Jump to content

When will we ever see an Heritage Day for white British/Europeans.


Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, blackbird said:

Canadians are being scammed right and left and required to pay compensation for aboriginal children who attended day school.  How is this reasonable?  If someone was abused that is one thing.  But paying every kid who went to school tens of thousands of dollars because they were allegedly deprived of some dead native language is ludicrous and a scam.  If that is the case, I am sure will come up with excuses to make Canadians pay and pay forever.

They were forcibly taken from their families and sent to boarding schools often far away and specifically intended to erase their culture. 

How would you feel if your kids were taken and sent to an Islamic or Sikh boarding school 200 miles from where you live.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Aristides said:

They were forcibly taken from their families and sent to boarding schools often far away and specifically intended to erase their culture. 

How would you feel if your kids were taken and sent to an Islamic or Sikh boarding school 200 miles from where you live.

Truth be told - it wasn't just the first nations.  the gov't got it in their head that they were going to tell ALL parents how their kids should live.  Which is always bad. Gov't rarely knows best.

But that's neither here nor there - bottom line is yes, it was a bad thing and a bad idea. I'm convinced reading the hansards and other docs that MOST of the people involved believe it was the right thing to do for aultruistic reasons but they were wrong

And they weren't trying to erase the first nations culture - they were trying to forceably integrate them. Literally their attitude was 'its fine if they want to live in their reserves in tents and hunt their food and live that way but at least if they know HOW to be british if they want then they can choose to live a better version of that".  They legit thought of COURSE everyone in the world would want to know how to be british.  I mean... crumpets, queens, the silly hats...  it's a slam dunk.

But it happened. And it's over. It was over a long time ago. Every single race and ethnicity goes through something similar, and they recover. My grandparents came here as children because their families had been killed in the russian revolution and they only got out with the shirts on their backs, they got here and they were broke, they didn't speak the language, they didn't undrestand the culture, and most of the family they loved was dead. They had suffered horrible hardships.

But within a decade or so they were thriving.

It's time to move on. And the people today did not choose for anything that happened in the past to happen.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Aristides said:

It's not ancient history, thousands of the kids who were sent to those schools are still alive.

It's history. Being "still alive' doesn't mean crap. There's still people alive who served in ww2, but we wouldn't claim ww2 was still strongly impacting our lives today, the vast majority of the people alive grew up without experiencing that.

And lets not pretend that the last schools to close were the same as the schools in the 1920's. The idea that every kid was raped or something in 1990 is just not real. They got clean places to live and good food etc.

It's important to not UNDERPLAY the effect either and i woudlnt' want to seem like i'm suggesting that nothing was wrong with any of this - that would not be true

But lets  get real.  A SMALL part of the native population was in schools in the 70's 80's and 90's, the schools were vastly improved compared to the problems of the past, they were gov't run not church run at that point,  the first nations were already integrated into canadian culture so it wasn't any kind of 'amalgamation' effort or 'stealing' culture at that point, And it was always about assimilation rather than wiping out their culture in the first place.

So the actual abusive and culturally damaging 'residential school' system is actually ancient history.  Ish - i mean it was still bad even 80 years ago but there aren't many around today who actually did attend school then, They'd be like 95.

So - time to move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Aristides said:

They were forcibly taken from their families and sent to boarding schools often far away and specifically intended to erase their culture. 

How would you feel if your kids were taken and sent to an Islamic or Sikh boarding school 200 miles from where you live.

Every kid today is required to go to school to get a basic education.  FNs old culture was entirely different.  They did not believe in working an eight hour day or going to work on a schedule for five days a week.  Their society let the women do most of the day to day chores in the villages and raise the kids, while the men did the hunting and gathering wild foods, game, and fish.  But they only did that at certain times.  They did not work like white men had to.  How do you think they could survive in the new colonized world without a basic education and changing their work culture to a white man's work culture which meant going to work on a schedule every day five or six days a week?   They had to learn to be able to work in jobs for other employers like logging, construction, etc.   There was no other way to change their thinking except through going to school.

They had to be required to attend schools in order to learn to live in society.  They need to learn to read, write, and some other subjects in order to function in society.  The old life of hunting and gathering had basically ended and there was no choice.   The way they lived and their thinking would not support them so how do you think they could live without a basic education and working in society.  It is nonsense to say the government was trying to destroy their culture.   The FN culture was finished and they could not make a living on that in the new colonized world.  That is just the way the world changes.  It has always changed and people have always had to adapt to the changes.

Secondly, it is ridiculous to say people living today must pay compensation for things that happened in the past that effected FNs lives.  That is just how the world changes.  You sound like you have no idea about history and how the world works.  

How do you think they could have lived without a basic education in white man's world?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you would have no problem with your children being forcibly removed and having them educated in a culture and religion different from yours, just because a government not of your culture and religion decided it was good for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Aristides said:

So you would have no problem with your children being forcibly removed and having them educated in a culture and religion different from yours, just because a government not of your culture and religion decided it was good for you.

And again - the left HAS to lie to make it's point.

I certainly didn't say it was no problem - @blackbird Didn't say it was no problem.

I said it happened a long time ago and while it was a bad decision at the time, it shoudln't be holding us back now and it's time to move forward ,

And blackbird said it was necessary for various reasons regardless, and that people today shouldn't pay people today for the sins of the past.

But instead of addressing EITHER of those points you felt the need to lie about what was said.

Tell me you know you're wrong without telling me.  Yeash. If the left had a single honest bone in their body maybe we could have adult conversations about these issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Aristides said:

So you would have no problem with your children being forcibly removed and having them educated in a culture and religion different from yours, just because a government not of your culture and religion decided it was good for you.

FNs had to change with colonization or starve.  There was no other choice.  They did not understand or agree to working in a day jobs for eight hours a day.  So the question was who was going to support them?  There was no welfare system or social services in those days.  You either worked or starved or begged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Sorry that you're upset Hewith, but why don't you tell me how to be an Indian, and how to fit in . . . .

LOL !

you just made me spit take my coffee up

Pretendians calling Indians "racist"

what a lunatic asylum

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, blackbird said:

FNs had to change with colonization or starve.  There was no other choice.  They did not understand or agree to working in a day jobs for eight hours a day.  So the question was who was going to support them?  There was no welfare system or social services in those days.  You either worked or starved or begged.

So you would have no problem with your children being forcibly removed and having them educated in a culture and religion different from yours, just because a government not of your culture and religion decided it was good for you.

 

There is no need to kidnap peoples children and strip them of their culture for them to learn how to function in a new society. Every immigrant does it.

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Aristides said:

There is no need to kidnap peoples children and strip them of their culture for them to learn how to function in a new society.

We are not talking about putting people in a barbaric aboriginal culture.  We are talking about the fact the aboriginal kids needed to be educated to function in a civilized Canadian society.   Is that too much to ask or do?   Would you rather leave them uneducated, unemployed and starving on some reserves?  Doesn't sound too bright.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, blackbird said:

We are not talking about putting people in a barbaric aboriginal culture.  We are talking about the fact the aboriginal kids needed to be educated to function in a civilized Canadian society.   Is that too much to ask or do?   Would you rather leave them uneducated, unemployed and starving on some reserves?  Doesn't sound too bright.

Why would we leave them uneducated? We could have easily educated them without stripping them of their homes and culture. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Why would we leave them uneducated? We could have easily educated them without stripping them of their homes and culture. 

No, they couldn't be educated on reserves.   Nobody in their right mind would go to live on some uncivilized remote reserve where there was no services, no running water, no sewer system, no healthy places to live, no stores, etc. etc.  You have to be crazy if you think anyone would go to live on a reserve to teach or work.  You forgot we are talking about a time when they had no normal housing or anything on reserves.   Reserves still struggle even today in many places with a lack of everything. 

FNs had to be brought out to the schools, either boarding schools or day schools only where there were clean accommodations for everyone to live and conveniences of life and access to what was needed.  But that had to be done off the reserves which were not habitable for non-indigenous people.  Simple as that.

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

36 minutes ago, blackbird said:

No, they couldn't be educated on reserves.   Nobody in their right mind would go to live on some uncivilized remote reserve where there was no services, no running water, no sewer system, no healthy places to live, no stores, etc. etc.  You have to be crazy if you think anyone would go to live on a reserve to teach or work.  You forgot we are talking about a time when they had no normal housing or anything on reserves.   Reserves still struggle even today in many places with a lack of everything. 

FNs had to be brought out to the schools, either boarding schools or day schools only where there were clean accommodations for everyone to live and conveniences of life and access to what was needed.  But that had to be done off the reserves which were not habitable for non-indigenous people.  Simple as that.

Maybe you should listen to yourself. Who put them on reserves without services?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Maybe you should listen to yourself. Who put them on reserves without services?

Nobody. They had every right to leave the reserves and live where the services are.  Many did. But land was set aside for their use in the traditional way that was not allowed to be messed with so they could KEEP their culture.

In the end it was a mistake - they should have just been treated like anyone else and as the land and game disappeared they would either integrate or die. Trying to let them live in a bubble obviosly didn't work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Nobody. They had every right to leave the reserves and live where the services are.  Many did. But land was set aside for their use in the traditional way that was not allowed to be messed with so they could KEEP their culture.

In the end it was a mistake - they should have just been treated like anyone else and as the land and game disappeared they would either integrate or die. Trying to let them live in a bubble obviosly didn't work.

We put them in the bubble, we didn't give them a choice,  just like residential schools weren't a choice. The land we set aside was land we didn't want at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Aristides said:

We put them in the bubble, we didn't give them a choice,

When you have to lie to make your point - you probably don't have a very good point. And thats a lie. They not only didn't have to stay in that bubble but they frequently didn't. We simply gave them a home area that nobody could touch if they wanted it.

 

5 minutes ago, Aristides said:

 

 just like residential schools weren't a choice. The land we set aside was land we didn't want at the time.

It's where they lived. So we set aside their homes as 'untouchable'. You can't even say we put them IN anything, we just simply took where they were and said "nobody touches this.".

And no. It was not mandatory to live on a reserve.

If you have to lie like that - well you obviously know you were in the wrong to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not the one who is lying. We made the rules, we decided what they would have. We made it impossible for them to live in the traditional way, we turned them into dependents and then condemned them for being dependent. 

 

They were doing just fine before we arrived, even the most conservative estimates believe their population was reduced by 2/3 between Europeans arriving and Confederation.

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Aristides said:

I'm not the one who is lying.

But you are.

27 minutes ago, Aristides said:

We made the rules, we decided what they would have.

But we didn't. With the exception of  bc we negotiated and signed treaties.

27 minutes ago, Aristides said:

We made it impossible for them to live in the traditional way,

But they did live in the traditional way

27 minutes ago, Aristides said:

we turned them into dependents and then condemned them for being dependent. 

We actually worked with them in a mutually beneficial arrangment for most of our history. It was only for about 100 years in out of several hundred that things went off the rails at all.

 

27 minutes ago, Aristides said:

They were doing just fine before we arrived, even the most conservative estimates believe their population was reduced by 2/3 between Europeans arriving and Confederation.

They were barely hanging on with a static population, low survival rate, average age before death of about 35, frequent wars, slavery, women being treated as property, frequent starvation and local extinction events - and it wasn't us that dropped their population it was sickness that travelled up from the south and would have no matter what Indications are their population could have dropped to near nothing if we weren't here to help them cope with that. The hudson's bay company went full on hardcore trying to save as many as possible.

All you do is lie. You make up fake shit like how they weren't allowed to leave the reserves to try to push a fake narrative.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If they leave a reserve they lose the housing and al the other things that go along with being on a reserve. By confining them we also made it impossible to live in the traditional way. That's what I mean about making them dependent. 

There is no way to know the  actual population of early Canada before Europeans arrived  but the accepted number is about 500K, an 1871 enumeration put it at 102K. In the 1630's smallpox wiped out over half the Wyandot (Huron) population. In 1862, a smallpox epidemic killed half the indigenous population of BC. That's just from smallpox and doesn't include all the other diseases introduced by Europeans.

In 1820, the average life expectancy in Western Europe was 36.

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

 

If they leave a reserve they lose the housing and al the other things that go along with being on a reserve.

and they gain the benefits that all other canadians have. Make up your mind - are reserves a good thing or a bad thing? 

If a first nations person wants to enjoy the benefits of living in a more traditional first nations community then they have the right to do that. If they'd rather live in a more 'european' style then they can do that too. That's more choices than I Have as a canadian. They literally have every right i have, then some.

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

 

By confining them we also made it impossible to live in the traditional way. That's what I mean about making them dependent. 

Also untrue entirely.  They're not confined in teh slightest.  They can move and have rights between bands, they still have the right to hunt and fish and do what they have always done on their traditional hunting grounds and guess what -  no more  stone arrow tips and spears, now you've got guns and top of the line fishing gear.

They are not even a little bit confined.

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

There is no way to know the  actual population of early Canada before Europeans arrived  but the accepted number is about 500K, an 1871 enumeration put it at 102K. In the 1630's smallpox wiped out over half the Wyandot (Huron) population. In 1862, a smallpox epidemic killed half the indigenous population of BC. That's just from smallpox and doesn't include all the other diseases introduced by Europeans.

Sorry kiddo - smallpox came from the chinese and was first introduced in north america by the carrabians.  Small pox travelled north from mexico, not across the waters from europe. And as noted the europeans spent a fortunate trying to save the natives as much as possible, to the point of keeping their sick inside their forts and homes, even the hudsons bay commander did. They paid to dust every blanket and item that came through the trading post with flour of sulfer and hauled food to native bands telling them not to visit other bands till it was over, they'd bring them supplies. (they often didn't listen and died anyway).

So sorry  -  common myth that 'europeans killed the Canadian natives' but no.  A few of the later infections came from european places (ruissa for the big one in bc in the 1800's). but if it weren't for the europeans in canada chances are there would be almost no first nations left alive today.

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

In 1820, the average life expectancy in Western Europe was 36.

My mistake - got my numbers reversed - it was just over 20 for the first nations.

And your life span if you lived to the age of one (which takes out birth mortalities) was double in europe.

And - as of the 1800's that number shot up rapidly, and would not for the natives had they not had the benefit of eurorpean medicine. So they'd still be dying in their 20's, instead of living til their late 70's now.


Almost every element of their lives got better.  Education was higher. Access to tools was higher. Instead of being 'confined' their mobility actually IMPROVED with european horse stock becoming available in large numbers, their ability to hunt shot through the roof with the introduction of iron and steel tools and firearems. Remember - pre contact they only had stone and they had no pack animals.

Clothing got better, medicines got better,  there wasn't much that didn't.

So instead of being locked in a cage in teh dark as you would paint the picture they expanded and thrived - and when illness from the south thraetened to wipe them out the europeans kept them going.

Nice try to re-write history to fit your narrative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

and they gain the benefits that all other canadians have. Make up your mind - are reserves a good thing or a bad thing? 

If a first nations person wants to enjoy the benefits of living in a more traditional first nations community then they have the right to do that. If they'd rather live in a more 'european' style then they can do that too. That's more choices than I Have as a canadian. They literally have every right i have, then some.


What benefits? Discrimination against FN was rampant in Canada, they couldn't even vote until 1951. 

Quote

Sorry kiddo - smallpox came from the chinese and was first introduced in north america by the carrabians.  Small pox travelled north from mexico, not across the waters from europe. And as noted the europeans spent a fortunate trying to save the natives as much as possible, to the point of keeping their sick inside their forts and homes, even the hudsons bay commander did. They paid to dust every blanket and item that came through the trading post with flour of sulfer and hauled food to native bands telling them not to visit other bands till it was over, they'd bring them Sorry supplies. (they often didn't listen and died anyway).

Sorry kiddo, it was introduced to North America by Europeans. Who brought it to Mexico genius? It was brought by the Spanish where it killed off the majority of the Aztec civilization as well. How many Mexicans and Caribbeans were in Canada during the 1600's and how would they have got here? The effect of European diseases on native American cultures is well documented. 

 

Quote

So sorry  -  common myth that 'europeans killed the Canadian natives' but no.  A few of the later infections came from european places (ruissa for the big one in bc in the 1800's). but if it weren't for the europeans in canada chances are there would be almost no first nations left alive today.

The plains native civilization was based on the buffalo, which the Europeans exterminated. The Pacific Coast native civilization was based on the salmon, which Europeans have largely destroyed through over fishing and habitat destruction. 

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2016/05/the-buffalo-killers/482349/

Your revisionist history is just bullshit.

 

 

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/6/2023 at 10:28 AM, Aristides said:


What benefits? Discrimination against FN was rampant in Canada, they couldn't even vote until 1951. 

 I specifically said they could do that now - so basically you feel the need to lie and be dishonest to try to make your point.

And in fact they could vote before 1951. Not that they paerticularly wanted to or asked to.  But there were various rules (actually there were for everyone).  but there was never a time i'm aware of that first nations people could not vote at all. It was just very difficult in the beginning - you had to be a lawyer or the like Which some did become but obviously it was rare.

And john a was going to make it legal for all first natiosn everywhere without condition till the uprising happened. THen it was legal for first nations in the east but not the rebellious west.

And any first nations serving in the military during the wars could vote automatically.

And it was a liberal - wilfried laurier (yes the same one who ignored the damning report about res schools and buried it) who set it back to the early conditions where you had to be a lawyer etc. He thought the first nations would vote conservative.

Soo.. not exactly true.  A first nations person absolutely could walk off the reserves, become "enfranchised", and vote and have a business or go to school wherever he wanted etc.

But even ON the reserves they got steel tools and weapons, they got advanced medicine they got textiles and gear that made their lives a thousand times better. You have no idea how something as simple as a copper pot makes ALL the flipping difference.

So - once again you prove you don't really know the history here.

On 5/6/2023 at 10:28 AM, Aristides said:

Sorry kiddo, it was introduced to North America by Europeans. Who brought it to Mexico genius?

I told you who.  Smallpox was first introduced into the americas by the Caribbeans. Not the europeans. 

Waves of it would show up later from europeans and russians and chinese - it made it's way around.  But - if you think it was canadian settlers who introduced it you were wrong,.

On 5/6/2023 at 10:28 AM, Aristides said:

 

The plains native civilization was based on the buffalo, which the Europeans exterminated. The Pacific Coast native civilization was based on the salmon, which Europeans have largely destroyed through over fishing and habitat destruction

Both of those are flat out lies in Canada.

In canada most of the first nations followed the caribou and still do.  This isn't america.

And the salmon on the west coast have been very strong for generations. More recently the stocks have suffered a small amount (first nations overfishing has been thoguth to be partly responsible along with climate change,) but the first nations still fish them plenty. I drive by a first nations fish processing plant regularly

So  more lies.

On 5/6/2023 at 10:28 AM, Aristides said:

That's american.  This is C.A,N.A.D.A   Buy a freakin' map and read a book

 

You've shown quite clearly you're an uneducated sack of shit who virtue signals pretending to stand up for first nations without having done a single drop of homework. NOTHING you've said has turned out to be true,

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.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,604
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    markanderson8093
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Hodad earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Stark22 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Stark22 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Freddie earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • capitosinora earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...