Woodland Indians Forum

You are not logged in.

Announcement

  • Index
  •  » General
  •  » David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

#26 Jan-31-2010 01:55:pm

bls926
Administrator
From: Texas
Registered: Oct-21-2006
Posts: 12082

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

lenape wrote:

Gummy Bear wrote:

I know that all of this over zealous condemnation of other Tribes is not the intention of the Council or the Principal Chief. I have talked to them both, in person. I know this.  It seems to only exist on the internet, and is not the case in person.

Well, I do not know about this, as they have spoken out very clearly in Oklahoma and Qualla about these shake and bake groups, in person, at symposiums and functions.  I know for a fact that a person showing up in Qualla claiming to be from one of these "groups" will be shown the door.  I also know that folks from these "groups" are not welcome at ceremonial grounds in Oklahoma, not to say a few have not straggled in, but they were not accepted with open arms, nor deemed "legit".  Now, having said that, this is not to say that members of the 3 Cherokee Tribes/Nations will not accept folks from these groups, am sure they will, but this does not deem them legit either, there are elders and leaders in NC that believe if you speak the language you are "Cherokee", to a degree, and at least "culturally", this I know for a fact, not that *I* agree with this, but I am not Cherokee, so what I agree with, or don't agree with means nothing.  But to say this is only an "internet" problem is really not true, anyone who wants to see this can go down to the boundary in NC or out to OK and talk with the folks out there.  Again, I don't see any problem with "heritage groups", as long as they don't try to represent themselves as "tribes" or "nations" and step on the toes of the legitimate tribes and nations that have survived and maintained their sovereignty.

Well said. Thank you, lenape.

No one has said that descendants don't have any place in the Nation. You can connect with Elders, learn the culture, traditions, language. You can band together with others and form heritage societies. However, you can't claim to speak for the People. You can't change the history, change things to make it easy. You can't create a tribe. For these groups to call themselves tribes is beyond arrogant.

Offline

 

#27 Jan-31-2010 02:17:pm

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4272
Website

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

I have a document that says I'm 1/8 American Indian, racially.  But, as Groucho Marx said:  "I don't want to belong to any club that will accept me as a member."

Offline

 

#28 Jan-31-2010 02:41:pm

bls926
Administrator
From: Texas
Registered: Oct-21-2006
Posts: 12082

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

sschkaak wrote:

I have a document that says I'm 1/8 American Indian, racially.  But, as Groucho Marx said:  "I don't want to belong to any club that will accept me as a member."

1/8 American Indian? Really? Not Lenape, Cherokee, Choctaw? Just American Indian? What kind of document would that be?

Offline

 

#29 Jan-31-2010 02:56:pm

bls926
Administrator
From: Texas
Registered: Oct-21-2006
Posts: 12082

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

Gummy Bear wrote:

sschkaak wrote:

I keep coming back to the foolproof solution to the Wannabe problem:  If you're not 1/4 American Indian BQ, then you're not an American Indian.  This would end all the B.S.

And it would dis-enroll how many???

And to reply to lenape,,, I know for a fact that a person showing up in Qualla claiming to be from one of these "groups" will be shown the door.  I also know that folks from these "groups" are not welcome at ceremonial grounds in Oklahoma,


And I'm sure that door swings both ways. To say that if someone from Oklahoma were to show up in south Georgia (or where ever) would be shown the door too. Like I said they don't care who thinks they are wrong.

Sorry, Gummy Bear, I think you're wrong on this one. I know some of these wannabee tribes would jump thru hoops to get an enrolled member of a legitimate Nation to show up at one of their activities. It would be a wet dream come true. Some are even willing to pay big money to get "real Indians" to participate. Somehow they think this validates their existence. roll

Offline

 

#30 Jan-31-2010 03:16:pm

Chevy
Member
Registered: Aug-01-2007
Posts: 1577

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

sschkaak wrote:

Bonnie:

The federally-recognized American Indian tribes can recognize anybody they want to as tribal citizens.  But, they're NOT all American Indians.   They might be Cherokee, but they're NOT Indians. 

There is only one thing that makes somebody an Indian.  Blood.  DNA, if you will.  The people who have been cheated and killed and pushed all over this continent were NOT white people or black people with distant Indian ancestry (with the very fewest possible exceptions).  And, they were treated this way because of their race.  Of all the people massacred at Gnadenhuetten, Ohio, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM WAS A CHRISTIAN.  They weren't massacred because they were Christians.  Same goes for the removal of the Cherokee, who had adopted almost all of the European lifeways--prior to removal!  So, practicing traditional culture is not a touchstone for being Indian.  Calling yourself an American Indian, when you look like my Uncle John, is complete nonsense, to me--whether or not you're enrolled somewhere.




I agree that especially with the Cherokee, everyone who is enrolled isn't Indian, and I'm not talking about the Freedmen.

That's  funny! ( the when you look like my Uncle John) But there are enrolled Indians who would disagree with you! They would say there are blond haired Indians, and I don't mean Cherokee. tongue

Well, it's a big mess, and probably going to get messier, because to me, if the U.S. government does anything, it will be to try to get out of treaty obligations, depending on who is running the government. sad

Offline

 

#31 Jan-31-2010 03:23:pm

Chevy
Member
Registered: Aug-01-2007
Posts: 1577

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

Well, here's a thought. A.I. Tribes/Nations say who is and isn't their citizen, and say if you aren't a Citizen you can not say you are, say Cherokee. Correct? :)So who died and left them God that they can say who can say they are Irish or Welsh? They can't say who is Mexican, or African-American, when it has nothing to do with the Cherokee Nation, so why can any Indian Tribe/Nation presume to tell another race what they can say about themselves?

Offline

 

#32 Jan-31-2010 03:25:pm

Chevy
Member
Registered: Aug-01-2007
Posts: 1577

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

And can any of you find a record where the Welsh or Irish have ever said, hey, if you are not a citizen of Ireland or Wales, and you're just a descendent, you can not say you're Irish or Welsh???? I bet you can't find any such record.

Offline

 

#33 Jan-31-2010 03:31:pm

bls926
Administrator
From: Texas
Registered: Oct-21-2006
Posts: 12082

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

As for state recognized tribes . . . States recognize these groups for a variety of reasons, the least of which is their historical connection to their people or their legitimacy. Most times it's all about money. Money the states hope to get from federal funding. Money generated from tourism.

This does not apply to those historical Nations who lost their federal recognition during the termination era. States have in the past and continue to give recognition to these people because it's the right thing to do.

The tribes that have formed in the past 10 to 30 years, the overnighters, are the problem. These are the ones who are distorting the history, bastardising the culture, making a mockery of the traditions. One of these Cherokee [sic] tribes has set up clans based on geographical location. That makes a joke out of a significant aspect of Cherokee culture. Your clan is passed down thru your mother; everyone in a clan is related by blood. There were reasons for the clan system and it wasn't to distinguish which state you lived in.

Offline

 

#34 Jan-31-2010 03:45:pm

bls926
Administrator
From: Texas
Registered: Oct-21-2006
Posts: 12082

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

Chevy wrote:

Well, here's a thought. A.I. Tribes/Nations say who is and isn't their citizen, and say if you aren't a Citizen you can not say you are, say Cherokee. Correct? :)So who died and left them God that they can say who can say they are Irish or Welsh? They can't say who is Mexican, or African-American, when it has nothing to do with the Cherokee Nation, so why can any Indian Tribe/Nation presume to tell another race what they can say about themselves?

I don't think anyone is trying to tell people what they can call themselves. If someone wants to self-identify as Cherokee, that's fine. However, when this self-identified Cherokee thinks he can form a tribe, speak for other Cherokee, twist the culture and traditions to suit his fancy, there's a problem.

Offline

 

#35 Jan-31-2010 03:53:pm

NanticokePiney
Member
From: Hopewell Twp., New Jersey
Registered: Jul-10-2007
Posts: 4214

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

bls926 wrote:

No one has said that descendants don't have any place in the Nation. You can connect with Elders, learn the culture, traditions, language. You can band together with others and form heritage societies. However, you can't claim to speak for the People. You can't change the history, change things to make it easy. You can't create a tribe. For these groups to call themselves tribes is beyond arrogant.

We ( the Nanticoke-Lenape) accept descendants with open arms even giving them a place and certain citizens rights. I have offered this to Ray several times. We have a 1/4 BQ but we don't treat the people who don't as "below us". Now if these descendants started a "tribe" that would be a problem.


I don't have anger issues...just violent reactions to B.S.
---------------------------------------------------
      Warning:  Some Profanity
This might cause you to experience reason

Offline

 

#36 Jan-31-2010 04:22:pm

Gummy Bear
Member
Registered: Jan-28-2010
Posts: 61

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

bls926 wrote:

Gummy Bear wrote:

sschkaak wrote:

I keep coming back to the foolproof solution to the Wannabe problem:  If you're not 1/4 American Indian BQ, then you're not an American Indian.  This would end all the B.S.

And it would dis-enroll how many???

And to reply to lenape,,, I know for a fact that a person showing up in Qualla claiming to be from one of these "groups" will be shown the door.  I also know that folks from these "groups" are not welcome at ceremonial grounds in Oklahoma,


And I'm sure that door swings both ways. To say that if someone from Oklahoma were to show up in south Georgia (or where ever) would be shown the door too. Like I said they don't care who thinks they are wrong.

Sorry, Gummy Bear, I think you're wrong on this one. I know some of these wannabee tribes would jump thru hoops to get an enrolled member of a legitimate Nation to show up at one of their activities. It would be a wet dream come true. Some are even willing to pay big money to get "real Indians" to participate. Somehow they think this validates their existence. roll

That's cool,, I've been wrong before. This is after all just my take on all of this.
But I think you are just over exaggerating that to make your point. I could ask you to prove that someone would pay to have someone else attend their meeting, but I won't because if you did come up with something it would probably just be one of those P.O. Box NDN groups, and I say as far as they go "Who Cares"


But I do understand that there will always be over zealots no matter whether your talking about NDN Tribes or Antique car clubs. Hell we even had one on the local Fire Dept. (you should have seen his car, not to mention all of the F.D. jewelry he wore) now that I think about it there is no difference here than with the full time Fire Fighters and the Volunteer Fire Fighters. The fire doesn't care.



"real Indians" you say.
See this is just what I mean. Is it your intention to be such a name caller? I wouldn't have thought that you were that kinda person. are you so scared of a State Tribe as to go to such lengths to belittle them? Or has something gone soooo wrong as to have you fall into the "divide and conker" mind set?

I say that if the CNO is so upset about how people identify themselves,,, It should be them that put some other word in front of or behind the word Cherokee so as to differentiate and elevate them above them thar "So Called Other People"... Perhaps they could call themselves "Cherokee Nation Citizen" or Enrolled Cherokee Citizen", "The one true and not fake Cherokee citizen".

All and all It's only the members of the CNO that care. the State Tribe NDNs don't care what you guys call yourselves.

I really don't understand why so many panties are in such a bunch over this meaningless thing, unless it's the fact that the CNO knows that there are more of them. or is it that they wet the bed so bad on the Freeman thingy that they are trying to divert attention?

Offline

 

#37 Jan-31-2010 04:24:pm

Gummy Bear
Member
Registered: Jan-28-2010
Posts: 61

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

NanticokePiney wrote:

bls926 wrote:

No one has said that descendants don't have any place in the Nation. You can connect with Elders, learn the culture, traditions, language. You can band together with others and form heritage societies. However, you can't claim to speak for the People. You can't change the history, change things to make it easy. You can't create a tribe. For these groups to call themselves tribes is beyond arrogant.

We ( the Nanticoke-Lenape) accept descendants with open arms even giving them a place and certain citizens rights. I have offered this to Ray several times. We have a 1/4 BQ but we don't treat the people who don't as "below us". Now if these descendants started a "tribe" that would be a problem.

Yes, but you don't exclude and belittle them to the point where they don't want anything to do with you and then for sure they would go out on their own.

Offline

 

#38 Jan-31-2010 04:29:pm

Gummy Bear
Member
Registered: Jan-28-2010
Posts: 61

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

bls926 wrote:

Chevy wrote:

Well, here's a thought. A.I. Tribes/Nations say who is and isn't their citizen, and say if you aren't a Citizen you can not say you are, say Cherokee. Correct? :)So who died and left them God that they can say who can say they are Irish or Welsh? They can't say who is Mexican, or African-American, when it has nothing to do with the Cherokee Nation, so why can any Indian Tribe/Nation presume to tell another race what they can say about themselves?

I don't think anyone is trying to tell people what they can call themselves. If someone wants to self-identify as Cherokee, that's fine. However, when this self-identified Cherokee thinks he can form a tribe, speak for other Cherokee, twist the culture and traditions to suit his fancy, there's a problem.

Yes they are,,, I have had discussions on the web where people said that the self identified NDNs should be put in JAIL for Identity theft. Over zealots run amuck.

Offline

 

#39 Jan-31-2010 04:30:pm

bls926
Administrator
From: Texas
Registered: Oct-21-2006
Posts: 12082

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

The EBCI has a 1/8 BQ requirement, with a direct lineal ancestor on the Baker Roll. The UKB has a 1/4 BQ requirement and the CNO has no BQ requirement, each requires a direct lineal ancestor on the Dawes Roll.

Sometimes I wish these three would join together, bringing the historic Cherokee Nation back. Maybe they would use a different roll or census. Only trouble with going back to one of the earlier rolls is that if your family has married out every generation since the early 1800's . . . how Cherokee are you? We think the jokes about CNO are bad now, can you imagine what they'd be then? They'd probably have to set a BQ requirement if they did that. Then there'd be an out-cry from the members of CNO who were dropped for lack of enough blood. I don't know what the solution is.

Offline

 

#40 Jan-31-2010 04:36:pm

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4272
Website

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

bls926 wrote:

sschkaak wrote:

I have a document that says I'm 1/8 American Indian, racially.  But, as Groucho Marx said:  "I don't want to belong to any club that will accept me as a member."

1/8 American Indian? Really? Not Lenape, Cherokee, Choctaw? Just American Indian? What kind of document would that be?

That would be (as you already know) a certification of results of a biogeographical (i.e., "racial") DNA test.  My tribal ancestries are not documented.  They are family traditions.  Hence, the need for DNA testing to verify the traditions.  Yes, DNA test results have a margin of error; but, so does a so-called "solid paper trail."  No matter how good your paper trail is, there's always a margin for error, due to mistakes in the records and/or the possibility of extra-marital "events."  (They DO happen.)  And, the further back your connection, the more likely there's an error. 

You seem to have missed my point, though.  That being that I don't consider someone an Indian who is not, at least, 1/4 American Indian BQ.  I take my cue on this from Vine Deloria, Jr.

Offline

 

#41 Jan-31-2010 04:38:pm

Gummy Bear
Member
Registered: Jan-28-2010
Posts: 61

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

bls926 wrote:

As for state recognized tribes . . . States recognize these groups for a variety of reasons, the least of which is their historical connection to their people or their legitimacy. Most times it's all about money. Money the states hope to get from federal funding. Money generated from tourism.

This does not apply to those historical Nations who lost their federal recognition during the termination era. States have in the past and continue to give recognition to these people because it's the right thing to do.

The tribes that have formed in the past 10 to 30 years, the overnighters, are the problem. These are the ones who are distorting the history, bastardising the culture, making a mockery of the traditions. One of these Cherokee [sic] tribes has set up clans based on geographical location. That makes a joke out of a significant aspect of Cherokee culture. Your clan is passed down thru your mother; everyone in a clan is related by blood. There were reasons for the clan system and it wasn't to distinguish which state you lived in.

I know of 2 Tribes that do this and I'd be willing to bet that I have family in one of them. I know they don't care what someone else thinks about the way they organize their Clans. it works for them... Not a lot of inter marriage going on in that Tribe today.  Sure 200 years ago the Tribe use it as a way to maintain marriage lines but come on the clan system is gone today in every way. It's back to that little thing called "sovereignty".

Offline

 

#42 Jan-31-2010 04:43:pm

sschkaak
Moderator
Registered: Sep-17-2007
Posts: 4272
Website

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

"The EBCI has a 1/8 BQ requirement"

Yes.  They do, NOW.  But, they have some tribal members who are 1/16 and 1/32, who have been grandfathered in.

Offline

 

#43 Jan-31-2010 05:00:pm

bls926
Administrator
From: Texas
Registered: Oct-21-2006
Posts: 12082

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

Gummy Bear wrote:

bls926 wrote:

As for state recognized tribes . . . States recognize these groups for a variety of reasons, the least of which is their historical connection to their people or their legitimacy. Most times it's all about money. Money the states hope to get from federal funding. Money generated from tourism.

This does not apply to those historical Nations who lost their federal recognition during the termination era. States have in the past and continue to give recognition to these people because it's the right thing to do.

The tribes that have formed in the past 10 to 30 years, the overnighters, are the problem. These are the ones who are distorting the history, bastardising the culture, making a mockery of the traditions. One of these Cherokee [sic] tribes has set up clans based on geographical location. That makes a joke out of a significant aspect of Cherokee culture. Your clan is passed down thru your mother; everyone in a clan is related by blood. There were reasons for the clan system and it wasn't to distinguish which state you lived in.

I know of 2 Tribes that do this and I'd be willing to bet that I have family in one of them. I know they don't care what someone else thinks about the way they organize their Clans. it works for them... Not a lot of inter marriage going on in that Tribe today.  Sure 200 years ago the Tribe use it as a way to maintain marriage lines but come on the clan system is gone today in every way. It's back to that little thing called "sovereignty".

They don't care what someone else thinks . . . It works for them . . . The clan system is gone today in every way

Historic Cherokee culture and tradition. It's the way it was, the way it always will be. And no, the clan system is not gone today in every way. It's not as strong as it once was, but it's still there.

Your attitude, the attitude shared by these made-up tribes, is the problem. Changing things to make it easy. Bastardising the culture. Making a mockery of traditions.

Sovereignty? Don't call yourself Cherokee if you aren't following any of the traditional Cherokee beliefs. This shows lack of respect. This has nothing to do with sovereignty.

Offline

 

#44 Jan-31-2010 05:04:pm

Gummy Bear
Member
Registered: Jan-28-2010
Posts: 61

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

And if Old Hop himself was here today, don't you think he would change with the times?

Things change.

Offline

 

#45 Jan-31-2010 05:07:pm

Gummy Bear
Member
Registered: Jan-28-2010
Posts: 61

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

<Don't call yourself Cherokee if you aren't following any of the traditional Cherokee beliefs.>

Tell that to my cuz in Ft. Gibson he could care less for Cherokee tradition yet he has a CNO card in his pocket.

He thinks his religion prevents it.



BTW he's still Cherokee too.

Offline

 

#46 Jan-31-2010 05:18:pm

tree hugger
Site Admin
Registered: May-12-2006
Posts: 11031

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

I'm finding some of these posts EXTREMELY enlightening..

Carry on, sorry for the interruption.

Offline

 

#47 Jan-31-2010 05:19:pm

Gummy Bear
Member
Registered: Jan-28-2010
Posts: 61

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

As for Bastardizing the culture. 
I would dare say that gathering every night in the long house or going to water every morning were very important aspects of traditional Cherokee life. When was the last time that happened in Tahlequah?

Offline

 

#48 Jan-31-2010 05:20:pm

Gummy Bear
Member
Registered: Jan-28-2010
Posts: 61

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

tree hugger wrote:

I'm finding some of these posts EXTREMELY enlightening..

Carry on, sorry for the interruption.

Well, OK as long as no one gets mad,,,

Offline

 

#49 Jan-31-2010 05:25:pm

Chevy
Member
Registered: Aug-01-2007
Posts: 1577

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

the fullblood cherokee are never going to go in with the thinbloods; they killed each other in the Cherokee Nation, in Indian Territory, bls.
It all goes back to who wanted to go to Indian Territory, and who didn't, and when, and who had slaves, was for the Confederacy, and who didn't and was for the Union.

It was a Cherokee feud.
Old feuds don't die.

bls said:
I don't think anyone is trying to tell people what they can call themselves. If someone wants to self-identify as Cherokee, that's fine. However, when this self-identified Cherokee thinks he can form a tribe, speak for other Cherokee, twist the culture and traditions to suit his fancy, there's a problem.

Gummy Bear said:

Yes they are,,, I have had discussions on the web where people said that the self identified NDNs should be put in JAIL for Identity theft. Over zealots run amuck.

I've heard ppl, enrolled who care not a bit for self-identifying "american Indians" lol, they hate them! and as gummy says, call them idenity stealers. tonguebig_smile Which to be nit-picking, according to Tribes and Nations saying who is and who isn't, they're correct.

I see their point, I just see mine too, about Irish and Welsh. smile

BTW, I emailed Irish and Welsh Gov, like they don't have enough to do, to see what they say about me calling myself "Irish and Welsh" lol.

sschkaak wrote:

and/or the possibility of extra-marital "events." (They DO happen.)

Boy, that's the God's truth!   "Surnames lie; dna never does!"

It's a good guess who your ancestor was, or if not yours, mine! big_smile

& so many generations back, who would know? Not everybody!

Offline

 

#50 Jan-31-2010 05:31:pm

NanticokePiney
Member
From: Hopewell Twp., New Jersey
Registered: Jul-10-2007
Posts: 4214

Re: David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

Gummy Bear wrote:

tree hugger wrote:

I'm finding some of these posts EXTREMELY enlightening..

Carry on, sorry for the interruption.

Well, OK as long as no one gets mad,,,

lol  Why would that be? You're being civil, and your conversation is intelligent.


I don't have anger issues...just violent reactions to B.S.
---------------------------------------------------
      Warning:  Some Profanity
This might cause you to experience reason

Offline

 
  • Index
  •  » General
  •  » David Cornsilk: Definition of Wannabee

Board footer

Powered by PunBB
© Copyright 2002–2005 Rickard Andersson