Digital & Print Membership
Yearly + Receive 8 free printed back issues
$420 Annually
Monthly + Receive 3 free printed back issues
$40 Monthly
Mní On Trial
Listening to Indigenous Voices on Standing Rock
For one to understand the accurate truth of Indigenous Peoples’ oral history and their present-day struggles, we must listen first. This is part of the oral history of the Oceti Šakówiŋ, shared with me by community leader Phil Two Eagle, Sicangu Treaty Council Executive Director:
“The name Oceti Šakówiŋ, meaning The Seven Council Fires, is known today as the collective name of our Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota Oyate (people)—seven distinct yet related nations bound together through ancient kinship, shared language roots, and ceremonial responsibilities. According to our elders, the name Oceti Šakówiŋ carries meaning far beyond political or tribal organization. It is rooted in the stars, the cosmos, and the sacred cycles of life. One way we received this name is from the universe itself. Our ancestors understood that the universe spirals with seven great arms, ever-turning, much like the sacred fire that brings our people together. We also inherited the name from the heavens—from the Wičháȟpi Šákowin, the Seven Stars of the Big Dipper constellation. These seven stars are a sacred teaching for our people, reminding us to live in balance, to walk the path of the Woopȟe (natural law), and to recognize that our ancestors are watching from above.
The Oceti Šakówiŋ also reflects the Seven Directions: East, South, West, North, Above, Below, and Within—the sacred center, where our spirit resides and where we light the fire. Each direction holds teachings and responsibilities, and together they make the circle of life complete. There are the Seven Sacred Stages of Life: Conception, Birth, Childhood, Adolescence, Adulthood, Elderhood, and Death (and Rebirth)—each a fire that burns in our journey, each a step in our becoming. These seven stages align with the sacred hoop of life and are honored in our ceremonies, especially those given to us by the White Buffalo Calf Woman. To be Oceti Šakówiŋ is not only to belong to the Seven Council Fires on Earth—it is to remember that we are patterned after the universe itself. Our name is a living prayer, a reflection of the stars, the spirals of creation, the sacred stages of life, and the sacred fire at the heart of every Tiwahe (family unit), every Tiospaye (extended family), and every Oyate (people).”

Mní Wíčoni means “WATER IS LIFE” in the Lakota and Dakota languages. On February 24, 2025, Standing Rock’s most essential resource of survival was on trial. Alone and at risk. Again. Since 2014, the Tribe’s water and human rights have been threatened by American corporate giant Energy Transfer (ET), and their golden child, the DAPL pipeline (The Dakota Access Pipeline).
The pipeline’s goal: Profiting $1.37+ billion per year off the lives of The Oceti Šakówiŋ and thousands of Indigenous communities, farmers, and towns in four different states (modern-day North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, and Illinois), and going after one world-famous Environmental NGO: Greenpeace.
Before we can even dive into the ET vs. Greenpeace trial, we must keep up with the long-standing legal battle between The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (Oceti Šakówiŋ) and the U.S Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). This 2016 lawsuit was over the illegalities of ET’s permitless pipeline’s location and construction, residing on Sovereign inherited ancestral Tribal land, Unceded Territory and Treaty land. After years of questionable court delays and dismissals, in 2024, Standing Rock decided to file a new lawsuit against the Army Corps—for allowing the continuation of the DAPL Pipeline’s illegal transport of crude.
“The Corps of Engineers has not earned the trust of our Tribe,” Standing Rock Chairwoman Janet Alkire said in a statement announcing the appeal for their new lawsuit against the Army Corps. “We cannot rely on the Corps to properly evaluate DAPL, so we are continuing our legal efforts to protect our water and our people from this dangerous pipeline.”
The “black snake” (aka today’s crude oil) is an ancient prophecy of the Oceti Šakówiŋ. The snake carries 574,000 barrels of liquid gold per day, under and across 200 waterways. DAPL had been “re-routed from a crossing above Bismarck, ND (84% white) across the Missouri River at the mouth of the Cannonball River on the Lake Oahe reservoir, less than one-half mile upstream from The Standing Rock reservation,” explained the Tribe. In today’s world, that would be considered a severe act of Environmental Racism.
Tim Mentz, former Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, produced the most thorough literature I have read regarding the environmental and cultural resource reviews of that specific territory. Read Mentz’s letter to Washington DC’s Deputy Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs. It is a crucial document that has been purposely and strategically discredited by Energy Transfer, its executives and attorneys.
As Standing Rock explains, “The 1851 Treaty of Fort Laramie guaranteed Unceded Treaty lands to the Oceti Šakówiŋ Oyate (The Seven Council Fires, colonially known as The Great Sioux Nation) at the crossing of the Heart River in present-day central North Dakota.”
If we were to step outside the corrupt racist structure of our Judicial system, anyone with logic would ask how the US government could allow a corporation to bypass an industrial-scale easement, profit billions, and go after an NGO for more than half a billion dollars. To add to the chaos, many also don’t know that there was a third lawsuit playing in the background, dancing with the other two. In the 2019 lawsuit, North Dakota State won $28 million, which to many, proved that the state believed USACE was responsible for the financial losses and for the costs of law enforcement to quell the Standing Rock protests. ET’s theory was that Greenpeace was responsible for all the financial losses and delays impacting DAPL’s construction, when in actuality there were two other lawsuits challenging the pipeline’s claims. This fight for Indigenous human rights had involved three active lawsuits with many complex layers, designed this way to confuse us all.
Coincidentally, about a week after Greenpeace lost, Standing Rock’s case was put on the back burner again by Federal Judge Boasberg. He dismissed their lawsuit and announced they would have to wait for USACE’s complete environmental study, which after five years, is still ongoing. On June 7, Standing Rock filed a notice of appeal signaling their intent to ask the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to review Judge Boasberg’s decision to dismiss their lawsuit. An investigative journalist should investigate why USACE’s environmental study is taking so long. Something is fishy.
Whilst Standing Rock’s lawsuit was playing in the background like a colonial ghost story, this past February-March 2025, I had the chance to witness the monstrous case: Energy Transfer (ET) vs. Greenpeace fund, Greenpeace International, and Greenpeace Inc. Most people still don’t know the legal breakdown of ET’s SLAPP suits against Greenpeace. You can catch up here.
I have yet to see this important statement issued by The Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Chairwoman, Janet Alkire, in any mainstream media outlet. They had a lot to share about the case, yet no one seems to have read it. To stay afloat, one must learn what the Indigenous communities, especially the elders, are saying. This is what helped steer me in the right direction in the midst of the information war that Energy Transfer and our legal system were creating and injecting into all three lawsuits pertaining to the pipeline.
With so much at stake, I wanted to witness everything firsthand, so I tagged alongside my close friend and renowned environmental justice attorney and corporate prisoner Steven Donziger who was meeting up with other legendary attorneys, Mandela’s Martin Garbus, The Farmers’ lawyer Sarah Vogel, Water Protector Legal’s Natali Segovia, and Environmental lawyer Scott Badenoch, to name a few. Judge Gion had declined all Press requests, which led the trial monitoring group to form a website to provide expert independent legal analysis to the public. There are many alarming findings that the Trial Monitors listed on their website, under “Trial Monitoring Statements.” The one that really bothers me is:
Prejudicial Mailers and Advertising: Energy Transfer or its affiliates appear to have distributed materials—including mailers and advertisements—in the jury catchment area and in other local 2 areas of the state portraying Greenpeace and the Dakota Access Pipeline protests in a negative light. These materials appear designed to sway public opinion and influence prospective jurors against Greenpeace. We are also concerned that Judge Gion has thus far denied a motion by Greenpeace to take discovery on who exactly paid for the mailers and ads, essentially denying the rights of the organization to motion the court for a remedy based on all relevant information.
Back in the courtroom, I observed the plaintiffs’ lead attorney, Gibson Dunn and Crutcher’s Trey Cox (Fossil Fuel’s favorite law firm), aggressively take over the linguistics of this case, arrogantly discrediting the Tribe’s Indigenous rights and existence.
On March 19, 2025, the oil town’s 9-member jury found Greenpeace guilty of nearly double the amount of the claims, $666 million to be exact. Interesting number. Despite my state of shock, my courtroom flashbacks reminded me of the jury’s PTSD stories. A local cafe owner had shared that the jurors had lived through 100k+ “strangers” coming and going through their towns, turning their daily lives upside down. The jurors’ verdict was an emotional symptom of colonial generational trauma bonding. The bias was oozing. I saw it in their eyes and facial expressions. I had never seen a jury collectively take such an extreme emotional vendetta on an NGO. When Greenpeace was charged with the maximum allowed punitive damages, it was clear to everyone that this legal fight had just morphed into a massive financial legal battle.
This shook the entire Environmental Justice community to its core and was another racist slap to The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and the entire Indigenous community of Turtle Island (aka The USA). As for Greenpeace, they have made it very clear to me and the public that, “If we have to take this all the way to the Supreme Court, we will!”
As Paul Paz y Miño, Associate Director at Amazon Watch, said so passionately whilst being interviewed by Steven Donziger next to the Missouri River, “It is the mighty corporations flexing their muscles to abuse the legal system… Greenpeace is not the only one on trial. Everyone is on trial. Standing Rock, all the organizations that stood with them. Greenpeace is just the sacrificial lamb because Energy Transfer wants its pound of flesh, and it thinks it can bankrupt Greenpeace and terrify the other organizations alongside it.”
Many unanswered questions were flying outside the courtroom and are still blank today.
How can 9 people define so much for Indigenous land and water rights?
Will the outcome of this case influence The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s chances to win their own legal battles?
Can peaceful protests be banned or severely challenged in this country?
Will transparent journalism be at risk of existing?
Will our freedom of speech vanish indefinitely?
Will one of the oldest and most notable American Environmental organizations in the world cease to exist?
Everything about this trial had been designed to fail. The cherry on top of it all, was when I found out how political it really was, as ET’s Kelcy Warren, was also one of Donald Trump’s top supporters, donating approximately $16 million+ to his presidential campaigns, fundraisers, and Trump groups, between 2016-2024. At one point, Trump even had direct financial ties to ET, by owning shares in the pipeline’s stocks.
This trial was a circus. A very expensive one. ET plucked Greenpeace out of the anti-DAPL movement’s hat, strategically ignoring that there were 100k+ Tribes, Nations, Indigenous groups, and allies from all over the world (veterans, activists, attorneys, scientists, religious groups, NGOs, famous musicians, celebrities, and even a president) coming together. This became one of the most united international solidarity movements in the world, led by a National Indigenous uprising.
In 2016, The UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues visited Standing Rock and issued a statement and report. This past April, the Trial Monitors sent a letter requesting for an independent United Nations human rights expert to “investigate ‘flagrant and repeated’ due process violations in the proceeding that resulted in an unprecedented $600 million verdict against the environmental organization.”
Steven Donziger weighed in: “We believe it is critical that people all over the world pay close attention to what is probably the most important legal case in the world related to the fossil fuel industry’s efforts to squelch free speech as a way to try to stifle the climate movement. The showdown between Greenpeace and Energy Transfer will go a long way toward determining whether our courts have the fortitude to push back against industry’s abuse of power and its targeting of Indigenous Peoples and the environment. As trial monitors, our purpose is to document the due process violations at trial and bring them into the public domain.”
This case led me to meet incredible souls and community leaders who were gracious enough to share their wisdom. “There is a complete disconnect between the colonial world and our Lakota way of Life. There is no accurate way to translate our way of life into ‘written documents or laws.’ The colonial way, it doesn’t belong to us. Our stories are passed down from our ancestors through oral history and teachings. We live by our Lakota way of life. Our connection is deep rooted in the land and mother earth. It is simple but hard to put into words. The colonial world likes to place us in boxes and for our people it is a worldview,” explained Jen Martel, a member of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, community organizer at Standing Rock, Sitting Bull College Visitor Center Coordinator, and Filmmaker of “Oyate.”
Father Floberg from St. James Episcopal church and longtime community member at Standing Rock, happened to sit next to me in court for most of the time I was there. One of the first things he shared with me was the ongoing frustrations he had with the courtroom, as everyone kept ignoring: “That unceded territory is HISTORIC TRIBAL TERRITORY. It was unlawfully ‘taken’ when the United States Congress broke the 1868 Treaty as it took the Black Hills and this territory. That act by Congress was unlawful, without remedy being provided for the unceded territory and an unacceptable remedy for the Black Hills theft itself. The distinction is critical. Reservation Land is not the same as Historic Tribal Territory.”
Today, Indigenous Nations and their descendants express that their very existence, including their oral history and Tribal law, is in jeopardy. They are struggling to survive and to be properly taught by the US educational system, let alone to be recognized and adopted in the US Federal Judicial system, or any US court for that matter.
The elders have a lot to express, and they want to be heard. It is up to each and every one of us to open our ears and offer our hands in support. The fight continues.
{
"article":
{
"title" : "Mní On Trial: Listening to Indigenous Voices on Standing Rock",
"author" : "Giada Lubomirski",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/mni-on-trial-lakota-dakota-nakota-greenpeace-and-energy-transfer",
"date" : "2025-07-20 17:35:46 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/mni-on-trial-thumb.jpg",
"excerpt" : "For one to understand the accurate truth of Indigenous Peoples’ oral history and their present-day struggles, we must listen first. This is part of the oral history of the Oceti Šakówiŋ, shared with me by community leader Phil Two Eagle, Sicangu Treaty Council Executive Director:",
"content" : "For one to understand the accurate truth of Indigenous Peoples’ oral history and their present-day struggles, we must listen first. This is part of the oral history of the Oceti Šakówiŋ, shared with me by community leader Phil Two Eagle, Sicangu Treaty Council Executive Director:“The name Oceti Šakówiŋ, meaning The Seven Council Fires, is known today as the collective name of our Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota Oyate (people)—seven distinct yet related nations bound together through ancient kinship, shared language roots, and ceremonial responsibilities. According to our elders, the name Oceti Šakówiŋ carries meaning far beyond political or tribal organization. It is rooted in the stars, the cosmos, and the sacred cycles of life. One way we received this name is from the universe itself. Our ancestors understood that the universe spirals with seven great arms, ever-turning, much like the sacred fire that brings our people together. We also inherited the name from the heavens—from the Wičháȟpi Šákowin, the Seven Stars of the Big Dipper constellation. These seven stars are a sacred teaching for our people, reminding us to live in balance, to walk the path of the Woopȟe (natural law), and to recognize that our ancestors are watching from above.The Oceti Šakówiŋ also reflects the Seven Directions: East, South, West, North, Above, Below, and Within—the sacred center, where our spirit resides and where we light the fire. Each direction holds teachings and responsibilities, and together they make the circle of life complete. There are the Seven Sacred Stages of Life: Conception, Birth, Childhood, Adolescence, Adulthood, Elderhood, and Death (and Rebirth)—each a fire that burns in our journey, each a step in our becoming. These seven stages align with the sacred hoop of life and are honored in our ceremonies, especially those given to us by the White Buffalo Calf Woman. To be Oceti Šakówiŋ is not only to belong to the Seven Council Fires on Earth—it is to remember that we are patterned after the universe itself. Our name is a living prayer, a reflection of the stars, the spirals of creation, the sacred stages of life, and the sacred fire at the heart of every Tiwahe (family unit), every Tiospaye (extended family), and every Oyate (people).”Mní Wíčoni means “WATER IS LIFE” in the Lakota and Dakota languages. On February 24, 2025, Standing Rock’s most essential resource of survival was on trial. Alone and at risk. Again. Since 2014, the Tribe’s water and human rights have been threatened by American corporate giant Energy Transfer (ET), and their golden child, the DAPL pipeline (The Dakota Access Pipeline).The pipeline’s goal: Profiting $1.37+ billion per year off the lives of The Oceti Šakówiŋ and thousands of Indigenous communities, farmers, and towns in four different states (modern-day North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, and Illinois), and going after one world-famous Environmental NGO: Greenpeace.Before we can even dive into the ET vs. Greenpeace trial, we must keep up with the long-standing legal battle between The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (Oceti Šakówiŋ) and the U.S Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). This 2016 lawsuit was over the illegalities of ET’s permitless pipeline’s location and construction, residing on Sovereign inherited ancestral Tribal land, Unceded Territory and Treaty land. After years of questionable court delays and dismissals, in 2024, Standing Rock decided to file a new lawsuit against the Army Corps—for allowing the continuation of the DAPL Pipeline’s illegal transport of crude.“The Corps of Engineers has not earned the trust of our Tribe,” Standing Rock Chairwoman Janet Alkire said in a statement announcing the appeal for their new lawsuit against the Army Corps. “We cannot rely on the Corps to properly evaluate DAPL, so we are continuing our legal efforts to protect our water and our people from this dangerous pipeline.”The “black snake” (aka today’s crude oil) is an ancient prophecy of the Oceti Šakówiŋ. The snake carries 574,000 barrels of liquid gold per day, under and across 200 waterways. DAPL had been “re-routed from a crossing above Bismarck, ND (84% white) across the Missouri River at the mouth of the Cannonball River on the Lake Oahe reservoir, less than one-half mile upstream from The Standing Rock reservation,” explained the Tribe. In today’s world, that would be considered a severe act of Environmental Racism.Tim Mentz, former Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, produced the most thorough literature I have read regarding the environmental and cultural resource reviews of that specific territory. Read Mentz’s letter to Washington DC’s Deputy Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs. It is a crucial document that has been purposely and strategically discredited by Energy Transfer, its executives and attorneys.As Standing Rock explains, “The 1851 Treaty of Fort Laramie guaranteed Unceded Treaty lands to the Oceti Šakówiŋ Oyate (The Seven Council Fires, colonially known as The Great Sioux Nation) at the crossing of the Heart River in present-day central North Dakota.”If we were to step outside the corrupt racist structure of our Judicial system, anyone with logic would ask how the US government could allow a corporation to bypass an industrial-scale easement, profit billions, and go after an NGO for more than half a billion dollars. To add to the chaos, many also don’t know that there was a third lawsuit playing in the background, dancing with the other two. In the 2019 lawsuit, North Dakota State won $28 million, which to many, proved that the state believed USACE was responsible for the financial losses and for the costs of law enforcement to quell the Standing Rock protests. ET’s theory was that Greenpeace was responsible for all the financial losses and delays impacting DAPL’s construction, when in actuality there were two other lawsuits challenging the pipeline’s claims. This fight for Indigenous human rights had involved three active lawsuits with many complex layers, designed this way to confuse us all.Coincidentally, about a week after Greenpeace lost, Standing Rock’s case was put on the back burner again by Federal Judge Boasberg. He dismissed their lawsuit and announced they would have to wait for USACE’s complete environmental study, which after five years, is still ongoing. On June 7, Standing Rock filed a notice of appeal signaling their intent to ask the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to review Judge Boasberg’s decision to dismiss their lawsuit. An investigative journalist should investigate why USACE’s environmental study is taking so long. Something is fishy.Whilst Standing Rock’s lawsuit was playing in the background like a colonial ghost story, this past February-March 2025, I had the chance to witness the monstrous case: Energy Transfer (ET) vs. Greenpeace fund, Greenpeace International, and Greenpeace Inc. Most people still don’t know the legal breakdown of ET’s SLAPP suits against Greenpeace. You can catch up here.I have yet to see this important statement issued by The Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Chairwoman, Janet Alkire, in any mainstream media outlet. They had a lot to share about the case, yet no one seems to have read it. To stay afloat, one must learn what the Indigenous communities, especially the elders, are saying. This is what helped steer me in the right direction in the midst of the information war that Energy Transfer and our legal system were creating and injecting into all three lawsuits pertaining to the pipeline.With so much at stake, I wanted to witness everything firsthand, so I tagged alongside my close friend and renowned environmental justice attorney and corporate prisoner Steven Donziger who was meeting up with other legendary attorneys, Mandela’s Martin Garbus, The Farmers’ lawyer Sarah Vogel, Water Protector Legal’s Natali Segovia, and Environmental lawyer Scott Badenoch, to name a few. Judge Gion had declined all Press requests, which led the trial monitoring group to form a website to provide expert independent legal analysis to the public. There are many alarming findings that the Trial Monitors listed on their website, under “Trial Monitoring Statements.” The one that really bothers me is:Prejudicial Mailers and Advertising: Energy Transfer or its affiliates appear to have distributed materials—including mailers and advertisements—in the jury catchment area and in other local 2 areas of the state portraying Greenpeace and the Dakota Access Pipeline protests in a negative light. These materials appear designed to sway public opinion and influence prospective jurors against Greenpeace. We are also concerned that Judge Gion has thus far denied a motion by Greenpeace to take discovery on who exactly paid for the mailers and ads, essentially denying the rights of the organization to motion the court for a remedy based on all relevant information.Back in the courtroom, I observed the plaintiffs’ lead attorney, Gibson Dunn and Crutcher’s Trey Cox (Fossil Fuel’s favorite law firm), aggressively take over the linguistics of this case, arrogantly discrediting the Tribe’s Indigenous rights and existence.On March 19, 2025, the oil town’s 9-member jury found Greenpeace guilty of nearly double the amount of the claims, $666 million to be exact. Interesting number. Despite my state of shock, my courtroom flashbacks reminded me of the jury’s PTSD stories. A local cafe owner had shared that the jurors had lived through 100k+ “strangers” coming and going through their towns, turning their daily lives upside down. The jurors’ verdict was an emotional symptom of colonial generational trauma bonding. The bias was oozing. I saw it in their eyes and facial expressions. I had never seen a jury collectively take such an extreme emotional vendetta on an NGO. When Greenpeace was charged with the maximum allowed punitive damages, it was clear to everyone that this legal fight had just morphed into a massive financial legal battle.This shook the entire Environmental Justice community to its core and was another racist slap to The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and the entire Indigenous community of Turtle Island (aka The USA). As for Greenpeace, they have made it very clear to me and the public that, “If we have to take this all the way to the Supreme Court, we will!”As Paul Paz y Miño, Associate Director at Amazon Watch, said so passionately whilst being interviewed by Steven Donziger next to the Missouri River, “It is the mighty corporations flexing their muscles to abuse the legal system… Greenpeace is not the only one on trial. Everyone is on trial. Standing Rock, all the organizations that stood with them. Greenpeace is just the sacrificial lamb because Energy Transfer wants its pound of flesh, and it thinks it can bankrupt Greenpeace and terrify the other organizations alongside it.”Many unanswered questions were flying outside the courtroom and are still blank today.How can 9 people define so much for Indigenous land and water rights?Will the outcome of this case influence The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s chances to win their own legal battles?Can peaceful protests be banned or severely challenged in this country?Will transparent journalism be at risk of existing?Will our freedom of speech vanish indefinitely?Will one of the oldest and most notable American Environmental organizations in the world cease to exist?Everything about this trial had been designed to fail. The cherry on top of it all, was when I found out how political it really was, as ET’s Kelcy Warren, was also one of Donald Trump’s top supporters, donating approximately $16 million+ to his presidential campaigns, fundraisers, and Trump groups, between 2016-2024. At one point, Trump even had direct financial ties to ET, by owning shares in the pipeline’s stocks.This trial was a circus. A very expensive one. ET plucked Greenpeace out of the anti-DAPL movement’s hat, strategically ignoring that there were 100k+ Tribes, Nations, Indigenous groups, and allies from all over the world (veterans, activists, attorneys, scientists, religious groups, NGOs, famous musicians, celebrities, and even a president) coming together. This became one of the most united international solidarity movements in the world, led by a National Indigenous uprising.In 2016, The UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues visited Standing Rock and issued a statement and report. This past April, the Trial Monitors sent a letter requesting for an independent United Nations human rights expert to “investigate ‘flagrant and repeated’ due process violations in the proceeding that resulted in an unprecedented $600 million verdict against the environmental organization.”Steven Donziger weighed in: “We believe it is critical that people all over the world pay close attention to what is probably the most important legal case in the world related to the fossil fuel industry’s efforts to squelch free speech as a way to try to stifle the climate movement. The showdown between Greenpeace and Energy Transfer will go a long way toward determining whether our courts have the fortitude to push back against industry’s abuse of power and its targeting of Indigenous Peoples and the environment. As trial monitors, our purpose is to document the due process violations at trial and bring them into the public domain.”This case led me to meet incredible souls and community leaders who were gracious enough to share their wisdom. “There is a complete disconnect between the colonial world and our Lakota way of Life. There is no accurate way to translate our way of life into ‘written documents or laws.’ The colonial way, it doesn’t belong to us. Our stories are passed down from our ancestors through oral history and teachings. We live by our Lakota way of life. Our connection is deep rooted in the land and mother earth. It is simple but hard to put into words. The colonial world likes to place us in boxes and for our people it is a worldview,” explained Jen Martel, a member of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, community organizer at Standing Rock, Sitting Bull College Visitor Center Coordinator, and Filmmaker of “Oyate.”Father Floberg from St. James Episcopal church and longtime community member at Standing Rock, happened to sit next to me in court for most of the time I was there. One of the first things he shared with me was the ongoing frustrations he had with the courtroom, as everyone kept ignoring: “That unceded territory is HISTORIC TRIBAL TERRITORY. It was unlawfully ‘taken’ when the United States Congress broke the 1868 Treaty as it took the Black Hills and this territory. That act by Congress was unlawful, without remedy being provided for the unceded territory and an unacceptable remedy for the Black Hills theft itself. The distinction is critical. Reservation Land is not the same as Historic Tribal Territory.” Today, Indigenous Nations and their descendants express that their very existence, including their oral history and Tribal law, is in jeopardy. They are struggling to survive and to be properly taught by the US educational system, let alone to be recognized and adopted in the US Federal Judicial system, or any US court for that matter.The elders have a lot to express, and they want to be heard. It is up to each and every one of us to open our ears and offer our hands in support. The fight continues."
}
,
"relatedposts": [
{
"title" : "Mamdani & The Era of Possibilities",
"author" : "Collis Browne, Céline Semaan, EIP Editors",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/mamdani-and-the-era-of-possibilities",
"date" : "2026-01-01 12:25:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/zohran-inauguration-1.jpg",
"excerpt" : " What wins elections? Laser focus on challenging the brutal economic oppression that defines our global reality.",
"content" : " What wins elections? Laser focus on challenging the brutal economic oppression that defines our global reality.There is an air of undeniable hope. No matter how hard the knee-jerk catastrophic thinking might try to override with doubt, the moment is hopeful. This is proof of collective power. No matter what comes of it, we are already in a winning moment, because the people of New York city have toppled a dynasty built on greed and corruption. The entire world was inspired by this moment that was made possible by everyday people rallying together. That is how monopoly gets interrupted by people power. It’s not rocket science or AI, it’s sweat, effort, and in person collaboration.Let’s remember why this landslide engagement across political divides, why this excitement from communities and demographics who have never voted, and why this worldwide inspiration from a local election: it is a direct response to Mamdani’s laser focus on challenging the brutal economic oppression that defines our global reality.That is what wins elections; that is what inspires and unites the majority across age, ethnicity, race, and all other factors. Speaking the truth of the crushing economic reality that we live under.So now, resist the urge to follow the media’s double edge sword to fetishize and make individualized mythologies around Mamdani, his wife, the personal and aesthetic choices they are making. But continue to see them simply as people, continue to join forces with them and to remain educated, informed and most importantly not in silo but in community. Realize that we need thousands more like him who have decided that they can make a better mayor than these corrupt relics of the antiquated self-destructive past, and we need millions to always raise them up against those colluding with oligarchic corruption. And when the inevitable “fall from grace” comes, when the “media darling” moment wants to swing the other way and vilify him, resist the urge to jump on and make him any more important than but one human who wanted to make a difference in a dehumanizing system — focus on the system.Resist the urge to join in a culture war, to focus on religion or lifestyle or taste or how we spend our time as non-billionaires, and remain focused on what we can all be doing daily to gather power away from the centers of wealth and exploitation.Resist the urge to isolate in ideals, instead join the messy moment of change by being an active participant in the political spaces you wish existed.The moment calls for more action. This year, 2026, begins a new cycle filled with possibilities and people power. The moment is you. It is now. Continue to be present, be active, and take your place in making the future possible. Being an active part of your world is the antidote to the overwhelming feeling of disempowerment. The ways in which we rise, is through verbs and action. Excited to build with you all internationally and locally here in New York City. Our city."
}
,
{
"title" : "Narrative Sovereignty in the American Wing of The Met: Don't Miss ENCODED at the MET",
"author" : "",
"category" : "",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/narrative-sovereignty-in-the-american-wing-of-the-met",
"date" : "2025-12-22 12:58:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover_EIP_Hidden_Exhibition.jpg",
"excerpt" : "As artists and multicultural activists, we did not come to the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s American Wing seeking permission, instead we showed up to the work with intention, responsibility, and a commitment to truth. ENCODED: Change the Story, Change the Future exists because silence is not neutral, presence without agency is insufficient and solidarity across values-based creativity is essential for liberation.",
"content" : "As artists and multicultural activists, we did not come to the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s American Wing seeking permission, instead we showed up to the work with intention, responsibility, and a commitment to truth. ENCODED: Change the Story, Change the Future exists because silence is not neutral, presence without agency is insufficient and solidarity across values-based creativity is essential for liberation.The American Wing is often described as a celebration of American art, yet it also functions as a carefully curated archive of colonial mythology and westward expansion propaganda. Its paintings and sculptures rehearse familiar narratives: conquest framed as destiny, extraction framed as progress, whiteness framed as purity, Indigenous absence framed as inevitability. These works are not merely historical artifacts; they are instruments of narrative power. They encode ideas about belonging, legitimacy, and nationhood, ideas that continue to shape cultural consciousness and public policy today. ENCODED intervenes in this institutional space not to negate history, but to complicate it. Using augmented reality, the exhibition overlays Indigenous artistic expression and counter-narratives directly onto famous works in the American Wing, reframing them through Indigenous epistemologies, lived experience, and historical truth. This is not an act of erasure. It is an act of expansion and an overt insistence that American art history is incomplete without Indigenous voice, presence, and critique.At its core, ENCODED is grounded in the principle of narrative sovereignty. Narrative sovereignty asserts that communities most impacted by historical and ongoing harm such as Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendant people, Palestinians, Pacific Islanders, Trans folks and the working class all must have the authority to tell their own stories, in their own words, and within the institutions that have historically excluded or misrepresented them. This is not a symbolic gesture. It is a democratic imperative.Democracy depends on access to truth. When museums present a singular, sanitized vision of history, they do not merely reflect power, they reinforce it. The American Wing has long upheld myths of “taming the West” and the so-called exhaustion of empire, narratives that obscure the violence of settler colonialism, normalize Indigenous dispossession and chattel slavery. ENCODED challenges these myths by making visible what has been omitted: resistance, survival, continuity, solidarity and accountability. For me, I also hope this intervention reflects back to museum goers and viewers the perils of authoritarianism, fascism and ongoing colonial projects such as legacy media consolidation, rapid creation of datacenters to produce AI, cutting access to healthcare, education, rights, or the current US regime’s attempt to erase history by any means necessary.The artists participating in ENCODED are not responding nostalgically to the past. They are engaging the present. Their work examines how colonial narratives persist in contemporary systems including environmental destruction justified by extraction, racial hierarchies reinforced through cultural storytelling, and institutions that benefit from the aesthetics of inclusion while resisting structural change. These are not abstract critiques; they are lived realities and for me deep lessons that have been shaped by having formerly worked at a neocolonial conservation nonprofit ran by wealthy cis wyt men and their enablers for nearly five years.Artistic integrity, in this context, cannot be separated from ethical responsibility. For too long, the art world has upheld a false binary between aesthetics and politics, suggesting that rigor diminishes when artists engage power directly. ENCODED rejects this premise. Integrity is not neutrality. Integrity is the willingness to tell the truth, even when it destabilizes comfort or prestige. Walking with integrity can be painful and takes courage.Importantly, ENCODED is not positioned as a protest staged outside the institution, nor as a request for institutional validation. It is an act of presence with agency. The project uses accessible technology to meet audiences where they are, inviting participation rather than reverence. Viewers scan QR codes and encounter layered narratives that ask them to look again, listen differently, and question inherited assumptions. Except for a few organized tours, the experience is self-guided, decentralized, and deliberately democratic. It’s also fun, and it is so special to hear the familiar sounds from the ENCODED pieces ring throughout the galleries signalling that kin is close by.This kinship network and accessibility is central to the work. Cultural literacy should not be gated by academic language, curatorial authority, white exceptionalism or economic privilege. By operating through personal devices, ENCODED rejects the museum’s traditional hierarchy of knowledge and affirms that interpretation is a shared civic space. The exhibition does not dictate conclusions; it creates conditions for reckoning and deep dialogue.Solidarity is another foundational principle of the project. ENCODED brings together Indigenous artists across nations and disciplines, in relationship with Black, Brown, and allied communities who recognize that colonialism is not a single-issue structure. The logics that dispossessed Indigenous peoples are the same logics that underwrote slavery, environmental exploitation, the seizing of Palestine, forced child mining labor of cobalt in Congo and in general global empire. Working in solidarity does not collapse difference; it honors specificity while resisting division and acknowledging historic patterns of systemic oppression.In a cultural landscape shaped by scarcity and competition, ENCODED models an alternative, one rooted in collective presence, shared resources, and mutual accountability. The project refuses the extractive norms of both empire and the contemporary art economy, offering instead a relational approach grounded in care, collaboration, and long-term impact on community.The decision to situate ENCODED within the American Wing was deliberate. Indigenous art has too often been confined to anthropological contexts or framed as premodern, separate from the narrative of American art. ENCODED asserts what has always been true: Indigenous peoples are not peripheral to American history; we are foundational to it. Our stories do not belong on the margins, nor do they belong solely to the past or through a white gaze.Yet presence without counter-narrative risks assimilation. ENCODED insists that visibility must be accompanied by authorship. By intervening directly within the American Wing, the project challenges the authority of colonial framing and invites institutions to reckon with their role in shaping public memory. Our hope is that eventually the Met will see this as an opportunity to engage in discussion and support its presence well into 2026.There is risk in this work. Naming colonial propaganda within revered institutions invites discomfort, defensiveness, and critique. But risk is inseparable from integrity. Artists and cultural workers are accountable not only to institutions and audiences, but to future generations. The question is not whether institutions will change, but whether artists will continue to lead with courage when they do not.ENCODED is an offering and a provocation. It asks what it means to inherit a cultural legacy and whether we are willing to transform it. Empire is not exhausted; it is contested. And art remains one of the most powerful sites of that contestation. When we change the story, we do change the future. Not through erasure, but through expansion. Not through dominance, but through relationship.Ultimately, ENCODED affirms that art is not merely a reflection of society, but a tool for shaping it and that when artists from the margins claim space at the center, together and with integrity, we open pathways toward a more honest, inclusive, and democratic cultural future. Join us.To access ENCODED review the exhibit website for instructions. While at the Met scan the QR code and click through the prompts for the self guided tour.https://www.encodedatthemet.com"
}
,
{
"title" : "The Aesthetics of Atrocity: Lockheed Martin’s Streetwear Pivot",
"author" : "Louis Pisano",
"category" : "",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/the-aesthetics-of-atrocity",
"date" : "2025-12-20 10:30:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover_EIP_Lockheed_StreetWar.jpg",
"excerpt" : "On December 12, The Business of Fashion published an article titled “The Unlikely Rise and Uncertain Future of Lockheed Martin Streetwear,” detailing the world’s largest arms manufacturer’s entrance into casual apparel.",
"content" : "On December 12, The Business of Fashion published an article titled “The Unlikely Rise and Uncertain Future of Lockheed Martin Streetwear,” detailing the world’s largest arms manufacturer’s entrance into casual apparel.Through a licensing deal with South Korea’s Doojin Yanghang Corp., Lockheed turns fighter jet graphics, corporate slogans, and its star logo into gorpcore staples. Oversized outerwear, tactical pants, and advanced synthetic fabrics sell out at Seoul pop-ups like the Hyundai department store with young Korean consumers chasing the edgy, functional vibe. Andy Koh, a Seoul-based content creator, tells BoF that while arms manufacturing is, in theory, political, he has never encountered widespread discomfort among Korean consumers. “As long as it looks cool and the product functions as expected,” he says, “they seem okay with it.”This trend aligns with a broader South Korean fashion phenomenon: licensing logos from global non-fashion brands to create popular streetwear lines. Examples include National Geographic puffers, Yale crewnecks, Kodak retro tees, CNN hoodies, Discovery jackets, Jeep outdoor wear, and university apparel from institutions like Harvard and UCLA. These licensed collections, often featuring media, academia, sports leagues, or adventure themes, have become staples on online retailers like Musinsa and in brick-and-mortar stores, propelled by K-pop influence and a tech-savvy youth market that make these odd crossovers multimillion-dollar successes.Lockheed, however, is categorically different. Its core business is not exploration, education, or journalism. It is industrialized death, and its arrival in fashion forces a reckoning with how far commodification can stretch.Having spent years in the military, maybe I’m the wrong person to critique this. Or maybe I’m exactly the right one. I know what weapons are for, how they’re used, and the human cost they carry. Lockheed manufactures F-16 and F-35 fighter jets, Hellfire missiles, and precision-guided systems that human rights organizations have repeatedly linked to civilian casualties across multiple conflicts. In Yemen, U.S.-supplied weapons incorporating Lockheed technology contributed to thousands of civilian deaths since 2015, most notoriously the 2018 airstrike on a school bus in Saada that killed dozens of children. In Gaza, since October 2023, Lockheed-supplied F-35s and munitions have formed the backbone of air operations that Amnesty International and other watchdogs have flagged for potential violations of international humanitarian law, cases now under examination by the International Court of Justice.In 2024, the company reported $71 billion in revenue, almost entirely from military contracts, with more than 1,100 F-35s already delivered worldwide and production lines running hotter than ever. That staggering scale is the reality lurking beneath a logo now casually printed on everyday apparel.So why does the planet’s largest arms manufacturer license its brand to streetwear? The answer seems to be twofold: easy money and sophisticated image laundering. Licensing delivers low-risk royalties from Korea’s reported $35-40 billion apparel market with virtually no operational headache. Lockheed simply collects checks while a third-party manufacturer handles design, production, distribution, and deals with all the mess of retail.The far more ambitious goal, however, is reputational refurbishment. Doojin deliberately markets the line around “future-oriented technical aesthetics” and “aerospace innovation,” leaning on cutting-edge fabrics to conjure high-tech futurism instead of battlefield carnage. By late 2025, as U.S. favorability in South Korea continued to slide amid trade tensions and regional geopolitical shifts, the brand quietly de-emphasized its American roots, according to Lockheed representatives. The strategy clearly tries to sever the logo from political controversy and plant it firmly in youth culture, where aesthetic appeal routinely outmuscles ethical concern.Lockheed has honed this kind of rebranding for decades. Their corporate brochures overflow with talk of “driving innovation” and “advancing scientific discovery,” spotlighting STEM scholarships, veteran hiring initiatives, and rapid-response disaster aid. The clothing itself carries the same sanitized messaging. One prominent slogan reads “Ensuring those we serve always stay ahead of ready”, euphemistic corporate-speak that sounds heroic until you remember that “those we serve” includes forces deploying Hellfire missiles against civilian targets. Other pieces feature F-35 graphics paired with copy declaring the jet “strengthens national security, enhances global partnerships, and powers economic growth”. It’s textbook PR varnish. Instruments designed for lethal efficiency, now rebranded as symbols of progress and prosperity.We’ve also seen this trick before: Fast fashion brands that slap “sustainable” labels on sweatshop products. Tech giants that fund glamorous art installations while they harvest user data. Oil companies that rebrand themselves as forward-thinking “energy” players as the Earth’s climate burns. Lockheed, though, traffics in something uniquely irreversible: export-grade death. By licensing its identity to apparel, multibillion-dollar arms contracts are reduced to mere intellectual property; civilian casualties dissolved into, simply, background static.In other words, vibes overpower victims. And when those vibes are stamped with the logo of the planet’s preeminent death merchant, resistance feels futile.Gorpcore has always drawn from military surplus for its rugged utility: endless cargo pockets, indestructible nylons, tactical silhouettes born in combat and repurposed for city streets. Brands like Arc’teryx, The North Face, and Supreme mine that heritage for authenticity and performance. After World War II, army fatigues became symbols of genuine rebellion, worn by anti-war protesters as an act of defiance against the establishment. Today, the dynamic threatens to invert entirely. The establishment itself, the world’s preeminent arms dealer, now supplies the “authentic” merchandise, turning subversion into subtle endorsement.Streetwear grew out of skate culture, hip-hop, and grassroots rebellion against mainstream norms. Importing the aesthetics of atrocity risks converting that legacy into compliance, rendering militarism the newest version of mainstream cool. For a generation immersed in filtered feeds and rapid trend cycles, Lockheed’s logo can sit comfortably beside NASA patches or National Geographic emblems, conveniently severed from the charred wreckage in Saada or the devastation in Gaza. Research on “ethical fading” demonstrates how strong visual design can mute moral alarms, a phenomenon intensified in Korea’s hyper-trendy ecosystem, where mandatory military service may further desensitize young consumers to defense branding while K-pop’s global engine drives relentless consumption.If the line proves durable, escalation feels inevitable. Palantir, another cornerstone of the defense-tech world, has already gone there, hyping limited merch drops that sell out in hours: $99 athletic shorts stamped “PLTR—TECH,” $119 nylon totes, hoodies emblazoned with CEO Alex Karp’s likeness or slogans about “dominating” threats. What’s to stop Northrop Grumman from launching its own techwear line? Or BAE Systems from dropping high-end collaborations?Lockheed already licenses merchandise worldwide through various agencies; broader international rollouts beyond Korea seem only a matter of time. Backlash is possible, boycotts from ethically minded buyers, perhaps even regulatory scrutiny as anti-militarism sentiment swells. Gorpcore’s longstanding flirtation with military aesthetics could calcify into outright fetish, obliterating whatever daylight remained between practical function and state-sanctioned propaganda.Yet, history suggests that in oversaturated markets, “cool” almost always trumps conscience. Lockheed’s streetwear pivot is a stark illustration of how fashion and culture launder raw power, enabling the machinery of war to conceal itself among hype, hoodies, and sold-out drops."
}
]
}