The Inuit--The People-of Canada have long dreamed of creating their own territory out of the former Northwest Territories. With the birth of Nunavut--Our Land--on 1 April 1999, that dream has come true. Proposed since 1974, Nunavut was approved by Native constituents in 1979. The tentative agreement was signed in December of 1991 and was ratified by the people of the Northwest Territories, Native groups, and the Canadian government in late 1992, but the new territory is very much a creature of the twentieth century that attempts to undo some of the mistakes of the past. Nunavut Territory lies in Canada's Central and Eastern Arctic, roughly north and east of the tree line, and along the boundaries of traditional Inuit and Dene Indian usage (see Nixon 1991; Burns 1991). Iqaluit, with over five thousand inhabitants and the largest town in Nunavut, has been designated its capital. As a third Canadian territory, Nunavut emerged from the collective efforts of many Inuit leaders and organizations. Elsewhere, I have referred to three main periods of Inuit history from a mainstream point of view. For thousands of years during the Free Reign period, the Inuit eked out a nomadic, hunting and gathering subsistence, living in what amounts to approximately one-fifth of Canada's land mass. After that, the Contact with an infusion of explorers, traders, whalers, and missionaries during the sixteenth through the nineteenth centuries, brought Anglo-and Franco-European material and nonmaterial culture into Inuit lives. This was followed in the mid-twentieth century by the which dramatically transformed Inuit lifestyles and culture, dreams and realities. The government moved the Inuit off the land into settlements when many issues converged: a tuberculosis epidemic, a canine encephalitis epidemic, the government's interest in centralizing health and welfare services, government pressure on families to send their children to school, and concerns about Canadian sovereignty in the Ar ctic (Billson 1990). Although widespread starvation and tuberculosis were controlled, resettlement succeeded in creating a structurally and culturally marginalized people (Billson 1988).Camps out on the land averaged forty to fifty people, compared to the settlements that range from 250 to a few thousand people. When the government placed the Inuit into settlements over thirty years ago, the people became almost completely reliant on government policies and support. A rash of social problems emerged from the dramatic changes in lifestyles and livelihood. The ramifications of moving from very small, isolated groups to larger communities include changes in family structure and parent-child relationships; rising levels of education and diversity of occupation; and disconcerting rates of alcoholism, suicide, drug abuse, domestic violence, and unemployment. Many Inuit believe that role reversal and male loss of the provider role have led to higher rates of substance abuse, depression, and violence among males (Skinner 1989). The Inuit provide us with an excellent case study of the ways in which domination of an aboriginal people has created both far-reaching opportunities and a perplexing social, economic, and cultural crisis for an indigenous population. The surge toward autonomy among the Inuit stems from long-standing domination by southern, Euro-Canadian government and business interests. Their situation also suggests the complex ramifications of the government-enforced massive resettlement of Inuit off the land into newly created settlements (Billson 1990). Nunavut can be understood only within the context of this dramatic shift from the land to village life. The concept of Nunavut emerged from the Resettlement Period as a political and spiritual quest for freedom and independence, but in a modern form designed to fit into Canadian realities of Confederation. On the other hand, the Resettlement Period, marked by central government control, paternalism, and economic support, leaves a complicated and stubborn legacy of dependency. …
Read full abstract