I read the summaries so I'll ask you a few questions to see if its worth reading the full version if it touches on any of the following.
How much support do the writers of the paper/Yellowhead have within Canada's indigenous communities? Is this a majority opinion? Are they also trying to win over other indigenous people with this paper or is that portion of their struggle over and now they're a united front?
The summaries seem to say that the writers of the paper want recognition of their own laws, knowledge systems, epistemics, etc. Do they want this within Canada or to secede from Canada?
Whether it's within Canada or after breaking away from Canada, do they want to build a modern capitalist economy rooted in traditional native principles (I.e. Greater/special emphasis on species conservation, greater/special emphasis on no/low resource extraction, etc) or do they want a return to pre-contact ways of living? I ask this because I want to understand how they plan to defend themselves in case of future wars or invasions by Canada. If they can't build an industrial economy then they're counting on settler Canadians to not do the thing they've been doing: just taking it by force.
Would there be independent indigenous self governments/ organizations on each piece of unceded treaty land or would they link up into one larger "native state".
How would they prevent the rise of a right wing (and eventually far right) which has happened in pretty much every country that has organized around a racial (ex. Israel, and others), cultural/ religious identity (ex. Pakistan and others)?
The Yellowhead Institute is a relatively new research institute so I'm not sure if there's any sort of popular opinion about it even among Indigenous groups. It's lead by Indigenous researchers focused on colonization and its effects, with this paper specifically studying historical examples of relations between Canada and Indigenous peoples. The paper has case studies for how Indigenous nations can assert their land rights, and the ignoring of land rights by the Canadian government is a near universal issue when it comes to Indigenous nations whether they support land back or not.
They want interactions between the Canadian state and Indigenous nations as real inter-national relations where law and governance are respected, but what that relationship looks like, whether that involves secession, federation within Canada or something else depends on the particular nation.
The economics of post-land back First Nations is highly speculative. Indigenous law is different to ours, which would definitely influence the way their production is organized, but it's likely they would still absorb some concepts from colonial systems. There is a trend of wanting to return to more traditional lifestyles, but not in an anarcho-primitivist sense, more of a merging of modern technologies and traditional ways of living to be more harmonious with the natural world. Whether this will recreate capitalism is yet to be seen. Regarding the defence against Canada, we already have examples of this. Every time an Indigenous group protests encroachment by Canada, they're beset by police and settlers and have engaged in different strategies to combat it, like the economic blockades we saw in 2019 or actual armed resistance like at Oka.
Each nation is usually governed by multiple tribes, but in terms of a larger union of nations I do not know. It would make sense to me economically and politically to do so, but it's not up to me.
Currently there is already a right wing (at least functionally) in the form of the settler created band councils that allow complicity with exploitation by the Canadian state. IMO any reactionary formations in a land back scenario would likely recreate this and it would need to be resisted by communists and anarchists the same as everywhere else.
I read the summaries so I'll ask you a few questions to see if its worth reading the full version if it touches on any of the following.
The Yellowhead Institute is a relatively new research institute so I'm not sure if there's any sort of popular opinion about it even among Indigenous groups. It's lead by Indigenous researchers focused on colonization and its effects, with this paper specifically studying historical examples of relations between Canada and Indigenous peoples. The paper has case studies for how Indigenous nations can assert their land rights, and the ignoring of land rights by the Canadian government is a near universal issue when it comes to Indigenous nations whether they support land back or not.
They want interactions between the Canadian state and Indigenous nations as real inter-national relations where law and governance are respected, but what that relationship looks like, whether that involves secession, federation within Canada or something else depends on the particular nation.
The economics of post-land back First Nations is highly speculative. Indigenous law is different to ours, which would definitely influence the way their production is organized, but it's likely they would still absorb some concepts from colonial systems. There is a trend of wanting to return to more traditional lifestyles, but not in an anarcho-primitivist sense, more of a merging of modern technologies and traditional ways of living to be more harmonious with the natural world. Whether this will recreate capitalism is yet to be seen. Regarding the defence against Canada, we already have examples of this. Every time an Indigenous group protests encroachment by Canada, they're beset by police and settlers and have engaged in different strategies to combat it, like the economic blockades we saw in 2019 or actual armed resistance like at Oka.
Each nation is usually governed by multiple tribes, but in terms of a larger union of nations I do not know. It would make sense to me economically and politically to do so, but it's not up to me.
Currently there is already a right wing (at least functionally) in the form of the settler created band councils that allow complicity with exploitation by the Canadian state. IMO any reactionary formations in a land back scenario would likely recreate this and it would need to be resisted by communists and anarchists the same as everywhere else.