Every nation has phrases and myths imbued into the consciousness of its people. America is hardly an exception. Its past and present is riddled with ideas about destiny, divine intervention, strength, and justice. But there are some concepts which are particularly characteristic of America, or rather of its fantasies about itself. "America, the great melting pot," "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free," "The land of great opportunity."
These phrases certainly have a basis in fact, but as America becomes increasingly entangled in bureaucracy and manipulation, we find ourselves clumsily tripping over complacent conceptions as we race towards a forced homogenized conformity. The slogans and schemes bandied about by corporations and governments often utilize threads of these conceptions in their P. R. phraseology. However, they are less and less real every year; the once poetic boasts of a vigorous new nation are increasingly tinged with paranoia, guilt, and greed.
The American Dream is a nightmare for more of its people than would care to admit it. But we dream on, while inept or sinister politicians attack phantom problems beyond their understanding, further brutalizing and entangling people too helpless to escape.
The governing of the American Indian is a case in point. The Indian Resources Development Act of 1967, the Omnibus Bill, is, at best, an incredible example of confused intention. It could also be a rotten scheme to steal the Indian land; to break the last vestige of communal tribal life.
As the machine increasingly dominates our lives, replacing, trust, love, and sense of community, Uncle Sam finds it necessary to remove to Indian heritage and plug its people into the system. The Indians are not a resource to be developed! "America, the great melting pot" has turned into a coerced illusion, forcing the Indian into completely relinquishing his real heritage, as it has done to most minorities.
Keep in mind, however, that American Indians are not minorities of the United States, but sovereign nations surrounded by Americans. An analysis of the Omnibus Bill was prepared by Techqua Ikachi (The Traditional Indian Land and Life Committee) with the help of several attorneys. They made it quite clear that The Indian Resources and Development Act of 1967 is actually a termination act for Indians: "It increases control of the Bureau of Indian Affairs over the lives of the Indians,...and it does not provide adequate technical or financial assistance." Most Indians are indeed desperately poor and without opportunity in respect to modern American life, but this bill offers a trap door into more misery and oppression, not a way to carry forth their destiny. It will make the Secretary of the Interior the Big Chief of all the remaining Indians on reservations. The Federal Courts and the Bureau of Indian Affairs will replace the necessity for an occupation army.
The United States rarely comprehends tribal or communal life. Misconceptions of the Indian and an absurd logic of Democracy run rampant through the bill, as is evidenced by these sections of the lawyer's analysis quoted below:
ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED
BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
INDIAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
ACT OF 1967" (OMNIBUS BILL)
"The individual loses such land and is not compensated for it...
Similarly, the following sections, 302-310, permit some Indians (only 25 per cent of the total when eleven or more own the property in question) to force a sale or partition of all such land. Although the owners who object to such sales or partition have a right to purchase the property under certain circumstances, they will now have to pay for the land which they previously occupied without charge. If they cannot pay, as most will be unable to do, they will lose their land (unless it is capable of being partitioned in kind and the Commissioner decides to partition it.)
"Thus Sections 301-310 make easier the loss of their land by the Indians; Sections 311-315 are even more drastic in permitting the involuntary breakup and loss of undivided Indian restricted or trust land, for they permit the Secretary of the Interior, on request of only 25 per cent of the owners, no matter how many there are, to acquire such land (at its 'appraised value' -- the method of appraisal is not specified -- plus a 'bonus', which in most cases will be nothing, and can never exceed $1,000.
"Under these provisions the United States shall hold such land up to ten years, during which period it is to be used 'to the best advantage of the United States' - not the Indians. While Indians may purchase the property during this period, if they have the funds to do so, the land "may be disposed of by sale, added to the public domain, a national park system, or devoted to any other use which the Secretary determine is the best interest of the United States' (Sec.. 313 (c) -- not the Indians. Undoubtedly the Indians will derive great satisfaction from knowing that visitors to these national parks will listen with interest when the park rangers speak of the Indians 'who used to live here.' "The title of this bill, 'The Indian Resources Development Act of 1967,' is not without irony, considering that it will have the effect of permitting or causing many Indians to lose their only asset, land. Furthermore, it is rather bizarre that a bill supposedly designed to assist Indians economically requires them to purchase the very same property which was previously held free (in trust or restricted status) for them. Yet that is the effect of Title III (Heirship) as the Secretary himself admits on page 26, in his explanation of the Bill.
"If there is any doubt that this is a termination act, one need only read the 'Relinquishment of Tribal Membership,' among provisions on livestock trespass, soil conversation and employee trading Section 505 (a) provides an incentive (or bribe) to terminate payment to the Indian for his share in the tribal assets. Why it should be necessary to give up all Federal rights and status as an Indian in order to obtain one's share of his tribe's assets is not altogether clear.
"If termination meant truly preparing Indians for participation in the mainstream of American life, they might well think it desirable. But, in the past, and under this Act, it means abdication of responsibility by which the actions of the BIA may be judged.
"The Omnibus Bill increases the control of the BIA over the lives of the Indians. The principal way in which this law would increase BIA interference in the lives of Indians is its authority to withhold, grant, condition, and revoke 'land management certificates,' all without any standards by which the actions of the BIA may be judged.
"The entire act embodies a philosophy of paternalism which limits and degrades the Indians but contains no checks to assure that the BIA is accurately performing its duties. Section after section bestows on the Secretary of the Interior unlimited discretion (for example, Sections 101, 108, 113, 201, 205, 301, 302, 311, 401) with no means of administrative or judicial review provided.
"Thus, the Secretary of the Interior can 'adopt rules and regulations governing the use of Indian lands whenever he concludes that such are necessary to conserve, protect, or promote the interests of the Indians (Sec. 113). And 'A (corporate) charter issued under this title may be revoked by the Secretary in accordance with such rules and regulations as he shall proscribe,' under Section 205. The constitutionality of such broad delegations of legislative power to the Secretary is dubious.
LAWYER'S CONCLUSION
"The foregoing analysis touches only some of the most serious defects in the proposed Omnibus Bill. There are numerous others, both of substance and procedure. Underlying the entire Bill is a fact, rather than helping to make the Indians self-sufficient, a number of factors in this act, such as the fragmentation and forced sale of land, and inducement to relinquish tribal membership weaken such resources and unity as the Indians now possess."
SITTING BULL CORPORATION?
Much of the reasoning behind the dissent that many Americans feel today towards war, American World Economic Dominance, and the insane consumption-oriented society can be extended to the Indian issue. Must these people be forced into the American form of life, where trust and brotherhood are impossible; where anxiety, neurosis, conformity, and greed dominate all else in society? A society diametrically opposed to Indian Spirituality, Life, and Community? The Indians need help now! Help -- before the railroads and corporation mineralogists find a way to gobble up sacred Hopi land, and clap-tract housing have the effrontery to call themselves Apache Estates or Pawnee Village.
Many Indians are already acculturated; others beaten and with little hope. There are many, however, who are trying to retain their rightful heritage. The people involved in the creative, spiritually oriented phenomenon that has been emerging in our society could do much to help the Indian.
Many young people look towards the Indian for some spiritual guidance and for communal and ecological guidelines. This is not a free ride! If it is, then we are simply Ugly Americans stepping over poor dark foreigners. Americans are not Indians, cannot form a traditional Indian Tribe, but we can help each other and work toward a proper development of our respective Karmas.
Remember the Hopi prophecy that the day of purification will come, Armageddon, when they are removed from their rightful land and life. When the consciousness of separate, individual, titled non-community pervades all of this country, the protection of the Great Spirit will be removed. Land is to be lived within, universally, in a spiritual system --not lived on, bartered, sold or consumed. This ill-conceived Omnibus Bill will throw the American melting pot within a generation, assuming the Hopi prophecy is delayed. The melting pot which scores of individuals are trying to climb out of today. If everyone helps each other in communion and consciousness, we can do what is necessary to find the way, and bring about a more natural and spiritual reality: for all.
