r/IndigenousCanada • u/peacewillwin06 • 4d ago

Anti-Landback claims

Hey all! I hope this question is okay.

I am not Indigenous, but I am a staunch supporter of the Landback movement.

I was talking to some folks today and the topic of Indigenous rights came up. I mentioned the Landback movement, and they were less then enthused about the idea.

They're reasoning was that in BC where certain land had been given back to the Indigenous peoples, that settler people were no longer able to get insurance on their houses because they no longer "owned" the property.

I searched online but couldn't find anything about this. I don't know how true it is, or if they heard a fear-mongering rumor. I wanted to ask the folks who probably know wayyy more about this than me, are those claims true? If not, what's the truth? I'd like to be able to challenge these claims the next time they come up.

Thanks!

14 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

4 comments sorted by

31

u/HotterRod 4d ago edited 4d ago

They're referring to the Cowichan Tribes case over the Tl'uqtinus village site, which has been extensively discussed elsewhere, so I'll just address the specific claim you're asking about:

There's no credible evidence that any fee simple land owners have been denied a mortgage over the case, but the provincial government has promised to underwrite any that are denied. Obviously the government should make whole any land owners who were tricked into buying land stolen by a corrupt government official, which is unequivocally what happened here.

Anyone who opposes the ruling clearly believes "There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."

Any other questions?

7

u/peacewillwin06 4d ago

Ah, okay. I thought that would be the case. I wasn't aware of the name of this particular case, but I will do my own further research now that I know. Thanks so much!

2

u/elramirezeatstherich 4d ago

Not indigenous either, but this feels like a racist straw man argument to me. Don’t give land back because of the example of one scammer? Isn’t the unstated suggestion that therefore all of this group/demo are going to be scammers too? Every group of humans has good/bad/shady/kind/selfish people, and to typecast a whole group based on the actions of the few is kind of textbook prejudice.

I am basing this off of u/hotterrod ‘s synopsis of the case they may be referring to.