This project examines the decision of American policymakers to deny the Amerasians of Vietnam--the offspring of American fathers and Vietnamese mothers born as a result of the Vietnam War--American citizenship in the 1982 Amerasian Immigration Act and the 1987 Amerasian Homecoming Act. It investigates why policymakers deemed a population unfit for the responsibilities of American society, despite the fact that they had American fathers.

The examination draws upon numerous archival collections of the key policymakers, humanitarians and non-governmental organizations involved in each piece of legislation. Additionally, archival and published documents from the U.S. government and military, popular media, and veteran's organizations, are important. Since many of those involved in the legislation are still living, oral history interviews are also a critical piece of the methodology.

The dissertation argues that the exclusion of citizenship was a component of bigger issues: international relationships in a Cold War era, America's defeat in the Vietnam War, and a history in the United States of racialized exclusionary immigration and citizenship policies against people of Asian descent. It exposes the contradictory approach of policymakers unable to reconcile the Amerasian mixture of race and nation with US law. Consequently, policymakers simultaneously employed an inclusionary discourse that deemed the Amerasians worthy of American attention, guidance and humanitarian aid, and implemented exclusionary policies that designated them unfit for the responsibilities of American citizenship.

This research explores the various and often conflicting interpretations of the Battle of Horseshoe Bend, an event seemingly lost in the public mind of twenty-first century America. The conflict, which pitted United States forces under the command of Major General Andrew Jackson against a militant offshoot of the Creek Confederacy, known as the Redsticks, ranks as the single most staggering loss of life in annals of American Indian warfare. Today, exactly 200 years after the conflict, the legacy of Horseshoe Bend stands as an obscure and often unheard of event. Drawing upon over two centuries of unpublished archival data, newspapers, and political propaganda this research argues that the dominate narrative of Northern history, the shadowy details of the War of 1812, and the erasure of shameful events from the legacy of westward expansion have all contributed to transform what once was a battle of epic proportions, described by Jackson himself as an "extermination," into a seemingly forgotten affair. Ultimately, the Battle of Horseshoe Bend's elusiveness has allowed for the production of various historical myths and political messages, critiques and hyperboles, facts and theories. Hailed as a triumph during the War of 1812, and a high-water mark by the proponents of Manifest Destiny, Jackson's victory has also experienced its fair share of American derision and disregard. Whereas some have criticized the battle as a "cold blooded massacre," others have glorified it as a touchstone of American masculinity, and excused it as a natural event in the unfolding of human evolution. Despite the battle's controversial nature, on 3 August 1956, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, a strong supporter of the National Park Service, approved act HR 11766 establishing Horseshoe Bend National Military Park, the very first national park in the state of Alabama. Hailed and forgotten, silenced and celebrated, exploited and yet largely unknown. This research explores what happened after the smoke cleared at the Battle of Horseshoe Bend. It is a story about the production of history, the power of the past, and the malleability of the American mind.

Twentieth century California Indians have received muted attention from scholars. The sheer size and diversity of California Indians can be overwhelming. Geographically, California is the third largest state and home to one hundred and ten federally recognized tribes. California Indians created alliances across the state among diverse tribal groups. Indian advocacy and activism of the twentieth century has been a limited discussion focused on four major events: Alcatraz occupation of 1969; Trail of Broken Treaties and subsequent occupation of the Bureau of Indian Affairs building of 1972; Wounded Knee of 1973; and the "Longest Walk" in 1978. These four major developments should not be ignored. However, the discussion should be broader and include diverse forms of advocacy and activism. In 1964 Rupert Costo, Cahuilla, his wife Jeannette Henry-Costo, Eastern Cherokee, and thirteen Indians from diverse tribes, largely from California, founded the American Indian Historical Society (AIHS). Costo served as president of the organization until its dissolution in 1986. The San Francisco based group sought to improve education, communication, and cultural development among Indians. Members of this activist organization challenged textbooks, testified at congressional hearings, created an Indian controlled publishing house, coordinated community meetings, and lobbied for protection of burial grounds. It also circulated, Wassaja, one of the first national Indian newspapers with original content. Through its publications, the AIHS sought to inform and promote mutual understanding between Indians and non-Indians. The AIHS' philosophy centered on the belief that Indians could, through their own initiative and innovation, lead the fight in Indian affairs. Through the years, the AIHS supported Indian issues and efforts of individual tribes to preserve their rights. Thus, the AIHS defended tribal self-determination and rejected pan-indianism. The federal government policy of relocation encouraged non-California Indians to move into California. Relocation caused friction as the focus by many in the mainstream media turned its attention to relocated Indians which increasingly rendered California Indians invisible. However, with conscientious effort the AIHS worked towards informing and educating Indians and non-Indians.

Museums reflect power relations in society. Centuries of tradition dictate that museum professionals through years of study have more knowledge about the past and culture than the communities they present and serve. As mausoleums of intellect, museums developed cultures that are resistant to relinquishing any authority to the public. The long history of museums as the authority over the past led to the alienation and exclusion of many groups from museums, particular indigenous communities. Since the 1970s, many Native groups across the United States established their own museums in response to the exclusion of their voices in mainstream institutions. As establishments preserving cultural material, tradition, and history, tribal museums are recreating the meaning of "museum," presenting a model of cooperation and inclusion of community members to the museum process unprecedented in other institutions. In a changing world, many scholars and professionals call for a sharing of authority in museum spaces in order to engage the pubic in new ways, yet many cultural institutions s struggle to find a way to negotiate the traditional model of a museum while working with communities. Conversely, the practice of power sharing present in Iroquois (Haudenosaunee) tradition shaped a museum culture capable of collaboration with their community. Focusing on the Akwesasne Museum as a case study, this dissertation argues that the ability for a museum to share authority of the past with its community is dependent on the history and framework of the culture of the institution, its recognition of the importance of place to informing the museum, and the use of cultural symbols to encourage collaboration. At its core, this dissertation concerns issues of authority, power, and ownership over the past in museum spaces.

The Kootenai River landscape of southwestern British Columbia, northwestern Montana and the very northern tip of Idaho helped unify the indigenous Ktunaxa tribe and guided tribal lifestyles for centuries. However, the Ktunaxa bands' intimate connection with the river underwent a radical transformation during the nineteenth century. This study analyzes how the Ktunaxa relationship with the Kootenai River faced challenges presented by a new understanding of the meaning of landscape introduced by outside groups who began to ply the river's waters in the early 1800s. As the decades passed, the establishment of novel boundaries, including the new U.S.-Canadian border and reserve/reservation delineations, forever altered Ktunaxa interaction with the land. The very meaning of the river for the Ktunaxa as a source of subsistence, avenue of transportation and foundation of spiritual identity experienced similar modifications. In a matter of decades, authoritarian lines on foreign maps imposed a concept of landscape far removed from the tribe's relatively fluid and shifting understanding of boundary lines represented by the river at the heart of the Ktunaxa homeland. This thesis draws on early ethnographic work with the Ktunaxa tribe in addition to the journals of early traders and missionaries in the Kootenai region to describe how the Ktunaxa way of life transformed during the nineteenth century. The works of anthropologist Keith Basso and environmental philosopher David Abram are used to develop an understanding of the powerful implications of the separation of the Ktunaxa people from the landscape so essential to tribal identity and lifestyle. Two different understandings of boundaries and the human relationship with the natural world clashed along the Kootenai River in the 1800s, eventually leading to the separation of the valley's indigenous inhabitants from each other and from the land itself. What water had once connected, lines on maps now divided, redefining this extensive landscape and its meaning for the Ktunaxa people. However, throughout decades of dominance of the Western mapmakers' worldview and in spite of the overwhelming influence of this Euro-American approach to the environment, members of the Ktunaxa tribe have been able to maintain much of their traditional culture.

This thesis explores the story behind the long effort to achieve Native American suffrage in Arizona. It focuses on two Arizona Supreme Court cases, in which American Indians attempted, and were denied the right to register to vote. The first trial occurred in 1928, four years after the Indian Citizenship Act granted citizenship to all Native Americans born or naturalized in the United States. The Arizona Supreme Court rejected the Native American plaintiff's appeal to register for the electorate, and subsequently disenfranchised Native Americans residing on reservations for the next twenty years. In 1948, a new generation of Arizona Supreme Court Justices overturned the court's previous ruling and finally awarded voting rights to all qualified Native Americans in the state. However, voting rights during the Civil Rights era did not necessarily mean equal voting rights. Therefore, this thesis also investigates how the Voting Rights Act of 1965 greatly reduced the detrimental effects of voter discrimination. This study examines how national events, like world war and the Great Depression influenced the two trials. In particular, this thesis focuses on the construction of political and social power in Arizona as it related to Native American voting rights. In addition, it discusses the evolution of native citizenship in the United States at large and for the most part within Arizona. The thesis also considers how the goal of native assimilation into American society affected American Indian citizenship, and how a paternalistic and conservative American Indian policy of the 1920s greatly influenced the outcome of the first trial. Another thread of this story is the development of mainstream white views of Native Americans. Lastly, this thesis identifies the major players of this story, especially the American Indian activists and their supporters whose courage and perseverance led to an outcome that positively changed the legal rights of generations of Native Americans in Arizona for years to come.