First Nations? Second Thoughts

by Thomas Flanagan

Over the last thirty years Canadian policy on Aboriginal issues has come to be dominated by an ideology that sees Aboriginal peoples as "nations" entitled to specific rights. Indians and Inuit now enjoy a cornucopia of legal privileges, including rights to self-government beyond federal and provincial jurisdiction, immunity from taxation, court decisions reopening treaty issues settled long ago, the right to hunt and fish without legal limits, and free housing, education, and medical care as well as other economic benefits. Underpinning these privileges is what Flanagan describes as Aboriginal orthodoxy - a set of beliefs that hold that prior residence in North America is an entitlement to special treatment; that Aboriginal peoples are part of sovereign nations endowed with an inherent right to self-government; that Aboriginals must have collective rather than individual property rights; that all treaties must be renegotiated on a "nation-to-nation" basis; and that Native people should be encouraged to build prosperous "Aboriginal economies" through money, land, and natural resources transferred from other Canadians. In First Nations? Second Thoughts Flanagan combines conceptual analysis with historical and empirical information to show that the Aboriginal orthodoxy is both unworkable and ultimately destructive to the people it is supposed to help.

Genres: Nonfiction, Politics, Canada, History

304 pages, Paperback

First published April 1, 2000

About the author

Thomas Flanagan (November 5, 1923 – March 21, 2002) was an American professor of English literature who specialized in Irish literature. He was also a successful novelist. Flanagan, who was born in Greenwich, Connecticut, graduated from Amherst College in 1945. He was a tenured full - Professor in the English Department at the University of California, Berkeley until his retirement. Flanagan died in 2002, at the age of 78, in Berkeley.

He won the National Book Critics Circle Award in 1979. The Archives and Special Collections at Amherst College holds his papers.

Reviews

[Cian · Rating 1 out of 5]

Objectivity is dead and not to be expected, but one does expect a certain level of critical thought and reflexivity. Both were lacking. This book has potential use only by providing fodder for disagreement.

[Bruce Crown · Rating 1 out of 5]

Racist drivel.

Move on from this. You will learn nothing except how racist Flanagan is, and you will never get the time it took you to read this trash back.

[Kayla · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book attempts to address the controversial relationship that has been created by the indian act. While the crippling impact of the colonization of indigenous lands can't be undermined the basis of this book acts as if the best solution to the issues created are to abandon both the act and the people. The language about civilization in the earlier part of the book make it clear the author has more interest in excusing the author racist perceptions. The end notes the author uses to validate his thesis are poorly executed and many are dated and or discredited, the use of historical documents to validate the rhetoric that indigenous society did not qualify as civilization. While there were moments of what appeared to be empathy towards the modern plight of indigenous groups the author continued to return to the premise that complete removal of treaties and federal supports is the only path forward and how grand the plan would be for all. Not only is this idea short sighted and lacking in ownership of the responsibility the federal government will always have towards those they have treaties with, it is completely one sided with the theory that "getting" to stand on their own in a society that has always and still oppressing them will be the best for this marginalized group. Ridiculous. Racist. Remiss in acceptance of the ongoing racism that would still impact us all. The fairy tale of a transition away from treaty status that magically makes the history go away , the racism go away, as if removing the obligations of the government will make everything change. The ideas presented about the "special" treatment that the First Nations get shows a lack of respect and naive to the point of stupid, the typical ignorant view of "free" money available to these groups. Awful book rage inducing.

[Liquidlasagna · Rating 5 out of 5]

The wild Amazone

Different but Interesting
8/10

First Nations Second Thoughts provides a different but interesting critique of the contemporary aboriginal rights movement in Canada.

Taking issue with the report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples author Tom Flanagan maintains that what he calls the "aboriginal orthodoxy" (aboriginal leaders, non-aboriginal politicians, among others) have misled ordinary aboriginal people.

By patronizing their traditional cultures and trying to find constitutional means to perhaps fossilize them aboriginal peoples, at the same time, are given sweet words but no improvements to their daily lives.

Flanagan challenges assumptions that aboriginal peoples ,collectively prefer their traditional ways and consequent isolation to integration into modern Western society.

His discussion is interesting except that he tends to set his own premises concerning the "aboriginal orthodoxy" rather than commenting on statements made by real people involved.

He also neglects aboriginal values such as co-operation and consensus which have much to offer modern Western society.

Nevertheless I reccommend "First Nations Second Thoughts as a perspective to those who have doubts about the aboriginal rights movement and as a challenge to those who defend it.

Robert K. Milligan

[Hunter Holt-Barry · Rating 1 out of 5]

Flanagan's analysis is limited at best and falls into the trap of mythological understandings of how the numbered treaties function and their intention--Its only use is for social analysis of how people misunderstand treaties and put forward false ideas of "land surrender" and discounts of Indigenous ways of knowing.

[Sean R · Rating 1 out of 5]

Racist

[Shannon · Rating 1 out of 5]

racist, ignorant, pro-assimilation

[Alexandria Fanjoy Silver · Rating 2 out of 5]

Politics aside, some of the conclusions drawn herein are ... a reach

[Garette · Rating 1 out of 5]

Painfully racist.

[Bridget Coady · Rating 1 out of 5]

Fuck this book and its racist ass author. Ughhhh. We’ll really publish anything huh?

[Chloe · Rating 1 out of 5]

I used my copy as fire wood.

[Lyf · Rating 3 out of 5]

From another members review as I couldn't have said it better:

"Stunningly ignorant and biased analysis, although actually worth reading for two reasons:

1. there are some random moments of rational, objective thought which are well-needed on this topic, that most scholars would typically shy away from due to their controversial nature; and
2. to understand the depth of the absurdity of the stance taken by the Federal government on "Indian" issues, as well as most provincial governments. It is helpful to know just what has been whispered in Stephen Harper's ear by Flanagan, his former Policy Advisor, ideas which we are now seeing in action on the floor of the Federal legislature."