not to mention all the money we'll save when those damn indians stop sucking our tax dollars from america's voluptuous teet of freedom.

There would be a lot of soverignity issues with that. Remember, the tribes have many of the powers of states and nations upon their own territories. Some of those are treaty obligations.

There would be a lot of soverignity issues with that. Remember, the tribes have many of the powers of states and nations upon their own territories. Some of those are treaty obligations.

LOL! Dude. Seriously. We are white dudes- since when do we care about treaties? Give em some beads and call it a day.

The handling of the reservation system to this point has only created a series of isolated communities where dependence on government welfare programs is the rule, not the exception. I just don't see why that should continue.

Because Democrats have to have someone to vote for them.

OK, yeah, but then where would I go play poker?

Seriously...

Yet on our state's Indian reservations the unemployment rate is hovering in the mid-sixties.

Now here in Washington state, 27 of the 29 federally recognized tribes have Class III gaming compacts. But here's the really good part (for tribal members): In most tribes, for example the Puyallup tribe, each tribal member receives approx. $2000 a month, minus taxes. Minors also receive these checks, but it is put into a trust fund until they are 18.

The Muckleshoot Tribe gave $4000 a month to each member in 2005! The rest of the profits go to the tribal social services, college grants and so on.

I have to assume that this is the same in North Dakota and other states as it is here.

My point: Those checks amount to a ton of incentive not to work, so the 60% figure isn't terribbly surprising. And neither is the crime, alcoholism and drug use.

Oh, and we forget that cigarettes aren't subject to state ciagrette taxes on Indian reservations. Less revenue for the state, more money to line tribal pockets.

What to do about it? Not much you can do now. Tribal members aren't going to want to give up that kind of easy money, so the tribes will fight hard to keep those payouts in place, even if the reservation system were completely disbanded.

Gotta agree with John on this one, Rob, and I live in New Mexico where there are about a dozen reservations (and their independence from many state laws creates a lot of difficulties in governing the state). The days when the US could unilaterally abrogate treaties with the Indians when it suits them are long past.

At this point in time it's to the tribes' benefit to retain those treaties. It will probably remain so for quite some time.

The money they get isn't in the treaties. If they want sovreignty, they should lose the right to vote as long as they are on the reservation and they should get no federal largesse, including medical care. Let them live on their land as their forefathers did. If they want to live the way we do, they should start doing so and ending the plantation reservation system.

Now, I am very ignorant about the history of indian reservations, but aren't they there to allow the native Americans to presesrve their historic way of life? If so, didn't they live for thousands of years without government subsidies? I think it's analagous to the problem in inner-city slums, too, in that when you provide no incentive for someone to do anything, they don't. I know this sounds very mean but take the subsidies away and make them either get jobs with the rest of the United States or return to a hunter-gatherer lifestyle (like I think the reservations are meant to be).

I'm libertarian-conservative.
I don't think the US is the center of evil in the world
I do think the US is the best behaved dynasty in history

etc, etc, etc.

But the indian tribes are SOVEREIGN NATIONS by our own treaties.
Treaties that we balked on enough times already.

My personal opinion is that they should dissolve themselves, or at least write modern constitutions for their own rule.

But that is not for the US to decide.

Put me in may place if I'm wrong. It won't be the first time, and I'm no historian.

But the indian tribes are SOVEREIGN NATIONS by our own treaties.

If so, it's a non-standard definition of "sovereign." In reality these are about as sovereign as South Africa's onetime "Bantu-stans."

McGehee: "If so, it's a non-standard definition of "sovereign." In reality these are about as sovereign as South Africa's onetime "Bantu-stans."

I can't say I disagree, nor that I think the current situation is healthy... They can dissolve themselves, or the US can change its relationship with the indian nations, but we should not remove their sovereignty with intention.

And they are still called "Native Americans". I still want a description of "native". How long does one have to live in a country (how many generations) before you are "native"?

Native American tribes are "sovereign" only to the degree that a state (like Iowa) is sovereign. They are fully under the authority of the Federal government. As such, individual tribe members are citizens of the U.S. just as residents of Utah are citizens of the U.S., with all the rights and responsibilities. Tribe members can vote in elections, young men can and have been drafted into the military, etc.

A tribe can set up a casino and share the funds with it's members, but any of the 50 states could do the same thing. In fact, states with gambling and lotteries use some of those funds for education and health care to benefit it's residents, just as tribes do. There are differences due to the fact that all reservations are within one or more state borders. Thus, a tribe member can be both a resident of a reservation as well as the State the reservation is in. Also some of the differences we see in how tribe members live is due to scale. A state or reservation of a few thousand people simply isn't going to have the dynamic economy of states with many millions of people

Finally, you get down to the most cruel trick every played on Native Americans by the dominate culture, which is that they been given an excuse to fail. With a ready excuse and a enough free money to survive, most individuals fall into the trap set for them by the liberal feel good politics of the late 20th century. The effectiveness of that trap is evident in the blighted conditions seen on the reservations and the ruined lives of it's residents. Out of love for our Native American brothers and sisters we should do away with that cruel trick.

Under 'International Law' one sovereign state can dissolve a treaty with another. At will. For no reason. The offended sovereign state has remedies. War. Dissolution of other treaties. Tarriffs on trade.

We can dissolve Indian treaties any time we find the courage to do so.

The only time the left talks about international law is when they like the outcome.

Why have we imposed on these poor people the worst of socialism? Was it because during the formative years of the system socialism was really truly believed by many to be helpful? Was it because of our silly dreams of the noble savage wandering the wilderness?

Whatever, it is now shameful and indefensible. End the treaties. Integrate the Indians. Give them each $100,000.00 (or whatever) and standard title to their land by auction, allocation or draw or something. Fire tens of thousands of rapacious bureaucrats.

indolene:

Now, I am very ignorant about the history of indian reservations, but aren't they there to allow the native Americans to presesrve their historic way of life?

No. The reservations were created when we took the lands that we wanted, and then allocated less desirable lands to Native Americans. Reservations were more created to get them out of the way than anything. They were concessions offered to defeated people.

If so, didn't they live for thousands of years without government subsidies?

Yes. But they also had land that allowed them to be self sufficient, which makes a big difference. We took away their livelihood, and then wondered why they were having a difficult time. Of course, its not as simple as that, but you get the point.

I know this sounds very mean but take the subsidies away and make them either get jobs with the rest of the United States or return to a hunter-gatherer lifestyle (like I think the reservations are meant to be).

First of all I have to say that I do not think that the reservation system is by any means a good one.

Second, it sounds like you are pretty uninformed about the history of Native Americans. This whole thing isnt a question of them "returning" to some older way of life (and by the way, they were not all hunter-gatherers by any means). The old ways of life are gone. Period.

They arent out on reservations trying to go back to some life where they are wandering around picking berries and nuts. They're on those reservations because they lost their lands, and were pushed into crappy lands that nobody wanted in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Today they're trying to find ways to make a living, just like the rest of us are.

There is certainly a problem with creating a situation where people are dependent on government handouts. And I agree that self determination and self sufficiency is what needs to happen. I guess there is a question of how they do it. Some groups have done it for themselves, while others have not.

Along with that, I think there is a question of what the US government could/should do in this whole thing. It's a reality that Native American people were outright disposessed of their lands by our government. And that's ironic considering our so-called "enlightenment" philsophies.

So, our government took away their means of survival, and today we have these groups of people who are struggling to get by. A lot of this happened a relatively short time ago, in the late 1800s up through the first half of the 20th century.

My main point here is that the current situation has direct roots in the policies and actions of the US government. Those people arent living out on shitty reservation lands, as is the case often, because that's where they really wanted to be. If our government created this problem, then in my opinion it should do what it can to help remedy it. But Native American people are also a massive part of the solution as well, of course. Things arent just magically going to get better.

Mrs. Davis wrote:

Let them live on their land as their forefathers did.

Ok. Then I guess we should give it back to them then. Tell the Cherokee that they can go back to the southeast US and set up shop again, for starters.

In the 1960s, the United States broke one of the oldest treaties that it had with Native Americans: The Pickering Treaty of 1794, which was made between the United States and the Seneca.

It read:

Now the United States acknowledge all the land within the aforementioned boundaries, to be the property of the Seneka nation; and the United States will never claim the same, nor disturb the Seneka nation, nor any of the Six Nations, or of their Indian friends residing theron and united with them, in the free use and enjoyment thereof; but shall remain theirs, until they choose to sell the same to the people of the United States, who have the right to purchase.

Basically, in the 1960s the Seneca were forced to sell, and a dam was built that flooded most of their former reservation lands.

Supposedly, the US is built upon the idea of equality, rights, freedoms, and the rule of law. I have seen a number of people advocating the idea that we just abolish treaties like the one quoted above. To me, that would decimate the whole idea of what the United States is supposed to stand for. Do we have ANY regard for the promises that our government made toward these people? Or should we just conveniently forget those commitments when they get in the way of our agenda?

Good arguments both ways.

I am sympathetic to the argument that the current structure is enabling a disfunctional native american culture.

That does not mean I think the federal government should confiscate tribe owned land... and I can't see myself changing my opinion.

I am a right of center fellow, and I have generally enjoyed right of center governance.

But I am weary of creeping disfunction with conservatism brought through the exercise of power.

Federal power is not the cure for all ailments. That is a core foundation of conservatism. Every argument for increased federal intervention should be scrutinized with extreme prejudice.

Maybe if they hadn't broke all the treaties ever made with the exception of one, maybe if you treated others like you expect to be treated, maybe......I could continue on and on but maybe all of you need to do some REAL studying on the cause and effect of what YOU people have done. Geonicide, stealing all the money from us and our land, religions and languages prohibited. They have stolen and taken from us since they got here, they even have tried to kill us off. What makes the US any different than Hitler and Hussin? You want us to live off OUR land then leave we will be happy to clean it up and effectively live better than we are now, on what you call our lands, you mean the lands you deemed for us.

Halito. Chin Chokma to my brothers and sisters. My ancestors fought hard to keep their way of life and because the outsiders wanted our land for homesteading we were moved like the other tribes to our new home. We were given allotments to split us up thinking it would make us better people and then the government figured out a way to screw us out of that. For all you non native people saying we should lose our right to vote my friend I believe you should lose your right to live on another persons land. I am a dual citizen of this country and I plan on voring in both tribal and national elections until the day my Creator calls me. As for taxes my Nation pays taxes on cigarettes and also on casino money. We also help out the school systems in Oklahoma and they should certainly be grateful for it whatever color they are. For over 500 years we have survived and we ain't going nowhere. I live on my land because I choose to and I am going to stay here. As far as the poverty in urban areas they are also Indians there and I think you should blame your government for these things and not try to take what little we have left. Your ancestors came here and they slaughtered us like cattle because they were starving to death. We tried to help them and look what we got out of it. The Natives of this country need to be respected and not put down for who they are. Mintahoyah-Come Quickly Woman

i agree there is an awful lot of ignorance in this thread. ignorance is not so bad..it can be cured by education, unless of course it is self inflicted ignorance. thats fatal. i have a feeling most of the posters have the fatal kind.

if indigenous peoples on reservations are dependent on the government then pat yourselves on the back. that was the intention all along. if you bothered to look at the reasons you will see the government deliberatley made the people dependent on them for everything as a means to control them. now you bitch about it? ok break the treaties then, but remember the food and medical care was in payment for lands taken, so if you break the treaty then the land comes back to us.
theres much more to be said , but is anyone listening? doubt it. self imposed ignorance is fatal.

Thanks everyone (with a few exceptions) for showing me in your replies why George Bush was twice elected. There's still a long way to go before you can join the true human race.

Why were the Cherokees moved off their lands and sent to Oklahoma or Indian Territory? The ones who signed treaties with the US weren't even those who should have. The US governament used many tricks to cheat Indians out of their lands. In the case of the Cherokees it wasn't because they hadn't accepted civilization, there was more literacy among them than among the surrounding whites at the time of the removal. They had their own government, newspapers, even plantations.
The only reasons behind putting Indians on reservations was because the invaders wanted their land! Now you think those sovereign governments should be done away with? I am Cherokee and I will always be Cherokee!

The government decided that the land that all americans were on ,was extremely valuable for settlers to begin to form a nation on,So they decided to take it,anyway the could,the president signed orders to move american Indians,anyway they had too,To get this land, even if it meant murder,No one asked the people from other worlds to come to Our country,But when they came the took our kindness as a weakness and butchered, American Indians because they stood in the way of the White Man,and their progress, so now We are on reservations, and belive me they aren't that great , these lands given to are ancestors were lands that no one wanted, they are very rocky and void of life as , Our ancestors knew it,Now you seek to destroy the only piece of Life we cling to,It's very obvious that the mental level of our pat enemies lives on, I am Cherokee and will die fighting to keep our culture alive, and trying to change this way of thinking.Kakamaysama

While I have defended, and will continue to defend, native american sovereignty, the grievance from some of the posters is the flip side of the coin.

I fully understand the perspective, but I think it is lacking something.

The nation-state is here to stay. Without it, pure power will have MORE of an advantage. The historical treatment of indiginous people by nation-states is pretty disgusting.... and also history.

Without the modern nation-state, we (collectively) would not even be able to SEE the mistakes we have made. We would not even be having this discussion.

To: author@nationalreview.com
Subject: J.J. Miller article about reservations

As an ex New Yorker and an Iowan by choice, I resent your racist article about reservations.

You have missed the point about the difference in cultures, Your don't see the earth as it is, you see it through white eyes, tempered by money. It is said Custer had no ears to hear, and after he was killed by his own ambition, the native women used awls to clear out his ears, about three inches deep, I am told. You should take better care of your vision. There is a lot more to see in the world before you make such rash judgements

I hope you get to see the PBS documentary with Graham Greene on the "War that made America", that aired last week. You need to watch it.

The library may have a copy of the "People of the First Man", which is composed of the paintings and observations of an expedition up the Missouri River in the early 1800's. It is a window back into the time before reservations.

Education is the answer to many short sighted ideas that come from lack of vision.

Theodore Sojka
Native Earthworks Society
Art Educators of Iowa

Rob wrote:

But we are giving the incentives to stay there along the lines of government entitlement and special priveleges, and that has made the problem worse.

Rob, as some other posters have mentioned already, those incentives and special priveleges were given to Native Americans in exchange for their lands; that was the deal. I'd argue that it was a pretty shitty deal. The US government got all the good lands and Native Americans got some half assed subsidies. And yet, you're arguing that it's those subsidies which are the "problem." Maybe the fact that they lost their livelihood is the problem?

The handling of the reservation system to this point has only created a series of isolated communities where dependence on government welfare programs is the rule, not the exception. I just don't see why that should continue.

Again, that dependency was created by the US government, as others have mentioned. And Native American people are living in isolated communities because they were basically removed, treated like prisoners, and stuffed into remote reservations. Gee, I wonder why they're isolated from the rest of us.

Reservations were the result of encroachment by white settlers. There were close to 300 treaties, very few were kept. The NDNS were given what was believe to be the poorest land, so the government didn't bother with mineral rights. Well, belhold they found gas, oil, coal, and other minerals on Indian land. Now you have a 200 year mismanagement of a Trust Fund that has been in the courts for almost 10 years. Sovereign Nations is a way to determine your own destiny. The Nations make pacts with the State, the State gets money, though it not advertised. Many have sharing agreements with other Tribes. They can then diversity, and get other work contracts. But it is not free, and their is debt that goes with the casino's. But it is jobs. Not all Tribes or Nations are prosperous, but then neither is the people that live in the city or county. I'm starting to wonder why 'it's time to rein in the NDNS". Are their ties to "One Nation", which is backed by gas, oil, and convenience stores?

I think some of what people have written here are worth repeating, so here goes.

Lyn Wrote:

Maybe if they hadn't broke all the treaties ever made with the exception of one, maybe if you treated others like you expect to be treated, maybe...

Mintahoya wrote:

For all you non native people saying we should lose our right to vote my friend I believe you should lose your right to live on another persons land.

and:

For over 500 years we have survived and we ain't going nowhere. I live on my land because I choose to and I am going to stay here.

Mo wrote:

if indigenous peoples on reservations are dependent on the government then pat yourselves on the back. that was the intention all along. if you bothered to look at the reasons you will see the government deliberatley made the people dependent on them for everything as a means to control them.

and:

ok break the treaties then, but remember the food and medical care was in payment for lands taken, so if you break the treaty then the land comes back to us.

Talwohali wrote:

Why were the Cherokees moved off their lands and sent to Oklahoma or Indian Territory? The ones who signed treaties with the US weren't even those who should have. The US governament used many tricks to cheat Indians out of their lands.

Kakamaysama wrote:

But when they came the took our kindness as a weakness and butchered American Indians because they stood in the way of the White Man,and their progress, so now We are on reservations, and belive me they aren't that great...

and this too:

I am Cherokee and will die fighting to keep our culture alive, and trying to change this way of thinking.

The story of US history is as much mythology as anything is, and most Americans buy into it hook line and sinker. They like to believe the "Manifest Destiny" idea that God somehow gave us all this land. The truth is that there were millions of people already here, and the westward expansion of the United States was full of deceit, treachery, and outright murder. Sorry, but that's the deal. We can either lie to ourselves and worship the fairy tale of American mythology, or we can realize that some things were done that didnt quite live up to the professed ideals of this nation.

Ignoring what happened, what our government did in the past, isnt going to get us anywhere.

Our history classes dont teach us about any of this for a reason: it's not pretty, and it doesnt fit in with the whole American story of liberty and justice for all. The inalienable rights of Native Americans were negated, as was their right to the pursuit of happiness.

So what do we do? Should we keep lying to ourselves and believing in the Disney version of American history, or should we try to acknowledge past mistakes and make strides toward reconciliation? I think the first step might be recognition of the past, which is a lot more complicated than most people want to think.

So the US Goverment breaking more treaties and stealing more of our land is a solution to our poverty and the problems that 200 years of Racism,Lies and Genocide have inflicted on our people?Please research the Fort Laramie Treaty,which is BTW ,THE STANDING TREATY between The Lakota Nation(and a few others) and The US Goverment.Then go read what the Constitution says regarding Treaty Law.Then tell us why we should allow peacefully That same Goverment to take the little we have left. Perhaps We do Not want to become assimalated? Perhaps The little bit we have left of lands that are Sacred to us and our Burial Grounds That have not been desecrated in The Name of "Progress" we want to keep?Are your comments truly made in Ignorance or are they just Racist?
Joelle Clark-Co-Founder Native Earthworks Society

Before Columbus bumped into the new world, indigenous peoples of the Americas settled disputes over natural resources the way such disputes have always been settled by humans, they went to war. Larger more powerful tribes moved into the better areas and moved other tribes out. Winning tribes would take adult prisoners and enslave them to serve the tribe while adopting the very young of the vanquished into the tribe. Some Great Lakes tribes practiced wars of genocide where ever member of an opposing tribe was killed. War, slavery, torture, murder, thievery, deceit, envy and lust were not brought to the new world by Europeans; they were already here, as they are in every human culture.

Here between two seas the indigenous peoples of the Americas were isolated from contact with the ancient peoples of Europe, Africa, and Asia. In that isolation they made slower technological progress, particularly in North America where writing, mathematics and the smelting of metals were never developed.

It was inevitable that the isolation would end and predictable that the larger more technologically advanced group would impose it's will upon the indigenous peoples of the Americas. If first contact would not have been in the 15th century, then it would have been in the 16th century and the initial technological difference would have been even greater. The wisdom of humankind in dealing with it's own kind is still insufficient in the 21st century to have done justice to the indigenous peoples of the Americas.

We cannot undo that past and those hoping to impose the injustices done in the past upon the current generation are doomed to fail. The current generation takes no responsibility for the actions of prior generations, many of whom are as far removed from their ancestral line as they are from the ancestral line of the indigenous peoples themselves.

For the sake of their future generations, this generation of indigenous peoples should seek to fully integrate into the dominate culture, which is becoming a world culture. People of all races enjoy the benefits of modern America while keeping connections to the culture of their ancestors. Many indigenous people have done the same and prospered.

A wise policy for this nation would be to help reservation residents leave the reservation through scholarship programs, job training, matching wages (like the current earned income program), and federal contract set asides. Some of these programs are already in place. Only then will the excuse to fail be gone, and with it the power it has to destroy lives.

As always, the same racial hatred rears its ugly head in regard to American Indians and people who obviously don't have a clue as to the history of what has been done to native nations, open their mouths and insert their foot and show how ignorant and racist they truly are.

If it wasn't so sad, I would have to laugh loud and hard at the insinuations made by people of how good the Indians have it - oh wow! all those "free" government handouts - wow!!!! Commodities - cheese and butter - maybe some peanut butter thrown in once in a while. No jobs because in most states the prejudice continues against American Indians and the wall of white society goes up - Indians Not Wanted Here.