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