America — it is time to make reparations for GENOCIDE.

The most direct thing to improve the quality of life for Native/ Indigenous Tribes who live in America — and to make the biggest step to apologizing for the horrors America has committed would be to make these three new Native Nations a reality.

2010 Census shows where Native people live in America. Notice that there are three large clusters of blue. While all Native tribes deserve to be an actual recognized nation, only these three have the population size and cultural cohesion to pull off being a modern nation. The Sioux, the Navajo, and the Tribes of the former Oklahoma Territory. The map above shows the original reservation land the American government promised to these tribes in the areas now called South and North Dakota — Utah, Arizona, Colorado, New MexicoOklahoma state. Many other areas in modern America have large Native population but none are more than around 10–60,000 members. True the tribes of Oklahoma are not just one tribe, however, they have had to live together in one allotted area for over a century generating some form of political cohesion as seen with the Navajo and Sioux.

A little bit about the author of this idea — I have been talking about a need for Native Nations and that land should be returned to Native Tribes — since 2012.

In 2012, I proposed the idea that the Navajo, Tribes of Oklahoma, and Sioux should all become nations — and California. I am returning to this idea — having time to think about how to do it RIGHT.
I also traveled throughout California, to 40 cities, in 2012 talking about this plan for an independent California that RETURNS LAND TO NATIVE TRIBES OF CALIFORNIA.
In 2013, I organized a panel discussion on a Independent California and made sure that Native people were represented. A member of the Otomi Tribe (the only woman on the panel) was part of the VERY FIRST DISCUSSION ABOUT CALEXIT.

THERE IS NO GOOD REASON — why these three Native Nations could not be accepted today.

Currently, 19 nations exists, recognized as official independent nations by the World that have a population of around 170,000 people or less. They compose about 10% of all nations. (Saint Lucia, Kiribati, St. Vincent & Grenadines, Tonga, Grenada, Micronesia, Antigua and Barbuda, Seychelles, Andorra, Dominica, Saint Kitts & Nevis, Marshall Islands, Monaco, Liechtenstein, San Marino, Palau, Nauru, Tuvalu, Holy See). Some would argue that these nations get to be official nations because they are islands and they could not be governed from a land so far away from them. However, 5 out of this group of almost 20 nations, are located in Europe — and all of these recognized nations are not islands or are at least so close to a major European nation, there is no good reason they had to be recognized as an independent nation. (Andorra, Monaco, San Marino, Liechtenstein, Holy See “Vatican City”).

Why would Native Tribes want to be official nations? Aren’t they already recognized as cultural nations.

Each Native group in America is recognized in American law as its own nation. However, this only has a limited meaning and only provides for limited rights.

First — NO NATIVE NATION IN AMERICA OWNS THEIR LAND, all Native land is held “in trust” by the American government, the same way that parents hold inheritance for their children in trust. Legally, the American government treats natives like children.

Chief Justice John Marshall set Native Americans on the path to poverty in 1831 when he characterized the relationship between Indians and the government as “resembling that of a ward to his guardian.” With these words, Marshall established the federal trust doctrine, which assigns the government as the trustee of Indian affairs. That trusteeship continues today, but it has not served Indians well. Underlying this doctrine is the notion that tribes are not capable of owning or managing their lands.

“The Constitution and later federal laws grant local sovereignty to tribal nations, yet do not grant full sovereignty equivalent to foreign nations, hence the term “domestic dependent nations”.

“The economic devastation in American Indian communities is not simply a result of their history as victims of forced assimilation, war, and mass murder; it’s a result of the federal government’s current policies, and particularly its restrictions on Natives’ property rights. Reservation land is held “in trust” for Indians by the federal government. The goal of this policy was originally to keep Indians contained to certain lands. Now, it has shifted to preserving these lands for indigenous peoples. But the effect is the same. Indians can’t own land, so they can’t build equity. This prevents American Indians from reaping numerous benefits. Indian reservations, Terry Anderson and Shawn Regan wrote in Louisiana State University’s Journal of Energy Law and Resources, “contain almost 30 percent of the nation’s coal reserves west of the Mississippi, 50 percent of potential uranium reserves, and 20 percent of known oil and gas reserves” — resources worth nearly $1.5 trillion, or $290,000 per tribal member. Tragically, “86 percent of Indian lands with energy or mineral potential remain undeveloped because of federal control of reservations that keeps Indians from fully capitalizing on their natural resources if they desire.”

Imagine if the government were responsible for looking after your best interests. All of your assets must be managed by bureaucrats on your behalf. A special bureau is even set up to oversee your affairs. Every important decision you make requires approval, and every approval comes with a mountain of regulations.How well would this work? Just ask Native Americans.The federal government is responsible for managing Indian affairs for the benefit of all Indians. But by all accounts the government has failed to live up to this responsibility. As a result, Native American reservations are among the poorest communities in the United States.

Secondly — while the America government says they respect Native tribes as sovereign nations — they don’t act that way. Progressive politicians in 2016–2017 treated Natives like garbage.

No progressive politician would talk about how Natives are poorly treated by American government to the United Nations

James Anaya, the UN special rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, said no member of the US Congress would meet him as he investigated the part played by the government in the considerable difficulties faced by Indian tribes.

American President Obama — made sure Natives were not empowered in the Federal Government just like American Presidents Reagan and Bush.

However, on Feb. 6, 2009, Obama’s administration also registered its retrograde position on a significant Indian preference case, despite promises to include more Native Americans in the federal government. As reported on, the Department of Justice filed a notice of appeal of a decision that backed a broad Indian preference policy at the Department of the Interior. The Obama administration’s appeal is in line with both the Reagan administration and the Bush administration, which had restricted the Indian preference policy at the U.S. Department of the Interior.

America President Obama — denied Native peoples money they were owed by the Federal government

Every Native American in this country should be burning with anger over the total incompetence of the United State government for this latest screw up.

“Cobell v. Salazar (previously Cobell v. Kempthorne and Cobell v. Norton and Cobell v. Babbitt) is a class-action lawsuit brought by Elouise Cobell (Blackfeet) and other Native American representatives in 1996 against two departments of the United States government: the Department of Interior and the Department of the Treasury for mismanagement of Indian trust funds. It was settled in 2009. The plaintiffs claim that the U.S. government has incorrectly accounted for the income from Indian trust assets, which are legally owned by the Department of the Interior, but held in trust for individual Native Americans (the beneficial owners). The case was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The potential liability of the U.S. government in the case is also disputed: plaintiffs have suggested a figure as high as $176 billion, and defendants have suggested a number in the low millions, at most.The case was settled for $3.4 billion in 2009.

Unfortunately, it hasn’t gotten much better. A recent class action suit alleged that the government mismanaged billions of dollars in Indian assets. The case settled in 2009 for $3.4 billion — far less than what was lost by the feds.

American President Obama — was silent on Standing Rock protest, and did nothing while Natives were being beaten.

In this context, Obama’s ongoing silence about whether protesters have the right to defend their lands — and the right not to be attacked with violence or starved into submission — stand in stark contrast to his September remarks, in which he talked about himself as a champion of Native rights.

While I would like to thank the president for putting a “temporary stop” on the building of the Dakota Access pipeline under the Missouri river, I must ask: Why did he wait until the 11th hour and 59th minute to do so, and allow so many people to suffer hardship and brutality?I appreciate the gesture, and it certainly eases the humanitarian strain for the holidays, but I very much doubt that he would have done this without the protests escalating to the point where thousands of our veterans self-deployed to protect our water — which shows his status of a man of principle to be in doubt.

Also remember that no progressive politician even mentioned that it is wrong that Native people don’t own their own land.

Third — the American people elected a racist after President Obama, who quickly began to insult Native people.

We’ve heard a lot less about his overt racism against Native Americans.

So the Trump administration’s move to scrap federal rules mandating a thorough cleanup of such ash landed in the community like a slap in the face, Simmons said.

CONCLUSION — the America government is either ran by racists who will attack Natives or it is run by progressives who effectively do not treat Natives fairly, despite acting like they care. So it appears that given all of these acts above happened in the last couple years — it is reasonable to believe that America will never be fair to Native tribes.

We know this conclusion is correct — because Native Tribes have already said this in formal reports.

Summary: Personal Experiences of Discrimination

Overall, Native Americans report substantial and significant personal experiences of discrimination, across many areas of life. In the context of institutional forms of discrimination, roughly three in ten Native Americans say they have been personally discriminated against because they are Native when being paid equally or considered for promotions (33%), when applying for jobs (31%), and when interacting with the police (29%). Additionally, about a third of Native Americans believes they or someone in their family have been unfairly stopped or treated by the police (32%) or unfairly treated by the courts (32%) because they are Native American.

The American government behaves badly toward native issues — BECAUSE IT CAN.

The American government behaves badly toward Native issues — BECAUSE IT CAN. Natives do not actually have property ownership, so their rights are limited, because the American legal system is based on real ownership of land. This means the American government doesn’t have to protect Native people’s interest like it does home and business owners.

Additionally, Native people do not have access to high level American government officials the way that foreign nations do, which means the American government can ignore Natives as long as it wants.

Additionally, Native people do not have access to press their case for world recognition of the injustice they face daily in America because international law is based on recognized nations, since the Treaty of Westphalia. International law was not designed to deal with the concerns of activists, and the United Nations is only beginning to recognize what are called Non Government Actors (NGO)— or groups of people with an issue, who aren’t nations; “Globalization during the 20th century gave rise to the importance of NGOs.” For example, the UN created its’ first declaration stating that Indigenous peoples have rights in 2008.

When the American government did not control all of the Natives and did not own all of their land, they had to treat them like they were a real Foreign Nation. There are no meetings where Leaders of a Native Nation are treated like Foreign Heads of State by the American government ANYMORE.

IF Native people had official nations — they could force the American government to treat them correctly. Because legally they would own the land, meaning they had full control and did not have to get the American government’s permission TO DO ANYTHING, and they would have access to the International legal network to demand world recognition of how America treats them and as a sovereign nation can demand face to face meetings on any issue they want with high level American officials, and the American government has to take it seriously.

Doubt it — well consider this — look at these recognized nations that forced the American government and the European government to make sure the issues facing their people — were dealt with.

The nations of Japan and Israel are just two examples that prove — nations can project power and force other nations to treat their people fairly, far more effectively than advocates.


“Fox wants a blanket amnesty for Mexican immigrants who entered the United States illegally.”

“President Bush arrived here on Wednesday evening for a summit meeting that was intended in part to allay this country’s concerns that he will not have sufficient political capital to push through broad-ranging changes in American immigration policy.”


“European leaders have rejected calls by the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, for Jews to migrate en masse to Israel, pledging to ensure their safety at home.”


“Simultaneously, leading Japanese officials expressed frustration with the treatment of Japanese immigrants in the United States. A U.S.-Japanese treaty signed in 1894 had guaranteed the Japanese the right to immigrate to the United States, and to enjoy the same rights in the country as U.S. citizens. In 1906, however, the San Francisco Board of Education enacted a measure to send Japanese and Chinese children to segregated schools. The Government of Japan was outraged by this policy, claiming that it violated the 1894 treaty. In a series of notes exchanged between late 1907 and early 1908, known collectively as the Gentlemen’s Agreement, the U.S. Government agreed to pressure the San Francisco authorities to withdraw the measure, and the Japanese Government promised to restrict the immigration of laborers to the United States.”

Consider this — the Japanese government, during the time when racism of Asian immigrants was its most rampant in America — was still successful in forcing the American government to listen to its concerns about how Japanese immigrants were dealt with in America, and to improve the situation — over the wishes of the American people.

This shows the power of advocacy that nations have — that activists do not have.

“Overall, NGOs exercise far greater rights at the U.N. than they do at parliaments within individual countries… NGOs have no formal rights in the policymaking bodies where governments are most sensitive about their prerogatives…”

“Though NGOs have few formal powers over international decision-making”

So how do Native Tribes make this happen?

20% of the population of Bolivia is Native, 45% for Peru, 25% for Ecuador, and 89% of Greenland. Given that in 2007, “Bolivian Ambassador Gustavo Guzman… said he takes the Lakotas’ declaration of independence seriously”, meaning that the formal nation of Bolivia, said it would recognize a Native nation, it is reasonable to expect that other nations with huge Native populations, also would be willing to push for acceptance of new Native Nations.

If the three proposed nations agreed to work together to push for international recognition of all three nations (Sioux, Navajo, Oklahoma Territory) as as set, it would create a powerful political coalition — that then could reach out to Boliva, Peru, Ecuador, and Greenland to push for United Nations recognition.

The UN would be receptive to 4 sovereign nations asking for formal recognition of three new Native nations — because they ALREADY SAID AMERICA SHOULD GIVE NATIVES BACK — their land.

A United Nations investigator probing discrimination against Native Americans has called on the US government to return some of the land stolen from Indian tribes as a step toward combatting continuing and systemic racial discrimination.

How does having nations for three Native regions do something for the rest of the Natives who don’t get a nation?

Police, Health Care, the Courts, and Schools are a joke on Native reservations. The American government has completely failed to provide for the basics for Native Tribes, that is ensures for the rest of America’s people.

Native tribes have complained for literally generations and things have not been fixed. Perhaps if multiple Nations in the United Nations were constantly bringing up these issues — not to the America government — but bypassing them and going directly to the world, things might change for all Native people more quickly.



Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Marcus Ruiz Evans

President Yes California/ Calexit movement. Interviewed by Politico, New York Times, FOX, WashPost, LA Times, LA Weekly, Sac Bee, Daily Show w/TN, Mother Jones