tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256462624206825199.post3057718597093705692..comments2024-03-12T20:13:31.561-05:00Comments on Algonkian Church History: The Dawes Act: Was it Good for Indians?Jeff Siemershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10162729454401137173noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256462624206825199.post-68291335088069967772013-02-28T06:11:24.155-06:002013-02-28T06:11:24.155-06:00bluette
Sarah..would just point out that usually t...bluette<br />Sarah..would just point out that usually the land has been sold unlawfully.It can be reclaimed thrue presenting original Treaties . The old,old bigger land treaties. It has happened in Maine with the Passamaquaddy and Penobscott Tribes. Maybe you could contact somebody there and find out how it was done..glAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12406186922418415761noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256462624206825199.post-62482363034263202152013-02-28T06:02:11.170-06:002013-02-28T06:02:11.170-06:00Idle No More..Idle No More..Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12406186922418415761noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256462624206825199.post-12329377013017666072012-12-02T16:33:00.567-06:002012-12-02T16:33:00.567-06:00Hi, I'm just a random law student who is study...Hi, I'm just a random law student who is studying the debate around privatization of reserves in Canada. I think it's a terrible idea. I think the problem with the argument in the Forbes article is it's limited analysis of the reasons behind poverty on the reserves. It is a strictly ideological and economic lens, that ignores all the social and historical elements that have created impoverished conditions among aboriginals. I disagree that their poverty is only due to their economic system. This was not true pre-colonization, and the assessment is essentially eurocentric and ignores the cultural perspective of aboriginal communities (who have a spiritual connection to the land and derive their identity from that connection). But anyway, the biggest problem I have with the privatization argument is the likelihood of dispossession. That's what happened in the Dawes Act, and that's what will happen here. Especially for very poor reserve families, their bargaining power is limited by their lack of resources. They are unlikely to get fair market value in negotiations with resource-rich developers. And then once the land is sold, there is no going back. The other problem is that if aboriginal title is converted to fee simple title, it will undermine the constitutional protection of aboriginal land that First Nations enjoy (but owners of fee simple do not enjoy in Canada). We don't have constitutional protection of our property like in the US under the fifth amendment. But First Nations do under s 35 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.Sarahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02363410058108479951noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256462624206825199.post-1108605799404370422012-05-07T20:17:05.931-05:002012-05-07T20:17:05.931-05:00I don't know who the other three are, but that...I don't know who the other three are, but that's Chief Koostatah behind Ickles. Picture was taken right after the government took power away from the chiefs and gave it to idiots, I mean Tribal Councils.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256462624206825199.post-72373966208558524052012-03-13T12:36:27.683-05:002012-03-13T12:36:27.683-05:00The Dawes Act was catastrophic for Indians. It mad...The Dawes Act was catastrophic for Indians. It made self reliance as tribal entities practically impossible. Which, of course, was the whole point behind Dawes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com