CRRF Presentation Final Presentation

7/25/2019 CRRF Presentation Final Presentation

1/180


2/180

Copyright 2016 by Kim P. Weaver and Coalition Against Racism in Mainstream Media

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or byany mean, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any other information

storage and retrieval system, without permission from the publisher.

Published in 2015 by Coalition Against Racism in Mainstream Mediaand

Kim P. Weaver (Thohahente)


3/180

Presented by


4/180

The Coalition against Racism inMainstream Media


5/180

Aboriginal people are Canadian/not sovereign.


6/180

Aboriginal people are Canadian/not sovereign.Example One:


7/180

Aboriginal people are Canadian/not sovereign.Example One:


8/180


Modern Indigenous Reality:

! The post intends to deflect and disable anargument against the aggregation ofIndigenous People into the Canadiancollective

! The writer asserts Indigenous Sovereigntydoes not exist because they do not choose toaccept that it does.

! To not accept the concept denies InherentIndigenous Rights and history (neversurrendered or were conquered as Nations)

!

The powers that be means the colonialgovernment. This assumes that Canada hasthe right to decide issues of Treaty partnersterms of existence.

! Denies the terms of the UNDRIPUNDRIP Document

Example One:


9/180

Aboriginal people are Canadian/not sovereign.Example Two:


10/180

Aboriginal people are Canadian/not sovereign.Example Two:


11/180



! This poster is commenting on a post clarifying thatMohawks are not Canadian they are Mohawks.

! Denies the Nation to Nation Treaty relationship

! Makes Indigenous issues an Indigenous problembecause they view the treaties as Nation to Nation(supported by the UNDRIP)

! Uses the right to be distinct to mean better thaneveryone (assumes they means Canadians) thusaggregating Indigenous back into the collective

! Assumes sovereignty means a free ride

!

Threatens violence of war.

! Fear , threats and violence to deny Indigenous rightsto be who they are and to deny our existence asNations in the face of both history and internationalcovenants

Example Two:


12/180

Aboriginal people are Canadian/not sovereign.Example Three:


13/180

Aboriginal people are Canadian/not sovereign.Example Three:


14/180



! Exhibits anger

! A rant based on personal beliefs and notfacts

! Declares omnipotence by saying there isno other argument - case closed

! Assimilate or else is the message

Example Three:


15/180

Indigenous Men are responsible forMissing and Murdered IndigenousWomen.


16/180

Indigenous Men are responsible forMissing and Murdered IndigenousWomen.Example One:


17/180

Indigenous Men are responsible forMissing and Murdered IndigenousWomen.Example One:


18/180



! Claims to be right thus absolving any needfor supportive citations. It appears to be aclaim based on only FN men are on reserves

! Suspecting a state of affairs implies lack ofknowledge . Makes previous commentsuspect

! Tries to establish validity of the firstparagraph by assuming all agree with themthen leaps to conclusion that causes areIndigenous because symptoms areIndigenous

! Ignores the findings of 58 current pieces of

credible research that root causes aresystemic institutional racism withinCanadian society and governments

Example One:


19/180



! Ignores findings of RCAP 1996. Assumessymptoms are synonymous with root causes.

! Accepts the simplistic argument that MMIWis an issue of criminality and not sociologicalin the face of all the evidence summarizedby LEAF Summary of Research Report

! Conflates Indigenous desire for autonomywith need to self-finance an inquiry

! All available research into the causative

issues points to colonialism yet this isignored and we are compelled to accept theposters theory as ultimate authority on theirword alone

Example One:


20/180

Indigenous Men are responsible forMissing and Murdered IndigenousWomen.Example Two:


21/180

Indigenous Men are responsible forMissing and Murdered IndigenousWomen.Example Two:


22/180



! Makes a statement without citing the source for thestatement

! Seems to be based on the RCMP report. Does not

realize their argument is void and nullified by theirown words.

! How can missing Native women be murdered byNative men if they are a) missing and b) no proof ofcrime exists

! The RCMP report is quite clear that the majority ofMMIW events are off reserve so the last claim isuntrue

! Nothing has been proven. Lack of evidence and lack

of citations

! This type of speculative damaging commentary isallowed to stand in spite of comment guidelines/.

Example Two:


23/180

Indigenous Men are responsible forMissing and Murdered IndigenousWomen.Example Three:


24/180

Indigenous Men are responsible forMissing and Murdered IndigenousWomen.Example Three:


25/180



! Again a claim based on the RCMP Report onMMIW 2014/2015 updateRCMP MMIW Report 2015 Update

! Does not indicate any critical thinking wenton before blindly accepting the RCMP reportas truth.

! Uses this as an excuse to blame Indigenousmen while not really knowing how thereport was assembled.

! The report actually does not make thefinding this person alleges.

! There are good critical analyses of the reportto provide some balancePam Palmater Analysis of RCMP MMIWReport

Example Three:


26/180

Indigenous people are[pejorative].


27/180

Indigenous people are[pejorative].Example One:


28/180

Indigenous people are[pejorative].Example One:


29/180



!

Menacing and racist says,Indians to quit crying and keepdying. Accepted and posted on

CBC.

!

Indians are all drunk all the time.Also cited here as the reason for#MMIW.

!

Hostile, belligerent racist and

scary.!

This post passed CBC moderationand was up for hours

Example One:


30/180

Indigenous people are[pejorative].Example Two:


31/180

Indigenous people are[pejorative].Example Two:


32/180



! The comment implies Morley people(Stoney Nakoda) do not love their landand are environmentally irresponsible

without supporting citations (libel)! Asserts all residents live off

government handouts ignoring thebenefit to settlers thru land use andresource extraction provided by treaty

! Suggests they are immature as thereason for the initial generalizationignoring the societal impacts of the IRSand 150 years of colonization

!

Implies Morley Indians are drunks andcriminals without foundation as aracist stereotype

Example Two:


33/180

Indigenous people are[pejorative].Example Three:


34/180

Indigenous people are[pejorative].Example Three:


35/180



! A racist slur suggesting alcohol was theobjective with no supporting citations orknowledge

Example Three:


36/180

Indigenous people are[pejorative].Example Four:


37/180

Indigenous people are[pejorative].Example Four:


38/180



! Opening remark implies Chief TheresaSpence is a bad person without citation& ignores the findings of a Deloittes

audit to the contrary

! Second point asserts the people wereoffered jobs but refused work whiledestroying their home again nocitations and libellous in intent

! Third comment implies governmentspend billions and the present policy

doesnt work. No citations and nocontext. It is simply a gratuitous racistremark

Example Four:


39/180

Aboriginal people benefit fromfree (insert a stereotype).


40/180

Aboriginal people benefit fromfree stuff.Example One:


41/180

Aboriginal people benefit fromfree stuff.Example One:


42/180

Aboriginal people benefit fromfree stuff.


! This comment blames all Indian issues on the Indiansand their Stone Age society. There is noacknowledgement that for 500 years the white manhas disrupted Indigenous culture and in the last 150years has almost destroyed it with the IRS and the

Indian Act.

NAHO Inter-generational Trauma Research

Native Social Work Journal IRS IntergenerationalTrauma

LEAF Report Aggregating Reasearch on MMIW

! The poster ducks blame saying it is because we dontassimilate. No mention of the benefits or sacrificesassimilation would involve.

! Without a study or citation to support his words hesays Indians want everything for free. No definitionof everything. No mention of legitimate treatyobligations or the role of the Indian Act in creatingwards of the state fiduciary responsibilities.

Example One:


43/180

Aboriginal people benefit from freeeducation and preferential treatment.

Example Two:


44/180

Aboriginal people benefit from freeeducation and preferential treatment.

Example Two:


45/180

Aboriginal people benefit from freeeducation and preferential treatment. Modern Indigenous Reality:

! This is a common dodge. Unable tocomment on a specific story, they gooff topic in another thread in order toexhibit their biases.

! The issue he raises is the DiversityPolicy for priority Aboriginaladmissions. He alleges they get specialrights and privileges, although itsunclear what they are. No effort toshow how this is prejudicial toCanadians.

! He does imply that there must belower standards for Aboriginals. Nocitations to prove his point. This isdemeaning and colonial; it is racist.

Example Two:


46/180

Aboriginal people benefit from freerides to positions of importance..Example Three:


47/180

Aboriginal people benefit from freerides to positions of importance.Example Three:


48/180

Aboriginal people benefit from freerides to positions of importance..


!

This poster alleges that Dr. PamPalmater must have gotten a freeride by Ryerson to get where she

is.

!

No citations, an allegation that heraccreditation is proclaimed .

!

The suggestion that there isspecial treatment based on herrace.

!

Slanderous in the context of thestory it was posted under.

Example Three:


49/180

Aboriginal people shouldassimilate.


50/180

Aboriginal people shouldassimilate.Example One:


51/180

Aboriginal people shouldassimilate.Example One:


52/180



! More misinformed, racism-based rhetoric via theNational Post.

! In response to a story on Indigenous schooling, thisposter takes the urban Native example andnormalizes his Aboriginal friends. He assimilatesthem by saying they got a Canadian education. Iwonder if his Aboriginal friends actually agreewith this or if they even exist?

! The lie he puts to all this is the belief Indigenoussegregate themselves on reserves. White men tookour rights and put us on reserves courtesy of theIndian Act.

! Indigenous People living and making careers inToronto have friendship centres and other facilities to

socializehttp://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=7b7964445c780410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD&vgnextchannel=5e018fb738780410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD

Example One:


53/180

Aboriginal people shouldassimilate.Example Two:


54/180

Aboriginal people shouldassimilate.Example Two:


55/180



! Starts with a somewhat interestinganalysis of First Nations in Manitoba andhas some assumptions on negotiatingwith individual communities or thetotality in Manitoba. It is unclear whatthe negotiations would be for.

! In most cases historically, it can be shownthat negotiations means what will theIndians give up?

Example Two:


56/180



!

Next he talks about a plan to buildsomething. It is unclear what ismeant except First Nations

students would learn a trade. Theobjective being to get them toleave their reserves. The final goalto close half the reserves. Closingreserves would open up the landso more resource extraction andhydro infrastructure could happenand less would be spentadministering the Indian Act. Atno point is the desire of the FirstNations considered. Paternalism,colonialism and racism.

Example Two:


57/180

Aboriginal people shouldassimilate.Example Three:


58/180

Aboriginal people shouldassimilate.Example Three:


59/180



!

Unsupported by any studies orcitations, this poster decides whatis best for First Nations education.

Racist and paternalistic. Offeringeducation with Indigenouscontent is somehow watereddown. No citations or studiesoffered to support this contention.

!

Finally a slight about the noblesavage and what matters is what

white people think. Make achange we like and by the wayshow up for work. Stereotypes,demeaning, paternalistic.

Example Three:


60/180

Aboriginal People should get offof reserves/out of remote areas.


61/180

Aboriginal People should get offof reserves/out of remote areas.Example One:


62/180

Aboriginal People should get offof reserves/out of remote areas.Example One:


63/180



! The opening If makes this commentsuspect. He doesnt live in a place with bigissues and poor living positions. As a settler,he has no connection with the land, unlike

Indigenous People on the same land forhundreds of years or more.

! An easy statement while lacking anyfirsthand experience and with no ties to theland.

! Now we start to get to the meat of the post.Overcrowding - Indigenous families are toobig if there is overcrowding. He mentionsnothing of the 8500 to 10,500 housing unitshortages due to AANDC incompetence,(http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/oss_20140205_e_39080.html).

Example One:


64/180



! Finally we get to the crux of this postersracism: We as a country should notmaintain people in perpetuity in remoteareas. Canada chose the reserve sites in the

overwhelming number of cases and decidedwhere bands would go so as not to interferewith white settlement. Now they are homeand the people are connected to the land.Canada made treaty over large areas foraccess to the land. The treaties extend inperpetuity. Thats the deal.

! The remaining part of the comment dealswith what the issue really is: he obviouslylikes the perks of being where there are no

problems and his living conditions are goodfrom having $600 billion of revenue virtuallyfor free from unceded Indian land annuallywashing through the economy. It is not okayin his mind that there be a cost for this.Whole Nations and communities shouldleave their homes so he can save a few bucks.

Example One:


65/180

Aboriginal People should get offof reserves/out of remote areas.Example Two:


66/180

Aboriginal People should get offof reserves/out of remote areas.Example Two:


67/180



! Exaggeration on the age of the treaties to sound harddone by. No citations to prove treaties are beingupheld contrary to readily available evidence viacitations.

! Implies Indians dont pay taxes. (

http://www.td.com/document/PDF/economics/special/sg0612_aboriginal_myth.pdf)

! Indians are lazy and need to get to work leaving theirhomes where the white man sent them. Sounds likea set-up.

! Indians wait for jobs to come to them. No, not really.The land base is insufficient considering resourceactivities to support the bands with traditional foodsources. Why have a job and move from where you

are connected to all that matters to you if you canhunt, fish, trap and farm to support yourself.

! No citations to support his opinions. Just bashingIndians hoping for a tax break with the Indian takingall the risk and making all the changes.

Example Two:


68/180

Aboriginal people must get overthe past.


69/180

Aboriginal people must get overthe past.Example One:


70/180

Aboriginal people must get overthe past.Example One:


71/180



! Semi-acknowledges that IndigenousPeoples within Canada have beenoppressed with the caveat of, but sohave lots of other people.

! Denies First Nations the right to justiceby saying they deserve compassionrather than justice. As if you cannothave both? On what grounds wouldjustice be denied? White privilege.

! The analogy of the life sentence beingpassed onto the next generation as ajustification to avoid accountabilityand responsibility as a nation for theIRS, the Sixties Scoop and for Treatyobligations is a case of white privilegeand bad logic.

Example One:


72/180



! Being a citizen of a nation where youdirectly and indirectly benefit from thefruits of oppression of your ancestors

carries a responsibility to seek restorativejustice.

! If the same forms of oppression exist inthe present, the onus is direct to remedy.

Example One:


73/180

Aboriginal people must get overthe past.Example Two:


74/180

Aboriginal people must get overthe past.Example Two:


75/180



!

This one is convoluted racist spewthat covers multiple stereotypes.

!

On commenting on recent tollblockade in Morley - first point ishard to understand. It might beimplying the majority ofIndigenous behave badly and thatwont change until democracy?

Majority? Make it change if youwant change.

Example Two:


76/180



! 'Indians live in the past'. No citations forclaim. Simply an obviously biased opinion;

"

Acknowledges suffering the past by Indigenouspeople. Says get over it, everyones ancestorshave suffered. Poster does not acknowledgeoppression continues today with racistgovernment policies, boil water advisories,inadequate housing, poor health, chronicpoverty, sub-standard education, high rates ofsuicide and violence etc.

" Everybody has to deal with the past and if they

want a decent present. Hardly considers thepast IS the present for Indigenous in Canada.

" Compares her past with Indigenous.Conveniently ignores the Treaties and theobligations of the Indian Act.

Example Two:


77/180



! Stereotypes are: Indians get freehandouts, Indian rely on Canada toprotect them after invading ourland, Indians whine and cry when they

dont get what they want.

! Somehow she sees Morley reserve asan embarrassment. No explanation.

! Talks about a wonderful reserveoutside Salmon Arm with no name,but sounds suspiciously like theOosoyoos Band in Penticton. Nocitations for this telling us we are notall bad.

! Plumbing the depth by saying Theygrow good wine.

Example Two:


78/180

Aboriginal people must get overthe past.Example Three:


79/180

Aboriginal people must get overthe past.Example Three:


80/180



! A single Indigenous person collected tolls for crossingreserve land at Morley. This underscores the typical rantof rhetoric and stereotypes.

! First the commenter suggests that '"Certain" people seizeevery opportunity to spoil things for others. No proof, no

citations. Its a fact because he said so. He also kindlysuggests those others are "good people" as if that

backhanded compliment erases the bigotry contained inhis comment.

! Wishes for a government that would make the Indiansknuckle under and admit the past was the past, (althoughreality says it is also the present).

! Conflated the action of the man in Morley with some vaguereference to amends for some undefined past somethinginto a need to stand on our own 2 feet. Implications arethat we dont stand on our own and that we want some

undefined thing.

! White privilege I know some Indians and they arent likethese other Indians. (Because they know you?) Norationale.

! Canadians owe nothing to anybody is a denial of Inherent/Treaty rights. You get the benefit you pay the price.

Example Three:


81/180



! No acknowledgement of the Morley Bands right todecide who enters their land. Says no harm reroutingtraffic although the area (reserve?), which is notproperly maintained (no citations), so take his wordfor it. Intimation - Indians are lazy?

! Agrees with another poster that an opportunity tobridge a gap was missed. White privilege because theadvantage is in settlers favour to drive through thereserve. No indications what the benefit is to Morleyexcept more traffic and an unthankful public becausethe area is not properly maintained land.

! Out of nowhere and totally disconnect from thearticle and everything else, the poster saysAboriginals get their own awards shows then goes onto say there would be outrage if there was aCaucasian Awards show. Isnt that one called the

Oscars?

! Last statement calls on undefined people to sayenough is enough. Is he talking about the Oscars?

Example Three:


82/180

Aboriginal people must get overthe past.Example Four:


83/180

Aboriginal people must get overthe past.Example Four:


84/180



! The opening comment to someone raising the issuesof the TRC and the dysfunction caused by theresidential schools positions the issue as a 1700skind of problem. The last school closed in 1996.Typical racist deflection, not my problem, ithappened long ago.

! Next comment says Indigenous need to reconcile toCanada. Wait! Didnt the TRC say it was the otherway around? And, its all about Canadas future,totally ignoring what Indigenous might want out ofthe relationship.

! Reconciliation means dropping grudges, (treatyrights, restitution for colonialism, fair treatment aregrudges)?

! White privilege working towards common goals.What are these common goals?. Most consist ofIndians giving up something. Canadas goal is stillassimilation to get the remaining land and resources.

! The American were bad to Indians. The Britishwerent as bad, but they did stupid stuff. Noexplanation and no citations.

Example Four:


85/180



! Canada took over and there will still be some badthings, but Canadians own Aboriginals, (the newslavery) and want them to join a better Canada. Toheck with what the Indians want. Complete denial ofIndigenous rights and Indigenous aspirations.

! Next a convoluted threat. Use of the aggressive termuprisingand saying they will suffer. How, if notviolence. Settlers do everything else to us includingstarvation, dispossession.

! We will miss some unspecified opportunity if westand up for our rights. What? More oppression?

! White men hate Indian Chiefs because they aregreedy, (stereotype #9 the chiefs stole the money).Chiefs dont improve the plight of the people. Thismay be true in some cases. However, the Chiefscannot change the Indian Act, the legislation ofsettler state, and other root causes of subjugation andoppression.

Example Four:


86/180



! Suggests First Nations will beindulging in domestic terrorism withno examples, no citations. It appears

to be related to standing up forTreaties and changes to the Indian Act.

! Issue the threat that the response toany uprising would be scrapping theIndian Act, making the British Treaties(apparently not Canadian Treaties)null and void and stopping funding aspotential election issues if Indians

misbehave. (Referendum?)

! Nothing new about threatening us withmore colonialism.

Example Four:


87/180

Traditional indigenous ways cannotbe reconciled with the modern world.


88/180

Traditional indigenous ways cannot bereconciled with the modern world.

Example One:


89/180


Example One:


90/180

Traditional indigenous ways cannot bereconciled with the modern world. Modern Indigenous Reality:

! Arguing against compulsory Indigenous historyclasses at University of Winnipeg.

! The racist theory built on Terra Nullius and the

Doctrine of Discovery exhibited. There was nothingthere until the white man came denies thousands ofyear of history and cultural development.

! This poster argues that there is no obligation to FirstNations because the white man has brought us allthis civilized stuff. He fails to acknowledge they alsobrought deadly diseases, oppression, culturaldisintegration, pollution, and racism.

! No acknowledgement of Indigenous contributions to

the world.

! Focuses very clearly on how settlers value thingsand that is the litmus test of having value.

Example One:


91/180


! Equates traditional with living in tents andtrapping and not having things.

! Dismisses Indigenous values of connectionto the land, family, spirituality food

sovereignty, sovereignty of the land.

! Resolves the conflict between settler realityand Indigenous by demeaning anything notabout stuff. White privilege.

! Embodies the belief that traditional meansstone age living conditions rather than a

system of values tied to Indigenous ways ofbeing.

! Presumes Indigenous would have otherwiselived in isolation and therefore incapable ofparticipation in modern history.

Example One:


92/180


Example Two:


93/180


Example Two:


94/180


! The Indigenous person quoted (Gallagher) identifiesthe impacts of colonialism on traditional Indigenousvalues and states they have not transitioned from thedevastation caused by colonization to where theyneed to be as rejuvenated or restored Peoples.

! Embodies the belief that traditional means stone-age living conditions rather than a system of valuestied to Indigenous ways of being. Ignores the facttraditional Indians can be traditional and work andlive in urban environments.

! Uses the statement by Gallagher as a club to convincethe reader of the benefits of assimilation while neverexplaining how it is good for Indigenous People.

! He denies colonization is happening in the 21stcentury when attributing the fight to the 19 thcentury.This ignores Bills C-38, C-45, C-10, C-27, the IndianAct, the Comprehensive Land Claims policy and theFirst Nations self-government policy. All arerecognized as racist and colonial legislationunilaterally imposed.

Example Two:


95/180


Example Three:


96/180


Example Three:


97/180


! This comment serves to show theincomprehensible lack ofunderstanding of what traditionalmeans in an Indigenous context. There

are plenty of citations, but racistsrarely fail to let facts get in the way of apreferred story.

! Conflates owning or using modernitems and conveniences with a viewthat traditional is the antithesis of themeaning of a traditional Indigenousworld view. Thoroughly mixes up the

two discrete notions of traditionaland traditional way of being.

! Has the audacity to tell someone whatbeliefs or values that one can or cannothave as in his definition of traditions.

Example Three:


98/180


Example Four:


99/180


Example Four:


100/180


! Interesting leaps of logic, especially intalking about First Nations usingbanned methods. The importantquestion is, banned by whom? Banned

by the settler state is the answer.Historically bans are done toadvantage the commercial fisheries atthe cost of First Nations harvests.

! The poster argues if you use onetraditional method then you need touse all traditional methods as if it weresome universal law of equilibrium.

! What the poster does not identify is thewaters are unceded Indigenousterritory. It is theirs to harvest.

Example Four:


101/180


! Studies on west coast salmon fisheriesindicate commercial open oceanfishing is a big factor in declining fishstocks; not Indigenous harvests.

! He provides no citations to support hiscontention natives attack commercialfishery and no explanations of whythis might happen.

! Cannot reconcile the right of FirstNations to use any method they wantbecause it is their territory and their

fishery and his white privilege ingetting to tell them what they can orcannot do.

Example Four:


102/180

All the Aboriginal people wereconquered; there are no moreAboriginal peoples.


103/180

All the Aboriginal people wereconquered; there are no moreAboriginal peoples.Example One:


104/180

All the Aboriginal people wereconquered; there are no moreAboriginal peoples.Example One:


105/180



The CBC Censors the Truth one thread at a time

! Poster tries to deny the Treaty agreements(all, both pre and post confederation) sayingit was a charade to prevent bloodshed.

! Implies First Nations should be grateful wewerent annihilated.

! Uses these two arguments to escaperesponsibility for honouring the treaties thuskeeping Indigenous marginalized.

! References to Zulus, England, and Africa are

immaterial and have no bearing on the FirstNations experience on Turtle Island.

Example One:


106/180



KB97

! Be grateful we didnt wipe you out is

the argument for not honouring thetreaties.

! Implies we are somehow conquered bymaking Nation to Nation treaties.

Example One:


107/180

All the Aboriginal people wereconquered; there are no moreAboriginal peoples.Example Two:


108/180

All the Aboriginal people wereconquered; there are no moreAboriginal peoples.Example Two:


109/180



!

Applies thats life theory for nothonouring the treaties andsovereignty.

!

States Indigenous conqueredbecause it is a law of nature,ignoring that it is really a case ofTreaty law and Inherent Rights.

!

Those who promote the ideas ofTreaty Rights and Sovereignty are

history revisionists.

Example Two:


110/180



! Moral relativismis the view that moraljudgments are true or false only relativeto some particular standpoint (forinstance, that of a culture or a historicalperiod) and that no standpoint isuniquely privileged over all others.

! Fails to connect how moral relativismhas anything to do with Treaty Rights andSovereignty except possibly to say thatwas then and this is now and morals havechanged to make it OK for your Treatyrights to be denied.

! Pretty hard argument to maintain since itcommits settlers to the moral abyss.

Example Two:


111/180

"But the literal interpretation ofthe treaties says..."


112/180

"But the literal interpretation ofthe treaties says..."Example One:


113/180

"But the literal interpretation ofthe treaties says..."Example One:


114/180



! Makes the case that if it were Muslims ratherthan First Nations as treaty partners, thenthe treaties would be honoured. Ignores theobvious mistake that the former is a religionand the latter is a Nation.

! This poster has been advised multiple timesby multiple readers with supporting citationsthat literal readings, especially of thenumbered treaties is inconsistent with the

body of law because it ignores oral history ofIndigenous yet once again. Uses a literalreading to support her white privilege.

! Why does CBC allow persistent and

malicious racist practices like this?

Example One:


115/180



! On the false basis she argues only Treaty 9applies to all treaties when it comes toeducation.

! Reserves the right to honour treaties at hersole discretion of correct interpretation.

! Argues that English treatment of Irish andher inability to make a claim should governFirst Nations claims for their land. Laws inIreland and England have nothing to do withIndigenous Treaty and Inherent Rights onTurtle Island.

! Because she chooses not to complainmeans Indians should shut up and preserve

her white privilege.

! What does it matter what she wants to do?Should that determine whether First Nationsfight for their rights?

Example One:


116/180

"But the literal interpretation ofthe treaties says..."Example Two:


117/180

"But the literal interpretation ofthe treaties says..."Example Two:


118/180



Baiting comment by feigning lackof understanding of a literalreading of a treaty to resolve hisdislike for the accepted legal

interpretation of the Treaties.

Ignores that treaties werenegotiated prior to the Indian Actthat then demanded mandatoryelected chiefs and councils.

Quote provided appears to be an

interpretationof a sourcedocument, with no citationprovided.

Ignores the body of law.

Example Two:


119/180

"But the literal interpretation ofthe treaties says..."Example Three:


120/180

"But the literal interpretation ofthe treaties says..."Example Three:


121/180



! Literal reading of the treaty as a generalization andno citation.

! Inflation pressures led to requests for more money.Again unsubstantiated claim-which bands, when,what were terms?

! Alleging the government made a deal to give moremoney with proof of need for more money (FNTA)without citation or references.

! Stating both sides agreed is an outright lie. It wasnever negotiated. It was unilaterally imposed.

! Another exaggeration of the truth. Bands dont wantto show very specific types of items, as noted in thearticle. Ignore the truth to marginalize.

! Last comment denies the fiduciary responsibility ofthe government that trumps every other objection torestrict payments.

Example Three:


122/180

"But the literal interpretation ofthe treaties says..."Example Four:


123/180

"But the literal interpretation ofthe treaties says..."Example Four:


124/180

"But the literal interpretation ofthe treaties says..."Example Four:continued


125/180



!

His failure to do researchunderscores a willingness todeceive to make a point.

! I found the following crediblecitations with one query in 2minutes:

!

http://www2.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/aboriginal/

5J_COL2011TreatyEducation.pdf

! http://esask.uregina.ca/entry/aboriginal_education_policy.html

Example Four:


126/180



!

His failure to do researchunderscores a willingness todeceive to make a point.

! I found the following credible

citations with one query in 2minutes:

! http://www2.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/

aboriginal/5J_COL2011TreatyEducation.pdf

! http://esask.uregina.ca/entry/

aboriginal_education_policy.html

Example Four:


127/180

Aboriginal people are supported byCanadian taxpayers/do not pay taxes.


128/180


Example One:


129/180


Example One:


130/180

Aboriginal people are supported byCanadian taxpayers/do not pay taxes. Modern Indigenous Reality:

Makes the assumption of two things:o

Band does not understand the funding rules

that apply to them.o

Assumes taxpayers are all non-Indian and

all monies are from tax revenues.

Standing up for First Nations rights by taking

action = punitive action will be taken =colonialism.

Implies First Nations dont take economicresponsibility; ignores the moose in the room

reserve system/Indian Act restraints/revenuecontributions from unceded lands.

Example One:


131/180


Is the reverse true Canadians suck First Nations

teat?

Ignores the fact that courts awards costs withdecision. If settler government wins = taxdollars/if settler government losses = tax dollars

just more.

Ignores Trust Fund mystery.

Example One:


132/180


Example Two:


133/180


Example Two:


134/180


Best argument forhttps://www.psychologytoday.com/

blog/millennial-media/201304/do-racism-conservatism-and-low-iq-go-hand-in-hand.

First part is incoherent likelyindicating extreme anger suppressingability to articulate thoughtscoherently. One wonders how thismade it past moderation.

Indicates treaty obligations aregenerational/one-sided. I will keep

my benefits of the treaty (and thosefrom ignoring the treaty) anddisenfranchise you from your treatyrights.

Example Two:


135/180


The standard FirstNations dont work anddont pay taxes statement.(http://www.td.com/document/PDF/economics/special/sg0612_aboriginal_myth.pdf)

Makes the falsedeclaration that!hisincome goes to FirstNations.

Example Two:


136/180


Example Three:


137/180


Example Three:


138/180


Questions the rights of First Nations tocontrol access to their reserve land.(Check AANDC rules re settlersentering reserve lands).

Toll charge as a protest against

unfettered access to reserve lands inspite of signage.

Denies rights to control of reservelands due to tax dollars transferred.

Doesnt understand First Nationsfunding and Fed/Provincial

responsibility. Conflates government funding with

ownership to deny rights.

Example Three:


139/180


Example Four:


140/180


Example Four:


141/180


Sales tax treaty-based exemptionoff reserve with income variesprovince to province. May havepaid partial taxes. Denial of treaty

rights.

Implies without citation thatnatives off reserve getmysterious claw backs on incometax.

Privilege of treaty based sales tax

exemption ignores the benefits ofland usage and resource access.

Example Four:


142/180


Example Five:


143/180


Example Five:


144/180


Bullying tactics of Settler toward aFirst Nations person stating theirIndian Act and Treaty rights to taxexemptions.

Denies benefits held by Canadians thru

access to unceded land and resourcesand resources on treaty lands.

Treaty rights associated with access toland called extortion. White privilege.

Outright lie that tax rate is 50% and itall goes to Indians.

Their Crap lives are Natives fault.

Example Five:


145/180


Assimilate and it will make everythingbetter, but dont ask me what I amprepared to give up. White privilege.

Lets be buddies, but you need to give

up your beliefs because they irritateme. No tradeoffs required for the

white side.

Insisting on respect for Inherent andTreaty rights is bitter foot stomping.Repressing Indigenous People is okayas long as my white privilege remainsas is and I get tax relief.

Your subjugation = my tax benefit.

Example Five:


146/180


147/180

Residential schools werebeneficial to indigenous peoples.


148/180

Residential schools werebeneficial to indigenous peoples.Example One:


149/180

Residential schools were non-harmful/beneficial to indigenous peoples.

Example One:


150/180

Residential schools werebeneficial to indigenous peoples. Modern Indigenous Reality:

The poster first devalues theWeaver comment byinferring prior knowledge ofWeaver - assuming neitherone of us actually attended aresidential school...

He or she attempts toestablish the necessity ofhaving to rely solely onwitness testimony, but then

discredits such testimony asonly the writtenremembrance of an admittedalcoholic.

Example One:


151/180


This would appear to be a reference toEdmund Metatawabins book, book UpGhost River, reviewed in the story on

which these comments are based.

Metatawabin suffered from alcoholismas coping mechanism for dealing withthe trauma he experienced while in anIndian Residential School. This wouldseem to be a circular argument in thatthe poster refuses to believeMetatawabins story of beingtraumatized by the residential schoolexperience because he is a drunk,

when it was this very trauma that led tohis being a drunk.

Example One:


152/180


The poster ignores the overwhelmingevidence of the processes and protocolsin place in the Truth and

Reconciliation Commission, nor doeshe understand that compensation is a

by-product of survivors realization ofholding Canada and the churchesaccountable for their actions.

Furthermore, the poster uses nocitations while suggestion that oneagree with his point of view by merit ofhis or her own authority. Thus, he orshe essentially gives him or herselfpermission to come to a judgment.

Example One:


153/180

Residential schools werebeneficial to indigenous peoples.Example Two:


154/180

Residential schools werebeneficial to indigenous peoples.Example Two:


155/180


Self-supporting opinion without citations tosupport the understand.

o

Contrary to the TRC Executive Summaryo

Contrary to the lawsuits claims

Assumes the schools had curriculum and

normalcy when TRC Exec Summary says

otherwise was the case.

Assumes an assimilated future is what thestudents wanted.

Assumes assimilation is better.

Fails to acknowledge the life they were taken

from was already dysfunctional due tocolonialism /trauma/cultural destruction/

previous IRS students as parents.

Example Two:


156/180

Residential schools werebeneficial to indigenous peoples.Example Three:


157/180

Residential schools werebeneficial to indigenous peoples.Example Three:


158/180


! Racist sanctioning racist.

! In the face of factual evidence ofcultural genocide being the intention,claim it an opportunity- sanitization,

denial.

! Assimilation = opportunity deniesbasic rights of mutual co-existence.UNDRIP.

! Assimilate and get the rest of theIndians land and resources.

! Touts success without a citation tosupport the claim.

! Possibly writing this stuff just to havefun. Does CBC condone racism as aleisure sport?

Example Three:


159/180

Residential schools werebeneficial to indigenous peoples.Example Four:


160/180

Residential schools werebeneficial to indigenous peoples.Example Four:


161/180


Unsubstantiated claim no onetalked of abuse. White privilegesilences the abused.

No citations; self-serving storytelling.

Denies TRC executive summary,Metatawabin, and heinousdiscipline noted such as electricchair and sodomy.

Unsubstantiated claims of

undescribed fun times by studentsmeant to diminish cases of rape,isolation, slave labour.

Example Four:


162/180


Deliberate lies for which the CBCis being used for leisure sport ofdemeaning IRS survivors.

Associates uncovering the truth of

the IRS with compensation.

Claims stories are made up for

financial benefit. Defies reasonand ignores the TRC.

So bad it begs the question

whether this is some form ofentertainment for Canuck47.

Example Four:


163/180

All people should be equal inCanada.


164/180

All people should be equal inCanada.Example One:


165/180

All people should be equal inCanada.Example One:


166/180



This comment simply denies theexistence of colonialism in the modernSettler State, where colonialism is definedas the policy or practice of acquiring fullor partial political control over another

country, occupying it with settlers, andexploiting it economically. (OxfordDictionary)

This policy, which denies any and alltreaty relationships, was employed by

both the French and English states datingfrom 1534, and remain in effect via theCanadian state and its agents through thepresent day. Examples include The

Indian Act (1876), the ComprehensiveLand Claims Policy (1986), the FirstNations Self-Government Policy (BillS-212 died on the order paper), and theFirst Nations Transparency Act (2014).

Example One:


167/180

All people should be equal inCanada.Example Two:


168/180

All people should be equal inCanada.Example Two:


169/180



The first poster, Walleye1, demonstrates very clearlythe phenomenon of white fragility, defined byDiAngelo, R. (2011). White Fragility. InternationalJournal of Critical Pedagogy. He equates totalsilence on the issue of racism to its cure, suggestingthat the receipt of government handouts by onegroup of people is at the root of the problem ofracism in that this act creates inequality. Inactuality, it is the denial of Inherent and TreatyRights which has resulted in this inequality.

Furthermore, the statement everyone contribute tothis great country of ours would imply that theposter does not believe that indigenous peopleshave made any contributions to Canada, astatement which entirely ignores the existence ofrevenues from unceded indigenous lands, trustfunds which are used extensively for the sustenanceof the Canadian economy, and the very origin of thecountrys name.

Example Two:


170/180



In the end, this is an argument for assimilation inthat racism will only die because there will simplynot be diversity.

The second poster similarly diverts responsibility

for racism to activists and to indigenous peoples;the use of Chretiens quotation blames the victims ofracism for their own discrimination, insinuatingthat the fight for Inherent and Treaty Rights andagainst assimilation is the cause for thisdiscrimination.

Slavko:

Chretien quote codifies all people should be equal inCanada. Indigenous Inherent Rights and Treatyright as the cause for settler racism to Indigenous.

Example Two:


171/180



Slavkoseeks to protect racist c ommentary by neutralizing it.

Dog whistle what he really means is Having made true equality basedon Inherent and Treaty Rights the greatest good, the activists have madethe case for settlers to deny them to maintain power base and socialadvantages.

Its the activists fault settlers dont honour Indigenous rights.

Walleye1

Equates not talking about racism to curing racism as a social ill.

White fragility only settlers get peeved when settler racism is exposed.

Indians get free handouts = inequality.

Make everyone equal = denial of Inherent and Treaty Rights UNDRIPtherefore = inequality.

Implying everyone contributed to Canada except the Indigenous withoutconsidering:

o

Trust Fundso

Revenues from unceded landso

Canadas existence (Cdn flag red on two ends)

Take away Indigenous Rights and racism dies code for: Indians gone atlast.

More respect when youre dead or assimilated so you remainmarginalized and silenced.

Example Two:


172/180

All people should be equal inCanada.Example Three:


173/180

All people should be equal inCanada.Example Three:


174/180



Treaty farce = Equity is irrelevant as long as Ikeep my privilege

Most people is code for white people (the realpower base)/settlers. Excludes Indigenouson the basis of their legal Inherent and

Treaty rights

Conflates Indigenous Inherent Rights andTreaty Rights as Nation to Nation with theIndian Act that racializes Indigenous Nationsto make the false statement that Indigenousrights are race based = Tittler argument

Makes an oppressed minority (Indigenous)racist for standing up for their rights.Demonizes the opponents of settler racism.

Meaning of racism distorted

Example Three:


175/180

All people should be equal inCanada.Example Four:


176/180

All people should be equal inCanada.Example Four:


177/180



! Hes right. if he is restricting his comment toCanada generally excluding First Nations.

! I make this declaration on behalf of Canada,therefore it must be done.

! Equality for white settler = still oppressedIndigenous.

! It is not modern thinking to concede rights toIndians.

! Tear up the Indian Act conflates racist lawwith Inherent/Treaty Rights = special status.

! No understanding of the Treaties andInherent Rights.

! Assimilation equals equality conflict withInherent/Treaty Rights.

Example Four:


178/180



! The personal story appeal to accept his bogusstatement Native Canadians. Settler needto define people = blood quantum,assimilation by suggestion

! Proud as a Canadian because he mentallystripped these people of their rights.

! Claims he speaks for all Canadianscommon racist form of inclusion.

! Emphasizes anger as a threat to thosestanding up for their rights.

! Equates: Tax dollars = sodomy; whiners =

First Nations.! Ignores truth from Auditors General.

Example Four:


179/180

The Coalition against Racism in Mainstream Media

Louise GaddRobyn Lawson

Sandy MacDonald

Rachel Ann Snow

Kim Weaver


180/180

Copyright 2016 by Kim P. Weaver and Coalition Against Racism in Mainstream Media

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or byany mean, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any other information

storage and retrieval system, without permission from the publisher.

Published in 2015 by Coalition Against Racism in Mainstream Mediaand

Kim P. Weaver (Thohahente)

CRRF Presentation Final Presentation

Documents

Transcript of CRRF Presentation Final Presentation