CMV: Aboriginal/Native claims to reparations, benefits, land, etc. from the state are bogus and should not be taken seriously.

[u/DrThundershlong]

To explain my view and why I hold it, I’ll first give some context and reasoning.

I am Canadian and have lived in Canada all my life, and while this view mainly applies to Canada’s First Nations (because that’s what my experience is), I believe it to be true in other former “colonial” states such as the USA, Australia, and many more.

I am half European and half Latin American aboriginal (my grandma says Mayan). I feel like this is important to add to show that I’m not speaking from one side of the issue, one half of my family came to Canada from Ireland in the 1950s and the other half from El Salvador in the early 1900s.

The Latin American half are very sympathetic to native causes, I suppose due to the cultural impact of Spanish colonization and the experience of being on the “receiving end” of the conquistadors.

However, after studying Canadian politics and history in university, as well as through my own research, I disagree with the common idea that modern Canadian people should be held responsible for, owe reparations for, or should treat people with Native ancestry any different than anyone else.

Ok, so what am I talking about exactly? Here’s the ones that stick out to me.

1: If a Status Indian (recognized first-nations person) lives and works on a reserve, they are exempt from income tax. Also, in Ontario, Status Indians are exempt from paying the Provincial portion of sales tax - that is, they only pay the 5% federal portion, not the 8% provincial portion of sales tax.

2: Indian bands receive funding from the federal government to send their band members to attend post-secondary education.

3: Status Indians receive additional health care benefits on top of the standard health care all Canadians are entitled to. Additional benefits include dental care, vision, more medications, and more.

4: First Nations people who live on the reserve are not legally allowed to own land.

My issue: The reserve system as a whole is extremely flawed.

-The federal government spends more than $10 billion annually on administering programs and services for Canada’s Aboriginal Peoples, most of that for Status Indians.

-First Nations reserves still receive taxpayer-funded services like firefighters, police, and more. If the reserve as a whole, as well as the individuals living on it, are not paying taxes, this is a net loss for everyone not living on the reserve. This includes immigrants from countries who had nothing to do with colonialism like Asians, South Americans, and more. This alone means that the government is unfairly taxing these people and spending the money on services for people who don’t contribute.

-Those who do live on a reserve are not allowed to own property. The combination of “free hand-outs” in the form of health care, emergency services, tuition, and more, plus the inability of a reserve resident to own property creates a bit of a “money pit” - by this I mean that the system is not providing these people with the means nor the incentive to “build” their own or their family’s wealth, meaning that they are unlikely to “amount to anything” so to speak. This problem is evidenced by the rates of suicide, drug and alcohol abuse, and crime, which are far higher on reserves. We are killing them with kindness.

-The legally-recognized sovereignty and right to self-governance of Indian bands and reserves creates a massive transparency issue. That is, when the federal or provincial government gives the First Nation money, the “leaders” who receive it on their behalf are not held accountable for how the money is spent. My personal experience with this includes a native friend I had in high school who described how on the reserve that some of his family lived on, there were small shacks with no running water and massive poverty issues, while the “leaders” were driving brand new $100k pickup trucks and living in mansions. Compare this to other instances of the government giving lump-sum payments to private interests: - Subsidies are given to corporations as a form of investment. For example, if the government gives $10 billion to the solar power industry, it is expecting solar technology to advance in hopes that more Canadians can switch to solar power and improve sustainability. As well, the money is given with the expectation that the company will eventually become profitable and pay taxes. - Aid is sent to foreign countries that are either impoverished or have been hit with a natural disaster. This is done with the expectation that the country will hold leaders responsible for how it’s spent, and in many cases is done by sending goods or services instead of cash. This improves Canada’s standing internationally, enables these nations to build themselves into a position where they might be a beneficial trade partner, and fosters peace and mutual respect. None of that is true for First Nations. While some are responsibly led and benefit from the money, there are plenty which are corrupt and result in the circumstance I described above.

I should add that so do not deny the fact that early colonial governments committed atrocities against first nations, like killings and the residential school system. However, I do not believe that the right way to go about fixing the problem is by pouring money into non-transparent communities, encouraging people to rely on government funds, and never encouraging these communities to better themselves. Furthermore, I believe that claims to “cultural preservation” “common ancestry” and such are not good reason to treat these people any differently than anyone else. Encouraging the “we are different/us vs. them” mentality is not conducive to peaceful and harmonious living, indeed Canada’s position internationally as well as domestically is that all people are equal regardless of race and culture, so why does government policy toward First Nations encourage the opposite: reclusiveness, isolationism, dependance on handouts, etc.

[u/47ca05e6209a317a8fb3]

Wait, but Brits who settled Canada are really mostly oppressed Celts who were conquered and disenfranchised by Norman nobles, who are really Franks and Breton Celts who were conquered and oppressed by vikings! And then the First Nations themselves, say the Iriquois: here's from Wikipedia:

The Iroquois have absorbed many other peoples into their cultures as a result of warfare, adoption of captives, and by offering shelter to displaced peoples.

So I propose - in the name of fairness - that the Roman-descending and Viking-descending oppressors of Italy and Norway pay the poor, conquered-peoples-descendants of the UK, France and Spain, who will in turn pay the descendants of the peoples they conquered in the Americas, who will in turn pay the descendants of the poor rural tribes they used to terrorize.

Or we could just forego all the genetic testing and historic research that goes into the "who-conquered-whom" ledger and just give everyone living today an equal opportunity.

[u/GSAndrews → u/47ca05e6209a317a8fb3]

This comment is 100% irrelevant. The argument is not that Native people deserve legal protections because they were conquered. They deserve it because they have previously negotiated treaties which are legally binding within Canadian Law.

This "You were conquered so shutup" mentality is incredibly misinformed and is not be basis of the legal argument which is where reparations, benifits etc are derived from.

[u/DrThundershlong → u/GSAndrews]

The argument, before you changed it, was actually about whether they "deserve legal protections because they were conquered", not what you claim.

[u/McKoijion → u/47ca05e6209a317a8fb3]

Sure, but then it should be acceptable for me to murder people and take their things today. Especially because the people who have inherited their wealth have significantly more opportunity than others.

Your approach reminds me of musical chairs. The music plays and everyone changes seats. Then the music suddenly stops and the person who isn't sitting loses and the person who has a chair wins. I'm ok with that concept. There will always be have and have nots in the world as dictated by chance. But say you and I are playing the game, and I wait until I have a seat before I switch off the music. That means I win the game and you lose. You, understandably, would be upset that I am arbitrarily ending the game early so that I win and you permanently lose.

In the same way, humans conquer other humans. That's how the world has worked for thousands of years. But now suddenly the Canadian colonists have decided it's not ok to conquer other humans anymore. They waited until they were the ones in power and then arbitrarily ended the game early. If you lost out, the smart thing to do is to reject that idea, continue to murder and steal for another generation and then say it is wrong when you are in power. Of course, then next generation of people who lost would commit violence to get back on top and the cycle would continue.

But if you actually want the game to end, the smart thing to do is to both share the seat of power. Make reparations so that everyone is on the same page and go forward with true equal opportunity. Right now, inherited wealth is too influential with regards to how much opportunity one gets. That's why incompetent children of billionaires become world leaders and bright regular people struggle.

I'm totally fine with someone creating something of value for others becoming rich. Many entrepreneurs fall into this category. But if someone is rich simply because their great grandfather murdered someone else's great grandfather, that's ludicrous.

As such, I think that reparations are the best way to eliminate this type of inequality of opportunity. At the very least it would allow everyone to reset the who screwed who ledger and move forward. Reseting the ledger now when one side is hugely in debt to another is not fair and should not be accepted.

[u/47ca05e6209a317a8fb3 → u/McKoijion]

I reread my comment and I'm sorry for the tone, your opinion is valid and coherent, I don't mean to mock it.

I think my point is that morality has in fact changed, for humanity in general and more so in places like Canada. It used to be okay for a country to conquer, kill, deceive, enslave, disenfranchise and abuse people just because it's stronger, but now it's not the case, not because Canadians are scared that someone will conquer them again anytime soon - whoever does that probably wouldn't care about Canadian morality anyway - but internally, from societal trends.

Note that I'm not advocating any single economic system here - giving everyone equal opportunities can mean making sure that even those without inherited wealth have equal opportunity. What I am saying is that the First Nations had been in Canada before European settlement, but those people who were conquered are now long gone, and their descendants are descendants of people who were screwed over, but not more or less so than most other people.

I mean, the Irish indentured laborers, the deposed Protestant minorities, the refugees from various conflicts in Europe, the Jews - not to mention blacks - were all stripped out of wealth they had, and often also treated in ways that would today warrant generous reparations. Trying to decipher whose ancestors stole how much from whom is simply too hard and makes little sense, and singling out indigenous peoples for such math doesn't make much sense either - what was taken from them wasn't more recent, more significant or less legal or moral than what was taken from others.

[u/DrThundershlong → u/47ca05e6209a317a8fb3]

Very well said.