Are aboriginals "immigrants"?

[PIK]

20 hours ago, The_Squid said:

Most "whiteys" don't actually agree with your bigoted notions of what society should be like. 

Most do and so do the non whites living and working here and paying taxes. Why does the left want to keep the same policies that have kept the natives down. All the billions and billions spent over the decades and the regular native on the rez lives a shitty life while the chiefs are millionaires.Why can't the left see that. And the fact that some rez's did not want to show where the money went, that right there should have sent up the red flags. Harper knew what was going on , but trudeau like most liberals are still in denial. This crap with the natives has to be ended.

[Argus]

25 minutes ago, capricorn said:

**Why the hell has the old US embassy building on Wellington street been kept unoccupied for 20 years after our government purchased it from the US in 1997? What a waste of prime real estate. Sheesh.

No one could ever agree on what to do with it. Trudeau solved that problem by ignoring what most people wanted to do in favor of giving it to the natives, er, aborigines, er, indigenous peoples.

There's a huge area just outside centertown here in Ottawa which was taken over by the federal government about sixty years ago for whatever reason I forget now. Blocks and blocks and blocks of people were evicted from their houses and businesses and everything was knocked down. Anyway, it's been vacant ever since because the next government didn't agree on what to do with it or didn't want to put up the money. Decades passed with this big area of weeds and concrete just outside the city centre. Finally, the feds decided last year to fill it with condos and office buildings, and an NHL arena, among other things. We'll have to wait and see if this one happens.

[bush_cheney2004]

18 minutes ago, Argus said:

...There's a huge area just outside centertown here in Ottawa which was taken over by the federal government about sixty years ago

 

LeBreton Flats ?

[capricorn]

33 minutes ago, Argus said:

No one could ever agree on what to do with it. Trudeau solved that problem by ignoring what most people wanted to do in favor of giving it to the natives, er, aborigines, er, indigenous peoples.

This is OT but what the hell, It looks like the offer of the gift was not well received by the leaders of the indigenous peoples. It appears the building in question is not conducive to indigenous culture. It's been categorized as a "left-over" by critics and indigenous architects. Translation: "we want land and money where we can build our own freaking building with our own freaking symbols". That's probably what will happen in the long run.

[Wilber]

3 hours ago, Argus said:

Yes, but they are very determined to defend their belief they have more rights than anyone else to this land because they got here first. They're special, you see.

Interestingly, the Left, which agrees wholeheartedly with this, will also be infuriated if you claim that someone born and raised in Canada coming from half a dozen generations born and raised here should be considered to have more rights to the place than an immigrant who arrived a couple of years ago.

They are under our law, but no nation or culture has an unalienable right to exist. History has demonstrated that innumerable times. FN special status will only exist as long as this country and its laws exist. And that won't be forever.

[jacee]

On 2017-6-19 at 10:35 PM, Moonlight Graham said:

Uproar after the Governor General of Canada recently called Canadian aboriginals "immigrants". He later apologized & said he misspoke.

Full story: http://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/governor-general-immigrants-social-media-outrage-1.4167384

Canadian aboriginals originally migrated to the continent around 15,000 years ago from Asia it's estimated.  Whatever the year they came, are indigenous peoples also immigrants?

http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-history-archaeology/24000-year-old-butchered-bones-found-canada-change-known-history-north-021178

The history of the peoples of this land is still being discovered.

24,000 years is a very long time, but may not yet be the full story: Migrations were not likely limited to the Arctic. 

Regardless, it's obvious that Indigenous people are not 'immigrants' to Canada since Canada did not exist thousands of years ago.

Indigenous Nations were and are sovereign nations. We live here by treaties, legal relationships with the original peoples of this land, who are allies of the Crown. Without our alliances with Indigenous Peoples, and their loyal and competent defense, Canada would not exist.

In my opinion, GG David Johnson has revealed that he is not an adequate representative of the Queen in respect to her treaties and alliance with Indigenous Nations.

[blackbird]

On 2017-06-19 at 8:35 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

StatCan says otherwise...

 

 

Quote

On 2017-06-19 at 7:35 PM, Moonlight Graham said:

Uproar after the Governor General of Canada recently called Canadian aboriginals "immigrants". He later apologized & said he misspoke.

Full story: http://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/governor-general-immigrants-social-media-outrage-1.4167384

Canadian aboriginals originally migrated to the continent around 15,000 years ago from Asia it's estimated.  Whatever the year they came, are indigenous peoples also immigrants?

 

The poor Governor General slipped up and mis-spoke a politically incorrect line.  It didn't fit with the first nations and lefty narrative so he had to apologize and speak the correct phrases.

[blackbird]

According to bible experts the earth was created about six thousand years ago.  So where were the aboriginals 14,000 years ago?   Native rights activists will cling to the 14,000 year story because it means they have far greater claim to the land than relative newcomers whose ancestors came here a few hundred years ago at most.

Edited June 23, 2017 by blackbird

[Wilber]

4 hours ago, jacee said:

 

In my opinion, GG David Johnson has revealed that he is not an adequate representative of the Queen in respect to her treaties and alliance with Indigenous Nations.

At what point did he say that the Crown shouldn't respect its treaties and alliances with indigenous peoples?

[Benz]

On ‎2017‎-‎06‎-‎21 at 10:47 AM, Wilber said:

I doubt that is true of the current aboriginals. When it comes to the people that currently occupy this country, there is no question that they and their ancestors were here first but If humans have been here for 15,000 years, it is very unlikely that the present aboriginals were the first to settle here. In other parts of the continent there is plenty of evidence of aboriginal cultures that have come and gone over the millennia. Why. we don't know, just as we are still trying to figure out the meaning of prehistoric structures like Stonehenge.

 

Wilber, if we do not know, then we do not know. That's it! Does the aboriginal encounter another civilization when they arrived here? Do they fight against them? Do they have breed with them? We do not know. Our knowledge about their coming 15k years ago is only our own deduction after the analysis of évidences found. There are no texts or record to explane us that history. So this irrelevent. Because we do not know. One thing I am pretty sure of, if there were non aboriginal humans living here before the current aboriginals arrived, they were not many and I doubt very much they were claiming the whole americas as their country.

It's pretty safe to say the aboriginals were not immigrants. Although I am sure few of them were immigrants sometimes migrating from one tribe to another for whatever reasons.

[Wilber]

It's true that we don't know a lot but as I said before, archeology puts the origin of our species in Africa so unless you believe that some sort of higher power created  North American aboriginals separate from the rest of mankind, they had to come from somewhere else. Given the time span, I doubt very much the current aboriginals were the first to make that migration, societies would have supplanted mingled with each other over the millennia and perhaps some of them did "immigrate" into societies which were already there. 

It isn't even necessarily a racial thing. The UK has been mentioned. Over the years it has been dominated by ancient Britons, Celts, Romans, Norse, Anglo Saxons and Norman French. Did I miss any? All of them migrants or conquerers and all of them Caucasian.

[OftenWrong]

How can you have immigration without a country? This was pre Canada, even pre history.

[Wilber]

1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

How can you have immigration without a country? This was pre Canada, even pre history.

Well, if you call yourself a "Nation".

[eyeball]

9 hours ago, blackbird said:

According to bible experts the earth was created about six thousand years ago.  So where were the aboriginals 14,000 years ago?   Native rights activists will cling to the 14,000 year story because it means they have far greater claim to the land than relative newcomers whose ancestors came here a few hundred years ago at most.

It pains me to think about how much our country officially accommodates some of the most whacked-out thinking on the planet.  Knowing how much of this thinking actually shaped our culture's treatment of native people sickens me.

I think Canada should be a little more aggressive in promoting and accelerating our trend towards secularism simply to start reducing the extent of the delusional thinking that grips so many minds. As a first step towards that I'd like to see our FN's demand the word God be expunged from the preamble to our Constitution and replace it with the more neutral term creator - and no capitalization.required AFAIC.

[August1991]

On 6/20/2017 at 4:23 PM, Argus said:

The only people bothered by this are the aboriginal guilt industry and lefty snowflakes.

Argus nails the key point.

=====

We live in  a universe of yet determined values. Sometimes, we just don't know. But sometimes we do.

 

[Omni]

26 minutes ago, August1991 said:

Argus nails the key point.

=====

We live in  a universe of yet determined values. Sometimes, we just don't know. But sometimes we do.

 

Speaking of snowflakes.

[blackbird]

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

It pains me to think about how much our country officially accommodates some of the most whacked-out thinking on the planet.  Knowing how much of this thinking actually shaped our culture's treatment of native people sickens me.

I think Canada should be a little more aggressive in promoting and accelerating our trend towards secularism simply to start reducing the extent of the delusional thinking that grips so many minds. As a first step towards that I'd like to see our FN's demand the word God be expunged from the preamble to our Constitution and replace it with the more neutral term creator - and no capitalization.required AFAIC.

A lot of religious people sacrificed much of their lives to try to give young people an education in religious schools, probably without much compensation.  Freedom of religion is a long-established historical part of our Constitution and society.  I doubt that will change anytime soon.  I would say the real threat to society is secular humanism which is anti-family and anti a lot of things and pro marijuana for example,  none of which is good for society.  If you want to see how atheism and humanism has damaged society, just look at the former Soviet Union and Russia.  They have a huge crime problem and society is a mess. Plus they are ruled by a totalitarian dictator.   Western European society is going down too.  Many churches in England have been closed or are being turned into mosques.  Look at the problems they have now.

Actually it was the communist atheists in the former Soviet Union and China that murdered hundreds of millions of people and trampled on everyone's basic freedoms.

Many good missionaries have laboured and spent their lives in the darkest backward places in Africa and other places to help those people.  Christians have contributed greatly down through the centuries by supporting a civilized society with education, laws and good government because those are things they strongly believe in.  I'm not saying there were not problems with respect to residential schools. Government had a policy of assimilation which turned out to be a disaster.   Some former residential school students will tell you there were some good things that came out of it and they did learn something. in spite of the negatives for many of them.  There were many positive things christianity has brought to the world in the last 2000 years..

Edited June 24, 2017 by blackbird

[Argus]

17 hours ago, Benz said:

 One thing I am pretty sure of, if there were non aboriginal humans living here before the current aboriginals arrived, they were not many and I doubt very much they were claiming the whole americas as their country.

It's pretty safe to say the aboriginals were not immigrants. Although I am sure few of them were immigrants sometimes migrating from one tribe to another for whatever reasons.

They migrated into whatever territory they were strong enough to keep or take, and if there were other people there already then they conquered (slaughtered) them and took their land for their own. Genocide was not something the natives had a moral problem with. But you won't ever find them being condemned for their own wars of conquest, only pitied for losing wars of conquest to us.

[blackbird]

I believe anthropologists say North American aboriginals came across the Bering Sea from Siberia or Mongolia.  I believe they have verified the connection with DNA testing.

[jacee]

On 2017-6-23 at 1:31 PM, Wilber said:

At what point did he say that the Crown shouldn't respect its treaties and alliances with indigenous peoples?

His disrespect was very clear. 

He besmirches 'the honour of the Crown'.

The Queen will not be amused.

[jacee]

On 2017-6-23 at 1:07 PM, blackbird said:

The poor Governor General slipped up and mis-spoke a politically incorrect line.  It didn't fit with the first nations and lefty narrative so he had to apologize and speak the correct phrases.

It didn't fit with reality.

Sounding like a juvenile spouting 'white pride' slogans isn't very appealing in the Queen's representative.

[jacee]

On 2017-6-24 at 2:41 AM, blackbird said:

A lot of religious people sacrificed much of their lives to try to give young people an education in religious schools, probably without much compensation.  Freedom of religion is a long-established historical part of our Constitution and society.  I doubt that will change anytime soon.  I would say the real threat to society is secular humanism which is anti-family and anti a lot of things and pro marijuana for example,  none of which is good for society.  If you want to see how atheism and humanism has damaged society, just look at the former Soviet Union and Russia.  They have a huge crime problem and society is a mess. Plus they are ruled by a totalitarian dictator.   Western European society is going down too.  Many churches in England have been closed or are being turned into mosques.  Look at the problems they have now.

Actually it was the communist atheists in the former Soviet Union and China that murdered hundreds of millions of people and trampled on everyone's basic freedoms.

Many good missionaries have laboured and spent their lives in the darkest backward places in Africa and other places to help those people.  Christians have contributed greatly down through the centuries by supporting a civilized society with education, laws and good government because those are things they strongly believe in.  I'm not saying there were not problems with respect to residential schools. Government had a policy of assimilation which turned out to be a disaster.   Some former residential school students will tell you there were some good things that came out of it and they did learn something. in spite of the negatives for many of them.  There were many positive things christianity has brought to the world in the last 2000 years..

Isn't missionary work always about assimilation?

[blackbird]

14 hours ago, jacee said:

Isn't missionary work always about assimilation?

No.  It's not always about assimilation.

It's far more complicated than that.  I just looked up the definition in the Oxford and assimilation is the absorption of a minority culture for example into the culture of the majority.  Missionaries did not and do not today see themselves as simply trying to assimilate people into a majority culture simply because there might be no other culture in existence in the places they go to.   Radio and television evangelists for example are broadcasting on the air constantly and not trying to assimilate anyone into a dominant culture. 

Canada was different after the Europeans settled here and the population grew. 

When the Canadian government brought in residential schools, their policy was assimilation.  They wanted to assimilate natives into the dominant culture of the country.  They gave the task to several church denominations to do it through the residential schools. 

At the same time, the schools taught religion from the perspective of their own denomination.  I would guess the denominations saw this as a missionary work.  So assimilation and missionary efforts were combined in the residential school system.  Denominations also built churches in various communities including villages which were mainly native peoples.

However, missionaries who travel to foreign countries in the past, such as Africa, were more likely doing strictly missionary work.  There was no dominant culture in those places to assimilate the natives into.  But they were taking the message of the gospel to what was considered as heathen peoples, who may have had their own tribal culture and religion with witch doctors and alien practices, alien to European and what was considered as civilized thinking.  So in those places, I think the only purpose of missionaries was to convert the natives to the christian religion. 

If you look back in history to the middle east and central Asia, when Islam spread through that part of the world, they of course were trying to convert the populations to Islam and were successful to a large extent.  I am just reading a history of the world now which covers a lot of that.

I hope that makes sense.

Edited June 26, 2017 by blackbird

[Wilber]

2 hours ago, jacee said:

His disrespect was very clear. 

He besmirches 'the honour of the Crown'.

The Queen will not be amused.

I disagree. When you get right down to it, the original Europeans weren't immigrants either. 

[OftenWrong]

On 2017-06-21 at 4:18 PM, Argus said:

No one could ever agree on what to do with it. Trudeau solved that problem by ignoring what most people wanted to do in favor of giving it to the natives, er, aborigines, er, indigenous peoples.

"Indians" is fine.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/i-5/FullText.html