Monday, May 17, 2021

Lesley McLachlan Gallery reporter Rukuwai Tipene-Allen

Facebook

Gallery reporter Rukuwai Tipene-Allen
OPINION: ‘Welfare dependent,’ ‘inferior,’ ‘savages,’ ‘natives.’
Walking through Parliament, I head to my office in the press gallery, passing gilded portraits of reporters who came before, and I recall that the people who adorn these walls were the same people who published some of the most racist rhetoric that has ever been printed, rhetoric that has shaped our society and the way the public perceives my people.
That’s how I feel every day walking into my office and, while there are days I feel numb to it, there definitely are days when it shakes me and makes me feel alone, because not only does the space not look like me or represent me, it celebrates those who oppressed the very thought that someone like me could exist.
A good friend of mine often reminds me, “growth and comfort cannot coexist,” and, ultimately, that’s why I continue to put myself in this uncomfortable environment because I know my people deserve to have their perspectives represented.
You and 1 other
17 comments
1 share
Like
Comment
Share

17 comments


  • Lesley McLachlan

    Daniel Karageorgis Sejin Pak

    Sejin Pak replied I wonder how the racism in NZ compares to that in Australia or the USA. My sense is NZ has done and is better than the other two.


    Lesley McLachlan

    Sejin Pak Daniel Karageorgis thank you for interest; /// Coexistence between Chileans and The Mapuche. Chile, Plurinational and Intercultural State
  • Elisa Loncon Antileo1 2
    1 Académica, Departamento de Educación, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, Santiago, Chile. elisa.loncon@usach.cl
    2 Profesora externa, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
    ABSTRACT:
    The result of the plebiscite of October 25, 2020, in which the ‘apruebo’ option prevailed by a surprisingly wide margin, has led Chile into a democratic process that will lead to a new political constitution for the country.
    In the demonstrations that led to this plebiscite, one of the most repeated demands was related to the constitutional recognition of indigenous peoples. It is no coincidence that the Mapuche flag or the Wünyelfe - the Mapuche star - were among the most characteristic symbols of the unrest.
    From that perspective, and at this historical juncture, in this debate we ask if it is possible for two nations to coexist, or if this can lead to a conflict like the one developed between Jewish people and Palestinians. Well, although we are aware that the relationship between the Mapuche people and the state of Chile has been complex - to the point of being an unresolved conflict of over 500 years - perhaps the new constitution is the ideal instance to legally acknowledge a problem that, after all, is a coexistence conflict.
    Keywords: coexistence; State; Mapuche; plurinationality; debate
    Chile is one of the most backward countries in terms of human rights for Indigenous Peoples. Today, in the face of the process of social and political change that began on October 18, 2019, and recently ratified on October 25, with the triumph of the ‘apruebo’ in the plebiscite to change the constitution, the urgency of the debate on the plurinationality of the State is unavoidable for the indigenous agenda. Unfortunately, the Chilean Parliament still does not have mechanisms for indigenous participation in the new constitution and, throughout history, the state government has not recognized this right, on the contrary, in the case of Mapuche, their political decision-making capacity was suppressed through the military occupation of their territory via internal colonialism (González Casanova, 2006).
    A plurinational state does not imply the creation of another state in the country, but rather the transformation of the monocultural and unitary state through a new mandate that redistributes wealth in equal social, political and parity rights; one that recognizes the collective rights of the nine original nations and the Afro-descendant people, which are: territory, language, culture and knowledge, identity, political rights to autonomy, self-determination, and indigenous consultation. Collective rights are not whimsical indigenous demands, they are international norms and instruments issued by the United Nations, including ILO Convention 169, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, OAS (2016) and the Plan of Action on the American Declaration on Indigenous Peoples (2017-2021). The latter commits the member States to the creation of an institutional mechanism that will monitor the implementation of the American Declaration and that is capable of responding to serious problems in matters of land and resources, environmental protection, and self-government of the people, including the health and safety of indigenous women and children (ECLAC, 2017).
    The plurinational state must also be intercultural because the future constitution must embody the desire for coexistence and respect for indigenous peoples, violated by racism and discrimination from the hegemonic power and State violence and its genocidal and linguistic-genocidal policies. The intercultural aspect of the state will imply the knowledge and appreciation of the peoples in Chilean society and the establishment of dialogue policies - rather than repressive ones. This requires a permanent civic and public education that leads to knowing the peoples, knowing their languages, histories and philosophies, identifying their contributions to the country. The intercultural condition of the state will give common and collective sense to multi-nationality, allowing diverse identities and the appreciation of the country’s indigenous roots. In other words, the intercultural will favors the entire population by offering the possibility of developing skills, values, attitudes, and knowledge to live in interconnected worlds with so many languages and cultures, and thus, to be better equipped as citizens of the global and local world. Another great contribution will be to incorporate the value, respect for Mother Earth, and the recognition of non-human rights to water, air, mountains, and so on. All necessary measures to guarantee the life of the Earth and ourselves.
    Plurinationality has been installed recently on the continent as a possibility in Bolivia and Ecuador; there are other forms such as territorial autonomy on the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua with the Sumo, Rama, Miskito, and Garífuna peoples; administrative autonomy in the case of the Cuna people of Panama, and others. These are forms of indigenous government with various nuances. The Chilean experience will not be a copy of other constitutions, but a genuine form of mandate and government built by diverse actors that guarantee rights to all.
    The original nations of Chile have not renounced their rights, they were forced to do so under pressure by the imposition of laws and deception. The Chilean State signed treaties with the Mapuche people and violated them, promised constitutional recognition through the Indigenous Law (1993), and did not comply. A plurinational and intercultural constitution is necessary to change history. The indigenous struggle - and Mapuche in particular - are paradigmatic examples of defense of life, of the land, of cultures, and of the beautiful brownness that makes up the country. ...
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 38 m
    • Lesley McLachlan
      2021 Chilean Constitutional Convention election : An election for the members of the Constitutional Convention was held in Chile between 15 and 16 May 2021. ... This was the first time that Chilean citizens were able to vote for the members of the body created to write the Constitution. Although based originally in the system to elect the 155 members of the Chamber of Deputies, this election process established several changes. For the first time, 17 reserved seats were established for the 10 official indigenous groups. Also, different mechanisms in the inscription of candidates and the election system itself were designed to ensure gender parity in the Convention, being the first assembly of this kind in the world with equal representation of men and women.[7]
      The election's results were considered a surprise and a complete rearrangement of the political system in Chile established since the end of Pinochet's dictatorship in 1990. The majority of elected members were independent candidates organized in new lists. Although Chile Vamos, the governing alliance, was the most voted list in the country, it represented the lowest results in Chilean modern history for right-wing politics, not even reaching the third of members needed to veto in the Convention.[8][9] The successor to Concertación, the main centre-left alliance, finished in fourth place, being surpassed by the alliance made by the leftist Communist Party and the Broad Front.[10] The List of the People, an anti-establishment list of independent candidates, finished in third place. /// Tim Hall thank you.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 37 m
    • Lesley McLachlan
      ARQ (Santiago)
      On-line version ISSN 0717-6996
      ARQ (Santiago) no.106 Santiago Dec. 2020 : https://scielo.conicyt.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext... ... Coexistence between Chileans and The Mapuche. Chile, Plurinational and Intercultural State ... Carol Chatterton Fred Milligan Veronica Neghme Marcelo Andres Barrios Espinoza Susan Perring Maytexu Paz
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 35 m
      • Edited
  • Tim Hall
    Somehow we all have to get on with one another rather than continually dragging over hurts of the past. We will only all move forward together if we all focus on a shared future that both encourages friendly ways and discourages unfriendly ways. The past is past and it's important to focus on a more harmonious future.
    FRIENDLY WAYS
    SITES.GOOGLE.COM
    FRIENDLY WAYS
    FRIENDLY WAYS
    1
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 38 m
    • Lesley McLachlan
      United Kingdom : The United Kingdom consists of four countries: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.[21] Their capitals are London, Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast, respectively. Other than England, the constituent countries have their own devolved governments, each with varying powers.[22][23][24]
      The union between the Kingdom of England (which included Wales) and the Kingdom of Scotland in 1707 to form the Kingdom of Great Britain, followed by their union in 1801 with the Kingdom of Ireland, created the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Most of Ireland seceded from the UK in 1922, leaving the present formulation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, which formally adopted the name in 1927 to reflect the change.[note 12] ... /// Division of Korea : ... the division of Korea began in earnest at the end of the war in 1945 ... /// Cyprus : A separate Turkish Cypriot state in the north was established by unilateral declaration in 1983; the move was widely condemned by the international community, with Turkey alone recognising the new state. These events and the resulting political situation are matters of a continuing dispute.
      The Republic of Cyprus has de jure sovereignty over the entire island, including its territorial waters and exclusive economic zone, with the exception of the Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia, which remain under the UK's control according to the London and Zürich Agreements. However, the Republic of Cyprus is de facto partitioned into two main parts: the area under the effective control of the Republic, located in the south and west and comprising about 59% of the island's area, and the north,[29] administered by the self-declared Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, covering about 36% of the island's area. Another nearly 4% of the island's area is covered by the UN buffer zone. The international community considers the northern part of the island to be territory of the Republic of Cyprus occupied by Turkish forces.[h] The occupation is viewed as illegal under international law and amounting to illegal occupation of EU territory since Cyprus became a member of the European Union.[35] ...
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 30 m
    • Lesley McLachlan
      Cornish nationalism : Cornish nationalism is a cultural, political and social movement that seeks the recognition of Cornwall – the south-westernmost part of the island of Great Britain – as a nation distinct from England. It is usually based on three general arguments:
      that Cornwall has a Celtic cultural identity separate from that of England, and that the Cornish people have a national, civic or ethnic identity separate from that of English people;
      that Cornwall should be granted a degree of devolution or autonomy, usually in the form of a Cornish national assembly;[1]
      and that Cornwall is legally a territorial and constitutional Duchy with the right to veto Westminster legislation, not merely a county of England, and has never been formally incorporated into England via an Act of Union.
      Contents
      1 Autonomy movement
      2 Distinct cultural, national or ethnic identity
      3 Constitutional status
      3.1 The official position on the Duchy of Cornwall
      3.2 The rights of the Duchy of Cornwall
      3.3 County or country?
      4 Background
      4.1 History of the separate Cornish identity
      4.2 History of modern Cornish nationalism
      5 Support
      6 Political parties and pressure groups
      7 Political representation
      7.1 In Cornwall
      7.2 In the United Kingdom
      7.3 In Europe
      8 Violence
      9 See also
      10 References
      11 Further reading
      12 External links
      Autonomy movement
      See also: Cornish Assembly
      [icon]
      This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (March 2010)
      Cornish nationalists, such as Mebyon Kernow, generally seek some form of autonomy for Cornwall.
      In 2003, a Cornwall Councillor Bert Biscoe commissioned a researcher to see if self-governing practices used in Guernsey could be applied to Cornwall.[2]
      Distinct cultural, national or ethnic identity
      See also: Cornish people and Culture of Cornwall
      A street lined with shops is filled with hundreds of people. In the foreground are children wearing black vests each one defaced with a large white cross. The children surround a fiddler. In the background are spectators.
      St Piran's Day is an annual patronal Cornish festival celebrating Cornish culture and history every 5 March
      The percentage of respondents who gave "Cornish" as an answer to the National Identity question in the 2011 census.
      In 2001, campaigners prevailed upon the UK census to count Cornish ethnicity as a write-in option on the national census, although there was no separate Cornish tick box.[3] In 2004 school children in Cornwall could also record their ethnicity as Cornish on the schools census.
      In 2004, a campaign was started to field a Cornish national team in the 2006 Commonwealth Games. However, in 2006, the Commonwealth Games Federation stated that "Cornwall is no more than an English county".[4]
      The concept that the Cornish are a separate ethnicity is based on the Celtic origin and language of the Cornish, making them an ethnic minority distinct from people in the rest of England.[5]
      In 2011, an e-petition directed at Westminster was launched.
      "This petition calls for signatures to raise the issue of the "Cornish Identity" in Parliament and aims to have Cornwall recognised as a National Minority.."[6] This petition has now closed, it received 851 signatures, (99,149 less than the 100,000 needed for the matter to be considered for debate in the House of Commons.)
      In September 2011, George Eustice, Conservative Member of Parliament for Camborne and Redruth, argued that Cornwall's heritage should be administered by a Cornish organisation rather than English Heritage.[7]
      On 24 April 2014 the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Danny Alexander, announced that the Cornish people had been granted minority status under the Council of Europe's framework for the protection of national minorities,[8] the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities.
      Constitutional status
      See also: Constitutional status of Cornwall
      The official position on the Duchy of Cornwall ...
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 20 m
    • Lesley McLachlan
      County or country?
      On 15 May 2000 the Revived Cornish Stannary Parliament (CSP), a pressure group formed in 1974, dispatched an invoice to the chief officer of the Duchy of Cornwall, the Lord Warden of the Stannaries. This invoice demanded a refund of a calculated £20 billion overcharge in taxation on tin production from 1337 to 1837. This was calculated according to production figures and historic wealth calculation methods (from an unpublished thesis of a Harvard University undergraduate dating from 1908), and The Sunday Times Rich List, March 2000, respectively. Cornwall was charged at over twice the rate levied on the adjacent county of Devon. On 17 May 2000 The Guardian reported that the CSP claimed that the Duchy had levied an excess tax on tin production in Cornwall for five hundred years, and requested repayment within 120 days. The CSP argued that their action demonstrated how Cornwall was treated separately from England in the past, and thus should have special status today. They declared that if they received the money it would be spent on an agency to boost Cornwall's economy.[11]
      The Guardian went on to point out that the Duke of Cornwall himself, Charles the Prince of Wales is in effect trustee and cannot sell off the Duchy's assets thus he would have difficulty in paying the bill. Charles does not receive any money from the state. His financial stability comes from the £5m-£6m annual net surplus generated by the Duchy.[11]
      Background
      See also: History of Cornwall
      History of the separate Cornish identity
      At the time of King Canute, Cornwall fell outside his British realms.[12]
      In 936, Athelstan fixed Cornwall's eastern boundary at the Tamar.[13] The Italian scholar Polydore Vergil in his famous Anglica Historia, published in 1535, wrote that: 'the whole Countrie of Britain ...is divided into iiii partes; whereof the one is inhabited of Englishmen, the other of Scottes, the third of Wallshemen, [and] the fowerthe of Cornishe people, which all differ emonge them selves, either in tongue, ...in manners, or ells in lawes and ordinaunces.'[14] Writing in 1616, Arthur Hopton stated:'England is ...divided into 3 great Provinces, or Countries ...every of them speaking a several and different language, as English, Welsh and Cornish.'[14]
      During the Tudor period many travellers were clear that the Cornish were commonly regarded as a separate ethnic group. For example, Lodovico Falier, an Italian diplomat at the Court of Henry VIII, said, "The language of the English, Welsh and Cornish men is so different that they do not understand each other." He went on to give the alleged 'national characteristics' of the three peoples, saying for example 'the Cornishman is poor, rough and boorish'[14] Another notable example is Gaspard de Coligny Châtillon – the French Ambassador in London – who wrote saying that England was not a united whole as it 'contains Wales and Cornwall, natural enemies of the rest of England, and speaking a different language.'[14] In 1603, the Venetian ambassador wrote that the late queen had ruled over five different 'peoples': 'English, Welsh, Cornish, Scottish ...and Irish'.[14]
      It seems however that the recognition by outsiders of the Cornish as a separate people declined with the language, which by the 19th century had essentially ceased to be used. The modern revival of the language, which had almost died out,[15] has caused some interest in the concept of Cornish identity.
      History of modern Cornish nationalism
      Cornwall has had its own gorsedd, Gorseth Kernow, since 1928
      The history of modern Cornish nationalism goes back to the end of the 19th century. The failure of Irish home rule caused Gladstone's Liberal party to revise and make more relevant its devolution policy by advocating the idea of 'home rule all round' applying to Scotland and Wales but opening the door for Cornish Liberals to use cultural themes for political purposes.[16]
      In April 1889, Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, the Marquis of Salisbury (who served three times as Prime Minister) at a meeting of the Primrose League in Bristol, spoke on the state of the Union. At the time, an Irish Cabinet "with all the appurtenances of government" was being considered. He said that "if Ireland were granted a Parliament and a Cabinet, Scotland would demand a Parliament and a Cabinet, and Wales would do the same." However, "..if all these Parliaments were granted an unconstitutional injustice would be done to Cornwall, which was a separate country geographically.." going on to talk about Cornish identity and culture, "On these grounds, which were set up as good reasons for granting separate and independent Governments to other parts of the empire, the claims of Cornwall could not be overlooked to a separate and independent Government, and if it was to come about, he hoped that all the alliances of the commission Parliaments and Cabinets would be friendly to the British Government."[17]
      Henry Jenner was an important figure in early 20th-century Cornish national awareness. He made the case for Cornwall's membership in the Celtic Congress, pioneered the movement to revive the Cornish language, and founded the Cornish Gorseth.[18]
      Some intellectual support for Cornish self-government has come from the Institute of Cornish Studies, affiliated to the University of Exeter.[vague]
      In 2000, the Cornish Constitutional Convention launched a campaign for a Cornish Assembly. This was a cross-party movement representing many political voices and positions in Cornwall, from Mebyon Kernow and Cornish Solidarity to the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives. It collected over 50,000 petition signatures.[19] A similar petition was started online by Mebyon Kernow in 2014, along with a series of "Assembly Roadshows" . This only achieved 2655 signatures, (a significant minority of which were not from Cornwall,) leaving it far short of the 5000 needed.[20][21]
      On 14 July 2009, Dan Rogerson MP, of the Liberal Democrats, presented a Cornish 'breakaway' bill to the Parliament in Westminster – 'The Government of Cornwall Bill'. The bill proposes a devolved Assembly for Cornwall, similar to the Welsh and Scottish set up. The bill states that Cornwall should re-assert its rightful place within the United Kingdom. Rogerson argued that, "Cornwall should re-assert its rightful place within the United Kingdom. Cornwall is a unique part of the country, and this should be reflected in the way that it is governed. We should have the right to determine areas of policy that affect the people of Cornwall the hardest, such as rules on housing ... Cornwall has the right to a level of self-Government. If the Government is going to recognise the right of Scotland and Wales to greater self-determination because of their unique cultural and political positions, then they should recognise ours."[22][23][24][25]
      The Cornish independence movement received unexpected publicity in 2004, when Channel 4's Alternative Christmas message, featuring the Simpsons, showed Lisa Simpson chanting Free Cornwall Now! / Rydhsys rag Kernow lemmyn ! ("Freedom for Cornwall now!") and holding a placard saying "UK OUT OF CORNWALL".[26][27
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 19 m
    • Lesley McLachlan
      Devolution : Devolution is the statutory delegation of powers from the central government of a sovereign state to govern at a subnational level, such as a regional or local level.[1] It is a form of administrative decentralization. Devolved territories have the power to make legislation relevant to the area and thus granting them a higher level of autonomy.[2]
      Devolution differs from federalism in that the devolved powers of the subnational authority may be temporary and are reversible, ultimately residing with the central government. Thus, the state remains de jure unitary. /// Devolution in the United Kingdom : In the United Kingdom, devolution is the Parliament of the United Kingdom's statutory granting of a greater level of self-government to the Scottish Parliament, the Senedd (Welsh Parliament), the Northern Ireland Assembly and the London Assembly and to their associated executive bodies ...
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 17 m
  • Lesley McLachlan
    Tino rangatiratanga : Tino rangatiratanga is a Māori language term that is often translated as "absolute sovereignty".[1] It appears in the Māori version of the Treaty of Waitangi, signed by the British Crown and Māori chiefs (rangatira) in 1840.
    The Treaty says:[2]
    Ko te tuarua
    Ko te Kuini o Ingarani ka wakarite ka wakaae ki nga Rangatira ki nga hapu - ki nga tangata katoa o Nu Tirani te tino rangatiratanga o o ratou wenua o ratou kainga me o ratou taonga katoa.
    The literal translation (by Professor I H Kawharu, published in Report of the Royal Commission on Social Policy, Wellington, 1988 [2]) of the above says:
    The Second
    The Queen of England agrees to protect the Chiefs, the subtribes and all the people of New Zealand in the unqualified exercise of their chieftainship over their lands, villages and all their treasures.
    It has become one of the most contentious phrases in retrospective analyses of the Treaty amid debate surrounding the obligations that were agreed to by each signatory.[3][4] The phrase features in current historical and political discourse on race relations in New Zealand and is widely used by Māori advocacy groups. A flag based on tino rangatiratanga was designed in 1990 and has become accepted as a national flag for Māori groups across New Zealand.[5]
    Contents
    1 Origins and etymology
    2 Treaty of Waitangi
    3 Flag ... /// Māori protest movement : The Māori protest movement is a broad indigenous-rights movement in New Zealand (Aotearoa). While there were a range of conflicts between Māori and Europeans prior to the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840, the signing provided a legal context for protesting, as the Treaty of Waitangi made New Zealand a British colony with British law and governance applying. The British authorities had drafted the Treaty with the intention of establishing a British Governor of New Zealand, recognising Māori ownership of their lands, forests and other possessions, and giving Māori the rights of British subjects. However, the Māori and English texts of the Treaty differ in meaning significantly; particularly in relation to the meaning of having and ceding sovereignty. These discrepancies, and the subsequent colonisation by the British, led to disagreements in the decades following the signing, including full-out warfare.
    In its modern form, the Māori protest movement emerged in the early 1970s[1] as part of a broader Māori renaissance and has focused on issues such as the redressing Treaty of Waitangi grievances, Māori land-rights, the Māori language, culture, and racism. It has generally allied with the left wing, although it differs from the mainstream left in a number of ways. Most members of the movement have been Māori but it has attracted some support from pākehā (non-Māori) New Zealanders and internationally, particularly from other indigenous peoples. Notable successes of the movement include establishment of the Waitangi Tribunal in 1975, the return of some Māori land, and the Māori language becoming an official language of New Zealand in 1987.
    Contents
    1 Background
    2 The Māori Affairs Amendment Act
    3 Sporting contact with South Africa
    4 Waitangi Day protests
    5 Māori language and culture activism
    6 The Treaty of Waitangi
    6.1 The Treaty to the mid 20th century
    6.2 Campaign for ratification
    6.3 "The Treaty is a Fraud"
    6.4 Activism and the Tribunal
    7 Land
    7.1 Bastion Point
    7.2 Raglan Golf Course
    7.3 1975 Land March
    8 Resurgence of protest on land and Treaty issues from the 1990s
    8.1 Fiscal envelope
    8.2 Pākaitore
    8.3 Takahue
    8.4 Huntly
    8.5 Ihumātao
    9 Foreshore and Seabed
    10 Te Mana Motuhake o Tuhoe
    10.1 Te Urupatu
    10.2 Anti-terror raids
    10.2.1 Arrests and following court cases
    11 Campaign to fly the Tino Rangatiratanga flag
    11.1 Sanctioned uses of the Tino Rangatiratanga Flag
    12 See also
    13 Notes
    14 Bibliography
    Background
    Although a large proportion of chiefs had signed the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840, there were almost immediately disagreement over British sovereignty of the country, ...
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 26 m
  • Lesley McLachlan
    Indigenous rights : Indigenous rights are those rights that exist in recognition of the specific condition of the indigenous peoples. This includes not only the most basic human rights of physical survival and integrity, but also the rights over their land (including native title), language, religion, and other elements of cultural heritage that are a part of their existence and identity as a people. This can be used as an expression for advocacy of social organizations, or form a part of the national law in establishing the relation between a government and the right of self-determination among its indigenous people, or in international law as a protection against violation of indigenous rights by actions of governments or groups of private interests.
    Contents
    1 Definition and historical background
    2 Representation
    2.1 International organizations
    2.2 United Nations
    2.3 ILO 169
    2.4 Organization of American States
    2.5 By country
    2.5.1 Australia
    2.5.2 Canada
    2.5.3 Denmark
    3 See also
    4 References
    5 External links
    Definition and historical background
    Indigenous rights belong to those who, being indigenous peoples, are defined by being the original people of a land that has been conquered and colonized by outsiders.[1][2][3][4]
    Exactly who is a part of the indigenous peoples is disputed, but can broadly be understood in relation to colonialism. ...
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 16 m
  • Lesley McLachlan
    American Indian boarding schools : Native American boarding schools, also known as Indian Residential Schools, were established in the United States during the early 19th and mid 20th centuries with a primary objective of "civilizing" or assimilating Native American children and youth into Euro-American culture, while destroying and vilifying Native American culture.[1] At the same time a basic education in Euro-American subjects was provided. These boarding schools were first established by Christian missionaries of various denominations, who often started schools on reservations,[2] especially in the lightly populated areas of the West. The government paid religious orders to provide basic education to Native American children on reservations in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) founded additional boarding schools based on the assimilation model of the off-reservation with the last residential schools closing as late as 1973.[citation needed] Off reservation schools such as St. Joseph's Indian School in South Dakota continue to operate.
    Children were typically immersed in European-American culture through forced changes that removed indigenous cultural signifiers. These methods included being forced to have European-American style haircuts, being forbidden to speak their Indigenous languages, and having their real names replaced by European names to both "civilize" and "Christianize" them.[3] The experience of the schools was usually harsh and sometimes deadly, especially for the younger children who were forcibly separated from their families. The children were forced to abandon their Native American identities and cultures.[3] Investigations of the later twentieth century have revealed many documented[4] cases of sexual, manual, physical and mental abuse occurring mostly in church-run[5] schools. In summarizing the recent scholarship from Native perspectives, Dr. Julie Davis argues:
    Perhaps the most fundamental conclusion that emerges from boarding school histories is the profound complexity of their historical legacy for Indian people's lives. The diversity among boarding school students in terms of age, personality, family situation, and cultural background created a range of experiences, attitudes, and responses. Boarding schools embodied both victimization and agency for Native people and they served as sites of both cultural loss and cultural persistence. These institutions, intended to assimilate Native people into mainstream society and eradicate Native cultures, became integral components of American Indian identities and eventually fueled the drive for political and cultural self-determination in the late 20th century.[6]
    Since those years, tribal nations have increasingly insisted on community-based schools and have also founded numerous tribal colleges and universities. Community schools have also been supported by the federal government through the BIA and legislation. The largest boarding schools have closed. By 2007, most of the schools had been closed down and the number of Native American children in boarding schools had declined to 9,500. During this same period, more Native Americans moved to urban environments accommodating in varying degrees and manners to majority culture; Contents
    1 History of education of Native Americans
    2 Non-reservation boarding schools
    3 Carlisle Indian Industrial School
    4 Legality
    5 Meriam Report of 1928
    6 Disease and death
    7 Implications of assimilation
    8 List of Native American boarding schools
    9 See also
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 13 m
    • Lesley McLachlan
      Native schools : In New Zealand, native schools were established to provide education for Māori. The first schools for Māori children were established by the Church Missionary Society (CMS) in the Bay of Islands after the arrival of the CMS in 1814. Bi… 
      See more
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 11 m
  • Lesley McLachlan
    Settler colonialism : ... Despite the end of the European colonial empires, settler populations typically remain. In this way, settler colonialism lasts indefinitely, except in the rare event of complete evacuation or settler decolonization.[3]
    Settler colonialism is generally discussed[by whom?] in terms of the one-way flow of British values, which overtake and repudiate the culture and history of the location in question.[4] Transnational and global studies of settler colonialism often give more importance to the histories of British emigrants rather than of the displaced indigenous peoples. Legal proceedings in Australia and Canada have challenged settler rights, highlighting the lasting effects of colonial takeovers, and the continued displacement of Indigenous peoples at the start of the twenty-first century. In the United States, Western Australia and South Africa, governments used land allotment as a legal way to take possession of indigenous peoples' land.[5]
    Contents
    1 Ancient world
    1.1 Greek colonization
    1.2 Rome
    2 Middle Ages
    2.1 Germany
    2.2 Japan
    3 In early modern and modern times
    3.1 In the Americas
    3.1.1 Settler colonialism in the United States
    3.2 Afghanistan
    3.3 Nepal
    3.4 Vietnam
    3.5 Indonesia
    3.6 Ireland
    3.7 China
    3.8 Philippines
    3.9 Bangladesh
    3.10 Russia
    3.11 Japan
    3.12 Taiwan
    3.13 Nazi Germany
    3.14 In Oceania
    3.14.1 Australia
    3.14.2 New Zealand
    3.14.3 New Caledonia
    3.15 In Africa
    3.15.1 South Africa
    3.15.2 Liberia
    3.16 In the Middle East
    3.16.1 Ba'athist Iraq
    3.16.2 Northern Cyprus
    3.16.3 Nakhchivan and Nagorno-Karabakh
    3.16.4 Zionism and Israel;  Settler colonialism is a form of colonialism that seeks to replace[1] the original population of the colonized territory with a new society of settlers.[citation needed] As with all forms of colonialism, it is based on exogenous domination, typically organized or supported by an imperial authority.[2] Settler colonialism is enacted by a variety of means ranging from violent depopulation of the previous inhabitants to more subtle, legal means such as assimilation or recognition of indigenous identity within a colonial framework.[3] Settler colonialism contrasts with exploitation colonialism, which entails a national economic policy of conquering a country to exploit its population as cheap or free labor and its natural resources as raw material.
    Unlike other forms of colonialism, the imperial power does not always represent the same nationality as the settlers. However, the colonizing authority generally views the settlers as racially superior to the previous inhabitants, which may give settlers' social movements and political demands greater legitimacy than those of colonized peoples in the eyes of the home colonies, whereas natural and human resources are the main motivation behind other forms of colonialism[citation needed]. ...
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 10 m
    • Lesley McLachlan
      Settler society : Settler society is a theoretical term in early modern and modern history that describes a common link between modern, predominantly European, attempts to permanently settle in other areas of the world. It is used to distinguish settler colonies from resource extraction colonies. The term came to wide use in the 1970s as part of the discourse on decolonization, particularly to describe older colonial units.[1]
      Contents
      1 Examples
      2 Province of men
      3 List of settler societies
      4 See also
      5 References
      6 Bibliography
      Examples
      One of the earliest examples of settler society was the Crusaders' Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, which lasted for almost 200 years. It constituted a localized feudal hierarchy established by the Franks, who ruled and exploited the territory according to their political and economic interests.[2] The settler society became one of the schemes used by the British empire to expand its imperial territories, particularly by the 1830s.[3] It became successful due to the demobilization of soldiers and sailors after the conclusion of the war with the Napoleonic France and the improved conditions of month-long voyages for people to start a new life.[3] This is demonstrated in the case of Australia, which initially was a destination for British convicts but eventually became a settler destination as it offered attractions such as the availability of unpaid labor and land on a scale the excited the British settlers.
      Province of men
      As a traditional model of comparative analysis, it has been described as the means by which white male settlers heroically conquers a land and established democracies of one sort or another.[4] This particular conceptualization has been criticized for ignoring issues such as race, ethnicity, and gender. However, it is noted that while the concept of settler society is structured along traditional gender lines, women settlers enjoyed favorable competitive position in comparison to their counterparts in the metropole.[5] For instance, an administrator's wife or a female teacher was able to attain wider social recognition in settler societies.[5]
      List of settler societies
      Australia
      Argentina
      Canada
      Chile
      New Zealand
      United States
      Uruguay
      Israel
      Turkey
      South Africa
      Taiwan
      Hawaii
      Northern Ireland
      Macau
      Puerto Rico
      Rhodesia
      See also
      Settler colonialism /// Colony : The Special Committee on Decolonization maintains the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories, which identifies areas the United Nations (though not without controversy) believes are colonies. Given that dependent territories have varying degrees of autonomy and political power in the affairs of the controlling state, there is disagreement over the classification of "colony". /// Colonialism : ... In the aftermath of World War II colonial powers were forced to retreat between 1945 and 1975, when nearly all colonies gained independence, entering into changed colonial, so-called postcolonial and neocolonialist relations. ...
      • Like
      • Reply
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)