Study on native drug users brings elder to tears

[Oleg Bach]

Technology is a perfect example of evolution, it does not necessarily improve anything but it does introduce factors that influence its continueing viability as a vindication of evolution. in answer to your question about the technology required to cross the Atlantic (at any time of the year). Yes, it took a highly evolved civilisation to learn the knowledge required to do that. If you aren't a sailor I suppose you will never really understand it but the Oceans are our all powerfull creationists. They can either transport you or take your life, they do both efortlessly, if your advanced guys have done their homework -properly and not forgotten anything, you'll make it across safely.

This has nothing to do with "Mythical spirituality" and everything to do with us amazing creatures and our obidience to the natural laws of evolution.

I sail..I know the power of nature and it's violence..it's not so much technology to stay afloat but careful understanding and skill and confidence..and knowing the limits and pushing the limits for more speed and power. The technology was but a boat -a mast - the stars - and above all the real hero was the man at the tiller..and he is low tech!

[AngusThermopyle]

and above all the real hero was the man at the tiller..and he is low tech!

I disagree. the man at the tiller is no more than a product of human evlution. he stands at the tiller not because he has some divine knowledge imparted to him, he stands there because he understands cause and effect and the results of evolutionary theory.

That however is too cold and analytical, lets just bash the accumulation of human knowledge instead. Thats way easier to do and you don't even have to have a basic High School education to do it and still sound authoritative.

[jbg]

"White people" in other words. Look around the planet, just about everywhere that Europeans pulled this sort of shit on indigenous people, resulted in a destabalizing culture shock that will likely resonate for generations. That was the whole point of doing it.

So what you're saying is that once "white man" is involved, "indigenous" people have the right, forever, and to all generations, to totally shirk responsibility?

If you look at the history of how things went, particularly it was Europeans who have been behind much of the imperialism that has caused much suffering in the world. But to say that Europeans are some kind of unique scourge upon the human race is to fail to realize that everything that was done by Europeans would have been done by ANY other civilization that had been in the same position of power. That is not to excuse Europeans either, but without understanding the problem there can be no overcoming it.

Before the age of imperialism, Europeans were doing the same thing to each other, and I bet dollar to a dime that if you had accurate historical records of every other region on Earth with advanced civilizations, they were probably doing the exact same thing. You can include the Aztecs, Mayans and Inca in that. While they may not have been as technologically advanced as Europe, the Middle East and Asia, they certainly had empires, and were thus in a prime position to be imperialists.

What about the Muslims? They are probably "Exhibit 'A' in imperliasm, having spread at the point of a sword west from their origin through the Middle East, then Egypt, then the rest of Northern Africa, and on to Spain and part of France before being partially repulsed. Eastword they spread through Persia, modern-day Afghanistan, Pakistan, large chunks of India, Indonesia, and large chunks of the Phillipines. Everywhere they exist they refuse to coexist with other populatins. The unwritten and unspoken story is that they sold Africans into slavery to the Europeans for transport to the Americas.

And the Europeans were the worst imperialists? Hardly.

Edited May 18, 2008 by jbg

[Oleg Bach]

So what you're saying is that once "white man" is involved, "indigenous" people have the right, forever, and to all generations, to totally shirk responsibility?

What about the Muslims? They are probably "Exhibit 'A' in imperliasm, having spread at the point of a sword west from their origin through the Middle East, then Egypt, then the rest of Northern Africa, and on to Spain and part of France before being partially repulsed. Eastword they spread through Persia, modern-day Afghanistan, Pakistan, large chunks of India, Indonesia, and large chunks of the Phillipines. Everywhere they exist they refuse to coexist with other populatins. The unwritten and unspoken story is that they sold Africans into slavery to the Europeans for transport to the Americas.

And the Europeans were the worst imperialists? Hardly.

Some Muslims are sweet people and will assimulate nicely. Others and there are lots of them, live here and hate our guts dreaming of our demise. Saudi Arabia is a terrorist Muslim state of cruel barbarity and intrigue..they send billions here to build mosques and create a slow incrimental internal displacement of our populace..You will see those from China and Canadian Muslims competing for supremacy..while our kids smoke pot and clean their toilets in a not to distant future. Europeans were imperialists..Iran would like to be an imperalist but can not cut it yet - Saudi Arabia IS an imperial power and has America the former imperialist by the gonads via blackmailing the oil merhants for sins committed that the Saudis know about. So who is going to rule the world..why us of course the blue eyed wolf people mutated out of the Caucus mountains..also Anglos are the least emotional and most cruel by nature..we will surive them all...cos we is baaad!

[CANADIEN]

What they need first and foremost is the most important thing that was taken away from them... respect for their dignity as human beings. The rest will fall in place.

[Remiel]

You know, JBG, if, for just a moment, you stopped hating Muslims long enough to think about all the angles, you would see that many European countries do in fact have Muslims beat. Even if we were to accept that those Muslims that have been imperalistic liked to convert people to their religion, forcibly, while moving into their territory, you must see that Europeans conquered religions, conquered territories, conquered languages and conquered cultures. Muslim imperialists (where they exists) at least will be content to leave you with the last two and maybe even the second if you give it the first one. They are really such amateurs.

Edited May 18, 2008 by Remiel

[CANADIEN]

You know, JBG, if, for just a moment, you stopped hating Muslims long enough to think about all the angles, you would see that many European countries do in fact have Muslims beat. Even if we were to accept that those Muslims that have been imperalistic liked to convert people to their religion, forcibly, while moving into their territory, you must see that Europeans conquered religions, conquered territories, conquered languages and conquered cultures. Muslim imperialists (where they exists) at least will be content to leave you with the last two and maybe even the second if you give it the first one. They are really such amateurs.

The problem with white imperialism (and those who defend it blindly) is not that what it did was that much worse than what happened elsewhere but that it was a complete denial of those values of "enlightmment" and "civilization" the white imperialists were wrapping themselves into.

[Borg]

How ironic that Borg's post, which seems to blame only Aboriginal peoples for their problems, ended with the line "it is always someone else's fault". If only Borg had applied the logic to everyone, and not just Aboriginal leaders. Both Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals share responsibility for where we are right now. Both must be involved to try to fix the problem.

Perhaps I did and you were too blind to see. Willingly blind perhaps?

As I said - It is always someone elses fault.

Personal responsibility is required and it is not there.

Borg

[CANADIEN]

First Nations must take ownership of the solution to their problems.

But let's not be fooled by the neo-conservative "personal respnsibility" mantra. It's code word for "we will not take any responsibility for the injustice and oppression we did, soyou got to admit it's all your fault". Of course, they will be the first to find someone to blame when it suits them, usually people they don't feel are good enough.

[Borg]

First Nations must take ownership of the solution to their problems.

But let's not be fooled by the neo-conservative "personal respnsibility" mantra. It's code word for "we will not take any responsibility for the injustice and oppression we did, soyou got to admit it's all your fault". Of course, they will be the first to find someone to blame when it suits them, usually people they don't feel are good enough.

Great words.

Too bad you twisted them into something that can be misconstrued.

I have come to expect this from you.

Perhaps you would like to be as specific as possible in your meaning in order for us simpler, country folk with no education to have a clearer understanding of what you are trying to say?

Borg

[jbg]

But let's not be fooled by the neo-conservative "personal respnsibility" mantra. It's code word for "we will not take any responsibility for the injustice and oppression we did, soyou got to admit it's all your fault". Of course, they will be the first to find someone to blame when it suits them, usually people they don't feel are good enough.

But when modern people are asked to "take responsibiity" the people in the past who were sexually abused (and are now dead) are not receiving redress; their descendants are receiving a windfall. This encourages less responsibility, more breeding, and more damage.

[CANADIEN]

The meaning is clear Borg. When neo-conservatives stop whining about "it's the fault of the immigrants, gays and lesbians, First Nations, etc. etc. etc.", I'll take the call for "personal responsibility" seriously. Especially when it's addressed to people who were delibarately treated like they were not fit enough to make their own decisions.

Letting First Nations take personal responsibility for their destiny was not that good of an idea when they were not deemed "civilized" enough to manage their own affairs, raise their children or vote.

[bk59]

Perhaps I did and you were too blind to see. Willingly blind perhaps?

As I said - It is always someone elses fault.

Personal responsibility is required and it is not there.

Borg

Your post came across as completely anti-Aboriginal. Perhaps you should follow your own advice?

Perhaps you would like to be as specific as possible in your meaning in order for us simpler, country folk with no education to have a clearer understanding of what you are trying to say?

Borg

[CANADIEN]

But when modern people are asked to "take responsibiity" the people in the past who were sexually abused (and are now dead) are not receiving redress; their descendants are receiving a windfall. This encourages less responsibility, more breeding, and more damage.

White people have children. Red people breed. I get it.

Many of the victims are still alive.

Taking responsibility is not, and should not be about money. It is about making sure the errors of the past are not made again today and tomorrow. What i see from too many people is a repeat of the same fundamental mistake, treating First Nations like second-class people.

[Borg]

Letting First Nations take personal responsibility for their destiny was not that good of an idea when they were not deemed "civilized" enough to manage their own affairs, raise their children or vote.

Times have changed - so let's kill the reservation system, department of indian affairs and send them out on their own. They claim to be ready and I see them as ready - provided of course they actually do take that personal responsibility.

Oh, and one more thing - provided they actually toss some of their crooked leadership and stop listening to those who would hold them back - those supposed wise elders. Those very same people who would allow poverty and drugs and sexual abuse and in some cases rampant criminal behaviour to run freely on reservations.

That very same leadership that manages to live well while their bretherin live in shameful poverty.

Borg

[bk59]

But when modern people are asked to "take responsibiity" the people in the past who were sexually abused (and are now dead) are not receiving redress; their descendants are receiving a windfall. This encourages less responsibility, more breeding, and more damage.

First, there are a number of people who went through the residential school system that are still alive.

Second, as pointed out in the study, much of the abuse came from the cycle started by the abusive behaviour found in the residential school system. This has continued through at least one generation. This doesn't exactly seem like a windfall to me.

And finally, how does wanting to work with Aboriginal communities to help solve these problems lead to less responsibility, more breeding (whatever that means) and more damage? It seems to me that if Aboriginal communities and non-Aboriginal Canadians work together to solve these problems it will lead to more responsibility and much less damage. Having Canada take responsibility and therefore committing to solving these problems can only bring about changes for the better.

[bk59]

Times have changed - so let's kill the reservation system, department of indian affairs and send them out on their own. They claim to be ready and I see them as ready - provided of course they actually do take that personal responsibility.

Oh, and one more thing - provided they actually toss some of their crooked leadership and stop listening to those who would hold them back - those supposed wise elders. Those very same people who would allow poverty and drugs and sexual abuse and in some cases rampant criminal behaviour to run freely on reservations.

That very same leadership that manages to live well while their bretherin live in shameful poverty.

Borg

Many Aboriginal communities and leaders have been calling for reform for quite some time. To "kill" the Department of Indian Affairs would be a mistake, but the type of reform necessary is perhaps a different debate.

What many people do not know is that much of the leadership, in particular band councils I believe, were forced upon Aboriginal communities by Canada and the various incarnations of the Indian Act. Maybe the government should, as you so fondly say, take some responsibility for letting things with some of these leaders reach such a sad state.

But I do like how you have painted the entire Aboriginal leadership as selfish and greedy, willing to "allow" poverty, drugs, sexual abuse and criminal behaviour. By that logic, all white people really are murdering, imperialist, genocidal conquerors intent on stealing and abusing Aboriginal peoples. Your generalization is a bit insulting to the leaders mentioned in the article who want to take a stand and address the hard issues facing Aboriginal communities.

[jbg]

And finally, how does wanting to work with Aboriginal communities to help solve these problems lead to less responsibility, more breeding (whatever that means) and more damage? It seems to me that if Aboriginal communities and non-Aboriginal Canadians work together to solve these problems it will lead to more responsibility and much less damage. Having Canada take responsibility and therefore committing to solving these problems can only bring about changes for the better.

I am all for working with people, individually and in groups, to solve problems. Provided that this effort is not meant to perpetuate the power of the povertician band leaders.

[CANADIEN]

First Nations are the ones that should decide if reservations are to continue to exist or not. If they have to take responsibility, then they should be free to make their own decisions.

[bk59]

I am all for working with people, individually and in groups, to solve problems. Provided that this effort is not meant to perpetuate the power of the povertician band leaders.

I find this interesting. So many times when discussing Aboriginal issues the issue of band leadership comes up. If someone says "there is a drug problem in Vancouver" how many people respond with "let's solve the problem so long as we are not perpetuating the power of the city council"?

Why is it assumed that when dealing with Aboriginal communities we must somehow avoid "perpetuating the power of the band leaders"? Why does the assumption only apply to Aboriginal communities? I want to make it clear that I am not making accusations against anyone, including you jbg. But the frequency with which Aboriginal leadership is criticized, particularly in situations where non-Aboriginal leadership would not be criticized in the same way, makes me wonder if we aren't unconsciously falling into the same old trap of assuming that somehow Aboriginal communities are incapable of leading themselves.

[jbg]

I find this interesting. So many times when discussing Aboriginal issues the issue of band leadership comes up. If someone says "there is a drug problem in Vancouver" how many people respond with "let's solve the problem so long as we are not perpetuating the power of the city council"?

Why is it assumed that when dealing with Aboriginal communities we must somehow avoid "perpetuating the power of the band leaders"? Why does the assumption only apply to Aboriginal communities?

Because the aid isn't reaching the members. At least, in a city, roads do get repaired so the money isn't all being stolen.

[CANADIEN]

I find this interesting. So many times when discussing Aboriginal issues the issue of band leadership comes up. If someone says "there is a drug problem in Vancouver" how many people respond with "let's solve the problem so long as we are not perpetuating the power of the city council"?

Why is it assumed that when dealing with Aboriginal communities we must somehow avoid "perpetuating the power of the band leaders"? Why does the assumption only apply to Aboriginal communities? I want to make it clear that I am not making accusations against anyone, including you jbg. But the frequency with which Aboriginal leadership is criticized, particularly in situations where non-Aboriginal leadership would not be criticized in the same way, makes me wonder if we aren't unconsciously falling into the same old trap of assuming that somehow Aboriginal communities are incapable of leading themselves.

Right on. Either First nations community are to take responsibility, and decide themselves which of their leaders they can or cannot trust to look for their interests, or they are unable to make their own decisions and then how can they take responsibility. we cannot have it both ways.

[CANADIEN]

Because the aid isn't reaching the members. At least, in a city, roads do get repaired so the money isn't all being stolen.

Been on Toronto's streets lately? The last time some of the potholes were repaired were probably for the Maple Leafs' Stanley Cup parade. Heard about the perks school trustees in toronto has paid themselves? The sponsorship scandal? The Mulroney-Schreiber scandal? We are not talking about First Nation leaders here.

[bk59]

Because the aid isn't reaching the members. At least, in a city, roads do get repaired so the money isn't all being stolen.

Your post implies that all Aboriginal leaders are stealing money and preventing "aid" from reaching the rest of the Aboriginal community. Not only are you overgeneralizing, but you are also quite simply wrong. Even if some leaders do steal, does that mean that all leaders should be replaced based on the improprieties of some? If so, we are going to have some problems filling a number of seats in the House of Commons (in all parties).

I think you have also missed my point a bit. When simply discussing the problem, why must we discuss replacing the community's leadership if the community under discussion is an Aboriginal community? When discussing similar problems in non-Aboriginal communities it is rare to hear someone immediately talk about how the leadership must be replaced. There seems to be a double standard here that implies Aboriginal communities are somehow incapable of leading themselves.

[Bryan]

That is one of the most disgusting things I have ever read on this forum.

What I find disgusting is people making excuses and blaming somebody else for abusing their own children.