████ ████
Professor Barnes
INDG 397
17 March 2023
The Struggle for Métis Selfhood and Recognition
Canada, as we know it today, is a by-product of the spread of colonization. Indeed, there is no doubt that this dissemination of colonialism in the Americas by Europeans has had its fair share of wide-reaching and oftentimes devastating consequences on the world at large, as part of the imperial hub from which the modern world arose. At the crossroads of the “old world” and the “new world”, the Indigenous peoples of North America and European settlers, arose a new people, with a distinct cultural identity and a strange place in the world — often considered neither wholly Indigenous nor wholly settler, the Métis have a complicated history in Canada. Struggling to find a place to fit in between Indigenous culture and traditions and those of their European fathers, the Métis were often looked down upon by many, subject to some of the same assimilationist tactics as their. Métis identity often also brings up thorny situations and the loaded question of blood quantum, being “half-blooded” individuals. For example, many non-Métis people often claim or attempt to claim Métis ancestry unjustly, in an attempt to reap some supposed benefit from belonging to a Native minority; these false claimants to the Métis heritage tend to obfuscate true Métis culture, as they lack historical ties or any interest in the culture beyond a passing fad. At the same time, however, the aforementioned issue of blood quantum makes this a tricky situation to navigate, as there is no percentage of Métis blood that is or should necessarily be required to prove oneself a member of the Métis nation. This, among other things, like the residual impact of residential schools and general government suppression, contributes to a loss of culture and tradition that would seemingly prove a disadvantage to any one solid concept of a Métis identity. That said, however, the Métis community remains as resilient and as strong as ever, since as with other Indigenous communities, efforts at reconciliation have enabled them a greater role in Indigenous-related decision making, more generally the ability to have their voices heard properly, and the power to control their own identities and destinies. In line with this course’s theming and topic of identity in Indigenous contexts (and beyond), this paper seeks to apprehend the history of the Métis Nation and how what defines and constitutes a Métis identity has evolved over the years, focusing primarily on the historical Métis struggle for recognition thanks to outside factors, and finally, how a Métis future might play out.
Perhaps the oldest challenge facing the Métis people and their cultural identity is their struggle to be recognized as Native peoples of Canada, and by extension their struggle to gain political enfranchisement and the ability to make decisions for themselves. They have, historically, been ignored in decision making that involves them, spoken over and suppressed by government agencies who would much rather take their land and resources by force and strip them of their agency rather than attempt to negotiate with them. As Patricia Russell and David Wylynko describe in their book, The True Canadians: Forgotten No More, a title which tells the story of the Métis Nation from its inception until now, “the Métis inhabiting these communities had little governing power, as the provincial government retained most decision-making authority” (Russell 14). It was not until the fallout of the Red River Rebellion that Métis rights were enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, via the Constitution Act of 1982 (this move was not and is not endorsed by all, as this paper will later uncover; some object to Métis inclusion, and others to the granting of supposed ‘special’ rights to Natives in general). Other kinds of disenfranchisement also plague the Métis; for example, Métis ‘pretendians’, who are culturally white (and not to be confused with culturally Métis individuals who are white), often hop on the apparent ‘fad’ of Indigeneity for some perceived benefit to their social standing. Oftentimes, these people claim that some long-forgotten genealogical connection to a Native individual makes them a Native minority themselves, even if they have never before identified with a Native community, and as a result “members of Métis communities are witnessing an increase in the number of self-identified Métis individuals who lack meaningful connection to long-standing Métis communities.” (Gaudry 163). Aside from stemming from a desire to be a part of a secular community of sorts, this desire also comes from a sort of fetishization of Native cultures, harkening back to the age-old stereotype of the ‘noble savage’. This sort of dilution of the Métis identity further confuses non-Indigenous people, and spreads the idea that Métis is an overly general identity, and thus that it is not an identity nor culture at all.
Internalized shame, fear of discrimination, and, in essence, xenophobia, also challenge many members of the Métis Nation. Historically, the Métis have suffered from a lack of recognition on a fundamental level — as previously covered, from the government, but also from other people on a more personal level. As was previously mentioned, the Métis were considered “half-bloods”, or the more pejorative slur “half-breeds”; neither fully Native nor European, they existed in a strange and uncomfortable middle ground, considered a distinct group by those around them even when the same could not be said for the legislative bodies that governed them. One such issue that plagues the ethnic-type identity of the Métis people is the ever-present issue of blood quantum, which is a double-edged sword of massive proportions. Blood quantum is, at its core, “a strategy used by the government and tribes to authenticate the amount of ”Native blood“ a person has by tracing individual and group ancestry.” (Rice). While it originated as part of government policies in North America to limit the ability of Indigenous peoples to gain Native citizenship, certain tribes (though not many) have adopted blood quantum in this age of self-determination to remain selective and restrict the intake of members to their tribes; in the United States, for example, post-Indian Reorganization Act, tribes have been permitted to create these enrollment qualifications of their own. Blood quantum served a purpose, albeit detrimental, in government affairs; as the University of New Mexico explains, “American Indian blood quantum was used to determine who was eligible for an allotment of land. Due to the blood quantum qualification, many people were ineligible, thereby effectively reducing the Indian holding of land.” (2). By contrast, tribal employment of blood quantum was a means to legitimize oneself as a Native, to pull oneself out of the wreckage of assimilationism. As Strong and Van Winkle, two collegiate researchers, note: “the vanquished are required to naturalize and legitimize themselves in terms of ”blood quantum“ — an imposition of the victor’s essentialized reckoning of identity that becomes an integral, often taken-for-granted aspect of Native subjectivity.” (552). This blood quantum, however, via objective lineage and statistical blood percentages, is no longer as necessary a thing as it once was, at least if reconciliation is to continue to progress its mission. Sure, one must be Native to be Native, but to quantify that amount via numerical value is an exclusionary waste of time. The fraction of Indigenous blood in a person should not matter as much as their Indigeneity in the first place, and their connection to their Native identity. Blood quantum has an even trickier relationship with the Métis people, too, as a prevailing cultural idea about Métis people is that they are not Indigenous peoples of Canada because of the blood percentages of their ancestry.
The concepts and ideas introduced into the political ecosystem (and beyond) by blood quantum have had far-reaching and oftentimes devastating consequences for the identification, self or otherwise, of Métis people. It has all too often been used to undermine Métis peoples’ identities, but also their basic rights as Indigenous peoples, as well as the recompense they receive in terms of reconciliatory legislation. Take, for example, a paper published by the University of Calgary’s own former political science professor John Flanagan, entitled, rather blatantly, “The Case Against Metis Aboriginal Rights”. In it, Flanagan argues that the idea of a Métis person is far too nebulous and superfluous for Métis peoples to be a distinct group with distinct status Indigenous rights, and that the granting of such rights in the Constitution Act in 1982 was a mistake intended only to pacify the rage and rebellion of the Red River insurgents. “What ’Métis’ means in the new constitution is completely unknown. Will it be limited to the traditional Metis of Rupert’s Land, or will it include non-status Indians? The answer to this question could be vitally important,” Flanagan writes, directly implicating an opinion that Métis identity does not and cannot, definably and categorically, actually exist, because it lacks a real distinction, at least from an outsider’s perspective. Furthermore, he believes that it will become too complex to quantify all the supposedly “Métis” individuals in Canada thanks to the fact that “the number of legal Metis may vastly increase from generation to generation as a result of racial mixing.” (Flanagan 315). Although he is not Métis himself, nor Native at all, Flanagan believes he has a horse in this race, and that his opinions are particularly valid when it comes to the matter of Indigenous self-identification, rights, and sovereignty, implying an idea of his own racial superiority and implying an uncivilized inferiority and lack of intelligence on the part of Indigenous peoples; in this fashion, he proves himself much like his forbears, believing he, as an elevated and civilized individual, should have more say in Métis futures (and by proxy, Native ones) than the Métis themselves.
Despite these competing factors (and far, far more that have gone unlisted and unexamined, for lack of time and space) that have attempted to erase them, and some that would still seek to dismantle their identities, collective and personal, however, the Métis people have time and time again risen above those voices that would seek to drown them out. They have been steadily gaining agency in a world that has historically shunned them and their other Indigenous brethren. Take, for example, the recent Métis Nation of Alberta’s constitution ratification vote, which sought to gauge the approval of the Nation’s members for the new Métis constitution that would grant citizens improved support from the MNA as well as a “new fiscal relationship with Canada to finally provide Métis-designed supports to our citizens in health, housing, language, education, training, economic development, and justice.” (Métis Nation of Alberta). Métis culture is also alive and well, in many facets; Russell and Wylynko’s book, aside from detailing the history of the Métis Nation (and specifically, the Alberta sector), also describes in-depth many Métis traditions, from storytelling to dancing (the Red River Jig in particular), to music, art and even the cultural interpretive destination of Métis Crossing, located northeast of Edmonton and the first of its kind in Alberta, where Métis events are hosted in order to share community and culture among themselves as well as with the world. The Crossing is crucial to Metis resurgence in the modern day, for as long as it grows in popularity, it might perhaps cement itself among other such famed tourist stops in Canada, with one notable difference. As Russell writes, “[t]he critical distinction is that while the monuments and historic structures of [many other tourist] locations celebrate Euro-Canadian accomplishments and culture, Métis Crossing is derived truly from the history of this soil, the traditions it applauds extending back hundreds of years.” (34). If the success of the ratification vote and the expanding opportunities for Métis people to both indulge in and share their culture with others is any indication, then hopefully the Métis people have an optimistic future in store for them and the continued survival of their identities.
Works Cited
Dillon, Amy. “MNA Overwhelmingly Approve Constitution in Largest Ratification by an Indigenous Nation in Canadian History.” Métis Nation of Alberta, 2 Dec. 2022, https://albertametis.com/news/mna-overwhelmingly-approves-constitution-in-largest-ratification-by-an-indigenous-nation-in-canadian-history/.
Flanagan, Thomas. “The Case against Metis Aboriginal Rights.” Canadian Public Policy / Analyse De Politiques, vol. 9, no. 3, 1983, p. 314., https://doi.org/10.2307/3550780.
Gaudry, Adam. “Communing with the Dead: The ‘New Métis,’ Métis Identity Appropriation, and the Displacement of Living Métis Culture.” American Indian Quarterly, vol. 42, no. 2, 2018, p. 162., https://doi.org/10.5250/amerindiquar.42.2.0162. Accessed 6 June 2023.
Haozous, Emily A., et al. “Blood Politics, Ethnic Identity, and Racial Misclassification among American Indians and Alaska Natives.” Journal of Environmental and Public Health, vol. 2014, 2014, pp. 1–9., https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/321604.
Rice, Kylie. “Blood Quantum and Its Role in Native Identity.” The Indigenous Foundation, The Indigenous Foundation, 26 July 2022, https://www.theindigenousfoundation.org/articles/bloodquantum
Russell, Patricia, and David Wylynko. The True Canadians: Forgotten Nevermore. Métis Nation of Alberta, 2023.
Strong, Pauline Turner, and Barrik Van Winkle. “‘Indian Blood’: Reflections on the Reckoning and Refiguring of Native North American Identity.” Cultural Anthropology, vol. 11, no. 4, 1996, pp. 547–576., https://doi.org/10.1525/can.1996.11.4.02a00050.