It is easy as a student of history to ignore major development with Native American tribes after the end of the nineteenth century and the so-called “closing of the frontier.” This is seen by many as the end of an era and a time where the federal government had finally settled its policy regarding the status and treatment of this country’s many Native American tribes. Charles Wilkinson in Blood Struggle paints a completely different picture of how the relationship between the tribes and the US government developed through the course of the second half of the twentieth century. The blood struggle outlined by Wilkinson in the book is one for the very soul of the Native American populations of the United States and how they dealt with the challenges thrown at them throughout the course of the twentieth century. The main point of the book tracing the course of Native American history from the dark days of Termination to a brighter day of a policy of Sel-Determination and new policy where the tribes have been able to do for themselves and create stronger communities as well as be stewards of the land. The story told by this book is a positive one and it shows that there is in fact hope for things improving.
The changing relationship between the federal government and Native American tribes is the main theme of Blood Struggle drawn by Wilkinson throughout the book. From the nadir of the losses associated with Termination to the slow and gradual improvement of tribal relations throughout the course of the 1960s and 1970s. These historical developments outline a powerful political history of the tribal relations with the US government and in particular the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). The four steps outlined by Wilkinson are broadly analogized as the relationship between the BIA and the various tribal communities throughout the country.
The first period in Native American history outlined by Wilkinson was the one where the relationship between the tribes and the BIA was one where it was at its lowest point and the tribes had as little power as it ever had. The BIA pursued an incredibly onerous policy where they attempted to assimilate tribal communities and they sought to do so by any means possible. Wilkinson cites the example of how the ““BIA and church schools vigorously sought to “Christianize” the Sioux students. Teachers prohibited children from speaking their Lakota language and cut off their braids. Everything Lakota was pagan and savage.” (Wilkinson 9) Furthermore, the BIA tried very hard to get rid of any traces of tribal culture by the banning of the Sioux Sun Dance, the policy of allotment which divided reservation lands into lots and endangered the Native ways of life. The BIA additionally, had a “nearly unfathomable degree of authority.” In Which local superintendents on the reservations “controlled the tribal budgets and manipulated tribal chairmen by disbursing or withholding dollars” (Wilkinson 21) This policy of federal control of Indian communities culminated with the policy of Termination which actively sought to actually dissolve Native communities and sell their lands for development. This was the lowest point of tribal power and it was something that aimed to recover from and did in the following decades.
The following part of the story details how Native Americans having just lived through the trauma and loss of hope following the Terminations crisis it was able to recover a modicum of organization and hope. In this period groups like the National Congress of American Indians and American Indian movement worked hard to recover Native identity and to force political change. This was driven in the early period by World War II veterans who came home and demanded equal rights because of their experiences overseas. AIM was founded, as a “counterforce to the ills of relocation, the despair disorientation, drunkenness and violence that plagued the gritty Indian ghetto of Minneapolis.” (Wilkinson 137) One of the primary goals of AIM were efforts to recover tribal sovereignty which they had lost. This step was important and it led directly to improving conditions for the tribes in the future.
The final two steps outlined by Wilkinson in the book were the process by which Native communities were able to regain self-determination in the first part and then assert their sovereignty in the later period. The 1960s and 1970s were a very important period in Native American history where finally the BIA slowly started to minimize its presence in the reservations by forwarding a new policy of self-determination which allowed for tribes to choose for themselves. This new independence was further enshrined throughout the 1990s and 2000s when tribes were able to take control of their own affairs and finally lead a way of life which they had chosen for themselves. This was the process by which Native American communities were able to reassert their sovereignty over themselves.
One of the most important themes discussed by Wilkson throughout the book is the broad of the concept of sovereignty, which effectively implies that tribes have a right to rule themselves. In one sense, there is a strict legal definition of sovereignty. Sovereignty in this sense is to taken to mean that the tribes should be “considered as distinct, independent political communities, retaining their natural rights, as the undisputed possessors of the soil, from time immemorial.” (Wilkinson 61) This meant that they could live without interference from anyone except laws passed by the US Congress. This conception of sovereignty as it was later applied by the tribes themselves meant that they could form their own parallel institutions based on tribal traditions and history. This meant that they could institute a system for tribal education, tribal governments, and their own justice systems. This was a very important development and one that meant that Native communities could finally assert their own ways of life and reclaim their traditional lives. This was a very important development and one that gives much hope for the future of Native American populations in the United States.
Wilkinson throughout the book approaches history by using the lenses and voices of those Native Americans who were there on the front lines and experienced these changes themselves. This approach to history is powerful because it gives a lot of emotional weight to the stories. It gives voice to those who have none and it is very emotional and this in itself weakens this approach. History isn’t always unbiased but it is supposed to be at least somewhat balanced and using the voices and experience of your subject can lend itself to a very complex problem of losing an analytical voice in favor of advocacy. History should have a message but it should first of all be unbiased which is something using this approach weakens.
One of the most important moments in Native American history portrayed by Wilkinson was the process by which the federal government meant to terminate the presence of some tribes by legal action. This process, known as Termination, was instituted in the 1950s and it was meant to get rid of five large tribes the Flathead, Klamath, Menominee, Pottawatomie and Turtle Mountain Chippewa as well as tribes in the states of California, Florida New York, and Texas. This meant that the tribes would be dissolved, its populations would be relocated and that the former tribal land would be sold for development. This meant that members of terminated tribes “most found themselves poorer, bereft of health care, and suffering a painful psychological loss of community, homeland and self-identity.” (Wilkinson 81) This was a very traumatic period in Native American history and one that meant the height of federal power over tribal institutions. This was in stark contrast to the later policy of self-determination promoted by the government.
The United States government during the presidencies of Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon created a new approach to the relationship between itself and Native American populations. In essence, the policy of self-determination meant that the tribes would be able to choose what was best for themselves and it allowed them to control their own affairs. The policy of self-determination meant a “step forward into modern times” and it “reflected long-standing needs and sentiments in Indian country.” (Wilkinson 189) These changes were enforced by the fact that Great Society programs during the Johnson administration and the funds coming from the Office of Economic Opportunity flowed to the “tribes, not the agency, received the grants and spent the funds according to their own priorities.” (Wilkinson 191) This was a large departure from the earlier period where the BIA had the final say in everything which happened in the reservations. Self-determination was a very positive step forward and it allowed for tribal communities to recover their confidence and allowed to move into a future where they would be able to choose for themselves in all important fields.
The living conditions and the state of the tribal institution since the 1950s have been highly shaped by the changing of the relationship between the federal government and Native Americans. In the 1950s, the BIA and the federal government exercised all of the power it deemed necessary on tribal communities almost to the point where it considered the literal termination of some tribes as a viable piece of public policy. Starting in the 1960s, self-determination and the reassertion of tribal sovereignty have made tribes much more responsible for their own affairs and dealing with their own problems. Since the 1990s, Native American tribes have taken a much more involved role in their administration largely thanks to the greater emphasis on self-determination and sovereignty. These developments the legalization of Indian gaming among them have made the tribes much more self-sufficient and they have a much stronger footing for life in the modern world. Contrasting it with the 1950s Native Americans in the United States are doing much better and they have improved their way of life by leaps and bounds this is undeniable but most importantly they have taken control of their own institutions. This simple fact has made their lives better, the BIA is no longer as an obtrusive a force as it used to be and now these communities can flourish on their own terms. One of the most important ways in which they have been able to do is by actually being able to reassert their way of life as well by being much better stewards of the land. The environment is very important to Native Americans and they have taken a notable role in dealing with being good stewards of the lands to which they have rights.
The greatest strength of this book is that it serves as a very thorough political and social history of Native Americans in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. The book is also very logically organized and has a very clear progression which takes the reader on a journey from the lowest point of Native American power in the United States, the Termination debate, to an awakening of Native identity, a reassertion of sovereignty and a new status quo where tribes have the power to assert themselves to the federal government. This in itself is an impressive feat and something which this book should be commended for. There are no major weaknesses with the book, it has an appropriate scope and it has a strong source base. This largely is a very strong book and something which has left me very well informed on a topic which I didn’t know much about and this in itself is a very good thing. Blood Struggle as a work of social and political history is impressive and it is something which many historians should attempt to emulate.
Works Cited
Wilkinson, Charles F. Blood struggle: The rise of modern Indian nations. WW Norton & Company, 2005.
