Why I disagree with Harriet Tubman Replacing Andrew Jackson on Colonial Capitalist Currency

If you haven't yet, check the headlines.

Now that I understand the history and context of colonialism a bit more, I've come to a few realizations. 

 

I already knew that the United States founded on slavery and land theft. I have ancestral connection to many of the lands that were taken and exploited. In addition, many of us know that United States would have never been able to achieve its status if it weren't for the outright shameful institution of slavery - importing black people from Africa and forcing them to work under abysmal conditions, while they lost connection to their previous lives and culture. Capitalism, locally and globally, would not have flourished without the exploitation and degradation of fellow human beings - an extremely problematic mindset that would continue to operate oppressively for centuries to come. 

For the United States, the idea of "freedom" was a farce for marginalized people of color from its conception. For indigenous people, colonization meant a permanent end to the freedom enjoyed prior to settlement. For the Indians that survived, continued survival meant forced assimilation. Our great grandparents had no choice but to live under the submission of the oppressor - there was no other way. It was carried out by a deliberate show of force. 

After it became bad PR for settlers to continue to carry out a genocide, assimilation became the new policy and "kill the Indian save the man" became the famous motto. While boarding school institutions were formed to kidnap Indian children and force them to adapt the ways of the white man, historians were rewriting and whitewashing the story of what was happening to that of bold conquest. Andrew Jackson, Indian killer, was a Western hero. Manifest destiny was widely romanticized from the "Old World" aka Europe to their new world. As the newly formed nation became a major player in the global scheme, public relations became key to managing internal rebellion.

They tricked us into thinking slavery ended. Because of internalized pressures, those in power knew the new colonial empire would cease to exist if they continued to be so open about their cruelty. So their solution? After a bloody war and many massacres, the abolition of slavery in the United States was achieved. It was a tremendous breakthrough that gave hope and a brighter future for many, though waged through continued oppression and discrimination.

Slavery then became exported. Companies like United Fruit waged war on indigenous peoples, polluted their water, and enslaved others. Governments waged guerilla wars, sponsored by the United States, against some of its own people many countries in South America, Central America, Africa, and beyond. The United States continues to make a profit from the conflict that stems from prior conflict.  Global hegemony and dominance were made into standard practice. The United States caught up on its PR game too. They began to condemn the very countries they were exploiting and wash their hands of all liability. In the interests of capitalism, it paid to have others do the dirty work, literally. Colonialism and slavery went global, fueled by the hegemony and greed of every Euro-centric country that espoused it for their benefit.

I have no doubt that good people are excited about the recent Harriet Tubman spotlight. She was a woman who literally was a guiding light to freedom. She worked to dismantle slavery - courageously risking her own life to free her own people. I mean, we could all use some inspiration, right? We need people like Harriet Tubman to look up to. We very much should celebrate those who have righteously stood firm for decent treatment as human beings.

However, we shouldn't be fooled either. A lot of us, myself included, were fooled by our state sponsored education system into thinking slavery ended. But exported slavery is still slavery... and people of color worldwide cannot claim the same victory. Colonialism continues to enslave and exploit.

Given this history, it is understandable that the call was made to replace Andrew Jackson's colonizer face with Harriet Tubman's. But isn't it just a little bit ironic, making Harriet Tubman the global face of capitalism of U.S. Dominance and supremacy? Would she have wanted that? Andrew Jackson was a tyrant - but he perfectly represents what that green piece of paper stands for - consumerism, capitalism, and colonialism. Harriet Tubman would be a misrepresentation of the face of currency - her worth is so much more than that.

The Catholic Church and the Witchcraft of Evoking Junipero Serra

-
I grew up in the Catholic church and cannot deny its influence in shaping my worldview. I can't deny the way its teachings have influenced my mind and development. Considering this, I'm hesitant to criticize the church's moves - out of respect for my family and to their devotion and beliefs. I respect everyone's right to their spirituality of choice.

But there comes a point in time when somebody has to say something, most especially when a clear and poignant evil is emulated from what many consider the most holy of holy of sources. The recently cannonized Junipero Serra is not holy. He was quite a questionable character and had a major part in colonizing, subjugating, and dehumanizing indigenous peoples.

Every Sunday, hundreds of thousands gather for mass and engage in the ceremony of paying homage to Jesus Christ. During this ceremony, these hundreds of thousands engage in this prayer that incorporates certain elements of the saints according to how they lived their lives. 

As a former Catholic I know that Catholics pray to the saints. Please, do not pray to Junipero Serra. No good can come from a prayer evoking destructive elements in the name of conversion. Serra's example and presence should not be evoked and admired as saintly. 

I believe that most of the prayer is a good thing. It is formed though good intentions. It is directed in sincerity and a good way. However, there IS a wrong way to pray.

The hundreds of thousands should not be evoking the name of someone who as perpetuated evil in these chants. Doing so is akin to evoking witchcraft in a bad way. But even for the less spiritual and more secular minded, there is much more implicated in the psyche of the matter.

For the atheists out there and the science minded—forget I ever said witchcraft. Forget I ever referred to anything spiritual. Instead, ponder the psychological aspects of reflecting on the life of someone who lived theirs with little regard for the territory and those inhibiting it.

Serra pretty much behaved as a psychopath with little regard for the sanctity of life. What does paying homage to someone who helped perpetuate genocide do to the psyche of those who pray on it? The psychological aspects alone are unsettling.

What happens when you add the spiritual effect to the psychological? Add it all together, and now we have a room full of hundreds of thousands of people on a given Sunday, chanting and evoking a person who lived his life in moral disarray. That, my friends, is witchcraft of the darker sorts. For that, the Vatican should be called out and exposed for perpetuating evil.

Disclaimer: This is my opinion of the hierarchies of the Vatican only, and is in no way a condemnation of anyone else, nor towards anyone practicing the tenants of the religion. The direction comes from the top down, and my criticism is solely directed at the people in charge at the top.

Your Support For Bernie Sanders Scares Me As Much As You Fear Support For Donald Trump. Let Me Tell You Why.

“In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends” – Martin Luther King

Things aren’t ever going to be the same on the borderlands. The United States is at war and border security is in the Nation’s interest, making it a top priority. Which means the Tohono O’odham Nation is under siege. Gone are the days of happy cook outs out in the boonies among the scenic desert beauty. I suppose we could try, but my happiness soon dissipates when a border patrol SUV, ATV, or helicopter shows up. Maybe that isn’t true for all. Some welcome the intrusion. For me, my thoughts are often occupied by various thoughts on how to control my rage. I don’t want to be so angry. I want to be understood. I want people to understand what is happening and what the potential consequences are. I’m not merely just trying to be subversive, I swear.

I’ve been told, by a genealogist of an indigenous nation far from the borderlands, that my mention of these issues is “selfish.” In the context of the argument, I may not have brought the subject up in a persuasive way, because sometimes my anger hinders my ability to do that. But since that comment was made, I’ve been arguing with him in my mind ever since.

It isn’t selfish to to demand inclusion. I mean, we are used exclusion. It makes sense that Tohono O’odham history is left out of the mainstream narrative of American Indian History. Tohono O’odham have always been here, in the desert, and our history is quite a bit different from that or of many other tribes in the North or to the East. Our traditional songs incorporate elements of the desert and the surrounding land. Our celebration music, Waila, or “Chicken Scratch” is unique and often a new experience for those of my Diné friends who venture to Tohono O’odham jewed. Tohono O’odham’s first encounters with colonizers were in the form of Catholic missions. When the Tohono O’odham Nation was designated a reservation, it was already after the treaty era had ended. Our colonization by the United States began with assimilation.

We are still dealing with the consequences of that era. In my opinion, our elected Council and other leadership would be fighting for our rights if that era wasn’t beaten into their consciousness. Our council does not respond to the daily complaints of harassment, destruction of property and environmental resources, halting of basic movement, and degrading check points and stops because of a domestic dependent relationship it has with the federal government – doctrine already formulated by the time the Tohono O’odham Nation became a federally recognized as a tribe. That relationship provides that the federal government has a high degree of control over our affairs. When the policy was crafted, indigenous people were intentionally halted from providing for themselves. Tribes were made dependent on government rations as a way of exercising control. Such a policy continues, and because my tribe doesn't have many lawyers, we aren't very informed of our rights within the colonial system. If we don't exercise our rights we lose them, and we are losing our rights at a record pace.

A lot of our history was kept from us, and wasn’t made clear to settlers either. I’m willing to bet many from my hometown of Ajo, AZ are not even familiar with Hia-Ced O’odham history in the area. I most certainly wasn’t taught anything in school. I wasn’t taught about Pia Machita and didn’t know that we actually do have a history of resistance. I was taught the opposite, that Tohono O’odham were peaceful and passive. I admit that I do have peaceful tendencies, but we aren’t really as passive as they teach us we are supposed to be.

We are used to being left out, and maybe that’s what is hindering a movement from taking off. People have been treated badly for so long, most feel like why bother? Its not like people care. Its not like we are ever considered in anything. Many are so used to being treated badly they have internalized it. There are not many jobs on the rez. Actually, that isn’t true. There are border patrol jobs and there are cartels coming in and offering people “jobs.” A person will make a mistake, (which many will condemn without knowing what its like) get busted, and will believe society when society tells them that they matter less, or that their human worth is less. That cycle repeats. The people who experience the worst abuses have made some of these mistakes. They have no recourse. Society has a way of ostracizing those who are suffering the most. Which sucks, because I believe that a strong community is actually the best way to get rid of the cartels. If we had pride in our land the way we used to, there is no way Tohono O’odham would let the cartels get away with what they do.

Our well being has been left out since the beginning of our inclusion in the United States, if that makes sense. Tohono O’odham existence wasn’t contemplated in the negotiation of the Gadsden Purchase, and settlers drew an imaginary line, cutting right in the middle of Tohono O’odham jewed. Before they started really enforcing “border security,” it was just that, an imaginary line that didn’t really matter much –  many would travel back and forth without second thoughts about the existence of it. That stopped in my lifetime.

We can’t cross anymore without being vigorously questioned. The last time I went to Mexico, I was interrogated for hours. Traditional crossings were shut down by homeland security, and what used to take 5 minutes now will take hours travel for many families visiting grandparents and loved ones. We have no right of free movement. Not even on the U.S. side. If one makes the mistake of taking the wrong dirt road on the rez, one can expect that they think its “reasonable” to be surrounded by agents and helicopters. I’m not the first person that has happened to. Sometimes they point their guns at unarmed people, our elders and even our children. That kind of thing happens every day.

I keep hearing that breakthroughs are being made in Indian Country. I hear that Obama cares about indigenous people. I hear that we (as indigenous people) aren’t as marginalized as we used to be – that its getting better. When I hear this, I can’t help but think – Are we the exception… again?! To say that policy is good towards us when it isn’t, to say we are being included when we aren’t…. That says something. It screams, “Not you! You don’t count!”

I understand that Bernie Sanders is the most progressive, and yes, he has paid the most attention to Indian Country. He persuades even me. I like what he says. He is a good speaker with amazing points. And with Donald Trump  so polarizing, he seems like a breath of fresh air.

That is why I find support for him terrifying. He has done this while ignoring us. It means more of the same, more recognition of issues that aren’t so politically difficult and ignoring the ones that might make a candidate look bad. I can’t help but think, what good is recognition of Indian Country, when even Indian Country ignores us too? No Indian lawyer contested when DHS waived laws on the reservation in the name of border security. Nobody even hears about that. Instead we hear the president is making “great strides” in Indian Country.  While they celebrate, DHS makes partnerships with Israel to supply new drones and 15 new spy towers to monitor activity on our land. Bernie supports this! He supported S 744 and proudly boasts about it in his campaign video. As much as I want to be as excited as everyone else, his support of a bill that virtually destroys us kind of kills it for me.

I’m not telling you not to vote for the guy. I get that the other prospects are scary too. Do what you do. For now, I just want to be understood. I’m not bringing these issues up just to be negative. I bring them up as a genuine concern of marginalization – rooted in the fact that we are marginalized and often even more so when leadership is progressive.

Think Pete Turner Didn't Keep the Name "Illegal Pete's" to Make a Profit Off Bigotry? Think Again

The grand opening of the restaurant "Illegal Pete's," a restaurant chain started by Pete Turner of Colorado has caused quite a stir. Here in the state of Arizona, the word illegal has been used to dehumanize and degrade brown people and treat them like lesser human beings. I say brown people because I know of several undocumented white people from Canada who have been spared the wrath of such a label. I know of several Tohono O'odham people, including myself, who have been accused of being "illegal" simply because we are not white. Which is pretty ironic, because we have been here since time immemorial.

Pete Turner defends the name of his restaurant by claiming that the "illegal" part was not intended as a derogatory connotation towards undocumented people. However, it is clear that he is aware the name attracts a certain type of white supremacist. After Colorado residents protested the name, a similar outcry of xenophobic support occurred. After complaints were made, Turner was flooded with support from racists.

Business owners can be pretty savvy when it comes to public relations. Turner may claim the name of this restaurant does not evoke a derogatory connotation all day, but that doesn't change the racist face of a sizable amount of his customers. There is no doubt that Turner was aware of this phenomena. He doesn't need to make a statement on his intentions. The response is visible in his receipt returns in addition to his vocal supporters/commentators on social media. He certainly wasn't oblivious that he would receive such an outpouring of support by racists when he chose to open up his restaurant in Tucson, where books have been banned, ethnic studies outlawed, and children are torn apart from their parents through mass roundups and daily Streamline deportations. No, this move was quite calculated, no matter what the man claims.

The following are screenshots of people supporting "Illegal Pete's." Pete Turner is making a pretty sizable profit from their patronage, and doesn't seem to have the slightest problem doing it.

"Illegal Pete's" has become the new gathering spot for SB 1070 supporters, white supremacists, neo-Nazi's, and Minutemen. Is that the type of establishment our community should support?

More comments added by readers:

Appropriation vs. Militarization: What makes an Indian more furious?

I think it is great when indigenous people find solidarity on certain issues. Having said that, I spend a lot of time wondering what makes a certain issue sexy, while another one is completely ignored.

Appropriation is one of those issues I can totally vibe with, but I guess I’m feeling a little envious that it is just so damn sexy and that trying to bring attention to militarization isn’t. At all. In fact, I have had indigenous folks often try and “check” me on my anger towards militarization. This is where I get really confused. I wonder if they think that I'm making things up? Why are they so dismissive? Don't they see that what we are experiencing is a product of colonization also? Why does the real lived experience of militarization, at a crisis level, not matter?

I’ll see those same folks in a flying fit of rage over indigenous appropriation. I’ll see them furiously defend their anger, and their right to be angry. And I don't disagree with them! I mean, we are talking centuries of oppression, assimilation, and subjugation. Indigenous history has been lied about, in everything, and that has consequences. Movies, books, and popular culture have helped to condition the masses to remain incredibly ignorant towards indigenous people.

I feel that rage too. I didn’t really get it until I went to college and actually felt the weight of the ignorance. Before that though, I was a product of my surroundings. Many people back home don't view appropriations as an important issue, and probably wouldn't understand why so much time and energy is spent fighting it. To me, it makes complete sense why they don’t get it. They aren't reading case law that demonstrates what can happen when a bunch of white people write stereotypes and ignorance into law. People back home would probably be surprised to find out that there are masses (mostly on the East Coast) who think that Indians are extinct!

A lot of people back home just don’t want to worry about what white people who appropriate are doing. Appropriations doesn’t concern them, because they are doing their own thing. I get that too. I even envy it! Academia can be full of itself. While being exposed to the academic realm did change my perspective, it also skewed it. I long to live my life in a more traditional sense, away from the pasty walls of academia. Being immersed in academia can be short-sighted and it doesn't have all the answers either.

The “academic Indian” doesn’t get my rage over militarization, I think for the same reason a lot of my “rez Indian” friends don’t see the big deal about appropriation. They don’t see it because they aren't having the experiences that would lead them to make the connections. They haven’t had a family member abused by a border patrol agent. They don’t have to go through checkpoints to visit home. They haven’t been surrounded by seven vehicles, armed agents, and a helicopter while just trying to go about their day. They haven’t lived it.

As a consequence, the “academic Indian” often will treat my rage like it is my own problem. They don’t connect the experience of militarization to the history of colonization in the same way they connect appropriations to colonization. They see me as someone who is getting mad over something trivial, and treat me very similarly to how people respond when they defend appropriation.

The Art of Anti Indigenous and Anti Immigrant Deception: The Pope and Sophie Cruz

I feel like people are going to throw tomatoes at me for the blog I am about to write.

I can’t stop thinking about Sophie Cruz. An amazing little girl, so smart, so brave, and yet so misled by the nonprofits set up to lie and deceive. 

Did it bother you that I said that? Did it seem like I’m saying not nice things about a beautiful little girl who only wants the best for her parents and her family? I really, really hope not. The truth is I have a lot of admiration for Sophie Cruz. I feel for her parents and want them to be together and live and work in peace. I want to be fighting along side her to make that happen. But I can’t, because I know the truth about comprehensive immigration reform and exactly what is happening.

We don’t exactly live in a philosophical era where truth is highly prioritized. I don’t see a lot of critical discussion surrounding indigenous people and how they are affected by comprehensive immigration reform. And it seems like many people I know and love also fall for the theatrics that tell them that it is a good thing. I don’t know how to tell them what I know. I don’t know how to tell them that this has been done before.

There are patterns in colonialism, and there are tactics that have been used since the dawn of the colonial era to subjugate indigenous people. The divide and conquer tactic is the most prevalent and effective. The dream of manifest destiny paved the way for deception. When settlers set out to take land, many indigenous people were lied to in order to get them to make concessions. Early settlers repeatedly and continually made false promises in the form of treaties and other agreements. On numerous occasions, colonists would pick specific community members to con into accepting deceptive promises. These selected persons would in turn bring the lies back to the community. They often did this thinking they were helping their people, not knowing that the settlers intended a more sinister plan of action.

It breaks my heart to see this tactic used today, and to see so many fall for it. Sophie Cruz doesn’t know that the reform proposed serves to harm indigenous people. She doesn’t know that its passage would make immigrants go through a very complex process that could result in deportation. She doesn’t know the truth—that comprehensive immigration reform is anti immigrant and anti indigenous.

The powers behind the theatrics knew exactly what they were doing. They knew that many indigenous people were protesting Junipero Serra that day. They know that a big part of CIR is militarization, and that increases migrant deaths. They know that it is a bad policy solution for indigenous people and migrants, but they don’t want us to know that. They intentionally chose a bright, amazing, adorable little girl to carry on their message of deception, and she has no idea. 

Junipero Serra is the Perfect Spokeperson for Comprehensive Immigration Reform and Divide and Conquer Policy

Junipero Serra is not the type of immigrant anyone should strive to be, but it is fitting that he is used to promote the colonial policy of comprehensive immigration reform. His tactics to convert, assimilate, and train indigenous people to become like settlers can be compared to modern day policies intending to assimilate the immigrant. Nowadays, the parameters for CIR have included an overwhelming push for assimilation. The legal environment is ripe with anti immigrant furor. That environment is composed of English-only battle cries, bans on ethnic studies, show me your papers SB 1070, 100 mile waiver of rights SB 750, countless laws waiving laws in the name of national security, and many CIR provisions that mandate assimilation in exchange for citizenship. Militarization is a part of CIR, and it is probably the most in-your-face form of colonization that we see coming out of it. In the Southwest, it started with missions. It continues with proposed spy towers on the Tohono O'odham reservation.

Back in the day, Serra wrote about his troubles converting the Indians to Christianity. He was feeling pretty down because they didn't want to convert willingly, so his solutions to their unresponsiveness was forced coercion. If they would not readily assimilate, they were whipped, beaten, forced into labor and not allowed to leave the missions. They had to adopt the ways of the dominant society or face the consequences. If they resisted, they were beaten into submission. Indians were not permitted to leave. Once they were in, they were trapped. Families, trapped behind the mission walls, were not even permitted to carry on relationships. Serra would purposely separate children from their parents so that they wouldn't learn their culture. (View Serra's testimonies here)

The conquest of Serra and others had devastating impacts on indigenous populations. Many did not survive the mission system. It wasn’t just because of diseases, as the settlers like to argue time and again. The settlers knew they were killing the Indians. Indians were viewed as savage and inferior, and therefore the decimation in population was not a concern to the colonizer.

It is fitting that Serra's canonization is being used to continue a similar policy. The push for comprehensive immigration reform says to indigenous people on the border, “We don’t have to consult you on anything. We’re going to take your lands and militarize them and you won’t have any voice in anything. You don't matter to us.”

In today's day and age, I have to give credit to the PR people in charge. They've given Serra an image of a saint, as one who gave indigenous people the wondrous gift of Christianity and away from their so-called heathen ways. They've managed to frame Comprehensive Immigration Reform as human rights necessity, when in reality the provisions it contains are human rights atrocities.  It's a giant set up. NGOs have been used to perpetuate the policy of divide and conquer.

Comprehensive immigration reform equals militarization. It means more border patrol, more harassment, guns, drones, tanks, towers, helicopters flying overhead, trespassing on Tohono O’odham land, and more migrants dying in desert.

The interests of white supremacy continue to condition immigrants, many with indigenous ancestry, to disrespect people indigenous to these lands. Not only have they been forced to leave everything they love because of colonial policies like NAFTA, but they are forced to take sides with the colonizer to survive. It is the same type of scenario indigenous peoples were forced into and why so many conceded to treaties and reservations. The system requires this assimilation in exchange for citizenship. 

Immigration is caused by colonization. Immigration also perpetuates colonialism through assimilation. The only way to break this cycle is through respect towards indigenous inhabitants. Given the fuss over the pope and the dismissal of indigenous people this week, we still have a long way to go in achieving that respect.