Kwey Kwey, Many people are not aware that Indigenous women and girls with disabilities are bigger targets of sexual violence because they cannot hear, see, walk, or run. As a matter of fact some women and girls are not able to speak up or scream that they are being, or have experienced, the trauma of a sexual assault. One of the barriers I have in raising awareness about this matter is that people make assumptions and/or repel when I use the word "disability". Sadly many elders and traditionalists themselves are a barrier to my process of raising awareness because they prefer to rest on the traditional teaching that children have "gifts" that we nurture; we do not talk about disabilities. While it is true that traditionally we talk about people and their gifts, the reality is that due to a lack of land, clean land, clear air, clear water, and due to poor sewage, poor housing, and poor nutrition the Indigenous body has been landscaped with a higher rate of disabilities. See #IWagWid for more information. That said, I once again created an online auction to better serve #IWagWid, and I need your help. I am asking you to join the auction asap, invite your friends through the invite button asap, and bid on the many items. I will be using the funds raised to offer a public talk on the relationship between land loss and the higher rate of disabilities. Awareness is the first step toward change. I need your help with this. Here is the link: https://www.facebook.com/groups/711242806601128 Chi-Miigwetch Lynn is an author, advocate, artist, and public speaker. Her work encompasses both anti-colonial work and the celebration of Indigenous knowledge. She challenges Canada’s practices, policies, and laws of colonial genocide such as the land claims and self-government process, sex-discrimination in the Indian Act, the continued destruction of Akikpautik / Chaudière Falls–an Anishinaabeg sacred place, and Canada’s lack of policy addressing Indigenous women and girls with disabilities who are bigger targets of sexual violence. © All Rights Reserved
0 Comments
Within the Algonquins of Ontario (AOO) land claims process, several issues are confounding who is Algonquin and who is not Algonquin. It is important for people to reflect on these issues deeply because the people identified will be eligible to vote on the final settlement package that will extinguish, relinquish, define our rights completely, modify, and/or terminate Algonquin land and resource rights. And it will also divide the broader Algonquin Nation that includes the Algonquin living in what is called Quebec. Of course the Algonquin do not need non-Algonquin voting on Algonquin matters. While not comprehensive, I offer here a discussion of many of the issues. First, the Algonquins of Pikwàkanagàn First Nation leadership must address the tyranny of the majority of the non-status. A huge issue that Pikwàkanagàn First Nation leadership has to contend with is the larger body of non-status Algonquin enrolled through the AOO land claim process. A ratification process that protects Pikwàkanagàn members from the tyranny of this constructed majority, or alternatively said the desires of the majority, has to be deeply considered and practically addressed. Yes, Pikwàkanagàn First Nation members are equal to the other so-called community members, but it is also different in that the people in the other so-called communities are loosely dispersed within various municipalities, townships, cities, and villages. This is not to say that Pikwàkanagàn First Nation is special. Rather, it is to say Pikwàkanagàn First Nation is equal, yet differently equal to the other communities. Second, Pikwàkanagàn First Nation leadership must insist on a strong evidentiary requirement process that insists on ‘certified original copies’ of all archival documents. In the past there was an issue with defining and determining the evidentiary requirements when enrolling people who are potentially Algonquin in the land claims process. When enrolling non-status Algonquin, Pikwàkanagàn First Nation leadership must insist on certified original copies of all archival documents – birth, marriage, death, census, baptismal, and letters – regarding Algonquin enrolment and beneficiary status. Sworn affidavits must also be required when the documents cannot be certified as original. This is especially important at the protest stage. People should not be allowed to drop evidence at this stage unless it has undergone a provenance testing process. Contrary to what has been reported on, the process of determining voters has been far from, “very rigorous” (Potts in Vetter, 2017). Third, Pikwàkanagàn First Nation leadership must remove all the non-Indigenous / non-Algonquin root ancestors. It is said that there are two or more French Canadian women on the root ancestor list who are not Algonquin or Indigenous (see Coburn, 2022a and 2022b; Di Gangi and McBride, 2016; Leo 2021a and 2021b; Leroux, 2021 and 2022). They and all their descendants must be removed. Four, Pikwàkanagàn First Nation leadership must remove all the Indigenous yet non-Algonquin root ancestors. It is said that there are a least six Indigenous women who are not Algonquin on the root ancestor list (see Coburn, 2022a and 2022b; Di Gangi and McBride, 2016; Leo, 2021a and 2021b; Leroux, 2021 and 2022). They, and all their descendants, must be removed. Five, Pikwàkanagàn First Nation leadership must remove people enrolled through 16th century Algonquin ancestors where there has been no further intermarriage and cultural exchange (see Di Gangi and McBride, 2016; Leroux, 2021 and 2022). Clearly people assimilated into the Canadian mosaic; people who lack additional intermarriage and a cultural connection; and people who do not demonstrate an Algonquin identity where reciprocity – versus economic or employment as their only agenda – is not part of their personal agency, must be removed. Six, Pikwàkanagàn First Nation leadership must remove all people enrolled through fraudulent documents and letters (see Coburn, 2022a and 2022b; Leo, 2021a and 2021b; Leroux, 2021 and 2022). Again, there is an issue with defining and determining the evidentiary requirements when enrolling people who are potentially Algonquin in the land claim process. The process must insist on ‘certified original copies’ of all archival documents or sworn affidavits. Seven, Pikwàkanagàn First Nation leadership must address the lack of historic and geographic configuration at the AOO table. Once the issues resulting in the large number of non-Algonquin enrollees are addressed it will become more apparent that the current configuration at the AOO table lacks legitimacy. Said another way, the AOO voting configuration must represent Algonquin historic configuration versus false divisions that have led to more AOO Algonquin Negotiation Representatives (ANRs) over Pikwàkanàgan First Nation ANRs. It must be deeply appreciated that the reason the ANRs do not want to address the issue of people appropriating Algonquin identity, also called “the pretendian issue”, is because once it is addressed it will become crystal clear that several of the communities and thus ANRs are not required. Pikwàkanagàn First Nation Chief and Council are stuck in a circular argument with the very people who benefit from the corruption and appropriation of Algonquin identity, yet there has been four layers of analysis on this very matter (see Coburn, 2022a and 2022b; Di Gangi and McBride, 2016; Leo, 2021a and 2021b; Leroux, 2021 and 2022). The AOO table must be rooted in ‘reason of mind’ versus merely what the heart feels, where the ANR community configuration holds historic and geographic legitimacy (Coburn, 2021). Eight, Pikwàkanagàn First Nation leadership must address the Algonquin descendants of women who are now entitled through the Indian Act amendments of Bill S-3, Bill C-3, and Bill C-31. Many people are aware that due to sex discrimination in the Indian Act many women and their descendants were removed from the community of Pikwàkanagàn (Gehl, 2021). Greater, efforts must be made to have these people registered as per the Indian Act and then encouraged to apply for membership in their mother’s, grandmother’s, great-grandmother’s community. To do otherwise is to entrench the sex discrimination in the Indian Act in the final agreement. Nine, considering the amendments in the Indian Act, Pikwàkanagàn First Nation must address all situations of double or dual representation. Enrolled Algonquin community members and for that matter ANRs must be enrolled in only one community, not two. It is not good governance or good government on the part of Pikwàkanagàn First Nation for people to be a member of one of the communities as well as a member of Pikwàkanagàn First Nation. The resolution of this matter should encourage the good governance of personal agency within, where if this fails Pikwàkanagàn First Nation leadership must exercise its jurisdiction according to good reasoning and good government practices. Note: This list is hardly exhaustive. References Coburn, V. (2021, November). Historic Communities Research. Presented During Pikwakanagan First Nation Treaty Pause Meeting. Coburn, V. (2022a). Genealogy of Thomas St-Jean dit Lagarde (1801-1853ca). Coburn, V. (2022b). Genealogy of Sophie Emelie Jamme dite Carriere (1807-1886). Di Gangi, P., & McBride, A. (2016). Review of AOO Voter’s List of December 2, 2015. Algonquin Nation Secretariat Analysis of AOO Voter’s List. Gehl, L. (2021). Gehl v Canada: Challenging Sex Discrimination in the Indian Act. Regina: U of Regina Press. Leo, G. (2021a, August 9). Mysterious letter linking 1,000 people to $1B Algonquin treaty likely fake, CBC investigation finds. CBC News. Retrieved from https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/letter-lagarde-algonquin-1.6121432? Leo, G. (2021b, September 13). Push to remove ‘pretendians’ from Algonquin membership rekindled after CBC investigation. CBC News. Retrieved from https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/algonquin-ancestry-lagarde-letter-follow-1.6171830 Leroux, D. (2021, Sept.). Beneficiary Criteria / Root Ancestor Research. First Nation Treaty Pause Meeting. Leroux, D. (2022). The RHW Treaty Governance Forum [Video]. Youtube. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LiXdg3dW24&ab_channel=RobinsonHuronWaawiindamaagewin Vetter, C. (2017, May 17). Treaties and Land Claims. Ottawa Life Magazine. Read my biographical note: www.lynngehl.com/biographical-note.html
Contact me, subscribe to my blog, and/or my newsletter: www.lynngehl.com/contact.html "Chief Haymond of Kebaowek First Nation echoed the idea that many of the people who voted in the main referendum did not meet reasonable eligibility requirements". "... such as the Badour, Cota, and Hollywood families are no longer included in the Algonquin Land Claim". Kwey Kwey, I am a member of Pikwakanagan First Nation. The Algonquin history is a terrible history. While it is more complex, for the most part the French of New France allocated reserves for Algonquin without treaty. When the French lost to the British, they realized they needed to respect the French as allies in part because they had populated the land and thus held power. Then moving around the top of the Great Lakes and out across the plains all the way to the mountains the British treatied with Indigenous Nations creating reserves as they colonized the land and waterscapes. As the British did this they refused to treaty with the Algonquin Nation. Today there are Algonquin reserves in both Quebec and in Ontario: nine and one respectively. Yet, in both Quebec and Ontario not all Algonquin live on reserve land as some communities were denied. As a result not all Algonquin are affiliated with a recognized First Nation where consequently many are not registered as status Indians as defined by the Indian Act. Finally, after more than 250 years since the 1764 Treaty at Niagara, it was in the early 1990s when Canada and Ontario agreed to enter into a land claim process with Pikwakanagan taking the "lead". This process of accepting the land claim limited to the Ontario side of the river is laden with many legitimate critiques. Many Algonquin people, and rightly so, are not happy with the division of our great territory. As Algonquin Anishinaabe and leading thinker Dr. Veldon Coburn has pointed out, our territory should be a province in its own right where we manage our own land and resources. Sadly today Canada continues to hold the power, in the form of our resources, and continues to deny who the Algonquin are as a larger collective that spans across our mighty river. In taking this approach Canada is continuing to impose the colonial genocide the Doctrine of Discovery has unleashed. It is my thought that Canada is particularly motivated to harm the Algonquin, and horribly so, because its parliament buildings illegally squat on Algonquin territory. Eventually Pikwakanagan was placed in a situation of having to identify the non-status Algonquin as the Indian Act embodies sex discrimination; and also identify the Algonquin who were never affiliated with a federally recognized First Nation. This process of identifying has been very hard, but it is important that this be completed in a good and reasoned way because non-Algonquin people should not be voting on a final Algonquin land claim, especially a land claim that offers us so little, and that is, as Russell Diabo correctly argues, is primarily rooted in our termination as Indigenous Nations. Most people know I am well versed in issues of Indigenous identity politics and wellness. I completed my masters on the topic, and then there is the 30 year plus effort I took to protect Indigenous women and their children from the sex discrimination in the Indian Act (Gehl, 2017). Less people, though, are aware that I completed my doctoral work on the Algonquin land claim process as it was unfolding in Ontario. As such I know these land claim processes are rooted in colonial genocide (Gehl, 2014). During my learning I was intrigued by the counter hegemonic position that Bob Lovelace offered who lived in the Ardoch area and who helped structure what became then the “Ardoch Algonquin First Nation and Allies”. I had questions, though, in terms of who the Ardoch members were. Eventually I learned that Harold Perry and his relatives are Algonquin, but the larger presence of non-Algonquin was always puzzling to me. Although offered, I never became a member of Ardoch because it was not my community. I was from Pikwakanagan, even if they denied me because of the very bloody Indian Act. Today, as the Algonquins in Ontario (AOO) move closer toward voting on a final land claim things are heating up; well more like boiling over. Thanks to a CBC investigation by Geof Leo and the experts he relied on, and reports put forward by other valued researchers, we have discovered that there could be as many as 4,000 people enrolled in the AOO process who should not be. Many are enrolled through fraudulent documents, and many are enrolled through a 16th or 17th century ancestor without subsequent community interaction, cultural continuity, and community responsibility. Some of these people enrolled are scholars seeking well paid employment positions. This is important to value because employed scholars shape knowledge production through such things like admitting students into their programs, shaping curriculum and thus shaping minds, passing students through their comprehensive exams and the ethic review process, and through writing letters for scholarships and employment. The point is that we have many people claiming to be Algonquin who are not, both in terms of Ardoch and in terms of the Algonquins of Ontario land claim. When Ardoch members argue that they are being challenged because they are against the land claim, this is not correct, and is in fact a misleading obfuscation. The issue is the need for the Algonquin to clearly determine who is and who is not legitimate regardless if you are pro land claim or anti land claim. I have read the First Peoples Group’s July 7, 2022 report titled “Gii-Ikidonaaniwan–It Has Been Said”, about how it is that Queen’s University has become complicit in wrongly representing who is and who is not Algonquin. In reading this report, of course I understand that knowledge is shaped by both the methodology and methods employed, as well as shaped by the amount of money and time allocated to the research and final knowledge production. This is the case with all knowledge productions. Of course questions generate and shape knowledge. Regardless, after reading Gii-Ikidonaaniwan as an Algonquin intellectual I felt it represented a good qualitative analysis of what Queen’s University students would be concerned with. I also read the unauthored / unsigned Ardoch response dated August 3, 2022 to Gii-Ikidonaaniwan and feel that it is too defensive and nastily so. What struck me most is that whoever wrote the response projected too much off of the issue of who is and who is not a federal recognized First Nation, which Ardoch is not; as well as projected off the issue of Indian status registration. The Ardoch response then proceeds to rely too heavily on the Supreme Court of Canada in making the claim of who Ardoch is. I find this odd because both the Indian Act and the Supreme Court of Canada are colonial institutions. Clearly the agency of one or two individuals carrying a court case forward all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada does not legitimate the existence of an entire First Nation community. Further, for the most part court processes rest on the material presented in paper form versus what is really happening on the land. Most people understand the limitations of the methodology of legal positivism and the process of resting truth on evidence, evidence that is shaped and mediated by power. Truth is not found or identified through the legal system. I know this all too well through Gehl v Canada (2017). Interestingly, it was the current Chancellor of Queen’s University, the Honourable Murray Sinclair, who wrote the Gehl clauses now present in the Indian Act. It is my thought that a better Ardoch response to Gii-Ikidonaaniwan would be for the leadership to clearly stand up and identify who they are as Algonquin. It is my thought that a better Ardoch response to Gii-Ikidonaaniwan would be for the Ardoch leadership to clearly name who their Algonquin root ancestors are. It is my thought that a better Ardoch response to Gii-Ikidonaaniwan would be offering a clear explanation of how many of their members descend from these Algonquin root ancestors. It is my thought that a better Ardoch response to Gii-Ikidonaaniwan would be offering a clear explanation of how many of the Ardoch members are adopted. It is my thought that a better Ardoch response to Gii-Ikidonaaniwan would be to offer a discussion of who their membership clerk is with an explanation of their qualifications as an archivist and genealogist. It is my thought that a better Ardoch response to Gii-Ikidonaaniwan would be a clear explanation of its membership criteria. It is my thought that a better Ardoch response to Gii-Ikidonaaniwan would be offering a clear list of the Ardoch membership. In short, I don’t think a harsh critique of Gii-Ikidonaaniwan was the best way to go. The larger Algonquin Nation, Queen’s University and their students are deserving of better truth. Nor do I think obfuscating through Supreme Court decisions is the way to go. Both the Supreme Court of Canada and the Indian Act are rooted on colonial oppression and the methodology of legal positivism. Finally, non-Indigenous people, or people who have picked up an ancient Indigenous ancestor to claim they are Algonquin, must respect that it has to be genuine Algonquin people who take up positions in universities because it is them who understand what we need. They need to move aside in a humble way. When people appropriate Algonquin identity, they are more likely to be subservient and compliant to someone else’s agenda. The Algonquin Nation needs genuine Algonquin who are well rooted in who they are as Algonquin because it is them who best understand the issues, and who best understand the importance of relying on Anishinaabe methodologies and methods, that in turn shape Algonquin knowledge productions, and thus subsequently serve to change policy and legislation in the direction needed for the Algonquin. Debwewin, Lynn Gehl, Algonquin Anishinaabe-IKwe See also: Di Gangi, P., & McBride, A. (2016). Review of AOO Voter’s List of December 2, 2015. Algonquin Nation Secretariat Analysis of AOO Voter’s List. https://www.scribd.com/doc/300528995/Algonquin-Nation-Secretariat-Analysis-of-AOO-Voters-List-Feb-25-2016 Leo, G. (2021a, August 9). Mysterious letter linking 1,000 people to $1B Algonquin treaty likely fake, CBC investigation finds. CBC News. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/letter-lagarde-algonquin-1.6121432? Leroux, D. (2021, Sept.). Beneficiary Criteria / Root Ancestor Research. First Nation Treaty Pause Meeting. Leroux, D. (2022). The RHW Treaty Governance Forum [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LiXdg3dW24&ab_channel=RobinsonHuronWaawiindamaagewin Read my biographical note: www.lynngehl.com/biographical-note.html
Contact me, subscribe to my blog, and/or my newsletter: www.lynngehl.com/contact.html Indigenous knowledge (IK) understands and talks about knowledge in a different way. It is valued that the primary portals of knowledge into who we are as human beings are our feet, hands, body, heart, and then after this the mind and reason. That is why we teach children through practice dance, song, and prayer before they are able to understand freedom of their own consciousness and thought, and thus, who they are as a human being. This very embodied knowledge gained through the practices of their feet, hands, body, and heart will then serve them when they are depressed or when they are grieving; meaning when their mind fails them their body will “remember” what they need to do. This is the life medicine of good embodied knowledge. When people talk about trauma and/or intergenerational trauma, they are talking about the negative embodied knowledge that has been ascribed on their being, their bodies, through various pitiful human acts such as physical and sexual violence and demoralization. What happens in the situation of trauma is that in the place where good knowledge should be ascribed, the trauma knowledge is placed or located. The trauma becomes landscaped on, and within, the body and this is what is more easily “remembered” because the body is more familiar with the trauma knowledge versus the medicine of good knowledge. As stated, the body is the more important repository of knowledge; versus the mind and reason. Growing up in a context where a mother loathes her children, because under the oppressive patriarchal industrial economic rule she had too many children, and worse no resources to care for them, what happens is this woman’s children become more familiar with her practices of loathe and disdain. In short, loathe is ascribed on the body of, or embodied on, the children where love should have been ascribed and embodied. This means the children will be more familiar with loathe so much so that they will confuse it with love. This trauma embodied knowledge is why so many women and men are "attracted" to the wrong partner and repeat the silly things humans do to one another. This "attraction" will continue until they do their most important work of looking deeply at the role their embodied knowledge has had in shaping their life, and they learn how to govern or manage the trauma of their embodied knowledge the best way they can. Lastly, when a persons embodied knowledge is trauma, the person has to constantly be aware of it, walk around it, and manage it so they do not repeat it or fall into its trap. At all times their mind has to be especially attuned to it. © Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley. Her most recent book Gehl v Canada is now available for pre-orders: https://uofrpress.ca/Books/G/Gehl-v-Canada My Algonquin Anishinaabe identity flows through my father, his mother, and her parents (my great-grandparents). Through learning who I am I can also link myself to the people who lived at the Lake of Two Mountains and thus to pre-contact relatives. Me saying that I can link to the historic community of the Lake of Two Mountains and pre-contact relatives does not mean my Algonquin identity, that I claim, merely comes from an ancestor that lived in the 1700s. Not at all. I am clear about my identity coming from my father. Please do not misunderstand what I am saying or cherry pick back to pre-contact times. What is more, while through Gehl v Canada today I am a registered status Indian I really do not have a community where I feel I am embraced. For one thing, I cannot go and live at Pikwakanagan First Nation as there is not enough space and, even if there was, I am not sure I would be welcomed by the people. What I have become, through Gehl v Canada, is a name on a membership list versus existing within a community. It is clear to me that my father’s, grandmother’s, and great-grandparents’ community has been greatly harmed by colonization and genocide. This is why I do the work that I do. My allegiance is with my kin relations. I, though, am “fortunate” in the sense that the land where some of my extended kin relations now exist was not relocated or flooded, and that my great-grandmother with her mother (my great-great-grandmother) opted to move to a reserve. But the reality is that not all Algonquins in Ontario and Quebec wanted to go to reserve communities, and mixed bloods were not welcomed, or for that matter were pushed out of the community when they “married-out”. This was part of the genocide process. My point here is that just as DNA and a blood line have limitations, community essentialism also has many limitations. Identity is more than about being welcomed to a community or having a community. This is especially so when we appreciate that through colonization many communities and community relationships have been destroyed. What I have are kin relations with a particular community. I always had these kin relations as my father made sure he passed on to me these kinship stories, best known in the language as “gi-nwendaagininaanig dbaajimowinan”. Now that I have status registration as per the Indian Act things are not that much different. While the kin relations are there I would not say I belong to a community. Genocide happened; and genocide continues to happen such as through the land claims process. Certainly the struggle Indigenous people are having regarding identity is difficult and heart breaking. Well, it is heart breaking for me. What is making it worse is all the settler academics and people jumping on board with who, and what is, in vogue. In doing this, settlers interfere with the Indigenous process of figuring it out; well, hopefully working it out. All this is not to say that I am not appreciative of the needed critical analysis of settlers claiming to be metis for the sole purpose of gaining Indigenous rights, and also appreciative of the needed critical analysis of settlers claiming to be Algonquin for the purpose of gaining rights through the land claims process – a land claims process that will only serve to extinguish Algonquin land and resource rights. It is important for us to remember that historically, prior to contact, Indigenous nations adopted, assimilated, kidnapped, and nurtured new members into our communities. Through rituals such as initiations, dancing, ceremony, feasting, and loving kindness we socialized people into being new citizens of our Indigenous nations. While belonging was a blood process, we also valued the medicine of genetic diversity, and we also understood that belonging was very much a social process that was more about loyalty to the nation. Through genocidal laws, policies, and practices the nation state of Canada took all these inclusive processes of establishing our citizenries away from us; yet at the same time Canada appropriated the cultural process of socializing new citizens into their nation. What I mean by this is that by usurping Indigenous land and resources Canada is able to embrace refugees and immigrants as new citizens of its nation. In this process Canada relies on Indigenous land and resources to socialize its new citizens into being good, obliging, loving, and loyal Canadians. Minister Maryam Monsef is one such celebrated Canadian citizen that the current prime minister likes to hold up as a success story. The socio-cultural processes and rituals that Canada relies on consist of such things as manipulating their minds by controlling the school curriculum and filling their hearts through the daily ritual of singing O Canada. Other mechanisms used to socialize new citizens of the Canadian nation consist of skewing media stories, offering national awards to accommodating people, creating provincial and national parks, filling national museums with state propaganda, and, to ensure the completion of hegemony, the ongoing creation and manipulation of national symbols and icons such as the Canadian flag and creating national monuments of acceptable heroes. As Canada does this, creating new citizens of the state, Indigenous people fight about DNA and blood essentialism, fight about community belonging essentialism, and for that matter fight about cultural continuity essentialism, all the while forgetting about their own practices of inclusion. I know that DNA and blood, community belonging, and for that matter that even cultural continuity all have limitations. What is more important is kinship connections, loyalty, and allegiance. Lastly, sadly Canada has pushed Indigenous people to the point where we have forgotten that in its anthropomorphic form, and after the human spirit has moved through the heart, morality, inclusive of loving kindness, takes that same heart pathway. © Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley. Her most recent book Gehl v Canada is now available for pre-orders: https://uofrpress.ca/Books/G/Gehl-v-Canada 11/24/2020 0 Comments Land backAllow Indigenous people to lead the way; follow them Understand that being an ally / activism is not about doing what you like to do Do not mistake social activity as doing something for Indigenous people Understand that Indigenous needs are more than about your need entertainment Move beyond your need for an education; you becoming educated is not a legitimate ally / activist role Do something as we define our needs to be; not yours Don’t hold up our books like trophies; do something Understand the most important knowledge is practiced; do something Like Jean says, “shut up and listen”; yes, she said this Learn the difference between anti-colonial knowledge and Indigenous knowledge; value both Learn the difference between Elders’ knowledge and Indigenous intellectual knowledge; value both Serve the most oppressed; not who you want to serve or get off serving Do not project your shame and mistakes on Indigenous people; they are your issues Understand lateral violence and stop causing it; think deeply here Stop interfering with Indigenous people's relationships; such as the one between them and their Elders Indigenous Elders are not for you; get over it Stand behind Indigenous people; not in front Understand that saving the land and water is more than about an aesthetic for humans to enjoy Stop gossiping about Indigenous people; it is pitiful Value Indigenous people who have done the hard work to get an education and who stand up Stop Romanticizing Indigenous knowledge; resolve your issues with this Stop thinking smudging absolves you or stands in place of you doing something Dig into your pocket and give generously weekly, monthly, yearly Seek out and purchase from Indigenous artists and crafters Fundraise for someone who is working hard already; you can do this Serve Indigenous food banks in real ways – weekly, monthly, yearly Stop pretending to be naïve, we can see right through it and it is patronizing Stop talking about hope; it is not a plan; and it is patronizing End your false generosity, we can see right through it to and again it is patronizing Understand the depth of knowledge an intersectionally oppressed person carries; and respect it Stop assuming lawyers and historians understand an Indigenous framework; most do not Stop thinking Indigenous knowledge is only about how you feel; it is more than this Understand the greatest gift we have is our minds; this is fundamental to Indigenous knowledge End racism, sexism, and ableism Learn about genocide and the doctrine of discovery Give your Land Back through your last will and testament © Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley. She is a published author of Claiming Anishinaabe: Decolonizing the Human Spirit and The Truth that Wampum Tells: My Debwewin on the Algonquin Land Claims Process. You can reach her and see more of her work at www.lynngehl.com. 6/28/2020 4 Comments A Canada Day Manifesto on GenocideCanada, the nation state, and Canada’s national policy continues to exist on the genocide of Indigenous Nations. Two public inquiries, The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (2015) and the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (2019) have concluded that Canada’s foundation is based on the physical, biological, and cultural genocide of Indigenous Nations and people. What is more, it was argued that this Canadian made genocide continues today through cultural means that include laws, policies, practices, and standard operating procedures, as well as through acts of neglect and omission. This is the case regardless of Canada’s so-called good intentions. A narrow focus on intent is not the definitive element in the case of the genocide of Indigenous Nations and people, and of Canada’s crimes against humanity in this regard. As long as this policy of genocide continues Canada, the prime minister, the privy council, the cabinet, and the members of parliament are human rights violators. There is no need to debate this. Cultural genocide against Indigenous Nations and people is carried out through Canada’s laws, policies, and practices—both written and unwritten—of neglect and elimination such as the extinguishment of Indigenous rights through the land claims and self-government process and policies that Canada, through forked-tongue rhetoric, erroneously calls the “Modern Treaty Process”. Since its inception in the 1970s, and largely due to Indigenous opposition to the genocidal terms of the land claims process, over time Canada has manipulated its rhetoric in its policy from the use of such euphemisms as “extinguishing all our rights” to “extinguishing only our land and land related rights” to “relinquishing our rights” to “defining our rights completely”. Regardless of the shift in rhetoric and the misleading name the outcome remains the same–Indigenous Nations continue to be denied the land and resources needed to rebuild our governance systems and institutions such as schools, housing, courts, and health care that are rooted in our knowledge systems and thus culturally meaningful, relevant, and subsequently efficacious in a way that the good life is attainable. Canada’s failure to address the genocide encoded in their land claims and self-government policies has been, and continues to be, manipulatively disguised and this is intentional. It is now clearly understood that Canada’s policy and law makers first and only priority is to obfuscate the genocide rather than address the genocide–meaning crafting a better tool—law, policy, practice, or gap in law, policy, or practice—that disguises the genocide. As a result the oppressor’s culture continues to be imposed on Indigenous Nations. This cultural imposition is genocide. Raphael Lemkin was clear about this. Continue reading this manifesto by clicking here on this link: https://www.lynngehl.com/genocide-a-personal-manifesto.html © Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley. She is a published author of Claiming Anishinaabe: Decolonizing the Human Spirit and The Truth that Wampum Tells: My Debwewin on the Algonquin Land Claims Process. You can reach her and see more of her work at www.lynngehl.com. People need to stop thinking reconciliation is possible through government rhetoric alone. Genuine action must follow. As long as Canada fails to participate in a genuine nation-to-nation relationship that honours Indigenous Land and Resource rights, reconciliation will always only be something settler people and their descendants celebrate through false parties at the expense of Indigenous people. Imagine an Indigenous child who has embodied within them generations of racist, sexist, and genocidal colonial policies and laws, where their father was an angry, abusive, drunken, maniac due to racism, abandonment, abuse, and poverty, and where their mother was a neglected child, a residential school survivor, and a victim of sexual abuse. Imagine this child who has grown up in a similar context as their parents of racism, sexism, abuse, poverty, neglect, and hunger. Imagine all this knowledge is embodied within this child yet the young child is unable to express it verbally; all they can do at their young age is express their embodied knowledge and inherent emotions at the level of practice. After all this is what Indigenous knowledge brings to the table – that being that knowledge is not simply in the mind; it begins in the feet and body first. Imagine this child of direct trauma, inter-generational, and multi-generational trauma goes to school and manifests their embodied knowledge and emotions of racism, sexism, and genocide against a more privileged white settler child, where they are then forced to reconcile their knowledge that is yet to be really understood, examined, and affirmed and consequently if fortunate enough addressed and resolved. In this context so-called reconciliation means the Indigenous child has to shut down their knowledge and emotions and who they are, where everyone is then allowed to ignore what the real underlying issues are all for the sake of reconciliation. In this context it is the privileged white settler child who gains reconciliation off the back of the Indigenous child. In this context reconciliation means the Indigenous child is not really a person; in this context the privilege child with all the material wealth once again gains. If you think reconciliation comes from institutions and organizations with paid employees that are funded in part through the latest political rhetoric and dollars you are not doing the critical thinking needed. And you are patronizing critically trained and thinking Indigenous intellectuals who know better. Follow the money and you will learn you are being manipulated; you are celebrating the oppression of others; and you are complicit in the perpetuation of the pain of children who are pooping in buckets, drinking poisoned water, and eating mercury contaminated food. When people celebrate their own oppression, or the oppression of others, this is the worst form of manipulation and genocide. Today colonization has become a celebration rooted in the lie of reconciliation. It is a party that makes some Indigenous people happy and where some settlers too are happy and benefiting more. Today reconciliation parties, like false generosity, are actually fake celebrations that may absolve settler anxiety and guilt. In this way these parties are rituals that are ultimately more for settler people. Today colonization means celebration called reconciliation that will include only some Indigenous people because the Indigenous critical thinkers want nothing to do with celebrating their own oppression. Look around and you will most likely see the party goers are paid employees; look around and you will most likely see party goers who are seeking awards; look around and you will most likely see party goers who are looking for political appointments. That said, if you need to attend a celebration to absolve your guilt, you can be sure there are Indigenous intellectuals who very well know you are complicit and they are hurt by your complicity. When you look at their faces you will see and feel their pain. Consider this transfer of their feelings the kindness and truth they offer. Reconciliation will only be achieved when Indigenous Nations’ jurisdiction to their Land and Resources is respected. We only need to turn to the land that Canada’s parliament buildings squat on. For almost 250 years the Algonquin Anishinaabeg have been asking Canada to respect our rights through the framework of the Two Row Wampum Belt and the British and Western Great Lakes Covenant Chain Confederacy Wampum Belt constitutional framework. Despite our repeated request Canada is only offering the Algonquin in Ontario 1.3% of our territory, a $300 million buy-out, and is currently desecrating Creator’s Sacred Pipe known as Akikpautik and Akikodjiwan. If you experience cognitive dissonance from this message this does not mean it is wrong. One day I hope to invite you to a real party that will not celebrate my oppression. © Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley. In 2017 she won an Ontario Court of Appeal case on sex discrimination in The Indian Act, and is an outspoken critic of Canada's land claims process. Recently she published Claiming Anishinaabe: Decolonizing the Human Spirit. You can reach her through, and see more of her work, at www.lynngehl.com. When it comes to Indigenous rights, it is part of Canada’s strategy to confuse its citizenry. Don’t be duped by the way Canada co-opts and re-defines terms. The truth is Canada is not signing treaties nor is Canada’s newly proposed Recognition and Implementation of Rights Framework[1] at all rooted in reconciliation, nation-to-nation, or an equal sharing of lands and resources. Rather, Canada will continue to sign agreements that grossly and narrowly define Indigenous rights as Canada allows them to be. While Canada calls these agreements “modern treaties”, the reality is Canada continues to refuse to meet international standards regarding Indigenous rights, and thus continues to be a colonial and genocidal agent. Remember Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould said the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) is unworkable.[2] Indeed Minister Carolyn Bennett should be embarrassed about her role in this. When Justin Trudeau came to power as prime minister, it was in large part reactionary to the loathe many people felt for Stephen Harper. Regardless, for other people, Trudeau’s lofty feminist platform and promises of reconciliation and a new nation-to-nation relationship that included the implementation of the UNDRIP was immediately recognized for the lies they were. This was apparent when Trudeau promoted Deputy Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada Michael Wernick to the position of Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to Cabinet. With this move Trudeau promoted the highest ranking civil servant to an even higher position.[3] To the wretchedness of many Indigenous people, it was in June 2016 when Trudeau divulged his thinking. He argued the federal government is the first order of government, the Provincial/Territorial governments the second, municipalities the third, whereas Indigenous government is the fourth and lowest order.[4] Clearly, Trudeau’s version of nation-to-nation was meaningless.[5] In the House of Commons Trudeau stated his new Indigenous Recognition and Implementation of Rights Framework would “include new legislation and policy that would make the recognition and implementation of rights the basis for all relations between Indigenous Peoples and the federal government moving forward.” He said this new legislation, now set to be tabled in the new year, will “recognize Indigenous governments, and ensure rigorous, full and meaningful implementation of treaties and other agreements.”[6] In line with lead colonial agent Trudeau, Bennett said following a co-development process with the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) she plans to replace policies governing comprehensive claims and self-government.[7] But keep in mind here that the AFN does not represent all Indigenous people in Canada. Rather, it is a body of First Nation chiefs and their membership. Justifiably, many Indigenous leaders are not happy with this approach. Chief Judy Wilson has argued, it makes more sense to implement UNDRIP as the new framework, rather than what Bennett is pushing, adding UNDRIP is the right direction for Canada to take.[8] Indigenous policy advisor and leading Indigenous thinker Russell Diabo adds, the Trudeau government is developing and domesticating a Canadian definition of UNDRIP to further colonize Indigenous Peoples.[9] He adds, the development of this framework has operated in secret, in a top-down process, and with particular organizations, chiefs, and participants. In taking this approach Canada has selected people who are willing to consent. Chiefs and people, for example, who are under the oppressors funding regimes. Diabo argues this framework is designed to terminate our existing sovereignty, self-determination, collective Aboriginal Title and Rights, and Treaty Rights as Indigenous Nations.[10] Thohahente Weaver, a First Nations band member of Kenhteke, the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte, and outspoken critic, agrees with Diabo arguing, we offered the new comers peace and friendship. We presented them with our Wampum Belts, a traditional governance structure that collectively codify a good and honourable relationship, yet Canada continues to impose our extermination. That is what this new framework is about: The end of Indigenous jurisdiction.[11] Diabo argues through the new framework, and through the fourth level of government, Indigenous rights will be domesticated and defined under federal jurisdiction. Canada will do this by financially coercing and co-opting Indian Act bands to become federally recognized as an Indigenous government. He adds it is important to know that this new framework only concerns Indian Act reserve lands, which consists of only 0.2% of our broader traditional territories. It is in this way that Diabo argues this new framework is an extension of the 1969 White Paper on Indian Policy that called for converting Indian reserves into fee simple ownership and private property.[12] No doubt Trudeau Jr is completing his daddy’s work first proposed in the White Paper. Clearly Indigenous self-government means more than the administration of our own property on reserves. It must mean meeting international standards of Indigenous self-determination which means Canada must respect our rights to our own land and resources so Indigenous Nations can build our own structures of governance and law, and our own institutions such as child care agencies, schools, hospitals, laws, courts, and policing. After all the land and the gifts it provides are ours because we are the Indigenous people to these lands, not the settler people and their descendants. In his book “Reconciliation Manifesto: Recovering the Land, Rebuilding the Economy” Arthur Manual said Canada’s greatest betrayal of this century belongs to Justin Trudeau for the lies and manipulation that he campaigned on, that being that UNDRIP would be fully implemented once he was elected as prime minister. Adding Jody Wilson-Raybould is also a devastating disappointment to Indigenous people. As an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley, a land and waterscape that due to processes of colonization I have never been afforded to live within, nothing speaks to me more about Trudeau’s lies and manipulation than the reality that Canada continues to stand still on their offer of 1.3% of our territory and a one-time buy-out of $300 million in the Algonquin of Ontario land claim. Trudeau’s Liberal government has not moved on this offer. It is through offers such as this and through the new Rights Recognition Framework that Canada’s genocide will continue. Nothing has changed, just more co-optation of the terms relied on. Canada’s Parliament squats on Algonquin land![13] [1]https://pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2018/02/14/government-canada-create-recognition-and-implementation-rights-framework [2]https://aptnnews.ca/2016/07/12/justice-minister-jody-wilson-raybould-says-adopting-undrip-into-canadian-law-unworkable/ [3]https://aptnnews.ca/2016/01/26/opinion-appointment-of-michael-wernick-as-top-federal-bureaucrat-in-ottawa-should-be-a-concern-for-aboriginal-peoples-especially-first-nations/?fbclid=IwAR17T-EscM85Qy-2WX19R1AiipoOej6kKo-LBNLEOOkFXUOCbkNdCdG19jM [4]http://www.cpac.ca/en/programs/headline-politics/episodes/47793606?fbclid=IwAR2v3R9nFRMmHi2pYlyt1AkTpK5eyw5D-vI8FFt1Sgd_m9NWGMyP5zUHSzs [5]https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5acc137850a54f99f58eb19a/t/5bd903d54ae237468519721e/1540948955470/Diabo+FPIC+Conference+Oct+25+18.pdf [6]https://aptnnews.ca/2018/12/04/trudeau-to-address-first-nation-chiefs-amid-growing-opposition-to-indigenous-rights-framework/?fbclid=IwAR2uIVhI3_s60cG91RCclpNESBbpD4tFBQ0ymMpBlRiQ4oeioiP8mnnItF4 [7]https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/carolyn-bennett-specific-claims-overhaul-1.4930894?fbclid=IwAR1xehpJBH_afyXAEyOePMbAnDPBimeMEETp2Fykx6n3fSfXdTwe1zyqQgA [8]https://aptnnews.ca/2018/12/04/trudeau-to-address-first-nation-chiefs-amid-growing-opposition-to-indigenous-rights-framework/?fbclid=IwAR2uIVhI3_s60cG91RCclpNESBbpD4tFBQ0ymMpBlRiQ4oeioiP8mnnItF4 [9]https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5acc137850a54f99f58eb19a/t/5bd903d54ae237468519721e/1540948955470/Diabo+FPIC+Conference+Oct+25+18.pdf [10]https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5acc137850a54f99f58eb19a/t/5bd904268985831ed03ba163/1540949031200/DOL+TC+INM+Brochure+Sept+23+FINAL.pdf [11]http://www.windspeaker.com/news/windspeaker-news/youth-rally-on-afn-takes-framework-message-to-afn-assembly/?fbclid=IwAR26fdEGv8aZhM7_UFPpZfof9v8AriNgVGj58mTyYabvKZM_0yH-Cj5QS84 [12]https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5acc137850a54f99f58eb19a/t/5bd90455758d468d5107cff0/1540949077581/DOL+TBR+INM+Backgrounder+Sept+7+18+FINAL+%2B.pdf [13]https://www.lynngehl.com/black-face-blogging/algonquin-anishinaabe-land-acknowledgement © Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley. In 2017 she won an Ontario Court of Appeal case on sex discrimination in The Indian Act, and is an outspoken critic of the Algonquin land claims process. Recently she published Claiming Anishinaabe: Decolonizing the Human Spirit. You can reach her through, and see more of her work, at www.lynngehl.com. 8/15/2018 1 Comment On Smashing IconsMany of the descendants of settlers – aka Canadians – are perturbed or in an uproar about the process whereby statues of the prominent early colonial and genocidal men are being taken down and relegated to storage rooms. We all know the names of the men because they have become icons of what is Canada. Icons, though, when you add power are more about propaganda than knowledge and truth. In the work I do I have been exposed to far too many settler thoughts that these statues need to remain erected in public settings if only as a measure so Canadians do not forget what happened and further as a way to ensure the genocide does not happen again. To this I have a few things to say: First, the descendants of settler people do not get to have a say here. Rather, it is Indigenous people who have the most important knowledge on this topic. This is a good time for the descendants of settler people to listen versus talk. After all, this is the reasonable and moral thing to do: to value that as the people who have benefited more from colonization, your thoughts and opinions are not important and should not be made audible. Second, descendants of settler people need to value that while the statues are coming down, Canada does indeed continue today with its colonial genocidal laws, policies, and practices such as the land claims process. The long-time presence of the statues has not changed Canada’s genocidal policies, not at all. As an example, the Algonquin in Ontario continue to be denied access to their land and resource rights. As a matter of fact we are only offered 1.3% of our territory and a $300 million one-time buy-out in our current land claim, yet we all know a nation is not a nation without the land and resources needed to govern its citizenry. Third, while Indigenous people may be relieved to see the icons taken down, the Liberal government will be the real winner because they will receive accolades, and votes, for removing them. In this way the practice by the Prime Minister and his cabinet is about nothing more than about manipulating the masses through optics and circumventing what is really needed: the end of the genocide in Canada. If you do not like what I say here, this is due to the cognitive dissonance inherent in iconoclasm. Keep in mind through that the best and most important knowledge is emotional. Hang on to your heart and listen to the voices that matter most: Indigenous people. And then be in an uproar about the reality that Canada’s genocide continues despite the presence or removal of the deceptive icons that Canada calls its leaders. The human spirit moves through the heart. Morals take the same pathway. Cognitive dissonance is more about ego versus morality. Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley. In 2017 she won an Ontario Court of Appeal case on sex discrimination in The Indian Act, and is an outspoken critic of the Algonquin land claims process. Recently she published Claiming Anishinaabe: Decolonizing the Human Spirit. You can reach her through, and see more of her work, at www.lynngehl.com The TRC Identifies Three Forms of Genocide … . For over a century, the central goals of Canada’s Aboriginal policy were to eliminate Aboriginal governments; ignore Aboriginal rights; terminate the Treaties; and, through a process of assimilation, cause Aboriginal peoples to cease to exist as distinct legal, social, cultural, religious, and racial entities in Canada. The establishment and operation of residential schools were a central element of this policy, which can best be described as “cultural genocide.” Physical genocide is the mass killing of the members of a targeted group, and biological genocide is the destruction of the group’s reproductive capacity. Cultural genocide is the destruction of those structures and practices that allow the group to continue as a group. States that engage in cultural genocide set out to destroy the political and social institutions of the targeted group. Land is seized, and populations are forcibly transferred and their movement is restricted. Languages are banned. Spiritual leaders are persecuted, spiritual practices are forbidden, and objects of spiritual value are confiscated and destroyed. And, most significantly to the issue at hand, families are disrupted to prevent the transmission of cultural values and identity from one generation to the next. In its dealing with Aboriginal people, Canada did all these things. To read more: click here The Heartbreak of Algonquin Genocide ... . Eventually, after generations of petitions and only after we were in a particularly pitiful state of poverty and division, Canada entered into a land claims and self-government negotiation process with the Algonquin of Golden Lake, now Algonquin of Pikwàkanàgan First Nation. In this process only the Algonquin living in Ontario are involved, where through this process all Indian status members, approximately 1,800 members, are accepted as beneficiaries. So too are the approximately 6,000 non-status Algonquin accepted as beneficiaries. Through two federal government policies - the Comprehensive Land Claims Policy and the Inherent Rights Policy - our jurisdiction, land, and land related rights are not protected but rather continue to be denied and placed within the confines of a small b□x. Through these policies Canada has imposed on us what it thinks we are entitled to: a very small percentage of our traditional territory and a one-time buy-out. This deal was tabled in November 2012. Clearly 117,000 acres which amounts to only 1.3 per cent of our traditional territory and $300 million is a bad deal. To read more: http://rabble.ca/news/2013/03/heart-break-algonquin-genocide http://www.lynngehl.com/open-letter-to-prime-minister-justin-trudeau.html http://www.lynngehl.com/open-letter-to-dr-bennett.html Like and share this blog. Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley. She has a section 15 Charter challenge regarding the continued sex discrimination in The Indian Act, and is an outspoken critic of the Ontario Algonquin land claims and self-government process. She has three books: Anishinaabeg Stories: Featuring Petroglyphs, Petrographs, and Wampum Belts, The Truth that Wampum Tells: My Debwewin of the Algonquin Land Claims Process, and Mkadengwe: Sharing Canada's Colonial Process through Black Face Methodology. You can reach her at lynngehl@gmail.com and see more of her work at www.lynngehl.com. In this short video and recent article - http://linkis.com/nationalpost.com/36W4R- dated January 15, 2016, professor Akhavan offers a narrow understanding of what is genocide and then he proceeds to argue Indigenous people of Turtle Island don’t really understand the United Nations Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. I have a few issues with his reasoning as it is presented. First, a professor of law as he is, Akhavan roots genocide in intent with this statement: “provided the specific genocidal intent was in place”. Intent is too narrow a place to locate the practice of genocide. Placing knowledge, and consequently genocide, in the mind or in one’s intent is a myopic understanding of what knowledge is and where knowledge is located. It is well understood that proponents of western positivism of law and science must awaken to the limitations of their own knowledge paradigm. Clearly it is not working, especially so for the water and the trees and the other beings, never mind what it is doing to humans. This should come as no surprize in that western positivism is manmade law. Second, a professor of law as he is, Akhavan is unable to perceive the cultural aspects of genocide as it is written in the United Nations Convention for the Prevention and Punishment for the Crime of Genocide. While subsection (a) discusses direct killing, the UN definition moves on to talk about cultural aspects of genocide, thus expanding the definition beyond that of direct killing: (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. While the word “culture” may not be in the text, cultural elements of genocide are inherent. Culture is all that humans are. Culture is much more than icons and books as the news article suggests. Culture includes the laws, policies, and institutions that humans create. Without cultural teachings, knowledge, and structures we are not human at all. Cultural genocide is genocide in that it is culture that makes us human. Cultural genocide, as it is placed within Canadian laws and policies, such as the land claims policy which forces Indigenous Nations to extinguish our jurisdiction and rights, and Aboriginal Affairs’ unstated paternity policy which assumes unstated fathers are non-Indians, are much more insidious and devious forms of genocide. They are more insidious and devious in that many people are unable to perceive them for the genocide they are where, as such, the genocide is able to go on and on and on. Third, in making the argument that the recent use of the concept “cultural genocide” was more about a need for recognition and mourning is offensive and incorrect. Akhavan is incredibly assumptive in his analysis. Akhavan assumes Indigenous thinkers, ceremonialists, traditionalists, scholars, and philosophers are unable to really understand what they mean when they use the concept “cultural genocide”. This assumption in itself is an act of colonialism. Law is not a science that seeks to understand the nature of the human condition and as such law, as it is defined by western positivism, needs to move over and allow other knowledge systems the space required in the discussion of what is genocide. For more of my thoughts on genocide and cultural genocide: http://www.lynngehl.com/black-face-blogging/the-insidious-nature-of-cultural-genocide Please like and share this blog. Miigwetch Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley. She has a section 15 Charter challenge regarding the continued sex discrimination in The Indian Act, and is an outspoken critic of the Ontario Algonquin land claims and self-government process. She has three books: Anishinaabeg Stories: Featuring Petroglyphs, Petrographs, and Wampum Belts, The Truth that Wampum Tells: My Debwewin of the Algonquin Land Claims Process, and Mkadengwe: Sharing Canada's Colonial Process through Black Face Methodology. You can reach her at lynngehl@gmail.com and see more of her work at www.lynngehl.com. |
To subscribe to Lynn's Blog: click here
To subscribe to Lynn's Newsletter: click here To follow Lynn on her Public Facebook Page: click here To subscribe to Lynn's YouTube channel: click here To book Lynn as a speaker: click here To contact Lynn/License her work: click here Copyright Dr. Lynn Gehl, 2024 All Rights Reserved
|