how much land has the process of self-flagellation via land acknowledgements actually returned to its supposed original owners in canada?
Timeline
Post
Remote status
Replies
9
@7666 we stole this land that is why we are now inviting the entire world to live on your land
@sun @7666 um that's not how it works.
It's an agreed upon part of reconciling with the first nations here. The first step is acknowledging they are still here, and that we're on their land. Each first nation of course has their own interests and 'reclaiming the land' isn't always the high priority. Some first nations have more pressing issues. Fort William first nation for example just declared a state of emergency not that long ago about homelessness there (which it's important to note this case[1] is recent in that area)
There's some nations who are working on getting more control over their land (in places like BC) here in saskatchewan a bunch of nations have gotten the federla government to come back to the bargaining table and admit that they haven't been honouring the numbered treaties, and have made good on some of the neglected components (esp cows & plows provisions). Here in #treaty6 territory our first nations literally just met with his majesty the king to discuss their remaining grievances (ie most recently, Marlaina Smith). In saskatchewan generally the government just came out with a 100 odd page report detailing all the hundreds of steps that have been taken to work towards reconciliation since the publishing of the TRC report. And today, the government of canada just put 40B$ on the table to connect inuit and "northern northerner" NWT rezzes to the rest of canada via highways (and increase the capacity of airports to service northern reserves).
Generally -- there's *a lot* happening on the first nations ticket under the carney government, and quite a bit happened under trudeau -- including devolving power in areas like nunavut to local governments. https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1352471770723/1537900871295
Not all good, of course -- Carney has made a couple of whoopsies in BC (negotiating with "pretendian" groups) but he seems consistent, at least, on making good on his promises to continue to both prioritize first nations development (including but not limited to clean water on reserves) and to make sure they are stakeholders on what gets developed /where
[1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/first-nations-woman-told-to-stop-building-her-own-house-1.2433655
It's an agreed upon part of reconciling with the first nations here. The first step is acknowledging they are still here, and that we're on their land. Each first nation of course has their own interests and 'reclaiming the land' isn't always the high priority. Some first nations have more pressing issues. Fort William first nation for example just declared a state of emergency not that long ago about homelessness there (which it's important to note this case[1] is recent in that area)
There's some nations who are working on getting more control over their land (in places like BC) here in saskatchewan a bunch of nations have gotten the federla government to come back to the bargaining table and admit that they haven't been honouring the numbered treaties, and have made good on some of the neglected components (esp cows & plows provisions). Here in #treaty6 territory our first nations literally just met with his majesty the king to discuss their remaining grievances (ie most recently, Marlaina Smith). In saskatchewan generally the government just came out with a 100 odd page report detailing all the hundreds of steps that have been taken to work towards reconciliation since the publishing of the TRC report. And today, the government of canada just put 40B$ on the table to connect inuit and "northern northerner" NWT rezzes to the rest of canada via highways (and increase the capacity of airports to service northern reserves).
Generally -- there's *a lot* happening on the first nations ticket under the carney government, and quite a bit happened under trudeau -- including devolving power in areas like nunavut to local governments. https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1352471770723/1537900871295
Not all good, of course -- Carney has made a couple of whoopsies in BC (negotiating with "pretendian" groups) but he seems consistent, at least, on making good on his promises to continue to both prioritize first nations development (including but not limited to clean water on reserves) and to make sure they are stakeholders on what gets developed /where
[1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/first-nations-woman-told-to-stop-building-her-own-house-1.2433655
@demha @7666 I'm coming at it from the standpoint that pro immigrant us and canadian progressives have an incoherent set of beliefs, not a generic anti immigrant policy. they should dump land acknowledgements, because they're stupid virtue signaling that they don't actually believe.
there are some arguments I could make for why me in japan is different (like the Yamato are the indigenous people in japan so they could invite whomever they wish) but I admit that they're rationalizations haha.
there are some arguments I could make for why me in japan is different (like the Yamato are the indigenous people in japan so they could invite whomever they wish) but I admit that they're rationalizations haha.
@sun @7666 @demha
it's not quite the same thing, don't think. north-meri natives were (mostly) forced out of places with guns. true "land acknowledgements" generally come from people who can't even pronounce tribe's names though, and personal unpopular (and never going to happen) opinion, yeh, is "just make everyone citizens with equal rights and have the emotional-interest-vested lands be national parks". then there would be arguments about who's allowed to use what national park resources, but letting some tribe in oregon fish for religious reasons and nobody else is as stupid as making "religious freedom" carveouts for christians. (let people grow their own peyote though, dumb drug war
it's not quite the same thing, don't think. north-meri natives were (mostly) forced out of places with guns. true "land acknowledgements" generally come from people who can't even pronounce tribe's names though, and personal unpopular (and never going to happen) opinion, yeh, is "just make everyone citizens with equal rights and have the emotional-interest-vested lands be national parks". then there would be arguments about who's allowed to use what national park resources, but letting some tribe in oregon fish for religious reasons and nobody else is as stupid as making "religious freedom" carveouts for christians. (let people grow their own peyote though, dumb drug war
@jeffcliff @sun i mean real action is good if there is impactful reconciliation to be done, i just find that the concept of land acknowledgements has been perverted into performative self flogging and virtue signaling. that step probably could have been skipped.
@jeffcliff @7666 why would an individual do it before a meeting or event