Native complaints about Canada's 150th

[jacee]

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

Sounds like does not equal.  And I'm of the firm opinion that my solution is better than yours.  I still don't see what the government could have done to make 21st century kids want to stay in Davis Inlet or Appawatiskat.

And in the end, they are going extinct as a culture anyway.  Better to pull a bandaid off quiickly...

Sapper, it's very disturbing that you (or any Canadian) just throw out genocidal wishes and strategies as if this is a 'joke'.

"going extinct ... anyway ... pull a bandaid off quiickly..."

You are suggesting that we destroy Indigenous cultures ... quickly.

What you are doing is advocating genocide.

That's a felony in Canada:

"318 (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years."

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-318.html

 

[Wilber]

2 hours ago, jacee said:

Sapper, it's very disturbing that you (or any Canadian) just throw out genocidal wishes and strategies as if this is a 'joke'.

"going extinct ... anyway ... pull a bandaid off quiickly..."

You are suggesting that we destroy Indigenous cultures ... quickly.

What you are doing is advocating genocide.

That's a felony in Canada:

"318 (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years."

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-318.html

 

Where did he say all indigenous people should be killed?

[Hal 9000]

You wanna know what Jacee?  I've been to FN ceremonies..and actually participated in them too.  They were in larger areas, cities.  They were on reserves that were adjacent to cities and they were great events.  I've also been on many reserves that were remote, upwards of Bella Bella, and on up to Prince Rupert and the Metacatla reserve.  They had nothing, nothing that even remotely resembles culture.  If you think the people of Attawapaskat and such are enjoying or expressing their culture more than the FN's in Tsawassen, Osoyoos or near some other actual city you're dead wrong - and of course you are.  I've seen more FN's culture near cities where they can actually survive...no thrive.  

What do you envision happening on these remote reserves?  Do you envision daily ceremonies, the medicine man, hunting parties, traditional bone fishing, women sewing animal hyde shoes, "Dances with wolves" style Buffalo Hunt, stories of how grandfather is now a great bear or whale?  Yeah, I've watched the CBC too.  

Reality is; these people have lost nearly all culture already.  They live in construction trailers (portables like we complain the schools sometimes get) and if they have a wooden house, chances are, they've removed the walls for firewood, then junked the insulation.  Their food is either frozen or in a can, their water sucks.  They can't fish or hunt their traditional way, they can barely do it the modern way.  These people would not survive a winter in the northern provinces or on the prairie without government help.  I wont get into the drugs, alcohol, abuse, corruption, rape, molestation etc again.  

My point is simply that bringing them into society, might be the best thing for them and their "culture". 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, jacee said:

Sapper, it's very disturbing that you (or any Canadian) just throw out genocidal wishes and strategies as if this is a 'joke'.

"going extinct ... anyway ... pull a bandaid off quiickly..."

You are suggesting that we destroy Indigenous cultures ... quickly.

What you are doing is advocating genocide.

That's a felony in Canada:

"318 (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years."

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-318.html

 

If you're going to talk about stuff, it's better that you aren't ridiculous about it.  Really, it is.

[jacee]

2 hours ago, Wilber said:

Where did he say all indigenous people should be killed?

Irrelevant.

Genocide is destruction of culture groups.

Killing is only one way.

[jacee]

2 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

You wanna know what Jacee?  I've been to FN ceremonies..and actually participated in them too.  They were in larger areas, cities.  They were on reserves that were adjacent to cities and they were great events.  I've also been on many reserves that were remote, upwards of Bella Bella, and on up to Prince Rupert and the Metacatla reserve.  They had nothing, nothing that even remotely resembles culture.  If you think the people of Attawapaskat and such are enjoying or expressing their culture more than the FN's in Tsawassen, Osoyoos or near some other actual city you're dead wrong - and of course you are.  I've seen more FN's culture near cities where they can actually survive...no thrive.  

What do you envision happening on these remote reserves?  Do you envision daily ceremonies, the medicine man, hunting parties, traditional bone fishing, women sewing animal hyde shoes, "Dances with wolves" style Buffalo Hunt, stories of how grandfather is now a great bear or whale?  Yeah, I've watched the CBC too.  

Reality is; these people have lost nearly all culture already.  They live in construction trailers (portables like we complain the schools sometimes get) and if they have a wooden house, chances are, they've removed the walls for firewood, then junked the insulation.  Their food is either frozen or in a can, their water sucks.  They can't fish or hunt their traditional way, they can barely do it the modern way.  These people would not survive a winter in the northern provinces or on the prairie without government help.  I wont get into the drugs, alcohol, abuse, corruption, rape, molestation etc again.  

My point is simply that bringing them into society, might be the best thing for them and their "culture". 

I understand and share your genuine concern, Hal, but you cannot force them.

Has anyone offered anything?

If they leave their land, what happens to their land rights? Will the government take their land? (Of course.)

Are they getting any revenues from activity on their lands, or does the government take that too ... and give them only enough to keep them desperately destitute? (Likely)

Do they have outstanding land claims that the government won't settle? (Likely)

Attawapiskat has diamonds on their traditional lands.

DeBeers rakes it in and they get a pittance.

Frankly, I'm suspicious that a lot of remote communities are in resource rich areas and suffering from intentional government  neglect to intentionally 'starve them out'.

Certainly wouldn't be the first time.

Who's gonna know?

Another insidious face of genocide. 

And it is always about the government's greed for their land and it's resources.

It just isn't as simple as making them move.

Edited July 7, 2017 by jacee

[Hal 9000]

15 minutes ago, jacee said:

You cannot force them.

You mean physically or from a moral standpoint?

[jacee]

10 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

You mean physically or from a moral standpoint?

I mean legally.

Our governments have a long and ugly history of forced removals and relocations of Indigenous Peoples to take their land for our purposes: settlement, railroads, resources, etc.

 

[Hal 9000]

2 minutes ago, jacee said:

I mean legally.

Our governments have a long and ugly history of forced removals and relocations of Indigenous Peoples to take their land for our purposes: settlement, railroads, resources, etc.

 

Maybe instead of the charade we all play -- the charade that you play a major role in, maybe the government and the FN's should have a grown-up discussion about their/and our futures.  

[jacee]

11 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Maybe instead of the charade we all play -- the charade that you play a major role in, maybe the government and the FN's should have a grown-up discussion about their/and our futures.  

I wish that was possible, but our governments always deal with them dishonestly.

Because all they want is their land and resources ... without any costs attached. 

Politicians are only in it for a four year stint, and to try to be reelected. They don't take on difficult and controversial issues like that. Few Indigenous people vote, so it buys politicians nothing.

The Senate maybe ...?

[Hal 9000]

1 minute ago, jacee said:

I wish that was possible, but our governments always deal with them dishonestly.

Because all they want is their land and resources ... without any costs attached. 

Politicians are only in it for a four year stint, and to try to be reelected. They don't take on difficult and controversial issues like that. Few Indigenous people vote, so it buys politicians nothing.

The Senate maybe ...?

TheFN's engage in their fair share of extortion too, lets be honest here.

Edited July 7, 2017 by Hal 9000

[jacee]

6 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

TheFN's engage in their fair share of extortion too, lets be honest here.

I'm not sure what you're referring to, but from your descriptions of remote FN's, they're not gaining much from it.

And across the board, FN services are still underfunded compared to ours.

Edited July 7, 2017 by jacee
Add

[Hal 9000]

6 minutes ago, jacee said:

I'm not sure what you're referring to, but from your descriptions of remote FN's, they're not gaining much from it.

And across the board, FN services are still underfunded compared to ours.

Of course they're underfunded - our entire medical and social system is underfunded, that's the Fkg point.  Where is the money ($1 Trillion) gonna come from to bring the Indian Bands up to an acceptable level?  Do you know?  Do you care?

[jacee]

9 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Of course they're underfunded - our entire medical and social system is underfunded, that's the Fkg point.  Where is the money ($1 Trillion) gonna come from to bring the Indian Bands up to an acceptable level?  Do you know?  Do you care?

Fossil fuel industry subsidies of $1b/year would help.

I'm sure there are many other political payoffs ... er ... I mean unnecessary business and industry subsidies that we could put to better use.

[Hal 9000]

2 minutes ago, jacee said:

Fossil fuel industry subsidies of $1b/year would help.

I'm sure there are many other political payoffs ... er ... I mean unnecessary business and industry subsidies that we could put to better use.

Yeah, I really don't think you understand the enormity of what you want.

[jacee]

3 hours ago, bcsapper said:

If you're going to talk about stuff, it's better that you aren't ridiculous about it.  Really, it is.

And you.

I don't have to explain to you why advocating destruction of Indigenous cultures isn't 'right'.

It's illegal.

You might want to cool it.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, jacee said:

And you.

I don't have to explain to you why advocating destruction of Indigenous cultures isn't 'right'.

It's illegal.

You might want to cool it.

No, I don't think so.  I don't try and pretend you have said something you haven't in order to win an argument. 

In fact, the arguing is the fun.  Winning doesn't matter so much.  Not so much that I would make something up, anyway.

Edited July 7, 2017 by bcsapper

[jacee]

18 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Yeah, I really don't think you understand the enormity of what you want.

These are enormous human needs, FN needs, and our needs, as you pointed out.

While politicians are paying off their political backers with bogus 'subsidies' ... with our money.

[jacee]

Just now, bcsapper said:

No, I don't think so.  I don't try and pretend you have said something you haven't in order to win an argument. 

In fact, the arguing is the fun.  Winning doesn't matter so much.  Not so much that I would make someting up, anyway.

Then please explain what you meant by this:

"And in the end, they are going extinct as a culture anyway.  Better to pull a bandaid off quiickly..."

[Guest]

1 minute ago, jacee said:

Then please explain what you meant by this:

"And in the end, they are going extinct as a culture anyway.  Better to pull a bandaid off quiickly..."

By allowing it to happen. By not forestalling it with more good money after bad, when it just extends their torture anyway. 

Really, did you think I was advocating gunplay?

[Hal 9000]

16 minutes ago, jacee said:

These are enormous human needs, FN needs, and our needs, as you pointed out.

While politicians are paying off their political backers with bogus 'subsidies' ... with our money.

This is that same stupid argument that if the politicians can give themselves a $5000 raise, why can't they give (insert victimized union worker) a 20% raise?  

Ok, let me put it this way; in order to bring every reserve up to date as far as medical, housing, education, social services and all the other things that would be needed, each and every (from newborn on up to 100 YO's) Canadian would owe $30,000.  A young family of 5 would owe $150,000.  That's before yearly upkeep of those reserves.  Yearly upkeep to those standards would add a couple thousand more to the bill. 

Edited July 7, 2017 by Hal 9000

[jacee]

22 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

By allowing it to happen. By not forestalling it with more good money after bad, when it just extends their torture anyway. 

Really, did you think I was advocating gunplay?

First, Indigenous cultures in Canada are not going extinct. There is a strong resurgence happening since the 'cultural' genocide of the 'Indian' Residential Schools ended. Young adults of today are the first generations not directly impacted by those heinous schools, but they know and experienced how it affected their parents, grandparents, etc. They are strong, educated and determined to reclaim their cultural practices and languages. The birth rate has increased substantially.

Second,

"By allowing it to happen. By not forestalling it with more good money after bad,"

You are suggesting underfunding them to the point of deprivation, so they 'cease to exist'?

That's (c) in the list of the acts of genocide:

Article II

In the present 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.

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CrimeOfGenocide.aspx

Intentional neglect and deprivation is still genocide.

Be careful what you advocate.

Edited July 7, 2017 by jacee
Add

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, jacee said:

First, Indigenous cultures in Canada are not going extinct. There is a strong resurgence happening since the 'cultural' genocide of the 'Indian' Residential Schools ended. Young adults of today are the first generations not directly impacted by those heinous schools, but they know and experienced how it affected their parents, grandparents, etc. They are strong, educated and determined to reclaim their cultural practices and languages. The birth rate has increased substantially.

Second,

"By allowing it to happen. By not forestalling it with more good money after bad,"

You are suggesting underfunding them to the point of deprivation, so they 'cease to exist'?

That's (c) in the list of the acts of genocide:

Article II

In the present 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.

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CrimeOfGenocide.aspx

Intentional neglect and deprivation is still genocide.

No it's not.  Or should I say, refusing to fund them is not intentional neglect and deprivation if you are willing to relocate them somewhere where they can actually have a life, and their children don't sniff glue until they commit suicide.  

Edited July 7, 2017 by bcsapper

[jacee]

Just now, bcsapper said:

No it's not.  

Yes it is:

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

[Guest]

Just now, jacee said:

Yes it is:

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

Yeah, I'm actually talking about doing the opposite. I'd like to avoid their physical destruction if possible.