Eva Marie Garroutte

Radical Indigenism1 calls for much more than relativistic acceptance of others, especially those who are different than the quantified group. This concept, which is largely endorsed by E.M. Garroutte, requires individual criticism and engagement of the scientific inquiry,2 methodology,3 and pathology4 (Garroutte 2003:114-16,116-18, 162). Scientific inquiry2 is called into question because the conceptual racial paradigm5 today maintains a large façade as a biological6 endeavor; this requisite focuses on the biological6 ¼ or sometimes ½ of a blood quantum7 to socially allow members entry into a social group, in this case Native American people into a tribal group (Garroutte 2003: 114-18, 146-48). Doing so, bequeaths enrollees8 with elements of prestige, achievement, and opportunities (Beaini 2010:4). The blood quantum7 has to decipher what privileges are allocated to a member of a tribe: a.) how economic resources are distributed; b.) which social services can be accessed as a result of tribal affiliation; c.) monetary opportunities and rewards; d.) legalized protections such as the Indian Child Welfare Act; e.) protection over the possession of specific ceremonial objects; and f.) protection of arts and crafts to authenticate the sale of art made by Indian persons (Garroutte 2003:16-18). Theoretically, the tribal government is vested with its own sovereignty once the federal government has initially responded to the concern validating the cultural and legal identity of a true enrollee or creating social outcasts of those who don’t meet the blood quantum7 by disallowing those privileges (Garroutte 2003: 30).

As this conceptual racial shift evolves, the largest beneficiaries aren’t the Native American people, who have managed to execute valid proof of membership for the sake of the authenticity of the group, but it is the non-indigenous people who benefit from stifling the socio-cultural context considered to be “pure” and authentically Indian (Darnell 1972; Orvik and Barnhardt 1974). Ethnicity, then, becomes a distinction of how those that measure up are in contrast to others who fail, despite attempts at doing so (Beaini 2010: (5):4).
Though, race may start as a biologically-based idea, it suddenly becomes adjusted to fit societal attitudes. In a nutshell, the conceptual racial paradigm5 has to be initially labeled biological, even though it much more social; this is done so that Americans will avoid looking at how they cluster physical, emotional, and mental traits into permanent groups, how they racially categorize and the meanings behind each category, how homogeneity has become an aspired status in American culture, that race is an evaluative dimension declaring worth and value to American society; this evaluation is conducted by all people (Beaini 2010 : 4(3):4). If we look at the causal ideas behind race, science and religion, then this further illustrates race as a socialized mechanism. It is really science and religion that yield to these ideas behind the conceptual racial paradigm5 being challenged (Beaini 2010: 4(3):4). In history, missionaries who settled on the lands of the Native American people did so originally to convert them to Christianity, believing their practice as Christians (or Catholics in New Mexico, California, and the Southwestern part of the United States) was supreme to the hedonic 'savages', they ambitiously perceived as a sea of lost souls who needed saving (Garroutte 2003: 124, 195).
Socially, there is quite a lot of fraudulent con-artistry when it comes to claiming Native American ethnic identity (Garroutte 2003: 5,87, 187). Potentially, this could have something to do with individual necessities to renew one’s self in the face of Whiteness, which equates to not being able to identify any ethnic heritage. Self-identification as Indian doesn’t satisfy legal definitions (Garroutte 2003: 82). Since whites are an extremely privileged social group, they don’t have to consider their own racial and ethnic membership.
The suppression and omission of one’s true cultural identity has finally come to an end, if an individual’s possesses “mixed blood” with traces of good amounts of “Indian” blood in them. Psychologically, this has large consequences of affiliations to primary groups (one’s specific tribe) and secondary groups (people of all recognized or confederated tribes). Additionally, the “question of what is real” in terms of Indianness, legitimizes membership to both the primary and the secondary social groups. Consequently, though no such a phenomena truly exists and such a notion is based off of myth, the allegiance to each designated and legitimate tribe is arbitrary (Garroutte 2003: 16, 90). It’s because of how the secondary group(s) divides from each other and those excluded from ascertaining membership; this formulates how the primary group is decided.
In contrast, to “Indianness,” Whiteness is simply unexamined. Many people who haven’t explored Whiteness at all, have gone what’s called “ethnic shopping” to try to change their identities, this is the same as filling a personal ethnic void (Beaini 2010: 4(5): 11). American Indian culture becomes an attractive culture to those fulfilling this ethnic void, largely because they don’t usually stop to think about the difficulties that American Indians have overcome or continually surmount, but they find interest in the close relationships achieved between American Indians and the earth. An example of this is a phenomenon that arrived in the New Age religious practices in America called neo-Shamanism.

In this extremist adoption of an ethnic identity, those choosing to practice neo-Shamanism self-identify falsely as Native American, either spiritually or in an attempt to be innovative; there is North American DIY (Do it yourself) spirituality guides (McGaa 1989; SunBear 1989; Wa-na-nee-che & Freke 1996), non-native sweat lodges, medicine weekends, and pow-wows put together by those who aren’t rightfully Native American (Garroutte 2003:91). Non-native indigenous people who are neo-Shamans, performing many sacred customs and traditions are accused of neo-colonial theft (Garroutte 2003: 102). These syncretistic usages of Native American Indian spiritualities that were/ aren’t theirs to take, end up being misused, and/or misrepresent Native American people to the American public.
What I am wondering is this neo-Shamanism a psychological fetish? A type of social conditioning? In culture, it becomes understood what is permissible and what will be offensive given one’s cultural parameters; but in the case of neo-Shamans, if their cultural parameters don’t honor the knowledge as exclusive to the original Native American Shamans, not only do they unknowingly misappropriate the indigenous cultural property (as was the case with the Mooney’s), but they do so with delusions of “direct access” to such indigenous wisdom (Fears 2010: Cultural Exercise 1). If we look at hierarchical integration, in a developmental sense of the word, then syncretic nature becomes a clear refusal to differentiate from the discreetly homogenous; meaning, staking a claim over the Native Americans is done the same way that the missionaries did, only this time, it’s culturally and religiously done by the neo-Shamans. Perhaps, they view themselves as falsely “necessary” and “doing the native culture a favor in preservation.” The assumption that renewal is going to be indigenously supported by economic, social, and governmental systems is flawed, especially since replacing one’s identity or adopting a new cultural identity that seems to fit the individual, but doesn’t have any truth behind it, will not be reinforced by society. How are these systems supposed to adjust for individual perceptions of identity, when identity includes racial, cultural, socio-economic, religious, personal lifestyle? In a multitude of all such qualifiers, there are hints that bio-ethnic diversity is blatantly refused; Garroutte elucidates this point, when she claims that if one has both mixed white and Native American blood, and potentially some black blood thrown in too, their legal definition, regardless of desire will first, be minority status (2003:9, 30). In this case, holding white ancestry will be completely ignored. Next, the issue of looking black will be dealt with accordingly, relegating the person to that racial group (Garroutte 2003:43-48). Unconsciously, these needs for ethnic renewal occur; some parts of this perception is learned by these systems and some are innate. There is still no certainty to decipher between innate perceptions and externally triggered perceptions.
An example that comes to mind in is the novel Coming of Age in Samoa, by Margaret Mead who is an American cultural-anthropologist that explores the age old debate of Nativism verses Empiricism, doing so she manages to shed some light on innate perception and what is learned. Mead’s novel is about her fieldwork in Samoa which she ethnographically conducts around the sexual development that occurs in adolescence (Mead 1973). She wants to explore if what is learned in a social environment creates the experience of a certain phase in development or if the perceptual experience is essentially the same in adolescence no matter what environment one is in, because perception is innate. She finds that development in Samoa from childhood to adulthood (adolescence) is a smoother transition (Mead 1973). There is no marked emotional or psychological distress, anxiety, or confusion like we see in the United States where a change of social environment equals the inclusion of a new culture; some would say this culture versus the Samoan culture swims in drugs, peer pressure, commercialism, eating disorders, dysfunctional families, suicide, and homelessness.
Beneath any and all claims of cultural relativism,9 Garroutte suggests that indigenous knowledge10 should be passed off as authentic in a contemporary cultural context11 (Garroutte 2003: 111, 138). If indigenous knowledge is managed to be passed off then, cultural identities belonging to each tribe, as well as traditions that go back for centuries will not be forgotten. The problem with this transfer of valuable ideas is that it’s creating cultural diffusion;12 there is specificity for scholarship in the Native American higher learning institutional commitment, but such specificity is being superseded by Euro-scholarship (Garroutte 2003: 102). What little bit of the indigenous knowledge systems are imparted compound this knowledge in an overwhelmingly generalized way; Garroutte urges the reader that these generalizations need to be dealt with immediately, before each tribe quickly is deleted from modern recognition (Garroutte 2003: 149-152).
Methodology3 in the theme of Radical Indigenism,1 responds to kinship,13 which is the relationship of reciprocity14 if not biology,6 which is the relationship of ancestry14 (Garroutte 2003: 118). As confusing as that is, we see that, ancestry just isn’t enough sometimes to permit entrance into a racial status as Indian (citation). This particular racial status, carries with it historical recognition of past genocide and ostracism. Interestingly, there has been an escalation in the population who attribute themselves to some kind of Indian heritage; however, with this trend “Indianness” has become increasingly urban. The change in environments from moving off of the reservation, has played into a very high inter-marriage rate. Subsequently, it is this high inter-marriage rate that threatens and causes loss of Indian cultural identity.
Exposure to difference(s) in racial ties can help Americans take a deeper look at the overall factors weighing into the process of racial identification;15 these factors are inter-marriage, childbirth, individual choice to identify with the social groups’16 customs depending upon allowance permitted by the social group (Beaini 2010 Lecture 4 and 5).16 Kinship13 may or may not have to do with the complex blood lines, but marriage (this includes inter-racial marriage) doesn’t necessarily ensure progeny,17 but it furthers kinship13 ties dependent on the established qualities of the relationships between the couple. For example, in the novel Valley of the Horses by Jean Auel, Thonlan gets Temio pregnant and joins her cave after he first abandons his primary kinship13 and blood-line18 obligations, as well as his original cultural identity19 as a Zelandoni. Thonlan, then decides to undergo initiation into Mamutoi cave life because his new bride-to-be is Mamutoi; this is an example of how Thonlan, specifically replaces20 his ethnic identity by virtue of his own individual ethnic renewal process.21 However, after their official union Temio loses the baby and dies after trying to give birth. Thonlan doesn’t feel any need to leave the Mamutoi and return to his ways as a Zelandoni without union and without children; so even though, this change hasn’t been made in his blood,18 it might well have been since once he replaced his ethnic identity,22 he never even once entertained thoughts of returning to his old familiar ways.
Overall, Radical Indigenism,1 Garroutte’s coined term, tells us as Americans that there is no such thing as “purity” of blood;18 as an American there is a lot of inter-related exchanges in cultural heritages and cross-over’s into being a member of several racially mixed groups. In the case of some tribal groups, there is a result of a diluted blood quantum7 in one of the vertical lines; such a result, can hinder the individual’s chances of staking a legitimized claim that will be acknowledged legally in a particular Native American tribe (Garroutte 2003: 41-53, 54-59). The denial of tribal citizenship lends itself to the creation of nonentity in those individuals who don’t fit into the ethnic role that is then left over for them to fill (Garroutte 2003: 31).
To better understand why this occurs, we need to firmly recognize how a native culture’s philosophy gets started. Why are so many indigenous philosophies, currently over-shadowed by a Western defined cultural standard? Many reasons mingle in our conscious; however, the largest one in anthropological terms is that academic discourses22 strip away the native autonomy.23 Anthropology helps determine and discover history, oppression, discrimination, removal and exile of native peoples from their originally claimed lands; this discipline, also yields to each natal cultures intrinsic value24 of differentiated intellect, spiritual practice, and sacred traditions. Though each may be declining, cultural anthropologists do their esteemed best to retell the traditions with social justice25 at the backbone of their ethnographical26 intent. But, still Garroutte asserts that more needs to be done and now she’s got her audience’s attention.
Respect is a key construct in views of the self, areas of life such as health, interactions within friendship27 and systems of kinship,13 and romantic dyads,28 and in family processes.29 A group of people with some vertical respect assures they have some defined status dimension. In the case of tribal citizenship that has been granted, an elevated social status has been granted in tandem with the granting of the tribal citizenship not only in the tribal community, but in the federal government as well (Garroutte 2010: 57). Although, respect is a continuum rather than a dichotomy, it is paradoxically and strategically difficult to tease out where the racial identity process becomes a continuum socio-politically. “By being pure, Native Americans have more right to social respect (Roosens).” Identities are organized hierarchically, at least to some extent; identities vary both in their importance (central relevance30) to the issue at hand and to their probability that they will be invoked in a given situation (their salience31) (Stryker & Serpe 1994).
In terms of how the CDIB card32 is strongly relied upon, by many Native American tribes to assuage doubts as to who belongs and who doesn’t, this card creates a great amount of salience31 and centrality30 to the Indian identity both radicalizing and political-zing the Indian identity (Garroutte 2010:107-139). If race is bound in culture, than politics are not far behind in the conditioning of each faction (Fish p. 271).
Tocqueville (2000) explained that racialism is a “blind instinct,” but if humans naturalize race and the ways all races are classified and reclassified (Beaini 2010: Lecture 3, section 4, 11-12), acknowledging how outer perception vs. human biology can prove racial ties, then how can both leading to the same visual knowledge be so readily ignored? Both are inconsistent methodologies. There is no clear cut definition guiding either each person’s outer perception.33 is culturally relative or is there the same blood quantum7governing tribal membership.
Even with legal documentation,34 there is no guarantee that one is thinking and living in accordance to one’s Native American ethos or the particular creed35 that binds together all of the members of the tribe. Legalization of what it means, essentially exploit the traditions left behind because of one’s tribal ancestry14 for capital gain (Garroutte 2003: 35). The relationship between legal definition and legal right(s) affects the various definitional parties through public policy
application. The existence of individuals and groups who claim to hold rights pertaining to Indianness, but do not conform to the federal definition passed down by the government, leads to the possible denial of rights because of the boundaries of exclusion (citation). In order to define an Indian, there is the opportunity to examine our cultural hatred and intolerance at how race is disputed, but in order members of this Indian racial group to be acknowledged the darker their skin is the more sound their membership will be; Garroutte gives an example how strong social disapproval will be given to those Native Americans that don’t pass the “brown paper bag test,” with their skin not being “darker than a #10 sack (2003:48),”while interacting with each other.
E.M. Garroutte main argument surrounding Radical Indigenism is that firm cultural identity is made within discourses of history and culture; unfortunately, due to the shrinking size of many Native American tribes like Cherokee’s that have less viable blood lines to couple with, their tribal community has become less strong. A very small and somehow shrinking tribe- not due to blood lines, but due to sudden-infant mortality is the Atikamek, who live off of the ancestral land in Quebec Canada called the Atikamekw. There is something about the tight-knit closeness in the tribal community that is spoken ubiquitously, no matter what tribe one belongs to or has ancestral ties to; in this way, I feel fully convinced that preservation of the language, customs, foods, homes, hairstyles, clothing, fishing techniques, kinship that includes political alliances like Alabamas have forged can be learned a great deal from and should be taught by those who are infinitely wise on each topical issue; however, I would assume the trouble with that is much like the trouble for adequately representing each voice from all current tribes that are still in existence that each tribal member will have a different experience with mainstream culture, adapting and adopting to the changes that have been incised on their tribal lives. Will there be fair and equal representation, men, women, disabled, gay, lesbian, transgendered, those with changed last names, etc., who have self-identified as Native Americans and meet the blood-quantum of fitting this term Indian? This is what needs to be managed in order for indigenous people to successfully take their ancient rituals into modern day. Also, how will all of this bio-ethnic diversity be found with language barriers, in shrinking tribes, in tribes who are afraid that others will copy them?
I think this book was a good introductory book, as far as being convinced goes about needing scholarship based in Radical Indigenism, but I don’t think that the social and cultural histories of all of the appropriate native tribes of the North American continent are represented here, which would be a huge undertaking. Putting each personal voice buried in the appendix doesn’t do the author’s argument justice, particularly, because even though she does use some interview snip-it’s throughout her text she only, current societal conflict with her point of view or rather the con and doesn’t explore the pro, as adequately as she does in the conclusion and appendix.
Today we live in more conformity in particular under the Native American social,
economic, and cultural customs and traditions than with their presence in our country’s
institutions, of which they are now an active part nationally, culturally, and socially. In
reading this book: Real Indians Identity and the Survival of Native America (E. M. Garroutte
2003) and thinking through this topic, I realize I only attended school in all of my years with one person who self-identified as Native American; this experience happened when it
was Show and Tell in the first grade. I am still friends with the girl, who is proudly Creek
American. Ever since, I have yet to meet another individual who self-identifies as some kind of
Native American; now thanks to reading this book I understand the conundrum associated with
self-disclosure, even if one does legally fit the blood quantum.7 Tribal ancestral relationships
with others not affiliated with a tribe has definitely created inequality. To this day, the majority
of Native Americans live in impoverished conditions, their scholastic achievements are quite
low, and the rate of alcoholism amongst the majority is immensely high. Though E.M. Garroutte
makes the argument that Native American people individually and collectively are scarcely
surviving, she urges the continuation of the old ways, so that the “dying race” in terms of
pathology.
Bibliography

Auel, Jean. The Valley of Horses (1982). New York, NY: Crown Publishing.

Barnhardt, R., & Kawagley, A. O. Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Alaska Native
Ways of Knowing. (2005) Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 36(1), pp. 8-23

Batelaan, P. Learning to respect (2001). Intercultural Education, 12, 237-245. doi: 10.
1080/14675980120087453

Darnell, Frank, ed. Education in the North: The First International Conference on Cross-
Cultural Education in the Circumpolar Nations (1972). Fairbanks: Center for Northern
Education Research, University of Alaska Fairbanks.

Darwall, S. L. Two kinds of respect (1977). Ethics, 88, 36-49. doi: 10.1086/292054

Fears, Dana. Cultural exercise one (2010). Anthropology 315U. Professor Beaini: Assignment
Blackboard Learning System.
Gruenewald, David A. The Best of Both Worlds: A Critical Pedagogy of Place (2003).
Educational Researcher 32(4): 3-12.

Gutierrez, Kris D. and Barbara Rogoff. Cultural Ways of Learning: Individual Traits or
Repertoires of Practice (2003). Educational Researcher 32(5): 19-25.

Haydon, G. Respect for persons and for cultures as a basis for national and global citizenship (2006).
Journal of Moral Education, 35, 457-471. doi:10.1080/03057240601012253

Kant, I. Groundwork of metaphysics of morals (1998) (M. Gregor, Trans.) Cambridge, UK (original
work published in 1785)

Lawerence- Lightfoot, S. Respect: An exploration (2000). Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.

Lonnwer, W.J. The search for psychological universals (1980). In H.C. Triandis & W.W. Lambert (Eds.),
Handbook of cross-cultural psychology perspectives (Vol. 1, pp. 143-204). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

McGaa, E. Mother Earth Spirituality: Native American Paths to Healing Ourselves and
Our world (1989), New York: Harper San Francisco.

Mead M: Coming of Age in Samoa (1928). New York, William Morrow & Company, 1973

Orvik, James, and Ray Barnhardt, eds.Cultural Influences in Alaska Native Education
(1974).Fairbanks: Center for Northern Education Research, University of Alaska Fairbanks.

Sun Bear, with C Mulligan, P. Nufer & Wabun. Walk in balance: The path to Healthy,
Happy, Harmonious Living (1989), New York: Fireside/ Simon & Shuster

Tocqueville, Democracy in America (Harvey Mansfield and Delba Winthrop, trans., ed.;
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000) (original work was published in 1865).

Wa-Na-Nee-Che (Renault, D.) & T. Freke. Thorson’s Principles of Native American
Spirituality (1996), London: Thorsons.… (plus d'informations)