Blogs
First Nation Flood
The building of a dam on a sacred first nation site is both unacceptable as it is a historical site, and a direct violation of our basic rights to religion. This is an extremely terrible breach in our rights. This means that the government or even worse a company can breach out basic rights for a little more energy. This is also a cultural abomination as much can be learned about the our history. Not only as a country but as a species, the rituals of ancient humans, their weapons, artifacts, and means of survival. Creating this dam is destroying what it means to be human, which is to gain knowledge.
-Qayyum Devji
Post comment
2 Comment(s)
I think the base of your post has a good purpose to it. A few things that stood out to me was that you were saying "our rights" a lot which is good in the sense that we should all have the same rights and the First Nation people don't deserve to have their rights violated but also by saying "our rights" you indirectly dismiss the First Nation identity. The treatment of Aboriginal people in Canada nowadays is a result of violent European colonialism, compared to other minorities in Canada the struggles of First Nations in Canada have been significantly worse. So it shouldn't be "our rights" because our rights shouldn't be the main point of this post. It is prejudice against FN people specifically. Building this dam almost humiliates FN culture in relation to Canadian history, it dismisses FN rights to their own land. Also don't assume FN people are "ancient people", they still exist, they are a modern civilization, that have been a subject of assimilation in the Americas for years. So we should acknowledge that FN are minorities and treated by the government accordingly. But other than that I can really appreciate and respect the message in your post, good job Qayyum.
Your comment may be true but you have to consider the other side as well. Although true history will be destroyed, this dam will provide electricity to the local population which may include all of BC. There are many other places where history can be found. History doesn't have to be preserved in the site, it can be moved to other sites like museums. Take Fort Edmonton as an example, it was destroyed to make space for our provincial legislature. Once that was done, we simply reconstructed the historic land mark in another location. Past this I often argue that why should one culture get special treatment while everyone else is treated equally. Canada is a very multicultural society with different cultures coexisting in peace. I argue why should the first nations be treated differently from others? People often say it's because the Europeans treated them badly but they did that with every culture at one point so let bygones be bygones. The dam will provide befits for everyone including the first nations. I'm not saying the First nations are not important they are very important to our history, I'm simply saying that we should stop hanging on to the past and move on arm in arm. "Those who foolishly cling onto the past will surely all perish"-Unknown
Mike Zhang, you stated:
"Although true history will be destroyed, this dam will provide electricity to the local population which may include all of BC. There are many other places where history can be found [...] History doesn't have to be preserved in the site, it can be moved to other sites like museums."
Although building a dam where the required natural resources are most abundant is justified in itself, there are two ways in which this issue can be approached.
- Preserve the Aboriginal lands and construct a dam in the second best location to achieve a similar effect.
- Build the dam in the most ideal location, and tell the Aboriginal Peoples that they must, in a sense, "relocate" their history and sacred grounds.
By building the dam on the Aboriginal sacred lands, it is true that the power it supplies would benefit nearly everyone within British Columbia's provincial boundaries, but is the need for supplying that power greater than our responsibility to protect endangered cultures? By choosing to build the dam in that very location, aren't we, as a country placing a price on the value of other Canadians' culture and heritage?
It is true that history moves - but at the same time history is anchored to certain objects or landmarks. History moves with the people and lives on through the people. But relocating one's cultural site in favour of a dam that could, almost without consequence be built elsewhere, is no longer an an issue of the relocation of history, but an act of cultural genocide.
I implore you to consider this. If a power company were to one day announce that it would tear down an important heritage site such as the Great Pyramid of Giza, or relocate the Stonehenge for the resources in the area, massive protests would undoubtedly break out across the globe. People would without a shadow of a doubt, fight to preserve the rich history and cultural significance of these sites.
But what is the difference between tearing down the Great Pyramid and tearing down an Aboriginal settlement? And what is the difference between relocating the Stonehenge and relocating an Aboriginal cultural site?
The correct answer is that there is none. All these sites are cornerstones - central pieces of history and culture that make up a nation and serve as a part a collective's identity. Not one is more valuable than another, in the same way that no society or culture is superior to another.
I believe that a better argument could have been:
"Although the dam may not be built in the most geographically ideal location, its purpose in providing green energy to the residents of British Columbia will remain unchanged as there are numerous other places in which a hydroelectric dam can be constructed without greatly obstructing its practicality and efficiency. By relocating the dam, the endangered cultures of numerous Canadians will be given a chance to thrive and revitalize therefore ensuring a brighter future for both Canada's hydroelectric industry and its cultural diversity."
Through participating in projects like #Decarbonize and COP21, the ultimate lesson to be learned isn't simply reading statistics from a page or finding the most convenient way by which to solve an issue. Those are very important skills to have, but what's essential is that we develop empathy for others and an attitude of unity. Addressing climate change is the whole world's responsibility, and before we can work together, we must first better our understanding of each other, and respect each other for our differences.
"Unity is strength... when there is teamwork and collaboration, wonderful things can be achieved." - Mattie Stepanek
Autumn (Çeralyn) Jiang
Grade 12 Student, Lillian Osborne High School,
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Participated in TRC, COP20, and COP21
I agree with your thoughts, but the government should not be deciding if a dam should be built. The decision should be made by the First Nation because it is their land and therefore they are entitled to absolute ownership over it.
Samiha Zafreen
Oct 16, 2015