Native complaints about Canada's 150th

[herples]

On 7/3/2017 at 0:25 PM, Argus said:

The idea is not to give them more welfare. The idea is to wean them off welfare. Most of these isolated reserves will never and can never be anything like economically self-sustaining. There is no work there for the people because the reserves, unlike towns and cities, did not spring up naturally in response to some need for people nearby (ie, farming communities, mining communities, lumber communities, communities along river transport corridors, fishing communities, etc.)

 

In order to remove them from "welfare" they need money injected into their reserve in order to afford basic services that we have here in the city. These places are not economically self sustaining due to mental health and lack of infrastructure. The government chose to pay the Natives, pay them more to fix their issues. Cutting off the money will only exacerbate the situation.

[Hal 9000]

27 minutes ago, herples said:

In order to remove them from "welfare" they need money injected into their reserve in order to afford basic services that we have here in the city. These places are not economically self sustaining due to mental health and lack of infrastructure. The government chose to pay the Natives, pay them more to fix their issues. Cutting off the money will only exacerbate the situation.

On the predeeding page there is an article about the "abuse" of FN people - a little bias as some research pointed out to me, I digress.  Anyway it shows that the Atawapiskat people were given 90$million dollars, that is on top of everything the government puts in, plus all the jobs that were created, plus the business that was generated...and look at the place...it's a dump - no hyperbole, a dump.  

So, how much money do you figure it would take to bring that reserve up to standards of "basic services" - assuming you mean health care, food, heat, water, education etc.?  Then multiply that by all the reserves in Canada.  Do you think it's doable? It would take nearly a $trillion, just to get it to the standards you're talking, and that's before upkeep.

[herples]

35 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

On the predeeding page there is an article about the "abuse" of FN people - a little bias as some research pointed out to me, I digress.  Anyway it shows that the Atawapiskat people were given 90$million dollars, that is on top of everything the government puts in, plus all the jobs that were created, plus the business that was generated...and look at the place...it's a dump - no hyperbole, a dump.  

So, how much money do you figure it would take to bring that reserve up to standards of "basic services" - assuming you mean health care, food, heat, water, education etc.?  Then multiply that by all the reserves in Canada.  Do you think it's doable? It would take nearly a $trillion, just to get it to the standards you're talking, and that's before upkeep.

90 million dollars or roughly 1% of the profit DeBeers is getting from the mine plus all royalties going to provincial government despite being right in backyard of the reserve. 

I do not know the final cost obviously it would be expensive however that expense is great due to the lack of willingness of the Canadian government to uphold their part of the treaties which is to provide services and means to the bands in exchange the natives leave their land and settle else where. That elsewhere being mostly determined by the colonial government back then. 

[Hal 9000]

3 minutes ago, herples said:

90 million dollars or roughly 1% of the profit DeBeers is getting from the mine plus all royalties going to provincial government despite being right in backyard of the reserve. 

I do not know the final cost obviously it would be expensive however that expense is great due to the lack of willingness of the Canadian government to uphold their part of the treaties which is to provide services and means to the bands in exchange the natives leave their land and settle else where. That elsewhere being mostly determined by the colonial government back then. 

1% is not really the point, the point is; WE CAN NOT AFFORD TO DO WHAT YOU THINK IS RIGHT!  Do you get that?  NO! you don't do you?  Sheesh, this is why people on the right don't trust lefties with money. 

[herples]

Just now, Hal 9000 said:

1% is not really the point, the point is; WE CAN NOT AFFORD TO DO WHAT YOU THINK IS RIGHT!  Do you get that?  NO! you don't do you?  Sheesh, this is why people on the right don't trust lefties with money. 

The issue isn't lefties or righties the situation spans multiple governments throughout Canada's existence. From a mere outpost back then to cities today.  The provincial government can certainly stand to give up some of those royalties to the people affected. 

[Hal 9000]

Here's a small article about the DeBeers situation.  There are better articles that detail the money and effort put into the community, if you're inclinded (you aren't), you should seek out the info (you wont).

 

http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/attawapiskats-refusal-to-support-a-diamond-mine-misses-an-opportunity-for-better-prosperity/wcm/0213eeb9-1d60-4803-85f1-de8500589d86

[herples]

Quote

During Idle No More, Attawapiskat leaders complained about the relationship between the community and De Beers, publicly criticizing its impact and benefits agreement as insufficient for community needs. However, the solution is to seek a better agreement, not to stop production at the mine.

From your article.

DeBeers provides little money compared to what it is getting out of the mine. 

Edited July 5, 2017 by herples

[Hal 9000]

5 minutes ago, herples said:

From your article.

DeBeers provides little money compared to what it is getting out of the mine. 

IOW, The chiefs and council wasted/embezzled all the money, and rather than invest in their community and work with DeBeers, they tried extorting more and the company walked away.  Also, a company isn't going to walk away over 1 or 1.5%, if they're making that much money, so I have a hard time trusting the band's numbers.

[herples]

Just now, Hal 9000 said:

IOW, The chiefs and council wasted/embezzled all the money, and rather than invest in their community and work with DeBeers, they tried extorting more and the company walked away.  Also, a company isn't going to walk away over 1 or 1.5%, if they're making that much money, so I have a hard time trusting the band's numbers.

The report found no evidence of embezzlement just bad book keeping in a community that is practically falling apart. 

[Hal 9000]

1 minute ago, herples said:

The report found no evidence of embezzlement just bad book keeping in a community that is practically falling apart. 

Yeah, every band office just has "bad bookkeeping".  Fine, but just for a laugh, where do you think the money went?

[jacee]

23 hours ago, Accountability Now said:

I'm Metis. Does that count?

 

There was no genocide. Stop using that term. The UN doesn't recognize it as such and even the TRC doesn't go that far. 

 

What efforts have the natives put in other than the protests for more money? 

You state it needs to be collaborative but yet all I hear from that side is constant denouncing of Canada and how they are not a part of it. If they want to distance themselves then we will continue to treat them distant. 

Metis counts now.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/indigenous/landmark-supreme-court-decision-metis-non-status-indians-1.3537419

Genocide ... 

The TRC concluded that "cultural genocide" occurred in Canada, using a term more palatable to Canadians. However, according to the UN, intentional destruction of cultures is genocide:

"In the present [UN] Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

 

Certainly, Canada's intention was the destruction of Indigenous Peoples 'as such', and certainly we did some or all of the "acts" on that list.

However, the UN, or its International Courts of Justice have not characterized Canada's treatment of Indigenous Peoples as genocide because they have not been asked to comment or rule on the question of genocide in Canada.

But Canada's Truth and Reconciliation Commission was constructed under rules and procedures designed by the UN for Truth Commissions, with oversight by the International Centre for Transitional Justice.

https://www.ictj.org/our-work/regions-and-countries/canada

Do you think we should ask the International Courts to rule on that question?

 

Protests ...

When the government refuses to act appropriately, protest is a necessity. In most cases all they are asking for is what they are legally entitled to - opportunities for collaborative discussion, consultation, or negotiation instead of unilateral decisions imposed on them by our governments.

When our governments stop ducking and weaving to avoid their legal responsibilities, perhaps protests won't be as necessary.

[jacee]

8 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

Yeah, every band office just has "bad bookkeeping".  Fine, but just for a laugh, where do you think the money went?

" every"?!

That's slander. You've provided no evidence to support those accusations.

Edited July 5, 2017 by jacee

[jacee]

19 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Actually the discussion raises many tough questions about the problem Natives have had. By now these people should have come further along, with all the help and support they've received from the people of Canada over the past many years.

We should continue helping natives, but need to look at the situation realistically. It's not the success which it ought to have been. A lot of money has been thrown at it by past governments, without proper oversight. Wherever there's lots of money there's corruption, and with government money all the more so. Those of us who criticize native government and the irresponsible funding situation are in fact the ones trying to help the most poor natives.

Your assumptions are wrong: Natives in fact receive less funding per capita than we do for governance, education, health and social services.

Regarding where those funds come from, please see my post here, esp the part about Trust Funds starting with:

"Canadians who are ... "sick to death not only of hearing about the aboriginal crap, but PAYING for it" ... don't have a very good understanding of Canada, possibly because some politicians mislead them."

 

Edited July 5, 2017 by jacee
Add quote

[jacee]

17 hours ago, Argus said:

You'd think after 150 years of practice we'd be doing better at it. Instead, for some odd reason, their population continues its steady rise...

"doing better" at genocide is not something most Canadians would aspire to. :/

Typically, populations subjected to genocidal acts do rebound and grow more quickly when pressures ease. The 'Indian' Residential Schools, arguably the most physically and mentally heinous "acts", have eased up only in recent decades.

Now our governments are focusing more on legal extinction -  renegotiating treaties and including (illegal) 'extinction' clauses.

Mostly our governments just try to extinguish FN by malicious neglect, underfunding, etc.

[jacee]

15 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

Do you even understand what the complaints of "the few grumpy nonnatives are"?  I sincerely doubt it.  

I think most people are understandably appalled, disturbed and 'unsettled' by the conditions on some FN reserves.

And I think some politicians, esp Conservative ones, try to convince us that FN themselves are responsible for this.

If you fall for that malarky, you are actively avoiding the facts of 150 years of Canada's genocide, including theft of Indigenous lands and resources.

[DogOnPorch]

7 minutes ago, jacee said:

I think most people are understandably appalled, disturbed and 'unsettled' by the conditions on some FN reserves.

And I think some politicians, esp Conservative ones, try to convince us that FN themselves are responsible for this.

If you fall for that malarky, you are actively avoiding the facts of 150 years of Canada's genocide, including theft of Indigenous lands and resources.

 

Genocide? There was no genocide in Canada. But the word gets misused OFTEN.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, jacee said:

I think most people are understandably appalled, disturbed and 'unsettled' by the conditions on some FN reserves.

And I think some politicians, esp Conservative ones, try to convince us that FN themselves are responsible for this.

If you fall for that malarky, you are actively avoiding the facts of 150 years of Canada's genocide, including theft of Indigenous lands and resources.

They are certainly responsible in part.  How large a part I don't know, but choosing to live somewhere with no prospects for a successful economy makes them responsible.  Failing to account for the money they are given makes them responsible.  Failing to use that money for the betterment of all the members of the band makes them responsible.

At some point the notion that Natives can live fulfilling lives in holes like Davis Inlet or Attawapiskat in the 21st Century has to be seen to be a pie in the sky liberal fantasy.  Liberals are also responsible, of course.  Probably as much as the FN themselves.

There is no reason for any culture to survive.  Canada's goal should now be to move all FN off reserves and have them join the rest of society.  They can form part of the multicultural mosaic, and maintain their culture the same way I do, or an Ethiopian in Edmonton does, or a Japanese person in Steveston does.

 

Edited July 5, 2017 by bcsapper

[Hal 9000]

23 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

They are certainly responsible in part.  How large a part I don't know, but choosing to live somewhere with no prospects for a successful economy makes them responsible.  Failing to account for the money they are given makes them responsible.  Failing to use that money for the betterment of all the members of the band makes them responsible.

At some point the notion that Natives can live fulfilling lives in holes like Davis Inlet or Attawapiskat in the 21st Century has to be seen to be a pie in the sky liberal fantasy.  Liberals are also responsible, of course.  Probably as much as the FN themselves.

There is no reason for any culture to survive.  Canada's goal should now be to move all FN of reserves and have them join the rest of society.  They can form part of the multicultural mosaic, and maintain their culture the same way I do, or an Ethiopian in Edmonton does, or a Japanese person in Steveston does.

 

I think Jacee is trying to argue that FN's are too lazy for fend for themselves, too far back that they can't function in society, too dumb to use their money for the betterment of the band or even account for it.  I think her idea is treat them like children and instead of letting them grow up, give them their allowance and when they pretend they lost it, just give them more.

Jacee will be the parent who has a 35YO son working at McDonalds and living in her basement.

[Goddess]

It can be done.

 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-magazine/clarence-louie-feature/article18913980/

[Hal 9000]

16 minutes ago, Goddess said:

It can be done.

 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-magazine/clarence-louie-feature/article18913980/

That's a good read - long, but good.  The big "take away", i suppose, is that this successful chief doesn't seem to buy into the helpless "Indians are victims...and should remain that way" mentality.  It makes me think of "what could've been" for the Attawapaskat people if they had better leadership and foresight.

I hope Jacee gets something from this article. 

[DogOnPorch]

21 minutes ago, Goddess said:

It can be done.

 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-magazine/clarence-louie-feature/article18913980/

 

The OK Valley tribes have some really good business ideas. The Penticton band has real estate, a golf course as well as a small mall to bring in the cash. I think they get a % of the airports revenue, as well. Probably other bits I've missed...

[Argus]

14 hours ago, herples said:

In order to remove them from "welfare" they need money injected into their reserve in order to afford basic services that we have here in the city. These places are not economically self sustaining due to mental health and lack of infrastructure. The government chose to pay the Natives, pay them more to fix their issues. Cutting off the money will only exacerbate the situation.

You are ignoring my point. Calling it 'injecting money' is just another way of saying 'more welfare'. These reserves, many of them, will never, and can never be economically self-sustaining. The residents should be moved to a location where there are jobs available.

[Argus]

2 hours ago, jacee said:

"doing better" at genocide is not something most Canadians would aspire to. :/

Typically, populations subjected to genocidal acts do rebound and grow more quickly when pressures ease. The 'Indian' Residential Schools, arguably the most physically and mentally heinous "acts", have eased up only in recent decades.

Now our governments are focusing more on legal extinction -  renegotiating treaties and including (illegal) 'extinction' clauses.

Mostly our governments just try to extinguish FN by malicious neglect, underfunding, etc.

 The only reasonable future the natives have is to assimilate into the mainstream. Else they'll be stuck out in reserves getting drunk, doing drugs, and wasting their lives. 

[DogOnPorch]

My wife lived in Rankin Inlet as a younger person for a few years...one of the most depressing places on the planet. It isn't a reserve, either...it was a copper mine until 1962. But the natives stayed for some reason. Couldn't say WHY....

[Accountability Now]

4 hours ago, jacee said:

Metis counts now.

Jacce....just to be clear. You commented about a bunch of grumpy white guys complaining, so I asked if being Metis counts....as in its ok that I complain because I'm Metis. Are you saying its ok for a Metis person to complain but not a white person even though they have the same argument?

4 hours ago, jacee said:

The TRC concluded that "cultural genocide" occurred in Canada, using a term more palatable to Canadians.

And is the TRC some new ruling body? Does the UN recognize this cultural genocide? Does any other legal jurisdiction recognize it?

4 hours ago, jacee said:

 

"In the present [UN] Convention,

You should stop at this point and ask yourself why you are quoting the UN definition for genocide when the UN has never come close to calling it a genocide. 

4 hours ago, jacee said:

 

 genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

 

Certainly, Canada's intention was the destruction of Indigenous Peoples 'as such', and certainly we did some or all of the "acts" on that list.

Your loosey goosey interpretation is what fails you. By this definition, any war would fit into the category of genocide. Did any natives ever kill white people. Oh...that would be genocide as per part (a).  Did any native ever cause any serious bodily harm to white person. That would be genocide.  

There are reasons that people who aren't just google lawyers like yourself actually make these decisions and interpretations as to what is and isn't genocide. So again....you saying something happened doesn't make it so. 

 

4 hours ago, jacee said:

Do you think we should ask the International Courts to rule on that question?

Do you think it hasn't been asked yet? Or discussed? And what have they said up to this point? NOTHING because it wasn't genocide. Even the TRC steered away from calling it that and carefully chose 'cultural genocide' as that was as close as they could possibly get. 

So please....contact the international courts and let me know how that works for you.

 

5 hours ago, jacee said:

Protests ...

When the government refuses to act appropriately, protest is a necessity. In most cases all they are asking for is what they are legally entitled to - opportunities for collaborative discussion, consultation, or negotiation instead of unilateral decisions imposed on them by our governments.

When our governments stop ducking and weaving to avoid their legal responsibilities, perhaps protests won't be as necessary.

They can protest all they want. My point is that when the point of their protest is to emphasize how rotten Canada is and how they want to distance themselves from us then they should not be surprised when we actually do distance ourselves from them.