Custer Died For Your Sins

by Vine Deloria Jr.

Standing Rock Sioux activist, professor, and attorney Vine Deloria, Jr., shares his thoughts about U.S. race relations, federal bureaucracies, Christian churches, and social scientists in a collection of eleven eye-opening essays infused with humor.This “manifesto” provides valuable insights on American Indian history, Native American culture, and context for minority protest movements mobilizing across the country throughout the 1960s and early 1970s. Originally published in 1969, this book remains a timeless classic and is one of the most significant nonfiction works written by a Native American.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Native American, Indigenous, Politics, Race, Social Justice

297 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1969

About the author

Vine Victor Deloria, Jr. was an American Indian author, theologian, historian, and activist. He was widely known for his book Custer Died for Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto (1969), which helped generate national attention to Native American issues in the same year as the Alcatraz-Red Power Movement. From 1964–1967, he had served as executive director of the National Congress of American Indians, increasing tribal membership from 19 to 156. Beginning in 1977, he was a board member of the National Museum of the American Indian, which now has buildings in both New York City and Washington, DC.

Deloria began his academic career in 1970 at Western Washington State College at Bellingham, Washington. He became Professor of Political Science at the University of Arizona (1978–1990), where he established the first master's degree program in American Indian Studies in the United States. After ten years at the University of Colorado, Boulder, he returned to Arizona and taught at the School of Law.

Reviews

[Traci · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this when I was about 16 and it changed my life. I know that sounds hokey, but this book, "God is Red," and "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee," flipped a switch in my head that I have never wanted to turn off. I was raised by civil rights activists, and my dad was born on an Indian reservation in the Midwest (he is not Indian) so I had some sort of context for what Deloria was talking about...where my dad grew up he said the word "Indian" was like the N word in the south...Deloria lit the fire of Indian Pride, Brown Power and AIM...and while it took me a few more years and a lot of conversations with indigenous friends to decide to spend my life studying indigenous cultures prior to European contact rather than the modern period...these three books are where it all began. P.S. The pre-contact period is easier to manage than the modern history Deloria recounts...I choose the easier context because its so beautiful and less painful...but I will always love an angry brown person and Deloria is at the top of that list.

[M. Kei · Rating 5 out of 5]

Hilarious and truthful, you never knew history could be this entertaining--and this horrifying. Vine Deloria is a Native American author who explains why American Indians are not quietly vanishing the way conquered people are supposed to. The absolutely horrible things that are still happening to Native Nations in the United States are repetitions and replays of what has been going on for hundreds of years, and if one is gifted with a dark and surrealistic sense of humor, it's incredibly funny, too, in the way that it's funny when you watch somebody crack his nuts on the board when he flubs a dive off the high board. You have to laugh... but ow.

If you want to know more about Native Americans than the highly sanitized and stereotyped images on greeting cards and t-shirt, start here. It's a Must Read Before You Die Book.

[Lyn · Rating 3 out of 5]

Vine Deloria Jr.’s 1969 manifesto stays relevant half a century after its first publication.

I read the 1988 edition, with an updated preface, and this continues to be a go to book for an illuminating but also frequently humorous tome on race relations, government bureaucracy and first and foremost Native American culture.

The author keeps this sometimes dry recitation of broken treaties and case law moving with personality, wit and some scathing dark comedy. It’s no secret that the United States has not treated our indigenous cousins well, but Deloria explains and examines the result of decades and decades of failed policy with a warmth I did not expect.

And he can be funny.

My favorite chapter is Deloria’s section on Indian humor. He correctly opines that a good way to truly understand a people is to learn what makes them laugh. He goes on to say that the stereotypical image of a scowling savage is far from the truth and that most tribes are filled with people who love to smile and tease each other. This section goes on to describe a wealth of jokes and hilarious anecdotes, the most fun are the ones that make fun of Custer or the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

The title comes from a tongue in cheek bumper sticker.

Another indigenous writer cited this as a first on a short list of books that needed to be read about the North American tribes and I enjoyed learning more and from a talented writer.

[Virginia Arthur · Rating 5 out of 5]

Recently I read an interview with a Native American academic. The interview, written by a white journalist, was all about the ways Native Americans appreciate the earth, in other words, the kind of bullshit that drove Vine up the wall.

Here we go romanticizing the Indian again.

When I worked as a biologist in Alaska and we went to Tongass, there were sections of Tongass that were clearcut to nothing, including the riparian areas--down to dirt, nothing left. It looked like a nuclear bomb. I thought it was the USFS that did it but it wasn't. It was the native Alaskan tribal corporation that raped the forests on this island. It is the Native Americans that have put heinous and horrible casinos all over San Diego County including one massive hotel and parking lot IN the floodplain of the San Luis Rey River. They destroyed acres and acres of pristine habitat, endangered species. Native American tribes in Montana mine and damage their lands and their relationships with one another--for coal. I had a native American woman in my ecology class a few years ago that talked to me about it. It was tearing the res' apart and still is.

Vine was ahead of his time, ahead of these developments, but he foresaw the inevitable capitalistic conversion of the Native American, and in this book sets us up for it. What our ancestors did was cultural genocide. They wiped out the indigenous people of this continent in the most brutal of ways and now we want to go back and "appreciate" the Indian way only after we stripped the Native Americans of everything they had: their land, their way of life, their language, and yeah, now they are capitalists too. What the hell choice do they really have at this point? Maybe whites need the myth of the "Indian way" for some reason but how fair is this? How dare we hold the Indian to higher standards than we hold ourselves, Vine would say. I had the chance to hear him speak a few times. He had a way too of making us all laugh--at ourselves.

Vine had a huge influence on me. Mention of this book, along with the TMWGang, is in my own novel.

Vine was a Truth Teller.

How I miss our Truth Tellers.

[Kaelan Ratcliffe ▪ كايِلان راتكِليف · Rating 4 out of 5]

I went in looking to understand the Native American, and finished with a greater understanding of the world.

I got something different out of this book that I wasn't expecting. Jane Elliot, the creator of the infamous 'Green Eye / Blue Eye' test (look it up if you on YouTube haven't already, be ready though, it gets rough) has a recommended reading list on her website, and this book was on it. Going in, I wasn't sure what the meat and bone of the book would detail, and I certainly didn't know the nuances of modern Native American culture. On one hand, I had the vague knowledge that Native American culture, above western culture, understands that there is a spiritual aspect to life that transcends monetary value. The earth is not so much ours, so much as WE belong to it. This, along with a few other impactful statements, quotes and general history (thank you Mr. Howard Zinn) had been the extent of my knowledge before being introduced to Vine Deloria Jr .

For anyone reading this, Custer Died for Your Sins will inform you on a number of topics. These range from disseminating the real and unreal perceptions of Native Americans; dismantling the 'The Anthropologist' (laugh out loud chapter); breaking down the Native view on western religion and the missionary situation; understanding the government agencies dealing with the tribes; shedding light on Native humour; contrasting the civil rights movement with the wants and needs of natives; and, last but not least, how Native Americans can move forward from their current situation. However, the most astonishing realisation the reader will have as he/she explores the native world, is how the above mentioned will have the profound ability to make you simultaneously understand the native view, and see your world in a completely different light. I marked the below quote out as an example:

"But the understanding of the racial question does not ulti­mately involve understanding by either blacks or Indians. It in­volves the white man himself. He must examine his past. He must face the problems he has created within himself and within others. The white man must no longer project his fears and in­ securities onto other groups, races, and countries. Before the white man can relate to others he must forego the pleasure of denying them. The white man must learn to stop viewing history as a plot against himself.

It was more than religious intolerance that drove the early colonists across the ocean. More than a thousand years before Columbus, the barbaric tribes destroyed the Roman Empire. With utter lack of grace, they ignorantly obliterated classical civiliza­tion. Christanity swept across the conquerors like the white man later swept across North America, destroying native religions and leaving paralyzed groups of disoriented individuals in its wake. Then the combination of Christian theology, superstition, and forms of the old Roman civil government began to control the tamed barbaric tribes. Gone were the religious rites of the white tribesmen. Only the Gothic arches in the great cathedrals, sym­ bolizing the oaks under which their ancestors worshiped, re­mained to remind them of the glories that had been."

A note on all of the above mentioned topics (especially the final one). It's a shame this book hasn't received an update on the various issues discussed in its pages. Apart from a preface written in 1987 from the author- something I would recommend reading before AND after finishing- there's little more to find that will sate the interest of the reader (believe me, you'll want to know how certain aspects of the communities spoken of are doing now). I do feel this is important specifically to this book (it is a manifesto after all), as I felt at times I was reading something solely stuck in it's time period, with no additional notes added in it's pages. As such, this does make for slower reading as you feel you may be taking in information that actually doesn't hold precedent in the 'now'.

The only other reason this has four stars is due to a disagreement I had with Delorias on the concept of Corporations, and how he believed the infusion of a Native American tribalism could be combined with the concept of the White Mans attempt at tribalism to make Indian lives better. I won't go into detail seeing that as a white male living in London, I really can't judge concepts being thought up by a man 4,477 miles away, who was trying to better the lives of his people, and who, in turn, were very well aquatinted with the difficulties experienced (and still experienced) on a daily basis with the once imported, now mutated capitalist juggernaut that is the United States government. However, I will say that I found it weirdly contradictory that he mentions Native Americans rising again to their former glory (in some form), only to then talk about the above concept, which, to my eyes, seems like a massive compromise on the behalf of the Native American people to take a white concept, and turn it into something good for the original people of the American land. Another discussion for another time I think.

However, this will not ruin the effect this book will have on the reader, and you will come out a better person for having opened it.

[Steven Yenzer · Rating 2 out of 5]

Meandering and often vague. Along with the wit, there is a heavy dose of theory, which is not particularly compelling. I learned a lot about Indian culture, but I also learned that white culture either doesn't exist or is founded on violence and exploitation.

A good chunk of the book is taken up with Deloria Jr.'s elevation of Indian culture above white (and specifically, American culture). For him, there is little (really, nothing) wrong with Indian culture, which is infinitely wise, holistic, and eternal. On the other hand, America and American culture are meaningless and have accomplished nothing.

It's not that I mind criticism of America — I just mind it when it isn't based on facts and history but rather, theory and ideology. Deloria Jr. essentially declares himself arbiter of culture and philosophy, with the power to crown Indian culture as the greatest of all human cultures in history.

Along with this is his less-than-subtle, somewhat prophetic declarations that Indians will one day drive whites out of America and retake their land. Again, I don't have a problem with the sentiment. But it's the "evidence" Deloria Jr. uses to back it up that is problematic. For example, he cites the restoration of Israel to the Jews as evidence that, like them, Indians will eventually retake their homeland. Not only is this an obviously fallacious argument, but it also relies upon "white culture's" artificial creation of Israel.

So the violent, destructive, possibly non-existent culture seems to have produced at least one thing upon which Deloria Jr. can hang his hat — Zionism.

[Gina · Rating 3 out of 5]

My feelings are very mixed on this book. Deloria is an interesting thinker, and his view of how the future would work out, and his contemporary situation was interesting. His scathing humor was often enjoyable, including his section on anthropologists. At the same time, I disagree with much of what he says, especially his feelings about separatism and certainly his characterization of whites. Certainly he had reasons for feeling that way, but prejudice towards the majority isn't exactly more commendable than prejudice towards the minority. I suppose its wholesome to see how being prejudged based on your color feels every now and then.

At times I would think that the book is now outdated, which would make it less important, but some of his points are still very relevant. Definitely not everyone's cup of tea.

[Kusaimamekirai · Rating 3 out of 5]

I don’t think that many would argue that the United States has repeatedly and violently suppressed and lied to Native Americans over hundreds of years. Land was stolen, treaties were broken and even to this day Native American land is still expropriated and exploited. The question is for any group with this history, what are you going to do about it? Treaties that were broken aren’t going to be retroactively honored. Land that was stolen isn’t going to be given back. So what are you going to do about it?
Reading Vine Deloris’s “Custer Died for Your Sins”, I didn’t get any sense that there was any real ideas about what needed to be done to right historical wrongs. He cites a litany of injustice and seems slightly envious of other minority groups such as African Americans who organised and saw some advancement during the the 1960’s when this book was written. He criticises the March on Washington and the Poor People’s March as being pointless so he keeps his people at home and chooses not to participate. But surely being there and the visibility it would have given the issues he discussed would’ve been more productive than staying at home and sulking? He argues that demonstrating for middle class rights from the White Power structure is meaningless because Native Americans don’t want any part of the White world. They are as he writes, nationalists:

"As nationalists, Indians could not, for the most part, care less what the rest of society does. They are interested in the progress of the tribe."

When he sees a few young Native Americans at the Poor People’s March on TV discussing Native fishing rights, he is dismissive of them. But why? Surely raising awareness of this issue, a vital one to the Native American community, can only be a positive rather than retreating into isolation.
Indicative of this isolation is his support for Barry Goldwater. He writes:

“Politically, most minority groups have shifted to the Democrats and remained loyal through thick and thin. Margins compiled by blacks, Indians, and Mexicans for Democratic candidates have been incredible. In 1964 it took a strong Indian to support Goldwater in spite of his publicized heroic flights to the Navajo and his superb collection of Hopi Kachina dolls.”

Leaving aside the bizarre idea that because Goldwater collects Hopi dolls he would be sympathetic to Native issues, he supports Goldwater because unlike LBJ, he won’t make unpredictable changes, good or bad, to Native American policy. It’s such shortsighted and almost selfish attitude of not caring what the War on Poverty might do for Black, Hispanic, or other minority groups in the cities. We don’t live in the city so screw everyone else. It’s all well and good to argue that your land was stolen and trying to get that land back from the thief is outrageous and demeaning. But what is the alternative?
Delorias’s whole argument seems to be “leave us alone”. Which is fine. But then he is highly critical that the federal government doesn’t do enough to provide money to the reservations. In an ideal world yes, the government would give you money with zero oversight and never interfere. But we didn’t live in an ideal world in 1968 and we don’t live in one now. You can accept federal money and accept that there will be some input as to how it’s spent, or you can eschew all funds and go on your own. You can’t have it both ways.
Ultimately that was what I found frustrating about this book. He is sarcastic about the feds abandoning Native Americans on one hand, then sarcastic about just wanting them to go away. There are some interesting chapters here on history which I enjoyed and found interesting, but the mental gymnastics and inconsistencies in his arguments are frustrating and ultimately extremely short sighted.

[Kurt · Rating 2 out of 5]

I remember seeing this book when I was a youngster. It was published in 1969 when I was 10 years old, and I remember thinking that the title was sort of sacrilegious or disrespectful -- and I remember being very curious about it.

Since that time I have read dozens of books about Indian history. It's become a subject I am very interested in. One time while I was reading an enthralling account of red vs. white warfare I even felt an overwhelming intuition that in a previous life I was, in the flesh, a certain valiant warrior who had fought victoriously in several battles only to die a hero's death while defending his family and his people in their final armed struggle. I have always admired and respected those Indians in the past who stood up to the aggression of those who sought to take away their lands and their way of life. Likewise, I admire those Native Americans and other indigenous people all over the world today who fight the ongoing battles for their people and their culture.

Custer Died For Your Sins details the plight of Native Americans in the modern day -- describing how the same governments and agencies that defrauded them and forced them out of their native lands and stole or destroyed their resources years ago continue to plunder them today.

While meticulous in its detail and accuracy, the book seemed unnecessarily heavy handed to me. The author seemed to want to offend or pick a fight with all white people regardless of their sympathies or philosophies. The book was also quite dated. A lot has happened in the past 50 years that would possibly add to the author's complaints in some ways or alleviate them in other ways. But even though this book was quite educational, it was just not very enjoyable or interesting to me.

[Cheyenne]

I picked up this book at the home of my aunt right before taking a week long beach vacation. The same aunt gave me Deloria's God Is Red for my birthday, and I hadn't read it yet, so I figured this might be a good primer before taking on the other book.
Deloria hits the nail on the head with a lot of things in this book. The Indian Humor. The rise of traditional religions. With his scathing sarcasm, his voice radiates off of the page. He also gets a lot of things wrong, however, in a way that almost made me want to stop reading several times.
His treatment of "black militants" and the Black Power movement in general leaves something to be desired. Do I understand what he's saying? Yes. It's not that I don't get it, it's that I don't think we should use words like "ape" when discussing the way black people in the 1960s attempted to gain rights and recognition in the settler state. Additionally, I don't think the corporate mindset is good for indigenous communities. Yes, holding property in common while keeping personal property is good. Yes, working towards the greater good of the community is good. But I think the word Deloria was looking for and was probably adverse to using during the time the book was written was something along the lines of communism. I disagree with his capitalistic outlook on how tribes can advance themselves, especially when it's coupled with his own knowledge that Indians tend to be removed from US politics and economy. In but not of the settler state. Why dive headfirst into settler economy if the goal is recolonization and eventually a red North American continent?
Deloria contradicts himself quite a few times, but the book was still a good read. I finished Nick Estes' Our History is the Future the same day I started this book, so I was primed for the talk of treaty rights, especially with regard to the making and breaking of specific treaties, as well as talk of Task Force reports, that the average reader may not be prepared for. Even with my qualms, I think I will still read Deloria's other works, especially considering how large of an impact he has had on so-called Indian Affairs.

[Guy A Burdick · Rating 3 out of 5]

Deloria's perspective on U.S. history was both discomforting and eye-opening. Whenever someone (clearly caucasian) tells me about their Cherokee princess great-great grandmother, I think of Vine Deloria's book.

[Alayna T · Rating 5 out of 5]

this is honestly a must read for americans. i had to give time to gather my thoughts after reading this because it's so thought provoking.

i wont lie, you can tell vine deloria is not a historian. he would say certain statements that were obviously not true, i.e. native americans were never slaves. however, i think that his central argument(s) are so important that you can over look some of those blips.

delorias central argument (to my understanding) is that native americans are not an extinct 'species' of people. they are not of antiquity. native americans are still around, and are trying to maintain their cultures in a country that is hellbent on erasing them. within that main argument, he makes tons of other arguments, such as the united states seeing native americans as 'wild' animals that need to be tamed, as well as the fact that the fight for soverignty is the crux of their struggle.

this book was written in 1969, and you can tell, but so much of what he said still sounds brand new and relevant to today. one chapter that really stuck out to me was the 'cultural anthropologists and other friends' essay. he stated that many of the difficulties faced by native americans are rooted in historical problems, such as forced relocation. this concept of historical trauma is still something that our country is trying to grapple with and learn about until this day.

another thing that really stuck with me is the constant comparisons to black americans. in fact, theres a whole chapter explicity dedicated to that, even though these comparisons are brought up in nearly every chapter. i was not expecting that. i see the book as a partial criticism of the civil rights movement in general, and why it did not suffice not just for POC in general, but for black americans. deloria made the argument that the fight for civil rights could have been seen as black americans wanting to be a part of white culture, something he didnt understand. furthermore, he said that just because 'a middle class black can eat lunch at the holiday inn does not mean you've achieved equality'. that especially stuck out to me. further furthermore, deloria even made the arguement that black people should embrace american indian tribalism and create our own ethnostate (lol). my main rebuttal to deloria's slight chastising of the black community is that whenever black people did create their own institutions, they were burned down like tulsa. its times like that when im reminded that this is not meant to be a historical book. but, i was still very surprised that he talked at length about the black community in this indian manifesto.

this was a really good and at times hard read. however, i think its worth it if you want to learn about radical movements from the 60's and 70's as well as native american history. we can all learn from each other.

[Amaru · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book shed alot of light on the history of Native Americans in the U.S. I learned quite a bit that I didn't know previous. Deloria's mix of humor and factual information had me laughing and nodding my head as I read many of the chapters.

He's brutally honest about European/white treatment of Native Americans but the truth hurts.

[Almira · Rating 5 out of 5]

There are so many thoughts swirling around in my mind about this book, where to begin?

So, this review will be a hodge-podge of thoughts and not necessarily in any particular order of the Manifesto itself.
This book was first published in 1969 and republished in 1988.
There are many references to events that many younger readers may not have "lived" through, maybe never even heard of in their history studies.
As a 72-year-old "white" woman there are many events that I had never been taught.
I will add that this is not an easy book to read, for many reasons -- terms used, thoughts expressed by the author, the disgraceful treatment of the original occupants of the North American continent.

Ok, so the reason I decided to read this book, having read "We Had a Little Real Estate Problem, The Unheralded Story of Native Americans & Comedy" by Kliph Nesteroff (see my earlier review), "Custer Died for Your Sins" was mentioned in nearly every chapter, it seemed to me that I should understand the relevance to the Native American community.
Vine Deloria, Jr, (1933-2005) was an activist, historian, theologian, who taught history at U of Arizona and U of Colorado and served as the Executive Director of the National Congress of American Indians.

Vine writes " Easy knowledge about Indians is a historical tradition. After Columbus "discovered" America he brought back news of a great new world which he assumed to be India, and, therefore filled with Indians. ..... The absence of elephants apparently did not tip off the explorers that they weren't in India" page 5.
And so the misnomer of the word to describe the Native Americans became a term used even to this day.

Vine describes how "white European Settlers" basically decided that the land was there for them to take, and how the Indian population was to be sorted out.

One term used many times throughout the book "termination" which defined is
"Termination of a tribe meant the immediate withdrawal of all federal aid, services, and protection, as well as the end of reservations. Individual members of terminated tribes were to become full United States citizens and have the benefits and obligations of any other United States citizens."
Many tribes chose this path, most did not.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs, at the time of this writing, did not really have the interests of the Indian in mind, rather more what the government could do to thwart the Indian population.

Vine goes into detail regarding the various "rounding up" of tribal members and forcing them unto lands that were not familiar to them.... Think "Trail of Tears" where the tribe(s) started from and where they ended.

This is a book that should be considered in higher education American history courses to create a better understanding of the importance of living in a unified country.

[Kaitlyn (ktxx22) Walker · Rating 4 out of 5]

Like a 3.5 rounded up. It’s amazing to me how true this is now so many years into the future. The discussion on tribalism and the rejection of the status quo we’re definitely entering that time and I’m living for it. The folks holding steadfast to the past are generally steeped in hateful ideologies and prejudices so we’re hopeful that they just go away eventually 👀 I mean it shoooo GET gone! We don’t want you round here No more!

Highlights in this are definitely the humor part and the later comparisons between the natives and the black community which were new thought experiments that I had not come across before, but would lead to one hell of a discussion group.

[Nic · Rating 5 out of 5]

It’s strange to me that the more negative reviews focus on things like tone and the lack of citations for this magnificent book. Despite the second edition being publish by a university press, this book was not published originally by an academic publisher nor does it pretend to be a work of academic scholarship. Some of the pieces appeared originally in Playboy magazine, as indicated in the book’s front matter, to give you a sense of the aims and audience for this text. This is a work by a public intellectual writing in the same vein as Mark Twain and (the non-academic pieces of) WEB DuBois. Imagine being upset at the lack of citations in Twain’s essay on the awfulness of the German language or The Souls of Black Folk. There are so many details, forgotten or buried histories, names, agencies, details on tribes and bands—I think it takes a certain kind of arrogance to critique the book for these reasons when it reviews and introduces a history you probably knew little to nothing about or knew about only in such a generalized way that your understanding is inapplicable in any given local context. To ask that Deloria write in a tone that you feel more comfortable reading is to recenter your (probably white) feelings over that of a colonized person whose aim was to center a Native perspective. To ask that he provide academic citations in a book whose partial aim was to critique the total uselessness of university research on Native life, which was largely based on false premises and stereotypes, shows that you have no idea what his argument is.

This is a work addressed to well-meaning white people within the context of the American Indian Movement. It’s clear aim was to create a readable document that could offer the perspective of a Native American intellectual and community advocate with deep knowledge of Native history, politics, governance, and US government programs and institutions, to confront various misperceptions by white colonizers and to help them understand contemporary Native activism. Another goal was to suggest directions to help future state and federal programs on how they can be better directed toward achieving their aims of assisting all US Natives on the reservation and in urban centers. And finally as a manifesto, it is a polemical document to create a vision for Indian survivance. Many of the suggestions were applicable only in that specific historical moment. Some suggestions are still relevant and need to be taken up. And many others were just as important several decades ago as they are today.

I also want to note that I appreciated his insistence on the heterogeneity of Native cultures and perspectives and I appreciated his willingness to be critical of Native leadership and politics. My biggest criticism of the book is that he paints the Black movements of his time in broad strokes that at times seemed ungenerous, inaccurate, or just wrong.

The chapters most worth revisiting for me were Ch’s 1, 4, and 8-11.

[Elle · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really wanted to love this book, and most aspects of it are great, but some of the history is factually wrong. In essence, it's mostly true, but there is some conflation of historical leaders (Henry VIII for one) that made me raise an eyebrow occasionally. This could have been solved with better editing, as it was mostly irrelevant information at didn't change his point. It didn't subtract from the overall message, which was well carried out. But it did make me doubt some of what he said about facts, places, dates, and people, so take that for what it's worth. That said, it is essential reading for every American, because we're still swallowing the propaganda against Indians from our literal fathers, and this will take a massive swipe at that. That's a pretty big necessity in the land of the Greatest (Genocidal, Hypocritical) Country On Earth.

[Jessica · Rating 3 out of 5]

In response to questions posed in the class for which I read this:

“Indians are alive” seems like such an obvious statement, but as Deloria evidences time and again, it was necessary to blatantly state this in his 1987 preface and would probably still hold true if he were to write this today. This statement, “Indians are alive” can be taken literally and figuratively. Indians, in fact, do exist. Though they’ve been on a rollercoaster ride of relocation, termination, legislation, and misrepresentation, they continue to rally and make the best of whatever their situations.
By 1834, the tribes in the Eastern United States who had fought alongside the Americans as allies had been relocated further west (p. 42) Deloria states in the context of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 that Indians realized that to have a voice, they had to band their tribes together (p. 17). It’s within this same discussion that he mentions two active groups run by Indians: the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) and the National Indian Youth Council (NIYC). Actions from both groups, perhaps the NCAI more than the NIYC, have proved that even if not well, the Indians are at least alive; however, they still need to band together in a show of tribe solidarity to remain (p.21).
Even though the white man knew of the Indian’s physical existence, he had be able to subjugate them through legislation that essentially rendered the Indians nonexistent (p. 7) Then lo and behold, White Man learns that Indians own 135 million acres of valuable land and “Welcome to existence, my Indian friends!” Land ownership made the Indians relevant to the white man, so now he is willing to recognize the Indians as “human-beings” capable of owning, and thereby selling, land (p. 7) The Dawes Act of 1887 made this official as Indians were granted their own private property at 160 acres per Indian which left more than enough left over for them to sell (p. 46).
Deloria proposed throughout his manifesto that Indians were only “alive” to the white man when he had something to gain from them, be it land, prestige, a congregation, or funded summer trips to the reservations. Regardless of the motivation behind the legislation, the Citizenship Act of 1924 gave all Indians full citizenship status (p. 76).
It’s been established that Indians are alive, and as a corollary, they have dreams and goals of their own devising. The fact that there exists two active organizations mentioned above, the NCAI and the NIYC trying to make better lives for their constituents by focusing on strong tribal membership and short-term projects demonstrates their desire to achieve a state of their own determination (p. 17). Another example of their intentional desires is the continued existence and active participation of the oldest Indian-run organization: the League of Nations, Pan-American Indians (p.18).
As mentioned earlier a central theme running throughout Deloria’s manifesto is that tribes need to unite together to achieve their goals. He addresses one of their dreams in his discussion of tribal religion. He notes the years from 1870 to 1930 as a period of conversion from the long-standing tribal religions to Christianity (p. 109). The Indians, as a group, were content with their spiritual practices before the missionaries began meddling into their practices. In fact, they became such a thorn in the sides of the Indians that some “obediently followed the way of the white man because it was the path of least resistance” (p. 109). Despite this, they still desire their age-old practice of religion that includes dances and celebrations of religious expression (p. 119). It seems that they will achieve their dream of tribal religious customs and beliefs as long as they can let the white religious experiment run its course.
Finally, Deloria argues in his preface that Indians “are being overrun by the ignorance and the mistaken, misdirected efforts of those who would help them.” This final point of his triad is perhaps the most open to argument. On one side, there are genuine people out there who truly want to help the Indians, even if their sincere efforts have negative effects. On the other side, it is pretty obvious that there are also individuals or groups that have never had the best interest of the Indian at heart. The next two paragraphs offer a few pieces of evidence for each side.
Deloria writes on page 173 that “There was never a time when the white man said he was trying to help the Indian get into the mainstream of American life that he did not also demand that the Indian give up land, water, minerals, timber, and other resources which would enrich the white man.” Evidence offered in his manifesto would suggest otherwise. Deloria alluded to a “number of white organizations that attempted to help Indian people” but because he felt they offered no merit, he didn’t mention any by name or even say anything more about them (p. 19). Obviously with the near total lack of information, the intents of these organizations or individuals cannot be examined here so the reader must take Deloria’s word, for whatever he or she thinks it is worth. The Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 appears to have been conceived in good conscious (though my knowledge is limited to Amy’s lecture, the brief mentions in Deloria’s book and some definitions found on the Internet). It allowed for reservations to practice self-government, manage their land, have land returned to them, and involved rehabilitation programs (p. 48). The discussions around page 112 about missionaries also indicate that they were honestly trying to share their religion with the Indians, even if they were misguided themselves. A final example of good intentions gone wrong involves the anthropologists Deloria hates so much. It doesn’t seem likely that anthropologists would intentionally set out to mislead the Indians. It’s hoped that their intentions of studying the Indians for the Indians’ benefit were genuine and driven by scholarly advancement. Although as we read we discovered that actions of the anthropologists appeared to influence young Indians to drink and older Indians to give up their summer activities of small gardening and livestock care in exchange for pow-wows in attempts to meet the anthropologists’ expectations (pp. 86 & 87).
In direct contrast to the genuine instances above, there exist examples of corrupt groups or individuals only looking out for their best interests. For example, bills were introduced that seemed to be in favor of the Indians, but riders were attached that either undermined the bill at hand or proposed some other radical idea that certainly wasn’t in the best interest of the Indians (p. 37). A more obvious example of deliberate deceit involves the stipulation in the treaty with the Chippewas that granted the United States access to and ownership of the copper reserves on their land (p. 44). A third example features Indian Subcommittee leader Arthur Watkins who disregarded the four points that determined a tribe was ready for termination in an effort to quickly terminate a mass amount of tribes before the upcoming Presidential election brought in someone who would realize what he was doing (p. 62).
Deloria presented many arguments and selected evidence throughout his manifesto that supported his perspective, however, after giving myself a night to process the book, I still feel that the evidence offered to support his statements was tailored or at the least very carefully selected and interpreted to lend credence to his views. He made his case through personal examples, interpretations of legislation, and reported accounts, but it seemed very one-sided to me. In a way (and he would absolutely hate this!) he approached this subject much like the anthropologists that he claimed already had the answer before they came out to observe. He seemed to have a conclusion and all of the evidence included was destined to support it.
In Custer Died For Your Sins, Deloria’s views, motives, and intentions are transparent. He doesn’t leave you guessing where he stands on any issue and provides the reader with many examples to either support his points or to help the reader see his point of view. He writes with an authoritative voice, provides additional evidence in support of the facts he presents, and certainly doesn’t try to hide his thoughts or feelings.
Is it a successful and persuasive manifesto? Yes and no. It’s successful in the fact that it meets Merriam-Webster’s definition of a manifesto and continues to sale. It’s persuasive, in my opinion, but only to a degree. As I mentioned earlier, he seems to be omitting important details. In order for me to be persuaded, I have to believe that the source I’m basing my information on is unbiased, has addressed the pros and cons of each side of an argument, and then I like to take the information I’ve learned and formulate my own conclusion. Deloria is certainly biased and I don’t get the sense that I have all of the information. He also lost credibility in my opinion in Chapter four on the anthropologists and some statements he made were oversimplified or too generalized. All things considered, I learned a lot from reading his manifesto, and would like to continue reading more on the subject in order to gain perspective and to have something with which to compare Deloria’s work.

[Mary · Rating 3 out of 5]

I picked up this classic 1969 work at an exhibition on treaties at DC's Museum of the American Indian. Some parts of the book haven't aged super well in the 50+ years since it was first published, but other moments--such as these--seem only too current:

"But the understanding of the racial question does not ultimately involve understanding by either blacks or Indians. It involves the white man himself. He must examine his past. He must face the problems he has created within himself and within others. The white man must no longer project his fears and insecurities onto other groups, races, and countries. Before the white man can relate to others he must forego the pleasure of defining them. The white man must learn to stop viewing history as a plot against himself" (174-75).

"Everyone understands that 'law and order' are synonymous with repression of the black community."

It's been over 50 years since Deloria wrote these words.

[Lotts · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book has a lot of information and concepts so it took me quite a bit of time to read but I learned so much! The US has broken all of its 400 plus treaties with the Native tribes and stolen billions of acres of land from them, and that's not even scratching the surface of the atrocities committed. This book puts a lot of things into perspective and opened my eyes to the absurdity of certain "leaders" and the despicable actions taken on Native people throughout the decades. Everyone should read this, it was written during the 80s but it is STILL relevant in 2025.

[Kiki Ong · Rating 3 out of 5]

There were definitely a lot of gems in this book. Loved Deloria’s satirical voice throughout, it was genuinely so funny

However, given that this book was written in 1969, I do think some of the ideas are dated and Deloria definitely speaks for other communities (primarily Black communities in regards to the Black Power Movement) that didn't feel just.

For a large portion of the book, Deloria focused on the effects of state violence and had interesting ideas on how Natives' could create their own ethnostate by "re-colonizing" the US (I found this language weird) At the same time, he was incredibly critical of Black communities' responses to said violence. Overall worth the read, but definitely take it with a grain of salt. Would love to obtain a copy with the 1988 preface to see if he re-addresses any of the above ideas.

[Graham Cifelli · Rating 4 out of 5]

Surprisingly funny! Writing has a real wit and a lot of info but some of the portions read a little dated (it was published in 1969 though so I can't fault it too much there)

[Alexis Kaelin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Holy smokes. Not at all what I expected, and I loved every minute of it. I laughed audibly a number of times and was just blown away by the honesty and humor of the author. If you are looking for a historical account, kindly look elsewhere. This is an Indian account of how they feel they have been treated/wronged by the US government and how they should be treated. It says "manifesto" in the title. I kept thinking about how my husband, who teaches Russian/Soviet history, tells students at the beginning of the semester that he will present the Russian side of the story whenever possible since students already know the American side. And so it is with this book - a presentation of the Indian mentality by and for Indians. I appreciate the brief peek into Indian lives that this book offered.

[Thomas · Rating 1 out of 5]

It seemed like this was "required reading" for folks interested in Native American issues so I bought a used copy and it's been on my shelf for a few years. Well I started reading it and there was a few insights I gleaned but I found a lot of statements the author made that were presented as fact but he never listed his source. One particular statement he presented as fact was that the U.S. government gave Indians blankets infected with small pox. I had thought that this had been debunked and so I googled it. I found that it's a little bit of an ambiguous idea rooted some in fact and some in speculation. Small pox unquestionably was devastating t Native Americans. How the disease was actually introduced to Tribes is the question. I would not doubt the idea that biological warfare was used against Native Americans considering all the other atrocities inflicted but there doesn't appear to be any record of disease infested blankets being handed out. The only thing I could find was a record of British soldiers giving smallpox blankets out but not the U.S. government or soldiers.

I also read that a University of Colorado professor, Ward Churchill, started the "blanket" idea in book titled "A little Matter of Genocide" published in 2001. Vine Deloria Jr., in this book, published in 1969, writes "In the old days blankets infected with smallpox were given to the tribes in an effort to decimate them." Churchill says his source was a 1987 book, "American Indian Holocaust and Survival", by Russell Thornton, an anthropology professor at UCLA. But where did Deloria get the idea?

Also he writes as though every Native American thinks like he does. That's not the case, opinions greatly vary from tribe to tribe, person to person in Indian Country. Maybe I'm missing something because I didn't finish the book but that's the impression I got.

There are more mental notes I made but I'm to lazy to spell it out, lol! Besides, a word of wisdom I hears was "don't disparage the dead", so I wont talk to badly about Mr. Deloria.

One other thing. He mentions the Shoshone Chief Washakie once. I'm a non-enrolled member of the Easter Shoshone Tribe and my Great-Great Grandfather and Washakie's 1st cousin, John Enos, is buried next to him at Ft. Washakie, WY. As I said, he mentions him once in the entire book, only to say that "Washakie, the Shoshone chief who tattled on the other tribes every chance he got and finally received a nice reservation in Wyoming was another early fink who was honored posthumously as a good guy." Dude...I don't necessarily care about what people think about Washakie, I've no dog in the fight, but really? From my understanding, growing up on the Wind River, the "nice reservation in Wyoming" Washakie received, is a little more nuanced. Maybe expand on the guy a little. I think he was a good guy and recognized that fighting the whites was a losing battle and decided to save lives of his braves, women, children and elders by settling down and choosing the white way of life. Pretty wise in my opinion. So yeah, he did get a nice reservation for his people but it's much, much more detailed than Washakie "tattling" on other tribes.

I didn't finish this one, though I might yet still read the chapter on Indian Humor, and I have another book by Deloria "Red Earth, White Lies". I'll pass on reading that one. I've got enough of an idea what I'll be reading.

[Claudia · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have read two other books recently that led me, finally, to this one...the first book articulating issues from a Native perspective: There, There, by Tommy Orange (a novel about urban Indians), and Lakota Woman, by Mary Crow Dog (a memoir of the struggles of AIM in the 70s). Add to this, the appointment of Deb Haaland, a member of the Laguna Pueblo, as Sect of Interior, which oversees the federal relationship with all Natives. Deloria got some things right, I think, in 1969, and others wrong...but Haaland's appointment can open a new chapter to our sorry relationships with the first Americans.

This books is a series of essays, each focusing on an aspect of Native life, and Native relationship with White America...His book foresees the struggles of the 70s when AIM arose.

He mocks how, even as the dominant society marginalizes, attacks, and ignores Indians, nearly everyone wants to claim ancestry from an Indian Princess. Elizabeth Warren comes to mind here...but, in OK, sometimes it's hard to really get at the truth in some families. He analyzes the federal program of 'termination', essentially breaking all reservations, all Native governments...all identity. After 400 years of broken treaties, they tried to obliterate the tribes.

He criticizes the anthropologists who get big money every summer to 'study' the tribes, and to go home and write papers with lots of footnotes. He slams the missionaries and religious leaders who tried to take Native religion away in the name of 'civilizing' people. Those mission schools were brutal places for children...and that is on us.

In 1969, Deloria compares and contrasts the struggles of the Civil Rights movement of Black leaders with the Native American nationalism movement (see AIM and Native American Church. Blacks had been excluded from American society...Natives were being forced to be assimilated. The situations and goals of the two groups of oppressed people were different enough that he supports Native withdrawal from the Civil Rights movement...His essay on Indian leadership shows the tensions of trying to unify all the tribes into one movement or not...of working together even tho goals for tribes may be very different. He speaks here from experience as a leader.

His vision of the future is optimistic. He predicts urban Natives will become new leaders of the movement...he sees termination ending, tribes allowed by the feds to chart their own futures, according to the needs and strengths of the tribes.

Now...back to those other three books. Orange gives us a heartbreaking look at urban Natives...they have not grown the way Deloria hoped. They have lost their tribal identity, and all those programs have not actually helped Natives who are cut off from their heritage. Crow Dog's memoir takes place just a few years after Deloria's book...she was deeply involved in the AIM struggle. Deloria would be happy, tho, to see Native religion become important again, as Crow Dog tells us.

And Haaland...my God. What an opportunity. What a task.

[Ma'Belle · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely brilliant and hilarious, Vine Deloria Jr. has to be one of my new favorite authors of history between American Indians and white colonizers.

There are so many witty and pointedly insightful moments throughout this book, but I will here simply paste the few notes I took while listening to it.

This book has me cracking up multiple times in the first chapter. He recalls from his days [as the head of an organization whose name I forget] how almost every day some white would come to his office and proudly declare they had some Indian blood. All but one person claimed it was on their grandmother’s side, leading Deloria to calculate that for the first three hundred years of colonization, these Indian tribes - most popularly Cherokee, then Mohawk and Chippewa - were entirely female. LMAO!!! He theorizes that they were uncomfortable with the idea of having a Native male ancestor because it brought notions of a savage warrior undeserving of their family history, but an “Indian Princess Grandmother?!” Perfect: genteel, graceful, beautiful, elegant, and feminine. He says after a while of hearing all the white people claiming to be part Indian, he started to affirm them and understood or sympathized with their need to identify that way. He hoped that one day they would be able to accept themselves and leave [Native Americans] alone. Howww

After listing and describing the work of various Indian organizations, he dryly says, “There are a number of white-led organizations that attempt to help Indians. Since we would be better off without them, I will not mention them, except to acknowledge that they do exist.” HAHAHAH

[Lubna · Rating 3 out of 5]

2.5 stars rounded up to 3. Overall, it’s an interesting book, but it’s quite dated since it was written in the 1960s. I particularly enjoyed the chapter on “Indian humour” and it made me realize that one of the reasons I enjoy reading literature by indigenous North American writers is that I like their sense of humour, it’s a lot like Egyptian humour.

The author contradicted himself in some areas, however, and seemed to be confused about whether he believed in Christianity or not. He also seemed to confuse mythology with historical fact, considering the Bible and particularly the Old Testament as historical documents. That had my alarm bells screaming, so I Googled him and discovered that Deloria did indeed have some rather bizarre beliefs about creationism and science. Now, I’m from the Middle East, and one thing I know is that people who read the Judeo/Christian/Islamic religious texts literally and believe they’re historical and scientific documents are the reason we have problems in that part of the world.

I was going to give the book 2 stars, but the dark humour was just so good I decided to add one more.

[Samantha Shain · Rating 5 out of 5]

I thought this book was fantastic and insightful. The jokes were funny enough that I frequently shouted them across the apartment to my partner - and read aloud most of the chapter on anthropologists. I appreciated all of the social movement insights comparing urban/reservation Indians (his terminology!) as well as how many Indian political perspectives map onto the civil rights movement and Black power struggle. I appreciate the scope and depth of the book, since Deloria has such extensive political/advocacy experience. This really helped me learn about different political phases and treaty violations between indigenous people and the US government.

[Dale · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow! And now a little back story...I was adopted shortly after my birth in 1969. I found my birth mother in 1998 and at that point I found out that I am Native American and that Vine Deloria is my great uncle. My birth mother recommended this book to me and it had been a total eye opener. I loved the stories and the humor and the sarcasm and the culture in the face of some of the worst treatment and injustice on the planet. Even though this was written 50 years ago, it’s still very relevant today.

[Kathrine · Rating 4 out of 5]

The harsh truths and scathing humor in this is delivered expertly by Kaipo Schwab in audiobook format. While some of the information is outdated, as indicated in the preface added in (I think) 2003, this is still essential reading for 1) historical context and 2) the grim reality that much of this book is still relevant today.

I don't usually add quotes to my reviews, but the eloquence of this one struck me.

"Before the white man can relate to others, he must forego the pleasure of defining them"

If we're not reading to continually better ourselves right now? What are we doing?