« | Home | »

Forget the Pandas


Yesterday, David Kawapit, Stanley George Jr, Geordie Rupert, Travis George, Johnny Abraham and Raymond Kawapit, along with the 263 other young people who joined them en route from Whapmagoostui, arrived in Ottawa, on foot, having walked 1000 miles in temperatures that hit a low of -58ºC, as part of the Idle No More movement.

The sun came out over Parliament Hill, along with several thousand people, and the walkers each talked about their journey and the reasons behind it. But Stephen Harper wasn’t there. The prime minister was at Toronto airport, greeting two pandas just arrived from China. He described them as ‘national treasures’. Most of the mainstream media followed Harper to Toronto; they’ve paid little attention to the Journey of Nishiyuu since the walkers set out on 16 January.

It has received plenty of attention on social media, however, especially from young people, who recognise it as a historic achievement. The walkers were welcomed, fed, celebrated and hosted by the many communities through which they passed.

But Harper has made his priorities clear, as his government continues to pursue policies that violate aboriginal treaty rights, weaken environmental laws and neglect the poverty and social problems in many First Nation communities.

Comments on “Forget the Pandas”

  1. Bob Beck says:

    It’s true Harper shows no inclination to do anything meaningful about the social problems of First Nations people (or indeed of anyone else in Canada). But his trip to the Toronto zoo was more than simply a distraction from the Cree walkers’ arrival. There was a fairly direct connection between the photo-op and the snub.

    He was, after all, greeting not only pandas, but diplomats from China, to which he’s keen to sell tar sands oil, and secondarily minerals. The most effective opposition to projects like the Northern Gateway pipeline comes from First Nations in British Columbia, loath to acquiesce in the inevitable contamination of their traditional territories and fisheries.

    You might think that a government, if provoked to vindictiveness by opposition to its plans, would confine it to those particular opponents. But that’s not, apparently, how Harper et al prefer to do politics. First Nations self-government, the lack of which is an important driver of the Idle No More movement, would after be an insuperable obstacle to the Harper project of transforming Canada root and branch.

  2. raoul duke says:

    Keep in mind the media here through ‘leaked’ financial management reports colluded with the Harper government to portray the financial mismanagement of Chief Theresa Spence as indicative of the whole of the First Nations population. This effectively marginalized Spence, Idle No More, and any representatives of First Nations as a credible voice for that population, in less than a week.

    Harper and co. don’t pay attention because they know there’s no one that will be portrayed as credible in the media to hold them to account for doing so.

    • Bob Beck says:

      Yes, Harper’s people know full well how to play (in the sense of con, or dominate) the media, and they practice message control as a black art. There was some commentary on CBC Radio and elsewhere to the effect that the leakage of the “audit” of Chief Spence’s band’s finances was obviously very carefully timed and orchestrated. But such nuances did not finally prevail in the general uproar.

      Still, a mastery of PR will not help Harper, Oliver et al when the pipeline issue gets to the courts. The Conservatives dislike the 1982 Constitution so much, perhaps, that they overlook how it’s evolved and come to be applied, or even what it says, in a black-letter sense. Court after court has affirmed the basic principle that First Nations must be consulted in major land-use decisions, and will do so again.

      Of course, by that point Harper may be out of power, Northern Gateway may be completed (or scrapped), and many things will be different.

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.

  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • name on Who is the enemy?: Simply stating it is correct doesn't make it so, I just wish you would apply the same epistemic vigilance to "Muslim crimes" as you do to their Hebrew...
    • Glen Newey on Unwinnable War: The legal issue admits of far less clarity than the simple terms in which you – I imagine quite sincerely – frame them. For the benefit of readers...
    • Geoff Roberts on The New Normal: The causes go back a long way into the colonial past, but the more immediate causes stem from the activities of the US forces in the name of freedom a...
    • sol_adelman on The New Normal: There's also the fact that the French state denied the mass drownings of '61 even happened for forty-odd years. No episode in post-war W European hist...
    • funky gibbon on At Wembley: If England get France in the quarter finals of Euro 16 I expect that a good deal of the fraternity will go out the window

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Edward Said: The Iraq War
    17 April 2003

    ‘This is the most reckless war in modern times. It is all about imperial arrogance unschooled in worldliness, unfettered either by competence or experience, undeterred by history or human complexity, unrepentant in its violence and the cruelty of its technology.’

    David Runciman:
    The Politics of Good Intentions
    8 May 2003

    ‘One of the things that unites all critics of Blair’s war in Iraq, whether from the Left or the Right, is that they are sick of the sound of Blair trumpeting the purity of his purpose, when what matters is the consequences of his actions.’

    Simon Wren-Lewis: The Austerity Con
    19 February 2015

    ‘How did a policy that makes so little sense to economists come to be seen by so many people as inevitable?’

    Hugh Roberts: The Hijackers
    16 July 2015

    ‘American intelligence saw Islamic State coming and was not only relaxed about the prospect but, it appears, positively interested in it.’

Advertisement Advertisement