Recognition takes on many forms, and it is requested and demanded by many individuals who believe they not only deserve acknowledgement, but also feel it is their right to be entitled to it, regardless of its underlying merits or how it should be properly bestowed and earned at large. When delving into the multifaceted nature of this concept and its profound implications for social justice, Canadian identity, and political reality, I've always believed that recognition should be earned through merit, a reward that authentically reflects and validates one's exceptional contributions or achievements. This perspective aligns with my East Asian upbringing and the Chinese Confucian values inculcated in me throughout my personal and academic journey. …show more content…
Merit itself can be a contested concept, influenced by societal biases and unequal opportunities. For marginalized groups, the struggle for recognition often involves challenging the very criteria by which merit is judged. By taking social justice into consideration, I realize that I have to be cognizant of the politically charged nature of these demands for recognition, especially regarding land acknowledgements, which further complicates the issue at hand. Part of me wants to dismiss and disregard these as purely political maneuvers backed by a powerful elite with an agenda that sets the tone as a necessary act of reclaiming power and asserting identity. However, I'm also starting to see beyond this initial reaction and understand that the politically-charged nature of these demands doesn't necessarily negate their legitimacy or importance. As the very need to demand recognition seems to highlight the lack of it for the Indigenous peoples in the first place, since if Indigenous peoples' rights and histories were truly recognized and respected, there would be no need for such demands. This circular logic as evinced by Dr. Bingham during this week's lecture underscores the complexity of recognition and the deep-rooted nature of the struggles for it that the Indigenous peoples continue to endure, especially as a marginalized group …show more content…
Recognition adumbrates as a source of validation, a means of asserting identity, and all of which forms a critical constituent in making up the alphabet soup of modern social justice. For indigenous peoples in Canada, respecting their right to demand recognition of their unceded territories is a vital first step towards reconciliation and healing, as it requires a sincere commitment to understanding their history and addressing their grievances. Yet throughout the course of my own life experiences, I have come to understand that merit is not necessarily always a level playing field. Perhaps the achievements of those from more privileged backgrounds are often more readily recognized, while those from marginalized communities have to be twice as conscientious just to maintain a competitive edge to earn the same level of acknowledgement. The classroom discussions on recognition this week have challenged my long-standing beliefs ingrained in me since childhood, leading me to confront my biases and reevaluate my core beliefs that I was raised with. Yet facing and internalizing this intrinsic skirmish is not only integral to my own personal growth, this clash of ideas has also presented an opportunity to confront and reevaluate my own perceived biases while also acknowledging the necessity of demanding recognition in the face of historical and
The Calder Case was the spark that led to the Canadian government recognizing Aboriginals and their rights. Firstly, the aboriginals used the Calder Case to inform the government that they were taking away their rights. The Calder Case was launched after the Attorney General of British Columbia declared “that the Aboriginal Title, other wise known as the Indian Title, of the Plaintiffs to their ancient tribal territory...has never been lawfully extinguished.”1 The statement made by the government claimed that the Aboriginal Title did not exist in the eyes of the law and before the Calder Case, it allowed them to ignore Aboriginal land rights all over the country. In addition, The Calder brought the issues the Aboriginals were facing with land claims to the attention of the Canadian government. “According to Kainai Board of Education The case made it all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada where the court ended up rejecting the native's claims after being split on it's validity. However, the Supreme Court of Canada's recognition required new respect for Aboriginal land claims.”2 The Supreme Court of Canada's recognition of the Calder Case benefited the Aboriginals as the government was...
Glen Coulthard’s “Resentment and Indigenous Politics” discusses the politics of recognition that are currently utilized within Canada’s current framework of rectifying its colonial relationship with Indigenous peoples. Coulthard continues a discussion on reconciliation between Indigenous peoples and the state that recognizes the three main methods of reconciliation: the diversity of individual and collective practices to re-establish a positive self relation, the act of restoring damaged social and political relationships and the process in which things are brought to agreement and made consistent.
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.
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
Struggles by Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander people for recognition of their rights and interests have been long and arduous (Choo & Hollobach: 2003:5). The ‘watershed’ decision made by the High Court of Australia in 1992 (Mabo v Queensland) paved the way for Indigenous Australians to obtain what was ‘stolen’ from them in 1788 when the British ‘invaded’ (ATSIC:1988). The focus o...
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.
Few Canadians acknowledge the Aboriginals and their land rights, and even fewer Canadians study them. The Royal Proclamation of 1763 is considered one of the most important treaties in history to be made with the Native People; yet very few have even a vague idea when they hear the words “Royal Proclamation, 1763”. Even with the grounds that the Royal Proclamation of 1763 provided, Canada has repeatedly shown ill treatment towards Aboriginals in an repugnant manner. The Royal Proclamation should be respected as an official treaty, signified as a milestone, as well as to be a lesson to teach Canadians equality toward Aboriginals.
One of the most contentious issues in Canada’s history is that of the Metis. Some people feel this unique group of people does not deserve any sort of recognition, whereas others believe their unique history and culture is something to be recognized and cherished. The history of the Metis people is filled with struggle; not only struggles against other powers, but also a struggle for self-identification. Despite strong opposition, the Metis people of Canada have matured as a political force and have taken great strides towards being recognized as a unique people.
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. Simultaneously, recent modern land claim settlements bypass the authority of the Indian Act over specific groups.
“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
For Status Indians various activities have expanded nearby control under the Indian Act and permitted the arrangement of new administrative structures to supplant that act. On the other hand, numerous First Nations keep up that any type of assigned power is conflicting with an intrinsic right of self-government. Inuit have sought after self-government through open government courses of action in the north in conjunction with area claims, while the Métis have progressed different cases for area and self-government. Native people groups have additionally drawn on the privilege of self-determination and worldwide law to bolster their cases. The creating assemblage of global law on human rights has concentrated much consideration, as of late, on the privilege to self-determination as it applies to Aboriginal people groups. Native associations have contended that the characteristic right of self-government is a part of the privilege of self-determination perceived in the United Nations Charter and in the Draft Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous
The question that is often brought to our nations attention is whether or not incremental equality for First Nations children is compatible with reconciliation. When considering my personal opinion, the two are in fact compatible with one another. However, Canada is still working towards reconciliation but still has not completely reached it. The working towards reconciliation within First Nations children is seen throughout many aspects in Canada. Firstly, incremental equality is trying to be reached through education. Next, incremental equality is working towards being met throughout health systems as well as behaviors. Lastly, incremental equality for First Nations children is moving towards reconciliation throughout the physical environments
As a result, identity plays a role in articulating. According to Smith, “racism can be seen as a form of sexual violence against indigenous peoples” (Smith 2005, 3). The faith of the Native American’s empire lies in the hands of the U.S. Congress. For that reason, “indigenous people do not have full authority to decide because, under U.S. law […], it is the U.S. Congress that has full ‘plenary power’ to decide the fate of indigenous peoples and lands” (Smith 2005, 60). This explains the reason for their suffrage, and also the reason why they as portrayed as a target for sexual violence. Native American organizations have continued to demand the U. S. to disburse their land as compensation, due to its history of racial oppression. For this purpose, “one of the reason for tensions between Native and main stream environmentalists’ use of rhetoric – usually concern for the well-being of the earth – that obfuscates colonialism and racism” (Smith 2005, 62). Which explains why, “many women and men of color do not want to have any dealings with white people” (Anzaldúa 1987, 107). As Smith explains, reparations will only be effective if we “continue the legacy of these pioneers, remembering that white supremacy is a global problem that
Similar to other marginalized groups affected by colonialism due to the government in power, the Indigenous peoples of Canada have struggled as a nation due to the unequal treatment they have encountered in the past. The governing bodies that control these Indigenous communities have continued to have colonialistic tendencies that attempt to put the ‘white man’s’ needs before the Indigenous peoples.
Although the youth of the late twentieth century were eager to evolve toward a progressive definition of gender and equality of the sexes, the authoritative figures and later generations regulated, and defined gender expectations. Social institutions, government parties and the general population all played a role in enforcing these gender expectations publically, and socially, thus pressuring the transformative generation to conform. With these strict gender boundaries enforced it confined women to certain spaces and men to other thereby enforcing the separation of the sexes. The distinct responsibilities and expectancies of men and women also helped keep the two sexes separate, by encouraging girls to practice domesticity, typically by practicing