Interview With Penobscot Nation Chief Kirk Francis: Changes to the Maine Indian Land Claims Settlement Implementing Act

Miss Chief’s Wet Dream  Kent Monkman  2018  Acrylic on canvas  144” x 288"

Collection of the Art Gallery of Nova Scotia, image courtesy of the artist

Today I'm happy to share this interview on the important issue of Tribal Sovereignty, the transcript shared on social media by Sunlight Media Collective. (You can hear the audio interview  archived here on WERU.) Also excited to share the image, which I added, with the permission of artist Kent Monkman, a Canadian artist of Cree ancestry; a picture worth at least a thousand words on what kind of sovereignty will best see humans through the storms ahead.

Interview with Penobscot Nation Chief Kirk Francis about the First Meeting of the Task Force on Changes to the Maine Indian Land Claims Settlement Implementing Act

By Sunlight Media Collective, in partnership with Community Radio WERU 89.9 FM

WERU/Sunlight Media Collective (SMC): So thanks for joining us again, Chief Francis, here to talk with us about the first meeting of the Task Force on Changes to the Maine Indian Land Claims Settlement Implementing Act. We want to quickly get into your reaction to the first meeting and where things stand right now, but if you can first orient us with the background of the creation of this task force and its stated goals.

Chief Francis: Sure. And thank you for having me again. It was probably back in the spring. We received an invitation from the Speaker's office and the President of the Senate and legislative leadership that wanted to meet with Tribal leaders and discuss some things. And at that time, we really didn't know what the issue was about. There was a ton of Indian-related bills going on in the legislature and I thought it was around those topics. So when we went to the meeting, it just quickly turned into, "Well what about amendments to the Implementing Act?" Which we were all a little taken aback by, I guess because it's kind of been a nonstarter in conversations in previous years. So it was refreshing that people were kind of thinking along those terms and...

SMC: As a root of many of the problems facing the Tribal-State relationship.

Chief Francis: Right, exactly. So Senator Carpenter was there and others and said, "Everything's on the table. Let's try to figure out a way to get through this." And then through subsequent meetings, the idea came up about forming this Task Force to work on it over the summer and into the fall and with some clear deadlines and some clear outcomes to be reported out in December. So that's kind of how it all got started. Then of course they passed legislation solidifying the process. Then on Monday, we had our first meeting.

SMC: Can you give us your initial reactions to that first meeting? The Task Force includes all the Tribal Chiefs, except Vice Chief Maggie Dana was representing Passamaquoddy Tribe at Sipayik, for that particular meeting. There are three representatives, two senators and ex officio members from the Governor's office, the Attorney General's office and the Maine Indian Tribal State Commission. Can you give your impressions from this first meeting?

Chief Francis: Sure. I thought it was more of a feeling out type meeting. I think the Tribes did most of the talking as you probably saw. I think there's the impression, the take away I got from the first meeting is that there's still a long way to go in terms of education and what exactly we're shooting for, for outcomes. I think from our side, we're pretty clear on the issues that need to be addressed. We addressed those issues in a May 16th joint letter from all the Tribes and really explained what we would expect through this process and the issues that have been kind of at the center of contention and the things that should be changed and getting tribes back to what Bottomley said in 

the Bottomley case in 1979 that said that Maine tribes are federally recognized tribes, that their territories are Indian country, and that they enjoy all the same rights, privileges as any tribe in the United States.

That's kind of where we want to be. It became very clear that there's still a lot of, "Well, what if that happens? What will it mean to this or that or the other thing?" And you heard a lot of that type of questioning going on. I think we really just need to get away from the tribes having to be in this justification and approval type process and really focusing on what is the standard for how federally recognized tribes that are be treated, which is rooted in a lot of law. How do we get Maine to a place where at the very least comparable to that? I would hope we would want to be better than most in this area, but again, I still have some concerns about the process. I think when you hear things like, "Let's do the easy things," and that sort of stuff. And I'm not even sure what that means. I don't know what the easy things are in the Implementing Act but I know that it's going to be a challenging process, it's going to be a tough process.

I'm hopeful that we can get some results out of it, but I do have some concerns over what appeared to be a lot of unpreparedness at the meeting and just having a basic understanding of where the tribes were before the settlement act, how has the Settlement Act hindered us. I thought some examples went out. There were some missed opportunities on our part too. I thought the example of well, isn’t your child welfare system doing better? Well, it is doing better. And it's doing better because the tribes have built their institutions to a place where we are heavily involved, heavily knowledgeable, and we are really self-governing those issues.

I think that's where those successes... Of course with the willingness of partnerships with State agencies is also critical to that. But I think that that's a prime example of the growth of the Tribes and how that leads to success when allowed to really have solid decision making in these processes.

So I would say my overall takeaway is I remain cautiously optimistic that we can accomplish some things, but I also remain concerned that we have a ways to go to get to a mindset of what's right and wrong here.

SMC: And you referred earlier to the proposal of “let's work on little pieces of this” and that Senator Carpenter had given the suggestion that certain areas of controversy be addressed. For instance, sustenance fishing. There were a couple of others. But as you said, you and other Tribal leaders drew it back to, well, the reason that we're having all these particular areas of friction all come back to the issue of recognizing Tribal inherent sovereign authority and whether the state is able to do that. And as you asked if they can't, what makes them uncomfortable in recognizing that?

Chief Francis: Yeah. I think the tribes have articulated for a couple of decades through the At Loggerheads Report (Final Report of the Task Force on Tribal-State Relations, January 15, 1997) through the Maine State Work Group Report, (January 2008) through a whole host of the Suffolk Report, (February 2017) through a whole host of really comprehensive reports and processes what we want. And it's pretty basic. We want exactly what you said, to be recognized as who we are, and to be able to exercise our inherent sovereign rights in a self-governing way.

So we really need now to know from the State what is your concerns and what are the reasons you want to keep things in the act. So, for example, if you would ask them all laws, the laws that are spelled out that apply to Indian Tribes at Maine. Why do you want to keep it that way? Well, it has to be more than, well because we'd like control of that. That's not expressing any negative impact on the State of Maine.

So I think we could “what if” this issue to death. I think we really need to get away from that. What if we opened a paper mill on a reservation? That came up. We heard that in the work group process 12 years ago. Could you open a nuclear power plant? If you had the answers to those are yes, we could. But I think the misunderstanding, of course we probably never would. But I think the misunderstanding here is the absence of state authority does not create this lawless situation within Indian country. It's highly regulated, highly governed through our trust relationship. You know, any...

SMC: With the federal government.

Chief Francis: Yes. And that all businesses that come on to Indian reservation, especially because they can't own property, they would have to do leases. All those leases have to be approved by the Department of Interior. You have NEPA reviews. You have all kinds of things. I mean, so there's absence and gaps of State authority and oversight in our systems now. That doesn't mean that there's just this kind of wild west approach to governing. So getting everybody to understand that.

And the other concern I have is again, just the overall lack of two-way communication here. It was really a one-sided conversation I felt, and it was... I didn't see a lot of input from the other task force members. Hopefully it's just a feeling out process and a learning process initially for some and people will get more engaged.

SMC: And just to back up again for a minute, we're talking about what perhaps the State is uncomfortable with. But what the Tribes have been up against continuously is the State's interpretation of the Settlement Act, particularly in regards to its application to federal laws that apply to all other federally recognized Tribes across the country, including, as we've talked with you many times before, about the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), disaster relief, the Clean Water Act... We've seen that just recently over sustenance fishing. As you've also pointed out, there has been no mechanism to really mediate an actual interpretation. It's been the State's interpretation. And as the Tribal leaders were saying on Monday, that's had a negative, a very negative impact.

Chief Francis: Yeah. That's the thing. It's like, we say it all the time. It's the inability of the Maine Tribes to access the same rights and privileges as every other Tribe in the country. There's consequences to that. And the consequences for us unfortunately, are remaining in a condition that we have to creatively work around. We have to utilize Federal agencies to help us. We have to do a lot of different things to try to overcome the condition that that leaves behind. And we can never really get at it at a level like other tribes because we just don't have the tools available to us to do it.

So the thing that is really discouraging about all of that is when you have a State that's assuming in authority that really shouldn't be, but then has no mechanisms in place to deal with those decisions... It can't be just "We control that issue. The answer's no. Have a nice day." I mean it has to be, "The answer is no, but here's the programs, mechanisms and resources that we can help you with to address those things." And that never happens. I'm not saying I want things that way anyway, but I'm just saying there's just been this use of authority and with no responsibility. So, again, it's left a whole group of people in the State lagging far behind everybody else in a multitude of areas.

SMC: You and other Tribal chiefs brought up section 6206 and 7205 in the Federal Maine Indian Land Claims Settlement Implementing Act. Can you clarify what those sections, a reform of those sections could do?

Chief Francis: Well I think one of them deals with the applicability of State Law Audit to Tribes. Again this gets at the Tribes' self-governance rights around a whole host of issues. The other one deals with the same rights and privileges stuff and trying to make sure that the Tribes can access the tools that are available to Indian Tribes all across the country to address things like opioid addiction, violence against women, all of those disaster relief, enhanced jurisdiction for courts to get at drug dealing related charges, and those things also come with funding mechanisms when implemented.

So it's really just trying to get at, as I said earlier, the foundational principle of what this relationship should be based on is exactly what the court said. So you heard some stuff in the hearing too that on both sides, like have been conditioned for so long to think like this is the way it is. Like 

we were never wards of the state, in my mind. What the court case said in 1979 was “you were treated like that. It was an illegal exercise of authority over you.”

So we were never wards of the state. We were just being treated that way. I think getting out of that mindset, we're now 40 years into this and you can see that the state institution is still conditioned to treat and work with Indian Tribes in a certain way. No matter how good the individual is within that system, it's going to be tough to get by that.

SMC: And Tribal leaders were also bringing up the hindrance of economic development by... If you want to clarify a little more of that.

Chief Francis: Yeah. I mean, we know that there's been multiple senate hearings on this. There's been testimony from major corporations in front of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs for years, talking about why it's a challenge to do business with Indian Tribes. The number one hindrance is uncertainty over jurisdiction and layered bureaucracy. So what this creates is it creates a situation where investors don't want to get in the middle of that because the Tribes are not going to give up their jurisdictional stance on things. The State's not going to give up theirs. So you're going to end up with double permitting processes, in some cases, dual taxation. It creates a mess, and it scares people away. And the US Treasury has backed that up with, and I forget the number now, but it's into the billions of dollars that do not flow into Indian Country because of a lot of these reasons.

So there's very substantiated reasons for how economic development gets hindered. It's trying to create an environment that's conducive to good economic activity, for example. We are able to create gas stations here, and do all that stuff. Well, the geographical challenges we have within our territory has to provide for a competitive advantage. And that's what Congress does. They recognize those things. And it doesn't come without great debate and State's opposition and county's opposition and all of that. But you're seeing Tribes do tax-free fuel sales and a whole host of things that will drive opportunity. The Tribes have opportunities through preferential contracting. For example, a good partnership with Maine DCD and getting over the issues of who controls what. I mean, those would be great manufacturing opportunities for Maine.

So working more in partnership and also recognizing the Tribe's sovereignty does much better in the States that do, than the ones that don't. Again, this stuff is not stuff we're all making up. I mean it's been there since self-determination in the early 1970s the tribes that could get right off the starting line and do whatever they had to do. We're... are doing much, much better today than those that weren't. So just all these kinds of misperceptions of, for example, it was mentioned in there like, well, it's too bad that the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act was passed eight years after the Settlement Act. Well, what people should know is like these acts, like it wasn't just some gift from Congress to create the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. It was actually a Supreme Court case that said that Tribes have the right inherently to create gaming opportunities on their land.

And what Congress did too in the interest of States was to create the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act that forced compacting in States to give the State some interest in that economic opportunity on Indian land. So that was a restrictive act. That wasn't an act, grant, or right. That right was inherent and got restricted by Congress. So there's just a lot of misunderstanding of the basic rights that Tribes have and the history of all of this stuff. I just hope people are doing their homework and trying to figure out and getting to a place where the sky's not going to fall if this all happens. There's still going to be a lot of conversation. There's still a lot of things to be worked out. The Tribes are in a much different place than they were 40 years ago, but we're not going to be able to do everything overnight. Those are things we're going to talk through.

But I think the core issue of recognizing that you have inherent sovereigns in a State, which is what the land claims sought to mitigate, because the land claim part of the act, nobody's disputing that.

Nobody's disputing that there was an agreement to protect title to land in Maine and allow Tribes to regain some of their territory as well. Nobody's saying that didn't happen.

But the jurisdictional piece of it was a purposeful approach to a governor at the time that said, "No Nation within a Nation is going to exist in the State of Maine." And that was entirely what that jurisdictional piece was about. And we need to understand that that was wrong and it's illegal. It's not something that has ever been done anywhere else, by the way. There are some settlement acts out there, and yes, some of them are restrictive on specific things like gaming or whatever, but nothing touches things as broadly as this act does here.

SMC: Well, we thank you for taking so much time with us today. We know you have to go to a meeting shortly, but I just wanted to quickly touch on the next meeting and the goals for the next meeting, August 9th. And it sounded like at the end, that meeting that the Tribes would be coming up with some proposals in legislative form that then will be worked over by the committees. Is that your understanding as well?

Chief Francis: Yes, and we've already gone to work on it. We've got a meeting again tomorrow with all the Tribes, all our representatives. We're currently starting to mark up things, getting language that we like, do all of that. We're going to be as prepared as we can for the next meeting. We will get that to them in advance. It's that really getting into the nuts and bolts of it. We can't have a process that is really about everybody rehashing the last 40 years or trying to figure out what this means if we do this and that. I mean, we have to talk about those things. But I think if we get a section accomplished at each of these meetings, I mean that's my goal anyway. I just want us to continue to move forward and get some place where... I mean they're going to have to understand at some point if this is going to be productive, they're going to have a lot of heartburn at the end of it.

The Tribes are probably not going to be all the way where we want to be. That's what common ground processes should be about. There are some things that I'm sure are deal breakers for us, and I'm sure there's going to be some things that are deal breakers for them. But we have to all be in the mindset, especially on the State side, that they're not going to be very comfortable if this works out the way that I would like to see it work out, and I'm probably not going to be all the way comfortable with how it works out. But I want to, in December, have a product that makes the tribes of Maine better off than they are today, and that has taken huge steps towards, at the very least, recognizing us for what we are, our territory, resources and people and go from there.

SMC: You said at the end of the meeting that you could actually sum up in one sentence what the proposal would be. What would that sentence be?

Chief Francis: Well that, I mean, really for me, it's just the Tribes of Maine are federally-recognized Tribes with inherent authority over their territory and people and enjoy all the same rights and privileges as every federally-recognized Tribe in the country. I mean, I think, I don't know if that's more than one sentence, for me, that's it.

SMC: Well, thank you, Chief Francis very much for joining us today. And we will be continuing to cover this process as it unfolds.

Chief Francis: I appreciate it and I appreciate your attention to it.

WERU Community Radio Audio Link:
https://archives.weru.org/…/radioactive-7-25-19-task-force…/

Google Doc link for sharing by email:
https://docs.google.com/…/1ipj34Ui7IHEYyZs-8AMjurAIRX…/edit…

March 7 Mascot Workshop For The Electoral College Of School Boards -- Who Will Recuse?

Alleged fake Native American Mark "OneWolf" Yancey with school board member Jennifer Poirier following the Native American Guardian Association (NAGA) meeting with Skowhegan "Indian Pride" (SIP) group February 24, 2019 (photo from the SIP Facebook group)

There are several members of the school board with the last high school Native mascot in Maine who should be recusing themselves from any vote held this Thursday, March 7 at their 7pm meeting.

Top of the list is Jennifer Poirier who organizes the group Skowhegan "Indian Pride" and who convened the recent meeting with NAGA at the local bowling alley. A February screenshot from her Facebook group is evidence of her bias and why she should recuse herself according to board policy:

Apologies for the use of the R****** slur in this screenshot.

Todd Smith and Karen Smith are married and derive income from selling "Indians" sports gear at his local business, Maine Fire Equipment. They, too, should recuse themselves from a vote due to their pecuniary interest in the outcome, as noted in the guidelines provided to school boards by their law firm Drummond Woodsum.

From Todd Smith's Maine Fire Equipment website

Harold Bigelow should recuse himself because he, too, has indicated bias, and voting on the mascot would violate board policy. From the Waterville Morning Sentinel article of May 4, 2015, "SAD 54 residents argue over keeping Indian mascot for school teams":

Harold Bigelow, of Skowhegan, told the assembly of more than 60 people that there are Native Americans “who side with us” in support of keeping Skowhegan the Indians.  

“The natives today are being compensated for their past with entitlements and free education,” Bigelow said. “I personally feel they ought to focus on their own problems within, rather than creating problems for others. It is definitely not racist. Do what is right — this is our history, not theirs.”

Lynda Quinn should probably recuse herself, too, as she has been vocal in the past about her adherence to the current mascot. From the Portland Press Herald article November 12, 2017, "Mascot still in play at schools in Skowhegan":

As for the teams’ nickname, is there a chance for another vote? 

“From my perspective, no, I don’t think so – I think that was put to rest,” Quinn said. “My question is I don’t know what’s wrong with the name ‘Indian.’ It’s not making fun of anyone. It’s not disrespectful. I just don’t understand why they’re so opposed to the name ‘Indian.’ ”

Note to Ms. Quinn: why are Maine's four tribes all opposed to the name? Possibly because of tweets like this:

We’re on the warpath now! #Skowhegan #IndianPride #mepolitics https://t.co/p1irfJu56t

— Skowhegan GOP (@SkowheganGOP) March 2, 2019

And from the Lewiston Sun Journal article June 17, 2018, "Skowhegan last Maine school to retain Native American Mascot":

There are 11 members left on the 23-member SAD 54 school board that voted 11-9 to keep the Indians nickname in May 2015. Of those 11 members, eight of them voted to keep the name. In district elections held on Tuesday, four incumbent school board members were re-elected, unopposed on the ballot. Two of those re-elected Tuesday — Lynda Quinn and Harold Bigelow — are staunch supporters of keeping the Indians nickname.

Aren't board members allowed to have an opinion? Of course they are and of course they will. But bias means not being open to hearing all sides of an argument and possibly changing one's mind.

Tracking any vote taken this week will be difficult. While the 2015 vote was reported as 11-9 for keeping the mascot, this is somewhat misleading. Maine Administrative School District (MSAD) 54 was created to bring several towns together for the purposes of public education.

I'm guessing there was a lot of resistance to that change, thus the weighting system in use today that renders this board about as complicated as the electoral college:

Town:                  Number of Directors:          Votes Per Director:          Total Votes Per Town:

Canaan	2	43	86
Cornville	2	30	60
Mercer	2	16	32
Norridgewock	4	46	184
Skowhegan	11	53	583
Smithfield	2	27	54

To put names to votes, here is the current board makeup following Monday's election to fill a vacant seat in Norridgewock:

DIXIE RING Canaan  43 votes		JEAN FRANKLIN Canaan   43 votes		THERESA HOWARD Cornville    30 votes
DARCY SURETTE Cornville   30 votes		MARYELLEN CHARLES Mercer     16 votes		SARAH BUNKER Mercer    16 votes
KATHERINE WILDER Norridgewock   46 votes		HALEY FLEMING Norridgewock   46 votes		DESIREE LIBBY Norridgewock   46 votes
BRANDY MORGAN Norridgewock  46 votes		MARK BEDARD Skowhegan      53 votes		HAROLD BIGELOW Skowhegan   53 votes
JEANNIE CONLEY Skowhegan  53 votes		DEREK ELLIS Skowhegan     53 votes		RICHARD IRWIN Skowhegan   53 votes
PEGGY LOVEJOY Skowhegan   53 votes		JENNIFER POIRIER Skowhegan    53 votes		LYNDA QUINN Skowhegan   53 votes
AMY ROUSE Skowhegan   53 votes		KAREN SMITH Skowhegan     53 votes		TODD SMITH Skowhegan  53 votes
GOFF FRENCH Smithfield     27 votes		CHRISTY JOHNSON Smithfield    27 votes

If these look like mailing labels, it's because they are. I will have them on hand March 7 to help me accurately record what board members say during the meeting. It is described as a workshop convened so that board members may express their thoughts following lots of public comment since Penobscot Ambassador Maulian Dana delivered a letter asking to retire the mascot back in November.

Ms. Dana is currently in Washington DC meeting with officials about Penobscot Nation interests. Will she make it back to Maine in time to attend Thursday's meeting? Stay tuned.

ADDITIONAL INFO 3/7/19:
From the Portland Press Herald article of June 29, 2015,"Debate over 'Indians' mascot persists despite school board vote to keep it" (link here):

No Substitute For Respect - White Supremacists Infesting Maine, As Usual #mepolitics

 Elizabeth Ann Mitchell, Penobscot, On Why She Interrupted Janet Mills With Some Truth

Central Mainers often claim, We're not racist because there are no people of color around to be racist to. It's not true and never has been, but it's a pitch perfect example of why racism is not about the hatefulness of any individual. Racism is a systemic problem that affects and harms every single person living under it, no matter whether they are deemed by their appearance to be one of the "superior" group or one of the targeted groups.

Native people have maintained their culture, including language, while being sytematically robbed of their territory and persecuted for their beliefs in Maine. 

The Penobscot and Passamoquoddy are sovereign nations, and if anyone should leave so that a homogenous group of people can live in paradise, it certainly isn't Natives who should go. Skowhegan Area High School in central Maine continues to cling to its racist mascot the "Indian" despite the sobering testimony of Natives explaining how damaging this is to their children. 

Now lots of immigrants from around the globe have settled in Maine and are subject to racist harrassment and microaggressions daily. Check out this substitute teacher addressing a high school student with Lebanese ancestry. Brody Elahmar recorded her threatening him with deportation (though it's doubtful she knows such a big word) and ordering him to "speak her language." 

His comeback is priceless: "How many languages do you speak? I speak three."


Posted to YouTube by Brody Elahmar with the comment: "My teacher was harassing me because of my color !"

On the heels of this abuse of power by a public employee came news that the town manager of far north town Jackman is an avid white segragationist who invented a flag for an all-white New England devoted to Anglo culture that he imagines. With the ironic name Kawczynski, he is now trying to raise funds on a site called Hatreon (I can't make this shit up) that lacks guidelines banning hate speech like other crowdfunding sites have.

The town's selectmen may not have known about his desire to build an all-white "Albion" when they hired him, but he's been really active on social media since last November. Currently, they are conferring with their lawyer and I suspect he, like the substitute teacher, will be fired. 

The Chamber of Commerce in Jackman has already come out publicly in favor of firing him. 

(Too bad the Skowhegan Chamber of Commerce has not done the same; instead, it concocts racist promotions to "help" local businesses.) Jackman relies heavily on tourism for revenue, and a boycott would hit them where it hurts.

Here is the letter I sent to them via the contact listed on the town's website, Administrative Secretary Heidi.Dionne@Jackmanme.net:

Dear Jackman selectmen,

Your recently hired town manager, Tom Kawczynski, is making quite a splash as the public face of racism and religious bigotry in northern Maine. I am going to assume that you knew nothing of this when you hired him. Of course he is entitled to his views and to express them under the 1st amendment. But, in his capacity as town manager, encouraging those who share his hate to move to Jackman is problematic.

As a resident of central Maine along Route 201 I am concerned that a nearby town's manager is an active white supremacist. I hope the hateful crowds who descended on Charlottesville, Virginia last year do not feel welcome to congregate near my little town on the Kennebec.

As a teacher I will continue providing opportunities for children to learn what we all have in common: our humanity, our compassion, and our critical thinking abilities. As a history major I have a keen appreciation of what happens to societies who descend into hateful beliefs and practices. It is not a happy outcome for any group, however much they consider themselves "superior" to other people.

Sincerely,

Lisa Savage

Solon

I think such groups and individuals are afraid of competition. Who wants to be outdone by a teenager that speaks more languages than you do? 

Would it surprise you to learn that the KKK was active in Maine in the 1920's marching against Francophone immigrants who were taking "our" jobs?

The KKK in Maine is having a resurgence in these troubled times.

It is time for those quietly watching the rise of white supremacists in office to stand up and be counted.

More Concerned With The Tone Of Someone’s Message Than You Are With The Message Itself? #MillsVsPenobscots

Chloe Cekada and Iris SanGiovanni of Greater Portland SURJ disrupt Maine Attorney Janet Mills

calling for her to respect Native rights to protect the Penobscot River and its many life forms.

Guest post from Sass Linneken, program coordinator for Resources for Organizing and Social Change, who had just returned from a Maine People's Alliance event on June 29, 2017 (MPA is a "progressive" Democratic Party lobbying organization).

Musings on Maine’s Democratic Party, white feminism, and how white men take up space:

I went to the Resistance Rising summit hosted by MPA tonight and came away with some thoughts I need to roll out before going to sleep.

#1) I get anxious when I’m going into crowds, and anxiety is for the birds.

#2) The Democratic party is in no way leading anything resembling resistance at this point.

#3) The Democrats are having a difficult time realizing that taking a paternalistic/tone-policing attitude toward people they view as disruptive is not helping them to galvanize their base, it’s doing the opposite.

Villainizing disrupters is supremacist, and it completely negates the truths that exist within the disruption, for instance, the very fact that political disruption is a small thing compared to whatever issue is at the root of the disrupters’ cause.

***Case in point: Disrupting Janet Mills might feel egregious to people who support Mills, but that disruption is not going to kill her, or take her self-determination from her. On the flip-side of that coin, her refusal to support the Penobscots instead of lead the charge to steal their water rights and redraw the boundaries of their reservation when they hold less than 1% of the land they once did *will* impact their livelihoods and impact their ability to self-determine their own futures.

Letter found by Community Water Justice organizer Nickie Sekera in her son Luke's
pocket. Luke just graduated from middle school and is already a seasoned water protector.

Refusing to revisit the standards for justification in state-sanctioned police violence when there has been a drastic increase in police shooting fatalities *will* result in avoidable deaths, particularly of those who don’t look or live like Janet Mills. Rudeness in messaging should really be the least of worries in this context.***

Luke Sekera speaking at a previous event where Mills was confronted about her attack on
the rights of the Penobscot people to protect their water against industrial polluters the state of Maine protects.
Luke is being protected by Elizabeth Ann Mitchell, a Penobscot water protector.

#4) A candidate should not get a free pass if she’s a woman because she has it harder than her male counter-parts on the campaign trail or in office, and to suggest that the only reason she’s being held accountable is because she’s a woman is as sexist as the perceived sexism in the allegation to begin with.

#5) Saying that a candidate deserves our respect because she’s a champion for women’s rights when she is simultaneously engaging in an agenda that hurts women of color is the epitome of white feminism.

It’s not only hella problematic in its analysis of women’s rights, it’s detrimental to any perceived effort of resistance. To the contrary, it’s the very upholding of the systems and structures liberals/progressives claim to want to smash.

#6) If you’re a cisgender, able-bodied white guy, you’ve had the floor long enough. Shut the hell up.

The fact is, if your platform is not centering and considering the needs of PoC, you’re doing it wrong.

Trump was no accident, and if you think his agenda is egregious, it’s time to look in the mirror and ask yourself how you are complicit in his getting to where he’s at. And I don’t say that sitting on any kind of a pedestal, I’m a white person on a life-long learning curve.

All I’m saying is if you’re more concerned with the tone of someone’s message than you are the message itself, you are more a part of the problem than the solution, and that should matter to you if you want things to change.

Sass

Vigil At Poland Springs Today With Stop The War$ On Mother Earth Peace Walkers

The 5th Maine Peace Walk arrived in my area in the late afternoon yesterday. It was great for members of my old peace and justice community around Waterville to come together and enjoy the privilege of feeding the walkers and hearing their stories. 

We are older, tireder and grayer these days but our group was enlivened by the presence of 10 year old boy who is on his 5th walk (!), my 20 month-old granddaughter, and a 22 year old musician walking for the first time. Given that the oldest walker is nearly 80, it was a lovely range of humanity that sat down together to be nourished.

Chanting and drumming led by monks of the Nipponzan Myohoji order signaled the walkers' arrival in a quiet residential neighborhood amid the blaze of color that is October in Maine.

The stops planned to connect with the theme "Stop the war$ on Mother Earth" have been rich with connections between corporate profiteering and disrespect for life.

The walk began on Indian Island in the Penobscot Nation in solidarity with the Justice for the River campaign, recognizing the wisdom of Maine's original people advocating for the Penobscot River which has been severely polluted by industrial use. 

Walkers then stood in solidarity outside the Cianbro Corporation in a vigil organized by grandmothers opposed to the East-West Corridor. Cianbro stands to make a lot of money if this private highway and fossil fuel pipeline project ever succeed in slashing through some of Maine's most pristine forests and waterways. 

Just prior to Waterville the walk reached Unity where Maine's environmental school Unity College is found, spending the night on the grounds of the Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association (MOFGA). Maine has a long tradition of growing local food communities who recognize that life depends on defending the soil, water and seeds from corporate control.

Today the walkers make their way to vigil outside Poland Spring, the site of international water thief Nestle's faux-Maine brand bottled water plant. 

Nestle pumps out aquifers around the planet and sells the water back to people in little plastic bottles. Even though Maine has been in an historic drought all summer, the pumping goes on. An executive of the company has commented on record that he does not consider access to water a human right. Penobscots and peace walkers disagree with the absurd notion that profits have a higher value than human life.

U.S. militarization has enshrined the notion that profits trump human life, and the walk will end at the southern border of Maine outside the Kittery naval shipyard. Here obscene profits are made building weapons of mass destruction. Walkers will call on the Maine community to recognize that basing our livelihood on "defense" contracts is a dead end street. Advocating for the conversion of our industrial capacity to build for sustainable energy solutions, walkers will uphold a vision of Mother Earth as sacred, her health fundamental to the survival of human life.

If you want to join the walk, details may be found here on the website of Maine Veterans for Peace.