[RUEZ]

DerbyX DerbyX:

RUEZ RUEZ:

Sure a lot of self hating white men in this thread.

Nope. Just that I respect Native rights and their right to self-determination.

I might say there sure are a lot of colonial bigots here.

I've never seen the term "white man's laws" used so many times. Maybe we expect them to obey "white man's laws" because they are Canadian and it would be impossible for them to be removed from Canadian society in a way that they wouldn't interact and affect us? We put a high value on life and expect punishments to convey that value.

[DerbyX]

lily lily:

As I said... the claims need to be settled. As for the laws.... we were all born here, and we all fall under the same laws.

I don't see any reason we shouldn't.

No. The natives were born into a country that essentially took them over. They have little choice and when we determining the cultural make-up, the laws, the traditions of this great nation their input was none. Did we consider them in language laws? Flag? Government? Laws in general?

No we did not.

Saying "we are all Canadian" is only true if we give the Natives reason to believe that Canada includes them and there traditions.

We did so for Quebec and the french.

The same applies here.

[DerbyX]

RUEZ RUEZ:

DerbyX DerbyX:

RUEZ RUEZ:

Sure a lot of self hating white men in this thread.

Nope. Just that I respect Native rights and their right to self-determination.

I might say there sure are a lot of colonial bigots here.

I've never seen the term "white man's laws" used so many times. Maybe we expect them to obey "white man's laws" because they are Canadian and it would be impossible for them to be removed from Canadian society in a way that they wouldn't interact and affect us? We put a high value on life and expect punishments to convey that value.

Thats debatable. many consider Canada far to lax. Many want us to bring back the death penalty which could mean they want us to have less respect for life.

It seems so out of synch that us "white people" keep expecting the Natives to act "more Canadian" then degrade and insult those Natives (like Donnie) when they don't act like the complacent Natives we think they should.

When I see Native culture and language enshrined in law and constitution just like English and French then you might have a case.

Until then they remain related outsiders by our own valition.

[ridenrain]

TattoodGirl TattoodGirl:

ridenrain ridenrain:

I'd demand that the FN self government follow or develop a form of charter before anything further proceeds. Trusting tribal chiefs and a oral history isn't going to make a very stable government.

so only white man accounts?...just like removing hereditary chiefs and appointed chiefs through the indian act...that didnt work out to well.

So First Nations are to self govern, but by White man standards...hmmm sounds like history repeating itself.

So you say we should simply give them land and money and let them work it out on their own?

We can both argue strawmen.

I'd be happy if they came up with their own and I'd be disapointed if all it said was the hereditary chief is always right.

[DerbyX]

lily lily:

So what laws should we adapt/get rid of to be more inclusive? How shall we change our flag... and how does it not represent them?

How are we to consider them in language laws.... remembering they don't have one common language.... or culture either, for that matter.


It's funny, Derby. When it comes to religious issues, you're a huge advocate of Darwin. Why not here?

Explain What you mean about Darwin?

I'm not giving instructions as I'm not Native. What I am saying though is there is a reason they don't feel part of us and we should address it.

Yes they don't have a single language but so what? My suggestion wasn't Canada become a multi-lingual nation. Their language should be elevated in law though even if it is ceremonial.

I think we could bridge a lot of gaps by simply accepting them as Canadians rather then expecting them to become Canadians.

Clear as mud?

[DerbyX]

lily lily:

Darwin - adapt or die, although not literally in this case. We've all had to adapt our cultures and traditions. Nothing stays the same forever. A lot of native traditions aren't workable in today's world - same as the traditions of all our ancestors. It doesn't matter where we came from, them's the facts.

The trouble is Canadian culture was defined almost to the exclusion of them. We put so much effort making sure english and french were respected we didn't acknowledge theirs.

lily lily:

You agree they don't have a single language, then you go on to say their "language" should be elevated in law. They don't have a language. And what does "elevated in law" actually mean?

Elevated in law means a recognition of their language in law in courts, commons, and even in society.

It might mean something as simple as each county incorporate their local native culture in some way. Symbology perhaps.

we need to engage the natives. We need to ask them what it would take for them to consider themselves "Canadian".

lily lily:

I accept all Canadians as Canadians, whether they were born her or emigrated from elsewhere. I don't expect "them`to become Canadian... I expect them to BE Canadian.

Why? Just because we expect them to be Canadian?

How about this? China expects Tibet, Tiawan, and Hong Kong to "be" Chinese and all consider themselves as Chinese.

Should they adapt to China or should China adapt to include them?

[Gunnair]

DerbyX DerbyX:

TattoodGirl TattoodGirl:

ridenrain ridenrain:

I'd demand that the FN self government follow or develop a form of charter before anything further proceeds. Trusting tribal chiefs and a oral history isn't going to make a very stable government.

so only white man accounts?...just like removing hereditary chiefs and appointed chiefs through the indian act...that didnt work out to well.

So First Nations are to self govern, but by White man standards...hmmm sounds like history repeating itself.

That is EXACTLY right.

We expect natives to simply smile and adopt our white mans laws and justice system and thats not right. Sure, we'll allow them their trinkets and minor cultural symbols but to actually give them lawful governance over their lives and self-determination?

I'd love for them to become "Canadian" but for that to happen we need to understand that "Canadian" must therefore include Native culture (traditions, symbols, laws, etc) as part and parcel to our European ancestory.

If 'Canadian' must include native culture, then would it stand to reason that sentancing circles and such would be used outside native reserves?

[commanderkai]

Gunnair Gunnair:

If 'Canadian' must include native culture, then would it stand to reason that sentancing circles and such would be used outside native reserves?

I'm curious too, would I, as a non-Native, have the same sort multicultural experience in having a Native sentencing circle be a part of my criminal sentencing, if and when I commit a crime?

[Gunnair]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Gunnair Gunnair:

If 'Canadian' must include native culture, then would it stand to reason that sentancing circles and such would be used outside native reserves?

I'm curious too, would I, as a non-Native, have the same sort multicultural experience in having a Native sentencing circle be a part of my criminal sentencing, if and when I commit a crime?

Well, if Canadian culture had amalgamated some of the native cultural traits, then it would be a reasonable assumption.

That being said, I'm curious to know what native cultural trappings should have been brought into Canada's cultural norm.

Anyone got a list?

[DerbyX]

lily lily:

That was a long time ago, Derby. In the meantime, all of our cultures and traditions have adapted and changed. As much as I`d love to go back and do things the right way, I can`t. All we can do is move on and accept change.

Actually no. Harper recently reaffirmed the french nature of Canadian culture. I'm not talking time travel. I'm talking reconcilliation.

lily lily:

It`s impossible to recognize their language in courts, etc. Not only because they don`t have a single language, but because it would make a muddle of an already muddled system.

I don't believe so. We already make greater efforts in cities with significant non-english first language speakers.

lily lily:

Each county can - and sometimes does - incorporate local native culture.... why should it be enacted in law?

In order to make the understand that Canada includes them.

lily lily:

And finally... ask them what it would take for them to consider themselves Canadian? They already ARE Canadian.

And once again... what laws should we adapt/get rid of to be more inclusive?

why? Is it because we say so? Thats no different then saying the separatists are Canadian. Technically perhaps but not in spirit. We managed to include french who felt they weren't Canadian.

Not so with natives. We don't have "My Canada includes the Natives" sentiments do we.

No. We have "They should feel and be Canadian because they are".

Why is it then the Natives don't believe it?

[DerbyX]

Gunnair Gunnair:

If 'Canadian' must include native culture, then would it stand to reason that sentancing circles and such would be used outside native reserves?

A very good question and comment. I think so.

Tell me. Are you subject to naval/Canadian forces law, a law that only affects that group?

Are you part of a group that while part of Canada has its own code, traditions, and for lack of a better word law? Are you not still Canadian?

Perhaps Reserves can be like bases. An area where a people with a special circumstance and shared cultural experience have a set of laws that are part of yet separate from the rest of us.

Please give it some thought and don't dismiss my thoughts based on personal opinion towards me.

[DerbyX]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Gunnair Gunnair:

If 'Canadian' must include native culture, then would it stand to reason that sentancing circles and such would be used outside native reserves?

I'm curious too, would I, as a non-Native, have the same sort multicultural experience in having a Native sentencing circle be a part of my criminal sentencing, if and when I commit a crime?

That depends. Did you join the band and agree to become part of their culture as we expect immigrants to do here?

[Gunnair]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Gunnair Gunnair:

If 'Canadian' must include native culture, then would it stand to reason that sentancing circles and such would be used outside native reserves?

A very good question and comment. I think so.

Tell me. Are you subject to naval/Canadian forces law, a law that only affects that group?

Are you part of a group that while part of Canada has its own code, traditions, and for lack of a better word law? Are you not still Canadian?

Perhaps Reserves can be like bases. An area where a people with a special circumstance and shared cultural experience have a set of laws that are part of yet separate from the rest of us.

Please give it some thought and don't dismiss my thoughts based on personal opinion towards me.

I understand your assertions here, but I was under the impression that some of the arguments were for cultural inclusion into the Canadian mosaic, something that all Canadians could benefit from - not furthering the seperate but equal cultures.

[DerbyX]

Gunnair Gunnair:

I understand your assertions here, but I was under the impression that some of the arguments were for cultural inclusion into the Canadian mosaic, something that all Canadians could benefit from - not furthering the seperate but equal cultures.

Yes it was but we want them to believe they are Canadian and for that to happen we need to understand that we should approach them as much as they approach us so to speak.

I'm at a disadvantage to entail exactly what is needed. For that we need an actual native. I recall that by law and treaty Natives have auto passage between us and the US although I might be very wrong on this. It implies a separate nature for our Natives and theres and neither truly consider themselves Canadian or American.

I submit to you the question that if we expect that natives to be Canadian and they don't then who is at fault and where do we go to make it so?

We cannot force them to be Canadian and unlike an immigrant they cannot go back to whence they came.

[Gunnair]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Gunnair Gunnair:

I understand your assertions here, but I was under the impression that some of the arguments were for cultural inclusion into the Canadian mosaic, something that all Canadians could benefit from - not furthering the seperate but equal cultures.

Yes it was but we want them to believe they are Canadian and for that to happen we need to understand that we should approach them as much as they approach us so to speak.

I'm at a disadvantage to entail exactly what is needed. For that we need an actual native. I recall that by law and treaty Natives have auto passage between us and the US although I might be very wrong on this. It implies a separate nature for our Natives and theres and neither truly consider themselves Canadian or American.

I submit to you the question that if we expect that natives to be Canadian and they don't then who is at fault and where do we go to make it so?

We cannot force them to be Canadian and unlike an immigrant they cannot go back to whence they came.

There is a culture of both victemhood and victor that must be removed first - for they feed each other and ultimately allow neither to progress towards unity. I hear both sides of the argument, and firmly believe that for natives to fit into the cultural mosiac, they need to bring into it only the best of their cultural baggage and leave the rest (which includes their victemhood) at the door. We, on the otherhand, need to be open to including their unique culture and applying it to our own. I'm rather intrigued at sentancing circles actually. The idea of a municiple sentancing circle for petty crimes has a ring of grass roots justice to it.