For a moment there, I was worried they were cutting off Fort MacMurray;
Ontario Provincial Police shut down Canada’s busiest highway early Friday morning west of Kingston due to native protesters in the area, who had earlier blockaded a section of secondary highway and a stretch of nearby railway track on the eve of the National Day of Action.
Friday morning, the Ontario Provincial Police closed Highway 401 both ways between Napanee and Belleville and were diverting traffic north onto Hwy 7 due to native protesters “being in the direct area, for safety reasons,” said Sergeant Kristine Rae of the Smith Falls detachment.
Mark my words – the moment is approaching when a bandana prowling these police protected barricades will end up in the crosshairs of someone’s high powered rifle.
And right after that, Dalton McGuinty will blame Americans.
h/t.
Update: At the BBC, forum comments that go horribly wrong.
Related: Speaking of stereotyping and double standards – note the photograph chosen to illustrate this post. Bigot, heal thyself.
Astonishingly, Dawg responds with this: “I’d say some folks do a pretty good job of stereotyping themselves.”
Stereotype? When I see a cowboy hat, I think “cattle industry”.
In Dawg’s “progressive” world, cowboy hat means “racist”. Because, as we all know, western rural culture is synonymous with intolerance.
Dr.D: The source for the “natives did the US constitution” meme was a 1991 book by Dr. Donald A Grinde (‘Native American Societies and the Evolution of Democracy’ or something similar) and some chap named Johansen. It got torched in the Journal of American History and the American Historical Review at the time of its publication, mainly because the authors provided incredibly flimsy evidence to back up their statements. The scholarly consensus is that while some early American intellectuals were familiar with the constitution of the Iroquois Confederacy, the empiricist philosophers of the Scottish Enlightenment exerted considerably greater indirect influence over the eventual structure of the American government.
(yes, I am a historian)
Dr.Dawg,
“Holding a gun is the secret “spot the racist” clue?”
She’s right Dawg. Just what do you think I’ve been getting at for the last several months?
And it’s not just racism.
“A little self-deprecation? Maybe. But the images speak for themselves. And they jibe perfectly, as you know full well, with the “shoot the red niggers” crowd you attracted this morning.”
And the your posters? Do they speak for you? It’s a strawmen-sorry person-and double standard.
canuckistanian 2007 7:33 PM, good God man!! Just because the last residential school was closed only recently does not mean that any of the conditions necessary to be considered genocide actually existed in those schools. The old days of forced enrolement of children against their parent’s will was ended a long, long time ago. In fact, it ended before the Genocide Convention was created. But don’t let the facts get in the way.
Why I miss the Stone age (although I never lived in it).
1)
Natives have AK-47 Russian Military Rifles: more then just guns!!
The AK-47 Russian Military Rifles have been used in Ipperwash and in Caledonia: NO Joke!!
http://www.theturtleislandnews.com/newspaper/2007/may/23/page2.htm
Ipperwash was more then just a park: they kick out and took over our Military Base too!!! Yes kick our soldier’s butt’s!!Don’t blaim our soldier: they were given order’s to bend over and take it: NOT thier fault!!
Some times the Truth hurts!!! I could wite a novel except: I am not a writer to bad!!
Jim Smith
Caledonia, Ont.
dce_ak47@mountaincable.net
Dr.Dawg at June 29, 2007 8:42 PM, try reading something scholarly instead. A good treatment is “The United States Constitution and the Iroquois League” by Elisabeth Tooker in The Invented Indian : Cultural Fictions and Government Policies by James A Clifton, Editor. Same article, in an unabridged form was published in Ethnohistory 35(4) 1988.
mcgrimm – many thanks for your excellent posts.
Yes, the left romanticizes native culture and usually, without having any knowledge of the economic, political and social structures of those societies. Dawg’s confusion of the Aztec/Mayan/Inca city-states – with the much smaller H&G N. American groups is an example.
Ronald Wright is a part of the leftist theorizing, with his notions of ‘purity’ and ‘apocalpytic downfall from this mode.
As for the American constitution – Adams, for one, was greatly influenced by Cicero. Madison and his Virginia Act – no idea. But the notion that a settled rapidly expanding agricultural society of 1787 with strong intellectual ties to Europe would copy the political format of a small population horticultural group – with whom they were only marginally familiar – is rather specious. And another example of the romanticization of the native by the left.
Inter alia:
My posters don’t include racists.
I wonder why Kate thinks my illustration was of “Westerners?”
But on to more serious stuff. mcgrimm, I don’t care what credentials you want to wave around. That’s plain silly. Let’s discuss the issue on its scholarly merits.
I agree that, in the main, the American Constitution was based upon classical ideas. But checks and balances were, pace Locke, a new concept.
In 1751, Franklin wrote: “It would be a very strange thing if Six Nations of ignorant savages should be capable of forming a scheme for such a union, and be able to execute it in such a manner as that it has subsisted ages, and appears indissoluble; and yet that a like union should be impractical for ten or a dozen English colonies.”
Wright notes (116) that the eagle on the US shield is the Iroquois eagle, and it originally grasped five arrows, not thirteen (the Six Nations were originally the Five Nations, as you probably know.)
Wright provides these sources, among others:
Campbell, Janet, and David G. Campbell, “Cherokee Participation in the Political Impact of the North American Indian,” Journal of Cherokee Studies 6, no.2 (1981) p.92, 93.
Armstrong, Virginia I. (ed.) “I Have Spoken: American History Through the Voices of the Indians.” [Chicago: Swallow Press] (1971) 12.
Tooker, Elizabeth. “The United States Constitution and the Iroquois League.” Ethnohistory 35, no.4 (1988) pp.308-9.
Over to you. Just to save me a little time, can you reference this alleged “torching” of Grinde and Johansen (also cited by Wright)?
Dr. Dawg,
“My posters don’t include racists.”
“In any case, it’s simply disingenuous to racialize a group of people and then complain about the need for “colour-blindness” when they assume the identity that has been imposed upon them. ”
As I tried to examine-just who is disingenuously racializing a group?
This characterization is about as close to racism as you can get without actually using a racial slur.
It assumes WE are guilty of this by virtue of our ancestors. Hence, according to you, WE are not allowed to complain. Isn’t that the idea you are proffering?
PS: Tooker references the Franklin quote. She and Johansen strongly disagreed on the weight to be attached to the Iroquois influence, according to Wright: she in the reference just cited above, Johansen in “Native American Societies and the Evolution of Democracy in America, 1600-1800.” Ethnohistory 37, no.3 (1990) 279-90.
ET, try reading Wright before falsely characterizing his book.
I wander away from the computer for a couple hours and all hell breaks loose. Figures.
Ok, A’dam (stupid name, dude), MikMik, Dawg and any of the rest of you sorry SOB’s slinging racism slang, listen up.
What is the difference between the Hells Angels and the Mohawk Warriors Society? Both are composed of drug taking alcoholics who do all manner of crime, dress badly and smell worse. They rob, smuggle, assault people and generally break whatever laws they want, oh and they go armed a lot.
G’head geniuses, I’ll wait.
Why I think that after throwing billions of dollars into Communist Stone age way of living (+ the Indian industry support staff), I think throwing billions more into it will work:
1)
Phantom
That’s easy. One is defended as being historically oppressed and therefore deserving of support and laxity in perpetuity and the other gets the girls.
What I find amazing in this whole debate is how the aboriginal leadership isn’t criticized. Billions of dollars flow into native leadership coffers, yet they refuse to be accountable, and yes some of them are nepotistic and corrupt. It seems to me that they have dropped the ball big time here. I wish we could take every cent that goes to transfers to native leadership and instead give it directly to the people so they can vote in or out the leadership and services they need.
If we truly want to get at some of the horrendous conditions on some reserves, shouldn’t all stakeholders try and get together and solve this thing, instead of blaming each other and namecalling?
Maybe the natives should consider trying to inform Canadians of their plight. instead of trying to piss them off. Can’t help noticing the same kind of “get the man” Marxist ideology that is so prevalent in the radical environmental community, as Vaclav Klaus discussed above.
Instead of dialogue we have created a problem with no solutions discussed, just grievances on one side and bureaucratic nonsense and delays on the other. It is time for people of goodwill to get together and do something instead of letting radical thinkers on either side of the question win the day.
8bEbgcBBi, nuh uh. Although I will say the MWS’s taste in women is inferior to the Hell’s Angels. Don’t see too many biker chicks who outweigh their Harley.
C’mon racism police, have a go. Put that one lonely neuron to work.
The quote on the BBC article is a nice touch –
“We want the government to know, and the rest of this country, that we’re prepared to make commitments and sacrifices to ensure a safe, healthy environment in which our children can live
Shawn Brant
Mohawk Nation
So, Shawn, would that “sacrifice” include getting a job?”
You people would like the natives here!! When they talk to us it’s like they are still in the 1700 to 1800’s!
Ex. Paddle back to Europe where you people came from!! Sorry I said we sailed here: not all of us are from Europe either!!
They also change the name of our streets: to the old names!!
Ex. Argyle st. was Plank rd: next thing you know our Government do the same thing calling Argyle st.: Plank rd.!!!
Show what the Government knows about our town Caledonia!!!
History is the past: what worked then will not work now!!! History!!!
Jim Smith
Caledonia, Ont.
dce_ak47@mountaincable.net
Louise…sorry if my comment sounded offensive. I certainly didn’t mean it that way.
Dr. Dawg,
“My posters don’t include racists.”
“I have always said there are two words which get Canadians to slip on the bed sheets – “Indian” and “French Canadian”. The comments you listed were as vile as anything from the USA in regards to Blacks or Mexicans.”
Wow, a sweeping generalization against both Canadians and Americans. But hey, at least it wasn’t racist. And you banned me for being silly? Say it ain’t so.
I just sent this letter to the Whitehouse:
Dear President Bush,
Dude, you totally said that you would make no distinction between terrorists and those who harbour terrorists. Well, Canada harbours terrorists.
Shawn Brant and his band of armed thugs are terrorists by the Canadian, American, and UN definition. To the extent that Premier McGuinty and Prime Minister Harper have allowed the Indians to do what they want I can’t conclude that they are not harbouring terrorists.
So, would you kindly consider invading Canada at your earliest convenience? Seriously, we can’t get our act together up here; rule of law is gone and terrorists roam freely. You’d be doing us a favour.
Yours,
Andrew
dawg – I’ve read and reject Wright.
There’s an overview of the so-called ‘Iroquois influence theory’ on the internet. Title is the Iroquois Confederacy and the Influence Thesis. Brian Cook.
Lots of references and discussion, both pro and con. The rejections are by E. Tooker, S. Payne, P. Levy etc – in the Williams and Mary Quarterly. By A. Schlesinger who wrote it was just ‘feel good history’. And so on.
The debate is ongoing and one must make a choice whether to accept or not accept either side. I think the weight of facticity is against the Iroquois influence. The Founding Fathers were classical scholars – well versed in the political theories of the enlightenment – and Aristotle, Plato, Cicero etc.
Franklin’s referencing of the Iroquois in that context seems designed to appeal to the prejudices of the time, ie. if a bunch of indians can do it I don’t see why we white folk can’t.
Reference for review #1 is Mancall, Peter C in The Journal of American History 80 (1) (June, 1993), 243: “However wide-ranging in scope, the central arguments of the book remain unconvincing, mostly because of the use of evidence. . . Stylistic concerns also intrude; the narrative wanders, and the authors too often restate the central themes rather than offering convincing analysis. . . But though such appropriation of visual icons occurred, and the authors perform a valuable service in providing such fine examples, they read too much into such matters. They thus construct a causal argument out of circumstantial evidence, perhaps even coincidence; they are unable or unwilling to differentiate between colonists’ use of Indian symbols and more profound influences on colonists’ political culture.”
#2 is Kawashima, Yashuhide in The American Historical Review 98 (3) p.941: “The authors seem overly zealous in claiming more than their evidence could substantiate: they often fail to track down the specific connection, and many of their statements are overdrawn. Even the abolition of primogeniture, the Northwest Ordinance, feminism, judicial review, and the Bill of Rights are claimed to have had Indian origins. . . Although the American experiment was the first implementation of federalism in a large country, the idea was already known in Europe.”
Given that the authors are professors of history writing in the major journals of the field, these are remarkably unkind words. “Torching” was not an exaggeration.
“My posters don’t include racists.”
“Lucky she wasn’t one of them nigras or Moozlums.”
Stereotyping southerners.
“We’re not like those crazy Americans.”
Nuff said
ET: With respect, you’ve “read and rejected” a lot of notable writers and scholars, and I’m quoting you. Such assertions, by themselves, carry little weight with me. They simply sound pompous.
That being said, great link, and many thanks. Very even-handed–more so than you indicated. Indeed, the influence thesis, in a moderated form, is supported in the article.
I’m not radical about this. I don;t think the US Constitution was written, second-hand, by Native people. Just the (very important) notion of checks and balances.
Incidentally, and not to be nasty, check out the word “facticity.” It doesn’t mean quite what you intend it to mean, I think.
mcgrimm: Thanks for the references. If we are annoying our host, shoot me an email and we can continue this back-channel. In any case, I’ll be back to you. The dismissals of Grinde and Johansen seem rather general, but I’ll do the reading.
Dr. Dawg,
If you ignore it, I guess it doesn’t exist on your blog (or from your own fingertips)
but somehow it’s still ok for you to take random quotes from conservative blogs and use that to point fingers.
The elephant in the room for First Nations people is fetal alcohol syndrome.
Nobody will talk about it; nobody will admit it so nothing will be done until we stop being politically correct.
Kate: It is. Not a value judgement. Just a statement of fact, demonstrated by the fact that it no longer exists.
Right, because the history of colonialism, which is directly responsible for the near-extinction of Aboriginal culture, is just a statement of fact, not conceptualized, perpetrated, documented, or otherwise associated in any way with any value judgments.
Vitruvius: Yes, A’dam, I do think that the Assembly of First Nations doesn’t understand that they’re being racist against themselves when they seek mandatory non-volitional collectivism over their claimed taxonomical labelling scheme. We are not labels; we are real live individual human beings.
They’re not seeking “mandatory non-volitional collectivism,” Vitruvius, they’re seeking, as self-identified nations of people, the right to self-governance. Nationhood and self-determination go hand-in-hand.
ET: I – and vitruvius has said it far, far better than I – was pointing out that your definition of natives as a collective was denying each individual native their human identity as an individual. You see them only as a collective – and see their activity only as a collective, eg, Native ‘self-determination’ – which suggests some kind of separate species.
Acknowledging that one belongs to an identifiable community does not preclude individual identity. I am me, but I am also a Canadian. I do not see them (nor do they see themselves) only as a collective, but I (and they) do acknowledge their collective identity as First Nations.
If, as you argue, the First Nations communities have no right to speak as a collective, then by that same logic, neither does any other group battling for their own long-term national and cultural survival. Like, say, the Israelis. But you’d never say that the Israelis are only individuals and that to speak of them as a collective is racism, would you? No, I thought not.
Vitruvius: Stop telling us who to be, A’dam. Let each live as each, subject to their strengths and weaknesses, with appropriate altruistic charatable considerations amongst all. Be not, A’dam, a totalitarian authoritarian who would dictate to we the people a classist taxonomy we must obey.
Interesting position to take, Vitruvius, given that I’m the one arguing that First Nations peoples should have the right to determine their own collective and individual futures (e.g., self-government), which (as should be obvious) doesn’t require in the least that they live as stereotypically “Noble Savage” H&G economies (though it will have the eventual effect of abolishing the reserve system, as currently practised). And it’s even more ironic a position to take given that you and your peers have claimed that:
ET: Look – everyone in history has been overrun by other peoples at some time…And the natives have to realize it first
ET (again): the ‘aboriginal way of life’ is both inferior to, and archaic to, the modern way…why should they live the way they lived 1,000 years ago? Why should they live this way – rather than being part of the modern world – industrial engineers, physicists, doctors and so on? Why shouldn’t they live in the modern world?
Kate: It [the Aboriginal way of life] is [inferior to, and archaic in light of, the Western model].
You: Indians are not distinct, qua citizenry, they are no more or less unique than any other non-volitional taxonomization, for normal and unexceptional historical reasons.
Yours is precisely the language of colonialism, underpinned as it is by the presumption of your own cultural primacy. It takes as given the idea that they must adopt our (Canadian, and specifically conservative) social, economic, political, and cultural norms and values, for their own good. It is of the same line of hegemonic thought that gave rise to residential schools, among other attempts at cultural assimilation. And it has contributed in the past, as it continues to do in the present, to the deeply antagonized and dysfunctional relationship between Aboriginals and “non-Aboriginals” that makes things like the NDA appear necessary in the former’s eyes.
Lorraine: The elephant in the room for First Nations people is fetal alcohol syndrome. Nobody will talk about it; nobody will admit it so nothing will be done until we stop being politically correct.
Good people with the best motives are talking about, and working on, it:
– 3w.hc-sc.gc.ca/fnih-spni/famil/preg-gros/intro_e.html
– 3w.hc-sc.gc.ca/fnih-spni/famil/preg-gros/budget_2001_e.html
– 3w.phac-aspc.gc.ca/canada/regions/atlantic/work/e_t.html
– 3w.gov.sk.ca/news?newsId=9e0070cb-35e3-4e19-9be7-c971c30bf169
What makes it difficult to talk about openly and honestly in the public realm is that the discourse is too often polluted (as this thread has evidenced) by ignorant and hostile stereotyping that seeks only to condemn and mock rather than address the problem of alcohol abuse and FAS/FAE among First Nations communities.
Oh, and to those inspired wits who take issue with my nickname: Why assume my name is Adam? Think lateral.
Wow. Five posts in a row. I’m impressed.
Dr. Dawg, respectfully, I think Kate does has a point here. It doesn’t help “our” cause of condemning the stereotyping of Aboriginals if we also insinuate stereotypes about rednecks, etc. It would be a shame to give any excuse to the bigots on the “right” that their views are acceptable. We should all be striving for the higher ground.
To paraphrase Tennyson:
“Bigots to right of them,
Bigots to left of them,
bigots in front of them
Volley’d and thunder’d;
Storm’d at with shot and shell,
Boldly they rode and well,
Into the jaws of Death,
Into the mouth of Hell
Rode the six hundred”
A’dam, Dawg, et al…though everyone likes to think that “their side” is pure and true, bigotry exists throughout the political spectrum. There are no more “bigots on the right” than there are bigots on the left. Give it up.
As to the natives, they are either Canadians or not. If they are Canadians, then they MUST be subject to EXACTLY the same rights and responsibilities as the rest of Canadians. If they are NOT Canadians, then they MUST be defunded and left to survive on their own…the only issue is provide land for their nation, should we choose to do that.
But you know what? The “colonialists” essentially fought a war with them AND THE FN LOST. They lost or bargained away their land. If they want it back, they can either:
1) prove that any of the treaties give them right to the land and convince the courts that those treaties still hold sway today; or
2) make war to reclaim it.
Right now, it would seem that the FN folks are operating in a netherworld:
– they want their land and nationhood, but they want the money, too;
– they want to fight in the courts and make war;
– they want the rights of Canadians but none of the responsibilities.
Funny how, if a “Canadian” allows a part of their property to be “squatted on” by someone else for an extended period of time, the courts will rule that the “Canadian” has lost my right to the land…yet, if a “FN” allows a part of their property to be squatted on by someone else for an extended period of time, then somehow magically they still get to retain ownership?
This whole issue comes down to one thing…the governments are afraid to confront the FN and deny them because if they do, they will:
– have to do something aggressive (i.e. send in the troops to establish control and order); and
– be castigated in the press and risk losing their political power.
The situation would very quickly escalate as the FN’s will band together and will very likely morph into outright rebellion and true terrorism. The FN folks know this, and are playing it for all its worth. Playing both sides against the middle…pushing the boundaries.
Therefore, we are stuck forever in this limbo until someone decides to do something about it. Either outright capitulation or take up arms to end it. The chances of any politician ever making a decisive choice, however, are nil.
dawg – a postmodernist suggesting that a word has a stable meaning? My, my. ‘Facticity’ means exactly as it sounds; the state of being factual or existentially real. Unmoved by postmodernism. If postmodernists played around with it – that’s their problem.
adam – you are living as a Cloud-Dweller, someone pontificating words without acknowledging reality.
You have no knowledge of societies and their infrastructures.
First- stop with the neo-colonial guilt-trips. Do you know why colonialism developed? I’ll bet you don’t. You think it was just the evil greedy Europeans? Economies are deeper than individual emotions.
Second – your continual argument that the natives are a ‘self-identified nation of people’ is specious. Self-identification is pure subjectivism and irrelevant. And frankly – so what? They were not a nation before, by the way, and are not and cannot be a nation now. Why?
Third – because – and you, in your romanticism, refuse to consider this vital point – what is the economic mode of this presumed nation? Hmmm?
You insist that the natives be allowed to define their own self-governance. That’s ridiculous. Societies are not created or manufactured. They emerge within the ecological and historical contexts. You refuse to consider this.
Importantly – what is the economic mode of this new nation? You insist that they be self-governing. Over what? What’s their land base? What’s their economy? Well?
How about an answer – I’ve asked you several times.
Then – you move into the simplistic rhetoric of bashing ‘western culture’. Adam – you know zilch about social infrastructures. Drop the word ‘culture’; the way you use it, it’s like choosing a winter coat.
Social beliefs and behaviour (culture) is not a matter of simple choice; it is directly related to the economic mode – something that you’ve steadfastly refused to consider or discuss.
And yes, the western social infrastructure is superior to the non-western. It can support a larger population, in health and productivity, than any other mode.
This social infrastructure is: industrial production, capitalism (private accumulation of surplus), political and legal privileging of the individual rather than the group, and this means a democratic political system.
So- adam – what social infrastructure would you suggest for the natives?
By the way – your focus on them as a group is racist. Why? Because it rejects them as individuals. Your rhetoric that you mean ‘both’ is illogical. A group is defined by its LCD, its commonality – and this LCD is always based on non-individual attributes that are hereditary either biologically or culturally. The value must be ‘origin’. So- a group is defined by its ethnic origin, religious origin, linguistic origin.
An individual is not defined by origin of a non-individual property but by activities carried out only by that individual. No LCD. instead, a fcous on achievement.
adam, you are speaking the typical language of the left – with your assertion that the western culture is ‘hegemonic’; that ‘colonialism’ destroyed them; that they have the right to self-governance.
Again – self-governance over what? Are you suggesting that Canada hand over land to them? They’d lose their Canadian passports, money, benefits, of course.
What would be their economy on this land? This is a key question – and you don’t answer this.
What would be their political system on this land?
Did you know that political systems aren’t a matter of choice? You can’t, in an industrial economy, ‘choose’ to run your society in a tribal mode. You can’t, in an industrial society, have no leaders.
So- again, adam, what economy would your new Native Nation use? Would it be industrial? Well?
Excellent summation Eeyore.
The longer this state of limbo continues and the more the governments refuse to do anything the more the aggressive indian groups will escalate until in flash points like Caledonia or Ipperwash some citizen, who’s home is now worth nothing and their anger has reached a boiling point, interacts with the Warriors and the situation explodes. In the view of both sides, when you have nothing, you have nothing to lose.
One of the most moving and profound books I had ever read was The Battle at Wounded Knee so I am sympathic to the Indians but the time has come to move on. Though it is cruel history is written by the winners. Canada, especially at July 1, is the best country in the world, it is time to fold the tents away and join the party.
All Canada owes to each individual who lives here is the opportunity and freedom to be whatever you want to be not perpetual welfare on some private enclave.
It has taken the combined effort of millions to build and maintain our complex industrial society. It is held together by the fragile respect for our common laws and belief that our way of live gives the greatest good for the greatest number of people. When it is successfuly blackmailed by armed factions without punishment by those we have given the power to maintain control of the criminal element its citizens are bewildered and alarmed. The critical question, besides all the academic discourse, becomes if our governing elements fold in the face of this threat can we trust them to defend us when challenged by a greater threat.
Eeyore is quite right. A’dam and Dawg, et al, are what Lenin, Trotsky, et al, called useful idiots or infantile leftists. To them I would just say, take your eyes off the micro-history of Indian and White relations in Canada and look at the broad history of the world. Since the written record first began, there has never been a time when invasion and conquest by one group of people over another was not the norm and, as archeaological evidence suggests, probably even before that. In every era in history, some groups for one reason or another seem to acquire the capacity for strategic and tactical advantage over others and they exercise it both because they can and because it’s a slow, imperceptible rise to ascendancy, often unconsciously feeding itself, acquiring further advantage as it unfolds. In the case of First Nations and European encounters, we are talking a process that has been going on for 20 to 25 generations, which, at every step of the way, was influenced by events in widely scattered parts of the globe.
The notion of the right “self-determination” is a very recently developed mythology, lovely in theory but hopelessly naive and eminently exploitable. Folks that deal most successfully with the situation in which they find themselves are those that put down their own silly myths, develop a hard nose and exploit whatever strategic and tactical advantage they have, which includes making use of the cherished myths of others. The idea of self-determination is just such a one.
Just as the Islamist movement is making tactical use of Western media to exploit the soft, self-absorbed and gullible population of Western countries, First Nations organizations over the last forty years or so, have exploited and manipulated White guilt and the useful idiots and infantile leftist like A’dam and Dawg who wallow in it. Their capacity to convince every new and upcoming crop of groupies to hold on tenaciously to such myths has provided the entire machinery, and the bedrock on which it rests, of the Indian Industry.
Way to go, guys. You are tools in a big machine. Just like the useful idiots and infantile leftists who adored the Soviet experiment of the 20th century, your willingness to act as such keeps thousands of First Nations peoples in chains at the bottom of the pyramid.
The only saving grace in this farce is that, while Stalin was responsible for the deaths of millions, the Indian Industry only demands that grass roots Indian people remain fixed in their positions so it can stand on their backs. Since they are not dead, some day, those at the bottom may stir and the Industry will collapse. That day will come only when those of us who speak the truth recognize that the accusation of bigotry is but a tool in the Industry’s massive arsenal.
louise – perfect summation. Yes, indeed, the ‘useful idiots’ of the left, such as adam and dawg, are actually perpetuating the misery of the native communities.
The myth of ‘self-determination’ – of what? What is their land base? What is their economy? Do you actually sit down and choose an economy? Are they going to choose one that is different from the neighbouring economy? How will they sustain themselves?
The Indian Affairs bureaucracy in Ottawa, developing over the generations, is now a monstrosity, exactly as you say – an industry feeding itself from the native reserve system. And the corrupt native leaders are part of that industry.
What the reserve system has done is effectively put an entire population into an ‘old age home’. There is nothing for them to do. They are not allowed to own anything; they are not allowed to develop private businesses; everything belongs to the Administration – the gov’t. Indian Affairs. And a small ‘board’ is ‘elected’ by the inhabitants of this Old Age Home – who rapidly move into psychological dominance and corruption. Because even they, do not own their Home.
adam and dawg – the era of hunting and gathering, the era of horticulture, the era of pastoral nomadic economies is over. There is only one possible economy feasible in our modern world, because of the population size. Industrialism.
Industrialism as an economy is necessarily linked, as a structure, to a particular political mode – democracy. And democracy is linked to individualism, achievement by individual merit rather than hereditary origin – and so on.
You guys aren’t addressing these issues. You are stuck in the naive romanticism that ‘they can pick their own way of life’. But you haven’t defined that way of life, have you? And no, they can’t ‘pick it’. They have to consider land base, population size and context.
So? How about some pragmatic answers rather than Dances with Wolves.
Louise:
You’re ranting, I must say, like a hysteric. You have no idea whatsoever about my views on Native people and their possibilities, or about culture in general. Suffice it to say that I’m not a romantic on these issues, and I have little time for the wildly veering official policies emanating from Indian and Northern Affairs.
A’dam,you constantly prove your ignorance about native self-government. If your children wanted to be independent ,would you give them the basement of your house,feed ,clothe and care for them,provide them with spending money,and then allow them to follow thier own rules? This is the gist of native self-government in Canada.Do you believe this arrangement would improve your children’s lives or would hinder thier development? How long before you had enough and impose some much needed tough love?
While I am here,if anyone wants to experience racism firsthand,attempt to adopt an aboriginal child.Whitey is not allowed to adopt without permision from the child’s band,which is rarely given.This is because whitey cannot provide the cultural background that the reserve has in so much abundance.I lived with a native woman for three years and we attempted to get full custody of her 2 daughters,that was a pipe dream,proud daddy would not allow it. Now the 16 year old is a mom,and the younger one is in foster care on the reserve.Well done,enablers and apologists,they will experience thier wonderful culture while they grow bitter and lost.
While I know I am not going to get adam & dawg to see anything other than what they want to see, I’d recommend everyone have a look at world history. Peoples have been wandering the earth for a long time and for most of it has been spent conquering other people. Whether it was the Romans, Vikings, Normans, Zulus or even North American Aboriginals, they all have taken territory and assimilated the occupied people. So maybe the FN should just accept it and become Canadians with native heritage. You know, like the Canadians of English, Italian or Polish heritage. Just my opinion and for the record, my first gun was bought in Ontario.
It is. Not a value judgement. Just a statement of fact, demonstrated by the fact that it no longer exists.
“Right, because the history of colonialism, which is directly responsible for the near-extinction of Aboriginal culture, is just a statement of fact, not conceptualized, perpetrated, documented, or otherwise associated in any way with any value judgments.”
*******
I presume you were sarcastic, but in effect I agree with that.
No point bothering with value judgements – unless you’re proposing that the existing native cultures were somehow morally superior to western ones. That’s a stretch.
But that’s hardly the point, is it?
What is, is. Western culture has replaced these stone age ways of life for a reason – on the whole, people prefer it. Given the choice between the 21st century and the 5th, individuals choose the latter.
For all the protests to the contrary, the evidence is clear – North American Indians voted with their feet. Or, rather, their internal combustion engines.
ET, I once did a population density analysis of Indian lands in Canada and compared it to Japan. The mantra of land, land, land (as in land claims settlements in the form of real estate) will solve everything has been around for 40 years. It was interesting to note that the population per square mile ratio for First Nations and lands reserved for them was hugely more favourable than what the Japanese have to work with. Japanese islands have very little natural resources to exploit and virtually wall to wall people that somehow have to be supported. Yet they are an economic powerhouse, a member of the G-8 and a whole bunch of other things with a standard of living that dwarfs most other countries. This just goes to show that a land base has very little to do with economic success. What does count is ideology, ethics, education, skills, willingness to study hard and work hard and excel, all of which are prime Japanese cultural values. Hong Kong, prior to the handover to China would be another example and Singapore, yet another. It is the development and application of human ingenuity that accounts for the success of those countries.
There is a very profound lesson to be learned from this and it is that attitude and mindset are the keys to economic development. Leftist ideology is its antithesis. It is stuck in the past. A dead end. Again, a cornerstone of a tired old, corrupt industry, of which, BTW, INAC is only a small, small part.
Note that any attempt to dismantle INAC or to change the Indian Act in the past 40 years has been met with vociferous outbursts of opposition by the Indian Industry, most especially band councils and their umbrella organizations such as the AFN and FSIN. These groups are the anointed ones. They need these cornerstones to stay in place so they can use them, like they use their own people, to stand on while they pontificate. It’s the ultimate irony. Standing on the Indian Act and INAC while they rant and rail against it. Take those two instruments out from under their feet and they fall down. They know this, but the leftist idiots who have swallowed the mantras seem not to have figured that one out yet.
What a discussion! Best one in a long time… and SDA has TONS of good ones.
ET should write a book (I’m not kidding, ET); erudite to the core.
I took the liberty of, once agian, copying one of vitruvius’ comments, specifically, the one regarding chief Louie.
wallyj, with his comment at 9:00 P.M. (June 29), and Eeyore (8:15 A.M., June 30) really nailed the issue down, I think.
And Louise (10:03 A.M., June 30)… well said!
So many other commenters here with such complete understanding of the issue… that’s why I love coming to SDA, daily.
Earlier, Hans took note of my 1ST comment about how the protesters might as well dam the Columbia. I think he took my double meaning, insofar as it was a reference to our modern society, and what it has, and can, achieve. “Modernity” happens. Time marches on.
Some fools glibly suggest that backward culture (yes, backward) has certain superior aspects to modern society. OK, “gang”, name some (really, as though you yourselves actually believe them). The fact is, neither they nor the protesters want to live in anything but a Westernized (note the capital “W”), justice-based, free modern society, complete with its basic laizzez-faire economic formulae and its property rights. And that’s that.
Come on Kate, why confuse the issue with facts? A'(think laterally)dam and company just want somebody to focus their disdain on, you got elected.
I notice you louts haven’t picked up my gauntlet. Neuron got tired, did it?
I’ll help you out. The one and ONLY difference between the Mohawk Warrior Society and the Hell’s Angels is that the OPP just busted the Angels and seized their headquarters.
One set of degenerate a-holes is treated appropriately by government while the other gets a free pass for purely political reasons.
If saying so makes me a racist in your eyes, you’re an idiot. If me saying so on Kate’s blog makes -her- a racist, you’re a drooling idiot.
There is a persistent myth amongst modern (European) society (and not a few present day indigenists) that the “traditional way” subsistence living is somehow superior to modern. It isn’t, and you don’t have to look to modern society for the proof. Prior to the arrival of Europeans to Canada, surviving depended on primitive agriculture, primitive hunting (snare, bow, spear), some nomadism, and some trade with other tribes.
Within a generation of the arrival of Europeans, tribes in contact with them pretty much abandoned their primitivism. Within a generation the bow was replaced by the trade rifle, skins by cloth. Why? For the same reason modern Indians prefer outboards, ski-doos, and good hunting rifles for hunting and fishing, and central heat for their homes…because life is A LOT easier with these technological benefits. TIME has passed the traditional way by, with its need for large tracts of land to support subsistence. Indians must join the rest of us if they are to survive at all. There simply isn’t enough of them to hold out against the march of time otherwise. By not realizing this, many are being doomed to a life much less than it could be, and are ensuring that they truly become a footnote, rather than a vibrant part of present whole. History and anthropology books are littered with the remains of cultural deadends.
The old days of forced enrolement of children against their parent’s will was ended a long, long time ago. In fact, it ended before the Genocide Convention was created. But don’t let the facts get in the way.
Are you sure? The Genocide Convention was signed in 1951. I had thought that forced enrollment continued into the 1960s. Doukhobor children, certainly, were being forcibly removed to residential schools in the early 1960s.
At least Kate lives on land that is free and clear of Native land claims.
Have you been reminded yet today, Dr. Dawg, that you are squatting on Algonquin land? Kate has written like a hundred posts exposing corruption and abuse on Native reserves; all you do is blurt accusations of racism at anything that moves.
Kate McMillan has done more Native advocacy on her blog (see her series on the Poundmaker Working Group for example) than you or anyone else in the Canadian blogsphere. That is a factual statement based on the hundred posts she has written on the subject and your silence on Native abuse and corruption on your own blog.
As you know, Saskatchewan has the highest % Native population of any province. Ottawa has, in comparison, relatively few Natives. So it’s a little rich for a Central Canadian who is so extreme in his views that he doesn’t post at Rabble.ca anymore because it isn’t progressive enough to criticize someone who actually lives among the Natives and advocates on their behalf, all while you remain silent about Native corruption and abuse. Shame.