Montana, a western state in the US, is both worse and more familiar than I expected – at least as Native American sociologist Luana Ross tells it in her book “Inventing the Savage: The Social Construction of Native American Criminality” (1998).
Montana drew in Whites in large numbers starting in the 1880s. It had land for raising cows, it had silver, it had gold and, most of all, it had copper.
Many Natives in Montana depended on hunting bisons, but most bisons had been wiped out by the 1870s. When Whites arrived it got even worse: White-owned cows behind fences took the place of roaming bisons.
The US government gave away Native land to Whites through Homestead Acts in the late 1800s and early 1900s. They forced Natives onto reservations, pieces of land Whites did not want. And then they gave away the best of the reservation lands too.
By 1978 Natives had only 2.4% of Montana left.
In addition to taking their land:
- Further destruction of their economy: Whites killed their horses.
- Destruction of leadership: Whites killed or locked up many Native leaders. In their place came White judges, White police officers, White schoolteachers – and Natives who would do their bidding.
- Destruction of culture: Whites outlawed Native religion, criminalized their work and marriage patterns (“vagrancy” and “adultery” became crimes), punished men for wearing long hair, forced their children to receive a White education, etc. To leave a reservation you needed a pass. Since the 1930s many of these laws have been overturned, but the cultural damage was done, making Natives easier to control.
- Stereotypes: Natives as shiftless, savage, drunk, immoral, criminal, unintelligent, irresponsible, as unable to manage their own affairs, as a drain on society, as living the high life on government handouts paid for by hard-working (White) taxpayers. The “good Indians” are the silent ones who know their place. These stereotypes have changed little since the 1800s. It is part of why the law comes down way harder on Natives than on Whites. These stereotypes lead to:
- Internalized racism among Natives, which leads to internalized brutality: high rates of murder, domestic violence and substance abuse.
- Segregation: Even when Whites live within the bounds of a reservation, like Flathead (the government having sold its best lands), Whites will still have their own schools, churches, bars, museums and newspapers.
So what do Natives do?
At a personal level, the main choices are:
- Identificational assimilation: You see White culture as better (colonized mentality) and take on White ways to be accepted by the White world.
- Withdrawal: You see Native culture as better and withdraw into a largely Native world.
At the tribal level the big issue is:
- Sovereignty: Natives used to have independent nations, complete with their own land, leadership, language, laws, religion, etc. Despite the huge damage done by Whites, these nations are trying to hold onto what little they have left and gain back some of what they have lost.
See also:
still waiting on karma….
LikeLike
Regarding abagond,why do you always have something concerning Whites to bitch about?Sent from Yahoo Ma
LikeLike
@Abagond,
I know that this is Native American History Month and I do not want to detract from the main point of this post.
However, I think we need to expand a little bit on the following statements:
Chinese were brought into Montana in significant numbers to work in those mines and to build the infrastructure (rails, roads, ditches) to support them, making up 10-15% of the population in the state (probably a lot more – that was what the Census counted) from 1870 – 1890s. In the state capital, Helena, the majority of the population was Chinese for a few decades. Then they faced being driven out or killed off like they were all across the West. By the early 20th century, they dropped to something like 0.1%
There is a historical society based in Butte, MT that has opened up a museum on this.
(www.maiwah.org/index.html)
Their links page
(http://www.maiwah.org/links.shtml)
where there is a webpage (from U. of Montana) on the late 19th century / early 20th century history of this as well as some of the Chinese ghost towns. There is also an 1hr + you tube video discussion about it.
I do not think that the main points of your post would be affected at all, but it would be a great shame and even misleading to discuss the history of racism and race relations in Montana and completely omit this part of it.
LikeLike
So what do Natives do?
At a personal level, the main choices are:
Identificational assimilation: You see White culture as better (colonized mentality) and take on White ways to be accepted by the White world.
Withdrawal: You see Native culture as better and withdraw into a largely Native world.
——————————————————————————————–
The 3rd choice is to do “The Ghost Dance”
The Ghost Dance was associated with Wilson’s (Wovoka’s) prophecy of a peaceful end to white expansion while preaching goals of clean living, an honest life, and cross-cultural cooperation by Native Americans.
Every time I see a bunch of “Mexicans”, “Latinos”, “illegal immigrants…” I think about those people doing the ghost dance back in 1890.
LikeLike
Just wondering – have we reviewed the curriculum for Montana’s state board of Education? Is the information on Native Americans removed from the curriculum just as it has been done in the East, South and Midwest?
LikeLike
And the only way Natives will be made whole is 1)when the United States, as a national entity, ceases to exist, 2)if there are any Natives left to retake what was stolen from them and 3)if said Natives develop the clout, militarily speaking, needed to make good on their claims.
In the meantime, it’s a waiting game. On one side, the Natives are holding on to what they have left, waiting for a time when the white man’s grip looses and eventually fades. On the other, white American society is patiently waiting for its “Native problem” to dry up and blow away once and for all, all while wishing it could do the same for its troublesome “Negro problem,” too.
LikeLike
Good post. I have always thought of states like Montana and Wyoming and the Dakotas as not being place that were not open to diversity. Reading this post i see i was right.
LikeLike
@ Jefe
Good point. I changed the title from “Racializing Montana” to “Racializing Native Montana” to match the scope of the post.
LikeLike
I guess that takes care of it.
LikeLike
Abagond, being that we probably won’t hear from any actual Native north American voices, I wanted to post a few comments detailing the lives and history of the Dakota and Sioux people.
“In reviewing this drama of enforced acculturation of an indigenous people, Vine Deloria Jr. and others in assessing the impact of such policies have commented:
“When the missionaries first came, we owned the land, and they owned the Bible; now, we own the Bible and they own the land.”
http://www.oyatetourism.com/oyate_our_people/conflict_and_intentional_destruction_of_a_way_of_life
Large tracts of land were ceded from Iowa to the Canadian border, yet bands such as the Sisseton and Wahpeton were hesitant to disinherit so much, yet reluctantly did so per potential threat from the federal government as shown during the 1825 Black Hawk War where the Indian parties involved were also hesitant to negotiate. Included in the treaty stipulations was a monetary amount of $1,665,000 in cash and annuities and reservations established at the Upper Agency near Granite Falls, MN and another at the Lower Agency near Redwood Falls, MN, stretching from 20 miles in width to about 70 miles in length.
The Upper Sioux were more content as the boundaries contained some of their old villages and was more familiar hunting and fishing in that area. The Lower Agency however had displaced many from their traditional woodland areas which was a source of discontent. Also, another stipulation was that of a “traders-paper” rider which allocated $400,000 of the annuities to mixed bloods and traders who had claims against the Indians.
By 1858, Dakota leaders went to Washington D.C. again to sign two more treaties ceding the reservation north of the Minnesota River. With the on-rush of white settlers as well as the desire for more land by the federal government, along with their failure to pay the promised annuities, as well as the reduction of lands, the pressure to conform to Christianized ways, loss of hunting and fishing land, and the overall discontent of the Dakota bands would be the catalyst that would lead to the plains Indian Wars which would span the next 30 years.
So, to sum it up, the US government made an agreement to pay the tribe 1.6 million, which they didn’t do… but what the US government did do, was give $400,000 to white people and mixed white/Native Indian people who had a “claim” against the Sioux/Dakota tribes.
LikeLike
http://www.oyatetourism.com/index.php/tribal_history
the plains Indian Wars (spans 30 years)
In August of 1862, unrest among eastern Santee bands was ever prevalent and came to a climax with open combat in what would be called Dakota War of 1862, the Dakota Conflict or Sioux Uprising. On August 4th, 1862 the Sisseton and Wahpeton bands were able to obtain food and supplies. However on the 17th the Mdewakanton and Wahpekute bands were denied. Indian Agent and Minnesota State Senator Thomas Galbraith refused to distribute supplies without payment.
At a summit to resolve the matter, Dakota leaders asked trader Andrew Myrick to back their cause. His answer to Indians was: “So far as I’m concerned, if they are hungry, let them eat grass or their own dung.” This statement caused outrage among the Dakota people.
The day before, August 16th, monies arrived in St. Paul for distribution and were sent to Fort Ridgely on the 17th, but by then it was too late. The actions of four Dakota “Aki-ci-ta” or warriors at a settlement at Acton in Meeker County is considered by historians the beginning of the conflict. At Acton, a skirmish between white settlers and the Dakota took place due to the young “Aki-ci-ta” reportedly stealing eggs (as is the story told by the history books). It resulted in the death of five whites.
Soon conflicts erupted elsewhere around the region. Initially, the Dakota had victories at the Battle of Redwood Ferry, assault on New Ulm, and the Battle of Birch Coulee as well as a minor loss at the Battle of Fort Ridgely, with whites taking heavy losses in that victory.
Dakota “Aki-ci-ta” also laid siege to Fort Abercrombie for six weeks as well as disrupt supply lines and shipping from the north and Canada and couriers heading to St. Cloud and Fort Snelling. Large scale combat ended on September 26th, 1862 (yet skirmishes continued in the weeks following) when six companies of Minnesota militia and an artillery unit attacked Dakota positions at the Battle of Wood Lake.
Three days later, Dakota forces surrendered at Camp Release where 269 POWs were released to the troops there led by Col. Henry Sibley. Although still debated today, there were anywhere between 800 to more than 1,000 civilian and military casualties, but there are no ways to accurately determine the actual number.
LikeLike
http://www.oyatetourism.com/oyate_our_people/conflict_and_intentional_destruction_of_a_way_of_life
In the wake of the war, the Dakota were severely punished with 303 convicted of war crimes and sentenced to death. Of the 303, 38 men were hung the day after Christmas, in the largest mass execution in United States history.
The Army under General Henry Sibley succeeded in bringing this Dakota War to a halt in the late fall of 1862. Thereafter, many members of the eastern Dakota bands were rounded up and incarcerated at Fort Snelling, Minnesota, as well as Mankato, Minnesota.
A military court was convened and as a result, 300 of the Dakota leaders were tried and sentenced to death by hanging.
President Abraham Lincoln, after reviewing these cases, commuted the death sentences of all except for 38 of the chiefs and war leaders, and ordered them to be executed.
On December 26, 1862, the Army executed by hanging all 38 of these eastern Dakota war leaders at Mankato, MN. In the aftermath of this mass execution of the eastern Dakota leaders, Congress enacted legislation which abrogated all previous treaties with the Eastern Dakota bands, and furthermore ordered all Eastern Dakota bands banished from the State of Minnesota.
Often it has been said by the Old People “the civilized way of life” of the eastern Dakota bands came to an end at the time of the execution of the 38 eastern Dakota leaders at Mankato, MN, on December 26th, 1862, one day after Christmas, the observance of the birth of the Savior.
LikeLike
Linda, are you “Native American?”
LikeLike
Thwack, do you have reading comprehension difficulties or did you miss the part of my initial comment where I stated:
“Abagond, being that we probably won’t hear from any actual Native north American voices, I wanted to post a few comments detailing the lives and history of the Dakota and Sioux people.”
I’m not Linda Cares Carter, b … so take you’re act elsewhere.. I’m not here for you.
LikeLike
conclusion
http://www.oyatetourism.com/oyate_our_people/conflict_and_intentional_destruction_of_a_way_of_life
Efforts were undertaken to revoke the treaties, abolish the reservation, and expel remaining Dakota people from Minnesota entirely.
Bounties of $25 were put on any Dakota found within the boundaries (with the exception of 208 families of Mdewakanton who were considered “friendly.” )
Soon after, the further conflicts known in combination as the Indian Wars would proceed south and west ending with the Wounded Knee Massacre in 1890.
Sisseton and Wahpeton war leaders (former Dakota leaders) who had been acquitted, were then recruited by General Henry Sibley as scouts and were assigned the task of accompanying the Army to Dakota Territory in order to capture the balance of the eastern Dakota band members who had escaped there and many fled to Canada.
On the western edge of the Lake Traverse Reservation, the Army established Fort Wadsworth, later re-named Fort Sisseton, where the Sisseton Wahpeton leaders, under force of Army Cannon, were ordered to establish up to 30 scout camps where they were to detect any of the other Dakota people who had escaped from Minnesota and were trying to return to Minnesota.
General Sibley’s orders to the Sisseton and Wahpeton Scouts were very clear, as he ordered them to TAKE NO PRISONERS, and should they fail in regard to this order, they and their families themselves would be killed by the Army. The scouts followed their orders to the letter, and approximately 150 prisoners were execute
Since the Army could not justifiably exterminate the scouts and their families, numbering approximately 1,500 Sisseton Wahpetons — the government consented to allow the Sisseton and Wahpeton leaders to request Congress to create a special reservation for them.
On February 19th, 1867, Congress approved the request of the Sisseton Wahpeton leaders, and the Lake Traverse Reservation was established pursuant to provisions of the Treaty. This Sisseton Wahpeton Treaty however contained many policies of acculturation which included the requirement that the reservation be allotted to members of the tribe, that schools be established, and that a tribal government would be authorized as well as a tribal police force
Gabriel Renville 1824-1892, chief scout for General Sibley was appointed head chief of the Sisseton-Wahpeton bands by the War Department in 1866. In 1867 he was appointed Chief for life by members of the Sissetowan band.
Betrayal by one’s own is a common theme of oppressed people. There is always someone willing to sell out the many in the group, for a brief moment of the individuals self-interest.
LikeLike
@ Jefe
No. I would not hold my breath, though. Ross points out that in 1977 Montana passed a law that required teachers who taught on or near a reservation to take six hours of Native American studies. Just six hours. The law was quickly overturned. Schoolteachers argued it was in violation of White rights and would only increase racism.
LikeLike
Gee, taking 6 hours of Native American studies would increase racism and violate the rights of whites?
They have a really skewed perception of what causes racism and rights violation.
LikeLike
@ Linda
Thanks.
LikeLike
Photo of mural currently in the state Capitol Building in Helena, Montana. It was done in 1903, but represented the completion of the Northern Pacific Railroad, which was started in 1964 and completed in 1883 in Montana. It was built with Chinese labour and was what helped bring the White man to “settle” (ie, invade) Montana and the rest of the Pacific Northwest. President Ulysses Grant was there to drive the Golden spike.
close-up
Listened to commentary from the Montana Historical Society. They said that even though Chinese built the railroad there, those images were specifically and intentionally excluded from this mural. None of the workers in the mural were Chinese.
And look at how the Montana Plains Indians were depicted. It looks like they were standing on the side welcoming the white man to their land.
LikeLike
@ Jefe
What an obscene picture. Who was the artist? Bobby M?
LikeLike
LOL 😛
If you can imagine, this mural greets visitors to Montana’s State Capitol Building TODAY.
BTW (typo), the Northern Pacific Railroad began in 1864, not 1964, and completed in 1883, the year this mural represents.
LikeLike
*beginsarcasm* Ha ha, very funny. *endsarcasm*
I have never made ad hominem attacks against you, I don’t see why you feel the need to make them against me.
Even though I disagree with most of the things you say, I still believe that you are expressing your honest opinion, which is your right.
LikeLike
[…] https://abagond.wordpress.com/2014/11/20/racializing-montana/ […]
LikeLike
check out Lauren Chief Elk @ChiefElk
LikeLike
“Montana Steps Up for Native Students, Future Leaders”
Read more at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2015/04/21/montana-steps-native-students-future-leaders-160018
–“Indian Education for All is exactly what its name implies. All students in Montana public schools learn about the history and contemporary lives of the tribes living in the state. The state’s approach to developing curriculum for IEFA exemplifies its commitment to providing accurate and authentic information about the tribes.
OPI State Superintendent Denise Juneau, Mandan and Hidatsa Tribes, explains, “In 2009 our legislature provided $2 million to be divided among the tribal governments in our state to develop their own tribal histories.” The tribes alone were responsible for determining what story they wanted to tell and how that story would look.
“Some tribes created DVDs, some created textbook-like materials, some had a poster series that went along with a curriculum. We took those products and created tribal history documents, curriculum and timelines that brought it all together,” says Juneau.”
–“The American Indian population in Montana is about 7 percent, but 11 to 12 percent of Montana’s public school students are American Indian/Alaska Native, while 98 percent of the teaching force is white. Nonetheless, professional development for teachers in IEFA topics has been hugely effective. “We took those teachers who were interested in working on this effort and trained them,” Juneau says. “We needed to give them a lot of information that had been lacking in their own educational experience. Once they caught the bug of Indian education and what it meant and filled the gaps in their own knowledge, they were the ones who really moved IEFA forward.””
–“Montana’s commitment to integrating information about American Indians has extended to modifying Common Core standards. “One of the things that makes our state pretty significant is that we have modified Common Core standards to incorporate American Indian content throughout,” Broaddus says.
IEFA is not just for American Indian children. It’s about creating the next generation of national, state and local leaders and citizens. “Our leaders need to have a truthful history of both our country and our state to really be able to lead,” Broaddus says. “I think about the type of leaders our kindergarteners and first graders are going to be when they graduate. They’re going to be able to create policies that move our state together knowing that everybody in this state, no matter their background, really lends to the fabric of our community and that we all look out for each other.””
LikeLike