Comment 44693

By Cityjoe (anonymous) | Posted August 03, 2010 at 03:27:54

Thanks Undustrial for creating this thread.

You hear a lot of very bigoted things in this area, esp. since the land claim dispute near Caledonia. It`s brought a lot of `nasty` out from under the wood pile.

The same people who would react pretty vehemently if somebody tried to build houses in their back yard, don't seem to understand why Native people would object to the same thing.

As I understand it, the dispute has been handed over to the Federal (?) Government.(The Feds were in no great hurry give back Ipperwash, even though it was only lent to them for the duration of WW2.) The 6 Nations land claim could be tied up in court for another 200 years.

The Harper Gov. doesn't seem to care a great deal about Native people. (they stopped funding for The Aboriginal University earlier this year & other programs for urban natives also have been canceled.)

Shawn Atleo, National Chief, Assembly of First Nations, has suggested that scrapping of the Indian Act as soon as possible, & input from First Nations from the get-go is better than allowing the Federal Government to decide what will be done, how it will be done & when. I agree, but didn`t Native Autonomy also appear as part of the Meech Lake Accord? (Mulroney) When Meech Lake failed to pass, it took Native Sovereignty along with it. This is how the Federal Government does things. Omnibus legislation that ties many unrelated things together, or takes many important things away, while handing back a few small things.

I'm not saying that I have much more faith in a Liberal Federal Government, but I think The Assembly of First Nations is going to have to be very careful in any negotiations undertaken with the Harper Conservatives, given their interests in oil, gas, mineral, & logging. It's very important that bands retain all rights to the natural resources. (But could the Government try to trade these rights off against the rights of more southerly bands like the 6 Nations?)

To classify either people as 'purebred or mutts' seems to be really none scientific. All people, natives included may have other tribes, or whites, or blacks or any other race in their DNA. The same could be said for us all, considering the waves of migration, war, & trade across Europe, Africa, India, China & the entire World.

(The only purebred 'dog' is the wolf, & their are many species of them, which have also interbred. Breeding purebred dogs is breeding for a desired type, & that subjective assessment changes with time too. I agree that mixed breed dogs are often far healthier.)

The situation of Native kids being adopted outside of their culture presents problems to deciding who is Native or Metis & who is not. The children & grandchildren often don't know if their parents were 'Status Natives', or even who their birth parents are. The laws have changed for the better as far as Native women & their children are concerned, but does this change the definition of Metis along with 'Status Native'?

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds