Marxism and Native Americans - Ward Churchill

ed.Ward Churchill

Marxism and Native Americans

edited by Ward Churchill

SOUTH

END

PRESS

BOSTON

Other books by Ward Churchill: Culture Versus Economism: Essays on Marxism in the Multicultural Arena

(with Elisabeth R. Lloyd)

Agents of Repression: The FBI's Secret Wars Against the Black Pan ther Party and American Indian Movement (with Jim VanderWall) Critical Issues in Native North America

(edited)

Copyright © 1983 by Ward Churchill First Printing, 1983 Second Printing, 1989 Third Printing, 1992 Copyrights are still required for book production in the United States. How ever, any properly footnoted quotation of up to 500 sequential words may be used without permission, so long as the total number of words quoted does not exceed 2,000. For longer quotations please write for permission to South End Press. Library of Congress Number:

83-060182

ISBN 0-89608-177-X Paperback ISBN 0-89608-178-8 Hardcover Cover Design and Production by Carl ConeUa

South End Press, 116 Saint Botolph Street, Boston, MA 02115

Acknowledgements The ed i t o r would like to t h a n k the fo l l o w i ng ind ividuals for t heir a s s ist a n ce, both d irect a n d i n d i rect, i n the c o m p leti o n of t h is p r oject: C harlie Cambridge, Dan Deb o, R eyes Garcia, Deme t ries S tevies, Tom H ol m, R o x a n n e D u n b a r Ortiz, Nick M ein h a rdt, Bertell OIl man, Bill Means, Susi S c h neider, Jesse Hiroaka a n d G o nzalo Sant os, fo r o ffering c o n s t ructive criticism o f t he i d ea a n d / o r various aspects o f t h e m a n uscript. G race and Wallace Black E l k, C harles Fast H orse, John Trudell, Chris Westerman, Rick Williams, Charlie H il l, Cate G i lles and o thers t o o numerous to mention p r o v i d e d h o u rs u p o n h ours of co nversa t i o n afford i ng i n s ig h t t o a p or t i o n of t he s u bj ect matter. A nd a very s pecial thanks is d u e t o Faye B rown who p rovided all of the a b ove freely and unstintingly. I'd also like t o thank Bernard i n e D o h r n and Jeff Jo nes, whose p o stulations provided my first crash-course into t h e world of M arxist Leninist theory; Walter a n d R oseanne Kim mel, teachers w ho put a new perspective on my u nd erstan d i ng o f t h e M a r x ist paradigm; Kwame Ture, Bob Brown and Macheo Shabaka, brothe rs who are to an i m p o rt a n t extent broadening that p e rspective; Sarah S need, w h o has seen fit to challenge virtually ever resultant p o s i t i o n I hold ; Norbert S . Hill J r . , w h o has a l lowed me a cert a i n a m o u n t o f j o b flex i bility i n pursuing a p r oject which fai led to particu larly i n terest h i m ; Michael A l bert and S heila Walsh, whose letters, calls and advice fro m S o u t h End P ress p rovided a vital editorial assistance; a n d A lice E ngle bretsen, Janet S hotwell and Carol M oo r, whose skills at p r o o fing a n d typ i ng saved me a d e moralizing p o r t i o n o f the o ne-finger method through which I ordinarily c o m plete final copy. A lso: Da kota A I M, Women of All Red Nati ons, Yellow Thunder Tiospaye, Black Hills Alliance, Akwesasne, and-of course-the c ontributors from the P reface to t h e Postscript, as well as all the o t hers I've m issed ment i o n i ng-t h a n ks for everyth i ng.

DEDICATION

For Mike Jacobs, one of the best and brightest of my students, murdered by police in Seattle, September 1988. And for Steve Platero, another, murdered by "person or persons unknown" on the Navajo reservation during the same year.

CONTENTS Preface: Natural to Synthetic and Back

1

Winona LaDuke Introduction: Journeying Toward A Debate Ward Churchill

PART ONE The Same Old Song Russell Means

19

Searching for a Second Harvest The RCP

35

The Same Old Song In Sad Refrain Ward Churchill with Dora-Lee Larson

59

PART TWO Marx's General Cultural Theoretics

79

Elisabeth Lloyd Culture and Personhood R obert B. Sipe

91

Circling the Same Old Rock Vine Deloria Jr.

113

Observations on Marxism and Lakota Tradition Frank Black Elk

137

Marx Versus Marxism Bill Tabb

159

PART THREE Reds Versus Redskins Phil Heiple

177

Marxism and the Native American Ward Churchill

183

Notes and Bibliographies

205

PREFACE Natural To Synthetic And Back Again Winona LaDuke

This A merica has been a burden of steel and mud and deat h, But look now, there are flowers and new grass and a spring wind Rising fro m Sand Creek. Simon J. Ortiz From Sand Creek

I would argue t hat A m ericans of "foreign" descent must become Americans. That is not t o become a patriot of the United States, a patriot to the flag, but a patriot to the land of this continent, t hese continents. You were born here, you will not likely go away, or live anywhere else, and there are simply no more frontiers to follow. We must all relearn a way of thinking, a state of mind that is fro m t h is common ground. North America is not Europe, and t his is the I 980s-those are two "facts" that we must remember when we begin t o relearn and rebu ild. And, if we are in t h is toget her, we must rebuild, redevelop, and reclaim an understanding/ analysis which is u niq uely ours. Within the essays which follow, I believe t hat some of the questions are beginning to be as ked which we need answer if we are to move towards a new understanding. There are many histories of N ort h A merica. The ex periences of successive waves of i m migrants are distinct, as are-to a large degree-the h istories of the different classes comprising the immigrant waves. The histories of the various peoples native to the continent are also q u ite distinct within themselves. The story of each of these groups holds a rightfu l claim to its own integrity, to its own place and fullness of meaning within the whole. To deny this is to distort.

11


Yet there is another history, one which is most frequently overlooked or ignored in attempts at u nderstanding "America": the history of the land itself, the land and its relationship to all the peoples who live, have lived, or will live here. It is within t his aspect of reality, a reality common to us all, that the key to understanding lies. Without addressing the history marked indelibly i� the land, a history neither t o be refuted nor "interpreted" thru ideological sophistry, n o theory call be anchored. S ince an unanchored theory must inevitably re�l!lt in misunderstanding, it is' to the history of the land that Wt' mllst turn. Before the European penetration of North America. thou sands of generations of peoples indigenous t o t his hemisphere l ived out their lives, p racticed their cultures and exten ded their societies through time. The societies t hese people developed were highly rich and diversified but, in general, t hey were u niversally marked by being "natural" in the sense t hat they functioned in accord w ith, literally as a part of, nature and the natural environs. But with the arrival of the Europeans a break was made such that every seeming step forward into greater "devel op ment" could be measured simultaneously by the degree of divorce of s ociety fro m the natural environs. I t is no accident that felling natives as a means to expropriate land represented little more within the operative mentality than felling trees to clear a field. The American Indian was rightly, if unwittingly, considered as part and parcel of the natural order, a thing to be profitably surmounted. While proclaiming the land a wilderness t o be brought under human control, the settlers relied upon the primieval richness of its soil to provide the basis of their agriculture; the pristine quality of its lakes and rivers to provide fish and fur; and its teeming wildlife to provide protein. In like fashion, while pronounci ng the Indian as "savage," they lifted the form of the Iroquois Confederacy to organize their government and the crops of the Pequot and Pennobscott, Passamaquoddy and Wampanoag as the basis of their agriculture . Never once in their arrogance did they stumble upon the single fact t hat in sub suming t he wilderness and the Indian within their synthesis t hey were irrevocably cutting themselves off from the very substance of the new life they were forging in North America.

Preface

11l

The long history of colonization by Europeans changed the face of the land-for a new economic order was forged land, not

on the with the land. Across the country, forests retreated

steadily before the ax, the wildlife disappeared and, with them, the indigenous peoples. Land was sacrificed to the need for iron, and then steel. In West Virginia it was coal. In Pennsylvania, oil. As the land bled its wealth into the pockets of the newly rich in the East, the eyes of empire turned west toward gold, silver, and oil; bauxite and manganese; copper and zeolites, natural gas and uranium. And thus the developing technological society be came ever more divorced from nature, ever more "synthetic." Eden is "tamed," man is master of the universe; that is the essence of the American synthesis, the foundation of American power. Two Canadian authors, Robert Davis and Mark Zannis, in their book

The Genocide Machine in Canada. have succinctly

described the result: Simply stated, the difference between the economics of the "old colonialism" with its reliance on territorial conquest and manpower and the "new colonialism," with its reliance on technologically oriented resource extraction and transportation to the metropolitan centers, is the expendable relationship of the subject peoples to multinational corporations. This "new colonialism" was, to a certain extent, predicted by Karl Marx in his observation that industrialization would necessitate the expropriation of the general masses of people from the soil, their means of subsistence. And, in his view, this fearful and painful expropriation of the peasant formed the prelude to the history of capitalism. We would argue that while Marx was correct, not only the expropriation and its immediate social aftermath are important. Rather, the sort of permanent society which not only emerges, but which is possible under such circumstances must be brought into serious consideration. Is it enough to mitigate the physical suffering of the people thus dislocated, or must one also look to the psychic or spiritual damage suffered, and /0 the land as well? Is it possible to heal the wounds of the people, of whatever sort, caused by the process of separating them from the land, while

keeping them separated by virtue of a process which literally ever

consumes the land itself? In other words, can the synthetic

IV

Marxi sm and Native Ameri cans

adequately replace the organic, the natural? These are questions which must be as ked as t h e resu lt of any reasonable examination of Nort h A m erican history. It is widely recognized t hat something is drastically wrong. The topsoil of America has was hed away, agriculture can only be accomplished t hrough massive applications of chemical "en richments. " This "bett er living t hrough chemistry" seeps into our aquifirs, lacing our groundwater with lethal toxins and, as acid rain produced by t h e fly-ash of our steel mills and coal-fired power plants renders our surface water equally lethal, so bottled water becomes the fastest growing "foodstuff' item in the nation. The United States t hrashes about seeking technological "fixes" to technological catastrophes, and entire regions of the west are written off as UN at ional Sacrifice Areas. " In search of a long-term solution to an array of crises, reliance is placed upon "the friendly ato m," and we find increasing expanses of our environment contaminated beyo nd habitation for t he next quarter million years. The synt hetic system threatens to implode in radioactive chaos. It is no longer able to fend for itself, but the momentum of its existence refuses to allow it to stop. It is the land, always t he land, which suffers first and most. As the cities, those ulti mate manifestations of synt hetic cult ure decay, so increasingly is the produce of the eart h ripped loose to shore up their continuation. Steel, the stuff of the girders co mprising bridges and s kyscrapers, becomes exhausted with age and must be replaced. The earth yields iron ore to processes which require mushrooming quantit ies of energy, and so coal is stripped away from the yawning craters at Black M esa, WyoOak and elsewhere to fuel the generators of electrical currents which now litter the map. The land will yield u ntil the land can yield no more. But the need for its offerings will remain. And then? As the land suffers, so suffer t h e people. Whet her they are the citizens of the natural or the synthetic order, in the end there is no escaping t his basic lin k. It is an aspect-indeed, the imperative-of the synthetic order to forget or ignore such facts. N or could it be ot herwise. To face t he facts would have led inevitably to a retreat from synthetic procedures and ideologies, to a withdrawal from a way of life busily consuming the basis of life itself. The facts were not faced and, as Malcolm X o nce put it, "The chickens are coming home to roost."

Preface

v

The spiraling costs of continu ously refitting cities h as e x ceeded t he social ability to p ay. This is p a rticularly true in relation to the current moment, w h e n t he b u l� o f s o cial wealth a n d res ources are be ing d iverted t o t o o ls o f c o n q uest, a n o vert return to n o t ions t hat a n expans i o n of land base can i n itself c reate t he s u bstance o f a "vital" and "grow ing" synthetic reality. M eanwhile, the citizens o f the inner cities discover themselves s u bsisting on a govern ment dole of d ogfo o d a n d rice, mu c h t he s a m e as the citizens of traditionally c o l o n ized p e o p les, both w i t h i n and without the U nited S t ates. A s t h e l a n d has become u t terly expendable, so too have the people-all the people -in the name of "p rogress" and "the syste m." O n ce a ga i n , perversely, the land and the people are fused ; the logic of s y n t hesis. H ow d o we turn such a nightmare t o p o s it i v e ends? H ow to t u rn fro m the syn t hetic reality of c o n s u m p t i o n a n d expenda bility to t he n atural reality of conserv a t i o n and h a r m on y? H ow not t o perpetuate t he cycle of self-destruct i o n w i t h i n which we are currently engaged ? These are q u es t i o n s w hich n o t o n ly need to be, but must be answered-and s o o n-if w e are not t o have p assed the p o int of no return as a s p e cies, p o s s i bly as a planet. We can agree with M ar x ists that t h e p o i n t i s not only t o u n derstand the pro ble m, b u t als o t o solve i t . T h e r e a r e u n d oubtedly many rou tes to t h e answers. Througho u t the U n ited S tates p e o p le a re m o v i ng into res ist a n ce t o many o f the m o re covert forms of synthetic o p p ression. The d r a ft has met with mass i v e rejection even before it could be fully i m p lemented. A rel atively broad a n t i-nuclear war movement h as taken ro ot a cross geograp h i c, class, sex, and ethnic lines. M u c h the same can be said of a movement t o oppose u t i l izati o n of n u clear p ower i n any fo rm at a l l . A n u m be r o f environ mentalist gro u p s are e ngaged i n ext e n d i ng many of the a n t i-nuclear rationales to e ncom pass much of the i n d ustrial p rocess itself. Elsewhere, o t hers have targeted' issues of the most d isenfranchised s o cial s trata-mostly within u r ban centers-as t he i r focus. The common denominator o f all t hese i s d i rect action, action aimed against the status-quo. I f there is a u nifying t h eme, it would seem to be a fi rm rej ec t i o n of the status q u o , o f " business as usual . " T h e synthetic o rder is t h u s being questioned and, i n some areas, truly challenged . This is certai n ly t o the good. But something m o re is needed . No m ovement or group of related

VI


movements can succeed in offsetting present circumstances merely through a shared rejection. Not only must they struggle against something, but they must also struggle to ward something. Action alone can never provide the required answers. Only a unifying theory, a unifying

vision of the alternatives can fulfill

this task. Only such a vision can bind together the fragmentary streams of action and resistance currently at large in America into a single multi-faceted whole capable of transforming the synthetic reality of a death culture into the natural reality of a culture of life. This need should come as no revelation. It seems well known within most sectors of the active resistance. The quest for a unifying vision has been going on for some time. By and large, it seems to have gravitated steadily towards one or another of the Marxist or neo-Marxist ideologies with the result that there is currently in print the widest array of Marxian literature in the United States since, perhaps, the 1 930s. This is a logical enough development. Marxism, it must be said, offers a coherent and unifying system of critical analysis within which to "peg" a wide variety of lines of action. Further, it offers at least an implicit range of plausible options and alternatives to the status-quo. The details of a Marxist society may be forged in the struggle to overthrow the existing order. The Marxian scenario is rather neat. It seems all but ready made for applicaton to our current dilemma. Of course, it will require certain alterations, modifications intended to keep it ahead of the development of its opposition, and of those among its adherents as well, but such adjustment is not impossi ble. Habermas, Althusser, Marcuse, Gramsci, and others have de monstrated that. In effect, this is part of Marxism's neatness. This book questions that very neatness. Without denying that Marxism is (or can be) a unifying system, it steps outside the Marxist paradigm to ask new questions. What is Marxism's understanding of the land? What is or will be the relationship of a Marxist society to the land? Is Marxist thought other than a part of the synthetic order which is at issue? If Marxism is now inadequate to dealing with such issues, can it be altered in such a way as to make it adequate? If it is to be altered in such ways, will the result remain Marxist, or will it become something else? Is Marxism as it is now structured,

or could be structured, a part of

Preface

Vll

the solution or a part of the pro blem? And finally, is it, or what is appropriate to North America? These are not questions springing fro m the Marxist t ra dition. Nor do they come from any European or neo-European context. They are not the sort of questions p osed by "First W orId" (capitalist) polemicists, by those of the "Second (socialist) World" or "Third (industrializing) World." I nstead, they come from the realm of the remaining land based peoples of the North American continent, the remaining representatives of the natural order which preceded the advent of synthetic reality. In some quarters, this has come to be called the "Fourth World;" we prefer to term it t he "Host World." In answering such questions, Marxism goes far in defining its true allegiance and place i n the world. It begins to explain "what must be d one" in overcoming the synthetic by returning it to the natural. We say the questions posed by this book come from the perspective of the North American Host World, the truly landbased peoples. As Kwame Tun� has stated, "When you speak of liberation, true liberation, you are speaking ofland. And when you speak of land in this hemisp here, you are speakin g of American I ndians." The questions, then, come specifi cally from the perspective of t he Native American. The Host World, however, is not so confined. The questions asked in the text which follows could well have been posed by the tribal peoples of S outh or Central America, of Africa, the Kurds and others of the Middle East, the tribes of the Scandinavian arctic, the mountain peoples of Southeast Asia, the Inuit of Greenland, the Pacific Islanders, and many others across the planet. I n responding to the American Indian critique, Marxis m respo nds i n some way to the questions of all these peoples. We have a common ground and it is not only that which l ies beneath our feet. Rather, it lies within a shared u nderstanding of the correctness of S imon Ortiz' assessment of what America has become, and what it must become if we are to survive. The massacre of the Cheyenne people at Sand Creek in 1864 was not theirs alone; it was representative of the massacre of us all. Such a legacy must be turned into its opposite. We must "negate the negation" which is stained by blood t hat forever seeps into the land of Colorado and every where else the synthetic order has reigned. This is the vision, the d ream which will allow us to free ourselves of t he death culture.

llX


As Simon put it elsewhere in his epic poem: That dream shall have a name, After all, And it will not be vengeful But wealthy in life And compassion And knowledge And it will rise In this heart Which is our America On this continent we have come from the natural to the synthetic. We must find our way back again. We must turn the common ground of our agony into the common ground of our vision.

This

book is an important step in such a process, not because it provides the necessary answers, but because it asks many of the right questions. Only through the asking of such questions can the answers emerge. They must be answers which include the land as well as the people, which perceive and proj ect land and people as being one and the same, which understand that until alter natives are found which prevent the destruction of the land, the destruction of the people cannot be stayed: the movement back from the synthetic to the natural. Within such a movement Marxism, or aspects of Marxism, may well have a role and function. What and how remains to be seen. What better direction to turn for clarification than to those who have no particular question as to their relationship to the land, those who have all along retained their affinity to the natural order rather than "progressing" into the synthetic one? Let Marxism explain its utility to its hosts. Let it differentiate itself clearly from synthetic reality. And let the hosts for the first time take an active role in assisting in this process, denying what is false, supporting that which is true. Such an interchange cannot help but assist in establishing a strategy, a vision through which to reclaim the natural order. We must all participate in the process of completing the cycle: natural to synthetic and back again.

INTRODUCTION Journeying T ow ard A Debate Ward Churchill

This book was born of a sense of frustration. It began in earnest nearly ten years ago at a place called Sangamon State University, with a guest lecture by Karl Hess, former Goldwater speechwriter, sometime SDS theoretician and at the time a sort of avant garde urban anarchist. For me it was an evening marked by an almost crystalline clarification. Hess' talk covered what was (for him) tried and proven ground: growing trout under high density conditions in tenement cellars, roof-top gardening techniques, solar power in the slums, neighborhood self-police forces and block governing commit tees, collective small-shop production of "appropriate" tech nology, the needlessness of federal inc9me tax. The upshot of his vision was that the federal government is a worse than useless social oppression which should be dissolved so the United States can be taken over by a self-sufficient citizenry at each local level. After the customary polite applause, the session was thrown open to questions from the audience. The question I had to ask was: "How, in the plan you describe, do you propose to continue guarantees to the various Native American tribes that their land base and other treaty rights will be continued?"

2

M a rxis m and Native A mericans Hess seemed truly flabbergasted. Rather than address the

question. he pivoted neatly into the time-honored polemicist's tactic of discrediting the "opposition" by imputing to it sub versive or (in this case) reactionary intentions: "Well, I have to admit that that's the weirdest defense of the federal government I've ever heard." The debate was joined. I countered that I had no interest in protecting the federal government. but since Hess was proposing to do away with it, I was curious to know the nature of the mechanism he advocated to keep the Indian's rather more numerous white neighbors from stealing the last dregs of Indian land-and anything else they could get their hands on. After all, such a scenario of wanton expropriation hardly lacks historical basis. Perpiexed by my insistence and a growing tension in the room. Hess replied that the federal government seemed some thing of a poor risk for Native Americans to place their faith in. Perhaps. he suggested, it was time Indians tried "putting their faith in their/ellul1' man rather than in bureaucracies." Now it was my turn to be stunned. A bit feebly, I rejoined that I wasn't aware that anyone was making an argument in favor of the federal bureaucracy, but I was still waiting to hear what his replacement for federal guarantees would be in the new anarchist society, or in a Marxist state if he wished to address that. But I couldn't grasp his notion that elimination of the feds would do anything positive for Native people if it threw them upon the goodwill of their non-Indian neighbors. What, I asked, was it that whites had ever done to warrant the sort of faith in their collective intentions that Hess was recommending? Clearly disgusted with my "racism," Hess answered abrup tly, "I hope at least you're a Native American, given your line of questioning." I gave up before asking why one needed to be Indian in order to consider issues relevant to them; somehow, I already knew the answer. This was in 1973. *

*

*

*

*

A s I said, the experience had a certain crystallizing effect for me. I had been active for years in that vague and amorphous configuration generally termed the "New Left." It was a time

3

Introduction

when, it was commonly understood, a generation was in the process of hacking and hewing an "American Radical Vision"

out of the living fabric of U.S. society, an alternative to im ported dogmas which had led to intellectual bankruptcy and disaster for the left in the not so distant past.

Yet I had witnessed the

dissipation of SDS at Chicago's Amphitheater in 1969 amidst choreographed wavings of Mao Tse Tung's Uttle Red

Book

by

ranks of factionalized automatons chanting prearranged Chinese slogans in unison. I had been confused by this, to say the least.

I had investigated the Young S ocialist Alliance, the youth wing of the Socialist Worker's Party and erstwhile sponsor of the S tudent Mobilization to End the War in Vietnam, as a pro spective member. The "American Radical Vision" I encountered was a watered-down version of Leon Trotsky's doctrines. In the S an Francisco area, I found the Free S peech Movement had been transformed into the "Bay Area Radical Union," an amal gamation of various left groups sporting portraits of Joseph Stalin on the covers of their publications. Returning to Chicago, I explored the legendary Industrial Workers of the World (Wobblies), and found the publication of songbooks to be its main contemporary stock in trade; that, and the rehashing of factional disputes more than half a century old. (The original protagonists had had the good graces to die off in the interim, but their descendants didn't seem overly conscious of that fact. ) On the Boston/ New York circuit, the Progressive Labor Faction of what had been SDS held the Maoist monopoly, calling on non-whites to join its version of "Third World Revolution."

Elsewhere, tiny splinter groups advanced the

various theses of Euro-communism, Albanian Revolutionary Principles, Kim el S ung's Maoist variations, and so on, and on; and Karl Hess' and Murray Bookchin's contemporary anarchism were also available commodities. Of course there were also grass roots activism, the growing women's movement, New Leftish projects, support groups, community organizations and the like. But the sects were the most visible remnants of the organized New Left in the early 1970s. It certainly occurred to me that the white left might not really be "the wave of the future" in terms of an American version of radical social change. But a survey of non-white groups

4

Marx is m and Nati v e A mericans

revealed essentially t h e s a m e pattern : a n overwhelming reliance on Lenin, Mao , Castro/Guevara; ultimately reliance on adap

tations of t heories advanced by Karl Marx wel l over a century earlier. in Europe. The Black Panther Party, the Young Lords O rga nizat ion, and the B r o w n Berets; each group possessed an i m p o rted ideology, which, as far as I could see, t hey were attempting to rhet o rically adapt t o the American context i n the sa me way as the i r white cou nterparts. Nowhere could I see anyt h i ng which remotely resembled t he ca l led-fo r " A merica n Radical Vision" which had so often and so loud ly been prom oted i n bot h t he New Left and mainstream press. But. while I could raise considered o bj ections to t hese particular d evel o p ments, I co uld not define what was lacking to establish a theoretical vision t hat eouid match t he realities of the American co ntext. The whole situat i o n was most d iscouraging. Of cou rse, t he re were fl icke rings in my own experiences t hat were indicat ive. but I was unable to put t hem toget her into anyt h i ng l i k e a coherent framework. Very b riefly, i n 1970, left attention had been capt ured by the "Indians of All Tri bes" Occupat ion of Alcatraz Isla n d ; there was a flurry of n on-Ind ian interest. but no m ore. Locally, in Ch icago, Indians occu pied an a bandoned Nike Missile base; it caused sca rce ly a ripple of left attent i o n . The Burea u of I n d i a n A ffairs Build ing i n Washington, DC. was occu pied by a group of Ind ians for nearly a week, but still left attention was minimal. Then t here was Wound ed Knee in 1973 ...

It was d u ring the A merica n Indian Movement occupatio n of Wounded Knee t hat Ka rl Hess made his ap pearance at S a n gam o n State University. The d ra m a unfolding i n Sout h Dak ota was rivet ing the attent i o n of most of the country, the left includ ed, as it had bec o m e a National Med ia Event. The American left was fi nally being made aware of Native A m ericans, a nd it was being made aware i n p recisely the same manner as t he rest of the populat i o n-t hrough t h e s p ectacles offered by C B S / N B C / A BC. I n s h o rt , it d awned o n me that t h e A merican left's awareness of the situation of Native A mericans was not parti cularly better informed than t h at demonst rated by t he rest of A me rica outside of "Indian Cou ntry." The occupation of Wounded K nee was undertaken p ri marily a s a stand co n cerni ng issues of treaty rights, sovereignty

Introduction

5

and self-determination for Native people. These were precisely the issues I was attempting to address through my questions to Karl Hess in a public (overwhelmingly white) forum; they were and are serious issues to any Native American. His replies, and indeed his entire attitude, suddenly clarified the whole range of confusions I had experienced relative to the American left for several years. In the first place. he did not seem to wish to deal with Native American issues at all; he obviously had not considered Indians in the construction of his utopian scenario and the mere introduction of such considerations was so threatening and disturbing as to prompt innuendos of "reaction" from him. Second.

he considered this particular form of reactionary

quest ion to be in some way weird. not a topic for intelligent discussion. Then there was the pitch to the "greater common good": there are clearly more invaders than Indians in this

country so Indian interests must be subordinate; in fact, given population ratios, a "democratic" assessment of Indian interests must conclude they are almost non-existent, irrelevant in terms

of revolutionary consideration.

And finally, there was his

assertion that to be preoccupied with Native American issues, one has to be Native, an apt summation of the posture of the American left; non-Indians simply have more important things to think about. Perhaps perversely, Hess' position (if it may be called that) solidified a notion which had been implicit in my ambiguous affiliations with the American left for a long while. This was simply that the touted American Radical Vision was a failed promise; "American" radicalism was fundamentally and com pletely an intellectual import. Conversely, there could be no American Vision, radical or otherwise, which did not begin with the original "American," the Native American. Unless and until this population is addressed on its own terms and in accordance with its own definition of its human needs, any conceivable revolutionary theory can only amount to a continuation of "the invasion of America." So much seemed and still seems academic to me. Unfortunately, the matter seems a bit less obvious to many of my opposition-minded colleagues. There are, of course, a

6


number of arguments to be made, but one of the more basic

relates to the issue of landbase . There can be no question that the entirety of the continental United States has been ex propriated from its original, indigenous inhabitants, with incal culably harmful consequences accruing to them in the process. From a moral perspective, it should be equally clear that no humane solution to the overall issues confronting any American radical can reasonably be said to exist, should it exclude mechanisms through which to safeguard the residual landbase and cultural identities of these people.

This presents a bit of a dilemma in that the land cur rently occupied by Indian tribal groups contains something on the order of two-thirds o f all readily extractable U.S. energy resour<.:t: deposits. as well as quite substantial inventories of other

critical raw materials. S uch resources are as necessary to a left oriented industrialized society as they are to one with a right wing philosophy. Unless the left acknowledges this, there is potentially no difference between the left and the right in their impact on Native Americans. On the face of it, matters will be essentially the same: the Indians will be divested of control over their last remaining resources by all factions of the Euro American political spectrum, unless the left can articulate a coherent formulation of priorities and values allowing for (at the very least) maintenance of the Indian/ white status quo in terms of land base. This is not an unimportant consideration, givcn the direct linkage of indigenous cultures to various geographical areas and conditions. The alternative to a satisfactory solution in this instance is genocide. And yet an examination of the dissident literature reveals an outright void regarding the Native American. There is a vast literature generated by non-leftists concerning the Indian, and sometimes selections from it are read by the left. but nowhere is there an analytical work, never mind a considering the Native

American,

ho((1'

of literature,

both historically and in

contemporary terms, as a fundamental ingredient which would make any left vision truly American. As Russell Means so aptly expressed it to me in late

1980, "Indians just don't fit in

anywhere. " Oddly, the same cannot be said for the colonized peoplcs of China, Cuba, Vietnam, Zimbabwe, Algeria, Palestine, South

I n t ro d ucti on

7

Africa, a nd elsewhere. C o n cerning th e m , t he A merican left has often devoted itself t o analysis and the o ry . N o r can it be said t h a t t h e thoughts and w ritings o f other T h i rd Wo rld revolut i o n a ry

lead ers Mao, Fanon, Che, Lumumba, Arafat, Ho, Kim II Sung, Me m m i , Castro, a m o n g others-have bee n igno red t o -

anyth i n g l i k e the e x t e n t to w h i c h the A m e r i ca n left has igno red t h e voices of its o w n i n d igen ous po pulati o n . *

*

*

*

*

In t his context I effectively dis e n gaged fro m active p a rti c i pati on on t h e left per se. I wasn't d is i nt e rested -the p r o b l e m w a s wha t I pe rce ived a s a n o ne t o o su btle s h i ft fr o m the 1960s New Left rej ecti o n of M arxist traditio n as sale p o l it ical fo u n d a t i on, t o a formal acce ptance

of M a rxism as the g u i d i n g

A m erica n alternative v i s i o n . At least p ri o r to 1 968 t he re s e e m e d t o h a v e been w i d e s p read accepta nce of the id ea that s o mething o t h e r t h a n , o r in a d d i t i o n t o , M a r x i s m was n ecessary to create a truly A merican alternative. By 1 97 5 it s e e m e d suc h a n idea had been d efeat e d . To my eyes

M a rx is m possessed-in one or

anot h e r com b i n at i o n of its varian ts-a l ite r a l hege m ony over the Ame r i c a n radical consciousness. To p a ra p h ra s e so ngwriter Pete Town s h e n d , "Meet the New Left, same as t h e Old Left." Fro m t h e new stat i o n s I t o o k up, first in S outh Da k ot a , t he n i n Wy o m i n g a n d fi nally i n C o l o rad o , I c o n s i d ered t h i s d eve l o p m e nt. Pe rhaps i t was for t h e bes t ,

I

t h ought. M a r x ism' at least

offe red a co herent analytica l fra m e w o r k i n t o w h i c h n e w d ata mi ght be fed, a vast i ntel lectual i m p r ove m e n t ove r t he e m o t ive rad i ca l is m of the 1 960s . Pe rhaps t h e m e a n s of sy nth esizi ng an American R a d i cal V i s i o n was bec o m i n g a v a i l a b l e through the u n l ike l i e s t of sources: an oft e n d o g m atic a nd utte rly a lien critical p h i losophical st ruct ure. Pe rhaps the t h e o ret ical and a n alytical i n sights offe red by M a r x i s m could p r o v ide the fo u n d ation fro m which t o launch a ne w pers pective for fut u re s o c i a l fo r m s .

I re read the w o r k s o f M arx, L e n i n , L u k acs, a n d o t h e rs in t h is light. I ventured into Ha be r m a s , M a rcuse, A d o r n o , and B e nja m i n . I s l ogged t h rough S a rt re , Gra m s ci, L u x e m burg and Ma o. I pai d spec ial att e n t i o n to Fa n o n a n d M e m m i. A n d I t ried

8


s o meth i n g n ovel a n d u n ique. I c o m bi ned the reading w i t h d i a l o g u e and d i s c us s i o n w i t h o t h e r Indian people fro m v a r i o u s tri bal and geogra p h i c backgrounds, various stat ions i n life, a nd v a r i o u s p o l i t ical perspectives (in t h e Euro sense of t he term). I t he n ca rried t he res u lt s of s uch dialogue back int o my read i n g a nd on i n t o d is c u s s i o n s w i t h n on-In d i a n frie nds I'd made on t h e l e ft over t h e years . Ulti mately, a p a t t e r n o f fu n d a m e n t a l o bj ect i o n s began t o e m e rge o n t h e part o f t he I nd ian p e o p l e I talked with. S i mila rly, a pattern of defe n s ive p o s i t i o n s e m e rged on the part of my Ma r x i s t frie n d s . Eve nt ually, t h e Ma r x i s t p o s i t i o n c o u l d be s u m med u p a s i d e n t i cal t o Hess': N a t ive A me r i c a n s a re irreleva n t t o t he c o u rs e o f World Histo ry, t hey cons t i t u t e a m i n o r sideshow o n t h e stage of \'lorld Revol u t i o n, they are a retrospective considerati o n . One astute "advanced" Marx i s t t he o rist even t o ok t i me to info r m me that it would really be p o intless t o beco me too i nvolved in such· i s s u es beca use "a l l h u n t ing and gathering societies will have ceased t o e x i s t befo re t h e year 2000." The "iron laws o f h i s t o rica l deve l o p m e nt" are at work. M y p rotest t h a t such an a t t it u d e was as ge n ocidal i n i t s i m plicat i o n s as a n y t h ing esp oused b y M anifest D e s t i n y i m peria l i s m or heat hen-crush i ng Christianity, m e t wit h a shrug. My assert i o n s t hat Native p e o p les were hard ly "h unt ing and gat her i ng societ ies" t hese d ay s met w i t h m i l d i n terest on occas i o n, b u t m o re o ften w i t h a m u sed co m mentary o n m y "roma nticism." A merica n Ind i ans, a s peo p le and as whole cultures, had been effectively written out o f serious M a rxist considerat i o n . S t i l l, I c o u l d n o t b r i n g myself t o d iscount a l l M a rxian r h et o ric c o n ce rning "the l i beration o f human ity." Marx ism, fo r better or w o rse, had c o me t o repres e n t the p r i m a ry "l iberat ory" a l t e rnat ive wit h i n t he United States. Na ively, I s u p posed t h a t

I

m u s t be talking t o t h e w r o n g p e o p le, t hat a m o n g t he broader spectrum of US M a r x i s m there must be sign ifica nt schools o f t h o u g h t w h i c h w o u ld be quick t o p ick u p o n t h e i n t r i n s i c ce n t ra l i t y of Native A merican issues if o n l y t h e facts and t h e c o n t e x t w e r e p resented in a for u m t aken seriously by t h e m . S uc h a p r ocess o f e x p o s i t i o n see m ed simple enough. Fro m early 1978 o nward ,

I

began t o write-and t o so licit

�

writ i n g by other N at i ve A meri c ns-on Ind ian issues as t hese

Intro d u c t i o n

9

might relat e to eXls tmg Marxist a n alyses of A merican c o n dition s . I c o n tacted several "serio u s " left p u blica t i o n s a b o u t t he ir willingness to recei v e s uch m a terial.

A ll expressed i nt eres t,

o bserv i n g t hat t he y had never before been offered t h e o p p or t u nity to pu blis h t h e " i n s i d e st ory on I n d i a n A ffairs ." Ma n u scripts were d ul y s ub m i t ted, b u t nothing e ver s a w pri n t . I n s tead, each pU blication's editorial board s a w fit to "correct" t he political perspectives pre s e n ted by I n d i a n act i v i s t s a n d ret u r n t he wri tings for "rev i s i o n ." W h a t w a s m e a n t i n e a c h c a s e ( a n d o n t h e part of titles as see m i ngly d i verse as Marxist Perspectives. The Insurgent Sociologist. and Socialist Re volution/ Review) w a s t hat Nat i ve Americ a n s u bm issio n s were desirable, b u t o nly i n sofar as t hey rei nforced preexi s t i n g Marxist n o t i o n s of w h at a n d h o w I n d i a n s s h ould t h i n k . Marx i s m w a s pres u m i n g t o exter n a lly a s s e s s t h e internal vali d i t y of t h e American I n d i a n pers pe c t i ve a n d w a s rejecting it a s u nacce p t a ble at every t urn. The form the m a n u scripts t o o k foll o w e d a p e c uliar line of develo p m e n t . I n i t i ally. t hey c o n sisted pri m arily of o bservat i o ns

and analysis of the internal colonial status of the U.S. geographic tribes, resource distribution within U.S. reservation areas, juridi cal a n a ly s i s based on treat ies, etc. A s t h e s e were ret urned w i t h c o m m e n t s li ke "... very useful d a t a, but

.

. " t h e c o n te n t s h ifted .

t o a m ore theoretical level, in ord er to art iculate lvhy gi ven p olitical c o n clus i o n s had been d ra w n fro m previ o u s l y s u b mitted data st u d ie s . As t he m ore t he oret i cal pieces were s u b m itted, t he ir return

became m u c h

m ore pro m pt,

t h e c o m m e n t ary m ore

d et ailed a n d negat i v e. T his, i n t u rn, pro m pt e d a serie s of s u bmis s i o n s flatly c h allen g i n g Marxis t c ult ural a ss u m p t i o ns w h ic h h a d s urfa ced in t h e rejec t i o n c o m m e n t ar i e s; t h e a b s o l u te a priori vali d i ty of Marxis m it self was bro u g h t i n t o q uestion. These last s u b m i s sio n s c a u s e d a br u p t a n d

perm a n e n t ru p t ure

in

c om m u n ication between the vari o u s journals a n d a u t h ors . What had been i n tended as t h e i n it i a t i o n o f a n i nformed d i alogue between t w o gro u p s v i t ally i n tere s t e d in s o c i a l c h a n ge e n d ed in

h ost ile s i l e n ce.

Organ ized

M arxis m

i n d icated

no

Willi ngness to entertain t h e v ie w p o i n t s of N a t i v e A merica u n le s s s u c h v i e w s turned o u t t o be r u bbers t a m p s f o r M arxi s m . No d i alogue w a s p o s s i ble eit her way:

diverge n t o r c o u nteri n g

lO


a nalysis was s i m p ly rej ected out of hand while ru bbers t a m p material-had it bee n s u b m itted-would have provided a rein fo rce ment fo r Ma rxism rat her then a d ialogue concern i ng its merits. What the Ma rxist publ icat ions sought were essent ially "woode n Indians" for their ethnic sta bles. The results were m u l t iple. In a personal sense it made for a rat her chast izing les s o n ; t he AIM people with whom I ass ociate s i m ply s m iled knowi ngly as if t o say, "we told you so." And i nd eed t hey had . O n another level, I found the conclusions I had been reaching conce r n i n g the relat ionship between M a rxism and Native A mericans catapulted into a world context. If, as it seemed, Marxism was u nwilling t o consider possi ble cul t ural d i fferentiation between its t rad it i o n and t hose of Native peo ples in t he Americas, w h at was t he MarJ5,ist stance vis a vis other non-European trad i t i o n s? If M arxism universally chose to d i s regard cultural perspectives o utside its own preconceived parad igm, what were t h e global i m p licat ions? These ques t i o n s had been t here a l l along, but it was the icy rej ect i o n by Marxist p u blications t hemselves w hich provo ked t h i s clear formulat i o n . O n ce confronted in such a fashi on, t here was n o way t o back o ff fro m the q uestions raised . *

*

*

*

*

Hence, t h i s boo k . I lay out t h e preced i ng h ist orical sketch not beca use I conside r my s trange odyssey across the landscape of American leftism to be especial ly n otewort hy, but becaus e of t he p recise o p posite. I hold the bumps a nd j olts and frozen m o ments I've experienced to be grimly reflective of the ex periences of a large a n d growing n u m be r of activists, both Nat ive American and otherwise. A n d , alt hough it seems to have gone sadly out of fas h i o n i n rad ical c i rcles, I bel ieve t here remai n a s ign ifica nt n u m ber of us out here still committed t o t he idea that a u niquely American rad ical vision is a t ranscendent requi rement t o effect i ng positive social c h a nge i n A merica. I m p orts, in and of t h emselves, without critique and careful adaptati o n , can only worsen an already intolerable situat ion. Marxism is n o d o u bt a q uite useful tool within A merican t he o ry, but fi rst thi ngs first . And t he Indian was fi rst by a ny criterion which can be d esigned for evaluat ive measurement. This

Introduction

II

is an objective condition with which Marxism. in its present configuration, has flatly refused to deal. No American theory can write the Indian off as irrelevant; the I ndian's is the first vision in this hemisphere, not only as a matter of chronological fact, but because the Indian experience was and remains formative to this society's psychological an d material character.

In addition,

Indian cultures adapted to, and where they have not been destroyed continue to respect, local and regional conditions rather than treating them purely as resources to exploit. Until theory comes to grips with these consistently evaded facts, it can n ever adequately deal with the realities of the American situa tion. No one can speak for the Native American. For any non Indian to assume a superiority in expressing the "correct" Indian perspective is arrogant folly at best, intentional and self-serving distortion at worst. The culturally generated political con sciousn ess of Native people must enter into the effective formu lation of any alternative American politics. The only valid question is how to effect this. The nature and structure of this book were dictated by such considerations. It had seemed to me quite necessary to under stan d the deficiencies of the prevailing Marxist vision in order to go beyond them. It had also seemed necessary to articulate the theoretical principles of the Marxist vision in their own right as the critique proceeded; one cannot necessarily assume they are k nown in their particulars" I felt Native Americans 'Yere in an ideal position to test the limits and pretentions of the Marxist vision, to challenge its most basic assumptions: to provide the critique and thus one pole of the debate. A natural juxtaposition suggested itself. On the one hand, Marxists could articulate whatever multi-cultural validity they perceived in their theory. On the other hand, Native American writers could explain what they perceived to be the defects and in adequacies of Marxism. S uch a point/ counterpoint would constitute a dialogue that might allow mutual learning. I assumed that each side possessed roughly equal oppor tunity to k n ow the other. Therefore, I "assigned" each author a given subject to elaborate. I expected each to have a grasp on hisj her subject matter sufficient to make the case at hand without

12

Marxism a n d Native Americans

refe re n ce to one a n o t h e r's m a n uscripts. This was i n tended t o i n s ure pres e ntat i o n o f e a c h p o i n t a s it m ight b e ge ne ral ly u n derst ood rat her t h a n i n t e rpersonal polemics between aut h ors . The res u lt i n g man uscripts were t o be ed ited and arranged w i t h i n two b a s i c sect i o n s : P a r t I was t o b e t h e M arxist Theory of C u l t u re, whi le Part II w a s t o be t he Native American Crit ique.

However, fo r a variety of rea s o n s , v i rtually all p reco ncei ved n o t i o n s o f t he b o o k's s t r u c t u re broke d o w n d u r i n g the process of its asse m bly. Firs t , the a u t h o rs cha nged . Several "big name" Marxists i n itially e x p ressed d e fi n ite i n t e rest in contri buti ng but the n backed out fo r reas o n s s u c h as "lack of t i me . " The n, as replacement a u t h ors c a m e forward I discovered that d i rect ma n uscript j u xta p o s i t i o n s w e re necessary to maintai n cont i n ui ty between t h e p ros a n d c o n s of e a c h p o i n t covered . The original two-part sce nario h a d t o be a ba n d oned i n favor of a d i ffe rent sequenci ng. F i n a l ly, predicta bly e n o ugh, cert a i n writers frac t ured every c o n ce i v a b l e t i metable i n s u bmitti n g t h e i r material. The d e lay was n o t c r i t i ca l , h o wever, as t h e b o o k co uld be p u b l ished whenever it was c o m pleted . Polit ical real ities, ho wever, e n t e red by the s i d e d o or. The e n t i re package was o ri g i n a l ly s c h e d u led t o be be s u b mitted t o S o u t h E n d Press by t h e e nd of Ju n e 1980; that is, p r i or t o the Black Hills S u rvival Gat h e r i n g a t Ra pid City, S o u t h Da k ota. Late arrivals caused post p o n e ments, and Russell M ea ns, as was als o sched uled, read h i s c o n t r i b u t i o n as a maj o r speech on the se c o n d d ay of t hat eve n t . * Of c o u rs e , at that point the idea of each a u t h o r not b e i n g m a d e p rivy t o t h e content of any o t h er's essay beca me impractical, t o say t h e leas t . I ndeed, M ea n s' Black Hills presentati o n provoked a q u i t e lengt hy and vituperative po le m i cal reply fro m t h e Rev o l u t i o nary C o m m u n ist Party, USA, i n its political organ , The Revolutionary Worker. '" Means' presentation has since appeared in print in several variations: under the original title used in this b ook, in the September, 1980edition of Lakota £yapaha (Pine Ridge, SO); as "Marxism is a European Tradition" in the Fall 1980 edition of Akwasasne Notes (Mohawk Nation): and as "For the World to Live, Europe Must Die" in the December, 1980edition of Mother Jones.

Intro d uctio n T h i s ultimately p roved a n u n a n ticip a t e d

13

b o o n . C e rt a i n

d iffi cult i e s w i t h t h e L e ninist sec tio n of t he bo o k h a d bec o m e a p p a re n t . Des pite repeated a n d s o m e t i m e s q uite d etailed descri p t i o n s of t h e s o rt of focus needed f o r t h i s p r o je c t . lit e ra l l y every L e n i nis t s u b m i s s i o n had fa l l e n c o n sid e ra bly wid e of t he m a r k . O n e m a n u s c ript w a s a n info r m a t i v e t re a t m e n t of " s o c i a l i s t re a l i s t " aest hetics . A n o t h e r a t t e m p t e d t o c o p e w i t h t h e r o l e o f T hird W o rl d litera t u re in t he c o m i n g glo b a l re v o l u t i o n . A t hird beca m e o p aq uely mired i n a t t e m p t i n g to u n ra v e l t h e distinctio n s b e t wee n ea rly S oviet a rtistic e x p e ri m e n t atio n a n d t he s t a n d a r d s f o r "cu l t u ral d e p l oy me n t " e s t a bli s h e d d u ri n g C h i n a ' s m i d -60s " C u l t u r a l R e v olu t i o n . " I w a s e x t re m e l y p e r p l e xed a s t h e re s e e m e d lit tle I c o uld say w h i c h w o uld co nvince the Le ninist w rit ers t hat when I s olicited an a n a l yt i c a l ela bo ration of " Le n i nis t T h e o ry o f C u l t u re , " I was not refe rri n g t o a rt s and let t ers. d a n c e , fo l k fo r m s or any o t h e r of t h e a es t h e t i c e x p ressio ns im plied by t he p o p ula r u s e of t h e t e r m t o ssed a b o u t s o c a s u a l l y i n c o n t e m p o ra r y c o n v e r s a t i o n . I n d e e d , I ' d e x p res sly req u e s t e d a n anthropological t r e a t m e n t of t h e i ngredie n t s of Le ninist t heo ry w h i c h a ll o w i t t o fu nction a s a l i b e ra t o ry d oc t rine in

a m ulti-cu l t u ral w o rld .

I spec ifically

refe rred t o " l i n g u i s t i c m a t ri x , " " s o c i o-relig i o u s s y m b o l ogy," " k i n s hi p p a t t e r n s , " e t c . , a s being i n dicative o f the sense in w hic h t h e b o o k w o u l d be e m p l oying t he t e r m " c u l t ure. " Mea n s , it seemed t o m e , had hit s q u a rely at t h e i m p l ici t c ult u ra l c o n t ent of t he L e nin i s t t ra d i ti o n i n h i s s t a t e m e n t . Y e t I h a d n o t h i n g of eq u a l s u bs t a nce t o j u x t a p o s e a s a Le ninist a r t i c u l a t i o n . The Revolutionary Worker p o le mic actu ally sal v aged

a

bad sit u atio n ,

at

t he e x pe n s e of f o rcing a direct

i n terc h a n ge between a u t h o rs ( o r a u t h o ri a l g ro u p s , in t h is case). The two p i eces . t oget h e r wit h a res p o n s e t o c e rt a i n points raised by the R C P but not a d d ressed i n i tia l ly by Mea n s (j o i nt l y w rit t e n by D o ra- Lee La rs o n a n d m y s elf) , c r e a t e d a s t r o n g section c o vering the c o n t e m p o rary L e ninis t e t h o s . No d o u bt m a n y L e n i nists w i ll disag ree, feeling t he R C P' s v i e w s f a i l t o represent "rea l L e n i n i s m . " I n t his c o n nectio n , i t s h o uld b e noted t hat t h e R C P h a s s u bjected itself t o a p u bl i c " self-cr i t i cis m " relative t o it s rejo i n d e r t o Mea n s . This occu rred after t h e section was as s e m b l e d , but wo uld have had lit t l e bea r i n g in any eve n t . The

J4

Marxism a n d Native A mericans

P a r t y fo u n d i t s e l f g u i l t y of n o s u bs t a n t i ve e r r o r s , o t h e r t h a n h a v i ng acted i n a p p r o p r i a t e l y i n i n c l u d i n g t h e m a t e r i a l refl e c t ed by t he t i t l e of i t s p ie c e ( a m a t t e r a p p a r e n t l y n o w c o n s i d e re d a cc u ra t e b u t u n nece s s a r i l y " i m p o l i t e" by R C P p r o p agand i s t s ) . H o w e v e r , t he i n t e rc h a nge o n L e n i n i s m was c e rt a i n l y n o t e n o u g h . M a r x i s m t o d a y h o l d s t o o m a n y fac e t s , p o ssesses t o o m a n y s t re a m s of t h i n k i n g t o be rea d i l y co n fr o n ted t h rough a n e x c h a nge w i t h t h e m ec ha n is t i c c h a r i ca t u re o ffe r e d b y t he R C P . H e nce, E l i s a b e t h L l o y d o ffe r s h e r v i e w o f a c o m p re h e n s i v e M a r x i s m , r i c h i n fo r m u l a t i o n a n d p o t e n t i a l fo r ge n u i ne c ro s s c u l t u ra l u n d e rs t a n d i n g t h ro u g h a p p l icat i o n o f d ia lectical met h o d o l ogy. B o b S i pe p re s e n t s a M a rx i s m e m p h a s i z i n g b o t h m a t e r i a l a n d p s y c h o l og i c a l r el a t i o n s a s i t s r o u t e t o u n i ve r s a l l y usefu l a n d a p p ro p ri a t e k n o w l e d ge . V i n e D e l o r i a , J r. a n d F ra n k B l a c k E l k fo l l o w b y c o n t e n d i n g t h a t M a r x i s m , fo r a l l i t s p o s s i b l e g o o d i n t e n t i o n s a n d gra n d i l o q u e n t p ro n o u n c e m e n t s o n b e h a l f o f h u m a n i t y , re m a i n s a s i t h a s a l ways bee n : a n e t h n oc e n t r i c d og m a e x p re s s i n g e t e r n a l v a r i a t i o n s u p o n a g i v e n t h e m e a n d p o s s e s s i n g l i t t l e c o n ce p t u a l u t i l i t y bey o n d i t s o r i g i n a l E u r o p e a n c u l t u ra l p a ra d i g m . A t w o r s t . t he s e c o n t r i b u t o r s c o n t e n d , M a r x i s m c a n o n ly s e r v e t o e x a c e r b a t e t h e c o n t e m p o ra r y p r o b l e m s fac i ng N a t i ve A m e r i c a ; at b e s t . M a rx is m c a n e m p l oy i t s o w n m et h o d o l ogy t o t ra n scend i t s e t h n o c e n t ri s m a n d

t h u s hecome u se fu l t o peo p les o f n o n

E u ro pe a n h e r i t age . I n e i t h e r eve n t , M a rx i s m i s c u r re n t l y n o p a rt i c u l a r barga i n fo r I n d i a n s . B i l l Ta b b cl oses o u t t h e d ia l og u e w i t h a n e s s a y w r i t t en a ft e r h a v i n g read a l l o t h e r c o n t r i b u t i o n s i n t h e v o l u m e t o t h at p o i n t . H i s i s t h e p e r s pect i v e o f t h e c o m m i t t e d M a r x i s t a c t i v i s t w h o h a s , fro m t i me t o t i m e , e n gaged d i rect l y i n I n d i a n s t ruggles fo r l a n d a n d s o v e re i gn t y . H e i s p re p a re d t o a rg u e t h e p o i n t s raised b y t h e I n d i a n c r i t i q u e s o f t he M a rx is t t ra d i t i o n , a nd i n w h a t m i g h t b e best d e s c r i be d a s a n a c c es s i b l e d o w n t o e a r t h fas h i o n . W i t h t h i s m a t e r i a l i n h a n d , I bega n t w o p r oj ec t s . F i r s t , I bega n t o rea s s e m ble t h e m a n u s c r i p t , a ba n d o n i n g t h e d i s t i ncti o n s bet ween c r i t i c a l t he o ry , p he n o m e n o l og i c a l M a r x i s m a n d p o s t M a r x i s m I h a d o nce i n t e n d e d . S ec o n d , I bega n t o m a k e a n e ffo rt to b r i n g s o m e o f t h e p ro t ag o n i s t s t oget h e r fo r p u r p o s e s of ve r b a l d e ba t e i n a p u b l i c fo r u m . T h e l a t t e r o c c u rred a t t h e West e r n S oc i a l S c i e nce A s s oc i a t i o n C o n fe re n ce , i n S a n D i eg o , i n t he

I nt rod uction

15

s p ring o f 1 98 1 . Three contri butors were p resent, as well a s Phil Heiple, a post- M arx ist scholar fro m S a nta Barbara. The results are incorporated into Hei ple's excellent "postscript" contained i n th e l a s t sect ion of t his col lect ion, which also includes my own c o m me nts on a nu mber of issues raised i n t he cou rse of the boo k . S ince t h e point at which the l a s t o f t hese contributions were received , t h ings have gone rat her slowly. I have bee n p reoccu pied with the establishment of Yellow Thunder Tiospaye, a n effort led by Russell a nd Bill M eans t o reoccupy a portion of t he Lakota t errit ory guaranteed i n perpetuity by the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1 868, a n d si nce usurped by the U n it e d S tates. The occu pation began A p ril 4, 1 98 1 , and continues as a rallying point o f the s t ruggle for sovereignty and self-determination by A merican Indian p e o p les. It seems al most red u nd a nt t o observe t hat t h is waters hed action has received sca n t attention a n d s u p port fro m t h e non-I ndian left "opposition." Eve n n o w, I am u nsatisfied wit h the book whic h follows. I a l ways will be. Like any collection o r a n thology, i t is i ncom p lete, u n balanced, and anyt hing but definitive. Still, nothing similar has gone i nt o print. As a n ind icati o n o f the reasons for this, let me m e n t i o n t hat Vine Del oria, Jr., proba bly t h e best - k n own A me ri can I n d ia n author to this point, was i nformed flatly by h is erstwhile p u blisher ( Harper and R ow) w h e n he d e l ivered u p the m anuscript to his Metaphysics of Modern Existence, that " I ndians d o n't write books on philos o p h y . " For all the thousands o f books o n M arxism i n print and availa ble i n the conte m p o rary U n ited States, n ot one clearly attem pts t o assess the Native American relationship to Marxism . A n d s o t h e b o o k is somewhat fragmentary. I t h a s h o les. Pieces o f t h e equation, both real and potential, remain u nad d ressed . It nonet heless moves into a vac u u m of left conside r ation, a n d such incompleteness is u navoid a ble. O ne must begin s o mewhere. I ndians do write books on p hilosophy and p ossess a k nowledge of its intricacies the "white man" has never acknow ledged . S uch books j ust fail to see print, for the most part. Perhaps t h is collective effort can d o s ometh ing to change t hat. Ho pefu lly, t his book will ange r people. I f. l i ke t he R e p , a n u m ber o f M arxist groups and M arxist individuals are p rovo k ed i n t o add ressing rather than ignoring the issues raised, perhaps t hey will a rticulate their positions in concrete rather than

16


rhet orical fas h i o n . At long last, for better or worse, thei r tru e colors will be flown . Nearly a century into the history o f U . S .

Marxis m, t his seems little e n ough t o as k. A s it is, concrete posit i o n s are taken in some rat her i m portant connect i o n s . The s u bject at hand has been broached i n depth a n d by a variety o f ind ivid uals. One hopes that t h is represents at least a tenuous beginning, a basis from w hich s im i larly focused work may e merge, s o o missions i n this parti cular treatment may be add ressed and other pers pectives added. There are certainly other Native A me ricans who have much t o contribute t o s u c h a n exchange a n d n o doubt there are also nu merous Ma rx ists with pieces t o ad d . Perhaps i n a cauldro n of intercultural d ialogue concerning t heoretical issues of signi fica nce t o social change, a uniq uely A merican Rad ical V i s i o n m a y at l a s t b e born. Ward C h u rchill B oulder, Colorado 1 98 2

PART ONE

S p read the word of your religion, C onvert the whole world if you can , Kill a n d s laughter those w h o oppose you It's worth it if you s ave o ne man. Take t h e land t o build your churches, A sin t o tax the house of God, Take t h e child while s he is supple, S p oil the mind and s p are the rod. Go a n d tell the savage native That h e must be Christianized . TeJl h i m , end his heathen worsh i p And y o u will m a k e him civilized. S h ove your gos pel, force your values, Down her t hroat until its raw, A nd after she is crippled, Turn y o u r back and lock the d oor. Like a n ever circling vult u re, You descend u p o n your prey, Then you pick the soul t o p ieces And you watch while it decays. M issio naries, missionaries, go leave u s all alone. Take y o u r white God to your white man, We've a God of o u r own. From a Sung Song by Floyd Weste r m a n

1 The Same Old Song Russell Means

The only possible opening fo r a statement o f t h i s k i n d is that I d etest writing. The process itself e p i t o m izes the E u r o pean c o ncept of "legiti mate" t h i n k i ng; w h a t i s written h a s a n i m p o r t a nce t hat is denied the s p o ke n . M y c u l t u re , t h e L a k o t a culture , h a s a n o ra l trad ition and s o I o r d inarily reject writing. I t is o n e o f t h e white world's w�ys o f d estroying t h e c u l t ures of n o n E u r o p e a n peoples, t he i m p o s ing o f a n a bstracti o n over the s p o k e n relationship of a people. S o w h a t you read h e re i s n ot w h a t I've written. It's what I've s a i d and s o meone else h a s written down. I will a l l o w t h i s , beca use i t seem s t h at the only way t o c o m m u nicate w i t h the white world is t h rough the dead, d ry leaves of a b o o k . I d on't really care whether m y words reach whites o r not. They've already d e m o nst rated t h rough t h e i r history that they can't hear, can't see, t h ey can only read (of cou rse, there are except i o n s , but the exceptions only p rove t he r u le). I'm m ore concerned with A merican I ndian peo ple, students a n d others, w ho've begun t o be a b s o rbed into t he white w o rld t h rough u niversities a n d other institutions. But even t h e n it's a marginal s o rt of concern. I t's very possible to grow i n t o a red face with a white m i n d a n d if t hat's a person's i ndivid ual c h o ice, s o be it, but I h ave no use fo r them. This is part of t h e process of cultural ge nocide being waged by E u ropeans against American "I ndian peoples today. M y concern i s with t h ose A merican I ndians who choose t o res i s t t h i s genocide, but w h o m ay be confused as to h o w to proceed .

19

20

Marxism a n d Native A mericans I t takes a s t r o n g effo rt o n t h e p a rt o f each A merican I n d ia n

n o t to become E u ro p ea nized . T h e strength for t his effort c a n only come fro m t h e trad i t i o n a l ways, the trad i t i o nal values that our elders ret a i n . It m u s t c o me fro m t h e hoop, the fou r d i rections, the relat i o n s ; i t cannot c o me fro m the pages o f a book o r a tho usand b o o k s ; no E u r o p e a n can ever teach a Lakota to be Lakota, a H op i to be a H o p i . A master's d egree in " I n d i a n Stud ies" or i n "educat i o n" o r anyt h i ng e l s e c a n n o t m a k e a person i n t o a h u m a n b e i n g o r p rovide k n owledge i n t o t h e trad itional ways . I t can o n l y m a k e you i n t o a mental Euro pean , a n outsider. I should be clear a b o u t s o me t h i n g h e re , because there seems t o be some confu s i o n about i t . When I speak of Europea ns or mental E u ropea n s . I'm n o t a l l o w i ng for false d istinctions. I'm n ot sayin g that o n the o n c h a n d t here are t he byp rod ucts of a few t h o usand years of genocidal, rea c t i o nary E u ropean i n tellectual d evel o p ment which i s bad, and on the o t he r hand there is some new revolutionary intellectual development w h ich is good . I'm refe rring here t o the s o-ca lled t h e ories o f M a rxism a nd a n a r chis m a n d "left i s m " in general. I d on't beli eve t hese t heories can be separated fro m t h e rest o f t h e E uropean i n te l l ectual trad i t i o n . I t's really j ust t h e same old song. Take Christianity a s a n h i s t o rical example. I n its day Christianity was revol u t ionary. I t cha nged European p o wer rela t i o n s fo r all t i me; t hat is, u n le s s you happen to think the R o m a n E m p i re i s s t i l l a d o m i n a n t m i l itary fo rce. But European culture , o f which C hristianity beca me a part , acted o n the rel igion i n such a way a s t o use i t as a tool fo r the destruction of n o n E u r o pean p e o p les, fo r t h e e x pa n s i o n of E u r o pean m i l i ta ry a n d e c o n o mic powe r a c r o s s the planet, fo r t h e consolidation of t he European nation-state s , for t h e formation of t he capital ist eco n o m i c system. The C h ristian revolution o r revolutions were an i m p ortant part of the deve l o p m e n t of Euro pean culture i n d i rections it was already h e a d e d ; it changed nothing o t h e r than t o s peed u p Europe's genocide outside Europe, and maybe inside Europe too. The same holds true for the capitalist and other European "revo l u t i o n s . " They c hanged p o we r relations within Europe around a bit, b u t o n ly t o meet t he needs of t h e w h ite wo rld at the expense of everyone and everyth i n g else.

The S a m e Old S o n g

21

N e w t o n "rev o l u t i o n ized " p hy s ics a n d t h e so-called nat ural s c i e n c e s b y red u c i n g t he p h y s i c a l u niverse t o a l i n ea r m a t he m a tical e q u a t i o n . Descartes did the same t h i n g with c u lt ure. J o h n L o c ke did i t with p o l i t ics a n d A d a m S m i t h d i d it w i t h e c o n o m ic s . Each o ne o f t h e s e " t h i n kers" t o o k a p iece of t he s p irit ua l i t y of h u m a n exi s t a nce a n d c o nverted it i n t o a c o d e , a n a b s trac t i o n . They were p i c k i n g u p w h ere C hris t i a n i ty e n d e d , t hey "secu lariz.ed" C hri s t i a n rel i g i o n as t h e " s c h o l ars" l i ke to say-a n d i n d oi n g t h i s t h e y m a d e E u r o p e m ore a b l e a n d re a d y t o act a s a n exp a n s i o n i s t cult ure .

E a c h of t h e s e i nt e l l e c t u a l rev o l utio n s

served t o a bstract t h e Euro p e a n m e n t a lity even furt her, t o re m o ve t h e wond erf u l c o m plexity a n d s p irituality fro m t h e u n i verse a n d re p lace i t w i t h a "logical s e q u ence"; o n e-two-t hree A N S W E R . This is w h a t' s c o m e to b e termed a s "effi c i e ncy" in t he E u r o p e a n mind. W h a tever i s m e c h a n i c a l is perfect, w h a tever s e e m s t o work at t h e m o m e n t - t h a t i s , proves t h e m e c h a n i c a l m o d e l i s t h e righ t o n e -i s c o n s id ered c orrec t even w h e n i t i s c l e ar l y u n true. T h i s i s w h y " tr u t h " c h a nges s o fas t i n t h e E ur o p e a n m i n d ; t h e a n s wers w h i c h res u l t fro m s u c h a process are o n l y s t o p-ga p s, o nly t e m p orary , a n d m u s t be c o n t i n u o u s l y d i sc a r d e d i n fav or of new s t o p-ga p s w h i c h s u p p ort t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l models; which keep t h e m ( t h e m o d els) a l i ve . H egel a n d t h e n M arx were h e irs t o t he t hi n k i ng o f Newt o n, D escartes , Loc k e a n d S m i t h . H egel fi n i s hed t h e p ro c e s s of s e c u l arizi n g t h e o l ogy-a n d t h a t is put in h i s o wn terms; he s e c u lariz.ed t h e religious t h i n k i ng t hr o u g h which Europe u n d er s t o o d t h e u n i verse. T h e n M arx p u t H egel's p h i l o s o p h y i n t o terms of " materi a l i s m." That i s to s a y t h a t rv1 arx d e s p ir i t u a l ized H egel's w or k a l t o ge t her. A ga i n , t h i s is in M arx's o w n terms. A n d t h i s is n o w seen a s the fut ure re vo l u t i o n ar y p o t e n t i a l o f E ur o p e . E ur o p e a n s may see t h i s a s revol u t i o n ary, b u t A merica n I n d ia n s s e e i t s i m p l y as s t i l l m ore o f t h a t s a m e o l d E u ro p e a n c o nflict b e t we e n being and gaining. T h e i n te l l e c t u a l roots for a new M arxi s t for m o f European i m perial i s m lies in M arx's - a n d his fo l l o wers'-l inks t o t h e tra d i t i o n o f N e wt o n , Hegel, etc. Being is a s piritual pro p os i t i o n. G a i n i ng i s a m a teri a l act. Tra d i t i o nally, A meri c a n I n d ia n s have a l w a y s a t t e m p t e d t o be t h e b e s t p e o p le t hey c o u l d . Part o f t ha t s pirit ua l process was a n d i s t o g i ve a w a y wealt h , t o d i scard wea l t h i n order n o t t o gai n . M aterial

22

Marxism and Native A mericans

gain is an indicat o r o f false status a m o ng traditional people while it is "proof that the system works" t o Europeans. Clearly, there are two com pletely o p posing views at issue here, and Marxism is very far ov�r t o the other side fro m the A merican Indian view. But let's look at a maj o r i mplicatio n of this; it is not merely an intellectual debate. The European m a terialist tradition of despiritualizing the universe is very similar to the mental p rocess which goes into dehumanizing another person. And who seems most expert at dehumanizing other people? A nd why? S o ldiers who have seen a lot of combat learn t o d o this t o the enemy before going back into combat. M u rderers d o it before going out t o commit murder. SS guards did it to co ncentration ca m p i nmates. Cops d o it. Corporation leaders do it t o workers they send into uranium m ines and t o work in steel mills. Politicians d o it to everyone in sight. And what each process of dehumanization has i n com m o n for each grou p doing the dehumanizing i s that it makes it alright to kill and otherwise d estroy other people. O ne of the Christian commandments says "thou shall not kill," at least not humans, so the trick is t o mentally convert the victims into non-humans. Then you can p roclai m violation of your own command ment as a virtue. In terms of the despiritualization of the u niverse, the me ntal process works s o that it becomes virt u o us to destroy the planet. Terms like "progress" and "develop ment" are used as cover words here the way "victo ry" and "freedom" a re used to j ustify butchery i n the dehumanization process. For example, a real estate speculator may refer to "developing" a parcel of ground by o pening a gravel quarry there; "develo pment" really means total, permanent destructio n wit h t h e earth i tself removed . But Euro pean logic has gained a few tons of gravel with which more land can be "developed" in the construction of road beds. U lt i mately, t he whole universe i s open-in the European view-to t h is sort of insanity. M ost important here, perhaps, is the fact that Europeans feel no sense of loss i n all t his. After all, their philosophers have despiritualized reality, so there is no satisfaction (for them) to be gained in simply o bserving the wonder o f a mountain or a lake or a people in being. No, satisfaction is measured in terms of gaining

The Same Old S o n g

23

m a t e r i a l - s o the m o u nt a i n becomes gravel and the lake beco mes coolant for a factory and t he people are r o u nded up for p roces s i ng through t h e ind octrinati o n mills Europeans like t o call scho o l s . This is all very "rat i onal" and to t h e g o o d , so n o s e n s e of loss i s experienced . A n d i t's ve ry difficult, o r i m possi ble, t o convi nce a pers o n there's s o m et h i n g wrong with the p rocess of gaining when they lack the s piritual wis d o m to feel a loss fo r what i s bein g dest royed along the way. Each new European abstract i o n is born of a d i rect need . Each t i me an abstraction begi ns t o we ar out, each t i m e the costs i n volved bec o me o bviou s -even o bvious t o some Europeans-a n e w a b s t ract i o n is created which s t aves off the inevitable. For a w h i le. Newto n , Locke, Descartes, and S mi t h lead to H egel and Marx and to Da rwi n, then there's Einstein and Niels B o hr, etc. Each one a b stracted reality even further and c o n t r i b uted to c o n t i n ui n g the syst e m o f science / materialism when the old "answe rs" were wearing out. But each new a bs traction, each s t o p-ga p , u p ped the ante out in the real world . Take fuel for t he i n d us t rial machine as a n example. Little m o re t h a n t w o cen t u ries ago, nearly everyo ne used wood-a replenishable, natural ite m a s fuel for t h e very h u m a n needs of c o o k i n g and s t a y i n g warm. Along came the i n d u s t rial rev o l u t i o n a n d coal became the dominant fuel as production beca m e the s ocial i m p e rative for E urope. Pollution began to beco m e a problem i n t he cities and t he earth was ripped open t o provide coal where wood was always s i mply gat hered o r harvested at

no great expense t o t h e

e nviro n m e n t . Later, oil became the m aj o r fuel as the technol ogy of production was perfected through a series of scientific "revolut i o n s . " Pollution i ncreased dramatically a n d n o body yet k n ows what the enviro n mental costs of p u m p i n g all t h a t oil out o f t he ground will really be i n t h e l o n g ru n . Now t here's an " e nergy cris is" and uranium is bec o m i n g the d o minant fuel-still in the n a me of the same system of materialist values which set up the crises, both of energy a n d of the environment. Capitalists, at least, can be relied upon o n l y t o develop u ra n i u m as fuel at a rate at which they can s h ow a good profit. That's their ethic, and maybe that will buy s o m e t i m e . M arxists, on t he o t h e r hand , c a n be relied u p o n t o develop u r a n i u m fuel as rapidly as possible simply because it's the m o s t "efficient"

24


prod ucti o n fue l avai lable. That's their ethic, and I fail to see w h e re it's p refe ra ble . L i ke I s a i d , M arxism is right s mack i n the m i d d le of t he Europe a n trad i t i o n . I t's t he same old song. The missionaries s pearheaded E urope's d rive to destroy t h e c o n t i nents of t h i s hemi s p here; not j ust t he peo p le who are i n d igenous here, b u t t he c o n t i nents t hemselves. The missionaries are still here and t hey're s t i ll active, and traditional people recognize t he m as t he enemy. But t hey've mai n ly been replaced i n i m p o rtance by capitalists w hose mission i t is t o "efficient ly" e.ltploit what t he missio naries o pe ned up. This change from c h u rch to capitalism has n o d oubt made s o me superficial d i fferences i n t he struct ure of E u r o pean s ociety-t hey've even gone t o great lengt hs t o "sep arate c h u rc h and state" i n their laws (to red uce the p ower of the c h u rch)-but, the p oint is, t h is "revolution" only made t h ings worse for non-Europeans. Capi talism is more destructive and efficient than the missionary vers i o n of E u rope we encou ntered a few hundred years ago . There's a rule o f t h u m b which c a n be applied here. You can't j u d ge the real nat u re o f a European revolutionary d octrine on the basis of the changes it prop oses t o make wit hin t he Euro pean power structure a n d s ociety. Y o u can only j u d ge it by t he effects it will have on n o n-European peop les . This i s because every revolu tion i n E uropean history has served t o reinfo rce Europe's tend en cies and abili ties to e x p o rt destruct i o n t o other peoples, other cultures a n d the environ men t itself. I defy anyone t o point o u t a n example where t h i s isn't true. So now we, as A merican I nd i a n people, are aSked t o bel ieve t hat a "new" E uropean revo l u t i o nary d octrine such as Marxism will reverse t he negat i ve effects of European history o n us. E uro pean power relations are to be adj us ted o nce again, and t hat's s u p posed to make things better for all of us. But what d oes this really mean? Right now, today, we who l ive on t he Pine Ridge Reserva tion are living in what Euro society has designated a " nation al sacrifice a re a. " What t h i s means is that we have a lot of urani u m d epos its here and Euro culture (not us) needs this uranium as e nergy production material. The cheapest, most efficient way for i n d ustry t o extract a n d deal with t he p rocess i ng of this uraniu m is to d ump the waste byprod ucts right here at the d igging sites.

The Same Old S o ng

25

R ight here w here we live. This waste is rad ioactive and will make the entire region uninhabitable forever. This is considered by ind ustry, and the white society which c reated this ind ustry, to be an "acceptable" price to pay for energy res o u rce development. A l o ng the way they also plan to drain the water-table under this area of South Dakota as part of the industrial process, so the regi on becomes d oubly u n i n habitable. The same s ort of thing is happening d own in the land of the Navaj o and H o p i , up in the land of the Northern Cheyen ne and Crow, and elsewhere. Over 60 percent of all U . S . energy resources h ave been found to lie under reservation land, so t here's no way t h i s c a n be called a m i nor issue. For A merican Indians it's a question of survival i n t h e purest sense of t he term. F o r white society a n d i t s i n d ustry it's a question of being able to continue t o exist in the i r present fo rm . . We a re resisti ng being turned i n t o a national sacrifice area. We're resisting being turned into a national sacrifice people. The costs of this industrial p rocess are not acceptable to us. It is genocide to d ig t he uranium here and t o d ra i n the water-table, no m o re, no less. S o the reasons for o u r resistance a re o bvious e n ough and should n't have to be explained further. To anyone. N o w let's suppose that i n o u r resistance t o extermination we begi n to seek allies (we have) . Let's s u pp ose further t hat we were to take revolutionary Marxism at its word: that it intends nothing less than the complete overthrow of the E u ropean capitalist order which has p resented t h is t h reat to our very existence. This would seem t o be a natural alliance fo r A m e rican I n d i a n people to make. After aU, as the Marxists say, it is the capitalists who set us u p to be a national sacrifice. This is true as far as it goes. B ut, as I've tried to point out, t h i s "truth" i s very deceptive. Look beneath the s urface of revolutionary Marxism and what d o you find? A commitment to reversing t h e i n dustrial system which created the need of white s ociety for uranium? No. A commit ment t o guaranteeing the Lakota and o ther American I ndian peoples real control over the land and resources they have left? No, n o t unless the industrial p rocess is to be reversed as part of their d o ctrine. A commit ment to o u r rights, as peoples, to main taining our values and traditions? No, not as long as they need the u ran i u m within our land t o feed the industrial system of the s ociety, the culture of which the Marxists are still a part.

26

Marxism a n d Native A mericans Revolutionary M arxism is c o m mitted t o even fu rther perpe

tuation and perfe ct i o n of the very industrial process which is d estroying us a l l . I t i s offering o n ly t o "red istri bute" the resu lts. the money maybe, of this industriali zation to a wider sect i o n of the populati on. I t o ffers t o take weal t h fro m the capitalist a n d pass it a r o u n d , but i n o rder t o d o s o, M a rx i s m m u s t m a i n t a i n the ind ustrial system. Once aga i n , the p o wer relations within Euro pean s ociety will h a ve to be altered, but o nce again the effects u p o n American I nd i a n peoples here and non-Europeans else where will re main the same. This is much the s a me as when p o wer was red istributed fro m the church t o p rivate business d u ring the so-called " bourgeois revolut i o n . " European society changed a b i t , at least su perfi c i a l ly, but its cond uct towa rd non-Europea n s continued as before. You can s e e w h a t the A merican Revolut i o n of 1 776 d i d fo r A merican I nd ia n s . I t's t h e s a m e o l d s o ng. R evolutio nary M a rx i s m, as with industrial so ciety in o t h e r forms, s e e k s to "rat i o nalize" all p e o p l e in relation to i n d u s t r y , maximu m industry, m a x i mu m product i o n . I t is a materialist d octrine w h i ch despises t he A mericap I ndian s p iritual t rad i t i o n . our cultures, our lifeways. Marx himself called us " p recapital ists" and "pri m itive . " P recapitalist s i mply means that, in h i s view, we would eventually d iscover cap italism and become capitalists; we have al ways been econ o m ically retarded in Marxist terms. The only manner in which A merican I n d i a n people could participate i n a M arx ist revo l u t i o n would be tojo in the industrial system, to become factory workers o r "proletarians" as M a rx cal led them. The man was very clear about the fact that his revo lution could occur only t h rough the st ruggle of the p roletariat, that the ex ist ence of a massive i n d ustrial system is a p recon d i t i o n of a success ful M arxist society. I think t here's a problem with language here. Christ ians, capitalists, M arxists, a l l o f them have been revolut i o nary i n their own m i nd s . But n o n e o f t hem really me'an revolu t i o n . W hat t hey really mean is a con t inuation . They do what t hey d o i n order that European culture can c o n t i n u e t o exist and develop accord ing to its need s . Like germs, European culture goes through occasio nal convulsio ns, even d ivisions wit h i n itself, in order to go on living and growi ng. This i s n't a revol u t i o n we're talking a bout, but a means to continuing what a l ready e x ists. An a moeba is still an

The Same Old Song

27

a moeba after it reproduces. But maybe comparing European c u l ture to an amoeba is n't really fair t o the a m oeba. M aybe cancer cells are a more accurate comparison because European culture has historically destroyed everything around it; and it will eventually destroy itself. So, i n order fo r u s to really j oin forces with M arxis m, we I n d ians would have to accept the national sacrifice of our h o meland ; we'd have to c o m m it cultural s u icide and become ind ustrialized , Europeanized, maybe even sanforized . We would have to totally defeat o urselves. Only the insane could consider this to be desirable to us. At this point, I've got to stop and ask myself whether I'm being too harsh . Marxism has something of a history . Does this history bear out my o bservations? I l o o k to the process of indus trialization i n the S oviet Union since 1 920 and I see that these Marxists have d o ne what it took t he English "ind ustrial revolu t i o n" three hundred years to do; and the M arxists d id it i n sixty years. I see that the territory of the U S S R used t o contain a n u mber of t ribal peoples and t hat they have been crushed to m a ke way for the factories. The S oviets refe r to this as "The National Question," the q uesti o n of whether the tribal peoples had t h e right to e xist as peoples; and they decided the tribal p e o ples were an acceptable sacrifice to industrial needs . I look to C h i na and I see the same thing. I look to Viet n a m and I see M arxists i mposing an ind ustrial o rder and rooting o u t the i n d i genous tribal mountain peoples. I hear a leading S oviet scientist saying t hat when u ranium is e xhausted then alternatives will be fou n d . I see the Vietnamese t a king over a nuclear p ower plant aband oned by the U . S . m i l itary. H ave they dismantled and destroyed it? No, they are using it. I see C h i na explode nuclear b o mbs, developing uranium reac t ors, preparing a s pace program in order to colonize and exploit the planets the same as the Europeans colo n i zed and exploited t h i s hemisphere. I t's the same old s ong, but maybe with a faster tempo this time. The statement of the S oviet scientist is very i nteresting. Does he know what this alternative e n ergy source will be? No, he s imply has faith . Scie nce will fin d a way. I hear revolutionary Marxists saying that the destruction of the environment, p ollu tion, rad iation, all these things will be controlled. And I see them

28


act u p o n t he i r w o rd s . D o they k n o w how these t h i ngs will be contro lled? No, they s i m pl y have faith. Science will fi nd a way. I nd ustrialization is fi ne and necessary. H ow do they know t his? Faith. Science will fin d a way. Faith o f this s o rt has always been k n o w n in Europe as religi o n . Science has become the new Euro pean relig i o n for both capitalists a n d M arxists; they are truly i n separable; they a re part a n d pa rcel o f the same culture. S o , in both t h e o ry and p ractice, M ar x i s m demands that n o n-E uropea n peoples give up their values, t heir traditions, their cultural exist ence a l together. We will a l l be i n d ustrialized science addicts i n a M a rxist society. I do n ot believe t h a t c a p i t a l i s m itself is really res p o nsible fo r the situation in w h i c h we h ave been declared a national sacrifice . N o , it is the European trad i t i o n ; E uropean culture itself is resp o ns i ble. M arxism is j us t the latest continuation of this trad i tion, not a s o l u t i o n to it. To ally with M arxism is t o ally with the very same fo rces which d eclare us an acceptable "cost." There is a n o t h e r way. There is the trad itional Lakota way and the ways of the other A merican I ndian peoples . I t is the way that k n o ws that h u m a n s do not have the right to degrade M o ther Earth, that there are forces beyo n d anything the E u ro pean m i nd has co nceived , that h u m a n s must be in harmony with all relations o r the relat i o n s w i l l eventually elimi nate the d i s harmony.

A

lopsided emp hasis o n h u m a n s by hu mans, the European arro gance of acting as t h o ugh they were beyo nd the nature of all related t hings, can o nly result i n a total d i s h a r m o ny and a read j u stment which cuts a rroga n t h u ma n s d o wn to size, gives them a taste of that reality bey o n d their grasp or control and res tores the harmony. There is no need fo r a rev o l u t i o n a ry t he ory to bring t h is a bout, it's beyo n d h u m a n control. The natural peoples of this planet know t h i s a n d so t hey do n ot t he orize about it. Theo ry is a n abstracti o n ; our k n owledge is real. Distil led to its basic terms, E uropean fait h -i ncluding the new fa ith in science- e q u a l s a belief that man is god. E u rope has a l ways s o u ght a mes s i a h , whether t hat be the man Jesus Christ or t he m a n K a rl M a r x o r t h e m a n A l bert Einstein. American I nd i a n s k n o w t h i s to be totally absurd . H u ma n s are the weakest of all creatures, so weak that o t h e r crea t u res are willing to give up their fle s h s o t hat we may live. H u m a n s a re only a ble to survive t h rough the exercise of rat i o n a l ity s ince they lack the abilities of

The Same Old S o ng

29

other creat u res to gain food t hrough t he use o f fa n g a n d claw. But ra t i o n a l ity is a cu rse si nce it can cause h u m a n s to forget t he natura l order of t h i ngs in ways other crea t u res d o n o t . A wolf never fo rge t s his/ her place i n the n a t u ral order. A m erican I n d i a n s c a n . E u r o pea n s almost always d o . We p ray o u r t h a n k s to t he d eer, o u r re latio n s , fo r allowing us t h e i r flesh t o eat. Euro peans s i m ply take the flesh for granted a n d consider the deer inferior. After a l l , Eu ropeans consider t hemselves g o d l i k e i n t he i r rat i o n a l i s m and s cience; god i s the s u p re m e being; a l l else must be i n ferior. Thus, the a bi l i t y of Europe t o create d is harmony k n o ws no limits. A l l Euro pean tra d i t i o n , M a rxism i n c l u d e d , h a s c o n s p ired to d e fy the nat ural order of all t h i ngs. M ot h e r Earth has been a bused , the p owe rs have been abused, and t h i s can n o t go o n for ever. No t heory can alter that s i m ple fact. M other Earth will ret aliate, t h e whole environment will retaliate, a n d the abusers w i l l be e l i m i nated . Things c o m e fu ll ci rcle . Back t o where t hey started . Tha t 's rev o l u t i o n . And that's a p r o p hecy o f my people, of the H o pi peo p le a nd other correct peoples. A merican I nd ia n s have been t ry i n g t o explain t h is t o Eu ro peans fo r centu ries. But, as I said earlier, t hey have proven the mselves u nable to hear. The natural order will w i n out and t he offenders w i l l d i e back, t h e way deer d ie when they offen d t he harmony by over p o pulating a given regi o n . I t's o n l y a matter of t i me until w hat E u ropeans call "a m aj o r catast r o p h e of global p r o p o rtions" will occur. It is the role o f A merican I nd ia n peoples, the role of all natu ral bei ngs to s u rvive . A part of o u r survival i s to res ist. We res ist, not t o overt h row a gove r n m e n t o r to t a k e p o litical p o wer, but because i t i s n a t u ral t o res i s t extermination, to s u rv ive. We d o n't want power over white institutions; we want . white i nstit utions to d is a ppear. Tha t 's revoluti o n . A merican I nd i a n s are still i n t o u c h w i t h t hese realities, the p ro p hecies, t h e t rad i t i o n s of o u r a n cest ors. We learn fro m the elders, fro m nat u re, fro m the powers. A n d w h e n the catastrophe is over, we A merican I nd ia n peoples will still be h e re to i n habit the hemisphere. Even if it ' s only a handful o f red people living high in the Andes, American Indian people will survive and har mony will be reestablished . That 's revolution .

N ow, a t t h i s p o i n t perhaps I s h o u l d be very clear about anothe r matter, o n e w h i c h should already be clear as a result of

30


what I've said in the past few minutes. But confusion b reeds easily t hese days , so I want to hammer home this point. When I use the term " E u ro pean," I'm n ot referring to a skin color or a part icular genetic st ructure. What I'm referring t o is a mind-set, a world view which is a product o f the devel opment of European cult u re . People a r e n o t genetically encoded t o hold this outlook, they are acculturated to hold it. The same holds true for A me rican I nd i ans o r for the members o f any other culture. It is possible for an A merican I n d ian to s hare European values, a E u ro pean w orld-view. We have a term for t hese people; we call them "apples" -red on the outside (genetics) and white on the i nside (their minds). Other groups have similar terms; Blacks have their "oreos, " Latinos have "coconuts , " etc. And , as I s a i d at the b e ginni ng o f this tal k , th e r e are exceptions to the Euro norm; people who are white on the outside, but not white inside. I 'm not sure what term should be applied to them other than "human beings." W hat I'm putting o u t here is not a racial proposition, but a cultural propositio n . Those w h o ultimately advocate and defend the realities of European culture and its indust rialis m are my enemies. Those w h o resist it, who st ruggle against it, are my all ies, the allies of A merican I ndian people. And I d o n't give a d a m n what their s k i n c o l o r happens to be. Caucasian is t he white term for t he white race; European is an outlook I o pp ose. The "Vietna mese Communists" are not exactly what you might consider as genetic Caucasians, but they are fu nctioni ng as ing as mental Europeans . The same holds true for "Chinese Com munists," for "Japanese Capitalists" or "Bantu Catholics" or Peter McDollar down at Navaj o or Dickie Wils o n up here at Pine R idge. There is n o racism involved in my position, just an acknowledgment o f t he mind and spirit which make u p cul t u re. In M arxist terms I suppose I'm a "cultural nationalist . " I work first with my people, t he t raditional Lakota people, because we hold a common w orld view and share an im mediate struggle. Beyond this I work with o t her traditional American I n d ian peo ples, again because of a certain commonality in world view and form of struggle. Beyond that I work with anyone who has experienced the colonial opp ress i o n of Europe and who resists Europe as a cultural / industrial totality. O bviously, this incl udes genetic Caucasians who struggle to resist the dominant norms of

The S a me Old S o ng

31

E u ropean culture; the I r i s h and the Basques c o m e i mmediately to mind, but t he re are many others. I work p rimarily with my own people, w it h m y own c o m

munity. Other people w h o h o ld n o n- E u r o pe a n perspect ives s h o u ld do the same. I do not p rocla i m myself a b l e to effectively d eal with t h e st ruggl e s of t h e Black c o m m u n i t y i n Watts or N ewar k . And I d o n't e x p ect a Black activist fro m t h ose commun ities to be particula rly effect ive in t h e d ay-to-day s t r u ggles of the L a k o t a people. Each c u l t u ral group can and m u s t build upon t h e basis of its own c u l t u r a l i ntegrity. This i s o u r s trength and t he s o u rce of o u r vision, a vision which c o m p e l l s u s to res i s t the i n d ustrial izat ion of E u r o pean culture. It i s this s o rt of vision w hich allows us to come toget her, to ally w i t h o n e a n other, t o p o o l o u r s t rength and reso u rces t o resist E u r o p e's d ea t h c u l t u re w h i le retaining our own identities as h u m a n beings. I do believe i n the s logan, "Trust your brother's vision," a l t h ough I'd like t o add s is t e rs i n t o t h e barga i n . I trust t h e c o m m u n ity / culturally based v i s i o n of all t h e races w h i c h natu rally res i s t i n d ustrialization and h u m a n exti nctio n . Clearly, i n d i v i d ual w h i tes can s h a re in t h i s , given o n l y t h at t h e y have reached the awareness that continuation of the i n d u s t ri a l i m pe ratives of E u rope is n o t a vision, but s pecies s uicide. W h ite is one of the s a c red c o lors of the Lak o t a people; red , y e l l o w , w hite, and black. T h e fo u r d i rect i o n s . The fou r seas o n s . The fou r periods of life a n d agi ng. Four races of h u m a n ity. M i x red , y e l l o w , w h ite, and black toget her and you get brown, t h e color o f t h e fift h race. This i s a natu ral ordering of t h ings. And so i t seems natural t o me t o w or k w i t h all races, e a c h with its o w n s p e c i a l m e a n i n g , identity, and message . B u t t here is a pecu l i a r behavior a m o n g m o s t Caucasians. As soon as I become critical of Europe a n d its i m p act o n other c u l t ures, they become defe n sive. They begin t o d e fend t hem selves. B u t I'm n ot attacking them pers o n al l y . I ' m attack i ng E u rope. I n personalizing my o bserv a t i o n s o n E urope they a re personalizing Eu ropean culture, identifying themselves with it; i n defen d i n g themse lves i n this context they a r e u l t i m ately defe n d i n g the d e a t h culture . T h i s i s a confu s i o n which must be over c o me, and it m u s t be overcome in a h u rry. N one of us have energy to waste in s uch false struggles.


32

Caucasians have a m o re positive vision t o o ffe r humanity t h a n E u ro p e a n culture. I bel ieve t h i s . But i n order to attai n t h i s v i s i o n it is necessary fo r Caucasians to step o u t s i d e of European culture-alongside t he rest of human ity-to see Europe fo r what it i s and what it d oes. To cling t o capitalism a n d M a rxism and all the other "isms" is s i m ply t o remain within E u r o pean culture. There is n o avoiding this basic fact. A s a fact this constitutes a ch oice. U nd e rstand t ha t t h e choice is based o n culture, not race . U n derstand that to c h o o s e European culture and industrialism is t o c h o ose t o be my enemy. A n d u n derstand the cho ice is yours, not mine. This leads m e back to those A merican I nd ians who a re d rift i n g t h rough t h e u n i versi ties, t he city s l u m s a n d other Euro pean institutions. I f y o u are t here t o learn to resist the oppressor in acc o rd a nce with y o u r traditional ways, s o be it. I d o n't k n o w h o w you manage t o c o m b i n e the t w o , but p e r h a p s you w i l l succeed . But retain y o u r s e n s e o f reality. Beware of coming to

believe the Euro world now offers solutions to the problems it c o n fronts us wit h . B e w a re too o f allowing the w o r d s of Native peo ple to b e twisted t o the ad vantage of o u r enemies. Europe invented the p ractice o f turning words around on themselves. You need only l o o k t o t h e t reaties between A merican Indian peoples and various E u ro pe a n governments t o know that this is true. Draw your strength fro m who you are. The twisting o f w o r d s goes on t oday; it has never stopped . This is why when I s p o ke in Geneva, S witzerland, about the coloni zation of i n d ige n o u s p e o p le s i n this hemisphere, I was

misrepresented as a "leftist" by some "radicals." This is why certain idiots are believed by a few empty heads when they label Ameri can Indian activists as being "Marxist-Leninists . " This is why certain groups in the "left" believe they share our values while rej ecting the same values at every practical turn . A cul ture which regularly confuses revolution with continuation , which confuses science and religion, which confuses revolt with res istence has n o t h i ng hel pfu l t o teach you, has nothing t o o ffer you as a way of life . E u r o p ea n s have long s i nce lost all t ouch with reali ty, if ever they were i n t o u c h with it. Feel sorry for them if you need to, but be c o m fo rtable with who you are as A merican I nd ians.

The Same Old S o ng

33

So, I suppose t o conclude this, I s h ou l d state clearly that leading anyone toward M arxism is t h e last t h i ng o n my mind. M a rxism is as alien t o my culture as capitalism and Christ ianity. In fact, I can say I d o n't t h i n k I ' m t r y i n g t o lead a ny o ne toward a nything. To some extent I t ried t o be a "leader" i n t he sense that the mainstream media liked t o use that term when the American Indian Movement was a young organizat i o n This was a result of a .

confusi o n I n o longer have. You cannot be everyt hing to every one. I d o n ot propose to be used in such fas h i o n by my enemies; I a m n ot a "leader." I am a n Oglala L a kota patriot. That's all I want or need to be. And I am very comfo rtable w i t h who I a m . . .

2 Searching for

a

Second Harvest The RCP

It i s a s ign of b o t h t h e advance s and t h e s t i l l rema i n i n g backwa rd nes s of t h e developing revo l u t i onary m ovement in the U . S . t ha t we are forced t o reply t o a recent s peech made by R ussell Means, fo r some time a well- k n ow n figure i n t he struggle of Native A mericans. The occas i o n for his t i rade was the 1 98 0 B l a c k H i l l s I nternational S u rvival G a t h e r i n g held fro m J uly

1 8-27 on a ranch outside the Black H il l s o f South Dak ota which d rew a n d e s t i m ated 1 0, 000 people. Participants were mostly vists fro m t h e anti-nuke movement, b u t t he event a l s o d rew s o me I n d ians a n d s o m e local ranchers. T h i s a re a , t h e l o cat ion of the Lakota Pine Ridge Reservation, has been t h e focus o f a great deal of s t r uggle a s rep orted i n t h e R W i n the p a s t . I t i s a k e y s o u rce i n t h e U . S . o f u ranium, t h e mining o f w h i c h h a s l e ft behind a lethal legacy o f c ontaminated water, a rate of m i s ca rriage s o n the reservation 6 Y2 t i mes the national average, and a n abomina bly h i g h rate o f birt h defect s , cancer and other causes o f death and d i sease to t h e Indian people. Means s poke on behalf of t h e Lakota A merican I n d i a n M ov e m e n t a nd h i s s peech w a s billed a s t h e keynote a d d ress. I t d i s gusted l i t e rally hund reds, left t h o us a n d s w i t h a s o u r taste i n t h e i r m o u t h s , and i n add ition t o c e rt a i n s t r on g-arm tactics p u rs ued by s o me forces gathered around Means at the gathering, has been t he s o u rce of widespread controversy within t h e I n d i a n m o v e m e n t and m o re broadly s i n c e t h e e v e n t c o n c l u d e d .

35

36

Marxism a n d Native A me ricans The heart o f M ea n s ' s peech i s a n attack o n revolut i o n i n

general a n d revo l u t i o n a ry M a r x i s m i n particular. H e attem pts t o t rade o n h i s rep u t a t i o n a s a n " A merican I nd i a n leader" (despite t h e o b ligatory fal s e disclai m e rs of " h u m i l ity" t o the contra ry) to ad vocate a program of capitulation to the enemy for both t he struggle of t he A merican I nd i a n s -a struggle which is gain i n g i n i ntensity and has been t he o bj ect o f vicious government reprisals as well as the movement m o re broadly. But beyond this, M e a n s' s peech is a s ort of inadvertent ad mission of the truth time a n d again n oted i n vari o u s ways by t h e great lead ers o f co m m u n i s m , fro m Karl M a rx t o Mao Tse t u ng: that fo r t here t o be a rev o l u t i o na ry movement, t here must be revol u t i o n ary t h e o ry. Therefore, M eans' speech i s p rinci p a l l y

ideological. H e is well a w a re t h a t p o l itical activists fro m various s p heres of social l i fe a re searching fo r answers, sea rching fo r a way out of t h i s mad-dog capitalist system. He at least senses t he renewal of revol u t i o nary ripples i n t he social fabric of this coun t ry and sense that t hese may well develop into m ighty waves i n the not too distant fut ure. But rather t h a n welcoming t hese develop ments for the promise t hey h o l d , h e fears getting washed away l i k e beach debris in the t i d e s . He has t h u s assigned h i mself t h e t a s k ( a n d we a r e n o t yet prepared t o s a y t hat he has been assigned the task) of concent rat i n g the most backward id eas w h ich have arisen particularly a m o n g s o m e a n t i-nuke and I nd ian activists into a worked o u t p o l e mic aga i n s t t h e most advanced ideas represented i n t h e p o l i t ical st ruggle i n this and other c o u n t ries, ideas which are today gai n i ng a begi n ning but significant i n fl u ence in the struggle of A me rican I n d ians-the ideas of revolu t i onary Marxism. To acco m p l i s h t hi s task, Means adopts the pose of the "noble savage, " fighting t o resist the corruption o f "European" o r " i n d ustrial" society. H i s t hesis is t h a t t h e enemy of Native A m e ri cans i s the industrialization t o w h i c h I n d ians have been s u bj e cted by E u ropean civi l i zat i o n and c u l t u re. I nd u strialization -even material p rogress itself-is t he e n e m y , independent of what class c o m m a n d s i t . M ea n s sees w h ite everywhere, warning I n d i a n y o u t h t o rej ect " E u r o p e a n c u l t u re" a n d return t o t he "natural ways" o f t h e I nd i a n s . H e s a y s : "It t a kes a strong effort o n the p a rt of each A m erican I nd i a n not to become E u ropeanized . The

Searching For A Second H a rvest

37

s t re ngt h of t h is effort can only come fro m their t raditional ways, the tra d i t i onal values that our elders retained. It must come from t he h o o p , t h e fou r d i rections, the relations; it c a n n o t co me fro m t h e pages o f a b o o k o r a t h o usand b o o k s ; n o E u ropean c a n ever teach a Lakota to be a Lakota, a H op i to be a H o p i . A n d furt her, n otes Means. when we say European we mean all w h i t e s . I n fact, his speech might a p p r o priately be entitled "it's the same old song," a p h rase he uses t hrough out. " I s h ould be clear a b out so met h i ng here. because t he re seems t o be some c o n fu s i o n a bout it. When I s pea k o f E u r o peans o r mental Euro peans. I ' m n ot all owing for false d istinctions. I'm n o t saying t hat on the o ne h a nd there are the byp ro d ucts o f a few t h o usand years of ge n o c i d a l , react io nary E u ropean intellectual development w hich i s bad , and o n t h e other hand t here i s s o m e new revolu t i o nary intel lect ual development which i s good. I ' m referring h e re t o the s o-called theories of M a rx i s m a n d a narchism and 'leftism' in general. I d o n't believe t hese theo ries can be separated fro m the rest of the E u ropean intellect ual trad i t i o n . It's really just t h e same old song." I n d eed t here is nothing all that new i n a "s o n g" which attacks M a rx i s m , even in the ever-so-slightly adapted "nat u ral" garb in w h ich i t is d ressed here. And c o u ld t he "confu s i o n" n oted by M eans i nd i cate that the general i n t e n t o f h i s s peech i s a feeble but very "theoretical" attempt to d r u m rev o l u t i o na ry M arxist idee s o u t of t he h eads of any young activist, o r fo r that mC!tter, any other i deas with a revol u t i o n a ry t h rust? Evidently, this i s his intent, beca use what fol l o ws these introd uctory c o mments is a t i rade w h i c h insidi ously tries to lump together capitalism and c o m m u n i s m , the bourgeoisie a n d t h e p roletariat, react i o n and revo l u t i o n . And t h i s is combined w i t h d emagogic but a l m ost l a ugh a ble a p peals t o quit fu cking w i t h m o t h e r n a t u re . And wh ile all this may well had had some influence a m o n g people who view the a t o m as the enemy, a fact that we certai n ly take i n t o acco u nt, it is a l s o i m portant to n ote the w i d e s p read sentiment of many c o ncerning Means' speech, concent rated in the words of one young activist i n the I nd ian move m e n t : "The fo o l is t ry i ng t o take u s back 250 yea rs . " A ct u a l ly, t here is even m o re t r u t h i n t h a t c o m ment t h a n t h i s c o m r a d e m a y have realized . For t hi s i d e a o f t h e " n o ble savage," t h e s u pposedly natural man w h o has not been c orru pted by t he

38


artificialities, hypocrisy a n d dest ructive s p i ritual empti ness of civiliza t i o n -t h i s id ea i s not t he original c reation of R u s s e l l M eans o r of t h e A merican I n d i a ns o r of "primitive m a n , " b u t rat her h a s its o r i g i n s i n E u r o p e s o m e 250-300 yea rs ago. T h e e x p a n d i n g b ourgeoisie a n d t he i r ideol ogists of t h a t t i me idealized the A merican I nd i a n s and o t h e r i nd i ge n o u s peop les with w h o m they w e r e aggressively c o m i ng i n c o n t a c t , p u rp o r t i ng to fi nd i n t h e m all t h e v i rtues w h i c h t he i r o w n b u rgeo n i ng civil izat i o n s o o bv i o u s l y lacked . A nd a s M a rx p ointed out, t h i s particular ideo logical crea t i o n was not j us t accidental, n o r was it what i t appeared to be o n t h e s urface, b u t r a t h e r i t had defi n ite r o o t s i n t h e growing bourgeois rela t i o n s o f prod ucti on. The i n d iv�d ual a n d i s o l ated h unter or fisherman, with whom S m i th a nd R i c a rd o begi n , i s one of the uni ma ginative fantasies of eighteent h-cen t u ry roma nces a Ja R o bi n s o n C r u s o e , w h i c h b y n o m e a n s e x p re s s m e rely a react i o n aga i n s t overre finement a n d a revers ion to a m i s u n d e r s t o o d n a t u r a l l i fe , a s c u l t u ra l h i s t o ri a n s i magine . . . T h i s i s a n i l l u s i o n a nd t h e m e rely aesthetic i l l u s i o n of the R o binsonades, great and s ma l l . On the cont rary, it is the anticipat i o n o f "civil s ociety" (capitalism), which began t o evolve in t h e s i x teenth cen t u ry and made giant s t rides t oward s m a t u rity i n the eighteenth. I n this society of free c o m petit i o n t h e i n d i vidual seems de tached fro m t h e natural ties, etc. , w h i c h in earlier histor ical e p o c h s make h i m a n a p p u rtena nce of a particular, l i mited h u man c o n gl o me ra t i o n . The p r o p hets of t he e i g h tee n t h centu ry , o n w h o se s h o ulders S mith and R icard o were s t i l l s t a n d i n g w i t h their whole weight, envisaged this eighteenth-century i n d ividual-the prod uct of the d i s s o l u t i o n o f feu d a l society on the one hand and of the new prod uctive forces evolved since t he sixteenth century on t h e o t her-as an ideal whose exist ence bel o n ged to t he p a s t . N o t a s a h i s t orical resu lt, but as h i s t o ry's point of d e p a rt u re . Not as arising histori cally but as posited b y nature, because this ind ividual was in c o nfo r m i t y with n a t u re, i n keeping with their

Searching For A Second H arvest

39

idea of h u man nat u re. ( K arl M a rx, " I ntroducti on to A Con tribution to the Critiques of the Polit ical Econ omy, " Grundrisse. ) As we s h a l l see often as w e go a l o ng, fa r fro m repud iating, e s c a p i n g or c o m batting capital i s m and E u r o pean civilizat i o n . M ea ns h a s i n fact adopted some o f t h e i n s i p i d fantasies of t h e b o u rgeo i s ie a n d h a s capitulated t o t h e m . F u rt he r , the total b a c k ward ness of Means' ad option o f this mythical " n o ble s av age" stance leads to m o re than a bit of h y pocrisy as he attempts t o c a r ry it t h rough. His assault against theory ( " t h e o ry is an abstract, o u r k n owle d ge i s real") as a "European" d e ve l o p me n t so mehow h a s n't p rev e nted him from atte m p t i n g t o make h i s o w n "theoreti cal" co n t r i butions to the times i n w h i c h we l i ve. A n d while he c o m pl a i n s ea rly i n his s peech that " w r i t i n g . . . i s one of t h e w h it e w orld's w a y s of destroying t he cultures of n o n- E u ropean peoples, the i m p os i n g of an abstract i o n over the s p o k e n relat i o n s h i p of a p e o ple," it was a p p a rently w i t h i n t h e scope of t h e "natural" p h i l o s o p h y of R ussell M e a n s to have s o me o n e write out, rep r o

d uce a n d d is tribute t h i s s peech s o t hat people at t he S u r vival G a t hering could read it.

.

C o ns i d e ring Means' incessant chatter a b o u t M ar x i s m being a " c o n t i n uation of European intellectu a l trad i t i o n , " he o bviously fee l s it i s best to have his own intellectual r o o t s left u n d e rgro u n d . B u t M a r x i s t s have no need fo r s u c h 0 bfu s ca ti o n . The p h i l o s o p h y o f d ialectical material ism d i d ind eed d evel o p out o f the p h i lo s o p hies of t he rad ical b o urgeoisies of E u r o p e , most i mmediately fro m the d i a l ectics of H egel and the materialism o f Feuerbach. With t h e d e velo p ment of the m o d ern proletariat, M arx and E n gels were able to leap beyond t h e idealism of t h e fo rmer and the met a p hysics of the latter to d i scover the true nature o f mate r i a l real i t y in historical society u n h i nd e red by t h e b o u rgeo i s viewpoint, w h i c h l i k e that of all p revi o u s ruling c l a s s e s , has the need to view its system as the c u l m i n a t i o n of all human develop ment, eternal, unchanging, etc. As Bob Avakian p o i nted out in his boo k , Mao Tsetung's Immortal Con tributions; . . . t h i s philosophy was not s i mp l y , or fu ndamentally,

40

Marxism and Native Americans the prod uct of the brai ns of Marx and Engels . It was t he result of the develop ment of capitalism, of natural science and of t he class struggle. And it was the product of a dialectical process of development of p hilosophy itself, reflect ing these changes and upheavals in society and in man's comprehension and mastery of the natural world. Nor did d ialectical and historical materialism represent M a r x and E ngels and a few others alone; it was , and is, the revoluti onary p h i l o s o p hy of the prole tariat, both o bj ective and partisan, reflecting both the o bjective laws of natural and historical development and the i nterests and historic mission of the proletariat , which are fully in accord with t hese laws. For, unlike all other classes in human hist o ry which have previously risen to t he ruling position and remolded society in t heir i mage, the proletariat aims not merely t o seize p ower; its mission is not to establish an " eternal" u nchanging system representing the "end p oint" of human devel o p ment, but to abolish all class distinctions and enable mankind to continuo usly overcome barriers to devel opment of hu man society and its transformation of nature. (page 1 39.) We d o n't feel there's so met hing shameful about the fact that

M arxism has its roots i n capitalism, t hat it developed out of the co ntrad icti ons of b o u rgeois society. The proletariat itself is o bviously a p roduct of capitalism, and i n fact everyt hing devel ops out of the c o ntradictions o f what already exists. I f Means fi nds it necessary t o pretend that his ideas come from outside of the world of capitalism and i m perialism, i t is only because he has s o mething to hide. S h o rtly after the passage by M arx q u oted above, he further notes, "The point need not have been mentioned at all, if this n o nsense, which had rhyme and reason for the people of the eighteenth century, had not again been pulled back i n all serious ness into modern political economy by Bastiat, Carey, Proud h o n , etc." The same can be said about Russell M eans . And the fact t hat he would g o several centu ries backward to fish up


41

aspects o f b ourgeois myth which has l ost whatever feeble j ustifi cation it may once have had , and w h i c h has by n o w become both hackneyed and reactionary, and that he d redges it u p i n o rd e r to attack revol utionary M arxism-well, all this should be a clue as to what he has to hide and what he is actually up to. And s u re enough, we find that Means d oes after all d raw a certain distinction between capitalists a n d M arxists: "Capitalists, at least can be relied upon to develop uranium as fuel at the rate at w hich t h e y can show a g o od profit. That's their ethic, and maybe that will buy some time. Marxists on the other hand , ca n be relied u p o n t o develop uranium fuel as rapidly as possible s i m ply because it's the most 'efficient' production fuel available. That's their e t h ic and I fail to see where its preferable . " This t hinly d isguised defense o f bourgeois class rule is followed by a program o f total capitulation to imperial i s m i n crisis. Now we are told: " . . . The European a rrogance o f acting as though t hey we re beyond the nature of all related t hings, can only res ult i n a total d i s ha r m o n y and a readj ustment which cuts arrogant humans d o wn t o size, gives them a taste of that reality beyond their grasp o r control and restores the harmony . . . Mother Earth will retaliate , the whole environ ment will retaliate and the abusers will be e l i m i nated . . . . I t's only a matter of time until what E u ropeans call 'a maj or catastrop h e o f global proportions' will o ccur. I t is t he role of A merican I nd i a n peoples, the role of all n a tural-beings to survive. A part of our survival i s t o resist. We resist, not t o overthrow the government or to take political p o wer, but because it is natural t o resist extermination . . . A merican I ndians are still in touch with these realities. We learned fro m the elders, fro m nature , fro m the powers. And when the catastro p he is over, we indige n o u s peoples will still be here to i n habit the hemisp here. I don't care i f it's only a handful o f Red p eople living high i n the Andes, i n d igenous people will survive and harmony will be reestablished. Tha t 's revolutio n . " S o rry, Russell Means, b u t t hat's capitulation-to the hilt. H ere is program for withdrawal until some never-never time off i n the future after the "catastrophe," clearly referring to the p o ssibilities of nuclear wea p o n s in the coming s howdown b etween the U . S . and t he Soviet U n i o n . As for any funny ideas a bout t rying to preven t inter-im perialist war through revoluti on, a ny attem pts to turn this aro u n d o n the imperialists if t hey a re

42

Marxism and Native A m e ricans

able to start i t -forge t i t , j ust wait a r o u n d passively for the new savior, this t i me M other Earth i nstead of the old, d iscred ited Jesus C h rist t o take c a re of i t a l l fo r you. Means has adopted a n old plan t o let t h e real " p o w e rs" t h a t t oday t h reaten the world's people with world war c o mpletely o ff t h e h o o k . Everything will work out, a s long as s o me " s u rvive" -even if it's s o mewhere in t he Andes. A n d j u s t i n case anyone might not realize through all t h i s t h a t he i s really q u ite c o mfortable w i t h t he way t h ings are, M eans let i t all h a n g o u t at a later point i n t h e Gat hering when h e said, " Part o f t h e c o n s u m p t i o n s o ciety, the indust rial society which they've laid o n u s , i s i mpatience . . . we have t o ack n owl edge that resista nce is goi n g t o take ge nerations, its' a p rocess o f ed ucat ion

.

. . I s e e n o reaso n t o s t o p i t o r hu rry it up."

Anyone who has any sense o f the d u ng heap that is t h is society, anyone w h o has c o m e i n t o p o l it ical struggle agai nst a ny of t h e atrocities o f the capitalist system -fr o m the wholesale slaughter a n d c o n t i n u i n g d egrad a t i o n and o p p ress i o n o f the Native American people, t o the massive t h reat o f disease and death posed by the capitalist n u clear i n d u s t ry, and especially to t h e war feverishly bei ng p rep ared by t he U.S. imperialists and t h e i r S oviet rivals-anyone w h o wants to do something a b o u t all t h is shit should by n o w be going through a "p rocess of educa t i o n " the mselves c o n c e r n i n g the stand, t h e politics-and yes , t h e philos o p hy-of R ussell M ea n s ! *

*

*

*

•

R ussell Means' speech is b o g u s . H e h a s no m o re intenti on o f lead i ng a back-to-nature m o v e m e n t t h a n t h e U . S . h a s of a b a n d on i ng plans to mine u ra n i u m in the Black H ills. H is ideological offensive against M arxi s m -a n d rev o l u t i o n in general-is serv ing an i m p o rtant fu nction for t h e rule rs of the U . S. at a crucial ' time i n the hist o ry o f t h i s c o untry. J u s t the same, while i t is true that his speech , his "natu ral" pat h forward s o t o speak, has invoked hostility o n the part of many activists, i t is also t rue t h at the general ideology-on w h ich h i s s peech was based , one rooted i n a basic i dealist and metaphysical world outlook, is still wide spread i n the U . S . t o d ay including a m o n g t h ose active in struggle against various aspects of i mperiali s m , and t hat in particu lar, t h e spiritualism o f t h e " revenge r of M ot h e r Earth" and t h e romanti-


43

cized n o t i o n of a n earlier, pre-ind u s t r i a l time i s a widely held v i e w p o i n t a mong those active in t h e struggle against t h e o p p res s i o n of Native America n s . In other words, many of b o t h t h e p a rt icular a n d general ideas M e a n s p u t s fo rward are s h ared b y many w h o are friends and allies in t h e revolutionary fight. This is inevita b l e and will be t rue u p to, d u ring a n d a fter a revolution, for resistance, s t ruggle, and even revo l u t i o n s d o n o t c o m e to t h i nk j u st alike. People are d rawn into s truggle and revolution o u t of m a ny d ifferent necessities a n d with many d i fferent ideas i n t h e i r heads. B u t at the same time, revo l u t i o n ary struggle w i l l c e a s e to g o forwa rd at some point a n d will u lt i m a tely fail. if the gu iding i d e ology o f t h e struggle d oes not c o ns i s t of-an d i n t he case o f

this histo rical epoch, t h i s m e a n s Marxism -t h e m o s t a d vanced and scientific ideas available and i f this i d e o l ogy d oesn't increas ingly bec o m e the property of the masses o f people the mselves. Therefore, first, we recognize a clear and sharp d i ffere nce b e t we e n friends and enemies-between t h o s e w h o may have c o n fused o r backward ideas but fig h t against i m perialism on the one hand, and t h ose w h o are t ry i n g t o use reac t i o n a ry ideas t o derail t h e fight and l e a d it i n a c o u nte r-revolutionary d irecti o n , o n the o t h e r . A n d sec o n d , we struggle a g a i n s t t h e i n c orrect id eas t hat c o n fu s e and mis lead people. S p e ci fically, i n this case we must talk about b o t h a scientific w o rld view in general a n d about a c o r rect und erst a nd i ng of the h i s t ory o f A merican I nd i a n s in p a rt i c u l a r. The s truggle fo r a s c i e ntific u n d ersta n d i n g of t h e h i s t o rical d evel o p m e n t and p res ent situati o n of Native A merica n s i s an i m portant task, but not because I nd i a n s are somehow i n nately s u perior t o o t h e r people, a s M e a n s would have us believe. It i s because such a n u n d ersta nd ing is a n i m p o rtant p rereq u i site for t h e co rrect p ro g ra m m e of the p r o letarian revo lution i n t h i s country, a n d w i l l a l s o m a k e great c o n t ri b u t i o n s to man's understan d i n g o f the ove rall d evel o p me n t o f s ociety. A ctually, one of the big p r o blems i n volved i n such an u n d e rt a k i n g is that the vast maj o rity o f t h e s t u d ie s d on e s o far h a ve been colored by the b o urge o i s prej U dices a n d viewpoints of m a ny a n t h r o pologists -ideas which in essence are little different fro m t h o se o f Russell Means. For exa m p l e , the r a m p a n t idealism o f M e a n s' t h e o ries abounds i n n u m e r o u s studies of Indian cultu r a l for m s , se parated off fro m and in fac t raised a b ove t h e devel o p me n t o f t h e productive fo rces of the period being d iscusse d .

44


This is also true o f bourgeo is a n t h r o pologists. ( I ncidentally, t h is state of affairs will itself be transfo rmed one day. It is truly insp iring t o consider t h e fact that o nce the proletariat has seized power and ended t he b o u rgeo isies' m o n o p oly over much of the k n o w ledge o f man's devel o p m e n t , t h e class co nscious proletariat will be able t o unite wit h A merican I n d ians to discover the actual process o f d evel o p ment. S u c h discoveries a re impossible u n d e r the r u l e of the bourgeoisie, w h i c h a s i d e fro m i t s overall metaphys ical and idealist viewpoint also has t he particular necessity of j u st ifying its continuing nati o n a l o ppression of Native A m e r icans.) Still, there i s much that has a l ready been proven which i s u seful today. W e k n o w , for example, that at the t i me of the first lasting E u ropean c o ntacts i n t he

1 500s the Native American

populati o n o f what is now t he U . S . was made up of a wide di versity o f tribes, s ome of which were mainly no madic hunters and gatherers, whil e others were m ore agricultural and many relied o n a c o m bination of t h e two for their subsistence. Gener ally s peaking, while there existed t h e beginni ngs of class divi s i o n s among s o m e t r i b e s , n o t a b l y i n t h e s o u t heastern part of t h e U . S . , overwhelmingly d evel o p ment had n ot gone beyond the u p p e r stages o f primitive c o m m u nalist-t h at is, the initial stage of human society prior to t h e develo p ment o f classes and private property. The low level o f the p ro d uctive forces meant that people lived at a su bsistence level characterized by scarcity: there was no s u rp l u s t o a l l o w fo r the e x i stence of a class t hat lived o ff the l a b o r of others o r fo r p rivate ownership of the means o f production. People were o bliged t o w o r k together to avoid star vation o r attack fro m a n i mals and neighboring tribes. Further, the level of s ociety existing at that time was itself a p rod uct of d evelo p me n t fro m earlier times. The first Native A mericans were not really "native" at all, but came to this conti nent fro m Asia, most likely across a land bridge that formerly con nected Alaska and shown that by about

S i beria.

Archeological findi ngs have

1 0,000 B.C. at the end of the Pleistocene

Period (also k n o w n a s the ice age) man in t his hemisphere was p rimarily a big game h u n ter, traveling i n small bands and killing a n i mals like the m a m m o t h and b i s o n antiques fo r his foo d . Perhaps the fact t hat t h e s e a n i m a l s n o l onger e x i s t explains

Searching For A Second Harvest

45

M eans' reluctance to cite this particular p re-tribal period as part of the "trad i tional" ways h e claim s t o want t o return to; anyone w ho d e pe n d ed o n t he mammoth for food today would be i n big trouble. In any case, early man's s u pposed "natural harmony with all related things" did not prevent h i m fro m u nconsciously contributing to the d isappearance o f those animals with such i nefficient s laughtering methods a s t h e jumpkill - with t h is method a band of hunters armed only with spears would sur round a herd of t hese much larger a n i mals and d rive them off a cliff to their death. (And here, where t h i s society was able to create a - m o mentary-surplus value above s u bsistence needs, it could n't be used and most of the meat had t o be left to rot . ) A nother way o f life was develo p i n g a s t h e big game hunting period was coming to a close-ba n d s of h unters and gatherers m oving around differen t regions, with somewhat d ifferen t levels of s u b sistence based on the a m o u n t of s m a l l game and natural vegetation in the area. This was still m arked by extreme scarcity. Perhaps Means would like t o be transported back some 7,000 years t o t h e d ays of the d esert bands of t h e great basin of Nevada and western Utah t o live in the ways of "the ancestors" o f that p e riod. Anthropolgists recently e x a mined a cave i n the area and t h e results of their findi ngs were s u m med u p i n t he Ne w York Times o n Tuesday, August 1 2 : " I n o n e o f the middens ( refuse heaps) t he scientists found large d e p o sits of coprolites, desicated h u man feces. S ince it seemed strange that t he ancient people would use a storage cave as a latrine, Dr. Thomas said , i t is possible that the feces were stored t h ere for what archeologists call t he 'second harvest.' Other p ri m itive people were known to h ave s aved t heir feces s o that, in t i m e o f famine, t hey could extract und igested seeds and other prod ucts for foo d . A nalysis of the cop rolites showed that the heads of cattails and other marsh plants were a substantial part of the lakeside people's diet." And while we are on the subject of t h e supposed glories of earlier times, we wonder if M eans would advocate a return to a p a rt o f the t ribal traditions of t he C h ippewyans o f Canada, who o n occasion allowed their female i n fants t o d ie -a practice viewed by some of t he adult women a s a k indness. Women were beaten frequently, and although i t was a crime t o kill a Chipp e wyan man, a husband was permitted t o beat h i s wife to death with n o p u n ishment at all. The point here is n o t to lapse into some

46


rid icu l o u s argument that p e o p l e now are better than people

then, or that o ne a rea of t h e world p rod uced better people than another-after all , most E u r o pe a n s (themselves not i n d ige n ous) went t h ro u g h s i m i la r stages of development. (In the case o f the q uesti on o f treatment o f w o me n , t h e stage of development still exists to a great degre e . ) The point is t o u n d e rstand what is at the basis o f the d evel o p m e n t o f society and on what society itself is based . As M ar x put it in the c o u rse of a p o lemic against Prou d h o n ( w h o has several p o i n t s i n c o m m o n with Means) describing h o w t h e struggle o f m a n agai n s t n a t u re determi nes t h e overall co urse o f h u m a n h i st o ry: "what he h a s n o t u n d e rstood is that these d efinite social relations are j us t a s much produced by men a s l i nen, fl a x , e t c . Social relat i o n s a r e cl osely b o u n d up w i t h prod uc tive force s . I n acquiring new p r o d u ctive fo rces men cha nge t he i r m o d e of p r o d u c t i o n ; a n d i n c h a n g i n g t h e i r m o d e of product i o n , i n c h a n g i n g their w a y o f earning thei r l i v i ng, t hey cha nge all t h e i r s ocial relat i o n s i n c o n fo r m ity w i t h t h e i r material productivity, prod uce also principles, ideas a n d categories, i n conformity with their s ocial relat i o n s . " ( The Poverty of Philosophy, p . 1 09.) Contrast t h is a nalysis o f the development of society w i t h M eans' idealist child i s h a t t e m p t s t o d e m o li s h M a rxist material i s m by vulgarly terming it "ga i n i n g . " M a rxist materia lism, says Means, is so met h i n g "(seen by) A m e rican I n d ians . . . as still m o re of t hat same o l d E u ropean co nflict between being a n d ga i n i n g . . . being is s p i ritual propositi o n . G a i n i ng i s a material a c t . Trad i t i o nally A merican I nd i a n s have al ways attempted to be t h e best people t hey could. Part of t h a t s p i r i t u a l p rocess was and is to give away wealth, to d iscard wealt h in order not to gai n . M aterial gair, is an i n d icator of false status a mo n g traditional people while it is 'proof t h e system w o rks' to E u ropea n s . Clearly, t here are two c u m p letely opposing views at i s s u e h e r e , a n d M a rxism is very fa r over to the other side of t h e A merican I n d i a n view." Where, even in t h e most pri mitive s ociety that Means c o u ld i nv o k e , is it n o t t r u e t hat s o c iety's basis is the procurement ("gai n i ng") of t h e m e a n s of s u bs i s t e n ce? Cert a i n ly not in t he p revi o u s example cited, whose "trad i t i o n a l way" somehow gets left out of the " b e i n g vs. · gaini ng" fantasy. A nd beyond t h i s, s ociety i s constantly i n m o t i o n -nothing i n M eans' maternal


47

friend nature, includ ing mankind, i s unchangeable. The prod uc t ive forces develop as a result of the struggle of man against n a t u re -and this is independent of anyone's s u bjective desires. The H o p i tribe, whose "trad itional ways" Means continually u p holds as an example of the type of s ociety t o which we all s h o uld ret urn, h ave the mselves gone t h rough this process of development, attaining higher levels of production of the necessi ties of life with new developments in the productive forces. Their ancestors hunted deer and mountain s heep by throwing wood and later spears; they lived in caves and rock shelters. With the i nve ntion of both the bow and arrow and certain agricultural i m p lements, t heir society advanced to a higher level . There was n o w m o re certa i nty of meat and produce in t heir d iet. The formation of village commu nities d eveloped where maize and beans were cultivated . The later inve n t i o n o f the hoe led to greater d omestication o f plant life, including cotton (which now resu lted i n new apparel) and a much m ore c o mplex, mainly agricultural society. Clearly, t here was a great deal of "gaining" going on here. Means' claim that Indians gave away wealth, "in order not to gain," while t rue within many c o m m u na l , that is classless t ri bes, certainly d oesn't apply t o relati o n s between tribes. He c onve niently ignores the numerous n o madic tribes t hat went to war with each other over the "richest" hunting areas , as well as those t h a t raided the agricultural settle ments of others for their p ro d u ce and i mplements. It is quite true that primitive c o mmunalism was very egalitari a n -and it is j ust such equality, of classle�sness, that c o m munism o f the future will reproduce, but o n a much higher and qualitat ively differen t level. For i n prim itive society t h i s equality is q uite rest ricted b o t h in the sense that it applies only within each tribe, and i n the sense t hat it i s based o n a very restricted level of material-productive d evelopment. And be cause o f these facts, it als o restricted h u man develo pment. In order to move beyond this level, it was necessary to negate equality, to move through an epoch of class s o ciety, with all its brutal oppression, i n order to deve l o p the productive forces of h u manity and make possible a far higher equality. As Engels

explains in A nti- Duhring, in a passage which is worth quoting at s o me lengt h :

48

Marxism and Native A mericans The d i v i s i o n o f s ociety into a n exploiting and an explo ited class, a ruling and an o p p ressed class, was the necessary outcome o f t h e low d evelopment o f produc t i o n h i t h e rt o . S o l o n g as t h e s u m o f social l a b o r yielded a p r o d u ct which o n l y slightly e xceeded w hat was neces sary fo r the bare e xistence of a l l ; so l o ng, therefore, as all or a l m o s t all the t i me of the great maj o rity o f the mem bers o f s ociety was a b s o r bed i n labor, s o long was s o ciety necessarily d ivided into classes. Alo ngside of this great maj ority exclusively a bsorbed in labor there developed a class, freed fro m d i rect productive labor, w hi c h ma naged the gene ral b u s i ness of s ociety; the d i rect i o n of labor, affairs of state, j ustice , science, art, and so fo rth . It is therefore the law of the d ivision o f l a b o r w h i c h lies at t h e r o o t o f t h e d iv i s i o n into classes . But this d oes not mean t hat t h i s division into classes was not established by violence and robbery, by decep t i o n and fra u d , or t hat the r u l i n g class, o nce in the saddle, has ever failed to s t rengthen its d o mination at the cost of the w o r k i ng class a n d t o convert its social management into the exploitatio n of the masses. But i f, o n these g ro u n d s , t h e d i v i s i o n into classes has a certain h istorical j u stificati o n , it has t his o nly for a given period of t i m e , for given social conditions. It was based on the i n s u ffi ciency of p roduct i o n ; it will be swept away by the fu ll d evel o p ment of the mod ern p r o ductive fo rces. A nd in fac t t h e abolition of social classes has as its pres upposition a stage of historical d evelo p ment at w h i c h the existence not merely of s o me particular ruling class o r o t h e r but of any ruling class at all, that is to say, o f class d i fference itself, has become an anachroni s m , is o u t of d ate. It t he refore presupposes that the development of prod u c t i o n and of prod ucts, and with these, of p o l itical s upremacy, the monopoly of educati o n and i ntellectual leadersh i p by a special class of s ociety, has b ec o m e n o t o n l y s u perfluous but also econo mically, p o l itically and intellectually a hind rance to development.

Searc hing For A Second H a rvest

49

This point has now been reached . Their political and intellectual ban kruptcy i s hardly still a secret to the b o u rgeo i s i e t h e m selves, and t h e i r eco n o m ic bank ruptcy recurs regularly every ten years . In each crisis society i s smothered u nder the weight of its own pro d uc t ive forces and p roducts of which it can m a ke no use, and stands helpless i n the face o f the a b s u rd con trad iction t hat the prod ucers have n o t h i ng to consume because there are no consu mers. The expanding force of the means of production bursts asunder the bonds imposed upon them by the capitalist mode o f produc t i o n . Their release fro m these bonds is t h e sole condi tion necessary for an u n broken a n d constantly more rapidly progressing development of the productive for ces , and therewith of a practically limitless growth of prod uction itself. Nor is this all. The appropriation of society of the means of production puts a n end not only to the a rtificial res t raints o n production which exist today, but also to the positive waste and destruction of productive forces and p roducts which is n o w t h e i nevit able accompaniment of prod uction and reaches its ze n i t h in crises. Further, it sets free for society as a w hole a mass o f means of product i o n and p r o ducts by putting an end to the senseless luxu ry and extravagance of t he p resent ruling class and its political rep resenta t ives. The possibility o f secu ring for every m e m ber of society, through social production, a n existence which is not o nly fully sufficient fro m a material standpoint and becoming richer fro m day t o day, but also guaran tees to t hem the completely u nrestricted development and exercise of their physical and mental faculties -this possibility now exists for the first time, but i t does exist. E n gels continues with a d iscussio n of the fut u re communist s o ciety: The seizure of the means of prod uct i o n by s ociety puts an end to commodity prod u ct i o n , and t he rewith to the d o minat ion of the prod uct over the p roducer. A narchy

50

Marxism a n d Native A mericans in social prod uct i o n is replaced by conscious o rganiza tion o n a p l a n ned basis. The struggle fo r i n d ividual ex istence comes to �n end . A nd at this point, i n a certain sense, man fi nally cuts h i m self off fro m the ani mal world , leaves the c o n d i t i o n of a n i mal ex istence beh ind h i m and enters c o n d i t i o n s which are really h u ma n . The conditions of e x i ste nce for m i ng man's environment, w hich u p to now have d o mi n ated man, who n o w for the fi rst time bec o mes t he real conscious master of nature, because and i n s o far as he has beco me master of his own social o rga n i z a t i o n . The laws of his o w n social activity, which have hithert o confronted him as e x ter nal, d o m i nated laws of nature, will t hen be ap plied by man with co m p lete understandi ng, and he nce will be d o mi nated by m a n . M e n's own social organizat i o n which has h i t herto stood i n o p p o s i t i o n t o them as i f arbitrarily decreed by n a t u r e and hist ory, will then beco me the voluntary act of men t hemselves. The objec tive, external forces which have hitherto d o mi nated history, will then pass under the co ntrol of men t hem selves. It is o n ly fro m this point that men, with fu ll conscio usness, w i ll fas h i o n their own history; it is only fro m t h i s point t h at the s ocial ca uses set in motion b y men will have, p red ominantly and in constantly increas ing measure, the effects willed by m e n . It is h u manit y'S leap fro m the rea l m of necessity into the rea l m of freedo m . T o carry through this w o rld-emancipating a c t is the hist orical missi o n of the modern p roletariat. And it is the task of scientific s ocia lis m , the theoretical expres s i o n of the proletarian movement, to establish t he his torical conditions a n d , with t hese, the nature o f this act, and thus to bri ng to the consciousness of the now oppressed class t h e conditions and nature of the act which it is its destiny to acco mplis h . At t h is point in h i s t o ry, when t he leap of mankind i n t o the

rea l m of freed o m is act ually o n the h o rizo n, to p reach instead the necessity for a "seco nd harvest" o f primit ive life is an expression either of despair or o f counte r-revolution and reaction.


51

With Means, it co mes d o w n m o re t o reacti o n . Here he is e x t olling pri m itiveness and telling h o w I n d ia n s l i ke t o give away t h e i r material goods -which fits in p retty well with the old capi t a l ist tradition of stealing fro m t h e I ndians all t hey have and forcing t hem t o live i n abject poverty. Of c o u rse, M ea n s might argue that his main beef is against mach i n e ry and industry, t hat machi nes pollute the water, that machines will destroy t h e world , etc. But really isn't t h i s m o re t h a n a l ittle pragmatic, a "theo ry" based o n t h e appearance of t h i ngs and n ot their essence? W o u ld M ea n s argue, to take a n ot able exam ple from t he hist o ry o f t h e capitalists' o pp res s i o n of I n d ians, that i nstead of blaming the U . S . gove r n ment for inten t i o nally infesting blankets sold t o t h e I nd ia n s w i t h smallpox v i rus, t h at one should i n stead blame the blankets for t h e deaths caused by the d isease? There was, in the development of capitalism, a period in w hich the class struggle between workers and capitalists focused o n the i ntroduction o f machinery. When new machi nes were in t r o duced , vast numbers of pe o ple were thrown out of work, and as a means of gaining back their j o bs, l arge crowd s would destroy the m a c h i nery. The machi nes, on the other hand, were often c o nsci o usly i ntroduced by the capitalists as a means o f re p ressing s t r i kes. Marx, in recounting this h i s t o rical peri o d , re marks, "It t o o k bot h time and ex perience befo re t he w o r k pe o p le learnt to d i sting u i s h between machi nery and i t s employment by capital, and to d i rect t heir attacks, not agai nst the material instruments of p roduction, but against the mode i n which t hey were used . " ( Cap ital. Vol. I , page 429). H e re as elsewhere, we see a sentiment o r idea w h i c h once had s o me h i storical j ustificati o n , but which has l o n g s i nce been by passed-and which M ea n s now p r o poses to raise to a principle ! W hat h e cannot and will not u nderstand is s omet h i ng Engels p o i nted out over 1 00 years ago (to quote aga i n from A n ti Duhring) :

T h e forces operating i n society w o r k ex actly l i k e the forces operating i n nature-blindly, violently, destruc tively, s o long as we d o n o t understand t h e m a n d fa il t o t a k e t he m into account. B u t w h e n o n c e we h a v e recog nized them and u n d e rstood h o w t hey work. t he i r d i rec-

52

Marxism and Native A mericans tion and their effects, the grad ual subjection of them to our will an d the use of t hem for the attainment of our aims depend entirely upon ourselves. And this is quite especially true o f the mighty productive forces of the p resent day. S o l o ng as we o bsti nately refuse to under stand their nature and t heir character-and t he capital ist mode of production and its defenders set t hemselves against any such attempt-so long do these forces o perate in spite of us, against us, and so long do they control us, as w e have shown in detail. But o nce t heir nature is grasped, i n the hands of the producers work ing in associ ation they ca n be transformed from demon like masters into w i lli n g servants. It is the difference

between the destructive force of electricity in the light ening of a thunderstorm and t he tamed electricity of the telegraph and the a rc light; the d ifference between a conflagration and fire in the service of man. This treat ment of the p ro ductive forces of the p resent d ay, on the basis of their real nature at last recognized by society, opens the way to the replacement of the anarchy of social p roduction by t he socially planned regulation of production in accordance with the needs both of society as a whole and of each individ ual. The capitalist mode of appropriation, in which the product enslaves first the prod ucer and then also the appropriator, will thereby be rep laced by the mode of appropriation of the prod ucts based on the nature of the modern means of pro d uction themselves; o n t he one hand direct social appropriation as a means to the maintenance and extension of production, and o n the other hand direct i n d ivid u al a p p r o priation as a m eans to l i fe and pleasure. R ussell Means bills h imself as the exponent of nature and the natural, but i n fact he never strays outside the bounds of capitalism and bourgeois ideology. As we saw above, the roman tic l o nging for the supposed simpler and nobler life of primitive man is a product and a n expression of capitalist social relations, as is the view that history will never advance beyond capitalism. As Marx sums this up: "It is as ridiculous to yearn for a return to


53

t h a t original fullness as it i s to believe that with this co mplete e mptiness history has come to a standstill. The bourgeois view p o i nt has never advanced beyond this a n tithesis between itself and this romantic viewpoint, and therefore t he latter will acco m pany it as legitimate antithesis up to its b lessed end." ( Grundrisse, p. 1 62,) Well, if Russell Means wishes to return to the d ays of the "second harvest" -either economically o r politically o r both -he is free to do so; in fact, we are q uite willing to help him in h is q uest. We ony p lead t hat he not take everyone else along with h i m , His "bei ng" is a head-long flight into fantasy over reality, s p irit over nature, ideas over matter-all with the end result of keeping man perpetually hel pless before forces he would o bsti nately have us refuse to understand o r control. H is idealism remind s us of an incident which took p l ace i n a college classroom i n the early '70s. A professor, ideologically i n the same camp as M eans, theorized that even if one c o u l d not s w i m , but one thought one could swim, then one could swim. A rebellious C hicano student raised the point in t he d iscuss i o n : " Well, I had a friend who reasoned the same way. S o one day h e walked to the end of a pier and j u m ped in t he ocea n-even though he couldn't s w i m , " The professor anxiously asked , "Yes, and then what happened?" A nticipating the professor's scholarly (and foolish) i n q uiry, the student moved i n for the kill: "The damn foo l drowned to death, what t h e hell d o y o u think happened?" I n t he interest o f staying afloat, profess o r M ea n s , we would hasten to inform you t hat even the religious ideas o f t he Ameri

can I n d i ans, which have themse l ves und ergone a great deal of change and development with the corres ponding changes in I nd ian material reality, have a material basis which can be explai ned by applying Marxism. Like the rest o f t h e superstruc t u re of any society, they corres pond to that s ociety's material d evelopment. I n particular, since the Indian people were so much a t the mercy of the fo rces of nature for t heir s u rvival, it was t hought that these forces com manded supernat u ral powers. H o wever, the religious ceremon ies and customs varied depending upon the manne'r i n which t hey gained their s u bsistence. The H o pi, fo r example , being an agricultural tri be living in the semi a rid environs of the Southwest, held a religious belief that after pe ople d ied , t hey turned into clouds which brought rain t o

54


i rrigate the crops. T h e fi s h e r m e n o f t he N o rt h we s t , o n t he o t h e r h a n d , p u t great s t ress o n p r a y i n g t o S e a S p i ri t s t o b r i n g t h e m a n a bu n d a nce o f fi s h , a n d t h e n o mad i c h u n ters d evelo ped ce re m o n ie s a r o u n d gai n i n g s t re n gt h fo r t h e h u n t o r t o do battle w i t h ot her tribes.

Bu t

m o re

to

the

p o i nt o f M ea n s' part ic u l a r

a rgu m e n t , e v e n t he " r e v e n ge o f M o t h e r E a rt h " p h i l o s o p h y h e p r o m o t e s i s a fa i r l y rece n t d e ve l o p m e n t i n t h e re l i g i o n o f m a n y t r i bes i n t h e U . S . , h a v i n g bee n a d o pted after t h e c o n q uest a n d s u bseq u e n t o p p re s s i o n b y t h e fo rces o f c a p i t a l i s m , a s t h e I n d i a n s s a w t h e w o r l d -as t he y h a d k n o w n i t -being d e s t royed b y t h e i n vad e r s . T h e use o f t h e m e s s i a h w h o had c o m e b a c k to save t h os e w h o w e re n o t l o s t a ft e r t h e a p o ca l y p se was, i n m a n y cases, b o r r o wed fro m t he C h ri s t i a n i t y o f the E u ro pea n s . C o m m u n i s t s a r e o p p o s e d t o t h e w h o l e i d e a o f spirits b u t n o t t o t h e s p i r i t , if t h i s i s u n d e rs t o o d t o m e a n t h e a d va n c i n g c o nsci o u sness of m a n k i n d , b a s e d o n t h e material w o r l d . I n fa ct. we even write a b o u t i t in our s o ng s : " . . . To m a k e t he t h i e f d i sgo rge h i s b o o t y , t o free t h e s p i ri t fro m i t s c e l l . . . " g o e s t he fa m o u s l i n e Jr o m t he

In ternationale.

B u t t h i s is t he o p p os i t e o f

w ha t M ea n s i s t a l k i n g a b o u t . We u n d e rs t a n d t h a t i t is o n l y b y c o rrect l y g ra s p i ng t h e o bj ective l a w s of nat u re a n d society, a n d t h e re by be i n g a b l e t o c h a nge t h e m a t e r i a l w o rl d , t h a t m a n ' s " s p i rit" is t r u l y u n l e a s h e d -j u s t t h i n k of t h e great d i ffe r e n c e if t h e w o u ld - be s w i m m e r i n t h e s t o ry t o l d a bove h a d m e rely d o ne a l i t t l e i n vest igat i o n i n t o how t o a v o i d s i n k i n g t o t h e bott o m l i k e a s t o n e . B u t M ea n s w o u l d c o n d e m n us a l l t o a " b e i n g" - i n fact a "d r o w n i ng " - o f b a c k wa rd n e s s , i g n o rance, a n d s e r v i l i t y t o t h e b o u rge o i s i e a n d -d e s p ite protesta t i o n s t o t h e c o n t ra r y - t o prod u c t ive relat i o n s c h a racteri s t i c of its r u l e . N o thanks. Russell ! We'll take c o m m u n i s m and the e l i m i nation of classes a l t oget he r . ) A s w i t h religi o n , s o w i t h o t h e r as pects of t h e c u l t u res of t he A merican I nd i a ns - n o t o n ly was it a h i s t o rical creat i o n , but many a s pects w h i c h have come d ow n as "trad i t i o n a l " were created out of the h i s t o r i c a l c o n fl i c t between ca p it a l i s t e x p a n s i o n and t h e p r i m it i ve c o m m u na l society of t he I nd i a n s . I n fac t , t he t r i bes t ha t were m o s t s u ccessfu l i n res i s t i n g a n d d e laying t h e i r eve n t ual d e feat, l i k e t h e La k o t a t r i be of w h i c h M ea n s is a m e m ber, w e r e t h ose t h a t a d o pted the m o re ad vanced


55

tec hnology of the invader. Actually, t he entire La kota way of life was cond itioned by European contact. Originally, the tribe had been semi-sedentary farmers in what is now M innesota. They were attacked by Canadian tribes l i k e t h e Cree and Oj i bwa who had gotten guns fro m French t raders, forcing them westward into t he Great Plains. There they first came into contact with horses which had been brought to the western hemisphere by the early S panish colonists and subseq uently slowly s p read n orthwa rd . (The ind igenous horse had become extinct at t he same time a s the mammoth and big bison . ) They q uickly became known among all the tri bes of the Great Plains as t he finest buffa l o hunters and warriors in the area. When t hey recognized t hat t heir bows and arrows were no match fo r the U . S . Cavalry's m o re advanced weaponry, t hey began to conduct raids t o obtain the m ore modern weapons. They ad opted the method of fighting involving a field c o m mander giving tactical d i rection t o the troops, as o p p osed t o their "trad itional" way o f every man for h i mself that t hey had used in their previous fights with o t her tribes. I n this way, they were able t o infl ict s o me o f the most d evastating . defeats, if o n ly temporary o nes, o n the westward expansion of t he U. S . capitalists. Genera l l y spea king, all the tribes that existed adopted as pects of t h e invaders into t heir culture , or they were t o t ally wi ped out. The Navaj os took not o n l y h o rses a n d guns, but also developed t heir "traditional" sheepherding culture by raiding Spanish settle ments for sheep. The H opi expanded their agricul t u ral complex many times over by add ing d o mesti cated plant strains fro m both the Spanish and the A mericans. Of c ourse, not only was much of what is today considered "traditional" Indian culture a product o f the clash o f primitive commu nal s ociety with cap italist expansion, but that culture was a l s o then s u ppressed by the inexorable capitalist d rive for total s upremacy. I n add ition, genocide through d isease and massacre reduced the I ndian p o pulation fro m 1 0 m i l l i o n to 500,000 in t he area n o rt h of Mexico within 300 years. A s capitalism expa nded westward, t reaties were signed only t o be broken a few years later, and I nd ians were repeatedly forced o n t o c oncentration camps called "reservations," only t o be moved once aga in if valuable m i nerals were fou n d , where the land was p otentially productive for agricultu re or where the railroad needed the right of way. As

56


capitalism c o n s o l i d ated its victory over Native A mericans, laws were p assed mandating "fo rced assimilation" and I ndian lands were broken up i n t o s m al l e r parcels t o open them u p fo r settlement . At o n e p o i n t , I nd ia n lands were give n to Christian m i s s ionaries t o exercise trustee s h i p over t hem, wh ile bringing "rel igion t o t h e heat h e n s . " Of course, there was a lways fierce resistance to this repress i o n and p a r t icula rly to the attempts to m a k e the I nd i a n t r i bes d i s a p pear. In fact, the res istance was s o fie rce t h a t by

1 9 34 t h e i m p erialists a mended their " forced

ass i m ilation" schemes. They passed the I n d ia n Reorganizat i o n Act, s e t t i n g u p t he i r o w n p u ppet t r i b a l c o u n c i l s u n d e r t h e d i rection of t h e B u re a u o f I nd i a n Affa i rs to facilitate t h e conti n ued a r m e d r o b be ry of I n d i a n land -a robbery t h a t i s intensifying t o d a y with tribal c o u n c i l sanctions, such a s t h a t offered by Navaj o t r i b a l c h a i r m a n P e t e r M c Donal d . At t h e s a m e t i m e , p o l itical repre s s i o n a n d ou tright m u rder is offe red t o a l l t h o s e who d a re to resist. A h i s t o ry of bruta l o p p re s s i o n ; a h i story of atte m pted genocide. I n t h e face o f t h is i m perialist attempt to wipe I ndians off t h e face of t h e earth t h e re h a s been res istance, re bel l i o n , and reaffirmation by Native A mericans of their own culture aga i n st the onslaught of i m pe r i al i s m . As we've seen, Indian t raditions are not capable of g u id i n g the s t ruggle on the path to rea l l i berat i o n , e v e n t h o ugh t h e y h a v e played a p a rt i n provid ing a "cult u re of resistance" i n t h e I nd i a n m ovement. But in Means' hand s t h is c u l t u re of resista nce t u r n s i n t o its o p p o s ite-into a theo ry of ca pitulation. From a fight against capitalism and i m perialis m , he t ries to turn it into a fig h t aga i nst the fu t u re. H e reiterates : " I do not believe that ca p i t a l i s m itself is really responsible fo r the situation i n which we have been declared a national sacrifice. No, it i s the Euro pean t rad it i o n ; the E u ropea n cultu re itself is resp o n si ble.

M a rxis m i s j us t the latest continuati on of t h is

t r a d i t i o n , not a s o l u t i o n to i t . To a l l y w i t h M arxis m is to ally with the very same fo rces wh ich declare u s a n acceptable ·cost· ... But we t h i n k i n the fi n a l analysis t hat you d o understand t he d i ffe rence bet ween capital i s m a n d M a rx i s m , between the revolu t i o nary science of the w o r k i n g class a n d the react iona ry theo ries of its enemy. The p o i n t i s t hat you have a d o p ted a reactiona ry t h e o ry y o u rself-t he idealist and metap hysical theory of the bou rgeoisi e !

Searching For A Second Harvest

57

There i s only one final charge made b y M eans in his speech to which we must respond. " Look beneat h t he surface of revolut ionary Marxism and what do you f ind? . . . a commitment to guaranteeing the Lakota and other American I ndian people real control over the land and resource t hey have left? No, not unless the i ndust rial process is to be reversed as part of their doctrine. A commitment to our rights, as peoples, to maintaining our val ues and traditions? No, not as long as they need the uranium w i t h i n our land to seize the industrial system of this society, the cul ture of which the M arxists are still a part. " For the position of the proletariat on t h i s matter -once it has seized power-we w ill let the draft of the Ne w Programme

and Ne w Constitution o f the Revolu tionary Communist Party speak for itself: . . . (Native Americans) have been repeatedly forced off their land into concentration camps which are euphem istically called 'reservations. ' In un-doing this long s tanding atrocity the proletariat will, t h rough consul tation w i t h the masses of the I ndian peoples, establish large areas of land where they can live and work and will provide special assistance to the Indian peoples in developi ng these areas. Here autonomy w i ll be the policy of the proletarian state-the various I ndian peoples will have the right to self-government w ithin the larger socialist state, under certain overall guiding principles. The overall guid ing principles referred to are that practices and customs must tend to promote equality, not i nequality, unity not d ivision, between different peoples, and eliminate not foster, exploitation. The I nd ian peoples themselves w ill be mobili zed and relied on to struggle through and enforce these prin ciples. This w ill mean that policies related to local affairs as well as customs, culture and language will be under autonomous control, w hile at the same t ime the I ndian peoples will be encouraged as well to take a full part in t he overall affairs of society as a whole. Local customs and practices -such as medicine . . . w ill be s tudied for those aspects that have an underlying scientific content and t hese aspects will be promoted and appl ied generally by t he proletariat . . .

58

Marxism a n d Native A m e ricans This w i l l n ot

be d o ne because the proletariat has t h e

i m possible a n d u n d e s i r a b l e d re a m o f going backward i n time, b u t rat her because i t is a c r u c i a l part o f m o v ing fo rward t o cl a s s less s ociety . . . . I n particular, t h i s w i l l m o s t d efi nitely not be a new c h a p t e r in the h i s t o ry of o p p re s s i o n of t he I n d i a n peop les -·forc i n g t h e m o n t o reservat ions a n d treating them l i k e special 'wards of the state' when t hey move off them. I ns t e a d t he n e w p r o letarian state, w h i le fav o r i n g a n d e n c o u ragi ng u n i ty a n d i n t egrat i o n , will e n s u re t he s e fo r m e r l y o p p ressed p e o p l es' right to a u t o n o m y as p a rt o f a p o l i cy of p r o m o t i n g real eq u a l i t y bet we e n n a t i o n s a n d p e o p les.

( Ne w DraJi

Program and New Constitution , Drafts fo r D i s u ss i o n ,

p p . 62-6 3 . ) This great h i s t o r i c a l a d v a n c e c a n o n l y come a b o u t t h r o ugh t h e overt h r o w of t h e e x i s t i n g s o c i a l o rd e r a n d the esta b l i s h m e n t o f t h e d i c t a t o r s h i p o f t h e p ro l e t a r i a t -a period s t i l l m a r k e d b y t h e existence o f classes a n d class st ruggle, b u t w i t h o n e i m p o r t a n t d isti ncti o n from p re v i o u s revo l u t i o n s . T h e p ro letaria t , t he c l a s s w h ose u l t i mate g o a l i s t h e e l i m i n a t i o n of a l l c l a s s e s incl u d i ng itself, h o l d s t h e rei n s o f s t a t e p o w e r a n d exerc i ses t h a t p o w e r t o consciously wage t h e s t r u ggle fo r t h e attai n ment o f class less s o ciety. It is i n e v i t a b l e that this rev o l u t i o n will take p l a ce , a n d fu rt her t h a t h u m a n i t y w i l l m ove beyond it t o t h a t n e w era w h e re a l l m a n k i n d consciously gra s p s a n d a p p l ies the l a w s of natu re t o c o n t i n u o u sly t ra n sfo r m i t i n t h e i nt erest of m a n k i n d . B u t u n t il t h a t occurs, a n d t h e u l t i mate basis fo r t h e e x p l o i t a t i o n o f m a n by man is e l i m inated , t h e re will also inevitably be t h ose-l i k e R ussell M e a n s -w h o j u m p o u t t o o p p ose t h e rev olutio n a ry fo rward m a rc h of h i s t o ry u n d e r t h e s ign board of a ret rog rade retreat into t h e past - a n d w h ose " t h e o ries" are worth less t ha n t h ose specimens o f t h e c r o p o f t h e "seco n d h a rvest" d iscovered i n t h e Nevada desert.

3 The Same Old Song In Sad Refrain Ward Churchill with Dora-Lee Larson

The official re s p o nse of the

R e v o l u t i o nary C o m m u n ist

P a r t y , U S A t o R us s e l l M ea n s' state m e n t o n M a r x i s m at t he B l ac k H i l l s S u rvival G a t h e r i n g i nd uces a react i o n of a p p a l led co nsternat i o n a nd s heer d e l ight, i n r o u g h l y e q u a l p ro p o rt i o n s . The R C P p os i t i o n is d istres s i n g n o t o n l y for its see m i ngly willfu l ign o ra n c e , but a l s o fo r i t s o b v i o u s ly c o n sci o u s d i s t o r t i o n of k n o w n rea l i t ies. On the o t h e r h a n d , it i s pe rversely p l e a s u r a b l e t o n ote t h a t it c o u ld hardly have g o n e fur t h e r i n rei n fo rc i n g v i rt u ally every point p o s i ted by M ea n s , even if R us s e l l h a d d rafted t h e Party p a p e r h i mself. The a u t h o rs fi rst fe lt it most a p p r o p riate t h a t a res p o n s e be m a d e d i rectly by M ea n s . S u bse q u e n t d is c u s s i o ns, h o wever, m a d e it clear t h a t he fe lt c o m p e l l e d t o d e v o t e h i s t i m e a n d energy t o m o re press i n g matters t h a n t he r h e t o rical p o s t u r i n g of t he "caucasian left ," that n o t h i n g i n t he R e p piece u l t i mately raised ' i s s ues req u i r i n g ( fo r h i s p u rposes) a t h e o re t i c a l p o s i t i o n d iffe r i n g fro m t h ose he'd already p u bl i cly a s s u m e d , a n d a s a res u l t he was m o re than w i l l i n g to s i mply ignore " t h o s e i d i o t s . "

59

60

Marxism and Native Americans From a purely American Indian Movement member 's

pers pective. M ea n s ' a t t i t u d e s e e m s i ncontestably c o r rect in t h i s i n sta nce. T h e aut h o rs , h o wever, remai ned u n c o n v i n ced of t h e p ro p riety o f t hi s p o s i t i o n bey o n d A I M . T h e R e p is -for better o r w o rse - o n e o f the m o re p r o m i n e n t ly vocal a n d visible left o rg a n i z a t i o n s in t h e c o n t e m p o ra ry U n i ted States. As s u c h , it a t t racts cert a i n atte n t i o n t o i t s fo rmal ela b o ra t i o n s , att e n t i o n w h i c h neces s a r i ly t r a n s ce n d s b o t h i t s theoretical c o n t e n t a n d t h e a bs o l u t e n u m be r s h a v i n g pa rty m e m bers h i p . M a r x i s t s o f o t h e r t h a n L e n i n is t j M a o i s t p e r s u a s i o n m ight argue that s u c h atte n t i o n i s b o t h p ractical l y a n d i n t e l l ec t u a l l y u n warranted . T h i s i s per haps t r u e , but d oe s n o t h i n g t o a l t e r t h e fact t h a t s u c h atte n t i o n is n o n e t h e l e s s p a i d ; i g n o r i n g t h e R e p and s i m i l a r l y st ruct u red

M a rx is t- Le n i n ist gro u ps a c c o m p i i s hes n o t h i n g in c o m i n g to grips with t he c o n t e n t o f t h e i r i mage o r t h e i r a b i l i t y t o p o p u l a r l y p r oj ect i t , o ft e n t h ro u g h m e d i a fac i l ities unava i l a b l e t o m o re t he o retically i m p o rta n t left c o n figurat i o n s . S i m p ly d i s m i s s i n g t h e R e p a n d k i n d red part i e s of t he L e n i n is t m o l d as be i n g " t i n y , " " i rrelevant" and " i s o l ated" w i t h i n

the true flow of contemporary U.S. Marxism is a n evasion of c o n s i d e ra t i o n s of t he i r o bv i o u s l o n gevity, cont i n u i t y ( i n for m , at leas t ) , o rga n i z at i o n a l c o h e re n c e a n d p u bl i c vis i b i l i t y . A l o ng w i t h the

b o u rge o i s

media,

all

t h e s e factors

mi litate t o

id e n t ify

s e c t a r i a n d og m a wit h t h e g e n e r i c t e r m " M a r x i s m" in t he p o p u l a r m i n d . I t see m s i n e v i t a ble, t h e refo re, t h a t t hese d og m a s m u s t be d e a l t wit h s e ri o u s ly ; n o real a l t e r n a t ive a p pea rs fo r t h ose w h o w o u l d c l a i m t h e m a n t le of M a rx i s m i n terms o t h e r t h a n t h ose p re s c r i bed by L e n i n i s t d oc t r i n e . T h u s , we h a v e set o u t t o a d d ress t h e issues a n d d istort i o ns raised by t he R e p i n " S e a rc h i n g fo r t h e Second H a rvest" in s o me d e p t h a n d , i n places, o n a p o i n t - b y- p o i n t basis. T h i s is n ot d o ne fro m a M a rxist p o s i t i o n , t h o u g h i t is d o ne w i t h t h e k n o w l e d ge t h at the M a rxist parad i g m is h a r d l y l i m i ted to t h e Len i n i st catec h i s m . We a l s o w i s h t o m a k e it clear t hat our wri t i ng does n ot c o n s t i t u t e an official AI M res p o n s e , but rat her points offered by two p e o p l e w h o s ha r e in the A I M pers pect ive a n d w h o w i s h to o ffe r a c o h e re n t a n a ly s i s to t h o s e d e s i r i n g t o partici pate in a c o n s i d e red fo r u m , w h o s e e k to fu r t h e r t h e i r u nd e rst a n d i ng of t he rel a t i o n s h i p of M a rx i a n t h e o ry to N a t ive A me r i c a n s , and w h o

S a m e Old S o n g I n S a d R e fr a i n

61

w i s h t o rea c h a re a l i z a t i o n a s t o w h y M a rx i s m ( t h e Le n i n i s t v e r s i o n i n p a r t icu l a r) t e n d s t o be d i s m i s s e d r a t h e r h a rs h l y by t h e I n d i a n p o p u la t i o n . Before p rocee d i ng, h o wever, w e w o u l d l i ke t o o bserve t h a t i n c e r t a i n v e r y i m p o rt a n t w a y s , a p o i n t- by - p o i n t refu t a t i o n of t h e

R C P a rg u m e n t i s i n s u ffi c i e n t i n c o u n t e r i n g t he i r tec h n i q ue . T h i s i s beca u s e t h e p o i n t s t h ey offe r a re , i n t h e e n d , s ec o n d a ry t o t h e r e a l ll a t u re o f t h e i r a t t a c k . F i r s t , t h i s i s p u r e l y i d e o l ogical i n t h e n a r ro w e s t p o ss i b l e s e n s e , i . e . : " D oe s t he i n d i v i d u a l we a re c o n s i d e r i n g s u b s c r i be, a n d s u bs c r i b e i n e v e r y d e t a i l , t o o u r i d e o l o g i c a l p o s t u re'?" S u c h q ue s t i o n s p r o p e r l y b e l o n g t o gra n d i n q u i s i t o rs r a t h e r t h a n d e ba t e r s . I n q u is i t i o n , h o wever, i s p re c i se l y t h e p a r t y ' s s t oc k - i n - t ra d e , and fro m t h e p a r t y v i e w p o i n t , e n t i re l y w a r r a n t e d . T h e p a r t y i s by i t s o w n d es c r i p t i o n t h e s o le a ge n t of p r o l e t a r i a n l i be r a t i o n a n d t r u e rev o l u t i o n at la rge i n t h i s s o c i e t y t o d a y . T h o s e w h o d o n o t c o n fo r m , i n t e l l e c t u a l l y o r ot herw i s e , t o p a rt y s t r i ct u re s a re by d efi n i t i o n c o u n t e r-re v o l u t i o n a r y . T h a t w h i c h i s c o u n t e r-revo l u t i o n a r y m u s t be e x p osed a n d a t t a c k e d . H e nce, t he s u bs t a n c e o f t he R C P p o le m i c is e s s e n t i a l l y an i d e o l og i c a l l y m o t i v a t e d p e rs o n a l a t t a c k o n R u s s e l l M e a n s h i m s e l f ra t her t h a n a rea s o n e d a rg u m e n t a ga i nst h i s p o s i t i o n . W i t h t h i s i n m i n d , we c a n t u r n t o t he m a t e r i a l w i t h w h i c h t he R C P o rc h e s t rated i t s a s sa u l t . *

*

*

*

*

T h e fi r s t p o i n t of c o n t e n t i o n b e t w e e n t he R C P' s p o l e m ic a n d a n y o n e a w a re o f t h e c i rc u m s t a n ce s l e a d i n g u p t o R us s e l l M ea ns' a d d r e s s at t h e B l a c k H i l l s S u rv i v a l G a t h e r i ng i s the q u e s t i o n o f, as t h e p a rt y p u t s i t , M e a n s' " a t t e m p t s t o t ra d e o n h i s rep u t a t i o n a s a n ' A me r i c a n

I nd i a n

leader

( d e s p i t e t he o b l i g a t o ry fa l s e

disclaimers of "humility" t o the contrary), " The facts of the matter a re t h a t s e v e r a l p e o p l e o t he r t ha n M ea n s h a d a t t e m p t e d , d u ri n g t h e ye a r p r i o r t o t he eve n t i n q u es t i o n , t o p re s e n t e s s e n t i a l l y t he s a me a n a l y s i s ( i n b o t h "sc h o la rly" a n d " p o p u lar" fo r m a t s ) , to a n u m be r o f l e ft p u bl i c a t i o n s . R e p c a d re s were p res en t e d w i t h s u c h material a t l e a s t a s

early a s t h e Union of Marxist Social Scientists ' Conference h e l d in Oct o ber, 1 9 7 9 . Cad re res p o n s e , h o wever, w a s s i m p l y t o refu s e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of a n y p o s i t i o n d e v i a t i n g fro m the v a r i o u s


62

" N at i o n a l M i n o rit ies" pla n k s of t he party's d raft pla tfor m ; R e p rep rese n t a t ives fla tly m a i n t a i ne d t h rough t h i s post u re t ha t t h e pa rty n a t u rally p o ssessed m ore i n herent ability t o d eal w i t h A m e r i c a n I n d i a n i s s ues a n d pers pect i ves t ha n I nd i an peo ple t h e m selves . Clearly, t he p a rt y d e m o nst rated i t s u n w ill i ngness to grace t he pages of e i t her i t s " ma s s c i rcula t i on" t a bl o i d ( Revolu I iOllary

Worker)

or i t s " t heoret i c a l j o u r n al"

( Re v o lu r ion )

with

t h e v i e w s of N a t i v e A meri c a n a c t i v i s t s . Even d ur i n g i t s lat e r ed i t o r i a l ca m p a i g n t o "let 1 00 s c h o ols o f t h o u g h t c o n te n d , " t h e c o n t e n t of d ebate i n R W i s restri cted t o a n extremely narrow foc u s , ent i rely wit h i n

t he d octri n a i re c o n fi nes of s t a n d a rd

M arxi s t - Len i n i st d is c u ss i o n . I n a n y eve n t , t he pers o n s a t te m p t i n g t o s urfa ce t he analy s i s presented by R ussell Mea n s i n J Uly, 1 9 80 s h a red a co m m o n a t tribute a s i d e f r o m be i n g N a t i ve A merican act i v i s t s a n d writers. N o ne of t hem h a p pened t o h a v e recei ved a n y med i a accla i m as " I n d i a n lea d e rs . " T h u s t hey were q u ite u n i versally i g n ored and frozen o u t of p r i n t . T h e d i ffere nce i n left res p o n se acco rded M ea n s , a figu re h y ped fo r nea rly a decade by s u c h va r i o u s gla m orizers as Time, Ne ws week , a n d A n d y Wa r h ol, is st u n n i n g . T h e R e p art icle i n q uest i o n here i s fully t w i ce t he lengt h 0 1 t h � text o f R us sell's o r i g i nal s peec h . I n t he eve n t , i t w a s calc ulated t h a t o nly a per s o n w h o h a d bee n establ i s hed b y t he b o u rgeo i s med i a as a "leader" c o u l d i l i 1 P l' to penet rate t he m o noli t h i c eli t i s m and cauca s o i d fa n t a sy l a n d

prevailing i n the contemporary Euroamerican consciou s n ess , Marx i s t or ot her w i se. As Mea n s p u t i t nea r t he end of h i !> S P l' l' l h . h e i s n o t a lea d e r i n t he s e n s e c o n veyed b y t he med ia, h e i s m e re l y

used b y t he med ia; a fa ct bro u g h t dra m a t ica lly h o m e b y t h e R e p's s n id e c o m m e n t ary o n h i s "obligatory" a n d "false" d i s cla i mer, and c o m p o u n d e d by t he fact t h e t he pa rty i t s elf refused categori cally t o c o n s i d er t he s t a tements of any "lesser" per s o n al i t i e s . T h u s, t he i s s ue w a s forced from a mat ter of poss ible p r o d u c t i ve a n aly t i c a l d ialogue i n t o t he p r o paga n d i s t are na of "t he c ult of t he pers o nality," a n i n tri n s i cally M a rxist pro p os i t i o n ra t her t h a n a n I n d i a n o n e. T h e R e p itself was / i s q u ite acti vely i n v olved in c rea t i n g t he el itist c o n t e x t at iss ue.

Same Old S o ng I n Sad Refrain *

*

*

*

63

*

With a s o rt of i nevitable approp riateness, t he R e p launches its a nalys is o f "The Same Old Song" by utterly validating one of M eans' primary t heses. That is that "revolutionary M arxism" is h o pelessly locked into t he notion that product i o n, and thereby ind ustrial izat ion, const itute the "advanced ideas" of humanity w h i le those opposed to the m are the "most backward . " The R e p is c o n fro nted with the problem of p roving t hat t hese "advanced id ea s" are correct. This is precisely t h e situation which creates t he necessity fo r the R e p writers to valid ate virtually every point w i t hin M eans second thesis: t hat such a fo rmula is in herently racist and a totally inaccurate view o f the natural o rder. B y way of refuting the central t h rust of M eans' argu ment, the R e p once again arcs back to the snide, if meaningless, real m o f assault on the personality o f their opponent. N o t only is M eans a leader ( ho rrors ! ) , but he adapts the ga rb of t h e "noble savage" as well. This seco nd descent into na me-calling is grounded, i nte l lect ually, in the R e p assertion that M eans' c o m mentary on t h e natural order harkens bac k, not to his own Lakota heritage, but t o A d a m S mith and and the " R o binso nades. " This is, on one level, m e rely d istortion; S m ith, along with Descartes, Locke, and a n u m be r of other t h i n kers of E u r o pean o rigi n are dealt with in R ussell's tal k , securely placed in the intel lectual development of ca pitalis m a nd t herefore d i s missed as antithetical to Nat ive A merica n interests. Nowhere in his defense of native cultures is t h e re a s uggestion of the ahistorical i n d i vid ualis m for which the E u ropean t heorists can be justly criticize d . On a second level, t h i s attempt to l i n k M ea n s' thin king to a E u ropean school of idealist expo nents o f an i nvented "no ble savage," despite his crushing critique o f t hese same idealists, p o i nts t o a m uc h more serious problem. The R e p seems utterly i ncapa ble of placing M eans' thought in any other context than their o w n . From their viewpoint, all ideas, no matter what the claims o f their proponents, can be traced t o European o rigins, and if not M a rx ist, they must b e b o u rgeois; genuinely n o n ' E u rope a n ideas s i m p ly do not exist. It is as if t o the M a rx ist Leninist m ind non-European thought itself is a n i mpossibility; any t ra d ition of t hought alien to that of E u rope therefore remains opaque t o the polem icists of the R e p .

64


G iven t hat the R e p views ind ustrialization as constituting the ind ication of "adva nced t h o ught," it s ucceeds i n linking th ought itself ( by way of its "inherent" technol ogical dep loy ment) to p roduct i o n of material attainment. A crude cont i n u u m is thus est a blished : the m o re material attainment evidenced by a c u l t u re, the more advanced its thought; the less material atta i n ment, the m o re backward t h e t h ought. But-this is extremely im portant-it also fol l ows t h at the link between thought and prod uct ion ind icates t hat given levels of t hought cannot be achieved j,vithout a corresponding level of material attainment. The i m plicati o ns o f t h is should be immed iately appare n t . T h e La k ota, of which people R ussell M ea n s is a member, never evidenced a material culture similar t o that prevailing in Europe at t h e time the "noble savage" idealists d id their thinking. Thus, the Lakota could not have p ossessed a body of thought which equalled -much less s u rpassed-the t h inking of t hese idealists; such would be materially impossible. The notion t hat t he La kota and other non-industrial peoples might have a completely autonomous heritage o f t h ought on matters which intersect the thought of Europeans i n certa in su perficial ways, but which fo ll ows the l ogic o f t h e i r o w n cultural imperatives and per ceptions t o conclusions c o m p letely d issimilar to t h ose reached i n E u rope, i s an impossi bility t o t he historical materialist mind. The Leninist d octrine decrees t ha t Lak ota culture could not, in and of itself, have hist o rically generated a body of thought at the level evidenced by the European idealists sim ply because the Lak ota never e x h i bited a level of material attainment which would have provided the basis fo r t h i n king such t h oughts. The Lakota in p re-contact t i mes were, by purely materialist d efin i tion. a "stone age" o r "primitive" culture, t he t hought of which necessari(l' would reflect such status. It was t hus incu mbent upon the Rep writers t o assign M ea n s a d i rect equivalent in Euro pean history, regardless o f his conclusions, simply because of t he i n ternal structure o f t he i r o w n premanufactu red t heoretical assu mptions. To ack n owled ge even the possibility t hat Means' t h i n king has its roots i n Lakota rather than E u ropean culture would create a serio u s breach in the seamlessness of the product i o n j ind ustrialization parad igm. Transparent distortions o f M eans' content were t hus neces sary to reconcile the R e p critique to the su perstructure of

Same Old S o ng I n Sad Refra in

65

L e n i nist t he o ry. B u t the matter d oes not rest w i t h this single i n stance. G iven product i o n / industria l ization as t he meas ure by w h ich all h u man advancement may be calculated , then only E u rope can lay claim to u l t i mate lea d e rs h i p i n terms of human p rogress and development. G ive n t he p rod uctivist link between material att a i n m e n t and conceptual a b i l ity, OflZI' E urope can lay c l a i m t o establishing the intel lectual basis o f p la n etary t hought. All non-Eu ropean cultures must be c o n s idered "u nderdevelo ped" stages t o be transcended . All n o n-E u r o pean t hought must be c o n sidered ' 'primit ive" relative to t hat of Eu rope, consigned by " p r ogress" to Trotsky's "dust bin of h istory." A l l non-Eu ro pean a rt i cu la t i o n s not co rres p o n d i ng to t h e relative p r i m i t iveness p re scribed by h istorical materialist ass u m pt i o ns must be pegged to o n e or a n other component of t he E u ropean i ntellectual trad ition; t he y a re to be construed as "accu l t u rative att ributes." I n essence, E u rope must be t he ideal agai nst w h i c h all peo p l e and all t h i ngs are measured, the source of all "valid" and "advanced" inspirat ion. T h e m e re fact that M ea n s was , i n most instances, s i m p l y a p plying t h e teac hi ngs of the L a k o t a t r i ba l elders (who, it c a n b e vo uchsafe d , have neve r heard o f, m u c h l e s s rea d , t he " R o bi n s o n ades") t o the i m mediate context with which he was con fro nted , I i s s i ngularly lac k i ng i n i n terest t o the p a rty polem icists. Such facts do not fit the "party l i n e . " The nat u re o f t h i s willfu l l y a rroga n t d is rega rd fo r and d i m i nish ment of even t h e possih ilily of non-Eu ropean cultural attain ments and i ntegrity seems suf ficient to cause the nazi theoreticians to turn gleefully in their graves; it is the penultimate in a p p l ied t h e o retical racism masq u e rad ing beh i nd a li beratory facade. A s Baudrillard has a p t ly o b served, the analytical potential o f Marxism is broken by t he catechism, upon the "wheel o f production."2 *

*

*

*

*

Attempts to tie Means' argu ment t o a E u ropean t radition h e clearly renounces, however, were hardly e n o u g h to carry t h e R e p p o le m i c to a successfu l conclusion. I n o r d e r t o establish its c o unter-po s ition, the party (logically e n ough) perceived the need to demonstrate the overall inadequacy of traditional native culture s in relation to the "more advanced" E u ropean model. I n

66


order t o acco m p l i s h t his, a d i rect a p plicat i o n of hist o rical materialist cross-cult u ral analytical methodol ogy was cal led fo r. In w h at has, by now, beco m e s o mething of a pattern in party exposition, t h is a rg u m e n t lead s o ff with a s n ide atte m p t t o d i scred i t t he o p p o s i t i o n ; b u t t h is time t he "opposition" i s the w h ole c o mp l e x o f p e o p les a n d c u l t u res referred t o as Native A merica n. A s the party p uts its, "The fi rst Native Americans were n o t really native a t all, rat h e r t hey "came t o this continent fro m A s ia," and fu rther t h i s i m m igrat i o n probably occ u r red "across a land b ridge which fo r m e rly con nected A laska and S i beria . " The party t he n p roceed s t o cite "archeol ogical" evi dence as t o the big game h u nt i n g h a bits of the North American popUlation circa

1 0, 000 B e . T h is sequence of introd u c i n g

arc heological evidence is r a t h e r i m p o rtant. I n t h e first place, t he p hysical evide nce used to s u pport t he b o u rge o i s a n t h r o p o l ogical c o n t e n t i o n t hat A merican I nd i a n s crossed t h e B e r i n g S t ra i t l a n d b r i d g e fro m A s ia to the A me r i c a s has bee n a m bigu o u s a t best. T h e re is i n fact considerable evidence w h i c h militates agai n s t the validity o f any su c h n o t i o n . Geological evide nce p o i n t s firmly t o t he fact t h at t h e land b ridge i n quest i o n would have been passable a p proxi mately 1 2,000 years ago, essentially the same period t hat other data points t o t h e e x istence of a p o p u l at i o n s p read a c r o s s virtually the w h o le o f t h e N o rt h A merican c o n t i n e n t -t h i s i s w h a t R e p refers to as the bi g game h u n t i n g peri od . W o rse, i n terms of what the R C P is proposing, t he re is a vast s u r p l u s o f evidence t hat the So uth A merican continent was even m o re t h oroughly pop ulated at the s a me time. Barring the e x istence of j et aircraft i n the A mericas twelve mi llenia ago, the RCP c h r o n o logy is s i m ply a physical impossi bility. A n i m p os s i bility w h i c h , i ncidentally, has been acknowledged in all b u t t he m o s t arcane a n t h ropol ogical circles (such as among t h e M o rm o n s , w h o a re still bound a n d d eter mined to p rove Native A merican o ri g i n s a m o n g the Tribes o f I s rael) fo r well o v e r a decade. 3 I n a d d i t i o n , m o re recent i nfo rmation tends to s u p p o rt precisely w h at "primitive" Native A mericans have been saying all along: A merica n I n d i a n s d i d n o t migrate to this hemis p h e re . 4 I nd ian acc o u n t s h a v e been c o n s i s te n t l y chal ked off a s "l egen d a n d s u p e rsti t i o n" b y m o re " k nowledgeable a n d advanced" E u ro-

Same Old S o ng I n Sad Refrain

67

peans. R ecently, however, a contem p o ra ry a n t h r o p o logist, Jeff rey G o o d man, fi nally got a r o u n d t o treating H op i origin accounts as fact rat her than fic t i o n . When he i n itiated an a rcheo l o gical dig where the H o p is t he m se lves state the t ri be came fro m . h e fou nd precisely what they said he'd fi n d : evid e n ce o f occupat i o n old e n o u g h to validate t h e H o p i sequence of eart h , fir e a n d i c e i n literal geol ogical rat her that figurative mytho l o gical fashio n.5 In short , archeo l ogica l / a n t h r o p o l ogica l / geo logical d at a clearly tend to c o rr o b o ra t e A merican I nd i a n k now ledge; as M ea ns puts it, "our k n owledge is real. . . " I t i s i nteresting to note t ha t t h e w h o le Bering S t rait s peculat i o n o riginated wit h n o less a perso nage than Thomas J e fferso n i n his musi ngs entitled Notes o n Virginia, p u bl i s hed in 1 7 8 1 . G iven Jefferson's particular o u t l o o k , t h e t hesis may be viewed a s s o met hing of a device to assuage the guilt experienced by a p o l i t ical theorist associated w i t h the fi n a l p hase of genocidal p o l icy d i rected at the indige n o u s p o p u la t i o n o f t hi s continent. A l t h o u g h , as was noted earlier, n o t h i n g h a s ever e m erged t o v a l idate the Jeffers o n i a n propositio n , i t h a s gen e rally been accep ted by Euro scholars, perhaps due to the need to justify the E u ropean invasion of A merica: n o t o n l y was t h e ind i genous p o pUlat i o n "primit ive and savage," b u t i t t o o "i nvaded" t h e h e misp here, held n o real n ative title t o the land, a n d t hereby c onstituted j ust a nother u s u r p i n g agent in the ga m e of might m akes right. The RCP accepts this b o u rgeois a b s t raction (could anyone be mo re a p p ropriately termed " b o u rgeois" than T h o m a s Jeffer s o n?) ful l y and without reserva t i o n , t hereby t h e o retically aligning itself with t he most react i o n a ry p o s s ible t r a d i t i o n o f E u r o american culture in order to validate its own constructS . Thus it

c o rr o b o rates M eans' assert i o n t h at beyond s i m p ly having its i n tellectual roots i n the b o u rgeo i s t ra d i t i o n , M arx i s m continues this trad i t i o n full fo rce. In this particular c o nnect i o n , i t would s e e m "revolutionary" M arx i s m seeks t o d o s o eve n when t he b o u rgeo is ie i tself is quitting the myth i n certain q u a rters. *

*

*

*

*

U p o n completing its abstract c h a racteriz a t i o n of Nat ive A mericans as being no n-native, the RCP t u r n s to a m o re

68

Marxism and Native A merican s

con crete age n d a ; h i s t o rical materialist methodology does, aft e r a l l , b a s e i t s e l f i n "t h e c o n c rete a n d t h e rea l . " I n order t o acco m m od at e t h i s neces s ity, t h e p a r t y t u rn s t o t h a t "propaga n d a t o o l o f t he b o u rge o i s , " The New York Times, t he contents o f w hi c h are generally ( a n d q u ite acc u rately) p o rtrayed b y t h e m a s a cess p o o l of capitalist d i s t o r t i o n a n d fabricat i o n . I n its j udge ments on A merican I n d ians, h o wever, t h e Times is sudde n l y sacrosanct i n its o bj ectivity. The s pecu lat i o n of a s i ngle a n t h r o p ologist (hardly a M a r x i s t ant h r o p o logist, at t h a t ) , c o n c e r n i n g t h e p ractice b y a cert a i n "ancient p e o p le" i n t h e G reat B a s i n reg i o n of s t o r i n g fecal matter i n a given l o cat i o n , t ha t p e r h a p s t h e seed content of this fecal matter constituted a sort of reserve food supply, leads party p o l emicists to i m ply, i n essence, that "all ancient American I n d ia n s ate s h i t . " R ussell M ea n s' c a l l for the preservatio n a n d e n hancement of N a t ive t r a d i t i o nalis m is assumed to b e a n a logous to searching t hr o u g h fecal matter for a few grains o f n u t ritive val ue. T h e b o u rgeo i s a n t h r o po l ogist cited b y the New

York Times referred to t hi s p ractice as a possible "seco n d harvest" (reutilizat i o n of vegeta b l e prod ucts). T h i s newly appro pria ted t e r m was then used b y the party as t h e title of its p o l e m i c , a n d pres u ma bly a s t h e crux o f its argu ment. Upon e x a m i n a t i o n , o ne fi n d s t hat even the Times was u n w il l i ng t o s t retch t he q u ite tentative fi n d i ngs i n a seemingly iso lated l o ca t i o n t o c o v e r a l l o f Native A me rica 7000 years ago. The RCP d oes s o i n one wild lea p . The Times, in fact, n ow h e re d e m o nstrates a read i ness e v e n t o ascribe t hese tentative a n t h ro pol ogical c o n c l u s i o n s t o the occupants of the s ite i n question over a n y period of t i me; t he R C P is p erfe c t l y prepa red to advance t h is u n p roven speCU l a t i o n as a n overarc h i n g historical reality. A s M ea n s s u cci nctly o bserve d : M a rx i s m not o n l y d e rives fro m iden tical s o u rces as capit a l i s m , it freq uently goes beyond capital

ism in its negative i m pl icat i o n s fo r I nd i a n people. A s s u m i n g that the "second h a rvest" thesis is co rrect in the sense that it was a d v a nced i n the Times, a p o s s i ble i nterpretation of t h is w o u l d be t hat t he gro u p was u n d e rgoing a fa m i ne or other fo rm of n a t u ral d isaster req u i r i n g e x t r a o rd i na ry s u rvival mea s u re s . This scen a r i o i s at least as p r o bable a s the n o t i o n t hat t hese "a ncient o nes" c o n s u med fecal matter d ue t o t he consistently "p r imitive" state of their eco n o m i c p ractices .

Same Old S o ng I n Sad Refrain

69

Ass u m ing, on the other hand , the R e p's utterly u n s u p p o rted c o nclusion that such c o n d i t i o ns were p revalent i n a wid espread and multi-generational sense, t he party fails t o mention ex actly h o w this "backwa rd ness" and "primitive" cond i t i o n d i ffe rs fro m t he widesp read fam i ne p revailing in the U S S R under Lenin's New Economic Progra m , d u ring which i t was n ot u n c o m m o n to find the rural p o p ulace separati n g u n d igested corn (seeds) fro m h o rse d u ng as well as their own excrement as a s u rvival ex pedient. Nor d oes the R e p add ress t h e 9 m i l l i o n o d d d e a t h s attributable, mostly by starvat ion, t o Stalin's fo rced l a b o r reo rgan izat i o n of the S oviet eco n o my which fo ll owed o n the heels o f the N E P. Were these victims of "adva nced ideas" so m e h o w exempt fro m eating the n u t rient residue o f their own s t o ol d u ri ng enforced and terminal starvation? Less s o than the millions who were systemat ically starved t o death in the H itlerian organizati o n o f another "advanced" i n d ustrial context? These q uest i o n s , much less the answers t o them are n owhere n oted by t h e party ideologues. Yet, s p read ac ross t he face o f both 20th century E u rope and socialist Asia, one encounters precisely those c o n d i t i o n s -and on a truiy massive scale-which the Rep p o ints to a s ind icat ive of the "backwardness" of Nat ive t rad itionalism, a matter supposedly t o b e corrected by t h e " advanced " ideas of Marxist-Leninism . To return d i rectly to the R e p thesis t hat such conditions prevailed across t he continent a n d over a s u bstantial period of t i m e i n t h e " p rimit ive" eco n o m ies of Native A m e rica, the party is s t rangely silent in a n ot her con nect i o n : gi ven the k n o w n death ra tes u n d e r s i m i lar sta rvation cond itions under Stalin, H it ler, M a o, and Lenin, how is it that a N ative population s urvived fro m a p o i nt 7000 years ago t o t he period of European i nvasi o n and gen ocide? U nder such a bject poverty, even cannibalism could not have p revented extincti on i n a much s h o rter time period. A fee ble attempt is made to reconcile this contrad iction by stating elsewhere in the article that " . . . gen ocide t h rough disease and massacre red uced the I nd i a n p o p u l a t i o n fro m 1 0 m i l l i on to 500,000 i n the area north of M ex i c o . . . " The o b l i q ue i m plication of t his state ment is that the prec o n tact Native American p opula t i o n o f N o rt h A merica was perpetually s m a l l e nough i n p ro p o rt i o n to land base t o allow s pecies c o n t i n u a t i o n through the most " p r i m i t ive" hunting and gathering economies coupled to a

70


( newly d iscovered) "second harvest" economy. But once aga i n t h e R e p relies u p o n a bourgeois d ogma which was always unfounded, and has been fun d a m e n tally d iscredited , as a basis for its case. The demogra p h ic method o logy t h rough which bourgeois anthropologists and historians have red uced (on paper) the precontact N ative population of t hi s hemisphere are n o parti cular secret. The rationale for such statistical sleight of hand would not seem altogether d i fferent fro m t hat which caused (and causes) the persistence of t he Bering S t rait land bridge hypo t hesis: bad as the b o u rgeois figu res s h o w E u ro genocide to have bee n, quantifiable guilt for that genocide is red uced if the precontact Native p o p u lation can be " p roven" to have been less t ha n i t aciualiy was. or course, the R e p has n o particu lar vested interest i n d i m i n ishing bourgeois guilt; no, it n eeds the bourgeois data not t o m i n i m ize the i mplicat i o n s of bourgeois genocide, but to "p rove" its o w n t heses o n the i m plications of "primitive" eco n omies. In actuality, the precontact p opulation of the a rea north of Mexico probably exceeded 1 8 million , about twice the n u m ber a l lowed i n the b o u rgeois rearward projection fully accepted by the R e p . 6 Such a p o pulation stretches the economic struct u re i m p osed by t h e party o n p recontact I nd ian peoples well beyond the limit of any potential viabi lity, and for good reaso n . T h e hunting a n d gat hering economies which Euro scholars have always ins isted categorized the Native "natural order" would also seem to be little m o re t h a n a part of the myth of the "savage. " There are s u bstantial ind ications t hat agricu lture played a n important role i n native economies and that h unti ng and gat hering was a fo rm forced , in many instances, by massive dislocations induced in t hose eco n o mies by the European invasion itself. 7 In s u m , t h e mound o f d u ng the R e p has fixed on so o bsessively may well have been a c o m post heap rather than an im mediate food supply. Thus, fro m start t o finish, the central Rep thesis-the notion of the "second harvest" -is a n absurdity. Its sources are spurious, its logic fallacious, its underriding metho!o!ogy sheer self-serving p ro paganda. All cred i ble evidence points directly a way from the Rep conclusions; the party 's insistence on the validity of its position regardless of data is not u n l ike the posture

Same Old S o n g I n Sad Refrain

71

o f Christian missionaries i n rela t i o n t o A merican Indian and reality i n general -pure unadulturated faith. *

*

*

*

*

Throughout its elabora tion, t he R C P maintains a theme o f t h e ultimate sanctity of i nd ustriali zati o n as the advanced fo rm of h u man s o cial organization. This is " s u p p orted" by a parade of quotations from a list of deities : Marx, Engels, Lenin, Mao, etc. , a strange auto maton-like performa nce for "theoreticians" t o en gage in. O r perhaps alchem ical is a m ore appropriate word . I t is a s if at bottom, the R e p believes that if t he same i ncantations are recited, regu rgitated, chanted in catechi s m ic repetition often and l o ng enough, then they will somehow become true, no matter how wrong t hey have been in the past. Just as t he party never manages t o a d d ress the conditions of s t arvati o n p revailing under Lenin, Stalin, and M a o -which is u nd erstandable, coming fro m a p arty w h ich tends t o flank its s peakers' p latform with oversize p o rtraits o f Lenin, Stalin, and M ao-while l ambasting other cultural economies for perchance leading to starvation conditions, so too d oes it evade the d i rect i ssues raised by Means in connect i o n with the proble ms of i n d ustrial society as such. Rather than confronting the q u estions p osed, the party d istorts M eans' argument i n order to label him a s "reactionary" a n d "of service to capitalism." M eans' statement t ha t t h e p lanet w ould soon experience "a catstrop h e of global proportions" is i nterpreted as referring o nly to n uclear war, whereas the point raised by "The Same Old Song" is that even in the absence of a nuclear holocaust, the i m peratives o f the E u ropean industrial ization process are lead ing t o an essentially s imilar result. And M arxism , rather than capitalism, n o w constitutes the theoretical (if not yet the practical) vanguard o f this line o f "development." O n this point the R C P is d u mbfo unded and c onsequently attempts to d ivert the issue in the m anner n oted above. Maxi m u m p ro d uction and i n d ustrial efficiency, as M eans noted, is after a l l really their e t h ic , their theoretical pride and j oy. The n otion t hat it is ultimately the destructive element of h umanity, a s o p p osed t o the l i berato ry element, is too heretical to be dealt with; the party polemicists are reduced t o chanting "Not so. Not


72

so." Yet not a s i ngle c o herent c o u n t e rargument is advanced. The closest t hey can m us t e r i s to make the wild ly inacc u rate anal ogy that M ea n s is s o me h o w equating i n dustry to t h e smal l p o x

contaminated blankets issued b y U.S. troops t o the Mandans as an exter m i n a t i o n device. Blame t h e t r o o p s who issued the blanket s , n o t t h e b l a n kets ( w h i c h a re i n t h e mselves benign) says t h e R e p , accurately enough. A n d i n d ustry is t h e same a s blankets, s u bject to its e m p loyment by

people,

t h e p a rty asserts with complete

inaccu racy. One d i ffe rence between the blan ket and ind ustry, which s h o u l d be rat her o b v i o u s , is t hat t h e blanket (an industrial

by-product, in this case) consumes no energy; industry does . It see ms m o re t h a n slig h tly odd t hat staunchly Marxist-Le n i n i s t theorists, p r e s u m a b l y steeped in t h a t t rad ition' s pretenti o n s t o s t a t u s as a "science," might h a v e m issed s o met h i n g as elementary ( t o scientists) as t h e second law o f t hermodynamics. The sec o n d l a w states, a m o ng o t he r t hings, t hat e nergy u s e d for w o r k can never be used c o m pletely e fficiently, and t hat the waste energy is dissipated i n a more d i s o rderly fo r m t ha n t h e original source. The u n u sa bl e e n e rgy i s fre q u e ntly i n the fo rm o f heat but the same principle applies t o the rad i oacive waste produced by nuclear reactors. I n d ustry-the E u r o pean prod uct i o n process-is wit h o u t d ou bt the most e n e rgy cons u m p t iv e p rocess e v e r conceived b y t he h u m a n m i n d , a n d p ro d uces t h e m ost waste energy a s well as waste materials. N u cl e a r weapo n s are m e rely a by-product ( l i k e the germ-lad en b l a n k et s ) o f that p rocess; e v e n w i t h o u t thei r u s e , t h e radi oact ive w a s t e p r o duced b y t h e "peace fu l " use of nuclear energy, a l o n g w i t h the by-prod u cts o f other e nergy-intensive i n d u s t ries, t h reatens to accelerate t h e termination of t his planet's ability t o s us t a i n l i fe . This t h e r m o d y n a m i c d i s o rd e r is a parallel to the social and p o l it ical d i s o rd e r b e i ng created on a global scale t h rough the p rocess o f i n d ustrializati o n . Thus, M eans' position not o n l y o p p oses the d e p l oyment / e m p l oyment of nuclear wea p o n ry, it goes far beyond t his surface concern to o p p ose the root problem, the European p roduct i o n fet i s h itself. Clearly, such a position cann o t d erive fro m the l ikes of t h e R o b i n s o n a d e i d e a l i s t s ; t h e i r concern was with abstract social fo rms. Rather, M eans' t he s i s i s a physical proposition. I t is based d i rectly i n the fu n d a mental statement uttered by American

S ame Old S o n g I n Sad R e fra i n

73

I nd i a n s e v e r s i n c e t h e i r fi rst e n c o u n t e r w i t h E u ropeans ( a n d w h i c h , as M eans n o t e d , E u ro p e a n s h a v e res o l u t ely refu s e d t o h e a r ) : " y o u cannot d o t h i s . " N o t "yo u s h o u l d n't , " n o t " p lease d o n't , " but "you cannot. " A nd why? " Because the planet will eat yo u a l i v e if y o u do; beca use the u n i v e rse will destroy y o u . " There is no o p t i o n here, it is a s t a t e m e n t of fact, an assert i o n of k n o w l e d ge . A n d it i s a k n owledge b o r n e o u t d i rectly by m o d e r n p hysics , t h e p o i n t b e i n g t h at N a t i ve A merica n s k n e w t h is c e n t u ries before E u ropean p h ys i c i s t s arrived at t h e s a m e c o n c l u s i o n s . S o much for t h e determ i n i s t c orres p o n d e n ce between mater i a l attainment a n d c o n c e p t u a l a b i l i t ie s . So much for t he " i m m u table iron laws of h i s t o ry." A t t hi s point, t h e Rep fal l s back on p re c i sely the fai t h noted by M ea n s i n "The Same Old S o n g . " N o t having a s o l u t i o n t o t h e q uest i o n of h o w t o c o n t i n u e t o act u a l ize e v e r m o re a n d greater p r o d u c t i v i t y and i n d u s tr i a l izat i o n i n an e n t r o p i c u niverse, i t s i m pl y asserts the validity of i t s d octrine w i t h o u t refe r r i n g t o t h e fu n d a m e nt a l i s s u e at a l l . " T r u s t u s , w e ' l l fig u re t hi s o u t l a t e r ; trust u s , have fai t h , science will fi n d a way . " T h e re i s j us t no o t h e r way t o assess the p o s i t i o n the p o l e m i c i s t s lay o u t ; t he y a re utterly re l i gi o u s i n t heir e x p o s i t i o n . A t one p o i n t i t was even asserted t hat the p r o blem of trad i t i o n a l cu l t u res was t he i r " d e p e n d e nce o n n a t u re" as i f s o m e h o w M ar x i s m had , g o d l i k e , transcended n a t u r e a n d g o ne i n t o another real m ( w h i c h , o f c o u rs e , i s o n e way t o get around q uestions s u c h as t ho s e raised by p h ys i ca l law. ) ...

...

...

...

...

F i n a l l y, after all of t h e p recee d i ng, a rat ionale is a d va nced to j us t i fy the trust in M arxist- Le n i n is t i n te n t i o ns req uested by the R P C fro m Nat ive A me r i c a n p e o p l e . Its n a t u re? The contents of t h e p a rty's Draft Programm e and New Constit ution, ( t o be ac t u a l i zed a fter the " p roletaria n revo l ut i on " ) w h i c h read s i n part: H e re autonomy will be the p o l i c y of the proletarian stat e -t h e vari o u s I nd ia n peoples w i l l have the r i g h t t o s e l f-government within t h e l a r ge r s o c i a l i s t s t a t e , under ce rt a i n overall guid i ng p r i n c i p l e s . . . t h e p ractices a n d p r i n c i ples m u s t t e n d t o p r o m o t e e q u al it y , n o t i n e q u a lity, unity, n o t d ivis i o n , between p e o p l e s , a n d

74

Marxism a nd Na ti v e A me ri ca ns eliminate, not foster, exploitation . . . [and Indian people] will be encouraged to tak e a full part in the overall affairs of society as a whole . . . [emphasis ad ded] .

This is hauntingly familiar rhetoric, virtually a paraphrase fro m Stalin's writings concerning t h e "National Question" i n the U S S R . IO And small wonder; a pri mary intellect behind the prose of the d ocument i n question, and the "Chairman" of t he Revolutionary Communist Party U S A is one Bob Avakian, unabashed career Stalinist, a n individual who only lately reached the d ramatic conclusion that J osef Stalin "might have" made several "relatively minor errors" i n the course of his tenure of leaders hip i n the S oviet Union. Can t here be q uestio n as t o t h e nature of the real ity l u rking behind the compelling early Stalinist rhetoric concerning the "National Question"? Can t here be real questions as to the fate of t he S oviet m i n orities so solidly ass ured of "autonomy" within the "greater society" of the U S S R? The q uesti o n of the pragmatic significance of a "guarantee" of autonomy t o A merican I ndians by an i ntellectual/ political t radition which states, before the fact, "As we have seen, Ind ian trad itions are not capable of guid ing t he struggle on the pat h to t rue liberation . . . " m ust be confronted. The question of why Native A mericans would be better o ff "within the larger socialist state" than within geographically d iscrete territories (nations) of their own as are other sovereign peoples, must be confronted . The questi o n of the ad vantage to the "larger socialist state" of having t hose native groups within its corpus must be confronted . The meaning of "socialist equality, u nity," etc. within the Marxist-Len inist t rad ition must be confronted in the l ight of readi ly observable historical realities, as must the ultimate nat ure of the "encouragement" referred t o i n the party d ocument. The time for such confrontation is n ow, w hile what the RCP calls "the revolutio nary ripples" which may beco me " mighty waves in the not too distant fut ure" a re still ripples; not after a visionless and theoretically bankrupt "cadre" has once again seized the power necessary to continue "the same old song." •

•

•

•

•

Same Old Song I n Sad Refrain

75

Russell M eans' argument is anything but a call to reaction o r a defense of capitalism; such a content i o n can be predicated only in the s i mplistically mindless view that t he range of human o ption is p rescribed within the limitations o f t h e European cultural paradigm itself. Even then, it is vastly s i mplistic, a n exercise i n cynicism a n d manipulation. There are other options, other t rad itions, other heritages lead ing t o o bservations, perceptions and conclusions external t o the European cultura l context; t heir validity cannot be dismissed a priori. The anal retentive fantasies o f the R e p are not an isolated p henomenon on the A merican left. They are merely p resented in crystall i n e fo rm by the party. Other s c h o ol s of M arxism advance t heir thesis variants in m o re brilliantly sophisticated packages, calling upon m o re complex adj uncts to bolster the general theory, offering their positions in less o bviously t ransparent jargon. But, i n essence, t hey remain the same. Terms such as "primitive," " p reca pitalist," "underdeve l oped," etc. hold universal currency in M arxism, regard less of the sophistry within which t hey a re buried . I n the final analysis. t hey are raci st and arrogant terms, unsupported by fact. N o culture other than Europe has ever undergone the progression of material d evelopment experienced in Europe and indicated by such terminology; to presume t hat n o n- E u ropean cultures would i nevitably have followed a trajecto ry fro m primitive to pre capitalist to capitalist is su blimely s peculative. To l ock such speculati o n i nto a catego rical and u niversal "law" is a corner stone of all Marxist theory . To t h i s extent a t least , the R C P -for all its crudity and vulgarity -is representative of M arxian t h i n k ing. The converse applies here. Europe, p recisely because of the nature of its material developmental trajectory. has not under gone the experiences of non-European cultures. O n that basis a l o ne there is m uch k n owledge t o be gained and shared o n a cross-cultural basis. Pretense at cultural hege m o ny i n terms of k n owledge, on whatever basis, is m e rely o bfuscati o n , i n tellectual i mperialism, a barrier t o real understa n d i ng. It i s faith, n o t science. Europe h a s exported t h e faith of its core ideology under the mantles of Christianity, cap italism, and M arxism at t h e expense of know/edge throughout its history. To this extent, the p retentions of European knowledge a re and must remain a lie.

76

Marxism and Native A m e ricans I n t he i m me d i at e sense, it seems obvious that the R e p

k n o ws little o f Nat ive A merica n s .

Worse, i t seems eq ually

o bv i o u s t he party seeks n o m o re k n owled ge t h a n it has already ac hieved . The w i l l i ngness t o d i s t o rt , to fa bricate, to t w ist reality beyond recog n i t io n i n o rder to fo rce t h e o retical conform ity t o its p rec o n ce p t i o n s is s t u n n i ng. The petti ness o f t he pole m ics ad va nced a s party t he s e s , h o wever, cannot be easily d i s missed by either other M a rxist s c h o o l s or n o n - M a rxists. The c o m m o n a l i t ies of a ss u m p t i o n between M a rxists are ulti mately m o re compelling t h a n t he evident d is s i m i larities. The differences a re tactical, t he s i m i l a rities s trategic and theoretical . I n crit i q u i n g t he i n ad e q u ac y of t h e R e p position, n o n L e n i n i s t M a rx i s m m u s t c r i ti q u e t h e ground it h o l d s i n c o m m o n w i t h t h e R e p . A reasses s m e n t of t h e M a rxian core ideologies must occur. The alternative can only be t hat " M arxism n o l o nger has a n yt h i n g to tell u s , " as S a rt re so aptly put it. The red unda ncy c o n veyed b y t he p h ra s e " rev o l u t i o n a ry M a r x i s m" can t he n o n ly constitute a confl i c t i n terms, rendering R ussell M eans' o b servat i o n s j ust t hat m u c h m o re astute. What i s req u i re d at t hi s h i s t o rical j u n c t u re i s an aba n d o n ment of fa i t h in t h e fu n d a me n t a l role of prod uct i o n . I n its p resent co nfigu rat i o n , S t ruct u rally,

M arxis m h o wever,

has n o t h i n g t o say i n the matter. t h ro u g h its dialectical met h od o l ogy,

M a rx i s m can h ope t o t ranscend its own intellectual / theoretical stalemate. Self-serving, myt h o l ogizing polemics such a s the R e p i l l u s t rates s o well c a n s erve o n l y t o b a l k s u c h a p rocess; they a re regressive i n t h e extreme, t hey are t ruly "backwa rd ," truly "reactionary . " T h e a b s o l u t e n e e d t o c o m b i n e t h e k n o w ledges of a l l t h e cu lt u res of t he world w i t h i n a com prehensive world view h a s never been stro nger t h a n at t h i s m o ment. M arx i s m can a n d s h o u l d h a v e an i m portant role t o p l a y i n such a di alect ical e n d eavor. The i m perative t o accrue such k n o w ledge must be establis hed befo re, not after, some mystical "revolutionary" cataclys m. Pres u p p o s it i o n m u s t be e n d e d and i n te ract ion begu n. A nd t h e o n l y valid p o i n t o f d e p a rt u re fo r A merican M arxists is w i t h the c u l t u ral k n o wledge o f Native A mericans.

PA R T T W O

A t n i g h t , w h e n the streets of your cit ies and villages are s i lent and deserted, t hey will throng with t h e h ost t hat once fi lled, and still love this land. The w h i t e m a n will never be alone.

-Chief Sealth (Suquamish)

4 Marx's General Cultural Theoretics Elisabeth Lloyd

C a n M a rxist analysis be a p p l i e d s u ccessfully t o all of t h e d i verse cultures o n o u r p l a net? Critics often c o n t e n d that M arx i s m possesses no t heory of cult u re per se, a n d t hat its a nalysis t e n d s t o be adva nced fro m s u c h a n arrowly E u r o p e a n base t h at a n y conclusions d ra w n are s t ro ngly s u s p ected of b e i n g i n a p p ro p r i a t e to Thi rd World contexts. S u c h an a p pr o a c h to c u ltural d iversity renders M a r x i s m a s p o t e n t i a l l y d e s t r u c t i ve t o n o n E u ropean cu ltures as capitalis m / i mperialism. V a r i o u s bits of evidence are offered t o s u p p o rt t h i s c o n c l u s i o n : these often const i t ute part i c u l a r a n d u seful critic i s m of c o nte m p o ra ry M arxist practice. It might be argued , h o wever, t hat it i s p recisely w i t h i n t he real m of p ractice t h a t the defects o c c ur, and t hat M arx's t h e o ries do c o n t a i n material a p p l i c a b le w i t h i n a m u l t i-cu ltural arena; that M ar x i s m d o e s , i n fact possess the essentials of a theory o f culture in precisely t he sense inte nded b y critics . What follows i s n ot intended as defi n i tive, b u t as a brief s u m mary of cert a i n tendencies w it h i n M a rx's ge n e ral theories w h ich g o c o u nter t o the charges of m o n o-cultura li s m . A d d i t i onal d evelop ment of t hese p oints i s a p p ro priate, but must be left for a nother t i m e .

79

80

A


Question of Definition

We immediately co nfront a fu ndamental problem in termi nology when we speak of "culture" in M arxian analysis. Critics are wont to point out t hat M arx custo marily used this terminol ogy in relation to haute Kultur and volks Kultur, that is, to

define "high" and "low" realms in literature, music, dance, the plastic arts, etc. This usage s uppo se dly "proves" that Marxism possesses only the most superficial conception of culture and has no sense of how culture provides the complete matrix from which artistic endeavors s p ring. Given the broad anthropological definition employed by these critics, their argument is valid. Observation on arts and letters in no way begin to add ress q uestions of cultural differenti ation betwe'en peoples. Aesthetic criticism aux Lukacs and Adorno is at best o paque and, more p ro bably, is utterly i rrele vant in term� of the revolutionary aspirations of an Afghani tribesman. I f Marxis m's co nception of culture was limited to this aesthetic preoccupation, the critics would have their way. Marx ism would be truly disfunctio nal as a tool in all n on-European contexts. The situation is not s o simple. As has been observed else where, I Marx freq uently used concepts in varied and , at ti mes, apparently contradictory ways. Pu rely semantic exami nation of his work can lead to erroneous observations regard ing his theo retical conclusions. In the case at hand, the situation is even worse. The anthropological conception of culture was not cur rent in Marx's time, but was actually popularized long after his death. Thus, to criticize M a rx for not ackn owledging the fu ll cultural matrix in those terms is effectively to d iscredit hi m for not having fo reseen and utilized a vernacular that only came into use decades after his last work. This is manifestly absurd. The point at issue is whether, terminology notwithstanding, the essen tial ingred ients for a general theory of culture exist within M arxism. Further exploration of this point demands some agreement regard ing the term "culture." For purposes of this discussion, it may be posited (as it seems to be by the critics of Marxism's "defective" cultural theory) that culture involves characteristics which bind a particular group of people together socially. These

M a rx's G e n e r a l C u l t u r a l T h e o re t ics

81

w o u l d i n c l u d e l a nguage, b a s i s o f e c o n o m y , k i n s h i p rel a t i o n s ( m a rr i a g e , b l ood l i n k ages, m a t r i l i n ea r ! p a t r i l i ne a r s t r u ct u re , e t c . ) , s p a t i a l ! te m p o ra l c o n ce p t u a l izat i o n , a n d re l i g i o n , a m ong o t h e r factors ; i n other words, the galaxy o f b a s e and p r i m a ry s u p e rs t ruct u ral c h a racte r i s t i cs w h i c h d e fi n e a p e o p l e a s a p e o p l e . T h i s i s a s p ecifi c a l l y a n t h r o p o l og i c a l v i e w , b u t i t h a s p ro v e n u s e fu l i n cross-cu l t u ral co n si d e r a t i o n s .

T h e Dialectial Method G i v e n the preced i n g w o r k i n g d e fi n i t i o n , a ge n e r a l t h e o r y of c u l t u re w o u l d n o t only h ave t o e x p l a i n how t h i s a rray o f t r a i t s a n d c h a ra c t e r i s t ics fu n c t i o n s i n a s t a t e o f i n t e ract i o n ( e a c h e l e m e n t i n t e rac t i n g w i t h a l l o t h e r s ) t o create a s o c i e t y , b u t s h o u l d a l s o p r o v i d e coge nt i n t e r p re t a t i o n o f t h e n a t u re o f t h a t s o c i e t y , a n d i t s h i s t o rical d i rect i o n . M a r x i s m s e e m s e m i ne n t l y eq u i p ped to p r o v i d e t he necessary t o o l s fo r s u c h a c o n s t ructive a nd d y n a m i c c u l t ural t heory. T h e fu n d a m e n t a l m et h o d o l o gy e m p l oy e d w i t h i n M a r x i s t a n alys i s i s d i a lect i c s, o r m o re p re c i s e l y , t h e " t r i a d i c , dialect ic." This c o nce p t u a l for m u l a t i o n , b or r owed b y Marx fro m H egel , c o n s i s t s o f t h ree p ri m a r y p ro pe r t i e s o r " l a w s " : I ) t he t r a n sfo r m a t i o n of q u a n t ity i n t o q ua l i ty;

2)

t h e u n i t y o f o p p o s i t e s ; a n d 3) t he

n ega t i o n of t h e negat i o n . 2 T h e s e l a w s ( p a r t i c u l a r l y

2)

i ndicate

t h a t a l l t h i ngs, w h e t h e r c o n s t i t u t i n g t he s u bj e c t o r o bject o f e x a m i n a t i o n , m u s t be a n a l y t i c a l l y t r e a t e d a s i n he re n t l y rel a t i o n a l t o a l l o t he r t hi n g s . The s a m e l a w s ( p a r t i c u l a r l y I a n d 3 ) nece s s i t a t e t h e c o n s i d e rat i o n of s u c h relat i o n s i n t e r m s o f d y n a m i c p rocess ( i . e . , transfo r m a t i o n occurri n g t h ro u g h t i m e ) . T h u s , M ar x i s t met h o d o l ogy d e m a n d s t hat a n a n a l y s i s o f s o c iety occ u r i n h o l i s t i c fas h i o n ; a n y s o c i a l e l e m e n t can o n l y be fu l l y u n d e r s t o o d in its r e l at i o n s h i p to all o t h e r s . E p i s t e m o l ogi cally, d i alectical t h i n k i n g o r m et h o d o l ogy m u s t i m p l y a p ro ce d u re w h i c h is consta n t l y s e n s i t i v e to t he w h o l e n e s s of t h e c o n t e x t fr o m w h i c h t h e e l e m e n t o f e x a m i n a t i o n h a s b e e n l i ft e d ; t he c o n s i d e rat i o n of a n y e l e m e n t a l o n e , t h o ug h o ft e n n ecessary a n d u s e fu l , i s recog n i zed a s a p o te n t i a l l y d i s t o rt i n g a b s t ra ct i o n . 3 G i v e n t h is o perat i o n a l m o d e , M a rx i s m p o ssesses t he c o nce p t u a l t o o l s req u i s i te t o a n i n te ract i v e e x a m i n a t i o n o f s o c i e t y i n p re c i sely t h e sense called for by c u l t u r a l t h e o r y .

82


In practical a p plicat i o n , the d ialect ical met h od is brought into play t hrough a series of t h ree ge neralities perhaps best articulated by Louis Althusser: I n t he o ret ical p ractice (q . v.), t he process of t h e prod uc t i o n o f k n owledge, G e neralit ies I are t h e a bst ract raw material of science, G e neralities I I I are t he co ncrete, scient ific ge neralit ies that a re prod uced , while Ge nerali ties I I are t he t h e o ry of science at a given moment, the means of prod uction of k n o wledge . 4 A l t h u sser goes o n t o s t a t e categorical l y t hat "kn owled ge" i s "Generalities I I I . " G i ve n t h at d ia lectics p e r se constitute t h e esse n t i a i fr a mewo r k for " t h e t heory of science a t a given m o ment," t hen M a rx ists m us t p roceed from a given social e l e ment taken as raw d a t a, process t h i s k n o w n element i n h o l i s t i c or d i a lect ical fas h i o n , a n d fi nally ret urn t h i s element as a fu lly comprehended entity i n t o its context. Through such fu ll rela t i o n a l analysis, t h e context of elements itself is also co m p re hended . Thus, o n both t h e met h o d o l ogical level and i n terms o f an i n t e l lect ual p ractice, M ar x i s m is q u ite capable of accomodat ing the i ntrinsic complexity of culture, broad ly understood . I f t h i s is s o , t h e n why d o crit ics claim that no adq uate M a rxist cul.t u ral analysis has a p peared? The problem l ies i n t he p ract ice and a p p l icat i o n of d ia lectics by M a rx ist t heoreticians, most of whom have been u nable to d i s t i ng u i s h between t h e'i r met h od and s o me of t he m o re complex systems of purely causal rela t i o ns such as co-causality, cu m u la tive causation or s i m u ltaneous determi nation of a multi-variable structure where no va riables have been identified as dependen t or independent i n adva n ce . s In other w o rd s, t here i s a lack of clear d i fferentiation bet ween ca use / effect (linearity) and d ialectics ( h o l istic relat ivity or circuli nearity) within contemporary M arx ist analysis. W h i l e M arxist t he o ret icians claim ont ological alle giance t o t he t rad i t i o n o f d i alectics, many o f t he m seem confused as t o what, exactly, d ialect ical met hodology s h ould look like. T h i s confusion is oft e n hidden t h ro u g h t he mystifica t i o n of lan guage and values so p reval ent i n 20t h Cent u ry M arxism, w h ich

Marx's G e n eral C u lt ura l Theore t i cs

83

serves a s a rh etori cal barrier 0 bscuri n g t he n o n-d ialectical e p i s t e m o l ogy being practiced. T o ret urn Marxi st t heoret ical practice to its root h o l i s t i c m e t h o d , as o p posed t o u l t i mately a b stract s y s t em s o f c a u s a l i t y, i s s i m ul t a n e o u s l y t o perceive a Marx i s t m e t h o d o logical m o d e l cap a b l e o f allo w i ng a n a d e q uate (and u n b i a s e d ) t he ory of c u l t ure . T h e q u e s t i o n re m a i n s as to whet her M arx h i m self a c k n o wled ged, o r even i nte nded, the potent i al of t h i s m o d e l .

Semantic Considerations Rather than sifting Marx for deployment of t erminology n o t curre n t to h i m, it see m s m o re fru i t f u l to exa m i n e h i s t h e ories for mat erial which a p proaehes m ore pert i n e n t s u bject matter, al beit w i t h s ome i nterpretat i o n necessary. For exa m ple, t h e su b stitut i o n of Marx's term "society" for the term "c u l t ure" proves rew ard i ng. As he stated i n t h e u n fi n i s he d Introduction 10 the Critique of Political Economy : In t h e s t u d y of e co n o m i c categories, as i n t h e case o f every h i storical a n d social sc i e n ce, i t m u s t b e b o r n e i n m i n d t h at a s i n reality s o i n o u r m i nd t h e s u bj ect . . . i s given and that t h e categories are t herefore b u t form s o f ex press i o n, m a n i festa t i o n s o f exi s t e n ce, a n d freq u e n t l y b u t o ne-sided as pects of t h is s u bject, t h i s d efi nite society . 6 C learly, Marx w a s referring t o "society" i n t h i s i ns t a n ce i n t h e sa me sen se t h at "cult ure" i s referred t o w i t h i n a n a n t hr o p o l ogical d e fi n i t i o n . The categories referred t o � i n t h is case, eco n o m i c � are u nderstood as be i n g "for ms, " " m a n ifesta t i o n ," a n d "aspects" of a l arger whole, t h e ir c o n text . T h i s w h o l e or c o n t ext, w h i c h M a rx c a l l s "society," serves esse n t i a l l y t h e s a m e fu n c t i o n w i t h i n h i s theory as does "cu l t ure" for t h e cri tics. This i n t erpretat i o n i s sup p orted by a n o t h er p assage fro m t h e Introduction in w h ich M arx s t a tes, "[t h e categories o f b ourge ois s o c iety] s erve as the expre ss i o n of i t s c o n d i t i o ns and the c o m pre

h e n s i o n of its o w n organizat i o n . " 7 I n t h i s case t h e "categories" u n d er c o n s i d era t i o n are n o t l i m ited to t h e e co n o m ic, but are m ore ge n era l. c a p a ble of e n c o m p a s s i n g t h e w i d e array of s u p er-

84


structural elements req uisite t o a nt h ro p o l ogical investigation of " culture." M a rx beco mes m o re e x plicit when he asserts , also in t he Introduction. that: The s i m p lest eco n o mic category, say excha nge value, i m p lies t he e x i s t e nce of p o p U l ation, popUlation t hat is e ngaged in p r o d u ct i o n with determined relations; it also i m plies t h e e x i s t e nce o f ce rta in types of fa mily, class, o r state, etc. I t can have no other existence except as an abstract one-sided relat ion of an already given

concrete and living aggregate. [m y empha sis] 8 W h at is t h is "co nc rete a n d l i v i ng aggrega te". i f n o t "cu i t u reH,! W e can d raw certain c o n c l u s i o n s fro m M a rx's statements : that M a rx understood each base and s u perst ruct u ral concept as a co m po nent of a whole, w h i c h h e cal led "society"; t hat each component is l i n k e d , t h rough its re lati o n t o the w h o le, t o all other c o m ponents; a n d , given t he internal relat i o n s between t hese components , the w h o le can be said t o b e c o n t a i ned i n each o f its parts. each in its particular i nterco n n e ct i o n s w i t h the o t hers provid ing us with a vers i o n of the w h o l e . I n s o fa r as t h i s is true, t h e meaning of M a rx's "whole" o r " society" is clearly ident ifia ble with "culture". Thus M a rx d i d . i n fact, e l a b o rate an ent ity w h i c h fa lls within t h e a nt h ro p o l ogical d e fi n i t i o n of "cu lture," terminol ogical d i f ferences n o twit h s t a n d i n g . The q ue s t i o n still lies u n a n s wered o f w h e t h e r M a r x , h a v i n g articu lated a ba sis for s u c h , act u ally de ve loped something w h ich l o o ks l i k e a "theory of culture." He can be unders t o o d to have d o ne s o , but w i t h i n a context which he termed "social relat i o n s . "

The Method Applied " R elations" a re the m i n i m u m i rred uci ble u n its in M a rx's concept o f society. Put another way , his s u bject matter is society grasped in terms o f relations. Fa m i ly, religion, government, etc. , are a l l c onceived as s uperstructu ral relations contain ing in t h e mselves, as in tegral t o t h e i r identit ies, t h ose p a rt s with which t hey tend t o be seen a s externally tied . In M a rx's view, t hese rela t i o n s are co nceived as h o ld i n g p r o p e rties internal o ne unto

M a rx's G e n e r a l C u l t u ra l T h e o retics

85

the ot h e r . A n y a l t e ra t i o n in o n e r el a t i o n i m p l i e s c o rres p o n d i ng c h a nges i n a l l relati o n s ; t h e w h o l e i t s e l f is a l t e re d . F o r i n s t a nce, M a rx declares it a t a u t o l ogy t h at "t h e re ca n n o l o n ger be wage l a b o r when t he re i s n o l o nger any c a p i t a l . "9 S u c h a s t a t e m e n t c l e a rly i nd i cates t h e i n teractive, i n te r d e p e n d e n t q u a l it i es o f "re l a t i o n s . " F u r t h e r , a lterat i o n s o f rel a t i o n s at t h e b a s e level w i l l n o t o n l y i n c u r c h a nges i n r e l at i o n s a t t h at l e v e l b u t i n t h e s u p e r s t r u c t u r a l level as wel l . The i n verse a l s o h o l d s t r u e . A s M a r x p u t i t . "[society is] m a n h i ms e l f i n h i s s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s . " l o To p a r a p h ra s e , it m a y be a s s e rt e d t h a t c u l t u re is m a n h i m s e l f i n h i s overa l l relat i o n s . I s t h i s a m is i n t e r p retat i o n of M a rx's m ea n i ng? F o r M a rx, all c o nj u n c t i o n i s o rg a n i c , i n t ri n s i c t o t h e s o c i a l u n i t s h e c o n s id e rs a n d i n h e re n t t o e a c h . Of t h e re l a t i o n s o f p r o d u ct i o n , d is t r i bu t i o n , c o n s u m p t i o n , a n d e x c h a nge, fo r i n st a n ce , M a rx s pecifi e s t h a t " . . . m u t u a l i n t e ra ct i o n t a k e s p l ace b e t w e e n vari o u s e l e m e n t s . S u c h i s t h e case i n every o r g a n i c b o d y . " " Aga i n , the " o rga n i c b o d y" refe rr e d to ca n o n ly be c o n s t r u e d as t he s o c i a l w h ole, o r c u l t u re . I n t e r m s of t he o re t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n , c o n s i d e r M a rx's c l e a r s t a t e m e n t regard i n g t h e c o n nect i o n b e t w e e n p r o d u c t i o n a nd c o n s u m p t i o n , " P r o d u c t i o n is . . . a t t h e s a m e t i m e c o n s u m p t i o n , a n d co n s u m p t i o n , p ro d u ct i o n . " ' 2 T h e t w o a re s o c i a l l y j oi n e d a n d i nt egral t o o ne a n o t h e r . I n a n o t h e r p a s sage, M ar x e m p h a s i zes

that " the economic conception [is correct in holding] that d i st ri b u t i o n e x i s t s s i d e

by side w i t h

production

as a s e l f

c o n ta i n e d s p h e re . " 1 J I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e s t a n d a rd n o n - M a rx i s t v i e w t h a t p ro d u ct i o n a n d d i s t ri b u t i o n a r e i n te g r a l relat i o n s t o e a c h o t h e r i s i n s u ffi c i e n t ; c o n s i d e r a ti o n o f t h e s e t w o fa ct o r s as a s y s t e m w h i c h is i n d e p e n d e n t fro m t h e rest o f t h e s o c i a l system i s i n co r r e c t . M arx i s m t re a t s i t s e n t i re s u bj ec t m a t t e r a s "d i ffe re n t s i d e of o n e u n i t " ' 4 ; t hat i s , o f c u l t u re . A s y e t , we h a ve u n c o vered o n l y a n a p p r o p ri a t e m e a n s t o d i s c u s s a n a bstracted s t a t i c m o d e l o f a s o ci e t y o r c u l t u re. E a c h

unit

or

element defi ned as existi ng within a s ociety may be fully

e x a m i n e d ( o n l y) in its rel a t i o n s to a l l o t h e r e l e m e n t s so d e fi n e d . H owever, o n ce t h is s i g n i fi c a n t t a s k h a s b e e n c o m p l et e d , we a re l e ft w i t h o n l y a d e a d a n d m o t i o n le s s m o d e l , a n d n o r e a l s o c i e t y is s t a t i o n a r y . T h u s , t he model is o f deci d e d ly l i mi t e d p ract iced u t i l it y.

86

M a r x i s m and Native A mericans

As Paul LaFargue has noted , however, Marx 's

"

highly com

p l i cated w o r l d " is " i n c o n t i n u a l m o t i o n . " 1 5 The p rocesses o f c h a nge a n d deve l o p me n t c o n s t a n t l y occur; structure is o n l y a st age in t h is p rocess . To i n t r o d u ce a t e m p o r a l d i me n s i o n i n t o a n a ly s i s merely i m p l ie s v i e w i n g e a c h social element a s b e i n g related n o t o n l y t o a l l e l e m e n t s , b u t a l s o ( i ntegrally) t o i t s o w n p a s t a n d fut u re fo r m s . O n ce t h i s i s acco m pl i s hed , overall tem p o ral context i s e s t a b l i s hed by relating t he past and fut u re for m s o f a l l o t h e r s o c i a l e l e m e n t s as w e l l . W h i l e t h e p roced u re i s rea s o n a b ly s i m p l e t o c o n ce i ve , the res u l t i ng a nalytical p a n o ra m a i s i n fi n itely r i c h and c o m p l e x . This relat i o n a l m o d e l o ffe r s t h e p resent as a p o i n t a l o ng a c o n t i n u u m stret c h i n g fro m t h e d efi n a ble past i n t o a k n o wa b l e fu t u r e . A l l s o c i a l c h a nge i s c o n cept u a l i zed as actual izat i o n o f w h a t al ready potent i a l l y i s ; i t is s i m u l t a n e o u s l y t h e unfo l d i n g o f a p re-e x i s t i ng p rocess a n d a s p a t i a l re l a t i o n . The model i n t h i s fi n a l fo r m can h a n d le t h e v a s t a r ray o f c ha ngi ng h u m a n circ u m stance s . l n

The Relations o f Production The a bst ract c o m p o ne n t s have now bee n establis hed fo r the M a rx i s t a p p rehens i o n of c u l t u re i n t h e broad sense. " S ociety," as M a rx put it, i s " t h e s u m o f the re l a t i o n s in w h i c h i n d i v i d u a l s s t a n d t o o n e a n o t h e r . " 1 7 W h e n M a rx s t a t e s , "society itself, t h a t is man in h i s social relat i o n s , " 1 8 t h i s assess ment must be u n d e r s t o o d as extend i ng t h r o u g h o u t t h e rea l m o f "t he product(s) of m a n's

reciprocal activities " ; 19 since people are related to one another not o n l y d i rectly, but a l s o t h r o ug h the o bjects o f t h e i r p rod u c t i v e l a b or, a broad defi n it i o n o f "societ y" m u s t i nclude b o t h p e o p l e and t h e i r o bj ects. M a rx's d e p l o y m e n t o f his t he o retical c u l t u ral elements res u l t s i n t he specifi c at i o n a n d e x p l icat i o n of t hese v a r i o u s s o c i a l relat i o n s . We t u r n n o w t o t h e part i c u l a r p rod ucts o f M a rx's analytical t o o l s , that is, t he act u a l d e s c r i p t i o n s of social rela t i o n s w h i c h c o m p lete M a rx's c u l t u ra l t h e o ry . I t is p e o p le's n e e d fo r o t h e r p e o p l e a n d t h e i r assista nce i n t h e realizat i o n of h u m a n p o wers w h ic h h o lds society t oget h e r i n a l l p e r i o d s a n d p laces. T h i s " c u lt u ra l ceme nt" is cons idered b y M a rx t o be a " n a t u ral nece s s ity" ( N a t u r n o t we n d i g k e i t ) o r "interest . " 2o M a rx s t a t e d i n In t r o du c t i o n to t h e Cr it ique of Po lit ical

M a rx's General C u lt u ra l Theoret ics

87

Economy ":

Man is in the most literal sense of the word a zoon politikon, not only a social animal, but an animal which can develop in to an individual only in society. Production by isolated in dividuals outside of society-something which might happen as an exception to a civilized man who by accident got into the wilderness and is already dynamically possessed within himself by the forces of society-is as great an absurdity as the idea of the development of a language without in dividuals living together and talking to one another. 2 1

There a re t h ree points made i n the p reced i ng statement which s ho u l d be emphasized . First, M a rx o nce a ga i n asserts his view that people are i nherently social / cultural bei ngs. S eco nd , he d i rectly a c k nowledges l a nguage as a n aspect o f c u l t u ra l cement. T h i rd , he takes up the issue of prod u ct i o n within this p a ragrap h o n t h e n a t u re o f t h e human individ u a l . This last p o i n t is crucial. M a rx holds t hat p roduction is the area o f life i n which peop le's social c h a racters emerge most clearly; for M arx, prod uct i o n is the primary example of human cooperation. A n important i m p licat i o n o f the a bove statement fro m t h e Int roduction is t hat p roduct i o n cannot be separated fro m t h e socia l / c u l t u ral matrix o f which it is an i ntegral part, a relation. Prod uctive work is the core of "life activity" for Marx. 22 He s t ates, "prod u ctive l i fe is the l i fe o f the s pecies. I t is l i fe engend e r i n g life . "23 M arx sum ma rizes his u n dersta n d i n g o f the role of p roduct i o n in the shaping of h u m a n l i fe a s follows: " A s i n divid u a l s e x p ress t heir lives, s o t hey are. What they a re, t herefore, c o i ncides with their product i o n , bot h with what t hey prod uce and with h o w they produce."24 In t h is context, "what they (men) a re" can be u nderstood as man's e n t i re way o f being i n t he world, i ncl u d i n g his cultural existence. T h r o u g h examination of the p roducts and means o f product i o n , "the open book of ma n's essential p o wers" and "t he exposure to t he senses of human psychology" are revealed . 25 F o r M arx, h'u mans are i n herently social beings through the neces s i t y o f being materially productive. Thus, c o nsiderat i o n of p e o ple's re lations t o p rod uct i o n are central t o t h e a p p rehension o f t he nature of people's social / cultural character at any given h i storical m o ment and within any given geograp hical context.

88

M arxism a n d Native A me ricans

Conclusion

The preceding formulation of society and the central role of p roduction in an analysis of social relat ions completes the t heory of culture implicit i n M arxism. Reiteration of the main poi nts of this argu ment should clarify the connections between a broad theory of culture and M a rx's e m phasis on production as a social relation. The opening question was whether Marxist analysis could be applied t o d iverse cult u res. H aving established an anthropo l ogical definition of culture a s a p p ropriate, we asked whether the essential ingred ients for a general t heory of culture exist within M arxism, and found that M a rxist methodology, i.e. , d ialectics, is equipped t o explain how the different aspects of culture interact in order to create a society and culture. Through d ialectical analysis, each facto r in s ociety is explored and explained in relation t o all other factors; the result is a holistic analysis of the dynamic creation o f s ociety through t i me. Marxist method ology therefore fills the req uirement as a tool for an interactive theory of culture. Althusser's sche m a was used t o explore t he p ractical a ppli cation of the dialect ical m ethod. Some problems arose at this point concerning act ual p ractice by M arxist theoreticians; in ord er to arrive at a non-red uctive cultural analysis, theo rists must apply true dialectical analysis, rat her than one of the various forms of causal analysis. The o bvious q u estion then arose of whether M arx intended analytic tools t o be used i n this way. Upon examination o f his his writings, it became clear that M arx's term "society" has the s a me essential meaning as the anthropological definition of "cultu re." With this bit of interpretat i o n i n mind, M a rx's t heory of s ocial relations surfaces as the s ought after "theory of culture." Finally, we are i n a position t o su mmarize the key features of a M arxist theory of culture. All s ocial relations are i nteractive and i nterdependent; when one changes, all others change, as d oes the whole itself. This whole is society, the s u m of all social relations. At the core of M a rx's theory of social relations is p roduction. What people prod uce and how they d o so serves a s a foundation for all other relations, for culture. S o me comments are i n o rder. Given t he interactive and circular nature of d ialectical analysis, production should not be

M a rx's General C u l tu ra l Theoretics

89

u n d erst o o d a s the o ne s i ngle d e t e r m i n a t e of a l l o t h e r s o c i a l rel a t i o n s ; "t h ro u g h i t s ( p ro d u c t i o n ' s ) i nt e r n a l t i e s t o every t h i n g e l s e , e a c h fac t o r i s everyt h i n g e l s e v i e w e d fro m t h i s p a rt i c u l a r a n g l e . "26 A s u pe r s t r u c t u r a l rel a t i o n fro m a n y g i v e n c u l t u ra l per s pect i ve c a n n o t be p r o perly u nd e r s t o o d i n i s o l a t i o n fro m base s t r u ct u ral relat i o n s , a n d vice versa. T h i s l a t t e r is missed all t o o o ft e n b o t h by " p ract i c i n g M a rx i s t s " a n d b y n o n - M a r x i s t c r i t i c s . T o a d eg r e e , t h i s may be a res u lt of c e rt a i n m i slead i n g p o l e m i cal t e n d e n c i e s o n t h e part of M ar x h i m self. C e r t a i n s u pe rs t r u c t u ral p r o b l e m s s u c h as k i n s h i p a n d h e red i t y a t t i mes t h reatened t h e c o h e re n c e o f t he p ractical a p p l i ca t i o n o f h is general t heories . T h i s , as E n ge l s e x p la i n s , led t o a n i d eological e x aggerat i o n o f t h e d e t e r m i n a n t r o l e o f eco n o m i c fact ors. 2 7 I t h a s a l s o bee n p o i nted o u t t h a t M a r x s pe a k s o f a l l h i s t o ry i n t e r m s o f c l a s s s t ruggle a n d o ft e n refe r s t o for m a t i o n s

w i t h i n p re ca p i t a l i s t s o c ieties as "c1as s e s . " 2R T h i s is i n d eed a n

e x a m p l e o f M a r x a p p lying a concept w h e re o n ly a few o f many req u i s i t e c o m p o n e n t s are present (and the nature o f t h e s e te n d s to v a ry with his i m me d i a t e p u rpose) and i s t h u s o p e n t o d i s p ute i n t e r m s o f a cc u racy. S u c h "laps es" h a r d l y d i m i n i s h t he i m p o rt a n ce o f M a rx' s g e n e r a l p r i n ciples a n d i t i s a l s o p o s s i bl e t ha t i d e o l ogi c a l e x e r c i s e s a l o n g t h ese l i nes were a t a c t i c a l ploy d e s i g n e d to p r o m o t e rev o l u t i o na r y consciousness a m o n g the E u r o pean work ing class o f his d a y . 29 There s e e m s to be n o t h i n g i n he r e n t t o t h e d ialectical p ri nci p l e s e m p l oyed by M a rx a n d sketched i n t h i s essay w h i c h w o u l d l i m it t h e i r a p p l i c at i o n t o E u rope a l o n e . A n y c u l t u r e i s nece s s a r i l y c o m po s e d o f a n u m be r of defi n a b l e s o c i a l e l e m e n t s , e a c h o f w h i c h h a s a n h i s t o r i c a l c o n t e x t , a n d a l l o f w h i c h m u s t fu nct i o n i n d i rect i nt e ract i o n a l relat i o n s h i p t o o n e a n ot he r at a l l t i m e s . R ega rd less o f s u perst r u c t u r a l d i s s i m i la r i t i e s , a n y given c u l t ure m u s t - o n pain of s he e r s u r v i v a l -e n gage in basic ( o r " base") m a t e r i a l p ro d u ct i o n . With t h i s as a c o m m o n d e n o mi na t o r o r s t a r t i n g p o i n t fo r a n a l y s i s , a n d i n c o m b i n a t i o n w i t h a n a n a l y s i s o f a l l o t h e r i nt egral s o c i a l fact ors w h i c h e me rge, a n a c c u rate p o r t r a i t of any c u l t u re can be d ra w n . M ar x's t heoretical c o n ce p t i o n o f s oc i e t y o r c u l t u re a p pears q u ite s o u nd t od ay, a n d h i s general m e t h o d o l o gy for e x a m i n ati o n q u ite a p p ro p riate. R a t h e r t h a n p re s e n t i n g a d a n ge r o u s o r dys fu ncti o n a l a p p r o ac h t o cross-c u l t u r a l praxis. t h ese w o u l d seem to

90


o ffer an i m mediate counter to t h e bourgeois anthropological device of l i fti n g particular fac t o rs out of their social ! cu ltural context for p u rposes o f "critical exami nation", a n approach considered by some to be a " E u ro-specific" and all-enc o m passing methodology. Nor would it seem t here i s anything within M arx's work i n d icating that Eu ropean n o r m s be used as an evaluat ive s t a n d a rd against w h i c h a n o n- E u ropean cult ure s h o u l d b e meas ured . To t he cont rary, given valid a p p licat ion of M a r xist dialect ical methods, it seems obvious t h a t e x a m i nation of the integral co m p o nents of the given c u l t u re itself is s pecifically mandated . This m i litates against a value-laden "com parative" methodology. To the extent that M a r x is t s have been histori ca l ly guilty of violating t h is proced ure, there have been errors of practice; t h i s is not, however, the same as a defective t he o ry. It s h o u l d not be fo rgotten that e n t ire cultures are t he mselves relational/ i n ter-related e ntities. At the very least, European expans i o n a n d co l o n i a l p ract i ce has guara nteed this. Cultures, if t hey ever were, a re n o l o n ge r "p u re," but are intertwi ned t hrough eco n o m ic relations, t hrough k i n s h i p interaction. t h rough reli gious i ntercha nge, language, a n d a host of other fact ors. Each component culture can then be treated as a facet or set o f social relations in world-wide social context. M arx hi nted at t he neces sity of a d ia lectical analysis on a wo rld-wide scale in the Eco nomic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844: " M a n , much as he may . . . be a p a rticu l a r i n d i v i d u a l r or culture : my note] . . is j u st a s much a s the totality-the ideal totality the su bjective existence of a tho ught and experience d s ociety present for itself. "30 M arxism provides t he t o o l s for a n articulation o f a theory of s ocial relations (cultu re) which incl udes ind ividual cult ures as its relati o n a l un its. There i s n o i n d ication that this s h o uld be re s t ricted to a European a re n a . M a rx's t heories a re tailored not only to his unique vision of capitalism (the context of his own c u l t u re), but t o his u nu s u a l l y broad co nception of a truly u n iver sal social ! cultural reality. -

5 Culture and Personhood Robert B. Sipe The t i m e is ripe fo r a d i a l ogue betw e e n M ar x i s t s and N a t ive A m e rica n s . A merica's Eu ropean d e s ce n d e nt M arxists can learn a great d e a l a bout t h e i r o w n culture a n d i t s effects u p o n everyday l i fe t h r o u g h studying Native A m e r i c a n c u l t u r e . N a tive A m e ri c a n s ca n heig hten t h e i r a p p reciat i o n of t h e i r cultural tra d i t i o ns by exa m i n i n g the A merican ized vers i o n of European culture. To fa il t o engage i n this d ialogue will h a ve serious c o nse q u e nces fo r bot h gro u p s . For N a t i v e A me r i ca n s , to fai l to u n dersta n d t he absorbing tendencies o f A m erican Capitalist c u l t u re a n d its effect o n psycho-s ocial d evel o p me n t t h reatens their a b i l ity to keep i n touch with t h e t ra d i t i o n s t h at sustain and revitalize t he i r identity, community a n d s p i ri tuality. For M a rx i s t s , to fai l t o a p p reciate the c u l t u r a l c o n t e x t in w h i c h they s t r u ggle i s t o fa il t o come t o grips with critical v a r i a b les which s hape w o r k i n g class consciousness a n d praxis . F o r Nat ive a n d M a rxist A merican s a l i k e , t h e meeting of c u l t u res i s c r i t ical fo r b u i l d i ng a new i ntegrated s o c i a l ist culture t o glad d e n t h e future. A s Stanley D i a m o n d o b serves : O u r i l l n ess s p rings fro m the very c e n t e r o f civi lization, n o t fro m t o o much k n o wl e d ge, b u t fro m t o o little wisd o m . What p r i m itives possess . . . we have la rgely l o s t . If we have t he mea n s , the t o o l s , t h e fo r m s , t h e rat i o n a l i m a g i n a t i o n t o transfo r m t h e face of t he earth and t he conte m p o rary h u m a n c o n d i t i o n , p r i m itive society at its most positive e x e m p li fies a n essential h u ma nity. '

91

92


II A m o ng t h e m a n y a p p ro a c hes to explain t h e concept o f "cu lture" is Geo rge S i m mel's d e fi n i t i o n of culture a s " h u m a n self-creati o n i n t h e c o n t e x t o f cultivating t h ings, o r self-cu ltiva tion in the p rocess o f e n d o w i n g the t h ings of nature with use and meaning. "2 H ere w e see a n i nteractive dichotomy between s u bj ective culture and o bj ective c u l t u re. The in teract ion between these t w o c u l t u ral d i me n s i o n s -persons and t h ings -is essential for a critical t he o ry o f c u l tu re . I n this essay we will examine how the phenomenal growth of o bj ective c u l t u re in A merican s ociety has enda ngered s u bjec t ive c u l t u re . The p r 0 d uctive growth of things has produced a crisis i n t h e psychic l i fe o f A me rica's p r i marily white p o p u l at i o n . Through a d i alectical m et h o d o l ogy I hope t o shed s o me light o n h o w a o ne-d i me n s i o n a l c u l t u re maintains a n d e x p a n d s t h e e x p l o it ive p r o d u ct i o n r e l a t i o n s o f contempora ry A merican cap italism. Yet , a deeper cris i s , a crisis o f being, of pers o n h ood exists in contem p o rary A merican c u l t u re. H ow shall we understand t h is crisis? H o w has c u l t u re c h a n ged from an integrative fo rce w h i ch trad iti onally cultivated o u r sense of being h u man i n t o a d i s i ntegrative fo rce w h i c h fragments, s pecializes, stunts and reifies our h u manness? These a re critical questions. The tension between t h e i n tegrative and disi ntegrat ive fu nction o f c u l t ure in A merican s o cie.ty grows clearer if we view hu m a n k i nd a s homofaber rather than animal laborens. Such was

t h e view o f K arl Marx, who u n d e rs t o o d the drive o f o u r species being t o e ngage i n creative and p u rp o se fu l activity. To cultivate an i ntegrative culture is t he "everlas t i n g nature imp osed cond i t i o n o f h u m a n existence . " l I n s ha p i n g t he w o r l d a n d themselves as a social totality men and w o m e n e m e rge as be ings of p raxis. B y p raxis, Marx meant s o m e t h i n g rad ically diffe rent fro m t h e c o m m o n mea n i n g o f "practice." Praxis i s "c onscious l i fe activi ty" in w h ich social l i fe s t a n d s as an object of our will and o u r c o n sc i o u s n e s s . I n p r a x i s , w e u n ite t h e h u man facilities o f reas o n , i maginati o n , and c o m mu n i c a t i o n to develop a critical c o n s c i o us ness . In this m o d e o f awareness we are able to d iscover t h e struct u re o f natural a n d s ocial p r o cesses in which [we] take p a rt . . . [and] . . . make e x t r a p o l a t i o n s fo r t h e fut u re, proj ect goals, and l o o k fo r t h e m os t a d e q uate means t o satisfy them. ;'4 Praxis is

Culture And Person hood

93

the crea tive activity of constructing and reconstructing our social totality i n accordance wit h rea l , historically created human p o s s i bilities. Identify ing o u r species as homo faber suggests criteria by w hich we can analyze and eval uate modern socio cultural relations . The charge of Western Marxism stems fro m the "emanci pato ry i nterests" o f h u manity i n the conve rgence of reason, truth a n d free d o m . Our q uest is to t ransfo r m the quality of social rel a t i o n s o f men and w o men and t h e i r world. I n the i deal state, a l i b e ra te d , sel f-actu a l i zed h u m a n ity e x i s ts i n s y n e rg i s m w i t h the

nat ural e nvironment. This way of being existed in many cu ltures before it was swallowed by the wave of i nevitable colonization, modern izat i o n, cultural devastat i o n and ratio nal izat i o n chu rned u p by deve l o p i ng Western Capital i s m . G l i m pses o f t h i s harmony can be caught i n the past and p resent trad i t i o n s of Native A m ericans. The q uest for li berat i o n is a q uest for a lost un ity to i n s pire o u r future. III

Quest i o ns a bout the conflict o f h u ma n and product i o n rela t i ons were of prime i m p o rta nce t o a group o f German intellec tuals k n own as the Frankfu rt School. I ts lead ing m e m bers - M ax H o r k h e i m e r , Theod o re Adorno, a n d H e r bert M a rcuse -d rew heavily on the thought of H egel, M arx. Freud a n d , of particular i m po r t a nce fo r t h i s a n a l y s i s . G e o r g L u k a cs . T h e s e t h i n ke r s

viewed cult u re and society critically, antithetically. as something permeated by a negativity d e mand i ng t ra n sce nd a nce. They s h a red a vision of a radically d i ffe rent society founded on human h a p p i ness. t he satisfact i o n of vital needs, a n d t h e end to d o m i na t i o n . By t hi s vision t hey criticized the established culture and planned fut u re struggles . The Frankfurt School of cultural analysis stands in perpe t u a l o p position to t hose aspects of Western capitalism w h ich serve the interests of d ominat i o n -the social i nstitutions, modes of consciousness a n d the culture i n d u stry. Yet t h e "criticis m" of critical t h e o ry is of a specific d i a lect ical n a t u re . "By criticism," H o rk heimer said, "we mean that i n tellectual, and eventually p ractical effort which is not sat isfied t o accept the prevailing id eas, a ct i o n s , and social cond itions u n t h i n k ingly and fro m mere

94

Marxism and Native A me ricans

habit; effort which aims to coordinate the individual sides of social life with each other and with the general ideas and aims of the epoch , to deduce them generically, to distinguish the ap pearance from the essence, to examine the foundations of things, in short, to really know them . ' " Critical analysis attempts to reveal the world as it really is, devoid of rationalizations. S o the forms o f socio-cultural life are neither accepted by cust o m nor p racticed u ncritically, but critically scrutinized i n the interest of d eveloping a foundation on which society can build for general happiness and emanci pation. Critical theory would prevent us fro m losing o u rselves am ong the common sense u nderstandings of everyday life. It exposes the co ntrad ictions between what a society c l a i m s t o be and what it i n fact is. Critical theory thus a t t e m p ts t o expl icate the "gulf between the ideas by which ( perso ns) j udge the mselves a n d the world on one hand and the social rea lity which t hey reprod uce through thei r actions on the other hand . "6 Trent Schroye r fu rther explains critical theory as an "i m ma nent critique" which "resto res missing parts to historical self fo rmat ion, t rue actuality t o fa lse a p pearance" so that we can "see t h ro ugh socially un necessary authority and control systems. "7 In restoring the missing parts crit ical theory develops a socio cultural analysis which is concrete in the Hegelian sense of being "many-sided , adeq uately related, complexly mediated ."g N o si ngle aspect o f socio-cult ural reality is complete in itself. All facets of reality a re c o m plexly med iated and have meaning i n their totality. The positivists' inde pendent and isolated "social facts" a re replaced by the dynamic interaction between moment and totality, particular and u niversal. Within the multid i mensional universe, critical theory is not content to c o mplacently register and systematize soci o-cultu ral facts. From the potentialities of the i mmediate historical situa tion, critical theory e m p l oys const ruct ive concepts which depict rea lity not only as it is, but also as it can be. Accord i ng to Trent Sch royer, "critique reconstructs the constitutive ge nesis of the existing o rder to recognize the actual o r the universal p ossibilities that are o bj ectively present i n the existing. The intent is to promote conscious e m anci patory activity."9 As missing parts a re rest ored, new insights into t he potential ities for social transfo r-

Culture And Pers o nhood

95

mation emerge. Critical theory is a means of penetrating myths. I t offers insights into the construction of less alienating s ocieties. The critical t heory approach stands i n s harp relief to "orthod o x M arxism" which pays scant attention t o how culture forms societies. The subject of o rt h o d o x M arxist analysis is the dynamic development between the forces and relat i o ns of prod uctio n . The economic base is of para m o u n t i m p o rtance, while the c ultural superstructure is secondary at best and "epiphenomenal" at worst. O rt h o d o x Marxists have studied t he evolution of capitalis m and its ensuing class struggles fro m guilds t o modern factories. The evidence suggested , and rightly s o , t ha t the capitalist class was able t o assume and subsequently insure its d o minant position in the social hierarchy of production because it exerted i ncreasing control over all aspects of production. By controlling the means of production and t he organization of t he workplace, the capitalist class was able to control the p ro d ucts o f labor and the laboring class. As the social hierarchy of production was transmitted to other interlocking social institutions the d o mina tion increased. As family, church, social services and armed fo rces, all levels of government and education became increas ingly bureaucratic, capitalism became life itself. A u n i q ue cultu ral transformation which was virtually ignored by o rthodox Marxists accompanied and perpetuated t h is socio-economic transformation. The power of the new cultural context emerges in the e x tent to which the values and wo rldview of the capitalist class are successfully internalized in the psyches of the workers. The interiorization of the capitalist hierarchy b y those whom it most o p p tesses is a n additional bulwark for corporate capitalism. I n contemporary society, the slaves, s o it seems, e mbrace their chains a n d find self-fulfillment in t hat e m b race. We now turn t o t h e m.a n ne r in which capitalist socio-cultural relations shape our psyches. IV

The extension of this all-embracing s ocial, economic, polit ical and cultural hegemony to all facets of life i s the functional i mperative to the survival of capitalism. Structural elements such

96


as the growing role o f the state i n labor-capital relations, t he ethnic a nd social divisions, and labor o rganizations help to maintain the capitalist s ocial hierarchy. The capitalist social hierarchy further persists t h rough one-di mensional socialization and acculturation. I n the following pages, we will consider how the develo p ment of w o rking class c onsciousness and praxis h ave been overwhelmed s i n ce World War I I . If alienation is a l m ost complete, revolutionary class con sci ousness should, says Marx, develo p first i n the wo rkers. H o wever, the workers remain o p p ressed. Studs Terkel's oral histories of workers suggest t hat d espite their anger toward t heir j o bs and the conditio ns of their lives, workers have not recognized their right to control the labor p rocess and the conditions that affect their lives . 1 o W hy have workers not achieved class con sciousness? Class consciousness does not demand that each worker understand the socio-historical laws o f capitalist development or the totality of capitalist s ocial relations. However, working class consciousness must reflect some awareness of the connections between everyday life experiences and the larger social o rder. Wil helm Reich suggests the fol l owing d i mensions of class consciousness: '" k n owledge o f o ne's o wn vital necessities in all spheres; '" k n owledge of ways and p ossibilities of satisfying them; '" k nowledge of the o bstacles that a social system based on p rivate prope rty puts in the way of their satisfaction; '" knowledge of one's own i n h ibitions and fears that p revent one fro m clearly realizing o ne's needs and the o bstacles o f their satisfaction; '" k no wledge that mass unity makes an invinci ble force against the power of the oppresso rs. " Th us class consciousness stresses the essential unity between pers onal life and prevailing socio-cultura l conditions. It demands that workers know the nature of thei r u n mediated needs, t he nature of their important interactions, t he functioning of social institutions a nd the cult u ral c ontext o f capitalism. Most impor-

C u l t u r e A n d P e rs o n h o o d

97

t a n t i s t h e psychic struct u re of t h e c l a s s . T h e c o n d i t i o n s o f s o c i o c u l t u ra l l i fe are anchore d . reflected a n d reprod u ced i n t h e psyc h ic s t ru c t u r e . C a p i t a l i s t s o c i a l i za t i o n re fl e c t s c a p i t a l i s t p r o d u c t i o n a n d so i nt egrates t he cond i t i o n s o f d o m i na t i o n i n t o t h e psyche. P s y c h i c re i fi cati o ns m i n i m i z e the p o s s i b i l i t y o f an e m e rg i n g a l t e rn a t i ve c o nsci o u s ness a n d e m p o w e r i n g s o c i a l a ct i o n s . T h e u l t i m ate rela t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n p s y c h i c r e i ficat i o n a n d ca p i t a l i s m c o n s t i t u t e s a k e y o bstacle t o t h e d e ve l o p m e n t o f d y n a m i c c l a s s c o n s cIO u s n e s s . I n h is early w r i t i ngs and i n t he m o re s o p h i s t i ca t e d "fe t i s h i s m o f c o m m o d i t ies" sect i o n o f

Capital.

K a rl M a rx e x p l a i ned h o w

c a p i t a l i s t society t ra n s fo r m s s o c i a l r e la t i o n s i n t o " t h e fan t a s t i c fo r m o f a rela t i o n bet ween t h i ngs . " 1 2 M a r x u nd e r s t o od a l i e n a t i o n a s " t h e p rocess by w h i c h t h e u n i t y o f t h e p r o d u c i n g a n d t he p ro d u c t i s b r o k e n . The p r o d u c t n o w a p p e a rs t o t h e p r o d u c e r as a n a l i e n fac t i city a n d p o w e r s t a n d i n g i n i t s e l f a n d o v e r aga i n s t h i m , n o l o ng e r recognizable as a p r o d u ct. " 1 3 H is s o c io-eco n o m i c e x p l a n a t i o n o f a l i e n a t i o n s u p p o rt s p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e i fi c a t i o n "t h e m o m e n t i n t h e p rocess o f a l i e n a t i o n i n w h ic h t h e c h a rac t e r i s t i c of t h i ng hood beco mes t he s t a n d a rd o f o bjective rea l i t y ." 1 4 R e i fi ca t i o n is a mode of a l ie n a t i o n u n iq u e t o ca p i t a l i s t s o c i et y because

o n l y i n s u c h a n e n v ir o n m e n t c a n

w o r k e rs

be s o

e ffe c t i v e l y red uced t o co m m o d i t i e s t h a t t he y e n t e r i n t o e x c h a n ge r e l a t i o n s h i p s in a m o ney-fo r m . T h e c o m m u n a l a n d h u m a n is t ic n o r m s , c u s t o m s a n d h a b i t s o f p re-ca p it a l is t s o c i e t i e s are d e s t r o y e d by t h e i n e v i t a b l e o n s l a u g h t o f c a p i t a l i s t m a r k e t rel at i o n s . M a x Webe r a l s o recog n i z e d t h i s p h e n o me n a a s p a rt o f t h e i n ev i t a b l e

rat i o n a l izat i o n

and

d e - m ag i c i za t i o n

o f i n d u s t ri

a l izati o n . F o r Weber capi t a list d e ve l o p m e nt inevitably p e n e t rated " a l l s p h eres o f social l i fe : the e co n o m y , c u l t u re (art, rel i g i o n and s c i e n c e ) , t e c h n ology. l a w a n d p o l i t i cs , and everyday l i fe by a s i n g l e l og i c of formal

rationality.

T h i s l ogic is d e fi n e d by t h e

p ri nc i p le o f o rien tat i o n of h u m a n acti o n t o abst ract q ua n t i fi a b l e a n d c a l c u l a ble, and i n s t r u m e n t a l l y u t i l iz a b l e fo r m a l rules a n d n orms. " ' 5 D ra w i n g o n M a r x a n d W e b e r , G e o rg L u kacs p r o v i d es a fru i t fu l i n s i g h t i n t o t h i s t rage d y o f c u l t u re by re-e x a m i n i ng t he s u bj ec t i ve a n d o bj ective aspects o f reificat i o n . 1 6 M a n y of h is o bserv a t i o n s co i nc i d e w i t h p r ev i o u s a na l y s e s t h a t t h e d i s me m-


98

berment a n d fragme n t a t i o n of the worker a n d the e l i m i na t i o n of s u bj ectivity, s t e m fro m the nat u re and o rganization of ca p i t a l i s t p roduct i o n . ' re l a t i o n s h i p

But

Lu kacs e x t e n d s h i s a n a l y s i s to t he

i n t e r

of psychic re ifica t i o n a n d t he phenome n o n

of

c o m m o d i t y fet i s h i s m . Fol l o w i n g M a r x , h e posits "the fet i s h i s m of c o m m o d i t ies" as t h e cen t ra l p r o b l e m o f m od e r n capital i s m . I t s u n ive rsa l it y , accor d i n g t o L u k a c s , " i n fl u e nces t h e total outer a n d i n ne r l i fe of society" 1 7 so p r o fo u n d l y t ha t h u m a n conscious ness i s red uced t o a reified "sec o n d n a t u re" u n a b l e t o grasp t h e rea l d y n a m ics o f c a p i t a l ist p rod u c t i o n . C o m m o d i ty fet i s h i s m p ro d uces reified s o c io-cu l t u ra l re l a t i o n s w h i c h d istort h u man s u b j ectivity. For L u kacs, c o m m od i t y fet i s h i s m extends to all s o c i a l rel a ti o n s .

I n i he fu l l y develo p e d m a r ket e c o n o m y , he s a y s ,

h u man a c t i v i t y b e c o m e s e s t ra n ge d fro m i t s e l f a n d "t u r n s i n t o a c o m m o d i t y w h i c h , s u bj ec t t o t h e n o n - h u m a n o bj ectivity of t h e n a t u ra l l a w s o f society, m u s t g o i t s o w n w a y i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f m a n y j u s t l i k e a n y c o n s u m e r a rt i cle . " 1 8 W i t h t h e capita l i s t red uc t i o n o f h u m a n s o c i e t y t o t h e m o v e m e n t s o f c o m m od i t i e s , m e n a n d w o m e n b e c o m e parts i n a m e c h a n ical sys t e m . O bj ect rela t i o n s re p l ace s u bj ec t re la t i o n s . Q u a n t it a t i ve relat i o n s replace q u a l itat ive relat i o n s . H u man v a l u e i s d etermi ned by t he prevail i ng rate of excha nge. H u ma n needs a re satisfied i n t e r m s of c o m m o d it y excha nge. C o m m o d ity fet i s h i s m engend e rs a c o m m o d i ty consciousness a m o ng w o r k e rs -a reified c o n s c i o u s n e s s u n a ble to penetrate the " m i s t enveloped regi ons" of the social relat i o n s of capi t a l i s t prod u c t i o n a n d d i s t ri b u t i o n . F o r L u k a c s , t h e destruction o f c ra ft l a b o r , t h e red u c t i o n of w o r k t o a s e t o f repe t i t i o u s , mechan i c a l m o t i o n s , t h e rep ress ive o rga n izat i o n o f t h e fac t o ry sys t e m , a n d t h e e x t e n s i o n of t hese p rocesses i n t o t h e l a rger s o c i o-cu l t u ra l i n s t i t u t i o n s o f s o ciety e x t e n d s righ t i n t o t he worker's s o u l . " 1 9 The psyche i s l i k e wise frag mented and t he u n i fied pers o n a l ity syst e m i n t o o p p osed strands. Frag m e n t a t i o n i n turn p ro d uces the passive s u bj ectivity a m o ng w o r k e rs necessary to t h e fu n c t i o n ing o f late ca p i ta l i s m . S ays Lu kacs, " t h e p e rs o n a l it y c a n d o n o m o re t h a n l o o k o n h e l p le s s l y w h i l e i t s o w n e x i st e n ce is reduced t o a n isolated

particle and fed into an alien system . " 2 0 Reified consciousness is

Culture And Personhood

99

also passive: a consciousness devoid of subjectivity, isolated from praxis . The alienation of t he worker is com modity fet ishism ex tended t h roughout life. The power of t he capitalist system is generated at t he expense of t he worker, who is transfo r med into a t h ing, a reified co mmodity. I n the final analysis a maj o r reason fo r the fai l u re of the A merican w o r k i n g class to d evel o p crit ical class consciousness is capitalis m's penetration into the psyche. v

Late capitalism has required t h e e l i m i nation of labor-capital frict i o n and the containment of class antago nisms for its successfu l functioning. The complicated, hierarch ically organized a n d tec h n ically special ized prod uction req u i re ments of late capital i s m demand i nfi nitely greater and m ore varied social and c u l tural c o ntrol than ever before. This stems n ot o nly fro m the scientific, calcula ble and tec h n o l ogical requ i rements o f t he product i o n process, but also fro m t he fact that the contradictions of contemporary cap italism are i n fi nitely more manifest and d i fficult to contain. Accord i ngly, to o btain voluntary compliance w i t h the i rrationality of its relations of production, late capitalism must anchor the performance p rinciple with i n the worker's mental and psychic structure. This anchoring occurs primarily t h rough the one-dimensio nal socialization and acculturation p rocess o f late capitalism. Hence, fragmentation, ato m ization, and psychic reification assi mi late the worker into a n a ntago nistic s ocial reality. The essence of late capital i s m is captu red in what Herbe rt M a rcus e cal ls "one-d i mensionality. " All forms of social and cu ltural existence are defi ned and o perationalized within the p a rameters of the established society. A one-d i mensional society e ffectively represses the emergence of a q ual itative antithesis and t h e e x p ression of various " m o m e nt s of opposition" to the essential n egativity of the esta blished o rd e r. M a rcuse descri bes late capitalism as a society which, m i litates against qualitative c h ange. Thus emerges a pattern of o ne-d i mensional t h o ught and behavior i n

1 00

M a rx i s m and Native A m e ricans which ideas, a s p i rations, and o bj ectives that, by their content, transcend the established u n i verse of d iscourse and action a re either repressed or red uced to terms of t h is u n iverse. They are redefined by the rationality of the given system and of its q u a ntitative extension. 2 ! I n late capitalism we u n d e rstand c h a nge as a quantitative

relati o ns h i p c o n s isting o f ho mogenous steps, in cremental t o t h e established eco n o m i c base. The q u al itat ive di mensions o f socio cultural l i fe m u s t be neutralized a n d redefined as quantitat ive c o m p onents. Value must assu me a h o m ogenous interchangea b l e character b e s t represented i n t he med i u m of m o ney. I n cap italist s o ciety, exchange relat i o n s h i p s s u bsume social relat i o ns h i p s . People a n d t heir n e e d s beco me c o m m o d ities to be bart ered i n t h e marketplace. A s the need s, personality, conscious ness, and socio-cultural milieu of t h e w o r k e rs c o n fo r m t o t h e needs of adva nced corporate cap ital i s m , t h e worker beco mes one with society . The workers' needs belong t o t h e i r p os i t i o n s i n the occupational hierarchy. I d entity becomes a fu nction of activity. The traditional antit hesis between p ro letariat and c a p it a l ist is transformed into a one-d i me n s i o n a l u n i t y of o p p osites. The worker is integrated into the "performance p r i nci ple" o f late capita l i s m . That i s o u r crisis of c u l t u re . T h e perfo r m a nce p rinciple is d isti nguished fro m other rea lity princi ples by the p h e n o m e n o n o f "surp lus re press i o n . " O u r instinctual, psychic and socio-cultural structures come to rese mble t h e p r o d u ct i o n e x igencies o f late capitalism. I n order t o reduce t h e t e n s i o n b r e d by p a rt n e rs h i p with a n antagonistic social reality, "substitute mechanisms" are introd u ced into o u r p s y c h i c and socio-cul t u ral structures. Repression a n d manip U l a t i o n of w o r k i n g class sexuality, destruction of the worker's a u t o n o m o u s ego, t h e i m p os i t i o n o f a capitalist social character and a one-d imensional s o c io-c u l t u ral m ilieu a re experiences of surplus rep ressi o n . The crisis o f t h e i n d ividual is matched by the crisis o f culture . We are e nveloped i n a p r ofound alienatio n ' "neuroses, pervers i o n s , p a t h o logical c h anges i n character, t h e antisocial p henomena o f sexual life , and n o t least, d ist urbances

i n the capacity fo r w o r k . " 22

Cult ure And Personhood

101

One-di mensional society has integrated trad itionally antag o n istic s ocial classes and cultural m i l ieus into a single mass. A ntagonism has been caused by the c o ntradictions of capitalist product ion. The needs and i nterests o f the working class were, when M arx w rote, i n fun d a mental c o n t radict i o n t o those of t he cap italist class. Tod ay, this opposition has been assimilated into t h e ethos of bourgeois society. We have, M a rcuse asserts, been flattened : I f t he worker and his boss e nj oy the same television p rogram and visit the same res ort p laces, if the typist is as attractively made u p as the daughter of her employer, i f the Negro owns a Cadillac, if t hey all read the same news paper, then t h i s assimilati o n ind icates not the d i s a p pearance of classes, but the extent to which the needs and satisfactions that serve the p reservati o n of t h e Establishment a re s hared by t he u n d e rl y i ng p o p ulatio n . 23 The crea tion, manipulation, and ex haltation o f false needs has co-o pted the working class' revolutiona ry and emancipatory needs. W o rkers identify with t heir fact o ry, and find self-fulfillment t here. M arcuse concludes: The same technological orga n i zati o n which makes fo r a mechanical commun ity at work also generates a larger i nterdependence which i ntegrates the worker with the p l a n t . One n otes a n "eagerness" on the part o f t he w o rkers "to share i n the solution of production prob lems," a "des i re t o j o i n actively i n applying t heir own brains t o technical and product i o n problems which clearly fitted i n with the technology. 2 4 A s t h e workers needs a re reshaped t o conform with advanced tech n o logical production, their perso nal needs are conditioned by the demands of the j o b. The worker becomes happily assimi lated into the machine. Alienated labor becomes a s o u rce of self-fulfi l l ment. The trad itional a n t i t hesis between workers and bosses is tru ncated into a o ne-d imensio nal u n ity o f op posites w h ich reinforces the established order.

1 02

M a rxism and Native A m e ricans I n tegra t i o n e x t e n d s t o t h e c u l t u re . Trad i t i o nally, t here h a s

e x isted a higher o r c r i t ical c u l t u re t o o p p ose t h e preva i l i n g soci a l rea lity. W i t h i n a r t , fo r e x a m p l e , is t h e p o w e r of negation, t h e power to s uggest i m ages w h i c h transcend s o c i a l rea lity. H e re was s u ggested "the a p pearance of the rea l m o f freed o m : t he refu s a l to behave. " 2 s Today t hi s c r i t ical e l e m e n t has been i n corporated i n t o m a s s cultu re. S a y s M a rcuse: Today's novel fea t u re i s t he fl a t t e n i n g out of t h e a n t ago n i s m b e t w e e n c u l t u re a n d s o c i a l rea lity through the o b l i t e rat i o n o f the o p p os i t i o n a l , a l i e n , and tran sce n d e n t ele m e nts in the h i g h e r c u l t u re by v i r t u e of w h i c h it c o n s t i t uted a n o t h e r d i me n s i o n of rea l i t y . Th i s l i q u i d a t i o n o f t w o -d i mens i o ria l c u l t u re ta kes place not t h ro u g h t h e d e n i a l a n d

rej e c t i o n of t h e "cultural

values," b u t t h rough their w h o l esale incorpora t i o n into t h e e s t a b l i s h e d o r d e r, t h rough their re prod u c t i o n and

d i s p l a y o n a m a s s i ve scale. 2 6

A rt , or critical c u l t u re , has beco me an i n s t ru ment of s ocial cohesion serving t o u n ite a n d rei n fo rce rat her t h a n refute and c o n t rad ict t h e p reva i l i ng rea lity. To t ra n s l a t e a n d i n tegrate t h e s y m b o l s a n d i magery o f critical c u l t u re i t s s u bversive e l e m e n ts m u s t be dest royed . A rt t h e n beco mes less t ru e . O u r t ra n s ce n d e n t ideals become matter i n t he form of cons u m a ble c o m m o d i t i e s . "The m us i c of t h e s o u l is also t he m u s i c of s a l e s m a n s h i p . E x c h a nge v a l u e , not t r u t h value c o u n t s , " said Marcuse. 2 7 The t rad i t i o n a l a l i e n a n d a l i e n a t i n g w o r k s of crit ical c u l t u re beco m e prod ucts t he mselves o r rei nforce t h e m a r keting of p rod uct s . I n varia bly, o ne fi n d s a print o f Picasso's Guernica ad o r n i ng a l i v i n g r o o m wall a m o n g A me rica's l i beral "hip" p o p u lace. I n varia bly t o o , o n e hea rs strains o f Viva l d i in t h e halls of s o m e m o d e r n s h o p p i n g centers. The t r u t h value of c ri t i cal cult ure of th ese w o r k s has been effectively red u ced . The market place has become t h e p u rveyo r o f "higher culture." A merican mass cult u re has beco me one-d i me n s i o n al, h o m oge neous and sterile. T h e crises of c u l t u re fi n d s its mate i n the crisis o f the ind ivid ual. S i g m u n d Freud p o s t u lated a l ienat i o n a n d neuroses as an i nevitable, fu nctional i m perative fo r civil ized social l ife .

Culture A n d Pe rs o n hood

1 03

Despite t he fact that all i n d ividuals s u ffe r i n varyi ng d egrees fro m i ns t i nctual renunciati o n a n d s u b l i ma t i o n , t h e sacrifice maintains civilizat i o n by c o n t rol l i n g the u n ruly i n s t incts , t h e s e x u a l insti nct fo re m o s t . Se x ual s u b l i m a t i o n s h a p e s t he ind ivid u a l's fut ure be havior. Accord i ng to Freud : "the s e x u a l behavior of a h u m a n b e i n g oft e n lays do wn t h e pattern for a l l h i s o t h e r m o d e s o f react i n g t o l i fe . . . but i f , fo r a l l s o r t s o f reas o n s , h e refrai n s fro m s a t i s fy i n g h i s strong sexual i n s t i n c t s ,

h i s be h a v i o r w i l l

be

c o n c i l i a t o ry a n d resigned rather t h a n vigorous in o t h e r s p heres of life as well. "2 8 T hus, t he m a n n e r in w h i c h a s ociety's i n s t i t u t i o n s , v a l u e s and m o res regulate the sexual b e h a v i o r o f its members w i l l b e a crucial d eterm i n a n t of a l l beh a v i o r patterns . Thi., obs ervation is especially s i g n i fi c a n t for o u r analysis of A merica n wo rkers . In light o f the previ o u s d is c u s s i o n , it is i m perative to i n q u i re how a nd to w h a t end co n te m p o ra ry i n s t i t u t i o n s a n d soci o-cultura l processes c o n t ro l t h e sexual b e h avio r o f American workers. R e i m u t R e i c h e believes t h a t "the whole s p he re of sexua lity is today biased i n fav o u r o f t he syst e m . S e x i s red uced to a c o m m o d ity, t h e h u ma n b o d y is de-eroticized, a n d a false s e x u a l ity i m p osed o n l i fe i n general a nd on p e ople's rel a t i o n s t o t heir prod ucts. "29 The social relat i o n s o f capitalist c o m m o d ity production h ave t r a n s fo r m e d h u m a n s e x u a l i ty. Not only do sex uality a n d sexual rela t i o n s h i p s beco me o bj ect rela t i o n s a m o ng things, but a general d e-eroticizati o n o f t h e body also occurs. This has profo u n d c o n s e q u e n ces fo r t h e successful fu n c t i o n i n g o f late cap i t a l i s m . U n d e r the cover o f false sexuality, i n st i n c t u a l u rges and e ma n c i p a t o ry i mp u l s e s can be harnessed fo r the system. T h e prevailing social s t r u c t u re i s rep r o d u ced within o u r d e e pest psychic i nteriority. Thi s a n c h o ri n g h a s occurred t hrough the re p r es s i o n o f sexual i n s t i n ct s a n d t h ro ug h w h o lesale i n c o r p o rat i o n of the pleasure principle i n t o t he p e rfo r m a n ce p rinciple. T h e extent o f t hi s penetrati o n determines t h e degre e t o which "v o l u n t a ry" c o m plia nce between the w o r k e r a n d a repressive, irrati o n a l social reality i s secured . The p receding a n a lysis s uggests t hat i n o r d e r to o bt a i n the n e ces s a ry i ntegration a n d productivity fro m t h e l a b o rer, c o n t e m p o ra r y capitalism req uires an ever greater s u r p l u s repress ion o f the p re-ge n it a l , erotogenic z o n e s o f t h e body. S u pe r i mposed


1 04

upon our q ualitat ive, o bj ectless, a utoerotic sexuality is a plastic, quantifia ble sexuality m o re susceptible to manipulation and control. Reducing our potential fo r pleasure i n being increases our potential for e m p l o y m e n t . Erotic and libidinal bei ngs c a n n o t be chai ned t o t h e alienat ing, d u l l , repetitive j o bs or t o t h e repressive s o cio-cultural d o m i n a t i o n of late capitalism. Neutered , we have been harnessed t o the ma rket mec h a n i s m of corporate capital i s m . " I a m n o t e x aggerating," Freud i nsisted fifty years ago, " I a m d escri b i ng a state of a ffairs of which eq ually bad instances can be o bs e rved over and over again. To the u n i n i t iated it is hardly cred i b le h o w seldom normal potency i s t o be fou nd i n a h u sb a n d and h o w often a w i fe is frigid a m o n g married cou ples who live under the d o m i na nce o f o u r civilized sexual m o rality. "30 As

Wilhelm

Reich

has

o bs e rved , we become "orgastically

i m p otent" w h e n o u r ties t o t h e world around us are mechan ized . S o t o o t h e o p p o s i t i o n w h i c h s h ould p revail between t h e worker and a n e x p l o itat ive s o c i a l rea l ity i s neutralized . I n tegra tion and assimilation a re fu rt h e r achieved by soci o-cu ltural institutions and p rocesses which s o fragment the personality that we c l i n g hel plessly to the forces w h i c h have s haped us . Finally t h e a u t o n o m o u s e g o i s destroyed . Accord ing to Fre u d , we a re s h a ped by o u r fa mi lies . The child's ego deve l o p s t h r o u g h conflicts with the m o ralistic a u t h o r i t y of t h e fat her. The ego b e c o m e s t h e d y n a m i c as pect o f the psyche, mediating between t h e id's pleasure-seeing i mpulses and t he m o ralistic i m p e ratives o f t h e o u t s i d e w o rld , represented by the father.

Hence, the c o nscious, a u t o n o m o u s ego plays a

d o minant role in determin ing the c o u rse of this struggle. The

idealized

ind ividual o f b o u rgeois society develop s a

strong, a ut o n o m ous ego capa ble of reconciling instinctual u rges with moralistic demands. Such b o u rgeois character traits as orderli ness, o bstinancy and parsi m o n y rei n fo rce the power o f the a u t o n o m o u s bourgeois ego n o t only t o postpone the gratification o f t hese unruly instinctual u rges, but also t o transfo r m them into socially constructive ach ievements. Freud's claim that t h is process o f perso nality development is basically a h i s t o rical and t ranscultural is n o t valid . The Oed ipal

C u l t u re A nd Pers o n h o o d

1 05

e g o is h i s t oric aly r o o t e d i n t h e p a rt i c u l a r t i m e , p lace a n d c u l t u ra l m i l i e u o f n i n etee n t h a n d e a r l y t w e n t i e t h ce n t u ry E u ro pean s o c i et y . I t is a fa ct o f s o c i a l i za t i o n and a c c u l t u r a t i o n refl e c t i n g t h e socio-eco n o m i c d y n a m i c s of t h e e m e rg e n t c a p it a l is m o f t h e l a t e n i n e t ee n t h cen t u ry . S o t h e Oed i p a l s t ruggle m a y b e re n d e re d o b s o le t e by c o n te m p o rary c o r p o rate c a p i t a l i s m . The s o c i a l rel a t i o ns o f late c a p i ta l i s m have d e ve l o ped u n i q u e m o d e s o f s oc i a l izat i o n and acculturation. D y i n g w i t h t h e Oed i p a l s i t u a t i o n are p r i v a t e a n d fa m i l y

enterprises. Since World War I I , huge , multinational , quasi p u b l i c , m o n o p o l i s t i c c o r p o r a t i o n s have r e p l a c e d t h e m . E l i m mat i n g the i n d i v i d u a l e n t re p r e n e u r e n g e n d e re d a s e c o n d e ffect. The fa t h e r-d o m i nated or p a t r i a rc h a l fa m i l y d e c l i n e d a s the p r i m a ry s o u rce o f a c c u l t u ra t i o n . Says M a rcuse, t h e s o c i a l l y necessary rep re s s i o n s a n d

the socially

necessary beh a v i o r a re n o l o n ge r l e a rned -a n d i nternal ized - i n t h e l o n g s t r u ggle with t h e fat h e r -t h e e g o ideal i s r a t h e r brought t o bear o n the e g o d i re c t l y and 'fr o m o u t s ide'

before t h e ego i s

a c t u a l l y fo r m e d

a s the

p e rs o n a l a n d (re l at ivel y) a ut o n o m o u s s u bje c t o f m e d i a t i o n betwee n h i mself a n d o t h e rs . 3 1 A n e x t e r n a l accu m u l a t i o n p r o c e s s o c c u rs t h ro u g h t h e mass m e d i a , the e n terta i n m e n t i n d u s t ry , modern a d v e rt i s i ng, peer g r o u p s , t he e d u cat i o n a l syste m - a l l e n o rm o u s s t r u ct u re s able to i n t ru d e t h e req u i s i t e mores, v a l u e s and w o rld view o f c o n t e m p o ra r y c a p i t a list society i n t o t h e fa m i l y . The a u t o n o m o u s ego beco m e s a n a s c e n t e g o a p p a r e n t l y u n d e r t he c o n t r o l l ed s o c i a l i n s t i t ut i o n s . M a n i p u l a t i o n o c c u rs i n w ha t rea l i t i e s a r e p r e s e n t e d o r e x c l u d e d a n d t h e v e r y s t r u ct u re o f t h e s o c i a l i z i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s . S t a n l e y A r o n o w i t z s u ggests, t he rea l achievem e n t o f schools c o n s i s ted in t h e i r a bi l i t y t o t ra i n c h i l d re n t o a c c e p t t h e preva i l i n g c l a s s s t r u c t u re a n d t h e i r fat e as workers w i th i n t h e i n d us t r i a l s y s t e m . . . s t u d e n t s lea rn t h e s k i l l s n e e d e d t o a c c om o d a t e t o t h e fi rst req u i rem e n t o f i n d us t ri a l l a b o r ; res pect for a u t h o r i t y , t h e self-d i s c i p l i ne necessary t o i n t e r n a l ize t h e v a l u e s

Marxism a n d Nat i ve A mericans

1 06

o f the l a b o r p ro c e s s , a nd t he p l ace o f the w o r k e r w i t h i n t h e p reva i l i n g occu pat i o n a l hierarch ies . 32 T h u s , t h e fat h e r-d o m i na t e d fa m i l y has been s u p e rced e d by e x t rafa m i lial a u t h o r i t i e s i n our hearts and m i n d s . T h r o u g h o u t t h e p re ce d i n g c a p i t a l i s t period t h e auton o m o u s e g o h a s b e e n a s o u rce o f " i n n e r freed o m . " H a n s Gerth a nd C . W r i g h t M il l s suggest t h a t t h e a u t o n o mous e g o c o n s t ructs a s e n s e of self by e ngagi n g i n m e a n i ngfu l a n d critical s o c i a l p r a x i s w i t h s o c i a l rea l i t y . B u t t h e g r o w i n g p o w e r a n d tech n o l ogical s o p h i s t icat i o n o f l a t e c a p ital i s m h ave p r o gres s i v e l y p e net rated t h i s i n ner freed o m . I n d i v i d u a l o p p o s it i o n t o t h e status q u o has given way t o i d e n t ificat i o n with the p reva i l i n g social rela t i o n s of . c a p i ta l i s t p r o d u ct i o n . M an a ge m e n t o f t h e nasce n t ego h a s p r o d uced v i t a l c h a nges in the p s y c h e w h i c h have p re c l u d e d the d e v e l o p m e n t of c l a s s co nsci o u s n ess t h r o u g h a u t o n o m o u s ego s .

F r a n z Alexa n d e r ,

n o ted e g o p s yc h o l ogist, has o b s e rved "the ego beco mes 'co r p o real,' s o t o spea k , and its react i o n s to the o u t s i d e world a n d t o t h e i n s t i n c t u a l d e s i re s e m e rg i n g fro m t h e id bec o m e i n c reas i n gly 'au t o ma tic'.")) The d e fe n s e mec h a n is m s by which t h e a u t o n o m ou s ego was p re v i o us l y a b l e t o regu late t h e i n s t i nctual u rges o f t h e id a n d be h a v i o r n o w c o m e u n d e r t h e c o n t rol o f t h ose w h o m a n i p u late t he e x t e r n a l accu l t u ra t i o n s . I n t h e w o r d s o f R e i m u t Reiche, the ego l o ses m o s t o f its classic fu nct i o n o f m e d i a t i ng between

id a n d s u pe r ego a n d o u t s i d e w o r l d and

u n d e rgoes a n i nv o l u t i o n t o a state at which i t s i mply acts as a n age n c y fo r t h e i n t e r n a l i zat i o n o f exte rnal a u t h o r i t y and c o m p a rt m e n t a l i ze d i n fl u e n ce s fro m the super ego . Wit h the c o l lective d e c o m p o s i t i o n o f the fu n ct i o n o f t h e e g o , a m o n o p o l i zat i o n t a k e s p lace i n the mechanisms o f d o m i n a t i o n . I n p s y c h o l ogical terms, the s u pe r ego a n d t h e ego bec o m e o n e ; i n p o l i t i c a l terms, i n s t i t u t i o na l i ze d tec h n iq ues o f s o c i a l a n d p o l i t ical op p ress i o n beco m e o n e w i t h t h e i n d i vi d uaJ . 34 Free space has beco me so n a rrowed t h a t h u m a n reacti o n s a re a l m os t Pavlo v i a n . The ego's . p rivate space has become p u b l ic s pace occu p ied by t h e s o c i a l o rd e r . W h e n ego me rges i n t o the

1 07

Culture And Pers o n h ood

s u per ego , rich and many d i mensional i n t e ract i o n s give way to st atic, one-d i mensional identifica t i o n with the a d ministered real ity p rinci p le of co nte mp orary capita l i s m . T h e result of o n e-di mensional acc u l t u ra t i o n i s alienated i nd ivid uals u nable t o recognize themselves a s conscious subjects. Accord i n g t o Ronald Laing, we l ive i n our new "ontol ogical i n security" l i ke zombies.35 The i n heritance o f o u r time is e n gulfment, implosion, petrification and depers o n alizat i o n . We d o n ot d evelop a secure sense of self in relat i o n w i t h o t he r selves. T h e most important conseque nce of t h i s lack o f identity, t h is i n a bility to e x perience the " I , " i s that "it p revents i n tegration of t h e total personality; hence it leaves t he pers o n d i s u n it e d " 3 6 The reificat i o n and automation of the ego prod uces an o ntologically i n s ecu re working class una ble t o develop m ea n i ngfu l social p raxis. Destruction of t h e private s pace o f t h e ego p revents w o rkers fro m d evel o p i ng t h e req uisite s u bj ective a u t o n o m y to revolt against ex p l o itati o n . We beco me reified o bj ects of ad m i n istration that are acted u p o n . We become c o m m od i ty fetishes. .

VI

We have suggested t hat t h e i nterlo c k i n g crisis o f c u l t u re and the crisis of the individual i n conte m p o ra ry A m e rican s ociety be u nderstood as res ults of t h e fu nct i o n a l needs of t h e capitalist production-consumption process . A one-dimensional culture finds its prototype in a one-dimensional person . Reification

e ngenders s u bjectless s u bjects married to an antagonistic society. H o wever, a fu rther manipulation o f t he workers' s u bj ectivity cau ses the s m ooth and efficient fu n c t i o n i n g o f the establis hed social relations of corporate capitalis m . The tran s fo rmation of the individ u a l ego ideal into the social character o f corporate capitalism c o m pletes the d i alectical triad o f d om i nation within t h e psychic apparat us. For Erich Fro m m social character is e m bodied i n the organization man, a man w i t h o u t co nscience o r conviction, but o ne w h o is proud o f being a c o g , e v e n if i t is o n l y a s m all one, in a big a n d i m p o s i n g o rgan izat i o n . H e i s not t o ask q u e s t i o n s , not t o t h i n k

1 08

M arxism and Native A mericans critically, not to have any passionate interests, for this would i m pede the s mo o t h functioning of t he o rgani zation.l'

With the advent o f m odern technology, mass communication, behavior modification, and the production-consumption req u ire ments of late capitalis m . Our critical mental faculties, our sense of personal conscience, responsibility and autonomy have d e clined in proportion t o t he decline of the autonomous ego and the individual ego ideal. The established order has massified our privacy and per meated our private s pace. As Marcuse has o bserved , "the member of s ociety apprehends and evaluates all this, not by himself, in terms of his ego and his own ego ideal . . but through all others and in terms o f their common, externalized ego ideal."38 This external ego ideal is not imposed by force; there is no harsh conflict with the fat her. Rather it is comfortably acculturated into the worker's psyche i n the normal course of everyday life. The mass media, peer groups, school, recreational activities, j obs, are the e x cl u sive forces of psycho-social and cultural development fro m infa ncy until death. Thus we see that the redi rection of the id, ego, and ego ideal of t he workers' psyches toward the performance p rinciple of late capitalism has created social character among workers which channels their energy and behavior into system-supporting outlets. The increasi ng p roletarianization of the work force has extended this social character t o ever greater numbe rs of wo rkers. This expanding social character has p revented self realization fro m theatening the social dynamics of the establi shed o rder. It also serves as an i mportant mechanism for adapting w orkers to the increasingly dull, mechanical work relations of capitalist society. The "social character" has minimized the w o rkers' free d o m to o p p ose t he established social order. W o rkers are i n c reasingly u n a bl e to develop crit ical con sciousness and p raxis as a revolutionary class. Thus the devel o pment of a pervasive social character completes the trans formation of the workers from conscious subjects to reified beings reflecting the commodity fetishism of the era.

Culture And Pers o n h o od

1 09

Con clusion

We have explored how the productio n / consumption p roc esses of contempora ry capitalism have shaped the psychological a spects o f human social life . And we have offered a n i ntegrative framework for u nderstanding the crisis of cult u re a n d crisis of the i n d ivid ual which so powerfu lly engulf conte m p o ra ry American society. The t rad itional M arxist understan d i ng of socialist revolu t i o n as the i nevitable resolution of the socio-eco n o m ic contrad ic t i o n s -the o bjective conditions -of the capitalist system is no l o n ger sufficient. Psych o-cultural contradict i o n s -the subjective cond itions -have u rgent i m portance for effective revolutionary st rategy. The social contrad ictions of capital i s m are interiorized in the psychic apparatus of workers, there p rod ucing ever i nc reasing levels of neu rosis and mental pathology. The progres s ive res o l u t i o n of the o bjective crises has been t ra nsfo rmed into a reg ressive neut ralizat ion of the crises wit hin the SUbjective cond itio n s -the psychic life of workers. The e n ormity of the psychic and physical illness accompanying the reification of contemporary life can only be guessed at. But its effect is o bvious. Wh ile the crisis deepens, no rad ical working class c o nsciousness or pra x i s is born. New strategies and theories must be devel oped to penetrate this psychic and cultural reificati o n . These strategies m ust resti m u late our vision of a rad ically different s ociety based u p o n human happiness, an end to d o m i nation and the realization o f our s pecies-being. To resolve the twin crises o f the i n d ivid ual and of culture we m ust devel o p an integrated culture which recap t u res the holistic and liberatory aspects o f primitive and non-Western cultures. We m ust d evelop a new cultu re congruent with the n o n-exploitive s o cio-economics we read of i n the past a n d present s ocialist t heory. To reconceptualize the relationship between i nd ividuals, culture and instit utions, Marx ists must e ngage i n a d ialogue with Native Americans and other non-Western people. We must t ry to d iscern t hose non-European elements, tradi t i o n s and relati o ns w h ich p refigure o u r integrated and synergistic vision for A me r icans i n a post-cap italist society. The contrast between the quality o f life a m o ng i ntegrated cul t u res o f the past and modern A merican capitalism i s i m mense. S t a n ley Diamond explains that

1 10

Marxism a n d Native A mericans The a v e rage p r i m i t i v e , re lat ive t o his s o c i a l e n v i ro n m e n t , a nd t h e level of science a nd tech nology ach ieved, i s m o re acco m p l i s h e d , in t h e l i t e ra l sense o f t h a t t e r m , t h a n a re m o s t c i v i l i zed i n d i v i d u a l s .

H e partic ipates

m o re fu l l y and d i re c t l y i n the c u l t u re p o s s i b i l i t ies open t o h i m , n o t a s a c o n s u me r, and n ot v i ca r i o u s l y , b u t as a n actively e n gaged , c o m p lete m a n . A maj o r rea s o n for t h is fu n c t i o n a l i n tegri t y is i n h is c o n t r o l o f t h e p r o cesses o f p r o d u ct i o n ; t h a t i s , t h e p r i m i t i v e , i n c r e a t i n g a t o o l , creates i t fro m begi n n ing t o e n d , u s e s i t w i t h s k i l l , a n d c o n t rols i t .

H e h a s no

s c h i z o i d s e n s e o f i t c o n t r o l l i ng h i m , a n d h e h a s d i rect access t o t he fru i t s o f h i s l a b o r , s u bj ec t t o t h e rec i p rocal c la i m s of his k i n s m e n . H e s t a nd s , in the fa ce o f n a t u re , m u c h less ela b o ra t e l y e q u i p pe d t h a n o u rselves. w i t h h is w h o l e b e i n g a n d a l l o f h i s fac u l t ies a n d act i v i t i es geared fo r t h e s u rv i v a l. a n d p e r p et u a t i o n o f h i s fa m il y , c la n , village, o r tri b e . 39 H o w ca n t he v a l u e s , t h e i m agp.ry, t h e way of l i fe of t h e o r i g i n a l affluent societ ies s h o w t h e way t o a n e w A m e rican c u l t u re? B e t t e r y e t , h o w can t h o s e e l e m e n t s be p r e s e rved w i t h i n i n d ige n o u s N at ive A m e rican c u l t u re s t h re a t e n e d w i t h t h e i n t r u s i o n s o f t h e

U . S . G ov e r n m e n t a n d i t s c o r p o rate a l lies? This a n a l y s i s is w rh t e n to N a t ive A mericans a s a n e x p l a n a t i o n of t h e d e bi l i t a t i n g effe c t s of t h e c a p i t a l i s t s y s t e m . C a p i t a l i s m i s m o re t h a n a sys t e m o f e c o n o m i c e x p l o i t a t i o n ; i n h e rent i n i t s d e v e l o p m e n t a n d o p e ra t i o n i s t h e a b i l i t y t o d e s t r o y n o n-ca p i t a l i s t

cultures, to reshape their dispersed people in its own i m age , and to e nge n d e r p ro fo u n d a l i e n a t i o n and u n h a p p i ness for i n d i v i d u a l s u n d e r i t s y o k e . Psyc h o l o g i c a l a n d c u l t u ra l c o l o n izat i o n i s a n i nevitable c o m pa n i o n t o e c o n o m i c c o l o n i zat i o n . N o p r i m itive o r Nat ive A merican c u l t u re h a s o p t e d freely fo r t h e A m e rican w a y of l i fe . S o m e have c h o s e n d ea t h a n d e x t i n c t i o n ra t h e r t han s u c c u m b . As Native A me r i c a n s y o u m u s t develop s t rategies fo r p reserv i n g y o u r i n t e g rated p a s t a n d fo r res i s t i n g t h e hege m o n i c e n c r o ac h m e n t o f t h e ca p i t a l i s t w a y o f l i fe . T i m e s are i n c re a s i n gly peril o u s . C r i t ical a n a l y s is and act i o n i s i m pe rat i v e .

C u l t u re A n d Pers o n h o o d

III

A n d h o w can t h e w o r k i n g p e o p l e o f c o r p o ra t e A merica res o lve their psycho-c u l t u ra l crises and realize t h e awes o m e p o t en t i a l i t i e s fo r h a p p i n e s s a n d e m a n c i p a t i o n w h i c h l i e b e n e a t h t h e s u rface o f ca p i t a l i s m ? I b e l i e v e t h i s i s a t h re e fo l d process. First, we must penetrate the psychic and c u l t u r a l r e i ficati o n o f o u r t i me. We m u s t d e my s t i fy t h e g l o s s i ngs a n d i d e o l ogical t rap p i n g s of c o r p o rate ca p i t a l i s m a n d u n d e rs t a n d i t a s i t i s . E m a nci p a t o ry M a r x i s m , critical t he o ry, is our best t o o l . What you have r e a d is a co n t r i bu t i o n i n this effo rt. New research w i l l p o i n t new ways. Dialogue with Native A mericans and o t h e r n o n - E u r o p e a n p e o p le o ffe rs new i n s i g h t s t o p e n e t r a t e o u r p s y c ho-cul t u ral a m nesia. The peril o u s n a t u re of the t i mes m a ke s d ia l o g u e crucial. S ec o n d , we must d e v e l o p our sense o f the o bj ective and s u bj ective p o t e n t ia l i t i es fo r o u r A merican fut u re . I d ea l l y , t h ro ugh research and d i a l ogue, w e must deve l o p sense, v i s i o n , i n t u i t i o n , fa n t a sy o f w h at c a n a n d o ught t o b e . T h i s i s t h e v i s i o n o f a n i n t egrated c u l t u r e , o nce e nj oyed by c e rt a i n N a t i v e A me r i c a n a n d p r i m it ive c u l t u res w h i c h can rise aga i n . T h e n e w i n tegrated cul t u re must be through n o n-e x p l o i t i v e e m a n c i p a t o ry socialism. T h e visions o f the past m u s t be rev i t a lized t o acco m o d at e t h e n e w tec h n o l ogical pot e ntialities of t h e c u r r e n t a g e . Thi rd , and m o s t i m p o r t a n t , w e m ust p u t o u r a n a lysis a n d v i s i o n i n t o p ract ice . We m u s t begin a l o n g m a r c h t h rough t he

institutions of corporate capitalism . We must dismantle, dispel a n d root o u t the i n te r n a l ized psychic reifi ca t io n , t h e hege m o n i c i n fl uences of c u l t u ra l o n e-d i me n s i o n a l i t y , a n d t h e s oc i o-eco n o m i c o p p re s s i o n s te m m i ng fro m the i n s t i t u t i o n s a n d processes o f c o n te m p o rary c a p i t a l i s m . We shall have t o fi n d s t rategies for d ev e l o p i n g a ut h e n t i c everyday l i v e s . We w i l l h a v e to s t r uggle for fre e s p ace i n w h i c h t o e x p l o re o u r n e e d s a n d red efi n e o u r p o te n t i a l i t i e s . I n n e w fa m ilies, n e w n e t w o r k s , a n d i n t i mate s m a l l g r o u p s , t o g e t h e r we s h a l l h a v e t o c a s t o ff o u r c h a i n s a n d beg i n t o l iv e our v i s i o n .

6 Circling the Same Old Rock Vine Deloria Jr. Several years ago, after delivering a s peech o n I ndian p hil osophies, I was astou nded when the q uest i o n s raised by the audience almost all centered o n the relat i o n s h i p o f I nd i a n cus t o ms t o M arxis m. I passed off most of the q uest i o ns with the cryptic comment that as I d id not d i s t i nguish between the broth ers, and preferred H arpo, I saw no rea s o n t o go into the subj ect. Yet the questions persisted and t oday I suspect that hardly an I ndian can add ress a n audience u n less he i s prepared t o deal with quest i o ns regard ing the relevance o f M arxist t hi n k i ng to I ndian c o n d i t i ons, customs, and existing view o f the world. This past year I have devoted a considerable amount of time to reading a v ariety of materials which would give m e s o m e i nsight into the nature o f M arxism and enable me to give more i ntelligent a nswers to t hese q uestions. I t h i n k I am n o w a b l e to see why n on-I n dians feel that I nd ians and M arxists are saying basically the same t h ings. I think, h owever, that a considerable gulf sepa rates t he two t raditions and t hat t h i s gulf can n ot easily be bridged. M arxism, Indian traditions and C hristianity all s hare a c o m m o n fate, i n that they rep resent not clear channels of thought 1 13

1 14


but broad deltas of emotion and insight so that attempting to articulate one i n o rder t o c o mpare it with another involves con sid erable hazard . Whichever tributary of t hought one might choose fo r comparative analysis is al most i mmediately dis claimed by adherents of the respective faiths in favor of the i n te rp re t a t i o n that appe a rs most s i m i l a r to the pos i tive i n terpreta t i o n wh ich they wish to give, with the result t h a t virtua lly no

comparison takes place. A n articulation of the I ndian idea of the physical world, for example, will i m med iately invoke Christian clai m s that St. Francis, not St. Tho mas represents the Christian mainstream o r will produce a M arxist a rguing vehemently that nature includes man and society and precludes hu man institu tions which alienate and enslave. No one i s ever convinced of the arguments, but somehow the audience feels that it has preserved s o m e k i nd of tenuous u nity which we should enj oy as h u ma n beings, given t hat t he insights it a d m i res speak to all o f us a s human beings. In this paper I do not wish to de bate the effects of indust rial ization. It seems t o me that M a rxist analysis is superior at this point to the hopeless d efense w h ich Christianity seem s to offer in beh a l f o f va rious for m s o f capi ta l i s m a n d t o t h e I n d i a n refusal to take seriously the presence of ind ustrial s ociety on the pla net. The best arena for intelligent c o mparison, it would seem to me, would be the discussion o f human personality as each o f the three traditions views it. Clearly in t h is area we speak of a rticu lated goals and not prod ucts of t h e process. I ndians would clearly emerge as superior if we restricted discussion to the results of beliefs on human personality. After all, we do not have countless coffeeta ble albums o f p h o t ographs of old Marxists or old C h ristians -they really d o n't have i nteresting faces. I n m ost respects, Marxists and Christians simply grow old; they do not appear to grow wiser while d oing so. Prior to a d iscussi o n o f h u man personality, and certainly pre req uisite to any meaningfu l comparison, I bel ieve, is the s u b j ect of alienation and it i s here t hat we can make clear points a nd enhance the communication o f ideas. I n a nutshell, Christians and M a rxists spend a great deal o f time looking for the roots of alienation and seeking techniques and institutions through which t h is problem can be addressed . Alienation is clearly a critical building block for both systems. I nd ians, on the other hand, are

Circling The S a m e Old R o c k

1 15

notably d e v o i d of concern fo r alienat i o n as a c o s m i c i ngred ient of hu man l i fe , a quest i o n t o be an swered o r a p r o b l e m to be c o n fro n te d . T h i s is not to say that I nd ia n s d o n o tfeel s o me degree of aliena t i o n . R ather t hey d o not make it a central c o n cern of t h e i r cere m o n i a l l i fe, t h ey d o not feat u re i t p r o m i ne n t l y i n t h e i r c o s m i c myt h o l o g y , a nd t hey d o n o t s e e i t a s a n e s s e n t i a l p a rt of i n s t i t u t i o nal e x i s t e n ce which c o l o rs t h e i r a p p roach t o o t h e r aspects of l ife. A l i e n a t i on, therefore, is an essential element of Western c o s m o l o gy , either i n the metaphysical sense o r in the epistemo l ogical d i me ns i o n ; it is a minor p he n o m e n o n o f s h ort d u rat i o n i n the larger c o ntext of cosmic balance fo r A merican I n d ians. A l i e n at i o n is n o t a wholly Western idea s i nce B u d d h i s m a n d other E a s t e r n s y s t e m s p o s it h u m a n rela t i o n s h i p s t o t he p h y s i c a l world a n d / o r reality a s one s y s t e m i n w h i c h a l i e n a t i o n a p pears a l m o s t sui generis. The pecu liarity o f Western a l i e n a t i o n , h ow ever, is t h a t while i t appears at the earliest s tages of t hat trad i t i o n , t h e w r o n g q uest i o n s a r e asked regar d i n g i t s h i s t o rical genesis. C h rist i a n i t y , build ing u p o n Near Eastern religi o u s models, saw a l i e na t i o n in the fi rst act of d i s o be d i e nce o f Man t o wards the C reat o r . I t t hereafter p os ited a Saviour o r M e s s i a h whose task was t o rest o r e the cosmic balance b y o ffe r i n g h i m s e l f as a c o s m i c sacrifice t h e reby a t o n i n g fo r the p r i m o rd i a l s i n . T h e problem w i t h t h i s c o s mic d rama is that it fai l s c o m p letely t o become c o n crete. It is one thing to u ndersta n d t h e ancient d rama of blood sacrifice; i t i s another to feel cosmically cleansed by it s o m e two t h ousand years later. In i d e n t ifying alienation as a pecu l i a r ly h u m a n e m o t i o n , C h ristia n i t y i s clearly p r i o r t o M a r x i s m , but its fa i l u re t o provide a s a tisfact o r y e m o t i o nal / intelligible s o l u t i o n t o t h e p r o blem only made act u a l aliena t i o n , o bserva ble i n t h e i n d ustrial s ociety of t h e n ineteen t h century E u ropean nati o n s , o f s u c h clear i m p o rtance a s t o attract K a rl M arx and Frede r i c k E ngels t o t h e q uest fo r its s o l u t i o n . M a rxism, i n descri bing t h e p rocess of o bj ectifica t i o n w hereby t h e p r o d u c t of h u man h a n d s beco mes t h e agent of h u man a l i en a t i o n , seems to me a p o werfu l m o d e l fo r e x p l a i n i n g a great d e a l o f contemporary u n rest a n d acts a s a beacon for s uggest i n g a l ternative paths t hat might be wal ked . B u t a fo r m of a lienat i o n , d i scovered o n l y two c e n t u ries a g o , a n d clearly related to certa i n i nstitutional structures w h i c h s p e a k p r i marily t o t h e e c o n o m i c a spect of m o d e r n s o c i e t i e s , d oes n o t deal with t h e

1 16


metaphysical presence of alienation which must certamly lurk in the background of the western European pscyhe. That is to say, the Marxist description of alienation serves more to cond emn existing and discernible institutions, thereby making s o me aspects of alienation concrete (a task at which Christianity was spectacularly inept) t han it d oes to deal with t his problem in a comprehensive and comprehensible manner. Adam Schaff ad mits as much: "Together with p rivate p roperty, socialism abol ishes alienation in the for m in w hich it was known in capitalism. But this eradicatio n is by no m eans complete: in a modified for m all the elements o f this alienation as s pecified b y Marx remain, at least in socialism." I Socialism speaks specifically to alienation which origi nates in, is generated by, or is intensified by capitaiist industrialis m. I nsofar as socialism rem oves the specific manner in which capi talism aggravates or makes concrete existing Western alienation, it contains t he potential for reform and healing needed by West ern civilization and those societies affected particularly by con tact with it. I t is, perhaps, the light side of an otherwise dark step in human experience which can be seen in a broader perspective of systematic alienation through t he establishment of an abst ract dimension separating the worker fro m his product. Yet involved in even this analysis are salient points which d ifferentiate West ern civilization fro m other traditions and from its basic view of life and the place of h u man beings in the historical process. A critique of socialism of the Marxist variety would t hen necessarily involve an examinatio n of the presuppositions of Western civilization which go to form its basic perception of the world. Although these elements exist primarily within the West ern milieu, they are believed by Western peoples to be of unive r sal significance. Thus statements about the nature of, historical ex perience of, or ultimate destiny of human bei ngs withi n the s ocialist context are not necessarily applicable to non-Western peoples in a philosophical or theological sense. Offering a cri tique of Western thinking fro m o utside its cultural boundaries means that one must inevitably choose those elements most closely related to alternatives found in societies and traditions other than t he Western mode of expression. Such an arrange ment necessariy precludes logical lin kages that are familiar and anticipated by Western thinkers. M y arrangement of ideas may

Circling The S a me Old Rock

1 17

seem w h olly arbit rary to the schooled M arxist t h i n ke r but it d oes i n d i cate for the astute reader the probable hiera rchy of values existing i n one non-Western trad ition and s uggests t h e possi ble rea rra ngement which would be necessary if M a rx i st t h i n k i ng were t o atte m pt serious d iscussi o n with people of the American I nd ian tradition. A c o m m o n ass u m p t i o n underlying Western t h ought is t hat t h i ngs must have had a begi nning. From C h ristian t heological speCUlations through R ousseau's n o b l e s avage, into modern scientifi c fictions concerning evolution, a n d i n the M a rxist analy sis, begi n n i ngs or origins are critically i m p o rtant. While A me ri can I nd ian tribes all have creation s t o ries, t hese are rega rded s i mply a s the accum ulated k nowledge that has been passed d o w n fro m generation to generation. N o e ffort is made to ground contem p o rary philosophies, inst i t u t i o n s , o r systems of belief in the reality o f events long ago. Other customs may buttress these stories of creation and ceremonies may be regarded as deriving fro m creati o n events or su bseq uent revelations w h ich organically relate t o such events but the truth o r falsity of the stories them selves is not a terribly i m portant matter. A narrat o r of a creation s t o ry will si mply recount what has been t o l d t o him or her by elders, shrug, and ind icate merely that the story has been re peated in as l i te r a l an accou n t as when i t was fi rst h e a rd by people

of this generat ion. The Western propensity t o absolutize primordial events or t o suggest t hat cert a i n condi t i o n s m ust have existed at the begi n n i ng- either by a projecti o n backwards of present condi tions o r by assu ming the relevance o f certa i n conditions �see ms to me to create unnecessary difficulties in u nd e rstanding for Westerners. I n describing the nature of co nsciousness prior to expla i n i ng t he M a rx ist awakening w hich insight into the work i ngs of capitalism invokes, H erbert M a rcuse states: The first form consciousness assumes in history is not that o f a n individ ual but of a u n iversal consciousness, perhaps best represented as the c o n sciousness o f a prim itive group witb all individ uality s ubmerged i n the co m m unity. Feelings. sensations. a n d concepts are not properly the individual's but are shared among all. so

1 18

Marxism and Native A mericans that the com mon and not the particular determines the

consciousness. [Emphasis addedj2

This hypothetical scenario suggests t hat individual pain, love, weariness, and so forth could not be individual ex pressions a t all but must be s imultaneously ex perienced by the group and that individual consciousness i s actually a very big step in the forma tion o f human history. This m yt h ical (in the worst pej orative sense conceivable) state of existence is, of course, absurd, yet it is seriously cited as the p recond ition from which human beings e merge t hrough a variety of experiences not the least of which is labor i n the anthropological-philosophical sense which Marx felt was his unique discovery. I would like to suggest t h at t h is primordia! state of e m o tional being is a p roj ection backwards fro m a contemporary state, perhaps intuited , i n which we can o bserve certai n functions of a group consciousness, with this word given a very precise obj ective referent. For example, M a rcuse suggests that "the con sciousness of men will continue t o be determined by t he material p rocesses that reprod uce their s ociety, even when men have come to regulate t heir social relations in such a way that these contrib ute best to the free develop ment o f all. But when t hese material processes have been made rational and have become the con scious work of men, the blind dependence of consciousness on social conditions will cease to exist. " 3 ( Emphasis added). He re I believe t hat we have a conte m p o rary o bservation of seem i ngly ' mindless group behavi or which provides the model for vis ualiz ing prim itive conditions. Proper perception of the present state of ' c onfusion would then lead not s i mply t o M arxism but to orig i nal p urity. Deprived of the ass umption concerning the original state of consciousness as a grou p phenomenon, means other t ha n M a rxian analysis would be req u i red to really break through present herd-insensitivity. Rega rdless of the disposition of consciousness, one of the avenues out of the primordial c o m m unal-tribal-herd mist into individ uality see ms to be the creation / invention of language, although, accord ing to M arcuse, it performs a dualistic functi o n : Language i s t h e medi u m i n w h i c h t h e first integration between subj ect and o bject takes place. It is also the first

Circling The S a m e Old Rock

1 19

actual c o m m unity (Allgemein heit), i n the sense that it is o bjective and shared by all i nd i v i d u a l s . On the o ther hand. language is the/irst medium o/individuationJor thro ugh it the individual obtains m astery o ver the

objec ts he kno ws and names. [Emphasis added] 4 T h e d i ffi cu lty of starting a t a hypot hetical begin n i n g and attempti ng to explain both human hist ory a nd the philosophical meaning o f h u ma n individual and social life s h o uld be apparent. M a rcuse sees n o i nconsiste ncy i n s uggesting that l anguage i s the fi rst effo rt t o transcend the s u bj ect-obj ect g u l f w h i le mai ntaining that langu age is t he first med i u m of i n d i v i d u at i o n -which creates the subj ect-o bj ect polarizati o n of the world . Perhaps m o re d i s a p p o i n t i n g is his relia nce on the Biblical interpretatio n of naming as t he critical element i n hu man beings ga i n i ng mastery over o t h e r life fo rms. Whether we take the individual in h i s / her realistic context or a s the pattern for explaining read ily o bservable facts o f d aily e x istence for n u m bers of people, neither t he M arxist nor t he C h ri s t i a n c o n cept of the ind ivid u a l i s s o p histicated e n ough t o carry t h e b u r d e n i m posed on it. Christians, of course, basing their c o n cept on the relat ionship of the s olitary individual befo re h i s / her m a k e r, fo rego any realistic a nalysis of what we mean by the indivi d u a l in favor of o m n i p otent a b s o lutism vested i n the p e r s o n of the deity. Marxists seem to transcend t h i s crude c o n ception. A d a m S chaff writes: The hu man individual a s part o f n a t u re; as a n o bj ect; the i n d ividual as part of society-whose attitudes, opin i o n s , and eval uati ons are explain ed as a fu ncti o n of social relat i o ns; fi nally, the i n d i v i d u a l as a prod uct of self-creation, of the p ractical activity of men as makers of h i s t o ry -these are the fou n d a t i o n s o f the M arxian concept of the i n dividua1 . 5 T h i s c o m p le x o f ideas tells u s h o w M a rx i s t t h ought t a k e s d iverse strands of i nterpretati o n and merges t h e m i n t o a c o m p lex around which a d d i t i onal insights can be clustered , but it d oe s n o t tell us h o w ind ivid uality o riginates o r why t h i s i s considered i mp o rtant. Tra d i t i o nal Marxian rej ecti o n o f rel igious i nterpretations

1 20


may help to account for M a rx is t c o n cern with the i ndividual, but it essentially rest ricts the d a t a fro m which the concept of " i n d i vid ual" can d ra w meaning. I t fails to suggest an interpreta t i o n ca pable o f res olving u n d e r i t s u mbrella all conceivable com m o n p lace e x perie nces of t he i n d iv i d u al , t hereby making it usefu l bey o n d t h e b o rd e rs o f Western t h o ught. "The interpretation of t h e i n d ividual b o t h as part o f n a t u re and as a function of social relat i o n s fi ts into t h e m a n-centered autono mous conception t h at takes t h e h u m a n world for its p oi n t of departure, remains w i t h i n it, and d issociates itself fro m a l l t h e o ries t h a t h o l d that m a n ' s destiny is governed b y the influence of any extrahuman factors, " 6 Adam Schaff suggests . Obviously the concern that extrasensory entities not in t ru d e u p o n t h e analysis or the awareness of the problem lies behind S c h a ffs insistence that t he idea of t h e individual be generated within t h e h u m a n w o r l d and re main within it. Yet it is at p recisely this po int t hat A m e rican I ndian peoples would have great d i fficulty wit h t h e M ar x i s t p o s it i o n . Rej ecting the idea that th ere is a human world d i s t i nct fro m t h e rest of existence, A me ri can I nd ia n s would include e x periences of wholly rel igious c o n t e n t wit h i n t heir scope o f i n q u i ry, t h e reby rej ecting that p o rt i o n of M a r x ian t hought and p re s e n t i n g a dilemma fo r t he M arxist w h o w i s hed t o convince t h e m o t herwise. Quite properly t he A merican I n d i a n would insist t h a t everything falls within h u m a n perce p t i o n , and t h a t we have - no th i n g of extra-human origins except t hose ideas which we reve re a b ove our own ex periences. Even s hould an experience test ify t o the ultra-sensory nature of reality, nevert heless i t happened t o a h u man being, was communi cated by h i m / her t o others, a n d ca me to fo rm a part of t he collective social consciousness / h i s t o ry while still remaining as a natural p a rt of life . M a rx ist excl u s i o n of some kinds of experi en ces , p a rt i c ularly t h ose which seem t o motivate human bei ngs, a ppears w h o lly unnecessary and weakens the explanation that M arxists would ex pect us t o accept. S c h a ff provides u s with a better p hi l o s o p hical statement of M arxist ideas about t he individual when he writes: The individ ual's ontol ogical status i s clearly d efi ned w i t h i n t h e fra mework o f t he M arxist d o ctrine: the indi-

Circl i n g The S a m e O l d R o c k

121

v i d u a l i s part o f n a t u re a n d s o c i e t y , a n d t h i s determi nes his o n t o l ogical status. H e i s that p a rt of n at u re w h i c h t h i n k s a nd consciously t r a nsfo r m s t h e w o r l d , a n d a s s u c h he i s p a r t of society. As a n a t u ra l - s o c i a l e n t i t y he c a n be a p p rehended with n o a d d i t i o n a l factors, a p a rt fro m o bj ective reality. 7 P u t t i n g a s i d e the c o n t i n u i n g o bject i o n t hat we can n o t establ i s h a r b itrary a n d art i ficial l i mits c o ncern i n g o bj ectivity, t h i s defi n i t i o n a p p roaches what the A merican I n d i a n might accept regard ing the i n d i v i d u a l , were it n o t fo r the idea t hat the i nd i v i d u a l , w hi le n a t u re's t h i n k i n g p art, nece s s a r i l y m u s t be i n v olved i n t h e t ra n s fo r m at i o n of nature a n d t hereby ga i n e n t rance i n t o s ociety. Transfo r m a t i o n i s a w h o l l y Western i d e a, l i n ke d to t he n ot i o n of M an's i n i t i a l d o m i n ance over t h e other l i fe forms, a n d sus pect i n t h a t n o d i rection for t h e transfo r m at i o n i s given (even wit h i n t h e e v o l u t i o n a r y process, w e r e t h a t t o b e regarded as val i d ) . T h e h u ma n role respecti n g t h e world i s t h u s l e ft o p e n t o p r o p hetic i n te r p re t at i o ns which can be seized with i ntense fan a t i c i s m . Transfo r m at i o n , i n fact, i s one o f t h e i n n ov a t i o n s s u ggested b y H e brew p r o p hets to d es c r i be t he events o f t h e l a s t d ays a n d in e ffect d egrad es a n d destroys a n y val u e i n h e r e n t within n a t u re as w e pre s en t l y find i t . I n t he M arxist a n a ly s i s we are act u a l ly u n a bl e t o m o v e fro m b e gi n n i n gs t o p resent realities beca u s e o f t h e i n s i stence o n t h e i n d e p e n d e n t reality o f p r i m o r d i a l c o n d i t i o n s fro m which begin n i ngs w o u l d be made. In this respect M ar x i s m gives us l i t t l e m o re t h a n C h ri s t i anity o r other )Vorld religio n s , w h i ch s uggest a negat ive w o rld in need of red e m pt i o n , a n d t h e n suggest t h a t rede mp t i o n i s t he n a t ural o u t c o m e of the p re s e n t state o f t he w o r l d - i n e ffect negat i n g t h e e xistence o f t h e cre a t o r ( o r s u ggest i n g t h a t H e w a s rea l l y n ot v e r y b r i g h t after a l l ) . C o m pare these t w o st ate m e n t s w h i c h attem p t t o m ove us beyo n d our start i n g p o i n t . H erbert M a rcuse writes: T h r o u g h h i s l a b o r, m a n o v e rc o m e s t he est rangement between the o bj ective world a n d t h e s u bj ective w o r l d ; he t r a n s forms nature i n t o a n a p p r o p riate m e d i u m fo r h i s self-devel o p m e n t .

W h e n o bj ects a re taken a n d

s h a p e d by l a bor, t he y bec o m e p a rt o f t he s u bj ect w h o i s

122

Marxism and Native Americans able to recognize his needs and desires in them . 8 Erich Fro m m writes : For M arx the process of alienation is expressed in work and i n the d ivisi o n of l a bor. Work is for him the active relatedness of man to natu re, t he creat i o n of a new world, including the crea tion of man h i mself;9

Neither t h i n ker re ally departs fro m the curse of Genesis regard i n g t h e need for work, a l t h o ugh Fromm ap pears t o distinguish between w o r k and the d iv i s i o n of labor. Nevertheless, b o t h fi nd i n herent i n t h e situation either estrange ment o r alienat i o n , a n d if we regard t hese words as s i m i lar i n content if not wholly eq uiva

lent,

we stiB have aiienat i o n as a given condition of h u ma n

ex istence a n d not as s o m e t h i n g p r o d u ced by t h e historical pro cess Further, we have accepted t h e unarticu lated p re m ise that people must be working on a n d transforming nature t o be natural-at least a contradiction in conceptions if not i n terms. Of m u c h m ore re levance is S chaffs analysis of t he type of hu man activity that seems t o prod uce alienation: I t is only i n certain c o n d i t i o n s that the o bj ectificat i o n and reification o f h u m a n activity l e a d to alienat ion: namely when man's p rod ucts acq u ire an existence that is i ndependent of h i m a n d a ut o n o m o us, and when man is unable t o resist, in a conscious way, the s p o ntaneous fu nct i o n i ng of his own p ro d u cts, which s u b o rd i nates him t o their laws and can eve n t h reaten his life. 1 0

S c haff here descri bes a process where b y h u m a n bei ngs del u d e the mselves into thinking that t h e i r products somehow transcend i n value the perceived real i t y which they experience. Alfred N o rt h W h itehead descri bed this delusion as the fallacy of mis placed concreteness a n d Christian theologians label it idolatry.

Of fundamental importance in this discussion is w h y Western peoples would be peculiarly s u bj ect t o this delusion and why t hey w o u l d n o t recognize it fo r what it is and rej ect i t . At any rate , it was certai nly a historica l / s oc i o l ogical propensity long before M a rx exami ned Western ind ustrialism.

Circl i n g The S a m e Old R ock

1 23

I d e n t i ficat i o n of t h is process of a l i e n a t i o n i n s p i res me t o s i d e w i t h M a rx i s t a n a lysis regarding t h e p lace of rel igi o n i n Western c i v i l izat i o n . I n the words of Adam S c h aff: " G o d , a s u pernatura l b e i ng, i s a cre a t u re of man, a n external i z a t i o n a n d

0 bjectificati o n

o f h i s o w n ch aracte rist ics a n d attri butes. T h i s i m p overis hes m a n , b e c a u s e it ro bs h i m o f his o w n fea t u res a n d c o ntent i n favor of a p r oj ec t i o n , a product of his o w n m i n d , w h i c h acq u i res t he guise o f a s oc i a l bel ief-a nd so, by m a k i n g i t s e x istence i n de p e n d e n t o f i t s m a k e r , becomes a n a l i e n a n d oft e n h o s t ile fo rce, gradually

coming to ru le

o ver

man. " l l No q u e st i o n t h a t t h i s s u m ma rized

t h e role o f Western religio ns and t h e i r i ns t i t u t i o n s . With the c r e a t i o n and promulgat i o n of creed s, d octrines, d o gmas and catech i s m s , Western religion bec a me the h ighest e x p ressi o n o f g r a v e n i mages because it made i n t e l lectual fo rmulas a substitute fo r human e x periences. D i scuss i o n s o f t he status o f the S o n , n a t ure o f t h e Trinity, status o f t h e s a ve d , free d o m o f t h e w i l l , a n d n eces s i t y t o p reach t h e Gos pel a l l p r o d uced a d re a d fu l s e n s e o f a l i e n a t i o n i n Western peo p l e and i n d uced in them t h e belief that d i fferences i n practice of religion w e re t h e u l t i m at e criteria for discri m i nati o n a n d v i o lence. Western h istorical ex p�riences are n o t , h owever, t h e stan d a rd b y which human experiences s h o u l d be gauged . For every religious fan atic who saw i n G o d t h e Father a j us t i ficati o n for p u t t i n g pagans t o the sword , there w e re o t h e r p e o p les, particu l a rly A merican I nd i a n s , w h o exerienced G o d as G ra n d father, who c o u l d n ot co nceive of c o m m i t i n g v i o l e n ce because of reli g i o u s d i ffe re nces. I f we have a m p l e e v i d e n ce t ha t o t h e r p e o ples e x p e r i e n ced God in terms o f h u m a n i mages and c h a racter i s t ics a n d d id n o t fi nd it a n occass i o n fo r m u rder, I w o u l d suggest that the d i ffe rence can be explai ned using M arxist logical categories. C h ri s t i a n s were taught that G o d was t h e i r fat h e r but rarely e x p e rienced the d ei t y as s uch; A me ri c a n I nd i a ns e xperien ced G o d as a grandfather but refused to speculate fu rt h e r on the s u bject, t h e re by precl u d i n g the al i e n a t i o n which i s p r o d uced by o u r o w n t h o ughts when t hey beco me i n d e p e n d e n t of o u r experie n ce . T h e h i s t o ry a n d p resent c o n figu rat i o n o f Weste r n civil iza t i o n c a n be explained q uite easily w h e n we refo r m ulate it i n terms o f m i s p l a ced c oncrete ness (or o ri g in a l sin, o r i n d ependent obj ec-

1 24

M a rxism a n d Native Americans

tifi cat i o n o f work p r o d u ct) and w e need not rely upon the M arx ian analysis as the definitive acc o u n t of this process. Neverthe less, M arx d oes give u s the fo r m u l a by which we can make fu rt her observati o n s o n t h e illnes s which infects Western civilizati o n . I n descri b i ng t h e i nevitable economic l ogic o f capitalism i n Eco

nomic and Philosophic Manuscripts, Marx observes : . . . t h e more t h e w o r k e r p r o d uces the less he has t o c o n s u m e ; the m o re v a l u e he creates the m ore wort hless h e bec omes; the m o re refined his product t he more crude and misshapen the wo rker; t he more civilized the prod uct the m o re barbarous t he worker; the m ore work m a n ifests intelligence the m ore the worker declines in intelligence and becomes a slave of nature . 1 2 The process i nevitably prod uces, as C h ristopher Lasch descri bes

it, in the "culture of narcissism. " Alfred North Whitehead com mented in a similar vein when he said that while it takes a stroke of genius to devise a system it took only routine reflexes to operate it. Again the question bounces back to an examination of the origins of Western civilization, the intuited or apprehended existence o f alienation and estrangement a t its earliest period of awareness , and its subsequent failure to resolve this problem either religiously, economically. or politically. M a r x i s m appears to provide a d i fferent answer than C h ris tianity i n the s e n s e t hat it seeks to c o m bine nature and history withi n a p rocess t hat can best be d e scribed as evolving s ocial s o p h i sticat i o n -that is, a greater qual itative s ocial response to ex perience t h a n mere increase i n t he quant ity of goods o r t he conq uest o f nature. M a rx wrote t hat the "human significance of nature o n ly exists for social man, because only in this case is nat ure a bond with other men, the basis of his existence for others and of their existe nce fo r him." And, he argue d , "the natural existence of man has here bec o m e h i s human ex iste nce and nature itself has b ec o me human for him. Thus society is the acc o m p lished union o f man with nature, the veritable resurrec t i o n of nature , t h e realized naturalism of man and the realized h u manism of nature. " l l While one might argue that such a for mat prod uces basically t h e same result as Ch ristianity, in fact it

Circl ing The S a m e Old R o c k

1 25

escapes the other-world ly, j ud gment d a y eschatology that c h a r acteri zes the Christian faith in fav o r of a p rogressive a nd seem i ngly inevitable goal which nature fi n d s in t he h i s t o rical process. T h i s proj ected conclusion to t h e hist orical p rocess whereby nature and our s pecies are reconciled assu mes w i t h o u t fu rt her q u est i o n i n g t hat n a t u re a n d o u r s pecies a re i n it i a l ly a t odds and t h at the t r a n sfo r m a t i o n o f n a t u re t h r o u g h the fu l fi l l me n t of h u man personality provides the fi nal l i n k age w h i c h restore s t he s e p arati o n . This scenari o , while c o m p rehensible to Western m i n d s , fai l s t o c o n front the A merican I n d i a n a p p re h e n s i o n t h a t n a t u re and o u r species a re n o t o p p o ne nts. N o t o n l y w o u l d A m e r i c a n I n d i a n s seriously q uestion the g u l f between o u r s p ecies and n a t ure, b ut o f equal seriousness w o u l d be the c ri t i q u e leveled by I n d i a n s against the M a rxian view o f s o cial instituti o n s . M a rcuse writes t h a t " t h e i ns t i t u t i o n s m a n fou n d s and t h e c u l t u re he creates develo p l a w s o f t h e i r o w n , a n d m a n ' s free d o m h a s to c o m ply w i t h t he m . H e is o v e r p o wered by t h e expand i n g w e a l t h o f his eco n o m ic, social , a n d p o l it ical s u r ro u n d i n gs a n d c o mes t o fo rget t hat he h i m self, h i s free devel o p m e n t , i s the fi nal goa l of all t h ese w o r k s ; i n stead h e s u rr e n d e rs t o t h e i r sway. " 1 4

H e re we seem to move one step b ey o n d t h e i d e a of m i s placed c o ncrete n ess or alienati o n and d e a l w i t h t he reality o f group i d e n t ity which forges new emotions and e n e rgies u n p redictable b y a s i m p l e statistical a nalysis o f i n d i v i d u a l wants, goals o r d reams . Y e t Sch aff seems to i m p l y t h at t h e s e social i n stit u t i o ns a re so much pred etermined as to c o n st i t u t e a barrier to h u m a n fu lfi l l me n t because of t h e i r inevitab l e d o m i n a t i o n b y eco n o m ic c o n sidera t i o ns. " M a n is born i n t o a d efin ite society u n d e r d e fi n i t e social conditions and h u m a n relat i o n s , " S c haff reminds u s , " h e d oe s not choose t h e m : r a t h e r , t hey ex ist as a res u l t of t h e a c t i v i t y of earlier generati o n s . A n d i t i s t h e fou n d a t i o n o f t hese a n d no other social c o n d i t i o n s - w h i c h a re based on relat i o n s of p ro d u c t i o n -that the entire i n v o l ved structure of views, syste m s o f values, and t h e i r c o n c o m m i t a n t i n s t i t u t i o n s i s erected . " l s G ranted t h a t social rel a t i o n s are a cu m u lative facto r in h u m a n e x istence, I nd i a n s w o u l d argue t h a t c u s t o m s , s p a r k i ng s p o n t a ne ous be h a v i o r o n the p a rt· o f i n d i v i d u a l s who are o r i e n te d toward t r ibal l i fe, moderate t h e effects of t h e econ o mic fac t o rs and keep t he m in line.

1 26


Both t hese views agitate against contin ued rel iance of socie t ies upon the fict ional social cont ract which u nderlies West e r n capitalism. I nd i a n s would see the s o cial contract as a pheno menon having p ri m arily verbal reality which i n t u rn creates t lw gulf between prom ise a n d performa nce now sadly recognized h� Western l i bertarians. M arcuse attacks t he question of social contract d i rectly b y noting t ha t the common interest can never he derived fro m t he separate wills o f isolated and competing i n d i vid uals. M arcuse further suggests that t he social contract anthro pology i s fa ulty i n the extreme: "as he appears in the natural-law d octrine, man is a n abstract bei n g who is later equi pped with an arbitrary set o f attribu tes. The select ion of these attributes changes accord i n g to the changing apol ogetic interest of the particular d octrine. " 1 6 There s h o u ld be n o q uest i o n t hat t he Lockean o r M o ntesquieu vers i o n of m a n i n the social cont ract appears without gen d e r, age, l a nguage, educa tion, or emotional commitment. But s o d oes t h e M a r x i a n socialist, and the socialist is fu rther hampered because while he lacks t he positive attributes of reaso n and self-interest which d om inate English and French rationalist theories o f the social contract, he carries the burden of economic depriva t i o n which is assu med (although quite wrongly) not to exist in the L ockean model . An exceed i ngly st range ver sion of t he social contract is presently a rticu lated by J o h n Rawls and represents the ulti mate abstract i o n prod uced by this line of t h ought. U lti mately the social contract represents a general ized ver sion of the Christian d octrine o f t he personal relat ionship between d eity and t he i nd ividual. M a rcuse notes t hat "the social contract hypothesis cannot serve, for n o contract between indi viduals t ranscends t h e sp here o f p rivate law. The contractual basis that i s p res u m ed for the state and society would make the w h o le s u bject to t he same arbit rariness t hat governs private interest. " 1 7 It is this very flaw t h at c o n t i nually undermines Chris tian efforts to derive a d octri ne of t h e c h u rch from a theol ogy that grounds itself in grou p-s hattering demands of i nd ivid ual conver sion. I n t he same sense t hat individual cont racts must always re main as private law, so i n d ividual co nversions really can n ot and do not issue i n t h e c reati o n o r sustena nce of a corporate body of believers. Reduct i o n of the h u m a n being to an intercha ngeable

Circling The Same Old Rock

1 27

u n i t within a larger p o litical, social or economic t h e o ry or theol ogy simply restricts analysis to t hat concept. It prevents the p ractical realizatio n of the intended goal because of its failure to t a ke with any degree of seriousness the real d i ffe re nces existing within the spectrum of h u man personality. M a rxist thought, while recognizing the existence of classes and trying to acco unt for their ultimate p o s itive c o ntribution to s o c iety a s a whole, fails a s miserably as does Christianity. Schaff writes that s ocialism is by definition a system in which every i n d ivid ual is guaranteed ful l devel o p ment. But in practice, he s a d ly notes, " it did not check the spreading of anti-individ ualistic t endencies -not only in the sense of c o m bating t h e psychological legacy of cap i talism, but also i n the wro ng sense of denying the right to ind ividuality. " ' 8 Schaff admits that "in all the socialist s o cieties that have s o far existed , various forms o f alienation have

p

a peared . In other words, there is no a u t o m atic p rocess where by abolition of private owners h i p of t he means of prod uction e l i m inates alienati o n -if only beca use of the c o n t inued existence of the state as a coercive machinery." 1 9 Finally Schaff confesses t,h at "within t he fra mewo rk of a class s o ciety there are groups, for example, occupational, social, and other gro u p s that lead to a c e rtain d ivision of s ociety along lines of prestige, position in a s o cial hierarchy and the like. S i milar d i v i s i o n s c a n n ot be ruled out in a society that has abolis hed p rivated property and classes, on the cont rary, p revious ex perience ind icates that their exis t ence needs t o be taken for granted. "2o One need n ot recount the sense of help lessness within existing socialist c o u n t ries, the peri o d i c purges, and the d readful shifts in p ower marked by d ictato r i a l excesses and secret p o l ice to understand t h e failure of the M a rxist an alysis t o produ ce the classless s o ciety which ful fills h u ma n pers onality. The parallels between M arxist t h o ught and Western reli g i o us thinking, in particular the Christian religio n , would seem to i nd icate that they d i ffer only in the d egree o f real i s m w hich t hey a re will ing to ack n owledge in selecting their s u p p o rt i ng data. C h ristian t h inkers always seem t o be c o ntent t o see sin in univer s a l generalities, carefully preparing l o o p h oles for their flock, w h o a re devoutly convinced t h a t the p roper external behavior coupled with proper recitation of creeds and slogans i s sufficient

1 28


to ensure t heir u lti mate cosmic salvation. Marxists reject after death salvation and the j udgment day and rely upon the i nevita b i l it y of the workings of historical, eco nomic processes to pro d uce basically the same result. In b o t h instances the systems of t h o ught are based u p o n the individual as the fu ndamental con cep t used in analysis, both systems project t he fulfillment of h u man personality as the end prod uct o f their historical process. I t i s not stra nge , t hen, t o d iscover that both systems see in educa t i o n the final t o o l for s ocializat i o n of individuals into the grand m o vement which they purport to describe. Education was i nitially an ecclesiastical function. Designed to p rod uce a continuing ho rde of t rue believers; the churches devoted considerable time and energy in educational pursuits.

The United States , and particu larly the Midwest, still evidences many institutions founded by c h u rch bodies which were sup posed to ensure the continued survival of the devout. While paying lip service to brotherhood, church colleges nevertheless provid-ed ed ucat i o n to t he elect. M arxist thin kers seem to place as m uc h credence in ed ucation as did the A merica n church fat hers. But they seem to base i t as much on histo rical cond itions as o n anyth ing in herent in socialist ideology. Schaff represents the basic M arxist stance toward education: The historical genesis and trad i tional structu re of mod ern societies still p revents all cultural goods-especially t h ose whose assimilation requ i res s pecial preparation and kno wledge-fr o m becoming generally accessible. There is only one conclusion to be d rawn from this, particularly fro m the p oint of view of the educative tasks of socialist s o ciety: everything must be done 10fill this gap in the education of the masses as quickly as possible and raise them to a higher level. that is, make them into a cultural elite. [Emphasis addedj2 1 The desired goal o f this p rogra m, and the content w hich will illuminate the new cultural elite, according to Schaff, "is to

disseminate through practical example the ideal persuasion, an

attitude of j ud i cious egalitarianism that precludes the p u rsuit of wealth and the enlargement of ind ivid ual p ro perty for the p u r-

C i rc l i ng The S a m e O l d R o c k

1 29

p oses of s ocial elevat i o n . " 2 2 One c a n not e x a m i n e the idea l i s t i c goals o f s o c i a l ist educa t i o n w i t h o u t seeing the s i m ilarity between i t a n d t ra d i t i o n a l Western t heo ries of e d u ca t i o n . A l t h ough t h e C h r i s t i a n churc h h a s l o n g s i nc e aba n d o ned i t s r o le as educat o r i n fav o r o f t he s t ate, the underlying assu m p t i o n s by which t h e W e s t e r n state n o w e n gages i n u n ive rsa l e d u cat i o n at t h e p r i m a ry a n d seco n d a ry l e vels i s i d e n t ical to b o t h a n cient ecclesiastical g o a l s a n d m o re m o dern d e s i res t o create a res p o n s i ble cit izens h i p . I d ea l l y , w i t h i n t he Wes t e r n t rad i t i o n , such a n e d u c a t i o n , regar d l e s s o f its civic goals, must c o n s i d e r k n o wled ge in t he rati o n a l for m a t i n w h ich clear i d e a s and co ncise logic (the s c i e n tific met h o d o l ogy) i n fo r m , p re s e n t , a n d fo rmulate c o ncepts a n d t heories. R e as o n u n d e r l ies Western t h e o l ogical e d u c a t i o n , sec u l a r Western e d u c a t i o n , a n d M a r x ist socialist educat i o n . W it h o u t reas o n t h e W e s t w o u l d b e u n a b le t o classify and p a s s a l o ng i t s vers i o n o f h u m a n k n owledge . This p a s s i o n of the West is n o t w i t h o u t i t s flaws and fe w Western t h i n kers a re c a p a b l e of u n d ersta n d i n g h o w much c o n fl i c t such an educ a t i o n p r o d u ces i n t h e b o d y p o l i t ic. " S ocial and p o l itical real i ty cannot, for any length o f time, c o n form to t he d e m a n d s of reason," H e r bert M arcuse n o t e s , "fo r t h e state see k s t o mai n t a i n t he i nterest o f t hat w h i c h i s , a n d t hus t o fetter t he fo rces t ha t t e n d t o a h igher h i s t o r i c a l fo r m . S o o ne r o r later, t he ' free rat i o n a l ity o f t h o ught must c o me i n t o c o nflict with the r a t i o n a l i t y o f the give n order of l i fe . "23 B o t h res p o n s i ble s o c i a l c o n t ract citizens a n d c o m m itted s o c i a l ist s d e p e n d u p o n the u l t i m a t e rat i o n a l ity of t h e i r beliefs to guaran tee t h e p r o p e r fu n c t i o n i n g of t he i r respecti ve p o l i t ical / eco n o m i c orders. E d ucat i o n , w h i le a d v a nced as the s o l u ti o n to e x is t i ng p r o b l e m s , becomes t h e u l t i mate nemesis of t h e system. A me r i c a n I n d ia n s have c o n t i n u a l l y rejected the Western ed ucati o n a l fo rmat all t he while i n s is t i n g that t h e i r c h i l d re n receive a n e d ucat i o n w h i c h enables t h e m t o u n derstand w hites

a n d c o m pete success fully w i t h t h e m i n t h e s o c i a l , p o l i tica l and

ec o n o m i c rea lms . The i n c o nsistency i n t hi s p o s i t i o n is not as p ro fo u n d or ho peless as i t w o u l d see m . T h e reference point is n e ver the t ra n s format i o n of t r i b a l c u l t u res but the o pe n i ng o f the i n ne r w o r k i ngs o f w h i t e s ociety t o t h e u n d e rst a n d i n g of t r i b a l m e m bers. U nfortunately, b u t p re d i c t a b l y , A me ri c a n s o ciety has


1 30

responded t o I n d i a n ed ucational demands by attem p t i ng t o change I nd i a n social a n d cult u ral patterns -revealing that A me r ican education is a s o cializing process, not o n e t hat i m parts i nsights and i n fo r m a t i o n about t he world. I n short, I n d ians want to learn and are offe re d i n d octrinat ion. I n t he same manner, socialist c o u n t ries will eventually p r o d uce i nternal strife by con fus i ng ed ucat i o n and i n d octrinat i o n , b u t this propensity to c o n fuse o n e with the o t h e r s e e m s a t ra i t as o l d as Western civilizat i o n itself a n d m u st cert a i n l y d e rive fro m i t s religi o u s origins and fo undations. Western k n o w le d g e , a n d its c o mponent parts, i n cl u d i n g educat i o n , prod uces a l i e n a t i o n becau s e it refuses to focus o n the real knowledge t ha t can be gained fro m particulars, i n fav o r of u n iversal categories o f classificati o n which p u r p o rt t o give a transcendent k n o w ledge able to provide i nstant orientat i o n to t h i ngs k n o w n and u n k n o w n alike. M a rcuse puts i t best when h e writes : C o m m o n sense a n d traditio nal scient ific t hought take t he world as a t o t a l i ty of t h i ngs , more o r less existing per se, and seek t h e t r u t h in o bj ects that are taken to be independent o f t h e k n owing s u bj ect. This is m o re t h an an epistemol ogical attitude; it i s as pe rvasive as the practice o f m a n a n d leads t h e m t o accept the feel i ng that t hey a re s ec u re o n l y i n knowing and ha ndl ing objective facts. The m o re rem o te an idea is from the impulses, in terests. and wants to the living subject. the more true

it becomes. [Emphasis a dd e d j 2 4 .

T h i s insight is eq u a l l y a p plicable t o democratic and soci a l ist attitudes about k n owledge a n d i t certainly descri bes the fu n d a mental appeal of Wes tern t h e o l ogy. Unfo rt u nately i t also g ives eloquent test i m ony rega rd i ng t he sense of alienation ex perienced by t he Wes t -inclu d i n g M arxist t h i n k i ng. Erich Fro m m , i n i n t r o d u c i ng M a rx's Economic and Ph ilo

sophic Manuscripts to American readers in 1 96 1 , paid parti cu

lar atte n t i o n t o t h e place of Karl M a rx in Western i ntellectual and religious history. "The mainst ream of Messianic thi n k ing after t h e Refo rmat i o n , h o wever, was expressed n o l o nge r i n

Circl ing The S a m e Old R ock

131

rel ig i o u s t h o ught," Fro m m s uggested , " b u t i n phi l o s ophica l , his t o rical a n d s ocial t ho u ght. " And, he co ncl u d e d , "it fou nd its latest and most c o m plete e xpres s i o n i n M a rx's c o nce p t of social i s m . "25 Further, Fro m m maintai ned, " M a rx's p h i l o s ophy was , in secu lar, n o n t heistic la nguage, a new a n d radica l step forward in t he trad i t i o n of pro p h e t ic M es s ia n i s m ; it was a i med at the ful l real izat i o n of ind ividual i s m , the very a i m w h ich h a s gu ided Western t h i nking fro m t h e Renaissance a n d t h e R e fo r m at i o n far i n t o the n i n eteenth ce ntury. "26 M a rx h i m s e l f issued a p h i l o s op h i cal clario n call to rede mpti o n :

Communism is the positive a b o l i t i o n of private prop erty. of human se(f-alienation. and t hu s t h e real appro priation of human nat u re t h r o u g h and fo r m a n . It is, t h erefore , t he ret urn o f m a n h i m s e l f as a social, i . e . really human being, a complete a n d c o n s c i o u s return which a s s i m i l ates a l l t h e wealt h of pre v i o u s develop m e n t . C o m m u n i s m as a fu lly-devel oped naturalism i s h u m a n i s m a n d as a fu l ly-devel oped h u m a n i s m i s natu ra l i s m . I t is the

definitive

res o l u t i o n o f t he a n t a g o n i s m

between man and nature, and between man a nd m a n . 27 I f n o t a s poetic as Isaiah, we cert a i n l y have here t h e p ro m ise of s a l vati o n and the a n n o uncement o f t h e day o f t h e Lord , al beit i n secular clothes. The i m p l icat i o n s of M a rxist t h i n ki n g may be rev o l ut i o nary fo r West ern pe oples but t hey raise a strange res p o n s e i n A m eri ca n I ndia n s . Why is it t h at Western peoples fee l t hemselves a l i e nated fro m nat u re? And why is it t hat t hey seek s o me ki n d of m es s i a n ic, ultra-histo rical s o l u t i o n once they h ave i d e n t i fied t h is e s t range ment? To co nsider co m m u n i s m , even i n its p u rest fo rm, the

definitive resolution

betwee n h u m a n i ty and n at u re is basic

a l l y to a n n o u nce that the alienat i o n of h u m a n ity a n d nature is the fu ndamental pro b l e m around which all o t h e rs revo lve . S i nce t h is p r o blem is so co n t i nuously on the m i n d s of Western people s , a nd s i nce, after a l l t h e eco n o m ic a n a lyses are concluded , M arx returns t o this theme, a better use of o n e's time than advocacy of cap ital i s m o r c o m m u n i s m might be an e x a m i n a t i o n of how Western peo p les decided or when t hey first e x pe r i e nced t h is

1 32

Marx i s m and Nat i ve Americans

a l i e nat i o n -s ince i t d oes n o t occur w i t h i n the A m erican I n d i a n context as a p r o b l e m o f t h is m a g n i t u d e . M arxism w o u l d t here fo re appear to be s i m p l y a n o t h e r C h r i s t i a n d e n o m i nation, albeit a highly secularize d vers i o n , see k i ng t o d iscover t he Messiah and o p p os i n g t h e " K i ngd o m o f this world" I f one needed fu r t h e r c o n fi r m a t i o n of t h i s ident ificat i o n , it is read ily a p p a rent i n t h e M a r x i s t concern fo r i n ternatio nal strug gle. Acco rd i n g t o A d a m S c h a ff, "internat i o n a l i s m . . . i n t h e M a r x i s t syste m i s n o t s i mply a councel o f ba t tle dicta ted b y t h e need to u n ite fo rces o f o n e c l a s s against a n other o n a s u p ra n a t i o n a l scale, but i t i s a l s o a p r i n c i p l e o f equal ity that makes t h e n o t i o n of brotherh o o d rea l i s t i c . " 2 8 C o u l d Ch rist ian ity have made a better case fo r i t s e l f? S c h a ff e m p h a s izes t h is a rgu ment q u ite e l o q uently when he write s : . . . it is bey o n d d is p u t e t h at in ternationalism is an i n se p a ra b l e p a rt o f t he attitude o f c o m m u nists and tha t b o t h t he fo u nd e rs o f M a rx i s m a n d a l l t h e i r d i s ciples and fo ll owers regarded i t as o n e of t h e c h a racterist i c features of t h e pers o n a l i t y o f t h e c o m m u n ist m a n . 29 G o ye t h e refore i n t o a l l t h e w o rld , p re a c h i n g my G o s pel. " I t is a l s o u nchallenged , " S c h a ff c o ncludes, "that internationalist atti tudes should be fo s t e red c o n sc i o u s l y , t hat they do not arise s p o nt a ne o u s ly, least o f a l l in p e r i o d s laden with nati o nalist moods, but can o n ly be fo rmed i n a s t r uggle against nat i o n a l i s m a n d rac i s m of all varieties a n d s h a d e s . "30 The Marxist message, t h e refo re t ra n s ce n d s l o c a l , t r i b a l , and n a t i o n a l b o u n d a ries and is a n d must be aggre ssively m i s s i o nary- m inded not s i m p l y t o suc ceed but to rea lize itself in a l l its essentials. M a r x t ruly s t a n d s w i t h i n t he Western t rad i t i o n and his m e ssage i s hard ly n e w or i n n o vative. F. S . C . Northrup, in h i s b o o k The Taming of the Nations, described Western u n i versal ism as follows: The great achievement of t h e West as c o m pared with Asia i s i t s capac i ty to ach i eve p o l i t ical u n ity over s ocial groups and geogra p h ical areas extend i n g far beyond the H e b rew or As i a n j o i n t fa m i l ies o r t r i bes, a p o l itical

Circl ing The Same Old R o c k

1 33

u n i o n , moreover, t h e m o ral c o m m u na l roots o f which have not h ing t o d o with fa m i l y , t r i be . stat u s , or i n d uc tively given stat i o n . The concept of such a s ociety was fi rst envisaged by t he Stoic p h il o s o p hers w h o c reated Western law. This new, m o re u n i ve rsal c o n cept of law and polit ical organization the R o ma n S t oics d e rived fro m G reek natural science and p h i l o s o p h y. 3 1 O f particular interest in understan d i n g this p o l itical unity is the type of moral ity which acts as its glue, p r o vi d i n g t he internal c o n sistency, apart fro m fo rce. to make it acceptable to indi vid uals. To be a m o ra l man means t o be a citize n n o t o f one's fa m i ly or one's tribe or of any particular geogra p h ical area, b u t t o be a cit izen of a com m u n ity o.f theoret ically constructed. techn ical1v concep t ualized relations. Thus l a rge n u m bers o f men living t o o fa r a p a rt fo r i n t u itively feIt contact can achieve a co m m o n bond of u n ity by free i n d i vi d u a l acceptance of a com m o n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l con tract w h ich has n o t h i n g to do with i n d uctively o bserved fa mily, caste, o r t ri bal stat us. ( E m p h a s i s added . ) 32 N o rt h r u p was, I t h i n k , wrong i n tracing t h i s belief bac kwards only t o the R o man S t o ics or even to G reek n a t u ral p h i l o s o p h y a n d scie nce. But if it can b e t raced bac k t h a t fa r with a fai r degree of consistency, then we can at least m a ke o n e i ncisive com ment w h i c h s h o u l d d i s t i n g u i s h A m e ri c a n I n d i a n fro m W e s t e r n t h ough t . Western mathe maticians c o n ceive z e r o as i n d icative o f nothi ngness and t h e concern of G r e e k p h i l o s o p hy, Socrat�s, Plato and Parrnenides particularly, revolves a bo u t t he interplay of bei n g and n o n-be i n g . A m e rica n I n d ia n s , particu l a rly the m o re a d v anced g r o u ps i n M exico, Central a n d S o u t h A m e rica, con ce ived t he zero to represent fu l l ness, n o t n o t h i ngness, and t h us t h e u lti mate value i n a bst ract ions t a k es fu n d a m e n t a l l y and d ia metrically o p posed viewpoints as between t h e two groups. Even m o re sign ificant, h owever, i s t h e o bs e rvat i o n made by R o bert Bel l a h i n h i s essay o n reli gi o u s e v o l u t i o n . Bellah fi nds c o n s i d e rable signi ficance i n t h e fact o f t h e "emergence i n t h e fi rst

1 34

M a rxism and Native A mericans

m illen n i u m B . C . all across the Old W o rld . at least i n centers of high culture, of the p h e n o m e n o n o f re ligious rejection of the world cha racterized by a n extremely negative eva l uation of m a n and society and the exaltation o f a n o t he r rea l m of reality as a l o n e t rue and infi nitely v a l u a ble."33 B e l l a h fu rther o bserves t hat "world rej ect i o n marks the begi n n i n g o f a clear o bjectifica t i o n of the social order a n d s h a r p crit icis m of i t . I n t he earlier world acceptance phases religi o u s conceptions and social order were so fused t hat it was a l most i m p o s s i b l e t o crit icize the latter fro m the point of view of t h e fo rmer. In the later p hases the possibi l ity o f re making t h e w o r l d t o c o nfo r m t o value d e m a n d s has served i n a very d iffe rent way to mute t h e e x t re mes of world rej ect i o n . "34 U nless we can acce pt the idea that whole societies could sud d e n ly and convinci ngiy acce pt a c o m p lete reversal of their unders t a n d i n g of l ife - w i t h o u t any external e ven t m o t ivat ing t h e change - I s uggest that Marx i s m , C h ristianity, and Western civilization would d o the mselves well t o pursue their historical i nvestiga t i o ns into their o w n past and d i scover what h appened. What even t riggered a c o m plete and a p pa re n tly humi liating accepta nce of the belief that this world , nature included, n o lo nger had any value? Marxism l o o k s forward to t he product i o n of "u niversal m a n" who has the e m o t i o na l , i n t e l l ectual, p olitica l , and s o cial resou rces t o t ranscend h i s (sic) own alienat i o n and ful fi l l his personality. M arxism makes the claim t hat it can succeed w here other interpretat i o n s of h u man destiny have failed by concent rat i n g on conditions and h i s t o rical forces to the exclusion of e x t ra h u man co ncepts. Yet it m ust, l i k e all other Western i n stitut ions, confront the reality of its cultural past and deal fo rt hrightly with the heritage of the West which s u ggests that an event long s h rouded i n the past provided t he sign ificant t rigger fo r rad ical change-a cha nge that has yet t o be control led o r understood . Of p a rt icular i m p ortance i n begi n n i n g t o confront this event i s the recognition t hat A merican I n d ia n s and other tribal peoples, indeed t hose societies which lacked s o p h istication and c o m plex ity, d i d not s u ffer t he e m o t i o n a l trauma of t he first millennium a n d conseq uently did not fi nd it necessary to l o o k beyond nature and outside of themselves for meaning.

Circling The Same Old R ock Tod ay

1 35

Western t h inkers are greatly agitated wit h the

i nsights of M arxis m and wit h good reas o n . If a p p l ied pri marily to an a n a l y s i s of the effects of i n d u s t r i a l i s m , t he segrega t i o n of wealt h and p o wer by a m i n i scule grou p of our s pecies and their s u bsequent i n h u m a n t reatment of the rest of us, Ma rxism gives u s sign ifica n t insights into our cond i t i o n . It h e l p s to e x p l a i n the c r u de fu nct i o n i ng of the capitalist s y s t e m a n d its o p p ressive m ach i n e ry w h ich e x p l o i t s t h e mass of p e o p l e on t h e p lanet. But c a p i ta l i s m , a s Marx we l l k new, is based upon a rigid moral p ri n c i p l e : t he ren u nciation of life itself: The less you eat, d r i nk, buy books, go t o t h e t heatre o r to b a l l s , o r t o the p u b l ic house, a n d t h e l e s s y o u t h i nk, l ove, theorize, s ing, p a i n t , fence, etc. t h e more you will be able to save and the

greater

will bec o m e your trea

sure which neither moth nor rust will corrup t -your

capital. The less you are, the less you express your life, have, t he greater is y o u r alienated life and the greater is the saving of your alie nated being. Eve ry

the m o re you

t h i n g w h ich t h e eco n o mist takes fro m y o u i n t he way of l i fe and h u m a n ity, he restores to y o u in t he for m of

money

and

wealth. 35

The a p p lause which Nort hrup reserves for Western genius is t herefore sadly misplaced if we are d is cu s s i n g h u m a n bei ngs and the new m o rality w hich Western t ho u g ht p r o d uce s . M ar xist a bolition of t his for m o f personal e x p ress i o n , w h i l e it m ay reso lve s o me h i storical inequ i t i es, hardly provides any ultimate solutions t o t he h u m a n pro blem. From t h e pers pect ive o f A merican I nd ia n s , I would argue, M a rxism offe rs yet anot her grou p of cowboys rid i n g around the s a me old r o ck. It is Western religion d ressed in eco n o mistic c l ot h ing, and s h a b by clot hing it is. I t accepts u ncritically a n d a historically the worldview generated by s o m e a n c i e n t Western t ra u m a t hat o ur s p ecies is alienated fro m n a t u r e a n d then o ffers b u t a n o t her version of Messianism as a s o l u t i o n to t h i s artificial p r o bl e m . Its universalism, d isguised in the costu me of inter nat ional concern a n d a p p l icat i o n, poses as m u ch t hreat as ever

d i d t he C h ristian miss i o n ar ies. I n ed ucati o nal theory it provides

1 36


out moded and inap plicable socialization wit h abstract and useless, if not invalid, knowledge; at least generalizations which have little relevance to the tribal s ituation. American I ndians and other tribal peoples sta nd today as the sole example of true h umanism because they wil l ingly recogn ize the attributes that serve to compose and define the hu man being. They revere age and recognize the growing process. They establ ish wit h s o me degree of clarity the difference w hich gender creates in h u man perspectives. They adm it t hat fa mily considerations play a crit ical role in the distribution of goods and t he application of j ustice. t hey recognize law but they also see the fu llness of t he moment and ask legal and political solutions t o be just as well as lawful. They reject a universal concept of brotherhood i n favor of respectfu i treatment of human beings with whom they have contact. It is not necessary, t hey argue, t hat crows s hould be eagles . Both M arxists and Christians s h ould heed that i nsight si nce in attmepting to transform the world into eagles they have merely produced vultures.

7 Observations on Marxism and Lakota Tradition Frank Black Elk I have been asked t o make some o bserva t i o n s c o n cerning the rel a t i o n s h i p between Marxism and the s p i ri t u a l t r a d i t i o n s of the

na t i v e peoples of this hemisphere . Firs t , allow me to say that

I

a m n o M arxist s c h o l a r . I s u p p o s e my u n d e rsta n d i ng of t h e s u bject is t h e resu l t of what has been p o p u l arly p rojected t o me, o ften e n o ugh by peo ple calling t h e mse lves M ar x i s t s o r M arxist L e n i n i s t s . I ass ume that what t hey've passed a l o n g to me is an accura t e e n o ugh s u m m ary of the m a i n p o i nts o f t h e i r traditi o n . S e c o n d , a l l o w me t o say that n o i n d ividual can h o p e t o accurately a d d ress the ra nge of s p i ritual t rad i t i o n i n d ige n ous to the A m e ri

cas . There are a great number of cultures among native people, eac h w i t h i t s own i n fi nitely c o m plex s p irituality. To do j ustice to t h e subj ect, repres e n t at ives of each trad i t i o n would be necessary. Of c o u rs e , t h i s i s i m p o ss i ble i n t h e c o n t e x t of a b o o k s uc h as t hat w h i c h has been p r o p osed t o me. C o verage of j us t the q ues t i o n of s p i r i t u a l i t y would req uire v o l u m e s , if d o ne i n fu l l , and

then the balance of the subjects to be covered

w o uld re m a i n ,

req u i r i n g additional v o l u m e s . O bv i o u s l y , few p e o p l e would p o s sess the t i m e and e n e rgy t o read s u c h a l e n g t h y w o r k and s o it is i m practica l .

1 37

1 38

Marxism and Native A mericans O f necessity, then, I w i l l restrict the bulk of my o bserva t i o n s

to the trad i t i o n s of my o w n people , t h e Lakota p e o p l e . I a m not a s piritual leader or an "expert " , even i n this. Spiritual leaders h i p is the role of t h e tribal e l d e r s , fo r t h e m o st part, and I a m you n g . I have n o netheless, been fo rtu nate e n o ugh to have benefited fro m t h e wisd o m a n d k n ow l e d ge o f my uncle, Wallace B l a c k Elk, my aunt, G race Black E l k a n d vari ous other elders. I know enough to s peak i n generalities, which i s what is needed here. Finally, my l i mited focus upon t h e Lakota t ra d i t i o n s i s not as potentially mislead ing as it may appear at fi rst glance. I bel ieve t h at, despite t heir great d i ffere nces i n some very i m p ortant w ays, most s p iritual trad i t i o n s of the A mericas s hare cert a i n central values a n d u n d erst a n d i ngs. This is, in a way, the s a m e as that the various factions of t h e Christian church hold certain core fea t u res i n c o m m on , d e s pite o t h e r d i s s i m ilarities. This is not to say that I believe that all native s p i rituality sprang fro m a s i ngle s o u rce as the C h risti a n rel i g i o n is reputed to have, nor even t hat I believe C hristianity is t he product of a given source. Along .w i t h Vine Deloria, J r. , i n his book God Is Red, I feel that s piritual trad i t i o n s were probably born of and conti nued by such t h i ngs as the geogra p h y fro m which t hey s p rang; t hey a re

truly i n d igenous t o c e rtain areas a n d are the only fo rms of s p irituality appro p r iate to t h ose a reas. In any event , an un der standing of the L a k o t a t r a d i t i o n i n its possible relat ionship to t he Marxist tradition s hould prove hel pfu l to t h ose see k i n g to u n d er stand s i mi l a r relat i o n s h i p s between Marxism and other natural spiritual trad itions.

II. My fi rst impre s s i o n s o f M ar x i s m came t h rough hearing statements such as "religion i s t h e o p iate of the people." S i nce

Europeans often have considered native spirituality as being "religion", such statements were c o n fu s i ng to me. I asked several people for an explanat i o n of t h i s a n d , in each case, I received essentially the same a n s wer. Yes, by religi o n , spirituality was being refe rred to; s p i rituality or religi o n is one o f the ways t he "ruling class" subverts the revolutionary energies of the peo ple. By promising a gl o r i o u s "afterlife" o r " heaven" to t hose who stay

M a r x i s m and Lak ota Trad i t i o n

139

i n l i n e d ur i ng their l i v e s o n e a r t h , a n d by t h re at e n i n g a h o rrible and ete r n a l afterlife called "hell" t o t h os e w h o do not stay i n l i n e , t h e ruli n g class is a b l e to maintain its p o s i t i o n o f s o c i a l power b y frightening t h e p e o p le a w a y fro m revo l t i n g a n d t a k i n g p o w e r fo r t h e mselves . The church i s o bviously associated w i t h the r u l i n g class and h e l p s to defi n e what stay i ng i n l i n e m e a n s . This descript i o n of rel igion o b v i o usly served t o d escribe t h e

Christian ch urc h , an institution which h a s nothing at all to do w i t h the trad itio nal s p irituality of t h e Lakota p e o p l e . I p o inted t h i s out t o each of the i n d ividuals who were e x p l a i n i ng the v a r i ous n egat ive social effects of rel i g i o n t o m e , in h o p e s that t h i s w o uld c a u s e t h e m t o c o n s i d e r t hat my p e o ple's " re l i g i o n" w a s n ot a d d ressed by t h e i r a n a l y s i s . But it d i d n o t . I n e a c h c a s e , it was asserted (with various twists, accord i n g t o the s p e a k er) that, w h i le rel i g i o u s for m s tend t o vary fro m c u l t u re to c u l t u re , or even within a given c u l t u re, t h e net s o c i a l re s u l t o f a l l religi o n s is essentially the same: t h e people are "d rugged" by religious " s u pers t i t i o n " to the point of not rea c h i n g their ful l p o tential as h u man beings . B u t , I asked , h ave y o u really e x a m i ned all t h e spiritual t rad iti o n s of all the d i fferent cultu res o n earth i n o r d e r to reach t h i s conclu s i o n? W e l l , no, was the ge neral reply, t h a t would be m u c h too lengthy and c o m p licated a n u nd er s ta n d i n g . Besides, t h e re's really no need , i t has been d i alectically d e t e r m ined t hat t h is is t h e social res ult of religi o n . I nstead of wasting la rge a m ounts of t i me and energy analyz i n g w h at it a l ready u n d e r stands t o be a s ocially negati ve c o n d i t i o n , M ar x i s m wisely d�v otes i t s resources t o the unders t a n d i n g o f a p o s i t ive social vision w h i c h ca n overco me religion a n d r u l i n g classes i n ge neral. U s ually, I tried o ne last time. B u t t r ad it i o n a l Lak o t a s p i r i t u a l i t y could n o t serve t h e social p u r p oses y o u d e s c r i b e , I i n s isted , a g a i n and agai n. The Lakota have never had a r u l i n g class; l eaders s e rve by co nsensus o f t h e p e o p l e . The L a k ota have never been co ncerned with heaven and h e l l . The L a k o t a h ave never even had need for a church, at least n o t i n the sense t hat C hris t i a n ity has a church. Wouldn't i t be wise fo r Marxists to take a l o o k at t rad i t i onal Lakota s pi r i t u a l i t y , i n its o w n r i g h t , and see if i t weren't so mething o t h e r than t h e religious "op iate" c o n d e mned b y Marxism.

1 40


But my info r mants would have none of this. They were sorry, of course, perhaps even a bit embarrassed, to have to . explain to me that what I was saying, while perhaps true as far as it went, did n't really matter. The problem, as they saw it, was t hat religion possessed socially useful attributes at certain, rather primitive levels of social organization. History s hows that, as societies develop, religion assumes less and less useful social characteristics, becomes more and more socially repressive as a means to continue its existence (once the real need for it has passed) until finally it assu mes a role as one of the most reaction a ry social forces. So, even if Lakota spirituality seems to retain certain superficially appealing characteristics now, as Lakota culture goes t hrough its inevitable evolution "into the twentieth century," this same spirituaiity will just beco me like a dead weIght around the neck of the people, a weight always attempting to pull them d own into the mire of primitive superstition. Finally, o ne ind ivid ual (gently) explained to me that, while he was thrilled to see me standing up for the sovereignty and self-determination of my people-as a "Third Worlder" -I had to

be constantly alert to the dangers of "glamorizing" my heritage and traditions. After all, he cautioned, it is absolutely essential to a "co rrect" understanding of the situation that one bear in mind that traditional Lakota and other indigenous spiritual forms of this hemisphere are aspects of stone age culture. and, of course, no sane human bei ng would consciously advocate a return to life in the stone age. One must be realistic, one must carefully separate "advanced" ideas fro m "backward" ideas; a "new age" is d awn ing. What was done to the I ndians was genocide, was horrible, but it's past; the duty of all I ndians now is to leave the past behind and move o n into the fut u re, a new social order is emerging and I ndians should take a n equal place in that order. That tore it. The guy s o u nded j ust like the head master at the old boarding school I was sent to after being kid napped fro m my parents by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Although you can be assured my oId head master was hardly trying to convert me to a belief in M arxism, both he and the M arxist were equally sure t hat they possessed the " keys " to solving the problems of native people . They were also, despite their prepackaged "solutions , "

equally and completely igno rant . of t he people they figured to "help". And they were equally disinterested in doing anything at all to overcome that little matter of abject ignorance.

M a r x i s m and La k ota Trad i t i o n

141

" L i s t e n , my frie n d , " I s a i d , "the only s o c i a l o r d e r I have t h e l e a s t bit of i n terest i n j o i n i n g is an i n d e p e n d e n t L a k ota Nation, the s a m e i n d e p e n d e n t Lak ota Nation

you fo l k s g u a ra nteed you s t a rted c o m i n g

you w o u l d n't mess a ro u n d with befo r e

us up

with bet ter ideas of h o w l,ve s h o u l d live our l i ves . " " Fr a n k , " h e re p l i e d (laughing, o f c o u rs e ) , " y o u ' re a h o peless ro mantic." " R o m a n tic, " I retorted (gett i n g r e a l l y h o t at h i s t o o s m ug a m u s e m e nt), "refers to R o me . I , i n c a s e it h a s n't d aw n e d o n y o u , a m an O g l a l a La k o t a . Y o u w i l l k i n d l y k e e p y o u r r a c i s t b u l l s h i t i n your mouth." " Let's c u t t h i s I n d i a n crap . . . " B u t , I was a l ready w a l k i n g a w a y r a p i d l y . H e was l u c k y I d i d n't p u t serious press ure on his j a w w i t h my fi s t . M aybe if, as a l w ay s , h e had n't been fo rty p o u n d s a n d fo u r i n c h e s b igge r t ha n m e , I would h a v e . And s o i t g o e s . . . . A n yway, at that p o i n t , M a rx i s m a n d I experie nced a decided parting o f t h e ways. Officially. U n o ffi c i a l l y I re m a i n e d i n t rigued by the " l i bera t i o n" rhetoric of M a r x i s m and the o bv i o u s willi ng n e s s of at least s o m e M a r x i s t s to p u t t h e i r a l l on t h e l i n e in effo rts to res i s t o p p res s i o n and to overt u r n the s t a t u s q u o . A n y o n e p o s sess i n g a n y fa m i l ia rity at a l l w i t h t h e c o n t e m p o ra ry c o l o n i a l conditions imposed On native peoples throughout the Americas by the status quo , s h o u l d be able to read ily u n d e r s t a n d t h e appeal fo r m e t h at c o mes with the i d e a o f overt u r n i n g it.

I

k e p t my eyes

o p e n , but I was (and re m a i n) wary. III. can't s a y t h a t I 've exactly b e e n o b s e s s ed w i t h t h i n k i n g a bout M a r x i s m s i nce I first i nvestigated i t . B u t , a s I s a i d , cert a i n a s pects o f i t retained a s o rt of natural a p p e a l . S o ,

I c o n s i d e red t h e

p ro b l e m s w h ich had t u rned u p i n m y d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h M a rxists, a t least fro m t i m e t o time. Basically,

I

c a m e u p w i t h what I t h i n k

a r e a couple o f maj o r p o i n t s . F i r s t , i t seems M a r x i s t s a re h u n g u p o n e x a c t l y t h e s a m e i d e a s of " p r ogress" a n d "deve l o p m e n t" t h a t a r e t h e gu i d i n g m o tives o f t h o s e they s e e k to o vert h r o w . They h a v e t h i s i d e a t h at L a k otas are ( or, at least, were) a p r i mi t i v e p e o p l e i n relat i o n to E u r o p e . Any rat i o n a l person would h a ve t o a s k w hat's s o "pri m i-

1 42


tive" a bout a people which managed to maintain a perpetually democratic way of life, which shared all social power equ itably between both sexes and various age groups, which considered war essentially a game rather than an excuse to indulge in the wanton slaughter of masses of people, which killed game only fo r food rather t han as a "sport," which managed to occupy its environment for thousands and t housands of years without sub stantially altering it (t hat is to say, destroyi ng it) . That same rational person would have to ask w hy any sane ind ividual would not ch oose to live that way if the chance were available, or aspire towards such an existence if the chance wasn't immediate. That same rational person would then have to ask what's so "advanced" about a culture which generates authoritarianism and diciatorship as a sociai norm, which deprives its women, its et hnic minorities, its eld ers and its youth of any true social power, which engages in the most lethal warfare on a regular basis and has left perhaps a half billion mangled bodies in its wake d u ring this century alone, which is eliminating entire species of plant and animal life forever and without real concern, and which has utterly devastated the environment of t his continent in approxi mately two centuries. Finally, that same rational person would have to ask what sort of lunatic would choose to switch fro m the first way of life to the second. The answer, of course, is probably even a lunatic wouldn't choose anything that crazy. The real question is why people trapped in the second way of life d o n't really sta rt seeking ways to get over into the first one. The answer is, perhaps, simply that they d on't know how. A n d , t hey're so used to pretend ing to have all t he answers (that attitude seems to be inbred within the second way of life) that t hey're afraid to ad m it they no longer know how. S o they-Christians capitalists , communists , fa sci s ts , the whole range of " ists " and "isms " making up Euro culture-de mand that we native people all become a part of their in s ani ty and fear .

Our way of life was and is possi ble only because of the values and attitudes instilled in us by our spirituality, our spiritual traditions . The difference between native spirituality here and

the Christian form which d o m inates Europe can be measured in the difference between the two ways of life.

M arxism a n d La kota Trad ition

1 43

B u t t h i n gs are n o t q uite this s i m p l e . The European put d own of nat i v e peoples is more complex . They call us primitive, but as we've see n , t here's no o bvious rati o n a l rea s o n fo r t his. And Europeans p r ide themselves o n their rationality. S o t h e re must be a less o bv i o u s reas o n . This seems t o be that Europeans have decided , generally speaki ng, that o u r p r i m i t iveness l i es i n the fact t h a t we ( l i k e most of t h e world) are "underdeve l o p e d . " N ow, it's not i m m e d i a tely clear what is meant by t h is e i t her. Clearly, Europea n s generally d o n't know e n o u g h a b o u t the su btleties-or even t h e c r u d ities-of o u r cultures t o h ave a n y idea a s to the state of o u r "devel op ment" i n t hose term s . S o the answer must lie in s o me s u perfi cial area which i s i m m e d iately v i s i bl e , even t o a total outsider. This l e a d s me back t o t h e "comrade's" observ a t i o n t h a t my people, t h e Lakota people, were a s t o ne age culture before the

Europeans came here. But how is that? Is there something stoney a bo ut o u r governmental forms or o u r medicine or o u r emotions, art, or foo d ? What i s t h i s stone age by which E u r o s d efin e our c u l t u re? W e l l , it seems that our weap o ns a n d tools were made of s t o n e , a material util ized i n its m o re o r less natural state. Thus we are a p r i m i t i v e people. N o m o re q u e s t i o n s t o a s k a b o u t us i n that. Thus t o o , a r e we u n de rdeve l o p e d . N o further questions there eit her. It c a n even be q u a nt i fied . Let's see now, the stone age occurred i n Europe about 1 0,000 years or so before Euros went s a i l i n g off to ""d i scover" s t o n e using p e o p l e s on the o t h e r s i d e of the A t l a n t i c . I t fol l ows, t h rough s o m e preoccupati o n o r demen tia, t ha t t h e p eople s t u m bled u p o n by a group of t h oroughly lost I t al i a n and S panish sailors must have been 1 0,000 years behind E u rope; a ft e r all, they d i d n't even p ossess muskets and steel swords wit h which to civilize savages . Gee, what retard s . Now, n o ne of t hese "enlighten ed" E u ropeans e v e r got a r o u n d t o a s king t he s avages whet h e r t here might , i n fact be a

reason why t h e Natives fancied using s t o ne tools and such. After a l l , no o n e could rightly ex pect an u n d e rdeve l o p e d , primitive savage to reason a bout much of anything. S u c h an assess ment, o n purely material terms, was clearly b orne o u t by the Aztec, I nca a n d M ayan (among other) cities " d iscovered" almost imme d iately by t h e con q u istadores. And s o , it has become a tradition i n Europe to view virtually everyone e l s e a s und erdeveloped,

1 44

M a rxism a n d Native A m erica n s

backward and retarde d . W h i c h isn't t o s a y that E u r o s eve r had m u c h reaso n for s u c h o d d behavio r , j us t that they were a n d are rath e r greed y folks o n t h e w h ole, a n d possessed of the wea p o ns ( p u re a n d s i m ple) t o e n fo rce t he i r peculiar stand ard of measure o n anyone who h a p p ened to be nearby. I t's t h e peculiarity o f the s t a n d a rd of meas u re here w h i c h stri kes me a s bei n g m o s t i m p o rt a n t . I t's a l l a matter of t h e " w i l l" and ability t o accu m u l a t e m a terial; t h e standard also indicates a need t o c o n stantly arra nge a n d rearra nge material. The sta n d a rd of measure seems t o me t o be t h a t the m o re compu lsive a c u l t u re can become i n terms o f gathering u p and rearranging material, t he m o re "advanced" it i s c o n s idered t o be. The m o re relaxed , at peace, and willing t o leave material t h i ngs ( beyond real ne�ds) alone a culture can be s h o w n t o b e , t h e m o re "back\\'ard" i t is considere d . Now, such "logic" i s rather o d d , t o say the lea s t . A

h u n d red years ago a great L a k o t a s p i ritual l e a d e r ,

Tatonka Yatonka (Sitting Bull), observed o f w h ites t h a t , "the l ove o f posses s i o n s i s a d isease w i t h them. " M y h u n c h i s t h a t , as usual, t h e s avage h i t the n a i l squarely o n t h e head. Of course, Sitting B u l l d i d n't know much about t h e psychoanalytic t h e o ries of Sigmund Freu d , and neither do I , but it would seem t hat Freud and t h e B u l l were in total agree m e n t on at least s o me t h i ngs : t h at t here is a certain n e u r o t i c b e h a v i o r characterized by a d ri v i n g c o m p ul s i o n t o gath e r u p material a n d play with i t and t hat i t ' s a n o bsess ive p reoccu p a t i o n w i t h p u re l y p hysical acc u m u lati o n a n d arrangement. T h e n a m e o f t h is p a rt i cular d isease o r disord e r o f the m i n d , Freud termed anal retention. Perhaps Freud c o n s i d ered t h i s t o be a d isease i n d i cat i n g a n "advanced" mental state. I ' m n ot really s u re about that. B u t it would see m q u ite p ossible, given t h e standard of measure it l i kes t o foist off o n other p e o p les, a nd which is really j ust t h e refle c t i o n o f its o w n c u l t u r a l value s t r u c t u re , t hat s omewhere i n t h e c o u rse o f i t s "develo p ment" t h e whole o f E u ro p e got stuck i n t h e ad o les cent and retentive stage. Perhaps if some d e e p t h i n ke r c a n sit me d own a n d prove to me t h a t the Lakota were a n d are c u l t u rally deprived because of their marked i n a b i l i t y t o i n d u lge i n s pectacular material d i s p lays like World War I I , I w o u l d be p r o m pted t o change my analysi s of all t h i s . B u t I consider t h e p r o bability of anyone really want i n g to attempt t o p rese n t such a case to be a bit l o w . Likewise, if

M a r x i s m a n d L a k o t a Trad it i o n

1 45

someone could show me how plastic Barbie Dolls , TV dinners , Porsch e 9 1 1 s , punk roc k , double-olympic-sized swimming pools c o n s t ru c t e d for the offi c e rs in S a i g o n , Cam R a h n Bay and D a n a n g , n a p a l m and c l u s t e r b o m b s , l a k es of a s p halt cal led p a r k i n g l o t s and all the rest o f t h e vast a r r a y o f l e t h a l a n d u s e l e s s E u ro p e a n material

reollJ'

benefi t s m y c u l t u ra l e s s e n ce o n e i o t a , I

m i g h t r ec o n s i d e r . B u t aga i n , I d o u bt v e r y m u c h t h a t a n y o n e wants t o tackle such an absurdity. I mean,

consider t h e

i m p licati o n s o f a t ra d it i o n w h i c h c o m

pels its p e o p l e to march across h a l f a c o n t i ne n t , e n gage i n a maj o r w a r t o s t e a l t h e l a n d fr o m my p e o p l e , e ngage i n g e n o c i d e i n o r d e r t o preserve t h e i r c o n q u e s t , and all p r i m a r i l y s o t h e y can d ig g o l d out of a s m a l l p o r t i o n o f that l a n d , t r a n s p o rt i t b a c k a c r o s s t h e c o n t i n e n t , a n d b u ry i t aga i n at F t . K n o x ! T h e v i r u l e nce of the d i sease S i t t i n g Bull s p o k e o f i s truly s t aggeri n g . A n d , l e s t M a r x i s t s t h i n k t hey've s o m e h o w evaded t h i s c ri t i q u e s i m p l y bec a u s e c a p i t a l i s m h e l d a n d h ol d s p o w e r d u r i ng t h e p e r i o d s I ' m t a l k i ng a b o u t , l e t me r e m i n d y o u t h a t i t w a s a " h a rd c o re" M a r x i s t w h o s o s m ugly i n fo r m e d me t h at I needed to very c a refu l l y b e c o m e "real i s t i c , " t o join the i n s a n ity wit h o u t "roman t ic" re s i s t a nce, a n d get ready fo r the " n e w o rd e r" c o m i n g u p . N o m a t t e r w h a t m u d t h e c a p i t a l i s t s m i g h t w i s h t o s l i n g at t he m e m o r y o f K a r l M a r x , t h e y c a n n e v e r d e n y h e was a g o o d E u r o p e a n : h e t ra n s p o rted t h e P u r i t a n i d e a l o f h eaven i n t h e n e x t l i fe t h ro u g h p r o d u c t ive w o r k in t h i s o n e i n t o a n i d e a l i s m pro c l a i m i n g heaven i s a t t a i n a bl e o n e a r t h t h r o ugh t h e

sartle p r o d u c

t i ve w o r k . I've h e a rd it s a i d t hat M a rx's greatest "ac h i e v e m e n t " w a s to c o m p le t e l y secu larize Christian dogma. I d o n't know if this eval u a t i o n is c o rrect. H o wever, I ' m cert a i n h e acco m p l i s hed this, and t h a t i t w a s a m aj o r t h e o retical turning p o i n t i n E u r o pe a n h i s t o r y . H e set o u t t o d e m o l i s h t h e o p i u m o f E u r o pe ' s p e o p l e , a n d I 'd c a l cu l a t e he s ucceeded . Wha tever s p i ri t u a l i t y r e m a i ned in C h ris t e n d o m d ied wit h M a r x . The anal ret e n t i v e c o m p le x which had a l ways b e e n s p u t t e r i n g in t h e Euro psyche became c o n c retized as "d i a l e c t i ca l material i s m " ;

materi a l i s m

has t h u s

become

the

E u ro p e a n rel i gi o n . T h e u p s hot o f a l l t h is i s t h a t , as a n o n- E u r o pe a n , an o u t

s i d e r J have trouble differentiating between Marxist s , capital i s t s , a n d a l l t h e o t h e r "ists . " J u s t l i k e I 'v e n e v e r r e a l l y b e e n a b l e t o ,

1 46


u n scram ble all t h e t h e o l ogical fi n e p o i n t s wh ich d is t i n g u i s h the vari o u s d e n o m i n a t i o n s o f the C h r i s t i a n religi o n . All C h rist i a n s s a y essentially t h e s a m e t h i n g t o m e : " Become C h ristia n . " A l l t h e m a t e r i a l i s t s h ave t h e i r o w n , esse n t i a l ly s i milar, message: "Get w i t h t h e p rogra m, beco m e a materialis t. " They are all prosely t i zers; that is, seeking to gain recru i t s , more recruits. A l l of t h e m w a n t me t o c hange; n o ne of t h e m care t o supp ort w h o I a m . A E u ropean i s a E u ropean is a Europea n .

Christians , capitalists , Marxists; all any o f them really want fro m me is my identity as a L a k o t a , as an "ot her. " All any of t h e m really w a n t o f t h e L a k o t a i s t h e i r i d e n tity as a people, as s o me t h i n g " o t h e r" than the u n dersta n d i ng (or m i s u n d ersta n d i ng) of E u r o pe . I, and my people, are j u s t s o much m o re material to be acc u m uiated a n d rea rranged i n t o s o m e t h i n g we weren't a n d never wanted to be . At t h i s p o i n t , having t h o u g h t t h e matter over, I arrived at a m o n u me n t a l l y " r o m a n t ic" c o n cl u s i o n . On a theoretical leve l , as wel l as a personal level, M a rx i s m and I were necessarily go i n g our separa t e ways. I may u l t i mately become fod d e r material fo r o ne a n o t h e r E u ropean p o w e r gro u p v y i n g fo r m ore t h i ngs to p l a y with, b u t n o t b y choice. t h a n k s . A n d as to t h e "u n rea l i s m " of m y d e c i s i o n t o a t t e m p t to p a r t i c i pate i n t h e c o n t i n u a t i o n of L a k o t a trad itions, values, a n d n o n-materi a l i s t spirituality, I will q u ote one of the M a rxists who d i d (and still d oes, i n a way) attract me, " Be realistic, demand t h e i m p os s i ble . " I believe Dany Co h n Bendit said that. A n d a nyway, t he im possi ble, a i n't. Despite my d is e n c h a n t m e nt with M a rx i s m a n d with the ge nera l potential for E u ropean c u l t u re to provide anything l i k e s o l u t i o n s t o t h e g l o b a l p r o b l e m s i t h a s created , I w a s intrigued when asked to pre p a re this paper. I decided t o back u p and s t u d y i n a b i t m o re dept h , t o read s o m e of t h e M arxist literat ure beyond the "fu nd a mentals" I'd earlier waded t h rough. M u c h of what I atte m pt e d , although I t h ought I u nd e rstood M a rx i s m t o be intended as a "wor k i n g class" t h e o ry , was couched in a langu age which ren d e red it th oroughly u n i nt e lligi bl e (much l i k e M a rx hi mself). I d o n't know t h a t I u n d e rstood all I read ; I d o n't k n o w that it's an i s s u e o n e way o r t h e o t h e r . Obfuscation is an as pect o f intellectual "games m a ns h i p" ; w h a t I ' m c oncerned with a r e p rac tical rea lities. I d o u bt t h a t I ever beca me profi c i e n t in "the mean ing of M a rcuse," if that matters t o anyone.

M arxism a n d L a k o t a Trad i t i o n

1 47

Two of the b o o k s I read d u ri n g t h i s p r e p a r a t i o n period d i d g r i p my a t t e n t i o n , h o wever; at least i n certai n secti o n s . These were Un orth odox Marxism by M ichael A l bert and R o bi n H a h nel ( S o u t h E n d Press, Boston, 1 97 8 ) a n d A lienation by Bertel l O i l m a n ( C a m bridge U n iversity P res s , 1 97 1 ) . The p a rts which rea l ly got m e excited were the sect i o n s w h e re t h e a u t h o rs descri be t h e M a rx i s t i d e a of dialect ics, which b o t h b o o k s bring out i n re m a r k a b ly s i m i l a r fas h i o n , a n d t h e mea n i n g o f w h i c h I ' d never been q u it e clear o n before. As A l bert and H a h nel i n p a rticular n ot e , M a r x i s t s a re often to be heard refe r r i n g to d ialectics t h i s a n d d ialect ical t h a t , b u t more oft e n t h a n n o t , t hey- never m i n d t h e r e s t o f u s " u n i n i t iated" types-d o n ' t r e a l l y s e e m to h a v e a h a n d l e o n w h a t t h i s s o mewhat m y s t i c a l w o r d is s u p posed t o m e a n ; it s e e m s to u s u a lly be j u st a n o t h e r o f t h e e t e r n a l s t r i n g o f l e ft w i n g b uzz w o r d s . S o it w a s a revelati o n t o r e a d s o me reas o n a b l y art i c u late d e fi n i t i o n of t h e fa m o u s d i a le c t i c . I was also q u ite t a k e n with s o me a s pects of O i l m a n's a l ie n a t i o n t h eo ry too, but I ' l l get t o t h at later. Now, if I may take the l i berty t o d o so, I'd like to b riefly lay o u t what i t was t hat struck me a b o u t the a bove a u t h ors' descrip tions o f how dia lectics work. All o f them seem t o agree t h a t i t i s a relational m e a n s of conceiving rea l i t y . That is t o say t h a t a ny a s pect o f reality m u s t be viewed as related , by v i rtue of existing at a l l , to a l l o t h e r as pects of reality. Nothing can be truly under s t o o d except i n re l a t i o n to eve ryt h i n g else. T h u s , t h e u niverse can be understood as a total of all its p a rt s , but the u nd e rs t a n d i n g of any of t h e p a rts d oes not p roduce a n u n d e rsta n d i n g of the u n i verse. I n fac t , unless t h e i n teract i o n of t h e u n i verse is u n dersto o d , a t rue u n d e rstandi ng of any s i ngle p a rt w i t h i n it c a n never rea l l y be a rrived a t . L i k e I said , dialectics would seem to be- by d e s i g n - a c o m pletely relatio nal way of t h i n k i ng; in o t her words, a view i n which a l l t h i ngs are rel at i o n s . D i alectics s e e m s t o be held o u t by M ar x i s t s a s the fo unda tion of a l l M ar x i a n p h ilosop hy, the way o f t h i n k i ng w h i c h d i s t i n g u i s hes M a rxism fro m other Euro pean p h i lo s o phies. M a r x ists p ri d e t h e mselves i n being a b le to a c h ieve a m ore total view of c i rc u m s t a nces than can their o p p o si t i o n , w h i c h tends to think i n t e r ms of m o re simplistic linear syst e m s , l i ke cause and effect. U p t o t h i s p o i n t , I have t o wholehea rted l y agree w i t h t h e M a rxist t h e ory, a t least in principle. But I wonder how many Marxists

1 48


have ever heard , much less u nderstood, the word ,

Metaku

yeayasi?

As I understand it , Christians close their prayers with t he word "a men," the meaning of which origi nally meant "all men," o r some such. The term seems rat her limited in its intended app lication (one might even term it "human chauvinist" in its implications) and clearly sexist in its structure, but that's the Christian church fo r you. The Lakota, on the other hand, close, open, and often punctuate their p rayers with the word Meta kuyeayasi, a generally accepted translation of which is "al l rela tions." And anyone thinking "all relations" is referring simply to fathers, mothers, cousins and brothers, is less than ignorant of the Lakota. These human relations are, of course, included . But, in the same se nse, s o a re the four legged ani mals, t he a n imals which crawl and swim and fly, the plants, the mounta ins, lakes, plains, rivers, the sky and sun, stars, moon, the four direct ions . . . in short, everything. Everyt hing in the universe is related wit h i n the trad ition o f La kota spirituality; everything i s relational, and can only be understood i n that way. The basis for t his u ndersta nding on the part of traditional Lakota culture is its spirituality. The relationality of the universe is a spiritual proposition, a force so complex and so powerful that it creates a sense of wonder and impotence in any sane human who truly considers it. Only t h rough the devot ion of the better part of a lifetime of intensive study under the su pervision of an array of seasoned teachers who have also devoted t heir lives to a lifetime of study can one h o pe to begin to fathom this complexity and power which we call Tunkashila, the Grandfat her, the U n i verse, the Great M ystery. This is why our tribal elders are neces sarily our spiritual leaders, our teachers: only they have had sufficient time to gain the k n owledge which allows even a limited understand ing of the G reat M ystery of the Relations. It may be a s o mewhat j olting announcement to make to doctrinaire Marxists who are convinced otherwise by the memor ization of some "revolutionary" tract or other, but Lakota spirit uality is-in perhaps t he only translational terms comprehensible to Marxists-the pursuit of a true understanding of the dialecti cal nature of the universe. That, and to conform our lives to living relationally, as a relati o n among relations; not at the expense of

M a r x i s m a n d La k o t a Trad i t i o n

1 49

o u r re l a t i o n s . R a t h e r t h a n being " a n o p iate" t o the L a k ota p e o p le , t he t rad i t i o n a l Lakota spirituality, o u r religion as it were, a c t u a l l y constit utes a s t i m ulant, a s o c i a l age nt req ui r i ng a per p e t u a l p u rs u i t of d ia l ectical k n o wledge and a ct i o n . T h i s , it seems t o me, is what M a rx i s t s a re always saying t hey're a b o u t . Meta kuyeayasi. on the o t h e r hand , is the c oncept u a l esse nce of L a k o t a s p i r i t u a l i ty ,

a

s p i r i t u a l i ty w h ich i s t h e p r a c t ica l e s s e n ce of L a k o t a

l i fe i t se l f.

I t a l s o seems to m e , the pr o b l e m he re is n o t m e re l y one of a o n e-s i d e d i n t e rcultural i g n o rance. R a t her. as A l bert a nd H a h n e l p o i nt o u t i n Unorthodox Marxism. even t h e " h eavyweight" M a rx ist t h e o rists seem at a loss to d efi ne t he d i fference between how t h e i r " d i alectics" works a n d h o w the m ore c o m plex systems o f l i n e a r l ogic work. I believe this is t ru e because M ar x i s m , at least i n t he fo rm avai l a b l e i n t h is c o u n t ry today, d oesn't work t h rough a d i alectical system o f t h o u g ht a t a l l . I t does w o r k t h rough t h e s a m e l ogical systems a s t h e " b o u rgeois" t he o rists i t s a y s i t o p p o ses; it takes a l i n e a r , c a u s e a n d effect, route t o u n d e rst a n d i n g p r o b l e m s and p r o p o s i n g s o l u t i o n s , r a t h e r t h a n a t r u l y relat i o n a l a p p r o ac h . S o , w h e n M a rxists c o me u p o n a c u l t ure w h i c h functions o n t h e b a s i s o f truly d i a l ectical u n d e rs t a n d i n g a n d t h o ught, t he y d o n't u n d e rs t a nd i t , t hey d o n't recog nize it, t he y c o n d e m n t he i r o w n a v o we d m e a n s t o rea s o n as bei n g " p r i m i t ive" a n d "under d evel o p e d . " As my M a rx i st acq uai n t a nces w o u l d say, t h e magni tude o f the "cont rad iction" he re is overwhel m i n g . A n d s o it goes . . . . I t s e e m s entirely reasonable t o m e t h a t , i f M arxists had ever really b e e n funct i o n i n g o n the basis of d i a lectics, t hey would have

been i n t e rested in fi n d i ng out e n o u g h a b o u t L a k o t a c u l t u re to d i scover w h a tever t h e exact relat i o n s h i p between t h e t rad i t i o n a n d t h e i rs m i g h t be. T h e y did n't. B u t i f t hey h a d , I ' m confident t h ey would (with s o m e astonis h ment, n o d o u bt) have d iscovered w h a t I 've n oted a bove. Of course, s i nce t he y have a l ways been p r o ne t o d i s m i ss L a k ota c u lt u re as b a c kward , before t he y i nves t igated its t rue n a t u re , t h e re's no way t he y c o u l d m a k e the su bse q u e n t d i s c o very. Perhaps even if t he y had e n gaged i n s o m e s e r i o u s a t t e m pts a t investigation t hey w o u l d still n o t have u n d e r s t o od t h e sig nifica nce of what they were seeing, because I ' m h a rdly c o nvi nced they yet u n d e rs t a n d or pract i ce dialectical reas o n i n g.

1 50

.

M a rxism a n d Nat i ve Americans

If M a rx i s t s h a d ever c o m e c l o s e t o c o m p re h e n d i n g the u n i verse i n a n y t h i ng r e m o t e l y rese m b l i ng a t r u ly re l at i o n a l sense, it see m s utterly inconceivable t ha t t hey could e ngage i n perpetuat ing t h e a r r ogance of l o g i c t hr o u g h which E u ro p e has ass i g n e d h u ma n i t y a mystical p l a c e o f i n h erent s u periority a m o n g l i v i n g t h i ngs. I t see m s e q u a l l y i m p o s s i b l e t h a t a relat i o n a l world view could acc o m o d ate t h e rat h e r s t u p i d notion t h a t t h e u niverse was s o me h o w d e s i gned a s the p l a y gr o u n d for h u m a n e x p l oita t i o n . S u c h e x a m ples c o u l d b e c o n t i n ued a t great lengt h . I n a n y e v e n t , t he q ue s t i o n m u s t be posed : if M ar x i s m h a s

been completely unable to discover t h e rather obvious

com

monality noted above between themselves and a Native tradi tion,what else has their " advanced learning " managed to miss? T h ; C' ; C' 1"\ I"'\ t ", n i rl l 43 r O I AC" t ; r. n I. ' 1 J. � 1 0.) I I V I. " I ' 1 '-' .1 \'< '1 "' '''' '' '' ' '-' 1 ''' .

Tf

J. .l

� A .." r v ; C' t C' , Y 1. U l J"Io. I .., .. J

tr111" 11. 1 U ' )

ho l ; a, , , ,o � i ..,. 1 ,o.,.... t 1 ""C' i c U '"' I .l '-' '' .... U J U , '"' '"' " . ..... .'} l J

the m o s t s o p h is t i c a t e d " m o d e o f reason" ever d iscovere d by h u m a n ity ( a n d , of c o u rs e , t h i s d i sc overy is held to have b e e n m a d e i n E u r o p e - t h e way E u ro p e " d i s c overed" A m e rica), t he n t hey are h a r d l y i n a p o s i t i o n t o c o n d e m n a c u l t u re w h i c h fu n c t i o n s o n t h a t basis a s s o m et h i n g t o be "transce n d e d " o u t of h a n d . R a t h e r t h a n b e i n g c o n d e m n e d a s " p r i m it ive", s u c h cu l t u re s m us t be c o n s i d e red -if M a r x i s t d e fi n i t i o n is n o t t o b e fla t l y self-co n t r a d i ct o r y - a s "ad v a n ce d " i n terms o f t h e i r " m o d e s o f reaso n . " E u r o pe pales t o retard a t i o n b y c o m p a r is o n . T h e si mp l e fa ct i s t h a t t h e L a k o t a p o ssessed a fu l l y fu n c t i o n a l l i feway based i n d i a le c t i ca l k n o w l e d ge t h o u s a n d s o f years befo re M a rx, and it re m a i n s i n m a t u red effect while M arx's d esce ndents a re s t i l l atte m p t i n g to a ct u a l i z e t hei r d i a l e c t i c a l r h e t o r i c . We h a v e m uch to teach o u r prot o-d i a lectical frie n d s .

v. T h i s l e a d s me to t he s e c o n d p o i nt of real interest I d iscovered in read i n g t h e b o o k s I m e n t i o n e d e a rl i e r . This is that a good d e a l o f t h e cu rrent M a r x i s t l i t e ra t u re see m s preoccup ied w i t h a s o c i a l p h e n o m e n o n c a l l e d " a l ie n a t i o n . " I fi n d t h at, acc o rd i n g to M a rx ists, a l i e n a t i o n re p re se n t s an e p i d e m i c psyc h o l ogical d i s o r d e r a m o ng m e m bers of m o d e rn "devel o ped" i n d ustrial s ociet ies s u c h as t h e U n ited States a n d w e s t e r n E u rope. This s i t u a t i o n , t hey a t t r i bute to t h e social c o n d i t i o n s of "late capita l i s m" ; a t rue c u re t o t h e d is o rd e r o f a l i e n at i o n is the e l i m i n a t i o n of c a p i ta l i s m ; s t e p s l e a d i n g t o t h e e l i m i n a t i o n of a l i e n a-

M ar x i s m a n d L a k o t a T ra d i t i o n

151

t i o n are i n e ffect s t e p s l e a d i n g t o t h e e l i m i na t i o n o f c a p i t a l is m . I n t h i s sense , revolu t i o n becomes a m a t t e r o f p s y c h o l ogical healt h . As fa r a s t h i s goes, I have t o agree. B ut , i t seems a n y o n e who w a n t e d to c o u l d r e a c h a s i m i l a r concl u s i o n c o nce r n i n g soci a l / psyc h ological c o n d i t i o n s i n east ern E u r o p e , t he U S S R , etc. The p e o p l e in t h os e c o u n t ries seem about as a l i e nated in t he i r l i ves as p e o p l e in the c a p it a l i s t s oci eties. S o m e M a rx i s t t h e o r i s t s h a ve n o t e d t h i s fac t o r and have developed a d e fense aga i n s t s u c h a rg u m e n t s . The d egree o f alien a t i o n e x p e rienced i n t h e U S S R a n d e l s e w here, t h e y say, c o rre s p o n d s to t h e degree to w h i c h the S oviets a n d o t hers h ave a b a n d o ned M a r x i st ideals a n d s u bstituted a m o d i fi e d for m of "state capita l i s m " in thei r p l ace. I n other w o rd s , c a p i t a l i s m i s still the problem.

This seems a n odd a nd contorted argu me n t a t bes t . Exactly w hat i s p r e s c r i bed t h ro u g h M a r x i s m w h i c h hag b e e n p erverted in R us s i a is not rea l l y , o r at least not c o n v i n ci ngly e x p la i ned . M ar x called for centralizat io n / rat i o n a l i z at i o n

of s ociety, and t h e

S o v i e t s have central ized and ratio n a lized . M a r x c a l l e d for e l i m i nat i o n of a l l social classes except t h e w o r k i n g class or "proleta riat . " and the S oviets have e l i m i nated w h ole s oc i a l classes i n p u r s u it o f t h a t obj ective. C o m p l a i n t s h a ve a ri s e n t hat t h e S oviets have est a b l i s hed a massive bureaucracy, a p o l ic e a p paratus, h uge m i l i t a ry b u d get and s t a n d i n g army; M a r x never c a l l e d for t hese t h i ngs. B u t t hen, he never said they s h o u l d n't be established either, n o t w h e n maj o r capitalist p o we rs still e x i s t t o c o n front t he M a rxist c o u ntries. The m ore s o p h i st i cated Marxist t h e o rists tend t o d i s miss t h e l atter conditions noted above a s being " aberrant " o r by-products of L e n i n ' s " d i stort i o n" of M ar x i s m . I ' m n o t e n o u g h of a M arxist s c h o l a r t o a rgue t h e finer points of "revi s i o n i s m . " but I d o know t h a t every M a r x i s t revo l u t i o n i n h i s t o ry h a s bee n based o n t h e Le n i n ist v e r s i o n of M a r x . T h a t i n c l u d es M a o's revolution in China, C a s t ro's in Cuba. H o C h i M i n h's m ov e m e n t i n Viet nam, Kim e l S u ng i n K o rea, etc. I've neve r h e a r d o f a rev o l u t i o n p ulled off by t h e Frankfurt School, existential M ar x i s m , p henomono l ogical M a rx i s m , struct u ral M a rx i s m , e t c . The q u es t i o n of which b r a n d i s really M a r x i s m is a b o u t a s a b s u rd a s w hi c h d en o m i n a t i o n is really Christian; even M ar x was p ragmatic e nough t o a l l o w v a l i d i t y to t h a t grou p which s ho w e d a b i l ity t o exercise

1 52


And that group, among M arxists, is and has always been the Leninists. S o, if capitalism is n ot real ly the root of the problem socialist so cieties s hare with late capitalist societies, there must be some thing else, something s hared in common. And that, it would seem to me, is industrialism. That, and the peculiar social forms gener ated by the ind ustrial process itself. Centralization is a dynamic shared, of necessity, by any industrial / industrializing society. It

po wer.

is n o t capitalist o r communist, it is simply a n industrial by-prod

uct. Rationalization is another factor; I don't believe assembly line workers are alienated s o much by the abstract notion of t heir "distanci ng" from their "product" or "profit" so much as they are alienated by the sheer physical misery of being trapped in a factory. Period. Yet rationalizatio n is a necessity of ind ustrializa tion, whether the factories be capitalist or communist. The pro blem at hand here d oes not exist within the left / right paradigm which underpins all M arxist political analysis. Instead, it goes back d irectly to M arxism's rhetorical voicing of a "dialec tical" position, while never having established a dialectical vision to match . If M arxism is t o be forever forced into the constraints of its opponent's logic and assumptions, then nobody should wonder why the end result of M arxism is pretty much the same as the end result of capitalism: industrialization, alienation and hu man extinction. Alienation is j ust one of the aspects of a cu l t u re-w ide a n a l - rete n t i ve neuros is w h ich I referred to earlier a nd of which contemporary M arxism is itself a part. Now, I want to d o u ble back again to my Lakota culture by way of making a contrast. As I n oted in the preced ing sect i o n , Lakota culture exists o n t he basis of a relational or d ialectical world-view as thoroughly worked out as the linear view is in Europe. This is not a m ode of thought we've come up with and are attempting to master, it is a mode we've practiced for t h o u sands of years. You might say Lakota culture has d ialectics down to a fine art. And, p recisely because of this, questions of aliena tion have no meaning to us. We, as a people (within t he traditional cultural view, at any rate), view ourselves only in direct (natural) relation to every thing else at all times. Thus, we cann o t feel the sort of distance indicated in the notion of alienation, either between each other as people, or between ourselves and any aspect of the universe.

M a r x i s m a n d L a k o t a Trad i t i o n

1 53

A l iena t i o n is an i m p o s s i b i l i t y w it h i n t ra d i t i o n a l La k o t a culture; we a re p revented , by t h e way we view reality, fro m t a k i n g t h ose steps which would, sooner o r later, p r o d u ce t he c o n d i t i o n o f a l i e n at i o n . T h u s , we are p revented , d i re c t l y a n d c o n c retely, fro m u n d e rt a k i n g a l ienating and self- d e s t r u c t ive s t e p s s u c h a s i n d us t r i a l iza t i o n . La k ota c u l t u re, in its t rad i t i o n a l for m , e n d s w h e re t h e real p o s s i b i l i ty of alienat i o n begi n s . T h e s o l u t i o n t o a l ie n a t i o n lies in d ialectical v i s i o n applied. I f M a rxism had ever devel o p e d t h e d i alectical w o rld-view it c l a i m s a s its own, i t c o u l d not help but a rrive a t a very s i m i l a r u n d e rst a n d i ng. To the e x t e n t that it h a s n o t , it re mains fu l l y a part of t he p rocess it o p p oses ( i n t h e o ry). A l ie n a t i o n is j u s t one m o re i n d ication of t h e fai l u re o f M a r x i s m t o devel o p t h e d ialecti cal i n s i g h t s it itself offers as t h e only correct vis i o n of h u m a n ity, i n s i g hts h e l d by "pri m i t ive" n o n- E u ro p e a n c u l t u res all a l o n g. U nt il M a rx i s m is prepared to d iscard i t s s e l f-c o n grat u l a t o ry a n d a rr o g a n t ass u m p t i o ns , s t o p p r o s e l y t i z i n g i t s "new" and mis guided fai t h . a n d t ranscend t h e biases o f its origins by listening to p e o ples a l ready possessing the correct v i s i o n s o f h u m a nity. i t can d o no m o re t ha n fa i l . I t has, t o date, predetermined i t s own fa i l u re t hrough i t s b l i n d l y s t u p i d E u r o c h a u vi n i s m , a c h a racte ris t i c be h a v i o r n o t u s u a l l y d i s t i nguis h a b l e to n o n- E u r o peans fr o m a n y o t h e r caucasoid j i ngoism. VI. I n c l o s i ng,

I

feel t h e n eed t o o ffe r s o m et h i n g i n the way of

p o s itive c o m mentary rat her t han s i m p ly leaving m a t ters at t h e l e v e l of c r i t i c i s m . What

I h a v e i n m i nd

is t o p o i n t t o a means w i t h

w h i c h M a rxists (and o t hers, for t hat matter) m i g h t overc o m e s o me o f t h e m e n t a l and t heoretical p r o blems I ' v e t r i e d to d e s c r i be ; m i g h t be able t o get past t h e et h n oce n t r i s m o f t heir t h e o ry a n d practice, might begi n to a t t a i n a n actual d i alectical v i s i o n , m ight rea l l y begin to a d d ress t he disease o f a l i e n at i o n . I t s e e m s t h a t o n e o f t h e m o re p r o m is i n g aspects o f c o n t e m p o rary M a r x i s m i n t h e U n ited S t at e s is a relatively new a re a c a l led " R a d i c a l Thera p y" or " R T' . The b a s i s o f t h i s , as

I

u n d e r

s t a n d it, is t hat g r o u p s of M ar x i s t s g a t h e r a r o u n d c o m m o n i n terests a n d e m p l o y various t e c h n i q u e s t hrough w h i c h they hope c o l lectively t o overco me the o p p re s s i v e "false consci o u s n e s s" t h e y a s s ociate w i t h having l iv e d t he i r l ives i n capitalist

1 54


society. Through this p rocess they h o pe to establish more effec tive and penetrati ng s ocial analysis, and thereby discover ways to reconcile their lives to t heir analytically generated course of action. This, they believe, will make t hem better Marx ists, they will necessarily be better human beings since Marxism is the theory which seeks to overcome the conditions which lead to their need for therapy in t he first place. This is simplified but, I t h ink, true. One of the pri mary t herapeutic means employed to this end is ( by whatever name or jargo n it is described by the various p racticing groups) the old Maoist technique called "criticism / self-criticism. " This is where a group sharing a common theoreti cal view (in the M aoist case, cad res of communist troops and party members) gathers in order to straighten out its collective analysis and resulting performance. A particular member will be sCIected to receive "constructive criticism" of his / her thinking and activities. Upon co mpletion of t he group analysis, the selected member d oes not defend him/ herself against the group critique; the group consensus view is given as inherently superior to "individ ualist" views. The selected member, rat her than launching into self-serving polemics , furthers the grou p's obser vations / reco mmendations by engagi ng in self-criticism (aga i n constructive) designed to reconcile t he individual view to the group view, the individual line of action to the needs of the gro u p , a n d so on. T h e function of a l l t his is t o p roduce t h e tightest, most effective possi ble cadres on the one hand, the most confident and securely developed people on the other. Through each individ ual, so the group; through the gro up, s o -eventually-society. I n rud imentary form, t his is dialectical o r relat ional (if only between people). Criticism/ self-criticism has been a very useful tool towards revolution for Leninists. It may become so for non-Leni nist Marxists. I n any event, the more o r less continuous processing o f thought against a collective sounding board and the conscious effort to live our lives in the best hu manly possible way (always in direct conj unction with others) is i narguably to the good . People engaging in R T, at least in this form, are clearly attempting to put their bodies and minds where their mouths are, they are attempt ing to become the best possible human beings in the sense that they (through their t heory) understand this.

Marxism a n d La k o t a Tra d i t i o n

1 55

C o n s id e r , now, the principle of t he L a k o t a sweatlod ge. I f

Metakuyeayasi

is t h e conceptual m o d e u nd e r l y i n g a l l La k ot a

s p i r it u a l i t y , t he sweat l odge m ig h t b e v i e w e d a s

the fu ndamental

and c o n s i s t e n t physical act ivity i n v o l ved i n what M a rxists would call o u r "praxis." I t i s wit h i n t h e s w e a t l o d ge t h a t gro u p s o f L a k otas rec o ncile t h e i r day t o d a y l i v i n g with the relat i o n a l world-v i e w . T h i s occu rs both i n terms of m e n t a l o u t l o o k a n d growt h , a n d i n terms of the p hysical acti v i t i e s s p r i n g i n g fro m t h is o u t l o o k . T h i s also occurs both in t e r m s of t he g r o u p i nteract i o n i nvolved a n d through individual effo rts t o a c h ieve a rec o n c i l i a t i o n w i t h t h e group (the people, u l t i m ately) b o t h p h y s ically a n d mentally. The sweat itself facilitates t h o ught, i nt r o s pecti o n a n d rea l i za t i o n . T h e sweatlodge , w h i c h t h e L a k o t a h a ve possessed a n d used in t h is way fo r t h o usand s o f years, i s not u n l i ke t h e pri nci p l e o f critici s m / self-criticism l a t e l y d iscovered b y M arx Ism. B u t , beyond the i m med iate si m i l a rities, t here a r e i mportant d i fferen ce s . First, and perhaps m o s t o bv i o u s , i s the fact t h a t t he Lakota h ave had

vastly

lo nger t o pe rfect h o w s u c h an activity

m ig h t most e ffectively fu nct i o n . S e c o n d , a n d less i m med iately obvious, i s that the Lakota employ t his means t o reconcile or seek harm o n y w i t h

all re lations

(rather than only with p e o p le) w h i c h

reflects a m o re mature d ialectical v is i o n . T h i r d , t h e sweatlodge i s a g u id i n g fo rce a m o n g

all

t radit i o n a l La k o t a s , r a t h e r t h a n a n

" i n n o v a tive n e w idea" which i t s practi t i o ners h o p e might "catch on." A n d fi n ally, perhaps most i m p o rt a ntly, t h e Lakota fu lly rec o g n i z e t he s p i ritual a s pects of t h e s w e a t l o d ge e x perience; t hey possess no fal sely arrogant n o t i o n s o f t h e i r o w n mental o m n ip o te nce; t h e y call their s pirituality

spirituality,

not

science.

W h a t I h o pe is made clear t h r o u g h t h i s final c ross-c u l t u ral c o m p a ri s o n i s that t here i s at least o n e practical tendency between "advanced" M a rxist and " p r i m i t ive" La k o t a praxis, one w h i ch I believe would prove extremely reward i n g t o M a rx is ts and M a r x i s m if it were purs ued t o i t s ful l p otential. I b e l i eve it was L e n i n w h o said s o me t h i ng t o t he effect t h a t " w i t h o u t revo lutionary theory t h e re can be n o revolutio nary pract i ce . " I t s t ands to reaso n , t h e n , t h a t a c r i p p led a n d v i s i o n less t h eory c a n yield o n l y a crippled a n d v i s i o nless "revolut i o n . " W h a t I s uggest i n t h i s conclud i n g sect i o n is n o t o ffered as a

1 56


p a nacea, but a mea n s - b o t h tactical and strategic-to correct a d e fective t h e o ry w h i c h seems to me t o be barring pos itive act i o n . A truly revolutionary theory m u s t b e brought into being if t h e r e i s to be revolutio nary act i o n . Perhaps w h a t is m o st i m m e diately needed is s i m p l y fo r Rad ical T herapy p e o p l e to begi n a s king the right quest i o n s , t o attempt t o a t least consider whether t here are not cultural b l i n d e r s t hey n e e d to d is ca rd . They m i g h t start with playing "devil's advocate" a m ong t h e mselves a n d seriously cha llenging the h a l l o wed n o t i o n t hat p rod uctive a b i l i t i e s constitute t h e measu re o f h u ma n achievement. Fro m that, they might proceed to questi o n w hether t h e u l t i mate hege m o n y o f p roduction relati o n s is rea l l y

t h e most desirable fo rm of h u m a n s o cial o rganizat i o n . I f t he s e

two q uestions

ca n

b e successfully dealt w i t h , I believe i t w i n

become o bviously necessary for R T groups to seek answers t o why prod ucti o n has a s s u m e d s u c h overridi n g i m portance i n t h e trad itional M arxian "dia lectical" world-view, and how s u c h a world-view d i ffers-at a root level -fr o m t hat fielded by ca p i t a l i s m . A t t h i s p o i n t , it s e e m s t o m e that the nature of M arx i s m ' s

o wn alienati o n w i l l beco me clear t o Radical Therapists. T h e stage w i l l be s e t for a breakt hrough . . . .

Radical Therapy will then be in a position, as a s ocio int ellec tual process, t o begin t o generate a theory capable of facing t h e -

t e s t of global considera t i o ns . A t t hat p oint, I foresee t h a t t h e l a c k of pre fa bricated a n s wers t h u s c o n fronted by RT p e o p l e w i l l b e rather traumatizing. They w i l l b e t r u l y cast i ng a b o u t for a w a y out of the void . T h e y w i l l be spiritualized by t h e overwhe l m i n g complexity a n d awes o meness of the q uestions before them . T h e cultures a n d trad itions of other peoples, which E uro peans have h istorically chosen t o d e ride and ignore, shall t he n e merge, revea led as brilliantly co herent a n d possessed of d e p t h s of understand ing u n k n o w n to E u rope. I t w i l l become clear t h a t t h ose aspects of c o m p re h e n s i o n o nly now dawning among E u ro peans have truly ancient app lications elsewhere. Europe, after all, is the primitive culture, tragically arrested in the co urse of its development by a n anal fi x a t i o n ; a pathetic bully, s o to s p e a k . Through RT, s u c h a p o s s i bility e x i s t s . It is the point of departure to a "new age," a t i me w h e n - l i k e water seeking its own Ieve l the d o m i nance o f European i rrat i o nalism is finally reconciled t o

M a r x i s m and La k o t a Tra d i t i o n

1 57

i t s rightful relat i o n s h i p s w i t h t h e rem a i n i n g c u l t u res of hu m a n i t y a n d t a k e s i t s rat i o n a l pl ace with i n t h e relat i o n s o f t h e u niverse. This i s not t o say t h a t I a m a d v o c a t i n g t h at masses of n o n - La k ot a s s u d d e n l y attempt -e i t h e r l i t er a l l y or fig u r a t ively to bec o m e Lakota. O r t h a t they a tt e m p t to b e c o m e C h i n e s e , T i b e t a n , B a n t u o r a n y t h i n g else t hey a re n o t a n d c a n n o t be. R a t he r , i t i s t o say t h a t the Lakota and other n o n- E u ro p e a n

c u l t ures claim no monopoly o r copyright o n vision . They never d i d . It is e n t i rely p o s s i ble for E u r o p e a n s , e s p e c i a l l y in t h e i n i t i a l l y s m all g r o u p s i m p l ied by a s t r u c t u r e s u c h a s R a d i c a l T h e r a p y , t o ass i m il a t e v i s i o n as a c u l t u rally benefi c i a l c h a racte r i s t i c . This i s i n m u ch t h e s a m e s e n s e t h at the L a k o ta o n c e a s s i mi l a t e d t h e h o rse into t h e i r c u l ture. E u r o peans m u s t d e ve l o p a n a n t i d ote to t he i r c u l t u ra l c h a u v i n i s m and b l i n d ness w h i l e r et a i n i n g t he i r i d e n t i t ies a s E u r o pe a n s ; j u s t as we Lakota have had t o a d a pt t o vastly changing c o n d i t i o n s w h i l e ret a i n i n g

our

i d e n t i t ie s . It i s n o easy

task. W o rse, i n t h e s i t u a t i o n add ressed h e r e , i t may u l t i mately p r o ve i m p o s s i b l e . The rea l prereq u i s i t e to begi n n i ng , a s with any o t he r v i r u l e n t mental d is o rder, i s that the patient first

edge

t h a t a d is o r d e r e x i s t s , and t hat h e / s h e

A d m is s i o n o f fu n d a mental incorrectness i n

acknowl desires t o be c u re d . anything has never

been d e m o n s trated t o be a E u r o pean c u l t u ra l c h a racteristic. A way m u s t be fou n d o u t of s u c h a n i m p as s e . s i ngle m os t

therapeutic benefi t

R T c o u ld

That

w o uld be t he

best o w u p o n its

ad here n t s . A n d , a s adva nced p e o p l e s a re w o n t t o d o , t h e La k ota w i l l n o d o u bt b e w i l l i ng t o assist t h e i r n e u r o t i c a l l y ret a rd e d relat i o n s t o a c h i e ve a m o re a d u l t a n d w h o l e s o m e o u t l o o k o n reality. I t m a y be a s s u m ed t h a t o t h e r n o n-European c u l t u res w i l l d o l i k e w i s e .

We m u s t , a s h u m a n beings, build u p o n o u r c o m m o n s t rengths , n o t s u cc u m b to i n s a n ity and wea k n e s s . We have m u c h to learn, m u c h t o do, as equal partners w i t h the rest o f creat i o n . And we m u s t d o it t o get h e r .

8 Marx Versus Marxism Bill Tabb

O n t he S alt R iver Reservation abuting Phoenix, Arizona is an industrial park where young Pima I nd i a ns can learn urban occupations. " I n dustrial and commercial development offers the best possibility for making this reserva t i o n self-supporting" H e r shel A n d rews, a Pima I ndian who is p resident o f the Salt R iver Pima- M aricopa I ndian Community tells the Wall Street Journal. M r. A n d rews likes to talk about "stan d i n g o n your feet." That isn't easy, says the Journal, on a reservati o n that gets half its support m oney fro m the federal government . . . at last count, 3 8 % of the more than one million U . S . I nd ians lived o n incomes below t h e poverty line. "Among the reasons," says a 1 976 government study, is "the sca rcity of i n dustrial o r com merical j o bs nearby." 1 I t' s the old familiar story. I nd i a n s are poor because they won't move with the times. They need to get training and j o bs in t he modern worl d . The buffalo's gone a n d I nd ians have become lazy, d r u n k e n wards of the welfare system . But a few leaders are trying to help their people, explain the realities of life, help them compete in the modern world. Cliff M a n uel, a Pima computer expert a c k nowledges the disappearance of tribal traditions. " But," h e says, "we're surrounded . We must compete in all sec t o rs with people in Phoenix. To do that, we must h ave A nglo ed ucatio n s and we must modernize. How d o you d o that and still retain old tribal traditions? That's the q uestion," he says. "Maybe you can't turn back the clock. " 1 59


1 60

Yes, friends there you have it, from the mouth of a gen u i n e P i m a I nd i a n computer expert. S a y , those people are s o u n d i ng l i k e real A merica ns. The Wall Street Journal welco mes a l l y o u m i n i m u m wage i n d ustrial reservation I ndians t o t h e American workfo rce, a little Third W orId p rofit center j ust miles fro m d owntown Phoenix. A c o unter perspective i s offe red i n the Marxist trad i t i o n . "I mperialism, t he penetrati o n of Western capitalism i n t o native cultures fo r purposes of exploiting the i r labor power and a p pro priating t heir raw materials represents u neven excha nge forced on the colo nized by the capitalists, usually through t he use of fo rce and economic blac k m a i l . " M arxists stand wit h the colo n i zed peoples of t he world : "Oppressed minorities at home a n d e x p l o ited workers everywhere agai n s t the system t hat oppresses us all". '" S u c h h owever was n o t the s t ance of the father of scientifi c socialism, K a r l M a r x . H is I nd i a n critics are q uite right, I t h i n k . M arx beli eved t h e barbaric races s h o uld b e civil ized , made p a rt of the capitalist syste m , t u rn e d i n t o wo rkers because then t h e y c o u ld become proletarian revolut i o naries and h e l p bring about socialism. In t his essay, I a rgue that Marx took such a view, that Native A m erica ns have every r i ght to resent h i s position, and t hat t o o m a n y M a rxists today s t i l l accept what is a narrow a n d unsati sfac t o ry analysis of i n d ige n o u s cultures. I also a rgue t hat t he Native A mericans and other land based peoples have much to teach M a rxists if we a re w i l l i n g t o listen, but also t hat M arxism (as I u n derstand t hat evolving method of analysis and praxis) a l ready accepts, in its most p rogress i ve variants, much of the I n d i a n critique of industriali s m a n d c o m m o d ity producti o n . T h e cri tique of the Native A m e r i can contribut o rs to this book may need not be a d i s m issal of M arxism, but can and should be i ncorpo rated by M arxists. M ar x i s m as a methodology and as revolu t i onary praxis would be the gainer if M arxists could be m o re o pe n to such criticis m . The n a m e calling and cheap dismissals of other views o n the part of some "left" contributors to this volume d oes not d i m i ni s h the need t o seek the intrinsic merit in the p o i nts of v i ew. ·The q uote" are meant to suggest the formulaic nature of the a nalysis.

Marx Versus M a r x i s m

161

Marx 's Eurocentrism M a r x 's p o l i t ical e c o n o m y was based o n h i s s t u d y o f E u r o p e .

H e e x p e c t e d , i n t h e w o r d s o f t he

Manifesto.

t hat Eu ropean

ca p it a l i s m o v e r t i me "d ra ws a l l , even t h e m o s t b a r b a r i a n n a t i o n s i n t o c i v i l i z a t i o n . " The c he a p p rices o f i t s c o m m o d i t i es a re t h e h e a vy a r t i l l e ry w i t h w h i c h i t batters d o w n a l l C h i n e s e wal l s , w i t h w h i c h i t fo rces t h e b a r b a r i a n's i n te n se l y o b s t i n a t e h a t red o f fo r e i g n e rs t o c a p i t u late.

I t com pels a l l

e x t i n ct i o n , t o a d o p t t h e b o u rg e o i s

nations, o n pain of

m o d e o f p r o d u ct i o n , t o

bec o m e b o u rge o i s t h e mselves. I n d ee d Marx a n d E n ge l s ge n e ra l l y rooted fo r t h e c o l o n i a l i s t p o we r s , b e l i e v i n g t h a t i n t h e u l t i m a t e s e n s e , a n d d es p i t e t h e i r h y p oc ri t i c a l

rat i o n a les

o f God

and

c i v i l iz i n g

mission as a

w o e fu l l y i n a d e q u a t e c o v e r fo r gree d , c o l o n i a l i s m d id represent a s t a t e t h a t n o n - w e s t e r n c o u n t r i e s neces s a r i l y h a d t o p a s s t h r o u g h . M a rx d i d w r i te: E n g l a n d has t o fu lfi l l a d o u b l e m i s s i o n i n I n d i a : one d e s t r u c t ive, the o t h e r rege ne ra t i n g t h e a n n i h i l a t i o n o f old

Asiatic society, and the laying o f t he material

fo u n d a t i o n o f Western s o c i e t y i n A s i a . E n gels w r o t e ,

T h e c o n q uest of A l g e r i a i s a n i m p o rt a n t a n d fo rtunate fact fo r the p rogress o f civilizat i o n . W h y w o uld n't t h o u g h t ful N a t ive A me r i c a n s rej ect M a rx?

M a r x , i t seems p r o bable, would have rej ected them, caIlin g them p ri mit ives and barbarians, bac k w a rd a n d i n need of c o l o n izing by E u r o p e a n s . M a rx bel ieved ca p i t a l i s m was d riven t o expand a n d e n c o m pass the whole world within i t s p r o d uctive syste m , but t h at its ve ry growth could n o t be s u s t a i ned and as it ran o u t of r o o m t o e x p a nd i t w o u l d fi n d t h e c o n d i t i o n s fo r i t s co n t i n u ed e x i s t e n c e u n dermi ned . Without being able to e x p a n d further, it

w o u l d t u rn i n u p o n itself, become p a r a s i t i c a n d u n d ermine its a b i lity to recreate itself. The d rive t o i n c rease p r o fits would lead i t t o irra t i o n a l waste of res o u rces, its a b i l i t y t o p ro d uce would ex ceed i t s c apacity t o create markets, costs would rise, i ncreas i n gly m o re resources would be req uired to p r o d u ce. H e believed

162

M a rxis m and Native A mericans

the gap between what was p o s s i b l e and what could be prod uced w o u ld widen as ca p it a l i s m bec a m e overripe. H aving created vas t technol ogical capacities, capita l i s m wo uld itself ulti mately s t a n d in the w a y of t h e i r rat i o n a l u t i l ization. In a world b r o u g h t t o a n a d vanced stage i n the deve l o p m e n t o f t h e forces o f p r o d u ct i o n w o r k i ng p e o p l e w o u l d s e e that w h a t s t o o d i n the w a y of a better l i fe w a s t h e irrati o n al eco n o m i c system w h i c h k e p t h u m a n p o t e n t i a l fro m being realized . I t h i n k i n t h i s analysis M a r x w a s c orrect. W e see a s i ngle wo rld ec o n o m y e mergi ng, p u l l i n g l a n d based p e o p les o n every continent i n t o t h e cas h nex u s . C o m m o d ities fin d t h e i r way eve rywhere forcing fo r merly self-sufficient p e o p le to enter the market in order t o p u r chase i t e m s they c o m e t o see as n ecessary to their existence. F o r u nderstanding t h i s process o f c a p itaiist acc u m ulat i o n , M a r x i s m is a most useful a n alytical t o o l . A t t he same t i m e t h e re a re a n u mber of crit i c i s ms N a t ive A me r i c a n s i n this vol u m e make o f t r a d i t i o n a l M a rxism w h i c h I believe m u s t be c o n s i d ered s e r i o u s ly . The fi rst is the questio n o f w h e t h e r the p r o b l e m i s m e rely capita l i s m o r whether it i s also i n d us t rialis m per se. Whether alienation, fo r example, is o n ly a result of estrange m e n t fro m o w n e r s h i p and control of the means of prod uction or w h et h e r cert a i n j o bs a re by their nature a l i e n at ing and cert a i n "efficient" ways of organizing work are i n t r i n s i cally d e h u m a n izing; w hether fa ctories i n the S oviet U n i o n d o n o t h a v e ·s i milarly a l i e n a t i n g a s p e c t s to those i n capital ist s o ciet i e s . Le n i n , i n his d e s i re to m o d ern ize, adopted a l m o s t t o o w i l l i ngly H e n ry Ford's i d e as on p l a n t o r ga n i z a t i o n . O n e can say t h a t t h e S oviet U n i o n i s n o t c o m m u n i s t i n t h e way M a rx used t he term, but there is still t h e issue of the way M arxists trea t t h e rela t i o n s h i p bet wee n t h e fo rces o f p r o d u c t i o n and the relation s of producti o n . M arx believed t h a t overcoming basic scarcity was neces sary before c o m m u n i s m c o u l d devel o p . I think this is c o r rect . B u t he u n d e re s t i m at e d b o t h t he extent to which capita l i s m c o u l d c reate artificial scarcity and t hat t h e degree to w h i c h i t s o ught t o i n c rease p r o d u ct i o n was

itself destructive

of t h e p o s s i

bilities of healthy growt h . 2 M a rx t o o k l a n d fo r granted . T h a t i n d ustri a l i s m fo uled t h e a i r a n d water he was well a w a r e . That t h e Enclosures, a n e a rly parallel t o the seizu re of rural lands by large agri business and

M a rx Vers u s M a rx i s m

1 63

m i n i n g c o r p o rati o n s today, dest royed a people's way of life he u n d e rs t o o d . But he was bas ically o p t i m is t i c a b o u t the l o ng run effect o f such cha nges i n raising t he overa l l s t a n d a rd of living. He c o u l d not k n o w of t he d estruct ive p o wers o f late c a p i t a l i s m and i n d u s t rialis m on the environ ment's a b i l it y to s u s t a i n itself.

Class and Landbased Struggles M a r x i s t s have made too a x i o m a t i c a c o rrel a t i o n between devel o p me n t of the fo rces of prod u c t i o n and t he p otentiality of h u man freed o m . While criticizing capitalist ad vert i s i n g with its " m o re i s better" consumeri s m , M a r x i s ts h a ve accepted the idea that ca p ital i s m does create the potential fo r human l i berat i o n by creat i ng t h e p o s s i bi l ity o f materi a l a b u n d a n c e , t h e bas i s for a j ust d is t r i b u t i o n and a transformed eco n o m y c o n t rolled by the d i rect p r o d ucers . U p on t h is high material base, u n a l i e n ated labor is seen t o be p o s sible. A m o n g M a rxists t o d ay t here i s a n i ncreas i n g realizat i o n t h a t t e c h n o l o gy is n o t neutral, s o m e t h i n g e a s i l y tu rned fro m bad (ca p it a l i st) to good ( s o c i a l i s t) e n d s .

E n d s heavily i n fl uence

m e a n s , as an old d iscuss i o n has it, a n d a s s e m b l y l i nes and typing pools just a re n't much fu n n o matter h o w s o c i a l ly desirable the e n d p r o d uct. Marxists must understand t h at when a t o n of steel is p ro d uced s o t o o are wo rkers who are c h anged by t he ex perience o f t he i r d a i l y work i n the m i l l s . The t o l l t he w o r k itself takes must be calcu l ated as part of t he price of steel. The p o is o ns e mitted in t h e p r o c e s s , the health, safety, and psychological well-being of p r o d ucers are all factors, o r s h o u l d be i n a social calculation of what e x t e n t a n d type of product i o n i s desirable. I t h i n k it would be i nc o rrect t o say t hat t here a re n o M a r x i s t s w h o think a b o u t s u c h i s s u e s , and this is clearly t o the g o o d . H o wever, M a r x i s m c a n be a n i n s u ffi c i e n t t o o l o f s o c i a l a n a l y s i s t o t he e x t e n t t h a t i t i s red uct i o n i s t .

Eco n o m ics is

i m p o rt a n t . I t does give shape t o c l a s s i s s u e s , t o p o l itics, t o c u l t u re . B u t i t is also i n s ufficient, a s fe m i n ists r i g h t l y i n s i s t , t o u n d e rs t a n d i s s ues such as ge nder. S i m i larly, religi o n is n o t merely the sigh o f o p p ressed people, t he i r o p i u m . R e l i g i o n can, a n d in

1 64

M a rxism and Native A mericans

E u ro p e d oe s , e m bo d y o p p r e s s i v e , a u t h o ritari a n, and p rofo u n d l y rep ressive values. B u t A me rican I n d i a n rel igions rooted i n a o n e ness w i t h nat u re can g u i d e native p e o p les i n a harm o n i o u s l i fe-preserving pattern o f b e h a v i o r i n s p i red b y a s p i ritual i t y t h a t is not a react i on t o o p p re s s i o n i n a hiera rch ical class s oci et y. A s a n eco n o m is t , I fi nd M ar x i s m t he most useful a p p ro a c h t o u n d e rs ta n d i ng a d v a n ce d c a p i t a l i s m , not beca use i t has i ro n l a w s of h i s t o ry t hat replace t h e need fo r m e to t h i n k a n d d o h i s t o rically s pecifi c researc h , but because o f t h e relat i o n a l i t y o f its h i st o rical materialist a n d d i a lectical approach. This is m y t rad i t i o n . Frank Blac k E l k t e l l s u s , o u t o f h i s trad i t i o n , a s i m i l a r relational means of c o ncei v i n g real ity is called Metakuyeayasi. H is s p i ri t u a l i s m and my material i s m intersect , so to spea k . The I n d ia n view o f n a t u re a s a living total ity seems a m o re adva nced fo r m ulati o n of t h e mechan ical co ncept . "spac e s h i p e a rt h" w i t h w h i c h tec h n i c a l l y a t u ned m e n a n d w o m e n t r y t o s e e t h ro u g h t h e i r l i m ited u n d ersta n d i ng o f feed bac k l o o p s , a s y s t e m t h at i s b o t h fa r m o re c o m p l e x a n d i n fi n itely s i m p ler. That i t i s easier t o res olve m a n y o f o u r tec h n ocratic p r o b l e m s by sto p p i n g t h e i r crea t i o n a n d re p r o d uct i o n t h a n b y l o o k i ng fo r co m p lex p a t c h u p s o l u t i o n s , s e e m s a n i d e a a l m o s t b e yo nd t h e c o m pre hen s i o n of the ind ustrial w o rld .

Because product i o n co mes first in contem porary Western s ociety, solutions take the need t o c reate the problems as a give n .

Stepping outside t h e system t o s e e w h a t really needs to be p r o d uced, w h a t our real n e e d s a re and how best to meet th ose needs ( r a t h e r than t o feed the growth i m p e rative fo r more com m o d i t ies) see ms almost beyond Western men and women fu ncti o n in g i n a capitalist context. O u r scientists and ecologists predict t h e e n d of abu n dance a n d the need fo r co nservation, yet t h ey d o s o

within t h e context of trying to continue a s many o f t h e o l d patterns as possi ble. Native A mericans a n d other land based peoples have a great deal t o teach t he rest of us about alternatives that could increase our q uality of l ivi ng, if not the G N P . V i n e Deloria cogently questi o n s : W h y should M arx's cen tral notions, such as "alienation", have meaning to indigen o u s peoples? These concepts are constructs derived from concrete experience i n a particular historical setting, i . e . , industrial capi talism. This is indeed a serious criticism of M a r x i s m . T o t h e

M a rx Versus M a rxism

1 65

extent M a rxis m claims u n iversalis m , it is false t o n o n-Western e x p erien ces. I ts generalizations truly have "little relevance t o the t r i bal sit uation". But Deloria has also asked o f Western ed ucation t h at it adapt itself not to "the transformation o f tribal cultures but the opening o f t he inner work ings of white s ociety t o the understand ing of tri bal members. " Marxism may not be of much practical u s e as a guide to t ribal life, who really would expect that it would be? I t was fashioned t o understand capitalism as a n economic system o f e xploitation and d o m i nation. I f Native A mericans w i s h to u n d e rstand t he process w h i c h o p p resses and colonizes t hem, they may find M a rxism helpfu l to t hat e n d . Conversely, M arxist i nsights into capitalist d evelopment ca n be e nriched by A merican I n d i a n t h in king about the destruc t ive n a t u re o f ind ustrialis m . The 1 9t h century optimism M ar x h a d about developing the forces of product i o n and then turning t he m t o socially constructive ends a ppears s omewhat superficial a ce n t u ry later. S uch i deas of science, p rogress, and material plenty a ppear naive t o present day M a rxists too who understand what the degradati o n of work d oes t o humans, what growth religi o n can be about, what crimes can be committed in the names o f i n creasing G N P, c o m pleting the Five Year Plan. S i milarly, we are less willing t oday t o dismiss the role of myth and belief as p o werfu l fo rces in society as were the rationalists o f the 1 9t h Century. M a rx was hi mself a product o f 1 9t h Cent u ry W estern E uro pean capitalism. H e developed a crit ical method fo r examining h i s society. His mind n o netheless was not t hat o f a n isolated i ntellige n ce, but t hat of an ind ivid ual w i t h a specific history in a c o n crete cultura l context. The same constraints clearly apply t o a l l su bseq u e nt Marxists i n the E u ropean trad ition. Native A mericans and other o p p ressed groups, even while t hey grow u p w i t h i n t he l a rger context of capitalist i n d ustrial s ociety, have by the nat u re o f their position and relative cult u ra l autonomy an a bi l ity to see certain aspects of the d o minant society fro m a d i fferen t perspective.

1 66


The Strengths of Marxism

I have said s o me of M arx's I nd ian crit ics a re right i n their summary of his views. But t here are a n umber of other points that must also be made. First, M arx i n his writing understood that t h e u niversal system he attempted t o b u i l d was n o t a useful analyt ic tool for studying non-Western societies . Further, he understood the need to examine each particular cultural-historical setti ng and t he futility of delivering obiter dicta of what an unstud ied reality must be about. Second, the alternatives critics such as

Russell M eans appear t o be o ffering are inadequate to their announced goals of saving land based peoples. Third, M arxism is a useful analytic t o o l and political orientation fo r dealing with t he main enemy at t h is time: an ever expanding global capita l i s m , I will d iscuss each of t hese t hree points. I t can be argued, as S h lomo Avineri has, t hat time and again Marx warns his d isciples not to overlo o k the basically European horizons of his d iscussions of historical development. M arx warned not t o "metamorp hose my historical sketch of the genesis of capitalism i n Western Europe into a n historical-philosophic theory of a general path every people is fated to tread . " Dos Kapital, he said , "does not pretend to do more t han trace the path by which, in Western E u rope, t he capitalist order of economy emerged from the womb of the feudal order of society."3 In this famous letter t o the Editors of Otechestvenniye Zapiski of November, 1 8 77, M arx further wrote, "Thus events strikingly analogous but taking p lace in different h istorical s u r roundings led to totally different results. By studying each of t hese forms of evolution separately and t hen compari ng them one can easily find the c l ue t o t his phenomenon, but one will never arrive there by using as one's master key a general historical philosophical theory, the supreme virtue of which consists in being super-historical."4 Marxists, surely even without such scriptural citation, s h ould see the need for concrete i n vestigations of particular cultures. For Marx h imself such studies were not the central task, which was t o i nvestigate t he nature of capitalism as a n economic and social system. H is conclusions as t o t he impact of the system on people remains a devastating critique and is in substantial agreement with t hat offered by some of the Native American writers in this volume.

M a rx Versus Marxism

1 67

Sitting Bull is widely quoted as having said of whites that "the love of p ossessions is a disease with them." Karl M arx's critique of capitalism was essentially s i milar. M o ney and the possess i o n of things created the illusion t hat the wealthy were m o re intelligent, more beautiful, m o re cultured because they could buy the accoutrements of social acceptance. Yet their wealth came from others and the m o re t hey had, the less they were, he t h ought. In the " Declaration of Depende nce on the Land", d rafted at a n d rati fied by the I980 Black H ills I nternational S u rvival Gath ering, was the statement, "the land has been desecrated because it has been treated as a commodity." Marx would h ave agreed. It was the basic distinction between use value and prod uction to meet needs on the one hand and exchange value, production, or t h e market to expand capital and i ncrease control over others, t h a t was a central analytic element in M arx's model If the d i rect produ cers controlled t he i r labor power, the land, and capital, as well as the creati o n o f labor, then p rod uction could not be exploitative. While M arx saw the oppression of men and women as workers in the capitalist system t o be exploitative, he was less sensitive to abuses ofthe land . Writing at a time of the i n d ustrial revolution he saw the h orrors done t o pe�ple by the factory system, but he also knew of the harshness o f rural life in England and saw the liberating potential of machinery. H e was n o t altogether wrong in this hope. Science and technology can be liberating within a societal context of respect for nature and our fellow creatures. While some landbased people can survive with less depen dence on factory-produced goods, it seems to me transforming

i n dustrial society rather than aban d o n i ng it is the m ore desirable option for most North A mericans, few o f w h o m live traditional ist lives. And I would think the m aj o rity of the world's population t o d ay require a relevant industrial society. The I nd ia n tradition alist's p references for autonomous development must be coord i nated carefully with those of the m aj ority who n o w i nhabit lands w h i ch were once exclusively the I n d ians', This, it seems t o me, is t h e crux of t he problem in Means' t hesis.

M arxis m a n d Native A m e ricans

168

It seems natural that trad itio n alist Native A mericans want t o be left alone by white society. If whites would j ust go away all would be well: " W hat d o you whites want? Our land, the re s o u rces t hat we are stewards over. W h ites pollute the air a n d water, wound the l a n d with rad i o activity and t h e scars o f m i n i ng. I nd i a n s d o n't want power over whites. They would like never to see a n other white person who seems t o bring only destruct i o n in h i s or her s h o rt-s ighted ignora nce a nd greedy thirst to produce m o re a n d more. W h ites want t o possess, to accumulate. They do not know h o w t o e nj oy h a r m o n y w i t h nature , with the fo rces of life that offer real c o ntentment a n d p u r p oseful existence . " But is t h is a matter of s k i n color o r of o u r eco nomic and political system? T h oughtfu l w h ites i n i n c reasing n u m b er s s hare the i nd ia n v i e w of ind ustrial society and i t s dest ructiveness of t h e environ ment, its s piritual b a n k ruptcy, a n d its capacity to destroy the ecol ogical possibil ity of the seve n t h gene rati o n from now k n o w ing the beauty of nature. The question fo r t he m is build ing a revolutio nary movement to challenge the existing order. M eans has an a p ocalyptic view of "revoluti o n . " He t o l d t h e G athering: " A l l E u ropean trad i t i o n , M a rxism included, h a s c o n s p ired t o defy t h e natural o r d e r of t h i ngs. M other Eart h h a s b e e n a b u s e d , the powers have bee n a bused , a n d t h is cannot go on fo rever. N o t h e o ry can alter that s i m ple fact. M other Earth w i l l retal iate, the whole e n v i r o n m e n t will retaliate, and t h e a busers will be e l i m i nated . Things come ful l circle. Back to where if started . That's revo l ut i o n . " " I t i s the r o l e of A m e rican I nd i a n peoples, t h e role of al natural beings, t o s u rvive. A p a rt of o u r survival is to resist. We res ist, not t o overt hrow government o r to take p o l itical power, but because it is natural to resist extermination, to survive. We d o n't want p ower over white i n s t i t u t i o n s ; we want white institu· tions t o d isappear. That's revolut i o n . " W h a t a r e t h e prospects t hat w h ite institutions will "dis appear?" Not li kely, I t h i n k , u n less M ot her Earth does retaliate and the "Fire Next Ti me" destroys the vast maj ority of the h u man race. R ussell takes heart i n t he l i k e l i h o o d t hat s omewhere high in t h e Andes some I nd i a n s will s u rvive t o start agai n , or rather continue wit h o u t t h e c o n st raints of E u ro peans with their greed and destruct i o n . S u rely s uch a calamity is t o be avoided rather than wished for a n d t he question i s how to avert such a fate.

M a rx Vers u s M a r x i s m

1 69

S h o rt o f the A p ocalypse, M ea n s a d vocates a n a l t e r n a t i ve e c o n o m i c syste m w i t h i n t he U . S . a n d r e s i s t a nce t o i n d u s t r i a l g r o w t h w i t h i t s m a x i mal p r o d u ct i o n . I t w o u ld see m usefu l t o e x p l o re w h a t s u c h a n a l t e r n a t ive w o u l d l o o k l i ke a nd h o w we get fr o m h e re to t here. F o r m a n y , a p p ro priate t ec h n o l ogy, s e l f s u fficiency a n d h a r m o n i o u s d e a l i ngs w i t h t h e ecol ogical l i fe of the p l a n e t are the a nswer. F o r s o m e , such an a l t e r n a t i v e s e e m s p o s s i b l e . L a n d self-sufficiency, t h e u s e of renewable e n e rgy s o u rce s , h o l i stic h e a l t h a n d s u rv i v a l s k i l l s w e re a l l s h a red . B u t t here was a l s o a w i d e u nd e rs t a n d i ng, s y m b o l ized by t h e g i a n t B - 5 2 s t hat d rowned o u t s p e a k ers as t hey c a m e t o l a n d a t t h e a i r fo rce b a s e on t h e o t h e r s i d e o f t h e fe nce fro m t h e G a t h e r i n g s i t e , t ha t it i s d i fficu l t , i n d e e d i m p o s s i b l e t o e s c a p e t h e s y s t e m of v i o le n c e , greed and capital accu m u l a t i o n t h a t see k s t o e x p a n d a n d ta ke o v e r everyt h i n g o n t h e p l a ne t . The s y s t e m must be t a k e n o n a n d d e fl a ted i f we a r e t o h a v e t h e p o s s i b i l it y o f l i v i n g i n h a r m o n y w i t h nature. A s t h e c o n cl u d i n g d oc u m e n t t o t h e G a t h e r i n g states: T h e n e e d is not o n l y t o continue and escalate t h e attacks on the c orporat i o n s , but t o b r o a d e n a n d deepen st rug gles by c rea t i n g a n u n d e rs t a n d i n g of the i n h e r e n t d e s t r u ctive power of tech n o l o g y . T h ose w h o r e m a i n i n c l o s e a n d sacred co ntact w i t h t h e i r l a n d h a v e t h i s u n d e r s t a n d i ng. C o n t r o l o f l a n d i s t he u lt i mate c o r p o rate c o n t r o l ; fai l u r e t o g a i n c o n t r o l o f t h e l a n d w i l l s p e l l t h e u l t i mate co r p o rate d o o m . W e m u s t t u r n t o t h o se w h o l i v e in h a r m o n y w i t h t h e l a n d fo r a foc a l p o i n t o f t h e s t r u ggle fo r d i rect i o n a n d u n d e rsta n d i ng. W h e n c o n t ro l o f the u s e of l a n d i s held by t h e p e o p le w h o l ive on it, t e c h n ology will be i n the c o n t r o l o f t h e p e o p l e . T h i s is a keystone t o a l l o f o u r survival . 5 T h e a n a logy t o M a rx's v i e w o f c o n t r o l b y the d i rect p r o d ucers o f t h e i r labor p o w e r i s i m me d i a t e . Pres e n t d a y M a rx is t s s h o u l d c e rt a i nly be c o m fo r t a b l e w i t h t he s t re s s o n l a n d based s t r u g g l e s i n the light o f the h i s t o ri c d e v e l o p m e n t of e nergy a n d r e s o u rce s t r u ggles a n d t h e k e y r o l e t h e y p lay i n capitalist d evel o p m e n t t o d ay . A key part of M ar x i s m surely i s to m a ke analysis of the c e n t r a l contra d i c t i o n s o f the h i s t o ric e p oc h i n which one l i v es .

1 70

M a rxism a n d Native Americans Whether M a r x would have j o i ned any vanguard party w h i c h

ca rried p o rt raits o f S t a l i n o r K i m el S ung, M a o , o r C h e d o w n M a i n S t reet A me rica i n 1 98 1 , I d o n o t k now. 1 rather d o u bt i t . L a t e i n h i s l ife w h e n t o ld w h a t s o m e o f his erstwhile fol l o wers were u p t o h e res p o nd e d , " I am no M a rx i s t . " 1 do know i n t h e c o n text of N i netee n t h C e n t u ry E n g l a n d M a rx d i d n o t fav o r

conspiratorial vanguards, but mass-based wor k i ng people's asso ciat i o n s . I do not t h i n k he w c u l d s u p p o rt i m ported ideologica l structures but might well have s o m e i n terest ing t h i ngs to say about Eugene Victor Debs and M al c o l m X. O n e c e rt a i n l y ca n n o t know what he would have thought of R ussell M ea ns' speech a t T h e S u rv i v a l Gat h e r i n g. O n e p res u m e s he w o u l d have s a i d , " o f c o u rse y o u w a n t i n d ust r i a l s o c i e t y t o leave y o u a l o n e a n d t o cease d e s t r o y i n g t h e enviro n m e n t t h a t s u p p o rt s land based p e o p l e s . B u t c a p i t a l i s m won't d o t hat. I t i s i t s n a t u re t o c h e w u p w o r k e r s a n d t h e v e r y earth itself i n p u r s u i t o f wealt h . I t is a syste m t h a t m u s t e x p a n d o r i t will d i e . Y o u m i g h t as well rage a ga i n s t t he w i n d fo r blowing or t h e moon fo r cast i n g its light across t h e night sky. O n l y the working people u n ited can overt h r o w this syst e m based o n greed . Y ou say you are not a p ro leta rian a n d d o n't w a n t t o be. I t is n o t w hat you want b u t t h e c h o ices c a p i t a l i s m gives y o u w h i c h a r e a t issue. Tru e , y o u ca n b e a rebel. That m a y be pers o n a l l y gratify i n g , but is ha rmless en o u g h t o t h e m . Y o u m u s t u nderstand h o w c a p i t a l i s m w o r k s and crf:ates a class conscious rev o l u t i o n a ry movement t o overt h row i t . O n ly t h e n can t here be respect fo r n a t u re a n d h u m a n bei ngs' p l a c e within it." M a rxists have pe rha p s been too o p t i m istic. A rmed wit h t h e k n owledge t ha t i n t he l a s t c h a p t e r t h e people's fo rces ro u t e t h e capitalists t h e y c a n be i n s e n s i t i v e t o t h e i rre parable da mage u nc o n t r o l led i n d u st r i a l i s m can d o . This c a n lead t o a fai l u re to see t h e centrality o f c o n t r o l of reso u rces and land based struggles t o t he rev o l u t i o nary p rocess. The st ruggles o f N a t ive A me rica n s t o protect t heir w a y of l i fe , indeed t o protect the Eart h as a n u rt u re r fo r fut u re ge n e ra t i o n s is an i n t egral p a rt of a n u m be r of i nterrelated struggles. These include on the o ne side t he so fa r fairly s u ccessfu l effo rt s of t h e energy c o nglo merates t o i m p o s e the high cost of ecologically a n d socially d is a s t r o u s "s o l u t i o n " t o the e n e rgy crisis upon the peo ple of t h e world. The critique of highly ce n t ral ized , e x pe n s ive

M arx Versus M arxism

171

and destructive energy paths has long been made by Native A mericans. Trad itionalists have much to teach the rest of us a bout how to think of nature and resources in terms of our children's children seven generations into t he fut u re. This is not a romantic backward looking approach but is an example of sanity in a world so used to short-run thinking that we may be preclud ing possibilities of certain desirable fut u res through decisions now being made. The Unity

of the Stru ggle

Perhaps it is a comment on human nature, or at least on the ways of l i beral white folks, that an i ncreas ing sensitivity t o what t h is country did over the past t hree centuries-mass murder and stealing land from Native Americans-is not matched by an involvement in attempting to preven t present day genocide and t heft of I ndian lands. The energy crisis of the last decade has opened a new chapter in t he genocide practiced by the United States against Native A m ericans. Because seemingly worthless land, t he reservations that Indians were granted, now is found to contain sixty percent of all do mestic energy reserves, a new land grab is on. Ignoring the guarantees of the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1 8 68, the U . S . G overnment and the energy corpo rations have declared t he Black H ills of South Dakota a National Sacrifice Area. Not onlv N a t ive A m e r i c a n s but s m a l l farmers a n d r a nchers a re to be d ri ve n fro m the land to develop coal and u raniu m . At t h e Gathering, Winona La Duke, a Chippewa member of W o men of All Red Nations, quoted Lucie Keeswood , a Navajo activist resisting corporate takeovers of Indian lands in New M e xico: "Where will we be 20 to 25 years fro m now, when the coal has all been mined and t he co mpan ies operating these gasifi cation plants have all picked up and m oved away? There will be n o t hing t here. They will be working elsewhere and we will be sitting on top of a bunch of ashes with nothing to live on." Susan S hetrom who, with her husband and seven year old daughter, lives three miles from the Three M ile I s land nuclear facility, told the Gathering how s he had totally trusted the government and the nuclear industry to act responsibly, had never attended a protest rally, but had come to see herself and

1 72


ot hers as victims of the nuclear ind ustry's mad ness and greed. H e r family now had twice t he pro bability of getting ca ncer as before the accident, and her daughter's chance of bearing a healthy child had greatly d iminished. Activists at the Gathering understood that Susan Shetrom is u n ique only in that s he l ives s o close to TMI. S he and t hey realized t hat there is no safe p lace to move. It is not easy to fi nd a community totally removed fro m the effects of the nuclear fuel cycle and impossible to find one not threatened by nuclear weapons. The afterword t o The Keystone/or Survival, t he Gathering generated statement, makes the same point. "The crimes of the H o o ker Che mical Co mpany at Love Canal are repeated in New Jersey, North Dakota, Los Angeles and elsewhere. The soid iers and Nevad a citizens who were told to watch the atom bomb tests in the 50' s sent their sons to Vietnam to be sprayed w ith Agent Orange."6 Scientists, with their terrible hubris, have unleashed rad io active wastes they have no satisfactory way of containing; t hey prod uce carcinogenic and mutagenic chemicals and cas ually introd uce them into the lives of unsuspecting millions; they trifle with the eco-sphere and start irreversible processes of unknow able dimensions. Present day M arxist critics of capitalism, of societies run by "experts", by a caste of corporate appointed initiates, can and d o ad opt many of the criticisms Native A meri cans make of industrialism into their critique of capitalism. The cost of irresp o nsible forestry practices, the conse quences of chemical i ntensive agriculture, of d isplacing a dive r sity of native seed varieties with a few hybrids were not issues M arx could have known about. The du mping of chemical and rad ioactive wastes, of strip mining, high voltage powerlines with their damaging electronic emission s are of course things he could not have fo reseen. They are issues which should be important to contemporary Marx ists. Not all Marxists may understand t h is, but then n ot all Native A mericans do either. It would be a mistake t o set up either "side" in t h i s very artificial debate as either of one mind or as holding exclusive truth on their side. For example one of the Survival Gathering d ocuments proclaims: "The Western ind ustrial cycle of greed , profit and exploitation is

M a rx Versus M a r x i s m

1 73

fu n d a m e n t a l l y rem oved fro m any sac red t ie to t h e E a rt h itself. T h e Ogl a l a P e o p l e believe t h i s t i e m u s t be rest o re d t o break t he d e s t ruct ive cycle a n d to s h o w t h e way t o l i v e and s u rvive i n t h e w o rld s o as to preserve t he l a n d

t h ro u g h t h e next seven

genera t i o n s . " 7 H o weve r , N a t ive A merican activists m u s t face the reality of t h e i r elec ted t ri b a l gove r n m e n t s s e l l i n g o u t the t rad i t i o n a l I nd i an w a y o f l i fe, having acce pted ene rgy d e v e l o p ment a n d e x p l o ita t i o n of I n d i a n l a n d s . C o a l ga s i fica t i o n p l a n t s , s y n fu e l process i n g a n d n u clear e n ergy pa rks a re b e i n g p u s hed o n N a t ive A merican p e o p les. A q u i fers d e pleted of water used i n mining w i l l take c e n t u r i e s to r e p l e n i s h t h e m selves. S t r i p - m i n e d l a n d may t a k e as l o n g t o re h a b i l i t a t e i t s e l f a n d rad i o a c t i v e waste may m a k e a reas u n i n ha b i t a b l e . M a r x is t s are n o t s u rprised t o see t he U . S . G o v e r n m e n t a n d t h e e n e rgy cor porat i o n s c r e a t e a C o u n c i l o f Ene rgy R e s o u rce Tribes w i t h I nd i a n l e a d e rs w o r k i n g t o t ra n s fe r e n e rgy rich l a n d s fr o m I n d i a n c o n t r o l . The money is i n e x c h a n ge for t he dest ruc t i o n of Native A merica n land based l i fe a n d culture. T h e I n d ian leaders q u o ted at t h e s t a rt o f t h i s p a p e r w h o hope t o b r i n g ed u cat i o n and t r a i n i n g t o c o m p e t e in c o n t e m p o rary

A merica t o their p e o p l e , and t r i b a l l e a d e rs who are s e l l i n g the c o a l a n d u r a n i u m o n their reserva t i o n s , g i v i n g p e r m i s s i o n fo r m i n i n g a n d b u i l d i n g p o w e r plants, a c t w i t h t h e a u t h o rity of d e m oc r a t i c e lect i o n . They are re p re s e n t a t ives of t h e i r p e o p l e c h ose n by t h eir p e o p l e . N a t i ve A me r i c a n s h ave n ot succeeded any m o re than white radicals i n m o b i l iz i n g a maj o ri t y o r even m a s s i ve m i n o rity of t h e i r p e o p l e t o o p p o s e c a p i t a l i s t d o m i n a nce.

N o r ca n any o n e gro u p in A m erica a l o n e d efe nd itself a n d e n d the o p press i o n a n d e x p l o i t a t i o n t h e syst e m visits upon t h e m . W h atever t h e criticism t h ose i n t h e s t ruggle may h a v e o f o t hers w h o o p p ose t h e syste m , t h a t c r i t i c i s m m u s t b e g i v e n i n t h e c o n t e x t of t h e d e s i r a b i l ity o f u n ity a n d t h e needs o f t h e overall s t r u gg l e . The points o f c o n t e n t i o n d e bated i n this b o o k are not m i n o r . I have suggested i ndeed t h a t M a rx is t s h a ve much t o learn fro m t h e i r I n d i a n critics but a l s o t ha t t h e e n e m y i s class d o m i na t i o n and a system of e x p l o ita t i o n t h a t must be u n d e r s t o o d if i t is to be s u ccess fully c o m bated . M a r x i s m i s a crucial t o o l fo r u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h a t syst e m . The task is t o j o i n t he s t r e n gt h s of t h e t w o

1 74

M a r x i s m a n d Native A mericans

t r ad i t i o n s a n d t o forge s t r o nger a llia nces. J us t as t h e A m e rican I n d i a n M ovement came into b e i n g because it is not j u s t t h e O g l a l a pe o p l e of t h e P i n e R id ge reserv a t i o n w h o a r e col o nized and fee l i ng t he pres s u re o f res o u rce- h u n gry corporate A merica, but t he Navaj o , t he Crow, the H o p i , t he N o rt hern C heyenne and others, s o t o o t h e s t ruggle e x t e n d s t o the rest of t h e A mericas a n d i ndeed t he w h o l e world . This p o i n t was m a d e a m p ly c l e a r by speakers at t h e G a t hering. " G e n e ra l M i l e s , who led the s la u g h t e r at W o u nded K nee i n

1 890, e i g h t years l a t e r i n v a d e d P u e r t o R i c o , " J ose A l be r t o A lvarez, F i r s t Secretary o f t h e P u e r t o Rican S ocialist P a r t y fo r N o rt h A merica, t o l d t h e G at hering. H e descri bed t h e p l ight of t h e i s l a nd u n d e r U . S . c o l o n ia l i s m a n d especially o f t h e st ruggles of t h e fis h i n g a n d fa r m i n g p e o p ie s o f t he isiand of V ieques ( o ff the P u e r t o Rican coast) to fo rce the U. S. Navy t o stop using t h e i r i s l a n d as a b o m b i n g range. Pierre V u a r i n , fro m Lazac, France, w h e re over a decade of s t ruggle h a s t ra n s p i red between fa rmers res isting relocati o n a n d N A T O , t o ld a s i m i l a r s t o ry. The B l a c k H i l l s A l l ia n ce s e e k s t o u n i te t h os e t h eatened by the e n e rgy c o n g l o m e rates' l a n d and water grab p l a n s - I n d i a n s , ranchers, fa r m e r s . I t s e e k s a l l i a n ces w i t h a n t i- n u k e activists, t h os e who fight t h e d a ngers of n u c l e a r wea p o n s , t h ose concerned w i t h t he fate of u ra n i u m m i ne rs w h ose very e m p loyment is d ea t h . The S u rvival G a t h e r i n g was a n i m p o rt a n t e v e n t i n our his t o ry . It b r o u g h t d i verse p e o p l e s t ogether out of co m m o n con cerns to learn fro m each o t h e r and to bet t e r work with each o t her. The e ssays i n t h is b o o k a re a c o n t i n u a t i o n of t h e G a t h e r i ng. The d ial ogue it i n s p ired m u s t go o n .

PA RT THREE

W here were you w h e n we c a m e close t o the end? When our land was being stolen, you j ust stood by. When we were being massacred, you d i d n't even cry. When t hey put us on reservations, you d i d n't lose any sleep. When we were starving half t o death, you had enough to eat. When we had n o voice, you never said a word. When we cried out to you, you never even heard . When our freedom was being denied, y o u never q uestioned why. A n d when we needed hel p , somehow the well was always dry. Where were you when we needed you, our friend? Where were you when we needed you t o bend?

N o w you claim t o be part Sioux or Cherokee. But where were you when we came close to t he end? From a S ong Sung By Floyd Westerman

9 Reds Versus Redskins

Phil Heiple

O n A pri1 30, 1 98 1 , several of the c on t r i b u t o rs t o t h i s volume had the o p p ortunity to get together a nd excha nge o bservati o n s o n t h e Marxist / Indian debate. W i t h Ward Churc h i l l moderat i ng, Vine Deloria, Jr. , Russell Means, Bob S i p e, the audience, and I had a highly s t i m ulating time clarify i n g p o i n t s of co ntact and d isagree ment among us. I'd like to s u m marize what I think t hese were, a nd their rel a t i o n s h i p t o s o me o f t h e p ractical politi cal problems facing us in t hese times . W h ile Bob and I had certain d i sagreements, as did Deloria and Means, l i nes of contention were clearly established o n most i s s u e s . O n the q u e s t i o n o f what is t o be d o ne , the M a rx ists ( B o b a n d I ) s p o ke o f a radical reorganizati o n o f t h e so cia l relations of capita l i s m , while t h e Native A me rican s ( V i n e and Russell) called fo r a q ualitative change in the rela t i o n s h i p betwe e n people and enviro n me n t s . Where t h e Marxist point o f view i m p lied political s t rategies ranging fro m decentraliza ti o n t o o utright seizure of p ower , t he Native A mericans s uggested a radical separatism which e roded the basis for existe nce o f such p o we r and where traditi o nal lifestyles are a d opted on a li mited and local scale.

1 77

1 78

M arxism a n d Native Americans A s t h e Marxists criticized t h e Native American s for a fatal

underestimation o f i mperialist ease at corrupting a n d undermin ing t ra d i t i o nal socie t i e s , t h e N a t i ve America n s resp o n d e d with critici s m o f Marxism a s bei n g part of t h e corrupting t rad i t i o n itself. T h e M a rxists s a w n o h o p e for Native A mericans: t r a d i tional s ocieties w e r e d o omed l o n g ago. The Nat ive Americans saw no h o pe for M a r x i s m : a n y p a rt ici pation i n Western society, including i nternal c r i t i ci s m , o n l y c o n t ri butes t o the s u icide of humankind. A l l t h i s a ppears t o l e a v e v e r y l i t t l e fo r M a rxists a n d Native A me rica n s to t a l k a b o u t w i t h a n y h o p e of agreement. But t h is is becau se the d i scuss i o n t h u s far has focused mai n l y u p o n t h e d i fferences between t h e perspectives, e . g. : where e a c h s e e s t h e other going w r o n g , i n s tead of t h e i r many a n d fruitfui s i m i iarities. A s u rvey of t hese s i milarities c o u l d go a long way t o ward m i n i mizing t h e i m p ortance of d i ffere nces a n d provid i ng s o m e b a s i s for mutual understan d i ng a n d c o o perati o n . A s a sign of g o o d w i l l , M a rx i s t s and Native A mericans c o u l d agree t o d isagree a b o u t a g r e a t n u m be r of th i ngs. M a n y p o s i t i o n s i n polit ical t h e o ry a re m o re a matter of pers o n a l taste a n d o p i n i o n t h a n of logic a n d e x perience. " T h e lyrics d o n't matter a s l o n g a s y o u l i k e the bea t , " s o t o s p ea k . B y t hi s I mean t h a t the t o n e a n d temperament of a t h e o ry a re as i m p orta nt as its elucidati o n s . I t seems t o m e that t h e se s u bj ective characteristics a re what a re m o s t s i m i l a r betwe e n M a rxists a n d Native A me rica n s , especi a l ly t h ose militants e x e m p l i fied by R u ssell Means a n d t h e A m e rican I n d ia n M ove ment. I t h i n k t h e main i n tersect i o n i s evide nced within the a nger both sides s h a re t o w a rd t h e destruction of human life a nd na t u ra l res o u rces fo rged b y W e s t e r n i m p e ri a l i s m. T h e d i ffe rences s t e m fro m the d iverging a c c o u n t s of t h e o rigi n s and e v o l u t i o n o f t h is d e s t ruct i o n . A l t h o u g h b o t h attribute it to p ractices a nd i n s t i t u t i o n s originating i n E u ro p e , t h e y d i ffer sharply a b o u t the essen t i a l rea s o n s be h i n d i t . M a r x i s t s v i e w t h i ngs i n materialist t e r m s , i n h o w t he o bj ective c o n d i t i o n s necessary fo r life were created and c o n t rolled by p e o p l e with m a t e rial access t o t hose res o u rces . Native Americans s u c h a s M e a n s a nd Deloria a rgue that s u bj ec tive factors-values a n d attitudes c o ntempt u o u s of tradit i onal l ifestyle and "the natural order" -are the core problem.

Reds Versus Redskins

1 79

Whichever reason is given, however, a n u m be r of political strategies remain the same. Both sides advocate civil disobedi ence and involvement i n oppositional political movements. Both express a will toward greater personal involvement i n and control over the means to survival. Both assert that identity and a sense of c o mmunity are superior to "security" and a sense o f power. And both sides loa th a nd ridicule the sy mbols of com modi ty culture used to legitimate the system and e ngender popular support. This strategic commonality should put Marxists and Native Americans side by side o n most contemporary political iss ues. Nevertheless, there is considerable reason for Native American militants to remai n suspicious of M arxism. Some of these, such as the Christian hue to M a rxist tradition and p ractice, have been solidly advanced by Deloria and others. To this, I could add my own list of t heoretical and practical problems relevant to the debate. The main problem is the manner i n which ethnic struggles and the "national question" have been handled within Marxist tradition. D u ring the period within which they wrote, Marx and Engels saw the possibility for revoluti on only in l arge, centralized ind ustrial states. They d i d not foresee problems of international alignment as barriers t o c ha nge within states, and they therefore subord i n a ted questions of e t h n ic s t rugg le to ques tions of class

conflict. Hence, one finds M arx's scathing critique of the British d o mination of Irel a nd , as well as his view of the German domina tion of t h e Czechs as being a quite d i fferent matter: British colonization of t he I rish had "advanced" the latter people to the point at which revolution was possible, while Czech indepen dence fro m Germany would d isrupt the economic o rganizatio n prerequisite to successful proletarian revolution i n central Eur ope. Likewise, Engels dism issed Slav yearnings for national independence on the grounds that subord i na t io n to the Germans was the best hope for spreading Western civilizati o n and s ocial ism in eastern Europe. Yet, today, when one looks around the world , among the clearest and most d ramatic examples of liberatory c onflict are ethnic minorities involved i n nationalist struggles. S o me of these are the Basques, Catalans and Galicians in Spain, the Bretons in

1 80


France, the Quebequois, Metis and James Bay Cree in Canada, the Kurds in south-central Asia, Serbs and Croats in Yugoslavia, Palestinians in Israel , the Bahnar, Rhade and other " Montag

nard" tribes in t he highlands of Vietnam , the Greek and Turk Cypriots, Corsicans, Sardinians, Pathans, Baluchis, Eritreans, South Moluccans and, i n the United States, Chicanos, Puerto Ricans, Blacks (especially Muslims) and Native A mericans. Contrary to Marx's expectations, the ind ustrial p roletariat in the advanced capitalist nations of t he West (excepting perhaps France and Italy) has demonstrated a greater interest in aligning with state power than in o p p osing it. Further, socialist and Marxist states, while condemning the capitalist system, have been quite full of admiration for the productive forces that sys tem has created . That such a situation should come to p ass seems retrospectively predictable enough, given the conception of rela tions between humans and nature d rawn by Marx in the Com munist Manifesto and other writings. In essence, this a m o u nts to the notion of an inherent opposi tion between humanity and nature expressed through the quest to gain control over the forces of nature via the med ium of labor and in order to c onvert t hese forces into economic products within an a rtificial o r man-made world . This, in the Marxian-as well as capitalist-view represents, or at least has represented , "progress" for humanity. On the basis o f this tenet, one of Marxism's primary func tions in the post-revolutionary society of the S oviet Union has been to transform a "backward" agrarian society into a massive ind ustrial complex rival i ng t hose evidenced in the late capitalist nations. To this can be added the imperialism a nd betrayal waged in the name of Marxism d u ring the Twentieth Century: Kron stadt ( 1 920), Spain ( 1 939), Yugoslavia ( 1 948), Berlin ( 1 953), H ungary ( 1 956), I n d onesia ( 1 965), Czechoslavakia and France ( 1 968), Chile ( 1 973), Kampuchea ( 1 976-77), and France (again, in 1 978). And then t here a re other frequently noted facts, such as that Hitler always termed hi mself a "socialist" while developing a state terrorism quite similar in many of its aspects to t hat con structed by Stalin, or that Mussolini e merged quite literally fro m t h e ranks of t h e Italian left. Today, t here are rumblings of the Sandinistas i mposing forced relocation upon the Indian tribes of

181

Reds Versus Red s k ins

t h e N ica ragua/ H o n d u ras b o rder regi o n while t h e Vietnamese c o n d u ct mil i t ary o pera t i o n s aga inst m ou n t a i n tribes i n both Vietna m and Lao s . To s u m up, the c o m p l i me n t a ry attitudes t o wa rd nature a n d " n atural peoples" ex pressed t h rough b o t h c a p i t a l i s t a n d M arxist d o ctrine, a s well as the highly suspect perfo r m a nce / p olitics of the p r o letariat w h e re industrialism has occu rred , make fo r a very weak reco m mendation of Marxism a s a n e mancipatory t he o ry for e t h n i c / tr i bal nationalists-or anyone, for t h a t matter. Thi s critique, h o wever wide-ranging, i s n on e t h e less far fro m e x h a u s t i ve . I t s i m p l y d o e s n o t a p ply to m o s t m a n i fe s tati o n s o f M a rxism i n the West w h i c h represent c o ns i d e rable m o d ifications (" revi s i o ns") of Marx's o riginal t h e o retical m o d e l .

Council

c o m m u n i s m , critical t h e o ry and p he n o m o n ol o gical Marxism all h o ld positions o n science, reas o n , nature and labor which a re very d i fferen t fro m trad i t i o nal o r " o rt h od ox " M a rxism. There ue also ideol ogies of the left , such as anarchism and syndicalis m , w h i c h c a n b e (and often a re) m o re critical of M a rx i s m t h a n either right-wing p hi l os o p h y o r criti c i s m such as that e x tended by Delo ria, Means, e t . al. A n u m be r of s uccesses ca n a nd s h o uld be p osted to Ma rx is m's credit as well . The Russian Rev o l u t i o n of 1 9 1 7 is probably t h e m o s t i m p o rtant, fol l o wed by the C h i nese Revo l u t i o n i n 1 949, and a l m ost e very m aj o r revo lutio n s i n c e : t h ose in Cuba , Viet n a m , Algeria , Angola, Z i m ba b we , Nica rag ua and elsewhere. Less d ra matic are Marxis m's o rga nizing c o n t ri b u ti o n s t o such st ruggles as t he eigh t - h o u r workday, child labor laws, u niversal s u ffrage and t he right of unions t o picket and s t ri k e . Of less i m portance p e r h a p s , b u t s t i l l n o t a b l y relevant is t h e M a rx ist i mpetus b e h i n d parliamenta ry o p p o sitions w i t h i n t h e governments of France, Engla n d , W e s t G e r m a n y , I t a l y a n d S wed e n . To s o me e x t e n t at l e a s t , t h e y h a v e p r o v e n s uccessfu l i n d i m i n i s h i n g t he b r u n t of capitalist i mperial p ractice against t h e v e r y c o l o n i a l peoples represented i n b road t e r m s by the Native A m erica n c o n tri b u t o rs t o t h i s v o l u me, as well as having achieved ce rtai n c o n c rete gai n s for t h e i r o w n " m o t h e r c o u n try" p o p u lat i o n s . Finally, a n d p e r h a p s least i m p o rt a n t i n t h i s scheme of t h i ng s , a re t h e many artists whose aes t hetic acumen and social

1 82


sensibilities have been sharpened t h ro ugh a fam i l iarity with M a r x i s m and M a r x i s t t h e o ry . A few o f t h e better known include G e o rge Orwe l l , Kathe K ollewitz, Bunuel, Ernest Hemingway, J o h n Dos Passos, Berto l t B rec h t , D i ego R ivera, Le Corbusier, Pablo Nerud a , A l d o u s H u xley, William Faulkner, Pablo Pi casso, And re Breto n , J e a n Paul Sartre, Rita Mae Brown , Kan di nsky, Paul Robeson, Richard Wright, Jane Fond a , M a t isse, G . B. Shaw, a nd Joan M i r o . To c o m p letely d i sc o u n t s u c h a s s e t s is t o aba n d o n t h e o n l y t r ad i t i o n which h a s proven itself c a p a b l e , h o wever a m biguously , of resisting a n d defe a t i ng t he fo rces of capita l i s m . W h i l e t h e radical stance o f Native American activists i n wishing to step outside of history t o wage their s t ruggle at t h e s p i ritual level has a trendy reiigi o u s a p pe a l , it see ms to me that the o nly possible outcome of such a s t rategy w o u l d be the acceleration of t he i r extincti o n . M o re t h a n personal suicide, s u c h a separatist l ine o f action is precisely w h a t rep resentatives o f t h e status q u o wa n t a n d need . The state, afteralI, m a i n t a i n s itself primarily within the rule of "divide and c o n q uer". The c o m m o n ground between M arxists and Native A m e r i cans must be fu rt h e r e x p l o red a n d b u i l t u p o n . D i ffe re nces must be put in proper p e rspective a n d d e a l t with accord i ngly. For exam ple, not only i s t h e c r i t i q u e of C h ri s t i a n elements i n Marx i s m rather weak when c o m p a red t o o t h e r thi ngs worth c o m p l a i n ing a b o u t , it is extra o rd i n a rily m i s p l aced considering t he overt attempts by politically-minded Christians (such as the so-called " m o ra l maj o rity") t o control t h e eco n o my and legi slate m o r a l i t y . Fro m an environ m e n t a l i s t viewp o i n t , t h e greater p r o b l e m is n o t M a rx's l a t e n t pos i t i v i s m , b u t the ideological licence c l a i m e d by Reaganites such as I nt e r i o r Secretary Watt, w h o views h i mself as being o n a mission s a n c t i o ned by n o less the Jesus C h rist himself: " M y responsi bility is t o fo l l o w the scriptures, which call u p o n us to occupy the land until Jesus ret urns." We must close ranks i n t h e common interest and to c o n fronts the co m m o n foe . When D e l o ria says "God is Red ," Watt seems only t o e l a b o rate, "He i s red , white, and blue. "

Marxism and the Native American Ward Ch urchill B a t t le has bee n j o i ned, so t o s p e a k . A s u m ma ry of the various argu ments and o bserva t i o n s o ffe red i n t h is b o o k seems in o rd e r , biased though my asses s m e n t m ay s e e m ( o r be) , for it i s o n l y t h r o u g h such review t h a t we may seek a n s wers t o t h e q u es t i o n : " Where do we go fro m hereT' Elizabe t h Lloyd has, in my o p i n i o n , d on e an excellent ser vice in l a y i n g bare t h e t he o retical b o ne s of M a rx's general t h e o ry of c u l t u re , a struc t u re t h rough w h i c h M a rx ian q u e s t i o n s c o n cern i n g i s s u e s of c u l t u ral d i ffere n t i a t i o n might be res olved . I n t h is , she i s reinforced t o s o me extent b y B i l l Ta b b i n h i s notation of M a rx's a d m o n i t i o n t o his readers not to atte m p t t o u n i versalize conclusions d rawn fro m t h e h i s t o rical materialist exam i n a t i o n of E u ropean c u l t u ral evol u t i o n . I t may t h u s be right ly c o n tended t ha t t h e rudi ments of a t ru ly adequate system for the a p p re he n s i o n of cultures and t heir manifestations exist i n Marx, and ex ist i n a fash i o n remarkably clear o f e t hnocentrism. That M a rx never fleshed out this basic t he o ry i s certa i n ly n o fau l t of anyone who has come a l o ng s ince, certainly not o f the Marxist c o n t r i b u t o rs to this volume.

1 83

1 84

Marxism a n d Native Americans But neither the framework nor even the fullblown rendering

of such a theory is, n o r c o u l d be, sufficient, . merely by virtu e of existen ce. What is, and always was , required is practice derived from theory : praxis in the Marxist vernacular. This is precisely w hat i s lacking in Marx a n d s u bsequently within M arxis m . It is not e n o ugh t o articulate a n a p p r o p riate met h o d o logy when one aband o ns it at the next turn. The notion t hat the p r o n o unced economism of past M arx ian t heoretica l practice i s a ppropriate to elaboration of European condit i o ns and fails t o bear, in fact o r intent, upon non-European

co nditions does n ' t pass muster under even the most meagre scrutiny. The permeati o n o f the M arxist cosmology with such concepts as "precap itali sC' and / o r "preindustrial" as well

litter of jargon i n c l u d i n g

"primitive" and

"

as a

un d erd eve l o pe d " has

hard ly been restricted in applicat i o n -either by M arx or by M a rxists. M o re than a century o f M arxism, begi nning with M arx, has indeed a p plied t h e standard o f measure accruing fro m a n intensive study of European cultural evol ution, t he antecedent p h ases of capitalism, t o all other cultures. This is a mentality s o e m bedded i n most aspects o f M a rxist tradition that i t can only be seen as integral t o t h e whole, i n p ractice if not necessarily in theory. Thus Russell M ea ns' critique of what has essentially been Lenin's grafting o f Bakuninism o n t o the corpus of M arxis m -a s represented t h rough a series o f twentieth century revolutions and resultant "socialist orders" -need not be restricted entirely t o the Leninist line of t h inking. Economism is a strand which runs, with various d egrees of overt expressi o n , through virtually all the M arxist thinking in this volume. M eans is perhaps p reoccu pied with Leninist expres s i o n insofar as it has evidenced itself most clearly in historical terms. H i s analysis none�heless is c o n s i derably broader in i t s i m p l icat i o ns . The temp oral insinuations of Marxism vis a vis a l l t h at i s n ot European engulf t h e theoretics s p ri nging fro m Frankfurt, for example, to at least as gre a t a n extent a s the "cruder" o fferings o f Leninist d octrine. Citations fro m critical theory c ontain references t o the supposed virt u e s of "early societies," yet n o attem p t i s ever made to add ress the o bvious question of what, e xactly, i s "early" about n o n-ind us trialized' societies which exist here and now, in 1 983 . Critical t h e o ry, in thi s sense at least, is perhaps t h e d irect equivalent within M arxism o f t h e " l i be ral s o phistry" of t he fascist / cap italist "moral maj o rity" tre n d .

M arxism And The Native A m e rican

1 85

Still , it i s certai nly c orrect that Le n i n i s t a d herents can be crude, at least at t h i s j u ncture . Little c o u l d better fi l l t hat descrip t i o n t h at t he "sly" a n n o u ncement t hat " R us s e l l M ea n s wants t o e a t s h it" ( by " l o o k i n g fo r t h e s e c o n d h a rvest") w h e n he dares t o challenge t h e sc r i p t ure o f t h e R ev o l u t i o n a ry C o m m u n is t Party fai t h . D e s p i te (or perhaps because o f) the vehemence o f its res p o n s e , t he p a rty offered l ittle with which to a d d ress t h e s u b s t a n t ive i s s u e s raised by M eans' crit i q u e . T h e y d i d , o n t he o t h e r hand, d o u s all the service of t ro t t i n g o u t v i rtually t h e full range o f banalit i e s , misinfo r m a t i o n a n d o u t r i g h t a b s u rd it i e s c oncerning I nd i ans l o d ged i n A m e r i cana and h o l d i ng currency o n t h e l eft. H o pefu l l y , D ora-Lee Larson and I were able t o clarify matters i n m a ny o f t hese a reas. Bob S ip e enters the fray with a n e x p os i t i o n o f the p r i n c i pal tenets o f crit ical t h e o ry and e x t e n d s a t ho r o u g h case as to i ts a nalytical potential as a m o d e t h r o ug h which N a t i v e A me r i cans may bett e r u nderstand t h e i n n e r w o r k i ngs o f t he d o mi nant c u l t u re s u r r o u n d i ng t h e m .

It see m s to

m e , h owever, that h i s

argument l o s e s force i n a t l e a s t t w o s i g n i ficant w ay s : a) his crit ical a p p rehe n s i o n of advanced capital i s t negat i v i t y d oes not seem p a rticularly d ifferent fro m that a d v a n c e d b y M e a n s ; only h i s

"solutions " are di fferen t b) And, as Vine Deloria Jr . points out .

c o m pel l i n gly, r t h i n k-the s o l u t i o n s hard ly corres p o n d t o needs ge nerated t h rough t he A me rican I nd i a n h e r itage a n d e x perience. T h u s , alt h ou g h S i pe's recipe for the nat u re o f the n e w s ociety may be a p p l ic a b l e t o t h e European heritage, fo r I n d i a n s i t i s a matter of a t t e m p t i n g to d rive r o u n d pegs i n t o s q u a r e h oles-at a n y cost. This, it seems t o me, i s a ce n t ral theme c o m m o n t o a l l the I n d ia n c o n t r i butors t o t h i s v o l u m e . The M ar x i s t analysis o f cap italis m i s a good begi n n i n g , a t l e a s t i n large part : i t i s held i n c o m m o n a n d even e x p an d e d u p o n by a n u m be r o f Native A m e ri c a n militants a n d trad i t i o nalists. A s Phil Heiple p oints out, w h e re I nd i a n s a n d M a r x i s t s part c o m p a n y l i e s w i t h i n t h e realm o f c o n cl u s i o n s t o be d ra w n fro m analyses o f w ha t i s wrong with the cap i t a l i s t proces s ; with a v i s i o n o f a n a l t e r n a t i v e s o c i ety. Beyond red i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e p r o d ucts o f c a p i t a li s m i t s elf, I nd ian critics se e little d i fferentiati o n between the t w o s u p posedly c o n t e n d ing m od e s . A n d red i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e p roceed s accru i ng from a syste m a t i c rape of t h e earth is, at best, an i rrelevancy to A m e ri can I nd i a n t rad i t i o n .


1 86

C o n fronted with s u c h arg u m e n tation, M a rxists seem to have little w i t h which t o reply o t h e r t h a n to insist that d e i n d ustrializat i o n is " i m practical" (so say the capitalists, a s w e l l ) . B e y o n d this , they s i m p ly begin t o repeat -as if b y rote-t heir arguments t oward t h e h u manization of society t h rough worker control of t h e means of p roduction and concomitant red istri bution of the wea l t h p r o d u ced . At best, M arxists such as Tab b acknowledge the s u bstance o f I nd i a n criticism t h rough agree ment t hat tec h n o l ogical s o l ut i o ns t o the environ mental i mpact of i n d ustry are not o n l y crucial but must be supplemented by a reevaluation of s ociety's priorit ies i n relation to the natural w o rl d . M ore c o m m only, it is assumed that under socialism the tec h n o logical problems will take care of t h e mselves. The i ndians i n this v o l u me have suggested (or demanded) somet h i n g rather d ifferent t h a n a p p lication of t he prove rbial tec h n o l o gical fi x. Rhetorically at least , much of Marxism agrees m u c h more p rofo u n d ly w i t h D u p o nt ("Better Living Through C he m istry") C h e m icals and P hilips ("we can m a ke a well- h e a d b l e n d with any environ ment") Petroleum than with any of the I nd i a n contributors. S m al l wonder t h e n that Means refers to "continu ity rather t h a n revol u t i o n " as the M arxist cred o , a n d c a l l s b o t h cap italis m a n d M ar x i s m j ust the "sa m e old s o n g" o f E u rope. S uc h a situation may s e e m p a radoxical. That avowed revolutio naries might allow s u c h obvious c o m m o n ality between t h e mselves and t h e i r " o p p o s it i o n" p resents a riddle. It may be explained t h rough a n o t h e r theme, one w h ic h runs w i t h a m azing consistency t h rough all t h e M arxist writing in t h i s volume: The fo rces o f capitalis m are as inevita b l e a n d natu ral a circumstance as eart h q u a k e and glaciat i o n , as p r i meval as life . I n s u m , they are by-products of "human nature , " the " scientific laws " of human d evelopment, as M arx o nce put it. That capitalis m is a s y s t e m c o m p o sed of a myriad of human decisions, a n d glaci a t i o n is not, is a d i stinction w h i c h seems to escape them. In eleva t i n g a h u m a n ly d etermined system t o t h e s t a t u s of a "natural l aw" they h a v e predete rmi ned t heir inability

to perceive what alternatives are actually viable ; the choice has been made by the v e ry system they ostensibly oppose. To quote Engels, as cited by the RCP i n underpinning i t s polemic agai nst

Marxism And The Native American

1 87

M eans, "The forces operating in society work exactly like the fo rces operating in nature . . . " Even Tabb, who 'seems to reject t he "inevita ble natural law" interpretation, can find no better a n a logy fo r t h e fu t i l i ty of d e n y i ng the i n e v i ta b i l i ty o f i ndustria l i s m . " You m i g h t a s well rage aga i n st t h e w i n d fo r blowi ng o r t h e moon fo r cas t i ng its l igh t across the night sky . "

Fro m first to last, Marxists insist upon the specific inevit ability of ind ustrialization and capitalism as sanctification of t heir "science" in the same fashion t hat biologists approach t heirs: th rough assertion of unassailable p hysical/act. From this perspective, Marxists can no more step outside their precon ceptions of order to seriously entertain other considerations t han a responsible biologist could reasonably engage i n professional discourse on t he aeronautical characteristics of the blue whale. This is no doubt understandable, given the assumed validity of the perspective in question. The problem is that the validity is only assu med , never proven. For all Karl Marx's elaborate attempts to establish his theory as an "o bjective" or even physical science, he was unsuccessful, partly because he limited his data essentially to a single cultural context. That the exam ples of other cu ltures could well h ave served to refute t he "iron laws" of s ocietal evolution into capitalism seem s hardly arguable, since o n ly Europe has ever fol lowed that particular trajectory. But to truly allow for this disparity from culture t o culture would necessarily have removed the aura of o bjective fact fro m his pronouncements, leaving instead the mist of s ocial science subjectivity. It was thus left to those who came after Marx to uphold his scientism through the exclusion of all examples, all data which would di minish and impugn the Marxian hypothesis, constructing instead ever more insular layers of "proof' and reinforcement. S uch p henomena are, of course, not without precedent in t he real m of pseudo-science. Consider the Piltdown hoax, or t he more recent flocking of the U . S . anthropologic al community to validate t he fabrications of Carlos Castaneda. These two ex a mples were debunked in a quarter-century and less t han a d e cade respectively, while Marxism has lasted nearly a century and a half. All of Castaneda's supporters have disappeared now, except for a few who rallied to his "insights" like true religious

1 88


zealots. Ad herents to Marxis m , under its many factional guises, burgeon with the passage of time. We are confronted wit h something rather more t han a false lead in the area of science. False leads can generally be dispensed with through the extension of co ntradicting data and the logic of informed argument. M arxism is a self-contained system, allowing consideration only of data which serve t o perpetuate it; logic and evidence are of no use in confronting it. Since Marx, the Marxian question has always been "how ? " , never "whether? " The latter approach is magically but no less inevitably diverted bac k into the former through sheer reiteration of scriptural "fact." This is the foundation of no known science. Rather, it is the assert ion of will, of faith and of p u re religiousity. The RC P's Bob Avakian is thus Httle more (or less) than a Marxist eq uivalent to Oral Roberts, Sipe and Tabb equivalents to Chardin. M arxism is p redicated upon capitalism for its very exis tence, and it believes i n the same t hings at base. It can only continue, never truly ren o u nce its industrial heritage, for t o do so would represent its own n egation. Hence, it must insist o n the ultimate negation of all t hat is non-industrial as the final signification of its sanctity, its "scientific" correctness. That this flies directly in the face of any conceivably "liberatory" ethic is irrelevant to t rue believers. S pecies suicide may well be the result of the "iron laws of history" and a small price to pay for final validation. That R ussell M eans rej ects t his as an alternative route to liberating h is people from the death-grip of i mperialism s hould come as no surprise. Nor should Deloria's o bservation that Marxism reduces to little more than "materialist missionarism." He is, after all, a trained theologian . He recognizes missionary zeal when he meets or reads it, regardless of its anti-religious t rappings. And as might be expected, t he M a rxist counter-arguments seem weak. For example, the content ion t hat Deloria and other Indians "look to the past" for illustrati ons of Native American dif ferentiation are both inaccurate and i rrelevant. First, traditional I nd ian cultures-contrary to Euro mythology of t he "vanishing red man" -continue to exist with an amazing vitality and con tinuity o n a number of reservations. Hence, "past" is hardly an appropriate term t o apply to the substance of Deloria's examples.

M a rx i s m And The Native A me rican

1 89

S ec o n d , D e l o ria never argues for t h e recreat i o n of t he specific

p hy sical l i a nce

context

of centuries

pas t ,

but

to

a

further

upon the values and worldview of a c ultural reality

re

w h ich

has l o n g d e m onstrated its ability t o e l i m i n ate s o c i a l a l i e n at i o n in ways only s peculated u p o n by M a r x i s t s .

A nalyses of c o n

t e m p o r a ry I n d i a n trad i t i o n a l i s m as s o me h o w "past" dovetail neatly w i t h reference s t o c o n te m p o ra r y n o n- i n d u st rial cultures as "earl y . " S u c h s e m a n t i c g a m bits a r e i nt e n d e d t o m a s k ( t h o u g h t hey do a p o o r jo b of it) a c u l t u ral chauv i n i s m and a rroga nce built into t h e M a rxist o u t l o o k which is a d d ressed by Fran k Black Elk when he picks up Delo ria's c o m p a r i s o n of M a r x i s m t o m i s s i o n a ri s m . B lack E l k , h o wever, makes h is a p proach i n p r i m a ri l y concrete rather t h a n t heoretical terms, c a l l i n g o n his own l i fe e x periences to p u n c t u a t e h i s p o i n t s . A verita b l e o n e-two p u n c h is t h u s a ffo rd e d between t he o ry and practice w h i c h s h o u ld give p a u s e t o t h i n k i n g M a rx i s t s , b u t o n e which is n e a t l y s id e s t e p ped by t h e o t h e r c o n t r i b u t o r s . For e x a m p l e . w h i l e T a b b focuses w i t h s o m e e n t h u s i a s m o n Black El k's stated perce p t i o n s o f at l e a s t potential c o m m o nality between Lakota t rad ition a n d t h at o f M a rxism, he h o mes p recisely u p o n the aspect o f Black E l k's essay w h i c h s e rves, h owever t e n u o u s l y , t o valid ate t h e p r i n c i p l es o f Marxist d octri ne. A nd with the except i o n of Ta bb, the M a rx i s t contributors i n sist t h a t t h e e l a borate texture o f

Marxism

rep rese n t s a

neces s a r y a n d "overarchi ng" reality t o w h i c h I n d i a n s an,d their i n s ights must inevi tably be s u b o rd i n a t e d . The fi rst p riority is for Nat ive A me rica ns to beco me intimately a cq u a i nted wit h t h i s i m p li c i t l y m o re "adva nced" perspective, s o t h a t t h e y will be in a position

to

assist

in

t h e perfe c t i o n

u n fo r m l y maintain that t heirs is the

i

while p i c k i n g off

p i e c es

of

Marxism.

M a r x ists

"su perior" sy ste m

,

all the

of "I nd ian-ness" with which to enrich

t h e i r o u t l o o k . Sipe d i s covers that I n d ia n s may well be living a " prefigu ration" of the coming s ocialist o rder, a way o u t of the

oedipal tangle of capitalist socialization . Tabb and Sipe acknowledge that " Indians have much to tell us " about matters such as ecology, environment , and "appropriate technology. " One might add , about agriculture, p harmacology and a few other things as well , if Marxists were " astute enough to listen . " But there are many ways to listen .

1 90

Marxism a n d Native A mericans (The reader will forgive me if I rec a l l that i t was t he m aj o r

fo r m u l ative as pect o f t h is b o o k -an as pect e x p ressed t o a l l contri butors along t h e way-that i t was M a rxis m w h i c h w a s t o res pond to critique b y defi n i ng i t s utility and potential t o I nd i a n s , n o t t h e o t h e r w a y a r o u n d . I t s e e m s d u bious a t t h i s point t h a t many I nd ia n s h a v e bee n o r are l i kely to be swayed by t he M a rxist articulations here. The M a rxists, o n t h e other hand, seem to have gleaned a lot of potential fro m t h e I nd ia n view, if o n l y fo r dep loyment w i t h i n M a r x i s m . . . w hi c h is what t he I n d ians have insisted t h orough o u t . T h is s h o u l d tell s o meone so mething . ) The positive c o n t r i b u t i o n s ava i l a ble w i t h i n i n d igen o u s

trad i tio ns wh ich migh t b e m a d e , con tribu t i o n s w h ich s h o u ld surprise no o n e except E u ro-s u p r e m i cists, are not at issue here. The point i s whet h e r M a rx i s m is i n tent upon a symbiotic o r even a

rec i p rocal

relat i o n s h i p

with

n o n- E u ropean cultures

and

t raditions. Truly, we fin d even t he m o re "sympat hetic" M a rxist c o n t r i b u t o rs t o t h i s v o l u m e s k i m ming off the "high p o i n t s" of I nd i a n c u l t u re for potential i n c o r p orat i o n into their syst e m . And w hat d o t hey offe r i n e x c h a nge? Only the "su periority" of an " a n alyt ical system which i s a t best s U bstan tially similar to t h a t a l ready u t i lized by t he I n d ia n , and a s e t of conclus i o n s , t h e outc o me of w hich w o u l d necessarily be t h e dissolution o f I nd ia n c u l t u re . O n e hears echoes o f t he c r usaders pirating t h e concept o f t h e vau lted a rch fro m t h e " heat hen" M o ors and incorp orat ing i t i n t o E u ropean architect ure. E u ro pean syst ems a n d institu t i o n s h a v e a lways e n riched t h e mselves with t h e k n owledge and a t t h e e x p e n s e o f n o n - E u r o p e a n s . I t i s a m e t h o d M a rt i n Carnoy c a l l s "cultural i m periali s m . " E m p i re, whet h e r it be p hy s ical o r intellectual, m u s t be defended. H e nce, one fi n d s even the m ost clear-thi nking M arx ists res orting t o all m a n n e r o f s t range a n d wonderfu l a rgu m e n t s as a means of defe n d i ng t he s a n ctity a n d hegemony o f t h e i r t h e o retical d o ma i n . W i t n e s s B i l l T a b b warning I ndians t hat t h e i r traditional culture c a n n o t p revail i n s o far as their "elected" leaders c o o p e rate with t h e fed e r a l gove r n m e n t . Aside fro m t h e o bservable fact t h at t h i s is precisely t h e s a m e rat ionale utilized b y t h e Bureau of I n d i a n A ffa i rs t o i m p ose its " s u perior" v i s i o n a n d ma nagement u p o n I nd i a n s , what d oes t h i s mean?

Marxism And The Native American

191

Tabb maintains t hat Indians must "face the reality of t heir own elected officials selling out the traditional I n d ian way of life . " Conversely, the BIA holds that I nd ians must face the fact that traditionalism sells out "progress." Does Tab b concur? Clearly, his version of p rogress would d i ffer fro m that projected in BIA scenarios, but the suggestion is that traditionalism is a wr ite -off either way, whether its passing is assisted or lamented. And this hinges, neatly, on the fact that elected officials are involved . As Tabb should know, this democratic jargon is extremely misleading. The system of so-called elected officials never derived fro m traditional culture, nor d oes it in any way represent traditionals. It was in fact i mposed from Was hington, essentially by fiat, through the "I ndian Reorganization Act of 1 934." The trad itionals d id not and generally do not vote in the elections for the simple reason that voting was n ot and is not a part of their t rad itional form of governing themselves. The tribal councils refe rred t o are the appurtenances of colonial rule, and are thus d esigned t o sell out traditionalism at every turn. How such a system works should present no particular mystery t o anyone at all knowledgable in the methodology of colonialist rule (like Tab b ). The sell-out by elected officials has never precluded M a rxists fro m advocating t he develo p ment of auton o mous local res istance struggles. To put it another way, would M a rx ists have been inclined to advise the Castro brothers and Che Guevara t hat the struggle for liberation in Cuba was h opeless because Batista was an obvious U . S . puppet? Would they have sought to explain to Ho and Giap that the unification struggle in Vietnam should be considered as vain because the elected offi cials of the South had sold out to U.S. interests? What would their advice have

been to Fan on d uring t he .latter's preparation of manuscripts concerning t he anti-colonial struggle in Algeria? The s ituational analyses i n these cases rack up rather d i fferently t han that usually afforded to I ndian activists. Why? S urely the acutely negative objective conditions facing the other dissidents were at times comparable to those facing I nd ians in this country to-day. Yet t he left is k nown to have frequently and loudly p roclaimed that those who were so badly o utgunned

1 92


eventually won o u t in each case, won with active moral support fro m Marxists and people of conscience abroad. Such sup port is frequently denied I ndian resistence fighters through precisely Tabb's formulation, w hich s o mehow proves that their cause is much more hopeless than the rest. Of course, each struggle at some level or another is emphatically different fro m the others. On the other hand, each of the non-Indian struggles is the same insofar as they share a doctrinal adherence to the principles of Marxism. Shou�d RqsseU Means and John Trudell suddenly announce a newfound faith in Marxist scripture, one is forced to wonder whether Marxists might equally suddenly d iscover a way to overcome the reality of the sell-out of tribal officials. At that moment, m ight the left find some corner within the Marxist analysis for a prospering of I nd ian traditionalism? These correspondences between t he arguments advanced by Tabb and orthod ox M arxist positions give rise to questions about the "missionarism" attributed by Deloria and others to M arxist theory and practice. Tabb has done and continues to do work with I ndian-focused organizations such as the Black H ills Alliance. H is work, noted in his essay, relative to t he 1 980 Black H ills I nternational S urvival Gathering was commendable; his services are valuable, his explanations of the intricacies of advanced capitalist processes gladly accepted and put to use. But this d oes not deny t he appropriateness of the question which must be asked of any M arxist: Does he or she come ultimately to join an extant and ongoing struggle conducted by local people, or do they come to transform that struggle into a reflection and validation of their own faith? Are t hey ultimately supporters or recruiters? Fighters of this struggle o r missionaries of another? Such questions perhaps carry with them no immediacy M arxists, after all, are not presently in power in the United S tates-. But as Means rightly insists, in the longer view these issues will emerge as crucial considerations. This dynamic is explicit i n Sipe, who calls upon Native Americans to develop a "class consciousness" as a means to associate themselves with the broader mass of common op p ression and common interest a cross the nation. While Sipe p resumably means more than just economic class, the termin ology minimizes the vast differences between the oppression of

M a rxism A n d The Native A merican t h e I n d i a n and t h e p r o letariat u n d e r c a p i t al i s m .

1 93

American

I nd ia n s have no class i n a n y c o n ve n t i o n a l s e n s e ; i n s o far as they have become proletarians (usually u n e m p l oyed ) t hey have al ready b e e n t o rn fro m their trad i t io n a l c u l t u re s - a c o n d i t i o n t h at S i p e a n d H e i p le , fo r e x a m p le , w a n t to e n c o u rage, as i t p r o v i d es p otent i a l s u p p orters for their cause. W he re is i t written i n M arxist s c r i p t u re t ha t the c o l o nized , as a matter of "first p r i o rity," must i d e n t i fy w i t h t h e w o r k i n g class of the col o n iz i n g p o w e r? F a n o n has been s t o o d on his head . Did n o t S a rtre a rgue convinci ngly e n o u g h t h a t t h e t a s k of M a rx i s m (and the left in general) was t o c o n v i n ce the w o r k i n g class of France t hat t h e i r class i n t e rests l a y with the colonized of A lgeria? I n t h e U . S . , this flow is magically reversed: the "black skin, white masks" of F a n o n's t hesis are t o be i m posed by t h e " l i b e r a t o ry" d oct r i ne of M a r x i s m i tself. M a ny M ar x i s t s even go b e y o n d S i pe's p o s i t i o n to r i d i c u l e

Native Ame rican " Third World pr e t e n s ions . " In t h is vie w , t h e c o l o n i a l e q u a t i o n is p red icated u p o n t h e e x i stence, occu p a t i o n a n d a d e q u a t e defe n s e of a d e fi n e d ( o r a t l e a s t d efi na ble) h o me l a n d , a content i o n w h i c h w o u l d no d o u bt c a u s e a certai n c o n s t e r n at i o n a m o n g Pales t i n i a n s . S i nce t h e A me ri c a n I nd ia n c a n n o t be c o u nted u p o n t o successfu l l y d e fe n d res e rvati o n areas a g a i n s t a l l- o u t m i l i t a ry a s s a u l t by the U n i t e d S t a t e s , the w hole c o n s i d e r at i o n of e n gage ment i n p u rely a n t i-co l o n i a l st ruggle is d i s m is s e d as a b s u r d . In effect : " I n d i a n s s h o u l d give u p t h is d e l u s i o n a l n o nsense of ret a i n i n g t h e i r c u l t u re s a n d h o m e l a nd s , get t i n g on with t h e important b u s i n ess o f m e rg in g w i t h t h e i nt e r e s t s e x p ressed by every o n e e l s e a m o n g t h e o p p os i t i o n . " O f c o u rs e , t here i s a word for t h i s l i n e o f t h i n k i n g a n d a c t i o n : a s s i m i l a t i o n . I t s res u l t i s cult ural . genocide . A ba n d o n ment of t h e i r l a n d b a s e is not a n o p t i o n for N a t i v e A me r i c a n s , e i t her i n fact o r i n t h e o ry. The res u l t w o u ld s i mply b e "auto-genocide." These are p o i n t s w h i c h are bound to i n d u ce s o m e t h i ng less than e n t h u s iastic trust a n d c onfi d e nce among I n d i a n s con cern i n g t h e " a l t e r n a t ives, benefi t s a n d s o l u t i o n s " ava i l a b l e t o t he m t h rough contempora ry M a rx ist t hi n k i n g . To t h e c o n t ra ry, it s e e m s a l m o s t as i f t h e M a rx i s t c o n t ri b u t o rs t o this book had d ecided a m o ng t h e mselves to v a l i d a t e Russell M e a ns' " h arsh" assess m e n t that M a r x i s m is i d e n t ic al i n i t s i m p licat i o n s for

1 94


i n d i ge n o u s peoples a s is capital i s m , i n t e n t i o n s notwithsta n d i n g . Certainly, t hey h a v e p roceeded t o b e a r h i m o u t t hrough a l l m a n n e r of contrad i ct o ry a n d convoluted logic. When seemi n g o p p osites beco me ideologically fused , a w hole results. I n a sense, t he I n d i a n critique of Marxism likens i t s rela t i o n s h i p t o capitalism a s a s o rt of parallel to t h e relat i o n s h i p of the democratic a n d rep u blican parties wit h i n the U n i te d S t a t e s . Between d e m ocrats a n d republicans ideo logical d is tinctions certainly e x ist and a re t he s o u rce of bitter controvers y . To a M a rxist, such d istinctions are i n s u bstantial, i d l e chatter, t h e contestants represent basically t h e same t h i n g regardless of style and inflect i o n . S o too, t o traditio n alist Native A me ricans, a re t h e finely wrought differe ntiat i o n s b e tw e n Marxists and capita lists . To a democrat o r re p u bl i c a n , t h e terms of t h e game a re clearly u nderstood and representat ive of t h e " r e a l i s t ic" c h o ices available. It must seem inconceivable to eit her that another individual might reas o n a b l y step o u t s ide t he game altogether and thereby determ ine other viable o p t i o n s . o p t i o ll s which t ruly transcend the s o-cal led "left-right dichoto m y " wi t h i n U . S . elec t o ral p o l i t i cs. Yet a n y M a rx i s t can tes t i fy t h a t n n e m a y t a k e s u c h a step a n d , i n d e e d , be t h e b e t t e r for i t . O W l' t a k C I l , t h e s t e p b e y o n d t he elect o ra l s y s t e m opens new \l s t il � o f n p p o rt u n ity, releases the s hackles of n a rrowly defi n ed p n l l ! i .:a I c o nstraints, and s o o n . The choice bet wee n d e m o c ra t , H i d I ' T " h h �: a n see ms

trivial or irrelevan t to the M arx ist, and t h e �L! I .'l I s t is n o d o u bt right i n this s u m mation. Yet, as d e mocrats and rep u b l icans C il I l I l I ; 1 : d l o w t ha t t h e i r perspect ive might b e usefu l ly t ra n scend e d , l i CI t h I ' / c a n Marxists. The idea that t here a re other views o n this p l a n e t which go well beyond the l i m its a fforded t h ro u g h their syst e m i s as alien to them as it is t o t h e i r capitalist c o u nterparts. A nd as M i lton Fried man and William F. Buckley resort t o all manner of s p urious "techniq ue" t o d efe n d thei r c h osen d octrine from transcendence, s o too d o M a rx is t s . As d efe n s i ve p o lemic takes h o ld , t he openness necessary for theoretical development at r o p hies. and t h e basis for broadening the range of u n dersta n d i ng d i s a p pe a rs . Doctrine becomes d ogma, regardless of the s o p hist ication and permutations of its articulation. M a rxism, a n d s o it h as b e e n for s o me t i me.

So it is w i t h

M a rxism And The Native A me rican

1 95

Pe r p e t u a l incantat i o n of t h e catec h i s m of M a r x is t virtue d oes no m o re to fav o rably res o lve t h e situation than d o s i m i la r p ro n o u n ce m e nts o n t he part of e x p o nents of "free market" d octrine. A s Means observed , sides o f t h e same coin.

M a r x i s m a n d capitalism are two

He then went on to describe the

fu n d a m e n t a l att ributes he perceived the c o n t e n d e rs holding i n c o m m o n . N o ne o f the M arxist rej o i nders refuted , o r really atte m p t e d to refute, any point o f t hat l i s t . Yet each i n t u rn p rofessed t o be appalled a t his conclusi o n , insisting he was wrong despite tacitly ack n owledging his correctness t hr o u g h t h e lack of refuta t i o n . T h e t w o s id e s of t h e coin a r e t hu s d e m o nstrably fu sed, alt h ou g h one half still demands t o b e c o n sidered a s o perating i n d e p e n d e n t l y of t h e ot her. The c o i n may well bel ieve t h i s , but observ e rs need n o t fo llow suit. A term is necessary to denote the p h en o m e n o n ; Means e m p l oys " E u ro" (a generic term, l i k e " I n d i a n " ) . I t is p e r h a p s not the best p o s s i ble word c h oice ( i s "Indi an"? ··Native A merican"? ··A merindian"?), but i t i s at least accurate i n s o far a s it ascribes t h e o rigi n s of t h e o u t l o o k s that I nd i a n s fi n d both s y n o n o m o u s and reprehe nsible-capital i s m , M arx i s m a n d missionarism-to E u ro pe , c u l t u r a l transplanta t i o n s fro m that continent to t his. U nt i l M arxism c a n e x tricate itself fro m its com monality i n existe nce with ca pitalism it can never be o t h e r than uEuro," a part o f the same c u l t u ra l coin. N o ne t heless Means maintains t h at ·· E uro" i s a m i n dset, a w o rldview, n o t an i nnate characteristic w h i c h acc o m panies white s k i n . A s was noted earlier, t h e "syst e m , " whet h e r defined as M arxist or capitalist o r Euro, is c o m p o sed o f h u m a n act i o n s , h u man d ec i s i o n s . Only those devoutly religi o u s i n their zeal would a s c r i b e its e x istence t o an act of god , s o me t h i n g not to be transce n d e d t h rough c onscious c o u n t e r-act i o n . F o r t h e m , there may well be n o h o p e ; regrettably t hi s n e u r o s i s e n c o m passes all w h o hold t he i r human system t o have been e n acted as a p r i meval fo rce, M a r x i s t s or not. That one need not be genetica lly, o r even cultur a l ly for that matter, n o n-European in order to t ra nscend the b i n a ry options of the M a r x i s t / capitalist coin i s d e m on s t rated b y the recent pheno m e n o n of " p o st- M a rxist" theory . This p r o cess of "immanent critique" ( i d e ntical i n name and p ract ice t o the methods em-

1 96


p l oyed by K arl M a rx i n t ranscending Feuerbach) rep re s e n t s M a rxists t hemselves overc o m i n g t he in herent contrad ict i o n s o f t h e i r system w h i c h has l o n g left t hat d octrine hopelessly t heo logical and ethnocentric i n its basic assumptions. Perhaps the e x e m p l a ry e x p o n e nt of this practice i s the French w riter Jean Baudril l a rd w hose book, The Mirror of

Pro duction, should be read by a l l , es pecially M arxist s , who have been given even brief pause by t he I nd i a n critique offe red in t h e

p resen t volume. T h i s holds particu l a rly true for Baudr i l l a rd 's essay " M arxist A n t h r o p o l ogy a n d t h e Domination of N a t u re . " T h e reader will fi nd t h a t d e s p ite a rather tort u o u s language a n d occas i o n ally circuitous route, Baud rillard arrive� a t many o f t he s a m e conclusions as M e a n s , Deloria a n d myself, and fo r virt u a l l y the s a m e reasons. For e x a m p l e : Rad ical i n its logical a n a lysis of capital"

M a rxist

t h e o ry nonetheless maintains a n anthropological con sensus with the o pt i o n s of Western rat ionalism i n its defi n i t ive fo rm acquired i n eighteenth century bou r geois thought. Science, tech n o l ogy, p rogress, history in

these

ideas we

have an entire civilizat i o n that

c o m p rehends itelf as p r o d ucing its own development and takes its d ialect ical fo rce towards com plet i n g hu man ity i n terms of t otality and happiness , N o r d i d

M arx invent t he c o ncepts of genesi s , d evelopment a n d fi nali t y , H e changed n o t h i n g b as ic re ga rd i n g the idea o f man producing h i m s e l f i n his i n fin ite determ ination, and continually s u rpassing hi mself toward his own end. T h i s , despite an e n t irely d i ffere n t sort of background

and

heritage fro m any N ative A merican author. The I ndian arguments a re t h u s n o more in nately I ndian t h a n " E u ro-consciousness" is i n nately the p roperty of th ose posse s s i n g caucas ian genes. T h e y a re s h a red i n large part by at least a few E u ropean theorists, This, it w o u ld seem to me, represents s o mething of a breakthrough, if only a small one at present. But t o para p h rase M arcuse, it is fro m such small break t hroughs that t h e overcoming of false consciousness can occur. The route

M a rxism A n d The Native A me rican

1 97

currently b e i n g e x p l ored by A m e ri c a n I n d ia n activists (and other T h i rd o r Fo urt h World e rs) fro m o n e c u l t u ra l perspective a n d , fro m a n o t h e r by B a u d r i l l a rd a n d o t h e r p ost- M a r x is t s , s uggests itself as an o bv i o u s c o u rs e t o be p u r s u e d b e y on d the d i scuss i o n contained i n this book. T h i s i s , h owever, a m o re or less p u re l y t h e o re t i c a l d i rect i o n . M a ny p e o p l e , M a rx ists and I n d ia n s a l i k e , a re n o t particularly i n c l i n ed t o wa rd t h e rarified a t m o s p here o f fu l l bl o w n a b st ract i o n . M o re d i rect s orts of activity a r e req u i r e d t o a l l o w for constructive participat i o n by a l l t h ose of M a r x ian bent who wish to test the rea l i ty be h i n d t h e I n d i a n words c o n t r i b u t e d t o t hi s d ia logue.

Here I wholeheartedly concur with the line of activity u n d e rta k e n by B i l l Tabb in his a s s o c i a t i o n with the B lack H ills A ll i a n c e . I a l s o c o m p l etely agree w i t h his e v a l u at i o n of t h e 1 980 B l a c k H i l l s I nternational S u rvival G a t h e ring, s p o n s ored i n large part by t h e A l lia nce, as a singula rly i m p o rt a n t event. I w o u l d s u gge s t . h o w ever, t h at generalized s u p p o rt fo r a n d p articipation i n A l l i a n ce activities not be restricted to m aj o r and s pectacular d e m o nstrat i o n s such as the Gathering. There is d ay t o day struggle b e i n g wage d . M a r x ists can learn the realities of t h is struggle t h ro ugh d i rect participati o n o n a consistent basis . P r i o r t o u n d e r t a k i n g s u c h a l i n e of a ct i o n , a b i t of factual o r i e n tat i o n (as o p posed t o t h e o ry) s e e m s i m perative. This is multifaceted and c o u l d ea s il y become a career occupation , so l ittle is really k n o w n by the bulk o f the A merican left about the I n d i a n e x pe rience in A merica, but I will atte m p t t o assem ble a rud i me n t a ry "cras h c o u rse" which will a l l o w u p front per

spective . First, everyone needs "historical grounding , " so copies o f Francis Jennings ' The In vasion of A merica and Ralph

K.

Andrist ' s The L ong Death are i n order . Many leftists have

read such materials , but few go beyond this rather minimal historical perspective in attempting to truly understand things Indian . A second historical orientati on is needed , concerning the evolution of In dian policy from 1 776 through the present . Here , Fr anci s Paul Prucha ' s Documents of United States Indian Policy will prove useful, especially in combination with Vine Delori a Jr . and Clifford M. Lytle ' s A merican Indians, A merican Justice and Deloria's A merican Indian Policy in the

198


Twen tieth Century. The more ambitious may wish to secure a

copy of Charles Kappler ' s massive compilation , Indian Treaties, 1 778-1883. Other useful readings include D elo r ia s Behind the Trail oj Broken Treaties and Roxanne Dunar Ortiz 's The Great Sioux Nation: Sitting in Judgemen t on A merica. As to ac h ievi ng a grasp o f the events within the Indian '

movement itself, we can recommend n ot hing better than my and Jim VanderWall ' s Agen ts oj Repression and Jim Messer schmid t ' s The Trial oj Leonard Peltier. Peter Mat thiessen' s In the Spirit oj Crazy Horse is also extreme ly valuable, as is Rex Weyler ' s Blood oj the Land, and Roberto Maestas ' and Bruce Johansen ' s Wasi 'chu: The Con tinuing Indian Wars. I t see m s that m o s t n o n- I n d i a n s , for whatever reas o n s , w i s h a gro u n d i ng in " I nd ia n s p irituality" befo re approaching N a tive A merican settings . This is well nigh i m p ossible, particul a rly t h ro u gh s u c h s t a n d a r d s as

Black Elk Speaks. Lame Deer: Seeker

oj Visions and The Sacred Pipe, all of which attempt (u ns ucess fu l ly) t o co nvey l i t e ra l c o n t e n t t o t h e u n�n itiated . I will rec o m mend o n l y V i n e Delo ria's

Modern Existence

God is Red

and The

Metaphysics of

t o o ffe r a p p ro p riate insights, as we ll a s t o

e x p l a i n w h y detailed

kno wledge

i s i m p o ss i ble i n t h i s connect i o n

o n t h e b a s i s o f literat u re . A t t h i s p o i n t , the nature of I n d ian i s s u e s s ho u ld be e mergi ng. Next, a visual exercise i s i n o rder. Acquire a stand a rd B u reau of I nd i a n A ffa i rs m a p i n d icating the location a n d b o u n d a ries of a l l c u rrent rese rv a t i o n a reas. I t co mes i n black a n d white, s o c o l o r i n t h e res e rvat i o n s w i t h a r e d magic marker o r c o l o red pencil. P i n i t to y o u r w a l l . Practice l o o k i ng at t h e scale o f t h e l a n d bas e i nvolved , n o t a s fed e ral trust a reas a k i n t o n a t i o n a l p a r k s , but as s overeign territ o ries g u a ranteed in perpetu i t y b y i n ternat i o nally b i n d i n g t r e a t y agree ments between the U n ited States gove rnment and t he v a r i o u s I ndian tribes. C onsider t he i m p l ications of t h es e n a t i o n s l y i n g U n i ted S tates itself; they a re

within t h e b o rd e rs of t he internal c o l onies p resently engaged

to varying extents in anti-c o l o n ia l struggle. Two t h i ngs s h o u l d have o c c u rred at this p o i n t fo r pers o n s w h o a p proach the p roj ect w i t h a n o p e n m i n d . First, t h e potential fo r o p p o s i t i o nal act i o n , centering upon tangi bles s u c h as l a n d b a s e rather t h a n a b s t ractio ns o n t h e o r d e r of "class interest" a n d

Marxism And The Native A me rican

1 99

(worse) "repressive desu blimation" s hould be starkly evident. Concomitantly, t he threat to the stability of the status quo should be readily apparent. A whole body of anti-colonial theory should s p ring to t he mind of any well-read leftist and serve to underscore this point. Prelimina ry factual orientation s hould now be complete. One is now ready to begin the approach t o d irect action per se, but as a novice, not an "expert. " These readings and exercises have barely s cratched t he surface of w hat must be learned. The particulars of struggle, in A merica as much as anywhere in the world, are intrinsically the product o f l o cal conditions and local people. The latter are the ex perts. I nitially at least, information flo w is l i kely to be o ne way; "they" will inform you as to the meaning, content and importance of various actions and pheno mena. There is very little of relevance you may initially impart, no doubt a bitter psychological pill for a member of a tradition predicated upon "explaining the world t o itself." Only thro ugh learning the specifics of the l ocal struggle can one hope to "fit it into the broader picture" without intellectually forcing it, a priori, into the constraints of preconception and stereotype. Often, the "broader picture" itself is changed for the better in the process. This is an entirely valid methodology seemingly long forgotten by the A merican left, at least where Ind ians a re co ncerned . Such a prescription does nothing of itself to deny t he a nalytical utility of M arxism in understanding the internal d ynamics of capitalism (which Marxists seem so defen sive about). It does, on the other hand, preclude Marxism's automatic assignment to itself of "most favored theoretical status," fro m overriding ("overarching") the reality with which it purports to deal. Or, to put it another way, it allows M arxism finally-to remain true to Marx's own methodological structure, as spelled out by Elisabeth Lloyd. Perhaps t hrough the simple expedient of taking Marx at his w o rd w i t h i n h i s m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p o st u l a t i o n s , M a r x i s t s c a n overcome t h e l o n g stasis of ethnocentrism deriving from confusion of the tenets of general theory and the specific byproducts of his investigation of particulars. It can be argued, after all, t hat Marx designed his system to transcend itself. If there is any merit at all to t hat p oint, Marxists have long since

200


failed the pro mise of their first thinker. Baudrillard is generations overdue. Such a move would d o much to start the removal of the intellectual baggage currently impeding or preventing fruitful intercu ltural dialogue, u nderstand ing and joint action. A nd it would d o more: in recog n izing the Eurocentris m of the assump tion of economic d eterminism, M arxism could open itself up t o t h e ful l range of socio-cultural realities operant within the Euro pean parad igm itself. Thus could Marxists at long last begin to fully investigate the meanings and functions of such things as kinship structures, sex roles, and aging, long subordinated -in their guise of mere "superstructural" elements-to the tyranny of the economic base. This prospect should be encouraging, indeed stimulati ng, to those seeking true understand ing of and solutions to the vast complexity of interpenetrating p ro blems facing us all. At mini mum, the proposition should hold nothing fearful to anyone with an open and reasonably inquiring mind. I n such an endeavor, those like American Indians,

who harken from markedly

different patterns of socio-cultural experience, should prove ad mirable allies if accepted for whom and what they are, rather than what t hey are needed t o be by the requirements of one or another theoretical predetermination. I n any event, a frrst locus of action i s necessary. I n this , there are a number of concrete options. Truly international efforts are on going in behalf of AIM prisoner of war Leonard Peltier through the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee, located in Kansas City; a simi lar level campaign continues to be conducted in behalf of traditional Dine (Navajo) people being forcibly relocated from their grazing lands in the Big Mountain area of Navajo and Hopi reservations . The Big Mountain Resistance is, of course, located on the land it self, but the support effort is centered in Flagstaff, Arizona.

At the more regional or even local levels, activists might render assistance to the Anishinabe (Chippewa) people of northern Minne sota in their ongoing struggle not only to preserve their residual landbase, but to recover portions of their treaty-guaranteed territory expropriated over the past century by both state and federal govern mental actions. Contact can be made through Anishinabe Akeeng (people's Land Organization) in White Earth, Minnesota. Similarly,

M a rxism And The Native A merican

20 1

throughout the Pacific northwest, an array of American Indian na tions-the Nisqually, Suquamish , Lummi, Siletz (Tuni), Muckle shoot, Quinalt, and P uyallup among them-are waging an intense struggle to preserve the fishing rights upon which their traditional economies are based . These are highly visible efforts and thus should be easy to contact. The same might be said for the Black Hills land claim campaign in South Dakota, the international status effort being undertaken by the Mohawks and other members of the Iroquois Six Nations Confederacy in upstate New York , and so on . In Canada, too, hooking up with indigenous liberation struggles is not particularly difficult. Support is needed for the widely publi cized Lubicon Lake Cree resistance to being forced from their tradi tional homeland in Northern Alberta by a conglomeration of govern mental and corporate interests. The same principle would pertain to the anti-uranium mining struggle being fought in the northern reaches of the same province, and the effort to end "hydrological engineer ing " in Ontario being conducted by the James Bay Cree, the Dam the Dams Campaign, and other entities. At a more diplomatic level, ac tive support to the Canada-wide Council of First Nations is in order and , as in the United States, the list could be extended to great length . There is no legitimate reason why anyone in either country "can 't find" an indigenous struggle to plug in to. So why has the left such a poor track record in this regard? One can only suspect that it is because there is almost absolute reluc tance on the part of most non-Indian activists to accept Indian values and perspectives as being valid, or to place themselves under Indian leadership in anything, even the Indian struggle itself. There are, of course , exceptions to this, but (as the saying goes) those ex ceptions only prove the rule. F o r t hose who still cannot reco ncile themselves to a line of action w h ich allows fo r u nchallenged I nd ia n leadership of I n d i a n str uggles and supports struggles fo r I ndian sel f-determination a t face v a l u e , free of a resid u a l clutter of "class struggle" and t h e l i k e , t h e re re mains a s u bstantial b a s i s for s u pportive partici p a t i o n . C o nsider t hat every inch of s t o len g r o u n d recovered, every bit of co ntrol over res ou rces rega i ned , every iota o f pol itical a u t o n o my achieved by anti-co l o n i al ist Native A mericans comes directly from the imperial integrity of the U . S . itself. If the agendas of AIM an d other oppositional Indian groups were ful filled , i f the treaty obligations o f the United

202


States to the various tribes which are on the books right n o w were met , t h e land base o f t h e 48 contigu o us states would b e diminshed b y approximately o n e third . Further, identified U . S. energy resource reserves would be reduced by two third s . Significant reserves of minerals i ncluding gold , silver, iro n , molybdenum, magnesium , bauxite and sulphur would also pass from U . S . control . Any hard-nosed Marxist revolutionary should be able to detect the absolutely critical nature of the issues . By any definition, the mere potential for even a p arti al dissolution of the U . S . landbase should be a high p r iority con sideration for anyone c oncerned with destabilizing the status quo .

Of course "the I ndian ca n't go it alone." The I n d ian never asked to. Native Americans are being forced to attempt to do so by a persistent demand from all quarters that they stop being I ndian a s a preco ndi tion to as s i s ta nce. The Indian can do little t o change this, but those d oing t he demanding can. Assistance and support without preconditions are entirely within the grasp of Marxists and progressives in general. The left in this country is i n the process o f missing a critical a n d u nique opportunity t o fo rge a truly A merican radicalism based first on those conditions which are most peculiar t o America, one with a chance o f cutting the U. S. power structure deeply. By allowing American Indian struggles to be cond ucted in effective isolation while Marxism concerns itself with "more important matters" such as how t o assert its "natural primacy" and hegemony over all liberatory strategies, the left is consigning itself to more of the repeated cycles of oblivion which has marked its history in the United States . I share with various Marxist authors in this book a belief that the Native American has much to teach Marxis m . I differ i n that I don't hold that the way for this t o occur i s for I ndians t o become M arxists, but that through wide-eyed participation i n I ndian liberation struggles o n Indian terms M arxists will learn much about themselves with which to alter and enrich their own d octrines and traditions. I rely upon direct action and experience to overco me the defects of theory and massive ignorance of the first Americans which currently pervades contemporary U.S. Marxist thinki ng, and I extend a basic human faith that such new found knowledge can be put to use i n better assisting the process of decolonizing the I ndian nations. I call this common ground .

M a rxism And The Native A m e rican

203

If the liberation struggles of Native America are defeated while the left s tands idly by debating " correct lines " and "social priorities , " a crucial opportunity to draw a line on the capitalist process in America will h ave been lost , perhaps forever. In the view of the emergence of outright American neo-fascism-as represented by the "New Right " and " Moral Maj ority " -none of u s can afford to pass such opportunities by, least o f all on points o f polemical pride . A gene ralized and consistent left s u p p o rt for Native A me ri can causes could be e n o ugh to tip t h e scale t oward l i mited wins in issues o f land / reso u rce rights a n d s overeignty. These wins can and s h o uld be rallying p o i n t fo r all o p p os i t i o n a l people. B i l l Ta b b h a s said , " L e t the d e b a t e c o n t i n u e . " I w o u l d o nl y a d d , "and let the act i o n begin."

NOTES AND BIBLIOGRAPHIES

206


Notes For The Same Old Song In Sad Refrain by Ward Churchill and Dora Lee Larson

1 . The language related to the Insurgent Sociologist request for manuscripts comes from correspondence to Ward Churchill generated by Eugene (Ore . ) editorial collective member , Rebecca McGovern . The request was reiterated on several occasions , verbally . The language concerning the rej ection was made by a regular IS consultant reader and editorial collective member at large who preferred (of course) to remain anonymous but who i s known to be a white j unior college sociology teacher i n Minnesota .

2. It could be asserted with equal validity that Means was applying the teachings o f his elders ' elders. See, by way of readily accessible ex amples , Black Elk Speaks, John G. Neihard (transcription) , Universi ty o f Nebraska Pres s , Lincol n , 1 96 1 and The Sacred Pipe, Jospe h Epes Brown (transcription), University of Oklahoma Press, Nor man , 1 953 . 3 . See The Mirror of Production, Jean Baudrillard , TELOS Press , S t . Louis , 1 977. 4. Leakey is more generally noted for his discovery of skeletal material of Momo habilis ( " handy man") in A frica during the 1 960 ' s in "Zinj anthropus , " a large variety o f Australopithecine a t Olduvi Gorge (East Kenya) . These discoveries of " pre-human " types has led to a considerable revision of the theoretics concerning human evolu tion . His final discoveries at Calico Hills, i n conj unction with Ms. Ruth deEtte Simpson , could have even more far-reaching conse quences i n rearranging notions of evolutionary chronology and geography . See "Archeological Excavations in the Calico Mountai ns , California : Preliminary Report , " L . S . B . Leakey, R . E . Simpson , and T. Clements, Science, V 1 60, March I , 1 968. Also see Leakey 's Luck, Sonia Cole, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich , New York , 1 975 .

5 . There are, of course, exceptions to this position on the part o f Native Americans ; non-migratio n i s not a monolithic belief. For ex ample, in his book They Came Here First, D' Arcy McNickle accepted the 1 2 ,000 year Bering Strait land bridge position fully. Archeological data , however, disputes McNickel ' s contention as readily as anyone else' s . It seems probable that the Eskimos and certain Athabascan groups did cross the Strait from Asia during the period in questio n ; an interesting proposition in this connectio n , and one which seems to be gaining some degree of currency, is that these groups represent a return m igration rather than a simple influx of population for reasons unknown .

Notes

207

6. Goodman has a book, A merican Genesis: The A merican Indian and the Origins of Modern Man (Summit Book s , New York, 1 980) which covers not only his own work in the Flagstaff area, but the whole of the data underpinning reverse migration theory . The bulk o f t h e data in t h i s section derives from that book . 7. For an articulation of how these demographic calculations have been derived over the past century, see The Invasion of A merica, Francis Jennings, (W . W. Norton, New York , 1 975). Also see Wilbur Jacobs ' testimony on Native American demography as presented at the 1 976 Sioux Sovereignty Hearings and published in The Great Sioux Nation: Sitting in Judgement on A merica, Roxanne Dunbar Or tiz , Moon Books, New York/San Francisco, 1 97 7 . 8 . See Roxanne Dunbar Ortiz' testimony on indigenous agricultural economies in The Great Sioux Nation, op . cit . 9. For a brilliant and closely reasoned articulation o f the implica tions of the second law of thermal dynamics in the socio-industrial context, see Entropy: A New World View, Jeremy Rifkin with Ted Howard , New Yor k : Viking Pres s , 1 980. 1 0 . See Selections From V. I. Lenin and J. V. Stalin on the National Colonial Question, Calcutta Book House, Calcutta , India, 1 970.

208

Marxism and Native Americans Bibliography for The Same Old SODg In Sad Refrain By Ward Churchill and Dora Lee Larson

B a u d r i l la rd , Jea n , The Mirror of Product ion. St. Louis, M issouri: T E L O S P ress, 1 977. Brown, Joseph Epcs, (Transcrip t i o n ) , The Sacred Pipe: Black Elk 's A ccount of the Seven Rites of the Oglala Sioux. Norman, Okla h o m a : U n iversity of Oklaho ma Press, 1 95 3 . Cole, S o nia, Leakey's Luck. N e w Y o r k : H a rcourt Brace J ovanovick, 1 9 7 5 . G oo d m a n , D r . Jeffrey , A merican Genesis: The A merican Indian a n d the Origins of Modern Man. New Y o r k : S u mmit Books, 1 980. J e n n i ngs, Francis, The In vasion of A merica: Indians. Colonists and the Cant of Conquest. New Y o r k : W. W. Norton Co. , 1 97 5 . Leakey, L. S . B . , R. E . S i m p s o n , and T. Clcmments, "Archeological Exca

vatio n s in t he Calico M o u ntains, California : Prelimi nary Report," Science. V I 60, M a rch I , 1 968. Lenin, V . I., and J . V. Stalin, Selections From V. I. Lenin and J. V. Stalin on the National Colonial Question. Calcutta Book H ouse , Calcutta, I nd i a , 1 970. M c Nickle, D'Arcy, They Came Here First: The Epic of the A merican Indian. New York: H a rper and R o w , 1 949. Neihard , John G., (Transcription), Black Elk Speaks: Being the Life Story of a Holy Man of the Oglala Sioux. Lincoln, Nebraska : Un ivers ity o f Nebraska Press, 1 96 1 .

Ortiz, Dr. Roxanne Dunbar, The Great Sioux Nation: Sitting in Judge men t on A merica. New York a n d S a n Francisco: I nternational Treaty Cou ncil / Moon Books, 1 977. Rifk i n , Jeremy with Ted H oward, En tropy: A New World Vie w. New York : Viking Press, 1 9 80.

Notes

209

Notes For Marx 's General Culture Theoretics By Elisabeth Lloyd I . See Be rteH Oilman, " Wit h Words That A ppear Like Bats," A lien ation, 2nd Ed ition, Cambridge University Pre s s , 1 976. 2 . This i s essent ially Lenin's articul a t i o n of triadic dialectical c h a racteristics, as e x p ressed in his Karl Marx. Foreign Language Press, Peking, 1 976.

3 . For a fuller and quite lucid e x a m i n a t i o n of d i a lectical ontology and epis t e m o l ogy, see M ichael Albert a n d R o b i n H ah n e l , Unortho dox Marxism. South End Press, B o s to n , 1 979. 4. The q u otation fro m Althusser is gleaned from t h e glossary of his

For Marx. Vintage B o o k s , New York, 1 969. 5 . Al bert and H ahnel, o p . cit . , p. 5 3 . 6. Introduction t o the Crit ique of Po litical Economy. Vintage Books, New York, 1 97 3 , p. 302.

7. Ibid, p. 300. 8. Ibid. , p. 294 . 9.

The Communist Manifesto. Washington Square Press , New

York, 1 967, p . 36.

1 0. Grundrisse, Vintage Books, New York, 1 97 3 , p. 600.

I I . Introduction to the Critique of Political Economy, p. 292. 1 2 . Ibid. , p 278. 1 3 . Ibid. , 276. 14. Ibid. , p . 29 1 . Als o : the " totality o f social life , " which Marx seeks

to e x p l a i n is, as he tells us on another occa s i o n , "the recip rocal action of the various sides on one ant her," The German Ideology, I n ternatio n a l Pu blishers, New York, 1 93 9 , p. 2 8 .

15.

Paul

LaFargue is

quoted

from

" Reminiscences

of Marx , "

Reminiscences of Marx and Engels, M o scow, n o date, p. 7 8 . 1 6. M a n y o f the formulations in t h i s sect i o n are borrowed fro m t h e w o r k of Bertell Oilman.

1 7 . Grundrisse. p . 1 76. 1 8 . Ibid. , p . 600.

1 9. Marx and Engels: Selected Corresponden ce. ed. and trans. Dona Torr, London, 1 940, p. 7. 20. The Holy Family, International Publishers, New York, 1 949, p. 1 63 . 2 1 . Introduction t o the Critique of Polit ical Economy, p. 268. 22. The Economic and Philosophic Man uscripts of 1844, Interna t i onal Publishers, New York, 1 973, p. 7 5 . 23 . Ibid.

210


24. The German Ideology,

p.

7.

2 5 . Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, p. 72; Grun drisse, p. 505. 26.

Oilman, op. cit. , p.

23.

p. 447. New World Publishers, New York, 1 967. 29. Po verty of Philosophy, Moscow, no date, p. 1 9 5 ; and Letters 10 Kugleman, London, 1 94 I . p . 1 9. 27. Marx and Engels: Selected Correspondence,

28. Capital, Vol. III,

30. The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, p. 1 05 .

Bi bliography for Marx's General Cultural Theoretics By Elisabeth Lloyd

A l bert, M ichael; and H a h n e l , R o b i n , Unorth odox Marxism. S o u t h End Press, Boston, 1 979. A I t h usser, Louis, For Marx, V i n t age Books, New York, 1 969. Engels, Freid rick, The Dialectics of Nature, I nternational Publishers. N e w York, 1 940. La Fargue, Pa u l , Reminiscences of Marx and Engels. M oscow, no d a t e . Le nin, V. I . , Karl Marx. Foreign Lang uage Press, Peking, 1 967. Mao Tset u ng, Selected Readings From the Works of Mao, Foreign Lan guage Press, Pek i ng, 1 97 1 . Marx, Karl, Capital. Vol. III, N e w Wo rld Pu blisher, New York, 1 96 7 . M a r x , K a r l ; and Engels, Fre i d r i c k , (The) Co m munist Manifes to. Was h ing ton Square Press, New Y o r k , 1 96 7 . M a r x , Karl, (The) Eco n o m ic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. I n ter national Publis hers, N e w York, 1 97 3 . M a rx, K a r l , (The) German Ideo logy, I nternational Publishers, New Y o r k , 1 9 34. Marx, Karl, (The) Grundrisse, V i ntage B o o k s , New York, 1 973. Marx, Karl; and Engels, Freid rick, (Th e) Holy Family, I nternational Pub lisher, New York, 1 940. Marx, Karl, Leiters to Klugeman, London, 1 94 1 . Marx, Karl; a n d Engels, Freid rick, Marx and Engels: Selected Correspon dence, ed. a nd t rans. by D o n a To rr, L o n d o n , 1 940. .•

M arx, Karl, (The) Poverty of Philosophy. M oscow, no date. Oilman, Bertell, A lienation. 2nd edit i o n , Cambridge U n iversity Press, 1 976.

Notes

21 1

Notes For Culture and Personhood By Bob Sipe I . Dia m o n d , Stanley, "The Search for the Pri m itive," The Concept of the Prim it ive, Ashley M ontague, ed . , The Free Press, New York, 1 968, p. 1 44. 2. Arato, A n d rew and Eike Gebhard t , e d s . , The Essential Frankfurt School Reader, Urizen Books, New York , 1 97 8 , p. 1 8 5 . 3 . M a r x , Karl, Capital, Vol. J , Progress Publishers, M oscow, 1 965, p . 1 83 . 4 . M a r k h o vic, Mihailo, From Affluence to Praxis. Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1 974, p. 66.

University of

5 . H orkeimer, Max, Eclipse of Reason, Sea bury Press (a Contin u u m B o o k ) , N e w Y o r k , 1 972, p. 270. 6. Ibid. , pp. 267-268 . 7. Shroye r , Trent, The Critique of Dom ination. Ge o rge Braziller, New York , 1 97 3 , pp. 30-3 1 . 8 . Jay, Mart i n , The Dialectical Imaginatio n , Little Brown and Com pany, Boston, 1 97 3 , pp. 82-8 3 . 9.

The Critique of Dom ination, op. c i t . p. 3 0 .

1 0. Terkel, S t u d s , Working, Rand om H o u se ( Pantheon Books), N e w Y o r k , 1 97 2 . 1 1 . Reic h , Wilhe l m , Sex- Pol: Essays,

1 929- 1934, Rand o m H o use

(Vintage Books), New York, 1 972, p . 3 5 8 . 1 2. Capital, o p . ci t . , p . 72. 1 3 . Berger, P., and S . Pullberg, "The C o ncept o f Reification," The New Left Review. 35, London, 1 966, p. 6 1 . 1 4. Ibid. 1 5 . The Essential Frankfurt School Reader. op. cit. , p. 1 9 1 . 1 6. Lukacs, George, History and Class Consciousness: Studies in

Marxist Dialectics, Rodney Livingstone, trans . , M I T Pres s , Cambridge , M a . , 1 97 1 . 1 7 . Ibid

. •

p . 84.

1 8 . Ibid. , p . 8 7 . 1 9 . Ibid. , p . 8 8 . 2 0 . Ibid p . 9 0 . .•

2 1 . M a r c u s e , Herbert, One Dimensional Man, Beacon Press, Boston, 1 964, p . 1 2. 22. Sex- Pol, o p . cit . , pp. 234-23 5 . 23. On e Dimensional Man. o p . cit. p . 7 7 . 2 4 . Ibid. , p . 30.


212

25. Ibid p . 7 1 . 26. Ibid p. 57. 27. Ibid. 28 . Freud, Sigmund , " Character and Anal Ero ti ci s m , " The Sta ndard Edition of the Complete Works of Sigmund Freud. Vol. IX. H ogart h Press, Lond o n , 1 957, p . 1 98 . 29. Reiche, Reimut, Sexuality a n d Class Struggle. Praeger Publishers, New York, 1 97 1 , p. 25. 30. " Character and Anal Eroticism , " op cit . , p . 20 1 . 3 1 . Marcuse, Herbert, A n Essay on Liberation, Beacon Press, Bost o n , 1 969, p . 47. .•

. .

32. Aronowitz, Stanley, False Promises: The Shaping of American Working Class Consciousness. M c G raw HilI, New York, 1 97 3 , p p . 74-75. 3 3 . A n Essay on Liberation , o p . cit . , p. 1 4. 34. Sexuality and Class Struggle, o p . cit . , pp. 1 3 5- 1 36. 35. Laing, R . D., The Divided Self, Ra ndom H o use ( Pantheon Books), New York, 1 969, p p . 40-68. 36. Fromm, Eric, Beyond the Chains of J1/usion, Simon and Sch uster, New York, 1 962, p. 56. 37. Ibid p. 1 40. 38. A n Essay on Liberation. o p . cit . , p. 5 1 . 39. "The Search for the Pri mitive , " o p . cit . , pp. 1 24- 1 26. .•

2 13

N otes Bibliography for Culture and Personhood By Bob Sipe Arata, A n d re w and E i k e G e b h a rd t . e d s . The Essential

Franfurt School

Reader. N e w York: U rizen B o o k s , 1 9 7 8 . A r o n o w i t 7 , S t a n ley. False Pro m ises. The Shaping of A merican Wo rk ing Class Consciousness. New Y o r k : M c G r a w- H i l i . 1 9 7 3 . B a ra n , Pa u l a n d P a u l S weezy. Mo nopoly Capital. A n Essay o n the A meri can Eco n o m ic and So cial Order. New Y o r k : M o n t h l y R e v i e w P ress, 1 966. B a r i t z , L o r e n . Th e Ser vants

(If

Po wer: A Hist o ry of the Use of Social & S o n s , 1 96 5 .

Science in A merican Industry. New Y o r k : J o h n Wiley

B l a u n e r , R o bert. A ienation and Freedom . the Factory Worker and His Indust ry. C h icago : U n i versity of Chicago Press, 1 964. B o a d e l l a , D a v i d . Wilhelm Reich, The Evolution of His Work. Ch icago : H e n ry Regnery Co .

.

1 9 74.

Brave r m a n . H a rry. '-abor and Monopoly Capital. The Degrada t ion of Work in the Twen tieth Cen t ur,J'. New Y o r k : M o n t h l y R e v i e w Press. 1 9 74. B r i g h t , James R . A ut o matio n and Management. Bosto n : H a rva rd U n iver sity P ress, 1 9 5 8 . Brown, Bruce.

Marx, Frpwi and the

Crit ique of Everyday L(fe. Ne w Y o r k :

M o n t h l y R e v i e w Pres s , 1 9 7 3 . Crozier, M i c h e l . The Wo rld

o f the

Office Worker. Chicago & Lond o n :

U ni versit y o f Ch icago Press, 1 97 1 . E d w a r d s , R i c h ard c . ; R e i c h

,

M ic h ae l ; a n d Weiss k r o p f. T h o mas E. The

Capitalist System, A Radical A nalysis of A merican Society. Engle wood C l i ffs , N . J . ; P r e ntice- H a l l , 1 9 7 2 . Fre u d , S ig m u n d . Civiliza tion and Its Discontents. N e w Y o r k : W. W . N o rt o n a n d C o . , 1 96 1 . Freud , S i g m u n d . a'r oup Psychology and the A nalysis of the Ego. New Y o r k : B a n t a m Books, 1 960. Fre u d , S i g m u n d . The Ego and the Id. New Y o r k : W. W. N o rt o n

&

Co.,

1 960.

Fre u d , S i g m u n d . Three Co n tributions to the Theory of Sex. New Y o r k : E . P. D u t t o n & C o . , 1 96 2 . Fried a n , Bet t y . The Fem inine Mystique. New Y o r k : Dell P u b . Co. , 1 96 3 . Fro m m , E r i c h . Beyond the Chains of Illusion. New York : S i m o n and S c h u s t er, 1 9 6 2 . Fr o m m , E r ic h . Crisis of Psychoanalysis, Essays o n Marx, Freud a n d Social .

Psycholgoy. New Y o r k : H ol t , R i nehart, a n d W i n s t o n , 1 9 70.

Fro m m , E r ic h . Escape from Freedom. N e w Y o r k : A v o n B o o k s , 1 94 1 . Fro m m , E ri c h . Man P u b . , .1 947.

For Himself. New Y o r k : G ree n w i c h , C o n n : Fawcett

214


Gerth, Hans a n d C . Wright M il l s . Characte and Social Structure. New York : H a rc o u rt Brace and World , I nc . (A Harbi nger Book), 1 95 3 . G i l bre t h , Lillia n . The Psychology of Management. The Writings of t h e Gilbreths. Edited b y Willia m R . S p riegel a n d Clark E . Meyers. H o mewood , I l l : R . D. Irwi n , 1 95 3 . G reenste i n , Fred I . Personality a n d Politics. Problems of Evidence. Influ ence, and Conceptualization. Chicago : M a rk h a m Pub. Co . , 1 969. H o rk h e i mer, M a x . Critical Theory. New Y o r k : Sea b u ry Press (A C o n t i n u u m B o o k ) , 1 969. H o rkheimer, M a x . Eclipse of Reason. New Y o r k : Sea bury Press , (A C o n t i n u u m B o o k ) , 1 974. I s rael , Joac h i m . A lienation. fro m Marx to Modern Sociology. Bost o n : Allyn a n d Bacon , I n c . , 1 97 1 . Jay, M a rt in . Th e Dialectical Imagination. Bosto n : Little, B rown & Co . , 1 97 3 . L a i n g , R . D . The Divided Self. New York: Rand o m H o use (Pan t h e o n B o o k s ) , 1 969. Le ns, Sid ney. The Labor Wars. G a r d e n City, N . Y . : Dou bleday & Co. ( A nchor Books), 1 9 7 4 . L o we n , Alexander. Bioenergetics. N e w Y o r k : Coward , M c Ca n n & Geogh agen, Inc., 1 9 7 5 . Lu kacs, George. History and Class Consciousness. Studies in Marxist Dialectics. trans. by R o d n e y Livings t o n e . Ca mbridge, Mass: The M I T Press, / 9 7 1 . Marcuse, He rbert. A n Essay on Liberation. Boston: Beacon P ress, 1 969. M a rcuse, H e rbert. Eros and Civilization. N e w York : Random H o use ( V i n tage Boo ks), 1 955. Marcuse, Herbert. Negations. Bost o n : Beacon Press, 1 968. Marcuse, Herbert. One- Dimensional Man. Bosto n : Beacon Press, 1 964. Ma rkovic, M i ha i l o . Fro m Af fluence to Praxis. A n n Arbor, M i c h . : U n iver sity of M ichigan Press, 1 9 74. Marx, Karl. Capital. Vols. I-I I I M oscow: P rogress Pu blishers, 1 965. Marx, Karl a n d Frede rick Enge l s . Selected Wo rks. Vols. I-I I I . M oscow: Progress Publishers, 1 969. Maslow, Abraham. To ward A Psychology of Being. Princeton, N. J . : D . Va n Nostra n d C o . , 1 962. M c Lea n , A l a n . Men tal Health and Work Organizations. Chicago: R a n d M c Nally & Co . , 1 9 70. Pol lard , Sid ney. The Genesis of Modern Managemen t: A Study of the Industrial Revolution in Great Britain. Ca m bridge, Mass. : Harvard U n i versity Press, 1 965. Reich, Wilhe l m . Fun ction of the Orgasm. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux (Noonday Press), 1 9 7 1 .

2 15

R e i c h , W i l h e l m . Sex- Pol Essays, 1 929- 1 934. N e w Y o r k : Rand o m H ouse ( Vi n t age B o o k s), 1 9 72. Reich, Reimut. Sexuality and Class Struggle. New Y o r k : Praeger Pu b l i s h ers, 1 97 1 . Sartre, Jea n Paul. Search for a Method. New York: A l fred A. Knopf ( Vi ntage Books), 1 968. Schiller, H e rbert. Mass Communication and A merican Empire. Bost o n : Beac o n Pre s s , 1 97 1 . Sch i l l e r, H e rbert. The Mind Managers. B o st o n : Beacon Press, 1 9 7 3 . Schroyer, Tre n t . The Critique ()f Domination. N e w York : G e o rge Braziller, 1 9 73. S hepard , J o n M . A utomation a n d A lienation: A Study of Office and Factory Workers. Ca mbridge, Mass: H a rvard U n iv. Press, 1 9 7 1 . Ta y l o r , Fred erick W. The Principles of Scientific Management. New Y o r k : H a rper

&

R o w , 1 96 7 .

Taylor, Frederick W. Scientific Management. New Y o r k a n d Londo n : Harper, 1 94 7 . T h i s single v o l u m e c o n t a i n s : Shop Management ( 1 903); Principles of Scientific Management ( l 9 1 I ); and a p u b l i c d ocument, Hear ings Before Special Co m m ittee of the House of Representa tives to In vesti gate the Taylor and other Systems of Shop Management ( 1 9 1 2). Th o m p s o n , E . P . The Making of the English Working Class. New York: Rand o m H o use, 1 96 3 . Zaretsky, E l i . Capitalism. t h e Fam ily. and Personal Life. S a n t a C r u z , Califo rnia : Loaded P r e s s , 1 974; (origi n a l l y p r i n te d i n Socialist Re volution. J a n . -J u n e , 1 9 73).

ARTICLES A d o r n o , Theod ore , "Sociology and Psyc h o l ogy," New Left Review, 46, 1 967, pp. Be rger , P . and S. Pullbe rg, "The Concept of Reifica t i o n , " New Left Review, 3 5 , 1 966, p p . 56-7 1 . D i a m o n d , S ta n ley, "The Search for the Pri m i t ive , " The Co ncept of the Primitive. Edited by A s h le y Montague, New York : The Free Press, 1 968. F re u d , Sigmund, "Character and Anal Erotic i s m , " The Standard Edition of the Complete Psycho logical Works of Sigmund Freud, V o l . I X , Lond o n : H ogarth Press , 1 97 5 , p p . 1 69- 1 7 5 . Freud , S i g m u n d , .. 'Civil ized' S e x u a l M o ra l i t y a n d M od e r n Nervous I l l ness," The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Vol. I X , Lond o n : H ogarth Press, 1 95 7 , p p . 1 8 1 -204. G ra n n i s , Josep h c . , "The School as a M o d e l of S ociety," The Learning of Political Behavior. Ed ited by Norman A d l e r a nd Charles Harringt o n , Glenview , Il l . : S c o t t Foresman & C o . , 1 970, p p . 1 39- 1 48 .

2I6

M a rx i s m a n d Nat i ve Amer i cans

M a rglin, Stephen A., "What The Bosses Do; The Origin and Functi o n of

t & I I ," Review of Radical Political Economics. S u m mer 1 974, pp. 60- 1 1 2; S pring 1 975, pp. 20-3 7 .

H ierarchy i n Capitalist Prod uct i o n , Parts

Portes, Alej and ros, " O n t he I n terpretation of Class Consciousness," A mer

ican Journal of Sociology, Vol. 7 7 , No. 2, Sept. 1 97 1 , p p . 22 8-244. Rothschild, Emma, "G M in M o re Trouble," Ne w York Revie w of Books, M a rc h 23, 1 972, pp. 1 9-23. S mith, M . B rewster, "A M a p for t he Analysis of Personality and Politics,"

Journal of Social Issues. Vol. X X I V, No. 3, I

N o t es

217

Notes For Circling The Same Old Rock By Vine Deloria Jr. 1 . Schaff, Adam , Marxism and the Human Individual, p . 1 34. 2 . Marcu s e , Herbert, Reason and Revolution, p. 74. 3. Ibid. , p . 3 1 9. 4 . Ibid. ,

p. 7 5 .

5 . Schaff, p . 7 3 . 6 . Ibid. ,

p . 69 .

7 . Ibid. , p. 100.

M arcu se , p . 77. Erich, Marx 's Concept of Man, p . 4 7 . 10. Schaff, p . 1 06 .

8.

9 . From m ,

1 1 . Ibid. , p . 1 1 2 . 1 2 . Marx , K arl , Economic & Philosophic Man uscripts, in Marx 's Concept of Man, p . 97 . 1 3 . Marx, Karl , Private Property and Labor, in Marx 's Concept of Man, p. 1 29 . 1 4 . Marcuse,

p . 246.

1 5 . Scha ff, p . 66 . 1 6 . Marcuse ,

p. 60 .

1 7 . Ibid. , p . 1 87 . 1 8 . Schaff, p .

43 .

1 9 . Ibid. , p . 1 28 . 20. Ibid. , p . 1 3 2 . 2 1 . Ibid. , p . 229. 22 . Ibid. , p . 205 . 23 . Marcuse, p . 2 3 9 . 24 . Ibid. , p . 1 1 2 . 25 . Fromm , p . 66 . 26. Ibid. , p . 3 . 27 . Marx , Karl, Private Property and Labor, i n Marx 's Concept of

Man, p . 1 27 . 28 . Schaff, p . 222 . 29. Schaff, p . 2 1 8 . 3 0 . Ibid. 3 1 . Northru p , F. S . C . , The Taming of the Nations, p . 1 89. 32. Ibid. , p. 1 92. 3 3 . Bell a h , Robert , Beyond Belief, " Religiou s Evolution , " p . 22 . 3 4 . Ibid. , p . 4 5 . 3 5 . From m , p . 3 6 .

218

Marxism and Native A mericans Bibliography for Circling The Same Old Rock By Vine Deloria Jr.

Bellah, Robert, Beyond Belief, New York: H arper & Row, 1 970. Fro m m , Erich, Marx 's Concept of Man. New York: Frederick U ngar Publishing C o . , 1 96 1 (Containing several of Karl Ma rx's shorter works including: Private Property and Labor a n d Economic and Philosophical

Manuscripts) Marcuse, H e rbert, Reason and Revolution. Bosto n : Beaco n Press, 1 960. Northrup, F. S . C. The Tam ing of the Nations. New York: Mac m i l l a n 1 954.

,

Schaff, Adam, Marxism and the Human Individual. New York: McGraw Hill Paperbacks, 1 970.

Notes

219

Notes For Marx Versus Marxism By Bill Tabb 1 . Ray Vicker, "The Industrial Reservation; Plan seeks to Blend In dians into Urban Society Without Sacrificing

I dentity as Tribe

Members , " Wall Street Journal, May 2 1 , 1 98 1 , p . 56 . 2 . See William E. Connolly, "The Politics of Industrialization , " Democracy,

July 1 98 1 , pp. 20-2 1 ; and Andre Gorz, Ecology as

Politics, Boston: South End Pres s , 1 980 for ecologically "with i t " Marxist perspectives .

3. See Shlomo Avineri , ed . , Karl Marx on Colonialism and Modernization, Garden City, N.Y. : Anchor Books, 1 969, p . 6. 4. Ibid. , p . 470.

5. Black Hills Alliance, The Keystone to Survival, Rapid City, South Dakota , Black Hills Alliance, P . O . Box 2508 , 1 98 1 , p . 1 03 . 6. Ibid. , p . 1 07 .

7 . Ibid. ,

p.

57.

220


AB O U T THE CONTRIBUTORS Frank Black Elk, Oglala Lakota, is the former head of the Col orado . ch apter of the American I ndian Movement and prese ntly a youth counselor in Denver . Ward Churchill, Creek/Cherokee Metis , is codirector of the Colorado chapter o f AIM . He is also director of the Educa tional Development Program and coordinator of American Studies in the Center for Study of Ethnicity and Race in America at the Uni"�rsity of Colorado/Boulder. Vine Deloria Jr. , Hunkpapa Lakota, is a professor of American Indian Studies, Political Science, and History of Law at the University o f Arizon a . He is author, editor or coauthor of n umerous books , including Custer Died/or Your Sins; We Talk, You Listen,' Behind the Trail oj Broken Treaties,' 0/ Utmost Good Faith,' Indians oj the Pacific North west; God Is Red,' Metaphysics oj Modern Existence,' The Nations Within; A merican Indians, A merican Justice,' and A merican Indian Policy in the Twentieth Century.

Phil Heiple is an applied cultural activist/critic working as a disc j ockey (specializing in reggae music) with radio station KDYP in Santa Barbara . He has published several essays and polemics in Insurgent Sociologist. Winona LaDuke, Anishinabe , was an early member of Women of All Red Nations and participated in the establishment of the United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Populations . She was a founder o f Anishinabe Akeeng (People's Land O rganization) at her native White Earth Reservatio n , and has published widely in j ou rnals such as Sinister Wisdom, New Age, Radical A merica and Co-Evolution Quarterly. Elisabeth Lloyd holds the doctorate in social philosophy from Princeton University, and is c urrently an associate pro fessor of philosophy at the University of California at Berkeley.

Notes

22 1

R ussell Means, Oglala Lakota , was a maj o r leader i n AIM dur ing t h e peak peri od of its organizational prom i n e n c e . In this capa c i ty, h e was s h o t t h ree times, stabbed once, taken to trial . on n u merous occasions and sent t o pris o n . During the 1 980s , Means

resigned

from

AIM

as

a

result

of its

"confused

priori ties " c oncerning extension o f support to the M i s k i t o , Sumu and Rama I n d i a n resistcnce to being subordi nated t o Marxian state power i n Nicaragu a . He h a s s i n c e become active i n Li bert ari a n politics and continues to lecture widely.

Bill Tabb tea..:: h es economics at Queens College , CU N Y . He is author o f The Long Default: Ne w York City and the Urban Fiscal Crisis as well as a number of sch olarly and popular econ omics articles . Robert B. Sipe teaches political and psychological theory at Sangamon St ate Univer s i t y . He has been an editor o f Issues in Radical Therapy and is a contributing editor to Ne w Studies on the Left.

N at i ve A m e r i ca n s/Po l it i cal S c i e n ce

u.s.

$1 6.00

MARXISM and NATIVE AMERICANS ed. ward Churchill Co n t ri b u tors:

R u s se l l

M ean s ,

Wi nona

La D u ke,

V i n e De l o r i a, J r. , Fra n k B l ac k E l k, E l i sabet h L l oyd , B i l l Tab b , Do ra Lee Larso n , Robert S i p e , t h e Revo l ut i o n ary Co m m u n i st Party, Ph i l H e i p l e a n d Ward Ch u rc h i l l

I n a u n i q u e fo r m at of i n t e l l e c t u a l c h a l l e n g e a n d c o u n t e r c h a l l e n g e p ro m i n e n t N at i ve A m e r i c a n s a n d M a rx i s ts d e bate t h e v i a b i l ity of M a rx i s m a n d t h e p reva l e n c e of e n t h n o c e n t r i c b i a s i n p o l i t i c s , c u l t u r e , a n d s o c i a l t h e o ry . T h e a u t h o rs e x a m i n e t h e stat u s of W e s t e r n n ot i o n s of " p ro g ress" a n d " d e ve l o p m e n t " i n t h e c o n text of the p ract i c a l re a l i t i es f a c e d

by A m erican

I n d ians

in

the i r o n g o i n g

s t r u g g l e fo r j u st i c e a n d s e l f- d e t e r m i n a t i o n . T h i s d i a l o g u � offe rs c r i t i c a l i n s i g h t s i n to t h e n at u re o f e c o l og i c a l a w a re n es s a n d d i a l ect i c s a n d i n to t h e p o ss i b i l i ty o f c o n s t r u ct i n g a soc i a l t h e o ry t h a t c a n b r i d g e c u l t u ra l bo u n d a r i es . 90000

9 7

S O U T H E N D P R ESS

ISBN:

O-:89608- 1 77-X

Marxism and Native Americans - Ward Churchill

Recommend Documents