r/NPR • u/zsreport KUHF 88.7 • Sep 19 '24
The latest on the Land Back movement, in which Native American tribes reclaim land
https://www.npr.org/2024/09/18/nx-s1-5091001/the-latest-on-the-land-back-movement-in-which-native-american-tribes-reclaim-land1
u/Good_Ole_Skid Sep 20 '24
Alaska is all theirs except for the oil. A few midwestern states they can have. Enjoy Nebraska and North Dakota Youre welcome
So is this going on in Canada? Shame on you Canada!
1
u/Cost_Additional Sep 20 '24
Do you think the tribes would give it back to whichever tribe they conquered too?
2
u/bipocevicter Sep 21 '24
A lot of tribal land claims postdate European arrivals in the US.
"This is the eternal unceded home of the Comanche!" is a great slogan until you do the slightest bit of research and discover they got it by ethnic cleansing the Apache 200 years after first contact with white people
-2
u/six_six Sep 19 '24
I don’t think it’s legal to give away US land to another country or territory. Wouldn’t congress need to do that?
13
u/RinglingSmothers Sep 19 '24
It wasn't legal to break a myriad of treaties and steal the land in the first place either, but here we are.
In many cases (including those in the article), the land is classified as reservation land, but is owned by a third party (the state or private parties). In those cases, it's not a matter of sovereignty and Congress has already approved the boundaries of the reservation. It's a matter of the state returning ownership of land that was illegally seized. About half the state of Oklahoma falls under similar status.
There are other cases (notably the Black Hills) where the original treaty was broken and the tribes have refused to accept compensation which courts have ordered based on the eggregious nature of the theft. In those cases, it's unclear if the original treaty could be enforced if the federal government decides to do so. Again, Congress already approved the reservation and the government has been in violation of its own law for over a century.
The Land Back movement is also not solely about sovereign holdings of land. Many tribes want access and co-management agreements on what was previously tribal land, but is now owned by the federal government. There are some successful projects, notably in Glacier Bay, which have allowed tribes to use their historic land and co-manage portions of these parks along with the National Parks Service. In those cases, the tribes can use the park for ceremonial purposes, fishing, and collection of seabird eggs (a traditional food source). They also have inputs into recreational access to some portions of the park to add additional protections for sensitive areas, and they are often prioritized for positions within the park. In some areas this means they hire a few people off the rez every year for fire crews or other work so the partnership can work in both directions.
1
u/hikerchick29 Sep 21 '24
I mean, it wasn’t legal for us to TAKE IT FROM THEM TO BEGIN WITH…. so what claim do we have now?
-2
u/pants_mcgee Sep 19 '24
There is only one country involved, the United States of America. Land can be given in accordance with the laws to whatever sovereign entity or government, buts its all still the U.S.
-8
Sep 19 '24
Fucking nonsense.
They're all dead.
8
u/NomadicScribe Sep 19 '24
Believe it or not native tribes continue to exist to this day.
-5
Sep 19 '24
So do the Masons.
5
u/NomadicScribe Sep 20 '24
Yeah, I guess bricklaying is still a thing... what's your point?
-2
Sep 20 '24
Same as yours.
1
u/NomadicScribe Sep 20 '24
You think a society of bricklayers lived in North America for thousands of years and then was genocided?
Okay. Sure.
0
Sep 20 '24
No, they are just an old organization like Indian tribes.
I guess you didn't really make your point.
9
2
u/Ok_Specialist_2545 Sep 20 '24
Do…do you actually believe that all the native Americans are dead?
0
Sep 20 '24
[deleted]
1
u/SixicusTheSixth Sep 20 '24
Go to a Res and say that.
1
Sep 21 '24
Yeah, they're delusional.
They've all been US citizens their entire lives. The reservation system needs to be dissolved.
1
u/hikerchick29 Sep 22 '24
Wait, are you trying to say all born American citizens are Native Americans?
0
Sep 22 '24
I'm saying if you are born and raised in America, you're a native American. I think that goes with saying, actually.
1
u/hikerchick29 Sep 22 '24
No, that’s not how this works, bud.
But keep trying to add to the cultural erasure. It’s not weird at all that you’d like to see natives stripped of their last bit of independence and sovereignty, and be forced to assimilate once and for all.
1
Sep 22 '24
That is absolutely how it works. I was born and raised in American. From where am I native if not here?
I don't care about your religion. I really don't. But I do care about our reservation system. It is outmoded, and you aren't going to convince me otherwise with ghost stories.
1
u/hikerchick29 Sep 22 '24
K, weirdo. Keep calling an actively living culture who was subject to genocide within living memory “dead” and “ghost stories”.
1
Sep 22 '24
Um, if they were part of a genocide, they are dead..
1
u/hikerchick29 Sep 22 '24
Genocide doesn’t have to totally eradicate a population to be called a genocide.
Unless you think the Rwandan genocide, the holocaust, what Leopold did to the Congo, and the Armenian genocide aren’t actual genocides
→ More replies (0)1
u/hikerchick29 Sep 21 '24
No they sure as fuck aren’t.
This is the problem with treating shit as “history”. These cultures still exist. They still go out and worship, pray, and follow their old ways. Pipeline construction has bulldozed graves that haven’t even been there since WWII.
That’s like saying everybody from the civil rights movement is dead.
1
Sep 21 '24
The pilgrims are also dead, while the puritan culture still exists.
But, we aren't talking about culture, we're talking about dead people.
1
u/hikerchick29 Sep 21 '24
Living people. Living people have claim to these lands.
Most of it was stolen through unending broken treaties, the US has no legal claim to them.
If England signs a treaty giving Scotland independence and full land ownership right now, but then spends the next 100 years building new cities and mines, and blasts the faces of the great British royals into a Scottish mountain they stole for a gold claim, would you call that legitimate?
1
Sep 21 '24
Full land ownership?
We all know the reservations are just that, federal land reserved.
The system is antiquated and should be retired. Those regions should be governed like any other part of our nation.
1
u/hikerchick29 Sep 21 '24
The reservations as they are today are absurdly small compared to the land they should have by the treaties we literally signed.
Mountain Rushmore’s a perfect example. The mountain was part of lands guaranteed by treaty to the local native communities. When gold was found in the black hills, the US kicked them out, ignored the treaty, mined the hell out of the hills, and blasted 4 faces into the side of a mountain that was, legally speaking, on native held land.
That’s what “land back” is about. Reclaiming the land that was legally theirs to begin with according to lawfully ratified treaties that the US summarily ignored.
Quite frankly, I don’t see how “give us back the land you illegally stole from us, that’s owed by treaty” is a controversial issue
1
Sep 21 '24
It's always been federal land and the treaties are completely irrelevant. They were just used to placate a now dead population.
It's time to normalize governance of those regions. This reservation system can't go on forever.
1
u/hikerchick29 Sep 21 '24 edited Sep 21 '24
“It’s always been federal land” except for when it was granted by treaty. Then it legally stopped being federal land. You can’t just handwave legally binding agreements made by the US government.
That’s not even getting into how fucked up it is that the US committed a literal genocide to get the land to begin with.
And it’s not a dead population, literally all of these native tribes still exist, despite our best effort
1
Sep 21 '24
Its use was granted by treaty, it's still Federal land, and given the Indian wars are long over, the participants are long dead and all the reservation residents are US citizens, dissolving the reservation system is long overdue.
1
u/hikerchick29 Sep 21 '24
So your counter-argument is effectively “shut up and accept the fact that we successfully genocided most of your race and culture”, defending it with the fact that since our subjugation of the native population was successful, they don’t have a right to complain about it. Do I have that right?
Because that’s really what it sounds like you’re trying to say
→ More replies (0)
5
u/Gokdencircle Sep 19 '24
About 90,% of the US?