Humanity: Post of the week - discuss.

I don't know what people hold in their hearts, but I think the arc toward fairness and equality is indicative that as a society we are progressing.  If there is a western worldview, then I think it must show up in our politics where economic reform is lacking and social reform moves forward, but we all know that on the economic front there are corporate interests in the way of what most people actually want.  Our systems have disconnected us from the world, but this is not a purely western phenomenon as we see it in all industrialized nations.

Decolonization in its literal form is giving back the land and allowing independence.  It reverses colonization.  What you are referring to sounds a lot like anti-racism, which I agree with.  Ending systemic inequality will be a long struggle because it can be hard to identify and it requires literally everyone to do it.  

Where I think we are going to have a problem with decolonization, especially in BC, is the acknowledgement that we are on their land.  This has legal implications down the road and it creates animosity because the reciprocal consequence of that statement is that non-indigenous people don't have a land or a home that is truly theirs.  Reconciliation is the restoring of friendly relations, and we have both talked about moving forward together, so the concept of decolonization is going to be difficult to square with that goal.  What is the process that makes this everyone's home and not a country full of guests?  Most of the First Nations in this province have no interest in settling these claims.

I think that land acknowledgement statements are somewhat disingenuous. Many people will say they are living on unceded territory, but how many property owners are willing to give it back? I know I am not.

Posted by: skooks

I think that land acknowledgement statements are somewhat disingenuous. Many people will say they are living on unceded territory, but how many property owners are willing to give it back? I know I am not.

This is why I take issue with it.  It is a lie because at the end of the day the laws that rule over the lands are Canadian laws and to really decolonize First Nations would need to have at least some form of sovereignty on their lands.  Without any sovereignty is it also hard to understand how it wasn't ceded in some way.  Currently, all the First Nations have are specific rights to the land, but they don't even have actual ownership and we have seen how "consulting" with them over land use is also BS.  We are nowhere near looking at how we can fulfill that obligation so it feels like we are driving without the headlights on and letting the courts take the wheel.  I also don't think many of the band councils or chiefs will accept any half-measure deals since the law is on their side.

I would like to make a deal that includes large territories for all the First Nations in BC without a current deal, and maybe even larger territory for the ones that do.  Make it so they can run their own municipal governments within the territory, or maybe even a series of small Territories to give them more control.  Of course, this could be an issue too if they decide to disenfranchise non-indigenous people living there or go back to traditional hereditary rule and turn aside democracy.  Any way you look at it, controlling the land while claiming it is not our land makes very little sense to me and I would imagine looks like pandering BS to a lot of indigenous people.

Posted by: skooks

I think that land acknowledgement statements are somewhat disingenuous. Many people will say they are living on unceded territory, but how many property owners are willing to give it back? I know I am not.

Agree with both statements.  During the Ipperwash Crisis, our family had an indigenous acquaintance tell my father that he didn’t like the way dad was laying ‘his’ new driveway stones.   

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipperwash_Crisis

My parents still own the place, and one day I will to.   Acknowledging is hard as a start, but acting is much harder.

Posted by: three-sheets

And i learned about this and much more as a kid, because ive never had my head in the sand.

Lets bring it home though shall we?

Mohawk often raided the Algonkin

It's easy for some to dismiss history if it predates what they want to learn or doesn't fit the narrative they want. Same shit went on in other places like the Scottish Highlands.

Posted by: heckler

Posted by: skooks

I think that land acknowledgement statements are somewhat disingenuous. Many people will say they are living on unceded territory, but how many property owners are willing to give it back? I know I am not.

Agree with both statements.  During the Ipperwash Crisis, our family had an indigenous acquaintance tell my father that he didn’t like the way dad was laying ‘his’ new driveway stones.   

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipperwash_Crisis

My parents still own the place, and one day I will to.   Acknowledging is hard as a start, but acting is much harder.

Interestingly enough in the last 48 hours there was a big media event as the Feds finished a land deal with the Bay of Quinte Mohawk band in Tyendinaga. If you look at the date the land issues started 1837 is in fact a pretty significant time period in terms of relations between First Nations in the eastern part of Canada after The War of 1812. 

Also found put alot of info about why this part of Ontario had such a high population of Irish and Scots come here.  And it had nothing to do with what some have in the past told me.

Posted by: Fast-Orange

This is exactly the same as the Russian there are nazis in Ukraine argument.

Basically it's ok to march in and destroy an entire place and collectively traumatize every local beyond all recognition as long as there are instances of the locals being violent to eachother from time to time.

You forgot to add in my interpretation of this religion is better then your interpretation and will attack your people to prove it

Posted by: heckler

Agree with both statements.  During the Ipperwash Crisis, our family had an indigenous acquaintance tell my father that he didn’t like the way dad was laying ‘his’ new driveway stones.   

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipperwash_Crisis

My parents still own the place, and one day I will to.   Acknowledging is hard as a start, but acting is much harder.

Just got home so....

So this happened 3 days ago.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/tyendinaga-culbertson-tract-claim-1.6604236

This  date quoted below is really interesting as this occurred 25 year after the ending of the War of 1812- it ended in 1815. The reason I found out that this time period is important is that with the decreasing threat of US attack. The government felt that the relationship with First Nations in the Eastern part of Canada would change.

"The land dispute dates to 1837 when the Crown illegally granted 370 hectares "

Up till the end of the War of 1812 relations with First Nations was done through at the time what was our military. And First Nations viewed the relationship as one of allies. it was after the War of 1812 ended that government decided to put any further relationships with First Nations with the civvy side of government instead of the military. And it was the civvy government agency who took the view that First Nations was in the way of things like farming. So basically they took the relationship form the military and handed it to civvies where it went to shit.

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: three-sheets

Posted by: syncro

That would be taking an Indigenous Worldview where the concepts of Relationality and Reciprocity are of the utmost importance. 

Or you could also call it anti-capitalistic, but that would require a wholesale change of the Western Worldview where individual ideology would have to take a back seat to collaborative and ideology.

Except the part where nations (tribes) raped and pillaged each other, just like everyone else.

And where did you learn this?

Syncro, well here is the  Tsetsaut who as a people died off . Also note the mention of the Nisga people keeping two  Tsetsaut.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsetsaut

Also recall a Youtube video up near Stewart BC I think where there is a hill that one of the First Nations peoples built a fortified village and also engaged at the time extensively in their version of slavery. Will try to recall which place.

A buddy who works for BC gov/ engaged with FN tells me there is/ was a lake between 2 tribes somewhere up towards stewart  whose name translated to english is " wash-my-dick lake" so on the way home from a robbing/ raping/ pillaging raid they would stop and clean up for the little lady shows a lot of Humanity eh

If people have any genuine interest in the concept of reconciliation then they'll take the time to learn what that actually means to Indigenous people across this land and how their cultures societies function/ed in general instead of wasting time throwing out examples about who did what to whom so they can point fingers and say "They were bad too." A good example is the  Haudensaunee Confederacy.

I'd like to hear some specific examples of historical first nations villains. What were their names? Who did they attack? What are some of the worst first nations perpetrated massacres or atrocities? We know the names and histories of the worst settler villains so surely there's more out there than just a vague "they killed each other somtimes" generalized statement. 

If this kind of specific history is in fact lost because so much of the cultural memory has been erased that just proves the falseness of the equivalence doesn't it?

Posted by: heckler

Posted by: Fast-Orange

I'll always do my best to make where I live a better place but my dream for humanity is one day we ditch all the flags and borders and evolve beyond such divisive concepts.

-snipped to focus on a beautiful concept

yeah....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDN-DtJMs4Y

Will never happen.

Posted by: Fast-Orange

I'd like to hear some specific examples of historical first nations villains. What were their names? Who did they attack? What are some of the worst first nations perpetrated massacres or atrocities? We know the names and histories of the worst settler villains so surely there's more out there than just a vague "they killed each other somtimes" generalized statement. 

If this kind of specific history is in fact lost because so much of the cultural memory has been erased that just proves the falseness of the equivalence doesn't it?

There is in fact nothing wrong with that. All tribes, clans, peoples, and so on have a history. Some good and some bad. Unfortunately some is lost or you only get part of it. Or when it comes to clan history you get a sketchy truth as I discovered a few years ago using Scottish history as an example.  Years ago told a story about my mothers clan that turns out was only a 20% true. LOL