Apolitical Democracy

Political Parties have caused dissention, confusion, and fighting among the people and the representatives of political parties since their inception. When the Constitution was written in 1787, the founders thought of political parties as "factions," acting only for their own selfish interests rather than the public good. The founders saw instances in history when factions resorted to assassination and civil war if they failed to get their way. Sound familiar? It should because we have been dealing with it for a long time. And just like in the Civil War, political parties are leading us down the path of destruction . Political parties feed on money flow. They are not driven by the needs or the desires of the people. Because of this, political parties because of their dependency on cash flow fall into the hands of special interests and corporate institutions. When this happens politics become about the desires of the large donors and not the needs and desires of the people. Political parties become the pawns of corporate interests. The function of political parties becomes protecting corporate interests rather than the interests of the people. Sadly, political parties will lead to the fall of democratic forms of government. In his Farewell Address, George Washington warned that political parties were likely "to become potent engines by which . . . unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government." It is obvious that from that time to the present, it is obvious that political parties are most effective at dividing the people. As long as political parties can keep division between the American People they can control the People. Since the inception of political parties nothing other than division of the people and excessive corruption has existed in political parties. Saying that nothing is perfect so we should keep political parties is also saying that we are not capable of creating a better process regardless of how flawed what we have created may be.

Individual Rights

The first constitution of the United States was, the Articles of Confederation. The Articles of confederation gave states rights the ultimate power to control individual rights. This is why some states were able to proclaim that Indigenous People were not entitled to any rights or considerations and that they were not human. It is why Confederate states were able to declare that Black People were not human and could be bought and sold as livestock. It became abundantly clear that to protect individual rights, there would have to be a stronger Federal Government. So,on March 4, 1789 the Articles of Confederation were rescinded and our current constitution was ratified. Abuse of state power isn't something new. There is a group of people that have always tried to decide who should have individual rights and who should not . We are now on the verge of losing all individual rights . The People have never fully understood what individual rights meant . Individual Rights are so extensive that the idea of enumerating all of the would have been so enormous that someone would still be enumerating them . Instead, it was decided that the 9th and 10th amendments would protect those rights . Unfortunately , states have tried to usurp those two amendments . And we have allowed them to get away with it. The one thing that has remained consistent since the founding of the United States is that rights may be guaranteed, but if we plan to keep them we will always have to fight for them. One of the ways that we have to figjt is to fight is through elections. We have to understand that every elected position is as important as as any other. We have a responsibility to vote in every single election. Of course we can always allow the constitution to be replaced by a new version of the Articles of Confederation. Unless that is what we want, we had better learn that no democratic form of government can survive as a spectator sport .

Tribal Sovereignty News

 

Americas Broken Criminal Justice System

The American Justice System is broken.
It isn't like it has ever been perfect, but after a couple of hundred years it seems like it would have improved much more.

In fact too often there is no justice involved at all.

Since Justice is blind , then it does not notice that there are problems that occur which are direct violations of the constitution.

What kind of violations you ask. Well I am glad you asked, let me tell you.

Crimes against American Indians are almost completely ignored all together.

Unless Tribes have given jurisdiction to states,then states don't have jurisdiction over crimes which occur on Tribal Land.

Crimes against Tribal members which occur off of Tribal Lands are of little interest to most local authorities.

Improvements in laws concerning crimes against Indians have improved very little since it was outright legal to kill Indians.

It is hard for some people to perceive that if someone got into a disagreement with an Indian and decided to kill the Indian  they were not breaking the law.

Before you jump in and talk about old history, we are talking about laws that only were changed as late as the 1960s.

Federal agencies are not much better. In fact it's so bad that the only law enforcement agency in the United States that is immune from prosecution for police misconduct, is Bureau of Indian Affairs Police.

18 USC 242 houses police misconduct provisions but specifically excludes BIA Police. Why?

I have heard a lot of answers to that question  but I have never heard one that makes sense.

Well sadly the criminal justice system isn't just broken when it comes to American Indians.

If you are a minority person of any minority or a poor person, you can expect to get as little justice as possible from this system.

Supposedly, you are innocent until proven guilty. If you believe that, you should get your affairs in order. You are probably going to find a new home in the penal system if you are accused of a crime.

If someone can hire an attorney and has the funds to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars for criminal defense, they may have a chance.

Otherwise, you will receive all the Justice you can afford.

Supposedly this system was designed so that 10 guilty people  would walk free before one innocent person would be imprisoned.

Good luck with that. The burden of proof is supposedly on the state.
That should mean that if you didn't commit a crime you can't possibly be convicted.

Since 1986, 359 people have been exonerated through DNA evidence.
There is no way to determine how many innocent people could not be exonerated because there was no DNA evidence.

The point is, innocent people go to prison every single day.

We have forgotten what evidence beyond a reasonable doubt means or how it should be applied.

It should not start at the trial  it should start during the investigation.
If there is not evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, then an arrest should not be made.

Does this mean that some criminals will get away with crimes? It certainly does. The next question is simple. Which has the most detrimental effect on the most people, an innocent person going to prison or a criminal walking free?

It boils down to a political question.
Can people get elected if they let one guilty person walk free even though they may have kept 10 innocent people from going to prison? Sadly probably not

So, politics corrupts justice.
Once corruption has it's foot in the door, you can't shut the door. The influx of other kinds of corruption infiltrates the CJS at this point until there is no semblance of justice left. That is where we are currently.

We have to decide what we want. We can't have it both ways.

Either we insure that innocent people can't be convicted, or we prosecute based on who we like for a crime.

Hate Crime In America

Hate Crimes in America are a subject that simply do not receive enough attention.

In dealing with hate crimes, we as a country have a long way to go.
It seems to be very difficult for many people to understand the connection between racism and hate crimes. It also seems to be difficult for many people to accept that these things do occur every day.

I am constantly amazed at the amount of people I hear from every day that are of the beliefe that violence against American Indians is a thing of the past. That these things have been rectified and no longer happen.

I hear things like, "The Indians were treated badly".

I am not exactly sure that I would consider being raped. murdered and tortured as being treated "badly".

Part of the misconception springs from the misinformation that American Indians were the perpetrators of horrific crimes against immigrants.

No doubt that all American Indian Nations did their share of retribution.

The question is where did and does the fault lie?

Tribes were at home on their own land. Foreigners came from another land and started taking their land and killing their people. Today we would justify the actions of the Indian Nations as 'self defense".

Now someone will say, "That was in the past, let bygones be bygones".

Not so fast. It is still happening today. Almost every Indian Nation are fighting battles to stop either the Federal Government or Large Corporations from attempting to steal land that holds resources that attract the greed of others.

You still are not a believer?

This is from the Southern poverty Law Center.

The Southern Poverty Law Center

Indian Blood

From the beginning, white Americans have brutalized American Indians. Half a millennium later, the hate goes on.

The study also found that "American Indians are more likely than people of other races to experience violence at the hands of someone of a different race," with 70% of reported violent attacks perpetrated by non-Indians.

Even to seasoned crime statisticians, the results were startling. "We now know that American Indians experience a much greater exposure to violence than other race groups," said co-author Lawrence A. Greenfeld. "The common wisdom was that blacks experience the highest exposure to violence."

But the results didn't come as a surprise to Navajo leaders, who have long referred to Farmington as the "Selma, Ala., of the Southwest."

"Just as some areas of the South remain hotbeds of racism because of the history of slavery and discrimination, the same can be said of areas where there are large Indian populations," said Raymond Foxworth, a scholarship coordinator for the American Indian College Fund who grew up on the Navajo reservation. "The historical treatment of Indians does indeed have contemporary significance. If we are willing to admit this about other groups, why can't the same be said with Indians?"

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2006/winter/indian-blood

You see, racism is still alive in America today. The bad part is this, if it can happen to any race of people, it can also happen to any other.