Pan-Indianism & Urban Indian Centers – Comprehensive Notes

Page 1

• Opening quotation by N. Scott Momaday (Kiowa, Los Angeles 1976)

  • Core worry: “How to remain Indian” in the city.

  • Solutions: maintain networks of communication, organize celebrations & pow-wows, cultivate inter-tribal unity.

• Narrative vignette: Lakota veteran at an Indian Center

  • Center = urban lifeline: food, blankets, apartment-search help.

  • Financial precarity: rent, food costs, donations.

  • Veteran’s reflection: “Many Indians were there … all my relatives.”

  • Illustrates the phrase “All my relations” as lived pan-Indian reality.

• Significance

  • Urban Indian Centers emerge as first-line social agencies.

  • Example foreshadows nationwide spread of such centers post-WWII.

Page 2

• Traditional worldview: collectivity > individual.

  • Still governs reservation & urban communities alike.

• Pan-Indianism

  • Historical phenomenon: tribes unite for

  1. Religion

  2. Politics

  3. Social life

  4. Economics (least).

• Post-WWII migration

  • Increased inter-tribal contact in 1950-60 relocation era.

  • Hollywood stereotypes + shared discrimination accelerate a new “Indianness.”

• Christian conversion

  • Produced pan-tribal denominational communities (Baptist, Methodist, etc.).

  • Urban Indian churches form; Bell Gardens, L.A.: ≈ $20$ tribes worship together.

Page 3

• Native American Church (NAC)

  • Late 1800s hybrid of Christianity + traditional spirituality.

  • Peyote = sacrament; blended prayer & song.

  • Cities of current practice: Milwaukee, Chicago, Twin Cities, OKC, Tulsa, etc.

• 1918 Congressional hearings

  • Fred Lookout (Osage) testimony: peyote improves sobriety, prosperity.

  • Legal incorporation in Oklahoma $10\,\text{Oct}\,1918$.

• States outlawing peyote (1920-24): Kansas, Montana, ND, SD, Arizona, Iowa.

Page 4

• Amended Oklahoma NAC charter stresses Love, Faith, Hope, Charity.

• Early nationwide pan-Indian political body: Society of American Indians (1911) — Eastman, Montezuma, Kellogg et al.

• 1920s urban clubs:

  • Grand Council Fire (Chicago)

  • National Society of Indian Women (Seattle)

  • Los Angeles “Wigwam Club,” “War Paint Club,” etc.

• Boarding-school alumni bring modern, urban, political outlooks.

Page 5

• Relocation 1950-early 1970s

  • Indians cluster, “re-tribalize” in city enclaves.

  • Phoenix Indian Center (opened $1947$) earliest model.

• Termination backlash

  • Oneidas (Milwaukee/Green Bay) form fact-finding committee; later become entrepreneurial (hotel, bingo, industrial park).

• Muscogee Creeks & Pequots follow similar business paths.

Page 6 – Chicago Conference 1961

• American Indian Chicago Conference (AICC)

  • Dates: $13\text{–}20\,\text{Jun}\,1961$.

  • $67$ tribes, ≈ $420$ delegates.

  • Fees: $\$5$ Indian, $\$10$ non-Indian.

  • Extras: White Sox vs. Twins tickets (17 Jun).

  • Mayor Richard J. Daley proclaims “American Indian Week.”

• Declaration of Indian Purpose drafted; emphasizes education & health.

Page 7

• 15 Aug 1962: 32 Indians present Declaration to President Kennedy on White House lawn.

• By 1969 ≈ $40$ urban Indian centers exist.

• HEW 1969 task-force on “Racially Isolated Urban Indians.”

Page 8 – Early 1970 Federal Models

• Interior’s 3-year model-center project; OEO promises support.

  • Planned grants: Denver $100{,}000$; Phoenix $100{,}000$; Minneapolis $88{,}000$; Los Angeles $200{,}000$; Fairbanks $35{,}000$.

  • FY-1970: OEO totals ≈ $625{,}000$ for six centers.

• Goal: make mainstream agencies (employment, health, housing) responsive to Indians, not duplicate them.

Page 9 – 1972-76 Legislative Momentum

• 19 Jun 1972: Senators lobby for $275{,}000$ to start five new centers.

• Native Americans Program Act 1974

  • Empowers tribes & urban Indians to design self-help projects.

• Public Law 93-644 (4 Jan 1975)

  • Funds $58$ centers, covering $140{,}921$ off-reservation Indians.

  • FY-1975: off-reservation $4.661\,\text{million}$ vs. on-reservation $25\,\text{million}$.

  • FY-1976: $3.6$ million vs. $12$ million.

• Feb 1976: National Urban Indian Council founded; Hank Howell quote: “If America’s Indians can’t be first-class citizens, they can damn sure be first-class Indians.”

Page 10 – Late 1970s Programs & Culture

• ONAP 1977: $60$ centers, $5$ million (grants $40{,}000$–$200{,}000$, avg $42$ dollars per Indian).

• Persistence of traditional communal ethic in city neighborhoods.

• Pow-wows

  • Plains origins; today: Chicago Navy Pier, Denver, Stanford, OKC Red Earth (> $1{,}200$ dancers).

  • Provide pan-tribal social glue.

• Sport leagues bolster youth pride & identity.

Page 11 – Chicago as Case Study

• American Indian Center (AIC) Chicago

  • Founded $15\,Sep\,1953$ at La Salle & Kinzie.

  • Address (1970s): $1630$ W. Wilson Ave.

  • Mid-1970s staff: $22$ full/part-time.

  • Membership: > $10{,}000$ Indians, > $80$ tribes; non-Indians welcome (no voting).

  • Activities: tutoring, alcohol counseling, food distribution, Head Start, canoe club, softball, pow-wow club.

• Publications: Chicago Warrior, Tepee Topics, Tom-Tom Echoes, etc.

Page 12 – St. Augustine’s & Statistics

• St. Augustine’s Center for American Indians (Episcopal, 1958)

  • 1965: $5{,}274$ interviews; $913$ families; $2{,}345$ cash assists; $1{,}935$ grocery packages; $707$ clothing; $429$ job referrals; $42$ scholarships.

  • Funding: ≈ $80\%$ private donations.

• 1967: AIC buys Masonic Temple as permanent home.

Page 13 – Other City Models & Red Power

• Los Angeles: Society of Friends launches first center; multiple centers by 1970s.

• Minneapolis “Indian Work” & Upper Midwest Center

  • Leases 10 public-housing apartments for newcomers (max 60 days).

• American Indian Movement (AIM) 1968 in Minneapolis → Red Power era (fish-ins, 1972 BIA takeover, 1973 Wounded Knee).

  • Survival schools: Little Red Schoolhouse (St. Paul), Heart of the Earth.

Page 14 – Factionalism & Expansion

• Post-1971 rift in Chicago AIC → formation of Native American Committee (NAC); lands $400{,}000$ federal grant.

• Dallas (1969)

  • Split into American Indian Center & Dallas Inter-Tribal Center/Clinic.

  • Inter-Tribal: free clinic, CETA jobs, outpatient alcoholism.

  • AIC: pre-school (grant $330{,}000$), social services, residential treatment.

• Lincoln Indian Center (Nebraska, 1971) — backed by City Mission & Methodist Church.

• 1970s peak urban competition: $12$ orgs in L.A., $24$ Minneapolis, $11$ Chicago.

Page 15 – Specialized Services & Oakland Example

• West Coast Indian Child Center: 24-hr care to prevent family breakup.

• Intertribal Friendship House (Oakland)

  • Opened 9 Jul 1955; served $29$ tribes; originally on Telegraph Ave.

• P.L. 93-644 boosts centers, but Reaganomics (1980s) cuts budgets → reliance on “soft money” grants; staff turnover breeds mistrust.

Page 16 – Economic-Development Agencies

• United Indian Development Association (UIDA, L.A., 1970)

  • Free business consultancy; helped > $450$ businesses; created > $1,700$ jobs (1976-77).

  • Publishes Reporter.

• United Indians of All Tribes Foundation (UIATF, Seattle, 1970)

  • Focus: economic self-sufficiency, education, arts.

  • Publications: Daybreak Star, Indian Educator.

• American Indian Development Association (Washington D.C., 1973) — national resource-development consultancy.

• FY-1975 ONAP split: off-res $4.661$ million vs. on-res $25$ million.

Page 17 – State-by-State Network (selected examples)

• Arizona: Phoenix Indian Center; Tucson Indian Center; Native Americans for Community Action (Flagstaff).

• California: Friendship House (S.F.); Southern California Indian Center (Garden Grove); L.A. Indian Center; etc.

• Colorado: Denver Indian Center & Denver Indian Health & Family Services.

• Illinois: Chicago AIC & St. Augustine’s.

• Michigan: Detroit, Flint, Lansing, Grand Rapids, Marquette, Sault Ste. Marie, Saginaw, Warren centers.

• Minnesota: Minneapolis Upper Midwest Center; St. Paul AIC.

• Montana: Helena Indian Alliance; Great Falls; Butte; etc.

• … (full lists in transcript; demonstrates national spread).

Page 18 – Cultural Outcomes & Theoretical Insight

• Urban Indian centers preserve traditional socialization within modern contexts.

• Transculturation: tribes adopt each other’s ceremonies — e.g., Creeks learn pow-wow dancing; Kiowas learn stomp-dance songs.

• Circular mobility: frequent reservation visits create pan-Indian commuter culture.

• Momaday reiteration: youth seek “traditional terms” of identity despite urban life.

• Pan-Indianness becomes a new urban-oriented ethnic culture crossing tribal lines for political, social & economic security.

Page 19 – Looking Ahead to Education (lead-in to next chapter)

• Lakota voice (San Francisco 1970) criticizes non-Indian “statistical” studies of urban Indians; calls for Indian-authored research giving “realistic analysis.”

• Narrative of Indian child facing school racism; parents’ limited schooling highlights need for education & culturally safe schooling.

• Sets stage for forthcoming discussion on Survival Schools & Higher Education.

Cross-Page Themes & Connections

• Communalism: Whether via centers, churches, or pow-wows, collective welfare is paramount.

• Religion as Pan-Tribal Glue: NAC, Christian denominations, hybrid ceremonies.

• Federal Policy Cycles: support (1960s–mid-70s) → retrenchment (1980s) → ongoing funding precarity.

• Economic Self-Determination: entrepreneurial success stories (Oneida, UIDA) show shift from dependency to business orientation.

• Factionalism vs. Cooperation: splits (AIC vs. NAC) illustrate both challenges and dynamism of urban Indian politics.

• Cultural Resilience: Despite urban pressures, language songs, dances, kinship vocab (“all my relatives”) endure and evolve.

Key Figures & Organizations (chronological highlights)

• Society of American Indians (1911)

• Phoenix Indian Center (1947)

• American Indian Chicago Conference (1961) → Declaration of Indian Purpose.

• American Indian Movement (AIM, 1968)

• National Urban Indian Council (1976)

• United Indian Development Association (1970-present)

Numerical & Financial References (selected)

• Model center grants: $100{,}000$–$200{,}000$.

• ONAP 1977 average funding: $42$ per urban Indian.

• P.L. 93-644 coverage: $58$ centers, $140{,}921$ people.

• St. Augustine’s 1965 assistance instances: $5{,}274 + 2{,}345 + 1{,}935 + 707 + 429 + 42$ = $10{,}732$ service episodes.

Ethical & Practical Implications

• Urban centers mitigate systemic gaps (housing, health, jobs) left by mainstream agencies.

• Grant-dependency creates soft-money employment dilemma; invites policy debate on sustainable funding.

• Pan-Indianism raises questions of identity pluralism: How to balance tribal specificity with broader solidarity?

Study Tips

1. Trace the timeline of federal policies (Termination → War on Poverty → ONAP → Reagan cuts) to understand funding fluctuations.

2. Memorize landmark events: AICC 1961, AIM 1968, P.L. 93-644 1975.

3. Compare urban centers’ roles: social services, cultural revival, political mobilization.

4. Link religious movements (NAC) to legal battles over peyote.

5. Relate sports & pow-wows to psychological well-being and identity formation.

The main arguments presented in the notes revolve around the complex experience of Native Americans in urban environments and the mechanisms they developed for cultural preservation, social support, and political advocacy. Key arguments include:

1. Maintaining Indigenous Identity in Urban Settings: A central theme is the challenge of how Native Americans in cities like Los Angeles and Chicago maintain their cultural identity and cope with urban pressures. Solutions highlight the importance of communication networks, cultural celebrations (like pow-wows), and inter-tribal unity.

2. The Vital Role of Urban Indian Centers: These centers emerged as crucial first-line social agencies, providing essential services (food, housing assistance, counseling) and acting as lifelines for Native migrants. Their spread post-WWII demonstrates their effectiveness and necessity.

3. Rise and Evolution of Pan-Indianism: Urban migration, shared discrimination, and inter-tribal contact in cities accelerated the development of a unified "Indianness." This pan-tribal solidarity manifested in religious communities (e.g., Native American Church), political movements (e.g., Society of American Indians, AIM), cultural events (pow-wows), and social support networks.

4. Impact of Federal Policies: Federal policies, particularly the relocation era and subsequent legislative momentum (like the Native Americans Program Act 1974 and Public Law 93-644), significantly influenced the funding and establishment of urban Indian centers. However, this support was often followed by periods of retrenchment, such as in the 1980s, leading to financial precarity and reliance on "soft money" grants.

5. Cultural Resilience and Adaptation: Despite urban challenges, traditional communal ethics, kinship systems ("All my relations"), and cultural practices (like language, songs, and dances) persisted and adapted. Processes like transculturation, where tribes adopted each other's ceremonies, further solidified a new, urban-oriented ethnic culture.

6. Shift towards Economic Self-Determination: There was a growing emphasis on economic independence, with examples like the Oneidas, Muscogee Creeks, and Pequots pursuing entrepreneurial ventures. Organizations like the United Indian Development Association (UIDA) emerged to support Native businesses, highlighting a shift from dependency to a business orientation.

The author's main argument is that Native Americans, despite the challenges of urban migration and fluctuating federal policies, successfully fostered cultural resilience and collective welfare in cities. They achieved this by developing a robust pan-Indian identity, establishing crucial urban Indian centers for social support and cultural preservation, and striving for economic self-determination, thereby adapting and thriving in new environments.