Previous  1 ... 5  6  7  8  9  Next

As crazy as it sounds, the leadership of the native community in Canada is pretty keen on maintaining that Indian Act that forces them on to postage-stamp sized parcels of land ... something to do with the source of power of chiefs and their corrupt band councils. If you held a national referendum, you would find that the overwhelming majority of Canadians would vote to scrap the Indian Act for a whole variety of reasons.

   

the idea of band councils is a contentious one amongst indigenous people, and is one created by the apartheid state of Canada. i would not say that it is a widely accepted form of government, considering it has nothing to do with the traditions of any of the people who are ruled by them. chiefs are also not necessarily how any given group of indigenous people were traditionally governed. many groups were more likely to use councils of elders than appoint a single figurehead or elect any other kind of council. the Indian Act, too, is a contentious issue. large parts of it are extremely problematic and oppressive, but other parts of it have to do with treaties. the Indian Act was created, in part, as a means of bundling how treaties are dealt with.

   

Can we someday get 'edited by mod' changed to 'removed by Mod'.

   

. the Indian Act was created, in part, as a means of bundling how treaties are dealt with.



Much easier to cut great, big cheques that way.

   

Quite a few of the chiefs like the perks that go with running their Bannock Republics. Were democratic reforms, rule of law and fiscal transparency to be instituted on these reserves, empowering the average individual, many of these chiefs would be given the boot or jailed for graft and corruption. It's in their best interest to keep the Indian Act alive, as that keeps them in power living a life denied to the majority of residents that they keep poor and under their heels. Many reserves are ruled like fiefdoms....some have benevolent rulers who are looking out for their people and others are ....well we read about them in the news all of the time, embezzling funds meant for daycares, schools and training, addictions, social assistance, disaster relief.....while blaming everyone else for their people's troubles.

   

Can't remember who said it, but it fits IceOwl the Dumpster Diver.

'His asshole must be envious of his brain for all the shit it produces'.

   

p.s. I did not write the Indian Act. I did not set up a system of apartheid, nor did any other living Canadian. Sorry. I am not responsible for what happened generations behind me any more than any "Native" Canadian is.

p.p.s. When are we allowed to refer to ourselves as "natives" of Canada? What is the cut-off date? How many generations?

   

On my paternal grandmother's side they can trace their roots back to the first few years of the 18th century(1703 or 1704), as can many descendants of the UELs. They eventually settled in and around Cornwall. On my mom's side they had UELs that settled around Renfrew, Ontario before heading west in the 1880s. Sort of interesting as my dad's dad came from Renfrewshire in Scotland

   

On my maternal grandmother's .... 1702 ... also became UELs from Pennsylvania. Rather than put the Mohawk, etc, in reservations, they married them, made them neighbours, members of their churches, families, fought along side of them defending their common homes. That other "Indian Act" stuff came along a couple of generations later.

   

regardless of whether you did it or not, you still benefit from it.

   

I do, do I?

   

Which one lol

   

We took their land. Without that Canada would not be Canada and would not have allowed white people to prosper as they did. Sounds like your family goes back a long ways here. Pushing the Natives onto reserves meant that families like yours could get established, provide a good upbringing for their kids thru the generations up to you.

We cant get away from the fact we committed ethnic cleansing in Canada, and collectively the Europeans (and now Asians) that came here benefitted from it. The question is how to deal with it, which is where i part ways with the Natives. Just keeping elevating them from a suppressed to a favored other just won't make a unified Canada in the long run. Natives need to integrate with the dominant culture. We need to provide the funds to help them do that, instead of continually trying to buy their silence so they won't get in the way while we build our prosperity.

   

Nor can we get away from the fact that ethnic cleansing is not some remarkable historical affair but perjhaps one of the most common events in human history, and, as far as athinic cleansing goes, this was by far one of the humanitarian efforts ever.

Compare, for example, the Crusaders in Jerusalem. Or the Mongol hordes. Or ISIS in SYria and Iraq. Or England in Scotland. Or humans and neanderthals. Or the Pacific Coastal First Nations on the Haida Gwaii. Every white guy in Canada comes from a long line of ancestors who at some point ot other have been subject to ethnic cleansing.

The problem with Frist Nations is not money. It's the relationship between the Government of Canada and the various tribes. It's the Indian Act.

   

No Argument there. But, I don't think we can just revoke it and say there you go, go on and be productive Canadians. Anyway, the Supreme court seems to have settled the matter, and we're going to be paying thru the nose from now on.

I don't think it's an excuse to say ISIS does it, so it's OK for us to have done it. Our whole legal framework says differently. Since we weren't smart enough to make treaties with the BC FNs when we had the upper hand, we are well and truly fucked now unless we want to go against our own laws. That's the problem with all the noble ideas of the equality and worth of man that came out of Europe. When that only applied to white men, all was good, but then some smarty pants started causing trouble.

   

Previous  1 ... 5  6  7  8  9  Next