In googling around on the Keeseekoose story, I ran across this oddly presented quote in the Star Pheonix on Oct.28.
And while hundreds of people are being flown out of a remote northern Ontario First Nation because of an E. coli outbreak in the water, Health Canada says six Saskatchewan reserves are under a boil water advisory. Segments of the Peepeekisis, Standing Buffalo, Poundmaker, Sweetgrass, Keeseekoose and Cumberland House First Nations are under the advisory, but don’t have E. coli contamination.
“I think if anything, the Native situation in Saskatchewan is better than the (Caucasian) situation,” said Hans Peterson, executive director of the Safe Drinking Water Foundation.
Emphasis mine.
Notice the parenthesis around the word “Caucasian” – in a quote, no less.
Why? Did Hans Peterson skip a word? Or did the writers – Janet French, Julie Saccone and Dan Jungwirth – decide to use “Caucasian” in place of something else?
Could it be that “white” has joined the growing list of words considered too politically incorrect to grace the pages of our fair paper, even for use in a direct quote?
I’d love to hear an explanation.
Kate
One explaination might be that not all caucs are white. East Indians and Arabs are part of the cauc world and they are not really all that white.
What is the word I am looking for …. oh ya!
(Inclusion) Jeez … those Liberals speak with forked tongue.
How’s this: “I think…anything…is better than the (Caucasian) sitution”.
Only left out four words.
…and the “a” in “situation”…
I can’t believe they overlooked the obvious “Second Nations”. If you’re going to segregate, at least do it with some consistent nomenclature.
I believe “Caucasian” (applied to whites in general, not just people from the Caucasus) was coined by a 19th-century German racial theorist. It’s odd that it should become a preferred term for the socio-linguistically sensitive.
Shaken needs a blog. “Second Nations”: another keeper.
I have another suggestion Kathy. Instead of “second nation” how about “present nation.” Emphasizes that “first nation” has not yet joined the present world, but still wants all the benfits.
That’s right, let’s dwell on the past and use it over and over as an excuse for laziness and inaction.
FEED ME!
WAAAAAAAAAAAH!
Oh, and another thing. I too can respect “another way of life” but put your money where your mouth is. If you want to pursue the “old ways” be my guest. Just don’t ask for the “new ways” benefits when you’re feeling a little uncomfortable.
It’s all about the Lefties’ guilt trip. Nothing more, nothing less. I would bet my life savings that if all programs and the government teat were shut off completely, the native “problem” would cease to exist within 5 years.
Yeah, imagine how well all these ‘first’ nation types would have fared had they been colonised by the Japs, the Russians,the Han….or even look at the situation up north under the Pax Britannia as opposed to say, the Spanish or Portuguese.
Having said that, maybe if they HAD been exposed to more barbaric colonial masters, perhaps they would have had no choice but to adapt and assimilate, rather than rot in the cradle of the welfare state.
Hey, what about the ‘first nations’ of Great Britain? Don’t Anglo-Saxons have a legitimate claim against present-day Rome for the theft of their native culture, lands & riches, stolen by the Legions?
Imagine if Britons had, subsequent to the Conquest, taken to whinin’, snivellin’ and a-cheque-cashin’ all this time….
Personally, I have always thought that the First Nations people should come clean and call themselves the �Subsequent Nations.�
If you believe emigration brought man from Asia to the Americas via a land bridge, then it only follows that the true first peoples here were more than likely the ancestors of *South* American aboriginals.
I guess there�s the possibility that those folks made an immediate beeline for the south � sand, sun, and tequila after all – but I think it more likely that successive waves of Johnnies-Come-Lately � i.e. the ancestors of our Canadian First Nations people – forced them off their land to points further south.
�Course, �fessing up could mean reparations for land never ceded, a whole lot of guilt going in the opposite direction, yada yada yada�
He means Natives are better off than folks in Azerbaijan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasus)
Obviously.
If the Star Phoenix is cleansing quotes on Social Issue stories it’s only because they want to make those stories as vanilla boring as what they offer in the Sports section.
If you want to see a lesson in political correctness watch next time a Crimestoppers segment airs on TV. If it is a native the only description that will be given is “male approximately 5’8″ heavy set with dark hair” but if it a white person they will indicate he is caucasion still I believe.
Regarding evilprinceweasel’s post, there are reminant unassimalated “aboriginal” groups in Japan, China and throughout South and Central America. (I do not mean there are no such groups in Russia, just that I am unaware of them.)
All of these groups make claims similar to those made by our own aboriginal groups, and with varying degrees of success.
Regarding Great Britain, the Angels and the Saxons did not invade England until after the fall of Rome and they came from areas outside of Rome’s sway on the continent. They may, however, have a valid aboriginal claim against France because of their treatment at the hands of the Norman invaders.
Reminants of the pre-Roman population of England still survive in Great Britiain, in the form of the Scots and the Welsh. The latter group may perhaps be traced back to the pre-Roman Picts which have otherwise disappeared.
However, neither group is liable to have much claim against Rome, except possibly for being forced to retreat into Scotland and Wales, because they were never conquered by the Romans. (I do not know anything about the early history of Northern Ireland.)
As regards England, one aboriginal group that might have had a claim against Rome were the Cornish. However, fortunately for the Italians, the last of the native speaking Cornish in England died out in the early 20th century and nobody except antiquarians, for their own amusement, now speaks the language in England. (I do not know if the language is still natively spoken anywhere in Britanny, if so the Cornish there might have a claim, since they were forced there by the Romans.)
The reason that the native speaking of Cornish would be a pre-requisite to any successful assertion of an aboriginal claim for the evils done to the Cornish people, is that it is the only way a person could show that he was a member of that wronged group. The Cornish people are now otherwise indistinguishable from the general population.