💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › aragorn-interview-with-klee-benally.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 07:08:59. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Interview with Klee Benally
Author: Aragorn!
Date: May 1st, 2014
Language: en
Topics: green anarchy, anti-civilization, indigeneity, identity, indigenous anarchism, black seed, interview
Source: Black Seed Issue #1 & Issue #2

Aragorn!

Interview with Klee Benally

Klee Benally is originally from Black Mesa and has worked most of his

life at the front lines in struggles to protect Indigenous sacred lands.

Klee doesn’t believe the current dominant social order (read “colonial

system”) can be fixed but should (and will be) smashed to pieces. When

asked about his politics he says, “I maintain Diné traditionalism as my

way of being in this world. I have affinity with Anarchism and identify

myself as an Indigenous Anarchist.” Klee performed with the rock group

Blackfire for 20 years and performs solo today. http://kleebenally.com/

Aragorn! - What would it look like for someone who has no spiritual

practice to develop one?

Klee -That’s a very personal question and I think what ends up happening

is that people start these centers like the ones in Sedona, or start

these new age centers. They are seeking that answer from other people

(as opposed to within or from within their own roots or asking the land

what developing a spiritual practice means). To me that is what it looks

like when people start appropriating from all these other sources. Or

they go to the usual suspects who are exploiting their own cultures or

just selling them or--even if it’s not for sale, even if there is no

monetary exchange--sometimes these people have been kicked out of their

own communities and are pimping out their own culture for their own

gratification. People are seeking from other sources, and forget that

mother earth is THE source. Ya know there is this sort of this cliché

that mother earth is not a resource it is THE source. It’s actually very

true though. I think it is part of like, almost all indigenous cultures

that I know, they don’t fucking missionize; they don’t go out and try to

convert people. When people start asking that question, it’s like.... Is

that an answer we can give? Because then we assume some kind of

responsibility in that relationship. I think where people expect it, you

know just different expectations about that. I can maybe speak from

experience to people I have known who have come to some kind of

spiritual understanding but again that’s deeply personal on some levels.

Of course we have culture, it’s a social cohesion; how we understand our

relationship to each other and relationship to the land. There’s an

anthropological definition of “culture” and there’s our own definition

or understanding of that, what that term means and how we again

understand our relationship to each other and the land. The discussion

about spirituality can’t happen without a discussion about culture and

what that means and there is context to that. I think there is a violent

context that we have to come terms with when we start talking about

those things. There is a lot of trauma that we have to address through

that discussion as well. In the past when I would answer that question,

when I think I was in a different place than today, for Diné people we

have Hózhó’ji which is “beauty-way” or more well defined Hózhó’ji is a

way of health and harmony. Beauty is this sort of fetish as well, that

anthropologists are like “here is a great definition.” They sort of

latched on to but it’s deeper than that. You know when we as Diné people

understand that foundation and philosophy, for our identity and our

relation to each other through K’é or through our clan system, our

relationship systems that extend not just to people but to our natural

environment, to other beings. It’s not something that you can just say

“here’s what this spirituality means and I’ll give it you.” There is

this whole deeper understanding of what our ceremonial practices are,

for us to restore health and harmony with our mind, our body, our

spirit, and our soul, even within that. So the problem that we face a

lot is when we say that to people, it seems rather convenient just to

take it, and just to do what they want and that’s exploitation. To me it

just an abuse, the process that we carried forward. There’s a lot of

indigenous people who don’t want to share their cultural knowledge of

course, for good reason, ‘cause it has just been exploited and abused

and people just misuse it or they just distort it, and they take

different parts that are rather convenient for them when they have an

answer that resonates for them at the time. And then they...

A! – “picking and choosing”

K- ... I think through my experience (this is why I picked on Sedona

really quickly) we have people like James Arthur Ray who was selling Sun

Dances for like $10,000 and you know people who were ultimately killed

by his hand through his application, interpretation of sweat lodge, who

were there for the “Spiritual Warrior Retreat” in very clear quotation

marks and that’s an extreme but that is what we see. This exploitation

continues, so, yeah maybe sometime along the way he asked those

questions and people gave him answers. I don’t know but that is his

application.

A- What I identify with that (I guess I want to talk through why it’s

impossible) is that basically you are saying that anyone who wants to

take this project seriously basically has to commit to

multi-generations. In other words, indigeneity, whatever that means,

will require that kind of time span. It’s not going to happen in your

lifetime. So of course why that’s impossible is the american consumer is

not going to accept that this is something they can’t buy. Even if the

consumption we’re talking about is of an ideology.

K – For some reason what you are saying reminds of this discussion

around the apocalypse that I have been having with friends (you know

because things seem very apocalyptic and so forth). Through my research

it became clear, and this is even Christians saying this, that

Christianity is linear, with this Genesis, with the Christ sacrifice or

whatever, coming of Christ’s sacrifice and then judgment day. Ultimately

the logical conclusion of Christianity is apocalypse, or judgment day ya

know, as opposed to looking at it from an indigenous perspective--which

is cyclical, you know; we are part of an ongoing process. So I don’t see

a beginning and end to it, I see it as an ongoing process.. I don’t see

it like, “oh here’s victory over here, here’s a goal, I can see a way to

achieve something that we want to accomplish which is liberation of our

lands, the thriving, the cultural vitality of our people and hopefully

abolishing these systems of oppression that are built up and reinforced

through colonization.” But at this point, and I don’t want it to be

interpreted as being abstract, ‘cause it’s not, it’s anything but

abstract, it’s very clear in relation to the system, it’s is an ongoing

process. To some degree I think that is part of the western mentality;

it’s like linear thought, how change is gonna come about. When we look

at the multi-generational projects, with the seven generation concepts

(even from other indigenous nations, certainly it’s pan-indigenous right

now that it can be interpreted very easily with other indigenous

nations) in relation to the core of our practices is to ensure that

cultural knowledge is transmitted and maintains its relevance or

vitality. So for me that’s part of it, thinking in that way that we are

part of a cyclical way of being. It’s not saying we are going to sit on

our hands and wait for shit to change, it’s about doing the best we can

now.

A! - Did you see that article on indigenous egoism?

K - Yeah yeah, I read that.

A! - Fascinating!

K – Yeah, I, well, it’s not fresh in my mind but part of the issue I had

with it was, just this sort of like over focus on individualism and

which to me is again is this extremely western concept, which is

interesting I think because in Diné culture we have a very strong sense

of the individual. Children are taught or treated as individuals when

they are young, but in relation to each other, there is this sort of

like separation of the sense of “community”. That’s what I wanted to ask

the author, what was her upbringing, what was her experience. How can I

take what they said about egoism and apply it to my community? I don’t

think it connects. It is part of the reason I am guarded with my words

or I am fairly choosy sometimes. I don’t want to speak in these

generalities, because that is what people expect. It’s just like when

talking to indigenous people, oh you speak for everybody. And people

want some pan-indigenous solution. Even part of the whole Zapatismo fed

into that to some degree; they were very smart about using that to their

tactical advantage to some degree. But it’s, I’m at the point right now

where I am still playing with all of these concepts ideologically and

trying to reconcile how they work from a cultural perspective and then

apply them, ‘cause I don’t want to ever get caught in that trap of the

theory and shit. It’s always on the ground for me. .. I would like to

talk to the author more just to get a sense of what their experiences

have been. And I need to read it again. Like I said it’s not fresh in my

mind. But that was like the first thing. It was just like oh great,

another voice that’s like, for the egoists and reinforcing the

hyper-individualism and wait there is like this stretch and connection

to indigeneity and I am just like, I’ve never seen that. In every

community I have visited and traveled to and

A! - Well you have given me a couple of things to think about. I think

that this decolonize, anti-decolonization differentiation... I think

there is something interesting there. First of all it is a fantastic way

to break away from the decolonization, the way it is being framed right

now is not quite toxic, but...

K – I think it’s highly toxic, cause from what I see from a

non-indigenous perspective to these areas, patently white--for the most

part--perspective. It becomes a personal project and we don’t need more

people just running around with these...

A! - By which you mean a process of personal self-revelation?

K – Yes. And ultimate gratification.

A! - My question for you, and I will frame it in the form of advice. So

this new project: my goal is to be the editor emeritus of this project.

In other words, I make it happen from the perspective of resources and I

open my rolodex to make sure good writers and people find the project,

but I am very serious about this. I really want a transformation along

lines that we have already discussed, specifically along the line of

talking about Native stuff in a different way, in a not fetishizing way

and having voices, varied voices...

K – Beyond the usual suspects..?

A! – Yeah, so my suspicion is that what that is going to have to look

like is me doing a lot of interviews. We are talking about a green

anarchist publication, but I really would like it to look like the Green

Anarchism that I would like to create... I think you and I have a bit of

a sense as to what that would look like, so how to do this correctly?

Because first of all, I have to say, if you look at today vs. ten years

ago there’s a hell of a lot more people to talk to. I mean it’s

unbelievable. It’s really unbelievable how many more people there are

that have come into anarchism. How would you do it if you were me?

K – I know how I wouldn’t do it, unfortunately that is a lot of my

initial response. I think part of it is just being on the ground with

folks and connecting with folks who are on the front lines and being

open to a sense that not everybody’s gonna have the articulate academic

voice and just making sure that people feel comfortable engaging and

that it’s not just gonna be some type of hostile place for them. When I

started doing media work it was partly out of just the frustration with

folks just sticking this lens and exotifying, essentializing, and

picking off the things they felt were sexy for other people to pay

attention to without dealing with the full range of who we are in all

our contradictions and conflicts as indigenous folks. Maybe establishing

this sense doesn’t have to be that explicit but trying to develop that

relationship. You want to dissuade the cultural pimps to some degree and

you want to get the heart of this discourse/discussion cause it sounds

like part of the objective is to amplify indigenous voices in to the

larger anarchist milieu, to assert another direction or ya know just

another option for folks to embrace their fights. I guess that’s like my

initial reaction when I heard. What is indigeneity mean for other folks

who are not indigenous to this area. There might be some people who want

to engage in that discussion. Like I said before, I don’t know how

interested I am in focusing on that as much as just drawing some

boundaries, and saying “hey maybe this is a good place for you all to

focus your fight” and making sure people aren’t just (for lack of better

terms) Zapatista-fying all these external struggles without saying “oh

wait, right, here we are on Tongvan (Indigenous folks of LA area) land,

maybe we should build a relationship with them and maybe it is going to

take a lot longer than we want and maybe they don’t have the articulated

position that’s convenient for us to just transpose their politics and

our politics interchangeably.”

A! - But I guess, that’s talking about fighting a fight with people on

the ground. You’re answering that question already with what you’re

doing here. It’s not exactly what I am asking. How many people do you

know are confident to say something challenging, how many of those

people could say it in print vs face to face, how many of those people

would it take days to develop a relationship before they would say it?

Cause if that is the only option then if you point me to the right

person I am willing to do it.

K – Yeah, so how it could be done is establishing a network. But folks

need to have a demonstrated sense that it’s not just some exploitative

work or something that’s hostile. ‘Cause like I said. We have a lot of

shit lessons. It’s part of the reason a lot of native folks don’t go to

the Bay Area Anarchist Book Fair. We have a lot of shit lessons. It’s

part of the reason why a lot of O’odham folks outside of Phoenix don’t

engage with radical folks. I know some communities where people have

only gotten hostility. So there is not a good relationship. Starting in

the Southwest, like you said there is this strong cultural base, and

part of the history of that unfortunately is because a lot of the

colonizers, I mean we fought off the Spanish for 350 years but a lot of

the colonizers rushed past us for the gold in California. Honestly,

looking at some of the sacred sites areas... Like I said, part of the

reason people are so aggressively fighting for sacred sites and a lot of

young people is because one, they are in areas where there is still an

intact relationship so it meets some of the criteria that you

established before. And those folks understand the risk and they are

engaging on multiple fronts. I think maybe hitting some of those places

or just reaching out to people.... Just focusing on the project first,

your audience, again. Just to hear it a little more clearly.

A! -.. That’s a great question. I assume that the audience is the

audience of the last magazine but perhaps that’s sloppy. So the

provocation is how to make it better, how to reach a different set of

people, and I would say in general that I have not done a particularly

good job of... the term we use is marketing. This is a marketing

problem. How do you find, especially since I am, like most anarchists,

by and large isolated from the rest of the world, by the wall of them

not caring about the way we put things and us being fine with that. So

if I break out of that for a second and think, the problem with green

discourse is that it’s, to use a loaded word, apocalyptic, and the

influence of anthropology, green capitalism, and christianity.

K – I guess when I ask that question, part of it is about when you were

talking about wanting to reach out to different contributors, find a

range of voices. Part of that question is, what relevance is this to my

community. It’s a question of distribution and dissemination and “Indian

Country” too, maybe just looking at how that will work out and how that

could look. There has been a range of different projects, the good ones

being in Canada, the more a-political and more arts-focused ones here in

the US and even them being somewhat limited and being a question. I

don’t feel as well versed in bridging indegeneity (which to me feels

still more like an academic term) and anarchism; you have a lot of

interesting writings that explore that. More just your perspectives and

what you have come to understand. Last time we talked you said you were

an anarchist without adjectives. I don’t feel uneasy about saying I am

an indigenous anarchist but indigenous always comes first; this is what

I have to preface the discussion with. And my affinity with anarchism is

through direct action, acting without mediation in the range of values,

like mutual aid. Which sometimes reinforces that sense of community. To

me it doesn’t have to be beyond the mutual here, but to me it connotates

that to some degree. The range of other basic qualifications for

anarchism. But I’m curious ‘cause you obviously dig deep, very deep.

What’s your expression? I read something a while back, that I am pretty

sure was written by you that was about Locating An Indigenous Anarchism

and I went back and read that some time ago. It was more or less, it

almost felt like it was a longing for something as opposed to

identifying as much. Which I appreciated.

A! - It is also the nature of being an urban, mixed Indian. It’s a very

different experience than yours. But, I think that where I begin, is

probably in this space of having a suspicion that my own internal

conflict is... on the one hand, I think that using the word “anarchist”

has magic powers. That’s on the one hand. On the other hand I think that

the anarchistic instincts are generalizable. The interesting part is in

the specifics, but that many of the 500 had anarchistic sensibilities.

So I’m not excited about the Iroquois (which some anarchists have become

excited about cause they model after them their idealized organizational

configuration or whatever). For me I am much more interested in the

small stories of how one’s elders communicate ideas of how to behave and

I think somewhere in those stories is something really different. I feel

like I am not even a good enough storyteller; the older people in my

life have been fantastic storytellers. It took me years to figure out

what they were driving at. So for me the challenge to anarchists is,

what does anarchism look like if it doesn’t use the word? The other part

of this is that I have more influence than many people in the anarchist

space. If I want to do a green anarchist publication I can and people

are going to read it. So the political motivation here is that I want

this story to be what the future of anarchism looks like. And the story

is going to be a long one. It is going to be drawn out, and it’s not

gonna be question then answer. I’m enough of a strategy person, up to

now I have been able to fit pieces out, thinking a couple years out.

This is more like a ten year fitting things together. And it involves a

lot of strangers and a lot of suspicions but I’m not sure. ..The flip

side in terms of the audience question is what do the people I am

talking to get out of it. And that’s important. It’s not just important

it’s a problem I don’t have an answer to. What I’m talking about would

benefit anarchists, because they need it. So what is it that anarchists

have that could actually benefit strangers? And the answer is the same

that it always is. Ridiculous enthusiasm, a lot of laughter, but then,

danger. So yeah I am going to have to think about that some more.

K – Yeah, that’s where we like Drew and Brian’s statements about wanting

accomplices not allies. They’ve done a great job of deconstructing f

ally-ship. Cause that’s part of what I hope gets sorted up front. It’s

interesting with this current wave of liberal disillusionment, with the

Obama administration, and Idle No more, the Keystone XL pipeline, that

people are paying attention to native struggles and that there is a bit

of a spotlight. And of course the non-profits are flocking, like the

moths that they are, rather blind. Fitting the metaphor very well

unfortunately. Yeah it will be interesting to see how that plays. ‘Cause

there have been other times when indigenous struggles have been sexy,

and then people just move on to the next interesting spectacle. And

that’s what I would hope this base has some aversion to. So one question

I had for you, I guess I’m still trying to extract some of your

politics. So what is your reaction to the statement, we belong to the

earth? Do you have an affinity for that?

A! - I do but it doesn’t have the sort of specificity that it does for

you. A little bit about my story; so while my mother’s family is all

registered Native people, my maternal grandfather was actually a

Canadian, therefore his quantum did not count. So I’m not registered

myself. But my father, a white man, loved Indians. Like he really really

like Indians like he read all of Carlos Casteñada, he knows all the pipe

ceremonies. I mean there is nothing about the western plains indians

that he doesn’t know. That’s why he found my mother. So while I was

raised by my mom, I spent plenty of time with this guy who very much

fetishized this whole aspect of my life. So my mother’s spirituality was

very quiet and not specific. And her mother was a catholic and pretty

much everyone else was a catholic. I have one traditional relative, and

she is still alive. She is actually why I am going to michigan, and she

was raised by Catholics, so all this is very different from your

experience. So it is much more on the level of platitudes than

places.[?] Even though I can go to this Indian village, which is this

shanty town outside of Traverse City, where generations of my people

were. But that was a village of timber houses. Not what was there

before. So my experience is post genocide. This is my language of

course. You might not accept it but to me, my struggle, what does life

look like, what does spirituality look like, my language is a couple

words and my great great grandfather who died when I was six, who was

the last fluent non english speaker that anyone in my family knows. So

to me, the question is what does life look like in these sort of ruins.

Which is kind of why I don’t talk about it so much, ‘cause that is what

life in the ruins is like. But I know that something in here is very

important and I know that something is missing. And I was raised with

all the urban indian problems. Alcoholism, violence, etc. But those are

the problems of urban people of color. Obviously natives have got a

spin. But this isn’t a triumphant story. I don’t have a good to reflect

against the bad. So while I am willing to go out and say spirituality is

possible and I can even say there was a place where I spent a lot of my

youth that was particularly important, I can’t bridge this sort of

existential gap. I point to that gap as being the genocide gap. My

language is harsh but that is the way that I would put it.

K – Yeah, that makes sense. It’s a lot to think about for sure. Thanks

for sharing, appreciate it. Yeah I guess that part of it is what’s worth

fighting for. When you talk about fatalism, that is part of the question

for me.

A! - Of course, right. At certain points in my life, I absolutely

thought there were things worth fighting for and over time I saw how

thin and shadowy they were. So I fought against nazi-skinheads when I

was a kid. I did a whole variety of irresponsible things in the belief

that it had this certain resonance that it didn’t actually have or that

it had for me only at that time . I’m not trying to demean my own

experiences but what you’re talking about is different. Because of the

three things or whatever.

K - I know you have challenged me with that question, of how unique

intact indigenous cultures who meet those three criteria are. So you are

engaging in this project and you put out some analyses sometime or just

stories you share regarding indigeneity. I want to see what the chance

is, ‘cause you put in my face a little bit about what can be done on a

practical level. What are we asking or urging people to do or move

towards, what are we inspiring. I guess that’s maybe in some way, shape,

or form to just put that ball in your court and maybe hear your thoughts

about that. Cause if we talk about how few indigenous nations maintain,

that keep that fire burning...

A! - Have the capacity to.

K – Cause we look at some of the indigenous nations in California who

have gotten just disturbingly rich off of casinos, completely removed

from their language, spiritual practice, and so forth, not necessarily

their land base, and so there are a couple of tribes that we met, or

indigenous nations that we met that are just traveling to other

indigenous nations and through a process that they just sort of

developed, basically sharing and learning from other neighboring tribes

but other tribes from other areas. And it was quite interesting cause

they were just collecting to establish a culture, which is being done in

a way, because they were up front with other nations people were

sharing. And they’re doing in a way that wasn’t just constructing

something false necessarily, because they are doing with a sense of--not

necessarily restoring their connection but--restoring a connection to

the land. I’m sure that from an anthropological perspective there is

some kind of name for it or whatever. You know that’s just what they are

doing to heal.

A! - That’s what they got. But the complication of course is that by and

large this is part of the process they have to go through to get

government recognition. Which in some occasions has been connected to

casinos and other commercial enterprise... In Michigan it is about

fishing rights. Fishing rights is big.

K - Yeah, it’s like, I guess you were asking, Where do you see things in

100 years or ten years or whatever. That’s part of it too I guess, just

putting part of that discussion back in the mix.

A! - The way I approach this problem is somewhat different, and perhaps

it is because I have read too much philosophy. Western philosophers have

done a lot of good thinking about their enemies. I’m sure that there is

someone who is waiting in the shadows against every argument that I

could possibly have against them. But I basically desire the dismantling

of the western project in all of its sundry forms and so specifically in

this case what I am about to talk about, my language, is the causal

chain that people create between action and spirit.

K- Causal alluding to causality?

A! - Right, cause and effect is one part of it, but also this idea that

ethics is why I chose to sit here and talk to you rather than walk over

to you and punch you in the face. I feel like all of this is... wrong is

too simple, but there’s something in the way that all of these are

constructed that I have a visceral revulsion to, and I’m not just going

to pull it out and say that there is something just spiritual, but I

could. But what I’ll say is that, a lot of questions that the western

mind thinks are answered, for me are mysteries, and they are only

satisfying and I can only be satisfied by them as long as they stay

mysteries. And the extent to which one wants to answer them, I usually

consider that person to be someone I am hostile towards. That make

sense?

K – Absolutely.

A! - So, by and large when someone asks me the question, why are you

doing what you are doing, my answer is fuck you. So I am a deep

pessimist who puts out a book a month. Many of these books are about

actions that happen on the street. Like one of our newest books is about

street tactics. But I don’t believe in fighting on the street. But I put

out a book a month. So there isn’t an answer to your question other than

this mystery that is definitely my preferred mode. Yesterday I was

talking with someone about the difference between social and anti-social

activities and I more or less identified as being for anti-social

activities. I was basically asked, “How can you be for infrastructure

and anti-social activities?” And the answer that I gave them, different

context, but whatever, spun my little story in a different way, but

basically I said, I believe in the power of seduction. [both laugh] So.

Yeah. [pause]

K – I wasn’t trying to ask you why you are doing what you are doing at

all. I questioned earlier “what’s worth fighting for.” Is it in relation

to just looking at some of the core values behind your thought.

Sometimes that question about belonging to the earth irritates egoists.

I don’t’ think they like to belong to anything, which is quite

interesting. I like to concern myself with not just outputting or making

lots of things but thinking about what the outcomes are. It’s like the

strategic or tactical thing that’s been ingrained in me. Just like doing

lots of ineffective things for so long, you just gotta try to consider

other options. So sometimes you just gotta think about the project that

you are working on and how I can put energy into that too, apply it to

these areas and move my agenda, my project along, which I identify as

essentially indigenous liberation, ya know, reinforcing resistance and

ultimately liberation.

A! - I just don’t put things like that at all. There is something in

that kind of triumphalism. I recognize how it’s a good communication

skill to be able to talk like that. [laughs] I prefer to not be

understood as far as that goes.

K – Yea, it’s interesting. I guess that’s why I keep revisiting some

stuff cause it’s interesting and I’m trying to elicit a bit more

understanding for myself and I appreciate your response of seduction and

I appreciate reading stuff from the folks in Italy who are torching shit

and talking about desire. I don’t like to fall into the trope traps and

sometimes feel myself, like I said earlier, feeding into them. And I do

need to have more discussions and read more about some of these things

to some degree because I feel...

A! - Let me, I will maybe say what you are trying to get at from a very

different place, maybe from a perspective you won’t appreciate. There is

a reason why people are turning to you to talk as a spokesperson, and

it’s because you know how to talk as a spokesperson.

K – Thanks for the insult, but yes, point taken.... I think that it is

really interesting to see the tendencies in radical circles in relation

to the anti-politic, and privilege theory, and identity politics stuff.

A! - When you refer to privilege theory what do you mean?

K – Well, primarily I am referring to folks addressing identity politics

in relation to saying “we need to deconstruct this discourse around

privilege” and just go beyond that and just focus on collective

liberation. Essentially that, like Andrea Smith just wrote an essay that

was talking about... essentially just arguing for collective liberation

to occur, we need to stop having these discussions that turn into

confessionals about each other’s privileges and people sort of atoning

for their sins of privilege and just move beyond that. Part of what

other folks have discussed too is just ensuring that folks are taking

initiative and not just objectifying indigenous people or just

objectifying even their senses of what the oppression is. ... I think

the bottom line is that this theory based around “if we all come to

terms with and own our own privilege and deconstruct it then we are

going to get to wherever we need to be,” and ultimately that just turns

in on itself and neutralizes people and ultimately the result is that

whoever are the oppressed group are still objectified. We are just

trying to move beyond that. That is my understanding, I think there is

more to it.

A! - Yeah, I guess I am curious as to why you care about this?

K – I guess a lot of other people care about it and it seems like the

terms to engage in allyship and support... The bottom line is that we

can’t do this alone. Collective liberation means something else when I

talk to other Diné people or other indigenous people and certainly when

I talk about resistance and liberation struggles with the white folks we

interface with here, or other folks of color, especially in the migrants

rights struggle, the so-called migrant rights struggle. Especially in

Phoenix, I think we see the problematic dynamics even worse with

organizations like Puente perpetuating this invisiblization of O’odham

folks whose lands they are occupying but also asserting this sort of

indigeneity as well, recolonization as some people call it. This example

should be built out more: Large budget non-profit migrant rights

organizations like Puente are working for comprehensive immigration

reform. Comprehensive immigration reform means increased militarism and

“border security” in the form of drone flights, increased checkpoints,

armed troops, the border wall, and more. Indigenous Peoples lands such

as the Tohono’odham are bisected by the so-called US and so-called

Mexican border. Some O’odham resist immigration reform as it means

destroying Indigenous communities. Migrant rights organization and their

“allies” invisibilize Tohono’odham and continue to rally for immigration

reform perpetuating the destruction of their communities. Part of the

basis of this intersectionality of oppression is tackling these issues

and finding ways to make sure we are engaging people who can provide

material support, cause our folks usually don’t have it at all... With

the infoshop for example, from the get go we knew that the folks who

have the time to volunteer are white folks with “privileged

backgrounds”--they have a lot of resources and a sense of volunteerism

as part of their social understandings. But for indigenous people it is

just like, usually with families with young ages, and school and work

and all these other things, it is a hard thing, to find a way to engage

on a sustained level. That’s part of it; we have been forced to

interface with folks who just show up. Then we assert our anti-colonial

politic and then they don’t know how to navigate, so then we end up

going through a bit of a process of orientation. Sometimes there’s

static, sometimes there’s problematic dynamics, especially if there’s

more white folks that are getting involved. So we have had a lot of

growing pains with trying to process all this shit. And people have done

it other places where it’s like everybody grew out of the identity

oppression olympic games and shit, where the challenge has been to find

a way to have each other’s backs.

A! - But you see, for me, that’s simple. And what you are talking about,

you are willing to use a whole ton of jargon or discourses, and I know

where those things come from... personally I would refer to it as “who I

am willing to negotiate with, and on what terms” and that’s a pretty

different conceptual space than kind of accepting the premise.

K – Yeah, and I think I have to give it more thought. Part of my initial

response is that I’m not sure how much negotiation--as far as it is

affirming and asserting like who we are and ensuring that other folks

understand--and that’s establishing the terms and just proceeding, ya

know? And certainly there has to be communication. We are not just gonna

impose. I don’t think it has ever been the nature of the relationship,

even though we have been imposed upon for so long... but I mean if we

are going to have a discussion about indigeneity and what that means,

there are certain terms that can’t be negotiated. That’s why I talked

about the natural law before, there are things that... I guess it’s

something I have to think about a little bit more. But yeah, I agree. I

do get sucked in o the academic establishment sometimes. I get sucked

into at least the periphery of the non-profit industry even thought I

try to dismantle it at every turn and part of it is just navigating to

survive. I am trying to find a way to be as effective as possible and

sometimes that means asserting myself in a different way. When I first

got involved in the peaks issue I had no idea what the National

Environmental Policy Act process was or what an environmental impact

study was or anything about The Forest Service decision-making

framework, but I had to learn, to be able to navigate and understand. I

always really deeply respect my brothers and sisters in the Native Youth

movement when that was a really fiery movement, because they were

fierce, no fucking question. And they wouldn’t have this conversation

with white “allies”, there’s no point and I’m not gonna have this

conversation with my elders cause there’s no point, and I say that not

to dismiss their intellect, ‘cause their intellect is beyond this., I

would offer them the respect to have a better conversation that’s direct

on that level. I think part of it is a survival mechanism to some

degree. Maybe I’ll grow out of it.

A! - I mean you’re not gonna be able to keep this space unless you are

willing to do it and there is something there that is a realpolitic,

that is something that I don’t accept but I get it... [laughs] Usually

when I hear people say these things I don’t like them very much.

K – No, no it’s interesting. It’s part of a discussion I have had with

other Native folks, ‘cause one, everyone on the outside presumes that

Native people have all the same politics, which is the first fucked up

assumption. Two, we do the same thing; we presume we are all on the same

page too and I had this... I mean I’ve had tons of horrible experiences

that have led people to either decide not to work with me or whatever,

just because I can be really critical sometimes. And people are like

“let’s start a campaign to get out the vote” and I’m just like “you’re

presuming we are all on the same page politically and you just told me

we didn’t have to have a discussion about politics before we talked

about tactics that we wanted to use in a campaign.” There is definitely

some deep things that we need to tackle. Yeah, sometimes I find myself

dislocating myself from what I feel should be authenticity, who I am and

the expression of who I want to be and honestly I think that’s part of

the expression... Out of frustration is the differentiation between

de-colonization and anti-colonial... I don’t think people are gonna get

it otherwise. Unless there is a strong enough differentiation where

people understand how to engage and how to not. I’ve told people through

music, through work over the years, if they ask, things they can do to

engage or not. I am just tired of doing that, I AM tired of sitting in

those circles and trying to hold hands. And basically just getting

frustrated with people who need that time to figure things out.

Sometimes it’s easy to subscribe to that, what is it? It’s not a

treadmill, it’s a hamster wheel or... (Sorry hamsters) of discourse and

the jargon that goes along with it.

A! - Yeah. Ok let’s talk about some anarchist stuff. Weasel words,

consensus, accountability.

K – Yeah ‘cause I do want to ask you more things.. Early on I had some

issues with collective process; the quick response is just noting how

people fetishize things easily. It’s just like the term “community.”

What does that mean?

A! - Right. It’s a weasel word.

K - I mean we could have a long discussion about it. Yeah, people focus

more on the process than the outcome sometimes and that’s the issue.

Just like you can sit for fucking hours in a meeting or you can try to

focus on getting shit done and doing the work, and sometimes that is the

process. There’s that zine Fetishizing Process, which I think does a

great job of sharing some anecdotes about how badly and how easily

consensus process can be manipulated. We’ve had some great

discussions... It’s the same thing with the word “accountability.” It’s

still somewhat prevalent to fetishize accountability processes in

communities and sometimes it is just as easily manipulated as consensus.

To the point where we have seen people attacked through accountability

processes. So here we have adopted a pairing of accountability and

responsibility. There has always gotta be an element of that through

whatever process. I think it’s great just anytime to throw out words

sometimes, but there is also a danger in just deconstructing everything.

Where do we stop? For me I have this point of reference, or points of

reference which are always culturally based, which is sort of grounding

for lack of a better term. Right now, you know like keh being our

familial clan-based relationships, which to me I see, I use that

interpretation of collective interchangeably, to varying degrees. One of

the lessons I learned early on with the big mountain resistance was that

everybody was just frustrated after the late 80s and early 90s. The

fragmentation of some of the families in the resistance was just like,

“Whoa, if we just had unity we would be effective and successful and

have victory.” And I had some of my elders, some of my relatives, say,

“Well if we were unified it might be easier for them to break us and

sometimes we just need to be in our own camps, doing our things.”

A! - Forcing them to negotiate separate deals.

K- Yeah, and so I always took that with me and used it as a frame of

reference when I thought about any joint or collaborative or collective

effort. Just thinking about what are the terms of unity and what are the

terms for working together, ‘cause sometimes people focus too much on

the process and we forget about the outcomes that can be achieved in

different ways. I really like having discussions like that... We just

like the sense of experimentation and we like to take risks here

sometimes, see what we can do based upon shitty experiences we have had

everywhere else. Just having discussions with other people, looking at

some of the methods that they have used and just being like, “yeah, fuck

that, let’s try something else because it’s not working.” For years,

every time I would get involved in any type of collective, one of the

first things we talked about was modifying consensus if it’s necessary.

There’s something to be said about over-focusing on the process and

forgetting about what the actual desired outcomes are. So I agree with

you on that. Obviously we’ve come to some conclusions from different

perspectives. I would like to hear more from you about that though. I’m

sure you have different experiences.

A! - Well I think I stopped... I mean, I was pretty into the process

around consensus for a great number of years. I feel like every group I

came into that had people less-experienced in these topics, I really

walked people down the country road. Oh and partially that’s because I

was in the Che Cafe (in San Diego), for a couple years and part of the

process of becoming a core member was being educated... The Che Cafe is

actually at the UC San Diego, and there were four other worker

cooperatives at UC San Diego. One of them was a bookstore, they were the

smart ones, and they actually, you had to go through a class where they

taught you how to think about consensus and there’s a book called the

“Red Doc”, it was a very thick binder and you had to go through the

whole thing. I learned afterwards that those people were Maoists, but

they were definitely teaching the Anarchists how to do consensus. So

that was actually why, I mean I got the hard lesson, [Klee laughs] I got

the full nine yards; they had very clear flow charts and the whole

thing. They had created it out of a process of decades of big fighting.

They did one thing that we actually replicated through my entire time in

collectives, which was crit, self-crit. Do you know about this, from the

70s? It actually comes from China. I mean crit, self-crit is basically,

we are in a collective together and you do something that is politically

inappropriate, crit, self-crit is the process of you being thrashed over

it, in public, within the group, within the central committee. To the

point to you having to confess your mistake. This was seen as a way to

even out power relationships. So in the context of the Che Cafe, every

three months the fifteen of us would sit together and block out the

whole day--with no one coming in or going out--to criticize each other.

It was, I mean especially for me, this really was my, like, becoming an

adult sort of thing. Prior to that happening, I threw temper tantrums. A

part of my personality and my rage issues and all the rest. I threw

temper tantrums. And boy after like two crit, self-crits I was cured.

But of course, as you can imagine, there were maybe one or two other

people who came from like a poor background. Everyone else... these were

the children of rich people. I wasn’t a student, they were all UC San

Diego students. It was a crazy thing for me to do, but that was...

Whatever, that was part of my process; it was part of how I came to

understand this stuff. And five years later I never worked with another

group that did that because, actually that’s not fair. I have become

increasingly critical of this over time. And especially what I feel is

the sloppy use of language. Every anarchist group is not a collective.

Anytime an anarchist decides to do something with another anarchist is

not an example of consensus. But that’s, it’s kind of like a pet peeve,

like when people say “very unique”, another pet peeve, but um... So I

guess what it comes to is this point where there has become an obsession

with process because anarchists don’t have particularly good answers to

the questions “what does that mean?” Americans, by and large, are

Protestants and the Protestants, they care about work a lot. It is part

of their religion that they’re gonna work. As a matter of fact I grew up

in Western Michigan; the neighborhoods in western Michigan were Black

people, Poles (as the poorest of the white people they got their own

ghetto), Indians, the Dutch. And the Dutch brought their type of

Lutheranism to western Michigan, and they believe in pre-destination, so

they work hard because they aren’t sure which way it is going to go

[heaven or hell] but it’s already been decided. Anyways, big long story.

The point is that...

K – I’m always interested in the long parts of the short stories.

A! - Yeah, of course. That’s where the flavor is! So the point is

Americans by and large think very functionally. Anytime you share your

crazy idea, the first question is always “How you gonna do it?” So the

response that has really come through the peace movement of the 70s ,

but really of the 80s and the--not clamshell alliance but whatever it

was called [the abalone alliance]--that was in the bay area. They are

the people who brought consensus into the anarchist discourse. It wasn’t

part of it at all before then. So that happened in the 80s and we have

been burdened with it ever since. Basically I would like to have you

join me in the resistance to it , but really it is joining the

resistance to weasel words, ‘cause what has happened is that we just use

these words to describe everything even if they aren’t necessarily

particularly accurate.

K – Yeah absolutely.

A! - ‘Cause a group of people sitting around a table and more or less

agreeing on doing something together, that still feels like a pretty

good way to do things.

K – Yeah. Certainly the will of the majority or impositions are very

challenging, but I think that is part of... at least the approach needs

to be mindful of... I mean, indigenous organizing with the NGO

non-profit world on an international level is focused on free prior

informed consent, which I think makes sense to people. And it’s

applicable I think. Right now there’s a bit of a monopoly on that term,

in the international indigenous organizing spheres, but I think there’s

different ways we can apply it beyond so-called human-rights struggles.

There is something to be said about free, prior, and informed consent.

A! - The free part is the deception.

K – Yeah, right. Especially when defined by international institutions.

A! - ...and the violence all over the place there. Just because violence

doesn’t look like violence any more.

K – That’s the thing. More recently I have been really fascinated with

talking about legitimacy too, and just thinking about what that means in

relation to... and I think it came out of one of the Rolling Thunders,

there was a really good essay about legitimacy and I just took the word

out of context. I don’t even remember what they were talking about but

it was interesting. I think that sometimes if you have these terms and

then you apply them you are legitimate, within these circles. And if you

don’t have them, “What are you doing here?”

A! - Actually I was going to mention this earlier, I was always struck

by the land bridge discussion.

K – Yeah, the Bering Strait.

A! - Specifically the idea of how, like I have challenged people a

couple different times on the idea that... perhaps I accept that there

were people who came out of the heart of Africa, the Euphrates and

Tigris, the Euphrates Basin? I’m willing to accept that “POP!” People

came. But you’re not willing to accept any other point of origin? In

other words most people who are scientifically-minded and believe in

evolution are very clear that everyone walked from there. It blows my

mind.

K – Yeah. We did a tour with our traditional dance group and took our

music up into those areas ‘cause there is an Athabaskan dialect, as it’s

called, has always fascinated anthropologists and we were talking to

them, and... You would have a much better conversation with my dad to

some degree ‘cause he doesn’t... Like, he gets straight to the point. So

it’s what we asked them up there, my dad was talking to them too and we

were just asking them what they thought about this and my dad was

saying, “Hey we’re relatives, in some way, shape, or form we know that

in our history this is what we say. That there was a time of conflict

here and some of our folks migrated up north and some folks came down

and we have words or names for them,” and one of the things that folks

up there, Dine said was that, if there’s a bridge, traffic goes both

ways. And we were just laughing about it, because of their

interpretation. I think the important thing for me, the main point I

mentioned earlier, we have our origin story, our traditional history

which is, that’s how we know ourselves in this world. It’s a challenging

discussion when you have people dislocating that and taking that from us

and calling it myths.