Constitutional Monarchy and the "Nation to Nation" Relationshi

[-1=e^ipi]

In the meantime might still hasn't been made right.

Good thing I never said that.

[eyeball]

Okay then, I was given to understand you believed there was some moral difference between a empirical world power with clear rules and laws and a bunch of disorganized tribes spread out across a large area that mattered.

[bush_cheney2004]

Nope...there isn't even any moral difference for a not so empirical world power dominating organized or disorganized tribes in a province or territory.

[-1=e^ipi]

Okay then, I was given to understand you believed there was some moral difference between a empirical world power with clear rules and laws and a bunch of disorganized tribes spread out across a large area that mattered.

Nope, I did not use the word moral.

[eyeball]

No surprise there..

[jacee]

We were talking about what does and does not have a clear legal system (Imperial Japan vs the 'Natives' in Canada before Europeans came). There are objective measures one can observe (is there a central authority? are there clear laws? can one get prosecuted for committing crimes? are the laws enforced by employees of the state?) to determine if a society has a clear legal system or not.

Well ... not "clear" to you perhaps ...

Do some research and get back to us on that.

Here's a start:

The thousand year old Great Law of Peace

Historians once thought the Iroquois Confederacy started in the 16th century, but a more recent estimate dates the confederacy and its constitution to between 1090 and 1150 AD. These estimates were based on the records of the confederacy leadership and astronomical dating related to a total solar eclipse that coincided with the founding of the Confederacy.[1]The laws were first recorded and transmitted not in written language, but by means of wampum symbols that conveyed meaning. In a later era it was translated into English. The Great Law of Peace is divided into 117 articles.

The Constitution of the Iroquois People

http://www.indigenouspeople.net/iroqcon.htm

[-1=e^ipi]

@ jacee, do you not understand the difference between all the first nations people and one specific group of people who lived near lake Ontario? Not to mention the Iroquois Confederacy was primarily in the States, not Canada.

[eyeball]

do you not understand the difference between all the first nations people and one specific group of people

Same species as everyone else on the planet.

[-1=e^ipi]

Same species as everyone else on the planet.

Read the context.

[eyeball]

Why? People are just people so treat them all the same, just like you'd want to be treated if you were in their moccasins, mukluks or gumboots.

[-1=e^ipi]

Why? People are just people so treat them all the same, just like you'd want to be treated if you were in their moccasins, mukluks or gumboots.

I advocate equal rights for everyone and abolishment of reserve system, indian act, etc.

But you are not reading the context. Jacee was responding to my claim that the peoples that lived in Canada before European Immigration were hunter gatherer societies and that no clear legal system was present in the lands of Canada.In previous posts we made comparisons to Imperial Japan. Jacee tries to use the Iroquois Confederacy as a counter example and I respond by pointing out that the Iroquois was primarily in the States, let along being representative of all first nations of Canada.

http://www.glenallanelementary.ca/article_images/16/iroquois_20map.jpg

Edited May 11, 2014 by -1=e^ipi

[jacee]

@ jacee, do you not understand the difference between all the first nations people and one specific group of people who lived near lake Ontario? Not to mention the Iroquois Confederacy was primarily in the States, not Canada.

Nations have their own laws, but the Great Law is widely acknowledged.

You are a victim of Euro historical revisionism:

The Iroquois Confederacy was and is both below and above the St Lawrence river and Lake Ontario.

[-1=e^ipi]

You are a victim of Euro historical revisionism:

Hunter-gatherer societies generally are not very advanced and do not have clear legal systems regardless of if they are European, Asian, African or whatever.

The Iroquois Confederacy was and is both below and above the St Lawrence river and Lake Ontario.

That's why I said 'primarily' in the States. It certainly isn't close to representative to all native groups in Canada.

[jacee]

Hunter-gatherer societies generally are not very advanced and do not have clear legal systems regardless of if they are European, Asian, African or whatever.

http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/IroquoisVillage/sistersone.html

Corn, beans and squash, The Three Sisters, were the principal crops of the Iroquois and other Native American groups in the northeastern United States, at the time Europeans arrived here about 1600. By this time, the Iroquois had been planting these three crops together for about 300 years.

...

Cultivation of crops, gradually brought about a change in the Iroquois' way of life from hunting and gathering their sustenance in the woodlands, to cultivating crops in fields created by clearing patches of woodland. However, the Iroquois had cultivated plants native to the Northeast long before the 'Three Sisters' became the basis of their economy.

That's why I said 'primarily' in the States. It certainly isn't close to representative to all native groups in Canada.

Yes it is.

[eyeball]

Hunter-gatherer societies generally are not very advanced and do not have clear legal systems regardless of if they are European, Asian, African or whatever.

That's why we apply the principle to do into others as we'd have them do to us to guide or actions

[-1=e^ipi]

Corn, beans and squash, The Three Sisters, were the principal crops of the Iroquois and other Native American groups in the northeastern United States, at the time Europeans arrived here about 1600. By this time, the Iroquois had been planting these three crops together for about 300 years.

United States != Canada. Keep trying.

That's why we apply the principle to do into others as we'd have them do to us to guide or actions

So you support abolishing the reserve system and Indian act in order to make everyone equal under the law?

[eyeball]

Eventually, but more to the point I don't support using people's level of advancement or lack thereof as a justification for feeling superior or better.

[-1=e^ipi]

I don't support using people's level of advancement or lack thereof as a justification for feeling superior or better.

Is anyone doing that in this thread?

[GostHacked]

No one. Why must you insist that the land was owned prior to the creation/imposition of Canada/British legal framework?

It was owned. Just because there was no piece of paper saying so, does not mean it was not owned.

[jacee]

United States != Canada. Keep trying.

Haudenosaunee territory, laws and economy spanned the then nonexistent US-Canada border. They were not solely "hunter-gatherers" prior to the Euro invasion, but an agriculture and trading economy with codified laws within their nations and between them and other Indigenous Nations.

So you support abolishing the reserve system and Indian act in order to make everyone equal under the law?

We are all equal under the law, all subject to the Treaties that are part of the Constitution Act.

I do understand that you are not just uninformed about Indigenous history, laws, culture, territory and treaties. Rather, you are an anti-Aboriginal propagandist along the lines of Frances Widdowson, Christie Blatchford and Gary McHale.

The uninformed can become informed.

The anti-Aboriginal propagandist has no interest in information or truth.

.

Edited May 21, 2014 by jacee

[jacee]

Jacee tries to use the Iroquois Confederacy as a counter example and I respond by pointing out that the Iroquois was primarily in the States, let along being representative of all first nations of Canada.

http://www.glenallanelementary.ca/article_images/16/iroquois_20map.jpg

Only because you are using a US map that only shows the US.

The official reference map for that era is the 'Mitchell Map':

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Map

The Mitchell Map was used as a primary map source during the Treaty of Paris for defining the boundaries of the newly independent United States. The map remained important for resolving border disputes between the United States and Canada as recently as the 1980s dispute over the Gulf of Mainefisheries.[1] The Mitchell Map is the most comprehensive map of eastern North America made during the colonial era.

MITCHELL MAP

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7b/Mitchell_Map-06full2.jpg

You will notice that "Six Nations" traditional territory includes Southern Ontario up to Georgian Bay and the Ottawa River.

The Great Law also governs other Indigenous Nations in Canada (and the US):

Example: ALGONQUIN WOODLAND METIS ANISHANABEK TRIBE

http://www.awmat.org/20.html

A) Qualifications for Full Membership requires a validation of Indian Blood according to Tribal, Custom and Usage and the Great Law of Peace.

.

Edited May 21, 2014 by jacee

[-1=e^ipi]

We are all equal under the law, all subject to the Treaties that are part of the Constitution Act.

That is untrue. In Canada, different people have different rights based upon their race, gender and religious affiliation. Heck our head of state is determined based upon birth right and is the leader of the Anglican Church. Why do you choose to ignore this?

[guyser]

That is untrue. In Canada, different people have different rights based upon their race, gender and religious affiliation. Heck our head of state is determined based upon birth right and is the leader of the Anglican Church. Why do you choose to ignore this?

Apart from some rights granted FN's , such as fishing and hunting, we are all equal under the law.

What right does the HEad of State have that you dont?

[jacee]

That is untrue. In Canada, different people have different rights based upon their race, gender and religious affiliation. Heck our head of state is determined based upon birth right

We are all follow the same laws, equal under the law.

and is the leader of the Anglican Church. Why do you choose to ignore this?

Who the hell cares. Edited May 21, 2014 by jacee

[eyeball]

Is anyone doing that in this thread?

This certainly looks like a typical too-bad so-sad thread about indigenous peoples that need to get over losing out to invasive races.

You keep claiming that the peoples that lived in Canada before European Immigration were hunter gatherer societies and that no clear legal system was present in the lands of Canada as if the legal system our ancestors arrived with dictates anything to do with sovereignty then or more importantly now and in the foreseeable future. It's ironic how our legal system has turned more than a few tables.

I'm reminded of how taken aback a few native coworkers of mine became when I shared lunch with a fellow whose ancestors had tried their level best to exterminate mine back in the past. Our friends' manner of avoiding the sometimes sticky issue of survivors was to not leave any who it might be assumed could or would seek redress for what was done or taken from their ancestors.