Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The impact of European settlement on aboriginals
The case of native sovereignty
The case of native sovereignty
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The impact of European settlement on aboriginals
Native Sovereignty In the following assignment, I will discuss the issue of native sovereignty in Canada, and address the question; "Can native sovereignty coexist with Canadian sovereignty?" To answer this question I will summarize two articles that discuss the issue. The first by John A. Olthius and Roger Townshend entitled "The Case for Native Sovereignty", and the second, by Thomas Flanagan, entitled "Native Sovereignty: Does Anyone Really want an Aboriginal Archipelago?" I will be taking the position against the coexistence of native sovereignty with Canadian sovereignty. These two articles will help me support my position on the issue. Olthius and Townshend are in favour of native sovereignty within Canada based on historical and moral grounds. These authors believe there is a difference in perceptions between native and non-native Canadians regarding the jurisdiction over Canadian territory. In their essay, they write that Aboriginal people believe the Canadian state is oppressive and usurps the powers of Aboriginal people, while most non-aboriginals would be unlikely to question the status of the Canadian state. The essay contends that before European settlement, First Nations people had stability in their economic and political structures. Although their style was different than that of European nations, there was recognition of sovereignty of aboriginal lands. Acquisition of land in Canada did not come from conquest; rather it came primarily in the form of land transaction treaties. However, the treaties did little to support the claim of Canadian sovereignty since they are mostly unclear about issues of jurisdiction. A secondary way of claiming land for European settlement was through discovery of vacan... ... middle of paper ... ...people in Canada. Creating a new level of government, and giving such potential political power to a relatively small percentage of Canada's population doesn't seem like a very wise idea, especially since the distance and many differences between the many nations of aboriginal people is so great. It remains to be seen whether native and non-native Canadians can come to an agreement on the definition of sovereignty. Bibliography: Bibliography Olthius, John A. and Townshend, Roger. "The case for Native sovereignty". In Crosscurrents: Contemporary Political Issues, 3rd ed. ed. Mark Charlton and Paul Barker, 5-8. Toronto: Nelson, 1998. Flanagan, Thomas. "Native sovereignty: Does Anyone Really want an Aboriginal Archipelago?". In Crosscurrents: Contemporary Political Issues, 3rd ed. ed. Mark Charlton and Paul Barker, 9-15. Toronto: Nelson, 1998.
Razack (20020 defines the historical legacy of the “white settler society” that has dominated the legal and historical rights to land usage in relation to indigenous peoples and people of color. In addition to this problem, Razack (2002) also defines the problem of “mapping” that has allowed a primarily racist Canadian government to marginalize or remove people of color from land ownership and placement in the white hegemonic community. In response tot this, Razack (2002) proposes an “unmapping” method in which the underlying racism of Canadian legal policies can be exposed and reconstructed to resolve the problem of racism in land usage in Canada. These are the important aspects of racial identity and spatial organization that define the conflicts of racism in Canadian law and in the “unmapping” of the “white settler society” that Razack (2002) identifies throughout the
Throughout history the attacks on Native American sovereignty proved to be too much and eventually tribes had to submit. The problems Native American tribes faced when fighting for and dealing with sovereignty in the 18th century are identical to the problems they are facing today. These
“The recognition of the inherent right of self-government is based on the view that the Aboriginal peoples of Canada have the right to govern themselves in relation to matters that are internal to their communities, integral to their unique cultures, identities, traditions, languages and institutions, and with respect to their special relationship to their land and resources." (Wherrett
The journey for the Aboriginals to receive the right to keep and negotiate land claims with the Canadian government was long but prosperous. Before the 1970's the federal government chose not to preform their responsibilities involving Aboriginal issues, this created an extremely inefficient way for the Aboriginals to deal with their land right problems. The land claims created by the Canadian government benefited the aboriginals as shown through the Calder Case, the creation of the Office of Native Claims and the policy of Outstanding Business.
Aboriginal people groups depended on an assortment of unmistakable approaches to sort out their political frameworks and establishments prior to contact with Europeans. Later, a considerable amount of these establishments were overlooked or legitimately stifled while the national government endeavored to force a uniform arrangement of limitlessly distinctive Euro-Canadian political goals on Aboriginal social orders. For some Aboriginal people groups, self-government is seen as an approach to recover control over the administration of matters that straightforwardly influence them and to safeguard their social characters. Self-government is alluded to as an inherent right, a previous right established in Aboriginal people groups' long occupation
LaDuke, Winona. All Our Relations: Native Struggles for Land and Life. Cambridge, MA: South End Press, 1999. Print.
Fleras, Augie. “Aboriginal Peoples in Canada: Repairing the Relationship.” Chapter 7 of Unequal Relations: An Introduction to Race, Ethnic and Aboriginal Dynamics in Canada. 6th ed. Toronto: Pearson, 2010. 162-210. Print.
In the 30 years after the Civil War, although government policy towards Native Americans intended to shift from forced separation to integration into American society, attempts to "Americanize" Indians only hastened the death of their culture and presence in the America. The intent in the policy, after the end of aggression, was to integrate Native Americans into American society. Many attempts at this were made, ranging from offering citizenship to granting lands to Indians. All of these attempts were in vain, however, because the result of this policies is much the same as would be the result of continued agression.
Canada likes to paint an image of peace, justice and equality for all, when, in reality, the treatment of Aboriginal peoples in our country has been anything but. Laden with incomprehensible assimilation and destruction, the history of Canada is a shameful story of dismantlement of Indian rights, of blatant lies and mistrust, and of complete lack of interest in the well-being of First Nations peoples. Though some breakthroughs were made over the years, the overall arching story fits into Cardinal’s description exactly. “Clearly something must be done,” states Murray Sinclair (p. 184, 1994). And that ‘something’ he refers to is drastic change. It is evident, therefore, that Harold Cardinal’s statement is an accurate summarization of the Indigenous/non-Indigenous relationship in
Through Laws, treaties and proclamations it becomes clear of the transfer of power between Native Americas and colonizing powers within the US and Canada. One significant treaty was Treaty NO. 9 in which Native Americans gave up their aboriginal title and land for money, hunting right, entrance into the christian school system and a Canadian flag presented to the Chief. The treaties described define the cascading effect of how western powers came into control of land at which Native Americans resided in. Specifically converging on the using Native Americans “elites” to influence other Native Americans into adopting western cultural beliefs, overshadowing the diverse Native American cultural practices. The overshadowing and belittling of Native American culture is not only expressed through the several treaties presented to Native Americans across history but also through real life accounts of Native American children adopted into the western school system. This sections places into the prospective the monopolization of Native American land and
The Board of Indian Commissioners was a committee that advised the United States federal government on Native American policy. The committee also had the purpose to inspect the supplies that were delivered to Indian reservations to ensure that the government fulfilled the treat obligations to tribes. The committee was established by congress on April 10th, 1869, and authorized the President of the United States to organize a board of ten or less people to oversee all aspect of Native American policy. President Ulysses S. Grant wanted to come up with a new policy, which would be more humane, with Native American tribes. The policy would be known as the Peace Policy, which aimed to be free of political corruption. This policy was prominent on
The issues surrounding Aboriginal land claims have posed both challenges and opportunities for Canadian unity. Establishing agreements between Aboriginal people and the federal government is quite complex, as the claims are often linked to social issues, governance, and other matters. Many Aboriginals see self-government as having been given to them by the Creator, and view it as a part of their spiritual connection to the land. Regardless, the federal government and Canadian Aboriginal people have been successful in negotiating several important settlements. This dispute however, has also lead to opportunities for Canadian unity. The long history and rich culture of Aboriginal people in Canada not only help define our national identity, but also shape our economic and social well-being. Collaborating with agreement partners help strengthen to approach to treaty implementation. Furthermore, land and resources under the control of these Aboriginal governments are more attractive to investors, and this facilitates partnerships between Aboriginal governments, other governments, and the private sector. As a result, greater prosperity for Aboriginal people and a more promising future for all Canadians may be achieved. The Aboriginal self-determination clearly proves the challenges and opportunities it can bring when dealing with Canadian identity and
Each individual makes up the society as it is, and various characteristics and beliefs makes up an individual. Although, individual lives together with a variety of personal ideologies, emotions, cultures, and rituals, they all differentiate one person from the other making up one’s own identity. This identity makes up who one is inside and out, their behaviour, actions, and words comes from their own practices and values. However, the profound history of Indigenous people raises question in the present about their identities. Who are they really? Do we as the non-native people judge them from the outside or the inside? Regardless of whether the society or the government were involved in their lives, they faced discrimination in every shape and form. They faced discrimination and left their values at residential school, outside in the general population, and faced gender discrimination. Many non-native government policies took place in their lives and shaped their new-unwanted identity, which was followed by the indigenous, however was it followed by them deep inside? One cannot agree on taking actions verbally and follow it physically, and if it was verbally and physically the results would have been different. However, in this case the results were awful as only physical forced was used by non-native peoples to get the native peoples to follow the Euro-Canadian way of lifestyle.
Indigenous people are the most disadvantaged minority in Canada and it has been this way for centuries. Missing women, flooding reserves, corrupt councils and a high suicide rate are only a small ratio of all the problems that are plaguing these communities and it is simply because they are not receiving the same amount of resources as the rest of Canada. Most Canadians cannot do much about this situation, but the government can. It has been shown that the government has tried to even with the Indigenous people in past accords and acts but most of these agreements were forced and hid the government’s racist motives in plain sight. For example, the White Paper Policy Paper of 1969 which was introduced by Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau and his Minister of Indian Affairs, Jean Chrétien to “enable the Indian people to be free, free to develop Indian cultures in an environment of legal, social and economic equality with other Canadians.” The paper proposed items such as eliminating Indian status, dissolving the Indian Act, and converting reserve land to private property that can be sold by the band or its members. Indigenous people across Canada were shocked. The White Paper failed to discuss the concerns raised by their leaders during the consultation process (Mohan, 2018). It contained no provisions to recognize First Nations’ special rights, to recognize and deal with
In present society, there are many conflicts within the Canadian First Nations, despite the fact that majority of the conflicts have been resolved. Like any other marginalized group, they continue to struggle and have limited opportunities and successes. Due to the factors of unemployment, death rates, health issues, and racism, many of the conflicts that involve Aboriginal people are not resolved. As a result of the lack of education given, the low standard of living, and isolation from society, the First Nations people continue to struggle and have limited success. However, it would be possible to resolve their struggles.