Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
History of Canadian colonization and the effect it had on the Indigenous population
Effects of imperialism and colonialism in canada aboriginal today
Impacts of colonization on aboriginal people
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The ongoing targeting of Aboriginal Children and Women is a significant impediment to Indigenous development in Canada and the wider world. In this essay I will critically interpret government-led development initiatives in Canada with a comparative analysis of New Zealand. I will address development interventions throughout Canada’s history with a focus on Indigenous women and children with specific reference to Indigenous womens maternities. First I will look at the progression of development interventions by the Canadian state throughout history. Then, I will observe how these systems of oppression have manifested throughout history looking at violence against Aboriginal women and over representation of Indigenous children in foster care in Canada. I will situate the struggles of both gendered and ethnic bodies away from dominant discourses in the international context by drawing on state led development initiatives in New Zealand, looking at Mana Wahine (Womens Power) to deconstruct the effect of colonialism on Maori women’s maternities. Then, I suggest that in order to achieve the goals of Indigenous development, we must decolonize development initiatives. I argue, that this is acheiveable by centreing Indigenous development initiaives in Indigenous knowledge and viewpoints. Following this, I will analyse the legitimacy of current development policy through a postcolonial lens. Then, I will suggest the need of a grassroots, participatory approach to development to government led development initiatives to gain the best possible outcome of equality for gendered and ethnic bodies in settler colonial states of Canada and New Zealand. To achieve this successfully, I argue the overarching principles of development policy must be... ... middle of paper ... ...p in Maori communities in New Zealand – particuarly in diplomatic and conflict reconciliation roles. However, this is not to paint a picture of Indigenous society with harmonious, egalitarian social structures. Rather this is to illustrate the way colonialism has impacted gender relations throughout the history of settler colonial states. Indeed a colonial settler society, which can only exist through the dissolution of indigenous peoples and the establishment of a new social body on the expropriated landmass (Wolfe 2006), must have at its core an obsession with indigenous reproduction. For this reason, a colonial settler society is inherently eliminatory in that the dominant culture must “destroy to replace” (Wolfe 2006:390). The mere existence, let alone reproduction, of the indigenous population is counterproductive to the colonial project (Landertinger: 2011).
Though Coulthard’s argues that Indigenous people’s ressentiment is a valid expression of Indigenous anger against colonial practices under certain
The French saw the Natives as uncivilized and felt it was their duty to improve the land in order to get the most out of it. Though Witgen does not note it as such, in An Infinity of Nations, this is our first experience of a gender roles between the two sides. Witgen often refers to the French as “the Father” and to the Indigenous tribes as “the children”. In efforts to create their empire, Witgen argues that the French felt as though they were the “Father giving birth to Native children, literally creating and suckling Indian nations into existance.” (WITGEN 230) While having this feeling of fatherhood, Witgen touches on the motherly traits of the French as well. “Native peoples need not disappear; they might be reborn as the children of the empire. Their French father would not only give them a new life, he would also nourish them as only a mother could,” Witgen notes. (WITGEN 112) With the sense of fatherhood and motherhood, the French felt as though they were responsible to impose their power on what should be the Native New
Jiwani and Young's argument also causes me to consider Audra Simpson's talk, "The Chief's Two Bodies," in which she discusses both how and why the eradication of Aboriginal women was necessary to the development of patriarchal colonialist society. In short, Simpson acknowledges that through the creation "status," an arbitrary blood relationship to one's Aboriginal lineage, marriage, and scrip colonialist were able to remove land "ownership" from Aboriginal women, by essentially making them invisible. In effect, Jiwani and Young reinforce and provide evidence to suggest that ideologically, the concept of Aboriginal women being invisible or contrarily "hypervisable" (899), in that they are the antithesis of the "good" Christian women (the mother, the sister, the wife, the virgin) creates a binary. These apposing ideological women cause a "moral and racialized economy of representation [that] works to privilege dominate societal norms" (Jiwani and Young, 904). What is interesting about these discursive modes is the fact that news reporting itself is a colonialist practice rooted in economic stability. These modes maintains the cycle of violence and marginalization and only counter media rooted in art, such as the "Red Dress Campaign," or the "Walking with Our Sister's Campaign" which, bring awareness to the Aboriginal perspective can act as a retaliation to standard media
The over-representation of Aboriginal children in the Canadian Child Welfare system is a growing and multifaceted issue rooted in a pervasive history of racism and colonization in Canada. Residential schools were established with the intent to force assimilation of Aboriginal people in Canada into European-Canadian society (Reimer, 2010, p. 22). Many Aboriginal children’s lives have been changed adversely by the development of residential schools, even for those who did not attend them. It is estimated that Aboriginal children “are 6-8 times more likely to be placed in foster care than non-Aboriginal children (Saskatchewan Child Welfare Review Panel, 2010, p. 2).” Reports have also indicated that First Nations registered Indian children make up the largest proportion of Aboriginal children entering child welfare care across Canada (Saskatchewan Child Welfare Review Panel, p. 2). Consequently, this has negatively impacted Aboriginal communities experience of and relationship with child welfare services across the country. It is visible that the over-representation of Aboriginal children in the child welfare system in Canada lies in the impact of the Canadian policy for Indian residential schools, which will be described throughout this paper.
In this proposal our team seeks to explore the injustices within the Indian Act. To achieve this our proposed research will examine the target population being the aboriginal woman. The paper will further explore the oppressions faced by the aboriginal women within the Indian Act. In conclusion, this proposal will sum up the negative impact that the Indian Act had on aboriginal women and how it continues to oppress this population within the Canadian National discourse.
First I will define the definition of terms used in this paper. When I use the word Aboriginal, I understand this as a label given from the colonizers/ Europeans to identify Indigenous peoples. Canadian legislation defines Indigenous peoples as Aboriginal, I understand this as indifferent from the dominant ideology, therefore, the colonizers named Indigenous peoples as Aboriginal. According to teachings I have been exposed to it’s a legal term and it’s associated with discrimination and oppression. However, audiences I have written for prefer the use of Aboriginal. More premise to this reference is Aboriginal, Indigenous, First Nations, Indian and Native are used interchangeable, but it should be noted these names do represent distinct differences. Furthermore, I will use Indigenous to represent an empowering way to reference a unique general culture in Canada. Under the title of Indigenous peoples in Canada, for me represents: First Nations people, Metis people and Inuit peoples. These are the two titles I will use when I reference Indigenous people from an empowering perspective and Aboriginal from a colonizer perspective.
Generations of native people in Canada have faced suffering and cultural loss as a result of European colonization of their land. Government legislation has impacted the lives of five generations of First Nations people and as a result the fifth generation (from 1980 to present) is working to recover from their crippled cultural identity (Deiter-McArthur 379-380). This current generation is living with the fallout of previous government policies and societal prejudices that linger from four generations previous. Unrepentant, Canada’s ‘Genocide’, and Saskatchewan’s Indian People – Five Generations highlight issues that negatively influence First Nations people. The fifth generation of native people struggle against tremendous adversity in regard to assimilation, integration, separation, and recovering their cultural identity with inadequate assistance from our great nation.
Feminism and Indigenous women activism is two separate topics although they sound very similar. In indigenous women’s eyes feminism is bashing men, although Indigenous women respect their men and do not want to be a part of a women’s culture who bring their men down. Feminism is defined as “The advocacy of women 's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.” In theory feminism sounds delightful despite the approaches most feminists use such as wrong-full speaking of the opposite gender. Supposedly, feminism is not needed as a result of Indigenous women being treated with respect prior to colonization. Thus, any Native woman who calls herself a feminist is often condemned as being “white”. This essay argues that Indigenous women may
Despite the decreasing inequalities between men and women in both private and public spheres, aboriginal women continue to be oppressed and discriminated against in both. Aboriginal people in Canada are the indigenous group of people that were residing in Canada prior to the European colonization. The term First Nations, Indian and indigenous are used interchangeably when referring to aboriginal people. Prior to the colonization, aboriginal communities used to be matrilineal and the power between men and women were equally balanced. When the European came in contact with the aboriginal, there came a shift in gender role and power control leading towards discrimination against the women. As a consequence of the colonization, the aboriginal women are a dominant group that are constantly subordinated and ignored by the government system of Canada. Thus today, aboriginal women experiences double jeopardy as they belong to more than one disadvantaged group i.e. being women and belonging to aboriginal group. In contemporary world, there are not much of a difference between Aboriginal people and the other minority groups as they face the similar challenges such as gender discrimination, victimization, and experiences injustice towards them. Although aboriginal people are not considered as visible minorities, this population continues to struggle for their existence like any other visible minorities group. Although both aboriginal men and women are being discriminated in our society, the women tends to experience more discrimination in public and private sphere and are constantly the targeted for violence, abuse and are victimized. In addition, many of the problems and violence faced by aborigin...
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.
As a result, identity plays a role in articulating. According to Smith, “racism can be seen as a form of sexual violence against indigenous peoples” (Smith 2005, 3). The faith of the Native American’s empire lies in the hands of the U.S. Congress. For that reason, “indigenous people do not have full authority to decide because, under U.S. law […], it is the U.S. Congress that has full ‘plenary power’ to decide the fate of indigenous peoples and lands” (Smith 2005, 60). This explains the reason for their suffrage, and also the reason why they as portrayed as a target for sexual violence. Native American organizations have continued to demand the U. S. to disburse their land as compensation, due to its history of racial oppression. For this purpose, “one of the reason for tensions between Native and main stream environmentalists’ use of rhetoric – usually concern for the well-being of the earth – that obfuscates colonialism and racism” (Smith 2005, 62). Which explains why, “many women and men of color do not want to have any dealings with white people” (Anzaldúa 1987, 107). As Smith explains, reparations will only be effective if we “continue the legacy of these pioneers, remembering that white supremacy is a global problem that
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
In An Indigenous Peoples’ History of the United States, historian Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz’s reexamines the American historical record and moves it passed the typical narratives of colonialism, revolution, and American exceptionalism. Dunbar-Ortiz’s analysis will impact the field of Native Studies and even general United States history with its examination and focus on settler colonialism as a genocidal policy. It is, as Dunbar-Ortiz argues, impossible to write American history without the acknowledgment of Indigenous peoples. Dunbar-Ortiz shatters the myth of “free land” and conquered Natives. She instead focuses on “the absence of a colonial framework (7),” which she believes is the reason that most historians overlook Indigenous history. In other words, historians need to view colonization as an ongoing process and not a
The history of New Zealand begins between 800 A.D. and 1300 A.D., when the Māori people arrived from Polynesia to the mountainous island they called “Aotearoa.” The people “lived in tribal groups” fairly peacefully (Wilson). However, life began to change for the Māori people when they first came into contact with a European in 1642, when Dutch explorer Abel Tasman “discovered” the island. In 1769, “[James] Cook successfully circumnavigated and mapped the country” (History). These explorations marked the beginning of Europeanization for the young country of New Zealand. Whalers and traders soon arrived, and missionaries arrived in 1814. When the Māori met with Europeans, events followed a similar path to the colonization of America and the decimation of the native populations-- “contribution of guns…, along with European diseases, led to a steep decline in the [population of] Māori people.” (History). Consequentially, “their chieftains entered into a compact with Britain, the Treaty of Waitangi, in which they ceded sovereignty to Queen Victoria while retaining territorial rights,” in...
...cal alliances while moving away from traditional broad-based party politics. In Whale Rider, the Maori tribe skewed away from the democratic and republic label, and instead kept their social background, beliefs, and ancestry alive. However in doing so, the tribe caused a fuss in terms of feminism and gender roles. These findings have important consequences for broad societies if there isn’t some type of budge in today’s system. In fact, the resolution of gender discrimination and uptight social groups is to embrace old tradition in new ways.