Populism, ‘Empty Signifiers’ and Indigenous Resistance in Canada

What are the implications of emergent populist forms of politics and the related use of ‘empty signifiers’ for Indigenous resistance movements in Canada? This article introduces the theories of populism and empty signifiers of Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe to Canadian Indigenous studies and finds that they present both pros and cons for Indigenous struggle. One major issue is that Canadian populist forms of politics may serve to marginalize Indigenous actors and lead them to feel misrepresented within related social movements. These movements commonly develop empty signifiers, which are vague terms that mean different things to different political actors, and which help to unite a ‘people’—the political agent that populist movements construct. Indigenous resistance movements may come to feel misrepresented by empty signifiers within populist movements led by other groups because their demands for sovereignty and decoloniality often become neglected within those movements. However, Indigenous resistance movements can strategically make use of empty signifiers to constitute a people or non-populist social movements that can challenge colonial institutions. I argue that any such movements would require careful strategizing between Indigenous and other social movements so as to ensure that Indigenous priorities are not marginalized.