Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

Do you not accept that there are also massive problems with how the money is spent by the various bands? It is far easier to blame the federal government than it is to do anything about the corruption that is rampant within some First Nation communities.

Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

but why focus on corruption in some First Nations bands at the expense of the general issue at stake here? Which is that, overall, indigenous people have been screwed by colonization.

I guess it's a popular move because, if we can focus on the baddies in the First Nations community, we can ignore our people's direct responsibility for the situation that FNations are in now.

Problem solved.

Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

In general, yes. I can't see any justification in a supposedly free society for one group of people having their lives controlled by government diktat.

However, I also see another side. However awful conditions are on a reserve they can still live there as people of their own nation. Scrapping the Indian Act in its entirety will be the final act of assimilation. I think for some First Nations, who have seen western society in all its glory, assimilation is not something to aspire to.

Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

Massive and rampant are very pejorative adjectives.

There is bound to be some corruption. These are human beings after all. Is there any system of doling out government money anywhere in the world that is free of corruption?

And, as Exkiwilass has said above, why does the fact that there are corrupt people within a system be a reason to not reform that system?

Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

I can't see what Exkiwilass says.

I have no issue with the system being reformed.

If members of a community are not able to receive the necessaries of life because those in a fiduciary position have spent the money on themselves, I would call that a massive problem. I don't know what adjective you would use.

Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

The catch being that the alternative to assimilation is subsidy. We currently keep the natives on reserves as we might animals in a safari park and that's not fair to the rest of the population. The native people have the option to leave their reserve but the remainder of the population does not have the option to go and live like the Montana Militia and to receive a grant for it.

No doubt the natives didn't choose to be conquered but there are no end of other Canadian citizens who've been conquered, some of them have been tortured. It's not democratic for the government to favour the eccentric lifestyle of one ethnic group ahead of those of the many other ethnic groups living in a multicultural society.

Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

Why don't the First Nations people move to Canada? The list of advantages is too long to list but at least their children wouldn't grow up too fast.

Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

I'm all for it and Chief Louie is a prime example of how to do it and make it work but there are lots of other native leaders that just piss away the money the Fed's throw at them.

Agree.

Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

:rofl:

Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

Everyone is descended from people who have been conquered or displaced at some time in the past so any treaties and reservations are exceptional in that context. It doesn't usually generate an entitlement to special treatment. The schools here have a curriculum which promotes a favourable view of the first nations which, up to a point, is fair enough in view of the way they were brushed aside. However, it does seem to feed a victim/handout culture which the descendents appear to be stuck in.

Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

I stayed home yesterday morning as we had a new posh, la-di-da fireplace with remote control put in because HID wants to sit on the settee and be able to turn the naffing thing up, anyway I was impressed with the gas fireplace bloke who seemed to be an expert analyst on Indian policy. And apparently, they [First Nations people] are really lucky how much free education and stuff Canada gives them and they don't pay taxes at all. :blink:

Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

I'm having de-ja-vu at the moment because there was a similar debate in the NZ forum and all the same ideas are being trotted out.

"Everyone was conquered at some point" is my fave. Never mind that the UK was last conquered 1000 years ago, well outside of anyone's memory or personal experience.

But apparently because the UK was conquered in the 10th century then the First Nations people, who had nothing to do with that, just should suck up being conquered by the UK.

And the thing is, they are. to their detriment.

Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

Ugh. It's depressing.

Tell HID congrats on winning the fireplace battle :thumbup: quite right, thing should be easy to turn up.

Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

I think you'll find that one of the constituant nations of the UK was last conquered approx 950 years ago. The others were conquered much more recently.

In my experience the ethnic minority groups who have emigrated to Canada are a good less sympathetic/understanding to the situation of the first nation.

Re: Was it really a hunger strike?
 

There’s a scientist somewhere who wants a lady to have a Neanderthal baby, which were apparently, the aboriginal people in the UK. So that could raise a lot of issues.