Native Americans, their own worst enemies?

[Valystria]

These ethnicity-based tax havens ought to be abolished. There is nothing egalitarian or fair about a state-sanctioned parallel society tied to ethnic status. Privileges based on race? Strange how it's not racist when it's indigenous people doing it...

You don't think that saying, for instance, racial group A has to pay taxes on certain goods, but racial group B does not, is racist?

Let's just take two examples.

Tobacco, and seal hunting.

because they're not ethnicity based, they're nationality based and race is irrelevant. A State can have more than one nation under its common sovereignty and recognition of the existence of indigenous rights is recognition of an Indigenous Nation distinct from the settler nation established in the same or overlapping territory. Its really no different to a person with dual-citizenship being subject to two different legal codes as they move between territories

http://www.voyageurmetis.org/status/status_e.htm

Q. I applied to the wrong group and they refused me. Why can't I just be accepted into the right group when I apply?

A. Because there are different organizations that represent different types of Metis, depending on your ancestry and culture, you need to apply to the group that fits your line.

No, it is not nationality based. It's race and ethnicity. It is not possible to join this "nationality" without being of the right ethnic stock and racial background. Racism.

In fact, they have two different categories for status based on if the indigenous person is of pure indigenous ethnic and racial stock, or if they are mixed with European lineage in which case they are downgraded to the Metis category.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Act#.22Indian.22

Only those on the official Indian Register maintained by the federal government (or a local "band list" in some cases) are Status Indians, subject to the full legal benefits and restrictions of the Indian Act. Notably this excludes Métis people, Inuit people, and so-called Non-Status Indians. Various amendments and court decisions have repeatedly altered the rules regarding who is eligible for Indian Status. Many bands now maintain their own band lists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9tis

In Canada, the Métis, as defined by the Constitution Act 1982, are Aboriginal people. They are descendants of specific mixed First Nations and European ancestry who self-identify as Métis, and are accepted into their current community.

It's a system of privileges based on race. It doesn't get more racist than that.

All it would take to replace this racial privileges system would be the repeal of the Indian Act. There is no excuse for state-sanctioned racism in this day and age. We ought to be better than that. All citizens should have equality under the law, and not having rights tied to ethnic and racial background.

[Infected Mushroom]

As long as the Indian Act remains, Canada will remain a racist nation. It doesn't get any simpler than that. You want to help the poor in general? Fine. You want to carve out special benefits and aid to people of specific ethnic backgrounds and promote a racist narrative of historical guilt? Not cool. Its racist.

[Cetacea]

because they're not ethnicity based, they're nationality based and race is irrelevant. A State can have more than one nation under its common sovereignty and recognition of the existence of indigenous rights is an explicit of a Indigenous Nation distinct from the settler nation established in the same or overlapping territory. Its really no different to a person with dual-citizenship being subject to two different legal codes as they move between territories

Race is entirely relevant. A white person can't apply for reserve Indian status.

A lot of Native Canadians can't apply for Indian status either because Indian under Canadian law is a legal status not a race

the law is racist in that it attempts to limit membership of an Indigenous Nation in the Canadian State by creation of a legal status that denies rights of certain people as compared to other members of their family. It is not racist to Canadians whose ancestors were from Europe or Africa or India as they were never part of the Indigenous nations being delimited by Colonial law

[Seangoli]

because they're not ethnicity based, they're nationality based and race is irrelevant. A State can have more than one nation under its common sovereignty and recognition of the existence of indigenous rights is an explicit of a Indigenous Nation distinct from the settler nation established in the same or overlapping territory. Its really no different to a person with dual-citizenship being subject to two different legal codes as they move between territories

Race is entirely relevant. A white person can't apply for reserve Indian status.

In the US, it is entirely tribe-specific as to whether you are eligible for tribal affiliation. Some are extremely strict, with a 5/8's blood quantum, and others have no set requirement beyond being able to prove ancestry with the tribe through census data.

That said, it's not wholly racial in context; the reservations were in no small part set up due to treaties (And changed often through unilateral alteration of said treaties by the government). The reservations are a lot more politically based than one would think; they were set up in the first place largely because Native Americans didn't want to join with the various governments in place.

Equally, being a member of a tribe, and particularly living on a reservation, does not provide you with as much as you would think; aside from being provided a very meager level of basic assistance (That is quite frankly sub-standard in other communities), the "services" they receive are often poor or present only in theory, not in practice. While most tribes provide "free" health care, for instance, the clinics are often underfunded and understaffed to the point where health care is at best spotty in many reservations. Much of the monetary assistance they receive are either required to be paid through specific treaties (And are pretty piss-poor), or comes from Reservation based activities, namely Casinos (Which creates a no small wonder that reservations with Casinos tend to have the strictest membership eligibility requirements). Follow up with a strong cultural attitude of ostracizing leaving the Reservation permanently for school and/or work, as well a complete lack of any form of actual work *on* the reservation, and it's not a bed of roses. The "benefits" are barely more than enough to survive-and in some cases aren't even that.

It's also not given out purely on a race basis; while there is an intersection with being of Native descent and these benefits, the intersection comes from the fact that the treaties involved were signed between the various governments and a seperate political entity, which by definition was a separate race.

[Infected Mushroom]

Race is entirely relevant. A white person can't apply for reserve Indian status.

A lot of Native Canadians can't apply for Indian status either because Indian under Canadian law is a legal status not a race

but only Native Canadians can apply, that is the key

If a law says ''Only White people with a former job as a construction worker can apply to get X benefit'' the fact that SOME white people can't apply for it doesn't change the fact that its racist because only white people are offered the benefit

[Kubra]

because they're not ethnicity based, they're nationality based and race is irrelevant. A State can have more than one nation under its common sovereignty and recognition of the existence of indigenous rights is recognition of an Indigenous Nation distinct from the settler nation established in the same or overlapping territory. Its really no different to a person with dual-citizenship being subject to two different legal codes as they move between territories

http://www.voyageurmetis.org/status/status_e.htm

Q. I applied to the wrong group and they refused me. Why can't I just be accepted into the right group when I apply?

A. Because there are different organizations that represent different types of Metis, depending on your ancestry and culture, you need to apply to the group that fits your line.

No, it is not nationality based. It's race and ethnicity. It is not possible to join this "nationality" without being of the right ethnic stock and racial background. Racism.

In fact, they have two different categories for status based on if the indigenous person is of pure indigenous ethnic and racial stock, or if they are mixed with European lineage in which case they are downgraded to the Metis category.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Act#.22Indian.22

Only those on the official Indian Register maintained by the federal government (or a local "band list" in some cases) are Status Indians, subject to the full legal benefits and restrictions of the Indian Act. Notably this excludes Métis people, Inuit people, and so-called Non-Status Indians. Various amendments and court decisions have repeatedly altered the rules regarding who is eligible for Indian Status. Many bands now maintain their own band lists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9tis

In Canada, the Métis, as defined by the Constitution Act 1982, are Aboriginal people. They are descendants of specific mixed First Nations and European ancestry who self-identify as Métis, and are accepted into their current community.

It's a system of privileges based on race. It doesn't get more racist than that.

All it would take to replace this racial privileges system would be the repeal of the Indian Act. There is no excuse for state-sanctioned racism in this day and age. We ought to be better than that. All citizens should have equality under the law, and not having rights tied to ethnic and racial background.

>downgraded to Metis
And on what grounds do you suppose Metis status to be a downgrade?

[Ostroeuropa]

You don't even really need to repeal the Indian act.
Just repeal the act giving Indians automatic citizenship in canada (A fairly recent development), and then ban dual citizenship of First Nation/Canada.

That way, everyone can be happy. Canadian citizens will be equal, and those who really want to stick to their traditional tribal culture can do so.

You could expedite Indian applications for canadian citizenship, provided they abandon their status as a member of a First Nation.

Traditional first nationers would lose the right to vote and some ancilliary rights, but retain the right to have a voice in tribal political successions and the rights membership of the tribe gives.

To do otherwise is as absurd as me demanding french, german, italian, spanish, austrian, swiss, and turkish citizenship because my ancestors got kicked out of europe.

[Cetacea]

A lot of Native Canadians can't apply for Indian status either because Indian under Canadian law is a legal status not a race

but only Native Canadians can apply, that is the key

If a law says ''Only White people with a former job as a construction worker can apply to get X benefit'' the fact that SOME white people can't apply for it doesn't change the fact that its racist because only white people are offered the benefit

no only members of Bands can apply for the status which as I have explained is recognition of their Nationhood distinct from the settler Nation of Canada.

the reason why europeans are unable to be part of those Indigenous Nations is due to time ie they weren't present when the Bands were formed and thus are not part of that nationhood.

[Valystria]

No, it is not nationality based. It's race and ethnicity. It is not possible to join this "nationality" without being of the right ethnic stock and racial background. Racism.

In fact, they have two different categories for status based on if the indigenous person is of pure indigenous ethnic and racial stock, or if they are mixed with European lineage in which case they are downgraded to the Metis category.


It's a system of privileges based on race. It doesn't get more racist than that.

All it would take to replace this racial privileges system would be the repeal of the Indian Act. There is no excuse for state-sanctioned racism in this day and age. We ought to be better than that. All citizens should have equality under the law, and not having rights tied to ethnic and racial background.

>downgraded to Metis
And on what grounds do you suppose Metis status to be a downgrade?

The same grounds as the federal government.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Act#.22Indian.22

Only those on the official Indian Register maintained by the federal government (or a local "band list" in some cases) are Status Indians, subject to the full legal benefits and restrictions of the Indian Act. Notably this excludes Métis people, Inuit people, and so-called Non-Status Indians. Various amendments and court decisions have repeatedly altered the rules regarding who is eligible for Indian Status. Many bands now maintain their own band lists.

Having been excluded from the Indian Act which gave privileges based on racial and ethnic lineage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9tis

In Canada, the Métis, as defined by the Constitution Act 1982, are Aboriginal people.

Only having been defined as Aboriginal since 1982.

In 2013, the Daniels Decision ruled that Métis people were legally considered 'Indian' under section 95 of the Constitution. This does not mean that Métis peoples are a First Nation, but rather that they are a federal responsibility. First Nations are distinct from Métis peoples, and they are not synonyms. The case is being appealed.

Not being considered a "First Nation" as the indigenous Aboriginal people of sufficiently pure ethnic and racial lineage are.

On April 14th 2016, the Supreme Court reached a landmark decision giving full Indigenous rights to approximately 700,000 Métis.

Not having had full Indigenous privileges up until yesterday. And regardless of that, they are maintained in their own "separate but equal" category, officially categorized as not being their own nation, and not being part of the First Nations. This is called separate but equal.

You can't be fully indigenous unless your racial and ethnic background is pure, but as of yesterday we're giving you equal privileges with the First Nations. But no, you can't be a part of them because your lineage is not sufficiently pure. A lesser category? It clearly is to the federal government, and arguably continues to be due to the Separate but Equal rationale.

[Kubra]

You don't even really need to repeal the Indian act.
Just repeal the act giving Indians automatic citizenship in canada (A fairly recent development), and then ban dual citizenship of First Nation/Canada.

That way, everyone can be happy. Canadian citizens will be equal, and those who really want to stick to their traditional tribal culture can do so.

You could expedite Indian applications for canadian citizenship, provided they abandon their status as a member of a First Nation.

Traditional first nationers would lose the right to vote and some ancilliary rights, but retain the right to have a voice in tribal political successions and the rights membership of the tribe gives.

To do otherwise is as absurd as me demanding french, german, italian, spanish, austrian, swiss, and turkish citizenship because my ancestors got kicked out of europe.

And what do you suppose "traditional tribal culture" involves?
You are aware that all first nations people, provided they were born in Canada, which they probably were, are legally Canadian citizens, right?

[Frank Zipper]

So it's not cowboys after all?

[Ostroeuropa]

You don't even really need to repeal the Indian act.
Just repeal the act giving Indians automatic citizenship in canada (A fairly recent development), and then ban dual citizenship of First Nation/Canada.

That way, everyone can be happy. Canadian citizens will be equal, and those who really want to stick to their traditional tribal culture can do so.

You could expedite Indian applications for canadian citizenship, provided they abandon their status as a member of a First Nation.

Traditional first nationers would lose the right to vote and some ancilliary rights, but retain the right to have a voice in tribal political successions and the rights membership of the tribe gives.

To do otherwise is as absurd as me demanding french, german, italian, spanish, austrian, swiss, and turkish citizenship because my ancestors got kicked out of europe.

And what do you suppose "traditional tribal culture" involves?
You are aware that all first nations people, provided they were born in Canada, which they probably were, are legally Canadian citizens, right?

Yes, they are legally canadian citizens, but that is a fairly recent development. I'm suggesting it be changed. If they weren't legally canadians my proposal would make no sense.

[Infected Mushroom]

but only Native Canadians can apply, that is the key

If a law says ''Only White people with a former job as a construction worker can apply to get X benefit'' the fact that SOME white people can't apply for it doesn't change the fact that its racist because only white people are offered the benefit

no only members of Bands can apply for the status which as I have explained is recognition of their Nationhood distinct from the settler Nation of Canada.

the reason why europeans are unable to be part of those Indigenous Nations is due to time ie they weren't present when the Bands were formed and thus are not part of that nationhood.

thats still judging and disqualifying people based on ethnic heritage and ancestry, hence racist

[Sanctissima]

Maybe "racism" isn't the technical word for it, but it is certainly a form of discrimination.

Actually, in Canada, the people who came up with the term didn't even try to hide it, unlike their counterparts in the US. Whereas the Americans called it "affirmative action", we just called it "positive discrimination". Either way, the intent is the same: voluntary segregation.

How do you get "voluntary segregation" from racial discrimination?

And I'm not being sarcastic. I really don't know what you mean.

As far as Aboriginal reserves are concerned in Canada (and the US too, really), it's a willful segregation. When a racial minority benefits from racial discrimination, they tend to want to keep intact that discrimination.

[Cetacea]

Traditional first nationers would lose the right to vote and some ancilliary rights, but retain the right to have a voice in tribal political successions and the rights membership of the tribe gives.

To do otherwise is as absurd as me demanding french, german, italian, spanish, austrian, swiss, and turkish citizenship because my ancestors got kicked out of europe.

you do know that Nation and State are not the same thing right? Nation is a group of people with a shared culture whereas State is a political structure holding power over a territory

Nationailty means membership of a Nation whereas Citizenship is membership of a State. You can infact gain Spanish or Turkish citizenship if you wish (I'm not sure what the residential requirements are for those states) but that doesn't grant you that nationality.

equally a person from Vancouver can be from the Squamish nation and have Canadian citizenship - they're not inherently linked, since citizen is also a legal status granted by the state.

[Ostroeuropa]

Traditional first nationers would lose the right to vote and some ancilliary rights, but retain the right to have a voice in tribal political successions and the rights membership of the tribe gives.

To do otherwise is as absurd as me demanding french, german, italian, spanish, austrian, swiss, and turkish citizenship because my ancestors got kicked out of europe.

you do know that Nation and State are not the same thing right? Nation is a group of people with a shared culture whereas State is a political structure holding power over a territory

Nationailty means membership of a Nation whereas Citizenship is membership of a State. You can infact gain Spanish or Turkish citizenship if you wish (I'm not sure what the residential requirements are for those states) but that doesn't grant you that nationality.

equally a person from Vancouver can be from the Squamish nation and have Canadian citizenship.

Sure, but i'm proposing that be changed.

[Kubra]

>downgraded to Metis
And on what grounds do you suppose Metis status to be a downgrade?

The same grounds as the federal government.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Act#.22Indian.22

Only those on the official Indian Register maintained by the federal government (or a local "band list" in some cases) are Status Indians, subject to the full legal benefits and restrictions of the Indian Act. Notably this excludes Métis people, Inuit people, and so-called Non-Status Indians. Various amendments and court decisions have repeatedly altered the rules regarding who is eligible for Indian Status. Many bands now maintain their own band lists.

Having been excluded from the Indian Act which gave privileges based on racial and ethnic lineage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9tis

In Canada, the Métis, as defined by the Constitution Act 1982, are Aboriginal people.

Only having been defined as Aboriginal since 1982.

In 2013, the Daniels Decision ruled that Métis people were legally considered 'Indian' under section 95 of the Constitution. This does not mean that Métis peoples are a First Nation, but rather that they are a federal responsibility. First Nations are distinct from Métis peoples, and they are not synonyms. The case is being appealed.

Not being considered a "First Nation" as the indigenous Aboriginal people of sufficiently pure ethnic and racial lineage are.

On April 14th 2016, the Supreme Court reached a landmark decision giving full Indigenous rights to approximately 700,000 Métis.

Not having had full Indigenous privileges up until yesterday. And regardless of that, they are maintained in their own "separate but equal" category, officially categorized as not being their own nation, and not being part of the First Nations. This is called separate but equal.

You can't be fully indigenous unless your racial and ethnic background is pure, but as of yesterday we're giving you equal privileges with the First Nations. But no, you can't be a part of them because your lineage is not sufficiently pure. A lesser category? It clearly is to the federal government, and arguably continues to be due to the Separate but Equal rationale.

Metis culture was itself halfway european, early political demands by Louis Riel would seem in some ways to be demands one would expect of the average rural Quebecois (this is a given, what with their common heritage), such as protection for french speaking catholics (which the metis were, at the time) in majority anglo-protestant lands. Before 1982, Metis folks could be and were recognized as indians and negotatiate as indians, the michel band in treaty 6 territory did, albeit not as metis (they legally couldn't) but as mohawk. The political project surrounding the ascendancy of the metis identity, included actual armed conflict with the feds, was not about indian status but about indian status as Metis, as a unique political and culture identity differing from the preceding aboriginal identities like Mohawk and Iroqouis.

[Sanctissima]

you do know that Nation and State are not the same thing right? Nation is a group of people with a shared culture whereas State is a political structure holding power over a territory

Nationailty means membership of a Nation whereas Citizenship is membership of a State. You can infact gain Spanish or Turkish citizenship if you wish (I'm not sure what the residential requirements are for those states) but that doesn't grant you that nationality.

equally a person from Vancouver can be from the Squamish nation and have Canadian citizenship.

Sure, but i'm proposing that be changed.

That... would be akin to creating a State within a State. I'd rather avoid that.

[Kubra]

And what do you suppose "traditional tribal culture" involves?
You are aware that all first nations people, provided they were born in Canada, which they probably were, are legally Canadian citizens, right?

Yes, they are legally canadian citizens, but that is a fairly recent development. I'm suggesting it be changed. If they weren't legally canadians my proposal would make no sense.

Oh, you're suggesting canadian citizenship for status indians ought to be revoke, then?

[Ostroeuropa]

Yes, they are legally canadian citizens, but that is a fairly recent development. I'm suggesting it be changed. If they weren't legally canadians my proposal would make no sense.

Oh, you're suggesting canadian citizenship for status indians ought to be revoke, then?

Other countries have previously banned dual citizenship.

Sure, but i'm proposing that be changed.

That... would be akin to creating a State within a State. I'd rather avoid that.

It's a more appropriate solution to the historical situation and it allows equality for canadian citizens under the law, while also acknowledging the traditional cultures and practices of the first nations.
Expediting natives application for canadian citizenship (provided they relinquish first nation status) would be best though. Is there a reason you'd avoid it?

[Kubra]

Oh, you're suggesting canadian citizenship for status indians ought to be revoke, then?

Other countries have previously banned dual citizenship.

So you want duel citizenship in general done away with?

[Sanctissima]

Oh, you're suggesting canadian citizenship for status indians ought to be revoke, then?

Other countries have previously banned dual citizenship.

That... would be akin to creating a State within a State. I'd rather avoid that.

It's a more appropriate solution to the historical situation and it allows equality for canadian citizens under the law, while also acknowledging the traditional cultures and practices of the first nations.
Expediting natives application for canadian citizenship (provided they relinquish first nation status) would be best though.

I'd prefer the latter option.

Having reserves become States within States would be... very odd.

[Ostroeuropa]

Other countries have previously banned dual citizenship.

So you want duel citizenship in general done away with?

No, there is also a precedent for targeting it toward specific citizenships being banned. I would use the mechanism to solve this issue by prompting natives to choose between first nation status, with the accompanying rights and tax exemptions, or canadian status.

[Sanctissima]

So you want duel citizenship in general done away with?

No, there is also a precedent for targeting it toward specific citizenships being banned. I would use the mechanism to solve this issue by prompting natives to choose between first nation status, with the accompanying rights and tax exemptions, or canadian status.

Why not just abolish the reserves, take away special rights and tax exemptions, and proceed to turn the former reserves into their own municipalities or integrate them into existing ones? That seems to be what you ultimately want, integrating them, so why not just go for the direct approach?

[Ostroeuropa]

No, there is also a precedent for targeting it toward specific citizenships being banned. I would use the mechanism to solve this issue by prompting natives to choose between first nation status, with the accompanying rights and tax exemptions, or canadian status.

Why not just abolish the reserves, take away special rights and tax exemptions, and proceed to turn the former reserves into their own municipalities or integrate them into existing ones? That seems to be what you ultimately want, integrating them, so why not just go for the direct approach?

I would prefer them be integrated, but I can also recognize that they should be allowed, if they want to, to retain their traditional cultures and independence.
Your proposal would be what I would do if I weren't concerned about the implication of their culture being entirely snuffed out by force of arms. (Without the exemptions on regulations, their traditional society would collapse.)

I'd also take it as preferable to the current situation.