Introduction
In the past decade, several salient Indigenous acts of resistance made headlines in mainstream Canadian news, including Idle No More and, more recently, the Wet'suwet’en land defenders challenging the Coastal GasLink pipeline. Although Indigenous acts of resistance are commonplace in Canada, sustained scholarly attention on Indigenous resistance has declined precipitously since 2010. Moreover, the time span of this scholarship typically ends by the early 2000s (Wilkes, Reference Wilkes2004a, Reference Wilkes2004b; Ramos, Reference Ramos2006, Reference Ramos2008). This empirical gap is surprising because Indigenous resistance has been identified as increasing in frequency since the 1990s (Wilkes, Reference Wilkes2004b). The literature also finds that resistance is driven primarily by First Nations (Ramos, Reference Ramos2008) employing “blockades” or similar actions that limit settler access to territory (Wilkes, Reference Wilkes2004b), with the aim of attaining self-governing powers and strengthening Indigenous identity (Repin, Reference Repin2012). This study seeks to identify whether these characteristics continue to define acts of Indigenous resistance from 2010 to 2020. Are there certain Indigenous groups that engage in these acts more frequently? Are there patterns in the issues that trigger resistance movements? Do these salient acts achieve the political or policy goals of Indigenous participants?
This research note analyzes the character and efficacy of salient Indigenous resistance across Canada, as reported by news media from 2010 to 2020, through a content analysis of online news articles from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). Acts of resistance are distinguished according to the participating Indigenous nation(s) or organization(s), the tactic(s) used by the Indigenous participants, and the central issue that triggered resistance. The research note finds that of the salient resistance events covered by the media, acts of resistance have increased over time. According to the CBC's reporting, they are primarily organized and executed by Indigenous nations and are mainly concerned with major development projects. Solidarity movements that involve several Indigenous nations also appear to be prominent. Moreover, injustices that affect gender justice and Indigenous youth produce salient resistance movements, in addition to those defending territory. Acts of resistance are found to rarely reverse state action but can positively support the resurgence of Indigenous governance grounded in Indigenous traditions. This transformative potential may explain why the state is reported to use injunctions and arrests when resistance is underway.
Indigenous Resistance: An Enduring Feature of Canadian Politics
Indigenous resistance describes actions that assert Indigenous ways of life, governance and self-determination while challenging settler-colonial hegemonic logics and institutions (Bargh, Reference Bargh and Bargh2007; see also Stark et al., Reference Stark, Craft and Aikau2023). Resistance entails a broad range of actions, from overt confrontations such as restricting settler access to territory to daily acts of “making do” that implicitly reshape power relationships (Bargh, Reference Bargh and Bargh2007: 17). Engaging in resistance advances the ongoing process of decolonization to halt the settler-colonial project of “complete[y] eradicat[ing] . . . the original inhabitants of contested land” (Tuck and Gaztambide-Fernández, Reference Tuck and Gaztambide-Fernández2013: 80). Resistance is an inevitable consequence of Indigenous sovereignty being nested within and apart from the settler-colonial state (Simpson, Reference Simpson2014). In the Canadian context, Indigenous peoples continue to resist settler-colonialism in order to assert Indigenous sovereignty, initiate diplomatic relations and uphold Indigenous lawmaking over unlawful colonial acts (for example, Borrows, Reference Borrows2005; Simpson, Reference Simpson2021; Eisenberg, Reference Eisenberg2022; Estes, Reference Estes2019; Coburn, Reference Coburn2015; Coulthard, Reference Coulthard2014). This study examines nonroutine and highly visible acts of resistance that directly challenge the state after a specific act of colonial injustice (Wilkes, Reference Wilkes2006). These types of resistance acts can be distinguished from “everyday” acts of resurgence that also create Indigenous ways of living apart from strategic engagement with the state (Corntassel, Reference Corntassel2012).
Existing scholarship that assesses the frequency of Indigenous resistance over time comes to similar conclusions about trends from the 1960s into the early 2000s: Indigenous resistance steadily increases after the 1960s, which mirrors the increased political mobilization of Indigenous groups, with a major spike in events in the 1990s (Wilkes, Reference Wilkes2004a, Reference Wilkes2004b; Ramos Reference Ramos2006, Reference Ramos2008). It is suggested that acts of resistance remain frequent into the 2010s, particularly in the context of the Idle No More movement beginning in late 2012 (Morden, Reference Morden2015). Nevertheless, there have been no systematic studies of Indigenous resistance since the early 2000s to confirm whether the frequency of resistance has remained high.
These studies that analyze the frequency of Indigenous resistance over time also consider the primary organizers of these events. Ramos (Reference Ramos2006) finds that Indigenous political organization in Canada is not driven by a main organizational force. Therefore, both First Nations communities and broader Indigenous organizations partake in organizing resistance (Ramos, Reference Ramos2008), many of which are at the local level (Wilkes, Reference Wilkes2004b). The organizers of Indigenous resistance may be changing, as Idle No More demonstrated the capacity of grassroots groups with decentralized organizational structures to lead nationwide resistance (Hodgins, Reference Hodgins2020; Wood, Reference Wood2015; The Kino-nda-niimi Collective, 2014).
These same studies focus on explaining the causal factors that make collective action possible in both large-N studies (Ramos, Reference Ramos2006, Reference Ramos2008; Wilkes Reference Wilkes2004a) and in case study approaches (Alcantara, Reference Alcantara2010; Morden, Reference Morden2013; Morden, Reference Morden2015; Repin, Reference Repin2012; Barker, Reference Barker2015), although this literature does not analyze more recent instances of Indigenous resistance. Due to their focus on establishing causality between various conditions to explain the likelihood of Indigenous resistance, these studies are less concerned with the grievance or injustice that triggers a specific act of resistance, although attention is given to the tactics employed across events (Wilkes, Reference Wilkes2004b).
The scholarship on Indigenous resistance does not systematically discuss the efficacy of these acts to achieve desired outcomes for Indigenous participants. Measuring success may be challenging due to the varied perspectives and goals of Indigenous participants (Belanger and Lackenbauer, Reference Belanger and Whitney Lackenbauer2015). And yet some acts of resistance provoke the state to reverse the specific course of action that triggered the resistance event (Russell, Reference Russell, Ladner and Simpson2010), while in other instances, political change is not attained (Morden, Reference Morden2013). Indigenous acts of resistance may constitute critical events that help frame and direct future macro political changes (Ramos, Reference Ramos2008; Ladner, Reference Ladner, Simpson and Ladner2010; Coulthard, Reference Coulthard2014). Given that Idle No More occurred in the early 2010s, it is valuable to examine whether more visible resistance actions have taken place and whether they produce political change. Relatedly, how the state engages with Indigenous participants may reveal whether this engagement attempts to diminish the efficacy of resistance acts, such as through the mobilization of security forces (Dafnos, Reference Dafnos2013; Crosby and Monaghan, Reference Crosby and Monaghan2018).
There are few studies on Indigenous resistance that show the frequency and character of these acts of political agency after 2010. A longitudinal analysis can help identify potential cases for future case study analyses, which could explore both how Indigenous acts of resistance emerge and their consequences.
Methodology
This research note employs protest event analysis (PEA) to analyze written news coverage of Indigenous resistance from the CBC's online news division (CBC.ca) from 2010 to 2020. CBC is chosen over news outlets like the Globe and Mail because it produces more consistent reporting on Indigenous-specific issues across the country, although it is unlikely to cover local events. Focusing on one source also makes a longitudinal, historical analysis more feasible. However, this choice potentially invites other biases, such as CBC's generally left-leaning reporting (Ipsos Reid, 2010) and its state-funded status. This study examines the CBC news articles to identify the descriptive characteristics of each act of resistance; descriptive bias in the media is generally low, even if omissions about event particulars occur (Earl et al., Reference Earl, Martin, McCarthy and Soule2004: 73). There was also a significant diversity of reporters across the news stories, which limits bias found in individual reporters.
A key shortcoming of using the media's coverage to identify acts of resistance is that the media exhibits bias over which events are covered (Earl et al., Reference Earl, Martin, McCarthy and Soule2004; Weidmann, Reference Weidmann2016). This disadvantage may be significant because this study uses only one news outlet, possibly introducing systemic omissions in reporting (Swank, Reference Swank and Coy2000; Koopmans and Rucht, Reference Koopmans, Rucht, Klandermans and Staggenbord2002). News outlets may exclude events based on their size, the issues at stake, the significance of actors and the importance of the locations at which events occur (see Oritz et al., Reference Oritz, Myers, Eugene Walls and Diaz2006: 398–99; della Porta and Diani, Reference della Porta and Diani2006). Additionally, the media's incentive structures—such as profit, attention cycles toward events, and available physical infrastructure—influence their reporting (Oritz et al., Reference Oritz, Myers, Eugene Walls and Diaz2006: 400–401). There is considerable disagreement among those scholars who assert that these biases are consistent over time and thus not unduly problematic (for example, Oliver and Maney, Reference Oliver and Maney2000; McCarthy et al., Reference McCarthy, Titarenko, McPhail, Rafail and Augustyn2008) and those who contend that the biases render media data limited in its ability to represent resistance activities (for example, Myers and Caniglia, Reference Myers and Caniglia2004; Cook and Weidmann, Reference Cook and Weidmann2019).
To mitigate these biases, this study is directed at understanding the characteristics and efficacy of Indigenous resistance that were covered by the media, so the media's coverage is not used as a proxy for real-world events. Mainstream media frames Indigenous peoples’ claims in ways that delegitimize their concerns and protect the colonial state's authority (see, for example, Hume and Walby, Reference Hume and Walby2021; Corrigall-Brown and Wilkes, Reference Corrigall-Brown and Wilkes2012; Baker and Verrelli, Reference Baker and Verrelli2017; Wilkes et al., Reference Wilkes, Corrigall-Brown and Myers2010; Wilkes, Reference Wilkes2016). Rather than adopt the media's biased interpretation of Indigenous peoples’ claims, the media's reporting is used as a proxy for an action's level of saliency. Another method to improve the reliability of media data is to include additional data to triangulate the media's coverage (Hutter, Reference Hutter2014). In future studies, adding Indigenous-centred news sources like the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network, police archives (Fillieule, Reference Fillieule1996) and social media (Zhang and Pan, Reference Zhang and Pan2019) can supplement mainstream news reporting of Indigenous resistance.Footnote 1
Indigenous resistance was identified through keyword searches on the CBC Archives; if there were broken links, news stories were searched using Google News. Databases such as Canadian Newsstream and Factiva produced fewer articles from CBC but were used to confirm that all relevant articles were collected.Footnote 2 Articles were coded to identify the primary organizer(s) of Indigenous resistance activities, the tactics employed by the participants, the main issue or grievance that triggered the act of resistance, whether resistance involved violent acts or reactions, and the state's response to the resistance. Keyword searches of the terms Indigenous, Aboriginal, Native, Indian, Inuit, First Nation and Métis were used to identify instances of Indigenous resistance. Keywords to capture different forms of resistance included protest, march, rally, demonstration, acts of solidarity, blockades and fish-ins/log-ins (Minkoff, Reference Minkoff1997; Ponting and Gibbins, Reference Ponting and Gibbins1981). As in Ramos’ (Reference Ramos2008) study, resistance was coded if nonroutine actions were taken outside of state-based political and legal processes with a clear target, participants, place, action and goal (802). If more than two of these criteria were not met, then the event was excluded (802). Although a broad range of activities is included to capture the various ways Indigenous actors may demonstrate resistance, only “physical” forms are included, to the exclusion of actions that take on discursive forms (Koopmans and Statham, Reference Koopmans and Statham1999).
An act of resistance is coded as one event if the action is largely continuous, with no more than 24 hours between activities; it is located within the same locale; and it includes the same participants with the same goals (Hutter, Reference Hutter2014: 348). Some events constituted acts of solidarity in support of another event taking place elsewhere. It is noted in the dataset if events are connected to a broader movement. Solidarity events are classified as representing the same issue as the primary act of resistance, but these events are coded as separate instances of resistance because they were organized by different Indigenous groups and nations. Instances of resistance and various characteristics about the events were coded by an individual coder on NVivo.
A total of 780 news articles were coded and 137 different issues were identified, excluding acts of solidarity in support of an existing act of resistance. Information was only coded if it was explicitly stated in the news articles.Footnote 3 The news articles did not always provide basic information about an event, such as the primary issues or actors involved, so the results of the coding likely represent a conservative estimate of events’ characteristics.
Results
Across the 137 issues identified, most events were only covered by one news story. Resistance that had at least 10 articles about the event included 1492 Land Back Lane (2020); the death and subsequent trial relating to Colten Boushie (2018); the death and subsequent trial relating to Tina Fontaine (2018); the Elsipogtog First Nation's resistance to fracking (2013); the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project (2011–2014); Idle No More (2012–2013); Indigenous Lives Matter, particularly after the shooting of George Floyd in America (2019–2020); the Indigenous suicide crisis among youth (2016–2020); Justice for Our Stolen Children (2018), which involved camps to bring attention to Indigenous children lost to protective services and the justice system; resistance in order to protect Mi'kmaq fisheries in Nova Scotia (2020); the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (MMIWG) crisis (2014–2017); the risk of contamination from flooding a reservoir at Muskrat Falls (2015–2018); the Trans Mountain pipeline project (2014–2019); and the Wet'suwet’en land defenders against the Coastal GasLink LNG pipeline (2019–2020). These issues appear to be the most salient in the 2010–2020 period and are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Indigenous Resistance That Received the Most Coverage in CBC News
Salient acts of resistance across 2010–2020 appear to be increasing over time, with a total of 442 events identified, including acts of solidarity. Figure 1 below shows the number of events in each year throughout the 10-year period. Of the salient issues identified above, most unfolded after 2015, with several events associated for each issue. It is likely that this count is a conservative estimate of the number of resistance activities across the 137 issues; for instance, it is possible that acts of resistance early in this period were not found in the scan of CBC news articles because earlier events may not be comprehensively archived. When accounting for the key issues of each action, only the most immediate injustice that triggered the resistance activity was chosen, rather than underlying problems, although many injustices related to the perpetuation of settler-colonialism are linked. Some instances of resistance were counted as including more than one key issue since a resistance activity can advocate or bring attention to several different issues.
Figure 1. Annual number of acts of resistance, 2010–2020
An analysis of the news articles indicates that Indigenous participants mainly organized to contest development projects. Fifty acts of resistance out of 137 were related to major projects; 6 of these 50 acts of resistance contested commercial or residential building projects, 35 challenged natural resource projects, and 9 were concerned with existing projects damaging the environment or culturally significant sites. Five of the most salient acts across the 10-year period involve concerns about major projects, such as the Trans Mountain pipeline and the Coastal GasLink pipeline.
The next issue that garnered significant attention from Indigenous groups involved criminal justice outcomes. Within this category, most events were marches or rallies in response to murdered or missing Indigenous women and girls (8),Footnote 4 such as Cassidy Bernard, Loretta Saunders and Serena McKay.Footnote 5 Additionally, resistance was also organized to demand a national inquiry on MMIWG and to critique the development and subsequent government reaction to the inquiry's findings (7). Indigenous groups challenging police conduct that resulted in the death of an Indigenous person, such as the deaths of Greg Ritchie, Jordan Lafond and Rodney Levi, constituted 8 events. Although there were fewer events reacting to criminal trial outcomes (5), two of those events, the separate trials addressing the death of Coulten Boushie and Tina Fontaine, were highly salient (see Figure 1). A total of 28 demonstrations challenged the colonial nature of Canada's criminal justice system.
Fifteen resistance activities were concerned with poor living conditions or other related socioeconomic issues. For example, First Nations in Attawapiskat demanded access to clean drinking water and an end to boil water advisories. Lack of housing also resulted in the formation of camps in urban centres such as Winnipeg and Vancouver. Eleven acts of resistance were about Aboriginal rights, title or disputed land claims. These acts typically focused on an Indigenous group's exercise of rights, such as the Mi'kmaq asserting their fishing rights in 2020. Ten resistance movements contested specific state legislation, statutes or regulations. The Idle No More movement is the most salient example in this category, whereby Indigenous nations from across the country staged round dances and travelled to Parliament Hill to halt the Harper government's omnibus bill.
The remaining issues had less than 10 acts of resistance: racist interactions or experiences (8), such as the separate incidents in Canadian Tire and Bank of Montreal where employees called the police in the presence of Indigenous customers in 2017 and 2020, respectively; symbolic politics related to place names or statues (7), such as #CancelCanadaDay in 2017 and 2020; child welfare policies (6), such as the Healing Camp for Justice and Justice for Our Stolen Children, both in 2018; and internal issues within Indigenous governments, such as band council decisions (4).
The articles reveal that acts of resistance were primarily organized and executed by specific Indigenous nations or communities. Only instances in which the articles explicitly accredited an event with an Indigenous nation were counted, while interviews with individual actors from various Indigenous nations were not. The specific actors in resistance events were often underreported, as they were only mentioned 292 times throughout the 780 news articles. There were 213 mentions throughout the articles that show Indigenous nations and communities were the primary actors in resistance events. The media often attributes resistance activities to a nation, but it may be the case that certain groups and activists within a community are responsible for organizing resistance, rather than the political leadership. Not many of the nations identified were repeat players, as most were recorded as organizing acts of resistance one time. The nations that were referenced more than 10 times as organizing multiple acts include the Tyendinaga Mohawks (38 references), Six Nations of the Grand River (25), Kahnawake Mohawks (13) and the Haudenosaunee (11).
The second most significant group of actors to organize and execute acts of resistance, according to media reports, were Indigenous activist groups, with 58 references. These groups are Indigenous-led organizations that advocate for specific issues, and their membership is not exclusive to Indigenous nations or communities. Other organizations or groups that were either not clearly Indigenous or were non-Indigenous accounted for 24 references. Non-Indigenous groups, such as municipal communities or environmental groups, accounted for 8 references. There were only 5 recorded instances of formal Indigenous political organizations being the central leaders or organizers of resistance activities. Indigenous political organizations include associations and organizations that represent several Indigenous nations in regional, provincial and national political arenas. There was evidence that these groups participated in other ways, such as presenting talks at rallies or lobbying government for policy change when resistance was underway.
The news articles describe four main tactics used during acts of resistance. Marches or rallies were referenced the most, at 444 times across the articles. The media also frequently described the use of blockades, which was referenced 313 times. Indigenous land defenders sometimes asserted that they were using checkpoints, not blockades, because they allowed entry through their territory if consent from the relevant Indigenous nation was acquired. Similar colonial-language-like occupations were referenced 84 times and camps 69 times. There is evidence that other tactics were employed, but the news articles suggest they were used infrequently (less than 15 times); these include motorcade-traffic convoys (11), which block major roads, and sit-ins (6). In identifying tactics, these types of actions were coded according to the media's reporting, and it is possible that the meaning of these terms is inconsistent across the articles.
The news articles suggest that these strategies largely excluded violent acts. Out of the 780 news articles, there are only 26 references to participants damaging property. There are also only 6 references to participants throwing rocks at law enforcement. There were some references of violence against Indigenous groups. Threats against resistors’ property were referenced 14 times, with 10 of these referring to non-Indigenous peoples destroying Mi'kmaq fisheries and equipment in 2020. There are also 8 references of violence against Indigenous peoples by non-Indigenous civilians who were often from far-right groups staging counterprotests.
Although acts of resistance were largely nonviolent, the state's responses suggest a preference for using instruments that attempt to re-establish the settler-colonial status quo. There are 169 references to police arrests and 162 references of court injunctions. Several news articles may be referencing the same series of arrests or injunctions against Indigenous groups, but it is revealing that news coverage about state responses overwhelmingly focus on arrests and injunctions. Political negotiations by state officials were only referenced 5 times in articles covering Idle No More and the Wet'suwet’en land defenders, which were both nationwide acts of resistance. It is possible that other political negotiations occurred but were not publicized.
Discussion
The findings from the CBC news articles reveal characteristics of recent, salient Indigenous resistance in Canada that are worth investigating further. The frequency of salient acts of resistance appears to be increasing over time, with the most recent year under study exhibiting the most events. This increasing number may suggest that Indigenous actors are using resistance to pursue political and social change, regardless of the state's purported embrace of reconciliation politics.
According to the news articles, Indigenous nations were the primary organizers of resistance, followed by Indigenous activist groups. Resistance remains a crucial way to assert Indigenous sovereignty, especially because the processes to define and delineate Aboriginal rights and title under the Constitution Act, 1982 are slow and constrained by colonial interpretive logics. This finding also corroborates Ramos’ (Reference Ramos2008) and Russell's (Reference Russell, Ladner and Simpson2010) analyses indicating that a lack of land claims resolutions is a main driver of Indigenous resistance.
Because exercising Indigenous control over territory varies across each Indigenous nation due to their specific relationship to the land, it is expected that most mobilization to protect territory involve the nations affected by a particular project. However, 9 out of 50 acts of resistance against development projects included solidarity movements by nations not directly impacted by a project. Of those 9 acts, 6 are also the most salient acts of resistance within the period under study. Future research could investigate when solidarity movements are triggered and whether solidarity is supported by networks of co-resistance.
The second most common issue that triggers resistance is criminal justice outcomes, such as the MMIWG crises and the results of criminal trials. This finding stands apart from past studies analyzing Indigenous resistance over time. Although Indigenous peoples’ colonial experiences with the criminal justice system are well documented (Stark, Reference Stark2016; Monchalin, Reference Monchalin2016; Chartrand, Reference Chartrand2019; Starblanket and Hunt, Reference Starblanket and Hunt2020), Indigenous resistance in these contexts is often siloed from the literature on Indigenous land defenders. Examining resistance movements that challenge colonial criminal justice outcomes may reveal how Indigenous peoples challenge the settler carceral state and broader systems of colonial control (Mussell, Reference Mussell2023). Resistance against the criminal justice system included 5 issues that garnered solidarity events across the country and constituted 3 of the 14 most salient issues between 2010 and 2020.
The findings from this study reveal how acts of resistance typically do not immediately change settler governments’ course of action, which is consistent with observations made by Morden (Reference Morden2013). Of the most salient resistance movements challenging development projects, only one contributed to the cancellation of a project: the Elsipogtog land defenders in New Brunswick successfully compelled SWN Resources to withdraw from the province. Those challenging the Muskrat Falls hydroelectric plant in Newfoundland directed attention toward the risks of mercury poisoning from this existing project. A commission asserted that the company should be held accountable for environmental contamination and concealing key project information (LeBlanc, Reference LeBlanc2020), and yet the dam will continue to operate, with the province receiving funding from the federal government to compensate its large cost overrun (CBC News, 2021). The other salient acts of resistance in the period were not successful in cancelling major projects. Construction on the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion and the housing project in Caledonia are underway. The Wet'suwet’en resistance, which had by far the most media coverage, did not result in the cancellation of the pipeline. Political negotiations between the federal, provincial and Wet'suwet’en government resulted in the recognition of Wet'suwet’en title, but the project is proceeding as planned. Despite the occurrence of highly salient mobilization, the state has not consistently yielded to Indigenous groups’ resistance.
And yet, a narrow definition of success as gaining short-term policy or legal change neglects other important political change. Morden (Reference Morden2013: 507) suggests that Indigenous resistance is successful at shifting discursive change and generating awareness. If agenda setting is more broadly defined as constituting the commonsense understandings of political issues and policy choices, then resistance could shape political agendas and discourse in the long term (Woodly, Reference Woodly2015; Carpenter, Reference Carpenter2023). For example, the Wet'suwet’en resistance discouraged the advent of other pipeline projects in their territory (Temper, Reference Temper2019). Future research on collective mobilization could investigate the conditions under which resistance can prompt policy change, either through discursive shifts or by altering the range of available policy choices (for example, Morden, Reference Morden2013).
Crucially, resistance produces political change among Indigenous groups. Engaging in resistance can improve the esteem of future generations of Indigenous peoples and show a meaningful alternative to unresponsive state institutions (Belanger and Lackenbauer, Reference Belanger and Whitney Lackenbauer2015). Rather than adopt the colonial state's political processes that seek to advance settler futurity disguised in a politics of recognition (Coulthard, Reference Coulthard2014), Indigenous peoples engaging in resistance fulfill their responsibilities to protect interconnected relationships (Nelson, Reference Nelson2020), which in turn advances Indigenous futurity grounded in Indigenous governance. Idle No More's nationwide impact arguably ignited a new resolve among Indigenous nations to adopt resistance as a pathway to resurgence, or a reinvigoration of Indigenous laws and traditions (Coburn, Reference Coburn2015). The rise in solidarity movements may also suggest Indigenous nations are embracing an era of resurgence.
In tandem with the finding that resistance builds Indigenous alternatives to settler-colonial political processes, the news articles reveal that the state often responds to resistance with injunctions and arrests. There has been scholarly attention on courts’ willingness to issue injunctions to protect corporate interests (Yellowhead Institute, 2019: 30). Such actions attempt to criminalize Indigenous resistance (Pasternak, Reference Pasternak2017). Considering the high saliency of injunctions and police arrests by the media, additional research can connect how these practices, alongside media attention, shape the state's engagement with Indigenous resistance (see Crosby and Monaghan, Reference Crosby and Monaghan2018).
Conclusion
This study produced an original dataset of salient Indigenous resistance by scanning online CBC news articles from 2010 to 2020. These findings present some new observations that depart from previous literature examining Indigenous resistance over time. Although the media shows that resistance continues to be organized by Indigenous nations, solidarity movements that include various Indigenous nations are gaining mainstream attention. Since the 2010s, the rejection of major pipeline projects and Idle No More produced acts of resistance in solidarity with other Indigenous nations. Additional research can investigate how networks of co-resistance have developed around this timeframe and whether they will be activated in future events. The media scan also revealed that salient acts of resistance were mainly, but not exclusively, about defending territory. Colonial injustices that endanger gender equality and Indigenous youth produce salient resistance movements as well. Contested territory remains a key site of conflict, but this study reveals how resistance also aims to protect the body politic of Indigenous nations, meriting further attention. Finally, this study presents the complexities of evaluating the effects of resistance. Examining the transformative potential of resistance to support Indigenous resurgence and governance may be more crucial than measuring policy change by settler governments.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank professors Daniel Carpenter, Kate Puddister, Carol Dauda and Sophie Borwein for their generous and insightful feedback and support on an earlier draft of this research note. The author would also like to express gratitude to her research assistants, Victoria Caravaggio and Brenden Dell, both from the University of Guelph at the time of writing, for their diligent and meticulous work on this project.
Competing interests
The author declares none.
Open access
