How best to develop Canada's Aboriginal languages and cultures?

[Machjo]

What do you think would be the best way to develop (or at least defend) Canada's Aboriginal languages and cultures:

1. Increase federal funding for Aboriginal language and culture education and other programmes. (maybe we could call this the statist approach).

2. Adopt an education voucher system at the provincial level that would allow parents to cash the voucher in at any school, grant schools the freedom to choose among English, French, or the local Aboriginal language as the medium of instruction, or the local Aboriginal language as the second language to fulfil graduation requirements, and scrap the Official Languages Act at the federal level so that bilingual English-French requirements do not punish those who may have chosen to become bilingual in an Aboriginal language instead. (maybe we could call this a somewhat more libertarian approach).

3. Other method.

[Wild Bill]

What do you think would be the best way to develop (or at least defend) Canada's Aboriginal languages and cultures:

1. Increase federal funding for Aboriginal language and culture education and other programmes. (maybe we could call this the statist approach).

2. Adopt an education voucher system at the provincial level that would allow parents to cash the voucher in at any school, grant schools the freedom to choose among English, French, or the local Aboriginal language as the medium of instruction, or the local Aboriginal language as the second language to fulfil graduation requirements, and scrap the Official Languages Act at the federal level so that bilingual English-French requirements do not punish those who may have chosen to become bilingual in an Aboriginal language instead. (maybe we could call this a somewhat more libertarian approach).

3. Other method.

Not meaning to be difficult, but this poll assumes one supports the idea in the first place!

Perhaps there should be an initial poll asking if we want our tax money spent on such a thing. Some might and some might not but everyone should at least be asked the question. After all, it is THEIR tax money!

[Machjo]

I voted 2 in the OP. Personally, I see no point in giving Canada's First Nations any money than we are now if we're then to turn around and systematically marginalize their languages and cultures through our legal mechanisms such as the Official Languages Act. That's like my giving you money to develop your culture and then turn around and place constitutional and legislative obstacles for you to jump at every step of the way, and then wonder why the money is achieving so little.

[Smallc]

The real question is, why? The culture and language are already developed. If we want to preserve them, fine, but I don't think that we should expend too much effort.

[Machjo]

Not meaning to be difficult, but this poll assumes one supports the idea in the first place!

Perhaps there should be an initial poll asking if we want our tax money spent on such a thing. Some might and some might not but everyone should at least be asked the question. After all, it is THEIR tax money!

Good point. Though option 2 makes no reference to giving or not giving any money to the Aboriginals, but rather removing legislative obstacles, which would essentially be nothing more than an administrative restructuring. For example, if I give you a school voucher for your child at a certain value, whether you cash it in at a French-medium school, English-medium school or Algonquin-medium school (assuming you live in the Ottawa area), the cost would be the same. If the school needs more money owing to the higher cost of books in one language, then the parents would need to pay themselves, or the employer pays, of they go on a collection drive, etc. Tax-wise, it would be totally neutral. The only difference their would be whether the government will at least step out of the way so that those who are willing to pay the extra money out of their pockets can, or whether it will even take away the free choice with our own money.

Essentially, option 2 removes any legitimate tax objection.

[Machjo]

The real question is, why? The culture and language are already developed. If we want to preserve them, fine, but I don't think that we should expend too much effort.

What effort would be involved in giving out school vouchers, letting schools compete on the free market, removing legislative obstales (i.e. government granting the freedom to schools to teach in the local Aboriginal language if they wish), and rescinding the Official Languages Act? It would involve no effort on our part at all. What it would do, though, is not stand in the way of other people's efforts in the private sector. So again, this removes any tax objection.

Edited July 21, 2009 by Machjo

[Machjo]

And as for Canada's Aboriginal languages already being developed, that's blatantly false for most of them. All but three of them are struggling to wurvive right now. If they die on their own, that's one thing. But for government to put obstacles in their way that have no bearing on government spending whatsoever is another matter.

Personally, I might even be for cutting spending to the Aboriginals. But what would be so wrong with simply letting the free market have at her rather than trying block their languages at every step, as if eliminating them were the goal?

[August1991]

I voted 3. Other method.

----

What "other method"? God knows better than I do. But here's what I think.

1. Get rid of the band council dictatorships. Natives have to choose their leaders differently.

2. Get rid of the Indian Act. The Indian Act is all about status, entitlements, contracts, obligations, legal mumbo-jumbo and deals and agreements. It's not native Indian at all.

There are a few exceptions but Band Councils and the federal Indian Act are contrary to Native thinking and institutions. IMHO, Band politics and the Act have harmed Natives.

Edited July 21, 2009 by August1991

[Machjo]

I voted 3. Other method.

----

What "other method"? God knows better than I do. But here's what I think.

1. Get rid of the band council dictatorships. Natives have to choose their leaders differently.

2. Get rid of the Indian Act. The Indian Act is all about status, entitlements, contracts, obligations, legal mumbo-jumbo and deals and agreements. It's not native Indian at all.

There are a few exceptions but Band Councils and the federal Indian Act are contrary to Native thinking and institutions. The Bands and Act have harmed Natives.

Band councils? I don't know enough abut them to comment.

The Indian Act, absolutely. It's just a paternalistic extension of the colonialist mindset and even the natives themselves want to scrap it. it's the feds that want to keep it.

I was talking to one lady at the Assembly of First Nations a few weeks ago, and she was telling me how the Conservatives are trying to force the First Nations to 'becomes Canadian citizens' (whatever she meant by that, I understand somewhat, but not the details fo what exactly she meant), but that the First Nations were standing fast.

It really is a tough position because as far as the First Nations are concerned, they've never given their land up, their treaties are international treaties between the Natives and the British, now inherited by the Canadian government, often scrutinized by the international community, and upheld as still legal documents by the Canadian courts. It really does put us all in a tight pickle jar, doesn't it.

[M.Dancer]

Well according to Charter Rights, he says they're not Canadian so who cares about their language and culture..if there not Canadian then it's Obama's problem.

[Machjo]

Well according to Charter Rights, he says they're not Canadian so who cares about their language and culture..if there not Canadian then it's Obama's problem.

The problem though is that, whether they consider themselves Canadian or not, we're on their land, according to treaties we signed with them in good (sic!) faith.

[Guest TrueMetis]

This is something that should be dealt with after the land claims have been dealt with.

[Machjo]

This is something that should be dealt with after the land claims have been dealt with.

Hmmm... 1867.... Still not resolved. Should the First Nations start charging interest?

Interesting. So who are the 'Indian givers' now?

[August1991]

This is something that should be dealt with after the land claims have been dealt with.

Land claims? That strikes me as more Indian Act, legal mumbo jumbo stuff. Band Chiefs or activists love land claims.

-----

TrueMetis, I think Band Councils and the Indian Act harm aboriginals more than they help.

My opinion.

[Machjo]

Land claims? That strikes me as more Indian Act, legal mumbo jumbo stuff. Band Chiefs or activists love land claims.

-----

TrueMetis, I think Band Councils and the Indian Act harm aboriginals more than they help.

My opinion.

So why did the reigning monarchs wign treaties if we were just to say generations down the road that any treaty with them is just mumbo jumbo? Hmmm... Perhaps this should go on Canada's international credit rating?

[Datastream]

Prior to commenting on this thread I feel it is important to qualify my opinions and expose potential prejudices with a few facts that influence my opinions. First is that my maternal grandfather was nearly beaten to death by his fellow classmates at a band school due to their ultra conservative upbringing. His near death experience led to his adoption. After adoption he was never allowed to return to his band due to opposition from ultraconservative aboriginals exploiting the Indian Act. Even his children were barred from returning to the band until after his death. Second is the fact that my mother claimed throughout life that it was harder for her to become a Canadian Citizen via enfranchisement in 1951 than it was for a foreign prostitute.

No outside influence can have a positive impact upon the development of aboriginal culture or identity. Most of the aboriginal culture that I see being promoted by government funding and concerned individual outsiders is more rooted in Hollywood's fanciful stereotypes than any Indian culture that I am familiar with. Even the regalia worn by Canadian Indian Act Chiefs at ceremonies of the Assembly of First Nations is more Hollywood than Aboriginal. Aboriginal Culture will only begin to flourish when it is allowed to do so without outside interference.

Despite unknown billions of dollars being spent by governments upon Aboriginal peoples , the vast majority of Aboriginal people see no financial benefit whatsoever. The vast majority of funding is spent upon those with status while an additional trickle flows to the organised non status. Those that are niether status nor organised receive nothing that I am aware of. There are no greater schisms within the Aboriginal community and individual mind than those caused by questions of Indian Status and financial entitlement.

[Guest TrueMetis]

Prior to commenting on this thread I feel it is important to qualify my opinions and expose potential prejudices with a few facts that influence my opinions. First is that my maternal grandfather was nearly beaten to death by his fellow classmates at a band school due to their ultra conservative upbringing. His near death experience led to his adoption. After adoption he was never allowed to return to his band due to opposition from ultraconservative aboriginals exploiting the Indian Act. Even his children were barred from returning to the band until after his death. Second is the fact that my mother claimed throughout life that it was harder for her to become a Canadian Citizen via enfranchisement in 1951 than it was for a foreign prostitute.

No outside influence can have a positive impact upon the development of aboriginal culture or identity. Most of the aboriginal culture that I see being promoted by government funding and concerned individual outsiders is more rooted in Hollywood's fanciful stereotypes than any Indian culture that I am familiar with. Even the regalia worn by Canadian Indian Act Chiefs at ceremonies of the Assembly of First Nations is more Hollywood than Aboriginal. Aboriginal Culture will only begin to flourish when it is allowed to do so without outside interference.

Despite unknown billions of dollars being spent by governments upon Aboriginal peoples , the vast majority of Aboriginal people see no financial benefit whatsoever. The vast majority of funding is spent upon those with status while an additional trickle flows to the organised non status. Those that are niether status nor organised receive nothing that I am aware of. There are no greater schisms within the Aboriginal community and individual mind than those caused by questions of Indian Status and financial entitlement.

What about the land claims?

[Bonam]

The answer is to live and let live. It is not our responsibility to develop or to preserve native cultures - it is up to the natives whether to and how to carry out this task. Just as it is the responsibility of other groups to decide whether to and how to preserve their own cultures.

[Riverwind]

A culture that relies on the notion of a collective victimhood/entitlement is not worth preserving.

Languages are also tools. English will go the way of Latin eventually and I don't think any should shed a care.

Edited July 22, 2009 by Riverwind

[Riverwind]

To re-enforce the point above:

Virtually every Canadian who's ancestors have been in the country for more than 3 generations is a mixture of multiple cultures. Yet it is only the Metis who seem to feel that their mixed cultural status is something that deserves special recognition. The only reason this occurs is because there is money to be made exploting archaic Canadian laws. Without that monetary incentive no one would care about preserving the 'Metis' as a distinct cultural group.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

To re-enforce the point above:

Virtually every Canadian who's ancestors have been in the country for more than 3 generations is a mixture of multiple cultures. Yet it is only the Metis who seem to feel that their mixed cultural status is something that deserves special recognition. The only reason this occurs is because there is money to be made exploting archaic Canadian laws. Without that monetary incentive no one would care about preserving the 'Metis' as a distinct cultural group.

Nobody, the English, the French, the Metis, the First Nations, no group deserves a dime of tax dollars to preserve any language or culture. Any group, the Chinese, the Greeks, the Italians, the Poles, etc who desire to protect such things can do so at their own expense. One group or another group are still citizens of Canada and all should be treated equally, so in order to spend on one the government should be spending on all, and in my opinion the government should not spend on any.

[Dave_ON]

The answer is to live and let live. It is not our responsibility to develop or to preserve native cultures - it is up to the natives whether to and how to carry out this task. Just as it is the responsibility of other groups to decide whether to and how to preserve their own cultures.

I would go a step further and state the only solution is full integration. This notion of Indian status is dated and archaic and needs to be addressed. They need to become fully integrated, taxpaying Canadians, clearly the Indian act has failed to resolve the issues heretofore and another 100 or so years will make no difference.

As for the land claims, be careful what you wish for. If the feds settle the land claims this could mean a great deal of money for the natives, however it would also mean all leverage would be gone and integration would be their only option. The land will have effectively been "sold" and the money would be all that remained to them. The notion that they will one day be able to form their own sovereign native nation is a fantasy. The ills of the past can't be rectified, but preventing their continuation by holding up the Indian act can be.

We have to stop trying to atone for the sins of our ancestors, and the natives have to stop exploiting the suffering of theirs.

[Datastream]

What about the land claims?

Secure home ownership is both an Aboriginal right and a fundamental Human right. Cultural and mental health are dependant upon secure land holdings that are administered by the holders with responsibility towards past, current and future generations. Without land there is no legacy. The individual that is separated from ancestral land is a lost and tormented being. They are like a dry leaf blown in the wind . They have no meaningful foundation to stand upon and they leave a poor legacy for their descendants. As they tumble in the wind, they ultimately vanish and are forgotten.

Most of the major land claims that I am familiar with are products of both Federal and Aboriginal fraud. The Federal and Local Governments want to gather a group of agreeable Aboriginal vendors to engage in land surrenders and sales that the vendors generally have no right to. Select groups of well organised Aboriginals derive personal profit from land sales and royalties they are not entitled to. A few examples of this are the New York Mohawks and Lake Superior Mississaugas that lay claim to the City of Toronto. That region is the ancestral Territory of the nearly extinct Wendats. Manitoba Cree obtain oil royalties in Alberta from land that is the ancestral possession of the Blackfoot. The British Columbia Niska have derived profit from lands that are the ancestral possessions of their neighbours. Only a minority of Aboriginal people derive any gain from these malicious and fraudulent practices. Many Aboriginal peoples are dispossessed by them. Both the living and future descendants of land fraud practioners are victimised by suffering in both this and future worlds. They are accursed. That is why there is so much rape, murder, robbery, arson and other violent crimes in their communities. Their guilt drives them to consume each others homes and lives just as they have consumed the land and spiritual rights of the neighbours they have dispossessed. Those that sacrifice and labour on behalf of the dispossessed can be freed from this curse. Those that do not seek to remedy these injustices stumble blindly into a painful state of disembodied oblivion.

[Machjo]

The answer is to live and let live. It is not our responsibility to develop or to preserve native cultures - it is up to the natives whether to and how to carry out this task. Just as it is the responsibility of other groups to decide whether to and how to preserve their own cultures.

So you're saying then that you agree that the government should remove all obstacles to the development of their language and culture, as is proposed in option 2?

[Machjo]

A culture that relies on the notion of a collective victimhood/entitlement is not worth preserving.

Languages are also tools. English will go the way of Latin eventually and I don't think any should shed a care.

So are you saying that Canada should have no official language and let the market deal with the languages on an equal footing?

I could agree with that.