Rae Merkle, 2021

 

I. Introduction to Project and Question for Analysis

The Dakota Access Pipeline is an underground oil line that currently runs through states beginning with North

Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, ending in Illinois. A company focused on providing Bakken’s oil to states and communities along the pipeline, Dakota Access also professes to being “an active member of the communities the pipeline traverses” (Dakota Access). Upon investigation of their “Communities” page, which hosts a list of donations to all those residing along the pipeline, a quick search proves to show that this could not be farther from the truth. Among names like “University of Mary,” the “North Dakota High School Rodeo,” and the “Mandan Veterans Memorial Ballpark,” there is not one mention of the Standing Rock Sioux, despite being the most affected. 

In 2016, there were protests among the Standing Rock Sioux because the Dakota Access pipeline construction

threatened to cut into reservation lands-- not only because of the potential contamination of drinking water, poisoned wildlife, and bulldozed cultural sites-- but also due to the fact that it violated a long standing treaty that had originally established the reservation. There were United Nations presentations, on-site peaceful demonstrations, and even camps set up in anticipation for the long months ahead. The protests have stopped since then, but the fight has not. Most recently, in 2020, there has been a motion for permanent injunction. In this document, former Standing Rock Chairman Archambault points out that the government obliging in the operation of the pipeline reinforces “...the deeply held understanding that the historic wrongs committed by the United States... will continue and that our voices will not be heard in ways that matter by those who have the power to stop the harm to our people” (Hasselman, 23). 

This motion for injunction is an endeavor to address the manifest destiny ideology of both the Dakota Pipeline’s

actions to proceed with construction upon protected lands and USACE’s allowance of it. I will analyze the paradoxes within this ideology of manifest destiny and how the actions of both Dakota Access and the government perpetuate this notion.

 

II. Background and Context of Chosen Artifact

Before then, and even now, Native American’s dealings with the U.S. often left their rights “sacrificed in the

name of ‘progress,’,” under the heel of the government and manifest destiny (Farrington). Evidence of this reaches as far back as the Indian Removal Act of 1830, instated by Andrew Jackson in the first year of his presidency (Farrington). This only further fed into the view that “indigenous peoples and civilization were incompatible” (Farrington). A phrase originally coined in 1845 under The Democratic Review, ‘manifest destiny’ was defined as “the fulfillment... to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions,” the root of this animosity and expansion (History). 

Decades later, the Fort Laramie Treaty was a negotiation signed in 1868 that assigned the Sioux a territory that

is now known as the Standing Rock Reservation (Avalon Project). It was a section of land given to both isolate and repay the Standing Rock Sioux for the hardships endured by them and their ancestors. This included giving the tribes “absolute use and undisturbed occupation” of the land they inhabited (Avalon Project). Hundreds of years have passed since then, but the Standing Rock Sioux are still titled as a “sovereign nation” (Smithsonian). Because of their actions against the will of Standing Rock, the Dakota Access pipeline of today is seen as something that could endanger cultural resources and the survival of the tribes themselves (Smithsonian). 

Dakota Access backed by a permit granted by USACE began construction of the pipeline in Native lands on

July 15, 2016, despite the aforementioned treaty-- actions that hearkened back to the ideology of manifest destiny (Hersher). While permitted by the federal government through USACE, the Fort Laramie Treaty is a document that is superior to the grant in age and authority. Being drilled beneath Lake Oahe, the pipeline would prove to be a threat to the drinking water of all the people who reside on the reservation, the tended plantlife, and livestock as well as wild animals, should a leak or multiple occur. 

The document being analyzed, the motion for a permanent injunction, has the goal of stopping the process of

Dakota Access. Considering the Standing Rock Sioux is a sovereign nation that has its own laws and policies, and the case is not held in their own court of law, there is a need to express this history that has plagued their people in a way that the court understands. Because of this, the document’s main argument is, 

“…both the law and the equities merit vacatur of the pipeline easement pending compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act… With the pipeline now operating illegally, and the Corps poised to take no action, the case for suspending pipeline operations is even stronger. DAPL has operated for nearly four years… exposing the Tribes to catastrophic risk and ongoing trauma that have never been subject to the scrutiny that NEPA requires” (Hasselman, 8).

Environmental concerns backed by NEPA, the illegal state of the pipeline’s actions, and the effect that has been put on the resident tribes as a result of historical stressors and wrongs performed by the United States-- this being only the newest of many. 

 

III. Application of Specific Rhetorical Concepts and Analysis of Artifact

In its essential form, an ideology is a system of beliefs that everyone possesses. In rhetorical terms, ideology is a

group of presuppositions that have influence over family, politics, and society as a whole (Longaker & Walker, 185). No matter what we do, where we go, what we choose, we are influenced by our ideologies. The presuppositions that make up these ideologies cannot be a passing fad either-- they must be supported by society or culture and be maintained for an evident term in order to be considered legitimate (Longaker & Walker, 186). It is the analysis of ideology that allows us to find the roots of these groups of presuppositions and be able to identify them. 

Standing Rock’s motion of permanent injunction points out the ideology of manifest destiny and how it affects

the relationship between the reservation and the government, as well as the rest of American society. For hundreds of years, this relationship between Native Americans and the U.S. government has been strained by manifest destiny, the belief that Americans have the right and responsibility to spread their way of life across North America and beyond her borders (Farrington). Chairman Archambault, in the document, notes this historical mistreatment of Natives at the mercy of federal dominion, stating that “This history impacts our people today – as the traumas our ancestors faced contribute to significant social problems” (Hasselman, 23). This alludes to the implementation of manifest destiny that has only hidden its roots-- not eradicated them-- as the Dakota Pipeline, that this document battles against, encroaches upon Native lands. Within the parameters of the case, this ideology is the backing force behind the decision of USACE and the following action of Dakota Access. In addition to this, the document for permanent injunction appeals to the treaty in order to highlight these responsibilities the government (and USACE as a part of the whole) has to Standing Rock because of this past that has been experienced with the effects of manifest destiny “...allowing the pipeline to continue despite the serious violations of law offends the solemn obligations of the U.S. government to protect Tribal Treaty rights and the integrity and safety of the Tribes’ homelands” (Hasselman, 16). 

Even so, what is not specified is the ideological paradox that the motion of injunction presents. A paradox is

defined by two similar sentiments standing parallel to each other, but never intersecting (Longaker & Walker, 200). In this case, the document reflects a conflicting paradox that has been occurring for centuries. In a 1916 issue, H.M. Chittenden of The Atlantic talks in depth about the paradox within manifest destiny, stating that,

“The paradox is evidently an outgrowth of that social institution known as title— title in land, particularly, —which gives to the holder thereof possession against all comers of that portion of the earth’s surface to which it pertains... It matters not how the title was obtained; once recognized as legal, it becomes inviolable” (Chittenden). 

It was stated that the pipeline was originally supposed to be near Bismarck, under the Missouri River, but for fear of contaminating the drinking water the company moved it to Lake Oahe on the Standing Rock Reservation (Smithsonian). The reason why this contributes to the problem of paradox within manifest destiny is the fact that because Dakota Access did not want to risk contaminating the water supply of the state capital, they appealed to USACE to unlawfully install the pipeline under the reservation instead, risking the lives of all the inhabitants who use the water source-- as well as risking many cultural sites to construction. It did not matter that the land was protected, because with the permit, it was as if the Sioux never owned the land they had been repaid in the first place. This is the ideological paradox of manifest destiny: if you are blocking progress, you will be overruled in the process.

 

IV. So What and Where do We Go From Here?

Ideologies are the beliefs that shape anyone and everyone, no matter how we live. Manifest destiny is one of

these ideologies that have been unchallenged in America for centuries, creating roots that hardly anyone has the awareness to weed out anymore. It’s power like this that ideologies possess-- able to trigger bombs, start wars, or in this case build upon sacred land. It is companies like Dakota Access and the complacency of the government that continue the ideology on a large scale, nevermind the microaggressions such as gentrification. 

No matter what the reason, minorities like Native Americans are always being sacrificed for “progress.” It is

possible for the problem of this ideology to be resolved and the paradox lifted, but not unless there is awareness about it. Covered extensively in 2016, the public has nearly forgotten about the fight that still continues with the Standing Rock Sioux in their battle against the modern reality of manifest destiny. The problem with this is that we see manifest destiny as something of the past, and we do not have extensive discussions about how it still affects us today. In order to fix a problem, it first must be recognized.

Since the pipeline has been completed, there have been 12 spills that have leaked large quantities of oil into the

surrounding areas (Hasselman, 21). Currently, after motions and lawsuits, the pipeline has been drained and is being put under extensive environmental review as claims are being investigated-- four years after the first bulldozer struck Native soil. This is still not the end of the Dakota Access battle, it’s only the beginning. There are nonprofits in place to donate to the Standing Rock Sioux as the case continues, but the coverage is slim to none without the aid of national media, such as it was back in 2016. Without attention, the Dakota Access battle will become yet another statistic for manifest destiny if issues continue to be swept under the rug by not only the government and ambitious companies, but by the public as well.
 

​

Sources: 

1. Avalon Project. “Transcript of Treaty of Fort Laramie (1868).” Ourdocuments,

https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=42&page=transcript. Accessed 13 March 2021. 

2. Chittenden, H.M. “Manifest Destiny In America.” The Atlantic, https://www.

theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1916/01/manifest-destiny-in-america/5283

69/. Accessed 11 March 2021. 

3. Dakota Access. “Moving America’s Energy The Dakota Access Pipeline.” Dakota Access Pipeline: Home.

https://daplpipelinefacts.com/. Accessed 11 March 2021. 

4. Dakota Access. “Your Community Is Our Community.” Dakota Access Pipeline: Community.

https://www.daplpipelinefacts.com/Community.html. Accessed 11 March 2021

5. Farrington, Tom. “Dakota Pipeline: America’s Indigenous People are Still Fighting A Centuries Old Racist

Ideology.” The Conversation, https://theconversation.com/dakota-pipeline-americas-indigenous-people-are-still-fighting-a-centuries-old-racist-ideology-70175. Accessed 10 March 2021. 

6. Hersher, Rebecca. “Key Moments In The Dakota Access Pipeline Fight.” NPR,

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/22/514988040/key-moments-in-the-dakota-access-pipeline-fight. Accessed 13 March 2021.  

7. History. “Manifest Destiny.” History, https://www.history.com/topics

/westward-expansion/manifest-destiny. Accessed 12 March 2021. 

8. Longaker, Mark Garrett, and Walker, Jeffrey. Rhetorical Analysis: A Brief Guide for 

Writers. Pearson, 2011.

9. Smithsonian. “Treaties Still Matter.” Smithsonian: National Museum of the 

American Indian, 2018. https://americanindian.si.edu/nk360/plains

-treaties/dapl. Accessed 10 March 2021. 

10. Hasselman, Jan; Ducheneaux, Nicole; Roy, Michael; Baker, Jennifer; Wilson, Rollie. “District Court Pleadings

Caption.” Earthjustice, https://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/standing-rock_motion-for-injunction.pdf. Accessed 15 March 2021.