Government: An Expression of Domination

Steve Newcomb















You need to be logged in in order to post comments
Please use the log in option at the bottom of this page




dinagw's picture
Questioning the legitimacy of government domination of Native peoples also raises troubling questions about nationalism in general, and more specifically, how power is enacted. If we acknowledge that governments are more formalized processes of power OVER people than power OF people, then how do we reconcile this to the mythologies so familiar to us: democracy is the enactment of freedom, and that it is our duty to export American democracy to the rest of the world? Isn't it more appropriate to just admit that nationalism is a necessary evil that we are all stuck with? Or can we imagine a different world where human dignity is truly honored, and we live harmoniously with the natural world?
softbreeze's picture
Something is a law when people have the ability to either persuade other people to follow their laws, or have the ability to enforce the laws through police, courts, or military. So, even though it is unconstitutional to violate the law of separation of church and state, unless those with the ability to enforce this law choose to enforce it, which in this case would be towards themselves, I think it's not likely to change. I think one thing we could perhaps change is how we address the issue. I think it's good and useful to be knowledgeable about federal indian law. But, maybe it's even more important to become experts and scholars of out own traditional native law. For example, traditionally, native americans did not accept the idea that you could "own" the land anymore than you could "own" the sky. Yet, for understandable reasons, many of the native tribes have gone to federal and state courts to sue over land "rights". In some sense, we are adopting the Christian-European/and Euroamerican ideology of "owning" parts of our Mother Earth. When we do this, we are in a sense, invalidating our own cultural concepts and beliefs. Maybe instead we could assert that as children of the Creator and Mother Earth, we believe we have the inherent right to live in a clean and safe environment, to obtain what we need to live directly from Mother Earth, and that we have the right to live harmoniously with all other Human Beings. So, instead of approaching the problem from a position of subordination by addressing the issue within the context of another culture's perspective, we could approach the issues from a position of equality by discussing and negotiating the problems from our own cultural perspective. This might also facilitate a better understanding on the part of the other culture as to where we are coming from.
ndnlady's picture
Thank you, Steven, another fine and thought-provoking piece.
dbender's picture
World order. It's what gives paper money value.
lakotaiam's picture
Domination or discrimination no matter how you word it or color it. The meaning is the same slavery. This land was not lost, we knew exactly where we lived on our land until greed came ashore and wiped us out. It still exists today in our our so called privledged boarding schools for our youth to learn of ruthless ways and forget their cultures.. There is a boarding school in california where all the head people are whites who have no shame in degrading and verbally abusing our children ( who are too afraid to speak up) do you think anyone cares?????? not on this continent unless they own half. These schools should not be closed unless decided by the people not white men who call natives trash and no accounts.. Does that mean all the gold and other Valuables are meanless also... This so called freedom of speech only applies to politicians who all speak with fork tongues.
dawnlawrencemusic's picture
Steven Newcomb you don't shy away from looking at the tough Christian concepts!! As a non Catholic Christian the concept of “…in Illo a quo imperia et dominationes ac bona cuncta procedunt confidentes…” is one that's not completely unfamiliar to me. Basically it's saying that God ordains and allows good and bad government. I think about that for a minute in light of the Nazis(or any negative example you would choose). I think about this even in light of a US government administration I don't like and didn't vote for. Some of the most vocal opponents of this administration or that, are Christians who do NOT appear to be accepting the premise that God ordained and allows the leader they don't like. The culture of the United States operates on the premise that people have the power individually and collectively to challenge authority and government within given structures. The fact that I have lived in the twentieth century, thinking of myself as someone powerful enough to determine details of my own life and future makes this a particularly sticky Christian concept to stomach but there it is...in Protestant theology as well. In the Vatican in 1493, this doctrine was part of the larger Western European concept of unquestioned submission to authority; Church authority, authority of family members, submission to local officials as well. In 1493 this went as far as submission to the idea that each person was born into a social class and even a location and a VOCATION in which God expected you to stay. How exactly this doctrine changed (or didn't) as it traveled with the people who practiced Catholicism wherever they went and encountered new and completely unfamiliar situations still holding onto concepts learned in "the Old Country" is recorded in the history we read or hear.