3 ms·

Curious about your stance on the “1969 Government of Canada report on how to deal with aboriginal people”. Ostensibly, this would have provided everyone with th

• neom 3y ago
  Big question. :) Of course, people have written books, books and books on this, so to cover it in a HN comment would be difficult. I'd also much prefer people read the documents and form their own opinions (either direction, but just to be well informed). I don't want to get into it too much, so what I'll say a few brief things: Nobody can tell what the other timeline would have looked like, had the 1969 report been adopted and the law changed to reflect it, I'm not sure I believe Natives would have been provided with the same level of social services. It's important not to be myopic, the recommendations in the report were vast, and in one hand I understand the intentions, but what was asked to give up was a lot, and I also agree that it very much feels like a way for the government to abscond on colonization era issues that needed to be resolved (and still are being resolved). As I alluded to at the end of my comment, I don't believe in assimilation. In defending the report, Trudeau said: "We can't recognize aboriginal rights because no society can be built on historical 'might-have-beens.'"