Posted by [EMAIL PROTECTED] :
DOCUMENT: WISEUSE.TXT
[Ed. Note: This article may be reproduced for electronic transfer and
posting on computer bulletin boards and networks provided that no
profit is made by such transfer and that full credit is given to the
author, the Center For World Indigenous Studies and The Fourth World
Documentation Project.]
THE ANTI-INDIAN MOVEMENT IN THE WISE USE MOVEMENT
THREATENING THE CULTURAL AND BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY OF INDIAN COUNTRY
by Rudolph C. Ryser, Chairman
Center for World Indigenous Studies
(c) 1993 Center For World Indigenous Studies
(This article is adapted from _Anti-Indian Movement on the Tribal
Frontier_, Occasional Paper #16 Revised Edition, published by the
Center for World Indigenous Studies, in June 1992.)
Indian nations' lands and resources are under attack. The
successful confiscation of Indian lands and removal of Indians
from the last remnants of their original homelands will open the
door to expansionist exploitation of the western hemisphere's
last biologically diverse regions. Indian nations in the Americas
from the Arctic North to the rocky tip of South America are under
systematic attack. From cold-war-like political conflicts in the
northern continent to brutal, violent wars in middle and southern
America resulting in thousands of Indian deaths each year, Indian
nations face political movements and armies intent on taking
lands and resources from their historical owners. In the United
States of America an alliance of greed and deception has been
formed from private property owners, recreation organizations,
rightwing organizations, governments and business. Together they
target Indian lands for transfer from Indian control to the
control of private, non-Indian U.S. citizens. Domestic and multi-
national corporations also want access to Indian lands and
resources. In Central America, state governments hungry for new
raw materials to diversify stagnant and unproductive economies
have invaded Indian territories -- in many instances forcibly
removing whole populations. Land and resources are the target.
Indians are considered expendable. In the states of South America
several states tolerate, or actively participate in the invasion
of Indian territories. Conducting counter-insurgency sweeps
against the Sindero Luminoso (Shining Path), the Peruvian
government participates in attacks on Indian villages. Land and
resources are at the root of the conflict. Thousands of Indians
have been killed. In Brazil, gold-miners invade Indian lands and
carry diseases into Indian society. The Brazilian government
directly subsidizes invasion of Indian lands for raw materials as
a matter of public policy. Nearly without exception, Indians
peoples, their culture and their environment are under siege in
the western hemisphere.
The systematic emphasis on Indian land transfers in the United
States continues to grow. Government, business and private
citizens are a part of an effort organized Anti-Indian Movement
intent on removing Indians from their reserved territories and
replacing them with new outside owners. The Anti-Indian Movement
also operates within the framework of the Wise Use Movement with
the goal to replace Indian land rights with private non-Indian
property rights -- public property with private individual and
corporate property. These movements wrap their public statements
in the protection of the U. S. Constitution and its emphasis on
property rights. Underneath, there is a single-minded bigotry
which not only threatens the cultural and biological diversity of
Indian nations and their territories, but directly challenges
U.S. public and private efforts to protect the environment from
further degradation.
Indian Country is vulnerable to organized efforts aimed at land
and natural resource expropriation. Next to the United States of
America and all the states, Indian nations combined are the
owners of the largest area of land. With more than 135 million
acres of wilderness, range, desert, timber, tundra and other
types of land Indian nations collectively have sixteen percent of
the wild forests, eighty-percent of the uranium, vast quantities
of coal, oil, oil-shale, natural gas, strategic metals, water,
wildlife, fisheries, range-lands, and wilderness. These are the
remaining lands and territories reserved to Indian nations after
more than two centuries of land expropriations, treaties, land
purchases and wars between the United States and Indian nations.
Benefiting from years of U.S. government policy aimed at the
dismemberment of Indian tribes, non-Indian U.S. citizens moved
into Indian territories in increasingly larger numbers. Many
became residents of Indian reservations. They became "on-
reservation non-Indians." The successful encroachment of non-
Indian populations on to Indian reservations serves now as the
catalyst for growing outside pressures to put Indian lands under
the control of state governments, county governments, private
individuals and commercial enterprises. The effect of land
transfers and in-migration of non-Indian populations to
reservations is reflected in the growing "near-reservation"
Indian populations -- Indians unable to live on the reservations
reserved by their ancestors. Instead of territories reserved for
the benefit of Indian peoples, many Indian reservations are
rapidly becoming the land and raw material source for the United
States.
CULTURAL AND BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY: A SUCCESSFUL
STRATEGY IN THE AMERICAS
There was a time when the only people who lived on the American
continent were America's original nations, now called Indians.
The original nations of North America have names like Ojibaway,
Haudenosaunee, Lakota, Hopi, Kiowa, Dene, Cree, and Yakima. Once
these nations and scores of other nations lived on virtually all
the lands of the Americas, from the highest mountains to the
lowest beaches. The culture of each nation developed from the
intimate relationship between people and land. Religious,
political, legal, economic and social systems within each culture
naturally developed from the interaction between the people and
the territories to which each had systematically and successfully
adapted. Some nations took as many as forty-thousand years to
reach the level of sophistication and classical grace only
achieved by very old cultures. Typical of all human nations
throughout the world, America's original nations reflected the
diversity of all the lands' varied ecological conditions. Those
nations that balanced human needs with the regenerative
capacities of the land, plants and other animals succeeded and
developed into complex cultures still able to adapt. Those
nations which demanded more of their environments than could be
naturally regenerated, either became expansionist -- seeking
sustenance and wealth from neighboring nations -- or they simply
failed, collapsing into nothing. Either way, the key to any
nation's survival is its culture, the land and the wealth of the
land. Without a place on the land, a nation becomes spiritually
and materially impoverished and dies or it becomes a threat to
the peace and security of neighboring nations. Without a place, a
nation can only have a culture of poverty.
<snipped>
THE ANTI-INDIAN MOVEMENT BEGAN INSIDE INDIAN COUNTRY
Under the guise of "mainstream non-profit research and education
organizations" and the deceptively attractive "equal rights for
everyone" slogan, the Anti-Indian Movement signaled the beginning
of a growing effort to "privatize property" in reaction to
growing Indian tribal government powers and the environmental
movement. With its right-wing extremist technical help, the Anti-
Indian Movement receives support and money from unsuspecting
"reservation non-Indians" and off-reservation non-Indians. With
their own agenda, the Anti-Indian Movement's reactionaries and
extremists employ tactics and slogans calculated to exploit
Indian and non-Indian fears of each other. Using the non-Indians'
fear of Indians to build a power-base in mainstream politics,
right-wing extremists took advantage of fear by encouraging
bigotry.
While many transplanted non-Indians now live as residents on
Indian reservations, large numbers are absentee landowners --
they don't live on the reservation. Despite their absentee
landowner status, the "reservation non-Indian" in the late 1960s
became a new and powerful challenge to the peace and stability of
Indian nations. Indian people had often heard the refrain, "Why
don't you go back to your reservation?' This was heard when
Indian and non-Indian conflicts arose outside the reservation. It
was a wrenching experience to have conflicts inside the
reservation and hear that "Indians should become a part of the
greater society and have equal rights with everyone."
Larger numbers of non-Indian landowners rejected tribal
governmental authority inside the reservation; and they called
upon the state to exercise its powers there. Non-Indian rejection
of "alien tribal governments" built pressures leading to legal
confrontations between tribal and state governments over a
widening range of jurisdictional subjects. Increasing numbers of
"reservation non-Indians" supplied state governments with the
wedge needed to expand state powers into Indian reservations --
defacto annexation of tribal lands. Tribes and states intensified
their mutual antagonism and suspicion.
ORGANIZING THE MODERN ANTI-INDIAN MOVEMENT
Since the General Allotment Act in 1887, limitations on
reservation resources forced more and more Indians to fish and
hunt for their food in ceded areas near reservations. Indians
asserted that treaties with the United States guaranteed
continuing tribal access to some off-reservation resources. Not
until tribes and states began to battle over control of natural
resources outside reservation boundaries did there arise an
organized Anti-Indian Movement in the 20th century. "Reservation
non-Indians" became the core organizers of what became a highly
structured Anti-Indian Movement. By 1991, the activists
responsible for starting the Movement in 1976 headed four key
organizations in the states of Washington, Montana, and
Wisconsin. The United Property Owners of Washington (UPOW) and
Protect Americans' Rights and Resources (PARR) in Wisconsin are
the main "constituent organizations."
Over the decades since the 1960s, the U.S.-based Anti-Indian
Movement grew. From a half dozen non-Indian property owner groups
in two states in 1968, it became more than fifty organizations in
1993. The first organized anti-Indian network formed in 1976
under the umbrella of the Interstate Congress for Equal Rights
and Responsibilities (ICERR). The ICERR linked on-reservation
non-Indian landowner opposition to tribal governments with off-
reservation non-Indian sport and commercial fishermen opposed to
tribal treaty protected fishing rights. The mixture of on-
reservation and off-reservation conflicts produced a sometimes
confused, often distorted, attack on tribal governments, the
federal government -- especially the judiciary -- and often
bitter attacks on individual Indian people. ICERR formed the
Anti-Indian Movement's populist and frequently racist ideology
that attracted legitimately distressed non-Indians as-well-as
bigoted activists.
During the ten years after first forming, the Movement shifted
from incipient forms of racism and populism to a more virulent
form of reactionary-racism with subtle contours and technical
refinements. Right-wing extremists began in 1983 to assume a
strong influence in the Anti-Indian Movement through the
Washington State based Steelhead & Salmon Protection Action in
Washington Now (S/SPAWN) organization.
In the years that followed, right-wing and militantly bigoted
activists gravitated to the Wisconsin-based Protect Americans'
Rights and Resources (PARR). Still later, right-wing
personalities assumed positions within the Citizen's Equal Rights
Alliance (CERA) and United Property Owners of Washington (UPOW)
organizations.
The Movement evolved into its present structure from two property
owners' associations and a single umbrella organization (ICERR)
in 1976. Today, the Movement boasts two "national organizations,"
five "coordinating local organizations" and a consistent network
of twenty-three "local organizations" or "local contacts" and a
claimed constituency of 450,000 people. Though the Movement
frequently targets the Quinault Indian Nation, Suquamish Tribe
and Lummi Indian Nation (in the state of Washington), Blackfoot,
Salish & Kootenai and the Crow in Montana receive strong emphasis
too. Politically active Indian tribes in Alaska, Arizona, Idaho,
Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, New
York, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Washington and Wisconsin
have felt the effects of the network.
In fifteen years the organizational and tactical focus of the
Movement switched from the state of Washington to Wisconsin and
then to Montana, and back to Washington again. Despite
maintaining contacts in several states, the Movement conducted
major activities in only the three tactical states. Though the
organizational focus shifted from one state to another, the
ideological influence, tactics and strategy flowed from
Washington State based personalities and organizations. Three
groups (Quinault Property Owners Association (QPOA - Quinault
Reservation), Association of Property Owners and Residents in
Port Madison Area (APORPMA - Suquamish Reservation), and the
Interstate Congress for Equal Rights and Responsibilities (ICERR)
are politically linked to each of the Movement's organizational
efforts. While the organizational strategy of the Anti-Indian
Movement was to create a new organization for each political or
legal challenge to Indian rights, all of the organizations have
essentially the same supporting organizations. In other words,
though the number of "national or coordinating organizations
increased in number, the number of organizers and activists
remained virtually the same - all had the same members.
Four individuals have been involved in the organization of every
coordinating or national organization in the Anti-Indian Movement
since 1968: George Garland (QPOA), Pierce and May Davis (APORPMA)
and Betty Morris (ICERR, and QPOA). All come from the state of
Washington. Garland and Morris are mainly concerned with the
Quinault Indian Reservation. The Davises are mainly concerned
with the Suquamish Indian Reservation. After 1983, these main
anti-Indian activists were joined by more sophisticated
organizers from the right-wing elements of American politics.
State Senator Jack Metcalf, fund-raiser Alan Gotlieb, political
organizer Barbara Lindsay, lawyer David L. Yamashita and National
Wildlife Federation activists Carol and Tom Lewis (all from
Washington) joined the Movement. These personalities have close
connections with the Wise Use Movement. Some, like Alan Gotlieb
(a key funder for the Free Enterprise Institute that serves as a
major opponent to the environmental movement and a major player
the Wise Use Movement) and Senator Jack Metcalf have close
connections with the Unification Church and with the Liberty
lobby. After organizing the Movement for twenty-three years, its
leaders can claim several successes which now contribute to the
growing capabilities of the Wise Use Movement:
- Adoption by a slim majority in the state of Washington
Initiative 456 intended to create the public impression that
Washington's voters opposed Indian rights and the continuation of
Indian treaties - 1984.
- U.S. Supreme Court decided a County government could
exercise zoning powers inside a reservation where non-Indians
make up a substantial portion of the reservation population -
1989.
- Through its organization CERA, the Anti-Indian Movement
became a direct and active participant in the Wise Use Movement
in 1988.
- The total number of consistent anti-Indian activists
country-wide is between 80 and 90 persons in sixteen states by
1991.
- The number of persons participating in anti-Indian
activities (including meetings, protests, conferences and letter-
writing is an estimated 10,850 persons country-wide by 1991.
- The number of persons who contribute funds or letters of
support to anti-Indian groups is an estimated 34,150 by 1991.
- A total of 50 local anti-Indian organizations or contacts,
five coordinating organizations and two national organizations
have been created by the Movement mainly in the states of
Washington, Montana, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. (not including
organizations with other agendas which closely identify with the
Movement) by 1991.
Though the Anti-Indian Movement is held together with a lot of
smoke and mirrors there is enough substance to it to seriously
threaten the peace and stability of Indian tribes in the United
States. Due to its new associations in the "Wise Use Movement"
the Anti-Indian Movement increased its reach and broadened its
potential constituency.
IN THE PSYCHE OF THE UNITED STATES
The Anti-Indian Movement has its roots deep in the collective
psyche of the United States. The bigotry of right-wing and Far
Right political extremes is also deeply rooted in America's
politics -especially in connection with Indians. The implied or
explicit belief in "white superiority" and "native backwardness
and inferiority" permeates American history. In the 1880's, U.S.
President Rutherford B. Hayes, Supreme Court Justice Waite and
Civil War icon General John Sherman advocated the Doctrine of
Manifest Destiny. Senator Dawes of Massachusetts was both an
adherent to the Manifest Destiny doctrine and the main sponsor of
the General Allotment Act of 1887. It was quite normal in the
U.S. Congress to espouse what now would be considered "white
supremacist" ideas. In 1899 Senator Albert T. Beveridge rose
before the U.S. Senate and announced:
God has not been preparing the English-speaking and Teutonic
peoples for a thousand years for nothing but vain and idle self-
admiration. No! He has made us the master organizers of the world
to establish system where chaos reigns .... He has made us adepts
in government that we may administer government among savages and
senile peoples.
Theodore Roosevelt, John Cabot Lodge and John Hay, each in turn,
endorsed with a strong sense of certainty the view that the
Anglo-Saxon was destined to rule the world. Such views expressed
in the 19th century and in the early 20th century continue to
ring true in the minds of many non-Indian property owners. The
superiority of the "white race" is the foundation on which Anti-
Indian Movement organizers and right-wing helpers rest their
efforts to dismember Indian tribes.
There victims on all sides of the growing Indian/non-Indian
controversy over property ownership inside and near Indian
reservations. Only a small number of people can be said to
intentionally provoke conflicts and violence between Indians and
non-Indians. Due to these conflicts, however, victims of Indian
and non-Indian conflicts fear one another - the cycle of fear
feeds on itself. The small number of people who either gain
politically or economically from Indian and non-Indian conflict
use bigotry to promote division and fear. Both contribute to the
destabilization of tribal communities and undermine tribal
values.
When democratic values are crippled, freedom and liberty become
the next victims. Authoritarianism, and terrorized societies
replace free societies. The Anti-Indian Movement threatens to
produce just such results in Indian Country. It also threatens to
intensify rather than relieve conflicts born from historical
mistakes, which can be resolved peacefully through mutual
government to government negotiations.
UNDERSTANDING WHAT HAPPENED:
From the point of view of many Indian leaders and many non-
ideological participants in the Anti-Indian Movement there is
agreement on what are some of the mistakes that should be
remedied.
- The forced division of tribally reserved territories under
the 1887 General Allotment Act and the failure of the U.S.
government to fully repudiate this disgraceful act creates the
popular impression that acts of land confiscation and relocation
of tribal populations is morally acceptable and justified.
- The United States government violated treaty and other
agreements when it unilaterally manipulated the sale of tribally
reserved lands to non-Indians without the consent of tribal
governments. This mistake was subsequently compounded when states
governments and the United States government unlawfully expanded
their civil and criminal jurisdiction (following non-Indian
reservation residents) into Indian reservations without the
consent of tribal governments. Finally, the mistake caused injury
to both tribal members and non-Indian land-owners when Indians
were displaced, and impoverished; and non-Indians were not
advised that as a practical matter they had consented to place
themselves under the jurisdiction of an Indian nation's
government.
- State governments have mistaken Indian nations as a threat
to their sovereignty. States governments and their subordinate
governments agreed as a price for statehood that they would not
attempt to extend their powers into Indian Country. To do so in
fact undercuts the state's legitimacy, thus weakening the state,
and encourages citizens to sabotage the rule of law.
- As a result of distraction or a mistaken belief in
"historical inevitability," the United States and the various
states failed to recognize that relations with Indian tribes have
always been political in character. And to ensure the healthy
cooperation between Indian tribes and the United States,
relations must be dynamically adjusted over time through treaties
and agreements and not through neglect or brute force. The basic
premise of mutual respect and sovereign equality between the
United States and Indian nations must be repeatedly incorporated
in each agreement.
- The failure of governments (tribal, state and federal) to
insist on the free and open negotiation of disputes, (always
taking into consideration the effect intergovernmental agreements
have on tribal members or non-Indians) has contributed to a
feeling of "being wronged" among many non-ideological citizens in
the United States. These persons may suffer economic or social
hardships as a result of these failures. As a result, persons who
may live on or near Indian reservations, have become prime
candidates for incitement to harassment or violence against
Indian people by militant bigots and Far Right activists who seek
to provoke conflict as a way of advancing their ideas of "white
supremacy." Furthermore, failure to encourage open negotiations
fosters wider public participation and encouragement of the Wise
Use Movement - the ultimate trap which catches the United States
in its own historical inconsistencies.
<snipped>
The Tribal government ought to sponsor and support
the formation and continued operation of a "Human Rights
Commission" which includes tribal and non-tribal membership. The
Commission ought to document incidents of bigoted harassment,
intimidation, property damage, and violence aimed at tribal
members and non-tribal members within the territorial
jurisdiction of the Tribe. The Commission should be responsible
for conducting public meetings to ensure public awareness of
human rights norms. The Commission ought to have the capacity to
provide assistance to victims of hate-crime, or refer victims to
an appropriate tribal agency.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
To have a current Center For World Indigenous Studies Publication
Catalogue sent to you via e-mail, send a request to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<or>
http://www.halcyon.com/FWDP/cwiscat.html
Center For World Indigenous Studies
P.O. Box 2574
Olympia, WA U.S.A.
98507-2574
FAX: 360-956-1087
OCR Provided by Caere Corporation's OmniPage Professional
