Escaping Authenticity’s Dark Side: How Indigenous Groups Negotiate Indigeneity During Contentious Interactions

Indigenous movement scholarship identifies two primary approaches to claiming indigeneity, strategic essentialism and decolonization, a binary that constrains Indigenous agency by suggesting that Indigenous actors must conform to settler expectations in the short term while postponing decolonization to a later stage. We broaden this perspective by looking at indigeneity from the perspective of constructed authenticity theory, which helps us reveal alternative agentic strategies for claiming identity. We examine how Indigenous leaders, animal rights activists, and policymakers debated Indigenous rights and identity by analyzing claims made during a Canadian summit on fur harvesting. Our findings reveal a clash between non-Indigenous authenticity claims, imposing rigid stereotypes, and Indigenous claims grounded in internal values and self-determination. Polarization persisted until Indigenous leaders reframed authenticity through historical and territorial connections, opening space for dialogue. Our study contributes to Indigenous movement scholarship by showing how different authenticity claims either reinforce settler constraints or foster Indigenous agency.