Systemic Racism in US and Canada

[Looch City]

Unless that personally happened to you, that's just an exaggerated hypothetical scenario.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by GGG

No,

You can put some effort in and become knowledgeable about the various provisions in the Indian Act and if you find any aspects of it that lead to disproportionate outcomes between First Nations communities and those who are not status Indians.

Well I have a question.

Should our goal be to get rid of the Indian Act with the idea of creating a level playing field, and accept the fact that it will take 2-3 generations until we actually get that level playing field?

Fun fact, Pierre Trudeau and Jean Chretien wanted to either get rid of the Indian Act, or modify it back in the 1970s.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Azure

Well I have a question.

Should our goal be to get rid of the Indian Act with the idea of creating a level playing field, and accept the fact that it will take 2-3 generations until we actually get that level playing field?

Fun fact, Pierre Trudeau and Jean Chretien wanted to either get rid of the Indian Act, or modify it back in the 1970s.

Treaties were made with independent nations in exchange for land so unless we want to buy out the treaties in some fashion you will still have obligations to First Nations people that you don’t to other citizens so it certainly is difficult.

It certainly needs modernization, the path forward also needs to be driven by Ottawa listening to the needs of individual bands as opposed to the time tested colonial / parental approach that has been used historically.

[81MC]

Originally Posted by Looch City

Unless that personally happened to you, that's just an exaggerated hypothetical scenario.

It happened to my girlfriend. I heard the exact conversation myself. There is no exaggeration or hypothetical in there, but it’s a good way to deflect answering the question.

Seriously though, what is the answer here? I’m enraged, and my girlfriend is obviously pretty upset, and it sounds like a pretty clear case of discrimination. In order to avoid anything too specific:

Manager: “they are looking for a VM, so we’re giving it to employee B”
Employee B:”So...is it because I’m (nationality)”
Manager: “Yes”

Keeping in mind, the nationality of Manager and Person B are the same, and their ‘visible minority’ happened to be the most proportionally represented group in the team.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by 81MC

It happened to my girlfriend. I heard the exact conversation myself. There is no exaggeration or hypothetical in there, but it’s a good way to deflect answering the question.

Seriously though, what is the answer here? I’m enraged, and my girlfriend is obviously pretty upset, and it sounds like a pretty clear case of discrimination. In order to avoid anything too specific:

Manager: “they are looking for a VM, so we’re giving it to employee B”
Employee B:”So...is it because I’m (nationality)”
Manager: “Yes”

Keeping in mind, the nationality of Manager and Person B are the same, and their ‘visible minority’ happened to be the most proportionally represented group in the team.

She has the choice that anyone experiencing discrimination has suck it up or go scorched earth and file a human rights complaint.

[sketchyt]

I am a VM.

I would be incredibly insulted if I was hired based on my ethnicity and would likely look for new employment if I were. However, this has never happened to me to my knowledge.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by GGG

Treaties were made with independent nations in exchange for land so unless we want to buy out the treaties in some fashion you will still have obligations to First Nations people that you don’t to other citizens so it certainly is difficult.

It certainly needs modernization, the path forward also needs to be driven by Ottawa listening to the needs of individual bands as opposed to the time tested colonial / parental approach that has been used historically.

So what kind of options are we looking at outside of billions in payments?

I think if we go down that road we won't get very far. No politician has that amount of political capital to accomplish anything in 4 years.

[Looch City]

Yes that sounds like a ####ty place to work. She has grounds to file a complaint of discrimination if she wishes. Or move on and find something else.

I've never come across something that blatant as well...

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Azure

Well I have a question.

Should our goal be to get rid of the Indian Act with the idea of creating a level playing field, and accept the fact that it will take 2-3 generations until we actually get that level playing field?

Fun fact, Pierre Trudeau and Jean Chretien wanted to either get rid of the Indian Act, or modify it back in the 1970s.

I think the black/slave experience in the US might imply its tougher than just saying 'we're all equal now' and thinking in 2-3 generations that will actually be the case (particularly economically).

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

I think the black/slave experience in the US might imply its tougher than just saying 'we're all equal now' and thinking in 2-3 generations that will actually be the case (particularly economically).

Which is fair and all but can we really say that the US been "were all equal'' the last few generations? I don't think so.

I do think though the quicker we can get to a system where everyone actually is equal the better. When anyone is treated differently (good or bad) because of their race, beliefs, culture, orientation there is always going to be a segment of people that causes issues.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

I think the black/slave experience in the US might imply its tougher than just saying 'we're all equal now' and thinking in 2-3 generations that will actually be the case (particularly economically).

I agree, it is tougher.

But I'm not sure the current system is better.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Which is fair and all but can we really say that the US been "were all equal'' the last few generations? I don't think so.

I do think though the quicker we can get to a system where everyone actually is equal the better. When anyone is treated differently (good or bad) because of their race, beliefs, culture, orientation there is always going to be a segment of people that causes issues.

I agree, but I think getting there will take 2-3 generations of struggle while changes are slowly made and people adapt.

So the question is are we going to accept that and constantly work to improve knowing that it will seem like a #####show for a while, or do we continue with status quo because it allows us to ignore those problems and live in our closed off society where indigenous issues don't affect us?

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Azure

I agree, it is tougher.

But I'm not sure the current system is better.

I think the issue is 'doing nothing' is not the same as 'creating equality'.

Simply moving Aboriginals to the same rights/laws as the rest of us would make them 'equal', but they're so far behind and have so little equity (not their fault) that 'doing nothing' doesn't really help. They actually need us to do more than take our foot off their heads (extreme but imo), they also need a hand up.

This has controversial names like 'Affirmative Action' where less qualified minorities are promoted ahead of the majority in order to try to 'help them up'. It may be racist, but its an attempt to use racism 'for good'. Complicated As long as 'race' is something we identify/see/group up with to some degree, 'racism' will be around, for good or evil.

[Agamemnon]

I definitely agree its awkward having 2 legal/political systems in Canada. IMO everyone should be a Canadian Citizen and subject to the same rights/laws. One option would be to 'cash them out' (FN), give them the land the Reserves sit on (cut into parcels and distibuted), and cut a gigantic, massive cheque, and then say 'you're the same now!', and treat them like regular Citizens just like everyone else.

Obviously there would be a ton of issues with that, in particular the legal aspects of just shredding some treaties...

I'd love a solution that leaves us all 'the same' legally at the end, but probably not possible. Not really a fan of 'Canadian Apartheid' (harsh? ), 2 peoples 1 country.

[David Struch]

So sad,

'I wasn’t even able to tell her I love her.' This is just a snippet of what Joyce Echaquan’s partner Carol Dubé had to say

https://twitter.com/APTNNews/status/1312079017110102016

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

I definitely agree its awkward having 2 legal/political systems in Canada. IMO everyone should be a Canadian Citizen and subject to the same rights/laws. One option would be to 'cash them out' (FN), give them the land the Reserves sit on (cut into parcels and distibuted), and cut a gigantic, massive cheque, and then say 'you're the same now!', and treat them like regular Citizens just like everyone else.

Obviously there would be a ton of issues with that, in particular the legal aspects of just shredding some treaties...

I'd love a solution that leaves us all 'the same' legally at the end, but probably not possible. Not really a fan of 'Canadian Apartheid' (harsh? ), 2 peoples 1 country.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1969_White_Paper

It's not so simple, and no you cannot have everyone be the same.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by GGG

No,

You can put some effort in and become knowledgeable about the various provisions in the Indian Act and if you find any aspects of it that lead to disproportionate outcomes between First Nations communities and those who are not status Indians.

I wasnt asking to be informed on it. I was asking for your perspective on how it impacts the discussion.

[Ped]

My sister has 8 kids. No one's ever suggested, hinted, or otherwise implied she's a prostitute.


Then again she's white.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

I definitely agree its awkward having 2 legal/political systems in Canada. IMO everyone should be a Canadian Citizen and subject to the same rights/laws. One option would be to 'cash them out' (FN), give them the land the Reserves sit on (cut into parcels and distibuted), and cut a gigantic, massive cheque, and then say 'you're the same now!', and treat them like regular Citizens just like everyone else.

Obviously there would be a ton of issues with that, in particular the legal aspects of just shredding some treaties...

I'd love a solution that leaves us all 'the same' legally at the end, but probably not possible. Not really a fan of 'Canadian Apartheid' (harsh? ), 2 peoples 1 country.

Even just fixing land title is a mess. It seems simple just giving title to the bands and ending the approval in the Indian Act but that certainly wouldn’t be universally agreed to by First Nations people. Then there would be the question of how those lands are distributed would the federal government dictate they be given to individuals or would they go to the band themselves. If they go to the bands themselves then how you you ensure it is not misappropriated. Is it even the Canadian Government role to ensure that band assets aren’t misappropriated?

And on and on and on.

I think giving ownership over land and houses to individuals rather than beholden to Nation leadership and government leadership would be a start but it would be a radical change to how Treaty lands are administered and would requires decades of negotiations with hundreds of individual nations and members.

I think the starting point is to define what success looks like.

To me it isn’t necessarily integration and being the same as the rest of Canada.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by GGG

Treaties were made with independent nations in exchange for land so unless we want to buy out the treaties in some fashion you will still have obligations to First Nations people that you don’t to other citizens so it certainly is difficult.

It certainly needs modernization, the path forward also needs to be driven by Ottawa listening to the needs of individual bands as opposed to the time tested colonial / parental approach that has been used historically.

When you treat people differently those people will have different outcomes. Three different treatment is a better explanation than "systemic racism" for difference in outcomes that we observe.

The treaties may be binding, and current policy may have good intentions. But ultimately the current model of segregation (treaty imposed or not) is leading to some very negative unintended consequences. Figuring out how to end FN segregation should be the first priority.