Wynne SLAMS Harper over missing, murdered aboriginal women comments
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
This is why 'an inquiry would delay action' argument is bull****.
Disturbing trend in debate on inquiry into missing, murdered aboriginal women
It's damaging to frame discussion as choice between inquiry and immediate action
I am seeing a disturbing trend in the multitudinous op-eds streaming out of the mouths and fingers of pundits on the issue of whether there ought to be a national public inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women (MMIW).
While lip service is generally paid to the welfare of indigenous women, two messages are actually coming out loud and clear:
1. An inquiry will tell us nothing we do not already know and,
2. We can have either an inquiry, or put the money into addressing the (known) root causes of the problem.
I want to address the second point first, because it is the most insidious, and apparently unquestioned of the two.
It is becoming an accepted truth that there is money out there, bulging out of a briefcase in someone’s office perhaps, just waiting to be spent wherever the public decides to aim it at. Apparently, though it is never stated so baldly, the Canadian public merely needs to make a choice: inquiry or action now. It’s up to us!
This is a classic false dichotomy. Only limited alternatives are presented, when in fact there are many more ways to approach the issue. Allowing this to be framed as an either/or situation is incredibly dishonest but plays wonderfully into divide and conquer tactics.
Why either/or dichotomy is so problematic
First off, the briefcase stuffed near to exploding with money does not exist. Neither for an inquiry nor for addressing underlying causes of indigenous vulnerability.
Can the money be found somehow? Absolutely, but that is not a given.
What is a given is that this government is incredibly hostile to the idea of an inquiry and has done next to nothing to address root causes so far, despite repeated calls to do exactly this.
Just because the issue of a national inquiry on MMIW is gaining public traction does not mean we are going to somehow magically alter this government’s attitude.
It is most certainly not the case that we, the public, will simply come to a decision and provincial and federal governments will march to our tune.
'Choice' vilifies those most affected by loss
Essentially, if you are one of the people supporting a national public inquiry into MMIW, then you are making a choice to spend all of the available (imaginary) funds on that instead of spending it to alleviate (supposedly known) root causes.
You are delaying action. You are actively putting more indigenous women and girls into harms way.
You are going to be responsible for all of the indigenous women and girls who are disappeared and murdered until such a time as an inquiry wraps up and action can finally be taken.
That is the logical extension of the logical fallacy at play here, and it is vile beyond compare.
To allow this debate to be framed in such a way actively vilifies grieving families, vilifies grassroots organizations, vilifies indigenous peoples and Canadians who give a damn and want MMIW to become a priority.
http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/aboriginal...o-missing-murdered-aboriginal-women-1.2749508
Disturbing trend in debate on inquiry into missing, murdered aboriginal women
It's damaging to frame discussion as choice between inquiry and immediate action
I am seeing a disturbing trend in the multitudinous op-eds streaming out of the mouths and fingers of pundits on the issue of whether there ought to be a national public inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women (MMIW).
While lip service is generally paid to the welfare of indigenous women, two messages are actually coming out loud and clear:
1. An inquiry will tell us nothing we do not already know and,
2. We can have either an inquiry, or put the money into addressing the (known) root causes of the problem.
I want to address the second point first, because it is the most insidious, and apparently unquestioned of the two.
It is becoming an accepted truth that there is money out there, bulging out of a briefcase in someone’s office perhaps, just waiting to be spent wherever the public decides to aim it at. Apparently, though it is never stated so baldly, the Canadian public merely needs to make a choice: inquiry or action now. It’s up to us!
This is a classic false dichotomy. Only limited alternatives are presented, when in fact there are many more ways to approach the issue. Allowing this to be framed as an either/or situation is incredibly dishonest but plays wonderfully into divide and conquer tactics.
Why either/or dichotomy is so problematic
First off, the briefcase stuffed near to exploding with money does not exist. Neither for an inquiry nor for addressing underlying causes of indigenous vulnerability.
Can the money be found somehow? Absolutely, but that is not a given.
What is a given is that this government is incredibly hostile to the idea of an inquiry and has done next to nothing to address root causes so far, despite repeated calls to do exactly this.
Just because the issue of a national inquiry on MMIW is gaining public traction does not mean we are going to somehow magically alter this government’s attitude.
It is most certainly not the case that we, the public, will simply come to a decision and provincial and federal governments will march to our tune.
'Choice' vilifies those most affected by loss
Essentially, if you are one of the people supporting a national public inquiry into MMIW, then you are making a choice to spend all of the available (imaginary) funds on that instead of spending it to alleviate (supposedly known) root causes.
You are delaying action. You are actively putting more indigenous women and girls into harms way.
You are going to be responsible for all of the indigenous women and girls who are disappeared and murdered until such a time as an inquiry wraps up and action can finally be taken.
That is the logical extension of the logical fallacy at play here, and it is vile beyond compare.
To allow this debate to be framed in such a way actively vilifies grieving families, vilifies grassroots organizations, vilifies indigenous peoples and Canadians who give a damn and want MMIW to become a priority.
http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/aboriginal...o-missing-murdered-aboriginal-women-1.2749508
"What was thye unemployment rate in the dirty 30's. A 'healthy economy' can survive 80% unemployment. one meal a day is lots when the calories you burn are cut way down"
MHZ; If you have a healthy economy, you are not going to have 80% unemployment.
I'd also question the validity of one meal a day.........realizing that some exist on that, and some on less. It's not "lots"
I stopped reading at that point.
Gotta say I agree with Petros's "huh?"
MHZ; If you have a healthy economy, you are not going to have 80% unemployment.
I'd also question the validity of one meal a day.........realizing that some exist on that, and some on less. It's not "lots"
I stopped reading at that point.
Gotta say I agree with Petros's "huh?"
It's way more than 40. Those are only reports made by government agencies and non-profits, and it's not even an exhaustive list. It's easily in the 100s.
Here's an even better way to prove it. Do some research, list out all the government inquiries that have been done, and track whether their recommendations were ever followed, and in the rare case that they were, whether it did any good.
I reckon that'll shut you up, unless your real concern is for sociologists, not Indians.
the whole point (as they'll be remiss to mention natch) is that the sh!t has already been done, and done and done before and very few governments of any stripe have had the ambition guts or spare time to act on any of the recommendations from past efforts...it's easier to blame Stephen Harper.
but sure, lets have a few more eggheads and papercutters tap away at their tablets on our dime and come up with more fixem lists. :lol:
Not taking requests today. Consulting hours are from 2-5 pm on Thursdays in my office.
You have said you don't read long posts.
My only hesitation with an inquiry over investigations of the specific cases is that of the money allocated about 99% would be the inquiry by only white collar people. Even with investigations if the motive isn't there the case gets less that the best effort. I still think 1 efficient investigator could do the white collar part could direct 10 cases with friends and family doing the grunt work. How many criminals would turn themselves in knowing somebody with grief is going to find them first?
Feeling somewhat like a lumbering triceritops, she surreptitiously deleted the Yellow Pages app from her iPhone........
We already have answers to violence against Aboriginal women
The solutions are there, should we care to act on them
By Tamsin McMahon | Maclean's – 21 hours ago
The Canadian Press - Tina Fontaine, right, walks during a vigil for her daughter, Tina Fontaine, and Faron Hall in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Tuesday, August 19, 2014. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Trevor Hagan
The murder earlier this month of Tina Fontaine, a wisp of a girl found by Winnipeg police divers who were looking for someone else, has rightly set off a public outcry about the alarming violence against Aboriginal women. Canada’s premiers are meeting this week in Charlottetown, where they have faced renewed calls for a national public inquiry into missing and murdered Native girls and women.
The demand for a public inquiry is understandable. But aside from the fact that such gestures too often end up costing millions, take months or years to complete and result in very little fundamental change, calls for an inquiry also ignore the fact that we already have many proposed solutions to the problems plaguing Aboriginal communities — should we care to act on them.
There have been dozens of coroner’s inquests into the murders, suicides and accidental deaths of Aboriginal girls and women, containing hundreds of recommendations on how to prevent such tragedies in the future. Tracia Owen was shuffled between foster homes and family members an estimated 64 times before the 14-year-old hung herself in a Winnipeg garage. The 2008 inquiry into her death produced 28 recommendations. Susan Redhead was 15 when she hung herself at her parents’ home in Shamattawa in northern Manitoba, having been sexually abused by five different men over the course of her short life. Her 2004 inquest ended in 108 recommendations. A $14-million public inquiry into the death of five-year-old Phoenix Sinclair —beaten to death by her parents, left to die on a basement floor and then dumped in a shallow grave — wrapped up earlier this year in Manitoba with more than 60 recommendations.
The murder earlier this month of Tina Fontaine, a wisp of a girl found by Winnipeg police divers who were looking for someone else, has rightly set off a public outcry about the alarming violence against Aboriginal women. Canada’s premiers are meeting this week in Charlottetown, where they have faced renewed calls for a national public inquiry into missing and murdered Native girls and women.
The demand for a public inquiry is understandable. But aside from the fact that such gestures too often end up costing millions, take months or years to complete and result in very little fundamental change, calls for an inquiry also ignore the fact that we already have many proposed solutions to the problems plaguing Aboriginal communities — should we care to act on them.
There have been dozens of coroner’s inquests into the murders, suicides and accidental deaths of Aboriginal girls and women, containing hundreds of recommendations on how to prevent such tragedies in the future. Tracia Owen was shuffled between foster homes and family members an estimated 64 times before the 14-year-old hung herself in a Winnipeg garage. The 2008 inquiry into her death produced 28 recommendations. Susan Redhead was 15 when she hung herself at her parents’ home in Shamattawa in northern Manitoba, having been sexually abused by five different men over the course of her short life. Her 2004 inquest ended in 108 recommendations. A $14-million public inquiry into the death of five-year-old Phoenix Sinclair —beaten to death by her parents, left to die on a basement floor and then dumped in a shallow grave — wrapped up earlier this year in Manitoba with more than 60 recommendations.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/we-already-have-answers-to-violence-against-aboriginal-women-225057129.html
Gee, I wonder why our top cops think this would 'delay action'.
Murdered aboriginal women: What to know about a national public inquiry
Calls for a public inquiry have gained steam - but what would it look like, and are there alternatives?
A public inquiry into Canada's missing and murdered aboriginal women is vital, if you ask provincial and territorial leaders, opposition parties and aboriginal groups. The federal government, however, suggests it's a misguided approach.
With so much debate about a public inquiry, here's a closer look at how one could work and what it could reasonably hope to achieve.
What would an inquiry look like?
The goal of a public inquiry should be to identify the factors causing these deaths and disappearances, so that they can be addressed, argues the Native Women's Association of Canada.
In order to do that, as many as possible of the more than 1,000 documented cases of murdered and missing aboriginal women from the last 30 years should be explored, said Dawn Harvard, vice-president for the NWAC.
"In an ideal world I would say we should talk to all of the families, we should look at all of those women, because every one of those women was important and it was a tragic loss," she said. Families of the missing, police, child welfare authorities and others could all be called as potential witnesses, she said. Topics like sexism, racism and poverty would all be relevant to the discussion.
Harvard wasn't prepared to comment on limits for how long the inquiry should take or how broad a time frame it might examine, saying that would still have to be discussed.
What would we learn that we don't already know?
"We need to see where we dropped the ball with these cases up until now," says Harvard.
She hopes an inquiry would identify instances in which indigenous women were treated differently by the authorities.
"It's that kind of thing that needs to come out and it's that kind of thing that will not come out if we don't have that legal clout to gain access to files, to essentially force people to come forward if they are subpoenaed and testify and discuss what happened in a number of these cases where it was obvious that our women were being treated differently."
http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/politics/m...now-about-a-national-public-inquiry-1.2748983
Murdered aboriginal women: What to know about a national public inquiry
Calls for a public inquiry have gained steam - but what would it look like, and are there alternatives?
A public inquiry into Canada's missing and murdered aboriginal women is vital, if you ask provincial and territorial leaders, opposition parties and aboriginal groups. The federal government, however, suggests it's a misguided approach.
With so much debate about a public inquiry, here's a closer look at how one could work and what it could reasonably hope to achieve.
What would an inquiry look like?
The goal of a public inquiry should be to identify the factors causing these deaths and disappearances, so that they can be addressed, argues the Native Women's Association of Canada.
In order to do that, as many as possible of the more than 1,000 documented cases of murdered and missing aboriginal women from the last 30 years should be explored, said Dawn Harvard, vice-president for the NWAC.
"In an ideal world I would say we should talk to all of the families, we should look at all of those women, because every one of those women was important and it was a tragic loss," she said. Families of the missing, police, child welfare authorities and others could all be called as potential witnesses, she said. Topics like sexism, racism and poverty would all be relevant to the discussion.
Harvard wasn't prepared to comment on limits for how long the inquiry should take or how broad a time frame it might examine, saying that would still have to be discussed.
What would we learn that we don't already know?
"We need to see where we dropped the ball with these cases up until now," says Harvard.
She hopes an inquiry would identify instances in which indigenous women were treated differently by the authorities.
"It's that kind of thing that needs to come out and it's that kind of thing that will not come out if we don't have that legal clout to gain access to files, to essentially force people to come forward if they are subpoenaed and testify and discuss what happened in a number of these cases where it was obvious that our women were being treated differently."
http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/politics/m...now-about-a-national-public-inquiry-1.2748983