Is gang rape a part of Islamic culture?

[Black Dog]

Can you think of any other situation where the gov't offers compensation to distant descendants of the people originally wronged? Do the Angles deserve compensation from the Saxons for the invasion of 1066? At some point in time history is history and we have to move on..

We're not talking about a great deal of time here. We're talking about a couple of hundred years. It would be one thing if all the oustanding issues were resolved and all of Canada's Aboriginal people's were living in harmony , but that's not the case. The effects of the decision to not honour treaties or to not provide fair compensation for land seized linger to this day. Deal with those and then move on.

Creating two classes of Canadians based whether they can trace their ancestry back to some native group is racism

I'm sure there's a great many people of native descent who would swith "classes" with you in a heartbeat.

[Argus]

Creating two classes of Canadians based whether they can trace their ancestry back to some native group is racism

I'm sure there's a great many people of native descent who would swith "classes" with you in a heartbeat.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Uhm... why?

Can you tell us how White Canadians are somehow more priliged than Natives?

[Black Dog]

Uhm... why?

Can you tell us how White Canadians are somehow more priliged than Natives?

Are you kidding? Natives in Canada are pretty much the bottom of the heap, our underclass. There's a lot of reasons for that (including widespread corruption in native communities, paternalistic governent policies and rascism), buit regardless, it's a helluva lot more of a picnic to be white than native (even, I reckon, if that native happens to be a member o one of the select few groups to beenfit from land claims setllements).

[Riverwind]

Are you kidding? Natives in Canada are pretty much the bottom of the heap, our underclass. There's a lot of reasons for that (including widespread corruption in native communities, paternalistic governent policies and rascism)

You want to know how to guarantee that racism will continue to trouble natives: sign treaties with them that give them control over large tracts of land and then allow them to deny rights to non-natives that happen to be living on that land (i.e. like the right to vote for the band council with the power to set taxes).

If natives want to end racism they have to stop asking for race based solutions to social problems.

[Argus]

Uhm... why?

Can you tell us how White Canadians are somehow more priliged than Natives?

Are you kidding? Natives in Canada are pretty much the bottom of the heap, our underclass. There's a lot of reasons for that (including widespread corruption in native communities, paternalistic governent policies and rascism), buit regardless, it's a helluva lot more of a picnic to be white than native (even, I reckon, if that native happens to be a member o one of the select few groups to beenfit from land claims setllements).

You did not answer the question. Natives have all the rights and privileges of Whites, including the right of mobility, the right to go somewhere more economical than their reserve, where they can get better jobs. They also have the right to dodge some of our taxes, the right to special grants not available to White Canadians, and including free higher education.

Which rights do Whites enjoy that natives do not?

[Black Dog]

You did not answer the question. Natives have all the rights and privileges of Whites, including the right of mobility, the right to go somewhere more economical than their reserve, where they can get better jobs. They also have the right to dodge some of our taxes, the right to special grants not available to White Canadians, and including free higher education.

Which rights do Whites enjoy that natives do not?

My bad for attempting to answer a question based on a false premise. Fished in. I never said natives enjoy more rights or less rights than whites. That was your formulation. My statement (which I should have gone back and re-read) was that natives occupy a different class than white Canadians. Which is entirely different from the construct you are trying to build. Just becaus ethey enjoy all the same rights doesn't mean they have all the same opportunities.

If natives want to end racism they have to stop asking for race based solutions to social problems.

Well, by that logic, any proposal to address the problems endemic to Canada's Aboriginal population would be, by nature, race based and thus rascist against white Canadians and would therefore perpetuate rascism against natives.

[Argus]

You did not answer the question. Natives have all the rights and privileges of Whites, including the right of mobility, the right to go somewhere more economical than their reserve, where they can get better jobs. They also have the right to dodge some of our taxes, the right to special grants not available to White Canadians, and including free higher education.

Which rights do Whites enjoy that natives do not?

My bad for attempting to answer a question based on a false premise. Fished in. I never said natives enjoy more rights or less rights than whites. That was your formulation. My statement (which I should have gone back and re-read) was that natives occupy a different class than white Canadians. Which is entirely different from the construct you are trying to build. Just becaus ethey enjoy all the same rights doesn't mean they have all the same opportunities.

Okay then. What opportunity do Whites enjoy which Natives do not? Bear in mind that every year untold tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of Whites are forced to relocate, often far from friends and families, in hopes of getting a better job. Hell, central Canada is full of Maritimers forced to move here because there are no jobs out east.

[Black Dog]

Okay then. What opportunity do Whites enjoy which Natives do not? Bear in mind that every year untold tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of Whites are forced to relocate, often far from friends and families, in hopes of getting a better job. Hell, central Canada is full of Maritimers forced to move here because there are no jobs out east.

The problem is a comparison between whites and Aboriginals is largely apples and oranges. Whites simply don't have the same extreme and chronic social and economic challenges the Aboriginal population has to contend with.

For most whites, not starting out as part of the underclass gives them a head start. To think the specific problems of Aboriginal poverty, dependancy, drug and alcohol abuse, suicide, etc can be rectified by adopting solutions that work for white people coming from totally different backgrounds, I'd have to disagree.

[Argus]

Okay then. What opportunity do Whites enjoy which Natives do not? Bear in mind that every year untold tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of Whites are forced to relocate, often far from friends and families, in hopes of getting a better job. Hell, central Canada is full of Maritimers forced to move here because there are no jobs out east.

The problem is a comparison between whites and Aboriginals is largely apples and oranges. Whites simply don't have the same extreme and chronic social and economic challenges the Aboriginal population has to contend with.

What, none of them? I bet there are more poverty stricken Whites than poverty stricken natives. Simply out of sheer numbers. How are you worse off growing up as a native on a reserve than growing up as a white in a violent housing project in Toronto or Vancouver?

For most whites, not starting out as part of the underclass gives them a head start. To think the specific problems of Aboriginal poverty, dependancy, drug and alcohol abuse, suicide, etc can be rectified by adopting solutions that work for white people coming from totally different backgrounds, I'd have to disagree.

the reason why most Whites do better than most natives is that Whites move to where the jobs are. Oh, some of them don't, some of them stay around their poverty stricken villages on pogey or welfare. But a lot of them, a helluva lot of them, travel thousands of miles to where there are better jobs, and raise their kids THERE, instead of back home. The natives on the reserves don't have crappy lives because they'r native. They have crappy lives because they live in areas which are not predisposed towards profitable economica activity which can reliably sustain a community.

[newbie]

What, none of them? I bet there are more poverty stricken Whites than poverty stricken natives. Simply out of sheer numbers.

Not. Try this: http://www.ccsd.ca/pr/2003/aboriginal.htm

[kimmy]

What, none of them? I bet there are more poverty stricken Whites than poverty stricken natives. Simply out of sheer numbers.

Not. Try this: http://www.ccsd.ca/pr/2003/aboriginal.htm

uh, from your link:

Although Aboriginal people accounted for a very small proportion in most of the cities included in the study (1.5%), the average proportion of poor people who were Aboriginal was 3.4%.

Although a disproportionate number of the poor are aboriginal, aboriginals comprise only 3.4% of the poor in the cities studied.

Or, as Argus put it, "there are more poverty-stricken whites than poverty-stricken natives, simply out of sheer numbers."

-k

[Black Dog]

What, none of them? I bet there are more poverty stricken Whites than poverty stricken natives. Simply out of sheer numbers.

What's your point? Aboriginals make up less then 5 per cent of the population. Obviously there will be more poor whites than poor aboriginals. But when you have a population, nearly half of whom are in poverty, it would seem to indicate that population has problems specific to them.

How are you worse off growing up as a native on a reserve than growing up as a white in a violent housing project in Toronto or Vancouver?

I'd say the former.

the reason why most Whites do better than most natives is that Whites move to where the jobs are. Oh, some of them don't, some of them stay around their poverty stricken villages on pogey or welfare. But a lot of them, a helluva lot of them, travel thousands of miles to where there are better jobs, and raise their kids THERE, instead of back home. The natives on the reserves don't have crappy lives because they'r native. They have crappy lives because they live in areas which are not predisposed towards profitable economica activity which can reliably sustain a community.

Noty to mention the problems those specific communities have, problems that can be traced back to the Canada's histiorical treatment of its native population. What this oils down to is that you are saying Canada's aboriginals hhave a choice (and that they choose to be poor). I'm saying the aborginal population's specific problems limit the awareness of those choices. Put another way, if your dad was a poor alcoholic, and his dad was a por alcoholic and his dad and so on, the chances of you ending up as anything other than a poor alcoholic are pretty slim, simply because those chopices are all you'd know. Which is the problem of poverty everywhere, but it seems to be especialy bad for Canada's natives.

[newbie]

What, none of them? I bet there are more poverty stricken Whites than poverty stricken natives. Simply out of sheer numbers.

Not. Try this: http://www.ccsd.ca/pr/2003/aboriginal.htm

uh, from your link:

Although Aboriginal people accounted for a very small proportion in most of the cities included in the study (1.5%), the average proportion of poor people who were Aboriginal was 3.4%.

Although a disproportionate number of the poor are aboriginal, aboriginals comprise only 3.4% of the poor in the cities studied.

Or, as Argus put it, "there are more poverty-stricken whites than poverty-stricken natives, simply out of sheer numbers."

-k

The intent was to show it per number of First Nations individuals vs. whites. Black Dog has it right.

[Argus]

Noty to mention the problems those specific communities have, problems that can be traced back to the Canada's histiorical treatment of its native population. What this oils down to is that you are saying Canada's aboriginals hhave a choice (and that they choose to be poor). I'm saying the aborginal population's specific problems limit the awareness of those choices. Put another way, if your dad was a poor alcoholic, and his dad was a por alcoholic and his dad and so on, the chances of you ending up as anything other than a poor alcoholic are pretty slim, simply because those chopices are all you'd know. Which is the problem of poverty everywhere, but it seems to be especialy bad for Canada's natives.

I'm aware that matters of cultural conditioning have a heavy influence on decisions made, particularly early in life. I seriously doubt natives are unaware they can get free post-secondary education, or that doing so opens up the world, or that they can do better with such an education if they leave the reserves. But for whatever reason, perhaps it just seems too improbable and too far away, far too many native youths dont' finish school, and wander around getting wasted instead of studying. This is rather similar to the problems of welfare lifers and their children, come to think of it. It is exacerbated by their being few or no opportunities on a reserve, which is one of the reasons I'd like to see more urban reserves.

Btw, my father was an alcoholic, and his father died of syphilus because he was too stubborn and stupid to go and see a doctor. Me - I don't drink.

[Riverwind]

It is exacerbated by their being few or no opportunities on a reserve, which is one of the reasons I'd like to see more urban reserves.

Urban reserves don't help. The just become proverbial 'neighbors from hell' that will do anything to make a quick buck (casinos, burning garbage, etc). What you need to address is the the culture that thinks working 9 to 5 is some how beneath them.

I think it is worth comparing the Japanese and Chinese immigrants to the natives. Japanese and Chinese immigrants experienced some of the worst excesses of rascism and abuse at the hands of our gov't yet you do not see the social problems that are endemic in native society. This tells me that simply making a amends to the natives for past wrongs won't accomplish anything.

[Black Dog]

I think it is worth comparing the Japanese and Chinese immigrants to the natives. Japanese and Chinese immigrants experienced some of the worst excesses of rascism and abuse at the hands of our gov't yet you do not see the social problems that are endemic in native society. This tells me that simply making a amends to the natives for past wrongs won't accomplish anything.

I think that's a facile comparison. As bad as wartime internment camps, head taxes and other discriminatory measures undoubtebly were, there was never the kind of large scale effort to destroy Chinese or Japanese culture in the way Aborginals were targetted through residential schools, reservations, etc. What's more, Asian immigarnts came from societies where both agrarian and urban lifestyles promoted a strong work ethic, not from largely nomadic , tribal societies suddenly plunked into an emerging industrial society.

[Riverwind]

What's more, Asian immigarnts came from societies where both agrarian and urban lifestyles promoted a strong work ethic, not from largely nomadic , tribal societies suddenly plunked into an emerging industrial society.

So you agree the problem is not really what the white gov't did to the natives but rather native culture itself? The residential schools seem like a really bad idea today, however, educating the natives so they would participate fully in the emerging industrial society was a reasonable thing to do at the time.

[Black Dog]

So you agree the problem is not really what the white gov't did to the natives but rather native culture itself?

No I do not. Native culture worked relatively fine in its own way. It was the conquest and subsequent destruction of that culture that paved the way for today's social problems.

The residential schools seem like a really bad idea today, however, educating the natives so they would participate fully in the emerging industrial society was a reasonable thing to do at the time.

The residential schools were designed to destroy native culture. They were not some well-intentioned experiment gone awry.

[I Miss Trudeau]

uh, from your link:

Although Aboriginal people accounted for a very small proportion in most of the cities included in the study (1.5%), the average proportion of poor people who were Aboriginal was 3.4%.

Although a disproportionate number of the poor are aboriginal, aboriginals comprise only 3.4% of the poor in the cities studied.

Expressed in relation to their population, they are worse off than whites. Sheer numbers is a meaningless measurement.

[Argus]

It is exacerbated by their being few or no opportunities on a reserve, which is one of the reasons I'd like to see more urban reserves.

Urban reserves don't help. The just become proverbial 'neighbors from hell' that will do anything to make a quick buck (casinos, burning garbage, etc). What you need to address is the the culture that thinks working 9 to 5 is some how beneath them..

I don't think you have in mind or that the government has attempted the kind of urban reserves I have in mind. Let me describe a place in Ottawa merely as an example. It's a middle class condo. It conists of a very long, low building, say about 4-5 stories, with two high towers at the ends. Behind this condo is a large open park like area with a man-made pond, with an island in the middle, and lots of greenery. You could probably fit the equivilent of the entire population of most reserves into this building. If you made it simply a low rise, and ran it completely around the borders of that area, ie, so that the interior land was an enormous courtyard, you'd still be able to fit in the population of almost any reservation in Canada. This easily smack in the midst of a city. You add in all the people you need to help with education, substance abuse, skills training, employment, etc. etc., and see if you can acclimate them to living in the midst of an urban area (If I'm not being too patronizing here). They'd still have their entire tribal structure, but outside the walls would be a city where they could find work. Is this totally out of line? I don't think something on this scale has ever been tried before.

[Riverwind]

add in all the people you need to help with education, substance abuse, skills training, employment, etc. etc., and see if you can acclimate them to living in the midst of an urban area (If I'm not being too patronizing here). They'd still have their entire tribal structure, but outside the walls would be a city where they could find work. Is this totally out of line? I don't think something on this scale has ever been tried before.

Most likely the place will be completely trashed and unlivable within 6 months as the residents sell off anything with value like washing machines and fridges. My extended family has some experience providing affordable housing to natives in cities so I am speaking from experience. One of the biggest problems with this concept is the native idea of community property. If you rent a place to one family then all of their friends and relatives presume it belongs to them as well. Communal ownership sounds Utopian in theory but, in the end, it always means nobody takes responsibility for anything.

[Argus]

add in all the people you need to help with education, substance abuse, skills training, employment, etc. etc., and see if you can acclimate them to living in the midst of an urban area (If I'm not being too patronizing here). They'd still have their entire tribal structure, but outside the walls would be a city where they could find work. Is this totally out of line? I don't think something on this scale has ever been tried before.

Most likely the place will be completely trashed and unlivable within 6 months as the residents sell off anything with value like washing machines and fridges. My extended family has some experience providing affordable housing to natives in cities so I am speaking from experience. One of the biggest problems with this concept is the native idea of community property. If you rent a place to one family then all of their friends and relatives presume it belongs to them as well. Communal ownership sounds Utopian in theory but, in the end, it always means nobody takes responsibility for anything.

I didn't have in mind renting the place out, but giving them the individual units. Here, it's yours now. Yours to keep up, too. If it breaks, it's yours to fix. Actually owning something usually has the effect of making people feel more protective towards that thing.

Hey, it might not work. Maybe you're right. But we we need to do something to get aborigines into areas where they can live economically, and not simply sit around on welfare drinking and sniffing glue.

[newbie]

So you agree the problem is not really what the white gov't did to the natives but rather native culture itself?

No I do not. Native culture worked relatively fine in its own way. It was the conquest and subsequent destruction of that culture that paved the way for today's social problems.

The residential schools seem like a really bad idea today, however, educating the natives so they would participate fully in the emerging industrial society was a reasonable thing to do at the time.

The residential schools were designed to destroy native culture. They were not some well-intentioned experiment gone awry.

And let's not forget the physical and mental abuse that was endured during the process.

[Riverwind]

The residential schools were designed to destroy native culture. They were not some well-intentioned experiment gone awry.

And let's not forget the physical and mental abuse that was endured during the process.

The residential schools were set up with the best intentions. Even today it is reasonable to argue that natives need to at least partially assimilate into mainstream society in order to get out of their poverty trap. The residential school approach was heavy handed according to today's norms, however, when they were set up 'white' kids were still getting the strap in regular schools. Insisting that residential schools were some non lethal concentration camp for natives is unfair revisionist history.

[newbie]

The residential schools were designed to destroy native culture. They were not some well-intentioned experiment gone awry.

And let's not forget the physical and mental abuse that was endured during the process.

The residential schools were set up with the best intentions. Even today it is reasonable to argue that natives need to at least partially assimilate into mainstream society in order to get out of their poverty trap. The residential school approach was heavy handed according to today's norms, however, when they were set up 'white' kids were still getting the strap in regular schools. Insisting that residential schools were some non lethal concentration camp for natives is unfair revisionist history.

I don't think you understand the gravity of the abuse Sparhawk. I'm not talking about strapping here. Here are some sites to check out.

http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/gs/schl_e.html

http://www.usask.ca/nativelaw/rsbib.html

http://www.ncsa.ca/residential.asp