NAFPS Forum
Odds and Ends => Etcetera => Topic started by: BlackWolf on February 18, 2010, 03:46:27 am
-
For the purpose of this thread I would like to narrow this thread down to people who are American Indian or claim American Indian heritage but “CAN PROVE IT” but for whatever reason can't enroll. This could cover anything from people descended from other Tribal Rolls of their Tribe but for one reason or the other can’t enroll. This could also include people with other various kinds of solid evidence that they are American Indian or of American Indian Heritage. It could be someone who has family members that are known to be Indian, and it can also pertain to people adopted and because of that can’t enroll. People who claim American Indian heritage and CAN’T PROVE IT, and people of Native heritage from Latin America I’m not including here because of their very different history with the Spanish Conquest. People of Canada could be included because of our somewhat shared History with the Anglo Saxon/French Conquest. So we’re just talking about American Indians or people of American Indian heritage “who beyond a reasonable doubt are of American Indian heritage” but aren't enrolled. This subject was started in the thread on Native American Musicians, but I don’t want to get off topic over there. What is everyone’s opinion on how these people should identity and under what circumstances?
-
Rattlebone
I too do not believe in the concept of "being part Indian." You either are Indian or you are not, and to me that is usually determined by the community around you.
Well apparently you don't feel secure enough in your own identity to be able to allow others to have a discussion about unenrolled people who have some Native heritage being in a different situation, when it comes to their rights and responsibilites, than people who are enrolled in a federally recognized community or are close to 1/2 of Native descent.... . It seems almost every time people try to discuss what may be appropriate boundaries for distant descensents to respect, you feel it is a threat to your own identity, and you get personally defensive or offensive.
Rattlebone
No, I have defended people with legitimate claims. It's my understanding that the word PODIA is just a simple way to say somebody has a great grandma story they can't prove.
So , when there is a conflict , it sounds like you feel anyone with any amount of Native blood who is a member of what they decide is a Native community, has rights that are just as important to defend as continuosly existing indigenous Nations rights to control maintain and benifit from their own resources and culture?
It's my understanding that the word PODIA is just a simple way to say somebody has a great grandma story they can't prove.
According to my rule book ( heh 8)) thats a wannabe .. My definition of a PODIA is people who are less than 1/4 - 1/8 BQ OR more than 2 generations removed from an ancestor who lived in a visible recognized Native community.
But Rattlebone ...a lot of what you are wanting to dispute doesn't even seem to belong in this thread. I guess we have all wandered a bit...
I still think it would be interesting if we could start a thread to discuss what is the characteristics of a Native community that has the right to recognize other people as NDN , and what is just some wannabes or PODIAs getting together and yelling " yes we are !!!"....
Well apparently you don't feel secure enough in your own identity to be able to allow others to have a discussion about unenrolled people who have some Native heritage being in a different situation
Actually I do. I did question another person on here if they were not putting people with similar histories in their situation.
I just feel that a lot of times certain ideas or beliefs about people get too one sided, and I don't feel that is right.
If there is not a voice to reason such things, then people can often times be put under labels that are ones of injustice to them. History has shown this to be true in much worse ways.
Why should I or somebody else not speak out, because if not, then those bullets we ignore may some day be directed as us.
when it comes to their rights and responsibilities,
I dunno about that. I have never really said I was against any of the laws that apply to Arts & Crafts, or possession of feathers etc.
I have however questioned them at times considering there have been cases I posted up here in which a man who was nearly full blooded and from a unrecognized California tribe was barred from possession of eagle feathers even though the courts recognized he was racially American Indian, and by their own words "for other purposes."
Now what I can say for an argument is a few things I have seen yourself and Educated Indian bring up.
You have spoke about how some people may actually hold their Indian ancestry as something important to them, and it having an impact on their lives. I do not remember your exact words, but it could most likely be used as a good example in defense of families similar to what Educated Indian was talking about once when I read him speak about running into some unrecognized people in the midwest whom he said even had a sort of "rez accent."
Most likely these people, their families, and the individuals from them would be raised with an Indian identity, and whatever culture and world view that may be passed down because of that.
Now it seems you think as long as they remain "unrecognized" that if they were to write books, or assert who they are, that until they are recognized the should say they are "of descent" or something like that.
Then if they were recognized by the Fox who protects the hen house (the USG of course) then for legality reasons they can now say they are "Indian."
The rights to speak as who they are, and assert who they are as long as their claims are legitimate should not be taken away legal technicalities.
Right now there is an entire band of Chippewa who have been unrecognized, and once again denied recognition. Should they be barred from saying they are American Indian because of this?
Maybe the argument should be made that they should because many of them look nothing but white????
than people who are enrolled in a federally recognized community or are close to 1/2 of Native descent.
Considering that many tribes now days, including one in my area goes by descent instead of BQ, I don't understand why you keep focusing your argument on people who are 1/2 or more.
I do believe that around 1/3 of the overall enrolled Native population of the United States is at the 1/4 mark or less. This is with the native population marrying to NON Natives at a rate of 70% or higher. So doing the math and figuring the stats, BQ is a lose lose situation.
The place where you and I seem to die on communication is this point. I try to focus on "the people" which means the survival of NDN people regardless tribe and BQ, and care little for the notion of throwing BQ in the mix.
As far as benefits and what not go....I believe those 1/4 and higher should be the only ones getting them at this time since they are more likely to experience discrimination, hardship and poverty. That is the only time when I believe in the concept of BQ.
As far as cultural and religious boundaries go...I believe that should be up to the elders. I am skeptical about it being left up to tribal governments since they don't always make decisions that are in support of their traditional.
It seems almost every time people try to discuss what may be appropriate boundaries for distant descensents to respect, you feel it is a threat to your own identity, and you get personally defensive or offensive.
I don't see where that is coming from. I have above gave my opinion on laws such as the arts and craft laws etc. I am not really against those. Nor am I against those who are not enrolled being barred from receiving benefits because of claiming a native ancestry.
As far as boundaries concerning ceremony, I think who is allowed in those and who is not is up to the elders and or the person running those ceremonies as long as that person or persons is not an exploiter.
I have seen a well known elder in my area allow a NON into a ceremony, and he was in no way any kind of exploiter. He knew some people he trusted and he knew would come and leave in respectful and good way, and so he allowed them to come.
I feel I have been very fair and balanced on this subject and have never been for ignoring boundaries.
So , when there is a conflict , it sounds like you feel anyone with any amount of Native blood who is a member of what they decide is a Native community, has rights that are just as important to defend as continuosly existing indigenous Nations rights to control maintain and benifit from their own resources and culture?
No, by native community I mean recognized peoples and the members who come from them,or people in cases such as in California where you have entire tribes and bands with no formal recognition.
You make it seem here like I am saying a person with some "claimed" Indian ancestry can get together with a few more, and then decide "they have a community." I was saying no such thing.
You also keep adding the "Resources" hook into the equation and I was not even touching on that whatsoever. Individuals do not have the right to that anyhow enrolled or not. Things such as resources are taken care of by the tribal government, which should be by the will of the enrolled members. In California there are however problems with that due to unrecognized bands.
-
It seems like a big part of the controversy involves wording and semantics. It would be like if someone lived in an urban area with little connection with his/her people and isn't enrolled, but nevertheless, can prove that they are of American Indian Heritage, how should they present themselves whether it be a dinner party, work or school? Let’s also assume the person had very little exposure growing up to their Tribal Background, but nevertheless later in life became more interested in it. Let's say for example someone is 1/16 of Tribe X and knows this for sure because their grandma was enrolled with Tribe X. I'll use the term Indian ,but it could mean any particular Tribe. Leaving aside the issue of benefits, eagle feathers, health care, etc, what would be the proper way for this person to describe themselves.
"I'm Indian", " I'm of Indian descent", “I'm of American Indian Heritage", "I'm 1/16 American Indian Heritage", or should they not say a word about it because it's only a small part of what they are, as in Moma_Porcupine's smoothie analogy? I guess the other question is, "Is it this person's right to determine this"? or would enrolled people of Tribe X have a say so?
-
This conversation began here
http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=261.0
Quoting myself from the last thread
BQ generally says something about the culture that was carried by our parents, garandparents or greatgrandparents, but it doesn't show which community these people lived in or what culture their children were mainly exposed to. Which is why I try and talk about BQ along with how many generations it's been since someones family lived in a native community.
I would add to this that the other reason i use BQ is because it's the only way I know to express the reality that as people become more and more of non native descent, and they are exposed more and more to only non native culture, this tends to have more and more influence on who they are and the Native part of their heritage has less and less influence.
Unless we are talking about a political identity, as in having membership in a Nation like America, or the CNO , the idea that people are either NDN or they aren't seems unrealistic, because it seems obvious that when it comes to individuals there is a full spectrum of Native descent and influence.
So based on this , I would say it seems realistic when a person who is unenrolled but 1/2 or more of Native descent, claims an NDN identity, as this is reasonably close to being the largest part of their ancestry.
If a person is unenrolled and they are between 1/2 and 1/8, I would say this person is being realistic and is on solid ground when they identify themeselves as mixed blood. Their NDN relatives and community may call them NDN , but from what i have seen , if they do, some people in their community may get annoyed with them. So from what I have seen , the mixed blood people i know usually let others make the claim they are NDN and don't do this themselves. People who exhalt themselves set themselves up to be knocked down.
People who are less than 1/8, OR more than 2 generations removed from an ancestor who was formally recognized as a member of a recognized Native community, seem like they would be kind of exaggerating things if they even claim to be mixed blood. I mean, by the same logic would anyone see an enrolled NDN as having a substantial identity as a mixed blood if they had a gr gr grandfather who was European ?
So i think after the parental contribution of Native influence gets watered down to 1/8, or a couple generations outside a historically recognized ,culturally strong Native community, the descendents are most realistically described as PODIAs or people of distant Indian ancestry.
PODIAs is just an abreviation, and i'm not suggesting anyone needs to call themself a PODIA. It sounds like something that got dropped out of a UFO.
I'm also not against PODIAs who feel a connection with this part of their heritage, and my own position on this was described in detail in the thread below.
http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=1111.0
It seems realistic for PODIAs to occaisionaly refer to themselves as having a bit of Native blood back there. Or way way back there... As the case may be.
When people try to claim an NDN identity that overstates their actual hetitage, is sort of seems like an older woman trying to use a lot of makeup and low cut blouses, to seem younger, when she could be aging with grace and dignity.
In the other thread I mentioned that in my own defintions and how i use these words, a PODIA is a person who does have some Native descent, and a person who can't prove this is a wannabe not a PODIA, however, this isn't necessarily true as by the same logic that points out some people with substantial Native blood haven't got the right paper work to get enrolled , some people actually have a bit of Native blood, but can't prove it on paper.
This is one of the reasons it is so impractical to imagine PODIAs should have the right to a full NDN identity, but that wannbes who can't prove it deserve nothing but ridicule. It is possible to be both a PODIA and a wannabe who can't prove it, at the same time.
Once people track back to gr gr gr grandparents, the records are often spotty enough that the structure of family trees is often based in a lot of guess work and assupmtions.
For example, if someone has a marriage record showing their gr gr gr grandfather married a Native woman named Mary, but no detailed birth or death records exist for her kids, without Mary's death record, showing she survived long enough to have been the mother of all of these children , it's impossible to be sure that it wasn't a second marriage to someone else, that produced some of the children.
Once people go past the time censuses began listing all family members by name and age, mistaken assumptions about who someones mother is are very common and can go on for generations until someone stumbles on a previously undiscovered death record or the record of a seconfd marriage, and people realize 1/2 the kids in a family had a different mother.
People frequently make an issue about NDN people who were wrongly recorded as White or Mullato, but I recall hearing a tribal genealogist expalin that these cases of misidentification go both ways and house guests, adopted children, or non native relatives were also often frequently wrongly recorded as being Indian when other records prove they were not.
Once people get back past gr grandparents, or into the time period that happened prior to the mid to late 1800's, mistakes , guesswork and complete unknowns in genealogies are really common. There is also problems with unrecorded marriages, adoptions, illigitimacy, infidelity, ect ect ect .
This only becomes a serious problem if people want to define their whole identity on the basis of one gr gr gr grandmother who was recorded as Native.
People who are more than 1/8 or who have ancestors living in a time and area where there is lots of surviving records, are on much more solid ground when they claim an NDN identity , as they will usually be able to track back several generations past the most recent ancestor recorded as Indian, and will be able to find many records about many ancestors and their relatives showing Native heritage. Even if one of these lines is a mistake, it isn't likely they all will be.
But someone is basing their entire identity on one record of one distant Native ancestor, they are putting themselves in a very unstable and tenuous position.
In the big picture, it seems very important that indigenous peoples retain and regain the right to control, protect , and benifit from their own resources.
Their ability to do this hinges on actual indigenous communities being recognized and supported as the rightful owners of these resources.....
In the vast majority of cases wannabes and PODIAs who claim these rights for themselve, or who encourage others to make these claims, confuse public perception of the issues and undermine public support of the rights of actual indigenous communities, which are struggling to survive with insucfient resources.
So for both political, cultural and personal reasosns, it seems to me it is best to stay on solid ground and off the thin ice, when it comes to any claim of NDN identity.
This is just my own opinion based on my own personal experience and various people of NDN , mixed blood or PODIA ancestry I have known. Ultimently it is up to Native communities to define this, but for me, my own way of seeing this seems to make sense, and I have given it a lot of thought over the years.
========================
Rattlebone
You also keep adding the "Resources" hook into the equation and I was not even touching on that whatsoever.
Rattlebone, you just made 9 posts in the thread linked to at the begining of this post , which was discussing people who may not be NDN by some definitions marketing their products as American Indian productions.
8 of your posts appeared to be defending the right of people of distant ancestry to do this, or personally attacking people who pointed out to you where you were saying this. Now you tell us your defense of PODIAs claiming an NDN identity isn't about resources... This is so unrealistic and contradictory , that at least for the moment, I can't be bothered arguing with you and your endless forgetful hairsplitting. It's exhasting and goes nowhere.
If people want to read what was actually said and not the discussion that is going on in your own head, they can read the thread.
====
edited to add;
I hope some other people will contribute thier own opinions to this thread besides me and rattlebone. I feel like I have blabbed on more than my fair share on this topic over the years and I don't mean to drown out anyone elses voice...
-
Moma_porcupine said
For example, if someone has a marriage record showing their gr gr gr grandfather married a Native woman named Mary, but no detailed birth or death records exist for her kids, without Mary's death record, showing she survived long enough to have been the mother of all of these children , it's impossible to be sure that it wasn't a second marriage to someone else, that produced some of the children.
Once people go past the time censuses began listing all family members by name and age, mistaken assumptions about who someones mother is are very common and can go on for generations until someone stumbles on a previously undiscovered death record or the record of a seconfd marriage, and people realize 1/2 the kids in a family had a different mother.
This is exactly right. Probably the most common mistakes that I know of involves either this analogy, or mistaken an ancestor with someone with the exact same name as someone on Tribal Roll. Often times, all other evidence that proves that this is not the same person is ignored. Most of these cases are just Wishful Thinking.
-
I have many issues when it comes to this subject.
One I am an enrolled member who lives on the reservation.
I am 7/8 with 1/8 oglala blood. My first husband was enrolled
on another tribe as my present husband who is enrolled.
I have my grandson's who are not enrolled, My son, their Father
is enrolled with half of my blood but not his Father's blood because
he is from a different tribe.
If the blood was allowed they would be enrolled.
Now for the issues,
my grandson's mom is white, my grandson are raised in
the white world, my son has died. They know nothing of our world.
To me my own beautiful grandsons are Not native why because they
are not enrolled, The mother has refused to allows to enroll them,
they are not raised cultually native and they do not look
native. They are my blood but not a tribal member.
One day maybe if they decide to learn our ways they can be accepted and
enrolled.
They recieve no land from me or inherit anything from the family.
Is this harsh yes!
My granddaughter is born on the rez, enrolled member of the tribe, raised in the
culture, looks native will inherit and always be a member of the tribe.
Oh My!!! says all the people who are descendants
I do not see people who are 1/8 as native people sorry.
I know you will get into an uproar!
In my part of the country we are not
I do believe that around 1/3 of the overall enrolled Native population of the United States is at the 1/4 mark or less. This is with the native population marrying to NON Natives at a rate of 70% or higher. So doing the math and figuring the stats, BQ is a lose lose situation.
One must come to my part of the country because we still have a great deal of people who are full-blood and our BQ for enrollment is 1/4th. You will notice right off that blond hair and blue eyes is rarity here.
They kind of stand out in the crowd because we are native.
-
LaDonna, I am sorry about your son and grandsons. Thank you for posting this. For too many people on the net, all of this is theoretical. I really appreciate it when you, and those with the same sort of background as you, post about the realities here. Moran Taing (Many Thanks)
-
Moma_Porcupine said
I hope some other people will contribute thier own opinions to this thread besides me and rattlebone. I feel like I have blabbed on more than my fair share on this topic over the years and I don't mean to drown out anyone elses voice...
Thanks for you input Moma_porcupine. I read the link you have on Podias, and it was really informative.
And I think when you talk about the racial issue as opposed to the political issues your right on target and correct Moma_Porcupine. Is someone who is 1/64 Cherokee racially Cherokee/Indian. Of course not. It only means that this person is the direct descendent “by blood” of a Cherokee somewhere in their family line. It would be like a white southerner saying he was racially black because of a ggggg black grandma. The BQ issue isn’t about numbers and fractions to the Cherokees. Its just saying you are descended from Cherokee blood somewhere in your family line from our people. And this is what the citizenship policy is based on. I think a lot of Cherokee Claimants in the SE have some sort of personal fantasy of what this all means. Most of this fantasy belief is just based on popular culture and a lot of nonsense.
In Oklahoma you do have white looking Cherokees that are part of ceremonial life and know the traditions, etc, and some that even speak the language, but at the same time you have a lot of enrolled Cherokees that don’t know much about Traditional Cherokee ways, and in reality could probably care less about them. There are light skin Cherokees that do know traditional ways, but that is because they were ACTUALLY BORN AND RAISED in a Cherokee community, and sometimes surrounded by a full blood/ traditional community in NE Oklahoma. In other words, there are Cherokees with low BQs that really do know about Traditional ways, but the light skin Cherokees that don’t’ know about these ways, don’t pretend like they do. If that makes any sense to anyone?
But regardless, all enrolled Cherokees are citizens and are Cherokee by blood. They are Cherokee in the political sense, but some are not so much in the cultural sense and not really in the racial sense either for those with low BQS.
So then you must ask yourself where that would leave someone who may have some Cherokee blood but at the same time, they aren’t enrolled, nor recognized by their community, and it has been more then 150 or 200 years since their ancestor was part of any real, living, breathing Cherokee community. I wouldn’t argue with them that they were “Cherokee by blood” if they could prove it. But if they are so proud of this Cherokee heritage and it means so much to them, then, I would wonder why they never at least visited a Cherokee community or traveled there to learn about the culture and heritage that they claim to care so much about?
The Cherokee Nation is just a great Nation where everyone has a common ancestry. No more, and no less. I think the problem is that to many people read to much into what this actually means. For me its pretty straight forward. Your “Cherokee by blood” descended from a Cherokee by blood on the Dawes Roll. If your not, your not a citizen.
When I hear claimants with fairly tale beliefs of what that small amount of Cherokee blood makes them, it just makes me laugh. I then realize that these people have probably little to no real contact with real Cherokees whether they be mixed blood or full bloods. Now for those that actually do have a Cherokee BQ but aren’t’ enrolled, I would suggest to them that if they want to honor this, then they should go and visit a real, living, breathing Cherokee community first of all. And also, as I pointed out in other post, just because one Tribe recognizes people of lineal descent as a member of their Tribe regardless of BQ, this isn’t necessarily the case for a lot of Tribes out West who weren’t on the Eastern Seaboard in the main Cross hairs of European Colonization. Some of those tribes may have been a bit more isolated and may not have had to deal with issues that tribes like the Pequots had to, and in that regards were able to better maintain their racial identity to a higher degree. I’m not saying that they didn’t experience colonization and hardship any less, just that it was a bit different in the East. ( Especially for Tribes whose territorial boundaries were part of what would later become the first 13 colonies of the United States.
So in that sense, I think the key is that if someone is claiming Cherokee or Creek, or Mohawk, or Apache, or Seminole, etc, then they should concentrate on these communities ( Cherokee, Creek, Mohawk, Apache, Seminole, etc. As I said before, if I was for example, 1/8 French but not a citizen of France, what would be the point of me trying to convince a Greek that I’m European? Greeks and French have about as much in common as Creeks and Navajos. If I really wanted to honor my French heritage, I would want to learn about French culture and traditions, and not give myself a Pan European Identity. Especially when I’ve never even been to France to begin with???
-
There in lies the problem with acceptance.
No one seems to be able to separate the Political from the Racial from the Cultural.
No matter what side you stand on, someone may be discussing something of a political (citizenship) nature and to defend their position they will start bringing in elements from one or both of the other sides of this issue.
-
Posted by: Paul123
There in lies the problem with acceptance.
No one seems to be able to separate the Political from the Racial from the Cultural.
No matter what side you stand on, someone may be discussing something of a political (citizenship) nature and to defend their position they will start bringing in elements from one or both of the other sides of this issue.
Your right Paul. And I think what I wrote in regards to all of these issue just really shows how unrealistic some people of Cherokee heritage that aren’t enrolled are about a lot of things. When I hear some unenrolled Cherokees talk about what their Cherokee heritage means to them, I realize that some o f these people, in their attempts to try to honor their heritage, are really just being more offensive than anything else.
My stance is sort of like this. If you weren’t born and raised in a Traditional Cherokee community in either Oklahoma or North Carolina, then you really shouldn’t try to do a poor imitation of what you believe is based on a Traditional Cherokee belief system. You’re just making a mockery of things. This scenario can apply to any tribe. Now, there are a lot of other things that you can do to honor this heritage (or alleged heritage), but we have to be careful about how we go about this.
When you try too hard to be part of something that wasn’t really part of your identity in the Real World, you’re just in a lose lose situation. When someone discovers or decides later in life to embrace this long lost identity, they have to be careful about how they portray themselves to people who were raised in these ways, or had family raised in these ways. When people try to portray themselves as something that is not part of who they are, We can see right through the bull crap, so my advice to people who want to explore their heritage and aren’t’ enrolled, would be for them to be realistic about what it is they really want to accomplish or are trying to do. Identity is important and a part of this. In regards to Cherokee/Native American Spirituality, my best advice to people that seek this out, not raised in an actual community, would be to just forget about it. This may sound harsh to some, but that’s how I see it. The time, effort, and emotional toll that this takes, is a lot more then a “part time Indian” not living in a REAL, LIVING, BREATHING COMMUNITY is able to handle. It would be like all of a sudden trying to become a professional baseball player when your 40 years old, and you’ve never actually played baseball before in your life. The only thing that you will accomplish is making a fool of yourself in front of the pros and they will probably see you as just mocking what they do.
-
this is a good topic. for me, L'nu means any indigenous people of the world, now to get status in Mi'kmaw country, depending on the first nation's membership code, you can be as little as 1/4, which i guess for us is honouring the Grandparents, that is under stipulations, for 1/4 to get status, it has to be thru the fathers line, if the father has status and marries a full status native, if the father is full status and if the mother is non-status, the full status father has to be listed as the father on the childs birth certificate for the child to get status. until 1985 when bill-c31 was enacted into law, the full status mother and her children lost thier status if they married an non-native, like my mother...... so in 1985 canada moved me from the non-status list to the status list, but low and behold, they created 2 different levels of status, 61 and 62, and any women who was reinstated to the status list (meaning any woman who lost her status when she married the non-native, was given full status back) but her children are listed as 62, for a 62 to pass down status, the 62 has to marry a 61, if the 62- meaning me- if i marry a non-native my 1/4 blood child will have no status..... if i marry another 62, my children will not have status even tho technically they would be HALF-BLOODS!! and in the coming generations when the children born right after 1985 have children it would be possible for a full blood and a 3/4 blood to not have status, if a 62 who is full blood marries a 62 who is full blood or half blood!!!!
it gets worse for me, because of the extreme hatred of those Mi'kmaw women who married non-natives, the band council, they passed a band resolution, their children and any other 62 Mi'kmaw will not have housing rights, nor will they have voting rights, they will not be allowed to vote in the election, i can run for the election that i cannot vote in!!!!!!
so for me 1/4 bloods are Mi'kmaw, although some like my children if i marry a non-native, would not have status, they still would be Mi'kmaw, but anything under a 1/4 blood i would not consider Mi'kamw, under 1/4 some people call them a "descendant" and the ones from great-great-great-granny i call them podia's i like to pronounce it like it was a L'nu word, bow-dai-Ya,
-
<my best advice to people that seek this out, not raised in an actual community, would be to just forget about it.>
Yea that does sound harsh.
I am one that is trying to learn all that I can and I would bet that it is worth the effort.
I am exploring what I can through the CN's satellite communities. This way the info should be correct. How much they will teach is still up in the air as this is a new endeavor for them as well.
The history class was well worth it.
-
Paul said
<my best advice to people that seek this out, not raised in an actual community, would be to just forget about it.>
Yea that does sound harsh.
I am one that is trying to learn all that I can and I would bet that it is worth the effort.
I am exploring what I can through the CN's satellite communities. This way the info should be correct. How much they will teach is still up in the air as this is a new endeavor for them as well.
The history class was well worth it.
I'm not talking about culture and history. That's quite different then spirituality. From what I know of the Satellite Communities and for the ones in California that have been established for a while, its more about being a community organization for Cherokee Citizens. It would be like you had a French Embassy in Ireland. French people living away from their community ( France) but residing in Ireland would have community meetings at the embassy, maybe have French dinners, drink French wine, eat French cheese, and maybe listen to French music and dance to traditional French Folk music. They also might have a social soccer match and talk about family back home in France. And then a History Teacher might be sent in from France to speak about French History to try and connect its citizens to French culture that live away from its community.
I don’ think a Catholic Mass or Sunday School Services would take place at this type of gathering. Someone’s family would be responsible to talk about Spirituality to them. I think the Satellite Communities in California have social Stomp Dance exhibitions on occasion but that’s about it. I seriously doubt “spirituality” is part of what these organizations do. I guess it may be taught in “subtle manners” just for the fact that at these meetings you will usually find enrolled Cherokees that are from Oklahoma, but not really "spirituality" in the sense that I think you mean?
Not only that, but there are many Cherokees that are also Baptist, Methodist, and a few other denominations.
When you say your trying to learn all you can, what do you mean by this? Are you speaking of Spirituality or just Cherokee culture in general? I’m not too sure where your coming from? I guess one can learn “about” certain aspects of spiritually. Such as “This is the Stomp Dance”, “this is how it is interpreted”, etc, etc. But spirituality is nothing you can learn Paul. When you try to do this, your walking the fine line of filtering everything you learn through a non Cherokee belief system. As far as the culture and the History Class you mention, I believe your doing the right thing by learning with these Organizations. But as far as spirituality goes, I’m really not sure you will ever be able to understand ways that weren’t/aren’t part of your life in any meaningful way. Obviously, this is a decision only you can make, but that’s just how I see things.
-
<When you say your trying to learn all you can, what do you mean by this? Are you speaking of Spirituality or just Cherokee culture in general?>
Don't confuse "All I can" with everything there is.
-
This is what I said.
When someone discovers or decides later in life to embrace this long lost identity, they have to be careful about how they portray themselves to people who were raised in these ways, or had family raised in these ways. When people try to portray themselves as something that is not part of who they are, We can see right through the bull crap, so my advice to people who want to explore their heritage and aren’t’ enrolled, would be for them to be realistic about what it is they really want to accomplish or are trying to do. Identity is important and a part of this. In regards to Cherokee/Native American Spirituality, my best advice to people that seek this out, not raised in an actual community, would be to just forget about it. This may sound harsh to some, but that’s how I see it. The time, effort, and emotional toll that this takes, is a lot more then a “part time Indian” not living in a REAL, LIVING, BREATHING COMMUNITY is able to handle.
And then you responded here.
Paul123 said
Yea that does sound harsh.
I am one that is trying to learn all that I can and I would bet that it is worth the effort.
I am exploring what I can through the CN's satellite communities. This way the info should be correct. How much they will teach is still up in the air as this is a new endeavor for them as well.
The history class was well worth it.
And I was only talking specifically about Cherokee Spirituality, not culture. Now, many parts of culture are interwoven with spirituality in certain ways. So of course it’s not entirely separate. But I was speaking in general about someone trying to implement Cherokee spirituality into their life when they’ve never lived or been part of a Traditional community. You seem not to agree with my statement in regards to spirituality. Can you explain why?
-
<You seem not to agree with my statement in regards to spirituality. Can you explain why?>
Well,, I wasn't necessarily disagreeing. but with that said, I do believe that one can learn anything if they have the right teacher.
-
I do believe that one can learn anything if they have the right teacher.
I don't agree with this. The statement puts the responsibility of learning
on the teacher. The teacher is not the one learning.
You can have the right teacher and not learn a thing. I would say that
everything a person learns is solely on the person learning. Even with
the worst or wrong teacher, a person can learn an abundance.
But I think in this context, of what Blackwolf is saying, is that there are elements of
the cultural spirituality that without being actually raised within it, a person would never
really learn. This is something I do agree with.
Because, as close as a person may come to understanding another culture, they are still
not 'of' it. You can retrain your brain and mind to think in or within certain terms, or
perspective, but the old operating system is still there and does play a part.
Raised within the culture and the cultural spirituality, there is no other programming format
that is in play. The syntax of the entire cultural and spiritual system is intact. There are no gaps.
And that makes it complete in a sense that it can never be with a person not raised within.
I hope that makes sense. Not sure I can express it better.
-
<You seem not to agree with my statement in regards to spirituality. Can you explain why?>
Well,, I wasn't necessarily disagreeing. but with that said, I do believe that one can learn anything if they have the right teacher.
While you might not be able to learn "anything", with the right teacher you can come very close. Having the right teacher makes all the difference in the world. I would listen to the Elders; try to learn from those who are very connected to the Nation. You may not learn the total of Cherokee spirituality, but you will gain a definite appreciation for the traditional beliefs. There are many enrolled Cherokee who do not practice the traditional Cherokee ways. As BlackWolf pointed out, there are many Baptists, Methodists, and other Christian denominations among the Cherokee. I doubt if some have taken the time or had the interest to learn the traditional ways.
-
Paul123 said
I do believe that one can learn anything if they have the right teacher.
So lets assume Paul that you actually do find the right teacher that is willing to help you.
But let me ask you this? Have you ever actually been to a Traditional Cherokee community in either Oklahoma or NC? Are you willing to relocate to Oklahoma and reestablish your life in a Traditional Cherokee community there? Are you willing to quit your job and move you and your whole family there to start anew? Are you willing to toss out many of your old beliefs that have shaped your entire life up until now? Once you move there, are you willing to get involved in your new Community? Are you willing to become part of Ceremonial Life in your new community? Will you become part of a Ceremonial Grounds out there and take medicine? If this is so, will you go on a Regular Basis, month after month, year after year, decade after decade? Will you grow old and die with this new found Spirituality and belief system? Are you Christian? Most Traditional people involved in Ceremonial life there are non Christians. Will you reevaluate your old belief system? Will you incorporate your new found spirituality into your everyday life?
Are you willing to dedicate your life to your new Community? Are you willing to live your whole life there? Are you willing to die there in your new community?.
The other thing I would ask is will you actually truly believe in your new found belief system? And if so why? Since as of now, you know nothing of Cherokee Spirituality, how can you put so much faith into something you know nothing of? Answer me at least some of these questions Paul, and I might be able to understand where your coming from?
-
< Answer me at least some of these questions Paul, and I might be able to understand where your coming from?>
That's a lot of questions for sure.
First let me say that the past few posts seems to be leaning more to the side of, learning everything, rather than what I can. I'd be happy with some history and culture, anything else would be the cherry on top.
And yes one may have a great teacher and not learn (or visa versa). That's a given.
Now for all of those questions, (in order).
1: no,
(I assume passing through as a runaway teenager doesn't count) <ha,ha>
2: no,
And neither was my past 3 generations either. They staid right where they were born, and raised their families and crops as best they could. ( well some of them moved all over the dang place and some went to IT on the TOT, (but that was about 4 generations ago)). As I said before, My parents didn't want me to think of my self as anything but white.
Given that this second question was a no, the rest of your questions are moot.
(but serve a purpose to others reading this).
Don't misunderstand, I do see your point. (and the points made here by bls926 and critter).
However I also am not out there tiring to become Super-Injun either.
I'm getting old now, as I said, I'd be happy with some history and culture. I do agree that someone that was not raised NDN will never be able to know/understand it all. Some of it, yes.
I don't think that those Pow Wow-Super-twinkies that learned what they have care what someone from the CNO thinks either. They are surrounded by like minded people and they all feed off of each other. Nothing said here will matter at all to them. There is a whole sub-culture of them. And some of them get so wound up in all of this that they do go out and try to form their own tribes like the "Golf & Country Club Cherokees" in Alabama. or the Guys in Deltona Fl. that have appointed themselves as tribal police officers that patrol their tribal land (so what if it's only a corner lot in a suburban neighborhood).
-
I think in a way Blackwolf has a really good point ... Though it probably depends a bit on how far back a persons ancestry is and if they have living relatives who have remained a part of the original Native community ....
Unles people move back to a Native community and commit their lives and their families life , to this community, I don't think anyone who's family has been disconnected with a culturally strong native community for more than a generation or 2 at most, will ever be able to learn the culture in such a way as to be able to reclaim those traditions and carry them forward.
I think what people might realistically hope to learn, through experiencing real culture and learning about the history , is to recognize where some of the influences that already exist in themselves and in their own family came from.
This is true when people learn about the history and culture of all their ancestors whether they were European or Native.
I think when people get to know their own background, there is a chance to make connections and put things in context.
It is sort of like if your grandfather was Spanish, when you go to Spain you would learn about his culture, and what influences your parent may have been responding to when they made the choices they did . Maybe he was in a war, and by learning about that, you suddenly understand why he always got quiet and left the room whenever a certain person or town was mentioned, or why something would make him angry.
I think many people who grew up outside the culture also sometimes notice there is certain things that always made them feel good, and when they learn there is a connection between that feeling and their roots, whatever those various roots may be, there is a feeling of being connected with something bigger than yourself, which is probably the foundation of a lot of Spiritual belief systems.
I think maybe that is where a lot of PODIAs and mixed blood people get confused, because in a culture which isolates people by placing so much emphasis on individual development and aquisition, that feeling of being connected with something greater than themselves is very attractive, so they then try and imitate and personally carry the Spiritual traditions they think are most likely to bring them more of that feeling.
I think this desire to personaly own this glimmer of trancescdental feeling is misplaced, and it would be a lot better if these people simply enjoyed the feeling of connection they have , from the sidelines, leaving the resources to the people who actually have an unbroken tradition and knowledgable life long community support. It is these people who are best able to be the ones to sucessfully carry these traditions into the future generations, so these generations can also enjoy the benifits of an unbroken line of ancient tradition.
But even though a lot of people get confused and go on to misappropriate Native traditions, and generally make a major nuicence of themselves to the people who actually have this job, I do think descendents who no longer actually live in the culture, can benifit , from being allowed to have an experience of the real culture and feel a sense of some things being in better context and perspective.
However, if these people can't govern themselves and their relatives, to prevent them from grabbing bits of ancient traditions and mangling them, I think the responsibilites the rightful carriers of these traditions have to future generations, is a reasonable grounds for completely excluding these people or only allowing them to participate from the sidelines.
So from that standpoint, when it comes to their Native heritage, I think the first thing PODIAs who live outside of a Native community which has continuously maintained the traditions could learn, is to stay on the sidelines and appreciate what is shared from that position only.
=======
edited to add
Maybe after a couple of generations of watching and finding unobtrusive ways to support a Native communitiy, some of these traditions could gradually be reclaimed. But i think that would take more than one generation, if this was done in a real way, and not a cheap imitation.
-
Moma_porcupine said
However, if these people can't govern themselves and their relatives, to prevent them from grabbing bits of ancient traditions and mangling them, I think the responsibilites the rightful carriers of these traditions have to future generations, is a reasonable grounds for completely excluding these people or only allowing them to participate from the sidelines.
I'm starting to realize more and more that this is how things need to be done Moma_porcupine.
Its like, you invite someone over for dinner Friday night. At desert time, not only do they eat all the cake, but they eat the cherry on top that wasn't meant for the guest. They didn't even ask. And they wind up making it their business to stay all weekend. You probably wouldn't invite this person back for dinner.
-
Moma_porcupine said
However, if these people can't govern themselves and their relatives, to prevent them from grabbing bits of ancient traditions and mangling them, I think the responsibilites the rightful carriers of these traditions have to future generations, is a reasonable grounds for completely excluding these people or only allowing them to participate from the sidelines.
I'm starting to realize more and more that this is how things need to be done Moma_porcupine.
Its like, you invite someone over for dinner Friday night. At desert time, not only do they eat all the cake, but they eat the cherry on top that wasn't meant for the guest. They didn't even ask. And they wind up making it their business to stay all weekend. You probably wouldn't invite this person back for dinner.
Well isn't things usually put in place to prevent them from happening in the first place?
What I usually see is that even with people that are visibly "racially" NDN and enrolled, they still don't just get an open invite to show up to ceremonies and other things.
I have seen on so many occasions where a person must go speak to the elder or person running a particular ceremony so that the person in question can be spoken to in order to see where their head is at and what kind of person they are. If they have never been to such a thing, then I have seen where the elder and people who have given them the invite explain things to them, talk about whatever things should or should not be done etc, and what to expect.
If any so called spiritual leader or elder just let people show up to ceremony or other things without doing such things, I would question them just as much as I would the people showing up.
To much in this thread and on this site it is spoken as if people who are enrolled or high BQ are naturally connected because of it and would know what is right or wrong, and that is simply not true.
Due to this being 2010 and not 1410, so many native people are just as clueless about things as these PODIA people. To say otherwise is wrong.
Anyone regardless of BQ or enrollment status should be spoken to by an elder or person running a ceremony to see if them coming there is a good idea. If after being approved they do things that they were told not to, or persist in doing what they have been asked not to; then regardless of BQ, status etc, they would and should likely be sent away.
Enrolled and high BQ people are just as likely now days to mangle things,or be ignorant of them as non enrolled low BQ people.
-
Rattlebone
Enrolled and high BQ people are just as likely now days to mangle things,or be ignorant of them as non enrolled low BQ people.
Rattlebone
We have all seen situations where enrolled and or high BQ people become exploiters, but in almost every situation, these people are supported and encouraged by a mainly non native or low BQ or unenrolled audience. In other words, in almost every situation of exploitation, the traditions involved are being exploited outside of a context of a Native community which has continuosly maintained it's culture. And it's pretty obvious that enrolled or high BQ people are a lot more likely to have culturally appropriate guidence and community support, so they are a lot less likely to become abusers, at least within the context of maintaining these traditions in their own communities.
So what you are saying here doesn't seem true .
If those traditions get mangled and destroyed, everybody looses , and if they are maintained properly, everybody with any connection gains. So cultural preservation, would seem to be more important than every individual being able to be front and center when it comes to maintaining whatever tradition they take a fancy to ....
You must know this, in yet you act like this isn't really a problem, and continue to argue on behalf of the people who remove these traditions from traditional communities .
Which seems strange.
-
Some of the issues of who is excluded or not would also depend on the particular Tribe and particular Ceremony or Grounds that are involved. In Oklahoma there are some grounds that accept non Indians, Unenrolled Indians, and outsiders. A friend of mine told me that there are even Asians that participate at one of the grounds there. But I think these are exceptions to the rule. I think exceptions are OK to a certain extent. But my personal opinion is that these exceptions to the rule will happen regardless. Although there are enrolled Indians that may exploit, from what I can see, most of the people stealing and mangling ceremonies are white folks or other Non Indians masquerading as Cherokees, Lakota Sioux, and other well know tribes. And to a very lesser extent Enrolled Indians and Unenrolled Indians.
The example of that John Two Hawks guy is one good example of why people should be excluded from Ceremony. He probably went out to South Dakota and took advantage of some well meaning Indian people, and betrayed their trust. I think cases like this are more likely to happen as opposed to cases of the humble unenrolled Indian and/or American Indian Claimant that can participate in Ceremony and conduct themself in a humble non intrusive way. I think the general rule that Moma_porcupine mentions of excluding people is really the only way for Tribes to protect themselves at this point in time. Unfortunately, this is what it has come down to. And like I said, if it’s really meant for someone that is unenrolled to be part of Ceremony, then it will happen behind the scenes. It won’t happen on the Internet, and probably not in Public. I have seen cases of enrolled Indians exploiting, but from what I can see, it’s pretty much across the board the “Claimants” of American Indian Heritage and White Folks that mangle and misappropriate. This is so because these people aren’t accountable to nobody but themselves and their own Twisted Egos, while Enrolled Indians are accountable to their Tribe and Family name. I have seen cases of disconnected Enrolled Indians maybe doing something that’s not quite right, or misinterpreting a particular ceremony, etc, but these are usually honest mistakes as opposed to blatant exploitation by these CLAIMANTS of American Indian heritage. The enrolled Indians that do exploit for money are usually denounced by their Tribe.
-
I have been away for a while tending to an ill friend, and return to see more frauds exposed, and help gathered for those hit hard by the winter.
It is good to see civil discussion and sharing of thoughts on these questions, as these problems allow the fraudsters to thrive. As I mentioned earlier, I know the questions, but the answers are not mine to give.
I do want to express my opinion that in every case it will be a decision by the elders of each people which course of action to take. and those decisions will vary from nation to nation depending on their own circumstances and most likely may vary from the decisions made by the elders of other nations.
I think that all here may share deepest concern for the California peoples, and wish them the best in the recognition process.
Let us hope that some of the worst fraudsters will recieve justice soon for their acts.
-
What I'm about to write here is some thoughts and opinion based on my own life experience and sure it was influenced by wisdom of some other people, both my Slovenian and my husband's Dine. English is not my maternal language (it's Slovenian) so I apologize if my English isn't always correct or my expressions seem odd. I'm also aware that several thoughts in my post have been already written by other people here, but it seems there is still a lot of things unclear about these issues, especially with people who were not raised within Native community (not to mention "wannabes").
As Slovenian it's definitely not my place to say who should or should not be considered a member of a certain tribe or nation, I'll just write down some thoughts in general on difference of being geneticaly (or "by blood") a member of a certain nation and being a descendant raised and living among other members of that particular tribe/nation. The latter involves BOTH an individual's personal identity, which goes much deeper than just simple statement I'm X, it means deep understanding (not just rational, but also emotional, symbolic, and practical in every day life) - of the land, cultural and spiritual ways AND his/her place in the particular community which involves all the complex relations among the person and other members of the community. All that cannot be given or achieved or learned, and of course not bought, by any means. It's about evolving, growing into certain society, it's about weaving the complex pattern of relations with the people and their cultural and spiritual ways of life and this is a multiple way process that cannot be decided or lead or speeded-up by the person who wish to become a member of certain society, no matter what his/her BQ is. Considering this, it is obvious that being Dine, Lakota, Slovenian ... etc. other than merely by blood cannot be a matter of statement/personal decision it's a matter of everyday LIFE and long term interaction with other members of the nation. It's something that is hard to comprehend and accept for some people, because it goes beyond individualistic conception of today's narcissistic Euro-American society. Part of that conception are certain convictions such as: "You can become all you want to be" "If you put enough effort anything can be achieved/got" "What you think/feel is who you are." These deeply impressed conceptions and lack of awareness of the meaning of the community are also part of the reason why it's so hard or even impossible to convince wannabes that they are on a wrong path.
And what to do if you happen to be Native by blood but have lived off the community most of your life and would like to get closer or if you have a partner/spouse from a different nation (there is difference in these two situations, but a lot is also in common)? Here I can share some of my life experience that worked. First thing that later came out to be the foundation of all good relations with Dine was my awareness of who I really was (both my personal identity and cultural background). The second thing was to FORGET what kind of relation I might wish to have or what place I might wish to get in the Dine community. No pretending, no acting, no wannabe thinking/acting. At the beginning I've just looked for what we share, what we already have in common just as simple human beings and see how our relations evolve. And I've found a lot! More than enough to find a good way to exist and be comfortable both ways within Dine community. BTW, I was just dropped to the middle of the Rez by some strange coincidences and hadn't learned anything about Dine from any book before I found myself on the Rez. And that came out later to be on my side - I started learning directly from Dine in THEIR way and THEIR pace without having any (mis)conceptions in my head previously.
To a wannabe who might read this (might be a bit off the topic): Learning included traditional cooking, making frybread, learning to fix a broken tyre on a truck in the middle of nowhere on the Rez, how to tell whether clouds will bring storm or not, it included learning (that was a hard and long term one) how to deal with drunk men and how to work together and comfort each other with other Rez women to minimize the hard consequences of alcoholism and domestic violence, when and how to offer help so that I'd be of any use and not just annoying... and No, learning didn't include how to run ceremonies, nor any kind of "initiation". Yes, I was invited to some ceremonies, but not all of them, and that was because of the nature of the ceremony itself not because of some individual's decision or possession of the ceremony . And I'm still not adopted ;) or any more Indian than I was at that moment I stepped out of that old truck without door to the dry land of the Navajo Rez for the first time. The reality is what IS not what we might want it to be.
-
Good post, Vida! Thank you for sharing that with us. There's definitely more to being Indian than the blood quantum. Yes, you might be racially Indian but that would be the extent of it. So many things you can't know unless you actually are part of the community.
A lot of times people think they can assume any identity they want. Yes, they may have one Indian ancestor who lived and died 100 years ago. However, this does not make you Indian. What about your other ancestors, the European, African, Asian ones? You can't pick one over the others. You need to honor all your ancestors. To honor one and ignore the others is to show disrespect for all of them.
-
How about if I wear an "Kiss Me I'm Irish" tee shirt on St. Patty's day? ;D
-
As an enrolled member we see our people (enrolled member) who abuse our cultural ways as ones who live
off the reservation, they may dwell or visit in the urban areas where there people do not know
what they do. On the reservations here we all know each other and if you are doing or saying bad thing or things that are not true you will be confronted by the elders. So if there is a full-blood or enrolled member they usually are work, visiting or living in urban areas.
I hear all the time when people who maybe are descendant of a tribe say well full-blood or enrolled members do bad things too as their excuse. As enrolled member we are responsible for our people.
The people who marry non-natives and go to europe out of there view of their people tend to become
more than what they are because their people are not there to keep them in check. We also have some of our people who travel overseas because people pay them and they tell them things just to make their money. Just like all these so called pipe keepers or shield keepers or whatever they called themselves.
People tell lies so much they believe them.
If you are a part of nation then you should be able to tell the people of your family and family name. If you don't know then you are not a part of the nation. We are family orienated people so if you don't know your family then you are not apart of the tribe.
Non-Native seem so straved for that center inside them they will listen to anyone even if they steal them blind.
-
Boy!, where to begin in my reply....
Ok, let's see: German/Netherlands/Yewish/NA/spanish and probably more, that i don't know of.
Those are my ancestors, i honour them all.
Does that make me 1/5th of all the above mentioned? off course not!
What makes a person is not only determined by the birthplace of the person itself, or his/her ancestors.
A person is formed by his/her upbringing, surroundings, character and so on.
There is a heritage offcourse in who were/are your ancestors, but their role is not as big as people tend to believe.
You are what you believe you are!
But you must really believe this and feel it.
So if you would say:"i'm american indian", then you should live by your claim and live as a native.
I never claimed to be a native, i was told, that a little part of me is from Lakota.
Since it is such a small part..... all other parts are as small.
So, i honour each part as equally important.
I was honoured to meet natives, living as much as they could as natives.
I was mesmorised by their compassion for eachother and for life itself.
I was given the chance to learn more, but never lived with them.
Now i'm relaying the message of this compassion to the best of my abilities.
Many blessings,
Wayne
-
You are what you believe you are!
But you must really believe this and feel it.
So if you would say:"i'm american indian", then you should live by your claim and live as a native.
... Wayne, are you saying you think white Europeans can "believe" they are Native and this makes it so?
-
In a way yes, but will they be able to live as a native american?
I don't think so, thus will they never be native american.
It is all in the eye of the beholder so to say.
A european will know (deep down) he/she is not a native, so the believe is not valid.
When they would have given the chance to live with a nation as a member of that nation, then that would make them a native american...... over time (a long time).
Many blessings,
Wayne
-
No. It has nothing to do with the beliefs, fantasies or delusions of non-Natives. It's up to the Native people, of the particular Nation in question, to determine who is a member of their Nation.
-
Wayne ,so if I believe strong enough that I am a horse does that make me a horse? LOL NO I will never be a horse just because I think I am that is delusional. I am Cherokee not because I believe I am but because it is so!
-
Could any man live as a horse?
Please read carefully.
Is it up to the members of the tribe?.... yes, offcourse.
White people know this too, so they could never become native.
If members would decide to grant this "membership", then it could be possible.
I understand why no non-native would ever have the honour to become native.
I was only trying to make a point. ;)
The rest of my reply is not taken into account here, so what about the rest?
Please understand, that i'm not defending the exploiters.
Many blessings,
Wayne
-
Flyaway, you will be a horse if you "live" like a horse for a long (very long) time! :D
-
Good one critter!
I do like this kind of humor.
Many blessings,
Wayne
-
Quote from Wayne:
What makes a person is not only determined by the birthplace of the person itself, or his/her ancestors.
A person is formed by his/her upbringing, surroundings, character and so on.
There is a heritage offcourse in who were/are your ancestors, but their role is not as big as people tend to believe.
You are what you believe you are!
But you must really believe this and feel it.
So if you would say:"i'm american indian", then you should live by your claim and live as a native.
Wayne your thinking "you are what you believe you are" is true but not in the case: So if you would say:"i'm american indian", then you should live by your claim and live as a native.
To just say I am an American Indian Does Not make you one even if you lived with a tribe for a very long time, even if you are adopted ,say by a Lakota or Cherokee family does NOT make you one. You will NEVER be an American Indian if you are NOT ONE! You can say it until you are blue in the face and it will not make it so! You have no rites to do any ceremonies, healings, NOTHING that belongs to any tribe, NONE! AND the American Indians do NOT have shamans, I get so sick of hearing this!
BE who you Really are,there is nothing wrong with that, unless you are not willing to walk your own personal path.
-
I feel, that i need to make a humble apology.....
It was never my intention to mock or otherwise hurt anyone with the remark about believing who you are.
I only said it to give an example.
Offcourse it is never so, that you can become something you are not.
What i was trying to get across is that everyone has a right to believe in whatever.
If someone believes he is native american..... let him, spirit will deal with him in one way or an other.
Just let him be, but warn others, so they are not hurt by him.
That's in my opinion the right thing to do.
I do have my own path to follow, as do all of you, sometimes these paths cross and we meet new friends.
That is what i was trying to say.
My sincere apologies for possibly hurting anyone with my words.
Many blessings,
Wayne
-
As a Lakota grandmother it is important for my people to know who they are
which means if you claim 1/5 Native American -Lakota
you should be able to tell me
which Band come from,
what is your Territory,
what is your Tiospaye and
reservation name
which Tiwahe you come.
there 14 Lakota-Dakota-Nakota Reservation located in 8 states
if you have been removed from your people then how do you know
what is true and what is not true?
If you don't live among your people why bother to claim to be one of them?
If you do not help your people then why brother to claim to be one of them!