Essay: Iroquois Confederacy and 'Gayanashagowa'

"The Iroquois Confederacy and 'Gayanashagowa':
 the U.S. Constitutional style of governance"
 
by Hiali NeX

There are 8 billion persons on Planet Earth. As such, there are 8 billion "religions" on Planet Earth. What spins the compass of governance must be rational/secular in nature. This rational/secular infrastructure *must* allow each individual person the right to BE, and FULL equality under all of this infrastructure's rational/secular laws. This is the only way to respect the INDIVIDUAL HUMAN RIGHTS of INDIVIDUAL HUMANS within their nation, whilst keeping faith-based laws out of the entire process.

Regardless of how many people "believe" (choose to not think) that the United States is a "religious" nation, it never has been, is not, nor will it ever be a "religious" nation. Any time someone brings "religion" into the Constitutional process, or into one's "Bill of HUMAN RIGHTS", they are not adhering to the way this nation's infrastructure was set up. The Federal "Bill of Rights", specifically, allows one the right to think and believe whatever one wants, whilst keeping the irrationality of "religious" thought from infringing on the Constitutional process or any individual's FULL HUMAN RIGHTS. "Rights" can *never* be voted on via a "bill" of *any* sort, simply because they are one's INALIENABLE HUMAN RIGHTS.

One person's (or group's) "religious" beliefs cannot govern all the people within a nation. "Religion" belongs no where in government. The mythological concepts of "God"/"Allah"/"Yahweh"/etc. (and their subsequent 'set of mythical laws') do not/should not make the laws of any rational/secular nation. These are PERSONAL beliefs; whether or not, one person- or many people- share in them. RATIONALITY should all ways be the basis of law and the starting point from which to begin ANY nation on Earth that respects DEMOCRACY.

Contrary to popular belief, United States' "democracy" is not really based on an Athenian-style government, though it carries many aspects of it. It is based on the indigenous-style democracy of the Iroquois Confederacy; the people native to the northeastern area of the present-day United States.

European-style "democracy" believed in the concentrated power of "kingship". Many Republican conservatives, unknowingly, cling to this concept, though it is very much outdated and tends to be about: "every man/woman for themselves". This tends to throw a focus on the Executive figurehead, whilst "blurring out" the PEOPLE (represented by the Legislative branch). Republicans, as a party, tend to not like working within the democratic system (which throws the focus on all 3 branches of government in a more balanced way). Their focus ends up radiating from their own personal religious ideals and sense of individual isolationism.

All though, on the surface, it seems as if there are only two parties in the United States: Democratic and Republican, the Constitutional infrastructure allows for more than that; an unlimited amount, actually. The Constitution, itself, contains no mention of parties and the Framers regarded them as "undesirable" or even dangerous.  Of the two main parties people tend to vote for, Democrats (by nature) tend to be closer to the Constitution, whilst Republicans tend to be closer to the Executive branch, first, and all other branches, second. Their religious values (as a group) tend to outshine Constitutional values. This belief that we are a religious nation is not delineated (or, even supported) by our Constitution. People who vote Republican often times do not understand the very document which created our nation in the first place. They attempt to convince others that they should aspire to these "religious" values and forget all about our government. People who vote from this nebulous stance basically "throw their vote away".

Note how expansion of "immigration" laws are often side-stepped by Republicans, unless it is to curb them. In an increasingly finite world allowing others into the nation would undermine the Republican goal of holding on to the majority of resources. Their first and foremost concern is to protect self-centered interests. A sense of "entitlement" tends to psychologically produce people who think like this. Republicans lean towards not sharing, whilst Democrats do.

The "yay" and "nay" polarities within the voting system are probably what created and evolved two opposing (major) parties, instead of many. Even if we had only one single Democratic Party (which will probably happen in the future), the United States would still go on. We don't really need any more parties as there is enough difference within the Democratic Party itself to keep the government functioning smoothly. Everyone within the Democratic Party does not vote the same way on every issue. But, they *do* eventually reach a harmonious conclusion. This is key to moving things right along.

Partisan fighting between Democrats and other parties create more issues that simply drag on instead of providing working solutions for our governance. The existence of Republicanism is becoming more and more like an impedance. As their party wanes in power, Republicans seem to only be good for keeping everyone in a perpetual argument over nonsensical issues, like LGBT marriage. This is a human right. But, Republicans continually inject religion into it, knowing full well that "religion" is not supported by the Constitution, or even the Bill of Rights; except to allow you the right to believe whatever you want. It is like "beating a dead horse"; or, a Democratic "mule" in this case. Social issues within the United States, and the aggressive nature of people who are all seeking to be "free", may have exacerbated this divide.

Still, whilst many others do vote across the vast spectrum of parties, "Republicans" and "Democrats" tend to attract the most members. In a nation like the U.S.- where so-called "Latinos" and persons of predominate African and Asian descent are now, in tandem, the majority- "Democrats" are fast becoming the favoured party. These before-mentioned ethnic groups, traditionally, stick closer to the idea of community than many others might; though this is not a hard-fast rule.

Republicans are often the ones accusing Democrats of being "communists". "Communist" simply means "community-oriented". Regardless of its origins and philosophies, the definition is clearly in the word itself. There is nothing wrong with this term except in the minds of those who demonised the word in the first place: self-seeking Republicans who do not care for government and wish to be separate from the rest of their nation. The irony is that they are all ways touting slogans like: "Country First". People *are* the country. What they are subliminally pushing is "Resources First".

In a world of 8 billion (so far), "Resources First" will tend to rub people the wrong way and cause them all to uprise against the elite ruling class. If Republicans attempt to spark any type of insurrection, they will find themselves outnumbered by the working classes who will not tolerate being trodded upon. History has shown us these "revolutions" over and over again: the "French Revolution", then, and the "Egyptian Revolution", today. Hogging up the resources will eventually create sufficient tension to cause the proletariat to rise up and demand their individual Constitutional "freedoms" and "liberties"; what the U.S. is essentially founded upon in the first place.

Native American Iroquois believed in a balance of powers. There were 3 tiers, or levels, of government: a "federal" one (which covered everyone), a "state" one (which were the different tribes; today, they are the different states) and the various "local" governments (counties and cities). The many different tribes within the Iroquois Confederacy lived in relative peace because of this arrangement.

3 branches of the government exist within each level: Executive (the "President". the" Governor", and the "Mayor"), Judicial (Supreme Court, State Court, City Court) and Legislative (a Senate & a House of Representatives on the federal, state and local levels). Each one (within a specific level) has a set of powers that keeps the other two in a "balance". In this way, "dictatorship" is avoided on every level of government.

This is what the U.S. has today: a system that is based on "checks" and "balances". The "checks" and "balances" system creates two opposing sides (Executive & Legislative), with a witnessing and balancing third (Judicial). Amendments to the Federal "Constitution" systematically pass through all branches after being introduced into the legislative branch. These amendments modify the "Constitution" (on each level: federal, state and local) in order to fit the evolving needs of a growing nation; the goal being: full freedom and full equality under rational/secular law.

PEACE is all ways maintained as "balance" is all ways kept. This is why you see the President (who rules for a maximum of 2 four-year terms) fight on behalf of all people from the Federal level. "Governors" fight for the people of their state and "Mayors", for the people of their cities. Other politicians (from the other branches) make arguments for and against whatever "bills" are presented into this system of "three". The politicians belong to the Legislative and Executive branches and handle most political business from there; though in certain special cases, the Judicial branch weighs in. This system, all most exclusively Native American in nature, maintains intact "Gayanashagowa" (the 'Great Law of Peace').

All though the U.S. has had a socially-tumultuous history getting itself organised around this way of thinking, it is an ancient indigenous American system that keeps the U.S. (a nation within "America") from falling apart at the seams. Our issues tend to be mostly social "growing pains" as this has become a nation of immigrants (save for the natives who have lived in America for all most 30,000 years). There are many groups fighting for recognition within the U.S. Each individual (within any given group) is guaranteed their FULL human and individualistic freedoms; delineated not only in the "Constitution", but also in a "Bill of Rights" (a separate document).

When building a new nation, other modes of governing (such as the one I've just described) are things one ought to take into consideration. When one looks at how other countries started out, perception of another's gubernatorial system sometimes helps a nation come to a conclusion on what would work out best for them. Despite a U.S. civil war (in the mid-19th Century) and, later, international concerns (and, wars extended from those concerns), the Iroquois Confederacy was and is a sound system of governance that has worked for indigenous people in "America" for thousands of years.

All though "religion" is respected by being allowed, it has NO part in government on ANY level. The original founding fathers of the United States were not "Christian", or of any particular faith. They, in fact, abhorred religion as useless and mythological. These days, some conservatives (and, a few politically-uninformed liberals) push their religious agenda only to be stopped by the mechanics that hold the actual system together. Faith does not rule the United States in terms of our Constitution, rationality/secularism does.

copyright 2012

"Jesus"/"Horus"/"Aten" & the American Solar Deity, "Inti"

by Hiali Quiñonez

Solar veneration in America began with native people. The concept of "Jesus"/"Horus"/"Aten" was brought by Christianity in the 16th Century. For thousands of years before that, "Inti" was how Americans related to the Sun (the "Son"). Other names may predate "Inti", but the importance of the "Sun" is an obvious human concern. Adopting another culture has no effect on who you are genetically, so religion does not tell us much about descent; exceptions are when inter-marriage due to cult doctrine creates future lineage.

Culturally-speaking, the "Jesus"/"Horus"/"Aten" concept replaced "Inti" due to European conquest and expansion, at first. Later, other cultures brought their ideas with them into America and added on as they procreated together. The spiritual belief pool from which we draw our ideas from, today, come from a much larger body of ideas.

The MANNER in which descendants actually relate to a communal belief such as (insert any organised "religion" <"religiokos", to link back> here), however, emerges partially or whole from WHO they are genetically, and how THEIR HISTORY in any given place applied to their antecedents. All though a myriad of dominant cults still exist in America, people are free to believe in whatever they choose.

c.2012 SoulChango Ink

"Womb-man"

 by Hiáli R. Quiñonez

Men may become truly powerful the day they begin birthing & raising other humans. Otherwise, without a female there is no child and no one to wean it if it did exist.

Women (and Gatekeepers), by their very nature, are powerful, so some insecure men choose to instill the FEAR of retribution by some textual "god" upon those women and Gatekeepers; manipulated ideas created long ago and whose only "power" comes from being so thoroughly ingrained across several millennia (The lie has become a truth.). It is the power of a lie that holds many women & Gatekeepers from realising their place in the world.

In Native Caribbean societies, men and women were EQUAL and women were respected as rulers of their own tribes. These egalitarian traits still survive in many present-day Caribbean societies. Even though foreign ideas have served to suppress female power through religious coercion and untruths, with the coming of independence... most of those trends have not been furthered.

Preview: "When God Was A Woman"

by Merlin Stone (click)

"Overcoming the Myth"

Excerpt from:

Courage: The Heart and Spirit of Every Woman/
Reclaiming the Forgotten Virtue
 
By Sandra Ford Walston, The Courage Expert

Excerpt from "Song of Songs" / Ogun & Oshun (1994)

by Hiáli R. Quiñonez

"What is this coming up from the desert / like a column of smoke, / breathing of myrrh and frankincense / and every perfume the merchant knows? / See, it is the litter of Solomon. / Around it are sixty champions, / the flower of the warriors of Israel; / all of them skilled swordsmen, / veterans of battle. / Each man has sword at his side, / against alarms by night. / King Solomon/ has made himself a throne / of wood from Lebanon. / The posts he made of silver, / the canopy / of gold, / the seat of purple; / the back is inlaid with ebony. / Daughters of Zion, / come and see / King Solomon, / wearing the / diadem with which his mother crowned him / on his wedding day, / on the day of his heart's joy."

The story is told in the voice of a warrior; an understanding of love from the aggressive human experience.  Stories which depict human nature at its most basic can be found enmeshed in mythologies all around the world.  Humans conjure these tales in order to explain what they do not understand and, quite possibly, to find an identity in this world.

The Yoruba people of SW Nigeria, some of whom were brought to the Americas in the late 1800's with their own distinct cultural worldviews, were a minority group and relative new arrival.  But, their strong cosmopolitan organisation allowed them to exert a great deal of influence over other agrarian-oriented African societies that were mostly rural and spread out.  The urbanite Yoruba asserted a strong cultural presence and became greatly influential within Caribbean Creole society.

Yoruba mythology is based on a people who began at Ife, where the Staff of Oranmiyan marks the point "Obatala came down to the Earth".  Obatala is one of many Orisha deities thought to rule over certain aspects of nature.  Symbolically, we can say that Obatala is like light, a prism would be like Esu and the visible spectrum, produced when that light was shone through the prism, would be the many different Orisha energies that existed in Nature.  The Orisha are colour-coded entities who together, as an anthropomorphised group, represent the "face" of Olodumare, or "God"; "God" being 'that which we cannot think of'.  Each one of these Orisha "energies" is said to hold sway over a particular aspect of Nature.  As such, each has a multitude of symbols and ideas that go along with it.  The mythology behind each delineate, in symbolic terms, just how the Universe works.  The stories describe Orisha doing different things to and with each other, good and bad.  This is Nature and the Orisha are simply reflecting that; their symbology aligned in similar fashion as any other religious system that employs symbols to explain "natural" things more efficiently.

Yoruba mythologies were more than likely, wholly or partially, based on earlier myths propagated by Oromo people.  Oromo were the indigenous people of the East African empire of Kush, later known as Oromiyaa.  Their language was called Oromiffa.  The staff of Oranmiyan (a corruption of the word "Oromiyaa") signals the arrival of "Oduduwaa", child of "Lamurudu" ("Nimrod", the hypothetical son of "Cush").

Yoruba mythologies would change, yet again, during and after the enslavement period in the Americas.  Some of the myths survived Maafa intact; others were modified to suit the new social arrangement.  Myths from other tribes were sometimes merged along common denominators and whole new stories, reflecting the current state of affairs, were born.  As mythological tales have all ways done: the Yoruba described their current state and worldview in symbols, the easiest way to share belief with others more efficiently.

"Orisha Ogun was a medicinal Deity associated with the creation of technology.  He was considered to be a wild and dangerous warrior whose gruff, aggressive nature caused him to often miss out on love.  When he wasn't out warring with the world, he'd spend most of his days and nights in the forest, building and constructing.  One day, Ogun became infuriated with his fellow villagers.  He felt he did not receive enough recognition for his role in the creation of Civilisation.  After having several arguments, he disappeared deep into the forests vowing never to return.  No sooner did he depart, when all the wheels of civilisation came to a screeching halt.  The villagers begged the other Orisha to plea before Olodumare, the "Owner of the Sky", so that Ogun might come back to the village.  They lamented taking him for granted.  

Olodumare suggested that Oshun, the smallest and daintiest of all the Orisha, go and bring him back.  The Orisha laughed at the thought of such a young, beautiful woman bringing back this wild man from the forest.  What kind of powers could such a small, young lady like Oshun possibly possess?  All the Orisha could do amazing things: Shango moved the thunder, Yemaya stirred the seas, Oya could even manipulate the wind at will.  But, what could the guardian of the river possibly do?!

So it was.  Oshun set out to the forest dressed in a beautiful white cotton dress; amber and gold scarves billowed behind her as she walked.  Sensuous cavorts caused her cowrie-laced braids to punctuate in rhythmic snaps.  Her gold bangles elevated the rhythms of her body and song.  On her head, a pot of sweet-tasting honey.  Oshun continued her dance along the perimetre of the forest, following the sound of Ogun's heavy hammer hitting the anvil.  Before entering the woods, Oshun reached out and dropped sweet confections and cowries at the foot of the guardians of the forest, Esu Aroni and Osanyin.  She made her way up to the middle of a clearing, where she began to intensify her alluring dance.  Oshun twirled and sang her beautiful songs to Nature.  Her 5 scarves moved effortlessly about, caressing her every enticing move.  As Ogun peered through the brushes at this bedazzling creature, her dance seemed to freshly define each passing moment.  

"What is it that causes me to get so enamoured with this gorgeous creature whose stunning body moves with such a harmonious flow?", he thought.

Ogun was mesmerised.  Oshun drew closer and closer, his eyes remained fixated with hers.  She reached out and slathered some of her sweet-tasting honey across his lips.  It was like nothing he'd ever had before.  Ogun was now suddenly caught in the moment with this wondrous creature.  Time seemed to flow with a rhythm he'd never experienced before.  Without missing a beat, Ogun lovingly followed this amazing woman back into the village where he was welcomed by all his former villagers.  Oshun's loving embrace brought the mighty Ogun back from obscurity and into the fold.  As long as Oshun remained close to Ogun, civilisation could go on."

Culture, symbolically represented by Oshun, is what gives distinction to the cold, pragmatic routines which define our interactive civilisation; more specifically, love and appreciation... civility.  This concept can be found across many world cultures, as religious mythology diverges with people when they move across the globe and across time.  The concept of culture "bringing meaning to Life" is synonymous with human ways.  We give meaning to Life because our reasoning minds seek it, much like electric Ogun is caught in the force field of magnetic Oshun.

In the third poem from King Solomon's "Song of Songs", a warrior is coming to terms with the essence of beauty and love.  The first lines read: "What is this coming up from the desert / like a column of smoke, / breathing of myrrh and frankincense / and every perfume the merchant knows?"  *Beauty* rises from the Earth, heralding the beginning of culture and aesthetic appreciation ("like a column of smoke").  The effect of beauty is described from the perspective of the ever-seeking warrior/hunter whose world is one of trade ("breathing of myrrh and frankincense") and reflects his own personal experience ("and every perfume the merchant knows").  Beauty, here, is an assault on the senses; described as an alien erotic pleasure, previously unknown.  As with Ogun, it is love as lust, not yet a reasonable and useful love, which is what it becomes by the end of the tale.  Ogun, a quasi-god with frailties like all the others, learns humility and control in the face of Love.

Beauty's draw, in the "Song of Songs" excerpt, is likened to power ("See, it is the litter of Solomon. / Around it are sixty champions, / the flower of the warriors of Israel; / all of them skilled swordsmen, / veterans of battle. / Each man has sword at his side, / against alarms by night. ").  The allure of feminine, internal power is described in terms of masculine, external energy.  The attractive principle present in this act of temptation is what achieves a working balance, much like "Oshun remained close to Ogun" so that "civilisation could go on".

The allusion to power is present throughout the "Song of Songs".  It is purportedly King Solomon telling the story.  Human cultures branch off from whomever populates successfully, an "originator" who influences possible propagation of their own particular beliefs, along with their genes.  In this case, King Solomon is relating this encounter with his own experience.

Development into a distinct culture is a product of evolution.  The next few lines in the same poem describe and delineate the process as it unfolds: "King Solomon/ has made himself a throne / of wood from Lebanon."  Representational objects elucidate: "The posts he made of silver, / the canopy / of gold, / the seat of purple; / the back is inlaid with ebony."  The posts are silver, a pure metal, representative of the technology with which warrior/hunters originally formed society.  The canopy of gold crowns a successful civilisation.  Gold, itself, is viewed in many cultures worldwide as a metal of beauty.  It is representative of the art which makes life more enjoyable beyond the mundane.  This might also include the art of erotica and appreciation of beautiful moments with people, places and things.  The "seat" being "purple" anoints royalty and signifies the philosopher-king.  This seat might also represent a central hub of culture based on socialising in a civilised and sophisticated, well-thought manner.  The "back is inlaid with ebony" alludes to the East African roots of his people.

The first few lines spoke of warrior/hunters being introduced to "beauty", followed by the introduction to the actual feminine force.  The conclusion is the blossoming of beauty into a culture of mores and rules.   "Daughters of Zion, / come and see / King Solomon, / wearing the / diadem with which his mother crowned him / on his wedding day, / on the day of his heart's joy."  It culminates with a harkening of the ancestral mothers, the source of their power, to bless the universal order of masculine and feminine polarities, the energies which both men and women have.  Men have feminine qualities, as much as women have masculine ones.  The Yin/Yang symbol of Chinese culture shows a balance of energies, with each one carrying a piece of the other within itself.

The "wedding day", described as the "day of his heart's joy", is civility empowered and guarded by the "Daughters of Zion", women.  In the Ogun myth, Oshun is the keeper of Ifá, the most high Oracle in the Orisha tradition.  She is the confidante of Esu, a trickster Deity who embodies ashé (chi, for those familiar).  Oshun is the only one who can lead and hold Ogun in place for she is bestowed with the cohesive ability to manipulate and sustain emotion; something that Ogun often operates instinctively on.  In many societies of the not-too-distant past, a woman's power was duly recognised as being equal to that of a man, in strength and wit.

copyright 1994