Turtle Talk

The Introduction to “The New Trail of Tears” (TNToT), written by Naomi Schaefer Riley (NSR or the author), frames the book as an attack on the United States’ Indian policies. For NSR, it the federal government’s poor governance in the area of Indian affairs that is behind the poor state of Indian peoples’ lives.

The trap for readers is that TNToT seems like a reform minded book with deep sympathy for Indian people, with the federal government as the bad guy. It’s not. At best, TNToT is paternalism, termination era- and allotment era-style liberalism. NSR characterizes the Indians that live in Indian country as poor, alcoholic, suicidal rapists. Or really, really sad people who are always slowly shaking their heads (classic Vanishing Indian stuff). 

At worst, this is paid propaganda for conservative organizations that tend to support the view that the federal government is a terrible thing. For NSR, Indians are either victims or perpetrators, and need to be saved or punished. Finally, and in my view most importantly, TNToT throughout ignores tribal and Indian property rights, which is ironic given that NSR will frequently refer to property rights as a justification for her conclusions.

Let’s begin with the Introduction.

TNToT Depends on the Myth that All Indian Nations are the Same

TNToT focuses on several specific Indian nations, but there are 567 federally recognized Indian tribes. Not all are the same. And yet on page viii, NSR writes that we have “what amounts to a third world country within our borders.” This might seem like nitpicking, but statements like these lead readers to believe that all Indian nations are the same. Readers likely know very little about any Indian nations. Some are very traditional and isolated. Some are very traditional and urban. Some have resources. Others do not. Each Indian nation has its own history, and each Indian nation has differences. There is no massive glob of federal/tribal land in the middle of the US somewhere that houses all Indian nations.

Throughout TNToT, NSR asserts terrible things about specific Indian tribes, and explicitly or implicitly applies those things to all tribes. Keep reading future posts and you’ll see.

TNToT Assumes that Federal Spending on Indian Affairs Continuously Rises 

TNToT paints a picture of federal Indian affairs policy as something as simple as federal money administered by federal bureaucrats on reservation lands. And that federal money grows and grows and grows. This is just false. TNToT ignores completely reports such as “A Quiet Crisis: Federal Funding and Unmet Needs In Indian Country.” TNToT will often reference Obama era budget requests — budget requests are not budgets.

TNToT draws from anti-government commentaries and asserts there are 9000 BIA/BIE employees, 1 per every 111 Indians living on reservations [at ix]. Of course, that number is down considerably from the years before the beginning of the self-determination era — 16,000 — and has been falling ever since. I found that number in the first edition of Getches et al., Cases and Materials on Federal Indian Law at 125. This omission of fact is either sloppy reporting or selective reporting. Context matters.

Continue reading →

Boozhoo!!

Over the next couple of weeks I’ll be reviewing and commenting on a new book by Naomi Schaefer Riley, “The New Trail of Tears: How Washington is Destroying American Indians.” (link to Peter D’Errico’s review here). DO NOT READ THIS BOOK if you are a supporter of tribal interests and the future of Indian people, unless you’re interested in learning about a game plan to send 21st century Indian people on a new trail of tears. Because, to be blunt, that’s what this book is about.

There are five chapters, plus an introduction and a conclusion. I’ll have a short post on the introduction chapter later today, and will try to follow up on each chapter every other day or so.

This book focuses on a small number of Indian nations around the country — Crow Nation, Northern Cheyenne Tribe, Seneca Nation of Indians, Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina, Oglala Sioux Tribe, and Rosebud Sioux Tribe. The author has found a lot of extremely negative things to say about these tribes in particular, and implicitly is generalizing about all of Indian country when she does. If you’re a tribal member from these communities, or work with or for these communities, I’d love to hear your perspective (either on my commentaries or on the book itself). I know fairly little about these tribes (although I did work for the Seneca Nation appellate court from afar for a few years), and won’t have much to say about the details in the book. Feed me.

Additionally, I call upon anyone interviewed by Ms. Schaefer Riley to comment. I’m absolutely positive at least one of her interview subjects won’t be happy about how they are quoted or characterized. I know from personal experience how journalists can, even in good faith, misquote.

Mino-bimaadziwin.