The “greatness” of European religions and cultures was brought to the Indigenous peoples, who in return shared the lands and after “accidentally” being introduced to European disease, simply died off and whose descendants now fill the urban ghettos as alcoholics and welfare recipients. Of course, a few “remnants” of Indian cultures was retained, and there are even a few “professional” Indian politicians running around.
– Gord Hill, 500 Years of Indigenous Resistance
Anarchism, and anarchy, like all European exportation, were byproducts from critique of their own society that were sent and embedded into as part of colonial and imperial cultures. That these cultures reach into the heart and mind of worldwide indigenous struggle. White and non-indigenous anarchists would like to tell the oppressed that these exploitative colonial cultures were always universal, and that it’s also as the sense of birthright of anarchist cultures, to build a “better world” or “permanent autonomous zone”, directly on stolen land. The irony that these so-called liberating cultures exist merely because of the hundreds, if not thousands of year of oppression toward indigenous struggle under most brutal methods and assimilation, brought by the ancestors of these anarchists in the first place. But anyone who stood up against these sound solutions to so-called worldwide revolution on stolen land, would be immediately seen as agitators, disruptors or reactionaries. Like fathers like sons, white anarchists using colonialist definitions to label, dehumanize and dismiss indigenous struggle, are no better than anything they supposed to stand against. To support a colonial anarchy is to be part of the programming that settler state laid the foundation for all so-called liberation and revolution.
The framework of whiteness and its attempt to assimilate indigenous cultures into the univeralism and transculturalism, served only purpose is to normalize the struggle of indigenous population. White anarchists attempt to ‘speak’ for indigenous, or ‘representing’ them through their platform or media so that they could capitalize the struggle even further. The author of this article worked with another indigenous comrade within a majority-white leftist organization, to release a well documented case of the settler state kidnapping children of an Anishinabek mother, and extortion to her in attempt to keep her children in foster home. The two comrades worked within 2 days to process all the documents and demanded to release these info on an antifascist media as soon as possible. Yet they met with vigorous and irresponsible delays from the leftist group to release the information on time. There was barely any radical media report on this document release. No solidarity from the white comrades. The mother never got her children back. But surely they continue to share so-called solidarity toward indigenous resisting TransCanada pipeline for free likes and emoji, yet they could not support indigenous homeless within the area. Once again it has shown that whiteness continue to haunt indigenous people whenever they go, even within the resistance.
The Left, and anarchism, have never really stood for indigenous throughout history of humanity. It was always and foremost the “universalist for all” but conveniently left out indigenous and people of color. The Left only show a glimpse of solidarity toward indigenous genocide only when it was ripe to exploit and capitalize the struggle. There hadn’t been any inclusion of indigenous in the labor movement, when the Harlan or Blair Mountain strikes within the Appalachia, not once in the documented historical literature of the Coal Wars mentioned that the Appalachia mountains were once a populated area of Natives, they were being drove away or massacred by these newcomers and miners, who in the sheer irony, in turn getting exploited by capitalists when times changed. The Left never once mentioned that their breeding ground for revolutionary activities in so-called Montreal, Ottawa and other settler towns, were founded upon endless massacres and forceful removal of indigenous lifestyle and culture, bringing the complete destruction of any trace that the Natives were once here. Erasing the history of indigenous is what the settler state done best, and the worst offenders are the Left and so-called anarchists who continue to uphold the myth of settler state until this day.
Perhaps the best and worst example of how whiteness within anarchism culture to oppress indigenous, is about Lucy Parsons, in shown its attempted to control the narrative and blanket the framework on indigenous contribution to the struggle. Lucy Parsons was one of the most prominent anarchist in 20th century, the co-founder of Industrial Workers of the World. She was indigenous and black, however the saddest part was that for most of Parsons’ life, she distanced herself from the indigenous ancestry in fear of discrimination and repression, even within the so-called progressive leftist movement. To this day, there are bourgeois liberal and leftist institutions who tried everything to dismiss that Lucy Parsons was ever indigenous “at all” in attempt to erase indigenous struggle that took significant part in the labor movement.
In Europe, anarchists have shown somewhat strong support toward Catalan and Basque resistance, yet these solidarity only happen because of the past history of Spanish Civil War. In contrast to these struggle, the Sapmi people in so-called Scandinavian have not seen such solidarity from these Nordic Europeans as much as they showed in other part of the continent. Anarchism becomes a brand whenever the whiteness follow through and dominate all aspect of struggle. One could point out as clear as daylight, that those who were supportive Rojava indigenous resistance, won’t show the same or be even against indigenous struggle within their so-called homeland. This is the duality of struggle that indigenous people must bear, that at any time and place, their struggle could either become a fame or a farce, the lives of them hanging on the string, depending on when the trend of whiteness decided to set stone in.
There is no hope, no home, and no help from the radicals who kept telling indigenous that they are the best and only allies the indigenous people ever got. The indigenous people and creatures are being massacred at alarming rate, but the whiteness of anarchy insist that they got the best chance right now to build up hopes and being armed for the so-called revolution. There is no revolution on stolen land and there won’t be any. Ever.
This article is not a critique on anarchism, as the concept of anarchism predates European society, colonialism and civilization. This article is merely another silent cry of observation from an indigenous anarchist toward white anarchism, and to point out its repeated failure to show solidarity to worldwide indigenous struggle. To end this article with the quote about indigenous culture as early anarchy and egalitarian society, from “Resisting Illegitimate Authority” by Bruce E. Levine:
At the time Europeans began to colonize North America, Native American societies were highly diverse with many different political systems and various religious beliefs. However, they did share certain common characteristics. Native societies in what now constitutes the United States did not have the hierarchical and authoritarian organization of the Aztec and Inca societies south of them. In what now constitutes the United States, historian Eric Foner notes, “Many Europeans saw Indians as embodying freedom.” He reported that a European religious missionary during that time said about Native Americans: “They are born, live, and die in a liberty without restraint.” Foner also quotes an early trader who observed that Indians had no words to express “despotic power, arbitrary kings, oppressed or obedient subjects.”
European colonizers came from extremely hierarchical societies, ruled by kings and aristocracies; and within families, husbands ruled their wives. Upon marriage, a European woman surrendered her legal identity, which meant she could not own property or sign contracts, or, except in rare circumstances, get a divorce. By contrast, in most Native societies, women could divorce their husbands and choose premarital partners. And while tribal leaders were mostly men, female elders would help select male leaders and take part in tribal meetings. Thus, for European colonizing men, their absolute power within their marriage was threatened to the extent that their wives were aware of Native American life. In general, the relative attractiveness of Native American societies was threatening for authoritarians.
A common characteristic of Native American societies is an absence of impersonal authority and coercion. Ensuring civility is seen as a collective responsibility. When interpersonal conflicts arise, the emphasis is on negotiations among parties and kin groups to settle conflicts. A common characteristic of Native societies is to make all efforts toward members not experiencing coercion and resulting resentments. If consensus could not be achieved, bands would splinter off.