A couple of days ago - John Cummins, Leader of the BC Conservatives' said this, in regards to First Nations Land Claims...
Cummins acknowledged First Nations have a constitutional right to hunt and fish, but said the same test for aboriginal title under the constitution would limit their territorial claim to not much more than the area they live now
"If the province is not owned by the people of British Columbia, and I mean all of the people of British Columbia, then what's the purpose of the legislature, what's the purpose of the Ministry of Forestry or Ministry of Mines if we have to go to the local Indian band to get permission to proceed with a project."
Read the full news article here
However - I, and I suspect a number of First Nations and non-aboriginals disagree with the stance of Mr. Cummins on First Nations... In fact, courts have consistently ruled that both the Federal and Provincial Crowns have a statutory duty to consult with First Nations, when it comes to resource extraction that may be occurring in their traditional territory and to compensate First Nations for any impacts which includes monetary or other compensation packages...
Finally - I received two comments today in relation to Mr. Cummins stance on First Nations as follows:
a) BC Conservative Leader John Cummins said alot about First Nation People, I see his comments as his exit out of the position as BC Conservative Leader and his exit out of the race for all Government jobs with such a negative insight, good bye Mr Cummins
b) I here the comments from Mr John Commins on First Nation people and see his comments as his way of starting his exit out of the political government and taking his hat out of the race for Primer of BC , thank you MR Commins for your early exit
12 comments:
I think Mr. Cummins has hit the white elephant in the room on the head. He speaks for the majority of us British Columbians that are tired of the pandering to groups that do nothing more than find continual reasons to block progress and yet, do little to help themselves, yet complain about government involvement. I will be standing behind Mr. Cummins 100%.
Brad McRae
McRae, you're about as foolish as Cummins. Who is your majority? An imagined group of people or just white settlers who managed to take over the 'empty' lands post-genocide?
It's easy to bash a minority group that has been legislatively oppressed since initiating the Indian Act, racially forcing a group onto a small piece of land, while exploiting everything around it. Next time I come knocking on your door, I'm taking everything, and I'll watch to see if you complain.
My majority are the working tax paying canadians that are tired of the creation of real long term jobs and the stability of a province being hyjacked by a group that says no to everything and yet offers no answers nor gives any cooperation. And funny story, you dont have to be "oppressed" by the Indian Act, you can go be a free person and get a job and buy a house or some land and live off it. You dont have to live under the act if you so choose not to. So ya, cancel the reserve system, make it land owned by whomever gets the title and be able to sell and buy as you see fit.
And quoting history from colonialism many many years ago does nothing to salvage your case. It happened, wars happen, there are winners and losers. Accept it and try and be a winner.
And I paid for my house under the current system, by working hard, and if that changes, then i will have to learn to change with it.
Brad McRae
McRae, you're still as naive as Cummins. Your majority is led by settlers who have occupied the original peoples' homes, insisting that it is either righteous or necessary, and even legitimizing war and genocide. Your argument falls apart on moral and legal grounds.
The belief that First Nations would 'choose' oppression is somewhat misleading as well; in doing so, you're advocating what all the genocidal folk did before you - conform or perish.
I'll try not to blame you for the bad education and that people lied to you about Canada, but its worth noting that genocide is wrong in the normative laws of both cultures; moreover, BC has acknowledged, by virtue of the BC treaty process, that they do not legally own the land because there was no transaction and that British law required them to do so. In this sense, the Crown fails to abide by its own laws (rule of law), which is illegal.
So best of luck arguing your fiction - that the original land owners are 'hijacking' your militarized settler occupation.
Back to the argument of settler genocide? really. Give me a break. If you continue to dwell on that as your only positional argument you will cease to exist, and self genocide yourself. One only has to go to any reserve out west to look at the inability of a group to self actualize. But of course, dont take self accountability, blame everyone else for your misfortune. I hear lots of successful groups used that tactic...oh wait, they didnt.
As far as poor education, play that misinformation card as much as you want. Ill play the card that says i am canadian, and want the best for canada and british columbians.
... You deflect real argumentation because you do not know the history.
Why do you think there's a Truth and Reconciliation Commission? really? yeah. Sorry that I dwell on bringing out the truth of the history and yearn for justice.
You can keep playing that Canadian card because it fits your description. 'kanatian' according to the Mohawk language translates to 'squatter'.
Too bad its canadian land and not mohawk land.
Your maturity shines through your immorality. Your reaction to injustice is to deny it and ridicule people who believe that wrongs should be addressed to further future peace. I suppose you don't like Indigenous peoples' idea of progress. Your attitude just confirms that you're incapable of understanding through someone else's shoes, that you are as irresponsible as politicians in dealing with fundamental issues that question the legitimacy of Canada, and that you prefer to hide behind your white privilege in the hope that this problem will just disappear.
... the land will always be Mohawk because settlers sure do not know how to treat the land as much more than an object to be exploited.
I love the fabled noble savage rhetoric you sill, and you talk about my issues with believing fallacys....and white privilege, I love the fact you assume im white.
As far as political legitimacy, the dominant political method is democracy, and if that changes, thats because a better system wanted by representatives has prevailed. You sir, are hanging on to such a weak argument of denial that you have no case. History is not to be forgotten, buty dwelling on it as a crutch and not working with it to move forward makes you just as forgotten.
white privilege is imagined, and you've done that be reconstructing the 'Other'.
the current political method is liberal democracy; the reason I prod you is because you've declared support for the worst kind of representative - for presumably selfish, racist reasons (as you've shown to date). You are hardly trying to improve the situation personally, and you'd rather hand it off to those who do not believe in the 'public' beyond what their business friends tell them.
pretending that I'm holding onto a weak argument is pretty unfounded and poorly argued. You just have to go to the most expensive Royal Commission Canada has ever produced to find that I am speaking truthfully, and that its a lot of denial that's coming from people who feel threatened by the outcome - that the land was illegally acquired (de jure sovereignty).
maybe try piecing together a consistent theory next time instead of predictable deflections, which just secure your irresponsible position on the matter.
there are a host of problems and the only way to solve them is to return to where the errors began. That means reviewing history, noticing where things went wrong, and then fixing them. The choice you present is forget about it and conform into white society. If you take the problems seriously, then you have to look into the past, fix them and 'move forward' - and I suppose that an approach like that threatens you because ... (only you know that one)
And so nothing typical about you in your weak argument hiding behind this consipiracy known as "the white privilege"....
It wasn't indigenous people who created the colonial divide; just have to look at Africa, Latin America, Asia, and here to see it exists. Plus, there's plenty of scholars, if you've visited a university to see, that have developed what you call a 'weak argument' ...
Post a Comment