the view of humanity was Hmited tonthe members of the immediate tribe.nKiUing was murder only when donenwithin the tribe. Those who did itnoutside the tribe gained social andnpolitical standing as well as materialnwealth through plundering the goodsnof the deceased. Such had been theirnattitude long before the coming ofnEuropeans. When battles went againstna tribe, slavery — and worse — was thenlot of captives, while many tribes practicednthe most terrible cruelties in torturingnthe men captured in battle.nWhen Native Americans and immigratingnEuropeans met each other innwhat now is the United States, eachnside felt not only that it was right butnalso that it was a positive good to killnand rob the other. Murder too oftennhad been dignified, bringing with itnhonor and standing and somethingnthat was equated with “manhood.”nWar between two such cultures wasninevitable. And because the newcomersnwere numerically superior andnmore advanced technologically, theirnultimate victory was inevitable.nYet when the shooting stopped innthe 1880’s — when the tribes had beennforced to accept permanent reservations—nNative Americans did notndisappear. True, the physical threatnthey posed was gone. No longer didnthe lonely frontier settler fear the hootnof an owl or the howl of a coyote.nTherefore he began to change hisnimage of the Indian. He at last concedednthat Native Americans werenhuman, but not adult. They werenwards of the government, subject tonoversight by the Bureau of IndiannAffairs. The Indian was seen as anchild — and a drunken, lazy one atnthat. It was nobody’s business if thenfrustrations of reservation life turnednsome Indians to alcohol.nAnd now a hundred years havenpassed, a century in which some reservationsnhave been broken up and allotmentsnmade under terms of the DawesnAct. Indian governments were dissolved,nand some tribal ways werenforgotten. The old attitudes persistednwell into this century in movies asnwhite audiences cheered when the buglesnblew and the cavalry charged tondisperse war-painted warriors bent onnplunder and pillage of circled wagonsnbehind which valiant but outnumberednpioneers fought for their lives.nYet there came a reaction in attitudenas the nation moved farther from thendays of raid and counterraid. By then1930’s, some people wanted a change.nJohn Collier, Commissioner of IndiannAffairs during the New Deal, pushednfor passage of the Wheeler-HowardnIndian Reorganization Act of 1934;nthis reversed the policy of allottingnindividual plots of land to Indians.nCollier encouraged the tribes to returnnto their old ways of government and tonpursue native arts and crafts, tribalnreligion, and tribal social customs.nUnder terms of the Wheeler-nHoward Act, the Indians did reorganizentheir governments and began tonpush for “redress of past wrongs.”nThese included free medical carenalong with a host of social programsnthat brought in an entrenched bureaucracy,nboth white and red, with anvested interest in continuing the arrangementnof Indian wards being takenncare of by the “Great White Father.”nMoreover, just after World War II, thenIndians were encouraged to institutensuits for land taken from them, and thenfederal government has paid hundredsnof millions of dollars as a result.nThe Comanches were given a generousnsettlement for lands taken fromnthem on the High Plains from south ofnthe Arkansas River deep into WestnTexas. But the Comanches, whonmoved out of their original RockynMountain home in the early 1700’s,nconquered this land from the Apaches,nwho, in turn, had taken it from itsnprevious owners sometime betweenn900 and 1200 A.D. The Comanchesnsued the United States for wrongfullyntaking this land from them, and werenhandsomely paid. Using the samenlogic, the Apaches ought to sue thenComanches.nAnd so the pattern continues. ThenIndians charge that they should continuento receive special treatment — andnappropriations — based on what happenedn100 or 200 years ago. Andnnon-Indians, wallowing in guilt for thenactions of ancestors (usually someonenelse’s), continue to pay.nThis is a pattern whose only resultncan be a continuance of the Indiannwars. Whites, so long as they continuento pay, will never recognize the Indiannas anything other than a child. Indians,nso long as they continue to demandnsuch appropriations and vilify whites asnnnperpetual oppressors, will guaranteenthemselves second-class citizenship asnwards of the government.nNeither side has made a concertedneffort to see the other as adult humannbeings. Recent books, some of themnon the best-seller list for months, havenbeen propaganda of the old type,nwretched as history and biased in attitude,nmaking no attempt to achieve anbalance between the races. These havenpictured the Indian as human and thenwhite as inhuman, the Indian as environmentallynsound and the white as andestroyer of Nature, the Indian asnliving in harmony with the universenand the white as a discordant intruder.nPronouncements by militant Indiannleaders — and some liberal whites —nhave reinforced the stereotypes by portrayingnwhites as ogres who have degradednthe noble Red Man.nAt the same time, many of thenpractices of the Bureau of Indian Affairsnare designed to perpetuate thenstatus of the Indian as a child — andnthe Indians have been quick to pointnthis out. Yet when Ross Swimmer, nownheading the BIA, talks of doing awaynwith government programs that perpetuatenthe second-class status of Indians,nit is the Indians who protest thenloudest.nNeither side is yet wholly able tonconcede the other the status of adult,ncaring humans. The sins of our fathersnhave indeed plagued us for the biblicalnseven generations and more.nAnd in these crosscurrents of prejudicenand hatred, all Americans havenlost. The melting pot has not worked.nIn fact, some insist violently that itnshould not work. Is not the fabric ofnour republic strong enough to withstandnvariant cultures and ethnicngroups? Must the taxpayers of then1980’s pay for the sins of the I680’s?nDoes blood descent from someonenwronged a quarter of a millennium agonentitle a person to free medical, educational,nhousing, and welfare benefits?nIf indeed the American people believenin the credo of the FoundingnFathers that “All men are creatednequal; that they are endowed by theirnCreator with certain unalienable rights;nthat among these are life, liberty, andnthe pursuit of happiness,” then whatnwe need today to solve the enduringnIndian-white problem are men of reason,nnot men of rage; men of humani-nMAY 13881 47n