ExFlyer Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 Just now, eyeball said: What war? Where are the official declaration and surrender documents that cede and extinguish indigenous title to traditional lands to our forces? Invaders needed those back in the day to support their claims against competing claims from other would be invading empires and colonial powers rampaging around the planet. It's like claiming seabeds and other chunks of the world that remain in contention today - there's evidence to support the claim. Simply wading ashore, planting a flag and calling it a done deal was a romantic notion even hundreds of years ago. Conquered. Succumbed. Defeated. Yielded. Submitted. Capitulated. Call it what you want, they lost it. They lost....period. And they are where they are because they lost. They chose not to integrate and now are what they are, a welfare society. Seabed analogy makes no sense in this discussion 1 Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
herbie Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 15 hours ago, Venandi said: Your breathtaking inability to connect the dots here is (IMO of course) what actually perpetuates Perhaps your insistence that dots are not just dots, the have to be connected is the problem. I too held some similar redneck gripes until I left the confines of the city and spent the last half of my life living and working alongside native people. I have friends and family with status and understand grievances. I'm also quite aware there are extreme views among all humans and just like with everyone else those people's views are not the views of their race or social status. You are on a forum where a lot of extreme right ideas are believed to be mainstream conservative ones. Quote
Black Dog Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 38 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: Dude, you are way off base here. As pointed out, there are "3,394 reserves in Canada set aside for more than 600 First Nations. According to the 2021 Census, there are 1,127,010 First Nations in Canada.https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100013791/1535470872302" all of whose population live there for free...housing, clothing infrastructure etc ... all free and every resident gets government monthly cheques. The indigenous lost the war and therefore their "traditions lands" mean shit. Their "reserves" are on their "traditional lands". They chose it. I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make here, but You really are quite ignorant of history if you think the Indigenous people chose where the reserves would be. Quote But hey, you are deflecting again. You still have not answered the question i asked you waaaay back "What have the indigenous done for Canada in the past 300 years???? What value do you add to Canadian society? Answer that!! " Why would I bother answering a bad faith question when i know you won't accept the answer? Quote "Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." - Francis M. Wilhoit
ExFlyer Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 17 minutes ago, herbie said: Perhaps your insistence that dots are not just dots, the have to be connected is the problem. I too held some similar redneck gripes until I left the confines of the city and spent the last half of my life living and working alongside native people. I have friends and family with status and understand grievances. I'm also quite aware there are extreme views among all humans and just like with everyone else those people's views are not the views of their race or social status. You are on a forum where a lot of extreme right ideas are believed to be mainstream conservative ones. I too have had the pleasure or displeasure of being on many small indigenous communities and reserves and the overwhelming remembrance and take was the lack of interest and endeavour to better themselves. I saw misery and always an excuse for it. I saw despicable living conditions but no attempt at bettering it. When you get everything for free, you lose ambition and desire and that is, unfortunately, what I saw. 1 Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
ExFlyer Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 4 minutes ago, Black Dog said: I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make here, but You really are quite ignorant of history if you think the Indigenous people chose where the reserves would be. Why would I bother answering a bad faith question when i know you won't accept the answer? If you do not know what the point is, why do you keep on trying to justify? You know what I said and have tried and tried to disavow it but failed each time. This is a free country and no indigenous person is forced, in any way, to live on reserves or anywhere else for that matter. Look Dude, you have not and cannot prove your claims. You can not and have not answred the the simple question posed to you. The hole you are digging or dug has nothing at the bottom. You come across as a liar trying to justify your lies, so "Why would I bother answering ", well to prove what you have spent so much time trying to justify. I would gladly accept if you had given an answer with proof of your claim. Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
eyeball Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 49 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: Conquered. Succumbed. Defeated. Yielded. Submitted. Capitulated. Call it what you want, they lost it. They lost....period. And they are where they are because they lost. They chose not to integrate and now are what they are, a welfare society. Except they're winning everything back in court. They appear to be integrating our justice system into their ways quite handily. Anyway, there's very little welfare happening hereabouts. There's way to much opportunity for that to be worth the trouble. Of course we have modern treaties where I live so maybe that has something to do with it. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Black Dog Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 19 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: If you do not know what the point is, why do you keep on trying to justify? You know what I said and have tried and tried to disavow it but failed each time. This is a free country and no indigenous person is forced, in any way, to live on reserves or anywhere else for that matter. LOL wait do you think i was talking about the present day? Man what? Quote "Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." - Francis M. Wilhoit
ExFlyer Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 5 minutes ago, eyeball said: Except they're winning everything back in court. They appear to be integrating our justice system into their ways quite handily. Anyway, there's very little welfare happening hereabouts. There's way to much opportunity for that to be worth the trouble. Of course we have modern treaties where I live so maybe that has something to do with it. That is a sign of our times. Call it what you want but if your entire income comes from the government...it is welfare. Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
ExFlyer Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 4 minutes ago, Black Dog said: LOL wait do you think i was talking about the present day? Man what? There has never been a time when you could not live where you wanted. The pit you have dug is still empty LOL "Man what"??? Huh?? LOL Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
Black Dog Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 4 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: There has never been a time when you could not live where you wanted. Between 1886 and the 1930s or '40s, Indigenous people in certain areas couldn't leave the reserve without a pass issued by the government. Man, are you ignorant. 1 Quote "Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." - Francis M. Wilhoit
eyeball Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 6 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: That is a sign of our times. Call it what you want but if your entire income comes from the government...it is welfare. I suppose but what does welfare have to do with removing barriers to opportunity by negotiating treaties, winning court rulings and reconciliation? Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
DUI_Offender Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 I've always stated that the main issue facing the prairie provinces, especially Winnipeg, is the integration, assimilation, and acceptance of our Indigenous community. I believe of the 850,000 people in the city, there are 100,000 people with Native blood, and most are full Indigenous. The problem with the people who are complaining about Natives "being lazy" or "looking for handouts" is that they have never even remotely experienced the widespread racism, discrimination, or abuse that the Native community has endured for the past century. The City of Winnipeg, in particular, has done everything humanly possible to make the problem worse. First, the close down rec centres, libraries, hockey rinks, and other places that children and young adults gravitate to, in the roughest and poorest areas of the city. Then they build a huge casino in the 90s in the North End, knowing that the Natives were experiencing very high rates of alcohol and drug abuse. So naturally, they now gravitate to the casinos, considering there are limited options in employment, and themselves being residential school survivors, have no parenting skills. even if the city loses money on keeping libraries, rec centres, sporting facilities, and educational opportunities open in the North and West End, the trade off would be lower crime, and less chance young people have of joining gangs, since the majority of kids who join gangs or start using substances do so for boredom, or from a sense of not belonging anywhere else. Obviously, the solution will not be easy, but the people that have the opinion that the First Nations people should "just get over it" or are "just waiting for an easy handout" is intellectually lazy, at best. Quote
DUI_Offender Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 (edited) 1 hour ago, ExFlyer said: Conquered. Succumbed. Defeated. Yielded. Submitted. Capitulated. Call it what you want, they lost it. They lost....period. And they are where they are because they lost. The French lost in the Battle of Acadia, and as to my knowledge, they were not stripped of their human rights, and forced to live on non-arable reservations in the middle of nowhere, and shunned from most aspects of society. French Canadians did not have their children taken away forcefully, relocated to schools to erasure their culture and traditions, only to be abused and dehumanised, both physically and sexually. Edited October 2 by DUI_Offender Quote
ExFlyer Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 51 minutes ago, Black Dog said: Between 1886 and the 1930s or '40s, Indigenous people in certain areas couldn't leave the reserve without a pass issued by the government. Man, are you ignorant. Prove it...... Oh wait, you cannot prove anything LOL Just another epic fail by black duck LOL Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
ExFlyer Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 (edited) 15 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said: The French lost in the Battle of Acadia, and as to my knowledge, they were not stripped of their human rights, and forced to live on non-arable reservations in the middle of nowhere, and shunned from most aspects of society. French Canadians did not have their children taken away forcefully, relocated to schools to erasure their culture and traditions, only to be abused and dehumanised, both physically and sexually. The French got Quebec...the indigenous got whatever they wanted. The french had to work, to pay for that they had. the indigenous lived and still live off government handouts and teat. It may suck to be indigenous but.. they have as much opportunity as any Canadian to live where they want and to better themselves but, it seems it is easier to wallow in self pity Edited October 2 by ExFlyer Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
ExFlyer Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 56 minutes ago, eyeball said: I suppose but what does welfare have to do with removing barriers to opportunity by negotiating treaties, winning court rulings and reconciliation? What barriers??? They can go where they want and do what they want. They need a treaty to go to school? To move to wherever? To work and earn a living? 1 Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
DUI_Offender Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 (edited) 41 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: The French got Quebec...the indigenous got whatever they wanted. The French already owned Quebec. They had Nova Scotia, PEI, and New Brunswick too, but lost the territories to the British in the 18th century. The Indigenous received a bunch of small reservations, in the middle of nowhere. 41 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: The french had to work, to pay for that they had. the indigenous lived and still live off government handouts and teat. Not so easy to obtain employment, when nearly all the employers at the time refused to hire Native Canadians. 41 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: It may suck to be indigenous but.. they have as much opportunity as any Canadian to live where they want and to better themselves but, it seems it is easier to wallow in self pity No they have not. Only recently (last 50 years), have they acquired equal rights, that all Canadians enjoy. Edited October 2 by DUI_Offender Quote
CdnFox Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 56 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said: The French lost in the Battle of Acadia, and as to my knowledge, they were not stripped of their human rights, and forced to live on non-arable reservations in the middle of nowhere, and shunned from most aspects of society. French Canadians did not have their children taken away forcefully, relocated to schools to erasure their culture and traditions, only to be abused and dehumanised, both physically and sexually. None of that happened with the first nations either. However they DID rebel so there were some restrictions. ANd yes french canadians and a host of other immigrant familes had to have their kids educated at Canadian schools by law and had to learn english and so on and so forth. Some people just want to re write history to create victims. 40 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: What barriers??? They can go where they want and do what they want. They need a treaty to go to school? To move to wherever? To work and earn a living? They have every single right 'Whitey' has and then some we don't. 1 Quote
CdnFox Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 3 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said: The Indigenous received a bunch of small reservations, in the middle of nowhere. Where they already lived. Quote Not so easy to obtain employment, when nearly all the employers at the time refused to hire Native Canadians. The irish went throught that. Start your own business. Quote No they have not. Only recently (last 50 years), have they acquired equal rights, that all Canadians enjoy. First off if they have had them for 50 years then yes yes they have those rights. 50 years is a long time. And second they've had most of their rights for much longer than that, and some rights that other people still don't have. Soooooo... Not really a lot of excuse now. 1 Quote
CdnFox Posted October 2 Report Posted October 2 1 hour ago, Black Dog said: Between 1886 and the 1930s or '40s, Indigenous people in certain areas couldn't leave the reserve without a pass issued by the government. Man, are you ignorant. oh so you mean like when I had to show my vaccine pass before I was allowed to go anywhere in public? I don't recall hearing you complain that much about the concept at the time. You thought it was a great idea and we should all do it for our own safety. Boy that sounds familiar now doesn't it So apparently you don't have a problem with the idea of passes being necessary for people's own safety. And the government doesn't restrict that kind of behavior to first nations, everybody is subject to that if they want In addition it was a very small number of areas, wasn't enforced with any seriousness and as near as I can tell not a single person ever went to jail for it. Now personally I think that no Canadian should ever require a pass to travel within Canada. But you can't claim that one was a good thing and the other was not. Sorry Quote
DUI_Offender Posted October 3 Report Posted October 3 9 hours ago, CdnFox said: oh so you mean like when I had to show my vaccine pass before I was allowed to go anywhere in public? I don't recall hearing you complain that much about the concept at the time. You thought it was a great idea and we should all do it for our own safety. Boy that sounds familiar now doesn't it So apparently you don't have a problem with the idea of passes being necessary for people's own safety. And the government doesn't restrict that kind of behavior to first nations, everybody is subject to that if they want In addition it was a very small number of areas, wasn't enforced with any seriousness and as near as I can tell not a single person ever went to jail for it. Now personally I think that no Canadian should ever require a pass to travel within Canada. But you can't claim that one was a good thing and the other was not. Sorry 1 Quote
August1991 Posted October 3 Report Posted October 3 On 9/30/2024 at 1:05 PM, I am Groot said: ... And spare me your complaints about generalizing. I KNOW I'm generalizing. That's what you have to do when talking about a large group of millions of individuals. No one but a fool thinks that means every single member of that group is the same. I reckon this is Paul Martin whispering to Justin Trudeau. Quote
ExFlyer Posted October 3 Report Posted October 3 12 hours ago, DUI_Offender said: The French already owned Quebec. They had Nova Scotia, PEI, and New Brunswick too, but lost the territories to the British in the 18th century. The Indigenous received a bunch of small reservations, in the middle of nowhere. Not so easy to obtain employment, when nearly all the employers at the time refused to hire Native Canadians. No they have not. Only recently (last 50 years), have they acquired equal rights, that all Canadians enjoy. The indigenous "reservations" were where they were. They chose that locations and had lived there for eons. Your assumption. Employment was there if they wanted to work They always had the same rights as every other Canadian. There is no bill or charter or law that differentiated indigenous or non indigenous. The problem with most indigenous is they are so used to government handouts, they have no incentive to better themselves. If you claim only in the past 50 years, well, they have had 50 years to get their shit together. 1 Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
ExFlyer Posted October 3 Report Posted October 3 (edited) 15 hours ago, Black Dog said: Between 1886 and the 1930s or '40s, Indigenous people in certain areas couldn't leave the reserve without a pass issued by the government. Man, are you ignorant. Prove that. Ignorant? I provide evidence and proof...you? you Provide nothing, the ignorant are the ones making claims without providing data on what they claim. Sounds like another rectal pluck from you. Edited October 3 by ExFlyer Quote Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.
Moonbox Posted October 3 Report Posted October 3 18 hours ago, eyeball said: I'm admitting you're right that it's ridiculous - at least halfway. How do we carve out the ridiculous so local and distant management can get serious? I don't have a great answer for that, especially in the current environment. I'm just pushing back at the idea that local governments are any less prone to f*ckery, or that the only thing you should care about with the federal government is what handouts its offering you locally. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
Recommended Posts
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.