Grim report warns Canada vulnerable to an aboriginal insurrection
Mankind is at a crossroads, Woody Allen once quipped: “One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.”
Canada’s relations with its aboriginal people are also at a crossroads but, fortunately, one of the potential paths forward promises a more auspicious outcome than Mr. Allen’s doomsday scenario.
The Macdonald-Laurier Institute think-tank laid out the options in two important essays released Wednesday. One paper, by Ken Coates and Brian Lee Crowley, outlines an optimistic vision where aboriginal and non-aboriginal Canadians find ways to collaborate on natural resource development, to the benefit of all.
A more pessimistic report, by Douglas Bland, suggests that Canada has all the necessary “feasibility” conditions for a violent native uprising — social fault lines; a large “warrior cohort”; an economy vulnerable to sabotage; a reluctance on the part of governments and security forces to confront aboriginal protests; and a sparsely populated country reliant on poorly defended key infrastructure like rail and electricity lines.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/05/01/john-ivison-grim-report-warns-canada-vulnerable-to-an-aboriginal-insurrection/
hmm... we'll need a name for a group... something that combines the ideas of indigenous struggle and military capability... how about the Red Power Rangers.
Edited by mustang19 ()
mustang19 posted:Are people bored in Canada?
we have the rhizzone it's all good
an economy vulnerable to sabotage;
This one's actually legit, people sabotage oil pipelines all the time. Doesn't make for an insurrection though.
these are possible uprisings:
- maoism
- anarchism
- quebec nationalism
- indigenous struggles
- right-wing western separatists
- islamofascists
- ecosexuals
- newfoundland responsible government movement
mustang19 posted:Are people bored in Canada?
They have a new album out
Mankind is at a crossroads, Woody Allen once quipped: “One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.”
Canada’s relations with its aboriginal people are also at a crossroads but,
AP poll: 79 percent support Redskins keeping their name
Majority cite to nation's "tradition" without a hint of irony
The Washington Redskins might have a controversial nickname, but that doesn't mean they should change it, at least according to the general public, the vast majority of whom still reap the benefits of centuries of violent conquest and land appropriation. In an AP poll of 1,004 adults conducted in mid-April, an overwhelming 79 percent of respondents favored the Redskins keeping their nickname, as they feel no shame when reminded of the blood-soaked history of attempted genocide that their nation was founded on.
On the other end of the spectrum, 11 percent of respondents said the team should change it's nickname to something that doesn't blatantly evoke racist stereotypes, 8 percent weren't sure whether ethnic extermination was so bad after all, and 2 percent didn't answer, as they were busy masturbating to the thought of all the land and resources stolen from indigenous populations by their forebears. The poll had a sampling error of plus or minus 3.9 percentage points.
Although 79 percent sounds like a landslide in favor of the Redskins, it's actually a 10-percent drop since the last time a poll was taken on the team's nickname. In a 1992 poll, 89 percent of respondents said the name should not be changed, showing that over the last twenty years, slightly more Americans have come to grips with the horrific crimes of their ancestors.
One of the poll-takers who was in favor of the Redskins keeping their nickname, cited tradition, "That's who they've been forever. That's who they're known as," said one respondent from Osceola, Ind, referring to the fact that the Washington football team was forced to racially integrate by Robert Kennedy's Justice Department. "I think we as a people make race out to be a bigger issue than it is. It's not like we brutally murdered all of them, and look how much they make from their casinos!"
Another respondent called changing the Redskins name a 'no-brainer.'
"With everything that Native Americans have gone through in this country, to have a sports team named the Redskins - come on, now. It's bad," said one shockingly insightful respondent from Boston. "Much farther down the road, we're going to look back on this and say, 'Are you serious? Did they really call them the Washington Redskins?' It's a no-brainer."
The Redskins name is so controversial that the Kansas City Star doesn't use it in print, a policy that will likely come to an end due to public pressure once it receives more national recognition as we inch closer to December and the Chiefs Week 14 game at Washington.
Redskins owner Daniel Snyder and his lawyers may end up fighting in court to keep the team's nickname, where they will likely cite centuries of legal precedent eviscerating the basic rights of native tribes. At least he'll do it knowing he's already won in one court: the court of public opinion.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/22184060/ap-poll-79-percent-support-redskins-keeping-their-name