From time to time students
approach me to discuss some project they are working on, usually to do with the
indigenous people, because of my longish history of contact with them. Usually
these are young women, always extremely polite, pleasant to talk to, and
forgotten almost as soon as they disappear (like so much else in my life these
days, my memory no longer being anything like it was when I was a young
reporter). Occasionally one of them will send me the result of their studies,
an article, film, video or written thesis, and occasionally these are very
impressive.
I have a
slightly ambivalent attitude towards these theses, which is nothing to boast
about, but comes from my life experience, which took me from my fourth year at
high school directly into the lowest rank of journalism, a reading room in a small-town
local newspaper, and embarked me on a working life that has never ceased since
I started it in 1945. During that time I have come to think --- perhaps it
would be accurate to say I have developed a prejudice --- that inclines me to
think that much academic work
obsfuscates rather than clarifies.
At first I had an exaggerated
respect for universities and those who taught or studied in them: I remember
when I was first asked to talk to a University class how I thought there must
have been some mistake: how could I tell them anything they didn’t already
know? Only after a few such experiences did it dawn on me that many students
were bored with their studies, and were happy to have a lay person who spoke
easily understandable English appear in their classrooms to bring them the
occasional word from ordinary life.
Eventually, at a time of some
economic need, I was invited to, and accepted, a job for one term teaching as a
visiting professor at the University of Waterloo, which I found a remarkable
experience, both because of the limitations it revealed to the university
experience (frankly, I disliked it), and because of the remarkable talents and
dedication I observed in a few teachers who were ushering their students
towards elevated degrees, with astonishing dedication to the job and to the
students in their care.
One student who has recently sent me her thesis is a
young woman called Shiri Pasternak, who presented her study “On Jurisdiction & Settler Colonialism: The Algonquins of
Barriere Lake
Against the Federal Land Claims
Policy” in pursuit of her Ph.D at the
University of Toronto.
One common factor that has struck me
in relation to the theses I have read is that usually one has to plough through
a veritable mountain of jargon, which may be important and meaningful for the
author and his or her mentors, but that is virtually meaningless to anyone
outside academia. Ms. Pasternak has such a chapter at the beginning of her book
that she warned me perhaps I should skip. It deals with jurisdiction and its
various meanings in terms of law and so on, and I confess it was loaded with
language that, from my blunt layman’s view, seems slightly pretentious and
frankly aimed at one small group, and thus, elitist. (However, this is just my
personal view, and I don’t expect anyone else to react as I always do. This is,
after all, how they earn their doctorates.)
Interestingly,
she begins her story by telling the tale of how her grandparents settled the arid Negev desert in
Palestine, taking over land that had been occupied for centuries by the local
people who, willy-nilly, had to be displaced. She makes hardly any excuses for
this, except to say the land was not actually stolen, but was bought by the
Jewish Agency, though she does ask what authority the sellers had to make the
sale.
This
does lead her into the main focus of her thesis which is the struggle that has
been waged over the last twenty or so years by the Algonquin people of Barriere
Lake, a small group of 400 or so
indigenous, rooted in their experience as hunters and gatherers, who have found
the forest of their traditional lands are being clear-cut around their ears, as
it were. Since this is one of the poorest communities in Canada, and has been
brought to that status by many decades of oppression by both state and
religious orders, a study of their past and present struggle to survive
provides, as Ms Pasternak says, a classic example of Canada in its role as
colonial power dictating the daily lives of the indigenous peoples who were found
living here already when the European invaders arrived.
At
first the invaders pretended the land was unoccupied, calling it by the
European legal name Terra Nullius, on the basis of which false assumption, and
others, they immediately began to erect a series of legislative actions to
control the people who so mysteriously claimed prior occupancy and ownership of
the territory.
In
other words, Ms Pasternak frankly admits (as indeed is incontrovertible) that
the entire basis of what became the Canadian nation was erected from the first on
questionable assumptions that cannot be called other than racist, ignorant and
staggeringly arrogant. Others have told this story in much more detail than she
needs to do, notably the late McGill University anthropologist and
archaeologist, Bruce Trigger, whose remarkable book The Children of Aataentsic deals particularly with the history of
the Algonquins, as well as with its ostensible subject, that of the Hurons.
Suffice to say that the Algonquins, original inhabitants of the Ottawa river
valley, were subsequently forced to give way before the encroachments of the
logging companies that wanted the timber, leaving the Algonquins to make pathetic,
unremitting and usually fruitless appeals during many decades, for recognition
of their rights in their traditional lands. This is a tale that every Canadian
should know, but that is never taught in high schools, so far as I know, and
that is certainly not familiar to most Canadians I have met.
What
is even more disturbing in Ms Pasternak’s account of this local form of
colonialism is her detailed account of the recent negotiations through which
the Barriere Lake people --- a group that resisted efforts to gather them into
the big reserve at Maniwaki where most of the displaced Algonquins were
gathered by the church and state in 1851 ---- have tried to establish what is
in effect a new mechanism through which to solve their troubled relationship
with the dominant society that has always paid them so little heed.
After
a period of negotiation interrupted by acts of civil disobedience, blockade and
so on, they managed to get the Quebec and federal government to sign with them
a Tripartite Agreement which, if all the work were ever concluded on it, would
have established the rights in their forest of each of the contending parties
--- themselves, (the party that is customarily ignored) as well as that of
miners, loggers, tourist operators, sports hunters and the like. This agreement, negotiated under the leadership
of their traditional governing council, has been hailed as a ground-breaking
initiative in the always difficult question of relations between the indigenous
and non-indigenous contestants for the same lands, hailed not only in Canada,
but in United Nations documents, and in other countries.
Anyone
who cares about this country should read this story: it is terrifying in its
exposition of the bad faith of the governments with whom this impoverished
community has had to deal. First the Quebec government began to renege on the
deal; then later the federal government. And the measures taken against the
people of the reserve have been breathtaking in their effrontery and in their
lack of a concern for justice and decency.
One
faction within the reserve, built around one of the more powerful traditional
families, has opposed much of what the Chief and his followers have proposed,
and the government has seized on this to
exercise the classic divide-and-rule tactics by which the federal government
has normally befuddled its way through this area of Indian policy over many decades. Behind their
every action has been their reluctance to implement an agreement that does not deal in land. Because, as Ms.
Pasternak makes clear in one of her last chapters, land deals have been
accompanied by government insistence that part of every land deal has been the
requirement that the native signatories surrender all the rights guaranteed to
them under the Canadian constitution. And such a surrender is not implicit in
the Trilateral Agreement. The group Defenders of the Land (hailed only this
month by Noam Chomsky for their stout defence of the planet Earth, in contrast
to the governments that are sailing on hell-bent for destruction, with the Canadian government in the lead) have
analysed this policy as one of “emptying out” the guarantees given to
Aboriginals in the Canadian constitution, and some of their members have
characterized this policy as “Canada’s war against the First Nations.” The many
land claims negotiations that are underway across Canada, are all being done at
the eventual expense of the First Nations, who will thus be saddled with
massive debts as they take off on their brave new course in life, but they have
borne little result so far, and Ms
Pasternak’s narrative leaves little
doubt that the policy should be abandoned. This policy is described by Ms.
Pasternak in as much detail as anyone has ever described it , and it will be a
great service to the nation if her thesis, possibly edited to eliminate some of
its academic language, is published as a book for the general reader.
After reading the post, I can say that the thesis was really amazing! The student really knows what she was trying to get from her research. I wish I can read the whole paper or maybe the thesis abstract of it, because I know that I can get some information and data from it.
ReplyDelete