The Inconvenient Indian: A Curious Account of Native People in North America

Chapter 8 focuses on debates surrounding the “future” of Indian people in the US and Canada. King argues that questions of “sovereignty” lie at the heart of any discussion of Indian-White relations. While sovereignty typically refers to “supreme and unrestricted authority,” King writes that, in reference to Indians, it is a set of more practical concerns: “the authority to levy taxes, set the criteria for citizenship, control trade, and negotiate agreements and treaties” (194). The various treaties and laws that constitute US and Canadian Indian policy typically grant some level of sovereignty to Indian nations. However, King describes how some individuals, including US senators, have begun to advocate the policy of “neo-termination,” which seeks to “abrogate treaties, eliminate federal guarantees, divide First Nations land into fee-simple blocks, and allow Native people to participate freely in the economic markets that Western capitalism has created” (197).

King argues that questions of Indian sovereignty must focus on practical issues of how Indians would like to govern themselves. For King, two of the most pressing concerns are “tribal membership and resource development” (202). Most tribes are allowed to determine who is considered a member of the tribe, which gives an individual federal and legal recognition as an Indian.