tribal landing

Justin Trudeau approved the Kinder Morgan pipeline which will run from Canadian oil sands to the Pacific Ocean. The pipeline, which will put Tsleil Waututh First Nations tribal land at risk of oil spills and contamination, undermines every false promise made by Justin Trudeau to put the environment and the safety of FN people first. Trudeau is literally just a liar who has done nothing but break his most important promises to Canadians and further marginalize already marginalized people

Nightmare

Summary: Sam’s nightmares lead you in pursuit of a string of mysterious deaths in Michigan. You and Dean talk about what happened with Cassie and Dan.
Words: 3.1k+
Dean x Reader, Sam x Jess (past Dean x Cassie, OMC x Reader)
Warnings: past infidelity, angst

A/N: this is part of my ‘Jess never died’ rewrite, find the masterpost here 
Beta: @blacksiren

Your name: submit What is this?

You woke up with incessant knocking on your motel door. Your eyes opened and you squinted at the clock, seeing it was just past 3am.

Gently peeling Jessica’s arms from around you and grabbing the gun from under your mattress, you walked over to the door.

Pistol raised, you carefully opened the door to be met with-

“Don’t shoot,” Sam said, knowing that you’d be instinctively defensive. “We have to go.”

Keep reading

International Socialist Republican Solidarity with Standing Rock!

We, the undersigned socialist republican organisations from Ireland, Scotland and Wales, express our complete solidarity with the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and their heroic resistance against the imposition of the Dakota Access Pipeline on their sovereign territory.

The ongoing resistance at Standing Rock in defence of land, natural resources and the right to water, is providing inspiration to anti- capitalist and anti- imperialist struggles around the world. The resistance at Standing Rock resonates in particular, in Ireland, Scotland and Wales, where our peoples have, and continue to fight against the joint systems of Capitalism and Imperialism and in defence of our homes, our natural resources and our right to clean safe and free drinking water.

We recognise that the fight of the Lakota is our fight and we further recognise that Standing Rock is a key battle ground in the struggle of the international working class and oppressed peoples around the world against the exploitation and oppression of Capitalism and Imperialism.

We condemn the US Imperial administration for its ongoing attacks on the Standing Rock Sioux. The militarisation of tribal lands, and the brutalisation of those acting in defence of their future is unacceptable and must end immediately.

We note with concern the recent raid on Last Child Camp and the subsequent mass round up of protestors. We demand that all those arrested are immediately released.

It is our view, that the US administration, acting as it is, in support of the private capitalist interests behind the Dakota Access Pipeline, have convincingly demonstrated, the fundamental truth of James Connolly’s maxim, that ‘governments in capitalist society are but committees of the rich to manage the affairs of the capitalist class’.

We call on all progressive forces in the United States to rally behind the resistance at Standing Rock. For our part, we pledge our continuing support and solidarity and vow to do what we can in our own countries to highlight the outrages being committed at Standing Rock and to build international support for the resistance!

Defend natural resources!
Release All Prisoners!
Stop the Dakota Access Pipeline!

Signed (List in formation)

Ireland- Éirígí
Wales- Yr Aflonyddwch Mawr - The Great Unrest

Seattle’s City Council has voted to not renew its contract with Wells Fargo, in a move that cites the bank’s role as a lender to the Dakota Access Pipeline project as well as its creation of millions of bogus accounts. As a result, the city won’t renew its contract with the bank that expires next year.

The unanimous vote will pull more than $3 billion in city funds from the banking giant, the council says. Seattle says the bidding process for its next banking partner will “incentivize ‘Social Responsibility.’”

Not long after Seattle’s vote, the City Council in Davis, Calif., took a similar action over the pipeline. It voted unanimously to find a new bank to handle its roughly $124 million in accounts by the end of 2017.

On the same day the two cities moved to cut ties with Wells Fargo, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers granted an easement allowing the Dakota Access Pipeline to cross under the Missouri River north of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. As NPR’s Rebecca Hersher reported, that clears the way for construction of the final 1.5 miles of the more than 1,700-mile pipeline.

“Protests in Seattle against the Dakota Access Pipeline project have been large and frequent, often organized by local tribal members,” member station KUOW reports. “Protesters, many of them Native people from Washington state, share the concerns of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, which says the pipeline would threaten tribal water supplies, land and cultural sites.”

Wells Fargo has been in the headlines since last fall over a scandal involving bank employees creating fake accounts in customers’ names to bolster performance results and boost bonuses. While other banks are also involved in the pipeline deal, Wells Fargo’s recent history seems to have helped make it a target once again.

Seattle’s plan to stop its dealings with Wells Fargo comes months after the city canceled a $100 million bond deal between its electric utility and the bank. That took place last fall, when the treasurers of California, Illinois and other entities said they would freeze their dealings with the bank — in some cases, for a one-year period.

Wells Fargo’s commercial banking manager for Washington state, Mary Knell, tells KUOW that she’s disappointed in Seattle’s new move, noting that the bank is bound by its contract with the pipeline project.

Knell tells KUOW that the bank has “enhanced our due diligence on projects such as this to include more research into whether indigenous communities are affected and that they have been properly consulted.”

Read more:http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/08/514133514/two-cities-vote-to-pull-more-than-3-billion-from-wells-fargo-over-dakota-pipelin

So I didn’t know if I would post this but here I am, doing so. Because compared to my other blog I run (aka my personal) I have more followers here. So here it goes…

I can’t believe you are all letting Timeless slip through our fingers??? Honestly???

The main cast is comprised of 7 people, 4 of which are POC??? And one of these in the main cast is a lesbian who is married to another WOC with 2 daughters??? And literally all the bad guys are white???

And the show is surrounded by 3 of them time traveling but it has explicitly shown that traveling to past decades is only good/non dangerous for one of them (because that one is a white male, while the others are a woman and a black male)???

They’ve also had the focus of their time traveling episodes on real historical figures who were forgotten, more often than not other POC?? 

Travels back to the Alamo?? Time to tell you about the fact that most of the people who fought on both sides were black and latino (if that wasn’t obvious since Texas was part of Mexico and the other side was Mexico), and in fact that Mexico had outlawed slavery years prior and it wasn’t until Texas won their independence then the US came back in and grabbed it that they had slavery. 

Travels back to the French and Indian War?? It’s time to meet Nonhelema, a real, powerful Shawnee chieftess who often led her tribe into battle, as well as stood in front of the US Congress to request land for the Shawnee in Ohio, and married 2 Shawnee men, as well as a white general at some point and would write the first English-Shawnee dictionary. 

Travels back to the 1969 Moon Landing? Time to meet Katherine Johnson, the mathematician who wasn’t allowed in the room to watch the landing (which I found a fault in “Hidden Figures” because by showing her in there for the John Glenn thing then not showing the moon landing day at all they make you assume she was allowed in for the moon landing, she wasn’t) but basically did everything to make sure it was successful, such as figuring out how fast they’d have to go to break the barrier, where they would need to find them when they came back down, all that.

Next week they’re traveling to the Wild West? Time to meet the Lone Ranger, who maybe people don’t know because of the myths put out by Hollywood, was a real man, but he was an African-American man named Bass Reeves who lived on tribal lands with Seminole and Muscogee tribes after he escaped his white slave owner, but as you should know, found and brought to justice outlaws. And time to meet Tonto, who wasn’t exactly one person in real life but based off Seminole and Muscogee friends who helped him.

And this show isn’t even on fucking, I don’t know, HBO or the CW or some network who is usually more like this. It’s on NBC, yeah one of the three main commercial television networks. But what is happening to it? 

It’s on the brisk of possibly being cancelled, it’s currently considered a “bubble show”, which means their ratings aren’t good enough to renew but not bad enough to guarantee cancellation. However, no show with ratings under 3.5 has ever been renewed by NBC, and last week, their ratings were 3.45. 

I don’t know how everyone can argue for representation and acknowledgement like this, then not actually watch it and so they end up cancelled after one season.

I don’t know how I want to end this but plead with you to please watch this show if you are not already, and watch it live (also this Monday, during it’s broadcast at 10est/9cst people are planning to try to have #RenewTimeless trend on twitter so tweet it). Or well it’s bye to probably the only realistic, inclusive time traveling/sci fi show, and probably sent a loud message to NBC on their future endeavors.

But if the natives are already agriculturalists, then why not simply incorporate their productivity into the colonial economy? At this point, we begin to get closer to the question of just who it is (or, more to the point, who they are) that settler colonialism strives to eliminate—and, accordingly, closer to an understanding of the relationship between settler colonialism and genocide. To stay with the Cherokee removal: when it came to it, the factor that most antagonized the Georgia state government (with the at-least-tacit support of Andrew Jackson’s federal administration) was not actually the recalcitrant savagery of which Indians were routinely accused, but the Cherokee’s unmistakable aptitude for civilization. Indeed, they and their Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw and Seminole neighbours, who were also targeted for removal, figured revealingly as the “Five Civilized Tribes” in Euroamerican parlance. In the Cherokee’s case, two dimensions of their civility were particularly salient. They had become successful agriculturalists on the White model, with a number of them owning substantial holdings of Black slaves, and they had introduced a written national constitution that bore more than a passing resemblance to the US one. Why should genteel Georgians wish to rid themselves of such cultivated neighbours? The reason why the Cherokee’s constitution and their agricultural prowess stood out as such singular provocations to the officials and legislators of the state of Georgia—and this is attested over and over again in their public statements and correspondence—is that the Cherokee’s farms, plantations, slaves and written constitution all signified permanence. The first thing the rabble did, let us remember, was burn their houses. Brutal and murderous though the removals of the Five Civilized Tribes generally were, they did not affect each member equally. This was not simply a matter of wealth or status. Principal Cherokee chief John Ross, for example, lost not only his plantation after setting off on the Trail of Tears. On that trail, one deathly cold Little Rock, Arkansas day in February 1839, he also lost his wife, Qatie, who died after giving her blanket to a freezing child. Ross’s fortunes differed sharply from those of the principal Choctaw chief Greenwood LeFlore, who, unlike Ross, signed a removal treaty on behalf of his people, only to stay behind himself, accept US citizenship, and go on to a distinguished career in Mississippi politics. But it was not just his chiefly rank that enabled LeFlore to stay behind. Indeed, he was by no means the only one to do so. As Ronald Satz has commented, Andrew Jackson was taken by surprise when “thousands of Choctaws decided to take advantage of the allotment provisions [in the treaty LeFlore had signed] and become homesteaders and American citizens in Mississippi.” In addition to being principal chiefs, Ross and LeFlore both had White fathers and light skin. Both were wealthy, educated and well connected in Euroamerican society. Many of the thousands of compatriots who stayed behind with LeFlore lacked any of these qualifications. There was nothing special about the Choctaw to make them particularly congenial to White society—most of them got removed like Ross and the Cherokee. The reason that the remaining Choctaw were acceptable had nothing to do with their being Choctaw. On the contrary, it had to do with their not (or, at least, no longer) being Choctaw. They had become “homesteaders and American citizens.” In a word, they had become individuals. What distinguished Ross and the removing Choctaw from those who stayed behind was collectivity. Tribal land was tribally owned—tribes and private property did not mix. Indians were the original communist menace. As homesteaders, by contrast, the Choctaw who stayed became individual proprietors, each to his own, of separately allotted fragments of what had previously been the tribal estate, theirs to sell to White people if they chose to. Without the tribe, though, for all practical purposes they were no longer Indians (this is the citizenship part). Here, in essence, is assimilation’s Faustian bargain— have our settler world, but lose your Indigenous soul. Beyond any doubt, this is a kind of death. Assimilationists recognized this very clearly. On the face of it, one might not expect there to be much in common between Captain Richard Pratt, founder of the Carlisle boarding school for Indian youth and leading light of the philanthropic “Friends of the Indian” group, and General Phil Sheridan, scourge of the Plains and author of the deathless maxim, “The only good Indian is a dead Indian.” Given the training in individualism that Pratt provided at his school, however, the tribe could disappear while its members stayed behind, a metaphysical variant on the Choctaw scenario. This would offer a solution to reformers’ disquiet over the national discredit attaching to the Vanishing Indian. In a paper for the 1892 Charities and Correction Conference held in Denver, Pratt explicitly endorsed Sheridan’s maxim, “but only in this: that all the Indian there is in the race should be dead. Kill the Indian in him and save the man.”
— 

Patrick Wolfe, Settler Colonialism and the Elimination of the Native

anti-Communism has been part of the European soul since before Communism was a thing

Hollywood is really stupid when it comes to Native Americans. First, they are generic “red devils” then they are the “noble red man”. Hollywood only recognizes the plains Indians and then only the Lakota, Cheyenne, Comanche and Apache. There were 500 other Indian nations on the land. Hollywood wants you to believe that they lived a harmonious life with nature. 

In fact, they were as hard on the natural world as any stone age people could be. They fought and killed each other. They didn’t have individual ownership of land but they most definitely had tribal ownership of the land and woe to any poor Crow Indian who strayed into Lakota land. They fought each other constantly. Raped captive women. Tortured captured males and enslaved each other whenever they could.

They weren’t wiped out by war. They killed as many whites as whites killed Indians. They were good fighters. They were wiped out by diseases such as smallpox and cholera but then again so were many whites. There were just more white people than Indians to replace those who died. Hollywood gives special dispensation for Native American superstitions as if they were somehow more believable than any other set of superstitions.

Why lie? Why not just tell the actual truth?

telegraph.co.uk
American Indian tribes plan to make marijuana a cash crop
As more states legalise the recreational and medicinal use of marijuana, American Indians are looking to grow the crop on tribal land

From The Telegraph​, “American Indian tribes plan to make marijuana a cash crop”.

Due to tribal land’s unique legal status, many Native American tribes are now looking to grow and regulate cannabis through the same mechanism they can operate casinos.

Allen St. Pierre, Executive Director of NORML, is quoted in the article saying “It is certainly significant, America has seen some tribes go from being economically disadvantaged to becoming powerful economic and political players through the introduction of one industry, gambling. Now the same could be happening with marijuana.”

Do you think this is a good development for legalization? Tell us in the comments!

anonymous asked:

can you do a post on how each of the founding fathers felt about native americans?

I couldn’t find enough information to make a formal presentation- which I initially tried at first (which it took me to long to answer this- I apologize!) But I typed it up instead. 

Benjamin Franklin, felt sympathy for the Native Americans. He had acquired this first by publishing treaty accounts, then by taking part in treaty councils. On December 14, 1763, fifty-seven vigilantes from Paxton and Donegal, two frontier towns, rode into Conestoga Manor, an Indian settlement, and killed six of twenty Indians living there. Two weeks later, more than 200 “Paxton Men” (as they were now called) invaded Lancaster, where the remaining fourteen Conestoga Indians had been placed in a workhouse for their own protection. Smashing in the workhouse door as the outnumbered local militia looked on, the Paxton Men killed the rest of the Conestoga band, leaving the bodies in a heap within sight of the places where the Anglo-Iroquois alliance had been cemented less than two decades before. Franklin responded to the massacres with the an enraged piece of writing-  A Narrative of the Late Massacres in Lancaster County of a Number of Indians, Friends of this Province, by Persons Unknown. It displayed a degree of entirely humorless anger that Franklin rarely used in his writings. 

“But the Wickedness cannot be Covered, the Guilt will lie on the Whole Land, till Justice is done on the Murderers. THE BLOOD OF THE INNOCENT WILL CRY TO HEAVEN FOR VENGEANCE!”

Franklin went on to defend the Native Americans who were massacred. Franklin continued to develop his philosophy with abundant references to the Indian societies he had observed so closely during his days as envoy to the Six Nations. Franklin’s writings on Native Americans were remarkably free of ethnocentricism, although he often used words such as “savages,” . Franklin’s cultural relativism was perhaps one of the purest expressions of Enlightenment assumptions that stressed racial equality and the universality of moral sense among peoples. His writing seemed like he admired the simple life that the Native Americans lived.

George Washington’s presidency established much of the basis for the federal Native American policies we have today. Like others who were not Native Americans of this era, he viewed them as a vanishing people, or at least a people who at some time in the near future would cease to exist in the United States. Native Americans were to either die out, migrate, or become totally assimilated. Near the beginning of his first term as President, George Washington declared that a just Indian policy was one of his highest priorities, explaining that,

 "The Government of the United States are determined that their Administration of Indian Affairs shall be directed entirely by the great principles of Justice and humanity.“

Congress proceeded to approve a treaty with seven northern tribes (the Shawnee, Miami, Ottawa, Chippewa, Iroquois, Sauk, and Fox). This agreement, however, lacked meaningful protection of tribal land. Members of the northern tribes believed it was necessary to use force to prevent further incursions. Washington’s sent American military response. In 1790 and 1791, Washington dispatched armies to confront native forces, and in both instances the Americans were defeated. Washington sought to provide safe havens for native tribes while also assimilating them into American society. 

Washington believed that if they failed to at least make an effort to secure Native American land, their chances of convincing Native Americans to transform their hunting culture to one of farming and herding would be undermined. As the two reluctantly came to recognize, however, it was the settlers pouring into the western frontier that controlled the national agenda regarding Native Americans and their land. 

During John Adams’s presidency, in his first annual message to Congress, Adams referred to relationships with the Indians as, “this unpleasant state of things on our western frontier.” Foreign agents, he said, were trying to “alienate the affections of the Indian nations and to excite them to actual hostilities against the United States.”

The same year, the newly formed Tennessee legislature informed Adams that the Cherokee Indians were occupying their territories as “tenants at will,” or at the forbearance of whites. In response, Adams sent a letter to “his beloved chiefs, warriors and children of the Cherokee Nation,” explaining that squatters had gone beyond the boundary established in a 1791 treaty and had protested when the federal government tried to remove them.

In the letter, Adams asked the Cherokee to acknowledge the “sincere friendship of the United States,” but said his “stronger obligations” were to “hear the complaints, and relieve, as far as in my power, the distresses of my white children, citizens of the United States.” The result was the 1798 Treaty of Tellico, in which the Cherokee ceded more of their homelands in eastern Tennessee.

The treaty was the last of four enacted during Adams’ four years in office, from 1797 to 1801. He also oversaw treaties with the Mohawk, Seneca and Oneida, who relinquished all their lands in the state of New York. His first encounter with Native Americans occurred when he was a boy and leaders of the Punkapaug and Neponset tribes called on his father. In a letter penned to a friend, Adams called Natives “blood hounds” who, let loose, could scalp men and butcher women and children. Much like the other founding fathers, Adams held conflicted beliefs about Natives and their role in the nation’s future.

In his inauguration speech, Adams pledged himself to a spirit of “equity and humanity” toward the Indians. He promised to “meliorate their condition by inclining them to be more friendly to us, and our citizens to be more friendly to them.” But Adams also ignored existing treaties and established the Indiana Territory in 1800.

Thomas Jefferson viewed American Indians or Native Americans as subjects of intellectual curiosity or saw them in political terms as enemies in war or partners in peace. Jefferson’s long public career during a time period allowed him to shape the relations between the United States and the various Native American nations.

“I beleive the Indian then to be in body and mind equal to the whiteman,“ 

Only their environment needed to be changed to make them fully American in Jefferson’s mind. Even though many American Indians lived in villages and many engaged in agriculture, hunting was often still necessary for subsistence. Jefferson believed that if American Indians were made to adopt European-style agriculture and live in European-style towns and villages, then they would quickly "progress” from “savagery” to “civilization” and eventually be equal, in his mind, to white men.

Thomas Jefferson believed Native American peoples to be a noble race. Nevertheless, Jefferson developed plans for Indian removal to lands West of the Mississippi. Before and during his presidency, Jefferson discussed the need for respect, brotherhood, and trade with the Native Americans. Yet beginning in 1803, Jefferson’s private letters show increasing support for a policy of removal.

Jefferson was fascinated with the Indian culture and language. His home at Monticello was filled with Indian artifacts obtained from the Lewis and Clark expedition. He had compiled a dictionary and assorted grammars of the Indian language. Jefferson refuted these notions in his book, Notes on the State of Virginia, where he defended American Indian and their culture.  Andrew Jackson is often credited with initiating Indian Removal. But Jackson was merely legalizing and implementing a plan laid out by Jefferson in a series of letters that began in 1803, although Jefferson did not implement the plan during his own presidency. Jefferson advocated for the militarization of the Western border, along the Mississippi River. He felt that the best way to accomplish this was to flood the area with a large population of white settlements.

In his first Inaugural Address upon assuming office, James Madison stated that the federal government’s duty was to convert the American Indians by the, “participation of the improvements of which the human mind and manners are susceptible in a civilized state.” Like most American leaders at the time, Madison had a paternalistic and discriminatory attitude toward American Natives. He encouraged American Native men to give up hunting and become farmers and supported the conversion of American Natives to a European way of life. 

Yet for a president who “pushed hard” for expansion, Madison rarely spoke about Indians. Privately, however, Madison was skeptical of the beliefs behind federal Indian policy, which at that time focused on civilization, or transitioning Indians from their “savage” state to agricultural societies. Madison believed that Indians would resist civilization.

The Hamilton-Oneida Academy in Clinton, New York was created with the idea of educating Indian and white children side by side to build cultural understanding. The charter for the academy was granted in 1793. Hamilton was incorporated as a trustee and a namesake of the school soon after. Hamilton had an equally enlightened opinion of Indians even after some of them, in the pay of the British, threatened to attack the home of his father-in-law, Philip Schuyler, in Albany in 1781 while Hamilton’s pregnant wife was living there. The Native Americans and their fellow British raiders were scared off when one of the Schuyler women bluffed that a group of rebel soldiers was on its way (by the way- it was Margarita “Peggy”). 

In spite of their presence in the raiding party, Philip Schuyler negotiated with neighboring tribes to keep them neutral during the war. After the war, when speculators wanted to push Indians out of western New York, Hamilton warned that only friendly relations with the natives would guarantee peace. He also became a trustee of what was later named Hamilton College, a school that accepted Indian students as well as whites.

James Monroe during his presidency recommended that Indians who wanted to own land as individuals should be allowed to do so and should be given a fee simple title to their land. This would, of course, break up the communal land holdings of the tribes and allow lands to be acquired and developed by non-Indians.

In 1824, President James Monroe presented Congress with a plan for “civilizing” Indians by sending them voluntarily west of the Mississippi River.

7
DailyPBO: The President & The Standing Rock Sioux Reservation - June 2014

The crowd to President Obama: “We love you President Obama! You’re our hero!” President Obama: “I love you back!”

Obama became only the fourth sitting president to visit an Indian reservation. Attending with the First Lady, it was a truly inspiring event at the Cannon Ball Pow Wow Grounds in Cannon Ball, North Dakota. The Native American community was bursting with pride over the president’s visit and when he spoke Lakota during his speech, they were completely moved. It was a wonderful day for a community that never (and I mean NEVER) gets the respect they deserve. Bravo, Mr. President. For more reactions, check the Twitter hashtag: #PrezRezVisit

The slow trek back to this ones cabin only settled the reality of his ships condition. Holes in the hull armor covered by hastily bolted on sheets of metal, temporary repairs that had become a permanent fixture, granted he was well aware the mechanic is capable of better.

Buuuut it’s hard to fix up the old girl when it’s a choice between mandatory repairs and food, or cosmetic patching. Seemed this region of the world was always ready to throw some new horror at those who traveled through it. Be it in the skies, or upon the ground. Numareia wasn’t a horrid place, just her inhabitants weren’t the friendliest of creatures.

The plains and foothills were a patchwork of barbarian tribal lands, ‘cursed’ mounds the size of small mountains, and in some places a moor where strange prismatic fluids bubbled to the surface in shallow pools. The region was haunted by wandering metal constructs the barbarians spoke of like ghosts of the old world - and most of the things were not of the friendly nature, the skies the home of pirates. Still there were bastions of civilization!

However this one was well aware that the concept of civilization and law tended to be more of a wistful thought once one left the gates, or the watchful eye of the cities defense works… Provided it had any.

It was a lonely existence, scraping by on what one had, hoping for a better tomorrow while staring down a harsh today. But who knew what was around the corner right? Technological marvels buried in ancient caverns and mounds, magic, riches, power! … Probably best to just keep flying cargo and oddballs.