Colonization as a Global Experience: Theories of Colonization, Conquest and Extinction 08/09/2011 17:39:00

Movie Review: Disease hit Wampanoag the hardest, so weakened their power in relation to other First Nations groups in the areas, and so teamed up with the Europeans to try and even out balance of power Opened up space for Europeans to come in. o Religious: Bible suggested their would be empty space, and interpreted it as divine intervention Religious o European: Moral authority to act on behalf of the Wampanog, claim jurisdiction on behalf of god and thus the church Assimilation in Church camps, active conversion goals, while not so much on the part of the Wampanog Wampom: o Viewed as currency by Europeans as a currency o Wampom has important cultural role in agreement making, that ensured that the agreement would be sacred, and not able to be broken o Different understanding of the nature of the agreement o First example of treaty type agreements Perceptions of threat o Relationship between the women o Europeans brought women and children which in Wampanog society implies that they werent going to be violent, because Wampanog wouldnt involve women and children in war o Europeans viewed as savage because of pre-emptive raids on entire communities o Wampanog viewed as savage due to lack of European style clothing and abode Surprises in movie: o Wampanog initially pitied the Puritan settlers o Speed at which settlers arrived o European power dynamics:

Puritans couldnt go back to England, they would either make it or die Huge population growth, where they werent totally able to keep up Lots of turmoil and power shifts between empires French, English, Dutch, Spanish influences in the south

Key points: o One of the first English experiments with treaty making Ambiguous how successful it is Interplay between two impulses on English side Assimilation, Conquer, Demand, Domination Treaty, Compromise et English never able to totally sort out which way they are going to go o Prof: This uncomfortable interplay between two sides continues until today on behalf of the English settlers, continues to be unresolved

Colonization The acquisition by a nation of other territories and their peoples, in the case of indigenous peoples in North America, we look at European Colonization European Colonization A political and economic phenomenon where European countries explored, conquered, settled and exploited other territories Not all countries did this in the same way Why do nations colonize Exploit natural resources o Out of it domestically, and go to seek it elsewhere Create new markets for the colonizing country o China market so many people there, they will buy more of our stuff Expand living space for colonizers population o Not enough room, so expand elsewhere (ie. North American situation)

Extend colonizers way of life (more European) o Eg. Puritans Extend civilization to backward peoples (more European) o Evangelical aspects of Christianity may be a pretty strong drive of this aspect Types of Colonization Exploitative o Profit o Expansion of power o Religious conversion Settler o Expand power o Profit o Escape tyranny and oppression o Religious conversion The two broad categories overlap in many areas Different Models of European Colonization Spanish o Attempted to put themselves at the head of existing power structures o Hierarchical societies o Local/centralized urban style areas missions Would encourage people to move to these areas o Mercantile economy Came looking for gold Set up sugar/slave trade o Business, exploitative style

Portuguese o Similar to Spanish o More economically driven, less conversion/forced assimilations French o South: large plantations, slave trade o Quebec: integrationist o Nature of the resources there is no such thing of a beaver mine so you need to work with local populations, because you cant concentrate the population in a single area Dutch o Very privatized, decentralized, high reliance on companies o Dutch East India Company

English o More decentralized, privatized, not necessarily sent by the crown o Hudsons Bay Company o Reliance on legal structures Importance of honor codes to culture Want a legal legitimacy to back them Leads to the difficulty defining how they are going to interact Doctrine of Discovery - one of the first international law An international legal principle which enabled colonization Provided legal justification for governmental and property claims over territories and inhabitants Justified by religious and ethnocentric ideas of European superiority Europeans who arrived first in new territories gained property, governmental, political and commercial rights Origins of the Doctrine of Discovery Crusades -11th century

o Claim the holy land for Christendom 1400s Series of Papal Bulls o Spanish/Portuguese conflict over who has the right to which territory, so they ask the pope to sort it out o Which part of the world belongs to Spain, to Portugal o Pope says: whoever got their first, whoever discovered it, only Europeans counted Elements of Doctrine First discovery European o Discovery creates titles, full sovereignty Occupancy and possession o IN order to establish claim of discovery, you had to stay there and create a form of presence, to fully claim sovereignty o If you could claim the mouth of a river, you could claim the entire watershed Preemption o Who ever is in control, has the sole right to buy land from the local people Indian Title o Related to #1 and #2 o After discovery, native people automatically lose full title and sovereignty over their lands o Retain rights to use and occupy the land, but no longer sovereignty, and it could last forever, until there is an agreement for succession Tribal limited sovereignty and commercial rights o Rights are only at the pleasure of the European power Contiguity o Watershed example o You have dominion over reasonable amount of related land Terra Nullius o Aka. Vacant Land

o Basic Foundation of Doctrine: if Europeans arent there, the land is legally empty Christianity o Pope defines it o By European meant Christian countries o Some sense a duty to colonize Civilization o Civilized countries are Christian o Superiority of European civilization, so its a blessing/privilege that they bring their culture to other lands Conquest o Military victory is considered an automatic transfer of

sovereignty Importance of Flags (1490s) Flag symbolizes all of the elements of Doctrine of Discovery Become central to the European colonization experiences Peoples all over the world operated with the same set of values, but the Europeans codified it Efforts to Repudiate Doctrine of Discovery Never been officially overturned UN Declaration Quakers Episcopal Church Presbyterian Church Parliament of the Worlds Religions United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues 2010

Terminology

08/09/2011 17:39:00

Teacher- Nation: Anishinabe, Language: Ojibwe, Tribe/Band: Lake Superior Band of Ojibwe, Reserve: Keweena Bay Aboriginal yes In Canadian context includes First Nations, Inuit and Mtis Native - yes Indian (status vs. non-status) non-status in Canada Native American - yes American Indian yes (older term) First Nation (s)/Inuit/Mtis Capitalize or not?? Personal preference, just please be consistent First Nations, Inuit, Mtis, Aboriginal - Always Indian if talking about legal/political status Indigenous Used in a global setting for a political purpose Why is definition so difficult: Everybody is indigenous somewhere, so why do some people qualify while others do not. Several indigenous groups havent been there all that long, or may not be the original groups there o Eg. Maori in New Zealand, only been there for 400 years or so more than the European settlers A universalizing term that overlooks individual experience, vast variation in circumstances Indigenous vs. ethnic minorities Tribal vs. indigenous Are settlers indigenous?

States want to narrow definition; Indigenous people want broad definition Difficult to figure out who arrived first in Asia, Africa and Europe

UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Passed in 2007, after 30 year struggle at the UN No definition of indigenous in the declaration, entirely based on selfidentification o State resistance to a lack of a definition o HUGE victory of indigenous peoples UN working definition of elements of indignity 1. Pre-colonial presence o easy in North America, not in Asia/Europe/Africa 2. Continuous cultural linguistic and/or social distinctiveness o more difficult in North America 3. Self-identification and/or recognition by other indigenous peoples All 3 categories are very subjective, and leads to very little clarity on these issues Missing category: connection to land/territory/geography, left out, victory on the state side

Indigenous People of the World More than 300 million people worldwide 6% of global population Live on 6 continents More than 5000 distinct peoples in 72 countries

Global Distribution from 1990 Asia 80% South America 7% North America 6% Africa 4% Australia/Oceania 3% Europe 0.1% Countries With Indigenous Majority Populations Greenland Guatemala Bolivia Mongolia Vanuatu Western Samoa Kiribati Nauru Indigenous populations over 1 million Canada USA Much of Asia Central Africa Western S. American What do they have in common Discrimination/Marginalization Assimilation

Discourse

08/09/2011 17:39:00

Definition: a particular way of representing ideas and the relations between them

A group of statements which provide a language for talking about o i.e. a way of representing a particular kind of knowledge about a topic A way of constructing knowledge Limits the way a topic can be constructed Foucault 20th century French social theorist Statements work together in discursive formation Discourse implicates practice Discursive practice o the practice of producing meaning All social practices have meaning, therefore all practices have a discursive aspect There are no facts about the social, political or morals world o Look for the meaning instead o 1. Power has the ability to make things true

power produces knowledge o 2. Discourse is one of the systems through which power circulates Discourse produces knowledge which constitutes power o Those who produces discourse have the power to make it true Brantlinger Social Darwinism o The doom of primitive races cause by the fatal impact with white Western civilization

o Disappearance is inevitable Causes of Extinction o 1. Violence o 2. Disease o 3. Savage Customs Self-exterminating savage

Extinction Discourse According to the discourse, the extinction of Indigenous peoples is o Inevitable o Self-fulfilling o Universal

Restalls Challenge to Dominant Discourses Surrounding Indigenous Peoples Localized nature of native responses to the Spanish Local identities remain paramount Denial of native defeat, sometimes inverted it Native exploitation of Spanish Borrowing from Spanish characterized as local Tenaciously sought ways to continue local ways of life and improve the quality of life Discourse of evolution, adaptation

Exclusion of Indigenous Peoples from Decolonization 08/09/2011 17:39:00

International law was both a universalizing discourse and a form of cultural imperialism that defined the normative foundations for the society of states creates by the expansion of Europe Paul Keal What does this mean? How can international law function as a universalizing discourse and a form of cultural imperialism? International Law and the Primacy of States Treaty of Westphalia (1648) invented modern state system and international law International law privileges states over all other structures International law as it emerged/been practiced over the centuries was closely connected to narrative of empire, imperialism, colonialism, racism Henderson Indigenous peoples as primal anarchy, other Hobbes Congress of Vienna (1814-15): Indigenous peoples as non-persons in international law, they were exempted from it Modernization Definition: the adoption of European ideas and values Inevitable Means throwing off tradition and adopting a market based economy, nation state government, laws and Western culture Indigenous Peoples Challenge the framework, worldview (the binary of state vs. other) Want to maintain varied aspects of own traditions, values, etc., while still understanding that states are there in international law UN Decolonization Adopted paradigm of the nation state Blind to Indigenous systems of governance Excluded Indigenous Peoples Decolonization = Independent, territorial, sovereign statehood for former colonies Nation = state, still worked in the binary

Early International Indigenous Activists Deskaheh First Nations group w/ treaties with USA and Canada that werent being recognized, went to League of Nations to settle dispute, told was not a state, and should go home and work it out with Canada T.W. Ratana Maori activist from New Zealand o Treaty signed in 1840 not being respected by 1850, so early 1920s, was told by League of Nations the same thing as re. Canada History of Decolonization League of Nations (1920s) o Deskaheh (1923) o Ratana (1925) o Turned away Domestic concerns UN Charter (1945) o Peoples have inherent right of self-determination o inherent rights govt cant give them or take them away o Peoples left undefined o Meant: self-determination means the right of peoples to independent framework, maintaining statehood framework o Belgian Thesis: Extend right of self-determination to Indigenous peoples living within nation-states USA, CANADA, NZ, AUS no, we mean colonies outside the territories The Indigenous Exclusion 1960: UN condemns colonization, launches decolonization efforst Decolonization emanates from principle of self-determination Salt Water Thesis o Self-determination applies only to overseas colonies, those lying over salt water o Indigenous peoples specifically exempted from decolonization o Indigenous peoples not peoples but now domestic populations Movement to include Indigenous peoples in decolonization, with the right of self-determination Until today: Indigenous peoples use the term peoples,

governments use the term populations

Guest Speaker: Larry Grant Musqueam Elder 08/09/2011 17:39:00

Larry Grant - Musqueam elder and language instructor at UBC Born & raised with a Musqueam identity Gives a short speech in Musqueam: My name is Larry Grant, I come from Musqueam, my ancestors were here to greet first people Land Point Grey to Lions Bay to Indian Arm to Maple Ridge to Fort Langley to Tsawassen Capt. Vancouver arrives ad sees many empty villages because of disease which came across north America from the south and the southeast During the 1500s-1700s Explorer mandate to claim and occupy land People have been on delta since last ice age, starting from Fraser Canyon and the mouth of the river used to be at the Port Mann bridge St. Mungo site Musqueam interpretation centre at the south footing for the Alex Fraser bridge Identity People can from the land and those colonizing When south footing going in, asked for it to be moved to protect archeological site, ignored to protect the Sudbury House colonial era pub Disregarding the importance of what was there, disrespect to first peoples, not able to collect evidence to corroborate oral history Maori have stories of travel to arrive where they did Musqueam have no stories of travel, journeys to arrive where they are. History of their people has them as always being there Oral society Stories repeated many many ties to ensure history passed down Chose to remember, disregard Every family has a historian who takes stories from older generations and remembers them. Ability is recognized at a young age, child who is able to remember and maintain those stories Genealogy, cultural activity, geography Not common practice in western society, oral history not accepted unless it is written down

Everyones biases will come out in their stories, including Mr. Grants. There are things that people forget, but there is no manual to look them up in, people fact check against and collaborate with other family members Meetings Hang up your anger, your differences, outside the door, we are here to learn something When a speaker is designated at an event, they become the historian by default, there to relay the message of the host o Diplomatic o Removed from the hosts concerns, so able to present them calmly o The host does not fill this role because they are too close to the issue, and anger could more easily come out Unlike the Speaker of the House, no agenda, no opinion. They are a speaking tool Almost always male, because of the power of the voice & presence of speaker, but it is occasionally a woman o No a reflection of society, which is bilateral, not maternal or paternal. Connections to many communities up and down the coast

Larry Grants Story Summer spent fishing with aunty and great uncle who didnt speak English. Spoke different dialect on moms side of the family Not status, went to public school. Eng of grade 8 went to family for 2-4 years to learn about family. Wanted to make sure he could continue to go to school o When he came home he was speaking the other dialect and got in trouble. Told to speak Musqueam instead because language is an important part of identity and who you are o English doesnt define who you are if it isnt your first language Defines what resources you have in your territory, plants, animals, stories, creation stories. Able to scientifically tear both apart but they are important to all peoples Orative stories

Myths. Musqueam stories have them always here. Great-grandparents still alive with their stories o Many young people not aware of them, as it takes a complete community to raise a child, not just an individual family o This is what the residential school system did, assimilation to English boys and girls Outlawed language central identity factor o Post-residential school, kids would come home and argue with elders about the truth of their stories No words for god, angel, devil, heaven, hell in the Musqueam language o Society has been around 7000 years more than the bible, there

is no identity with a single person-god-creator o There are stories about many different things, all transformation stories are in a sense creation stories Wreck Beack transformation story o Site of fresh water and someone divided them, wasnt going to share it o 2 rocks there, 1 larger, 1 smaller NAIPA North American Indian Phonetic Alphabet used for writing because ther are unique Musqueam sounds Must be spelt properly or ignoring identity Eg. Robby Burns and his moon licht nicht (moonlit night) Musqueam Story Dont go to the boy at now 25th and Camosun o 2 headed serpent that will try to entice you, sounds like a mallard duck o if you hear the loud duck, dont go near o eventually runs out of food because the local people dont go there o went to the sea to ear, so heavy it created Musqueam creek o its poop killed all plants, and new ones grew a year later Little nuances get lost in translation, lost parts of identities there too Personal identity I am from Musqueam

Born in Agassiz in the middle of the night during hops harvesting o 2-3 months premature, unusual to live at the time Everyone worked for Grandfather, all money went to him to care of all o Put in a shoebox, mom allowed to stay with him 24 hours a day, normally would go right back to work after birth Grew up with grandparents in Musqueam Spent a couple of year in reserve on south side of New West o Only aboroginals could live on reserve Dad is a farmer from China, arrangedish marriage, courted in-laws o Dad couldnt live with mom on the reserve because of Indian Act. Grew up in a family kept apart by law, essentially a single parent family o When parents married (4 years old), became non-status and didnt go to residential school, went to public school o Went to school in China town at the Chinese Presbyterian church, then Strathcona (DTES), VanTech grad 1955 Fairly long commute to Van Tech from Musqueam 2 kinds of discrimination o Musqueam identity (family, stories, culture) Canadian governent said not Indian, but Chinese, no residential school for you Now viewed as a god-send, and going to public school with a wide selection of different immigrants o Saw all types of social stratification (much in part of colonization) Purpose: individual affluence and empire powers akin to todays multinational corporations, benefit of the few, not the many o Before Residential schools, egalitarianism central to Musqueam teachings. Rich person is the one who shares the most 2 types of riches physical resources, oral traditions o If it was all about me, I wouldnt be here to share my story with you How to understand government control of identity

o Asked mom: youre considered different o Looking Asian during WWII, cowboys & Indians dynamic (wanted to be John Wayne, why always on the losing side) Status o 1975 status reinstated after 20 year court battle

Dr. Coulthards Lecture - Recognition 17:39:00

08/09/2011

Indigenous peoples and the politics of recognition in Canada The turn to recognition: a political history of aboriginal rights in Canada Arguement Since 1969, the colonial relationship as shifted from a domination/assimilation structure to one that is maintained through granting aboriginal rights in a very limited way o Colonial relationship is facilitated through the granting of rights to aboriginal people What the state structure gives to people, not necessarily what the want/require Rights in 3 areas o Rights to lands Territorial rights o Rights to self-government Political rights o Economic rights Economically benefit from land development What is a colonial relationship o Chracterized by domination o Power (economic, gender, racial and state power, capitalism) has been secured into an unequal relationship between indigenous and non indigenous people, as represented by the state o End goal : disposition of indigenous peoples of their lands and self-governing authority over that land Canada needs land for state-formation, economic development, settlement o Canada has to gain land from indigenous peoples Originally through state muscle (1800s onwards) Unilateral action on/over indigenous peoples for the purpose of dispossession Now through treaties Land central to the relationship in Canada

Indian Act o End goal: creates legal category of Indians, and then proceeds through its policies to eliminate them as a distinct entity. Get rid of Indians o Get rid of them through assimilation as legally and culturally different o Once you get rid of Indians, you dont have the Indian land question anymore, and then you can proceed land settlement o Indian people didnt want to assimilate, which is why it wasnt the quick process as anticipated by the government, but still an issue today

The turn to recognition more subtle colonial relationship The White Paper -1969 o Get rid of the Indian Act (Trudeau and Chretien) Protection of individuals as equal under the law Dangers: group rights in Quebec and First Nations, collective self-determination rights Super-individualist understanding with rights and liberalism Problems of Indigenous communities stemmed from the fact that Indians were treated unequally in the law Saw Indian act as discriminating against Indian people (true) and that this was the source of their trouble Views as a simple legal discrimination issue Simplistic terms = simplistic solutions o Blanket Legal and Political Assimilation for Status Indians Indian Act and constitutional basis for differentiation would be eliminated Remove Indian act BA 1867 amended so Indians no longer seen as government responsibility Canada would publicly recognize First Nations contribution to Canadian culture Within the framework of Canadian state

First Nations should receive services from the same channels as all other Canadians 91.24 of BNA Federal govt has jurisdiction over Indians and land reserved for them eliminate this

Control of Indian lands (reserves) handed over to Indians in the form of private property o Get ride of legislation that legally distinguishes them from other Canadians, and absorbing them o Maybe positive in theory Trudeau viewed as making people more equal, promote equality Repeals a bad, racist, colonial piece of legislation o Potential bad First Nations people not consulted, dominant culture assumes what is best for the childlike native population o First cause for First Nations political unilateral action, as ultimate endgame of assimilation and dispossession Amount of political pressure, white paper formally shelved in 1971 The Calder Decision -1973 o Supreme court decision about Nishgas Nation in north-western British Columbia About aboriginal title: ownership and jurisdiction over land Deciding if the Nishga hold title to their lands SCC rules against the Nishga 4-3 o The Nishga lost, but the way they lost is important 3 rules that they had title, but it had since been legal extinguished by the crown assumption that native peoples arent equal, and dont have the same rights as European peoples Doctrine of Discovery/Terra Nullius 3 rules that they still held title to the lands in questions because it had NOT been legally extinguished by the Crown No treaties Canada: Real estate transactions Natives: Establishment of nation-to-nation relationships

1 ruled against Nishga based on a technical question not specifically related to the content of the case o Question that remained open: There was such a thing as aboriginal title that needed to be dealt with in some way Explicitly recognized as something The Paulette Decision and the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline 1973 o Like Calder, but in NWT o Put forward by the Indian Brotherhood of the NWT (now the Dene Nation) To stop a pipeline going from tar sands up the Mackenzie valley Filed caveat with land registry in NWT We have some interest in the land proposed for development Crown felt it had already been dealt with in earlier treaties Justice felt that they werent going to resolve this in court, so put together a commission about the nature of treaties and their nation-to-nation relationship Still fresh oral history of Treaty 11 and 8 o Ruled that Dene have interest in land claims and have indigenous rights o Suggested that Dene title was never extinguished by signing Treaties in 8 and 11 (1908 and 1921) o Re-opened the question of existing Aboriginal land rights in the NWT o Went back to the Supreme Court Lost, but only because it shouldnt have made it to the Supreme Court, but didnt mention any issues of land claims, so that remained valid The Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry 1975-1977 o Big oil/gas reservoir discovered in Alaska during oil crisis Govt wanted access and decide to build a pipeline to do so Same issues as with the Keystone pipeline now

Evironmental, outside influence etc. o Established to look into the environmental/social intersts of the proposed MPV Because of Calder and Paulette, govt needed to address these issues actively o Appointed Berger to investigate issues about the pipeline, and held consultation around the territory Combined with scientific evidence and indigienous testimony about social, cultural impact and environmental impact Called for a 10 year moratorium on the construction of the MVP Goal that it would give enough time to deal with land claims o Forced the issue of land claims into the public eye The Comprehensive Claims Policy: In all Fairness o Fundamental change in how Canada treats First Nations peoples Treaty Process in BC offshoot of this o Established in 1973 to address issues of land rights in rights of previous decisions and reactions Deals with claims to land, where title has yet to be formally extinguished through historical treaty or other means (much of Canada) o Seek certainty over land ownership and jurisdiction, by exchanging ambiguous Aboriginal rights and title for benefits clearly detailed in the text of the settlement o Purpose: Conspiracy Treaty Create a political and economic environment suitable to capitalist economic development of Indigenous lands o BC on finally participated once there was an economic threat Exchange the uncertainty for the land claims provision Historically serve the same purpose as treaties do Land claim agreement makes sure that there is a stable investment climate over the land

First Nations under existing treaties dont have access to the land claims process, except in the NWT where the Paulette decision applies in recognizing that the federal government committed fraud re the nature of the treaty o Why do First Nations participate in land claims when it is such an unequal relationship Better than nothing, we can either participate in the established system and get something, or not, and be left out of the process Economic necessity extreme poverty and lack of economic resources, which are often aided through the

land claims process Greed on behalf of some native leaders The effect of participating on understanding of the process Recognizing Aboriginal Rights in the Canadian Constitution - 1982 Repatriation of Constitution o Aboriginal peoples needed to have their rights in the constitution Via direct pressure on govt, the queen and international venues You cant transfer power from the UK to Canada without recognizing their relationship with Aboriginal peoples Section 35.1,2,3,4 o Section 1 Recognition of existing Aboriginal and treaty rights Important because it eliminates historical rights that are no longer recognized (ex. Native title for treaties) Gives the state wiggle room on what is and is not protected o Section 2 Who are aboriginal peoples? o Section 3 For the purposes of Section 1, land claim negotiations will also be included

o Section 4 Guaranteed equal male and female rights re Section 1, 2 and 3 Federal government given 3 years to ensure all legislation complied with constitution and charter Section 15 of charter compelled changes in Indian Act Recognition of self-government rights 1995 Constitution doesnt say what existing aboriginal and treaty rights are? o First Minster conferences to establish what these are through negotiation, this time included major Aboriginal political associations o 4 conferences between 1984-1985 o Unable to get any clarity 1995 Decided to recognize in policy o attempt to stave off litigation o claimed as an inherent right, but not true, because would imply it existed before Canada existed, but in practice they are dictated by the federal government akin to slightly more jurisdiction than cities/municipalities That makes it not very inherent, but more of a power relationship Recognition issues re colonialism Terms of recognition granted will always be determined by and in the interest of the colonial power Over time, these unequal terms of recognition often get internalized: by the colonized thus rendering the inequality less pronounces or even identifiable as inequality

Recap of Identity Guest Speakers & Film 08/09/2011 17:39:00

Glen: How to get at the resources occupied by the land. The Indians are in the way of those resources, and so they need to be delt with, to eliminate that problem. Indian act was the legal tool to do this Distinction between Canada/US: Glen said Canada was more subtle, Sheryl argues that they were similar. Competing motivations between conquest and treaty making. End goal still to deal with the Indians. Differences maybe better along east-west axis AND the temporal differences. Very important date: 1969 White Paper. Government proposed legislation to get rid of any sort of differentiation because its discriminatory everybody would be equal. Eliminate Indian Status so there would be no point to have reserves anymore. What is recognition as described by Glen: in a colonial conquest, they need to be recognized by the colonial power, uneven situation to begin with. Granting of rights, on state terms. Being defined on the terms, from the perspective, using the framework prescribed by the colonial power structures. Rights and title can be ceded by agreement with the state. An exchange in made. Aboriginal title in exchange for some agreement with the Canadian state. After these agreements with the state are made, the set of rights/scope of rights are very limited and are dictated by the Canadian state. Land and self-determination rights are NOT on the table, cultural etc. ones are. The whole process is very problematic, but people still do for a whole set of real life, practical reasons. Violence not necessarily physical violence, but some sort of political trouble Australian residential schools and the film Yes film about Australia, but the same things was happening in Canada and the USA at the same time with the same thought processes and motivations.

Reaction paper is it cohesive, arguing a particular point. Talk about something that struck you and how it relates to what youve learned in class. Please take license with it. Time for about one big question Film text citations, just use it in text, same thing with presentations. If you are doing something from the other readings, please cite formally. Apologies Australian PM Feb 2008 Canada 2008 Action that is a progressive motion in a positive way. But doesnt come near to enough re policy change

Land

08/09/2011 17:39:00
First Nations Property Ownership Act Tom Flanagan has offered this proposed act a s a solution to the First Nations land problems in Canada Quick Write are you in favour of his proposal or opposed (didnt actually happen) o Privatization/Fee simple title. Get of trust status completely on the reserves New System o Full ownership of property, individually and collectively. Converts to fee-simple title for nations and individuals o Voluntary o Removes a First Nation from the Indian Act Loss of official status and all the benefits that that includes o Land can be bought, sold, mortgaged and taxed Taxes A person of Indian status is living on reserve, they are exempt from certain taxes Arguments For: o Control o No one else involved o Terminates a racist legal distinction Arguments Against: o Form of assimilation o Removes some responsibility from the federal government for the REAL problems on reserve o The size of the reserves are really small o People cant afford the taxes, so they have to sell it to cover the taxes USA Case 1871: US Congress unilaterally ends treaty0 making with Indian tribes 1998: Dawes Act / General Allotment Act survey tribal land and divide into individual allotments

individual could select or be assigned parcels from 40100 acres what ever not allotted could be sold to non-Indian Surplus Land Lots and lots and lots sold 1906: Burke Act o Secretary of Interior decide in an Indian was competent to manage land and own affairs Yes - land removed from trusts and declared taxable With or without individuals knowledge Land loss through tax foreclosure o Land held by deceased could be sold off to non-heirs by secretary Total land lost under policy 90 million acres 1928: Merriam Report o Heavily criticized the allotment policy due to land loss 1934: Wheeler-Howard Act o Ended allotment policy o Established banc council government Remaining effects o Fractionated heirship o Checkerboard land ownership pattern o Landloss

Areas of Concern
BOLDLEY READING: Herman Merivale (1861)

08/09/2011 17:39:00

Categories of Tribal Customs Violations of the eternal and universal laws of mortality (need to go immediately!!!) o Cannibalism o Human sacrifice o Infanticide Less horrible but still pernicious (more time could be taken to deal with these issues) o Tribal kinship and social order (ind. Govt) o Indigenous languages Simply absurd o Styles of dress o Innocuous customs Bodley Methods of Cultural Modifications: Direct Force (outlaw things) SOCIAL ENGINEERING Help others to help themselves Education o Language (colonizers or indigenous) o Remove children from education in indigenous knowledge o Creating individuals out of collectives (removing children

Religion/Spirituality (outlaw) Change the ecological climate/environment removing the source of food aka remove the buffalo from the prairies Change the economic climate SMITH Convince members of that culture of the positional superiority of Western Knowledge Things get uncomfortable here Appropriation of indigenous knowledge o Contemporary issue Indigenous knowledge: o Definition: cumulative body of knowledge and beliefs handed down through generations by cultural transmissions about the relationships of living beings (including humans) with one another and their environment from Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples o *** note: indigenous languages are vital to indigenous knowledge o if no language, impossible to transmit knowledge*** AREAS OF CONCERN brought to UN by indigenous groups (5) unauthorized copying infringement of individual copyright appropriation of indigenous themes and images culturally inappropriate use of images and styles expropriation of traditional knowledge without compensation WATCH YOUTUBE CLIP on Issue of Eco Tourism look at benefits and their connection to the 5 messy areas listed above: -Masai in Kenya -called New: Tourism ____ -complexities in this case: commodification of their culture, bifurication of culture (what the tourist wants to see and what actually happens are those cultural practices still happening, etc?) -showed us some of the big debate alive and well on both sides (ind. And non-ind societies)

 International Initiatives to try to address these complexities: o universal declaration on human rights o convention on biological diversity o declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples o international labour org convention no. 169 o international covenant on Economic, social and cultural rights o UN agencies

Debate: Indigenous Peoples and Intellectual Property Rights -extend intellectual property rights to -against extending intellectual property included traditional knowledge rights to include ind. Knowledge -patenting -would destroy the social basis necessary for -arguments for: generation and managing knowlsge -will provide innovation -*ind knowledge is non-capitilist is essence -incentives for conservation they believe in collective ownership -moral obligation to protect a particular set -cant fit ind. Knowledge in western of cultural property framework -is the term appropriate applicable to knowledge? -you cant take someones knowledge away Cases What is the issue surrounding indigenous knowledge or cultural property? What is the indigenous knowledge at stake? What is the source of the information? Who are the winners and losers in the case? Appropriation or protection? Asia: The Bethma Practice in Sri Lanka

Water sharing/trading scheme between communities o Several thousand years old

World bank studied it, and is not presenting the model to other seasonally arid areas around the world o World Bank didnt ask, and didnt compensate Africa: Hoodia Weight loss supplement from cactus in the Kalahari dessert Compensation for limited food source, is by chewing Hoodia because its an appetite suppressant How do they compensate the San (bushmen) people because this is there knowledge South Africa: Rainforest Plants Plant effective in destroying malignant cancer cells o Serious global gain Plants come from a particular area, how do you protect/patent that knowledge? Arctic: Inuit & Arctic Animals Seal hunting, not viewed positively in international arena Part of Inuit cultural traditions, knowledge Australia & New Zealand: Indigenous Designs Tattoos gained through particular acts Patterns used in popular culture (fashion spreads, hello kitty etc) Other peoples tattoos How do you copyright patterns North America: Wild Rice From N. Minnesota, S. Ontario etc Naturally occurring grain from swampy areas Harvested by hand University of Minnesota could make GM rice that grows more effectively o Spores move into other paddies and dont allow natural plants to reproduce So sell the Natural rice as distinct from GMO o Which community gets the proceeds from this, who get the pattents it? Commodification of cultural herritage product

Midterm - Exam Prep & Recap 08/09/2011 17:39:00

Give back test or lose 10 points

Section 1 short answers (40%) o Paragraph 1 define o Paragraph 2 discus relevance 5 points each part make point cohesive and analytical may argue a side, or present an overview Section 2 essay question (60%) o Choice of 2 fairly broad questions o 4-5 paragraphs o structured around a thesis statement o show me what you know structure around an argument, but put in lots of information all readings, lectures, films etc. are in play here use evidence may agree/not agree with what weve learned, but please present a convincing argument Here is the debate, this what is unresolved, here are implications o Use case information presented in class, readings, etc. o If you can remember the author, great if not give contextualization to explain where you got your information still better if you can rememeber Will probably take the entire class make sure you budget time well Review: o Major terms and concepts from the notes and readings o If it was important enough to do a quick write about it its probably on the exam she will post the questions because shes awesome Court cases not a law class, so please understand the concepts, but not what is going on. Things in both readings and lecture very important

o In only one or the other still quite important Recap Very clear, explicitly stated thesis statement. Follow this structure o Thesis statement o 3-4 major arguments, all linked to thesis statement o some form of evidence for each statement, perhaps 2 pieces readings, lectures, media experienced Recognition argument paper o Problem: strong tendency to reify the state Turning the state into a solid object, rather than considering its multifaceted nature AND the people the make up the state o Recognitions is a fairly new approach by the state, replacing explicit assimilation o Glen is trying to say the politics and language of recognition will not fundamentally/substantially alter the colonial relationship Knowledge: collective nature, how it has been appropriated without the consent of IP, and how it is a difficult system to rectify in capitalism Self-determination: right of IP to make its own decisions, relationship to self-governance, relationship to sovereignty, some authors and what they have to say about theses issues Salt water and Belgian thesis: discussion on decolonization in the UN, not groups internal to the land mass, should have mentioned in some manner, IP werent included in the concept of self determination, there were viewed not as a peoples, but as a population Should have included why not having a definitive definition at the UN was a victory for IP

Include main points, debate and readings in all answers.

Self-determination, self-government and sovereignty 08/09/2011 17:39:00

What is the difference between the three concepts for indigenous peoples (my thoughts) Self-govt practical, on the ground institutional practice, within the existing sovereign state structures, not too different from municipal or provincial power. They do not have sovereignty in Canada, but they do have this Self-deter inate right, not needing to be granted from others Soveg based on state systems, the international relations program: exclusive, recognized by other states, rights to unchallenged rule of law over a territory These terms are confusing and politically contentious Aotearoa/New Zealand: Maori flag controversy o 2008/2009 push by from Maori people to have the Maori flag flown on the auckaland harbour bridge on their national day (Waitangi day) day of treaty signing o 2 flag poles, and on major national holidays they fly the applicable countrys flag (bastille da france) o Viewed treaty as a partnership, not subservience, most NZ dont feel this way Tino Rangatiratanga Maori word: sovereignty o Waitangi Treaty in 2 languages Maori version sovereignty NOT seceded to the crown English sovereignty is seceded to the crown o How much separatism is being asked for? In international law when a treaty says 2 different things in 2 different languages, common law says that the treaty should be interpreted as to what the indigenous believe understood it to mean at the time. In practice this doesnt happen, but there are examples of it being applied in all common law colonial countries

Why were the treaty terms between Maori and the England so much more generous towards Maori?

At the time Maori very powerful, fearsome warriors, the English people were not in a position of as much power as in other colonies

Politics, Identity and Politics Until the 1980s there was no universal Maori identity, but rather to the individual tribes Use of the Maori flag definitely originated as protest flag Sovereignty International law understanding o Absolute power or authority Over a particular territory o Independence of a nation state, statehood o Totality of international powers (Crawford 1979) o External sovereignty Internal sovereignty = political and legal authority within nationstates (DePuis 1987, Lashi 1921) o Federalism Shared within the state with the provinces etc. NEW ZEALAND is NOT a federal state, so the concept of internal sovereignty is more contentious o Exists within a sphere of authority

Indigenous Sovereignty Asch (Aboriginal Self-Government) o Indigenous nations had equal sovereignty at contact o Does not extinguish without consent, negotiation English context: treaty o Passage of time does not provide legitimacy Macklem (Distributing Sovereignty) o Best justification for indigenous sovereignty lies in distributive justice argument Eg. Comes down to social justice/poverty aliviation o Claims are weak if made on claims of prior occupancy, and cultural relativism or distinctiveness

This is vulnerable to the state coming in and taking it away o Critiques Indigenous people are not indigenous people because they are poor Alfred o Indigenous critique of the concept o Incompatible with indigenous notions of power o Maintains colonial structure o By indigenous peoples aiming for sovereignty, they are aiming for a western understanding of power, and that is an example of further assimilation o Critique Suggests that indigenous peoples can continue on exclusive of what is going on in power structures in the world/of what else is going on.

Indigenous Self-Determination Thuen (Saami Peoplehood) o Protects cultural distinctiveness o Right to decide their own affairs (like a self-government arrangement without that language) o No territorial demarcation o Crosses borders o Control of resource management Alfred would probably like this model because it is moving away from the eurocentric nation-state model Aboriginal Self-Governance Definition o A degree of exclusion from the main polity (state govt) Most, if not all, indigenous people have a desire to exercise some measure of political, economic and cultural decision making for themselves, separate from the surrounding state (Wilkins)

o When Wilkins is writing Self-Governance includes groups which are ok operating within the state model, those who are totally independent of it, and those who are on the border. Alfred/Coulthard critique o problem is that it is delegated from the state rather than an inherent right

Self-Determination United Nations meaning Appears in o UN Charter o Universal declaration of Human Rights o International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Other human rights instruments "All peoples have the right of self-determination" o Inherent, not a delegated, right Self-determination & UN Decolonization Associated with decolonization regime (from 1950s) Inherent right of all peoples o Formerly colonized peoples can choose their relationship to other political communities or states (Wilmer) Usually interpreted as a discrete moment when an aboriginal peoples decides what to do Salt water thesis exclusion o Only colonies that were separate from the mother county by salt water all eligible for decolonization Usually meant independence, sometimes joining another state UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples IP wanted to have the salt water exclusion removed Recognized indigenous peoples as having right of self-determination

Protection for existing state sovereignty o Decoupled sovereignty from self-determination Changed UNs meaning of self-determination o Shifted away from sole state centric construction

Indigenous Self-Determination Indigenous peoples have the right to freely determine their own affairs as well as the degree of integration within a state (Lightfoot 2009) Can be secured through a standards that exist either within states, and/or outside the bounds of Westphalian states o Negotiations must be done on an individual basis with states

More pluralism, multi-faceted view of self-determination Increasing use of term among indigenous peoples Diff way of interpreting sovereignty o Less problematic in federations, where this distinction already exists, less of a problem o In states without a concept of divided sovereignty, this becomes much more problematic o BIG international challenge as is a different way of approaching international relations for the past several hundred years Challenge to recognize equality Diff communities in diff parts of the world have diff perspectives on what the ideal final outcome would be Concept of sovereignty very much European, royalty based concept Difference between the concepts of Nation and of the State

Maya Tailfeathers Guest Lecture 17:39:00

08/09/2011

From the Blood Reserve in s. Alberta, part of the Blackfoot confederacy Largest land reserve in Canada Saami from N. Norway Chief and Band Council Signed a deal with 2 oil companies without consulting/informing any of the 10,000 Blood members, got a 50 million dollar signing bonus Tribal members have no say in what happens to that 50 million dollar signing bonus o 10 days before Christmas an 800 dollar cheque was given out, and what poor person would turn down 800 before Christmas? 50% of land for the next 5 years 200 wells will be built using fracking techniques o chemicals used by these companies are patented, so they dont have to release information about what it is in them o Ruins ground water Band members decided that they needed to do something, and left in a legal no mans land Companies signed a deal with your representatives, so this is an internal issue Difficult situation, as there is very little recourse as to what the options are Very high unemployment in the community, so thought that Band would have signed deal with the goal of economic improvement for Band members Not the case o Of the 30-40 people working on the site, none were band members Protestors preventing access to the site o Arrested and put in tribal jail cell for 10 hours o 2 court dates, 1 one yesterday o Extensive international support Goal Have criminal charges dropped o Charged with intimidation

Big trucks and male oil and gas employees Injunction against oil companies until the process is done in a consultative, inclusive matter

Challenges Apathy people are in survival mode, and dont have the energy to fight this, have been beaten down for a long time Fight the oil companies not served best by the chief and council? o Very recent right (June 2011) where Chief and council can be held accountable for their actions and brought before courts, but not a universal mechanism or option for recall Financial mismanagement a serious issue on reserves with councils.

Treaty in 4 Anglo Countries

10 min class presentation on Thursday

08/09/2011 17:39:00

Why have there been treaties, and primarily in English speaking counties? Has been used to exercise some sort of nationhood, exchange, sovereignty, some sort of consent between colonizers and indigenous peoples To what extent has it been used as a tool for colonization British Law Precedent Royal Proclamation 1763 North American o Where we havent bought it, they can use it and be left alone o Sense of British sovereignty, and that Aboriginal use 1873 Report of the Parliamentary Select Committee on Aboriginal Tribes New Zealand o No private person can buy from indigenous peoples, but can only be bought by the Crown outlined how indigenous peoples should be treated what has precedent meant for British law moving forward? o It is the only way that settlers can legitimately occupy land while at the same time recognizing the historic and ongoing presence of indigenous peoples is via treaty Cross-cultural law and/or colonialism? o British common law understanding seems to cover both Several ways to interpret treaty not necessarily one or the other What does it mean to make a treaty? Nation to nation negotiated treatment, and we shouldnt think of indigenous treaties as any different, but under colonial settings, often used to coerce or negotiate the entrance of settlers into a territory Long history among indigenous peoples, different understanding of how they are binding, sacred, lasting agreements What happens with sovereignty?

o Whose sovereignty, what is exchanged, what kinds of sovereignty exchanged o British sovereignty absolutely ceded and exchanged, does not match up with many indigenous perspectives Case o Was sovereignty negotiated? What kind? How much? Typologies of Treaty 1. Treaty of Conquest o military action with a clear winner/loser o peace treaty to negotiate end of violence o complete capitulation or surrender 2. Treaty of Cession or Sale o land exchanged for money, ongoing rent, annuity 3. Treaty of Co-existence o 2 distinct peoples or nations determine how theyre going to live side by side eg. 49th parallel between British Canada and USA 4. Treaty of Sharing o 2 nations or peoples come together and agree how they are going to live together, perhaps in a single nation state structures etc. Remember, not discrete categories, but a fair amount of overlap

How have treaty rights been shaped? What is the history of treaties used in settling/colonizing this country? o How would you describe the relationship? Typology or original relationship, and what has come out of that now Hostiles relationship, no use of treaties Banks gave 2 reasons, settlers felt they were the aggressors and proved conflict o Examples? Contemporary status of treaty?

o Still in play? Current issues re treaty? What are they? Current event example? o How are some of these treaty issues being addressed? History section Contemporary most recent Pastoral lease Mabo v. 2 commission

Group Presentations

08/09/2011 17:39:00

New Zealand 1800s First Contact o late o wanted to avoid many of the conflicts in North America o New Zealand company and the British Crown did not agree, as they both felt they had rights of pre-emption (very important) Treaty of Waitangi o Cnflictin interpretations: English vs Maori translation British felt they had soveriegnty Maori felt that this meant they were granted protection, some benefits, but complete rights to self-determination Company Territory o High Price of Land + Settlers with Little Funds = Squatters Major political voice o Wakefield System Land lottery designed to be a fair system Land distributed to individuals by lottery, Maori guaranteed 10% Land given was bad land, no one was happy 1852 NZ Constitution Act o No actual constitutions o Just sets up that NZ exists o Maori lands guranteed, but never provided 1858 Fort Acre System o Many new settlers found that there 40 acres were not useable, and wanted Maori land 1845-1872 o Maori Wars

Maori rebelled, and the Crown lost Land was taken anyways NZ Settlements act said they were in rebellion against the state, so the state could take their land 1865 Native Land Act o Squatters on Maori land want legal title to their property o Maori ended up losing lots of land this way 1863 o Australia Waste Land Act Provided pastoral leases to farmers Outside of the Wakefield system No one happy with how everything worked out, haphazard system, treaties undermined and language manipulated Current Issues o Historical problems = current conflict o Growing Maori population, no longer enough land o Land claims process very cumbersome o Govt historically used language to work around treaty provisions Addressed Now o Govt recognizes that action needs to be taken o Waitangi Tribunal Appointed by government and must be reappointed Originally dealt with environmental issues 1985 got retroactive authority to make recommendations to prior treaty agreements, shift to land issues, during claims process government was selling land to private owners o Govt considers Maori one nation, not historically that case

Treaty nature o Based on British law o Coercive and manipulative (different terms in different language) o Continued erosion of Maori lands

Canada Perceived to be the most peaceful of the colonization process Trends etc. o First contact perceived to be one of mutual dependence and mutual benefits o As settler pops increased in Lower Canada, shift in powers, increased marginalization of aboriginal people o Treaties 1-7 Competition between Canada and US, as to claims to territory Clear the way for Canadian settlements o Treaties 8-11 More about resource access than competition with US o 1) increased government dependency no compensation provided, became dependent on the government law for their existence government service promises not fulfilled o 2) process of marginalization no longer equal, bilateral negotiations 1-11 still exist because constitution act acknowledged all pre-existing treaties BC the most complex treaty process Type of agreements o 1. Framework

o 2. Agreement in principal o 3. Final agreements Process slowed down because of definition conflicts etc. o Government tries to conclude agreements within 3 years o Native peoples disagree because there is not defensible to reason to conclude negotiations o Very one-sided power agreement Current treaties o More about land issues that other issues right now o Govt sees them as keeping an ongoing relationship with indigenous peoples o Treaties are legal, but probably not fair

USA Shift from cooperation to conquest o Indian wars treaties of peace o Cession treaties access to resources etc, land Unique o Tribal nations given sense of sovereignty not seen elsewhere, immune from state legislation, given own judiciary, police, education Still subordinate to federal government Still built around the idea that goal was assimilation o Feds reserve the right to dissolve the treaty, terminate the existence of the nation and the tribe if the government decides that they are assimilated enough Treaties follow and east to west pattern o 1871 decision to have no more new treaties US govt and Native groups have very different perspective on the treaties o Govt: supposed to be one step in the assimilation process, and now that they are old, considered out of date, and have few qualms about circumventing

o Tries: govern all aspects about relations with government, and so are very concrete, current and relevant Black Hills Claims o S. Dakota & Wyoming 1979 US courts ruled that act seizing land violated 5th amendment and rewarded lost of money didnt accept because they thought that meant that they would be selling there lad 1982 new case filed, saying they wanted the land back, because the government has admitted that they took it illegally Fundamental difference in how to resolve these situations o Lawyers were granted 10% of money, but Tribal council said no, because they dont represent our interests Enforcement of agreements o No neutral third party enforcer All colonial institutions, thus biased to their perspectives Unequal power relationship o Agreements are only effective if they are enforced Treaty process will be one-sided and messy Not all tribes are covered by treaty process, so some groups are then classified as non-existent and assimilated into culture, so have no rights, even if they exist in fact, but not in historical documentation Supreme Court o Where treaty disputes are resolved, handled, thus one sided o 1830s Domestic Dependent Nations (Marshall Court) Recognized some measure of internal sovereignty term used Domesticated every single tribe under federal sovereignty umbrella Unique in USA recognition of sovereignty Unresolved issue of HOW MUCH sovereignty tribal nations have

Pastoral Leasing Talking Points Pastoral leases

o Large tracts of lands owned by the crown and leased for extended periods of time to ranchers to be used mainly for grazing, in exchange for rent o Preserved the Crowns prescence in remote frontier areas Kept land from passing into control of individuals who could set up as shepard kings in their own fiefdoms After 1850 o All pastoral leases had to include a reservation that would provide Aboriginals with basic right to entre at all times to seek subsistence As long as the areas werent enclosed and improved upon Hope to keep frontier violence to a minimum 1996 High Court Wik decision o concluded that native title had never been extinguished on pastoral lease land o example of how 19th century Colonial Office policy may be affecting 21st century land claims disputes o native title continues to co-exist alongside lease rights on pastoral leases Future implications o Uncertain of the legal concequences and practical implications of the Wik decision o 40% of Australia is covered by pastoral leases o Important and pertinent issue as all the pastoral leases in the state of Western Australia expire in 2015

Mistahi Muskwa Treaty 6 Canadian Plains 08/09/2011 17:39:00

Understanding Nehiyaw Political Organization Difficulty in comparing European and Indigenous political bodies worked o Indigenous groups dont have the same idea of sovereign entity who speaks for everyone Group continues to live a nomadic hunting lifestyle, relatively independent of the Canadian state Research Question What can we learn about the governance of contemporary Band Council by looking at how Plains Cree peopl practive governance directly before movement on to reservces o Focused on Band led by Mistahi Muskwa (Big Bear) Power Ability of people to affect the decisions and actions of others, relational terms, shouldnt be always associated with the negative Authority The designation to make decision on behalf of an organization or group categorical, you either have it or your dont Legitmiacy

Discussion on Briefing Packet

08/09/2011 17:39:00

8 pages of text, add in necessary visuals that are relevant How to ensure that your packets work together Paper must be turned in 3 ways: hard copy to class, emailed copy as a PDF, TurnItIn Governments can touch on a number of issues, but ensure that you are approaching it from the government points of view. Write the entire report (including history) as a representative of that government Less of a template, more do what makes sense Intro History of colonization 3 issues explain why this issues are important, can argue that certain issues are important overtop of other actual legitimate issues why poverty trumps other concerns of human rights etc. Recommendations Conclusion

Sweden Executive Summary Table of content History of the ...... o Who are the ..... o Colonial period Modern issues..... o On going battle o Current issues and solutions o Future Works Cited Bangladesh: Responding to criticism, history of why these are issues, whats happened, and what the government intends to go Overview

Introduction Land Rights Human Rights Government Response to International Criticism Summary Canada Executive Status Current Status Historical context Current Issues Recommendations Japan Introduction Hisotrical Context a few paragraphs Indigenous Issues bult of report Government Position on how to resolve issues And or government defence on current policies

Indigenous Resistance to Colonialism 17:39:00

Violent Zapatistas Non-Violent Global Indigenous Movement Politics of Shame

08/09/2011

Zapatistas Mexican Government policy of land redistribution ended with NAFTA First post-modern revolution: o Hot conflict, but not for very long, because there was only fighting for one day, not to overthrow the government, but to be heard Used websites - which was VERY new technology at the time Used global communications and technology to drawn international attention Encuentro Gathering between idealists, indigenous rights activists, left-wing activists, lost of non-indigenous peoples went down there Important, because it was an issue about particular land rights in Chiapas, but went much larger than that to get focus on the area Became about politics beyond guns How did they show solidarity o Language issues Tactical Media fairly new at the time o Protection: international eyes Lesson learned to be very careful, because violence often escalates once the cameras leave o Global message/Marie-Claire effect Imagery o Sound Bites

o Information politics/framing Not reliant on government to get message across, able to set the message and the facts o Strategy Choice of what information gets put out, and the only message that gets put out is what the media is provided with o Symbolic politics Linking their movement to history of Mexico, framed as natural continuation of Mexican society o Presumption that the state will have the upper hand in media etc, so less about balanced coverage by individual sources, but a balance media picture across the entire spectrum Has been a hot war at times, and a war of ideas o Usually goes hot when the feeling that there needs to be more attention Layered complexities of the insurgency

Non-Violent Politics of Resistance Transnational Advocacy Networks (Keck and Sikkink 1998) o Networks of non-state actors working internationally on an issue, who are bound together by shared values, a common discourse, and dense exchanges of information and services Key: networks and non-state actors (NGOs, indigenous nations, churches) Common discourse what is it, how did it develop when such a large, varied, scattered group Dense exchanges of information and services have exploded recently through increased global communication o Multiply channels of access to international systems More routes to access states, not just domestically, but from other, including international directions Multiplies power o Goal: change the behaviour of states and international organizations

o Boomerang Pattern Transnational Advocacy Networks (TANs) o Frame issues How to frame a local issues so that it resonates with other actors on a global scale? o New ideas, norms and discourses How do you connect something new to something already agreed upon by the international community? o Information and testimony What sort of information, testimony do you disseminate o Norm implementation How do you start an international movement to put pressure on a nation that doesnt really want to change its position o Major actors include: NGOs, foundations, media, churches, trade unions, consumer organizations, intellectuals etc. Who supports this campaign, where does the money come from? What types of media? o Ability to do all these things will determine how successful the movement is able to be. Indigenous Resistance as a TAN (Politics of Shame) o International Level Collective vs. individual rights Brand new, had been attempted during cold war unsuccessfully Meaning of self-determination (independent nationstates) Shift away from nation-states as the central understanding of the international system Decolonization exclusion o Domestic Level Legal systems of states either inadequate or inappropriate for redress Use of human rights law and principles from the international level to get domestic implementation

Where to boomerang model comes into play Existing Human Rights Framework o Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) o Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1963) Convention (1965) o ------------------------------------------------------------------o International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) o International Convention of Civil and Political Rights (1966) o Youtube video: teaming up with another movement (environmental movement) and going to the UN to make their

case Organizational Beginings

UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 08/09/2011 17:39:00

UN Working Group on Indigenous Populations Drafted the UNDRIP Established in 1982, Geneva to draft UNDRIP Countries and indigenous organizations met Open participation by indigenous peoples o Participation by indigenous peoples was open, if you could get there, you could participate o Dynamics have changed now that in New York, visas, 9/11 etc. Purposes o 1. Information gathering o 2. International standard setting Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (1994) Similar but no identical to the final draft Remember that the document is 100% compromise 1994-1997 the draft declaration negotiated Doesnt pass the UN General Assembly until 13 September 2007 DRIP Bare minimum international standard of indigenous peoples rights o Some states view as a goal to reach for o By drafters, looked at as the floor Morally binding, but not legally binding o Not hard law (treaties, conventions) with a compliance mechanism, and the security council can act on it o Soft Law not legally binding in an international legal sense, but are morally and politically on the whole world whether signed on or not. Global consensus on indigenous rights o Then should guide how states and indigenous peoples should relate to each other

Individual and collective rights Land rights, self-determination rights o Important because there are certain states that are threatened by the implications of this component o What does self-determination mean? Now different from just territorial sovereignty Document of compromise each article and as a whole o Negotiated from 1982 until the last weekend in 2007 Changes made: Enhance state sovereignty, concerns about what does fair compensation/redress mean. USA, Can etc. couldnt politically come forward and speak against a HR document, so asked Africa to do so on their behalf, as Africa was also not in favour, but could also support the concerns.

Les Melezer, Chairperson of the Global Indigenous Caucus The declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples constrains no new provisions of human rights. It affirms many rights already contained in international human rights treaties, but rights that have been denied to the Indigenous Peoples Prof: agree mostly except for the introduction of group rights What UNDRIP does do Emphasizes the right to maintain and strengthen cultures, traditions and institutions Prohibits discrimination Asserts collective rights of Indigenous peoples to remain distinct form their surrounding societies, pursue own visions of development, promote full and effective participation in decision-making processes on issues that may affect them Voting Record 143 votes in favor 11 abstentions: o Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burundi, Colombia, Georgia, Kenya, Nigeria, Russia, Samoa, Ukraine 36 absent:

o Chad, ivory cost, equatorial guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Israel 4 againts o Canada, United States of America, New Zealand, Australia o Aka CANZAs group Prior to Stephen Harper, Canada was supportive of and a leader in negotiations of the declaration

Canadas Objection Lack of inclusiveness and transparency in process o Open to all since 1982 Does not reflect current state practice or current obligations under international law o Yeah, thats the point Not legally binding o Esp. because they didnt vote for it Commitment to indigenous rights through existing international mechanisms and its domestic constitutional guarantees o Looks at all other human rights documents they take part of No objection to collective rights Land rights would be incompatible with parliamentary system Will continue to rely on domestic legal instruments o Because didnt vote for it, self-exempting First time Canada ever failed to support an international human rights document USAs Position Lack of transparency Text is confusing, fundamentally flawed Objects to self-determination, land and resources rights, redress Opposed to collective rights Rely on domestic law

New Zealand Does not reflect current state practice Fully supports principles and aspirations aspirations key word again Text is discriminatory and incompatible with democracy Land rights o Unworkable as could encapsulate entire country Inequality Redress unworkable Not legally binding Australia Sef-determination (impairs territorial and political integrity) Land rights Inequality o Sets up indigenous Australians with different rights than everybody else Notion law applies Places indigenous customary law in superior position to national law Not legally binding

Australia Changes Position April 2009 Incoming Rudd government announced change of position to support But... o Document is aspirational o Non-binding

Does not affect existing Australian law

New Zealand Changes Position April 2010 after a shift in government Opening ceremony UNPFII Minister of Maori Affairs, Dr. Pita Sharples (Maori Party in coalition with National Party) o youtube But... o Declaration is aspirational o Not legally binding Canada Changes Position March 2010: speech from the thone, move towards endorcement (thinking about thinking about), but would be in a framework totally consistent with Canadas laws Novermber 2010: Canada will be formally endorcing the declaration in a manner fully consistent with Canadas Constitution and laws o Not legally lbinding o Aspirational No public ceremony No change in goverment (unlike in Australia and NZ) USA Changes Position April 2010: Following NZ announcement , USA announces a reconsideration, tribal consultation process December 2010: Obama announces US is lending support in remarks to the White House Tribal Nations Conference o Youtube Follow-up statement released by the White House later that day (16 page document) explaining why document is aspirational, nonbinding and wouldnt change US domestic law in any way

Lightfoot (2012) International Journal of Human Rights Selective Endorsement o 1. Removes concerns over process legitimacy transparency concern o 2. Underscore normative importance of the rights while also qualifying their status o 3. Strategically, collectively and unilaterally attempted to write down the norms so that they align with current policies and practices Thus, the states assert compliance with the rights norms without having to change domestic laws and practices

1981 1. 2. 1977 1. 2.

Geneva Conference more global Idea of secession taken off the table ,pragmatic choice Using international system Geneva Western/ Global IITC, WITC Term indigenous comes form this , idea of self-determination o declaration of principles

08/09/2011 17:39:00
International Law most applicatble to internationl struggle - UN Charter friendly development of relations between nations and peoples Peoples s selfdetermination, vs. population or issues at DRIP Beginging of DRIP 1. Standing rock south dakota IITC 2.WCIP 1975, shared history of global issues

Transnational Advocacy Network Collective and individual rights and self determination, shift in understanding of what self-determination, collective rights Domestic, many state legal systesm are inadequate o Need hums rights to have state implementation

1)Constructive Engagement 1. Content emphasis on equity, inclusiveness, here for the long all, every one has legit claims 2. Negotiation Indigenouspeople sovereign by vitrue of being there first, and never gave it up, repairing relations, people with rights, not minorities with problems -taking indigeneity seriously power sharing, rethinking citizenship new rules of agreement and reconiliation dialgoue Obvious Biases in constructive engagement validity of existing state, irights with crown not other way, politicization

States: biases need based vs rights based, jr not equal partner, conformity, universal citizenship, ethnic of miinoiryt v IP Realities politics gets in teh way, states really enjoys it power to establish agendda, fear of national unity threat to, constitutuional change, globalization and profit engagement. Treaty restitution based treaty (comprehensive land claim, treaty) Goverment offers compensation and control in exchange for full and final settlement, no more opportunities for renegotiation at a future date. Interpersonal, social, government and intrinsic proposittions of recognition (NEED ALLL) Interpersonal: encounters free of racism, understanding, empathy, inclusiveness Social: inclusive social policies Governments rediristribution of powers b/t elecetd and non-elected Intrsinsitc; recongiton of sovg and self-d rights Reconsiliaton from IP Rgth wrongs New partnerships Full = participation in Work throught differences Respect indineity Difffernt perceptions of colonialism Anger bsesd on past dispossession Guilt on settler behalf Proud of colonizatoin, no point on dwelling in the past

Reconciliation politics of 1. Attonment righting of historical wrongs 2. Renewal sorry, practical, land rights, restoring as institutional partners

Comprehensive Land Claims Exchange of rights, resources of and obligations Extinguish aboriginal title in exchange for various land rights, comanagments, payouts, self management 1. Problems: o politics of partnership )0 sum game o adviersarial w/ state o rivaly in comeptition for resources o contractural reliance litigation as problem solver o reliance on past and rhetoric o aspirations within Eurocentrcic framework o issues as an end vs. a struggle 2. Negatives o adminstrative quick fix o conducive to partnership? o Recipe for conflict btween competeing claims 3. Benefits o identity building

o resource mobilization Waitangi Not any formal implication now Treaty esttlement focues, compensation of Different languages DRIP resasons for refusal Constiutional Approach v. Indigenous Approach Engagment v entitlement Relationship v. rights Interdependence v. oppostion Cooperation v. competition Reconcilation v. resitution Power sharing v. power confict Ongoing issues Crown resistant to foundational changes Sever colonial bonds Frames on colonial discourse with a more human face o Viewed as a problem peeople o Indigeneity no t taken srious o Contsitutionl appraoch still persists Shifts in Indigenous Affairs

1. Promote I driven capacity v. state programs, with not for, effort to improve economic development

Approach to improve indigenous politcs Increaesd indigenization of policies Restiutionall settlement Statutory amendments Develiution fo power Decentralized services Lmited self government arrangements

Why is indigenous lobbying when exported Western Europe: few concerns have local residents, not threats to own jobs/secutiry. o Cree to Europe to international meeting, canoe to amerstadamm, increasing awareness o Evironmentalism as a facade Jury raised attention to surpirse of inconsistency of human right International organization most important driver for change - add/remove credibility Politics shame Creative way the UNHRF does politics, public denunciations, attention of protest, can sometimes bring a reluctant government to the table, sometimes an agreement can result BAD: must meet public expectation to qualify for help (wise, environmental etc), end up adopting core values of western state to have an effect, must focus on issues where majority will agree to, as the more central ones will have already. Compassion fatigue, ordinary when compared to genocide States of maximum level of recognition, soft rights, cultural diversity, when you reach that point, no more Contrastic deffinition fo self-determination (land, injustice, language etc?)

Requires development of instutions that are moden,

UN Working Group Value Meet annually Connection between UN and IP Broad topic Self defined attendance, international attention No states

Host of annual forum in Geneva, new models of self determination, bring about UN ratification to establish interantional standards for protection to rights, became the permanent forum in either 2000 or 2002 States in favour of v. states opposed africa Main features of indigenous global politcs Grounded in indigenous cultural practives, traditon style and decision making Open indigenous participation, tool for justice, incraeses in scope and clarity of over; Positive DRIP Big step forward Collective rights are new Take and a whole and more Article right to, right of aspiration v inherent, night before, article too

Drip Reights to maintian culture No discrim Collective rights Georgraphy and Political Issolation If technology -> more interction

Global level wider audience and support and new stratgies, dont like looking bad. Local leve admin inconvenie, less support Written Law to express self-determination Reconsituting sovg in ways understanding No experience of communal memory in western legal art, how to make the state Types of self-determination Non discrim Cultural iteg Control over land Social welfare UN political statu, control of resources, sustinance, cultural development Important Points of Agreement btwn states and ip Qwill to establish forum High in UN, EOSC

Reveals: UN largely controled by states

UNPFII 1. Centrepiece of decade of interpal people o a. states would appoint reps, rejected o b. more experience in intl politics, so they should trust their formula o reference to the charter of the UN didnt know if they wanted to mention is, forced to, wasnt binding Challenges state sovg International - reforms in intl law Pluralistic forces within the states, nations within natios Written law New chances to use written law to their benefit

Geogrge Manual shuswap leader in BC, ground work in 1970s for globlization, threat Hall, Anthony. Reconliliation in Aus & Zapatista movement Reconciliaton is now a nation-class-wide thing o Auss: terra nulia, white supremicits, Mabo & Wick,movemet to reshape o Zap: local located, globally orientaed, trans Niger Agoni activitst, against evironmental desicration. Clearest examples of abo group on cutting edge of protest v. globalizatoin. Silenved by government, critique of shell, government tried to treat problem as domestic much international attention

IP v. Ngo. Ip dont have consultative status, only 20 w/ consultative status, rep nations. 5% of worlds population, 80% of worlds cultural diversity, 20% of land surfface, 80% of worlds biodiversity, 70+ nation states. Stavehagen deffinition of indigie Chronology not as important Type of unjust relationship Peoples: group who have an objectively distinct indentity and subjectively perceive themselves as differnt. Problme is matter of perspective and degree. TANS: Networkds of non state actors (NGOS, inna, curhc) workin intl on an issue who are boudn together by shared value, common discourse, dense exchanges of information o Coming at teh state from multiplie directions, not just below, mutltiple channels access, goals to chang state behvious Actors: NGO, foudations, meida, churrch, unions, intellectuals, consumer organizaton Boomerang pattens o Not working through domestic pattersn Importance of framing. o Frame local issues so that they resonate globally o Connect the new with the norms o What kind of information you let out Zapatistas Tactical media o

Only live when in use, 46 articles, almost all individual rights, took 30 years to wrtie. Negotiation of nation to nation relationship at inernational level, less 1. Conquest beat teh other person, end of the war (peac) 2. Sale/Cession money, rent 3. Coexistance determine how to coexist 49th parallel 4. Sharing overlap Talk about comprehensive landtreaties Are treaties cross cultural negotiaton. Colonialism. Process, treaty used to exercise nationhood, exchange, consent British Law of precent only way that settlers can occupy land Chitagong Hilltracts Bangladesh Causes of conflict: autonomous state under autonomous rule, given to pakistan, dams forced relocation, identiy crisis forced to assimilate, imposed national identity, asiimilation policies, military as conflict resolution, human rights violations, minority in own lnd o Peace accord signed, but never implemented 1. Treated at national issues.

08/09/2011 17:39:00