Red Skin White Masks Analysis

One of the most contentious issues in Canada's history is that of the Metis. Some people feel this unique group of people does not deserve any sort of recognition, whereas others believe their unique history and culture is something to be recognized and cherished. The history of the Metis people is filled with struggle; not only struggles against other powers, but also a struggle for self-identification. Despite strong opposition, the Metis people of Canada have matured as a political force and have taken great strides towards being recognized as a unique people.

Throughout the 1950’s and 1960’s Canada achieves it’s ‘just society” by developing equal and fair rights through collective rights for some of its most affected groups. Canada achieved its goal in becoming a just society by amending the collective rights of the Aboriginals. Since Confederation the Federal

J.R. Miller’s article entitled “Victoria’s “Red Children”: The “Great White Queen Mother” and Native-Newcomer Relations in Canada” was published in July 2008 in the Native Studies Review, Vol. 17 Issue 1, p1 -23. The article examines how even though First Nations people suffered tremendously during Queen Victoria’s reign, they maintained their strong allegiance to the Crown mostly due to their kinship mentality. Miller notes that slowly but noticeably, by the end of Victoria’s reign the Great White Queen’s Red Children were beginning to adjust their rhetoric to use the Crown and imperial government at Westminster as counterweights against national and provincial governments within Canada that were oppressing them.

Townshend describes how Aboriginals view the Canadian government as a foreign government. Furthermore, Townshend disputes the process of assimilation, integrating Aboriginals to the modern Canadian society. The solution is to create a third tier government that would work in cohesion with the Federal and Provincial levels. Different levels of government and the “…sharing of jurisdictional powers between government institutions is already part of the essence of the Canadian state,” (Townshend 39). If Canada is able to increase globalization and trade agreements on an international level, than Canada should not be so unwilling to share jurisdiction with an Aboriginal government.

The first paper by Ladner and Orsini, (2003) gives a detailed account, review and analysis of the First nations governance act. The paper reflects on the act and provides arguments supporting the fact that it is an example of a gentler, subtle form of colonialism that is still in practice today. It argues that although the government has well researched the problems affecting the first nations, it has not efficiently advocated the involvement of these people in their own welfare and improvement.

Power is what ultimately determines if one is facing social exclusion and that is due to there is no influence on government decisions in which Indigenous people face this in Canada because they are seen as minority to the population. Policy makers make policies to better one’s lifestyle from what it was, however; by implanting restrictions on residential schools, taking away land it causes a change in family structures and social structures now shifting to health regimes. Social exclusion leads situation were there is no means of hope causing one stress. By creating policies that result in one feeling socially excluded, instead governments should be making policies that protect the minority and provide them with employment opportunities. (Social Exclusion,

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.

Introduced in Canada in 1876, the Indian Act was a consolidation of pre-existing legislation that reflected the Canadian government’s primary goal of assimilation. As the self-appointed fiduciary duty of the Canadian government to protect and civilize First Nations members, the Act imposed the first classification of ‘Indian’ status on the First Nations people of Canada. The Act also implemented the process of enfranchisement which encouraged and/or forced First Nations members to abandon their status and traditional way of life to become fully functioning members of Canadian society. Yet, despite the government’s ‘honourable’ intentions, the Indian Act promoted gender-based discrimination towards the women of Canada’s First Nations communities, resulting in a loss of status, status rights, and identity for generations of women. This essay will explore the notion of fiduciary duty, will provide an overview of

McRoberts argues that Anglophone Canada has never been responsive to Quebec and its distinct needs. But to make matter worse, Anglophone Canada has taken on the opinions of Trudeau, and as such view giving any extra powers to Quebec as unfair. Thus, true recognition of Quebec has not happened, and the outlook for its future is not very bright. Seymour adds to this by stating what English Canada has not recognized is Quebec`s linguistic identity, as French, and its cultural identity, as bilingual. Finally, Gagnon and Taylor argue that the only way to properly recognize Quebec is through asymmetrical federalism. This will allow Quebec sufficient autonomy to protects its own culture as it sees

* Collective rights come from the roots of Aboriginal peoples, Francophones and Anglophones in the land and history of Canada.

A powerful and compelling case for cross-cultural consensus on fundamental constitutional principles is outlined by James Tully in lectures delivered at Cambridge in 1994 and in essays based on his involvement in the work of the Canadian Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (Tully 1995; 2008). Tully argues that the dominant language in which the claims of Indigenous people have been assessed is both Eurocentric and imperial. It is hostile to cultural diversity in general and to Indigenous cultures in particular. But there is another language available to us, in which the claims of Indigenous peoples can be put forward and negotiated in ways that are not prejudicial from the outset and that provides a basis for differential rights and distinct

Moreover, Corntassel takes a different approach to the issue of Indigenous peoples by considering the perspective of women through an intersectionality lens. He recognizes that indigenous women are often the ones who are more disadvantaged as they experience a higher level of discrimination and are victims of violence (123). Corntassel equates democracy with the right of self-determination (101). The concept of self-determination is a very complex as it involves the process of establishing a sense of belonging and having an input on the governance of the state. This is essentially what the Indigenous communities sought from the Crown during the establishment of the Canadian government. However, it should be noted that democracy can also be flawed at times, given that it relies on the opinions of the majority and takes only that into consideration when making political decisions. Consequently, the opinions of the minorities are discarded. Collective rights, therefore, can pose a threat to the well-being of individuals who belong to minority

After this, the Red Shirts essentially waterboard Nemecsek. As Gereb laughs away (he’s honestly the worst), Feri Ats watches stone-faced. Borzage shoots this scene precisely — Nemecsek is plunged into the water, we see Feri Ats watching, Nemecsek is lifted out of the water and held in the air for a few seconds so we can see the desperation on his face. He’s terrified, struggling to breathe, all while battling a cold. It’s a pitiful sight. The audience wants someone to intervene; a child is being tortured, someone do something! Gereb is clearly not going to do anything, so the only choice is Feri Ats. The audience knows this, even before he does himself. This is a key moment — Borzage has to show that Nemecsek is able to affect Feri Ats with his pureness. The audience can sense that Feri Ats has goodness. When Nemecsek confronts Gereb, soaking wet, Borzage shoots him in a close-up. It’s a beautiful shot, with soft light clearly illuminating his wet face. Compare this with the way Gereb is lit — that’s more of a haze, like the light is reflecting off of Nemecsek and hitting him. Nemecsek is a star, the beacon of light and hope. As he cries about how he’d rather die than be a traitor, even Gereb is made to feel bad. Feri Ats gives him a hug and sends him off with a salute (“you’re alright”). Once again, Nemecsek’s innocent tears aligned him with others. The first time, it was the audience. The second time, the Red Shirts. Nemecsek walks off into the distance, the camera lagging behind, as he passes through the archway created for him. In that moment, even though he came to retake the flag, the enemy side is awed by his nobleness. It’s important to note that during all this, the performances of the actors are underplayed. It’s not like the characters are making big pronouncements about how they feel about Nemecsek. Instead, the audience can simply tell from their actions.

Currently, the First Nations, Inuit, and Métis people of Canada are not treated as well as they were told they would be. This is evident in the fact that they are constantly segregated and the subject of many cruel and racist stereotypes over the years (such as being drunks, drug-addicts, etc.). Moreover, their quality of life is not very appreciable, as the quality of the land that they live on is not considerable, the quality of education is not up to par, and their homes are in disrepair. Furthermore, they do not have many rights, and these Aboriginals can receive a post-secondary education if they give away their "status" as a registered Aboriginal. These points further reinforce the fact that the Métis, Inuit, and First Nations people of Canada are

The sad state of affairs faced by Indigenous people in Canada today is not, as many would have us believe, a simple accident of fate. Since the beginning of our colonialist past, the Canadian federal government has been creating and implementing both legislature and policies in attempt to destroy First Nations culture, history, and life in this country (King, 2012). One of the first recorded policies laid down by Canada’s earliest parliamentary bodies was the Constitution Act of 1867, which delegated Parliament legislative jurisdiction over “Indians and the lands reserved for the Indians.” (Hanson, 2015) Nine years later, in 1876, Canada’s infamous “Indian Act” was first past, giving the colonial government absolute control with regards to First Nations political structures, governance, cultural practices, education, and even identity (Hanson, 2015). Not only did the Indian Act of 1876 allow for paternalistic and oppressive European colonists to effectively dismantle traditional First Nations systems of governance, it made sweeping generalizations with regards to Canada’s diverse and varied groups of First Nations people, and forbade both individuals and communities from expressing their cultures, beliefs, and religion (Hanson, 2015). This first leg of Canada’s Indian Act was in place for nearly 85 years, with minor revisions and amendments being made along the way, forcing First Nations assimilation and maintaining absolute governmental control