Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

When did it become wrong to even question natives?


Recommended Posts

An interesting story in the Post today in that it encapsulates all that most of us despise about so-called progressives.

A Quebec environmental bureaucrat wrote a letter to his federal counterpart on upcoming legislation. 

The letter, sent last month from a Quebec environment official to one of his federal counterparts, does not seem all that inflammatory. The Quebec official notes that proposed federal legislation requiring that traditional Indigenous knowledge be taken into account when assessing environmental impacts permits a “very broad” definition of such knowledge. And, he adds, the bill should be clearer about how traditional knowledge is to be weighed against scientific data when deciding whether a project should proceed.

How could anyone be upset about this? Clearly it's simply warning that science, and not the undefined term 'indigenous knowledge' should guide environmental assessment. Yet two cabinet ministers had to apologize amid the 'outrage' over the disrespect to natives. I think this just goes to show how lost to reality progressives are in their fanaticism at appeasing and pandering to every single minority identity group. You can't question the 'wisdom' of indigenous people, despite the fact they had zero knowledge of science and were basically a bunch of tribal hunters restricted to small geographic areas. Even suggesting we should promote science instead an endanger your career as the hysterical progressives start calling you names.

And yes, of course, the progressives have already started crying racism. It's what they do, after all.

 

http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/quebec-deputy-minister-gets-pushback-after-questioning-place-of-indigenous-traditional-knowledge#comments-area

Edited by Argus
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

An interesting story in the Post today in that it encapsulates all that most of us despise about so-called progressives. A Quebec environmental bureaucrat wrote a letter to his federal counterpar

Around 2015. That's when the latest wave of increased... "sensitivity"... started. That's when everyone started to be worried about "cultural appropriation", "microaggressions", "being an ally", "inte

Jordan Petersen is one of those people who are pushing back. The leftist social justice warrior progressive liberals despise this guy because Petersen makes them all look stupid. They deserve to be no

Climate Barbie and the wonderful sunny days team want to codify "indigenous knowledge:??????????????

Yeah, when the Vikings, then French and finally English got here, they found all of these universities, libraries, technological centers, etc. - this vast store of "indigenous knowledge".  The aboriginal population has given so much knowledge to the world. 

Next thing you know Ralph Goodale will be proposing a bill to recognize that Plato, Euclid, Pythagoras, Davinci, Tessla, Einstein and Hawking will be officially declared Swamp Cree.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

When did it become wrong to even question natives?

Around 2015. That's when the latest wave of increased... "sensitivity"... started. That's when everyone started to be worried about "cultural appropriation", "microaggressions", "being an ally", "intersectional disadvantage", "cisgender privilege", etc. But, this is the first wave of this bs that is having some real pushback from reasonable middle-ground people (i.e. the increasing number of university professors who are starting to speak out against the atmosphere now found at many universities), who previously just kind of took the increasingly stifling anti-free-speech inclinations of the modern left as an annoyance to be ignored. 

Quote

You can't question the 'wisdom' of ingenious people

Haha, I wouldn't question the wisdom of "ingenious" people either. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bonam said:

Around 2015. That's when the latest wave of increased... "sensitivity"... started. That's when everyone started to be worried about "cultural appropriation", "microaggressions", "being an ally", "intersectional disadvantage", "cisgender privilege", etc. But, this is the first wave of this bs that is having some real pushback from reasonable middle-ground people (i.e. the increasing number of university professors who are starting to speak out against the atmosphere now found at many universities), who previously just kind of took the increasingly stifling anti-free-speech inclinations of the modern left as an annoyance to be ignored. 

Haha, I wouldn't question the wisdom of "ingenious" people either. 

Jordan Petersen is one of those people who are pushing back. The leftist social justice warrior progressive liberals despise this guy because Petersen makes them all look stupid. They deserve to be noted as stupid. My opinion. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read it. 

"Let’s pay attention in this. Instead of mocking it, which is very insulting,” he said. “If we look at the question of the bear spirit according to our scientific criteria, obviously it will be put aside. But if we seriously take it into account, if we talk to people who believe these things, we will maybe be very impressed.”

How do these people expect to be taken seriously?  I had assumed it was climate patterns and which side of the tree the moss grows, that kind of thing.

Not Yogi's ghost!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Argus said:

An interesting story in the Post today in that it encapsulates all that most of us despise about so-called progressives.

A Quebec environmental bureaucrat wrote a letter to his federal counterpart on upcoming legislation. 

The letter, sent last month from a Quebec environment official to one of his federal counterparts, does not seem all that inflammatory. The Quebec official notes that proposed federal legislation requiring that traditional Indigenous knowledge be taken into account when assessing environmental impacts permits a “very broad” definition of such knowledge. And, he adds, the bill should be clearer about how traditional knowledge is to be weighed against scientific data when deciding whether a project should proceed.

How could anyone be upset about this? Clearly it's simply warning that science, and not the undefined term 'indigenous knowledge' should guide environmental assessment. Yet two cabinet ministers had to apologize amid the 'outrage' over the disrespect to natives. I think this just goes to show how lost to reality progressives are in their fanaticism at appeasing and pandering to every single minority identity group. You can't question the 'wisdom' of indigenous people, despite the fact they had zero knowledge of science and were basically a bunch of tribal hunters restricted to small geographic areas. Even suggesting we should promote science instead an endanger your career as the hysterical progressives start calling you names.

And yes, of course, the progressives have already started crying racism. It's what they do, after all.

 

http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/quebec-deputy-minister-gets-pushback-after-questioning-place-of-indigenous-traditional-knowledge#comments-area

If you think in groups like this, clearly you should all be in jail for the crimes your group have committed, or is that 'scientific knowledge and irrelevant to your current efforts to insult others?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On ‎2018‎-‎03‎-‎29 at 7:37 AM, Penderyn said:

If you think in groups like this, clearly you should all be in jail for the crimes your group have committed, or is that 'scientific knowledge and irrelevant to your current efforts to insult others?

It's not clear what you mean. Would you mind elaborating please? In the meantime perhaps you can hum a line or two of "Kumbaya my lord, kumbaya, oh lord kumbaya"

A mind at peace is a mind at focus!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tribal_wayz said:

It's not clear what you mean. Would you mind elaborating please? In the meantime perhaps you can hum a line or two of "Kumbaya my lord, kumbaya, oh lord kumbaya"

A mind at peace is a mind at focus!

How did you get there?   God give it you, did He?  Theft is theft is theft is theft is theft.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Penderyn said:

How did you get there?   God give it you, did He?  Theft is theft is theft is theft is theft.

"Theft" is only theft if you "own" something.   Can you show me the registered title deed for what was "stolen"?

If merely being somewhere is what it takes to own something, I was once standing at the corner of Portage and Main in Winnipeg, so I guess it's mine?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the Canadian indigenous people have a concept of land ownership? Do they think that they didn't own the land either but since nobody can possibly own land then when somebody claims to own land it is theft? Or did the land belong to clan- or tribe-chiefs prior to the European arrival?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2018‎-‎03‎-‎28 at 5:47 PM, bcsapper said:

Just read it. 

"Let’s pay attention in this. Instead of mocking it, which is very insulting,” he said. “If we look at the question of the bear spirit according to our scientific criteria, obviously it will be put aside. But if we seriously take it into account, if we talk to people who believe these things, we will maybe be very impressed.”

How do these people expect to be taken seriously?  I had assumed it was climate patterns and which side of the tree the moss grows, that kind of thing.

Not Yogi's ghost!

I think Trudeau killed the Northern Gateway Pipeline project because he believed it would offend the Spirit Bear in the Great Bear Rainforest.   The pipeline would have gone through a small part of the so-called Great Bear Rainforest to reach Kitimat.  But he killed it and said the Great Bear Rainforest was no place for a pipeline.   Don't offend the Kermode Bear.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I think Trudeau killed the Northern Gateway Pipeline project because he believed it would offend the Spirit Bear in the Great Bear Rainforest.   The pipeline would have gone through a small part of the so-called Great Bear Rainforest to reach Kitimat.  But he killed it and said the Great Bear Rainforest was no place for a pipeline.   Don't offend the Kermode Bear.

Actually, every single native band on the route of that pipeline was in favour of it and was working on a deal with Enbridge.  It only all went to hell when the feds got involved.

The great bear can kiss their arse when the money's good enough.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, eyeball said:

When it became popular to do so in the belligerent conceited manner that more than a few people in this forum enjoy using.

Still okay though.  Natives are not special.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cannuck said:

"Theft" is only theft if you "own" something.   Can you show me the registered title deed for what was "stolen"?

If merely being somewhere is what it takes to own something, I was once standing at the corner of Portage and Main in Winnipeg, so I guess it's mine?

That's a hard one to prove. Mainly because the registering of land was done by the European nations that colonized North America. Good luck even getting a deed to anything as a native. So the locals on the land had to leave because someone else bought and sold the deed to their land.  Seems fair, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GostHacked said:

That's a hard one to prove. Mainly because the registering of land was done by the European nations that colonized North America. Good luck even getting a deed to anything as a native. So the locals on the land had to leave because someone else bought and sold the deed to their land.  Seems fair, right?

Fairer than how they handled it before the Europeans. When one native tribe decided to attack another it killed everyone on the land and then it was THEIR land.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit that even to me the idea that anyone owns land land is a bit strange but as experience has shown that when "we all" in other words party-bureacrats own land the land ends up terribly badly kept. Simple human nature; you look after what is yours and don't care about what really isn't yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, cannuck said:

"Theft" is only theft if you "own" something.   Can you show me the registered title deed for what was "stolen"?

If merely being somewhere is what it takes to own something, I was once standing at the corner of Portage and Main in Winnipeg, so I guess it's mine?

How many people anywhere have title deeds to their countries?   Theft is theft is theft is theft..    Stay on that corner and get a living, there's as good boy, since you were born there centuries ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Penderyn said:

How many people anywhere have title deeds to their countries?   Theft is theft is theft is theft..    Stay on that corner and get a living, there's as good boy, since you were born there centuries ago.

Since my wife is a direct decendent of Selkirk settlers, and is also eligible for first nations status, I guess you are right.  Would you please call up Jame Richardson and tell him to get his ass out of my building.

BTW:  using your logic, how many aboriginals today are 300 years old?

Of course I was being fecetious about land registration.  A society with no sophistication and no written language was really not going to do that.   As others have pointed out, their respect for property rights and human life was that when they wanted to go someplace, but someone else was already there, they simply killed them.   To that standard, they should be in everlasting state of gratitude we did not do what the yanks tried to do and simply wipe them out.

The land DOES belong to them - as Canadian citizens they should share in all crown land and the benefits from same.  The concept of having hundreds of "sovereign nations" within our country is ludicrous and unworkable.

Edited by cannuck
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, cannuck said:

Since my wife is a direct decendent of Selkirk settlers, and is also eligible for first nations status, I guess you are right.  Would you please call up Jame Richardson and tell him to get his ass out of my building.

BTW:  using your logic, how many aboriginals today are 300 years old?

I was pointing out that, as the only member of your corner-boy nationality, you must be old enough to have some claim to your corner, whereas those you rob can manage thousands.   I understood that  Selkirk was in Scotland (which is currently run by Irish and Germans), but was never hot on geography.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Penderyn said:

I was pointing out that, as the only member of your corner-boy nationality, you must be old enough to have some claim to your corner, whereas those you rob can manage thousands.   I understood that  Selkirk was in Scotland (which is currently run by Irish and Germans), but was never hot on geography.

Lord Selkirk was indeed from Scotland.  Selkirk is in MB, where one can find Selkirk's fort and trading post, but the settlers spread downriver to St. Andrews, where that arm of my wife's family is buried.  Under the rules of the Anglican Church of Canada, only three things qualify one as "Canadian" nationality - your paternal decendance being from a United Empire Loyalist, Red River Settler (Selkirk's lot) or being aboriginal.  Obviously, the Church of England did not seem to be aware of the Jay Treaty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




×
×
  • Create New...