babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
"If, for example, someone flatly states, "FN are sovereign nations", I'm going to ask questions and challenge that. Does a FN tribe possess the sovereignty of a Canada or China? No. Does it possess elements of sovereignty? Absolutely. The question then becomes: What are the characteristics of the sovereignty that FN tribes possess and what are the limits of those sovereign rights relative to a Canada or a China?"
Sovereignty - European word (French actually) - defined by them, imposed on us.
In political theory, the ultimate authority in the decision-making process of the state and in the maintenance of order.
In political theory, the ultimate authority in the decision-making process of the state and in the maintenance of order.
I think this conversation should move over to PM, as were off topic here a whole bunch! I could go on for a while, but wrong place, wrong time!
[ 08 March 2007: Message edited by: SavageInTheCity ]
Frankly, I pin the breakdown squarely on those few posters who simply insist on "shouting down" questions or thoughts with, essentially, "You have no right to have an opinion about this" if questions or statements stray the least little bit from the "party line" (even if some of the concerns reflected in my posts were the same as, or very similar to, uncertainties expressed by some FNs here).
In very stark contrast, the responses of zazzo and Catchfire were very constructive, helpful and positive counter-observations (but, for some posters, it's not even permissible for me to say that!!).
I agree!! [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img] And, I would welcome a PM discussion or a discussion on this subject on a different thread.
http://www.collegefund.org/news/advertising.html
I have seen their ads in both National Geographic and Harper's magazines.
To prove aboriginal title, a First Nation has to show a distinct culture and a longstanding connection to the land, among other things, and has to spend substantial resources and years in court (or at the negotiating table) presenting evidence to document what Tom Berger called "the tedious proof of the obvious." The sovereignty of Canada and the United States, on the other hand, is simply assumed.
Quick question: how do we know that Sven is white?
Sven: your history in these kinds of threads has made you somewhat of a target, and I'm not sure that's unjustified. You have been told repeatedly that "reverse-racism" or equivalency arguments are unacceptable in these forums, yet you persist, claiming ignorance. Why is that? remind is certainly turning the screws in you, but there is a great deal of frustration with your obstinate refusal to understand that you can't just reverse the colours of an AR-dilemma to undermine it.
The fact is that there is a great deal of support for an exclusionary FN school, because of history, power dynamics and culture that simply don't correlate to the same question about whites. This has been explained to you again and again, yet you keep bringing up the same re-hashed arguments. As a result, even when you add a certain degree of delicacy, anything that slightly resembles these kinds of arguments is a magnet for antagonism. Do you understand why this is?
Personally, I think Whitehorse would be an ideal city for an Aboriginal University. It would attract young people to the North, it would greatly benefit from the large indigenous population, and it would organically educate a region that currently has no local access to higher education.
This is probably a dumb, but if there are 70,000 FN people in the GTA and probably many more nearby, why Whitehorse?. Any graduates would probably be heading to Toronto, Calgary or a similiar place to look for work anyway.
I suppose it might create some good jobs in Whitehorse, though.
The thought that quickly comes to mind, however, is how do we train FN people in the more technical and science oriented occupations, such as the various forms of engineers, computer systems architectures, computer chip design, automotive design, etc, etc.
These type of areas are where future jobs will probably be, especially as our work force becomes more and more technical.
[ 09 March 2007: Message edited by: oreobw ]
Too bad you did not read the full article.
I don't know. How do you train white people to do that? Throw them some goodies and treats for leanin' so well? Some gold stars?
Jeezus Christ, now I've read everything.
Umm, did you also know they have the INTERNET on computer-thingies now?
No need for the bs, I was not talking about operating a computer but designing the chips that make up the computer, quite a different topic and requiring several years of technical education (same for the other jobs I mentioned).
On the other hand, I was not trying to insult anyone.
So what did I miss in the article about different ways of learning science/technical subjects? Was the article out to lunch or did I mis-read it?
PS: I just re-read the article, I think I got it about right the first time.
[ 09 March 2007: Message edited by: oreobw ]
What "different" ways of learning science are there?
Either you learn the material or you dont! Ive been in both high school systems (Canadian High School and -gasp- an all-native high school) and can honestly tell you the teaching methods werent entirely different. The smaller classes on-reserve helped troubled students (those who wanted help anyways). At my on-reserve high school, computers/technology was an option/the alternative was Algonquin language.
Further up, the question was posed, would an all-native school stand up to a charter challenge? On-reserve schools (elementary an high school) on-reserve ARE exlusionary, and its a big reason Im against exclusionary schools. Especially at the lower levels. It teaches all sides that exclusion is OK! There was recently a racial fight here between 40 kids (seeHere).
This fight was between students for the town school and the rez school. Think exclusion is good? This isnt new here. When I was a teen, it wasnt as violent, but there were as many racial divisions as there are now.
What "different" ways of learning science are there? Either you learn the material or you dont!....
No, I'm not offended,and I was not trying to troll or bug anyone.
I don't have a strong opinion re separate schools, so I won't comment without some thought.
I was reacting to the article posted by northern-women re the different way FN people view science training and trying to relate that to highly technical fields where 4 -5 years are needed on top of a BSc.
I have spent the past 30 - 40 years working in fairly technical areas so I am quite conscious of some of these fields of work and the training required.
SITC is way too nice to you. You are trolling and your comments are offensive. Are all white people the same? Do you all suffer from some freaking brian tumor called BS covert racism? Get a fucking grip. There is zero reason why FN people cannot 'learn' the same way as anyone else.
This is my last post in this forum. I am so sick and tired of the insults and Bullshit.
Jeezus Christ to you too.
If we are having trouble with FN students doing basic science in grade 8 then how do we get them through a BSc in chemistry/physics and then on to an advanced degree in electrical engineering specializing in computer circuit design (as an example)?
That is what I was wondering about. Obviously, we need to fix the system.
[ 09 March 2007: Message edited by: oreobw ]
I am not trolling and if you think my comments are offensive, that is unfortunate.
However, I obviously said something that is politically very incorrect, so why not explain to me what you object to (without the insults).
PS: I didn't say FN people couldn't learn the same as anyone else, I always assumed FN people did learn the same as anyone. The article posted by northern-woman said FN people approached science education differently and this caused learning problems (this was news to me).
[ 09 March 2007: Message edited by: oreobw ]
I resemble your discription,but hopefully you do not mean all of babble, and your viewpoint is in important in the aboriginal issue forum too, if you just mean it and not the whole forum.
They want to silence and/or marginalize voices, IMV, and they shouldn't be able to suceed.
[img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
I don't understand why people feel such a strong need to keep posting again and again in forums where they are clearly not understanding or following the mandate.
If you are not Aboriginal, this forum was not made for you, and you are a guest. (That includes me.) Be a good guest. If your host tells you that you're being offensive, shut up. If your host is telling you you're taking up too much space, then step back. It's really just that simple.
Why not PM me and tell me exactly what I said was wrong or inappropriate. I would really apppreciate it.
Please read the article posted by northern-woman that prompted my comments if you have time.
Thanks.
SITC, was speaking about lower grade levels and exclusionary dynamics that occur on reservations, that on a surface level, could appear to support the negation of FN's post secondary schools.
However, exclusiveness of FN's primary, and middle/high schools is not because of FN planning, but because of the remoteness of the reserves.
Remoteness of reserves, are the ultimate creation of whitemen for the purposes of *gasp* exclusion.
Exclusion of white children in schools in a Reserve setting nowadays, is a by-product of whiteman's exclusionary actions, not a created, nor purposeful action by FN's. So, people need not go away and say: "see FN's again have more rights and freedoms than the rest of Canadians."
Beyond that, it appears that some are still not getting the fact that the proposed university is NOT being planned as an exclusionary institution.
Truthfully, any discussion in this topic surrounding exclusion are redundant and non-applicable.
Really? Why now? After all, you used/expropriated his words for a response to catchfire's post. So really, what you did was took his voice, then used it for your own purposes to rebutt what you decided catchfire was saying. And now, you want to say you will allow SITC to clarify them, after you used them.
Also, I never made any attempt to clarify's SITC words. I re-stated that he noted the exclusionary state of being of Reserve schools in the early grade levels. And then I noted this is a truth on many Reserves.
However, I went further to note, and this has nothing to do with SITC commentary, why that exclusionary state exists and how that it came about. Neither of which have anything to do with SITC's later commentary or even utilizing his words.
The conclusion was also my personal observation. Which was; seeing as how this university, that is the topic under discussion, is not seeking exclusionary status, any conversation along those lines, are non-applicable as it is not a reality. And therefore it is only hypothetical non-event.
Moreover, it has also been pointed out here, there are already numerous FN's postsecondary schools that are in existence, and some have been for sometime, that are also non-exclusionary.
So again, why would there be any objections to any such schools? Or indeed any opinion at all, other than a general: "great, the more schools there are, the better for everyone".
And then going so far as to object, when other people say there should be no objections and that they have none, is quite....
[ 10 March 2007: Message edited by: remind ]
Look, Catchfire, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that there is a lot of support for schools that are exclusively FN, correct? Not that you support them, but that there is support for them, right?
Now, when I raised concerns about FN-exclusive schools (something that SITC also raised concerns about), I get admonished.
That's fucked up, no?