Can a Native State Exist Within a Canadian State

Political Scientists, Thomas Flanagan and Roger Townshend explain the key to the big question: “Can a Native State Exist Within a Canadian State?” in the readings: “The Case for Native Sovereignty” and “Native Sovereignty: Does Anyone Really Want an Aboriginal Archipelago?”. The essay will outline and provide evidence to both sides, whether there could or could not exist a Native State in Canada. The document will argue that Natives are not organized enough to form their own government. Throughout the decades, Natives have agonized many savageries at the hands of the European settlers. The essay will take Flanagan’s side with the belief that Natives should not be sovereign, using the textbooks “Principles of Comparative Politics”, and “Contemporary Political Issues”. According to Weber’s definition of the state, the state is “a human community that successfully claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory,” (Clark, Golder, & Golder, pp. 92).
In the reading by Thomas Flanagan, “Native Sovereignty: Does Anyone Really Want an Aboriginal Archipelago?” explains his point of view based on Natives not gaining sovereignty. “Hunting-gathering societies have political processes that assign rank and dominance within communities” (Flanagan, pp. 43), as argued by Flanagan, native 's hunting-gathering societies practice out of period political processes. Flanagan claims that Natives cannot have their own structure of government and this is why it wouldn’t make sense for Natives to want a sovereign state. Natives have a huge variety of people – particularly, there are over 700,000 status Indians, who belong to over 600 Indian bands spread on more than 2,200 reserves. Hundred of thousands Metis and non-status Indians live outside who do not posses reserves. Natives are divided into certain categories; for example, they may classify themselves by language, customs, religion and history. Flanagan suggests that there are many types of