By Leonard Buffalo | North of Polite
Analysis and commentary

There is a particular arrogance in speaking with certainty about people whose history you have never bothered to learn. It appears whenever someone turns a First Nations patient into a stereotype, dismisses Métis identity as a convenient claim to benefits, or treats an entire community as responsible for the conduct of one person. Repetition gives these ideas familiarity. It does not give them truth.

Racism toward First Nations and Métis people in Alberta deserves to be confronted plainly. The Alberta Human Rights Commission states that Indigenous people in the province face disproportionate hate, racism and discrimination in their daily lives. This is a recognized problem within Alberta’s own human rights system, not simply a disagreement about whether someone found a remark offensive.

The ignorance that sustains it needs attention too: ignorance of history, of the law, of the differences between peoples, and of the consequences when a stereotype influences a decision.

Start by learning who you are talking about

First Nations and Métis are distinct peoples. First Nations include different nations with their own histories, languages, governments and relationships with the Crown. Métis people have distinct collective histories, cultures and communities. Neither identity can be understood through a handful of assumptions about appearance, poverty or government assistance.

Alberta’s eight Métis Settlements are a concrete part of that history. They have a land base and a governance framework established through provincial legislation. They are not First Nations reserves, and they do not represent every Métis person in Alberta.

These distinctions matter because prejudice thrives on treating everyone as interchangeable. Someone who cannot distinguish a Métis Settlement from a reserve should learn the difference before confidently explaining what everyone living there supposedly receives.

There is nothing shameful about discovering a gap in your knowledge. The shame lies in using that gap as a platform from which to belittle other people.

The tax myth survives because resentment is easier than research

The sweeping claim that Indigenous people do not pay taxes is false. The Canada Revenue Agency explains that the Indian Act tax exemption applies under particular conditions, including connections between property or income and a reserve. Indigenous identity alone does not create a blanket exemption.

Métis identity does not, by itself, qualify someone for that exemption. Even for people eligible under the Indian Act, the rules do not mean that every purchase and every dollar earned is automatically tax-free.

Those qualifications tend to disappear when someone wants an easy explanation for why another person allegedly has an unfair advantage. A complicated legal provision becomes a story about a whole population getting everything for nothing.

Before repeating that story, check it. Financial frustration does not make a false accusation more accurate, and it does not make the person targeted responsible for someone else’s bills.

When assumptions enter healthcare, the stakes change

Alberta’s government has gathered accounts of racism and culturally unsafe healthcare from First Nations, Métis and Inuit participants. Its information-gathering process included sessions held between October and December 2024 and an anonymous online survey.

The province’s medical regulator has also drawn attention to Alberta research documenting anti-Indigenous bias among physician respondents. That research should not be stretched into a claim that every physician is prejudiced, or treated as a measurement of every encounter. It provides evidence that professional qualifications do not automatically eliminate bias.

The practical concern is serious. A patient needs their symptoms assessed, their account heard and their treatment determined by clinical evidence. An assumption about substance use, reliability or pain tolerance can interfere with that responsibility.

Racism becomes more than an insult when someone with authority allows it to shape another person’s access to care. Institutions must examine decisions and outcomes, as well as the language their employees use.

One person’s wrongdoing does not establish a people’s character

An Indigenous person accused of a crime should face the same requirements for evidence and fair process as anyone else. If convicted, that person’s conduct can be judged and punished through the law. Their ancestry does not turn the offence into a collective act.

The same principle applies to an Indigenous leader or organization. Financial decisions, political conduct and governance deserve scrutiny. Specific wrongdoing should be investigated, and people harmed by it deserve to be heard.

But criticism becomes racial prejudice when the evidence about an individual is replaced by contempt for a people. “What happened to this funding?” is a legitimate question. “That is what those people are like” is a stereotype masquerading as an answer.

No community is composed entirely of admirable people. Equal treatment includes the freedom to be judged as an individual, without being required to defend everyone who shares your identity.

Rights do not depend on public approval

Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 recognizes and affirms existing Aboriginal and treaty rights and expressly includes Métis among Canada’s Aboriginal peoples. The content and application of particular rights can require careful legal and historical examination. They cannot be settled by whether a commentator likes the people asserting them.

There is room for serious debate about policy, public spending, representation and the evidence supporting a particular claim. That debate improves when participants understand the legal distinctions involved.

It deteriorates when “treat everyone the same” becomes a way of refusing to acknowledge that treaties and constitutional rights exist. Learning what an obligation means is part of an informed argument. Pretending there is no obligation avoids the argument altogether.

Ignorance is correctable. Perpetuating it is a choice.

People inherit mistaken ideas from families, workplaces, classrooms and social circles. Some have never been given an accurate account of Indigenous history. That helps explain how prejudice travels; it does not remove responsibility for examining what we repeat.

Once a false claim is corrected, there is a choice: investigate, reconsider, or keep circulating it because it confirms a resentment. Employers, educators and public officials have an additional responsibility to prevent those assumptions from influencing decisions about other people.

Useful action is practical. Correct the false tax claim. Challenge collective blame. Examine whether a complaint was investigated fairly. Teach First Nations and Métis histories with enough substance that students encounter living peoples rather than stereotypes.

First Nations and Métis people should not have to produce a résumé of military service, employment, education or community contributions to qualify for respect. Nor should someone experiencing poverty, addiction or homelessness have to become an exceptional success story before being treated with dignity.

Alberta can expect responsibility from individuals while confronting discrimination against communities. Doing both requires evidence, honesty and the willingness to learn. Anyone who claims to value those qualities should be prepared to apply them when the subject is First Nations and Métis people.

© 2026 North of Polite. Original reporting, analysis and commentary. All rights reserved. 🍁