On The Blood Quantum as Historical Racism and Future Implications

The blood quantum was an unjust and racist extension of settler colonialism, with lasting implications to this day. The institution of the blood quantum is apparent today in tribal governance, but changing landscapes of native autonomy may be changing the traditional narrative of the blood quantum. Only through Native autonomy will it be discovered if settler colonial tools can be repurposed for indigenous rights, or, if they must be done away with altogether. In this essay, I will explore the historical use of the blood quantum, the shifting of this traditionally colonial tool, and through this, make the case for native sovereignty.

Blood has its own connotations depending on cultural context. It can span the bridge of both the metaphysical and physiological. European colonial concepts of blood, rely on their notions of race, and are purely physiological. In turn, in their violent quest to colonize America, they tried to force this notion onto the indigenous people of the continent. There prescription of race was based on the idea that your physical heritage defined you. That you could break down an identity into something quantifiable. This was institutionalized first as a way to strip native people of their independence as tribal nations, and then in the ethnocide via the assimilationist panderings of Pratt and his ilk under his devastating “Indian Boarding Schools.”

Though these institutions are devastating to indigenous populations in the U.S., the current use of the blood quantum is in some ways disrupting this. On the topic of enrollment in a tribe, some tribes choose to institute a blood quantum, while others do not, choosing instead to opt for the use of lineal descent, often tracing back records under the Dawes Act of 1887. Of course, there are several instances in which this choice is restricted by the US government, but still the act of reclaiming the blood quantum, makes it apparent that only through native sovereignty can equitable coexistence between native nations and the US Government begin to take shape.

Two arguments, popular amongst native activist in increasing Tribal Sovereignty for Native Americans is the Case for Reparations, and the Case for Restorations. Reparations suggest that the US Government use its economic power to put money directly into the pockets of indigenous populations, whom it has disenfranchise since before its conception. However, since indigenous identity is often intertwined with land, monetary compensation alone is likely not enough. Instead, a more holistic approach can be found in the case for restoration, which suggests that full tribal sovereignty be given over original tribal lands. This may be idealistic as it would require the dismantling of the U.S., but this is the path to justice.