Truth and Reconciliation... Legitimacy

[Argus]

So you do get it but you just don't care. This isn't so much a struggle between us and them as just between us - those who care and those who don't. Fair enough.

Why do you Lefties always assume you have a monopoly on sympathizing and caring about the plight of others? You don't, you know. You just seem to have a monopoly on hand wringing and useless gestures.

There were probably under half a million natives in Canada when Columbus arrived, scattered around in tiny villages and amidst the massive length and breadth of empty Canada. The suggestion this constituted a 'country' is frankly silly. Most of the natives didn't even know of the existence of most of the other natives, nor would speak their language, and had no knowledge of how big the country was or where anything was outside their own small zones of hunting, trapping and fishing. They were like people who grew up in a small town and spent their entire lives there, never having gone or seen anywhere else - except these ones had no TV, newspapers or radio to clue them in.

Edited June 7, 2015 by Argus

[eyeball]

As always you pick out one thing I said and focus on that instead of the point of this whole thing. As long as we are separate there will always be struggles with the US versus THEM mentality. As much as people think natives win with tax breaks or other rights, they lose in so many other ways which is why we see reserves in the conditions they are

Which people lose and how much do they lose in comparison to others? As always you ignore the point I made about that. I had to stand aside and give up my livelihood in the name of native aspirations. As far as I'm concerned I got caught in the middle of your struggle with them. Sure I struggled with the sense that I was a victim of racism and wondered why I should have to pay for the sins of the past too but that all changed when I started learning about what happened. What pushed me forever into the native camp was when I saw how many of the non-native survivors in your struggle were often the same wealthiest most powerful and influential players that existed before. The same system of scamming that scammed natives way way back in the day is still very much alive and active. The same old corrupt attitudes and government that caused all the problems are still very firmly in place. On my worse days I'd just as happily replace that with anarchy but I'd rather try re-constitution first.

So what do you actually expect you'll have to give up again besides a few pennies on the dollar?

[eyeball]

They already did. Didn't you see the videos of the rent a mob in Toronto?

I would however like an example of a revolution that coalesced around indigenous aspirations.

The Mexican Revolution for one.

The main ideals of the Mexican Revolution grew out of the basic belief that a few wealthy landowners could no longer continue the old ways of Spanish colonial rule...

The ridiculously powerful and the filthy rich just never get it and probably never will.

[Bryan]

The Mexican Revolution for one.

You should read up on the Mexican Revolution. It wasn't an aboriginal uprising, it was a populace of mixed race that no longer wanted to answer to Spain.

[eyeball]

There were probably under half a million natives in Canada when Columbus arrived, scattered around in tiny villages and amidst the massive length and breadth of empty Canada. The suggestion this constituted a 'country' is frankly silly.

It constituted their heritage and now they want it back.

Why do you Lefties always assume you have a monopoly on sympathizing and caring about the plight of others?

My guess is that there's a lot of common ground between them.

[eyeball]

You should read up on the Mexican Revolution. It wasn't an aboriginal uprising, it was a populace of mixed race that no longer wanted to answer to Spain.

No the revolution followed the war of independence from Spain. It was against a wealthy powerful minority that wanted to continue ruling like Spain did, to maintain their own power and wealth above all others.

[Bryan]

No the revolution followed the war of independence from Spain. It was against a wealthy powerful minority that wanted to continue ruling like Spain did, to maintain their own power and wealth above all others.

Not an aboriginal uprising.

[eyeball]

Not an aboriginal uprising.

Background

The Mexican Revolution was not the first violent war in Mexico. After Mexico’s conquest in 1521, the most powerful citizens were European, Spanish-born citizens or the peninsulares living in the New World. Three centuries later, in 1821, the war for Independence (starting in 1810) ended, freeing Mexico from New Spain. This was a war that, however, benefited mainly the criollo (Spanish-blooded upper class) minority. A century later, in 1910, the majority of the population of Mexico were mestizos, half-indigenous and half-Spanish-blooded Mexicans, and these indigenous peoples again rose up in a violent armed struggle, the Mexican Revolution. A timeline can help us understand the history leading to the revolution.

[bush_cheney2004]

Deriva hilo, no ?

[Bryan]

Not an aboriginal uprising.

Background

The Mexican Revolution was not the first violent war in Mexico. After Mexico’s conquest in 1521, the most powerful citizens were European, Spanish-born citizens or the peninsulares living in the New World. Three centuries later, in 1821, the war for Independence (starting in 1810) ended, freeing Mexico from New Spain. This was a war that, however, benefited mainly the criollo (Spanish-blooded upper class) minority. A century later, in 1910, the majority of the population of Mexico were mestizos, half-indigenous and half-Spanish-blooded Mexicans, and these indigenous peoples again rose up in a violent armed struggle, the Mexican Revolution. A timeline can help us understand the history leading to the revolution.

Not an aboriginal uprising.

[Accountability Now]

So what do you actually expect you'll have to give up again besides a few pennies on the dollar?

How many pennies in total would I lose from Duffy or any other senate debacle? How much did I lose when Redford used government funds for private use? Both of those examples involved peanuts but it caused a huge onset of rage because it was tax payer money. So if your only argument is that I shouldn't care because it will cost me pennies, then I would be inclined to say you don't have an argument at all.

With all this said, I'm waiting to see what the results of the SCC ruling on the Mets. I recently found out that I am eligible for Metis status and if the ruling goes through then I'll have the same rights as status Indians in the reserve. How's that work especially since I'm at best 2% native???? That's our courts!!!!

[eyeball]

Not an aboriginal uprising.

I said a revolution coalescing around indigenous aspirations.

[Bryan]

I said a revolution coalescing around indigenous aspirations.

Still not what happened.

[Scott Mayers]

Then go read it.

.

Evidence, NOT hearsay testimonials.

Perhaps you might try to think of the problem in a different way. If it is true that such a giant conspiracy existed by the government and these residential schools to such an extraordinary extreme as you believe this to have been, then you would have to agree that at least such conspiracies can be true of anyone, correct? Add to this how such a conspiracy was able to prevent not one person to be accused and convicted directly of a crime let alone all the 37, 999 other claims of extraordinary abuses, this conspiracy MUST BE VERY POWERFUL indeed!

So, given you believe such an incredible conspiracy is both possible and has occurred among varied and many people of different competing religions and political bodies, then is it at least possible that you can imagine that the many people of one common set of objectives would and should have even more such potential, right?

Do you not think it possible that the collective interests of the first nations people here are potentially more vulnerable to conspiratorial behavior here?

Note too that the incentives to both the natives AND the politicians representing the established cultures of the churches involved are extremely high. Accepting of these claims as 'true' with the negotiated agreements to protect all perpetrators (including any potential perjurers on all sides), adds even more force to enable a more likely conspiracy since no individuals have to be held accountable. If there is no risk to you to report some abuse in which you are certain to benefit from, who would be stupid NOT to report such abuses even if it is made up?

Politically, this benefits politicians if they are able to use the accounts to compensations as a means to excuse financial losses elsewhere. The scandals affecting all parties here dealing with financial mismanagement gives justice for why politicians would favor some scapegoat to excuse potential (and likely) misuse of money.

To the established 'white' cultures of the catholic churches (Anglican & Roman) as well as to the impositions of our specifically two-official-languages, these groups benefit by keeping our attention away from their abuses.

[jacee]

jacee, on 07 Jun 2015 - 11:09 AM, said:

"Cease to exist" in law in Canada?

Ie, constitution, treaties, Indian Act, etc. ... ?

Accountability Now:

In that definition then yes....I do. They should be part of the Canadian people. Not separate.

Not at all. As per my previous post I stated to jacee, they should have the same rights as any other Canadaian including the right to exist. No more, no less.

You are advocating that they cease to exist as distinct Aboriginal Peoples in law.

You do understand the implications of that?

.

.

Edited June 7, 2015 by jacee

[Accountability Now]

You are advocating that they cease to exist as distinct Aboriginal Peoples.

.

Nope. They can be what ever they want. Irish, Chinese, Russians, Polish, Japanese, Pakastani and many many many more can and do exist as their own people. The difference here is that the Aboriginal people need us to make it ok for it to be valid. That is sad. They should be able to know what they are and not have to prove it. Of course, this isn't about proving it...its about leveraging it for funding.

[jacee]

Nope. They can be what ever they want. Irish, Chinese, Russians, Polish, Japanese, Pakastani and many many many more can and do exist as their own people. The difference here is that the Aboriginal people need us to make it ok for it to be valid. That is sad. They should be able to know what they are and not have to prove it. Of course, this isn't about proving it...its about leveraging it for funding.

You are advocating that Aboriginal Peoples cease to exist.

You do understand that's illegal and never to happen.

You and Smallc.

Bryan ' s back pedaling.

Big Guy's not heard from.

poochy ' s overwhelmed.

Edited June 7, 2015 by jacee

[Accountability Now]

You are advocating that Aboriginal Peoples cease to exist.

You do understand that's illegal and never to happen.

You and Smallc.

Bryan ' s back pedaling.

Big Guy's not heard from.

poochy ' s overwhelmed.

Nope. They still exist just the same as every other Canadian. And no it certainly is not illegal as long as they decide. You really don't know how the law works do you?

[jacee]

Evidence, NOT hearsay testimonials.

First person reports are not hearsay.

Perhaps you might try to think of the problem in a different way. If it is true that such a giant conspiracy existed by the government and these residential schools to such an extraordinary extreme as you believe this to have been, then you would have to agree that at least such conspiracies can be true of anyone, correct? Add to this how such a conspiracy was able to prevent not one person to be accused and convicted directly of a crime let alone all the 37, 999 other claims of extraordinary abuses, this conspiracy MUST BE VERY POWERFUL indeed!

...

To the established 'white' cultures of the catholic churches (Anglican & Roman) as well as to the impositions of our specifically two-official-languages, these groups benefit by keeping our attention away from their abuses.

No idea what you're speculating about.

But I suggest you read up on the process and do a valid assessment yourself.

You might find something in there that says applicants had to waive the right to pursue criminal charges.

Many abusers are dead.

The RCMP OPP etc have not yet released their records of criminal cases to the TRC.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/reconciliation-with-first-nations-requires-more-than-words-commission-chair/article24716835/?service=mobile

Last year, after telling compensation adjudicators since 2007 there was no record of sexual abuse at St. Annes Indian Residential School in Fort Albany, Ont. where such activity was rampant and children as young as six were shocked in an electric chair and made to eat their own vomit the government was forced to admit to Justice Paul Perell of the Ontario Superior Court that it was withholding thousands of OPP and other documents about abuse at the school. Justice Perrell ordered them to be released.

Now, in another cases from another school Bishop Horden in Moose Factory, Ont. many students allege there was abuse in the 1960s that resulted in criminal charges against supervisors.

No documents were produced by the government to that effect. And, in the past few months, government officials were forced to admit under oath that no effort has actually been made to search for the records of residential-school abuse that exist within most federal departments including the RCMP, Justice and Health Canada. Justice Perrell has yet to make a ruling in that case.

[jacee]

Nope. They still exist just the same as every other Canadian. And no it certainly is not illegal as long as they decide. You really don't know how the law works do you?

I see you do understand the critical element of free choice.

And that will never happen.

So why are you even talking about it?

.

Edited June 7, 2015 by jacee

[On Guard for Thee]

Nope. They still exist just the same as every other Canadian. And no it certainly is not illegal as long as they decide. You really don't know how the law works do you?

Are you suggesting aboriginal people might decide they dont want to exist any further...

[Argus]

I see you do understand the critical element of free choice.

And that will never happen.

Never? You're saying the natives are doomed to live isolated in the woods like hobbits or something forever? We'll be into the twenty third century, flying air cars to mars, but the natives will still be living their quaint lives dancing their quaint dances around open fires in the woods, right? This is what the Left wants to preserve?

[Accountability Now]

I see you do understand the critical element of free choice.

And that will never happen.

So why are you even talking about it?

.

Have you already forgotten what we were talking about? I said that Canadians will never budge the way that FN want them to. As such FN have to change how they go about this and look at a different way to get what they want while being inclusive to the Canadian society, That could include a significant pay out...or some sort of financial benefit. The us versus them concept will never work which is why I'm talking about this.

[Smallc]

That's why we're all talking this. Some of us just can't keep up.

[eyeball]

Have you already forgotten what we were talking about? I said that Canadians will never budge the way that FN want them to. As such FN have to change how they go about this and look at a different way to get what they want while being inclusive to the Canadian society, That could include a significant pay out...or some sort of financial benefit. The us versus them concept will never work which is why I'm talking about this.

The concept will only continue to grow, along with their population and as more and more Canadians are also marginalized by the state's perennial desire to widen income gaps.