Taino Extinction? Or Academic Imperialism?
In this article I will be addressing some concerns or statements that were given by a Professor named Dr. Gabriel Haslip Viera in regards to the Taino Restoration Movement. He took the time to write several papers on his concerns about indigeneity in the Caribbean, therefore I will take the time to dissect each statement I felt that was important to address. The type of concerns he has are a great example of colonialism and academic imperialism in present day Puerto Rico, and they are worth addressing, for this exact reason. I will be comparing Taino culture, genetics, history, identity, paper genocide etc to other tribes who were or are currently in the same position as Taino today. Dr. Haslip tells you his thoughts of what he thinks indigeneity is, and I will be giving you the reality of what it actually entails. In this article I will be tackling the lack of awareness he has about the reality of the indigenous identity that exists throughout the Americas. If you are new reader of mine it’s important to address who I am and why I am equipped to speak on this subject. I am Quechua who’s family (all on my mothers side) come from a full blooded village in Peru called Yungay in Ancash Peru. My father Is Boricua who also has mixed tribal ancestry. I am born and raised in NYC however was raised 100% Quechua from speaking Runasimi to the foods I eat, and the dances I dance. Here in NYC I’m sure Dr Haslip is aware about the many indigenous communities that exist here In NYC. My father was never in my life, but as I got older I began to become curious in learning my family history and lineage on his side of the family. This then sparked my journey of interests such as indigeneity, history, identity, and ethnicity in the Americas, as well as having 12 years studying genealogy.
Some flaws to Dr Haslips arguments on indigeneity in Puerto Rico and in general are :
Not understanding nuances and complexities in culture and identity among indigenous people.
Not knowledgeable on Paper Genocide and how it affected ALL indigenous people not just “Taino”. Not to mention, that this happened first to Taino.
Lack of understanding how Tribes function , identify, nor the requirements of Federal Recognition.
Does not understand the history of Blood Quantum nor how it affects indigenous people today.
He lacks knowledge in linguistics ex: understanding how a word like Jibaro has its original origin and what it later evolved to mean.
Who is he and why is he Important?
Dr. Gabriel Haslip Viera is a Latin American studies professor at City College who happens to be Puerto Rican. He was also the Director of the Center for Puerto Rican Studies at Hunter College from 1997- 2000, who also chaired the former Department of Latin American and Hispanic Caribbean Studies at City College from 1985-1991, and again from 1993 -1995. His interests are Latin American and Latino Studies, Ethnicity, Race, Ancient Civilizations, Peoples of New York City, Critiques of Pseudo-Scholarship in the Social Sciences.
Affordable Web Design, A Click Away.
Web Design
from $300.00
TAÍNO: NATIVE HERITAGE AND IDENTITY IN THE CARIBBEAN at the Smithsonian National Museum of the American Indian
This is one of the reviews that Dr. Haslip gave in regards to the Taino Symposium which happened prior to the opening of the Exhibit. I want to explore and properly quote certain points that he makes,while dissecting the ones that catch my attention most.
“Taíno “survivalists,” “revivalists,” or “reclamationists” and their supporters are all too often, exaggerations, distortions, or totally bogus. A number of these survivalists have also been able to encamp themselves as staff persons at the Smithsonian in recent years. These
include most notably, the Cuban “Taíno,” José Barreiro (retired as a staff-person from the library at Syracuse University), and the Dominican “Taíno,” Jorge Estévez, an “activist” and “teacher”[tekina] who doesn’t seem to have any academic credentials for the job but is familiar with the issues.”
Note:
So far dissecting this first part notice how he uses words describing Taino as “Exaggerations” “distortions” or “Bogus” .
Also notice how referring to Jorge Estevez he tries to discredit him by saying he lacks academic credentials. Jorge Estevez is acknowledged and credited as one of the most knowledgeable people on the subject of Taino in the Caribbean as well as revitalization.
I would argue that for some reason he feels very strongly about Taino in the modern day. For someone who is known to specialize in Puerto Rican studies as an academic, I am willing to guess he is for the integration of what is now Puerto Rico. This tends to be the argument against Taino a lot. Puerto Ricans like to point out that because of integration you can not identify as one or the other ethnicities a Taino is mixed with, however this happens all the time with other tribes who are bi-racial or tri-racial like Taino. Also just because someone is not an academic, does not mean they can not be knowledgeable enough to speak on a topic such as identity. There are “ACADEMICS” who falsely push narratives that Native people were helped building the pyramids by aliens (Herbert George Wells), are the lost tribe of israel ( Mordecai Manuel Noah), and even originally Black. These are theories by people who were considered academics by definition. It’s important to realize just because you are an Academic, does not mean you actually understand indigenous identity. Non Native people read it, and we live it. These are two different types of experiences especially when you are reading research typically from Non Native academic who lacks cultural nuances, which is a prime example of Academic Imperialism.
At the end of the Day someone like Jorge Estevez has his lived experiences, he is in fact from Dominican Republic, his family are from Jaibon, and has also worked with many different academics such as anthropologists, geneticists, historians, and more. He as well has put great efforts working with our cousin tribes, to revitalize our culture and language. Mind you this is not an uncommon act from tribes that were greatly affected by genocide today. It seems that Puerto Ricans or people like Dr. Haslip, view revitalization as “pretending to be indian” when in fact many tribes have revitalized in the same manner and it is viewed simply as revitalization among indigenous people. Due to being the first people colonized , it is obvious that Puerto Ricans have lost this nuance and understanding. It’s important to point out many people especially in the Taino community had parents or great grandparents etc who identified as “Indian”.
As someone Quechua, I know that I am qualified to speak on indigeneity and have more of an understanding of it throughout the entire Americas, more than someone like Dr Gabriel Haslip Viera. Academic or not, he lacks a lot of cultural nuances and history when it comes to indigenous people all around. He specializes in the integration of Latin America, NOT Indigeneity in “Latin America”. Although I do not know him personally, I have read several of his reviews or research that indicate he does not understand actual indigeneity in the americas. What makes me qualified? I am Quechua my direct lineage is all from Yungay on my mothers side. My wife is Mi’kmaq as well as my daughter. I myself have spent a lot of time with other people from different tribes such as Lakota, Navajo, Mi’kmaq, Choctaw, Luiseño, Cherokee, Mexica, Kiche, My family, my people, and more. I also grew up in City Line Brooklyn which is a predominantly Black and Puerto Rican area in NYC. Growing up, although I was not raised knowing about my father nor interacted with him in my life, I in fact grew up around Boricuas. In Brooklyn you could find a Botanica almost anywhere, and in those Botanicas had Santeros, Espiritistas, or Paleros. All my life before I even knew what “Indio” or “Taino” was in Puerto Rico, I knew people my grandmothers age, if not even older, who identified as “India” or “Indio”. I don’t want to get into semantics but Taino was a fairly new word, but not really. It was recorded by a man named DR. Chanca, to identify “Taino”. That’s why the older generation only says “Indian”, Taino is more commonly used now.
“There are some groups in the Caribbean that can justifiably claim to be “still here,” including the Arima of Trinidad, and the Kalinago of Dominica despite their mixed ethnic background. These groups have an established historical tradition and have been officially recognized as indigenous and tribal on these islands. To some degree, the same can also be said of certain specific families in Eastern Cuba that also have a historical tradition in documents going back to the 19th century if not earlier, and have been granted some unofficial recognition by the Cuban government. However, this ironically also means that Cubans in general cannot freely claim this exclusive identify and pedigree if they are not somehow connected to these families (see Barreiro 2006)”
Note:
Notice how Dr. Haslip says “despite their mixed ethnic background”. It indicates that he thinks only full blooded Natives are typically Native, which is not true. This is an indicator that He does not understand the complexity of indigeneity or how we identify as indigenous people.
He lacks the understanding of indigenous identity and he himself is not indigenous. How do I know this? He does not claim to be from any Nation, and if he was he would understand the nuance that being mixed does not disqualify you from being indigenous.
The Integration of people who later became countries who are also were formed by “the colonizers” DO NOT dictate who is and isn’t indigenous. Whether America, Peru, Colombia, Mexico, or Puerto Rico acknowledges its indigenous people does not change the fact indigenous people are still in fact there.
Also while he references historical tradition in documents in Cuba, again he lacks the understanding that documents were easily manipulated. They were manipulated either being recorded through a non indigenous lens or just by not being recorded regardless. Even when the Spanish were recording Taino they mixed up creation stories and mis recorded the language. Even the first census that was recorded by the Spanish, they would go on tot of a mountain to see how many Indians lived in a Bohio (House). It also shows the numbers were not accurate. To learn more about the history of the Census in Puerto Rico and the Americas click here.
“Taino” were in fact forced to identify as anything but Indian after a certain period of time. This does not mean Taino were “extinct”. However because Dr. Haslip goes by documents he would then believe this. I would then ask if Dr Haslip Vera is aware that in the U.S for example, there was a point in time that Native people were not counted in the census. Native people weren’t counted as a group until 1860. For the next few census counts, census takers were told not to count “Indians not taxed,” a phrase mentioned in the Constitution and interpreted as those living on reservations or outside of recognized settlements. Even from 1790 not all tribes in the U.S were counted. Then in the 1890 Census was the first one to count Native Americans throughout the country. The 1930 census featured an additional form for what it called the “Indian population”, which was more specific. That’s about 140 years of being not counted in the census. So were those people “extinct” those 140 years? Did they suddenly just pop out in thin air? or is this considered manipulation through documents? Historical documentation can also NOT be accurate for this reason, this thinking is flawed.
It’s also very contradictory for Haslip to say “ These groups have an established historical tradition and have been officially recognized as indigenous and tribal on these island” while later on (if you read his entire rebuttal) he acknowledges that Puerto Rico dropped a public proclamation signed and sealed by the mayor. If you read his entire rebuttal he just denounces anything that proves Taino were never extinct. He likes to play semantics with words and manipulate any type of evidence that does not benefit his argument. He often refers to research in the early 2000’s when we have current day research in linguistics, culture, and DNA to disprove him. As an academic his rebuttals are more emotion driven rather than fact based.
Even in the proclamation Puerto Rico is acknowledging its indigenous people who Haslip keeps denouncing. The proclamation says and I quote:
“ These organizations have worked diligently to promote dialogue between the indigenous people Boricua, the State Government and the Municipal Government of Puerto Rico, to raise a new awareness about the importance of our Ceremonial Center and ensure the cl respect for our sacred and resting places. ceremonial objects, bones and ancestral remains indigenous people of the island I, ALAN J. GONZÁLEZ CANCEL, Mayor of the "City del Vivi", Utuado. Puerto Rico under the powers conferred on me by law, I call upon all citizens to respect our sacred heritage National, as well as the rights of the Indigenous People Boricua and thus proclaim July 25 as the "Day of the Caguana Taino indigenous cry in the town of Utuado "Autumn." In witness whereof, I sign the present Proclamation and I stamp thereon the great official seal of the Municipality, "City of Vivi today, August 5, 2005 “
The proclamation Acknowledges INDIGENOUS BORICUA.
(Special thanks to my sister Stephanie Bailey (Inaru Boríashi) from Arayeke Yukayek for assisting me in finding this document.)
“1) All Puerto Ricans are considered indigenous on the island according to U.S. law because of
Puerto Rico’s territorial status. However, an island politician, Victor Vassallo Anadón, has proposed legislation that would make all Puerto Ricans “Taíno” by definition.
”2) These studies have shown [for example] that 61% of Puerto Ricans have
“indigenous” mtDNA which might be part Taíno.
”
Note:
What he’s not explaining is what the research is saying is 61% of Puerto Ricans can have between 1%-13% of Taino Dna.
His statements are contradictory. How can ALL Puerto Ricans be indigenous on the island when 61% of Puerto Ricans have some type of Taino DNA? That means out of the 39% are Not Taino nor have ANY Taino DNA. Also family history and the history of that country can be entirely different. Just because someone’s grandparents are from Puerto Rico , it does not make them INDIGENOUS to Puerto Rico. You are indigenous if your lineage goes back many many generations to a region. For example my entire lineage on my mothers side is from the Andes. That’s what makes me indigenous to Peru, not because I have one grandparent or two grandparents there.
Also what ties someone to being Taino is being from the campo where Taino culture is alive. I explain this several times within my article.
By Haslip’s definition every Caucasian in America who has ancestry here would have valid claims to being Cherokee. Despite they sold land to White people thus made them apart of the Dawes rolls to claim being ethnically Cherokee. In reality what makes someone Cherokee is having family connected to a reservation (village). It’s community, not having 1% drop of Cherokee blood. He has a flawed way of thinking when it comes to indigeneity.
Also if this was the case Puerto Ricans would care more about the Taino culture and Identity willingly. They would need zero persuading ,for it would personally affect them due to having true connection to their people. Which, is obvious Haslip and Puerto Ricans who denounce Taino do not have this real connection.
““Extinction” is denounced by the Taíno Survivalists because of their claim that despite admixture with Africans, European and others after 1492, “Taíno blood”still lives inside the bodies of Caribbean Latinos and this justifies their claim to an exclusive identity and even pedigree despite admixture. However, the issue of “extinction” is not all that simple in actuality because the opposite can also be claimed. “Extinction” as an idea and a reality can be justified because it’s clear that the pre-1492 indigenous ceased to exist as a distinct Native American population unmixed with Spaniards, Africans and Asians from other continents by the late 1500s. The Native American population was mixed but it was only a Native American mix prior to 1492. The result after 1492 was the emergence of an admixed peasant population which reduced the indigenous into a biological and cultural influence and nothing more. ”
Note:
Again he fixates on admixture as a way to insinuate that Modern Taino need to be full in order to be Indigenous. This is again his take on what he assumes indigeneity is as someone not indigenous. He is going off of Eurocentric Ideology on what being Native should look like or should be. There is a reality to what indigeneity was and is today vs what outsiders think it should look like.
Its worth noting nobody I ever met in the Taino community makes claims of having no admixture, but this is again why nuance is very important. He is also talking about a movement and community he himself has never experienced. There are many tribes with admixture who may look phenotypically white or black and still identify as being Native.
Haslip also acknowledges that Pre-Colonial Taino were mixed, but were mixed tribe, thus making them still native because they would be “full blood”. Again he tries to use Blood Quantum a tool that was forced on Native people as a way to confirm if someone is actually Native or not. Blood Quantum is not exclusive to the U.S where it was imposed on All native people this is why terms like Mestizo were created. It was used as a tool of oppression to say someone was mixed and not Spanish nor Native. However this then becomes a MIXED Identity which im sure someone like Dr. Haslip would be familiar with its complexities. If indigeneity is already too complex for Dr. Haslip to grasp, think about being mixed and indigenous.
Taino or the History of Puerto Rico is not actually unique like a lot of Puerto Ricans like to claim it is. Every country in the Americas has an integration of the races Native, African, and European etc.
“There are also other problems that focus on the limitations of genetic testing as noted in a number of recent articles in the news media, but a more reliable type of testing which looks at the entire genome of Caribbean Latinos is also minimized, dismissed, or ignored as irrelevant to any discussion by most Taíno survivalists because for these particular individuals, culture is all of a sudden seen as most important as opposed to genetics in the construction of their identity if not their pedigree”
I’m glad he realizes genetic testing are flawed, and that Taino look at culture more than blood quantum. The fact that Haslip points our admixture several times just indicates he doesn’t understand the reality of today’s indigenous Identity . I can’t help but think about something I recently came across. Although I’m not a huge fan of Joe Rogan, I once saw him interview a Native woman named Shannon O’laughlin. Shannon is of Polish and Choctaw decent, and she's the executive director of the Association on American Indian Affairs. Listen to how she responds:
If you notice how Shannon responds to Joe Rogan when asked about her Blood Quantum , she then takes it as a moment to educate.
Note:
Notice how Shannon says she’s Polish and Choctaw? It’s very different having one parent who is one race and the other being Native. It means she was also raised around polish people or polish culture which is why she says “Half Polish”. This is typically when we as indigenous people acknowledge being mixed. We don’t typically say we are mixed when we were raised indigenous and we have an ancestor or 4th great grandparent who was a different race. This is a nuance Dr. Gabriel Haslip Viera will never know. He doesn’t know enough indigenous people to understand this nuance. It’s also worth mentioning that in Spanish speaking countries being Indigenous is a little different. A lot of the older generation go through self hate because they were taught to be ashamed to be indigenous, thus leads to them in wishing to be mixed. Therefor in many cases someone who looks indigenous will say their ancestors are ALL Spanish. You can say the same mentality exists in Puerto Rico as well, because they do in fact discriminate against Jibaro , who Haslip constantly refers to as the peasants in Puerto Rico, but in fact are the indigenous people on the island. This mentality exists in every Spanish speaking country, and again is a nuance not always understood. Also, every Spanish speaking countries “Peasants” in Central and South America are usually Indigenous.
Joe Rogan Mentions a woman named Cynthia Ann Parker. She was ethnically white, but adopted Comanche. She had 0% Comanche blood, but was looked at as such.
As native people we adopted people outside our tribe and this is also how Native people mixed. This is actually why the “My great great grandmother was a Cherokee princess” is a phenomenon because Cherokees also sold land to White people who later would be in the Dawes roll as a Cherokee, when ethnically THEY WERE NOT CHEROKEE.
Haslip and Rogan have the SAME type of thinking when it comes to what being Native is, however Rogan then takes a step back to understand its complexities.
Understanding Dr. Haslips usual rebuttals, I am willing to bet he doesn’t know Choctaw are bi-racial or tri-racial just like Taino. Also not all bands of Choctaw are recognized. I will also assume he doesn’t know many tribes like the Choctaw have history or bands that requiring ANY degree of choctaw blood and some up to 50% for enrollment. This means you can be as little as 1-50%. You can find examples of these other tribes here, although this is just an example in 1998.
Some tribes even require as little as either ANY blood or 1/16th blood to enroll. Percentage wise that is 1%-6.25% of blood, which negates Haslip’s arguments of Blood Quantum against Taino. The Average Puerto Rican has more than what some tribes “require” for enrollment. The issue at hand is he again is not knowledgeable enough on indigeneity to speak on it, for this exact reason.
Also most of the people ACTIVELY in the Taino Community in the East Coast do not claim being indigenous solely because of blood quantum (or not mixing), but due to having family and connections to a campo in PR where we know Taino culture and language still exists. And when I say the language exists (I know that if he reads this he will try to flip my words around) what I’m saying is where Arawakan words are most commonly used. That is not to say it is completely in tact, but again there are many tribes that are in the same position as Taino even linguistically. One example is “Hawaiians” (Kanaka Maoli) which you can view this here. So when indigenous people like “Hawaiians” revitalize their language usually Puerto Ricans don’t keep the same tone. There is a double standard because most Puerto Ricans do not understand Indigeneity due to Taino integrating in society earlier than most tribes.
There are tribes that specifically base indigeneity solely on ancestry BECAUSE blood quantum is irrelevant and they have admixture like Taino.
Things To Know About Hawaiian Revitalization And How It’s Relateable To Taino
By 1959, when Hawaii became the 50th U.S. state, the Hawaiian language had nearly died out.
Hawaii’s population is ethnically mixed. In the 19th century, sugar plantations drew workers from Japan, China, the Philippines, Korea and Portugal, and other immigrants have arrived since then, including from other Pacific islands. All this information can be found here.
Native speakers of Hawaiian number in the thousands out of a population of 1.4 million in the state, but renewed teaching means that many more now can speak it at a basic level. Notice it says a basic level, this could be said about the remanence of the Taino language left on the island, but for some reason Puerto Ricans will view it as extinct while for Hawaiians its revitalizing.
Stories are written in English, then translated with help from experts at the University of Hawaii. Reporters hope to see the project expand.
“That’s kind of the dream,” said deputy editor Nathan Eagle. “Let’s get content coming to us in Hawaiian and then go translate it back” (This is no different than what Taino are doing today, but again some people like Dr. Haslip have issues with this.)
“Nevertheless, “genome-wide,” “autosomal” or “admixture mapping tests” consistently demonstrate that Caribbean Latinos are genetically mixed. For example, Puerto Ricans on average have 64-73% European, 14-21% African, and only 13-15% [or lower] indigenous DNA.”
Note:
Dr. Haslip is absolutely correct when he says that Caribbean people are genetically mixed. However there are Boricuas where the highest percentage could be up to 35% Taino, which is more than 1/4th.
It’s important to know if Taino DNA comes from the Mother MTDNA. It’s worth mentioning as children of our parents we gain only 50% of their DNA. Hypothetically speaking for you to be 35% Taino your mother would have to be 70%. Let’s humor the average 13-15% DNA. This means your mother would hav to be 26%-30%. However, the point is there are in fact people who are 30-35%. Anything beyond that has never been heard of currently. That itself debunks extinction by blood.
People tend to get lost within the verbiage when it comes to Taino DNA. 61% of people have SOME type of Taino DNA that could be as low as 1%.
Breaking Myths About Blood Quantum
Native People Never Mix: This is actually not true. Some tribes intermarried with other tribes, slaves, and slave owners (for obvious reasons). A lot of eastern band tribes in the United States are actually Bi racial or Tri racial like Taino in the Caribbean.
If You’re Mixed You’re Not Native: This is also a myth that NON NATIVE (Including Non Native academics) people impose due to stereotypes. Non native people look at indigeneity as looking phenotypically like our ancestors which is not the reality for some tribes. As stated earlier there are many tribes that are federally recognized and the majority do not phenotypically look like their ancestors. Again, being native is belonging to a community, blood, and culture regardless of blood quantum.
One thing worth noting is race really is a social construct. Natives, Europeans, and Africans all mixed today. There was mixing before colonization, during, and after colonization. Either we were mixing with other tribes we were trading with, or outsiders. Another thing while taking commercial DNA tests, you must take them for a grain of salt. It’s important to know how these DNA companies detect your ancestry, and understanding how to decipher your DNA results. Understand that your result is not based on fact, but a suggestion on what your DNA may be aligned with. Each DNA company has different markers (or data base) for specific populations, and if a segment of that DNA matches, it marks itself that you may belong to that population (ethnicity). This is why you can take two different DNA tests and come up with different results. This doesn’t mean that your DNA changed, it means there is a different database picking up your DNA that the other one is lacking. Therefor, the percentages and populations are off. The only real way to determine your Native ancestry is by doing a paper trail, but once you hit a specific time frame it gets tricky because ALL Native people went through something we call paper genocide.
What Is Paper Genocide: It was a tactic the colonizers used on Native people to force us to identify as anything but Native, to remove our existence on government records.
Watch My Color Reel. To Book Me For Color Grading Click Here.
“Native Americans do not use genetic ancestry tests to define citizenship…. We have a much stronger sense of what it is to be Native American that is governed by our family relationships, by lived social relations ... that matters to us. ”
“There can be considerable disagreement among these groups on a number of issues [e.g.: the origins of the pre-Columbian language of the indigenous and which one should be studied and adopted]. There also is competition and even conflicts between certain
groups or tribes and especially between the “confederations.””
Note:
Dr. Haslip is in fact correct about in fighting in the community however MANY tribes in the same position as Taino in terms of blood quantum, loss of culture, or language, go through this as well. A good example: The Lumbee. It is said The Lumbee had to agree and adopt Tuscarora culture, to revitalize their culture. It is not uncommon for tribes to revitalize language or culture by looking at their cousin tribes. However, for some reason when Taino create the efforts to revitalize, Puerto Ricans including Dr. Haslip have a double standard. It’s either they have a double standard or are ignorant to the reality of the indigenous identity.
Looking at the lumbees historical timeline you will see it took them about 121 years to be acknowledged. To view their historical timeline you can view it here.
1835: North Carolina Constitution denies rights to people of color. Lumbee are classified as “mulattos” (having some African American heritage) and lose their rights. (This happened to multiple tribes including Taino but Dr. Haslip thinks otherwise. He believes Taino being classifies anything other than Indian means they were extinct and this historical fact about the lumbee is one example to show this happened in the U.S as well.)
1865–1872: “Lowry Wars” begin. Henry Berry Lowry eludes capture.
1885: The Lumbee petition for and receive state recognition and funding for schools.
1952: Tribe votes to call themselves Lumbee.
1956: U.S. government recognizes Lumbee as a tribe, but denies them federal benefits.
The biggest issue in the Taino community is you have 3 different traits of thought within the Taino community. You have those who prefer to 1) revitalize 2) those who create new culture that have absolutely nothing to do with our ancestors, and 3) those who want to be pan indigenous for example: wanting to integrate with North American tribes. And it’s worth noting there are tribes who revitalize who take the pan indigenous route. However while talking to a lot of the pioneers of the East Coast Taino Restoration movement will tell you they were in fact welcomed by these other tribes. Were there some tribes who did not accept Taino? Sure, but this isn’t the over all experience Taino had on the East Coast. The reality is there is discrimination in GENERAL in all Native communities. Dr. Haslip most likely doesn’t know this, because he seems to understand indigeneity from an outsiders and imperial academic lens. Common arguments among ALL tribes are 1) Full Blood Vs Mixed Blood 2) Reservation “Indians” V.S Urban “Indians” (Natives who leave the reservation or village who later integrate or were born in the city). 3) English/French speaking Natives vs Spanish speaking Natives. This same infighting happens among black people ex: African Americans vs Africans, African Americans vs Afro Latinos, or Mixed African Americans vs African Americans etc.
Mind you although he is correct about infighting about the language there are even disputes on the origin of Taino. For example: some ACADEMICS (who have credentials) think we are mayan and that is simply not true. This is not an opinion but a fact, and we have recent genetic studies that show we did not mix with the mayans. You can view the genetic research here. There are also theories of Taino originally being the lost tribe of israel or black. Mind you these people are academics much like Haslip himself. So it’s important to point out that you could still be an Academic and still be incorrect.
Understanding Indigeneity In The Americas And Puerto Rico
Here’s a chart that I created specifically to show you how similar Indigeneity is across the board of the Americas.
In this slide I show how tribes function and identify while showing how colonization impacted them. It also explains why Taino refer to themselves as Taino or Boricua and NOT Puerto Rican.
“Elba Anaka Lugo uses the problematic “Jibaros Boricua Taíno” label to define the alleged indigenous in Puerto Rico. This label and other variations conflate and emphasizes the “Taíno”and erases the African, Spanish and other contributions to the biological and cultural background of the “Jibaro” which is usually defined and equated historically with the hybrid rural peasantry in Puerto Rico in various and at times contradictory ways. The “Jibaro” label, its origins and how it’s been applied has been thoroughly investigated by historian, Francisco Scarano among others (see Scarano 1996. Also discussed in Curet 2015).”
Note:
It was recorded actually we identified in several ways like most tribes.
We went by multiple identifiers such as Nitaino, Luku, and Borikwa. When we encountered the spanish we said Nitaino which was misinterpreted as Taino.
When the spanish referred to the word Lucayo in the carribean that was just Luku Cairi which is the lokono way to identify being lokono, however it was hispanicized with an -ayo ending.
Borikwa the identifier itself, was a mixture of Kalinago and Arawak, and there are research to support this. Till this day everyone in Puerto Rico calls themselves Borikwa but with the spelling hispanicized as Boricua. The spanish was known to write for example wa as hua or wao as guao.
Another word that has been studied and proven to be indigenous is in fact Jibaro and you can view this study here. This word was researched by Casike Jorge Estevez and a really close friend of mine and researcher named Rene Perez Liciaga. What Haslip forgets is just because a word changed its meaning over time, does not make it the original definition of the word. Jibaro originally meant to be indigenous where as later on it began to mean peasant and include Africans. This is another example on how he tries to manipulate you to side with his rebuttal.
It seems although that Dr. Haslip continues to refers to research way beyond the current years. Research is constantly evolving, and many people in those times lacked nuances nor did they study our cousin tribes culturally nor linguistically. Because if this was the case they would see similarities such as the Garifuna still say NiTaino but as a different dialect of course saying Nutano and in Kalinago it was Niteigno. This is considered a dialect difference. This research can be found here. Let me break it down as a quechua.
Hi, How are you? = Imano tan ke kanki (Huaylas Dialect in Ancash)
Hi ,How are you? = Iman Kashanki (Kichwa in Ecuador)
Look at the difference, mind you studies show the Quechua civilization and language originated where my family are from (Yungay, Ancash Peru). Back in 2012 they used to think it was from the south where today presently they know it came from where my family are from.
“Despite the Neo-Taíno rhetoric that they are independent minded, pro-indigenous, anti-Eurocentrists, and anti-imperialists, they should be seen as “state hooders” in Puerto Rico and supporters of U.S. imperialism when it comes to their specific goals.”
Note:
Being Pro Indigenous is simply being Indigenous or an indigenous sovereigntist. Which is what indigenous people in fact are, this is the core and start of tribalism which Dr. Haslip does not understand because he is NOT native.
Tribes that Integrated were in fact DETRIBALIZED, and many tribes in the same position as Taino retribalized a good example is the shinnecock in long island who were not recognized or viewed as a sovereign nation up until in 2010. That’s 13 years ago and many tribes have been fighting for recognition. Shinnicock aren’t the first nor will they be the last to fight for recognition in the United States. Another example would be the Pomo in California.
Calling Taino state hooders sounds manipulative and simplifying the argument for Haslip doesn’t understand the benefits for Federal Recognition. It’s important to mention there are Taino against it, and there are Taino for it. This same quarrel is going on with Samoans in the U.S and you can read it here.
It’s interesting how Puerto Ricans are typically okay with identifying as White and some as Black, but when A Taino says they are unapologetically Taino there is again a double standard. I already explained the indigenous nuance that Haslip lacks when knowing about detribalized tribes proceeding to retribalize, or fighting for indigenous sovereignty. When Natives mixed with other races and left their village (or reservation), in the census they were labeled as what they looked like phenotypically. There are white and black passing natives that were never seen as such UNTIL they left their reservation or village. It’s almost as if Puerto Ricans want to pretend there isn’t racism or discrimination towards Native people within spanish speaking countries in general. Everyone who speaks Spanish knows to be called an Indian, Indio, or Cholo was used as a derogatory word or insult, even in the Caribbean. Why? Because being Native was looked at as being poor or uneducated. Is there Anti blackness in the Caribbean? Absolutely. but there is also Anti-Nativeness. I would ask Puerto Ricans and Haslip to walk up to someone African and to prove their blackness. I am curious to see how that goes, and people do this with “Afro-Latinos” too. There is a notion that Afro-Caribbean people are not Black like Black Americans, and the argument is usually because of possibly being mixed. How is this possible when African Americans themselves are MIXED? This is the ignorance that is held in academia or in Spanish speaking countries involving BIPOC.
Some Quotes On Whether Samoans Should Gain Recognition Or Not
““Neil Pilcher lives on Tutuila, American Samoa’s largest island, on land his family owns. His neighbors are all relatives. The most important thing for Samoans, he said, is to be in accord with their living environment.”
”And it’s this Samoan way of life — the land, ownership and inhabitants — that is central to a debate over citizenship. While American Samoa has been an unincorporated U.S. territory since 1900, people born there have never been granted birthright citizenship, unlike the four other U.S. territories — Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas.”
”A federal judge in Utah ruled last Thursday, however, that those born in American Samoa should be recognized as U.S. citizens. Not everyone, including Pilcher, agrees”
”When you live here in American Samoa your family gives you land and it is up to you to make a home from it or grow things to serve the family/chief,” Pilcher said. “There are very sacred bonds between us and our land and our water. Land and water are extensions of our identity. So if you take away our land and water, you are not just severing us from economic mobility, you are killing part of our identity.”
So after reading these inner Quarrels among Samoans you can see a difference in opinion still happens among indigenous people. Samoans Unsure About Federal Recognition Is Relatable To Taino. Dr. Haslip does make some points however what he doesn’t know is there are landless tribes in the U.S that still get federal recognition. Taino can fight for being a soverign Nation, Still be from their home land (Boriken), and can qualify as a landless tribe because Boricuas have been in the states since the late 1800’s. There are accounts in georgia that were recorded in the 1700 and in those accounts the tribes nearby suggested that the taino have been there prior to that hundreds of years before that. The Bohicket (Taino that migrated to Charleston) was recorded as early as 1600 and you can view this here. One of the research papers you can read on this can be found here. The point im trying to address is our ancestors traveled. If we came from the amazon to Puerto Rico to Florida, you think we couldn’t have went to Charleston? Of course. My wife is Mi’kmaq and they have stories traveling from New Brunswick Canada to Florida. Who is to say they did not encounter Taino as well?
Landless/Non Federally Recognized Tribes in the U.S
Pomo - California
Coast Salish- Washington (Read about the other landless tribes in this state here)
Little Shell Chippewa- Montana (Read about other landless tribes in this state here)
Esselen Tribe- California (Read how they fought extinction here)
Ohlone - California (You can read more about how they fought 30 years for recognition here)
Mashpee Wampanoag- (Declared falsely extinct in 1973. You can read about it here)
Koi Nation- California
5 landless Alaskan Tinglit- Alaska
Fun fact: there are 400 unfederally recognized and landless tribes like Taino in the East Coast. Not to mention many with “Admixture”
“Two of the important archaeologists doing this kind of work have written the following critique:
”The “Taíno survivalists” “replicate a colonial trope…based on models that are exogenous to what is traditionally considered to be our indigenous reality on the island, but they try to adhere internally to the supposed social organization described for the Taíno in
order to legitimize their ‘Taínoness’…
. (T)their recent aim to impose their agenda on the island has been a problem, based as it is on the aforementioned colonial tropes”
The reason why some Taino want Federal Recognition is not to solidify their “Indianness”. I am Quechua and I know I am VERY Indigenous,as someone who’s tribe is not recognized here in the U.S. It does not change my “Indianness” nor Taino’s “Indianness” for not being federally recognized. However, different bands of Taino want access to bigger grants which is usually held for federally recognized tribes. Being un-federally recognized we are forced to apply to MULTIPLE grants just to equate enough to get funding for revitalization for example linguistic work. possess certain inherent powers of self-government and entitlement to certain federal benefits, services, and protections because of the special trust relationship.
“Again, there is the claim that “Taíno” survival movement is not “anti-Black, ”but it can certainly be seen that way because of the consistent and deliberate erasure of the African and “
Black” from Neo-Taíno rhetoric. I have also seen racist anti-black statements made by a number of Neo-Taínos on the internet and can provide examples. At one point, Professor Feliciano Santos made reference to the anti-blackness problem in the Dominican Republic which has become worse in recent years. She inquires as to why these two groups should be mutually exclusive? ”
Note:
Years ago Dr. Haslip has been referring to Taino as “Anti-Black” but the same could be said to Puerto Ricans being Anti-Native, which exists in many spanish speaking countries.
Taino revitalizing their language, culture, and spirituality does not affect the integration of Puerto Rico at all. All it does is cause awareness to the indigenous people of Boriken. It’s showing another side of history and culture told through an indigenous lens.
It’s ironic how he keeps saying Taino are erasing Africans from Puerto Rican history, when its really Puerto Ricans who are practicing colonialism and indigenous erasure. No one Taino is saying nobody is mixed and that africans didn’t have anything to do with Puerto Rico’s history or culture. They were simply bringing your attention to the Native elements that Puerto Rico kept trying to HIDE for many many years. Also being inside this community for almost 13 years I have personally never witnessed any Anti Blackness or racism.
One harsh reality Dr. Haslip doesn’t know is that there are Native people in the U.S who are Racist against Black people. There are racist people almost everywhere who also push colorism.
Also just because someone calls themselves “Taino” does not mean they are actually apart of these yukayekes or tribes who are legitimately in the East Coast Taino community. We all know everyone apart of this community or know someone who knows them. We function as a community no different how families in the campo know each other.
The reason for exclusivity is exactly WHAT IT MEANS TO BE TRIBAL. There is something we call fake Natives in the Native community, which is "(Pretendian). A pretendian is someone who claims to be a part of a tribe but has no ties or proof that they are in fact a part of the tribe. You can not randomly call yourself a tribal member representing a specific Nation, without having any family connected to a reservation, village, or community. This is Tribalism, we decide who is in our community and who is out.