The Cherokee Nation, that rump group of Native Americans who are more proud of their White heritage than their Black heritage, voted to expel Blacks from the nation. That means they have to share $$$$ coming to the tribe via US government and gaming enterprises, with fewer people.
Among the many who have spoken up about this is the Congressional Black Caucus, which, according to the Associated Press, is asking the federal government “to weigh in on the legality of a vote by the Cherokee Nation earlier this month to revoke citizenship from descendants of former tribal slaves."
This from the AP: "Saying they were 'shocked and outraged,' more than two dozen members of the Congressional Black Caucus signed a letter to the Interior Department's Bureau of Indian Affairs questioning the 'validity, legality, as well as the morality' of the March 3 vote.
"'The black descendant Cherokees can trace their Native American heritage back in many cases for more than a century,' said Rep. Diane Watson (D-Calif.). 'They are legally a part of the Cherokee Nation through history, precedent, blood and treaty obligations.'”
Read what Mike Shelton, a member of the state legislature in Oklahama, says about how the Cherokee Nation is marching on the wrong trail: http://www.muskogeephoenix.com/opinion/local_story_070192128.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
It's funny how all the "Others" kinda hafta choose to be Black or white. I remember observing this in high school.
Apparently, it's still going on - hopefully less-so than before.
The Freedman and Intermarried white lived among the Cherokee people but were never considered as Cherokee and therefore not citizens of the Cherokee Nation. The recent vote is yet another attempt at clarifying this.
Experts on all sides of the issue agree that the non-Indian rolls of the Cherokee Nation were made up almost entirely of non-Indians. It is unfortunate that some of these non-Indians chose to play a race card and choose to play victim rather than explaining to why these descendants should be considered as Cherokee.
The Cherokee Nation vote did not exclude those of any other race (Black, White, Etc.) that could prove Cherokee blood lineage. It only excluded anyone (Any Race) from claiming Cherokee Citizenship of those who could not prove Cherokee blood lineage. If a black or other race individual can prove blood lineage, the vote did not exempt them from Cherokee Tribal Citizenship.
This also leads to the question of heritage and culture. Why would any race decide to pursue the heritage and history of another culture rather then their predominate culture? Does one drop of blood constitute a person as that race over their dominate race? Why does everyone want to be an Indian these days?
The rights of the Cherokee Freedmen were established under the 1866 treaty with the U.S. federal government.
If one group of right-holders decides to separate from another group of right-holders, that't fine.
It's quite another thing to say that one group of right-holders is entitled to all the assets.
When the Cherokee Freedmen go, of course they should take their fair share of the assets and then set up a separate tribe.
No need to stay where they aren't wanted.
Coming from a Cherokee/Choctaw background most people from Natives to Americans do not have the full story. During the 1800's in places like Mississippi, Tennessee, Carolina, the census man would come to the door of the dwellings of Native peoples. They would take your family's names, number of members, and ages. They would then ask you your ethnicity. When you answered "Indian" they would go away as if nothing happened. Next thing you know, this information would be used against you and a soldier or government official would later come knocking on your family's door, make you gather your belongings, take your house, take your land, and send your family on foot to Oklahoma (the famous Trail of Tears). So many family's caught on so when a government man (they called the official "the white man") census man or whoever came to the door for any reason, the popular and safest thing to say was that you were mulatto. Natives during this time hid under the auspices of being "colored" or "mulatto" to escape the threat of being masacred or removed from their sacred lands. Many refused to sign any type of roll or reveal their true identity on the census for fear of the above. Yet the tradition of passing down among family of what Native tribe you belonged to remained strong yet secretive. See Native Americans were not allowed to be citizens of the United States until the 1920's. With that being said to claim Native American ancestry and not reside on a reservation was dangerous. Hundreds of thousands of Cherokee marched the trail of tears yet millions remained where they were, renaming themselves for survival. Many were not privy to governmental ordinances, treaties, or laws regarding them. All they knew is when you see a "white man" at the door tell him such and such so he'll go away. At that time, you didn't know what you were up against so you kept it short sweet, or you didn't answer the door at all. So to say that the paperwork from that era is a complete and trustworthy one is unrealistic. The political climate of that time gives no indication of fairness and a need to sustain human rights. If one were to look at the "freedman" and Cherokee history one would see that Cherokees owned slaves and intermarried having children with them. One would also see that white slavemasters owned Cherokee and Native slaves. The books that support both of these are Wilma Mankillers book, a former Cherokee Chief clearly indicates in one chapter how the holy men of the tribe surely dissapproved of the Cherokee's slaveholding and felt it went against the Great Creators laws. Also you will find that many slave holders had Cherokee and Choctaw slaves of which many intermarried with African slaves. And you will also find many full-blood Native Americans living as African-americans today because their great-grandparents decided and determined to save and preserve their family from the threats of Indian removal. And then their are Natives who live as Natives yet their names are on no ones role and they lack the health care, monetary benefits, etc because somebody somewhere didn't sign a roll before they were born.
With all of this, what am I trying to say. There is no other group that requires so much documentation of who they are after they've been totally stolen from. So I propose the following........A DNA TEST!
Yet many would shun this because it would expose some and pull back covers on others that have been collecting benefits for generations yet have not one ounce of Native blood. And let me tell you why. When the rolls were being developed and implemented do you actually trust a government at that time, with it's political climate to be totally trustworthy with its dealings of who made the list. With ones signature on the rolls, one was promised land and benefits so many "whites" signed on as Natives in order to receive this things encouraged by the agents who were sent to sign people up. Yet actual Natives were put through the whole "you look Native or you don't" and were judged strictly by features. And we now want to hold up this same document in 2008 as the standard of who is Native and what it means to be Native. If your whole tribe was masaquered in one fell swoop, would you be racing to sign some document with a group of people who had a M.O. for unorthodox ways in their dealings. How could our forefathers and foremothers have known that had they signed the roll, signed a census, told the truth about who they were and their family lineage that there would be a casino check in the mail for future generations. All they knew is that they had to preserve their family at the time and titles and ethnic identity and its governmental benefits was a foreign way of thinking. It didn't make any sense. People in an 1800's Washington making decrees and treaties that these people probably never knew about or read about. Now their descendents suffer the consequences of having been stripped of their identity, stripped of the ability to reclaim it. And as for the Freedmen Cherokee, being denied the right to even uphold a treaty that is obvious when you read it. Cherokee, Choctaw, and Africans had a relationship that was threatening the government of that time. These people early allegiance to eachother began to make a new kind of people black indians. This cut into the slave inventory seeing that Natives were considered free and Africans considered to be slaves. So how would they deal with a group of people who incompassed both. Simple make a law that forbade indians and "negroes" from mingling and introducing enslavement practices to the Cherokee, Choctaw, and Chickasaw (of the 5 civilized tribes). Yet the union between African and Natives proved strong among the Seminoles of that time and Florida was held down by this intermarried group defeating the U.S. government for a while. Cherokees should read Wilma Mankillers book and heed the words of the healers and holymen and educate themselves by actually reading the freedman treaty and reading Native American and African narratives of that time.
Yet if a casino check is motivating you, then you will be a co-conspirating to a history that has yet to tell the whole story. When Joseph was sold into slavery, he later helped his brothers when he became the Ruler of Egypt. It would be good if people could take note of this story.
Post a Comment