#readingreflection

“Decolonization Is Not A Metaphor” by Eve Tuck and  K. Wayne Yang was the kind of complex essay that was hard for me to wrap my head around.  I don’t feel that I properly understood it and I’m inclined to think that I’d probably have to read it at least five more times before I could even pick out the key points of it.

However, I still felt that it was incredibly important reading, and some key things stood out to me. For example, settler moves to innocence. I’ve seen some of these, heck I've even been complicit in thinking some of these, which is why it’s important for me to read something like essay and be able to think critically about my own actions.

I liked the way that Yang and Tuck not only defined the colonial triangle of settler-native-slave, but also saw that these things are not necessarily identities, and the existence of ancestry that is a settler and native and slave does not excuse a settler mindset. This little bit of knowledge I think is personally important as someone whose ancestry comes from that dichotomy. However, the identities of my ancestors does in no way “to mark [myself] as blameless in the attempted eradications of Indigenous peoples.” (Tuck & Yang p.10) In fact, I recognize that I have been complicit and contributing to the landscape of settler colonialism, just like land acknowledgments, I don’t think that work can be down without recognizing that. And recognizing it without dwelling in the guilt that it can bring up.

A number of years ago I had to learn first hand what guilt does to people, especially when we’re talking about white people in racial justice work (which, while not the same as settlers in native decolonial work, probably has similar guilt issues with white people). When faced with mistakes that were harmful to other people, the white people found it easier to first mourn their mistakes, then ignore the issues that had caused them, before later refusing to re-engage and continue to process of learning racial justice work. Watching this refusal to learn because of guilt made me, to put it bluntly, want to bang my head against a wall. 

“When faced with this truth [that non-native people are the beneficiaries of the illegal settlement of Indigneous people's land and appropriation of their resources], it is common for activists to get stuck in their feelings of guilt, which I would argue is a state of self-absorption that actually upholds privilege. While guilt is often a sign of a much needed shift in consciousness, in itself it does nothing to motivate the responsibility nexessary to actively dismantle entrenched systems of oppression.”

-”Decolonizing Together”, Harsha Walia, pg 47

The final line, that guilt doesn’t inspire and moves forward the work they are supposed to do, is pretty crucial. As a settler, I should not see the “desire to be made innocent, to find some mercy or relief in the face of the relentlessness of settler guilt” by hiding in my ancestor's identity, because that does nothing to help no one. Instead, I need to commit to the work of unlearning, solidarity and alliance building as a |move towards breaking the “ system of imperial violence and capitalist exploitation” that settler colonialism is. (”Settler Colonialism”, Saranillio 296)

One thing that I saw that was in a footnote of page 7 of “Decolonization is Not a Metaphor” was that “settler describes a set of behaviors, as well as a structural location, but is eschewed as an identity“ This made me think - if settler describes a set of behaviors, than it means that the identity of being a settler is not permanent, it means that changes can be made away from ‘the settler’. It means that the sense of guilt really is useless because all it does is slow the process of unlearning settler behaviors and working towards solidarity with indigenous people. There is no reason to dwell on guilt when that energy could be used to change instead.

This move away from guilt connects to the Indigenous Resilience Panel from last Thursday. One of the speakers (I think it was Ronalda Tsosie) recognized guilt as a settler emotion, that it didn’t exist prior to colonialization, and certainly not in the way it does now. She said that the culture was, if you did something wrong and you were called out on it, it was an opportunity to learn and grow, not a reason to feel guilty. 

“Emerge” 

A quote that really stood out to me was, “Talent development should bring joy and pleasure to our lives, as it is part of the experience and intended purpose that comes with the playground called Earth.” (p.31) The reason this stood out to me so much is because it reminds me of what my mom encourages us to do. We are supposed to live a life we love and is honoring God. My brother just graduated high school and does not want to go to college. So many people are saying that he needs to go to college or he won’t be able to support himself, but college would not be good for him. He has a passion for cars and photography, he is an entrepreneur. He is taking his talent of photography and developing it into a skill that can be used for his livelihood. In this development he has helped our church out with their videography. He is living a life he enjoys in this great playground of Earth.  

“All That Is Made”

All that is made is in the image of the Creator. So often we forget that we are created in God’s own image, in the likeness of Him. He is a creative creator, therefore we can be as well. When I think deeply about this subject it boggles my mind. God created me to create things in this world. From creating activity with others through track to creating a watercolor postcard, I am a creative being. 

“Art & a Playful God” PDF 

The chapter ends with the idea of a relationship, a team. God has made everyone a part of a team, or as referred to as in Corinthians a part of one body. Everyone has a part to play in the team and one of those parts is being an artist. When we worry about not doing a good enough job for the team, we just need to remind ourselves that God is always near and ready to lead us in the right direction. 

Genesis 1:27

Art and Empathy by the Art Assignment brought up really interesting topics. My brain right away went to conversations I had had with my boyfriend on sympathy versus empathy. Empathy is so much more than sympathy, it is the ability to share and understand the feelings someone else is going through. Depending on what the art piece is, you can feel different emotions. One example the video gave was Arthur Rosthstein’s Farmer and Sons Walking in the Face of a Dust Storm. This was during the Great Depression and shows the harsh poverty that has stricken the land. It makes you think back to relatives stories and how they dealt with the Great Depression.

The article The Basics: Icons & Iconoclasm said, “An icon is a religious work of art most commonly in the Eastern Orthodox that can have various subjects including Christ, the Virgin Mary, angels, saints, and apostles either as portraits or narrative scenes of the holy figures' lives.” I did not know much about icons. As I read the next article, it described why icons are important. I feel that this is very evident in the Catholic Church, especially with the saints and the Virgin Mary.

This week’s material got me thinking about the creative processes that must occur before a product emerges. The development and evolution of a creative work is one that demands a few things. In order to finish an endeavor of creativity, one must conspire an idea, develop skills, establish productive habits, get a little messy, and just get started. 

I loved the statement, which the speaker in the video titled The Habits of Effective Artists quoted. He says, “Habit is deceptively simple. Daily work.” I completely agree with this statement. You’re never going to complete a project if you don’t create habits that you practice every single day. 

However, before you invest in habit creating, you have to construct an idea. Often, you have to intentionally cultivate an idea. This can occur by many means, but one that really stands out to me is that of action. In the book Emerge, the author writes, “Action is the spark for generagting ideas”(Perini, p.62, 2014). Sometimes, if you want to forge an idea, you have to get the hammer out and start pounding away till something arises from the hunk of raw material. Once your idea begins taking shape, you can start practicing and developing useful and creative talents to help you on your creative endevor. Also, just a side note, this idea building, habit forming, and skill sharpening, might get a little blotchy, muddled, and tangled. This is OK. “Messy is the recipe for success”(Perini, p.106, 2014). 

In in the end, the real key to accomplishing a creative undertaking is to GET STARTED. Place the pen on the paper. Dig your hands in that glob of clay. Dip the brush in that bucket of paint. Snap that first photo. 

Identity. 

First off, who determines my identity? Who created me? Who knows my exact thought process and the true desires of my heart? Who knows the ways in which I change and grow daily? Who created the why behind me? Who knows my struggles and passions? 

Every time I get lost in the overwhelming spinning wheels of what my identity is and why I am who I am, I have to return to my Identity Maker. I have to run back to the firm and unchanging arms of God. 

My town is filled with firsting and lasting. Everything about its history (a history that it’s very proud of) teaches people to relegate Native Americans to the past and celebrate the “accomplishments” of settlers. 

My town was founded in 1635. They hold a lot of pride in that incorporation. In the old historic “first period” homes that we have. There is so much relegation of native peoples to the past, even though their mark is all over the town. 

People seem to forget, with my town being “historic” that history is not something of settler origins, history did not begin with colonialism. There was history in our town for centuries before the Puritans arrive, yet the town tries to hide that fact. Walking around town you see the “first church” you see the historic sign that commemorates our town as the site of the “first jailbreak in america.” There’s a large mural that has the whole history of the town, one that has Native Americans in four places. At the beginning, before settlers arrived and the purchasing of the land that would become out town. A painted on stature of Masconomet the Sagamore of the Agawam people. A small depition in the second panel of native people killing settlers, obviously painted in the favor of the settlers. And lastly, in the last panel, where there is a (wrong) depiction of Emma Jane Mitchel Safford, the so-called “Last Indian Princess of Ipswich” (which is incorrect in a number of ways) who died in 1958, and the only northeastern native person talked about in the public schools after the 1700s. While this brings native people into the near(ish) present, it firmly leaves them out of the modern context of today’s town.

There isn’t a lot of information about the Native people of my region today. It’s one of those towns where everyone assumes that the native people aren’t there anymore, and there’s no (easily accessible) evidence to say whether or not it’s true. Even if it was true, that the native people aren’t here anymore, it still doesn’t make the settlers any more the first inhabitants of a place. 

Names that are native place names get associated with settler things. Like Annisquam being associated with a neighborhood of a city rather than a native name for a place. Or Masconomet being associated with a high school rather than the Sachem of the Agawam.

But I think the biggest danger of teaching Native history of a specific area where there aren’t really native people anymore, is that those people will go out and assume that there aren’t native people anywhere. They’ll think that the Wampanoag people are gone or the Massachusett people or the Nipmuck or any of the other tribes in the United States, are gone. When they’re not gone. They’re still here, they were first, they have outlasted settler expectations of the ‘vanishing indian’ and in many places that aren’t my hometown, they’re resisting too.

Prior to reading this book, I hadn’t really approached Standing Rock from a historical perspective, and certainly not one that centered the sovereignty of the Oceti Sakowin before. It centered indigenous sovereignty from an indigenous perspective (being written, of course, by a native, sioux, person).

But I think that Nick Estes did a very good job recontextualizing historic events that I had heard about from settler perspectives and relating them to the continued fight for indigenous sovereignty that brought us to the events of the #NoDAPL movement. 

Old Wars

It recontextualized things like the “American Indian Wars.” According to Wikipedia’s “list of wars involving the United States”  there were 4 wars between the various Oceti Sakowin tribes and the United States; The Dakota War of 1862,  the Colorado War (1863-65), the Powder River War (1965) and Red Cloud’s War (1866-68) which led to the creation of the Treaty of Fort Laramine, which much of the book is based around. There were also 2 other wars after the treaty was signed: the Great Sioux War of 1876 (which seized the black hills that were given in the treaty), the Pine Ridge Campaign (which led to the massacre at Wounded Knee). In reading Estes's account of these events, I realized that the way that these wars are taught in my childhood history classes, was as if there weren’t real wars. They were not portrayed as sovereign nations resisting encroachment onto their territories by the United States. I mean, they were barely taught at all, because history class preferred to focus on the Civil War that was happening at the same time. 

When I was in Chicago at the cultural center, there was a sign that said: “The Civil War was also a settler colonial war.” This made sense to me in some way, because it was a war over land that belonged to neither group that was trying to claim it. The Indian Wars and the Civil War were both, as the sign said: “each part of the westward advance of the United States empire and the colonization of the west. The Civil War...was also a conflict over the way the United States empire would develop.” That sign, plus the realization that the dates of the American Indian Wars overlap almost completely with the Civil War made me realize just how wrong the United State’s history is taught. 

The history of the Oceti Sakowin - their origins to now - isn’t included in the curriculum. The United States gets to act like their expansion was inevitable, and ignore the historic wars that were waged against sovereign nations in a conquest for more land and resources. And ignore the modern war with the continued occupation of lands, breaking of treaties, and denial of modern sovereignty.  By simply thinking of the Oceti Sakowin Oyate/Great Sioux Nation as a nation it directly challenges the notion that it was inevitable. It recontextualizes the history and the supposed ‘greatness’ of the United States by proving that it is a nation built upon the destruction of other nations.

Ghost Dancers

Another thing that stuck with me from the book was the Ghost Dance. Settler history doesn’t portray it in the same way as Estes does. Its generally refered to as some kind of ‘crazy indian thing’ on par with the Dancing Plague of 1518 because of its mischaracterization by anthropologists. What isn’t mentioned is how much it makes sense in the true context of its time period. Estes calls it “an accumulation of prior anti-colonial experiences, sentiments, and struggles” and recontextualizes it as a true anti-colonial resistance movement, one that went against the US ‘concentration camp’ reservations, boarding schools, and the movement towards assimilation. A movement that posed a threat to US imposition of their sovereignty over the Oceti Sakowin, and was met with military force and violence. 

The title of the book, our history is the future was confusing to me at first, but the explanation of the ghost dance actually helped me to understand it. Estes description of the ghost dance as being “transported to a forthcoming world where the old ways and dead relatives lived” in contrast to the “horrors of their current reality” and that it offered “a reminder that life need not always be this way” to its participants, I was able to better understand (Estes 124). The idea of looking to our past in order to envision a future that is better than our current present makes sense. I think it’s a bit like envisioning the future that you want as the first step to making it a reality, like in Decolonization is not a metaphor, decolonization must first stop being a metaphor in order for “the very possibility of decolonization” to be real (Tuck & Yang 4). 

And similarly, I think, Standing Rock offered a similar window into the past and the future. Estes recounts Ladonna BraveBull Allard’s story from the Sacred Stone camp, seeing everyone working, roasting deer meat, kids playing, and people telling stories. “They were all speaking Dakota. I looked at them and I thought, ‘this is how we are supposed to live. This makes sense to me.’ Every day...I saw our culture and our way of life come alive.” (BraveBull Allard, via Estes pg 51-52)

Continued Resistance

There are so many “Standing Rocks” that have happened over and over again throughout Octei Sakowin history as their land has been taken, and dams have flooded their towns, their land, as police killed their people, and there has been resistance to all of these. Yet from my perspective, settlers see Standing Rock and the Dakota Access Pipeline as different from all these other events that the tribes didn’t want. 

But what really makes it different? Is it because there were other people involved? Because there were non-Sioux and non-native people who stood with them? What makes one act of resistance more important than another? Because all these acts of resistance are important to be recognized. “This Battle for native sovereignty had already been fought many times before, and that, even after the encampment was gone, their anti-colonial struggle would continue.” (From inside cover, Our History is the Future)

When I was considering those questions,  a quote came to mind from Pualani Case, a Native Hawaiian who is a leader of the Protect Mauna Kea movement to stop TMT. 

“When the Native people of a place say, ‘not this time’ ‘no more’ ‘you have taken almost everything we have, and if we allow you to build on the most sacred’ without attempting to stop that, we may as just lay down, as a native people and say ‘take everything’ if you take the most sacred what will we have left.” 

-Pualani Case, Source

When I first heard this quote, it made me uncomfortable, because I thought, ‘just because someone takes one thing doesn’t mean they should take all of it, but when I rewatched the video for the third-ish time, and after I read Estes’ book, I think I understand it better. That quote isn’t about the settlers taking the land, it's about the importance for the native people to defend the land, to try to stop settler imposition and construction on the land. Some of what makes them still have a right to the land are because they have never stopped fighting for it in one way or another. 

Chicago Cultural Center is built on land that “consists of both territory ceded through treaties that the U.S. government coerced Indigenous people to sign and unceded territory created by landfill after those coerced treaties were signed.” (Decolonizing the Chicago Cultural Center, pg 20 ) Many other places in the united states are built like that, Boston is like that. But coerced treaties and made land doesn’t separate Native people from the land, it’s still theirs and they are still of the land.

And therefore, every act of resistance, every existence as resistance, is important, even if some are more important because they deal with the most sacred, and the most important things, like the water, and the right to live. 

Modern Sovereignty

“Internationalism” was another concept from Our History is the Future that I thought was super interesting and recontextualizing. Because if you consider all the tribes to be their own nations that retain their sovereignty, then gatherings like the sacred stone camps at standing rock, organizations like the American Indian Movement, are international movements. And interactions between the United States and native nations are nation-to-nation, they are international relations, or at least, maybe they should be considered international relations.

A lot of my thoughts on this book are still scattered, even after the weeks that I’ve spent processing and connecting it to my interactions in my daily life. But there’s one paragraph that I really like that I think does a good job, a better job, of relating all these things I talked about down. 

“The Ghost Dance was not a monolithic movement, but  an accumulation of prior anti-colonial experiences, sentiments, and struggles that informed #NoDAPL. Each struggle had adopted essential features of previous traditions of Indigenous resistance, while creating new tactics and visions to address the present reality, and, consequentially, projected Indigenous liberation into the future. Trauma played a major role. But if we oversimplify Indigenous peoples as perpetually wounded, we cannot understand how they formed kinship bonds and constantly recreated and kept intact families, communities, and governance structures while surviving as fugitives and prisoners of a settler state and as conspirators against empire; how they loved, cried, laughed, imagined, dreamed, and defended themselves; or how they remain, to this day, the first sovereigns of this land and the oldest political authority.”

After reading chapter 4, I found the chapter to depict many of the brutal incidents natives faced from Congress and white settler society. The first point that struck me was Estes writing on the Pick-Sloan dams and their main purpose of destroying vital, rich native land. I found myself to agree with Estes point that these dams were “nothing short of genocide” for native tribes throughout the chapter as he explains how one of the dams, Oahe Dam, destroyed over 160,889 acres of Standing Rock. Another major point that struck me in this chapter was Congress’ power over tribal nations and their blatant treaty violations. Estes heavily describes how Congress was the major force behind the atrocities towards natives. Some examples are the passing of the House Concurrent Resolution 108, Public Law 280, and the Homestead Act. The Homestead Act alone gave 1.5 million white families over 246 million acres of Indigenous land. One thing that also surprised me was how white society governed the usage of water by tribes who owned the water. Estes talks about how Supreme Court decisions have allowed society to determine how much water tribes are allowed so the rest of the tribe-owned water can be given to settler society. The final point in chapter 4 that make me feel a little uncomfortable was reading about how white societies utterly rejected natives from living in their towns because they are a “burden.” Estes describes this situation perfectly when he says, “White settlers want Indigenous lands, but they don’t want Indigenous peoples.” 

Chapter five offered a slight difference in tone than chapter four as it seemed more positive and described the native youth movements that are resisting settlers’ brutal attacks on their culture. The first point that I enjoyed reading about was the rise of AIM, which projected native rights into mainstream media and present tribalism as a “modern political identity.” Another point that Estes makes that I found fascinating was his idea that Black Power and Red Power movements are linked in a certain manner. He describes how both black and native groups had no say over how they would be incorporated into settler society. The next major point Estes makes is about the powerful role of women in the activist movement, which reminded me of some previous material we talked about in class about the impactful role of women. Estes explains how all the survival schools for native children were founded by women and how native women are able to be powerful while staying invisible from society and press. I liked how Estes also mentions how colonialism had a different effect on women than men as they faced sterilization and high levels of abuse, domestic violence, and rape. The final topic of this chapter that shocked me was the concept of “border towns” and the brutality natives faced when they were off the reservation. For example, Estes gives the example of a native man that was kidnapped, beaten, forced to dance as a “drunken Indian,” and left to die in the cold winter by a group of white men. Estes also mentions the practice of “Indian busting,” where white men would target intoxicated natives and torture or kill them for fun and as a pastime. I found these stories to be extremely horrific and impactful in a sense. 

Chapter six was a very interesting and informative chapter as I was able to learn about Indigenous relations with other nations around the globe. One of the first points that struck me throughout the chapter is how the U.S. blatantly ignores the efforts from natives to get access to their treaty rights and citizenship. Estes mentions numerous examples of U.S. diplomats ghosting global conferences where Indigenous tribes would be speaking to avoid their guilt and horrific actions towards the native communities. One example is Presidents Jimmy Carter through George W. Bush boycotting the UN “Decade” program due to the addition of a “indigenous peoples” category. Another point I enjoyed reading about in this chapter is how the Treaty Council worked to attain to international relationships with other countries to push their agenda forward. I have never actually seen or heard of a native group that has worked with another country. It was interesting to read how the Treaty Council was able to gain support from European and Asian nations to make their voices heard on the international level. Furthermore, I also enjoyed reading about the native relationship with the Palestinians because I never knew that Palestinians were also affected by settler colonialism. Israel’s adoption of settler colonial tactics from the U.S. and implementation on Palestinians allowed them to connect with the native community and help them on the international stage. 

For the final chapter on “Liberation,” I found Estes’ point on how settler society has continually played the angle in history that they are the victim, while natives are the aggressors intriguing. The point that the existence of native communities still poses a threat to settlers because they are a reminder of the settler’s “precarious” claims to the land was also interesting. Estes employs the context of the Standing Rock Protest to illustrate this as he talks about how DAPL saw the protest camps as a “place of death” and a place that “threatened to expose the legitimacy of settlement.” Furthermore, it was disturbing to read about TigerSwan, which called natives “terrorists” and even called them “jihadist insurgency.”