INDIGENOUS STATUS IN CANADA - sites.camosun.ca · flaws or gaps or missing links or problems or...

© Dr. Francis Adu-Febiri, 2020

FULL-CIRCLE?

/http//sites.camosun.ca/francisadufebiri/

Contact – 1812:

High Status

1820s – 1960s: Low Status

1970s - Present:

Improving but

Marginal Status

INDIGENOUS STATUS IN CANADA

Contents of the Presentation

Introduction: Central Question, Main Thesis, Main Argument, Thinking & Application, Collaboration & Communication, Creativity & Innovation, and Integrated Thinking Skills.

Social Status

Sociological conceptualization of Social Status

Significance of Social Status

Indigenous Social Status in Canada• Status Quotient

• Social Construction of Status

• Status Pattern

– Conclusion

– References

MOTIVATE:• Why sociology 106 matters

INTRODUCTION

CENTRAL QUESTION:

Why does it matter to address the issue

of Indigenous status in Canada?

INTRODUCTION

Main Thesis:

It matters to identify, explain and project the social status patterns of the Indigenous Peoples in Canada, and based on the patterns and projections, propose strategies to maintain, enhance or change the social status patterns because there is a strong relationship between shifts in Indigenous social status and Indigenous peoples’/communities’ access to valued resources in Canada.

INTRODUCTION

Main Argument:

Analyzing Indigenous issues with Sociology can be a depressing

subject as it highlights the many problems/challenges Indigenous

communities and people face in Canadian society.

To help go beyond the negative dimension of Indigenous

peoples’ experiences in Canada without sugar-coating the

issues:

– 1) the course argues that the problems/issues in Indigenous

communities have solutions:

• It highlights examples of success stories of Indigenous communities and

solutions sociological theories suggest.

– 2) Students are challenged to take positive actions, through,

application of concepts and paradigms, collaboration and

communication, creativity and innovation projects, integrated

thinking, to make a difference in Indigenous communities.

INTRODUCTION

Thinking & Application:

Critical review and problem statement &

questions assignments challenge

students to develop synthetic/analytical

thinking, critical thinking, creative

thinking, design thinking, and

sustainability thinking as well as apply

compositional skills, sociological

concepts and theories.

INTRODUCTION

Collaboration & Communication:

Team work :

– a) challenges students to develop and/or

apply team skills and team leadership

abilities.

– b) provide students with opportunities to

develop and/or deepen social networking

skills to increase their social capital.

INTRODUCTION

Creativity & Innovation:

Emphasize the importance of challenging students to develop/apply research skills, critical thinking, creative thinking, design thinking, sustainability thinking, compositional ability, sociological concepts and paradigms, public speaking skills, and deep community connections.

INTRODUCTION

INTEGRATED THINKING SKILLS

Critical thinking is about the ability to assess or evaluate situations, issues,

communication, books, articles, technology, policies, programs, projects, organizations,

systems, communities, societies, countries, and/or the world to identify their substantive

flaws or gaps or missing links or problems or what improvements are necessary (Adu-

Febiri, 2014). The story of critical thinking is that new ideas are necessary.

Creative thinking is about coming up with “original ideas that have value” (Robinson,

2008), that is, the ability to imagine ideas that could be used to resolve flaws, fill gaps,

provide missing links, problem-solve, and/or provide improvements (Adu-Febiri, 2014).

The story of creative thinking is that there is hope because new ideas are always

possible.

Design thinking is the ability to use imagination to produce plans, source resources,

and coordinate tasks to implement creative ideas. The story of design thinking is that

creative ideas can turn into products and/or services (ibid.).

Sustainable Thinking is the ability to proactively connect and integrate critical thinking,

creative thinking and design thinking processes to provide products and/or services that

transform social interaction/relationships in ways that improve the quality of the human

condition without compromising the quality of the natural environment and the lives of

future generations. The story of sustainable thinking is that the quality of the existing

human condition and the quality of the lives of future generations matter (Adu-Febiri

2017).

EXPLORE:

–To know the major concepts

of the social construction of

Indigenous Status in canada

to understand the statics

dynamics of the Indigenous

lifeworlds.

MAJOR CONCEPTS

SOCIAL STATUS

Status Set—Ascribed and

Achieved, Status Symbol,

Master Status

Image and Identity

Status Quotient

Status Pattern

Social Construction

Sociological Imagination

Social Construction of Reality

SOCIAL STATUS

SOCIOLOGICAL

CONCEPTUALIZATION OF STATUS

STATUS: Socially Defined Position

within a group/society

THE STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL POSITIONS

SOCIAL STATUS(ASCRIBED & ACHIEVED))

Master

Status

Status

Symbol

Status Set

STATUS SET & MASTER STATUS

Female

Daughter20 years old Aboriginal

Sister

Classmate

Roommate

Friend

Teammate

Student

Employee

SOCIOLOGICAL CONCEPTUALIZATION OF

STATUS 1. Status is Social: --SOCIAL STATUS

The position individuals or a group of people occupy in society.

Property, Power, Prestige, and Privilege are socially welded to status—great deal of property/power/privilege/prestige, little property/power/privilege/prestige or no property/power/privilege/prestige.

2. Status is ascribed and/or achieved– Ascribed Status: not asked for nor chosen; inherited

– Achieved Status: earned or accomplished.

3. Status is identified by a sign or symbol.– Status Symbol

4. People occupy more than one status at a time.– Status Set.

5. Usually one of the statuses in one’s status set overrides or overshadows the others:

– Master Status.

QUIZ #1

The latest Canadian census data show that

the face of poverty in Canada is an Aboriginal

female living on reserve. What social position

does this representation suggest?

– A) Achieved Status

– B) Ascribed Status

– C) Status Symbol

– D) Status Deflation

SIGNIFICANCE OF SOCIAL STATUS

WHY SOCIAL STATUS IS

IMPORTANT

Social status is important because it is

the basis for:

a) the Image/Identity of a people in human

society

b) access to socially valued resources

such as power, wealth, prestige and

privilege

c) self-fulfilling prophesy and perpetuation

of prejudice and stereotypes

STATUS AND ITS IMPLICATIONS

STATUS

IMAGE IDENTITY

ACCESS TO RESOURCESSELF-FULFILLING PROPHESY &

PERSISTENCE OF STEREOTYPE

INDIGENOUS STATUS:

–a) STATUS QUOTIENT

–b) SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION

–c) STATUS PATTERN

–a) STATUS QUOTIENT

Status Quotient (SQ):

SQ is a numeric rating of social positions

derived from the Status Equation: s=Σpdc

Indigenous Status is a collective social rating

socially constructed and connected to the

roles Indigenous people play in the processes

of production, distribution and consumption in

the Canadian political economy.

QUIZ #2

On a scale of 10 (Very High) to 1

(Very Low), what is your rating of the

status or social position of the

Indigenous Peoples in Canadian

society today?

STATUS QUOTIENT: SOC 106 STUDENTS’

RATINGS OF INDIGENOUS

Year and

# of Students

LOW: 0-4 MEDIUM: 5-7 HIGH: 8-10

2016: 28

2017: 31

2018: 22

2019: 24

2020: 36

17 (60.7%)

22 (68.6%)

16 (72.7%)

13 (54.2%)

12 (33.3%)

10 (35.7%)

8 (25%)

6 (27.3%)

2 (8.3%)

19 (52.8%)

1 (3.6%)

1 (3.1%)

0 (0%)

9 (37.5%)

5 (13.9%)

Ratings

b) SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF

INDIGENOUS STATUS:

SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIONS

OF INDIGENOUS STATUS:

Indigenous status is not natural; it is

made up or socially constructed. The

social construction processes involve– layers of historical and contemporary fallacies

about Indigenous peoples that European

explorers, missionaries, scholars, thinkers, and

the western media consecrate as truths in their

attempts to denigrate Indigenous Peoples (Daniel

Mengara 2001).

• The impact is the low participation rates of Indigenous

peoples in the production, distribution and consumption

processes in the Canadian political economy

SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIONS OF

INDIGENOUS STATUS:

Indigenous Status, and its accompanying

image and identity did not exist prior to

Indigenous contact with Europeans.

Indigenous Status, image and identity

emerged only in the contact interface

contexts as part of European social

construction of the indigenous—”Red

Indians”, “Natives”, “Aboriginal”,

“Savages”.

ANALYZING WITH TWO MOST SIGNIFICANT SOCIOLOGICAL CONCEPTS

• SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGINATION:

• The predictors of human behavior/condition/destiny are macro social

forces such as culture, political economy, social closures, and

patriarchy.

• Like all other people, particular social and historical contexts

influence who you are and what you can become.

•

• SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF REALITY:

• The predictor of human behavior/condition/destiny is micro social

forces such as Human Agency.

• Within social and historical contexts you develop the ability to use

your Human Agency (self: “I” and “Me”) to shape your life and

society?

• FUSION OF THE TWO CONCEPTS:

• The predictor of human behavior/condition/destiny is the intersection

of macro social forces and micro social forces

• Fusion is represented by the theory of Structuration and the

methodology of Triangulation

ANALYZING WITH TWO MOST SIGNIFICANT

SOCIOLOGICAL CONCEPTS

• Sociological Imagination, according to Charles Wright

Mills (1959), is the quality of

mind that could see

connections between personal

troubles and macro social

forces)

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v

=BINK6r1Wy78)

C. Wright Mills

• Social Construction of Reality,according to

Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann (1966), is a process by which people creatively shape reality through social interaction. It is about the use of Human Agency or individual abilities to subjectively define social interaction situation to change lives and create/transform social structures and cultures.

Peter Berger

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BINK6r1Wy78

CONCEPTUALIZING THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION

OF INDIGENOUS STATUS

1. According to Sociological Imagination, Indigenous status is an OBJECTIVE IMAGE CONSTRUCTED [made up] by macro social forces (culture, politics, economics, education, Religion, patriarchy, etc.) in Canadian society beyond the control of Indigenous people as individuals and/or groups.

Sociological Imagination: The Power of Macro Social Forces:

Special insight and ability or quality of mind to know that social system (made up of objective macro social forces) determines statuses, and for that matter, our images and identities as well as what we get, do, know, say, feel, love, think, dream, etc. as individuals and/or groups.

2. According to Social Construction of Reality, Indigenous status is a SUBJECTIVE IDENTITY; an ever-changing micro phenomenon CONSTRUCTED [made up] through interaction among individual Indigenous people and non-Indigenous people as well as Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups.

Social Construction of Reality: The Power of Choice:

Subjective micro processes (individual and/or group definitions, interpretations, negotiations) determine statuses, and for that matter, images and identities as well as what we get, do, know, say, feel, love, think, dream, etc. as individuals and/or groups.

c) STATUS PATTERNS

SOCIOLOGY AND THE

SIGNIFICANCE OF PATTERNS Sociology conceptualizes human society as a

complex of status patterns of social relationshipsorganized around and within roles, social groups, organizations, cultures, social institutions (family, economics, politics, education, religion, media), interaction and their inter- and intra- relationships.

Sociological Agenda:

Sociology seeks to – 1) do scientific research that produces empirical evidence to

identify patterns in the social structure (status is an important component)

– 2) use theories to explain and project the patterns to enhance prediction, and where necessary,

– 3) create a better world by designing and implementing projects/programs to change human behavior/condition and/or meet particular needs and desired goals.

THE COMPLEXITY OF STATUS

PATTERN

STATUS PATTERN

ROLES

CULTURES INTERACTION

SOCIAL

INSTITUTIONS

SOCIALGROUPS

& ORGANIZATIONS

ISSUES IN THE STATUS PATTERNS

OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLE IN

CANADA

Aboriginal: First or Original Occupants– “First Nations”

“First” in those social areas that count the least

– Unemployment and poverty

– Formal educational underachievement

– Suicide

– Ill-health and Morbidity

But rarely “First” in realms that matter the most

– Property

– Power

– Privilege and Prestige

Reference: Fleras & Elliott (2003, p. 170)

CURRENT OFFICIAL STATUS

PATTERN OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLE

IN CANADA

Indigenous Status as a legal statusdetermined by the Indian Act 1876:

Four major status groups are socially constructed out of the Indian Act:

– 1. Status Indians

– 2. Non-Status Indians

– 3. Metis

– 4. Inuit



IN CANADA

Status Indians & Bill C-31s: – Governed by the Indian Act, registered with and under

the legislative and administrative competence of the federal government, affiliated with a band, may or may not be entitled to residence on a reserve, may be treaty or non-treaty.

First Nations refers to “groups of status Indian origin” (Wotherspoon & Satzewich 1993:xv). The term “First Nations was coined and first used in 1981 by the National Indian Brotherhood to address the Canadian rhetoric about the “two founding nations” (Frideres abd Gadacz 2008, p. 22).

Represented by the Assembly of First Nations



IN CANADA

Non-status Indians:– Have social or biological linkage to Indians but

not legally defined as Indian by the Crown. Ancestors were not entitled or refused/failed to register under the Indian Act or taken off the register for enfranchisement in exchange for right to vote, drink off the reserve, marry non-Indian man

Represented by the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples



IN CANADA

Metis:– Offspring of mixed European – Aboriginal unions, according to the

Constitutional Act, 1871.

Represented by the Metis National Council and the Congress of Aboriginal People

Inuit: (“Eskimos” from contact till the 1970s)– Currently not registered under the Indian Act (under the Canadian

Constitution Act, 1982), no treaties but originally included in the Indian Act

Represented by the Inuit Tapirisat

“FIRST NATIONS”: Legally speaking, “First Nations” refers to Status Indians. However, in this course “First Nations” will assume a sociological meaning, i.e., all Indigenous groups who define themselves as offspring of the first occupants of the territory now called Canada.

Ref: Blackwell (2000), Cudmore (2001), Fleras & Elliott (2003), Makin (2001), Peters (2001), Spiers (1998), Steckley & Cummins (2001), Wotherspoon & Satzewich (1993).



IN CANADA

The definitions of “Indian”, “non-status”, “Metis”, and “Inuit” are far from being settled (Frideres and Gadacz 2008: 49).

Whatever the definition of “Indians”, the legislation in place led to the government strategy of “divide and conquer” as well as assimilation. It allowed the government to create an apartheid system by placing Aboriginal peoples on reserves. Moreover, the changing definition of who is Indian has an impact on who is defined as Metis and/or Inuit (Mallea 1994).

CURRENT SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS

PATTERN OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLE IN

CANADA

POSITIVE: 1. Entrepreneurship: create businesses at a faster

rate than the national average (Howes, 2001).

2. Enrollment in post-secondary education soared from 200 in the 1960s to 27,487 in 1997 (Simpson, 1998). In 2006, 43000 Aboriginal people had university degrees (Statistics Canada 2006, AUCC 2011)

3. Have the right to vote and stand for elections into public office

4. Many Aboriginals have attained exceptionally enriched lives by integrating indigenous and mainstream EuroCanadian cultures (Fleras & Elliott, 2003).

CURRENT OFFICIAL STATUS PATTERN

OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLE IN CANADA

NEGATIVE: 1. Housing: inadequate, overcrowded, lack of basic amenities

(Frideres, 1998)

2. Employment:/Unemployment rate is three times the national average; on certain reserves up to 95% of the population are on welfare or employment insurance (Drost et al, 1995)

4. Individual incomes are half of that of all Canadians; income assistance ratio is five times that of the larger population (Purvis, 1999; Statcan 2001).

5. Most Aboriginal languages are at the verge of extinction (Fleras, 1987)

6. Violent death rate is four times the national average; there is endemic lateral violence or domestic abuse (Dorst et al , 1995)

7. Health: twice as more likely to have heart problems and cancer; five times more likely to have diabetes; AIDS epidemic is spreading (Brady, 2001).

8. Formal Education: Attainment is terribly below the Canadian average (Statcan 2001).



IN CANADA

BALANCE SHEET:

No matter what evaluation criteria used, Aboriginal peoples as a group remain at the bottom of the socio-economic heap (Bird et al, 2002).

“As a group, … most [Aboriginal peoples] live under conditions that evoke images of grinding developing-country poverty” (Fleras & Elliott, 2003, p. 177).

Some individual Indigenous People have achieved high economic and political status. However, Indigenous status as a collective or structural position is still negative.

BRIEF HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

OF THE “FIRST” STATUS PATTERN

“First”: Indigenes or Immigrants?– The Creation or Origin Legends Theses

– Migration Theses: Land Route vs. Sea Route• See Steckley & Cummins (2001: 1-15) for details.

Indigenes or Immigrants, Canadian Aboriginals were the “First” in all things that mattered before the 19th century.– Initial European Contact up to about 18th Century:

“First” in all things that mattered.

– 19th Century: A shift towards the “First” in things that didn’t matter.

SHIFTS IN INDIGENOUS

STATUS PATTERN

Contact – 1812: High Status

1812 - 1820: Irrelevant Status

1820s – 1960s: Low Status

1970s - Present: Improving but Marginal

Status

SHIFTS IN INDIGENOUS

STATUS PATTERN

High

Status

Low

Status

Contact 1812 - 1820 -1960 1970 - Present

PROCESSES AND CAUSES OF THE SHIFTS IN

INDIGENOUS STATUS PATTERN:

Economics, Legislation, Policy & Politics

1. Exploration, Trade, Evangelism, Warfare: Cooperation and Accommodation

2. Military Truce: Indifference

3. Settlement, emergence of Canadian State and industrial economy: Elimination, Marginalization, Segregation, “Assimilation”

4. Consolidation of settlement, Canadian state and industrial economy: Integration.

5. Emergence of post-industrial economy: Devolution

6. Consolidation of post-industrial economy: Conditional Autonomy or Disempowered Inclusion

PROCESSES OF THE SHIFTS IN

INDIGENOUS STATUS PATTERN

CONTACT TO 1763: COOPERATION Economics: Exploration & Commerce

Policy: No policy

Legislation: No Legislation

Politics: No systematic politicking

Status: High; Patron or Equal Partner

Ref: Miller (2001).



1763 – 1812: ACCOMMODATION Economics: Demise of commerce and beginning of

resource exploitation

Policy: Alliance

Legislation: Royal Proclamation of 1763

Politics: Imperial politics among French, British and American; The British Indian Department

Status: High; Military and Religious Allies

Ref: Allan (1993), Boldt (1993), Hall (2000), Rotman (1996), Slattery (1997), Steckley & Cummins (2001).



1812 – 1820: INDIFFERENCE

Economics: Transition to industrial economy

Policy: No Policy

Legislation: No legislation

Politics: British as the major imperial power in

Canada; The Crown unilaterally imposed its

sovereignty on Aboriginal people and lands.

Status: Irrelevance

Ref: Jhappan (1995)



1820s – 1960s: “ASSIMILATION”

Economics: Consolidation of Industrial Economy

Policy: Reservation & Assimilation (Sir John A. Macdonald’s “No more Indians” national policy

Legislation: Gradual Civilization Act of 1857; British North America Act of 1867; Gradual Enfranchisement Act of 1869; Indian Act of 1876

Politics: Canadian federalism dismissing Aboriginal peoples as apolitical communities

Status: Low; Wards (Children)

Ref: Allan (1993), Bell (1997), Kulchyski (1994), Miller (2001), Steckley & Cummins (2001), Wotherspoon & Satzewich (1993).



1960s – 1970s: PROPOSED INTEGRATION

Economics: Emergence of Post-industrial Economy

Policy: Vacuum

Legislation: No Legislation

Politics: Management of crises that the fiasco of the White Paper created

Status: Improved but Marginal; envisioning self-determination but maintaining fiduciary relations with the Crown prescribed in the Indian Act.

Ref: Brooks (1998), Frideres (1998), Rotman (1996), Weaver (1981), Wotherspoon & Satzewich (1993).



1980s: DEVOLUTION Economics: Consolidation of Post-industrial

Economy

Policy: Decentralization: Aboriginal Self-Government Municipal Style

Legislation: The Constitution Act of 1982; First Nations Land Management Act of 1986

Politics: Government direct involvement in Aboriginal communities in service delivery instead of through DIAND

Status: Improved but Marginalized constitutionally and socio-economically

Ref: Bell (1997), Fleras (1996); Fleras & Elliott (2003)



1990s – PRESENT: CONDITIONAL AUTONOMY Economics: Matured Post-Industrial Economy

Policy: A third tier (or municipal level) Aboriginal Self-Government

Legislation: Federal Policy Guide on Self-Government of 1992; Nunavut 1999; Nisga’a Final Agreement of 2000

Politics: More rhetoric than implementation: government hardly walks the walk of Aboriginal self-government

Status: Improved but still marginalized: distinct tier of government approved in principle but operate within the Canadian Federal system and Canadian Constitution; Indigenous communities are not allowed to declare independence

Ref: Brooks (1998), Fleras & Elliott (2003), Frideres (1998), Government of Canada (1994), Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (1996), Steckley & Cummins (2001).

APPLY

THE TWO UNBRELLA

SOCIOLOGICAL

CONCEPTS:• 1. Sociological Imagination

• 2. Social Construction of

Reality

Show the

relevance of these

two concepts in

accounting for the

shifts in Indigenous

Status Patterns.

APPLY: QUIZ #3

Given the historical and current

status quotient (SQ) of the

Indigenous people in Canada, what

do you think are or should be the

common desired goals of Indigenous

communities in Canada?

CREATE

BE A CHANGEMAKER;

BE A GAME- CHANGER

What creative ideas and

innovative designs would

you propose to implement

any of the goals/desires of

Indigenous communities

identified by Indigenous

students in the next three

slides to bring Indigenous

Social Status in Canada to a

full circle?

DESIRED GOALS OF INDIGENOUS

COMMUNITIES (Students’ Opinions: 2017)

1) Addressing intergenerational trauma

2) Removal of abuse against women and children in Indigenous communities

3) Obtaining more resources on reserves located in rural communities

4) Healing residential school survivors

5) Abolish the Indian Act

6) Improve living conditions

7) Healing Residential School survivors

8) Improve self-esteem/Indigenous identities

9) Combat racism

10) Bring more resources to the communities (clean water, stores, schools)

11) Decolonization: Reclaim health culture

12) Control over natural resources

13) Celebrate Positive Stories

14) Learning to be healthy in the settlers’ world

15) Spread awareness to non-Indigenous communities about the living

situations of Indigenous peoples

16) End stereotypes and stigma


COMMUNITIES (Students’ Opinions: 2018)

1. Reconnect with Culture/Traditions

2. Increase Postsecondary Educational opportunities

3. Resolve the land claims issue; Protect Land

4. Empowerment/Self-governance

5. Develop Indigenous Identity

6. Create Unity within/among Indigenous Communities

7. Create Equality

8. Honour Treaties

9. Have Healthy people

10. Develop Children

11. Solve Poverty issue

12. Provide Educational and Cultural opportunities for the Youth

13. Provide Job Opportunities


COMMUNITIES (2019) 1. Indigenous Solutions

2. Equality

3. Respect and Understanding

4. Strong/good Leadership

5. Housing

6. Indigenous Teachers

7. Self-governance or self-determination

8. Health care on Reserves

9. Elimination of Poverty

10. Good Education

11. Positive Role Models

12. Preservation and Revival Culture

13. Larger Lands/Property

14. Unity

15. Elimination of domestic and other Lateral Violence

16. Language Revitalization

17. Identity that Empowers

CONCLUSION

The social status of Indigenous Canadians has devolved (from high to low/negative) and is evolving (from negative, through marginal, and hopefully to high again).

The shift seems to be moving to a full-circle: from peoples and allies through wards to citizens to minorities and is moving towards peoples.

The shift is mainly a function of the shifts in the western controlled/driven global political economy.

REFERENCES: ASA STYLE

Allan, Robert. 1993. His majesty’s Indian Allies: British Indian Policy in the Defence of Canada 1774-1815. Toronto: Dundurn Press.

Bell, Catherine. 1997. “Metis Constitutional Rights in Section 35(1).” Alberta Law Review 36(1):180-204.

Bird, John, Lorraine Land, and Murray Macadam. 2002. Nation to Nation: Aboriginal Sovereignty and the Future of Canada (2nd

ed.). Toronto: Irwin.

Blackwell, Tom. 2000. “Judge Rules Metis Don’t Need License to Hunt in Ontario”. National Post. 21 January.

Boldt, Edward. 1993. Surviving as Indians: The Challenges of Government. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Brady, Margaret. 2001. “A Separate Heal Crisis.” National Post. 19 July.

Brooks, Stephen. 1998. Public Policy in Canada: An Introduction. Toronto: Oxford University Press.

REFERENCES

Cudmore, James. 2001. Inuk Accuses Ottawa of Discrimination”. National Post. 22 March.

Fleras, A. and Jean L. Elliott. 2003. Unequal Relations: An Introduction to Race and Ethnic Dynamics in Canada. Toronto: Prentice Hall.

Frideres, James and Rene Gadacz. 2008. Aboriginal Peoples in Canada. Eighth Edition, Scarborough: Prentice Hall.

Hall, Anthony J. 2000. “Racial Discrimination in Legislation, Litigation, Legend and Lore.” Canadian Ethnic Studies 32(2): 119-37

Howes, Carol. 2001. “The New Native Economy.” National Post, 27 January.

Jhappan, Radha. 1995. “The Federal-Provincial Power Grid and Aboriginal Self-Government.” pp. 155-186 in New Trends in Canadian Federalism. F. Rocher and M. Smith (eds.). Broadview Press.

REFERENCES

Kulchyski, Peter (ed.). 1994. Unjust Relations: Aboriginal Rights in Canadian Courts. Toronto: Oxford University Press.

Makin, Kirk. 2001. “Court Recognizes Metis as Distinct People.” National Post, 24 February.

Miller, J.R. 2001. Skyscrapers Hide the Heavens: A History of Indian White Relations in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Peters, Evelyn. 2001. “Geographies of Aboriginal Peoplein Canada.” The Canadian Geographer 45(1):138-44

Simpson, J. 1998. “Aboriginal Conundrum.” The Globe and Mail15 October.

Slattery, Brian. 1997. “Recollection of Historical practice.” Pp. 76-82 in Justice for Natives: Search for a Common Ground.Andrea P. Morrison (ed.). Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen’s Press.

REFERENCES

Spiers, Rosemary. 1998. “Apology to Natives Should Have Come From Chretien.” The Toronto Star 8 January.

Steckley, John L. and Bryan D. Cummins. 2001. Full Circle: Canada’s First Nations. Toronto: Prentice Hall.

Weaver, Sally. 1981. Making Canadian Indian Policy: The Hidden Agenda, 1968-1970. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Wotherspoon, Terry and Vic Satzewich. 1993. First Nations: Race, Class, and Gender Relations.Toronto: Nelson Canada.

INDIGENOUS STATUS IN CANADA - sites.camosun.ca · flaws or gaps or missing links or problems or...

Documents

Transcript of INDIGENOUS STATUS IN CANADA - sites.camosun.ca · flaws or gaps or missing links or problems or...