Probing an Intellectual Quagmire

Abstract

B ARSH'S ATTEMPT TO FIND A UNITY in twentieth-century Indian policy is provocative and often insightful but not entirely satisfactory. Certainly his suggestion that Indian land and resources have been central to policy seems valid. Similarly, one can agree that bureaucracy offers a degree of continuity because the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), like all government agencies, seeks its own perpetuation. But the continuity is less strong than Barsh indicates. For purposes of commentary, this essay will center on four principal areas: the nature of the BIA, Indian policy during the pre-World War I era, John Collier's Indian Deal, and Barsh's use of Arthur C. Ludington's policy study during the Wilson administration. Barsh does not fully appreciate the unique nature of the BIA, a kind of government within the federal government guided by diverse and often contradictory forces. The services and protections carried out by the BIA because of treaties and statutes, for example, frequently conflict with white vested interests which attempt to shape Indian policies and legislation. Despite its many critics-Indian and whitethe outcome of these conflicts varies. The BIA is not always stupid or evil, and it sometimes demonstrates a surprising degree of altruism in its handling of Indian affairs. Attempting to discover some unity presents difficulties that Barsh has not overcome entirely. Barsh also treats the BIA as a static organization when in fact its nature has changed substantially during the twentieth century. The agency, for example, started the century with some degree of strength within the federal hierarchy, but it has increasingly lost influence to better financed and more aggressive public domain agencies formed in the interior and agriculture departments during the Progressive and Deal Eras. Moreover, the composition of BIA personnel has changed as Indian administrators assumed more central posts in the BIA since 1933. Curiously, their presence has not reduced the vocal criticisms from the field, and the BIA remains the focus of the peculiar love-hate attitudes of many Indians. His assessment of the social and economic forces of pre-World War I America appears outdated and overly simplistic. In light of subsequent events, the famous debate between Roosevelt and Wilson (New Nationalism vs. New Freedom) during the 1912 campaign