Saul, John Ralston PAC -‐ Northern Public...
The well-‐known concepts of peacekeeping, multiculturalism, environmentalism, and balanced foreign policy have long been cherished as cornerstones of Canada’s national identity. What is perhaps not so well known is that these concepts can be traced back to the traditions of Canada’s indigenous peoples. Indigenous influences run deep in Canada and our country would not be what it is today without them. This is John Ralston Saul’s argument in his groundbreaking book A Fair Country:
Telling Truths about Canada. In fact, Saul argues that it is a mistake to think of Canada as a dichotomy of English and French traditions. It’s more of a triangle really. That is to say, we are composed of English, French and indigenous traditions. Saul underscores that until we collectively acknowledge that truth, we will never fully achieve our potential as a nation. First published in 2008, well before the emergence of Idle No More, this book presciently broaches similar discussions by asking ourselves: who are we? In response, Saul suggests that “we are a métis civilization” (3).
This a challenging thought. On the one hand, to be Canadian is surely to be a blend of many formative traditions. On the other hand, thinkers such as Taiaiake Alfred have criticized Saul for freely using an identity with distinct cultural and legal rights and for suggesting that the collective “we” can simply lay claim to it. My sense is that Saul is not suggesting that the collective “we” is somehow imbued with the same distinct cultural and legal rights as the Aboriginal peoples of Canada but rather he uses this concept of métissage to help us appreciate how indelibly marked we are by our indigenous traditions, and to acknowledge and appreciate that fact rather than continuing to gloss over it as has been our country’s tendency (perhaps that is why he consciously does not capitalize “métis”). This insight is an important one, for it arguably underpins much of the frustration evinced in the Idle No More movement. It speaks to the unfinished work of reconciliation. Indeed, Saul says as much when he asserts that “the single greatest failure of the Canadian experiment, so far, has been our inability to normalize—that is, to internalize consciously—the First Nations as the senior founding pillar of our civilization” (22).
Saul, John Ralston
PAC -‐ Northern Public Policy Book Review Forum
Review of A Fair Country by John Ralston Saul
By: Christian Bertelsen, Board Member, IPAC NWT Regional Group
----
'If the country can't be linear, then it must be an abstraction.'
'If the country can't be linear, then it must be an abstraction.'
The well-‐known concepts of peacekeeping, multiculturalism, environmentalism, and balanced foreign policy have long been cherished as cornerstones of Canada’s national identity. What is perhaps not so well known is that these concepts can be traced back to the traditions of Canada’s indigenous peoples. Indigenous influences run deep in Canada and our country would not be what it is today without them. This is John Ralston Saul’s argument in his groundbreaking book A Fair Country:
Telling Truths about Canada. In fact, Saul argues that it is a mistake to think of Canada as a dichotomy of English and French traditions. It’s more of a triangle really. That is to say, we are composed of English, French and indigenous traditions. Saul underscores that until we collectively acknowledge that truth, we will never fully achieve our potential as a nation. First published in 2008, well before the emergence of Idle No More, this book presciently broaches similar discussions by asking ourselves: who are we? In response, Saul suggests that “we are a métis civilization” (3).
This a challenging thought. On the one hand, to be Canadian is surely to be a blend of many formative traditions. On the other hand, thinkers such as Taiaiake Alfred have criticized Saul for freely using an identity with distinct cultural and legal rights and for suggesting that the collective “we” can simply lay claim to it. My sense is that Saul is not suggesting that the collective “we” is somehow imbued with the same distinct cultural and legal rights as the Aboriginal peoples of Canada but rather he uses this concept of métissage to help us appreciate how indelibly marked we are by our indigenous traditions, and to acknowledge and appreciate that fact rather than continuing to gloss over it as has been our country’s tendency (perhaps that is why he consciously does not capitalize “métis”). This insight is an important one, for it arguably underpins much of the frustration evinced in the Idle No More movement. It speaks to the unfinished work of reconciliation. Indeed, Saul says as much when he asserts that “the single greatest failure of the Canadian experiment, so far, has been our inability to normalize—that is, to internalize consciously—the First Nations as the senior founding pillar of our civilization” (22).
Two disciplines that offer us useful avenues to recognize the formative influence of indigenous peoples are history and education.
Indeed, incorporating all of our history (both good and bad), rectifying omissions, and underscoring the pivotal contributions should be a priority for any country engaged in reconciliation. With respect to history, there are a number of historical events that have been deeply influenced by indigenous peoples but are not well known. For instance, have you ever wondered why Québec sovereignty has been on the wane? Well, one of the reasons can surely be attributed to the James Bay Cree. Why, you ask? Well, at the time of the 1995 referendum, the James Bay Cree took the opportunity to raise the issue of considering their collective rights in any potential negotiation of secession. This move had the effect of foregrounding the realization that any separation of Québec from Canada would not be as simple as carving out the province based on its current borders. That’s because the James Bay Cree have collective rights and title (negotiated with the federal Crown) on significant tracts of land throughout the province, and those existing agreements would need to be factored into any potential secession negotiation, which would necessarily have a significant impact on Québec’s post-‐separation borders.
With respect to living in increasingly plural societies, our indigenous peoples can teach us a great deal. Indeed, considering the contentious debate about values and identity politics that Québec is engaged in at the moment, it becomes clear that we might benefit from understanding indigenous ways of reconciling difference.
Thus Saul posits that:
Thus Saul posits that:
“the idea of difference is central to indigenous civilization. These differences are not meant to be watertight compartments, not vessels of purity. It is all about working out how to create relationships that are mixed in various ways and designed to create balances. It is the idea of a complex society functioning like an equally complex family within an ever-‐enlarging circle. That is the Canadian model”(107).
In the context of the Québec conversation, it is clear that finding balance within its complex family is that which is needed. For as Saul wisely suggests, “learning to live with complexity and uncertainty is all about reinventing social tension as a positive” (80).
Saul’s book is a compelling call to reconciliation, and provokes thought on how we can take up the project. It is in this light that the Government of the Northwest Territories’ recognition of 11 official languages and its unique resource revenue sharing framework inspire us to consider how else we can further recognize and incorporate our indigenous cultural influences in earnest. And the greatest implication for those involved in public policy is that the path of reconciliation has not been completely drawn. Along it there remain a number of opportunities for identifying and taking concrete actions to realize its intent and achieve its goals. Overall, Saul’s book is a challenge to all authors of public policy, a challenge to consider how to advance the project of reconciliation when undertaking their work.
A Fair Country is replete with provocative and challenging ideas and it is no exaggeration to suggest that it is one of the most important books written on
Canadian identity and its indigenous origins within the last decade.
Canadian identity and its indigenous origins within the last decade.
No comments:
Post a Comment