Wojapi4Me

Things are being lost everyday, and if we continue to bicker about what is being "traditional" and what isn't we're going to lose precious time and ways.

Just this past week there was an article about the LAST fluent Mandan speaker. The LAST!!!! I was extremely saddened to read that article. The article went on to say the language has been preserved on tapes, videos and books, but still...the language will, more than likely, not be spoken fluently again.

One thing I disagree with is people feeling the need to choose one tribal heritage over another. Why can't a person do both? My daughter is of two tribes and is learning both ways.

Personally, I'm not a Christian, but I do see how a person can incorporate beliefs from that faith as well as traditional beliefs. In many ways, the core values are the same...just maybe the actual cermemonies and stories are different. I will admit though that I am not that keen on people who only practice Christianity and want nothing to do with their people's ways. To me, that's sad.

I once heard an old person say that a person must speak their language fluently to be considered traditional. If that's the case, then not knocks out myself and just about 98% of Indians out there.

__________________
If pro is the opposite of con, then wouldn't progress be the opposite of...lol

Zeke

I'm not certain that assimilation is specifically the word I would use, but we -- clearly -- would be dooming ourselves to something. (Which is very much what I've been saying for MONTHS.)

I am in complete agreement.

Further:

1. Nobody is "traditional," anymore, in an academic sense.
2. Those that rely on quantum for identity are short-sighted.
3. Recognizing such does NOT make you assimilationist.

I try not to belabor my reading skill by perusing Suzze's tripe but -- occasionally -- someone will quote it within their statement and I must. Without much comment, take a GOOD look at her recent, rabid, scribbling. It would be, almost, worth taking her off my Ignore List to see if she had any valid retort to North of Ada, who hit this one squarely on the screws.

Zeke

100% correct.

So we move on to other things. As previously stated:

"1. If we're not a growing culture, we become just like Sanskrit: a DEAD museum piece utilized (by closet idealogues) out of inertial pity.
2. If we are a living culture, closeted-types must shelve their fear, show a little evolution and socially "grow up." (Lest they assign us all to Natural Selection.)"

I prefer we act as a living culture. If the language is gone, we'd best come up with something else -- culturally -- that defines us and move forward.

whitewave

I agree with you in a lot of ways on this one, another issue I'm a lil torn on....What, in your opinion would be the best way to raise a child of mixed heritage? What do you teach your children being of different nations? I ask because you hear about people mixing ways all the time, I'd like to hear another way....the other side of the spectrum. Maybe that is a more appropriate question for the natives marrying non-natives thread, but it applies to different ndn nations intermarrying too. Hey, I'm tryin to figure it out for myself....what I will do when the time comes....so any ideas would be appreciated....on either side of the spectrum....sorry for goin off topic a lil bit....just sparked my curiosity.

__________________
"To ignore injustice is to allow it"

Peace, Love, and many blessings,
White Wave

Skillet

I agree totally with all that youve said...there were 3 other languages lost this year as well when the last fluent speakers died.The same applies for ceremonies and oral histories both family and tribal.
In my opinion,being traditional is following a set of teachings or beliefs ( or what ever term one wants to use) in ones life.I It isnt a black or white definition. We do live in a far different time now and yes people have adapted and accepted modern conviences.So what? that doesnt mean one has to change the way they conduct themselves in life.Ceremonies are important because they remind us of the teachings and our relationship in and to this world.We do the best we can do and none of us is perfect(altho some think they are self-righteously).Being Traditional has a different meaning to everyone.Driving a car or using a computer doesnt make one less traditional anymore than using a toaster makes a Christian less Christian.There have been posts on other threads condemning any and all who are traditional and "traditional" has been defined by that poster in black and white terms to suit his own agenda.I find it beyond ridiculous that anyone can condemn Traditional Peoples( not only people from this site but our Elders,Frank Fools Crow,Leon Shenandoah,Oren Lyons,Thomas Banyaca,Phillip Deer and countless others ) in such a broad and disrespectful manner,insinuating that we are bumbling ignorant freeks of nature who should be in a wild west show..
One only has to look at the US govts. relocation policies of the 40s and 50s to see the affects on Indian Peoples.Look at the current drug,alcohol and gang problems on the res now...more of the wonderful affects of assimilation.If we define ourselves culturally or allow others to define us culturally,we will become pan-indian and lose ALL of our true cultural identity.One big grey melting pot of mixed songs,ceremonies,stories,language(how many times have you heard non-lakota people say "Mitakuye Oyasin"?).The sole purpose of cultural identifying,which isnt stated ever by the poster who incessantly whines about assimilation and how we must identify ourselves culturally or we are extinct,is to pad the numbers for statistical reasons.If you allow anyone who claims to be Indian, to be enrolled or listed as Indian ,the numbers increase, and thats how the US Govt funds Indian programs which means bigger pay checks.The other fact thats not stated,is when you define a People cultural and not by their own standards,it is much easier for the Govt to then turn around and terminate tribes...if the tribe is no longer truly that tribe,then it ceases to exist..and that is exactly what the US govt has wanted for years and esp. wants now...with no true tribes,ALL treaty rights are gone,lands would be forfit etc. Of course that isnt mentioned in the pro-assimilation/cultural identity rhetoric.
The issue was raised about Christianity and Traditionalism...i know many people who are very traditional and go regularly to NAC meetings...i think thats an individual choice and i personally havent heard of anyone being told they werent traditional because they also believed christian teachings as well...i think if there was every any objections raised it would be by the Christian churches.

__________________

Skillet

LOL youve used assimilation MANY times....
and who are YOU to define us?

__________________

Skillet

Moving forward by YOUR plan will TERMINATE US AS A PEOPLE
Without our languages we cease to be a people...maybe its best to do everything we can to save the languages that are left...same happened with quillwork back in the 70s...it was almost a lost art but people saw the need to perseve and maintain OUR cultures and traditions.What else are we going to"come up with -- culturally -- that defines us"? Pan-Indianism?

feel free to move on zeke....

__________________

lostsalt

[quote=Zeke;951316

Personally, I think the name of this thread -- likely not designed to be, but it [i]does[/i] such -- immediately places one in a perceived position that, if you reject hardcore anthropological traditionalism, you are a pan-Indian assimilist. This is, of course, crap. (Much like saying that, if you disagree with George Bush, you are not patriotic.)



Okay, I'll own the poorly worded thread liner and the broad definitions. My apologies. The idea (though poorly executed ) was to try and get some clarification on the viewpoint you have been espousing without the other "stuff" clouding the discussion.
Of Course, I think you have to live in the days you were born in.
Just as Wabisha and others lived in the days the were alloted.
Traditionalism(as I perceive your viewpoint Zeke) is an anchor to the destruction of the past. I see Traditionalism as changing with the times. How many people now regard Bear Butte as sacred, but their own people traditionally never did.
Can new ways not be create except by discarding the old. That is not logical. Life is a progression. A circle if you will. Things build upon the foundations of the past.

You've raised the idea of culture being the determining factor for tribal identity. Can you explain further how that might work? I agree that getting it (determination) out of a Blood Q. requirement is the only way to assure a vibrant population in future generations. But I cannot see how it would play out on main st.

Lostsalt

__________________
"Now remember, things look bad and it looks like you're not gonna make it, then you gotta get mean. I mean plumb, mad-dog mean. 'Cause if you lose your head and you give up then you neither live nor win. That's just the way it is." JW

Josiah

I was rereading Losalts original post and I had overlooked several points he brought up

Tribes defined by culture not bloodlins and Selfdetermination of staus Vs Gov controlled

These are actually one in the same issues
Because right now both are defined by the Gov (BIA)
I know my tribe has a bigggg fight on its hands with bucking the system and trying to self determine our citizenship to only members with ndn blood.
The Freedman issue is a different issue anyway and I wont discuss it here...

But it comes down to another issue and that is a Tribes right to pass laws on its own and Govern itself using its Governing Documents ( Consitution) Which we voted on again this past June
I say damn right we need to determine our own fate
We know what the BIA has done the Past 100 years!!!

__________________

SuzzeQ4

Are children are taught both ways, but they are not done together, If they are giving the Mohawk thanksgiving address then it had better be in Mohawk, when we are doing a Mohawk ceremony & vice versa.

Now I know someone is going to get on me for saying that this is OK, but not so for trying to be both Christian & traditional NDN, but there is a difference due to the beliefs being of the same concept & one day our kids will choose because one day they will have to decide to be adopted into a Mohawk clan or not. I have not done so because I'm not trading off who I am for my husband (who agrees with me on this) & then our children will choose for themselves. I can practice Mohawk ceremony with my husband without any Mohawk person trying to convert me or tell me that the Mohawk way is better then the Lakota way. That's the number one difference, things are done differently but there are way more similarities then 2 flood stories.

Suzze

Suzze

SuzzeQ4

Agreed, I also agree, it is true that we have all been affected by some degree of assimilation, especially christianty, but we then choose, we either accept the assimilation or we throw it off. And yes if we throw off the assimilation it's print is still on us, but we have made the choice not to live assimilated no matter what our past brought us.

Suzze