A A More Agressive American Indian Movement?

My understanding is that a few millitant native Americans have gone to prison in the late 20th century for 'activities'. What if it was a bigger and more agressive movement along the lines of the black panthers? The American Indian population could have once numbered around 10 million, it's only a fraction of that today! Also the Lokota people have been particularily vocal in shouting for their rights in recent times and in rejecting treaties with the pale skins!
 
Since this is the post 1900 forum my guess is not much, their numbers would be too low to really force a change and the rest would be tarred with the same brush as “possible militants.” All this would do is make life harder for natives and justify the federal government’s treatment of them to many people.
 
well, if they do a lot of the organizing that the Black Panthers did maybe Reservations are some what better, if they do the whole "scary brown people with big guns" thing white fears of non-white unity is greater, you'll see that as a under-theme in right wing media up till today, not enough Indians to make a big impact really it'll be seen as part of the wider Black Panther movement
 
Why do we still have these reservations? Isn't it about time to end this segregation of part of our population?
 
Well for a more aggressive Native movement I think far less of them would need to have died. It might be interesting as something before 1900.
 
Why do we still have these reservations? Isn't it about time to end this segregation of part of our population?

Reservations are not segregation. American Indians can travel and live anywhere they want to in the nation. The Reservations are simply the land of tribes as designated by Federal treaty. They are "dependant nations". Reservation lands are not under state law and enjoy their own sovereignty.
 
Reservations are not segregation. American Indians can travel and live anywhere they want to in the nation. The Reservations are simply the land of tribes as designated by Federal treaty. They are "dependant nations". Reservation lands are not under state law and enjoy their own sovereignty.

They also suffer from a severe lack of law enforcement because of it.
 
My understanding is that a few millitant native Americans have gone to prison in the late 20th century for 'activities'. What if it was a bigger and more agressive movement along the lines of the black panthers?

More indian on indian violence. In the 1970s, Lakota reservations were among the most violent rural areas in the United States. A certain percentage of the violence was between AIM members and native Americans who were opposed to the movement for whatever reason.

A stronger AIM would also have led to more criminal violence on the reservations as well. Like their white, black and hispanic counter parts of what ever political orientation, the AIM mixed more than a few criminal acts into their political "activities" and the lines between the two could get pretty blurry.

Since this is the post 1900 forum my guess is not much, their numbers would be too low to really force a change .
But did the AIM share the same psuedo leftist ideaology as the Panthers? What if Castro actively trained and supported them?
 
Last edited:
Why do we still have these reservations? Isn't it about time to end this segregation of part of our population?
They tried that in the 1880s, with the Dawes Act. Essentially, the reservations were to be split up, and every Indian family would get a plot of land. "Surplus lands" went to white settlers or the railroad companies. Even though they couldn't sell their plots of land, a lot of Native Americans still ended up losing them to white people through leasing, selling of inheritance, and so forth.

So the net result was that the amount of land owned by natives lost two thirds of their land. Thus, they remained skeptical of later efforts to abolish the reservations.
 
Why do we still have these reservations? Isn't it about time to end this segregation of part of our population?

Eisenhower agreed, but his "termination" policy was reversed in part due to the efforts of various people in the Native American/American Indian community IIRC. Personally, I'd rather see a solution like the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act applied in the 48 continuous states myself.
 
Top