December 28, 2007

Why Means thinks he's free

"Lakota Nation" Confirmed--They Are Not Part of the U.S.The times, they are achangin'. Go to the website. There you'll see Canupa Gluha Mani of the Strong Heart Warrior Society of the Lakota Nation cutting up his colonial driver's license. He's doing this because on December 17th 2007 the Lakota delivered their "Declaration of Continuing Independence", just in time for the Winter Solstice.The rationale:Treaties concluded through bribery and with colonial puppets, instead of with valid representatives of our people, are not legal. It should be borne in mind that most, not all, of the treaties ever made with the colonizers granted them only very limited rights that fall far short of the greedy advantages they imagined. They had no intention of ever living up to any treaty. They were hell bent on stealing everything. The U.S. and Canada came as profiteers and fraudulently tried to steal all our assets.

Such documents were concocted in clear violation of international law then and now. This requires the informed consent of the people concerned. No state can incorporate another unless a clear majority of the people has expressed consent through fairly conducted democratic processes based on a clear question.
Comment:  I'd love to see the 19th-century international laws that applied to Indian treaties. I'd love to see the specific clauses that say such treaties must be ratified by a popular vote. I've never heard of any treaties that require a popular vote, but perhaps I'm not versed enough in international law.

But wait, there's more:Should all Indigenous nations of Onowaregeh, Turtle Island, assert our freedom and independence, what would happen? The action of the "Lakota" is going to have repercussions far and wide.

The colonists would go out of business, especially the oligarchs. They would have to work out agreements with all the Indigenous people on whose land they are squatting. Indigenous "liens" on buildings, development, resource extraction and all activities on our land will have to be governed and executed by us. Each Indigenous nation will assert our power over our lands, assets and resources. The colonies of U.S. and Canada will just have to become law abiding. They will have to learn to respect indigenous and international law. This will not bring a catastrophe for the ordinary people living on our land. They just have to come to terms with the reality that they are living within our jurisdiction, that they are visitors on our land and that they are required to follow our law.

The pointlessness of their former reliance on their handpicked "Indian" puppets set up by the colonial Indian Act band councils and federal Indian law tribal councils will become obvious. These sell-outs will have to live amongst their relatives without colonial power and support. Whisky, money and guns will lose their mystical attraction.
Comment:  This whole screed is based on the mistaken notion that a Lakota "nation" of people exists independently of the various Lakota tribes recognized by the federal government. And that this "nation" can make decisions for the Lakota people independently of those tribes. Wrong on both counts.

So 560-plus tribal governments are "colonial puppets" and "sell-outs"? And all the Indians who voted for them are also "colonial puppets"? Is everyone a "colonial puppet" except Means and his group?

This whole stunt is based on the fantasy that 560-plus Indian tribes will rise up against their duly-elected governments and overthrow them. And that the US government will recognize and accept these revolutions as legitimate. Neither action is ever going to happen.

In fact, I'll bet that not a single tribal government will vote to join Means in abrogating its treaties and declaring its independence. I have $100 that says I'm right and Means is wrong. Anyone care to take the bet?


dmarks said...

"This whole stunt is based on the fantasy that 560-plus Indian tribes will rise up against their duly-elected governments and overthrow them"

Shades of Tecumseh!

Now, what about the fact that the Lakota, prior to white man coming, hardly ventured past western Minnesota? I don't think that Minnesota is even in this land-grab list; just a bunch of other states. What of the other tribes who were pushed from these lands, or are still there, who might not agree with this?

writerfella said...

Writerfella here --
Rob, your money is safe, unless (for whatever reason) Russell Means decides to take you up on your bet...
All Best
Russ Bates