I wasn't saying you are white or a dominator, or that the book is a colonizer mindset. I meant that the whole history of individualist anarchism happened within the context of white dominator culture. I had a DNA test because I'm adopted, I'm 99.5% European. I'm whiter than most white supremacists.
General statements like what we have now on reservations and with tribal government is not representative of what our traditions were in the past, dismiss the ones that still keep their traditions of government alive. The ones that don't didn't devolve because of the principals of their government, it was because they were colonized. That doesn't effect the principals. Imo a philosophy that endured in practice for at least 1000 years holds at least as much weight, or probably more, than a philosophy that is a logical theory.
Nothing in this world is black or white. Imo it is a mistake to equate government with control just like it is a mistake to equate guns with murder.
indidivualist anarchism does have a special place in America but it was not exclusive to America or Europeans. Also, people are individuals. All seminoles are not the same, all choctaw are not the same and, yes, you are correct, not all tribal governments are the same. But in my experience (anecdotal, I know) the ones that are loyal to their people and traditions are the minority.
I am not sure what specific philosophy you are referencing. The difference between a tribal government or nation is that they are not claiming a monopoly on all of the earth and everyone born on the land as the State does.
"indidivualist anarchism does have a special place in America but it was not exclusive to America or Europeans." Who and where? I can't think of one anarchist philosopher, individualist or otherwise, who isn't American or European.
"Also, people are individuals." Yes, that's self evident
"...But in my experience (anecdotal, I know) the ones that are loyal to their people and traditions are the minority." That's been my experience as well.
"I am not sure what specific philosophy you are referencing." The philosophy of government by the will of the people. Which, as far as I can estimate, is having rules without rulers.
"The difference between a tribal government or nation is that they are not claiming a monopoly on all of the earth and everyone born on the land as the State does."... I can't think of an example of an indigenous nation that doesn't claim territory and I can't think of a State that claims all of the Earth. That's a distinction without a difference.
State and Nation are synonyms. Authoritarianism is a form of government, not the definition of government.
"The difference between a tribal government or nation is that they are not claiming a monopoly on all of the earth and everyone born on the land as the State does."... I can't think of an example of an indigenous nation that doesn't claim territory and I can't think of a State that claims all of the Earth. That's a distinction without a difference.
Ok, let me rephrase to be more clear: Tribes don't claim a monopoly on land, at least in the past we didnt. some tribes were stationary but many were nomadic. It was a totally different concept of land and property, you know this. The State's around the world all collectively claim ownership of the Earth.
also, " Who and where? I can't think of one anarchist philosopher, individualist or otherwise, who isn't American or European."
I don't know that everyone ever espousing their individuality or a philosophy of self governance has been catalogued or even wrote their ideas on paper. To assume that only Americans and Europeans are capable of individuality or understanding individualist anarchist philosophy is silly.
Again man, I feel like no matter what platform you engage me on you are antagonistic or looking for an argument.