Anti-Muslim vandals strike Fort Saskatchewan home twice
Zipperfish @ Mon Oct 27, 2014 9:02 am
andyt andyt:
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.
Canada can revoke the lives of every Indian if need be. That is the brutal calculus at the end of the day. The Government of Canada has overwhelming military might compared to any First Nations. Not that I would support such an approach--we would end up like Israel.
$1:
I don't think it's an excuse to say ISIS does it, so it's OK for us to have done it.
I don't recall saying such a thing. I said it happens. Frequently. Acknowledging it is not excusing it.
$1:
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.
What are you talking about? Who's "we"? I wasn't even alive. You are talking about the entity of Canada of which you are a part, as is every member of every First Nation in Canada. And as for upper hand, if anything Canada has more of an upper hand now than when BC was a colony, for example.
The deal is a mutually prosperous relationship on Canada's terms--i.e. that Frist Nations remain a part of Canada.
I support First Nations becoming peaceful, propsperous and contented citizens of Canada, and I support limited self-governance within Canada. I don't support any law that defines genetics as a basis for special rights or persecution.
andyt @ Mon Oct 27, 2014 9:17 am
You inherited the deal. Can't weasel out of it because you were alive. We neglected to make treaties the way they did in the east, because we didn't think it was worth the bother for those no count injuns we could just push around. Now we're reaping that harvest. And you and I are alive now, having to be visited with the sins of our fathers.
You don't support any law that defines genetics, yet support limited self-government. Who are these people who will self-govern themselves? how will they be determined except by genetics.
This I wasn't alive is really old bullshit. You live in the country you were born into. What you have inherited is a very difficult problem. How to deal fairly, as defined by our current views on what's fair, with people that were screwed around?
And the reason you get to be a prosperous white boy is because your ancestors pushed around the people that were already here, to build a system that for the longest time favored the whites, allowed them to prosper and raise their children under that system. Meanwhile, for the red boys, not so much for the longest time. No way around acknowledging that. The question is what to do about it that doesn't just create the inverse situation for the future.
Zipperfish @ Mon Oct 27, 2014 9:27 am
andyt andyt:
You inherited the deal. Can't weasel out of it because you were alive. We neglected to make treaties the way they did in the east, because we didn't think it was worth the bother for those no count injuns we could just push around. Now we're reaping that harvest. And you and I are alive now, having to be visited with the sins of our fathers.
I'm aware of that, but although I'm Canadian, I prefer to to keep "me" separate from "the entity of Canada." Keeps the books cleaner.
$1:
You don't support any law that defines genetics, yet support limited self-government. Who are these people who will self-govern themselves? how will they be determined except by genetics.
Yes, I support limited self-governance. But part of that would be an immigration strategy for First Nations. They cannot deny citizenship in a given First Nation based on racial heritage.
$1:
This I wasn't alive is really old bullshit. You live in the country you were born into. What you have inherited is a very difficult problem. How to deal fairly, as defined by our current views on what's fair, with people that were screwed around?
Again, I'm aware of that. But I keep the actions of "me" and "Canada" separate. So I don't say things like "we shipped their children off to residential school." Canada shipped them off. I'm not taking any personal responsibility for that. I take personal responsibility for the areas over which I have control. Thta is a vote on voting day. And I support candidates and Parties that seek peaceful means to make First Nations prosperous, peaceful and contented Canadians.
$1:
And the reason you get to be a prosperous white boy is because your ancestors pushed around the people that were already here, to build a system that for the longest time favored the whites, allowed them to prosper and raise their children under that system. Meanwhile, for the red boys, not so much for the longest time. No way around acknowledging that. The question is what to do about it that doesn't just create the inverse situation for the future.
[/quote]Who knows what my ancestors did. Some may have spit children on medieval lances in an orgy of bloodlust. Others perhaps starved as slaves.
andyt @ Mon Oct 27, 2014 9:42 am
Can't deny citizenship to a given FN. How is an FN determined, except by genetics. Otherwise they just become cities with no right to restrict immigration to anybody. Personally I would like to see that, get rid of any special status based on race. Doubt I'll see it, tho, nor your children.
You want to quibble about me vs Canada fine. Personally I'm willing to shoulder my share of collective guilt. Otherwise, it's a bunch of me's who didn't do anything themselves, yet here we are.
Zipperfish @ Mon Oct 27, 2014 10:02 am
andyt andyt:
Can't deny citizenship to a given FN. How is an FN determined, except by genetics. Otherwise they just become cities with no right to restrict immigration to anybody. Personally I would like to see that, get rid of any special status based on race. Doubt I'll see it, tho, nor your children.
The people who are not of Indian descent should have representation on lands controlled by First Nations. You can't, to my mind, devolve power to First Nations if all authority is vested in bloodlines. So, for instacne, non-natives should be able to run for council.
This is a conversation that needs to happen in the context of the Supreme Court granting more power to First Nations.
$1:
You want to quibble about me vs Canada fine. Personally I'm willing to shoulder my share of collective guilt. Otherwise, it's a bunch of me's who didn't do anything themselves, yet here we are.
It's not a quibble to me. It's an important differentiation. I have no guilt--or pride, for that matter--for acts in which I had no part in committing. Collective, or otherwise. The situation is as it is. I can do my part to make it better.