Let me set the scene for you. I am sitting at the dining room table. I got my room temperature mint tea and my chicken Thai soup that I threw some leftover vegetables in, it's pretty good. The news is on in the next room and I am watching it because it was talking about the floods in BC. It flips over to a press conference with Erin O'Toole, the leader of the conservative party of Canada. I roll my eye because I know he is going to say some bullshit but I figure if I just sit through it, there might be something worth listening to afterwards. To my surprise the second question presented by reporters was on the Wet'Suwet'en protests that were happening.
For context, the We'Suwet'en protests have been happening for a while regarding a coastal link gas line that is going through their land. The initial problem that came about this was, it seemed, that the voted in chief of the territory allowed the pipeline through but the hereditary chiefs are against it. As far as my research led me to believe was that the hereditary chiefs were more of a group of respected elders than official leadership. This opens up a huge amount of discussions regarding the way that decisions are forced upon indigenous communities and the problems with having a single person able to make such a decision in some backroom that people are not privy too. Either way, there has been active protest with blockades into the territory to halt the construction. These have been met with law enforcement, to nobody's surprise. This is where the story surrounding the Wet'Suwet'en protest has changed as the the police have raided various buildings and arrested reporters with general impunity. So, what could have been a misunderstanding between indigenous groups that could have been handled via discussion is being forced through. Honestly, this is the usual pattern with things.
So, back to the press conference. The question was talking specifically about the video that has been released regarding the arrest of the reporters. O'Toole, in his infinite ignorance, decided to state that these blockades hurt indigenous people the most because they deny income and royalties that they could use. He also associated them with "protest culture" and how David Suzuki promotes terrorism because he has stated that people are so frustrated with these pipelines that they will escalate to violence because that is the only way they can be heard. What stuck out out me the most about what he said was how there were a collection of things being done regarding "economic reconciliation". I am not going to delve into the obvious fear mongering but I am going to look into this concept of "economic reconciliation" that I feel is very constantly being pushed by politicians.
I think that for a lot of non-indigenous reconciliation has mainly been contextualized with a lot of nasty history of Canada, a lot of apology speeches from politicians, and then hearing about indigenous people getting money from the government. Seeing this pattern play out over and over again it becomes apparent that this is a strategy to undermine the process of reconciliation and try and give it the appearance of it being weaponized against the government. It is essentially the same concept of "immigrants are taking out jobs" where the common person is being shown that they are having something taken away from them by a social group outside of their norm when in reality it is the larger entity trying to shift blame. In reality most of these scenarios and pay outs are due to the government not actually following through on the promises to indigenous groups and thus the problem having gotten worse and worse. We are seeing this happening right now with Trudeau's huge pay out that he is fighting in court regarding enforcement of Jordan's Principle. The government willingly abusing a loophole to keep indigenous kids from getting funding for medical care got them in this and their unwillingness to accept that fault is why the cost has been increasing.
Reconciliation is not about economic change but social change. The only time that economy is related to that is when it is required to facilitate some change (community centers, medical facilities, better housing projects, etc.) or to provide the proper recompense for outstanding legal agreements, namely land claims. When these actions are termed as "economic" it paints the picture that these are for the profit of the indigenous communities involved. It furthers this narrative of indigenous people being lazy and relying on the government for pay outs, which has been a long standing harmful stereotype.
The majority of reconciliation relates to creating proper avenues for indigenous communities to have sovereignty over their spaces and slowly removing the colonial barrier that are constantly appearing in interactions between Canada and indigenous people. I have to be honest, I full believe that when this was introduced by the government it was expected that this was meant to be something to shut up the growing indigenous rights movement and also try and manage the bad press surrounding all of the human rights issues occurring through out indigenous communities. That isn't what happened because there were people, indigenous and non-indigenous, that believed in a de-colonized future. This has lead to better communication and a sense that indigenous people are actually being heard by someone. It might not be the lawmakers and those that can make changes but it is someone at least.
As is often the case with indigenous protests they are born of frustration rather than anger over one single event. Often it is years and years of hearing about something going to be solved and those people that are meant to help dragging their heels. These are not issues where delay is acceptable. You can't be patient when you do not have clean water. You can't be patient when the housing on reserves is a fire hazard and filled with mold. You can't be patient when the only solution to these is to give over the land that you fought for years to get to some company that will ruin it and then leave. It is this sort of scenario that is often capitalized to give the impression that indigenous people are not grateful for all of the government is doing for them when nothing has actually happened yet. This same scenario is abused by mining and oil companies to instigate these sort of protests to then call in law enforcement. We saw it at Standing Rock where private security was called in with dogs to instigate violence and we are seeing it at the Wet'Suwet'en protest with the local law enforcement being used in the same way.
I am going to refocus on reconciliation rather than getting dragged down into the blunt handling of protests by colonial entities. So, let me start by talking about some key examples of reconciliation focusing more on a social element rather than an economic one. One of the earlier movements that was occurring during the push for reconciliation in the government was the Murdered and Missing Women and Girls Report, M.M.W.G., which began to look into the large disparity of cases with indigenous women going missing when compared to non-indigenous women. Many of these cases has essentially gone cold despite there being very consistent locations where murders took place (namely a 724 km stretch of highway in British Columbia where there were so many cases it became named the Highway of Tears). This was very obviously not done for money, though I am sure some settlements occurred because of it, as the report was motivated to try and get people to pay attention to this problem. As with many indigenous problems there are a lot of factors at play here. From the quality of life being generally poor on reserves, generational trauma leading to problematic family lives, as well as the willingness of the police to actually put resources into investigating these missing persons reports.
If the M.M.W.G. report sounds similar it is because it is very much the same effort that is happening with the Residential schools. When it comes to indigenous issues often it comes down to the indigenous community very much aware of the exact abuses that have occurred but are not involved in the process in fixing them. This detached problem solving process by the government often leads to further issues because the solution that is devised is often blunt or only solves the symptoms. The strangest part about all of this is how often the indigenous community would be more than happy to help with solving this problem but are not involved. I shouldn't say strange because I know exactly why this is the case. It is due to wanting indigenous communities to be accepting and grateful for whatever little help they do get. It worked for Trudeau for a bit when he gave indigenous people an ear for a moment. Once indigenous people's patience ran out with the promises he made it seemed to prove that indigenous people are not a reliable voting base.
So this narrative that "indigenous people are relying on tax payer money" or "indigenous people are not appreciative for what they are given" consistently being woven by politicians and media. This narrative is helpful for them because it places the blame on indigenous people and paints the government as the victim. It should be fairly apparent how paternal the Canadian government is regarding indigenous issues. Constantly using the problems that the government has created and is unwilling to fix as proof of indigenous inability to govern themselves. It is a very consistent cycle that has, honestly, just gotten very boring and predictable.
I never want to leave people feeling terrible after writing these indigenous issues posts so I do want to leave everyone with something nice to end on along with all of the learning. There is a recent trend I have been seeing with indigenous leadership that I am very excited about. That being that there seems to be more women being voted into leadership positions. Right now the head of the Metis Nation of Canada (MNC) is a women and so is the National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, who was elected in July 2021. This, to me is a great sign of a move away from colonial culture as women were very often involved in the leadership to often being the head of tribes. Gender as a whole was far less of an issue for indigenous cultures and would often have more than 2 genders. I am looking at this trend as a subtle trend that is indicative of a perspective change. Being able to pick apart the colonial hang ups out of modern indigenous culture is going to be critical going forward, so I am hopeful that this is a sign of that happening.