Well it can’t be both. Either it’s racist or they get criticized like every other corrupt business and government that gets lambasted for squandering money and screwing people who are on the bottom wrung.
That’s the problem. Point out the same problems as any other corrupt organization, someone shouts racist, discussion over. Congrats. You won. Good job it did protecting the people living in poverty with #### education and health care, rampant drug addiction, high crime rates, unsafe living conditions, poor employment opportunities etc.
But hey, at least you’re not racist.
Yes the discussion stops. I'm not sure there is a bigger fear out there right now than bring call a racist. Being called crackhead might be better.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
If you assume without evidence that bands are more corrupt then typical governance structures that would likely be an assumption driven by race.
It would only be racist if you thought it was due to innate traits of indigenous people. Recognizing weaknesses due to political structures and culture is not racist. Is it racist to acknowledge that there's far more corruption in the Quebec construction industry than the Alberta construction industry?
First nations are diverse, but they tend to have the following structural weaknesses:
Very small populations with few educated and skilled workers. Except in the largest bands, there's essentially no functioning bureaucracy.
Because bands like to keep business contracts local, there's often a very weak (or no) tendering process for contracts.
Little oversite. There's no functioning news media, and an indigenous leader can go her entire career without ever giving an interview or being challenged by a reporter.
With no private property and few private business, band leadership dispenses virtually all property and wealth in a community.
Regarding leaders awarding jobs to family and supporters, in the great majority of societies in the world, leaders are expected to reward family and supporters. In-group loyalty is more normative in human societies than the universalism that Western societies have idealized in recent centuries.
When I was a reporter in the NWT, it struck me as suspect that several highly paid civil servants were the siblings of the local MLA. I asked my publisher if anyone at the paper had ever done any digging about the awarding of those positions. He took me aside and explained that was a "southern" way of looking at the issue ("southern" was a euphemism for "white"). He said that I, and the paper, would look like fools if we tried to cast the MLA as unethical because she gave plum jobs to her family. Nobody expected her to do otherwise.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
Last edited by CliffFletcher; 10-06-2020 at 07:05 AM.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
The lack of skilled workers and general educational resources on many reserves is a big reason why the water treatment plants aren't maintained.
One would think that having training programs in place across Canada once the plants are built would be a smart plan, but nobody would accuse our government of making smart decisions. They are generally only good at wasting money.
It would only be racist if you thought it was due to innate traits of indigenous people. Recognizing weaknesses due to political structures and culture is not racist. Is it racist to acknowledge that there's far more corruption in the Quebec construction industry than the Alberta construction industry?
First nations are diverse, but they tend to have the following structural weaknesses:
Very small populations with few educated and skilled workers. Except in the largest bands, there's essentially no functioning bureaucracy.
Because bands like to keep business contracts local, there's often a very weak (or no) tendering process for contracts.
Little oversite. There's no functioning news media, and an indigenous leader can go her entire career without ever giving an interview or being challenged by a reporter.
With no private property and few private business, band leadership dispenses virtually all property and wealth in a community.
Regarding leaders awarding jobs to family and supporters, in the great majority of societies in the world, leaders are expected to reward family and supporters. In-group loyalty is more normative in human societies than the universalism that Western societies have idealized in recent centuries.
When I was a reporter in the NWT, it struck me as suspect that several highly paid civil servants were the siblings of the local MLA. I asked my publisher if anyone at the paper had ever done any digging about the awarding of those positions. He took me aside and explained that was a "southern" way of looking at the issue ("southern" was a euphemism for "white"). He said that I, and the paper, would look like fools if we tried to cast the MLA as unethical because she gave plum jobs to her family. Nobody expected her to do otherwise.
Those sound linke items you could back up with research
When you attribute the above factors to all bands without evidence for that band it certainly is prejudiced. You can decide for yourself what’s motivating that prejudice.
The generalization of all ________ are ________ is never a sound position.
And yes saying that a specific Quebec construction company is more corrupt then a specific Alberta company without evidence is discriminating based on place of origin.
Those sound linke items you could back up with research
When you attribute the above factors to all bands without evidence for that band it certainly is prejudiced. You can decide for yourself what’s motivating that prejudice.
The generalization of all ________ are ________ is never a sound position.
And yes saying that a specific Quebec construction company is more corrupt then a specific Alberta company without evidence is discriminating based on place of origin.
This isn’t even consistent. First you say generalizations are bad then you switch gears and say only if it’s specific.
We can draw some conclusions based on the bigger picture about more specific instances but only as a known generalization. In order to make a specific judgement we’d need to examine that specific instance. It’s not all _____ are _____. It’s identifying trends. Quebec construction industry is more corrupt. That’s a known issue, ignoring it to avoid being discriminatory is just as bad as turning a blind eye.
It’s like you’re intentionally turning it into a catch 22 to avoid ever having to actually examine the broader issues.
It seems to me that he's saying while criticism of specific band leaders may be warranted based on things we know, talking about band leaders that way in general or like the problems of some apply to all is prejudice.
It's not about being unable to examine broader issues, it's that using prejudice as an attempt to do so is flawed. Being aware that the Quebec construction industry is more corrupt is a fine thing to include in your examination of something, but assuming then that all Quebec construction companies are corrupt and making judgements based on that is lazy.
The Following User Says Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
It seems to me that he's saying while criticism of specific band leaders may be warranted based on things we know, talking about band leaders that way in general or like the problems of some apply to all is prejudice.
It's not about being unable to examine broader issues, it's that using prejudice as an attempt to do so is flawed. Being aware that the Quebec construction industry is more corrupt is a fine thing to include in your examination of something, but assuming then that all Quebec construction companies are corrupt and making judgements based on that is lazy.
It’s a straw man then because no one did that. He’s trotting out an opposing view that no one supports or made.
Those sound linke items you could back up with research
When you attribute the above factors to all bands without evidence for that band it certainly is prejudiced. You can decide for yourself what’s motivating that prejudice.
The generalization of all ________ are ________ is never a sound position.
And yes saying that a specific Quebec construction company is more corrupt then a specific Alberta company without evidence is discriminating based on place of origin.
I don't think anyone is attributing anything to 'all bands', those of us that deal with various aspects of the band system are pointing out there is an issue with practical governance structures in all bands that at times causes issues for some bands and will impact any attempt to address the wider issue of access to basic services.
Moreover the practical weakness in the band system was 'our' fault in the sense that white Canada set up a system that would assist in our exploiting/pacifying the native population over a century ago, it was in our interest to keep native leadership reliably compliant and keep the disperate native nations unconnected and disorganised and so 'we' built in a basic weakness into their band system, all be it based on the same basic weakness that allowed white settlers to take N America in the first place, the lack of larger organised political structures in Native populations when whites got here is why we were able to conquer N America with relative ease.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to afc wimbledon For This Useful Post:
Replace that with bands and all of a sudden it’s a problem?
No one is saying all bands are this way, they’re discussing the general trends. Exactly what you just advocated for.
There is a difference between talking about the way the band system is set up, and generalizations about bands and band leaders. But you are right, I shouldn't have said "I haven't seen anything but" because that's not true, and some people are talking about the band system in specific and not generalizing all bands.
That said, I still don't entirely understand your angle. Is GGG wrong about his assumption that generalizations of bands/band leaders have some prejudice behind them? I didn't see GGG specifically accuse anyone of being racist, and if you don't think anyone here fits the description, why the hostile reaction to it? I don't think it's a controversial thing to say.
Why, in your mind, can't we have both these discussions? What are we afraid of here?
The Following User Says Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
I think it is important to recognize 'we' set up bands to be corrupt, that was the whole point of the Indian Act and Reservations and bands, it is supposed to be corrupt, it is a system that is supposed to encourage power to lie in a few unsupervised hands that will do very well as long as they go along with what ever we ,'white' Canada, asks.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to afc wimbledon For This Useful Post:
It’s a straw man then because no one did that. He’s trotting out an opposing view that no one supports or made.
I’d disagree it’s a strawman. It’s a request to check ones motivations and basis when thinking about placing blame on the plights of First Nations people. My post stemmed from reviewing my own thoughts on problems and solutions with First Nations leadership.
AFC makes excellent points when he talks about the design and purpose of the systems currently in place.
My own opinions on the subject were formed working for the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, working as a journalist in largely indigenous communities, and working with my father - a consultant and longtime executive with several Western and Northern Canadian Metis associations.
There’s a lot of tremendous work being done in developing Canada’s First Nations. But these are carried out against powerful structural and cultural headwinds that are not easily overcome, even by the most well-intentioned outsiders.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
Last edited by CliffFletcher; 10-06-2020 at 01:31 PM.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
I’m an ageist; prejudiced against all students regardless of their race. A bit of education without any life experience does not result in the wisdom necessary for society altering actions.
