The not so Great Racism in Canada Thread

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I was told Quebec was exceptional and that racism was just Anglo Canada's fascination with all things American:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/...brotherhood-president-comments-1.5630427

Newsflash: Quebecers are human just like every one else!

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Newsflash: Quebecers are human just like every one else!

So Quebec isn't special after all. And has the same concerns as the rest of North America? Or does the bullshit only hold as long as no Quebecer speaks up?

It's amazing how you simply handwave away all your previous shitting on the rest of Canada for getting riled up. But have nothing to say at all about Quebecers having the same concern.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

So Quebec isn't special after all. And has the same concerns as the rest of North America? Or does the bullshit only hold as long as no Quebecer speaks up?

It's amazing how you simply handwave away all your previous shitting on the rest of Canada for getting riled up. But have nothing to say at all about Quebecers having the same concern.

Quebeckers are basically Anglo-Americans who speak French.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by dreambrother808

If you read the article, one person say that “museums as we know them have to be abolished” which means he thinks they should fundamentally change, hence the “as we know them”. One person in one article who isn’t saying “close all museums” or “no museums”. He is referencing museums as “imperial trophy cases” with stolen artifacts, etc.

There is that wording in this current discourse where people hear “defund” or “abolish” and their natural first interpretation is “completely get rid of” and occasionally someone does actually mean that. But if you are keeping up, reading articles, and following relevant people on social media while parsing through everything you’ll find that most do not mean that.

Meh. Go to the world's great museums and you see people from all over the world taking in the exhibits. Whether they're from China, North America or Africa they all want to see and learn from it, whether it is an "imperial trophy case" or not.

I find great irony in the appeal of Rome for worldwide tourism, when the statues and monuments people flock to are often linked to conquerors just as bloody or "barbaric" as those who are being toppled today.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by Hawrylyshyn

There is a Residential School Museum in Manitoba. It's not to honour them, but educate people about them and teach Canadians about this dark, racist past.

Link for Article
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lpband.ca/residential-school-museum-becomes-a-reality/amp/

It's actually a very good idea but I am afraid that it will perpetuate the myth that racism is strictly a Caucasian phenomena.

In order to get at the root of racism and how it effects our contemporary society we must view it in a holistic manner and attack all it's forms. That will require Natives to not only display the horrifying history of residential schools and the racism and cultural imperialism that gave rise to them but also pre-European times. Teaching them that their Native societies also had similar values and were just as racist, sexist, and blood thirsty as their European counterparts. If not they they are trying to teach a lesson proceeding from a false assumption and trying to teach history and learn from it when the historical record itself is flawed doesn't get you anywhere.

[savevp]

Originally Posted by whatnext

I find great irony in the appeal of Rome for worldwide tourism, when the statues and monuments people flock to are often linked to conquerors just as bloody or "barbaric" as those who are being toppled today.

Maybe the last act in this sordid play is the demolition of the Coliseum, home of systemically racist slavery. And while we're at it let's get rid of the Pyramids, which were built by an enslaved minority - oh wait, Jews don't get victim points because they're privileged now.

But surely we can settle on demolishing the Taj Mahal because the Indian caste system is systemically racist. Humxnkind must continue the fight, don't stop at Churchill or Brock! Soon we can replace Nelson's Column with an inoffensive interpretive blob structure. Vive la révolution!

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by savevp

Maybe the last act in this sordid play is the demolition of the Coliseum, home of systemically racist slavery. And while we're at it let's get rid of the Pyramids, which were built by an enslaved minority - oh wait, Jews don't get victim points because they're privileged now.

But surely we can settle on demolishing the Taj Mahal because the Indian caste system is systemically racist. Humxnkind must continue the fight, don't stop at Churchill or Brock! Soon we can replace Nelson's Column with an inoffensive interpretive blob structure. Vive la révolution!

You’re trying to delegitimize a movement using totally fucking ridiculous examples. The slaves who built the pyramids 5000 years ago are not still fighting for their equal treatment under the law and by authorities. Nor are the descendants of slaves who were forced to fight in the Coliseum 2000 years ago. You’re drawing ridiculous false equivalences to something that is very real with present and ongoing data to prove it. Grow the fuck up and read a book, idiot.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

It's actually a very good idea but I am afraid that it will perpetuate the myth that racism is strictly a Caucasian phenomena.

In order to get at the root of racism and how it effects our contemporary society we must view it in a holistic manner and attack all it's forms. That will require Natives to not only display the horrifying history of residential schools and the racism and cultural imperialism that gave rise to them but also pre-European times. Teaching them that their Native societies also had similar values and were just as racist, sexist, and blood thirsty as their European counterparts. If not they they are trying to teach a lesson proceeding from a false assumption and trying to teach history and learn from it when the historical record itself is flawed doesn't get you anywhere.

This is where I might kinda side with my nemeses on here. I don't necessarily think that things really have to go as far as what you're suggesting.

Right now we have a lot of mythologizing about how things were milk and honey in the Americas (and also Oceania and Africa) before the Europeans came along. I would say that simply stopping that narrative (or at least injecting a dose of reality into it) would be pretty good step.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

So Quebec isn't special after all. And has the same concerns as the rest of North America? Or does the bullshit only hold as long as no Quebecer speaks up?

It's amazing how you simply handwave away all your previous shitting on the rest of Canada for getting riled up. But have nothing to say at all about Quebecers having the same concern.

Well we have BLM protests in Japan and Korea, so it's not surprising to see an impact in Quebec when we actually border the U.S. directly?????

I think you read what you want to read. I have never said that Quebec is immune to U.S. influence, only that most people here don't feel U.S. issues in their bones like other Canadians often seem to do.

I don't see why that is surprising or a bogus claim when perhaps only 25% of Quebec's population (ok perhaps a tad more) has the linguistic capacity to easily understand stuff like Fox News, Stephen Colbert, CNN, SNL, etc. that you guys consume like it was homegrown. And of those who can understand, not that many make that stuff their bread and butter. Like it or not, all of that has an effect.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by Acajack

This is where I might kinda side with my nemeses on here. I don't necessarily think that things really have to go as far as what you're suggesting.

Right now we have a lot of mythologizing about how things were milk and honey in the Americas (and also Oceania and Africa) before the Europeans came along. I would say that simply stopping that narrative (or at least injecting a dose of reality into it) would be pretty good step.

I’m pretty sure most people know things weren’t all roses and rainbows before the rape/conquest of the “new world.” However, in the pre-colonial regions, slavery was verrry different than the savage dehumanizing slavery perpetuated by Euro/Americans. Nearly every society in Africa that won wars enslaved the ones who lost. The enslaved were largely treated like members of the society with few restrictions, and most often set free after a time of servitude. Obviously this was done in order to prevent rebellions, and because the slave owners knew their slaves were human and so were treated as such. There are a few cases of brutalizations like with the Aztecs subjugating other empires and subsequently brutally slaughtering and/or enslaving their people, and stuff with the Zulu in South Africa (though the reality of that is still up for debate). The reason African emperors sold slaves to the Euros is because to them, that is what slavery was, they probably had no clue the horrific treatment those people would suffer. We also shouldn’t forget that eventually the Euros moved in and annihilated those empires as well, razed their capital cities and villages and brutalized their people in their own lands. This had never been done on a scale like this before, the closest would be the Mongol Invasions in the 11 and 1200s.

I’ve studied precolonial Africa and the precolonial Americas fairly extensively, and the comparison with the way Euro/Americans dehumanized/raped/terrorized/brutalized their slaves and continue to subjugate them 155 years later just doesn’t hold up. the biggest difference during the Euro/American slave era is that they didn’t see their slaves as human, while in other cultures the humanity of their slaves was essential knowledge.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

I’m pretty sure most people know things weren’t all roses and rainbows before the rape/conquest of the “new world.” .

I have my doubts about that.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

I’m pretty sure most people know things weren’t all roses and rainbows before the rape/conquest of the “new world.” However, in the pre-colonial regions, slavery was verrry different than the savage dehumanizing slavery perpetuated by Euro/Americans. Nearly every society in Africa that won wars enslaved the ones who lost. The enslaved were largely treated like members of the society with few restrictions, and most often set free after a time of servitude. Obviously this was done in order to prevent rebellions, and because the slave owners knew their slaves were human and so were treated as such. There are a few cases of brutalizations like with the Aztecs subjugating other empires and subsequently brutally slaughtering and/or enslaving their people, and stuff with the Zulu in South Africa (though the reality of that is still up for debate). The reason African emperors sold slaves to the Euros is because to them, that is what slavery was, they probably had no clue the horrific treatment those people would suffer. We also shouldn’t forget that eventually the Euros moved in and annihilated those empires as well, razed their capital cities and villages and brutalized their people in their own lands. This had never been done on a scale like this before, the closest would be the Mongol Invasions in the 11 and 1200s.

I’ve studied precolonial Africa and the precolonial Americas fairly extensively, and the comparison with the way Euro/Americans dehumanized/raped/terrorized/brutalized their slaves and continue to subjugate them 155 years later just doesn’t hold up. the biggest difference during the Euro/American slave era is that they didn’t see their slaves as human, while in other cultures the humanity of their slaves was essential knowledge.

Well, those Africans sure didn't give that much thought when they hauled the asses of their slaves or prisoners from other African nations to places like the island of Gorée off the West African coast to sell them off to Europeans.

Perhaps they underestimated just how evil the Europeans were?

[Chadillaccc]

Yes, my post mentions that expressly.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Yes, my post mentions that expressly.

You know I think you post in good faith and are knowledgeable, so this is not an attack.

But I really do get the impression that your posts about this are examples of what I was talking about: "sure they did it too, but they weren't as bad..."

I am mostly bringing this up because it doesn't seem like we are in the "benefit of the doubt" era. For example, in terms of minority rights and human rights in general, the "West" (including the U.S.) leads the world. But we're told that the West must still improve significantly. And I actually agree with that.

But I don't see why this would not apply to everyone, both for our contemporary era and the way we interpret history.

[savevp]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

The slaves who built the pyramids 5000 years ago are not still fighting for their equal treatment under the law and by authorities.

Although I'm just an idiot who needs to grow the fuck up and read a book, I'm sorry to inform you that Jews actually are fighting for equal treatment in Egypt and elsewhere in the Middle East, and have been for about 5000 years. But you'd gloss over that because there's no systemic racism against Jews apparently. I'm not Jewish so I won't pretend to know the depths of it, but I should think the statute restricting Jewish marriage, so that the Jewish population of Egypt is now estimated at less than 20 might constitute some kind of organised racism. Your (and the SJW crowd, collectively) selective blindness toward those you don't deem victims is nauseating.

So given the fact Jewish people are presently oppressed in Egypt and the Middle East, do you stand by your assertion that the Pyramids should be disregarded as symbols of oppression and racism?

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

You’re trying to delegitimize a movement using totally fucking ridiculous examples. The slaves who built the pyramids 5000 years ago are not still fighting for their equal treatment under the law and by authorities. Nor are the descendants of slaves who were forced to fight in the Coliseum 2000 years ago. You’re drawing ridiculous false equivalences to something that is very real with present and ongoing data to prove it. Grow the fuck up and read a book, idiot.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

I’m pretty sure most people know things weren’t all roses and rainbows before the rape/conquest of the “new world.” However, in the pre-colonial regions, slavery was verrry different than the savage dehumanizing slavery perpetuated by Euro/Americans. Nearly every society in Africa that won wars enslaved the ones who lost. The enslaved were largely treated like members of the society with few restrictions, and most often set free after a time of servitude. Obviously this was done in order to prevent rebellions, and because the slave owners knew their slaves were human and so were treated as such. There are a few cases of brutalizations like with the Aztecs subjugating other empires and subsequently brutally slaughtering and/or enslaving their people, and stuff with the Zulu in South Africa (though the reality of that is still up for debate). The reason African emperors sold slaves to the Euros is because to them, that is what slavery was, they probably had no clue the horrific treatment those people would suffer. We also shouldn’t forget that eventually the Euros moved in and annihilated those empires as well, razed their capital cities and villages and brutalized their people in their own lands. This had never been done on a scale like this before, the closest would be the Mongol Invasions in the 11 and 1200s.

I’ve studied precolonial Africa and the precolonial Americas fairly extensively, and the comparison with the way Euro/Americans dehumanized/raped/terrorized/brutalized their slaves and continue to subjugate them 155 years later just doesn’t hold up. the biggest difference during the Euro/American slave era is that they didn’t see their slaves as human, while in other cultures the humanity of their slaves was essential knowledge.

Hard to think of anything worse than Arab slavery in Africa and Turkic slavery in India.

This White exceptionalism is a disgusting manifestation of White supremacy from the new woke left.

[savevp]

The new woke left aren't interested in attempting to solve anything. It's all about scoring victim points or, in their absence, virtue points to be gawped at in their social media circles. The above whitewashing of selected non-European instances of slavery is but a particularly repugnant example. The Prime Minister taking a knee with protestors rather than enacting the legislation they demand is another. There are positive, constructive approaches to Canadian progressivism that are being discarded because the woke left believe compulsive self-flagellation and acknowledgments of privelege absolve them of the guilt they're so quick to foist on others; "white people are the problem, but not me because I know my privelege."

[saffronleaf]

https://reason.com/2020/06/29/kneeling-in-the-church-of-social-justice/

Great article

The new faith also manifests itself in objections to what its adherents process as dissent. A friend wrote on Facebook that they agreed with Black Lives Matter, only to have another person—a white one, for the record—post this reply: "Wait a minute! You 'agree' with them? That implies you get to disagree with them! That's like saying you 'agree' with the law of gravity! You as a white person don't get to 'agree' OR 'disagree' when black people assert something! Saying you 'agree' with them is every bit as arrogant as disputing them! This isn't an intellectual exercise! This is their lives on the line!"

[SignalHillHiker]

Someone on Feild (surname, not a typo) Street (next block to mine) posted two signs in her window: “White Lives Matter” and “I Can Breathe”. The former could be ignorance but the latter is just rotten to the core. Literally mocking far too many black men’s dying words.

Luckily, instead of breaking out her windows as everyone online was suggesting, people protested outside her house, pinned signs to it, wrote chalk messages on the sidewalk, etc. She took her signs down and, of course, “wasn’t trying to be discriminatory” lol.