The Rights of Native Americans and First Nations

[Marcus Wolfe]

Well maybe the world needs to do a better job of picking it's leaders.

 

Corruptible you say? What exactly do you mean 'corruptible'?

[Abramul]

Reading Native American History a while back, the thing that stood out the most to me wasn't the "Drive the natives off their land and take it for ourselves" aspect. That's been repeated often enough to be unsurprising. Rather, it was the treaties that were signed, and then ignored as soon as it happened to be convenient.

 

P.S. I was under the impression that a democracy was a system in which any citizen who cared about an issue had a voice and a vote as to what was done about it.

[ResidentWeevil2077]

Funny thing is, our Chief and Council are more prone to corruption than any other municipal gov't.

 

That sounds like emotive guesswork. Have you evidence to support it? I'm not saying you are wrong in stating the system is corrupt but I am not prepared to accept the comparison on your say so. The awkward thing about those in charge is that they are human beings. They suffer from the same weaknesses and failures the world over. As yet we do not have a kite mark (dunno the US/Canadian equivalent) to prove that human beings are certified as reaching a required ethical standard.

 

But before going further can I please debunk the myth that there is anywhere in the world that has this thing called democracy. The concept of democracy is that anyone can stand for election and has an equal chance of being elected. Sadly in this day and age the chance of standing and being elected depends on the funds you can raise and with none of your own to start with you have zero chance. There are different 'democratic' systems in place throughout the world but the USA (which proclaims itself the bastion of democracy) has a system that means anyone who looks for a senior government position has to be rich. The correct term for this is NOT democracy but plutocracy. Because elections are only held periodically, in the intervening periods decisions are taken by those who have voting power in the government. The correct term for this is 'oligarchy' not democracy. What it means is that a 'democratic' election does not lead to a democracy. Once we stop being confused by this we can start thinking of how to work with what it does lead to.

You know, for once somebody also sees through the transparency of "democracy" - I couldn't have said this any better myself. Democracy is just simply an illusion that those in power, no matter how good their intentions are, use to blind and deceive those that put them on their pedestal... It's just that I see it more evident in our local gov't than others. Not only is the federal and provincial gov't ignoring us, our own leaders neglect our needs (for one, housing on reserves isn't what one would call certifiably livable).

[Marcus Wolfe]

Sheesh, I thought the Chiefs would be less corruptible than other forms of municipal government. But it appears that I am wrong.

[ninja_lord666]

Not that I'm saying our rights trump everyone else's rights, but we're still not treated as fairly.

As a person with very little to no Native American blood at all in me I feel completely free to say this.

 

YES THEY DO!

This is what many people like to call reverse racism. I don't like that term; it's, in a roundabout way, racist. I just simply call what you're doing plain old racism, because it is. You are looking only at the natives and how your comment affects them; you are completely ignoring everyone else. You are saying that the natives are better than everyone else. This is racist; this is the epitome of racism. Sure, the whites were racist to the natives before, but that doesn't give anyone the right to reverse it and have the natives racist to the whites; that's just as bad and will do nothing besides further dividing the two peoples. The only way to stop racism is to not give compensation to those who, in the past, were discriminated against but, instead, NOT BE RACIST! Just treat them as equals; forget the past; forget what happened. Just focus on the hear and now. In the hear and now, giving something to a non-white, because (s)he's non-white is racist. Instead, give something to that person because (s)he bought it or earned it. Just ignore the skin colour; ignore the heritage. Bad things happened, but that's in the past. Let's look at the slaves for example. In the past, the blacks were slaves. Let's look at one owner/slave relationship in particular: John and Joe. Joe was John's slave. Then, the slaves were free. Joe left. Now let's forward the time 100 years. Both John and Joe are dead. The current generation is John III and Joe III, Neither were alive back then. In fact, they're both only about 20 years old. One day, John III and Joe III meet each other. They don't know who each other is, and start talking. They become good friends. About four months later, John III and Joe III are talking about their family histories and find out that Joe III's grandfather was John III's grandfather's slave. There are three things that can happen, two racist, and one not. The first thing that can be done is Joe III demands reparations from John III for all those years of slavery of his grandfather, his grandfather's father, etc. This is the most racist out of the three. Why? because Joe III is demanding money from John III because Joe III is black and John III is white. There can be no clearer case of racism. Unfortunately, this is what usually happens and is why there is still a lot of racial tension. Second, Joe III can simply leave and refuse to speak to John III ever again. This is racist for the same reason as above, just not to the same degree. Third, John III and Joe III can realise the coincidence and also realise the irony of them being good friends. They continue being friends for the rest of their days. I like this; this is good; this is what should happen all the time, but it doesn't. As I said, the first scenario is usually what happens. If everyone did the third scenario, however, then all the racial tension would quickly vanish in only one or two generations.

 

How does this all play into the topic? If you're smart, you've already figured it out: ignore the past, and just admit all natives as full citizens of the USA or Canada (depending on where they live). Get rid of reservations, and just let the people live like normal people. The reservations are nothing but harsh reminders of what was, and the healing can never happen if those reservations continue to taint the map. They shouldn't exist. Unfortunately, racism still exists and taints almost everything, especially (as I hear) the Canadian government.

 

 

 

Racism is a pendulum. On one side, is white superiority, and, on the other, is non-white superiority. It used to be on the left side, but it swung down and is now reaching up to the non-white. By the time the morons in charge realise what's happening, it'll be too late, and the whites will be subjugated. The pendulum will begin swinging down again to balance things out, but, being morons, those in charge won't realise the past and will sit and offer whites reparations which will only bring the pendulum back up. Will the pendulum stop, and, if so, when? I can not say. I hope so, but doubt it. People don't seem to know what equality is. People offer compensation to cover the past instead of threating the person the same as everyone else. Giving non-whites special treatment because of what happened is just as bad. One example of this is Affirmative Action. Yes, I'm preaching equality, and I'm tearing down Affirmative Action. Crazy, huh? Again, if you're smart, you already know what I'm going to say. First, a bit of background, after the slaves were given their freedom, employers were very reluctant to hire blacks, because of racist residue. Affirmative Action was formed to force employers to give a certain percentage of their employee jobs to non-whites. This was good...for the time. Now, it's lost it's goodness, and has actually descended into racism. Now, most employers aren't racist anymore; it doesn't pay to be racist. Employers want money, and they get money by hiring good employees, regardless of who they are, personally. However, Affirmative Action still exists and still forces employers to make a certain percentage of their employee roster non-white. Let's have another example. There's a hospital. This hospital has one opening in it's surgery ward, and four people apply: one Harvard graduate, one state graduate, and two technical college graduates. You are currently thinking that the interviewer should hire the Harvard graduate; that is, after all, the smart choice. However, he, the state graduate, and one of the technical college graduates are white. The other is black. Because the hospital doesn't meet the percentage requirements, they are forced to hire the black guy. Now let's say you get a heart attack and are rushed to the ER of this hospital. You need surgery or you'll die. The only available surgeon is the new guy. Would you prefer to be operated on him or the Harvard graduate who wasn't hired? I don't care if the guy's white, black, green, or purple with pink dots; give me the Harvard guy!

 

I hope you all at least understand racism a little more now, even if you don't agree with everything I just said.

I know most of this is off topic, but I don't think this post should be deleted; it has a very important message.

Also, as one last note, I appologise for calling you racist, hoots7. You probably just didn't understand what you were saying and why it's racist; most people don't.

[Abramul]

The idea of reparations isn't really inherently racist. Certain opinions, on both sides, may be, but the basic question is this:

 

Bob kills Joe and takes his stuff. Is it reasonable for Joe's great^n grandchildren to ask Bob's for some of that stuff back?

 

My answer would be that it depends on the magnitude of what is taken, the value of n, and what the logistics are. As an example (untainted by research), it wouldn't be possible to give Manhattan back, but breaks on property taxes for those of Lenape descent might be feasible.

[kungfubellydancer]

Racism is an incurable affliction of this world. No matter what people say or do, someone is going to have a problem with someone else, period. Humans are by nature demanding power and are self centered. Look at a toddler for example; he goes into the kitchen because he wants cake, and he feels that he alone has first dibs on it. If he sees someone else eating the cake he'll cry and have a tantrum. Even if he's disciplined well and doesn't throw a fit, inside he feels that the cake was his from the start. The point is, humans are born caring only about themselves. This is one of the factors of racism, feeling that this land or this city belongs to me and not to you, because you are :insert different-from-me characteristic:

 

I am opposed to racism, 110%, but that doesn't mean that anything can be done about it. Not everyone in this modern world knows about the brutality of racism and what other nations are going through, like Bosnia, Iraq, Palestine, etc etc. The news don't talk about how this hundred of people were slaughtered today, this group was mortared, etc. No, we just hear about the local murder, the new burial site found in Germany (which was a result of a horrible holocaust 60 years ago, but what about 300 other holocausts happening right now?) and other irrelevant news.

[Marcus Wolfe]

The reason we'll always have discrimination is because humans seeks out differences in each other and base our actions on these differences. Not just race, but gender, intelligence, height, etc. Of course, one must keep in mind that anyone who is completely indiscriminate must be either bisexual or asexual, as they do not perform gender discrimination when picking sexual partners.

 

well that's just some unique insight.

 

Anyhow, land grab is very different from the bad deals we've given before. The whole beaver pelt thing is something you could look back on and laugh:

 

"Hey, Pocahontas, remember when we traded fur for metal objects?"

 

"OMG, I can't believe we let you rip us off for so long...."

 

<laughter>

 

But taking ancestral land away is something completely different.

 

Perhaps everything would have gone more smoothly if the European immigrants had simply assimilated with the native groups, then we'd get a whole society of Metis.

[Chesto]

Perhaps everything would have gone more smoothly if the European immigrants had simply assimilated with the native groups, then we'd get a whole society of Metis.

 

Yep. If there was a higher governing intelligence in the universe, PHILOSOPHICALLY speaking, Louis Riel (sp?) would have won.

 

BTW, most of the land grabbing white/off white men who came to N America had been forced to leave their own lands which had in turn been grabbed by their Lairds, landlords etc. in their former countries. See Enclosure Acts. [EDIT: This trauma has probably created the mindset that allows the ' incomers' to take from the existing inhabitants. And continues to do so. ]

[ResidentWeevil2077]

Not that I'm saying our rights trump everyone else's rights, but we're still not treated as fairly.

As a person with very little to no Native American blood at all in me I feel completely free to say this.

 

YES THEY DO!

This is what many people like to call reverse racism. I don't like that term; it's, in a roundabout way, racist. I just simply call what you're doing plain old racism, because it is. You are looking only at the natives and how your comment affects them; you are completely ignoring everyone else. You are saying that the natives are better than everyone else. This is racist; this is the epitome of racism. Sure, the whites were racist to the natives before, but that doesn't give anyone the right to reverse it and have the natives racist to the whites; that's just as bad and will do nothing besides further dividing the two peoples. The only way to stop racism is to not give compensation to those who, in the past, were discriminated against but, instead, NOT BE RACIST! Just treat them as equals; forget the past; forget what happened. Just focus on the hear and now. In the hear and now, giving something to a non-white, because (s)he's non-white is racist. Instead, give something to that person because (s)he bought it or earned it. Just ignore the skin colour; ignore the heritage. Bad things happened, but that's in the past.

You would be right - but this not just a simple matter of being racist. We practically had our culture almost wiped from our minds, our languages almost forgotten about, our heritage becoming nothing more than a feint glimmer of our past. This is referred to as "cultural genocide". It's not only just being racist toward Native peoples, it's the destruction of an entire culture, so that we, in the eyes of the European settlers, would become more like "them", and less like the "savages" that we have been referred to as for over 100 years after the first European set foot on our land. I wish not to argue against your opinions; I only wish for you to see the misunderstanding of your view.

 

Let's look at the slaves for example. In the past, the blacks were slaves. Let's look at one owner/slave relationship in particular: John and Joe. Joe was John's slave. Then, the slaves were free. Joe left. Now let's forward the time 100 years. Both John and Joe are dead. The current generation is John III and Joe III, Neither were alive back then. In fact, they're both only about 20 years old. One day, John III and Joe III meet each other. They don't know who each other is, and start talking. They become good friends. About four months later, John III and Joe III are talking about their family histories and find out that Joe III's grandfather was John III's grandfather's slave. There are three things that can happen, two racist, and one not. The first thing that can be done is Joe III demands reparations from John III for all those years of slavery of his grandfather, his grandfather's father, etc. This is the most racist out of the three. Why? because Joe III is demanding money from John III because Joe III is black and John III is white. There can be no clearer case of racism. Unfortunately, this is what usually happens and is why there is still a lot of racial tension. Second, Joe III can simply leave and refuse to speak to John III ever again. This is racist for the same reason as above, just not to the same degree. Third, John III and Joe III can realise the coincidence and also realise the irony of them being good friends. They continue being friends for the rest of their days. I like this; this is good; this is what should happen all the time, but it doesn't. As I said, the first scenario is usually what happens. If everyone did the third scenario, however, then all the racial tension would quickly vanish in only one or two generations.

I agree with you - in fact, I'll go so far as to say that I have several cousins who are black. But again, this isn't just a simple case of racism. Unlike slaves, Native people (for the most part) weren't made to suffer the same fate; as I pointed out, or will right now, we suffered great

 

How does this all play into the topic? If you're smart, you've already figured it out: ignore the past, and just admit all natives as full citizens of the USA or Canada (depending on where they live). Get rid of reservations, and just let the people live like normal people. The reservations are nothing but harsh reminders of what was, and the healing can never happen if those reservations continue to taint the map. They shouldn't exist. Unfortunately, racism still exists and taints almost everything, especially (as I hear) the Canadian government.

Again, you are not seeing the facts - it is not just a simple matter of "forgive-and-forget". Unlike African slaves, Native Americans suffered almost every cultural atrocity under the sun, in an effort by European settlers to make us more "civilized". You do understand that if reserves are abolished or removed (first), where would we go? Many non-natives are still misunderstanding of the situation of the Native people, and while I can see integration into society as a very real possibility, how would we go about dispelling resentments/myths/prejudice/discrimination toward each other? And then there's the whole discrimination of Gov'ts toward Native peoples. Let me ask you this - if the Gov't is unwilling to change its attitudes, how can we expect people to change their's when they are the ones that elected them in the first place? I don't expect you to answer my questions (feel free to - in fact, I encourage you to; perhaps you can dispel some of my misunderstandings), but I only want to say that this is not a simple matter.

 

Racism is a pendulum. On one side, is white superiority, and, on the other, is non-white superiority. It used to be on the left side, but it swung down and is now reaching up to the non-white. By the time the morons in charge realise what's happening, it'll be too late, and the whites will be subjugated. The pendulum will begin swinging down again to balance things out, but, being morons, those in charge won't realise the past and will sit and offer whites reparations which will only bring the pendulum back up. Will the pendulum stop, and, if so, when? I can not say. I hope so, but doubt it. People don't seem to know what equality is. People offer compensation to cover the past instead of threating the person the same as everyone else. Giving non-whites special treatment because of what happened is just as bad. One example of this is Affirmative Action. Yes, I'm preaching equality, and I'm tearing down Affirmative Action. Crazy, huh? Again, if you're smart, you already know what I'm going to say. First, a bit of background, after the slaves were given their freedom, employers were very reluctant to hire blacks, because of racist residue. Affirmative Action was formed to force employers to give a certain percentage of their employee jobs to non-whites. This was good...for the time. Now, it's lost it's goodness, and has actually descended into racism. Now, most employers aren't racist anymore; it doesn't pay to be racist. Employers want money, and they get money by hiring good employees, regardless of who they are, personally. However, Affirmative Action still exists and still forces employers to make a certain percentage of their employee roster non-white. Let's have another example. There's a hospital. This hospital has one opening in it's surgery ward, and four people apply: one Harvard graduate, one state graduate, and two technical college graduates. You are currently thinking that the interviewer should hire the Harvard graduate; that is, after all, the smart choice. However, he, the state graduate, and one of the technical college graduates are white. The other is black. Because the hospital doesn't meet the percentage requirements, they are forced to hire the black guy. Now let's say you get a heart attack and are rushed to the ER of this hospital. You need surgery or you'll die. The only available surgeon is the new guy. Would you prefer to be operated on him or the Harvard graduate who wasn't hired? I don't care if the guy's white, black, green, or purple with pink dots; give me the Harvard guy!

While I agree fully that Affirmative Action has, how shall I put it, lost its usefulness or run its course, I will say that it is not entirely true. In fact, I must point out that discrimination toward Native people is still prevalent. Let me give you an example. A person from my reserve applied for a job as manager of the McDonald's in the nearby town. She was quite qualified, as she had her bachelor's degree in business and management. However, she was passed up for someone of non-Native descent, someone who was, shall I say, less than adequately qualified for the job. In the end, she was eventually hired because the other person fouled up employee records and miscalculated profits. Forgive me if my story sounds inaccurate with details; I only heard it maybe once or twice, as this was an isolated. But that's not to say discrimination against white people isn't happening, I just wanted to point out that the opposite is still true.

 

I hope you all at least understand racism a little more now, even if you don't agree with everything I just said.

I know most of this is off topic, but I don't think this post should be deleted; it has a very important message.

Also, as one last note, I appologise for calling you racist, hoots7. You probably just didn't understand what you were saying and why it's racist; most people don't.

And yes, I understand racism more better now - I really do appreciate your input on this matter Ninja. Your opinion does matter, as this seems to be the only way anyone can really put aside differences and misunderstandings. I thank you.