Challenge to Colonized Culture

by Howard Adams (Métis)

[Excerpts from Chapter Ten of the book “A Tortured People” originally published in 1995, revised in 1999 as “Tortured People”.]

…Smashing Indigenous culture has been imperialism’s most effective weapon in conquering Aboriginal populations. Aboriginal cultural institutions were restructured, as well as their mode of behaviour and way of thinking… This cultural destruction hastened the denigration and mocking of Indigenous culture and its values…

European imperialists did not completely destroy Indigenous cultural and political institutions; only what they determined to be a threat to imperialism. Certain institutions were restructured to serve the functions and benefits of imperialism. Traditional Indian governments were weakened, and chiefs and council members were co-opted…

…Historically, we have not emulated white European Canadian society. In the 250 years of the Canadian fur trade, Indians were forced into a segregated fur gathering class and kept isolated from the white imperialist merchants. Indians were forbidden to live close to European trading posts. Both the British and French maintained a strict caste system with regards to Aboriginal workers. Although Métis had a blood link to Europeans, the mixed blood population was outcast from the white conquerors. After the fur trade, Indians were imprisoned in isolated rural compounds in an apartheid system. Métis were forced into similar colonies, rural ghettos and road allowances maintained under vagrancy laws dictated by white bureaucratic oppressors.

The segregation of Aboriginal peoples from white mainstream society was a deliberate strategy employed by the state. This separation tended to reinforce stereotypical images of Indigenous peoples who were cast aside as being dirty, lazy, vulgar, and unsuitable to live amongst so-called civilized and clean white society. These images became internalized and Native peoples developed a shame and inferiority complex about their culture. As a result we legitimize the stereotyping of our culture and personality.

However, since the Native national movement of the 1960s, the Native young people have become outspoken about the hypocrisy, and are inclined towards a rejection of mainstream culture. This movement has caused them to align more closely and intimately to their true Indigenous culture, which serves to enrich, revitalize and expand within the appropriate subproletariat class structure. It has resulted in an upsurge in the direction of humanism and collectivism.

The 1960s nationalist movement created a new cultural awakening among the Aboriginal people throughout Canada. It caused them to redefine themselves from their colonized position. Aboriginal communities began to recognize the need to assert their own definitions, to reclaim their history and culture. They began to create their own sense of nationhood…

…When Aboriginal peoples first started to speak out during the 1960s they spoke with a certain anger and hostility…. Our angry and direct language was a sharp contrast to that of the chiefs and Métis leaders who had played the puppet role and who had used accommodative, submissive language… Our liberation spirit had become strong and powerful. It was linked to a national political ideology that inspired Indian and Métis activists. Instead of trying to cloak our subproletariat class, it became a source of strength and pride…

…The oppressed Aboriginal population were anxious to identify themselves with rude and anti-middle class concepts, such as ‘warrior,’ ‘trapper,’ ‘breed,’ ‘bannock-eaters.’ The Indian and Métis militants used other words with scorn and contempt, such as ‘racist pigs,’ ‘white honkeys,’ ‘Uncle Tomahawks,’ and so on. These were expressions of counter-consciousness and counter-culture. It was the language that mainstream whites and academics called vulgar rhetoric and sloganeering. Colonized language was threatening and offensive to them…

Linguistic Imperialism

…An important value of middle class culture is correct “Standard English.” Standard English is held as being superior to any other language or speech pattern. The failure to speak such language has long been a definite mark of low status and class. Searle argues that the English language has been a monumental force, institution of oppression and rabid exploitation throughout 400 years of imperialist history. There is no doubt that it has scorned and mocked Indigenous languages throughout the world. English has served to humiliate and subjugate many Aboriginal nations.

Language can be seen as content specific. This means that it is specific to that ethnic race/class. The differences are not only the spoken language but also the cultural content. Concepts and perceptions are reinforced by stimuli and responses from that particular cultural environment. The symbols and concepts that are embedded in that particular language shapes the style of speech for that group of people. Therefore, Indians and Métis express thoughts and concepts that are unique to their language. Therefore, the denial of our Aboriginal languages denies us confidence and the articulation of full creative expression. A culture cannot develop without a language; thus the stamping-out of Aboriginal languages has halted the development of Indian culture. In other words, the loss of Aboriginal languages was the loss of much Indigenous culture and history…

During the Native nationalist struggles of the 1960s, the English language was used to highlight concepts and notions of racism, inequality, oppression, and apartheidism… It is not until the Aboriginal underclass is able to publicly voice their concerns using the colonizer’s own weapons, such as language, that the reality of the colonized situation can be exposed. As long as the Native colony remains silent, then no threat is posed against the ruling class culture, and at the same time very little achievements are made in the Native culture.

Literature/Arts as Empowerment

The Aboriginal cultural protest of the 1960s and 70s was not only a counter-cultural expression, but a “return to the source.” It was a revival or a renaissance of Indian, Métis and Inuit culture and nationalism…

…In a colonized culture where written creative literature is sparse, autobiographies and poetry are the first in national rejuvenation. This is so because the first expression is to release the pain and suffering of our lives before we can proceed to the next level of more deliberate and rational thought and writing.

Indian and Métis traditional culture became the context of the new publications… The story Halfbreed by Maria Campbell is a deeply moving semi-autobiography committed to traditional values of the Native society. Campbell combined description and comment very effectively with analysis and personal commentary.

The novel Slash by Jeannette Armstrong portrays the conflict of self contained Aboriginal society with the intruding white man’s world. In addition, she makes a considerable analysis in the personal experiences of the colonial situation.

Lee Maracle in Bobbi Lee: Indian Rebel brings to life the grim realities of the struggle of Indian and Métis workers, and how they survive in the brutal white supremacist system. Lee’s simple and direct words convey the powerful feelings experienced by rank and file Aboriginal people.

These artists and others played a major role in launching the cultural renaissance; as well they also enriched Aboriginal literature. The majority of Indian and Métis writers are not necessarily highly educated, and that may be a good thing, as Native writing has tended to be more candid and less academic in style…

…Often, white liberals are quite anxious to usurp our creations, as well as to embrace them as successes of the imperialist bourgeois nation… Aboriginal culture is not an appendage of white supremacy bourgeois culture. Of course, as colonial artists, some are vulnerable to the flattery and patronage of the colonizer.

For Aboriginal artists it is difficult to straddle two cultures without being hypocrites as well as frauds…. Aboriginal literature and creative arts need to be expanded and elevated in their unique Indigenous nature. It is necessary to indigenize the English language as a medium of artistic and intellectual inventiveness. Indian and Métis authors must avoid portraying Aboriginal people in popular mainstream stereotypes…

…The Aboriginal cultural renaissance… emerged from the nationalist movement of the 1960s and has become successful within the last few years. The Indian and Métis consciousness and culture-building movement of today is stronger and more significant than ever in our history. It is crucial that we work in unison as an Aboriginal nation, and not in terms of tribal units and middle class pretenders. It is inevitable that our productions reveal colonization, oppression, racism and subproletariat class; however, they will also reveal decolonization, Aboriginal traditions, spirituality, freedom and liberation

Cultural Nationalism

…Since the Canadian Aboriginal renaissance of the 1970s, cultural nationalism has become the norm… There has been a shift from the old style of arts and crafts to new creative expressions, aesthetically and artistically, without sacrificing the traditional essence. At the same time it is a statement of self-affirmation, of pride of heritage and of identity. Generally, we as Aboriginal peoples are not seeking integration into mainstream society; instead, we are praising our Aboriginal nationalism. We know that integration can only be superficial, casual and trivial.

Without a radical ideological base, however, cultural nationalism can be an oppressive, colonizing force… As Indians and Métis artists we need to be on continuous alert to prevent cultural nationalism from becoming cultural imperialism.

Cultural Imperialism

…Cultural imperialism usually is a reactionary form of nationalism emphasizing outdated and archaic rituals. The state promotes it because it hinders Natives’ development of progressive political ideas. Government officials recognize the significance of cultural imperialism as a control mechanism. They generously fund archaic Aboriginal ceremonies and activities, thereby reinforcing an ossified and caricatural culture. Aboriginal culture is now packaged and paraded before white spectators throughout Europe…

Rather than uniting on the basis of national liberation, Métis and Indians are led backward to greater oppression. They think that government-sponsored Native performances are signs of their growing freedom, but nothing could be further from the truth. Cultural imperialism is a retreat from the necessary class and political struggle – it is a form of political and cultural oppression…

…Of course, having Métis and Indians explore their identity and culture is not necessarily dangerous nor negative, providing self-awareness includes a political consciousness. Cultural imperialism often does not. It is a false form of nationalism stressing legends and myths the state uses to direct attention away from revolutionary nationalism. A genuine, liberating nationalism must include and promote revolutionary, working class and socialist ideologies; these are essential and perhaps the greatest weapons Natives need to win their struggle for self-determination.

Nationalism in its subjective, ideological, and even spiritual forms should provide Aboriginals with a sense of solidarity and pride that moves them forward, not backward. A sense of identity rests with understanding a common history and heritage, as well as the community’s collective place in mainstream society.

A counter reaction to cultural imperialism is revolutionary nationalism, which serves as a basic ideology for freedom and self-determination. It is a nationalism that is progressive; politically and culturally. Revolutionary nationalism is a force for the transformation of the socio-economic system. It is a motivation for changing the structure and institutions of capitalism to a new society of freedom, equality and justice. It is more than a reform of the existing racist, colonizing institutions. It is more than multiculturalism and sensitizing white supremacist Canadians to their racism. It is a complete change of the colonial structure of capitalism and the domination of pseudo-apartheidism in Canadian culture and bureaucracy…

Métis/Indian Struggles of the 1960s

[Excerpts from Chapter Seven of “A Tortured People”]

All Native peoples across Canada, from Vancouver to New Brunswick, were restless. They were fed up with oppression, racism and injustice. They were fed up with being pushed around and they were ready to start pushing back. All across the land Indians and Métis were talking back to agents of Indian Affairs and Métis Council Administration. “Some Indians and Métis,” wrote Stewart of the Star Weekly, “the timid, the elderly, the responsible, call this new aggressiveness self-determination; others, bolder, younger and more determined, call it Red Power.”

…In the 1960s, there was a parallel between Red Power in Canada and Black Power in the US. When a racial minority people are oppressed for a lengthy period, despised on racial grounds, they will inevitably decide to fight back… Self-righteous Canadians were looking across the border and saying to themselves that it can’t happen here. But what was happening in the US was also happening in Canada. Indians and Métis were turning militant and radical, and proclaiming that they had nothing to lose…

…In spite of the wide spread protests and confrontational demonstrators, the history of Indian, Métis and Inuit liberation movements during the 1960s and ’70s remains hidden from the public. Although there has been an explosion of publications, written by both Aboriginals and whites, on the Métis and Indians in the last 20 years, none includes a discussion of the Native peoples’ struggles during that important period. The ruling establishment has hidden this history in order to silence our people and deny us a sense of power and heritage…

…When our battle for justice and liberation began in the early 1960s, Métis and Indian leaders were unsure what it would involve, what direction it would take, or how it would eventually end. The only thing we knew with any certainty was that our people were no longer willing to tolerate exploitation and oppression in the colonies, ghettos, and reserves.

We were demanding political rights and better living conditions. We needed sufficient food, or as we put it, we wanted to put “bannock and lard” on our tables. Our cold, leaking shacks needed to be fixed. We demanded welfare cheques that didn’t leave us begging at the end of each month. But, more than that, we needed to be free from the colonizer’s imprisoning welfare system. As Indigenous peoples of Canada, we were determined to rid ourselves of colonial oppression in every possible manner…

…Since I was intimately involved with Aboriginal organizations and liberation struggles in Saskatchewan, I have greater knowledge about them than those of other provinces. Consequently, I will focus on Saskatchewan organizations and political confrontations. However, Indian and Métis organizations throughout the nation were quite identical to those of Saskatchewan. The one exception in Saskatchewan is that the Aboriginal liberation struggle was originally more militant and politically radical than those in other provinces, with the exception of the Mohawks.

…The Federation of Saskatchewan Indians represented status Indians, while the Métis Society, led by Joe Amyotte, a mainstream Métis, served the province’s southern regions. Amyotte sunk the organization into the mainstream psyche; he supported integration and government domination. In the north, Malcolm Norris and Jim Brady, devout socialists, led the Métis Association. These men had steered the organization for years, nourishing and politicizing Aboriginal issues. Rod Bishop, a Métis from Green Lake, and I shared their views and joined them to turn Native dissension into a national democratic movement emphasizing the politics of self-determination.

As activists and radical leaders, we opposed traditional tribal chiefs and Métis collaborators who had betrayed the movement. Likewise, we opposed the growing class of Native elites allying with our enemies – government bureaucrats, white politicians, and other members of the corporate elite. Radical Native leaders advocated socialism. After all, capitalism was the system on which we were robbed of our lands, resources, and rights.

Activists like Brady and Norris educated our people about how the state prevented Natives from adopting or forming alternative ideologies, such as collectivism or socialism… The state smothered Aboriginal peoples’ culture and traditional way of thinking, and then forced us to adopt a false consciousness.

Because colonized people have been socialized into a state of dependency, they tend to leave important matters to their leaders. To combat this phenomenon, we held study sessions and organized community gatherings to discuss critical issues about decolonization in simple terms. We had to tap into our people’s most intense and personal emotions if we were going to encourage them to actively fight in decolonization struggles. Leaders spoke of our struggle in the context of imperialism in the Third World. It helped to feel that we were part of a global revolution against oppression…

…If the ruling power gave us freedom, they could take it back whenever they wanted. To truly obtain freedom one has to own it, and our people could only own their freedom if they fought and seized it. Local people must be involved if they wanted local changes; they must become part of the solution. Local people should participate at all levels from strategy planning to mass demonstrations. Also, it is important to begin the battle where there is considerable home support.

By concentrating on local issues, we engaged in confrontations we felt we were sure to win. Neighbourhood activists acted as leaders and got a taste of victory. Regardless of the prize’s small size, success buoyed and motivated our people to continue. We embraced the concepts of Aboriginal nationalism and the necessity for confrontation. We knew that liberation would require a struggle against the government and if necessary, certain force might have to be used…

…Unlike unions, Aboriginal disruptions and mass defiance were often spontaneous and immediately disruptive, and therefore all the more effective. Although spontaneous, they were well organized. The state bureaucrats would seldom predict our next move, and our tactics confused the police’s usual procedures for gathering facts and names, and the government’s methods of tracking us…

…The state, always fearful that conflicts will widen, is highly sensitive to social disturbances. Indian and Métis youths actually baffled state officials, who could not function outside their strict, policy-driven world. Bureaucrats, unable to deal with defiant youths, always responded by asking to speak with Aboriginal “representatives.” In other words, they wanted to deal with collaborators; Aboriginals with middle-class values and a facility to communicate in the colonizer’s language…

….We made headway on our turf; that is, in our colonies and reserves, and the streets, not in the colonizer’s parliament, courtrooms, and conferences, and we were more successful than we had originally dared to hope…

Articles that refer to Howard Adams on this site

Maria Campbell’s speech to the Native Peoples Caravan in Toronto (1974)

Canadian Imperialism & Institutional Racism: Connections between Black & Métis resistance

Land Back: The matrilineal descent of modern Indigenous land reclamation