Skip to main content

The Indigenous Voice

Might does not make right. All the power in the world cannot save us, if we lose sight of reason and justice.

This is why we need to listen to the indigenous voice. It’s not just for their survival, it’s for all of us. Those voices that were dismissed, are the voices of our own human heart.  A heart that has been silenced for the punitive ideology misnamed progress.

This ideology assumed that humanity would be saved by industry, war, colonization, and consumerism.  These have given us many things from silk to medicine, but the instruments of this ideology also centralized power within the hands of an elite, and a new more devastating sickness infiltrated our minds and extended to our communities.

It’s not that our leaders were stupid, absolutely selfish or entirely corrupt, but that we were all influenced by the operating system – the matrix. We (those born and raised in these systems) were taken in by the teachings of our elders who had learned how to avoid falling into the machinery in factories and on battlefields. 

Children in the industrial cities who refused to submit to doctrines that didn’t make sense to them would have their pants taken down, ordered to bend over  and then caned in front of their classmates.  If they cried, if they showed emotion, they would be forever branded as weak. If their sisters got pregnant out of wedlock they were cast away from their families.  If the continual humiliation had forced their rage and despair into their subconscious, they would not know they are walking time bombs looking for someone with less muscle to punish; someone to bully to enable a fleeting feeling of power.  If they kill another on the street they are   publicly hanged, and they refuse to kill on the battlefield they are executed by a firing squad. 

This is how the great nations became great.  By squeezing the human impulse out of  humanity and replacing it with abstract disciplines far removed from the human heart yet which benefited the most powerful institutions.

Now after World War I and World War II we are able to see this system brutalizing the indigenous peoples of the entire globe.  That is, we are able to see it if we dare look back to that little child sitting in a classroom not knowing what the future holds for him, raised by adults who believe they must beat all the potential errors out of him before he makes a mistake.  If we dare see the many ways we were punished for being ourselves,  dare feel the heart that was once full of hope, empathy, and love, dare feel the vulnerability that was ridiculed and the dignity denied throughout our formative years before we found our own power, we shall make the connection.

In terms of our culture, what does it mean if we have learned how to survive in systems that reward brutality and punish vulnerability.  What do we learn from economies where managers who value their staff get fired while managers who are ruthless are promoted?

People who maintain their humanity in these institutions struggle to hang onto their jobs and their sanity. Those who give up, pretend to themselves that nothing matters except winning their own private game. 

We live in the age of the game, a labyrinth of stereotypes that fail to reveal who we are. The media, the mall and the economy has failed to reflect our real lives and our personal struggles. People who have needs, who love, who feel pain, people who want good health for their relations, people who seek joy, people who want a hopeful future. People who fight quietly against extraordinary odds. 

As Reinhold Niebuhr has been quoted, "nothing but madness will do battle with malignant power".

If we fail to see our own humanity in the struggles of our indigenous nations, we shall perish along with them. Most of them know this.  They get it.  They are us, only more so.  


Popular posts from this blog

The Ultimate Goal of Patriarchy is the End of Life

I want to clarify the line between men in general and patriarchal values propagated and imposed on human society.

In order for patriarchy to succeed, it had to kill more efficiently than the nine months gestation it took for a woman to give birth.  So the craft of war  became more than simply defending territory. It became the ritualized erasure of our human nature for the rule of centralized power. 

And no, it hasn't succeeded in diminishing the human population on this planet but it has succeeded in sustaining an ideology of what it means to be a man. 

Civilizations built on myths of great conquerors. Histories about the exploits of the greatest killers. Inventions of race, religious ideology and ritual that transformed the teachings of thoughtful prophets into crusades. Endless games of winning and losing.
Men who celebrate life through medicine, science, education, art, philosophy and poetry must be dismissed as soft, shamed as effeminate. 

Men who have been raised with love, love …

Anonymous Sources

Where does "Greatness" come from? The imagination? Facts? Confidence? A willing suspension of disbelief in a slogan that makes us happy? A capacity to judge well? An ability to observe and find solutions that benefit most if not all? Taking responsibility for the community? A masters degree from Oxford or Yale?

Let me offer the opinion that greatness comes from extraordinary effort or talent.  Greatness as it may exist in our anonymous ambitions does not win fame except in isolated circumstances.  That is to say, fame is not a realistic goal for an individual.

Greatness is like a dove in the imagination, an angel, a temporary insight, a fleeting epiphany. Something aspired to in the privacy of our minds.

Greatness was an ambition I held when I was a teen and had no proof that I was good at anything or useful to the world at all. After repeated criticism and dismissal from the community around me where I attempted to win something, anything, like a medal, a competition, or a…

Torturing Youth is Okay with us?

“More than two-thirds of Canadians feel Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made the wrong choice in awarding a $10.5 million settlement to Omar Khadr, according to a new poll by the Angus Reid Institute.” CBC News
But we don’t see the survey questions in this article. How was the poll actually worded? Reading one article might make us believe we are well informed, but how does a single poll actually tell us how people feel?  
“And while the survey shows that a majority of Liberals and New Democrats are opposed to the government's decision, how the numbers compare to previous polling suggests that views on Khadr have hardened over the last decade — and that he remains a divisive figure.”
How can a single poll tell whether Khadr is a divisive figure or not? What information do respondents have to make such a claim? 
The article then switches to a former US special force soldier who was blinded in one eye during the 2002 firefight in Afghanistan involving Khadr.  Of course he would be critica…