Sovereign Nations or Reservations? An Economic History of American Indians.

AuthorTrosper, Ronald L.

This book deals with two key aspects of the public image of American Indians in the United States today: their advocacy of respect for nature and their poverty. Regarding nature, Anderson seeks to defend the thesis that "rather than promulgating myths that societies can solve their economic and social problems only by consciously choosing to revere and respect plant and animal communities, we should learn from American Indians that it is the institutional environment that matters most" (xv). Similarly, poverty can also be explained by an analysis of institutions. The book applies the ideas of the property-rights school of political economy to seek understanding of aboriginal Indian economies, the dynamics of interaction between natives and settlers on the American frontier, and today's reservation conditions. Anderson clearly explains that institutional barriers were not freely chosen by tribes.

By putting the sole emphasis on institutions, the author precludes careful examination of the balance of causes of Indian poverty today. One should expect both the expropriation of Indian property in the past and the exercise of federal control over remaining reservation resources throughout most of the twentieth century to have had effects. Some tribes -- such as the Taos Pueblo -- are very clear in stating that they do not necessarily want economic growth if the impact on their environment is too great; this cultural factor should also be included. Surely, resource endowment, community goals, and governing institutions all have influence.

The first chapter, "Culture, Property Rights, and Paradigms," provides the reader with a review of the property-rights paradigm, with brief references to competing paradigms. The second chapter, "The Red Man's Law," starts the substantive analysis. Anderson identifies the existence of usufruct tenure systems and the defense of territories by bands of Indians as evidence that private ownership existed among Indians prior to contact. This argument uses an unusually broad definition of private ownership. Many Indian communities allocated individuals use rights to land and particular resources without at the same time allowing users to sell the land or the resource use rights. The Iroquois and Hopi, for instance, recognize use rights but prohibit sales by individuals. The hunting territories of the Cree are individually allocated and can be inherited, being passed down from father to son; but sales were not and are...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT