maxsyno

Yes. Stewardship has become competitive. It is business now. Look at the environment with its quick fix solutions to complete anihilation, let alone inequality in society - poverty, education and more. All down to competition. The legal system/ business today are the 'stewards'. Shame.

Oleg Bach "As far as this being your friends society and him claiming ownership - I suggest that he get out and work and manage the place properly before he claims to be the boss.." This is the thing. They do not want to do that. Stewardship has sold out for big bucks now. It is gone.

Keng: Your attitude stinks of the colonial character. It comes through every pore of your skin or every word you type I will show you from your own words; "How many members of Six Nations live off reserve, like that kid who murdered someone in Brantford the other week? I don't think you quite understand; I only listed a few; if I were to catalogue all of the crimes committed by people from Ohsweken alone, I'd have to spend weeks if not months compiling the list. You're really drifting into the "calling someone a racist or bigot" zone. So every time someone has an issue with how Six Nations functions, it constitutes "racism" and hence they must be sympathetic to the white supremacist movement? Isn't that convenient. That was not said. You ASSUMED it. "Put it this way, if people want to be respected and treated as equals in my society", Who's society!!!! Such an audacity. Only an ignoranant redneck could say that. Canada does not belong to either Jesus and his bunch of cronies or yourself but to the corporations "then they are open to criticism for what I perceive to be their failings, just like anyone else". Again the arrogance as if YOUR OPINION counts. What you percieve is irrelevent. We are speaking statistics. Not only that we need to ask IF they are correct. Statistics are more often than not manipulated by the POLITICS of the RESEARCHER That is common knowledge. "If some group in my society" Your Society. People who live here should be equally part of society. It is NOT just YOURS. Your attitude is one of ownership and superiority, as seen from the very words you use. "want to undermine Canada and just in general cause problems, then I'm going to say something about it regardless of their race or religion." Firstly, people do not WANT to commit a crime. Crime is committed because government fails to meet out is social contract. And you 'saying so' without consideration of race, religion is the same as the 'christian supremicist' complex concerning there percieved notions of superiority. "It's you who always views things through the perspective of race, and twists everything that has to do with Six Nations as a racial issue. Frankly, I think it's getting a little tiring, and I'm wondering if maybe this sort of conduct on your part is the reason you were absent for the last little while..." Who cares? As if you matter! You and your 'sort of conduct', not everybody desires to kiss the backside of a christian preacher. They are idiots. They present manners/conduct as 'the way to 'salvation' , white supremicist notions of salvation anyway,while committing atrocities all over the world.

Canadian educational initiatives to both 'integrate' people (in theory) and yet in practice to 'seperate' off has failed. We need only look ar residential schools. Perhaps it should be a lesson. . . . in PRINCIPLE as follows:.Of course this is not a direct parallel but its something to learn from. Once ordained, Egerton started The Christian Guardian, Canada’s most-read newspaper. It was published by Ryerson Publishing press, which still exists today. In 1833, he went to England to fight the Anglican Church’s bid to become the official church of Canada. When he returned, he became principal of Methodist academy Victoria College. There, he eliminated the coed program, sending the girls away, and cut all vacations except Christmas and New Year’s. Then in 1843, Egerton helped elect an advisory council friendly to the governor general and in return, he was appointed school superintendent. He worked for Upper Canada for more than 30 years, introducing free primary and secondary education. Instead of focusing on the three R’s, Egerton believed students should study science and the arts. It was during these years that he established the Normal School to train the colony’s teachers and earned the reputation as the godfather of Canada’s education system. And this is likely the only way Egerton would be remembered if he hadn’t been a supporter of residential schools. There is no single event that is accepted as the genesis of residential schools, but the Bagot Commission Report, named after the governor in 1842, became a seminal document in the establishment of labour schools for native boys. Egerton supported the Bagot Commission. He believed, in complete faith, that separate schools run by the government were the best way to improve native quality of life. It was a belief formed on the Credit River with Chief Jones. Egerton wanted to emphasize religious and language teachings, while also instructing farming and mechanical labour to make the school self-sufficient. He did not want the natives to learn specific trades, arguing that they would do best as “working farmers and agricultural labourers.” Egerton apparently elaborated on these thoughts in the 1847 report, though there isn’t a lot of available research on the actual text itself. For the most part, it’s cited on timelines of residential schools. For instance, one from cbc.ca reads: “1847 — Egerton Ryerson produces a study of native education at the request of the assistant superintendent general of Indian affairs. His findings become the model for future native residential schools. Ryerson recommends that domestic education and religious instruction is the best model for the Indian population. The recommended focus is on agricultural training; and government funding will be awarded through inspections and reports.” Egerton was a man of his times and his peers would not have seen him as a rabid, or even radical, racist. In fact, from what is available, it appears Egerton was convinced that his plan of federally funded separate schools was the only choice to ensure the well-being of aboriginals. In reality, the opposite turned out to be true. As J.R. Miller, a history professor at the University of Saskatchewan and residential school expert, says, “Nobody yet knew what the horrors of the residential school would bring.” In 1907, Dr. Peter Bryce, medical inspector for the Department of Indian Affairs, found that nearly 50 per cent of all western residential school students died from disease. His report, entitled “A Story of a National Crime,” came to light in 1922. Unfortunately, two years earlier, the government had amended the Indian Act to force all native children ages 7 to 15 to attend residential schools, now called boarding schools, which churches of various denominations ran with government funding. Parents could go to jail if they didn’t send their children to a place where teachers banished aboriginal languages. And once there, the schools acted as assimilation camps where a host of human rights abuses —sexual assault, corporal punishment and forced labour — occurred. The abuse continued until the government started closing boarding schools in the 1990s when public awareness of the abuse grew. The last residential school closed in Saskatchewan in 1996. And in April 2006, the Conservative government completed a $1.9-billion compensation deal with the Assembly of First Nations that had first been negotiated with the Liberal government. Undermining the financial relief, Indian Affairs Minister Jim Prentice said the government wouldn’t apologize on behalf of Canada. Native leaders were outraged that today, 170 years after Egerton advocated for schools to teach native children European culture, the government could not say: “We’re sorry.” . . . . Of course the Toronto board is NOT TODAY speaking of putting the kids into residential schools. But the PRINCIPLES are exactly the same. What could come of this? I do not think the rationale has changed much from then to now by the sounds of you guys.

maxsyno said: "I'm thinking that often the problem with racism or nationalism tends to stem from this very thing. I wish they would teach more world history in order for children to see just how integrated we are in many respects. I think the kids would love it actually. It would broaden there horizons and prick there curiosity toward the political realm". Bambino said: "I think the question to ask in response to that is: how do you teach the world's history to children in only eight years? I'd venture to say: you can't. And not doing so doesn't make one a racist or nationalist. It's just practical." Absolutely! That is, not teaching world history results in racism. I guess that because I'm european i think it is possible since we had to learn about europes development from an early age. So it is only natural that I would be concerned that a majority Canadian curicculum could result in kids believing that their country is the 'best of all possible worlds' so to speak. . . .and that other cultures throughout the world are strange as opposed to simply different. I think that it is more then possible to compare effects of major historical events For example the industrial revolution and the differing repercussions of it internationally; or the effects of the cold war, Vietnam, two world wars and so on. Kids can be facinated by history. I remember a few of us thinking that history was akin to 'The Lord of the Rings'. I don't under estimate childrens ability to draw from major events and there consequences. In fact I believe that today there imaginations are being stifled ( I digress, a new thread maybe?). Afterall, comparing different provinces is a similar exercise to comparing different countries, especially if the young student has never visited a different province. Effect from one place to another is geographical as opposed to what we consider to be 'mind boggling'. Perhaps it becomes easier to teach more world history if it is kept in the context of how and why countries have gone to war, responded to major changes in the economy and so fourth. At least the kids would be able to grasp patterns of events rather than having to percieve in a subliminal way something akin to 'seperatism' and countries as novelty 'items'. Afterall, we all are participants in history despite borders. At least it becomes possible for any student to equally assess which/or what country/ies they would like to study later if they so wish. Apart from that they may become 'informed' voters.

G. Bambino said: "there should be one history taught predominantly in our public schools, and that's the history of Canada". I'm thinking that often the problem with racism or nationalism tends to stem from this very thing. I wish they would teach more world history in order for children to see just how integrated we are in many respects. I think the kids would love it actually. It would broaden there horizons and prick there curiosity toward the political realm.

Nobody in particular. In fact Iv just had to reread the thread again to see what prompted my response. It is a general response to the posts refering to Marx/ or left. It is also an endeavour to touch base with what he thought about religion though as you know it was not his main concern. I brought in the Young Marx to highlight the differences of philosophical opinion he arose out of. THe relevance would be that any body who calls themselves Marxist or left in the Western world would agree with him in the main; religion is a result of alienation wrought by political economy. Radical religions clash over it today because Western PE is forced down there throats. They want to protect against it (regardless of what we think about it either way).

IF it just so happens that ALL black kids are behind in their grades, there are other possible remedies to outright seperation. Perhaps they could complete a kind of 'bridging school term' in the summer break to bring them up to speed. Once up to speed they could be dispersed within mixed schools. Seperation is absolutely horrifying. Children naturally adapt to each others cultures. Low income areas are the problem. Black people are not employed because of racist views for example foreign = terrorist (if coffee colured skin), Blacks as gangsters, or even complications with bureacracy for the employer with newbies. But whatever it is, immigrants are being put into low income areas together. Anyway, we need to break that kind of steretyping/catagorisationa. Kids are lumped into schools depending on location and income. THese schools need to be upgraded. THey should not be used as a means to 'guarantee' a shoddy education for minorities, hiding behind excuses of cultural differences. Or hiding the fact that such differences can be worked into the system. The school does not have to rid 'culture' or lump it together as black. The kids can still have there own home understanding and learn from the Canadian system also. Studies of kids undergoing this has shown that kids adapt both ways with much ease. (sorry, forgotten my source but its to do with the quality of rational language structures and communication). Seperation is a guarantee that minorities will NOT enter the workforce. They will not integrate and there education will be shoddy. They will never escape poverty and you will have to pay for such errors of the system. That is, if everybody really does want these kids to have equal access to university, professional jobs, trades etc then integration is vital right? I assume everybody does since there is a lot of moaning about those on welfare. So surely a bridging system could work out for differing levels before entrance into standard Canadian schools? Even if it cost the state/tax payers it would be an investment because future 'black' welfare collecters et al would be avoided. Lets try and keep the innocence of the kids alive by integration so racism stands a possible chance of being beaten.

Not only that, it keeps people preoccupied. The media feeds these fears which takes away epoples attention from what really is going on around them -including the globe. It does effect each and everyones lives but the focus has been rivetted on 'terrorism'. Liscence is given to governments to secure the nation through costly irrational security zoning methods. Its still incredibly easy to smuggle 'gadgets' from one country to another despite being searched a couple of times, despite more bureaucracy and long lineups. Government relations with these nations ensure huge money for business but Joe public has to pay for cheap security methods to 'keep them happy' while we let government roll in the tanks which drains the publics resources too! Nonetheless, it is an investment of public money that will line the pockets of those in power. They are forming foundations which caters for the smooth exploitation of nations.

Marxists tend to be atheist. In fact Marx referred to religion as the'opium of the people'. A form of 'alienation' arising out of the political economy, even before capitalism, and its by product of 'self estrangement' (Hegel's term). Marx drew from the works of Hegel and Feurerback (sp?). Hegel argued that the human mind, thought or rather 'spirit'comes before the material world itself in relation to how humanity proceeds in survival. Feurerback, on the contrary to Hegel asserted that religion is a social phenomenon arising out of the material world and relations of production. People turn to religion in order to 'aspire' to what they would like to be, religion provides an explanation of why people suffer so much and it gives them meaning and hope, much needed, to hide the truth of peoples shoddy life conditions and stunted development. Marx was more in allignment with Feurerback but took it further to specifically include its direct relationship to and with political economy. In the 1844 Manuscripts published before the volumes of Kapital, he stressed that working with nature together enables human survival and production. The material activity of production then leads to 'ideas' about production, communication and so fourth. Only this way do we realise our 'species being'. Besides all that, Marxists have always offered a critique of religion as it is still a part of political economy and how we view the world and how we act within it. It will look at different modes of production along with its reflective ideologies as seen between owners and workers, class, class within culture of many whom are religious and have to contend with the rapid changes in production through the ages. New and old religions globally still have to depend/function/react/object in the political economy. I have not read the Koran, but regardless of whether it is a book like the bible that is riddled with brutality, people that do follow the Koran suffer from the first worlds economy which caters to its dominant form of religion and ideology. We need only look to how policy is continually being debated/ammended over such things as abortion and gay rights in order for the most popular candidate to win as Bush did. I do not think the muslims compromise so much, they do have differences of opinion, but nonetheless due to being lumped together have suffered for it -economically unless the US chooses not to for its own economic benefits.

"Morals, values and honour have nothing to do with the religious trait of bullheaded stubbornness and unwillingness to consider ideas that contradict their perceptions of God. And, no, that trait is not an admirable trait that should be passed on from generation to generation because it is detrimental to society. It stifles open-mindedness and co-operation between peoples". This is akin to a breath of fresh air! Cool. My cat was altruistic. She would deliver us mice and put them under the bed for us.

Perhaps its better to just look at who recieves the tax breaks and who pays for them in order to decide whom to vote for. In other words who picks up the tax bill. The theoretical issues are always cloaked and misrepresented. But at least and yes it is 'at least', we can thereby fathom out who are the crooks by working from core figures to endeavour a candidates probabilities in whom he/she chooses to benefit. I think simply judging how 'chaste' they have led there lives does not 'figure' in it at all. A financial record of a party is the only way we can work out incentive. Of course Id feel better if MORE was spent on our social structure. After the wars everybody agreed to pay tax for these basic needs. It was to be a guarantee if we were going to fund rebuilding and change in production processes. We need a descent healthcare, education system, pensions and welfare in times of change and hardship, it happens! However, Much money is wasted. For one simple example Canada educates many doctors, that costs money. Then the doctors move to the US to recieve a descent wage packet. So Canadian money is wasted here. Im not sure how many years this has gone on but I bet the debt is huge.

And after such a history of conflict its about time the people got what they wanted. However, because of the world economic pre-conditions for participating on the market, Im certain people feel many contradictory forces in the political arena. They also may be quite frightened of the possible consequenses which ever way Russia evolves.

Did/do you not think Iraq et al equally fraught with the prospect of war? These countries could have allied together because they do have something to lose - oil. However, the US is 'managing' these folk. . . .in its usual ugly way. Russia is in absolutely no position of opposition. THe country is a mess. IT has been subject to economic blockades and sanctions for far too long as imposed by the west. It has absolutely nothing to gain through war. Every single hope of surival would be dashed if they chanced it. They will not. Unless of course it could rally very rich allies . By the way the third world is still maintained today, as it was throughout its colonised history, as underdeveloped and impoverished.

Russia has been MAINTAINED as underdeveloped by the West for many years. Any interest in its oil by the west means that Russia will be exploited because of its lack of facilities, technology and more. However, China has built up indusry at an alarming rate. It needs vast quantities of oil. America is going to keep the Arab oil suppliers for itself. This could have been a huge problem for China since it has only recently built up its industrial capacity to compete with the world. It is 100% dependent upon oil import. It has been expected that oil blocades to China through US policy were going to occur, as oil depletion/mad competition is expected. It seems likely that Russia could/would supply China. However, we do not know how the US and europeans will take this. They may become paranoid and start repeating the ideologies of the cold war and thereby to act accordingly. However, the US could act upon thse fears with ease. However, Russia is in need of support not war. It simply could not survive.I guess that the european interest in Russia's oil is precisely because Russia could supply China all its oil so they want a piece of the economic pie. They would have to send over engineers and so fourth anyway to get the project moving. In that sense the europeans would protect there own interest which in turn would protect Russia whom they intend to exploit. Hence the problem would perhaps be between the US and euro's. China needs oil to function so it cannot risk itself in alligning itself with Russia. Russia wants full participation in the world market which means it is completely at the mercy of the US good will!

Yes, I think that it always adapts. It seems to keep itself in allignment with politcal and ethical issues often brought about by media scandels, politicical representations/sales pitch, combined with such things as abortion rights, gay rights and more. I would guess that if we were to look at the most recent history of US and Canadian cultural trends we'd find that Western christianity would have got itself involved in the key elements of changing from cultural standpoint to another. For the very survival of christianity itself would surely depend upon it otherwise its power would diminish.

"are groups of Middle Eastern men purposefully behaving suspiciously in airports and on airplanes in an effort to cash in on America’s civil justice system"? In all honesty this North American mind set is extremely primative and embarrassing. How on earth could anybody determin behaviour as ' "purposefully" behaving' as opposed to simply behaving as normal for a start. Could a North American actually ever know how Arabs 'behave' for a start? And what is "suspiciously"? This is completely absurd. For a start if one is behaving suspiciously it is often because they dont really want to draw attention to themselves! If these people were rude on the airlines then that is 'it'. Simply that. They were rude and the flight atendent should have dealt wit hit. "The Director of Safety and Security for at least one airline, Sun Country Airlines, believes this may be true. There are some groups out there pushing the limits to reap the rewards of what happened on 9/11,” Tony Loeks told PJM in an interview. “They behave in a non-violent but suspicious manner to get themselves pulled off the aircraft with the result being a civil suit against the airline.” Oh really! I'd hate to be related to this idiot.

Russia is brassic and broken. I do not know how you could think her a threat to the West.

People also have 'faith' in the law. But at least they have something concrete to argue or ammend. THe existence of god is fraught with problems. I wonder why any such creature would hide evidence? Why would such an entity not reveal itself clearly in order to at least stop the devastation that believing in it has caused. One thing we can say is that the 'belief' is a real presence due to the consequences reaped 'over it'. It is thereby a social phenonema. Nature however is 'immune to what we think about it, our beliefs and so fourth. It is not immune to our actions as we can see. The only 'gods' we have on the planet are ourselves which are accountable.

It is when compared to genocide that they survived.

Course Description "Whiteness is a concept that must be defined historically. However, the power of White privilege has subverted history, perpetuating the perception that Whiteness does not exist nor is it privileged. Typically history is written by those who have won but this course will give voice to those who have been silenced. We will uncover how White privilege has evolved, how it is perpetuated and what we can do in our roles to unhinge its power". What is wrong with this? It is of the absolute essence of Western culture. On further reading many a student could only identify three races. This is appalling. Obviously they need to know there environment. The fact is is that these very ignorant students will move on to shape our policies. They need to be educated to do this. "This conference is designed to assist college student educators reconceptualize identity development to be more inclusive of intersections among students' multiple identities and to create more inclusive learning environments. Some of the issues that might be raised at this conference include: How does the cross section of race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, nationality, class, ability, and religion shape our students? Ourselves? How do we attend to the tension between building multiracial communities on our campuses while balancing the needs of students individually? How can we create learning environments within and across these identity categories while attempting to "do no harm, but benefit to all?" To what extent does the current generation of college students care about differences within and among these social constructs? How does the lack of knowledge about oppression, power and privilege affect intergroup dynamics and communication? How can educators assist students who are unaware or don't care about societal privilege as it relates to the construct of race and other identities?" Again, absolutely necessary. These students are the ones that shape the future. On reading the course description of one of the above outlines, nowhere did I see that these were compulsory. However, if they were so be it. Who knows what this campus was like before they adopted these courses. Perhaps it was laden with bigotry. Perhaps it was a response to a bad reputation and so fourth (it happens you know). However, if students were REALLY forced to answer questionaires then there is a problem. Id rather think that they felt compelled to or rather obligated to do so through there own naivity. The thing is that universities exist because of the very material they study which is the world, religion, culture and more. It is only fair then that students also undergo analysis. Why? Because their own subjective views of white privilege, of sexuality and more WILL FRAME there research. Thus people unwittingly maybe subject to a researchers bias/prejudice view without even realising it. It happens. Our future researchers, policy makers etc need to be analysed as well as the working class, culture, religion and more. Fairs fair! You would not want a bigot making important decisions in government now would you.

The left endeavours to use history as a means to work out the current political state of things. It can never be assumed to be infallible but past patterns and trends are used as a means of 'displaying' the rational calculations, formulas and character behind what is occuring in the present. Also the left would argue that pointing out distinctions is not harmful. What is harmful is to adopt the pc notion that in doing so is being 'judgemental' and that it is disrespectful. It would be argued that distinction and debate are healthy and relevent. Once you introduce morality into politics the truth of things gets distorted by it and the real debates are rendered mute. Much like the church renders many things into silence. Liberals, not the left are those that carry emotion based politics, despite sometimes sharing left wing views. Remedies of reform are then posited as opposed to over turning policies etc. Liberals therefore advocate and work for the right wing . . .eventually. They just tone down the distinctions.

It could well have been a non native Caladonian for a number of reasons; the local economy for one ,house prices and so fourth have fallen since the land claim. I still do not think it would be one of the six nations. It would be absolutely flying in the face of what the six nations are trying to achieve. Such action could only accomplish delay in the legal process of what all this is about. Six Nastions cannot afford to mess up the process by allowing a loose canon to start a fire. As for this incident being for the purpose of adding to the 'victimization' list, Six Nations surely realise that after a history of surviving genocide, cultural genocide, economic exclusion (and more), that burning down a shack is laughable for adding to the list!!!! Thereby, in all probabilities it was a Canadian. Afterall, he/she would have nothing to lose whereas a f/ns individual would cause much harm to the process.

Yes, id agree faith and reason are incompatable. I guess i could use a crude example, which hopefully could be applied as some kind of general principle. If a car breaks down in the middle of nowhere and the driver is not mechanical, does not have a phone or an engine manual, the driver has few options of 'what to do' in order to 'move on'. I guess the rational kind of individual would attempt to try and work out the problem of why the motor broke down. That would be even if he/she has no knowledge skills of car maintainance. They would endeavour to reason it out through vision, or following by touch cables and so fourth. Faith based folk would pray. Anybody or anything could come along at any moment or NOT, but whatever happened after the prayers; it would be interpreted as either a blessing or a warning from god/jesus. Chance would not figure into it. Reason ( one of the faculties we have as human) would then be applied to 'justify' any faith based effect whatsoever. Again, a crude example, but you can see what im trying to get at.