Proclamations that the Idle No More movement is a fast growing and widely supported cause seems reasonable given the solidarity protests being held across Canada and outside its borders. There are reasons, however, to doubt this claim.
Idle No More is a social movement protesting the unjust treatment of First Nations, Metis, and Inuits by Canada’s federal government. The movement gained attention in November 2012 when Chief Theresa Spence of the Attawapiskat First Nation began a hunger strike protesting a housing crisis in her community and the enactment of Bill C-45, a piece of federal legislation that, according to activists, undermine Canada’s environmental protection laws.
Between November 2012 and January 2013, Idle No More quickly attracted support in pockets across Canada, the US, Australia, and Sweden. The movement and the peaceful protests held in its name made headlines in the Canadian press and were hot topics across social media platforms. In combination, press and social media exposure gave the movement considerable presence in the minds of many Canadians and led to claims that Idle No More enjoyed rapidly growing support.
Those celebrating the growth of the movement, however, failed to note that Idle No More never gained the attention (let alone the support) of major news sources outside of Canada or the major human right international non-governmental organizations (INGOs). Only one US newspaper reported on the movement (the Tampa Bay Times). The New York Times and the Washington Post, in contrast, remained silent on the issue. Looking at newspapers outside of North America, only two UK sources and one New Zealand newspaper reported on Idle No More. Perhaps more telling of the inability to movement to gain traction outside of Canada, however, is the lack of reporting on the issue by human rights INGOs. Human Rights Watch makes no mention of it. Amnesty International, in contrast, reported on the movement once but only once.
Given that Idle No More has yet to penetrate the reporting of some of the most respect news source and human rights INGOs I feel it is only fair to ask: how truly successful has the movement been in gaining international support? I believe the answer to that question is: less successful than existing supporters would like to think.
This unflattering assessment, however, leads to another question: is the modest success of Idle No More typical of how transnational social movements start? In theory, international social movements do have modest beginnings: budding domestic movements attract the attention of larger, more powerful actors outside state borders. In combination, the smaller domestic actors and larger international actors pressure the target government to reform. It is unclear, however, if the theories that advance this causal argument (there are many) is relevant to Idle No More. The above argument is the result of research on states transitioning out of conflict or transitioning out of autocracy/anocracy towards democracy. Canada is doing neither.
In sum, at this point, growing interest in Idle No More seems questionable, particularly outside of Canada’s borders. The lack of international attention, however, does not mean that the goals of the movement are not worth pursuing nor does it mean that these goals cannot be reached through domestic activism alone. But if Idle No More wants to gain considerable support outside of Canada, it must find away to gain the attention of the key media outlets and human rights INGOs. Additionally, the movement must be realistic about the progress it has made thus far.