Argus Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 I most certainly did not intentionally delete it. You should be ashamed of trying to equate your family's rather insignificant suffering with that of a planned genocide. You should be ashamed of trying to equate what happened to natives to real genocide. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
On Guard for Thee Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 The White folks never committed genocide, which is why there are so many natives still around today. It doesn't hold people responsible for the actions of people who died before they were born. Once again you see to fail to comprehend the actual meaning of the word genocide. Quote
Argus Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 Interesting question. That would happen via a lawsuit taken to the International Courts of Justice, if justice within Canada is ineffective in resolving issues. Where is there justice in blaming completely innocent people because some of their ancestors were better at fighting than Indian ancestors? At least half the population, if not more, don't even have ancestors who were in Canada before about 1950. Yet you want to punish them all because why exactly? Natives live in a great country and have all the benefits and rights of every other citizen. You want to stick them on reserves for all eternity like quaint little cigar store Indians and then bankrupt the country to build mansions for them and hire them servants? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 Once again you see to fail to comprehend the actual meaning of the word genocide. I know what genocide is. I just reject your made up definition of the term. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
On Guard for Thee Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 I know what genocide is. I just reject your made up definition of the term. Your comments seem to indicate genocide couldn't have occurred because a particular race continues to exist, which shows you seem to be struggling with a made up definition of the term. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 ...Keep in mind the Royal Proclamation was generic and said anything east of the Appalachians not having a full understanding what was this far out west. Also, there were other players in the game including the Spanish to the south and the French involvement which ultimately lead to the Louisiana purchase. All in all, development started happening and no one stopped to ask questions. Thanks...that's what I thought all along...it was just imperialist BS called "The Crown". Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
eyeball Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 They never had a country. They had hundreds of little villages scattered around, and lots and lots of empty space. We never had a country either that's what they want back. We all go back to square one - that's what pushing the reset button means. Confederation 2.0 Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Je suis Omar Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) What does ignorance in the non pejorative sense become once the previously ignorant have had their ignorance explained, repeatedly, to them. Edited June 2, 2015 by Je suis Omar Quote
Je suis Omar Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) Argus: You should be ashamed of trying to equate what happened to natives to real genocide. Provide some examples of real genocide. Edited June 2, 2015 by Je suis Omar Quote
Accountability Now Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) Provide some examples of real genocide. Since you completely ignored my previous request, I thought I would ask again. Does the UN classify the residential schools as genocide? You like using their definition so it would seem fitting to see what they have to say. Edited June 2, 2015 by Accountability Now Quote
eyeball Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 The residential school's were just things. It's what was done in and with them - the government's policies - that were genocidal. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Accountability Now Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 The residential school's were just things. It's what was done in and with them - the government's policies - that were genocidal. The UN doesn't seem to think so and they wrote the definition that everyone keeps posting about genocide. Quote
Smallc Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) The residential school's were just things. It's what was done in and with them - the government's policies - that were genocidal. In the most loose interpretation of the word...and only then with a real stretch. Edited June 2, 2015 by Smallc Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 The UN doesn't seem to think so and they wrote the definition that everyone keeps posting about genocide. Agreed...the residential school system is/was not considered to be "genocide" by UNGC standards then or now, which specifically defined but excluded "cultural genocide" from the international convention for a lot of reasons. Canada also has its own legal definitions of "genocide". http://www.academia.edu/3289432/The_Genocide_Question_and_Indian_Residential_Schools_in_Canada Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Argus Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 Your comments seem to indicate genocide couldn't have occurred because a particular race continues to exist, which shows you seem to be struggling with a made up definition of the term. Not at all. I don't think the actions described constitute genocide since genocide is rarely 'well meaning'. They were basically trying to 'civilize' the red man and draw him into our society, not to exterminate him in ovens the way the Germans did to the Jews. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 We never had a country either that's what they want back. We all go back to square one - that's what pushing the reset button means. Confederation 2.0 Fine with me. That means we vote to say how things work, right? I think we outnumber them slightly. I'm also guessing the vote would say they were our full partners, with all the same rights and responsibilities, and no Indian act. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 What does ignorance in the non pejorative sense become once the previously ignorant have had their ignorance explained, repeatedly, to them. I suspect that you're something of an expert on the subject. Why don't you give us a dissertation on it? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 Provide some examples of real genocide. The Holocaust would be the best example. In fact, the word genocide was actually invented to describe what happened to the Jews. The word did not exist prior to then. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
On Guard for Thee Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 Not at all. I don't think the actions described constitute genocide since genocide is rarely 'well meaning'. They were basically trying to 'civilize' the red man and draw him into our society, not to exterminate him in ovens the way the Germans did to the Jews. Perhaps I should have been clearer. What you have just described is called cultural genocide, although I guess I just assumed you knew that thats what the discussion is about. Quote
Smallc Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 Perhaps I should have been clearer. What you have just described is called cultural genocide In other words, it's not a real genocide, so we made up a fancy term. Quote
Je suis Omar Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 The Holocaust would be the best example. In fact, the word genocide was actually invented to describe what happened to the Jews. The word did not exist prior to then. I suspect that you're something of an expert on the subject. Why don't you give us a dissertation on it? There's no need for a dissertation, Argus. We have this quote of mine, "What does ignorance in the non pejorative sense become once the previously ignorant have had their ignorance explained, repeatedly, to them", and then your reply to my request, Omar: "Provide some examples of real genocide." Argus: "The Holocaust would be the best example. In fact, the word genocide was actually invented to describe what happened to the Jews. The word did not exist prior to then." Argus, there WERE millions of Jewish people alive on the planet after WWII. You have been erroneously stating that the continued existence of a people negates the idea that a genocide has taken place. You have stated this same nonsense a number of times, right after you were corrected, right after evidence/proof was placed right in front of your nose. And now, right here, YOU blatantly contradict yourself and YOUR spurious contention. Quote
Je suis Omar Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 In other words, it's not a real genocide, so we made up a fancy term. Smallc leaps into bed with Argus. Quote
Smallc Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 I was in full agreement with him on this from the beginnig. What was done was done wrong, and it was awful. In most of the timreframe involved though, it wasn't unique, and it wasn't comparable to the holocaust. Quote
eyeball Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) Fine with me. That means we vote to say how things work, right? I think we outnumber them slightly. I'm also guessing the vote would say they were our full partners, with all the same rights and responsibilities, and no Indian act.No I suspect this will be dealt with by 1st Nations and the GG or the Queen. Edited June 2, 2015 by eyeball Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
TimG Posted June 2, 2015 Report Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) No I suspect this will be dealt with by 1st Nations and the GG or the Queen.ROTFL. Are you serious? The entire constitution can be torn up and be re-written if there is a strong democratic mandate supporting it. The idea that the democratic will of Canadians could be usurped a small group of wannabe feudal lords is laughable. The only rights that natives have are those which the majority chooses to let them have. Nothing will ever change that. Edited June 2, 2015 by TimG Quote
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.