strong suit of our progressive friends. anyhow, mixed in the hubbub was -- the nature of his location, he didn't say, that's a lie, how said, you lie, like a declaration of the man, five years ahead of his time before anyone else caught on, and it's like sinatra sings, obama lies. it was that natural a declaration. ...

before we get started, can everyone please turn off their cell phones? i'm sure your ring tones are great. our guest is better. so we are going to do things a little differently today because this event is being broadcast. most notably committee q&a is going to bump off the bump off a microphone if not this exact microphone, very similar to this one. when we are done speaking, if you could hold your questions until i am interface with a microphone, that would be wonderful to make sure everyone can hear you and that it can be

heard on broadcast. thank you also much for coming to book people tonight. we are an independent bookstore. your business is the single reason we exist. we could not put on events like this without you. before we get dirty, for some energy, why do we give ourselves a round of applause? [applause] we are thrilled to be joined tonight by author and act to this, roxanne dunbar-ortiz. tonight we will learn about roxanne's eighth book, making us all feel lazy, "an indigenous peoples' history of the united states." braxton has been active in the international indigenous movement for more than four decades. she received her phd from ucla and went on to teach in a newly established native american studies program at cal state university hayward. while they are, she helped found both the ethnic studies and when studies departments. her 1977, the great sioux nation

was the fundamental document at the conference on indigenous peoples of the americas held at united nations headquarters in geneva. we are so thrilled to have her here tonight. please join us in welcoming, roxanne dunbar-ortiz. [applause] >> thank you to all of you for coming out with this beautiful fall weather you are having. a little warm. [laughter] first, i want to acknowledge that we are standing on the traditional unseeded lands of the comanche and the apache peoples and its unseeded land in the translation of that is

stolen. this book, i want to really think book people. it's such a pleasure to be here. i have never been inside. i have only seen it on c-span because they have recorded several times here before i think. it's a wonderful place, great audiences asking intelligent questions, so it is very nice to be here. this book, "an indigenous peoples' history of the united states," is part of the beacon press revision in american history series. inspired by the late howard said in his classic book, a people's history, the united states, which was originally published by beacon press. the people said my title as the

possessive apostrophe after the ouster refer to the more than 500 native american nations and communities in north america. it is very history of the united states that have attempted to write here. i want to read from the introduction to the book, which i call this land and i want to quote this carlos williams from the american green. this land, don't you feel it, does that make you want to go out to steal from non-epithet must be clinging to their corpses. so under the crest of that portion of the year is called the united states of america, from california to the pollster

waters, are in turn the boat and villages, fields and sacred objects of american indians. they cry out for their stories to be heard through their descendents to carry the memories of how this country was founded and how it came to be as it is today. they should not have happened at the great civilizations of the western hemisphere, the very evidence of the western hemisphere were destroyed, the gradual progress of humanity and arrested inside upon a path of greed and destruction. traces were made that forged a path towards destruction of life so. the moment in which we now live and die as our planet shrivels overheated. to learn and know this history is both a necessity in a responsibility to the ancestors and descendents of all parties concerned, but it's zero so

inactive survival. what historian david chang has written about the land that became oklahoma applies to the whole united states. nation, race and class converged in land. everything in u.s. history is about land. who oversaw it, cultivated it, finished his fathers, and maintained its wildlife. and when they did install it, how it became a commodity, real estate, broken into pieces to be brought and sold on the market. u.s. policies and actions related to indigenous peoples olafson framed racist or discriminatory are regularly depicted as what they are, classic cases of imperialism and a particular form of colonial

miss him. as australian anthropologist patrick wolfe writes, the question of genocide is never far from discussions of colonialism. landslides or at least land is necessary for life. writing u.s. history from indigenous repost perspective requires reasoning came to consensual narrative of the united states. that narrative is wrong or deficient not on its fact, states or details, but rather in it i sense. an inherent in the mess we've been taught is an embrace this colonialism and genocide pfeffer said it's not for lack of free speech or poverty of information , but rather the motivation to ask questions that challenge the core of a scripted

narrative of the origin story. how might the acknowledging the reality of u.s. history work to transform the society quiets that is the central question this book pursues. teaching native american studies i hate to admit it for 35 years, i always begin with a simple exercise. i ask students to quickly draw a rough outline of the united states at the time they gain independence from britain. invariably, most draw the approximate present shape of the united states from the atlantic to the pacific. the continental territory not only appropriated until a century after an opinion. what became independent in 1783 with 13 british colonies hugging the atlantic shore.

when called on to do this exercise and doing it, students are embarrassed because they know better. they know immediately that is not right. but he assured them they are not in loan. in fact, i call this a test of unconscious manifest destiny and that in the minds of nearly everyone in the united states and around the world. this status reflects seeming inevitability of the united states extensive power, its destiny, with an implication that the continent has previously been tearing all us, and land without people. woody guthrie's a love that song that is sort of the alternative income to the star-spangled banner, this land is your land, celebrate the land belongs to

everyone, reflecting the unconscious manifest destiny we live with. but the extension of the united states from sea to shining sea was the intention and design of the country's founders. they attracted european settlers. many became slaveowners for lucrative cash crops. it built the united states. the land and labor. preceding the writing of the u.s. constitution, the continental congress. it is revealing the motive for those desiring independence. they protected tandon territory

at the time ohio was northwest. this is land over the appalachian allegheny mountain chain. britain had made supplement their illegal jeffers said happily describe the intention for horizontal and vertical continental expansion, stating however they may restrain us within our own, it is impossible not to look forward to distant times when the rapid multiplication will expand itself beyond the limits and cover the whole northern if not the southern continent with the

people speaking the same language governance similar form a similar roles. the monroe doctrine, signaling the intention of dominating the colonial territories in the americas and the pacific, which will be put into practice during the rest of the century. it was annexed. origin narratives from the vital core of the people is unifying identity and of the values that guide them in the united states for founding and developing an anglo-american settler state involves a narrative about. to settlers who had a covenant with god to take the land, that

part of the origin story supported and reinforced by the columbus man and a doctrine of discovery. i don't know if you've heard the doctrine of discovery. i'll explain it. according to a series of late 15th century papal bulls, european nations acquire title ii the lands they discovered and the indigenous inhabitants lost her natural life to that land after your cancer by dean claimed it. the comments that suggest that from u.s. independence onward, colonial settler saw themselves as heart of the world system of conversations. columbia, to name used in reference to the united states from its founding through the 19th century was based on the name christopher columbus. the land of columbus was and still is represented by the damage of a woman in sculptures

and paintings by institutions such as columbia university and by countless games including that of the national capital, the district of columbia. the 1798 handheld columbia was the early national anthem is now used whenever the vice president of the united states make an appearance. the columbus days to the federal holiday despite columbus never having effort on the continent. traditionally, historians at the united states hoping to have successful careers in academia and to offer lucrative school textbooks become protect yours at the origin. with the colonial people in the academic world during the 1960s, to patty rowland, some other people adhere to,

engendered by the civil rights movement, student activism historians can't call for object to the and fairness in revision name -- in revision in interpretations of u.s. history. they warned against moralizing and placing blame, urging city dispassionate and culturally relative approach. historian bernard chan at the time had a very influential essay in which he called for a study of cultural conflict, of people just not understanding each other, that native and euro american relations were fraught with cultural conflict. and he even said right out that this approach defuses the focus of guilt.

in striving for balance, however, historians spotted latitude. they were good and bad people on both sides. american culture is an automation about ethnic groups. a frontier is its own and our action veteran cultures, not merely advancing european settlement. later, or at the present, trendy post honoring studies insist on indigenous agencies under the guise of individual and collective power vent, making the casualties of colonialism rather responsible for their own demise. perhaps worst of all, some craven and still claim that especially the spanish in the vatican that the colonizer and the colonized experience and encounter and engaged in dialogue, thereby making reality

reality -- masking reality justifications and rationalizations insured apologies for once cited robbery and murder. in focusing on cultural change on conflict between cultures, and this kind of approach avoids fundamental questions about the formation of the united states and its implications for the present and the future. this approach to history allows one to safely put aside present responsibility for continued harm done by that passed on the question of reparations, restitution, restoration of land and reordering of society. multiculturalism became the cutting match of post-civil rights movement and revising u.s. history.

for this to work in the process, indigenous nations and communities had to be left out of the picture. i've territorially and treaty-based people's in north america, they did not fit into the greater multiculturalism, but were included by transforming them into inculcate oppressed racial group by colonized mexican-americans and puerto ricans were dissolved into another such group variously called the scenic or like e-mail. i'm on the whole question of the mexican border is blurred in that manner as well. the multicultural approach emphasize the contribution of individuals from the press groups to the countries assumed greatness. indigenous peoples for those credited with black skin black cabinets, maple syrup, hundreds of place names, thanksgiving and

even the concept of democracy and federalism. this idea of the giftgiving and in helping to establish and enrich the development of the dissonant video smokescreen meant to excuse the fact that the very existence of the country as a result of looting an entire continent and its resources. the fundamental unresolved issues of indigenous plants, treaties and sovereignty could not but scuttle the premise of multiculturalism for indigenous peoples. awareness of the settler colonialist context in u.s. history writing is essential if one is to avoid the laziness of the default position and the mythological unconscious belief in manifest destiny.

the form of colonialism the indigenous peoples of north america experience was modern from the beginning. the formation and expansion of european reparations backed by government armies of foreign areas for subsequent expropriation lands and resources. colonialism as david chang pointed out and patrick wolf is a genocidal policy inherently. native nations and communities all struggling to maintain fundamental values have from the beginning resisted colonialism and defensive techniques including modern forms of resistance and national liberation in what is now terrorism. and every of their thoughts for

survival of people. the objective of u.s. colonialist authorities was to terminate their existing fast people, not as random individuals. this is the very definition of modern genocide is contrasted with premodern and consists of extreme violence that did not have the goal of extinction by particular groups. the united states socioeconomic and political entity as a result of the century long and ongoing colonial process. modern indigenous nations and communities their societies swarmed by the resistance to colonialism of which they've carried their practices and history. it is breathtaking, but no miracle they have survived if people because it was not the intention of the colonizers. to say the united states is not

to make an accusation, but rather to face historical reality without much consideration not much in u.s. history makes any sense at all unless indigenous people are simply erased. but indigenous nation are resistant to survive them bear witness to this history and the aero worldwide decolonization in the second half of the 20th century the former colonial powers and their intellectual colleges mounted a counterforce often called neocolonialism from which multiculturalism and postmodernism emerged good although much revision history reflects neo-colonialist strategy and attempt to accommodate the reality is in to retain the dominant, neo-colonialist method signal a certain victory for the colonized by native peoples. such approaches, one result has

been the presence of significant numbers of scholars in u.s. universities who are changing the turns of analysis. the main challenges these scholars have and revising u.s. history in the context of colonialism is not lack of information, nor is it one of methodology or serious. certainly difficulties with documentation or no more problematic than they are in any other area of research. rather the services that the refusal or inability of u.s. historians to comprehend the nature of their u.s. history. the fundamental problem is the absence of the colonial framework and empire the history of fedex as arthur schlesinger junior had it.

or economic penetration of indigenous societies, the european in your american colonial powers created dependent dna balance of trade inc. with indigenous nations and fears of an alliance in control then indirectly in with indefensible use of christian missionary and alcohol. in the case of u.s. settler colonialism, land was the primary commodity. with such obvious indicators of colonialism outwork, why should so many interpretations of the u.s. political economic development be convoluted and obscure, avoiding the obvious. the settler colonialism as an institution requires violence or the threat of violence to attain its goals. people do not hand over their

land, resources, children of futures without a fight and not fight is not with violence, even if it's nonviolent in resisting. the amount of force necessary to accomplish its goals is often extreme exemplary violence, seemingly insane if you look at andrew jackson's career for 40 years. but he was a cold, calculating colonialist and the extreme violence has been an example to everyone else to behave. the notion that settler indigenous complexes and inevitable product of cultural differences from misunderstanding or that violence was committed equally by the colonized and colonizers blurs the nature of the

historical process. euro-american colonialism, and asked back of the globalization that began in the 15th century have from its beginning a genocidal tendencies. so we'll talk about genocide for a minute. i've used the word several times, but it's actually a term of international law. the term genocide was first coined following the holocaust and its prohibition was enshrined in the united nations adopted in 1948, the u.s. convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide. the convention is not rich or reactive, but it is applicable to united states indigenous relations since 1986 and other peoples in the united states such as african-americans.

in 1986, the u.s. senate finally ratified a following for nearly 40 years. very explicitly stalling for fear of accusations and african-americans. the terms of the genocide convention are also useful tools for historical analysis of the effects of colonialism in any area. in the convention, any one of five axis considered genocide is committed with the intent to destroy in whole or in part a national nick racial or religious group. within the society. so besides anyone of these five things, obviously killing members of the group, and others causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, which doesn't require killing

and all. another is deliberately inflict it on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part. again, not necessarily involve killing. imposing measures intended to prevent first within the group. of course we have evidence of decades of sterilization of native women and african-american women. finally, forcibly transferring children of the group to another group, boarding schools, federal religious funds. in the 1990s, the term ethnic cleansing became a district of a term so as to avoid using the term genocide. but it's the same thing.

it was just invented to water down. it's not a war crime, but it's not a good name. it is morally wrong because it is not written anywhere in international criminal law ethnic cleansing, genocide. rafael link in who coined the term genocide noted in his book on the subject access rule in occupied europe says it is often good and needs to be clear. he was also very important in lobbying for the genocide convention. here is his interpretation. generally speaking, genocide is not necessarily mean the

immediate destruction of a nation except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of the nation. it is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of the central found nations of life of national groups and annihilating the groups themselves. the objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions of culture, language, natural feelings, religion and economic existence of these groups and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity and of course even the lives of people belonging to such groups. so u.s. history as well as the inherited indigenous, from

centuries of genocidal campaigns and experiences cannot be understood without dealing very openly with this reality because not only does it affect the casualties of genocide, it affected those who carried out those policies on the whole society that is not either actively enough recognizing it to be in denial, though simply erasing it her memory. so it lines itself, i believe, in the subconscious and comes out in many ways. we do live in one of the most violent countries in the world, even some countries that were people killing each other to not

succeed in killing as many people as we do. so we have to consider, you know, the past to understand the situation of the country today. so from the colonial period to the founding of the united states, continuing the 21st century, this is in tip for native people, torture, terror, sexual abuse, massacres, systematic operations and occupations. removal of indigenous people from the ancestral territories, removal of indigenous children to military boarding schools, forcing a longer speak their languages or practice any of their cultural practices. the access of the regret or tragedy in the annual celebration of u.s. independent,

we trace a deep disconnect in the consciousness of u.s. americans. so colonialism is inherently vital in terms of the genocide convention. in the case of the british north american colonies in the united states on the extermination of removal of part is, but also the disappearing of the prior existence of indigenous people and this continues to be perpetuated in local history. the ojibway historian jean o'brien needs this practice thursday in the last scene and that's the name of her book i highly recommend. -- a total over the continent, local histories, monuments and signage. the first settlement, the founders, the first school, the first while in some of the first

everything there had never been occupations of those places. on the other hand, the national narrative tells of the last indians, the last tribe such as last of the mohicans issued the last indian and into this trail is a famous sculpture by james earle fraser is titled. document policies of genocide in the part of u.s. administrations can be identified in four distinct periods. the jacksonian era during the u.s. independence. the jacksonian era of forced removal, the the california gold rush in northern california, the postbubble war era of the so-called indian wars in the great plains in the 1950s termination. , all of which are discussed in this book.

cases of genocide carried out this policy may be found in historical documents as well as in the oral histories from indigenous communities. as an example from 1873, it is typical of these very explicit orders from general william t. sherman and the generals that burned atlanta during the civil war, all of the civil wars went right out into the planes in with a really hard-core military that had developed did not go civil war to eliminate the planes people. so he said in 1873, we must act with vindictive earnestness against the sioux.

even to their extermination, men, women and children during an assault. the soldiers cannot toss to distinguish between male and female or even discriminate as to age. that is pretty explicit and that is fast actually typical, not atypical. not that he was reprimanded for stating this. it was policy. as patrick noted, the peculiarity of federal colonialism is that it is the elimination of indigenous populations in order to make land available to settlers. not all colonialism. very few areas of the world's under colonization, under imperialism, british or french with their colonialism. they will colonies of new

zealand, australia, united states and canada, the primary ones in the later period of the spanish colonization, argentina, chile, paraguay. very similar settler colonial alimentation's policy. under classic colonialism, the indigenous population is wanted for labor in south asia, south america and so forth. so the project is not limited to government policy, but rather involves all kind of agencies, voluntary militias and settlers themselves acting on their own, but never been punished or curtailed in doing so. immigrants are brought over and

settled in minnesota territory. and then the nikon shoo dakota people were living there farming the mayor put on top of them, so they had to kill the indians and called the military to do the job. so that is how were over and over. paradoxically, the way in which many have acknowledged the fact of genocide leads them to write off native americans as a relevant politics. actually, native americans have the fastest growing population in the united states right now. never recovering their original 10 million over made up of what is now the united states.

maybe one day. nevertheless, robust numbers. but this sort of winner takes all kind of democratic politics in the united states, what to indians not either? this is the nature of the politics. this is what anthropologist michael wilcox calls terminal narrative. so it's walking a fine line to explain genocide and not have that's so sad, but they're gone. you don't have to deal with that anymore. so wilcox calls for the active dismantling of indian histories, which explain the absence cultural or disappearance of indigenous peoples.

in the wake of the u.s. 1950s termination policies, the pin indigenous movement arose at the powerful civil rights and the mint and the broad-based social justice antiwar movements of the 1960s. the indigenous rights movement succeeded in reversing the u.s. termination policy. however, repression, armed attacks on legislative attempts began again in the late 1970s, giving rise to the international indigenous movement which greatly broadened support for the indigenous sovereignty and territorial rights in the united states. strengthening indigenous sovereignty and self-determination to prevent the further loss of native lands will take general public outrage and demand, which in turn will require the general population

those descended from the settlers and endocrine know their history and assume it's the ability. the central pore says that prior on the land in the indian country continues to have profound implications for really the future of the united states. all finished just by having come you know, a little bit clearer picture of the people physically in the country. there are more than 500 federally recognized indigenous communities and nations comprising nearly 3 million people in the united states. now that term recognized or knowledge is an important term because they are probably about

three times that many native people who don't have federal acknowledgment. all of the native people were moved further east of the mississippi river to indian territory during the jackson administration come in the indian removal, not just the five nations trail of tears. these are the largest nations, but all of these nations. so the remnant, not everyone went, but those who did not go lost all of their race to be identified with a collect his identity east of the mississippi. so there's been this recruit been in reforming communities and reconstruct game their nations and attempting to get federal acknowledgment.

so these are the descendents of the 15 million original inhabitants to the land. the majority of whom were farmers who lived in town. this is a very important point. it's like other parts of the world, those who lived by the ocean were fishers, but in the planes were by sin, the bison -- people of the bystander other animals. but the densest populations were farmers of horticultural zone in the world who invented corn. most of the foods that sustain us today. so they were very wealthy people in terms of culture and long life and good health and

sustenance. so that is another minute, you know, that they were really only two people running around here they didn't have any connection with the land itself because they didn't own it individually. they owned communities as collectives. so the united states established a system of indian reservations, which doesn't include all native people by any means. some of these are colonies. they are called colonies in nevada. some are publicized into mexico and some are larger land bases like navajo begin the largest. so beyond the land bases, within the limits of 310 federal iraqi nice reservation, indigenous land water and resource rights extend to all federally acknowledged in the genus

communities, whether they are reservations or not. so as a result of federal land sale, seizures and a lot is, most reservations are severely fragmented. each parcel of tribal trust in privately held land is a separate enclave in her multiple lies and jurisdictions that denomination has the largest contemporary contiguous land base among native nations. nearly 16 million acres or 25,000 square miles. it is larger than about 25 states that have membership in the united nations in southborough native land bases

are. so this is the other aspect of the book i will touch on that is a major theme. following world war ii, the united states was at war with much of the world, just as there was war with indigenous people of north america in an 18th century. this is total war, demanding the enemy surrender unconditionally or face annihilation. it was inevitable that the earlier wars against indigenous people have not acknowledged and repudiated ultimately would include the world. richard slatkin who calls of regeneration through violence, the worst that repeat themselves. in the 20th century after the end of warning against the indian, they overlap into the philippines, into the caribbean

with wars of occupation and annexation after the massacre warranted in 1890. so according to the origin narratives come in united states warns rebellion of oppression against empire and us is a product of the first anti-colonial abolition for national liberation. at narrative flows from a fallacy further broadening and deepening of democracy, the civil war and the soothing second revolution of emancipation ending slavery from the 20th century mission to save europe from itself and the ultimately triumph at site against communism with the united states in inheriting the burdensome task of keeping order in the world. it is a narrative of progress and benevolence. the 1960s social revolutions

ignited that the native american -- by the african-american liberation movement complicated the narrative but it's imperative they shouldn't have been left intact. this incorporation of women, african-americans and endocrine and latinas who call us contributors to the commonwealth. this revised narrative produced a nation of immigrants free market rhetoric, which it secures the u.s. practice of colonization, merging colonialism with immigration or we all came from somewhere else. how often have you heard that, to the metropolitan centers during and after the industrial revolution. native peoples to the extent they are included at all were renamed first american thin dust themselves cast distinct

immigrants. the provincialism in oshawa chauvinism of the u.s. history production makes it difficult for effective revisions to gain authority. scholars both indigenous and several important nonindigenous scholars who would attempt to rectify the distortions are labeled advocates and their findings are rejected for publication on that basis. indigenous colors look to research and inking that have emerged in the rest of the colonized world. to understand the historical experiences of the indigenous people, these thinkers and writers creatively apply to historical materialism of marxism in some place, to liberation theology developed and want america, social analysis to the effects of colonialism on the colonized there, colonized another approach is including development eerie and postmodern

theory, postcolonial theory. all of many insights gained from the source is due to the exceptional nature of the u.s. colonialism among 19th century colonial powers, indigenous scholars and activists are in gauged in exploring new approaches. well, in this book, i climbed the history of the united states from integers people's perspective. but of course there is no such thing as a collect of indigenous peoples perspective, just as there is no monolithic asian or african peoples perspective. it is not a history of the best civilization has survived between the gulf of mexico in canada and between the atlantic ocean pacific. these histories are being written and they are extremely important and i couldn't have

written this book without having access to those written by historians would donate, blinking, muskogee, mole in the, another indigenous communities and nations that have survived. so what this book attempts to do is tell the story of the united states as a colonialist settler state, one that let colonialist european states subjected the original civilizations in the territories it now rules, indigenous peoples now in the colonial relationship with the united states inhabited and thrived for millennia before they were displaced to fragmented reservations and economically decimated. but they are here today and there is still a colonized situation.

so we actually have a colonial situation in the united states today. not just in its history. but until the history is understood, it is hard to understand that and what that, what the implications are for the whole society. one implication is that there will be -- there'll have to be geopolitical rearrangements and changes because about 100 million acres of land total adjusted the consummate, not including alaska and hawaii, other colonies of the united states were taken illegally outside of treaties and need to be restored as land. in their secret areas that were ticketed just simply cease for national parks are for other

reasons like the black hills, yellowstone, yosemite, grand canyon. of course they were the sacred places of the native peoples and they were all taken at the settler states property. so i think if you really think about it, most people have no really great problem of having native people to go. but it means being responsible to the people who are the stewards of the natural stewards of the land. i hope you'll think about these things then you will have some provocative questions and make thank you very much. [applause]

>> i think most people here are sympathetic with your views and understand most of this history. but when i talk to people in the larger culture, i have greeted with an extraordinary hostility. i need, non-pitcher it, you know, the united states. it's really a conflict of worldviews, which you lay out is a difference in values talking about manifest destiny to use modern terms as genocide deniers. others just don't even want to pay attention to data. it doesn't matter if 97% of historians agree. how do we deal with? >> if anyone has a better

answer -- [laughter] open it. well, you know, i have been committed to working on that. all i can say and i think my generation you can also say it has changed somewhat. for those of us who first of all started making this analysis, it really started in the 1950s for some extraordinary native people whose names are kind of forgotten, even by those of us who can't act than the six events having a spirit we didn't know we were kind of reinventing the wheel because back in the thick is, people like darcy nick nichols and others had begun to conceive that these things says

the agent decolonization it just like malcolm x did with this really ran by us. so it kind of came out of the agent decolonization. so i think a lot of consciousness was raised at that time and then there were grand events like alcatraz and the windows ce should do it half months. at that has weaned and explained in the world because i was at college a counterrevolution against the national revolution movements that have colonized in africa, so these great liberation movement that has so much potential were crushed and all kinds of dictatorships and horrible governments, opportunistic people came to power in corporations had a big role in going for the resources.

so it is more difficult now. we make importing gainsaid icp not this time in native studies. when we first started out with our mentor, there were only about, i don't know, eight or nine native people with doctorate degrees. and trying to go to all of these different scholarly associations and breakthrough and love taking us to anthropological conference is and he would write on the blackboard, the only good anthropologist is a..out. anthropology has really changed a lot. they have stopped studying indians. they look at tanks and all kinds of things now.

but there are not many that study native americans anymore. i think that history is the appropriate discipline, you know, for a study not just a study carried eristic sick people of the them apart in human behavior thing. anthropology was invented to tell the settler, the european distorted stages that develop of how human beings used to be, but now we are all modern people. as i said, these are all modern societies, already modern societies that were colonized. ..

in their own -- the communities to get this word out. so, i decided that it seems like a small thing, but i think the consciousness is very important, and maybe something like this is just needed as a way for people to reconceptualize and begin talking without being so defensive. in my own family, i'm a settler,

colonial, and indian in the same family. my dad is' family is scotch irish settlers from the beginning, the worst kind, the andrew jackson scotts irish kind, and then my part indian mother. so in my own family, i have that -- don't kind of accusations that you get when you get the pat buchanan accusation of -- he thinks the mexicans coming to the united states are trying to retake northern mexico. i hope so. i don't think so but i hope pat is right. be better off. yes? >> i recently had the

opportunity to meet one of the daughters a couple weeks ago, and it was getting to the point he was talking about when she was introducing herself, and they were absolutely ignorant to who russell mean was. can you speak about the american indian movement? >> yes, thank you. i always like to talk about the american indian movement. i was -- certainly changed my life. i got involved right after wounded knee, not before, and i kind of had to be brought kicking and screaming into the native movement. i wasn't raised in native community. my scots irish dad was a sharecropper, and all the we lived in a area with lots of native towns, they were plains indians. my mother, who is part cherokee,

and so i -- and there was almost no communication between the white baptist towns and the indian baptist towns, black baptist towns in oklahoma. but a real system of apartheid. so i kind of got recruited to work on the wounded knee legal cases. there were more than 300 people arrested with criminal charges, and i was in law school, so i got recruited by some of the lawyers working on it. and of course i got hooked on it, and the leadership trials -- when i got involved the leadership trialeds've russell means and others had ended, and they served some prison time and it went on and on and on. so, i had done my dissertation

on the history of land tenure in new mexico, and i was interested in a place where free colonialism has taken -- three colonialism -- two eras of spanish colonialism, the mexican state, which was an interesting 20-year period of time, and then the united states. sort of looking at the layers of colonialism and how they worked and how it affected land tenure. so that was my specification and then i wanted to move into looking into oklahoma, very different situation. i hadn't not thought of the plains at all and i found myself being asked to do this oral hoyt -- oral history of the sioux treaty, and i hadn't planned to do it but when you get asked by a group of elders to do something, it's very hard to say -- it's impossible to say

no, because they don't really ask you the question. this is what you're going to do now. so i did the great sioux nation, and it was my first published book, and then we did -- the important thing, and i think russell mean was the main mind behind this, with forming the international indian treaty council in 1974, to take the treaty to an international level because these treaties between the united states and different native people, over 300 legitimate treaties. plenty of treaties -- well, like to remove the cherokee from georgia, andrew jackson's emissaries locked the cherokee leaders up, and closed down their newspaper. they had a thriving newspaper in the cherokee language. and then hand-picked two or

three random cherokees to -- with a guck at their head to sign that they agreed to go to oklahoma -- indian territory. so, that's not a legitimate treaty by anyone's standard, but there are legitimate treaties, and they're extremely important. so, that's work i've been doing for the last -- since we went to geneva in 1977, and i'm going to a u.n. conference on indigenous peoples that the u.n. general assembly is having next week, september 22nd and 23rd. so it's very important work. it's worldwide indigenous people, so clearly native people, and the american indian movement, international indian treaty council, that started the ball rolling.

>> i think it's another thing, an example of how important it is to look at -- i think many of you here are interested in social justice, and many people in the united states are, and especially as we have face climate catastrophe and so forth, that some of the kinds of strategies that native americans have developed are almost always based on survival, and we're all getting in a survival mode. so it's important to look at the strategies for survival, and one is human solidarity. so, the work of the united nations is very important for people to be doing because it's like any government body, and

it's a government of governments, they will just go off on their own as politicians do, and not do anything very useful unless they have massive push hind them. wouldn't be an intern nap treaty and protection of women if not for the massive worldwide women's movement in the 1970s there wouldn't be the rights of a child had it not been for child advocates all over the world gathering, and there's a treaty, or the treaty against torture. and these thing does make a difference. the media in the united states and the government, of course, the right wing, they want you to think that the united nations is a completely useless body, or it's just a security council and the security council is its own thing, completely separate and very -- it is a problematic institution that was added on

the end, but the general assembly and all of the committees and -- what native people have been doing in the -- at the end of the book i explain and it have references to other books that can be read on the subject, but you can also just go to u.n..org and look up indigenous people and fine the whole history of this movement, what was accomplished here. >> can you talk a little bit about your research process or -- where there any unusual documents or interviews that you incurrent at thed in the process of -- encountered in the process of putting this book together? >> that's a really good question. there were. i have to say with all the -- my long-term real disgust and --

with the character of andrew jackson, i did not know that he -- after the battle of horseshoe bend, of annihilation, the creek resistance in alabama, that when -- before he was president, when he was a major general in the army, that he had his soldiers strip the bodies of the dead and use the skin to make reins, horse reins. i didn't know that fact. i didn't know -- you know where the term red skins comes from? it comes from the pea connecticut war, the genocide campaign against the native people by the people of

massachusetts bay, and they too stripped -- a medieval practice but they had done on each other in europe, but certainly they had done it in ireland and english in their conquest of ireland, they strip the bodies and a body without skin is red, and they called them the red skins. literally dead indians. dead, flayed indians. that's why it's so repulsive to native people. it's almost nauseating to even talk about. a lot of people don't understand why it is such a negative -- because native americans don't mind being call other names like indian, not an authentic name or anything, but this is a deep racial slur that is a symbol of genocide.

so, another thing, more recent, that i came across, cass -- were the cases being used as precedents in the decisions what to do with the lawful combatants, a word that never spitzed in international law that your great george w. bush invented, or his aides. they're usually called p.o.w.s. prisoners of war, but in ordinary to lock them up at guantanamo, where they still are, some of them were brought to trial. the center on constitutional rights made that possible, are still fighting to get these people trials, because they're just held forever, without even coming to trial. some of the cases devised were based on 19th century indian

war cases. one was a seminole case and one was a case of the pit river indians in california who killed a -- the modocs, and the modoc war in which they killed a u.s. general canby, and in those -- in the trial of the modocs, they found that they were outlaws, that they deserved execution because this was a crime beyond any kind of law. so the old anglo's idea of an out law is anyone can kill because they're outside the law. they're wolves, they used to say so kill them. and the seminole case was the --

one of the seminole wars in the florida everglades so i was not aware that the judicial -- the military -- this is military justice -- the military judicial system is actually using as legitimate cases genocidal wars against native people in the 19th century to justify genocidal wars taking place right now. so i found that disturbing, but i guess i shouldn't have been so surprised, that they would do that. that it is an active part that is not just history. it's an active part of the present. that's one thing i really try to get across in this book, it's part of our culture right now. >> this is perhaps a bit

tangential but you mentioned you worked a lot in new mexico and i was curious if you could talk done -- it's a place i've recently spent a lot of time and i was curious you could talk about the disappearance of the salinas pueblos. and happened early on and there were huge pueblos, unlike the other that were well known, never survived. >> what war they called? >> the salinas pueblos. >> you tell me about them. >> there were three of them. >> in new mexico? >> in new mexico. >> oh, new mexico. >> centered around the mountain there, and they were every bit as amazing as the current day toas pueblo. >> now i know what you're

talking about. there were 98 pueblos when the spanish came in 1598 when they brought 500 settlers, basque people. settled there. they -- within a generation, the number of pueblos were reduced to 21 from 98, and that was a combination of things. it was mainly warfare because the pueblos fought back, and they had navajo and apache fighting alongside them, and they finally in 1680, 82 years after the colony began, drove the spanish out completely, and kept them away in el paso for 12

years and then came back again with somewhat different policies of allowing the religious practices as long as they could stay there. so, it was a different kind of colonization, but each of those pueblos are remembered. their sites, where they are. the pueblos had -- part of it was their shifting around because when -- that cass settler colonialism at the time. typical colonialism think brought settlers, they wanted land to put them on to make the colony self-sufficient. it was an experiment of the spanish because everywhereles they were u -- all they wanted was the gold and silver and go into the mines and use the native people as labor, work them to death. they felt they would establish this colony and try a settler colony. the british had begun to do it. new england, seemed, successful.

and so all of the things they talk about here, settler colonialism, this eliminationism. so the pueblos already had a practice, for instance, buie bonnic plague was endem nick to the gigantic irrigation system they had for farming, and when plague would hit, the would burn down the whole city state. these are city states. they live in apartment buildings. they would bunch it down -- burn it down and move and build a new one. everything was for the best of human beings. i mean, things can be rebuilt but you can't replace the people who are dead. that die. so, it's a wonderful concept, that material things are not the most important things.

the human being is. so the spanish were a discourage, with the bubonic plague, and many of them left join the navajos and apaches in the mountains who were resisting and merging with them and that continued, that there was this resistant force. they were never conquered, navajos and apaches, never conquered by the spanish. some was just the spanish afflecking, take over prosperous villages and forcing the people out. so, those villages are among -- they are all remembered, people remember their lineages, the pecos pueblo, the farthest south, one of the first ones destroyed. >> is our time up?

>> thank you so much. [applause] >> we can happily continue the conversation at the signing table. there are still plenty of copies downstairs at the information desk that you see when you first walk into the store. we ask you purchase a book before we write in sharpie in it and we'll be here long enough, if you do that, we'll still be here. [inaudible conversations] >> you're watching booktv on c-span 2.