Post by Totems4jt on Jul 15, 2008 12:41:44 GMT -5
Jay Tavare
Mar 4, 07 - 8:59 PM It's a tough call.
I wanted to share this news with you all, it's hard to take sides but this is not what the Grandfather nations lived by...
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Native American Cherokees voted to expel descendants of black slaves from their tribe nation in a special election that has prompted charges of racism, according to returns made public early Sunday.
ADVERTISEMENT
But a vote of 77 percent to 23 percent, the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma adopted Saturday an amendment to their constitution that strips membership from so-called "Freedmen," those descended from slaves once owned by Cherokees, blacks who were married to Cherokees and children of mixed-race families.
"The Cherokee people exercised the most basic democratic right, the right to vote," Chad Smith, Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation, said in a statement. "Their voice is clear as to who should be citizens of the Cherokee Nation. No one else has the right to make that determination."
However, opponents of the amendment say it was a racist project designed to deny the distribution of US government funds and tribal revenue to those with African-American heritage, US media reported.
"This is a sad chapter in Cherokee history," Taylor Keen, a Cherokee tribal council member who opposes the amendment, told the New York Times.
"But this is not my Cherokee Nation. My Cherokee Nation is one that honors all parts of her past."
Advocates of changing the 141-year-old treaty rules defining who is a Cherokee say the tribal nation has a sovereign right to decide citizenship and that other tribes base membership on blood lines.
The Cherokee Nation, which ranks as the second-largest tribe behind the Navajo, has some 250,000 to 270,000 members and is growing rapidly. Members are entitled to benefits from the US federal government and tribal services, including medical and housing aid and scholarships.
Cherokees, along with several other tribes, held black slaves and allied themselves with the Confederacy during the US civil war. After the war, the federal government in an 1866 treaty ordered the slaves freed.
In 1983, the Cherokee Nation expelled many descendants of slaves as members but a Cherokee tribunal ruled last year that the Freedmen were fully-fledged citizens with voting rights. That court decision prompted Saturday's special vote.
Native American tribes recognized by the United States government have the right to self-determination and authority similar to US states.
Election results will remain unofficial until certified by the Cherokee Nation Election Commission, but officials said percentages were not expected to change significantly.
____________________________________________________
Blackangel
Mar 4th, 2007 - 10:48 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Hi Jay (and all in Jayland!),
I'm glad you posted this here. It is easy for some to see the color issues and immediately scream racism but I've heard that this is happening across the US with even full-blooded Indians being expelled from tribes, especially when there is big money at stake. This is so horrible. Here is a video about what's happening with the Pechanga Tribe in California:
Click here: video.nbc4.tv/player/?id=64156
People of color no longer need to look outside of their communities for oppression and troubles. We are quite capable of self-destruction.
-Malaika
Davis, CA
AIM: www.myspace.com/blackangel250
____________________________________________________
gunilla
Mar 5th, 2007 - 3:01 AM Re: It's a tough call.
I reed this in the newspaper today! What can I say, it`s sad when it all happens again, when people separate themselves from eachothers because of coulors or race, we "all" are connected to one and eachother, and when you do harm to another person you do harm to yourself ....i hoped Cherokees learned from the history, but so was not the case.....Gunilla
Sweden
___________________________________________________
~Moni_Bella~
Mar 5th, 2007 - 6:08 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Thank you Jay for posting this. I agree with you Malaika, but I new it would happen and it will continue to spread amongst other tribes. This is only the beginning.
No documentation, or even with some documention Fullblooded or not, if you just don't fit the bill you are still denied. What's next DNA testing? Will this solve matters? I Doubt it. There is always one group that stands alone.
~Moni_Bella~
___________________________________________________
Shay
Mar 5th, 2007 - 6:15 AM Re: It's a tough call.
So very sad but not surprising, not surprising at all
Thanks Jay for the information
Shay
____________________________________________________
Cool Surfing
Mar 5th, 2007 - 7:24 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Just passing through
As I was reading this post it reminded me of a book I just read by Sharon Ewell Foster "ABRAHAM'S WELL". I had been hearing of events such as this. I didn't know the extent of it all though.
Mixed Emotions
Cool Surfing
___________________________________________________
Cool Surfing
Mar 5th, 2007 - 7:40 AM Re: It's a tough call.
I didn't know that it had gone to this extent either Cool Surfing. It is really sad.
Thanks for sharing this with us Jay.
Yolanda
___________________________________________________
Running Red Fox (Forum Hostess)
Mar 5th, 2007 - 8:09 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Thank you for bringing the issue to the Forum.
Malika, I totally agree with your statement!!!
"Divide & Conquer" - It has always been the plan and it seems to be working.
Still for peace,
RRF
Forum Hostess
___________________________________________________
Winterlibra
Mar 5th, 2007 - 1:09 PM Re: It's a tough call.
First of all. Hi!!!!! Everyone.
Now on to what I wanted to say. It's so sad that in the 21st Century, we are still trying to seperate ourselves from each other. We try to teach children that we should except each other regardless of sex and color but yet as adults, we can't seem to follow our own advice. I wasn't aware that this was going on but I'm glad that it was brought to everyone's attention. I just hope that people wakeup and soon.
Your Location: Still At Work
___________________________________________________
dragonfly
Mar 5th, 2007 - 1:55 PM Re: It's a tough call.
This is all so interesting, the ways that we like to determine who we will include in our groups and who will be left out. The use of blood lineage as the critical factor is not new, and certainly not unique to this continent. And historically, the world over it usually has not resulted in long term advantage for the societies that embrace the custom rigidly. After all, a group you cannot join except by being born into it is doomed to dwindle away.
The question I have, is what exactly is being preserved by the exclusion of the Freedmen? A way of life? Spiritual and cultural tradition? And do these belong more to some people than others? Hmmm.... It is with this sort of corruption of proud thought that the idea begins, that one person can be more of a person than another.
Here we can remember that a democratic decision and just decision are not necessarily the same thing. We cannot forget that in the past we have heard other clear voices declaring who ought to be citizens of their nations and who should not. To avoid hyperbole and insult, I will not liken the Cherokee nation to these, for it is not warranted. Yet when the right to absolute self determination is held up as a shield from criticism, the parallel is undeniable.
I am sorry to say, that I also am not surprised by the vote. I find this situation more than sad, but also very unsettling.
Dragonfly
marg38o@yahoo.com
___________________________________________________
Seania
Mar 5th, 2007 - 3:57 PM Re: It's a tough call.
I will have to step up & speak too. It saddens my heart to hear this. Blood is blood, no matter the color of skin. I have always said that I am prejudice against prejudicism.
Why do people keep looking at the outside package instead of the quality of the person within?
Though, I can also see the counsel's point. There are those who claim to be something in order to take what they can get out of it, for free. But if one can prove they are, by blood, despite color of skin, why not consider them part of the tribe? For those who have seen or met me, does that me, on the other end of the spectrum, that I can't be part of the tribe either, because I'm so white skinned? (Yeah, I know I need to get out in the sun a little more....work, school, church, and home keep me indoors much of time....)
Sorry, but fair is fair, and it's time to drawl the line on the one about a person's skin color....
Blessings,
Sea~
___________________________________________________
Yolanda Khayyam
Mar 5th, 2007 - 7:58 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Hi everyone. My sister wanted to reply to the post so she came on as Cool Surfing, we use the same computer. The second Cool surfing post is actually me. Sorry for the mix up. My sister usually lurks in the shadows, Im glad she finally replied to something.
Yolanda Khayyam
___________________________________________________
Barbara
Mar 5th, 2007 - 8:38 PM Re: It's a tough call.
I don`t think it`s a surprise either even though I didn`t know this was going on. Seems really short-sighted even though folks have a right to their decisions. I always thought the Cherokee wanted to know who all their relatives were and include them.
___________________________________________________
Fontenel/Forum Hostess
Mar 5th, 2007 - 10:42 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Thank you Jay for posting this very special topic/article.
It's doesn't matter how they vote they can't take away someone hertiage in a vote. "THIS VOTE WAS ALL ABOUT MONEY" For some of the descendants of black slaves and Cherokees we a nation of people just want to know who we are and where we came from. You can't just vote that away from us.
Peace to all
Fontenel/Forum Hostess
___________________________________________________
Summer Breeze
Mar 6th, 2007 - 1:24 AM Re: Re: It's a tough call.
This is similar to what happened in 2000 with the Seminole Nation. The Seminole were no longer authorized to conduct gaming, the freedmen were allowed back into the tribe. Hopefully, the same will happen with the Cherokee Nation.
Summer Breeze
____________________________________________________
Indigenousfilmlover
Mar 6th, 2007 - 4:07 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Thanks for posting the news article, Jay.
I have a friend who belongs to the Lakota nation. His Mother is Lakota and his father is African American. He was telling me a couple of days ago that this is (unfortunately)quietly going on in many Indian Nations........
He experienced alot of racism growing up on the reservation for having mixed (Metis) blood, but he still thinks of it as his home and although he has lived off the reservation for a couple of years now, he misses it very much. These are very difficult times for him and other mixed blood Native Americans, to feel so unwanted that you could be voted away....
These are strange dark times of intolerance and imbalance...............
____________________________________________________
Observer
Mar 7th, 2007 - 9:46 AM Re: Re: It's a tough call.
Just for the record, a Metis is defined as a person of mixed Native American and European blood. Is your friend European also as well as African? If so then would be Metis.
____________________________________________________
Ms. Muse
Mar 6th, 2007 - 6:57 AM It's a tough call indeed
OKLAHOMA CITY - The Cherokee Nation vote to revoke the citizenship of the descendants of people the Cherokee once owned as slaves was a blow to people who have relied on tribal benefits.
Charlene White, a descendant of freed Cherokee slaves who were adopted into the tribe in 1866 under a treaty with the U.S. government, wondered Sunday where she would now go for the glaucoma treatment she has received at a tribal hospital in Stilwell.
"I've got to go back to the doctor, but I don't know if I can go back to the clinic or if they're going to oust me right now," said White, 56, a disabled Tahlequah resident who lives on a fixed income.
In Saturday's special election, more than 76 percent of voters decided to amend the Cherokee Nation's constitution to remove the estimated 2,800 freedmen descendants from the tribal rolls, according to results posted Sunday on the tribe's Web site.
Marilyn Vann, president of the Descendants of Freedmen of the Five Civilized Tribes, said the election results undoubtedly will be challenged.
"We will pursue the legal remedies that are available to us to stop people from not only losing their voting rights, but to receiving medical care and other services to which they are entitled under law," Vann said Sunday.
"This is a fight for justice to stop these crimes against humanity."
Results to be finalized March 12
Cherokee Nation spokesman Mike Miller said Sunday that election results will not be finalized until after a protest period that extends through March 12. Services currently being received by freedmen descendants will not immediately be suspended, he said.
"There isn't going to be some sort of sudden stop of a service that's ongoing," Miller said. "There will be some sort of transition period so that people understand what's going on."
In a statement late Saturday, Cherokee Nation Principal Chief Chad Smith said he was pleased with the turnout and election result.
"Their voice is clear as to who should be citizens of the Cherokee Nation," Smith said. "No one else has the right to make that determination. It was a right of self-government, affirmed in 23 treaties with Great Britain and the United States and paid dearly with 4,000 lives on the Trail of Tears."
The petition drive for the ballot measure followed a March 2006 ruling by the Cherokee Nation Supreme Court that said an 1866 treaty assured freedmen descendants of tribal citizenship.
Mirrors 2000 Seminole decision
A similar situation occurred in 2000 when the Seminole Nation voted to cast freedmen descendants out of its tribe, said attorney Jon Velie of Norman, an expert on Indian law who has represented freedmen descendants in previous cases.
"The United States, when posed the same situation with the Seminoles, would not recognize the election and they ultimately cut off most federal programs to the Seminoles," Velie said. "They also determined the Seminoles, without this relationship with the government, were not authorized to conduct gaming."
Ultimately, the Seminole freedmen were allowed back into the tribe, Velie said.
Velie said Saturday's vote already has hurt the tribe's public perception.
"It's throwback, old-school racist rhetoric," Velie said.
"And it's really heartbreaking, because the Cherokees are good people and have a very diverse citizenship," he said.
Miller, the tribal spokesman, defended the Cherokees against charges of racism, saying that Saturday's vote showed the tribe was open to allowing its citizens vote on whether non-Indians be allowed membership.
"I think it's actually the opposite. To say that the Cherokee Nation is intolerant or racist ignores the fact that we have an open dialogue and have the discussion, he said.
____________________________________________________
Turquoise
Mar 6th, 2007 - 6:46 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Thanx for sharing this Jay.
This is very sad and irritating story. Discrimination is very sickening and the fact that it still keeps happening in this century. It is more saddening that this is happening in a Native American tribe. Shame on humanity!!!!
T.
____________________________________________________
Star
Mar 6th, 2007 - 7:28 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Jay, I also appreciate you sharing this. The more things change, the more they remain the same. Oppressed peoples the world over seem to react in this manner when the opportunity arises. I went to the Cherokee Tribal News website to see the amendment. An exerpt - ...amend the tribe's constitution and restrict tribal citizenship to descendants of Indians by blood listed on the Dawes Rolls and to exclude descendants of Freedman and intermarried Whites. Also, the string from the report at nbc4.tv in LA about the Pechanga is now inexcessible. - Gee, I wonder why??? Getting a lot of bad press!!!
____________________________________________________
Lisa
Mar 7th, 2007 - 8:26 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Hi Jay, thanks for the information. I see both sides, but as for me I am caucasian/cherokee and would fall into the category of "intermarried whites", but speaking for myself I was very saddened by this whole incident. I have been mesmerized by the indians ever since I was a little one and when I became older my father told me that we had an indian blood line and therefore I started my genealogy study, but it was never about the money, (of which I do not receive any). I just wanted to know who I was and where I came from. I have always been proud to be part Cherokee and still am, but this vote is just not right. It is a sad thing for all involved.
Lisa
vineyards4ljt@yahoo.com
____________________________________________________
Ms. Muse
Mar 7th, 2007 - 11:09 AM It's a tough call. - Update
OKLAHOMA CITY - Black Cherokee Indians said Tuesday they will challenge a weekend vote to kick them out of the tribe that once owned their ancestors as slaves.
They threatened legal action to overturn the vote Saturday in which 77 percent of those who cast ballots said they should no longer be Cherokees.
"We are working with our attorneys," Marilyn Vann, president of the Descendants of Freedmen of the Five Civilized Tribes, told Reuters. "Rest assured, we will be challenging this."
The vote would remove from tribal rolls 2,800 people who were mostly "freedmen," or descendants of slaves owned by the tribe before the U.S. Civil War brought their freedom.
They were adopted into the tribe under a 1866 treaty with the United States, but there has long been controversy among Cherokees about whether they belonged.
Exclusion from the tribe means the black Cherokees cannot vote in tribal elections or receive entitlements such as health benefits or a share of casino revenues on tribal lands.
The tribe has about 250,000 people, but only 8,500 cast ballots in Saturday's vote.
The vote, which calls for amendment to the Cherokee Nation constitution, was described by Cherokee authorities as a move to more clearly define who is a tribe member. Opponents said it was motivated by racism and money.
Tribe spokesman Mike Miller, based in the tribal headquarters in Tahlequah, said, under tribal regulations, the black Cherokees have until Monday to protest the vote.
"The Cherokee Nation is not going to implement anything until that protest period passes," he said.
Miller said that if the black Cherokees lose their tribal benefits, they will be phased out gradually.
____________________________________________________
Jen
Mar 7th, 2007 - 10:06 PM Re: It's a tough call.
We live in a tough and ever changing rule. Bless those who need it.
____________________________________________________
akula1
Mar 8th, 2007 - 7:40 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Very sad but not surprising.
This is not the only tribe going through this issue nor will it be the last. My experience with the First Nations is extremely limited but it is my understanding that tribal membership has always been a descision made by the tribal members themselves and wasn't always based on BQ.
This is a very different world than the one that existed when the treaties were made.
Like everyone else, the First Nations will ultimately be responsible for the people they become.
P.S.- I'm Canadian and if I've offended anyone with the use of the term "First Nations" I apologize.
____________________________________________________
Carol aka The Empress
Mar 8th, 2007 - 9:05 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Hello Jay and everyone in Jayland . This is an interesting and hot topic lately. First of all, I think that this decision is more than about race. Proponents on both sides have their own opinion about what drives it. Is it racism or is it about self-determination and autonomy? Maybe both. Maybe neither.
However, I agree with what someone else has stated, it's more about the green, dinero, payola, bread...you get my meaning. Who gets to control those government dollars? Who gets to have access to them? That appears to be the real motive. Of course, there's also the sentiment that the Freedmen have been "carried" by the Cherokee nation for too long and that the nation was forced to adopt them after the 1864/1865 treaty...hmmmm.
My inquiring mind questions...why now? After 140- some odd years are the people who lived within the community, marrying into the community, working in the community no longer acceptable? It seems those Freedmen were targeted because they were an easily visible group. I doubt the "cleansing" stops there. Time will tell.
The Empress
____________________________________________________
Dazzle
Mar 9th, 2007 - 1:17 AM Re: It's a tough call.
...as they say, everything happens for a reason.. I dropped by to collect an addie and saw this..
It is almost too laughable to be for real, however it is typical when we as 'Tribal' people attempt to forget our past.
I understand there is some abuse of the system going on, where by some who should not receive assistance, claim heritage and are, but as all difficulties of a magnitude nothing can be achieved with vast solutions, and decisions made out of one's own personal feelings, disregarding the overall good of the many.
There seems to be a misguided thought that in this big melting pot, people will NOT continue to love others of differing races, marry, have multi-racial children,and continue the delusion of all races. What then ??
This has been our past, present and our future.
It is obvious there is still much to consider, and as someone mentioned, we, they - the Cherokee, are still and always will be people of color, and eventually, I believe,unfortunately will be reminded of that we all still, have an overall struggle here to just be treated fairly.
My family is from the Carolinas ( most likely Cherokee) and I carry Native Blood Patrilinneally and Matrillinealy . Most Black Americans often claim Cherokee lineage as some 80% of us, do have Native American blood lines, but in my case it is more likely Cherokee,than not. My surname I recently discovered is also one of the three most popular surnames of the Cherokee people. So,this fact could also mean via owned/freed slave.
Regardless, years ago when I began tracing my geneaology, I discovered that a way the government had of reducing the lands of Native people down South, was by taking 'said' people off the Government counted 'rolls'( how ironic) or roll call, and thus claiming they required less land.
In the Carolinas, around the turn of the century, the way they did this was basically on 'sight'.
They visted, saw a racially mixed group of people, and decided who was Black and who was Indian. Obviously darker skin - Black. It being against the law for Black people to own land, much was easily stolen.
I guess it probably wasn't a good thing to work outside,in the hot southern sun, which most did, because all a Native person would need is a bit of a tan, and it was just cause to take away your property.
You base heritage on skin color and just as then, you will eventually eliminate the land and the people connected to it. It seems history continues to repeat itself.
But as bad as this is, it's still not as bad as the rules behind blood lineage. I read a few months ago, how it is possible to be a full-blooded Native American, and still NOT be able to claim connection to any particular 'Tribe" because you DO NOT meet any particular Tribe's requirement for membership.
All because your parents are from different tribes. Such as, to claim this group, your mother, not your father must be this,to claim that group your father must be at least half this...etc
Further,without a Tribe affiltation, the Government oftentimes does not want to recognize you as being of Native American heritage.
Government agents no longer have to perpetuate the annihilation of a people, we are doing it ourselves.
Dazz
____________________________________________________
Christi
Mar 9th, 2007 - 9:54 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Hello to All,
I have received a number of articles through emails on this, and one said the tribe was using the old rule of determining who is black (one drop of black blood). I don't know if this is true or not, however, when I went to the opening of the American Indian Museum in D.C. they said that the majority of American Indians today are not full blooded. If they did a DNA test on all the tribe members my bet is that the non-black members on average wouldn't have any more Cherokee blood than the black members since so many are part Caucasian.
So they claim this is democracy in action. However if the U.S. suddenly voted the people of the Cherokee nation out as U.S. citizens they'd think that was wrong, and so it would be, as this was wrong. It was based on greed, and in the long run any nation engaging in "ethnic cleansing", whether it's a non-violent form or not only serves to cripple it self from within. When Europeans conquered this land they brought over as many people from Europe as they could (even ethnic groups they didn't like) to populate the land they took because they understood it takes people to build a nation. Apparently a number of tribes still haven't figured this out. Nations who practice "Aparthied" should be looked upon and delt with in the same way as South Africa was. Oh yeah, they used to claim those vile policies were voted on democratically also.
Jay,
Thank you for allowing your site to be used a platform for discussion on this very difficult issue.
Christi
seven3_ad@yahoo.com
____________________________________________________
Catmeow
Mar 9th, 2007 - 7:27 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Thanks for the post. This is the first I've heard of it and it was very sad news indeed.
I'm 1/8 Cherokee (and a quarter Crow) but am not registered, etc. So many people both white and black proudly claim Cherokee in their lineage. The Cheroke nation blazed new paths and set examples for many other tribes in the U.S. It's disturbing to see them take this type of action in this day and age.
Equality for all? Evidently only if you fit their "profile". I am ashamed.
Steph
webemacks@netzero.com
____________________________________________________
Miss Davis - a.k.a. "Five Shrieks"
Mar 10th, 2007 - 6:33 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Wow. Discrimination still exist, obviously. As if booting out those with African heritage will automatically delete the Native heritage out of the DNA gene pool of these members of that tribe. Unreal. This is really sad. I wonder if there is such a thing as an organization or "tribe" that includes all Native people that have African heritage or even those who are intermarried? One has to wonder, but I wish things like that weren't necessary. *sigh*
Miss Davis
____________________________________________________
Blackangel
Mar 11th, 2007 - 2:17 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Hi Miss Davis and fellow Jaybirds,
I just wanted to let you know that there is such an organization. Check out blackindians.com for the Black Indians and Intertribal Native American Association or (BINAY) tribe. It's not BIA registered (That doesn't surprise me and due to current events I think that's a very good thing!) but is a 501 C3 non-for-profit organization for any one of Native descent whether mixed or full-blood (card-carrying or not, doesn't matter) and it's main goal is to preserve the legacy and heritage of Black Indians.
Davis, CA
www.myspace.com/blackangel250
____________________________________________________
Miss Davis - a.k.a. "Five Shrieks"
Mar 13th, 2007 - 5:12 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Thanks Black Angel! That's great to know!!!
Miss Davis
____________________________________________________
Ahalani
Mar 19th, 2007 - 11:23 PM Re: It's a tough call.
As a Cherokee not on the rolls but who still honors the tribal ways through participation in the rituals of the Cherokee, I must say that, while recognizing the right to tribal sovereignty, this vote saddens me.
It flies in the face of an entire lifetime of training that our people accept as family all those who live, or have lived, among us and honor our ways.
I have many aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents, sisters and brothers who are related not by blood but by a familial recognition of our souls and spirits that we are all related. A recognition that we all give for the betterment of each other and the tribe as a whole.
I can't help but feel that now when things are better for our people after centuries of tribulation we should be looking to share our good fortune with all our people rather than casting some members away.
agganciato@yahoo.com
___________________________________________________
Bizzy
Mar 24th, 2007 - 3:55 AM Re: It's a tough call.
This information comes as a shock and a deep heartbreak to me as well...
I am 1/8 Cherokee on my Mother's side, and it hurts tremendously that the majority of Cherokee in Okhlahoma share this view. Although I have always identified myself as a Black woman, I have always been proud of my Cherokee ancestry too. I have sympathized with many of the plights of American Indians in this country. So to read this news and see that many Cherokee would rather seperate themselves from any ties to those with Black bloodlines for the sake of keeping more funding for themselves is very sad and dissappointing. I hope one day soon that all who allow the temporary riches of society, to divide the spiritual richness of unity,will come to their senses.
b_thebomb@yahoo.com
____________________________________________________
Donna Williams
Jul 29th, 2007 - 2:45 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Hadiyh so'indgin Jay! Thank you for sharing this news. I would like to share my views
with you on this treaty issue and concern. I am not speaking on behalf of our speaker
nor my Wet'suwet'en relations or other First Nations. My experiences in the legal,
corporate, medical and treaty offices since high school have biased me in favour of
First Nations despite my negative experiences based on my mixed ancestry. Directly and indirectly, I was told that I was not Wet'suwet'en enough! My father's father was Gitksan and my mother's father was Wet'suwet'en (and French or German? Mom said he had flaming red hair when he was young LOL). I consider myself Wet'suwet'en as our Grandparents raised us after our father died and mom moved away to work. Later in life, I learned that everyone was mixed LOL. We have descendants from a Chinese man who was working on the railway in BC. Also, a Norweigan who forsake his ancestry and learned to speak only Wet'suwet'en until his death. Despite all these life experiences, I still see the bigger picture, which is our future generations well-being must be considered in all treaty and non-treaty negotiations. The federal government is pushing to have First Nations concede to accepting cut-off lands (which are being decimated) and determine blood ratio for benefits and lands purposes. Since the Nisga'a finalized their treaty, bilateral and trilateral negotiations are pushing to move in their direction. Currently, I do not know how they are fairing. But I understand that it was not a good deal when their treaty was being reviewed. I see other treaties ratified in BC and it is sad. A lot of the final treaty monies are 80% loan and 20% grant. Some non-natives are against treaty negotiations and some are for finalizing them. All monetary-based as I am concerned. My grandfather was both a Hereditary and Band Chief and he brought ambulance services, hydro and water to our reserve in the early- to mid-1970s. Washing your hair in rain is always LOL. As noted in Myspace, my grandparents took us everywhere. Life was good. Crystal Meth is now in our community as well as other heavy drugs. Too many deaths and suicides of our young people. Federal and provincial governments are cutting back on a lot of much needed
prevention, intervention and follow-up programs. That is my two cents on this issue and hope this gives insight from 'inside'. LOL. Take care and God bless Jay and here is an angel for you (\o/) PS How funny that I should say that. The Eurythmics Angel song is on as I sign off LOL.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
I wanted to share this news with you all, it's hard to take sides but this is not what the Grandfather nations lived by...
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Native American Cherokees voted to expel descendants of black slaves from their tribe nation in a special election that has prompted charges of racism, according to returns made public early Sunday.
ADVERTISEMENT
But a vote of 77 percent to 23 percent, the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma adopted Saturday an amendment to their constitution that strips membership from so-called "Freedmen," those descended from slaves once owned by Cherokees, blacks who were married to Cherokees and children of mixed-race families.
"The Cherokee people exercised the most basic democratic right, the right to vote," Chad Smith, Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation, said in a statement. "Their voice is clear as to who should be citizens of the Cherokee Nation. No one else has the right to make that determination."
However, opponents of the amendment say it was a racist project designed to deny the distribution of US government funds and tribal revenue to those with African-American heritage, US media reported.
"This is a sad chapter in Cherokee history," Taylor Keen, a Cherokee tribal council member who opposes the amendment, told the New York Times.
"But this is not my Cherokee Nation. My Cherokee Nation is one that honors all parts of her past."
Advocates of changing the 141-year-old treaty rules defining who is a Cherokee say the tribal nation has a sovereign right to decide citizenship and that other tribes base membership on blood lines.
The Cherokee Nation, which ranks as the second-largest tribe behind the Navajo, has some 250,000 to 270,000 members and is growing rapidly. Members are entitled to benefits from the US federal government and tribal services, including medical and housing aid and scholarships.
Cherokees, along with several other tribes, held black slaves and allied themselves with the Confederacy during the US civil war. After the war, the federal government in an 1866 treaty ordered the slaves freed.
In 1983, the Cherokee Nation expelled many descendants of slaves as members but a Cherokee tribunal ruled last year that the Freedmen were fully-fledged citizens with voting rights. That court decision prompted Saturday's special vote.
Native American tribes recognized by the United States government have the right to self-determination and authority similar to US states.
Election results will remain unofficial until certified by the Cherokee Nation Election Commission, but officials said percentages were not expected to change significantly.
Moricetown BC Canada
www.myspace.com/ndngurlmotown
____________________________________________________
Running Red Fox (Forum Hostess)
Jul 29th, 2007 - 9:55 AM It's a tough call. - Hello Donna
Hi Donna Williams and welcome to Jayland. Thanks for diving right on in..LOL, and we look forward to seeing more post from you.
RRF
Forum Hostess
Mar 4, 07 - 8:59 PM It's a tough call.
I wanted to share this news with you all, it's hard to take sides but this is not what the Grandfather nations lived by...
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Native American Cherokees voted to expel descendants of black slaves from their tribe nation in a special election that has prompted charges of racism, according to returns made public early Sunday.
ADVERTISEMENT
But a vote of 77 percent to 23 percent, the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma adopted Saturday an amendment to their constitution that strips membership from so-called "Freedmen," those descended from slaves once owned by Cherokees, blacks who were married to Cherokees and children of mixed-race families.
"The Cherokee people exercised the most basic democratic right, the right to vote," Chad Smith, Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation, said in a statement. "Their voice is clear as to who should be citizens of the Cherokee Nation. No one else has the right to make that determination."
However, opponents of the amendment say it was a racist project designed to deny the distribution of US government funds and tribal revenue to those with African-American heritage, US media reported.
"This is a sad chapter in Cherokee history," Taylor Keen, a Cherokee tribal council member who opposes the amendment, told the New York Times.
"But this is not my Cherokee Nation. My Cherokee Nation is one that honors all parts of her past."
Advocates of changing the 141-year-old treaty rules defining who is a Cherokee say the tribal nation has a sovereign right to decide citizenship and that other tribes base membership on blood lines.
The Cherokee Nation, which ranks as the second-largest tribe behind the Navajo, has some 250,000 to 270,000 members and is growing rapidly. Members are entitled to benefits from the US federal government and tribal services, including medical and housing aid and scholarships.
Cherokees, along with several other tribes, held black slaves and allied themselves with the Confederacy during the US civil war. After the war, the federal government in an 1866 treaty ordered the slaves freed.
In 1983, the Cherokee Nation expelled many descendants of slaves as members but a Cherokee tribunal ruled last year that the Freedmen were fully-fledged citizens with voting rights. That court decision prompted Saturday's special vote.
Native American tribes recognized by the United States government have the right to self-determination and authority similar to US states.
Election results will remain unofficial until certified by the Cherokee Nation Election Commission, but officials said percentages were not expected to change significantly.
____________________________________________________
Blackangel
Mar 4th, 2007 - 10:48 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Hi Jay (and all in Jayland!),
I'm glad you posted this here. It is easy for some to see the color issues and immediately scream racism but I've heard that this is happening across the US with even full-blooded Indians being expelled from tribes, especially when there is big money at stake. This is so horrible. Here is a video about what's happening with the Pechanga Tribe in California:
Click here: video.nbc4.tv/player/?id=64156
People of color no longer need to look outside of their communities for oppression and troubles. We are quite capable of self-destruction.
-Malaika
Davis, CA
AIM: www.myspace.com/blackangel250
____________________________________________________
gunilla
Mar 5th, 2007 - 3:01 AM Re: It's a tough call.
I reed this in the newspaper today! What can I say, it`s sad when it all happens again, when people separate themselves from eachothers because of coulors or race, we "all" are connected to one and eachother, and when you do harm to another person you do harm to yourself ....i hoped Cherokees learned from the history, but so was not the case.....Gunilla
Sweden
___________________________________________________
~Moni_Bella~
Mar 5th, 2007 - 6:08 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Thank you Jay for posting this. I agree with you Malaika, but I new it would happen and it will continue to spread amongst other tribes. This is only the beginning.
No documentation, or even with some documention Fullblooded or not, if you just don't fit the bill you are still denied. What's next DNA testing? Will this solve matters? I Doubt it. There is always one group that stands alone.
~Moni_Bella~
___________________________________________________
Shay
Mar 5th, 2007 - 6:15 AM Re: It's a tough call.
So very sad but not surprising, not surprising at all
Thanks Jay for the information
Shay
____________________________________________________
Cool Surfing
Mar 5th, 2007 - 7:24 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Just passing through
As I was reading this post it reminded me of a book I just read by Sharon Ewell Foster "ABRAHAM'S WELL". I had been hearing of events such as this. I didn't know the extent of it all though.
Mixed Emotions
Cool Surfing
___________________________________________________
Cool Surfing
Mar 5th, 2007 - 7:40 AM Re: It's a tough call.
I didn't know that it had gone to this extent either Cool Surfing. It is really sad.
Thanks for sharing this with us Jay.
Yolanda
___________________________________________________
Running Red Fox (Forum Hostess)
Mar 5th, 2007 - 8:09 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Thank you for bringing the issue to the Forum.
Malika, I totally agree with your statement!!!
"Divide & Conquer" - It has always been the plan and it seems to be working.
Still for peace,
RRF
Forum Hostess
___________________________________________________
Winterlibra
Mar 5th, 2007 - 1:09 PM Re: It's a tough call.
First of all. Hi!!!!! Everyone.
Now on to what I wanted to say. It's so sad that in the 21st Century, we are still trying to seperate ourselves from each other. We try to teach children that we should except each other regardless of sex and color but yet as adults, we can't seem to follow our own advice. I wasn't aware that this was going on but I'm glad that it was brought to everyone's attention. I just hope that people wakeup and soon.
Your Location: Still At Work
___________________________________________________
dragonfly
Mar 5th, 2007 - 1:55 PM Re: It's a tough call.
This is all so interesting, the ways that we like to determine who we will include in our groups and who will be left out. The use of blood lineage as the critical factor is not new, and certainly not unique to this continent. And historically, the world over it usually has not resulted in long term advantage for the societies that embrace the custom rigidly. After all, a group you cannot join except by being born into it is doomed to dwindle away.
The question I have, is what exactly is being preserved by the exclusion of the Freedmen? A way of life? Spiritual and cultural tradition? And do these belong more to some people than others? Hmmm.... It is with this sort of corruption of proud thought that the idea begins, that one person can be more of a person than another.
Here we can remember that a democratic decision and just decision are not necessarily the same thing. We cannot forget that in the past we have heard other clear voices declaring who ought to be citizens of their nations and who should not. To avoid hyperbole and insult, I will not liken the Cherokee nation to these, for it is not warranted. Yet when the right to absolute self determination is held up as a shield from criticism, the parallel is undeniable.
I am sorry to say, that I also am not surprised by the vote. I find this situation more than sad, but also very unsettling.
Dragonfly
marg38o@yahoo.com
___________________________________________________
Seania
Mar 5th, 2007 - 3:57 PM Re: It's a tough call.
I will have to step up & speak too. It saddens my heart to hear this. Blood is blood, no matter the color of skin. I have always said that I am prejudice against prejudicism.
Why do people keep looking at the outside package instead of the quality of the person within?
Though, I can also see the counsel's point. There are those who claim to be something in order to take what they can get out of it, for free. But if one can prove they are, by blood, despite color of skin, why not consider them part of the tribe? For those who have seen or met me, does that me, on the other end of the spectrum, that I can't be part of the tribe either, because I'm so white skinned? (Yeah, I know I need to get out in the sun a little more....work, school, church, and home keep me indoors much of time....)
Sorry, but fair is fair, and it's time to drawl the line on the one about a person's skin color....
Blessings,
Sea~
___________________________________________________
Yolanda Khayyam
Mar 5th, 2007 - 7:58 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Hi everyone. My sister wanted to reply to the post so she came on as Cool Surfing, we use the same computer. The second Cool surfing post is actually me. Sorry for the mix up. My sister usually lurks in the shadows, Im glad she finally replied to something.
Yolanda Khayyam
___________________________________________________
Barbara
Mar 5th, 2007 - 8:38 PM Re: It's a tough call.
I don`t think it`s a surprise either even though I didn`t know this was going on. Seems really short-sighted even though folks have a right to their decisions. I always thought the Cherokee wanted to know who all their relatives were and include them.
___________________________________________________
Fontenel/Forum Hostess
Mar 5th, 2007 - 10:42 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Thank you Jay for posting this very special topic/article.
It's doesn't matter how they vote they can't take away someone hertiage in a vote. "THIS VOTE WAS ALL ABOUT MONEY" For some of the descendants of black slaves and Cherokees we a nation of people just want to know who we are and where we came from. You can't just vote that away from us.
Peace to all
Fontenel/Forum Hostess
___________________________________________________
Summer Breeze
Mar 6th, 2007 - 1:24 AM Re: Re: It's a tough call.
This is similar to what happened in 2000 with the Seminole Nation. The Seminole were no longer authorized to conduct gaming, the freedmen were allowed back into the tribe. Hopefully, the same will happen with the Cherokee Nation.
Summer Breeze
____________________________________________________
Indigenousfilmlover
Mar 6th, 2007 - 4:07 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Thanks for posting the news article, Jay.
I have a friend who belongs to the Lakota nation. His Mother is Lakota and his father is African American. He was telling me a couple of days ago that this is (unfortunately)quietly going on in many Indian Nations........
He experienced alot of racism growing up on the reservation for having mixed (Metis) blood, but he still thinks of it as his home and although he has lived off the reservation for a couple of years now, he misses it very much. These are very difficult times for him and other mixed blood Native Americans, to feel so unwanted that you could be voted away....
These are strange dark times of intolerance and imbalance...............
____________________________________________________
Observer
Mar 7th, 2007 - 9:46 AM Re: Re: It's a tough call.
Just for the record, a Metis is defined as a person of mixed Native American and European blood. Is your friend European also as well as African? If so then would be Metis.
____________________________________________________
Ms. Muse
Mar 6th, 2007 - 6:57 AM It's a tough call indeed
OKLAHOMA CITY - The Cherokee Nation vote to revoke the citizenship of the descendants of people the Cherokee once owned as slaves was a blow to people who have relied on tribal benefits.
Charlene White, a descendant of freed Cherokee slaves who were adopted into the tribe in 1866 under a treaty with the U.S. government, wondered Sunday where she would now go for the glaucoma treatment she has received at a tribal hospital in Stilwell.
"I've got to go back to the doctor, but I don't know if I can go back to the clinic or if they're going to oust me right now," said White, 56, a disabled Tahlequah resident who lives on a fixed income.
In Saturday's special election, more than 76 percent of voters decided to amend the Cherokee Nation's constitution to remove the estimated 2,800 freedmen descendants from the tribal rolls, according to results posted Sunday on the tribe's Web site.
Marilyn Vann, president of the Descendants of Freedmen of the Five Civilized Tribes, said the election results undoubtedly will be challenged.
"We will pursue the legal remedies that are available to us to stop people from not only losing their voting rights, but to receiving medical care and other services to which they are entitled under law," Vann said Sunday.
"This is a fight for justice to stop these crimes against humanity."
Results to be finalized March 12
Cherokee Nation spokesman Mike Miller said Sunday that election results will not be finalized until after a protest period that extends through March 12. Services currently being received by freedmen descendants will not immediately be suspended, he said.
"There isn't going to be some sort of sudden stop of a service that's ongoing," Miller said. "There will be some sort of transition period so that people understand what's going on."
In a statement late Saturday, Cherokee Nation Principal Chief Chad Smith said he was pleased with the turnout and election result.
"Their voice is clear as to who should be citizens of the Cherokee Nation," Smith said. "No one else has the right to make that determination. It was a right of self-government, affirmed in 23 treaties with Great Britain and the United States and paid dearly with 4,000 lives on the Trail of Tears."
The petition drive for the ballot measure followed a March 2006 ruling by the Cherokee Nation Supreme Court that said an 1866 treaty assured freedmen descendants of tribal citizenship.
Mirrors 2000 Seminole decision
A similar situation occurred in 2000 when the Seminole Nation voted to cast freedmen descendants out of its tribe, said attorney Jon Velie of Norman, an expert on Indian law who has represented freedmen descendants in previous cases.
"The United States, when posed the same situation with the Seminoles, would not recognize the election and they ultimately cut off most federal programs to the Seminoles," Velie said. "They also determined the Seminoles, without this relationship with the government, were not authorized to conduct gaming."
Ultimately, the Seminole freedmen were allowed back into the tribe, Velie said.
Velie said Saturday's vote already has hurt the tribe's public perception.
"It's throwback, old-school racist rhetoric," Velie said.
"And it's really heartbreaking, because the Cherokees are good people and have a very diverse citizenship," he said.
Miller, the tribal spokesman, defended the Cherokees against charges of racism, saying that Saturday's vote showed the tribe was open to allowing its citizens vote on whether non-Indians be allowed membership.
"I think it's actually the opposite. To say that the Cherokee Nation is intolerant or racist ignores the fact that we have an open dialogue and have the discussion, he said.
____________________________________________________
Turquoise
Mar 6th, 2007 - 6:46 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Thanx for sharing this Jay.
This is very sad and irritating story. Discrimination is very sickening and the fact that it still keeps happening in this century. It is more saddening that this is happening in a Native American tribe. Shame on humanity!!!!
T.
____________________________________________________
Star
Mar 6th, 2007 - 7:28 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Jay, I also appreciate you sharing this. The more things change, the more they remain the same. Oppressed peoples the world over seem to react in this manner when the opportunity arises. I went to the Cherokee Tribal News website to see the amendment. An exerpt - ...amend the tribe's constitution and restrict tribal citizenship to descendants of Indians by blood listed on the Dawes Rolls and to exclude descendants of Freedman and intermarried Whites. Also, the string from the report at nbc4.tv in LA about the Pechanga is now inexcessible. - Gee, I wonder why??? Getting a lot of bad press!!!
____________________________________________________
Lisa
Mar 7th, 2007 - 8:26 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Hi Jay, thanks for the information. I see both sides, but as for me I am caucasian/cherokee and would fall into the category of "intermarried whites", but speaking for myself I was very saddened by this whole incident. I have been mesmerized by the indians ever since I was a little one and when I became older my father told me that we had an indian blood line and therefore I started my genealogy study, but it was never about the money, (of which I do not receive any). I just wanted to know who I was and where I came from. I have always been proud to be part Cherokee and still am, but this vote is just not right. It is a sad thing for all involved.
Lisa
vineyards4ljt@yahoo.com
____________________________________________________
Ms. Muse
Mar 7th, 2007 - 11:09 AM It's a tough call. - Update
OKLAHOMA CITY - Black Cherokee Indians said Tuesday they will challenge a weekend vote to kick them out of the tribe that once owned their ancestors as slaves.
They threatened legal action to overturn the vote Saturday in which 77 percent of those who cast ballots said they should no longer be Cherokees.
"We are working with our attorneys," Marilyn Vann, president of the Descendants of Freedmen of the Five Civilized Tribes, told Reuters. "Rest assured, we will be challenging this."
The vote would remove from tribal rolls 2,800 people who were mostly "freedmen," or descendants of slaves owned by the tribe before the U.S. Civil War brought their freedom.
They were adopted into the tribe under a 1866 treaty with the United States, but there has long been controversy among Cherokees about whether they belonged.
Exclusion from the tribe means the black Cherokees cannot vote in tribal elections or receive entitlements such as health benefits or a share of casino revenues on tribal lands.
The tribe has about 250,000 people, but only 8,500 cast ballots in Saturday's vote.
The vote, which calls for amendment to the Cherokee Nation constitution, was described by Cherokee authorities as a move to more clearly define who is a tribe member. Opponents said it was motivated by racism and money.
Tribe spokesman Mike Miller, based in the tribal headquarters in Tahlequah, said, under tribal regulations, the black Cherokees have until Monday to protest the vote.
"The Cherokee Nation is not going to implement anything until that protest period passes," he said.
Miller said that if the black Cherokees lose their tribal benefits, they will be phased out gradually.
____________________________________________________
Jen
Mar 7th, 2007 - 10:06 PM Re: It's a tough call.
We live in a tough and ever changing rule. Bless those who need it.
____________________________________________________
akula1
Mar 8th, 2007 - 7:40 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Very sad but not surprising.
This is not the only tribe going through this issue nor will it be the last. My experience with the First Nations is extremely limited but it is my understanding that tribal membership has always been a descision made by the tribal members themselves and wasn't always based on BQ.
This is a very different world than the one that existed when the treaties were made.
Like everyone else, the First Nations will ultimately be responsible for the people they become.
P.S.- I'm Canadian and if I've offended anyone with the use of the term "First Nations" I apologize.
____________________________________________________
Carol aka The Empress
Mar 8th, 2007 - 9:05 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Hello Jay and everyone in Jayland . This is an interesting and hot topic lately. First of all, I think that this decision is more than about race. Proponents on both sides have their own opinion about what drives it. Is it racism or is it about self-determination and autonomy? Maybe both. Maybe neither.
However, I agree with what someone else has stated, it's more about the green, dinero, payola, bread...you get my meaning. Who gets to control those government dollars? Who gets to have access to them? That appears to be the real motive. Of course, there's also the sentiment that the Freedmen have been "carried" by the Cherokee nation for too long and that the nation was forced to adopt them after the 1864/1865 treaty...hmmmm.
My inquiring mind questions...why now? After 140- some odd years are the people who lived within the community, marrying into the community, working in the community no longer acceptable? It seems those Freedmen were targeted because they were an easily visible group. I doubt the "cleansing" stops there. Time will tell.
The Empress
____________________________________________________
Dazzle
Mar 9th, 2007 - 1:17 AM Re: It's a tough call.
...as they say, everything happens for a reason.. I dropped by to collect an addie and saw this..
It is almost too laughable to be for real, however it is typical when we as 'Tribal' people attempt to forget our past.
I understand there is some abuse of the system going on, where by some who should not receive assistance, claim heritage and are, but as all difficulties of a magnitude nothing can be achieved with vast solutions, and decisions made out of one's own personal feelings, disregarding the overall good of the many.
There seems to be a misguided thought that in this big melting pot, people will NOT continue to love others of differing races, marry, have multi-racial children,and continue the delusion of all races. What then ??
This has been our past, present and our future.
It is obvious there is still much to consider, and as someone mentioned, we, they - the Cherokee, are still and always will be people of color, and eventually, I believe,unfortunately will be reminded of that we all still, have an overall struggle here to just be treated fairly.
My family is from the Carolinas ( most likely Cherokee) and I carry Native Blood Patrilinneally and Matrillinealy . Most Black Americans often claim Cherokee lineage as some 80% of us, do have Native American blood lines, but in my case it is more likely Cherokee,than not. My surname I recently discovered is also one of the three most popular surnames of the Cherokee people. So,this fact could also mean via owned/freed slave.
Regardless, years ago when I began tracing my geneaology, I discovered that a way the government had of reducing the lands of Native people down South, was by taking 'said' people off the Government counted 'rolls'( how ironic) or roll call, and thus claiming they required less land.
In the Carolinas, around the turn of the century, the way they did this was basically on 'sight'.
They visted, saw a racially mixed group of people, and decided who was Black and who was Indian. Obviously darker skin - Black. It being against the law for Black people to own land, much was easily stolen.
I guess it probably wasn't a good thing to work outside,in the hot southern sun, which most did, because all a Native person would need is a bit of a tan, and it was just cause to take away your property.
You base heritage on skin color and just as then, you will eventually eliminate the land and the people connected to it. It seems history continues to repeat itself.
But as bad as this is, it's still not as bad as the rules behind blood lineage. I read a few months ago, how it is possible to be a full-blooded Native American, and still NOT be able to claim connection to any particular 'Tribe" because you DO NOT meet any particular Tribe's requirement for membership.
All because your parents are from different tribes. Such as, to claim this group, your mother, not your father must be this,to claim that group your father must be at least half this...etc
Further,without a Tribe affiltation, the Government oftentimes does not want to recognize you as being of Native American heritage.
Government agents no longer have to perpetuate the annihilation of a people, we are doing it ourselves.
Dazz
____________________________________________________
Christi
Mar 9th, 2007 - 9:54 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Hello to All,
I have received a number of articles through emails on this, and one said the tribe was using the old rule of determining who is black (one drop of black blood). I don't know if this is true or not, however, when I went to the opening of the American Indian Museum in D.C. they said that the majority of American Indians today are not full blooded. If they did a DNA test on all the tribe members my bet is that the non-black members on average wouldn't have any more Cherokee blood than the black members since so many are part Caucasian.
So they claim this is democracy in action. However if the U.S. suddenly voted the people of the Cherokee nation out as U.S. citizens they'd think that was wrong, and so it would be, as this was wrong. It was based on greed, and in the long run any nation engaging in "ethnic cleansing", whether it's a non-violent form or not only serves to cripple it self from within. When Europeans conquered this land they brought over as many people from Europe as they could (even ethnic groups they didn't like) to populate the land they took because they understood it takes people to build a nation. Apparently a number of tribes still haven't figured this out. Nations who practice "Aparthied" should be looked upon and delt with in the same way as South Africa was. Oh yeah, they used to claim those vile policies were voted on democratically also.
Jay,
Thank you for allowing your site to be used a platform for discussion on this very difficult issue.
Christi
seven3_ad@yahoo.com
____________________________________________________
Catmeow
Mar 9th, 2007 - 7:27 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Thanks for the post. This is the first I've heard of it and it was very sad news indeed.
I'm 1/8 Cherokee (and a quarter Crow) but am not registered, etc. So many people both white and black proudly claim Cherokee in their lineage. The Cheroke nation blazed new paths and set examples for many other tribes in the U.S. It's disturbing to see them take this type of action in this day and age.
Equality for all? Evidently only if you fit their "profile". I am ashamed.
Steph
webemacks@netzero.com
____________________________________________________
Miss Davis - a.k.a. "Five Shrieks"
Mar 10th, 2007 - 6:33 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Wow. Discrimination still exist, obviously. As if booting out those with African heritage will automatically delete the Native heritage out of the DNA gene pool of these members of that tribe. Unreal. This is really sad. I wonder if there is such a thing as an organization or "tribe" that includes all Native people that have African heritage or even those who are intermarried? One has to wonder, but I wish things like that weren't necessary. *sigh*
Miss Davis
____________________________________________________
Blackangel
Mar 11th, 2007 - 2:17 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Hi Miss Davis and fellow Jaybirds,
I just wanted to let you know that there is such an organization. Check out blackindians.com for the Black Indians and Intertribal Native American Association or (BINAY) tribe. It's not BIA registered (That doesn't surprise me and due to current events I think that's a very good thing!) but is a 501 C3 non-for-profit organization for any one of Native descent whether mixed or full-blood (card-carrying or not, doesn't matter) and it's main goal is to preserve the legacy and heritage of Black Indians.
Davis, CA
www.myspace.com/blackangel250
____________________________________________________
Miss Davis - a.k.a. "Five Shrieks"
Mar 13th, 2007 - 5:12 PM Re: It's a tough call.
Thanks Black Angel! That's great to know!!!
Miss Davis
____________________________________________________
Ahalani
Mar 19th, 2007 - 11:23 PM Re: It's a tough call.
As a Cherokee not on the rolls but who still honors the tribal ways through participation in the rituals of the Cherokee, I must say that, while recognizing the right to tribal sovereignty, this vote saddens me.
It flies in the face of an entire lifetime of training that our people accept as family all those who live, or have lived, among us and honor our ways.
I have many aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents, sisters and brothers who are related not by blood but by a familial recognition of our souls and spirits that we are all related. A recognition that we all give for the betterment of each other and the tribe as a whole.
I can't help but feel that now when things are better for our people after centuries of tribulation we should be looking to share our good fortune with all our people rather than casting some members away.
agganciato@yahoo.com
___________________________________________________
Bizzy
Mar 24th, 2007 - 3:55 AM Re: It's a tough call.
This information comes as a shock and a deep heartbreak to me as well...
I am 1/8 Cherokee on my Mother's side, and it hurts tremendously that the majority of Cherokee in Okhlahoma share this view. Although I have always identified myself as a Black woman, I have always been proud of my Cherokee ancestry too. I have sympathized with many of the plights of American Indians in this country. So to read this news and see that many Cherokee would rather seperate themselves from any ties to those with Black bloodlines for the sake of keeping more funding for themselves is very sad and dissappointing. I hope one day soon that all who allow the temporary riches of society, to divide the spiritual richness of unity,will come to their senses.
b_thebomb@yahoo.com
____________________________________________________
Donna Williams
Jul 29th, 2007 - 2:45 AM Re: It's a tough call.
Hadiyh so'indgin Jay! Thank you for sharing this news. I would like to share my views
with you on this treaty issue and concern. I am not speaking on behalf of our speaker
nor my Wet'suwet'en relations or other First Nations. My experiences in the legal,
corporate, medical and treaty offices since high school have biased me in favour of
First Nations despite my negative experiences based on my mixed ancestry. Directly and indirectly, I was told that I was not Wet'suwet'en enough! My father's father was Gitksan and my mother's father was Wet'suwet'en (and French or German? Mom said he had flaming red hair when he was young LOL). I consider myself Wet'suwet'en as our Grandparents raised us after our father died and mom moved away to work. Later in life, I learned that everyone was mixed LOL. We have descendants from a Chinese man who was working on the railway in BC. Also, a Norweigan who forsake his ancestry and learned to speak only Wet'suwet'en until his death. Despite all these life experiences, I still see the bigger picture, which is our future generations well-being must be considered in all treaty and non-treaty negotiations. The federal government is pushing to have First Nations concede to accepting cut-off lands (which are being decimated) and determine blood ratio for benefits and lands purposes. Since the Nisga'a finalized their treaty, bilateral and trilateral negotiations are pushing to move in their direction. Currently, I do not know how they are fairing. But I understand that it was not a good deal when their treaty was being reviewed. I see other treaties ratified in BC and it is sad. A lot of the final treaty monies are 80% loan and 20% grant. Some non-natives are against treaty negotiations and some are for finalizing them. All monetary-based as I am concerned. My grandfather was both a Hereditary and Band Chief and he brought ambulance services, hydro and water to our reserve in the early- to mid-1970s. Washing your hair in rain is always LOL. As noted in Myspace, my grandparents took us everywhere. Life was good. Crystal Meth is now in our community as well as other heavy drugs. Too many deaths and suicides of our young people. Federal and provincial governments are cutting back on a lot of much needed
prevention, intervention and follow-up programs. That is my two cents on this issue and hope this gives insight from 'inside'. LOL. Take care and God bless Jay and here is an angel for you (\o/) PS How funny that I should say that. The Eurythmics Angel song is on as I sign off LOL.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
I wanted to share this news with you all, it's hard to take sides but this is not what the Grandfather nations lived by...
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Native American Cherokees voted to expel descendants of black slaves from their tribe nation in a special election that has prompted charges of racism, according to returns made public early Sunday.
ADVERTISEMENT
But a vote of 77 percent to 23 percent, the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma adopted Saturday an amendment to their constitution that strips membership from so-called "Freedmen," those descended from slaves once owned by Cherokees, blacks who were married to Cherokees and children of mixed-race families.
"The Cherokee people exercised the most basic democratic right, the right to vote," Chad Smith, Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation, said in a statement. "Their voice is clear as to who should be citizens of the Cherokee Nation. No one else has the right to make that determination."
However, opponents of the amendment say it was a racist project designed to deny the distribution of US government funds and tribal revenue to those with African-American heritage, US media reported.
"This is a sad chapter in Cherokee history," Taylor Keen, a Cherokee tribal council member who opposes the amendment, told the New York Times.
"But this is not my Cherokee Nation. My Cherokee Nation is one that honors all parts of her past."
Advocates of changing the 141-year-old treaty rules defining who is a Cherokee say the tribal nation has a sovereign right to decide citizenship and that other tribes base membership on blood lines.
The Cherokee Nation, which ranks as the second-largest tribe behind the Navajo, has some 250,000 to 270,000 members and is growing rapidly. Members are entitled to benefits from the US federal government and tribal services, including medical and housing aid and scholarships.
Cherokees, along with several other tribes, held black slaves and allied themselves with the Confederacy during the US civil war. After the war, the federal government in an 1866 treaty ordered the slaves freed.
In 1983, the Cherokee Nation expelled many descendants of slaves as members but a Cherokee tribunal ruled last year that the Freedmen were fully-fledged citizens with voting rights. That court decision prompted Saturday's special vote.
Native American tribes recognized by the United States government have the right to self-determination and authority similar to US states.
Election results will remain unofficial until certified by the Cherokee Nation Election Commission, but officials said percentages were not expected to change significantly.
Moricetown BC Canada
www.myspace.com/ndngurlmotown
____________________________________________________
Running Red Fox (Forum Hostess)
Jul 29th, 2007 - 9:55 AM It's a tough call. - Hello Donna
Hi Donna Williams and welcome to Jayland. Thanks for diving right on in..LOL, and we look forward to seeing more post from you.
RRF
Forum Hostess
