J.D. Colbert, a member of the Muscogee Nation, is a senior advisor at Avondale Investments in Norman, Oklahoma.

Chuck Trimble´s column in the 4-12-10 edition of indianz.com got me to thinking about the subject of a "decolonization" and the idea of a Native American utopia.

The term Utopia is a homophone. Homophones are, of course, words that are pronounced the same (and oftentimes are spelled the same) but have very different meanings. For example, the word "rose" can be used as in rose (a flower) or rose (past tense of rise).

So, on the one hand we have "eu-topia" meaning essentially "good place" and then we have "oo-topia" meaning "not place" or meaning an ideal place or state of being that is not possible.

If Native Decolonization is defined as a return to the pre-Columbia, idyllic and halcyon days of yore, a pertinent question to ask is: "Would a mass emigration of the immigrant hordes from the lands we presently call the U.S. of A. engender a Native eu-topia?"

While the posing of that question may be an interesting exercise, most of us know that it is a oo-topia or an impossibility that the USA can, or even should be, ethnically cleansed from sea to shining sea of all but Native people.

And, by the way, just who constitutes "Native people"? Is it just those who can produce the CDIB pedigree? (if so, it would be ironic indeed as many would agree that the pedigree is one of the major vestiges of colonization!); would it be those who look Indian? (think Hollywood stereotype!); or how about those who claim a Cherokee princess as their grandmother? (in which case EVERYBODY qualifies as Native).

But I digress...and to get back to progressing let me acknowledge that we cannot simply click our heels together three times and immediately return to those pre-Columbian, idyllic and/or halcyon days of yore, however real or imagined.

Trimble rightly seeks a definition and description of the "ultimate decolonized state". Trimble notes, correctly, that a big problem with those who promote Native decolonization and a return to the old ways have not articulated a clear and compelling vision of what this "new, old world" would look like.

Trimble posits the paramount question of, "What are we looking for"?

I am not one of those Native scholars who promote decolonization referred to by Trimble in his column but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night, so allow me to offer my "expert" opinion.

My sense is that Trimble comes very close to formulating an auspicious answer to his own questions when he stated that, "Today, the Decolonization movement gains support from the apparent inability of modern tribal governments to deal with the myriad of problems in Indian Country that are destroying families and communities alike.".

This statement in turn begs the questions: Is there a better, more efficacious, more traditional or culturally relevant way for Indian tribes to govern themselves? And, would such a decolonized, traditional and cultural relevant form of government be more effective in addressing the myriad of economic and social ills that still pervade too much of Indian Country?

The decolonization process in Indian Country, I would aver, might yield its best and quickest results in the re-definition and reconsideration of the form and structure of Indian Tribal Governments, particularly for those Indian tribal governments that face a Perfect Storm of seemingly intractable and acute social and economic hardships. This redefining and reconsideration is a process that must, I think, begin with our rank and file Native peoples.

During my lifetime, I have been greatly blessed to personally witness the resurgence of Indian tribal governments across Indian Country that have risen, Phoenix-like, from the ashes of decades and centuries of attempted conquest, assimilation and genocide, to name but a few of the hegemonies of the dominant society over Native peoples over the past 500 years.

Over my lifetime then, Indian tribal governments have flexed their muscles in areas such as health care, social services, law enforcement, business and the judiciary. In these and many other areas, Indian tribal governments have grown by leaps and bounds. I applaud such growth and development and pray more will continue.

Indeed, many of these Indian tribal governments, oftentimes governmental structures modeled upon the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA), have succeeded beyond anyone´s wildest dreams. These fortunate Indian tribes have a governmental effectiveness, stability and economic robustness that are better than many cities, counties or even state governments.

But such successes with IRA or IRA-like governmental structures are very uneven across Indian Country. Trimble rightly notes that far too many Indian tribal governments, trying their very best, still cannot seem to effectively address the ongoing and oftentimes the continued deterioration of social, economic and health conditions on many reservations.

Certainly this is true of far too many city, county and state governments as well. Yet in Indian Country many share an ineffable yet poignant sense that there is a better way, and that better way lies in some ambiguous, amorphous return to "the old ways".

So it seems prudent to ask ourselves: What does it mean to be an Indian tribal government in the 21st century? What is the plan? What do we hope to achieve? Should we abandon IRA forms of government in favor of more "traditional" forms of government? What values should guide the tribe in its various deliberations?

Certainly, as Trimble points out in his recent column ("Tribes Reclaim their Traditional Names", Indianz.com, March 15, 2010) there is a very welcome movement among many tribes to reclaim their traditional names.

Could this phenomena be the first major domino to fall so as to actuate a chain reaction across Indian Country toward greater decolonization (however we as Native people ultimately define and practice such decolonization)?

In the end, I am increasingly persuaded that these are questions for each individual tribe to discern in their efforts and in their own ways to define their decolonization of Indian Country as well as to create more effective governance structures.

I am equally persuaded that Trimble is dead-on correct in that it is, "...the spirit, morality, ethics and values of the old cultures that we seek".

In the end, to the extent that we as Native peoples will seek to cast off as much of the shackles of colonization that we possibly can, I rather think that our destination will not be a utopia in the general understanding of the word but rather we will create a "Native-topia".

This Native-topia may be a new, heretofore unseen "place" that is fully capable of thriving in the modern world but that cleaves to timeless values, ethics, and spirituality of our Native ancestors.

The ultimate decolonized state of affairs may be manifested by an amelioration of the heretofore grinding and seemingly hopeless social and economic conditions that still pervades across too many reservations.

Moreover, I rather think it should be marked by having the salutary effect of instilling a sense of wholeness, of peace, of contentment, of fulfillment and deep reverence and honoring of cultural values, ways and traditions among the majority of our Native people who may be blessed to reside in such a Native-topia.

Perhaps this is what is sought.

Related Stories:
Charles Trimble: Decolonization and Native communities (4/13)