Most Indian nations in North America have traditions that allow anyone to speak their mind, although it’s certainly true that some tribal governments have departed from those traditions to punish their critics. Since the First Amendment does not apply to Indian nations, it’s good for us to think about the contours of free expression when confronted with the spectacle of a musician who happens to be a Canadian ex-pat in a very public political debate with Canada’s elected Prime Minister.

We know who elected Stephen Harper, so who elected Neil Young?

How dare an entertainer contest with a politician for hearts and minds?

I’m here to suggest that politicians are entertainers and entertainers are politicians and I expect it was that realization that backed Judge Bork from his “originalist” view that because the purpose of the First Amendment was to protect robust political debate, it only protects politicians in the immediate practice of politics.

The poet Langston Hughes asked, “What happens to a dream deferred? Does it dry up like a raisin in the sun…?”

The poet Joy Harjo observed “We no longer know the names of the birds here, how to speak to them by their personal names.”

In my poetry book, I wrote of “Briefcase warriors ululating; counting coup; seeking dignity.”