Literary analysis and critique of authorial perspective and argumentation

¶ … David Kamper's work of non-fiction entitled The Work of Sovereignty: Tribal Labor Relations and Self-Determination at the Navajo Nation. This book primarily discusses various considerations for Native Americans in relation to labor unions and other forms of organized collectives for the purposes of labor. The author's principle idea is that there are several inherent differences between indigenous Americans forming a collective for the purpose of bargaining as a unit of labor and conventional Americans. He cites a case study which serves to elucidate several of these distinctions. Moreover, he also provides an alternative to the traditional labor union approach and explicates why this methodology appears to have more success with these people. It is of the opinion of this author that Kamper's notions are both sensible and logical, particularly as they apply to the Society of American Indian Government Empolyees (or SAIGE), which is the alternative to traditional labor unions cited in this manuscript.

Prior to discussing the advantages of SAIGE, Kamper indicates the reasons there are some difficulties in getting Native Americans to consistently enroll in and participate in labor unions. Many of these notions seem cogent to the author of this document, particularly considering the history of deceit and trickery that these people witnessed once Europeans arrived en mass on the shores of this continent. One of the issues that can complicate the involvement of Native Americans in organizations modeled after labor unions is "tribal solidarity" (Hale, 2013, p. 120). Kamper illustrates this point with an extended case study of health care professionals that are part of the Navajo tribe, and denotes how complicated the process of aligning a number of different workers and groups from four different organizations and regular citizens is, in which "The layers and complexities of tribal politics were daunting" (Hale, 2013, p. 121).

Additionally, the author indicates that Native American resistance to labor unions pertains to the sort of bureaucracy which they typically encompass. Again, this fact seems credible because there was similar bureaucracy affected by the U.S. government in its initial treatment of Native Americans, which left these people as a race on the verge of a genocidal massacre. As such, there are various points in Kamper's book in which it becomes clear that "the language and glad-handing employed in typical non-Indian union activities were not always appropriate or well received" (Hale, 2013, p. 121) by Native American populations. The author indicates that because of this bureaucracy, Native American involvement in the union in the Tuba City case study was extremely circumscribed. Moreover, he also offers convincing evidence that certain basic aspects of unionization, such as signing petitions, was viewed negatively by Native Americans (Hale, 2013, p. 121)

However, the most convincing evidence for the involvement of Native Americans in collective bargaining processes similar to those enacted by labor unions involved the description of the activity of SAIGE. This organization is simply a non-profit with a mission to galvanize Native American government employees to operate as a collective so they can receive better treatment from their employers. This organization seems extremely progressive, and substantially more so than some of the labor unions to which Kamper alludes. It effectively, "advocates for ethical and fair treatment for Indian workers in the federal system and helps members who experience racism on the job" (Hale, 2013, p. 121). Furthermore, since it is not a formal labor union, it is largely bereft of much of the bureaucracy that made Native Americans hesitant to join the organization Kamper cited in Tuba City.

The reason that SAIGE is so important to many of the concepts that Kamper writes about in The Work of Sovereignty is that it provides a true case study that actually works. The case study at Yuba City merely implies the possibilities of Native American collective power in a certain industry. The efforts that SAIGE has made help to actually demonstrate tangible progress that Native Americans make when they come together as a collective force within industry. In this respect, SAIGE provides the best example for many of the ideas that Kamper believes that Native Americans are capable of creating and actuating by joining forces with one another. The primary distinction between what Kamper is suggesting and what SAIGE is actually doing is that the latter is working with Native Americans in numbers in a way that is indigenous to them and to their culture. The subsequent quotation readily shows this fact.