I am struck by the very practise of Pikwakanagan First Nation surveys asking questions about the place of Algonquin Indigenous knowledge (AIK), how to prioritize AIK, and when and how to apply AIK? This is so great!
 
What strikes me about this process is that Pikwakanagan First Nation has yet to establish a clear understanding and model or models of where AIK is located and how we create more of it as we move into the future. It is crucial that various models of AIK be established as it will set the foundation of the discussion. Pikwakanagan can ask its intellectuals to develop various definitions and models of AIK using our beliefs and assumptions to shape them. With these models in hand community people will more easily think about AIK, have collective discussions about AIK, and move forward with AIK in a good way. The strength of models, shaped by our Algonquin beliefs, is that they serve to guide our thinking and movement forward. This is the strength of beliefs and models. To be clear, models are not Truth, rather they are models that shape truth, and they are crucial in terms of keeping us on track. What is more, there can be more than one model for this same topic because they are frameworks of thought versus being intended to be an absolute Truth.
 
Some people reading this may gripe, arguing that models are colonial. This is not so. Women always held a cognitive model and/or patterns when they were making moccasins, and men also rely on cognitive models of their trapline and hunting territories using natural land features to help them. Further, the Sun and Moon rising in the East and setting in the West is a belief and model of reality that establishes a solid foundation of who we are. Algonquin also relied on maps that they could draw in the sand or the mind’s eyes of other people. That said, of course Algonquin had models, to deny this is to say we were so primitive and not intelligent enough to have had governance and thinking structures in our worlds. We did, and we still do. Our Algonquin ancestors were intelligent and we are intelligent.
 
Another model of the Algonquin Anishinaabe worldview is the belief and ideology of the Four Sacred Elements and the Four Layers of Creation. As most know, there are Four Sacred Elements: Rock, Water, Wind, and Fire. And there are Four Orders of Creation: the Four Sacred Elements, the Tree Nations, the Animal Nations, and the Human Nations. As an Algonquin Indigenous scholar with my doctorate in Indigenous Studies, versus for example a doctorate in history or cultural studies, I am trained in Indigenous knowledge philosophy whereas such the understandings, models and theories relied on are always Algonquin. Given this, I am always thinking through AIK and doing my best to let it frame what I know, how I think, and what I do. While I of course value that AIK is shaped by ancient knowledge, language, and the land, and I do rely on them to guide me, one crucial model I rely on is the combination of the Four Sacred Elements and the Four Orders of Creation.
 
For example, several years ago when I was learning and thinking about the dangers of nuclear energy I of course relied on my training in the sciences and my experiences measuring toxic organic pollution to guide my learning about the dangerous effects of radioactive particles. Through this I learned that radioactive particles are carcinogenic, teratogenic, and mutagenic. In these ways, radiation is dangerous to humans and our babies.
 
But my thinking was also relied on the cognitive model of the Four Sacred Elements and the Four Orders of Creation. Thinking through the need to respect the Four Sacred Elements I was able to understand that in cracking atoms, the nuclear industry destroys Rock; I was able to understand that the process of cooling nuclear reactors depends on the cold Water found in the deep rivers, such as the Ottawa River, thus warming them; I was able to understand that the Wind and air we all breathe is contaminated through the process of vented emissions; and I also realized that Fire is generated unnecessarily for destructive and dangerous means.
 
What is more, my thinking also relied on the cognitive model of the need to respect the Four Orders of Creation. Through this I was able to understand that not only is nuclear energy destroying the Four Sacred Elements and Human Nations, it is also harming the Tree Nations and the Animal Nations.
 
When human beings rely on the economic model to guide us, versus walking the knowing process back to, and through, the Four Sacred Element and the Four Orders of Creation, we fail to be the human beings Creator wants us to be. And we fail to operate within the Algonquin Indigenous Knowledge worldview.

​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

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.

​Know your rights! Since the arrival of the new comers to Turtle Island, explorers, cartographers, botanists, lumber men, trappers, linguists, anthropologists, and sociologists have appropriated Indigenous knowledge for their own interests without regard for the wellness of Indigenous people or the Land. Unfortunately, the appropriation of Indigenous knowledge continues to this day. Prime ministers, corporations, journalists, academics, and many Canadians continue to think the Indigenous mind and our knowledge systems are an entity they can mine, take from, and modify to their liking without requesting permission, or offering respect and remuneration to Indigenous Nations and people. In this way colonization continues. That said, there is a relationship between intellectual property, copyright, fair dealing, plagiarism, and cultural appropriation. Here are some detection tools that will prove useful in identifying it. First though, a disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. It is important that you do your own research, your own critical thinking, and hire a lawyer if required. . . .

This interview with Anna Maria Tremonti on CBC the Current was such a good experience for me. We discussed many things such as my book Claiming Anishinaabe, Indigenous knowledge, the intelligence of the heart, Algonquin politics, and Canada's ongoing genocide. This episode of The Current was titled "How author Lynn Gehl reclaimed her Indigenous roots" and it original aired on Nov 9th, 2017. 

Listen to the podcast here:

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
​

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

It is correct that the Indian Act is archaic and on its way out through the second-generation cut-off rule. It is correct that there are some members in First Nations that are not Indigenous such as the situation where non-Indigenous women married Indigenous men. Yes, many know about the history and future of the Indian Act.

Algonquin Identity Appropriation

There is a new epidemic that is causing all kinds of issues for the Algonquin: Indigenous identity appropriation. Many non-Indigenous people are claiming an Indigenous identity for the purpose of culture, exoticness, student funding, research funding, awards, and employment. This is not a small issue. It is huge. It is a colonial industry. Indigenous people are in need of the resources that are directed toward them. It is Indigenous people who need to direct and shape their futures through education and research that ultimately shapes policy and legislation such as health care and family services. Indigenous people do not need settler Canadians to do this for us and we do not need people usurping our identities, funding, and employment opportunities. Please stop.

Non-Algonquin Claiming to be Algonquin Who are Pro-Land Claim

The Algonquin living in Ontario are in a terrible situation where it is said that as many as 1,000 - 1,500 settler people are claiming to be Algonquin when they are not Algonquin. Some of these people are in very powerful positions making decisions about our settlement dollars, settlement dollar investments, and land choices and land selections. In actuality due to issues of root ancestors it is said that there are as many as 4,000 people enrolled in the Algonquin land claims that should not be. This is 50% of the enrollees. For the most part it seems that these people are pro-land claims possibly for the purposes already stated above, or for the purpose of gaining Indigenous rights. Sadly, because they are pro-land claim some Algonquin seem to take a soft position about their inclusion. Yet these people represent a tyranny over genuine Algonquin.

Non-Algonquin Claiming to be Algonquin and Who are Anti-Land Claim

There is also another group of settler people who are claiming to be Algonquin yet they too are not. These people are also taking up important space, funding, research direction, and academic employment opportunities from genuine Algonquin. When confronted many of these people argue that they are being challenged because they are anti-land claim. This is a complete obfuscation. No hegemony is ever that complete so much so that this can be correctly stated. In fact there are many genuine Algonquin who are anti-land claim and other genuine Algonquin who are pro-land claim. In making this argument these Algonquin identity appropriators obfuscate and confuse matters because they need to manipulate and shift the focus away from the real issue that they are claiming to be Algonquin when they are not. What makes this situation more difficult is that many of them are directors and professors making important decisions about funding and graduation, consequently they have many administrators, and students under their wings whose agency is pacified, controlled, or silenced. Many of us put down semma praying that this appropriation ends but it seems like the power of institutions are unable to address this because they are under the thumb of an oppressive all-encompassing economic paradigm.

In Summary

In sum, while the Indian Act has let in non-Indigenous people into our communities, there are people today who are actively appropriating Algonquin identity to first, become beneficiaries in the land claim and second, for funding and employment. It is important for people to pull all this apart and think deeply about the layers. People appropriating Algonquin identity are a huge concern and interference. Pikwàkanagàn’s First Nation members, inclusive of the non-status Algonquin, are unable to get to the real and many issues of the land claim. Genuine Algonquin people have a very legitimate concern as the last thing they need is another ‘settler tyranny of the majority’. Some people think the nation state likes this.

This issue of identity appropriation is causing an incredible interference in the Ontario Algonquin land claim. The most vocal Algonquin are the ones who are able to pull it all apart and examine it for what it is: colonial genocide. We must stand behind and listen to the voices of the people who continue to remain strong. They are not ‘children of the state’ that must be pacified and controlled. Rather, they are descendants of a long tradition of warriors who taught them to protect their community.

While the interference of the nation state via the Indian Act is a terrible history, the modern-day issue of Indigenous identity appropriation has reached an epidemic proportion.
​
Lastly, Bob Lovelace does not speak for us.

While many people may assume that when my court case ended and when the Gehl clauses were added to the Indian Act via Bill S-3 that my work on sex discrimination ceased. It did not.
 
For the last few years I have been working with a group of women inclusive of First Nations women leaders, organizations and allies, and Canada’s senior feminist experts on Indian Act sex discrimination. This group is observing, advocating, and stressing for the need for Canada to more quickly implement Bill S-3. They are also addressing other issues: the consequences of the discrimination, resolving the lingering differences between matrilineal and patrilineal lines of descendance, and the involuntary enfranchisement of women, and thus her children, when their husbands enfranchised.
 
Of course I am always sure to raise issues that continue to exist since Gehl v Canada (2017) and the subsequent addition of the Gehl clauses to the Indian Act. In my goal of ensuring community people have access to information that they need, I offer an edited component of a recent document the working group created that specifically addresses situations of unknown and unstated paternity.
 
It is incorrect to think that all children of unknown and unstated paternity will automatically become registered status Indians like the mother. Gehl v Canada did not solve all situations of unknown and unstated paternity. This is what the court and Canada does; they narrowly define legal remedies as tightly as possible as a measure to save money.
 
First, as a reminder, when a status registered mother cannot, or will not, identify the father of her child, her child is treated as if they only have one status parent. If the mother has 6(1) status, she can pass on 6(2) status to her child. However, if the mother has only 6(2) status, her child is not entitled to status and is hit with the second-generation cut-off rule.
 
Although the requirement that a mother provide the father’s name in order to demonstrate that he is a status person was modified through the Gehl case, evidentiary difficulties continue with Indigenous Services Canada’s unknown or unstated paternity rule. Today a mother is required to show, on a balance of probabilities, that the father is/was a status Indian in order for her child to have full status. If the mother is unable to meet the evidentiary requirement the child’s status is bumped down or the child may be denied status altogether.
 
It is easy to reason that the difficulties of proof fall harshly on women; this is especially so for young girls who become pregnant. There are, for example, cases of complete unknown paternity where a father is not known to the mother, child, and grandchild because the child was conceived through sexual violence such as rape, gang rape, rape while unconscious due to rape drugs, sexual slavery, prostitution, or situations of multiple partners.
 
Further, as many know, unstated paternity situations include unreported paternity, unrecognized paternity, unacknowledged paternity, or unestablished paternity, where a mother records the father’s name on the child’s birth registration form, yet he refuses to sign it because he needs to protect his standing in the community, and/or a marriage to another woman, and/or to avoid child support payments, and/or wishes to hide that he had sex (read rape) with a minor child. Unnamed paternity also happens when a woman or minor girl child cannot name the man due to issues of sexual abuse and incest.
 
What is more, and disturbingly, some birth documents have been changed, or tampered with, sometimes more than once, by hospital or government officials to obscure paternity in cases of adoption, unmarried mothers, or other situations (Gehl, 2017).
 
https://www.erudit.org/en/journals/fpcfr/2017-v12-n1-fpcfr06468/1082440ar/
 
And there is still more to discuss here. It is well understood that Indigenous people have a higher rate of disabilities, and further that Indigenous women and girls with disabilities are bigger targets of sexual abuse (Gehl, 2021). Some of these women and girls are unable to hear, see, or move to defend themselves and some become pregnant where the man (I opt not to call them fathers) are unable to be identified and thus named and placed on a child’s birth document.
 
https://www.lynngehl.com/indigenous-women-and-girls-with-disabilities-are-bigger-targets-of-sexual-violence.html
 
It is in these ways that the two-parent rule continues the male dominance of the registration system, because identifying the father requires his cooperation, which he can withhold without penalty. Finally on this topic, there is no indication that the files of persons who were denied status because of unstated or unknown paternity before the Bill S-3 changes were made are being reopened and reconsidered. As people can determine Canada has more work to do in meeting their reconciliation agenda.

I know knowledge producers, that we call “artists” knowledge producers, who intentionally incorporate imperfections into their work as a reminder of the teaching that Creator does not always make things that are perfect, and that we need to value difference and diversity. As a late learner of reading and writing many people critique my spelling, grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation issues – yet they claim to love the teaching inherent in what I call “quilted imperfections”.

Like many Indigenous people my life has been pretty miserable moving through the poverty, the neglect, the trauma ... . As a scavenging child my focus was on survival in terms of the physical and in terms of my safety. Thus, you can be sure many critical periods of learning passed by me. Today I have a PhD yet it seems that some people want me to now go back to grammar school because they have issues with my grammar and punctuation. The truth is I have no desire to learn to perfect the colonizer’s language anymore than I have. My next big project after Gehl v Canada is completing a manuscript on Canada’s Algonquin genocide. People really need to learn how to link teachings with lived reality, or as academics say link theory and practice.

I love Indigenous knowledge; it teaches me so much.

A 16th Century Algonquin Ancestor

People who have 1 Algonquin ancestor from the 1600s are 4 centuries or 400 years away from this ancestor. Considering that in each 100 years there are 4 generations of lineage, a person of today is approximately a 16th generation descendant of the said Algonquin ancestor. Furthermore there were 400 years of intermarriage with other socio-cultural-ethnic-linguist peoples. This points to the reality that although you claim to be Algonquin, you are not. This is reasonable.

The Deep Love of the Brown Brothers

Thomas Brown and Robert Brown were best friends. They did everything together such as play, sing, dance, feast, and hunt. They were so close as brothers that they were married on the same day on July 1, 1779. Thomas Brown married a lovely Irish woman named Beth who became Beth Brown, and Robert Brown married a lovely Algonquin woman named Akik who became Akik Brown. Both marriages resulted in many children both boys and girls. These two families lived in the same town where every subsequent generation also had their own families who carried the Brown surname and many of them continued to live in the same town. The larger family network of cousins remained close and intact where through family folklore and stories the descendants of Thomas and Beth and the decedents of Robert and Akik all claimed that they had an Algonquin ancestor. Yet, only the descendants of Akik Brown were genuine descendants of an Algonquin woman named Brown. This conflation is un-reasonable.

The Creation of Identity Gaps and Traps

All cultures contain a dense tapestry of rituals, dance, language, and foods that sustain them physically, emotionally, and spiritually. Sadly, with the emergence of state nationalism, where nation states destroy the cultural features and inherent deep meaning people need as they move through the world, a gap is created. In its place, state nationalism offers a thin veneer of culture such as a song and a flag. It is precisely because of this gap in deep cultural meaning and identity that too many settler peoples fall into the trap of usurping Algonquin identity.

Performance as an Indigenous Way of Knowing

Performance is a traditional Anishinaabeg way of coming to know and embodying knowledge. Performance is not solely defined as an explicit and consciously constructed story for a stage play. Not at all. Everything we do daily is a performance where the inherent activities and practices of the performance shape who we are and how we think. It is through the repetitive process of performing activities and practices that moves knowledge into our bodies which thus becomes embodied. This embodied knowledge then seeps into our subconscious, seeps into our hearts, and seeps into our dreams where through this embodiment we further become who we think we are. Today there are many settler people who, due to an identity gap created through state nationalism, have mistakenly stepped into administrative and leadership activities and practices of being Algonquin, where consequently they now think and feel and dream that they are genuinely Algonquin when they are not. The power of performance and embodied knowledge in these situations has become the trap many settler people are entangled in so much so that reason fails them.

​A Meandering Story: Truth, Evidence, and the Lack of Evidence
 
Prior to contact the Anishinaabeg had a traditional practice of learning about people, who they were, and their integrity. Essentially we told each other stories about who we were. We told people our names, who are family members and relatives were, and we told them our clan. This practice provided us with the beginning of what could be or would be a trustworthy relationship. We had this ancient tradition because it spoke to the integrity of the person. In the modern context we now want to know what kind of education and training a person has, what they do for employment, and how they have lived their lives. This is reasonable.
 
The Anishinaabeg tradition has always respected the greatest gift that Creator bestowed humans: our minds and our very ability to reason. Reasoning ability was respected and nurtured in our methods of parenting, teaching, and training. What I mean by this is parents and teachers value that individuals needed to develop their own ability to reason from within their being so much so that our methods of teaching are never didactic. Rather we always left room for the person to think through issues on their own. Respecting and nurturing an individual’s ability to reason was our way.
 
European Enlightenment brought forward the idea and methodology of positivism, that truth is rooted in evidence such as scientific positivism where knowledge and truth is rooted in atoms and molecules, historical positivism where knowledge and truth is rooted in artifacts and archival documents, and legal positivism where knowledge and truth is rooted in evidence.
 
In terms of legal positivism, when there is an absence of evidence judges use their training and minds and reason in their process of making a determination. This is what happened in Gehl v Canada. There was a lack of evidence and the judge reasoned through the community and family context of my father’s existence to determine he was and I was, like his mother, an Indian. This speaks to the need for critical thinking, and appreciation that the lack of evidence must be reasoned through.
 
There is more to consider with the idea that truth is rooted in tangible evidence. Evidence, like truth, is shaped by assumptions about the world such as patriarchy and colonization and thus power where people with more power foremost become the producers of what is evidence. This means that critical thinking is required when considering what is evidence and what is not evidence. For example, people with power can and will create or manufacture evidence according to their own selfish needs. What is more, people with power can and will destroy evidence, and disturbingly some will even work hard to ensure that as they do corrupt things there is no evidence to be found. This speaks to the need for critical thinking, and appreciation that the presence of evidence and the lack of evidence must be reasoned through.
 
As I say this no one should interpret me as saying that judges rooted in colonial law are able to determine truth. Clearly their assumptions are an issue. Most judges cannot come to a genuine and moral truth because Canada’s legal history emerges from the racist and genocidal Doctrine of Discovery. Again power mediates evidence, the lack of evidence, and truth.
 
All this said, no one should interpret that I am suggesting that in the absence of evidence we just accept the person as Indigenous. Not at all because after all the very absence of evidence can itself be manufactured. What is more, when this so-called absence of evidence exists within a broader context where there is the creation of fraudulent archival documents doubt is reasonable. Again, Creator gave us the ability to reason, and Canada’s court system also relies on the ability to reason.
 
The issue with the excuse that a person lacks evidence of who they are as an Indigenous person is limited. Canada began conducting census-taking as early as the year 1666 and it was as early as the year 1765 when Canada began recording if a family was Indigenous. Also, it was in 1871 when Canada began to take census every ten years. Another source is the Jesuit Relations beginning in 1631 through 1673.
 
If you cannot prove you are Algonquin, you should not be enrolled in the land claims process. You should not be shaping the process in a leadership role and you should not be afforded the right or responsibility to vote on the final agreement. Rather, harness your integrity and walk away. When the time comes and the agreement is final you can then submit a community application and that community can rely on their own criteria set to determine if you are to be accepted as a member.
 
This is easy to reason. Creator bestowed you with this skill within your being.

​© Lynn Gehl, Ph.D. is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-Ikwe from the Ottawa River Valley. She is a member of Pikwàkanàgan First Nation 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.  Her most recent book is titled Gehl v Canada: Challenging Sex Discrimination in the Indian Act. You can reach her and see more of her work at www.lynngehl.com. Bare with me as I troubleshoot a new tool disseminating my blogs.

​​
​© 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.

Allow 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.

​In the Indigenous knowledge tradition, which sits closer to the naturalistic paradigm versus the humanistic paradigm, we are reminded to turn to the natural world to guide our behaviours and practices.
​
Although the moon comes and goes, or alternatively said waxes and wanes, she always returns. She is consistent in her path; She always wears the same face of bright reflected light; and She always provides us with love in our darkest hours. She is never two faced. This is what She teaches humans.

​© 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.

​​© 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.

“Who is doing social justice work?”, she asked?

“I am”, I responded.

According to the Great Law of the Anishinaabeg, philosophers and intellectuals were an important part of the larger community. Their work was valued to be equally as important as the clan members who were hunters, clan members who chopped and gathered wood, clan members who took care of the children, clan members who sewed clothing, and clan members who cooked. The short story is all clan members were equally important and all clan members worked together to live the good life. Hunters provided for all, where in turn wood choppers provided for all, where in turn cooks provided for all, and where in turn the intellectuals provided for all. It is said that the sacred circle provided equally for everyone.

Today we live in a top down power structure where oppressive power is inherent in all of our structures such as our medical and housing structures. This power structure is also laden in our education institutions where as such many people who work within them have limitations in what they can say and do. They have to be careful because they must not upset their employer and risk the economics and benefits that they are stitched into. Of course these employees are doing important work; no one would deny this. Regardless, we must not confuse an employee as the ideal intellectual and human rights advocate because, again, they are edited, monitored, and controlled in what they say and do by their institution and employer.

While this is the case today, there remain many intellectuals and human rights advocates who consciously opt not to work within the crushing limitations of oppressive structures such as universities or government institutions. These intellectuals and human rights advocates opt to work outside of these institutions because they do not want to be complicit in top down power, do not want to be censored, do not want these institutions to monopolize their time, effort, and voice, or because they need the freedom to do the hard work that has to be done. They must and want to remain at the community level. Like the muskrat, they do have a strategy.

Unfortunately today community intellectuals and human rights advocates who work outside of institutions are not valued at the community level by community people, the very people who need and want change. Despite all the discussions of the need to de-colonize, for some reason too many people continue to think community based intellectuals do not need to be provided for. Some people who wish to see and experience change contradictorily think these community intellectuals and human rights advocates should go get a job when in fact they have a job. Let’s face it, if they did get a job in an institution they would be unable to do the intellectual and human rights work they are doing.

We need to move back to a place that values these community intellectuals and human rights advocates because they deserve to be provided for. If community people and organizations are unable to see this rationale, it should be even clearer that community intellectuals and human rights advocates need to be provided for. They need fire too; they need water too, they need clothing too, they need eggs too, they need bread too … .

“Who is doing social justice work?”, she asked?
​
“I am”, I responded.

​​​© 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.

Canada, 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.

When Justin Trudeau relied on a platform/promise of truth and reconciliation and nation-to-nation to come in to power, I found myself in a sad and miserable state. What made this feeling worse for me was how so many people were falling for it. I knew it was a political lie. I knew he had no plan to meet Indigenous people on a nation-to-nation basis. I knew he was not going to share the land and resources on an equal basis. Although I knew this what made me sad and miserable was that he was manipulating the hopes of Indigenous people. This I felt was a violation of the worse kind. I know too many Indigenous people who have killed themselves because they had no hope. And I know what it is to live without hope. I do this every day of my life. As a child all too often I felt and observed my hope being manipulated by other people; people who knew better but could not come through for me. Recently I have had another experience of this manipulation of hope. This time it was more of a bizarre form of appropriation.

I must caution you though that reading the paragraphs below may cause within you extreme cognitive dissonance, extreme enough for you to project hatred toward me, or maybe it may deepen that hate you already feel. I will take that risk though because ultimately I know I am going to die alone; die alone without all the pretenders who claim to care about Indigenous people.

Indigenous people have been speaking up, petitioning, and protesting for our land and land related economic rights since the early 1600s. Our more recent protests include challenges to the 1969 White Paper, and in 1982 when the Constitution was re-patriated. And of course there have been numerous court challenges such as the 1973 Calder decision, 1990 Sparrow decision, 1997 Delgamuukw decision, 2004 Haida decision, 2014 Tsilhqot’in decision … . Indigenous people have done our work over and over and over again. It is clear as day we want our Land Back. Again we have done our work.

The latest Indigenous uprising is on the matter of the Wet’suwet’in Nation’s demand that their rights be upheld and honoured. Many Indigenous and settler people across Canada protested in solidarity with them. During these protests I had an odd experience, again a feeling, and an insight when I heard an older white woman share her joy that she, in her old age, was finally able to experience Indigenous people rise up against the colonial state. This older woman expressed her glee where people around relished along with her. I experienced this collective glee perplexing and disenfranchising because it seemed to me that she was making the protests all about her and her need for a happy story and ending. It seemed like the only thing that was important was how she felt experiencing the protest and the hope it gave her. To me this was a bizarre experience of appropriation of hope somewhat analogous to when a wealthy person appropriates the ‘culture of poverty’ as a part of their persona.

Indigenous protests are not about settler Canadians and their need to feel good about themselves. It is foremost about Indigenous people and our need to address in concrete and practical ways the hopelessness that many of us feel and experience. As many know, many Indigenous people feel hopelessness every day of our lives and for good reason. We wake up with this feeling of hopelessness, every step we take is with this feeling of hopelessness, and we go to bed with this feeling of hopelessness. For me, and many Indigenous people, it was a sad situation when Juno award nominee Inuk singer Kelly Fraser ended her life on Christmas Eve. She was only 26 years old and for many she held hope.

I have always felt that there is the need to allow Indigenous peoples the space required to express this very hopelessness. I do this bravely as I soldier on. We need to keep in mind that suicide is only one manifestation or response to living with hopelessness. We need to allow people the right to talk about hopelessness when they want to versus quell and silence it.

My commentary here is not so much about living with hopelessness, rather it is about how it is that our protests are not about a settler’s need to feel hopeful especially considering that most settlers do not really understand what the issues are and what it is that we want: Our Land Returned to Us. We want more than Church charity; We want to live as well as Canadians on our land and from our land with structures that are meaningful to us such as health care, education, and law.

It was my experience that this older woman appropriated the recent Wet’suwet’in protest as hers for her need to feel good. To me it was bizarre because I know that it will not be until settler Canadians stand up en masse to their government regarding Indigenous rights that anything will change. Once this happens, Indigenous people will genuinely experience the joy and glee associated; then settler people can stand behind that. Until this happens there really is nothing for settlers to feel joy about.

Please Creator make them stop these bizarre forms of appropriation. The hopelessness and hope to be felt is not at all, all about them. When it is, the hopelessness sinks deeper for Indigenous people. It sure does for me.
​
While after reading this, while some people may be prone to act and think into a place of cognitive dissonance and hate the messenger, as settler Jean Koning has stated several times, “Settler people need to shut up and listen” and I will add stop stealing hope that is not really there.

​© 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.

​While you may have questions guiding your thinking, and this is a good thing, it is never appropriate to assume you can direct your questions to a person. Said another way, while it is good that you are thinking and have some boundaries around what it is that you are seeking to learn, you should not assume that you have a right to have your questions answered. There are many reasons for this.
​
First, knowledge does not unfold in linear ways. Continue to listen, read, and think. As the knowledge unfolds you will learn what is important when the time is right. As the knowledge unfolds you may learn that your guiding questions were not important after all.

Second, a good teacher will always respect your own journey. They will respect your process of learning because they know that if the journey to the knowledge is your own process of observing, participating, thinking, dreaming, and making the necessary cognitive connections you will come to embody the knowledge and remember it better than if the knowledge is simply handed to you on a plate. We need to value that knowledge is more than about a squirrel collecting nuts or about rote memory; this is especially so if the knowledge is deeply layered or requires conceptual reasoning skills.

Third, when the knowledge is of a personal nature it is not appropriate to ask questions. This is especially so if you do not have a proven good relationship, a proven trusting relationship, or a proven relationship of reciprocity with the person.

Fourth, if you are in a quest for knowledge it is really important to demonstrate that you will be responsible first. Responsibility means many things such as you will act in a good and respectful way versus use the knowledge for personal gain; or when the knowledge is of a personal nature you will not use it to gossip about and thus harm.
​
Fifth, it must be understood that the most important knowledge will not be shared and we may never know it because the knowledge is too personal. Sometimes you have to trust your authority versus question it.

​© 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.

The Second of 13 Moon Teachings

The Anishinaabeg have sophisticated teachings about the intelligence of the heart that can take many years, if not a lifetime, to come to understand and fully know. In my work on Indigenous knowledge, identity politics, the land claims process, and cultural genocide I have had to reflect on the intelligence of the heart over and over again. I cannot teach the depth of this in this short blog. In the immediate, though I can offer two short teachings that I think many people will find useful. As you read on though, be forewarned that you may be triggered.

Pain is Not a Competition

Some time ago a friend told me a story about an experience she had with a ‘victims of a sexual violence’ support group that she herself had facilitated. This experience was an important teachable moment for the members of the group. Support groups are important because through them victims are provided a safe context where they share their thoughts and feelings about the violence that they experienced with people who have had similar experiences. Through sharing with people who are like them a context of wellness potentially presents itself.

In this particular support group, my friend told me that the women began to compare their pain in a competing way through offering statements such as “he raped me more than once”, “he raped me with a knife to my throat”, and so on …. Upon observing this my friend was compelled to gently interfere because the process of sharing for social mirroring and potential healing was becoming more of a competition. She reminded the women that they were gathered together to support and listen to one another.

She carefully reminded and coached the women to understand that support groups are not about members competing with one another; rather support groups are about social mirroring and all that is inherent such as listening to and gaining understanding from people who have had similar experiences. She implored the women to hear and understand what she was saying because as a wellness professional she knew that it is through the medicine of social mirroring that people gain, in the very least, a tiny little bit of medicine, where after, this little bit could become the seed for more healing to follow.

My point is, it is a good practice not to silence people who have had a similar experience as you. Rather, it is best to listen to others where in turn others who understand your pain will then listen to you when you share. Pain is not a competition. Wellness can be found in listening.

On Vicarious Trauma

Heartache is never the same for any two people; even when the traumatic event that causes the heartache is the same, we all experience things differently because many things mediate our personal responses. For example, our various subjectivities mediate what we observe, how we feel, and how we cope. Another way to say this is there are multiple responses to the same stimuli; there is no universal response to any one trauma. All humans have a subjectivity that includes such entities as a person’s age, gender, and race.

While the concept of subjective responses to violence are easily grasped, some people struggle with understanding how at times the same traumatic event can become vicariously magnified in one person. Understanding vicarious trauma requires a little more conceptual thought but it can be done. In a home where an episode of physical violence has occurred, while each child will experience the trauma based on their subjectivity, some of the children also experience vicarious trauma. They do this through reading the pain on their sibling’s faces and bodies, where through this reading, they themselves experience additional trauma. For example, an older child who feels responsible for the safety of younger siblings may observe and read the pain in their faces where through this process additional trauma becomes inscribed in their own heart and mind thus deepening the heartache. Depending on the number of children involved, vicarious trauma can be two fold, three fold, four fold, five fold, six fold, seven fold… .

No two people share the same trauma; subjectivity mediates. We must also consider the possibility of vicarious trauma.

Chi-Miigwetch for reading this and thinking about it.

​​​​​​© 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.

The First of 13 Moon Teachings
​
I have come to learn that many people do not really understand what I mean when I talk about “practice knowledge”. There are many delineations of what I mean …
 
First, some people think I am talking about the difference between theory and practice, and that when I talk about practice knowledge that I am stressing that people can have all the theory in the world but if it is not practiced it is meaningless. While I like this truth and agree I mean something different ... .
 
Second, in the Anishinaabeg knowledge tradition it is commonly thought that the most important knowledge is the knowledge we do through our practices. What I mean by this is our parents teach us how best to do things through their practices, meaning through being good role-models. For example, through practice they teach us how to be good human beings. From this process of practice we practice it too even though we do not consciously understand the theory of ontological morality. We just do morality in practice as it was practiced for us to learn from. This means we do not necessarily have a conscious and cognitive ability to talk about the theory of morality and why it is important; rather we embody and practice it.
 
Third, ceremony is a collection of practices. While some people are able to conduct a Sacred Pipe Ceremony because they learned it through practice from their Elders, others who were not trained in ceremonies yet who have been trained in Indigenous knowledge philosophy have the skill to talk about it in a way a ceremonialist or Elder may not be able to. Both are important.
 
Fourth, some people who embody intergenerational trauma manifest it at the level of practice with little ability to express consciously and cognitively the very knowledge they have within their bodies. This inability does not mean they do not have knowledge about their trauma; they do at the level of embodiment and practice. When knowledge is embodied and practiced in this way, in a way that is harming to self and others, it is suggested that the person go on a journey; a journey to connect one’s heart and mind so they are better able to cope and have a good life.
 
Fifth, some people have great ideas in that they are great thinkers but they lack the skills, or maybe the time, to manifest the ideas into concrete practice. When this happens another person can pick up the idea and work with it to ensure it moves into practice.
 
Sixth, sometimes practice knowledge is just yours and only yours. It is not something you do for other people. For example, it is never advisable to say to an impoverished person, “I will pray for you”. Once I heard someone say this to a woman who was struggling to feed her eight children. I could tell by the look on her face that she was patronized and was thinking, “I don’t need your prayers. Stuff your prayers and help me feed my children in real and practiced ways.”
 
Most of the time knowledge at the level of practice is the most important knowledge. Sometimes thinking or theoretical knowledge is the most important knowledge. And sometimes both together are important knowledge.

Chi-Miigwetch for reading this and thinking about it.

​​​​​© 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.

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.