Jump to content

Trudeau vows help after Indigenous kids' unmarked graves found, but offers no details


Army Guy

Recommended Posts

I came across this on a conservative forum, and it's a pretty damned sad thing to acknowledge that a small right wing online newspaper has a more accurate and coherent explanation about the whole residential school graves than in any mainstream media report I've seen to date. It calls out the inaccuracies of the media reports and has a graph from the truth and reconciliation commission report detailing the most common causes of death at residential schools. This report has the context all the mainstream media reports have lacked.

When it comes to the coverage of graves identified near residential schools in three First Nations communities, the legacy media in Canada has done a tremendous disservice to all Canadians – especially First Nations. 

They have created a moral panic, and continue to fan the flames of racial division.

This panic came to a breaking point over the weekend, when prominent statues were knocked over and at least 25 churches in Western Canada were either vandalized or completely burnt down. 

To make matters worse, several prominent commentators, including politicians, journalists, professors, lawyers and activists, excused the behaviour of the mob, explained away and justified these riots, and in some cases, even cheered them on. 

https://tnc.news/2021/07/07/six-things-the-media-got-wrong-about-the-graves-found-near-residential-schools/?fbclid=IwAR1hBFiREnGZhWU1VbuOa4D6LrQpCh7MLcgwT3atl3NJj5Q6s4sSegl65s4

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/31/2021 at 6:40 PM, Army Guy said:

I've been watching this for the last few days, and i find it very very disturbing and it leaves nothing more than questions, were they found in a mass graves or buried individually in marked graves or unmarked... How did each one of those children die ? and Who is reasonable the church , government who ? and if there was any wrong doing  are we going to hunt them down and bring them to justice .

My entire life i was left to believe nothing like this could happen in Canada, i mean i heard rumors, all my time in the army spent in the worlds shit holes, i always thought we as Canadians were better people than those that did evil shit to each other in conflicts, we had better morals and values, i am starting to think not...Canada may be no better than they are... 215 children is a little hard to explain, and i'm guessing this is only the beginning... i hope that this is fully investigated, and if any wrong doing is found, then they be brought to justice, and their names recorded for history to be forever judged... 

I hope that the survivors get a huge payout, along with the families that lost a child... if we can give 10 million to a terrorist, what do we give an innocent child...   

Giving the track record of the church  and children.....id place my bet on the church

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There will be many sites with unmarked graves discovered. All of them will not be beside the locations of former residential schools. All over North America, for instance, there are unmarked graves of natives slaughtered by other native tribes as well. There are unmarked graves in the hundreds of "boot hills" all over the west, with crude wooden markers disappearing decades ago. There are thousands of unmarked graves of slaves adjacent to cotton plantations. They are a reflection of another time. There are tens of thousands of unmarked burial sites in Europe where plague victims were thrown.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/10/2021 at 7:38 AM, Shady said:

His goons won’t allow any questions now. 
 

 

Trudeau's borg only allow questions from approved mainstream media that are under the control of the Liberal party.  Every public appearance is very tightly controlled.  This is not democracy but it is Marxism.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/10/2021 at 8:08 AM, Antichrist said:

Giving the track record of the church  and children.....id place my bet on the church

You of course would believe the red power activists and their non-native woke supporters.  You will likely never know the details about these so-called unmarked graves because that is not what the red power activists and woke people want.  Many probably had wooden markers or crosses that just rotted away.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will never hear or read the true stories of the 100 or 150 years of residential schools because that history has been hijacked by the radical red power activists and their supporters, many of whom are politicians, some time ago.  Senator Lynn Beyak tried to question their narrative which came from the so-called Truth and Reconciliation committee of the Senate, but was shot down.  The residential school policy of forcefully removing aboriginal kids from their homes was a mistake.  But not everyone working in residential schools were criminals or abusers I am sure.  There were likely many normal people who sincerely tried to do a good job.  All that has been undercut by the abusers and the forced removal of children from their homes.  In the TRC hearings only the worst accounts over a 130 year history were allowed. 

The bad things that went on (cases of sexual / physical abuse) have been exploited to the extreme to discredit the whole of white man's society and government by the activists. 

Yet it is known many natives died from diseases.  A large number died from tuberculosis (TB).  Unfortunately, Europeans did inadvertently bring diseases to north America and natives had little or no immunity.  That is one reason many died.  They also had very poor hygiene and a lack of sanitation.  This contributed to the spread of disease and death.  It is unfortunate disease was spread from Europe to natives in north America but mankind has always migrated and there have always been diseases around.  Also, little was known about diseases in the earlier period. A large portion of Europe died from the black plague in the middle ages.  I think there are reports that was carried from the Orient.  That is part of the history of mankind.  We can't change it.

 Now the activists have developed their propaganda tools and the unmarked graves have become the latest tool in their arsenal against colonization and white supremacy.  Trudeau has described Canada as a country of systemic racism, but will not call the burning down of churches a hate crime.  What would he call it if it were mosques that were vandalized or burned down?  Of course it would be a hate crime. 

 The unmarked graves are portrayed as proof of genocide without a shred of evidence.   It is all about increasing their power for land claims, compensation for all kinds of things and reparations for white man coming to north America.

Edited by blackbird
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are historically inaccurate narratives about residential schools, Sir John A. MacDonald, and falsehoods about other figures and events allowed by current governments to set public policy?   Conrad Black calls out the inaccuracies, but as usual these days the loudest and most radical voices drown out the truth and the public is cheated: 

https://apple.news/AlBlLoximQ6mypRpbEP-g_A

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/1/2021 at 7:55 AM, Michael Hardner said:

I was thinking about a moment like this at the time Gord Downie was naively praising Trudeau for his work on aboriginal issues, on the last stage of his life...

It's evil and mundane mediocrity all mixed together causing this and we allow it to happen.

Downie is responsible for one of the biggest fabrications about residential schools.  The Secret Path is a tissue of lies and he knew it as he was given all the relevant documentation - facts about Chanie.  He chose to ignore the truth.  Instead he invented a story he felt he could sell and to our shame it did.  Of all the children he could have picked that indeed suffered at a residential schools it is still a mystery to me why he picked Chanie and why he lied about how his death actually came about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/3/2021 at 6:21 AM, Zeitgeist said:

No genocide was committed and no proof of murder exists for any of the dead in these graveyards.  These are media events choreographed for the main purpose of disparaging Canada, extracting more money from taxpayers, and making Canadians who didn’t start residential schools feel badly about themselves.  Anti-Canadian vandals are destroying the country and must be stopped or our leaders must be sent packing.  Violence is being permitted and property is being destroyed without consequence.  Acts of hate against religious groups are being overlooked.  What are the police doing to stop this?  What are our governments doing to end this?  It appears that nothing is sacred.  Religious symbols are desecrated.  Images of our head of state are openly toppled.  
https://apple.news/Aw9Q1KOcrSlm0zvHLz3dAtQ

https://apple.news/AjtiapemYQLK9zec2rqvImg

From the time the first story broke about the so-called 'discoveries' so close to Canada Day, I believed and still do that this was a well-timed, well-planned event by activists within FN communities designed solely to grab headlines and with the complicity of the media milk them for all they could.  I've read the entire TRC report. These grave sites have been know for decades yet nothing was done about them until now?

The media ate this up publishing article after article that only regurgitated what was already in the news.  It took FN communities themselves actually admitting that these graves sites were identified long ago to finally quell some of the uproar much to the dissatisfaction of the more extreme activists.  

First Nations and the media had an opportunity to advance the cause of reconciliation and ignored it in favor of erroneous headlines and outright lies. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/17/2021 at 9:46 AM, Zeitgeist said:

Why are historically inaccurate narratives about residential schools, Sir John A. MacDonald, and falsehoods about other figures and events allowed by current governments to set public policy?   Conrad Black calls out the inaccuracies, but as usual these days the loudest and most radical voices drown out the truth and the public is cheated: 

https://apple.news/AlBlLoximQ6mypRpbEP-g_A

From the link: 

"the principal attitude of successive authorities in Canada to Indigenous people was patronizing, feckless, ill-considered, and generally ineffectual benignity. We have to make up for our mistakes, our condescension, and at times our nastiness,"

Agreed.

"but not for evil intent and particularly not genocidal ambitions of any kind."

Disagree.  The goal was to eliminate the "savage" and "heathen" practices and beliefs of indigenous people, to make them "white" enough to fit in.  If it's evil of ISIS to desire to eliminate the practices and beliefs of anyone not Muslim under their control, it is no less evil of the government to have that goal for indigenous.

Unless you think ISIS should be considered patronizing, feckless, ill-considered, and benign, and given a pass on their cruelty towards anyone they consider not Muslim enough to fit in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dialamah said:

From the link: 

"the principal attitude of successive authorities in Canada to Indigenous people was patronizing, feckless, ill-considered, and generally ineffectual benignity. We have to make up for our mistakes, our condescension, and at times our nastiness,"

Agreed.

"but not for evil intent and particularly not genocidal ambitions of any kind."

Disagree.  The goal was to eliminate the "savage" and "heathen" practices and beliefs of indigenous people, to make them "white" enough to fit in.  If it's evil of ISIS to desire to eliminate the practices and beliefs of anyone not Muslim under their control, it is no less evil of the government to have that goal for indigenous.

Unless you think ISIS should be considered patronizing, feckless, ill-considered, and benign, and given a pass on their cruelty towards anyone they consider not Muslim enough to fit in.

ISIS doesn't want to change people's culture. It simply kills those who don't believe as they do. There's no nuance here. Comparing what Canada did to natives with ISIS is intellectually bankrupt nonsense.

I doubt anyone back a hundred and fifty years ago even considered that natives HAD a culture. All they saw were bands of people who had no future unless they were educated in the ways of the new world. ISIS would not have educated them. It would simply have shot or beheaded everyone except the pretty girls, who it would have sold as sex slaves.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Argus said:

1. ISIS doesn't want to change people's culture. It simply kills those who don't believe as they do. There's no nuance here. Comparing what Canada did to natives with ISIS is intellectually bankrupt nonsense.

2.  I doubt anyone back a hundred and fifty years ago even considered that natives HAD a culture. All they saw were bands of people who had no future unless they were educated in the ways of the new world.

3.  ISIS would not have educated them. It would simply have shot or beheaded everyone except the pretty girls, who it would have sold as sex slaves.

 

1. What is culture, eh?  Beliefs and practices - religious or not.  ISIS wants everyone under their control to be their version of Muslim, just as Canada wanted everyone under their control to be their version of "white Canadian".  Lack of outright murder does not change the basic goal, which is to eliminate other culture, aka beliefs and practices common to that culture.

2.  Whether or not they *saw* a culture is irrelevant.  

3.  How many Indigenous people died as a direct result of the Canadian governments policies?  In the residential school it was upwards of 70% of the kids, significantly higher than even poor non-indigenous kids at the time.

The idea was, in the words of the person who defined the goal of residential schools "Our objective is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic and there is no Indian question, and no Indian Department, that is the whole object of this Bill."

How is that any different than the goal of ISIS?  Whether by murder or forced and violent assimilation, if it's evil when ISIS does it, it was evil when Canada did it.  

BTW, those who run ISIS think they're working in the best interests of Muslims generally, saving them for Allah; perhaps we should forgive them their methods because their motivation is good, hmmm?  Sound ok to you?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

1. What is culture, eh?  Beliefs and practices - religious or not.  ISIS wants everyone under their control to be their version of Muslim, just as Canada wanted everyone under their control to be their version of "white Canadian".  Lack of outright murder does not change the basic goal, which is to eliminate other culture, aka beliefs and practices common to that culture.

2.  Whether or not they *saw* a culture is irrelevant.  

3.  How many Indigenous people died as a direct result of the Canadian governments policies?  In the residential school it was upwards of 70% of the kids, significantly higher than even poor non-indigenous kids at the time.

The idea was, in the words of the person who defined the goal of residential schools "Our objective is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic and there is no Indian question, and no Indian Department, that is the whole object of this Bill."

How is that any different than the goal of ISIS?  Whether by murder or forced and violent assimilation, if it's evil when ISIS does it, it was evil when Canada did it.  

BTW, those who run ISIS think they're working in the best interests of Muslims generally, saving them for Allah; perhaps we should forgive them their methods because their motivation is good, hmmm?  Sound ok to you?  

 

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

1. What is culture, eh?  Beliefs and practices - religious or not.  ISIS wants everyone under their control to be their version of Muslim, just as Canada wanted everyone under their control to be their version of "white Canadian".  Lack of outright murder does not change the basic goal, which is to eliminate other culture, aka beliefs and practices common to that culture.

2.  Whether or not they *saw* a culture is irrelevant.  

3.  How many Indigenous people died as a direct result of the Canadian governments policies?  In the residential school it was upwards of 70% of the kids, significantly higher than even poor non-indigenous kids at the time.

The idea was, in the words of the person who defined the goal of residential schools "Our objective is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic and there is no Indian question, and no Indian Department, that is the whole object of this Bill."

How is that any different than the goal of ISIS?  Whether by murder or forced and violent assimilation, if it's evil when ISIS does it, it was evil when Canada did it.  

BTW, those who run ISIS think they're working in the best interests of Muslims generally, saving them for Allah; perhaps we should forgive them their methods because their motivation is good, hmmm?  Sound ok to you?  

It was obvious that traditional native culture was not going to work in Canada.  We are not talking about the culture of dressing in masks and native clothing or native dancing.  That is not the problem.  The problem was natives believed in only working when they needed to.  They did not work an 8 hours day for five days a week on a certain scheduled starting and ending time.  They did not use money.   That's where the phrase "Indian time" came from.  They also wanted the modern conveniences of civilization brought by the Europeans, such as houses, appliances, and various other conveniences.  That requires a person to work in a regular job and earn money.  Who was going to pay for or provide all these things?  Also, if they could not read and write, they could not function in modern civilization.  There were only three choices.  1.  Leave them on their reserves to try to live the way they always did.   2. Totally support them with government funding and grants. or 3.  Bring them to residential schools and educate them so they could function in modern society.

Number 1. and 2. were not viable.  Number 1. was not very practical because their traditional ways of supporting themselves was disappearing and they could not afford to buy homes, and all the conveniences that white man had.  White man's civilization worked on the principle of work to earn money.  That was not the principle of native culture.  The government had to change them to the system of work for a living to support themselves and use money.   These things were alien to native culture.   Number 2 was not acceptable to the government and taxpayers because of the huge cost of supporting every native in the country forever.  That leaves only one alternative.  To educate them so they could support themselves in society, the same as non-natives did.  They would have to learn to be able to get a job and work for a living in the new world. Just leaving them uneducated was not a viable choice.

 

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, blackbird said:

It was obvious that traditional native culture was not going to work in Canada

Why not?  Plenty of people who come here maintain some of their traditions.

8 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Natives believed in only working when they needed to.

So what?   Why are people "required" to work beyond what they need to, other than that happens to be *our* culture.  That is such an ignorant thing to say.

11 minutes ago, blackbird said:

They also wanted the modern conveniences of civilization brought by the Europeans, such as houses, appliances, and various other conveniences. 

Did they?  Somehow I doubt that was an overwhelming desire on their part; in any case, why couldn't they have that and maintain their cultural traditions - potlatch, belief in whatever spirits they wanted, strong family ties, hunting and fishing for sustenance?  Why did they have to be confined to reserves, have their children taken from them, have their culture destroyed before they were allowed to have houses, and appliances and various other 'conveniences'?

14 minutes ago, blackbird said:

There was only three choices.  1.  Leave them on their reserves to try to live they way they always did.   2. Totally support them with government funding and grants. or 3.  Bring them to residential schools and educate them so they could function in modern society.

1.  They didn't "leave them on reserves"; they CONFINED them to the reserves.  They weren't allowed to leave the reserve without permission for decades; they couldn't have a job off-reserve without permission from the Indian agent; they couldn't go to university unless they renounced their "Indian" status.  Did you know that the Indian agent would threaten them with starvation to encourage them to give up their kids to go to a residential school?    

2.  What we have now is so much better eh?  We destroyed families, villages, culture and have ended up spending plenty trying to make them into 'us'.

3.  What a joke.  So many of the kids who went to residential school were so damaged when they come out that they couldn't function in the white world, or in their own world.  

Instead of making excuses, perhaps face the facts that the policies of the time have resulted in the mess we have today and the prevalence of poverty, violence and drug use/alcoholism on too many reserves.  Instead of making excuses for the past, maybe figure out what you can do to make things better today.  Pro Tip:  it doesn't involve excusing what happened in the past, or dismissing the very real problems Indigenous have today as their own fault.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dialamah said:

Why not?  Plenty of people who come here maintain some of their traditions.

So what?   Why are people "required" to work beyond what they need to, other than that happens to be *our* culture.  That is such an ignorant thing to say.

Did they?  Somehow I doubt that was an overwhelming desire on their part; in any case, why couldn't they have that and maintain their cultural traditions - potlatch, belief in whatever spirits they wanted, strong family ties, hunting and fishing for sustenance?  Why did they have to be confined to reserves, have their children taken from them, have their culture destroyed before they were allowed to have houses, and appliances and various other 'conveniences'?

1.  They didn't "leave them on reserves"; they CONFINED them to the reserves.  They weren't allowed to leave the reserve without permission for decades; they couldn't have a job off-reserve without permission from the Indian agent; they couldn't go to university unless they renounced their "Indian" status.  Did you know that the Indian agent would threaten them with starvation to encourage them to give up their kids to go to a residential school?    

2.  What we have now is so much better eh?  We destroyed families, villages, culture and have ended up spending plenty trying to make them into 'us'.

3.  What a joke.  So many of the kids who went to residential school were so damaged when they come out that they couldn't function in the white world, or in their own world.  

Instead of making excuses, perhaps face the facts that the policies of the time have resulted in the mess we have today and the prevalence of poverty, violence and drug use/alcoholism on too many reserves.  Instead of making excuses for the past, maybe figure out what you can do to make things better today.  Pro Tip:  it doesn't involve excusing what happened in the past, or dismissing the very real problems Indigenous have today as their own fault.

 

 

 

 

The problems they have with drugs, alcohol, and domestic abuse, are largely of their own making.  They have been told all along that drugs, alcohol abuse, domestic violence are the wrong way to go, but many just choose to ignore the warnings.  You can't force people not to do those things.  Blaming white man for all the problems is the the way of shifting the blame, but not everyone buys it.  The government spends billions of dollars every year to help them.  But there are corrupt leaders among them to have helped themselves at the expense of their own people.  Yes there are many things they have to accept responsibility for and stop blaming others.

Also, they could not support themselves on their traditional ways of making a living for a variety of complex reasons.  They could not survive by just working when they wanted to.  The world changed and the old way of life was no longer sustainable.  Why are you in denial?  If you really want to know the answers as to why they could not remain in their old way of life after the arrival of Europeans and settlement, you can do some research yourself.  It is simply a fact of how history developed.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the past, taxpayers have already been tapped for $3.3B with respect to residential schools and their "issues", real or imagined. I hope this isn't a train to more gravy but being POTawa it almost certainly will be. TrootOWE will see to that.

Edited by RedDog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dialamah said:

Why not?  Plenty of people who come here maintain some of their traditions.

So what?   Why are people "required" to work beyond what they need to, other than that happens to be *our* culture.  That is such an ignorant thing to say.

Did they?  Somehow I doubt that was an overwhelming desire on their part; in any case, why couldn't they have that and maintain their cultural traditions - potlatch, belief in whatever spirits they wanted, strong family ties, hunting and fishing for sustenance?  Why did they have to be confined to reserves, have their children taken from them, have their culture destroyed before they were allowed to have houses, and appliances and various other 'conveniences'?

1.  They didn't "leave them on reserves"; they CONFINED them to the reserves.  They weren't allowed to leave the reserve without permission for decades; they couldn't have a job off-reserve without permission from the Indian agent; they couldn't go to university unless they renounced their "Indian" status.  Did you know that the Indian agent would threaten them with starvation to encourage them to give up their kids to go to a residential school?    

2.  What we have now is so much better eh?  We destroyed families, villages, culture and have ended up spending plenty trying to make them into 'us'.

3.  What a joke.  So many of the kids who went to residential school were so damaged when they come out that they couldn't function in the white world, or in their own world.  

Instead of making excuses, perhaps face the facts that the policies of the time have resulted in the mess we have today and the prevalence of poverty, violence and drug use/alcoholism on too many reserves.  Instead of making excuses for the past, maybe figure out what you can do to make things better today.  Pro Tip:  it doesn't involve excusing what happened in the past, or dismissing the very real problems Indigenous have today as their own fault.

 

 

 

 

Nobody said they can't have their traditional cultures, providing they do not break the laws of Canada.  Canada is sovereign over the whole country and all people are subject to the laws and authorities that govern Canada.   People are free to have their own traditions as long as they don't run afoul of the laws which are designed to protect everyone.   As far as I know laws against potlatches were abolished long ago.  But potlatches can cause serious problems if you look into it. In non-native society, everyone has to work in a regular job in order to pay for the cost of living.  This was a change that many natives found hard to accept or adjust to.  Their old way of life disappeared and it was necessary to adjust to the times. Their tradition was only to work when it was needed for harvesting food, while the women did much of the day-to-day work at home.   Money was not a part of life as I already explained.   In modern civilization, most people must work in a steady job 8 hrs a day and five days a week to earn money to support their families.  Some never did accept that and live in poverty or  on welfare and government handouts.  Add drugs, alcohol and domestic abuse to that and you end up with the mess many found themselves in and prisons with an excessive number of aboriginals in them.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dialamah said:

Why not?  Plenty of people who come here maintain some of their traditions.

So what?   Why are people "required" to work beyond what they need to, other than that happens to be *our* culture.  That is such an ignorant thing to say.

Did they?  Somehow I doubt that was an overwhelming desire on their part; in any case, why couldn't they have that and maintain their cultural traditions - potlatch, belief in whatever spirits they wanted, strong family ties, hunting and fishing for sustenance?  Why did they have to be confined to reserves, have their children taken from them, have their culture destroyed before they were allowed to have houses, and appliances and various other 'conveniences'?

1.  They didn't "leave them on reserves"; they CONFINED them to the reserves.  They weren't allowed to leave the reserve without permission for decades; they couldn't have a job off-reserve without permission from the Indian agent; they couldn't go to university unless they renounced their "Indian" status.  Did you know that the Indian agent would threaten them with starvation to encourage them to give up their kids to go to a residential school?    

2.  What we have now is so much better eh?  We destroyed families, villages, culture and have ended up spending plenty trying to make them into 'us'.

3.  What a joke.  So many of the kids who went to residential school were so damaged when they come out that they couldn't function in the white world, or in their own world.  

Instead of making excuses, perhaps face the facts that the policies of the time have resulted in the mess we have today and the prevalence of poverty, violence and drug use/alcoholism on too many reserves.  Instead of making excuses for the past, maybe figure out what you can do to make things better today.  Pro Tip:  it doesn't involve excusing what happened in the past, or dismissing the very real problems Indigenous have today as their own fault.

 

 

 

 

You don’t cite facts.  70% of children died?   What?   Also, “Indians” could go on to higher education and costs are covered.  It was possible to leave the reserve, but you couldn’t retain status or double dip as happens today, enjoying the tax breaks, free land, and benefits of Indian status while also holding down western-style jobs that pay, yet also being free to fish and hunt without the restrictions that non-Indigenous face.   Yes some of these rights changed over time, but it’s a sweet deal today for Indigenous, who receive more privileges than any ethnicity in Canada.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, dialamah said:

From the link: 

"the principal attitude of successive authorities in Canada to Indigenous people was patronizing, feckless, ill-considered, and generally ineffectual benignity. We have to make up for our mistakes, our condescension, and at times our nastiness,"

Agreed.

"but not for evil intent and particularly not genocidal ambitions of any kind."

Disagree.  The goal was to eliminate the "savage" and "heathen" practices and beliefs of indigenous people, to make them "white" enough to fit in.  If it's evil of ISIS to desire to eliminate the practices and beliefs of anyone not Muslim under their control, it is no less evil of the government to have that goal for indigenous.

Unless you think ISIS should be considered patronizing, feckless, ill-considered, and benign, and given a pass on their cruelty towards anyone they consider not Muslim enough to fit in.

These are strange comparisons.  I don’t know where these notions come from, but it’s the sort of ahistorical pablum that appears commonly in media today.  There really was a divide between those who adapted to the better living conditions/practices and standards and those who could not.  The governments tried a number of ideas, but none of them worked well for everyone.  The immigrant settler population overwhelmed the less dominant and less well-adapted cultures.  You may not like this, but that pattern has only accelerated as more and more immigrants come each year.  It’s unrealistic and ridiculous to think that the Indigenous population could be hermetically sealed off from modern western civilization. The truth is that most Indigenous didn’t really want that, not when they saw the benefits of modernization for health outcomes and living standards. All living things move towards pleasure and away from pain.  Any plotting by government to manipulate Indigenous was vastly overwhelmed by the influence of culture and technology.  The Romans did it to the Britons.  Later the British, French, and immigrants from multiple countries did it to the Indigenous, but all cultures influence each other and settlers also learned from Indigenous.  Governments early on did try the nation to nation approach that you mentioned under George the 3rd, but one side vastly outpaced the other.  We can’t put the genie back in the bottle, nor would that help.

The bigger long-standing concern at this point, because the settlers aren’t going anywhere, is this idea that certain groups need to be taken care of by virtue of their ethnicity and ethnic purity. End the silly paternalistic protections and benefits that keep the cycle of dependence alive.  That’s the real source of racial bias today, because the reserve system and Indian Act are creepy attempts to coddle certain groups and remind them that they need special help from the state. Residential schools are just a subcategory of that approach.  They caused new problems even as they tried to solve other problems such as illiteracy, but they’re certainly not the only source of the social problems Indigenous face today.  Moreover, they’re gone now, at least the ones run by non-Indigenous.

Canada emphasizes and pays for the preservation of cultures more than any country I can think of, but we don’t only live off of cultural ideas.  We need clean air and water, decent food and shelter, and gainful work that allows us to use our talents and reach our potential.  Indigenous are no different in that regard. They’re part of our modern world and have evolved with it. The fastest road to self-determination and self-actualization for Indigenous is to shed dependence on the very state that suppressed Indigenous cultures in the past.  It means paying for the upkeep of your own communities, because we can’t honestly talk about Indigenous being stewards of our land when Indigenous living on reserves are dependent on the state to be the stewards of their land (and health and education).  Instead, grandfather the official “Indian” status, end the Indigenous-only benefits, and let bands decide what to do with their reserve land.

Canadians will continue to fund the vast expenditures of Indian Affairs as long as Indigenous demand them, because Canadians are on the whole fair and generous, or if you think that’s too kind a characterization, Canadians will maintain their legal obligations to Indigenous. However, if you want a real fix beyond hollow apologies and taxpayers throwing money at the problem, the Indian Act and reserve system must be dismantled.  I hope Indigenous make that move because it’s the only real way forward in my opinion.  The stereotypes and cynicism among the populous are unlikely to disappear, unfortunately, until that happens.

If you think that we need to listen more to Indigenous ideas because they can help us with some of our current socio-economic and environmental problems, great.  We probably do need to live in greater harmony with nature and bringing in 400,000 immigrants per year (continued colonization) probably isn’t a long-term solution to our environmental and social cohesion problems, but that’s a big topic, probably for another thread.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way if I were indian would I want the reserved dismantled. You think I would want some white liberal bundle of sticks, who knows nothing, telling me what to do?

We are a long way down this road, such that the native man now holds contempt for non-natives. That has been taught from father to son, and much like with the blacks in USA, it will not go away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

No way if I were indian would I want the reserved dismantled. You think I would want some white liberal bundle of sticks, who knows nothing, telling me what to do?

We are a long way down this road, such that the native man now holds contempt for non-natives. That has been taught from father to son, and much like with the blacks in USA, it will not go away.

I’m not talking about taking land away.   The reserves belong to Indigenous.  It’s the imposed rules around them that must go.  The idea of special status and associated benefits and tax breaks for working on (staying on) reserves are backward.  If bands decide to privatize and sell their property to whomever, that should be their choice.  The liberals and other politicians set up these conditions.  There’s no self-determination under such conditions.  The Nisgaa figured that out.  The Inuit in Nunavut figured that out too and essentially run their own affairs.  You have to pay to play, however.   Want better infrastructure in your communities?  Want pride and care of ownership?   You’re going to have to collect taxes and pay for the upkeep like non-Indigenous or else the cycle of dependence will continue.  How can there otherwise be an equal partnership?   You’re right though, too many Indigenous vested interests enjoy these benefits even as they reinforce forms of bondage.  It’s become a self-imposed prison because no one is keeping anyone on reserves.  It’s the policies of the Indian Act and “status” that incentivize a form of apartheid.  Indigenous can scrap them.   Not sure they will.   As for attitudes towards the “white man”, it’s like attitudes towards Indigenous.  In order to perceive each other differently we have to do things differently.

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

even as they reinforce forms of bondage.  It’s become a self-imposed prison because no one is keeping anyone on reserves.

The reserve I live near is nothing like this. It’s a well kept, separate community. Probably the best place to live in Canada, imo.

I suggest maybe “whites” need to cut it out with the prescriptive narrative for natives as though they know what is good for them. Just like we think we know what’s good for anyone else. These people have the power of the human mind same as anyone else. Let them decide their next best move. Canadian government has had their six.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...