Hi, this post is looking for answers and a better understanding of CAPs position and the ideas of it members. This part raised some questions:


The Canadian Action Party's third initiative is a new policy on Aboriginal Affairs. The Canadian Action Party acknowledges that the native community has historically suffered from abuses and genocide as a result of colonization, marginalization, and the suppression of their people and culture. At the present time, native bands across the country are involved in disputes with the government and corporations over land claims and the ongoing corporate seizures of lands and resources. Now, with the global awakening, native communities have the support of a diverse spectrum of citizens; together we can change society for the better.

The Canadian government has consistently failed to honour treaty obligations, to investigate serious crimes committed against the native communities and to protect native rights and freedoms. The native community is being assaulted by the same corporate practises and schemes as are currently threatening all Canadians. It is essential that the Canadian Action Party be recognized as a possible political instrument to support the changes and justice that native communities seek within Canadian society. Further, it is essential to the Canadian Action Party to have the help, strength and wisdom within the native community to enable us to address the shared issues and dangers we face as Canadians in this period of international corporate-financial control and the increasing formation of a totalitarian and police state system. It is the intention of the Canadian Action Party to seek direct input from First Nations communities across Canada to work with us to create policies that best address native issues. The Canadian Action Party wants to search together for ways to transform the corruption and incompetence of the Canadian government and corporate sectors, the police services, and the judiciary. We want to work with Native individuals and communities to restore justice and individual sovereignty within Canada while enabling aboriginal communities to thrive.



So my observations and questions:

What kind of future does CAP see for Canada if these ideas were implemented? What is this policy saying?

So CAP acknowledges that the Native Community has suffered from abuses and genocide. That pretty much describes most of Canada’s population. You do not have to go too far back in history to find all sorts of abuse including genocide.

In the last century that would include the Ukrainians, Albanians, Jews, Chinese, Vietnamese to just name a few. The century before that when Aboriginals faced genocide south of the border we were creating the NWMP to protect them and many other Canadian families were also facing genocide, The Irish Famine comes to mind, while Ireland was starving they were forced to be a net food exporter, that was genocide.

And on it goes. All Canadians have such abuse and genocide in their background. If they think they do not then they do not know their history.

No doubt this common suffering is where this support from a diverse spectrum of citizenry comes from but support for what? Support for the current system of racial segregation and special treatment?


There is also no doubt that the governments at all levels, including Britain have failed to abide by all aspects of all treaties, and in many cases we have no treaties. The Aboriginals themselves have failed to abide by many treaties and settlements. That was the cause of Caledonia, Aboriginals failing to abide by an agreement. So what is CAP suggesting when they make such statements? Is there a plan of action? A method of ending these failures?


CAP believes it is essential that they be seen as a possible instrument for changes and justice that Natives seek within Canada. Does CAP understand what justice Natives seek? Would it not be better to seek for Justice for all Canadians including Natives?


CAP also believes it is essential to have the help, strength and wisdom within the native community to enable us to address the shared issues and dangers we face as Canadians. I do not see such a claim that it is essential to have the help, strength and wisdom of other Canadians or all Canadians. Why is that? Maybe I just haven’t looked close enough? (possible as I’m not that familiar with CAPs positions). Maybe it is implied?

Same goes for much of this position on Aborginal issues, does it apply to all Canadians?


But I see this following part as the one needing the most revision (and I’m sure that CAP is a work in progress). …..work with Native individuals and communities to restore justice and individual sovereignty within Canada while enabling aboriginal communities to thrive.”

Restore justice? When was this justice of which is written? Was it before they displaced the people who were here before them? Or only in parts of Canada where there is no evidence of prior people? Was there justice in those Native communities whose women were treated as little more than slaves? You can see the question, when was this justice? It seems the answer to that points to the CAPs idea of the future justice for Canadians.

Restore individual sovereignty? Natives are going to hear that as Native sovereignty, not a call to strengthen the rights of the individual. Is that was is being said? To cancel the treaties? Give back land? If so how is that possible within the sovereign country of Canada. If Natives have self government, sovereignty, they they are not part of Canada, they are sovereign,

Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a territory. If Natives have that they are by definition not Canadian.

Again I’m looking for discussion and clarification, trying to get a feel for CAP and what the present members of CAP think a future Canada should look like.


Myself, and many Canadians, would like to see a Canada that does not measure a person by the colour of their skin. We want a Canada were all people, regardless of race, sex, gender or beliefs are treated equally. All Canadians should be treated equally in the eyes of the law. It is brave position but is it not the right position?

If so that would mean we cannot continue to support racist treaties and legal discrimination. We would need to settle treaties peacefully, hopefully before that peaceful option is lost. We need to settle them before they cannot be settled without massive bloodshed as was seen in the United States, South Africa and elsewhere.

We need to settle all treaties and outstanding claims to create a Canada where all Canadians are equal and have the same opportunities. For me the discussion is how we get to that Canada. What Canada does CAP want to get to?

.

Canadian,

CAP's Policies are all a bit fuzzy. The problem with a Policy statement such as this is that it says nothing concrete, nothing at all. It is merely a Reflection on the state of things.

The notion of incarcerating natives on tracts of marginal land and creating ghettos is entirely backwards and colonialist. The Indian reserves were a bad idea from a human rights perspective. Its a pity the first natives who signed the treaties were so gullible...rather like the idiotic people today who trust their doctor to give them vaccines "for their own good". If I were a full-fledged Indian I would get off of the reservation as fast as I can and make a real life for myself, rather than sulking and playing the victim. No Gov't handouts, thank you very much. Nobody is going to stick labels on me or keep me in a prefab ideological box.

I think the reserves may have been a very good idea for the times. Hard to judge from this perspective. They were good enough for South Africa to adopt them and many Natives seem to be very happy at the result, even today.

I would also suggest that the Aboriginals who signed treaties where not gullible at all. Those treaties allowed them to stay and not integrate into a new and different culture. A good deal for them at the time.

Maybe not so good a deal today. Particularly if a person wants to see all people have basic human rights including rights of equality and freedom from discrimination based on Race, Religion or Gender.

Would you get off the reserve? Would you give up your treaty number? Would I? Sure we like to say we would but so few in that situation do that I have my doubts.

It is a pleasant lifestyle in many ways. In particular, the whole “eat dirt to get money” thing is removed. There is no need to jump up out of bed in the morning to rush to some lousy low paying job that demands your very soul and then gives almost nothing in return for it.

You get to spend more time with friends, and while you do not have a lot of money you do have the basics covered. Something that is not always the case should you leave the reserve and treaty number to fight with the unwashed masses for pennies.

Of course the racial segregation and culture of victimization has the many negatives we can clearly see but people can get used to such things, even believe in them.

I’m not so sure I would leave such a community. I suspect I would fight to keep the racial inequality, to keep the money flowing for as long as the sunshine’s and the rivers flow.

I wish I was a better person but I’ve been without money and know that the rules change when the basics cannot be covered.