bcholmes: (politics)
[personal profile] bcholmes

I like how all of the news articles about The Apology seem to avoid any real discussion about the horrible stuff that went on in residential schools. (Yes, I'm using that special definition of "like".)

I wish there was more awareness of information like this, for example.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-11 02:03 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] suitablyemoname.livejournal.com
This apology isn't meant to change much. It's just politics. Harper has only "done the right thing" when he thinks he stands to acquire votes by so doing.

The Aboriginal vote tends to be solidly Liberal-NDP (maybe Green in some areas these days), and it will take substantially more than a blithe apology to change that. This is really more about convincing white people that aboriginal schools have been settled.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-11 02:07 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] suitablyemoname.livejournal.com
Also, I loved how the government is so careful to emphasize how many words are in the speech, relative to similar speeches from other world leaders. BECAUSE THAT TOTALLY MATTERS! LONGER SPEECHES ALWAYS WIN!

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-11 02:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] wild-irises.livejournal.com
I know less than squat about residential schools in Canada, but man, if they're anything like residential schools in Australia, an apology would be the very, very beginning of reparations.

(Not from Australia ...)

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-12 12:37 am (UTC)
ext_28663: (Default)
From: [identity profile] bcholmes.livejournal.com
I'm all for symbolic first steps. I think the Australian example is a good one. But we've already gone through some of the beginning steps.

A first apology was made in 1998.

In 2005/2006, a (not especially good) reparations package was put forth. It includes some annoying conditions: if you take the money, you can't sue the Canadian government, and stuff like that.

I think Harper's apology is just a public relations matter. This is especially true given that the Kelowna Accord, one of the first major accords designed in tandem with First Nations and Inuit leaders, disappeared from the government agendas when Harper assumed power.

It's hard for me to see this as much more than Harper grand-standing. I want it to be more than that, but I can't convince myself that it is, I'm afraid.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-11 04:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rbowspryte.livejournal.com
IMO the presence and promenance of Christian religious institutions and in those communities (which always seem so central whenever I've visited) always seems like salt in the wounds to me.

Just saying.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-11 11:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sonjaaa.livejournal.com
Not necessarily. A lot of First Nations people I know are Christian by their own choice.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-06-11 11:48 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rbowspryte.livejournal.com
Yes I know that and respect that however I would always be wondering which came first. In my mind it would be hard to identify if the belief was part of me or if I had come to believe it because of my environment.

The Christian faith is often very prominent in those reservations and areas with high native populations.

I'm not saying their not entitled or questioning their beliefs I'm merely juxtaposin' and philosophizin' on the matter.

Profile

bcholmes: (Default)
BC Holmes

February 2025

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
2324252627 28 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios