THE ABORIGINAL SEARCH FOR “SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES”

 

SOCIOLOGICAL FACT: STATISTICS CANADA – THE AVERAGE INCOME OF FIRST NATIONS PEOPLE IS ABOUT 56 PER CENT OF THE CANADIAN AVERAGE, AND ROUGHLY 40 PER CENT LIVING BELOW THE POVERTY LINE, COMPARED WITH 12 PER CENT OF THE REST OF CANADIANS =====> {WHAT ABOUT?} LIFE CHANCES/ OPPORTUNITY STRUCTURE: ONE IN 10 ABORIGINAL CHILDREN IS IN FOSTER CARE, COMPARED TO ONE IN 200 NON-ABORIGINAL CHILDREN, AND THE AFN ARGUES THE PROBLEM IS EXACERBATED BECAUSE CHILD-WELFARE AGENCIES FOR FIRST NATIONS GET 22 PER CENT LESS MONEY THAN THOSE THAT DEAL WITH NON-ABORIGINAL CHILDREN, DESPITE DEEP POVERTY IN MANY ABORIGINAL COMMUNITIES.

APPLIED SOCIOLOGY PROBLEM: TOOLS FOR THE CREATION OF SOCIAL ARRANGEMENTS, SOCIAL FORMS, AND SOCIAL CONTEXT THAT ENCOURAGE SYNERGY {WIN-WIN} IN LIFE ====> CREATING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES IN WHICH PEOPLE FLOURISH.

SUSTAINABILITY [DEF'N] ======> A STRATEGY BY WHICH COMMUNITIES SEEK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT APPROACHES THAT ALSO BENEFIT THE LOCAL ENVIRONMENT AND QUALITY OF LIFE. FOR A COMMUNITY TO BE TRULY SUSTAINABLE, IT MUST ADOPT A THREE-PRONGED APPROACH THAT CONSIDERS ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES. COMMUNITIES MUST CONSIDER THESE NEEDS IN THE SHORT TERM AS WELL AS THE LONG TERM

(SOURCE: SMART COMMUNITIES NETWORK =============>

{{{WWW.SACTAQC.ORG/RESOURCES/PRIMERS/GLOSSARY_LAND_USE.HTM}}})

SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES ARE CHARACTERIZED BY ======> 1) TRANSPARENCY, 2) ACCOUNTABILITY, AND 3) SELF-DETERMINATION.

 

{WHAT PREVENTS SUSTAINABILITY IN ABORIGINAL COMMUNITIES?}

 

 

CONTEMPORARY CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ABORIGINAL AND NON-ABORIGINAL RELATIONSHIP IN CANADA {INHIBITING SUSTAINABILITY}

 

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

 

 

THE PUBLIC POLICY FORUM REPORT FOR 2005

 

INDIAN ACT THWARTS FIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT”

...

 

THE PUBLIC FORUM REPORT THESIS: THE INDIAN ACT IS "A PERVASIVE AND INVASIVE PIECE OF LEGISLATION," THE GOVERNMENT WOULD BE BETTER TO REPLACE IT WITH A SELF-GOVERNING ALTERNATIVE. IN TINKERING WITH THE ACT, OTTAWA IS TRYING TO FIX WHAT IS ESSENTIALLY THE COLONIAL THINKING OF 1860.

 

THE INDIAN ACT IS THWARTING DEVELOPMENT AMONG FIRST NATIONS AND MUST BE SCRAPPED IF THEY ARE TO CLOSE THE DRAMATIC ECONOMIC GAP BETWEEN THEM AND THE REST OF CANADIANS, A NEW REPORT SAYS.

 

THE REPORT, A RESULT OF CONSULTATIONS CONDUCTED BY THE PUBLIC POLICY FORUM WITH FIRST NATIONS AND GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES, SHEDS LIGHT ON REASONS BEHIND THE VIRTUALLY NON-EXISTENT ECONOMIES OF FIRST NATIONS.

 

THERE IS A STRONG DESIRE AMONG FIRST NATIONS "TO COME OUT FROM UNDER THE SMOTHERING CULTURE OF DEPENDENCY," BUT THE INDIAN ACT POSES THE MAJOR BARRIER TO THIS, THE REPORT SAYS.

 

{1} THE ACT SYSTEMATICALLY RESTRICTS THESE COMMUNITIES FROM USING THEIR PROPERTY TO GUARANTEE BANK LOANS — A CRUCIAL FIRST STEP IN A BUSINESS ENDEAVOUR, {GORDON SHANKS, EXECUTIVE IN RESIDENCE FOR THE PUBLIC POLICY FORUM}

 

{2} THE ACT ALSO FORCES NATIVES TO LEASE LAND FOR DEVELOPMENT FROM THE CROWN, A CONVOLUTED PROCESS THAT IS FRAUGHT WITH UNCERTAINTY AND DOES NOT KEEP UP WITH THE PACE OF BUSINESS, MR. SHANKS SAID, ADDING THAT THIS HAS RESULTED IN AN ANTI-RESERVE BIAS IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

 

 

THE REPORT ALSO RECOMMENDS THAT THE GOVERNMENT:

 

{1} MAKE LEADERS LEGALLY ACCOUNTABLE FOR FINANCES SO THAT THEIR COMMUNITIES SEE THE BENEFITS WHEN BUSINESSES PROSPER.

 

{2} CO-ORDINATE GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS AND DEPARTMENTS THAT DEAL WITH FIRST NATIONS (I.E. INDIAN AFFAIRS, HUMAN RESOURCES AND DEVELOPMENT AND INDUSTRY CANADA) TO MAKE THEM MORE USER-FRIENDLY. (THE CURRENT PATCHWORK FORCES PEOPLE TO SCRATCH FOR INFORMATION AS THEY TRY TO COBBLE TOGETHER BUSINESS PROPOSALS.)

 

{3} DEVELOP INFRASTRUCTURE. MANY OF THE RESERVES ARE IN REMOTE AREAS NORTH OF THE 55TH PARALLEL, WHERE THERE IS NO ACCESS TO ROADS OR ELECTRICITY GRIDS.

 

{4} AVOID CLAWING BACK PROFITS AS BUSINESSES THRIVE. {THIS IS A BIG CONCERN AMONG NATIVE COMMUNITIES, WHO FEAR THAT SUCCESS WILL LEAD THE GOVERNMENT TO REIN IN FUNDING.}

 

====================================================

 

{{{SOCIOLOGICAL QUESTION {POSED BY THE REPORT FOR LOCATING THE SOURCE OF ABORIGINAL AND NON-ABORIGINAL DISPARITIES}: IS THE SO-CALLED “INDIAN PROBLEM” IN ACTUALITY A “CANADIAN PROBLEM”?

 

SOCIAL FACT: ABORIGINAL PEOPLES DEFINE THEMSELVES AS DESCENDENTS OF THE ORIGINAL OCCUPANTS WHOSE COLLECTIVE AND INHERENT RIGHTS TO SELF-DETERMINATION OVER INTERNAL JURISDICTIONS HAVE NEVER BEEN EXTINGUISHED BUT REMAIN INTACT AS A BASIS FOR ENTITLEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT.

 

SOCIOLOGICAL QUESTION(S): [1] DO NON-ABORIGINAL CANADIANS HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS DEFINTION? [2] DO NON-ABORIGINAL CANADIANS HAVE A PROBLEM ACCEPTING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE “DISENFRANCHISEMENT”{DEF: A CONTEXT OF

DEPRIVATION AND STATE-INITIATED VIOLENCE OF THEIR LIVES} OF ABORIGINAL PEOPLE?

{FLERAS & FOSTER: IT IS CONVENIENT TO TALK ABOUT THE “INDIAN PROBLEM” OR REFER TO THE “GAP[S]” BETWEEN ABORIGINAL AND NON-ABORIGINAL LIFESTYLE AND ATTAINMENT === BUT === WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THIS IN A WIDER DISCOURSE OF “DISENFRANCHISEMENT” AND CREATED DEPENDENCY AND LEARNED HELPLESSNESS [FLERAS] === AND === WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT IT IN A WAY THAT PUTS BURDENS ON INSTITUTIONS SO THAT WHAT COMES UNDER THE MICROSCOPE ARE THE POLITICS, THE CULTURE, AND ECONOMICS OF DOMINATION}

 

 

{{{SOCIOLOGICAL SOLUTION {FOR REDRESSING DISCRIMINATION AND PROMOTING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY}: ========> THE “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}}}

THE DEBATE TODAY (FOR MOST PART) REVOLVES AROUND THE MAGNITUDE OF THESE RIGHTS RATHER THAN THEIR LEGITIMACY. THE CHALLENGE LIES IN FINDING A WORKING BALANCE BETWEEN ABORIGINAL RIGHTS TO SELF-DETERIMINING AUTONOMY WITH CANADA'S RIGHTS TO IMPOSE RULE OF LAW IN ADVANCING NATIONAL INTEREST [FLERAS, SP PP.323].

FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL AUTHORITIES TENDANCY TODAY IS TO SEE ABORIGINAL PEOPLE AS JUST ANOTHER “SPECIAL-INTEREST” GROUP (AND THEIR ASPIRATIONS AS CONTINGENT) TO BE CONTROLLED, APPEASED, AND ADMINISTERED

SOCIOLOGICAL NOTE: ABORIGINAL COMMUNITIES HAVE A DISTINCTIVE ETHNICITY EVEN THOUGH THE FIRST NATIONS REJECT LABELING AS A ETHNIC MINORITY – THEY ENDORSE THE STATUS OF A PEOPLE OR NATION. ====> {NOT AN INDEPENDENT NATION-STATE, BUT RATHER COLLECTIVES (1) WITH A RIGHT TO GOVERN SELVES, AND (2) IN PARTNERSHIP WITH CANADA}

 

{{{SOCIOLOGICAL ASIDE: ALL IN ALL, ABORIGINAL LIFE “TODAY” IS AN “OPPOSITIONAL PUBLIC SPHERE” {WITH OPPOSITIONAL DISCOURSES AND PRACTICES} ====> ENGAGED IN A CONCERTED CRITIQUE OF THE STRUCTURES OF DOMINATION THAT SHAPE THEIR LIVES AND SUPPRESS THEIR ASPIRATIONS =====> [THIS ENTAILS RADICAL RESTRUCTURING OF SOCIETY ALONG CONSTITUTIONAL LINES, CHANGING THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWER WITHIN A RECONSTITUTIONALIZED STATE]

 

Levels of Aboriginal Self-Governance

Statehood

*absolute (de jure) sovereignty

*internal + external jurisdiction

*complete independence with no external interference

 

Nationhood

*de facto sovereignty

*self-determining control over multiple yet interlinked jurisdictions within a framework of shared sovereignty

*nations within/province-like

 

Community/Municipality-based

*conditional sovereignty

*community-based autonomy

*internal jurisdictions, limited only by interaction with similar bodies and higher political authorities

 

Institutional

*nominal sovereignty

*decision-making power through institutional accommodation

*parallel institutions