There is a story in the NY Times today about a vote of the Cherokee nation. You can read it here.
Essentially, the Cherokee have voted to deny citizenship in the Cherokee nation to the descendants of people who were living with their tribe about 100 years ago but who, according to a list compiled by the U.S. government, were descendants of slaves.
This story has so many different contradictory and ironic layers, it is hard to know where to start.
Although it is probably not well known, some Native American tribes owned slaves, the Cherokee among them. In addition, in keeping with U.S. law, persons of African descent also encountered severe discrimination from the Cherokee. Here, for example, is a portion of the 1839 Cherokee constitution:
No person shall be eligible to a seat in the National Council, but a free Cherokee male citizen, who shall have attained the age of twenty-five years.
"The descendants of Cherokee men by all free women, except the African race, whose parents may have been living together as man and wife according to the customs of this Nation, shall be entitled to all the rights and privileges of this Nation, as well as the posterity of the Cherokee women by all free men. No person who is of negro or mulatto parentage, either by the father's or mother's side, shall be eligible to hold any office of profit, honor or trust under this government.
The persons who were enslaved by the Cherokee and other tribes were freed in 1866 as a result of the U.S. Civil War. Here is how the U.S. Supreme Court described that event:
(Cherokee)constitutional amendments were brought about by the action of the United States at the close of the civil war in dictating that the slaves or freed persons of color in the Cherokee country should not only be admitted to the rights of citizenship, but to an equal participation in the communal or common property of the Cherokees. ...(T)he overthrow of the Cherokee Nation and the treaty of peace, 1866, and the terms dictated by the United States, whereby their former slaves were made their political equals and the common property of the Cherokees was to be shared in with their servants and dependants, was in effect a revolution.
This is what the Cherokee constitution of 1866 says:
All native-born Cherokees, all Indians and whites legally members of the Nation by adoption, and all freedmen who have been liberated by voluntary act of their former owners, or by law, as well as free colored persons who were in the country at the commencement of the rebellion and are residents therein, or who may return within six months from the nineteenth day of July, 1866, and their descendants who reside within the limits of the Cherokee Nation, shall be taken and deemed to be citizens of the Cherokee Nation."
Now, what is well known is that the U.S. Government conducted a centuries long campaign to dominate and control Native Americans and steal (there is no other word to use) their land.
The two threads of slavery and exploitation came together in the late nineteenth century when the U.S. Government decided to re-distribute tribal lands to individual tribal members. The Cherokee had over 4,400,000 acres of land, which they held in common. The U.S. government thought that the Cherokee and some other tribes would be more "civilized" if they held the land as individuals.
In order to accomplish this,the U.S. government drew up a list of people who were eligible to receive an allotment of the land. However, because of the racist nature of both the United States and the Cherokee (and other tribes involved)there wasn't just one list. There were two.
One list was of so-called native Cherokee. The other list was of the so-called "Freedmen," who were descendants of persons who had been freed after the civil war. Now, persons on this list were not "pure" descendants of former slaves. Nothing is ever that clear where race is involved. Some freedmen had intermarried with Cherokee. In fact, some "freedmen" probably had more Cherokee ancestors than African ancestors.
So, as always happens in any racial system, there was a degree of arbitrariness in assigning who was going to belong on which list. It is also unclear to me whose idea it was to have two lists in the first place. But, be that as it may, there were.
So, even though persons on these two lists were entitled to their allocation of the land that was being divided up, and even though persons on both lists were considered citizens of the Cherokee nation, they were divided.
Now, fast forward to the present. The Cherokee and other Native American tribes have, for some years, attempted to re-assert their independence and self-determination. They have had some success. Some have opened gaming businesses which have brought in substantial revenue. There are also certain benefits which persons who reside on Native American lands are entitled to, provided by the U.S. Government, like funds for health care and scholarships for education.
However, no one would claim that Native American tribes, including the Cherokee, have struck it rich and now are on "easy street." And, obviously, the more people who have access to the resources of a tribe, the fewer the resources there are per person.
So, there is a financial pressure to limit membership. There is also a financial incentive to be a member.
Now, before anyone gets too outraged about this vote to exclude the descendants of slaves from citizenship in the Cherokee Nation, I would like to bring the following bit of history to your attention.
In the 19th Century, the Cherokee also excluded some white people from participating in land ownership rights. The Supreme Court described it this way:
In 1874 the rapidly growing value of the Cherokee lands was becoming perceptible. On the one hand there were white men who desired to marry into the tribe, and, marrying and residing in the Nation, desired the rights and privileges of citizens; on the other hand there were white adventurers desiring to share in the wealth of the Nation, soon, it was believed, to become available to individual citizens. The public welfare might be benefited by allowing the one, and most certainly would be conserved by excluding the other. No restriction appeared to exist in the constitution which would forbid the National Council from admitting white men to citizenship upon the condition that they should not acquire an estate or interest in the communal or common property of the Nation."
And so, in 1877 the Cherokee voted to allow certain white persons who intermarried with Cherokees to become Cherokee citizens, but not to own Cherokee land. The descendants of these persons were excluded from the list of persons entitled to an allotment of the 4,400,000 plus acres of Cherokee land.
So, the Cherokee can say, "See? We are not doing this because the people involved are descendants of slaves. We have a history of limiting access to our resources to the people we decide ought to have them."
On the other hand, the descendants of the "Freedmen" can say: "First, splitting us off from the other Cherokee only ratifies, 100 years later, the adoption of an arbitrary, racist standard imposed primarily by the U.S. Government."
Now, the U.S. Government has the power to step into this situation, as it did after the civil war to emancipate and make Cherokee citizens of, Cherokee slaves. But the U.S. Government is hardly the "knight in shining armor" when it comes to its dealings with Native Americans. They rightfully resent the interference of the U.S. Government, which has killed, stolen and generally mismanaged Indian affairs since our founding.
For example, there is presently pending in the federal court a case involving how the Bureau of Indian Affairs has mismanaged billions of dollars of money paid to it by persons exploiting mineral resources on Native American Land. Billions of dollars that the Bureau of Indian Affairs refuses to account for; even after a court order.
So, what is this story all about? To me, it is a story of oppressed people, who are themselves not free of the racism and prejudice to which they have been subjected, engaging in some shameful behavior which we, non-Native American U.S. citizens should want corrected; except that if we, non-Native American U.S. citizens, are really interested in righting wrongs, then we have a lot more to do than in reversing this one vote. We have to begin to look at all of the wrongs involved and not just this one.