Now ever since Blazing Saddles, I thought Blacks and Indians got on just fine
but it just isn’t so.[quote]
Cherokees May Reconsider Expelling Descendents of Black Slaves
U.S. government objects to tribal court’s ruling banishing freedmen.[/quote] slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/09/ … 69506.html[quote]
The U.S. government is at odds with the Cherokee Nation over its decision to expel the descendants of black slaves from its ranks.
The tribe, the country’s second-largest, revoked the citizenship of 2,800 black members last week. The move cut them off from health care, food stipends, and other services, the Associated Press reported.
It followed a decision by the tribe’s Supreme Court that upheld a 2007 constitutional amendment limiting the Cherokee Nation to those with Cherokee blood. That excluded the descendants of slaves who had been owned by wealthy Cherokee individuals until being freed after the Civil War. In an 1866 treaty between the tribe and the U.S. government, those “freedmen” were guaranteed full tribal membership rights.[/quote]
Now my head is spinning here for several reasons.
There were wealthy Cherokee?
They had black slaves?
In another article that I can’t find now, I read that not only did they support the Confederacy, the Cherokee FOUGHT for the South in the War.
I’m sure some were wealthy, but doubt many of those holding slaves were. At least, not at the time of the civil war.
Various native groups in Canada had slaves too, and some on the west coast were quite wealthy, until the turn of the century.
Wrong kind of wealth though: hard to hold on to when the new society moved in.
Hey, look at that: a point I was making the other day in another thread.
I’m not surprised that they are trying to kick out the descendants of slaves out of their band. Minority groups are often fighting with one another. It’s what makes watching Democratic Party infighting so entertaining.
The Potato Famine Irish (versus the much earlier Scots Irish immigrants that fought for both sides) usually supported Northern War Democrats during the Civil War because they saw the Republican Party as promoting equality for Blacks—something that would make them workforce competitors to the Irish.
Cherokees supporting Jefferson Davis? A lot of this had to do with their hatred of federalism and Andrew Jackson (i.e. The Trail of Tears) almost half a century before the Civil War. Still a few remained loyal, including John Ross.
That they are now, in the 21st Century, removing a reconstruction-era provision that required freed slaves to become band members strikes me as being exclusionary. Tribalism within the tribe?
[quote=“Jaboney”]
I’m sure some were wealthy, but doubt many of those holding slaves were. At least, not at the time of the civil war. [/quote]
The Chief John Ross, who remained loyal to the Union, was wealthy and a slaveholder.
First of all, many different tribes took slaves before the white man was anywhere near. They raided and enslaved each other.
Secondly, yes, hatred of Jackson. Also, most present day Cherokee land is south of the Mason Dixon. Of course they fought with the south. And they were pressed into service, too. Not always willing to just jump into the white man’s war.
Then, when the war was over, they were ordered to accept their slaves as citizens.
I’ve read accounts that black slaves preferred Indian masters to white, and other accounts of the opposite claim. I don’t know how true any of them are. I remember first hearing about Cherokee slave owners because black slaves had fled from white masters and the Cherokee agreed to hide and care for them, in exchange for work–or for becoming a slave to the Cherokee instead.
Cherokees purging non-Indian blood citizens now is very politically incorrect, but might make sense to some. Access to Native American citizenship means money. Money from government subsidies, and sharing in the tribal wealth (and many tribes are getting wealthy off gambling these days). It means free university education, free health care, and free food programs.
So I’m saying that this may not be simply a Cherokee Nation thing. They may have been pressed into this decision from US Nation reps. Maybe not, of course. But if so, do you think anyone would want any press about THAT? Haha. Hell no. Two of the worst, most embarrassing, chapters of American history repeated again and all at once. But the sudden change of heart this day and age does seem surprising, doesn’t it?
[quote=“housecat”]I can’t see what’s so shocking about any of this.
First of all, many different tribes took slaves before the white man was anywhere near. They raided and enslaved each other.
Secondly, yes, hatred of Jackson. Also, most present day Cherokee land is south of the Mason Dixon. Of course they fought with the south. And they were pressed into service, too. Not always willing to just jump into the white man’s war.
Then, when the war was over, they were ordered to accept their slaves as citizens.
I’ve read accounts that black slaves preferred Indian masters to white, and other accounts of the opposite claim. I don’t know how true any of them are. I remember first hearing about Cherokee slave owners because black slaves had fled from white masters and the Cherokee agreed to hide and care for them, in exchange for work–or for becoming a slave to the Cherokee instead.
Cherokees purging non-Indian blood citizens now is very politically incorrect, but might make sense to some. Access to Native American citizenship means money. Money from government subsidies, and sharing in the tribal wealth (and many tribes are getting wealthy off gambling these days). It means free university education, free health care, and free food programs.
So I’m saying that this may not be simply a Cherokee Nation thing. They may have been pressed into this decision from US Nation reps. Maybe not, of course. But if so, do you think anyone would want any press about THAT? Haha. Hell no. Two of the worst, most embarrassing, chapters of American history repeated again and all at once. But the sudden change of heart this day and age does seem surprising, doesn’t it?[/quote]
Like she said–most of the slave holders were from the original nation in the east coast which was considered the largest of the "civilized nation’’ a lot of whites (myself included) claim Cherokee lineage to this massive tribe who also will never be recognized. Seqouia a Cherokee man developed the written language years back, which is still taught in North Carolina and Oklahoma reservations I use Cherokee to give commands to my dogs if you ever want to hear it spoken. I can’t remember how to write it! They had representation in congress way before the great plains wars and yes they had slaves and supported the South in the civil war. Personally I think that expelling the freeman is just another way to continue the circle of poverty and reliance on the government as well as promoting inbreeding and a loss of tribal culture and language. It’s all about the money and being born into a world of entitlement.
I’m one generation out from entitlement. If I could have convinced my mom to join, I’d have gone to university for free.
My son’s first school in AR was Seqouia Elementary. They taught the Cherokee alphabet, and who the man was, but nothing more than that. There is Cherokee on signs throughout AR and OK (that I’ve seen), and elsewhere along the trail of tears route.
I have a good friend who spent a few years as a doctor on the Tahlequah reservation in exchange for medical school loan forgiveness. I spent quite a bit of time with them there, and I’ve attended as a guest at a couple of Pow-wows. The original tribal customs and culture, especially the language, are fascinating. But reservation living is toxic. They can get handouts and live hand to mouth, with free medicine, schooling, and food, but there aren’t jobs. If they leave to find a job, they leave the safety net of handouts, too. There’s no incentive for them to do anything but drink and gamble. I think, in all the time I was there, I heard two young people speaking Cherokee ONCE. Mostly they young ones don’t bother. It’s pretty sad.
[quote]Regular readers remember that about three weeks ago, the Cherokee Nation broke an 1866 treaty and expelled thousands of descendants of enslaved blacks — called the Cherokee Freedmen — who were brought to Oklahoma by Native American owners. Booker Rising then mentioned that it was a political move, due to the fact that the (1) Cherokee Freedmen are backing the man who is challenging incumbent Cherokee Nation Chief Chad Smith in this month’s special election and (2) eliminating their vote would make it much harder for the challenger to win, and potentially violated the 14th Amendment and Voting Rights Act.
Well, the feds have done a swoop down. From the Associated Press: “A federal order for one of the nation’s largest American Indian tribes to restore voting rights and benefits to about 2,800 descendants of members’ former slaves threw plans for a special election for a new chief into turmoil Tuesday. The federal government sent the sternly-worded letter to the Cherokee Nation after it sent letters last week kicking the descendants out of the tribe and stripping them of benefits including medical care, food stipends and assistance for low-income homeowners. The tribe also barred the descendants from voting in a Sept. 24 special election for principal chief.”
The federal government said that unless the Cherokee Freedmen descendants were allowed to vote, the upcoming special election wouldn’t be considered valid.[/quote]
These folks are not “pure black West African” or even as mixed as the average African American, many have significant Native ancestry, often more so than many “whites” who claim Native Ancestry if they are 1/16 (which they can do by law)…
The issue is that when they did the census to determine who was “black” and who was “Indian” they based it on white census people (over 100 years ago) going to this area and determining “race” by people’s appearance. So if you looked “black” then you were “black”. Typically in America, anyone from Mariah Carey to Barack Obama to Wesley Snipes can be considered “black”. White has a much more narrow definition, if you aren’t European looking (and often in U.S. history some Mediterranean groups were often accused of not being “white” for a long period…this largely ended between WWI-WWII) then you were not “white”.
Basically it is the “one drop rule”…anyone with any noticeable African ancestry was “black” anyone with any noticeable non-European ancestry (or what people thought was non-European) was at best suspect, but often considered non-white.
So to the white census taker…
Cherokee + black = black
Cherokee + white = Cherokee
The Cherokee Nation does not accept DNA test to determine ancestry or “blood quantum”…but census records.
This surprises me. If you are descended from someone on the rolls and can document the lineage you should be able to get on the rolls yourself regardless of whether your mother got herself registered. Of course, the tribes have their own criteria for deciding (not necessarily 1/16th, contra DragonHorse). But many tribes are relatively liberal – other than some tribes regarding descendants of freedmen, who were placed in their own category (with some arbitrariness in how people were categorized).
This surprises me. If you are descended from someone on the rolls and can document the lineage you should be able to get on the rolls yourself regardless of whether your mother got herself registered. Of course, the tribes have their own criteria for deciding (not necessarily 1/16th, contra DragonHorse). But many tribes are relatively liberal – other than some tribes regarding descendants of freedmen, who were placed in their own category (with some arbitrariness in how people were categorized).[/quote]
I was speaking specifically about the Cherokee, not other tribes.
Even within the Cherokee, different bands have different requirements.[/quote]
I was not aware of that. My cousin is one of the ones who got kicked out recently…she is now back in. in any case as to this specific situation, it was all political…they played a race card to win try to swing an election. Pretty simple.
Several tribes, including the Cherokee, refused to free their slaves after the Civil War. It was a crisis situation that nearly led to war. The tribes relented at the last minute and emancipated their slaves.
It’s a popular myth among many Americans that they are partially descended from natives, particularly from the Cherokee. Less than 5% of non-Hispanic whites and blacks have any Native American DNA.
