I am compelled to write this blog before the upcoming meeting between the “Harper Government” (i.e. Harper and a few Cabinet members) and a small contingency of First Nation Chiefs (approximately 100). It has been reported that no provincial premiers will be in attendance, nor will any grass roots Indigenous peoples will invited. I realize that the meeting has not yet happened and may be imprudent to try to guess what will and won’t happen, but the way this meeting is shaping up deserves some consideration. I can understand a meeting being restricted in size in order to address important issues. What makes no sense to me is that the media is severely restricted about what they can and can’t broadcast or attend. The media is allowed to record and broadcast the opening ceremonies, the opening speeches and the scrum (series of questions) afterwards. All the real business in the plenary sessions will be part of a media black-out – no one in the media can see what happens inside. None of this is necessary in an age where web-casting, pod-casting and live-streaming is available on the Internet as well as television broadcasts. This is not only offensive to me as a grass roots Indigenous person, but also seems to me to be the ultimate in Harper hypocrisy. The Harper government has vilified our leaders in the media as being corrupt and not accountable, has tried to impose legislation on them to make them more “open” and “transparent” and even made open, transparent and accountable governments part of the agenda for this meeting. Yet, it is Harper, not First Nations leaders, who is implementing the media black-out for the actual plenary meetings – thereby preventing openness, transparency and accountability. Every time an elected Chief even attempts to make what he/she does open and transparent, Canada, through Indian Affairs, reminds him/her that they are only accountable to Indian Affairs via the Indian Act, and not to their people. How can Harper accuse First Nations of NOT being open when an important meeting like this one will be off-limits to the community members served by those Chiefs? These are the very ways in which Canada sets up our leaders to fail their people every time. How can any grass roots person have an opportunity to judge for themselves what their leaders do on important issues if they are banned from seeing it for themselves? This is an insult to grass roots members and even to the many Chiefs who are not able to attend the meeting. Notice how Harper is dividing Chiefs into elite groups with “access” and those without, and also dividing communities into those with power (Chiefs) and those without (grass roots). Something like this should be open for all to see if they choose. It is not uncommon for some government meetings to be closed to the cameras or the public. One must keep in mind, this is not a confidential Cabinet discussion about an upcoming budget, it is not a meeting to negotiate foreign trade strategy, nor does it involve litigation or even high-stakes negotiations. This is a high-level political meeting more for show than for decision-making. In fact, this meeting has no mandate to do anything at all but talk about what Harper decided was important: education, economic development and accountability. So far, Harper has told the media that First Nations should temper their expectations – that nothing should be expected out of this meeting. But we all know what the real issue is. This meeting would NEVER have even come to fruition, and certainly not on January 24th, 2012, had the politically embarrassing situation in Attawapiskat not hit the headlines in the media and stayed in the media for so long. Harper had promised such a meeting several times before and it never came about. So, we see that this is a meeting not one of choice, but of perceived political necessity – i.e., to save face. Having a meeting for the purposes of saving face politically and to appear as though Harper is taking concrete action on Indigenous issues neither starts the meeting with the right intentions, nor can it be expected to result in any sort of commitment for Indigenous peoples. However, given that the meeting is about saving face, Harper could never allow the public or the international community to see him called out by First Nation leaders about his assimilatory legislative agenda, his purposeful chronic underfunding of essential social services or his complete rejection of Aboriginal and treaty rights. This is the real reason why the meeting is not slated to be broadcast. So, Harper demands transparency on the part of First Nations, but then does not allow to be transparent. He demands openness on the part of Chiefs, but then closes the doors on an important meeting involving the health and well-being of all Indigenous peoples. He demands accountability, but only works with “willing partners” – i.e., those who will support the Conservative agenda. This meeting represents everything that is wrong with Harper – he is a dictator and assimilationist who would enjoy nothing more than to have Indigenous people dance for him, give him gifts in hopes of gaining his favour – an exercise in futility. UPDATE: I have learned that organizations like the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations (FSIN) will be providing a live feed of the three plenary sessions at the Saskatoon Inn so that their community members can watch the proceedings. http://www.fsin.com/index.php/communiques/713-fsin-executive-communique-january-13-2012.html I also understand from the Assembly of First Nations website that they are trying to be inclusive to the Chiefs who cannot attend by setting up certain locations where non-attending Chiefs can view all three plenary sessions. It also looks like the AFN is trying to set up a second Ottawa location (I assume not at the venue) where officials can watch the proceedings. http://www.afn.ca/uploads/files/crown/nc-bulletin_december.pdf I will continue to contact organizations and see if anyone is providing a live-stream feed on the Internet where all grass roots Indigenous peoples can watch what is happening any of the three plenary sessions. It now makes even less sense to me that the media is not allowed in the plenary sessions or that they cannot broadcast the plenary sessions when clearly First Nation organizations are permitted to do so in select locations. I applaud those First Nation organizations like FSIN who will be doing their best to ensure people can see the events, but I am sure they are limited by funding and technology to be able to set up viewing stations on every First Nation in the province. This is something that should be streamed online or at least televised by the Government of Canada, or at least something the media is permitted to do. My biggest concern is that he will propose the following “deals” with “willing partners”. These deals won’t be spelled out in the Summit – but instead key words and phrases will be used to signal where he and his officials are headed. The true extent of the deals will be spelled out in future one on one meetings – how Indian Affairs usually does its business. (1) Education Harper will commit to find “efficiencies” in current funding envelopes (aka no new funding) to fund a First Nation education system as defined by him. This will mean that funding will flow through a national school board system, or similar method that mimics provincial systems or in some way that removes jurisdiction and decision-making away from local First Nations. This will pit individuals versus communities; lump diverse Indigenous Nations like Cree, Mi’kmaq and Mohawk as a generic Indians (again); and ultimately promote the same assimilatory education agenda that is so prevalent in many (not all) provincial school systems. The idea here is to make sure First Nations communities are not in control and that they don’t get to hire education coordinators or provide things like child care for single mothers trying to go to school. The efficiencies found in eliminating local control and related educational services will be used to promote a school board or boards stacked with Conservative supporters and those “willing partners” willing to take power away from First Nation governments and create new forms of power among Conservative Aboriginal elite. (2) Economic Development There is no surprise here either. The language that Harper has been using around this item is very clear as to the end results – “unlocking” the economies of First Nations for the “benefit of all Canadians”. Clearly this relates to continued use of our traditional lands and natural resources for their own government and corporate benefit. Think: oil sands, mining, timber, fishing and international exports and ignore Aboriginal rights, treaty rights, inherent rights, international human and Indigenous rights and so forth. But key words have been used here: “unlocking” is the language used by the most infamous assimilationist, Tom Flanagan, in his newest book: Beyond The Indian Act. It is the same language being used by Manny Jules, head of First Nation Tax Commission, who agrees with Flanagan’s plan to break up reserves into individual pieces of land that can be sold to non-Indians. We only hold less than 0.2% of all land in Canada as reserve lands, yet the 99.8% of our traditional lands will continue to be exploited for the “benefit of all Canadians”. This 99.8% of our lands are not enough for those with a capitalist persuasion. They now want to “unlock” what little we have left and squeeze every ounce of cash out of our reserve lands that they can with no thought for our well-being or future generations. So, any commitments or efficiencies found in other funding envelopes might be used to offer economic development incentives with the condition that support is found for the upcoming First Nation Property Ownership Act or that quick and cheap agreements can be made to forgo land claims. Other legislative initiatives like the matrimonial real property legislation which will open up reserve lands to non-Indians may also fall under this category. (3) First Nation Accountability We all know what this is about. Harper wants his legislation to pass forcing First Nations to publish their salaries. But that is just what we see on the surface, what he is really after and what we will likely never see or hear are the hidden changes to funding agreements, reporting requirements and reporting of business activities that will likely be more invasive, despite the Auditor General’s criticism in this area. I can also see extreme pressure being placed on First Nations to accept the water bill proposed in the last session of Parliament (S-11) where Harper will be able to transfer all costs and liability for water systems onto already underfunded First Nations. There will be no extra money provided for this purpose of course, but the efficiencies found in off-loading the responsibility may be used to provide up-front training and minimal infrastructure investments that will fall apart will lack of stable funding for upkeep and maintenance. It will be stressed that accountability = doing what Harper wants – versus what is best for their communities will be the condition for all future funding. Things like emergency housing or water services will likely be contingent on third party managers or co-managers imposed quietly. This meeting and those that we will never hear about will focus on getting control over the Indian problem. The Indian problem will be resolved in one of two ways: (1) our continued colonization through empowering those Aboriginal people who have internalized colonization and now turn on us, or (2) legislating those Indigenous people who resist colonization and assimilation out of existence – keeping them in constant litigation, medicating them, vilifying them as “radicals”, splitting up families, dividing women from their communities, and over-incarcerating us. If anyone thinks I am being pessimistic – you are welcome to your opinion. However, the writing is clearly on the wall and anyone who expects otherwise will be disappointed. Now, I might stand to be corrected. Harper could make any sort of announcement where I would happily concede the error of my predictions. Harper might announce at this meeting that he will reduce First Nation Poverty in 5-10 years: http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2012/01/12/harper-once-pledged-to-reduce-aboriginal-poverty-in-5-to-10-years/ Oh, wait, he already did that. Ok, Harper might announce that he will speed up land claims with a “revolutionary” new Specific Claims Tribunal: http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2011/05/16/four-years-later-harpers-promised-tribunal-still-mired-in-bureaucracy/ Darn, he did that too, with similar non-results. Sadly, 2, 4 even 6 years later, Harper’s old promises still have not come to fruition. I think if he makes any new promises at this meeting – First Nations might be well-advised to wait and see what concrete actions are actually taken, and not jump too quickly for that “willing partners” name tag. I fully admit that all of this is my best guess based on all my research, education, and experience, but that is all us grass roots people will have, since the actual meeting is off-limits to the majority of us who are affected by their decisions – unless of course we find an organization that is permitted and willing to live-stream the event online for all of us. I will keep looking…
Tag: media
-
Eskan Racism – Bottled and Sourced in Canada for Over 500 Years
With the warming of the days that comes with summer and the positive effect a little vacation and relaxation has on many of us, I had hoped that the red necks would be able to take some time off as well. Yet, this latest advertisement for Eska Water is another testament to the fact that racism in Canada is an ongoing problem that doesn’t just surface when there is tension or disagreement – but is, in fact, so embedded in some parts of the population that they themselves don’t even recognize it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfNDFdZVDE8 Some of you may think that I am being too harsh and that none of the folks as Eaux Vives Canada Inc ever “intended” for anyone to take offence. http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/canada/native-group-wants-racist-water-ad-pulled-58789.html Some of you might also feel that if any of us don’t like the ad, we should simply refrain from watching it. Alternatively, it has been suggested that anyone who is offended by the ad should take solice in the fact that the ad was intended to be “funny” and not meant to represent any particular group. Eaux Vives Canada has explained that they had no indication that anything in the ad might cause a problem – nothing to make them “suspect” an issue. In fact, Eaux Vives conducted a focus group of the local population and received “all positive feedback”. They admit, however, that there may not have been any First Nations people included in that sample. http://www.ctv.ca/generic/generated/static/business/article2089081.html Eaux Vives Canada Inc is responsible for approving such an ad, so this reflects very poorly on their company, including those in the senior-most positions who make the decisions. However, one should also shine the spotlight on the ad’s creators – KBS & P which stands for Kirshenbaum Bond Senecal and Partners. http://www.kbsp.com/ They are owned by MDC Partners Inc. A company that specializes in marketing. http://www.mdc-partners.com/#/agency/mdc_partners/2/about You’ll notice that KBS & P’s bigger clients include Coke, Levis, North Face and Victoria’s Secret. They work in the big leagues, so to speak, and either know better or should have known better. Further, for anyone who does any kind of advertising – be it print, television or online media – they all know or should know, the laws relating to discrimination, racism, hate crimes and limitations on free speech. Its not like these companies do not have access to legal advisors, community relations experts and senior management-types to appropriately review and approve public ads. Afterall, these ads don’t just sell products, they reflect on the character or lack thereof of the company and it’s leaders. That is why when the company’s spokesperson, Gilles Corriveau said to the media that the company had “no intention to hurt people”, he made the company look even worse. Anyone who studies anti-discrimination law knows that it is NOT the intention that counts – but the effect that it has on the person or groups offended. But more than that, big companies like Eska Water, KBS & P or MDC Partners cannot plead ignorance when they ALL have the resources, capacity and experience to know better. I might also ad that there are no shortage of people that work in the area of human rights, anti-discrimination, anti-racism, and First Nations issues. Any number of people, groups, organizations or universities could have been consulted to provide input on any number of ads that has the potential to impact certain groups in society. Let’s pretend no such experts or advisors exist, is there any excuse for not googling the issue of racism in the media and making sure that your company is adequately aware of the issue? I googled the issue just now and tons of sources came up. Even the first source that popped up would have made the company think twice – had they taken the time to read it: http://www.usask.ca/education/coursework/802papers/crawford/jamesc.html The issue, sadly, is much deeper than that. The company itself indicated that it may have failed to include First Nations people in their focus sample, which amounts to more than a mere oversight – some might even call it incompetent. There is no doubt that the company was trying to portray an Indigenous group, whether or not it was a fictional one. In so doing, they used stereotypes about what Indigenous people look and act like – neither of which were presented with accuracy, thoughtfulness or dignity. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSggKIAShbM Indigenous people in Canada and indeed all over the world must fight the colonially-imposed requirement to be “authentic” or “pure” Indians. The stereotype includes the requirement to live and behave as this did at some arbitrary and distant point in pre-contact times. Real Indians wear feathers, paint their bodies and carry around spears, arrows and other weapons. Real Indians are primitive and fierce and seek only to make war with non-Indians. These stereotypes are not just promoted in the media, but are also promoted by right-wing academics and governments. https://pampalmater.com/2011/03/no-natives-allowed-how-canada-breeds.html In the Eaux Vives Eska water ad, we see the age-old stereotype of purity. The mixing of orange juice with water is portrayed as being an offence to maintaining the purity of the water. Colonial governments have been obsessed with defining Indigenous peoples in terms of “purity” both legally and politically. Even Canada, through the Indian Act and other laws and policies, tries to exclude from legal recognition any Indigenous person who is not a “pure” Indian – i.e., someone who is mixed Indian and non-Indian (water and orange juice). http://www.vueweekly.com/front/story/blood_challenge/ This means that the public at large is constantly bombarded by these types messages and no consistent education about Indigenous realities in Canada. Even the omission of positive images of Indigenous peoples in the media serves to reinforce negative stereotypes. How often do you see an Indigenous woman consulted as a legal or political expert on the news, in the papers or in advertisements of any kind? What about Indigenous men as business analysts, foreign affairs experts or champions of human rights? We are led to believe that Aboriginal women are all victims of violence and Aboriginal men all corrupt leaders or criminals. It is simply not enough to say, if you don’t like the commercial don’t watch it. Even if we could be with out children and youth 24-hours a day, the fact is they will eventually be exposed to these sorts of ads. However, what is worse is that Canadians will be exposed to these kinds of ads and thus these old stereotypes will continue to be reinforced and played out in relations between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in Canada. Consider the situation where racist jokes are told to co-workers but not the Indigenous person in an office. This still has the effect of creating a hostile work environment for the Indigenous person. I would argue that ads like Eska Water helps create a hostile country for Indigenous peoples where we are seen as the savage terrorists as opposed to the First Peoples. https://pampalmater.com/2011/05/from-savages-to-terrorists-justifying.html We as Indigenous people already know, that none of these stereotypes reflect our wonderfully diverse and rich realities, ways of being and relations. We do indeed have many social issues created and perpetuated by colonial governments, like the inequities in funding for essential services, Canada’s failure to live up to treaty and self-government obligations, the theft of our lands and the failure to share our resources with us – like water. Over 50% of First Nations in Canada have unsafe drinking water according to the Auditor General. http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/docs/parl_oag_201106_04_e.pdf The very least Eaux Vives Canada should have done was issue an IMMEDIATE apology. The hiring of a public relations firm shows more concern for minimizing loss of profit than for the humanity of others. They don’t need a meeting with First Nations leaders to know that the right thing to do is to pull the ad. What an insult for Eaux Vives Canada to make such a mockery of Indigenous peoples and profit from OUR water sources while First Nations are denied access to this and other basic necessities of life. This water ad serves, ironically, to highlight the problem in ideology (racist ad) and in practice (lack of clean water for First Nations). Racism has been ongoing in Canada for over 500 years since contact. It is time to acknowledge the problem and work towards addressing it.
-
“No Natives” Allowed: How Canada Breeds Racism and Fear
On the one hand, I cannot believe that we as Indigenous peoples are still subjected to such overt racism on a such a frequent basis. On the other hand, I am not surprised, given that this kind of anti-First Nation sentiment is still out there in more hidden forms also known as systemic racism. I guess the best way to describe my feelings is that I sometimes feel overwhelmed that these perverse ideologies don’t just come from a few wackos, but comes from all elements in society – individuals, business, professionals, academics, politicians, and government.
I received this picture from people on Facebook today who wanted to bring this issue to the attention of the public and the police. This picture is allegedly of a restaurant in Lakefield, Ontario. It was reported in the Toronto Sun that the police are investigating this as a hate crime. Here is the link to that story: http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/03/16/17638211.html If this incident actually happened (and everyone is innocent until proven guilty), it is a symptom of how Indigenous peoples are portrayed generally in our society – in schools, the media and by federal and provincial governments. Even if this one turns out to all a big misunderstanding, there used to be many similar signs like this, just for Aboriginal people:
I am less surprised by this kind of overt racism from members of small communities, when I hear famous people, like Kevin O’Leary (who appears on Dragon’s Den and CBC News’ Lang & O”Leary show). You will recall, that Kevin O’Leary called his co-host an “Indian giver” and when she rebuked him for such barbaric language, he repeated the phrase and defended his use of it. http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/950584–cbc-ombud-slams-o-leary-s-offensive-on-air-comment This comment was made on Canada’s CBC News during prime time when a large number of Canadians would be watching. It happened LAST October 2010 and not a word of apology was issued by O’Leary or CBC. It wasn’t until 5 months later and AFTER the CBC Ombudsperson had publicly released their decision that the comment was wrong and so was CBC for not immediately addressing it – that we heard any mention of an apology. Specifically, the Ombudsperson stated: “In this instance, the preferred course would have been for O’Leary not only to privately recognize the fault of his ways but to publicly express remorse, either that night or the next night or soon after. But if he wasn’t going to publicly apologize, the program could have done something further to make amends. Its obligation goes beyond the complainant to the viewers in order to uphold the broader reputation of the program and CBC itself.” http://www.cbc.ca/ombudsman/pdf/2011-03-02-Jamieson.pdf This is obviously the point I am getting at about the effect such comments have, especially when left for many months to fester. The problem is that Indigenous peoples are getting it from all sides and by not acting to address these issues, it’s no wonder society thinks this is acceptable. Scripted apologies forced by legal decisions, litigation or threat of job loss are hardly sincere or even effective at undoing the damage caused. http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/pundit+censured+offensive+exchange/4399119/story.html You will recall on the very same day that Prime Minister Stephen Harper offered a public apology on behalf of all Canadians for the physical, sexual, and other abuses committed in residential schools, his conservative MP, Pierre Poilievre, had the nerve to question the compensation being given to survivors and asked whether it was “value for money”. I still feel nauseated when I read his comments. As if there is any monetary amount that could ever compensate for sexual abuse like rape, physical abuse like beatings, neglect that resulted in many deaths and the loss of culture, language and hope. http://www2.macleans.ca/2008/06/11/pierre-poilievre-shows-his-empathy-for-residential-school-survivors/ Keep in mind, Canada has compensated Japanese families for ripping them from their homes and putting them in camps during the war. The Chinese were also compensated for the head tax that was imposed on them to prevent them from immigrating to Canada. While the Supreme Court of Canada has specifically said that discrimination is not “a race to the bottom” (i.e. who is more discriminated against), they have said that often times Aboriginal peoples are dually disadvantaged on mulitple levels not necessarily experienced by other groups. http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1999/1999canlii687/1999canlii687.pdf Indigenous peoples suffered in residential schools for their entire childhoods and many others suffer the deadly inter-generational effects for communities all over the country which could take generations to address. How could the residential school compensation be less “value for money” than another group’s? Somehow, conservatives and others find a way to insert doubt and blame into the conversation when it is about Indigenous peoples. We all know about Senator Patrick Brazeau who uses the Senate chambers, resources, and logo to film carefully worded videos meant to portray First Nations as lazy and corrupt. In fact, on my previous blogs, I have highlighted his negative, stereotypes of First Nations and how in one show he even accused First Nations as hubs of “illegal activity”. This all coming from an individual who claims to be First Nations – imagine the powerful effect this would have on the views and opinions of non-Aboriginal peoples. That brings us to Minister of Indian Affairs, John Duncan. As you know from my previous blogs, I am no fan of Minister Duncan given his past racist comments about Indigenous peoples and their rights. https://pampalmater.com/2010/09/indian-agents-are-back-pm-new-indian.html Duncan was very much opposed to Aboriginal and treaty rights to fish, ignored their constitutional protection, and characterized them as “race-based”. http://www.mediaindigena.com/rickharp/issues-and-politics/indian-affairs-minister-john-duncan-menacing-or-muzzled More recently, however, Minister Duncan appeared before the Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples regarding Bill S-11, the bill dealing with safe drinking water on First Nations. Senators have commented that all witnesses, both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal alike, including water experts and legal experts all agree that this Act is so bad that even amendments could not save it. On March 8, 2011, Minister Duncan, expressing his frustration, commented that:
“This committee has been receiving a very one-sided view on the way things are going. We’ve actually been working very collaboratively especially with the Treaty 6, 7 and 8 group from Alberta…. You’re correct in concluding that everyone does not have the same view. But I think this committee has managed to somehow capture a prevalence of negative views. Sometimes that’s what happens. It’s easier in First Nation politics to be aggressively contrary to something than it is to be supportive. And that’s an observation that I will make and stand behind and it’s something I hope we can change”
How could we as Indigenous peoples NOT be, at the very least, “agressively contrary” to the sexual abuse in residential schools, the outlawing of our cultures, the legislated exclusion of our women and children from our Nations, the removal of thousands of our children to child welfare agencies, the early deaths of our people from extreme poverty, the theft of our traditional lands and resources, and the political and legal destruction of our laws, governments and communities? In other countries, this can and has resulted in revolutions. While I can’t say for sure what was going on in his head, it certainly appears to me that Minister Duncan gave his comment some thought before he said it as he followed up his comment with confirmation that he will stand behind it. This is not dissimilar to Kevin O”Leary standing beside his racist remarks, or Tom Flanagan standing beside his comments. I have always been told to believe people when they tell you who they really are – so I am listening. Aside from showing a pre-disposition to having racist views about Indigenous peoples, Minister Duncan’s negative stereotyping of First Nations does little to suggest his views have evolved over time. Looking at it from society’s point of view, if the Minister of Indian Affairs, who is supposed to be an advocate and champion for Aboriginal peoples in Canada has such hostile, negative views about Aboriginal peoples, why would we expect society to be any better? It is almost as if Minister Duncan is sickened to even have to work on this portfolio – which begs the question – why the heck does he?
Sadly, comments by our top law enforcement agencies about Indigenous peoples do not fair any better. Official documents in the Canadian Military have characterized Mohawks as insurgents or terrorists. This not only false and offensive, it also serves to spread fear and distrust amongst non-Indigenous society. My children’s own friends ask questions about whether we are “terrorists”.
http://video.ca.msn.com/watch/video/military-apologizing-to-mohawks/16ahlo0dq
The damage has been done. No carefully worded apology will be able to undo the damage to Indigenous peoples and especially the Mohawk in this case. Canadians are more likely to see us as terrorists than the First Peoples of this country. If there was any doubt, just ask Christy Blatchford and TVO, who portrayed Mohawks in Six Nations as lawless and out of control: https://pampalmater.com/2011/01/update-tvo-agenda-botches-show-on.html
Yet, despite the military’s indication in 2010 that they would be offering a very carefully worded apology, one remains to be given. Many months later and not a single word has been issued. It makes me wonder what kind of priority they made of the apology. Instead, there seems to be a universal default that these comments will be allowed to be said, defended, repeated, and given time to sink in before any superficial apology is offered. We deserve more than this anti-First Nation propaganda on our own homelands. http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Military+apologize+Mohawk+Warriors/4015748/story.html
Add to this the list of right-wing academics who promote the assimilation of Aboriginal peoples in various forms like Tom Flanagan, Dale Gibson, Frances Widdowson, and Alan Cairns, etc. This is reinforced by some teachers in schools which either don’t teach their students about Aboriginal peoples, do so in a minimal way or teach some of these same stereotypes. This is further reinforced by the various media outlets who make millions off portraying First Nations as lazy, crooked, criminals and movies or TV shows which promote an archetype of Indians that few today can live up to – the “good” version or the “bad” version.
This is an old battle, one that we have been fighting since contact. While many in society would like to believe that old colonial ideologies about Indigenous peoples have long waned, the opposite is true. Just take a peek at some of the vile comments posted on online media stories about Indigenous peoples and you’ll see what I mean. Not only do Indigenous peoples face this battle on multiple fronts and on a daily basis, but they must also face the battle within themselves, Every day we face the battle to prove we are worthy as human beings. Too often this battle is lost and we lose our young people to suicide, violent deaths, and early deaths from diseases, malnutrition, and lack of housing caused by extreme poverty.
I’d like to point out that the Criminal Code of Canada specifically prohibits hate crimes (section 319) which provides that public statements made against an identifiable group that incites violence against that group is a CRIME. Similarly, section 318 specifically probihits GENOCIDE – which is the killing of an identifiable group, or creating lufe conditions would bring about that group’s physical destruction. Sounds like an option, but the tricky part is you have to get the Attorney General to agree to bring these charges. So, back to the drawing board…while assimilation, racism, theft of our lands, resources and souls continues…
Those of us who manage to wake up every day and win this internal battle (at least enough to keep trudging along), must then engage in the political and legal battle for our basic human rights and freedoms, to protect our cultures and identities for future generations, as well as the key issues like sovereignty, Aboriginal and treaty rights, land rights and so on. We have to know more than anyone else about our issues, we have to work harder than anyone else, and we have to find ways to do so politely and with smiles on our faces lest we be characterized as “agressively contrary” or “terrorists”. So the next time you hear someone say how easy First Nations have it; how they get everything for free; or how lazy they all are, why don’t you suggest they live with Indigenous peoples for a while and see what the “free & easy” life is really like? Or perhaps they’d like to discuss the subject with those of us who fight in this battle 24-7? It is time Canada accepted the fact that we will not be assimilated. Whether you call it “agressively contrary”, “insurgency” or “criminal” – we will continue to protect our cultures and identites for future generations. If only Canadians could leave their minds open long enough to see the incredible strength of our diverse peoples, the beauty of our rich cultures and traditions, the unique ties we have to our territories, or the incredible pride we have in our identities – then they would see why we refuse to give it up.
-
Racism on a native reserve? Try Racism in Our Media!
I am always torn whenever I read low quality, uninformed, and unresearched editorials, commentaries, and/or special columns written in print media that promote negative stereotypes about First Nations. My first instinct is to write a reply, but that would become a full-time job in and of itself. Then I wonder whether giving any attention to such blatant racism is helping or hurting the goal of helping to educate the public. Amongst my peers, there seems to be a difference of opinion on that issue. However, at the end of the day, given that so many Canadians obtain their “information” about Aboriginal peoples from the media, I as an educator, simply cannot sit by while media outlets, like the National Post, misinform readers and malign First Nations. Yet, despite my attempts to address the misinformation, I still have a serious issue of exposure. Similar to gossip rags like the National Enquirer, the National Post has a loyal following that includes those of the right-wing persuasion. My responses to such articles, on the other hand, only reach those who happen to read my blog. None of my comments to the National Post have ever been published, nor those sent to other newspapers to whom I have written – so what is the result of my efforts? Some individuals get the benefit of another perspective. An incredibly bright professor once told me that images shape our aspirations. So, if all Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people see in the media are negative stories about First Nations and uninformed print media which spreads negative stereotypes about First Nations, then our children – yours and mine – continue to see First Nations as inferior. A vision that is no better than the racist views of colonial days supposedly long-past. It is absolutely ludicrous for a newspaper to take a story about an ISOLATED incident of ALLEGED racism on ONE First Nation of the 633 First Nations in Canada, and somehow use that as proof positive that ALL Chiefs of ALL First Nations are not accountable and prefer instead to “do things behind closed doors”. This is categorically false and perpetuates the very kind of “hate” about which this National Post article critiques. The Assembly of First Nations itself has long called for and made requests of Canada to meet and talk about ways to modernize First Nation accountability measures. More than that, the Auditor General (AG) Sheila Fraser has reported on more than one occasion that First Nations ARE accountable for the funds they receive from the federal government. In fact, all First Nations submit audited financial statements to Canada and according to the AG, First Nations fill out so many reports about their funding that it averages out to one report every three days. Nothing in First Nations related to federal funding happens behind closed doors. In fact, most learned commentators have noted that of all the groups in Canada – political, religious, cultural or otherwise – that First Nations’ activities are so closely monitored that they often feel as though their whole lives are “under a microscope”. Yet despite the plethora of research, reports, studies, commissions, and considerations of First Nations issues, none of them have ever shown that all First Nations leaders are corrupt or that First Nations are more likely to abuse their residents than Canadian governments. Yet, we continue to be bombarded by uninformed and unsubstantiated allegations against First Nations in the media that serve only to misinform the public and malign First Nations. Rarely are Aboriginal commentators asked to submit their own views and most issues are not covered in any balanced manner that would give the public enough information to make up their own mind. For example, the National Post printed a comment in today’s newspaper entitled: “Racism on a native reserve”. Here are just a few of the unsubstantiated or incorrect items presented: (1) “Canadian taxpayers pay close to $10-billion a year to finance on-reserve programming for natives.” In fact, almost HALF of that amount goes to Indian and Northern Affairs and/or other government departments to support their bureaucracy and ever-inflating salaries. The taxes used to pay for some of the First Nation programs come from taxes submitted by both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Canadians. Furthermore, the privileged position of non-Aboriginal Canadians in relation to First Nations is the DIRECT result of them benefitting directly or indirectly from the theft of First Nations’ lands and resources by their ancestors. (2) “Whenever it is proposed that we IMPOSE some accountability…the AFN… complains that its members are being mistreated.” (emphasis added) In fact, the national Chief Shawn Atleo was interviewed by APTN last night wherein he reinforced the fact that the AFN and First Nations ALL believe in accountability to their citizens and that they have called for discussions with Canada on how to improve those accountability measures. What he did not agree with was the “imposition” of laws by Canada on First Nations without so much as even consulting with them first (as is required by law). (3) “…even in 2010, natives are still waiting to enjoy the full protection of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” In fact, Aboriginal peoples have ALWAYS the full benefit of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms like all Canadians since 1982. What some Aboriginal peoples did not have was access to the complaint process under the Canadian Human Rights Act, but this was remedied in 2008. Now complaints relating to the Indian Act can be brought against Canada and in a little over 6 months, they can bring complaints against individual bands. Bands simply wanted an opportunity to amend their laws to make sure they were compliant with both human rights and their traditional laws. But it is not even these obvious pieces of misinformation that is the worst part. It is the fact that one solitary example of alleged racism on one reserve could be used to say that all Chiefs and First Nations are corrupt and that their only goal is to “circle the wagons in defence of their cash and powers”. This is little more than a discriminatory remark meant to stir up racist images about Aboriginal peoples so as to deflect readers from the real issues. That kind of blatant racism should not be tolerated, nor should it be published by our national media. This kind of comment does nothing to add to the debate nor does it inspire collegiality amongst citizens or offer mutually beneficial solutions. The vast majority of First Nations Chiefs are tireless, hard-working, passionate leaders who carry the weight of every single community member on their shoulders. Many Chiefs don’t make a great salary, but regardless of the pay they go far above and beyond their role as a political leader. They often find themselves mediating marital disputes, helping students find text books, volunteer as cooks, firefighters, pow wow emcees, hunters, fishers, babysitters, chauffeurs, and mentors. While managing social conflict within their communities, they must also negotiate with federal, provincial and municipal governments, manage the same programs as provinces, stay on top of developing laws, and monitor private activities within their territories. Many of the Chiefs I know literally work 20 hours a day and carry the weight of community ills as their own personal failings. Chiefs are trashed in the media as often as we hear the weather forecast. They are vilified and disrespected by federal and provincial governments and their triumphs are overlooked by the media in exchange for scandal and hardship. I would suggest that the National Post and any other “mightier-than-thou” media outlet try walking in the shoes of First Nation leaders for a day. Instead of berating them and spreading hatred against First Nations, they need to finally recognize that section 35 of our Constitution Act, 1982 is there for a reason and just as Canadians are not going anywhere, nor are First Nations. Despite the assimilatory goals of the past, First Nations have survived and are here to stay. The supreme law of the land (Constitution Act, 1982) and the Supreme Court of Canada recognizes the special place of First Nations in this country and the democratic obligation we all have to ensure their continued existence. Reconciliation is a two-way street – we can’t expect to move forward as a country if we respect all our laws except those that relate to First Nations. We have an obligation to respect our First Nations as we would each other and racist stereotypes have no place in that relationship. It seems ironic that on the one hand, the National Post comment advocates for greater human rights for First Nations, and then on the other hand, uses racist comments and stereotypes to demean them. I would suggest that the National Post and others like it should reconsider their roles in educating the public about important issues related to First Nations and better represent the public which it serves – including First Nations. Here are some tips for moving forward: (1) Hire some Aboriginal reporters, columnists, and commentators who are knowledgeable about the issues; (2)Hire some Aboriginal people in management at your paper/station who are knowledgeable about the issues; (3)Include more Aboriginal people on your advisory committees who are knowledgeable about the issues; (4)Make a concerted effort to offer more balanced and informed perspectives which are based on fact, not sensationalism. Try practising what you preach. For more information about these issues, please read my previous blogs.