A Conversation With Native Americans on Race
The video A Conversation With Native Americans on Race elucidates on the social construction of race. The social construction of race is the notion of a culturally accepted stratification of people according to color and origin. The Native American communities feel that they have been marked out and singled. One of them explains that social construction is being pushed to biological limits with the question of pure nativity coming in strongly. One of the interviewees also states that people always say to him that he should be proud of accepting his culture. This is a vivid form of microaggression that could be unintended or intended. However, to him, the question is not about accepting the culture because he lives it every day, and it is a part of him.
This social conflict pops the question of the ingroup versus outgroup turf war. An ingroup is any social group that anyone identifies as being a member. According to the native people in the film, A Conversation With Native Americans on Race, they are treated as an outgroup in their own country. White supremacists have dominated the American sphere and are treating them as animals and even go to the lengths of monitoring their blood quantum. One of the ladies quips that it is only horse and dogs whose blood quantum is measured. Their cultural relics and practices have been abolished with their traditional dances considered heathen for a long time by the majority white (King et al., 2001).
Ethnocentrism is another considerable concern or the native persons featured in the film. Ethnocentrism is the analysis of another culture using stereotypes that exist in one’s culture. According to the people featured in the short film, most people treat them weirdly and have developed stereotypes for them within which they fit. One of the ladies narrates that older men have walked up to her and stated that if it were in ancient times, they would have done what they wanted with her. King et al. (2001), in their article, Playing Indian: Why Native American Mascots Must End, criticizes the continuous use of mascots and figurines associated with native communities in a connotative manner. They point out the use of war chiefs, making cultural dances in-between game breaks of teams that associate themselves with such figures. Such practices preconceive the natives as primitive buffoons who know nothing about civilization. The mascots give life to racist stereotypes, and for that reason must be abolished for sports formations (King et al., 2001).
The film also discusses the sociopolitical hegemony by the majority against the minority communities. Hegemony is the domination of a particular group over others. One lady explains the one-drop rule that was used to divide the people amongst themselves. If you had a drop of black blood in you, you would be automatically black. However, if you had biological blood from any other tribe, you would not qualify to be a pure native. The social system of the Apache of matriarchy has also been overruled by the patriarchal American system that is now being used to classify them. One of the ladies opines that they are being decimated socially in a bid to extinguish their contractual agreements with the government over their sovereignty and land occupation rights, with the government taking away the land.
Video: Why the Sioux Are Refusing $1.3 Billion.
Inequitable resource distribution is displayed in the video Why the Sioux Are Refusing $1.3 Billion. This is a situation where a dominant community enjoys the best resources in terms of quality and quantity at the expense of subordinate groups. The dwellings of the Sioux experience the lowest life expectancy, with men living about 48 years and women living averagely four years more. Half of the children there live in poverty, with an average household income being 8000 dollars a year. King et al. refer to the situation of the native communities as “colonial conditions of exploitation,” referring to their inferior living conditions that they contend with.
Hegemony and oppression come into play in the video Why the Sioux Are Refusing $1.3 Billion. Hegemony is the dominance of a group over others that are considered subordinates. At the same time, oppression is the maltreatment of a group or person or the unjust exertion of authority over somebody or a group. The government took the land of the Sioux tribes that occupy the black hills and is offering them 1.3 billion dollars if they could relocate from the mountains that are purportedly mineral-rich. In this case, their cultural pride has been dismissed as the concern is being quickly shifted to the monetary benefit that other people could gain from exploiting their ancestral lands. Tribal attorney Mario Gonzalez notes that compensation funds, such as the 1.3 billion dollars, have been the embodiment of the mistreatment of native Indian tribes. Worse still, the government is suggesting a relocation from the fertile hills to dry and desolate landscapes. Additionally, the money being offered is much less than the actual worth of the mineral-rich mountains. The government is not also compensating for any other cultural artifacts that the tribes own in the area.
White supremacy is also seen in this video. White supremacy is the racially effected belief that white people are superior over other races and should exert their dominance over them. This video displays white supremacy at lay when the predominantly white government capiatl9zes non a series of dishonored land treaties to snatch away the ancestral land of the Sioux tribes and forces them to accept payment. The driving motive for this domination and oppression is that the mountains are purportedly mineral-rich and could avail plenty of resources to the white supremacists. In their articles, Why Native American Mascots Must End, King et al. quote historian Richard White suggesting that the white population of America are not aggressive to the Indians but don’t credit them with the ability to make any change (King et al., 2001).
Reference page
King, C. R., Leonard, D. J., & Kusz, K. W. (2001). Playing Indian: Why Native American Mascots Must End.”. The Chronicle Review, 9.
A Conversation With Native Americans on Race, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siMal6QVblE
Why the Sioux Are Refusing $1.3 Billion, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siMal6QVblE