Imposing Liberalism. Aboriginal Experiences of Liberalism: The key to understanding how liberalism has been viewed by different groups in North America.

Imposing Liberalism

Aboriginal Experiences of Liberalism:• The key to understanding how

liberalism has been viewed by different groups in North America is based on differing world views– First Nations Worldview

• Collectivism • The Laws of Relationships

among all living things • Interconnectedness of people

within their community and their natural environment

– European Worldview• Liberalism

– Rule of law– Individual – Capitalism (competition, efficiency

and profit)

• These very different worldviews led to differing opinions/interpretations of the Treaties that were signed by both parties

Differing perspectives on treaties:• Assumptions behind the treaties

– Aboriginal • Harmony both with the present and

with the past (traditions)– European

• Change/progress• Royal Proclamation of 1763

– Aboriginal peoples lived on traditional lands

– Interest in these lands belonged to groups and nations not individuals

– On the Crown (The British Monarch) could buy or accept aboriginal lands

– The Crown generally required an agreement to obtain lands from Aboriginal people

– Aboriginal people were under the Crown’s protection

– The Royal Proclamation of 1763 stated that the ‘nations and tribes of Indian's were recognized as distinct peoples and nations who had the power to govern themselves and negotiate with the Crown as a sovereign nation

Perspectives on the treaties:First Nations Government of Canada

Treaties are agreements made between sovereign nations, upheld by oral tradition

Treaties are agreements made by interested parties, upheld by a written document

Relationship with the land is of collective and spiritual nature; land is provided by the Creator, and people are to exist in harmony with the land

Land is a resource that can be owned by individuals for their exclusive use

Treaties are established to share the land with newcomers

Treaties were established to ‘clear the way’ for European settlement

The Indian Act of 1876• Defined Indian

– fragmented Aboriginal peoples • Legislated Colonization

– These social control aspects of the Indian Act placed Indians in the position of a colonized people. • "Instead of implementing the treaties and offering much needed protection to Indian rights the Indian Act subjugated

to colonial rule the very people whose rights if was supposed to protect". Harold Cardinal

• Concentrated Government Authority – The Indian Act was and still is, a piece of social legislation of very broad scope which regulates and controls

virtually every aspect of Native Life. – The act was administered directly in Aboriginal committees by the Indian agent. – These new white chiefs were to displace traditional Aboriginal leaders in order to bring in a new way of

living which was in line with the governments.– Clause 25 of the Act obtained the governments guardianship over Indian lands.

• They had extraordinary administrative and discretionary power

• Defined Enfranchisement Process – The Act spelled out a process of enfranchisement whereby Indians could acquire full Canadian citizenship

by relinquishing system there ties to their community. • This involved giving up ones’ culture and traditions, and any rights to land.

– The cost of Canadian citizenship for an Aboriginal person are surpassed the cost for a immigrant from another country.

– The government of Canada saw the Indian Act as a temporary measure to control Aboriginal Peoples until they were fully assimilated through enfranchisement. • Acculturation through enfranchisement clearly failed in Canada, as the rate of enfranchisement was extremely low.

– In the 1960s this policy changed and Indians were granted the right to vote in federal elections.• This was the first time that the government acknowledged citizenship for Aboriginal Peoples without the condition of

the assimilation into the Canadian white society.

Indian Act 1876... • Forced Assimilation??• From the inception of this Act, First

Nations political institutions and forms of government were ignored

• Behaviours were controlled by the Government, First Nations people were seen as wards of the state (basically the same arrangement as children to their parents)

• First Nations peoples were encouraged to leave their reserves and get full citizenship

• The Act also actively eroded their collective rights and cultural heritage– Residential Schools

• Intent of the policies matter...what was the intent behind these policies in Canada?

Legacy in Canada:

• 1991 Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples– Was critical of the past actions by the government – Suggested some change both in how grievances

would be addressed and on how the government should move forward

• As these are recommendations only there has been much debate on what should be acted on and how this issue should be resolved– First Nations self government

Promoting Liberalism in the World

• Imposing Liberal Ideology– There are two reasons why an ideology would be

imposed on a people• National Interest

– Which is imposing liberalism to reduce or eliminate threats (terrorist/environmental/economic)

• Humanitarianism– Which is imposing liberalism for moral or ethical reasons, such

as to improve living conditions or stop human rights violations

The argument of Safety:• “The history of the world is a history of war yet, significantly, in history:

democracies do not wage wars on other democracies”• So, then establishing a democracy even if war is needed is a necessary,

and defensible foreign policy...– Germany 1933-1939– USSR 1930-1989– Iraq 1991 and 2003– Afghanistan 2001

• The problem:– Who decides?– Premption?– What is democracy? What is liberalism?

• Who gets to define these terms??• Do they mean the same thing?

Case Studies:• Turkey and the European Union (EU)

– Good example of economic interests being used to impose Liberal values

– Turkey has to meet some basic criterion to enter the EU (democracy, Rule of Law, human rights, and a free market economy)

• Canada in Afghanistan– Goal was to limit the ability of further attacks from

Afghanistan against Western powers after 9/11, 2001– Overthrow of the Taliban government as establish a

democratic government based on liberal principles• Security, literacy, and economics that are based on legally

produced products• USA in Iraq

– Viewed by the American government as part of the attacks 9/11

– Saddam Hussein was seen as being linked due to his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) as a possible terrorist state

– Goal was to establish a democratic government in the region that would be friendly to the West

Assignment:• ‘Memories of Treaty Day’

– Page 222 question 1• ‘The Potlatch’

– Page 225-226 Questions 1-3• Knowledge and Understanding

– Page 230 Questions 1-4• ‘Canada’s Involvement in Afghanistan’

– Page 235 Questions 1-4• Knowledge and Understanding

– Page 238 Questions 1-5• ‘Hati’s Troubled Democracy’

– Page 239-240 Questions 1-5• Further Exploration

– Page 241 Questions 1-3 and Question 6

Challenging Liberalism

Challenges to Liberalism from other ways of thinking:

Liberal Values• Individual Rights

and Freedoms• Self Interest• The Rule of Law• Economic

Freedoms• Private Property

Feminism Environmentalism

Socialism

Aboriginal Perspectives

Religious Perspectives

Communism Fascism

Aboriginal Perspectives and Ways of thinking:

• Aboriginal collective thought– Values the group and the interconnectivity between people and nature

• 1982 and the Canadian Constitution Act– Provided recognition of the collective rights of aboriginal peoples

• Métis land claims– Originally these were issued to individuals not to the Métis as a group– Several court cases in both Alberta and Manitoba have challenged these claims and

seem to be moving in the direction of supporting the collective rights of the Métis • UN Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous peoples

– Canada did not sign, argued that it would be unconstitutional as it would grant rights to collective groups rather than individuals

• Aboriginal Self Government – While the Canadian Government sees this as a fundamental right in the charter of rights

and freedoms, there has been significant debate as to what this actually entails – Every group has a different perspective of what this would be

Religious Perspectives:

• Doukhobors– Resisted concepts of

individualism and eventually protested over material possessions

– The Government ended up taking their land and forced their children to attend schools

– How should the government have responded to these claims, criticisms of liberalism?

• Religion and Law– Should individuals be able to

choose what laws determine how they are governed within families?• Sharia Law• Hebrew law

Environmentalism and Collective Ways of Thinking:

• These perspectives challenge the way that liberal societies explain economics

• This challenge is a significant response to liberalism as it examines and finds complaints in capitalism

When are Challenges to Liberalism Justified?

• Most challenges have been based around concepts that seem to be inherent in liberalism– Militarism – Materialism– conformity

• The most notable areas of resistance have been:– Civil Rights Movement USA

1960s– Iraq 2003– Food Not Bombs– Red Army Faction (RAF)

Assignment:• ‘Aboriginal Rights in Canada’

– Page 248 Questions 1-3• ‘Aboriginal Self-Government and Liberalism’

– Page 251 Questions 1-3• ‘Reflecting on the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement ‘

– Page 253 Question 1• ‘Welcoming War resisters’

– Page 257 Questions 1-3• ‘Religion, Sharia, and Human and Individual Rights’

– Page 259 Question 1• Knowledge and Understanding

– Page 263 Questions 1-5

• ‘The Iraq Freedom Congress’ – Page 266 Question 1

• ‘Fighting for Civil Rights’– Page 268 Questions 1-2

• ‘Violence and the RAF’– Page 271 Question 1

• Knowledge and Understanding– Page 272 Question 1-3

• ‘Religious Freedom and the Law’– Page 273-274 Questions 1-3

• Further Exploration – Page 275 Question 3 and 4