Shé:kon yónnhe ne Kayanerekó:wa tahnon ka’nikonhrí:yo; Rotinonhsyóni wa’ontateri’wanontonhse’ tsi yontatekwenyénhstha’ raotiríhwa, 1924–1977 The Great Law of Peace is Still Alive and Well; the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Asked Them to Respect Their Business, 1924–1977

IF 0.5 Q3 AREA STUDIES American Review of Canadian Studies Pub Date : 2023-01-02 DOI:10.1080/02722011.2023.2172889
E. McKenzie
{"title":"Shé:kon yónnhe ne Kayanerekó:wa tahnon ka’nikonhrí:yo; Rotinonhsyóni wa’ontateri’wanontonhse’ tsi yontatekwenyénhstha’ raotiríhwa, 1924–1977 The Great Law of Peace is Still Alive and Well; the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Asked Them to Respect Their Business, 1924–1977","authors":"E. McKenzie","doi":"10.1080/02722011.2023.2172889","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article examines the non-linear and often backwards development of universal human rights for Indigenous peoples in twentieth-century North America. It criticizes the failure of international bodies dedicated to upholding the so-called universal human right to self-determination in the wake of a Canadian military coup at Six Nations of the Grand River in 1924. By assessing the legal grounds upon which the Haudenosaunee Confederacy has repeatedly argued the need for international intervention, to both the League of Nations and the United Nations, the article asserts that international law has perpetually denied the Confederacy equal nationhood status on the world stage, despite meeting all recognized (and quasi-legal) criteria.","PeriodicalId":43336,"journal":{"name":"American Review of Canadian Studies","volume":"53 1","pages":"82 - 100"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Review of Canadian Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02722011.2023.2172889","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT This article examines the non-linear and often backwards development of universal human rights for Indigenous peoples in twentieth-century North America. It criticizes the failure of international bodies dedicated to upholding the so-called universal human right to self-determination in the wake of a Canadian military coup at Six Nations of the Grand River in 1924. By assessing the legal grounds upon which the Haudenosaunee Confederacy has repeatedly argued the need for international intervention, to both the League of Nations and the United Nations, the article asserts that international law has perpetually denied the Confederacy equal nationhood status on the world stage, despite meeting all recognized (and quasi-legal) criteria.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Shé:kon yónnhe ne Kayanerekó:wa tahnon ka'nikonhrí:yo;Rotinonhsyóni wa'ontteri'wantonhse'tsi yonstatekwenyénhstha'raotiríhwa,1924–1977《伟大的和平法则依然存在》;1924年至1977年,豪德诺绍尼邦联要求他们尊重自己的事业
本文考察了二十世纪北美原住民普遍人权的非线性和往往是倒退的发展。它批评了1924年加拿大在大河六国发生军事政变后,致力于维护所谓普遍人权的国际机构的失败。通过评估豪德诺索尼邦联一再向国际联盟和联合国提出需要进行国际干预的法律依据,该条断言,尽管符合所有公认的(准法律的)标准,但国际法一直否认邦联在世界舞台上享有平等的国家地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: American Nineteenth Century History is a peer-reviewed, transatlantic journal devoted to the history of the United States during the long nineteenth century. It welcomes contributions on themes and topics relating to America in this period: slavery, race and ethnicity, the Civil War and Reconstruction, military history, American nationalism, urban history, immigration and ethnicity, western history, the history of women, gender studies, African Americans and Native Americans, cultural studies and comparative pieces. In addition to articles based on original research, historiographical pieces, reassessments of historical controversies, and reappraisals of prominent events or individuals are welcome. Special issues devoted to a particular theme or topic will also be considered.
期刊最新文献
The Gender Gap and Academic Publishing in Political Science: Evidence from Canada Debating the Voting Age: How Canadian Legislators Grapple with the Federal Voting Age NORAD: In Perpetuity and Beyond Managing Federalism Through Pandemic The Right to Be Rural
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1