Reflections
from the Ahnishinahbæótjibway (We, the People)
|
On
July 7, at about 6:30 in the evening, I received a call
from a Federally Recognized blood-quantum Indian, who stated that my
columns
were “negative writing” about the Indians and the Whites.
He said, “You should not be writing that
negatively, because the White man gave you a house,” meaning the
“Indian
housing” funded by the United States Government for the Indian settlers
to
occupy Ahnishinahbæótjibway land.
I told him, “I do not live in a house built
by the U.S. Government.” I built my
house myself, with my own labor and my own money, on the land which has
belonged to my Dodem for hundreds of thousands of years.
Then
the White Indian made a typical White racist remark, “Do
you live in a tepee? ... What are you, a Traditionalist?”
A “Traditionalist,” as told by Chippewa
Indians, is embodying the White man’s definition of what an Indian is
supposed
to be: Hollywood stereotypes, racist anthropology, and other vicious
scapegoat-projections. This abusive
nonsense of the White man about what a “Real Indian” is supposed to be
and do,
comprises insults that I have heard many times. About
a month ago, I talked to a White woman who was working on
the new edition of the League of Women Voters’ book, “Indians in
Minnesota,”
which on the surface seems to be a thoroughly researched and objective
book,
but the last edition of which promotes and re-creates the White man’s
artificial Indians. This woman’s latent
racism came out when she saw that I use a computer to write this column. She said, “I thought you Indians used
tom-toms and smoke signals” to communicate.
Then, she said, “you should be saving the Indian culture, and
teaching
the young all about being Indian.” I
answered, “I’m not an Indian, and I am not about to promote your
artificial,
White Indian culture for you. You White
people have deliberately destroyed much of my Aboriginal culture, and
killed
most of my Dodem,” meaning my family.
The Indian culture curriculum taught in the schools is both
institutional child abuse and a human rights violation.
I told the League woman that the schools
should teach the children chemistry and math, and “better yet, teach
them
English” instead of Chippewa. I am not
going to stand by silently while anybody’s children are taught to
self-destruct
with Indian stereotypes and are programmed to be the White man’s
scapegoat. Examples of the racism which
I have experienced my whole life include the name-calling, stereotyping
and
scapegoating which are a necessary part of the pseudo-male
Euro-American
English trade-language.
The
Chip-away Indian caller also complained that I wore
“white man’s glasses”—my glasses are not Indian Health Service glasses. As far as I am concerned, the United States
Government could leave my land tomorrow, and take the B.I.A. and all of
their
other Indian programs, and their Indians, with them.
I don’t benefit from the U.S. Government’s “Indian”
programs. I would joyfully give up my
computer,
and my glasses, and everything else that the White man has “invented”
within
his infrastructure based on my Peoples’ resources: to have my family
that’s
been killed, back again. I would also
gladly give up their English language, which is not my language and was
violently forced onto me in “Indian” Boarding School.
I
explained to the Wanna-Be Redby Indian that ninety percent
of the so-called “Indians” are Indo-Europeans who have been turned into
“Indians” and put on the Indian Rolls by the White man, and who
maintain their
fictitious Indian blood quantum at the pleasure of the White man—and I
invited
him to come look at his genealogy, and see for himself.
I also said to him that the Indian identity
is an English term—it is not an Aboriginal term. There
is no word for “Indian” in the Ahnishinahbæótjibway
language. I informed him that he had a
White man’s identity, of “Indian.” He
hung up on me then. Part of the
artificial Indian identity is hating “white people,” and I suppose that
he
didn’t want to hear about how the White man trapped him with the
Euro-Americans’ Indian identity.
INDIAN TREATIES: The
testimony at the Mille Lacs Treaty Trial
has concluded, and the main question of who is going to regulate the
six fish
and the other few natural resources which remain after three centuries
of
plunder, awaits the decision of Judge Murphy.
The question of who will issue fishing licenses at Mille Lacs
was not
stressed in the media reports of the trial—but State Law, United States
Law,
and Indian Law are all Roman Law, and no matter what decision is handed
down,
the White man wins.
Irrelevant
of the outcome of the Mille Lacs Case,
“Me-Economics” [a social structure organized according to the White
pseudo-male
paradigm and enforced by violence: “hooray for me and F* you”] will
prevail. The Roman and British illegal
systems which have been imported by the Euro-Americans to this
Continent, in
concert with the Indo-European languages, define and structure an
abstract
“reality” which is a closed system, and deny the existence of any other
possible reality, especially the egalitarian and harmonious Aboriginal
Indigenous ones. Subject peoples of the
“world powers” derived from the Roman Empire are imprisoned by their
language
and their culture so thoroughly that most of them do not even realize
that
anything exists beyond the very real walls of their linguistic,
theological and
metaphorical prisons.
Because
the “Indian Treaties” were based on the White man’s
mythology of Indians without eminent domain; and written in the
Euro-American
English language, under Roman and British laws, the outcome of these
“Treaties”
was predetermined before they were ever negotiated.
The dice were loaded, the deck was stacked, and all the Aces
were
up the Treaty Commissioner’s sleeve.
The bottom line of the Indian Treaties was to re-define the
Aboriginal Indigenous
people and to brainwash our children in compulsory-education schools.
UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION: There
is no mention of women in the U.S.
Constitution, and their President and Vice-President are explicitly
referred to
with male pronouns. The Nineteenth
Amendment did not literally give women the right to vote, although it
mentions
sex. The U.S. Constitution, like other
documents of Roman Law, was written in the pseudo-male language of
English. There is no female language in
the U.S.
Constitution, or in American English for that matter, which is why the
Equal
Rights Amendment failed. It is also
why, although women purportedly gained the “right to vote,” they are
disproportionately represented in elective offices.
The Nineteenth Amendment did not re-apportion representation to
accommodate the additional voters, and I don’t know what 51% of the
electorate
is voting for, since representation in the U.S. Congress is
Constitutionally
allocated to “male citizens 21 years of age.”
Although
women are by implication invisible chattel—un-named
and not recognized as human beings (like the Aboriginal Indigenous
peoples)
throughout the U.S. Constitution, “Indians” are mentioned both in the
European
colonists’ Declaration of Independence (as “merciless savages”), and
three
times in the U.S. Constitution: once as subject to U.S. commercial
regulation,
and twice as “Indians not taxed” explicitly excluded from U.S.
representation
and implicitly barred from holding land as Indians.
(So-called “Indian land” has been stolen from the Aboriginal
Indigenous people, and the White man’s alien title is held by the
United States
Government, under “trust” for their mythological Indian wards.) One of the reasons that the deliberate racist
misnomer, “Indians,” is used so many times in the Constitution, was to
cover
the genocide that the European settlers had begun and were planning on
continuing. Many of the Euro-American
immigrants had fled violence and/or ecological devastation in Europe,
but
because they did not understand their hierarchical languages and social
structure objectively, their descendants have inevitably re-created the
very
conditions which made their ancestors migratory refugees from their
home lands.
The
United States Constitution begins, “WE the people of the
United States, in order ... to secure the blessings ... to ourselves
and our
posterity, ... “ At the time the U.S.
Constitution was written, the identity of “WE the people” was
unambiguous—they
meant White, Protestant, male property-holders. In
the past two hundred years, “WE the people” has become
conveniently ambiguous. The people who
have been referred to as the Founding Fathers are said to have “fought
for
freedom” in the American Revolution, although by the time the U.S.
Constitution
was ratified in 1789, their ardent desire for “liberty” had been
distorted by
greed and lust for power in European-language terms.
Article four, section 3, of the Constitution includes, “1. New
States may be admitted by Congress ... but no new State shall be formed
or
erected within the jurisdiction of any other State ... “
This is one place where the malignant social
pathology of Manifest Destiny, stealing other peoples’ property, is
written
right into the U.S. Constitution, using ambiguities and euphemisms to
explicitly
lay out their plans for destroying Aboriginal Indigenous Peoples’
families and
cultures, and stealing our land.
My
telephone number is (218) 679-2382 and my mailing address
is P.O. Box 484, Bemidji, MN 56601.
Wub-e-ke-niew
|
|
|