Blue Corn Comics -- Stereotype of the Month Entry

Stereotype of the Month Entry
(2/2/09)

Jonathan Kay Another Stereotype of the Month entry:

For my initial thoughts on this article, see Kay Thinks Indians Should Assimilate. In this posting I'll dismantle a few of Jonathan Kay's arguments.

Jonathan Kay on aboriginal assimilation, and the best Canadian policy book written in the last 10 years

[W]hat's even more interesting to me than their policy prescriptions is the way the authors deconstruct the prevailing "progressive" orthodoxy—the idea that a return to authentic native culture is the key to aboriginal success—from a left-wing perspective. As they show, policies that emphasize segregation and race-consciousness contradict a host of venerable leftist dogmas—and, in some cases, even blur into fascism.

Consider:

—From bioethics to evolution, progressive advocates long have urged that government policies be formulated on hard, secular science—not hidebound cultural traditions or religious fairy tales. Yet where aboriginals are concerned, this principle is ignored.

Wrong. In any debate where conservatives try to bring up religion—abortion, homosexuality, birth control, stem-cell research, etc.—liberals are consistent. We don't change our views if Natives are involved in the discussion.Suddenly, myths about a Yahweh-like "Creator" take precedence over clear evidence that North American natives migrated across the Bering Strait.Wrong. With the exception of asking that ancient remains get a decent burial, Indians aren't impeding the work of archaeologists."Traditional medicine," with all its quackery, is praised as if it were the equal of Western medicine.Wrong. Advocates of "traditional medicine" claim it has some value in some cases—cases which they've documented with facts and evidence. They don't claim that traditional medicine is the equal of Western medicine in all cases.At Canadian academic conferences, militant leftists will gladly stand at solemn attention to honour a native shaman waving his feathers and intoning his prayers—a spectacle that would be unthinkable if the holy man happened to be holding a Bible and talking about Jesus.Wrong. People are exposed to public Christian prayers a lot more often than they are to public Native prayers. From what I've seen, they're equally respectful to the Christian and Native religious practitioners.

As a card-carrying liberal and agnostic who's stood through many Native prayers, I'm guessing a lot of us don't do it "gladly." I'd be glad if every public ceremony from a Native conference to the presidential inauguration skipped the religious trappings. But I accept them as part of our multicultural society.

Indians seek segregation?

—From the civil rights movement onwards, progressive forces in our society have weaned us off the toxic notion that a person's race dictates the content of his or her character. But this enlightened attitude is wilfully discarded in the case of natives, who are imagined to be genetically enlightened environmentalists, pacifists and (as discussed below) socialists.Wrong. First, many Indian tribes are multiracial in nature. And even if they're primarily "Indian" by race, they're officially political organizations, not racial organizations. They're exactly like Japan or Iceland or the state of Maine—organized around political principles, not racial ones, even though they're racially homogeneous.

Second, what we imagine of Native people is based on their cultures, not their biology. There's absolutely no belief that an Indian raised by wolves or Mormons or Rockefellers would grow up to be an environmentalist, pacifist, or "socialist." Anybody who doesn't understand this basic point is too stupid to be arguing the issue.

Third, what we imagine of Native people is largely a stereotype. True, Indians often claim to be stewards of the land—because the evidence often proves they were and are stewards of the land. But most Indians don't claim to be pacifists. The truth is just the opposite: they're inordinately proud of their warrior traditions.

And most Indians don't claim to be "socialists." What they claim is to have more concern for the community's well-being than their own. This "it takes a village" mentality is what stupid right-wingers mislabel "socialism."

This racist conceit is in turn used to justify segregation—since any other policy would expose natives to the pollution of white values.Wrong again. First, there's no "racial conceit" except in Kay's imagination.

Second, about two-thirds of Natives live off the reservation in cities. Overall, I'm not sure they're more segregrated than any other racial group. In fact, you could argue that whites, blacks, and Latinos are more segregated. But wherever Indians live, many still want to honor and preserve their traditions.

Third, the minority who want to live on reservations aren't practicing "segregation." In many cases, non-Indians can live on the rez too if they obey tribal laws. And Indians who live on the rez interact freely with the "outside world"—going off-rez to work, attend school, shop, etc. They're "segregated" only in the sense that every state and city is "segregated" from other states or cities.

The Native minority who live on reservations do so for the same reasons any community or neighborhood "segregates" itself. Every political body in the world maintains order within its boundaries to create a sense of unity. Every political body seeks to preserve its values and way of life.

Indians are no different. They aren't trying to avoid all "white values," since they're in favor of families, education, and work. They're trying to avoid the negative values.

You know, values like "might is right," "winning is everything," and "one nation under God"? These values have caused many of the world's problems, so Indians are wise to avoid them. I avoid them too because I'm a smart Obama liberal, not a stupid Bush conservative like Kay.

Incidentally, have you wondered why this is a racist screed and not simply a screed? It's because Kay doesn't argue for the dissolution of any "racial" enclave other than Indian reservations. He doesn't say that white people should abandon their failing small towns and farms, their dead-end lives built around coal mines or steel mills. No, only Indians must leave their traditional homes. Only Indians are too "primitive" and "superstitious" to make a living in rural areas.

So Kay is prejudiced against Indians. He admits that this prejudice is based on their genetics, not their cultures. That makes him a racist.

For more on Disrobing the Aboriginal Industry, see Demolishing Disrobing.

Related links
Should Indians cling to reservations?

* More opinions *

. . .

Copyrighted material is posted under the Fair Use provision of the Copyright Act,
which allows copying for nonprofit educational uses including criticism and commentary.

Comments sent to the publisher become the property of Blue Corn Comics
and may be used in other postings without permission.