Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Canada diversity essay
Why canada is a multicultural country
Canada diversity essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Canada diversity essay
Canadian Aboriginal
Canada has been constantly acknowledged as a nation of different people from different part of the world (MacDonald 66). Our great nation is recognized as a very diverse country filled with unity, which continues to encourage people from other part of the world to come and live in Canada. Although its been constantly considered as one of the top countries in the UN Human Development Index, Aboriginal peoples classified together with residents of Panama, Belarus, and Malaysia in terms of their economic and social possibilities (qtd. in MacDonald 66). In a special report by James Anaya, claimed that Canada has issues in regards to the circumstances surrounding indigenous people of the nation, and Aboriginal petitions continues to be unsettled, and therefore resulted to an excessive amount of lack of confidence among Aboriginal peoples towards the government (qtd in MacDonald 66).
Canadian Aboriginal people were the first to inhabitant the nation and call it home before the European started to explore different territories around the world and discover the nation called Canada. This discovery made the European people established their culture, traditions, and so many people started to migrate to Canada and called it home.
…show more content…
Through out the history, native people have been the last individuals to participate in any government related work or progress in society. Native people are one of the least poor people in Canada right now, as many of them do not know their legal rights, and more and more Aboriginal individuals are getting incarcerated for different offences also, women have very little status in the society as many of them does alcohol and substance uses and therefore results to short lived
Steckley, J., & Cummins, B. D. (2008). Full circle: Canada's First Nations (2nd ed.). Toronto:
In this paper, I will consider James Tully’s argument for an element “sharing” in a just relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people of Canada. I will claim that “sharing” is one of principles to the relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people who has connection with economic, political and legal relations. I will argue, that it is important to build “sharing” into a new, postcolonial relationship since it brings beneficial to country. I will also state proponent view with James Tully’s discussion that utilization of “sharing” to economic, political, and legal relations is essential to our society.
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.
Although the Canadian government has done a great deal to repair the injustices inflicted on the First Nations people of Canada, legislation is no where near where it needs to be to ensure future protection of aboriginal rights in the nation. An examination of the documents that comprise the Canadian Constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms reveal that there is very little in the supreme legal documents of the nation that protect aboriginal rights. When compared with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples it is clear that the Canadian Constitution does not acknowledge numerous provisions regarding indigenous people that the UN resolution has included. The most important of these provisions is the explicit recognition of First Nations rights to their traditional lands, which have a deep societal meaning for aboriginal groups. Several issues must be discussed to understand the complex and intimate relationship all aboriginal societies have with the earth. Exploration into the effects that the absence of these rights has had the Cree of the Eastern James Bay area, will provide a more thorough understanding of the depth of the issue. Overall, the unique cultural relationship First Nations people of Canada have with Mother Earth needs to be incorporated into the documents of the Canadian Constitution to ensure the preservation and protection of Canadian First Nations cultural and heritage rights.s
Life for the Métis was adventurous with all of the hunting and trading they did. Métis were the result of Aboriginal people and Europeans. Many would work at fur trading companies or just be hunters. When they would travel to different places they would often use Ox Carts to haul all of their belongings. Their culture was very important including what music they played and the language. When they traded they would sell a lot of things because they were so talented at making things. The Métis grew up an having unique and adventurous life including who they were, the culture, what they made, Red River Trails, the Fur Trade, where they've live and how they live today.
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.
Living in Canada, there is a long past with the Indigenous people. The relationship between the white and First Nations community is one that is damaged because of our shameful actions in the 1800’s. Unnecessary measures were taken when the Canadian government planned to assimilate the Aboriginal people. Through the Indian Act and Residential schools the government attempted to take away their culture and “kill the Indian in the child.” The Indian Act allowed the government to take control over the people, the residential schools took away their culture and tore apart their families, and now we are left with not only a broken relationship between the First Nations people but they are trying to put back together their lives while still living with a harsh reality of their past.
In the video “Aboriginal Peoples -- It's time”, the main topic of the video is advocating for equity and justice for the aboriginal people. Aboriginal people is a collective name for the original peoples of North America and their descendants. The Canadian constitution recognizes three groups of Aboriginal peoples: Indians (commonly referred to as First Nations), Métis and Inuit. These are three distinct peoples with unique histories, languages, cultural practices and spiritual beliefs. More than 1.4 million people in Canada identify themselves as an Aboriginal person, according to the 2011
Presently, access to programs and health care services is fragmented given the nature of the health care system for Aboriginal peoples (Wilson et al., 2012). The federal government is responsible for providing limited health services among Inuit living within traditional territories and status/registered Indians living on reserves (Chen et al., 2004). This responsibility is vested in the First Nations and Inuit Health Branch organizations to carry out protection activities and health promotion, and provide funding for community health programs in Inuit communities and reserves (Chen et al., 2004). Firstly, the complexity of the health care system for Aboriginal peoples has resulted in an unequal access to health services due to the First Nations and Inuit Health Branch program (FNIHB), which only applies to Inuit and Indians. Therefore, Metis and other Aboriginal peoples who do not qualify for registration under the Indian Act do not receive health services provided by FNIHB (Chen et al., 2004). Secondly, the transfer of responsibility to health boards, communities and other authorities has resulted in unequal supply of health services between territories and provinces, uneven distribution among communities, and leaves limited opportunity for increased funding (Loppie et al., 2009). It has also lead to controversy between various levels of government over the responsibility to pay for particular health services. Jurisdictional limitations, which have failed to recognize Metis identity and rights, have resulted in health disparities among the Metis population (Wilson et al., 2012). While the federal government recently decided to include Metis status in Aboriginal initiatives, the funding has not been equitable when compared to those of Inuit and First Nations or to the non-Aboriginal populations in Canada (Loppie et al., 2009). The Aboriginal health
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...
“In about half of the Dominion, the aboriginal rights of Indians have arguably been extinguished by treaty” (Sanders, 13). The traditions and culture of Aboriginals are vanishing at a quick pace, and along it is their wealth. If the Canadian Government restore Native rights over resource development once again, Aboriginals would be able to gain back wealth and help with the poverty in their societies. “An influential lobby group with close ties to the federal Conservatives is recommending that Ottawa ditch the Indian Act and give First Nations more control over their land in order to end aboriginal poverty once and for all” (End First). This recommendation would increase the income within Native communities, helping them jump out of
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
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.
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
The first interpretation of sovereignty that is examined by Flanagan views sovereignty in an international sense. Sovereignty for these leaders means gaining more international power and acceptance. Flanagan argues that major international bodies such as the United Nations will be accepting such an attempt at sovereignty (71). As the second largest country in the world the geographical constraints on uniting Aboriginal people living across the country plays a significant factor. Flanagan also points to the diversity within this group; there are over six hundred bands across the ten provinces in Canada in more than 2,200 reserves. Compounding the geographical constraints facing their unity, Aboriginal bands in Canada often differ from each other significantly in their culture including language religion/customs (Flanagan 71). Many Aboriginal people now choose to live off reserve which further complicates their unity (Flanagan 73). Flanagan highlights that as many small bodies they would not be able to survive in the competition of the international community. Current international governance is extremely complex and Flanagan argues it is unlikely for poor isolated people to succeed (73). One united aboriginal voice is also highly unlikely according to Flanagan; having been freed of one power most bands would not choose to become conne...