Indian Termination and Collective Action

• In Event: Native American and Indigenous Sovereingty

Abstract

The mid-20th century U.S. policy of Indian Termination aimed to cancel all treaties, settle land and other claims, and fully assimilate Indigenous people into mainstream American society. The policy sought to end federal recognition of, and obligations to, Native nations and entities. We critically examine the implementation and eventual reversal of this contentious policy using in-depth tribal case studies, archival sources, and statistical analysis of novel datasets. We find that the roll-out of termination inspired intertribal collective action aimed at policy reversal. In particular, tribes responded by coordinating and merging their demands on the federal government, highlighting overlapping priorities. This research underscores a feature of collective action that has not received adequate attention: the consolidation of heterogeneous demands can reduce central government costs and affect policy changes, even in the absence of credible threat. Furthermore, the reduced package of demands need not be more aligned with government norms to be less costly or more desirable. These findings contribute to our understanding of intergovernmental dynamics involving Native nations and add to extant explanations for how they are able to influence policy despite minority status and institutional arrangements that often obstruct the meaningful expression of self-determination.

Authors

• Scott Cooley, University of Chicago

• Sonja Castañeda Dower, University of Chicago