Mt. Rushmore Site Should Be Returned To Indigenous Native American Tribes

[Rams]

Mt. Rushmore Site Should Be Returned To Indigenous Native American Tribes, U.N. Official Says
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/07/mt-rushmore-un-report-james-anaya_n_1496120.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmaing7%7Cdl3%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D158545

South Dakota's Black Hills, home to the granite faces carved into Mt. Rushmore, should be restored as Native American tribal lands, a United Nations official recently said.

James Anaya, a U.N. special rapporteur on the rights of indigenous people, completed a fact-finding mission on Friday that included meetings with a number of Native American tribal leaders as well as White House officials. His investigation led him to suggest that the United States take additional steps to repair the nation's legacy of oppression against Native Americans. He'll officially propose the plan in an upcoming report. From the Associated Press:

Anaya said land restoration would help bring about reconciliation. He named the Black Hills as an example. He said restoring to indigenous people what they have a legitimate claim to can be done in a way that is not divisive "so that the Black Hills, for example, isn't just a reminder of the subordination and domination of indigenous peoples in that country."
 The Black Hills, home to Mount Rushmore, are public land but are considered sacred by the Sioux tribes. The Sioux have refused to accept money awarded in a 1980 U.S. Supreme Court decision and have sought return of the land. The Black Hills and other lands were set aside for the Sioux in an 1868 treaty. But Congress passed a law in 1877 taking the land.


According to Anaya, handing over these lands would be a key step toward repairing relations with the indigenous people who once controlled them. It would also further the nation's compliance with the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, a measure that President Barack Obama endorsed in 2010, reversing a previous vote.

"I have heard stories that make evident the profound hurt that indigenous peoples continue to feel because of the history of oppression they have faced," Anaya said Friday in a statement issued by the U.N. human rights office in Geneva. "Securing the rights of indigenous peoples to their lands is of central importance to indigenous peoples' socioeconomic development, self-determination, and cultural integrity. ... Continued efforts to resolve, clarify, and strengthen the protection of indigenous lands, resources, and sacred sites should be made."

Anaya will outline a full set of recommendations regarding Native American relations in a report set to be released later this year.
***************************

Although some will disagree, all I've got to say is, I don't agree.

[DirtyDan]

i would saw the native americans got one of the rawest deals in history

that being said

should we give them back the whole contenient ?

dan

[The Anvil]

i would saw the native americans got one of the rawest deals in history

that being said

should we give them back the whole contenient ?

dan

To your 1st point; YES. The gonocide of the native Americans is the most complete in history. The Holocaust pales by comparison.

To your second point; NO (and I think we're in agreement).

Look, every nation has dark periods in it's history. That was our big one. What determines the greatness of your nation is not whether or not you have wrongs in your past because every nation has them. What determines your greatness is how you learn from and respond to them.

White settlers won. They did it in a cruel and callous fashion and with lots of dirty tricks but but a W is a W. It's "ours" now. Nobody is required to like it but it is what it is.

[tank_post142]

  How far should we go back? the Celts originated in western china, they pushed the Germanic tribes out of what is now the middle east.
  I am Metis and would stand to benefit from any giveback, but it's ridiculous to even suggest such a thing. kinda tells you a lot about the UN doesn't it? 
 

[The Anvil]

Israel? Anyone?

[BF]

Maybe the muslims should give back Europe and lower Michigan.  While we're at it, the blacks should give back all of the inner cities too.  And let's not forget China Town......they should give that back too.  And all of the euro-whites should move back to Europe too.  

[robin]

They lost get over it!!!!!!

[Serk]

Well... we should definitely give New York back to the Native Americans that original inhabited the area!

...not all of it, mind you... just the part currently being occupied by the UN headquarters...

[Fudd]

I just don't see Mt. Rushmore being returned to the Native American people and then being restored to it's original state.  Too many Americans recognize it as one of our most important national treasures.

I would be in favor of, in mitigation, return another suitable area of the Black Hills to the Native Americans.  I would like them to be able to govern it in any way they choose without the United States' authority.

[tank_post142]

didn't we have a little war a while back concerning secession ?

[TGViper]

It's time to move on.  In S.D., the native americans can have casinos, free education, subsidized housing, etc.. But, for a lot of them, this means being lazy, playing the victim, etc.. 

Get over it.  It is now the year 2012.  What happened to your great great great relatives is ancient history. 

[Willow]

Some of my ancestors were Choctaw.  The Choctaw suffered much at the hands of the resettlement of the North American continent.

I find ridiculous some of the emotional stuff that goes around about what should belong to the Indians and what should be given back to them.  

Interestingly the Plains Indians had no concept of ownership of land, but now they want given back to them what their ancestors did not consider theirs to own?  They did have a strong sense of territory and their idea of territory was based on the idea of what they could dominate by force over neighboring tribes.  Just as an aside, some of the most violent slaughters of Indians were at the hands of other Indians.  Truly, peoples all over this world have been displacing other peoples for as long as there have been peoples.

I won't tell anyone there wasn't wrong done, but I will say that the popular notion of the evil Europeans stealing life, liberty, and happiness from the peaceful, pastoral natives is hogwash.

Pretty well across the board, with some exception, the worst off economically and socially of the Indians of North American are the ones living on land controlled by their own tribes.  The best off are the millions who have become a part of the American population as a whole.  More and better land won't change that in my humble opinion.

"The Holocaust pales by comparison."  Really? Get a grip on reality.  There were roughly six million Indians living in North America when the Europeans began to come ashore.  The Europeans displaced most of them over a period of three hundred years.  The Nazi regime slaughtered over six million Jews in less than five years.

I think we should treat the remaining Indians that desire to remain with their own people in their own cultural environments with respect and a reasonable amount of generosity and the opportunity for some autonomy.  I don't think the government of the United States of America should get involved in "returning" large tracts of land to Indian nations.  I'm opposed to it not only because of what would be the result of the first wave, but I really don't want to open up the can of worms that would be the questions of what the Shawnee owe the Cherokee or the Kiowa owe the Ute.  Then, of course, there are those pre-Columbian peoples who have completely disappeared at the hand of the surviving Indian peoples.  Who will collect the debt owed them?  

I say keep the Black Hills and tell the U.N. to butt out.    

[Tailgate Tommy]

ad victorem spolias

To the victor go the spoils.

[Fudd]

I don't see giving an area of land back to the Indians any different than creating a Jewish state (Israel) in the middle east.

Where possible, shouldn't every group of people have a homeland?  We go to a lot of trouble to see that the Jews are able to keep theirs.

I'm sure that the Naive American people never thought of the concept of land ownership until some white settlers told them that this now "their" land.

[tank_post142]

they currently have approx. 55.7 million acres ( 2.3% of the U.S.A)       population 4.1 million
conversely, Israel covers approx. 5.54 million acres.                           population = 7.63 million

[jer0177]

Just as an aside, some of the most violent slaughters of Indians were at the hands of other Indians.  Truly, peoples all over this world have been displacing other peoples for as long as there have been peoples.

My family tree goes back to East Texas and a settlement called Ft. Parker.  There was a family that homesteaded there from Illinois and built a fort.  The Comanche Indians attacked Ft. Parker in 1836 and killed most of the inhabitants, but captured a few.  Cynthia Ann Parker was one of the children captured - she was 9 years old - and was raised as a Comanche.  She fathered a son - Quanah Parker - who became the last Comanche Chief. 

Read the Fort Parker massacre article.  Definitely brutal.

Also, slave traders did not go into the African continent to capture people to bring over for the slave trade.  They were sold to the slave traders by the tribes that won the battles they fought - so in other words - they were captured and sold by their own people.

So if we give Mt. Rushmore back, as others have asked, where does it stop?

[The Anvil]

Willow, when I said that the holocaust "pales by comparison" I was not speaking of bodycount. I was speaking of the ultimate effect it had on the targeted people. The Jews have recovered quite nicely and are thriving as a people. Native American culture is still on life support.

[DavRed]

'' The best off are the millions who have become a part of the American population as a whole ''                                   
screw the  u n                              $.02

The same can be said about ANY Race, Creed?, or Color. If your PEOPLES are downtroden in the USA today. I sugest you look to your People and not the goverment to fix the problem. I will go see the black hills and be proud of what them boys did to the side of a mountian. 

[alph]

Native American culture is still on life support.

somebody should pull the plug, just like i'm sick of hearing about that "400 years of slavery" thing.

when i was a kid we would go to a place called Wisconsin Dells.  they use to have native american dance ritchuals and displays of their culture.  now, there's a cosino and discount cigarettes, nothing "indian" about it, and not a single display of the true indian  way of life. 

i use to know of three school systems that had an Indian Chief as a logo, now we find out that it's offensive and those schools are now "bird" names or someother animal. 

soon, indians will only be known for their casinos and cigarettes.  now that's progress isn't it?

[Jack]

The Indian hunted and fished all day while the woman cooked, cleaned, sewed, made pots, gathered wood for fire, etc, etc.  How could the Europeans think they could improve on that.  I don't know about land but I would take back the life-style.

BTW, my great-grandmother was Cherokee.

[RainMaker]

Well... we should definitely give New York back to the Native Americans that original inhabited the area!

...not all of it, mind you... just the part currently being occupied by the UN headquarters...

+1

[Jabba]

The reservations are some of the saddest places I have ever seen.  And a great example of what happens to people when you GIVE them enough to get by on...

They then... barely get by, do nothing for themselves, and are abused by the few who are industrious enough to build and run casinos and discount cigarette outlets.  Those guys are rich.   

Jabba

[The Anvil]

Well... we should definitely give New York back to the Native Americans that original inhabited the area!

...not all of it, mind you... just the part currently being occupied by the UN headquarters...

+1

Yeah give them back the financial center of the universe. That's bright idea.

[~ Timbrwolf]

...First time Chili and I came around the bend and saw MT Rushmore in person it was awe inspiring. Unfortunately, we spent less then 5 minutes enjoying it...(big lesson learned).  We also stopped at Devils Tower..(Close Encounters of a Third Kind). I was struck by the fact that it was extremely commercial on the "American side"...and totally natural on the opposite side where the local Indians treated it as a shrine and would place offerings there. (They believe its the entrance to the after life.)


The atrocities that were visited upon the indigenous people of this land we call America, have long been documented, and us Europeans have a long grisly history of mistreating others. Living in Northern Michigan I was amused when I first moved here to see so many things with "Indian names" and named after Indians....considering we slaughtered them and took everything they had...including their culture.
But Im also amused when I go to the local casino,s for their Buffet..(I dont gamble in them)...and see all those clueless Americans sitting their like zombies in that huge windowless room until they leave ..(without their money)....Indian Revenge ?

[musclehead]

i would saw the native americans got one of the rawest deals in history

that being said

should we give them back the whole contenient ?

dan

To your 1st point; YES. The gonocide of the native Americans is the most complete in history. The Holocaust pales by comparison.

To your second point; NO (and I think we're in agreement).

Look, every nation has dark periods in it's history. That was our big one. What determines the greatness of your nation is not whether or not you have wrongs in your past because every nation has them. What determines your greatness is how you learn from and respond to them.

White settlers won. They did it in a cruel and callous fashion and with lots of dirty tricks but but a W is a W. It's "ours" now. Nobody is required to like it but it is what it is.

every nation on earth has a similar dark story, and no they don't like ot talk about it.

gotta agree with Mr. Anvil

[Fudd]

they currently have approx. 55.7 million acres ( 2.3% of the U.S.A)       population 4.1 million
conversely, Israel covers approx. 5.54 million acres.                           population = 7.63 million

To read these stats, you'd of thought we overcompensated them.  No mention of how much of this land was useless real estate that no one wanted.

[Oss]

Willow, as usual,  an interesting read

War has been around a long time

Slavery was not a European invention

Polygamy is also an ancient tradition and in the animal kingdom a male has as many females as he
can catch before a stronger male kicks his butt

Self defense is a right of people and nations.

What is new under the sun?

To me what is new is this concept of entitlement

This concept to me is an abomination, whether its govmt paying children to have children or paying people to come here and get our money for nothing or affirmative action which says person A is not equal to person B in applying for school or employment or housing or medical care

Now before Anvil or someone else gets all hot under the collar I am not talking about a safety net for those who need it, who have been hurt, who are unable ever to take care of  themselves because of disability

We the people are supposed to be making this union a better place by WORKING to make it a
better place

And by the way, I find the one wife to be more than enough to deal with, I dont own any slaves and I
havent declared war on anyone yet, but its only 1237 pm.

[musclehead]

Willow, when I said that the holocaust "pales by comparison" I was not speaking of bodycount. I was speaking of the ultimate effect it had on the targeted people. The Jews have recovered quite nicely and are thriving as a people. Native American culture is still on life support.

spoken like a nor'easterner, I have met some Indians in the southwest and they would probably disagree. you can catch radio programs on the am side in native tongue.

[musclehead]

I got some Cherokee in me, a few generations ago. not visible in my face but my uncle and my grandma both show native lineage.

[Serk]

Well... we should definitely give New York back to the Native Americans that original inhabited the area!

...not all of it, mind you... just the part currently being occupied by the UN headquarters...

+1

Yeah give them back the financial center of the universe. That's bright idea.

Foghorn Leghorn	powered by Aeva

[jer0177]

Re: Jews vs Native Americans

Jewish people oppressed by Hitler's regime were European.

Native Americans oppressed by settlers were of Asian descent.  Same with the indigenous peoples of lower North America (Mexico).  When the Spanish invaded lower North America, they didn't "divide and conquer" the natives - they integrated.

Spanish civilization is advanced.  European civilization is advanced.  Upper North American civilization is advanced.  Some parts of Asian civilization is advanced, some isn't.  Mexican civilization isn't. 

I'm betting that Native Americans, no matter what would have happened to them, would not have advanced without help from somewhere else.

My US History course in college taught me that the Native Americans spent roughly 4 hours a day working to sustain their lives.  The rest of the time was spent in recreation.  Simply put, they weren't working to advance themselves - and the condition of "reservations" shows that, except for the few studious ones that have started to take advantage of the opportunity.

[FPG52]

Don't assume your history course in college was totally representative of many societies.. We lump Native American"as one group... They were many tribes operating I independently and many tried to conquer other tribes... Being territorial was not just a white man's idea.

But that is not the main issue as I see it... We are a sovergn nation and NO International agency should have any say on our actions of the past...and decide how we should deal with it.  It's his opinion and frankly I would like to tell him to go pound salt!  However our administration in Washington will spend my tax dollars to have meetings and studies to listen to this ineffective organization that likes to pound it's chest and tell the free world how it should act!

In the meantime waring nations in Africa are committing similar actions NOW but no UN? 

As Clark said many years ago.... "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn"

[alph]

Re: Jews vs Native Americans

Jewish people oppressed by Hitler's regime were European.

not only that, but i don't recall our government hording up as many indians as they could just to kill 'em the way hitler did.  i'm no historian, but maybe anvil will prove me wrong.....  he seems to throw out the Jew issue alot when ever he's making an argument over race, whether it concerns black slavery, or native americans.....

[Fudd]

Willow, as usual,  an interesting read

War has been around a long time

Slavery was not a European invention

Polygamy is also an ancient tradition and in the animal kingdom a male has as many females as he
can catch before a stronger male kicks his butt

Self defense is a right of people and nations.

What is new under the sun?

To me what is new is this concept of entitlement

This concept to me is an abomination, whether its govmt paying children to have children or paying people to come here and get our money for nothing or affirmative action which says person A is not equal to person B in applying for school or employment or housing or medical care

Now before Anvil or someone else gets all hot under the collar I am not talking about a safety net for those who need it, who have been hurt, who are unable ever to take care of  themselves because of disability

We the people are supposed to be making this union a better place by WORKING to make it a
better place

And by the way, I find the one wife to be more than enough to deal with, I dont own any slaves and I
havent declared war on anyone yet, but its only 1237 pm.

I would like to think that between the time of the cave drawings and 12:37 pm today, we've gotten past the concept of "to the victors comes the spoils" attitude.  If not, lets just throw a big world war and let it be "winner take all."

I oppose all the entitlement programs, also.  We have a whole class of people with the attitude that the more babies they can pump out, the more money they are entitled to.  My feelings on this are not racist, it seems like all colors and creeds (Native Americans included) have members that would prefer to be in the freebee line because it is "owed" to them.

With the case of the Indians, we exterminated most of them, forced the rest in cesspool reservations and told them to go ahead and prosper.  These people were a very successful group that were used to an open range lifestyle and weren't going to be compatable with the modern American way.  They were in the way.

Native Americans were a spiritual people.  We did everything in the world to break that spirit.  The way I see it, granting them control of a few of their sacred places, would help the esteem of the Indian people and be a good thing.

[fiddle mike]

Israel? Anyone?

 

[fiddle mike]

Re: Jews vs Native Americans

Jewish people oppressed by Hitler's regime were European.

not only that, but i don't recall our government hording up as many indians as they could just to kill 'em the way hitler did.  i'm no historian, but maybe anvil will prove me wrong.....  he seems to throw out the Jew issue alot when ever he's making an argument over race, whether it concerns black slavery, or native americans.....

You ought to do your homework. 

Maybe Anvil's  wondering why it's OK to send Native Americans to fight and die for the security of Israel when they don't enjoy full religious freedom, to this very day.
Proportionally, more Native Americans serve in the US military than any other ethic minority, yet they receive the least amount of Federal funds.  

[The Anvil]

Re: Jews vs Native Americans

Jewish people oppressed by Hitler's regime were European.

not only that, but i don't recall our government hording up as many indians as they could just to kill 'em the way hitler did.  i'm no historian, but maybe anvil will prove me wrong.....  he seems to throw out the Jew issue alot when ever he's making an argument over race, whether it concerns black slavery, or native americans.....

I'll agree with you on this; the systematic way the Nazis went about extermination was unprecedented. The Germans applied everything they'd learned up until that time (which was a LOT) to maximize the efficiency of extinction. Much of the plight of Native Americans was not direct malice but through displacement and the virtual extermination of one of their primary food sources (the Buffalo). But if the end result of malice and depraved indifference are the same then genocide is genocide, isn't it?

Let's play a game of Who Said It? "..it is of incalculable importance that America, Australia, and Siberia should pass out of the hands of their red, black, and yellow aboriginal owners, and become the heritage of the dominant world races."



And the only reason why I bring up the Jews is because I find it curious that so many supporters of Israel get so offended at the idea of giving American Indians a true nation of their own not subject to the laws of the US government. The UN effectively created the country of Israel (yeah I know, Britain donated the land yadda-yadda). So why is it such an outlandish suggestion that American Indians get the same consideration? I mean I don't think that giving them Mt. Rushmore is the answer and with Israel what's done is done but I think the contrast in attitudes is interesting.

[Valker]

No one seems to be taking the New Americans' perspective on the Native American issues of the past. In the 17th and 18th centuries, it was common, indeed, the expected outcome of any battle/war that the conquered peoples were to be killed or turned into slaves by the conquerors. The idea of giving the defeated groups ANY land (of ANY kind) to live as they wished, was a new and progressive idea (at that time). Human history is rife with these type of examples.
Things have changed so very much in the past 100 years (ever see the movie "The Mouse that Roared"?)

[Willow]

I would like to think that between the time of the cave drawings and 12:37 pm today, we've gotten past the concept of "to the victors comes the spoils" attitude.  If not, lets just throw a big world war and let it be "winner take all."

I oppose all the entitlement programs, also.  We have a whole class of people with the attitude that the more babies they can pump out, the more money they are entitled to.  My feelings on this are not racist, it seems like all colors and creeds (Native Americans included) have members that would prefer to be in the freebee line because it is "owed" to them.

With the case of the Indians, we exterminated most of them, forced the rest in cesspool reservations and told them to go ahead and prosper.  These people were a very successful group that were used to an open range lifestyle and weren't going to be compatable with the modern American way.  They were in the way.

Native Americans were a spiritual people.  We did everything in the world to break that spirit.  The way I see it, granting them control of a few of their sacred places, would help the esteem of the Indian people and be a good thing.

Fudd, I applaud your perspective, especially your rejection of the spoils to the victor concept.  I do see a couple of problems, though.  One is that although it's a popular myth that Indians were living in prosperity and peace before the Europeans came, it is a myth.  That said, I do acknowledge that different tribes in different regions lived in varied states of social and political development, but fee, if any, met the picture we've been presented of tranquil and prosperous pre-Columbian bliss.

Many years ago when I was attending college classes, there was a popular television advertisement rebuking modern Americans for their littering, their desecration of the landscape.  The advert showed an old Indian canoeing along a tranquil stream with all the beauty of unspoiled nature around him.  He brought his canoe to the shore and step out onto the shoulder of a highway where someone threw a bag of trash from a passing car.  As the trash landed at his feet the camera tightened into the old Indian's face to show a single tear rolling down his cheek.

My econ instructor informed us that was a good ad with strong emotional appeal, but the only problem was that prior to the arrival of European civilization, that Indian would've been dead twenty years before the age they showed him.

I agree with my econ professor, but there is exaggeration in both directions.

The big problem is if we decide to give some back, how much do we give?  Obviously some will claim their barbarian ancestors had it all.  Can we at least hold back a few reservations in Oklahoma for the non-indigenous Americans?  What about improvements on the land?  Normally when property is returned to its rightful owner, the improvements are included.  What do we do with the partial Indians who have lost touch with their "natural" heritage?

It's going to be complicated, but I just don't see how we can turn back the clock and reverse the direction of those boats.  Hey there's a thought.  What if we ran the simulation so that the Europeans left the Aztecs and Incas alone long enough for them to invent gunpowder?  What if they would've sailed east and conquered Europe?  Will we owe then Europe also?

Okay, I'm rambling, but the point is you have a good heart, but I don't see a practical application of trying to undo past wrongs by taking from the descendants of some and giving to the descendants of others.  Then, of course, there are those of us who are descendants of both.

What can we do?    

[Willow]

And the only reason why I bring up the Jews is because I find it curious that so many supporters of Israel get so offended at the idea of giving American Indians a true nation of their own not subject to the laws of the US government. The UN effectively created the country of Israel (yeah I know, Britain donated the land yadda-yadda). So why is it such an outlandish suggestion that American Indians get the same consideration? I mean I don't think that giving them Mt. Rushmore is the answer and with Israel what's done is done but I think the contrast in attitudes is interesting.

Jameson, that's the second time you've erroneously mentioned how the U.N. "effectively created the country of Israel."  I know it was before you or I were born, but you might want to recheck your history books.  The U.N. recognized the state of Israel.  That is a way of saying they admitted the state actually already existed.  The Israelis at that time already controlled the territory that the U.N. acknowledged they had.  Britain's part was simply to stop fighting against Israeli control and withdraw from their protectorate.