Pankiw and Ahenakew sitting in a tree...

To begin with, this is a quote from an article: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090306.wsask0306/BNStory/National/home
“Daniel Poulin, a lawyer for the human rights commission, said since the pamphlets aren't subject to the act, the panel was unable to consider whether Mr. Pankiw's statements were objectionable.”
Jim Pankiw- what gets me is how racism-discrimination is such a hard thing to understand. Certainly it is related to oppression, and that is why advantaged people have such a hard time understanding it. If you attack an already oppressed group of people, you are irresponsible. It is akin to the lowest of blows, it is nothing more that dirty fighting. Moreover, how do you use equality against an already disadvantaged people? Seems to me the constitution got it right. Need I remind you Section 15(2) states: “Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantage individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race...”
The only reasoning I can come up as to why equality is used is because it is all about keeping the disadvantaged out. Yet this country was built with advantages, it is therefore hard to see how not allowing advantages to others is against the status quo. I would also think the constitution has a higher ideal/principle than some emotional opposition. Imagine if equality started at the inception of this country, there would be no reserves and the First Nations people would not be controlled and dominated by some legislation.

Now in terms of Ahenakew: To begin with, I believe that the views espoused by Ahenakew clearly came from a different source other than from himself. In fact Ahenakew’s words sound like they are merely repeated, and so the depth of his attitude remains in question. Ahenakew appears if anything to be a middleman; the crime comes from those who held such deep attitudes of hatred to the Jews. This hatred for Jewish people had to of come from those who interacted with them on a personal level. And because of that it is hard to see Ahenakew as being a hard-lined racist, against Jewish people. Unfortunately Ahenakew spoke, he got caught, and as a result the real perpetrators are getting away. If anyone should be indicted it should be those who hold such deep attitudes of hatred.

Here is a quote from a blog, “ i don’t share ahenekew’s position one bit, but as far as i know he never encouraged anyone to harm a jewish person, and he was (once) charged with promoting hatred for simply answering a question truthfully. the ku klux klan is known to act violently against blacks. Jews and homosexuals yet they are allowed to hold meetings, in national parks no less.” http://www.breakfastmeat.com/2006/06/ahenekew-vs-kkkcanada-vs-usa.html

By using a situation that involves a venerable and emotional old man, is nothing more than exploitation. Ahenakew will never get forgiveness from the general public, but unlike the colonial way his forgiveness does not depend on them.
Complaining about how the justice system is serving a minority is also another attempt at manipulating the facts; I then have to ask should justice serve only the dominant majority. Will society be better by denying justice to an already disadvantaged people? Yet it seems the rising sentiment of the majority is nothing more than, riding roughshod over the minority and their disadvantages.
Race is a small factor, yet some people make it a big factor. It is these people who are the ones who cause problems in our society; they are the ones who need to be reprimanded. They are the ones who bring the rifts in our society.
So in the end it is always about Natives, First Nations, aboriginals, it is sensationalism- too bad cause natives really are sensational.
If there is anything I do believe it is that the Ahenakew and Pankiw cases tend bring out the racist views.
Moreover, the most disturbing thing about the Ahenakew and Pankiw case is the anti-native sentiments that seem to follow and are expressed.
Hopefully there will be an outcry over Pankiw as there was for Ahenakew.
Ekosi

Independance

I wrote this before Obama was inaugurated, he is truly an inspiration; cause surely the blacks were one of the most mistreated people, but they have now overcome! It's now time for aboriginals to rise.

It’s time we take the helm; and we must rise up and move to the “Promised Land:” The promised land of independence. It is time to move and shake mountains.

I feel for the student body at the First Nations University, they reside in a no-man’s land. Leadership has lost its connection; maybe it never had a connection in the first place. The days of partisan politics are on its last legs; it’s time for real leadership to move in, politicians move over. No more playing the people, no more manipulating things for your own self aggrandizement. A real leader calls out for the poor, poor in spirit. Our people are victims of circumstances that are not often of our own doing.

Our enemies are great, but greater are you because we have a just cause. Justice must reign in and amongst our people. We are a Nation, not just little broken up pieces that have little or no strength. Our cause is across those little nations and that makes us one.

I am tired of my inability, I’m tired of my circumstances, I am tired that I am getting nowhere, and fast!

My forefathers were the true pioneers of the Great White North; it is truly our home and Native land. But you will not find that in a history class, neither will you be told that we are a positive feature in Canada.

My people were the foundation of “Good Government.” Democracy made us a strong people; we had the ability to unite, and to put away our reasons for enmity. Since we are an ocean of people, our waters should cover our enemies. This new tide is not for the proud and arrogant, neither is it for those who just want a free ride. When the waters of justice roll in, you do not want to be on the wrong side.

Justice will be for the true North Strong and Free. Native people have to be free. I cannot be free if my reality is of no concern, to mainstream. My struggles and oppression must be given a voice. At some point I have to shake off “the status of degradation;” (to use a John Hope Franklin phrase.)

The Indian Act has roosted way too long, politicians rise and play the people, and they seek to sit on the throne of power. Real leaders do not exalt, they lift up others. There was a time when our people never took leadership lightly, in fact people would rather avoid leadership positions at any cost, and that was because it was a great responsibility. Where are those humble leaders? Where are those leaders who know to be leader is to be responsible?

And thus we have our multitudes of people lacking a leader; they are in a land of disarray. The left and the right are hedged up and our enemies are in hot pursuit, like Moses, only the sea is in front of us. The Promised Land looks far off; the time is here for us to cross, to get there, and to set our foot on the promise of independence.

Fear not, we shall get there! Because surely Justice wants us to get there!

Freedom

What were the original aspects of Multiculturalism? According to Trudeau, “The government will encourage and support the various cultures and ethnic groups that give structure and vitality to our society. They will be encouraged to share their cultural expressions and values with other Canadians, and so contribute to a richer life for us all.” Notice, originally, it was the job of the government to encourage and support; nowhere did it state they would take control and dictate how multiculturalism should unfold. Unfortunately multiculturalism has taken a turn, even though it may seem small to some nonetheless it is like any other initiative that gets lost to the dominant: And as a result once again the oppressed are overlooked.
In fact, by allowing people to develop it creates an autonomy which is a form of self-government, which essentially is to have control over your own affairs.
Thus any control over ethnics, stems historically from the colonial mind: Which is based solely on superiority and domination, to where the colonist thinks they know more about who you are and what is best for you. It is certainly not like an over protective parent, but more akin to a domineering spirit.
Every nation has the right to rise and become independent. The problem with seeking independence is that little is conceded and sadly the alternative is to demand. Dominance is always kept in place, independence is never voluntarily given. Even though it may mean a stronger relationship, yet the sociopathic symptoms of control are deeper and harder to overcome. This form of dominance sees no advantage in giving independence; it only sees what it will lose. Thus what was originally meant to encourage independence and growth is thwarted by a reluctance based on domination. Multiculturalism is now about catering to that domination, it is not about progressing. It is about the Status quo, of domination/ colonialism once again being intact. Shall Canada falter because it refuses to relinquish what is so natural, namely independence? Are these the Colonial times all over again, shall the colonies/reserves demand their independence.
How can a country strive for all that is good, yet deny a certain segment those very benefits? Yet Canada is doing just that.
Ever since, our Native forefathers touched the pen, and we were placed under the Indian Act, we lost our Freedom. We lost our dignity. We lost our worth.
It is anyone’s right to throw off despotism, any form of government that does not produce security or does not give you the right to be free to develop. In this case change is for the better. Where I can hold my head up, and know my worth is great. Where I know that I have a greater chance to do good, and my future, my children’s future, will be as bright as the new day.
My forefathers were magnificent people, they were the true pioneers, and they were the ones who settled this harsh country. They said let us share this country, let us be a nation that is made up of many brothers. My country will be a country that promotes, “freedom for all.” Free to chose, free to develop, and free at last! Thank God we will be free at last! Canada will surely rise when it moves to promote freedom. Freedom for all is true freedom!

Obscurantism and Improvement

One of the secrets to the southern domination of blacks was that the media paid little if any attention to the racial reality that was so prevalent at the time. "(The) success of segregation had been the way newspapers had neglected it." It is unfortunate, that even today, given the freedom of the press how the unconventional reality of race is often overlooked. Even though we live in a great democracy, sadly the totalitarian way is still eminent. Racism is not some exception that goes on rather it is conventional and ingrained via culture.

People cannot be free, if they are subjected to oppressive measures. Therefore the obscurantism of this reality is part and parcel to the denial of freedom. Great freedom will never be achieved, unless those who are repressed are set free and given the public opportunity to openly face their oppression.

When I read Dr. Green's article, I know it is saying more than what some people can fathom. That because such an issue as race is overlooked and given little consideration it is seen as the exception; and nothing can be further from the truth.

All a person has to do, is listen to the people south of us and you will hear about the race reality that occurs in the not so distant land. Barak Obama coming to the helm of power is a prime example. The mistreatment of the Blacks was openly confessed, and the racial significance of Obama was then conferred. It was considered by some to be the fulfilment of Martin Luther's dream speech. Yet here in Canada, there were other emotions, such as fear and anger. How can such an event be met with such extreme and diverse sentiments? How can hope stand side-by-side with fear and anger? If anything it proves that yes there is a veracity that is not recognized: And it is defined by race and its reality. When I see fear and anger, and when justice is ringing from the mountain tops, then are you really holding back a dream? It is only equality that will pave the way for greater things. And we should start with giving people the opportunity to express their reality. Canada certainly needs a greater infusion of justice: And Canada does have room for improvement.

 

Racism in Canada

In the deep south of America, there were some very strident measures in place (the Jim Crow laws); these measures were all about race. One of the secrets to the continuous power of racial oppression was that those who were oppressed were hardly if ever recognized; little or no effort or recognition was given to their oppression. Thus the ones in power could keep in a system of power by not recognizing the reality of those whom they oppressed. Regarding Natives and their plight, there is little recognition, and their mistreatment is conventionally overlooked. This is as clear as a parallel as one could get.

In terms of native people the oppression is locked in place through many factors, yet being in a democracy this goes against all that a democracy represents. Social equality is a must for a democratic country, and thus there should be no disadvantaged person or groups. However there is a bold face lie and manipulation of truth that is often used to keep things in place. Every time a small advantage is given to native people there is an outcry, yet in the context of justice, the little that is given cannot compare to the disadvantages incurred by Native people in our great (Canadian) society.

Racism has always been about power, from putting measures in place to creating advantages, to incurring disadvantages for others. This is the essence of institutionalizing racism, by making it convention, to creating a culture of racial advantage and disadvantage. Yet these fundamentals are obscured, and made to be insignificant. If a person dare mention racism and its oppressive nature, it appears to border on treason. But how can recognizing the injustice of the lowly be treason? If anything, it is clearly wrong to continue on, where some people are advantaged and others disadvantaged: More so when those who are disadvantaged are so poor. If justice is truly color blind, than racial distinction inclined to give advantage and disadvantage is clearly unjust.

A clear example of the power that accompanies racism is the recent election of our first black President, Barak Obama. The fact that this appointment was met with anger and fears indicates that the issue of power-shifting from one person to another, (and the other being not like yourself), was a jolting experience for some. Yet from another perspective the idea that a person from a disadvantaged group could make an unprecedented stride was exhilarating, to say the least. It seems that when power is threatened, all hell breaks loose. And it seems equally understandable that fear and anger are the net result of losing power.

If we are in a great and actual democracy, it would seem the sharing of power is not some strange bedfellow. Rather it should be the essence of our countries, the time has come where people must think of unifying and this could ultimately mean working with others not like you.

Another example of the elements in racism has to be apartheid system in South Africa. “Apartheid can be best understood as (the systematic attempt to reverse economic integration as much as possible by legislating social barriers) in order to channel the inevitable political consequences of African economic advancement in the interests of privileged white.” For those caught in a repression like this (colonialism) they must transcend the efforts of humiliation and disrespect. These attacks have been so widespread that the obvious example of the Indian Act is a true culmination of these colonial efforts of humiliation and disrespect. The Indian Act will always be an act of colonialism; (the economic and political policies by which a nation indirectly maintains or extends its influence over people). And so it is that within civilized society, there were many different ways to achieve the end of advantage and disadvantage.

To then overcome both apartheid and colonialism is to overcome control/domination and exclusion. Clearly the Indian Act is a prime example of both control/domination and exclusion. It was certainly not the Apartheid system, nor was it the Jim Crow Laws but it was a system so similar that it is obviously no different than the other systems of exclusion, and domination/control.

Segregation is not conducive to an equal and democratic country. It would seem it is inevitable that systems of segregation will be challenged by the enlightenment of equality. That all men are created equal, and that given the same opportunities success is predestined.

The net result of such a system is the pit of poverty that continually grows, and it seems unjust that billions have to be poured into poor communities. It becomes a national outcry; riches should be given to the progressive, let alone the unmerited poor. For example the constructed Jim Crow laws helped “white Americans, as a group (to) continue to be the beneficiaries of the legal apparatuses of white supremacy, carried out the full weight of America’s legal, political, and economic institutions. The consequences of state-sponsored racial inequality created a mountain of historically constructed, accumulated disadvantage for African Americans as a group.”

The only way for the lowly to succeed is to tear down the control/domination and exclusion factors.
The worth of the lowest is equal to the highest. No longer should the lowest be disrespected and humiliated.

Power does not always go to the arrogant. The Apartheid system was defeated by democracy, the idea that numbers would play an important part in redistributing power was the culmination of the new system. The Jim Crow laws were also defeated by democracy, this time it was about the equality of man. In Canada it will be about “good governance,” that unless native communities practice democracy good governance will not be possible. The people have to decide matters for them self, they do not need outside indirect (colonial) control. Those days are gone; the perpetual children need to grow up. The Indian Act and its paternalism are truly anachronistic.

I think the idea that this is new information is nothing more than a farce, it is about the age old secret of keeping things the way they are, about hiding the obvious, and by not recognizing the repressed reality. Justice is about hearing the repressed, about initiating change that we might all partake of the benefits that this great country has to offer.

Responsibility

Native people are needy. They have little political power, little resources, all in part to their marginalization. Our present government was given, by me, a lot of room to produce a better relationship. I started out feeling that there was hope, however, it has been replaced by a greater belief that arrogance lies at the root of our government. Firstly there was the United Nations incident where indigenous people where to be given more rights. But Canada took the helm and acted against this initiative, and that, moreover, the lowly should receive nothing more. Is Canada only about progress of the rich, the rich get richer? The road to riches has been unimpeded, so at what point do the powerful consider the lesser? There is a great responsibility with great power, no doubt about it. The rich cannot continually snub their noses at the needy and feel they are acting responsibly? If I feel somehow under duress, to consider those who are less fortunate, then there is an obvious disconnection and waywardness to our social responsibility. Are the lowly forgotten and unheard, never, their cries are loud, and they are heard by a greater factor: A factor so in control that they, the lowly, will inevitably ascend.

The biggest factor of impediment to progress is the arrogance factor. Arrogance is a great corruptor of power, but to be responsible with power means consideration. In other words it is the inconsideration of others that is the apex of arrogance. Our world, country for that matter, is tagged as being Democratic. Yet being democratic means social equality. Segregation is the biggest factor when it comes to discrimination. There is nothing different, about fundamentals, no matter how we think we can control or dictate things. For example Multiculturalism per se will never change racial issues, and segregation is this biggest factor related to bigotry. To even think that we are as dominant as to control social outcomes reeks of subversive arrogance. Unless, good honest, respectful relations are sought with all diligence, then we shall, continually, be tripped up. There must be forums and debates that must occur to enhance these good relations. Respect and honour needs to given to all parties involved.

Recently the latest political developments are certainly a prime example of how things need to change. Arrogance has reached a peak; our government feels it does not have to act as the world: And we can deduce that once again arrogance is leading the way. This time though, it has backfired. There are two things that will happen; our government will be in trouble for its ways or arrogance will rise even more. Unless the government sees that this is a second chance to recreate better relations.

In other words, we have to become better people by more civil interactions. This present issue should be seen as a second chance at averting a disaster. The governor general is not the one who holds the balance, it is the government. Now if all that can be deemed as good is that we are democratic, then social relations must then be a priority. If it is about going back to the people, then it is also about proper representation. If we are multicultural, as we so dauntingly hold to, the doors of diversity are a must. Is Democracy about majority rules? Or is it about diversity being given the chance to express its concerns, (minority issues have to be more than a marginal thing): then and only then we will ultimately become more democratic.

I fear that given a system of opportunity that power and corruption will continually try to manipulate our system into a self-serving scheme. More power more arrogance, yet we have been given a way out and that is to open the doors for greater participation. The more involved the less room for arrogance; take the present initiative of downsizing, it could mean more power for fewer people. Downsizing of bureaucracy seems more sensible, but greater participation must also be an inevitable thing for a country like Canada: Less bureaucracy and more participation.

The present situation of where the government is threatened by a coalition that wants to take-over has been met with distain. Since most of Saskatchewan is conservative, this whole thing would be pretty disturbing, to say the least, especially regarding these seemingly unprecedented developments. And so we have a majority up in arms, how is that for instantly losing power? No matter how you feel about being in control, suddenly there comes along a circumstance that invariably chances everything. Is there anything greater than, the lifting up of the strength of man? Is there a greater justice in the works? I would think so!

Moreover consider the reactions that are taking place: First there is the ridiculing of the coalition and then there is the demonizing of the Quebec MPs. Already these are not reactions conducive to good relations, if anything it indirectly promotes further divisions and arrogance. How the government in place is a representation of democracy seems obviously erroneous. 37% of the popular vote is hardly a representation of democracy. In fact, we must admit that what has recently transpired is related to the governing system that is in place.

Harper is now evoking for more democracy and that the people should decide. But democracy means greater social equality, and not to mention greater representation. At least this is what democracy should entail. We must also know there certainly will not be as much power in the hands of a few and the representation of a multicultural spectrum will be inevitable. This is what our country will look like; a spectrum of multi-cultures and a broader base for which power can lay.

We may decry the present initiative as being underhanded, yet having a government with 37% of the popular vote is just as underhanded and manipulative. But you may even justify it as being democratic yet when in fact real democracy is about proper representation. Canada is multicultural and diverse and it would seem that our government should be no different.

So one should ask is this about growing pains? Or are we about to dissolve because we cannot develop into greater things? The old school of one group being dominant is fading away. Welcome to the twentieth century, where others will and should take their rightful place in government.

Harper's position

So far, we have been told that the country will break apart. We have been told the separatists are akin to making a deal with the devil. Two things have run by us under deception; One, that Harpers was a person who was proposing the use of the block to get power, even before this whole new issue came into focus. Two, that the coalition is about two parties coming together, and that the block has limits. After using deception under demagogy, and driving a wedge between the parties, you would think it has done more harm than anything. Harper obviously knows how a coalition works, and to also come out and give false information is deceptive and irresponsible. By saying that the coalition refused to sign by the flag is also deceptive and irresponsible? He stopped at nothing to cling to power, a different scenario where he once arrogantly pranced about doing his business. Canadians must not forget these facts. He must be held to the highest standard given the disaster that was before us. It has been fortunately averted, and people who played the demagogic card should be disciplined. Certain folks forced people to act in certain way by using fear-mongering and playing an emotional rollercoaster to sadly manipulate their way into hanging onto power. Not everyone is deceived. Chicken Little has frenzied the barn house: And they should be held accountable.

Let not, the arrogance continue

Now permission has been given, will this further endorse arrogance? Will the fear mongering continue? Do we not have a system with certain procedures? Are these procedures to be followed, or is playing politics the most important. Harper has now used politics today to change things, to get his way once again. And therefore he must now be more responsible, otherwise arrogance will be the undoing: It is now up to Harper and his party to clean up this mess and to act responsibly.

 

An Injustice to one is an injustice to all

This is a video on youtube, it depicts the growing unrest, but it is all done through peaceful measures.

Day of Recognition

Two things, Pittsburgh Penguins won, which is a surprise considering how they got slaughtered in the first two games. The point is how an environment clearly makes a difference to anyone’s success. Pittsburgh could not do anything when they played in Detroit, but when they went back to play in their home town things miraculously changed. Environment obviously changes things, and it does not matter who you are.
Now you take Native people and self-government, their greatest success might only come in their own environment. It is not about harming Canada; it is about giving people who have had little chance at success and giving them that opportunity to succeed. It’s a no-brainer, once again.
There was a march here in Regina, a protest for recognition. The relationship between the government and First Nations people and more specifcally how the government treats its First Nations people, was under question. It is sad that native people have to establish their voice, when it should have come uncontested especially living in a grand and free country. But the turn-out for this protest was something else, it seems the wheels are turning and we are not getting any further. Public indifference will play against any progress native people make. It’s like living two lives, the two faces of Canada, one says we are a rich and progressive country, that is getting richer; but the other face of Canada, says poverty and its undesired life is still intact for native people, Macleans magazine can attest to that. Who cares about the underprivileged when progress is in place? In that case the public will always act the way they always acted and that is to overlook natives for the country's all impending progress. Justice will never reside in Canada until it changes it relationship with its native people.
In the end, Canada is only just as good as its native people.

Retribution

Amazingly, after all that controversy, all the negative press regarding natives, a show was on the radio about racism. It started off with the usual hub bub,the blatant scorges of racism. Cross burning was mentioned, the fountain thing, the signs that posted whites and the "other." Yeah yeah, I would have to go against the current on this one. It seems to me a lot is said about blatant racism. However given the fact that many people are pretty darn smart; I'm guessing few people are, today, openly and blatantly racist. In fact since racism is related to a deep attitude, it can be hidden quite easily. Thus racism is more often subversive. Racism is about domination, its about oppression. I'm also thinking in terms of racism that a minority cannot do as much damage as someone from the majority when it come to slurs and derogatory comments. Thus we can also conclude racism is about power. The more a person has, the more his opressive and dominating words will inflict the greater damage. Racism is about an attitude, we might alter our outward appearances, but we could still have those festering attitudes. Just because you have a few friends that are not like you, doesnt necessarily mean you are without predjudice. At least we can say interacting is a good start. Lastly we have made a conjecture that racism lies in forced segregation. Yet simply chosing to segregate, is just as bad if not worse. Any segregation opens the door to the inability to socialize with those that are not like us. If anyone is anti-social it has to be those who are segregated. Segregation is going against some of our more recent developments. Multiculturalism and intercultural relations have a better chance of creating a common good for all people. It is a larger theory, and greater than domination and homogenizing the masses. Just knowing that Canada's landscape is changing, to where the aboriginal population is the fastest growing segment in our society: And there are some 1/4 of a million biracial marriges. Need I mention that only 18 percent of our people call themselves Canadians, all the rest of Canada is broken up into ethnic groups. Canada is certainly going multicultural bigtime. We can hold to the old ways or we can change for the better. I think if a person contiues to make racial remarks or pushes the race thing they are treading on thin ice. It is time to reconsider past cultural indiscretions and move with the times.

Talk show hosts, Ahenakew, and Saskatchewan politics

More things to say....
This controversy (the Ahenakew debacle) is doing more harm, and it is discouraging that people cannot see this. Like I said it is too bad if anything it is more related to one person who is offended at some past things. This talk show host obviously cannot see past his bitterness. Now native people have to reap the havoc, and they have to be disciplined. To me it is about that hegemony that is so deeply ingrained in Canadian politics. Just the response from everyone other than natives themselves is a prime example. It has been said, “take away the funding,” I even think people have gone as far as making derogatory remarks about the chiefs; this is certainly getting out of hand. At some point there has to be some respect for native people particularly how they want to deal with things. Now after positioning himself in derogatory sentiments, there is no turning back, no means of retracting such statements: The damage is done and until a public apology is given for instigating spite against our First Nations people or we will continue to roll in Saskatchewan’s argil. Lastly, I still firmly believe that good things await native people: And that they will be up and reaching new heights, and justice will surely reign.