How does Ron Paul feel about repairing relations with Native Americans?

Athan

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,784
Just curious, I wonder how a liberty candidate would approach Native American affairs. Despite them being individuals, the US government has broken treaty after treaty with them despite their nations being specifically mentioned in the US Constitution.

I'd like to know:

1. If he would repair relations with them diplomatically how and what way.
2. If he would simply follow the Constitution as it is now instead of repairing relations. (Now that they went and have a current set of treaties that precede his presidency.)

I'm talking about if he could wave a wand and provide the most ideal libertarian solution to this issue. All I can figure is he does not want them to be wards of the state which should be obvious. Its something I could never really figure out on being fair to them as well.
 
Don't have an answer to your question but interestingly enough in 1988 Paul's main competitor for the LP nomination was Native American activist Russell Means.
 
Great question! I read a heartbreaking book a couple years ago called In the Spirit of Crazy Horse that talked about how American Indian settlements in the Dakotas have some of the highest mortality and poverty rates in the country. The male life expectancy for males is around the mid-50's, which is the lowest in the western world except for Haiti. The BIA (Bureau of Indian Affairs) doesn't really represent native interests at all, and sometimes (as during the horrible reign of Dick Wilson), vigorously suppresses native activist groups through terrorism and intimidation. The continued disenfranchisement, poverty, and substandard lifestyle of modern American Indians is one of the major unspoken travesties in the world today, and it's happening right in our own heartland.
 
Great question! I read a heartbreaking book a couple years ago called In the Spirit of Crazy Horse that talked about how American Indian settlements in the Dakotas have some of the highest mortality and poverty rates in the country. The male life expectancy for males is around the mid-50's, which is the lowest in the western world except for Haiti. The BIA (Bureau of Indian Affairs) doesn't really represent native interests at all, and sometimes (as during the horrible reign of Dick Wilson), vigorously suppresses native activist groups through terrorism and intimidation. The continued disenfranchisement, poverty, and substandard lifestyle of modern American Indians is one of the major unspoken travesties in the world today, and it's happening right in our own heartland.

For the most part, I do not agree. Many Indians were given headrights and became quite wealthy overnight. I did not agree with that, as no one alive today had one thing to do with what happened generations ago. Furthermore, those Indians that live on reservations today chose to do that, instead of getting involved in the rest of society.

I grew up very close to a reservation. Only one family that I remember chose to leave the reservation and move to town. Their sons and daughters went to school and then on to college. They are very successful today. Those who stayed at the reservation chose to live with what the government doled out to them. Different choices; different outcomes.

We are all responsible for our choices. Even Indians.
 
Last edited:
Ron Paul likum repair relations with Native Americans. Also make legal smokum peace pipe.

Ron Paul would not legalize drugs. He would decriminalize them at the federal level and let states execute their own drug laws, without federal government intrusion.
 
She's a good woman, just a bit tight :).

I re-read that after and realized what "just a bit tight" may appear to be. I meant tightly wound.

Don't eat my testicules for breakfast, LE. REMEMBER I CALLED YOU A GOOD WOMAN!!

Lol.

Relax and enjoy the joke LE. ;)
 
Last edited:
Relax and enjoy the joke LE. ;)

Well, see, there are a lot of people around here who appear to misunderstand RP's stance on the whole drug deal and I finally decided that I'm not going to let it slide anymore. It has caused a lot of voters out there to get the wrong idea.

:)
 
This is something I've always wondered about too, not the individuals, since we all fall under the liberty banner, but the actual nations and tribes which treaties were broken with 100 times over.

All I know is he

- wants to end the Department of Interior (which contains the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which manages native lands and education).
- wants to reduce Indian Health Services (which provides health services to natives, no duh) by 20% of 2006 levels.
- wants to reduce federal government power is just about every way (which MIGHT include giving Native American nations more autonomy like he wants to do with states).
 
She's a good woman, just a bit tight :).

I re-read that after and realized what "just a bit tight" may appear to be. I meant tightly wound.

Don't eat my testicules for breakfast, LE. REMEMBER I CALLED YOU A GOOD WOMAN!!

Lol.

donald.gif


I understood you the first time. :)
 
Bureau of Indian Affairs responsibilities should go to the State Department if we are really going to respect their sovereignty.

XNN
 
This is something I've always wondered about too, not the individuals, since we all fall under the liberty banner, but the actual nations and tribes which treaties were broken with 100 times over.

All I know is he

- wants to end the Department of Interior (which contains the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which manages native lands and education).
- wants to reduce Indian Health Services (which provides health services to natives, no duh) by 20% of 2006 levels.
- wants to reduce federal government power is just about every way (which MIGHT include giving Native American nations more autonomy like he wants to do with states).

Yes, they do appreciate his integrity. That's a selling point.

The BIA is not traditionally a friend to the Indians, and getting rid of it (and the rest of Interior with it) is a selling point.

Cutbacks can be excused by pointing out that Ron Paul would in no way hinder their own moneymaking operations, including but not limited to casinos.

Yes, more autonomy is nothing but good.
 
Back
Top