Metis Identity in Canada Thesis - Chapter 2

CHAPTER 2

1.     CULTURAL IDENTITY

            This chapter will explore characteristics and issues pertaining to the discussion of Métis identity.  This will involve using examples of Métis cultural identity, debate around self-identification and other arguments that have arisen with the questions of Métis identity.  The reason for exploring the idea of Métis cultural identity is because, as has been stated, they are the only mixed race in the world that has emerged to have their rights as Aboriginal people constitutionally protected.  This chapter will begin to include the quotations and dialogue from the questionnaire.

1.1)             Maintenance of specific cultural items/practices

Walkem & Bruce (2003) claim that it is primarily culture that sets the Métis apart from other Aboriginal peoples.  Many Canadians have mixed Aboriginal/non-Aboriginal ancestry, but this does not make them Métis or even Aboriginal (p 64).  As Gabriel (born in 1966 from Saskatchewan), in the questionnaire responded “just because someone has found out they are Métis does not mean they are “Métis”, meaning you have to live it, many people are exploiting the Métis[...]Taking stories and legends and making them their history without feeling it inside” (Questionnaire, 2008).  This quote discusses that self-identification is not enough, that one must identify with the cultural aspects and portray the importance of “living the culture” versus just self-identifying.

            Green (2003), states that culture remains an essential context for individual and collective identity, and that it is through culture that our individuality is made meaningful (p 8).  The Métis people during the “Forgotten Years” 1885-1960’s, who retained their culture through memory and continued practice, were able to continue to pass it down orally to their children.  This practice also acted as a form of resistance to the pressures of the colonial regime and the threat of cultural assimilation and extinction.  Frantz Fanon (in Green, 2003) makes the analysis that “an indigenous culture under a colonial regime lives continually under the strain of knowing that its very existence is at risk.  Faced with the perpetual need to resist this threat, very old traditions are forced into service playing new roles in defence of the culture” (p 8).  On the other hand, Swan and Jerome (in Foster 2004) claim that cultural memory is often suppressed in the face of discrimination, where people (as in the case of the Métis) are meant to feel ashamed of their Aboriginal background and are taught to forget about their Aboriginal ancestors while promoting immigrant (European) relatives, who were acceptable in the dominant society based on their physical appearance (p 32).

            In the case of the Métis, after 1885 the destruction of cultural memory occurred because of Canadian society branding them as “rebels” and “traitors” to the national state.  This caused many to abandon cultural practices and forget aspects of Métis culture.  However, Emma LaRocque (in Green, 2003) states that Aboriginal people are dynamic peoples whose cultures although seriously disturbed, where not entirely erased by the colonial process (p 9).  Those that maintained the culture and traditions have provided the Métis with an opportunity for “cultural recovery” and a chance to spur Métis nationalism in the present (Green, 2003, p 8).  All nineteen respondents in the Questionnaire replied that they were interested in learning and understanding Métis history for two main reasons: so that the unique culture of the Métis could be carried on into the future and to understand their own identity and history (Questionnaire, 2008). 

            According to Goldthorpe (1996), culture refers to a complete way of life: a complex whole including language, material culture/technology, social institutions, and religious, moral and artistic values.  A cultural identity is a combination of these elements in a pattern that is recognizably different from other cultures (p 149).  Johan Gottlieb Herder (in Alcoff & Mendieta, 2003) argued that a nation is constituted through its language and culture.  Language and culture were not just merely aspects of the social environment within which people make their lives, but are constitutive of their very identity (p 271-272).  Herder also claims that human identity exists only in a framework of interpretation, which is provided by language, cultural symbols and creates awareness of ourselves and others (Alcoff & Mendieta, 2003, p 271-272).  The three cultural elements, which will be mentioned in this thesis, that are important to Métis identity include: language, sash and Red River Jig.

            The Métis created an absolutely distinct language; they often refer to their spoken language as “Michif”, which was named after them.  “Michif” is a unique and structured language that consists of Plains Cree, Saulteaux (First Nations languages) and French; however Cree and French are the dominant components (Barkwell et al.; 2001, p 23).  Michif is not just a random mix of languages because it incorporates a grammatical structure where the First Nations words are the verbs and the French words are the nouns.  As well, the grammatical structure of the Cree language is used for the verbs and the French structure used for the nouns.  Many of the Metis speakers of the time did not speak Cree or French, but conversed in Michif.  Although French and Cree speakers can recognize elements of their language in the spoken tongue of Michif, to many it is difficult to understand.  Presently, many of the remaining Michif speakers are found mostly in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta (Historic Métis Homeland) (Barkwell et al., 2001, p 23). 

However, many of the younger generations of Métis people have not learned this language.  This can be attributed to the aggressive assimilatory policies of Canada.  Therefore, fear that it will eventually become extinct exists.  Métis organizations in many of the provinces have started language revitalization for young people for this reason (Métis Nation of Saskatchewan, 2009).  The emergence of a specific language has been an important component of Métis culture and as Garry (born in Saskatchewan in 1957) responded to the question “Whether Métis heritage is important to you?” states “Especially our language....When I was young our parents or extended families did not speak our language to us because they were told not to; so the majority of us did not learn to speak our tongue and sooner or later I fear our language will be extinct” (Questionnaire, 2008).  This is an example of the importance of language to culture and also the significance that needs to be placed on the revitalization of this language, or an important aspect to culture, as Herder stated, will disappear (Alcoff & Mendieta, 2003, p 271-272). 

Herder also mentioned the importance of cultural symbols to culture (Alcoff & Mendieta, 2003, p 271-272).  The most important Métis symbol in representing Métis identity is the Métis sash.  Turner (1980) discusses the importance of body paint and bodily adornment of the Kayapo tribe that live on the southern borders of the Amazon Forest (p 115).  Although Turner refers to body painting and adornment as a form of dress amongst this indigenous tribe, it compares in symbolic importance to the meaning of the sash to Métis cultural identity.  Turner mentions that the Kayapo possess a quite elaborate code of what could be considered dress; he also states that this fact escapes notice to the western observer because it does not contain any involvement with clothing.  The Métis sash is also a symbol that from an outsider’s perspective resembles a colourful scarf, but to Métis people is a symbolic representation of their culture and identity (p 115).  For the Kayapo, body painting is a serious matter.  The method in which an individual is painted characterizes their individual identity and through the body painting a collective group identity (p 113).  The sash can be compared to the body painting of the Kayapo, based on its significance to Métis cultural identity (Goulet & Goulet, 2006, p 32).

The Métis sash is a finger woven belt with a blend of bright-coloured fibres woven into a decorative pattern (Goulet & Goulet, 2006, p 32).  The sash is truly a North American invention representing the diversity of the French Canadians, First Nations and Celtic heritage of the Métis.  The colours of the sash represent certain aspects of their history.  RED is the Métis bloodshed over the years in fighting for their rights, BLUE is the depth of their spirit, WHITE is the connection with earth and the creator, BLACK represents the dark period when Métis suffered dispossession and depression, GREEN signifies fertility and growth, WHITE AND BLUE woven interchangeably represents the colours of the Métis national flag and YELLOW represents prosperity for the Métis nation (see appendix figure A) (Goulet & Goulet, 2006, p 33).  As represented here the sash has been important as a historical and modern day symbol of Métis identity, which allows Métis people in the present to carry on the sash as an emblem of a collective Aboriginal identity in Canada.

Aside from the sash being an attractive addition to their clothing, it also served for a number of functional purposes: a belt wrapped around the coat to keep them warm, a scarf to keep warm in winter, a strap or sling passing across the forehead and over the shoulders to support a load on the back, a rope for such purposes as pulling a Red River cart out of the mud when stuck, a wash cloth and towel, a first aid emergency sewing kit and an emergency blanket (Goulet & Goulet, 2006, p 33).

  As was stated, the Métis sash has actually emerged with the culture into the present.  It also portrays stories of the past, when Métis people proudly wore this and continue to wear this as an emblem of their identity (Goulet & Goulet, 2006, p 32).  Although the sash is different from body painting in comparison, Turner (1980) assists in illustrating the importance of dress and symbols to certain cultures, that may not be understood by outside observers (p 115). 

Another important aspect to Métis cultural identity that has remained as a symbol of Métis nationalism is through dance, more importantly the Red River Jig.  Dyck & Archetti (2003) note that dance is concerned in the production and expression of embodied identities (p 1).  They also claim that dance is something that sparks widespread participation, critical appreciation and endless interpretations by performers and their audiences (p 1).  Dance is not only attributed to leisure, but also associated with the production, reproduction and competition of identities.  Therefore, the embodied identities created by dance are playful yet serious and categorical yet personal, which is transferred to the field of leisure (Dyck & Archetti, 2003, p 2).  The importance to dance as it relates to the Métis commences with the unofficial Métis anthem, which is a fiddle tune referred to as the “Red River Jig”.  This tune widely known and central to Métis identity, is accompanied by a popular Métis dance of the same name (Barkwell et al., 2001, p 170).

Métis dance consists of vigorous foot tapping, which some believe is the direct descendent to the beat of the drum.  Like the music, Métis dance is a mixture of Scottish, Irish, French and First Nation origins.  The foot work remains close to the floor and is continuous throughout the dance. Although there are many steps and movements, there are three main steps and it is the third step with a scuff, which gives a unique sound to Métis dance (Barkwell et al,; 2001, p 170).  The Red River Jig varies according to different regions; some dancers have as many as twenty to thirty steps, with a competition to see who can do the fanciest footsteps.  The dancer uses the three basic movements, to a certain fiddle note until the music changes.  At that moment, the dancer changes to a fancy jig step until the fiddle goes back to the original note.  This process is repeated as long as new jig steps can be created, but if an individual or couple runs out of steps they usually sit down.  This has become known as the national dance of the Métis, which is still performed in the present (Barkwell et al,; 2001, p 171). 

1.2)             DISCUSSION ABOUT MÉTIS IDENTITY

Aside from the cultural representations and aspects to Métis culture, much debate still centers on “Who are the Métis?” and “How can these people be identified?”.  Roosens (1989) states that cultural traits by which an ethnic group defines itself never comprise the totality of the observable culture, but are only a combination of some characteristics that the actors describe to themselves and consider relevant (p 12).  This explains that it is up to the Métis collectively to define their cultural traits, which places the onus on individuals to identify with the cultural traits of the Métis nation.  The term “Métis” is difficult to define because of its diversity, and those that identify as Métis often have different criteria for defining themselves (Imai, 1999, p 84).  Hall (1997) states that identities are constituted from within and are not based on outside representation, which explains that if people feel Métis then they are Métis (p 75).  Frideres & Gadacz (2005) ask the question “Who is Aboriginal?” and explain two different ways to establishing identity using both objective and subjective criteria (p 17).

            The first is the objective approach to self-identifying, which establishes indicators that are visible to other observers.  These individuals who have similar attributes such as skin pigmentation, hair texture, bone structure, language and eye colour.  Then based on an objective (concrete) approach to identification, these individuals would be considered Aboriginal (Frideres & Gadacz, 2005, p 17).  The subjective approach is utilized from the aspect of self definition.  One problem for Métis consists of the unavailability of measurable objective criterion of physical appearance to make judgement, which is not a practical method for determining a Métis person.  However, based on an objective approach to identifying Métis individuals, if society through ones physical appearance deems an individual as Aboriginal, then they will be considered Aboriginal by outsiders.  For example, if objectively one views a dark skinned person and assumes they are from Africa, then in their mind and perhaps in the minds of others they are considered African.  On the other hand, this individual may have been born in Canada and identifies as a Canadian, then in the individuals self-perception they are Canadian (Frideres & Gadacz, 2005, p 17).  Therefore, according to subjective criterion the identity of an individual lies in their conceptualization of self.  Trying to measure self-conceptualization is a difficult task, but can only inform us of the degree to which a person feels Métis (Frideres & Gadacz, 2005, p 17).

            The government of Canada has opted for the subjective approach in determining an Aboriginal person, which has created confusion for Canadians in attempting to define who is Métis, Indian, or Inuit.  For example, after 1885 till the 1960’s, if Métis people gave ample evidence that they were white, he or she would normally be treated as such.  If Métis individuals lived in a house rather than a tipi, wore cotton clothes rather than clothes made out of animal hides and had short hair they would be treated as non-Aboriginal (Frideres& Gadacz, 2005, p 23).  At this time the government only wanted two categories of peoples: First Nations and non-First Nations, so many Métis people stopped self-identifying and joined one of these two groups, which caused a loss to both individual and a collective identity (Frideres & Gadacz, 2005, p 23).

            Lussier (2009) claims that a contemporary problem with Métis identity is based on the flexibility of Métis people choosing their identity.  The author asks this question “When is a Métis no longer a Métis?” and the answer provided is “When he/she no longer considers himself/herself as Métis” (p 46).  Among any culture, as Roosens (1989) points out, internalizing ethnic identity is an important aspect of identifying with an ethnic group (p 15).  The same counts for Métis people, but self-identifying for Métis individuals should also mean identifying with the unique and distinct cultural aspects of being Métis.  This was also displayed in the quote mentioned by Gabriel earlier, who stated, that just because someone has Indian blood does not mean they are Métis, one must have to embrace the culture and “feel it inside” (Questionnaire, 2009).  Chartrand (2002) agrees with this aspect by saying that “mixed ancestry is not the foundation of the identity of the Métis people; many other people have mixed ancestry” (p 293).   

Green (2003) also discusses the idea of “belonging”.  She states that belonging is a human need and that nationalism, related forms of collective identity formation and celebration are expressions of that need.  As well, the search for belonging hinders those whose socio-political context is deprived of a meaningful community (p 4).  Sarah (born in 1967 in British Columbia) stated in the questionnaire that “I am not First Nations nor am I White.  So all I have is Métis” (Questionnaire, 2008).  She also mentions that, because of her dark physical appearance “I was not accepted by the White culture, but was not accepted by the First Nations as well, so I identified with the Métis culture” (Questionnaire, 2008).  These quotes portray a need to belong to a group.  In Sarah’s case based on physical appearance, she is not accepted into the “White” society and based on not being considered an “Indian, she has decided to identify as a Métis person.  Belonging appears to be most meaningful when it affirms one’s origins, identity, values and relationships (Green, 2003, p 4).

Looking back at Roosens’ (1989) idea of self identity being an important aspect of ethnic identity, this poses a slight controversy for the Métis nation.  Former president of the Ontario Métis Society (ONS), Duke Redbird, believes that, although the political status of the Métis has improved considerably, the ethnic status of today’s Métis is largely mythical due to it being a self-attributing phenomenon.  By mythical he is claiming that the name Métis becomes a catch-all for people with no identity to hang on to.  Therefore, the term Métis can become some sort of non-culture for Métis people themselves (Hedican, 1995, p 212).  Although this quote can encompass some truth, it is also problematic in that the political/identity resurgence of the Métis people is based on many years of disclusion, shame, discrimination and assimilation attempts, which has played a significant role in affecting both the individual and collective identity of the Métis people.  It can be agreed that the term Métis has encompassed a number of meanings by those internalizing what it means to be Métis, but there is a learning and understanding process involved in reclaiming one’s Métis identity. 

Presently, many Métis are reclaiming pride in their cultural history through this are taking an active interest in their identity.  In the questionnaire, all nineteen of the respondents claimed they are proud to be Métis.  However, a few of the people that, although claiming to be proud, also stated that they were reluctant to inform others right away that they were Métis.  For the few that do not, the reasons were because they were worried about the opinion of others (Qustionnaire, 2008).  On the other hand, Mary (born in 1972 from Saskatchewan) in the questionnaire responded about the issue of informing people “I am Métis first before I am Canadian.  If I am Canadian then I am assimilated and I refuse myself to go down that way” (Questionnaire, 2008).  

This re-emergence of Métis group nationalism has assisted in the contemporary attempts to understand who the Métis people are.  Of course, this has spurred some individuals to locate their identity, or to cling to the term as a sense of belonging, but is nonetheless part of present issues that surround the term Métis.  Schouls (2003) notes that nations are created by feelings of nationalism, and that nationalism is the idea that distinctive cultural and political attributes of the collective identity are in a position to be best protected based on the structures of these nations (p 8).  Schouls then goes on to state that Aboriginal identity is based on a threefold experience of: (1) the experience of colonization reinforces awareness of Aboriginal ethnic identity; (2) Aboriginal identity is based on the process of self-identification by those that are linked to one another through the process of colonization and having been in the past and (3) presently marginalized has often spurred the desire to survive as a distinct and unique identity (p 53). 

This threefold process can be attributed to an identity approach associated with the self-identification process.  Schouls (2003) mentions that Aboriginal identity exists because these individuals who happen to share ancestry, historical elements of culture and politics decide that it is important to be members of the same collective group identity (p 53).  The idea of self-identification has often lead to difficulties in census data, in recording the amount of Métis people that self-identify, which has lead to a difficulty in recording the current numbers of the population.

Estimates of the number of Métis range from less than 500,000 to more than 1 million, which is dependent upon different sources.  In 1980, a report by the Native Citizen Directorate for the Secretary of State estimates the following figures: Métis and non-status Indian core population 300,000 to 435,000; Métis and non-status Indian self-identifying 400,000 to 600,000 and Métis and non-Status Indian noncore and not self-identifying 1 million to 2.5 million (Frideres & Gadacz, 2005, p 40).  These figures portray the difficulties at reaching concrete figures on the Métis population.

In 1981, Statistics Canada placed the Métis population at 98,260, which appears very specific compared to the previous numbers.  The main problem in determining the numbers of the Métis population is the difficulty in defining “who the Métis are” because the term is internalized differently.  This was problematic because officially the term Métis was used to incorporate all Indian people who are Non-Status Indian or Inuit, which flawed Métis census figures (Purich, 1988, p 22).  To address this issue, in 1986 people were asked if they considered themselves to be an Aboriginal person and specifically if they considered themselves to be Métis, Indian, Inuit and non-Status Indian.  However, the results were not accurate because many Indian communities boycotted the census and on top of that approximately 125,000 non-Aboriginals misunderstood the question and identified as Aboriginals (Purich, 1988, p 21). 

Prior to this, in 1941, the Métis were placed on the census as Half-breeds and the figures reported a Canadian total of 35,416 Métis, with the Prairie Provinces (Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba) with the largest populations.  However, this is also a flawed number because the term Half-breed had a derogatory meaning; so many Métis people had no desire to categorize themselves this way.  In the early 1980’s, Métis spokespeople themselves estimated the population to be around 700,000 thousand (Purich, 1988, p 21).  Currently, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) list on their website that according to the 2006 census, one third of all Aboriginal people identify them self as Métis and that the Métis experienced the highest population growth at 91%, reaching an estimated 389,785 peoples (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, 2009).  This is census data, so how accurate the census is must be questioned.  The vast differences in census figures portray the difficulty in accurately estimating the Métis population and this can be attributed to the idea of self-identification. 

As Goulet & Goulet (2006) state in their book “Why should we care to what degree exactly of mixture we possess European blood and Indian blood?  No matter how little we have one or the other, do not both gratitude and filial love require us to make a point of saying ‘We are Métis’” (p 14).  Although this quote is discussing the degree of blood, which is not a requirement for identifying as Métis, it borders the idea of, as Chartrand (2002), mentions a “Pan-Aboriginal approach” to Métis identity.  This approach according to Chartrand emphasizes a “mixed blood” linked to a First Nations family anywhere in Canada as the form of Métis identity (p 295).  If this were the case, then the population would be over a million people.  As Chartrand recognizes, this would fail to distinguish the exceptional circumstances, which gave rise to the Métis people in western Canada, and would fail to reflect the long and wide experience of other countries where “mixed blood” or “mestizo” people are not regarded as separate indigenous people, but are either a part of the general population or part of the indigenous nations (p 295).  This is the case in the USA, where “mixed blood” people have either had to assimilate into general population, or remain part of Indian tribes (p 295).  Jacques Rousseau (1970, in Peterson & Brown, 1985) an eminent Quebec biologist, stated that 40% of French Canadians could find at least one First Nations in their family tree, due to the colonial policy of the French in the New World (p 19).  This shows the further difficulties with the biological pan-istic approach to identifying Métis people.

The MNC has been recognized since 1983 as the political representative of the Métis Nation by actions of the Canadian government.  The MNC has decided to base their definition of Métis (which will be discussed more in-depth in the next chapter) on identity based through time and generations, rather than on the concept of racial ancestry (Chartrand, 2002, p 293).  The question “What is your personal definition of a Métis person in Canada?” was asked in the questionnaire and thirteen out of the nineteen respondents stated that the definition was based on racial mixing, or the Pan-Aboriginal approach, so this might conclude that many Métis people feel that being Métis, has to do with coming from a mixed background.  The other respondents based theirs on more cultural definitions or the certain criterion that have been accepted by organizations, governments, or the judicial system (see further) (Questionnaire, 2008).

As well, confusion exists around the “historic Métis” and the “other” Métis.  Currently in Canada, the Métis people are identified as a western phenomenon of the Prairie Provinces (Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta).  However, in a biological sense Métis people have also emerged on the western coast as well as in the east as direct descendants of the early colonial encounters (Peterson & Brown, 1985, p 19).  Peterson & Brown (1985) also explain that, in the east or in the St. Lawrence Valley, a clearly defined sense of separate identity did not occur due to the foundation of a new nation as was the case in the west (Red River Region).  This can be attributed to the fact that in the east the French element remained, while contact with Métis that migrated west occurred much later and the French influence had been greatly reduced in the early 1800’s (p 21).

Purich (1988) notes that the term Métis refers to anyone of mixed blood, but has often been used to refer to those that are the descendants of the western Canada Métis, that united to protest their grievances with the HBC and Government of Canada (p 155).  In that case, the term “Métis” has commonly been taken to refer to the Red River Métis population that emerged in the Red River colony in the 17th and 18^th centuries.  The Métis populations of the west are amalgamated into a single identity known as the “Historic Métis Nation” as the MNC refers to them (Foster, 2004, p 315).  In September 2002, the MNC defined a Métis person as: one who self-identifies; is of historic Métis ancestry and accepted by a Métis community, distinct from other Aboriginal peoples and is able to trace their roots back to the Red River in the 1800’s.  This would make the geographic area of the Métis in the national definition limited to Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, although some parts of BC and Ontario may be included (Foster, 2004, p 315).

Another organization the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP), which was created in the summer of 1990, represents those communities that are excluded from the MNC definition such as in: parts of Ontario, Northwest Territories, Nova Scotia and Labrador (Isaac, 2008, p 5).  This is another aspect of the complexities of Métis identity.  In the questionnaire, on the question about defining Métis identity, one respondent, Gabriel, stated “First Nation and European blood; that is mixed! Don’t believe that your ancestors had to have settled in Red River to be considered Métis.  That would not be fair; it is not fair” (Questionnaire, 2008).  Here emphasis is placed on the definition based on a “mixed race”.  Also he agrees with the RCAP, that the geographical limitations to the historical Métis nation should not apply when defining a Métis person because “it is not fair”.

  As has been stated, another issue with Métis identity is the feeling of shame about their ethnic identity, which occurred following the years after 1885.  This has caused an issue with younger generations of Métis, whose parents were ashamed to discuss their identity with their children as a way to protect them from discrimination.  Lussier (2009) suggests that if the Métis are remembered for anything at all in Canada, it is usually for the 1869 and 1885 resistances.  This could explain why in the present those that integrated or assimilated with the French Canadians still may renounce their identity (p 46).  Mary in the questionnaire responded “I was raised in a home where being Aboriginal; much less Métis; was very much taboo.  When I was fifteen; I learned and I began searching my roots thereafter” (Questionnaire, 2008).

This is not an uncommon occurrence in many Métis households as Cody (born in Manitoba in 1952) stated “My family kept much of this quiet while I was growing up and tried to assimilate.  They always admitted to having-a bit of Indian back there, but tried to minimize the significance” (Questionnaire, 2008).  Howard Adams (in Hedican, 1995), discusses the discrimination that Métis people faced in their community (p 212).  Adams states “that in my half-breed ghetto, finding a job was always difficult because the only employers were white.  It mattered little that I did not look truly Indian: all local employers knew whether I was half-breed or white.  Seeking employment as a Native was more than looking for a job it was asking to be insulted” (p 212).  Maria Campbell (in Hedican, 1995) in her book “Halfbreed” agrees and discusses the remorse and bitterness her parents experienced as a result of the Métis experience in western Canada (p 213).  She states “I never saw my father talk back to a white man....I never saw him or any of our men walk with their heads held high before white people” (p 213).  These were the issues that many Métis people encountered, they had been shamed by the dominant society and often it was easier to just go unnoticed then to stand out (p 213).

Hedican (1995) claims that another problem that Métis people faced is that they must convince outsiders that they have a valid claim to a distinct Aboriginal status in Canadian society.  Métis have had to negotiate their distinct identity in the face of two opposing forces, First Nations and Euro Canadian, which have not readily accepted their existence.  Both groups have dismissed Métis claims, which caused difficulty in laying claim to a legitimate cultural identity that is distinct from both First Nations and Euro Canadians identities (p 214).  The lack of recognition of their distinct culture has often referred to the Métis people as the “Forgotten people” (Imai, 1999, p 83).

It was not until after World War II and the emergence of cultural minority groups that the Métis issues gained more recognition and local organizations were created (Donaud, 2007, p 13).  The Native Council of Canada (NCC) was created in 1971 with the goal of achieving First Nations and Métis participation in the life of modern Canadian society, Donaud (2007) provides an excerpt from the council’s declaration of rights:

“We the Métis and non-status Indians, descendents of the “original people” of this country, declare: That Métis nationalism is Canadian nationalism.  We embody the true spirit of Canada and we are a source of Canadian identity:...That we have the right to preserve our identity and to flourish as a distinct people with a rich cultural heritage....that we are a people with right special status n confederation.” (p 13).

This declaration asserts an old Métis claim of them being the true Canadians.  Both Indians and Whites are immigrants with only a difference in time between their respective arrivals, whereas the Métis represent a genuinely indigenous hybrid race.  In this way they have the best of both worlds (Donaud, 2007, p 13).  This claim displays the end of the period of shame and the beginning of a modern form of nationalism and pride among the Métis nation.