I see very little point in that. There is nothing worse than mulling over historical rights or wrongs. The Quebecois and the Irish have been doing that for years and it hasn't gotten them anywhere.
Replace Canada day with Reconciliation Day?
- Thread starter White_Unifier
- Start date
We'll call it "Cheque Day".
My people were enslaved by the Romans for 400 years and I wait daily for my compensation from the Italians.
A fair number of french loyalist were exiled to Canada after the king was beheaded. Maybe we should send then monthly cake?
I've always loved this argument. It boils down to "unless every wrong can be compensated, no wrong should be compensated."
It's really just another variation on the tu quoque fallacy.
It's really just another variation on the tu quoque fallacy.
The next logical step is to determine who was wronged and I mean that in a highly selective sense.
Of course every and all those that even have a drop of native American blood should be compensated .
Which does not negate the fact that wrongs were done to generations of people around the world who somehow managed to get over it and get on with their lives. It takes guts and courage to admit that the life you have is a dead-end and to have a better one you might have to leave all that is dear to you behind and forge a new road. The Canadians I celebrated most yesterday were those new citizens who had that kind of courage.
It means that most big wrongs are too big to be compensated for and this one is one of the biggest ones.
Strange.
I see it as "here is a example of a wrong that, if compensated, would be rediculous" with an implied challenge to explain why your wrong, if compensated, is NOT rediculous.
Its funny how people will run from this, when in fact it is an open ended challenge to state your best case.
It was that age for anybody working in what is called a 'Company Town' particularly in coal mining towns. Kings and Queens and Bankers is considerably higher. There are lots of references that could be checked to verify if that is true or not.
Company Towns: 1880s to 1935 - Social Welfare History Project
Origins: Traditional settings for company towns were for the most part where extractive industries existed– coal, metal mines, lumber — and had established a monopoly franchise. Dam sites and war-industry camps founded other company towns. Since company stores often had a monopoly in company towns, it was possible to pay in scrip (a term for any substitute for legal tender). Typically, a company town is isolated from neighbors and centered on a large production factory, such as a lumber or steel mill or an automobile plant; and the citizens of the town either work in the factory, work in one of the smaller businesses, or is a family member of someone who does. The company may also donate a church building to a local congregation, operate parks, host cultural events such as concerts, and so on. If the owning company cuts back or goes out of business, the economic effect on the company town is devastating, as people move to jobs elsewhere.
Company towns often become regular public cities and towns as they grew and attracted other business enterprises, pool transportation and services infrastructure. Other times, a town may not officially be a company town, but it may be a town where the majority of citizens are employed by a single company, thus creating a similar situation to a company town (especially in regard to the town’s economy).
A list like this would be needed for all of the EU.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_monarchs
https://www.rothschildarchive.org/exhibitions/timeline/
John Robson: Canadians feel for aboriginals, but our patience for too many insults has limits
Aboriginal activists should remember that the public to whom their appeals for reconciliation are addressed is not a faceless line of abusive residential school staff
It seems the federal Liberals are starting to pay a price for their arrogance. It is a cautionary tale for others including aboriginal militants whose scornful response is helping take the shine off Trudeaupia.
The Liberals were remarkably conceited to suppose their sunny ways and blithe ignorance of reality would, among other things, enable them to solve all problems with the descendants of Canada’s pre-European inhabitants. But the fault is not entirely theirs.
As the National Post noted, Aboriginal Day, a classic from the ministry of symbolism, went sour fast for the Liberals. Including rededication of the old U.S. embassy across from Parliament Hill as some sort of aboriginal space being met with sneers: “Indigenous architects called the building a ‘hand-me-down’ and not ‘culturally appropriate space’” and the chair of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada Indigenous Task Force “said Ottawa should pay for the construction of a building that Indigenous architects design.”
You’re welcome. Besides, what would be “culturally appropriate”?
Presumably the idea is not to create a pre-contact structure, a longhouse or teepee without furnace, electricity or running water. These indigenous architects, in a profession unknown before 1534, drive cars, own smartphones, issue press releases and generally live like the rest of us in the full flood of modernity. But that’s not the point.
The point is to bow to whatever demand is made without presuming to analyze its logic. Hence NDP MP Romeo Saganash declaring himself insulted and frustrated not to be permitted to speak only Cree in the House of Commons “because my language has been spoken for 7,000 years.”
This claim is manifestly false. The Cree that Saganash speaks today cannot possibly long predate Latin or Sanskrit. Especially in non-literate societies, language is dynamic and fast-changing and becomes barely recognizable after centuries, let alone millennia. Nor did various First Nations occupy their traditional territory for millennia before white people showed up and got violent.
Another recent victim of political correctness (which is itself a European cultural imposition) was the Governor General, despite his manifest sympathy for aboriginal causes, because he called aboriginals “immigrants.” Some zealots actually seem to deny that humans entered North America across the Bering Strait at all. Others apparently believe they all came across at once, fanned out equitably to places the Creator assigned them, then lived in peace and harmony with one another and nature.
They didn’t. They came in waves and spread out in waves, frequently displacing earlier settlers violently. Where is the “Dorset culture” today? Or the Laurentian-speakers Cartier found at Hochelaga but Champlain did not? An excruciating piece in Canada’s History magazine just claimed that before European contact “Life here in Turtle Island was self-determining – the rivers ran as rivers, the elk roamed as elk, and the many nations of Indigenous peoples charted their own paths to the future…. Everything had the right to life. The deer had an inherent right to life… to live in a healthy home and to raise its children in a kind and loving way. The peoples of this land, too, had the right to life…”
The author admits people killed deer, albeit respectfully. But nowhere does his piece mention war, torture, sex slavery or any of the other all-too-human things ordinary Canadians know happened in this non-Eden despite the exquisite PC grovelling that is instinctive among our political and cultural elites.
In his ill-fated announcement of the new aboriginal cultural centre in the old U.S. embassy, Prime Minister Trudeau said “No relationship is more important to this government than that with the indigenous peoples.” Bosh. The most important relationship for any government is with all the citizens in whose name, for whose benefit and with whose permission it governs.
By the same token, aboriginal activists should try to remember that the Canadian public to whom their appeals for reconciliation and justice are ultimately addressed, often in peremptory language, is not a faceless line of Jeffrey Amherst clones and abusive residential school staff. A great many of us, or our ancestors, came here fleeing oppression and sometimes encountered it on arrival too, and have long tales of historical woe of our own about which nothing can ever be done.
I speak not only of non-white Canadians. What of Canadian descendants of survivors of the Holocaust, Stalinism, the Armenian genocide or even just French religious persecution?
Most Canadians are heartbroken at the difficulties that afflict so many aboriginals today and bitterly regret the history that brought this misery. But most of us had nothing to do with it, have sad stories of our own ancestors, and will tire of every open hand being met with open insult like a “reoccupation” of Parliament Hill to spoil the Canada Day mood, of every concession bringing new demands.
Peddling false history from within the mantle of victimhood is perilously arrogant for those who claim special treatment based on history. So beware.
Hubris does not only bring nemesis to white politicians.
John Robson: Canadians feel for aboriginals, but our patience for too many insults has limits | National Post
Aboriginal activists should remember that the public to whom their appeals for reconciliation are addressed is not a faceless line of abusive residential school staff
It seems the federal Liberals are starting to pay a price for their arrogance. It is a cautionary tale for others including aboriginal militants whose scornful response is helping take the shine off Trudeaupia.
The Liberals were remarkably conceited to suppose their sunny ways and blithe ignorance of reality would, among other things, enable them to solve all problems with the descendants of Canada’s pre-European inhabitants. But the fault is not entirely theirs.
As the National Post noted, Aboriginal Day, a classic from the ministry of symbolism, went sour fast for the Liberals. Including rededication of the old U.S. embassy across from Parliament Hill as some sort of aboriginal space being met with sneers: “Indigenous architects called the building a ‘hand-me-down’ and not ‘culturally appropriate space’” and the chair of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada Indigenous Task Force “said Ottawa should pay for the construction of a building that Indigenous architects design.”
You’re welcome. Besides, what would be “culturally appropriate”?
Presumably the idea is not to create a pre-contact structure, a longhouse or teepee without furnace, electricity or running water. These indigenous architects, in a profession unknown before 1534, drive cars, own smartphones, issue press releases and generally live like the rest of us in the full flood of modernity. But that’s not the point.
The point is to bow to whatever demand is made without presuming to analyze its logic. Hence NDP MP Romeo Saganash declaring himself insulted and frustrated not to be permitted to speak only Cree in the House of Commons “because my language has been spoken for 7,000 years.”
This claim is manifestly false. The Cree that Saganash speaks today cannot possibly long predate Latin or Sanskrit. Especially in non-literate societies, language is dynamic and fast-changing and becomes barely recognizable after centuries, let alone millennia. Nor did various First Nations occupy their traditional territory for millennia before white people showed up and got violent.
Another recent victim of political correctness (which is itself a European cultural imposition) was the Governor General, despite his manifest sympathy for aboriginal causes, because he called aboriginals “immigrants.” Some zealots actually seem to deny that humans entered North America across the Bering Strait at all. Others apparently believe they all came across at once, fanned out equitably to places the Creator assigned them, then lived in peace and harmony with one another and nature.
They didn’t. They came in waves and spread out in waves, frequently displacing earlier settlers violently. Where is the “Dorset culture” today? Or the Laurentian-speakers Cartier found at Hochelaga but Champlain did not? An excruciating piece in Canada’s History magazine just claimed that before European contact “Life here in Turtle Island was self-determining – the rivers ran as rivers, the elk roamed as elk, and the many nations of Indigenous peoples charted their own paths to the future…. Everything had the right to life. The deer had an inherent right to life… to live in a healthy home and to raise its children in a kind and loving way. The peoples of this land, too, had the right to life…”
The author admits people killed deer, albeit respectfully. But nowhere does his piece mention war, torture, sex slavery or any of the other all-too-human things ordinary Canadians know happened in this non-Eden despite the exquisite PC grovelling that is instinctive among our political and cultural elites.
In his ill-fated announcement of the new aboriginal cultural centre in the old U.S. embassy, Prime Minister Trudeau said “No relationship is more important to this government than that with the indigenous peoples.” Bosh. The most important relationship for any government is with all the citizens in whose name, for whose benefit and with whose permission it governs.
By the same token, aboriginal activists should try to remember that the Canadian public to whom their appeals for reconciliation and justice are ultimately addressed, often in peremptory language, is not a faceless line of Jeffrey Amherst clones and abusive residential school staff. A great many of us, or our ancestors, came here fleeing oppression and sometimes encountered it on arrival too, and have long tales of historical woe of our own about which nothing can ever be done.
I speak not only of non-white Canadians. What of Canadian descendants of survivors of the Holocaust, Stalinism, the Armenian genocide or even just French religious persecution?
Most Canadians are heartbroken at the difficulties that afflict so many aboriginals today and bitterly regret the history that brought this misery. But most of us had nothing to do with it, have sad stories of our own ancestors, and will tire of every open hand being met with open insult like a “reoccupation” of Parliament Hill to spoil the Canada Day mood, of every concession bringing new demands.
Peddling false history from within the mantle of victimhood is perilously arrogant for those who claim special treatment based on history. So beware.
Hubris does not only bring nemesis to white politicians.
John Robson: Canadians feel for aboriginals, but our patience for too many insults has limits | National Post
The wheel was known, of course. As it was in China. And as in China, not terribly popular.
Do you consider China inferior to Europe as well?
The wheel was not known as a transportation aid or device. There was one small area, I think, in Mexico, that used something circular in another manner. And I'm not putting down natives. From what I've read the wheel was discovered by someone somewhere, and spread from there in all directions. It was likely one of those one-off things, and there's no evidence anyone else anywhere else ever thought of it. Thus it's quite likely that it would never have been thought of here either, had Europeans not introduced it.
So how does that scale? Would you recommend to someone screwed by their mechanic, or injured by a defective product, or struck by a drunk driver, to get on with their lives?
I come to the same conclusion you do. I oppose all special status, special programs, and special money for Indians. My reasons are just different from yours.
Of course not. You're just claiming that Indians had made no progress for a thousand years, defining your technical advantages as "superiority" (your word), and congratulating yourself on how superior you are.
Let me know when you shut down the courts.
