Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

27/04/20151 “Empty versus Full or Half-Full Medicine Chest” CONTROVERSIES IN INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE IN CANADA © Dr. Francis Adu-Febiri, 2013.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "27/04/20151 “Empty versus Full or Half-Full Medicine Chest” CONTROVERSIES IN INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE IN CANADA © Dr. Francis Adu-Febiri, 2013."— Presentation transcript:

1

2 27/04/20151 “Empty versus Full or Half-Full Medicine Chest” CONTROVERSIES IN INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE IN CANADA © Dr. Francis Adu-Febiri, 2013

3 INTRODUCTION The main controversy over Indigenous governance in Canada has been the conflict between Canadian government’s “hidden” agenda of neo- colonization and Indigenous stance on de-colonization. The main controversy over Indigenous governance in Canada has been the conflict between Canadian government’s “hidden” agenda of neo- colonization and Indigenous stance on de-colonization. 27/04/20152

4 3 MAJOR CONCEPTS Power and Authority Power and Authority Empowerment Empowerment Sovereignty Sovereignty Governance Governance Self-government Self-government Colonialism, Neo-colonialism, and De- colonization Colonialism, Neo-colonialism, and De- colonization Aboriginal Title Aboriginal Title

5 MODELS OF GOVERNANCE 1. Power Model 1. Power Model 2. Empowerment Model 2. Empowerment Model 3. Combinations 3. Combinations 27/04/20154

6 5 AUTHORITY: Compliance to command because it is perceived as legitimate: 1.Tradition 2.Legal-Rational 3.Charisma GOVERNANCE: Distribution and Exercise of Power: Sovereignty vs Delegation. POWER:Ability to compel compliance DOMINATION: Power relations in which regular pattern of inequality is established, whereby the subordinate accepts that position, obeying the commands of the dominant mainly because of fear of violence/suffering WESTERN MODEL OF GOVERNANCE: POWER MODEL FORCE SOVEREIGNTY

7 27/04/20156 INDIGENOUS MODEL OF GOVERNANCE EMPOWERMENT MODEL: EMPOWERMENT MODEL: –Consensus Governance Structure of government may be hierarchical/centralized, acephalous, or segmented while the dynamics of governance is egalitarian. Structure of government may be hierarchical/centralized, acephalous, or segmented while the dynamics of governance is egalitarian.

8 27/04/20157 EMPOWERMENT Empowerment is “the expansion of assets and capabilities of people to participate in, negotiate with, influence, control, and hold accountable institutions that affect their lives” (World Bank, 2002). Empowerment is “the expansion of assets and capabilities of people to participate in, negotiate with, influence, control, and hold accountable institutions that affect their lives” (World Bank, 2002).

9 27/04/20158 EMPOWERMENT “Empowered people have freedom of choice and action. This in turn enables them to better influence the course of their lives and the decisions which affect them”(World Bank 2002). Reference: TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTEMPOWERMENT /0,,contentMDK: ~pagePK:210058~piP K:210062~theSitePK:486411,00.html

10 9 THE NISGA’A GOVERNANCE MODEL: Power or Empowerment? Power Governance vs. Empowered and Empowering Governance: Power Governance vs. Empowered and Empowering Governance: Over one hundred years of rejection, in 1999 the Nisga’a signed a treaty that gives them self- government powers akin to municipal government, land, resource rights and cash. Under the treaty, they will once again govern themselves by their own institutions within the context of Canadian law…The Nisga’a will be allowed once again to follow their ayuukh, their code of law under their own government and self-determination (Steritt : 73). Over one hundred years of rejection, in 1999 the Nisga’a signed a treaty that gives them self- government powers akin to municipal government, land, resource rights and cash. Under the treaty, they will once again govern themselves by their own institutions within the context of Canadian law…The Nisga’a will be allowed once again to follow their ayuukh, their code of law under their own government and self-determination (Steritt : 73).

11 27/04/ “EMPTY VERSUS FULL MEDICINE CHEST” The Nisga’s self-government template is the latest among a series of templates the Canadian government has offered/proposed to Indigenous peoples of Canada. The Nisga’s self-government template is the latest among a series of templates the Canadian government has offered/proposed to Indigenous peoples of Canada. The templates the government offers represent the “empty medicine chest” approach to Indigenous governance that the First Nations have rejected over and over again. The Sechelt, Alberta Metis Settlements, and Nunavut templates are mere repackaging of this “empty medicine chest” approach. The templates the government offers represent the “empty medicine chest” approach to Indigenous governance that the First Nations have rejected over and over again. The Sechelt, Alberta Metis Settlements, and Nunavut templates are mere repackaging of this “empty medicine chest” approach. This approach is in contrast to the First Nations “full medicine chest” template of “Aboriginal governance which seeks for sovereign independent Aboriginal nation states” (Frideres and Gadacz 2001: 251). This approach is in contrast to the First Nations “full medicine chest” template of “Aboriginal governance which seeks for sovereign independent Aboriginal nation states” (Frideres and Gadacz 2001: 251).

12 FRANK CALDER’S REMARKS after Parliament passed the Nisga’a Treaty We are now liberated, that is what is going on here… Now we’re free to exercise what we wanted to do, instead of remaining under the confinement of the reservation. The reservation, and to get out of it, that’s the main theme of what we’re doing (Matas 1999). We are now liberated, that is what is going on here… Now we’re free to exercise what we wanted to do, instead of remaining under the confinement of the reservation. The reservation, and to get out of it, that’s the main theme of what we’re doing (Matas 1999). 27/04/201511

13 27/04/ THE REAL MEANING OF THE “EMPTY VERSUS FULL MEDICINE CHEST” CONTROVERSY Neo-colonization Neo-colonization Versus Decolonization

14 27/04/ NEO-COLONIZATION AGENDA OF INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE THE LOGIC: THE LOGIC: By colonizing Indigenous people, EuroCanadians have had full access to material resources of Canada. To maintain this access colonization must continue. However, in the face of increased sophistication of Indigenous resistance and conventions of international human rights, it is suicidal to pursue classic/blatant colonialism. Hence Canadian government’s proposals of Indigenous governance templates since the 1970s that have the guise of self-government but maintain the core of colonialism. This is neo- colonialism. By colonizing Indigenous people, EuroCanadians have had full access to material resources of Canada. To maintain this access colonization must continue. However, in the face of increased sophistication of Indigenous resistance and conventions of international human rights, it is suicidal to pursue classic/blatant colonialism. Hence Canadian government’s proposals of Indigenous governance templates since the 1970s that have the guise of self-government but maintain the core of colonialism. This is neo- colonialism.

15 27/04/ NEO-COLONIZATION AGENDA OF INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE THE EVIDENCE: THE EVIDENCE: 1. Interpretations of Indigenous Governance: 1. Interpretations of Indigenous Governance: a) According to the Canadian government, “Indians, Inuit, and Metis were never nations in the legal sense and are not now to be treated as such” (: 236). Treaties signed with Aboriginals are not equal to that signed between other sovereign international peoples or nations. Indigenous people cannot therefore be accorded with full political autonomy. a) According to the Canadian government, “Indians, Inuit, and Metis were never nations in the legal sense and are not now to be treated as such” (: 236). Treaties signed with Aboriginals are not equal to that signed between other sovereign international peoples or nations. Indigenous people cannot therefore be accorded with full political autonomy.

16 27/04/ NEO-COLONIZATION AGENDA OF INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE b) Indigenous claim to sovereignty is false: Any sovereignty that existed in Canada was vested in the Crown. b) Indigenous claim to sovereignty is false: Any sovereignty that existed in Canada was vested in the Crown. According to the government, the following charters, treaties and acts phased out any Indigenous sovereignty in Canada (Frideres and Gadacz 2001): According to the government, the following charters, treaties and acts phased out any Indigenous sovereignty in Canada (Frideres and Gadacz 2001): – Royal Charters including the Hudson Bay Company Charter of –Treaty of Utrecht: –Various treaties in 1725 between Indians and the British. –The Royal Proclamation of –The Constitution Act 1867 (BNA Act). –Rupert’s Land Transfer Act. –The Indian Act of –The Constitution Act of 1982.

17 27/04/ NEO-COLONIZATION AGENDA OF INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE 2. Government’s unilateral introduction of rehashed versions of the 1876 Indian Act’s band Aboriginal self-government policy. This policy has been delegation of power to Aboriginals not recognition of Aboriginal sovereignty. The latest is the First Nations Governance Act (FNGA) Government’s unilateral introduction of rehashed versions of the 1876 Indian Act’s band Aboriginal self-government policy. This policy has been delegation of power to Aboriginals not recognition of Aboriginal sovereignty. The latest is the First Nations Governance Act (FNGA) This conclusion is borne out by a content analysis of the following positions of the Canadian government on Aboriginal self- government: This conclusion is borne out by a content analysis of the following positions of the Canadian government on Aboriginal self- government:

18 NEO-COLONIZATION AGENDA OF INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE A). The extent and division of powers between the federal and provincial government will not be changed through self-government negotiations. A). The extent and division of powers between the federal and provincial government will not be changed through self-government negotiations. B). There will be an attempt to accommodate Indigenous governments within the existing constitutional framework. B). There will be an attempt to accommodate Indigenous governments within the existing constitutional framework. C). The resultant self-government structures must conform to the established principles, jurisdictions, and institutions of Canadian jurisprudence. C). The resultant self-government structures must conform to the established principles, jurisdictions, and institutions of Canadian jurisprudence. 27/04/201517

19 27/04/ NEO-COLONIZATION AGENDA OF INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE This self-government policy was introduced in 1986 and the government began negotiating with specific Indigenous communities. Each band is given the opportunity to choose the form and structure of its self- government within the framework of the community- based self-government template: This self-government policy was introduced in 1986 and the government began negotiating with specific Indigenous communities. Each band is given the opportunity to choose the form and structure of its self- government within the framework of the community- based self-government template: –The Sechelt Indian Band Self-Government Act, –Community-based self government, –Municipal style government. This form of “Aboriginal self-government does not include a right of sovereignty in the international law sense, nor will it result in sovereign independent Aboriginal nation states” (Frideres and Gadacz 2001: 251). This form of “Aboriginal self-government does not include a right of sovereignty in the international law sense, nor will it result in sovereign independent Aboriginal nation states” (Frideres and Gadacz 2001: 251).

20 27/04/ NEO-COLONIZATION AGENDA OF INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE The The “hidden” agenda of the community-based self-government template: structure of the new forms of self- government would ensure that concern and hostility would be deflected to local leadership, not Indian Affairs personnel. Finally, the acceptance of the municipal style government by Indigenous people would lead to the acceptance of the dominant society’s culture and values, thus ensuring the further assimilation [sic] of Indigenous persons (Frideres and Gadacz 2001: 256).

21 27/04/ NEO-COLONIZATION AGENDA OF INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE Indigenous peoples’ responses to the community-based self-government template: Indigenous peoples’ responses to the community-based self-government template: 1. Non-Status Indians, Inuit, Metis, and some First Nations communities have bought into the Canadian state’s neocolonial template of Indigenous governance for pragmatic reasons. 1. Non-Status Indians, Inuit, Metis, and some First Nations communities have bought into the Canadian state’s neocolonial template of Indigenous governance for pragmatic reasons. 2. Sechelt and a few other First Nations communities have accepted municipal type governance template. 2. Sechelt and a few other First Nations communities have accepted municipal type governance template. 3. Nunavut preferred provincial-type governance but settled for a municipal-type government (Steckley and Cummins, 2008, p. 253). 3. Nunavut preferred provincial-type governance but settled for a municipal-type government (Steckley and Cummins, 2008, p. 253).

22 NEO-COLONIZATION AGENDA OF INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE 4. Non-status Indians and Metis “have publicly accepted the fact that any government for them will have to be delegated by either the provincial or the federal government” (Frideres and Gadacz 2001: 245). 4. Non-status Indians and Metis “have publicly accepted the fact that any government for them will have to be delegated by either the provincial or the federal government” (Frideres and Gadacz 2001: 245). 5. Metis Settlement Governance Model of Alberta is an old [internal colonial] structure infused with contemporary management notions and practices (Wall, 2000). 5. Metis Settlement Governance Model of Alberta is an old [internal colonial] structure infused with contemporary management notions and practices (Wall, 2000). 27/04/201521

23 27/04/ DECOLONIZATION AGENDA OF INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE In contrast to the neocolonial governance template offered by the government, most First Nations “have insisted that their inherent sovereignty defines and formalizes them as a fourth level of government” in Canada (Frideres and Gadacz 2001: 245). In contrast to the neocolonial governance template offered by the government, most First Nations “have insisted that their inherent sovereignty defines and formalizes them as a fourth level of government” in Canada (Frideres and Gadacz 2001: 245). For some First Nations “a fourth level of government” means “internal sovereignty”, while for others it means “full independence.” For some First Nations “a fourth level of government” means “internal sovereignty”, while for others it means “full independence.”

24 DECOLONIZATION AGENDA OF INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE Internal Sovereignty: This is partial sovereignty; the freedom to regulate certain of their own affairs without interference from outside (Kulchynski 1994). Internal Sovereignty: This is partial sovereignty; the freedom to regulate certain of their own affairs without interference from outside (Kulchynski 1994). Full Independence: This is full sovereignty; a complete control over their own affairs; does not receive its “enabling organizational act” from neither the federal or the provincial government; similar to pre-contact traditional Aboriginal governance. Full Independence: This is full sovereignty; a complete control over their own affairs; does not receive its “enabling organizational act” from neither the federal or the provincial government; similar to pre-contact traditional Aboriginal governance. 27/04/201523

25 27/04/ DECOLONIZATION AGENDA OF INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE The Aboriginal decolonization agenda of governance demands self-government derived from “Aboriginal title and not from Parliament” (Tennant 1984). This demand is premised on the fact that Aboriginal societies originally had a system of self- government that was in complete control over their internal and external relations (Boldt et al 1985). The Aboriginal decolonization agenda of governance demands self-government derived from “Aboriginal title and not from Parliament” (Tennant 1984). This demand is premised on the fact that Aboriginal societies originally had a system of self- government that was in complete control over their internal and external relations (Boldt et al 1985).

26 27/04/ DECOLONIZATION AGENDA OF ABORIGINAL GOVERNANCE First Nations leaders cite the following as a proof of pre-existing Aboriginal sovereignty: These charters, treaties, and legislation recognized that “Indians existed as nations” (Frideres and Gadacz 2001: 236-7). First Nations leaders cite the following as a proof of pre-existing Aboriginal sovereignty: These charters, treaties, and legislation recognized that “Indians existed as nations” (Frideres and Gadacz 2001: 236-7). –Royal Charters including the Hudson Bay Company Charter of –Treaty of Utrecht: –Various treaties in 1725 between Indians and the British. –The Royal Proclamation of –The Constitution Act 1867 (BNA Act). –Rupert’s Land Transfer Act. –The Indian Act. –The Constitution Act of 1982.

27 27/04/ DECOLONIZATION AGENDA OF ABORIGINAL GOVERNANCE Based upon these evidences, the Supreme Court has supported Aboriginal sovereignty. For example, Based upon these evidences, the Supreme Court has supported Aboriginal sovereignty. For example, In the Delgamuukw case, the Chief Justice noted that the Crown is under a moral, if not a legal duty to enter negotiations with Aboriginal people in good faith with the objective to achieve reconciliation of the pre-existence of Aboriginal societies with the sovereignty of the Crown (Laselva ). In the Delgamuukw case, the Chief Justice noted that the Crown is under a moral, if not a legal duty to enter negotiations with Aboriginal people in good faith with the objective to achieve reconciliation of the pre-existence of Aboriginal societies with the sovereignty of the Crown (Laselva ).

28 27/04/ DECOLONIZATION AGENDA OF ABORIGINAL GOVERNANCE The evidences shown above seem to suggest that Aboriginals have pre-existing sovereignty. The evidences shown above seem to suggest that Aboriginals have pre-existing sovereignty. However, the Crown has presented the following arguments purported to refute these claims of sovereignty (Frideres and Gadacz 2001: 238): However, the Crown has presented the following arguments purported to refute these claims of sovereignty (Frideres and Gadacz 2001: 238): 1. The continuity doctrine: in the case of conquest or cessation the sovereignty of a “civilized” original people continues until they change it through their own act of parliament. 1. The continuity doctrine: in the case of conquest or cessation the sovereignty of a “civilized” original people continues until they change it through their own act of parliament. 2. The Royal Proclamation states that the British became the sovereign after the proclamation. 2. The Royal Proclamation states that the British became the sovereign after the proclamation. 3. Canadian courts have concluded that European treaties with the Aboriginals were not international treaties. Moreover, no continuing right to self- government is mentioned in any of the treaties. 3. Canadian courts have concluded that European treaties with the Aboriginals were not international treaties. Moreover, no continuing right to self- government is mentioned in any of the treaties.

29 27/04/ DECOLONIZATION AGENDA OF ABORIGINAL GOVERNANCE Given Given the arguments of the federal government and the judicial system’s lack of power to enforce its decisions, Frideres and Gadacz (2001: 238) may be right when they conclude that: “It “It is unlikely that the courts or the government will ever find Aboriginal peoples to have sovereignty.”

30 27/04/ SOURCES OF AND SOLUTIONS TO INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY “Aboriginal people still argue that they have sovereignty; the government says they don’t.” (Frideres and Gadacz (2001: 238) “Aboriginal people still argue that they have sovereignty; the government says they don’t.” (Frideres and Gadacz (2001: 238) If the controversy is settled in favor of the Indigenous peoples they would achieve self- government beyond the municipal-government style that the Canadian government has offered. If the controversy is settled in favor of the Indigenous peoples they would achieve self- government beyond the municipal-government style that the Canadian government has offered. On the other hand, if it is settled in favor of the government, as the case is now, Indigenous peoples have to settle for limited control type of self-government. On the other hand, if it is settled in favor of the government, as the case is now, Indigenous peoples have to settle for limited control type of self-government.

31 27/04/ FOURTH LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT FOR ABORIGINAL PEOPLE What is the feasibility of Indigenous peoples in Canada realizing the “Fourth Level of Government” vision? What is the feasibility of Indigenous peoples in Canada realizing the “Fourth Level of Government” vision? Fourth level of government is full independence Fourth level of government is full independence Full Independence: a complete control over their own affairs; does not receive its “enabling organizational act” from neither the federal or the provincial government; similar to pre- contact traditional Indigenous governance. Full Independence: a complete control over their own affairs; does not receive its “enabling organizational act” from neither the federal or the provincial government; similar to pre- contact traditional Indigenous governance. What are the positions of the sociological paradigms on this controversy? What are the positions of the sociological paradigms on this controversy?

32 27/04/ FUNCTIONALIST POSITION ON INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY Cause: Dysfunctional Aboriginal Political Culture: Cause: Dysfunctional Aboriginal Political Culture: The controversy is the result of the dysfunctional Aboriginal political culture in contemporary Canada. Demand for Aboriginal sovereignty is unreasonable given that it would cause so many problems (dysfunctions) that would disrupt the balance (homeostasis) of Canadian social structure: The controversy is the result of the dysfunctional Aboriginal political culture in contemporary Canada. Demand for Aboriginal sovereignty is unreasonable given that it would cause so many problems (dysfunctions) that would disrupt the balance (homeostasis) of Canadian social structure:

33 FUNCTIONALIST POSITION ON INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY Dysfunctions of Aboriginal sovereignty: Dysfunctions of Aboriginal sovereignty: – From a practical point of view it would be unwieldy to operate over 500 governments in Canada; the economic implications of such an arrangement would be staggering (Mickingberg 1971). –Politically speaking, a fourth level Aboriginal self-government will not be a palatable solution to most Canadians (Frideres and Gadacz 2001). – Pragmatically, it would require a substantial overhaul of Canadian democratic system (Jhappan 1990). 27/04/201532

34 27/04/ FUNCTIONALIST POSITION ON INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY Solution: Assimilation Solution: Assimilation –The limited control or municipal type self-government currently being offered is the solution because it would facilitate the assimilation of Aboriginal political culture into Canadian governmental system without much disruptions in Canadian society. Many Aboriginal communities have bought into that template already. Many Aboriginal communities have bought into that template already. What is the main flaw of this position? What is the main flaw of this position?

35 27/04/ SOCIAL CONFLICT POSITION ON INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY Cause: Competition over Resources: Cause: Competition over Resources: Industrial capitalist economic processes require that internal colonialism is entrenched over Indigenous peoples to give a competitive advantage to EuroCanadian capitalists. Indigenous peoples’ resistance aimed at achieving a fourth level of government is a logical response to this disguised class inequality. Industrial capitalist economic processes require that internal colonialism is entrenched over Indigenous peoples to give a competitive advantage to EuroCanadian capitalists. Indigenous peoples’ resistance aimed at achieving a fourth level of government is a logical response to this disguised class inequality.

36 27/04/ SOCIAL CONFLICT POSITION ON INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY Solution: Proletariat Revolution Solution: Proletariat Revolution –It is only when Indigenous join the proletariats of all other racial groups in Canada to use militant means to overthrow capitalism that true Aboriginal sovereignty would be re-established. What is the main flaw in this position? What is the main flaw in this position?

37 27/04/ FEMINIST POSITION ON INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY Cause: Feminization of Aboriginality: Western Patriarchy Cause: Feminization of Aboriginality: Western Patriarchy The feminist paradigm postulates that controversy over Indigenous governance is caused by feminization of Aboriginality: the ideology that Indigenous peoples are not human enough or sufficiently “developed” to make major political decisions to effectively manage a fourth level government. The feminist paradigm postulates that controversy over Indigenous governance is caused by feminization of Aboriginality: the ideology that Indigenous peoples are not human enough or sufficiently “developed” to make major political decisions to effectively manage a fourth level government. Solution: Elimination of Western Patriarchy Solution: Elimination of Western Patriarchy Indigenous self-government would occur beyond the municipal type government only when western patriarchy is no more. Indigenous peoples should therefore join the feminist movement to eliminate western patriarchy. Indigenous self-government would occur beyond the municipal type government only when western patriarchy is no more. Indigenous peoples should therefore join the feminist movement to eliminate western patriarchy. What is the main flaw in this position? What is the main flaw in this position?

38 27/04/ INTERACTIONIST POSITION ON THE INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY Cause: Differential Definition of good governance: Cause: Differential Definition of good governance: The Western definition of governance in terms that favor individualism and hierarchically organized and impersonal politics is antithetical to Indigenous traditional definition of governance. For the western political mind a fourth level of government in Canada symbolizes chaos, but for the Indigenous political mind this form of governance is a symbol of equality in sharing power—empowerment--the most viable way to organize politics. The Western definition of governance in terms that favor individualism and hierarchically organized and impersonal politics is antithetical to Indigenous traditional definition of governance. For the western political mind a fourth level of government in Canada symbolizes chaos, but for the Indigenous political mind this form of governance is a symbol of equality in sharing power—empowerment--the most viable way to organize politics. The interaction between these definitions generates changing perceptions of governance, thus constantly changing the emphasis of the Indigenous governance controversy. The interaction between these definitions generates changing perceptions of governance, thus constantly changing the emphasis of the Indigenous governance controversy.

39 27/04/ INTERACTIONIST POSITION ON THE ABORIGINAL GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY Solution: Continuous re-definition and negotiation: Solution: Continuous re-definition and negotiation: The controversy demands continuous negotiations between the government and Indigenous political leaders as action units or human agents. There won’t be a time when the controversy is completely resolved; it will keep on shifting with shifting definitions/symbols of self-government. The controversy demands continuous negotiations between the government and Indigenous political leaders as action units or human agents. There won’t be a time when the controversy is completely resolved; it will keep on shifting with shifting definitions/symbols of self-government. What is the main flaw in this position? What is the main flaw in this position?

40 27/04/ POSTMODERNIST POSITION ON THE INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY Cause: Homogenization of governance: Cause: Homogenization of governance: Globalization-induced homogenizing influence of Western political culture on traditional Indigenous governance is the main source of the controversy Globalization-induced homogenizing influence of Western political culture on traditional Indigenous governance is the main source of the controversy Solution: Multiculturalization of politics: Solution: Multiculturalization of politics: Extend egalitarian pluralism or multicultural policy to political culture of Canada. Such a policy would compel the mainstream to respect and facilitate the reinvention of traditional Indigenous governance—the empowerment model. Extend egalitarian pluralism or multicultural policy to political culture of Canada. Such a policy would compel the mainstream to respect and facilitate the reinvention of traditional Indigenous governance—the empowerment model. What is the main flaw in the position? What is the main flaw in the position?

41 27/04/ POSTSTRUCTURALIST POSITION ON THE INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY Cause: Structured intersectional power inequality in the Canadian State system: Cause: Structured intersectional power inequality in the Canadian State system: The controversy is a reflection of the power base of the Canadian state structure which is white, male, middle/upper class, able-bodied dominated. The controversy is a reflection of the power base of the Canadian state structure which is white, male, middle/upper class, able-bodied dominated. Groups such as Indigenous people who are outside this structural intersection are excluded from the center of power, that is, federal and provincial governments and pushed to the margins of political power structure—municipal government. Groups such as Indigenous people who are outside this structural intersection are excluded from the center of power, that is, federal and provincial governments and pushed to the margins of political power structure—municipal government.

42 27/04/ POSTSTRUCTURALIST POSITION ON THE INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY Solution: Elimination of the Centralized State Structure: Solution: Elimination of the Centralized State Structure: Indigenous should join forces with other racial/ethnic minorities, women, the lower/under class, and other disenfranchized Canadians to organize politically to eliminate the Canadian state structure and redistribute power equally (Bannerji 2000). Indigenous should join forces with other racial/ethnic minorities, women, the lower/under class, and other disenfranchized Canadians to organize politically to eliminate the Canadian state structure and redistribute power equally (Bannerji 2000). –“Change takes power, power takes organization, and organization takes unity” (Taiaike Alfred 2002: 3) What is the main flaw in this position? What is the main flaw in this position?

43 27/04/ POSTCOLONIALIST POSITION ON THE INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY Cause: Colonial Cultural Mentality (Franz Fanon): Cause: Colonial Cultural Mentality (Franz Fanon): Cultural domination of Indigenous peoples has caused them to buy into Western imperialist notions of governance – Power Model. Cultural domination of Indigenous peoples has caused them to buy into Western imperialist notions of governance – Power Model. Solution: De-colonization of the colonial mind-set Solution: De-colonization of the colonial mind-set Unless Indigenous peoples are liberated from this colonial mentality, true self-government will elude them like the case of African, Latin American and Asian countries which are “politically independent” but are still operating western imperialist governance systems that continue to oppress them. Unless Indigenous peoples are liberated from this colonial mentality, true self-government will elude them like the case of African, Latin American and Asian countries which are “politically independent” but are still operating western imperialist governance systems that continue to oppress them. What is the main flaw in this position? What is the main flaw in this position?

44 27/04/ ABORIGINAL POSITION ON THE INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY There has never been a single position among Indigenous groups as to what self- government means or how it is to be implemented (Cardinal 1986). There has never been a single position among Indigenous groups as to what self- government means or how it is to be implemented (Cardinal 1986).

45 27/04/ ABORIGINAL POSITION ON THE INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE CONTROVERSY As stated earlier, there has been a continuum of Aboriginal positions on the Indigenous governance controversy: As stated earlier, there has been a continuum of Aboriginal positions on the Indigenous governance controversy: At the lower extreme are some status Indians who accept the Indian Act type Band Council system and at the upper extreme are the First Nations that seek a fourth level/order of government with powers similar to those of the federal and provincial governments (Frideres and Gadacz 2001). At the lower extreme are some status Indians who accept the Indian Act type Band Council system and at the upper extreme are the First Nations that seek a fourth level/order of government with powers similar to those of the federal and provincial governments (Frideres and Gadacz 2001). In between these two extremes are Indigenous groups who settle for municipal type (Sechelt, Nisga’a and Alberta Metis Settlements) and enlarged municipal type (Nunavut) of self-government (Steckley and Cummins 2001). In between these two extremes are Indigenous groups who settle for municipal type (Sechelt, Nisga’a and Alberta Metis Settlements) and enlarged municipal type (Nunavut) of self-government (Steckley and Cummins 2001). What is the main flaw in this position? What is the main flaw in this position?

46 27/04/ CONCLUSION: EMPOWERING GOVERNANCE OR TYPES OF SELF- GOVERNMENT? There cannot be good governance in a nation or group without the power of self-government. There cannot be good governance in a nation or group without the power of self-government. However, Good governance is not necessarily produced by systems of self-government. Many countries, nations and groups with powers of federal, provincial/state/regional, municipal/local governments in a capitalist or socialist political system have failed to achieve empowering governance that enhances the lives of their citizens because of human factor decay/deficiency (Adu- Febiri 1998). However, Good governance is not necessarily produced by systems of self-government. Many countries, nations and groups with powers of federal, provincial/state/regional, municipal/local governments in a capitalist or socialist political system have failed to achieve empowering governance that enhances the lives of their citizens because of human factor decay/deficiency (Adu- Febiri 1998).

47 27/04/ CONCLUSION: EMPOWERING GOVERNANCE OR TYPE OF SELF- GOVERNMENT? In In this regard, the type of self-government the Canadian government offers Indigenous peoples does not matter as much as the state/level of Indigenous peoples human factor competency. effect, it is the development of Indigenous human factor competency rather than the type of self-government that would guarantee effective, liberating Indigenous governance. What What is the main flaw in this position?

48 27/04/ REFERENCES Adu-Febiri, Francis “The Failure of Socialist Experiments in Africa: Misconceptions, Myths and Realities.” In Senyo Adjibolosoo and Benjamin Ofori- Amoah (eds.). Addressing Misconceptions About Africa’s Development. Lewiston: The Edwin Mellen Press. Adu-Febiri, Francis “The Failure of Socialist Experiments in Africa: Misconceptions, Myths and Realities.” In Senyo Adjibolosoo and Benjamin Ofori- Amoah (eds.). Addressing Misconceptions About Africa’s Development. Lewiston: The Edwin Mellen Press. Alfred, Taiaike “The Great Law of Change.” The Eastern Door. Alfred, Taiaike “The Great Law of Change.” The Eastern Door. Boldt, M., J.A. Long and L. Little Bear (eds.) The Quest for Justice. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Boldt, M., J.A. Long and L. Little Bear (eds.) The Quest for Justice. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Cardinal, H “Constitutional Change and the Treaty 8 Renovation.” In Indian-Provincial Relations. M. Boldt, J.A. Long and L. Little Bear (eds.). Lethbridge: The University of Lethbridge. Cardinal, H “Constitutional Change and the Treaty 8 Renovation.” In Indian-Provincial Relations. M. Boldt, J.A. Long and L. Little Bear (eds.). Lethbridge: The University of Lethbridge.

49 27/04/ REFERENCES Fanon, Franz Black Skin, White Masks. New York: Grove Press. Fanon, Franz Black Skin, White Masks. New York: Grove Press. Frideres, James S. and Rene R. Gadacz Aboriginal Peoples in Canada: Contemporary Conflicts. Sixth Edition. Chapter 9. Toronto: Prentice Hall. Frideres, James S. and Rene R. Gadacz Aboriginal Peoples in Canada: Contemporary Conflicts. Sixth Edition. Chapter 9. Toronto: Prentice Hall. Kulchynski, P. (ed.) Unjust Relations: Aboriginal Rights in Canadian Courts. Toronto: Oxford University Press. Kulchynski, P. (ed.) Unjust Relations: Aboriginal Rights in Canadian Courts. Toronto: Oxford University Press. Laselva, S “Aboriginal Self-Government and the Foundation of Canadian Nationhood.” B.C. Studies, 120: Laselva, S “Aboriginal Self-Government and the Foundation of Canadian Nationhood.” B.C. Studies, 120:

50 27/04/ REFERENCES Said, Edward Orientalism. Said, Edward Orientalism. Steckley, John L. and Bryan D. Cummins Full Circle: Canada’s First Nations. Chapter 24. Toronto: Prentice Hall. Steckley, John L. and Bryan D. Cummins Full Circle: Canada’s First Nations. Chapter 24. Toronto: Prentice Hall. Sreritt, N “The Nisga’a Treaty: Competing Claims Ignored!” B.C. Studies, 120: 73-98). Sreritt, N “The Nisga’a Treaty: Competing Claims Ignored!” B.C. Studies, 120: 73-98). Wall, Denis “Aboriginal Self-Government in Canada: The Cases of Nunavut and the Alberta Metis Settlements. In David Long and Olive Patricia Dickason (eds.). Visions of the Heart: Canadian Aboriginal Issues. Toronto: Harcourt Canada. Wall, Denis “Aboriginal Self-Government in Canada: The Cases of Nunavut and the Alberta Metis Settlements. In David Long and Olive Patricia Dickason (eds.). Visions of the Heart: Canadian Aboriginal Issues. Toronto: Harcourt Canada.


Download ppt "27/04/20151 “Empty versus Full or Half-Full Medicine Chest” CONTROVERSIES IN INDIGENOUS GOVERNANCE IN CANADA © Dr. Francis Adu-Febiri, 2013."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google