Citation
Native American cultures and traditions

Material Information

Title:
Native American cultures and traditions an example for the North American Greens
Creator:
Lagarde, Catherine
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
iv, 54 leaves : ; 29 cm

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Green movement -- United States ( lcsh )
Indians of North America -- Social life and customs ( lcsh )
Green movement ( fast )
Indians of North America -- Social life and customs ( fast )
United States ( fast )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
General Note:
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree, Master of Arts, Department of Political Science.
Statement of Responsibility:
Catherine Lagarde.

Record Information

Source Institution:
|University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
25485472 ( OCLC )
ocm25485472
Classification:
LD1190.L64 1991m .L33 ( lcc )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
NATIVE AMERICAN CULTURES AND TRADITIONS:
AN
EXAMPLE FOR THE NORTH AMERICAN GREENS
by
Catherine La.garde
A thesis submitted to the
I |
:j Faculty of the Graduate School of the
University of Colorado in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts
Department of Political Science
1991
t


This thesis for the Master of Arts
degree by
Catherine Lagarde
has been approved for the
Department of Political Science
by


I.
I
Lagarde, ^Catherine (M.A., Political Science)
I
Native American Cultures and Traditions: An Example for the
i' I
North American Greens
i
I
Thesis directed by Professor Michael S. Cummings
While the Green movement is establishing itself in the
United States, Greens look toward Europe for direction.
The first chapter of this work summarizes the essence of
Green philosophy. The paper proposes that Native Americans
had, and often still have, a more harmonious relationship
I '
with their environment than their European counterparts.
The ten key values, on which Green philosophy is based,
share many similarities with Native traditions.
Consequently, the Greens should study Native philosophies
and cultures as a model for their new society. One of the
I '
first steps jin this direction is to form an alliance with
Indian groups interested in such a coalition.
I
The form and content of this abstract are approved. I
recommend its publication.
1 I
I Signed
Michael S. Cummings


CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.................
; i
CHAPTER
. I
1. GREEN VALUES
;j i
2. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW . .
i i
3. EUROPEAN VIEW OF NATURE
i 1
4. COMMON;PHILOSOPHY . . .
I ,
5. COALITION ...............
i' 1
SELECTEDjBIBLIOGRAPHY . .
.1
3
12
22
31
42
52
i-
I
I
iv
i


INTRODUCTION
Over the last few years a new political trend has emerged
worldwide.
Born in Germany, the Green movement has spread to
different climates and cultures. In the United States, the movement
i. ;
faces numerous challenges, especially in its attempt to find its own
identity,
the German
Many Greens look towards Europe for direction, and indeed
Greens have been rather successful. But in Green
i
Politics, Spretnak and Capra note: "The roots of Green ideas in
1 I
, r 1
American culture reach back to our earliest origins. For more than
20,000 years Native Americans have maintained a deeply ecological
| i
sense of the subtle forces that link humans and nature, always
| i
emphasizing the need for balance and for reverence toward Mother
j
Earth." This paper will study the relationship between the Green
i
movement in the US and Native Americans.
, I
A first[part will summarize the essence of Green philosophy
|, '
with an overview of its ten key values and the Green political
i,: i
platform (SPAI^A) We will then explore the historical aspects of
|. i
Native American cultures and consider their philosophy of the
environment. Jwere Native Americans truly the first ecologists of
| !
this country?| What can we learn from them? A third part of the
paper will! discuss the conflict of American values with environmental
concerns, and,| concomitantly, the ways in which Native Americans have
I . 1
been adversely affected by modern technology, the plundering of
| I
natural resources and the ensuing pollution.
Besides!comparing Green values and Native American traditions,
i ! .
practical proposals will also be suggested. One aspect of this
effort wil
1 be to combine the environmentalists' philosophy and the
i


Indian one:in [order to formulate a common view of their relationship
i. !
with the Earth. Is a coalition between Greens and Native Americans
possible? ij If
so, under what conditions? Could a powerful
alternative to traditional politics arise from the mutual
I
understanding [between the ecological movement and the first
i
inhabitants' of this hemisphere?
i i
2


CHAPTER 1
GREEN VALUES
In mbdern times, the impact of humanity on nature has increased
tremendously.| Often, development has meant better lives for human
beings. But, the same development has also been guilty of harming
the environment. Water and air become polluted. Natural resources
i |
are getting scarce. We are running out of space for our trash.
j j
Besides thje ecological catastrophe we are confronted with, our
I' 1 .
society must also face generalized social and economic disruptions.
'!' i
In the face of this multi-faceted, global crisis, the nascent Green
i I
movement in Europe and elsewhere aspires to present an alternative
solution. While in Europe the movement has been quite successful, in
the United States it is still searching for its identity. Because of
I
the European successes, the American Greens usually look towards
Europe forj a model. One of the aims of this paper is to find
1,
American r'oots for the movement, but a look at Germany in particular
will allow, us
to compare the European and American situations.
In Gprmany, on March 22, 1983, twenty-seven new
! |
parliamentarians were Greens. This success drew wide attention to
the German
Green movement. Some of the roots of German Greens can
I
be found in enduring regionalism and a romantic love for nature. The
majority o|f the Greens were born immediately after World War II.
! j
They censujred[ their parents whom they accused of cooperation with the
Nazi regime. 'At the end of the Sixties, many European countries were
ii I
rocked by [Student protests. Germany was not excluded from this


movement.
Aftier this wave subsided, in the Seventies, many people
became enthralled with spiritual searches, traveling to Asia and
. i 1 .
Africa for| enlightenment. At the same time, a broad range of Germans
I .
started questioning the environmental practices of their government.
i
The Green movement was born from the confluence of these two
I i
i
currents. I' The German Greens were particularly inspired by
;i '
Schumacher,'s Small Is Beautiful: Economics As If People Mattered and
Callenbachj's Ecotopia. In 1978, Herbert Gruhl, author of A Planet
\ i
Js Plundered, jformed the Green Action Future. The group decided to
run its first[candidates. They were joined in their movement by some
3 j
Anthroposophists of Action Third Way and some members of the Free
! [
International I University, a group from the non-dogmatic left. In
i i
1983, the tiny Green party captured 5.6 percent of the German
election. |
i
From the beginning, the German Green party was split between
i !
the "realp's" and the "fundis." The "realos" favored a coalition with
I I
the SPD (the German Socialist Party), while fundamentalists like
i |
Rudolph Bahro|opposed any association with the Social-Democrats.
I I
l
Fundamentalism entails putting "ecology before economics and
I
fundamental, long-term interests before immediate short term ones." 1
Bahrjo views ecology as a third way between capitalism and
socialism.j He thinks that radical changes are necessary and
proposes tjo drastically transform society. Looking at the American
1
|
Indian example, in which "the average tribe member was more a human
' i j
being than the average worker is now in the present structure,"* 2
i |
Bahro prop'oses that "we need communities, communes in human
RudolfJ Bahro, Building the Green Movement, trans. by Mary Tyler
(Philadelphia] PA: New Society Publishers, 1986), p. 171.
2Ibid, p..ll|8.


proportions, in which there can be a scientific technology on a
i !
human scale."3 These small units would be "locally integrated and
self-administrated."4 In a first phase, communities would not only
allow us to escape neurosis-generating families and "the Big
Machine," they would also be a fall-back system for the society's
destitute-unemployed in particular. Ultimately, the new society
would be aj network of interlinked base communities of about 3,000
people who; would agree on a "simple, non-expanded reproduction of
their material basis."5
In June;of 1984, Greens were elected to the European
Parliament. They proposed to seek a new vision of reality. Their
i
new valuesj an4 ideas came from different tendencies: especially
ecological, holistic and feminist movements. The Green goal was to
transcend the old political framework of left-versus-right. The
1980 Federal program of the German Greens reads: We represent a
I
total concjept,! as opposed to the one-dimensional, still-more-
production' brands of politics. Our policies are guided by long-
i
term visions for the future and are founded on four basic
principles': ecology, social responsibility, grassroots democracy
and nonviolence."6
The concept of ecology more recently called "deep ecology"
calls for an appreciation of nature's cycles. Greens ask for soft
energy, appropriate technology and organic agriculture, and
especially
demand "a halt to our ravaging of natural resources and
our poisoning of the biosphere through the dumping of toxic wastes,
3 Ibid, p. 158.
4ibid. :
5 Ibid, p. 14.
6 Charlene Spretnak and Fritjof Capra, Green Politics, the Global
Promise (S;anta Fe, NM: Bear and Company, 1986), p. 30.
5


I
the accumulation of so-called acceptable levels of radiation
I
exposure, and .the pollution of the air."1 In this system the world
is viewed in terms of relations and integration. The immediate
measures advanced by the Greens to protect the environment were
certainly responsible for the Greens' instant success in German
politics.
Social responsibility encompasses social justice. Greens
must insure that their environmental protection programs respect
poor people arid working people's access to a decent income. The
Federal Program of the German Greens states: "The ecological and
social spheres belong inseparably together: the economy of nature
is linked to the economy of humans for better or worse."8
Grassroots democracy is the third pillar of Green philosophy.
"Grassroots-democracy politics means an increased realization of
decentralized,' direct democracy. We start from the belief that the
decisions at the grassroots level must, in principle, be given
'! i
priority. We[grant far-reaching powers of autonomy and self-
administration to decentralized, manageable grassroots units."8
Half of the Green parliamentarians' salaries and some national
membership dues are used to finance Oko-fond, an organization at
the state level which provides funds for apprenticeships for
unemployed youth, to battered-women shelters and peace camps.
I
The 'fourth pillar, nonviolence, calls for an end to personal
violence and "structural" violence of states and institutions. As
an outgrowth of this principle, Greens support self-determination
for groups; and individuals. The issue is still debated, because
7 Ibid, ;P 31
8 Ibid, :p. 3 6
9 Ibid, P- 37
6


some Greens argue that a violent state can only be changed by
force. Most Greens, though, believe that means are as important as
i
ends. Petra Kelly often quotes Martin Luther King:
"Even today Ijstill dream that one day there will be an end to war
and that men will beat their swords into ploughshares and their
spears intb pruning hooks, that nation shall not lift up a sword
against nation, neither shall they learn war any more."10 11
American Greens have undeniably found their inspiration in
the German movement. But the American movement also grows from its
j !
own cultural and political background and from the current
situation. Charlene Spretnak notes, "the roots for Green ideas in
American culture reach back to our earliest origins. For more than
20,000 years Native Americans have maintained a deeply ecological
sense of the subtle forces that link humans and nature, always
emphasizing the need for balance and for reverence for Mother
Earth."11 | !
In the USA, most Greens have come from the civil rights and
environmental movements. Most members want to dissociate
themselves from conventional environmentalism by incorporating it
into a larger vision of social justice, sexual equality, grassroots
democracy,! and nonviolence.
i
For the .purpose of starting a Green, movement in the United
States, a meeting was held on the campus of Macalester College in
St. Paul, Minnesota, in August of 1984. Out of this founding
meeting, the Committees of Correspondence were created. Located in
Kansas City, this organization serves as a clearinghouse for local
10 Petra, Kelly, Fighting for Hope, trans. by Marianne Howarth
(Boston, MA: South End Press, 1984), p. 56.
11 Charlene Spretnak and Fritjof Capra, Green Politics (Santa Fe,
NM: Bear and Company, 1986), p. 193.
7


I
groups. From the beginning,, the American movement has been plagued
I 1
by a divisive 1 issue: some members view the movement as an
j i
educational tool aimed at modifying people's attitude towards their
environment, while other members favor the creation of a political
: !
party, which would be an alternative to conventional politics.
Both sides present valid arguments which would require more space
I
for a fair presentation. At a recent meeting the two positions
! !
were finally accommodated. Each local group can now be affiliated
either with tile political branch, the Green Political Organizing
Committee,.! or j the former CoC, now called Green USA, or both. This
j i
organizational twist should be able to reconcile both tendencies in
the movement.
At the founding meeting, back in 1984, the Committee of
Correspondence produced a document, revised in 1986, which
summarized
Green ideas. These were the Ten Key Values:
1. Ecological I wisdom
I
How can1we operate human societies with the understanding
that
live
j
wejare part of nature, not on top of it? How can we
within the limited resources of the planet? How can we
guarantee rights of nonhuman species? How can we promote
; l '
I
sustainable agriculture? How can we build a better
I
relationship between cities and countryside?
2 Grassrojots democracy
'! |
How'baniwe ensure that representatives will be fully
accountable to the people who elected them? How can we
encourage the "mediating institutions"-family, neighborhood
association, church group, ethnic group-to recover some of
I. I
| i
the functions now performed by government? How can we


strengthen the American tradition of voluntarism?
i
1 I
3. Personal and social responsibility
I
i
How can
we promote healthy lifestyles? How can we encourage
suchj ,'va|ues as simplicity and moderation? How can we have a
I i
community-controlled system of education which would promote
i i
ecological wisdom, social responsibility and personal growth?
Nonviolence
i l
How 'can|we en<^ violence in the home, on the streets, between
I
I
nations? How can we use nonviolent methods to oppose
I |
practices with which we disagree?
Decentralization
i i
i i
How ;can|We restore power and responsibility to individuals,
local institutions, communities, and regions? How can we
j |
havej a decentralized, democratic society? How can we
reconcile the need for community and regional self-
detejrmination with the need for appropriate centralized
regulation in certain matters?
! !
6. Communijty-based economics
How .can
we redesign our work structures to encourage employee
ownership and workplace democracy? How can we establish some
! i
.1 > I
form of|economic security, open to all?
'i i
7. Postpatiriarchal values
j I ,
How:|can|we replace the cultural ethics of dominance and
controliwith more cooperative ways of interacting? How can
| |
we bjuild respectful, positive relations across the lines of
gender and other divisions? How can we encourage people to
\ i
carej about persons outside their group? 8
8. Respect for diversity
9


How can ,we honor cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, and
I, |
religious diversity within the context of individual
responsibility for all beings?
9. Global responsibility
1 i
How pan i we assist grassroots groups in the Third World? How
can we lielp other countries make the transition to self-
sufficiency in food and other basic necessities?
I
10. Future, focus
How 'can|we induce people and institutions to think in terms
i
of the long-range future, and not just in terms of their
short-range selfish interest? How can we make the quality of
life!, rather than open-ended economic growth, the focus of
future thinking?12
. i
i i
While these are commendable issues to be raised, they are far
from constituting a political program apt to attract middle-class
, I
America or,, especially, impoverished minorities. Although key
i' I
value number 8 adresses the issue of racial diversity, minorities,
whose energy might be more focused on survival, have shown little
interest in the Green movement.
Amazingly, a political platform did emerge from these
questions.' The proposals were compiled in a single document, SPAKA
' j
(Strategy ,andj Policy Approaches in Key Areas), which was discussed
at the Third National Gathering in Estes Park in September of 1990.
This ambitious program attempts to touch a vast spectrum, from
Animal Liberation to Waste Management, through topics as diverse as
I
Energy, Forestry, Health and Healing, and Spirituality. One of its
___________i l____________
,s Charlenej Spretnak and Fritjof Capra, Green Politics (Santa Fe,
NM: Bear and Company, 1986), p.230-233.
10
I


I
1' I
1 I
! I
more remarkable features is its almost painstaking abundance of
i
details. Thejplatform proposes changes in all aspects of life,
from individual behavior modification to economic conversion and
political reorganization. Some of the proposals come as answers to
immediate problems, while others span more extended periods of
time.
j i
In addition to sketching out a political program, the Third
I ;
Annual Gathering was also remarkable for its keynote address, which
' !
was delivered;by Walter Bresette, a Chippewa Indian from the Red
i
Cliff reservation and founder of the Lake Superior Green Party.
I i
His presentation combined for one of the first times, Green values
and Native1 American ideas. Therefore, it was a strong inspiration
for the theme of this work.
i
I .
i
; i
i
i
i i
i
i
i
11
i


I
I
I
; I
I
I
CHAPTER 2
HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
History, is an essential tool to fathom the relationship between
Native Americans and their environment. An examination of the past
may validate the claim that Native Americans did, in fact, understand
their surroundings in a holistic way and lived in harmony with
nature. If this proposition proves to be true, environmentalists,
i ;
and Greens in, particular, can find captivating lessons in the past.
Baird Callicot writes that at the onset of this search, two
sets of obstacles have to be mastered. First, it is difficult to
uncover a Isingle model of Native American culture. The American
continent !is yast and varied. Each group had to adapt to a different
environment, and the adjustment to a similar environment could also
i !
diverge from one group to another. Obviously, some groups were more
successful than others, and fairness demands including a wide range
of traditions, in the historical overview.
A second set of difficulties arises from the oral transmission
of Native (cultures. No written document, so dear to conventional
social scientists, which would allow for a reconstruction of the pre-
contact Indian life, can be found. We have then to rely on two
sources. (The, accounts of the first Europeans to come in contact with
the Natives provide one set of information. But these documents have
to be treated1 with caution: The agenda of these first Europeans was


to convert:,the heathen. They misunderstood the Native beliefs,
assuming that!the latter were inspired by the devil. Another set of
documents can'be found in the tales of post-contact Natives who
! !
recall the^ir culture and tradition. Callicot refers here
i i
particularly to Neihardt's work, Black Elk Speaks, which is based on
a testimonial|by a Sioux holyman. Of course, these types of tale are
i . !
second-hand and are often tainted with nostalgia or in the case of
Black Elk Speaks by/Neihardt's own Christian biases.
i j
Callicot believes that there is a common thread among most
Native Amejrican people "a complementary unity" best defined in
11 i
Joseph Epejs Brown's words:
All American Indian peoples possessed what has been called a
metaphysic of nature; all manifest a reverence for the myriad
forms and forces of the natural world specific to their
immediate environment...13 14
I i
Since the advent of the ecological movement in this country,
i
the relationship between Native people and nature has been debated.
In the Forties Aldo Leopold was the first to define the term "land
i
ethic." Whilejthe ecological movement grew strong in the Seventies,
i j
Stewart Udallj thought that "Indians were in truth the pioneer
ecologists] of1 this country."u Native Americans themselves supported
j
this argument; Vine Deloria wrote:
"The Indian lived with his land. He feared to destroy it by changing
its natural shape because he realized that it was more than a useful
i, I
tool for exploitation. It sustained all life, and without other
13 Joseph E.j Brown, "Modes of Contemplation through Action: North
American Indians," Main Currents in Modern Thought. 30, 1973-74, p.
60, quoted by; J. Baird Callicot, "Traditional American Indian and
Western European Attitudes Toward Nature: An Overview," Environmental
Ethics. 4(4),! Winter 1982, p. 294.
14 Calvin Martin, The Keepers of the Game: Indian-Animal
Relationship and the Fur Trade. (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London:
University of1 California Presses, 1978), p. 159, quoting Stewart
Udall. !
13


forms of life, man himself cannot survive."15
As soon as these ideas were formulated, some authors chose to
disagree. Calvin Martin, an associate professor of History at
Rutgers University, sees many flaws in this theory. He argues that
Native Americans had a tendency to overkill wildlife. He remarks
that during the Pleistocene age an impressive part of the fauna and
flora were extinct. The reason might have been climatic changes, but
Martin suspects that man was the principal agent of extinction. He
also notes that during the fur trade, the beaver, hunted by Indians
for the hat-makers of the old world, almost vanished from this
i
continent. He denies either moral consideration in the Indian world
f
perception orjethical bonds between man and nature. Contradictorily
he then argues that Indians were motivated by "spiritual-social
I
obligations" and formed "a compact predicated on mutual esteem" with
nature. But,I despite these qualities, in Martin's view, "the Indian
still remains a misfit guru... There can therefore be no salvation
in the Indian's traditional conception of Nature for the troubled
environmentalist."* 16 17 For Martin, the Indian cannot be a model
because his cosmic vision is vastly different from the European one.
As a Christian, the Western man could never adjust to the cosmic view
of the Indian.11 (Does the inability to change validate one's
current way of thinking?)
| l
In 1982) Tom Regan, a professor of Philosophy at North Carolina
I
I
,5 Ibid,1 p.1 260.
16 J. Baird| Callicot, "Traditional American Indian and Western
European Attitudes Toward Nature: An Overview", Environmental Ethics.
4(4), Winter 1982, p. 312-314 quoting Calvin Martin.
17 Calvin Martin, Keepers of the Game: Indian-Animal Relationship
and the Fur Trade (Berkeley, Los Angeles & London, University of
California Presses, 1978).
14


State University, found some inspiration in Calvin Martin's work. In
his book "All!That Dwell Therein: Animal Rights and Environmental
Ethics"18 he outlines the moral basis for vegetarianism. According to
I
Regan, the Amerindians kept an ambiguous relation with nature. In
his view, they do not qualify as shallow environmentalists or as
proponents of!deep ecology, because they were not motivated by morals
or ethics but by fear and self-interest.
One of the most simplistic views proposes that Indians just
lacked the technology to harm their environment, without the
theorist'sj questioning the reason for this absence. A few writers
seek proof of this argument in wastage, such as buffalo rotting on
I
the plains or even, as someone reported, in "the litter of bottles
and junked, cars to be found on Indian reservations today."1
Callicot suggests that Regan and Martin are being overly
i
cynical aboutihuman nature. He believes that any human being is
capable of ethical or moral behavior and that the Indian land ethics
were similar to Western humanitarian ethics. Furthermore, he argues,
if Indian restraint towards nature was simply motivated by self-
interest, 'this restraint would still exhibit a view of nature
diametrically different from the European. Richard Nelson reports
that for Native Americans "natural and supernatural worlds are
inseparable. 1 Natural entities are endowed with spirits and with
spiritually based power. Humans and natural entities are involved in
a constant spiritual exchange that profoundly affects human
18 Tom Regan, All That Dwell Therein: Animal Rights and
Environmental Ethics (Berkeley and Los Angeles:University of
California Presses, 1982) .
18 Callicot', p. 311.
i
15


behavior.
"20 Even if the reasons for the native land ethic were more
practical than philosophical, the end result is what matters
ultimately. I
In Callicot's view,
i
; I
American Indian cultures provided their members with an
environmental ethical ideal, however much it may have been from time
to time or from person to person avoided, ignored, violated, or for
that matter, grudgingly honored because of fear of punishment.21
I
In this regard, Callicot avoids the trap into which some
environmentalists may fall. The way American Indians were relating
to their environment was not flawless. But an unbiased evaluation
certainly gives strength to the idea that Native Americans had an
unusually harmonious relationship with their environment. The idea
of the "go'od savage" is usually paired with the notion of some people
that Indian culture is best preserved in museums. These views may
stem from good intentions, but they call for caution. One of the
intended purposes of this paper is to show the relevance of
traditional indigenous culture to modern issues. Also, at the other
end, some environmentalists believe in the importance of protecting
the environment but deny the competence of native people in this
endeavor, i Hopefully, this notion too will be dispelled at a later
point.
Adaptation does not mean that Native Americans did not
transform'their environment. For example, Stephen Pyne shows how the
fire practices of North American Indians transformed large areas from
forest to grassland. "Through the use of fire, both confined and
20 Richard Nelson, Make Prayers to the Raven: A Koyukon View of the
Northern Forest (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), p. 225-
237 .
21 Callicot, p. 318.
16


i
I
broadcast,Indian tribes created an environment favorable to their
i i .....
existence." > Pyne also believes that some ancient civilizations
I
like the Moundbuilders in the Ohio Valley, the Anasazi of Mesa Verde
and Chaco Canyon, and the Hohakam of the Southwest 'disappeared'
I ;
because they did not live in "some perpetual ecological harmony with
one another or with their environment."22 23 (Indians say that the
Moundbuilders1 are today's Shawnees, Kickapoos, etc; that the Anasazi
| i
are today's Hopis and that the Hohakam are today's Pimas and Papagos
and that they(didn't 'disappear.')
Kieffer^s views mirror Pyne's, but in a stronger fashion. He
too visited Chaco Canyon and assumes that the Anasazi hastened their
own demise1 by1cutting down all the trees. His article is somewhat
ambiguous.j For one thing, he is unable to decide if the "self-
I
inflicted ecological disaster" or socioeconomic forces advanced by
his friend and "geoscientist" Betancourt are the reasons for the
disappearance|of the Ancient Ones. He is also not very clear about
l
the lessons conveyed by his example. Does he try to prove that
humans will inexorably tend to destroy their environment or does he
believe that j'perhaps the ghosts of civilizations past are warning us
of not being careful stewards of our land and its resources"?24
i
John Ragsdale, in his discussion of the Hopi Indian values, in
comparison with modern America, reaches similar conclusions. "The
basic focal point was not expansion, but stability, balance, and
harmony with the harsh and demanding environment of the Arizona
22 Stephen Pyne, "Indian Fires," Natural History. 92(2), February
1983, p. 6-11'.
23 Ibid' ,
24 Michael Kieffer, "Fall of the Garden of Eden," International
Wildlife, j19 (4), January 1989, p. 28-31.
17
I


desert.
2S I
' i
In sum, .notwithstanding the few exceptions reviewed earlier,
most scholars.in the fields of law, environment, political science,
I I
anthropology,'agree that Native Americans can provide contemporary
environmentalists with valuable lessons. Both Callicot's and
Ragsdale's articles confirm this opinion. Ragsdale offers a superb
study of the Hopi Indians, who have certainly achieved a excellent
adaptation to the demanding Arizona climate. For Callicot, the
Lakota people offer an excellent example "that the American Indian
I
lived not pnly by a tribal ethic but by a land ethic as well, the
overall and usual effect of which was to establish a greater harmony
' I
between Indians and their environment than enjoyed by their European
i
successors!. "ie J
The philosophy underlying this harmony will be discussed in
I !
more detail later, but at this point Lame Deer provides a useful
understanding of Native beliefs:
Nothing is so small and unimportant but it has a spirit given
it by Wakan Tanka. Tanka is what you might call a stone god,
but 'he is also a part of the Great Spirit. The gods are
separate beings, but they are all united in Wakan Tanka. It is
hard to I understand, something like the Holy Trinity. You can't
explain;it except by going back to the "circles within the
circles" ideas, the spirit splitting itself up into stones,
trees, tiny insects even, making them all Wakan by his
everpresence. And in turn, all the myriad of things which
makes up the universe flowing back to their source, united in
one (Grandfather Spirit.
! i
i
Perhaps! more relevant than the philosophy itself, are the
i I
practical applications that such a world view will encourage. 25
25 John iRag^dale, Jr., "Law and Environment in Modern America and
Among the Hopi Indians: A Comparison of Values," Harvard
Environmental Law Review. 10 (2), 1986, p. 43.
Callicot, p. 311.
Callicot, p. 302.
27


Jorgensen, in"Land Is Cultural, So Is a Commodity", compares the
cultural definitions of land among Indians, farmers, ranchers and
environmentalists. He takes as example the Achomawi tribes of
northeastern California, who recognized, like most other Indian
nations, the communitarian ownership of the land.
Achomawis knew their space intimately, its oak and pine trees, the
riffles and holes along the river, the nesting and resting sites for
ducks, geese, swans, and coots, and watering sites for deer, the
sunflower prairies, the yampa root grounds, the tule swamps, the
springs, and so forth.28
In this communitarian ownership of the land, leaders were
mostly stewards invested by the communal owners to oversee the
propriety.
The authority possessed by stewards was nominal. They held the
trust of the members of the ownership unit, and that unit conceived
ownership as using their space and places for future generations, and
often specifically recognizing the continuity of ownership from past
generations. 'Stewards were speakers, representatives, leaders,
esteemed colleagues and kinsmen.29
Ragsdale remarks that there is little economic disparity among
the Hopi, because their society has little interest in furthering
material gains. Hopi Indians had, and still have, a strong
i
collective consciousness. Because there is no divergence between the
group and (personal goals, the Hopi don't have any major problem with
law enforcement. The Hopi feel that their laws, learned during a
lengthy educational process, are in harmony with their surroundings
and are compatible with the well-being of the group as a whole.
Ragsdale observes:
The Hopis, in contrast [to the American growth society] view space,
I 3
28 Joseph Jorgensen, "Land Is Cultural, So Is a Commodity: The
Locus of Differences Among Indians, Cowboys, Sod-busters and
Environmentalists," Journal of Ethnic Studies. 12(3), Fall 1984, p.
3.
Ibid, p. 15.
19


I
time, body, and the natural order as inextricably interrelated in a
complex, balanced whole. With this world view, it is appropriate, if
not inevitable that the Hopi act in ways to maintain and preserve the
balance.30 j
Further,along, Ragsdale explains that "Instead of the
artificial clamor of industrial civilization, they experience the
sun, wind, snow, rain, heat, cold, sand, rock, trees, and animals.
They sensei the balanced interrelationship, respect it, and bear the
responsibility for its continued maintenance."31 32
In Hopi society, tensions do arise, but Ragsdale finds that
there are built-in mechanisms to deal with the tensions. Because the
villages a.re usually quite small, the Hopi rely on face-to-face
relationships to solve their differences. "The desire to maintain a
good reputation in the community creates an inducement to conform to
the proper Hopi way."33
Each economical unit is self-supporting and self-contained,
thus avoiding!the risk of exaggerated interdependence. "The
subsistence agriculture of traditional Hopi society also results in a
stable, ongoing balance between production, consumption, and the land
capacity."33 'The Hopi "have employed simple, adaptable means of
farming and housing,"34 thus ensuring their resilience and longevity.
The Hopis' religious beliefs "include a love for the land, sky,
weather, plants, animals, and mutual balance,as well as a keenly felt
responsibility for their maintenance... The Hopi stable state model
30 See 25, Ragsdale p. 454.
31 Ibid, p, 455.
32 Ibid, p. 443.
33 Ibid, p.; 453 .
34 Ibid, p. 445.
I


venerates jstability, balance, harmony, and cooperation, and eschews
competition, force, materialism, and in general, growth. "3S 36
i
i
i
i
I
i 35 36
35 Ibid,! p. 446 and p. 452.
36 See dlsoj:
Basic Call to Consciousness. Akwesasne Notes (Rooseveltown, NY:
Akwesasne ,(Notes, 1981).
Sharon lo'Brien, American Indian Tribal Government (Norman:
University ofj Oklahoma Press, 1989)
Vine Deloria, God Is Red (New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1973) .
: 21
I


CHAPTER 3
EUROPEAN VIEW OF NATURE
I
In his article "Traditional American Indian and Western
European Attitudes Toward Nature: An Overview," J. Baird Callicot
explores the relations of Native Americans with their environment.
He gathers that the American Indian "pictures nature as an extended
family or society of living, ensouled beings"37 a view that calls for
restraint and respect for non-human nature. To the contrary, the
Western European attitude shows little respect for the environment.
Callicot correctly identifies the basis for the European
attitude in an entertaining overview of the diverse European
philosophies involved in the maturation of this attitude. He
believes that; in fact, the Greek mythopoiec cosmology had a lot in
I
common with the cosmological concepts of Native Americans. Soon,
though, the atomic theory of matter would shatter the similarity.
Pythagoras was the first to state "that the order of nature can be
successfully disclosed only by means of a quantitative description, a
rational account in the most literal sense of that word..."38
Callicot adds; "... modern philosophy of nature might be oversimply,
but, nonetheless, not incorrectly portrayed as a merger of the
Pythagorean intuition that the structure of the world order is
determined according to ratio, to quantitative proportions, and the
Democritean ontology of void space (so very amenable to geometrical
37J. Baird jCallicot, Traditional American Indian and Western
European Attitudes Toward Nature: An Overview," Environmental Ethics.
4(4), Winter 1982, p. 303.
38 Ibid, ip. 297.


I
analysis) and. material particles."
: I
Another.component of the modern European attitude toward nature
can be found in the "Pythagorean/Platonic concept of the soul as
immortal and otherworldly, essentially foreign to the hostile
physical world."39 40 Callicot elegantly summarizes this view:
In sum, nature is an inert, material, and chemical continuum
exhaustively described by means of the arid formulae of pure
mathematics. In relation to nature the human person is a lonely
exile sojourning in a strange and hostile world, alien not only to
his physical environment, but to his own body, both of which he is
encouraged to| fear and attempt to conquer.41 42
i,i, , , ,
Cartesianism, the triumph of reason, for which truth is found
by rational analysis of ideas independent of empirical data, emotive
attitudes,, or authoritative pronouncements, unquestionably reinforced
this view,1 while the Judaic themes of dominion of man over nature
i
found in Genesis strengthened it further.43
i 1
Ragsdale observes similar roots of the "modern growth society."
I
"Modern society has developed in an environment of seemingly endless
space and |abundance, venerating the principles of free market
1 I
capitalism and observing the biblical dictate that man should subdue
39 Ibid,, p.297.
40 Ibid,1 p.i 298 .
41 Ibid, p.298.
42 Genesis 1:26: "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after
our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea,
and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the
earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."
1:28: "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful,
and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have
dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and
over every lining thing that moveth upon the earth."
Ironically, Christians and Jews could possibly interpret the term
"replenish the earth" as an ecological injunction.
43 I
See also Robert White, "Religious Roots of our Ecological
Crisis," Tribal Assets. The Rebirth of Native America (New York: Holt
& Co, 1990) i
23


the earth.,"44 For Ragsdale, more than the European philosophical
foundations, it is free market capitalism and its inherent values
that account for the dismal state of our environment. In this regard
he specifically criticizes "individualism, competitiveness, profit,
l
speed, and efficiency." Ragsdale quotes Gregory Bateson, who aptly
I
summarized the ideas pervading the "Industrial society":
a) It's us against the environment.
b) It's us against other men.
c) It'is the individual (or the individual company or
individual nation) that matters.
d) We can have unilateral control over the environment and
must strive for that control.
e) 'We live within an infinite expanding "frontier."
f) Economic determinism is common sense.
g) Technology will do it for us.45
Contrary to Native American beliefs which emphasized man as
part of nature, cooperation and harmony, the Western mind perceives
nature as a random collection of "individuals of various types"
relating to each other in an external fashion. This
anthropocentrism, which Ian McHarg called "simple-minded,"46 allows
! i
for humans to be placed at the top of a pyramid and assumes that the
remainder of creation exists solely for humans' sake. This logic
certainly did^ not entice the White man to use restraint towards his
environment.
i
The relationship of the Europeans to land is also indicative of
44 John Ragsdale, Jr., "Law and Environment in Modern America and
Among the !Hopi Indians: A Comparison of Values," Harvard
Environmental Law Review. 10(2), 1986, p. 419.
45 Gregory Bateson, Steps to an Ecology of the Mind. 492 (1972),
I
quoted m 'Ragsdale.
46 Ian McHarg, "Values, Process, Form," The Fitness of Man's
Environment (Washington, D.C.:Smithsonian Institution Press, 1968),
reprinted in Robert Disch, ed., The Ecological Conscience. (Englewood
CliffsiPrentipe-Hall, 1970), p.25, quoted in Ragsdale p. 307.
24


this lack of symbiosis. Ragsdale remarks that
, i
Nineteenth century natural resource law reflected the attitude that
land is here to be used and to be exploited and that the best method
for getting the most advantage out of the land... is by disposing of
the land to private individuals so that they may use their labor and
their capital)to develop it and use it for their benefit and for the
advancement of the economic interests of the nation, viewed largely
as the sum total of individual benefits.41
In his study of the different values that land has, Jorgensen
agrees with Ragsdale. For the Whites who came on Indian land, land
i
was a commodity. This concept is based on the English law of
freehold tenure and the capitalist idea of speculative value. Land
then can "acquire value other than that created by the uses to which
it is put by the local community."* * 48
Consequently,: farmers express few concerns about the conversion of
marginal farm land to trailer courts, acid rain, particulate grime,
high rates of sulfur dioxide and nitrous oxide, radioactivity,
radioactive aquifers, wind blown radioactive sand, heavy uses of
water by energy producers in water sparse regions, removal of top
soils in fragile environment, cutting of roads, and the like.49
According to Ragsdale, these values, on which our society is
based, have created tensions between the individual and government
regulation, and between growth and environmental quality. In such a
society, indiyiduals are more motivated by their own personal
interest than those of the society at large and reluctantly follow
laws that have been designed to allegedly encourage efficiency.
Another source of tension arises when economic growth is confronted
with environmental concerns. Since much emphasis is placed on
Ragsdale', p. 422.
^Joseph G. Jorgensen, "Land Is Cultural, So Is a Commodity: The
Locus of Difference Among Indians, Cowboys, Sod-Busters, and
Environmentalists," Journal of Ethnic Studies. 12(3), Fall 1984, p.
4.
49 Ibid/ p. 13.
25


growth, the environment is generally sacrificed.
Ragsdale accurately describes the consequences of these
i 1
tensions for society. First, he thinks that the modern society is in
great danger because of its complexity and subsequent
interdependence. Government becomes fragmented and narrow-sighted.
At this point; it is difficult to grasp a unified view of the country
and the whole,system becomes sclerotic. This loss of flexibility is
specially dangerous in the economic realm, since one breakdown can
topple the entire economy.
Technology, enthusiastically embraced by our society, presents
many drawbacks. William Ophuls, quoted in Ragsdale's paper, compared
the impact.of technology on the biosphere to "the blind thrust of a
screwdriver into the workings of a watch."50 51 The use of technology
has socioeconomic repercussions by displacing a large number of
i i
people and provoking hardship for inner-city minorities. In modern
i
capitalistic societies technology is mainly used by the elites to
further their material gains. Since the working class does not
control technology, it benefits little from it. Therefore, contrary
; i
to popular belief, technology has a tendency to widen socioeconomic
gaps. ;
1 i
Not only are natural resources finite, but modern technology
j i
creates a lot1of pollution. Ragsdale agrees with Jeremy Rifkin, who
wrote that
"since according to the first law [of thermodynamics] energy can
neither be created nor destroyed but only transformed, and since
according ito the second law it can only be transformed one way
toward a dissipated statepollution is just another name for
entropy, "f
I
50 Supra note 44, Ragsdale quoting William Ophuls, Ecology and the
Politics of Scarcicitv. 1977, p. 117.
51 Ragsdalei quoting Jeremy Rifkin, Entropy. 1980, p. 35.
' 26
I


I
The same idea is echoed in Barry Commoner's "there is no such a
thing as a free lunch." Since entropy and, then pollution, are
inevitable, wisdom would require us to minimize entropy.
Unfortunately, the European mind refuses to consider this reality.
In sum,;the growth society, moving swiftly toward the limits of
the land's carrying capacity, has an inflexible and myopic
internal structure and parallel shortcomings in its politics
and its specialized citizenry. An overburdening of the
carrying capacity, environmental disaster or technological
breakdown, or a political upheaval could wreak havoc.
A society which fails to establish a balance between
population, consumption, and natural resources will eventually
provoke itjs own demise. But before it falls, it will first harm its
most underprivileged segments. Native Americans, as a minority in
inner cities or relegated to forsaken reservations, have taken the
brunt of the attack. It is commonplace to acknowledge the disastrous
effects White1 society has had on Native cultures. Examples are
abundant and well-documented. For instance, Dean Baker studies
Canadian efforts to halt logging and create a national park in South
Moresby, homeland of the Baida. He notes that in the mid 1850's
the Haida 'were about 8,000. After they first came into contact with
the Europeans, they were ravaged by diseases, and by 1920 their
number fell to 600. Ever since, their culture has been affected by
ennui, alcoholism, and suicide.
Sometimes, Native Americans have been indirectly afflicted by 52 53 54 55
52 Ragsdale quoting Barry Commoner, The Closing Circle. 1971, p.
29-42. |
53 Ragsdale, p. 438.
54 Dean Baker, "Islands on the Edge," The Amicus Journal. 11(4),
Fall 1989,. p. 40-42.
55 Ibid: ,
27


European mischief. In the Pacific Northwest, Indian cultures were
based on the salmon harvest. Europeans heavily contributed to the
disappearance of the fish, not so much by fishing it for themselves,
as, more indirectly, by indiscriminately logging the forest. The
heavy equipment used around rivers causes silting, thus depriving the
salmon of their breeding ground. When too many trees are removed,
the water becomes warmer and the salmon then avoid this river, while
abandoned stumps also impair the salmon's ability to breed.
Generally, European greed and Native survival collide in less
subtle ways. .Jeff Radford examines how stripmining has undermined
the Navajo way of life in the Chaco region of New Mexico. He argues
that an increase in coal development would further reduce the quality
and quantity of water available to the Navajo. Likewise, air and
soil would also suffer from stripmining. Ironically, while relegated
to poor land, Indians own valuable natural resources. But they
rarely benefit from the exploitation of these resources, and "severe
environmental problems may be associated with resource development
such as coal mining, oil and gas extraction, and nuclear and coal-
fired electric generating plants."56 57
Phillip Shinnick adds,
...it must be understood that the survival of traditional people is
being threatened by industries which promote the showering of acid
rainfalls, the dumping of uranium-contaminated water and tailings,
stripmining and the exploitation of natural resources on
reservatiqns.51
Shinnick believes that Indians are most affected by pollution
Jeff :Radford, "Stripmining Arid Navajo Lands in the U.S.:
Threats to Health and Heritage, Ambio. 11(1), 1982, p. 9-14
57 Philliip Shinnick, Natural Sport, the Olympic Prison and the
Fight For Sovereignty Rights of the Mohawks," Canadian Ethnic
Studies. 9(1), Spring 1981, p. 43-52.
28


I
because multinationals disregard Native rights. American Indian
i I
Movement leader Ward Churchill agrees with this view, but his
criticism jis more vehement. For him, the worst aspects of industrial
pollution jhave been displaced to remote Indian land in order to hide
them (at least temporarily) from the society at large.
The U.S government has steadily usurped native American national
sovereignty by imposing its own jurisdiction over Indians' reserved
land base,| supplanting traditional governmental and juridical forms
in the name ot self-proclaimed "trust responsibility." This expedient
has been employed to legally strip away much of the Native Americans'
treaty-guaranteed land base and to deny them direct control over
residual areas, especially in terms of control over water and
resources .
!
As for the clean-up of the pollution, Indians are left to fend
for themselves in most cases. In 1985, a judgment from the Ninth
I I
Circuit of the Court of Appeals held that the states did not have the
power to implement Resource Conservation and Recovery Act on Indian
lands. jThus, Marjane Ambler remarks, tribes were given clear
i
authority |by Congress but scant resources to clean up their
environment.58 59 60^ Julie Andersen, who visited the Pine Ridge
reservation, accuses the Environmental Protection Agency of
I !
practicing "environmental apartheid, affording one race fewer
protections than the rest of the population."61 Many tribes are then
faced with tough choices, since their top priority must be to feed
and shelter their members. Yet most tribes recognize the importance
58 Ward ,'Churchill, "American Indian Lands: The Native Ethic Amid
Resource Development," Environment. 28(6), July 1986, p. 14.
59 Catherine Pope, "Environmental Law-Federal Indian Law-Recent
Developments-State of Washington, Department of Ecology v. United
States Environmental Protection Agency 752 F.2d 1465 (9th Cir. 1985),
Natural Resources Journal, 27, Summer 1987, p. 739-755.
Marjane Ambler, "The Lands the Feds Forgot," Sierra. 74(3), May-
June 198 9,'p., 44-48 .
61 Ibid., ]
29
i


I
of allocating at least some of their meager resources to clean-up.
| !
It is time for the environmental movement to concern itself also with
'i
this aspect. 1
i
i
I
I
I
30


CHAPTER 4
COMMON PHILOSOPHY
Historically, Native Americans knew how to live in harmony with
their environment. Unfortunately, as soon as they came in contact
with the Europeans, their cultures were threatened and often
destroyed. But, while their cultures were sacrificed in the name of
progress, they also contributed to the shaping of the United States.
1 i
I I
Bruce Johansen demonstrates how Native Americans influenced the
Founding Fathers, thus becoming in his words Forgotten Founders.
Benjamin Franklin greatly admired the Great League of the Iroquois
and found extended inspiration in the Iroquois system for his Albany
Plan of Union:. Thomas Jefferson, also, admired the Native cultures,
"Indian sociejty may be best, but it is not possible for a large
number of people"62 63 a contention to be discussed later. Tom Paine,
who came to America at Franklin's invitation, was "fascinated by the
Iroquois.Johansen convincingly proves the influence of Native
Americans on the founding of contemporary America and its
institutions,' the Constitution, in particular.
Similarly, George Cornell substantiates the Influence of
Native Americans on Modern Conservationists. He quotes Stewart
Udall: "much pf our ecology does, in fact, represent a return to the
Bruce! JoHansen, Forgotten Founders (Harvard and Boston, MA: The
Harvard Common Press, 1982), p. 108.
63 Ibid, p.! 116.


land wisdom of the Indian."64 65 In the late nineteenth century, George
I
Bird Grinnell combined his interests in Indians and in conservation
in articles that he published in his magazine, Forest and Stream. He
also founded the Audubon society in 1886, with Theodore Roosevelt
among others. Ernest Thompson Seton also significantly incorporated
i
Native thoughts in his work. He shaped the Woodcraft Indians, who
would later become the Boy Scouts of America, with Tecumseh in mind,
"the great Shawneephysically perfect, wise, brave, picturesque,
unselfish, dignified..."66 67 Cornell believes that both Grinnell and
Seton made "enormous contributions" to the modern environmental
movement.
i :
The American Indian philosophy finds its roots in concepts
fundamentally, different from the European. In many Native
cosmologies, life results from the cosmic union between Mother Earth
and Father Sky. Black Elk, in Callicot's words, believes that "not
only does ievefything have a spirit, in the last analysis all things
are related together as members of one universal family, born of one
i
father, the sky, the Great Spirit, and one mother, the Earth
herself."66 Callicot adds:
The concept of the Great Spirit and of the Earth Mother and the
family-like relatedness of all creatures seems to have been very
nearly a universal American Indian idea, and likewise the concept of
a spiritual dimension or aspect to all natural things. 61
"It is necessary to one's well-being and that of one's family and
64 George Cornell, "The Influence of Native Americans on Modern
Conservationists," Environmental Review. 9(2), Summer 1985, p. 105.
65 Ibid,1 p. 112.
68 J. Baird Callicot, "Traditional American Indian and Western
European Attitudes Toward Nature: An Overview," Environmental Ethics.
4(4), Winter 1982, p. 302.
67 Ibid, p.j 303.
32


I
tribe to maintain good relations not only with proximate human
persons, one's immediate tribal neighbors, but also with the nonhuman
persons abounding in the immediate environment."6B
Cornell remarks that for American Indians, "all products of the
creation are sacred and to be treated with care and respect."68 69 70 The
|
relatedness of all life is often symbolized in the sacred circle or
hoop, which represents the bond between all living things. The
environmental ethics derived from this belief are based on strong,
personal bonds with nature. All beings are connected in an unending
cycle of mutual dependence.
Reuben Snake confides: The Indian is part of the creation,
|
and we're supposed to fit into and be in harmony with the creation,
and not to have the thought that we can dominate any part of it."10
These universal obligations born from the sacred perceptions of all
life regulate Indian behavior in order to preserve the future. "Our
ethics, our moral principles, come out of our spiritual and religious
teachings. "71
The Indian legacy is carried on in more than the
political or fconservationist realm. In the crisis faced by the
modern United States, much inspiration can be found in Native
thoughts. Chief Luther Standing Bear, quoted by Johansen, describes
the issues at stake:
It is time now for a destructive order to be reversed, and it is well
to inform other races that the aboriginal cultures of America were
not devoid of, beauty. Furthermore, in denying the Indian his
ancestral 'rights and heritages the white race is but robbing itself.
68 Ibid, p. 305.
69 George Cornell, "The Influence of Native Americans on Modern
Conservationists", Environmental Review. 9(2), Summer 1985, p. 107.
70 Reuben Snake, interviewed by the Christian Science Monitor.
Thursday, February 15, 1990.
71 Ibid J
33


America can be revived, rejuvenated, by recognizing a Native School
of thought.72 !
The 'Native contributions to the Green movement will be examined
in light of the Ten Key Values. More than proposals, the Ten Key
values imply a series of questions. An examination of Indian
i 1
philosophy and historical examples will provide answers to some or
all of these (questions.
Regarding ecological wisdom, the first key value, Native
Americans offfer an ideal model for it. Contrary to Europeans who
believe that nature has to be dominated, the indigenous people of
this continent regard themselves as part of nature. This idea is
I |
clearly close to the concept of deep ecology of radical
: I
environmentalists like Earth First! members. While Earth First!
believes that nature has the right to exist for its own sake, a more
extremist, fringe of the movement has decided that, in fact, nature
would be better off without any humans at all. At this point Earth
First!'s philosophy takes an almost antihumanistic quality, with
J I
little regard for reality. Compared with this 'nature chauvinism,'
the Indian vijew remains eminently reasonable. When the Greens try to
live with|n the limited resources of the planet and promote
sustainable agriculture, there is no better model than the American
Indians.
Ward Churchill explains the Indian way:
In simplest terms, the American Indian world view may be this:
Human b|eings are free (indeed encouraged) to develop their
innate capabilities, but only in ways that do not infringe upon
other e;lements-called "relations", in the fullest dialectical
sense of the word-of nature. Any activity going beyond this
Luther Standing Bear, Land of the Spotted Eagle. (Lincoln:
University of| Nebraska Press, 1978), p.255 quoted in Bruce Johansen,
Forgotten
1982), p.
Founders (Harvard and Boston, MA: The Harvard Common Press,
xi .i
34
I


limitation is considered as "imbalance", a transgression, and
is strictly prohibited. Key to the indigenous American world
view is the firm knowledge that the human population may expand
only to1 the point, determined by natural geographical and
environmental circumstances, where it begins to displace other
animal species and require the permanent substitution of
cropland for normal vegetation in any area.73
The iwhole philosophy mentioned earlier sustains an ecological
wisdom without comparison in European thought. Therefore, it would
be a big mistake for American Greens to look towards Europe for a
| |
model. Indeed the very roots of modern ills come from the European
world view. On the contrary, even European Greens should, to some
extent, consider the Indian model a valid one. But, on this land,
I
which has been cared for by generations of indigenous people, there
is no reason ;to look towards Europe for inspiration. American Indian
religions and spirituality should be attentively studied by the
' I
Greens, because they contain all the necessary elements for a healthy
and harmonious relation with the environment. When, as in the Native
view, the jworld is regarded as a continual process of creation,
humans are expected to participate in and harmonize with this process
rather to Istand outside of it. As Ragsdale points out, "the Hopi
Indians of northern Arizona have lived for centuries by means of a
i |
skillful, delicate, and pragmatic agricultural technique, which
operates in equilibrium with nature, not in opposition to it."74
In such, a system, not only have humans adapted to their
environment: they feel responsible for its maintenance. "In the
I
I ,
traditional Ute view, nature is perceived as a living process with
73 Ward;Churchill, "American Indian Lands: The Native Ethic Amid
Resource Development," Environment. 28(6), July 1986, p. 15.
74 John|Ragsdale Jr., "Law and Environment in Modern America and
Among the :Hopi Indians: A Comparison of Values," Environmental
Ethics. 4 (,4),| 198 6, p. 419.
35


spirit, a sacred power and a source of power. Indians are the
guardians of the land, they are not at the center of control."
Humans are responsible for maintaining the harmony of nature rather
than disturbing it. "Land is a living body with spirit and power,
which contains tribal genealogy. The Creator made the land and the
people must hold it in trust: Never abuse it, sell it, trade it, or
give it away."s
As for grassroots democracy, Native Americans also provide an
excellent illustration of this principle. After all, as we have seen
earlier, the Native idea of democracy inspired Jefferson, Franklin,
and Paine: In The Legal Conscience. Felix Cohen writes: "It is out
of democratic] tradition that the distinctive political ideals of
. ! | i ,
American life emerged; universal suffrage for women as well as for
men, the pattern of states within a state we call federalism, the
I* \
habit of treating chiefs as servants of the people instead of as
their masters,."* Karl Marx too, after reading about the Great Law
i
of Peace of the Iroquois, admired Iroquoian democracy and
(
egalitarianism. He was especially intrigued at the Iroquois' ability
i |
to achieve ecbnomic leveling without coercion.75 76 77 One of the aims of
the Greens is: to promote a more democratic society. Like many others
before them, the Green movement needs to look at Native America for
75 Stephanie Romeo, "Concepts of Nature and Power: Environmental
Ethics ofithe Northern Ute, Environmental Review. 9(2), Summer 1985,
p.160-161:
76 Felix Cohen, "Americanizing the White Man," Legal Conscience
(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1960), p.317, quoted in Bruce
Johansen, iFordotten Founders. (Harvard and Boston, MA: The Harvard
Common Press,1 1982), p. 13.
77 Bruce Johansen, p. 122 quotes Friederich Engels, The Origin of
the Family. Private Property, and the State: In the Light of the
Researches ofl Lewis Morgan (New York: International Publishers,
1942) .
i
'i >
! I
36


its inspiration. Not only are the political organizations of the
Iroquois and Algonguins still relevant, but some contemporary Indians
are living this tradition. Weatherford, visiting a modern powwow,
notices that the Indians there follow a collective mentality and the
1
mood of the group rather than orders from the top. "The Indian
penchant for respectful individualism and equality seems as strong
today in Fargo, North Dakota, as when the first explorers wrote about
it five centuries ago... Indian societies operated without strong
positions !of leadership and coercive political institutions."18
This observation overlaps with the third key value, personal
and social responsibility. Obviously, if a system does not require
| I
strong coercion, it presumes the notion that each individual feels
| i
responsible for the well-being of his group. Usually, in most Indian
societies,' ini which simplicity and moderation were valued, the weaker
members were being cared for by the group.
Nonviolence is a delicate issue for many indigenous people and
I i
| I
for some Greens. The Iroquois, for one, believed in negotiations
i
before using military force. Contrary to popular beliefs, the
j *
Comanches,, in Abram Kardiner's book,78 79 were described as pacifists,
who fought back when their territory was encroached upon by British,
French and Spanish colonizers. Here again concepts need to be
redefined!in indigenous terms. Violence has a different meaning for
! *
Native Americans: They view death and killing as part of life.
Hunting is accompanied by prayers to thank the killed creature for
its life. Usually wildlife was hunted only as much as was needed to
i
feed the group. Wars were more a matter of prestige and certainly
78 Jack Weatherford, Indian Givers. (New York: Fawcett Columbine,
1988), p.121.,
79 Abram Kardiner, The Psychological Frontiers of Society. (New
York: Columbia University Press, 1945) .


I I
involved less I physical violence than modern warfare. We can also
imagine that, in the often desperate position contemporary Native
Americans 'have been pushed into, nonviolence has understandably not
become the exclusive focus of Native philosophy.
Indians;have always lived in families, groups, tribes.
Decentralization is a natural characteristic of Native American
values. This'idea, combined with the concept already considered by
the Greens, of bioregion, should be a model for the Greens. Thomas
Jefferson ^viewed Indian societies as ideally the best, but not for a
large number of people. Decentralization is the obvious solution to
circumvent! Jefferson's objection. In Ecotopia, a book by Callenbach
which has inspired the American Greens, a major emphasis is placed on
i |
communities. The intentional-communities movement remains vigorous
in this country90 .
As Ragsdale points out, the Hopi stable-state model was
especially remarkable because of its self-sufficient economic units.
: I .
"Each decentralized unit has the capacity to employ a full range of
economic skills and to supply all or most of the physical necessities
I
of life." Connelly notes:
the jprinciples of decentralization and self-sufficiency are
well-exemplified by the clan, which, as an economic, social and
religious grouping, is complete within itself or at least has
the capacity of being complete. A system of more or less
independent clans is flexible and mobile and has been credited
with managing the population in a manner best suited for the
harsh desert environment.92 80 81 *
80 Cris 'Popenoe, and Oliver Popenoe, Seeds of Tomorrow: New Acre
Communities That Work, (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1984) .
and Corinne McLaughlin and Gordon Davidson, Builders of the Dawn
81 John iRagsdale, "Law and Environment in Modern America and Among
the Hopi Indians: A Comparison of Values, Harvard Environmental Law
Review. 10, (2) {, 1986, p. 448.
88 Connelly; "Hopi Social Organization," Handbook of North American
Indians-Sduthwest. A. Ortiz ed., 1979, quoted in Ragsdale, p. 453.
38


In sum,I community-based economics too is a concept adopted by
Native Americans.
The place of women in Native societies varied greatly from one
tribe to another. But, in general, women were well treated and at
the time of the European invasion, had more political rights than
their European counterparts.'3 Because the idea of equality among
the sexes was remote in European preoccupation, early colonizers
failed to mention the treatment of women in their reports. But, soon,
the settlers admired the skills of Native women, who knew how to
. i i . ,
build candes and prepare the meat from hunted animals. While the
West saw some strong frontier women, European men still liked to
think of t'heir women as fragile creatures needing constant
protection. Among the Iroquois, the great Law of Peace provided a
system of checks and balances between men and women. Members of the
Grand Council were men, but they had been nominated by the women of
j !
their extended clan. Women also were the providers of food; to veto
a war, the women would simply withhold the food supply and the great
I 1
warriors stayed at home. The descent, as in many other tribes, was
matrilineal. t If the conduct of the leader was found inappropriate,
he could be impeached by the women, who would then choose a new one."
j
Engels described life among the Iroquois: "there cannot be any poor
or needythe communal household and the gens know their
responsibilities towards the old, the sick, and those disabled in 83 84
83 See a!lso:
I Am the Fire. The Voices of Native American Women, ed. by Jane
Katz, (New York: Dutton, 1972).
Carolyn Niethammer, Daughters of the Earth: The Lives and Legends
of American Indian Women. (New York: Collier Books, 1977)
84 Jack Iweatherford, Indian Givers (New York: Fawcett Columbine,
1988), p.138-139.


I
war."85 * 88 Whereas Indian societies do not provide an exact model for
i |
postpatriarchal values, they certainly offer some valuable insights
in a more ;just society.
Overall, Native American societies appear to be very tolerant
of cultural, racial, and religious differences. Run-away slaves,
fleeing their:white masters, were sometimes adopted by the remaining
tribes of the!Southeast. Indeed, a number of Whites have also been
accepted as full members of Indian nations.06 Paragraph 99 of the
I. . ,
Great Law lof Peace already guaranteed freedom of religion. An
author, J.N.B. Hewitt, writing in 1918, remarked that among the
' |
Iroquois, 'lall forms of religion were tolerated and practiced.01 One
might even argue that very tolerance contributed to the Natives'
i ! ....
demise, when they became confronted with the rigid dogmatism of the
first missionaries. This example substantiates the assumption that
key value number 8, respect for diversity, can also be found in
Native American thought. Johansen reports that "the shade of one's
skin meant^ less to the Mohawks than whether one accepted the laws of
the Great .Peace, which contained no racial bars to membership in the
Six Nations."00
As for global responsibility and future focus, these two issues
can be examined together. Historically, Native Americans were not in
a position tojhave to consider the first one. But, on the other
! I
85 Friederich Engels, The Origin of the Family. Private Property.
and the Stlate;: In the Light of the Researches of Lewis Morgan (New
York: International Publishers, 1942), p. 97, quoted in Weatherford,
p. 162. :
88 Conrad Weiser, a friend of Benjamin Franklin, had been adopted
by the Mohlawk as a full member of the nation. Bruce Johansen,
Forgotten ^Founders. (Harvard & Boston: The Harvard Common Press,
1982), p.58. '
07 Ibid,j p.! 18.
88 Ibid, p. 51.
I
40


hand, nobo|dy has better articulated the need to think of future
i
generations than the Iroquois. Every decision was to be taken
bearing inj mind the consequences of this decision for the seven
generations to come. This belief certainly reduces the chances for a
people to ispoil their environment.
I
In sum,:in many respects, Native heritage provides almost a
blueprint !for!Green values. American Greens would, therefore, be
well advis.ed to study more closely Native beliefs and praxis in their
search for a new society.
I
i i l
l
41


CHAPTER 5
i
i
I
COALITION
As we have just seen, Native American values have a lot in
common with Green aspirations. Ragsdale, at the end of his paper,
discussing the merits of Hopi society, shows how modern America might
adapt Hopi values.89 He proposes to raise the consciousness of
modern Americans on a modest scale by education and environmental
legislation that focuses on "holistic concerns rather than economic
! i
growth."90 "...the interaction between the [Hopi] society and the
I
environment has been favorable, m large part because the core
personal values of the Hopi mirror natural principles. Thus, the
I
Hopi value balance, holism, rhythm, harmony, flexibility, continuity,
and a dynamic, ongoing, vibratory form of stability."91 Looking at
modern society, Ragsdale believes that an economic recession might
bring about the conditions for a change. But he argues against such
a 'nonconsjensual transition' that could lead to a significant
increase in environmental damage. Also, he fears the ensuing social
and political|instability could lead to a repressive totalitarian
system.
Since "a consensual shift to a stable-state economy is
unlikely, and economic stagnation would be neither healthy nor
enduring," Ragsdale proposes some small societal changes. "First,
89John Ragsdale Jr., "Law and Environment in Modern America and
Among the jHopi Indians: A Comparison of Values," Harvard
Environmental1Law Review. 10(2), 1986, p. 457.
90 Ibid,J p. 420.
91 Ibid,j p.1 456.
Ibid, p.1461.
92


survivingjstable states of Native Americans such as Hopi should be
I
protected against official policies that further erode their
traditional life style." Ragsdale is very enthusiastic about "small-
scale, stability-oriented communities."93 94 One assumes here that he
is referring to intentional communities such as religious ones and
the more recent experimental communes. But he also alludes to
experimentation in which "urban residents can experiment with
gardening, recycling, energy conservation, solar power, restoration
of abandoned buildings, and local enterprise."99 These are ideas
pervading |the nascent Green movement.
Finally! Ragsdale advocate more wilderness.
Wilderness can provide far more than the purely utilitarian arguments
would suggest, however... [It] requires men to accommodate
themselves to1 nature, rather than the reverse... Some have found
profound symbolic qualities in wilderness to admire and protect-
, i
qualities such as beauty, purity, timelessness, reciprocity, harmony
and balance, 'perhaps most importantly, many have found a sense of
spiritualism, mysticism, religion, or transcendence.95
i I t
His final words are a quote from E.F. Schumacher: "it is
impossible for any civilization to survive without a faith in
I '
meanings and values transcending the utilitarianism of comfort and
survival. "96 *
I
While Ragsdale's position is laudable, especially in comparison
with the views prevailing in modern America, he still looks at the
environment from an ethnocentric standpoint. He finds qualities in
nature that are not immediately 'useful,' but one can argue that
nature has the right to exist for its own sake. Also, a step further
93 Ibid,j p. 461.
94 Ibid,' p.' 462.
95 Ibid,j p.. 465.
ge I I #
Ragsdale, quoting E.F. Schumacher, A Guide for the Perplexed.
1977.


I
l
1 i , , ,
in the protection of wilderness areas and in the improvement of
Native life, would be to combine these two issues in one solution:
allocating more public land to the tribes and letting them manage
i
these resources for the society at large. Native Americans have
proven time and again to be a valid model for the Green movement. On
a practical level this commonness of view should logically lead to a
coalition between Greens and American Indians.
I
Understandably, Native Americans in general might find an
alliance with: any European group quite problematic. Some Indian
leaders are leery of any association with Whites: Too often have they
been promised help that never materialized. Others consider, they
already have enough problems to solve without having to handle an
I
extra.issuemoreover an issue generated by the White man's
ignorance.' A coalition must therefore be initiated by the Greens;
i
I !
first, because Native Americans possess a knowledge of value to the
Green movement: in general, while only a few Greens have skills useful
1 I
to the Indians; secondly, if the Greens aspire to be more than an
environmental movement, they need to tackle social issues. They have
i i
to approach minorities, but, in the case of Native Americans, they
have to understand that Indians are not just another minority; they
\ i
are nations, ancient, with sovereignty; they are the first
inhabitants Ojf this continent and have been wronged ever since the
white man arrived. No real justice will ever exist before these
wrongs have bjeen remedied.
Some Indian leaders, especially members of The American Indian
Movement,ihave recognized the link between their movement and the
Green. In 1983 an Indian delegation went to visit Germany, where the
members were ,the guests of the Greens there. During this Journey of
44


! i
I
Peace, Indians and German Greens recognized that they had one common
ennemy, the US. In 1855, Chief Seath was reported to have said:
I
Tribes followjtribes and nations follow nations. It is the order of
nature and regret is useless. For even the White Man whose God
walked and talked with him as friend to friend cannot be exempt from
the common destiny. We may be brother after all, we shall see...
The need for coalition is somewhat recognized in Spaka, where a
l
little less than a page out of twenty-three is devoted to the subject
of indigenous people. This specific chapter contains nine articles.
The first one'recognizes the existence of treaties between most
tribes and the US government. The second and third affirm the need
to support treaty rights and the Native American struggle. In a
fourth one, the Greens oppose the forced relocation of the Dine in
I
Arizona. ;The Greens intend to lend their support to Native
enterprises in order for them to escape the poverty prevalent on
j !
reservations. Greens support the renewal of native American
traditions. They pledge to include people of color at all levels of
'j 1
organizing. When Spaka was last updated, in 1990, Greens affirmed
their supportj for the Mohawks at Oka, Canada, who were opposing the
I i
construction of a golf course on their sacred land. Finally, the
Greens choose, to honor 500 years of resistance and dignity. While
these propositions are commendable, unfortunately they remain
incomplete anil disregard the lessons that could be learned from
Native Americans.
Not|only are essential resources wasted, but this
shortsightedness could prove dangerous. As Winona LaDuke remarks:
They sometimes call us "the First Americans." I've wondered
what that means, and the only thing I've come up with is that
Indians are always the first to feel the sharp end of the
stick; !the first to suffer biological and chemical warfare at
the'hands of the US government, the first to lose their land to i
i 45
! i
I


big business, the first to lose their legal and human rights in
the national interest, the first to be laid off from any jobs
they manage to find, the first to be cut from the social
services every year...
j' But we are never the last to suffer what we first
experience, and I think that's something everybody might think
about it. Non-Indians will be next... And if you don't
believe! me, go ask a farmer about his land these days. Go ask
somebody from Love Canal or Three Mile Island about their
health.1 Go ask an Appalachian miner about his job and the
benefits of transient, extractive industries.97 98
LaDuke's remark illustrates perfectly the urgency for the
Greens to .enter into a coalition with Native Americans. Such
I
coalitions between environmentalists and Indians already exist in
many parts of,the continent. In his keynote address, Walt Bresette
, i
talked about his Witness for Peace program in Wisconsin, in which
non-Indiarts pledge to report any abuse against Indians who try to
exercise their fishing rights.99 A local branch of Greenpeace
participat!ed in the occupation of Yellow Thunder Camp, only to be
reprimanded by the national leadership for doing so. The McLean
l
article iii American Forests reports the coalition between the forest
industry, [environmentalists, and Indians to end the logging war.
McLean notes,;a little naively, that the forests were saved when all
the parties involved recognized that "we humans are caretakers of the
J ;
land"99a .concept the forest industry might have had some reluctance
to admit. ; Baker, describing another example of coalition, shows how
the association of environmentalists and Indians were able to halt
97 Winnona LaDuke quoted by Ward Churchill, "American Indian Lands:
The Native Ethic amid Resource Development", Environment, 28(6), July
1986, p. li4 .
98 Walter Bresette, keynote address at the 1990 Third National
Green Gathering in Estes Park, Colorado, published in Green Letter.
Greener Times. 6(3), Winter 1990.
99 Herbert McLean, "Ending the Northwest Logging Wars," American
Forests. 93(5r6), p. 31.
46


logging in Fort Moresby and create a national park. He also notes
that the next,phase of this plan would be to recognize Native
i
rights.100 ; |
; i
Often, environmental protection and Native rights are closely
related. Radford, in his article on stripmining in Arizona, remarks
that stripmining degrades soil, air and water but also spoils the
I (
scenery and ruins the Native American culture.
In his impressive article, Jorgensen tells that rangers have
come to associate with Indians in their struggle to protect their
environment. He apparently disputes the beliefs held by some
environmentalists that land is part of nature, with rights of its
own, and that)human uses are essentially destructive. Michael
Kieffer for one tries to link the disappearance of the Anasazi people
with ecological mismanagement. He laments: "And if primitive people,
r i
like Rousseauf s 'noble savage' were capable of such destruction,
where are we, their ignoble and industrialized progeny, headed?"101
Contrary to what this type of environmentalist believes,
American Indians are well qualified to protect their environment.
Jorgensen idiscloses the fact that the Sioux rejected $145 million for
7 million jacres of their sacred Black Hills.102 For them, land is
i
more important than money. Also, in Wyoming, the Cheyenne
subordinated the positive effects of coal mining (money, jobs,
availability of coal for Cheyenne use, increased tribal control) to
. i 1
I
100 Dean Baker, "Islands on the Edge", Amicus Journal, 11(4), Fall
1989, p. 40-4^.
101 Michael Kieffer, "Fall from the Garden of Eden, International
Wildlife. 19 (4), January 1989, p. 39.
102 Joseph Jorgensen, "Land Is Cultural, So Is a Commodity: The
Locus of Differences Among Indians, Cowboys, Sod-Busters and
Environmentalists," Journal of Ethnic Studies. 12(3), Fall 1984, p.
47


I
I
the negative aspects (increased social and community problems, damage
to the environment, loss of non-renewable resources, influx of Whites
' i ...
with no respect for Cheyenne culture, shattering of traditional
! |
Cheyenne c.ultiire)1" But, Jorgensen points out, the Cheyenne are
willing tq manage and extract renewable resources. In State of
Washington v.! United States Environmental Protection Agency, the
court supported Indian self-determination in the area of
environmental|protection of Indian land, a judgment that reaffirmed
Worcester v. Georgia (1832) by which Indians retain power of self-
government103 104 These examples show that not only Indians are
qualified to look after their land, but this fact is recognized by
the laws of the United States.
Although Indians have proven their competence in environmental
matters, Some'environmentalists still deny their skills in this
i ;
field. Walrd Churchill observes that often environmentalists are
; I
uninterested in Indian issues. He deplores their reticent support of
i
the occupation of Yellow Thunder camp in the Black Hills in the
beginning of the 80's, where Indians preserved a small parcel of land
from the effects of mining. The TREATY program for autonomy, self-
; i
sufficiency and environmental protection launched on the Pine Ridge
i
reservation also attracted little support from mainstream
environmentalists. It also took 10 years for non-Indians to become
involved in the Four Corners struggle against the forced relocation
at Black Mesa.
Churchill believes that Indian sovereignty and environmental
concerns are linked. "What happens to American Indian lands
103 Ibid, p.| 18.
104 Catherine Pope, "Environmental Law-Federal Indian Law-Recent
Developments," Natural Resources Journal.27. Summer 1987, p. 739-755.
48


I
I I 10S
ultimately: happens to the rest of the environment as well." He
I
urges environmentalists to ask for more than just clean water. In
his words,; the American Indian Movement participates in many
different environmental actions. "Indians realized that sacrifice of
native rights|simply forecloses the (re)emergence of ecologically
viable social1 countermodels in North America."105 106 107
Phillip Shinnick too, in his paper on natural sports and
sovereignty rights of the Mohawks, links concerns for the environment
and the "struggle of native Americans to preserve that which was
sacred to their people; the need as organic beings to live in unity
with the land; while fighting cultural annihilation." In his view,
the issues of modern monopoly capitalism and control of natural
!' I
resources !are preempted by racism and the view that Indians cannot
govern themselves. Shinnick adds that this common struggle "has
i !
fused the iNative American people with the anti-nuclear coalitions and
alliances |in mass demonstrations which speak out against the by-
J ;
products cjf nuclear industries and call for respect of the
sovereignty of reservation land."101
Now that the linkage between Green ideas and Native struggles
has been established on a theoretical and also practical level, one
of the important tasks for the Greens, then, is to support Indian
treaty rightsi. Churchill reminds his readers of the existence of 371
treaties which set aside territories for the Indians' own exclusive
use and occupancy.
I
Given that the land in question represents precisely those areas of
105 Ward! Churchill, "American Indian Lands: The Native Ethic amid
1 i
Resource Development," Environment, 28(6), July-August 1986, p. 32.
,os Ibid
107 Phillip Shinnick, "Natural Sport, the Olympic Prison and the
Fight for[Sovereignty Rights of the Mohawks," Canadian Ethnic
Studies. 9(1), Spring 1981, p. 43-52.
I 49
I


the contin'ent1 most imminently threatened, the return of Indian land
to Indian owners is rendered doubly important... Put another way,
every inch of land returned to its rightful Indian occupants is an
inch withdrawn from the ravages of the present industrial order.109
i
As the opinions of AIM members like Ward Churchill and Winnona LaDuke
have shown, AIM is at the forefront in regard to environment
concerns among Indian organizations. The National Congress of
American Indians is a national, intertribal organization dedicated to
the protection, conservation, and development of Indian land,
I i
mineral, timber, and human resources. Since its main goal is to
improve the lives of American Indians, it might favor developing
i
Indian resources over stringent environmental protection. In the
West, the Council for Energy Resource Tribe surveys expansive natural
resources such as coal, uranium, and oil, and the tribes then choose
to mine them or not. But these options have to be respected by
environmentalists: after all, it's their land.
I
Walter Bresette as a Chippewa Indian and as the founder of the
. i
Lake Superior]Greens bridges the gap between the two movements. He
thinks that Indians fit in the Green movement in two ways. First,
treaties are va tool to help stop further degradation"; therefore the
Greens need to support treaty and aboriginal property rights. One of
the responsibilities of the Greens is to show mainstream America that
support for treaties is fostering its own self-interest. Bresette
l
also believes1that "Greens are like woodticks on a dying elephant."
i
"If the economy fails, war resumes or the environment dies, all the
technicians in the world won't be as important as a single medicine
i
i i
i
i
See 105.1
50


I
man or a singer of sacred song."105 He adds: I concluded that we
!' i
are supporters of Indians because of inherited history and our
i !
i '
political [beliefs." The coalition envisioned by Bresette would be "a
place where every individual-regardless of race, lifestyle, religion,
skill or inheritance" can participate in the common political goal.110
i. ]
For ja closing statement no words are more forceful than Reuben
! j
Snake's: "EverybodyI don't care what color, creed, ethnic origin
i !
their roots arewe're all the same. We all have common roots. In
| I
spite of a|ll these technological achievements, we begin to understand
i ,
that there1 is; a oneness to the whole universethere is a oneness."111
<. i
In llight of these statements, a Green-American Indian coalition
i !
would be the logical and natural outcome, if the Green movement is to
; i
succeed. |0n one hand, Native Americans present an excellent model of
I !
ecology. 'On the other, and more important, if the Greens ask for a
radical transformation of society, they cannot ignore the other
components! of jit, minorities in particular. At a time when a
i i
l
increasing! nuiifoer of Native Americans proudly recognize the value of
! i
their heritage, they might be willing to share their knowledge with
Greens ready to listen to them. Stimulating ideas could be generated
I |
from such a collaboration.
i i
i
i
_____________J____________
109 Walter B|resette, keynote address at the Third National Green
Gathering at Estes Park, Colorado, Fall 1990, reprinted in Green
Letter, Greener Times, Winter 1990.
1,0 Ibid: !
111 Reuben Snake interviewed by Rushworth M. Kidder in the
Christian Science Monitor. February 15, 1990, p. 14.
! I
: : 51
i
i


SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
I '
! 1
Bahro, RudplfJ Building the Green Movement. Trans, by Mary Tyler.
Philadelphia, 'PA: New Society Publishers, 1986.
Basic Call' to'Consciousness. Akwesasne Notes. Rooseveltown, NY:
Akwesasne Notes, 1981.
i !
Callenbachy Ernest. E.c.otopia; The Notebooks and Reports of William
Weston. New York: Bantam Books, 1975.
i 'i
Deloria, Vine; God Is Red. New York: Grosset and Dunlap, 1973.
; j
Engels, Friederich. The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and
the State:__In]the Light of the Researches of Lewis Morgan. New York
International'Publishers, 1942.
I
i !
I Am the Fire, The Voices of Native American Women, ed. by Jane Kat
New York: Dutton, 1972.
I (
Johansen, Bruce. Forgotten Founders. Harvard and Boston, MA: The
Harvard Common Press, 1982.
I !
Kardiner, Abram. The Psychological Frontiers of Society. New York:
Columbia University Press, 1945.
i I
Kelly, Petra.[Fighting for Hope. Trans, by Marianne Howarth. Boston
MA: South End^ress, 1984.
Martin, Calvin. The Keepers of the Game: Indian-Animal Relationship
and the Fur Trade. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of
California! Presses, 1978.
[
Nelson, Richard. Make Prayers to the Raven: A Koyukon View of the
Northern Forest. Chicago: Unversity of Chicago Press, 1983.
Niethammer;' Carolyn. The Daughters of the Earth: The Lives and
Legends of. American Indian Women. New York: Collier Books, 1977.
, i
O'Brien, Sharon. American Indian Tribal Government. Norman:
University1 ofOklahoma Press. 1989.
i
Popenoe, Chris, and Oliver Popenoe. Seeds of Tomorrow: New Age
Communities That Work. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1984.


I
i ;
; i
! I
Regan, Tom. All That Dwell Therein: Animal Rights and Environmental
Ethics. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Presses,
1982. j ,
J |
Schumacher, Ernst. Small is Beautiful: Economics as if People
Mattered. NewiYork: Harper & Row, 1973.
i !
. i 1
Spretnak, Charlene, and Fritjof Capra. Green Politics, the Global
Promise. Santa Fe, NM: Bear and Company, 1986.
i i
Standing BearJ Luther. Land of the Spotted Eagle. Lincoln: University
of Nebraska Press, 1978.
I I
Weatherford, Jack. Indian Givers. New York: Fawcett Columbine, 1988.
Articles in Journals
Ambler, Maitjane. "The Lands the Feds Forgot," Sierra, 74(3) May-June
1989. ! ;
| i
Baker, Deah. 'jlslands on the Edge." The Amicus Journal, 11(4) Fall
1989. j !
! i
l I
Callicot, J. Baird. "Traditional American Indian and Western European
Attitudes Toward Nature: An Overview." Environmental Ethics. 4(4)
Summer 1982. 1
! i
Churchill, \ Ward. "American Indian Lands: The Native Ethic amid
Resource Development," Environment. 28(6) July 1986.
1
Cornell, George. "The Influence of Native Americans on Modern
Conservationists," Environmental Review. 9(2) Summer 1985.
i |
Jorgensen,jJoseph. "Land Is Cultural, So Is a Commodity: The Locus of
Differences Among Indians, Cowboys, Sod-busters and
Environmentalists," Journal of Ethnic Studies. 12(3) Fall 1984.
i
Kieffer, Michael. "Fall from the Garden of Eden," International
Wildlife. ,19(4) January 1989.
! i ,
McLean, Herbert. "Ending the Northwest Logging Wars," American
Forests. 93 (5-f6) .
! i
| | i
i
i


Pope, Catherine. "Environmental Law-Federal Indian Law-Recent
Developments-State of Washington, Department of Ecology v. United
States Environmental Protection Agency 752 F.2d 1465 (9th Cir.1985)
Natural Resources Journal.
i i
27 Summer 1986.
Pyne, Stephen; "Indian Fires," Natural History, 92(2) February 1983.
Radford, Jeff. "Stripmining Arid Navajo Lands in the U.S.: Threats to
Health and Heritage," Arobio, 11(1) 1982.
Ragsdale, John, Jr. "Law and Environment in Modern America and Among
the Hopi Indians: A Comparison of Values," Harvard Environmental Law
Review, 10,(2) 1986.
i
Romeo, Stephanie. "Concepts of Nature and Power: Environmental Ethics
of the Northern Ute," Environmental Review. 9(2) Summer 1985.
Shinnick, Phiiip. "Natural Sport, the Olympic Prison and the Fight
for Sovereignty Rights of the Mohawks," Canadian Ethnic Studies. 9(1)
Spring 1981.
Articles in Books
| i
Cohen, Fel'ix. I "Americanizing the White Man" in Legal Conscience. New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1960.
Me Harg, Ian, "Values, Process, Form" in The Fitness of Man's
Environment. Washington, D.C.: Smithonian Institution Press, 1968
reprinted in Robert Disch, ed. The Ecological Conscience. Englewood
Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1970.
White, Robert,, "Religious Roots of our Ecological Crisis" in Tribal
Assets. The Rebirth of Native America. New York: Holt & Co 1990.
Interviews and Speeches
Bresette, Walter. Keynote address at the 1990 Third National Green
Gathering in Estes Park, CO. Published in Green Letter. Greener
Times. 6(3) Winter 1990.
i
Snake, Reuben iinter. by Rushworth M. Kiedder in The Christian Science
Monitor. Thursday, February 15, 1990.
I I
I ;
I 1
i ,
I I
I I
54


Full Text

PAGE 1

:i ,, !' 'i I I. I ,, I J I NAITivE AMERICAN CULTURES AND TRADITIONS: I ANII EXAMPLE FOR THE NORTH .I : by AMERICAN GREENS : 'I 'I I .: I I I i I I I Catherine Lagarde A thesis submitted to the I Faculty of the Graduate School of the UnivJrsity of Colorado in partial fuifillment I I .. ,[ of the requirements for the degree of I. ' I. I .;i .. I' i I 'i I'" I : I .I' I I I I I I I I I Master of Arts Department of Political Science .1991

PAGE 2

I I ' I ,. l ::: ,. 'i I, I. This thesis for the Master of Arts degree by Catherine Lagarde has been approved for the Department of Political Science by

PAGE 3

'I, I i Lagarde, 'catherine (M.A., Political Science) I I Native American Cultures and Traditions: An Example for the 1: I North American Greens I Thesis direqted by Professor Michael S. Cummings I Whi+e the Green movement is establishing itself in the I United States, Greens look toward Europe for direction. The first chapter of this work summarizes the essence of ' Green philosophy. The paper proposes that Native Americans had, and often still have, a more harmonious relationship I with their nvironment than their European counterparts. The ten values, on which Green philosophy is based, share many similarities with Native traditions. I Consequently, the Greens should study Native philosophies and as a model for their new society. One of the I, first iin this is to form an alliance with Indian interested in such a coalition. The form and I recommend I I I I I I content of this abstract are approved. I publication. Signed

PAGE 4

:j. ,. I !.. CONTENTS INTRODUCTION. l . . . . . . . . . 1 I CHAPTER 1 :[ ; 1. GREE;:N VALUES I l .I 1 2. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW . I i 3. EUROPEAN VIEW OF NATURE r 4. COMMON1PHILOSOPHY : I I 5. .... I 3 .. 12 .22 .31 .42 SELECTEDjBII?LIOGRAPHY .............. 52 i I I l 0 I I I ,, l I. iv

PAGE 5

I I t I. l I I 'I INTRODUCTION I I last few years a new political trend has emerged ld I i wor Born Germany, the Green movement has spread to different and cultures. I In the United States, the movement I faces challenges, especially in its attempt to find its own identity. lMaJy Greens look towards Europe for direction, and indeed I the Germani have been rather successful. But in Green : I Politics, Spretnak and Capra note: "The roots of Green ideas in I i : American culture reach back to our earliest origins. For more than I I 20,000 yeabs ijative Americans have maintained a deeply ecological I I sense of the subtle forces that link humans and nature, always I : I need for balance and for reverence toward Mother : I Earth." This1paper will study the relationship between the Green I' I movement ih the US and Native Americans. I. I A fifst;part will summarize the essence of Green philosophy h i . an of ten key values and the Green 1: I platform We will then explore the historical aspects of Native cultures and conSider philosophy of the environment. Jwere Native Americans truly the first ecologists of I this countfy?l What can we learn from them? A third part of the paper the conflict of American values with environmental I I I I concerns, andJ concomitantly, the ways in which Native Americans have "I I I. been adversely affected by modern technology, the plundering of I' I natural resources and the ensuing pollution. Green values and Native American traditions, I. i practical proposals will also be suggested. One aspect of this I effort willi to combine the environmentalists' philosophy and the I I 1 'I .I I . 1. I

PAGE 6

Indian one_jin iorder to formulate a common view of their relationship I I with the Ea.rtH. Is a coalition between Greens and Native Americans I possible? ;tif lso, under what conditions? Could a powerful I alternative to traditional politics arise from the mutual I understandtng !between the ecological movement and the first I inhabitants of this hemisphere? I i I 2

PAGE 7

.I I CHAPTER 1 GREEN VALUES ., i. :[ I :I ., In mbdern times, the impact of on nature has increased .: I I I tremendous:ly. 1 Often, development has meant better lives for human 'I beings. 'the same development has .also been guilty of harming ! the environment. Water and air become polluted. Natural resources : i are getting sarce. We are running out of space for our trash. I I Besides eeological catastrophe we are confronted with, our I, I society mu1st also face generalized social and economic disruptions. j I ,!' i In the of this multi-faceted, global crisis, the nascent Green -.: I movement in and elsewhere aspires to present an alternative [. solution. :! in Europe the movement has been quite successful, in I the States it is I the Europe1an I I $uccesses, I still searching for its identity. Because of the American Greens usually look towards zhodel. I One of the aims of this paper is to find Europe fori a 'I American for the movement, but a look at Germany in particular I I I I will us I to compare the European and American situations. I I I I In G1erm
PAGE 8

i 1,, '. ; i I ; i. I I I i ,I .J I I I I movement. I After this wave subsided, in the Seventies, many people r 1 became enthralled with spiritual searches, traveling to Asia and ;-I I I Africa fori At the same time, a broad range of Germans I I started the environmental practices of their government. i I The Green movement was born from the confluence of these two I I I currents. I Tlie German Greens were particularly inspired by ( I Schumacherts Small Is Beautiful: Economics As If People Mattered and : I Callenbach(s I i In 1978, Herbert Gruhl, author of A Planet Is iformed the Green Action Future. The group decided to I ,I run its They were joined in their movement by some ,I I ,of of Action Third Way and some members of the Free I I Internatiohal:university, a group from the non-dogmatic left. In I I 1983, the Green party captured 5.6 percent of the German II I election .. 1 From the beginning, the German Green party was split between i I the the "fundis." I I The "realos" favored a coalition with the SPD (the German Socialist Party), while fundamentalists like I I I Rudolph Baproiopposed any association with the Social-Democrats. i Fundamenta!lisrh entails putting "ecology before economics and I I fundamenta11, long-term interests before immediate short term ones." 1 :r Bahrl6 views ecology as a third way between capitalism and I H+ thinks that radical changes are necessary and "I I I ' proposes t.o transform Looking at the American .i I Indian in which "the average tribe member was more a human I .i I being than1 the average worker is now in the present structure, "2 I I I Bahro prop:oses that "we need communities, communes in human I 1Rudolil1 Building the I PA: New Society 2Ibid, b_. I I I 'I 'i I I I Green Movement, trans. by Mary Tyler Publishers, 1986), p. 171. 4

PAGE 9

, in which there can be a scientific technology on a i I I human scale."3 These small units would be "locally integrated and self-administrated. "4 I I In a first phase, communities would not only allow us tp escape neurosis-generating families and "the Big I '. Machine," they would also be a fall-back system for the society's in particular. Ultimately, the new society would be a: of interlinked base communities of about 3,000 I people who: agree on a "simple, non-expanded reproduction of their basis."5 I I In 1984, were elected to the European Parliament. They proposed to seek a new vision of reality. Their I new valuesl an4 ideas came from different tendencies: especially ecological, h6listic and feminist movements. The Green goal was to transcend the old political framework of left-versus-right. The I I 1980 program of the German Greens reads: We represent a I total as opposed to the one-dimensional, still-morel I production brands of politics. Our policies are guided by long-! term visions for the future and are founded on four basic principles!: ecology, social responsibility, grassroots democracy I and nonviolence."' 'I The concept of ecology more recently called "deep ecology" i calls for of nature's cycles. Greens ask for soft I energy, appropriate technology and organic agriculture, and 'I I especially: demand "a halt to our ravaging of natural resources and our poisoning of the biosphere through the dumping of toxic wastes, 3Ibid, P 158. 'Ibid. 5Ibid, p.14. 6 Charlene ,Spretnak and Fritjof Capra, Green Politics. the Global Promise Fe, NM: Bear and Company, 1986), p. 30. 5 I I

PAGE 10

the accumulation of so-called acceptable levels of radiation I I exposure, and.the pollution of the air."7 In this system the world is viewed in terms of relations and integration. The immediate measures advanced by the Greens to protect the environment were certainly responsible for the Greens' instant success in German I politics. Socikl encompasses social justice. GFeens must insure that their environmental protection programs respect poor people and working people's access to a decent income. The Federal Prj:>gram of the German Greens states: "The ecological and social spheres belong inseparably together: the economy of nature is linked t-o the economy of humans for better or worse."" Grassroots democracy is the third pillar of Green philosophy. "Grassroots-dE7mocracy politics means an increased realization of decentralized,' direct democracy. We start from the belief that the decisions at the grassroots level must, in principle, be given I priority. we:grant far-reaching powers of autonomy and self-administration to decentralized, manageable grassroots units, Half of the parliamentarians' salaries and some national membership dues are used to finance Oko-fond, an organization at I the state levE7l which provides funds for apprenticeships for unemployed to battered-women shelters and peace camps. The pillar, nonviolence, calls for an end to personal violence and "structural" violence of states and institutions. As an outgrowth of this principle, Greens support self-determination for groups; and individuals. The issue is still debated, because 7 Ibid, p. 31 8 Ibid, p. 3 6. 9 Ibid, p. 37. 6

PAGE 11

some Greens that a violent state can only be changed by force. Most Greens, though, believe that means are as important as I I ends. Pet.:ra often quotes Martin Luther King: I I "Even today Iistill dream that one day there will be an end to war and that will beat their swords into ploughshares and their spears intb pruning hooks, that nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. "10 American Greens have undeniably found their inspiration in the German movement. But the American movement also grows from its I I I own political background and from the current I situation. Ctlarlene Spretnak notes, "the roots for Green ideas in I i American reach back to our earliest origins. For more than 20,000 Native Americans have maintained a deeply ecological sense of forces that link humans and nature, always tqe need for balance and for reverence for Mother Earth. "11 In the USA, most Greens have come from the civil rights and environmental movements. Most members want to dissociate themselves from conventional environmentalism by incorporating it into a vision of social justice, sexual equality, grassroots democracy ,.1 and nonviolence. I I For of starting a Green.movement in the United States, a meeting was held on the campus of Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota, in August of 1984. Out of this founding meeting, the Committees of Correspondence were created. Located in Kansas City, this organization serves as a clearinghouse for local 10 Petra, Kelly, Fighting for Hope, trans. by Marianne Howarth (Boston, MA: South End Press, 1984), p. 56. 11 Charlene Spretnak and Fritjof Capra, Green Politics (Santa Fe, NM: Bear and Company, 1986), p. 193. 7

PAGE 12

I i I I I groups. lff.Om I the beginning, the American movement has been plagued b d . I. I rnb h y a some me ers t e movement as an I I educationai tool aimed at modifying people's attitude towards their I I other members favor the creation of a political I 'I. Party, wh1ch would be an alternative to conventional politics. .. I Both sides[ yalid arguments which would require more space I I for a fair1 presentation. At a recent meeting the two positions I I were final!l.y accommodated. I I Each local group can now be affiliated either political branch, the'Green Political Organizing Committee,.!: or I the former CoC, now called Green USA, or both. This I organizational twist should be able to reconcile both tendencies in I the movement. i I, I, At founding meeting, back in 1984, the Committee of I ; Correspondence produced a document, revised in 1986, which surmnarizedi GrJen ideas. 1. Ecologipal wisdom I These were the Ten Key Values: How can we operate human societies with the understanding are part of nature, not on top of it? How can we rl the limited resources of the planet? How can we I I rights of nonhuman species? How can we promote ,,. I I agriculture? How can we build a better between cities and countryside? j. I 2. Grassr9pts1democracy I I Howbanlwe ensure that representatives will be fully I I I to the people who elected them? How can we the "mediating institutions"-family, neighborhood asso1ciation, church group, ethnic group-to recover some of h If 1 f db ? t e 'I now per orme y government. How can we 'I .i; r 8 ::1 .I r

PAGE 13

I I :1 strepgtl}en the American tradition of voluntarism? I 1 J. How can we encourage !: : suchi :vatues as simplicity and moderation? How can we have a I I community-controlled system of education which would promote I I wisdom, social responsibility and growth? 4 N 1 : I ence I. I I How :can 1 we end violence in the home, on the streets, between I natipns? How can we use nonviolent methods to oppose .! I .. which we disagree? 5. I I 1 I How pan1we restore power and responsibility to individuals, I locail iAstitutions, communities, and regions? How can w.e i I havei. a decentralized, democratic society? How can we I : reconcile the need for community and regional self-! ' 1 with the need for appropriate centralized I I regu!.iatfon in certain matters? I' I 6. Communiity-l:based economics , I I How ;can i we redesign our work. structures to encourage employee ownel:r;ship and workplace democracy? How can we establish some I ,1.' I ofleconomic security, open to all? I I I 7. values How :!can we replace the cultural ethics of dominance and I. with more cooperative ways of interacting? How can 'I we respectful, positive relations across the lines of gender 1nd other divisions? How can we encourage people to I I care; abfut persons outside their group? 8. Respect: fof diversity I I J I .I 9

PAGE 14

How can1we honor cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, and I I diversity within the context of individual I for all beings? 9. Global ,responsibility I I How assist grassroots groups in the Third World? How I I can we qelp other countries make the transition to self-sufficiency in food and other basic necessities? i I 10. Future, focus How ban:we induce people and institutions to think in terms I of the iong-range future, and not just in terms of their I : selfish interest? How can we make the quality of I life!; rather than open-ended economic growth, the focus of thinking?12 I i Whil1e these are commendable issues to be raised, they are far from a political program apt to attract middle-class I America or,, especially, impoverished minorities. Although key I I value number 8 actresses the issue of racial diversity, minorities, whose ener;gy rhight be more focused on survival, have shown little interest the Green movement. Amaz,ingty, a political platform did emerge from these questions.! The proposals were compiled in a single document, SPAKA I I (Strategy !andiPolicy Approaches in Key Areas), which was discussed at the Third National Gathering in Estes Park in September of 1990. This program attempts to touch a vast spectrum, from Animal Liberation to Waste Management, through topics as diverse as Energy, Forestry, Health and Healing, and Spirituality. One of its I I 12 Charl!enei Spretnak and Fritjof Capra, NM: Bear and Company, 1986), p.230-233. I I I 10 .I. Green Politics (Santa Fe,

PAGE 15

I more remarkable features is its almost painstaking abundance of I I I I details. !l'he 1platform proposes changes in all aspects of life, from indiv:;idual behavior modification to economic conversion and political Some of the proposals come as answers to immediate problems, while others span more extended periods of : time. I In to sketching out a political program, the Third I Annual Gatbed.ng was also remarkable for its keynote address, which i : was delive;red: by Walter Bresette, a Chippewa Indian from the Red Cliff and founder of the Lake Superior Green Party. I His presen!tatton combined for one of the first times, Green values and Nativei, ideas. Therefore, it was a strong inspiration I for the theme of this work. lo I ,, 11

PAGE 16

CHAPTER 2 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW History: is an essential tool to fathom the relationship between ' Native Americans and their environment. An examination of .the past may validate the claim that Native Americans did, in fact, understand their in a holistic way and lived in harmony with ,, nature. If proposition proves to be true, environmentalists, I and Greeni in,particular, can find captivating lessons in the past. Baird Callicot writes that at the onset of this search, two ' sets of have to be mastered. First, it is difficult to uncover a !single model of Native American culture. The American continent 1is yast and varied. Each group had to adapt to a different environment, and the adjustment to a similar environment could also I diverge pne group to another. Obviously, some groups were more successful than others, and fairness demands including a wide range of traditions. in the historical overview. I A second set of difficulties arises from the oral transmission of Native No written document, so dear to conventional social which would allow for a reconstruction of the pre-contact life, can be found. We have then to rely on two I sources. ;The: accounts of the first Europeans to come in contact with the one set of information. But these documents have to be with caution: The agenda of these first Europeans was

PAGE 17

I I I. I i. I to convert; ,the heathen. They misunderstood the Native beliefs, : I assuming latter were inspired by the_devil. Another set of documents found in the tales of post-contact Natives who I recall thelir and tradition. Callicot refers here I I to Neihardt's work, Black Elk Speaks, which is I based on part icula r:ly a testimon!iall by a Sioux holyman. Of course, these types of tale are I I second-hand and are often tainted with nostalgia or in the case of I I I Black Elk 1Spe9-ks by !Neihardt' s own Christian biases. Native Joseph I I believes that there is a common thread among most "a complementary unity" best defined in I I Epe1s Brown's words: I I All !Ametican Indian peoples possessed what has been called a meta:physic of nature; all manifest a reverence for the myriad 'I I a?d forces of the natural world specific to their immediate environment ... 13 I t?e advent of the ecological movement in this country, the .: I I between Native people and nature has been debated. In the Aldo Leopold was the first to define the term "land I ethic." While the ecological movement grew strong in the Seventies, i Stewart Udall thought that "Indians were in truth the I of this country. "14 Native Americans themselves supported this argument, Vine Deloria wrote: _1: "The with his land. He feared to destroy it by changing its natural shape because he realized that it was more than a useful I. I , , tool for explo1tat1on. It susta1ned all l1fe, and w1thout other I I 13 E i Brown, "Modes of Contemplation through Action: Nor_th American Main Currents in Modern Thought, 30, 1973-74, p. 60, quoteq by! J. Baird Callicot, "Traditional American Indian and Western Echopean Attitudes Toward Nature: An Overview," Environmental I I Ethics, 4(4),! Winter 1982, p. 294. 14 Calvi,n The Keepers of the Game: Indian-Animal Relationship and the Fur Trade, (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: UniversitY, of1 California Presses, 1978), p. 159, quoting Stewart Udall. 13 : 'i I'

PAGE 18

forms of life; man himself cannot survive. "15 As soon as these ideas were formulated, some authors chose to disagree. Martin, an associate professor of History at Rutgers sees many flaws in this theory. He argues that Native Ame:ricans had a tendency to overkill wildlife. He remarks that durin'g the Pleistocene age an impressive part of the fauna and I flora were extinct. The reason might have been climatic changes, but Martin suspects that man was the principal agent of extinction. He also notes that during the fur trade, the beaver, hunted by Indians for the ha!t-m-?-kers of the old world, almost vanished from this I continent. He denies either moral consideration in the Indian world I perception or;ethical bonds between man and nature. Contradictorily he then that Indians were motivated by "spiritual-social I and formed "a compact predicated on mutual esteem" with nature. But,idespite these qualities, in Martin's view, "the Indian still remains a misfit guru... There can therefore be no salvation in the traditional conception of Nature for the troubled environmentalist. "1 For Martin, the Indian cannot be a model because cpsmic vision is vastly different from the European one. As a Christiar, the Western man could never adjust to the cosmic view of the Indian:. 17 (Does the inability to change validate one's current way of thinking?) : i In Tom Regan, a professor of Philosophy at North Carolina I 15 Ibid,: p.' 260. 16 J. Baird! Callicot, "Traditional American Indian and Western European Toward Nature: An Overview", Environmental Ethics, 4(4), Winter 1982, p. 312-314 quoting Calvin Martin. 17 Calvin Martin, of the Game: Indian-Animal and the Fur Trade (Berkeley, Los Angeles & London, University of California Prbsses, 1978). 14

PAGE 19

State University, found some inspiration in Calvin Martin's work. In I his book "All:That Dwell Therein: Animal Rights and Environmental Ethics"19 he the moral basis for vegetarianism. According to I Regan, the kept an ambiguous relation with nature. In his view, they do not qualify as shallow environmentalists or as proponents of;deep ecology, because they were not motivated by morals or ethics by fear and self-interest. One of the most simplistic views proposes that Indians just lacked the technology to harm their environment, without the qu,stioning the reason for this absence. A few writers seek proof of this argument in wastage, such as buffalo rotting on I the plains or even, as someone reported, in "the litter of bottles I and to be found on Indian reservations today."1 Callicot suggests that Regan and Martin are being overly i cynical about1human nature. He believes that any human being is capable of or moral behavior and that the Indian land ethics were similar to Western humanitarian ethics. Furthermore, he argues, ' if Indian towards nature was simply motivated by self-interest, restraint would still exhibit a view of nature diametrically different from the European. Richard Nelson reports that for Native Americans "natural and supernatural worlds are inseparable. :Natural entities are endowed with spirits and with spiritually power. Humans and natural entities are involved in a constant exchange that profoundly affects human 18 Torn Regan, All That Dwell Therein: Animal Rights and Environmental Ethics (Berkeley and Los Angeles:University of California Presses, 1982) 19 Callicotf p. 311. 15

PAGE 20

' behavior. "20 1Even if the reasons for the native land ethic were more I practical than philosophical, the end result is what matters ultimately. In Callicot's view, I I American cultures provided their members with an environmental ethical ideal, however much it may have been from time to time or frbm person to person avoided, ignored, violated, or for that matter, grudgingly honored because of fear of punishment.21 In this regard, Callicot avoids the trap into which some environmentalists may fall. The way American Indians were relating to their environment was not flawless. But an unbiased evaluation certainly ,gives strength to the idea that Native Americans had an unusually harmonious relationship with their environment. The idea of the "go'od :;;avage" is usually paired with the notion of some people that Indian Cl!llture is best preserved in museums. These views may I stem from good intentions, but they call for caution. One of the intended Jurpc;>ses of this paper is to show the relevance of traditional culture to modern issues. Also, at the other end, some environmentalists believe in the importance of protecting the but deny the competence of native people in this endeavor. Hopefully, this notion too will be dispelled at a later point. Adaptation does not mean that Native Americans did not transform;their environment. For example, Stephen Pyne shows how the fire practices of North American Indians transformed large areas from forest to grassland. "Through the use of fire, both confined and Richard Nelson, Make Prayers to the Raven: A Koyukon View of the Northern (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), p. 225-237. Callcot, p. 318. 16

PAGE 21

' broadcast,:. Inciian tribes created an environment favorable to their ; 22 1 existence." Pyne also believes that some ancient civilizations I like the Mpun9huilders in the Ohio Valley, the Anasazi of Mesa Verde and Chaco Canyon, and the Hohakam of the Southwest 'disappeared' I I because they not live in "some perpetual ecological harmony with one anothe:r or with their environment. "23 (Indians say that the Moundbuild,ers 'are today' s Shawnees, Kickapoos, etc; that the Anasazi I are today's H9pis and that the Hohakam are today's Pimas and Papagos and that they,didn't 'disappear.') views mirror Pyne's, but in a stronger fashion. He too visite;d Chaco Canyon. and assumes that the Anasazi hastened their own demise' by 1 cutting down all the trees. His article is somewhat ambiguous i F?r one thing, he is unable to decide if the "self' inflicted eco:)..ogical disaster" or socioeconomic forces advanced by : I his friend and "geoscientist" Betancourt are the reasons for the disappeara:nce 1 of the Ancient Ones. He is also not very clear about I the lessons c9nveyed by his example. Does he try to prove that I humans will inexorably tend to destroy their environment or does he believe rperhaps the ghosts of civilizations past are warning us of not careful stewards of our land and its I John in his discussion of the Hopi Indian values, in comparison with modern America, reaches similar conclusions. "The basic focal point was not expansion, but stability, balance, and ' l harmony the harsh and demanding environment of the Arizona "Indian Fires," Natural History, 92(2), February 1983, p. 6-11'. 23 Ib. d I 1 r "Fall of the Garden of Eden," International Wildlife, ,19(4), January 1989, p. 28-31. 17

PAGE 22

desert. "25 I In :notwithstanding the few exceptions reviewed earlier, most the fields of law, environment, political science, I :agree that Native Americans can provide contemporary environmentalists with valuable lessons. Both Callicot's and Ragsdale's' articles confirm this opinion. Ragsdale offers a superb I study of the Hopi Indians, who have certainly achieved a excellent : I adaptation to the demanding Arizona climate. For Callicot, the I Lakota people offer an excellent example "that the American Indian I lived not pnlf by a tribal ethic but by a land ethic as well, the I overall an:d uyual effect of which was to establish a greater harmony between and their environment than enjoyed by their European i successors;. "26! The philosophy underlying this harmony will be discussed in I I more detail! but at this point Lame Deer provides a useful understanding of Native beliefs: Nothing is so small and unimportant but it has a spirit given it Tanka. Tanka is what you might call a stone god, but also a part of the Great Spirit. The gods are separate beings, but they are all united in Wakan Tanka. It is hard tolunderstand, something like the Holy Trinity. You can't expLain, it except by going back to the "circles within the circles!' ideas, the spirit splitting itself up into stones, tiny insects even, making them all Wakan by his And in turn, all the myriad of things which up the universe flowing back to their source, united in one ;Grandfather Spirit. 21 I Pernaps:more relevant than the philosophy itself, are the i I practical :app;t.ications that such a world view will encourage. 25 John 1Rag$dale, Jr., "Law and Environment in Among the Indians: A Comparison of Values," Environmental' Law Reyiew, 10(2), 1986, p. 43. 26 I I Call1cot, 27 Callicot, I p. 311. p. 302. 18 Modern America and Haryard

PAGE 23

Jorgensen,. in"Land Is Cultural, So Is.a Commodity", compares the cultural of land among Indians, farmers, ranchers and environmentalists. He takes as example the Achomawi tribes of northeastern California, who recognized, like most other Indian nations, the communitarian ownership of the land. Achomawis knew their space intimately, its oak and pine trees, the riffles and holes along the river, the nesting and resting sites for ducks, geese, swans, and coots, and watering sites for deer, the sunflower prairies, the yampa root grounds, the tule swamps, the springs, and so forth. 29 In this communitarian ownership of the land, leaders were mostly stewards invested by the communal owners to oversee the propriety .. The authority possessed by stewards was nominal. They held the trust of t.he l')'lembers of the ownership unit, and that unit conceived ownership 'as using their space and places for future generations, and often specifiyally recognizing the continuity of ownership from past generation:s. 1 Stewards were speakers, representatives, leaders, esteemed colleagues and kinsmen. 29 remarks that there is little economic disparity among the Hopi, their society has little interest in furthering material gains. Hopi Indians had, and still have, a strong I collective Because there is no divergence between the group and !personal goals, the Hopi don't have any major problem with law enforcement. The Hopi feel that their laws, learned during a lengthy educational process, are in harmony with their surroundings and are compatible with the well-being of the group as a whole. observes: The Hopis, in contrast [to the American growth society] view space, 28 Joseph Jorgensen, "Land Is Cultural, So Is a Commodity: The Locus of Differences Among Indians, Cowboys, Sod-busters and Journal of Ethnic Studies, 12(3), Fall 1984, p. 3. 29 Ibid, p. 15. 19

PAGE 24

time, body, and the natural order as inextricably interrelated in a complex, whole. With this world view, it is appropriate, if not inevitable that the Hopi act in ways to maintain and preserve the balance. 30 Further,along, Ragsdale explains that "Instead of the artificial clamor of industrial civilization, they experience the sun, wind, snow, rain, heat, cold, sand, rock, trees, and animals. They sense th' balanced interrelationship, respect it, and bear the responsibility for its continued maintenance. "31 I In Hopi'society, tensions do arise, but Ragsdale finds that there are built-in mechanisms to deal with the tensions. Because the villages a;re usually quite small, the Hopi rely on face-to-face relationsh,ips to solve their differences. "The desire to maintain a good reput'ation in the community creates an inducement to conform to the proper way."n Each economical unit is self-supporting and self-contained, thus avoiding:the risk of exaggerated interdependence. "The subsistende of traditional Hopi society also results in a stable, ongoing balance between production, consumption, and the land capacity. ,'JJ 'The Hopi "have employed simple, adaptable means of farming ar1:d housing, "34 thus ensuring their resilience and longevity. The Hopis' religious beliefs "include a love for the land, sky, weather, plants, animals, and mutual balance,as well as a keenly felt responsibility for their maintenance... The Hopi stable state model 30 See 25, f.agsdale p. 454. 31 Ibid, P. 455. 32 Ibid, p. 443. 33 Ibid, p.: 453 0 34 Ibid, p. 4 4 5 20

PAGE 25

' I I venerates staJility, balance, harmony, and cooperation, and eschews I I t 1 d 1 th ,orce, an genera grow . I I I j. 35 Ibid,! p., 446 and p. 452. 36 See Basic Call to Consciousness. Akwesasne Notes (Rooseveltown, NY: Akwesasne.Notes, 1981). Sharon lo' Brien, American Indian Tribal Government (Norman: of; Oklahoma Press, 1989) Vine God Is Red (New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1973). 21

PAGE 26

CHAPTER 3 EUROPEAN VIEW OF NATURE In h,is "Traditional American Indian and Western European Attitudes Toward Nature: An Overview," J. Baird Callicot explores the relations of Native Americans with their environment. He gathers that the American Indian "pictures nature as an extended I family or society of living, ensouled beings"n a view that calls for restraint and respect for non-human nature. To the contrary, the Western European attitude shows little respect for the environment. Caflicot correctly identifies the basis for the European attitude in an entertaining overview of the diverse European involved in the maturation of this attitude. He believes in fact, the Greek mythopoiec cosmology had a lot in I common with the cosmological concepts of Native Americans. Soon, though, the theory of matter would shatter the similarity. Pythagoras the first to state "that the order of nature can be successfully disclosed only by means of a quantitative description, a rational account in the most literal sense of that word ... "38 Callicot addsr ... modern philosophy of nature might be oversimply, but, not incorrectly portrayed as a merger of the Pythagorean intuition that the structure of the world order is determined to ratio, to quantitative proportions, and the Democritean of void space (so very amenable to geometrical 37J. Baird iCallicot, "Traditional American Indian and Western European Toward Nature: An Overview," Environmental Ethics, 4(4), p. 303. Ibid, i p. 2.

PAGE 27

I I 'I analysis) 'and. material particles. "39 : I Another.component of the modern European attitude toward nature I : can be fol.ind ;in the "Pythagorean/Platonic concept of the soul as immortal and btherworldly, essentially foreign to the hostile i I physical world. "4 Callicot elegantly summarizes this view: I I 1 d h l In sum, 1s an 1nert, mater1a an c em1ca cont1nuum exhaustively described by means of the arid formulae of pure mathematiqs. :In relation to nature the human person is a lonely exile sojourn;ing in a strange and hostile world, alien not only to his physical environment, but to his own body, both of which he is encouraged tol fear and attempt to conquer.41 I I I I Cartes1an1sm, the triumph of reason, for which truth is found by apalysis of ideas independent of empirical data, emotive attitudes,1 or authoritative pronouncements, unquestionably reinforced I this view,1 while the Judaic themes of dominion of man over nature I : found in strengthened it further. 43 Ragsdale observes similar roots of the "modern growth society." I "Modern society has developed in an environment of seemingly endless space andlabundance, venerating the principles of free market I capitalism observing the biblical dictate that man should subdue 39 Ibid,. 40 Ibid,' 41 Ibid, p .297. I Pt 298. 42 Genedis [: 26: "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." I: 28: 'jAnd God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have I dominion qver the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over lifing thing that moveth upon the earth." Ironically, Christians and Jews could possibly interpret the term earth" as an ecological injunction. See Robert White, "Religious Roots of our Ecological Crisis," Tribal Assets. The Rebirth of Natiye Am,erica (New York: Holt & Co, 19 9 0 ) 1 I 23

PAGE 28

the earth., "44 For Ragsdale, more than the European philosophical foundations, it is free market capitalism and its inherent values I that for the dismal state of our environment. In this regard he specifically criticizes "individualism, competitiveness, profit, I I speed, and efficiency." Ragsdale quotes Gregory Bateson, who aptly I summarized the ideas pervading the "Industrial society": a) It's us against the environment. b) It's us against other men. c) It's the individual (or the individual company or individual nation) that matters. I d) We can have unilateral control over the environment and must strive for that control. e) lwe live within an infinite expanding "frontier." f) Economic determinism is common sense. g) Technology will do it for us. 45 Contrar to Native American beliefs which emphasized man as part of nature, cooperation and harmony, the Western mind perceives nature as a random collection of "individuals of various types" relating to ekch other in an external fashion. This anthropoce;ntr;i.sm, which Ian McHarg called "simple-minded, "46 allows I for humans to. be placed at the top of a pyramid and assumes that the remainder of creation exists solely for humans' sake. This logic certainly did not entice the White man to use restraint towards his I environment. I The relationship of the Europeans to land is also indicative of John Ragsdale, Jr., "Law and Environment in Modern America and Among Indians: A Comparison of Values," Harvard Environmental Law Review, 10(2), 1986, p. 419. 45 Steps to an Ecology of the Mind, 492 (1972), I quoted 46 Ian McHairg, "Values, Process, Form," The Fitness of Man's Environment (kashington, D.C.:Smithsonian Institution Press, 1968), reprinted in Robert Disch, ed., The Ecological Conscience, (Englewood 1970), p.25, quoted in Ragsdale p. 307. 24

PAGE 29

this lack of symbiosis. Ragsdale remarks that Nineteenth century natural resource law reflected the attitude that land is here to be used and to be exploited and that the best method for gettirig the most advantage out of the land ... is by disposing of the land to private individuals so that they may use their labor and their capitallto develop it and use it for their benefit and for the advancement of the economic interests of the nation, viewed largely as the SU!f!. total of individual benefits. 4 In his study of the different values that land has, Jorgensen agrees with Ragsdale. For the Whites who came on Indian land, land I was a This concept is based on the English law of freehold tenure and the capitalist idea of speculative value. Land then can "acquire value other than that created by the uses to which it is put 1by the local community."" farmers express few concerns about the conversion of marginal farm land to trailer courts, acid rain, particulate grime, high rates of sulfur dioxide and nitrous oxide, radioactivity, aquifers, wind blown radioactive sand, heavy uses of water by energy producers in water sparse regions, removal of top soils in environment, cutting of roads, and the like.49 According to Ragsdale, these values, on which our society is based, have created tensions between the individual and government regulation, and between growth and environmental quality. In such a society, indiyiduals are more motivated by their own personal interest than those of the society at large and reluctantly follow laws that have been designed to allegedly encourage efficiency. I Another source of tension arises when economic growth is confronted with environmental concerns. Since much emphasis is placed on I 0 p. 422. 48Josepli G .. Jorgensen, "Land Is Cultural, So Is a Commodity: The Locus of Difference Among Indians, Cowboys, Sod-Busters, and Environmentalists," Journal of Ethnic Studies, 12(3), Fall 1984, p. 4. 49 Ibid,, p. 13. 25

PAGE 30

' growth, is generally sacrificed. I Ragsdale accurately describes the consequences of these tensions for society. First, he thinks that the modern society is in great danger of its complexity and subsequent ! I interdependence. Government becomes fragmented and narrow-sighted. i. At this it is difficult to grasp a unified view of the country and the whole! system becomes sclerotic. This loss of flexibility is specially dangerous in the economic realm, since one breakdown can I topple the economy. Tedhnoiogy, enthusiastically embraced by our society, presents I many drawbacks. ; William Ophuls, quoted in Ragsdale's paper, compared the impact.of technology on the biosphere to "the blind thrust of a screwdriver into the workings of a watch. I The use of technology has socioeconomic repercussions by displacing a large number of I, i i people anq pr9voking hardship for inner-city minorities. In modern I capitalistic technology is mainly used by the elites to I further theirmaterial gains. I .I I I Since the working class does not control technplogy, it benefits little from it. Therefore, contrary I to popular belief, technology has a tendency to widen socioeconomic gaps. I Not .only are natural resources finite, but modern technology i I creates a of pollution. Ragsdale agrees with Jeremy Rifkin, who wrote that "since according to the first law [of thermodynamics] energy can neither be created nor destroyed but only transformed, and since I I ,to the second law can only be transformed one way--toward a dissipated state--pollution is just another name for H I entropy." 1 note 44, Ragsdale quoting William Ophuls, Politics of Scarcicity, 1977, p. 117. 51 Ragsdale' quoting Jeremy Rifkin, Entropy, 1980, p. 35. I I 26

PAGE 31

The same idea is echoed in Barry Commoner's "there is no such a thing as a free Since entropy and, then pollution, are inevitable, wisdom would require us to minimize entropy. I Unfortunately, the European mind refuses to consider this reality. In sum,: the growth society, moving swiftly toward the limits of the land's carrying capacity, has an inflexible and myopic internal structure and parallel shortcomings in its politics and its specialized citizenry. An overburdening of the carrying capacity, environmental disaster or technological or a political upheaval could wreak havoc.53 I A society which fails to establish a balance between population, consumption, and natural resources will eventually provoke its own demise. But before it falls, it will first harm its most underprivileged segments. Native Americans, as a minority in inner cites or relegated to forsaken reservations, have taken the brunt of the attack. i It is commonplace to acknowledge the disastrous I effects White' society has had on Native-cultures. Examples are abundant well-documented. For instance, Dean Baker studies Canadian efforts to halt logging and create a national park in South Moresby, homeland of the Haida. 54 He notes that in the mid 1850's the Haida about 8,000. After they first came into contact with the they were ravaged by diseases, and by 1920 their I I 1 number fell to 600. Ever since, their culture has been affected by ennui, alcoholism, and suicide. ss Sometimes, Native Americans have been indirectly afflicted by I I 52 Ragsdale' quoting Barry Commoner, The Closing Circle, 1971, p. 29-42. I p. 438. 54 Dean "Islands on the Edge," The Amicus Journal, 11(4), Fall 1989r p. 40-42. 55 Ibid.: 27

PAGE 32

European mischief. In the Pacific Northwest, Indian cultures were based on the $almon harvest. Europeans heavily contributed to the disappeara,nce of the fish, not so much by fishing it for themselves, as, more indirectly, by indiscriminately logging the forest. The I I heavy equipment used around rivers causes silting, thus depriving the salmon of their breeding ground. When too many trees are removed, the water bec?mes warmer and the salmon then avoid this river, while abandoned stumps also impair the salmon's ability to breed. Generaliy, European greed and Native survival collide in less subtle ways .. Jeff Radford examines how stripmining has undermined the Navajo way of life in the Chaco region of New Mexico. He argues that an increase in coal development would further reduce the quality and of water available to the Navajo. Likewise, air and soil would also suffer from stripmining. Ironically, while relegated to poor land, Indians own valuable natural resources. But they I rarely benefit from the exploitation of these resources, and "severe environmeqtal problems may be associated with resource development such as coal mining, oil and gas extraction, and nuclear and coal-fired electri9 generating plants. "5 Shinnick adds, ... it must be, understood that the survival of traditional people is being threatened by industries which promote the showering of acid rainfalls, dumping of uranium-contaminated water and tailings, stripmining ?hd the exploitation of natural resources on reservatiqns.n Shinnick believes that Indians are most affected by pollution 56 Jeff :Radford, "Stripmining Arid Navajo Lands in the U.S.: Threats td Health and Heritage, AmbiQ, 11(1), 1982, p. 9-14 57 Phil.llip khinnick, Natural Sport, the Olympic Prison and the I Fight For Sovereignty Rights of the Mohawks," Canadian Ethnic Studies, 9(1), Spring 1981, p. 43-52. 28

PAGE 33

because multinationals disregard Native rights. American Indian I I I Movement leader Ward Churchill agrees with this view, but his criticism iis more vehement. For him, the worst aspects of industrial I pollution been displaced to remote Indian land in order to hide them (at }east temporarily) from the society at large. The U.S gdverbment has steadily usurped native American national sovereignty by imposing its own jurisdiction over Indians' reserved land base,j supplanting traditional governmental and juridical forms in the name of self-proclaimed "trust responsibility." This expedient has been emplpyed to legally strip away much of the Native Americans' treaty-guaranteed land base and to deny them direct control over residual areas, especially in terms of control over water and resources .,51 As the clean-up of the pollution, Indians are left to fend for themselves in most cases. In 1985, a judgment from the Ninth I Circuit of the Court of Appeals held that the states did not have the power to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act on Indian lands.59 'Thus, Marjane Ambler remarks, tribes were given clear i authority !by Congress but scant resources to clean up their Julie Andersen, who visited the Pine Ridge accuses the Environmental Protection Agency of I ; practicing "ehvironmental apartheid, affording one race fewer protections than the rest of the population. "61 Many tribes are then faced with_topgh choices, since their top priority must be to feed I and shelter their members. Yet most tribes recognize the importance 58 Ward "American Indian Lands: The Native Ethic Amid Resource Development," Environment, 28(6), July 1986, p. 14. Pope, "Environmental Law-Federal Indian Law-Recent Developmerits-State of Washington, Department of Ecology v. United I I States Environmental Protection Agency 752 F.2d 1465 (9th Cir. 1985), Natural Resources Journal, 27, Summer 1987, p. 739-755. 60 I I Marjane Ambler, "The Lands the Feds Forgot," Sierra, 74(3), May1. June 198 9, p., 44-48. 61 Ibid.1 i 29

PAGE 34

of allocating,at least some of their meager resources to clean-up. I It is time fot the environmental movement to concern itself also with 'i I this aspect. I I, I I I 0 30

PAGE 35

CHAPTER 4 COMMON PHILOSOPHY Historically, Native Americans knew how to live in harmony with I their Unfortunately, as soon as they came in contact with the Europeans, their cultures were threatened and often destroyed. But, while their cultures were sacrificed in the name of I progress, they also contributed to the shaping of the United States. I I I Bruce Johansen demonstrates how Native Americans influenced the Founding thus becoming in his words Forgotten Founders. Benjamin Franklin greatly admired the Great League of the Iroquois ' and found extended inspiration in the Iroquois system for his Albany Plan of Union:. Thomas Jefferson, also, admired the Native cultures, "Indian socie:ty may be best, but it is not possible for a large I I number of people"62 -a contention to be discussed later. Tom Paine, who came t,o America at Franklin's invitation, was "fascinated by the Iroquois."63 Johansen convincingly proves the influence of Native Americans on the founding of contemporary America and its institutions,! the Constitution, in particular. George Cornell substantiates the Influence of Native Americans on Modern Conservationists. He quotes Stewart Udall: "much of our ecology does, in fact, represent a return to the 62 Bruce: .Johansen, Forgotten Founders (Harvard and Boston, MA: The Harvard Common Press, 1982), p. 108. 63 d I 6 p .1 11

PAGE 36

land wisdom of the Indian."64 In the late nineteenth century, George Bird Grinnell combined his interests in Indians and in conservation in articles he published in his magazine, Forest and Stream. He also founded the Audubon society in 1886, with Theodore Roosevelt among others. Ernest Thompson Seton also significantly incorporated i Native thoughts in his work. He shaped the Woodcraft Indians, who would later become the Boy Scouts of America, with Tecumseh in mind, "the great Shawnee--physically perfect, wise, brave, picturesque, unselfish, ... Cornell believes that both Grinnell and Seton made "enormous contributions" to the modern environmental I movement. i : The American Indian philosophy finds its roots in concepts fundamentally, different from the European. In many Native life results from the cosmic union between Mother Earth and Father Sky. Black Elk, in Callicot's words, believes that "not only does have a spirit, in the last analysis all things are related tpgether as members of one universal family, born of one I father, the sky, the Great Spirit, and one mother, the Earth hersel."66 adds: The concept bf the Great Spirit and of the Earth Mother and the I relatedness of all creatures seems to have been very nearly a universal American Indian idea, and likewise the concept of a spiritual dimension or aspect to all natural things. n "It is necessary to one's well-being and that of one's family and 64 George Cornell, "The Influence of Native Americans on Modern Conservationists," Environmental Review, 9(2), Summer 1985, p. 105. 65 Ibid,: p. 112 66 J. Bqird Callicot, "Traditional American Indian and Western European Attitudes Toward Nature: An Overview," Environmental Ethics, 4(4), Winter 1982, p. 302. 67 Ibid, Pi 303. I 32

PAGE 37

tribe to good relations not only with proximate human persons, one's immediate tribal neighbors, but also with the nonhuman persons abounding in the immediate environment. "6 Cornell remarks that for American Indians, "all products of the creation are sacred and to be treated with care and respect."69 The relatedness of all life is often symbolized in the sacred circle or I hoop, which the bond between all living things. The environmental ethics derived from this belief are based on strong, personal bond$ with nature. All beings are connected in an unending cycle of dependence. Reuben Snake confides: The Indian is part of the creation, I and we're supposed to fit into and be in harmony with the creation, and not tq the thought that we can dominate any part of it."w These universal obligations born from the sacred perceptions of all life Indian behavior in order to preserve the future. "Our ethics, moral principles, come out of our spiritual and religious teachings: "71 The Indian legacy is carried on in more than the I political or bonservationist realm. In the crisis faced by the modern United' States, much inspiration can be found in Native : ' thoughts. Chief Luther Standing Bear, quoted by Johansen, describes the issues at' stake: It is for a destructive order to be reversed, and it is well to inform races that the aboriginal cultures of America were not devoid of .. beauty. Furthermore, in denying the Indian his ancestral and heritages the white race is but robbing itself. 68 Ibid, p. 305. 69 George "The Influence of Native Americans on Modern Conservationists", Environmental Review, 9(2), Summer 1985, p. 107. 70 Reuben Shake, interviewed by the Christian Science Monitor, Thursday, February 15, 1990. 71 Ibid.: 33

PAGE 38

America can revived, rejuvenated, by recognizing a Native School of thoughi. 72 I o o oll b o d The to the Green movement e in light tpe Ten Key Values. More than proposals, the Ten Key values imP,ly a series of questions. An examination of Indian I philosophy and historical examples will provide answers to some or all of Regarding ecological wisdom, the first key value, Native I : Americans offer an ideal model for it. Contrary to Europeans who believe pature has to be dominated, the indigenous people of this continent regard themselves as part of nature. This idea is clearly c{osel to the concept of deep ecology of radical : I like Earth First! members. While Earth First! believes .that nature has the right to exist for its own sake, a more I extremist fringe of the movement has decided that, in fact, nature I would be off without any humans at all. At this point Earth First!'s P,hil:osophy takes an almost antihumanistic quality, with I little regard' for reality. Compared with this 'nature chauvinism,' I the vibw remains eminently reasonable. When the Greens try to live within the limited resources of the planet and promote I sustainable agriculture, there is no better model than the American Indians. Ward Churchil;l explains the Indian way: In terms, the American Indian world view may be this: Human are free (indeed encouraged) to develop their innate capabilities, but only in ways that do not infringe upon other eilements-called "relations", in the fullest dialectical o:f the word-of nature. Any activity going beyond this I 72 Luther Standing Bear, Land of the Spotted Eagle, (Lincoln: University of! Nebraska Press, 1978), p.255 quoted in Bruce Johansen, Forgotten:Founders (Harvard and Boston, MA: The Harvard Common Press, 19 8 2) p. :Xi. I 34

PAGE 39

is considered as "imbalance", a transgression, and is prohibited. Key to the indigenous American world view is the firm knowledge that the human population may expand onli to: the point, determined by natural geographical and circumstances, where it begins to displace other and require the permanent substitution of cropland for normal vegetation in any area. 73 The :whole philosophy mentioned earlier sustains an ecological wisdom comparison in European thought. Therefore, it would be a big mistake for American Greens to look towards Europe for a I i model. Indeed the very roots of modern ills come from the European world view. pn the contrary, even European Greens should, to some extent, consider the Indian model a valid one. But, on this land, I I I which has 'been cared for by generations of indigenous people, there i is no reason look towards Europe for inspiration. American Indian religions and spirituality should be attentively studied by the Greens, because they contain all the necessary elements for a healthy and relation with the environment. When, as in the Native view, the iwor!l.d is regarded as a continual process of creation, humans expected to participate in and harmonize with this process ' rather outside of it. As Ragsdale points out, "the Hopi Indians of norcthern Arizona have lived for centuries by means of a i I skillful, and pragmatic agricultural technique, which I operates with nature, not in opposition to it."u In such, a system, not only have humans adapted to their I environment: feel responsible for its maintenance. "In the I traditional Ute view, nature is perceived as a living process with 73 Ward "American Indian Lands: The Native Ethic Amid Resource qeveJ.opment," Environment, 28(6), July 1986, p. 15. 74 John Jr., "Law and Environment in Modern America and Among the : Indians: A Comparison of Values," Environmental I Ethics, 4(,4), 1986, p. 419. 'I 35 I

PAGE 40

spirit, a sacFed power and a source of power. Indians are the guardians of the land, they are not at the center of control." Humans rerponsible for maintaining the harmony of nature rather than disturbing it. "Land is a living body with spirit and power, which contains tribal genealogy. The Creator made the land and the people must hold it in trust: Never abuse it, sell it, trade it, or give it away.:" As for grassroots democracy, Native Americans also provide an I excellent illustration of this principle. After all, as we have seen earlier, the Native idea of democracy inspired Jefferson, Franklin, : I and Ip The Legal Conscience, Felix Cohen writes: "It is out of democratic! tradition that the distinctive political ideals of I I I American Iife emerged; universal suffrage for women as well as for men, the pattern of states within a state we call federalism, the I I I habit of treating chiefs as servants of the people instead of as their masters,. "76 Karl Marx too, after reading about the Great Law I I I of Peace of tpe Iroquois, admired Iroquoian democracy and egalitarianism. I I He was especially intrigued at the Iroquois' ability to achieve ecbnomic leveling without coercion." One of the aims of the Greens is: to promote a more democratic society. Like many others I before them, the Green movement needs to look at Native America for 75 Romeo, "Concepts of Nature and Power: Environmental Ethics of :the Northern Ute, Environmental Review, 9(2), Summer 1985, p.160-161: : 76 Cohen, "Americanizing the White Man," Legal Conscience (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1960), p.317, quoted in Bruce Johansen, Founders, (Harvard and Boston, MA: The Harvard Common Press,: 1982), p. 13. n Bruce p. 122 quotes Friederich Engels, The Origin of the Famili. Property. and the State: In the Light of the Researches' ofl Lewis Morgan (New York: International Publishers, 1942) 36

PAGE 41

: I I its Not only are the political organizations of the Iroquois and Algonguins still relevant, but some contemporary Indians I are living tradition. Weatherford, visiting a modern powwow, notices that the Indians there follow a collective mentality and the I mood of the group rather than orders from the top. "The Indian I I penchant for respectful individualism and equality seems as strong today in Fargp, North Dakota, as when the first explorers wrote about it five centuries ago ... Indian societies operated without strong positions !of !leadership and coercive political institutions."78 observation overlaps with the third key value, personal and social responsibility. Obviously, if a system not require I .I strong presumes the notion that each individual feels i the well-being of his group. Usually, in most Indian societies, in1 which simplicity and moderation were valued, the weaker I members being cared for by the group. Nonviolence is a delicate issue for many indigenous people and 1. ; for some Greens. The Iroquois, for one, believed in negotiations ; before using military force. Contrary to popular beliefs, the 'l I Comanches,, in Abram Kardiner' s book, 79 were described as pacifists, who fought balk when their territory was encroached upon by British, French and colonizers. Here again concepts need to be terms. Violence has a different meaning for I I I They view death and killing as part of life. Hunting acpompanied by prayers to thank the killed creature for its life. 1 Usually wildlife was hunted only as much as was needed to i feed Wars were more a matter of prestige and certainly 78 Jack Weatherford, Indian Givers, (New York: Fawcett Columbine, 1988), p .121. I I 79 Abram Kardiner, The Psychological Frontiers of Society, (New ' York: Columbia University Press, 1945). 37 I.

PAGE 42

i I involved lesslphysical violence than modern We can also imagine that, in the often desperate position contemporary Native Americans lhave been pushed into, nonviolence has understandably not I become the exclusive focus of Native philosophy. always lived in families, groups, tribes. Decentralization is a natural characteristic of Native American values. I I the concept already by the Greens, of bioregion, should be a model for the Greens. Thomas Jefferson :viewed Indian societies as ideally the best, but not for a large of people. Decentralization is the obvious solution to i ; Jefferson's objection. In Ecotopia, a book by Callenbach which has 'inspired the American Greens, a major emphasis is placed on JThe intentional-communities movement remains vigorous in this country80 I As Ragsoale points out, the Hopi stable-state model was especially remarkable because of its self-sufficient economic units. I I "Each decentralized unit has the capacity to employ a full range of economic skills and to supply all or most of the physical necessities of life. "81 I notes: the of decentralization and self-sufficiency are weli-exemplified by the clan, which, as an economic, social and grouping, is complete within itself or at least has the capacity of being complete. A system of more or less independent clans is flexible and mobile and has been credited I with managing the population in a manner best suited for the harsh desert environment. 82 8 Cris and Oliver Popenoe, Seeds of Tomorrow New Age Communities That Work, (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1984) and Corinne McLaughlin and Gordon Davidson, Builders of the Dawn I 81 John "Law and Environment in Modern America and Among the Hopi A Comparison of Values, Harvard Environmental Law Review, 1986, p. 448. 82 "Hopi Social Organization," Hancibook of North Alnerican Indians-SOuthwest, A. Ortiz ed., 1979, quoted in Ragsdale, p. 453. 38

PAGE 43

I In sum,:community-based economics too is a concept adopted by N ' i The place of women in Native societies varied greatly from one tribe to a:nother. But, in general, women were well treated and at I the time of the European invasion, had more political rights than their European counterparts. 83 Because the idea of equality among the sexes :was' remote in European preoccupation, early colonizers failed to 'mention the treatment of women in their reports. But, soon, I the settlers admired the skills of Native women, who knew how to I I I and prepare the meat from hunted animals. While the West saw s:ome. strong frontier women, European men still. liked to think of t'heir women as fragile creatures needing constant protection. Among the Iroquois, the great Law of Peace provided a I system of 'checks and balances between men and women. Members of the Grand Council were men, but they had been nominated by the women of I I : their extended clan. Women also were the providers of food; to veto a war, would simply withhold the food supply and the great warriors stayed at home. The descent, as in many other tribes, was 1 If the conduct of the leader was found inappropriate, I he could be by the women, who would then choose a new one.84 I Engels described life among the Iroquois: "there cannot be any poor I or needy--the communal household and the gens know their towards the old, the sick, and those disabled in I 83 See also: I Am the Flre. The voices of Natiye American Women, ed. by Jane I : Katz, (New York: Dutton, 1972). Niethammer, Daughters of the Earth: The Liyes and Legends of Affierican Indian Women, (New York: Collier Books, 1977) I I Jack !weatherford, Indian Giyers (New York: Fawcett Columbine, 1988), 39

PAGE 44

I I war. "85 Whereas Indian societies do not provide an exact model for 1 I I postpatriarchal values, they certainly offer some valuable insights I I in a more :just. society. Overall, Native American societies appear to be very tolerant of racial, and religious differences. Run-away slaves, I fleeing th,eir; white masters, were sometimes adopted by the remaining tribes of ;the! southeast. Indeed, a number of Whites have also been accepted as full members of Indian nations.'' Paragraph 99 of the I Great Law 'lof Peace already guaranteed freedom of religion. An author, J.N.B. Hewitt, writing in 1918, remarked that among the I Iroquois, Ialli forms of religion were tolerated and practiced. 87 One might even arc;:rue that very tolerance contributed to the Natives' demise, wJen became confronted with the rigid dogmatism of the first miss.ionfries. This example substantiates the assumption that key value 'number 8, respect for diversity, can also be found in Native American thought. Johansen reports that "the shade of one's I k I 1 I h h k h h h d h 1 f s 1.n meant: ess to t e Mo aw s t an w et er one accepte t e aws o I the Great ,Peace, which contained no racial bars to membership in the I I Six Nations. "88 As for c;:rlobal responsibility and future focus, these two issues I I can be examined together. Historically, Native Americans were not in a position to;have to consider the first one. But, on the other : Friederich Engels, The Origin of the Family. Private Property. I and the state: In the Light of the Researches of Lewis Morgan (New York: International Publishers, 1942), p. 97, quoted in Weatherford, p. 162. ; M Weiser, a friend of Benjamin Franklin, had been adopted I I by the Monawk as a full member of the nation. Bruce Johansen, Forgotten :Founders, (Harvard & Boston: The Harvard Common Press, 1982), 87 Ibid,i p.: 18. 88 Ibid, p. 51. i I, 40

PAGE 45

hand, nobddy has better articulated the need to think of future i generations than the Iroquois. Every decision was to be taken I bearing mibd the consequences of this decision for the seven generations to come. This belief certainly reduces the chances for a people to :spoil their environment. I I In s_um,;in many respects, Native heritage provides almost a blueprint !for! Green values. American Greens would, therefore, be well advis,ed to study more closely Native beliefs and praxis in their I search for a new society. 41

PAGE 46

CHAPTER 5 COALITION As we hi . 1 h 1 ave JUSt seen, va ues ave a ot common wit;h Gteen aspirations. Ragsdale, at the end of his paper, discussing the merits of Hopi society, shows how modern America might adapt Hop1 values. 89 He proposes to raise the consciousness of modern Americans on a modest scale by education and environmental that focuses on "holistic concerns rather economic I 90 I growth." ... the interaction between the [Hopi] society and the I environment has been favorable, in large part because the core j I personal values of the Hopi mirror natural principles. Thus, the I Hopi holism, rhythm, harmony, flexibility, continuity, and a dynamic, ongoing, vibratory form of stability."91 I Looking at modern society, Ragsdale believes that an economic recession might I : bring about the conditions for a change. But he argues against such I a transition' that could lead to a significant increase in environmental damage. Also, he fears the ensuing social and could lead to a repressive totalitarian system. I Sinde consensual shift to a stable-state economy is unlikely, ,and economic stagnation would be neither healthy nor enduring, ":92 Ragsdale proposes some small societal changes. "First, 89 John Jr., "Law and Environment in Modern America and Among the Indians: A Comparison of Values," Harvard Enyironme9tal1Law Reyiew, 10(2), 1986, p. 457. 90 Ibid,: p. 420. 91 Ibid,j p.1456. 92 Ibid, p..

PAGE 47

surviving '!stable states of Native Americans such as Hopi should be :: I I protected official policies that further erode their traditional lji.fe style." Ragsdale is very enthusiastic about "smallscale, communities."93 One assumes here that he I is referrfng to intentional communities such as religious ones and I the more recent experimental communes. But he also alludes to experimentatibn in which "urban residents can experiment with gardening,, re7ycling, energy conservation, solar power, restoration of buildings, and local enterprise. "94 These are ideas pervading [the nascent Green movement. Finallyi Ragsdale advocate more wilderness. Wilderness can provide far more than the purely utilitarian arguments I would suggest, however ... [It] requires men to accommodate themselvesto1 nature, rather than the reverse ... Some have found profound symbplic qualities in wilderness-to admire and protectqualities :such as beauty, purity, timelessness, reciprocity, harmony and balande. 1 Perhaps most importantly, many have found a sense of mysticism, religion, or transcendence.95 i i I His words are a quote from E.F. Schumacher: "it is impossible fOF any civilization to survive without a faith in I meanings and values transcending the utilitarianism of comfort and survival. '196 While position is laudable, especially in comparison with the prevailing in modern America, he still looks at the environmeQt from an ethnocentric standpoint. He finds qualities in nature that are not immediately 'useful,' but one can argue that ,I I nature has the right to exist for its own sake. Also, a step further 93 Ibid,j p. 461. 94 Ibid,1 p.' 462. 95 Ibid,\ p .. 465. 96 I I Ragsdale1quoting E.F. Schumacher, A Guide for the Perplexed, 1977. 43

PAGE 48

' I in the of wilderness areas and in the improvement of Native life, would be to combine these two issues in one solution: allocating more public land to the tribes and letting them manage I these resources for the society at large. Native Americans have I proven and again to be a valid model for the Green movement. On a practical level this commonness of view should logically lead to a coalition Greens and American Indians. I Native Americans in general might find an alliance with: any European group quite problematic. Some Indian leaders are leery of any association with Whites: Too often have they I been help that never materialized. Others consider, they I already have to solve without having to handle an I extra.issue--koreover an issue generated by the White man's ' ignorance.! A coalition must therefore be initiated by the Greens; I I first, because Native Americans possess a knowledge of value to the I Green movemenf in general, while only a few Greens have skills useful to the Indians; secondly, if the Greens aspire to be more than an environmental movement, they need to tackle social issues. They have i i to approaqh but, in the case of Native Americans, they I have to understand that Indians are not just another minority; they I are nations, ancient, with sovereignty; they are the first inhabitants of this continent and have been wronged ever since the : I white man arr[ved. No real justice will ever exist before these I wrongs hate bFen remedied. I Some Indian leaders, especially members of The American Indian Movement, ,have recognized the link between their movement and the Green. In an Indian delegation went to visit Germany, where the I members were ,the guests of the Greens there. During this Journey of 44

PAGE 49

, I I Peace, Indians and German Greens recognized that they had one common I ennemy, the US. In 1855, Chief Seath was reported to have said: I Tribes and nations follow nations. It is the order of nature and regret is useless. For even the White Man whose God walked and talked with him as friend to friend cannot be exempt from the common We may be brother after all, we shall see ... The need for coalition is somewhat recognized in Spaka, where a little than a page out of twenty-three is devoted to the subject of indigenous people. This specific chapter contains nine articles. I I I The f1rst one recogn1zes the ex1stence of treaties between most tribes and the US government. The second and third affirm the need to support rights and the Native American struggle. In a fourth one, the Greens oppose the forced relocation of the Dine in ; I I Arizona. :The Greens intend to lend their support to Native enterprises in order for them to escape the poverty prevalent on ! reservatidns. Greens support the renewal of native American traditions. pledge to include people of color at all levels of '! When Spaka was last updated, in 1990, Greens affirmed their support; for the Mohawks at Oka, Canada, who were opposing the I I construct1on of a golf course on their sacred land. Finally, the Greens to honor 500 years of resistance and dignity. While these propositions are commendable, unfortunately they remain disregard the lessons that could be learned from I I Native Americans. Not :only are essential resources wasted, but this could prove dangerous. As Winona LaDuke remarks: call us "the First Americans." I've wondered what that means, and the only thing I've come up with is that Indians are always the first to feel the sharp end of the stidk; first to suffer biological and chemical warfare at the1hands of the US government, the first to lose their land to 45

PAGE 50

big business, the first to lose their legal and human rights in the national interest, the first to be laid off from any jobs manage to find, the first to be cut from the social services every year ... I Bht we are never the last to suffer what we first I experience, and I think that's something everybody might think about it. Non-Indians will be next ... And if you don't believe!me, go ask a farmer about his land these days. Go ask from Love Canal or Three Mile Island about their health.1 Go ask an Appalachian miner about his job and the benefits of transient, extractive industries. 97 LaDuke's remark illustrates perfectly the urgency Greens to into a coalition with Native Americans. I for the Such coalitions between environmentalists and Indians already exist in I many parts of,the continent. In his keynote address, Walt Bresette I talked about his Witness for Peace program in Wisconsin, in which non-Indians pledge to report any abuse against Indians who try to exercise their fishing rights." A local branch of Greenpeace I' I participated in the occupation of Yellow Thunder Camp, only to be I by the national leadership for doing so. The McLean I article iri I American Forests reports the coalition between the forest I industry, and Indians to end the logging war. McLean notes,: a little naively, that the forests were saved when all the ipvolved recognized that humans are caretakers of the .I land"99--a ,concept the forest industry might have had some reluctance to admit. Baker, describing another example of coalition, shows how the of environmentalists and Indians were able to halt 97 Winncina LaDuke quoted by Ward Churchill, Indian Lands: The Native.Ethic amid Resource Development", Environment, 28(6), July i 1986, p. Walter Bresette, keynote address at the 1990 Third National Green Gatherihg in Estes Park, Colorado, published in Green Letter. Greener T:i!mes, 6(3), Winter 1990. I 99 Herbert the Northwest Logging Wars," American Forests, 93(5r6), p. 31. I 46

PAGE 51

logging in Fort Moresby and create a national park. He also notes that the next, phase of this plan would be to recognize Native I rights 100 Often, environmental and Native rights are closely related. ,Radford, in his article on stripmining in Arizona, remarks I that stripmining degrades soil, air and water but also spoils the .I. d i. h . 1 scenery t e cu ture. In his impressive article, Jorgensen tells that rangers have come to associate with Indians in their struggle to protect their environment. He apparently disputes the beliefs held by some that land is part of nature, with rights of its own, and uses are essentially destructive. Michael I Kieffer for one tries to link the disappearance of the Anasazi people .with ecologic?l mismanagement. He laments: "And if primitive people, I like Rousseaufs 'noble savage' were capable of such destruction, where are we, their ignoble and industrialized progeny, headed?"101 to what this type of environmentalist believes, American lndians are well qualified to protect their environment. I Jorgensen 1discloses the fact that the Sioux rejected $145 million for 7 million ;acres of their sacred Black Hills. 102 For them, land is I I more than money. Also, in Wyoming, the Cheyenne subordinated the positive effects of coal mining (money, jobs, bf coal for Cheyenne use, increased tribal control) to I I 100 Dean Baker, "Islands on the Edge", Amicus Journal, 11 (4), Fall 1989, p. 101 Michael !Kieffer, "Fall from the Garden of Eden," International Wildlife, :19 01), January 1989, p. 39. 102 Joseph ,Jorgensen, "Land Is Cultural, So Is a Commodity: The Locus of Differences Among Indians, Cowboys, Sod-Busters and Environmentalists," Journal of Ethnic Studies, 12(3), Fall 1984, p. 17. I : 47

PAGE 52

the negative aspects (increased social and community problems, damage ' l to the environment, loss of non-renewable resources, influx of Whites i I with no respect for Cheyenne culture, shattering of traditional : Cheyenne 103 But, Jorgensen points out, the Cheyenne are willing tq manage and extract renewable resources. In State of v.;united States Environmental Protection Agency, the court Indian self-determination in the area of environrnentallprotection of Indian land, a judgment that reaffirmed Worcester ;v. 9eorgia (1832) by which Indians retain power of self-government 104 These examples show that not only Indians are qualified to look after their land, but this fact is recognized by the laws of the United States. Alth:ough Indians have proven their competence in environmental matters, s1ome 1 environmentalists still deny their skills in this I field. walrd Churchill observes that often environmentalists are I I I uninterested in Indian issues. I He deplores their reticent support of I the occupa,tion of Yellow Thunder camp in the Black Hills in the beginning of the 80's, where Indians preserved a small parcel of land from the effec;=ts of mining. The TREATY program for autonomy, self-sufficiency I and environmental protection launched on the Pine I Ridge I a+so attracted little support from mainstream reservatio'n I environmentalists. It also took 10 years for non-Indians to become involved in the Four Corners struggle against the forced relocation at Black Mesa; Churchill believes that Indian sovereignty and environmental i concerns are iinked. "What happens to American Indian lands I I 103 p .I 18. I 104 Catherine Pope, "Environmental Law-Federal Indian Law-Recent Developmen'ts, Natural Resources Journal, 27, Summer 1987, p. 739-755. 48

PAGE 53

ultimateli happens to the rest of the environment as well. "105 He I I urges environmentalists to ask for more than just clean water. In his words,: American Indian Movement participates in many different environmental actions. "Indians realized that sacrifice of native rig'htslsimply forecloses the (re)emergence of ecologically I viable social' countermodels in North America. "106 I Phillip' Shinnick too, in his paper on natural sports and sovereignty rights of the Mohawks, links concerns for the environment and the of native Americans to preserve that which was sacred to people; the need as organic beings to live in unity i with the while fighting cultural annihilation." In his view, the issues of modern monopoly capitalism and control of natural .; I resources :are preempted by racism and the view that Indians cannot govern Shinnick adds that this common struggle "has I fused the American people with the anti-nuclear coalitions and alliances jin demonstrations which speak out against the by1 products qf nuclear industries and call for respect of the sovereignty of reservation I Now that the linkage between Green ideas and Native struggles has been established on a theoretical and also practical level, one I i ;, of the importknt tasks for the Greens, then, is to support Indian I treaty Churchill reminds his readers of the existence of 371 treaties which set aside territories for the Indians' own exclusive use and occupancy. I I Given that land in question represents precisely those areas of 105 Ward[ Churchill, "American Indian Lands: The Native Ethic amid I Resource Development," Env1ronment, 28(6), July-August 1986, p. 32. 106 Ibid 107 Phil!lip Shinnick, "Natural Sport, the Olympic Prison and the Fight for !sovereignty Rights of the Mohawks," Canadian Ethnic Studies, 9(1), Spring 1981, p. 43-52. I 49

PAGE 54

the continent1most imminently threatened, the return of Indian land to Indian is rendered doubly important ... Put another way, every inch of.land returned to its rightful Indian occupants is an inch withdrawn from the ravages of the present industrial order. 108 I As the of AIM members like Ward Churchill and Winnona LaDuke i have AIM is at the forefront in regard to environment : i concerns amonc;r Indian organizations. The National Congress of American is a national, intertribal organization dedicated to the protection, conservation, and development of Indian land, I I I 1 'mb1 d h s 1 an uman resources. goa to improve the lives of American Indians, it might favor developing i Indian resources over stringent environmental protection. In the I West, the Council for Energy Resource Tribe surveys expansive natural resources such as coal, uranium, and oil, and the tribes then choose to mine them or not. ; I But these options have to be respected by environmentalists: after all, it's their land. I Walter Bresette as a Chippewa Indian and as the founder of the I Lake Supeiior!Greens bridges the gap between the two movements. He I thinks that Indians fit in the Green movement in two ways. First, treaties are tool to help stop further degradation"; therefore the Greens t9 support treaty and aboriginal property rights. One of the responsibilities of the Greens is to show mainstream America that I I support treaties is fostering its own self-interest. Bresette also beliJves1that "Greens are like woodticks on a dying elephant." I "If the esonOJ;llY fails, war resumes or the environment dies, all the technicians in the world won't be as important as a single medicine ,oa see fos i 50

PAGE 55

I I man or a singer of sacred song. "109 He adds: I concluded that we I. ; are of Indians because of inherited history and our I I I i political beliefs." The coalition envisioned by Bresette would be "a I 1 : I place wher;e eyery individual-regardless of race, lifestyle, religion, skill or can participate in the common political goal.110 I I I. For ia closing statement no words are more forceful than Reuben I I I Snake's: ",Everybody--! don't care what color, creed, ethnic origin I I I their root-s are--we're all the same. We all have common roots. In I spite of a!11 these technological achievements, we begin to understand I I I that there:. is i a oneness to the whole universe--there is a oneness. "111 In l!ight of these statements, a Green-American Indian coalition l would be the logical and natural outcome, if the Green movement is to I I succeed. ;on 0ne I hand, Native Americans present an excellent model of -I I ;on the I other, and more important, if the Greens ask for a ecology. I radical transformation of society, they cannot ignore the other : components: ofjit, minorities in particular. At a time when a I of Native Americans proudly recognize the value of I I their heri:tage, they might be willing to share their knowledge with i I Greens rea:dy tpo listen to them. Stimulating ideas could be generated from I I ,. 108 B1resette, keynote address at the Third National Green I Gathering a:t Estes Park, Colorado, Fall 1990, reprinted in I ' 990 Letter, Greener Tkrnes, 1 I 110 Ibid: 111 interviewed by Rushworth M. Kidder in the Christian Monitor, February 15, 1990, p. 14. I 51

PAGE 56

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY I Bahro, RudblfJ Building the Green Movement. Trans. by Mary Tyler. I Philadelpha.a, 1PA: New Society Publishers, 1986. I I Basic Call' toiConsciousness. Akwesasne Notes. Rooseveltown, NY: Akwesasne 1981. I Einest. Ecotopia: The Notebooks and Reports of William I Weston. York: Bantam Books, 1975. I .I Deloria, God Is Red. New York: Grosset and Dunlap, 1973. I I I Engels, Fr:j_ederich. The Origin of the Family, Private Property. and the State:' In;the Light of the Researches of Lewis Morgan. New York: I InternationalPublishers, 1942. I I I I Am the The Voices of Native American Women, ed. by Jane Katz. New York: Dutton, 1972. Johansen, Bruce. Forgotten Founders. Harvard and Boston, MA: The I I Harvard Co'mmori Press, 1982. I I Kardiner, Abd.m. The Psychological Frontiers of Society. New York: Columbia Press, 1945. I Kelly, Petka. !Fighting for Hope. Trans. by Marianne Howarth. Boston, MA: South End ,Press, 1984. I I Martin, Caivirt. The Keepers of the Game: Indian-Animal Relationship and the Fur Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California; 1978. Nelson, Make Prayers to the Raven: A View of the Northern Fprest. Chicago: Unversity of Chicago Press, 1983. Nietharnmer', Carolyn. The Daughters of the Earth: The Lives and Legends of: Indian Women. New York: Collier Books, 1977. i O'Brien, Sharon. American Indian Tribal Government. Norman: University' of 1oklahoma Press. 1989. I I Popenoe, Chris, and Oliver Popenoe. Seeds of Tomorrow: New Age Work. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1984. I I I I

PAGE 57

i Regan, Ethics. 1982. Tom. All That Dwell Therein: Animal Rights and Environmental I Be;rkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Presses, i I I Schumacher:, Small is Beautiful: Economics as I if PeOple Mattered. Harper & Row, 1973. I I ,, I Spretnak, and Fritjof Capra. Green Politics, the Global Promise. Fe, NM: Bear and Company, 1986. I i I Standing Bbar) Luther. Land of the Spotted Eagle. Lincoln: University I of Nebraska Press, 1978. I I Weatherford, Jack. Indian Givers. New York: Fawcett Columbine, 1988. I I I I Articles ip Jqurnals I Ambler, Ma/rjane. "The Lands the Feds Forgot," Sierra, 74(3) May-June 1989. I Baker, Deah. ''Islands on the Edge." The Amicus Journal, 11(4) Fall 1989. l 1 i I ' I I 0. "Traditional American Indian and Western European Nature: An Overview." EnVironmental Ethics, 4(4) I Summer 1982. I I Churchill,; Wa:td. "American Indian Lands: The Native Ethic amid I Resource Development," Environment, 28(6) July 1986. 'I I Cornell, "The Influence of Native Americans on Modern Conservationists," Environmental Review, 9(2) Summer 1985. I I I Jorgensen,[ "Land Is Cultural, So Is a Commodity: The Locus of Differences Arttong Indians( Cowboys, Sod-busters and I I Environmentalists," Journal of Ethnic Studies, 12(3) Fall 1984. I I Kieffer, Mlchael. "Fall from the Garden of Eden," International . : I Wildlife. 19(4) January 1989. : I ; McLean, Hefbelt. "Ending the Northwest Logging Wars," American Forests, 93(5-"6). I I ! 53

PAGE 58

I. Pope, "Environmental Law-Federal Indian Law-Recent Developments-State of Washington, Department of Ecology v. United States Envirormental Protection Agency 752 F.2d 1465 (9th Cir.1985) Natural Resources Journal. 27 Summer 1986. I I : I Pyne, "Indian Fires," Natural History, 92(2) February 1983. Radford, Jeff. "Stripmining Arid Navajo Lands in the U.S.: Threats to Health and Amb.i.Q, 11(1) 1982. Ragsdale, John, Jr. "Law and Environment in Modern America and Among the Hopi Indians: A Comparison of Values," Harvard Environmental Law Review, 10,(2) 1986. I Romeo, Stephanie. "Concepts of Nature and Power: Environmental Ethics I of the Northern Ute," Environmental Review, 9(2) Summer 1985. Shinnick, Phiiip. "Natural Sport, the Olympic Prison and the Fight for Rights of the Mohawks," Canadian Ethnic Studies. 9(1) Spring 1981. Articles eJoks .I. ;I Cohen, Fellx. "Americanizing the White Man" in Legal Conscience. New Haven: University Press, 1960. MeHarg, Ian, "Values, Process, Form" in The Fitness of Man's Environmerit. Washington, D.C.: Smithonian Institution Press, 1968 reprinted in Disch, ed. The Ecological Conscience. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1970. I White, Robert,, "Religious Roots of our Ecological Crisis" in Tribal I ' Assets. The Reb1rth of Nat1ye Affier1ca. New York: Holt & Co 1990. I Interviews. anq Speeches i I Bresette, Keynote address at the 1990 Third National Green Gathering in Estes Park, CO. Published in Green Letter. Greener Times. Winter 1990. I Snake, Reuben ,inter. by Rush worth M. Kiedder in The Christian Science Monitor. Thursday, February 15, 1990. I I I : I 54