Native Sovereignty, Are The Native Alaskans Owed or Have They Sold?

Cee Peterson
During the 1800's the Russians were exploring a new land. This became known as Alaska. What they found was not only a new land, but also a new people. The United States of America bought Alaska from Russia in 1867. With the new land also came the native people. They brought with them their own culture and traditions. They abused and took advantage of the native people. They stole their land, their belongings and their culture. Many natives eventually died from the white mans diseases.

Until 1971 there was no reform for the native people. The natives of Alaska now want the right to sovereignty. They now want the right to be able to perform taxation and law enforcement. This would also include other such powers that are usually reserved for the state and federal government. This would include but is not limited to marriages, divorces, child custody and many, many more.

Although there may be proof to the contrary, nonetheless, I believe that native sovereignty is wrong. They have been paid compensation for their hardships, their traditional way of life is no longer existent and enough is enough.

With the Native Claims Settlement Act, Congress did away with native sovereignty in Alaska. In 1971 the State of Alaska made a deal with the Alaskan natives to give them twelve large corporations, 200 smaller ones, 44 million acres of their choice land, and large amounts of continual money in exchange for their Aboriginal rights. Each month every registered Alaskan Native receives a compensation check. Natives have profited greatly from their lands. Logging has been performed for years without state control or concern. They were paid and are continually paid for the oil revenue and other such Alaskan investments. They have been paid for their sufferings and now they want more?

"Eskimos" were once fierce hunters and trappers that lived a very successful subsistence lifestyle. Where once were dogsleds and snow shoes are now snow machines and all terrain vehicles. The traditional tribal way of life is very different from todays' tribe. They have been greatly modernized. The State of Alaska has given them the right to hunt special animals at special times and have special quantities of these. They have been granted special rights and privileges that are not available to non-native Alaskans. They are even given preferential treatment in hiring for jobs. Now they are requesting more?

The natives were here first and they were mistreated. However, why must every man continue to pay for that? Many natives have got good jobs and can maintain a great lifestyle. They want the additional right of taxation and law enforcement of their people and all the other people that may walk onto their lands. They have kicked people out of the native villages, such as the mentally ill. The United States cannot kick the mentally ill out of the United States. Why should natives be so special?

Creating native sovereignty will create as many as 225 sovereign native villages. That is the equivalent to having 225 different nations inside the boundaries of the State of Alaska. Is this right?

Natives have a past, a present and a future. Their heritage does need to be protected. However, they are no better or worse than the average Alaskan. We all need to work together to create a better future for every Alaskan. The issue of Native Sovereignty is an issue that Alaskans will have to face sooner or later. We paid them once and I don't see why we should have to pay them again and again just to be here. Why don't we just pay every one on the earth to live here? This debate has been sited as war on native people. It must not be that way. Can't we all stop acting like we are five years old in the sand box fighting about whose dirt you can play in? The natives want all these special rights and benefits although, if they were to take them out and take away their gasoline and ammunition in this day and age they would probably not survive. No matter how much they may try to deny it, the fact is that they have been modernized and there is no going back. Every American should be informed of this issue because it involves every one and their future.

Published by Cee Peterson

Mother of 2 wonderful boys!  View profile

4 Comments

Post a Comment
  • CJH12/7/2009

    the right of taxation and self governance in their own tribes and villages is an entitlement of their own sovereignty. what is that to you anyway? they're not asking to tax you, whom of which most likely do not live in their village or tribe. therefore everything you mentioned having little to no effect on you. where did you get your facts for your arguments of preferential employment and modernization? and i certainly don't see how sovereignty of 225 "little nations" within the state is any of your or anyone else's concern with the exception of the tribal members. for that matter what difference or drastic noticeable change will it make on the current state of alaska? 0 that's what.

  • JMH12/3/2007

    "With the Native Claims Settlement Act, Congress did away with native sovereignty in Alaska." You clearly did not research this topic and the result is an ill-informed, inaccurate article. There is an entire chapter devoted to Alaska Natives in Cases and Materials on Federal Indian Law and I highly recommend that you read it. With ANCSA, aboriginal claims to land were relinquished, not aboriginal rights as you state in your article. The 12 Native corporations established with ANCSA in 1971 differ from the "200 smaller ones" you mention; I think you are confusing the Department of the Interior's federal recognition of over 200 Alaska Native tribes in 1993 with the Native corporations. ANCSA did not strip tribes of their sovereign powers; that was not even the intent of the Act.

  • Isabel Stewart6/18/2007

    of setting them free from themselves then just don't ever give it back. The reason for your upset is nothing other than GREED.

  • Isabel Stewart6/18/2007

    If you rented a property to someone and made a profit from them and all the money that they gave you, would you then feel that they had paid you enough and therefor they should just keep it? It is the same principal, their land was taken from them, and they were quiet entitled to make money, just because they made money out of their own land does not mean that they should now just give it up because some people think that they have made enough. Would you tell a business man, well I think you have made enough, it is time for you to hand it over. And I guess if you guys are in Iraq long enough, you'll be saying, look how much we have given you and how much you have profited, why should we let you have your country back. Do you think that Iraq did not see America as bringing them freedom but saw Americans as invaders for no reason, NO, it was because everyone in the world, especially Iraq's knows how the current imperialist country works, borrow it, keep it for a while, under the auspices

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.