Beyond J11

J11 is now history!  Prior to J11, there were great expectations, some skepticism (myself included, see lsawatsky.blogspot.com, Jan. 4, 2013) and demands were made.  Chief Theresa Spence’s hunger strike deserves a significant portion of the credit for getting the Harper Government to agree to the meeting on J11, and the #IdleNoMore (INM) movement deserves the rest of the credit.  Forcing Harper to have a meeting on First Nations issues is a noteworthy accomplishment and I wholeheartedly applaud both Chief Spence and INM for achieving this. 

Despite misgivings on my part, it is necessary to recognize and respect the attempts on National Chief Shawn Atleo’s part to get consensus of First Nations Chiefs and even for going to the meeting to tell Harper face to face what the Chiefs and INM are demanding.  The option to not attend was also a reasonable and respectable choice but Grand Chief Atleo did what he was elected to do within the colonized framework of First Nations governance under the Indian Act.  

But what were the expectations and demands of Chief Spence and INM prior to J11?  Chief Spence wanted

• A meeting with Harper, the Governor-General and the Ontario Premier all present
• Discussion on the implementation of the Treaties, the nation to nation relationship between First Nations and Canada, and the constitutionally protected rights as a sovereign nation. 

Contrary to mainstream media reports, the INM has been very clear about their expectations:

• Withdrawal of sections of both Omnibus bills that affect First Nations
• Protection of land, water and air, and resource sharing
• Implementation of historic treaties on a nation-to-nation basis
• Self-determination for First Nations, the original inhabitants, as full-fledged Nations
• Support for Chief Theresa Spence and her demands. 

I ask forgiveness from Chief Spence and the INM if I have failed to word these expectations appropriately or missed some key demands. 

What has become clear one day after J11 is that none of these expectations or demands have been met: 

• Harper designed the meeting so that Chief Spence would have to boycott the meeting, if for no other reason than to retain her integrity.  As predicted, Harper still has not met with Chief Spence, nor will he. 
• The Governor-General was not part of the meeting of Harper and First Nations Chiefs
• The Government clearly refused to rescind anything in the Omnibus bills
• There was no assurance about environmental protection, resource-sharing or sovereignty for First Nations
• Despite the agreement to discuss Treaty relationships, Harper and First Nations are on a completely different page when they use the word “treaty”.  In fact, they are in a different book. 

If Harper agreed to modernize the historic, numbered Treaties on J11, what he has in mind is a similar template as is currently being used by the Government of Canada in making treaties with First Nations in B.C., most of whom do not have Treaties.  Essentially what the treaty-making process in B.C. amounts to is extinguishment of indigenous rights – termination.  Already in the first such settlement with the Nishga in B.C. 10 years ago, they are soon running out of the money they settled for and are now put in a position where they have to sell land on the reserve to non-native buyers.  This suits the Harper government and their corporate bosses just fine. 

Many of the initial signers of the historic Treaties were held hostage simply because they did not understand the language or importance placed on the written word by John A. MacDonald and his cronies, nor did MacDonald or his cronies understand the importance First Nations placed on oral tradition.  If the First Nations leaders stay true to their position that the historic Treaties are sacred and based on true Nation to Nation relations, then I am convinced these discussions with the Harper government will come to nothing. 

So what does the rejection of all key demands of IdleNoMore and Chief Spence mean for the future?  For INM, it clearly means that this movement will have a long life because considerable public pressure will have to be exercised to bring about the fundamental transformational change required to achieve its aims.  For Chief Spence, the prognosis is not so good.  The Harper government is in power for another two years, and I do not see any possibility of the corporations that control Harper letting him off the hook and allowing him to do the humanly and morally sensible thing, whether Chief Theresa Spence is with us or not.  If the choice between the existence of the Harper government and meeting Chief Spence’s demands were up to me, I would choose Theresa Spence in a heartbeat. 

What we need is transformation of the whole way of doing things in Canada: true and sincere Nation to Nation relations with First Nations, Metis and Inuit, but also economically, politically, democratically, ecologically and culturally for the rest of us.  The Nation to Nation transformation (see my next blog) must happen immediately, not only for the sake of historical justice but also for Chief Spence’s life.  And frankly, I for one, cannot wait another 2-3 years until the next charade of an election either.  

Is there a role for non-Aboriginal people in #IdleNoMore

After contributing a short video and some pictures from the Idle No More rally I attended in Saskatoon on January 5th to the #IdleNoMore website, I received a very kind comment back which included the question, what did I bring back from the experience of attending the rally.  This blog is devoted to answering that question from the perspective of one who is not Aboriginal.  I am, in fact, a white, male, senior citizen (barely…senior, that is).  I should also acknowledge that Aboriginal issues are not new for me as I have worked off and on for almost 30 years with various First Nations and Metis organizations. 

The January 5^th rally in Saskatoon was the fourth #IdleNoMore event I attended.  In the first three events, I brought my bear drum to support the singers and at the rally I obviously brought my iPad and contributed photos (both drum and iPad were gifts from my Cree spouse).  Being somewhat limited in my capacity, I am unable to drum and take pictures at the same time.  The experience I came away with at all four events was a deep sense of joy and hope and exhilaration.  Why?  The hook that first got me involved in Aboriginal issues was the over-representation of First Nations and Metis people in prison.  Since then I have dealt with other concerns such as traditional justice (peace-keeping and peace-making), Aboriginal control of services, self-governance, Constitutional issues, Treaty Land Entitlement, urban native issues, natural resources, residential schools, and indigenous organic market gardens. 

Having also done research and teaching in these areas, I have often wondered when First Nations and Metis people would take matters into their own hands and show resistance to forces equally destructive as apartheid in South Africa, the holocaust for Jewish people, or as the Vietnam War and slavery of black people in the U.S.  I came away from the rally with a deep sense that it is beginning to happen, and how happy I am to be included in this resistance.  It is an honour to stand with this movement and be idle no more about injustices that are as abominable as those I have listed above among others. 

I come from a people who were invited by the colonialist government of the time to come to Canada a few years after the first several numbered Treaties were signed – the Mennonites.  We came in several groupings over a period of 50-60 years.  Most of us came with nothing but our experience in farming and we were given cheap if not free land.  Although I was raised in poverty, I owe a lot to the indigenous peoples of Turtle Island.  I do not waste my time with guilt about this, or with self-loathing or with blaming my people; rather, I am delighted and grateful for the opportunity to give back through my previous work and now by standing with #IdleNoMore, to give back from that which was shared by indigenous ancestors with my ancestors.  These Treaties are my Treaties as well, and they gave me life.  Indeed, we are all Treaty people. 

At the first flash mob round dance in Saskatoon, I thought that it might be seen as inappropriate for me as a non-Aboriginal to join in, especially bringing my own drum and supporting the singers. It’s not that I would feel awkward; in fact, I feel much more at home with most Aboriginal people than I do with most white people.  But I did not want to usurp or exploit what is essentially an Aboriginal movement; there has been too much of that.  But as I listened to Tantoo Cardinal, Chief Wally Fox and particularly the four women who founded #IdleNoMore (one of whom is non-Aboriginal), I found my spirit singing with their spirit.  The #IdleNoMore issues are my issues as well, and I would be so bold as to say that they are the issues of every single Canadian, whether they realize it now or not. 

So it is encouraging to see more and more non-Aboriginal people at #IdleNoMore events.  Those of us who attend and participate have far more in common with Aboriginal people than either side realizes.  Many non-Aboriginal people have seen the light as well, many are looking for a way to deal with the brokenness of our society and our world, many, in fact the majority, do not have a voice and feel powerless.  Let us not forget that Steven Harper and his cabal were elected by only 23-24% of eligible voters in Canada.  That means the majority of non-Aboriginal people should really support #IdleNoMore. 

Who among us all on Turtle Island wants to live without clean water?  Who among us all wants to live with a poisoned atmosphere?  Who among us wants to live with soil that has become useless?  Who among us can live with our own Mother being raped and abused?  If we acquiesce to these realities, we won’t be living with anything anymore, we’ll be dead. 

This is what #IdleNoMore is shedding some light on, and this is what every single Canadian that is not part of the 1% should support.  There is a role for non-Aboriginal people in the Idle No More movement as supporters, as allies, as participants, as contributors, but not as leaders or saviours.  If anyone is going to do any "saviouring", it will be Aboriginal people saving the rest of us.  They did it before; let’s support them in doing it again.  

On Harper meeting with First Nations and #IdleNoMore

To use a phrase often used by Harper, “Let’s be clear”, and realistic: the meeting between Harper and First Nations on January 11, 2013 will in no way address or achieve the goals set by the #IdleNoMore movement or the goals of Chief Theresa Spence’s fast. 

I heard Harper’s press conference on this matter and I have the statement Harper issued before me.  It is manifestly clear that he is determined to drive the agenda for this meeting.  Not a word about Chief Theresa Spence, and in response to a question from the media, he said it was up to Grand Chief Atleo whom he includes in his delegation at this meeting. First he neglects her, and then exploits a divide and conquer tactic to put the issue of her attendance in the Grand Chief’s court. 

In a tweet I put out a couple of weeks ago, I predicted that Harper would not meet with Chief Theresa Spence.  So far he has not proved me wrong.  Harper has clearly stipulated that the January 11, 2013 meeting will be a “working” meeting and solidly within the framework of the Crown-First Nations Gathering of January 2012.  Nothing of any substance has taken place since then, and the same outcome will prevail after next week’s meeting. 

Yet Harper spins that “some progress has been made” since January 2012 without giving any specifics.  If any progress had been made, would Chief Spence be sitting outside of Parliament in the cold on a 25 day fast?  Would the #IdleNoMore movement been spawned, not only across Canada but across the world?  As it went with the January 2012 meeting, so it will go with the January 2013 meeting as long as Harper and his cabal are in charge. 

How can I be so confident about this prediction?  First of all, look at how Harper words his conception of the agenda.  Not a word about land claims or resource protection, nothing about the collective nature of Aboriginal realities, and not a word about a Nation to Nation discussion or agreement. But he does talk about accountability of Aboriginal governance, success for individuals, economic development and maximizing benefits for all Canadians.  Loaded words – it’s the rhetoric of the status quo market economy which has guided all his policy about the environment as well. 

I’m particularly amused by his reference to Aboriginal and Treaty rights “as recognized and affirmed in the Constitution Act, 1982”.  Well, the Constitution Act certainly recognizes Aboriginal rights but it does not define them, let alone affirm them.  How could you affirm rights that have yet to be defined.  The courts have done a partial job of defining Aboriginal rights but no mention of that in Harper’s agenda for the meeting. 

But the clincher comes in the last paragraph of Harper’s statement.  He asserts that the Government of Canada and First Nations have had an “enduring historic relationship based on mutual respect, friendship and support.”  Anyone who knows even a smattering of history will understand this to be an outright misrepresentation of the truth.  If this is how Harper sees relations between the original inhabitants and the white immigrants who came here post 1763, what positive outcome can there be of this meeting. 

At least Harper is consistent.  Two or three years ago, he told a G-20 meeting in Philadelphia that Canada has no history of colonialism.  I guess when one is so completely stuck in a colonialist mentality, you can’t see that what you are foisting on others is actually colonialism.  Through omnibus bills and other administrative and regulatory measures, Harper’s agenda is to completely dismantle any Treaty obligations on the part of Government.  And this is the “relationship” that he is “committed to strengthening” as the last sentence in his statement indicates.   

Signs of the Times: A Contemporary Morality Story

Signs of the Times: A Contemporary Morality Story

A Contemporary Morality Story

For the past four years, I have been actively involved in assisting in the implementation of organic market gardens on First Nations territory.  For three growing seasons I have lived and worked with members of the Flying Dust First Nation near Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan, starting with 2 acres of chemical-free vegetables and fruits, then 7 and 12 acres in subsequent years.  With the financial assistance of Heifer Canada International, Inroads to Agriculture Institute, EI training dollars and provincial work opportunity money in the first year, more than 20 people received training and made a living doing the work involved in preparing the earth, planting, nurturing, harvesting, storing, distributing and marketing the produce created.  They now have legally established a workers co-op which has continued the market garden program on their own over the past year.

I should add that the initial concern of those who spear-headed this impetus at Flying Dust First Nation was both health related and economic self-sufficiency.  Many of the diseases First Nations people are suffering are diet-related (e.g., diabetes) and the goal of the organic, non gmo market garden was to get people used to eating fresh vegetables and fruit that was immediately available.  Furthermore, to counter the culture of dependency, this was an attempt to produce healthy foods on First Nations land by Band members who were formerly dependent on social assistance.  This resulted in the trainees distributing produce to other Flying Dust members, trying to engage the schools in the area in field days, providing food for lunch programs and getting parts of their own training curriculum into the school curriculum, selling produce at the local farmers market and grocery stores, and engaging the community in the work of the market garden or planting their own backyard gardens.

The success of this venture at Flying Dust as well as the longer history of accomplishments by the Muskoday First Nation in organic potato production prompted the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations (FSIN) to ask me to develop and implement a proposal which would spread this organic market garden venture to all First Nations in Saskatchewan who wanted to be a part of this project.  The proposal was developed over this past year, along with a detailed budget and workplan as well as a five-year budget plan indicating growth and self-sufficiency timelines.  Upon completion, this program proposal was presented to Aboriginal Affairs officials of the Government of Canada, and it was rejected.  The excuse given was that it did not fit with their program guidelines, even though I looked up their program guidelines on a government website and found they fit perfectly.

Being convinced of the merit of the vision, goals and principles of the program, and confident in our strategy for making this project work, we went with enthusiasm to over 40 of the top and largest corporations in Saskatchewan asking them to support the proposal through their community investment and corporate donations activities.  Once again, our professional appeal fell on deaf ears.  The only corporation that provided a bit of seed money to the tune of $5,000 was the Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Association.  One of the several potash companies in this province was interested enough to call for a meeting with FSIN to discuss a substantial contribution but they insisted that we drop the organic aspect of our operation.  Fortunately, FSIN had the guts to say, "Thanks but no thanks".

Even though FSIN has used some of their own money to support the development of the Indigenous Market Garden Program, recently they had to let it go due largely to the diminishing of federal funding to tribal councils and provincial representative organizations with further cuts pending in the coming fiscal year.  Another Aboriginal funding agency, Inroads to Agriculture Institute of One Earth Farms, is interested in funding this project but the amount of funding they can contribute is not sufficient to get this project of the ground.

This scenario has happened many times over the past several decades, and at least four times in projects that I have been directly involved with (traditional justice projects, self-governance in policing, indigenous peacemaking training, etc.).  What lessons can be learned from such stories, something that is more than merely anecdotal?  There are several conclusions that can safely be reached but the most overwhelming one is that governments and corporations do not want First Nations or Metis people to succeed.  At least, not on their own terms, not if its based on traditional cultural values, not if it may result in genuine self-reliance.  

There is plenty of willingness and money to get First Nations involved in oil, gas, uranium and other resource exploitation or devolution of certain government services, but here government and corporations can dictate the terms and conditions.  Such co-optation involves working within existing capitalistic models of business and marketing, accommodation to the organizational or procedural values of the dominant society, surrender of land and treaty rights, and various "co-management" and "partnership" arrangements. All of these attempts to involve Aboriginal people have as their goal the assimilation of participants to the status quo (read, white) model of doing things.  There is even some tolerance or accommodation for First Nations to run their own casinos.

There is a collusion between corporations and government to deal with "the Indian problem".  In essence, the intentions, and even many of the methods, of the corporate state are no different than it was during the heyday of colonialism in Canada. In my view, we are not in a post-colonial period, we are still in the midst of it.  The code of conduct put forward by this society by its actions and omissions with respect to Aboriginal peoples is clearly a colonialist morality.  It reminds of an old truth: if you want to know by what morals or code of ethics someone lives by, look at their actions, not what they say.

The cruel irony of it all is that First Nations were growing vegetables on Turtle Island long before white people became aware of North America.  Squash, pumpkins, beans, corn, Jerusalem artichokes, even wild potatoes and onions, and all sorts of berries were nurtured and gathered here prior to "discovery".  And, they were shared, along with wild game, with scurvy-ridden "discoverers" and other white settlers, so primitive to this land that they would not have been able to survive.  Maybe the corporate state doesn't want First Nations to use their territory to grow healthy food so they can use the land for more resource exploitation or store uranium waste.  Maybe they don't want Aboriginal people to get healthy and become self-reliant so that they continue to be dependent, so that movements such as Idle No More will not get full momentum.  Maybe traditional culture of indigenous peoples is a threat to the status quo economy and power arrangements.  Maybe there are too many people who would lose their position of privilege if First Nations actually demonstrated that they could be successful using their own land and become self-sufficient and healthy.  Definitely maybe.

Corporate Coup-de-tat

Two weeks ago I heard an interview on The Current (CBC) with Diane Finley, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development, about social bonding or contracting. This scheme would have the Government of Canada contracting out social justice type of services to major corporations such as banks and resource extractors and insurance providers instead of non-profit agencies. At first, I had to mentally re-orient myself - I thought I was listening to another CBC program called "This is That" on Saturdays at eleven. Checked the calendar and it was indeed a weekday, time for The Current and it was not a spoof interview. So, what this means is that the Government is seriously exploring having banks, Cameco, Power Corp. and others take care of services for homeless people, prisoner rehabilitation, victims of child abuse, etc. This means that the very forces which encourage poverty, crime and inequality are going to be responsible for services related to these such social concerns, AND they will be paid by government to do so. Last week I saw another story on CBC regarding how the Harper government is cutting back on CIDA funding and instead working with mining corporations to deliver the services that NGO's and CIDA personnel were delivering previously overseas. If you don't believe me, look it up and weep. Sometimes I find it impossible to believe what I am hearing. What made this story even more surreal is that the day before this story came out, CBC reported that group from Guatemala had come to Canada to challenge the activities of a Canadian mining company operating in Guatemala, including reports of theft of property, physical violence and rape. Two different news items in two different weeks. The common thread here is that so-called free enterprise corporations have not only gained a firm grasp over our lives in terms of commodities and the market, they will soon be able to dominate our whole lives. No longer will anyone look at root causes of poverty, crime, abuse, sickness and inequity, such as seasoned social justice activists would, but we will only deal with the symptoms, the same way the medical institutions have done. To control our economic lives was not enough for the corporations, they now want to control every aspect of our humanity. "We asked for signs the signs were sent: the birth betrayed the marriage spent Yeah the widowhood of every government -- signs for all to see." Leonard Cohen, in "The Anthem"

Semantics and Environmental Groups

Ever since I began to promote restorative justice principles as a better way to do justice in the mid-1970's, I have been outraged at the use of the word 'radical'.  Because some of us had the audacity to suggest that both victims and offenders would be better served by having dialogue and identify ways in which the offender could take responsibility and repair the damage done, we were called "radical".  Indeed, we saw ourselves as radical as well but when our critics used the word, they meant it in a derogatory way.  We had done our research and began to realize that the current retributive justice system was an aberration derived from the feudal and monarchic systems and notions about a vengeful God.  By advocating a more equitable, fair and reasonable way of doing justice, we were labelled as "radicals".

The same thing happened as a result of my involvement with the peace movement, traditional Aboriginal justice and self-governance, and advocacy of recycling, energy conservation, elimination of hazardous waste and promoting alternatives to nuclear power. Whenever you examine the roots of an idea or practice, go back to the source and the origin, instead of glibly and blindly accepting the way things are or appear to be on the surface, and then suggest a more wholesome or human way, or even more scientific way to do it, you are doing something radical.  Copernicus suggested the sun was the center of the universe, not the earth as was commonly understood.  He, too, was a radical in his time.    

Most recently, the federal Minister of Natural Resources, Joe Oliver, used the word "radical" when referring to environmental groups who plan to submit briefs to the environmental hearings on the Gateway oil pipeline project running from the Edmonton area in Alberta to Kitimat, B.C.  The primary definition of the word 'radical' is to proceed from the root of a plant.  Mathematicians know what the term radical really means.  And so do surgeons who perform radical surgery in order to remove all the tissue affected by a disease.  But what the Harper government means by the word radical is extreme, threatening, even dangerous, almost insane.

Now I realize that the meaning of words do change over time and that we cannot always insist on linguistic purity.  But in this case, the use of the word radical by the Harper government to describe environmental and Aboriginal groups is far more Orwellian than simply a linguistic and social shift in semantics.  In 1984, the Ministry of Truth was really the ministry of propaganda and lies and the Ministry of Peace conducted perpetual war.  To be radical, to go to the root of a matter, is truly a good thing.  To avoid deeper issues and embrace superficial fixations such as the economy without any protection of the environment is destructive and will eventually mean the end of life as we know it.  In fact, as David Suzuki pointed out in an e-mail to CBC, environmentalists are true "conservatives" because they are the ones who wish to conserve life on this planet.

Calling for more radicals - there are not enough of them.