Indigenous Thinkers

Over the past few months I have been inspired, honoured with learning from so many great Indigenous thinkers.

For starters, there has been so many great discussions in my LinkedIn Group, Indigenous Economic Development. Generally speaking, everyone is in agreement that economic development is important. However, there are many different approaches to this.

For starters, the word "development" itself carries colonial baggage - often used to mean resource development or development of mechanisms by which a financial profit can be gained from the Earth. Terminology and baggage aside, there is also a tension between colonial (aka mainstream or Western) approaches and culture/tradional ways of life.

In fact, many people often believe that culture and economy are disjoint. The fact is that they are not. Even colonial nations have culture embedded within their economies. The first problem is that economy takes the driver seat and priority over culture. The second problem is that colonial culture intentionally places a greater importance on profit and financial gain than culture, environment, people.

What has set Indigenous peoples apart is that their approach ensures that economy is NOT the driver. Rather each sphere of life plays an interconnected role. Culture, Social, Recreation, Economy, Health, etc., all play a role, holistically, to ensure balanced prosperity of person, spirit, nature.

When you really think about it, what price are we willing to pay for "successful" economic development? Are we willing to adopt colonial practices at the cost of our cultures, our ways of life?

What if we didn't have to adopt colonial practices to be thriving, people, fully meeting our potential? What if we didnt have to sacrifice our culture, our ways of life, our spirits to be "successful?"

Here is what I'm thinking. First we need to define what success means to us. Then we need to articulate how we can meet our needs (core meaning of economy) in a way that honours our ways of life, our cultures, our languages even.

In a future post, I would like to begin diving into this in greater detail. Through your comments/feedback, and through learning from the many great thinkers and leaders I am blessed to be contact with.

Indigenous People and the Betty Crocker Axe at Our Necks

I recently came across a call for papers from Indigenous Policy Journal for their “Special Issue of Indigenous Policy, Spring 2012.”

This was of great interest to me because it treats the subject of a current court case in Alaska where Indigenous people there are literally fighting in the courtrooms for the recognition of their existence.

The story starts back in 1989. Exxon Valdez, an oil company had been responsible for a serious oil spill in Alaska on March 24, 1989. Between 260,000 and 750,000 barrels of crude oil had been spilled. According to the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council (www.evostc.state.ak.us/History/FAQ.cfm). The immediate effects were wildlife deaths in the hundreds of thousands and the complete destruction, permanently, of the fisheries in the region.

The local economy, environment and entire way of life had been completely and utterly destroyed in a single devastating event. Many people, including the mayor of one town in the region, committed suicide after the spill. Even now, 22 years later, the toxins have not been removed and the environment has not been restored. The economy still remains in ruin. Because the Indigenous communities there are remote, fishery and wildlife was the cornerstone of the local economy. Now, there are limited economic options or hopes.

Exxon should have fairly compensated the local people for the destruction they caused, right? Apparently, many others thought so too. They took it to court. Exxon ultimately won by “proving” that the Indigenous people there (the Alutiiq people) were no longer Indigenous people by the time of the spill and, therefore, their culture could not have been damaged. So, no compensation required.

How did they prove this? They argued that the Alutiiq people were no different than average middle class Americans because they had been observed using Betty Crocker cake mix.

In a second trial regarding hunting and fishing rights in 2008, the US government denied the Alutiiq people their rights, arguing that they did not exist as a pan-Alutiiq people prior to contact (they were several groups who amalgamated in identification) and so they could not possibly have Alutiiq rights.

Although these are American court systems and laws, the approach of trying to deny Indigenous people their rights on the basis of “modern” practices is well used by colonial governments all over the world.

Pamela Palmater, in her blog, summarized many of the key points to this backward way of thinking. The main point that applies here is that the rights of Indigenous peoples can NOT be “frozen” to pre-contact times, as repeatedly clarified by the Supreme Court of Canada

Consider the ramifications of the Exxon and the US government’s flawed logic. If what they say were to be relevant, then USA and Canada have no rights selling computers, electronics, automobiles, modern housing (with drywall and vinyl and the many modern materials) because all of these items were no traditionally traded by these colonial governments pre-contact. Skyscrapers, subways, and all the modern conveniences would all need to be torn down and done away with as they are irrelevant to traditional Americans and Canadians. Obviously, this is ridiculous.

The problem comes from a flawed understanding of what trade and economics truly mean. Usually it is Wall Street thinkers that struggle to wrap their heads around the broader, more accurate understandings of trade and economics. Allow me to illuminate so that we are all on the same page.

Wall Street thinking of “trade”: financial transactions

True understanding of trade: any exchange of goods or services whether or NOT they make use of a common trade medium such as currency. If I catch a fish and trade it with my uncle for his solar-powered calculator, this is trade. It is a transaction. No money was employed, but it is an economic activity and it is a commercial activity regardless of whether the two parties or related or not.

Wall Street thinking of “economics”: currency, GDP, financial profit

True understanding of economics: the process by which people obtain what they need or want. This is often done through the science of incentives (I want something, an incentive, so I need to negotiate how I will obtain it). An economy can exist and be thriving and successful and never ever involve money. In fact, currency (money) is an imaginary system created to simply facilitate easier trade (See my earlier post on barter systems and discussions on the meaning of economy here, and here).

So a community that had fished for consumption in the past did in fact, have an economy. Fishing for consumption is an economic activity and just because it did not involve the exchange of money or a direct trade between two people, it did involve a trade of time and skill for an economic reward (fish). In this way, this economic activity was also a commercial activity.

Furthermore, just because a people did not engage in one specific form of economic activity in the past, does not mean that they have no right to do so in the future. To deny them that right means that every nation on this planet must be denied their right to produce and trade every modern product.

What about the question of culture?

Are our rights, our ways of life and our very culture itself restricted to historical stereotypes and caricatures? If I am not living in a teepee year round and wearing buckskin clothing, do I cease to be Ojibwe? Do my rights cease?

Naturally, the answers are a resounding NO. For the sake of argument, however, let us assume that this is the case universally. I will liberally borrow an idea from one of Dr. Pamela Palmater’s presentation of the “traditional” Canadian.

The traditional Canadian historically wore black robes, sported long locks of white or grey hair and was white. Their traditional way of life included squatting, consuming massive amounts of alcohol (Sir John A McDonald was a well documented drunk), arguing over legal terminology, and judging other people. In their traditional culture, homosexuality was criminalized and punished, people suspected of witchcraft could be burned at the stake. Now, if Canadians cease to practice these traditional ways and dressing, their rights are null and void. They are no longer Canadian citizens.

Since Canadians no longer outlaw homosexuality or burn people at the stake their Canadian culture is dead and no longer exists. Therefore they have no rights any longer and America may take the land, for example.

Ridiculous, no? Yet this is exactly what the white colonial governments attempt to do to Indigenous people in order to justify their continued expropriation of land and resources. Just as Canadians have been allowed to evolve as a culture and change over time, so must we be allowed.

The fundamental problem is when the colonials attempt to treat our nations as a culture or a race. We are neither; we are nations. Our nations do have a specific culture and majority of our citizens are of a specific ethnicity, but that does not deny the fact that our nations were historically and are now still nations.

So, let’s have a Betty Crocker revolution! Let us hold a box of Betty Crocker cake mix in the air and proudly proclaim that we still retain our cultures and our inherent rights as Indigenous peoples!

Hope for Indigenous people?

Our peoples face unprecedented challenges and have for a long time. When the Vikings first set foot in North America, their first act was to attack our people for blood. Our peoples drove them off. Then came christopher columbus (and yes I wrote his name in small letters, because his does not deserve capitalized names), whose first act was wholesale slaughter of every Indigenous person he could find, approximately 250,000 by conservative estimates.  But by then, we could not drive them off fast enough as other “explorers” came in droves.

Those who came after columbus came less violently and gained friendships with our peoples. Our first mistake. After contact, we were subjected to purposeful biological warfare, “ethnic cleansing”, genocide, unending war, land infringements, residential schools (aka death camps where nearly half of all children sent to these schools died of torture, starvation, beatings, freezing, etc. with those that survived being subjected to degradation, sexual, physical, emotional and psychological abuse), sixties scoop (where mothers were lied to that their babies were still births, and then the babies, very much alive, were adopted out to white families), the Indian Act legislating reserves to become concentration camps where people were arrested and beaten if they were caught leaving the camps and many were intentionally starved to death, outlawing of our languages, outlawing of our cultures, etc.

The list can go on and even today our struggles are no less:

·         Our children are denied equitable access to education – often funded and 50% less per pupil that white children

·         We are denied equitable access to health care – often forced off our own communities for treatment

·         Our babies suffer the highest infant mortality rates in Canada

·         Many of our communities have no running water and many that do are chronically underfunded by the Federal government so that they are under “boil water” advisories

·         We have some of the highest rates of TB in the world – primarily due to Federal underfunding of adequate housing causing multiple families to live in houses that are often no more than shacks

·         Some of the highest rates of suicide in the world

·         High rates of chronic diseases due to lack of access to healthy foods

·         Shorter life expectancies

·         A  rate of incarceration that is 5-6 times the national average; filling up to 50% of Prairie prisons even though we make up less than 15% of the population.

·         Our peoples are often judged harsher and given stiffer sentences

·         We suffer police brutality unparalleled by another group in Canada

·         Our lands are raped by transnational corporations for mining and oil, leaving us with NO benefits, NO equitable royalty payments, and devastating pollution causing disease and illness

·         We face continuous racism and prejudice by the public and media

·         We have higher rates of unemployment and economic exclusion

Reading all of that is depressing. However, there is one important fact to remember.

WE ARE STILL HERE!

That is a powerful fact. Despite 300 years of genocide, we are still here. Despite all the challenges levelled against us, we are still here. In the face of everything that the colonial government seeks to do to us, we are not only still here, but we are gathering strength.

The colonial governments are teetering on the verge of economic collapse:

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-11-05/news/30363948_1_barack-obama-debt-crisis-financial-crisis

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1083622

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204224604577027560761445968.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

http://seekingalpha.com/article/305746-an-economic-recovery-that-s-moving-sideways

The Occupy movement gathering around the world is an example of the failure of the colonial system. The global recession, started by greedy colonial men in Wall Street, is an example of the failure of the system.

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/world/archives/2011/11/20111106-095133.html

Yet, there are more and more examples of our Indigenous peoples beginning to rise up in strength. Some examples include:

·         Westbank First Nation

·         Oosoyos Indian Band

·         Tsawwassen First Nation

·         Membertou First Nation

·         Buffalo Point First Nation

·         Opaskwayak Cree Nation

·         And many more

Our path to victory and to strength will come from DOING the right things and not waiting for permission or approval or funds from the Federal government. Yes we will fight for those things, but we must not wait for them to be concluded before doing anything. Our destinies lie in our own hands. If we have survived 300 years of oppression, then really, nothing can stop us.

This is the irrational fear that has Canada ordering spies and military monitoring of our peoples.

http://www.socialist.ca/socialistworker/SW2011/issue533/NAT-Spying.html

http://www.stopracism.ca/content/spying-first-nations-harper-prepares-unrest

http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/515.php

http://indigenousnationhood.blogspot.com/2011/06/secret-agent-harper-conservative-spy.html

Harper, the conservatives, the elite, the colonials all see that we are beginning to rise to our feet and they fear it. They are afraid that they will no longer be able to sit upon the top of the teetering ladder. They are afraid of losing their privileged, exclusive position. They are likely afraid of the tables turning and becoming oppressed themselves.

It is an irrational fear because we are not seeking to oppress them, despite all that they have done to us. We are not seeking to impoverish them or take anything away from them. We simply seek our rights, fairness, and control of our own destinies. We seek respect for our peoples, our land, our rights, our cultures, our sovereignty.

We are not asking to make them our enemy, even though they see us as theirs. We have a higher vision of the spirit of cooperation, friendship and human harmony.

Is there hope for us? Yes. We must support one another and support our young generation rising up. We must mentor them, encourage them, and stand with them as we lift the yoke of oppression from our backs.

We are still here.

Miigwech

The Economy of Language

I want to talk about the effect of language on culture and culture on economy. I have been on a linguistic and cultural journey throughout my life. As a background I will explain where I am coming from, the culture that is embedded into language, and then how that affects our ways of viewing the world around us and our approach to economic development.

My Background

My first language was French, taught to me by my father. My mother had already lost her own language, Ojibwe, by that time. When the day came to start school, it was around the era in the early 80's when the French had begun fighting in the Supreme Court for their linguistic rights. They had suffered decades of oppression and assimilatory practices (sound familiar?) by the hands of the English. French school children had to hide their books in ceiling panels when English inspectors came.

As the court case was working its way through, the hatred and aggression against the French by English people was at an al time high. My father feared that if he continued teaching me French, I would never get a job when I got older. So, well meaning, he placed me in English school and I lost everything.

Fast forward. Years later, after growing up entirely in the city, disconnected from my community, I set out on my own distancing myself from extended family and met the woman who would become my wife. I eventually immersed myself into her French language and culture, being fully accepted with wide open arms by her family. Her family became my family and her language became a beautiful gift to me.

Fast forward. Although I have spent most of my career involved in Indigenous business development, economic development and employment; it has only been in the past year I have begun having inexplicable longings to return to my home community. I say inexplicable because I have never actually lived there, only visited. Nonetheless, without going into too much detail, I have begun forming connections and friendships with my fellow Anishinaabe citizens*, reconnecting with relations, and now pursuing my native tongue.

Throughout this linguistic and cultural journey, I have learned a great deal. Through looking at 3 languages, I have seen how embedded and inseparable the culture is from the language and vice versa. Let's explore this together.

English Language and Culture

What do we know of the culture of English speakers here in Canada? With some modest generalizations I note the two common points: 1) there is one way to do things right, all others are either inferior or less effective; 2) in the mainstream English speaking world of Canada, we are taught to be bold, aggressive, and confident, sell yourself in job hunting

The English language is such that consonants are very hard sounding; bold, in-your-face. I know this after seeing how the same consonants in other languages (French, Spanish, Ojibwe) are often softer, smoother, and generally more gentle sounding. This makes sense when we consider the pervasiveness of English culture and language globally.

With English, grammar is such that there is a rigid structure in place with complex rules and syntax. This results in a rigid structure that leaves only one "correct" way of saying something. You might change the vocabulary, but the structure must always be in that one way. Anyone speaking like Yoda (Star Wars), would not be viewed as intelligently as someone with a "commanding" grasp of the English language.

One other embedded cultural element contained in the language is that of assimilation. The very language itself assimilates words of other languages, English-icizes their pronunciation, and more often than not, replaces the Indigenous language that was there first.

The English language is based on a subject-object relationship where, philosophically, they are independent of one another and the subject “does” something to the object as though the object has no role or say in the matter. In Ojibwe and many other Indigenous languages, subject and object are interdependent and not differentiable. They are not doing something “to” one another, but having an experience together.

Naturally, you can see how historic and contemporary English-speaking culture parallels these elements of the language. In fact, so embedded is it that the influence of the language construct sub-consciously reinforces specific world views and approaches to treating people. From English tendency to assimilate people, to viewing themselves and their ways as superior, to their views of dominance over the environment and the exploitation of natural resources, to their ways of interacting with one another, we can see the culture influenced by the language.

French Language and Culture

In the French language, there is also some rigid structure involved in how you say something, but with one key difference than that of the English language. In French, you have several options of how you wish to say something. I am not talking simple vocabulary switches here either, I mean complete phrase structure changes between these options.

The language is still based on subject-object, but sometimes the subject come after the object and in many cases, the phrases are indirect. With English, it is subject does something to object. In French, there are forms in that structure where object is affected by subject in such and such a way, rather than strictly "subject does action to object". Culturally, there is some acceptance of different ways of being (as there are some options of different ways of speaking a phrase). However, it is limited acceptance.

One very interesting difference is that in English, emotion is all but stripped out of the language so that English speakers are forced to use descriptor words to explain emotion. In French, emotion and romanticism is embedded. The French culture has always been noted for their romantic natures, charm, and often their seductiveness (not saying this in a negative way). These cultural tendencies are rooted in the very language itself.

There is no way to say “I like you” in French. You either LOVE them or ADORE them, nothing less. Pronouns and adjectives for people are often terms of endearment, embedded into the language. Even the method in which the words are spoken involve animated hand motions to the point that expression is a well known trait for French people.

Ojibwe Language and Culture

In Ojibwe, there is an interesting trait of the language. The word order does not matter in most cases. Rather than a rigid, “one right way,” structure, an Ojibwe speaker may use whatever order they wish. It is, in many ways, like the cultural view that one must find their own way. It is truly a liberating feeling coming from the rigidity of the English language.

Consonants in Ojibwe are ALL much softer than in English. A “g” is spoken closer to a “t” sound and a “b” closer to a “p” sound, etc. This is very much in parallel with our culture of being softer spoken, more tentative and respectful, and exhibiting gentleness. As our language is not at all “in your face,” our culture is very much about humility.

In English, we operate under the rigidity of subject + action +object. The philosophical underpinning of that structure is that subject and object are independent of one another and the subject may do as it pleases (action) to the object (ie. Environment), with or without consent.  In Ojibwe and many Indigenous languages, there is little difference between subject and object. One is not “doing” something TO the other, but rather they are sharing an experience together.

Practically, English speakers (subject, ie. Government) wish to do something (action, ie. Improve social-economic status) to Indigenous people (object, as though they are separate and apart from English speakers and no interdependency). This is why such efforts ultimately fail. The subjects are not sharing in the experience, good or bad. As a result, it is impossible to effect real change.

In that same example, from an Ojibwe linguistic and cultural perspective, the solution lies in both “subject” (ie. Government) and “object” (Indigenous people) to have a shared experience improving socio-economic status. This approach means it is not just a job some hired bureaucrat does, but rather it is a whole community (both English speaking mainstream Canadians and Indigenous people) approach that transcends a 9-5 job. It becomes something that we live. It means we are not going to talk about how bad poverty is and then go home at the end of the day to our Steak dinner in front of our 60" flat screen tv and 6.0 surround sound system.

Culture and Nationhood

I have learned a great deal from the French people, whose culture I was happily accepted into. The French in Canada also have a history of oppression and persecution at the hands of the English. They had lost the war against the British (which, sadly was about controlling a land that did not belong to either of them) and suffered as the losers of the war at the hands of the victors.

One thing I had learned was the way they had maintained their culture and nationality over time. They did this through the protection of their language above all else. Not land, not programs, not individual communities could have enabled the French in Canada to survive to the point where they are today. I have observed when French people hear another person speak French, even a complete stranger, and the instant sense of connection that they demonstrate.

I have felt this connection as well. It is these lessons that have shown me the critical importance of our Indigenous languages to protecting our cultures and identities. These identities, cultures and linguistically influenced world views are absolutely critical to cultivating the wisdom required to recreating local, national and global economies that are better integrated and interconnected with the land, the environment, people and animals.

I feel this connection again as I am in the process of learning my own native tongue.

Effect on Economic Development

Now we can see how language intrinsically influences and shapes culture (and vice versa). Together, language and culture influence and shape our world views and hence, our approach to economic development.

The mainstream approach to economic development has been driven, in large part, by the English speaking world. As a result, consciously or not, people have adopted a separated view of themselves and our environment – a philosophy of disconnect between all that exists in this universe. This has led to exploitation of resources, harmful corporate practices, even genocide (when the perpetrators view the victims as disconnected from themselves). This philosophy has led to the belief that animals and resources exist to be dominated by humans without the acknowledgement of the interconnectedness that exists.

(NOTE: this is not to say that there are not many English speaking people who have altered their perspectives on these issues. Certainly there are many who have and many who are champions for a new way of developing and approaching this world - but these shifts in perspective generally have come from education and awareness, not from intrinsic and subconscious influence of their spoken language)

The alternatives to this approach stem from our Indigenous languages. The embedded cultural world views are full of the wisdom required for the changes this world is going through. Economic Development can be done in a different way than exploitation and profit above all else. The key to finding these alternatives lie in our understanding of the world views that come from our languages.

Concluding notes:

There are gifts that can come from every language. The trouble begins when we allow for one language (any one) to dominate the others. The same global issues could have stemmed from a different language if it had gained dominance. Our global strength lies in our diversity.

Notes:

*I say citizens because our nations are not simply communities, but nations with the power of citizenship, even if our current leaders are not exercising that power.