The continued subjugation of the native dehumanizes and dooms the indigenous people to genocide, decolonization must occur to solve. Be skeptical of any movements that do not start with ridding the state of colonial opression
Razack 14 (Sherene Razack, Professor of Sociology and Equity Studies at the University of Toronto, 10-7-2014, "Sherene Razack on Our Settler Legacy," Possible Canadas, http://possiblecanadas.ca/en/sherene-razack-canadas-settler-legacy-2/) CH
The growing, institutionalized dehumanization towards specific groups. It’s as though society is evolving based on the principle that human life doesn’t matter. Every morning, I read about 10 things that make me think we’re growing increasingly distant from each other. It begins with race and becomes a structure that invades everything. White people routinely dehumanize Indigenous people. I’m talking of a spectrum of violent acts, like police officers who drive a man out of the city and leave him to freeze to death. The principle that this person’s life is not worth as much as yours is both an everyday act and a state practice. Look at the “tough on crime” initiatives that conservatives love. What kind of cruelty and disregard for human life do these kinds of policies come out of? I always think about how dominant subjects make themselves dominant. You’re not born that way. I tell my class, “No one is born White.” You have to learn it and you have to keep performing it every day. People don’t easily believe in their own superiority or that others are lower forms of humanity. They have to convince themselves, and they’re terribly haunted by it. The Settlers had to learn that Indigenous people were inferior, were savages. But it was a very hard lesson to learn, because for one thing, they’re not. Indigenous people had a lot of knowledge about this place and clearly had a developed society. Because we have to be taught not to recognize the humanity of others, maybe we can interrupt this process. We have to learn that the colonial project that is Canada is not viable, because it is not structured on the principle of a common humanity. We could look at all the instances where spectacular meanness and repression have not produced anything good, moments when Canada was tempted to be extremely vicious to Indigenous peoples. If that principle structures your country, which is what structures this country, then it’s almost like you can’t go anywhere good from there. We can’t move into recognizing the humanity of refugees or other people if our day-to-day life is intensely structured by the inhumanity with which we have treated Aboriginal people. Almost everything we do came out of that colonial moment when we tried to figure out how to steal the land. We have to confront this colonial paradigm before we can open the way to Others.
This dehumanization is how the extermination of the natives ensues, only by portraying the native body as lesser can the colonizer justify the continuous oppression.
(Nadine Gordimer, 2003, Introduction of The Colonizer and the Colonized, by Albert Memmi, http://atlasarts.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Albert-Memmi-The-Colonizer-and-the-Colonized.pdf, pp. 22-24) CH
*we don’t endorse gendered language
Memmi has strikingly described the sequence of steps that leads them to "self-absolution." Conservatism brings about the selection of mediocre men. How can an elite of usurpers, aware of their mediocrity, establish their privileges? By one means only: debasing the colonized to exalt themselves, denying ' the title of humanity to the natives, and defining them as simply absences of qualities-animals, not humans. This does not prove hard to do, for the system deprives them of everything. Colonialist practice has engraved the colonialist idea into things themselves; it is the movement of things that designates colonizer and colonized alike. Thus oppression justifies itself through oppression: the oppressors produce and maintain by force the evils that render the oppressed, in their eyes, more and more like what they would have to be like to deserve their fate. The colonizer can only exonerate himself in the systematic pursuit of the "dehumanization" of the colonized by identifying himself a little more each day with the colonialist apparatus. Terror and exploitation dehumanize, and the exploiter · authorizes himself with that dehumanization to carry his exploitation· further. The engine of colonialism turns in a circle; it is impossible to distinguish between its praxis and objective necessity. Moments of colonialism, they sometimes condition one another and sometimes blend. Oppression means, first of all, the oppressor's hatred for the oppressed. There exists a solitary limit to this venture of destructiveness, and that is colonialism itself. Here the colonizer encounters a contradiction of his own: "Were the colonized to disappear, so would colonization-with the colonizer." There would be no more subproletariat, no more over-exploitation. The usual forms of capitalistic exploitation would reassert themselves, and prices and wages would fall into line with those of the mother country. This would spell ruin. The system wills simultaneously the death and the multiplication of its victims. Any transformation would be fatal to the system. Whether the colonized are assimilated or massacred, the cost of labor will rise. The onerous engine suspends between life and death, and always closer to death, those who are compelled to drive it. A petrified ideology devotes itself to regarding human beings as talking beasts. But it does so in vain, for the colonizers must recognize them first, even to give them the harshest or most insulting of orders. And since the colonizers cannot constantiy supervise the colonized, the colonizers must resolve to trust them. No one can treat a man like a dog without first regarding him as a man. The impossible dehumanization of the oppressed, on the other side of the coin, becomes the alienation of the oppressor. It is the oppressor himself who restores, with his slightest gesture, the humanity he seeks to destroy; and, since he denies humanity in others, he regards it everywhere as his enemy. To handle this, the colonizer must assume the opaque rigidity and imperviousness of stone. In short, he must dehumanize himself, as well.
(September 2009, Anarchist Organizer, From a Male-bodied Settler Moving Towards Allyship With Dakota Decolonization and Female and Male-Bodied Settlers, Unsettling Ourselves: Reflections and Resources for Deconstructing Colonial Mentality, pp. 111-112, https://unsettlingminnesota.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/unsettling-minnesota-sourcebook1point0.pdf, accessed 7/27/15) CH
The process of becoming an ally to indigenous people fighting for decolonization differs according to one’s identity, and perceived identity. What it takes for a perceived white male to be trusted and accepted as an ally is different than a female or non-white male. Western civilization’s manifestation of colonization is uniquely tied to the privilege carried by white males. The history of complacency, cowardice, betrayal, dishonesty, aggression, rape, murder and genocide is one that every male-bodied person must accept and actively confront if they hope to create an alternate world. For the land we continue to pillage and scar, for indigenous whose way of life we continue to deny, for our female-bodied friends fighting for a life free of sexual and gender violence, for a life without degradation or objectification, and for ourselves, male-bodied creatures who desire a more healthy way of living, we must act. We must act with respect, communication, and a creative drive that comes from within. If we do not define and design this action ourselves, if we relegate responsibility of instigation to those who are affected by our privilege, we are simply adding to the burden of those who deal with this shit every day. It is my hope to be a part of a male-bodied momentum actively confronting male-bodied privilege, sexism, colonialism and hetero-patriarchy with each other. A momentum amongst men in which we talk and share and call each other out and are so much more the better for it. This is one aspect of my process of unlearning. As I come to understand my settler privilege and history of benefiting from colonization, I also come face to face with my racism tendencies and am forced to see my hetero-patriarchal upraising. While this may not be a direct dialogue with you, this is an expression of vulnerability and I expect what I have written to be challenged. Writing an essay does not make me any closer to being an ally to those I care about, but how I go about sharing my ideas can be one step towards mutual liberation. I will move forward with the uncomfortable and towards my fear, listening to others and reaching out to those I share privilege with. I do not know if I will live up to my beliefs, I do not know how to live up to the responsibility that comes with such a history of genocide and oppression, but I will live trying. As a second growth redwood once said to me as I sat high in its arms refusing to let it be cut, “Cut me down if you dare, I do not live like you and until you take my life I will be here. Living.”
Colonization is alive and well in the status quo
(Waziyatawin, Waziyatawin is a Dakota professor, author, and activist from the Pezihutazizi Otunwe in southwestern Minnesota , 1-2-2011, "Colonialism on the Ground," Unsettling America, https://unsettlingamerica.wordpress.com/2011/01/02/colonialism-on-the-ground/#more-45, accessed 7/26/15) CH
To be sure, the brand of colonialism in the United States today differs from the brands of earlier times when imperial forces from Europe established colonies in the “New World” as a means of expanding the wealth and power of their nations while also battling with competing imperial nations over pieces of the global pie. Thus, in the United States American schools teach our children that the “colonial era” ended when the United States gained its freedom from Great Britain. However, this denial of itself is simply one of colonialism’s myths. This denial is so extreme that even today the United States government insists on the language of “possessions” rather than “colonies” to identify its holdings outside the contiguous land base it claims in North America, despite the fact that many of them fit classic definitions of colonies precisely because they have not been absorbed into the state. But, the interest in domination and control over territories was established even before the entity of the United States was born. As American colonies gained their independence from their Mother Country, they sought to further expand their wealth and influence through the continuing invasion and acquisition of other Peoples’ lands and resources and the subjugation of the Original Peoples. The shedding of the constraints of their Mother Country simply facilitated and hastened that project. The United States soundly expanded its empire and is now so deeply entrenched in its colonial acquisitions that to anyone but the most conscientious observer, those roots have been lost in obscurity.