4 ms·
> Even in Vancouver, I see cops treating white arrestees with dignity and respect whereas I see them pinning black and indigenous people to the ground as their
by core-questions 6y ago
> Even in Vancouver, I see cops treating white arrestees with dignity and respect whereas I see them pinning black and indigenous people to the ground as their first move -- almost every single interaction that I've witnessed.
This is nothing but an anecdote; you don't know the whole situation in these cases, you're probably just walking by, you don't know what happened beforehand, you don't know what level of threat these individuals posed. It's also almost certainly a case of bias confirmation, you're paying attention to the demographics during an arrest and chalking up datapoints when you see what you're looking for. Are you everywhere in the city? Do you have a representative sample of policing? Not even close.
You're just looking to see this happening, and nowhere in your mind does it possibly occur to you that these perps might have been disrespectful, might have fought back, might be "known to police" already as a troublemaker that's causing yet again another incident despite living in a city with nothing but programs and handouts and tolerance for the antics of the homeless.
> nonviolent oil protests
Illegal trespassing, in many cases, and the show of force is to make it clear that there will be no violence, because none will be tolerated. If anything, it should help make it far more clear cut that there cannot be any pushback on these issues. It doesn't matter what your opinion is on the subject, it matters what has been decided by the government, and it's probably better that a protestor realizes that they have no hope of violent resistance rather than giving it a try.
> The main difference is that the genocide in canada was largely effective
Is this really how my fellow citizens view their own history? What an incredibly biased, anti-White narrative. No wonder folks like you want to deconstruct everything that is well-built, predictable, and good about our nation as we have it today: you view it all as an evil inheritance that was stolen, rather than a beautiful workable system hewn out of cruel nature.
> We need to remove a bunch of duties from police, and hand them to social services, mental health care workers, and unarmed bylaws enforcement.
I'll give you this: it might actually have a chance of working here, to some extent, because of how nonviolent people generally are and because we don't have a massively armed population.
Still, there will be incidents where these unarmed support officers are going to be physically overpowered, abused, beaten, even raped; there will be incidents when people get away who should be caught; and when it happens, we'll all just have to remember that that wouldn't have happened if sufficient force had been present.
> work to improve the lives of people who are shat on by our society.
One of the big dichotomies between people like you and people like me is that it never seems like your side is willing to admit to the large numbers of people in this position who themselves shit on society rather than the other way around. Again, we have as many opportunities for a leg up here as there have ever been, anywhere in the world.
- JamisonM 6y ago> Is this really how my fellow citizens view their own history? What an incredibly biased, anti-White narrative It seems like perhaps there is a lot of Canadian history that you haven't reckoned with. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_of_indigenous_peoples#Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_of_indigenous_peoples... In particular I think the Beothuk in particular might have opinions on this. There is a good reason to have an honest reckoning with history and then move forward from there, not for the purposes of blame but rather to start with a sound basis in fact for making decisions about the future.
- core-questions 6y ago> It seems like perhaps there is a lot of Canadian history that you haven't reckoned with. Perhaps instead it's simply that I am an adherent to the great Western tradition of the last two thousand years: namely, the sins of the father are not the sins of the son. I see narratives like this as an attempt to bludgeon Canadians into accepting blame for the actions of others which are deliberately contextualized by "historians" to make them sound as evil as possible. Great, there were some battles in the past. My ancestors, like everyone else's, fought battles for their existence from the dawn of time. How many subgroups were wiped out in Europe as they vied for dominance? Should I feel bad for them, too? Do you? Should people just be passive, do you think that will work game-theoretically in the long term? > an honest reckoning with history All "honest reckonings" that have come out in the last hundred years or so are used to demonize western people; small wonder that people are beginning to question whether it's really honesty, or an attempt to disenfranchise us within the nations we created and brought to greatness.
- JamisonM 6y agoI think that if accepting the truth of what actually happened is viewed by you as being "bludgeon[ed] into accepting blame for the actions of others" is a problem with how you personalize the actions of others in the past that you view as part of your identity group as opposed to an attempt to blame you personally. If I quote John A Macdonald saying ".. refusing food until the Indians are on the verge of starvation to reduce the expense" and then quote Mackenzie's response that he's not starving them enough - how is that offensive to you personally? It seems like it could only hurt you if you believe that you are on the "team" of the governments of that day - why would you think that? Let's all be on the team of justice and fairness and not take personal offense at the ignorance of the leaders of the past (or the present for that matter)!