On The Revolutionary Potential of Native American Reservations

[Nuvem]

I've been thinking a lot recently about the plight of the Native Americans of both Northern and Latin America. As everyone knows, the entire contiguous USA is made up of land formerly occupied- but never owned- by various Native American tribes. Over more than 400 years, their native lands were taken by Colonial and American imperialists, who stole from the natives what the natives had never believed could be owned in the first place. Millions of natives were killed in the process, leaving their culture shattered. Eventually the US government ceased its military genocide of the North American Natives and granted them parcels of land, reservations, to whither away and die in- concentration camps by another name wherein the natives could wallow in poverty as their culture and heritage slowly slipped away into obscurity.

Most Native American reservations east of the Mississippi are sad scraps of land, tiny blips on the map. There are a few notable exceptions, such as in northern Wisconsin, but the zone is fairly sparse- my own state, Illinois, named for the Illini Native American confederation, has not a single reservation in a region that once contained at least 13 tribes of Natives numbering in the thousands. It is clear to all that there was a massive population of natives east of the Mississippi prior to the westward expansion of the budding US empire; without their aid, the first settlers would not have survived a single winter. This is testament to the brutal effects of the westward expansion and the displacement of Native Americans, forced to move further and further west by encroaching US borders.
http://mappery.com/maps/Indian-Reservations-in-Continental-United-States-Map.thumb.pdf.png
West of the Mississippi, reservations hold considerable tracts of land in certain places. Nationally, reservations constitute 55.7 million acres or 225,410 square km. That's no inconsiderable amount- in the Plains, there are reservations larger than some small countries, though hardly as densely populated. These reservations are, generally speaking, brutally impoverished. To quote Wikipedia;


Today, other than tribes successfully running casinos, many tribes struggle. There are an estimated 2.1 million Native Americans, and they are the most impoverished of all ethnic groups. According to the 2000 Census, an estimated 400,000 Native Americans reside on reservation land. While some tribes have had success with gaming, only 40% of the 562 federally recognized tribes operate casinos. According to a 2007 survey by the U.S. Small Business Administration, only 1 percent of Native Americans own and operate a business. Native Americans rank at the bottom of nearly every social statistic: highest teen suicide rate of all minorities at 18.5 per 100,000, highest rate of teen pregnancy, highest high school drop out rate at 54%, lowest per capita income, and unemployment rates between 50% to 90%.
The barriers to economic development on Native American reservations often cited by others and two experts Joseph Kalt and Stephen Cornell of the Harvard Project on Indian Economic Development at Harvard University, in their classic report: What Can Tribes Do? Strategies and Institutions in American Indian Economic Development,are as follows (incomplete list, see full Kalt & Cornell report):


Lack of access to capital.
Lack of human capital (education, skills, technical expertise) and the means to develop it.
Reservations lack effective planning.
Reservations are poor in natural resources.
Reservations have natural resources, but lack sufficient control over them.
Reservations are disadvantaged by their distance from markets and the high costs of transportation.
Tribes cannot persuade investors to locate on reservations because of intense competition from non-Native American communities.
The Bureau of Indian Affairs is inept, corrupt, and/or uninterested in reservation development.
Tribal politicians and bureaucrats are inept or corrupt.
On-reservation factionalism destroys stability in tribal decisions.
The instability of tribal government keeps outsiders from investing.
Entrepreneurial skills and experience are scarce.
Tribal cultures get in the way.

While the final bullet point I find thoroughly disgusting, the rest point to undeniable truths- the Native Americans are short on options and beset by a million problems. Their conditions rival the worst ghettos in any large city anywhere in the world. They are few in number, separated, surrounded, and bankrupt. Crime is rampant. For many, it's one of the ways to survive the terrible poverty imposed on these people. A return to their traditional way of life simply isn't an option, especially in the Plains where they now mostly reside, where they once lived nomadic lives in constant pursuit of the bison, their primary source of food- the bison migrate tirelessly across the plains, but the natives may not. Of course, this refers only to wild bison- the majority are actually bred in captivity for meat consumption and use of their hides. Thus denied their traditional way of life, the Native American people are forced to make a choice between a life of overwhelming poverty or assimilation into American culture- either way, the game is rigged. The genocide against the North American Natives is no longer carried out with dramatic battles on the Plains, massacres, forced relocation or chemical warfare as it was in the past; this genocide is a socially perpetuated one. Those who choose to remain on their reservation will either remain impoverished or make their fortune in the gambling industry or via corrupt reservation politics- most are condemned to the former. Those who choose to integrate into American society will likely abandon most of their traditional customs and breed with non-natives, until eventually all remnants of the Native American people culturally, ethnically, and politically, dissipates.

And so I finally come to what has been on my mind. More than anything, what I'm seeing in data trends in terms of the situation on reservations are a few key issues which stand out to me.

1. Near total lack of productive capital and therefore capital development
2. Corruption of leadership
3. A massive and undereducated Lumpenproletariat dominated by a small, powerful Bourgeoisie
http://wizbangblue.com/images/2009/02/native%20american%20poverty.jpg
http://newsfornatives.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/indian-reservation-squalor-shanty-hut-hovels-poor-poverty1.jpg

In a perfect world, I would have the Native Americans return, unfettered, to their former state so as to follow through with their natural line of progression without interference from imperialist elements- but this would mean the elimination of the United States of America, the displacement of 300,000,000 people, the freeing of the bison, the replanting of the forests, the de-urbanization and de-industrialization of an entire continent. Quite simply, this isn't going to happen. It's not even in the deck of cards being dealt to us. Therefore, we must find the most favorable outcome of this situation for the Proletariat and global struggle in general and more specifically the natives themselves. To quote Wikipedia once more,


Because tribes possess tribal sovereignty, even though it is limited, laws on tribal lands vary from the surrounding area. These laws can permit legal casinos on reservations, for example, which attract tourists. The tribal council, not the local or federal government, generally has jurisdiction over reservations. Different reservations have different systems of government, which may or may not replicate the forms of government found outside the reservation.
I find this very interesting. Could, hypothetically, a reservation be re-organized as a commune? This issue would require much more legal study on my part in order to learn the specifics, but if I'm interpreting this correctly it's my understanding that the tribe occupying the reservation makes the ultimate decision on how the reservation is governed. If this is true, it could theoretically be possible to begin the construction of Communism in America's own back yard- literally. Holding that these assumptions are true, these communes would also be free from attack or other interference from the federal government; presumably, they would even be legally protected by it. Of course, there is the issue of gaining the support of the tribe. Such a thing would be very difficult in a reservation sustained by the gambling industry, as not a single one of their leaders is anything but a Bourgeois prince of the gambling industry. But what of reservations without casinos and with little to no capital or industrial development? If consent was found among the local population and its leadership, couldn't it theoretically start along the path of a collectivized society? It's a daunting prospect. Tribal politics are a hard wall to scale, and any violent uprising will be quickly put down by the federal government. It would be a kind of reformist revolution, but with nothing in common with the reformist strategies of Social Democrats or national reformism. The Bourgeoisie hasn't taken hold of reservations quite the way it has in terms of the nation. Most natives on reservations aren't wage slaves, because most of them aren't employed. Industry hasn't been developed because the reservations are segregated from the market by geography and legal status. We're looking at a very large and hugely oppressed Lumpenproletariat which has suffered at the hands of imperial interests since the 16th century; they do not work because there are no jobs to be had and they dull the pain of poverty with alcohol, drugs and suicide. Collectivizing just might be the key to their development and the sustaining of their cultural identity. Are there any historical examples of attempts at this? Does anyone have relevant legal information regarding reservation governance and restrictions? This is all just a hypothetical I've been kicking around, and I'm very eager to learn more relevant data and discover just how much untapped potential there is here. Please share your opinions and relevant data.

[Unclebananahead]

This is a rather intriguing notion, and I'm quite curious to see how this thread develops. Here in San Diego county, the only reservations I'm familiar with are the 'casino variety.'

[Cane Nero]

http://revista-amauta.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/brasilmapa.gif
http://pessoas.hsw.uol.com.br/indios3.htm


In Brazil, many Indigenous tribes were virtually wiped out, especially the larger ones. But there are still some tribes who have not had contact with the white man and maintain their culture almost intact.

I still have to do more research regarding this matter.

[Burn A Flag]

I'd say those groups have a massive revolutionary potential if they were to be radicalized. The problem with areas like that is that they're so undereducated and dire need of necessities, no one is thinking about that. They might think about trying to make some money, or do something small, but no radicalization has occured (kind of like the USA's black slums right now).

[Nuvem]

Yes, I would say that reaching out to and radicalizing them is the first order of business. However, given their horrid living conditions, that may not be as difficult as it sounds. It may be hard to reach those in power, but the average Native on a reservation lives in a small trailer or shack on little to no income- if presented with the possibility of living a better, more fulfilling life without having to sacrifice their cultural heritage, they may take quite nicely to the idea of social revolution or collectivization. No doubt most of them already hold the obligatory hatred for imperialism- at least those with any sense of history whatsoever.

Renan, I encourage you to continue your research on the struggles of Latin American natives, as it's something I don't know much about. I'd like to learn about their legal status and relationship with the Latin American states. From what I've read in Open Veins of Latin America and press releases by the EZLN, natives of Latin America may have it even harder than their northern cousins.

[scarletghoul]

Yes native American reservations are full of revolutionary potential. History has proven this, not just through their many wars of resistance against colonialism, but also the AIM, which is still around albeit it as a shadow of its former self. The AIM's leader is still a political prisoner. I am not sure what's stopping them from organising and rising up again, but it is obviously possible to do.

Reservations, alongside the Black ghettoes and the undocumented Hispanic workers, are a huge reservoir of revolutionary potential in the US. Theyve risen before and they can rise against.. to be sure, it's hard to imagine a new American revolution without them.

As for Latin America, we can see that natives are at the forefront of revolutionary movements (Peru and Bolivia come to mind). Dont see why it shouldnt spread across the whole continent..

[Decolonize The Left]

The plight of the Native Americans is immense indeed. But before we speak of potentially 'radicalizing' this group of people, we need to understand that the war being waged against the American Indian is multifaceted.

In the first place, as this thread notes well, the American Indian is confined to a reservation and therefore restricted in access to land and resources. This seems pretty straight-forward, but is much more complex than seems at first glance. For example, a large city upstream of a reservation may dam the river, thereby creating a socio-political climate of tension due to the economics of the river. Pollution is another issue which is largely undocumented or disregarded.

Secondly, the Indian culture is under constant attack. Not only in schools and entertainment, where the American Indian is often portrayed as a red-skinned savage, but also in the trivializing of the American Indian way of life as "spiritual" and "shamanesque." This isn't to say that there isn't an American Indian spirituality or shamans, but it is to say that these facets of the culture are often given much more light and as a consequence the overall culture is trivialized and belittled.

Finally, there is the issue of population. American Indian blood is constantly being thinned through relationships outside the tribe. This is an age-old tactic for destroying a civilization and one which has been enacted with great subtlety by the American Government. For by confining the American Indian to a reservation, and thereby depriving them of productive capital, the government is tacitly encouraging them to leave and seek opportunity elsewhere. This thins the bloodline and by consequence, destroys the culture over time.

In short, there is great radical potential in the American Indian, but it is certainly not up to the white person to radicalize them - they must radicalize themselves. I'm not sure if anyone has been to a reservation, but as a white person you must understand that there is a long history of great oppression which contextualizes your presence in their land, and you are the last person they are looking to for 'help.' Not only is this position potentially patronizing and insulting, it's also misguided for the most powerful group of radicals is one who have radicalized themselves.

- August

[FreeFocus]

I've been thinking a lot recently about the plight of the Native Americans of both Northern and Latin America. As everyone knows, the entire contiguous USA is made up of land formerly occupied- but never owned- by various Native American tribes. Over more than 400 years, their native lands were taken by Colonial and American imperialists, who stole from the natives what the natives had never believed could be owned in the first place. Millions of natives were killed in the process, leaving their culture shattered. Eventually the US government ceased its military genocide of the North American Natives and granted them parcels of land, reservations, to whither away and die in- concentration camps by another name wherein the natives could wallow in poverty as their culture and heritage slowly slipped away into obscurity.

It is true that Native communities were the first victims of American imperialism and still suffer from this imperialist relationship, but it is important to note that Native nations aren't monolithic. We had different concepts of nationhood, land, and land rights. No nations had the concept of "private property," that was a European capitalist concept. We had communal ownership of national lands (settlements and hunting grounds) with personal property. There were many wars fought over hunting grounds, and this was exploited by European colonists, and it's disgusting to reflect on this history of Native-Native brutality exacerbated, sometimes at the behest of, Europeans.


And so I finally come to what has been on my mind. More than anything, what I'm seeing in data trends in terms of the situation on reservations are a few key issues which stand out to me.

1. Near total lack of productive capital and therefore capital development
2. Corruption of leadership
3. A massive and undereducated Lumpenproletariat dominated by a small, powerful BourgeoisieThis is more or less correct. Many reservations are isolated in rural areas and underdeveloped.


I find this very interesting. Could, hypothetically, a reservation be re-organized as a commune? This issue would require much more legal study on my part in order to learn the specifics, but if I'm interpreting this correctly it's my understanding that the tribe occupying the reservation makes the ultimate decision on how the reservation is governed. If this is true, it could theoretically be possible to begin the construction of Communism in America's own back yard- literally.No, it doesn't work like that. The BIA has the ability to override the decisions of most tribal councils and have in the past, and if I'm not mistaken still do for some nations, approve Tribal Chiefs. The colonial relationship is laid bare in this state of affairs. It is a limited sovereignty that Native nations currently have. They aren't a "state-within-a-state," but are considered "domestic dependent nations." It's obviously bullshit. If you want to learn more about this, read some Vine Deloria, Jr. (especially The Nations Within).


Holding that these assumptions are true, these communes would also be free from attack or other interference from the federal government; presumably, they would even be legally protected by it.Absolutely false, to be frank this is a ridiculous assumption. The United States which violates international law, flaunts the fact that it is immune from global opinion, invades countries of millions of people and occupies them, overthrows governments, and ignores its own national law, are we talking about the same country? If you look at Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, you'll see that Andrew Jackson told the Supreme Court to piss off because they couldn't enforce their decision (which wasn't all that considerate to Natives anyway). National law, and international law for that matter, is irrelevant to imperialism, capitalism, and the bourgeoisie. Power is power, they write the laws, they can ignore them too. You should also look at Wounded Knee II and see how much force the FBI amassed there, and also look at the GOONs and how the Tribal government was used as an extension of American imperialists (the classic arrangement).


The Bourgeoisie hasn't taken hold of reservations quite the way it has in terms of the nation. Most natives on reservations aren't wage slaves, because most of them aren't employed. Industry hasn't been developed because the reservations are segregated from the market by geography and legal status. We're looking at a very large and hugely oppressed Lumpenproletariat which has suffered at the hands of imperial interests since the 16th century; they do not work because there are no jobs to be had and they dull the pain of poverty with alcohol, drugs and suicide. Collectivizing just might be the key to their development and the sustaining of their cultural identity. Are there any historical examples of attempts at this? Does anyone have relevant legal information regarding reservation governance and restrictions? This is all just a hypothetical I've been kicking around, and I'm very eager to learn more relevant data and discover just how much untapped potential there is here. Please share your opinions and relevant data.The bourgeoisie doesn't have control in terms of breadth, since there isn't much development, but in terms of depth, control is extensive. Things work differently in Indian Country, just like things work differently in Afghanistan and Central Asia. There's the bourgeoisie and then a larger lumpenbourgeoisie which engages in the drug trade, smuggling, crime, and money laundering.

Yeah, there's a lot of problems. But it's much more complicated and transplanting European-style communism won't fly. People on here talk about, as in the thread in Politics about the IRA, "abolishing culture," that people should "spit upon their national identity." You say this shit to a Native, it's going to bring back all the memories (and, for those nations that don't have historical amnesia, make connections to present realities) of the Residential/boarding school experience, ethnic cleansing, and White supremacy.

Some exciting things are happening in Canada with the Indigenous resurgence there that you can look into. Most First Nations have an acute awareness of the colonial relationship that exists with the Canadian government and capitalist exploitation of Native resources and land.


http://revista-amauta.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/brasilmapa.gif
http://pessoas.hsw.uol.com.br/indios3.htm


In Brazil, many Indigenous tribes were virtually wiped out, especially the larger ones. But there are still some tribes who have not had contact with the white man and maintain their culture almost intact.

I still have to do more research regarding this matter.

The Brazilian genocide of Natives was disgusting. The book Green Hell chronicles the history of this, and the tactics the Brazilian government and ranchers used to devastate the Native population. A lot of it happened in the 1900s. This isn't distant stuff. And it's still going on, when capitalists go in to clear land, when ranchers are shooting Natives, and when the government is sending its armed thugs in to attack Natives protesting by occupying and shutting down these work sites.


Yes, I would say that reaching out to and radicalizing them is the first order of business. However, given their horrid living conditions, that may not be as difficult as it sounds. It may be hard to reach those in power, but the average Native on a reservation lives in a small trailer or shack on little to no income- if presented with the possibility of living a better, more fulfilling life without having to sacrifice their cultural heritage, they may take quite nicely to the idea of social revolution or collectivization. No doubt most of them already hold the obligatory hatred for imperialism- at least those with any sense of history whatsoever.

Renan, I encourage you to continue your research on the struggles of Latin American natives, as it's something I don't know much about. I'd like to learn about their legal status and relationship with the Latin American states. From what I've read in Open Veins of Latin America and press releases by the EZLN, natives of Latin America may have it even harder than their northern cousins.

There's the first problem: most don't have an "obligatory hatred for imperialism" (this is different in Canada where awareness is exponentially higher). Look at the high rates of military service, for example. You can't go to a pow-wow without seeing the American flag in the Grand Entry, veterans featured prominently, and hearing the American national anthem. Instead of a hatred for imperialism, there is a mass Stockholm syndrome. That's not something non-Natives will solve, either.

Conditions in Latin America vary greatly depending on the country. You have a serious resurgence in Bolivia and Ecuador, and to a lesser extent, Peru. In Brazil, there's resistance, but a small Native population and a ruthless government and a ruthless resource capitalist class. In Central America, the US-sponsored crimes in Guatemala resulted in a genocide that killed over 200,000 Mayans. Even the Left has committed crimes against Natives - the Sandinistas weren't particularly kind to the Miskitos.


Yes native American reservations are full of revolutionary potential. History has proven this, not just through their many wars of resistance against colonialism, but also the AIM, which is still around albeit it as a shadow of its former self. The AIM's leader is still a political prisoner. I am not sure what's stopping them from organising and rising up again, but it is obviously possible to do.

Reservations, alongside the Black ghettoes and the undocumented Hispanic workers, are a huge reservoir of revolutionary potential in the US. Theyve risen before and they can rise against.. to be sure, it's hard to imagine a new American revolution without them.

As for Latin America, we can see that natives are at the forefront of revolutionary movements (Peru and Bolivia come to mind). Dont see why it shouldnt spread across the whole continent..

These wars were long ago and a distant memory for too many Natives. We don't celebrate our national heroes anymore.

I would hardly call Leonard Peltier "AIM's leader." He has become a significant figure of course and is a political prisoner though.

And indeed, any revolutionary sentiment in the US will not come from middle class/upper class Whites in the suburbs. It will come from the ghettos (urban and rural) and the barrios.


The plight of the Native Americans is immense indeed. But before we speak of potentially 'radicalizing' this group of people, we need to understand that the war being waged against the American Indian is multifaceted.

In the first place, as this thread notes well, the American Indian is confined to a reservation and therefore restricted in access to land and resources. This seems pretty straight-forward, but is much more complex than seems at first glance. For example, a large city upstream of a reservation may dam the river, thereby creating a socio-political climate of tension due to the economics of the river. Pollution is another issue which is largely undocumented or disregarded.

Secondly, the Indian culture is under constant attack. Not only in schools and entertainment, where the American Indian is often portrayed as a red-skinned savage, but also in the trivializing of the American Indian way of life as "spiritual" and "shamanesque." This isn't to say that there isn't an American Indian spirituality or shamans, but it is to say that these facets of the culture are often given much more light and as a consequence the overall culture is trivialized and belittled.

Finally, there is the issue of population. American Indian blood is constantly being thinned through relationships outside the tribe. This is an age-old tactic for destroying a civilization and one which has been enacted with great subtlety by the American Government. For by confining the American Indian to a reservation, and thereby depriving them of productive capital, the government is tacitly encouraging them to leave and seek opportunity elsewhere. This thins the bloodline and by consequence, destroys the culture over time.

In short, there is great radical potential in the American Indian, but it is certainly not up to the white person to radicalize them - they must radicalize themselves. I'm not sure if anyone has been to a reservation, but as a white person you must understand that there is a long history of great oppression which contextualizes your presence in their land, and you are the last person they are looking to for 'help.' Not only is this position potentially patronizing and insulting, it's also misguided for the most powerful group of radicals is one who have radicalized themselves.

- August

While reservations have historically been prisoner of war camps, it at least gives Native nations a real land base. It doesn't have to be used as a prisoner of war camp.

And thank you for noting that any radicalization must be done by Natives, not outsiders (who are mainly White folks).

[Imposter Marxist]

I highly doubt the OP meant "White people should go teach those natives" Also, why do people assume he is a white upperclass teen who wants to do that?

[Decolonize The Left]

I highly doubt the OP meant "White people should go teach those natives" Also, why do people assume he is a white upperclass teen who wants to do that?

I assumed nothing about his/her class or age. I assumed that the OP was a non-American Indian as s/he referred to "the Native Americans." For example, the OP says "[...]I would have the Native Americans return[...]". This indicates that s/he is not an American Indian. So with that in mind, I believe my post stands.

Also, from what conversations I have had with American Indians, I have been led to believe that they prefer this name to "Native Americans." The latter has been bastardized by years of cultural warfare.


While reservations have historically been prisoner of war camps, it at least gives Native nations a real land base. It doesn't have to be used as a prisoner of war camp.

Absolutely. I did not mean to insinuate that it is currently a PoW camp though it may have been instituted as such.
My point was that while the real land base is indeed important and valuable, it is limited not only in a physical sense (i.e. it ends at some point) but also in a system sense (i.e. that the American Indian is not responsible nor in control of what occurs outside of the reservation and potentially impacts the land on which they live).
Hence the reservation is valuable, but it is part of a greater ecosystem which may be endangered by those outside of the reservation - and while this is of importance to the American Indians as it directly impacts them, they may not be granted the right to fight for themselves in the specific case.

- August

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

the Native American people are forced to make a choice between a life of overwhelming poverty or assimilation into American culture

Uh . . . no.
There really are meaningful struggles for indigenous autonomy and self-determination that reject this bullshit "choice".
Find them.

[FreeFocus]

Uh . . . no.
There really are meaningful struggles for indigenous autonomy and self-determination that reject this bullshit "choice".
Find them.

The situation in the United States is much different than it is in Canada.

[gorillafuck]

If Native Americans rose up, it would be a good idea (and in my opinion, something that radicals should certainly do) to give them support (material, propaganda, whatever) from wherever you are. It's not a good idea to be an outsider who goes in to radicalize them, that's actually a really bad idea.