So, a disclaimer: I am not an indigenous person. I do not share in their rich and varied cultures. I study how indigenous peoples fair in judicial systems that are not of their own making. I am an advocate, observer, and admirer.
And I have some thoughts on Elizabeth Warren./1
And I have some thoughts on Elizabeth Warren./1
It is possible to be:
1. Critical of Elizabeth Warren's claim of indigenous ancestry, and
2. Critical of Donald Trump's use of it as a political punching bag, and
3. Critical of the people defending either, because
4. Noone involved actually cares about indigenous peoples /2
1. Critical of Elizabeth Warren's claim of indigenous ancestry, and
2. Critical of Donald Trump's use of it as a political punching bag, and
3. Critical of the people defending either, because
4. Noone involved actually cares about indigenous peoples /2
Tribal membership is determined solely by the tribes. Full Stop.
By attempting to claim lineage Warren is diluting what it means to have indigenous ancestry, and worse, she appears only to be doing so for political gain. /3
By attempting to claim lineage Warren is diluting what it means to have indigenous ancestry, and worse, she appears only to be doing so for political gain. /3
Furthermore, their already exists enough fetishization of indigenous ancestry in the United States. Stories of so-and-sos Great Grandmother being a member of Tribe X are rampant, but those individuals generally have zero connection with the tribe itself. /4
But Trump seriously should keep the word "Pocahontas" our of his mouth.
As he uses it, it is a racial slur. Also, the story of Pocahontas itself is the origin of the "Indian Princess" trope which furthers a Eurocentric/Western view of indigenous peoples /5
As he uses it, it is a racial slur. Also, the story of Pocahontas itself is the origin of the "Indian Princess" trope which furthers a Eurocentric/Western view of indigenous peoples /5
Defenders on both sides of the argument are using indigenous peoples and ancestry as weaponry in a partisan fight, but seemingly neither group actually care about the plight of indigenous peoples in American.
And ya'll, it doesn't look so good. /6
And ya'll, it doesn't look so good. /6
The Indian Child Welfare Act is responsible for boosting tribal membership and keeping indigenous children within their communities. It has been working well since 1978.
It was declared unconstitutional on October 4th by a federal judge. /7
It was declared unconstitutional on October 4th by a federal judge. /7
The Violence Against Women Act contained a provisions which allowed tribal courts to prosecute non-members for domestic violence. Indigenous women suffer sexual violence at a much higher rate than the general population, this provision helped.
VAWA will expire December 7th. /8
VAWA will expire December 7th. /8
Tribal sovereignty in this country is under attack. Bears Ears, ICWA, VAWA, water rights, treaty protections, voting rights (everyone wave at North Dakota), etc etc. The federal and state governments are actively attacking tribal sovereignty. /9
But lets not talk about the important issues concerning indigenous people in the US. Let's debate what two white politicians think about something as superficial and unimportant as DNA tests. That's the American way. /end
