People are getting fed up with natives

[BC_chick]

The problem is both complaints have a lot of truth to them. The miserable plight of natives is due to the application of centuries old agreements which make no sense any longer. They're a drag on Canada's economy, and they're most definitely not in the interest of Canada or natives - except of course, the chiefs. The Indian Act needs to be torn up. Economically unsustainable reserves need to be closed down. Natives need to become better integrated with Canada.

So in other words, you want the First Nations to give up all the things they got from the treaties because things didn't go quite as planned; but you want the Crown to keep all the land and everything else that was gained for the government from the treaties.

There's an expression for this, I can't remember. Indian something.... right?

Edited March 21, 2016 by BC_chick

[eyeball]

How are you inclined exactly?

In a direction opposed to your's.

I said this to you a long time ago:

That was you, the vitriol bit. Two pages later, it's still there. No answers though.

Yes, I admit I'm a little abusive towards racism. Anyone expecting an apology for that or a break from it can forget it.

So, why start another thread? Just say how you are inclined in this one.

I was thinking of polling people on whether they think the tone of the OP and affirmative posts is all just a bunch of racist bigotry dressed up in an expectation of political politeness, or not.

To reiterate my position:

1) FN Chiefs receiving tax payer money should be accountable for it, to their own people and the people providing the money, and,

A strongly held belief I have towards every relationship between every single human government and every single governed human. I don't need to have this concept waved in my face like you just discovered it 5 or 6 pages ago and you know it. Quit wasting my time. You want to impress me and inspire natives, institute the point to the same degree in Ottawa and provincial capitals first. Make them set an example and put up or shut up before demanding the same of the native governments they've empowered.

2) Every effort should be made to integrate FN into general Canadian society from reserves where they are currently suffering from poverty, unemployment and insanely high suicide rates. (Short of forcing someone to do what they do not want to, obviously)Those aren't my ideas of course, I just happen to agree with them

Okay. Get Argus to present this idea to the Assembly of First Nations and let me know how that works out for you guys.

I have a question. It just occurred to me. Do you think I take the above positions because I just don't like natives, the same way some on here think I abhor violence in the name of God just because I don't like Arabs?

I thought you just thought I was a racist because I dared to actually have an opinion, however uninformed it might be.

No, its because you insist on maintaining the OP is a reasonable civilized treatment of a sensitive issue. Why there are people who think you don't like Arabs is anyone's guess.

And for the record, I abhor violence too albeit with less civility - you got me there I suppose.

Edited March 21, 2016 by eyeball

[jacee]

The whole idea of calling a band of a few hundred people a 'nation' is progressive nonsense which not only serves to reinforce the idea they are outsiders and not Canadians, but makes it harder to reach agreements since the chiefs now consider themselves as national leaders of the same level as the prime minister. But I suppose it helps them justify why they make three or four times as much as the mayor of a similar small town.

The "Nations" are the peoples who actually signed treaties and have legal relationships with the Crown.

'First Nations" are a dubious creation of Ottawa and the 'Indian' Act.

I find it interesting that most of the vitriol toward Indigenous Peoples relates to those dubious creations of Ottawa, not the real treaties and relationships with the Crown.

Perhaps more success could be achieved if people directed their vitriol more appropriately to Ottawa, instead of just venting it in racist attacks.

Unless venting in racist attacks is the only purpose of creating ignorant threads such as this.

Seems so.

.

[Guest]

In a direction opposed to your's.

Yes, I admit I'm a little abusive towards racism. Anyone expecting an apology for that or a break from it can forget it.

I was thinking of polling people on whether they think the tone of the OP and affirmative posts is all just a bunch of racist bigotry dressed up in an expectation of political politeness, or not.

A strongly held belief I have towards every relationship between every single human government and every single governed human. I don't need to have this concept waved in my face like you just discovered it 5 or 6 pages ago and you know it. Quit wasting my time. You want to impress me and inspire natives, institute the point to the same degree in Ottawa and provincial capitals first. Make them set an example and put up or shut up before demanding the same of the native governments they've empowered.

Okay. Get Argus to present this idea to the Assembly of First Nations and let me know how that works out for you guys.

No, its because you insist on maintaining the OP is a reasonable civilized treatment of a sensitive issue. Why there are people who think you don't like Arabs is anyone's guess.

And for the record, I abhor violence too albeit with less civility - you got me there I suppose.

So really, you're just all pissed off. That's it. You don't actually have a view. It's just that other people better not have one either.

An apology? Good Heavens, when did I ask for one of those? It's enough just to know your motives.

Edited March 21, 2016 by bcsapper

[Argus]

I didn't want to respond to this thread because it just feeds into the racists comments that have been posted in the OP but I can't abandon other posters here who deserve my support.

Awww, that's so sweet! Posters who are calling people names need your help! What a dear you are!

I trust you understand why we all snicker at your constant complaints about how mean and insulting people are being, right? Clearly you have no issue with insults as long as they agree with your political views.

[Argus]

Interesting....now it's a "native problem"...not a Canadian problem.

Liberal bigots don't see them as Canadians. They're separate nations currently being oppressed by the evil white people who fund them.

[Argus]

So in other words, you want the First Nations to give up all the things they got from the treaties because things didn't go quite as planned; but you want the Crown to keep all the land and everything else that was gained for the government from the treaties.

What I want is for there to be no slums in Canada. Too many native reserves are nothing but slums filled with miserable people who have no hope of anything changing for the better. Their kids drop out of high school and sniff glue because they have no hope for jobs anyway. Alcoholism and drug abuse is rife on reserves, as is violence, because there's nothing for anyone to do. It's been that way my entire life. And all the progressives propose is more of the same. Why do you all hate natives so much anyway?

I'm willing to pay a huge amount of money up front to see natives' lives improved, and the only way I can see that is by moving them in closer to the rest of us. Where do you think I figure the land for these new urban reserves is gonna come from anyway? The land fairy? Of course we'd have to buy it for them, and build houses or apartment blocks. But if it's to integrate them, welcome them to the 21st century, and start to end their complete dependence on government welfare it will be worth it in the long term.

[Argus]

I find it interesting that most of the vitriol toward Indigenous Peoples relates to those dubious creations of Ottawa, not the real treaties and relationships with the Crown.

I find it interesting you make up points so you can find something interesting. I guess your life is just that sad.

Resentment towards natives is, as I said, due to the high amount of crime and addiction caused by their dysfunctional societies, which in turn is caused by liberal bigots who insist on keeping them out in the bushes like quaint museum pieces.

Unless venting in racist attacks is the only purpose of creating ignorant threads such as this.

Seems so.

Like most who despise natives, all you seem to care about is shutting down dialogue so that they can be kept out on the reserves so you can feel smug about how superior you are.

Edited March 21, 2016 by Argus

[eyeball]

So really, you're just all pissed off. That's it. You don't actually have a view. It's just that other people better not have one either.

Okay.

[square]

I think we should start by getting rid of the Indian Act and starting a new Nation to Nation relationship.

[BC_chick]

What I want is for there to be no slums in Canada. Too many native reserves are nothing but slums filled with miserable people who have no hope of anything changing for the better. Their kids drop out of high school and sniff glue because they have no hope for jobs anyway. Alcoholism and drug abuse is rife on reserves, as is violence, because there's nothing for anyone to do. It's been that way my entire life. And all the progressives propose is more of the same. Why do you all hate natives so much anyway?

I'm willing to pay a huge amount of money up front to see natives' lives improved, and the only way I can see that is by moving them in closer to the rest of us. Where do you think I figure the land for these new urban reserves is gonna come from anyway? The land fairy? Of course we'd have to buy it for them, and build houses or apartment blocks. But if it's to integrate them, welcome them to the 21st century, and start to end their complete dependence on government welfare it will be worth it in the long term.

Hmmm, judging by your OP and other posts on the thread, I'm inclined to believe you care more about the welfare cheques than you do about the actual welfare of the communities.

But whatever your motive, who cares. You're not acknowledging the fact that there are treaties in place and if you seem to only want a 'one-way' do-over. So you want to crown to keep all the benefits and land acquired through the treaties, but no longer fulfill the obligations that were offered?

You can make this about me as much as you want, that's nothing new, but it doesn't change the fact that the crown has obligations to the community.

Any change that happens needs to happen within the community - not through broken treaties.

[Argus]

Hmmm, judging by your OP and other posts on the thread, I'm inclined to believe you care more about the welfare cheques than you do about the actual welfare of the communities.

I care about both. I hate the waste of resources, human or monetary, and the way things are going, with antipathy towards natives rising, the atmosphere is going to make it even harder to solve these problems if we just kick the can down the road yet again.

But whatever your motive, who cares. You're not acknowledging the fact that there are treaties in place and if you seem to only want a 'one-way' do-over. So you want to crown to keep all the benefits and land acquired through the treaties, but no longer fulfill the obligations that were offered?

The treaties have been reinterpreted again and again by the courts to modernize them. I doubt any of them, for example, called on the government to supply houses and heating oil and electricity and health care. Those are self-imposed obligations of a society towards those on welfare. The only natives better off on isolated reserves are the rich chiefs. That's the problem when you have a party whose interests are not the same as those they are responsible for governing.

[Guest]

It's tough to argue with "Those who know what's best for them", but I remember not long after arriving in this country I got my first taste of the First Nation's problems and I was a little stunned. It seemed so obvious to me. You just say, "OMG we really f****d that up. Sorry about that, come on in!". I would have thought that about fifty years ago might have been a good time.

But no, they have to stay out. The people on here who scream "RACIST" everytime someone says something they disagree with remind me of those who oppose assisted suicide. They'd rather someone suffered than change their minds.

I thought Argus's comments, while justified, were a little harsh. But I see now they aren't. There do exist people who think Natives are different. They cling to that whole, "Stewards of the Land" bullshit, as though that could apply to all of them in this day and age.

One of the most heartbreaking things I remember was the taking of adopted children from loving parents, a good life and decent prospects to be given to some Aunt and Uncle who had never heard of them because "Those who know what's best for them" decided the most important thing for a child was clinging to a dying culture.

But of course it's racist to think the best thing for the child was a good life.

Edited March 21, 2016 by bcsapper

[Guest]

Okay.

So you actually do think we should all get our posts vetted in Ottawa, the provincial capitals and the Assembly of First Nations before we post.

Sorry, I thought you were just mad.

[eyeball]

Whatever you say chief.

[eyeball]

But of course it's racist to think the best thing for the child was a good life.

No it isn't, it's just plain ignorant to try and turn things on their head like this or casting people that are calling BS on the OP as the real racists. Who you people think you're trying to fool is anyone's guess but it sure underscores the point of the long cultural native tradition of warning about people who speak with forked tongues.

[Guest]

No it isn't, it's just plain ignorant to try and turn things on their head like this or casting people that are calling BS on the OP as the real racists. Who you people think you're trying to fool is anyone's guess but it sure underscores the point of the long cultural native tradition of warning about people who speak with forked tongues.

Isn't that a cliche, from the pulps?

Still, it's good to know I wasn't being racist.

[BC_chick]

The treaties have been reinterpreted again and again by the courts to modernize them. I doubt any of them, for example, called on the government to supply houses and heating oil and electricity and health care. Those are self-imposed obligations of a society towards those on welfare. The only natives better off on isolated reserves are the rich chiefs. That's the problem when you have a party whose interests are not the same as those they are responsible for governing.

The issue is that change has to come from within the community, otherwise it's simply going back on a treaty which is what you suggested earlier and I oppose vehemently.

I'm all for improving situations, but autonomy was *the* main factor for FN communities in ratifying these treaties. If their chiefs are mishandling funds, the media should continue to expose the truth so that the community engages in social change.

Assimilation is not the answer, it's what FN have feared ever since Europeans arrived. You view things from your ethnocentric view that Europeans are 'better' and therefore FN should be grateful this fate was bestowed upon them (similar to what you said to me on the Israel thread where you think you would've welcomed European Jews if you were a Palestinian circa 1940), but that's not how it goes in these types of dominant cultures assimilating smaller ones.

You honestly need to have an empathetic look from their perspective. Assimilation is what they've been fighting for centuries.

Promoting change has to be planted as a seed and allowed to grow as opposed to forced broken promises which not nothing but fuel more mistrust and anger.

[Guest]

Assimilation is not the answer

I think assimilation is inevitable. What we have currently is the equivalent of tearing a large elastoplast off a hairy part of the body, 1 mm at a time.

When you say it's what FN have feared, which FN do you mean? I would suggest you mean those who are the most comfortable with the current situation. I would suggest you don't mean the teenager who sees what (s)he is missing on all the gadgets they have, all the while trapped on some ice road dependent hole in the middle of nowhere.

Edited March 22, 2016 by bcsapper

[Accountability Now]

I would suggest you don't mean the teenager who sees what (s)he is missing on all the gadgets they have, all the while trapped on some ice road dependent hole in the middle of nowhere.

Or the large number of them that have already assimilated.

[DFCaper]

Assimilation is what they've been fighting for centuries.

I thought it was the settlers, by settling up the reserve system were the original people fighting assimilation. They were put on reserves to keep them away. I am sure the settlers hundreds of years ago set up the system to their advantage, not the Natives.

I can see why a chief would fight assimilation, but why would others? I thought the complains were that they don't have the same as we have!?!?!

[Argus]

The issue is that change has to come from within the community, otherwise it's simply going back on a treaty which is what you suggested earlier and I oppose vehemently.

How does it come from within the community when the chief and his cadre have such total control over them? If you say anything against the chief you can forget your house getting repaired, or your daughter going to university. The Conservatives did bring forth a law which would at least let the community see how the chiefs were spending all that money, but Trudeau is ditching that so a blanket of silence falls over reserve spending once again.

I'm all for improving situations, but autonomy was *the* main factor for FN communities in ratifying these treaties.

But they were signed in a time when none of them and none of us could even imagine natives living as part of the 'white' community! It's irrelevant now!

No native considered himself a Canadian, or a member of our society. Times have changed.

If their chiefs are mishandling funds, the media should continue to expose the truth so that the community engages in social change.

A little hard to do when what they're spending funds on is going to be secret. And what media are you talking about? Do you expect reporters from the Post to travel to isolated reserve and interview people there, trying to ind someone willing to be identified as the chief's enemy, who is willing to talk?

Assimilation is not the answer, it's what FN have feared ever since Europeans arrived. You view things from your ethnocentric view that Europeans are 'better' and therefore FN should be grateful this fate

Assimilation is the only answer. That doesn't mean they surrender everything about their past or culture. Lots of people are successful at retaining their cultures while still being part of the overall Canadian community. And my 'view' is one of logic and realism not a pie in the sky romantic attachment to a centuries dead lifestyle that is no longer tenable. You think it better for them to stay on their isolated reserves to 'preserve their identity' at the cost of miserable wasted lives of poverty, violence and addiction!? Seriously!?

You honestly need to have an empathetic look from their perspective. Assimilation is what they've been fighting for centuries.

Maybe it's you who needs to have an empathetic look from their perspective. I don't know what your ethnic background is, but I bet you're happy speaking English now and living as a Canadian and wouldn't exchange it for living in some miserable old world shithole where you had to scrounge for food every day but retained your glorious culture. People have come to Canada from all over the world, and their descendants are WAY better off than they'd have been staying back in their old crappy NATION and living in poverty.

[Martin Chriton]

Assimilation is not the answer, it's what FN have feared ever since Europeans arrived. You view things from your ethnocentric view that Europeans are 'better' and therefore FN should be grateful this fate was bestowed upon them

It's not about assimilating into a white world -- Canada and the US are increasingly diverse. For example, Toronto is now ~50% visible minorities. Where I live (in the US) Asian's earn more on average than white Americans.

It's about natives assimilating into the modern world -- somehow.

While I doubt we'll see real progress in my lifetime for the natives in Canada or blacks in America, I expect at least this argument against progress to be discarded. Hard to say it's a white nation with white privilege required to succeed when whites earn less than minorities (at least in some scenarios; and I expect it'll broaden over time given long term demographic trends).

I don't see how throwing good money after bad is going to fix this problem. Clearly, the status quo on the reserves isn't working. They need to be given a path to a great education and ability to relocate where they can find work.

[jacee]

I think assimilation is inevitable.

...

When you say it's what FN have feared, which FN do you mean? I would suggest you mean those who are the most comfortable with the current situation. I would suggest you don't mean the teenager who sees what (s)he is missing on all the gadgets they have, all the while trapped on some ice road dependent hole in the middle of nowhere.

Assimilation has nothing to do with "gadgets" or living a modern lifestyle.

Assimilation is typically used to suggest that Indigenous Peoples should give up their Aboriginal and treaty rights.

They can live a modern lifestyle and still retain cultural practices, values, ceremonies ... and land and other rights.

.

[Guest]

Assimilation has nothing to do with "gadgets" or living a modern lifestyle.

Assimilation is typically used to suggest that Indigenous Peoples should give up their Aboriginal and treaty rights.

They can live a modern lifestyle and still retain cultural practices, values, ceremonies ... and land and other rights.

.

I never said assimilation was to do with gadgets. Only that through those gadgets a lot of FN might be getting the idea that somehow, there might be more to life. Assimiliation has nothing to do with treaty rights either. You say so yourself in your last sentence. They just might want to to all that in some other place than Mosquito Breath, Manitoba, and the Federal government should make helping them with that a priority, instead of just handing the cash into a black hole.

Edited March 26, 2016 by bcsapper