Friday, January 22, 2021

"If we are going to heal, we must remember..."


The War of 1812 and the European Colonization of Africa and the Americas

Collusion and Competition

at the service of

Corporate Imperialism

In the War of 1812, the British promised refuge to any enslaved Black people who escaped their enslavers, raising fears among White Americans of a large-scale revolt. The final provocation was that men who escaped their bonds of slavery were welcome to join the British Corps of Colonial Marines in exchange for land after their service. As many as 4,000 people, mostly from Virginia and Maryland, escaped. Some of them participated in the burning of the White House in 1814.


The British kept their word to Colonial Marines after the war, refusing the United States’ demand that they be returned and providing them land in the Caribbean island colony of Trinidad and Tobago to resettle with their families. The Island colony had only been under British control for a decade, having transitioned from the original colonial occupation of Spain, the Dutch, and finally the French. The Original Nations of the Indigenous Peoples of the islands have been victims of the systematic international pogrom of genocide and impunity across the Caribbean that is ongoing today.


Francis Scott Key, author of the Star-Spangled Banner which was presented in Hollywood spectacle at the Biden inauguration on January 20th, was from a wealthy plantation family and enslaved people. He spoke of Black people as “a distinct and inferior race” and supported emancipating the enslaved only if they were immediately shipped to Africa.


During the Andrew Jackson administration, Key served as the district attorney for Washington, D.C., where he spent much of his time shoring up enslavers’ power. He strictly enforced slave laws and prosecuted abolitionists who passed out pamphlets mocking his jurisdiction as the “land of the free, home of the oppressed.”


“The elevation of the banner from popular song to official national anthem was a neo-Confederate political victory, and it was celebrated as such. When supporters threw a victory parade in Baltimore in June 1931, the march was led by a color guard hoisting the Confederate flag.”


Source: Wikipedia


Key Concept: Intellectual Slavery

From the Divine Right of Kings

to the

Divine Right of States

Historical Amnesia

and the

Institutionalization of Ignorance

The ugly reason ‘The Star-Spangled Banner’ didn’t become our national anthem for a century

Thursday, January 7, 2021

Western Shoshone Self Determination and the Doctrine of Discovery

Western Shoshone Self Determination and the Doctrine of Discovery

Inter American Commission on Human Rights

Organization of American States

Western Shoshone Nation v. United States of America

Re: Mary and Cary Dann, Case 11.140



The legal position of the US government in the Western Shoshone case before the IACHR is a narrative of racial supremacy and animus towards the Indigenous Peoples that pretends to argue that the “gradual encroachment” of US settler state constituents over Western Shoshone traditional territories is a legal justification for dispossession and environmental destruction.  “Encroachment” is not a valid legal theory, it is only an excuse, in this case a bad excuse.  Besides the fact that encroachment presumes a recognized right of possession over what is being encroached upon, in this case Western Shoshone Territories affirmed in the 1863 Treaty of Ruby Valley, the action of encroachment never eliminates this preceding underlying interest.  Encroachment of the settler state domestic system of fee simple patent of private individual property interests only subverts the underlying and persisting Indigenous title and rights or imposes upon it in the form of a subsequent (in time) set of interests.


The “gradual encroachment” theory in the Western Shoshone case by the US government is the evil twin of the theory of “laches” that the state of New York used against the Onondaga Nation when it attempted to correct a similar territorial issue of international import before the US Supreme Court in 2016.  Both theories contemplate an extended a period of time, one forwards and the other backwards, and officialize this version of settler state history, ignoring and subverting the historical evidence of the territorial responsibilities and rights of the Original Nations of Indigenous Peoples of the territories in question.  These cases are classic narratives of description of the jurisprudence of the Forked Tongue Folk when it comes to Indigenous Peoples, where law is practiced but justice is never delivered.


Historically, just as the Haudenosaunee Confederacy saw the arrival and departure of the Dutch and the French in their territories, the Shoshone Nation also saw the coming and going of Spain and Mexico. New York was originally called New Amsterdam by these folks, and Nevada is a term that originates in the Spanish geography of the Empire of New Spain which the Republic of Mexico integrated into the formation of the Republic of Mexico in 1821.


In the Western Shoshone case, the United States claims that the title to the land in question was ceded to the United States by Mexico in 1848, subject to occupancy by the Native Americans.


Before proceeding further, clarifications are required, contemporary principles of international justice and non-discrimination must be established:


All subsequent arguments by the US government in the Western Shoshone case presume that the legal validity of the “title to the land in question” ceded to the US by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848) with Mexico is unquestioned, has never been questioned, and never will be questioned in a venue of jurisdiction where the principle of justice is the law that governs the rules. Not just the law of the rulers.


United Nations Commission on Human Rights

Sub Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities



Study on treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements between States and indigenous populations


The concept of the ‘rule of law’ began to traverse a long path, today in a new phase, towards transformation into ‘the law of the rulers’.

Final report by Miguel Alfonso Martínez, Special Rapporteur

22 June 1999


The United States maintains that the 1863 Treaty of Ruby Valley with the United States and the Western Shoshone is an agreement to end hostilities between them and live amicably. The United States claims that subsequent to the treaty with the Western Shoshone it treated certain lands within the area at issue as lands of the United States.


The “treatment” of Shoshone ancestral territories by inscription into the public land patent system of the US real estate system of dominion originates in the Common Law of England, exemplified by the enclosures of the crown. According to this claim, the process is identified in the Western Shoshone case as “inverse condemnation” via the gradual encroachment of settler state constituents encouraged to move into the territory by the US government.


This line of argument has been upheld in the US courts by decisions that affirm extinguishment of Shoshone land title by the inverse condemnation of gradual encroachment, and the claim that the Treaty of Ruby Valley “was not intended to acknowledge Shoshone title to lands covered by it.”


In terms of the proceedings within the US Indian Claims Commission’s case regarding the Shoshone territories referenced in the 1863 Treaty of Ruby Valley, the fraudulent claim of extinguishment in 1872 is compounded by the attempts of the US government to hide the racist and discriminatory nature of the bureaucratic dispossession of Indigenous Peoples from their ancestral homelands in the Indian Claims Commission proceedings.  Against these forces of extinguishment, expropriation and exploitation, the Dann sisters, Mary and Carrie, gave their entire lives in full force of battle as indigenous women of the Western Shoshone Nation.  Mary Dann passed away in 2005 and Carrie Dann has now joined her sister in the Spirit World in January of 2021.


The IACHR issued a report in 2002 condemning the United States for violating the Dann sisters' human rights, rejecting the United States' argument that its denial of continuing Western Shoshone rights was in accordance with U.S. law.  The IACHR also noted the inadequacy of the historical rationale for the presumed taking of Western Shoshone land and also cited the United States' failure to apply the same just compensation standard ordinarily applied for the taking of property interests under U.S. law to the Western Shoshone.


Yet in none of these proceedings and determinations has the legal issue which is the contextual core of the dispute been raised that could clarify the fundamental question: 


Specifically, what is the legal foundation for the claim that the government of Mexico in 1848 had authorization to transfer valid land title and jurisdiction, in this case over Western Shoshone territory, to the US government?

The US-Mexico international border is today a fully functioning instrument of empire. It is simultaneously a 2,000-mile-long scar and an open wound. The border is a militarized monument to white supremacy formulated and made necessary by the racist ideology of American Manifest Destiny, both in its historical expression which was the motivation for the war with Mexico in 1846, and its present contemporary “Festering Destiny” extrapolation in the form of the “Trump Wall” border project. The pathological racist tenets of Manifest Destiny, both past and present, are rooted in the false narrative of cultural supremacy of Christendom, whose geopolitical context of “America” has been informed, normalized, and institutionalized by the Doctrine of Discovery. The historical meme of collective cognition being Christopher Columbus and the date of October 12, 1492 (Gregorian).

The US government had announced its intention to recognize the independence of the Spanish-American colonies in 1822, Spain did not recognize Mexico's independence until the Santa María–Calatrava Treaty of December 28, 1836. This was the first case in which the Spanish monarchy acknowledged the independence of a state that had been erected within the limits of her former colonial empire in the New World."


Under the terms of the Santa María–Calatrava Treaty of December 28, 1836 the dominions of Mexico were to be comprised of the former Viceroyalty of New Spain, the captaincy-general of Yucatan, the commandancies of the eastern and the western interior provinces, lower and upper California, along with the annexed territories and adjacent islands.  The source of the original purported territorial claim by the Viceroyalty of New Spain in Mexico which was transferred to the Mexico was the royal charters given to Columbus by the monarchy of Spain in 1492 and affirmed from the pinnacle of the imperial structure of Christendom (the Vatican) by Pope Alexander VI via the Papal Bull Inter Caetera of 1493.


As recently as 2016, the Indigenous Peoples of Mexico have called upon the Vatican State and Pope Francis to repudiate the Doctrine of Discovery and revoke the Papal Bull Inter Caetera of Pope Alexander VI 1493 as the basis for the legal concept of "original property of the nation", under which the current government of the Republic of Mexico presumes to make delivery of the territories of the Original Nations of Indigenous Peoples to national and international industries for resource extraction, mining and neo-extractivism in general in violation of the right of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC).







Doctrine of Discovery


Thursday, June 25, 2020

NLG Webinar: "Dismantling the Doctrine of Discovery: Decolonization & Indigenous Self-Determination"

PRC/EHRC Webinar Series via Zoom:
Thurs. 6/25 7 pm EST

Guest speaker, Tupac Enrique Acosta from TONATIERRA in Phoenix, Arizona, will speak in this foundational webinar kicking-off our webinar series, laying the groundwork for understanding the importance of decolonization and exploring the impacts of neocolonialism. Discussion on US Mexico Canada Agreement (USMCA) and forced disappearance of the 43 Ayotzinapa students on September 26, 2014.

Elements of Process: A Dismantling Methodology

1) Information: Search, Research, Intake, Absorb, Share.

2) Consciousness: Develop a personal critical consciousness on the issues which are pervaded by the institutionalization of the Doctrine of Discovery from the local-regional, continental-global context.

3) Reveal: Create a shared community understanding on how the dehumanizing principles of the Doctrine of Discovery are relevant today and continue to provide the cultural framework for the ongoing colonization and genocide of the Original Nations of this continent, the Great Turtle Island Abya Yala.

4) Take a position. Denounce and repudiate the Doctrine of Discovery and the underlying pathological schema of patriarchy: DOMINATION.

5) DISMANTLE: Take action, and follow through with inter-generational decolonization strategies.


Tupac at North with West
"If you want to stay in America you might just get deported back into colonization, however, we're headed toward Liberation!"

Tupac Enrique Acosta

 October 2, 2010 North High School Auditorium, Phoenix, AZ

June 9, 2020 
The Murder of George Floyd and The Death of "White" Supremacy 
Whatever may come of the murder of George Floyd, the death of institutionalized American "White" Supremacy must follow: NOW! 

Dismantling the Master's Narrative

May 29, 2020 
TONATIERRA:Open Letter to the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, House Committee onForeign Affairs 

Unknown to the students, a shipment of heroin worth an estimated 2 million dollars was hidden on two of the buses.  The students themselves were on route to attend the anniversary of the Massacre of Tlatelolco ‘68, when the Mexican army opened fire killing hundreds of unarmed protesting students in Tlatelolco Plaza in Mexico City, where the Olympics of 1968 were being hosted. 
June 19, 2020 

Where is Tomas Zerón? Has he been granted protection by the Canadian government in spite of being the subject of an arrest warrant for his criminal actions in the Mexican government coverup of the Forced Disappearance of the 43 students of Ayotzinapa? Why has the Canadian government refused to confirm or deny that Zerón is in Canada?

Is the Canadian government now also complicit in the coverup of the international crime of Forced Disappearance in the case of the 43 Ayotzinapa students?


The history of transition from a chartered colony of Christendom, to a territory ruled by force of violent invasion by the European American “white” colonizers, to the formation of a polity of statehood and subsequent admission into the union of states called the USA, also required a systemic mechanism to control the allegiances, nationality and citizenship of the constituencies of the new republic as a whole. In the absence of the absolute command of allegiance of the Sovereign, in this case King George of England, the colonies broke from the modus operandi of the cartel of the Divine Right of Kings (Christendom). It became necessary to format the public consciousness in a systematic manner, manufacturing consent for the rationalization and expansion of territorial dominion via political acts of allegiance to the Divine Right of States.
It became necessary to manufacture the mythology of America.


Thursday, November 28, 2019

Kings and Kingdoms: Doctrine and Domination


“Presidents are not kings.”
U.S. District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson
November 25, 2019
“States are not kingdoms.”
Tupak Huehuecoyotl, Izkaloteka

"Remove justice, and what are kingdoms but gangs of criminals on a large scale? What are criminal gangs but petty kingdoms? A gang is a group of men under the command of a leader, bound by a compact of association, in which the plunder is divided according to an agreed convention.

If this villainy wins so many recruits from the ranks of the demoralized that it acquires territory, establishes a base, captures cities and subdues peoples, it then openly arrogates to itself the title of kingdom, which is conferred on it in the eyes of the world, not by the renouncing of aggression but by the attainment of impunity.

For it was a witty and truthful rejoinder which was given by a captured pirate to Alexander the Great. The king asked the fellow, “What is your idea, in infesting the sea?” And the pirate answered, with uninhibited insolence, “The same as yours, in infesting the earth! But because I do it with a tiny craft, I’m called a pirate; because you have a mighty navy, you’re called an emperor"...

To crush and subdue more remote peoples without provocation and solely from the thirst for dominion—what is one to call this but brigandage on the grand scale?".

St. Augustine (354-430), Concerning the City of God Against the Pagans (H. Bettenson, Tr.), Book IV, Ch. 4

The history of transition from a chartered colony of Christendom, to a territory ruled by force of violent invasion by the European American “white” colonizers, to the formation of a polity of statehood and subsequent admission into the union of states called the USA, also required a systemic mechanism to control the allegiances, nationality and citizenship of the constituencies of the new republic as a whole.  In the absence of the absolute command of allegiance of the Sovereign, in this case King George of England, the colonies broke from the modus operandi of the cartel of the Divine Right of Kings (Christendom).  It became necessary to format the public consciousness in a systematic manner, manufacturing consent for the rationalization and expansion of territorial dominion via political acts of allegiance to the Divine Right of States.  It became necessary to manufacture the mythology of America.

Person - Inhabitant - Savage

Therefore, for a polity such as the USA that derives is purported legal claim of territorial integrity (dominion) on the continent to being a successor settler state to the nefarious “Doctrine of Discovery” of Christendom, it is a legal impossibility to recognize the collective personality of the Indigenous Peoples as being equal in right before the law since to do so would necessitate the recognition of full equality, without discrimination, of the individual indigenous “person” as being equal to a “white person”.

The historical record on this issue is unequivocal.  The United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues presented a formal report on the Impact of the Doctrine of Discovery in 2010, calling for the repudiation of the “nefarious” doctrine among the member states of the UN system. As precedent and predicate to this report, in affirmation of the inherent right of all Indigenous Peoples to self-determination, the Original Nations of Indigenous Peoples of Abya Yala proclaimed on the floor of the UN General Assembly on May 18, 2006:
“That the Papal Bull Inter Caetera of Pope Alexander VI is hereby ANNULLED, as well as whatever Doctrine of Discovery proceeding from which that pretends to deform the relationship of Harmony, Justice, and Peace of we the Indigenous Peoples of Humanity in its entirety.”
The Continental Commission Abya Yala went further, calling for:
“a Tribunal of Justice regarding the Doctrine of Discovery of Christendom, by at all levels of humanity across the globe, to address the issue in the historical and legal context of the universal principles of justice and jurisprudence of the Indigenous Peoples."

Continental Commission Abya Yala
October 12, 2019
527 Years of Indigenous Resistance

This preliminary study establishes that the Doctrine of Discovery has been institutionalized in law and policy, on national and international levels, and lies at the root of the violations of indigenous peoples’ human rights, both individual and collective. This has resulted in State claims to and the mass appropriation of the lands, territories and resources of indigenous peoples. Both the Doctrine of Discovery and a holistic structure that we term the Framework of Dominance have resulted in centuries of virtually unlimited resource extraction from the traditional territories of indigenous peoples. This, in turn, has resulted in the dispossession and impoverishment of indigenous peoples, and the host of problems that they face today on a daily basis.


Wednesday June 10, 2020 - American Indian Movement AIM topples the statue of Christopher Columbus in front of the state capitol of Minnesota.