Talk:Kill the Indian, Save the Man

Inappropriate use of sources, possible OR

This quote was added as if written by Churchill, but its use here appears to be OR: "By 1970, approximately two-thirds of the marriages of those on the tribal rolls were to people who were not, with the result that only 59 percent of births reflected a situation in which both parents registered themselves as possessing any Indian blood at all." - U.S. Dept. of Health, Education and Welfare, A Study of Selected Socio-Economic Characteristics of Ethnic Minorities Based on the 1970 Census, Vol. 3: American Indians (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1974) pp. 74, 78. There is no evidence cited in the article that Churchill referred to this data in his book. Parkwells (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Use of 1995 quote

It is not clear how the following long quote relates to this article; no editor says that Churchill reflects the following in his book, or whether his views had changed in nearly the decade since this interview. This seems more appropriate to use in the general article about Churchill, rather than about this book. I will copy it there.Parkwells (talk) 15:53, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

"Churchill discussed his views with David Barsamian, an oral historian:

You could say that five hundred years ago was the basis of blood quantum in Ibero-America. But in Anglo-America, while there was some preoccupation with it, it was not formalized until the passage of the General Allotment Act, mid-1880s. At that point they began to define Indian as being someone who was demonstrably and documentably of at least one-quarter by quantum blood indigenous in a given group. You couldn't be an eighth Cheyenne and an eighth Arapaho and be an Indian. You had to be a quarter Cheyenne or a quarter Arapaho or hopefully a quarter and a quarter. The reason for this was quite clear. They were identifying Indians for purposes of allotting them individual parcels of land in the existing reservation base at that point. If they ran out of Indians identifiable as such, then the rest of the land would be declared surplus. So it was clearly in the interests of the government to create a definition of Indianness that would minimize the number of Indians that were available. It was an economic motivation for the application of this genetic criteria to Indianness in the first place. It's become increasingly so ever since." (David Barsamian (1995). "Interview with Ward Churchill: Historical and Current Perspectives". Z Magazine. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help))