jim
John Thornton <jthorn65 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Miles Jackson wrote:
> John Thornton wrote:
>
>> Ismail Lagardien wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi folks
>>>
>>> This is from another list - incredible. What a country!
>>>
>>> Cut Here:
>>> By an overwhelming vote
>>> the Cherokee amended their constitution that in effect nullified tribal
>>> citizenship for nearly 3,000 members for having ancestors that included
>>> people of African descent. The one-drop rule seems to have resurfaced
>>> with a bite.
>>>
>>>
>> The one drop rule?
>> What does the most recent decision by the Cherokee Nation have to do
>> with the one drop rule?
>> Absolutely nothing.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> --On the contrary: it's precisely analogous to the one-drop rule in the
> South! One group sets an arbitrary standard for "pureblood" membership
> that excludes people of African descent? Check. The arbitrary standard
> is then used to allocate rights and resources to the "pureblood" group
> and exclude the "mixed race" group? Check. The official designation of
> the "pure" racial group reinforces the myth that there are biologically
> distinct racial groups? Check. --What's not to get here?
>
> Miles
I'll try to explain this as best I can after a few gin & tonics. Many Cherokees owned slaves. They not only owned slaves of African descent but Lenape and Creek descendants. Race originally had nothing to do with slavery for the Cherokee and race had nothing initially to do with tribal membership either. The Cherokees let members of any race become tribal members. Tribal membership was viewed in political terms, not racial terms.
All of this slowly changed as the Cherokee, in an attempt to show whites how civilized they were, adopted more white values. Only in 1824 did it become illegal for a tribal member to marry someone of African descent. This was, in a sense, the beginning of the end of racial tolerance. In 1828 blacks could no longer be members of the tribe but existing tribal members with black ancestry were no stripped of membership. If the one drop rule were to be believed to have been applied then those tribal members with African ancestry would have been stripped of their membership. Therefore it is obvious that the one drop rule was not being applied.
The Freedmen were just exactly that. Slaves who were freed in 1866. They were not allowed to become members of the tribe but the reality is that the 1935 census of Cherokees showed that fewer than 1% of the freed slaves claimed any Cherokee blood ancestry. They were not Cherokees either through kinship or custom at that time so why it is "obvious" today that they should be considered Cherokee?. There are Cherokee with black ancestors and there is no move to strip them of citizenship which would also have to be the case were the one drop rule to be applied. As I have repeatedly said, I disagree with the vote to exclude the Freedmen and I think it is disgraceful but I believe it is disgraceful for real reasons, not imaginary ones. Believing it is a version of the one drop rule is imaginary. I have never defended the tribes position on this issue but I also wish for it to be seen for what it is. If you oppose it because you believe it is an implementation of the one drop rule then once it is demonstrated that it is not does do this the grounds for opposition are removed. Opposing the tribes position for real reasons runs no such risk.
When the truth is damning enough why do some feel compelled to embellish the story and exaggerate what has taken place? How can one reconcile the fact that there are Cherokees with African ancestry who are tribal members if they really believe that the tribe is attempting to implement some form of the one drop rule? The one drop rule would exclude those tribal members and there has NEVER been any discussion of removing those members. Some list members bristle at the use of the term fascist to describe our current administration because it is not accurate. They should equally bristle at the idea that what the Cherokee have recently voted to do is implement a one drop rule. Denying Freedmen tribal membership is ugly, hateful and racist but it is not an implementation of the one drop rule.
John Thornton
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
Jim Davis Ozark Bioregion, USA
New: http://www.lulu.com/content/306796 http://shops.half.ebay.com/brothershak_W0QQmZbooks -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20070320/9c8c58cc/attachment.htm>