Dear Editor:
Fortunately for Julian Hudson, he is entitled to an opinion. (UN declaration racist, Jan. 5 ) I agree racism is racism, and ignorance is ignorance.
Mr. Hudson must remember first and foremost that the history of the United Nations is that it was established by the elected representatives of countries sending their most literate and qualified people to promote peace. Mr. Hudson should take this Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, in the context that a breach of an international agreement is a criminal offence under international law and that all agreements prior to this may not be breached in the administration of the terms of this declaration.
I would remind Mr. Hudson that Canada was developed by the “Western World” by treaties with the people who already inhabited the land. We all had choices made by our ancestors in establishing those treaties, which if you boil it down to today’s terminology, were the rules of immigration and the basis for establishment of our government. Mr. Hudson must realize that Indian councils are a form of government that administers the land reserved for these people from all of the lands of the country as a whole and that if someone were to come to his “yard” uninvited and without justification they would be trespassing — and that applies to the military on Indian lands.
The “Western World” has that there was already a civilization and a form of government when they came here and people were alive and as well as conditions provided. The fur trade had that the people already here paid “dollars” for the technology brought here in pelts that had transportation costs to the markets for those — as did the technology they were purchasing when pelts were stacked against a musket. In exchange for the Western World transporting that technology of guns and class beads here, the natives paid for those to get technology beyond what they had.
As for Article 31, that is something that would mean that the young native fellow who expressed great anger because a museum wanted money for a native artifact he had recovered at his expense would have nothing to complain about, he has the right to have that property if he can pay for the costs of the recovery of history that’s both his and mine because of the country we live in and the treaties.
He forgot that the article might not have been around for his kids to enjoy and appreciate if that had not been preserved by the people who so wonderfully preserved that by recovery of those artifacts. Now he has the right to bear the costs of those being recovered or a loss by disrespect for the history of a great and beautiful country.
Mr. Hudson should also understand that “genetic resources” are those that determine who has the proportions of indigenous blood to be eligible for treaty consideration and he should understand that there are laws that say unless you have a certain amount of Indian blood you are not entitled to be considered Indian. My daughter-in-law is one-half Indian yet her offspring with my son are not Indians, rather my grandson is Metis. I pray that his other grandma teaches him about his Indian heritage in Canada because it is history that is our history.
Mr. Hudson’s consideration of being “disadvantaged” is that our Constitution is protected under international laws and the courts are the “peacekeepers” and they can take away rights if you commit an offense and they protect your rights.
The issues of this Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, are to ensure we lose no history; that we don’t have an education system like the one that first existed when Indians were taught to read and write English in regard to treaty rights where the system caused that we could have lost all those things listed in Article 31 that would have been a loss of the history of this country prior to western habitation. Indians want us to know well without establishment of this agreement that places responsibility for history and artifact preservation on the Indians themselves it becomes what history Indian people want to know because all preservation has been primarily done by white people.
A Ponoka resident is a prime example of the foresight of a white person in regards to the history that is Canada and who, along with her team, was nominated for the Governor General’s Award. The nomination was made by an Indian woman because the lady took elders to the Glenbow Museum to identify Indian artifacts so the words of the Cree language were not lost and her grandchildren could learn about their heritage.
I encourage Mr. Hudson to go online or to the local library and read a book on UN agreements and read them in the context of the Canadian Constitution. I remind him that the “privileges” the native people have are because they agreed to not fight with the western world and to act in a manner that the UN promotes.
When Mr. Hudson is finished understanding this declaration he should be pleased that someone has helped him to understand and perhaps the intentions of the people of the United Nations are understood because in reading these agreements in the context of science being discovered only today, these people were foresighted and thanks to our Constitution, Mr. Hudson lives in a country that promotes peaceful associations.
Cathy Canfield