Canadian Politics Thread

[Bob Long]

8 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

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. 

 

but isn't democracy an ideal that rises above any particular government formation? Why isn't that the guiding principle for a dispute?

[Optimist Prime]

10 minutes ago, The Arrogant Worms said:

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.

Not a friend of his but I knew of him yeah. No complaints from me on his work. 

[Bob Long]

1 minute ago, bishopshodan said:

 

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

 

my Russian ancestors weren't very nice to some folks either. 

 

Ultimately tho, we're all related to that one asshole monkey that smashed his friend over the head for the banana. 

[Sharpshooter]

2 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

 

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

Borrowing this from a White Noise post that seems apropos. 
 

3 hours ago, The Arrogant Worms said:

 

[bishopshodan]

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

 

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

 

 

That one looks more indepth.

 

I was doing a bunch of JIBC courses over 6 weeks. The main indigenous one was about 7 hrs but alot of the corrections courses talk about indigenous issues as the over representation in the prison system is ridiculous. Which is another spin off from how first nations were treated. 

I have a lot more courses to go. They keep developing your knowledge for 18mths while you work the line and earn your next rank. Then you can decide if you want to take it further, become a supervisor etc...

[Coconuts]

1 minute ago, Bob Long said:

 

but isn't democracy an ideal that rises above any particular government formation? Why isn't that the guiding principle for a dispute?

 

Democracy is a western construct, one that is intertwined with the history of Canada but maybe not one necessarily intertwined with various traditional and modern Indigenous ways of knowing and doing 

 

I'm not sure one can jump right to democracy is the goal is to have dispute between Indigenous Peoples largely resolved by said Indigenous Peoples 

 

I don't have an actual answer besides deferring to Indigenous nations and communities themselves, they are the ones best suited to know what approach to conflict resolution works best for them imo

 

Given the diversity amongst Indigenous Peoples it stands that there is likely a vast range of ways conflict, disagreement, and disputes are resolved 

[Coconuts]

3 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

That one looks more indepth.

 

I was doing a bunch of JIBC courses over 6 weeks. The main indigenous one was about 7 hrs but alot of the corrections courses talk about indigenous issues as the over representation in the prison system is ridiculous. Which is another spin off from how first nations were treated. 

I have a lot more courses to go. They keep developing your knowledge for 18mths while you work the line and earn your next rank. Then you can decide if you want to take it further, become a supervisor etc...

 

I'm well aware of the disproportionate incarceration rates, it's neat to hear what you've just said from someone within the institutional system though, that's an encouraging sign 

[bishopshodan]

Just now, Coconuts said:

 

I'm well aware of the disproportionate incarceration rates, it's neat to hear what you've just said from someone within the institutional system though, that's an encouraging sign 

It's massive now. A real focus on it.

 

I'm gonna do my first smudge soon. They just hired a new ICL, Indigenous cultural liaison. She and a few of the residents in our care and custody ( yep, thats what we call inmates these days)  have asked me to partake. Pretty cool.

[Coconuts]

2 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

It's massive now. A real focus on it.

 

I'm gonna do my first smudge soon. They just hired a new ICL, Indigenous cultural liaison. She and a few of the residents in our care and custody ( yep, thats what we call inmates these days)  have asked me to partake. Pretty cool.

 

That'll be very neat experience for you, I'm glad you're being exposed to a lot. 

[Bob Long]

4 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

Democracy is a western construct, one that is intertwined with the history of Canada but maybe not one necessarily intertwined with various traditional and modern Indigenous ways of knowing and doing 

 

I'm not sure one can jump right to democracy is the goal is to have dispute between Indigenous Peoples largely resolved by said Indigenous Peoples 

 

I don't have an actual answer besides deferring to Indigenous nations and communities themselves, they are the ones best suited to know what approach to conflict resolution works best for them imo

 

Given the diversity amongst Indigenous Peoples it stands that there is likely a vast range of ways conflict, disagreement, and disputes are resolved 

 

So for me at least, this is where I see it breaking down. Until we can figure out some common framework like democratic will to help guide us, I just don't see much more progress being made. Internal First Nations politics is one thing, its a very different thing when we're looking at major projects like energy or mining that we will need going forward and its provincial or federal negotiations and First Nations. 

 

We don't need frameworks when things are going well, we really need them when there's disagreement.

 

 

[Sharpshooter]

3 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

So for me at least, this is where I see it breaking down. Until we can figure out some common framework like democratic will to help guide us, I just don't see much more progress being made. Internal First Nations politics is one thing, its a very different thing when we're looking at major projects like energy or mining that we will need going forward and its provincial or federal negotiations and First Nations. 

 

We don't need frameworks when things are going well, we really need them when there's disagreement.

 

 

The issue seems to then be National Energy/Security/Etc requirements first and then National Reconciliation adherence to Treaties, second. 
 

? 
 

[Bob Long]

Just now, Sharpshooter said:

The issue seems to then be National Energy/Security/Etc requirements first and then National Reconciliation adherence to Treaties, second. 
 

? 
 

 

pretty much. Looking forward to the mining projects e.g., that will need to happen to get those battery factories humming, you know there will be resistance to it from someone, somewhere. If that resistance is from hereditary folks but not elected bands e.g., (like we've seen with natural gas pipelines in BC), then what? sorry Canada, you lose 10s of billions in investment?

 

I don't know how Canada doesn't come off looking like a bully to some if some heredity rights are ultimately not adhered to for some big projects. 

 

Or do we all say, nope no more investment until all the treaty and heredity/unceeded issues are resolved?

 

[Sharpshooter]

1 minute ago, Bob Long said:

 

pretty much. Looking forward to the mining projects e.g., that will need to happen to get those battery factories humming, you know there will be resistance to it from someone, somewhere. If that resistance is from hereditary folks but not elected bands e.g., (like we've seen with natural gas pipelines in BC), then what? sorry Canada, you lose 10s of billions in investment?

 

I don't know how Canada doesn't come off looking like a bully to some if some heredity rights are ultimately not adhered to for some big projects. 

 

Or do we all say, nope no more investment until all the treaty and heredity/unceeded issues are resolved?

 

These are the questions ‘we’ as a Country will continue to wrestle with. 
 

‘We’ say, it’s ‘our’ land and we need it to produce whatever. 
 

Then we say to the folks of First Nations, ‘We’ acknowledge that these lands that we ‘Treated’ are ‘Your Lands’. 
 

Then, how do ‘We’ say that ‘We’ need these lands for whatever and say it’s our National Interest? 
 

That’s the rub. 
 

(Please, no one take this the wrong way, I don’t use this term lightly, but to convey)

 

Are ‘We’ as a Society just a bunch of ‘Indian Givers’? 
 

Either we accept that we need permission or collaboration on a parcel of land that benefits the First Nations or we recompense them mightily if what on or in ‘Their’ land is vital to Canada’s survival( in all ways/shapes/forms), existentially. 

 

 

[The Arrogant Worms]

35 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

Not a friend of his but I knew of him yeah. No complaints from me on his work. 

 

https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/michael-coleman-former-duncan-mayor-lawyer-poet-family-man-dreamer-dies-at-78-4690393

 

It was the reason Michael Coleman, during his time as mayor of Duncan, raised money in the Cowichan Valley for a Kenyan town called Meru, which he had pushed to twin with Duncan, whose city hall/health centre needed a concrete floor; it was the guiding principle behind his push, as a young alderman, to get Duncan to twin and develop relationships with Montmagny, Que.

 

Chris Coleman said that relationship paid off for the country in 1995 as that small region, against pundits’ expectations, voted against separation after the Cowichan Valley started working on their friendships in Quebec, to let them know they were family.

 

It was also a driving force in Michael’s push to have First Nations greet and welcome delegates to a national board meeting in Duncan for the Federation of Canadian Municipalities.

 

“It was one of the first times First Nations were brought in to welcome delegates, now that’s part of standing protocol,” said Chris. “He had a real impact, but quietly,” he said. “He was a real character, and he believed in miracles like that he could run for the Liberals and win in the Cowichan Valley and that the Leafs would win the (Stanley) Cup again.”

 

After university, where he graduated with a law degree, Coleman and his wife Barbara and eldest son Charlie moved to Duncan in 1969. The couple would have two more sons, Ted and Jamie.

 

He would practise law for 46 years. He retired in 2015.

 

He was elected as an alderman in Duncan in 1973 and would eventually step into the mayor’s chair in 1980 until 1982. He would sit as mayor again between 1987 and 2005.

“He was always Mayor Mike,” recalled current Duncan Mayor Michelle Staples. “He and his family were always there for the community. The community and his family meant a lot to him, it was always a part of their life and they were so deeply interconnected.”

 

Staples said while she and Coleman would often see the world through different lenses, there was always mutual respect and the ability to put aside differences. “It was alright to have a difference of opinion with him.”

 

Coleman helped to ­create community groups and ­organizations like Big Brothers and Big Sisters, Cowichan United Way, House of Friendship and the Cowichan Foundation. He also helped to develop better relationships with First Nations.

 

 

Edited April 12 by The Arrogant Worms

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

24 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

That'll be very neat experience for you, I'm glad you're being exposed to a lot. 

 

Hopefully not exposed like this...

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

[Bob Long]

1 minute ago, Sharpshooter said:

These are the questions ‘we’ as a Country will continue to wrestle with. 
 

‘We’ say, it’s ‘our’ land and we need it to produce whatever. 
 

Then we say to the folks of First Nations, ‘We’ acknowledge that these lands that we ‘Treated’ are ‘Your Lands’. 
 

Then, how do ‘We’ say that ‘We’ need these lands for whatever and say it’s our National Interest? 
 

That’s the rub. 
 

(Please, no one take this the wrong way, I don’t use this term lightly, but to convey)

 

Are ‘We’ as a Society just a bunch of ‘Indian Givers’? 
 

Either we accept that we need permission or collaboration on a parcel of land that benefits the First Nations or we recompense them mightily if what on or in ‘Their’ land is vital to Canada’s survival( in all ways/shapes/forms), existentially. 

 

 

 

"we" are also not a monolithic group, there's a huge range of opinions, ideas, experiences, etc. in the Canadian population and its always changing with immigration. So there's that wrinkle. What "we" think is enough is a spectrum. Some think "get over it", others think far far more needs to be done. 

 

This here is "crown land". No its "unceeded". This chunk over there is clearly treaty, that chunk over there is a city, which you can't move. 

 

This is why I love the economic project collaborations so much. They aren't perfect but enlightened self interest tends to cut through the BS. I love that the Squamish nation is scaring people near UBC and Kits with high-rises.  I personally think the way forward is projects like this and many others from fish farming through to mining. 

 

And I really don't care if Amensty International or the UN doesn't like it, if a band and whatever government is involved can make these things happen, I want to see much much more of it. 

 

 

 

 

[Ghostsof1915]

45 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

my Russian ancestors weren't very nice to some folks either. 

 

Ultimately tho, we're all related to that one asshole monkey that smashed his friend over the head for the banana. 

I thought it was the proto-monkey that touched the Monolith, and beat up another for the water supply?

[Sharpshooter]

1 minute ago, Bob Long said:

 

"we" are also not a monolithic group, there's a huge range of opinions, ideas, experiences, etc. in the Canadian population and its always changing with immigration. So there's that wrinkle. What "we" think is enough is a spectrum. Some think "get over it", others think far far more needs to be done. 

 

This here is "crown land". No its "unceeded". This chunk over there is clearly treaty, that chunk over there is a city, which you can't move. 

 

This is why I love the economic project collaborations so much. They aren't perfect but enlightened self interest tends to cut through the BS. I love that the Squamish nation is scaring people near UBC and Kits with high-rises.  I personally think the way forward is projects like this and many others from fish farming through to mining. 

 

And I really don't care if Amensty International or the UN doesn't like it, if a band and whatever government is involved can make these things happen, I want to see much much more of it. 

 

 

 

 

We, society at large, are certainly not a monolithic group. 
 

We also haven’t had the impediments that the folks/descendants of First Nations folks have had here. 
 

The ‘wrinkle’ gets ironed out when ‘We’ say we’re going to accept the decisions of those that deserve a part in the decision making process. 
 

Either it’s Full Stop or it’s where the winds of our National politics take us. 
 

We can’t/shouldn’t make agreements/treaties/promises/etc based on the winds of change. 
 

That’s not Reconciliation. That’s platitudes. 
 

Once our Democracy and the process of First Nations (hopefully democracy) gets together and structures or restructures things, then that should be the ‘lay of the land’ for ‘Our Land’. 
 

It may suck, it may help, but ‘we’ all need to recognize it, and move forward together. 
 

This Is The Way. 

 

[Bob Long]

57 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

I thought it was the proto-monkey that touched the Monolith, and beat up another for the water supply?

 

That's him 

[Optimist Prime]

1 hour ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

Hopefully not exposed like this...

 

  Hide contents

 

 

 

I just watched your signature gif all the way thru to the delightful "all your base are belong to us". Thanks for the grins. 

[112]

Just now, Optimist Prime said:

I just watched your signature gif all the way thru to the delightful "all your base are belong to us". Thanks for the grins. 

It's an old meme, but it checks out.

[Optimist Prime]

3 hours 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?

 

You will pardon my lack of detail, but this is roughly what happened with the Wet'suwet'en People up north regarding the coastal gas link pipeline. The band council and elected chief signed the deal to allow it on their land, and then the old hereditary chief and his sons and their heirs and families got their noses out of joint on not being  a party to the agreement on behalf of the Nation.  I am in the dark as to the actual negotiations around that sticky wicket but i believe the hereditary chief was made aware he no longer speaks for the Nation, as they have moved onto an elected Chief, but a big part of my gut is telling me likely there was likely some concession given the hereditary Chief and/or his heirs and family in order to persuade them. I don't know though, it might have just played out in court and that is the end of it. 

 

Not my business though, to be sure. It is the business of the people of that first nation on who has legal authority to speak for them. 

 

I am nominally against hereditary leadership, which is akin to dictatorships no matter what country, nation or culture they are operating in, I just don't have a horse in that race, it is up to them.

[Bob Long]

11 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

You will pardon my lack of detail, but this is roughly what happened with the Wet'suwet'en People up north regarding the coastal gas link pipeline. The band council and elected chief signed the deal to allow it on their land, and then the old hereditary chief and his sons and their heirs and families got their noses out of joint on not being  a party to the agreement on behalf of the Nation.  I am in the dark as to the actual negotiations around that sticky wicket but i believe the hereditary chief was made aware he no longer speaks for the Nation, as they have moved onto an elected Chief, but a big part of my gut is telling me likely there was likely some concession given the hereditary Chief and/or his heirs and family in order to persuade them. I don't know though, it might have just played out in court and that is the end of it. 

 

Not my business though, to be sure. It is the business of the people of that first nation on who has legal authority to speak for them. 

 

It is tho, as Horgan wrote a fat cheque with your tax money.

 

So people can decide for themselves if that's what the opposition is about. 

 

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/vaughn-palmer-b-c-funds-lng-pipeline-opponents-as-construction-stalls

 

 

11 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

I am nominally against hereditary leadership, which is akin to dictatorships no matter what country, nation or culture they are operating in, I just don't have a horse in that race, it is up to them.

 

Well, this is Canada tho. I can't support keeping women out of power, because hereditary. 

[aGENT]

3 hours ago, bishopshodan said:

 

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

 

To my Scottish ancestors too 

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

5 hours ago, Optimist Prime said:

I just watched your signature gif all the way thru to the delightful "all your base are belong to us". Thanks for the grins. 

 

For great justice.