Fungibility: Florida Seminole Casino Dividends and the Fiscal Politics of Indigeneity

Abstract

In this article, I examine Florida Seminoles' governmental distributions of tribal-gaming revenues that take the form of per capita dividends. Dividends reveal the political and cultural stakes of money's fungibility-its ability to substitute for itself. From tribal policy debates over children's dividends to the legitimization of political leadership through monetary redistribution, Seminoles selectively exploit the fungibility of money to break or make ties with one another and with non-Seminoles. They do so in ways that reinforce indigenous political authority and autonomy, and they thereby challenge structural expectations in U.S. public culture and policy that would oppose indigenous distinctiveness to the embrace of money. [

The Psychological Science of Money

“…Many anthropological studies of money-in-practice have focused on what Rogers ( 2005 ) calls the "politics of liquidity" or what Jessica Cattelino ( 2009 ) has addressed in terms of money's fungibility. Both authors treat money's ability in particular circumstances to make things equivalent as something achieved and not given in advance.…”

Losing Lévi‐Strauss: The 2009 Year in Cultural Anthropology

“…Jessica Cattelino considers a particular instance of this in her analysis of the transformation of Florida Seminole gambling revenue, potentially morally suspect, into dividends distributed to individuals and spent on unremarkable items. This money—like the knowledge discussed by Blaser—nonetheless also serves to distinguish Seminoles, with outsiders inevitably curious about “how much we make a month … being Indian” (Cattelino 2009:193). The reverse side of this is that Seminoles use the consequences of monetization to “reinforce indigenous political authority and autonomy” (Cattelino 2009:194), so that dividends both serve as and support the reproduction of markers of distinction.…”

“…This money—like the knowledge discussed by Blaser—nonetheless also serves to distinguish Seminoles, with outsiders inevitably curious about “how much we make a month … being Indian” (Cattelino 2009:193). The reverse side of this is that Seminoles use the consequences of monetization to “reinforce indigenous political authority and autonomy” (Cattelino 2009:194), so that dividends both serve as and support the reproduction of markers of distinction. Classification and taxonomy, thus, continued to be central to cultural anthropological work in 2009—whether through a focus on how friction and state involvement reproduce difference or a consideration of how everyday practices (from calling in with a radio request to lining up for a dividend check) reinscribe otherness.…”

Auctioning Patronage in Northeast Brazil: The Political Value of Money in a Ritual Market

“…On the other hand, many recent scholars posit that money can reaffirm local hierarchies and classifications (Guyer 2004). People can deploy money's “uniscalar valuation template” (Kelly 1992:102) to signify personal talents (Barber 1995), modernist subjectivities (LiPuma 2000), and ethnic solidarities (Cattelino 2009).…”