Also there was so much discrimination against Aboriginals; many times Canadians would say the phrase “Kill the Indians” which showed how much hatred was shown to Aboriginals. The Canadian government funded all the expenses for residential schools, which wasn’t a whole lot of money becaus... ... middle of paper ... ...was shown over and over again how it emotionally and physically scarred the children which paid a huge role in having them lose their Aboriginal identity. The breakdown of Aboriginal family was a long term effect of the residential schools, the children lost their language, culture, spiritual beliefs, and traditional ways of subsistence. They knew nothing of family life, family values, structure or parenting skills. Many would raise their future children in the same harsh and abusive ways they were taught in the residential schools.
Kayla Schwab May 1st, 2014 NDG 4M Mr. Schroeder The Indian Act The Indian Act no longer remains an undisputable aspect of the Aboriginal landscape in Canada. For years, this federal legislation (that was both controversial and invasive) governed practically all of the aspects of Aboriginal life, starting with the nature of band governance and land tenure. Most importantly, the Indian act defines qualifications of being a “status Indian,” and has been the source of Aboriginal hatred, due to the government attempting to control Aboriginals’ identities and status. This historical importance of this legislation is now being steadily forgotten. Politically speaking, Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal critics of the Indian act often have insufferable opinions of the limits of the Indian Act’s governance, and often argue to have this administrative device completely exterminated.
Because of poor management, underfunding, a lack of understanding Aboriginals cultures and values, the experiment was a big failure. It most certainly did not stop there. In 1876 the Canadian government introduced the Indian Act. It is “…the principal statute through which the federal government administers Indian status, local First Nations governments and the management of reserve land and communal monies” (Parrot, 2006). The First Nations have to be given their Indian Status, a legal acknowledgment of a person’s First Nation heritage.
Do you know that despite Canada being called multicultural and accepting, Canada’s history reveals many secrets that contradicts this statement? Such an example are Canadian aboriginals, who have faced many struggles by Canadian society; losing their rights, freedoms and almost, their culture. However, Native people still made many contributions to Canadian society. Despite the efforts being made to recognize aboriginals in the present day; the attitudes of European Canadians, acts of discrimination from the government, and the effects caused by the past still seen today have proven that Canadians should not be proud of Canada’s history with respect to human rights since 1914. First, is because of the attitudes of European Canadians towards aboriginals, which were mostly cruel and inhumane.
Sir Wilfrid Laurier warned that “If this military bill is passed, we will face a cleavage which may rend and tear this Canada of ours down to the roots” (Newman, 94). Conscription had surely made an enormous dent in society. Riots occurred in Quebec because of this single issue. The Quebec citizens were absolutely outraged that they were forced to fight for “les Anglais”. Feeling little attachment to both France and Britain, many did not want to participate in the war.
1-3), the Ontario Hydro dams that destroyed part of the wild rice harvest and degraded the habitat of fish and fur animals, as well as the displacement of the community (due to relocation into prefabricated houses where electricity and running water were promised) and the culture shock it created (para. 4). He also discusses the successful blockade in 2002, which is the longest-lasting blockade in Canadian history (para. 28)—an example that shows how employing legal methods were critical in the struggle against environmental injustices for this community. There are a number of other issues that will be discussed in the following paragraphs; the above are just a few of the injustices the Grassy Narrows community face.
For a large portion of history, Canadian legislation on refugees banned certain individuals from finding asylum in Canada. Specifically, individuals who were previously seen as a burden on social welfare were refused access into Canada. This proves that national policies, as well as social welfare legislations, saw refugees as a burden on social welfare (textbook). To clarify, refugees were being seen as a waste of social welfare resources, and policies were put into place that legitimized this negative viewpoint of refugees. This shows that the discrimination and oppression of refugees was present even in a system that was set up to help all members of Canadian society, including those that come to Canada seeking asylum.
Through many different points and facts, it’s shown that Louis Riel genuinely was a rebel who threatened the dominion of Canada. Leading two rebellions, executing Thomas Scott, and going against the government, were just a couple of the many things Riel did, to show that he truly was a rebel. All the things Riel did, have something in common, they all stopped progress. The government can’t trust Riel after the things he did, which slowed down the development of the newly formed dominion of Canada. Although many would disagree, the information shows, that Louis Riel was nothing more than a rebel to Canada, who went against the dominion of Canada.
The legacy consists of poverty, powerlessness, and the breakdown of social cohesion that plague so many Aboriginal families and communities. These conditions did not come about by chance or failure to modernize. They were created by past policies that systematically dispossessed Aboriginal people of their lands and economic resources, their cultures and languages, and the social and political institutions through which they took care of their own (Brant-Castellano 2001:5). Due to colonial and imperial impositions the majority of Canada’s Indigenous population is amongst the most highly excluded, poverty stricken, oppressed, and disadvantaged groups. Within the past half century, Aboriginal peoples have been relentless and determined in their struggle to attain self-determination, maintain their treaty rights and dispute rightful control of land possession matters.
Another major reason for conflict occurred years later, after the Canadian Government and the Metis revealed conflicting views over the process of dividing land that was entitled to the Metis in the Manitoba Act of 1870. Dissatisfaction over this and other land issues led the Metis to reform their provisional government, take up arms, and engage in a string of battles against the Canadian Government. It is safe to say that the conflict between the Metis and the Canadian Government in the years 1869 to 1885 began and escalated largely because the Metis people were denied rights to the land they occupied and were therefore entitled to. The Metis people of Canada once occupied a large area known as the Red River Colony located within Rupert’s Land, which was then sold right out from under them by the Hudson’s Bay Company. Rupert’s Land covered much of North Western Canada, and was considered by the Canadian Government to be fertile land that was suitable for agriculture and settlement.