Really small recognized tribes are called "Pueblos" - a third form of
"nation". Pueblos have the same status as recognized tribes; the ones
I have had connection with are all in SW USA (New Mexico, Ariz.).
Can we agree to use the word "recognized as autonomous"? - sovereign
is a little too far towards absolute. There are so many constraints
on the inherent functions of states that indicate they are sovereign
that they can't really be defined as separate from the US - rights
they have to conduct their business is very limited. I.e., no foreign
relations, they can't issue stamps or coins or banknotes, the US
manages their defense, states they are in have the right to license
and tax their casinos, etc. But, they do have their own governments -
about as "independent" from the U.S. government as the D. C.
government is.
Len Nadybal
--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "acroorca2002" <orc@o...> wrote:
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Stavro Blofeld <
> blofeld_es@y...> wrote:
> > Peers,
> >
> > This may be slightly off topic
>
> off what topic
>
> , and if you find it to
> > be just please ignore.
>
> of course it is just
> & ok
> if i do
> but why
>
> > I am curious of the status of certain native-american
> > communities. Could someone in our group clarify and/or
> > comment on the matter?
>
> yes
>
> > For example, what is the legal status of some
> > communities?
>
> i believe about 560 tribes have been legally recognized as sovereign
> with new ones still being added
> but all the rest arent
>
> > Is it correct to use the term "nation"?
>
> usually the terms tribe & nation are practically interchangeable
> depending perhaps on the size of the tribe &or on who is speaking
>
> > Are there examples of stand-alone legislation in some
> > cases?
>
> if you mean
> are any indian nations legally recognized as such in american law
> as distinct from indian tribes
> then i am not aware of any
>
> > How much self-government is implemented?
>
> they implement as much as they can get & handle
>
> sort of like kurds
>
> > Do all
> > native-american societies enjoy the same rights and
> > responsibilities, or is this a matter of negotiation
> > between the federal (or state?) government and the
> > society in question?
>
> partly answered above
> but of course it is a huge patchwork
> complicated especially by the gambling laws of perhaps as many as 40
> different states
> while tribal governments too are notoriously chaotic & idiosyncratic
>
> > And how is membership in and/or
> > affiliation with a certain nation/community/society
> > determined?
>
> by percentage of alcohol in blood
> er
> i mean
> by percentage of indian blood
> which varies
> but is typically as low as 25 percent
>
> > Is this a question of the bloodline,
> > territorial heritage or something else?
>
> genealogical usually
> & sometimes a minimum residence requirement on the rezzie
> but of course it is a mess
>
> >
> > Thank you,
> > M
>
> you are most welcome
>
> & tho you dont ask directly
> of course the question of what real sovereignty really means keeps
> coming up in this connection too
> just as it does in kurdistan
> & all iraq
> & indeed it seems everywhere lately
>
> but i believe sovereignty is really just divinity
> which every individual human being has equally
> while in the illusion of physical reality
> sovereignty of course just boils down to
> a localized monopoly on violence
>
>
> strange conundrum indeed