Canadian Politics Thread

[Sharpshooter]

6 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

You can't undo anything in the past, but we can recognize who still benefits and who doesn't. Certainly a good place to start, and should take the "blame" part of the discussion out if it for people that are hung up on that before looking at solutions. No one alive today is responsible for what happened originally. 

 

But what does that really mean? E.g., Do I have to agree with anything a heredity male chief says, even though that goes against much of what I believe is the correct way to live? do I just toss my beliefs of equality because 4 or 5 people from one group claim hereditary status? 

 

I think a big part of this is actually figuring out what disagreement means between first nations groups and the Canadian government, and what that then means for all of us plebs. 

 

Until we know how equitable disagreement looks I'm not sure how we move forward. 

 

 

Agree. ‘We’ cannot unring a bell. ‘We’ can however make it ‘sing a different tune’ in how it’s recognized and dealt with. 
 

Blaming get everyone nowhere. What’s done is done. ‘We’ move forward with that knowledge and empathy/desire to atone for what deficiencies ‘we’ can address. 
 

I don’t agree that one hereditary chief speaks for a Nation, unless they do based on a democratic acceptance that the representative speaks for the majority. If they do, then society ought to respect the will of that Nation, unless it’s something that is wholly detrimental to Society at large. This may be contentious and I recognize that. 
 

Like @Coconuts proffered, it’s equity, not equality that will be the path forward, including recompense and reconciliation. 
 

 

[Bob Long]

12 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

Agreed, and actual Indigenous People need to be involved in concluding what that justice is. One can utilize the disability rights slogan "nothing about us without us" and it'd apply quite nicely. 

 

I think a lot of what we can do is already mapped out in the truth and reconciliation report, and the calls to action. Historically, since closer to the advent of colonization really, Indigenous Peoples have been one of the most marginalized demographics in Canada. Any semblance of Canada's Indigenous Peoples being on anything resembling equal footing has to involve actual systemic and legal changes. Equality shouldn't necessarily be the aim, because that treats everyone the same, the goal needs to be equity, which aligns more with justice. 

 

A great deal has been done to Canada's Indigenous Peoples over many years, resulting in modern issues like intergenerational trauma, languages at risk of extinction, a massive loss of culture, widespread poverty, institutional racism, and a great deal more. Addressing this in a reconciliatory manner was never going to be an easy, straightforward process, and it's a process that involves various levels of government playing ball instead of stonewalling. 

 

This isn't to say strip away everyone's property, something like that simply won't happen, but it's about a lot more than just land. 

 

I think we're absolutely making progress on it, but it'll likely take a long while yet. That being said, there's been a lot of shifting happening over the past several decades that would have once been inconceivable. 

 

Our ancestors didn't see things as we do, and things aren't how they once were, we can absolutely be better. One should look at history with context, but that doesn't mean disregard the history after and write things off as simply being how they were when how things were isn't a reflection of today's reality. We collectively know a lot more now than we did then, and we can very easily look back at the history if we choose to. 

 

I can agree with the general principles you're putting forward, but the hard work is and will continue to be in the details. 

 

What do we do e.g., when there's disagreement between heredity chiefs, and band elected wishes? Who does Canada listen to?

 

[Sharpshooter]

3 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

I can agree with the general principles you're putting forward, but the hard work is and will continue to be in the details. 

 

What do we do e.g., when there's disagreement between heredity chiefs, and band elected wishes? Who does Canada listen to?

 

Nation by Nation referendum? 

[Bob Long]

1 minute ago, Sharpshooter said:

Agree. ‘We’ cannot unring a bell. ‘We’ can however make it ‘sing a different tune’ in how it’s recognized and dealt with. 
 

Blaming get everyone nowhere. What’s done is done. ‘We’ move forward with that knowledge and empathy/desire to atone for what deficiencies ‘we’ can address. 
 

 

I'm really thinking about people like the senator or mayor that continues to deny harm from residential schools, they seem to me to be reacting from some sort of odd reaction to feeling responsible and rejecting harms outright. Or the folks that feel the need for me to reveal how many generation of settler I am. I have no time for either of these groups. 

 

1 minute ago, Sharpshooter said:

I don’t agree that one hereditary chief speaks for a Nation, unless they do based on a democratic acceptance that the representative speaks for the majority. If they do, then society ought to respect the will of that Nation, unless it’s something that is wholly detrimental to Society at large. This may be contentious and I recognize that. 
 

 

So this is really the point, I agree with you that democratic acceptance is key, but I can find you folks that say thats a colonial ideal, therefore trash, and doesn't apply. Fruit from a poison tree and all that. 

 

1 minute ago, Sharpshooter said:

Like @Coconuts proffered, it’s equity, not equality that will be the path forward, including recompense and reconciliation. 
 

 

 

I don't really understand what that means, I need a for instance. 

 

[Bob Long]

4 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said:

Nation by Nation referendum? 

 

I'm thinking e.g., of a pipeline where the elected bands want it, the hereditary chiefs don't. What does Canada do?

Edited April 12 by Bob Long

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

Probably not popular on here but I don't agree with Indigenous rights or status that creates another level of government within Canada. A citizenship that gives different rights than others. That said I do believe in proper land settlement treaties. I have no problem with ownership participation by bands in infrastructure projects like TSM. All within context of proper treaties. Bands having revenue streams outside the federal government is desirable. Ultimately Indian Affairs has to end and Indigenous people incorporated into the Canadian mosaic. 

 

My ancestors were Germans from Russia/Germany, England and Scotland. They were all dirt poor and to my knowledge did not represent colonial interests. They were all farmers who were basically starving to death back in the old country. What they accomplished is a testament to their hard work and sacrifice. My great grand father was a orphan from England who had his passage paid for by the Morman Church. He was penniless but was young and strong. 

I'm assuming you think your taxes go towards funding indigenous communities, they don't. If Canada actually held up their end of the treaties we'd all owe a whole lot more so consider yourself lucky.

 

Also, treaties are only made between 2 sovereign nations so hopefully that helps clear up the whole citizenship issue. 

 

Agreed on the Indian Act statement. It's main purpose was to keep Indigenous people on reserves and away from the rest of us. It needs to go. 

[Elias Pettersson]

1 hour ago, The Arrogant Worms said:

Reading it again they plan to consult

 

I see. So what that is saying is that the government will now give the banks access to your CRA account to confirm income. It isn’t the CRA doing it, they will be giving the banks a “tool” to access the info. Not sure how the heck that is going to work. It’s all in the name of fraud and money laundering. 
 

So you file your taxes and CRA has all of your info. So somehow they will be giving the mortgage industry a “tool” to access this info. Interesting. 

[112]

3 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

I don't really understand what that means, I need a for instance. 

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

Probably not popular on here but I don't agree with Indigenous rights or status that creates another level of government within Canada. A citizenship that gives different rights than others. That said I do believe in proper land settlement treaties. I have no problem with ownership participation by bands in infrastructure projects like TSM. All within context of proper treaties. Bands having revenue streams outside the federal government is desirable. Ultimately Indian Affairs has to end and Indigenous people incorporated into the Canadian mosaic. 

Nope 

 

Not touching this.  Not even a little.  I can't begin to let you know how offensive and out of touch this whole statement or belief is.  Especially with the systemic and ongoing segregated policies that exist that perpetuate things for first Nations individuals

 

Suggesting that indigenous people are xist outside of the Canadian mosaic?  What the ever loving fuck

[Ronaldoescobar]

1 hour ago, The Arrogant Worms said:

My Grandmother on my Dad's side came from Sweden ....and my Great Grandfather on my Dad's side came from Norway.  Fun fact when my Great Grandfather came over there were too many Hansen's living here so he changed the family name.

Almost exactly my situation although it was my grandparents from Norway and Johansen being too common a name that they changed it upon arrival in Canada

[Bob Long]

12 minutes ago, 112 said:

 

OK so in this analogy, we're looking at outcomes. 

 

What are the future outcomes we can agree on? I'd say for starters:

 

1) everyone in Canada has similar health outcomes

2) everyone in Canada has similar expectations for the legal system

 

What else?

 

Edited April 12 by Bob Long

[Optimist Prime]

55 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

I'm pretty sure Sweden is where my last name originates 

 

I spoke to my mother, but my dad is a landed US immigrant whose lineage stems from Scandinavia, as far as I can tell it relates to living near a lime tree 

 

there is a finn insult that translates as "ski to a spruce", your lime tree origins made me remember that tidbit from my dad before he died oh and a joke my grandmother said to all the little kids "goodnight said grandmother as she poked her other eye out". bleck...hehehe. 

[Sharpshooter]

Just now, Bob Long said:

 

I'm really thinking about people like the senator or mayor that continues to deny harm from residential schools, they seem to me to be reacting from some sort of odd reaction to feeling responsible and rejecting harms outright. Or the folks that feel the need for me to reveal how many generation of settler I am. I have no time for either of these groups. 

 

 

So this is really the point, I agree with you that democratic acceptance is key, but I can find you folks that say thats a colonial ideal, therefore trash, and doesn't apply. Fruit from a poison tree and all that. 

 

 

I don't really understand what that means, I need a for instance. 

 

To your second paragraph, weren’t ‘Chiefs’ either elected in the before times? Was it always based on lineage? 
 

Regardless, First Nations people need to decide for themselves some way, while respecting their cultural ways, while dealing with Society at large. Democracy seems to be, imo, the best way to bridge any cultural gap. One Nation decides amongst itself and then ‘Our’ Nation negotiates based on that, so that ‘two Nations’ settle and move forward. The ‘perfect’ will be the enemy towards what’s ‘good’. 
 

We have one ‘tree’ from which we all ‘eat’. How ‘sweet’ that fruit is will always be argued. The point however is, ‘we’ ALL get to ‘eat’, equitably. Those that starved previously have the ability and ‘Right’ to starve no longer. Those of us that just arrived to ‘eat’ can still get our fill. 
 

Equity is a level playing field. Equality is ‘the same’. We, in context of all that has been ripped away from the First folks, are not ‘equal’. We as a Society, regardless of how many generations of ‘us’ that have been here, can assist in ensuring in making the ‘field of play’ less tilted against others, and giving others the same benefits, considerations, abilities to succeed as ‘we’ have….equity. 
 

Are members of any of our backgrounds the same? No. That’s not equity. Giving everyone the same chance to succeed is equality. Making sure that those that were marginalized to the point that they’d not be able to be equal, is equity. 

[Optimist Prime]

4 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Nope 

 

Not touching this.  Not even a little.  I can't begin to let you know how offensive and out of touch this whole statement or belief is.  Especially with the systemic and ongoing segregated policies that exist that perpetuate things for first Nations individuals

 

Suggesting that indigenous people are xist outside of the Canadian mosaic?  What the ever loving fuck

I agree with you but a little less vehemently. I can see what Boudrias was getting at, the general strokes. I too hope for an end to the Indian Act, but that is easily 50 years away, unfortunately, as a more just relationship develops between the nations and what Canada has become. We are ALL Canadian, and with indigenous folks ties to the land for generations immemmorial AND historical injustices there does need to be a distinction for now. It is tricky, the process or evolution of the relationship with each individual band takes a few generations as there is several major steps to moving off the Indian Act. My buddy who happened to be the Commanding Officer of the Special Operations Regiment when it was stood up and cut its teeth in Afghanistan retired to a liason position with the BC government and toured extensively throughout BC's first Nations. If i remember rightly he had visited every band in the province when he ran as our Candidate in the Saanich, Sooke and Esquimalt riding federally as a Liberal. He couldn't unseat the highly popular Randall Garrison who is now retiring and being replaced with my other good friend, the Mayor of SOoke, Maja Tait as the NDP candidate in the riding. ANywho...back to my story, We talked for hours and hours about First Nations issues and the process is already there, and slowly moving through each bands inner workings. It is a partnership endeavour, not a senior government dictating to junior government kind of situation. I am happy that we have treaties in BC and I hope they can be stabalized as a forever deal with each unique nation until we can rip up that indian act and put it in the closet of historical shame. 

[Sharpshooter]

17 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

I'm thinking e.g., of a pipeline where the elected bands want it, the hereditary chiefs don't. What does Canada do?

Take the majority opinion of those that fall under that present cultural catchment. 

[The Arrogant Worms]

6 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

there is a finn insult that translates as "ski to a spruce", your lime tree origins made me remember that tidbit from my dad before he died oh and a joke my grandmother said to all the little kids "goodnight said grandmother as she poked her other eye out". bleck...hehehe. 

You seem dialed in on local politics.  Did you know Micheal Coleman?  He was a good friend and one of the most moral men I have ever known.  And he loved puns.

[Coconuts]

20 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

I can agree with the general principles you're putting forward, but the hard work is and will continue to be in the details. 

 

What do we do e.g., when there's disagreement between heredity chiefs, and band elected wishes? Who does Canada listen to?

 

 

I think that has to be approached on a nation by nation basis, because Indigenous Peoples are not a monolith. I do think that the solution would have to largely be driven by Indigenous Peoples themselves as you've stated as well, in many cases I do think solutions need to be Indigenous driven.

 

This isn't to say that Indigenous Peoples will make all the decisions, the fact that Indigenous Peoples are willing to reconcile after the history they've experienced speaks to their willingness to collaborate though. 

[Optimist Prime]

4 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said:

To your second paragraph, weren’t ‘Chiefs’ either elected in the before times? Was it always based on lineage? 

From  my post above, i happen to know the answer: Each First Nation has had its own historical way of deciding a Chief. Some was lineage on the paternal side, some on the mothers side, and some were chosen at the death of the last chief from those who wanted the job, basically elected. Many modern bands now have an elected chief and council, some have both. My half sister is the daughter of the Hereditary Chief of the Pacheedaht First Nation's wife. We found out when she was already an adult she was my dad's daughter though, not the Chief's. She is awesome. I met her on my 16th birthday and she remains the best gift I have ever gotten for a birthday. A new big sister, imagine!

[bishopshodan]

12 minutes ago, 112 said:

 

 

Wild. I was going to go dig up this pic.

 

It was used in a course on indigenous peoples that I just did for my work.

 

It used 'fairness' and 'equality' but the point is the same. 

I think everyone should really try to learn about the intergenerational trauma and all the other things that our first Canadians have gone through.

As a Brit immigrant I am disgusted with the part my country/ descendants played in it. 

 

[The Arrogant Worms]

Ontario alcohol expansion largest Canadian deregulation policy in decades, report suggests

https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/ontario-alcohol-expansion-largest-canadian-deregulation-policy-in-decades-report-suggests-1.6844625

[Bob Long]

3 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said:

To your second paragraph, weren’t ‘Chiefs’ either elected in the before times? Was it always based on lineage? 
 

 

I think when you're talking about 100s of groups over millennia, it was probably both and everything in between at some point. 

 

3 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said:

Regardless, First Nations people need to decide for themselves some way, while respecting their cultural ways, while dealing with Society at large. Democracy seems to be, imo, the best way to bridge any cultural gap. One Nation decides amongst itself and then ‘Our’ Nation negotiates based on that, so that ‘two Nations’ settle and move forward. The ‘perfect’ will be the enemy towards what’s ‘good’. 
 

 

thats how I see it as well, but can see a lot of potential for a handful of people claiming hereditary status having different desires from elected band members. I don't believe Canada should have to wait for a group to figure out that disparity, and there's a chance that they never do. In the meantime, do we hold up projects or economic opportunities that everyone benefits from?

 

 

3 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said:

We have one ‘tree’ from which we all ‘eat’. How ‘sweet’ that fruit is will always be argued. The point however is, ‘we’ ALL get to ‘eat’, equitably. Those that starved previously have the ability and ‘Right’ to starve no longer. Those of us that just arrived to ‘eat’ can still get our fill. 
 

Equity is a level playing field. Equality is ‘the same’. We, in context of all that has been ripped away from the First folks, are not ‘equal’. We as a Society, regardless of how many generations of ‘us’ that have been here, can assist in ensuring in making the ‘field of play’ less tilted against others, and giving others the same benefits, considerations, abilities to succeed as ‘we’ have….equity. 
 

Are members of any of our backgrounds the same? No. That’s not equity. Giving everyone the same chance to succeed is equality. Making sure that those that were marginalized to the point that they’d not be able to be equal, is equity. 

 

again agreed in principe... just not sure what happens when the rubber hits the road and there isn't a clear way forward. 

 

There are things I think we should be able to agree on, like everyone living in Canada should have a healthy life. We're nowhere near that in some rural First Nations areas. 

 

 

 

[Bob Long]

4 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

 

 

Wild. I was going to go dig up this pic.

 

It was used in a course on indigenous peoples that I just did for my work.

 

It used 'fairness' and 'equality' but the point is the same. 

I think everyone should really try to learn about the intergenerational trauma and all the other things that our first Canadians have gone through.

As a Brit immigrant I am disgusted with the part my country/ descendants played in it. 

 

 

I think we can all agree that it's all the Brits fault. 

[Coconuts]

4 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

 

 

Wild. I was going to go dig up this pic.

 

It was used in a course on indigenous peoples that I just did for my work.

 

It used 'fairness' and 'equality' but the point is the same. 

I think everyone should really try to learn about the intergenerational trauma and all the other things that our first Canadians have gone through.

As a Brit immigrant I am disgusted with the part my country/ descendants played in it. 

 

 

Was it this one? Because I've been meaning to take it for a while, just haven't had the free time to pursue leisurely studies on top of my actual classes.

 

https://www.ualberta.ca/admissions-programs/online-courses/indigenous-canada/index.html

 

 

[Sharpshooter]

3 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

 

 

Wild. I was going to go dig up this pic.

 

It was used in a course on indigenous peoples that I just did for my work.

 

It used 'fairness' and 'equality' but the point is the same. 

I think everyone should really try to learn about the intergenerational trauma and all the other things that our first Canadians have gone through.

As a Brit immigrant I am disgusted with the part my country/ descendants played in it. 

 

Never put that on yourself. They aren’t you. You weren’t them. 

[bishopshodan]

Just now, Bob Long said:

 

I think we can all agree that it's all the Brits fault. 

 

What a mess my little island made for many, many years.