The Domination Chronicles is podcast where Steven T. Newcomb (Shawnee/Lenape) and Peter d’Errico examine how domination shaped the legal and political foundations of the United States.You can find transcripts and show notes at our website: www.dominationchronicles.com

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/10/27/19/a209be13-7848-405e-a5dc-404a885b071c_writing.mp3

In this episode, Steve Newcomb and Peter d’Errico talk about their writing. Steve notes that in all their years of working independently and together they have never discussed their process: how they think through what they want to write, and how they keep “working to make more clear what it is we’re attempting to get at.” He credits Peter with helping him become more streamlined when he gets wordy. He then asks about the new direction Peter has taken, posting fiction on Substack, a kind of writing “that has a lot of teachings and a lot of learning experiences for the reader.” From there the two take up Steve’s larger question, “the role of writing in the creation and construction of reality,” and follow it through Peter’s Shawnee and Creek stories, Crazy Horse, Owen Barfield, courtroom ritual, and the way minds and bodies together make what we call reality. Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

EP25: Writing, Fiction, and the Construction of Reality

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/9/26/19/e7fc9c01-e272-4a7e-ad6b-524c8a09c625_undhr.mp3

In this episode, Peter and Steve take a close look at a document most people assume they already understand: the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Steve traces how he first stumbled onto the question at the 2023 Parliament of the World&#39;s Religions in Chicago, where a line in the Declaration&#39;s preamble caught his eye and was waved off by the panelists. That line says human rights should be protected by the rule of law &#34;if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression.&#34; Tyranny and oppression, as Steve points out, are simply two synonyms for domination.The conversation then turns to what the drafters wrote before they wrote that. The first draft, dated June 4, 1947, had no preamble at all. Its Article 29 was a single sentence: &#34;Everyone has the right, either individually or with others, to resist oppression and tyranny.&#34; Eighteen months later, when the Declaration was adopted on December 10, 1948, that sentence was gone. In its place stood three clauses about duties to the community, limitations &#34;determined by law,&#34; and a prohibition on exercising rights &#34;contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.&#34; A right to resist became a duty to obey, with rebellion demoted to a last resort after every procedure and tribunal has been exhausted.Peter and Steve ask what that reversal reveals. The United States and France, whose revolutions were premised on exactly the right the 1947 draft affirmed, were central to producing a final text that folds resistance into a complaint system administered by the state. From there the discussion widens: what is a &#34;right,&#34; what is &#34;the state,&#34; what is a &#34;person&#34;? These are ideas treated as if they were physical realities, and yet real people in bureaucracies embody them and enforce them. Steve draws on the 1608 Calvin&#39;s Case, in which English judges declared allegiance was owed not to England or the crown but to the person of the king, to show how the whole structure rests on a mental world of projected relationships.The episode closes on the View from the Shore. Steve reconsiders the language of &#34;dehumanization,&#34; suggesting that the projection of &#34;heathen,&#34; &#34;pagan,&#34; and &#34;infidel&#34; onto Native ancestors was the dehumanizing step, while the brutal &#34;humanizing&#34; process, the California missions being one example, was the forcing of those ancestors under the domination system. If &#34;person&#34; comes from the Greek word for mask, then a right to personhood is a right to an identity card issued by the state. As Peter&#39;s t-shirt puts it: Land of the Free. Some restrictions apply. Void where prohibited.Listen for a conversation that reads the fine print on human rights from the vantage point of those who were never asked to sign.#HumanRights #UDHR #UniversalDeclarationOfHumanRights #RightToResist #Domination #DominationSystem #DoctrineOfDiscovery #ViewFromTheShore #Decolonize #IndigenousRights #IndigenousSovereignty #UnitedNations #Podcast Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Domination System"

We compare the 1947 draft of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights with the 1948 final: a plain right to resist tyranny became a duty to obey and a “last resort.”

Subscribe on YouTube

Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content

Episode 24: Some Restrictions Apply

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/6/25/5/d2e999ec-f4e4-490f-b937-76b2e31e6fb6_e023-bishops-papal-bulls-and-domination-rev2.mp3

In this episode, Peter d’Errico interviews Steve Newcomb about a May 2026 Catholic bishops’ symposium on the Doctrine of Discovery in Edmonton, Alberta. Steve reflects on the event, the call to revoke Inter Caetera, and the danger of language that hides domination behind softer terms such as “discovery,” “renunciation,” and “reconciliation.” Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

Episode 23: Bishops, Papal Bulls, and the Problem of Domination

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/6/8/4/63298890-8ac7-41a5-8385-d2abd39a50c6_where.mp3

In this episode of <a href="https://dominationchronicles.com" rel="nofollow">Domination Chronicles</a>, Steven T. Newcomb and Peter d’Errico explore why “domination” has become a slogan instead of a serious inquiry—and why language, law, history, and power must be carefully unpacked. Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

Episode 22 of Domination Chronicle

Where Are We Now? Why Domination Is the Beginning of the Conversation, Not the End

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/5/25/22/ad5d8ed1-920d-44fa-b2d3-3a35efeb2ee4_sov-final.mp3

In this episode, Steven T. Newcomb and Peter d’Errico return to one of the most repeated phrases in federal Indian law and public advocacy: “tribal sovereignty.” But what does the phrase actually mean within the legal framework of the United States? Steve and Peter argue that “tribal sovereignty” is an oxymoron when it is defined by federal anti-Indian law as “limited sovereignty” or as sovereignty that the United States has not yet extinguished. Drawing on definitions of sovereignty from Jean Bodin and Sterling Edmonds, they explain that sovereignty means a claim of supreme and unlimited authority. If Native nations are said to be sovereign only to the extent that the United States permits, then the phrase no longer describes free and independent existence. It describes domination. The conversation turns to Felix Cohen’s Handbook of Federal Indian Law, often treated as the “Bible” of federal Indian law, and examines how its framework converts original Native independence into a legal system of U.S. supremacy. Steve and Peter also discuss treaty rights, land claims, religious freedom, consultation, “federal lands,” and the danger of accepting the opponent’s premise. The episode concludes with a discussion of the Pe’ Sla / Black Hills drilling controversy and how legal and environmental advocacy can unintentionally reproduce the very domination framework it seeks to resist. Resources mentioned: Felix Cohen, Handbook of Federal Indian Law Pe’ Sla drilling analysis Complaint filed in the Pe’ Sla case Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

Episode 21: “Tribal Sovereignty” 101: Limited Sovereignty, Federal Domination, and the Language Trap

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/4/18/15/4dc47470-6faf-4eda-95b6-665fd00c7f8b_dc20.mp3

Today we deep dive into the legal and philosophical foundations of the &#34;federal Indian law trust doctrine.&#34; We argue that the term &#34;trust&#34; is a euphemism for a relationship of domination rather than a protective legal obligation. Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

UNTRUSTWORTHY “TRUST”: DOMINATION, FEAR, AND FEARLESSNESS

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/4/7/16/10a4cc92-b9f6-4fcf-9cb8-7a29d0fa33ed_dc19.mp3

A deep conversation between hosts Steven Newcomb and Peter d&#39;Errico and guest Loretta Afraid of Bear-Cook, about the preservation of Oglala Lakota traditions, the power of indigenous language, and the resistance against systems of domination and modern convenience. Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

Episode 19: LORETTA AFRAID OF BEAR-COOK: “LIVING IN OGLALA LAKOTA COMMUNITY”

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/3/20/18/1515dcea-e03f-482b-92aa-a59d33e21648_mark.mp3

Attorney Mark Savage joins us in this episode for a provocative discussion of the US claim of “plenary power” over Native nations and peoples. In the early 1990’s (!), Mark authored two seminal law review articles showing that the doctrine of “plenary power” has no basis in the US Constitution. In November 2025, in a dramatic move at the Supreme Court, two justices took the same stance! Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

A conversation with Mark Savage

Episode 18: Mark Savage: “Natural Rights” -- Unravelling The Questions

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/3/9/21/744b2a67-e904-410a-b0f1-849574c01639_bruce.mp3

Historian and lawyer Bruce McIvor joins us in this episode for a deep dive into how Canada’s colonizing legal system continues to attack First Nations with laws and policies dressed up in thelatest costume of “reconciliation”. Bruce is a member of the Manitoba Métis Federation, descended from the Red River Métis. His law firm, First Peoples Law, represents Indigenous Peoples across the continent. Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

Episode 17: Bruce Mcivor: Legalized Lawlessness

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/2/24/17/3150ed90-2a8d-4383-91d3-43b773ad96d5_dc16.mp3

In this powerful episode, hosts Steve Newcomb and Peter d’Errico dissect a February 2, 2026, The Economist article titled &#34;The Indian Removal Act, Unchecked Expansionism, and Disregard for the Rule of Law.&#34; They expose how the author misuses an 1832 Muskogee Creek Nation memorial – a protest against settler invasion – to draw parallels to modern US immigration policy.The discussion delves into the disingenuous framing, exploring how the term &#34;rule of law&#34; was weaponized historically and remains a tool for domination. Key themes include renaming settlers accurately, understanding the legal system&#39;s role in colonialism, and recognizing the philosophy of domination that underpins the &#34;Empire of Liberty.&#34; Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

Responses to "The Indian Removal Act, Unchecked Expansionism, and Disregard for the Rule of Law."

Episode 16: “COLONISTS, SETTLERS, INVADERS, EXPANSIONISTS, IMMIGRANTS

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/2/19/20/52f7bcca-91f6-459a-9848-b098892d4bb4_e015-domination-chronicles-stolen-land.mp3

Episode 15, “STOLEN LAND”: The Danger and Limitation of Performative Speech, begins with the Grammys uproar after Billie Eilish said, “no one is illegal on stolen land,” and the fast backlash that followed. Peter P. d’Errico and Steven Newcomb argue that much of the public fight is performative speech: words that signal virtue or expertise while blocking real inquiry. They dig into the deeper structure beneath the sound and fury—how U.S. concepts of “property,” “theft,” and “title” grow out of a claimed right of domination. The conversation turns to Johnson v. McIntosh (1823) and the “extravagant pretension” that Christian “discovery” created superior legal rights over Indigenous lands. Steven traces “government” and “dominion” through Latin roots linked to domination, showing how legal language can hide coercion. The episode challenges listeners to move past gestures and confront the framework itself. Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

on the grammys and Billie Eilish

EPISODE 15: “STOLEN LAND”: THE DANGER AND LIMITATION OF PERFORMATIVE SPEECH

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/2/11/1/1cf2b0a2-e81f-47d3-89ae-abb69e187edf_e014-domination-chronicles-guest-russel-diabo.mp3

Russell Diabo and our hosts examine Canada’s “reconciliation” agenda, exposing domination, fiscal dependency, and ongoing struggles for Indigenous self-government. Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

with special guest Russell Diabo

E14: TRUTH BEFORE RECONCILIATION

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/1/28/4/48a90506-b397-4a9b-8d7a-9312e5299267_keyterms.mp3

A concise exploration of key terms that reveal how words like civilization, sovereignty, and empire encode patterns of domination and power in law and history. Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

Critical Terms for studying the Doctrine of Discovery

mini-Episode 13: Keywords in the Study of Domination

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/1/23/5/a18a3f88-3bb2-4554-8b68-086048a5e89c_e012.mp3

Newcomb and d’Errico examine the Federal Indian Boarding School Report, its apology, assimilation policies, dispossession, and ongoing domination today. Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

Apology, Assimilation, and Ongoing Domination

Episode 12: The Federal Indian Boarding School Report

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2026/1/23/5/582102f7-e217-4e5b-ad83-362ea365aa18_e011.mp3

Domination Chronicles opens the new year with a wide-ranging conversation that sets the direction for months ahead. We explore free existence and domination through close attention to words, meanings, and entangled histories. Drawing on legal documents, technology debates, and long-standing narratives of sympathy and apology, the podcast invites careful reading and sustained reflection. Future episodes will include guest voices and focused discussions of cases, texts, and emerging tools—always with the aim of understanding life beyond inherited frames. Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

A New Year’s conversation exploring domination, free existence, law, language, and technology—connecting deep history to urgent questions shaping 2026

Episode 11: 2026 - The Year Ahead

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2025/12/22/17/39535f92-ece6-4373-816f-c76a95b58932_e010-tee-hit-ton.mp3

In this episode of Domination Chronicles, our hosts Steven T. Newcomb and Peter d&#39;Errico commemorate seventy years of Tee-Hit-Ton v. United States. Our hosts reflect on seventy years of Tee-hit-ton to expose how U.S. law has been used to legitimize domination—both domestically and globally. They trace how the 1955 decision reaffirmed the 1823 ruling in Johnson v. McIntosh, which asserted a U.S. “right of domination” over Indigenous lands through the doctrine of Christian discovery. By quietly deleting the word “Christian,” the Court in Tee-Hit-Ton sanitized this religious foundation for a modern legal audience, making it easier for later courts—including a 2005 opinion by Ruth Bader Ginsburg—to rely on Johnson without confronting its theological roots.Newcomb and d&#39;Errico then place Tee-Hit-Ton alongside Brown v. Board of Education (1954). At first glance, Brown, which repudiated “separate but equal,” appears to move against racial domination. But we explore how both cases, in different ways, served U.S. Cold War ambitions and a broader project of global control—over people, land, and resources such as the timber taken from Tlingit territory.Drawing on cases, commentary, and human rights documents, this episode reveals how legal “progress” and legal repression can advance the same imperial trajectory. Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

Seventy years of attempted legal domination via Tee-Hit-Ton v. United States

E010: Pulp Legal Fiction: The Bizarre Case Of Tee-hit-ton v. US

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2025/12/18/0/a214ae17-3c06-4213-9efa-40847131651c_e009-revealing-and-concealing.mp3

Our springboard is the 2020 Supreme Court decision, McGirt v. Oklahoma, that upheld US criminal law jurisdiction over “major crimes” in “Indian country” (via the 1885 Major Crimes Act, an act based on the claim of a right of domination by the US over the Original Nations).We focus on the way the US claim of “a right of domination” under federal anti-Indian law is both visible and invisible in the majority opinion (authored by Justice Gorsuch). Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

Steve Newcomb and Peter d&#39;Errico provide an analysis of McGirt v. Oklahoma that examines how the decision reveals and conceals domination in U.S. law, jurisdiction, and federal power over Indigenous nations.

Subscribe on YouTube

Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content

EPISODE 009: MCGIRT V. OKLAHOMA: REVEALING AND CONCEALING DOMINATION

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2025/12/8/4/3d45fef3-ebaf-48c0-912f-9bf145f75e86_e008.mp3

The Domination Chronicles explores how everyday language hides systems of power. In this episode, Steven T. Newcomb and Peter d’Errico unpack the words we use—state, sovereignty, civilization, landlord—and show how they mask a “claim of a right of domination” embedded in U.S. law and Western thought. Drawing on decades of research, they trace how naming, translation, and legal rhetoric normalize domination while obscuring original free existence. Their dialogue invites listeners to pause, look again at familiar terms, and consider what it means to step outside the worldview that produced them. Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

OUR CONVERSATIONS

E008: WORDS & MEANINGS

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2025/12/1/2/02b1a7f2-53fb-4c7f-a87f-5865f963ab7b_w_of_free_existence_as_entangled_indeterminacy.mp3

In this episode, Steven T. Newcomb and Peter d’Errico explore how quantum physics offers a fresh way to understand the idea of free existence. Drawing on the insights of physicist Federico Faggin and philosopher Hans Busstra, they examine how concepts like indeterminacy and entanglement challenge the rigid, mechanical worldview that shaped the domination system brought from Christendom to Turtle Island.The conversation traces how colonial powers misread Indigenous Peoples’ non-dominational ways of life, how federal anti-Indian law grew from that mindset, and how domination shaped everyday concepts such as time, space, matter, and number. By contrasting quantum openness with imposed structures like time zones, they highlight what was lost—and what remains possible—when Indigenous free existence is recognized on its own terms.This episode invites listeners to rethink existence itself and to see how new stories can open pathways beyond domination.Topics include:<ul><li>Quantum theory and the meaning of free existence</li><li>How colonizers misunderstood Indigenous relational life</li><li>Time zones and the mechanics of domination</li><li>Space, time, matter, number as tools of control</li><li>Why federal anti-Indian law is a continuation of civilization’s story</li><li>How Indigenous Peoples respond rather than submit to imposed narratives</li></ul> Learn more at <a href="https://dominationchronicles.com" rel="nofollow">dominationchronicles.com</a> where you can view show notes and download a transcript. Don&#39;t forget to like and subscribe to our podcast on <a href="https://dominationchronicles.com/youtube" rel="nofollow">youtube</a>. Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

E007: A Quantum View of "Free Existence" as Entangled Indeterminacy

https://s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/pod-public-media-files/2025/12/1/2/16b244f9-df27-461c-a7e2-6ea38ec9afe7__-_supreme_court_justices_attack_plenary_power.mp3

<a href="https://dominationchronicles.com/episodes/e006-plenary-power/" rel="nofollow">A dramatic Dissent by Supreme Court Justices Gorsuch and Thomas Opens a Path to Tectonic Changes in US Law</a>. Episode 6 marks a turning point in the long debate over federal domination of Native Nations. Steven T. Newcomb and Peter d&#39;Errico walk through a recent Supreme Court dissent from Justices Thomas and Gorsuch that challenges the very foundation of plenary power---the claim that Congress holds total authority over Native Peoples. This power has shaped U.S. Indian law since the nineteenth century and rests on old racial assumptions and the so-called Doctrine of Discovery.The conversation moves from the details of the domestic-violence case that triggered the dissent to the larger architecture of domination. The Court refused to hear the case, but the dissent calls for what it names &#34;a day of reckoning.&#34; It questions the legal logic behind Kagama, the Major Crimes Act, and the trust doctrine itself. The episode shows how narrow legal disputes open up deeper questions about sovereignty, free existence, and the long reach of Christian imperial ideas embedded in U.S. law.Newcomb and d&#39;Errico also note the silence of the federal Indian law establishment. While legal communities in places like Guam reacted quickly, major Native-focused law organizations have not. The episode invites listeners to think past &#34;settled law&#34; and ask harder questions: What does freedom look like outside structures of domination? And what happens when even the Supreme Court begins to see the cracks?Learn more at <a href="https://dominationchronicles.com" rel="nofollow">dominationchronicles.com</a> where you can view show notes and download a transcript. Don&#39;t forget to like and subscribe to our podcast on <a href="https://dominationchronicles.com/youtube" rel="nofollow">youtube</a>. Subscribe on YouTube Support this podcast at — <a rel='payment' href='https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content'>https://redcircle.com/dominationchronicles/exclusive-content</a>

E006: Supreme Court Justices Attack 'plenary power' over Native Peoples

Subscribers get access to bonus episodes and extended interviews. 

Because domination isn’t a metaphor—it’s a system

*The Domination Chronicles* is podcast where *Steven T. Newcomb* (Shawnee/Lenape) and *Peter d’Errico* examine how domination shaped the legal and political foundations of the United States.

You can find transcripts and show notes at our website: www.dominationchronicles.com