1063 replies to this topic

[Victoria Watcher]

My position is that they were simply too small in number and in advancement, and had too short a lifespan to cause any environmental degradation.

Their “middens” were just dumps. Did they make environmental assessments before they located same?

They were a simple, not highly advanced people. Just like our ancestors were. No need for tall tales.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 15 March 2024 - 07:24 AM.

[dasmo]

You should read some Hillary Stewart books. Cedar is great. They are beautiful books and might give you some more perspective.

[Victoria Watcher]

There is simply no accurate research.

[Nparker]

The Disneyfication of pre-contact indigenous history isn't really telling the whole story though is it?

[dasmo]

There is plenty.
The Disney version is of course BS. But seriously. At least get somewhat informed. Go to the museum and comb over the artif….. oh….. ya…..

[dasmo]

Start here…. Cedar: Tree of Life to the Northwest Coast Indians
https://www.amazon.c.../ref=mp_s_a_1_1

[Victoria Watcher]

There is evidence they had religious beliefs, that’s common to man. And I guess unique to man also. So the artifacts show this, plus tools etc.

But no evidence pointing to “stewardship”. Maybe they thanked the sun god for their food offerings or whatever. But that’s not an indication of any type of larger environmental awareness.

A bit further south the indigenous were big fans of human sacrifice. The “involuntary” type. That’s not very enlightened.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 15 March 2024 - 07:42 AM.

[dasmo]

Out east it is documented. The confederacy of the Iroquois. The US constitution is based on theirs. Humans are going to human, yes. But…. that should also make you realize they had a civilization and were not savages. Out east their “slaves” were part of their justice system. Another “family” would have to pay reparations for damages they caused on another. This might be with a life. Not that much different than our prisons. Some were spoils of war etc. So about as savage as we are today.

Edited by dasmo, 15 March 2024 - 07:55 AM.

[Victoria Watcher]

I never said they were savages. I’m just saying they did not have to tools or knowledge to understand conservation.

[dasmo]

The evidence suggests the opposite.

[Victoria Watcher]

Let me put it another way. They simply didn’t have the numbers or the scale to do environmental damage.

Lucky that way.

[dasmo]

It doesn’t mean they were angels or something. The Haida themselves almost made the sea otter extinct trading their fir to the Europeans. But as for their way of life it is fairly well documented that they stewarded land, they didn’t own it. This is in part why the concept wasn’t understood. It’s also why there is contention around the Douglas treaty since that’s considered a peace treaty to them, not an ownership contract. In the laws of the confederacy of the Iroquois they outline the differences between the cultivated land and the shared land that all the nations steward. That confederacy speaks to their humanity as it is called the Great Law of Peace because it was brought to them by the Peacemaker to end thousands of years of revenge killing.

Shoot, you can visit the south end of Saltspring and see the cedar stripping there. Sure it’s possible their population size had an effect on things but that’s true to this day. Case in point cutting down 235 hectares of forest to serve 15,000 more homes.

[dasmo]

Let me put it another way. They simply didn’t have the numbers or the scale to do environmental damage.

Lucky that way.

That’s entirely possible too haha.

[Victoria Watcher]

I can’t blame them for sea otter problems either. They had no way of knowing the range or lifecycle of them. Or that there simply wasn’t unlimited numbers.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 15 March 2024 - 08:39 AM.

[dasmo]

You also can’t discount greed. The pelts were in high demand and the Europeans had magic items to trade!

[Victoria Watcher]

I don’t call it greed. Nothing wrong with making hay while the sun shines. I can imagine Europeans also traded for tools that would seem incredibly valuable to them. Saws, knives, that kind of thing.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 15 March 2024 - 08:41 AM.

[Tony]

I think this discussion illustrates an important point. We look at things from a particular perspective that is based on our cultural upbringing. This is the filter through which we view things. 

 

With respect to conservation I look at conservation from a more scientific approach, for example if there is a perceived problem collect data as a baseline, select an action collect more data to see the effects.

 

Some cultures have evolved  cultural practices and beliefs that can result in the preservation or conservation of important elements in the environment.

 

From my belief in the scientific type of approach, treating the evolution of cultural practices and beliefs as examples of conservation is a reach too far.

It is hog wash!

 

My cultural filter denial does not mean that indigenous cultural practices and beliefs are not also examples of long term conservation practices.

[dasmo]

Bias is assumed. No need to self flagellate over it. Even language itself which is why I put "Family" and "slave" in quotations. So yes, even "conservation" can be interpreted different ways. We were talking about "stewardship" though. "Seven generation stewardship is a concept that urges the current generation of humans to live and work for the benefit of the seventh generation into the future. It is believed to have originated with the Iroquois – Great Law of the Iroquois" Or the Great Law of Peace - the Haudenosaunee. This is documented.... 

 

Bottom line is the truth is almost impossible to know because it is relative. Discussing the possibilities of what could be true is a worthwhile endeavor though... 

 

[Victoria Watcher]

A B.C. judge says our courts need to deal with non-Indigenous offenders trying to game the system, warning that a ‘tsunami’ of Indigenous identity fraud is coming, driven by convicted criminals seeking smaller sentences.

 

“A tsunami is coming; driven by the desire of non-Indigenous people to get what they perceive to be the benefits of identifying as Indigenous,” wrote Judge David Patterson in a recent Prince Rupert ruling.

 

Patterson says Crown and defence came up with an ‘unduly lenient’ joint submission for the former Baptist Associate Pastor Nathan Legault, who was convicted of making and possessing child **rnography, based on Legault’s newfound Indigeneity.

 

Patterson found Legault’s claims of Indigeneity baseless but reluctantly agreed to the joint submission that allowed the 30-year-old man to avoid hard jail time. But not before calling on the courts to deal with non-Indigenous offenders falsely claiming Indigenous identity.

 

“I am of the view that the only way to give meaning to the Supreme Court of Canada’s teaching…is for judges to be alive to the issue of Indigenous identity fraud and require some proof that satisfies the court that the person being sentenced is entitled to be sentenced as an Indigenous person,” Patterson said as he handed Legault a conditional sentence of two years less a day.

 

Patterson’s concerns around Indigenous identity fraud arise from a Supreme Court of Canada decision known as Gladue — which requires judges to pay “particular attention” to the circumstances of Indigenous offenders to achieve a “truly fit and proper sentence.”

 

 

https://www.cheknews...courts-1195707/

[Nparker]

This is why it's wrong to offer "justice" based on race.