h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

When you assert that Americans are wealthy because indian people are poor, you're usually greeted with hostile skepticism, but it's true nevertheless. Few Americans nowdays seem to recognize the importance of the landbase in establishing relative levels of prosperity yet the land underlies the credit system, by providing collateral, the economic system by providing water, minerals, agricultural produce, etc.. and so on.

And all of the land in production has been at one time or another alienated from indian people. The compensation for the loss, if it has been rendered at all, amounts to maybe a few cents per acre on the average so not only have indian people been denied the use of the land but the compensation for that denial has been mostly inadequate for them to reestablish an adequate resource base.

When you consider that reservation land, the landbase upon which the remnants of indian tribes must establish their economies upon now, is marginal for the most part, and deliberately so, you might can see that their prosperity prospects are extremely limited.

So why don't they just get jobs like everybody else?

Well, not only is the rez marginal for things like agriculture but it's often remote from settled areas where the jobs are. And often the jobs available for indian people are minimum wage, substandard positions that can hardly pay for the commute. So the choice becomes essentially to stay on the rez in relative poverty or settle in the towns and the cities and give up tenure on whatever land's left. Join the communities of strangers as individuals competing with other individuals for an extremely limited piece of the American pie.

Now at this point, people often mention how many reservations have mineral resources like oil and gas and coal which the previous generations of Anglos overlooked when allocating the reservations and now indian people should be up to their hips in money, which of course is what they need to live since the land won't support them anymore than it supports Anglo farmers or ranchers.

But these mineral resources are limited and their extraction is often expensive and polluting. The extraction also offends the spiritual sensibilities of people brought up to view the earth as their mother and any mineral extraction operations as essentially non-sustainable stewardship of the land, unlike the subsistance agriculture or whatever that was practiced in the past.

So, even when indian people become relatively wealthy it's at an enormous cultural and longterm economic cost. So what can you do?

Well, that's a very good question that many tribes are struggling with. There are of course other options like tourism and casino gambling that have been exploited, but few societies can prosper on such things very long. Both tourism and gambling depend very heavily on the relative prosperity of the dominate society, which, as we know, has had and continues to have its economic ups and downs. During the down times, gambling and travel are among the first things to be given up.

So where does that leave us?

One possibility is to renegotiate settlements for lands already alienated to more accurately reflect the values involved. Payments made in the mid-twentieth century for land alienated in the nineteenth century at nineteenth century price levels is not equitable by any stretch of the imagination.

Another is to simply return lands that were alienated but are now in the public domain, such as BLM and National Forest land. Tribes could then at least benefit from the grazing or timber leases the federal government currently collects from these lands and presumably distributes to the population at large in the form of services or whatever. These fees are the legacy that rightfully belongs to indian people and would partially compensate for their historic deprivation. The leases and associated fees should not be considered the property of the American public at large since this only continues the desparity of wealth that we're talking about without any real justification.

So then maybe it's time to consider this stuff seriously. The government for years has blown off its obligations under treaty, the courts have recognized indian rights to previously alienated lands but have usually undervalued the costs to indian people of such alienation. Indian water rights have been deemed in principle superior to all others but in practice this doctrine has been pretty much ignored with previously fertile lands being turned into desert due to the destruction or isolation of ancient irrigation systems.

It may be possible in time for many tribes to fashion sustainable economies out of a mixture of tourism, casino gambling, mineral extraction and subsistance farming or ranching but without the credit and resources that the alienated lands would have provided had they not been alienated, the assertion that Americans are wealthy because indian people are poor will continue to be true.

I don't think that's what the American dream should be about, do you?

Some land questions and answers:

What good is land? Can you eat it?

Answer: Well, mostly the produce but in a pinch you can eat dirt which is more nutritious than plastic shrinkwrap or cellphones whether gutted or not.

What good is land? Will it buy you love?

Answer: Depends on your lover's expectations. Does she/he prefer to to rent or own?

Why do I have to pay property taxes?

Answer: Because the government says so and will take the property in lieu of the taxes if you don't pay.

What happened to Grandpa's homestead?

Answer: It got repossessed when they built the golf course next door and the taxes went through the roof because golf courses are worth more than agricultural land because golf is more important than eating.

Why can't I trespass on indian reservations?

Answer: Because the ranchers who lease them might get pissed off.

Why isn't 15 cents an acre a fair price for land?

Answer: It is if you're stuck in the 14th century. It isn't if you have to operate in the 21st century. The price of everything just keeps going up. The price of indian land just keeps going down. The difference is profit.

Why is land worth more after it's subdivided?

Answer: Subdivision is a fundamental improvement to the land that gives it a pleasing more or less checkerboard appearance after the lawns are planted. It also insures that only rich people can live on the land thus further appreciating its value to other rich people.

Who really owns the land?

Answer: God, but he's represented by fundamentalist Christians who have power of attorney.

Why should I pay for indian land?

Answer: You probably don't need to unless you think it's easier to remember than fraud.

If we return indian land previously illegally taken, then what?

Answer: You might have to work for a living but people will know they can probably leave you in charge of the cash register. Otherwise, you're going to have to be screened and bonded.

Why can't we all just share the land?

Answer: Good question. Does that mean the fences will come down?

How much land do indians really need?

Answer: About a quarter of what you need and a tenth of what you've got.

Why won't the indians let me stripmine their land?

Answer: They like to keep it with the soil on top.

Why don't they just irrigate like everybody else?

Answer: You stole the water too and they don't think there's much market for brine.

Why don't indians put their clotheslines in the backyard like everybody else or get a dryer?

Answer: It's better if the clothesline is on the other side of the shack from the outhouse and dryers require too fuel for the generator.

http://www.indiantrust.com/

You must know this site Analiese,I thought it may be intresting to others. I think the short commentary to the left sounds like something the WMI could have written.

I see they have dropped the case agaist Norton saying she could not be responsible for the mishandling of the trust brefore she came along(in the Federal position she has now) Funny (not really)she was responsible for that very thing when serving the state of Co . Or do I have that wrong?

Also what happened to the link to your and others writing in the post front page? It used to have the ??gag-cac or whatever it is listed. That is they only way I knew to get to that area. I will look into your entry section --maybe they are listed there. What are those initials for that area I am looking for?

Also what happened to the link to your and others writing in the post front page? It used to have the ??gag-cac or whatever it is listed. That is they only way I knew to get to that area. I will look into your entry section --maybe they are listed there. What are those initials for that area I am looking for?