HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 2:50 AM
VANRIDERFAN VANRIDERFAN is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankieFlowerpot View Post
5 "upstanding" members of the Armed forces here

http://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/canadian-...ifax-1.3487255
Against my better judgement I watched the entire interaction.

Lots of mis-information on both sides. I guess you could say the there was a whiff of potential violence by the white guys just being there but the anti-cornwallis folks were the most aggressive of the two groups. Good thing there was that tall lady who was doing her best to keep both sides from escalating the situation.

In the end the "boys" received a one way conversation from Rear Admiral Newton at 8 am this morning (that would not have been a pleasant experience) and are under administrative review. The way the MND and General Vance are reacting, the "boys" could be released from the CAF.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 3:01 AM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant
Posts: 3,692
This vid post is incomplete here (quotes missing), but the responses are worth reposting. I'll add the original post of the thread for context...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy View Post
Does the average Canadian care {little alone know} about NAD?

I guess I should add to that question is if the average First Nation's Canadian even cares either? Seriously, you see all the politicians making speeches like they could careless but everyone knows these are just media events with politicians trying to make as much political hay as they can.

Almost everything we hear about First Nation's, which is quite frequent these days, is bad news. From murders, suicides, lack of housing and clean water, addiction, family violence, and poverty. Perhaps Canadians view it as more of a National Depression Day when the media and government try to remind us of the desperation that 3% of our population lives in and, at least subconsciously, the rest of us try to avoid.


Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
Early Canadian governments used a divide-and-conquer approach toward indigenous relations. By separating indigenous people into 600+ separate First Nations, instead of allowing them to maintain traditional cultural alliances and negotiate as larger tribes (similar to how they're set up now at regional and provincial levels), they made the process of assimilating them easier. Preventing them from leaving their reserves severed ties to nearby reserves, and they essentially couldn't communicate or organize back then to advocate for their own interests. Several generations in, each First Nation tends to see itself as a separate community from the others as opposed to one part of a larger, regional community, and each chief sees themselves as the lead negotiator between the crown/government and their people, as opposed to have a few representatives make deals on behalf of many First Nations.

The fact that "consultation" means 600+ meetings with all of those reserves, and essentially unanimous agreement among all 600+ chiefs for laws to pass without controversy, means that easy fixes are essentially impossible. A lot of indigenous people are pushing for democratization and regional co-operation between First Nations and the crown/government but they're up against the wall of the Indian Act and stubborn (sometimes hereditary) chiefs, who under that Indian Act have many more powers than they should, and being indigenous doesn't preclude one from being greedy.



Well luckily for them, this stuff is between indigenous people and the government. The average white person in Toronto really doesn't have to be too invested in the details of these efforts, they simply have to voice support for a solution to be found, as opposed to staying silent and apathetic to the problem. No one is asking Southern Canadians to come up with solutions, we just want them to support the solutions that are presented so that they can be put into effect.



There is a similar problem that the government has when negotiating policies, like universal health care, with the provinces: how will the system work? Who will provide the services? Who will pay for it, and how will they get the money to pay for it? Is the programme permanent (like social insurance), based on periodic intergovernmental agreements (like universal healthcare), or temporary (like infrastructure programmes)?

And keep in mind: the government has to make this deal with 600+ separate entities. That's one of the biggest hurdles, and that's a problem that the government created itself in order to give itself the upper hand 100 years ago.



Yes.



They raise these issues in local media. For example, the water treatment plant in Fort Hope failed a few weeks ago because of arson cutting off the buildings power supply and damaging a pump. (It was only out for a few days—not every situation where water treatment isn't available is a permanent problem). In Rankin Inlet a decade ago, it was because a snowstorm cut power supplies for several days and the frozen water damaged the entire system. In Marten Falls, it was a lack of water treatment operations not maintaining the system correctly that led to contamination issues and eventually a boil water advisory. In Gull Bay, the pumps failed and no one will pay to fix them.



The problem is where the funding comes from. Repairing a water treatment plant is considered a capital expense, that comes out of the INAC budget. They don't want to pay for it though! So they say it's an "emergency". Emergencies are dealt with through contingency funds. That funding isn't separated line-by-line and seems to be limitless. So while Marten Falls needs a $50,000 filtration system to be back up and running, it's much cheaper for INAC to let another government agency (such as Ontario Clean Water Agency) to take over the "emergency" instead by spending $350,000 per year flying bottled water to the community instead. INAC saves money, OCWA is a "hero", and the natives have water. Win-win-win!

A lot of communities have put in applications for water treatment system repairs and been denied them because of costs. (This happens for housing too). In some cases, where OCWA isn't involved in bottled water and INAC supplies it from its own emergency funding source, they often delay release of funds (typically once per quarter and sometimes they require the band to pay the bill first and then simply reimburse them) which makes the community look bad if they keep ordering water and can't pay for it on time.

But another thing people overlook: Because of the size of reserves, and the way the Indian Act governs housing on them, it forces the reserves to be dense. They can't be spread out like a rural white community like O'Connor. They have to be dense. And often, the lack of electricity supply means they rely on diesel generators, and those require large storage tanks which often leak. That means groundwater becomes contaminated with a wide variety of toxic chemicals, and therefore unsafe to drink, so there is no choice but to build a community-wide water treatment station. But only 500 people and the school only goes up to grade 8? Who is going to run it? And once it is up and running, you still have to deal with the fact that you've just plunked a "colonizer's toy" in the middle of a community that experiences the worst poverty in this country. If you're a troubled youth who wants to "fight back" against an oppressor, what are you going to target? Probably that fancy new thing "the oppressor" just plopped into town.

And then that brings us to the social issues, and...

It's an incredibly difficult situation to be in.

Now the water is fairly easy to solve: a high efficiency, compact ultrafiltration system which requires minimal maintenance and can be maintained by someone who travels from community to community on a regular basis—many communities in Northern Ontario have this kind of set up. Marten Falls, iirc, was given a proposal for one but INAC rejected funding for it because there was no capital left for it that year. In a secure, fireproof building you greatly reduce risk, but how do we pay for that system? How do we pay for 89 of them to provide water to the communities without clean water? How do we pay for a couple hundred more to replace outdated systems many communities rely on? And we still haven't solved the pervasive social problems they face!



Everyone at that ceremony was Canadian. I think what you mean to say is "white supremacists can't disrupt indigenous ceremonies", and with that, I agree.



But that's essentially what it is, when you have an understanding of how the treaty was negotiated and interpreted by both sides at the time of signing and in the present day. The government has even acknowledged the land was originally stolen and that it can't necessarily be returned, that's why they've been paying billions of dollars to First Nations bands over the past two decades through the land claims process.



Except that in the Spanish colonized countries, despite the caste system, their indigenous populations tend to have more of a say in society. They weren't assimilated into Spanish culture; Spanish and indigenous cultures were melded together into a new culture. There are still problems there but there is also greater control for indigenous people in many of those countries.

Canada took a more apartheid-like approach (apartheid was actually inspired by Canada's and the US's of indigenous peoples, except they turned the dial up to 11) and that's the root cause of our current problems.



None of our communities had water treatment or electricity until the late 1800s. You can't expect that just because people are indigenous and live in the north that they have to remain nomadic. If we applied this idea to white people, we'd be telling them to go back to England and drink tea with scones because we didn't have white-Canadians pre-contact.

Also, there are remote white communities our there. Moose Factory isn't a reserve, it's a town that's 60% white. Pickle Lake is 60% white and it's 8 hours north of Thunder Bay. Churchill is a majority white community whose current connection to the world is by airplane or ship.

There are always problems delivering things to remote communities. Hell, Thunder Bay struggles with this. We routinely run out of produce, meat and fuel due to hiccups along the supply chain, since we're literally at the end of it for almost everything we need. Should Thunder Bay be shut down? Should Armstrong? What about Newfoundland's outports? All the tiny, shrinking farming communities in the prairies?



Most of those reserves actually came to be located where they were because fur trading posts—a feature of the rational, first world economy of the time—were near by, and native trappers were their main suppliers. Why do you think they have names like Fort Hope, Fort Albany, Fort William, Moose Factory, York Factory, etc? (A factory is a kind of trading post).



We can say the same about dying farming communities and former mining communities and abandoned railway water stations. But we don't. I don't know why we don't, we just don't. Why does Allan Water still exist? No one knows! They don't even have a school but there they are, 100 white people in the middle of fucking nowhere. No one ever bitches about having to pay for them? For every native person living in a remote community in this province, we've got 5 white people doing the same thing and no one ever says "force them to move!"



Canada took 9 million square kilometres of land from First Nations, and on that land built a $1.7 trillion/year economy. $8 billion (0.5%) goes to INAC, which serves about 1.6% of the population.

Indigenous people were promised, by the nearly illiterate white men who brought them the treaties in the first place a century ago, that the government would provide them with homes, schools, and healthy communities, even though that wasn't explicitly laid out in the treaties. Remember that at the time, indigenous people had an oral culture, and that still today, many of Canada's traditions are oral and unwritten as well. There's the reason and the precedent. It has been passed down orally by the descents of the people who signed those treaties that the communities that signed them were promised things by the crown that, in their eyes, the government fails to deliver. I feel that the treaties were negotiated in bad faith, but our country's legitimate claim to the land depends on their validity. For much of our country's landmass (and much of its resource wealth), the only real claim we have that that land is firmly Canadian land is a piece of paper that a few native chiefs who spoke no English were essentially tricked into signing in the late 19th century. It helps that unlike most oppressed minorities, they don't active campaign against our country and seek full independence. They could be like Hamas and terrorize us; they don't. They don't want to. Be glad that the worst of "native people oppressing us fragile whites!" is a native elder asking a journalist to leave the room.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 3:09 AM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is online now
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 18,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by VANRIDERFAN View Post
Against my better judgement I watched the entire interaction.

Lots of mis-information on both sides. I guess you could say the there was a whiff of potential violence by the white guys just being there but the anti-cornwallis folks were the most aggressive of the two groups. Good thing there was that tall lady who was doing her best to keep both sides from escalating the situation.

In the end the "boys" received a one way conversation from Rear Admiral Newton at 8 am this morning (that would not have been a pleasant experience) and are under administrative review. The way the MND and General Vance are reacting, the "boys" could be released from the CAF.
Some of the worst elements are drawn out by things like this.

I think the media have exacerbated the issue by trying to politicize events from nearly 300 years ago. The real story is messy and murky, with no clear good and bad guys. It is not something worth protesting about and fighting people over.

I keep reading about how terrible Cornwallis was for ordering scalping of natives. However, the same news stories rarely point out that this happened within the context of a war (called Father Le Loutre's War in the Maritimes). I think the natives, who were aligned with colonial France back then, actually did the first killing. There were many attacks on British settlers. During the worst one I know of, 20 settlers (civilians, not soldiers) were killed in Dartmouth in 1751 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raid_on_Dartmouth_(1751)). Cornwallis was a British official who only lived in Nova Scotia for a few years. The dynamics of his day don't have much to do with 1817 or 1917, let alone 2017.
__________________
flickr

Last edited by someone123; Jul 5, 2017 at 3:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 3:17 AM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
C'est quoi l'affaire?
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 27,853
Regarding white supremacist soldier guys...

It is not a popular view but I'd submit that many native protesters are the flip side to the same coin.

I mean, when I hear people use language like "white lady" or "white guy" in a sneering way, and people who are native-born told they don't belong here... that's intolerant, aggressive language that goes against Canadian and Western values that wouldn't be otherwise tolerated.

We just cut them more slack because of what they (the protesters) are assumed to have "been through".
__________________
Nowhere else but here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 3:35 AM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
Because it's 2015.
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 37,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
Regarding white supremacist soldier guys...

It is not a popular view but I'd submit that many native protesters are the flip side to the same coin.

I mean, when I hear people use language like "white lady" or "white guy" in a sneering way, and people who are native-born told they don't belong here... that's intolerant, aggressive language that goes against Canadian and Western values that wouldn't be otherwise tolerated.

We just cut them more slack because of what they (the protesters) are assumed to have "been through".
There is a clear power imbalance. When the native people say "racist" things toward white people, they usually don't result in actual threats and violence committed against white people. Native racism against white people is usually verbal, and results in road closures or other inconveniences like having to confront things we don't want to confront. White racism against native people result in assaults and death. Policies proposed by white people that hurt native people are included in some form or another in the platforms of almost every political party in this country. Policies proposed by native people that hurt non-native people are ideas that get ignored and derided by the public, if they're ever heard at all.

In the dispute in Halifax, you had white men who were members of the armed forces intimidating indigenous women who were protesting, but not in a way that seriously harmed or inconvenienced anyone as far as I could tell, other than forcing them to confront an unfortunate truth about an important figure from local history.

In terms of rhetoric from the average person, sure, they're equal. And that sentiment from the native women at the news conference in Ottawa is definitely on the extreme end of the spectrum as far as "native supremacy" goes, but the vast majority of native people don't hold opinions that extreme, and the vast majority of white people don't hold the inverse opinion.
__________________
Toronto & HamiltonThunder Bayother photos | my geofiction | random things | skyscraper diagrams
It's not about what you don't have—it's the little you're given, and how far you can run with it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 4:26 AM
Loco101's Avatar
Loco101 Loco101 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Timmins, Northern Ontario
Posts: 1,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
There is a clear power imbalance. When the native people say "racist" things toward white people, they usually don't result in actual threats and violence committed against white people. Native racism against white people is usually verbal, and results in road closures or other inconveniences like having to confront things we don't want to confront. White racism against native people result in assaults and death. Policies proposed by white people that hurt native people are included in some form or another in the platforms of almost every political party in this country. Policies proposed by native people that hurt non-native people are ideas that get ignored and derided by the public, if they're ever heard at all.

In the dispute in Halifax, you had white men who were members of the armed forces intimidating indigenous women who were protesting, but not in a way that seriously harmed or inconvenienced anyone as far as I could tell, other than forcing them to confront an unfortunate truth about an important figure from local history.

In terms of rhetoric from the average person, sure, they're equal. And that sentiment from the native women at the news conference in Ottawa is definitely on the extreme end of the spectrum as far as "native supremacy" goes, but the vast majority of native people don't hold opinions that extreme, and the vast majority of white people don't hold the inverse opinion.
Exactly! Media will often only show the extremes.

The two women at that press conference were very odd. I have no idea who they are and only know that they are activists. How was the reporter being disrespectful but asking a question at a press conference?!? The way they snapped and used racial remarks was just so low. They definitely don't speak for or represent the vast majority of Indigenous people in Canada.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 4:37 AM
ssiguy ssiguy is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,079
Here we go again listing all the Native problems like we haven't heard them before but this thread is NOT so much about Natives themselves but Canadians reaction to Natives and NAD.

In many ways it is akin to African Americans and the plight they have. Most non-black Americans genuinely care about the crime, poverty, and social ills that effect them but after endless government iniatives and little progress, most white Americans have tuned out. You can only handle bad news stories before you begin to tune out.

I think this is where Canadians are at now. During the last 50 years Canadians have universally accepted the terrible history that Natives have had to endure often with the blessing of our governments. Now arfter untold billions spent, countless government programs, non-stop apologies, and near daily broadcasts of a group that only represents 3% of the population and vastly less than that in the Corridor, with absokutely no progress socially, politically, or economically, many Canadians are just raising their arms up in hopelessness and moving on.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 4:45 AM
Loco101's Avatar
Loco101 Loco101 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Timmins, Northern Ontario
Posts: 1,815
I see quite a few Indigenous people doing very well in the region I live in. There have definitely been improvements but there are of course still many problems and social issues out there. There is a big difference between many Cree people who live in Timmins and those living on a remote reserve who do little to help themselves.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 4:55 AM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant
Posts: 3,692
Here we go again with all the whining and complaining about Natives.

Natives may never assimilate to your liking. They are genetically designed to co-exist in a radically different environment/society. Same with African Americans.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 10:32 AM
Marshal Marshal is offline
from the inside out
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 888
You really should elaborate logan5.

As for being tired of Native issues, and blaming a crippled community: you people need to think about your own families - the alcoholics, the dysfunctional, the handicapped, etc. and how difficult, often impossible it seems for them to overcome their hopelessness and inability to get 'better' in whatever manner that brings one to be 'normal.' Then, when you have finished that, consider what your position would be if your 'people' were routinely driven by the police out into the frozen prairie and dropped off at 3AM to die or whatever; or your sister and the sisters of people you know routinely turned up in the bottom of the Red River, or your parents, and uncles and grandparents all suffer from anxiety, depression and low self worth because of residential schools and adoptive 'scoops,' and then sit back and think about your community's reaction to having 100 missing and murdered women from your home towns . . . I could go on, but really, just get your heads out of your asses!

White extremists rely on intimidation and killing, native extremists don't. So, asking if there is a double standard is really stupid. Anyone who associates themselves with white extremism is pushing a lineage that links up with lynchings, murders, beatings, cop killings, and the indigenous things I just listed. There is no equivalency, so there is no possibility of a double standard. White people (and some others) have been beating up, killing and denying work, wealth and respect to natives, blacks (and some others) for centuries - and it continues today. Blacks and natives also kill, but I defy you to find in their history the discovery of a immunity weakness in the white population and then injected our homes with a deadly pox. The history is so completely fucking out of balance that 'Native complaining,' and pointing out percieved 'double standards' is both ill-informed, sadly without perspective, and stupidly willing to make claims about something you bloody well don't understand past your own simplistic prejudices. Either spend some time learning about it, or put your efforts into other subject matters. This discourse doesn't need your nonsense.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhh.

Lastly, ssguy, you rightly point out the fatigue that factors into all this. But, there's a lesson right there. If the majority, non native population, suffers fatigue related to native problems - well, lets then imagine the fatigue with its resulting drain on the collective will, on the other side of the equation. Yeah, we're all tired of it. I can only imagine how tired or native peoples are of the very same thing.
__________________
Baby Desaguliers was taken out of France in a barrel to escape the Revocation of Nantes. My great grandfather escaped from the same French town. He ended up reading Desaguliers' Newton papers at Oxford.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 1:22 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 12,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
One Radio-Canada program had a Canada Day quiz this weekend, and one of the questions was how many aboriginal communities in Canada didn't have clean drinking water.

The answer?

89.
Soon to be 88: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...tion-1.4190354
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 1:34 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 12,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy View Post
Here we go again listing all the Native problems like we haven't heard them before but this thread is NOT so much about Natives themselves but Canadians reaction to Natives and NAD.

In many ways it is akin to African Americans and the plight they have. Most non-black Americans genuinely care about the crime, poverty, and social ills that effect them but after endless government iniatives and little progress, most white Americans have tuned out. You can only handle bad news stories before you begin to tune out.

I think this is where Canadians are at now. During the last 50 years Canadians have universally accepted the terrible history that Natives have had to endure often with the blessing of our governments. Now arfter untold billions spent, countless government programs, non-stop apologies, and near daily broadcasts of a group that only represents 3% of the population and vastly less than that in the Corridor, with absokutely no progress socially, politically, or economically, many Canadians are just raising their arms up in hopelessness and moving on.
This is absolutely false. There has been progress across the board, although it is uneven and there may be cases where conditions are deteriorating. The current more agitated state of affairs is itself a strong indicator of progress as indigenous people have gained the education and political savvy to make their voices heard.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 2:06 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 12,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
Early Canadian governments used a divide-and-conquer approach toward indigenous relations. By separating indigenous people into 600+ separate First Nations, instead of allowing them to maintain traditional cultural alliances and negotiate as larger tribes (similar to how they're set up now at regional and provincial levels), they made the process of assimilating them easier. Preventing them from leaving their reserves severed ties to nearby reserves, and they essentially couldn't communicate or organize back then to advocate for their own interests. Several generations in, each First Nation tends to see itself as a separate community from the others as opposed to one part of a larger, regional community, and each chief sees themselves as the lead negotiator between the crown/government and their people, as opposed to have a few representatives make deals on behalf of many First Nations.

The fact that "consultation" means 600+ meetings with all of those reserves, and essentially unanimous agreement among all 600+ chiefs for laws to pass without controversy, means that easy fixes are essentially impossible. A lot of indigenous people are pushing for democratization and regional co-operation between First Nations and the crown/government but they're up against the wall of the Indian Act and stubborn (sometimes hereditary) chiefs, who under that Indian Act have many more powers than they should, and being indigenous doesn't preclude one from being greedy.


.....


Except that in the Spanish colonized countries, despite the caste system, their indigenous populations tend to have more of a say in society. They weren't assimilated into Spanish culture; Spanish and indigenous cultures were melded together into a new culture. There are still problems there but there is also greater control for indigenous people in many of those countries.

Canada took a more apartheid-like approach (apartheid was actually inspired by Canada's and the US's of indigenous peoples, except they turned the dial up to 11) and that's the root cause of our current problems.

....


....

Very good post, but I had a question and a comment on the above bits.

Do I take it that you reject the idea of First Nations communities as "sovereign", who can deal with the Government of Canada on a "nation to nation" basis, as the PM espouses? I would have thought that at least some segments of the indigenous community would have problems with that. If one does not recognize a First Nation as "sovereign", it would seem to call into question the status of any "treaties" that they have entered into, although that's academic as the courts have repeatedly upheld their validity.

I don't recognize Latin America at all in your comment - with some exceptions, indigenous peoples are at the very bottom of the social heirarchy of these countries. The "mestizo" culture that has evolved in many LatAm countries recognizes (sometimes reluctantly at the individual level) the aboriginal component of its identity but is in general assimilated into the mainstream national culture, which considers itself "Western" if not "European". That would be in contrast to Canada's recent recognition of the Metis as a First Nation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 2:32 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
C'est quoi l'affaire?
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 27,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loco101 View Post
Exactly! Media will often only show the extremes.

The two women at that press conference were very odd. I have no idea who they are and only know that they are activists. How was the reporter being disrespectful but asking a question at a press conference?!? The way they snapped and used racial remarks was just so low. They definitely don't speak for or represent the vast majority of Indigenous people in Canada.
Perhaps not but in the leadership they've obviously spread the word recently that a more aggressive militancy is the way to go.

I am hearing a lot about it in my entourage. Living where I do I have lots of friends who are public servants - both at INAC and in other departments who deal with aboriginal issues. These days when the feds approach indigenous communities with (what the feds think is) good news they are received with lots of defiance and hostility.

Just last week a good friend of mine went to the official opening of this exhibition in Gatineau: http://www.mosaicanada.ca/

And one of the speakers was an aboriginal leader who went into a long rant about this being "our land and not yours", "you are guests here", "white people this and white people that".

So there is definitely something going on.
__________________
Nowhere else but here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 2:40 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
C'est quoi l'affaire?
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 27,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
There is a clear power imbalance. When the native people say "racist" things toward white people, they usually don't result in actual threats and violence committed against white people. Native racism against white people is usually verbal, and results in road closures or other inconveniences like having to confront things we don't want to confront. White racism against native people result in assaults and death. Policies proposed by white people that hurt native people are included in some form or another in the platforms of almost every political party in this country. Policies proposed by native people that hurt non-native people are ideas that get ignored and derided by the public, if they're ever heard at all.

In the dispute in Halifax, you had white men who were members of the armed forces intimidating indigenous women who were protesting, but not in a way that seriously harmed or inconvenienced anyone as far as I could tell, other than forcing them to confront an unfortunate truth about an important figure from local history.

In terms of rhetoric from the average person, sure, they're equal. And that sentiment from the native women at the news conference in Ottawa is definitely on the extreme end of the spectrum as far as "native supremacy" goes, but the vast majority of native people don't hold opinions that extreme, and the vast majority of white people don't hold the inverse opinion.
There has been and still is a lot of tragedy in indigenous communities all over the new world, but sad to say most of it in terms of violence comes from aboriginal people inflicting it on themselves or on other aboriginal people.

"White" (sic) people by and large don't go out and physically harm indigenous people in Canada. Or at least, the direct physical harm inflicted by "white" people (Robert Pickton, those SQ cops in Val-d'Or, etc.) is just a tiny fraction compared to what goes on intra-muros in the communities themselves.

Obviously the power imbalance you refer to and other forms of injustice do play huge roles in creating the conditions that make aboriginal people hurt *themselves* way more than other groups in our society do.

BTW, I sincerely hope you don't think I am anti-indigenous.

If we discussed what is needed in terms of investment and autonomy for indigenous Canadians regarding education, health care, infrastructure, accommodation, culture, etc., you'd probably find we're in agreement on almost everything.
__________________
Nowhere else but here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 2:42 PM
Xelebes's Avatar
Xelebes Xelebes is online now
Sawmill Billowtoker
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Rockin' in Edmonton
Posts: 12,398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
I am hearing a lot about it in my entourage. Living where I do I have lots of friends who are public servants - both at INAC and in other departments who deal with aboriginal issues. These days when the feds approach indigenous communities with (what the feds think is) good news they are received with lots of defiance and hostility.
Imagine for a moment, a husband who has a long history of being abusive and none the wise to this fact--or perhaps worse, he is wise to the fact --decides to treat his wife with a bouquet of flowers. What's the wife's reaction?
__________________
The Colour Green
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 2:45 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 12,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
Perhaps not but in the leadership they've obviously spread the word recently that a more aggressive militancy is the way to go.

I am hearing a lot about it in my entourage. Living where I do I have lots of friends who are public servants - both at INAC and in other departments who deal with aboriginal issues. These days when the feds approach indigenous communities with (what the feds think is) good news they are received with lots of defiance and hostility.

Just last week a good friend of mine went to the official opening of this exhibition in Gatineau: http://www.mosaicanada.ca/

And one of the speakers was an aboriginal leader who went into a long rant about this being "our land and not yours", "you are guests here", "white people this and white people that".

So there is definitely something going on.
Absolutely, and both sides are having to feel their way forward in a new dynamic (even a new vocabulary). Not surprisingly, the indigenous activists are out front in this process. Some of this is just theatre (of course our poitical leaders would never indulge in something like that!), but at some point I suspect that they will encounter "push back" and then both sides will regroup and adjust their interactions in response (I hope in a way that emphasizes mutual respect). This will be uncomfortable for many, but it strikes me as normal and necessary (although I have no idea if it will lead to good or bad results).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 2:50 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
C'est quoi l'affaire?
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 27,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xelebes View Post
Imagine for a moment, a husband who has a long history of being abusive and none the wise to this fact--or perhaps worse, he is wise to the fact --decides to treat his wife with a bouquet of flowers. What's the wife's reaction?
Oh, I am not saying I don't understand the reaction.

It's just a very noticeable change, and quite different from the attitude even when the less "aboriginal-friendly" Harpercons were in power, vs. the Trudeau Liberals who are way more conciliatory and obviously looking to make amends.
__________________
Nowhere else but here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 3:13 PM
begratto's Avatar
begratto begratto is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Verdun > Montréal > Québec > Canada
Posts: 641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xelebes View Post
Imagine for a moment, a husband who has a long history of being abusive and none the wise to this fact--or perhaps worse, he is wise to the fact --decides to treat his wife with a bouquet of flowers. What's the wife's reaction?
Maybe, but in this case we're talking about the well-meaning great-grandson of the abusive husband.

Should he be held responsible for things that happened generations ago?
__________________
Venit ad oppidum!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2017, 3:19 PM
Xelebes's Avatar
Xelebes Xelebes is online now
Sawmill Billowtoker
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Rockin' in Edmonton
Posts: 12,398
Quote:
Originally Posted by begratto View Post
Maybe, but in this case we're talking about the well-meaning great-grandson of the abusive husband.
Are we?
__________________
The Colour Green
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:42 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.