the politics of aboriginality: repairing the relationship
Post on 09-Feb-2016
25 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
The Politics of Aboriginality:Repairing the Relationship
“”
Bonus assignment• Worth 2 marks – submit one page summary of three key
points in video. One week deadline.
• NFB video “The People of the Kattawapiskat River by Alanis Obomsawin. Free streaming ends on January 18. google: nfb.ca or
• http://thetyee.ca/video/2013/01/11
Competing Narratives
• THE GOOD, THE BAD, THE CHALLENGING• Success - Osoyoos
• Dysfunctions - Attawapiskat
• Challenges - Caledonia
Core Insights # 1
• Canada’s Aboriginal Peoples = Indigenous Peoples
• 350 million everywhere• Original inhabitants• Colonization = deep persistent inequities• “Get out” of existing relations (vs get in for immi
LEGACY OF COLONIALISM
• Colonialism and its Aftermath• What is colonialism
– Fundamentally exploitive and controlling relationship– By which indigenous society is transformed and dominated– According to priorities, interests, and superiorities of the colonizer
• Effects– Indigenous peoples forcibly incorporated + loss of land, identity,
and political voice + marginalized or encapsulated status
• Impact
Structures/legacy of colonialism persists
THE POLITICS OF INDIGENEITY/ABORIGINALITY
Pre colonial Colonialism Neo Colonialism
- Same game- Same rules- Different
conventions- Different players
Post Colonialism
Core Insight no 2Canada’s Difference Model (p.176)
ABORIGINAL PEOPLES IMMIGRANTS (multicultural minorities)
Sociological Status
Constitutional Status
Core Problem
Proposed solutions
Anticipated Outcomes
Core Insight No 3: Diversity in Inequality
• Internal Diversity - Legal and Constitutional Status - historical, cultural and social differences - reserves, rural, urban - youth - women
Constitutional and Legal StatusSTATUS INDIANS+ REGISTERED INDIANS+ NORTH AMERICAN IND.
METIS INUIT
+ NON STATUS INDIANS
Patterns of Aboriginal Inequality
SOCIOECONOMIC - demographic- income/poverty- employment/unemployment- Education- housing
HEALTH - violence - Suicide- diseases
OFF RESERVE - Discrimination- Access to services- Lack of human capital
COMMUNITY /RESERVE DYSFUNCTIONS- Band governance- Boredom/Lack of opportunity- powerlessness- Location/Remoteness - Dependency
Urban Aboriginal (Identity) Population, Selected Cities, 2006.
Toronto
Winnipeg
Regina
Saska
toon
Calgary
Edmonton
Vanco
uver
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
Thinking about urban Aboriginal peoples
• 1950s-1980s “caught between two worlds– Moving to escape poor social conditions on-reserve– Caught up in poor conditions in the city (Indians on Skid Row)
• 1980s-1990s– Less emphasis on cultural conflict– A disadvantaged group, along with others – More practical concern with outcomes, policies/programmes– Circular movement
• 2000s– Increased recognition of urban spaces as Aboriginal spaces– Hybrid identities and biculturalism (not cultural conflict) – “Happiness” factor
Intersecting cycle of poverty and powerlessness
Poor living conditions
Poverty/powerlessness health, violence etc
Poor parenting, school failures
Grassy Narrows/Attawapiskat
• What are causes of socio-economic-cultural problems?
- an “Indian” problem? - a Canada problem - a Canada/”Indian” problem
• What are solutions - assimilation, autonomy, accommodation
Poison stronger than love
WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN YOUR READING• Different levels of meaning in the title• What is the nature of the problems on the Grassy
Narrows Reserve• What are the causes?• What policy framework best explains situation?• What are solutions depending on how the problem
is defined: assimilation, autonomy, accommodation?
Core Insight NO 4 Contesting the problem definition/
Proposing Solutions
ASSIMILATIONIST (Functionalism)• (so called) “INDIAN” PROBLEM• Problem = Blame the victim /people with needs• Solution = Modernize (‘more like us’)
ACCOMMODATIONIST (Symbolic Interactionism)• CANADA-”INDIAN” PROBLEM• Problem = Blame the relationship/situation• Solution = Relations Repair + Improve situation mutual adjustment/citizens +)
AUTONOMISTS (Conflict Theory)• CANADA PROBLEM• Problem = Blame the system/colonization• Solution = Indigenize (‘less like you’) + Separation
Competing Models (p225)Model Assimilation
“Indian” ProblemFunctionalism
AutonomyCanada problemConflict theory
AccommodationCan-”Indian” probSymbolic Interaction
Who to blame/cause/ResponsibilityProblem Source
Solution
Means
Results
Outcomes
Core Insight No 5Aboriginal Policy: Friend or Foe?
• Historical relations• As instrument of progress or regress?• At worst, disempower and destroy– No more ‘Indians’– Assimilation/self sufficiency
• At best – smoothing the pillow of a dying race (progress)
• Canada = logic: white supremacist society
Comparing Aboriginal peoples Policy
Perceived Status of Aboriginal Peoples
Underlying Assumptions behind Policy
Proposed Policy Goals
Proposed means to achieve policy goals
Assimilation
Integration
Devolution
Conditional autonomy
Indian Act 1876
• Exercise in micro management• Reserves =multiple meanings
Accommodation (1760s-1830s)
Royal Proclamation (1763)
C-31 Inheritance RulesStatus Man
Status Woman
(Married before 1985)
6.1 Status
Non-Status Spouse
6.1 Status (if b. Pre 1985)6.2 Status (if b. After 1985)
6.1 Status woman
Non-Status Man
6.2 StatusNon-Status
Spouse
Non-Status
6.2 Status 6.2 Status
6.1 Status
• Continues to be gender-discriminatory • The “cousins problem”
Summing UpOverview: You got it … You took it….
Aboriginal Policy = contested site/competing agendas = Assimilation x Accommodation x Autonomy
• Drivers of Aboriginal Policya) Constitution Act, Indian Act, Court Rulingsb) Treaty Obligationsc) Imposition of Certaintyd) Canada’s international reputation/ UN Scrutinye) Political Ideology
• FEAR• Aboriginal Militancy• Not another Ipperwash/Oka
Towards a Reconciliation/ Relations Repair
Taking ABORIGINAL DIFFERENCE seriously
ABORIGINAL TITLE AND TREATY RIGHTS
ABORIGINAL MODELS OF SELF DETERMINING AUTONOMY / SELF GOVERNANCE
Pre and Post-Confederation Treaties
National Resources Canadawww.nrcan.gc.ca
Modern Treaties (as of 2010)
Indian and Northern Affairs Canadawww.ainc-inac.gc.ca
Aboriginal Title and Treaty Rights
• Towards a treaty based relationship Proclamation Act• Three types of treaty claims
1. Specific Treaty Claims2. Comprehensive (modern) Treaty Claims3. Compensation Claims (Six Nations)
• Aboriginal title
Aboriginal Title
• Customary right rooted in common and international law• If prove continuous occupation and use prior to European contact,
aboriginal peoples are “en-title-ed” to land and resources• Freedom of use, except...• Crown usurpation of title but only if
1. National Interests2. Consultations, (consent) and compensation
• Realistic Compromise?
Models of Self Determining Autonomy or Models of Self Government
Statehood (Complete sovereignty) Nationhood (Strings Attached Sovereignty)
Community/Municipal Level (embedded) Institutional Level (nominal)
Core Insight No 6: Unblocking the Impasse“REPAIRING THE RELATIONSHIP”
• From a Colonial relationship /social contract • A neo-colonial relationship at present (same game, same rules, different conventions, different players )
• Towards a post colonial social contract (different game, different rules, different players)
• Principles of Constructive Engagement - partnership - power sharing - participation - property return
Towards Relations- Repair Model
• Principles of constructive engagement/see also RCAP (p 201-202)– De facto sovereignty– Relations repair– Peoples with (aboriginal) rights– Political communities– Power sharing/partnership– Living together jurisdictionally – Aboriginal models of self determining autonomy – Belonging/citizenship thru nations– Difference matters– Reconciliation and property return
COLONIAL PARADIGM(old social contract –from Indian Act to White Paper)
NEO COLONIAL PARADIGM(current social contract based on the principle of indirect rule)
POST COLONIAL PARADIGM (proposed social contract based on pples of RCAP + constructive engagement)
STATUS
Children Citizens plus Peoples/nations/political communities
RIGHTS
Wards of the state: From citizen minus to equal citizenship rights
Delegated rights and responsibilities
Inherent and collective indigenous rights
ENTITLEMENTS Social problems with needs A minority problem with rights Indigenous peoples with rights
NATURE OF RELATIONSHIPParent-child guardianship Partnership (senior-junior partners)
Nation to nation;Government to govt;Peoples to peoples
RULES OF ENGAGEMENT Paternalistic (‘do for’) Partnership (senior-junior-partners) Partnership (work with)
POWER DISTRIBUTION Power deficit Delegate power Power sharing
POLICY APPROACH Canada knows what is best(obey/conform)
We know what is best but we have duty to consult + administrate what we say
Indigenous peoples know what is best + work together
POLICY GOAL Assimilation(protection until absorption and normalization)
Integration (conditional autonomy + state determination)
Relational Self determining autonomy without domination
UNDERLYING POLICY ASSUMPTIONS
Absorption Modernize Indigenize – indigenous difference as basis for rewards, recognition, and relations
ANIMATING LOGIC Eliminate ‘Indian’ problem Control problem by coexistence Co-sovereign coexistence
ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES Individual self sufficiency Community self sufficiency Self determining autonomy as basis for living separately together
CORE LOGICFoundational principles/rules of a colonial constitutional order are uncontested
Conventions that inform the rules/foundational principles of a neo colonial constitutional order are modified nt this.
Challenge the rules/foundational principles underlying constitutional order to create post colonial contract
REDEFINING THE SOCIAL CONTRACT: EVOLVING PARADIGMS IN the RELATIONAL STATUS of ABORIGINAL PEOPLES (p 220)
top related