“As linguistic, economic, religious, social, and cultural drives are integrated into philosophies of action by groups, it will become apparent that the Western world is being submerged into tribalism and ethnic communities.”

– From the Book “We Talk, You Listen” by Vine Deloria, Jr.

In Chapter 7 of Vine Deloria’s book We Talk, You Listen, titled “Power, Sovereignty, and Freedom,” he began with addressing a recent rise in power groups and “the realization of power segments of the minority communities” (114).  In 1966, Deloria was part of the Red Power movement, an American Indian social-political group that was also part of several other power movements (at that time), such as Black Power.

When it comes to Tribalism, Deloria didn’t right away define what tribalism was, but he addressed it carefully over a span of chapters.  Deloria saw tribalism as a new form of powerful social groups that emerged from race and poverty issues. Deloria explained how minorities (in his time) were often ignored or invisible because the white dominant social structure (when it comes to race) only looked at black and white relations (87).  And American Indians were often overlooked and placed in another category called “Others” (86).  In this complex social system, Deloria asserted that old European American ideologies created factions that are not that different in how the federal government controls American Indian tribal lands and membership.

For example, Deloria described similarities between block organizations and cooperatives, notably how American Indians “hold their lands and assets in common.” This is similar to how “people purchase a share of the building” and thus “hold property in common.” Memberships can later be defined by specific criteria (94-95). This process creates a bureaucracy that gets “the minimum impact from maximum effort” (95).

Deloria argued that tribalism was a necessary response to the challenges faced by groups such as Red Power, Black Power, and Chicano Power. He claims that, despite their protests, these groups struggled to exercise their collective sovereignty. Deloria defines tribalism as power groups exercising their sovereignty, which supports his central argument in this book: that empowered, self-defining groups are key to resisting dominant structures.

Deloria stated, “Each ethnic group must, in effect, form its own interpretation of itself from which it can choose those paths of action which can best be achieved within a certain time span” (57).

During the 1960’s, studying Ethnic studies as a minor or a concentration had one thing going for it: it could “provide the historical background of contemporary problems.” Deloria believed that Ethnic studies needed more than that to survive (57), not to mention it needed to make a positive difference in someone’s life.  He felt that each ethnic group needed to develop “its own interpretation of itself” and, from there, move forward and make decisions that will enable them to thrive as a resilient group (57), suggesting that each ethnic group develop its sense of good “peoplehood” (106).

In chapter 6, “Another Look at Black Power,” Deloria stated, “the great melting-pot theory was used to explain the apparent creation of a homogeneous society,” but a great divide in race relations grew between white Americans and minorities (106). Deloria believed that if this gap were recognized, groups could come together and build strong, prominent relations (106). As each group develops its sense of good peoplehood, it resists disappearing into the proverbial melting pot.

Deloria pointed out that, “In recognizing the integrity of the group, we can understand the necessity for negotiations between groups (106).  Here, Deloria is simply saying that if groups became strong and prominent, they could work with other groups and, together, confront the dominant society’s lack of understanding of minority groups, which has been a source of much social and political conflict.  Deloria also asserted that the dominant white society needs to learn to understand the many points of view of prominent minority groups and peoplehood, and how each relates to the others (106).

“Black power was a philosophical activism” (102).

“We live in a time when old nations are breaking up and new nations are being formed.  It thus becomes imperative to destroy anyone who appears to be developing a sense of life values that does not coincide with what we have come to regard as our own” (207).

Last, but not least, Black Power united black people to acknowledge their heritage and “build a sense of community” (102).  Deloria also stated that Black Power called upon black people to “define their own goals,” and to take charge of and support their own organizations (102), and that American Indians were doing the same thing in their own terms. The civil rights movement had two great black religious leaders, Martin Luther King, Jr. (a Christian preacher) and Malcolm X (a Muslim preacher), who were both assassinated.  Their murders marked a problem in American society that dominant white society would go to great lengths to keep the status quo, and they knew that Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X were creating a new ideology and a new religion, and they destroyed it before it could take over and change (for the better) the status of black people and for minorities (207-208).

Bibliography:

Deloria, Vine. We Talk, You Listen : New Tribes, New Turf. University Of Nebraska Press ; Chesham, 2007.

‌