First off, I doubt you speak for most Canadians. In fact, I think you only speak for a minority of white supremists.
And, what is Canadian culture? Can it actually be defined?
‘Do you have running water? I don’t and I live in Canada’
- Thread starter dumpthemonarchy
- Start date
And, what is Canadian culture? Can it actually be defined?
If you're thinking in terms of conquered nations and submission, you're more of a monarchist than your handle implies.
Canadian Culture is a farce. We don't have one other than that supplied by TV. A culture is what you eat, wear, the music you listen to and the community events you create and participate in, your style of arts etc. All of that comes from TV.
I think I speak for more than a majority of Canadians. I go on the simple idea that most people assume that if you live in Canada, you're likely a Canadian until proven otherwise. We grant people Canadianism fairly easily, because what else is to assume?
There is an attitude out there, that you're not even supposed to ask someone where they are from, because that is considered offensive, a subtle dig, that they may not be Canadian and a point of contention. You're Canadian, fine, next point. get on with the job. Canadians are generally into discussing politics. But immigrants often are.
This is a problem for aboriginals, they want to discuss their situation, their status, but are you really supposed to talk about complicated aboriginal affairs with an aboriginal? A touchy subject. This is a very PC crowd here.
I'm a real monarchist? DTM for King! As long as the salary is good, no fantastic as I will be working for the govt, and I have lots of good looking secretaries, my people could talk to your people. I would even hire some of your people.
Indians have been conquered, they lost. It is a comedy or tragedy-take your pick, that this discussion is still going on. But there is so much money on the table right now, that it will decades to even decide what the exact issue is. Over ten billion a year and counting. We can afford it.
Excuse me I have been away for a couple of weeks but when I return pieces like this demonstrate
the same lack of understanding still exists. Why would all the Aboriginals want to move to cities?
Besides if everyone lived in cities alone it would create so many problems, economically, socially and
otherwise that water would be the least of the problems.
The other thing that got missed here is that if over a hundred years ago we listened to the natives
we wouldn't have many of the environmental problems we are paying for now. Its true that rural
agriculture instituted water supply for the areas, but what is not mentioned is that the natives were
ushered onto reserves that in many cases did not have the same access to water or the farm
settlers claimed the mountain lakes and water systems leaving little or none to support increasing
demand for the resource.
The opening statements of this this thread leave one shaking their head in wonder that someone
would make an opening suggestion like this in the first place. It clearly demonstrates that some
people confuse a simple solution with simplistic unrealistic solutions.
Oh and one more thing, the rural communities did not do their own water systems for the most part,
they were cost sharing agreements that went back over a hundred years and today there is a
conflict of sorts in the encroaching development, is putting pressure on water systems capacity.
BC for example is re negotiating all of the former deals regarding water and access to it.
Government has been involved with urban and rural water systems at some level right across this
country so why wouldn't they enter into an agreement with the aboriginal community?
the same lack of understanding still exists. Why would all the Aboriginals want to move to cities?
Besides if everyone lived in cities alone it would create so many problems, economically, socially and
otherwise that water would be the least of the problems.
The other thing that got missed here is that if over a hundred years ago we listened to the natives
we wouldn't have many of the environmental problems we are paying for now. Its true that rural
agriculture instituted water supply for the areas, but what is not mentioned is that the natives were
ushered onto reserves that in many cases did not have the same access to water or the farm
settlers claimed the mountain lakes and water systems leaving little or none to support increasing
demand for the resource.
The opening statements of this this thread leave one shaking their head in wonder that someone
would make an opening suggestion like this in the first place. It clearly demonstrates that some
people confuse a simple solution with simplistic unrealistic solutions.
Oh and one more thing, the rural communities did not do their own water systems for the most part,
they were cost sharing agreements that went back over a hundred years and today there is a
conflict of sorts in the encroaching development, is putting pressure on water systems capacity.
BC for example is re negotiating all of the former deals regarding water and access to it.
Government has been involved with urban and rural water systems at some level right across this
country so why wouldn't they enter into an agreement with the aboriginal community?
No one likes bad news. I take issue with myths and make believe you try and post like its fact. I'm far more critical of the First Nations than you are. I just prefer to deal in fact and reality, unlike you.
I don't think things are being handled just fine. But I don't have to use false stereotypes, myths and lies to get things changed. I actually want the right things changed.
That's a lie. I literally have hundreds of conversations about First Nations with dozens of people. Only a few of you are bigots.
Maybe if you actually had a legitimate topic, and conceded to fact when confronted with it, you could shed the bigot label you so richly earned.
I agree. But lets stick to facts. Your bigoted BS does nothing constructive.
In this case, it is the gov'ts duty, by contract.
The first honest and correct thing you've said.
Yep, but when you have a contract with the gov't, it becomes their job.
You do know how a contract works don't you?
They do if they have a contractual obligation to do so.
They have. They've asked the people responsible, to fix the problem.
Yep. And when they make a contract with someone to do the job. The job becomes that persons responsibility
.
I imagine it would. You have expressed a complete lack of understanding, when it comes to how a treaty works.
Because they already have a contract in place.
Ummm, these people didn't decide that this is where they wanted to live. Now this the life they know. Anyone that suggests just up rooting them and putting them somewhere else, is an idiot.
Adriadne, you're starting to repeat the same answered question. Why are you unable to grasp what is being said?
Well duh. That's why the injins got stuffed on that land.,
Because the gov't is contractually obligated to do so.
First you build a strip that can handle a C 130.
If that.
Yes and no, but they are still responsible.
Your seemingly willful ignorance, is becoming annoying.
Not really, but there is a strange feeling of abandoning the last connection to where you came from.
So do I, a status Injin. So what are you talking about?
That's not status, that's location.
The commitment doesn't say help. It says look after, period.
Because it's in the contract.
Do you expect a mechanic to fix your car when you take it to him?
Got some proof?
Because we have a contract that says the gov't will do so.
Only for uneducated idiots.
I agree, you have no understandingg at all what so ever. Where as, I have an excellent grasp of what the issues are. But then again, I don't run on Op/Ed and myths.
Some? Would you like some stats? Try the majority.
I agree, and it was almost refreshing when you almost conceded to the fact that not all reserves are one big problem.
They do what they want. Then get forced when taken to court.
LMAO!!!
I'm Canadian. The gov't didn't listen to me and several Injins when we brought a litany of evidence to their attention, about corrupt leaders.
Wanna make anymore silly claims?
I'm Canadian, can you tell me about this Canadian culture?
You speak for uneducated bigoted white trash.
Sure why not?
Unless you want to talk about myths and silly generalizations, ignore facts and evidence. Then when you do have an aboriginal audience, you'll get called exactly what you behave like, a bigot.
Not at all. I'm far more critical than you are when it comes to First nations. The difference being I live and deal in reality. Where you live in deal in bigoted BS.
So you keep saying. Which is funny, because I am accused of being anything but PC, regularly.
Please post citation.
I was leaning to pathetic, but you do have your funny moments.
Ya, because you have a contract. Break it and see what happens.
Last edited:
Okay, so 100-200 years ago abos weren't allowed to live in Canadian cities, that was called racism. Now some-like me, say that cities is where more should live because for one thing, no matter how poor they are, they can get clean water everywhere. A very PC attitude, what was done in the past was bad, but the new solution, I don't know, let's take another look at old solutions that have no relevance.
If we listened to the natives? Natives live on a very small scale, they consume few resources, they hunt, fish, and farm very simply-hey just European peasants used to. This is a subsistence existence, done by traditional peasants all around the world, prior to the Industrial Revolution, have you heard of that event? It's not going away, even in Canada. We now live in a world of millions and billions of people, size matters here ladies and germs.
As I mentioned earlier, traditional pre-industrial peoples, like abos in Canada, peasants in Europe, Africa and Asia, don't believe in progress, equality for women or democracy. The big men decide how things will be done and everyone else will fall in line or start a violent revolution if you disagree.
As usual, got a link? So over 4 billion are still tilling the land with animals. Wow. Impressive.
Some people want all the benefits of living in Canada, but still want to be special, unique. Everybody wants it both ways. Go for it. See what you can get as fast as you can.
Oh my goodness ... still no running water? Would you like me to provide the educational materials required to get running water? Seriously, this has to stop! Standing around stomping one's feet and complaining because everyone else isn't saying "how high" when they hear the word "jump" is not a solution.
Yes and please read them yourself first.
Yea and please read them yourself and while you're at it hassle John Duncan and tell him to get off his useless ass.
Just like the word 'abos'.
So long as you aren't homeless and have to be a paying customer.
Not that I even remotely think you have the guts to answer this...Why aren't they relevant?
Really? I'm native and if you listened to me, you'd know what you just said, was ridiculous.
Accept the Haudenosaunee, who were a matriarchal society, and can claim the longest running participatory democracy in history.
Again, if you listened to natives, like me, you wouldn't say such stupid things, repeatedly.
That's why you get labeled a bigot.
Good to see that you failed to read anything that was replied to you previously.
That can only mean one of three things...
Willfully ignorant.
In which case bigotry must be at play.
Or you have a severe reading comprehension issue.
Which is it?
And there I thought having the freedom to be special and unique was one of the benefits.
Not only do you not understand how First Nations treaty obligations work but you seem to fail to understand the concept of a federation as well. Two of the main things that define this country politically. :thumbright:
Please, continue. I haven't been exposed to such an entertaining spectacle of unabashed ignorance since I was stateside.
Huh?!
ROFL I wonder what he calls Caucasians, "Caucs?"
About those communities that aren't able to cope: with social deterioration comes general anxiety and then you get social apathy where deep depression and suicide abounds. Happens everywhere in the world where people have lost hope from being pushed too far. When people are in that situation they also become degraded mentally just as they do physically, to the point of becoming incapable of escaping their predicament. Add some corruption to the mix, some ****ing industry polluting the water so bad no filter in the world could remove that **** and you've got yourself a Third World hell-hole. Nothing like seeing your baby come out half-dead, brain-damaged and with extra limbs to lower your daily productivity. By international legal standards, Canada should be tried for crimes against humanity...and things are a lot more civilized now than they were a few decades ago--there's a reason South Africa in the good ol' days of the Apartheid sought advice from Canada as to how to deal with undesirable populations.
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBear
Just like the word 'abos'.
Abos? We use A-Bros in these parts. You've heard it before. Aaaa Brooo.
Abos? We use A-Bros in these parts. You've heard it before. Aaaa Brooo.
Abos, it's okay to use in Australia. Very PC, and also very English, fussing over every word, very interesting. But relax, its just a shortened form of a word. It saves space.
Sure, we're all unique and special. But I don't expect any govt to compensate me for it. Treaties were made a long time ago, and things have greatly changed. The original treaties said nothing about taxes, trucks, trains, planes, the internet, corporations and plenty of other topics. All of this has been read into treaties by judges and lawyers looking to keep busy and get paid well. All these new obligations like water are a scam. Time to create private property on reserves and end African-style tribal homelands in Canada.
You see, treaties made by the British allowed a class system that is pre-industral and pre-modern like the British themselves were and sometimes are today. The British made treaties with traditional subsistence peoples because it created clients and loyalty, and they never expected to live in a country called Canada or dreamed of it. Canadians now simply don't need aboriginal loyalty any more, so power says get rid of the treaties. And we don't believe in the odious British class system that did not and does not believe in democracy and equality, so we have no obligation to it legacy any more. The only good treaty is an extinguished treaty. Equality and freedom for all, like it or not. It's called progress.
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBear
Just like the word 'abos'.
Abos? We use A-Bros in these parts. You've heard it before. Aaaa Brooo.
"A rose by any other name smells just as sweet". :smile:
First Nations aren't compensated because they're unique or special. They're compensated because they signed a contract with the Crown.
Agreed. Since the Crown first established that Treaties were living documents, when they wanted to exploit them for benefit of parties other than First Nations. The Courts award the same privilege to First Nations.
Taxes are most definitely considered, by explicit mention in treaties. The rest of the items in your list, sound as silly as the myth we get a new snowmobile every year.
Can you provide some references to the gov't purchasing these items for First Nations please.
I can't find any mention of this in any court records I have.
LOL, water isn't new. And certainly isn't a scam.
African style tribal lands?
Yes, that is exactly why you get called a bigot. Thanx for removing any doubt.
You really want war and genocide don't you?
Because to arbitrarily abolish the treaties means both parties would have to go back to the state at which they were, when they entered the contract.
Do you know what that means?
Funny you say that, since the Six Nations had that before your ancestors did. It took your ancestors to f!ck it up.
Thanx.
Last edited: