Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Lakota Tribes: Stop This Country, We Want to Get Off!

Posted by Joshua Holland, AlterNet at 11:41 AM on December 21, 2007.


Independence movements: they're catchy.
buffalodancer
lakota

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Rights and Liberties in your
mailbox!

 

Well, well, well. This is certainly interesting …

The Lakota Indians, who gave the world legendary warriors Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse, have withdrawn from treaties with the United States.
"We are no longer citizens of the United States of America and all those who live in the five-state area that encompasses our country are free to join us,'' long-time Indian rights activist Russell Means said.
A delegation of Lakota leaders has delivered a message to the State Department, and said they were unilaterally withdrawing from treaties they signed with the federal government of the U.S., some of them more than 150 years old.
The group also visited the Bolivian, Chilean, South African and Venezuelan embassies, and would continue on their diplomatic mission and take it overseas in the coming weeks and months.
Lakota country includes parts of the states of Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana and Wyoming.
[...]
The treaties signed with the U.S. were merely "worthless words on worthless paper," the Lakota freedom activists said.

The only thing that's surprising is that there hasn't been a more aggressive push towards self-determination for indigenous Americans. We're all familiar with the struggles of groups like the Kurds in Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran, or the Basque in Spain and Southern France, among others, but there are independence movements going on all over the world. That our own indigenous nations haven't struggled to secede -- with obvious exceptions like the AIM movement -- is, I suppose, a testament to just how thoroughly Europeans wiped out the natives. The Chechens, Nunavut, Palestinians and Papua New Guineans may have had some fight left in them, but America's indigenous people were well and truly decimated, and the fact that they remain living in squalid poverty in Bantustans called "reservations" -- and that everyone goes about their business like that's not a big deal -- really speaks to that unique American combination of extreme brutality and the exceptionalism that allows us to deny its existence.

The Lakota actually declared independence back in the mid-1970s, but that went nowhere. It's worth noting that a shifting perception of indigenous rights in general is part of the equation:

[The effort gained momentum] in September, when the United Nations adopted a non-binding declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples -- despite opposition from the United States, which said it clashed with its own laws.
"We have 33 treaties with the United States that they have not lived by. They continue to take our land, our water, our children,'' Phyllis Young, who helped organize the first international conference on indigenous rights in Geneva in 1977, told the news conference.
One note about the plan: the Lakota intend to issue their own passports and driver's licenses, and anyone within their territory would be eligible for citizenship. Citizens of the new state would live tax-free, and all a person has to do is renounce their allegiance to the United States.

I can see conservative heads exploding over that Sophie's Choice: On the one hand, you can live in Nebraska without ever paying taxes again, but on the other, you've got to become a dirty, rotten, un-American foreigner and can never mindlessly (but honestly) scream U-S-A! U-S-A! at a sporting event again.

Digg!

Tagged as: separatists, lakota, native-americans

Joshua Holland is an editor and senior writer at AlterNet.


Is It Cruel and Unusual to Sentence Teens to Die In Prison?
The Supreme Court is hearing two cases today that will affect the fate of more than 2,500 people sentenced to life without parole as teenagers.
Post by Liliana Segura. November 9, 2009.
Students Who Exposed 30-Year-Old Wrongful Conviction Being Targeted By Chicago DA
It's shocking that the state would rather keep an innocent man behind bars than admit a mistake.
Post by Ari Berman. November 9, 2009.
The Ugly Politics of Mass Killings
Where's the liberal cover-up?
Post by Steve M.. November 7, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
What about healthcare?
Posted by: Seabrook on Dec 21, 2007 1:03 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was just one the Pine Ridge Reservation (Lakota) last summer, talking to women's health activists about their struggles, and I have to say that this news strikes me as a mixed bag, at best.

Firstly, the activists I talked to were highly critical of Means, the man who appears to have led this effort at succession. They saw him as a self-promoter who didn't have a realistic appreciation of the difficulties faced by people in Pine Ridge, particularly women.

Secondly, despite the fact that the US government has not lived up to its treaty obligations (and has actively violated Native people's human rights on a systematic basis), the US government does currently pay many peoples' salaries on the reservation, and funds a pretty decent hospital (the problem with the hospital is that people have a really hard time getting there, since there are no buses and most families do not have cars). If this succession really goes through, what happens if the US government stops funding the hospital???

Just a few thoughts...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What about healthcare? Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: What about healthcare? Posted by: gathaiga
» RE: What about healthcare? Posted by: peacefullaim
» RE: What about healthcare? Posted by: newtype_alpha
» RE: What about healthcare? Posted by: anonymous black writer
Serious Implications
Posted by: SavageDissension on Dec 21, 2007 1:44 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I actually stumbled onto this little nugget of news yesterday, and I'd like to thank Alternet for diving into this fascinating development. I was shocked (still am) when I'd read about it, but was even more shocked that this had happened with almost no media acknowledgement or discussion.

I cheer for the Lakota on this one (I have family who are closely related back to the pure tribe living in that region) and certainly hope they can find a way to make this succeed, although I realistically realize that they face a whole horde of issues that will be no easy feat to overcome. Frankly, I doubt they'll manage to pull this off (or if they do, if it'll be much of an improvement over their current situation) but I continue to applaud the movement if only because it'll be an excellent move towards from new developments in this country; if, that is, it gets proper coverage and people are made aware of it's occurrence.

That's where I really hope Alternet comes through. Based on what I've seen of media coverage of this event, I think that the establishment has a vested interest in keeping this quiet. I doubt the average American even knows this is going on or why, and there will be no public discourse on this so long as that remains the case. Truly, this is the time for netroots and citizens to look into this issue and keep it current and updated. It's a hotpoint of real dissent in this country; people performing serious, life-changing, world-changing activities, and it could be the start of something big. I can't even begin to fathom the ripples something like this might have, but I can guarantee that there will be no ripples if no one talks about this. If the government can keep this quiet, odds are good they'll move in, take care of it their way (and we have evidence of what "their way" encompasses) and no one will be any the wiser.

I fervently hope that Alternet and the rest of our devoted, thinking citizens can seriously discuss this issue and what'll it'll mean for us.

As I said, I'm still in a bit of shock as to what it all means. For now, I think the best I can do is keep an eye on things and engage anyone I can to talk about it.

One question, though: Who'll be the one to design the new US flag?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Serious Implications Posted by: peacefullaim
I have heard Russel Means talk
Posted by: UnEasyOne on Dec 21, 2007 3:45 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whoo! That dude is pissed! Not an admirer of "Manifest Destiny" - to say the least.

No reasonable person can deny their many grievances; what I wonder is how many of the Lakota support this move. Are the vast majority of the Sioux as militant as he? Will Means make things better or simply wind up back in prison?

This country was frankly built on slavery, genocide and injustice.

OK, what do we do about it? Frankly, I don't have a clue. There are many actions we can take - such as releasing the untold billions "held in trust" for various tribes by the Department of the Interior. But an overall solution? I ain't gonna leave - where would I go? I have ancestors from here and all over Europe.

This is a tangled mess; unless (and it doesn't sound like it) Means has toned down his approach a bit, he'll accomplish very little - except to be hunted, captured and imprisoned - as he was in the 70s.

Maybe he has changed - but the last time I heard him speak, he pretty much hated me because I'm white and here. I would like to see as much of the injustice as possible rectified, but I ain't gonna drop dead just to please him. Neither are a couple hundred million of the rest of us.

If we DID, what would happen? More Europeans, Russians, Chinese, Mexicans and so on would come in to replace us. The kind of low density population that this country used to have won't ever happen again, barring eradication of 90% of the world's population.

What Means can accomplish is to get attention for his cause; hopefully something positive will happen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

i'd do it...
Posted by: mammamaia on Dec 21, 2007 3:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...if i could be a citizen of hopiland!... i lived with the hopi for a good while and saw firsthand how the us gummint has only added to the abuses those gentle people had already suffered under the harsh, thieving hands of the conquering spanish and then the migrating navajo...

...i'd vote for all 'first nation' people, as the canadians call them, being free of the yokes all such 'treaties' locked around their necks, with virtually none of the promised quid pro quo being honored...

love and hugs, maia
www.saysmom.com
for 100% free writing help: maia3maia@hotmail.com

"You must BE the change you wish to see in the world." Gandhi

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: i'd do it... Posted by: ankhet
This isn't actually true
Posted by: Seabrook on Dec 21, 2007 4:02 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
or, at best, it is misleading....

Apparently, Means et al are not backed up by the tribal council on this one... (which explains the reference to the ancestors -- he is trying to claim an authority that he otherwise doesn't have to speak on behalf of the Lakota people).

linked text

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hmmm... can they grow hemp there now?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Dec 21, 2007 5:30 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
See this story: Pine Ridge farmer struggles to grow hemp July 06, 2007

"He said he became interested in growing hemp in 1998 after seeing country star Willie Nelson promote it. The OST also passed a measure legalizing the growing of hemp on the reservation."

"The tribal law should have been enough to allow hemp farming because of the sovereignty granted to the Lakota by treaties, White Plume said."

"White Plume planted hemp on his land in 2000, planning to make money by selling the seed to others, but U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration agents cut down his plants a few days before he intended to harvest them. The DEA also seized similar plantings by his brother and sister in the next two years."


Basically, the problem is still the federal government. Treaties, no treaties, it doesn't really matter. Basically the issue is this: why can't this Lakota farmer grow hemp without interference from the federal government? Especially since there are so few economic opportunities on reservations?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Lakota Nation - an American Netherlands? Posted by: meetmeineleusis
Indian country says Means has no standing
Posted by: Davidco on Dec 22, 2007 5:32 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Suzan Harjo, a columnist for Indian Country Today comments:

"News flash to Means: treaties are made between nations; you are a person and not a nation; you are not empowered to speak for the Great Sioux Nation; as an individual, you can only withdraw yourself from coverage of your nation's treaties."

She goes on to observe: "Means is the same Oglala Sioux actor who tried to beat domestic violence charges by challenging the sovereign authority of the Navajo Nation to prosecute him - he took it all the way to the Supreme Court and lost."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Means is a side issue
Posted by: davidg on Dec 22, 2007 6:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't know much about Means but he is the side issue. It is red flag to the nation...what is America and who wants to belong to what it ahs become? The country with such a profoundly inspired constitution is now governed by a junta of class interests who are war criminals. We all need a course in critical history, not the history of heroes, to see how we got here. And I suppose that's univerally true in all countries, but in the USA...urgent.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Means is a side issue Posted by: peacefullaim
» RE: Means is the only issue Posted by: Davidco
» RE: Means is the only issue Posted by: davidg
» RE: Means is the only issue Posted by: Davidco
Think about this.
Posted by: OldRedleg on Dec 22, 2007 12:44 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Those of you who support this maneuver probably have your hearts in the right places but your heads are fluttering about in outer space. As ugly as the westward expansion of the US was (is?) to the natives occupying the land, it is a done thing here in the continental USA. This totally foolish ploy will only generate more hostility and bigotry toward Native Americans, and will only strengthen the hands of the idiots who are already trying to seal this country into a fenced white enclave.

Besides, does anyone really believe that the Sioux were the original inhabitants of the Black Hills? Check your history. They are also guilty of pushing the previous inhabitants out and taking the land. Will that be addressed? This is the unfortunate history of life on this planet for all plants and animals trying to survive and advance.

Obviously, things SHOULD have been better now that humans have pretty much filled the planet with our species. But the unfair competition and greed is still there for those who are allowed to get away with it. There are much better ways to reconcile and correct the wrongs that the US did to the then indigenous peoples of America. This most definitely is not one of them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My Opinion
Posted by: lakota_woman on Dec 25, 2007 2:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I found Russell Means statement that he and three other people were withdrawing from the 1851 and 1868 Sioux treaties very irrational. The tribes of the Sioux Nation. are already regarded by the Federal courts and Congress as separate nations that exist outside the U.S. Constitution. So they cannot secede from the United States. They were never was part of the United States to begin with.

But more importantly, Russell Means and three other tribal members from the Oglala Sioux Tribe and the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe have no authority to withdraw their tribes from the 1851 and 1868 Treaties. If they don't want to be part of the Sioux treaties all they has to do is relinquish their tribal membership and the treaties will no longer apply to them.

A good chronology of the Sioux land claims can be found in Appendix H of tribal attorney Mario Gonzalez's book "The Politics of Hallowed Ground, Wounded Knee and the Struggle for Indian Sovereignty." It is a historical fact that it was Mr. Gonzalez and not Russell Means or AIM that successfully led the Sioux people's efforts to stop the payment of the Indian Claims Commission awards in Dockets 74-A and 74-B in the nineteen eighties. Appendix H from Mr. Gonzalez's books is available through Google.com, but I would recommend to readers interesting in learning about Sioux treaties and land claims to read the book.

How important is it for the Sioux tribes to reject the land claims award? Mr. Gonzalez gave several reasons when he spoke to one of my college classes. But I think one of the best reasons was given by President Putin of Russia in a December 20, 2007, article that was printed in the whatdoesitmean.com blog:

"Reports circulating in the Kremlin today state that an enraged President Putin has ordered Russian Foreign Ministry Officials to begin the processes needed for Russia to recognize the Lakota Sioux Indian Tribe as an independent Nation, and who have now broken away from the United States by renouncing their treaties with their occupiers, and as we can read as reported by the AFP News Service . . .

Putin’s anger, according to these reports, is based upon the United States engineering of the failure of United Nations talks on the Serbian breakaway province of Kosovo which is seeking independence, and which, according to Russian experts, will lead to an ‘uncontrollable crisis’ throughout the Balkans.

Putin was reported to have told one of his top aides that ‘two can play at this game’, in an obvious reference to the American President whom President Putin blames as being behind the machinations to increase instability along Russia’s borders with Eastern Europe.

Russian legal experts further state that of all of the United States Indian Tribes, the Lakota Sioux are the best positioned to have their declaration of independence from the American government recognized by the United Nations as they remain the only indigenous peoples in the US to have refused to accept payment for their lands, estimated to be nearly $1 billion, which they consider their ‘sacred grounds’ and have stated they would never relinquish."

I do not support Russell Means' actions by quoting this article. I only wish to show the importance of the Sioux tribes' efforts in rejecting Indian Claims Commission's award and demanding a fairer settlement of the claims.

The 1868 Treaty was a treaty of peace, and if the Federal and State governments would withdraw their continuous assault on the sovereignty of the Sioux tribes and allow them to benefit from their own lands and resources, the Sioux people and their White neighbors could learn to live side by side in peace and prosperity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

in addition to what I just wrote...
Posted by: anonymous black writer on Dec 25, 2007 8:34 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Also, the few freedoms that we have came from people standing up to make it a reality, not going along to get along. We may need just this-standing up-now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

and...
Posted by: anonymous black writer on Dec 25, 2007 8:53 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I also want to make the argument that flawed though Russel Means may be, his cause is an important one and he brings up good points. I can understand people not agreeing with him, his stance, or approach. But even if you don't see a need for his actions or agree, current conditions leave much to be desired regardless of this. Business as usual don't seem to be working as it stands now. Perhaps it could be worse but maybe it could be better.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where am I/
Posted by: learner on Dec 26, 2007 3:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The year 2007.Seven years into the 21st century.Where have I been?What can I say?I speak for non one but myself.I get to vote in 2008.
Was there a treaty made for voting?So, if there is no treaty to vote .Then we get to vote for more of the same.War is Peace or is Peace War?It is a little confusing or is it.Does it take a rocket scientist to know what is happening to US.All of US.The politics of the day .I promise.I will.
When I vote in 2008
I want to make sure the person I vote for has the best smile.Nicest haircut,prettiest teeth,and That wives,husbands and children have the best medical and dental care available.They are diven in vechiles which are safe.Attend the best schools available that money and influence can buy.
These people knows what best for all of us.The sick,hungry and poor.Those that know what the best medical care is for all.Medicine is cheap.Or, is it what does it really cost and sure we should be taking our pill a day to protect our love ones.
I don't know Russell Means ,but I have met some of his Peoples during my life time.I have had ocassion to sit in circle with a Sioux
Medicine Man.Who really are these Peoples.Not some more of them,those,and others.
Lets be down to earth.Lets bring it home.
Is it possible to do this.I don't know.
Lets go for win/win relations,making thoughtful choices,and being solution focused.
May the Great Mystery the Mother/ Father
God be with us all on our paths.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I Have Already Seceded
Posted by: mn on Dec 27, 2007 2:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do it today! You can! Try it!

I am Manderso Nation. After the 2000 election abortion I seceded from the USA. How did I do it? I did it in my own mind! That was all that was necessary!!

Remember Shelley? He did it too. Join us. You are not that far away already. Means is just kick-starting a trend that is well on the way.

The USA is dead. Kick it while it's down, before its voracious maw of debt kills you and your family. The USA is the whole problem, just be done with it. Thanks!

Senior Agent Manderso Nation
Black Rock Travel Agency, since '37

mikea@nevadacityfreepress.com
www.nevadacityfreepress.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]