It's the Fifth Annual White Liberal Guilt Trip Day!

[ExFlyer]

17 hours ago, eyeball said:

They never lost anything it just needed to be proven it was still theirs.

That's not what our courts, treaties and international conventions we agree to say.

Yes they did. They lost their territories. They lost territories to to other bands in their wars and then they lost them to the Europeans. 

Yeah, well, our courts are too politically correct as opposed to reality.

 

[ExFlyer]

16 hours ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Your whole premise is based on a misconception. Indigenous peoples were never conquered here. That’s why there were treaties. 
Learn your own history.
 

Oh? They were not conquered?? Were they then vanquished? Defeated? Subdued?Were they then? Being submissive? 

Bottom line is they lost and yes, we made treaties but that was only to prevent more killing of the natives and we (Canada) had certainly paid that for the past 200+ years.

 

[Chrissy1979]

5 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Oh? They were not conquered?? Were they then vanquished? Defeated? Subdued?Were they then? Being submissive? 

Bottom line is they lost and yes, we made treaties but that was only to prevent more killing of the natives and we (Canada) had certainly paid that for the past 200+ years.

 

Lost what? There wasn’t a war. You’re thinking of the U.S. That’s not our history.

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Lost what? There wasn’t a war. You’re thinking of the U.S. That’s not our history.

No, I am no thinking of the US. The Europeans came and took what they wanted. Sometimes with resistance other times without, they just gave it up.  

The brits and the french fought and some  indigenous chose partners. When french lost, so did the indigenous. 1763 ended the French and Indian War/Seven Years' War between Great Britain and France, as well as their respective allies. In the terms of the treaty, France gave up all its territories in mainland North America, effectively ending any foreign military threat to the British colonies there.

Here is some history of the natives warring with each other....https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/services/military-history/history-heritage/popular-books/aboriginal-people-canadian-military/warfare-pre-columbian-north-america.html

[I am Groot]

16 hours ago, eyeball said:

I don't feel guilty, I feel cheated. I had no idea what our government did to First Nations.

Took their land? Boohoo. 

16 hours ago, eyeball said:

There was no mention of it in my education when I was growing up

You weren't taught any history? How sad for you. Clearly you lived under a liberal or NDP government.

I learned that the place I'm from was invaded and largely conquered by the Romans who brutalized the population. Then, after they left, it was invaded and almost entirely occupied by the Vikings, who brutalized the population. Then, after they were driven off, it was invaded and occupied by the Normans, who brutalized the population.

Are you starting to get the idea of how the entire world worked for most of human history? What we did to the natives was NOTHING compared to what they did to each other when they invaded each others territory, much less what was done to us when we were occupied. Look everywhere in the world and you see the same damned thing, but somehow, the only people still crying about it are the bloody indigenous people in the Anglosphere.

16 hours ago, eyeball said:

t's not guilt for our governments actions that we've inherited it's liability for our governments actions and inaction towards First Nations. There's no clause in the Constitution that limits that liability.

So change the constitution. Rip it up and make a new one that doesn't indulge in racial prejudice.

[eyeball]

4 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Yeah, well, our courts are too politically correct as opposed to reality.

If you say so. If even more than half the country got behind you it'll still be a long hard uphill push to turn that on its head never putting natives back in their place.

Good luck.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

You weren't taught any history? How sad for you. Clearly you lived under a liberal or NDP government.

Ontario PC's at the time actually.

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

I learned that the place I'm from was invaded and largely conquered by the Romans who brutalized the population. Then, after they left, it was invaded and almost entirely occupied by the Vikings, who brutalized the population. Then, after they were driven off, it was invaded and occupied by the Normans, who brutalized the population.

Are you starting to get the idea of how the entire world worked for most of human history?

Sure but we're talking about the period of time that encompasses our living memory not your ancient historical whataboutisms.

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

So change the constitution. Rip it up and make a new one that doesn't indulge in racial prejudice.

You're the one that's unhappy about it, you change it.  Good luck, you'll probably be dead and gone before its even open to the possibility of change.

[ExFlyer]

40 minutes ago, eyeball said:

If you say so. If even more than half the country got behind you it'll still be a long hard uphill push to turn that on its head never putting natives back in their place.

Good luck.

There is a lot more than half the country thinking the indians have gotten far too much.

 

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

There is a lot more than half the country thinking the indians have gotten far too much.

 

No cite.

30%polled say too much is spent 

https://angusreid.org/indigenous-status-culture/

I have to say I would guess a lot more than half would be more than 60%, which is about twice what the actual number is according to Angus Reid.

Edited October 2, 2025 by Michael Hardner

[ExFlyer]

48 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

No cite.

30%polled say too much is spent 

https://angusreid.org/indigenous-status-culture/

 

If you take the don't know, can't say into account here is way More than 50%.

60% say they should be governed by the same systems and rules as other Canadian.

"For example, while a slight majority of Canadians feel that Indigenous People have a unique status in Canada (55%), and the vast majority of Indigenous identifying individuals agree (68%), a large number push back (45%), saying Indigenous Peoples should have the same status as others living in modern Canada, including two-in-three Conservative Party voters (68%)." 

Very important in this poll is "The Angus Reid Institute collected responses from those who self-identify as Indigenous in this survey."

"The total number of responses from Indigenous individuals (245 responses) was weighted within the total sample to be statistically representative at five per cent. Please consider these views as informative but not authoritative."

So, the poll is only asked of 245 indigenous....  Ask Canadians and see what ya get

Anyway Michael...your cite does not help your cause

[Nefarious Banana]

Un~elected UNDRIP and their influence on woke governments will be the downfall of Canada.  It's well on its way.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

30%polled say too much is spent 

https://angusreid.org/indigenous-status-culture/

This is an encouraging poll result alongside the one above.

From the article.

The federal government stopped enforcing the requirement for First Nations to publish audited financial statements in 2015. Four-in-five (82%) including 63 per cent who identify as First Nation, say this should be brought back.

[Army Guy]

7 hours ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Lost what? There wasn’t a war. You’re thinking of the U.S. That’s not our history.

Below is a list of conflicts between Canada and our own indigenous people, so many that they were listed in alphabetical order...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Indigenous_conflicts_in_Canada

[Army Guy]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

No cite.

30%polled say too much is spent 

https://angusreid.org/indigenous-status-culture/

I have to say I would guess a lot more than half would be more than 60%, which is about twice what the actual number is according to Angus Reid.

Yes but then again 45 % of Canadians think that Indigenous people think they should not have any special status that other Canadians don't have....

and 60 % say indigenous people should be governed by the same systems and rules as other Canadians are....

[Michael Hardner]

58 minutes ago, eyeball said:

This is an encouraging poll result alongside the one above.

From the article.

The federal government stopped enforcing the requirement for First Nations to publish audited financial statements in 2015. Four-in-five (82%) including 63 per cent who identify as First Nation, say this should be brought back.

If only they wanted that for the white government too...

[I am Groot]

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

Ontario PC's at the time actually.

Like I said, liberals.

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

Sure but we're talking about the period of time that encompasses our living memory not your ancient historical whataboutisms.

Our living memory? You remember life back before the Europeans came, do you?

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

You're the one that's unhappy about it, you change it.  Good luck, you'll probably be dead and gone before its even open to the possibility of change.

Probably. When the mass of 'newcomers' becomes the power, they'll get tired of all the mandated money going to non-working people and change the constitution, do away with all the treaties, and tell natives to work or starve.

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

This is an encouraging poll result alongside the one above.

From the article.

The federal government stopped enforcing the requirement for First Nations to publish audited financial statements in 2015. Four-in-five (82%) including 63 per cent who identify as First Nation, say this should be brought back.

What is encouraging? Or, who is it encouraging for?

 

[Chrissy1979]

48 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Below is a list of conflicts between Canada and our own indigenous people, so many that they were listed in alphabetical order...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Indigenous_conflicts_in_Canada

No, it's not. If you had looked, you would see they rarely involved the Government of Canada. Those that did (like the Red River Resistance) were settled with treaties, not conquest 

[herbie]

B.C. Conservative staffer fired for calling Reconciliation Day flag a ‘disgrace’

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

No cite.

30%polled say too much is spent 

https://angusreid.org/indigenous-status-culture/

 

And another 21% that aren't sure. Sounds like at least 50% of people either think it's too much or aren't sure if it's too much.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

Our living memory?

Yes, two to three generations of people, many still alive and the concept living memory encompasses people who witnessed and experienced the pain of older generations.

I know this sort of thinking makes you alternate between puking laughing and screeching but I really really DGAF.

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

Probably. When the mass of 'newcomers' becomes the power, they'll get tired of all the mandated money going to non-working people and change the constitution, do away with all the treaties, and tell natives to work or starve.

Very few people will be working by then and it'll be AI whining about it's mandate to produce free stuff for lazy ungrateful people off all stripes and flavours.

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

What is encouraging? Or, who is it encouraging for?

Not sourpuss' with chips on their shoulders that's for sure.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

Yes, two to three generations of people, many still alive and the concept living memory encompasses people who witnessed and experienced the pain of older generations.

I know this sort of thinking makes you alternate between puking laughing and screeching but I really really DGAF.

Very few people will be working by then and it'll be AI whining about it's mandate to produce free stuff for lazy ungrateful people off all stripes and flavours.

That's not what living memory means.  It doesn't mean that someone knew someone who remembered it. 

 

[eyeball]

25 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

That's not what living memory means.  It doesn't mean that someone knew someone who remembered it. 

I'm sorry but you just don't have fùcking clue what you're talking about.

the concept of "living memory" is often intergenerational, encompassing the shared narratives, knowledge, and values passed down through families and communities, creating a sense of collective identity and cultural continuity across different ages. This process is central to constructing collective memory, where individuals receive and contribute to the understanding of a shared past, even while personal or implicit memories are transformed through their reception by younger generations. 

[Legato]

16 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I'm sorry but you just don't have fùcking clue what you're talking about.

the concept of "living memory" is often intergenerational, encompassing the shared narratives, knowledge, and values passed down through families and communities, creating a sense of collective identity and cultural continuity across different ages. This process is central to constructing collective memory, where individuals receive and contribute to the understanding of a shared past, even while personal or implicit memories are transformed through their reception by younger generations. 

Yeah, just like whispering something into the ear of the person beside you and passing it on around 20 people until it gets back totally different. Don't tell me you never tried that.

[eyeball]

1 minute ago, Legato said:

Yeah, just like whispering something into the ear of the person beside you and passing it on around 20 people until it gets back totally different. Don't tell me you never tried that.

No, it's nothing like that at all.

And I don't frequent Infowars thanks.