Canada: The Land of Genocide

[Michael Hardner]

9 hours ago, Moonbox said:

1. The Europeans would have beat them just by scale.   

2. Guerilla warfare wasn't a uniquely native thing either.  

3. I don't really know either.  I remember the debates on this forum back in the Harper times were silly things, with left-leaning folk talking about large swathes of urban Ontario and BC being handed back to First Nations etc.  

1.  True.
2. No, I didn't mean to say it was but it gives home field advantage is my point.
3. The achilles heal of the "reform" that people on here push is that there is zero attention span for these things in "the" public.

[Moonbox]

6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

3. The achilles heal of the "reform" that people on here push is that there is zero attention span for these things in "the" public.

As with many things unfortunately.  It’s one of the side effects of pushing unilateral partisan agendas simply because you can.  Things aren’t as bad here yet as in the US, but we’re far from immune ?

[Michael Hardner]

13 hours ago, I am Groot said:

1. We have to clean up the mine. We don't have to treat natives like fragile children who have to be carefully protected, nurtured and have all their decisions made for them by us.

2. ...the answer to that is difficult...

3. Which means you're going to have to overcome almost certain opposition from native chiefs and go over their heads to the natives themselves in proposing solutions that would result in abandoning the reserve system and the Indian Act in favor of a change which would be challenging and tumultuous but result in a better life in the long run.

4. They are not separate nations. That is a polite fiction, like an adult patting a child's head and congratulating them on some terrible creation they've just presented you with. Most of these 'nations' are under 2,000 people strong. That's not a nation. It's barely a village. Not to mention separate nations don't need to have 100% of their bills paid by someone else. Quebec, btw, is not a nation either, but that's a whole other argument about political cowardice.

5. A nation without a sense of shared identity is brittle and will fracture at the stress lines and dissolve into violence under pressure.

6. Of course there would eventually be cost savings. Do you imagine Canadians are going to put up with paying their way forever? It's going to last only until the majority of power brokers in parliament are not white. Once the Asians take over - and they will inevitably take over given immigration and birth levels) natives are going to be faced with some pretty goddam harsh choices because I've never met a non white immigrant who had ANY sympathy for natives (I'm sure there are at least some who do). And the ones with the least sympathy are the ones whose culture is most demanding of hard work. And yes, I'm aware Jagmeet Singh makes all kinds of mouth noises about supporting natives, but he's a trust fund rich boy who operates on an ideological level quite different from most people. 

1. No we don't have to take a specific approach to address the problem, I agree.
2. So the answer is that their leaders are corrupt, and First Nations people accept that on some level and so it's complicated.  Shouldn't that be the first stop of any reform of the relationship then ?  
3. As a thought exercise, maybe come up with an analogous situation with non-natives and see how it would be solved perhaps.  What if a foreign government was trying to convince the Canadian people that something was too their advantage but we, and our leaders, were against it ?
4.  And yet we acknowledged Quebec as a 'nation' in the HoC ?  You seem to be unable to accept that other groups will not buy into your vision as it is.  You can plead and rhetoricize on here but two solitudes won't be moved by that.  Harper made a political decision and so far it has worked for its goals, it seems to me.
5. "Nation" or "Nation State" ?  It seems to me you are talking about the fundamental attributes of a nation, which is shared identity.  A "State" is a different thing.  Is it divisible ?  Absolutely and that's one of the chief goals of a state, ie. unity.  
6.  Yes I think Canadians would pay for these things for a long, long time without too much complaining and I'm wondering if you are projecting your own annoyances onto the population.   Yes, Jagmeet is one Asian politician at a position of significant power, and he says he wants to prioritize indigenous rights.  Asians, too, can be politicians.   "Most people" have been living with the current system for their entire lives.

And so I acknowledge that you're looking for improvement here, but the gateway to a massive change of arrangement that you propose would not survive an opening statement if it included the sentiments you reflected here.  It could survive by appealing to a broad desire to "improve" but that would need to preclude cost cutting as even an intermediate goal IMO.  
 

[I am Groot]

12 hours ago, eyeball said:

From your article;

Like I said this is going to take generations - you should learn to just let it go.

I don't believe in race based laws. I don't believe in excusing someone's vicious brutality because of what he experienced earlier in life. Would you forgive Hitler because of the trauma he suffered in WW1?

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

I don't believe in race based laws. I don't believe in excusing someone's vicious brutality because of what he experienced earlier in life. Would you forgive Hitler because of the trauma he suffered in WW1?

I'd probably have cut him a little slack if he'd had brain damage from birth.  The other difference of course is that Bobby Crane didn't have accomplices.