Land acknowledgements, a signature feature of the left’s virtue-signaling pantheon, have become commonplace at universities and city councils nationwide. They serve as formal statements of acknowledgement and recognition of the Indian tribes whose territory the institution “occupies.” In reality, land acknowledgments are empty gestures that undermine American sovereignty and fail to help Indian nations.
At UC Berkeley, every club orientation includes this passage: “OASIS acknowledges that UC Berkeley sits on the territory of xu?yun (Huichin), the ancestral and unceded land of the Chochenyo-speaking Ohlone people, the successors of the sovereign Verona Band of Alameda County.”
The university dedicates multiple webpages to land acknowledgments and even named a new housing complex “xu?yun ruwway,” an Ohlone name. The Ohlone people number around 4,000 today and are not a federally recognized tribe. Yet UC Berkeley and other institutions around the country continue to push the ridiculous notion that small, unrecognized tribes are sovereign entities whose land is somehow still under occupation.
The unfortunate story of pre-modern human history is the conquering of land. But litigating centuries-old conquests is futile and doesn’t reflect the current reality that these lands are full of American citizens and have been American for centuries. Land acknowledgments only work to undermine America’s sovereignty. By classifying the United States as an eternally occupying force, land acknowledgments fit into the leftist narrative that American laws and borders don’t hold importance. Instead, American sovereignty is treated as unjust and temporary, even if the supposed victims of said occupation are treated equally under the law. This narrative gives credence to the idea that all of America is sovereign Indian land. The reality is that American land has been, and will remain, American, no matter what mental gymnastics folks will play to prove it’s not.
But this is not to say that American Indians don’t exist; they do. The nationwide charade the left plays does nothing to help real Indian nations in the United States. Consider the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota, home to the Oglala Lakota people. It’s the poorest place in America. The average life expectancy is around 50 years, nearly 30 years below the national average. The unemployment rate exceeds 70%, with most residents living in poverty. These numbers contribute to high drug addiction and alcoholism rates. The reservation also deals with the infamous kidnapping and murder of Lakota women, a problem to this day. These problems aren’t just found among Indians in Pine Ridge, but also on other reservations like Rosebud, Standing Rock, and Navajo.
These issues go to the very core of how Indian reservations operate. One of the biggest factors that contributes to abject poverty in Indian country is the Trust System. The Federal government holds Indian land in trust to prevent reservations from losing land to non-Indians. While the system has noble intentions and helps Indian lands stay Indian, it prevents individual Indians from owning and developing land. This results in Indian country being economically barren and underdeveloped. Although Indian reservations are less than 3% of the United States, the federal government continues to impose stringent control over Indian land through the Trust System.
But abolishing the Trust System would certainly destroy reservations and their ability to stay Indian; instead, the system needs to be reformed to protect Indian sovereignty while also breaking the shackles of government dependency. One solution is to expand Indian Trust Asset Management Plans (ITAMPs), which are plans that the tribe submits to the Bureau of Indian Affairs to extend greater tribal control over land and assets rather than rely on the federal government. The constraints of being regulated by a paternalistic federal government through red tape have made Indian wealth creation and infrastructural development particularly difficult. Reservations deal with a complicated hodgepodge of Indian agency regulations in addition to intrusive federal regulations and oversight. This creates an extra layer of red tape specifically on Indians who reside on reservations, making the already arduous process of starting a business even harder and forcing Indians to leave their land for economic opportunity. Expanding approval of ITAMPs could theoretically make it easier for Indians to build improvements on their own land rather than waiting for BIA approval.
The current situation may appear bleak, and there are no easy solutions to the reservation system and its many shortcomings. Our first step must be changing our mindset regarding Indian reservations. Legally, these are sovereign governments we’re interacting with. While they’re still under federal jurisdiction, their sovereignty needs to be oriented toward growth and prosperity, not dependency.
Given these conditions, it’s not enough for those on the right to point out that progressives’ land acknowledgments amount to empty posturing at best. Conservatives fall into a trap if they avoid Indian issues because they fear sounding too critical of America. It’s not unpatriotic to recognize that our nation’s historical treatment of Indians has been regrettable, and our current policies are keeping them dependent and impoverished. What differentiates America from the rest of the world is our ability to look back at our founding principles and use them to ensure equality, dignity, and prosperity. Our country has made tremendous strides with the Indian Citizenship Act and Indian Civil Rights Act. Now our job is to secure the blessings of liberty to Indians and their posterity, all while preserving their tribal identities.
It’s time to shed light on the plight of Indian reservations and produce solutions that can bring them out of the shadows. Recognizing Indian issues is done through practical change, not hollow statements. Let’s move beyond land acknowledgements and help Indian nations, not just name them.
