8 ms·
I think this is terrific. It's high time the indigenous people reclaimed their sovereignty. The idea that "When you’re building 30, 40-storey high rises out o
by lisper 3y ago
I think this is terrific. It's high time the indigenous people reclaimed their sovereignty. The idea that "When you’re building 30, 40-storey high rises out of concrete, there’s a big gap between that and an Indigenous way of building" is just ridiculous. Who the fuck are you, white man, to say what is and is not consistent with an "Indigenous way of building"? You aren't living the same lifestyle and building the same buildings that your ancestors were hundreds of years ago, why should they? I say: more power to the (Indigenous) people!
(P.S.: I'm a white guy.)
- stavros 3y agoIt was a woman, actually. Your point is valid, I just don't like how "white man" has become a slur.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- badcppdev 3y agoI think the quote is from a white man called Gordon Price. Full quote to assist you. "In 2022, Gordon Price, a prominent Vancouver urban planner and a former city councillor, told Gitxsan reporter Angela Sterritt, “When you’re building 30, 40-storey high rises out of concrete, there’s a big gap between that and an Indigenous way of building." "White man" can be used in that form when the white man appears to be telling a different culture what they can or cannot do or be.
- chrisco255 3y agoSure if you want to be racist. The shoe on the other foot, replace White man with Black man, Red man, etc and its clear that its racist.
- ivan_gammel 3y ago“White man” is not racist, it is a self-describing short term for Eurocentric supremacy and a quote from Kipling. As such it is not replaceable by Black/Red etc. Everyone can use it in such context as a metaphor, not as a racial reference. Edit: previously my message included some poor choice of words, which I will keep here for history and an example of accidental bias: “White men are absolutely allowed to use it as a slur towards other white men.”
- gambiting 3y ago>>White men are absolutely allowed to use it as a slur towards other white men. What kind of nonsense is that, the mental gymnastics to not call it what it simply is - racism - is just unbelivable.
- ivan_gammel 3y agoFeel free to suggest another term for a person of European origin and Eurocentric education who is lecturing indigenous people on how to live. Modern discourse isn’t about physical characteristics at all, even it does have roots in old racial theory. It’s certain views, it’s identity and culture. If someone behaves like in Kipling’s poem, he is the white man, not because of his race, but because of his actions.
- gambiting 3y agoI'm not debating the original point - I'm commenting on the clearly quoted section which says what white men are allowed to call other white men. Like, it really doesn't ring any bells of "something is not right here" when you read it?
- ivan_gammel 3y agoHaha, now I got you and apologize for inaccurate choice of words. Those bells didn’t ring, as I’m not American and not native speaker. Of course, everyone can use it.
- williamcotton 3y agoFive year olds and internet commenters care about things being even-handed and fair. The rest of the world either settles their matters or employs lawyers to do so for them. Most time settlement is a disappointing serving a crow, hence the glint of involving the courts. How much will that serving of crow cost? Why do I bring this up? This “replace X with Y” is the ultimate form of an algebraic rhetoric that demands a fully balanced system of mathematical perfection as if this were a reasonable way to go about things.
- LunaSea 3y agoIronically, this is the most Twitter-logic garbage explanation I've seen in this thread. Laws do impose parity so in fact it's not just some online rhetorical device.
- trimethylpurine 3y agoI disagree. It's an ad hominem point. Comments should focus on ideas. Race based commentary like this is a discredit to one's own argument and character.
- ethanbond 3y agoRace: Famously irrelevant to the whole tribal lands/indigenous rights topic
- coldtea 3y agoIt's irrelevant to "does this follow indigenous tradition or violate it" point, which is the point discussed in the subthread - not tribal lands/indigenous rights.
- badcppdev 3y agoWhy would Indigenous people have to follow tradition? I believe it is racist (or sexist) to say that a group of people cannot do something because that is not something they've done in the past. For Mr Gordon Price to imply that a group should not do something because it has not been done before is him trying to deny their agency.
- coldtea 3y ago>Why would Indigenous people have to follow tradition? They don't "have to". But they can break with it in a nice way or in a bad way. Same way a culture can change their tradition in a respectful way or to replace it with McDonalds and Starbucks for example. This is not confined to "indigenous people". The same critique can and does apply to any group.
- trimethylpurine 3y agoNo one said they do. The article provides no background or context from which one could conclude an implication that "a group should not do something because it has not been done before." He didn't say that. The article attempts very poorly to imply that meaning. You've created a dummy to punch and you're punching it. Unfortunately this is all too common. It's called a straw man fallacy.
- dudeinjapan 3y agoThe correct slur to use here is Honky.
- skywhopper 3y agoI wouldn’t call it a slur. To the extent it’s an effective insult, it’s due to centuries of behavior by white men. If someone uses “white man” to call out certain behavior, it might be worth their target considering why they got called out. Maybe sometimes it’s unfair to the white man to be called out, but often it isn’t. For folks who find it troublesome or disturbing to not receive the benefit of the doubt about their intentions as a white man, consider how much benefit of the doubt is given in everyday contexts to pretty much any individual who is not a white man.
- stavros 3y agoAren't you worried about the consequences of supporting generalizations over a group from the actions of their members? I learned at an early age that that's not OK, but it seems to be changing again, as long as the target is in a specific group.
- soupbowl 3y agoI wouldn’t call it a slur. To the extent it’s an effective insult, it’s due to centuries of behavior by black men. If someone uses “black man” to call out certain behavior, it might be worth their target considering why they got called out. Maybe sometimes it’s unfair to the black man to be called out, but often it isn’t. For folks who find it troublesome or disturbing to not receive the benefit of the doubt about their intentions as a black man, consider how much benefit of the doubt is given in everyday contexts to pretty much any individual who is not a black man.
- zmgsabst 3y agoThat’s people’s objection to “woke” views on ethnicity: You’ve returned to the world of racial essentialism, the most debunked form of racism, where you argue nonsense about what kinds of buildings people should make based on their ancestry. No matter how you dress it up in the language of civil rights, the racialized views promoted by the institutional left (eg, academia, media, and government) are built upon that racism — which we see articulated in your quote. But if you touch grass, you’d know people consistently build with the best technology available to them — and have throughout history.
- mschuster91 3y ago> You’ve returned to the world of racial essentialism, the most debunked form of racism, where you argue nonsense about what kinds of buildings people should make based on their ancestry. No matter how you dress it up in the language of civil rights, the racialized views promoted by the institutional left (eg, academia, media, and government) are built upon that racism — which we see articulated in your quote. If anything, the person you're replying to rejected this kind of crap, they argue (like the article) that it should be the right of the Indigenous Nations to determine on their own what they want to build on their own land.
- EnigmaFlare 3y agoFind out what you're complaining about before getting race-baited into hating someone. The context of his statement might have made it perfectly reasonable. This article is obviously trying to paint everyone and their dog as a racist so don't trust it to be open about the context.
- badcppdev 3y agoI think you need to provide some links with context because the article makes a compelling case that people are trying to block an indigenous group from exercising their agency.
- trimethylpurine 3y agoDo we know that it's not a small few wealthy deal makers selling the land out from under people that wanted to preserve it? I'm not Canadian, so I have no clue. But that would be my immediate suspicion based on experience in real estate and movies I saw on TV.
- badcppdev 3y agoI agree that's absolutely a possibility. Also not a Canadian. But I will point out that superficially there doesn't seem to be opposition to development on the land. The opposition appears to be based on what is being built rather than where.
- kareemm 3y agoI am Canadian and lived a literal stones throw from the site in question for 4 years. The real issue is that Vancouver is full of NIMBYs who want sightlines, low density, and “character” preserved. It’s basically encoded into the zoning laws for the municipality. Those groups will use whatever tactics at hand to prevent density at a scale they don’t approve of from being built.
- EnigmaFlare 3y agoI couldn't find the context so, given the tone of the article, I think it's a safe assumption that the author isn't being charitable and is trying to mislead.
- sgt 3y agoYou're being downvoted because of statements like "Who the fuck are you, white man" What if you said (in a different setting, where it would technically make sense): "Who the fuck are you, eskimo?" I bet you wouldn't, because you've been programmed by woke media.
- trimethylpurine 3y agoI think I missed the meaning of the quote. Skyscrapers are not an indigenous lifestyle. I suppose that's not okay to bring up in this context? If someone put skyscrapers on the last Hawaiian island I'd be pretty upset about it. The entire population of the Earth should be. Can't we leave one thing undeveloped? But okay, maybe there is plenty of land to go around in Canada that looks the same as this land, so I could see that... How does any of that relate to indigenous people using granted land to build them? Does Canada have some law about that? I guess I don't see why this quote has any bearing for or against the development. It feels entirely out of place in the article. Just seems like an unrelated fact.
- timmytokyo 3y agoIn a city completely inundated with skyscrapers, it's odd -- and maybe a bit telling -- that some people become concerned for the first time in their lives only once an indigenous nation decides to build a skyscraper.
- trimethylpurine 3y agoI'm not sure you understand my question. I don't see from the quote that there is any concern. Where are you drawing that from?
- kareemm 3y agoThere’s been tons of opposition to building up in Vancouver, especially outside of downtown. Opposition isn’t unique to indigenous builders. What is unique is that nimbys have a new arsenal of tactics to use as to why this isn’t a good idea eg “concrete skyscrapers aren’t the indigenous way so you shouldn’t build your project.”
- comeonbro 3y agoIn a thread full of people with weird preconceptions talking past each-other, this is the most perfectly wrong statement anyone has made. The people you're talking about would strangle this entire country to death (and have) before allowing a single 3-story building to be built outside of the small areas that were already been zoned for it 80 years ago. The Canadian Indigenous identity issues tied up in this project are the only force that have ever been powerful enough to bludgeon them into submission, just this one time.
- verticalscaler 3y ago> Who the fuck are you, white man, to say what is and is not consistent with an "Indigenous way of building"? Who the fuck are you, white man, to say "It's high time the indigenous people reclaimed their sovereignty"? You're foisting your notions of sovereignty and time unto them, which is racist. P.S.: I'm indigenous ;)
- refurb 3y agoHow is sovereignty and time in any way subjective?
- verticalscaler 3y agoAccording to CNN being on time and indeed, daylights savings time, are forms of white supremacy. Although prior to being informed of this all I saw when glancing at my wrist was Mickey Mouse. Did not occur to me the rat bastard was out to get me. I suppose whether I am being rescued by my white saviors espousing this new age philosophy or tormented and infantilized is a subjective matter. It is important for us to remember not to judge a man until you've walked three full moons in his moccasins. ;)
- coldtea 3y ago>Who the fuck are you, white man, to say what is and is not consistent with an "Indigenous way of building"? A person univolved with the colonization of Canada, not even from there or living there, that still believes that? >You aren't living the same lifestyle and building the same buildings that your ancestors were hundreds of years ago And that's bad in a lot of ways too. Not all modernization is for the better. It can turn a vibrant community into a gentrified Starbucks shitscape, for example.
- astrange 3y agoGentrification has nothing to do with Starbucks. Gentrification is caused by blocking infill development.
- FredPret 3y agoYou’re so virtuous
- trallnag 3y agoUnhinged
- faeriechangling 3y agoHating/liking this project is going to fall on age lines more than racial ones, the age demo of hacker news is likely to almost universally LOVE this project.
- lisper 3y agoNot only am I a white guy, I'm an old white guy. (I'm 59.) Even worse, I'm rich too, so I am solidly in the demographic of the person I was quoting. But despite the fact that I am a rich old white guy, I don't consider rich old white guys to be my tribe. I look at the history of what rich old white guys have done (and in many cases are still doing) to racial minorities and it fills me with deep shame that I am one of them. So I genuinely love seeing racial minorities stand up for themselves. I particularly admire what the Maoris have accomplished in New Zealand. And I especially love it when it ends up annoying the rich old white guys that the racial minority is starting to do the exact same thing that the rich old white guys have been doing for centuries. Seeing the irony and lack of self awareness lets me tell myself that no, I am not one them, despite the fact that I look like them. BTW, the flip side of that is, "I am one of them despite the fact that I don't look like them." Which, it seems to me, is what we ought to be striving for.