Perhaps I shouldn’t have been so surprised, since I’ve seen plenty of other images of Native Americana in Istanbul — including a garishly “sexy” Native outfit on a very skinny mannequin in the window of a clothing store in Galatasaray. Why all the Native American stuff? Continue reading
by Brian Awehali
Every year, as Thanksgiving approaches, and Christmas music begins to permeate every public space, I am filled with profound ambivalence. Even as a child, the standard Thanksgiving story always seemed to me too simple, too wholesome, and too peaceful to be true or truly American. Finally, past the faux-historicism of school textbook-styled Pilgrims and Indians, I was able to delve into the actual construction of the story of Thanksgiving. And, in this way, I learned just how fabricated and utterly bizarre this American holiday really is.
In 1621, at Plymouth Plantation on Massachusetts Bay, 50 Pilgrim settlers joined with at least 90 Native guests in a three-day feast which is now traditionally cited as the “First Thanksgiving.” In reality, this seasonal, quasi-secular New England harvest celebration was not repeated in Plymouth and was in fact forgotten until a reference to it was discovered almost 200 years later, in a contemporary book known as Mourt’s Relation. Contrary to the widely accepted, idyllic account of two cultures sitting down to share a meal in harmony, most 17th-century colonial images relating to Native Americans depict violent confrontation. It was only around 1900, when the western Indian wars had largely subsided due to a shortage of Indians left to kill—and when it was safe for Euroamericans to supplant fear with nostalgia—that the romantic Thanksgiving narrative most Americans today are familiar with took hold.
Thanksgiving Day provides an ideal opportunity to consider the formation of national identity and the concept of a civil religion. It’s also a living metaphor of the prevailing American model for immigrant assimilation and the ways in which history can be reinterpreted, and indeed wholly reinvented, to serve competing ethnic, patriotic, religious, and commercial ends.
by Brian Awehali
“I’ve never seen more egregious conduct by the federal government,” said Royce C. Lamberth, the federal judge overseeing the Individual Indian Trust (IIT) reform case, which stands as the largest class action lawsuit ever filed against the U.S. federal government. His comments were elicited in 1999 when the Department of the Interior and Treasury Department announced they had “inadvertently” destroyed 162 boxes of vital trust records during the course of the trial, then waited months to notify the court of the “accident.”
“You tell me if that’s fair,” lead plaintiff Elouise Cobell told Mike Wallace in a 60 Minutes interview in 1999. “When they have to manage other people’s money according to standards, why aren’t they managing our money to standards? Is it because you manage brown people’s money differently?”
Filed more than seven years ago by Cobell, a member of the Blackfoot tribe, and her legal team, and representing more than 500,000 individual Native American landholders, the Indian Trust case—also known as Cobell vs. Norton—is easily one of the biggest stories of government criminality in modern U.S. history. The case has turned into such a nightmare for the Department of the Interior (DOI) and Treasury that the government now has more than 100 lawyers assigned to the case, more than they employed in the Microsoft antitrust litigation.
And perhaps most significantly, the government is losing. Badly.
At stake—over $100 billion rightfully belonging to the nation’s most impoverished people. The Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Treasury say they have simply “lost” the money and claim they cannot now provide an accurate accounting of how much is owed to whom. In the course of the lawsuit, the government has repeatedly destroyed vital accounting documents, deliberately filed false reports to the court, and generally conducted itself in such bad faith that a stunning total of 37 past and present government officials, including current Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton and former Secretary Bruce Babbitt, have been held in contempt of court for their misconduct.
During the first of two trial phases, the government attempted to limit its liability, but suffered a resounding defeat when Judge Lamberth ordered the Interior Department to conduct a full accounting of Indian trust assets – dating all the way back to 1887 — and imposed strict liability on government trustees.
“This is a landmark victory,” Cobell said of Judge Lamberth’s Phase One decision. “It is now clear that trust law and trust standards fully govern the management of the Individual Indian Trust and that Secretary Norton can no longer ignore the trust duties that she owes to 500,000 individual Indian trust beneficiaries.”
Most recently, however, the White House and “top lawmakers” have pushed through an arguably unconstitutional “midnight rider” on an appropriations bill that would delay the accounting of Indian trust funds still further. It simply could not be clearer that the government is completely aware of its misconduct and insists on responding with ill will, betting on the U.S. public’s lack of awareness of, interest in, and solidarity with Indian trust beneficiaries.
An Unlikely Warrior
Cobell lives in Browning, Mont., where she founded and helps run the first tribal-owned bank in the country. She also served as treasurer of the Blackfeet tribe from 1970 through 1983.
While she was growing up, Cobell’s family had no plumbing, no electricity and no running water. She remembers they would often complain about sporadic or suspiciously small checks from the government for the land given to Cobell’s grandmother during “allotment” at the turn of the century, land that is now leased out by the Dept. of Interior and the BIA to ranchers and timber companies.
Allotment was the policy ushered in by the Dawes Act in 1887 in an attempt to break down tribal structures and reduce Native American land holdings. The heads of tribal households were given up to 320 acres of land, but were forbidden actual ownership; instead, the government forced a trust relationship, where the Interior and the BIA would oversee the land and disburse all revenue from its use to the individual landholders. The Act also allowed for the sale of “surplus” land, a provision white settlers exploited fully in their purchase of around 90 million acres — almost 65 percent of all Native American lands — by 1932. The government openly stated during this period that this trust relationship was necessary because it did not believe Indians were capable of managing their own affairs.
Yet it’s difficult to conceive of how anyone could have done a worse job managing the trust.
After discovering a number of anomalies in the Blackfeet tribe’s trust, including an account drawing negative interest, as well as a host of unauthorized transactions, Cobell began asking questions. She claims that her initial questions to the BIA were met with derision. “They said, ‘Oh! you don’t know how to read the reports,’” Cobell recalls. “I think they were trying to embarrass me, but it did the opposite — it made me mad.”
Steadily more resolved, Cobell caught a break when a deputy commissioner for Indian Affairs in the first Bush administration, David Matheson, arranged for her to meet with several well-connected, influential government officials and banking experts. Among this group was Dennis Gingold, eventual lead prosecuting attorney for the case, who was quoted in the Los Angeles Times as saying of his first meeting with Cobell, “From my experience, American Indians were not involved in banking. I was looking for a bunch of people with turbans.”
What Gingold came to learn about the case astonished and enlightened him however. Each year more than $500 million comes into the Individual Indian Trust from companies leasing Native American land for grazing, oil, timber, coal, and other natural resources. The money is collected by the Interior and sent to the Treasury, where it’s then theoretically deposited into individual trust accounts.
The problem is, the Interior and BIA are widely regarded as the worst-run agencies in the entire federal government. 50,000 trust accounts don’t have names or proper addresses. One such account has $1 million in it.
A House Committee on Government Operations in 1992 issued a damning report entitled “Misplaced Trust: The Bureau of Indian Affairs’ Mismanagement of the Indian Trust Fund.” Two years later, Congress passed the Indian Trust Fund Management Reform Act, appointing a trustee to oversee the process. This was Paul Homan, who brought with him to the job a reputation for cleaning up problems at financial institutions. Before being appointed the first trustee, Homan had been CEO of four problem banks and the executive vice president of another. No shrinking violet, Homan eventually quit in disgust, claiming he received no cooperation from the Interior or the BIA, or particularly, then Interior Secretary Babbitt of the Clinton administration.
Before he left, Homan reported bluntly that it was impossible to ascertain how many people were owed money. Of the 238,000 individual trusts Homan’s crew located, 118,000 were missing crucial papers, 50,000 had no addresses, and 16,000 accounts had no documents at all. Homan further reported that one could assume money had been skimmed extensively from the trust: “It’s akin to leaving the vault door open.”
Forced to Sue
Faced with the prospect of a wide open vault door the government seemed to have no interest in closing, Cobell was eventually compelled to file a lawsuit on June 10, 1996, demanding a full accounting of all IIT monies. It’s doubtful that anyone at the Interior or BIA expected Cobell and her team to have as much success as they’ve had.
In the intervening seven years, Cobell’s team has piled up an impressive series of victories. On February 22, 1999 Babbitt, Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, and Asst. Interior Secretary Kevin Gover were held in contempt of court by Judge Lamberth. On August 10, 1999, Lamberth ordered the Treasury to pay $600,000 in fines for misconduct.
And on Dec. 21 of that same year, the judge issued his Trial One opinion (the case is divided into two phases), wherein he found that the government had breached its trust responsibilities to Native Americans and ordered the government to file quarterly reports detailing its reform efforts. Lamberth also retained jurisdiction over the reform for a period of five years.
During the first phase, the Interior seems to have bungled things in every conceivable way. The Senate Government Affairs Committee cited the Interior’s handling of the Indian trust as one of its “Ten Worst” examples of federal government mismanagement. It came to light through a report filed by court-appointed Special Master, Alan Balaran, that Interior and Justice Department lawyers were destroying e-mails at the same time they were assuring the court the emails were being preserved.
The second phase of the trial, to ascertain the amount of money owed to Indian trustees, is now underway. As the suit nears its conclusion, desperation on the part of the government has led them to try every means available to them, ethical or otherwise, to derail or minimize the imminent settlement.
On September 29, 2003, Special Master Balaran filed a site visit report after being ordered to vacate the premises of the Dallas office of the Minerals Management Service. In the report, Balaran cited “chaotic document management, an inability to locate audit files…and the unexplained presence of an industrial shredder.”
The destruction of vital documents has continued and has been cited repeatedly in reports to the court. Numerous experts have testified that a true accounting of the trust based on existing records is impossible. As a result the plaintiffs have submitted an accounting plan employing a satellite mapping technology known as Geographic Information Systems, or GIS, to estimate how much money individual Native Americans should have received from oil leases on their lands. “This methodology is necessary where the trustee has destroyed the records necessary for an accounting of all funds,” explains Gingold.
Using detailed production records from every well drilled in the West, the plaintiffs can determine how many of those wells are on Indian reservations. With this information, the amount of revenue those wells managed through government leases would have produced can be estimated. The mapping technology also includes ways of calculating for timber, grazing and mineral leases on Native American lands in the West.
Divide and Conquer?
Trust reform is taking a heavy toll on the national treasury. The administration has requested $554 million in the 2004 budget to reform the trust fund, an increase of $183.3 million above the $370.2 million that was set aside in 2003. In a recent letter from the Indian Affairs Committee, Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-Colo.), urged a speedy settlement and predicted that Congress would intervene soon and negotiate a settlement if the suit was not resolved.
To illustrate how costly the government’s evasions are and why pressure is mounting for a settlement, in a January 2001 interview with Harlan McKosato on the national radio show “Native America Calling,” Cobell noted that “just by not settling the case, it’s costing the government and taxpayers $160,000 an hour, $7 million a day, $2.5 billion a year.”
Support for Cobell’s efforts in the Native American community is far from universal, however, and this may prove the greatest remaining obstacle to a fair and final settlement. Because part of her team’s efforts involve removing trust responsibilities from the BIA and Interior, some worry that this would be to their detriment because it could provide grounds for terminating the government’s trust relationship with tribes that depend on funding.
In March, five tribal chairmen published an article in Indian Country Today, the country’s leading Native American newspaper, alleging that the Cobell suit was employing “scorched-earth” tactics, and that “an attorney for the plaintiffs has publicly stated that the Cobell suit has the potential to destroy tribal governments.”
Alarmist rhetoric aside (the Cobell team flatly denies ever commenting on the suit’s “potential to destroy tribal governments”), the concerns of the chairmen seem to hinge on three main assertions; that the tactics of the Cobell legal team are akin to “warfare;” that the Cobell team has not utilized opportunities for diplomacy and negotiation to the fullest extent; and that in requesting a third-party receiver to resolve the trust’s problems (taking it away from the Interior and BIA) without first consulting tribes, Cobell and Co. demonstrated a disregard for tribal governments.
A reply written a week later by Cobell and John Echohawk, the executive director of the Native American Rights Fund, pointed out that the “consultation, communication and cooperation” urged by the chairmen in their letter are doomed to failure because of the Interior’s manifest, well-documented bad faith. In defending the “warlike” decision to bring the authority of a federal court to bear on the Interior, the letter reasoned, “Our approach is to ensure accountability when people mismanage Indian assets and that can no more be described as ‘scorched earth’ than holding Enron and Arthur Anderson executives accountable for their misdeeds.”
“It is curious that now, when a multi-billion dollar judgment and accountability seems inevitable, officials within the Interior are pushing the notion that there is ‘no end’ and that a congressionally forced ‘settlement’ is the only solution. Tribal leaders and Indian people must not fall for this ploy” the letter closed, “and must see these actions for what they are — an attempt to get Congress to step in at the eleventh hour and bail out the government. …We cannot allow the Interior Department, their proxies, or anyone to ‘divide and conquer us.’ The government is losing and they are desperate. They are banking on being able to make us war against one another.
[But] what’s wrong with the Indians winning for once instead of the cavalry?”
As the suit draws slowly to a close, this unlikely scenario seems closer and closer to being a reality, despite underhanded government efforts to block accountability through the use of a “midnight rider” in a senate appropriations bill. The rider, now before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, would delay the accounting of at least $13 billion in trust funds.
“I’ve heard from friends that the government thinks I’m tired and that they’ll wear me down, so that I’ll just go away,” says Cobell.
Just outside of her hometown is a marker that tells the story of the winter of 1884, when 500 Blackfeet died of starvation and exposure while awaiting government-promised supplies. They were buried in a mass grave now referred to as Ghost Ridge. During the more difficult stages of the lawsuit, Cobell said she visits Ghost Ridge and thinks of her ancestors who perished in the cold almost 120 years ago, while waiting for the government’s good will.
With that lesson from history firmly in mind, it seems unwise for the government to bet on Cobell or her team going away any time soon.
by Brian Awehali
(originally published by Britannica.com as part of a regular history feature called “Yesterday’s News”)
July 25, 1876 — The U.S. Army today suffered its worst defeat ever in Plains Indian warfare, as more than 260 soldiers in the 7th Cavalry were killed along the banks of the Little Bighorn River in the disputed Montana Territory. The bloodbath ensued after an evidently ill-conceived charge under the command of Gen. George Armstrong Custer. There appear to be no human survivors from the 7th Cavalry and only one equine survivor, a cavalry horse (ironically named “Comanche”). Because of the Indians’ custom of immediately removing their dead from the battlefield, it is difficult to ascertain how heavy their losses were, though estimates place the total at around 140.
Sources report that Custer may have disregarded the orders of Brigadier Gen. Alfred H. Terry—as well as the dictates of sound judgment—when he rushed ahead of reinforcements and led between 260 and 270 cavalrymen against a force of approximately 2,500 Sioux, Northern Cheyenne, and Arapaho Indians, a war party believed to have been the largest that the Plains Indians have ever arrayed against U.S. forces.
According to one eyewitness, during the battle “Indians took clothing from dead [U.S.] soldiers and dressed themselves in it to confuse the soldiers,” a ruse which appears to have been successful. Further eyewitness reports indicate that many of the U.S. troops, confronted with certain defeat, attempted to surrender, but that the Indians “did not take a single soldier prisoner, [killing] all of them.”
Custer apparently decided not to wait for reinforcements from Terry, who was to bring a larger body of troops up the Yellowstone River in an attempt to trap the Indians between the two forces. It is unknown why Custer chose this course of action, but his tactic appears to have been undermined in no small part by the failure of at least one officer under his command. Maj. Marcus Reno, after assuming command of one of two flanking forces, retreated prematurely and with apparent cowardice, leaving Custer’s main force fatally exposed.
Following so soon after last week’s defeat of Gen. George Crook at Rosebud Creek by Oglala Sioux leader Crazy Horse and his warriors, this newest setback underscores the poor planning and lack of resolve that have come to characterize the U.S. military’s inglorious campaign against the Plains Indians. Although the Second Treaty of Fort Laramie in 1868 guarantees Indians the exclusive and permanent possession of the Dakota Territory west of the Missouri River, the U.S. government has consistently failed to take measures against illegal pioneer settlements in the region. In fact, several Indian raids on such settlements have been taken as a pretext for release from the terms of the treaty. The recent discovery of gold in the Black Hills of the Dakota Territory—recognized as a sacred hunting ground for the Sioux and Cheyenne—has only worsened matters.
The death of Custer, who takes two brothers, a brother-in-law, and a nephew with him to a High Plains grave, brings to an end one of the more colorful military careers in recent history. Despite graduating last in his class at West Point in 1861 and, in the words of one commentator, “utterly fail[ing] to distinguish himself,” Custer achieved surprising success during the Civil War, as the Michigan cavalry brigade he commanded doggedly pursued Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee and led in no small part to Lee’s surrender at Appomattox. Custer personally received the flag of truce that brought the war to a close.
Although Custer was court-martialed two years later for abandoning his post to visit his wife, his suspension from military service was short-lived. The decline in military enlistment and the demand for leadership in the intensifying campaign against the Plains Indians soon led to Custer’s reinstatement.
He wasted no time in stirring controversy when, under the orders of Major Gen. Philip H. Sheridan, troops under his command ambushed a Cheyenne encampment along the Washita River. Custer reported that he had killed about 100 warriors, women, and children and that he had destroyed all livestock and winter supplies. Public outcry about these events led to the creation of the federal Peace Commission, which was charged with converting the Plains Indians from their nomadic life to reservation settlement; faced with exposure and probable starvation, many of the Cheyenne at Washita accepted resettlement. Custer’s reputation as “the Army’s premier Indian fighter” is based upon such actions.
The bloody end that has befallen Custer and his men at the Battle of the Little Bighorn will surely resonate in the public mind for many years and is all but certain to intensify U.S. governmental action against the Plains Indians.
- Encyclopædia Britannica: “George Armstrong Custer and Battle of the Little Bighorn”
- Larry Sklenar, To Hell with Honor: Custer and the Little Bighorn (University of Oklahoma Press, 2000)
- The West, PBS
- Interview with Louise Barnett, author of Touched by Fire, on C-SPAN’s Booknotes
Here is a fairly comprehensive archive of work by Brian Awehali.
» Drift to Live: Words with China’s People’s Historian, Liao Yiwu
“Why should the government fear me?” says Liao smiling, the first day we meet, along with an interpreter and several of his writer friends, at a riverside teahouse outside of Chengdu, in Sichuan province. “I’m just a guy who tells stories…”
:: Counterpunch :: April 2011
» China’s Underground Historian
Liao Yiwu may be the most censored writer in China. His work has been translated into several languages and has enjoyed international critical acclaim, yet in his hometown of Chengdu, where his books are banned, he’s virtually unknown.
:: The Progressive :: April 2011
» Mongolia’s Wilderness Threatened by Mining Boom
Multinational mining companies eye Mongolia’s earthy fortunes
:: Earth Island Journal / Guardian (UK) / Third World Resurgence (Malaysia)/ Ger (Denmark) :: 2010-11
» Native Energy Futures
Renewable Energy, Actual Sovereignty & the New Rush on Indian Lands
:: LiP :: 2006 :: Project Censored award winner :: PDF version
» Trust Us, We’re the Government
How to Make $137 Billion of Indian Money Disappear
:: Alternet :: 2002 :: Project Censored award winner
» The Bureau of Indian Affairs’ $100-Billion Shell Game
:: Z Magazine (cover) :: April 2002 :: with Silja Talvi
» Broken Promises
Government malfeasance continues in landmark Indian Trust case
:: ColorsNW :: 2003 :: Society of Professional Journalists award-winner :: with Silja Talvi
» New World Disorder
How U.S. arms dealers and their Cabinet-level cronies profit from the war on terror
:: LiP / Alternet :: 2002
» Monitoring Your Every Move – A Guide to Biometric Technologies
What are the facts about biometrics? Predictably, industry leaders and critics paint wildly different pictures. Here, however, are a few brief looks at today’s leading biometric technologies, which may be a much bigger part of your life than you’d expect, in a considerably shorter time than you’d imagine.
:: High Times :: 2002
» Profit, Control, and the Myth of Security
The advance of Total Surveillance Society, aka Total Security, promises a world free of danger and uncertainty, yet the arguments for a comprehensive surveillance society comprise a fear-addled litany of threats and fantastic promises of security that are grossly exaggerated by the very corporate and government serial offenders who pose the greatest threat to our health and safety.
:: LiP :: 2006 :: with Ariane Conrad
» Life After Corporate Death Care
As traditional religious death rituals have given way to more secular alternatives, a consumer revolt against the high cost of dying in America is well underway.
:: Alternet :: 2004
» David and Goliath in Indian Country
The feds are on the losing side of the largest class action lawsuit ever filed against the U.S. government. This time, the Indians may actually beat the cavalry.
:: Alternet :: 2005
» Propaganda, Public Relations, and the Not-So-New Dark Age
Edward L. Bernays birthed the public relations industry in the United States. His clients included General Motors, United Fruit, Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, the U.S. Department of State, Health, and Commerce, Samuel Goldwyn, Eleanor Roosevelt, the American Tobacco Company, and Proctor & Gamble. He directed public relations campaigns for every president from Calvin Coolidge in 1925, to Dwight Eisenhower in the late 1950s. He was, in the estimation of cultural historian Ann Douglas, the man “who orchestrated the commercialization of a culture.”
:: with Stephen Bender :: LiP :: 2006
» Challenging the War on Drugs
A landmark conference on drug policy in Los Angeles convened nearly 600 attendees from across the U.S. and Europe.
:: Santa Fe New Mexican / Alternet :: 2002
» Nike Come Home, All is Forgiven
Oregon invites shoe giant to consider the economic advantages of domestic prison labor.
:: LiP :: 1998
» Inventing Thanksgiving
Thanksgiving Day provides an ideal opportunity to consider the formation of national identity and the concept of a civil religion. It’s also a living metaphor of the prevailing American model for immigrant assimilation and the ways in which history can be reinterpreted, and indeed wholly reinvented, to serve competing ethnic, patriotic, religious and commercial ends.
:: Britannica.com :: 2002
» Where Fools Rush In – Custer’s Last Stand
July 25, 1876 ― The U.S. Army today suffered its worst defeat ever in Plains Indian warfare, as more than 260 soldiers in the 7th Cavalry were killed along the banks of the Little Bighorn River in the disputed Montana Territory. The bloodbath ensued after an evidently ill-conceived charge under the command of Gen. George Armstrong Custer.
:: Britannica.com :: 2000
» Madness and Mass Society
Pharmaceuticals, Psychiatry, and the Rebellion of True Community
:: an interview with Dr. Bruce Levine :: LiP :: 2006
» Torture Taxi – Anatomy of a CIA Front Company
Anatomy of a CIA Front Company
:: an interview with A.C Thompson and Trevor Paglen :: LiP :: 2007
» Remote Control Hip Hop
Culture, power and youth…
:: an interview with Jeff Chang :: LiP :: 2005
» Who’s White?
Race, Humor and the New Black/Non-Black Breakdown
:: an interview with damali ayo and Tim Wise :: LooseLiP podcast :: 2007
» Bad Vibes – Poison Pleasure Products?
Words with Jessica Giordano, co-founder of the Smitten Kitten and the Coalition Against Toxic Toys (CATT).
:: with Lisa Jervis :: LiP :: 2006
» Conveying Correctness
The Prefabrication of Political Speech
:: an interview with Chip Berlet :: LiP :: 2005
» Designing Our Demise
One respected Cornell robotics expert is in firm belief that machines will acquire human levels of intelligence by the year 2040, and that by the middle part of this century, they will be our intellectual superiors.
:: an interview with Hans Moravec :: Britannica.com :: 2000
» Membership Has Its Disadvantages
Whiteness and the Social Entropy of Privilege
:: an interview with Tim Wise :: LiP :: 2005
» Notes On a National Disorder
A look at the growing problem of excessive concentration in the U.S. culture industries, and the oligopolistic sway of just a few giant players over television news, book publishing, popular music and cable TV. Also, how the hell Bush II happened.
:: an interview with Mark Crispin Miller :: LiP :: 2005
» Addicted to Waste
Harm Reduction, Disposability and the Myth of Activist Purity
:: an interview with Julia Butterfly Hill :: Tikkun :: 2005
» On Irony
A pointed Q&A with author Rebecca Solnit
:: LiP :: 2006
LiP: Informed Revolt
In 1996, I started a zine called LiP in Chicago, learned a lot from it, took a break for several years to do other things, then relaunched it as a full-fledged North American periodical in 2004. The magazine, always printed on 100% recycled PCW paper, using non-petroleum-based inks, and with either worker-owned or union printers, explored radical (root/fundamental) aspects of the world and its power relations in a way we hoped could reach beyond the choir and be compelling for a wide readership. We did surprisingly well with our all-volunteer staff, 600+ contributors and no appetite for running an actual business, garnering awards from Project Censored, Utne Reader, East Bay Express, South by Southwest and Clamor during our run. Below are links to one complete issue of the magazine, and to various items related to the publication of the LiP anthology, Tipping the Sacred Cow (AK Press).
LiP No. 5:
The Relentlessly Persuasive Propaganda Issue [PDF]
Featuring: Eduardo Galeano, Vandana Shiva, Dr. Bruce Levine, Guillermo Gomez-Pena, Jeff Conant, Antonia Juhasz, Timothy Kreider and Hugh D’Andrade, among many others.
“‘Making the world safe for democracy,’ that was the big slogan.” – Edward Bernays, on his work for the first US government propaganda ministry, the 1917 Committee on Public Information
“In really hard times the rules of the game are altered.” – Journalist and social theorist Walter Lippmann, speaking of both elite manipulations of society and history’s mass cataclysms.
“Tipping the Sacred Cow is a savvy and well-curated collection of the comics, illustrations, articles and interviews featured in LiP’s myriad print and online incarnations from 1996-2007. Capturing the magazine’s cheeky nature, it reads like a super-special edition of LiP—complete with illustrations by cartoonist Eric Drooker, a “theft ethics” quiz, a glossary of culture-jamming lingo and other useful appendices—including some exclusive, behind-the-scenes, previously unpublished material…. Tipping the Sacred Cow serves as a worthy headstone for a publication that died before its time.”
— “R.I.P. LiP” – In These Times, 11/2007
“Every single article in this anthology forced me to shift my thinking about issues near and dear to my heart (feminism, the teachings of Martin Luther King, Jr., eco-friendly policies—even the fine art of using the toilet).”
— Feminist Review, 11/2007
“[There’s a] paradox that’s becoming increasingly difficult for independent publishers–especially progressive, environmentally conscious ones–to resolve. ‘Being values-driven,’ says Awehali, ‘I think we’re fundamentally and structurally at odds with the systems we use to print, to distribute, and so on. It’s really no surprise that [LiP] found it difficult to survive and thrive in a hypercapitalist periodicals marketplace.'”
— “Shelf Life,” Utne Reader, 11/2007
- Extended online release: Download Tipping the Sacred Cow – The Best of LiP: Informed Revolt [PDF, 9.3M]
- ZNet author Q&A: Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz interviews Brian Awehali about the publication of Tipping the Sacred Cow. (2007)
- Wikipedia page for LiP: Informed Revolt