|
A dark day for Indian country?
by Rod Van Mechelen
Conservative American Indian Republicans—ConservativeAIR.com™
Posted November 14, 2004 4AM PST
Pundits fear Bush victory threatens Indian country.
The lamentations in Indian country over George W. Bush's decisive victory are loud:
I am disappointed we are saddled with another four years of the Bush administration. In the pit of my stomach, there is a foreboding—the feeling the nation is in for a rough ride. — Tribes show some poll clout, by Dorreen Yellow Bird, Grand Forks Herald, November 6, 2004
Others, such as Eddie Chuculate, are downright alarmist:
Color Nov. 2 black. Just about every ballot issue or candidate who could have benefited American Indians was beaten down convincingly, after brainwashed Bible thumpers and rubes had their way. — Our gloom: American Indians lost out as Bush won on that dark Tuesday, by Eddie Chuculate, Albuquerque Tribune, November 10, 2004
Columnist Tim Giago calls it "fightening." But their melodramatic views, intentionally or not, are misinformed, contradictory and ignorant. Giago's, in particular.
First, he reminds us of the judgmental settlers who, in the mid‑ to late‑1800s, condemned the Indian practice of men having more than one wife. "This was not a moral issue to the Indian tribes," Giago asserts, "but one of necessity."
If they asked they would have discovered that Indian values determined how the wives and children were cared for in the event of the death of the father. Indians did this because it was a very tough world out there and a woman alone with children would have had a very difficult time surviving. — On the cutting edge of "moral values", by Tim Giago, Native American Times, November 8, 2004
Then, after asserting it was not a moral issue, he contradicts himself: "Survival not sex was the moral issue here."
Necessity—the requirements of survival—determines our values. These values form the basis for our principles, which, in conservative cultures, determine our morals. Because the requirements of human survival are everywhere the same, most principles, and their concomitant morals, are universal. The prohibitions against murder and theft, for example. Even a man taking more than one wife. There is no Biblical prohibition against it. Maybe the controversy of gay marriage motivated Giago to mention it.
Ignoring history
Giago does not stop with marriage, however, but points to the dark history of America with respect to Indian religions:
The United States government and their Christian ministers determined that the Sun Dance of the Great Sioux Nation was immoral. … The sacred Sun Dance of the Lakota was outlawed. Freedom of religion is only for those with the power to set the rules. — On the cutting edge of "moral values", by Tim Giago, Native American Times, November 8, 2004
While historically accurate, his assertions presume a context in which conservatives are to blame. It was, however, the liberal ideology of Manifest Destiny that, more than any other, excused the settlers to squat on Indian land, from whence they demanded that the federal government protect them from the "savages."
All Indian country suffered for this. Some right‑wing pundits carp that this was long ago, and we should get over it. Yes, and the Nazi Holocaust was a long time ago, too; yet, we remember. Another generation, and there will be no survivors of that holocaust left. Is that reason to forget? Of course not. It's one thing to "get over it," and another to forget.
We do not forget the squatters, whose liberal views excused them for the murder of Indians and the theft of Indian lands. But Giago makes the mistake of forgetting that it was during the Administration of another deeply religious president—Jimmy Carter—that the American Indian Religious Freedom Act was passed:
On and after August 11, 1978, it shall be the policy of the United States to protect and preserve for American Indians their inherent right of freedom to believe, express, and exercise the traditional religions of the American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, and Native Hawaiians, including but not limited to access to sites, use and possession of sacred objects, and the freedom to worship through ceremonials and traditional rites. — American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978, TITLE 42, CHAPTER 21, SUBCHAPTER I, § 1996. Protection and preservation of traditional religions of Native Americans
Carter, like Bush, was not shy about expressing his beliefs during his Administration:
In Georgia Carter became a prominent businessman and active citizen, known as a liberal on racial matters. He was elected to the state senate in 1962, was reelected two years later, and then ran unsuccessfully for governor in 1966. At this time he had a religious experience, becoming a "born-again" Christian. He won the governorship in 1970 and headed a politically moderate administration, representative of the New South. — Jimmy Carter, World Almanac for Kids, World Almanac Education Group Inc.
Nor is this the only thing that Giago forgot:
Perhaps under the new moral values of the Christian right gaming in Indian country will come under scrutiny and the devout will decide that it is not a good thing for Indian people. Once again the values and morals of the majority could crush the moral values of the minority. — On the cutting edge of "moral values", by Tim Giago, Native American Times, November 8, 2004
This is patently absurd. Far from attacking Indian gaming, it was a conservative president—Ronald Reagan—who supported it and signed the 1988 Indian Gaming Regulatory Act:
While acknowledging the federal government's responsibility to the tribes, Reagan's intentions were clear: To get government off the backs of the Indians while freeing the taxpayer from some of the financial burden of supporting the reservations. … Reagan later signed the 1988 Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, which established an oversight commission and required tribes and states to enter into compacts for the operation of casinos, horse racing and lotteries. … Reagan was betting that the states would find no justification for shutting down most Indian gambling operations, and he was right. — Unleashing the Spirit: The Reagan Administration's Indian Policy, by Jason Manning, The Eighties Club: The Ronald Reagan Resource, 2001
The major attacks on Indian gaming come primarily from liberal Republicans, backed by envious businesses, who want to expand gambling so they can profit from it, too. Such is the liberalizing impulse of the profit motive, which worships but one god, and it's name is Greed.
This is what conservatives understand about the human condition: it's easy to sell sin. To imbibe is what we want. And if what we want is frowned upon, discouraged or illegal, businesses will come forward to press for legalization and approval. So, the efforts of organizations such as the National Coalition Against Legalized Gambling notwithstanding, the most persistent efforts to undermine Indian gaming come, not from the "Christian right," but from envious businesses eager to cash in on casinos of their own.
Leftist canards
Without explanation or justification, Giago also throws in the leftist canards of abortion, stem cell research and same‑sex marriage:
It does not matter if I believe in freedom of choice for women, in same sex marriage, or in stem cell research. There are thousands of Americans who do believe in these issues. — On the cutting edge of "moral values", by Tim Giago, Native American Times, November 8, 2004
In terms of property rights, abortion is the eviction of an unwanted tenant from a woman's body. Right now, there is only one way to do that: abortion. However, with the advent of the artificial womb, transplantation will become a viable alternative. At that point, the new moral debate will be about whether it's permissible to kill the fetus when a non‑lethal alternative exists.
The liberals' criticism of Bush over stem cell research, however, is entirely a product of propaganda, as they claim that the president has prohibited it. The fact, however, is that this is only a funding issue. There is no prohibition against stem cell research, only a limitation of federal funding for fetal stem cell research.
The left also claims that Bush wants to prohibit same‑sex marriage. Contrary to what the mainstream news media reports, however, this is not the case, because there's nothing to prohibit.
Marriage, since time immemorial, has been between males and females. Sometimes that meant one male and several females, in a few instances it has meant between several males and several females. But, until very recently, it never meant between members of the same sex.
What the gay lobby is trying to do, is use the courts to redefine marriage. This is what the president, along with most Americans, opposes, and what he is committed to prohibit. The gay lobby and the press misrepresent this as prohibiting same sex marriage. This is a standard tactic of the left: label opposition as antagonism … or oppression … or aggression … or assault, anything but what it really is: resistance.
President Bush resists the leftists' efforts to redefine marriage, and so they claim he is trying to prohibit that which they seek to redefine it to include. It's just another one of the left's big lies, and as with so many on the left, Giago piles one wild‑eyed assertion on top of another in his attack on President Bush. Like the myth that the Bush Administration has refused to allocate money for Indian schools:
Indian schools will continue to crumble and the health of the Indian people will continue to deteriorate because of the lack of money. — On the cutting edge of "moral values", by Tim Giago, Native American Times, November 8, 2004
It's not that the schools are falling apart for lack of funding, but that some Indian leaders rejected the money that the Bush Administration already offered:
Catherine Begay, principal of Greasewood Springs, said the school has qualified for about $8 million in BIA money that can be used only to renovate the school.
"But it's hard to renovate something that's been built on shifting soil, is falling apart at the seams and has 40-year-old wiring in it," Begay said. "We are in desperate need of a new school, and that's going to cost $25 million to $30 million." — Navajos look to Kerry: Tribe wants crumbling schools fixed, by Mark Shaffer, Republic Flagstaff Bureau, Oct. 25, 2004 12:00 AM
Why? As a hardball negotiating tactic to get even more money:
Indian Eddie
Another member of the Indian media making "the sky is falling" exclamations, is Indian Eddie:
Color Nov. 2 black. Just about every ballot issue or candidate who could have benefited American Indians was beaten down convincingly, after brainwashed Bible thumpers and rubes had their way. — Our gloom: American Indians lost out as Bush won on that dark Tuesday, by Eddie Chuculate, Albuquerque Tribune, November 10, 2004
With all due respect, Ed, I am neither a Christian nor a rube, but I am an Indian who has been beaten down again and again by progressive thinking liberals. It's revealing to note, however, that Chuculate's major gripe isn't with conservatives, but with the fact that the people who promised the most goodies to Indian country lost:
In South Dakota, Sen. Minority Leader Tom Daschle, who worked hard for Indians and lobbied President Bush personally for more money for the Indian Health Service, was sent packing in an upset by fresh-face John Thune, who has no clout in Washington. — Our gloom: American Indians lost out as Bush won on that dark Tuesday, by Eddie Chuculate, Albuquerque Tribune, November 10, 2004
That was an "upset" which Bruce Whalen worked hard to help engineer. Whalen, chairman of the Shannon County Republican Party, in South Dakota, is Oglala Lakota.
Another "upset" that disturbs Chuculate, is Kerry's loss:
Nationally, John Kerry, who promised to appoint Indians to high offices in the White House and meet with leaders, lost, even though he was the overwhelming choice in big cities. — Our gloom: American Indians lost out as Bush won on that dark Tuesday, by Eddie Chuculate, Albuquerque Tribune, November 10, 2004
Kerry promised us programs and positions, pennies and prominence. His kind of help, we don't need. But one concern I do share with Chuculate is over liberal Republicans who lack a sense of historical perspective:
In California, voters shot down an initiative that would have allowed more gambling and given the state's poor tribes a source of income. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger opposed the initiative, yet wants more money from Indians. Schwarzenegger says tribes must come to him to negotiate better gambling contracts; tribes say he should come to them, or they'll just wait until he's out of office. — Our gloom: American Indians lost out as Bush won on that dark Tuesday, by Eddie Chuculate, Albuquerque Tribune, November 10, 2004
Schwarzenegger turned his back on history and tradition when he emigrated from Austria: To him, America is all about new beginnings. Hence, he is predisposed to reject talk of heritage and history. This is problematic, but not insurmountable. He's a smart, hard‑working man who understands property rights. Therefore, that's the basis upon which to approach him: inheritance is a property right, and Indian rights are inherited.
Handouts from the left
Most of the complaints coming from Indian country about Bush are just leftist hand‑me‑downs. Little, if any of them, are new or original, and even less are valid. The best interests of Indian country are served better by the truth.
The truth is that the Bush Administration has done a lot of long‑term good for Indian country:
But if Bush hasn't been a godsend to tribes on the trust funds, the BIA reorganization or sovereignty, he's still done well by tribes on several counts. The good things he has done, however, have been done in a different way than we're used to, with economic efficiencies and effectiveness uppermost in mind, while popular acceptance is secondary. As noted in the first installment of this two‑part article, the broad slow approach to structural improvement isn't much appreciated until it's upon us, whereupon amnesia sets in as to the problems it has solved (or often more precisely, dissolved). — The Presidents — George Walker Bush, by: Jerry Reynolds, Indian Country Today, October 12, 2004
According to Reynolds, these include reform in healthcare, education, grant making and self‑determination. To them, I would add a fifth agenda item for his second term: Uniform Business Codes (UBC) for Indian country. The president has already committed to provide $1 million toward the development of UBCs that would apply to all tribes.
This particular item is so important, because once we have UBCs in place, investment money will begin to flow into Indian country. We know it will, because Indian reservations can afford enormous regulatory advantages over state and local governments. In fact, this is one of the characteristics that anger so many businesses, who must sit by the sidelines and watch as tribal enterprises do things they can't. So, we know that non‑Indian businesses want those advantages, too.
Potentially, UBCs will make it possible for tribes to offer these advantages, by reducing the risk that investors perceive as a barrier to doing business with tribes. From this single agenda item, a veritable floodgate of investment money may flow into a multiplicity of economic development projects.
Far from foreboding a dark day for Indian country, the re‑election of President Bush presages the creation of thousands of partnerships between Indian tribes and the American people. This will change tribal life for the better, and ultimately it may even help to liberate all Americans from the leftist legacy of onerous regulations that try so hard to stifle the great American spirit.
|