eyeball Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 (edited) There is a mohawk professor on CBC right now explaining why they have racist laws. His explanation rests on the fact that they can. That's right, and the fact is we created the Indian Act that empowers band councils to wield their power the way they do. We created the Indian Act because we could. Native people who are not in leadership positions are bound to speak up sooner or later against injustices just like our ancestors did. I think this natural human process like most within native communities has been slow to emerge because of the effects and shock of first contact, the full recovery from which is still probably a few generations off. In the meantime I guess it's just as natural to expect the dominant culture's chattering classes will blithely climb aboard their high horses, raise their eyebrows, point their fingers and wag their self-righteous tongues just like the hypocritical assholes their own ancestors probably had to put up with did. Edited February 17, 2010 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 That's right, and the fact is we created the Indian Act that empowers band councils to wield their power the way they do. We created the Indian Act because we could. I read this and thought that is one of the stupidest things I have read in a long time. Then I saw who posted it....and thought, well of course, keep the expectations low and you won't be disapointed. Yes and we also created the laws that empowers cities and provinces....not suprisingly those jurisdictions aren't planning judenfrei zones.... Again I would say I am amazed at your ability to absolve everyone of personal guilt or responsibilty and to take their sins on yourself...but then again, I only have low expectations for you and your collective christ complex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 But but but the non-natives. Like I said it's completely natural to expect the dominant culture's chattering classes will blithely climb aboard their high horses, raise their eyebrows, point their fingers and wag their self-righteous tongues just like the hypocritical assholes their own ancestors probably had to put up with did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted February 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 That's right, and the fact is we created the Indian Act that empowers band councils to wield their power the way they do. So... Mohawks are racist because the white man hasn't taught them how not to be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 So... Mohawks are racist because the white man hasn't taught them how not to be? No the Mohawk government is still more heavy-handed than our's because, and I repeat, ordinary Mohawks that are being poorly led have yet to find their own voice and use it to speak out against this themselves. This natural human process like most within native communities has been slow to emerge because of the effects and shock of first contact (with our culture), the full recovery from which is still probably a few generations off. This isn't just what I think by the way it's also what a native friend of mine who has been grappling with very similar issues for years expressed to me. That our culture is simply too impatient to wait for a few generation is not the fault of native people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted February 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 No the Mohawk government is still more heavy-handed than our's because, and I repeat, ordinary Mohawks that are being poorly led have yet to find their own voice and use it to speak out against this themselves. And that's the fault of the Indian Act, how? Besides, they have enough voice to speak - and act - out against supposed injustices caused by non-native governments. Why do you suppose they're so weak when it comes to challenging their own? Where are all their so-called "warriors"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 And that's the fault of the Indian Act, how? It's an effect of it's long term impact on native communities and the people living in them. Besides, they have enough voice to speak - and act - out against supposed injustices caused by non-native governments. Why do you suppose they're so weak when it comes to challenging their own? Where are all their so-called "warriors"? I don't know. Perhaps their allegiance is to their government and the man's still to big and still too strong. Around here young native people have openly talked of how their ancestors would resort to assassins when strong men wouldn't bend. Be careful what you wish for. Why did it take our ancestors so long to create a just society? Why do people insist on believing our culture can just pass out democracy like it was a vitamin and expect everyone we bless with it to just magically and suddenly get it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted February 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 (edited) It's an effect of it's long term impact on native communities and the people living in them. So, then it isn't that the Indian Act fails to quell the natural racism of Mohawk leaders, rather, the Indian Act made Mohawk leaders racist? Really, eyeball, no matter which way you spin this, it doesn't make the Kahnawake heads look good at all. Perhaps their allegiance is to their government and the man's still to big and still too strong. But, you said they hadn't found their voice, when clearly they have. Odd that they'd use it against the bigger and stronger opponent before the smaller and more closely associated one. Of course, I don't intend to imply through my lazy use of generalisations that all Mohawks are silent on this matter; whole groups are speaking out against it; just, not as loudly as those who know how to protest for profit. [c/e] Edited February 17, 2010 by g_bambino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 So, then it isn't that the Indian Act fails to quell the natural racism of Mohawk leaders, rather, the Indian Act made Mohawk leaders racist? No, that's simply how you're spinning what I've said. Really, eyeball, no matter which way you spin this, it doesn't make the Kahnawake heads look good at all. I'm not trying to make them look good. But, you said they hadn't found their voice, when clearly they have. Odd that they'd use it against the bigger and stronger opponent before the smaller and more closely associated one. What are you talking about? Of course, I don't intend to imply through my lazy use of generalisations that all Mohawks are silent on this matter; whole groups are speaking out against it; just, not as loudly as those who know how to protest for profit. You've completely lost me now I'm afraid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted February 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 No, that's simply how you're spinning what I've said. Care to show how else it can be spun, then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 Care to show how else it can be spun, then? No, that's your prerogative not mine. What I've said should be clear enough to anyone who's capable of reading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted February 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 What I've said should be clear enough to anyone who's capable of reading. Then I was correct; you think the Kahnawake's racist policies are the fault of the Indian Act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 Then I was correct; you think the Kahnawake's racist policies are the fault of the Indian Act. No you're flat out wrong because that just ain't what I said at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted February 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 (edited) No you're flat out wrong... Yet, you adamantly refuse to explain how. Allow me to paraphrase your earlier words: [Kahnawake racist policies are] an effect of [the Indian Act's] long term impact on native communities... I'm truly intrigued as to how one could read that and not see that it says Kahnawake leaders' racism is the result of the Indian Act. [correct] Edited February 17, 2010 by g_bambino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 I'm truly intrigued as to how one could read that and not see that it says Kahnawake leaders' racism is the result of the Indian Act. Perhaps your bafflement stems from being so truly full of shit that you simply can't see straight. What I've said two or three times now, is that the Mohawk government's ability to operate in a heavy-handed manner is a result of the way the Indian Act empowers them to do so. Allow me to paraphrase your earlier words: [Kahnawake racist policies are] an effect of [the Indian Act's] long term impact on native communities.. Christ on a stick it's no wonder you're so confused if that's how badly you can botch up a paraphrasing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 I think what Eyeball is struggling to articulate is that the Indian Act, which gives powrs to band councils across canada, has been used in an inherintly racist manner by Mohawks. In so much as no other band has exerted itself in such a racist manner, the Mohawks are not mature enough to have self governemnt and it is the white mans fault that they have self government. Eyeball clearly believes that the Mohawks because of their racism, should not be allowed to manage their affairs. Shame Eyeball, shame Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted February 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 (edited) Christ on a stick it's no wonder you're so confused if that's how badly you can botch up a paraphrasing. You've got to be f*cking kidding. Either that, or you're so far backed into a corner you'll utter the most ridiculous things in your defence. What I've said two or three times now, is that the Mohawk government's ability to operate in a heavy-handed manner is a result of the way the Indian Act empowers them to do so. And what exactly is "heavy-handed manner" but a euphemism for "enforcing racist policies"? [+] Edited February 17, 2010 by g_bambino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted February 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 Eyeball clearly believes that the Mohawks because of their racism, should not be allowed to manage their affairs. Ah, but I already said very close to that: So... Mohawks are racist because the white man hasn't taught them how not to be? He judged that interpretation to be incorrect, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 I think what Eyeball is struggling to articulate is that the Indian Act, which gives powrs to band councils across canada, has been used in an inherintly racist manner by Mohawks. You're clearly full of crap. What I've articulated, repeatedly, is that the Indian Act, which gives powrs to band councils across canada, has been used in an inherintly heavy handed manner by Mohawk leaders. I've bolded the words you've shamelessly chosen to insert or edit. Eyeball clearly believes that the Mohawks because of their racism, should not be allowed to manage their affairs. More utter horseshit. I've clearly articulated repeatedly, that ordinary Mohawks will over time find ways to deal with injustices that are due to being governed in a heavy handed manner, i.e. through the course of managing their affairs. You see, you insist on inserting or editing out stuff out like references to ordinary Mohawks as opposed to Mohawk leaders and in so doing prove what a truly and utterly pathetic and transparent liar you are. Mohawks would call it speaking with a forked tongue. You will not find a single post any where in this entire forum that even comes close to saying I don't support native self-government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 Ah, but I already said very close to that: He judged that interpretation to be incorrect, too. As near as I can interpret you're pretty much indistinguishable from Morris. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 You're clearly full of crap. What I've articulated, repeatedly, is that the Indian Act, which gives powrs to band councils across canada, has been used in an inherintly heavy handed manner by Mohawk leaders. Are you saying then, forcing Non native spouses who have married Mohawks to move is only heavy handed, not racist? If they made them wear a yeelow badge would that be heavy handed? I've bolded the words you've shamelessly chosen to insert or edit. I think at this point I have to question your rationality. I inserted every word, edited every word. You will not find a single post any where in this entire forum that even comes close to saying I don't support native self-government. every post in this thread, where you blame the racismheavy handed policies on the Laws that give Mohawks self government, you articulate that it isn't the Mohawks at fault, but the law that gives them the power to be self governing. ergo, you don't support self government. Even a plastic Shaman could deduce this from you... Yet another example where the half baked addled notions of Eyeball come home to roost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted February 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 As near as I can interpret you're pretty much indistinguishable from Morris. Hmm.. I might just take that as a compliment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted February 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 One more time: What I've said two or three times now, is that the Mohawk government's ability to operate in a heavy-handed manner is a result of the way the Indian Act empowers them to do so. Unless you're off on some other completely irrelevant topic, what is "heavy-handed manner" but a euphemism for "enforcing racist policies"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 I mean, if someone said that they objected to the US declaration of indendence and the constitution and bill of rights....naturall they would deny the US right to self government. Eyeball is denying the legal articles to Indian self government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 (edited) Are you saying then, forcing Non native spouses who have married Mohawks to move is only heavy handed, not racist? If they made them wear a yeelow badge would that be heavy handed? Morris, I've never said the result of the Mohawk leaders decision didn't push any race buttons but yellow badges? Get a grip. As others have pointed out, our own government sometimes makes similar decisions that divide families according to race and nationality. I think at this point I have to question your rationality. I inserted every word, edited every word. That's right, you lied through your teeth. every post in this thread, where you blame the racismheavy handed policies on the Laws that give Mohawks self government, you articulate that it isn't the Mohawks at fault, but the law that gives them the power to be self governing. ergo, you don't support self government. Even a plastic Shaman could deduce this from you... Correct I said it was the fault of Mohawk leaders, not ordinary Mohawks, that the Act that gives them self-governance was used the way it has been. I don't agree with it, but I'm not about to jump up and down and make assumptions about natives being inherently racist. I am however going to make certain assumptions about leaders being inherently heavy handed, especially when the law allows them to be. Leaders are only human after all. Yet another example where the half baked addled notions of Eyeball come home to roost. No it's just another example of you making shit up. Edited February 17, 2010 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.