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.
By the way, dawg, sending your children to schools ratified by the state is the law in modern societies. Whether it is public, private or, with permission, home schooling, the children MUST be educated in the curriculum of the state.
Why? Because our species derives most of its knowledge from social systems; we have very little innate or biological knowledge. So, a state must educate its citizens within a common knowledge base.
Canada has gotten off track with its multicultural balkanization of the population into isolate groups defined by origin (linguistic origin, ethnic, religious)and focusing the knowledge base within each ‘original group’.
That’s why Canadians, on the whole, feel so little sense of commonality, have so little knowledge of Canada, have no image of ‘Being Canadian’. How can you continue to define yourself within an ethnic identity, for example, when your present contextual reality is far removed from the original causes of that ethnic identity? How can a population be healthy when it confines its members in groups isolated from the realities of its local and contextual realities – environmental, economic, social?
That’s as valid for immigrants as it is for the indigeneous.
Kate: Given the choice between the 21st century and the 5th, individuals choose the [former].
Why are those the only two choices? Who’s saying that, if granted the right to self-government, that the First Nations will choose the latter? And why does choosing the former, as you insist they do (and I suspect they might as well) necessarily require assimilation into Canadian political and social systems?
Skip at June 30, 2007 12:56 PM, excellent point. Another mantra of the Indian Industry is that the Indians welcomed the whiteman to their shores because they had such goodness in their hearts in contrast to the evil European who was intent on conquest and exploitation. Well, guess what. The whole reason our ancient ancestors were welcomed is because they had something the Indians wanted. We know that Basque fishermen were trading with Indians on the East coast well before any permanent attempt was made by Europeans to gain a toe hold on what is now Canadian soil. There is evidence of other contact made by seafaring Europeans and the people along the Labrador coast. The Indians knew Europeans had superior technology (iron tools being a big one) because of their occasional contact with these people. Moral superiority had absolutely zip to do with it.
ET:
Maybe I’m just crabby today, but your pomposity seems to be reaching new heights. I am in favour of a universal public school system. Always have been. That’s not what the issue was with Native residential schools, and you jolly well know it.
Andrew:
You seem to enjoy spinning good yarns woven out of assumptions, half-truths and outright fabrications (my alleged reason for not posting on Rabble is a particularly ripe and smelly example of the latter). If I were a Native person, I would not see Kate as my advocate, to be blunt. I’d rather take my chances with the Saskatoon constabulary on a cool night.
I’m aware that I live on unceded Algonquin territory. Maybe we (and I don’t include you) need to sit down and deal. Settle all the land claims. Stop the stalling; stop the walking away from signed agreements (Barriere Lake comes to mind). Now, there’s a concept.
If you wish to defend comments of the “shoot the red niggers” variety and accuse those outraged by such drivel of “blurting racism at anything that moves,” so be it. I would suggest that this says far more about you than about me.
A’dam: And why does choosing the former, as you insist they do (and I suspect they might as well) necessarily require assimilation into Canadian political and social systems?
=========================
So they can have an economy, you idiot. How are they going to build a political and social system without an economic base? To have an economic base, you have to be tied to the economy around you and through that to global trading networks. La-la-land only exists in your dreams, sweetheart. Grow up.
Dr. Dawg,
“If you wish to defend comments of the “shoot the red niggers” variety and accuse those outraged by such drivel of “blurting racism at anything that moves,” so be it. I would suggest that this says far more about you than about me.
Franky, I’m with Andrew and have been pointing out your “”blurting racism at anything that moves,” for the past several months.
So where did you see Andrew defending “shoot the red niggers”?
Case in point!!!
Dr.Dawg at June 30, 2007 1:15 PM, yes I am very sure. I have been studying this issue since my earliest days in university (late 1960s) and even before then. World War II marked a turning point in Western societies. A joint Senate-House of Commons Committee struck in the late 1940s invited Indian participation from all across Canada. One of the items being considered was Indian Education. Most of the briefs and presentations made by Indian individuals and groups to that committee agreed that the best solution for improving education for Indian children was to send kids to schools in nearby towns so they could get a better education and learn how to function in mainstream society. And that is basically what happened over the next couple of decades. It wasn’t until the 1960s that radicalism and anti-colonialism became the fashion and suddenly everything was the evil whiteman’s fault. Residential schools continued to exist, but in nearly every case, it was the parent’s decision to place their children there. As time went on, those schools became places where children from broken and disfunctional families were sent and those cases may have involved court orders and such. At no point, since the new Indian Act of 1950s were children just scooped up and stolen from well functioning families without their concent, at least not here on the prairies. Since the 1980s most residential schools have been managed by Indians themselves, or at least Aboriginal people have played a major role in staffing and decision making in the running of those institutions.
So the Doukhobors were a kind of holdover, then?
I’m aware of what residential schools morphed into, over time. It was the cutoff date that I was questioning: when forcible enrollment ceased. I’m finding this difficult to track down. Was there a policy directive of some kind?
Louise: To have an economic base, you have to be tied to the economy around you and through that to global trading networks.
True enough. And that precludes First Nations self-governance how exactly?
ET: I’m at least somewhat familiar with your particular macro-ecological perspectives of world history, so kindly drop the academic elitism. Let me just point out that the theses of Diamond, Braudel, etc. do not necessarily imply inevitability. Understanding the various macro-scale forces that impact on local trajectories does not lead inexorably to the conclusion that we are helpless slaves to them.
Louise,to this day most natives that want a decent education for thier children will send them off-reserve for it. A year or so ago there was an article in the Sun written by a native that basically declared that the only hope for his children was an education OFF-RESERVE. Most reserve students grade poorly because of thier peer group that is allowed to skip classes for any reason,and the complete lack of respect for the staff.I know that if I was allowed to skip school whenever I felt like it,chances are I would be on the gov’t dole.Until parents take responsibility and ensure that little Johnie and Jane attend,the cycle will continue.
I see you still have neglected to link the comments you quoted, Dawg. You can rationalize that any way you like, but you are dishonest when you did not provide the source, or acknowledge that a number of were deleted as soon as I saw them.
I used to respect your integrity, I can no longer do that. You’ve misrepresented what has been posted at this site, called me a racist, insulted rural Canadians in a way you still seem incapable of understanding, and then hypocritically used the very comments thread you denigrated to engage in a debate that you could not generate on your own.
That crosses a line of hypocrisy that’s astonishing by anyone’s standards. As much as it pains me to say this – you are no longer welcome here.
Dawg: “I’m aware that I live on unceded Algonquin territory. Maybe we (and I don’t include you) need to sit down and deal. ”
Now we’re making progress. Still, it is disconcerting that you are so uncertain about what is to be done about a claim against your own property. How long have you been deliberating? When do you plan on coming to a decision?
The Algonquin claim is bogus. You can read more about it here:
http://www.aboriginalaffairs.osaa.gov.on.ca/english/negotiate/algonquin/algonquin.htm
Now, I’m sure you’re confident McGuinty’s crack team of accomplished and well paid negotiators, including the deeply principled Warren Kinsella, will do the right thing. I of course beg to differ.
wallyj, that reminds me of a little story I can tell. Years ago I taught on the home reserve of King Bigot, David Ahenakew. The local community had control of their own education. The school board was grappling with the chronic absenteeism that has ALWAYS characterised Indian school attendance (I’ll post more about that some day), and they wanted to impose some sort of penalty on parents whose kids had missed more than 20 days of school. When it was discovered that many of their own members would fall into that category, they dropped the idea.
True enough. And that precludes First Nations self-governance how exactly?
===========================
By being forced to comply with the laws governing the market place (you can’t do business in the construction trade, for example, if your don’t comply with business laws, building permits, contracts, etc., etc., not to mention the ability to get things like credit and earn the respect and trust of the other players in the market. Market forces are pretty much inexorible, despite what lefties might think about them. If you don’t play by the rules, you won’t have an economy and if you don’t have an economy, you can’t have much of a government.
Kate,
Please don’t do to Dawg what he did to me. I have been riding his hypocritical ass for quite some time. If you disinvite him here, he can claim victory on his blog and then how will you reach his followers.
Just let him expose his own hatred and anger.
It’s the only way. There are no guarantees he will learn from his bigotry.
adam- yoo hoo. You’ve still not answered my repeated question on – what type of economy do you suggest for the self-defined, self-governed native nation(s)???? Well?
Why do you get uptight when you are asked if they would choose between the 21st c and the 5th c? Are you seriously suggesting they might want to choose the 19th c, the 18thc, the 16th c??
Why don’t you answer the basic question – what type of economy do you think is feasible?
And- what does it require in the way of land and capital and work? Hmmm? Are you seriously suggesting that Canada should hand over blocks of land to them – which would be separate from Canada, because they would be ‘self-governing nations’? Well? Why don’t you answer the questions and move out of your vague ambiguous neocolonial rhetoric – and into specifics?
dawg – my response was to your statement of ‘enforced enrollment of children against their parent’s wishes’. I suggest you are the one who is being pompous.
adam -what academic elitism? Please explain. Is it elitism to refer to these people? Why?
Who said anything about inevitability? Kindly explain.
What you don’t understand, is that an economic mode is directly – that’s directly – linked to a particular political and legal mode. Is that what you consider ‘inevitability’? If so – yes, it is inevitable. You can’t have a tribal mode of governance in a multimillion population base. You can’t have a multimillion population base without industrialism. Those are ”inevitables’. Also known as ‘necessary’. Just like you can’t have a complex biological organism without specialized organs.
And again – kindly explain what type of economic mode you suggest for the Native Nation(s).
[deleted – you were asked to leave, not invited to negotiate. ED]
Louise,amusing but sad. I caught fontaine on the news an hour or so ago,pontificating the usual”working together,fairness,harmony,etc.and of course,”it’s all about the children”. I think that if the “leaders” expended the energy,time and resources towards educating the children as they do trying to win the land claim”lottery”,the children may stand a chance in the future.But I doubt if it will happen. The mindset is akin to me taking the day off work because I bought $20 worth of 6/49 tickets for tonights draw.
ET- I hope you are not holding your breath waiting for a reply from a’damn. I have concluded from his/her’s postings that he/she only proposes self-government and self-determination for the natives because those words sound so swell and progressive. Empty words from an empty ideology,but good for his/her self-esteem.
Dr. Dawg
“Your sense of grievance here bears all the signs of careful manufacture, right down to denouncing me in your update. But by all means keep playing to the gallery. They lap that stuff up.”
Kate has no control over us. This is disingenuous. Why are you blaming her for our recognition of your bigotry?
Dr. Dawg,
“Your sense of grievance here bears all the signs of careful manufacture, ..”
Paranoia?
Unfortunately, my user nic goes back several months on your blog. Are you intimating that she manufactured this outrage several months ago? Did she plan the “Day of Protest” as well at least that far back?
Kate is truly one of the world’s preeminent evil geniuses. Be afraid. Be very Afraid!
Baaaa!
ET: You’ve still not answered my repeated question on – what type of economy do you suggest for the self-defined, self-governed native nation(s)????
Well, presumably some sort of fur-trading economy.
Are you seriously suggesting that Canada should hand over blocks of land to them – which would be separate from Canada, because they would be ‘self-governing nations’?
Actually, yes, or at least their fair share of control over such territories. This will take place over long stretches of time, of course, and only through extensive and complex negotiation, but in a nutshell, yes.
what academic elitism? Please explain.
Refer to your own intellectually arrogant and condescending phrases like, “Do you know why colonialism developed? I’ll bet you don’t,” “you know zilch about social infrastructures,” and “What you don’t understand, is…”
What you don’t understand, is that an economic mode is directly – that’s directly – linked to a particular political and legal mode. Is that what you consider ‘inevitability’? If so – yes, it is inevitable. You can’t have a tribal mode of governance in a multimillion population base. You can’t have a multimillion population base without industrialism…
The US approach has its share of flaws, but it recognizes Tribal Entities as sovereign and self-governing, while allowing for the integration of two distinct political and (capitalist, industrial and post-industrial) economic systems, one both embedded within and simultaneously (in certain respects) independent of the other. There are lessons to be learned here. A 1:1 link between particular economic modes and particular political/legal modes is overly rational and deterministic. All human systems are dynamic; no particular process or formulation is inevitable.
By the way – your focus on them as a group is racist. Why? Because it rejects them as individuals.
Does this mean that you would never refer to, say, “Israelis” or “Palestinians” or “Muslims” as a collective group, for fear of committing racism? Of course not.
http://www.ideachannel.tv, in case certain commenters wish to find out how a successful economy actually runs.
I suggest one watches Milton Friedman’s original 1980 series first. Know this, that when they were produced, U.S. (and Canadian) unemployment was runnuing in the double digits, inflation was up around 14% annually, interest rates were well over 15%…
Friedman was proven 100% correct.
I’ll take Milton Friedman’s ideas of government and economics, as opposed to, say,
“Tribal Entities”.
“Well, presumably some sort of fur-trading economy.”
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Northern trappers have been subsidized by various other sources of income for decades, mostly welfare or makework jobs funded by tax dollars. Trapping is just about the least lucrative business in the world. In Northern Saskatchewan, the only economy that supplies jobs is mining and forestry. To work in those industries and make good money one needs to have highly trained skills, which means completing high school and getting some post-secondary trade. It ain’t happening sweetie.
Of course, you can always set fire to the forests and get periodic work fighting fires, but several years ago the government clued into the fact that locals were doing this and forthwith they stopped hiring people who lived closed to where the fire started.
You really do believe in a lot of romanticised bullshit, don’t you. The fur trade!!!
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
A fur-trading economy!!!! OMG,you are either delusional or have a fine sense of humour.I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt,thanks for the laugh.
The fur trade.
Now, I’ve read everything.
wallyj- I think that ‘adam’ or a’dam is a woman. The term a’dam refers to some sort of necklace or bracelet in a sci-fi fictional tale, that gives the woman the ability to inflict pain.
At any rate – I don’t believe it, adam, I don’t believe that you are actually serious in your suggestion of a ‘fur-trading economy’. What a belittling and ignorant suggestion!Is that your image of natives?
Why on earth must these people live in a perverted hunting/gathering mode (perverted because they are selling the furs)! Why can’t they live in the industrial modern world! What a derogatory comment. Is that your image of natives? Canoing along the river to get their fur traps to sell the furs to The White Man? How belittling.
First- where are the animals that they must trap and kill for these furs? Hmm? Are you aware that they don’t exist in the numbers required to support the current native populations?
Second – what if there aren’t any animals around? Hmm?
Third – why only a one-mode of economy – hunting furs?
Fourth – do you seriously suggest that trapping furs can sustain a population – in houses, schools, hospitals, roads, etc, etc???? What fictional world are you living in?
So- they can’t, according to you, live in an industrial economy. They must live in the hunting and gathering mode – and sell their furs to the White Man.
Again – what if there are no furs? None?
And how absolutely belittling and demeaning of you – to refuse to imagize the natives within an industrial mode.
Now – you expect Canada to actually hand over blocks of land to them. It will no longer belong to Canada. Canada will lose sovereignty over pockets of land. It will be native ‘nations’. OK – so, what do they do for money? Nope- they can’t use Canadian currency – not unless they and their economy are under the laws of Canada. Nope- they can’t use Canadian passports. Or police. Or hospitals. Nothing. What do they do about roads in and out of the Native Nation? Border control?
All they can do – is sell their furs – from the animals that will rapidly become extinct on their lands. What do they do then? How do they pay for their own roads, building their own hospitals, houses, schools, printing their own money? Hmm?
Ahh – well, do you actually know why colonialism developed? From your posts, I’ll guarantee that you haven’t a clue. That’s not arrogance or elitism; that’s empirical critical observation.
Post-industrial? Explain.
You are quite wrong. A society is a logical infrastructure – and its economic, political and legal systems are not optional but intimately related. Yes, deterministic. That’s how it goes. A hunting/gathering economy has a particular political and legal system – all over the world. Same with the various types of agriculture – each type of agriculture (wet/dry horticulure, pastoral nomadic, irrigation, rainfall) has its own NECESSARY political and legal mode of organization. Same with both early and late industrialism.
The US does NOT cede land to the natives as separate nations-within-a-nation. They are still Americans, still obeying the economic and legal laws of the land. They are more like municipalities – not separate economies or legal systems.
Again, your focus on natives treats them as a group. Your analogy with ‘Israelis, Palestianians, Muslims’ etc is invalid. One is already a nation and the term Israeli refers to citizens of that nation. Palestinians refers to a people living in a particular area, under a particular gov’t, who want to be defined as a nation. Muslim refers to members of a religion. Under no circumstances am I defining the economic work of any of them (eg fur traders) – they are individuals.
Again – I’m astonished by the naivete and indeed, your derogation of the natives with your image of them as having an economy of ‘fur-trading’. And your expectation that Canada will cede them blocks of land.
My god – unreal. So, they can’t be engineers, doctors, scientists. Nope- they’ll all be fur-traders, even if there are no animals. And they’ll have their own mini-nations inside of Canada. Incredible. No wonder your name is fictional.
Indian boy: Mommy, when I grow up I want to be an engineer.
Indian mom: I’m sorry son, you can’t do that.
Indian boy: Why not, mommy?
Indian mom: Because commissar A’dam has decreed that people like us have to be fur traders.
Indian boy: But that’s not fair, mommy!
Indian mom: Totalitarians don’t care about fair, son.
ET- You are probably right about a-damn being a woman. I was thinking more along the lines that he/she was the ‘T’ in GLBT,confused about everything.
Unless I’m completely mistaken, some aboriginals (just not all) are engaged in the fur trade.
In BC, the barrier to entry for non-natives seems to be $40 a year … oops, now there is going to be a rush to get into the very lucrative fur trade.
Of course,during the slow times the womenfolk can always sell moccasins by the side of the highway.A’dam,you are treading water in the shallow end.
If I have to be called a racist, this this the best kind of moron to be called a racist by.
The fur trade? BWAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!!
I went back in the comments,A’dam-June 29th 10:14 a.m.,a little peeved about stereotypes.Fast forward 30 hours,”presumably-the fur trading economy”. Hoisted on its own retard,I would say.A’dam,please don’t go away,I’m dying to find out your views on the enviroment.I bet you think think we can save oodles of electricity by shutting off our headlights in the daytime. Cheers,it has been fun.
I do find the prospect of the Inuit resuming the whale hunt on a commercial basis to have a certain appeal.
When i was a kid I worked on farms with Six nations people, as a young man i worked in a steel mill in Hamilton with some of them. Little did I know they were yearning to making a living in the fur trade.
I suppose it might have been just a suggestion, but that fur trading fantasy was an illustration of so much of the fantasy that underlies lefty attempts at reality.
Indian boy: Mommy, when I grow up I want to yodel like this: tinyurl.com/28gvqn
Indian mom: I’m sorry son, you can’t do that.
Indian boy: Why not, mommy?
Indian mom: Because commissar A’dam has decreed that people like us have to play drums.
Indian boy: But that’s not fair, mommy!
Indian mom: Totalitarians don’t care about fair, son.
Indian boy: Mommy, when I grow up I want to be a pastry chef.
Indian mom: Don’t bother me, son. Can’t you see I’m busy with my beadwork?
Small dead animals will be the backbone of the new aboriginal economy.Isn’t it ironic?
wyatt salt at June 30, 2007 7:05, PM ROTFLMAO!!!
Can anyone point me to job on the *nline (can’t say o) job boards that have as qualifications (any of them):
– blames others for his/her situation
– can not accept responsibility
– unwilling to learn
– wants to learn the fur trade industry
– etc etc
Outside of:
http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ai/aw/hir_e.html
or any other gov’t position … maybe not.
Gee, when I heard that, I thought they were talking about Fort McMurray too.
Joanne, are you the same Joanne that visits Iraqi blogs? The one that used to drive those monster trucks?
Hey, where’d A’dam go? I was looking forward to boxing his ears again.
Fur trade… Bwaha!
The stuff that they were feeding us in high school (late sixties) is for the most part blather now. After my generation there has been at least 2 … 3 … maybe more generations of adaption by youth.
This I understand and applaud … we had no calculators, computers, internet, ipods, cable tv, etc. etc. … they, our children, do.
To think that our children could function in today’s world with only the knowledge of slide rules is ridiculous … to think that they could function with the knowledge of how to make a flint arrow head in ludicrous.
You can’t get into this game with one foot in and one foot out.
[Sigh] Folks, the fur-trade suggestion was sarcastic, meant to highlight both the obvious baiting by ET as to the possible economic mode(s) a self-governing First Nations might possibly adopt (apparently, she is insisting that I decide for them, in lieu of her deciding for them, when I’m arguing that via self-determination, they can decide for themselves) and the ridiculousness of her (and Kate’s) assertion that I believe that Aboriginals should (or would even desire to) revert to a pre-Industrial lifestyle. I should have thought that the sheer absurdity of the statement (when taken at face value), and my position here arguing in favour of Aboriginal rights to self-determination, AND my mentioning in the same comment of Tribal Entities in the US as an example of Native communities who participate in the modern economy while maintaining the right of tribal self-government would have made this clear. But instead, I suspect I will now just be accused of being a hypocritical racist or some-such. So be it.
ET: I think that ‘adam’ or a’dam is a woman. The term a’dam refers to some sort of necklace or bracelet in a sci-fi fictional tale, that gives the woman the ability to inflict pain.
Interesting, but entirely wrong. Try again, if you like.
I don’t believe that you are actually serious in your suggestion of a ‘fur-trading economy’.
You’re right, I wasn’t. Yet, everything else in your post then assumed I was, as though you were trying to misrepresent my position. Kind of like a straw-man. Hmm.
One is already a nation and the term Israeli refers to citizens of that nation. Palestinians refers to a people living in a particular area, under a particular gov’t, who want to be defined as a nation. Muslim refers to members of a religion.
First Nations, like Palestinians, also live in a particular area, want to live under their own particular gov’t, and want to be defined as a nation (actually, nations). They also, like Muslims, practise their own forms of spirituality. Their special Aboriginal status is recognized in Canadian legal and constitutional documents, past and present, and were/are predicated on unique historical relationships rather than race per se. So now can they can be thought of, and spoken of, as groups?
They are still Americans, still obeying the economic and legal laws of the land. They are more like municipalities – not separate economies or legal systems.
But not entirely like municipalities either. The decision to obey economic and legal laws are negotiated choices made by Tribal governments. These governments are (in theory if not in practise) sovereign and equal rather than subordinate actors. They are not mere legal/administrative entities created by the states, as municipalities are here. Many operate their own courts, and many have civil and criminal jurisdiction over events that occur within their territorial boundaries. The land is indeed not “handed over,” but the management of that land (and her assets) are largely the domain of the Tribal governments.
So, while the US model is far from perfect, and shouldn’t be applied wholesale to Canada, it does at least illustrate that Tribal rights of sovereignty and self-government can go hand-in-hand with “Western” economic and legal modes. Thus, while I agree that “a society is a logical infrastructure – and its economic, political and legal systems are not optional but intimately related,” the particular forms of those economic, political, and legal systems are capable of divergence from any inevitable, one-to-one, “this, ergo that” model. Which in turn cautions against over-confidence in deterministic views, especially when you move from abstract macro-historical theories to present and future micro-level applications.
So we agree, then, that any treaty or statute that is about Indians or any other so-called race, and any clause of any statute that mentions Indians or any other so-called race, is prima facie racist; ergo it should be abrogated and stricken from the statutes.
No, adam, nice try to cover up – but I asked you what type of economy and you said ‘fur trade’. This wasn’t ‘baiting’ but a valid question. Don’t try to pin the causality of your choice on declarations of you being a victim of me. Stand up – like a man – and take responsibility for your own words. You said it; you take the heat.
You still haven’t answered my question. What type of economy? And ‘fur-trade’ is not a type but a version of a type; namely, a hunting/gathering type. So, you are now saying that they need not be hunting/gathering but can be industrial?
Now – inform us exactly how. What is their capital?
Again- what you seem to ignore or simply don’t know, is that economic mode is not a matter of choice. That’s utterly naive. You cannot exist, economically or politically or legally in the world – which is a network – by choice. You can’t ‘choose’ which type of economy you’d like to live in. The type of economy is dependent on your population size, your geographical niche and other peoples. You, naively, think that it’s ‘all a matter of free choice’. It isn’t.
Are you hypocritical? Yes – but above all, you are naive. By the way – did the Canadian population ‘choose’ to be industrial? When and how was the ‘choice’ made? Hmmm?
First – there’s no such thing as race. Second, defining people into categories or groups ignores their commonality – ie, that we are all the same species. You continue to reject the native as an individual and insist on lumping all members into a group. Why? Why should native peoples move into industrialism as a group rather than as individuals? Why should they all live together in a bunch? Why can’t the native integrate with the rest of the world – as an individual – with awareness of his long-ago origins? Just as others remember their ancestral origins in France, in Scotland, in Thailand, in China etc. Why do you insist that these people all live in a group?
Do you work in our modern economy? Are you working in that economy defined as a member of a group or as an individual?
Now you are saying that the Canadian natives can ‘choose’ to become industrial. Again, it’s not a matter of choice. But – you haven’t explained how they’d be industrial. What exactly would they do? What is their capital? Don’t you realize that they’d have to drop the Kept Status? No more handouts from the gov’t; they’d have to develop their own income from their own work. That would end, by the way, the communal ownership of the land.
Nonsense – the decision by US native communities to obey US laws is not a matter of negotiation. They have no freedom to decided to reject US laws. They may not harbour criminals in their territory. They may not set up one law that contradicts US laws. They must pay taxes; they use the US dollar; they are not sovereign nations.
Macro-micro has absolutely nothing to do with this argument. An industrial society has a particular formal infrastructure – or it becomes dysfunctional. The ‘informal’ or actual representations of the ‘formal’ model of an industrial society will of course vary from place to place – but the infrastructure (formal model) remains the same.
Now- why must natives lives ‘as a group’? Why do you reject them as individuals and insist that they ‘choose’ to live ‘as a group’?
There sure seems to be alot of angry people on this post. Angry people angry at yet another Indian incident; and angry people angry that angry people are angry.
The message I got from this string of comments is that some people have been convinced that the police are not going to ‘serve and protect’ their lives and their property if the perps are FN. And, that when these people express concern, the progressives in the crowd tell them to shut up, as being concerned about your life and property is racist, especially when the perps are FN. Telling people to shut up, and calling them names is a great way to encourage debate.
The issue is the erosion of faith in the police. I am glad the Official Spokesmen for the Leftist Movement have tried to silence dissent. Those whose faith in police is crushed now know that words are futile, and that they should meet in secret and prepare for worse days to come. Good work, comrade A’dam and Dr.Dawg! In days to come, you will receive the rich reward for your efforts to force Canadians into a better mold.
adam, all laws should be equally applied to all canadians. no law should be passed that does not apply equally to all canadians.