h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I agree with everything you say, and I'm not going to argue with your numbers. Of course, I'm not a white American; I'm a white Canadian. Historically, this isn't much better. We didn't have Indian Wars, but we did crush the Riel Rebellion. But, more recently, we said to 20, 000 Inuit, "you're right, you've lived on that land forever. Let's give it back. Now a huge percentage of our counrty is a native Territory called Nunavut.
My ancestors came here in the 1700's. In the part of Canada I'm in now, most whites are no more than third generation Canadians. A few years ago, posters started showing up encouraging respect for senior citizens. The slogan was "Treat elders with respect: they built this country." I think I offended a lot of people when I repeatedly screamed at white people "your ancestors didn't build this country! My ancestors stole this country from the Indians and gave it to your ancestors!" Nobody got it.
The question is, of course, what do we do now? Do we bicker as though we sat on a rock in the Middle East? Or do we try to discuss things in good faith? I hope for the latter. I'm pretty sure that the leaders of the First Nations of Canada hope and try for the latter. Now and then, our Federal Government has shown an ability to do the latter. Unfortunately, far too many ordinary white people just don't get it.
I find it horribly depressing.

anhaga

I apologize for the delay in answering you. I didn't see your comments before now because I don't routinely check these entries. Oh well, at least I've learned something now I didn't know before.

As for what we do now about the stuff I mentioned in the article, I think there are several options.

One of course is to honor existing treaties although such a thing might severely impact "the bottom line".

There have always been exchanges between our peoples but often one side has decided not to acknowledge the exchanges but to simply consume things and defer the exchange to future generations. In time, the debts become sort of insupportable though when this strategy is followed.

So it's probably a good idea to start paying off the debts before they get too much bigger. At the same time we could renegotiate the treaties if such negotiations could be conducted among national equals. Negotiations based on domination and submission have little to offer to either of the parties.

One thing that probably isn't very wise would be to continue to ignore the obligations. This has the effect of perpetuating the past injustices and insuring that they will continue to be practiced to the detriment of all concerned.

Hey, Analiese:

Glad you found it. You do sometimes let your rightly felt bitterness shine through your argument. I'm hoping that the progress on land-claims that Canada has been making will continue and will be an example to the world. Up here we're proud of what we call a Cultural Mosaic, something that is a huge contrast to the American idea of a Melting Pot. We don't want immigrants or the First Nations to lose there cultures; we want them to keep their cultures and make them a part of our big mosaic. For example, the Provincial Museum of Alberta has devoted one quarter of its space to a gallery of Aboriginal Culture and History: http://www.pma.edmonton.ab.ca/gallery/peoples/info.htm. This is a permanent exhibit which is honest about the horrors that Europeans have committed. This gallery is the centerpiece of the museum and in it white history is exposed, warts an all, to visitors to the province.

There are still huge problems for First Nations in the province and in the country, but I have hope that the governments have made steps in the right direction and the momentum won't let them turn back.

Did you know about the Unesco World Heritage sight in Alberta? It's my favourite place in the world: http://www.head-smashed-in.com/centre.html

Anhaga

I was wondering something about First Nations that maybe you can answer. I appreciate your ideals of cultural mosaic but I was wondering if they provided for true self-determination.

Does the Dominion or whatever you call it now, recognize the First Nations as sovereign or are they considered Subjects? If the latter, to what extent is their sovereignty compromised?

I already know how the First Nations would answer but I'm curious about the government.

We don't use the term Dominion anymore. Nor subjects. I suspect the Government of Canada would consider the individual members of First Nations to be citizens of Canada. The Mohawks likely have dual citizenship, American and Canadian. But I also don't think that the government would consider them to be citizens "just like the whites". Although they wouldn't want to state it publicly, the First Nations do have extra rights that white people don't have. They also have social disadvantages that white people don't have. As to sovereignty I think the government line would likely be something like "maybe". Canada is a federation (we use the term confederation which actually emphasises the equality of the association, to my mind) of Provinces. The Provinces have powers determined by the constitution. There are also Territories which are administered by the Federal government until such time as they become provinces. The province I'm in was part of the Northwest Territories until 1905, at which point it became a Province. Nunavut is something different. It is no longer simply a territory, nor is it a province. It's something else entirely. It is part of Canada and gets financial and social support from the rest of the country, but it also a political entity based on Inuit society. A parallel might be found in the Province of Quebec, which is a part of Canada but it has a separate civil law code that is different from the rest of the country (as well as having a different language from most of the country. I would argue that the sovereignty of the Inuit of Nunavut is compromised as much as the sovereignty of Quebec was compromised by the long process of becoming a part of Canada. First Nations in the south of the country are likely going to have a harder time coming to settlements with the Provincial and Federal government simply because there are so many whites, browns, and yellows established in those areas. but I still hope.
I should mention that the Federal Minister responsible for First Nations affairs is absolutely despised by the First Nations. I suspect he'll be replaced in the next year or two. There are horrible systemic injustices remaining and individual injustices (which are abhored by the governments, the judiciary, and the general public) continue to be perpetrated, but I still have hope.

Anhaga

I just realized that I didn't really answer part of your question. No, the "cultural mosaic" that is Canada compromises self-determination. When the Inuit agreed to form Nunavut, they became full partners in Canada, which means that they are sharing the northern half of the continent with a whole bunch of other people who have agreed to abide by the same rules. This is the same situation that occurred in the 13 American Colonies. No one had a gun to the heads of the Inuit and no one had a gun to the head of the government.
Newfoundland made a similar decision in 1949 when it decided after a long debate and a referendum to join Canada. The jury is still out on whether it was a good decision, but they are a full part of Canada, just as the citizens of Nunavut are, just as the citizens of Quebec are.

So, again, yes they gave up some self determination, but they have a great deal more self-determination than do, for example, the Italian-Canadian community, which in the eyes of the government is simply a free association of Canadian citizens. Nunavut is a political entity, not an ethnic group. I'm pretty sure the federal government has a similar view on the status of other First Nations.

Thanks. That's very helpful in understanding things a little better.

Maybe you can explain something further then? If the Canadian government policy is so apparently benign, why do the First Nations despise the person responsible for implementing that policy? Is the policy subject to the sort of contradictions we encounter in the United States?

In short, Yes. The good stuff started happening before the present minister's time. He's been sort of marking time.

I was thinking as I waxed my bathroom floor after the last post. Don't get me wrong: the situation of the fast majority of aboriginal people in Canada is pure sh*t. They're the most disadvantage people possible, most living in third-world conditions. The point I try to make is that it seems like there's hope for the future to be better than the past and the present. I don't want to give you the impression that Canada is some sort of paradise for natives; it isn't. But I do think that all the banging of native heads (by the natives themselves; this is a metaphor, not a description of the methods of the Saskatoon police department) against the wall of discrimination and exploitation has actually started to bring the wall down unlike in the U. S. apparently.

Hey Analiese:

I just unsubscribed from all those "What's wrong with thoughts on the proud to be an american war with iraq" threads. It just seems so pointless after 5000 posts of "you're no good" "oh, yeah? well, you're no better!" Don't you think? No one is convincing anyone else. No one's even listening to anyone else (except the lurkers). I've got better things to do.

Hey, I was just re-reading your entry "what's wrong with western civilization" and I was struck (stricken?) by this line:

"One society, one race, one people. That's how they presume we'll all finally be able to get along."

That's sort of exactly the opposite of what I was trying to get across about the ongoing vision that Canada has. I think maybe the two big insoluable solitudes of French and English Canada have made us realize that you can't make a society that is one race, one people. The original (British) point of Canada was as a final solution to the French Problem; they were meant to be assimilated (sound familiar?).
But the French never gave in and finally (most of) the rest of Canada realized that it was kind of neat to have Quebec around. Now everybody is realizing that it's kind of neat to have curry, or rollmops, or French wine, or scotch, or spring rolls, or burgers, or enchiladas, or poi, or sushi, or pemmican for goodness sake. That's a list that could go on a long way. And that's just from the food court at the mall.

Whatever, Anhaga. You probably need to do what you think is right.

I'm sticking around because I've noticed the loonies are coming out and I suspect they're actually the old opponents assuming other identities they don't need to protect with some bogus representation of reasonableness. So they're saying what they really think now, and it's important to refute it when I can I think even though it gets to be a drag sometimes.

After giving 639 iterations of the same history lesson, people wonder why I know my history, eh?

Your thoughts about your federation are interesting too.

I've thought sometimes that had the Articles of Confederation been retained instead of the Constitution, a lot of things might have been different in America. For one thing, I think the snake would still be on the flag with the appropriate attitude of "Leave me alone and I'll leave you alone." That wouldn't have been especially a bad way to behave, I think.

Of course the revolution insured that whatever it became wouldn't be Canadian.

I think some Americans might be a little nervous about the Quebecois just as the Iroquois used to make them nervous. It sort of questions their whole melting pot bilge, which is really the prophecised triumph of white Christian supremacy.

The minorities then become subservient to this retreaded Puritan theocracy, everybody knowing their place as once the slaves knew their place, eh? You can even see it's manifestations now. People think Americans are acting crazy but they're not crazy. They're just acting like Americans.

Remember, you can't trust what they say in public usually. It's what they say in the locker room or the board room or the bathroom that counts.

I used to clean toilets for my board and room and pretended not to talk English too good, so I got an earfull enough times to convince me of this phenomenon. It's interesting what you hear when you're invisible and regarded as a child of the inferior ones. They were so confident that I was retarded that they spoke freely around me and I've never forgotten that, especially since it wasn't that long ago. Just a few years really.

One nation under God, indivisible and unassailable with liberty and justice for the privileged and the blessings of civilization for everybody else. You're especially blessed when you serve, and if you work hard enough, in time, nothing will change.

Sucker!!!