The Idle No More Movement

Within the Aboriginal ways of knowing it is suggested that “land is the heart of Creation, a realm where humans are among a vast array of creatures” (Belanger, 2014, p. 7). In essence, the Aboriginal people have looked upon the earth as a source of resources that may be utilized but must be honored. This is further substantiated by Belanger when he states that “human beings began to measure their existence in terms of how well they ensured the land’s health and safety, as opposed to how well they acquired wealth and personal gain” (Belanger, 2014, p. 8). As a result of this deeply ingrained relationship between the Aboriginal person and Creation, it comes as no surprise to learn that the Aboriginal people of Canada have decided to revolt

Holocaust Survivor, Elie Wiesel, in his speech, “The Perils of Indifference” (1999), advises that having an apathetic attitude to a situation is dangerous a society in need of help. He supports his claim by gaining credibility from his audience and uses imagery to help, then addresses briefly about his past life and an example of when indifference occurred, and finally, throws everything that transpired in the past and hints what we can do differently in the future. Wiesel’s purpose is to urge the audience to not be indifferent to what is happening around the world, but to see how society could all help. Throughout the speech, there are a few different tones such as gratuitous, passive, and grateful for his audience to make a change.

Utilitarianism is a moral theory according to which an action is right if and only if it conforms to the principle of utility. An action conforms to the principle of utility if and only if its performance will be more productive of pleasure or happiness, or more preventive of pain and happiness, than any alternative. The rightness of an action entirely depends on the value of its consequences, this is why the theory is described as consequentialist. The “separateness of persons” is an objection against utilitarianism stating that the theory fails to recognize people as distinct individuals. It rejects the allowance of one person’s loss to be offset by another person’s gain, and it is only the net sum total that ultimately matters. Recognition of the “separateness of persons” is needed to put constraints on such trade offs. In this essay I will lay out the theory of utilitarianism and explain the “separateness of persons” objection presented by John Rawls and Robert Nozick. Ultimately I do think they present a successful argument, since utilitarianism is detached from individuals it can lead to grotesquely immoral consequences when put into practice.

When Canada was first inhabited by the First Nations people, the land was completely their own. They were free to inhabit and use the land in whichever manner they saw fit. However, since the arrival of the European settlers, the First Nations people have been mistreated in countless ways. They faced many issues throughout history, and are now facing even more serious problems in our modern society like having to endure racism, discrimination and social ridicule. Given what they already have to deal with, the last thing they should have to worry about is the denial of their rights which is a problem that Aboriginals have to contend with as well.

Canada can be considered one of the most desirable First World Nations to live in however what many people are not aware of is the Third World nation that lives within our borders. Fist Nations people within the Canadian North live in the most extreme poverty often with inadequate access to water due to either a lack or deteriorating infrastructure. The statistics about First Nations water issues are startling and this leads to implications of their quality of life, a disappearing culture and pure lack of serious government intervention. This can be attributed to many things such as Canada’s Aboriginal versus non-Aboriginal and centralists versus decentralists fault lines. If I have learned anything in my life time, it is that people deserve the right to life and that means meeting them at their most basic needs such as providing opportunity in water resources.

Often times, when it came to the discussion on equality within Canada, the actions of Canada were compared to those of the United States, and often times, a comment is made stating that the United States could learn from Canada’s example when it came to racial harmony. However, this idea was often criticized as the racial problems within Canada were just as severe. The respect and the livelihood of the First Nation were violated for years even before the start of the twentieth century. However, the issues of the First Nations were hardly ever brought to light by other Canadians because these issues were often hidden deep within the reserves that these First Nations were forced into. From taking their land away to disregarding their cultures, the government rarely ever acknowledged the needs of the First Nations until they could no longer be ignored. The government continuously stressed assimilation, especially with the Indian Act , and expected the First Nations

Injustice brings anger and fear to everyone. It could cause someone to act unconsciously or hide to wait for an end. Injustice shapes our history, proven by the French Revolution, the Holocaust, and 9/11. Yet these events are history, what is the right way to respond and end injustice? Elie Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor and writer, wrote many forms of literacy including Night that shares his experiences and actions during the Holocaust and “We Choose Honor” an article that features 9/11 and the United States’s response to it. Similarly, Maurice Ogden’s poem “The Hangman” demonstrates the flaws that occur when a population refuses to confront authority or injustice. Wiesel argues that the right way to respond to an act of injustice is to work as a group with your peers to solve the situation. Wiesel is correct in his belief of solving injustice because humans, at their core, are social beings that are more likely to succeed helping each other, and a group of humans is more intimidating and have more power to overcome injustice.

Even though Canada is holds the 2nd position from all nations for its tolerance and inclusion, Canada has a more atrocious racism problem than the US. In comparison to the African-American population, the Aboriginal population is treated worse with bountiful hardships, obscene education and bad living conditions (). Nearly all measurable indicators of the Aboriginals are worse than the African-American population including the unemployment rate (). Additionally, Canada fails to supply the Aboriginals with health care especially when Aboriginals have dreadful health issues (). Overall, Canada faces a racial and appalling crisis in its hands when it comes to the circumstances involving Canada’s native people. The last feature that I am not proud of in Canada is its environment. Canada is practically dead last when it involves environmental protection (). Even though Canada has some greenbelts and parks for wildlife and biodiversity, in large amounts of Canada the wildlife habitats and ecosystems are not preserved and nothing is done to prevent species at the risk of

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

The Canadian government was being deceitful towards the Mohawk peoples; they ignored their claims to the land and decided to build anyway. This was unjust act was bound to be followed by retaliation. Even after the crisis ended in September of 1990, one of the non-aboriginal locals stoned 75 cars that had aboriginal women, children, and elderly inside. This shows the hatred and disrespect for people who were just defending what was rightfully theirs. Cases like this one help to make Canadian's more aware of the current situation with the First Nations. It shows them how the government is and has been failing to treat the First Nations people fairly when it comes to their rights to the land.

In not seeking justice for these people, a high human cost is created because the rights of those who are negatively impacted are being ignored and they are suffering with no hope of reconciliation. Using the Canadian Charter as an example, every citizen has the right to seek justice and restitution. However, if the current generation is not accountable for past events, the justice that indigenous peoples deserve will not be given, and they will be forced to live with the negative legacies of historical globalization. Recently, the Canadian government has stepped up and acknowledged the immoral actions of the past, such as the removal of children from their homes to be placed in residential schools and the trauma and suffering it may have caused these individuals. Because of this, First Nations now receive financial benefits such as money for post-secondary education, land set aside for reserves, health benefits, and other things in an attempt to give then the compensation and justice they

For the decades the first nation peoples are not being treated properly. Whether in terms of signing treaties or getting compensation of using their water from shoal lake 40. The Canadian government has carried out against Indigenous people, their land and their water as well. A centaury ago when the demand for water was increasing in Winnipeg city because of growing population , the federal government forcefully captured their reserve land on shoal lake 40 in order to construct aquaduct which is used to carry water extracted from shoal lake into the Winnipeg city. The federal government did not think about the consequences the first nation people will face who actually depend on shoal lake for their survival. T

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

People all over the world are suffering or in danger and no one is helping. In the memoir, Night, author Elie Wiesel describes what it felt like to be a part of the suffering and devastation of the Holocaust. Similar to Wiesel’s memoir, Martin Niemoller’s poem, “First They Came For The Communists”, expresses the feelings the author possessed in the time of the Nazi invasions. Lastly, Elie Wiesel’s speech, “The Perils of Indifference,” discusses how indifference can be adverse. All of these texts represent how speaking up for one another can be helpful and ignoring what is going on in the world can be detrimental. All people should be obligated to aid and assist others when they are in dangerous situations because bystanding only causes more

This work has probably received more analysis than any other work on utilitarianism available. However, I seek to do here what many others have been unable to accomplish so far. I hope to, in five paragraphs, cover each of the chapters of Utilitarianism in enough depth to allow any reader to decide whether or not they subscribe to Mill's doctrine, and if so, which part or parts they subscribe to. I do this with the realization that much of Mill's deliberation in the text will be completely gone. I suggest that anyone who seeks to fully understand Mill's work should read it at length.