Native American Oppression Essay Example

to learn about American Indian/Alaska Native injustice. This paper will guide you through experiences of social inequity that this population has dealt with. Attitudes and values, theories of oppression, and effects of discrimination will be used to provide a more holistic picture of the victimization of American Indians/Alaska Natives. Past and plausible efforts of resistance to discrimination will be offered.

For purposes of simplicity, American Indians/Alaska Natives will be referred to as Native Americans. It is hoped that those who read this paper will fully understand the complexities of Native American oppression and will be motivated to join the fight for the rights of this population. Origins & History The oppression of Native Americans is not a new phenomenon. This disparity has been going on for decades and decades. The history of discrimination that Native Americans fell victim to is multi-layered and therefore, can be best explained through the “five faces of oppression” (Young, as cited in Perry, 2002, p. 32).

According to Young (1990), the five faces of oppression are “inter-related faces of oppression by which we might characterize the experiences of minority groups” (Young, as cited in Perry, 2002, p. 232). These faces include exploitation, marginalization, powerlessness, cultural imperialism, and violence (Young et. al. , 2002, p. 232). Webster’s New World Dictionary (1988) categorizes exploitation as any act that unethically uses individuals to benefit others (Neufeldt & Buralnik, 1998, p. 479). “Cheap labor” is one of the most detrimental ways that Native Americans have been exploited.

Studies conclude that there is a correlation between tribal characteristics, the availability of jobs, and the distribution of income (Huyser, Sakamoto, & Takei, 2010,

p. 543). As a result, Native Americans have been underrepresented in well-paying jobs and overrepresented in low-income jobs (Perry, 2002, p 232). Those who strictly adhere to their cultural norms are amongst the most underrepresented Native Americans in the labor market. This is because a lot of professional jobs prefer candidates that exemplify the ability to work in a Eurocentric manner, a manner that is less favorable to Native American work ethics.

The disproportionality has not only caused many Native Americans to remain destitute, but also has made it easy for majority groups to force this population into marginalization. Marginalization refers to the exclusion of others (Neufeldt et. al. , 1998, p. 479). In this context, marginalization refers to the detachment of Native Americans from mainstream America. To not abide by the rules of “the white man” has forced most Native Americans to permanently reside on reservations, or land where those who have tribal affiliation are able to practice tribal traditions (Perry, 2002, p 233).

Living on reservations is very oppressive and not as favorable as it may sound. This is because reservations are not as rich in resources as other area of the U. S. Consequently, Native Americans do not have as many pathways to success as groups that reside in more suburban areas in the world. This lack of opportunities has contributed to the powerlessness of many Native Americans. Power can be viewed as the ability to influence and/or control others. Another flaw about reservations is the fact that they are not totally governed by Native American representatives. The U. S. overnment actually has tight control over the majority, if not

all, reservations (Perry, 2002, p 233). This tight control has left the Native American population powerless in terms of self- regulation. Despite the fact that Native American government do exist, U. S. government has managed to distort Native American governance. This distortion has led to the absence of Native American sovereignty (Tennant, 2011, p. 24). This is because distortion has caused a reduction in Native American decision making about political, economic, and social well-being (Perry, 2002, p 233).

This reduction, in turn, has led to cultural imperialism. Cultural imperialism is when members of one group do not approve of the traditions and/or norms of another group (dictionary. com, 2011). This disapproval usually occurs between majority and minority populations, where the majority population attempts to alter the traditions and/or norms of the minority population. The discussion above exemplifies Native American cultural imperialism. The U. S. government obviously disapproves of certain aspects of Native American governance (Perry, 2002, p. 233). Consequently, the U. S. government’s dominance has been used to limit how Native American representatives culturally influence Natives living on reservations. Native Americans have had no choice but to abide to this limitation. Those who have attempted to preserve their cultural values often fall victim to violence.

Violence is one of the hardest faces of oppression to withstand. Native Americans who have attempted to “challenge whiteness” were often victimized by violence (Perry, 2002, p 236). Violence does not only include physical acts, but harsh language as well (dictionary. om, 2011). Take the story of Charlene Teters, for instance. Charlene is a Native American woman who protested against the use of Native American Mascots at the University

of Illinois (New Day Films, 1997). Her courageous act of activism triggered others, most of who identify with the majority, to forcefully impose their power over her through harsh language. Charlene’s story not only exemplifies verbal violence, but also illustrates another contributor to Native American oppression; societal attitudes and values.

Societal Attitudes & Values Societal attitudes and values have a lot of influence on how the world operates. Unfortunately, societal attitudes and values have been detrimental to Native American well-being. Societal attitudes and values are equally damaging. However, more values were discovered as contributing factors to Native American oppression. Although multiple societal values that exist today have been used as tools for discrimination, three stood out the most. These three values include holidays, religious affiliation, and citizenship.

Americans love the holidays, especially Thanksgiving. Thanksgiving is supposed to be a time to give thanks for the land that is lived on today. What many Americans fail to realize, or acknowledge, is how degrading this holiday is to Native American history. Subsequently, Native Americans continue to be “casted in a subordinate and supporting role in the Thanksgiving drama, in which they supposedly welcomed and helped the settlers” (Fiskesjo, 2010, p. 13). The controversy associated with Thanksgiving and its validity has raised many eyebrows.

It should have given individual a reason to question the origins of Thanksgiving, but because this holiday is valued by so many Americans, this question remains unexplored. The fact that the validity of Thanksgiving is viewed as unimportant is oppressive within itself. This is because it shows how irrelevant Native American history is viewed in comparison to European history. This view is

the result of many factors. One factor is religious affiliation. Religious affiliations contribute to individual perceptions.

This is especially true when it comes to religion and racial attitudes (Eitle & Steffen, 2009, p. 7). In a study that examined the perception of White college students about Native American inequity, it was found that student belonging to dominate religious affiliations, such as Protestants, perceived Native American oppression as a result of individualistic factors, including laziness (Eitle et. al. , 2009, pgs. 14-16). The fact that Protestants have such a negative viewpoint about Native American discrimination is an injustice within itself.

The spiritual beliefs and affiliations of Native Americans are outnumbered by Protestants. Thus, the misrepresentation about Native American spirituality and victimization continues to be demonized. This notion somewhat aligns with citizenship as a factor of oppression for Native Americans. Americans often belittle individuals who are considered to be foreigners, like some Native Americans, in today’s society. Determining the legal status of Native Americans is a process that has had no consistent approach in American history (Tennant, 2011, p. 4).

One reason for this inconsistency is because there is still controversy about who is legally considered to be Native American. According to Tennant (2011), some people believe that those who consider themselves to be Native American, with no tribal affiliation, are not legally American (Tennant, 2011, p 38). Thus, are not entitled to the same rights as Americans. For instance, destitute individuals who are not legally considered Native American and do not identify with any other race-ethnicity do not qualify for any public welfare assistance.

This is because the welfare system is set

up so that only American citizens can take advantage of the services offered by the system. Cases like the Standing Bear vs. Crooks case, a case that acknowledged Native Americans’ constitutional rights in the United States, helped to alleviate this disparity (Tennant, 2011, p 38). This case did not, however, stop the majority from treating Native Americans like outsiders. Still to this day, Native American norms continue to be disrespected. These norms are disrespected in a way that can be best explained through theory.

Theories of Oppression There are many theories that have been used to explain the oppression of vulnerable populations. Some theories seem more logical then others. One of the most comprehensible theories used to explain Native American oppression is the social oppression model. According to Hardiman, Jackson, and Griffin (2010), this model is depicted by a 3D cube that encompasses multiple concepts that are used to explain the many layers of oppression in today’s society (Hardiman et. al. , as cited in Adams, Blumenfeld, Castaneda, Hackman, Peters, & Zuniga, 2010, pp. 26-27).

These concepts include conscious and unconscious oppression, individual attitudes and behaviors, Institutional policies, practices, and norms, and social/cultural values, customs, and norms (Hardiman et. al. , as cited in Adams, Blumenfeld, Castaneda, Hackman, Peters, & Zuniga, 2010, pp. 27-28). Social norms will be used to explain discrimination and oppression in regards to Native Americans. In this context, social norms are regular activities that individuals engage in to increase their social well-being. Social media, such as online forums, is one of the most popular ways that Americans connect.

Forums are also a place where you will find derogatory

language about Native Americans. According to a study that examined the role of online forums in expressing racial attitudes about Native Americans, Online forums include comments that devalue Native Americans (Steinfeldt, Foltz, Kaladow, Carlson, Pagano, & Benton, 2010, p. 367). One comment stated, “How many of them pay for college? Unlike 90% of other students” (Steinfeldt, et al. , 2010, p. 367). Electronic gossip, which is widely socially accepted, severely discriminates against Natives by creating false accusations about Native Americans.

Another theory of oppression that is socially accepted is the notion of deculturalization. The Urban Dictionary states (2011), deculturalization is “the removal of one’s own culture and replaces it with another” (Urban Dictionary, 2011). Deculturalization is another way that the disapproval of Native American traditions and/or norms is expressed. Deculturalization, however, attempts to completely remove the traditions and/or norms of oppressed groups as oppose to making slight alterations.

The public school system is a great example of how European education is used to eliminate cultural competence n Native American youth (Perry, 2002, p. 236). . According to Perry (2002), the American school system is set up in a way that forces Native American youth to learn “the art of civilization” (Perry, 2002, p. 236). The ability to speak English is one aspect of the art of civilization. Native American youth are forced to learn English because little, if any, of their Native Language is offered in the American school system. The fact that English is considered to be a part of proper education is oppressive within itself. Proper education is needed to take advantage of most opportunities in today’s society.

Without it,

chances of success are very limited. Although the idea of deculturalization and the social oppression model are impressive theories, the merit of both theories can be questioned. If the idea of deculturalization is examined from a less narrow viewpoint, it could be argued that deculturalization is an effective way to meet the needs of America’s general population. America is made up of individuals with many different cultural values and norms. It is unrealistic to think that it is possible to have a system that caters to the needs of all these cultural values and norms.

For reasons of simplicity, having a system that follows the traditions and norms of the majority population is logical. As far as the social oppression model, some of its dimensions are a bit extreme when applied to certain scenarios. For instance, policies that prohibit certain non U. S. citizens from receiving certain services have been considered a form of institutionalize oppression, but imagine if such policies did not exist. Individuals who do not financially support the system would be allowed to drain it, which would be very problematic.

This is because more people would be taking from the system than contributing to it. This, in turn, would cause even more conflict and increased efforts of discrimination, which would also increase the effects of discrimination. Effects of Discrimination Discrimination has had major effects on the well-being of Native Americans. These effects are not proportional. Some effects of discrimination negatively affect certain aspects of Native American well-being more than other aspects. Economic and social effects of discrimination are some of the major disparities forced upon Native Americans.

These disparities

not only keep Native Americans oppressed, but they also impact the oppressing (agent) group(s). This is because the oppressing group(s) is forced to face the benefits and drawback that result from efforts of discrimination. Native Americans continue to face economic hardship. This is because Native Americans’ economic well-being is limited by “the privilege of whiteness” (Steward & Dixon, 2004, p. 14). White privilege continues to be used as a method to keep Native Americans economically disadvantaged in regards to earnings (Huyser, Sakamoto, & Takei, 2009, p. 63). Wilson (1996) and Taylor (1998) indicate that differences between majority and minority groups continue to be a primary determinate of the distribution of wealth in the American system (Wilson & Taylor, as cited in Stewart & Dixon, 2004, p. 1). Although there are many differences between Native Americans and White Americans, racial and cultural differences are some of the most significant factors of income inequality (Stewart et. al. , 2004, p. 1; Mushinski & Pickering, 2000, p. 403).

According to McCall (2001), racial and cultural differences result in negative effects on Native American economic well-being because they are “a determinate of labor force outcomes” (McCall, as cited in Stewart et al. , 2004, p. 1). For instance, Native Americans who speak English fluently are more likely to have positive labor force outcomes compared to those who do not speak English well (Snipp, as cited in Huyser, et al. , 2009, p. 543). Those who identify as being White American and have Eurocentric cultural values are rewarded with good jobs and high wages as oppose to those who identify with opposing racial and cultural values.

The opposing

group, Natives in this case, is typically rewarded with low wages (Huyser, et al. , 2009, p. 543). There are a few Native American who have obtained good jobs. These few Native Americans, who have managed to receive higher wages, are still unfairly compensated. Farly indicates (1996) that Native Americans typically make 87% of what White Americans make (Farly, as cited in Stewart et al. , 2004, p. 3). It is assumed that this number has decrease since the economic crisis. Because of this, it is very rare for Native Americans to reach economic stability.

Social stability is an issue with this population as well. The effects of discrimination have made it virtually impossible for many Native Americans to form strong social systems. This is especially true in regards to forming social systems outside of their own population. There are multiple contributing factors to this issue. Stereotyping is a common and more noticeable contributing factor (Perry, 2002, p. 223). Forced isolation through unfair sentencing, outside of reservations, is another common contributing factor (Wilmont & Delone, 2010, p. 152).

The second contributing factor is not as evident as the first one. Since the arrival of Europeans in America, stereotyping has been used to illustrate negative images of Native Americans and their tribal affiliations. Some of the earliest European invaders stereotyped Native Americans as being “backwards” and “heathens” (Corlett, 2001, p. 218). These negative stereotypes have multiplied since then. It is not uncommon for Native Americans to be referred to as “savage” and “uncivilized” human-beings in today’s society (Riding In, as cited in Perry, 2002, p. 33). Distorted viewpoints about Native Americans have caused a

distance between Native Americans and other populations, which has limited their social abilities. This is because individuals who are viewed as a threat or worthless in America are not welcomed and therefore, are less favorable to interact with. Stereotyping also limited the social well-being of Native Americans because it has been proven to be a significant factor in judicial decision making (French, Lujah, & Nielsen, as cited in Wilmont et al. , 2010, p. 154).

The judicial system is another way that social abilities of Native Americans have been hinder, through extended periods of exclusion from mainstream America. Wilmont and Delone (2010) state that Native Americans “are 16. 6% more likely than Whites.... to receive a stay of execution versus a stay of imposition (Wilmont et al. , 2010, p. 170). This is because false illusions about Native Americans continue to influence court decision makers’ final verdicts (Wilmont et al. , 2010, p. 154). This disproportionality is more contextual than systematic because it is only relevant in certain geographic reas (Alvarez & Bachman, Bachman et al. ; Bynum & Paternoster; Droske; Everett &Wojtkiewicz; Flowers; Lujan; and Swift & Bickle, as cited in Wilmont et al. , 2010, p. 152). For instance, a study that examined disparities in Minnesota’s sentencing process found that Native American offenders receive worst treatment and longer sentencing than White American offenders for offenses, such as “burglary”, “robbery”, and “violence” (Wilmont et al. , 2010, pp. 167-169). Longer sentencing reduces chances for Native Americans to socially integrate.

This, in return, negatively affects the social well-being of this population. Social integration is important for any population. This is because social networks

are an important factor in social opportunities and acceptance. Without strong social network, a person and/or population’s social well-being is limited. Discrimination and limitations, like this, not only prove to be beneficial to the oppressing group(s), but also are associated with drawback. The oppressing group(s), mostly made up of White Americans, has been privileged to many benefits that have resulted from the ill treatment of Native Americans.

First, the income inequality benefits the majority by ensuring that members of this group continue to obtain the best and highest paying jobs in America. This is beneficial because it allows the oppressing group(s) to maintain tight control of the distribution of wealth. Thus, the members of this group continue to maintain a high quality of life because of their preference to reward those who are members of their own group. Secondly, the disproportionality of incarcerated Native Americans is beneficial because it decreases the amount of “free” individuals who live by opposing traditions and/or norms.

This is favorable because the more individuals that conform to European ways, the easier it is for the oppressing group(s) to control how America operates. One the contrary, there are multiple drawbacks associated with the unequal treatment of Native Americans. There are two common drawbacks related to wage and judicial discrimination against Native Americans. First, many members of the oppressing group(s) is forced to use their financial gains to help oppressed Native Americans. Case in point, wage inequality unusually forces naturalized Native Americans to rely on public assistance to help meet their basic needs.

Public assistance is supported through the tax dollars that everyone is required to pay. Tax dollars

also help fund jails and prisons. This is a drawback for the majority because the more you make, the more you pay into the system. Secondly, unfair treatment causes conflict between majority and minority groups. This conflict often forces majority group(s) to give up some of their control. For example, affirmative action reduces the extent to which oppressing group(s) can discriminated in the labor market. The concept of conflict as a drawback can be better conceptualized by examining efforts of resistance by Native Americans.

Active Resistance Efforts of resistance to inequity and discrimination have been everlasting for the Native American population. Activism is one of the more popular ways that this population has attempted to gain respect from the majority. The American Indian Movement (AIM), which was model after the Black Panther Party, is one of the most famous forms of Native American activism (D’Arcus, 2009, p. 1245). This movement was formed to address Native American disparities related to racial issues (Bank and Erdoes; Churchill; and Matthiessen, as cited in D’Arcus, 2009, p. 250). For example, Education and legal equality has always been a major racial concern for this population (Perry, 2002, p. 236; Wilmont et al. , 2010, pp. 167-169). AIM created “alternative learning environments” and “Indian patrols” to address these concerns (D’Arcus, 2009, p. 1250; Bank and Erodes, et. al. , as cited in D’Arcus, 2009, p. 1251). Alternative educational opportunities were made available to Native American youth, outside of traditional educational facilities, to meet their unique needs (Matthiessen; Smith; and Warrior, as cited in D’Arcus, 2009, p. 1251).

According to D’Arcus (2009), Indian patrols were used to reduce the number

of Native Americans that were wrongfully incarcerated by having other Native Americans intervene during attempts of arrest (D’Arcus, 2009, p. 1250). Other matters involving the legal rights of Native Americans were also used as a method of resistance. Court cases are perfect examples of how Native Americans have attempted to have certain legal rights recognized through the judicial system. In the Elks vs. Wilkins case of 1884, John Elk was denied registration to vote in Omaha, Nebraska (Tennant, 2011, p. 4).

Elks was denied registration because his right to citizenship was uncertain. Being able to fully integrate into society has been a major barrier to Native American rights (Perry, 2009, p. 401). Elks argued that because he had given up his tribal affiliations and integrated into mainstream America, he is entitled to vote (Tennant, 2011, p. 36). Unfortunately, the courts did not rule in Elks favor. According to Tennant (2011), it was argued that Elks had no right to citizenship because citizenship is determined by the U. S. overnment and not by individuals (Tennant, 2011, p. 37). The acts of AIM and Elks exemplify some of the successes and failures that Native Americans have encountered in their attempts to eliminate social injustices. AIM was successful in helping to bridge the gap between culture and education for Native American youth. AIM was also successful in helping to reduce the amount of Native Americans being victimized by profiling in Minneapolis (D’Arcus, 2009, p. 1250). What this movement did not do was to create a lasting or global reduction in legal and educational disparities.

Native Americans continue to be wrongfully accused and the education system continues

to exclude Native American cultural considerations (Wilmont et al. , 2010, p. 154; Perry, 2002, p. 236). Although the Elks and Wilkins case did not grant Native Americans voting rights, it did impact the legal rights of this population. The Elks case forced the world to acknowledge the rights of naturalized Native Americans. Native Americans who go through the process of naturalization are entitled to most of the rights that U. S. citizens are entitled to (Tennant, 2011, p. 37).

This did not, however, ensure respect for Native American rights, which exemplify the need for social work practice. Social Work Practice Macro and Micro It is evident that Native Americans are some of the most oppressed people in America today. This indicates that there is a strong need for social workers to work hard to create a just society for this population. There are many ways that practioners can meet this need. One way is to use social work practice methods to help alleviate pass and present oppression. It is important for worker to use macro and micro methods of intervention.

This will ensure that collective and individualized factors of oppression are properly addressed. Two ways that workers can address the needs of Native Americans on a macro level is through policy and community development. For example, the oppression that Native Americans have encountered has negatively impacted their mental health but there is few, if any, service available that specifically cater to the mental health needs of this population (Goodkind, Toledo, John, Hall, Ross, Freeland, Coletta, Fundark, Poola, Roanhorse, & Lee, 2010, p. 87). Outside of discriminatory factors, funding may be a factor

associated with this issue. Policy can be used to help erase this factor. According to Goodkind, et. al. (2010), there is a strong need to “provide funding for programs that connect prevention and treatment” in a way that will meet the needs of the mental health disparities of Native Americans (Goodkind, et. al. , 2010, p. 390). This, in turn, will help improve Native American community by reducing the amount of mentally unstable individuals that roam the streets.

Community development efforts are another way to improve Native American Communities. This is especially true for the communities that are located on reservations. There is a need for community organizers to respectfully assist Native Americans communities by collaborating with members to identify community needs. It is important that once these needs are identify, community organizers allow Native Americans to articulate the ways that they want to improve their communities. This method will ensure that no bias assumptions are used to address community development needs.