal Law and Order Act, 2010. (Photo: Obama White House Archives

      He was so good at stuff like this. He was so kind and always thought about standing up for the "little guys" in society.

    2. Offenses by one Indian against another were usually handled by social and religious pressure and not by formal judicial processes; emphasis was on restitution rather than on punishment.”

      Crazy that we saw such a shift in this, why did we not just let the native people handle their own discussions??

    3. dian Civil Rights Act

      How did I not know that this existed?! That just goes to show the bias in the american schools systems with perpetuating the story of white victors

    4. Wirt urged the Cherokees to use Corn Tassel’s case as a test case in the US Supreme Court, for the Cherokees to assert their status as an independent nation.

      This is a really good strategy. They thought outside the box to get their voices heard!

    5. or sovereign

      I wrote about how boundaries are important because it gives different people responsibility for different areas. We still use jurisdiction today because some counties have different laws and ordinances than others. So only officials from those places can enforce those rules.

    1. ey ignore you,Then they laugh at you,Then they fight you,Then you win

      Wow, this is powerful. So unbelievably inspiration. Cobell is amazing and I cannot believe I haven't heard of her until now.

    2. n a 2005 decision

      2005!? What?! I can't believe this existed in our lifetime. I wish this was well into history and it wasn't. Cobell is such an inspiration to work as hard as she is to fix this mess.

    3. Because few Indians—many of whom could not speak English, much less write—had written wills, this usually meant that property descended to the heirs determined by state intestacy laws.

      This sounds like the literacy tests for African Americans. Its a way for the government to continue to control minorities

    4. the bank and for financial literacy.

      This financial literacy is crucial for everybody but especially with a group of people who have had their money taken from them. The government made them rely on them and took advantage of the natives.

    5. to become treasurer for the trib

      In the video, Cobell mentions how billions of dollars were supposed to be managed by the government was actually taken from the Natives. Billions of dollars taken from them that could have been managed by a tribe treasurer.

    1. r, it is worth noting that Marshall’s heroic defense of Indian rights to self- government in the United States relies heavily on the jurispathic force of a familiar racial stereotype of Indians as “warlike” savages

      I didn't realize Marshall had heroic defense of Indian rights to self-government. Maybe I was confused on his role.

    2. Worcester v. Georgia thus required the Supreme Court to address for the fi rst time the important legal question of whether it was the fed-eral government or an individual state that exercised the superior rights

      Wow this is a very interesting proceeding. I guess they continued to find new issues they needed to rule on and change society based on those rulings.

    3. Cherokee Nation, this long- established language of racism conveniently provides Marshall with the interpretive principle for understanding the Founders’ original intent toward Indian tribes in drafting Article III of the Constitution:

      I feel like racism was convenient for many people during this time period.

    4. hat would enable the state to take control over the immensely valuable Indian lands within its borders and make them available to Georgia’swhite citizen farmers and plantation owners.

      They did this to assimilate the natives to their language and cultures. This was a power move.

    5. post- Brown contemporary racial sensibili-ties, or whether he really meant all the horrible, misinformed things he said about Indians in Johnson, however, are questions that are quite be-side the point that needs to be made about this foundational precedent of the Supreme Court’s Indian law.

      I read a quote one time that said "who are we to judge the character and morality of those before us" or something like that. Basically saying that though we think we know what people were thinking, we don't actually know and we don't know the situation and what was going on in their lives to make them do what they did.

    6. Because of their savage “character and religion,” Indians were regarded as inferior peoples with lesser rights to land and territorial sovereignty under the European Law of Nations. They therefore could be lawfully conquered and colonized by any European- derived nation that desired to under-take the effort.19

      As much as this is horrible, this was a good summary that defined why the europeans took over

    7. is, without question, the most important In-dian rights opinion ever issued by any court of law in the United States

      It's sad that I've never heard of this before. If it was the most important decision why is this not more known.

    1. The Head-Men and Warriors of all the Cherokees, shall restore all the prisoners,citizens of the United States, or subjects of their allies, to their intire liberty: They shall alsorestore all the negroes, and all other property taken during the late war from the citizens, tosuch person, and at such time and place, as the commissioners shall a

      Still talking about people as property I see. Something that can be used and restored as a part of a treaty. So sad.

    2. Library of CongressArticles of a treaty, concluded at the mouth of the Great Miami, on the north-western bank of the Ohio, the thirty-first of January, onethousand seven hundred and eighty-six, between the commissioners plenipotentiary of the United States of America, of the one part,and the chiefs and warriors of the Shawanoe Nation of the other part. http://www.loc.gov/resource/bdsdcc.18101of the United States, or any of them, that nation shall deliver such offender, or offenders tothe officer commanding the nearest post of the United States, to be punished according tothe ordinances of Congress; and in like manner any citizen of the United States who shalldo an injury to any Indian of the Shawanoe nation, or to any other Indian Indians residingin their towns, a

      I guess this makes sense? Maybe? If US citizens are harmed then they would seek punishment against that person. But the terms seem pretty unclear what is qualified.

    3. HREE hostages shall be immediately delivered to the commissioners, to remainin the possession of the United States, until all the prisoners, white and black, taken in thelate war from among the citizens of the United States, by the Shawanoe nation, or by anyother Indian or Indians residing in their towns, shall be restore

      I can't believe that human beings were used as a bargaining chip. I cannot believe I am actually reading a real document

    1. in the 1994 American Indian Trust Management Act, legislation which required the Secretary of State to make a full accounting to each trust account holder each year. <img src="https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/570fe928c2ea518f457619ed/1602522938318-B2VEIIHMD8PEQC3MXD6H/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kIBg_0Ibv7A8m9q5Sr6wRDxZw-zPPgdn4jUwVcJE1ZvWEtT5uBSRWt4vQZAgTJucoTqqXjS3CfNDSuuf31e0tVHgDy_2D7YPJsmX7ctk-kC317Ma9zWn4IJcAs3sQcNuFgTd9VkOqQkRGOBLVmfxUP4/Elouise+Cobell.jpg" alt="Elouise Cobell (Blackfeet), lead plaintiff in Cobell v. Salazar" />

      Wow that's amazing and the least that the US government could do.

    2. Policymakers and reformers reasoned that if Natives were forced to give up communal land ownership and assume individual property rights, they would become “civilized” and easily assimilated into the American citizenry

      They did this because they had the power. They wanted a homogenous nation.

    3. European nation who “discovered” Indian-occupied land the right of acquiring that land and making settlements on it, it did not operate in any way to interfere with tribes’ preexisting rights of self-government.

      This is great evidence and use of the existing laws.

    4. n without a license to do so. The defendants, Samuel Worcester and Elizur Butler, were working on Cherokee lands with the permission of the Cherokee Nation. They lacked any state license and were convicted in a trial and sentenced to four years of hard labor in the state penitentiar

      I don't even know how something like this could hold in court

    5. Indian Removal Act, 1830

      I remember this very well from AP US History and I hated what I learned then and now. This is the one of the biggest embarrassments in US History

    6. despite treaty provisions which obligated the US to defend the tribes from encroachment and state interference in their affairs.

      This means they just did that to appease the Natives so that way they wouldn't argue or fight them. But obviously they didn't mean anything they said.

    7. n Alabama, the general assembly passed laws in 1827, 1828, and 1829, which extended the state’s legal authority into all of the Creek Nation, with the proviso that no Indian would enjoy ‘any political or civil rights’ under state law. In 1832, they passed a law which prohibited the functioning of Creek national gove

      That's really horrible. I don't know why the Natives threatened them so much where they had to make those laws

    8. The Johnson case stemmed from the conflicts surrounding land that had been ceded to the United States by Great Britain after the Revolutionary War.

      I didn't know that this issue went to trial.

    9. n 2012.

      2012! Oh my gosh that's shocking. We read about Natives in history and I think a lot of the time we think that it's only in the past, but its not and we still have a long way to go.

    1. Instead, current citizens of the Five Tribes today exercise the privileges ofdual citizenship and have the opportunity to participate in state and federal elections, inaddition to tribal participation.

      Interesting trade-offs happening in the state of Oklahoma.

    2. Tribes have been successful in conflicts with the State of Oklahoma withrespect to tribal property rights,4 4 state and tribal taxation authority,4 5 and in the exerciseof tribal police powers to the exclusion of state criminal jurisdictio

      Seems as though the law is working well in Oklahoma for the majority of its citizens.

    3. Most commentators rightfully praise the tribal leaders for their resilience ininitiating the Sequoyah movement, noting that these were true statesmen earnestly tryingto do the best for their nations in light of dreadful circumstances.

      Their goal of this type of state would have been a very good example for other Indian nations to follow.

    4. Following thePresident's remarks, no action was taken in Congress with respect to Sequoyahstatehood.12 The majority adopted the single state option,13 and the Sequoyahmovement was defeated, paving the way for Oklahoma statehood in 1907

      Who struck this down?

    5. The new state would envelope thetreaty-guaranteed territorial boundaries of the Five Tribes, geographically bordered byTexas to the south, Arkansas to the east, Kansas and Missouri to the north, and the

      This seems like a very ambitious proposal.

    1. That all political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their benefit; and they shall have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform, or abolish their form of government as may be lawfully provided for

      Seems like a massive move by the governing body.

    2. ve been preying upon us continual-ly. We tell them to stop, but it does no good. Then the

      Since some of these territories were so loosely governed, it is hard to understand how a governor could take action against small bands of whites or other non-protected indians.

    3. his Council will do a great deal of good to the Indians of the Plains. I promise you that as soon as I get home I will see them and tell them of all the good talk I have heard here.

      Clearly this council is a council that could be used for the betterment of most Indian nations.

    4. The Government of the United States seeing the great pressure that could be brought to bear on us, standing singly, has provided for us the means to unite.

      I wonder how many other Indian tribesman shared this view at the beginning of this council.

    5. them something good here in this country. Now, I want you to tell in Washington, that the man

      Another tribe wants to assimilate and develop their nation. This seems to be what a good majority at this council want.

    6. "VY hen we had a good start there, and doing well, the citizens of Palo Pinto and Earth counties, who wanted our reserve, came upon us, and made war against us, causing us to lose the greatest portion of the property we had.

      Sounds like they need serious protection like the other nations.

    7. Agent Miles has treated the Indians well, and very kindly, and I have made peace with all the red brothers of the plains.

      I wonder how and who facilitated these relationships.

    8. Our young men were treat-ed very kindly by the soldiers, and the subsistence derived from the military at Port Sill, was a great help to us in getting through the dreary winter that has just passed.

      Natives fighting Natives, but with the help of US troops now.

    9. They have tables and chairs. They wear citizen clothes, quit blankets. They think it best to settle and improve. We want a deed for our reservation, that our places may go to our chil-dren, when the old people are gone. We do not want the land to be taken from our children.

      This group has gone out of their normal ways in order to progress and assimilate into modern society and norms.

    1. What imaginary spectre was therein the constitutionto frighten those who are candid and just enough toadmit that all will be well if we are allowed to go onin our own way?

      Non-native American readers of the constitution would be worried by the document's contents.

    2. the officers ofwhich should be chosen by the Indians from their ownrace, practically independent of the United StatesGovernment but operating under its sanction

      This seems like something we see with Guam/Puerto Rico today. I may be wrong.

    3. Nations are all against it.It appears to have been taken for granted, thatif the Indian Government had ever gone into operation,it would have been permitted to go on; -- if not so,then all this cry about a barbaric dominion surroundedby a Chinese wall was but an idle waste of breath.

      The Indian Government would have been useless without strong action

    4. f the Indian nations, over whom theOkmulgee Constitution was designed to operate wereenemies and not friends of the Federal Government --if their life was one of war and not of peace -- ifthey rejected civilization instead of fostering andseeking it -- if they were powerful instead of bein

      This really opened my eyes to understanding how their relationship was like walking on egg shells. As long as they behaved, then the federal government would leave them alone. And if not they were enemies

    1. nd whereas the United States are engaged in a just and necessary war, in defence and support of life, liberty and independence, against the King of England and his adherents, and as said King is yet possessed of several posts and forts on the lakes and other places

      This is an interesting part of the clause because it doesn't say they won't ever fight, but that they will only do so when necessary.

    2. That all offences or acts of hostilities by one, or either of the contracting parties against the other, be mutually forgiven, and buried in the depth of oblivion, never more to be had in remembrance.

      Maybe this was a way to get on good terms with each other?? Or maybe it was a way to shove things under the rug.

    1. That to establish a right to the lands claimed by the Indians, by virtue of an implied conquest, will require the constant employment of a large body of troops, or the utter extirpation of the Indians. That circumstanced as they are at present, being in alliance with, and favorably treated by, the British government, the doctrine of conquest is so repugnant to their feelings, that rather than submit thereto, they would prefer continual war.”

      It's a shame that this was not truly upheld.

    2. If the Delawares had immediately petitioned for statehood, it would have possibly given them a lot of power to broker federal relationships with the Native nations to the west

      I wonder why that didn't happen.

    3. Many neutral tribes found that as the Revolution progressed, they were left with little choice but to choose. If they sided with the British, and the British lost, they could expect land confiscation. But what if they sided with the Americans?

      Wow! that's an interesting perspective that I've never thought of.

    4. not even a second Chinese wall, unless guarded by a million soldiers, could prevent the settlement of the Lands on the Ohio and its dependencies.”

      It's still crazy how time back then was all about conquering and the strongest prevailed.

    5. Militant factions of different tribes coming as far as the Senecas in New York, the Chippewas in Minnesota and Natives from Illinois came together to remove the British from posts recently occupied by the French

      I honestly didn't know that they came together to fight against the British.

    1. eport cards are bad enough, but the destructive effects reported by researchers (on interest in learning, preference for challenge, and quality of thinking) are compounded when students are rated on what they do in school day after day. 

      I half agree with this. In my opinion, I do think that grades and report cards teach kids accountability and work ethic, but I do believe adjustments can be made.

    2. the more students are led to focus on how well they’re doing, the less engaged they tend to be with what they’re doing.

      I 100% agree with this and it's exactly how I feel. I'm not actually learning the material and applying it to previous knowledge. I learn what I need to know for exams.

    3. “gradi

      I actually really agree with this. I, my self, focus so much on my grades that I only worry about what I need to learn for the time being to get the best grade I can and then I move on. I wish it wasn't like that. I wish I could actually focus on what I'm learning!