« Avoiding the pitfalls of settler decolonisation (I): John Lowe, ‘Multiculturalism and its exclusions in New Zealand: the case for cosmopolitanism and indigenous rights’, Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, 16, 4, 2015 , pp. 496-512
On the relationship between postcolonial and settler colonial studies: Diana Brydon, ‘Postcolonial and Settler Colonial Studies Offer Human Rights a Revised Agenda’, in Pavan Kumar Malreddy, Birte Heidemann, Ole Birk Laursen, Janet Wilson (eds), Reworking Postcolonialism: Globalization, Labour and Rights, Springer, 2015, pp. 183-198 »

Avoiding the pitfalls of settler decolonisation (II): Jeremiah Chin, Nicholas Bustamante, Jessica Ann Solyom, Bryan McKinley, Jones Brayboy, ‘Terminus Amnesia: Cherokee Freedmen, Citizenship, and Education’, Theory into Practice, 2015

13Dec15

Abstract: In 2007, the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma amended its constitution to limit membership to only those who can trace lineal descent to an individual listed as “Cherokee by Blood” on the final Dawes Rolls. This exercise of sovereignty paradoxically ties the Dawes Rolls, the colonial instruments used to divide the lands and peoples of the Cherokee Nation, and self-determination. In the process it effectively disenrolls Cherokee Freedmen, the descendants of Blacks enslaved by the Cherokee Nation. In this article, we explore the implications of this history in the context of self-determination and sovereignty, particularly looking at the influence of colorism on the Dawes Rolls and its ongoing effects. Our goal is to share a piece of history that is often obscured or unknown; to explore how and to what extent the exercise of self-determination and sovereignty in Indigenous nations is impacted by colorism; and finally to consider implications for practice created by the disenfranchisement of peoples from Indigenous nations.


Filed under: Uncategorized   |  Closed