Spiritual balance is goal of the people
Posted: May 09, 2008
by: Editors Report / Indian Country Today
What distinguishes American Indian communities from nation-states are
different values, cultural understandings and goals. In the United States,
American Indian nations have different cultural understandings on a variety
of significant levels: creation teachings, understandings of political
community, political processes, stewardship of the land and relations with
the natural world. These cultural and value differences between Indian
nations and the U.S. government underscore significant disagreements about
and the absence of shared rules and understandings of culture, land and
social and political philosophy.
Upholding a commitment to continue their own way of life is one of the main
reasons indigenous peoples do not want to leave behind their traditions to
join the cultures and political relations of nation-states. Nation-states
have tried in many places to instill their own values and understandings
within indigenous individuals, meeting with varying degrees of resistance.
While often accepting new knowledge, indigenous peoples are not willing to
sacrifice their identity, self-government, land or cultural ways of living.
Nation-states have a vested interest in educating their citizens to develop
loyalties and commitments to the central government. Of all of the methods
used to accomplish this, formal education is the most critical. Leaders like
to believe their citizens are in agreement with the cultural and political
rules of the nation, and therefore most citizens will not resist education
that interprets history and supports the culture of that nation. However,
since indigenous peoples do not share the fundamental cultural philosophies
of the history and culture of the nation-state, they are often unwilling
participants in the nation-building processes of formal education.
Consequently, the processes of education are politically and socially
coercive, as witnessed by indigenous survivors of assimilationist
residential schools of the United States, Canada and Australia. Still, when
indigenous communities have some control over education, their children do
not graduate at high rates and generally are not well prepared for college.
We have not yet learned how to create successful, culturally supportive
education programs in which the history, culture and well-being of the
indigenous communities are the central goals.
The difficulties of indigenous education and participation in nation-state
institutions are not simply a question of differences between tradition and
assimilation, or colonialism. It lies in deep cultural differences between
the culture of nation-states, Western culture in the United States, and
among indigenous peoples. We must understand these fundamental cultural
differences in order to understand who we are, and who the community and
culture of nation-states represent.
The absence of cultural understanding leads to generation conflict and
contestation. For example, the concept of freedom is fundamental to Western
civilization, if not one of its defining concepts. Great Western thinkers
such as George Hegel and Karl Marx envision the main evolutionary path of
human history as a struggle to gain greater individual and social freedom.
There will be freedom, in many senses salvation, at the end of history. Many
conservative liberals hold this same vision today and argue for the
long-term value of free markets and political democracy. The idea that
freedom is realized through history is a secular version of Christian
salvation, and derives from the vision of the emergence of national freedom
when the Israelites escaped from slavery and tyranny in ancient Egypt more
than 3,000 years ago.
The concept of freedom dominates Western intellectual thought and is
inherent in modernization theory, as well as post-modern and post-colonial
theories, that continue to focus on political marginalization of groups
(like indigenous peoples) and give little attention to their own cultural
interpretations, understandings or goals. The Western interpretations assume
that freedom is also the goal of indigenous individuals and nations.
Freedom, however, is not a central core theme in the teachings of indigenous
peoples. There are sometimes evolutionary themes, but those themes, such as
among the creation teachings of the Navajo or Pueblos, focus on lessons of
gaining increasing moral community and knowledge about how to sustain
spiritual balance among tribal members, other peoples, and the powers or
spirits of the cosmic order. Spiritual balance, the golden rule, moderation,
working within ritual and life constraints, fulfilling ceremonial duties,
maintaining individual and community moral commitments, and accepting
individual and community responsibility for proper moral and ceremonial
relations are core values for indigenous communities.
The basic cultural difference between freedom and spiritual balance need
not, even cannot, be a hindrance for negotiation and greater understanding
with non-indigenous nation-states. The challenge for the future is not in
returning to traditionalism and rejection of nation-states. Rather,
indigenous nations may be better served by establishing cultural agreements
and differences democratically and consensually with nation-states and the
international community, while developing economic self-sufficiency in ways
that support greater cultural and political realization of indigenous ways
of life.
© 1998 - 2008
Indian Country Today. All Rights Reserved To subscribe go
visit go to:
http://www.indiancountry.com |