Page 57 - ECOlogic Book

We find in the actual content of our founding documents, these elements
which also appear in the Great Law: the fundamental bicameral structure of
the U.S. government – the two “houses”, (in the Great Law, there were
three “houses”, a direct reference to clans from the Iroquois Law); separate
legislative branches, its systems of checks and balances, the separation of
powers, the rights of individuals and their representation trough states
(nations), and State’s Rights. Even the symbols, the bundle of arrows and
the eagle that adorn our constitution have been borrowed directly from the
65
Great Law.

Structurally, the Great Law and the U.S. Constitution are almost identical.
But there are some differences, having to do with the differing cultural
milieu. In the Great Law there was no executive branch, so single ruler, or
president. In the Native American cosmology, a chief cannot tell anyone
what to do. “Chiefs without power”, they are more facilitators than rulers.

“The Onondaga do not have to this day a police force or army to carry out
any orders by the chiefs. Therefore, it is elemental that the people agree
66
before any change takes place because they are the ones to carry it out.”
Chiefs cannot even declare war, which is a decision of such megnitude that
there must be consensus among all the people to carry it forward. Warriors
can serve only voluntarily. If not enough warriors show up for a war, there
is no war.

But they did show up. Because all decisions were made by consensus, a
deliberately slow process that can prevent precipitous actions. And all
decisions were required to take into account the well-being of those not yet
born, “even unto the seventh generation”.

But by the far the most striking difference has to do with the power held by
woman in the Great Law. Every clan had its Clan Mother, and a council of
Clan Mothers decided who the chiefs would be, whether or not to go to war
(a decision that had to be ratified by all the people), and whether or not to
remove a chief who had overstepped his or her authority. A chief could be
either a man or a woman.

Within this structure, a chief, (and there may be many, each with a distinct
role), had a great deal of autonomy. But ultimately, he or she was

65 Mander, Jerry, In the Absence of the Sacred, (Sierra Club Books, San Francisco, CA 1991).

66 Lyons, Owen, quoted in In the Absence of the Sacred, (Sierra Club Books, San Francisco, CA 1991)

57