Re: [A-List] Canadian elections

[Macdonald Stainsby <mstainsby@xxxxxxxxx>]

Jim Yarker wrote:
and never mind that it was a PQ gov't which
> negotiated the first agreement in principle on native land claims and
> self-government in Canada which explicitly precluded the extinguishment
> of ancestral claims to territory, following a principle written into the
> PQ program in 1991 under Parizeau's leadership,

As I've demonstrated before with the sweet sounding talk of the BC
Premier, what is important is not a electoral platform listing of the
various titles of concepts "enshrined", but rather what the approach of
the Settler State is to actual devolution.

Nowhere is absolute control contemplated. It is simply a fiction to
imagine that the same party who helped in the white-washing of the
operation on Oka, has any illusions about surrendering territory or more
importantly, resource control, to any nation. Again, for those who
aren't interested in the muddy details, there also needs to be
understood that every indigenous nation has a different relationship and
result with their dealings with the occupier-- some worse and some
better off when dealing with the French white settlers than the Anglo.

It is not true that the PQ initiated the first process whereby the term
extinguishment would be removed. No Canadian or Québecois initiated
such; the first place as the victory of the Deh Cho in refusing any such
process. That has been underway since the 70's, the federal government
relenquished in the 80's to simply the "Deh Cho Process". It was not a
gift from any settler, it was a right wrestled by Indians themselves.

In practice of course, much like the inclusion of "nation" in any
manner, it is a verbal/rhetorical sleight again, for it is a wording
that defies the actual direction: No real nation in the world whether
third or fourth world, can really be expressing sovereignty when their
resources are expropriated and plundered by forces from outside the
nation with no revenue understod as rent.

Provinces retain far greater powers than any territory so administered
by Québec. When push truly comes to shove, Québec nationalists have
shown the beliefe that they can force the Mohawk to "move" from Canada
to Québec, they have never once reneged on this promise, and this threat
 to a people already thrice colonised to be swapped around like so much
chattel is indicative of how much things are truly different in another
settler state.

As always, what is never understood by the Quebecois Nationalist is that
simply comparing one genocide process to another is precisely a Canadian
favourite: If Canada is questioned on their right to retain Quebec,
never mind indigenous nations, the response is to, in Zionist fashion,
point out that they are "nicer" in application than so many other
countries. With vigor Canadians like to recall the difference in the
American attitude towards "clearing the frontier" to Canadian "treaty
making" under the Aegis of English tactics. The point there is as gross
as the point in Québec: "Never mind that we are killing people, think of
how lucky they are we kil them nicely".

Mussolini supporters use this visavis the Nazis all the time.

--
Macdonald Stainsby
http://independentmedia.ca/survivingcanada
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green
In the contradiction lies the hope
   --Bertholt Brecht.