Hi Friends
I think I'll talk about institutionalized racism. Examples abound.
School boards around the country have removed Tom Sawyer from the school shelves because of the "N" word appearing in print...yet nothing is said about the term Injin Joe, and in the fly leaf of this classic novel is a short afterward by George P. Elliott that states " Injin Joes depravity is satisfactorily explained by his race, he reappears in town where he is wanted for murder, by a sort of divinely retributive accident he dies with suitable horribleness:"
You have got to wonder why then isn't this derogatory term ever cited when all those politically correct people are pulling these unsavory novels from school shelves??
Even when the media of today focus on racist behavior it seems not to see the racism directed towards native.
Not long ago on one of those current affair shows the media was up in arm over the young singer Miley Cyrus and her friends making "Asian eyes" by pulling their eyes long with their fingers. In that very same clip there was a friend of hers in the same shot doing "war whop motions and using their fingers to approximate feathers" ( no one in the media reporting this bad behavior noticed... only the Asian eyes.)
Each year at Halloween the costume shops are full of native costumes with war paint and tomahawks etc. and this is just good fun. Let some one say they want to dress like any other culture though, and then you become the racist. This is institutionalized racism.
Racism that is so prevalent as to not raise an eyebrow. So common as to not draw attention...even in a media story about racism...
We as a community have lost too many women to this evil, too many young men to this evil,and disheartened too many youth to this evil.
The jails and graveyards are filling up at an alarming rate.
I think its odd to say the least that even "new Canadians" ( immigrants) are mis-informed about the tax free status of 1st. nation people yet. The Government issued citizenship tests make sure to point out the tax exempt status of the First nations, but not why we have it. Nor do is it made clear that this is not all First Nation peoples rights. All this land is still un ceded, its a treaty right. I view the tax free status as kind of like a rental income.
The double wampum treaty states that we were to share the land, each traveling on our own journey not
interfering with the other. We all know how thats going.
I've mentioned before that I do not live on reserve but still do reside in my traditional territory...yet I still pay income tax, sales tax and the gst,(soon to be harmonized, because the provincial gov. wasn't fiscally responsible) as do all off reserve native people,and not one word about it from our leadership. The AFN or the chiefs and councils (who by the way receive pay out from the provincial and federal governments, based on their populations),the majority of nearly all reserve populations are off reserve. Yet we remain under serviced and on some reserves unwelcome.
Can you practice racism against your own? We did with the enfranchised women, we do with their children and we continue to do so with their grandchildren.
Even the membership codes are discriminatory as I pointed out. The word membership implies it...meeting certain criteria, paying dues etc. Semantics suggests that citizenship ( a member of a nation) is a much more inclusive term, and that is institutionalized racism.
regards Debra
Friday, August 28, 2009
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Power to the people
Hi Friends
Today I think I will talk about the sense of powerlessness some 1st. nations people feel. Recently at a membership meetings I was told that to institute a membership code the reserve must get a 75% vote passed or INAC (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada) won't except it. Indian Act rules. When I asked when was the last time the reserve tried to make a code, I was told there had been two previous attempts but there was never enough votes to pass it. My next question was: 75% of on reserve or 75% of all (on and off reserve) members? I was told then they can't use the term off reserve?? so it therefore must be the entire membership that votes. So now am I the only one who sees that the entire process is stacked against the nation taking power over whomever they want to call a citizen? Thats right the Gov. of Canada has decided for the 1st. Nations who their citizens are. The only way the Nations can choose to recognize their own is through a citizenship code...The Gov. says the Nations can make their own codes,then set unattainable majority rules in place to thwart the best efforts of the various Nations. This from a political party that was elected into office with the lowest voter turn-out ever recorded? I think it was something like 35% of Canadians voted in the last election!! Hippocracy is what the 1st. nations have to live with...or do they? It's been reported that we are the fastest growing population in the country. Here's an idea Iet's unite. At least your off reserve and on reserve members. Did any one ever get rich with the monies from Ottawa? I know a few Chiefs and some councilors who may have profited while in office but rich??? Now quit being afraid of your own and get together to lift our nations up. Now there are quite a few out there who can only be described as self haters either passing, or mistreating your selves. I have knowledge of some right in my own family. To these people I can only say, don't give so much power to strangers. If some one wants to disrespect you on the grounds of your heritage, skin colour, or language, there is very little to be done about that. As long as you know all there is to know about your culture this can go a long way in shielding you from these haters. Know that these lands were NOT traded away for a handful of beads. Know that our chiefs dealt nation to nation with the new comers, and that it has been the white governments that have proven over and over again that they can't be trusted to keep their word. We were also a clean people and that it was diseases that impacted the Nations hardest. We also were using medicines to treat our sick while the whites were still practicing bleeding the ill in effort to heal them. Our contributions have been many and we can still contribute as long as you can get over the self doubt and embrace the challenges of the future.Take pride in all that we as Nations have accomplished, medicine, art, sport, music etc. My advice to all do not stand on the side lines, jump in. We can all make a contribution to the betterment of our nation. Maybe even reach back and help another up. To all the disreputable chiefs and councils out there, that is not our way. The native governments of old had leaders(not rulers) and a genuine concern for ALL their people. This so impressed the invaders that the American constitution was modeled on OUR systems of good governance.
regards Debra
Today I think I will talk about the sense of powerlessness some 1st. nations people feel. Recently at a membership meetings I was told that to institute a membership code the reserve must get a 75% vote passed or INAC (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada) won't except it. Indian Act rules. When I asked when was the last time the reserve tried to make a code, I was told there had been two previous attempts but there was never enough votes to pass it. My next question was: 75% of on reserve or 75% of all (on and off reserve) members? I was told then they can't use the term off reserve?? so it therefore must be the entire membership that votes. So now am I the only one who sees that the entire process is stacked against the nation taking power over whomever they want to call a citizen? Thats right the Gov. of Canada has decided for the 1st. Nations who their citizens are. The only way the Nations can choose to recognize their own is through a citizenship code...The Gov. says the Nations can make their own codes,then set unattainable majority rules in place to thwart the best efforts of the various Nations. This from a political party that was elected into office with the lowest voter turn-out ever recorded? I think it was something like 35% of Canadians voted in the last election!! Hippocracy is what the 1st. nations have to live with...or do they? It's been reported that we are the fastest growing population in the country. Here's an idea Iet's unite. At least your off reserve and on reserve members. Did any one ever get rich with the monies from Ottawa? I know a few Chiefs and some councilors who may have profited while in office but rich??? Now quit being afraid of your own and get together to lift our nations up. Now there are quite a few out there who can only be described as self haters either passing, or mistreating your selves. I have knowledge of some right in my own family. To these people I can only say, don't give so much power to strangers. If some one wants to disrespect you on the grounds of your heritage, skin colour, or language, there is very little to be done about that. As long as you know all there is to know about your culture this can go a long way in shielding you from these haters. Know that these lands were NOT traded away for a handful of beads. Know that our chiefs dealt nation to nation with the new comers, and that it has been the white governments that have proven over and over again that they can't be trusted to keep their word. We were also a clean people and that it was diseases that impacted the Nations hardest. We also were using medicines to treat our sick while the whites were still practicing bleeding the ill in effort to heal them. Our contributions have been many and we can still contribute as long as you can get over the self doubt and embrace the challenges of the future.Take pride in all that we as Nations have accomplished, medicine, art, sport, music etc. My advice to all do not stand on the side lines, jump in. We can all make a contribution to the betterment of our nation. Maybe even reach back and help another up. To all the disreputable chiefs and councils out there, that is not our way. The native governments of old had leaders(not rulers) and a genuine concern for ALL their people. This so impressed the invaders that the American constitution was modeled on OUR systems of good governance.
regards Debra
Saturday, August 22, 2009
righting the wrong
Hi friends
I've been trying to engage off reserve people in politically sensitive issues. I truly want to get beyond the stereo-types...I've been mistreated more then you...
As I mentioned in a previous blog we are now living in the Indian vs Indian times. Such controversy surrounds the re-en-statement of native rights to the enfranchised mothers ( or the Act to Amend the Indian Act) that the children of the mothers got only watered down status, and their grandchildren no status at all. That is how it remains today as I write this. The Gov. of Canada has said it does not plan to oppose Ms. McIvor any further
and would look into the quickest way to address the discrimination against the enfranchised womens children. To me a straight forward method of doing this would be to simply go back to the original amendment and grant the women entitlement to pass status to their spouses and viola, done. Too easy I guess. The most disconcerting thing I deal with is the Indian Act, and the willingness of the native communities to soldier on under it's oppression. This is mainly due ( in my opinion) to the transfer payments from Ottawa and the Provinces being tied to it. The phrase "divide and conquer" springs to mind. I think Hollywood said it best in the movie gangs of New York...(for those who haven't seen this movie) there is a scene in it where the ruling class men are discussing the up rising of the Irish and the Italians, and ultimately what to do about it...When one jolly old guy laughs heartily and says..."thats easy, you pay one group to kill off the other"...
Casinos, diamonds, and hydro electric plants on select reserves very effectively does just this...guess who's paid to eradicate whom...and the Gov. keeps arms length from the destruction.
regards Debra
I've been trying to engage off reserve people in politically sensitive issues. I truly want to get beyond the stereo-types...I've been mistreated more then you...
As I mentioned in a previous blog we are now living in the Indian vs Indian times. Such controversy surrounds the re-en-statement of native rights to the enfranchised mothers ( or the Act to Amend the Indian Act) that the children of the mothers got only watered down status, and their grandchildren no status at all. That is how it remains today as I write this. The Gov. of Canada has said it does not plan to oppose Ms. McIvor any further
and would look into the quickest way to address the discrimination against the enfranchised womens children. To me a straight forward method of doing this would be to simply go back to the original amendment and grant the women entitlement to pass status to their spouses and viola, done. Too easy I guess. The most disconcerting thing I deal with is the Indian Act, and the willingness of the native communities to soldier on under it's oppression. This is mainly due ( in my opinion) to the transfer payments from Ottawa and the Provinces being tied to it. The phrase "divide and conquer" springs to mind. I think Hollywood said it best in the movie gangs of New York...(for those who haven't seen this movie) there is a scene in it where the ruling class men are discussing the up rising of the Irish and the Italians, and ultimately what to do about it...When one jolly old guy laughs heartily and says..."thats easy, you pay one group to kill off the other"...
Casinos, diamonds, and hydro electric plants on select reserves very effectively does just this...guess who's paid to eradicate whom...and the Gov. keeps arms length from the destruction.
regards Debra
Saturday, August 15, 2009
debra-rezervations
hi friends.
I'm new to blogging, but am assured that if I feel that I have something to say this is the best way to get things off my chest.
First things first...hopefully my title will tell you that I'm a First Nation woman. I also do not live on a reserve.
I grew up in the times of Cowboys vs Indians and now find my self living in the time of Indians vs Indians. My mother was enfranchised (baned from her home reserve) when she married my father in 1939 and moved with him to a white town 150 miles away. She was a shy woman who was openly discriminated against by her in-laws and towns people alike. I can remember school children war-whooping at us as we did the grocery shopping. I also remember her being admonished to have her 1/2 breeds keep their dirty hands off the merchandise, unless she was buying it...nobody wants something you lot have been touching.My mother (or any Indian, for that matter) ran the very real risk of being arrested if they went into any establishment that had a liquor license, unless accompanied by a white person. It was against the law to sell liquor to Indians, according to the Indian Act. I also remember going to see my Granny and various relatives on the rez only to be told we needed a pass- book and needed to give an exact time when we would be leaving. The one time the car broke down before we were retrieved from Gran's house we were escorted to the end of the rez to wait off reserve land to be picked-up. This was by the order of the Indian Agent, a government employee who lived on reserve to enforce these laws. Why did the Chiefs allow their enfranchised women to be treated so badly? Why did't they fight for these women? Well again the Indian Act said that no native person would be allowed to hire a lawyer and that would be the way things stayed till the 1960's. That was my last visit there till long after my mothers passing and the law was changed and she was given her status back,as well as her children. But not her grandchildren. My Uncles who married out (the term for native/non-native marriages) had given status to their wives and any minor children they brought to the marriage. This was the govt. policy of paternal rule.
So when the act, to ammend the Indian act (a racist document that many 1st. nation people live under even to this day) was passed in 1985 after many years of court battles fought on grounds of sex discrimination I too got a status card, but one hitch not my children. None of the enfranchised womens grandchildren would be recognized. Enter Sharon McIvor. Sharon took a court challenge on the grounds of sex discrimination, citing the paternal rule, (men who married out till around the 1970s, still passed their their status to their wives) and thus she (as did many others across the country still had white in-laws, and their children with status, but not her children) She won in the lower courts and was on her way to the highest court in the land when all of the sudden the Harper Government cancelled the court challenges program. Now the court challenge program is at the very heart of democrocy. If the citizenery isn't allowed to bring legal challenge against their Governments, then that assumes that the Government is infalliable, and then we live not in a democory but a dictarorship. The Aboriginal Women's Association then got behind the court challenge and began fund raising to continue the fight for an end to the discrimanation of aboriginal women. Then in late June of this year the minister of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada Chuck Strul made the announcement that they will be consulting with the AFN (Assembly of First Nations) and the Aboriginal Women's Association through out the summer to address this issue, and set the month of April 2010 as the time they should start to give status to the second generation.
regards debra
I'm new to blogging, but am assured that if I feel that I have something to say this is the best way to get things off my chest.
First things first...hopefully my title will tell you that I'm a First Nation woman. I also do not live on a reserve.
I grew up in the times of Cowboys vs Indians and now find my self living in the time of Indians vs Indians. My mother was enfranchised (baned from her home reserve) when she married my father in 1939 and moved with him to a white town 150 miles away. She was a shy woman who was openly discriminated against by her in-laws and towns people alike. I can remember school children war-whooping at us as we did the grocery shopping. I also remember her being admonished to have her 1/2 breeds keep their dirty hands off the merchandise, unless she was buying it...nobody wants something you lot have been touching.My mother (or any Indian, for that matter) ran the very real risk of being arrested if they went into any establishment that had a liquor license, unless accompanied by a white person. It was against the law to sell liquor to Indians, according to the Indian Act. I also remember going to see my Granny and various relatives on the rez only to be told we needed a pass- book and needed to give an exact time when we would be leaving. The one time the car broke down before we were retrieved from Gran's house we were escorted to the end of the rez to wait off reserve land to be picked-up. This was by the order of the Indian Agent, a government employee who lived on reserve to enforce these laws. Why did the Chiefs allow their enfranchised women to be treated so badly? Why did't they fight for these women? Well again the Indian Act said that no native person would be allowed to hire a lawyer and that would be the way things stayed till the 1960's. That was my last visit there till long after my mothers passing and the law was changed and she was given her status back,as well as her children. But not her grandchildren. My Uncles who married out (the term for native/non-native marriages) had given status to their wives and any minor children they brought to the marriage. This was the govt. policy of paternal rule.
So when the act, to ammend the Indian act (a racist document that many 1st. nation people live under even to this day) was passed in 1985 after many years of court battles fought on grounds of sex discrimination I too got a status card, but one hitch not my children. None of the enfranchised womens grandchildren would be recognized. Enter Sharon McIvor. Sharon took a court challenge on the grounds of sex discrimination, citing the paternal rule, (men who married out till around the 1970s, still passed their their status to their wives) and thus she (as did many others across the country still had white in-laws, and their children with status, but not her children) She won in the lower courts and was on her way to the highest court in the land when all of the sudden the Harper Government cancelled the court challenges program. Now the court challenge program is at the very heart of democrocy. If the citizenery isn't allowed to bring legal challenge against their Governments, then that assumes that the Government is infalliable, and then we live not in a democory but a dictarorship. The Aboriginal Women's Association then got behind the court challenge and began fund raising to continue the fight for an end to the discrimanation of aboriginal women. Then in late June of this year the minister of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada Chuck Strul made the announcement that they will be consulting with the AFN (Assembly of First Nations) and the Aboriginal Women's Association through out the summer to address this issue, and set the month of April 2010 as the time they should start to give status to the second generation.
regards debra
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)