Author Topic: Echota Cherokee  (Read 121705 times)

Offline taraverti

  • Posts: 82
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #30 on: September 12, 2009, 02:41:29 am »
Paul,

Now I understand better. You have family connections to CNO and the Echota Cherokee. That explains so much, at least to me. Thanks for that.

I would echo MP in saying it is a complex issue. And I am on my way out the door to work but wanted you to know I appreciate your continued efforts to make sense of all of this. Bottom line for me is what choices/actions on my part support soveriegnty for the Indian Nations. For me it's being not-Indian, even though I do have ancestry. the good of the many... etc etc.

Other people make other choices. It all works out in the end.

Offline wolfhawaii

  • Posts: 294
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #31 on: September 12, 2009, 06:49:50 am »
I see I have missed a lot of discussion :o It was a long day at work, 12 1/4 hours. It seems Paul took umbrage at my comment; I will confess that i am unfamiliar with the Cherokees of Central Florida....if they are a recognized heritage group or satellite community of enrolled members then that is fine. There are so many fake groups and "tribes" that I can't keep up with them all anymore. I got my information on the Echotas of AL from their website; looked at the photos, read their histories (where did they get the idea that Redbird Smith was Chief of the Cherokee Nation?) The idea of using clans as regional groups is past wrong, and would only be done (in my opinion) if they were unaware of their own clan. I support the efforts of people to reconnect with their ancestral nations but there are many pitfalls along the way. I encourage you to keep seeking, Paul, but the tone of your postings has me concerned that you may veer off into unproductive paths and you are not hearing the calls of concern. I will not judge you as you have me; I have travelled some of the roads you seek.

Offline LittleOldMan

  • Posts: 138
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #32 on: September 12, 2009, 11:22:49 am »
Good morning.  I started to respond to this on going subject last night but I wanted to sleep on my response to the group.  So with the utmost respect may I offer up a comment or three?  First, this is one of the finest sites that I have ever encountered on the web.  It is moderated well and responses are usually held to the discussion of the subject in question rather than some boards that quickly descend to the level of personal attack and worse.  As I commented before I will write personal knowledge which must be considered from a legal standpoint as only hearsay or op/ed.  Where I can I will document with legally verifiable data.  Within this discussion I see two different subjects being looked at one, the Echota and two the, concept of state tribes.  The Echota some years ago became embroiled in a dispute involving tribal politics, money, power and maybe other subjects that I may not be aware of.  It digressed to the point of a court battle. I have not researched the outcome of this court fight but it should be public record for those interested.  I have a friend who will be knowledgeable but he is unavailable to talk with for a couple of weeks he is an AIM rep and understandably so, very careful about what he will say both on line as well s on the phone.  Perhaps I will be able to offer up some information about the Echota then.  My observations concerning the concept of state tribes, for over twenty years, are as follows.  There are many out there that I consider to be both counterfeit and dangerous.  Counterfeit due to some pie in the sky concept of just what it is to be Native American from a cultural standpoint.  Too much of a romantic concept based on films etc.  Dangerous because for some of the ignorant, monetary loss and criminal abuse can occur.  I hasten to admit though that I have never encountered the criminal aspect from the state tribes as I believe them to be better regulated.  The criminal element comes mostly from personality cults that prey on the others for money and sex.  I well understand the stand that the CNO has taken.  There is just so much money, Federal and State, to go around and under some circumstances State Tribes can access some of these funds.  Understandably this is the main reason for their stance.  There is another theme that some express pertaining to culture that through ignorance the culture could be adulterated in some way.  Both have merit.  Here, in my opinion, the CNO has dropped the ball.  I would argue that it would be to their advantage to in some way take under their wing some of these State Tribes (heritage groups).  I would argue that in doing so they would be in control and be able to police their culture better.  This concept would also have the effect of them being able to out and out fight the frauds would it not?  As it stands the State Tribes fill a void that the CNO was either unwilling or unable to satisfy.  Thank you for your time.  With respect I am “LittleOldMan
Blind unfocused anger is unproductive and can get you hurt.  Controlled and focused anger directed tactically wins wars. Remember the sheath is not the sword.

Offline Paul123

  • Posts: 148
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #33 on: September 12, 2009, 12:06:50 pm »
I see I have missed a lot of discussion :o It was a long day at work, 12 1/4 hours. It seems Paul took umbrage at my comment; I will confess that i am unfamiliar with the Cherokees of Central Florida....if they are a recognized heritage group or satellite community of enrolled members then that is fine. There are so many fake groups and "tribes" that I can't keep up with them all anymore. I got my information on the Echotas of AL from their website; looked at the photos, read their histories (where did they get the idea that Redbird Smith was Chief of the Cherokee Nation?) The idea of using clans as regional groups is past wrong, and would only be done (in my opinion) if they were unaware of their own clan. I support the efforts of people to reconnect with their ancestral nations but there are many pitfalls along the way. I encourage you to keep seeking, Paul, but the tone of your postings has me concerned that you may veer off into unproductive paths and you are not hearing the calls of concern. I will not judge you as you have me; I have travelled some of the roads you seek.

Well yes I took "umbrage", mostly to the "Maybe they'll make you Chief" part but,
I see that you are an honorable man. I will take you confession of unfamiliarity and offer my apology.  I should not have taken so much offense to your statement.

As for Red Bird Smith ---- I dunno
As for the clans--- you are probability right about why they do it that way. I'd guess that as their membership grew and there were enough members in an area that they would have rather met up with each other in their own area instead of traveling across the state and their clan system formed from that. After all the original Clan systems were based on close family lines and marriage rules. I don't think that the Tribe is worried about who is marring who these days.


And again sir,,, I apologize. 

 

Offline Paul123

  • Posts: 148
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #34 on: September 12, 2009, 12:15:18 pm »
...  Here, in my opinion, the CNO has dropped the ball.  I would argue that it would be to their advantage to in some way take under their wing some of these State Tribes (heritage groups).  I would argue that in doing so they would be in control and be able to police their culture better.  This concept would also have the effect of them being able to out and out fight the frauds would it not?  As it stands the State Tribes fill a void that the CNO was either unwilling or unable to satisfy.  Thank you for your time.  With respect I am “LittleOldMan

LOM,
Thanks I await you input, and your statement above said it well.
My take is that the CNO thinks everyone wants money from them. Not true,,, there are a lot of people out there that would only want membership. 

Offline wolfhawaii

  • Posts: 294
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #35 on: September 12, 2009, 08:13:17 pm »
My interpretation of the official CNO stance is that they take no position on verifying  individual claims to Cherokee ancestry; they have no issue with groups of descendents coming together for the purposes of retaining or relearning cultural traits; but will aggressively defend the political and financial prerogatives of the 3 federally recognized Cherokee governments (CNO, UKB, EBCI) and will not tolerate infringement of their sovereignty. (I am not a spokesman for anybody; this is just my understanding, but i will be eating fried hog in OK next week, yum yum. :))

Offline taraverti

  • Posts: 82
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #36 on: September 12, 2009, 10:04:56 pm »
...  Here, in my opinion, the CNO has dropped the ball.  I would argue that it would be to their advantage to in some way take under their wing some of these State Tribes (heritage groups).  I would argue that in doing so they would be in control and be able to police their culture better.  This concept would also have the effect of them being able to out and out fight the frauds would it not?  As it stands the State Tribes fill a void that the CNO was either unwilling or unable to satisfy.  Thank you for your time.  With respect I am “LittleOldMan

LOM,
Thanks I await you input, and your statement above said it well.
My take is that the CNO thinks everyone wants money from them. Not true,,, there are a lot of people out there that would only want membership. 

I think the CNO has started to address this with the sattelite communities, which is a good thing. Hopefully this is the beginning of some rapproachmont.



Offline Rattlebone

  • Posts: 257
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #37 on: September 13, 2009, 02:08:08 am »
My interpretation of the official CNO stance is that they take no position on verifying  individual claims to Cherokee ancestry; they have no issue with groups of descendents coming together for the purposes of retaining or relearning cultural traits; but will aggressively defend the political and financial prerogatives of the 3 federally recognized Cherokee governments (CNO, UKB, EBCI) and will not tolerate infringement of their sovereignty. (I am not a spokesman for anybody; this is just my understanding, but i will be eating fried hog in OK next week, yum yum. :))

 That is my take on the situation as well.

  The CNO for one, does recognize the fact that their are people of Cherokee descent that can't be enrolled for whatever reason. I do believe on their official website they even mention that, or maybe I read that on their task force thing. However regardless if they do acknowledge the fact of unenrolled people that can not be, they still as you said do not tolerate infringement on the CNO, UKB or EBCI.

Offline LittleOldMan

  • Posts: 138
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #38 on: September 13, 2009, 11:02:59 am »
I really have no problem with their stance on sovereignty.  I am well enough off that I do not covet any privileges that they have as a Fed Tribe.  I also will not be an enrolled member of a State Tribe, my choice.  I think that I would enjoy a cultural center here in Al sponsored by one of the three Tribes.  As it is now all we have is the internet or books.  Distance to OK or NC is prohibitive both in time and money.  If there was an outlet for the dissemination of cultural knowledge somewhat more local that taught true culture most of the State Tribes might then become more heritage organizations and some but not all the problem would cease.  As it stands now there is just too much cultural misinformation out there. I see it at every gathering and powwow.  Then perhaps what you had left would be only the egotistical and the frauds.  Thanks for your time.  "LOM"
« Last Edit: September 13, 2009, 11:06:39 am by LittleOldMan »
Blind unfocused anger is unproductive and can get you hurt.  Controlled and focused anger directed tactically wins wars. Remember the sheath is not the sword.

Offline Paul123

  • Posts: 148
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #39 on: September 13, 2009, 12:57:58 pm »
My last rant,,,
The CNO base their enrollment on the Dawes rolls. So someone that has family on these rolls get their card regardless of BQ. even if it is only 1/256 (all well and good). Then someone like me and hundreds of thousands of others (perhaps even many of you here on this forum) look up their family tree and find themselves for whatever reason in the "outaluck" category. Chad Smith said not to long ago that there are 250,000 Cherokee on the rolls (not sure if this includes the other 2 Tribes) and that there were 500,000 more people that claim to be Cherokee. So there are twice as many outaluckers than enrolled. Anyway an outalucker looks at their tree and sees that they have a much higher BQ than some others, but, but, but, damn...Oh well it's not about BQ anyway.

 Then you hear the excuses why not...

If your ancestors chose to leave the nation and live in another country,,, well all of their descendants will have to live with that,,, Well that all sounds good if you're one of the enrolled but to an outalucker, it's just BS. That would be like saying that all of those Jewish people and their descendants that were rounded up and sent to Hitler's death camps are Jewish and all the rest of you are not. If your family managed to escape the roundup that's great but by doing so they gave up their descendants rights.

OK, so to make that more palatable we have the thingy about "Well you have to realize that we know that you may be of Cherokee descent but, you have to understand that there is a difference between being of descent and having Citizenship".  OK, yea, yea,,, I got it... Screw you too. We'll just go somewhere else and band together without you... after all there are twice as many of us as there are of you.  Then we hear... Oh hell no,, you can't do that either. Well it might be OK if you don't call yourselves a Tribe, band, clan or even Cherokee for that matter, we have a patent on those terms,  and oh, by the way, don't dress like us or dance like us or speak like us and for God's sake don't teach anything to anyone because we know that you have gotten it all wrong... And NO we won't teach you how to do it right! You should be in Jail!

  And to make all of this way worse, there are those who prey upon these groups to get rich, power, sex, did I mention money? (oh yea I did,,,)  and on and on...

I am a thinking person. I over analyze everything. When I start to look at something I see both sides and try to understand them both without bias. Until I start to see things on one side that just don't add up, or seem just flat out wrong. Then I start to take sides. It's human nature to root for an underdog. I have looked at this issue and decided that Dr. Seuss said it best with his book about the Sneetches on the Beach.
 
Here's the story outline.

Sneetches are a group of vaguely avian yellow creatures who live on a beach. Some Sneetches have a green star on their bellies, and in the beginning of the story the absence of a star is the basis for discrimination. Sneetches who have stars on their bellies are part of the "in crowd", while Sneetches without stars are shunned and consequently mopey.
In the story, a "fix-it-up chappie" named Sylvester McMonkey McBean appears, driving a cart of strange machines. He offers the Sneetches without stars a chance to have them by going through his Star-On machine, for three dollars. The treatment is instantly popular, but this upsets the original star-bellied Sneetches, as they are in danger of losing their method for discriminating between Sneetches. Then McBean tells them about his Star-Off machine, costing ten dollars. The Sneetches formerly with stars happily pay the money to have them removed in order to remain special.
However, McBean does not share the prejudices of the Sneetches, and allows the recently starred Sneetches through this machine as well. Ultimately this escalates, with the Sneetches running from one machine to the next,
"until neither the Plain nor the Star-Bellies knew
whether this one was that one or that one was this one
or which one was what one... or what one was who."
This continues until the Sneetches are penniless and McBean departs a rich man, amused by their folly. Despite his assertion that "you can't teach a Sneetch," the Sneetches learn from this experience that neither plain-belly nor star-belly Sneetches are superior, and they are able to get along and become friends.


So now after 40 or 50 years of people with and without stars on thares still running to and fro. And the McBeans (plastic Shamans)  of the world are still getting rich. There are some people that are beginning to see just how foolish all of this is. But with so much water under the bridge and so many bad feelings, I doubt that this issue will come to the happy ending that Dr. Seuss' story did for another 50 years. If ever.

As for me,,, "Screw it"  " I give up",,, I'm getting off of this merry go round. I haven't completed my research to be sure that I am in fact an "Outalucker" but at this point even if I find proof that would allow me Citizenship in the CNO, I don't want to align with a group like that.? And at the same time I don't want to get wrapped up in all of the hassles that go with having to defend one's self for being a member of a State Tribe.  So the only answer (for me)  is,,, SCREW IT,,, And no one will give a rat's ass that I choose to get off of this merry go round. It wasn't meant to be…

 Oh yea,,, I did go to the CNO's satellite group's meeting yesterday.  That was the icing on the cake. I drove 75 miles one way to get there. Only to discover that I was an hour early (well that's better than an hour late). An hour and forty five minutes later a group of 3 or 4 drove up and walked past me carrying some food stuff. (there was suppose to be a pot luck dinner) So I ask them--- "Cherokee Nation" ? Their answer--- " no englase"  (Spanish???) OK,,, I waited another 15 minutes ( now it's been 2 hours) and no one else showed up. So I went back home. Saying SCREW IT, all the way home. The gas I wasted would have gotten me back and forth from work a whole week. It wasn't meant to be… In a month (or less) yous guys will have forgotten all about me.




Offline Moma_porcupine

  • Posts: 684
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #40 on: September 13, 2009, 03:39:45 pm »
Hi Paul

I don't want to disagree with your frustration because it sounds like you have a right to it. But some of what you said in your last post made me want to respond.

I agree the CNO guidelines for enrollment seem kind of arbitrary. It seems like the Dawes roles were originally based on a list of people who were community members in a particualr place and time. On first glance it does seem unfair that a person can be enrolled on the basis of an ancestor being on the Dawes roll, but if someone can prove their own ancestor was this persons sibling, the person not on the Dawes roll is outaluck.

The problem is, as soon as there is a need to define membership eligibility, and create a non flexible cut off point , there is going to be people who feel they are unfairly on the wrong side of the line.

If the cut off point is flexible, then there would be a problem with arbitrary choices being made based on personal likes and dislikes...

People who are close to full blood can be outaluck just because they don't have enough BQ from any one tribe to meet any tribe enrollment standards. Someone who grew up in a Native community with a parent in a Native community who finds they are ineligible to enroll anywhere would also feel this was unfair. As another example, I think the Hopi only enroll if the matrilineal line is Hopi and people with a Hopi father and non Hopi mother are also outaluck.

No matter where you draw the line, this will seem unfair in some situations.

Now as for the CNO's cut off point...  I suspect one of the reasons there is so many bogus Cherokee tribes is not so much because the cut off point seems arbitrary, ( many tribes have this ) But it is that the CNO allows people with a very low BQ to enroll, which  inspires a lot of PODIAs to point at the CNO and say "Hey if they are Cherokee and have 1/ 250 BQ, then so am I."   

Paul   
Quote
If your ancestors chose to leave the nation and live in another country,,, well all of their descendants will have to live with that,,, Well that all sounds good if you're one of the enrolled but to an outalucker, it's just BS. That would be like saying that all of those Jewish people and their descendants that were rounded up and sent to Hitler's death camps are Jewish and all the rest of you are not. If your family managed to escape the roundup that's great but by doing so they gave up their descendants rights.

Another way to look at this is that lots of people were forcibly removed from their original Nations and have over time assimilated into American society . For instance , there was the Africans brought here as slaves , and the Scots and Irish who's stories in many ways are not that different than what happened to the Cherokee.

These people are all descendants and no one denies this part of their heritage may be an important part of who they are. However even though their ancestors may have been African , irish or Scotish and in many cases were wrongly forced from their homelands against their will, after a couple generations these people are not eligible for citizenship or benifits in their ancestors Nations.  If these descendents get together and begin declaring themselves soviergn Nations of Africa / Ireland/ Scotland, the soveirnty of these countries is taken seriously enough people would usually see these folks as a bunch of flakes.

So it seems even stranger when people of predomninantly English / Irish / Scots or African heritage try and declare them self a Nation - and they don't even use the National identity of the largest majority of their own ancestors, but instead try and claim the national identity of a group their own ancestors helped wipe out....

It seems the basis of this choice is often the same racial biases that allowed their non native ancestors to push the cherokee people from their homelands in the first place. 

All too often Native people are seen as toys or not real and not having real rights to their land, homes , identity or National soverighnty .

I think that is the problem.

As for culture ... I think some parts of culture can be learned with your head but most of culture is about love and deeply interconnected relationships with real people, real values, real history and the real land where people live. Expecting the 250,000 enrolled Cherokee people to have the energy to build relationships with the 500,000 claiments is a lot to expect . Espcially as many of this 500,000 who would come forward would be approaching Cherokee culture with a lot of non Cherokee assumptions and world views.

Being realistic, and practically speaking, could this even work?

If you think it could , how would you envision this ?

As I said i don't mean to criticize you for your frustration, as you seem sincere and how you feel is undertstandable, but I think there is a lot some reasons behind what you are experiencing that deserve more respect and consideration than the silly and vain star belly sneaches..     

   
« Last Edit: September 13, 2009, 03:54:54 pm by Moma_porcupine »

Offline Don Naconna

  • Posts: 257
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #41 on: September 13, 2009, 06:23:18 pm »
I enrolled in the Echota Cherokee Tribe because when I did some genealogical research I discovered a long lost cousin who was an enrolled member. I also have ancestors on both the Guinion and Dawes Rolls, however I had no contact with that branch of the family in my life. I've never even been to Alabama except during the civil rights movement (Selma). When I spoke to other members I realised that I had nothing in common with them, as far as politics, religion or world view. I've never been at all involved in tribal affairs and never intend to be. I am a Canadian citizen and have been for over 40 years, this is my home, my nation and my people.
I agree with Paul about enrolling in the federal Cherokee tribes, frankly, as a mixed blood and having not grown up in Indian communities I do not consider myself to be an Indian. Having Indian blood does NOT make you Indian. I speak French, but to my wife's family, that doesn't make me French Canadian. It makes me sick to see people who learn a few words of Tsalagi and use them constantly, or people who claim to be Cherokee and use Chacta words.
Because of my commitment to human rights and social justice, I've become involved in exposing Indian frauds and exploiters and have been in this group from a few years. Thats why I've been so active in exposing black Indian cults and phonies, because I truly believe that they are seeking to get benefits they do not deserve. Some like Tecumseh Brown Eagle are simply trying to rip off Indian people. Others like Jerry Monroe and the Binay are simply business ventures selling memberships to black people who want to be anything but black. BTW anyone who wants to confront the Nuwaubians should join luv4self_network@yahoogroups.com.
In closing, I would like to say that I believe that the whole system is wrong. Its a relic of paternalism and forces isolation and bigotry. I believe that in both Canada and the states its time to re-examine all relationships between tribes and government. I would argue that far too many people want to be Indian because they want something from government, either money, casinos, healthcare, scholarships etc. I have argued that if black folks ever got reparations for slavery, half of white Americans would find some slave in their family tree.

Offline Defend the Sacred

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3430
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #42 on: September 13, 2009, 07:26:46 pm »
I have argued that if black folks ever got reparations for slavery, half of white Americans would find some slave in their family tree.

Excellent comparison. And it would be the ancestor they currently deny was Black. Or the branch of the family they pretend didn't exist.

And how would Black people feel if suddenly people with white skin privilege, people who have grown up with all the benefits of being 99% Euro-American, were suddenly demanding to be "recognized" as Black. Even better, you know some of the white people would set themselves up as the "real" Black people, and find a way to say they were more Black than the Black people.

"I'm Black IN MY HEART!!!"  ;)

Offline Don Naconna

  • Posts: 257
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #43 on: September 14, 2009, 09:12:10 pm »
Black wannabees usually are people who have family stories of mythical Indian ancestors. None has any documentation. This one black super wannabee who haunts yahoogroups, has claimed to be Chacta, Cherokee, Olmec, Yamasee and more. Some like the Erie Moundbuilders Tribe base their claims on the myths of Africans in prehistoric America, Tecumseh Brown Eagle their "chief: may even get a casino. There is a thread about TBE and a white wannabee who stole a Shawnes family's genealogy! Dualing wannabees!
As long as race/ethnicity has a dollar value attached there will be phonies trying to get something for nothing. Black people believe that Indians got "reparations" because most have no understanding of history and don't know what treaties are. Some who claim Indian blood hate Indians, because they are black supremacists like the Washitaw/Nuwaubian/Moundbuilders.
As I said if reparations for slavery were ever granted, which will never happen, white folks would be claiming their ancestors slaves were really their cousins...

Offline wolfhawaii

  • Posts: 294
Re: Echota Cherokee
« Reply #44 on: September 22, 2009, 05:11:11 am »
(quote by Moma Porcupine) Expecting the 250,000 enrolled Cherokee people to have the energy to build relationships with the 500,000 claiments is a lot to expect . Espcially as many of this 500,000 who would come forward would be approaching Cherokee culture with a lot of non Cherokee assumptions and world views.(end quote)
 
I agree with this statement; I think it is a large part of the problem. I just got back from Oklahoma, visiting the ceremonial grounds I belong to. The wife of the 2nd chief told me about a couple of women who showed up there sometime back wearing buckskin dresses and dancing around the fire with a hawk wing they pulled off a roadkilled hawk, bloody meat and all. The more masculine of the two tried to make a speech at the fire,  much to the consternation of officials. I know of a number of cases of people who successfully integrated into communities, but there are far more who get themselves run off. Maybe that's why they make their own "tribes"; they can make it all up and not have to be accountable to an actual community. As far as federally  unrecognized "Cherokee" organizations go, I have not yet seen one that has all the elements of real culture. :'(