Tloke Nauoke

YouTube:

Tloke Nauoke

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEkxuWXZ-P-5BWhoD3FEXcQ

Raíz de Aztlan

Raiz de Áztlan

Crece y madura

En Los ojos de nuestros

Hijos y hijas.

Sus pies, floating

On the

Memory

of river water.

 

March 21, 2003

 

As with many other indigenous traditions from the length and breadth of the continent of Abya Yala, there exists with the Xicano-Azteka historical accounting and recounting the theme of transformation of the worlds, the arrival and traveling of the people through great periods of change, epochs of distinct character for humanity and the Earth.  These cycles, which include aspects of both light and shadow, take their names from the count of calendric symbols that describe the Tonatiuh, the power of the sun, for that era.  They have been described as the Five Suns, and their historical narration is found in the Tonalmachiotl, the Kuauhxicall - an Azteka stone monolith sometimes called the Sun Stone, or the Aztec Calendar. 

 

This calendric system is well recognized for the mathematical and astronomical exactness with which it continues to serve the indigenous nations of Itzachitlan, Abya Yala [Las Americas].  Distinct from the count of time, and thus the sense of history, of the so called “West”, our calendar is not linear but cyclical.  History for us has a human face not technological.  It is astronomically measured in terms of generations, a common proportion that is inextricably colored by our orientation in space, and that of our home the Mother Earth - in this universe of the Four Directions.

*******

 

It has always been good to wonder.  We as Indigenous Peoples of the continent have been wondering for over 500 years now about the arrogance of the European-American presence on our homelands, their claims of “Discovery”, and the moral and legal justifications given to not only colonize the continent, but to shield an ongoing colonization from impartial intellectual scrutiny.  At a time in world history when the concept of nation-state that grew to dominate international law and politics from its foundations in feudal Europe is increasingly being recognized as inadequate, where will the European-Americans abandon their racist concept of state and nationality?  When will they give up on being “white”?

 

This question is not meant to be rhetorical, but if the discussions in progress between mainstream environmental justice activists and organizations and the “communities of color” are to establish working collaborations, the institutionalized racism inherent in all sectors of European-American society must be addressed.  The foundations of “white” supremacy and environmental racism must be exposed, in particular as they reflect the political doctrines of genocide and colonization of the native nations of this continent.  Environmental racism is a term that has gained popular recognition, but the attempts by the Environmental Protection Agency to jacket the issue by calling it, “environmental equity” is like turning toxic pollution into a multi-cultural festival.  It doesn't address the root of the problem.  Was not the slaughter of the vast buffalo herds of the Great Plains an example of environmental racism?

   

From an indigenous perspective, the issue of environmental racism as it has become to be defined is only the latest manifestation in contemporary industrial and economic mode of an assault that began over 500 years ago.  On May 3rd and 4th  of the year 1493, Pope Alexander VI issued the Papal Bull Inter Cetera by which he granted “dominion” to the European Christian Royalty justifying a claim for title to the territories of the Western Hemisphere under the concept of Discovery.  Beyond the question of “dominion”, the philosophical basis for living “off of” and not “with” the land, the right to Discovery was restricted to the European.  It became a race concept when it was codified and made a legal identity as “white”.  The U.S. Civil Rights laws to this day use as the standard for juridical evaluation the “rights of white persons”.  Again, the question from Indigenous Peoples: “How did it come to pass that one branch of the family of mankind has isolated and elevated itself to define a superior race identity based on skin color?”  When will this form of American apartheid be exposed?

   

In the spring of 1984, an alliance of indigenous nations met in the construction zone of a Central Phoenix highway and began an effort to communicate to the world our understanding of this problem and attempt to initiate a solution.  The site called, La Ciudad, had been an ancient settlement of the people known as the Hohokam. These were the original constructors of the canal systems that when modernized led to the establishment of the Phoenix of today.  There had been removed from the site some one hundred cremations which were taken to the state university for study.  It was the old “Discovery” and “dominion”  doctrine once again, which was not surprising considering that the original Papal Bull of 1493 has never been revoked and continues to serve as the legal justification for all the Nation-states claiming jurisdiction in the Americas.  The gathering of the alliance at the site lasted four days, and one result was the initiation of a campaign to revoke the Doctrine Discovery as a violation of the Human and Environmental Rights of the Indigenous Peoples of Abya Yala [Americas].

 

This linkage between Human Rights, Environmental Justice and the Rights of Mother Earth is a movement which now is gaining momentum throughout the world.  And around the world, it is Indigenous Nations that are leading the movement.  The same doctrines of political and racial exclusion that are the foundation of environmental racism within the United States are an integral part of the international order as well.  As Indians are not “persons” within the meaning citizenship of the U.S. Constitution, Indigenous Peoples are not considered Peoples within the United Nations but only indigenous populations.  Defined as minority populations, the indigenous nations of the world are precluded from invoking rights of self-determination established by international norms and are forced to take drastic actions against the efforts of Nation-states to illegally claim their territories, such as happened as Wounded Knee South Dakota in 1973.

 

The Wounded Knee confrontation of 1973 resulted in a trip to the United Nations in New York by the Lakota Chiefs.  Their intentions were to speak on the floor of the General Assembly as sovereign nation, with a valid treaty with the United States Government- the Treaty of 1868.  It was nearly twenty years before a Lakota spoke on the floor of the General Assembly.  The occasion was the inauguration of the International Year of Indigenous Peoples, declared by the United Nations for the year 1993.  Indigenous representatives from throughout the world arrived to express with a natural dignity the message of the caretakers of the Earth.  The continental and worldwide resistance to the glorification of the Columbus Quincentenary by the colonizer governments had forced the United Nations to listen to the true nations of the world.  That, and the undeniable and impending ecological catastrophe threatening the planet, which the indigenous people hold the key to averting, signaled the arrival of the new but yet ancient power for all mankind - a New Sun.

 

There were concrete proposals presented to the General Assembly.  One was the revocation of the Papal Bull of 1493.  Another was to collaborate with the UN Sub-Commission on Prevention Discrimination and Protection of Minorities for the purpose of advancing the linkage between Human Rights and Environmental Justice Rights. But what was most evident was that the great transformations sweeping the world are destined to place the bloc of indigenous nations, some 300 million around the world, as the major global counter factor to the New World Order.  In fact, this has always been so.  It has always been the people of the land who care for the Earth as a sacred mother to the generations of all life.  It has always been the tradition of the Original Nations to look upon our Father Sun as the source of life for all humanity.  Within the  cultures of the Indigenous Peoples of the world is the accumulated wisdom and knowledge of the entire human experience, not only the past 500, 2,000, or 5,000 years.  And for the true nations of the world, there is only one race- the human race.

 

To we in Abya Yala - Itzachitlan [the Americas] has fallen a great responsibility in this global effort to reestablish the path of balance for the human family.  Across North and South Abya Yala the OrigiNations are in movement, uniting in anticipation of the historical moment that will surely come soon now.  It always was there, in our calendar and in our prophesies.  The Confederation of the Eagle and the Condor has been invoked, and wind of their wings bring a great change.  This transformation has been called the coming of the Sun of Justice, the Sun of Consciousness.  With roots in indigenous precepts of natural law, the equilibrium of nature, and the integral part that humanity has in the web of life is the ancestral concept of justice observed in harmony with the natural world of reciprocity and equilibrium.  Environmental Justice.

TONATIERRA

802 N. 7th Street Phoenix, AZ 85006

Mail:  P.O. Box 24009 Phoenix, AZ 85074

www.tonatierra.org

(Authors note: The piece above was written en 2003, four years before the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and before the Climate Justice and Rights of Mother Earth were articulated in the global agendas of the UN system)

###

YouTube:

 Return to Aztlan
In Neklhuayotl, In Aztlan

November 9, 2018

A report from the site of the National Chicano Youth Liberation Conference of 1969 at the headquarters of the Crusade for Justice in Denver, Colorado by Tupak Huehuecoyotl, Izaloteka.
The Spirit of the Roots of Truth: In Nelhuayotl, In Aztlan.
 

 ****************************

Nohuanyoqueh,

 

The following is a transcription of the intervention submitted to the United States Government representative to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, Switzerland in 1987. It is being offered here as an initiative of the Archives of Aztlan, www.tonatierra.org

 

In Geneva in 1987, we met with traditional leaders from the Indigenous Peoples of South Africa, chieftains of the Zulu who were living in exile in Switzerland due to their trade union activism. We discussed the points that we were bringing forward and compared our histories and knowledge. Upon reading our position paper which called for the reopening of the question of integration of the territories within the bounds of the US control in light of the current international instruments and protocols for decolonization, these leaders immediately drafted a parallel document that exposed as identical the legal tactics of the British-Boer regimes to those of the British-American techniques of colonization.

 

 

From the Archives of Aztlan:

 

Tlahtokan Izkalotl

Chicano Spiritual Council

Aztlan Traditional Nation

 

November 2, 1989

 

The Honorable George Bush

President of the United States

The White House

Washington, DC

 

On August 3rd, 1982 we wrote a letter to the Department of Justice requesting a clarification of our legal status as native "inhabitants" of the territories relinquished to the United States under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo-1848 and the Gadsden Treaty of 1853. The response from the representative for the Civil Rights Division by Mr. James M. Schermerhorn was to the effect that the US Attorney General was only authorized to render legal opinions to you as President, and the heads of the executive departments of the federal government. The pertinent declarations and inquiries of our initial correspondence are as follows:

 

Aboriginal Title – Aztlan

 

It is a common assumption that by Treaties of Guadalupe Hidalgo 1848 and the Gadsden Purchase of 1853 that the US acquired clear title to the territories therein described. Yet, the Native Nations populating these territories - legal holders of aboriginal title and sovereignty, never relinquished these powers to the government of the Mexican Republic of 1848. The case of Pit River, and the California Tribes with their unratified treaties are a testament to this fact as is the Hopi Nation. Thus, the land right acquired by these treaties is not one of clear title, but only a franchise to pursue extinguishment of the Indian or Aboriginal Title.

 

 

Citizenship

 

The falsehood that all Mexicanos in the relinquished territories became full US citizens as a result of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo has as it basis the 8th Article which states:

 

". . . but they shall be under the obligation to make their election within one year from the date of the exchange of ratifications of this treaty; and those who shall remain in the said territories after the expiration of that year, without having declared their intention to retain the character of Mexicans, shall be considered to have elected to become citizens of the United States."

 

In fact, for those Mexicano inhabitants of the territories who were nonwhite (non-European) no such opportunity was legally available. This is evidence by US naturalization law then in effect which required the racial identity of "WHITE" to be eligible for naturalization. Secondly, the California Constitution of 1849 limited the political rights of citizenship to "white male citizens of Mexico." Thirdly, the territorial acts of New Mexico and Utah, 1850, also restricted participation to "free white males." Fourthly, the 14th Amendment opening US nationality to nonwhites was 20 years away (1868) and finally as stated in the 1868 Convention regarding citizenship of Emigrants between US and Mexico, Article 1:

 

"The declaration of an intention to become a citizen of one of the other country has not for either party the effect of naturalization."

 

In view of these facts, did the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo identify the "white" and "nonwhite" Mexican inhabitants of the territories as separate and distinct populations within its provisions? Specifically, please clarify the identity of "established" vs. "not established" Mexicans as stated in Article 8.

 

Finally, if no distinction was made in the treaty, what is the explanation of the US Government for the division of Mexicanos into "white" and "nonwhite" classes in Federal, State and Territorial Governments since it was through these mechanisms that US Citizenship was to be acquired?

 

Clearly, these are questions of law that must be evaluated before a foundation of justice based on truth can exist for the Xicano Mexicano Peoples and indeed for all the aboriginal sovereignties of the treaty territories. What is essentially called into question is the process of integration of the territories into the political domain of the United States, which in addition to the defect in popular participation outlined above, must be reevaluated in terms of current international legal standards. We remind you of the United Nations Resolution 1541 (XV), Principle V:

 

"Once it has been established that such a prima facia case of geographical and ethnical or cultural distinctions of a territory exists, other elements may then be brought into consideration. These additional elements may be, inter alia, of an administrative, political, juridical, economic or historical nature. If they affect the relationship between the metropolitan State and territory concerned in a manner which arbitrarily places the latter in a position or status of subordination, they support the presumption that there is an obligation to transmit information under Article 73 e of the Charter."

 

Mr. President, in consideration of the above, we are requesting that you intercede with the power of your office and direct the current Attorney General to render a legal opinion regarding the question we have posed.

 

We attentively await your reply.

 

Sincerely,

 

Tupac Enrique Acosta

TLAHTOKAN IZKALOTL

 

Watering the Tree of Life: Astronomy and the founding of Nahuatlaca culture

Watering the Tree of Life:

Astronomy and the founding of Nahuatlaca culture

Celestial, terrestrial, and human cycles are intertwined in that they reflect each other’s pacing: a woman’s life-giving time mirrors the Moon’s orbit around Earth of 28 days. The geometry of a human body and plant growth expresses the mathematics of the ratio between the orbits of Venus and Earth around the Sun. The number of days in a cycle of Venus from Morning to Evening Star is the human gestation sequence just before birth.

When Olmec and Maya spiritual representatives met to renew the Nahuatlaca world that had existed before the Nahui-Atl (Great Flood) they chose August 13, 3114 BC, the date when a Perseids meteor shower appears and when the Sun was in its zenith over that area. Later they would construct the city of Izapa there on August 13, 1359 BC, a city that expresses in the positions of its buildings the astronomy embodied in the Aztec Calendar. This construction pattern continued across Anahuac: Teotihuacan, Tollan, Mexico-Tenochtitlan, Chalchihuites, Chaco Canyon, Cahokia.

The Perseids meteor shower was chosen as a celestial marker because it symbolizes “watering of the Tree of Life.” As the shower happens, the meteorites appear to fall on the T-shaped constellation Cygnus. In Nahuatlaca cosmology Cygnus represents the Tree of Life. When the invocation of this astronomical event came in 3114 BC, another meaning was attached: the meteorites also represent corn seeds and Cygnus was a corn stalk, a new Tree of Life.

Carlos Aceves

Raíz de Aztlan 2020

Decía la Llorona
Cuando se miraba pá' el norte-

"Y mis hijos-
¿Que les pasará?
Reconocerán la lucha
de sus tatas?
Sentirán el calor
de su historia indígena,
como yo los enseñe?
Serán ahogados
en el rio
en la historia europea ,
o nomás
mojados?"

Tupac Enrique Acosta

(1980)

The following is a transcription of the intervention submitted to the United States Government representative to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, Switzerland in 1987. It is being offered here as an initiative of the Archives of Aztlan, TONATIERRA.

In Geneva in 1987, we met with traditional leaders from the Indigenous Peoples of South Africa, chieftains of the Zulu who were living in exile in Switzerland due to their trade union activism. We discussed the points that we were bringing forward and compared our histories and knowledge. Upon reading our position paper which called for the reopening of the question of integration of the territories within the bounds of the US control in light of the current international instruments and protocols for decolonization, these leaders immediately drafted a parallel document that exposed as identical the legal tactics of the British-Boer regimes to those of the British-American techniques of colonization.

From the Archives of Aztlan:

Tlahtokan Izkalotl

Chicano Spiritual Council

Aztlan Traditional Nation

November 2, 1989

The Honorable George Bush

President of the United States

The White House

Washington, DC

On August 3rd, 1982 we wrote a letter to the Department of Justice requesting a clarification of our legal status as native "inhabitants" of the territories relinquished to the United States under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo-1848 and the Gadsden Treaty of 1853. The response from the representative for the Civil Rights Division by Mr. James M. Schermerhorn was to the effect that the US Attorney General was only authorized to render legal opinions to you as President, and the heads of the executive departments of the federal government. The pertinent declarations and inquiries of our initial correspondence are as follows:

Aboriginal Title – Aztlan

It is a common assumption that by Treaties of Guadalupe Hidalgo 1848 and the Gadsden Purchase of 1853 that the US acquired clear title to the territories therein described. Yet, the Native Nations populating these territories - legal holders of aboriginal title and sovereignty, never relinquished these powers to the government of the Mexican Republic of 1848. The case of Pit River, and the California Tribes with their unratified treaties are a testament to this fact as is the Hopi Nation. Thus, the land right acquired by these treaties is not one of clear title, but only a franchise to pursue extinguishment of the Indian or Aboriginal Title.

Citizenship

The falsehood that all Mexicanos in the relinquished territories became full US citizens as a result of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo has as it basis the 8th Article which states:

". . . but they shall be under the obligation to make their election within one year from the date of the exchange of ratifications of this treaty; and those who shall remain in the said territories after the expiration of that year, without having declared their intention to retain the character of Mexicans, shall be considered to have elected to become citizens of the United States."

In fact, for those Mexicano inhabitants of the territories who were nonwhite (non-European) no such opportunity was legally available. This is evidence by US naturalization law then in effect which required the racial identity of "WHITE" to be eligible for naturalization. Secondly, the California Constitution of 1849 limited the political rights of citizenship to "white male citizens of Mexico." Thirdly, the territorial acts of New Mexico and Utah, 1850, also restricted participation to "free white males." Fourthly, the 14th Amendment opening US nationality to nonwhites was 20 years away (1868) and finally as stated in the 1868 Convention regarding citizenship of Emigrants between US and Mexico, Article 1:

"The declaration of an intention to become a citizen of one of the other country has not for either party the effect of naturalization."

In view of these facts, did the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo identify the "white" and "nonwhite" Mexican inhabitants of the territories as separate and distinct populations within its provisions? Specifically, please clarify the identity of "established" vs. "not established" Mexicans as stated in Article 8.

Finally, if no distinction was made in the treaty, what is the explanation of the US Government for the division of Mexicanos into "white" and "nonwhite" classes in Federal, State and Territorial Governments since it was through these mechanisms that US Citizenship was to be acquired?
 

Clearly, these are questions of law that must be evaluated before a foundation of justice based on truth can exist for the Xicano Mexicano Peoples and indeed for all the aboriginal sovereignties of the treaty territories. What is essentially called into question is the process of integration of the territories into the political domain of the United States, which in addition to the defect in popular participation outlined above, must be reevaluated in terms of current international legal standards. We remind you of the United Nations Resolution 1541 (XV), Principle V:

"Once it has been established that such a prima facia case of geographical and ethnical or cultural distinctions of a territory exists, other elements may then be brought into consideration. These additional elements may be, inter alia, of an administrative, political, juridical, economic or historical nature. If they affect the relationship between the metropolitan State and territory concerned in a manner which arbitrarily places the latter in a position or status of subordination, they support the presumption that there is an obligation to transmit information under Article 73 e of the Charter."

Mr. President, in consideration of the above, we are requesting that you intercede with the power of your office and direct the current Attorney General to render a legal opinion regarding the question we have posed.

We attentively await your reply.

Sincerely,

Tupac Enrique Acosta

TLAHTOKAN IZKALOTL

*******

Raíz de Aztlan
Crece y madura
En Los ojos de nuestros
Hijos y hijas.
Sus pies, floating
On the
Memory
of river water.

Archivos de Aztlan:

Tlahtokan Izkalotl

Chicano Spiritual Council

Aztlan Traditional Nation

2 de Noviembre de 1989

Honorable George H. Bush

Presidente de Los Estados Unidos

La Casa Blanca

Washington, D.C.

El 3 de Agosto de 1982, hemos escrito una carta al Departamento de Justicia solicitando una aclaración sobre nuestra condición de nativos “habitantes” de los territorios cedidos a los Estados Unidos, bajo el Tratado de Guadalupe Hidalgo 1848 y el Tratado Gadsden de 1853. La respuesta del representante de la División de Derechos Civiles, Señor James M. Schermerhorn, fue en efecto para decir que el Procurador General de los Estados Unidos sólo está autorizado a rendir opiniones legales a usted como Presidente y a los que encabezan los departamentos ejecutivos del gobierno federal.  Las investigaciones y declaraciones pertinentes en nuestra correspondencia inicial dicen:

TITULO PRIMODIAL  -   AZTLAN

Se supone generalmente, que por los Tratados de Guadalupe Hidalgo y por la Gadsden Purchase (compra Gadsden), Estados Unidos adquirió títulos legítimas de títulos legítimos sobre los territorios en ellos descritos.  Sin embargo, las Naciones Indígenas que pueblan estos territorios poseedoras legítimas de títulos primordiales y soberanía, nunca entregaron estos poderes al gobierno de la República de México de 1848.  El caso de Pit River y de las Tribus de California con sus tratados no ratificados son la prueba de ello, como les la Nación Hopi.  Así, el derecho a las tierra adquirida por estos tratados no es un titulo legítimo, sino únicamente una franquicia para persistir sobre el título Indígena, el de la Soberania Autóctona.

CUIDADANIA

No es cierto que todos los Mexicanos de los territorios cedidos hayan adquirido la completa ciudadanía de Estados Unidos como resultado del Tratado Guadalupe Hidalgo, presuntamente tal como estipula el artículo 8:

“…Mas la elección entre una y otra ciudadanía deberán hacerla dentro de un año contado desde la fecha del cange de las ratificaciones de este Tratado. Y los que permanecieren en los indicados territorios después de transcurrido el año, sin haber declarado su intención de retener el carácter de mexicanos, se considerará que han elegido ser ciudadanos de los Estados Unidos.”

De hecho, para aquellos Mexicanos habitantes de los territorios que no eran blancos (no europeos), tal oportunidad no les cobijada legalmente.  Esto es evidente en las leyes de naturalización de Estados Unidos y en su cumplimiento, las cuales requieren la identidad racial de “BLANCO”, para poder solicitar la naturalización.  En Segundo lugar, la constitución de California de 1849 limitó los derechos de ciudadanía a “varones blancos ciudadanos de México”.  En tercer lugar, las actas territoriales de Nuevo México y Utah, 1850, restringen también la participación a “los hombres blancos libres”.  En cuarto lugar, la 14ta enmienda constitucional que da la nacionalidad de Estados Unidos que por primera vez a los no-blancos, se hizo 20 años después (1868) y finalmente, como estipula el Articulo 1 de la Convención de 1868, conciérnete a la Ciudadanía de Emigrantes entre Estados Unidos y México:

“El hecho de declarar la intención de querer ser ciudadano de uno u otro país no tiene, para ninguna de las partes, el efecto de naturalización”.

En vista de estos hechos, el Tratado de Guadalupe Hidalgo identifica los habitantes Mexicanos “blancos” y “ no blancos” como poblaciones distintas y separadas en sus estipulaciones?

Requerimos aclarar particularmente la identidad de Mexicano “establecido” vs. “no establecido” como se estipula en Articulo 8.  Finalmente se el tratado no hace distinción ninguna, cual es la explicación del gobierno de los Estados Unidos para clasificar los Mexicanos en “blancos” y “no blancos” en gobiernos Federales, Estatales, y Territoriales, puesto que a través de estos mecanismos que la ciudadanía de Estados Unidos se adquiría?

Evidentemente, estas son cuestiones de derecho que tienen que ser evaluadas antes de establecer una justicia basada sobre la realidad histórica que tiene el Pueblo Chicano Mexicano en el territorio y aún más parta todas las Soberanías Autóctonas de los territorios que cubren los Tratados.  Lo que llama la atención especialmente es el proceso de integración de los territorios al dominio político de los Estados Unidos, el cual se suma a las deficiencias antes señaladas y que tiene que ser reevaluadas en términos que prevalecen dentro de las normas internacionales legales vigentes.  Le recordamos la resolución de la Asamblea General de Naciones Unidas 1541(XV) Principio V:

“Una vez establecido que se trata a la primera vista de un territorio distinto desde el punto de vista geográfico y étnico o cultural, se pueden tener en cuenta otros elementos.  Estos podrán ser, entre otros, de carácter administrativo, político, jurídico, económico, o histórico.  Si influyen en las relaciones entre el Estado metropolitano y el territorio de modo que éste se encuentra colocado arbitrariamente en una situación o en estado de subordinación, estos elementos confirman la presunción de que existe la obligación de transmitir la información que se pide en el inciso (e) del Articulo 73 de la Carta.”

Señor Presidente, tomando en consideración lo que precede, nosotros le pedimos que Usted interfiera con el poder que le confiere su cargo y ordene al Procurador General encargado de dar un juicio legal sobre las cuestiones que hemos planteado.

Esperando su respuesta, quedamos de Usted muy atentamente.

Sinceramente,

Tupac Enrique Acosta

Tlahtokan Izkalotl

###

Seven Global Currencies of the Indigenous Peoples

Seven Caves : Seven Stars

SoundCloud: 

Seven Global Currencies of the Indigenous Peoples

Life Sustaining Systems of Exchange and Reciprocity

An Evaluation Matrix for the Global Economy

The Breath of Life

The Water of Life

The Givers of Life

The Sustainers of Life

The Foundation of Life

The Sharers of Life

The Seed of Life

*************************************

The Breath of Life: The Air, Winds and Atmosphere

The Water of Life: The Waters, the Clouds, Waterways, Rivers and Streams, and Oceans

The Givers of Life: The Sacred Species: Buffalo, Deer, Salmon, and Eagle

The Sustainers of Life: Corn, Beans. Squash (agriculture)

The Foundation of Life: The Land and Territory, Mother Earth

The Sharers of Life: Community, Clans and Pueblos and Nations

The Seed of Life: The Spirit, The Light: Quetzalcoatl

TIME is NOW

Architectures of the States and the

Territorial Integrity of Mother Earth

As Peoples of Mother Earth, we collectively determine to regenerate our relationships among ourselves within a Cultural Climate of Mutual Respect, Inclusion, Complementarity, and Self Determination beyond the existing constrains of the international systems of state sovereignty and in responsibility to the well being of the future generations;

Recognizing that unless this fundamental dimension of international relationships among human societies at the planetary level is first recognized, established and affirmed, there will be no sustainable progress in addressing effectively and in timely manner the Climate Chaos scenario that now befalls all of Humanity due to the impacts on Global Climate exacerbated greenhouse gas emissions by industrial society and extractive industries in particular in complicity with national government states and existing international monetary systems and institutions.

Therefore we proclaim and hereby reaffirm in collective Responsibility as Peoples of Mother Earth, in Equality with all Peoples, our collective Right of Representation and Self Determination in addressing the issues before the COP20 beyond the constraints of the architecture of the States and their agreements;

We further affirm and proclaim in Full, Effective, and Complete exercise of our equally shared Right of Self Determination as Peoples of Mother Earth, that our Sacred Mother Earth is subject of the Right of Self Determination beyond the limited juridical constraints of the Westphalian System of State Sovereignty represented in UN system and the international architectures of personality and procedures of negotiation and agreements;

NAHUACALLI

Embassy of Indigenous Peoples

c/o TONATIERRA

TP.O. Box 24009   Phoenix, AZ 85074

Email: tonal@tonatierra.org

www.tonatierra.org