Steve, I noticed your Leonard Peltier link. It reminded me of an old essay by Russell Means If I may quote a bit,

So, in order for us to really join forces with Marxism, we American Indians would have to accept the national sacrifice of our homeland; we would have to commit cultural suicide and become industrialized and Europeanized. At this point, I've got to stop and ask myself whether I'm being too harsh. Marxism has something of a history. Does this history bear out my observations? I look to the process of industrialization in the Soviet Union since 1920 and I see that these Marxists have done what it took the English Industrial Revolution 300 years to do; and the Marxists did it in 60 years. I see that the territory of the USSR used to contain a number of tribal peoples and they have been crushed to make way for the factories. The Soviets refer to this as "the National Question," the question of whether the tribal peoples had a right to exist as people; and they decided the tribal peoples were an acceptable sacrifice to industrial needs. I look to China and I see the same thing. I look to Vietnam and I see Marxists imposing an industrial order and rooting out the indigenous tribal mountain people.

AIM did exactly what you suggest: took up arms against their oppressor. You are right that their main aim was not to seize power, but to decolonize the indigenous population. I have to admit that (looking beyond the hyperbole that Means so enjoys) that he has a rather compelling point -- authoritarian socialism and industrial socialism seem like just (not very) novel forms of oppression to the colonized. In any social movement I become involved with, I would like it to have room for the sovereinty of native peoples.