This post if from Wednesday, but it still contains very important info including a great interview on the legal history. Please see the original link at: https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/in-violation-of-international-treaty-law-federal-government-evicting-standing-rock-this-afternoon-wcz/
Perhaps one of the greatest struggles in indigenous communities today is the laws that oversee their affairs but do not incorporate their own intrinsic values. Western society has become so accustomed to a worldview developed through sets of values such as Christianity that it becomes difficult to separate these perspectives from our every day lives. But not all peoples hold the same values, including the Maori in New Zealand.
Recently, New Zealand attorney general Chris Finlayson worked on agreements between the New Zealand government and various Maori groups to enable a swath of land or entire body of water to be granted personhood in the eyes of New Zealand law.
“In [the Maori] worldview,” stated Finlayson,”‘I am the river and the river is me’. Their geographic region is part and parcel of who they are.”
This idea seems foreign to those who view “personhood” as something that belongs only to a human being. But in a worldview that sees spirituality and what constitutes as living in a different light than what many Westerners see, this definition applies to traditional lands is completely logical.
The former national park, Te Urewera, existed from 1954 to 2015 and consisted of 821 square miles of North Island. Recently, the Te Urewera Act took effect so that the government abandoned its formal ownership and the land became its own legal entity, including having “all the rights, powers, duties, and liabilities of a legal person” per the statute that was passed. In other words, the park was granted personhood; a river system is expected to receive the same designation soon, once it passes Parliament.
This classifications seem like “unusual designations” for those accustomed to non-Maori worldview, yet the legal status is similar to that of corporations who are also not an individual human being. The decision to grant personhood was a “profound alternative to the human presumption of sovereignty over the natural world,” according to Pita Sharples, the minister of Maori affairs when the law passed. The settlement resolved the ongoing argument between New Zealand government and Maori groups over the guardianship of natural features within the country.
One great advantage to passing this law for the sake of conservation is the power it gives to the land itself. Lawsuits to protect the land can be brought on behalf of the land itself without any need to demonstrate how a human being is impacted while defending the land’s protection.
The river set to receive similar status is the Whanganui River, the third longest river in New Zealand. To the Maori, it is “an invisible and living whole, comprising the river and all tributaries from the mountains to the sea – and that’s what we are giving effect to through this settlement,” according to Mr. Finalyson.
These new designations do not mean people cannot still enjoy Te Urewera like when it was a national park; it simply means special permits for activities like hunting must be issued through a new board that represents the river. This board will consist of both government and Maori representatives.
The hope now is that this landmark decision will set precedent for other indigenous communities around the world whose worldviews and cultural paradigms are not being incorporated into the laws that govern their traditional and sacred sites. Finlayon has already began discussions with Canada’s new attorney general, Jody Wilson-Raybould, on how these concepts can be written into Canadian law.
Will Canada be next?
When I was at the United Nations conference last week, we held a meeting on indigenous issues. I brought up the mascot issue in one of the three questions allotted during the panel, and we discussed current work happening to resolve it. One guest in the room made the comment, “What about Chicago Blackhawks? I don’t ever hear anyone talking about them…”
I replied to her that they are talking, but that doesn’t mean you’ve heard much about it yet. When it comes to these kinds of issues, it’s mostly going to be our voices on social media until it causes a big enough stir to be covered by someone else.
I have also heard many people call the Blackhawks name and logo “one of the tamer ones” – which is true in one sense. It is true in the sense that it’s not intended to be a grotesque caricature with blood red skin, as with the Cleveland mascot, and it’s not a racial slur, as with the Washington team. But it’s still unacceptable to make racial-based mascots of any kind, including indigenous ones. This behavior seemed acceptable in a time when treating all sorts of non-Caucasian groups as inferior was part of normal behavior. It’s been taking a long time to get a voice, but the indigenous opinions far and wide are finally getting a chance to surface in the general public.
But what about the Chicago Blackhawks?
Folks see the mascot, they hear the name, and they ask me – what is Blackhawk? Is that a tribe?
Black Hawk was a Sauk leader who led armies against the United States in present-day Illinois during the Black Hawk War of 1832 – right at the peak of the Removal Era. Sovereign nations were resisting the French invasion taking place. This is evidenced by Black Hawk’s siding with the British previously in an attempt to keep America from invading his peoples’ territories.
Long story short: The US cheated Black Hawk and all of the indigenous peoples in the Illinois area. Black Hawk recognized his people were being cheated – bribed, in fact, to join the US’s side in expansion. The populations were divided between Black Hawk’s side and siding with the United States. Sadly, this was likely part of the strategy and, ironically, this was also the war that gave Abraham Lincoln military experience. Yes, Lincoln did some great things in ending slavery, but he was aggressively racist against indigenous peoples. He wasn’t all that great of a guy, let’s be real.
So what about the Chicago Blackhawks?
Well, the logo is a profile of what the Wiki page calls a “Native head” drawn in the 1920s. We can assume this must be based off of Black Hawk himself, as there is no “Black Hawk tribe”, but either way it’s clear it’s just a stereotypical drawing as usual. Also, Black Hawk was defeated so that the US could settle Illinois, one of the key battles in removing indigenous peoples out of the area during the US genocide/concentration camp campaigns. Doesn’t seem like a very nice thing to make as a hockey logo, regardless of all the obvious problems behind having indigenous mascots in this country.
Tommy Hawk (tomahawk? Sigh) is the hawk that runs around in the games. Sure, that’s somewhat tame for what it could be, and at least the tomahawk is Algonquin in origin, but did they really have to go there? I guess it goes with the whole theme of the thing… Many jerseys and shirts have the crossed tomahawks on the sleeves.
The American Indian Center has been noted as working with the NHL team to educate people on Native history and whatnot. That’s a start, and it’s definitely a positive example. But I still question the ethics behind having any kind of indigenous mascot whatsoever – regardless of how you present it. Studies have shown that negative and positive representations are still stereotypes, still cause damaging effects to the mascoted people, and still generate a platform for non-indigenous people to stereotype, mock, and perpetuate ignorance. It’s a damaging cycle and honestly none of it is necessary.
Which brings me to my main point that I want to expose: The “trail of beers”.
TRAIL OF BEERS
During the demonstration against Cleveland’s mascot/name this April, I got to hear a passionate speech by Anthony Roy of Chicago about all the wrongs of these mascots, including the effect they’re having on the Chicago community. He told us a list of things that happen as a result of people taking the mascot and stereotype way, way, way too far. This is the perfect example of why we have to get rid of these mascots. People don’t even know the harm they’re doing, the prejudice that they’re accepting and finding humor in.
One event, he said, is the “trail of beers”.
The Trail of Tears is the name given to the Cherokee people’s long walk during the US government’s genocide/concentration campaign that resulted in so many indigenous deaths. Today, it has resulted in the current struggles we see in many nations trying to recover their sovereignties. Today it is also, apparently, a source for drinking games for Chicago hockey fans.
I do not know the extent of these games, but I have found two examples on Facebook. One is in Bloomington, Indiana, called “Trail of Beers” on Facebook, and the other is in Dixon, Illinois, called “Blackhawk Trailofbeers”.
Here is what the description for “Trail of Beers” is on Facebook:
About: Celebrating the struggles of America’s native people. A beer for every tear.
Description: Trail of Beers Official Facebook TOB Staff Grand Marshal – Dexter Volx Asst. Grand Marshal – Casey McCune Head Facepainter – ((OPEN apply now)) Apprentice Facepainter – ((OPEN apply now)) Head Photographer – Adam Scheerer Apprentice Photographer – ((OPEN apply now))
Other volunteer positions are available, if you want to help out contact the GM or the Assit. GM
Traditionally the Trail of Beers has been a house crawl format. This year we are trying something new with the Trial of Beers Reservation. It is essentially a block party filled with live music, a slip-n slide, drinking games, other undisclosed activities, and of course copious amounts of beer.
More information is being posted daily. Like the page and be filled in on the TOB lowdown.
Thank you, Your Grand Marshall
Yes, you read that right: Trail of Beers Reservation. And in case you want to know where this Reservation is, they made us a map:
You can also buy t-shirts such as these:
And you can be wasted and classy in the name of all those “tears shed” like these people:
But when we check out the Blackhawks Trailofbeers page for the Dixon event, we see some even worse stereotyping, commentary, and just absolute disgustingness in general. It’s a gathering of parents and locals, all presumably white or other, playing “Indian”. They’ve got chicken feathers, paint, and fake buckskin pieces that they apparently think is what indigenous peoples wear. They have a drum with a buffalo painted on it, beer, and plastic canoes, plastic bows, headbands, and fake jewelry.
I’ll be frank: They look like complete idiots. What’s even worse, they’re contributing to the same things I’m trying to fight, like the sexualizing of indigenous women whose rape, murder, and missing statistics are disproportionately high (and who are disproportionately victimized by white men):
It’s not just these photos, but it’s the disgusting, derogatory comments that are public on Facebook. “Are you two part of the Secsee Tribe? I think so.” (Meaning “sexy”, probably in “Indian” to that, er, goon.) “Pocohantas!” (Oh, yes, the only indigenous woman you can imagine. Stop living in the Disney dreamland already and learn the truth about Pocahontas. Or some actual, notorious indigenous women.)
What’s even worse is these women apparently enjoy whoring out themselves as well as the peoples they’re stereotyping. This attendee to the “annual river trip”, decked with what appears to be a bindi? (she probably thinks we’re actually from India), liked all of the comments on her new profile picture. INCLUDING THE ONE WHERE SHE IS CALLED A SQUAW.
Oh, nooo. I have been called that in real life. This is so not okay. But really, if you want more evidence of peoples’ stupidty and cultural appropriation, just search the hashtag #trailofbeers and you’ll see plenty of “#throwbacks” with “#manifestdestiny” and other disgusting depictions of white people playing “Indian”.
JUST PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME: Why it is UNACCEPTABLE now to do this to black people? Which totally was NOT the case 100 years ago, when blackface was in actual practice. So WHY are we allowed to “PLAY INDIAN”???
Well, for the same reason we’re allowed to have mascots:
- People don’t actually understand the histories,
- Including the part that gets left out: We’re still here!
I remember reading that comment a couple of weeks ago on one of the Biloxi Facebook pages. A Biloxi alumnus and supporter of the continued use of BHS’s racist and stereotypical mascot/name was stereotyping and discriminating Deloria Many Grey Horses. This was in April, before I realized how involved I would be getting in indigenous human rights issues. But now I find the comment funny, because Deloria has not gotten the United Nations involved in this issue.
Several blog entries/articles I have been writing have recently gained the attention of a number of organizations. The Southeast Indigenous Peoples’ Center in particular asked me to write a supplementary document for the Permanent Forum in New York on April 30th. Roughly a week later, I found myself on a plane bound for Geneva. That’s where I am now, as a representative for indigenous youth, the US Human Rights Network, and the SIPC. On Monday, I will be sitting in the UN room with all of the media and delegates, the representatives at the podium to be addressed for the second time ever on their shortcomings in human rights issues. For the first time ever, delegates in the room have likely seen (or at least heard) about the complaints of “Native mascotry” in the US. And, if they attended one of the side events, it’s likely these spokespeople even have a copy of my one-pager with three pictures on the back page: one of the Cleveland Indians mascot, one of the Washington logo and name, and one of several Biloxi band members marching in Northern Plains-style headdresses.
Ironically, the comment I read on Facebook motivated me the most to travel to Geneva and address the U.N. It wasn’t just because someone was being snarky; it was because someone thought this is a joke, not worthy of the UN…or worse, that the UN is a joke.
But these issues are already being talked about, just in a different context – and in a different country.
For example, when I first arrived on Thursday, I was given a general pass. I sat in the gallery and listened to the review on Bulgaria. Most commentary was friendly and kind, suggesting that more be done but congratulating Bulgaria on its progress thus far. Until Russia stepped up to the microphone.
Russia was incredibly harsh regarding the way Bulgaria continues to mistreat Roma peoples (or maybe just the linguistics of Russian are so harsh that it translated as such). Russia accused Bulgaria of not providing enough care for children and called for funding to be cut to state groups who promote racism of the Roma peoples. And for those of you who don’t know, The “Romani” is the correct name for what you might call “gypsies”.
Next, Serbia adds to Russia’s opinions, concerned by the racism that exists in Bulgaria despite existing ethnic diversity.
Sierra Leone offered a different perspective, focusing on gender stereotypes and how to prosecute people for their hate crimes. The delegate also addressed her concern for victims of hate crime (“hate speech relief”), such as a need for women/domestic violence shelters in Bulgaria.
Slovakia called for more than just Bulgaria to work in unison, as part of a larger Roma integration strategy, especially in regards to children welfare.
All of these perspectives were interesting and I realized the Romani are, in many ways, like the indigenous peoples of certain parts of Europe. They don’t live a “standard” life, are stereotyped, and are viewed often as less than humans. It made me wonder what it would be like if the United States were finally scoured for all of their similar mistreatments of indigenous peoples protected by broken treaty rights.
Then, today, I visited two side events. The first was the International Indian Treaty Council, focusing on indigenous problems (but all of those discussed regarded the United States). The second was a more general discussion on American human rights deficiencies.
Andrea Carmen (Yaqui) discussed the US’s process of authorizing itself to dismiss treaties, and to declare it will make no more new ones. She argued this is how the US silences indigenous peoples, by ignoring them and putting them under plenary power with no legal basis. In later discussions, she brought these points up again in the case of the seizure of Hawai’i.
Chief Gary Harrison (Alaska) called for the decolonization of Alaska, proving that, by legal definition, the United States does not own Alaska. Alaska was “bought” from Russia, but Russia never conquered Alaska, therefore it was not Russia’s to own in the first place. He even explains how the process to vote for Alaskan statehood was completed by only settlers as it took five white people per Native to verify their “competence” in voting. He spoke out against mining in Alaska and how it causes problems in indigenous villages, such as pollution, rape, and murder. He defended their right to clean drinking water, and for salmon to live and spawn in clean waters, saying they have spent so much money cleaning up, yet mining companies want to return and re-pollute recently cleaned salmon streams.
Christina Snider spoke first about the concern of children welfare and having cultural households, then also about women’s rights and violence against indigenous women (and children).
Petuuche Gilbert (Acoma) focused on how the entire country was founded on the unethical idea of “manifest destiny”, stating that laws continue to be made in order to keep the land “in the hands of thieves”. This is his explanation to the continued land-grabs and exploitation. He also calls “domestic sovereignty” an “oxymoron”, saying “they made it up to control us, our land, our people.”
The floor was then open for discussion, and they took three questions. I ended up grabbing the third slot. My statement was (maybe not quite as eloquent because I was nervous! But this was the gist.): I am here to represent indigenous youth for several organizations. In indigenous youth populations, suicide rates are incredibly high, and substance abuse as well as the idea of “no hope” are also plaguing communities. Self-worth is low, because there is also a prevalence of disrespect from outside cultures. Through my personal experience and the experience of others, I have come to realize the significant of the mascot issue and how it perpetuates disrespect, lack of understanding, and this “no hope”/low self-worth experienced in such indigenous communities. What I want to know is, why can blackface be illegal and yet redface is okay [especially since it represents scalping, not skin color!]? Why haven’t these mascots been banned when the change would be so simple and have such a positive impact? A lack of education of our peoples also perpetuates the lack of respect, thereby perpetuating such discrimination and racism – people don’t even understand why it’s wrong.
I received a lot of nods from the board. They started with the questions in order, then returned to mine. Andrea Carmen stated that the UN permanent forum that was just held had a lot of input about the vastly disproportionate youth suicide rates in the indigenous populations of US and Canada, influenced directly by all these aspects of Reservation/urban Indian life that had been addressed in the side event. She also pointed out the connection between the history of child removal and residential schools, of disgracing what it is to be indigenous.
Christina Snider said that she is very involved at the National Congress of American Indians in the problems of cultural appropriation and the use of indigenous mascots. She argued it is indeed very intrinsically linked to the issues of youth, like high suicide rates, juvenile justice issues, and the “prison pipeline system”. She says, “Until we can respect ourselves as people, these issues will keep happening; until other people can respect us as not being pasted on their bumpers, painted on their faces, and worn on their heads at Coachella – how can we help ourselves if others cannot respect us as people? It’s all connected.”
Finally, as time was running out, Chief Gary Harrison added two key words: historic trauma. He shared that his father was murdered in front of his whole family and that the man who did it received one night in prison. He said, “When crimes are not rectified, this causes historic trauma.” Indeed, I remember reading articles about how post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is experienced by many people living on US concentration camps (Reservations). Chief Harrison continues, saying the mining camps contribute to these feelings of “no hope”. He said that, when these camps come in, the men get the jobs, then the community members see all these people come in with money and they don’t have any money or any way to take care of themselves….”And you wonder why they’re committing suicide.”
After the meeting, Chief Gary Harrison approached me in the hallway and thanked me for bringing up that point. He elaborated more on the psychological aspect of the issue, of historic trauma/PTSD, and we discussed the lack of appropriate education in the American system regarding indigenous histories, affairs, etc. It was very encouraging to see an Elder acknowledge the complications of Native mascotry and how they’re not acceptable.
Later, we reconvened at the Graduate Institute for presentations by the US Human Rights Network. All sorts of issues were represented. We discussed indigenous issues, southeast Asian deportations, torture crimes by the US government (delivered by men in the US military, and also an attorney for victims of Guantanamo Bay), police violence, and even a transgender woman of color stood up, nearly in tears, explaining her life expectancy is 35 because she chooses to live as who she is and has no protection. The event was followed by a social with dozens of students.
Well, there’s a re-cap of the last day and a half.
So, to reiterate the original point I made in this post – yes, the mascot issue is now a prevalent discussion in the 2nd US review… And, yes, Biloxi was used as a prime example of racist mascotry in the public education system.