In conclusion the oppression of Native Americans is an often overlooked subject. It's important to learn about this and be aware of it because many Native Americans still live on reservations. Their oppression has not yet dissipated completely and not until recently, as recently as 1962, were they allowed to vote in every state. So we must be well informed in order to continue to dissipate Native American oppression and try to correct the mistakes of the
Aboriginal women of Canada have struggled since 1967 to have their right to identity and their civil and political rights recognized. Part of this battle included changing century-old provisions in the Indian Act which banished women from their families and communities by forcing them to give up their Indian status, Band membership, and, essentially, their identity as Aboriginal women if they married outside their race (Leslie and Macguire 25).(f.1) The Tory government amended the Indian Act in June 1985 through Bill C-31. Aboriginal women 's struggle continues, however, as some Indian Chiefs are trying to overturn the amendments in court, claiming they interfere with their jurisdiction to determine membership in their own communities. It is my position that the civil and political rights of Indian women are fundamental human rights, and that they are Aboriginal rights which are now recognized under section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982.(f.2) These rights have never be extinguished and they continue to exist.
For several hundreds of years, Aboriginals have been impacted by the Indian Act in many ways. They have dealt with numerous challenges that have changed their lives forever. Laws were created by the Canadian government with the purpose of controlling Natives and assimilating them into Canadian culture.For multiple years,
Treaty benefits, health, rights to living on the reserve and property are forfeited as a result of losing Indian status. This also happens when an Indian women gets married to another Indian man. She loses her rights to her own band, and has to become a member of her husband’s band. Ultimately, if the women becomes widowed or abandoned then she loses all status of being an Indian all together. On the other hand, men can marry a non-status woman and all of his rights would be kept. With strides of equality throughout history, it takes a step back when Aboriginal women are entirely dependent of their husband. Several cases were took to court in the 1970’s, but not until 1980 is when there was a connection found between the United Nations Human Rights Committee and the Canadian Human Rights Act. With this section in direct violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the removal of a woman’s Indian status while marrying a non-Indian man was done and Bill C-31 was passed so victims of the Indian Act can be reimbursed. However, Bill C-31 is still under scrutiny because those who have their status reinstated to them can only pass it on for one generation. This is a violation under Section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Payne, 1992). The Indian Act is a controversial piece of legislation that was passed in 1876. It has been amended throughout the times, but the core concept of the Indian Act still
In modern society the question of why the aboriginal population receives benefits often arises. Much of today’s youth does not understand that the Native American people were often stripped of their rights in the past in order to gain these advantages. Two main incidents were established in the Aboriginal history, the first was the treaties that spread across Canada and the second incident was the Indian Act of 1876. The main difference between the Indian Act and treaties were the aboriginal’s role in the decision-making. Treaties allowed for a compromise between the Natives and the government that allowed for benefits on both ends whereas the Indian act
The Indian Act was an attempt by the Canadian government to assimilate the aboriginals into the Canadian society through means such as Enfranchisement, the creation of elective band councils, the banning of aboriginals seeking legal help, and through the process of providing the Superintendent General of the Indian Affairs extreme control over the aboriginals, such as allowing the Superintendent to decide who receives certain benefits, during the earlier stages of the Canadian-Indigenous' political interaction. The failure of the Indian Act though only led to more confusion regarding the interaction of Canada and the aboriginals, giving birth to the failed White Paper and the unconstitutional Bill C-31,
The Canadian government has great control of where the aboriginals are situated and what resources and services are made available to them. In 1876 the Indian act was created by the Canadian government (Indian Act). “The Indian act is a Canadian federal law that governs and matters pertaining to Indian statuses, bands, and Indian reserves”(Indian Act). A part of the Indian Act made the government give some crown land to the Aboriginals; the
The Indian Act was a challenge by the Canadian government to adjust the aboriginals into the Canadian culture including bring in residential schools, separating every First Nations in trying to “improve”, and practice them for standard society (Emberley, 2009). First Nations people were also not allowed to possess any land or offer the land that used to be theirs before the Indian act as this segregation put limits maintaining or even owning anything (Emberley, 2009). This lead to the point on everything being restricted for the First Nations including losing history, practicing
With the proposal of the ‘Statement of the Government of Canada on Indian Policy’ (hereafter referred to as the White Paper) in 1969 by Jean Chretien, existing tensions over the role and future of First Nations within Canadian society would finally come to a head. Prior to the introduction of this policy, government bureaucrats and missionary organizations had finally begun to realize that directed change and economic development were not taking place amongst First Nations communities as they had wanted, and decided in the favor of a change. This change in policy brought about the White Paper, which was a cleverly veiled assimilationist proposal of the Canadian government to the First Nations peoples of their country. This shift in policy
Two sections of the Indian Act are particularly discriminatory against Indigenous women. Section 12(1)(b) of the Indian Act states that women who marry outside of their band were to lose status, seize association with their own community, they lose ownership over any property located on the reserve and any property inherited that is located on the reserve land (Lawrence 2004: Jamieson 1978). These women would also lose access to any rights they had with status, including taking part in any band business or voting (Lawrence 2004: Jamieson 1978). Any children born to a woman who married outside her community would not be granted status or considered “Indian” in the eyes of the government and this woman and her children may be prohibited from returning to live with her family regardless of illness, need, divorce, death of her husband or separation (Jamieson 1978). Finally, through this section of the Indian act, upon marriage of an “outsider” an Indigenous woman loses her right to be buried on her reserve land with her ancestors (Jamieson 1978). Section 12(1)(a)(iv) also known as the “double mother clause” states that an “Indian born of a marriage entered into after September 4th, 1952 lost entitlement to registration at the age of 21 years if his/her mother and paternal grandmother were not entitled to registration as Indians before marriages” (Sterritt 2007).
From its birth, America was a place of inequality and privilege. Since Columbus 's arrival and up until present day, Native American tribes have been victim of white men 's persecution and tyranny. This was first expressed in the 1800’s, when Native Americans were driven off their land and forced to embark on the Trail of Tears, and again during the Western American- Indian War where white Americans massacred millions of Native Americans in hatred. Today, much of the Indian Territory that was once a refuge for Native Americans has since been taken over by white men, and the major tribes that once called these reservations home are all but gone. These events show the discrimination and oppression the Native Americans faced. They were, and continue to be, pushed onto reservations,
The primary goal of the Indian Act was to demolish any Aboriginal Canadians attempt to sovereignty and self-determination. Its promise to provide adequate living condition on reserves and social welfare services are few of many broken promises that Aboriginal Canadians did not acquire. Instead the Indian act consisted of assimilating policies stripping aboriginal Canadians of their status. “The principle behind the Act was that it was the Crown 's responsibility to care for and protect interests of First Nations people by acting as their "guardians" until such time as they could reach a level of sophistication that allowed them to fully integrate into Canadian society” (Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development of Canada, 2011). This quote, taken right from the Government of Canada’s website is an example of how the Federal government defines the Indian Act today. Terminology used amplifying control; “sophistication” is important indicators of colonization and assimilation tactics in which the government imposed in the past, and upheld today. A major implication of the Indian Act included Aboriginal identity in terms of status and
Thomas Flanagan disapproves the idea of Native sovereignty ever coexisting with Canadian sovereignty. Flanagan identifies the flaws in Townshend’s arguments referring to them as a theoretical approach and not a practical approach. It is true that the sharing of jurisdictional power is the essence of the Canadian state but this cannot apply to the Aboriginals of Canada. One reason a third level of government cannot work in Canada is “In the 10 provinces, Canada has over six hundred Indian bands living on more than 2200 reserves, plus hundreds of thousands of Métis and non-status Indians who do not possess reserves,” (Flanagan 44). Flanagan draws the fact that “No one has proposed a workable mechanism by which this far-flung archipelago could
These ‘White Papers’ focused on the social and economic problems that were rampant within the First Nation communities and was considered to be humane because of the fact that Native peoples were integrated within mainstream society [pp.6]. These problems were ‘highlighted’ through the result of various studies conducted by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development from 1966 to 1969 and became the basis of the ‘White Paper’. Although the paper was ultimately defeated, these beliefs were brought into mainstream society and became a more idolized form of modernizing the Aboriginal peoples. This form of ‘helping’ the First Nations peoples was the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development [D.I.A.N.D] way of dissolving the First Nations reservations. These institutionalized ideologies were masked as social and economic reforms that addressed the First Nation communities [pp.5-6]. Such reforms include the state of welfare on First Nation communities, re-educating the youth, and the identification of a First Nations person according to the government, which also includes the apology that Prime Minister Harper spoke on June 11th, 2008. These ideals have become the driving force behind the United Nation’s ‘Universal Declaration of Indigenous Rights’. This declaration has yet to be signed by Canada for a variety of reasons, one of them being that it is in direct violation of Article 25, which is a right to social services and health
Many instances of life has terrible misunderstandings involving different ways of how we further see how everything should and should not be, and U.S. History is no exception to this phenomenon. The Indian reform movement of the late 1800s provides many examples of cultural misunderstandings and how unsuccessful the outcomes can be. As were seen in the actions and misguided beliefs of the white activists of that time, good intentions are often not good enough to create positive and effective change. The supremacist attitude that the reformers had towards the American Indian culture would only add to their experiences of injustice throughout the “development” of the New