For the Métis people, Louis Riel is regularly seen as a hero and spokesman for the rights of the people and their land. To others, he was a rebellious threat who was brought to justice for his criminal acts of treason against the country. The views towards this man are divided, some viewing him as a “victim of Ontario religious and racial bigotry” (Thomas, 1982) and others believe he was an insane man who was rightfully convicted. Today, his life is one of the most controversial and debated topics in Canadian history. Nevertheless, all sides can agree that Riel played a major role in the creation of the province of Manitoba and ultimately bringing attention to the rights of the Métis people. Riel would be a forceful advocate and influential …show more content…
Rupert’s Land was a large territory in North America, owned by the Hudson’s Bay Company from 1670-1870. The Company’s territory was vast, expanding from Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, to Nunavut and the Northwest Territories. Portions of Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota were also kept under the Company’s control. This land contained almost a third of Canada’s current land mass. In this territory, the Hudson’s Bay Company had a monopoly over the trade and the land where the merchandise circulated. There was enormous pressure from the East and the South as both Canada and America attempted to expand their domain. This desire for further colonization and domination lead to tensions between the federal government and the people who called this land home. (“Rupert's”, …show more content…
Macdonald began negotiating with the Hudson’s Bay Company for the transfer of Rupert’s Land, but had little consideration for the population at Red River and the Council of Assiniboia (Thomas, 1982). “With the transfer scheduled for December 1 in 1869, Canada unwisely sent surveyors beforehand to mark out the lots it would be distributing to new settlers” (Bumsted & Cosh, 1997). This action rose feelings of resentment and tension in the colony which was largely dominated by the Métis. Without the reassurance of maintaining any rights to their land and their culture, tension began to build within the community. Riel believed his homeland and the payment for the transfer of its territory should be given to the true owners of the land: the Métis people. It would be in this location that resistance, led by Louis Riel and his allies, would change the course of Canadian
In the year 1957, Canada elected its first Prime minister without English or French root, John Diefenbaker. While growing up in the city of Toronto, because of his German name, he was often teased. [1] He grew up as an outcast, and so he was able to relate to the discrimination and inequality many of the minorities in Canada felt. This essay will attempt to answer the question: To what extent did Prime Minister John Diefenbaker help promote equality to the minority communities. . The minorities in this time period were the women, aboriginals, and immigrants. During his time as the Prime Minister, he was able to help protect the rights of this group because many of their rights were being abused by the society. Diefenbaker also helped the minorities to stand up for themselves and other groups. Diefenbaker was able to bring positive change to the minority communities by making an official Bill of Rights and appointing people of discriminated groups to the parliament while other members did not.
Louis Riel, even today, remains one of the most controversial figures in Canadian history. He was a political and spiritual leader of the Métis of the Canadian Prairies who sought to preserve Métis rights and culture as their homelands came progressively under the Canadian influence. The circumstance of his death had lasting political ramifications in Canada and was opposed by many. His trial is arguably one of the most famous in Canadian history, and the question as to whether it was unjust is a topic of debate. Louis Riel
Louis Riel was born in 1844. He was captured and executed by Canadian authorities in November 16, 1885. He was a leader who gave up his life and time to fight for the right of the Metis, Indians and the western settlers. He was an well-educated young man fluent in both French and English. He was also selected as the Metis’s spokesman to negotiate with the Canadian government. During the 1869-70, he led the rebel when Canada purchases Manitoba from the Hudson’s bay company. Also, he organized and led a similar rebellion in 1885. Above all, is he a patriote or a traitor? It was inappropriate to accuse Riel as a traitor. He tried to defend the traditional rights of Metis and made sure they treated as equally as the British subjects. Riel was a patriote, who passionately love, supported and defended his people. He was also a serious and thoughtful person who dedicated his life to help others. Metis, Native Indians and western setters were all very proud of and respected this leader because of his life long effort. He was a person who was willing to step up and told the government what they needed. Riel never wanted any violent, in fact, he wanted to use peaceful methods to achieve the changes they desired. Moreover, he had no intention to declare independence nor to take over Canada. Unfortunately, Canadian government did not realize the difficult situation of the Metis. They kept ignoring and disregarding their demand. Consequently, these people were forc...
The special thing about this war was that part of it was over the influence of the territory later Canada (Upper Canada history, 2011).... ... middle of paper ... ... Retrieved May 15, 2014, from McCord Museum website: http://www.mccord-museum.qc.ca/scripts/explore.php?Lang=1&tableid=11&elementid=105__true&contentlong. Official voting results -.
Louis Riel is considered today as one of the most controversial Canadian Historians. From his lack of loyalty to integrity it is apparent that he is no stranger to contradicting his objectives in turn for self benefit. Riel may have been viewed as a hero to the Métis, however his autocratic ways proved that he did not have the group’s best interest in mind. To proclaim Riel the title “hero” would imply his incentives were for the welfare of the people in the absence of personal fulfilment. Therefore, Louis Riel was deemed a traitor due to his fickle commitment to both the Métis and the Canadian Government.
The spirit of compromise and conciliation shown by the Quebec Act of 1774 would guide generations to come in the shaping of Canada. This legacy of equality and respect would resurface in men like Lafontaine and Baldwin (with their “responsible government”) and in the adoption of the British North America Act. The enduring loyalty it secured from its French-Canadian citizens would help keep the nation whole even through difficult
Louis Riel was a Metis leader, founder of Manitoba, and a central figure in the Red River and North-West resistances. He was born on 22 October 1844 in Saint-Boniface, Red River Settlement and died 16 November 1885 in Regina, SK. He lead 2 Metis Nations, and brought Manitoba to confederation. Many people think that he is a martyr. A martyr is a person that was killed to protect or for their religion or other beliefs. However I still think that Louis Riel is a traitor. A traitor includes someone who betrays another’s trust, someone who is false to an obligation or duty, and it is also someone that acts against one’s nation, sovereign or country. And I think that Louis Riel did just that.
Overall Howard deserves to be commended for his political approach to the struggles of 1885. His opinion of the class structure present and its importance in the developmental process of Canada’s political framework lends much insight to any reader willing to give it more than a moments thought. This article fits extremely well with class as it puts emphasis on the united quality among North-West groups, as well as the necessity to shed light on the Metis as a whole, not exclusively Riel. Personally I really enjoyed this article. I did not necessarily agree with the lens Howard was attempting to capture everything in, but the element of political theory that Howard brought to the table, for me, is always worthy of analysis: especially if you connect to a different theory that you can compare it to.
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
Many people saw Louis Riel as a hero because of his passion about preserving the Métis rights and culture. Riel was a great Métis leader because he risked his own life just to improve the Métis’ lives. His heroism began when he returned home to Red River in 1868 after his studies, and discovered that the settlement was alarmed by arrangements to transfer territorial rights from the Hudson’s Bay Company to the Dominion of Canada. This was because the Hudson’s Bay Company resigned its control of the Northwest, and sold Rupert’s Land to Canada. This caused the Métis (people of mixed Aboriginal and European heritage) to fear that they would lose control of their homeland and traditional rights. They we...
The Red River Colony was changing, but it wasn’t the only one, all of Canada were changing, because in the late 1860s Canada entered a new era and the changes and events that occurred in the Red River was only the beginning of many more conflicts and circumstances to come that would help shape and define this age Canada has entered. Although the Red River Rebellion had ostensibly achieved most of its major objectives, the Metis would soon find themselves at a disadvantage. They would rise yet again for another rebellion called The North-West Rebellion of 1885 to assert their nationality once more.
To them, the excitement and the adventure of the buffalo hunt held more appeal than farming. Hundreds of Metis were content to earn a living by hunting buffalo, making pemmican or finding employment as freight drivers. After a while Canada bought Rupertsland from Hudson Bay Company. When the Metis heard this they were alarmed. They feared their religion,their language, their lands and their old, free way of* life.
Expanding on the previous required reading, the chapter Historical and Contemporary Colonialism discusses the injustices faced by the Indigenous peoples of Canada by outlining the country’s history of colonialism. A significant legal document that began the process of colonization is known as the “doctrine of discovery”, which allowed for the stealing and raiding of Indigenous people’s land. As a result of this, Indigenous peoples were dehumanized and European colonizers simply viewed Indigenous people as conquered subjects with a complete lack of any rights and freedoms. As argued by the textbook, the doctrine of discovery was used as a means for European countries to justify their actions of stealing land from any non-Christian people.
Throughout the mid-eighteen hundreds, the Metis and First Nations people saw a lot of changes due to the increased numbers of White settlements. Throughout their struggles, one Metis man stood up in defense of his people and land. This is a story of the life of Louis Riel, the man who changed it all. His background, his roots, his history.
We want these Indigenous people to integrate into our society and become a part of what we have built but they didn’t and it shocked a lot of settlers. These indigenous people want to create reserves and live a life of uncertainty and it causes non-Aboriginal people to judge them each and every day. This judgement comes from a social bias that is put on by the Crown to itself and protect itself from a chance of a sovereignty of their land. The Crown has created an illusion that has become a reality that we have the right to indigenous land and have the control over aboriginals and how they are governed. Secondly Mackay shows us that some Aboriginal rights have been recognized but are only partial. These rights of land always land back in possession of the Crown. Finally, the idea of settler emotion is presented by Mackay. These settlers are extremely passionate about their land because of the hard work that their ancestors did to get it. They believe that these indigenous people didn’t work hard enough, and don’t want to integrate into the society of certainty thus we shouldn’t give up the land to them.