Dear Richard,

That is why I put "we" in quotation marks.  It was irony.  Also I
teach the Constitution, so I read it all every year.

So I am fascinated by your details about specific tribes, but I am
not sure what I said that implied I would take Euro-centric and/or
ignorantly chauvinist positions on any of this.
Cheers,
Nancy

Date sent:              Sun, 21 Sep 2003 12:05:11 -0600
Send reply to:          "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
From:                   Richard Seddon <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:                Re: TSE Digest - 9 Sep 2003 to 10 Sep 2003 (#2003-203)
To:                     [log in to unmask]

Nancy:

One of my problems is the use of "We".  "We" no more changed
Native American cultures than the modern French are responsible
for the change in English culture after William.

The U S Army was beaten by the Sioux.  The reason was that the
Sioux were using "modern" repeating rifles and were very angry
while Custer's men were using U.S. Army specified single shots.

The Navajo were defeated by Kit Carson because certain spiritual
leaders had convinced them that they were unkillable and led them
into a box canyon on the Dine'tah.  They got beat by their own
traditions on their own lands because of mis-leadership by their own
leaders.

The Seminole were never defeated by the U S Army and have yet to
sign a treaty.  They are, I assume, still at war with the United
States.

BTW:  around 1960 the Taos declared war on the United States over
the use of a sacred lake by fishermen.  The Taos won perhaps the
last "Indian war".

BTW:  Within the last 4 years one of the New Mexico Pueblo
Governors set up road blocks on one of New Mexico's main
highways where it crosses his Pueblo.  He won his dispute.

BTW:  The Navajo, the largest US Native American tribe, about
500,000 live in Dene'tah, has no casinos that I know of.  The Dene'
are against gambling.

Furthermore so as not to confuse the Europeans overly much, the U
S constitution delineates specified powers to a Federal government.
The constitution specifically assigns all non delineated powers to
the several States.  Because the Virginians at the constitutional
convention were concerned their citizens would be deprived of
certain rights they had under their existing constitution a Bill of
Rights was attached to the constitution.  This specified certain
rights of Individuals that any government could not infringe upon.
Interpretations of this Bill of Rights has resulted in a great extension
of the power of the Federal government especially in the last 50
years.  However, the individual states are still very individual.  There
is an enormous amount of difference between New Mexico law and
the law of the neighboring state of Colorado.  An entirely separate
body of law under the U. S. constitution governs Treaty law.  Many
of the various Native American tribes have treaties with the U S
government. The relationship of those tribes with the U S
government and the State or States that they live in is much colored
by those treaties.  The various Native American tribes, and
especially the Navajo, have members who are some of the most
respected practicers of Treaty law.  A trip to the Dene'tah town of
Shiprock, NM is most educational.  One is immediately struck with
the Sovereignty of the Navajo.

Rick Seddon
McIntosh, NM

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nancy Gish" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 10:56 AM
Subject: Re: TSE Digest - 9 Sep 2003 to 10 Sep 2003 (#2003-203)


> Dear Richard,
>
> I do know about the very different histories of native cultures after
> Europeans arrived, and I realize many retain sovereign nations and
> cultures.  The largest "minority" in Maine is native American, and they
> also are sovereign--though that does not stop the state from intervening
> in water rights and fishing rights and causing conflicts. So you are
> right that I was too general in my statement.  But it is true that
> Europeans took the land and that the United States is now a nation and a
> culture based on European (mainly British) legal, political, and
> cultural history.  The native Americans own pockets of land and often
> struggle to sustain their ways of life (hence casinos, etc.).  So
> "destroyed" may be too strong, but in comparison to the time before "we"
> (though I have a native American ancestor, I have no family history of
> the culture) came, it is probably not. Best, Nancy
>
>
> Date sent:              Sun, 21 Sep 2003 10:28:30 -0600
> Send reply to:          "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum."
<[log in to unmask]>
> From:                   Richard Seddon <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject:                Re: TSE Digest - 9 Sep 2003 to 10 Sep 2003
(#2003-203)
> To:                     [log in to unmask]
>
> Nancy
>
> Which Native American culture are you referring to, the Navajo, the
> Taos, the Mescalero Apache,  the Jicarilla Apache, the Hopi, the Santa
> Clara, the Jemez, the Zuni or some Peoples?   The Navajo and the Taos
> speak languages as different as German and Italian.  There are at least
> 5 separate languages among the Puebloans.  You are assuming a Pan-Native
> American culture that never existed except maybe in Hollywood.
> Furthermore, all Native Americans did not experience the total physical
> eradication that the Native Newfoundlanders did at the hands of the
> European Canadians.
>
> Many members of the tribes I listed live in their traditional culture
> and would very much resent it being dismissed as "destroyed".
>
> BTW:  The sovereign tribes of the Navajo and the Hopi happen to be
> currently in a state of aggression towards each other.  They are
> sufficiently sovereign to have "foreign" policies.  Few puebloans like
> the Navajo and some actually prefer Anglo company to Navajo.  Since I
> spent a significant part of my "growing up" time with the Navajo I sort
> of side with the Navajo but can understand the Puebloan point of view.
>
> Rick Seddon
> McIntosh, NM
>