Just have to express my disappointment with you folks at The Galloping Beaver over this one. Let us focus on coming together and better ways of working together instead of magnifying our differences, especially now. And I find it interesting that I'm not hearing any of this divisiveness here in SK.Let us focus on coming together and better ways of working together instead of magnifying our differences, especially now."Yes, I very much agree. But there are many voices in the movement, as there are outside it, who would pursue policies of division and difference. Their populism is attractive to some and these voices will become more attractive if talks between the PMSH and the Vice-regal deteriorate. I don't at all mind calling these groups out for the danger that I believe they are.
I worry about the wheels that are in motion right now. The PM has no intention of of talking to Indigenous leaders in good faith. His actions demonstrate that he sees Indigenous people as obstacles to his vision of Canada. Why else would he impose Bill C-45?
Furthermore, the PMs record shows that he will use the institution of state against itself to neuter his opponents. Prorogue, secrecy, you name it, he's done it.
I also worry that disruption of economic life will prompt loud public voices to call for a brutal government response. I worry about the deeper divisions this could provoke in our already divided country. The Harper government did not flinch when its allied security forces shutdown a city core and arbitrarily caged and abused over a thousand people in Toronto so it could have a meeting. Why would it flinch in crushing INM protests, should they become more direct?
There's a very real question of what happens if nothing productive comes from the current meetings, if Chief Spence dies. Larger economically disruptive actions like blocking ports and transportation networks will provoke a response by the government, but there's not a lot of consideration what the response might look like, and then of course what happens after that. You can bet that Harper is gaming this out. He holds the hard power here, which consists of monopolies on legislation, force, and the if/how of negotiations. If he's sitting down with the Chiefs, he's already decided on the outcome and if he looks like he's giving ground, its probably a trap, perhaps intended to satify enough people that the protests diminish enough not to restart when people realise nothing actually changed.
I am very concerned that if things grow worse, the unifying voices of non-violence and dialogue within INM will find themselves drowned out by those calling for harder measures. I believe these dangers need to be labelled.