Previous
Chapter 8. What Indians Want
Themes
and Colors
Key
LitCharts assigns a color and icon to each theme in The Inconvenient Indian, which you can use to track the themes throughout the work.
History and Mythology
Racism and Systemic Oppression
Land
Sovereignty
Summary
Analysis
King repeats his question from the previous chapter: “What do Indians want?” This time, he proposes that “it’s the wrong question.” Specifically, he argues that the “Indians” in question don’t exist but are instead a fantastical “Indian” that exists only in the popular imagination of the U.S. and Canada. Instead, King suggests, one ought to ask what the Lubicon Cree of Alberta want, or the Tlingit of Alaska. Alternatively, one could ask the question, “What do Whites want?” After all, King argues, the history of Indian-White relations in North America has never been about what Indians want.
King cuttingly suggests that it’s more productive to consider the future of Native Nations in terms of what White people want. After all, history tends to unfold according to what Whites want. By making this rather bleak observation, King invites readers to reflect on just how much North American culture has undercut the sense of agency that Indian people might otherwise have when it comes to their own future.
Active
Themes
According to King, Whites want—and have always wanted—land. To Whites, land is even more important than Indian removal or assimilation. While North American attitudes toward assimilation and residential schools have changed over time, their desire for land has never shifted. States King, “[The issue] will always be land, until there isn’t a square foot of land left in North America that is controlled by Native people.” King affirms that Painter saw the truth behind the many government-issued removals, allotments, and reservations: each was aimed at eliminating Native controlled land.
King claims that all Indian-White relations can be traced back to Whites’ desire to control land. While the U.S. has undertaken repeated efforts to frame their treatment of Native people in an evangelical or ideological context, even these incentives may be attributed to a desire to control land that Whites feel is wasted on Native peoples who have no cultural or economic interest in developing land for farming or other moneymaking projects.
Active
Themes
Land is also “a defining element of Aboriginal culture,” at the heart of Aboriginal peoples’ stories, languages, and customs. In contrast, King proposes that North America’s “societal attitude toward land” is to view it as a “commodity.” He cites the Alberta Tar Sands, a major energy-extraction operation with a host of horrific environmental implications, as an example of this attitude of land-as-commodity. King argues that North America doesn’t care about negative consequences of operations like the Alberta Tar Sands because they produce billions of dollars of profits; indeed, there has been little public outcry in response to the Tar Sands.
King cites the U.S. government’s breaking of the Fort Laramie Treaty as another example of prioritizing profit over ethics. Signed in 1868, the Fort Laramie Treaty was an agreement between the Lakota and the U.S. government that promised the Black Hills to the Lakota. However, after George Armstrong Custer discovered gold in the Hills in 1874, masses of White miners traveled to the Black Hills in search of wealth, and the U.S. Army did little to stop them. In 1875, the Lakota appealed to President Grant for help. The federal government’s response was to draw up a new treaty, offering the Lakota $25,000 to relinquish control of the hills. The Lakota refused to sign the new treaty.
Get the entire The Inconvenient Indian LitChart as a printable PDF.
"My students can't get enough of your charts and their results have gone through the roof." -Graham S.
In 1980, the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. government had illegally taken the Black Hills from the Lakota; however, instead of returning the land to them, the court ordered the Lakota to be paid the original $25,000 purchasing price outlined in the new treaty—plus interest—which totaled $106 million. Once more, though, the Lakota refused to compromise.
Active
Themes
In North American Indian history, it’s nearly impossible to talk about land without talking about treaties. Whereas Natives view Indian land as Indian land, North America (legally speaking) views Indian land as land that the federal government owns and has indefinitely loaned to Indian tribes. One key phrase employed in the treaty process is “as long as the grass is green and the waters run;” however, King reveals, he has yet to read a single treaty that contains this promise in writing. In the end, treaties resulted in a loss rather than a retention of tribal land.
Active
Themes
King presents several stories to help the reader understand the issue of land. In 1942, the Canadian government eyed land located on the Stoney Point Ojibway reserve in Ontario to use for a new military-training base called Ipperwash. The Ojibway band refused the government’s offers of payment, so the government took the land anyway. In the ensuing years, the Stoney Point Ojibway protested the theft of their land. Finally, on September 4, 1996, 35 Natives occupied the park to protest the land claim. Tensions escalated and violence erupted; in the end, the police wounded two Native protestors and killed Dudley George.
Active
Themes
King recalls a second story, this one taking place at the Kinzua Dam in the Allegheny National Forest in Pennsylvania. The dam was completed in 1965 and cost over $120 million to build. It formed the deepest lake in Pennsylvania, at the bottom of which lies land that was promised to the Seneca tribe in a 1794 treaty. When hearings in Congress began in 1956 to make arrangements and allocate funds toward the dam’s construction, no Seneca were in attendance. The Seneca went to great lengths to protest the building of the dam, even writing to President John F. Kennedy, though they received no response.
Active
Themes
King tells a third story. In 1717, France gave land located along the Ottawa River to the Sulpician Missionary Society. The main problem with this gift was that France didn’t own the land—the Mohawk did, and they would dispute its sale for the next 151 years. In 1868, Joseph Onasakanrat, a Mohawk chief, wrote to the Sulpicians, demanding the return of the stolen land. The Sulpicians ignored the request. Onasakanrat led an armed march on the Sulpician seminary, though local authorities ultimately forced the Mohawk to leave. When the Sulpicians sold the property in 1936, the Mohawk disputed the sale once more, and, yet again, their pleas were ignored.
Active
Themes
The Mohawk continued to fight to reclaim their lost land into the 20th century, suffering additional losses, such as when a golf course, Club de golf d’Oka, was built on the land. In 1989, the mayor of Oka, Jean Ouelette, announced that the golf course would be expanded, and luxury condos constructed next door, which would rob the Mohawk of additional land, clearing the trees of a forest the Mohawk referred to as “the Pines.” Finally, in March 1990, the Mohawk occupied the Pines. In July, the occupation turned violent. Ouellette ordered the Sûreté du Quebec to attack the Mohawk, which they did, armed with tear gas and grenades.
Active
Themes
The conflict between the Mohawk and the Sûreté escalated, leading to the deaths of Corporal Marcel Lemay and a Mohawk elder named Joe Armstrong. This led to the onset of the Oka Crisis. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police arrived to aid the Sûreté. Other Natives joined the Mohawk. The opposing sides remained in a standoff for 78 days. Of course, the Oka Crisis could have been avoided. Indeed, John Ciaccia, then Quebec’s Minister of Indian Affairs, pleaded with the federal government to purchase the land from Oka and return it to the Mohawk (despite the fact that the land still technically belonged to the Mohawk in the first place). Ultimately, the Oka Crisis cost over $200 million. In 1997, the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development purchased the land for just over $5 million and gave it to the Mohawk.
Active
Themes
King shifts his focus to the Northwest for his fourth story, which involves the salmon that have travelled upstream there for millennia and are vitally important to many tribes who live there. Europeans settled in the Puget Sound area of Washington in 1854, leading to the government imposing the Treaty of Medicine Creek on the Nisqually, Puyallup, Steilacoom, and other western tribes. The Nisqually objected to the loss of land, resulting in the conflicts that are now known as the Puget Sound War. Ultimately, Leschi, the Nisqually chief who objected to the loss of land, was hanged in 1858. After this, Whites assumed control of the land promised to the western tribes, denying Natives their fishing rights.
Active
Themes
A series of land disputes followed. Two U.S. Supreme Court cases, United States v. Winans (1905) and Suefert Brothers Co. v. United States (1919) ruled that Native people had rights to fish in the Northwest’s rivers. Even so, in 1945, a 14-year-old Nisqually boy named Billy Frank Jr. was arrested for fishing on the Nisqually River, and in 1954, a Puyallup named Bob Satiacum was arrested for fishing on the Puyallup River. Following arrests like these, Natives flocked to the Northwest’s rivers to conduct “fish-ins” in protest. Protestors were arrested and, in 1960, the Pierce County Court ruled that the Puyallup tribe didn’t exist. Moreover, a 1963 ruling claimed that Washington state was authorized to subject Indians to “reasonable and necessary regulations.”
Active
Themes
The conflict over fishing rights escalated, with Hollywood celebrities such as Marlon Brando and Buffy Sainte-Marie traveling to the Northwest to garner media attention. Still, the Department of Fish and Game refused to relinquish their perceived control of the rivers. Critics of Native fishing rights claimed that Natives would damage the ecosystem by “overfishing,” yet no such fears were directed toward sports fishers or factory ships. King suggests that opposition to Native fishing rights likely stemmed from Whites not wanting Indians competing in the commercial and sports fishing industries.
Active
Themes
The fishing wars escalated, eventually growing violent. On September 9, 1970, state officials raided a Puyallup fishing camp located along the Puyallup River, arrested 60 people, and bulldozed the village. Ultimately, the conflict went to the District Court of Western Washington. United States v. State of Washington ruled that Indians had fishing rights and the right to 50 percent of the rivers’ harvestable fish.
Active
Themes
King relays a fifth story. The Shaughnessy Gold and Country Club was a luxury club located in Vancouver that was founded in 1911. When the Canadian Pacific Railroad, from whom the club leased the land, demanded its land back in 1956, the club was forced to move. The club settled on a parcel of 162 acres of land overlooking the Fraser River—land that belonged to the Musqueam Nation. Through a series of discreet, private meetings, club leadership landed a deal for a long-term lease of the land. The Musqueam were hardly consulted about the matter. In fact, it wasn’t until 1970 when Chief Delbert Guerin received a copy of the lease.
Active
Themes
Guerin discovered that the Canadian government had leased Musqueam land to the club for 75 years at a price that was roughly half of the land’s appraised worth. The situation grew worse when, in 1965, Ottawa entered a deal with a private developer, granting them access to additional Musqueam land. New developments drastically increased the land’s value, yet the Musqueam were unable to benefit from the market increase, and the developers who bought the land continued to rent at prices far below the new market value.
Active
Themes
In 1995, when the leases were up for renewal, the Musqueam raised the rent to reflect the higher market value. The non-Natives who lived on this land were furious to learn that their rent would be raised. They argued that it was unfair to raise the price for Indian land, since they were unable to vote in Musqueam elections. Such logic is ludicrous, of course, as it’s not uncommon for people to own property in places where they have no voting rights. King points to a Canadian friend of his who owns a house in Florida as an example. Nevertheless, homeowners stopped paying rent and took the matter to court. Canada’s Supreme Court ultimately ruled that the Musqueam land was worth only 50 percent of surrounding non-Indian land. However, if the Musqueam sold the land, it could be bought at full market value.
Active
Themes
King’s final story takes place in New Mexico, which boasts the third-highest percentage of Indians after Oklahoma and Alaska. Created in 1906 by Theodore Roosevelt, the Carson National Forest is located on what used to be 50,000 acres of Taos Pueblo Indian land. Roosevelt offered the Taos Pueblo no compensation for the stolen land. Ba Whyea, “Blue Lake,” located in a remote corner of the land parcel, was a vital part of the tribe’s ceremonies. However, this didn’t stop the Forest Service from constructing a trail leading to the lake and stocking it with fish for hobbyists.
Active
Themes
The Taos fought to win back their land. In the 1920s, they were awarded nearly $300,000 by the Pueblo Lands Board. However, the tribe refused the offer, demanding the return of Blue Lake. In 1933, John Collier, then the Commissioner of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, helped the Taos obtain a 50-year permit granting them year-round, exclusive use of the lake, but the Forest Service delayed the passage of this permit. When the permit finally passed, it was for substantially less access than the original permit had permitted. In 1951, the Indian Claims Commission officially stated that the government had unfairly taken Blue Lake from the Taos, though the Commission lacked the power to actually return the land to the tribe. It wasn’t until President Nixon signed House Bill 471 into law that the Taos’ land was returned to them.
Active
Themes
