Canadian Identity: un-American

[charter.rights]

What does all this have with to do with Canadian identity?

Good question, Jerry!

Canadian "identity" is largely mythical and hypothetical. Read Raulston Sauls' "A Fair Country".

Real Canadians are "Metis" and we can no more separate our sovereignty or land from native people then we can separate our history and call it our own. While the elite would have us thinking differently, we have more in common with aboriginal people than we do with the Americans, British, French or other immigrants. Once people realize this then we can learn to accept the reasoning behind the special relationship the Crown has with First Nations. Those who would deny it are Victorians who are afraid of understanding real history, and instead have replaced it (and their roles in society) with delusions of grandeur.

[g_bambino]

What does all this have with to do with Canadian identity?

It's that Whoowhee doesn't believe Canada has an identity vis-a-vis the United States because the latter rebelled against the Crown and the former did not; in his mind - no matter how much contrary evidence is put before him - Canada is still a British colony.

[g_bambino]

I guess it is true then...that opposites attract...

Maybe, jbg, you can hope that CR will put you on ignore, too. The secret to getting such an honour is: keep using facts and logic against his inanity. He'll eventually stomp off in a pout and never respond to you again. Ahhh, bliss.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Good question, Jerry!

Canadian "identity" is largely mythical and hypothetical. Read Raulston Sauls' "A Fair Country".

Real Canadians are "Metis" and we can no more separate our sovereignty or land from native people then we can separate our history and call it our own. While the elite would have us thinking differently, we have more in common with aboriginal people than we do with the Americans, British, French or other immigrants. Once people realize this then we can learn to accept the reasoning behind the special relationship the Crown has with First Nations. Those who would deny it are Victorians who are afraid of understanding real history, and instead have replaced it (and their roles in society) with delusions of grandeur.

I checked my birth certificate, then I checked my passport, it seems I am Canadian. You should check yours too. It seems my passport is recognized around the world and my birth certificate anywhere in Canada.

Frankly I don't give a damn about the opinions expressed as those of the first nations. I respect those people as individuals and hope they accord me the same respect. As a group we are all Canadians according to any law you can find.

[g_bambino]

I checked my birth certificate, then I checked my passport, it seems I am Canadian. You should check yours too. It seems my passport is recognized around the world and my birth certificate anywhere in Canada.

I think where this thread started was with a Canadian identity, which isn't the same as mere legal definitions of what is a Canadian.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Yet my identity BEGINS with my nationality. For some it may be some form of ethnic or religious consideration but for me it is my nationality. After that the things I hold in common with my fellow citizens place me within that unique group of citizens called Canadians. Those things include my love of the land, the history of my nation and our place as a northern people. Part of our heritage is tied to the native folks who lived here before us, and part of our heritage is from those non natives who pioneered this land. Indeed part of our heritage is from all of those nations that our forefathers left to come here. Yet the reality is that we are the sum of all those parts, and still more.

[g_bambino]

Yet my identity BEGINS with my nationality.

Certainly. But nationality and citizenship are, though associated, not one and the same. Nationality is borne of language, culture, history and tradition; when I spoke of Canadian identity, I meant national identity, or nationality. Citizenship, however, is merely a legal category; one can hold it without feeling any sense of nationality.

[+ & sp]

Edited December 2, 2009 by g_bambino

[charter.rights]

Yet my identity BEGINS with my nationality. For some it may be some form of ethnic or religious consideration but for me it is my nationality. After that the things I hold in common with my fellow citizens place me within that unique group of citizens called Canadians. Those things include my love of the land, the history of my nation and our place as a northern people. Part of our heritage is tied to the native folks who lived here before us, and part of our heritage is from those non natives who pioneered this land. Indeed part of our heritage is from all of those nations that our forefathers left to come here. Yet the reality is that we are the sum of all those parts, and still more.

You just defined "Metis"

Canadian comes from Canadien which came from Iroquois Kanata meaning village.

Your identity as "Canadian" has its roots in the Metis - the blend between English, French and Native. So to suggest that it is something more than "...the sum of all those parts...." is somewhat delusional, identity-wise. The "sum" of all those parts IS Metis, how it originated as the offspring of two distinct cultures and how it has evolved as a "multi-cultural" society. If you are a naturalized Canadian, then your roots are in the Metis-settler society and not in the aristocracy of some mythical Canadian epic. Of course there is no such thing. Nor is there anything that resembles the elite who hold power, since their entire premise, their entire power is derived from us - the Metis - the settlers. It is only our buy in of the myths that they can hold power over us. As Canadians we spend much more time asleep (or on some discussion board pretending to solve domestic problems) than we do in real politics and issues. If we did we would not have stood for so long as government and corporations trod over our collective rights.

Many of you criticize protesters and activists, when in fact they are far more democratic, and effective than most who stop here to argue an ethereal point. Democracy INVOLVES "The People"and when people are not engaged it is not democratic - even if for all intents and purposes it appears to be. What and who we really have in power are the aristocrats, running oligarchies and monopolies. There is nothing democratic about it.

So if you are suggesting that "something more" can be derived from the sum of its parts", then you don't understand your own identity,Certainly less so then those characters in some beer commercial who boast "I AM CANADIEN".

[whowhere]

Good question, Jerry!

Canadian "identity" is largely mythical and hypothetical. Read Raulston Sauls' "A Fair Country".

Real Canadians are "Metis" and we can no more separate our sovereignty or land from native people then we can separate our history and call it our own. While the elite would have us thinking differently, we have more in common with aboriginal people than we do with the Americans, British, French or other immigrants. Once people realize this then we can learn to accept the reasoning behind the special relationship the Crown has with First Nations. Those who would deny it are Victorians who are afraid of understanding real history, and instead have replaced it (and their roles in society) with delusions of grandeur.

Ok JBG Here is nutbar. First of of all if you have a cross between a German Sheppard and a doberman you have a mutt. My parents were both English and French. Am I English or Am I French? Metis is about as much Indian as a mutt is a German Sheppard. How Canada started to recognize Metis is Beyond me. The Metis have polluted the Indian blood with their French or English. I think the Real Indians need to go on a scalping expidetion to rid their culture of these leaches. Metis are not indians in my book.

[whowhere]

It's that Whoowhee doesn't believe Canada has an identity vis-a-vis the United States because the latter rebelled against the Crown and the former did not; in his mind - no matter how much contrary evidence is put before him - Canada is still a British colony.

I would include your prior posts where you said the Queen was the sovereign of Canada. On that how has the Queen exercised her sovereignty on Canada? The queens arm of Sovereignty is the UK parliament. That is how the Queen has always exercised her sovereignty on Canada. The difference between Canada and the turks de caicos is the UK parliament can act on the Turks de Caico without the Queens involvement. Because of the Statue of Westminister the UK parliment would require the Queens input. Yes, canada is still a realm of the Monarch.

The queen is still the head of state and the Statue of Westminister did nothing to change that nor did the 1982 Constitution. To prove that fact the queen exercises her sovereignty through the UK parliment was in 1949 when the Queen joined Newfoundland with Canada.

[Guest TrueMetis]

Ok JBG Here is nutbar. First of of all if you have a cross between a German Sheppard and a doberman you have a mutt. My parents were both English and French. Am I English or Am I French? Metis is about as much Indian as a mutt is a German Sheppard. How Canada started to recognize Metis is Beyond me. The Metis have polluted the Indian blood with their French or English. I think the Real Indians need to go on a scalping expidetion to rid their culture of these leaches. Metis are not indians in my book.

Fuck you.

Edited December 2, 2009 by TrueMetis

[whowhere]

Fuck you.

Is this the Red Man or the White Man Speaking?

[M.Dancer]

Is this the Red Man or the White Man Speaking?

You are on. You are more on than usual.

More on.

[whowhere]

You are on. You are more on than usual.

More on.

http://metis.ca/index.php/metis-people/The%20definition%20of%20Metis%20Peoples

a Metis person is someone who is of mixed North American Aboriginal and European ancestry, and who self-identifies as Metis.

(Although there are some United States citizens with Canadian Aboriginal ancestors, the U.S.A. does not recognize Metis as an Aboriginal people.)

Either Do I, another way the US is on the leading edge.

[charter.rights]

http://metis.ca/index.php/metis-people/The%20definition%20of%20Metis%20Peoples

Either Do I, another way the US is on the leading edge.

We are not the US and WE (as in Canadians) recognize Metis as a distinct peoples.

You mustn't be a Canadian....eh....Are you perhaps a Nazi Gary?

Edited December 3, 2009 by charter.rights

[g_bambino]

The queens arm of Sovereignty is the UK parliament.

Only in the UK, obviously, you fool; lest you think Britain is subject to the Queen in her Canadian parliament.

[whowhere]

We are not the US and WE (as in Canadians) recognize Metis as a distinct peoples.

You mustn't be a Canadian....eh....Are you perhaps a Nazi Gary?

Because metis is a cross bread, I hate to break to you, eh. You no longer indian, eh, but just a simple plain o'le Canadian eh...Metis is no more distinct than any other mutt. People pay money for dobermans or jack russels, not a cross between a poodle and pekinganeese.

[g_bambino]

Because metis is a cross bread

Is that like a hot cross bun?

[whowhere]

Only in the UK, obviously, you fool; lest you think Britain is subject to the Queen in her Canadian parliament.

Really, when has the Queen ever exercised her sovereignty through any other parliament? The UK parliment is her vehicle of sovereignty. BNA, Statue of Westminister, Newfoundland Act, 1982 Constitution (Canada Act) are all legislation that lives on in the UK parliament.

One thing is fact, the English Law is one of Precedents. It's an evolutionary Law based on previous actions. England has the power as it has in its history to depose of the monarch and replace that monarch with another. After that monarch has been deposed, that monarch will exercise its sovereignty through the UK parliament as all monarchs have through Englands History. Whatever, realms are associated with the Monarch are subject to governance by the Monarch and the UK.

Power stems from the stroke of the pen. The UK will eventually wake up to this Reality and Canada will be brought before the International Court where Canada will be able to try and argue against English Common Law. Canada's only way to escape this fate will be to have the Canadians vote in a New Constitution without the Monarch. Something that should have been done in 1982.

[jbg]

Ok JBG Here is nutbar. First of of all if you have a cross between a German Sheppard and a doberman you have a mutt.

A non-sequitur. Coming from you it's not an insult.

[g_bambino]

The UK parliment is her vehicle of sovereignty.

Only in Britain.

When has the Queen ever exercised her sovereignty through any other parliament?

Every single day of her life since 6 February 1952. Have you not yet heard of the parliament of Canada?

BNA, Statue of Westminister, Newfoundland Act, 1982 Constitution (Canada Act) are all legislation that lives on in the UK parliament.

Irrelevant. And you've been told why about sixty four times, already.

[c/e]

Edited December 3, 2009 by g_bambino

[jbg]

Because metis is a cross bread, I hate to break to you, eh. You no longer indian, eh, but just a simple plain o'le Canadian eh...Metis is no more distinct than any other mutt. People pay money for dobermans or jack russels, not a cross between a poodle and pekinganeese.

To quote a great man speaking at a momentous moment in American history,"(y)ou have done enough. Have you no sense of decency sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency"? ?

[Guest TrueMetis]

Because metis is a cross bread, I hate to break to you, eh. You no longer indian, eh, but just a simple plain o'le Canadian eh...Metis is no more distinct than any other mutt. People pay money for dobermans or jack russels, not a cross between a poodle and pekinganeese.

And purebreeds are inbreed, screw you sister lately?

Edited December 3, 2009 by TrueMetis

[Jerry J. Fortin]

And purebreeds are inbreed, fuck you sister lately?

Canada is not a melting pot like the US. Here we all hang on to our heritage and are all distinct societies because of it. Just like the French, the Metis and the First Nations are indeed distinct, but so are the Poles, the Ukrainians etc. Somehow we have learned to respect each other enough to live next door to each other without rancor or remorse. That is the Canadian reality and most likely the definition we are all seeking of our unique identity.

[charter.rights]

I'm not sure that you understand the concept of Metis. For sure they are an independent and unique culture. But they are also settlers. They raised their homes and livelihood from the soil and from their settlements. This is no different than the many immigrants who came here to settle and work.

While we can say that each of the Polish, Ukrainian, German etc. ascendants managed to preserve much of their culture, they are no less metis (small 'm') than any other Metis (capital 'M'). Canada is made up of immigrants from all over the world who became settlers and had no intention of becoming the elite - oppressive, controlling and legally dominant.

When us metis try to make change in society it is not for the benefit or to support the elite. The quest for change is almost always to bring society back to those metis roots by limiting the interference of government, the imposition that big business has on the environment and to create communities that imitate settlements, instead of subdivisions of costly houses. Our common is in settler lifestyles and the quest for wealth and accumulation of things, is really a search for the Holy Grail - which for most will never materialize. These myths are created by the elite and the corporations in order to keep us out of their opposition. They know that when the settlers do uprise (as we see with the most recent Coldwater, Ontario dump proposed on a pristine aquifer)they can easily take the power away from them.

We are settlers. If we chose to continue ignore our responsibility to other settlers as we have in the last 3 or 4 decades, then we equally deserve the high taxation, government intrusions and corrupt institutions we have in society. If not for those who take an interest and do exercise their right to protest the lack of consultation on many projects, many of us would never know there was an issue at all. For the most part, people are detached and disinterested and that is exactly how the elite want us.

So the challenge is do we collectively have the fortitude to go beyond discussion board mousing, and get involved? Who really wants to "be the change"?