Canadian Indigenous People (Part 3): Relationships Between BC’s First Nations and New Settlers

By Terence Ho | Foundation of HKPLTW

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

This article is Part three of a three-parts-series. In this article, I will provide a general view of the relationship between Canadian Indigenous communities and new settlers throughout history of British Columbia. Part one talks about the general history, culture, and traditions of BC’s First Nations, while Part two talks about Five individual First Nations in BC. 

Early Time: Coexisting

Before the mid 19th century, the relationship between Pacific Coast First Nations and European settlers settlers developed differently from that between settlers and First Nations in the Eastern parts of Canada. The commercial aspirations of the Hudson’s Bay Company had overshadowed settlement in British Columbia. With a monopoly of fur trade in today’s British Columbia territory, the Hudson’s Bay Company restricted their diplomatic dealing with Pacific First Nations to commercial or fur trade matters.

From Peaceful to Hostile

Royal Proclamation in 1763 specified that the lands in the “Indian Territories” could be no settlement or trade, and only the Crown could purchase land from any First Nations. The intent of the proclamation was to slow the western expansion of the colonies and control the relationship between First Nations and colonists. Crucially, the Proclamation also became the first official recognition of First Nations rights to lands and title. However, in British Columbia, the settlers and colonists claimed that the Royal Proclamation does not apply to BC since it had not yet been settled by the British when the Proclamation was issued in 1763. This issue has greatly disputed today, as the Proclamation would have applied to BC since British sovereignty was established in the province.

Starting in 1850s, the Hudson’s Bay Company began to change their “Commercial First” policy to a colonist mindset. James Douglas, the later colonial Governor after 1854, signed with various Coast Salish First Nation peoples on Vancouver Island between 1850 and 1854. Under the treaties, the First Nations surrendered land required for settlement around the trade posts in exchange for goods and right to hunt and fish. These treaties broke the Royal Proclamation, which stated that only the Crown could purchase lands and other purchases lands were dismissed.

These treaties were known to laid the groundwork for the creation of the colony of British Columbia in 1859 — A deep and lasting impact on First Nations in the region. Despite making treaties, the colonists and settlers did not intend to keep their promises. They slowly retracted the previous promises made by Douglas, and they eventually stopped treaty-making altogether, showing British Colombia’s reluctance to recognize First Nations land rights.The denial of land and tittle persisted even after British Colombia joined Canada in 1871 and ran contrary to recognition of land and tittle in other parts of Canada. 

Legislated Assimilation and Systemic Racism

The Pacific Coast First Nation peoples often are not thought about during this phase of settler development and is the centre of issues still today regarding tittle and rights. In 1876, the Indian Act was introduced — a piece of legislation that would have long-lasting impact on First Nations. Under the Indian Act, the British Columbia government became increasingly restrictive,  intervening in band issues and making sweeping sweeping policy decisions.

The Indian Act was frequently amended nearly every year between 1876 and 1927. The changes made to the legislation allowed the government to impose ever-greater controls on the lives of First Nations, pushing for the whole-scale abandonment of traditional ways of life. For example, in response to the Nisga’a pursuit of a land claim in British Columbia, a new amendment was passed to forbid fundraising by First Nations to pursue land claims without the expressed permission of the Department of Indian Affairs. This amendment effectively prevented First Nations from pursuing land tittles and rights. 

The concept of enfranchisement dominated government policy on First Nations for decades to come. More restrictive regulations were made to “assimilate” the First Nations into White Canadian society, allowing the government to exercise considerable powers over their daily lives. With the Indian Act and other regulations limited First Nations’ control over their own affairs, their lives were difficult. Bands could not control over the administration of their communities and over the use of band funds and revenues. Right to vote, pension benefits, and welfare were not expended to them. In addition, the concept of enfranchisement led to a “cultural genocide” — Residential Schools. These schools would force children to abandon their traditional languages, dress, religion and lifestyle.

The imfamous enfranchisement legally stood until 1961. Over time, First Nation peoples have been enfranchised for serving in the military, gaining a post-secondary degree, leaving reserves for long periods – for example, for employment – and, for women, if they married non-First Nation men or if their husbands died. 

Growing Recognition: 1980s Onward

Starting in 1950s and following decades of civil right movements, many First Nations organization express their desire for equality with other Canadians and for right to maintain their heritages.

With their efforts, legacy of colonist policies established by the former government become increasingly apparent. More and more stories surfaced regarding mistreatment, as both Canadian government and society call for greater recognition of the Canadian Indigenous peoples. Government acknowledges and commit to address the decades of suffering the First Nations experienced and for the impact the Indian Act, Residential School, and other enfranchised policies had on cultures, languages, and traditions of Canadian Indigenous communities.

Although all levels of Canadian governments have committed to address this legacy, greater measures are needed. Government’s reconciliation seems to framed according to the logic of legitimating state authority rather than offering meaningful restitution for harms committed against First Nation peoples and homelands. Justice needs to come before reconciliation, it seems like a true reconciliation is still far away. 

This is an opinion article; the views expressed by me.

You May be Interested in:

Canadian Indigenous People and Chinese Canadians: Have apologies Truly Established Harmony for Them?

Legacy of Colonzation and Damage of Racism: Disenfranchisement of Canadian Indigenous and Chinese

Hidden Past of Residential School: “The Canadian Holocaust”

Colonialism and Residential School: “Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing”

Can Truth and Reconciliation Commission Make Reconciliation a reality?

Reconciliation Policy and Apology in Canada

The Road to Political Organizing and Activism For First Nations

Bibliography

Blatchford, Christie. “Blatchford’s Take: Shame and Disgrace—Canada’s native reserves deserve foreign correspondent treatment,” The Globe and Mail, February 2, 2008. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/canadas-native-reserves-deserve-foreign-correspondent-treatment/article717978/. Accessed 19 September 2021.

Hall, Anthony J.. “Royal Proclamation of 1763”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 30 August 2019, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/royal-proclamation-of-1763. Accessed 19 September 2021.

Harris, Cole. Making Native Space: Colonialism, Resistance, and Reserves in British Columbia. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2002.

Milloy, John. Indian Act Colonialism: A Century of Dishonour, 1869-1969. National Centre for First Nations Governance, 2008.

Hanson, Eric. “The Indian Act.” Indigenous Foundations. First Nations and Indigenous Studies UBC, 2020. Accessed 18 September 2021. https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/the_indian_act/.

Hanson, Eric, et al.“The Residential School System.” Indigenous Foundations. First Nations and Indigenous Studies UBC, 2020. Accessed 17 September 2021.https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/the_residential_school_system/#survivors-demand-justice.

“Indian Act”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 16 December 2020, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/indian-act. Accessed 19 September 2021.

Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples: Looking Forward, Looking back. Volume 1. Ottawa: the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996. 250.

Steckley, John, Bryan D. Cummins, and Xwi7xwa Collection. Full Circle: Canada’s First Nations. Pearson Prentice Hall, Toronto, 2008.

Restoule, Jean-Paul. “Making Native Space: Colonialism, Resistance and Reserves in British Columbia (Review).” University of Toronto Quarterly, vol. 74, no. 1, 2004, pp. 468-469.

“First Nations in Canada. ” Government of Canada. Indigenous Peoples and Community, https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1307460755710/1536862806124#chp1. Accessed 13 September 2021.

“Residential School: A History of Residential Schools in Canada”. CBC News Canada. 2021. Accessed 14 September 2021. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canada-residential-schools-kamloops-faq-1.6051632

Encyclopedia, The Canadian. “Women and the Indian Act”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 11 May 2020, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/women-and-the-indian-act. Accessed 19 September 2021.

McCue, Harvey A.. “Indian Status”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 11 May 2020, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/indian-status. Accessed 19 September 2021.

Canadian Indigenous People (Part 2): Five Individual First Nations

By Terence Ho | Foundation of HKPLTW

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

This article is part two of a three-part series to explain the First Nations communities living in British Columbia. Part one focuses on the general history, culture, and traditions of BC’s First Nations ; Part two focuses on Five individual First Nations in BC; Part three focuses on the relationship between them and Canadian settlers to BC throughout history.

In Part Two, I will talk about five groups of Pacific Coast First Nation communities in British Columbia. The five groups are: HAIDA Nation, COAST SALISH Nation, Cowichan Nation, Kwakwaka’wakw Nation, and SYILX OKANAGAN Nation. Since there are many tribes and bands in BC, it is important to keep in mind that I provide only a general overview about five groups of Pacific Coast First Nation people. This article does not reflect all the complexities and variations that are found among different First Nations in BC.

Haida Nation

Haida First Nation live in Haida Gwaii islands. Pollen fossils and oral historical records confirm that Haida ancestors were present when the first tree arrived, proving Haida settlement had been on the island for over 17,000 years. The Haida are famous for their craftsmanship, trading skills, and seamanship.

They traded regularly with the European and American fur traders and settlers. However, not all of the interactions were peaceful. The Haida defended themselves with fortifications, and took captives from their defeated enemies. During the 1780s to 1830s, they made use of the acquired modern firearms and western cannons to project themselves from European/American expeditions and aggressions. The Haida also turned aggressive towards other First Nation peoples. For example, the Haida had been attacking and enslaving the Coast Salish People in 1857. 

Despite having modern weapons and well-trained warriors, smallpox and other old world diseases were introduced to the Haida communities. These diseases significantly reduced the Haida population. On top of population loss, the increasing land purchases by the white settlers reduced the Haida’s sovereignty over their territories which opened the doorway to colonial power. As the Haida’s territories were colonized, their traditions and cultural works such as totem poles were destroyed. This undermined their self-knowledge and assimilated them into the western culture. Later, the Canadian government forcibly sent Haida children to residential schools where they were to be further diminished their morale and tradition. 

Haida First Nation peoples also have great art. Many of their artworks are identified by the carved, raised eyelid lines, and a distinctive concave orbit whose outline sweeps in a curve from the nose past the temple to the nostril. Another famous art of the Haida of the Haida culture is their shame figures. The artists in 1850s to 1890s produced “Curious”, which portrayed subjects previously considered as taboo. The rise of “Curious” artworks were often linked to decline of the Haida cultural values under the population loss and western assimilation. 

COAST SALISH Nation

Coast Salish First Nation, also known as Snuneymuxw, is a group of many tribes with numerous distinct cultures and traditions. This group of First Nations live in territories from middle to southern Vancouver Island, Greater Vancouver Area, Peugeot Sund, and Olympic Peninsula. The Coast Salish languages are part of Salishan linguistic group. Today, there are a limited numbers of fluent speakers due to former Canadian policies and residential school system aimed at assimilation. Furthermore, a characteristic that set COAST SALISH First Nation apart is primogeniture — Male inheritance is rare among the Canadian Indigenous cultures. The population is estimated to be 56,590 in 2013. 

Traditionally, Coast Salish peoples live in permanent villages during the winter, while they stay in temporary camps during the summer time. Their houses are built with red cedar wood. Since they do not use metal nails and bolts, withes of cedar are used to lash together roof planks and setting baseboards, a vital part of construction. Cedar poles formed the foundations of the longhouses, followed by a framework of fluted beams overlaid with cedar roof planks. Their houses are large longhouses that can accommodate several families, each with its separate living area.

Culturally, Coast Salish knowledges are passed down through oral histories. Many of their stories focus on importance of nature maintenance and certain resources. For example, the cedar tree are considered sacred for the resources they provide for them. Many beliefs are associated with the cedar tree. Coast Salish shamans often had cedar “spirit assistants” or “guard figures” or “anti-inflammatory properties” to ward off the evil and protect the communities. 

Last, art is also an important part of Coast Salish society. House posts and motifs featuring American Northwest animals and spiritual beings are major part in their art works.

COWICHAN Nation

Cowichan First Nation, also known as Ts’uubaa-asatx, lives in territory located in the Cowichan Valley region on Vancouver Island, BC. The population is over 4,900, making the Cowichan First Nation tribes the largest First Nation group in British Columbia. The Cowichan tribes are called “Quq’tsun Hwulmuhw”, meaning the “People of the warm land”.

Today, the Ts’uubaa-asatx Nation has a reverse area of 5,900 acres, made up of nine reserves, with a core traditional territory is 900,000 acres. Ts’uubaa-asatx is governed by a chief among 12 councillors under the Indian Act. 

Kwakwaka’wakw Nation

Kwakwaka’wakw, KWAKiUTL First Nation. According to a 2016 census, Kwakwaka’wakw is made up of 3,665 people. Most of them live on Vancouver Island. Their oral history says their ancestors came in the forms of animals by way of the land, sea, or underground. When one of the ancestral animals arrived at a given spot, it became human. Animals in Kwakwaka’wakw origin myth include the Thunderbird, orca, grizzly bear, or chief ghost. Some ancestors have human origins and are described to come from far-away places. 

Kwakwaka’wakw peoples have their crests that represent an animal or supernatural beings that are believed to be their ancestors. They display their crests that belonged to their lineages on the “Totem Poles.” The totem poles features visual representations of kinship, serving to document stories and histories. For instance, Kwakwaka’wakw families of northern Vancouver Island belonging to the Thunderbird Clan feature a Thunderbird crest and familial legends on their poles.

Traditionally, Kwakwaka’wakw economy based on fishing, with men working as fishermen and hunters, and the women working as gatherers. Socially, social status and wealth are not determined by the ‘amount one has, but by how much you have to give away’. Today, many traditional ceremonies remain, and winter ceremony is an important tradition in Kwakwaka’wakw communities. In the winter ceremony, Kwakwaka’wakw peoples practice their sacred red cedar bark ceremonial in which myths are re-enacted in songs and dances using spectacular masks. 

Marriage in Kwakwaka’wakw culture is interesting. After a few years into the marriage, a woman is redeemed by her side of the family through the repayment of marriage debt. The repayment ceremony include the food, luxurious goods, copper, and ceremonial privileges, which are given to the groom in return for the payment he made to his father-in-law before the marriage. The ceremony begins by placing sea otter teeth on the beach in the outline of a symbolic double canoe. It ends with the transfer of a copper, a symbol of considerable wealth and a box filled with ceremonial privileges as whistles, masks, and rattles. 

There two types of Kwakwaka’wakw art styles: Southern and Northern KWAKiUTL Arts. Southern Kwakwaka’wakw sculptures are characterized by angular carvings, preference for overall painting, and flamboyant expression. Whereas the Northern Kwakwaka’wakw sculptures are transitional and have unique characteristics such as the shape of the mouth and the yes placed high in the orbits. 

Syilx Okanagan Nation

Syilx Okanagan First Nation lives in today’s Okanagan areas in interior British Columbia. In their origin myth and oral histories, the Syilx people believe to guide to the Okanagan areas by “k̓ʷuləncútən” — A all mighty Creator. They have come from the land and animal themselves. Their ancestors are the “Pant and Animal peoples” whom the Syilx people believe their teachings, values, and world views are originated from.

Like other pacific coast First Nations, the Syilx was first contacted with white settlers via the fur trade and settlements. The Syilx people were often not thought about during this phase of settler development and is the centre of issues still today regarding Title and Rights to the Okanagan territories. With increasing numbers of White settlement occurring, many impediments are felt by Syilx people especially in regards to the introduction of old-world diseases.

Today, BC’s Syilx members live in reserves along Okanagan lake, Round Lake, Swan Lake, Duck Lake, Wood Lake, and Kalamalka Lake. They speak Nsyilxcn, one of 23 Salishan languages. The use of Nsyilxcn terms have come to be very prominent in Okanagan areas in British Columbia. For example, the term ‘Okanagan’ is an Anglicized version of ‘suqnaqinx’ which refers to the tops of the mountains. It sometimes refers to the people who speak Nsyilxcn. Another example is the various cities named after Nsyilxcn terms. They include Kelowna, Pentiction, etc. Overall, the use of Nsyilxcn terms are widely used for a variety of reasons in the Okanagan areas, as these terms are Anglicized used as the name for cities and places. 

More continue in Part Three.

This is an opinion article; the views expressed by me.

Bibliography

Black, Martha. “Totem Poles in the Royal BC Museum.” Royal British Columbia Museum. Victoria, B.C. http://staff.royalbcmuseum.bc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/WARSAW.pdf.

Goodfellow, Anne. “Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 7: Northwest Coast.” BC Studies, 1991, pp. 185.

Hanson, Eric.“Oral Traditions.” Indigenous Foundations. First Nations and Indigenous Studies UBC, 2020. Accessed 14 September 2021. https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/oral_traditions/.

“History of Syilx Okanagan People.” Okanagan Indian Band. Our History, 2021. Acessed 16 September 2021. https://okib.ca/about-us/our-history.

Huang, Alice.“Totem Poles.” Indigenous Foundations. First Nations and Indigenous Studies UBC, 2020. Accessed 16 September 2021. https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/totem_poles/.

Huang, Alice.“Cedar.” Indigenous Foundations. First Nations and Indigenous Studies UBC, 2020. Accessed 17 September 2021. https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/cedar/.

“Kwakwaka’wakw.” Northwest Coast Village Project. Bill Reid Centre, Simon Fraser University, 1990. Accessed 16 September 2021. https://www.sfu.ca/brc/virtual_village/Kwakwaka_wakw.html.

Sturtevant, William C., Wayne P. Suttles, and Xwi7xwa Collection. Handbook of North American Indians: Volume 7, Northwest Coast. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C, 1990.

Stryd, Arnoud H., and Vicki Feddema. “Sacred Cedar: The Cultural and Archaeological Significance of Cultural Modified Trees.” Report of the Pacific Salmon Forests Project. Vancouver: David Suzuki Foundation, 1998.

Kennedy, Dorothy and Randy Bouchard. “Coast Salish”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 25 July 2019, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/coastal-salish. Accessed 15 September 2021.

“Tribes and History of The First Nation Peoples.” My Mondo Trading. Accessed 15 September 2021. https://www.mymondotrading.com/tribes-and-history-of-the-first-nations-peoples.

Mills, Edward and Harold D. Kalman. “Architectural History of Indigenous Peoples in Canada”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 27 April 2020, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/architectural-history-early-first-nations. Accessed 16 September 2021.

Kennedy, Dorothy and Randy Bouchard. “Interior Salish”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 11 January 2021, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/interior-salish-first-nations. Accessed 17 September 2021.

Robinson, Harry, Wendy C. Wickwire, and desLibris – Books. Nature Power: In the Spirit of an Okanagan Storyteller. Edited by Wendy Wickwire. Talonbooks, Vancouver, 2004; 2000.

Webster, Gloria Cranmer. “Kwakwaka’wakw (Kwakiutl)”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 03 August 2018, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/kwakiutl. Accessed 15 September 2021.

Canadian Indigenous Peoples in British Columbia (Part 1): Pacific Coast First Nations

By Terence Ho | Foundation of HKPLTW

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

This article and the next two articles are a three-part series to explain the First Nations communities living in British Columbia. Part one focuses on the general history, culture, and traditions of BC’s First Nations; Part two focuses on the various individual First Nations bands in BC; Part three focuses on the relationship between them and Canadian settlers to BC throughout history. These articles aim to provide readers with a general overview of BC’s First Nations in different eras, from the pre-contact to the current time.

Pacific Coast First Nations in British Columbia

Before the arrival of European settlers to the West Coast of Canada, Indigenous peoples have settled in what is now British Columbia for more than 10,000 years. They were able to their cultures, laws, and material and spiritual needs through the resources of the natural world around them. There are six main First Nation groups in Canada: Woodland First Nations, Iroquoian First Nations, Plains First Nations, Plateau First Nations, Pacific Coast First Nations, and First Nations of the Mackenzie and Yukon River Basins. In British Columbia, the First Nation communities are the “Pacific Coast First Nations.”

It is important keep in mind that I provide only a general overview, and this article does not reflect all the variations that are found among different First Nations in BC.

The Pacific Coast First Nations is culturally distinct from the other five groups of First Nations in Canada. The First Nations inhabiting in British Columbia are subdivided into many tribes and bands. They have very similar cultures and traditions, shaped mainly by a familiar environment. Today, according to information on “B.C. FIRST NATIONS & INDIGENOUS PEOPLE”, WelcomeBC estimates:

The Pacific Coast First Nations have about 200,000 Indigenous peoples and are made up of 198 distinct First Nation communities. Among them, there are more than 30 different First Nation languages, and 60 dialects are spoken.

WelcomeBC

Social Organization

The Pacific Coast First Nations has well-defined social order. The basic social unit for all First Nations in British Columbia is the lineage whose members claim descent from a common ancestor. Even though there are differences in the degree to which each band practiced the customs, they all have social classes in which the aristocratic class is the top and regards as superior by birth. 

Most lineages have their crests that represent an animal or supernatural beings that are believed to be their ancestors. They display their crest that belonged to their lineages and the powerful rights and privileges that a family held on the “Totem Poles.” The Totem Poles features visual representations of kinship, serving to document stories and histories familiar to the community or family. For instance, Kwakwaka’wakw families of northern Vancouver Island belonging to the Thunderbird Clan feature a Thunderbird crest and familial legends on their poles. Influential families may have more than one crest. Totem poles can also be used to honour a particular event or individual. They may be built to commemorate the life of a chief, or may be commissioned to celebrate an important milestone, the reason for the pole’s creation is shared and celebrated in such ceremonies.

Food and Resources

The food resource of the First Nations in British Columbia is seafood — salmon, seaweed, shellfish, and whale. The easy access to abundant seafood makes it possible for them to build and settle in permanent villages. Their diet consists of dried and smoked salmon so that it can be stored and eaten later. Fish oil is also part of their diet, serving as a condiment with dried fish during the cold winter.

The forestland in British Columbia gives BC’s First Nations access to cedar. Since they do not use metal nails and bolts, withes of cedar are used to lash together roof planks and setting baseboards, a vital part of construction. Their houses are large longhouses that can accommodate several families, each with its separate living area. Cedar poles formed the foundations of the longhouses, followed by a framework of fluted beams overlaid with cedar roof planks. Furthermore, a wide array of gear from cedar wood. For example, the Pacific Coast First Nations travelled almost exclusively by water using canoes made of cedar wood. Most hunting canoe can carry one or two passengers and is about 5 metres long. The larger canoes are more than 16 metres long and can carry 40 passengers and two tons of cargo. Another example is that the freshly caught fish are preserved in cedar smokehouses or dried on cedar racks. Food can be stored in bentwood boxes, which are made from a single cedar plank bent using steam to form four sides.

In addition, the importance of red cedar plays a role in the spiritual beliefs. They recognize that the cedar tree has its own life and spirit. Many beliefs and taboos are also associated with the cedar tree. For example, a person who killed a tree through improper harvesting would be cursed by other trees. Similarly, Coast Salish and Tlingit shamans often had cedar “spirit assistants” or “guard figures” or “anti-inflammatory properties” to ward off the evil and protect the communities.

Traditions and Beliefs

The spiritual beliefs and knowledge of the Pacific First Nations are passed down through oral traditions. According to scholars Renée Hulan and Renate Eigenbrod, oral traditions are “the means by which knowledge is reproduced, preserved and conveyed from generation to generation. Oral traditions form the foundation of Aboriginal societies, connecting speaker and listener in communal experience and uniting past and present in memory.”

Oral-based knowledge systems are predominant among First Nations. Stories teach important lessons about a society’s culture, the land, and the ways in which members are expected to interact with each other and their environment.

The Pacific First Nations believe that they are part of the whole of creation — all beings, values, and the world are “all gifts from the Creator”. So, the First Nations give thanks to things they depend on for survival as individuals and members of their communities — ‘Living in harmony with the natural world and all it contained.’ This utmost respect that they have for all beings in the natural world is reflected in songs, festivals, and ceremonies.  The Pacific Coast has traditions and rituals relating to the annual salmon run. There are a welcoming ceremony and offerings to the first salmon of the year, thanking the salmon for providing the communities with much-needed foods. For the principles that guide their day-to-day conduct, they treat all objects in their environment with deep respect and promote harmony and balance with everything and everyone in the natural world. 

More continue in Part Two.

This is an opinion article; the views expressed by me.

Bibliography

Archibald, Jo-ann, Archibald, Jo-ann, Q’um Q’um Xiiem, and Xwi7xwa Collection. Indigenous Storywork: Educating the Heart, Mind, Body, and Spirit. UBC Press, Vancouver, 2008;2014;.

Black, Martha. “Totem Poles in the Royal BC Museum.” Royal British Columbia Museum. Victoria, B.C. http://staff.royalbcmuseum.bc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/WARSAW.pdf.

“B.C. First Nations & Indigenous People. ” WelcomeBC. Explore British Columbia, https://www.welcomebc.ca/Choose-B-C/Explore-British-Columbia/B-C-First-Nations-Indigenous-People. Accessed 13 September 2021.

“First Nations in Canada. ” Government of Canada. Indigenous Peoples and Community, https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1307460755710/1536862806124#chp1. Accessed 13 September 2021.

Eigenbrod, Renate, Renée Hulan, and Xwi7xwa Collection. Aboriginal Oral Traditions: Theory, Practice, Ethics. Fernwood Pub, Black Point, N.S, 2008.

Huang, Alice.“Totem Poles.” Indigenous Foundations. First Nations and Indigenous Studies UBC, 2020. Accessed 13 September 2021. https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/totem_poles/.

Huang, Alice.“Cedar.” Indigenous Foundations. First Nations and Indigenous Studies UBC, 2020. Accessed 12 September 2021. https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/cedar/.

Hanson, Eric.“Oral Traditions.” Indigenous Foundations. First Nations and Indigenous Studies UBC, 2020. Accessed 13 September 2021. https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/oral_traditions/.

Stewart, Hilary. Looking at Totem Poles. Douglas & McIntyre, Seattle;Vancouver;, 1993.

Stryd, Arnoud H., and Vicki Feddema. “Sacred Cedar: The Cultural and Archaeological Significance of Cultural Modified Trees.” Report of the Pacific Salmon Forests Project. Vancouver: David Suzuki Foundation, 1998.

Halpin, Marjorie M. Totem Poles: An Illustrated Guide. UBC Press, Vancouver, 2000.

Legacy of Colonzation and Damage of Racism: Disenfranchisement of Canadian Indigenous and Chinese

By Terence Ho | Foundation of HKPLTW

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

The early development of Canada was built on oppression — The cross-country railway that connected the lands, that were forcefully taken from the Canadian indigenous peoples, was built by the cheap and exploitable Chinese labours. Despite being given full apologies, the discrimination of the past still affect the indigenous and Chinese Canadian communities. The legacy of colonization still remains but is swept under the rug — The damage of racism is still occurring. 

In the past 12 months, there are two events: The discovery of unmarked graves in a former residential school site and the pandemic-related racism against Chinese Canadians.

Many Canadians were surprised by the unmarked graves and nation-wide protests because they believe offical reconciliation with the First Nation communities has already been “accomplished” by the government and Truth and Reconciliation Commission. They are unaware that the apology and reconciliation processes are not mandated to engage both sides, as perpetrators are not included in the process.

The Truth and Reconciliation commission continues to avoid the systemic and structural issues of residential schools and other institutionalized racism against the Indigenous peoples. The whole process is controlled by the commission, with the victims to testify and provide information only. So, the process is more of a reconciliation pronouncement on the part of the government and commission. The victims themselves had no input into what the reconciliation settlement should be. Thus, the past harms and ongoing legacy of assimilation policies are never being held accountable. 

The mainstream Canadians generally believe that Anti-Chinese racism is a thing of the past since the government of Canada had already issued a full apology for the Head Tax and Chinese Exclusion Act of 1923. I do not want mainstream Canadians to think that Chinese Canadians have already gotten their “reconciliation” with the state of Canada. Prime Minister Harper’s apology in 2006 was a grand gesture, but it was not a “full redress” settlement. The government of Canada controlled the whole settlement process, as the victims and their descendants had no input into the redress settlement should be — This settlement was partial redress. The apology by Harper was a political move in response to Canadians and the world becoming more aware of Canada’s status as “Multicultural” country.

Furthermore, there is a concept that the Chinese do not need sympathy for past suffering since the Chinese are the “Model Minority” — a stereotype of Chinese Canadian being affluent and well-educated. This stereotype is a false concept to discriminate against the Chinese and undermine the seriousness of Anti-Chinese racism. Many Canadians do not acknowledge the harms of racism; they believe that racist bias are just jokes, and that the Chinese Canadians might overacted to their “silly” jokes. This is a serious matter. When the society is peaceful, racism is present, though socially submerged. However, when there is pressure or crisis like the recent pandemic and Trump’s anti-Chinese rhetoric, the ugliness of racism gets pushed to the surface, exacerbates Anti-Chinese sentiment, and makes it more overt. 

In bringing to light the histories and experiences of Indigenous and Chinese Canadian people, the legacy of colonialism remains as the damage of racism is occurring. From the institutionalized racism like the Indigenous residential school and Chinese Exclusion Act to the recent events like the discovery of unmarked graves and pandemic-related discrimination, the “multicultural” Canada is not exempt from racist legacy. Only by acknowledging racism and discrimination can we educate ourselves and speak out against injustices. It is only by standing united, putting efforts together to take a stand against the aftermaths from our shared past of racism and oppression. 

This is an opinion article; the views expressed by me.

Bibliography

Burney, Shehla. Coming to Gum San: The Story of Chinese Canadians. Toronto: Multicultural History Society of Ontario, 1995.

Dere, William G. W. Being Chinese in Canada: The Struggle for Identity, Redress and Belonging. Douglas & McIntyre, Madeira Park, BC, 2019.

Chan, Arlene. “Chinese Head Tax in Canada”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 3 June 2020, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/chinese-head-tax-in-canada. Accessed 3 September 2021.

Chan, Arlene. “Chinese Immigration Act”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 7 March 2017, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/chinese-immigration-act. Accessed 3 September 2021.

James, Matt. “Recognition, Redistribution and Redress: The Case of the “Chinese Head Tax”.” Canadian Journal of Political Science, vol. 37, no. 4, 2004, pp. 883-902.

“Library and Archives Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission Web Archive.” Government of Canada. Library and Archives Canada, 2019, https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/aboriginal-heritage/Pages/truth-reconciliation-commission-web-archive.aspx. Accessed 3 September 2021.

Llewellyn, Jennifer. “Bridging the Gap between Truth and Reconciliation: Restorative Justice and the Indian Residential School Truth and Reconciliation Commission” in M. Brant-Castellano, L. Archibald, M. DeGagne, eds. From Truth to Reconciliation: Transforming the Legacy of Residential Schools (Ottawa: Aboriginal Healing Foundation, 2008) 183.

Nayler, Jade. “In search of Gold Mountain: My father’s Chinese head tax story”. CBC News Canada. May 24, 2021. Accessed 3 September 2021. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/first-person-jade-nayler-chinese-head-tax-1.6016861

Canadian Indigenous People and Chinese Canadians: Have apologies Truly Established Harmony for Them?

By Terence Ho | Foundation of HKPLTW

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

Both First Nation peoples and Chinese Canadians are the victims of the mistreatments of the mainstream Canadians and the paternalistic policies of the early Canadian government. Both ethnic groups got their “official apologies” from the state of Canada. However, have apologies established harmony for them in reality? 

Apologies Do not Automatically Accomplish Reconciliations

For the Canadian Indigenous Peoples, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission states that ending impunity and providing justice for residential school victims are its fundamental objectives. It opens up space for a dialogue without fear of sanction on those who testify and provide information, guiding and inspiring a process of truth and healing. In the case of the Chinese Canadians, Stephen Harper’s government issued a full apology for the Head Tax and Chinese Exclusion Act. For both groups, the Government of Canada’s actions were nevertheless significant steps that enabled the First Nation peoples and Chinese Canadians to move forward as equal and full members of our society. However, I do not want the public to think that reconciliation with the Canadian Indigenous peoples and Chinese Canadians has been “accomplished” because the major players (The government of Canada and major church organizations) are participating in the reconciliation process. 

Damages Go Far Beyond Residential School and Head Tax

We need to recognize that the damage to these two ethnic groups goes beyond Residential Schools and Chinese Exclusion Act.

Canadian society as a whole seems unaware of testimony and dialogue by the Truth Reconciliation Commission. Many Canadians believe that “reconciliation” has already happened. However, the “reconciliation process” has not established harmony and reconciliation in reality. The actual reconciliation process should include both sides, the victims and perpetrators. Canada’s Truth Reconciliation Commission fails to accomplish further goals as it does not mandate to have the perpetrators in the reconciliation process. The First Nation victims might testify to the commission, but their speeches mostly only reach the researchers. Meanwhile, our government is still somewhat reluctant to engage with the Indigenous peoples in a meaningful dialogue about what the issues are that are most important. The Canadian government tries to keep the apology and reconciliation within residential schools while keeping other historical injustices away from their agendas. The government seems to remain silent on the Euro-centric idea of land ownership. One “discovers” an empty land and is therefore entitled to possess it. The controversy over lands claims has been ignored. Under those circumstances, the damage of past wrongs remains. 

As early as the construction of the Pacific Railway, there was racism and discrimination against the Chinese Canadians. The Chinese workers did blasting and many dangerous tasks they were asked to perform while getting paid less than their white counterparts. Following the railway’s completion, the decrease in the demand for inexpensive labour resulted in the increased Anti-Chinese sentiments. The legislated racism began in Head Tax, which aimed to restrict Chinese immigration. After being victims of heavy tax upon arrival in Canada, the government passed the Chinese Exclusion Act on July 1, 1923, to prohibit all Chinese immigration. Although Harper’s government issued a full apology to Chinese Canadians, the damage will never be completely restored. Many Chinese elders could not forget Canada Day of 1923 because it was a day when the government used “all the legitimate means” to expel the Chinese — A day that shattered many dreams of family reunions and new lives. Many of them still feel unwelcoming because of Canada’s racist exclusion in the past. For this reason, many Chinese Canadians refer to July 1 as “Humiliation Day” and refuse any celebrations.

Conclusion: Justice and Respect are the Keys in Reconciliation

From the experiences of both First Nation peoples and Chinese Canadians, we can see that government apologies have not established complete harmony. While full apologies constitute a significant cornerstone towards reconciliation, these apologies have not brought “true justice and respect” to the victims. The justice goes beyond that of residential schools and the Chinese Exclusion Act. A true reconciliation not only would conciliate the Indigenous and Chinese victims but also would give the proper respect to them for what happened in the past. In other words, a true reconciliation must appease the victims and appreciate what they have pioneered in the development of Canada.

Thus, we must understand and acknowledge that the prosperity of today’s Canada can be linked to efforts of the First Nation peoples and Chinese Canadians: The free land Canadians did not pay for and the inexpensive and exploitable Chinese labour. Both ethnic groups are the “Unsung Heroes” whose lands, resources, and labours are used for the competition of Pacific Railway that linked all provides together and accelerated economy. The Government of Canada needs to acknowledge the building of Canada as a “multicultural effort” by groups of peoples and that all Canadians are all beneficiaries of the pioneers — “Every single ethnic group, not just the English and French Canadians.” All in all, only justice and respect could bring upon reconciliation and establish harmony for the Chinese Canadian and First Nation communities. Canada, both government and society, must pay the proper respect and recognize their efforts in building Canada because this nation owes them for what happened in the past. 

This is an opinion article; the views expressed by me.

Bibliography

Chan, Arlene. “Chinese Head Tax in Canada”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 03 June 2020, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/chinese-head-tax-in-canada. Accessed 3 September 2021.

Chan, Arlene. “Chinese Immigration Act”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 07 March 2017, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/chinese-immigration-act. Accessed 3 September 2021.

Burney, Shehla. Coming to Gum San: The Story of Chinese Canadians. Toronto: Multicultural History Society of Ontario, 1995.

Oh, Victor. “TEN YEARS SINCE CANADA APOLOGIZES FOR THE CHINESE HEAD TAX”. Senate of Canada. 23 June 2016. Accessed 3 September 2021. https://sencanada.ca/en/sencaplus/opinion/ten-years-since-canada-apologizes-for-the-chinese-head-tax/.

James, Matt. “Recognition, Redistribution and Redress: The Case of the “Chinese Head Tax”.” Canadian Journal of Political Science, vol. 37, no. 4, 2004, pp. 883-902.

“Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Statement of Apology”. CBC News Canada. 2008. Accessed 3 September 2021. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2008/06/11/pm-statement.html.

Lavallé, Omer. “Canadian Pacific Railway”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 15 July 2021, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/canadian-pacific-railway. Accessed 3 September 2021.

“Library and Archives Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission Web Archive.” Government of Canada. Library and Archives Canada, 2019, https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/aboriginal-heritage/Pages/truth-reconciliation-commission-web-archive.aspx. Accessed 3 September 2021.

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, Canadian Publications From 2013, and Canada. Honouring the Truth, Reconciling for the Future: Summary of the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015.

Mittelstedt, Meg. “Touring BC’s ‘Hidden’ History Shared by Chinese and Indigenous People”. The TYEE. 13 October 2014. Accessed 3 September 2021. https://thetyee.ca/News/2014/10/13/Shared-Chinese-Indigenous-History/.

Llewellyn, Jennifer. “Bridging the Gap between Truth and Reconciliation: Restorative Justice and the Indian Residential School Truth and Reconciliation Commission” in M. Brant-Castellano, L. Archibald, M. DeGagne, eds. From Truth to Reconciliation: Transforming the Legacy of Residential Schools (Ottawa: Aboriginal Healing Foundation, 2008) 183.

This is an opinion article; all views expressed by me.

The Almost Forgotten Relationship between First Nation Peoples and Chinese Canadians

By Terence Ho | Foundation of HKPLTW

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

The relationship between the First Nation peoples living in British Columbia and early Chinese Canadians was an essential part of our history in Canada. Yet this relationship has been neglected; little-known records of the history that they shared are left. In this commentary, I want to bring awareness to this relationship briefly. 

Chinese Workers and Harsh Conditions

I first learned about the Chinese railway workers in a social study lesson on the history of the Pacific Railway. As a Chinese Canadian, I was interested to learn more about Chinese Labour on the Railway. The more I researched, I learned how the discrimination and racist exclusion that early immigrants faced. Many Chinese workers came for the Gam Saan or Gold Rush without knowing the rising Anti-Chinese sentiment in Canada during the 1870s to 1880s. Canadian politicians were using “all the legitimate means” to expel the Chinese. 

Despite the harsh conditions, many Chinese workers remained for the construction of the British Columbia parts of the railway while being paid at half the rate of white workers. Many Chinese workers signed up for dangerous tasks, like blast through the mountain, because they would get paid exploitative wages. Many workers died for their completion of the Pacific Railway that accelerated the economic growth in BC and linked BC with the Eastern provinces. However, the Chinese workers were alienated and disenfranchised by the Canadian government and society. 

First Nation People’s Aid to Early Chinese Canadians

During this time, many injured workers were left to die beside the railroad. Many injured workers got taken to safe place and received aid from the First Nation communities, who also were discriminated against by the mainstream white society. The First Nation peoples nurtured the injured workers back to health, helped the survivors to settle down, and gave the dead workers proper burials. Some Chinese men also married First Nation women. Thrown together by circumstances and repression, these two ethnic groups turned to each other, giving them opportunities to establish relationships. 

Prejudices and Conflicts that Neglected Their Relationships

However, there was prejudice between the two ethnic groups. Chinese Canadians’ relationship with the First Nation communities has not always been smooth. The following events and regulations affected them and caused their relationships to go downhill. The mainstream white journalists reported that the liquor sold by the Chinese Canadian had caused insanity and deaths to a few First Nation peoples, which created distrust among the Indigenous communities towards the Chinese. Furthermore, there were discords over land preemptions. In the Native settlements under James Douglas, no one was allowed to preempt land that Indigenous peoples had already preempted. However, the Chinese Canadian residents preempted lands that belonged to the First Nation communities and generated discords among the two groups. Last, the dispute over water rights. The waiting period for the First Nation people was long, while the Chinese Canadians could get water rights faster had caused a sense of unfairness among the Indigenous communities. They directed their resentment towards the Chinese Canadians. 

The prejudices caused by regulations impacted their relationships. On top of that, a lack of communication by later generations gradually thinned out the once-close bond between the two ethnic groups, which eventually fading away and being forgotten in historical records. 

This is an opinion article; the views expressed by me.

Bibliography

Lavallé, Omer. “Canadian Pacific Railway”. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 15 July 2021, Historica Canada. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/canadian-pacific-railway. Accessed 2 September 2021.

Chow, Lily S. The Forgotten Ties : Relationships between First Nations People and Early Chinese Immigrants in British Columbia, Canada (1858-1947), 2012.

Burney, Shehla. Coming to Gum San: The Story of Chinese Canadians. Toronto: Multicultural History Society of Ontario, 1995.

Mittelstedt, Meg. “Touring BC’s ‘Hidden’ History Shared by Chinese and Indigenous People”. The TYEE. 13 October 2014. Accessed 1 September 2021. https://thetyee.ca/News/2014/10/13/Shared-Chinese-Indigenous-History/.

Can Truth and Reconciliation Commission Make Reconciliation a reality?

By Terence Ho | Foundation of HKPLTW

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

The most recent cornerstone of First Nation policy is creating the Canadian Truth and Reconciliation Commission. However, Canada is not the nation that has a reconciliation commission.

In comparison to the reconciliation commissions of other countries, the Canadian Truth and Reconciliation Commission is relatively new. According to Jennifer Llewelyn, the Canadian Truth and Reconciliation Commission was inspired by the principles of restorative justice gleaned from reconciliation commissions in other countries. Being created in 2008, it is unique in its focus on survivors of Residential Schools and on a class action settlement for the ongoing legacy of the past harms committed by assimilation policy. While it remains debated on what is needed to make a perfect reconciliation, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission represents a belief in the importance of using non-legalistic mechanisms to promote more harmonious relations between the First Nation peoples and other Canadians. 

Given the limited time frame of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Canada, it is still a significant challenge to address the injustices and problems for residential schools. Undoubtedly, it opens up space for oral testimony without fear of sanction and gathers evidence that can help to build a narrative of truth and fill in the many gaps in the record.

However, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission needs to address more significant structural and systemic issues of past harm rather than just individual crimes and wrongdoings. In Canada’s context, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission must go beyond simply ending impunity of the residential school system and providing justice with apology and compensation. As a study by Cindy Holder and Jeff Corntassel noted, the Canadian Truth Reconciliation Commission fails to address underlying problems and instead requires victims to become reconciled to their loss. These two scholars explain that decolonization and restitution are compulsory elements of reconciliation because they are essential to transform relationships with First Nation communities in the way justice requires. Hence, if the Truth and Reconciliation Commission continues to avoid the more significant systemic and structural issues of the Residential School system, there is little hope that past harms and ongoing legacy of assimilation policies are being held accountable. 

Overall, the Canadian Truth and Reconciliation Commission has done great things while coming short in other areas. It quickly becomes a key catalyst for dialogue and promotion about reconciliation. On the other hand, the Truth Reconciliation Commission should seek a different approach — one that would engage with broader structural injustices to ensure that violence does not recur and that the ongoing systemic effects of past wrongs are effectively addressed. By addressing more significant structural and systemic issues, it will result in a more meaningful recognition and redress for past harms committed against First Nation communities and securing amicable relationships with First Nation peoples. 

Furthermore, by addressing more significant structural and systematic issues, it would engage more Canadians in the reconciliation process. With more people in the process, the ongoing problems in First Nation communities would be noticed by a larger number of audiences, gathering the national supports that are needed for Aboriginal policies in future. 

This is an opinion article; the views expressed by me.

Bibliography

Llewellyn, Jennifer. “Bridging the Gap between Truth and Reconciliation: Restorative Justice and the Indian Residential School Truth and Reconciliation Commission” in M. Brant-Castellano, L. Archibald, M. DeGagne, eds. From Truth to Reconciliation: Transforming the Legacy of Residential Schools (Ottawa: Aboriginal Healing Foundation, 2008) 183.

Corntassel, Jeff, and Cindy Holder. “Who’s Sorry Now? Government Apologies, Truth Commissions, and Indigenous Self-Determination in Australia, Canada, Guatemala, and Peru.” Human Rights Review (Piscataway, N.J.), vol. 9, no. 4, 2008, pp. 465-489.

“Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Statement of Apology”. CBC News Canada. 2008. Accessed 13 August 2021. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2008/06/11/pm-statement.html.

Lutz, Ellen L. “INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND VIOLENT CONFLICT; Preconceptions, Appearances, and Realities.” Cultural Survival Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 1, 2005, pp. 13.

Balia, Daryl. “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” Jack Rabin, ed. Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy (Boca Raton, Florida: Taylor & Francis Group, 2005) 295.

“Library and Archives Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission Web Archive.” Government of Canada. Library and Archives Canada, 2019, https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/aboriginal-heritage/Pages/truth-reconciliation-commission-web-archive.aspx. Accessed 18 August 2021.

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, Canadian Publications From 2013, and Canada. Honouring the Truth, Reconciling for the Future: Summary of the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015.

James, M. “A Carnival of Truth? Knowledge, Ignorance and the Canadian Truth and Reconciliation Commission.” The International Journal of Transitional Justice, vol. 6, no. 2, 2012, pp. 182-204.

Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission

By Terence Ho | Foundation of HKPLTW

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

Reconciliation is important. The past conflict will snowball into ongoing conflict if the Canadian government does not stop the past wrong from bleeding. They need concern about everyday problem that prevent the indigenous peoples from succeeding in the contemporary world. If not, the past conflict will weave broader structural and systemic inequalities. Canada understands the significance of reconciliation and creates its own “Truth and Reconciliation Commission”. 

The Canadian Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was established in 2008 for settlement of Residential School. It soon emerged as a key catalyst for dialogue and promotion about reconciliation within all Canadian communities. Since its creation, the Truth Reconciliation Commission in Canada states that ending impunity and providing justice are its fundamental objectives. The True Reconciliation Commission focuses on survivors of residential schools and settlement agreements. It opens up space for a dialogue without fear of sanction on those who testify and provide information, guiding and inspiring a process of truth and healing. It will gather evidence from testimonies and research that can help build and reveal the truth to the public, helping to fill in the many gaps that exist in the record and bringing the abuses suffered in assimilation policies into the light. Overall, this commission works to renew relationships on a basis of inclusion, mutual understanding, and respect. 

This commission might lead toward reconciliation within First Nation, and between Aboriginal peoples and other Canadians. Still, its impact on First Nation and other Canadian communities is astonishingly tiny. Although the Truth Reconciliation Commission emphasizes repairing the harm caused by past wrongs, the reconciliation process, testimony, and dialogue never reach the general Canadian society. Canadians as a whole seem unaware of these events, and the government is still reluctant to engage with First Nation peoples in a meaningful dialogue about what the issues are that are most important. It does not seem to have any broad impact on the social well-being of communities and the wider society.

The Truth Reconciliation Commission provides the opportunity has done little at catalyzing structural change and at accountability. The reconciliation process are consulted by small groups of individuals, as most Canadian remain unaware of the process. First Nation victims might testify to the commission, but their speeches mostly reach to the researchers only. Opening up helps to reveal the truth and engages the government to make contrite confessions, but the past harms committed against the First Nation peoples go largely unpunished.

This is an opinion article; the views expressed by me.

Bibliography

James, M. “A Carnival of Truth? Knowledge, Ignorance and the Canadian Truth and Reconciliation Commission.” The International Journal of Transitional Justice, vol. 6, no. 2, 2012, pp. 182-204.

“Library and Archives Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission Web Archive.” Government of Canada. Library and Archives Canada, 2019, https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/aboriginal-heritage/Pages/truth-reconciliation-commission-web-archive.aspx. Accessed 18 August 2021.

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, Canadian Publications From 2013, and Canada. Honouring the Truth, Reconciling for the Future: Summary of the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015.

Balia, Daryl. “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” Jack Rabin, ed. Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy (Boca Raton, Florida: Taylor & Francis Group, 2005) 295.

Corntassel, Jeff, and Cindy Holder. “Who’s Sorry Now? Government Apologies, Truth Commissions, and Indigenous Self-Determination in Australia, Canada, Guatemala, and Peru.” Human Rights Review (Piscataway, N.J.), vol. 9, no. 4, 2008, pp. 465-489.

Reconciliation Policy and Apology in Canada

By Terence Ho | Foundation of HKPLTW

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

Introduction: Reconciliation in Canada

It seems like reconciliation policy is on the Canadian national agenda, as reconciliation emerges in the various statements of apology and policies emanating from the Canadian federal government. Thus, a reconciliation policy is essential for us to seek an approach that would secure amicable relationships and ensure past wrongs would not be replicated. 

Reconciliation policy is used in diverse ways in Canadian politics. It ranges from a meaning that denotes the need for restrictions on the exercise of sovereignty on issues impacting Aboriginal rights to requiring the First Nation peoples to become reconciled to limitations of their rights in modern Canada. Thus, reconciliation policy is about First Nation peoples reconciling their rights directly with the Canadian Sovereignty . Meanwhile, this policy can also be about the need for the Canadian government to develop better relations with First Nation communities by acknowledging the effects of past policies aimed explicitly at assimilation of First Nation cultures.

Recent Approaches to Reconciliation: Good or Bad?

Recently, this country’s policymakers attempt to reconcile or to promote reconciliation within the First Nation communities. Examples are PM Stephen Harper’s apology to residential school survivors in 2008, Canada installs First Indigenous governor general in 2021, and emergence of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

However, their conception of reconciliation is on the assumption that the wrong giving rise to the harm is the past. Since we are in a post-conflict situation, the process reconciliation begins an issued official apology and follows up with eventual acceptance of the apology and adequate compensation. Due to this vision, reconciliation policies focus more on individual apologies and forgiveness in interpersonal relations rather than the reshaping of collective relationships or redress for broader structural and systemic harms.

The procedures and practices of government are too politically driven. An apology is issued just because it is “politically correct,” or a policy is introduced in response to the unmarked gravesites that shock Canadians. For example, Harper’s apology in 2008 focused exclusively on the after-effects of residential schools. It does not mention how these schools fit into a broader policy framework of assimilation of First Nation peoples. The predominant theme in most legal processes has been truth revealing and remedial relief rather than reconciliation.

Conclusion

The government’s issued apology and policy have identified reconciliation as an essential component of the constitutional protection of the rights of First Nation peoples. Nevertheless, there has been continued debate about what is necessary to make reconciliation a reality. As noted above, most policies and apologies are legalistic mechanisms that only focus on individuals and treat the historical conflicts, such as residential schools, as an isolated policy initiative of the past. Under such an approach, the Canadian policymakers frame their reconciliation and other First Nation policies according to their logic rather than providing meaningful restitution for the damages done by the past wrongs and effective solutions for First Nation peoples to succeed in the commentary world.

Although the government takes action, it addresses individual wrongdoing rather than the more significant systemic and structural issues. Because the approach slants toward individual amnesty, there is little hope of the systemic legacy of assimilation policies being held accountable and mainly gone unpunished.

Bibliography

James, M. “A Carnival of Truth? Knowledge, Ignorance and the Canadian Truth and Reconciliation Commission.” The International Journal of Transitional Justice, vol. 6, no. 2, 2012, pp. 182-204.

“Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Statement of Apology”. CBC News Canada. 2008. Accessed 13 August 2021. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2008/06/11/pm-statement.html

Lutz, Ellen L. “INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND VIOLENT CONFLICT; Preconceptions, Appearances, and Realities.” Cultural Survival Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 1, 2005, pp. 13.

Corntassel, Jeff, and Cindy Holder. “Who’s Sorry Now? Government Apologies, Truth Commissions, and Indigenous Self-Determination in Australia, Canada, Guatemala, and Peru.” Human Rights Review (Piscataway, N.J.), vol. 9, no. 4, 2008, pp. 465-489.

This is an opinion article; the views expressed by me.

Colonialism and Residential School: “Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing”

By Terence Ho | Foundation of HKPLTW

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

Terence is a Research Coordinator for the Foundation of HKPLTW with interests in history & traditions, social organization & inter-group relations, culture & religion, and economics & politics of Canadian Indigenous People and Visible Minorities. Follow him on Twitter: @hkpltw

Background

The Residential School system was not simply a bad policy in the history of this country.  It was a disastrous consequence of the effects of colonialism, affecting not only First Nation children’s health and well-being but also the loss of culture and heritage. It is well established that the Residential School system purposely assimilated First Nation peoples into White Canadian and Christian ways of life. In large part, the horror of this system was not a result of cultural and value conflicts. However, the hidden horror was the act of genocide resulting from government policies to eradicate the First Nation culture hinged on targeting the most vulnerable group: Children.

Found Educational Institution to Carry Out Genocide

Like other things the colonists did to the First Nation Peoples, the Residential School system pretended to have good intentions but tried to assimilate Aboriginal culture. 

Targeting the children made it easier for the government and church to implement what best fit their agenda. Schools forcibly took the children at a young age and away from parental influences, which systematically assimilated early with the Canadian religious beliefs, social habits, and educational training instead of their native traditions and culture. Although this action done by the government and church seeming well thought through, it was execrable to do such a thing to First Nation peoples. To teach and force the students to forget and feel alienate of their cultures and upbringing remind me the idiom “Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing”. 

“The colonists and government policymakers who designed the residential school system were “Wolfs come to you in sheep’s clothing, but they are ferocious wolves”. 

The colonists in this country made these schools that outwardly looked kind with good intentions and positive connotations to the children, such as teaching the children English or French language. However, these schools inwardly were full of deceit and evil, putting sustained effort to assimilate the students and eradicate their cultures through painful treatments and cruel abuses.

To fit their own agenda, the government manipulated and deceived the children with lies and humiliations. The children were taught that their cultures were inferior, including their family and past. In addition, the government never intended to educate the First Nation children beyond christianizing and westernizing them. Improving the well-being of the First Nation students was not the government intention as much as it to separate them from their families and instil a new set of belief. 

Conclusion

Overall, the Residential School system was colonialism wearing a “Good Man” disguise to attempt genocide on First Nation peoples. These colonists’ outward demeanours might look kind with good intentions, such as teaching the children English or French language. However, under the disguise, these colonists working along with the Canadian policymakers delicately attempted to eradicate the language, culture, and belief of the First Nation peoples to assimilate First Nation peoples into the Canadian society and under its rule.

Among colonial policies, the residential school system has stood out as significantly damaging to Aboriginal peoples. To conclude, was the residential school system an attempted genocide by the colonists? Yes, it was because it twisted basic morality and crossed the line, as it did extensive damage to the livelihood, beliefs, and culture across generations of Aboriginal peoples. 

This is an opinion article; the views expressed by me.

Bibliography

The Truth Commission into Genocide in Canada, “Hidden from History: The Canadian Holocaust.” The Untold Story of the Genocide of Aboriginal Peoples by Church and States in Canada. http://canadiangenocide.nativeweb.org/genocide.pdf

Neeganagwedgin, Erica. “”They can’t Take our Ancestors Out of Us”: A Brief Historical Account of Canada’s Residential School System, Incarceration, Institutionalized Policies and Legislations Against Indigenous Peoples.” Canadian Issues (Association for Canadian Studies : 1999), 2014, pp. 31-36.

“Residential School: A History of Residential Schools in Canada”. CBC News Canada. 2021. Accessed 3 August 2021. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canada-residential-schools-kamloops-faq-1.6051632

Zalcman, Daniella. “‘Kill the Indian, Save the Man’: On the painful legacy of Canada’s residential schools.” World Policy Journal, vol.  33, no. 3, Fall 2016, pp. 74.

Dyck, Noel, and Prince Albert Grand Council. Differing Visions: Administering Indian Residential Schooling in Prince Albert 1867-1995. Fernwood, Halifax, N.S, 1997.

Hanson, Eric, et al.“The Residential School System.” Indigenous Foundations. First Nations and Indigenous Studies UBC, 2020. Accessed 6 August 2021.https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/the_residential_school_system/#survivors-demand-justice

de Leeuw, Sarah. “‘if Anything is to be done with the Indian, we must Catch Him very Young’: Colonial Constructions of Aboriginal Children and the Geographies of Indian Residential Schooling in British Columbia, Canada.” Children’s Geographies, vol. 7, no. 2, 2009, pp. 123-140.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started