Native Mascots and Ethnic Fraud in Higher Education: Using Tribal Critical Race Theory and the Interest Convergence Principle as an Analytic Tool

Abstract

This article examines one university's policies regarding Native mascots and ethnic fraud through a Tribal Critical Race Theory analytic lens. Using the principle of interest convergence, we argue that institutions of higher education allow and even work actively towards a particular form or level of diversity, but they do not extend it far enough. Once racial remedies no longer hold value or benefit the institution itself, the status quo is maintained. Ultimately, the university has an interest in “celebrating” diversity and supporting superficial multiculturalism, but it does not have an interest in critical, social justice-oriented policies that challenge the status quo, the current racial order, or the institution's privilege and power.

Notes

The authors thank the anonymous reviewers and Bryan Brayboy for feedback on earlier drafts of this article.

1. Throughout this article we use the terms “Indigenous,” “Native,” “American Indian,” “Indian,” and “Native American” interchangeably to refer to the peoples indigenous to what is now the United States. Scholars, educators, and other Indigenous people have not come to an agreement over the use of these terms, and we do not use specific tribal affiliations (the generally preferred practice) in an effort to protect the identities of the women who participated in this study.

2. All proper names have been changed to protect the anonymity of the participants in this study. Although ideally we would like to name Midwestern University in order to “out” the institution with respect to what they are and are not doing around diversity and social justice, IRB protocol does not permit us to do so.

3. This research was originally designed to explore the experiences of Indigenous women on a predominantly white campus. The research design focused on self-identified Native women because the first author was interested in the range and variation of experiences among this diverse group of women, and because this is currently the way Midwestern University identifies American Indian and Alaska Native students. We recognize, of course, the irony in this aspect of the research design given our examination of ethnic fraud in this article.

4. This is an illuminating example of the racial battle fatigue that often results from the countless experiences of racial microaggressions at “liberal” universities such as Midwestern. Although overt forms of racism are rare on these campuses, research has shown the multiple and varied ways students of color are marginalized and assaulted in predominantly white communities (Solórzano, 1998; Solórzano, Ceja, & Yosso, 2000).

5. Because of space limitations, we are unable to elaborate on CRT here, but we offer this brief explanation: Critical Race Theory begins with the notions that racism is ordinary (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001), and that race still matters in contemporary U.S. society (West, 2004). It recognizes, however, that differential racialization processes and experiences of racism certainly exist within and between groups (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001). Proponents of CRT argue that it is a tool for uncovering racial subordination and the marginalization of people of color and that in adopting a CRT frame, researchers necessarily are called to expose and challenge the racism inherent in everyday social life (Lynn, Yosso, Solórzano, & Parker, 2002; Parker & Lynn, 2002; Villenas & Deyhle, 1999). The main goals of CRT include presenting narratives and storytelling as valid forms of data and legitimate approaches through which to understand race and racism, eradicating racial subjugation while recognizing that race is a social construct that has very real impacts on people's lives, challenging dominant ideologies and working towards social justice, and making connections between race and other axes of oppression (Ladson-Billings, 1998; Solórzano & Yosso, 2002).

6. More recently, Guinier (2004) has argued that interest convergence is limited in its ability to explain the partial progress towards racial equity because of its sole focus on the interests of powerful white elites and Blacks. In doing so, interest convergence theory has overlooked other positionalities (e.g., social class, geography, etc.) that affect perceived interest divergences between and among groups. For example, Guinier highlights the fact that working class Whites resisted desegregation efforts and were also the ones to be directly affected by desegregation. While this is a helpful contribution to our understanding of efforts at greater racial equality, our work—like Bell's original focus in developing interest convergence—highlights the relationship between the interests of the powerful White elites and the interests of a group of color.

7. In order to keep our argument as straightforward as possible, we do not elaborate on the other aspects of Tribal Critical Race Theory. For a full description of this theoretical framework, see Brayboy, 2005a. It also worth noting that other scholars have extended CRT into LatCrit, FemCrit, and AsianCrit in order to highlight the particularities of other groups.

8. While definitions of whiteness abound among scholars, we mean here to reference ways institutions, structures, and social relations are organized such that white people consistently benefit at the expense of people of color.

9. For more on the history of dancing for the entertainment of white audiences, see Browner, 2002, and Farnell, 2004.

10. The issue of opportunistically claiming Native identity has become increasingly complicated as there appears to be a growing industry of DNA testing companies who purport to inform individuals of their racial and ethnic background (TallBear, 2005). There also is some evidence that people may be using these products and services with the sole purpose of claiming “benefits” (e.g., affirmative action scholarships) set aside for members of racialized groups. A white business executive from Maryland with two adopted sons had his children's DNA tested and found them to be 9% American Indian and 11% Northern African; in explaining his decision to have his sons' DNA tested, the father said “naturally when you're applying to college you're looking at how your genetic status might help you” (Harmon, 2006, p. A1).

11. Although there is a growing body of research that examines Indigenous students' experiences in institutions of higher education (Brayboy, 2004, 2005b; Castagno, 2005; Fixico, 1995; Garrod & Larimore, 1997; Huffman, 1991, 2003; Kirkness & Barnhardt, 1991; Mihesuah & Wilson, 2004; Pavel, 1998; Pewewardy & Frey, 2004; Tierney, 1992, 1993; Wright & Tierney, 1991), we do not explicitly engage with this literature here because doing so would detract from our primary purpose of illustrating how differently positioned Native women experience Midwestern University and how that variability is in the best interest of the institution. In other words, while most published studies examine the personal experiences of Indigenous students, we are primarily concerned in this article with institutional policies as they relate to Indigenous students.

12. Brayboy (2004) uses the concept of visibility in order to analyze Indigenous students' experiences at Ivy League universities. He offers an important and useful explanation of visibility and invisibility, but we are using the term here to mean simply that less tribal-culturally connected women are positioned by the institution as more visible because institutional leaders like what these women have to say.