This SHOULD be Ancient History by Now! To the Thoughts Mostly Unspoken About First Nations

Posted on by
4

I hadn’t intended to immediately write anything about the Indigenous after my previous post.  I was leaning towards something funny.  I was in the mood for a ha ha, but life interfered again. I’d since learned even more about what goes on within the politics of “Native” life.  I know that I am far from the only one who was or is unaware of a lot of this information that is readily available, but rarely shared.

I received a great deal of positive comment and support on that ‘Half-Breed’ post, which I certainly appreciated.  I was expecting at least one comment of dissension, if not an onslaught.  Certain criticisms mean that there is still need for education, an opportunity to dispel a myth or two.

There was one critical thought, but it was given indirectly, written on the Facebook page of a mutual friend who had shared my story on his page.  The comment didn’t bother me to any great degree, and I doubt that its writer was the only person who felt like he did or something similar.  I’ve heard it said many times, that this topic just needs to go away. Actually, I can’t think of a group of people who would agree with that more than the people of Indigenous nations.

Response to post Half-Breed to Metis, My Return from a Savage Wilderness:

Anon.( for the sake of mutual friend):  The bogus multicultural self-identifying that happens in this country is ridiculous, especially when it comes to the inheritors of the first nations.           May 12 at 7:28am via mobile · Like

Then I recently read another blog that spoke to the Idle No More movement and Indigenous issues in general.  Her first reply was from someone who took issue with her post.

Response to post “Idle No More”, by Blogger Anne Thériault, The Belle Jar:

Carlos:  February 1, 2013 at 10:19 pm #

Let’s be real. There was no threat of Spence actually dying, what with all that fish broth she was consuming. No it’s not a full meal, but nutritious enough for her to survive. Also, just because the First Nations were here first does not preclude them from supporting themselves. How do you think that “the white people” survived when they got here? Exactly in the same way that the First Nations people did, hunting, fishing, gathering, and building their own shelters. The main difference is that the “white people” sought to advance and grow as a society, rather than try and piggy back on the work and efforts of others. There’s no reason why my tax dollars should go to fund the lives of those that do not have any motivation to work to support themselves, when the institutions that my tax dollars are SUPPOSED to go toward are so poorly underfunded. In all honesty, I have little sympathy for a group of people that have mismanaged the assistance has been given to them. Blogs like this that try to validate their claims of oppression absolutely drive me insane.  

REPLY 

Permit me to reply.

The lack of threat to Theresa Spence’s life notwithstanding, these are the kind of continual single-minded replies that completely ignore the actual facts and nuances of all the Indigenous issues as noted in Anne’s blog, and over all these many, many years.

Let’s break it down a bit. Let’s have a short look at some of the facts and nuances. To start, it’s fairly certain that most individuals and community bodies understand the enormous amount of work and time necessary to help people recover from abusive childhoods.  I think few today wouldn’t understand that many abused kids may require treatment even for the rest of their life to regain a life worth living.  Yet, despite the number of people who get that, there are too many with almost no understanding about how that same idea applies to the healing of the Indigenous . These are people dealing with the same kind of traumas -and so much more – applied to generation after generation of Indigenous families from birth to death.

A typical response to that is something like, “Hey, we’ve given you lots of money, you should all be better already”!  Why not try such an easy fix, in general, with all abuse victims?  I think most people agree that money alone does not solve everything.  There are all kinds of needs in response to life-altering events that need attending to:  physical and mental health, education, training, follow-up, and time.  I also have to wonder what exactly is the correct designated time period to get over it and assimilate?

Moving on from that issue, how many people regardless of ancestry would be able to “advance and grow as a society” like the “white people” if they don’t have the same advantages of the “white people” like deciding who can work on, or even sell, their own lands?

How’s this for some facts, that are by far not the only like them on the books, that would raise havoc for the rest of Canada? (courtesy of  Anne Thériault, The Belle Jar from CDN Dept. of Indian Affairs) :

  • “First Nations peoples have very little control over reserve land, and the Minister of Indian Affairs must approve any land sales or transfers.
  • First Nations people need to seek government approval for selling or bartering any crops, livestock and other products grown, reared or cultivated on reserve lands.   (Add in minerals and oil too.  There is far too much money in royalties and business taxes for the government to look at relinquishing them easily.  I also wonder who benefits the most from those taxes and royalties?  I wonder what the percentage of those taxes and royalties are paid back to the Natives in all those annual “handouts”?)
  • …if you’re an Indigenous Person, you’d better hope that the government doesn’t declare you to be “mentally incompetent”, as that means that the Minister can force you to sell, lease or mortgage your land as he sees fit.
  • Even a dead Indigenous person isn’t safe from the Minister; no wills drawn up on reserve lands are considered legally valid until the Minister approves them’.”

This kind of changes the overly accepted idea that the Indigenous simply chose the plan for a ‘welfare state’, doesn’t it?  If you still think there is a privileged existence on those reservations, or as status Aboriginal peoples, why don’t you ask to live as one for a week and see if you still feel that way?

Why are the people who feel the contentions are only about ‘status,’ or some other unfair representation, unable to get the message that no, the playing field to a decent life is not even.  Not even close.  That is the crux of the issue.  This is exacerbated by the fact that even many of the actual agreements, the Treaties, that were put in place have never been truly or fully honoured by the Canadian government.  It is these sort of issues that are going to take a lot of work to work out, which is why it has still to be worked out even after all these hundred some years.

I’d also like the people who demand that no more of “their” tax dollars be spent on these issues to tell me exactly what they think they’ve actually lost personally.  What exactly was their portion of ‘the wasted loss’?    I’ll bet these guys also think that “Natives” don’t pay any taxes at all either.  Better look that one up – because yes, we do.

As for all the mismanagement of funds by Band leaders, yes, there is room for improvement – with some bands, probably lots.  However, name any sort of business, government department, or even charitable organization that hasn’t had some mismanagement issue, even without the ‘advantage of full government oversight as required by the Indian Act’.

Don’t even try to compare any of that band mismanagement, perceived or real, to the billions lost by the very governments that require oversight of the Native funds.  Can you say $3.1 billion this year by the Harper government in one department alone?  Or how about all those advanced and educated senators recently in the news who cheated on their expenses?  Yes, interestingly, even one of them happened to be “Native”.  We’ve come at least some way, baby.

It’s also convenient for some complainers to continually overlook all the Indigenous groups that are working damned hard to overcome overwhelming and seemingly insurmountable problems to uplift and change life for all.  The point made about white society advancing and growing on its own seems to have missed the point entirely:  that ‘the whites’ initially advanced and grew as a society on the backs, resources, and guidance of the Natives, and in many ways continue to so today.   No, we wouldn’t say it was the sole way that society advanced, but that doesn’t negate the long, and again,  continuing role of that fact.

So, I’m sure we can all agree that it really is too bad, even deplorable, that Indigenous issues are still an issue.  These discussions should all be ancient history by now, but they’re not, and not because of some simple inconvenience like the Indigenous simply wanting to “piggy back on the work and efforts of others”.  In order to speak to such a large overall issue, one needs to have a far larger view and a handle on all of the facts and history.

Personally, I am very happy to know that there are plenty of people willing, able, working to get able, and actually working on this.  If we want an issue to go away, the first step to being of any useful help is learning just what the problem is.   So, instead of opinions based on reactions to headlines or chats, why not try to really learn about the subject?  Who knows, maybe then, even we all could help.

RL

Thanks to the Belle Jar blogsite for the Idle No More commentary, and the May 24, 2013 post in the Winnipeg Free Press on Native business partnerships with conventional industries.

http://bellejarblog.wordpress.com/2012/12/26/idle-no-more/#comments

DULCE ET DECORUM:  http://noraloreto.ca/the-indian-act-in-plain-english/

May 24, 2013 post in the Winnipeg Free Press on Native business partnerships with conventional industries.

First Nations Business Partnerships Exploding

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/Industry-First-Nations-partnerships-exploding-204351481.html

Facebook – A Kvetch on FB Narcissism

Posted on by
3

I love Facebook.  It’s a fantastic and ingenious way to keep in touch with all whom I care to.  Maybe sometimes I love it too much. Sometimes I get carried away with sharing too many funny pictures or causing an occasional mini-flood of commentary updates on my favorite causes. I somewhat apologize my friends, I meant no harm.  I was maybe naïve about how many would be on my same mental page on those days.

I used to wonder - read minds

I have learned however, how to be a little more judicious in my postings, thanks in part to one of those funny comment posts I recently saw that made me laugh, then pause.

Mostly I learned because of  experience.  By experience, I’m talking about being on the receiving end of those contacts that post personal messages of self-love on an average basis of approximately 1EP/2M.  That would be one effusive post per every two minutes.  Oh, you know the ones I speak of.  They love, love, love their life, their children, their jobs, their hobbies.  They love every minute of every aspect of their lives so much that the rest of us couldn’t possibly know what it is like to live like that. We couldn’t possibly love our own kids like that, or enjoy our own vacations that way, or be happy with an achievement anywhere near the upper spheres that only they can inhabit.

No, I’m not overly concerned about offending anyone, because the guilty would never see this in themselves anyway.  And, don’t misunderstand me either.  I am merely kvetching, not indicting the guilty as ‘bad people’.  So far, no laws have been enacted to illegalize such behavior, but be warned, I sense a movement brewing.

In the interest of generous fairness, I’ll give the benefit of the doubt that they forget that everyone can see what is posted and maybe they mean for only their parents and in-laws to see all.  Although, it makes me wonder if the parents and in-laws are as enthralled as the rest of us at some point.

The side effect to all of this that I do find unfortunate is that, in an effort to not appear to be ‘that’ kind of post-er, the people that I really want to hear from post even less.  Hmmm, or is that really because of me?  Feel free to let me know friends.

For the record, I love seeing the things that make my friends, new and not so new, tick.  I like to see what makes them laugh. I really do enjoy the hilarious ‘what we did this weekend’ pictures. I love hearing what kids have managed to accomplish, I love to see the pictures of joy posted from all over the world.  I freely admit my life is far from overly glamorous or exciting.  I must live vicariously.  Or is that creepingly?

If I were able to say something to the overly effusive, it might be OK, we get it, you love your life, and that’s really quite wonderful, now how about filling the newsfeed with a comment about someone else now and then, or maybe we could go on a break.

Fair warning to my other friends though, I’m likely to have some more of those – you have got to see this, and this, and this – days.  Please don’t ‘hate’ me for it.  I suppose you could just re-categorize me in your friend lists.

Now, if only Facebook could stop making my simple ‘likes’ into a full blown post on my friend’s newsfeeds. For that, I plead not guilty.

RL

Seriously, about Group Work: Magic or Political Train to Hell?

Posted on by
Reply

group meeting
Group dynamics are always an interesting endeavor.  I’ve had the pleasure of working with a variety of groups in quite a few arenas both professionally and voluntary.  When I say ‘pleasure,’ I know that most have applied the word very kindly to an event or two.

Group size can affect outcomes, but usually it only takes a meeting of two or more people working together to have a ticket on the political train to heaven or hell.

There was one group that especially stands out in my mind.  It was comprised of 23-27 people at any given time over a 4 year period.  We were a volunteer school committee. This group type is often known as a hot-bed for problems with loads of hot-button issues, and frankly, a good number of hot-heads.  When the point of issue is your own child, there can be particularly intense attention paid to personal need.  It is often very difficult to get parents involved in these committees.

Thank goodness our group was not one of those!  I often remember that group with a great deal of fondness for what it achieved and how we interacted.  What made a group of this size and background variety work so well and effectively for several years? What was different about it from the ones that I’d seen crumble from ineffectiveness and at times, even deeply, regretted joining?

I don’t think it was rocket science and there were no magic rituals performed.  Although, there may have been some magic on some unknown level because the simplicity of what was done seems to be utterly impossible for a good number of people to perform in general.

For starters, it was the way it was managed by the various leaders and members.  The number one rule was keeping our eyes on the purpose of the group.  We were there to serve the greater good for the greatest number of students.   All decisions had to meet this first litmus test.  It was understood that sometimes this meant having to go against something that we personally desired.

Next, we had our general goal:  to provide the best educational experience possible to all students.  It’s the step after this that things can get tricky for any group – the how level.  This is where the group actions are determined to achieve those goals.  This is where there is lots of room for diverse opinion – and there was.

This level started with a boatload of questions. What are the student needs?  What are the priorities?  Why? How much money is needed, from where, from what kind of events, what should they look like, are they fun?  When do we need to do what, who’s going to run what, what resources are needed? Who’s going to get them?  All of these questions, and more, had to be agreed upon by the group – which they were.

We also allowed for newcomers to have fairly free rein to try out new projects or have a run at some of our established needs.  You don’t get new members if you lock the doors to opportunities for them to show what they can offer.  Let’s also acknowledge that that also gave the rest of us a much needed breather now and then.

There were certainly discussions based in disagreement, but all reasoning had to be put on the table upfront where it was examined by all, then a side chosen by all.  There was disappointment sometimes, but this group employed basic decency & respect.  The disappointed got a pat on the back and reminded that decisions made were not personal; it was always about the overall purpose and goal. In return, they backed up the decision with nearly full to full-blown participation.

The sub-committees performed in the same manner, just applying that method to the goals of their specific task, whether it was a book fair, Halloween bingo, fun fair, or the annual finance/budget projections.

There were times when someone might come into the group with a clear personal agenda, or vanity project.  Depending on the size or importance of the issue, the group might have said sure, go ahead; fill your boots – as long as it served the majority.  If it was somewhat more personally grandiose, they might have stirred up some group emotion, but in the end, those agendas didn’t last long on the table.  Without support or any willingness to continue in pointless argument, they (person & idea) would somehow just fade away.

All events succeeded or failed as a group.  Recognition was applied generously to all. Sure, we had our private conversations about what was really great or not, or what needed to get tweaked next time, but publicly everyone gave all the credit and if something didn’t work out, all swallowed the responsibility.

This group was an amazing story of supportive strength that achieved success after success, strong membership year after year, and easily attracted extra volunteer support whenever it was needed.  What was the secret?  Was this just a fluke for so many years; were these people just exceptionally well-rounded?

I don’t think so really.  As mentioned, it was a group of varying background, inclinations & personality: funny, serious, go-getter, care-giver, analyzer, organizer.  What we all had in common was that we started with the desire to make a difference for the better.  At the core, we simply wanted to do what was best, which included the willingness to do all we could to make that work.

What was in place to guide those wishes along was that simple requirement of asking what is this for and who does it serve?  It was really an easy fall-back position for everyone.  It was asked and applied so regularly that it became second nature; people were able to check their own ego needs. The point that everyone had an equal voice, and was free to use it, was critical to this cooperation and enhanced desire to pitch in. There were very few times that one had to dig deep to bring their respectfulness or support to the table. It made the overall experience fulfilling, and a lot of work a whole lot of fun.

Keep your on eye on the purpose, work in consensus, and exercise your abilities to respect and support both.   Why is that so hard for so many groups?  I don’t know. It seems to me that if you can’t work that way, then don’t work in any groups.  I really don’t think it takes all that much magic.

RL

c/r 712, April 6, 2013

Natures VS. Nurturing – If They Really Loved Me and Vice Versa – Couldn’t it Be More Simple?

Posted on by
5

hearts

We all want to be nurtured. We all crave that caring sense of love me, pick me, have my back support.  I’ve seen how trouble comes though, when we also expect that nurturing to be presented as we understand it. Because we are all unique representations of beings with unique expressions in need and gifts, it can be difficult to have those expectations met by others with equal fervor.

People who have already learned how to work around this, need not read further. For we average folk still treading through the minefields, I luckily have found Donna, a good friend who puts this expectation to bed with a much simpler approach. I think she’s onto something.

Troubles begin with a line of thought that goes something like this:  If they really loved me, they would know what I want or need, and they would do everything they could to provide it!

I have seen this thought put to action in varying ways; the girl who is angry that her mother didn’t buy a Christmas present that met her interests (guilty), the girlfriend deeply disappointed in her boyfriend’s missed idea of what is a great Valentine’s Day plan (guilty again), the wife who is sad and furious that her husband still doesn’t know her after all these years (divorced, so yeah, kind of guilty).

In each of these cases, the result could have been quite different if one simple effort had been practised  – talking with the object of those disappointments, (the person, not the gifts). I stress could have, I make no guarantees of would have success for reasons upcoming.

For example, I cannot believe how long it took me to realize that all of my loved ones – family & friends – were not psychics! I don’t claim to have had much of a well-adjusted background to begin with, so I had to learn that I had unfair expectations that they should be able to just know what would make me happy. Not just for gifts, but for when I was feeling low for whatever reason. Hey, they do it that way on TV all the time! To back-up that notion, I bolstered it with the fact that they were around me enough to know what I pointed out in varying degrees of hints and comment on what I liked, enjoyed, found beautiful, etc., etc., etc. They even sometimes acknowledged that they heard those comments. But, did they?

The thing is, I didn’t take into account that maybe they were having thoughts of their own at the same time. Maybe they were tuned into what was needed at work, or what they should have for dinner. Maybe they really couldn’t see the beauty in what I was pointing out.  The what really doesn’t matter, the point is there has to be allowance for the fact that no two minds are on the same page all of the time. Maybe they are even more different than the same most of  the time. Ugh, the heartache!

Much like most things in life, we need to simplify this meeting of the minds process as much as possible and/or the ways we can live with them.

For me, this starts with exercising a page from my own belief system in which I declare that I am (already) fully loved, nurtured and supported by the Universe. I believe something like this is a foundation for what is to follow in actual demonstration. Whatever you choose to do or say as a foundation is up to you, but as all guidelines have said since the beginning of therapies, it starts with what you believe.

We can’t be who we are not, and we cannot demand that someone else change to suit our needs. Change is a gift that we choose to give, it cannot be taken. I can guarantee that it will crumble if demanded.  If you want to give the gift of changing something about yourself, then give it gladly, not in resentment. If a relationship, of any nature, doesn’t work out, it’s not a failure. I repeat, not a failure. It was what it was, and another course in life knowledge is under your belt. The grade you get depends only on how you apply what you’ve learned to the next one.

So it comes back to us. Starting to see the pattern here? It’s about us being more gentle with our friends, family and lovers. How? Dare I say it? By lowering our expectations, and letting go of any ‘what can I get out of this relationship’ thoughts. Instead of demanding superhuman relating abilities, how about expecting only what is absolutely and honestly vital to our sense of nurturing, (i.e. respect, honesty, integrity)?

Taking into account that basic compatibility needs are met, & that you actually like the person, what is really necessary beyond someone simply wanting to give you their love and their best, as they know it?

My friend genuinely lives this way and she has a list of genuine friends longer than the new pope frontrunners did. She and her man work to provide what is needed, but their true treasure is every moment of family time they share. No need of fulfillment from the biggest toys life can offer. She is married 20 years and counting; she couldn’t be more cherished or in love with her man, & family and vice-versa. I‘d trade the most extravagantly planned Valentine’s evenings for that.

Think about it, we can gratefully accept nurturing in the way our loved ones can give it, and in return, we can gracefully fill in any blank needs  of our own by ourselves. Why couldn’t it be that simple, and why wouldn’t we want to, at least try to, practise it a little?

If someone is giving their love, then thank you Universe because really, how many of us have an over-abundance of people lining up to do that?

RL

(Um, quick note here to my loved ones: you’re still going to remember my birthday & Christmas, right?)

Robyn Lawson c/r 707-1 March 15, 2013