Well, the Bolivian situation is interesting, because the new president of Bolivia is an indian, the first one ever, and he ran on a platform of indian rights. So that’s driven by Bolivian domestic politics.
What’s even more interesting about that is that he has his own demands for autonomy to deal with.
Well, let’s see what the R.C. Journal says:
“A group represents the Lakota Sioux Indian representatives from various reservations and states said Wednesday that it is declaring sovereign nation status and withdrawing from all treaties with the U.S. government.”
Superb grammar aside, that sure clarifies the legal standing of this group. It “represents the representatives”? What representatives are these to begin with? As far as the Lakota people as a whole are concerned, do any of these folks have standing to declare anything? Have the tribal governments, who at least nominally represent their people, weighed in on this? Has Russell Means, nationally known though he might be, been elected to any office?
The Journal article reeks heavily of undiluted news release. Maybe they couldn’t be bothered to check it out further.
It made it to Wiki!
Some posts worried about the Lakota nation being blockaded by the US. From the vague description in an earlier link, it seems they would share a border with Canada. So, a plane or truck coming from Canada would not have to cross US soil to get there.
It seems to me the govt’s best bet is to pretend it isn’t happening. When a Russell Means-led group of activists “captured” Alcatraz Island, the federals ignored them until they left. When an adversary announces secession, while complaining that the people are too poor to run a country, there’s no need to counterattack. The revolution will collapse of its own weight.
Sons of pigs deserve to die.
(From the Rapid City Journal)
Screwing with other men’s land? That’s just effing rude. Sounds like some survialist nuts, rather than diplomats, if you ask me.
Hm. Three of them are '73 Wounded Knee vets. Hm twice. They’re saying they own good parts of five states, too.
Basically, the question is, how much of the Lakota Nation does ‘Lakota Freedom’ represent?
Now, I’m not saying that America hasn’t screwed over the Indians. We have. (Well, except the ones where I come from: we paid them to move away. Decent amount, as I understand it.), but I have to wonder at the timing of this. One year, and boom, someone maybe less insane in the White House.
Honestly, they really sound like tax protestors to me.
Well, it’s non-contiguous. You can see an example in South Dakota. Perhaps a few regions might share the border with Canada, but not all of them.
If it comes to the point where the U.S. Army has to put this down by force, Congress should insist they use only horse cavalry, in blue uniforms with 19th-Century carbines. Just for the look of the thing.
Yeah, I’m sure Congress will take charge. Just like it has in Iraq.
After reading this thread this morning, I’ve been listening to KILI radio (Voice of the Lakota Nation!) online today, and so far, no mention at all. The high school basketball game is on now.
I don’t have any objection to the Lakota asserting their status as a sovereign nation, I’m all for them issuing their own currency and stamping passports on Route 18, but at present it seems like a statement without any action to back it up, and it feels more like “Russell Means and some other guys” and not like the Lakota as a group.
So, of the people listed in the op article, do any of them have any significance in the Lakota Nation?
You seem to be saying the new nation would be only today’s reservation land. That’s not how I understand the proclamation. It isn’t clearly stated, but I understood it to mean all the land the Lakota would have had if the treaties had been honored. When Means said “the eastern parts of South Dakota and North Dakota,” I took it to mean just that. I have perused the links so far, and I can’t find the part where they mean only the reservations.
By the way, I’m not taking the side of the secessionists, and I think it’s unlikely that they’ll succeed in seceding. I tried going back to the lakotafreedom.org site, but they’ve maxed out their bandwidth. They are up to their wounded knees in the curious, and they can’t quite keep up with the information flow.
Russell Means was a leader of the American Indian Movement, and was involved in the “takeover” of Alcatraz, Mount Rushmore, and Wounded Knee. He’s ran for President of the Oglala Sioux a couple of times, and lost every time. He’s also tried to get the Libertarian Party nomination for President of the US unsuccessfully.
Phyllis Young was also an AIM leader and the founder of Women of All Red Nations (WARN), a feminist Red Power group that split off of AIM.
Duane Martin is the leader of the Strong Hearts Civil Rights Movement (Cante Tenza) He was most recently involved in the alcohol blockade at Pine Ridge Village.
Garry Rowland, I don’t know so much about.
What the activist are claiming is the area that was formerly Dakota territory…North and South Dakota, and most of Montana and Wyoming.
Which, of course, is silly. It wasn’t right for the U.S. to take the land as they did, but that doesn’t make it right to take that land away from the people who have spent their lives living in a place and improving it.
Well, they know they’re not going to get it. I think some of the people in this thread are making this into a much bigger deal than it is. It’s four radicals protesting and holding a press conference. But this isn’t going to lead to any changes in US-Sioux relations or anything like that.
The American government is an easy target for Indians to blame for their poor status. It’s certainly true that the United States government historically screwed over Indians. But nowadays in many cases, the person who’s most likely to be screwing over an Indian is another Indian. The reason 97% are poor is because the other 3% have taken everything. Many Indian nations are set up where a handful of people run all the businesses and use strongarm enforcers to quell any dissent within the nation and loud cries of sovereign rights to avert any challenges from outside.
This is the perfect opportunity for Bush.
He will likely win if he invades, improving his war record.
And he can be in the same league as the founding fathers.
Well, we did have a Freedmen’s Bureau for a few years, which was kinda the same thing: Freedmen's Bureau - Wikipedia
Ten minutes. Ten freaking minutes. Couldn’t you have waited! :rolleyes:
…
Annoying smiling bandit. Just one more service I provide! 