What has taken place among the nations as the result of governmental policies is understandably personalized on a tribal basis while recognizing it encompasses other nations as well.
With the advent of the internet for some these abuses have become something of a contest – whose the poorest, who endured the most, who was lied to or cheated the most, which atrocity was the worst, when the reality is for one nation to rise a standard must be set that will insure all the nations rise – that is if those who routinely employ what has become the cliche of “we are all related” as something more than meme actually has a value to them.
Collective bargaining commonly relates to workers having the ability to bargain with employers – an idea conservatives despise apparently for the singular reason that it empowers workers leading to better working conditions, better pay, and better benefits.
Collective bargaining is an approach I believe the nations should take even though we represent a very small percentage of the workforce, tax base, population, and voting demographic.
This collective bargaining has taken place among the nations in a few instances, but not to the degree we’re capable of in my opinion.
It would involve uniting behind single issues on a priority basis, a list of issues that could be lengthy but better served if all the nations pro actively coalesced behind them one at a time, because the reality is the issues are commonly shared – something each nation experiences.
Don’t believe the single issue approach would work? Consider then if every nation took it to the streets in real numbers to support or protest something in cities within their states at the same time and stayed the course in a national protest.
Still have doubts? The consider the success Ghandi, King, and others have had when it came to what are inherently human rights.
Individual nations that have made recognizable advances should be looked to as a role model, that isn’t to say every aspect of their success should be adopted because there will exist cultural elements that are tribal centric.
Elements that will or should insure their integrity as a culturally distinct nation.
We often talk about we should have the ability to enter into trade agreements with any country we choose, but how about trade agreements among our own nation with proceeds from such agreements plowed back into further development?
How about taking control of our resources and building infrastructure, jobs, and ultimately influence when it comes to national policies that affect us?
Not much is easy on the rez or in our urban communities and this wouldn’t be either, it could take time but we only live day by day and the future lays ahead of us.
A future that will either be redundant in it’s similarity or have the potential to be dynamic.
We can never live in the future, for each day is the present and the next remains the future – but if we plan for these future days and work diligently to that end then each day we live will arrive with the fruits of our labor and the present becomes the past.
An historical archive that says we did something more than remain, we advanced not just as a nation but as nations.
A future that may require sacrifice but a sacrifice accompanied by dividends.
Tribalism is no less a reality today than it was a hundred years ago, two hundred years ago, or at anytime during our collective history – a history that clearly illustrates it contributed to our downfall – be proud of your nation, express your related concerns, but consider also if we are all related the required long term solutions will only be achieved as the result of a unified focus.
I always felt the Corbell vs Salazar settlement would have better served the future had recipients “sacrificed” their share and contributed it to a ” nation building” fund within their communities that included community input and oversight, and I believe that should be the way of it with future settlements with exceptions made for extreme cases.
I haven’t and will not accept any “settlement”, nothing has been settled in my opinion.
Can money mitigate an issue, settle a bill? I suppose so, but there is also an air of hush money about it – here, take the money and shut up, and in the accepting yet another issue is added to “settled” ledger.
The land can’t be sold? Like hell, every “settlement” says it can and is and crafted in such a way as to pose the question of which do you want – the bird in the hand, two in the bush, or nothing?
Of course an argument can be made that something is better than nothing, and the truth of that as opposed to the possibility of actually recovering vast swaths of land and resources makes the money in the hand all the more appealing – I guess what I’m saying is let’s not enter into these fights as though it’s just about the money .
We’ve got students on the rez who have to drive a hundred or more miles round trip to access wifi – students and people without electricity or running water, non co op stores that reflect that in prices – and jobs? Forget about it. Access to decent healthcare is measured not only in miles but money as well.
Dependency is the way of it and we can either oppose or embrace this lack of self reliance.
When it comes to the political realm I believe as nations we should truly be “independents” – we ought to evaluate what is truly best for us and vote accordingly.
We can opt for the Democratic route awaiting the pie in the sky or go Conservative which is they very antithesis of addressing the needs of our people.
And while on the subject, finding a “conservative” among the nations is akin to looking for a needle in a haystack – I’ll go a step farther in saying no traditionalist would go in that direction.
There may the odd conservative here and there but the truth of the matter is those who are basically are our version of one percenters – they’ve got something more than the rest of us, a nicer house, more money, perhaps a business venture, and their priority like all one percenters is primarily based on that, what they have. In a word they exhibit the characteristics of assimilation.
In essence they’ve the proverbial “apples” and “twinkies” having lost any understanding of the language, culture, and traditions in their pursuits that defines us while wrapping themselves in the flag and rhetoric of conservatism and supporting dolts like Trump, Cruz, or Rubio who have absolutely nothing to offer the nations ……. that’s NOTHING in caps.
Having gone that route the progression is to adopt and foment the talking points.
You know, like – they’re coming to take our guns and if a bunch of kids or innocents get killed well shit happens.
Of course they also sidle up to Jesus mentioning the name at least on ocassion as all good conservatives are required to do, and conspiracy theories always take precedence over reality and facts.
They’ll drone on about the power of women and matriarchy within the nations yet support a party and individuals that never saw a woman they didn’t think should be controlled including surrendering control of their reproductive ability.
They’re fine with videos of refugees in other countries attempting to cross borders being portrayed as actually having occurred at this countries borders, or those memorable photos of “ISIS camps” in Texas, or a billionaire Orangutan so far removed from our reality and having a diametrically opposed ideology running for president because he’s going to make America “great”
Whose America when he’s opposed to raising the minimum wage? Whose America when he wants to strip and water down regulations that protect the environment, the very air we breathe, and the food we eat? Whose American when he isn’t even capable of showing respect to women of his own color? Think he will to our’s? It’s okay to rail about Uranium tailings and polluted water on the rez but all the rest of it’s good?
It’s okay while this idiot denigrates women at every possible turn as long as we talk about the physical and sexual abuse of our women and the need to address and change it?
Whose America when they talk about austerity measures that exclude their corporate handlers? Or tax plans that take the same approach?
And that’s where the apples and twinkies enter the picture, their America, their ideology isn’t the same as the rest of the nations.
Don’t forget it was the conservative lobby group Heritage Foundation that opposed VAWA, it was conservatives who were against a formal apology to the nations for five hundred plus year of abuses and it wasn’t until 2009 one was forthcoming yet hidden in a defense appropriations bill and never publicly announced.
I’m not the only one who can access voting records related to indigenous issues, take a look for yourself and ponder how can any indigenous person can even entertain the thought of supporting them?
I may have wandered afield but these are issues I have strong opinions about and believe a connection exists, that being in the struggle to improve our situation and achieve any measure of equity conservatives will oppose our efforts – they have a track record of doing just that.
And though it could hardly be the only litmus test if you want a little insight, a little clue into who a traditionalist is you could begin by asking which candidate, which party, they favor?