It’s Not The Anonymous You’re Thinking Of!

You may be shocked to read this, but every now and then I get a whiff of racism in Lethbridge. No, really. Hear me out.

Almost every discussion I have about local houseless concerns devolves into a diatribe against Indigenous peoples. Seriously.

It’s as though no one else of another cultural background is houseless.

It just might be me because what I’m witnessing can’t be true, right? 

Living in the bible belt. Strong family values. Rural work ethic. Love thy neighbour. All that good stuff! It captures southern Alberta’s essence. 

Let’s look around.

Anonymous Voices

To start, I’m not Indigenous and I’m certainly not speaking for anyone who is. The goal is to simply assess public statements and offer insights based on my 30 years of studying and/or teaching Indigenous Studies and 20+ years of researching housing issues.

Our starting point is a Lethbridge Herald editorial, “Council not the bad guys over funding decision”. It’s an example of the type of opinion piece that customarily follows any public critique of City Council for, say, not spending on the vulnerable.

In this case, the Herald came out in support of Council’s recent dunk on the Streets Alive outreach bid. Now, take a second and scroll down to the bottom of the story. https://lethbridgeherald.com/commentary/opinions/2023/03/15/council-not-the-bad-guys-over-funding-decision/

Did you read the public comments? That’s the space the Herald opens up to anyone looking to anonymously circulate their ideas, and in the spirit of safeguarding free speech. It’s a public service, don’t ya know!

Those who commented invariably linked houseless issues with Indigenous people and their culture. Happens all the time folks; this entry is typical.

This comes from a consistent bunch whose voices may be gaining influence. It also appears that many in this group want to talk.

Let’s oblige.

R.U. Serious? For Reals!

R.U. Serious penned the following response to the abovementioned piece. As folks can continue to edit their work online, I grabbed the following passages as they appeared on the Herald website, 8 a.m. March 16.

The most concerning issue on our streets obviously, is 70-80% native, large numbers of which were advised by their reserve band councils to leave reserve and that they are as of now not wanted in their communities/reserve. On the reserve, numerous people were subjected to sexual abuse, mental and physical abuse, frequently by close relatives and family friends.

Use it as it is! Despite the fact that federal funds continue to go to the reserves to support them, the band councils have pushed their problems onto our streets.

Since the natives are suing for everything nowadays, it is fair game to sue them and the band councils for the millions of dollars it is costing us to now try to deal with their issues they have pushed into our city.

To recover some of the expenses incurred by businesses and taxpayers, a class action lawsuit is required.

Our police and leadership have failed us and this is the only way we can recoup some of our losses.

I need to thank you for the link to watch the Vancouver is Dying video. Everyone should watch it!

Wowzers!!

Where to begin? I’ll just start with some basics.

According to Serious, the percentage of houseless Indigenous people may be as high as 80%. 

Lethbridge lacks reliable data in this regard, and 70% has emerged as the default. Several censuses I conducted in the 2010s showed Indigenous shelter users ranged from 37% to 65% of the population. Things change.

But how did Serious land on 80%? No sources? Alrighty then.

I loved this one: band councils advised folks to leave the community for LA. Is it possible that Serious was invoking a former Alberta premier’s promise to purchase one-way tickets to ship provincial welfare recipients to B.C.?

No, you say? They’re being serious? My oh my! Did anyone mention that forcing individuals out of any community is an obvious Charter violation, laws that apply to Indigenous peoples and their communities?

And that likewise apply to Lethbridge? Technicalities!!

Here’s Where It Gets Serious (Do Not Pardon The Pun)

Seems as though Serious is practicing a little artistic license here.

Artistic or not, presenting Indigenous peoples in this way … how do you say this nicely … could be considered racist.

Did you hear that? The collective cry to the heavens of those who simply want to ‘tell it like it is’, who’ll now demand an apology from me, for daring to even mention the ‘R’ word.

It’s not them, you see. 

It’s the woke snowflake that has flipped the script, stripping Serious and their brethren of their God-given right to benefit from the historic acts of starving people off their lands, physically isolating them on the chunks we graciously allowed them to reside on as they worked towards abandoning their culture to adopt Judea-Christian norms of acceptable behaviour.

What’s that? Get over it, you say? It’s history – over and done with! Move on already!!

The thing is, Serious is not speaking historically but rather in the now. Take a closer look.

Isn’t s/he suggesting we starve urban Indigenous peoples of resources to push them out of town? Back to ‘their’ communities? While also hinting that if they adopt our norms and mores, they may one day be allowed re-entry into Lethbridge—land the City Council consistently reaffirms to be traditional Blackfoot territory?

Sorry. That last bit about coming back to LA – fanciful thinking on my part. Everything else? It’s pulled from the colonial playbook.

Did You Hear That Dog Whistle?

Dog-whistle politics – you know, the use of coded language to secure public support – is being practiced here. And if I do say so, rather well.

That ain’t a compliment!

It’s particularly abhorrent to suggest, as Serious does, that those who have experienced abuse are exploiting their trauma to manipulate Lethbridge, and at a band council’s behest.

The complaints about federal funding going to First Nations? As if no other Canadian municipal-like communities receive federal funding. If they did (and they do), by this logic, LA would have to refund millions in annual programming dollars.

Then there’s that old nugget about the non-taxpaying Indigenous person. Time to move on, folks; the stereotypes are starting to bog things down.

Sue You, Sue Me: That’s The Way It Should Be!

One issue Serious accurately flirted with was Indigenous peoples suing Canada: they’re suing the hell out of Canada! And rightfully so … that’s why they’re winning more than they’re losing. Seriously! 

Unfortunately, outside of winning financial settlements, few changes to law or policy have resulted and public attitudes remain largely unaffected.

Resentment also seems to grow with every loss Canada suffers in court, defeats that inevitably expand Indigenous rights.

Oh, if we could just return to the old days! None of this would rise to a concern.

Remember those times? When ‘Indians’ lived on ‘their’ reserves and not in ‘our’ communities? When we took the cash from folks visiting town to acquire goods and services, and then demanded they overnight at the river bottom? 

Good times!

A (Lack Of) Class-Action!

Getting back to reality, let’s explore the class-action lawsuit Serious claims is required “To recover some of the expenses incurred by businesses and taxpayers.”

It’s clearly based on a belief that band councils are singularly responsible for their members’ actions, which makes Indigenous governments liable to be sued for damages.

This is akin to saying, for instance, that we can sue the Red Deer City Council for restitution if some Red Deer folks land in LA and use up our supports.

See where I’m going?

Even Indigenous peoples, Serious, have Charter–protected mobility rights, meaning they can move and stay where they choose; all without the fear of losing access to things like health care and social services.

They’re Canadian citizens … and Alberta residents … they may even be band members or, here it comes … municipal residents.

More importantly, and logically, the community to which you were born and/or raised is not responsible for your actions.

If that was the case, several nearby First Nations could sue Lethbridge for serial killer John Martin Crawford’s murderous rampage against Indigenous women in the 1990s.

Who To Sue?

I agree however that some people and/or institutions could do with a good suing. But who? Who to sue?

Folks could sue the City of Lethbridge for failing to effectively respond to the houseless crisis. It’s been threatened. Better yet, sue LA for violating the houseless community’s individual charter and human rights. Bring it on, to paraphrase Counc. Ryan Parker.

What about suing the Province of Alberta for cutting programs that openly placed the vulnerable in danger. I think that’s called abandoning duty of care responsibilities.

Here’s an easy target: Canada! Deep pockets, responsible for citizen well-being. 

The federal government’s choice to ignore a Supreme Court of Canada decision (Daniels, 2015) demanding Ottawa acknowledge its obligations for all Indigenous peoples is low-hanging fruit.

Hell, while we’re at it, let’s sue China for unleashing COVID-19 in 2020 (that’s what I heard anyhoo), as this threw everything into an economic tailspin from which we’re still reeling.

But suing Indigenous peoples and their communities? Seems like an overreach.

It would also require filing court papers with a legal name appended, and I don’t see that happening any time soon.

All in, the anonymous have spoken!

Final Word

As you can see, anonymous dialogues are not helpful. To anyone. 

Why?

Because they’re not constructive … they’re hurtful … they breed hate … they’re simply wrong. 

To those who want to peddle in this type of ‘hidden discussion’, take heed: this is my challenge to you. 

Unfortunately, the loudest in our community – whether in deed or word – tend to go unchallenged, and this has to change. 

Are you serious?

You shouldn’t have to ask!