RYLAN HIGGINS
Mi’kmaw scholar Bonita Lawrence describes an aspect of the history of Turtle Island (a.k.a. Canada) that we must consider, generally, but especially with regard to protesters supporting the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs. Lawrence details resistance by Indigenous people that marked the colonization of Turtle Island.
This history should be well-known, but unfortunately it is not. Importantly, Indigenous people have never stopped resisting. That which Lawrence describes is some of the earliest, going back centuries. Resistance has continued unbroken over the many decades since; it’s happening as I write this.
It is urgent that non-Indigenous people currently living on Turtle Island seek deep understanding of this resistance. I would argue, for example, that this resistance should form the cornerstone of attempts to educate young non-Indigenous people about Turtle Island. And this is because gaining this knowledge is the initial step toward an obligation that we non-Indigenous people must fulfil.
After gaining the necessary knowledge, the next thing everyone needs to do is make one of the most important decisions a non-Indigenous person on Turtle Island will ever make: whether you will support Indigenous people in resisting their continued oppression.
Everyone needs to decide. Not making this decision is tantamount to saying you don’t care either way, and I don’t think that remains an option. It is not a decision to take lightly. Indigenous resistance is complicated, but at its core is regaining rights to land, and this is precisely why the decision is so consequential.
If you chose not to support Indigenous resistance, then, for the purposes of this essay, suffice it to say that I suspect you will someday regret doing so.
If you are considering supporting Indigenous resistance, then it’s important for you to understand the implications. A sketch of my own current understanding will provide some sense of what it would mean.
Indigenous people I know feel strongly that most of the land their ancestors once lived on was stolen by settlers and the government, and that attempts to control and take land continue. They also recognize that policies like the Indian Act were racist and oppressive in nature. Many feel these policies were genocidal. The basic argument is that genocide policies and actions were the means to take over the land.
After much consideration, I agree.
Thus, Indigenous people are foremost resisting the theft of their land. They are also resisting the mainstream social, political and economic arrangements (past and present) that facilitate that theft. This includes laws that put them at a disadvantage, that work against their interests, and that they had little or no role in making. A decision to support Indigenous resistance would be weighty, for sure, and involve supporting Indigenous autonomy and forms of governance.
In thinking about all this, an instructive example can be found in the current situation regarding CN Rail.
There are the Indigenous protesters occupying the railways. I view their protests as them taking back lands that they have long had the right to occupy. Nothing about this, in my opinion, is unlawful.
CN Rail owners and executives could decide to support these Indigenous protesters. I will not hold my breath, but if they do, then they need to act accordingly.
CN Rail had nearly $15 billion in revenue last year, and over $4 billion in profit. The company could almost certainly keep paying the workers it has just laid off and still earn plenty of profit in 2020.
This would be an indirect, but nonetheless significant act of support, in that it would help quell the frustration that many non-Indigenous people are likely feeling as they are affected by the protests. This is the least CN could do in supporting Indigenous resistance. It could also support the protesters directly, perhaps with financial aid. All large corporations could do this.
CN Rail workers have more at stake. If, in the likely event that CN Rail chooses not to support Indigenous resistance, the workers will be faced with a difficult choice.
My suggestion would be to start by reflecting on the significant role that the railway system played in disenfranchising Indigenous people. It was an important part of the strategy of providing settlers and the government with the means to displace Indigenous people. In fact, that was one of the primary purposes of the railways.
With this in mind, laid-off CN Rail workers could show solidarity with Indigenous protesters. Workers might have more in common with protesters than is immediately apparent. I recognize that this would not be easy. CN Rail workers face the possibility of their livelihoods being greatly affected by the protests, and the same goes for lots of other non-Indigenous people on Turtle Island.
Indeed, for some people, support will mean sacrifice, but it will be worth it. Repairing the damage done to Indigenous communities in the past and halting current destructive programs will be good for Indigenous people, but it will benefit all of us here on Turtle Island. The choice should be clear.
Rylan Higgins is a professor of anthropology at Saint Mary's University in Halifax.
