Podcasts about tribal citizenship

In this episode, Dr. G talks with Indigenous educator and doctoral candidate Daphne Littlebear about  P.L.A.C.E curriculum and forming your Pueblo Cloud. People: IntergenerationalLand: SourceArt: GratitudeCulture: ResilienceEcology: NetworksDaphne Littlebear is from Tamaya, Santa Ana Pueblo, and is a descendant of the Mvskoke, Yuchi, and Shawnee Nations, where she resides. Music and dancing provide so much joy and healing to Daphne, she engages in many of the cultural dances of her communities.​Daphne is currently completing her doctoral degree at Arizona State University studying social justice education, education policy, and Indigenous education. The current working title of her dissertation is, “Affirming the Educational Sovereignty of Santa Ana Pueblo: The Intersections Community Based Education, Western Schooling, and Tribal Citizenship”.​Daphne is the Research and Evaluation Manager at the National Indian Education Association serving tribal colleges and universities. Daphne has had the opportunity to work in the education field for over ten years with various organizations, she believes, advocates and is a champion of educational sovereignty for Tribal Nations.

Daphne Littlebear who is from Tamaya, Santa Ana Pueblo and is a descendant of the Mvskoke, Yuchi and Shawnee Nations, where she resides. Music and dancing provides so much joy and healing to Daphne, she engages in many of the cultural dances of her communities. Daphne is currently completing her doctoral degree at Arizona State University studying social justice education, education policy and Indigenous education. The current working title of her dissertation is, “Affirming the Educational Sovereignty of Santa Ana Pueblo: The Intersections Community Based Education, Western Schooling and Tribal Citizenship”. Daphne is the research director at the American Indian Higher Education Consortium serving tribal colleges and universities. Daphne has had the opportunity to work in the education field for over ten years with various organizations, she believes, advocates and is a champion of educational sovereignty for Tribal Nations. IG: @daphlilbearTwitter: @daphlilbearContact: dlittlebear@aihec.orgdlittleb@asu.edu

Rhonda Grayson is the great-granddaughter of America Cohee Webster, a member of the Muscogee Creek Nation. Rhonda can say America’s roll number by heart: 4661. Rhonda grew up aware and proud of her Creek ancestry, but has not been able to enroll as a member of the tribe herself. In 1979, the Creek Nation re-wrote its constitution to change the citizenship parameters so that only people who could trace their lineage by blood could be members. That meant Black people who were the descendants of the Creek’s enslaved population were removed from the rolls. These people were called Creek Freedmen, and until 1979, they were considered members of the tribe. Rhonda is now a founding member of the Muscogee Creek Indian Freedmen Band, a group of Black people working to preserve their families’ connection to the Creek Nation. On Into America, Rhonda tells Trymaine Lee about her fight to be legally recognized as part of the Muscogee Creek Nation. And they talk about her family’s legacy: including her great-grandmother, America Cohee, whose picture you can find as the tile art for this episode. For a transcript, please visit https://www.msnbc.com/intoamerica. Further Reading and Listening: Information about the Muscogee Creek Indian Freedman Band Coronavirus takes more than Native Americans' lives. Killing our elderly erases our culture.

What does it mean for half a million Oklahomans to be citizens of both the United States and of their tribal nations? We speak with Jay Hannah, who has served the Cherokee Nation as Secretary-Treasurer, Chairman of the 1999 Constitution Convention, and Chairman of all tribal enterprises, about the history and meaning of tribal citizenship within American democracy. Facebook: @Ok.HumanitiesTwitter: @OkhumanitiesInstagram: @OkhumanitiesOur homepage: okhumanities.org/brainbox   View more about this episode: okhumanities.org/page/brainbox-s3-ep14

This weekend Senator Elizabeth Warren is expected to formally announce her candidacy for the democratic nomination for presidency. Today we are in conversation with Jacqueline Keeler about Warren's controversies of her Native American heritage, the issue about tribal citizenship and the history behind all this. Guest: Jacqueline Keeler is a Diné/Ihanktonwan Dakota writer and contributor to many publications including Yes! Magazine, Truthout, The Nation and others.  She is the editor of “Edge of Morning: Native Voices Speak for the Bears Ears.” Her piece about Elizabeth Warren and her Native American heritage can be found here. Then, The New Wild West: Black Gold, Fracking, and Life in a North Dakota Boomtown by Journalist Blaire Briody.     The post Elizabeth Warren's Native American Heritage and the Issue about Tribal Citizenship appeared first on KPFA.

Many American Indian cultures, like the Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians, practiced a form of non-hereditary slavery for centuries before contact with Europeans. But after Europeans arrived on Native shores, and they forcibly brought African people into labor in the beginning of the 17th century, the dynamics of native slavery practices changed. Supporting the Confederacy during […]

“Native American” is unique among American racial categories in defining not just social status or historical lineage, but also an individual’s relationship to state and federal governments. In Who Belongs?: Race, Resources, and Tribal Citizenship in the Native South (Oxford University Press, 2016), Mikaela M. Adams, an assistant professor of history at the University of Mississippi, tracks the histories of six Indian societies in the American South from the seventeenth to the twenty first centuries. In doing so, she argues that the question of belonging was often difficult to answer, particularly in a region where whites insisted on dividing the individuals along a strict, binary, color line. In Who Belongs?, Pamunkey, Catawba, Choctaw, Cherokee, Seminole, and Miccosukee communities all grapple with the fundamental question of tribal membership. After colonization and conquest, the answer to the question posed by Adams could have critical and concrete consequences. Often, whether someone belonged to a given tribe determined fundamental questions of identity, financial restitution, and land ownership. Who Belongs? is a critical retelling of the Native south which emphasizes the fungible nature of group identity and the adaptations Native communities made to survive within a settler colonial system of state power. Stephen Hausmann is a doctoral candidate at Temple University and Visiting Instructor of history at the University of Pittsburgh. He is currently writing his dissertation, a history of race and the environment in the Black Hills and surrounding northern plains region of South Dakota, Wyoming, and Montana. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“Native American” is unique among American racial categories in defining not just social status or historical lineage, but also an individual’s relationship to state and federal governments. In Who Belongs?: Race, Resources, and Tribal Citizenship in the Native South (Oxford University Press, 2016), Mikaela M. Adams, an assistant professor of history at the University of Mississippi, tracks the histories of six Indian societies in the American South from the seventeenth to the twenty first centuries. In doing so, she argues that the question of belonging was often difficult to answer, particularly in a region where whites insisted on dividing the individuals along a strict, binary, color line. In Who Belongs?, Pamunkey, Catawba, Choctaw, Cherokee, Seminole, and Miccosukee communities all grapple with the fundamental question of tribal membership. After colonization and conquest, the answer to the question posed by Adams could have critical and concrete consequences. Often, whether someone belonged to a given tribe determined fundamental questions of identity, financial restitution, and land ownership. Who Belongs? is a critical retelling of the Native south which emphasizes the fungible nature of group identity and the adaptations Native communities made to survive within a settler colonial system of state power. Stephen Hausmann is a doctoral candidate at Temple University and Visiting Instructor of history at the University of Pittsburgh. He is currently writing his dissertation, a history of race and the environment in the Black Hills and surrounding northern plains region of South Dakota, Wyoming, and Montana. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“Native American” is unique among American racial categories in defining not just social status or historical lineage, but also an individual’s relationship to state and federal governments. In Who Belongs?: Race, Resources, and Tribal Citizenship in the Native South (Oxford University Press, 2016), Mikaela M. Adams, an assistant professor of history at the University of Mississippi, tracks the histories of six Indian societies in the American South from the seventeenth to the twenty first centuries. In doing so, she argues that the question of belonging was often difficult to answer, particularly in a region where whites insisted on dividing the individuals along a strict, binary, color line. In Who Belongs?, Pamunkey, Catawba, Choctaw, Cherokee, Seminole, and Miccosukee communities all grapple with the fundamental question of tribal membership. After colonization and conquest, the answer to the question posed by Adams could have critical and concrete consequences. Often, whether someone belonged to a given tribe determined fundamental questions of identity, financial restitution, and land ownership. Who Belongs? is a critical retelling of the Native south which emphasizes the fungible nature of group identity and the adaptations Native communities made to survive within a settler colonial system of state power. Stephen Hausmann is a doctoral candidate at Temple University and Visiting Instructor of history at the University of Pittsburgh. He is currently writing his dissertation, a history of race and the environment in the Black Hills and surrounding northern plains region of South Dakota, Wyoming, and Montana. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“Native American” is unique among American racial categories in defining not just social status or historical lineage, but also an individual’s relationship to state and federal governments. In Who Belongs?: Race, Resources, and Tribal Citizenship in the Native South (Oxford University Press, 2016), Mikaela M. Adams, an assistant professor of history at the University of Mississippi, tracks the histories of six Indian societies in the American South from the seventeenth to the twenty first centuries. In doing so, she argues that the question of belonging was often difficult to answer, particularly in a region where whites insisted on dividing the individuals along a strict, binary, color line. In Who Belongs?, Pamunkey, Catawba, Choctaw, Cherokee, Seminole, and Miccosukee communities all grapple with the fundamental question of tribal membership. After colonization and conquest, the answer to the question posed by Adams could have critical and concrete consequences. Often, whether someone belonged to a given tribe determined fundamental questions of identity, financial restitution, and land ownership. Who Belongs? is a critical retelling of the Native south which emphasizes the fungible nature of group identity and the adaptations Native communities made to survive within a settler colonial system of state power. Stephen Hausmann is a doctoral candidate at Temple University and Visiting Instructor of history at the University of Pittsburgh. He is currently writing his dissertation, a history of race and the environment in the Black Hills and surrounding northern plains region of South Dakota, Wyoming, and Montana. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“Native American” is unique among American racial categories in defining not just social status or historical lineage, but also an individual’s relationship to state and federal governments. In Who Belongs?: Race, Resources, and Tribal Citizenship in the Native South (Oxford University Press, 2016), Mikaela M. Adams, an assistant professor of history at the University of Mississippi, tracks the histories of six Indian societies in the American South from the seventeenth to the twenty first centuries. In doing so, she argues that the question of belonging was often difficult to answer, particularly in a region where whites insisted on dividing the individuals along a strict, binary, color line. In Who Belongs?, Pamunkey, Catawba, Choctaw, Cherokee, Seminole, and Miccosukee communities all grapple with the fundamental question of tribal membership. After colonization and conquest, the answer to the question posed by Adams could have critical and concrete consequences. Often, whether someone belonged to a given tribe determined fundamental questions of identity, financial restitution, and land ownership. Who Belongs? is a critical retelling of the Native south which emphasizes the fungible nature of group identity and the adaptations Native communities made to survive within a settler colonial system of state power. Stephen Hausmann is a doctoral candidate at Temple University and Visiting Instructor of history at the University of Pittsburgh. He is currently writing his dissertation, a history of race and the environment in the Black Hills and surrounding northern plains region of South Dakota, Wyoming, and Montana. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

University of Montana Native American Studies professor Dr. Richmond Clow discusses how reformers began the citizenship push in 1879 as a dream for individual tribesmen. Beginning in 1882, specific statutes were passed advancing citizenship, and over the next two decades, most tribesmen became citizens even before Congress enacted the 1924 Indian Citizenship Act. Montana, like other states, experienced the consequences of these multiple and measured citizenship efforts both before and after World War I.