Treaty as De-Fetishizing Critique

A Social Theory of Treaty Interpretation

Bibliographic Data

ID6356932
AuthorsCorey Snelgrove (0000-0003-3171-5511, University of Alberta, corresponding author)
Year2024
Volume56
Issue1
Pages65-90
Publication date2024-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenuePolity (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0032-3497 • E-ISSN: 1744-1684
PublisherUniversity of Chicago Press (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1086/727910
OpenAlexW4388672258
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited22

Through a close reading of a 2018 Ontario Superior Court case—Restoule v. Canada—I demonstrate the persistence of the transactional interpretation of treaties, where treaty is understood as a contract of self-dispossession. I argue further that this can be explained through Karl Marx's theory of fetishism. Commodity fetishism provides the social traction for the transactional interpretation of treaties generally, while capital fetishism explains the subordination of the relational interpretation of treaties in Restoule specifically. Bringing Marx's theory of fetishism into dialogue with Indigenous treaty visions underscores the importance of attending to and ultimately transforming capitalist social relations to realize treaty while facilitating an appreciation for the way in which Indigenous treaty visions represent an instance of de-fetishizing critique

Fetishism · Indigenous · Interpretation (philosophy · Law and economics · Political science · Sociology · Treaty · Vision · Anthropology · Historical and Contemporary Political Dynamics · International Law and Aviation · International Law and Human Rights · Law · Philosophy

Tools

Open DOI