Rebirth of a nation

Breakdown in communication has not deterred factions of Lakota tribe

By Rebecca Bentz
Capital Journal Staff
Published/Last Modified on Wednesday, Jan 09, 2008 - 06:05:29 am CST

PIERRE — For some it is the rebirth of a nation — for others, an opportunity to further their understanding of current American Indian affairs.

The recent withdrawal from treaties with the United States by a breakaway sect of the Lakota Sioux tribe has generated much discussion, and not just in the United States. News agencies from the Cayman Islands to the Netherlands have followed the paths of four Lakota Freedom delegates from South Dakota to Washington, D.C., to the Republic of Lakotah.

Somewhere along the way, however, communication between the delegates broke down — leading some members of the press to say a rift had formed between representatives of the Lakota Freedom movement and the Republic of Lakotah. But the dream of a Lakota nation is still alive and well, explained Naomi Archer, liaison for the movement.

Archer and Canupa Gluha Mani, one of the delegates who traveled to Washington with Republic of Lakotah representative Russell Means, said some aspects of the movement were changed without the consent of the full delegation. Means, actor and longtime American Indian rights activist, and two other delegates changed the movement’s Web site and adopted plans for a provisional government without discussing it with the Lakota Freedom movement, Archer said.

“There needs to be discussion about these things so there can be unity,” Archer said. “But that doesn’t change what happened in Washington — which was a great thing, an amazing thing.”

Archer said she is confident that members of the Lakota Freedom movement and representatives for the Republic of Lakotah will work together again soon.

“These things can be worked out,” Archer said. “It might take a while, but that’s up to the Lakota people. Liberation is called a struggle for a reason.”

The proposed Republic of Lakotah would consist of all of South Dakota west of the Missouri River, as well as portions of North Dakota, Montana, Wyoming and Nebraska, according to the Republic of Lakotah Web site.

Energy, powered by windmills and solar panels, would be free within the country, Means said. There would be no federal taxes and local communities would be the most powerful governmental entities in the republic.

The republic hopes to negotiate with representatives of the U.S. and local governments located within the five-state area soon, Means said. The republic sent out an open invitation Jan. 1 and has received one reply. Sam Kephart, a Republican from Spearfish running for the U.S. Senate, will meet with Means Wednesday to learn more about the group’s concerns.

“I think there are substantial legal questions that have been inadequately dealt with over the last 120 years,” Kephart said. “I’m not necessarily siding or recommending what (Means) is doing, but I absolutely want to hear more about it.”

The Republic of Lakotah was born from a section of Lakota people concerned about their culture’s future and their lack of rights as American Indians, Means said.

“Every aspect of our life is threatened,” Means said. “We haven’t any constitutional rights on an Indian reservation.”

Negative response to the Republic of Lakotah does not concern Means or the other delegates, he said. The group is fully within its legal rights to withdraw from treaties with the U.S. according to the constitution and Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Means explained.

The republic has not been contacted by the U.S. State Department, Means said. The group plans to set up plans for electricity in the republic and finalize the structure of the provisional government during the next few years, he said.

Print this story Post A Comment

WARNING:

• Comments are not verified for accuracy nor have we verified the identity of any person’s name accompanying a comment, so please consider this as you weigh any statements made or opinions offered.

NOTE:

• Comments will not be posted if submitted in all caps, or all lower case, or do not show a reasonable attempt to follow basic rules of grammar and punctuation, nor will text-message like abbreviations be accepted, like ur for your.
• Postings must stay on the issues related to the thread and not veer off into personal comments about others. The tone of the post must be civil. For example, you can say someone’s ideas are stupid but you cannot say another poster is stupid.
• Postings must deal with matters of public concern.

Comments

20 comment(s)

Bill Hawk wrote on Jan 26, 2009 3:57 PM:

" I am Oglala, and prey every day for the strenth and vision to bring a truly brighter day for my people. I do not agree with some of Russel's words and tactics, but he has put himself smack dab in the middle. If more of us did the same the screams of many would surely resonate louder than the pleas of a few?May the great creator bless and guide us in our struggles. ''TO BE A WHOLE NATION AGAIN WOULD BE A BLESSING". "

crst norcal wrote on Nov 14, 2008 5:16 PM:

" Symbolism. Unfortunately, as usual, the Lakota involved refuse to present a unified front, which leads to confusion and derision, even among supporters. As for Russell Means, remember the words of Lao Tsu, "The true leader leads by following." "

Patrick Lee wrote on Jun 29, 2008 3:11 AM:

" Russell Means may not be the only one speaking for the Lakota Nation, but at least he is trying to bring about freedom the best he knows how. I send my prayersto Canupa
Mani and Russell Means and anyone else who desires freedom for the Lakota Nation. "

European wrote on Apr 20, 2008 12:45 PM:

" I think of the Lakota as a souvereign nation occupied illegally by the US, but:
1.Does the Lakota freedom delegation have the right to represent the Lakota Nation?
2.The occupation is illegal becuase of the treaties. If the Lakota Nation withdraw from the treaties, the occupation isn't illegal an more. Wouldn't it make more sense just to withdraw the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868 and accept the 1851 treaty? "

John wrote on Apr 8, 2008 5:24 PM:

" I wish Mr. Means well in all his efforts. I just hope to see greater solidarity among the Lakota in the future. It will surely be a cultural tragedy if the Lakota disappear and they are the ones that have to fight the hardest to ensure that it survives.
"

susie wrote on Mar 23, 2008 3:48 PM:

" I am a Lakota Sioux Indian and I would not want the likes of Russell Means or his new nation overseeing my life. What is he trying to do? Start a Revolution? Or create another Wounded Knee or Waco incident? "

Stephen Clark wrote on Mar 7, 2008 2:26 PM:

" Americans of all races should rise up and stand with the Free Republic of Lakota. It is, was, and always will be, their land and not America's. We are quickly loosing many of our freedoms in America and Russell Means has done the right thing for his people. I fully support him and only wish we had leaders like him to grant us real freedom. "

Stephen Clark wrote on Mar 7, 2008 9:26 AM:

Dean wrote on Feb 29, 2008 6:33 PM:

" I'm Umpqua Indian, Cow Creek Band, out of OR. I only wish that my own tribe would break off from the U.S. The Lakota have my full support, even if it meant me moving to there community to pick up the fight. Keep up the good work. I'll be watching to see how it goes. "

He Tasunka Luta wrote on Jan 21, 2008 9:46 PM:

" First of all; why do we need the U.S. Government to better ourselves. We could all be going back to school to better ourselves educationally. Return home and make the changes ourselves. Second; we need to go back to our traditional practices to find ourselves. Once that is accomplished; we can then work in harmony to make the corrections that be needed. "

LaDonna wrote on Jan 17, 2008 5:27 PM:

" Neither Naomi Archer, a woman who invented her own European tribe, non-Indian, nor Russell Means, who does not have the 3/4 majority of male Lakota votes to represent the Lakota Nation in the matter of treaties, have the right nor the authority to say anything concerning the governance of the Lakota Nation.

The right authority, the Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council, has announced that they have not endorsed what those individuals have said, and Lakota women associations have clearly asked not to give any weight to what this Nnaomi Archer is saying, as she does not speak for them. "

inhumansquirrel wrote on Jan 15, 2008 10:00 AM:

" so they are doing this with the full backing of all the lakota nations? im lakota and was never asked if i wanted this or not and no tribes have been approached on this issue it should be the ppls decision not one organization or man who has nothing to do with our day to day lives trying to dictate what we think from off the reservation,Mr. Means is the native Hitler. sure the rez is bad but only because we make it so "

Brother Bob wrote on Jan 12, 2008 8:11 PM:

" In a time where the US Government is taking over the world, it seems, and failing to protect the people of America, that some how division should not be sought by Freedom loving people ? Unification will come from factions with the same goal. Namely, leaving the corrupt USA. "

RIsupporter wrote on Jan 11, 2008 9:22 AM:

" Confused, Who owned the land first? I think its about time Americans wake up and realize we are puppets of America Inc.
http://republicoflakotah.com/forum/index.php "

Enisi Waya wrote on Jan 10, 2008 1:23 PM:

" (Grandfather Wolf) I have actually studied Russell Means' life and accomplishments. He gets a lot of free sometimes wanted but usually not sought publicity. This is more from the media knowing his name and having polls that show high recognition of his name. This is what sells news, headlines with name recognition. Russell has built up opportunities for all native people. He doesn't self promote. He is a leader and organizer trying to make native lives better.. I support him fully. "

Smithers wrote on Jan 10, 2008 4:15 AM:

" Not trying to degrade anyone, but there seems to be an issue running things on the reservation now... and their own country is a much greater responsibilty.

That isn't the say the federal government doesn't have their hand in the pot, but still. The track record here is not so good. "

Confused wrote on Jan 9, 2008 1:56 PM:

" While I am not unsympathetic to the concerns of and issues raised by the Lakota Freedom movement, I have to wonder, seriously, if they can honestly think that some of this is going to happen.

I simply cannot, ever, see the United States giving up land, especially from within the lower 48, to amy other nation.

"

Historicuss wrote on Jan 9, 2008 12:38 PM:

" Traditional way is government by consent. It is about individuals and communities, not remote control from national coercive dictators. One can choose to belong or not. But the fact that some do not wish to participate does not preclude others from choosing their own path. "

Darrel wrote on Jan 9, 2008 10:57 AM:

" Is this the plot of another Potter book? "

njd wrote on Jan 9, 2008 9:19 AM:

" So is the Lakota Nation together on this or not? All I see is a big bunch of publicity for Russell Means. "

WRITE A COMMENT

Use the form below to post a brief comment to this story, or respond to other readers. Please use the word count tool to assist you in keeping your remarks to 100 words or fewer.

Comments must be approved by an editor before appearing on the Web site. Editors review submitted comments periodically during the day for offensive or off-topic content before posting. Your thoughtful contribution to the online discussion is appreciated.