CHALLENGING THE STATE: SELF-DETERMINATION, NATIONALISM, AND ANT

CHALLENGING THE STATE:

{WHY}ABORIGINAL SELF-DETERMINATION

{{{THIS IS A STORY OF COLONIALIZATION, CULTURAL GENOCIDE AND RESURRECTION THROUGH ORGANIZED RESISTANCE}}}

INDIGENOUS PEOPLE PROJECT

FOR THE PAST 500 YEARS THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE PROJECT HAS HAD ONE MAJOR PRIORITY: SURVIVAL

THIS HAS ENTAILED SURVIVAL FROM THE EFFECTS OF A SUSTAINED WAR WITH THE COLONIZERS, FROM THE DEVASTATION OF DISEASES, FROM THE DISLOCATION FROM LANDS AND TERRITORIES, FROM THE OPPRESSIONS OF LIVING UNDER UNJUST REGIMES, {1} SURVIVAL AT A SHEER BASIC PHYSICAL LEVEL AND {2} AS A PEOPLES WITH THEIR OWN DISTINCTIVE LANGUAGES AND CULTURES (LEVEL).

COLONIZED =====> (DEF'N) RULED BY EXTERNAL POWER/AUTHORITY ======> CHARACTERIZED BY: (I) OPPRESSION, AND (II) EXPLOITATION OF RESOURCES

{{{{CULTURAL ANTITHESIS ASIDE} --- LAND AS PRIVATE PROPERTY; LAND AS DIVINITY [RESPECT FOR LAND AND ALL WHO INHABIT IT]}: EUROPEAN LAWS INSTITUTED A REGIME OF PRIVATE PROPERTY THAT EXCLUDED THE ORIGINAL INHABITANTS FROM ACCESS TO THE LAND AND USE OF ITS RESOURCES.}}}}

COLONIALISM === NOT ONLY PHYSICAL OCCUPATION OF SOMEONE ELSES LAND BUT ALSO ABOUT THE APPROPRIATION OF OTHERS POLITICAL AUTHORITY, CULTURAL SELF-DETERMINATION, ECONOMIC CAPACITY, AND STRATEGIC LOCATION.

{{{FOLLOWING THE SECOND WORLD WAR, AND MORE PARTICULARLY IN THE 1960S -- WHILE THE STRUGGLE FOR SURVIVAL STILL PREOCCUPIED INDIGENOUS PEOPLE IN CANADA AN AROUND THE WORLD -- A PLATFORM OF WIDER AND MORE PROACTIVE CONCERNS BEGAN TO TAKE SHAPE AROUND THE “DECOLONIZATION OF THE MIND”

“DECOLONIZATION OF THE MIND” STRATEGIES HAVE ATTEMPTED TO NURTURE AND SUSTAIN THE CULTURAL SYSTEMS OF (EVERY) INDIGENOUS COMMUNITY}}}.

GENERAL OVERVIEW OF “INTERNAL COLONIALISM”

ABORIGINAL PEOPLE OF CANADA LIVED IN THE TERRITORY THAT IS CANADA FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS BEFORE THE ARRIVAL OF THE FRENCH OR THE ENGLISH ====> THEIR CLAIMS THAT THE CANADIAN STATE DOES NOT REPRESENT THEM AND THAT, BY DECEPTION AND FORCE, THEY WERE DEPRIVED OF THE USE OF THE LAND ON WHICH THEY HAD LIVED =========>HAVE BEEN MAKE ELOQUENTLY AND OFTEN IN THE LAW COURTS, THROUGH THE MEDIA, IN POLITICAL PROTESTS, AND IN FORUMS LIKE THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

ABORIGINAL PEOPLE HAVE MADE IT CLEAR THAT THEY DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THE LEGITIMACY OF THE CANADIAN STATE ====> THEY ARGUE IT WAS FORM BY CONQUEST, BROKEN PROMISES AND EXPANSION BY FORCE AND TRICKERY =====> MOREOVER, IN ALL OF THE EUROPEAN COLONIALIST DEALINGS THROUGHOUT HISTORY THEY HAVE UTILIZED REPRESSIVE INSTRUMENTS --- FROM THE ROYAL PROCLAMATION OF 1763, TO THE BNA ACT OF 1867, TO THE INDIAN ACT OF 1876, AND MORE --- IN ORDER TO USURPED ABORIGINAL AUTHORITY AND GOVERNANCE, AND CREATED A DEPENDENCE AND “LEARNED HELPLESSNESS' TOWARD THE STATE.

IN MOUNTING THEIR CHALLENGE TO THE LEGITIMACY OF THE CANADIAN STATE, ABORIGINAL PEOPLES HAVE FACED OVERWHELMING OBSTACLES ====> THEY SHARE A HISTORY OF DISPOSSESSION OF LAND, DISENFRANCHISEMENT, RESETTLEMENT ON RESERVATIONS, AND PROGRAMS AND POLICIES SUCH AS RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLING DESIGNED TO PROMOTE THEIR ASSIMILATION AS SUBORDINATE MEMBERS OF THE MAINSTREAM CULTURE AND THE DEVELOPING CANADIAN NATION.

{{{DURING THE 19^TH CENTURY THE POLICY OF COLLECTING INDIANS ON RESERVATIONS BEGAN IN EARNEST --- IT WAS INTENDED TO BE TEMPORARY --- THE LONGER TERM STRATEGY WAS ASSIMILATION ====> ALSO KNOWN AS “CULTURAL GENOCIDE” AND FORCE RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLS (AS THE SINGLE MOST DEVASTATING FACTOR IN THE BREAKDOWN OF SOCIETY === THE COLONIALIST CURRICULA IGNORE, CONTRADICT AND DENY THE STUDENTS CULTURE; THEIR LANGUAGE IS FORBIDDEN AND THEIR DAILY LIFE IS STRUCTURED ACCORDING TO FOREIGN MORAL PRECEPTS OF THE COLONIZERS)}}}

IN 1998, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WAS FORCED TO CREATE A $350 MILLION HEALING FUND WHICH THE FOUR CHRISTIAN DEMONMINATIONS ---- ROMAN CATHOLIC, ANGLICAN, UNITED, AND PRESBYTERIAN --- JOINED THE APOLOGY FOR WIDESPREAD PHYSICAL, PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SEXUAL ABUSE ====> THE COURT CASES CONTINUE…..

CONTEMPORARY CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ABORIGINAL AND NON-ABORIGINAL RELATIONSHIP IN CANADA

1) INEFFECTUAL GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE AND PATERNALISTIC HANDOUTS.

2) THROWING MONEY AT A PROBLEM ====> EXPANDING LEGIONS OF EXPERTS IN HOPE OF FOSTERING ASSIMILATION THROUGH SELF-SUFFICIENCY.

3) RHETORIC OF SELF-GOVERNMENT AND A “NEW SOCIAL CONTRACT” ======> IN REALITY MOST INITITATIVES SIMPLY REFORM/ TWEEK THE OLD ONE AND REFUSE TO RELINQUISH ANY SUBSTANTIVE POWER.

SO, WHEN WE TALK OF THE “ABORIGINAL PROBLEM” WE NEED TO TALK IN A WIDER DISCOURSE THAT PUTS THE BURDENS ON INSTITUTIONS SO THAT WHAT COMES UNDER THE MICROSCOPE ARE THE POLITICS, THE CULTURE, AND THE ECONOMICS OF DOMINATION

STUNNING ARRAY OF EVIDENCE OF THE RESULTS OF INTERNAL COLONIALISM ====> CENSUS DATA ON LIFE SPAN, HEALTH, INCARCERATION RATES, AND INFANT AND MATERNAL MORTALITY --- TO ETHNOGRAPHIC AND ANTHROPOLOGICAL STUDIES THAT DETAIL HOW A WAY OF LIFE WAS DESTROYED --- HAS BROUGHT TO BEAR ON THE CASE THAT THERE IS A “THIRD WORLD WITHIN CANADIAN BORDERS”

1. IN 1995, 40 PERCENT OF REGISTERED INDIANS LIVED IN FAMILIES THAT WERE AT OR BELOW STATISITICS CANADA’S LOW-INCOME CUTOFF (LICO).

2. FOUR TIMES MORE ABORIGINAL PERSONS IN MAJOR WESTERNCITIES LIVEIN POVERTY THAN OTHER CANADIANS.

3. THE POVERTY RATE IN 1995 FOR OFF-RESERVE ABORIGINAL PEPOLES, 15 YEARS AND OVER, WAS 42.7 PERCENT FOR WOMEN AND 35.1 PERCENT FOR MEN, OVER DOUBLE THE RATES FOR OTHER CANADIAN MEN AND WOMEN.

4. {THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF WELFARE NOTES, THESE FIGURES WOULD BE HIGHER IF THEY INCLUDED RESERVE POPULATIONS.}

5. UNEMPLOYMENT RATE FOR ABORIGINAL PERSON IN CANADA RANGE FROM 40 TO 60 PERCENT, WHILE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE IS ABOUT 10 PERCENT.

6. [SO] THE INFANT MORTALITY OF ABORIGINAL POPULATION IS 17 PER 1000 (CAN. 6:1000); AND THE ABORIGINAL LIFE EXPECTANCY IS 10 YEARS LESS THAN THE REST OF POP (77 YRS., 1986).

7. (ALSO) NATIVE URBANIZATION AND "HYPERMOBILITY" AND THE PROBLEMS OF ADAPTION BY TRADITIONAL PEOPLE IN COMPLEX URBAN ENVIRONMENTS.

THE CONTEMPORARY “ABORIGINALITY” MOVEMENT

THE CONTEMPORARY POLITICS OF “ABORIGIALITY” REVOLVES AROUND THE KEY ISSUE OF SELF-DETERMINATION ======> OR MORE ACCURATELY, ABORIGINAL MODELS OF SELF-DETERMINING AUTONOMY =======> MEANS THE “DEVOLUTION” OF REPONSIBILITY AND FEDERAL JURISDICTION OVER ABORIGINAL LANDS AND AFFAIRS, AND THE TRANSFERENCE OF RIGHTS AND AUTHORITIES TO ABORIGINAL PEOPLE ====> IN SHORT, LAND, IDENTITY AND POLITICAL VOICE}}}

{{{{{EXISTENTIAL PROBLEM: ABORIGINALITY STILL CLASHES WITH THE FOUNDATIONAL PRINCIPLES OF A COLONIAL CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER =====> [EX.CLASH OVER IMMUNITY FROM, OR CONTAINMENT BY, NORMAL APPLICATION OF THE LAW]}}}}}

ON THE OTHER HAND, THE POSITION OF THE FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS HAVE BEEN THAT THE RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION COULD ONLY BE EXTENDED AS POWERS DELEGATED TO ABORIGINAL PEOPLE BY GOVERNMENT THROUGH LEGISLATION OR CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE.

FURTHER, THE POWERS THAT WOULD BE GRANTED BY GOVERNMENT WOULD EXTEND ONLY TO POWERS NOW HELD BY MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS RATHER THAN THE MUCH BROADER POWERS SOUGHT BY ABORIGINAL PEOPLES.

{{{{ALTHOUGH ABORIGINAL POPULATIONS ARE DIVERSE == THE INCREASINGLY UNIFIED DEMAND TO HAVE THEIR TERRITORY RETURNED AND FOR SOVEREIGNTY OVER THAT TERRITORY WAS FORCED DRAMATICALLY ONTO THE CANADIAN POLITICAL AGENDA IN THE SUMMER OF 1990 AT KANESATAKEⁱ WHEN “AN ATTEMPT BY THE MOHAWK TO STOP A MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE FROM BEING CONSTRUCTED ON LAND THEY BELIEVED TO BE THEIRS LED TO AN ARMED STAND-OFF AND ONE DEATH” =====>

IN THE AFTERMATH, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT STRUCK THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON ABORIGINAL PEOPLES {WIDE CONSULTATIONS WITH ABORIGINAL PEOPLE ON A MANDATE TO STUDY “VIRTUALLY EVER FEATURE OF THE INSTITUTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ABORIGINAL AND NON-ABORIGINAL CANADIANS.”}}}}

THE INDIAN ACT

FOLLOWING CONFEDERATION, ABORIGINAL PEOPLES CAME UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE GOVERNMENT. THE MECHANISM FOR THIS CONTROL, THE INDIAN ACT, WAS PASSED IN 1876 AND GAVE GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRATS ALMOST TOTAL CONTROL OVER ABORIGINAL PEOPLE. THE ACT EVEN WENT SO FAR AS TO DEFINE A “PERSON” AS “AN INDIVIDUAL OTHER THAN AN INDIAN.”

THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE INDIAN ACT WERE PROFOUND:

ABORIGINAL CHILDREN WERE FORCED TO ATTEND RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLS (WHICH MEANT THAT GENERATIONS OF CHILDREN WERE NOT RAISED BY THEIR FAMILIES.)

[IN LOCO PARENTIS (IN PLACE OF THE PARENTS) WHICH MEANT THAT GENERATIONS OF CHILDREN WERE NOT RAISED BY THEIR FAMILIES == CHILDREN WERE FORBIDDEN TO USE THEIR OWN LANGUAGE, WEAR THEIR OWN CLOTHES, OR MAINTAIN CULTURAL TRADITIONS OR RELIGIONS.)

TRADITIONAL RELIGIOUS PRACTICES WERE RESTRICTED.

ABORIGINAL PEOPLE DID NOT FULLY CONTROL THEIR OWN LAND AND COULD NOT SELL AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS OFF THE RESERVE.

THE GOVERNMENT IMPOSED A “PASS SYSTEM” WHICH RESTRICTED THE RIGHT OF ABORIGINAL PEOPLES TO TRAVEL OFF THEIR RESERVES.

AND, THEY DID NOT GET VOTING RIGHTS IN CANADIAN FEDERAL ELECTIONS UNTIL 1960.

IN THE 1960S, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BEGAN TO REVIEW THE POLICIES CONCERNING ABORIGINAL PEOPLES. A “WHITE PAPER”, TABLED IN 1969, PROPOSED ASSIMILATION OF ABORIGINAL PEOPLE – TREATIES WERE DROPPED, RESERVES WERE TO BECOME LIKE NEIGHBORING NON-ABORIGINAL COMMUNITIES, AND ABORIGINAL RIGHTS AND ABORIGINAL LANDS WERE TO BE DISCARDED.

REACTION TO THIS WHITE PAPER MARKED A WATERSHED IN ABORIGINAL POLITICS – A NATIONAL CAMPAIGN, WHICH ULTIMATELY FORCED THE GOVERNMENT TO DROP ITS PROPOSALS, BECAME A COUNTRYWIDE MOVEMENT AND SEVERAL PAN-INDIAN ORGANIZATIONS, INCLUDING THE ASSEMBLY OF FIRST NATIONS, WERE FORMED.

SELF-GOVERNMENT, ABORIGINAL RIGHTS, AND LAND CLAIMS BECAME THE RALLYING POINTS OF THE MOVEMENT.

SOME ABORIGINAL LEADERS, PARTICULARLY AMONG THE MOHAWKS, VIEW THEIR BANDS AS SEPARATE NATIONS THAT HAVE SOVEREIGN CONTROL OVER THEIR LANDS.

HOWEVER, MOST PROPONENTS OF ABORIGINAL SELF-GOVERNMENT TAKE THE MORE LIMITED VIEW THAT THEIR FIRST NATIONS STATUS GIVES THEM THE “INHERENT” RIGHT TO SELF-GOVERNMENT WITHIN THE CANADIAN FEDERATION.

THEY FEEL THEIR STATUS AS CANADA’S FIRST PEOPLE, WHO WERE NEVER CONQUERED AND WHO SIGNED VOLUNTARY TREATIES WITH THE CROWN, ENTITLES THEM TO THE RIGHT OF SELF-DETERMINATION AND THE PROTECTION OF THEIR CULTURE AND CUSTOMS – THESE RIGHTS ARE “GRANTED” BY THE GOVERNMENT, BUT ARE “INHERENTLY” THEIRS

FURTHER, THE POWERS THAT WOULD BE GRANTED BY GOVERNMENT WOULD EXTEND ONLY TO POWERS NOW HELD BY MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS RATHER THAN THE MUCH BROADER POWERS SOUGHT BY ABORIGINAL PEOPLES.

[[[ WHERE DO YOU THINK THIS PROCESS OF ENDING THE COLONIAL RULE OF ABORIGINALS WILL LEAD?]]]]

[[[EX: ONE MAJOR CHANGE TOOK PLACE IN 1999 WHEN INUIT TOOK OVER GOVERNMENT OF THE NEWLY CREATED NUNAVUT TERRITORY, ENCOMPASSING 350,000 SQUARE KILOMETERS OF LAND IN THE EASTERN ARTIC.]]]

[[[ CHALLENGES: WHAT TO DO ABOUT THE GROWING NUMBER OF URBAN ABORIGINALS// HOW WILL THEY BE INCLUDED? – THE APPLICABILITY OF THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS TO ABORIGINAL COMMUNITIES – AND, THE SOURCES OF FUNDING FOR THE NEW ORDER OF GOVERNMENT]]]

{LET'S CONSOLIDATE THE SOCIOLOGICAL DYNAMICS AND PROCESSES HERE} ==========>

RACIALIZATION OF THE INDIAN ACT ====> THE INDIAN ACT SERVED TO DIVIDE PEOPLE INTO ARBITRARY RACIAL CATEGORIES --- INDIAN AND NON-INDIAN --- AND THEN MANDATED DIFFERENT TREATMENT, DIFFERENT OBLIGATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES, AND DIFFERNETIAL ACCESS TO RESOURCES TO EACH GROUP === IN SO DOING, ARBITRARY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PEOPLE WERE ENCODED IN THE LAW, WHILE ALL DIFFERENCES AMONG THOSE PLACED IN EACH CATEGORY WERE MADE INVISIBLE.

EX: ====> SO IT WAS THAT MANY PEOPLE WHO CONSIDERED THEMSELVES MEMBERS OF ABORIGINAL SOCIETIES AND WHOSE PARENTS, BROTHERS, SISTERS AND COUSINS MAY HAVE BEEN CATEGORIZED AS ABORIGINAL WERE DEEMED NON-INDIAN ===> THIS RACIST CATEORIZATION WAS PROPELLED PRIMARILY THROUGH THE PATRIARCHAL IDEA: THAT SOCIETAL MEMBERSHIP OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN IS DETERMINED AND LEGITIMATED BY THEIR HUSBANDS AND FATHERS.

THE GENDERIZATIONOF THE INDIAN ACT ======> THE INDIAN ACT INCORPORATED THE WESTERN PATRIARCHAL LAW THAT CHILDREN ARE THE CHILDREN OF THEIR MOTHER’S HUSBAND ====> A NON-INDIAN WOMAN WHO MARRIES AN INDIAN MAN BECAME AN INDIAN, AS DO HER CHILDREN =====> AN INDIAN WOMEN WHO “MARRIES OUT” TO A NON-INDIAN MAN IS A NON-INDIAN AS IS HER CHILDREN =====> GIVEN THAT THE LAW WAS MADE MORE THAT TWO HUNDRED YEARS AFTER FIRST CONTACT (INCLUDING SEXUAL CONTACT) BETWEEN EUROPEANS AND ABORIGINALS, THE ATTEMPT TO FIGURE OUT WHO WAS AND WHO WAS NOT INDIAN “WOULD BE THE SUBJECT OFSATIRE IF IT HAD NOT HAD SUCH TRAGIC CONSEQUENCES ======> A NON-INDIAN COULD INCLUDE A PERSON WITH TWO ABORIGINAL PARENTS AS WELL AS ALL THOSE WITH NO ABORIGINAL ANCESTORS.

JUST AS THE INDIAN ACT DIVIDED AND CATEGORIZED PEOPLE, SO HAS THE RESISTANCE BY THOSE SEEKING TO SUSTAIN THE EXCLUSION OF WOMEN WHO MARRIED OUT. THE ASSEMBLY OF FIRST NATIONS (PRIMER AUTHORITY) ARGUED THAT “AS INDIAN PEOPLE, WE CANNOT AFFORD TO DEAL WITH INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS OVERRIDING COLLECTIVE RIGHTS” [QUOTED IN CANNON 1995: 98]

====> FIRST NATIONS LEADERSHIP USES THE ARGUMENT, FOR EXAMPLE, TO BLOCK ATTEMPTS BY ABORIGINAL WOMEN TO USE THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS (AND THUS THE CANADIAN STATE) TO SETTLE WHAT THE AFN PERCEIVES AS INTERNAL DISPUTES

THE PATERNALISM OF THE INDIAN ACT THE CONSTITUTIONAL RECOGNITION OF EXISTING ABORIGINAL AND TREAT RIGHTS (SECTION 35 OF THE CONSTITUTION ACT OF 1982, FOR EXAMPLE) HAS BEEN INTERPRETED PATERNALITICALLY SO THAT THE SOVEREIGHNTY OF THE CANADIAN STATE REMAINS INTACT ====> NOR HAVE ABORIGINAL LEADERS BEEN INCLUDED AS EQUAL MEMBERS IN CONSTITUTIONAL NEGOTIATIONS =====>

BUT THE MOVEMENT TO MORE INCLUSIVE DECISION MAKING HAS, IN FITS AND STARTS, BEEN UNDERWAY ====>

PARADOXICALLY, THE CANADIAN STATE --- AUTHOR OF THE COLONIZATION OF THE ABORIGIAL PEOPLE --- HAS SHOWN SIGNS OF HAVING THE CAPACITY (IF NOT THE WILL) TO RENEGOTIATE THOSE HISTORICAL RELATIONS OF INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION

(ASIDE: SOCIAL MOVEMENT FOR ABORIGINAL SELF-DETERMINATION --- HOW IS THIS DIFFERENT FROM OTHER SOCIAL ACTIVIST MOVEMENTS????? {MULTICULTUALISM, ANTI-RACISM, ANTI-GLOBALIZATION})

ABORIGINAL VOTING RIGHTS

SOCIOLOGIAL ASIDE {CONFUSION IN FLERAS' TEXT REGARDING “ABORIGINAL VOTING RIGHTS”} =====> FOR THE RECORD ======> METIS HAVE BEEN VOTING FOR MORE THAN A CENTURY, INUIT HAVE ONLY BEEN ALLOWED TO VOTE FEDERALLY SINCE 1950 AND STATUS INDIANS BEGAN VOTING IN 1960. ======>

SOCIOLOGICAL CAVEAT: A RECENT REPORT COMMISSIONED BY ELECTIONS CANADA FOUND THAT ON AVERAGE, THE TURNOUT AMONG ABORIGINAL VOTERS DURING FEDERAL ELECTIONS IS LOWER THAN OTHER CANADIANS.

EX: IN 2000, THE RATE ON RESERVES WAS 16 PERCENTAGE POINTS LOWER THAN THE GENERAL POPULATION.

THE AGENCY'S REPORT STATES IT HAS TAKEN MEASURES TO IMPROVE THOSE NUMBERS --- (1) IT HAS HIRED MORE ABORIGINALS TO WORK AS RETURNING OFFICERS, (2) SET UP MORE POLLING STATIONS ON RESERVES AND (3) BROUGHT IN ABORIGINAL LIAISONS TO WORK WITH RETURNING OFFICERS.

1The Mohawk community of Kanesatake is located on the north shore of the Lac des Deux Montagnes,

where it meets the Ottawa River, 53 km west of Montreal. The lands set aside for the Mohawks do not

constitute a reserve, and are interwoven with lands belonging to non-aboriginal people of the village and

parish of Oka. The surface area of Kanesatake is 1,142 hectares. The community also has access to

the Doncaster Reserve, an uninhabited territory of 7,900 hectares located 14 km north of Sainte

Agathe-des-Monts, north-west of Lac-des-Îles. The Doncaster Reserve is shared with the Mohawks of

Kahnawake.