More handpicked essays just for you.
The impact of colonization on Indigenous people
The impact of colonization on Indigenous people
The impact of colonization on Indigenous people
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The impact of colonization on Indigenous people
The government had imposed through the act an electoral system that in their perspective was ideal and would help aboriginal people. During that time, most governors criticized the traditional governmental structure of the First Nations without taking into account the great cultural value self-governance it represented. It was a system that had existed throughout many generations and reflected their values and beliefs. The electoral system entrenched by the act to their political structure only dismissed Aboriginals needs and rights. Its purpose of assimilation also ignored completely the fact that all of the First Nations tribes were unique in many different ways specially when it came to governing. So, this change that happened in Aboriginal
The journey for the Aboriginals to receive the right to keep and negotiate land claims with the Canadian government was long but prosperous. Before the 1970's the federal government chose not to preform their responsibilities involving Aboriginal issues, this created an extremely inefficient way for the Aboriginals to deal with their land right problems. The land claims created by the Canadian government benefited the aboriginals as shown through the Calder Case, the creation of the Office of Native Claims and the policy of Outstanding Business.
#8 I think the main goal of this act was to control Natives and assimilate them into Canada, and to bring First Nations’ status to an end. The act brought together all of Canada’s legislation governing First Nation people, which defined who Aboriginals were under Canadian law and set out the process by which people would cease to be Aboriginals. Under the act, the Canadian government assumed control of First Nation people’s governments, economy, religion, land, education, and even their personal lives.
He also assumes that they should be participated in economic cooperation, resource development and the sharing of knowledge and technologies, like they assisted non-Aboriginal people in the past time. (James Tully pg.53) Obviously, Aboriginal people get a chance to participate in the society and to get respect and rights to exert their ability. Therefore, Aboriginal are able to promote the economic development. It is sufficiently show equality between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people in economic aspect. On the other hand, Tully’s states that Aboriginal people want to get power back from the government, they more likely to govern themselves and desire to delegate several of their rights to the political area. (James Tully pg.53) I will argue that it is valid to repatriate legal and political powers to Aboriginal people. Because when they self-govern accord with their own tradition and laws, it will create stabilize social order which avoid misconduct in our society. Furthermore, it offers Aboriginal people fair chance to speak in public that maintain their interest and profit. Most importantly, it recalls and emphasizes mutual respect is a factor to balance citizens between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal. So that while Aboriginal people express their voice to society, it gain
The Assimilation Policy was only one of many policies put in place. Before the Assimilation Policy was laid down as a law in the 1930's there was a policy of Protection. This law was put in place to protect the Aborigines from disease and violence as the European settlers moved into their territory. The belief was that the Aboriginal race was gradually dying out. to become extinct in a short amount of years and that they were able to live their last few years in peace. As the Aboriginal race had not died out and were still ...
Of the 8 successful, the 1967 referendum which proposed the removal of the words in section 51 (xxvi) ‘… other than the aboriginal people in any State’ (National Archives of Australia ND), and the deletion of section 127, both, which were discriminative in their nature toward the Aboriginal race, recorded a 90.77% nationwide vote in favour of change (National Archives of Australia, 2014). As a result, the Constitution was altered; highlighting what was believed to be significant positive political change within Indigenous affairs at the time (National Archives of Australia, 2014). Approaching 50 years on, discussion has resurfa...
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
As European domination began, the way in which the European’s chose to deal with the Aborigines was through the policy of segregation. This policy included the establishment of a reserve system. The government reserves were set up to take aboriginals out of their known habitat and culture, while in turn, encouraging them to adapt the European way of life. The Aboriginal Protection Act of 1909 established strict controls for aborigines living on the reserves . In exchange for food, shelter and a little education, aborigines were subjected to the discipline of police and reserve managers. They had to follow the rules of the reserve and tolerate searchers of their homes and themselves. Their children could be taken away at any time and ‘apprenticed” out as cheap labour for Europeans. “The old ways of the Aborigines were attacked by regimented efforts to make them European” . Their identities were threatened by giving them European names and clothes, and by removing them from their tra...
Self-government gives greater control to and law-making authority over a complete range of control including governance and social and economic development. Self-government provisions may include health care and social services, police services, housing property rights, and children warfare. Unconditional support, meeting the diverse economic conditions of Aboriginal communities, encouragement of taxation and many other provisions for equity among Aboriginal governments and adjustment to fit the range of powers exercised and services delivered all help Aboriginals. The more the organizations of administration match the social originations of their constituent groups, the more noteworthy their authenticity and viability. Living conditions were raised to much higher standards when the Aboriginal self-government formed. It provided great help in the lives of Canada’s Aboriginal
The Indian act, since being passed by Parliament in 1876, has been quite the validity test for Aboriginal affairs occurring in Canada. Only a minority of documents in Canadian history have bred as much dismay, anger and debate compared to the Indian Act—but the legislation continues as a central element in the management of Aboriginal affairs in Canada. Aboriginal hatred against current and historic terms of the Indian Act is powerful, but Indigenous governments and politicians stand on different sides of the fence pertaining to value and/or purpose of the legislation. This is not shocking, considering the political cultures and structures of Aboriginal communities have been distorted and created by the imposition of the Indian Act.
It has become widely accepted that Canada uses a first past the post electoral system. However, this system may not be in the best interest of Canada any more. There are many reasons why Canada should change its electoral system to a mixed member proportional one, a variant of proportional representation. With a first past the post system, the elected officials will always be of the majority and this excludes minorities from fair representation. Adopting MMP can create stronger voter turnouts, more personal campaigning, better individual representation, and better party selection. John Hiemstra and Harold Janson, are both in favour of a MMP electoral system. They understand that with the switch, the citizens will get more representation in parliament, their preferred choice will have some say in the House of Commons, and finally someone can be held accountable which creates a closer knit between citizens and Members of Parliament. Nelson Wiseman argues against the MMP system because he feels that there is nothing to be fixed in Canada. If the current system has been working well thus far, there is no need to change it. MMP would allow smaller parties to have their voices heard. Unfortunately first past the post tends to have an over representation of regional parties; contrary to first past the post system, MMP lets Canadians have advocates and legislators who the majority of citizens agree with. Another advantage of MMP is the elimination of strategic voting. With MMP people can finally vote for who they want to rather than choose who the majority may prefer. A change in the electoral system of Canada will create a more fair and just Parliament governing the citizens.
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
Since the time of federation the Aboriginal people have been fighting for their rights through protests, strikes and the notorious ‘day of mourning’. However, over the last century the Australian federal government has generated policies which manage and restrained that of the Aboriginal people’s rights, citizenships and general protection. The Australian government policy that has had the most significant impact on indigenous Australians is the assimilation policy. The reasons behind this include the influences that the stolen generation has had on the indigenous Australians, their relegated rights and their entitlement to vote and the impact that the policy has had on the indigenous people of Australia.
The Indian Act is a combination of multiple legislations regarding the Aboriginal people who reside across Canada, such as the Gradual Civilization Act of 1857 and the Gradual Enfranchisement Act of 1869 (Hanson, n.p.). The Gradual Civilization Act was the Canadian government's attempt to assimilate the aboriginals into the Canadian society in a passive manner, through a method they encouraged called Enfranchisement. Enfranchisement is basically a legal process that allows aboriginals to give up their aboriginal status and accept a Canadian status (Crey, n.p.). This process, while under the Gradual Civilization Act, was still voluntary, but became a forced process when the Indian Act was consolidated in 1876 (Hanson, n.p.). The Gradual Enfranchisement Act introduced in 1869 was a major legislation that intruded with the private lives of the aboriginals. First, it established the “elective band council system” (Hanson, n.p.) that grants th...
Key events in Aboriginal Australian history stem from the time Australia was first discovered in 1788. For instance, when Federation came into existence in 1901, there was a prevailing belief held by non Aboriginal Australians that the Aborigines were a dying race (Nichol, 2005:259) which resulted in the Indigenous people being excluded from the constitution except for two mentions – Section 127 excluded Aborigines from the census and Section 51, part 26, which gave power over Aborigines to the States rather than to the Federal Government. Aboriginal people were officially excluded from the vote, public service, the Armed Forces and pensions. The White Australia mentality/policy Australia as “White” and unfortunately this policy was not abolished until 1972. REFERENCE
The British Electoral System In democratic states, electoral systems are of great importance. Elections give people the right to choose their government; ensure that governments represent the majority (or largest minority) of the people; ensure peaceful changes of government (stability); allow people with fresh ideas an opportunity to enter the political arena; confer legitimacy of government and allow the government to expect people to obey their rules. Unfortunately the British system, Simple Plurality, (also known as 'First Past The Post') has come under fire for its alleged discrimination against smaller parties and its tendency to allow the losing party the ability to rule. Therefore, this creates a question - is the British system fair and democratic, or is it in need of drastic change? There is no denying that the British system has its advantages.