#who’s_charlie

CanadaLand blog

“Je Suis…” confused whether it’s about the right to say what you want without consequences, the right to ideas freely expressed — judiciously — or the right to not be assaulted by hatred or stupidity wearing a flowery cartoon dress.

Someone recently noted somewhere, and I paraphrase here: I’m getting whiplash with my head going one way to read this and then the other way to read that.

Somewhere in this jumble, I may arrive somewhere else and find personal peace and enlightenment.

Huge flash mobs around the globe flipped a collective bird to terrorists, and a high five to “free speech”. Power to the people. Awe-inspiring.

Why it was just the absolute perfect time and place for some of the world’s worst offenders against free speech to line up and show their mugs for “photo ops” at the Paris #je_suis_charlie rallies. Protective colouring for the Saudi ambassador, among many.

Consider that his nation recently carried out a public flogging of a blogger for the crime of “insulting” the ruling family.

Russia, Nigeria, Israel, etc etc showed up with their smiling faces as well.  Only, there’s a report they didn’t actually “lead” the Paris rally but arranged for official photo ops to take place on a heavily-policed, barricaded-to-the-public, empty side street.

How… um… brave of them.  With fair weather friends like this, who needs enemies of free speech?

Talk about brave… #Canadaland blog featured an overly long rant by Jesse Brown and Jen Gerson, of the National Post. They went on and on about how gutless everyone else was for NOT re-posting the insulting cartoons of Muhammed from the pages of Charlie Hebdo.

How brave of the them too, as neither one will lose their jobs, be flogged, or face anything except maybe — and I stress MAYBE — a mild tongue-lashing from a nobody like me for intellectual puffery.

Brown and Gershon came off sounding like two wannabe-cool kids in a playground dissing everyone else for not wearing what they were wearing. Silly, childish, pretentious, and so wrong on so many points.

Great rebuttal by #Anne_Thériault, totally worth a read at http://canadalandshow.com for the full monty.

What the world needed after all that was a return to the present, and reality.  Like the soothing balm of the #Golden_Globe_Awards. Whoo-hoo!

Red pill? Or the blue pill?

*(Correction: National Post writer is Jen Gerson – not Gershon. Apologies)

is it freedom of speech?

QC papers reprint Charlie Hebdo cartoons

Thirteen people are dead.

Most are writers and satirical cartoonists at a Paris magazine called Charlie Hebdo. The killers added two police officers to the list of dead during their getaway.

Headlines around the western world trumpet expressions of shock, sorrow, outrage, anger, denial and solidarity in something called  “freedom of speech”.

In Quebec, French-language newspapers repeat the insult — reprint cartoons of the prophet Muhammed — as though one outrage committed by murderers justifies repeating an insult to all Muslims.

Before this goes further, nothing justifies the slaughter of unarmed people. It’s a crime — a mass murder. For the news media, it’s too easy to identify every massacre of innocents as “terrorism”.

Maybe it is. For certain, this was carried out by extremists who threatened to kill the people at this magazine, firebombed it, and decided to wipe out those working at the magazine that mocked the sacred, their sacred. The question we must ask is: Why?

Why did Charlie Hebdo decide to shock, to push, to push beyond good taste into insult, to venture slightly and then more beyond political satire, to sneer at and insult, to promote racism and intolerance in pursuit of something — but not truth anymore.

When that happens, it isn’t satire. It isn’t to expose the criminal, the incompetent, the idiotic, the stupid, and the lying liar. It becomes something else. It turns into a deliberate and concerted campaign against an enemy; a magazine looking for a fight.

There’s no such thing as limitless free speech. We all know the example of the person who yells ‘Fire!” in a burning movie theatre. There are consequences for being an ass in public. But the consequence or reaction should never be murder.

Neither should the reaction by journalists be further provocation and insult. This isn’t responsible journalism nor is it defending or practising free speech.

It’s piling one stupid insult upon another.

Hail to Freedonia!

F*ck me pumps

Really? 2015? Seven months? A friend likes to quote that great philosopher, Marx (Groucho not Karl):

“Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.”

True. So true.

To which I says: “Look to the future of Christmases Past.”™  (mind the trademark)

There was a show on TV once upon a time that combined skit comedy with social and political satire. It was called “Laugh-In” and was considered a trailblazer for reflecting the “blood humours” (in the medieval sense) of the time.

A last gasp of the late 60s and early 70s, the “Cold War” and looming threats of nuclear obliteration, “sex and drugs and rock & roll”, free love, and Vietnam.

You weren’t really there if you remember it. I had to check with an online encyclopedia to confirm all that.

Today it’s Groundhog Day and we’re all trapped in a perpetual 9/12; AIDS and ebola; zombies and vampires; ecstasy, meth and Kardashians, oh my; Afghanistan and Iraq, Iraq and Afghanistan again; and tsunamis of one kind or another. The Canadian dollar is worth the same as it was against the USDollar in the 1970s.

The genius called Colbert is the new late night Johnny, but The Daily Show remains young Americans’ number one source of news and their window on world events. My every keystroke is monitored for impure thoughts by some mindless super cop and its supporting and equally mindless mobs of minions.

People like Michael Brown are guilty until proven white. Please, may I erase my mental hard drive? I don’t like this place anymore.

Plus ça change.

So whatcha been doin’, Shmohawk? Writing. Seriously. I mean serious writing. You know, knuckling down to purge me soul of angry demons by slinging them onto the screen, much like I’m doing here. Only this is fun. That other stuff is hard work.

I hate it. I love it. It’s complicated.

I have a friend who’s done three books in that same time. Good for him, says I. I hate him. I love him.  This too is complicated because he’s a good friend, a best friend (I almost wrote “fiend”). In fact, he’s one of the constants in my meandering writing life.

Envy is a nasty bitch wearing too much makeup, a tight dress and high heels. But sometimes…. Oooh.

Not today though. Today, I have work to do. Begone, you nasty thing.

2015, eh.  Here we go again.

after the gold rush

[editor: I changed the title from “education or gold rush?”]

I remember going to school board meetings in Regina and Ottawa (not exactly as shown) in my past life as a reporter.

Boring affairs. Lots of empty seats. A few iffy stories. Mostly, I thought to myself, folks seemed more concerned about everyone else’s kids than their own. Not that different than rez parents.

I was therefore surprised at the amount of jabber-jabber among non-Indigenous types about the First Nations Education Act (FNEA).

First, it’s about (yawn) education.  Second, it’s about (double yawn) First Nations’ education. So why all the online chatter?

Right now, the topic’s just-a-popping especially after last week’s shocking, surprising, and dare I say (yes I do) historic resignation of Shawn Atleo as head of the Assembly of First Nations. He said he wanted to remove himself as a “lightning rod” for opponents of the FNEA.

So what, you say. Why should non-Indigenous types think this concerns them at all?

It doesn’t. But they love to tell Indigenous peoples that they’re a bunch of stubborn, misguided arses and that they’re ruining their own lives and those of  blah blah blah.

Maybe this compensates for frustration, deep feelings of anxiety, impotence and inadequacy at their own lack of control over their own politicians and governments. They got daddy issues, y’see.

If they were half as concerned as they claim, wouldn’t they have asked why First Nations students get about a third less money for education than their own kids? Or why so many FN schools sit on contaminated land, make kids sick from mold and other poisons, don’t provide classes in their own languages, or teach their own histories?

Sorry. I almost put you to sleep, didn’t I? But isn’t that the point?

Knowing all that stuff presumes non-Indigenous folks even care about news from Indian country. Of course, they don’t. Why should they when they got Rob Ford, Mike Duffy and Pauline Marois to entertain and enthrall.

Yet, so many non-Indigenous types get their knickers in a twist about FN education on the rez when their preferred teaching method is apparently provided by Canadian prison guards.

I mean… really? You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Choose one or the other. Education in schools? Or longer prison terms? Focus, people!

I’m being cheeky. Still …

I don’t think them hosers are really concerned about FN education or FN students at all. I think they’re really upset about losing control over Indigenous peoples. They’ve a lifetime of comforting stereotypes pounded into their noggins, after all, that “natives” are inferior in nearly every way including how to raise and teach their own children. And ain’t that the very foundation for residential schools?

Face it – there are a lot of hosers who think those schools weren’t all that bad. Eh?

My point is this. The FNEA and a string of other “historic” accomplishments passed by the Harper Government™ since it took power has been less about First Nations’ fiscal accountability, financial transparency, fair elections, matrimonial property rights, or education.

It’s been about the Federal  government blocking, limiting, undermining and avoiding at all costs the recognition of some fundamental rights of Indigenous peoples to control their own lives.

It’s about centuries of White privilege, and fear of losing a tiny bit of that, should Indigenous peoples escape those legal handcuffs so effectively applied by the Indian Act and other government policies.  I mean, just look at the amazing job the Canadian Government’s done so far? Need I say more?

Indigenous peoples already have legal recognition of their inherent rights; in the Aboriginal rights sections of the Canadian Charter of Rights, various decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada and other Canadian courts, in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and under international law.

The problem isn’t legal recognition. It’s Canada’s amazing, technicolor, hypocrisy.

One the one hand, Canada claims: “we respect Aboriginal rights”.

On the one hand, it does its darnedest to tear up those same Aboriginal rights in lengthy, expensive court cases.

Even when it’s been handed very clear, definite judicial smackdowns, the Federal Government’s lawyers will appeal almost with malicious intent.

There. I said it. I believe government lawyers can be petty and malicious. I hope you’re happy.

There seems an unwritten memo floating about the PMO (regardless of political occupant) that says: Deny, deny, deny.

Maybe this is why the Harper Government™ is in such a rush to cut Indians off at the pass. It’s a different kind of “red scare” these days.

Blogs, reports and studies, and headlines rally the troops to plant flags and stake claims before it’s too late. Do it now – before Indigenous peoples get there and demand a share of the wealth. Or at least a seat at the negotiating table.

Sheesh!  I mean, the nerve?! Google shows “about 21,700 results” with the words “Canada”, “Aboriginal rights” and “resource development”. A sizeable chunk warns governments and corporations that snoozers are losers.

• Harper govt worried aboriginal rights threaten resource development
• NB fracking protests and the fight for aboriginal rights – CBC
• RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT AND ABORIGINAL RIGHTS IN 
• THE CANADIAN NORTHLANDS
• Aboriginal rights based on treaties influencing Canada’s agenda, documents reveal
• Canadian Aboriginal Law: Creating Certainty in Resource Development
• Indigenous Peoples’ Land And Resource Rights

It’s the Harper Government’s™ version of THE AMAZING RACE with oil and mining companies scrambling over themselves to get there before the courts step in. “Thar’s gold (oil and other precious minerals) in them thar hills!”  Yee-haw!

Doncha think maybe, just perhaps, that could be why so many chiefs are upset at all the backroom deals and private talks going on between the Assembly of First Nations and the Harper Government™?

The AFN and PMO can use all kinds of fancy blah-blah about “historic” this and that, or yadda-yadda about saving souls, but we know it’s always been about used car salesmen and Indians getting the sh***y end of the stick.

Politics and Indigenous rights – not education or fiscal whatever. Anyone who says different is zoomin’ ya.

Yes, there are fundamental differences – that Great Native Divide; “comprised… of native people who think of themselves as Canadian citizens [and] those who regard themselves as citizens of their respective nations.”

But can that excuse those who think it must be one or the other – all or nothing – with no common ground? Are these the only choices: assimilation or Indigenation?

There are, after all, common Aboriginal rights at stake for adherents of both camps. Protecting and advancing those rights is — and should be — Job # 1 at the AFN. The question is whether this organization of chiefs has been doing that or jumping at carrots dangled by the Harper Government™.

Interesting sidebar: more and more people outside Indian country are becoming interested, learning about and debating these issues. Always a good sign. Welcome to the party, y’all.

I come not to praise but to bury

ed: a better written and edited version is at mediaindigena.com

Shawn Atleo says he wanted to remove himself as a distraction, a lightning rod for opposition to the Federal Government’s so-called “First Nations Control of First Nations Education Act”, or Bill C-33.

It’s the kids that matter, he says. So on Friday, May 2, he resigned in the middle of his second term as National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations.

I can accept that. No reason to question his reason for quitting or his commitment to children’s education.

But a politician’s words are empty without action. In this case, Atleo had people wondering – seriously concerned – about the direction he was taking the AFN.

Examine the record and it wouldn’t be hard to conclude that the AFN under Atleo did little to advance Indigenous rights in Canada. In fact, it could be argued – and often is by his detractors – that the AFN under Atleo became an accomplice of the Harper Government and a branch office of Aboriginal Affairs, unwitting or not.

In Atleo’s defense, people will point to a string of “historic” achievements while heading the AFN. First, there was the “historic Crown-First Nations Summit”, which led to the “historic Canada-First Nations Joint Action Plan”, and finally the so-called “historic agreement with the Assembly of First Nations to reform the First Nations education system.” One expects to hear about a “historic” trip to the bathroom after all that. Or a surprise “historic” meeting in South Africa while attending Nelson Mandela’s funeral. Wait… that actually happened.  And someone did call it “historic” but I can’t remember who.

For many, this apparent bromance between Atleo and Harper went too far especially when contrasted against a groundswell of grassroots anger and discontent. The Idle No More movement captured the mood perfectly with round dances and impromptu mashups directed at a raft of Harper Government’s policies that INM said were shoved down the throats of First Nations.

• FN Matrimonial Property Act;
• FN Elections Act;
• FN Financial Transparency Act;
• FN Fiscal Management Act;
• FN Control of FN Education Act.

In drafting the legislation above,  imposed — not co-created with the AFN – chiefs complained about a lack of consultation. In every case, First Nations said the Acts above undermined Indigenous rights and chipped away at the jurisdiction of First Nations; shifting more and more control of First Nations into the hands of the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and the Harper Government.

Atleo may be blamed for some of above. But folks should look at what else went wrong at the AFN and why. If they did, they might learn that AFN staffers — experts in their areas of research or policy development —  complained privately that they’d spend time, effort and expense developing draft policies, reports and analyses that expressed the wishes of First Nations. They’d send their work “upstairs” only to see their work gutted by the National Chief’s political staff.

AFN workers and analysts blamed individuals with the National Chief’s political staff at first. Then they noticed that changes to their work were made after Indian Affairs officials (later, Aboriginal Affairs) did some arm-twisting. The message? Make the changes or risk delays and even the loss of funding.  It didn’t take long before the National Chief’s political staff began to self-censor the work of the staff, second-guessing Aboriginal Affairs officials before they’d even read the papers.

This pattern of self-censorship apparently got worse when Atleo’s team took over. Even when there were clear directions from a majority of chiefs to the AFN to do one thing, Atleo and his senior political staff might do the opposite. Take for example, repeated instructions by a majority of chiefs to oppose Harper’s FN Education Act until key changes were made. It was a line in the sand drawn by the chiefs telling Atleo to hold fast. Don’t give in. Don’t negotiate. He did anyway.

For some time, it was clear there was a growing rift between the AFN and a majority of chiefs representing First Nations across Canada on a range of issues. This came to a head when Atleo and Harper convened a last-minute, invitation-only, news conference to unveil their “First Nations Control of First Nations Education Act”, or Bill C-33. There was almost no advance warning. It took place in southern Alberta on a Friday afternoon. It created instant suspicion among critics of the Act, and growing anger among the chiefs. The event seemed custom-made to stifle concerns of chiefs and avoid questions from journalists. It made a lot of chiefs angry because it seemed to be a deliberate snub of a few regional chiefs, who also sat on the AFN Executive, openly opposing the Act.

Atleo and his supporters might say that rebellious chiefs drove him from the AFN because he supported the Education Act and they didn’t. That’s probably part of the reason but Atleo’s own actions provoked them as well. Atleo ignored directives issued by the chiefs not once but at least twice, and both times about the Education Act. For many of the chiefs, passage of the Education Act would cause  long-term damage to Indigenous rights by surrendering parental control over the education of First Nation children to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs. To Atleo, however, the Act would be another “historic” achievement, and an improvement in lives of people on-reserves across Canada.

“Smashing the status quo means that everyone has a role to play. The status quo should NOT be acceptable to any political party – the NDP, the Liberals or the Conservatives.  This status quo should also never be acceptable to our Chiefs and leaders.”

Across Indian country, there’s sharp disagreement how best to “smash the status quo”. On the one hand, there’s much distrust of the Harper government and its string of Acts that impact Indigenous rights – from Matrilineal Property to Education. With each Act, and complaints about lack of consultation, lack of information, lack of involvement in processes that affect their rights, suspicion and frustration grows. Each Act is seen as another blow to First Nation jurisdictions and the loss of ever more control over their lives.

No one wants the status quo. Everyone wants change. But people differ on how best to make change happen. The Federal Government seems tone deaf to First Nations concerns even though concepts of “parental control” over their own children’s education is almost universal.

Atleo’s actions didn’t create but they exacerbated divisions within the AFN. The organization pretends those divisions don’t exist. It works hard to present a united face to the public and hide the in-fighting. The AFN wants the outside world to believe it’s one big happy family. But everyone knows the AFN is crumbling and pulling itself apart. Now everyone within the AFN must share blame for refusing to confront serious issues within the organization that threaten to pull it apart.

Despite evidence, the chiefs pretended nothing was seriously wrong. The chiefs allowed the National Chief’s office to run amok, almost out of control, and to isolate itself with political staff that interfered with the expressed will of the AFN’s chiefs and their communities.

Instead of listening to the growing discontent among AFN staff, the National Chief let senior political appointees insulate him from those who make the AFN run – its staff. Meanwhile, the staff pretended if they just did their work, and didn’t complain openly, things might improve. Things only got worse.

Regional chiefs heard dissent within the AFN ranks but decided it wasn’t their business to get involved. Chiefs from across the country failed, by choice or circumstance, to find out why they no longer controlled their own organization. And why the AFN was stumbling.

Aboriginal political reporters failed to inform their audiences what wasn’t working at the AFN – an “organization of chiefs” – so they might tell their chiefs to get involved before things got worse. Instead, journalists put out canned stories carrying government labels, producing lots of interesting dots but rarely connecting them. They lobbed predictable questions and got predictable replies from politicians that added almost nothing to anything that mattered. It should’ve been THEIR story – something they owned – but they left it up to the Globe and Mail to provide serious insight into the rise and fall of Shawn Atleo.

In the end, Atleo had one last “historic” to add to his list of accomplishments. He became the first AFN National Chief to quit that job.

 

hamba kahle, madiba

Invictus

The airwaves are full of memories about rolihlahla Nelson Mandela. The same words, over and over. The boxer, who became a lawyer, who became a freedom fighter, who became a prisoner, who became the leader of a nation and a moral example to us all.

So many people ask: Did you ever meet him?

No. But, yes, in a way.

Lessons in the Senate Scandal

It has only been a few days but this Wallin, Duffy and Brazeau thing is driving me nuts. What is going to happen to them? This horse and pony show is driving me crazy.

You’re not alone, my friend. This is being discussed in bars, lunch rooms, and in the back seats of taxis around the country. The whole darn thing has been driving a lot of people nuts for weeks and even months. But what’s this got to do with us Indigenous types, you ask? Everything. It’s a text book lesson in politics, from “the Hill” to the band office.