Ookpik Blog - All Comments

re: Native identity from an Inuk’s perspective

Napatsi Folger — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 21:24:35 GMT

This may sound weird out of context but I will quote one of my new favourite authors (not that he's new, but new to me), Sherman Alexie "Indians can be so funny in the most desperate of circumstances." And that is what i think of when I think of what makes me a "Native Canadian." Is my pride and ability to still have a sense of humor despite all the crap that has happened to me (or to my people I guess). It always astonishes me to see homeless Inuit that I know in the street in Ottawa, and even though they're homeless and have nothing, they always have a smile for me. That is something. To be down and out, and still be able to make a joke and really laugh from your belly. I feel like a REAL person, like there's no faking when I'm with those Inuit. We are who we are, and nobody judges.

re: Do you really mean what you say?

Elizabeth Zarpa — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 18:22:16 GMT

Interesting point of view because I have realized that using "what are you doing?" a more interesting question that gets a truer answer than "how are you doing?" ... I have just started using this question more often since about a week and to tell you the truth... I actually have to think about whether or not I have enough time to ask them that question before I ask because I usually get a big a** answer.

re: Do you really mean what you say?

Napatsi Folger — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 18:12:59 GMT

I agree that there are social signifiers that mean nothing, but I think people should make up their minds that it means nothing. Some people actually care how you are, while others don't. So how do you pick out the ones that care? How many awkward moments have there been between someone asking how you are and you actually answering, and they were about to walk off without hearing your answer and then, they swivel around in surprise when you start talking? Or how silly do you feel when you go to answer all you see is the backside of the person who asked as the head in the opposite direction without even looking back? I still stand my ground on this.

re: Do you really mean what you say?

mikuluk — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 18:04:11 GMT

Yes, but there are conversations to exchange meaning and your analysis is dead on there about jargon nad dressing to impress, etc. and then there are social signifiers which are the grunts we all agree upon ... which don't rely on the meaning of the words ... "How are you" really means "I see you are near me and I do not intend to kill or harm you" ... and you grunt back "fine" which means "ditto" ... the words don't matter. This is a problem in many intercultural situations where people have not been socialized with the proper grunts for the other culture.

re: National Native Organizations brief introduction

Calista Morrison — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 09:21:06 GMT

I agree with you Napatsi. I was talking to a friend at university once and mentioning the Gold Rush and Chilkoot trail and she didn't know anything about it. I was actually blown away. But then I realized that was my regional history growing up, and I didn't know any of hers.

re: IPY International Eary Career Researcher Symposium

Napatsi Folger — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 19:13:37 GMT

Interesting blog, and the conference sounded interesting too. I think it would be very good to share you opinions about it as well though, so that we can see how it affected you. It might be a interesting sounding conference, but what counts is how it affected the people who attended, ie you! thanks for sharing.

re: National Native Organizations brief introduction

Napatsi Folger — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 17:21:07 GMT

I would be interested to know who they polled? Do you know how many people were involved? I am no longer surprised at how little people know about the north when I talk to people from southern Canada. It makes sense I guess, I don't have a strong grasp of regions I didn't grow up in, like Saskatchewan. I don't know anything about Saskatchewan... I think it's just more noticable because there has been such a focus on the Arctic in the news for the last few years because of climate change, and so people think they should know more about it.

re: Government priorities could be education, but...

Elizabeth Zarpa — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 20:10:17 GMT

YEAH……… Inuit pay taxes in Canada, perhaps the highest taxes in Canada too. There are different levels of government in Canada (federal, provincial, municipal) and then other governments that represent different Native groups like a land claims government, etc.

These different levels of government each have their own jurisdiction of responsibilities set out in the Constitution Act.

On the other hand Native governments have their own set of responsibilities and they differ from federal, provincial and municipal responsibilities. They are unique to the population that they represent and the Native government was set in place to better meet the unique needs of its constituency. Aboriginal governance structures have been evolving throughout the past century and each differs in its priorities and responsibilities.

The Native governments like the federal, provincial and municipal governments receive money to pay its dues to govern the populations according to its set of responsibilities. The main difference that I am trying my hardest to express is that post secondary education is not a responsibility for federal, provincial or municipal governments and therefore they don’t fund post secondary education like some Native governments do.

A Native government like an Inuit land claims government DO FUND post secondary education with the money that they receive to govern its constituency. Not because they are privileged or have ‘special status’, but because the Native government that represents them prioritize post secondary education and therefore fund it. They put their money into different areas, whereas other levels of government put their’s somewhere else.

If the federal, provincial or municipal governments would put a lot of emphasis on post secondary education then perhaps they could reform their responsibilities to meet the demand, but you would have to change the constitution and that is hard. But possible

re: Government priorities could be education, but...

Calista Morrison — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 17:57:47 GMT

After a little more reflection I just had a few more things to say.

When Elizabeth says "Inuit in Canada are not burdened finically" and when I mentioned before school being "free" a critical point was missed. Its not free. Someone is paying for it. Through taxes or whatever means the funds for people being able to go to school without costs is a burden on someone. The money has to come from somewhere. In Nordic countries if all the citizens are paying a little extra somewhere so everyone can go to school thats very different from the land claims providing money for Inuit to go to school. All the citizens of canada are paying, but not all the youth is getting the benefits. If I've misinterpreted something please tell me because this has been something that I've often mulled over.

In regards to your second last paragraph Elizabeth I am confused and this might just be a difference of opinions of perhaps I am misinterpreting what you are saying. But you speak about how the education being payed for is not about privilege. Could you rephrase this a bit. When I think about this, all thats comes to mind is that if my school had been completely covered I would have viewed it as a privilege and that thats an amazing thing to have available to you. Wouldn't being in a group, there is probably a better word but I am blanking, that made it so that my education was covered make me apart of something special/different that others weren't? Being a recipient of the Yukon Grant made me different from non-Yukoners, and I knew it was a privilege of being a Yukoner.

I was also thinking about how much reform the education and government's finances would have to go through if they were to change the system and make university/college education available to all. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? I couldn't help but think of all the poor profs all of a sudden overwhelmed with double, triple the class sizes. Imagine how many new profs and support staff would have to be hired to manage the increased number of students. Perhaps this would open up tones of new employment opportunities across Canada. On the flip side, what if there were not enough people to support the students how would the education system suffer? Also with the government needing to find more money to pay for the students education and the increased staff nationally, would Canadians be willing to pay up? Perhaps taxes might rise to make education available to all, but people complain about taxes already...

re: Government priorities could be education, but...

Elizabeth Zarpa — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 16:57:18 GMT

Thanks for your point of view, Calista, I think it is well needed if individuals want to progress in their efforts of better understanding. Silence advances nothing; we must talk, to understand.

I too have pursued a higher education and intend on continuing to do so in the future. In my 4 years of post secondary study I have encountered people who thought that because I was Inuit (and therefore Aboriginal) I didn’t pay taxes and I got everything for free. In the imaginations of people who believe this there is a false personification of Aboriginal Canadians as a homogeneous group of peoples’ with one language, one heritage and one ancestry, this is wrong.

Generally there are three major groups of Aboriginals in Canada and they are the Métis, Inuit and First Nations. In the diversity of these broad groups there lay a beautiful variety of languages, heritages and ancestries which is not taught in school’s throughout Canada. Due to this lack of education focused on Aboriginal Canadians in Canada a majority of Canadians do not understand that the umbrella term Aboriginal was formed by the federal government of Canada. Under Section 91 (24) of Canada’s Constitution Act 1867 “Indian’s and land reserved for Indian’s” is a federal responsibility. Now, if the government had to name each group of Aboriginal peoples by their true names such as Innu, Cree, Ojibwe, Chippewa, Mi’Kmaq, Mississauga, Anishinaabe, etc then it would have made things complicated, so they opted for a simpler term “Aboriginal.”

Since each Aboriginal group consisted of their own culture and their own lifestyles before the introduction of British and French forms of religion and governance they deserved their own way to govern their communities, but this did not happen. In 1876 the federal government introduced the Indian Act and Aboriginals were relocated into reserves, hamlets and communities derived by federal mandate; while Residential School’s became the homes for many Aboriginals where the legacy of that experience lives on in the lives and communities today. I could continue to express my ideas about how these social policies have affected Aboriginal Canadians today, but the media is better at perpetuating the effects.

I am here to express the cause to the effects. The education that I have access to because of the land claims government that represents me is going to good use and I am taking advantage of the educational opportunities that I have. I am not buying alcohol and burning holes in my pocket going in debt because of partying.

So I believe that continuing to fund education so other people like me can express the silenced voices of our ancestor’s has far more benefit’s than it does costs, whether some beg to differ, I am open to listening to their perspective as long as they listen to mine.

re: Government priorities could be education, but...

Calista Morrison — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 15:36:43 GMT

Thanks for speaking about this Elizabeth. I've had many a discussion about topics relating to this with people I went to high school and university with.

Being from the Yukon I am awarded the Yukon Grant. "Awarded" may not be the right word, but I thought "given" doesn't express the right meaning. The Yukon Grant is something that I don't think should be taken lightly but is by many - without this assistance I would not have been able to go to the school I did without needing other means of financial assistnace. It was always something I was proud of and very lucky to receive.

I may not have been worthy of this Grant, but when I see other people "missuse" this gift it worries me. I cannot judge or define what missuse means, but ultimately I refer to students who with the freedom that comes with University maybe utterly distracted by partying and the massive hole that can burn in their pockets. I know of many students that used this money to party, subsequently did poorly in classes and were kicked out of school. In cases like that I wonder where the money went and was it worth while.

This happens all the time with the Yukon Grant and the land claims assistance, and other financial programs. Something that Yukon Grant has adopted is monitoring students' grades and if they get kicked out - they adjust the level of the grant or even revoke it and ask the students to pay it back. Prior to these changes the money was gone for good. I am entirely for cheaper education or increased programs to help students pay for costs, but I do also believe their should be some accountability. I know students who are incredibly responsible with their assistance and it makes me glad to know that they were helped in such a way, but I also see ones that have wasted it on alcohol or drugs and barely passing but stay because its free. It makes me sad to know that money can be handed over to people that don't respect it.

In regards to debt that students might acquire in university that same issue applies. Their debt might pile up because they have no alternative and to jsut get by they need the help. They get only what they suspect they'll need and no more to prevent digger the hole deeper. But again others can go into debt because with reckless abandon they spend. I've seen both. Do I have less pity for people I see spending aimlessly and complaining about loans...yes.

I know there are flaws in my thinking, but its how I feel about the matter. I was able to find a balance in school, and in my personal opinion I learned a lot of valuable lessons having to balance my finances and be responsible for myself. Something I think everyone needs to learn - it just happens at different stages in our lives. When university education is paid for I think that some of that lesson just might be pushed more into adult hood.

My last point is that while debt does suck. Its a fact of life, and as far as I know everyone will be in debt at one point in their life. Either for education, a house, a car, or just racking up a credit card bill. Its going to happen. I didn't go into debt until after I got out of school, and I'm fine by it. It was interesting when I first realized it for sure, but its a fact of my life now and its something I am responsible for and no one else.