Canada: An Iroquois Perspective

[a_majoor]

An interesting point of view, but what undermines the argument is the fact that these veiws can only be promoted by money from Canadian taxpayers, and applied (if at all) by creative use of Canadian Law in Canadian Courts, and enforced (if at all) by the power of the Canadian State.

http://www.ottawacore.com/blog/2006/07/02/canada-an-iroquois-perspective/

An Iroquois Perspective
by Tsi Nikayen’ Enonhne’

She:kon!

Canada is NOT a country. A sovereign nation IS sovereign because it makes a declaration and then practices it accordingly. It holds land and declares borders. A true nation has a constitution authorized by its citizens and upheld by its courts. An independent country authorizes law and statutes, and its head of state - often a president - is the head of its government.

But then look at Canada. The formation of a federation proposed under the British North America Act was an incorporation of business interests and it was authorized by the Crown. A federation is a loose group of people who join for common interests and it is well stated that the fathers of confederation were concerned about attack and financial manipulation by the US. The Confederation was formed as a counter measure to hostile business interests in the US.

Canada has no land base. Sovereign territories always have some land base. The only thing Canada ever had was purchased from the Hudson’s Bay Company and from an examination of the documents the Hudson’s Bay never held ownership in the land either. All they did possess was a commerce territory - not unlike a salesman’s territory - and THAT is what they sold. Also during the process of Confederation not one document purports to rescind or transfer the rights identified in the Royal Proclamation of 1763. In fact it was the British position that the Royal Proclamation - which identifies all of the territories west of a line drawn from Ottawa to Kingston - was off limits to British subjects for settlement and it was proclaimed as “Indian lands” only. Even the lands that were settled prior to the Royal Proclamation were considered Indian Lands, although it is recognized that settlement of those areas had already occurred. Canada has no land base - a prerequisite of being a country.

Canda never made a declaration of independence and instead not only asked permission from its sovereign to form the ~company~ but the Crown sought permisssion from our Royaner prior to Confederation. A ~company~ that seeks permission for its existence is not a country and can only be a subject of another sovereign who dictates the rules under which it operates.

The Constitution was not patriated by Canadians. Rather it was authorized by the Crown as the sovereign holding authority over Canada. There was little involved in a public process in which the citizen’s opinions were sought and captured as the values of its people and the basic rights of all people. Yet a corporate constitution can provide for the rights of its employees it still must identify the supreme law that would override their consitutional authority should a dispute arise. Low and behold, Section 25 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms…and then Section 35 which was added after - prescribes that all existing treaties with First Nations are valid and that the Royal Proclamation and any aboriginal rights that pre-existed confederation or which were added in future treaty negotiations were valid. These treaties were agreements between Britain as the sovereign authority, and the sovereign First Nations. This further implies that the ~company~ of Canada is subject to a greater authority - that of the Crown and in fact First Nations through these treaty agreements.

And for just a brief moment if that isn’t enough, consider how much of the consitution is actually defined by the courts and laws are voided as a result. If you had a real consitution certainly the courts and another sovereign nation would not be giving you permission to use it.

Canada has a Prime Minister BUT its head of State is the Governor General representing the Crown. While many argue that this is an honourary position, the laws still exist granting authority of the GG on behalf of the Crown to dissolve governments, to dismiss the Prime Minster in certain circumstances and to reject some legislation when the GG feels it is not in the best interest of Canada. Even though Candians believe in the myth of sovereignty you are in fact still very much tied to and under the authority of Britain and the Queen.

Canada therefore is nothing but a ~company~ with a corporate constitution and letters patent. Those articles of incorporation issued by the Crown have no weight in Indian Country and for the most part Canada has been operating illegally in most parts of Kanyenke. And while you have been conditioned to believe that you are independent and self-determining, you are not a sovereign nation in any sense of the word. Canadians operate under a myriad of myths and it is time that you woke up to your enfranchisement by corporate interests. You’ve been duped. Royally.

Yes, Happy Birthday Canada the cake isn’t even real and the icing is… well….pretty bland….The is the first day in the rest of your new life under Haudenosaunee governance.

O:nen

 

[Brad Sallows]

Fair enough.  Everyone settled west of the Ottawa-Kingston line starts off as a squatter.  If squatters gather together and unilaterally declare borders, claim unlimited sovereignty over everything within the borders, and defend the borders, the squatters are a nation.  There is no reason there can't be more than one nation, subject to the will and ability of bands of squatters to assert their declarations.  Anyone inclined to object can either acquiesce after thinking it over or try to assert differently.  Where should this go?  Should the question be settled so as to leave no doubt as to who is in control, and of what?

 

[Matty B.]

"Canadians operate under a myriad of myths and it is time that you woke up to your enfranchisement by corporate interests. You’ve been duped. Royally." Nice quotation. I know that some of the people on this site would reject this article, but please do read it and concider it.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Read. Considered. Dismissed.

 

[Michael OLeary]

So, does that mean perceiving all those diffferent tribal groups as a coherent body is equally invalid?

 

[orange.paint]

Exclude newfoundland as we joined your um "company" under the terms of union.

 

[3rd Horseman]

So if I can figure all this out, then the first peoples who are not the current first nations cause they ran the real first people out are just like us. We are in deep du-du if someone can find the real first people and we have to give it all back to them. Then where would those so called first people be....shit out o luck I guess.

 

[Kirkhill]

Anybody want to check with the Algonkians about Iroquois land claims?

 

[Roy Harding]

I am so damned tired of this kind of crap.

For the record, my ancestry is Irish, English, Scots, and Polish Jew.  My wife is part French (from France) and part Metis.  This makes my children Irish, English, Scots, Polish, Jewish, French, and First Nations.

Personally, I'd like to take the English to task for what they did to the Irish and Scots - but then the English part of me would be required to pay reparations, which would be intolerable to the Scots part of me.

The English part of me would like to take to task the Irish part of me for the "troubles" which, incidentally, drove my Grandfather from Belfast to Canada's shores - but the Scots part of me would find payment for those "troubles" intoreable.

The First Nations part of my wife and children wants reparations for past injustices, but the English, Irish, Scots, and Jewish parts of them don't want to pay those same reparations.  The French part of my wife and children want reparations for and a "redo" of the Plains of Abraham, but the English, Scots, and Irish parts say "what's done is done" - the Polish part of all of us feels that we're owed something by somebody, and by God when we figure out who it is, we're going to sue.

The Jewish part of me just wants to be left alone.

History is history, folks - it ain't pretty, and it's never fair - but it IS.  We CANNOT rectify historical injustices with money and rhetoric today.  We (and that means ALL of us - no matter what race or origin) have been guilty of some pretty dastardly deeds - that's a fact.  To be continually apologizing, and making monetary restitution for historical injustices makes absolutely no sense. 

Never forget those past injustices, and never again inflict them - but we can't change history.

Let's stop the madness - the Scots/Jewish part of me can't take much more.

 

[Bert]

Sorry Roy.  You didn't consider the cultural accents and immigration of more modern times in the
last three hundred years, plus Ghenis Kahn, the Romans, the Greeks, the Persians, the migrations
of the last 10,000 years, the migrations of the last 200,000, the evolution of human species in the
last 2.5 million years, to the extinction of the dinosaurs. 

This is not to scoff at the intention of the thread.  Like Roy says theres alot of history under the bridge
and alot of what makes humans, humans, has evolved over the years.  Other things about our behavior
collectively and individually has not.  Injustices and justices, the good and the bad, will continue. 
Theres no magic solution.  We move on, try and learn to make things better, and move on.

 

[Centurian1985]

Its all a moot point.  Build a time machine, go back in time, and complain to the British government.

We're all here now.  Sort that out first.  If you want to use legal definitions, then we've been here for about 150 years and we got squatters rights.  Either that or we've been accepted as a competing tribe and have been allowed to retain possession of a captured territory, the same way that Aboriginal groups fought over land, and lost and gained land, over 400 years ago.  

If you want to solve the problem, deal with the situation today, quit living in tomorrow.  Fight for rights that can be given now.  Its impossible to change 1,000 years of human history back to the way it was.  We can fix some problems.  We can apologize and compensate for Japanese internment, but we cant be held responsible for the government thought and acted back then.  What is your final demand? Shall every non-Aboriginal west of Toronto leave for Europe or Asia or whatever their ancestors came from? Shall every white person in Africa go back to Europe?  Its a bitch, life sucks, and someone always gets stuck with the short end.  Make what you can out of it.

 

[Roy Harding]

Sorry Roy.  You didn't consider the cultural accents and immigration of more modern times in the
last three hundred years, plus Ghenis Kahn, the Romans, the Greeks, the Persians, the migrations
of the last 10,000 years, the migrations of the last 200,000, the evolution of human species in the
last 2.5 million years, to the extinction of the dinosaurs.  ....

Damn! 

You're right ! 

There's a whole bunch more stuff that parts of me should be compensated for!

Thanks a bunch  - wanna make a class action suit out of something historical??  (I'm sure that two smart guys like us can come up with SOMETHING!)

Edit:  Grammar

 

[orange.paint]

Im calling for the "too bad clause".
It states that "to bad so sad,you lost."There are way too many people who could be compensated.If it was our generation I could understand but lets get a grip,everyone did something to someone along the way.

 

[aluc]

Move on .....that is an incredible idea. Instead of wasting everyone's time , moving on and trying to build a better future instead of languishing in the past...what a novel idea.      I wonder if the letter writer would like more cheese with his whine. My patience has worn through on issues such as this. I've grown weary of people who won't let the past be. Obviously there is no excuse for past actions, or inaction on the government's part, yet there comes a time when maybe some people should bite the bullet and stop beating a dead horse. Adapt, conform , and become a functioning member of society. This way you're furthering your chance of success as well as the nation on a whole. This constant squabbling only hinders progress for all people in Canada, and seems to me to be more rooted in revenge than actually living a fruitfull existence..

 

[JackD]

I find it interesting that this gentleman's article is in Canadian English, not the Iroquoian languages, therefore he is acknowledging the dominance of one of two official languages of a non-existing country. Does the gentleman concerned actually know how to write in the Iroquoian language? Did he go to a place of higher education that used the Iroquoian language? What manner of currency did the gentleman pay to obtain the word-processor he made up his article on? Indeed, to what journal was this article sent to and what nationality do they consider themselves to be... Hate to break the news to the gentleman concerned, but buddy, you are Canadian - by the way what beer do you drink?

 

[Centurian1985]

A low blow, but still....SLAM!