no no no...exactly that..... re read the thread. ALL troubles started after the Europeans got here. All the war, disease, raping of the land, over "harvesting" of wildlife.
Kanehsatake, 270 year of resistance.
- Thread starter CDNBear
- Start date
no no no...exactly that..... re read the thread. ALL troubles started after the Europeans got here. All the war, disease, raping of the land, over "harvesting" of wildlife.
No utopia but the proof that it was better is in the pudding - millions of more animals and plants, thousands that hadn't gone extinct, we only have about 5% of our old growth forest left, etc. Most of the serious conflict came about from displacement by settler communities.
exactly...see...... them injuns were the best damn stewards of the land that ever lived.
Are you sure they didn't cross the land bridge from Russia and the East? It has not been proven, but the eggheads believe we all came "out of Africa". We also know the Earth changed a lot over 20,000 years. As well, cattle are domesticated, we no longer have to chase bison over cliffs to harvest them, nor rely on the migration of herds of other species. We also aren't so much reliant on the harshness of seasons to determine our mortality rate. Yes, people "dirty" the land, so do other species, that is why they are nomadic. Whether you think all this is good or bad is your own opnion, we may all have our own prejudices or preconceived notions, but let's not base government policy on it.
Heaven forbid! I say do away with government all together. Perhaps when people get used to not having someone how to live, what to do and not do and take a littl eresponsibility for their lives, then we be able to design a government that doesn't run our lives and actually represents the will of the people - say like Switzerland.
Because we are talking of two different things; the skills needed for survival and history. Which do you think would take precedence? I don't know the answer, in bountiful times there may be time for history, in lean times the stories may be for basic survival. I will tell you one thing, survival is reliant on experience, knowlege, or training, there is no guarantee any or all of it will result in a happy ending, but "none of the above" is guaranteed to end badly. On a priority rating of having to memorize stuff, the real life relevent lessons learned and conveyed are the key to survival. Actual history can end up bastardized or embellished because memories either fade, events were forgotten or were considered irrelelvent, or there were other pressing matters at the time. At least when it is written it can be taken in context of the writer and the times, when it is oral is is merely a story.
I think it's getting late, I'm trying to make sense of your post. I assume you have your tongue planted squarely in your cheek, but I could be totally wrong. If you don't, I would certainly shake your hand, cautiously. Though I wouldn't say do away with government altogether because anarchy only invites another style of totalitarianism, but a Switzerland style governance would be my choice.
I dunno? Why be accurate at all? Just report the stuff you want to remember or be remembered, good or bad depending on your audience. I'm not talking about sweating it, only recording it. You have already indicated your prejudice so any oral history you would convey, (irrespective of who it was from) is already tainted, now just give it time.
Funny, that's not how we see it...We've been saying "Canada 0, Mohawks 1" since. But I would rather say "Mohawks 1, Quebec 0". Because it really wasn't Canada that stood in our faces.
I agree...
But with the advent of the FNC, you have a meeting of the various oral traditions. And thus a balanced look at history pre European arrival. Not to mention an even more accurate one, post their arrival.
As I noticed in another thread on a similar subject, what Canadians know about Canadian and in particular, Native Canadian history, is embarrassing.
Those Native oral accounts were taken as gospel, and recorded almost verbatim, so long as it followed the Gov't of the day's program.
Such as the "Iroquois" and the "Huron" battle at Saint Marie. The Jesuit/Huron account is what is tought in schools, at the mission and is a part of Canadian lore. It doesn't matter that it is almost completely false. I mean some people did get killed and all. They got that part right.
Well some of those Catholic Priests died martyrs deaths in the most horrendous circumstances, like St. Jean de Brebeuf.. the Patron Saint of Canada.. for the cause of their Faith, and expected no riches or earthly reward for their efforts. So there were enough crimes to go around.
And for the most part natives have at least the opportunity for better lives than what was available to them prior to these interlopers arrival. Whether they take advantage of that, or prefer to clothe themselves in robes of victimization and indignance, or bury themselves in self pity or alcohol.. is up to them.
And you'll find many of those in these 'First Nations' are some of the most devout of Christians.. and thankful for their deliverance from paganism and animism.. and savage societies.
You think the Bering was a one way street? lol Funny.
Don'tcha mean 250,000 years?
... and have a more sustainable life. Exactly. The European capitalist plan was what? Use it up and find something else to use up regardless of sustainability?
No, it isn't just my opinion. It's fact. Aboriginals lived more along the codes of nature back then and survived .... along with all the other species. Europeans flooded in killed off species, killed others almost to extinction, took up the best growing land for their cities and whatnot, etc. etc. Why? Because it was profitable. They had to have more than they could use.
Yeah, let's base gov't policy on how far humans can stretch Earth's hospitality. Let's keep the policies that enable a few to have immense amounts more than they or their descendants could ever use while watching others starve. Genius.
Yes. Relevance is the key. A lesson learned is a lesson learned regardless of whoever had the experience and when. What's more important, knowing that there's a control for diabetes mielitis or knowing that Banting and Best developed a control for it in 1920?
BTW, just because something's been written down doesn't make it fact any more than something spoken makes it a "story".
Back in the early 16th century if you told a European that tomatoes were edible, they'd have thought you were telling a story. Magellan or Cortez or one of those explorer types discovered people in another section of the world eating tomatoes so he brought some seeds back to Europe. All that done without the natives handing over a written document stating that tomatoes were edible.
Now if you and I were sitting at the table having a beer and I told you that, would it just be a stopry? Or would I be relating fact to you? Or would you only believe it if I wrote it down?
As I said, what difference does it make whether Banting and Best found the control for diiabetes in 1920? What if they'd developed it in 1910? Isn't it more important that it was developed? What difference would it make to someone 700 years from now after a cure had been found that insulin was first produced in 1920? People will just make comments like "Oh, yeah, way back when there used to be this disease called diabetes and it was controlled for a while and then there was a cure found". Is it really important that they'd have to read the info? Or read that it was 1920 and Banting and Best discovered the control? It's not that important in the overall scheme of things.
Write it down in your post when fire was discovered and who discovered it, please. And while you are at it, post who developed bronze and what date, please.
Oh, and BTW everyone has prejudices.
i remember going through the reserve south of grand rapids Manitoba and they had garbage and everything out on the lawn, carboard, plastic, styrofoam you name it.... No different then the rednecks with their cars rusting on the front yards....
i can honestly say i am a better steward of the earth than those specific people, and im european descent
i can honestly say i am a better steward of the earth than those specific people, and im european descent
lmao
That's what happens when you show up at your neighbor's and tell them they are full of shyte and that you know better.
Yeah, well, supposedly everyone has a better life now than then, right? Tell me, how much better is the life of a starving child in Ethiopia for having had some European come introduce Christianity or Islam to them. How much better were the "savages" in North America after the Europeans brought syphilis, smallpox, typhus, diptheria, etc. and decimated thousands of their food species?
roflmao Yeah, there's a sucker born every minute.
Id say that all complaining people do about white people is bull****. Look at the chinesse and japanesse they went through **** also, and yet they pump out smart kids and make the most on average in uor country of Canada then any other ethnic group.
What makes them so different? Well they dont bitch about the white man as much as other ethnic groups...
i think both whites and natives can learn from them
What makes them so different? Well they dont bitch about the white man as much as other ethnic groups...
i think both whites and natives can learn from them
Last edited: