Another Stereotype of the Month entry:
Another Stereotype of the Month entry:
From the Providence Journal:
Kudos to U.S. Rep. Christopher Shays (R.-Conn.) for bravely criticizing the federal process for recognizing American Indian tribes. His criticism followed the federal recognition of the Kent, Conn.-based Schaghticokes by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The decision, being appealed, would give the tribe access to funding for education, health care and housing. More to the point, of course, is that recognition would also give it the right to negotiate a gambling compact with the state. Get ready for the paving over of the southern Berkshires!
Congressman Shays is one of the few politicians courageous enough to raise questions about a process that assigns immense rights and wealth to groups of people often far more distinguished by their retention of good lawyers, campaign contributions to key politicians, and access to investment capital (sometimes foreign), than by ethnic connections to Native American ancestors.
A suspiciously large number of Americans still claim to have Mayflower ancestors. Now, seeing the pot of casino gold, a suspiciously large number claim to be members of coherent Native American tribes, however genealogically dubious.
Rob's reply
>> Get ready for the paving over of the southern Berkshires! <<
Because of one casino? Does Shays or the Providence Journal protest every time a business opens shop in Connecticut? No? I wonder why not.
>> Congressman Shays is one of the few politicians courageous enough to raise questions <<
No, he's one of the many politicians cowardly enough to pander to conservative constituents who fear any kind of change.
>> a process that assigns immense rights and wealth to groups of people often far more distinguished by their retention of good lawyers, campaign contributions to key politicians, and access to investment capital (sometimes foreign), than by ethnic connections to Native American ancestors. <<
Recognition doesn't "assign" wealth to anybody. It makes federal benefits and the right to conduct Indian gaming available to tribes. Neither one is a guarantee of wealth.
How often is "often," I wonder. Is the newspaper literally saying the majority of tribes seeking federal recognition are phony?
>> Now, seeing the pot of casino gold, a suspiciously large number claim to be members of coherent Native American tribes, however genealogically dubious. <<
Again, how large is "large"? And how does that apply to the Schaghticokes, whom the state has recognized for centuries?
For the basics on the Schaghticoke decision, see Benedict: Schaghticoke, Eastern Pequot Tribes Are "Bogus."
More on the Schaghticokes' recognition in the Stereotype of the Month contest
NY Times: Most would-be tribes have emerged since 1988
"War drums," "ominous cloud" warn of "Indian massacre"
Even the East Hartford Moose Club could buy recognition
Courant: "The state must stop this slot-machine tsunami"
Cartoon shows men in suits doing a rain dance for money
Related links
Greedy Indians
|
. . . |
|
All material © copyright its original owners, except where noted.
Original text and pictures © copyright 2007 by Robert Schmidt.
Copyrighted material is posted under the Fair Use provision of the Copyright Act,
which allows copying for nonprofit educational uses including criticism and commentary.
Comments sent to the publisher become the property of Blue Corn Comics
and may be used in other postings without permission.