1 CHAPTER 1: AMERICAN INDIAN SELF-DETERMINATION AND ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

According to historian Alvin M. Josephy Jr. and former NCAI Executive Director Robert Burnette (Rosebud Sioux), the Chicago Conference and the Declaration constituted a move toward "self-determination." 5 To be sure, the creation of such a statement did not mean that the AICC participants were wholly united in their views. The proceedings of a series of regional meetings leading up to Chicago and the discussions at the conference itself revealed deep divisions. For example, Eastern and Western Indians clashed on several issues. A few critics felt that "elitist insiders" dominated the conference. 6 documents in fd. 11, box 216, Sol Tax Papers, Department of Special Collections, University of Chicago Library, Chicago, Illinois. See also Progress Reports #4 and #5, 26 April 1961, "American Indian Chicago Conference (Charter Convention), 1961)," series XI, box 148/5, National Congress of American Indian Papers, National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. For secondary accounts, see Thomas Clarkin, Federal Indian Policy in the Kennedy and Johnson Administrations (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2001), 17-20; Thomas W. Cowger, The National Congress of American Indians: The Founding Years (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1999), 133-140; Laurence M. Hauptman, Tribes and Tribulations: Misconceptions About American Indians and Their Histories (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1995), chapter 8; Alvin M. Josephy Jr., Now That the Buffalo's Gone: A Study of Today's American Indians (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1982), 224; McNickle, Native American Tribalism, 115-117; Dorothy R. Parker, Singing an Indian Song: A Biography of D'Arcy McNickle (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1992), 187-191, 283. 5 Alvin M. Josephy Jr., Red Power: The American Indians' Fight for Freedom, 1st ed. (New York: McGraw Hill, 1971), 38; Philp, Indian Self-Rule, 211. 6 Hauptman, Tribes and Tribulations, 99, 102-106; John 4
Nevertheless, the Declaration identified several factors critical to self-determination: (1) the concept of inherent sovereignty and protection of Indian lands and resources, (2) federal services to tribes and opportunities for self- administration, and (3) preservation of distinctive Indian cultures. These factors make up what has come to be known as the "trust relationship" or "special relationship" between Indian nations and the federal government (although the Declaration did not use either of these specific phrases). 7 Fahey, Saving the Reservation: Joe Garry and the Battle to be Indian (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001), 175; Progress Report No. 4, 26 April 1961. 7 On trust relationship, see American Indian Policy Review Commission, Final Report, vol. I (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1977), 121-132; Robert L. Bennett, "Workshop on Tribal Government: National Congress of American Indians," 8 December 1959, fd. 12, box 16, series VI, William Zimmerman Papers, Center for Southwestern Research; National Tribal Chairmen's Association (NTCA), "The American Indian World," 9 February 1974, no fd., box 65, National Tribal Chairmen's Association Papers, National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.; D'Arcy McNickle, Mary E. Young, and W. Roger Buffalohead, "Captives Within a Free Society: Federal Policy and the American Indian," chapter 2/part III, no fd., box 14, D'Arcy McNickle Papers, Newberry Library, Chicago, Illinois; Felix S. Cohen's Handbook of Federal Indian Law, 1982 ed. (Charlottesville, Virginia: Michie Bobbs-Merrill, 1982), 220-228; Vine Deloria Jr., "Trouble in High Places: Erosion of American Indian Rights to Religious Freedom in the United States," in The State of Native America: Genocide, Colonization, and Resistance, ed. M. Annette Jaimes (Boston: South End Press, 1992), 271-273; Gilbert L. Hall, The Federal-Indian Trust Relationship: A Duty of Protection (Washington, D.C., 1979), 2-3; National Congress of American Indians (NCAI), Historical Tribal Policies and Priorities, 1944-1975 (1989), 3; Philp, Indian Self-Rule, 302-310; David E. Wilkins and K. Tsianina Lomawaima, Uneven Ground: American Indian Sovereignty and 5
Page 1 and 2: CHAPTER 1: AMERICAN INDIAN SELF-DET
Page 3: Anthropologists Sol Tax and Nancy L
Page 7 and 8: Such sovereignty was often recogniz
Page 9 and 10: While tribes possessed an inherent
Page 11 and 12: in exchange for Indians ceding thei
Page 13 and 14: fashion. Instead of working with In
Page 15 and 16: cultures was necessary for tribal g
Page 17 and 18: produced intratribal conflict. Neve
Page 19 and 20: communities on trust lands were not
Page 21 and 22: new Commissioner favored the eventu
Page 23 and 24: By the late 1950s and during the 19
Page 25 and 26: activist protests in the 1960s and
Page 27 and 28: Indian nations to administer progra
Page 29 and 30: constituted an important part of Pr
Page 31 and 32: esponsibility to open up opportunit
Page 33 and 34: chance to participate in the econom
Page 35 and 36: the economic and social conditions
Page 37 and 38: address by Hubert H. Humphrey, a De
Page 39 and 40: through states to access funds and
Page 41 and 42: fight against termination in the 19
Page 43 and 44: Access to and control over such fun
Page 45: y moving the government in the dire

1 CHAPTER 1: AMERICAN INDIAN SELF-DETERMINATION AND ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?