NationStates Jolt Archive

What do you know about Natives?

What do you think you know about Natives?

What would you like to know about Natives?

Do you ever think about aboriginal peoples at all?

Apparently the answer to the last question is....No?

What do you know about Natives?

I know about my tribe and some of my neighboring tribes.

What do you think you know about Natives?

I think I know they're actually a master race of alien Ninjas sent down by a coalition of Jesus and Shiva to kick ass and look cool.

What would you like to know about Natives?

I'd like to know if we'll ever regain our national pride.

Do you ever think about aboriginal peoples at all?

Yes.

I'm dating a Taino chick, if that counts.

The Taino by the way, are the Natives of Puerto Rico and Cuba, and also southern Florida. They were almost completely wiped out by the Spanish.
Also, they're related to the Arawak.

Add to that a few MiqMaq down my bloodline (Acadian, technicly Metis), and there.

Natives are people too, so why should I think about them?

EDIT: Oh, and Tainio chics are sex machines. Just thought I'd point that out.

What do you know about Natives?
Some

What do you think you know about Natives?
There are various different varieties, ranging from the bronze age Aztecs and company, to the nomadic Plains tribes.

Oh, and they got their asses kicked by some angsty Europeans

What would you like to know about Natives?
Lots

Do you ever think about aboriginal peoples at all?
Not really. I don't have a heart.

I've never met a Native who wasn't heavilly mixed with other ethnicities and who still practiced his culture. We had one Native kid in my highschool for one year. I never really met him, he hung out with different people. Usually I don't think about Natives at all. I don't see them in my day to day life.

I'm dating a Taino chick, if that counts.
Yeah, that counts. Aboriginals in ANY part of the world...not just North American natives:)
The Taino by the way, are the Natives of Puerto Rico and Cuba, and also southern Florida. They were almost completely wiped out by the Spanish.
Also, they're related to the Arawak.
Them and the Caribs...I was on a thread a while back that claimed all the natives in the Carribbean were wiped out...I thought they might be disconcerted to hear that about themselves.

Add to that a few MiqMaq down my bloodline (Acadian, technicly Metis), and there.

Natives are people too, so why should I think about them?
:) Good question...but it's easy to forget about Natives when they're hidden away on reservations or sitting in city gutters...(blatant stereotype warning)

What does it mean "native"? everybody is native of where is borne

I've never met a Native who wasn't heavilly mixed with other ethnicities and who still practiced his culture. We had one Native kid in my highschool for one year. I never really met him, he hung out with different people. Usually I don't think about Natives at all. I don't see them in my day to day life.
So I was watching Chris Rock one day..and he made a crack about how natives have it worse than the blacks in the US...he said something like, "When was the last time you saw a FAMILY of natives sitting down in Denny's for a meal...". It was sad, because it's kind of true...people don't see us much.

I think the less clothes you can wear while stalking big game in the forest, the cooler you are. :)

What does it mean "native"? everybody is native of where is borne
True. Native in this sense is often used to refer to the original inhabitants of an area. There are many terms that have been used by aboriginal groups. Some include:

aboriginal
native
First nations
Indians
(tribal name like) Cree, Inuit, Mayan

I think the less clothes you can wear while stalking big game in the forest, the cooler you are. :)
I'm sure you'd wish the women would go out and hunt...

Yeah, that counts. Aboriginals in ANY part of the world...not just North American natives:)

Them and the Caribs...I was on a thread a while back that claimed all the natives in the Carribbean were wiped out...I thought they might be disconcerted to hear that about themselves.


:) Good question...but it's easy to forget about Natives when they're hidden away on reservations or sitting in city gutters...(blatant stereotype warning)


Almost wiped out, being the key. The Caribs suffered more because they actually fought the Spanish.. and the Taino's.
Now, any Taino (And I suppose Carib, but I highly doubt they survived) you find is mixed with African and Spanish blood. But that doesn't matter, the language, culture, and traditions survived the Spanish genocide attempt.
I spent some time, and still do, learning the culture and language of the Taino's mostly because my girlfreind is cool and I wanted to. Plus my nation is made up almost entirely of Taino's and Sumerians.. but that's a messed up RP history.

Now, let's see if I can remember this...

Taiuaitiao Taino-ti

I'm sure you'd wish the women would go out and hunt...

Not necessarily. Have you seen in National Geographic what happens to women's breasts when they go naked too long? *shudder* :eek:

Not necessarily. Have you seen in National Geographic what happens to women's breasts when they go naked too long? *shudder* :eek:
:p You know you love it...and even with wonderbra, all women get the sag eventually...

What do you know about Natives?

What do you think you know about Natives?

What would you like to know about Natives?

Do you ever think about aboriginal peoples at all?

They are people, like the rest of us.
Some good, some bad.
Some educated, some ignorant.
Some clever, some stupid.
Why would I categorise them as being anything else?
And for that matter why are you?

:p You know you love it...and even with wonderbra, all women get the sag eventually...

True enough. But they're not twenty-two. :p

I always like to point out to peops in canada that we do indeed have ghettos just like the usa. Head to a select numbers of rezs and prepare to step into another world, dump that rez in any slum in the world and it would not look out of place...

When I was in Alaska, I knew a buncha natives, both eskimos (in my area, Inupiat) and indians (in my area, mostly Athabaskan). It's very different up there than the lower 48 though, because contact was so much later and the settlements were more equitable than the business with the BIA and reservations. As for a general opinion, I don't really got one. My experiences run the gamut from being threatened at knifepoint in a Native bar to yakking about new developments in drilling with a dude who worked one of the Doyon rigs in Prudhoe.

I mean Alien Born is pretty on the money. I met some drunks, I met some executives, I met some subsistence hunters, I met some K-Mart shoppers.

They are people, like the rest of us.
Some good, some bad.
Some educated, some ignorant.
Some clever, some stupid.
Why would I categorise them as being anything else?
And for that matter why are you?
Yes we are people just like everyone else. We are also UNLIKE everyone else. Despite being original inhabitants of many lands, we are basically unknowns to the majority, for whatever reason. Stereotypes, positive and negative abound about us, from the image of the 'noble savage' to the drunken, jobless bum. Many people in the countries we live in are uneasy with us, rarely interact with us, and are harshly critical of any 'special' treatment we may (or may not) receive. For this reason I single us out, with the hope that people can ask the questions they have, or discuss the ideas they hold about us.

I always like to point out to peops in canada that we do indeed have ghettos just like the usa. Head to a select numbers of rezs and prepare to step into another world, dump that rez in any slum in the world and it would not look out of place...
The scary thing is how out of the way they are...you can live your whole life in Canada and never see a reservation...

I'm frankly amazed more Canadians aren't responding at least...since native self-rule and land claims have been major issues in the past couple of years...

I'm frankly amazed more Canadians aren't responding at least...since native self-rule and land claims have been major issues in the past couple of years...

Want my opnion on those to?

Native Self rule: Let them vote MP's into parliment, I don't care. But I see no reason for two governments.

Land Claims: Shit happened, live with it. I see absolutly no reason why someone who's Cree, Huron, Miqmaq, or any other tribe, can not go out and get an education the same way I am.
And I don't want to hear BS about bad education on the reservations, if it's that bad, don't live there. I see plenty of natives not living on reservations, so I'm sure it's not illegal to move off of it.

That's my oppnion.

Yes we are people just like everyone else. We are also UNLIKE everyone else. Despite being original inhabitants of many lands, we are basically unknowns to the majority, for whatever reason. Stereotypes, positive and negative abound about us, from the image of the 'noble savage' to the drunken, jobless bum. Many people in the countries we live in are uneasy with us, rarely interact with us, and are harshly critical of any 'special' treatment we may (or may not) receive. For this reason I single us out, with the hope that people can ask the questions they have, or discuss the ideas they hold about us.

None of these stereotypes, except possibly the "noble savage" apply only to native peoples They are applied to all groups that are perceived as being "different" to the majority. By concentrating on this difference rather than emphasising the commonalities you are perpetuating this us and them mentality.
Those that would be interested in knowing more about a culture that is different to their own will tend to investigate these cultures anyway. Those that are not, will not ask anything even when invited to do so.

Thanks Dost...I was starting to think this thread was going to die a slow, painful death...
Want my opnion on those to?

Native Self rule: Let them vote MP's into parliment, I don't care. But I see no reason for two governments.
No group, native or not, can be adequately represented by an MP whose first allegience is to his or her party, rather than the constituents. But that's another issue:)

Frankly, I consider self-rule to be a pittance...here's your tiny, cramped little kingdom called a reservation...go ahead and run it. Just. Go. Ahead.

Land Claims: Shit happened, live with it. I see absolutly no reason why someone who's Cree, Huron, Miqmaq, or any other tribe, can not go out and get an education the same way I am.
Land claims aren't an education issue, though they aren't completely separate from the issue of education. Natives aren't pushing land claims because they want to go to school...they are fighting the fact that they were abitrarily moved off their land, moved into tiny parcels of what was thought to be useless land (haha for those bands who've since found oil...or in the north, diamonds and gold) and are expected to like it because that 'shit' that 'happened' was over two hundred years ago. For a people that think of things in terms of seven generations, two hundred years isn't that long.

And I don't want to hear BS about bad education on the reservations, if it's that bad, don't live there. I see plenty of natives not living on reservations, so I'm sure it's not illegal to move off of it.

That's my oppnion.
No, it's not illegal, but you're talking about kids here...because if you go to a reservation school, you start in kindergarden. So, move your kids to the city? Community is incredibly important to us. Our family ties extend far beyond the concept of the nuclear family. At least on the reservation, we have some chance of teaching our language and our culture to our kids.

That being said, my parents lived off rez to raise us kids. But let me tell you, the crap we went through being some of the only native kids in a mostly all-white rural school sure made me long for the 'crap' rez school sometimes.

The fact is, reservations have low employment possibilities, and it's hard to keep people on them. Once you step off reservation, however, you lose status. You're still on the roles as a member of the band, but legally, you are no longer entitled to band funding. You aren't counted in any stats as an off-rez native, you aren't counted as fully native by the law once you leave. That, coupled with the incredible culture shock most natives feel when they move from the reservation to a city, is devastating. It's like you've moved to a different country.

In any case, be happy to know that a great many of the people working on land claims are aboriginal lawyers, who did manage to get a good education...many of them nearly 10 years later than the average Canadian...but they did it.

None of these stereotypes, except possibly the "noble savage" apply only to native peoples They are applied to all groups that are perceived as being "different" to the majority. By concentrating on this difference rather than emphasising the commonalities you are perpetuating this us and them mentality.
Those that would be interested in knowing more about a culture that is different to their own will tend to investigate these cultures anyway. Those that are not, will not ask anything even when invited to do so.
Meh. That's like saying, don't argue your point because only the people who agree with you already will even bother to make an appearance. It might be true, but the effort is worth making.

Most people don't have anyone to ask about native issues, because they don't really know any natives. And in case you missed it, our differences are perpetuated by the very system in which we (in Canada anyway) live at the margins of society despite the centuries that we have been 'assimilated' into Canadian culture. We have tried, we really have, but at the cost of losing our traditions, our language, and our family structure, and STILL we are not just Canadian.

We still live, in North America, in small rural enclaves with little access to infrastructure, education, employment or mainstream acceptance. Despite having lived in our country for thousands of years, we are looked upon as a people that did not 'use the land efficiently' and therefore deserved to lose it. Now, we are forced to compete for a voice amongst the multitude of cultures that now inhabit this land. I for one don't want to see those cultures go, with only us remaining, but I DO want my people to stop being the only ones to blame for such high levels of suicide, abuse, addiction and hopelessness within our communities. If these problems, if our dependency, can be seen as all our fault for not 'assimilating' properly, despite thousands of years of self-sufficiency, then it simply eases the consciences of those who directly benefited from our removal to the margins.

We didn't start the us versus them mentality. We don't necessarily want to perpetuate it. Nor do we want to be assimilated. We want to be ourselves, and we want to reclaim our respect, and we want, most of all, to be understood as people, with a culture, with a history that belongs to US. I think that is a common desire amongst peoples of the world. Why SHOULDN'T I talk about it, when we rarely raise eyebrows at other cultural groups who want to celebrate their differences? We don't just want to flaunt our uniqueness...we want to work with you to solve our unique problems too. Before that is possibly, understanding is necessary.

What do I know about natives? Well it is dependent. The majority of my first hand knowledge about natives is via the Métis, having that ancestry and all. At the same time I’ve had so much Acadian blood poured into the mix that many of my own family are not sure if we even have native blood, despite the fact that if these people get anytime in the sun they tan red.

In general I know that they got the shitty end of the stick. At the same time I don’t historically see them as an exploited victim because that too is a stereotype. The natives here tried to deal with the Europeans on equal grounds, and for a long time succeeded. The problem was that they played a dangerous game, as equals, with nations who were technologically superior at the time.

What do I think I know? Would that not be the above?

What would I like to know? Well ideally everything. More realistically I’d like to trace my own family tree and see what exists on the Métis side of things. I’d also like to investigate the logistics of the native alignments and how that effects their dealings with the federal government.

Do I think of them? Well fairly often actually. As an Atlantic Canadian my experience with reservations is a little more personal. My high school in fact shared a border with a reserve. Hell that’s where all the good parties where. With about 1/3 students in my school being Native I got to see first hand how some of them abused the system of opportunities that was laid out for them. At the same time I could walk over to the reserve and see the poverty. Perhaps the most alarming was the fact that on the reserve if your name was Brooks or one of the other main family names your house was so much nicer.

I look at the situation with the native and self government a lot as well. I am a political science student though so I do have a bias towards thinking about it.

The way I see it the Natives can be classed into certain groups. The groups would have to be based on what bands want to co-operate with each other. Once we have these groups we could start to offer them the same autonomy as a province, the only difference would be the land claims.

The way I see it a Native could claim citizenship in his province OR in his band. Inside his band he would gain the rights so harvest all the wood he wants (though I’d appreciate it if they’d lay off the bird’s eye maple, it is an endangered species after all.) he’d elect his chief and generally go through the band for his rights to hunt, fish, et cetera. He’d also be tried by his band for everything that a provincial court would take care of. Tort law, for band member to band member, would also fall onto the band responsibility.

They would then however have all the downsides of a province as well. Services of the province would not have to be offered to the band unless the province and the band had come to an agreement. I.E. if you only harvest this much your citizens can have access to medical treatment. The band could of course refuse this approach and hire their own doctors but again, this is a decision that comes with autonomy. If a band member decides he doesn’t want decisions like this left to his band he can ‘migrate’ to another province.

As for funding I’d see each of the bands included in the equalization payments that the rest of the country is in on, meaning that taxation would need to occur. While this might seem abhorrent to some Canadians, it’d be the equivalent of having about 50 Québecs, this would give the natives a stab at the autonomy they desire. It’d also put to rest the argument about special treatment.

My reasoning for this comes from the fact that we as a country assimilated countless small governments. Now we are a federation based on separate but equal governments (provinces and the feds) so why not simply expand the boundaries of federalism to give the natives their chance at self government?

Interesting take! I find that you Marintimers usually have had more contact with native groups than a lot of other Canadians, and usually tend to have much more experience with native issues (though that doesn't mean the issues are any less polarized).

I'm torn about the whole self-rule issue. There is so much band corruption (like you mentioned, depending on your relationship to the chief, more or less riches may fall your way). I simply don't think we're ready for it, and I'm not sure that's the way to go. I rather like what the northern Dene and Inuit groups are doing...they don't have set reservations, but rather lands that are basically stewarded by their band. For example, the pipeline that is going past Inuvik down to McPherson passes through Gwichin and Inuvialuit lands. They have their own environmental inspectors who have to pass or fail the government inspectors' findings. Certain environmental standards must be met (that exceed federal standards) before development can occur, and a certain percentage of labour and profits must go to the native bands. That means more money stays in the are, which funds more infrastructure, and guarantees a certain level of employment, as long as the workers can maintain an acceptable working standard (which isn't always possible, sadly). Now, these areas are not separate from Canada...Canadian law still applies, but certain things have to work within a model of consensus with the band. That includes the environment, education, social programs and health care. It's a two-way street.

It works up there, but I wonder if it's just because no one else wants to live there:)

Also, things like sentencing circles are much more common in the north. They aren't used generally with major criminal cases, usually with civil or petty crime, but they involve community in the restitution of the person who committed the 'error' (as it is put). This isn't giving total power over to native groups, but it is accepting that until the Europeans arrived, we dealt with certain issues in our own ways.

That being said, I don't want the outside world NEVER to intrude...abuse is hidden that way, and we have terrible problems with addictions, FAS, suicide, diabetes, unemployment, dependence etc. We also have wonderful achievements, and I'm glad to see that there are awards for aboriginal achievements, that there is recognition of our artists and our culture than ever before. I'd simply like that to increase.

Anyway...have a great weekend everyone! See you all on Monday!

The way I see it the problems would either be solved or the people would move out and the band would become irrelevant, as equalization is based on population.

The increased representation and localized government would show conclusively whether or not Natives in general still have enough fight left in them to succeed. Assimilation is horrible your right. Not assimilating however assumes that the original culture is still viable. I have no doubt that some of these bands will eventually fold up but the hope is that the ones who are still strong, still viable, would thrive.

I have a hard enough time connecting with my Acadian heritage let alone the small amounts of Métis blood I’ve got. My priorities, as far as tradition, lie in researching French and learning what happened to my family during the Acadian expulsion. (Someone hid us and that’s where we think we picked up the Native blood.)

So with that in mind I am not in a position to dictate to Natives how they should go about preserving their cultures and identity. All I can do as someone who is going into politics is give them the autonomy to do it themselves. It will be terrible to watch some of these groups succumb to corruption and what have you but the federal government can offer certain bailouts. I think that the bands, once autonomous, will start to have good leadership. I don’t think that the people will let a corrupt chief stay in power for long. Another benefit of the autonomy would be that patronage laws would apply and that some of these chiefs would be held to federal statutes as they’d be the equivalent of a premier. With this kind of check and balance system I think that the tribes would do better.

Again I can only speculate and offer them the room to do it on their own.

Interesting thread Sinuhue ...

I've found the level of cultural awareness between aboriginals and non-aboriginals in Canada varies hugely depending on where you go, and there is alot of misunderstanding on both sides.

I grew up in Vancouver, where, despite the fact that there are several major reserves, there is almost no contact between aboriginals and non-aboriginals. There is more awareness and contact with the Asian community than the Aboriginal.

I lived in Ontario for awhile and same thing ... virtually no contact.

It wasn't until I had lived in Ireland for awhile (where my grandmother's family are from) that I really gained an appreciation for the perspectives and experiences of a colonized people.

So when I returned to B.C. to study in Victoria, I was much better prepared to learn about First Nations culture and history. Luckily I am in a program with a good number of aboriginal students and faculty, and where they make a strong effort to incorporate aboriginal issues into the curriculum. It also helps that my girlfriend is Mi'kmaq. :)

I am actually currently in the Yukon for four months, where First Nations issues are very prominent, and there is a much higher degree of intercultural awareness than anywhere else I have been.

I don't think that talking about differences as well as commonalities creates an us vs. them mentality. I think that mentality stems from misunderstanding. I think that cultural understanding comes from an ability to understand and appreciate commonalities and differences, and to celebrate both. Commonalities allow us to work together to solve common issues, and cultural differences are essential to our survival as a species as well as just plain making life interesting.

Thanks Dost...I was starting to think this thread was going to die a slow, painful death...

No group, native or not, can be adequately represented by an MP whose first allegience is to his or her party, rather than the constituents. But that's another issue:)

Frankly, I consider self-rule to be a pittance...here's your tiny, cramped little kingdom called a reservation...go ahead and run it. Just. Go. Ahead.


Land claims aren't an education issue, though they aren't completely separate from the issue of education. Natives aren't pushing land claims because they want to go to school...they are fighting the fact that they were abitrarily moved off their land, moved into tiny parcels of what was thought to be useless land (haha for those bands who've since found oil...or in the north, diamonds and gold) and are expected to like it because that 'shit' that 'happened' was over two hundred years ago. For a people that think of things in terms of seven generations, two hundred years isn't that long.


No, it's not illegal, but you're talking about kids here...because if you go to a reservation school, you start in kindergarden. So, move your kids to the city? Community is incredibly important to us. Our family ties extend far beyond the concept of the nuclear family. At least on the reservation, we have some chance of teaching our language and our culture to our kids.

That being said, my parents lived off rez to raise us kids. But let me tell you, the crap we went through being some of the only native kids in a mostly all-white rural school sure made me long for the 'crap' rez school sometimes.

The fact is, reservations have low employment possibilities, and it's hard to keep people on them. Once you step off reservation, however, you lose status. You're still on the roles as a member of the band, but legally, you are no longer entitled to band funding. You aren't counted in any stats as an off-rez native, you aren't counted as fully native by the law once you leave. That, coupled with the incredible culture shock most natives feel when they move from the reservation to a city, is devastating. It's like you've moved to a different country.

In any case, be happy to know that a great many of the people working on land claims are aboriginal lawyers, who did manage to get a good education...many of them nearly 10 years later than the average Canadian...but they did it.


Well, I base all my assumptions that everyone treats everyone equally and there is no racism or sexism.
Because that's the way I think.
So.. just shoot everyone who is racist and sexist (And who opposes me, but that's another topic), and we're all fine.
As for the land, again, I see no reason why the natives still have to live on a reservation. Look at the Chinese, Japanese, and Arab communities in many cities now, you can move to a city and maintain a community, even a tight one.
I brought in education because I seem to think "Land=Power, Education=Power, thus Education=Land" IE, get land to get power, or get an education to get land, or any combination.
Simply put, you wanna own land, get an education, a job, and buy it.
But that's my thought.

What do you know about Natives?

What do you think you know about Natives?
Not enough! I'm going to speak from an Australian pov here and we don't get taught enough at school. It wasn't helped by the fact that I only moved here when I was 14. I know a bit about the brutal treatment indigenous people received, and some stuff about the horrendous health and social conditions which exist today. Very third world...

What would you like to know about Natives?
I'd like to learn an indigenous perspective on Australian history, and learn more about the worldviews of indigenous people.
I'd like to know how I can contribute towards reconciliation in Australia, as well as maybe getting involved in indigenous healthcare whe I'm a doctor.

Do you ever think about aboriginal peoples at all?
Yes. In fact, I'm taking a subject called "Indigenous people and the state" next semester at uni. I think it's really important for everyone to know about these things as part of national identity.

Well, I'll just jump in here with a New Zealand point of view...

What do I know and what do I think I know?

About the Maori, well a fair bit. New Zealand is very centred on its race relations issues with the Maori. All the schools I went to devoted some time to talking about atleast the Treaty of Waitangi and about maori culture. Then, once I got to uni I learnt a lot more about the history of the Treaty and of land claims here.

I also know that the natives of Australia, the Aborigines were treated very badly and still are treated as second class citizens by the sounds of things.

I think the idea of reservations in the States and Canada is sickening and just perpetuates differences and racial disharmony.

I don't know very much about indigenous peoples outside of New Zealand and AUstralia though. Most indigenous peoples have been treated badly, thanks to the wonderful colonising nations who just wanted as much land in the world as they could get their hands on. The maori came out a little better off because by the time that England decided to bring NZ into the commonwealth they weren't so comfortable with the lie of terra nullius.

What would I like to know?

I'd like to know more about the history of the interaction between maori and colonisers. Particularly the New Zealand Land Wars. I find that the education here is particulalry lacking as we are not taught at school about the history of our own country in any depth at all. I'd rather know about our own civil war than the American Civil War. I think the education needs to be much better so that the general population can understand the reason behind the land claims and realise just how badly the maori were treated.

Do I ever think about aboriginal peoples?

Come to New Zealand, spend a few days here and you'll soon realise that it's hard to avoid the topic.

Well, I live in an area that was the Iroquois heartland (or Hoodinoshaunee, as they called themselves (sp?)). They were the most politically organized native tribe north of the Aztecs, having a loose confederation of all five tribes. Ben Franklin even considered them a model of the US Constitution. They lived in longhouses, were a mostly matrilineal society, and had a rich religion. They are mostly marginalized now, and in my opinion, they should be. They simply fell victim to the cycle of cultural change.

What do you know about Natives?
I'll presume you're talking about Native Americans, otherwise known as Indians. I know very little. American history a la European immigration and expansion and manifest destiny is my only contact with them. I also know that I'm distantly related to a Cherokee, but she/he is lost in the folds of my family tree.

They're currently really messed up. Reservation culture is one of depression, alcoholism and chronic welfare-reliance. They use the government as a crutch, but it's all they've really known for 150+ years. I don't know how to help them, but I feel I - and my government - MUST. My government has done so much to their ancestors... It makes me weep to think of it. I'm ashamed to be an American when I think of the Native Americans.

What do you think you know about Natives?
I try not to believe things about ethnicities or peoples without having concrete proof and experience.

What would you like to know about Natives?
It'd be nice to know more about the Cherokee.

Do you ever think about aboriginal peoples at all?
Yes. When I think about 19th Century America - I'm a History major, after all - I think about Native Americans. Also, in my mythology class, the Aborigines [don't know the proper name] from Austrailia are sometimes mentioned.

Well, I live in an area that was the Iroquois heartland (or Hoodinoshaunee, as they called themselves (sp?)). They were the most politically organized native tribe north of the Aztecs, having a loose confederation of all five tribes. Ben Franklin even considered them a model of the US Constitution. They lived in longhouses, were a mostly matrilineal society, and had a rich religion. They are mostly marginalized now, and in my opinion, they should be. They simply fell victim to the cycle of cultural change.

What is the cycle of cultural change?

What is the cycle of cultural change?
Perhaps he’s referring to the fact that some of the five tribes had differences of opinion on what to do in the American Revolution. The Iroquois nation decided not to intervene, it’s then strongest tribe succeeded and helped out. With the nation so weakened they could no longer resist British expansion into Ontario or American expansion into Michigan. Realistically we could’ve had a Native nation today if they would’ve stayed unified. At the time of the dissolution they were starting to adopt European weapons. (This is a very brief paraphrase and is much more complicated than that.)


I think the idea of reservations in the States and Canada is sickening and just perpetuates differences and racial disharmony.

I won’t attempt to defend our history of Native relations but real strides are being made today and it’s more than mildly offensive to see the above.

Today a Native can leave the reserve at anytime he wants. He has every right of any other Canadian and in terms of hunting, taxation, fishing, and forestry more so.

As for the land, again, I see no reason why the natives still have to live on a reservation. Look at the Chinese, Japanese, and Arab communities in many cities now, you can move to a city and maintain a community, even a tight one.
I brought in education because I seem to think "Land=Power, Education=Power, thus Education=Land" IE, get land to get power, or get an education to get land, or any combination.
Simply put, you wanna own land, get an education, a job, and buy it.
But that's my thought.

DL, I agree that land and education (or more precisely knowledge) are ways of achieving power, but I don't see how that means one leads to the other or that they are the same thing. That's sort of like saying that because beer makes me happy, and women make me happy, that beer is going to get me women or that beer and women are in fact the same thing.

Anyway, something to think about is that many aboriginal cultures centre around practices that are linked to the land (such as hunting, trapping, etc.) and in some cases, specific pieces of land. In Canada, most of that land is owned by the government, not by private landowners, and isn't for sale anyway, so the ony way to acquire it is through negotiation.

Even assuming the government was willing to sell the land, I'm not sure why aboriginal peoples would want to buy it from them, since in most cases, the government didn't acquire it from them legally in the first place. That's sort of like if a guy took your house, or something else that you owned that meant alot to you (maybe it had been handed down in your family for generations); are you going to go out, get an education, so you can make some money and buy it back from him, or are you going to go out and demand it back?

Moving to the city isn't any more of a solution than staying on the reserve because while grouping together might enable aboriginal Canadians to preserve a sense of community and some aspects of the culture, it doesn't provide them with the land base they need to practice many important traditions. It's a totally different situation than Chinese, Japanese, and Arab Communities, whose cultures are arguably much more urbanized, plus probably have the added protection of having a land base where they can practice more traditional elements of their culture back in Japan, China, or Arabia.

That's my two cents worth anyway ...

I've never met a Native who wasn't heavilly mixed with other ethnicities and who still practiced his culture. We had one Native kid in my highschool for one year. I never really met him, he hung out with different people. Usually I don't think about Natives at all. I don't see them in my day to day life.

i'm a quarter chipawaen, and i still believe many of the things my ancestors did. i believe that it isn't appropriate to kill any living thing without respecting it, and all parts of a killed life form must be used. i go hunting for turkey and deer and won't eat farm grown animals, because all life forms are equal, and they should have a chance to live out their life instead of every single animal being killed, like in a farm. and i believe that humans are a piece of nature, and we shouldn't choose what will happen to it even if we have the ability to change it.

i'm a quarter chipawaen, and i still believe many of the things my ancestors did. i believe that it isn't appropriate to kill any living thing without respecting it, and all parts of a killed life form must be used. i go hunting for turkey and deer and won't eat farm grown animals, because all life forms are equal, and they should have a chance to live out their life instead of every single animal being killed, like in a farm. and i believe that humans are a piece of nature, and we shouldn't choose what will happen to it even if we have the ability to change it.
That's cool, but there aren't many people like you in New Jersey. I don't get the chance to meet Native Americans around here.

I won’t attempt to defend our history of Native relations but real strides are being made today and it’s more than mildly offensive to see the above.

Today a Native can leave the reserve at anytime he wants. He has every right of any other Canadian and in terms of hunting, taxation, fishing, and forestry more so.

I apologise, clearly I don't know a whole lot about what is actually happening over there and the advances being made. It is good that things are being bettered and I don't mean to demean the efforts being made.

However, I still have strong disagreements with the idea of reservations and that they should have ever existed.

Don't know that much about my local Noongar people in Perth. Sadly, most of them were either killed or had their families destroyed thanks to the hideous policies of the 20th century which stole children away in the hope of "breeding out" the Aboriginals. The majority of those who do still live here are typical of most "Urban Aboriginals", in that they have been ruined by alchohol and idiotic welfare initiatives and now live in a state of abject quasi-poverty. A large portion of them end up in jail. :(

Natives/Aboriginals/Indians...what do you think about them?

Those guys suck! Nah, they're cool. Have some interesting beliefs, though. (Google 'the end of the Mayan long count')

Well, thought I'd bring this back up for discussion...some great views were posted! A few points from my view:

Move off the reservation:
Again, our culture is very community based, more than I think is coming across here. For example, in Cree, the word for sister (nimis) is the same as the word for female cousin (nimis), the word for brother (nistēs) is the same as male cousin, and the word for younger sibling (nisīmis) is the same for younger cousin. Kinships get a bit more complicated after that, but basically, all your mother's sisters' children are your brothers and sisters. All your father's brothers' children are your brothers and sisters. That would make my mother's sisters my surrogate mothers, and my father's brothers my surrogate fathers. We can often be found at one another's houses, and we are treated all like their children, not their nieces and nephews.

You move us away from one another and we end up living together anyway. Rent us a house, and you'll find we pack in three families because we don't consider ourselves to be one nuclear family with cousins and aunts and so on outside of our immediate family. We are ALL immediate family.

Keeping together is how we haven managed to save what culture and language and traditions we have left. A big part of that is the need to live together. Whatever solutions we come up with for our future, they must include ALL of us, not just some. That is why this is so problematic. We are not a collection of individuals living together in a community. We are a community FIRST, within which live individuals who are related by blood.

By the way, I'm glad that people with experience or questions about aboriginal groups OTHER than just native americans are including their views!

I'm 1/8 Cherokee, and my family knows almost nothing about their native background. I think I've learned more about it by living in Oklahoma than I ever did from my family. My dad told me that at the time he was born (1939) he could not legally own property in Georgia because he was 1/4 Cherokee.

I'm 1/8 Cherokee, and my family knows almost nothing about their native background. I think I've learned more about it by living in Oklahoma than I ever did from my family. My dad told me that at the time he was born (1939) he could not legally own property in Georgia because he was 1/4 Cherokee.
It seems to be pretty common that even if someone DOES have aboriginal heritage, not much is known about it in their family. Families tend to emphasise the other heritages...I think that started a couple of generations ago, and now people want to find out, but it wasn't a part of the heritage that was valued, so much of it was lost. It's hard to reclaim it once so much of a break has been made, and I think many people with native heritage feel embarrassed, or feel like they would be called wannabe indians if they tried to research their heritage more. We usually don't feel that way about Irish, or whatever else blood.

A lot of that DOES come from the native community though, I guess we're afraid of more cultural dilution from people who have lost their connection to us. We are also suspicious of the intent behind such interest...is it because people think they'll get free money or hunting rights, or do they have a genuine interest in their heritage? It's hard to know.

So I was watching Chris Rock one day..and he made a crack about how natives have it worse than the blacks in the US...he said something like, "When was the last time you saw a FAMILY of natives sitting down in Denny's for a meal...". It was sad, because it's kind of true...people don't see us much.
i live in new mexico
i see indians, mostly navajos, in dennys all the time
and in the store
and in the laundromat
and driving down the road
you get the point

one of my sons school friends was the great grandson of geronimo (or maybe great great). this little blond-hair, blue-eyed boy. his grandmother had married an apache who was the grandson of geronimo, so while not blood related, he was "in the family"

its different in new mexico, we have lots of indians and lots of indians who make money. they have put members through law school who then press treaty rights and win. they have used their money to buy back some of their lands. its very instructive to see that "people are people" and when given a chance they can do well.

i have a kind of admiration for people who can keep their culture in the middle of such a seductive culture as the US has. its not perfect by any stretch of the imagination but they do a good job being navajos, zunis, hopis, pueblos (tiwas) while being americans at the same time.

and they have casinos where i can play POKER, and they sell my sister cheap cigarettes ($10/carton). whats not to love?

I'm actually 1/16 cherokee, but I really don't claim any of their heritage, legally or otherwise. It's not who I am.

Hehehehe.

Do you live in a city or town? I find most city dwellers have very little contact with natives. Then again, it depends on how many happen to be around that area. The southwest seems to have a higher concentration of natives.

In Canada, because of the large distances, the majority of our reservations tend to be pretty far off the beaten track.

I'm actually 1/16 cherokee, but I really don't claim any of their heritage, legally or otherwise. It's not who I am.
Fair enough.

I believe I can count the times I've seen a native on one hand.

Hehehehe.

Do you live in a city or town? I find most city dwellers have very little contact with natives. Then again, it depends on how many happen to be around that area. The southwest seems to have a higher concentration of natives.

In Canada, because of the large distances, the majority of our reservations tend to be pretty far off the beaten track.
i live in the biggest city in the county! the county is bigger than the state of connecticut and has less than 20,000 people, socorro has amost 10,000!! (well ok i live outside the city because we were sick of all the hustle-bustle of city life)

but even in albuquerque you can see indians all over the place. mostly because alb. is surrounded by indian reservations.

indian reservations.

I was waiting for this to happen. What does it portend?

but even in albuquerque you can see indians all over the place. mostly because alb. is surrounded by indian reservations.
Neat:)

I wish there was more exposure everywhere, but that of course would take many more of us than currenlty are in existence. :D

I was waiting for this to happen. What does it portend?
I don't get it...are you worried about indians taking up all the good spots in the restaurants in advance?

I was waiting for this to happen. What does it portend?
uhhhhh

a suspension of judgement?

only in new mexico....

i went to the truth or consequences city festival

they had

cowboy music
mariachi music
indian drumming

all in the same day

It should be pointed out that "Truth or Consequences" is in fact the name of the city, not of some strange holiday celebrated in the SW.

I was waiting for this to happen. What does it portend?
I'm still trying to figure out this comment...

I live in upstate New York, and can see the Onondaga nation from where I work. Pretty much any place I’ve worked around here, I’ve worked with people who either live on the reservation, or had spent some of their life there. I’ve been to the reservation and some parts of it are very nice, and some not so great, much like the rest of the rural countryside up here. In fact, it can be difficult to tell exactly when you’re on the reservation and when you aren’t. Once in a blue moon, there might be a spat over some internal issue that sometimes spill over into non-reservation life (roads blocked off, very minor standoffs, that type of thing) but for the most part it’s like another town, albeit with a very different form of government.

My general opinion is that they’ve been sorely mistreated for a long time, but have a strong history to sustain them through it. I get the impression that they are working very hard to reclaim their language, and parts of their culture that were taken from them. They’ve shaped a lot of the culture of the area I live in, so I respect their work towards that. But for the most part, they seem to live and work just like anyone else and want the same kinds of things everyone else wants for themselves and their kids.

But that impression is from the perspective of an outsider; it could be a lot more difficult than it seems to be and I might be too ignorant to see that. My great-great-grandmother was Miqmaq, but back in 'those days', it was a pretty scandalous thing to marry outside your race or religion, so they kept pretty quiet about it. I don’t know all that much about her background, which is kind of sad, really. Still, I’d feel a pretty arrogant thinking of myself as Native American, since it’s such a tiny fraction of my very diverse ancestry.

One great thing about technology, the internet in particular, is that it is allowing elders to store their knowledge of traditions, language and culture for future generations in a much more visceral way than was ever possible in just books. I think it's a good step.

What do you know about Natives?

What do you think you know about Natives?

What would you like to know about Natives?

Do you ever think about aboriginal peoples at all?

I think they're people, first and foremost. Some good, some bad, like anyone else. I think they got the short end of the stick, and that is some cases, they've not really recovered from it...

I know that there was, at least at one time, a huge problem with alcoholism, and that poverty also seems to be a major problem.

I also know I have a lot to learn, so... thanks for the thread.

Well, does anyone have any particular questions about Cree natives? I can sort of speak for other groups (Dene, Inuit and so on), but I can tell you way more about my own people, if you are interested in something.

I would be honored to hear it, Sinuhue.

Yikes, I was kind of hoping for some leading questions...

I guess I'll start with basics. I'm Plains Cree, but the Cree in Canada are divided up into Woodlands, Plains and Swampy Cree. We each speak a different dialect of Cree, though within those three divisions there are also regional variations. My people speak the 'Y' dialect of Cree, one of the strongest (in terms of total number of living speakers).

Some of the traditional knowledge we still have includes, but is not limited to:

- traditional methods of hunting and trapping, and the curing of hides (either by chewing the hide, or smearing brains on the skin and smoking it, another method involved soaking the hide in urine:))
- plant medicine: for example, we still make cold remedies from pine gum, and sweetgrass still flavour's our tea and cleanses us.
- art: though much of our artwork had practical purposes in the old days, now very often it is seen as purely decorative. Still, the beadwork and quill work of our mothers is rooted in deep meaning aside from the artistic. Birch bark baskets are still preferred to purchased ones.
- music: you mostly hear native music as pow-wow music, but we all have our own distinct styles of drumming and dancing. That chanting you hear is not just drawn out meaningless syllables. They are prayers or stories or petitions or healing songs.
- community: we still respect our elders and we still revere those with traditional knowlegde. Our family ties remain strong, despite the fact that they were nearly broken by Residential schooling. Our bands are extended families, not just groups of strangers living together.
- spirituality: even as an atheist, I have a great love of our spirituality, which reveres the Creator and Mother Earth, as well as our relationship to all living things. We have certain rituals when harvesting plants, wood, or animals, and part of that is to keep us aware that we are simply borrowing these resources. We do not own them.


That's a bit of it...I could be more specific with specific questions, because it's hard to know what people know and take for granted, and what people have no idea about. Things that seem commonplace to me might seem very new to you.

Today a Native can leave the reserve at anytime he wants. He has every right of any other Canadian and in terms of hunting, taxation, fishing, and forestry more so.

This is a commmon perception, but I'm not sure I agree. As a Canadian whose ancestry is Irish and French, I can return to the countries of my ancestors at any time and hear the language spoken and engage in traditional Irish or French cultural practices, which are generally protected and upheld by the governments of those countries. I think this applies (or should apply) for vall Canadians, regardless of their ancestry. Don't aboriginal Canadians deserve the same treatment? Shouldn't they have a home country or territory where they are able to practice the traditions of their ancestors (in terms of hunting, fishing, forestry, etc.)?

I don't think aboriginal Canadians are any better off in this regard than Canadians that trace their ancestry to other parts of the globe. I don't think we ask Canadians of other ancestry to give up dual citizenship or any other ties they might possess to their mother countries, nor should we ask aboriginal Canadians to give up their traditions. If they have "more rights" than other Canadians within Canada, it is because because their traditional ties are to Nations that pre-date the Canadian state, and have been subsumed (at least partly) within the Canadian state, rather than Nations which exist elsewhere.

Thanks for sharing that Sinuhue ...

This is a commmon perception, but I'm not sure I agree. As a Canadian whose ancestry is Irish and French, I can return to the countries of my ancestors at any time and hear the language spoken and engage in traditional Irish or French cultural practices, which are generally protected and upheld by the governments of those countries. I think this applies (or should apply) for vall Canadians, regardless of their ancestry. Don't aboriginal Canadians deserve the same treatment? Shouldn't they have a home country or territory where they are able to practice the traditions of their ancestors (in terms of hunting, fishing, forestry, etc.)?

I don't think aboriginal Canadians are any better off in this regard than Canadians that trace their ancestry to other parts of the globe. I don't think we ask Canadians of other ancestry to give up dual citizenship or any other ties they might possess to their mother countries, nor should we ask aboriginal Canadians to give up their traditions. If they have "more rights" than other Canadians within Canada, it is because because their traditional ties are to Nations that pre-date the Canadian state, and have been subsumed (at least partly) within the Canadian state, rather than Nations which exist elsewhere.
Hmmm...you've put that much better than I was able to, and I thank you for it. I couldn't figure out how to explain that, bad as the reservations are, we risk losing ourselves completely if we abandon them. We just aren't strong enough in terms of our population to form communities elsewhere and keep our traditions alive.

What do you know about Natives?

Hmm. Well, depends on two things: how "pure blood" are you taking about and how culturally pure are you talking about.
1/4 Tsalagi (originally the Aniyunwiya) on my paternal side. But dad was adopted, so I have no deep cultural connections.

What do you think you know about Natives?

A little. Some history. A few words of the language. Bits and pieces here and there.

What would you like to know about Natives?

I wouldn't mind learning the Tsalagi language.

Do you ever think about aboriginal peoples at all?

Frequently.

Oh, on the alcoholism, I do know that it's at least partly due genetics, and has to do with the production of enzymes.

Questions for Sinuhue:
Were you raised on a rez? (What's the Canadian equivilant of a rez?)
How traditional was your upbringing?
Did you grow up speaking Cree as a first language?
If not, when did you start to study it and how well do you speak it?

(Probably more questions to follow.)

Questions for Sinuhue:
Were you raised on a rez?
I was born on the reservation, but my parents decided to move off rez because they thought it would be better for us kids to go to an off-rez school. Sometimes I'm thankful, sometimes I'm not.
(What's the Canadian equivilant of a rez?) A rez:).
How traditional was your upbringing?
Well, my mom is Cree and my dad is Irish, so we got a blend. My mom spoke as much Cree as she could at home, but she'd been to a Residential school when she was younger and had lost quite a bit of her language. I took classes on weekends with an elder, but my Cree is not as fluent as I would wish.

I learned to cure hides, I learned beadwork and quilling, I did fancy dancing and I learned to jig. I hunt, I fish, and I know a fair amount about our traditional uses for plants and such, but I do sometimes feel very cut off from my people because I grew up outside the reservation. These things I learned were sometimes not naturally passed on...my mom and my aunties made a great effort to teach us these things, and sometimes we didn't want to learn them. It's like that on the rez too, though. Now that I'm older, I wish I'd paid more attention to certain things like our songs and our legends and stories. I feel diluted:) but then again, I'm Irish too, and we focused always more on the Cree than the Irish. My dad's thoughts on that were, I could always visit Ireland if I really wanted to know more (though he was second generation and has never been there!).

Did you grow up speaking Cree as a first language?
No. But I grew up with English and Cree...like I said, I'm weaker in the Cree, but I think that is because outside of my mom and my aunties, I didn't get to speak it in school or outside my home. That is changing now...my people are trying to reclaim their language and use it on a wider scale. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone has Cree as their only mother tongue anymore (being born now that is...outside of the elders).
If not, when did you start to study it and how well do you speak it?
I learned from my mother, but I also took classes throughout junior high and high school. I couldn't take it in University because I just didn't have the time or the money for extra classes. I don't use it nearly as much as I should, and I'm losing it. I am considering going back to study it.

Oh, on the alcoholism, I do know that it's at least partly due genetics, and has to do with the production of enzymes.



Yes, alcoholism is a problem for the same reason that diabetes and lactose intolerance are also high in aboriginal communities. Agricultural societies had a chance to adapt to digesting these kind of products (milk, sugar, alcohol) over thousands of years. Hunter-gatherer societies such as aboriginal peoples that were unused to these products and had it thrust upon them had no chance to adapt, and still have difficulty metabolising these kind of foods.

What I find interesting is that while alcoholism is high in First Nations communities, so is abstinence. First Nations people in Canada are about twice as likely to abstain completely from alcohol consumption as the general population. It is interesting that THAT doesn't form part of our stereotypes about First Nations people.

• By comparison with non-Aboriginal people, a large proportion of Aboriginal people do not drink alcohol at all and, in some Aboriginal communities, alcohol consumption has been banned by the residents.
• Up to 35% of Aboriginal men do not drink alcohol compared with 12% of non-Aboriginal men.
• 40% to 80% of Aboriginal women do not drink alcohol compared with 19% to 25% of non-Aboriginal women.
In the Northern Territory, it has been estimated that 75% of Aboriginal people do not drink alcohol at all.
Research published in 1991 by Associate Professor Wayne Hall and Dr Randolph Spargo found no evidence of truth in the "fire water theory" which maintains that Aboriginal people are biologically less able to handle alcohol.
This is not to deny the obvious problems caused by the abuse of alcohol by the comparatively higher proportion of Aboriginal problem drinkers.

I agree that we should not always focus on alcoholism...it's a stereotype...there are drunks among every group of people. Also, many aboriginal groups that currently are viewed as having problems with alcohol in fact had their own alcohol before contact. Such groups include the Mapuche of Chile, the Aymara of Peru, various Amazonian aboriginals...even my own people fermented grains and drank the liquor on special ceremonial occasions.

The REASONS for alcoholism are more important than the alcoholism itself. We are not genetically WEAKER and less able to HANDLE alcohol. We are, however, more likely to take it to excess because of social issues.

There is no real scientific proof that Natives metabolise alcohol any differently than any other group, by the way.

Today, the idea that natives are more susceptible to the mind-bending effects of alcohol remains so tenacious that even some natives believe it.

In her book Firewater Myths, anthropologist Joy Leland reported that many American Indians believe they have a physiological weakness to the effects of alcohol and that alcoholism is ``in the blood.''

Ms. Leland concluded that young natives used the heredity explanation as an excuse for their own abuse of alcohol, even though studies show aboriginals do not metabolize alcohol much differently than people of other races.

Well I live in Northern Ontario, and I live and work with Natives everyday, they are like any other race of people, they have their own share of problems, but they can amount to anything just as well as any other race can. Plus it's good to take them shopping with you, no taxes is great.

Too many people form their opinions about natives and alcohol based on the natives they come across on city streets. You may not even notice the ones walking around a sober as you and I, or even identify them as native, just 'brown'. But the drunken bums sure are noticeable.

That's not to say it ISN'T a problem. It really is, and FAS is taking a terrible toll on our people. It's brain damage, plain and simple, and it's completely preventable.

However, many natives are so against drinking of any kind that they NEVER drink, because of their negative experiences with drunks. How many people in the general population are like that?

Our problems with alcohol, as I've said before, are social, not genetic.

Well I live in Northern Ontario, and I live and work with Natives everyday, they are like any other race of people, they have their own share of problems, but they can amount to anything just as well as any other race can. Plus it's good to take them shopping with you, no taxes is great.
I've never lived tax free in my life. Another difference between off reservation and on reservation natives.

Hmmm...you've put that much better than I was able to, and I thank you for it. I couldn't figure out how to explain that, bad as the reservations are, we risk losing ourselves completely if we abandon them. We just aren't strong enough in terms of our population to form communities elsewhere and keep our traditions alive.

Thanks Sinuhue. I think people really need to reconceptualize this debate. Aboriginal people are not "citizens plus" with extra rights, as some commentators have suggested. They are really more like dual citizens (like so many other Canadians); they are at once a citizen of Canada, and a citizen of their Aboriginal Nation, and have rights that attach to both of their nationhoods (just as other Canadians do). (I will admit that my ideas here have been heavily influenced by one of my professors, John Borrows).

It seems to me that the Rez does sustain a limited degree of community and culture, but that aboriginal people require a more substantial land base to really be able to practice traditional elements of their culture, as well as to be able to participate more fully in the economy. So the answer probably isn't to do away with the Rez system, but to transition over to something better.

It seems to me that the Rez does sustain a limited degree of community and culture, but that aboriginal people require a more substantial land base to really be able to practice traditional elements of their culture, as well as to be able to participate more fully in the economy. So the answer probably isn't to do away with the Rez system, but to transition over to something better.
I agree. However, conceptualising that 'something better' is very difficult. Defining its boundaries, or seeing outside the reservation is very hard for people when their more immediate concerns include abuse, addiction and suicide. I'm not sure how we can create that 'something better'.

We are in a strange position of uncertainty, as you have pointed out. Everyone else COMES from somewhere, and has ties however strong or weak to their origin. We come from here, but we have been tossed into the same pot as all the other newcomers...with few exceptions, including the reservation system.

I'll have to admit...this dual citizenship concept makes a lot of sense to me...

I think that unless there's some overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary, that we get off the idea of labeling people by the way they look, or where they were born.

There may be some groups of people who are fairly homogeneous from a "racial" perspective - some communities of natives, and some places like Japan, but the world is changing - in just a few generations, there's going to be the racial genetic blur.

I'm already a product of that - I can't honestly say what my racial heritage is at this point.

I think the world would be better off after this Mixmaster event occurs. It would reduce a lot of the crap that goes on today.

There is no real scientific proof that Natives metabolise alcohol any differently than any other group, by the way.

I stand corrected. Diabetes may also be an issue of social conditions, but I'm pretty sure I have seen a study that shows it is tied to differences between hunter-gatherer and agricultural metabolisms as well.

I'm already a product of that - I can't honestly say what my racial heritage is at this point.

I think the world would be better off after this Mixmaster event occurs. It would reduce a lot of the crap that goes on today.
Would it really? Or would it just make the imposition of a non-ethnic culture on everyone (consumerism)?

I think the majority of people in this world still identify with some ethnic heritage, and I'd hate to see that go. The differences are not the problem...reactions to differences are. You can't erase ignorance by erasing 'differences'.

Would it really? Or would it just make the imposition of a non-ethnic culture on everyone (consumerism)?

I think the majority of people in this world still identify with some ethnic heritage, and I'd hate to see that go. The differences are not the problem...reactions to differences are. You can't erase ignorance by erasing 'differences'.

Well, since ignorance is hard to erase, but differences tend to smooth out over time, I think nature has a different plan.

As for me, no one I have ever met has successfully guessed my racial or ethnic heritage (in fact, no one has come close).

I'll have to admit...this dual citizenship concept makes a lot of sense to me...

You should read some of John Borrows' articles ... he's been published in lots of Canadian law journals, and I'm sure there are one or two on this topic specifically.

However, his articles pale by comparison to his lectures, which are fantastic.

I stand corrected. Diabetes may also be an issue of social conditions, but I'm pretty sure I have seen a study that shows it is tied to differences between hunter-gatherer and agricultural metabolisms as well.
There may be more creedence to that one, though it should be pointed out that refined sugar only became a part of the world's diet in the last 500 or so years...NONE of us have truly adapted to metabolising it properly.

There are two different theories as to why Aboriginal people are so highly susceptible to diabetes. One theory, termed the "thrifty genotype" theory, is that Aboriginals became genetically adapted to patterns of alternating periods of feast and famine. They developed a genetic trait that allowed them to efficiently store energy as fat, which greatly increased their chance of survival during times of famine. Because of the shift to a much more Westernized lifestyle, which involves less arduous work and constant food, the set of genes developed to enhance fat storage in the body now work against Aboriginals. When individuals with a thrifty genotype are exposed to a continuous supply of energy-rich foods coupled with a reduction in physical activity, the result is too often obesity, low-glucose tolerance, and type-2 diabetes.16

Another theory is called the "thrifty phenotype" theory. It is thought that maternal malnutrition leads to an impaired development and function of the fetus’ pancreatic beta cells, cells that produce insulin, which leads to a greater susceptibility to type-2 diabetes. This theory is more hopeful than the "thrifty genotype" theory because controlling the maternal diet offers a potential way of breaking the cycle of diabetes.17

Diabetes also is made worse back lack of consistant medical care in many communities, binge drinking in those who are alcoholics, and a break in traditionally, healthy eating habits. We tend to get diagnosed later, and have complications from lack of care (on our part, and on the part of healt care professionals because of scarcity).

Well, since ignorance is hard to erase, but differences tend to smooth out over time, I think nature has a different plan.


I don't know that they smooth out...otherwise you'd think we'd be further along by now than we are...

I've never lived tax free in my life. Another difference between off reservation and on reservation natives.

The taxation issue is really interesting ... I did a couple of months of research on it last summer. It has a totally different history than other First Nations "rights", especially since it comes from the Indian Act and not the Constitution. There's alot of debate over its origin ... whether it was brought in to "protect" First Nations from having their land base taxed and taken away by the government, or whether it is some broader recognition that the Canadian government cannot tax First Nations due to sovereignty issues. Either way, it has evolved in directions that were probably not intended, and really exacerbates the unfortunate status/non-status distinction.

I'm still trying to figure out this comment...
Just funnin' they used the term indian to describe Native Americans.

True. Native in this sense is often used to refer to the original inhabitants of an area. There are many terms that have been used by aboriginal groups. Some include:

aboriginal
native
First nations
Indians
(tribal name like) Cree, Inuit, Mayan


Well, then, there are no natives in North or South America, since they all came accross the Berring Land Bridge from Siberia, therefore are immigrants, just like my ancestors, just a bit earlier.

Well, then, there are no natives in North or South America, since they all came accross the Berring Land Bridge from Siberia, therefore are immigrants, just like my ancestors, just a bit earlier.

Some natives will disagree with you there. Many don'tlike the Bering strait theory, despite all the evidence towards it.

Well, then, there are no natives in North or South America, since they all came accross the Berring Land Bridge from Siberia, therefore are immigrants, just like my ancestors, just a bit earlier.

Totally different time scale. Aboriginal peoples arrived her at least 10,000 years ago. Other peoples arrived within the last 500, most more recently than that. To put that in perspective, if aboriginal peoples have been here for an hour, your ancestors (and mine) showed up sometime in the last 3 minutes.

Another significant difference: aboriginal peoples had pre-existing organized societies here.

Most of us are natives here in Belgium, so I can't help you there. Sowy.

I've never lived tax free in my life. Another difference between off reservation and on reservation natives.

Well you don't have to live on a reservation, just have your mailing address on a reserve and just live in a city, then you get your status card and you are all set.

Well, then, there are no natives in North or South America, since they all came accross the Berring Land Bridge from Siberia, therefore are immigrants, just like my ancestors, just a bit earlier.
So one theory goes.

Choose a better term then.

Well you don't have to live on a reservation, just have your mailing address on a reserve and just live in a city, then you get your status card and you are all set.
Oh, thanks, I didn't realise I could do that! All this time I've been paying my taxes for no reason!

Most of us are natives here in Belgium, so I can't help you there. Sowy.
Aboriginals of Belgium, unite! :D

There are new theories and evidence in Australia which suggests the Aboriginals here may have arrived some 75,000 years ago.

I agree that we should not always focus on alcoholism...it's a stereotype...there are drunks among every group of people. Also, many aboriginal groups that currently are viewed as having problems with alcohol in fact had their own alcohol before contact. Such groups include the Mapuche of Chile, the Aymara of Peru, various Amazonian aboriginals...even my own people fermented grains and drank the liquor on special ceremonial occasions.

The REASONS for alcoholism are more important than the alcoholism itself. We are not genetically WEAKER and less able to HANDLE alcohol. We are, however, more likely to take it to excess because of social issues.
There is no real scientific proof that Natives metabolise alcohol any differently than any other group, by the way.


It is very important to avoid stereotyping. But it is also important to realise that genetics plays a very important role in alcoholism, and that certain populations do have the ADH2/2-3 allele) associated with alcoholism.

Does that mean that Natives are weaker? No.
Does it mean that they should blaim all the alcohol related problems on bad genetics? No.
But it does mean that there should be an awareness of a heightened potential
risk.

http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/aa60.htm
One well–characterized relationship between genes and alcoholism is the result of variation in the liver enzymes that metabolize (break down) alcohol. By speeding up the metabolism of alcohol to a toxic intermediate, acetaldehyde, or slowing down the conversion of acetaldehyde to acetate, genetic variants in the enzymes alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH) or aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) raise the level of acetaldehyde after drinking, causing symptoms that include flushing, nausea, and rapid heartbeat. The genes for these enzymes and the alleles, or gene variants, that alter alcohol metabolism have been identified. Genes associated with flushing are more common among Asian populations than other ethnic groups, and the rates of drinking and alcoholism are correspondingly lower among Asian populations (8,9).

http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/aa55.htm
Biological Factors. People vary in their vulnerability to the effects of alcohol. Some of these differences result from genetically determined variations in the body's ability to break down (i.e., metabolize) and eliminate alcohol (15). For example, after drinking, many Asian subpopulations experience flushing of the skin, nausea, headache, and other uncomfortable symptoms. Those symptoms result primarily from inactivity of aldehyde dehydrogenase-2 (ALDH2), an enzyme involved in a key step of alcohol metabolism (16). A study of Asian males born in Canada and the United States found that those who had inherited the gene for the less active form of this enzyme drank two-thirds less alcohol, had one-third the rate of binge drinking (i.e., consumption of more than 5 drinks per day), and were three times more likely to be abstainers than a group of Asian males who possessed the more active enzyme (17). However, some people develop alcohol problems despite possessing the inactive form of ALDH2, demonstrating the importance of additional factors in the development of drinking patterns and consequences (17).

Among some African Americans, genetically determined variability in another alcohol-metabolizing enzyme, alcohol dehydrogenase-2, appears to affect the degree of vulnerability to alcoholic cirrhosis and alcohol-related fetal damage (15).

link (http://www.alcoholism-cer.com/pt/re/alcoholism/abstract.00000374-200403000-00003.htm;jsessionid=Cug7A3uw2R2oMsAbEyOeRSgEhMEF2la7tELyH1HOUCgv9CyJl0FQ!-2081519285!-949856031!9001!-1)

The relative importance of causal factors
is an empirical question. There are studies in
the field, such as the Ten Tribes Study that we
are pursuing, that have assessed genetic as well
as cultural and historical factors. These en-deavors
may permit a quantitative answer to the
questions of whether a model of cultural, his-torical,
and genetic factors fits the data, and the
relative proportion of the variance in drinking
problems that is accounted for by each set of
predictors. Until such data are available, spec-ulation
is premature.
As the authors point out, not all Ameri-can
Indians are alcoholic, and dismissing the
contribution of genetic factors is inconsis-tent
with the authors’ acknowledgement of
individual differences. Genetic factors are
particularly important for understanding
interindividual differences within popula-tions.
Studies on epidemiologically sam-pled
twins of European ancestry have shown
that approximately 50% of alcoholism risk
is genetic. Molecular studies have yielded 2
confirmed alcoholism vulnerability poly-morphisms
in East Asians. Thus, it is fair to
conclude that genetic factors are an impor-tant
component of interindividual variation
in drinking problems. Even if genetic and en-vironmental
factors can be detected in isola-tion,
their roles must be understood within an
integrative framework.
Pitting the cultural and historical causes of
alcoholism against biological causes may have
an unintended impact on the public. Scientists
differing with each other over ideological di-vides
make good media stories. As public
health practitioners, we have an interest in pro-moting
science literacy, which includes the ca-pacity
to appreciate that complex diseases have
multiple causes.
PDF source (www.niaaa.nih.gov/intramural/web_lng/LN%20pdf_folder/KossAmJPublicHealth2000_1799.pdf)

(We should all be aware of genetic risks. They exist in every population. Alcoholism is a special one due to all the cultural baggage it carries. But would you be objecting if, for example, I said Tae Sachs wasn't genetically linked, and that certain populations were more at risk?)

This is a commmon perception, but I'm not sure I agree. As a Canadian whose ancestry is Irish and French, I can return to the countries of my ancestors at any time and hear the language spoken and engage in traditional Irish or French cultural practices, which are generally protected and upheld by the governments of those countries. I think this applies (or should apply) for vall Canadians, regardless of their ancestry. Don't aboriginal Canadians deserve the same treatment? Shouldn't they have a home country or territory where they are able to practice the traditions of their ancestors (in terms of hunting, fishing, forestry, etc.)?

I don't think aboriginal Canadians are any better off in this regard than Canadians that trace their ancestry to other parts of the globe. I don't think we ask Canadians of other ancestry to give up dual citizenship or any other ties they might possess to their mother countries, nor should we ask aboriginal Canadians to give up their traditions. If they have "more rights" than other Canadians within Canada, it is because because their traditional ties are to Nations that pre-date the Canadian state, and have been subsumed (at least partly) within the Canadian state, rather than Nations which exist elsewhere.

I’m not exactly sure where you’re trying to go with this. My original comment was in defence of the reserves and their growth away from the ghettoesque abuse centres of my grandfather’s generation.

As for being able to go back to France or Ireland; umm congratulations? This is not a right it is a privilege. With the growing immigrant population I can now list dozens of nationalities where this is not the case; either because their refugees or their home country is simply too violent to risk it.

Now I’m Acadian (as the native blood it too thin to consider myself Metis, though it exists) and while my ancestry takes me back to a lumber mill in western France I will never consider that the motherland. To me my heritage lies in the centre and north of New Brunswick. As far as I’m concerned the only heritage I have that presupposes Canada is Acadia. That said I cannot go up north (of here, being NB) and take back my farming land and I don’t speak French on a daily basis. My family has never and will never be reimbursed for the expulsion (and with interest and inflation it’d be quite a pretty penny) I don’t have the same ability as you, does that make me less advantaged than you? Do you possess more rights than me?

The hunting and fishing traditions of the Natives need to be evaluated. Not by me or you but by Natives. You see the problem I see is that a lot of them think like white men. I know natives who own logging companies so they get to clear cut on crown land. I mentioned Bird’s eye maple earlier.

It’s my opinion that should a native state developed they’d have even stricter environmental controls than we do now. How could a culture that revered nature so much not?

Now don’t get me wrong, I could go either way on the reserve issue. In my opinion they need to be given provincial abilities so that they can decide what is truly important to them. Allow them the freedom to make their own decisions and be able to take accountability for their own actions. At the same time I realize, as Sinhue, stated there exists concerns about their ability to self govern.

(We should all be aware of genetic risks. They exist in every population. Alcoholism is a special one due to all the cultural baggage it carries. But would you be objecting if, for example, I said Tae Sachs wasn't genetically linked, and that certain populations were more at risk?)
Funny, because I actually thought of Tay Sachs when I posted my objection:) The issue of gentics is such a convoluted one. It also doesn't apply to all aboriginal groups. The Mapuche indians of southern Chile and Argentina, for example, are able to metabolise alcohol at much greater rates than the Aymara of northern Chile. Why is this? Did they get used to liquor because they brewed it? Are they genetically different from the Aymara, or from North American natives?

To say that all aboriginal groups are more prone to alcoholism because of genetics isn't true. Saying that 50% of the risk is genetic is not believable either. I think cultural issues and issues of poverty etc have much more of a causal relationship with alcoholism than gentics. I think genetics gets used as an excuse by some native people, and I think it gets used as an excuse by non-natives to call us alcoholics.

Which is more of a risk factor? Genetics or the way natives are living? Which should we focus more on?

The hunting and fishing traditions of the Natives need to be evaluated. Not by me or you but by Natives. You see the problem I see is that a lot of them think like white men. I know natives who own logging companies so they get to clear cut on crown land. I mentioned Bird’s eye maple earlier.


I'm going to address this specifically:)

This is a big problem, though I won't blame it on the white mentality alone. There are huge flaws in TEK (traditional environmental knowledge) because my people lived in a land of abundance, and had a small enough population to not permanently negatively affect the environment. Many of our hunting practices WERE wasteful (look at the buffalo jumps). Others were not. Overall, we revere nature, and are taught to use resources sparingly, with need, and reverently.

That isn't necessarily the case anymore, and many of us are using our status to get a leg up on the non-natives. No native should be using a commercial-style gathering system...we should not be allowed to profit from the exploitation of natural resources EXCEPT under the same rules as everyone else. For our own needs, and the needs of our families, our status should apply. Once you start selling what you catch, that status should be tossed.

No more questions? Seriously?

I'm going to address this specifically:)

This is a big problem, though I won't blame it on the white mentality alone. There are huge flaws in TEK (traditional environmental knowledge) because my people lived in a land of abundance, and had a small enough population to not permanently negatively affect the environment. Many of our hunting practices WERE wasteful (look at the buffalo jumps). Others were not. Overall, we revere nature, and are taught to use resources sparingly, with need, and reverently.

That isn't necessarily the case anymore, and many of us are using our status to get a leg up on the non-natives. No native should be using a commercial-style gathering system...we should not be allowed to profit from the exploitation of natural resources EXCEPT under the same rules as everyone else. For our own needs, and the needs of our families, our status should apply. Once you start selling what you catch, that status should be tossed.

Completely concur, but you try telling the nice man in the ten tonne steel harvester that.

I have to be careful when I start making generalization about natives as I realize that my own experiences are jaded by certain exploitive people and that’s wrong. It’s why I support my idea about including them in federalism at a provincial level, they’d get to decide what was and was not important to them. It’d also create more jobs for natives as the bands filled administrative positions with their own people.