By David@Sixthestate.net
I was disappointed, but not entirely surprised to read this weekend that The Globe & Mail has officially joined Postmedia’s Christie Blatchford in denouncing the ongoing hunger strike in Ottawa by Attawapiskat chief Theresa Spence as an act not just of protest but of violence against the lawful order of the country: “Spence should not risk her health with a hunger strike, nor is coercion a reasonable or responsible tool to be used in making a request to meet with the Prime Minister.”
The idea that a hunger strike is “coercive” would be hilarious in itself, if a person’s life wasn’t at stake here. I realize that most of my fellow Canadians are more angry at Spence than at Harper over the present state of affairs, but please do yourself the favour of being brutally honest about your feelings on this. What these people are saying is that they would rather Spence die than that Harper “concede” to a meeting. We don’t negotiate with terrorists, and we don’t negotiate with hunger strikers.
It’s not that the government isn’t bothered. It’s reached deep into its ranks to trot out one indigenous MP and Senator after another to urge Spence to give up the hunger strike and “trust the process” by meeting with Aboriginal Affairs minister John Duncan. The media generally agrees with this position. I’ve already noted the Globe’s position. The Ottawa Citizen has similarly announced, by the usual official means of an anonymous editorial, that it is not “valid” for Spence to demand a meeting with the Prime Minister.
I want to point out a disturbing contrast here. With increasingly disturbing regularity, Tibetan monks commit suicide by fire in order to draw the world’s attention to the plight of their homeland, occupied by China. When this happens, I can’t help but notice that virtually no white Canadians ever declare that these people are trying to “coerce” the Chinese government, or that self-immolation is basically equivalent to terrorism, or that there would be far better results if they just trusted the duly constituted government and followed its duly established processes. No one says it’s just an attention grab, or queue-jumping, or any of the other silly ways that white Canadians have tried to rationalize Harper’s failure to respond to Spence over the past two weeks.
Instead, when Tibetan monks commit suicide, The Globe and Mail says things like the following (again from an official editorial, this one from March 2012):
There is no weapon that can stop these fires from spreading, only the low-tech approach of dialogue, of easing up, of permitting freedom . . . But the hubris of a powerful state and long habit prevent China from seeing the answer . . .
[The government of China] needs to relax its repressive grip . . . , respect the religious practices of the Tibetan people . . . , and open negotiations with the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan government in exile.
Fascinatingly, The Globe’s advice to the government of China is the polar opposite of its advice to the government of China. Spence’s claim to talk to the prime minister rests on the assertion that First Nations should get to speak with the federal Crown on a government-to-government basis. Almost to a (wo)man, our professional media doesn’t agree: they say that it would be inappropriate to agree to meet Spence as long as she claims any such privilege, and that, in place of this “nation to nation” basis, the chief should address herself to the responsible minister the way any other special interest group might do.
But the Chinese government have already taken The Globe’s advice on this one. They can’t accede to The Globe’s demand that they “open negotiations with the Dalai Lama,” because they’ve already agreed with The Globe’s counsel that indigenous “governments” don’t have sovereignty and can’t operate on a “nation to nation” basis.
wtf smh says
The slightest correlation between the Chinese Government and Canadian Government is absolutely ludicrous.
For the aboriginal community to compare their plight with the Tibetans is a complete and joke.
I applaud the natives for standing up for our environment and resources. Theresa Spencer is a self serving individual attempting to get revenge on the same people who outed her as a poor leader of her 1500 population enclave.
Unbelievable article suggesting anyone in Canada is treated similar to the religious minorities in China.
My personal protest will to never visit this website again, some garbage reporting here.
Brenda Romero says
Gandhi, was given a Nobel peace prize. He is known for fasting in a nonviolent peaceful protest, for the sake of positive change for his people. What Is so different about Teressa Spence doing the same for hers? Nothing at all except that any comment or article against Gandhi in his time or in her actions, to “be seen or heard, is clearly is spoken on bias and personal opinion that is supportive in corruption, against any such positive change.
Mike says
Good point – self-immolation definitely gets the attention of a government.
Spence has said she is prepared to die, but maybe that is too drastic for us in Canada.
How about a hunger strike without food – as in ONLY water?
Nite Owl says
Had Theresa Spence been a lobbyist for Israel she would have been immediately ushered into Harper’s office for a meeting.
Marie Barney says
where can we post protests to this paper?? time to take action here too!!!
Sharon Shirt says
There are two complaints that have appeared time and time again on the numerous postings in the media about Chief Spence and the Idle No More movement. First, the government insists that the Chief follow proper procedures to address her concerns, yet the government did not follow proper protocol when drafting Bill C-45. Second, people against the movement bring up the issue that they shouldn’t have to be burdened with what their ancestors did with the signing of the treaties. If they don’t want to honor this then this should also be applied to all agreements made since the treaty signings. Chaos and anarchy.
wholyroly says
People should understand she is standing up for all Canadians. Not unlike bill c-38, Bill C-45 severely compromises the protection of our country. Harper is selling out our resources in a fashion that promotes unbelievably irresponsible practices. What makes this country so great is our landscape, what makes us so powerful are the resources that lie within. Its not just an indigenous issue, its a Canadian one.
Bruce Murdoch says
I found Blatchford’s article to be disgusting, and right now I’m not too kindly disposed to the Globe and Mail. I haven’t read the Ottawa Citizen editorial, but if what is posted in the above article is so, then a pox on both their houses.