Who Are the Métis?

I thought I understood who the Métis were. I was never sure if I agreed with their official status that is virtually identical to the First Nations, but I thought I knew what their self-described label meant. Quite simply - to be allowed to call oneself a Métis and to benefit from whatever (no matter how small) recognition of that fact, one must have one ancestor who at some time during the 1600 or early 1700s to have been of First Nation Heritage. Generally, these relations occurred between Indigenous women and male Europeans involved in the fur trade. Their status has been confirmed by the constitution and by the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Métis argue that they have a distinctive culture including a unique language (which logically must just be a combination of Indigenous, French and English), dance, music and food. There is a history that includes a revolt against the Canadian Government and a treaty with that same government. While I had never thought about it - it seems logical that the Métis were more likely to live in the Prairies than in the Maritimes.

However, none of that should award them special status. I appreciate the fact that there is a specific group of people who have some cultural ties and who have lived in the same general area for a couple of centuries - but there are people whose families have lived in Quebec or the Maritimes for longer. We accept that Acadians have a culture, a language and a history of repression, but we do not give them special status. Although to be fair, there are those in Quebec with their own language, food etc who because of that and the fact that their roots in Quebec go back to the 1600s do demand, and get special status.

There is no doubt that the Indigenous peoples of Canada deserve special status and recognition. They were here first - for at least 10,000 years. We, as Canadians, live on land that frequently was either fraudulently obtained or just taken. The very least we owe those First Nations is the recognition of their special status as separate nations. But that is not true of the Métis. They, as a collective, were not here first, they "married" into a culture, had some kids and combined parts of that lifestyle with their European roots. That does not make them a separate nation. If some members of that group wish to declare themselves Indigenous - fair enough. But as they present themselves - they as a group are no more special than are Acadians or for that matter Ukrainians.

What makes the discussion particularly relevant in 2019 is that there are some people in the Maritimes who are using the word métis to define their cultural roots. The Métis of the Prairies and some Indigenous people are not happy. They appear to want that term to be restricted only to them. The Métis want to restrict others, who claim perhaps some specific cultural activities and certainly some genetic right to claim the term, to not do so.

It strikes me that the Métis are similar to those who build a cottage on a small lake and then want to have rules created so that it is harder for anyone else to build a cottage on that lake or a university group who have their rights to exist enshrined, but then want a say in who else can form a group.

The problem with identity politics is that while they may strengthen the capacity of that group to defend their rights - it prevents others from doing so. When we isolate ourselves by saying we are special - the rest of the statement logically is - and you are not. We will not solve the world's problem's by isolating people.