A Clash of Cultures in Canada: Friction and Reconciliation Between Indigenous Peoples and Capitalism
A Clash of Cultures in Canada: Friction and Reconciliation Between Indigenous Peoples and Capitalism
Achieving “Legitimized” Control Within Canada_________________________________
Effects of the Law on Indigenous Peoples Within Canada_________________________
Reimagining Canada’s Future_____________________________________________________
“Non-Indigenous legal traditions exert violence on Indigenous legal traditions by insisting that its interpretation of law is authoritative and excluding alternate interpretations.”
“We must ensure that the order we seek to dismantle, and it must be dismantled, is reconstituted with a sustained vision of respectable relations that does not deny their genealogy. It is necessary for all of us to move beyond any crippling sense of finality in our relations, and any despairing of colonial power as totalizing. It must be asserted that a decolonized future is possible. Yet, I maintain the ultimate meaning of decolonization, liberated spaces of living and identification for Indigenous peoples, is for them to decide.”
Settlers, colonialism and capitalism have operated in Canada to delegitimize Indigenous identity politics through projecting and ensuring the perception of Indigenous individuals as subordinate and dependent on the state. The foundations and structures of Canadian policies have had a cumulatively negative impact on the majority of Canadians, however, Indigenous groups have been pushed to the fringes of society to suffer the most. First through colonization, followed by settler-colonialism, and now within capitalist imperialism – Canadian governments have promoted class differences within society for the benefit of the international capitalist class. Indigenous peoples and their land have been exploited for the advantage of the dominant class, first through the creation of seemingly mutual alliances, followed by an onslaught of oppressive measures used to entrench power in newcomers and forever change the future of the geographic space now called Canada.
As Leroy Little Bear said “The Earth is where the continuous and/or repetitive process of creation occurs. It is on the Earth and from the Earth that cycles, phases, patterns, in other words the constant flux and motion can be observed and experienced. In other words, creation is a continuity, and if creation is to continue, then it must be renewed, and consequently, the renewal ceremonies, the telling and re-telling of the creation stories, the singing and re-singing of songs, which are the humans’ part in the maintenance of creation. Hence, the annual sundance, the societal ceremonies, the unbundling of medicine bundles at certain phases of the year.” People must reaffirm continuity by observing the world holistically and finding patterns out of constant movement. The Canadian legal system claims to achieve this through its constitutional doctrine of the ‘living tree’ whereby the law is gradually changed through the creation of legislative acts and binding judicial decisions. If Canada continues its prior repetition practices (i.e. following its own legal precedent), its majority of citizens can expect further oppression at the benefit of the wealthy; however, if Canada can find a way to reposition its legal system, by grafting a new branch onto its tree or realizing the end of its lifecycle – Canadians can eventually develop a sustainable, equitable system that benefits all of society.
This paper will examine the foundational clash between capitalistic and Indigenous cultures within Canada with an eye towards the current government’s goals of reconciliation. It is important to note that this author is a Canadian-born citizen with Canadian and British education, and a Bachelor of Commerce with a focus in finance, international trade and macroeconomics. The terms used herein describing Indigenous groups and peoples should be noted to refer to collectives of First Nations, Inuit and Métis. Reconciliation goals also may be viewed as a form of power-domination through recognition of Indigenous subordination which ensures future dependency on the government.
My motivations behind writing this paper stem from my academic background which has caused me to question the scientific accuracy of capitalistic concepts embedded in the economic theories to which Canadian governments have subscribed. When introduced to sociological concepts of social class and income inequality, I understood that our current state of neoliberalism (as described by Marx) was unsustainable which could lead to a devastating future for Canadian society and sought a legal education to be able to achieve policy reform to create a sustainable, accountable, and future-oriented government. After learning about the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the further injustices experienced by Indigenous communities, I sought to uphold the Calls to Action and educate myself towards gaining a more nuanced perspective. Since learning of the development of the Canadian economic and legal systems, it has become clear to me that Canadian society must find a way to discuss and achieve reconciliation within a more open and creative environment – which seems difficult within the current political and legal experiences in Canada and therefore requires a revolutionary way of observing reality.
In an attempt to demonstrate the continued genocide of indigenous persons in Canada, I will refrain from referring to Indigenous peoples as a collective ‘nation’ which has and is being used and understood in a Eurocentric context which may have negative future implications if this paper is to be published. Indigenous persons as an ethnos are described as distributed across ‘regions’ within Canada, and are disadvantaged by capitalistic, racial and spatial legislation. This paper may hopefully be used in future to achieve an organization of persons affected who may achieve policy reform; I attempt a demonstration of how Western / Eurocentric understandings of issues may explain the benefits of a new view for Canada’s future.
Achieving “Legitimized” Control Within Canada
“They came to the new lands with capitalism ‘in their bones’” The socio-political ideology of capitalism was woven from the European settlers’ mercantilist culture imposed upon the geographic space now called Canada. Settlers established colonies within this space through pioneering endeavours which have been depicted as occupying ‘empty-settings’ and characterised by a disavowal of the presence and persistence of Indigenous peoples. Maps were used as a “form of disciplinary power used by colonial governments to provide a textual tangibility to Indigenous landscapes and re-story the historical ambiguity of Indigenous sovereignty with a European spatial order.”
Governments further imposed paternal domination upon Indigenous groups to delegitimize Indigenous women to negotiate with the preferred males who were unable to sell land under Indigenous legal traditions. Therefore, it can be inferred that any and all land claims negotiated in this fashion should be legally null-and-void and ‘ownership’ returned to the wronged parties. Unfortunately, the Canadian legal system has been twisted to reject this proposal, and instead further delegitimize Indigenous persons in order to secure them as subordinates to Canadian sovereignty.
“Imposed Canadian Jurisdiction over Aboriginal peoples has created multiple barriers, especially among Aboriginal women, and the tradition of isolating and oppressing the true caretakers of the land continues today” but “one cannot separate the oppression of Indigenous women from the oppression of entire Indigenous nations, governing systems, families and communities.”
A grouping of European colonies has evolved into an internationally-recognized sovereign country with a responsible federalist government which depends on the capitalist ideology – using a legal system established in Canada to enforce capitalistic ideology and (often violently) condemn those who oppose it.
The second stage of ‘settler colonialism’ has been described as having “closed off the possibility for maintaining independent modes of life” for Indigenous peoples. It is viewed as an ongoing, uncompromising form of colonialism characterised by enhanced aggression and exploitation. The three internal development characteristics include: (1) Colonization: extermination of the colonized; (2) Assimilation: transfer of culture from ‘donor’ to ‘host’; and (3) Neither extermination nor assimilation: either living side-by-side or apart.
This was achieved by the Canadian government’s use of food rations as a coercive tool which amounted to ‘ethnic cleansing’, their spread of tuberculosis perpetuated by their prevention of humanitarian aid, and a decline in Indigenous populations on Reservations due to malnutrition.
The Canadian constitution was adopted from England in 1867 with an intentionally confusing division of powers, half of which included explicitly capitalistic concepts, which would bind ultimate control to a British parliament. The ideology of capitalism requires a common medium of exchange (currency); a method to control the value of currency (banking); a method of obtaining private property to competitively exploit a means of production for profit; and the capability to accumulate and hold capital. Within the capitalist system “markets” exist for goods, whereby goods producers compete within a “price-system” where prices for goods are determined by the equilibrium between supply and demand. The price-system has proven to be a flawed measurement of value within which government intervention is a feared concept.
“Private property rights reiterate whiteness as the norm, constraining Indigenous forms of life and sovereignty.” Private-property and exclusionary rights lie at the heart of capitalism and are closely guarded in the Canadian legal system. Those who seek to violate these rights face stringent legal battles or are punished for doing so. This is due to the capitalist presumption that the concept of private-property is essential to maximizing efficiency and productivity, and achieving continual economic growth and accumulation of wealth – the ultimate goal of the capitalist. This results in a system of individuals socialized to expect exponential growth, an unnatural concept outside of controlled laboratory conditions which have been proven to be unsustainable without an unlimited supply of resources. This system also claims to rely on the ‘invisible-hand’ of the investment market, however, as wealth becomes concentrated, so too does the power able to exert force upon this ‘invisible-hand’. Because Canadian governments do not possess the ability to provide an unlimited supply of resources, the entire system upon which the Canadian government is built, and within which it operates, is unsustainable from a domestic perspective. Furthermore, universal claims of productively engaged land assets through private property rights are “racially charged as Western culture is portrayed as an inevitable trajectory, not in the sense of a future perfect Indigenous population, but by revising history to conflate prosperous intra-national trade, enterprise, and personal property in Indigenous societies with the social relations of capitalist society today.”
The rise of settler colonialism broke-down inter-Indigenous connections, which is central to histories of elimination. This may also be explained by a system of ‘internal colonization described through five stages of government national policies by their:
- Establishing power in the North and West by purchasing the Hudson’s Bay chartered land, and using North West Territories Act and Mounted Police to take control over and direct the pace and nature of development of the land. These new ‘public’ lands were then used to enlist private capital to promote settlement.
- Removing Indigenous populations from developable land through the reservation system, the Indian Act and legal treaties, which effectively would “extinguish” Indigenous title and presence and marginalize and dispossess Indigenous populations in the name of Western-Canadian development.
- Creating transportation and communication links, especially through underwriting railway projects and guaranteeing the Canadian Pacific Railway a virtual monopoly over Western transportation.
- Facilitating white settlement using a ‘Dominion Lands’ policy which saw 90% of potential Western homestead land taken-up and settled by 1914.
- Expanding internal markets using tariff increases, which ensured subordination of the provincial regions and eventually would expose Canadian society to a particular vulnerability to the Great Depression.
“Property has been a central organizing principle in Indigenous societies since long before white contact.” Confederation marked a massive victory for the capitalist-class of settlers – securing their power by subordinating others and committing them to a future dependant on their success – and it seems the difficulty and embarrassment associated with admitting that the concepts underlying everything settlers have done in the past was wrong is preventing Canada from taking meaningful steps towards a true reunion.
My prior research on the development of the Canadian state depicts the effects of confederation which ensured British dominance over Canadian economic and legal systems for as long as could be allowed. Once integrated into a greater international capitalist economy, imperialism over Canada’s economic and legal policies shifted to the United States of America. The government is required to maintain this system, as capitalism requires international trade to fill-in resource gaps created by its need for exponential growth. The policies adopted by governments have allowed for wealthy foreign actors to access and exploit Canada’s geographic space thereby reducing ultimate governmental accountability for facilitating the takeover of Indigenous peoples’ lands.
My recent research has reoriented my view towards regional impacts from federal national economic decisions which were facially either spatial or non-spatial policies. Canadian regions have been disadvantaged and confined to economic subordination historically characterized by resource extraction and staples-exploitation of goods; Atlantic provinces fish, Central provinces manufacture, and Western provinces engage in mining and harvesting grains. This inflexibility is due to a convergence of Canadian law and politics ultimately found in the spatial-constructs of the division of powers entrenched in the Constitution Act, 1867, and non-spatial capitalist macroeconomic policies. Furthermore, none of this could have been achieved if not for the Canadian settler governments’ genocidal actions towards Indigenous peoples and their cultures – often described as economic development ‘for the good of the nation’.
Over time, the settler capitalist ideology has deteriorated Canadian society into a state of neoliberalism. This state is described as experienced by a political dedication to increasing the role of the private sector in the economy and society. The effects often become a narrowing of industry and competition as wealthy corporations consume smaller innovators in order to cater to the capitalists’ desires of exponential profit growth. Put another way, wealth distribution becomes depicted as a triangular hierarchy – concentrated though accumulation by a small number of individuals. Neoliberalism offers a singular path to prosperity, and “works through the cultural recognition of Indigenous difference.” The ‘politics of recognition’ involve delegation of land, capital, and political power from the state to Indigenous communities through land claims, economic development initiatives and self-government processes – whose rise in discourse would coincide with profound global reactions to Keynesian macroeconomic policies.
“Another popular neoliberal solution to resolve the global ‘Indian problem’ of competing ownership claims has been the promotion of free market policies to bring Indigenous lands into the circulation of capital markets.” This necessarily involves privatization of Indigenous lands which would not equate to a transfer of ownership in the traditional sense of public versus private, but rather the transfer of one social system to another: in this case exchanging colonial regulatory oversight to a more capitalist-oriented real estate market.
Effects of the Law on Indigenous Peoples Within Canada
As Canada formed, it was at the expense of those who had occupied those lands prior to its exploitation by capitalists. Those who owned and or controlled the factors of production secured domination through the destruction and segregation of indigenous peoples. This was achieved using Canadian laws, born and bred by England, as well as government policies which effectively socialized the whole of society towards a wage-labour economy, subordinate to the owners and controllers of capital and land.
Indigenous peoples have been subjected to deplorable acts by settlers and Canadian governments through the destruction of their ecosystems and food-sources, the intentional causation of death through withholding healthcare, the forced cultural assimilation and degradation through residential schools and other “Indian” policies, the dispossession of entitlement to cultural status and forced sterilization of indigenous women, the imposition of poverty, the prevention of publication of academic research, the restriction and revocation of mutual agreements between societies, the use of economic development policies regarding the price-system, and numerous other acts which should be addressed appropriately.
Green describes self-government as “necessary but not sufficient”, and believes (like many) that Canadian federalism must be transformed to include a third legal order – Aboriginal Government Jurisdiction. As noted by Pasternick, the conservative-preferred ‘Gitxsan Alternative’ of termination of a community’s standing as an ‘Indian Band’ ensures that Indigenous and capitalist governments’ fates will be linked as “revenues from resources are collected by governments indirectly, from industry; therefore private sector accumulation must be facilitated in order to collect monies from licenses and royalties” Furthermore, for Canadian governments “undermining distinct Indigenous rights also serves to weaken state obligations to these communities, reducing pressure on the public purse.” In the case of Musqueam Indian Band v Glass, Indigenous land values were reduced due to their “Aboriginal status”, which was associated with issues with taxation, servicing, and uncertainty about the Aboriginal interest, ultimately concluded by the Supreme Court of Canada in their decision to discount rents leasehold rents owed to the band by 50%.
Unfortunately, the fear of social and cultural death at the hands of settler-state interference is tangible in the decision-making of Indigenous communities. It impacts the ways in which political decisions are made, especially in regards to formal membership and issues regarding race-based legislation. Furthermore, the layered subjugation of Indigenous peoples across a myriad of government actions, especially regarding education, instills a greater fear. The Nunavut Land Claim Agreement established the Nunavut Arctic Community College (NACC), the only postsecondary institution available within this disperse land. I regard Guriria’s paper with skepticism, as the college is not duly described as an assimilation technique. In attempting to keep up with the pace of change while preoccupied with an institutional commitment to Inuit peoples, NACC is described as being anchored in the present realities of economic imperatives and therefore not dismissive of capitalist interests.
Casimir describes the clash between non- and Indigenous legal traditions as incommensurable, or immeasurable using a similar standard. By recognizing this reality, Canadians actually promote the continued existence of a multiplicity of normative legal narratives and respect for reality that is not oriented in the same direction. “Our legal system resists recognition of incommensurability because it is premised on the notion that there are universal values that are equally valid and true for every person in Canada.”
Capitalism’s grasp must be removed, prying finger by finger is the least-violent method of achieving reconciliation between irreconcilable beliefs. Standing side-by-side is a more appropriate stance than repeating capitalistic claims of ‘standing behind them’ thereby allowing a firm-grasp on the direction of Indigenous communities. Canadian non-indigenous legal traditions’ dominance must necessarily be displaced in order to achieve sustainability. To eschew capitalism is to avoid an eventual collapse in society whereby the value of a good can be unnaturally grown or reduced to nothing by the most powerful decision makers. To embrace Indigenous legal-traditions is to embrace a natural understanding of the valuation of natural things.
A true re-allocation of power in Indigenous government may be the only way to re-orient the Canadian legal system for domestic benefit. A massive organizational movement would be necessary for Indigenous communities to collectively enable constitutional change in Canada, especially given the amendment formulae provided by the British government and the first Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. A repeal and replacement of the constitution will eventually be necessary for a proper reimagining of the future for Canadian governments, however this is a long-term goal. Since speed is necessary, a more efficient process might be to seek an amendment regarding property which could result in a reimagining of “Canadian” space, and should result in achieving future goals of a sustainable society – whose participants will have to be actively engaged in the process of reconciliation within the unignorably capitalistic interdependency in Canada. This would necessarily involve (re)assigning constitutional legislative authority over all forms of property in Canada, and may expectedly be met with resistance. However, by recognizing that all Canadian land and property laws must conform to Indigenous legal principles the capitalist’s foundational pillar of private-property will begin to be eroded, and social behaviour will begin its adaptation towards reconciliation.
Reimagining Canada’s Future
One of my favourite valuation systems was developed by American academics following the Great Depression and used scientific understandings of energy (measured in Joules) to allocate a static, inherent value to goods. The system of ‘Technocracy’ embraced progressive bureaucratic, scientific and legal principles to create an intuitive government framework, which in its whole possessed some flaws in its authoritative perception. However, its valuation system poses interesting solutions to the inherent biases within our current understandings of currency and banking. Inflation risks are removed as the laws of physics provide that the energy contained within an object is a constant not a variable, and as efficiency increases the energy used decreases thereby ensuring that consumers can only benefit from development. The volatility of currency, as well as capitalist valuation of goods is susceptible to manipulation. The scientific understanding of energy-valuation of goods, if proper principles are upheld, will provide a naturally stable and understandable foundation upon which to achieve a possibility of reconciliation of one of the most basic social behaviours – establishing a collective, revolutionary valuation model.
A focus on the most efficient form of achieving effective change through the reassignment of constitutional legislative power over property could instantly ensure sustainability in Canada, and would create a more dynamic environment for legal change.
By conforming property laws to Indigenous legal principles, Canada can expect improvements in relation to issues long debated regarding environmentalism, sustainability and growth, community- and future-focused natural laws, equitable distribution, sharing accountability, gender disparities, genocide and discrimination.
Current possessors and occupiers of property need-not fear, as future costs would decrease through the eventual equitable provision of community services. They will fear, as any would, a disruption of power; Capitalism’s necessity of exponential growth ensures that those enthralled in wealth will continue to strive to accumulate more, which inevitably involves sharing less. However, the risk of capitalism’s demise increases as wealth is concentrated, since a new majority might form which could achieve the unthinkably difficult process of constitutional reform.
The capitalist characteristics within the constitution serve as anchoring mechanisms to which Canadian non-indigenous legal traditions hinge its values. These values inherently discriminate against Indigenous peoples and therefore must be removed to truly achieve reconciliation. Macroeconomic policies decided for the general ‘good of the nation’ inherently discriminate by ignoring any distinct, regional involvement and needs of Indigenous peoples in the economy. Canadian Human Rights’ legislation has been explicitly discriminatory by negating access to Indigenous peoples on-reserve, and in cases of the conflictions between the Indian Act and the Bill of Rights has had its usability suspended in fear of further loss of Indigenous power. Section 35 of the Constitution Act has been used by the judiciary to circumscribe Indigenous peoples’ ability to maintain their culture, the opposite facial interpretation of its reading.
Indigenous legal traditions are incommensurable with non-indigenous legal traditions and an integration or view of commensurability of these in Canada attracts risk of assimilation. The foundations of Canadian legal traditions are situated in the values of the capitalist class – entrenched in the Canadian constitution. Reconciliation can be achieved with an elimination of historical power imbalances by reimagining a constitutional framework that holds regional indigenous legal traditions on an equal or higher level than non-indigenous legal traditions.
A change in constitutional responsibility for land in Canada could be a catalyst which may avoid future risks of assimilation if accomplished responsibly. At minimum, a full ownership right to Indigenous lands on par with those rights held by the Crown would at minimum allow Indigenous peoples to fundamentally control the capitalist modes of production and in-turn shape their future within the current system.
Indigenous groups, if organized, might use the TRC report to reciprocate class imbalances, however, with property laws conforming to Indigenous legal traditions, the combined institutional and societal shifts may be sufficient to change the majority’s behavioural attitudes towards such change. A future where constitutional amendments may be achieved using the unanimity formula could develop through this framework as domestic regions would necessarily become interconnected with mutually-beneficial goals.
Capitalism should be viewed as a broken system which ensures that poverty exists as a coercive tool to socialize society to behave by prioritizing individual accumulation over community benefits. Indigenous communities in power could help reverse this trend to create a new Canada which is domestically controlled and serves those within its local regions first and foremost.
Constitution Act, 1867 (UK), 30 & 31 Vict, c 3, reprinted in RSC 1985, Appendix II, No 5.
Indian Act, RSC 1985, c I-5.
Angela Sterritt, Racialization of poverty: Indigenous women, the Indian Act and systemic oppression: reasons for resistance (Vancouver: Vancouver Status of Women, 2007).
Colin Samson, Carlos Gigoux, Indigenous Peoples and Colonialism: Global Perspectives (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2017).
Heather Castleden et al, “‘I Don’t Think that Any Peer Review Committee… Would Ever ‘Get’ What I Currently Do’: How Institutional Metrics for Success and Merit Risk Perpetuating the (Re)production of Colonial Relationships in Community-Based Participatory Research Involving Indigenous Peoples in Canada” (2015) 6:4 Int’l Indigenous Pol’y J 6.
Janie Brodie, The Political Economy of Canadian Regionalism (Toronto: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1990).
John Borrows, “Aboriginal Tile and Private Property” (2015) 71:2 SCLR 91.
Joyce Green, “Decolonizing in the era of globalization” (2002) 36:2 Canadian Dimension 31.
Kelly Aguirre, The Anti-Colonial Imperative and Postcolonial Prerogative of Indigenous Identity Politics in Canada (MA Thesis, University of Manitoba Faculty of Graduate Studies, 2009).
Kirsten Manley-Casimir, “Incommensurable Legal Cultures: Indigenous Legal Traditions and the Colonial Narrative” (2012) 31 Windsor YB Access Just 137.
Leroy Little Bear, “Jagged Worldviews Colliding” in Marie Battiste, ed, Reclaiming Indigenous Voices and Vision (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2000) 77.
Lorenzo Veracini, “’Settler Colonialism’: Career of a Concept” (2013) 41:2 J Imperial & Commonwealth History 313.
Matthew Wildcat, “Fearing social and cultural death: genocide and elimination in settler colonial Canada – an Indigenous perspective” (2015) 17:4 J Genocide Research 391.
Patricia Gaviria, “Indigenous Rights and Advanced Capitalism in Community Colleges: The Case of Nunavut Arctic College” in Community Colleges Worldwide: Investigating the Global Phenomenon (International Perspectives on Education and Society 2012) 99, online: <doi.org/10.1108/S1479-3679(2012)0000017008>.
Shiri Pasternak, “How Capitalism Will Save Colonialism: The Privitization of Reserve Lands in Canada” (2015) 47:1 Antipode 179.
Siomonn P Pulla, “Critical Reflections on (Post)colonial Geographies: Applied Anthropology and the Interdisciplinary Mapping of Indigenous Tradional Claims in Canada during the Early 20th Century” (2016) 75:4 Human Organization 289.
Sue Curry Jansen, Book Review of Dependency Road: Communications, Capitalism, Consciousness, and Canada by Dallas W Smythe, (1983) 12:3 Theory & Society 421.
 Kirsten Manley-Casimir, “Incommensurable Legal Cultures: Indigenous Legal Traditions and the Colonial Narrative” (2012) 31 Windsor YB Access Just 137.
 Kelly Aguirre, The Anti-Colonial Imperative and Postcolonial Prerogative of Indigenous Identity Politics in Canada (MA Thesis, University of Manitoba Faculty of Graduate Studies, 2009), at 169.
 Leroy Little Bear, “Jagged Worldviews Colliding” in Marie Battiste, ed, Reclaiming Indigenous Voices and Vision (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2000) 77.
 Lorenzo Veracini, “’Settler Colonialism’: Career of a Concept” (2013) 41:2 J Imperial & Commonwealth History 313, at 318.
 Siomonn P Pulla, “Critical Reflections on (Post)colonial Geographies: Applied Anthropology and the Interdisciplinary Mapping of Indigenous Tradional Claims in Canada during the Early 20th Century” (2016) 75:4 Human Organization 289, at 290.
 Angela Sterritt, Racialization of poverty: Indigenous women, the Indian Act and systemic oppression: reasons for resistance (Vancouver: Vancouver Status of Women, 2007), at 22
 Veracini, supra note 4 at 313.
 Ibid at 320.
 Matthew Wildcat, “Fearing social and cultural death: genocide and elimination in settler colonial Canada – an Indigenous perspective” (2015) 17:4 J Genocide Research 391, at 401.
 Ibid at 184.
 Shiri Pasternak, “How Capitalism Will Save Colonialism: The Privitization of Reserve Lands in Canada” (2015) 47:1 Antipode 179, at 183-184.
 Wildcat, supra note 10 at 402-403.
 Janie Brodie, The Political Economy of Canadian Regionalism (Toronto: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1990), at 100-101.
 Ibid at 101.
 Ibid at 102.
 Wildcat, supra note 10 at 187.
 Ibid at 185.
 Pasternak, supra note 12 at 182.
 Joyce Green, “Decolonizing in the era of globalization” (2002) 36:2 Canadian Dimension 31, at 31-32.
 Pasternak, supra note 12 at 185.
 Musqueam Indian Band v Glass,  2 SCR.
 Pasternak, supra note 12 at 189.
 Wildcat, supra note10 at 395-396.
 Patricia Gaviria, “Indigenous Rights and Advanced Capitalism in Community Colleges: The Case of Nunavut Arctic College” in Community Colleges Worldwide: Investigating the Global Phenomenon (International Perspectives on Education and Society 2012) 99, at 123.
 Casimir, supra note 1 at 160.
 Sterritt, supra note 6.