- Reaction score
- 14,932
- Points
- 1,160
"Other non-party land holders will get their chance to be heard later" Good luck for a individual to challenge that case with no resources.
But there ARE groups/organizations with resources"Other non-party land holders will get their chance to be heard later" Good luck for a individual to challenge that case with no resources.
Worse yet, what corporation is going to invest in development (pipelines, resources etc.) when there is a chance that the local tribe will move in after you have done all the expensive stuff. Consider what happened in Caledonia and multiply it 100 fold. And yes, tribe is a little derogatory I suppose but many (not all by any means) of these nations were no more than extended family groups at the time of confederation.I know government must reconcile and meet agreements, but if private ownership begins to be affected, this is a whole new ball of wax.
Why buy when there is a risk that the rug can be pulled out from underneath of you?
I like the fact that you were aware of that and went full steam ahead anyways.Worse yet, what corporation is going to invest in development (pipelines, resources etc.) when there is a chance that the local tribe will move in after you have done all the expensive stuff. Consider what happened in Caledonia and multiply it 100 fold. And yes, tribe is a little derogatory I suppose but many (not all by any means) of these nations were no more than extended family groups at the time of confederation.
Is it derogatory now? Find it interesting how this happens. The ones I knew including relatives used it when I was around in discussions with them. Visited the res and the group in the house I was visiting used it.Worse yet, what corporation is going to invest in development (pipelines, resources etc.) when there is a chance that the local tribe will move in after you have done all the expensive stuff. Consider what happened in Caledonia and multiply it 100 fold. And yes, tribe is a little derogatory I suppose but many (not all by any means) of these nations were no more than extended family groups at the time of confederation.
older history books certainly tell a different story. Books written say before 1950 had the indigenous groups asking for schooling, farm assistance, and other forms of training to escape the poverty associated with the tribes. Their lands were great if you were a hunter or trapper but they were sadly lacking in resources to develop a steady income and a future for the kids. It is accepted that there was abuse in the schools but then again St. Michaels in Toronto has had its share of scandals as well. Cultural genocide as they call it now was something totally different in 1880. Getting rid of the buckskins and putting on Levi's was every man's goal. Ask yourself how many of the indigenous (protect their culture, honour their tradition followers) get their squaws to make all their own clothing. Heck, how many would be alive tomorrow if they asked/told their wives to do so. Living in a Tepee may be fun for the weekend but not so great as a semi-permanent residence. It is time to stop trying to re-write history.A couple of more public opinion tiles to add to the mosaic, both from Angus Reid this week ....
- "Bills, Treaties, and UNDRIP: Canadian views of contemporary Indigenous land issues -- CPC voters at odds with others over consultation and accommodation of First Nations in development ..."
- "Two-thirds want additional evidence before accepting that soil anomalies represent unmarked graves at Kamloops school -- Majorities acknowledge that what happened at Indian Residential Schools was ‘cultural genocide’ ...
It is time to stop trying to re-write history.
cause the authors of these books were incapable of whitewashing (no pun intended) history?Books written say before 1950 had the indigenous groups asking for schooling, farm assistance, and other forms of training to escape the poverty associated with the tribes. ........ It is time to stop trying to re-write history.