Grand Chief's snub

rustled
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25209
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Grand Chief's snub

Post by rustled »

GordonH wrote:So rustled what's so important about meeting with William and Kate anyway.

Not my place to say, although I do wonder how important Phillip would have felt it to be, if he'd been snubbed by not being invited? But how important it is isn't really the point, IMO.

When you're representing people, you're often asked to do something you don't find important, or you're not personally excited about doing. He was treated politely and with respect, and had the opportunity to graciously decline, or make political hay. He chose.
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - Martin Luther King Jr.
User avatar
antelee
Fledgling
Posts: 132
Joined: Nov 30th, 2004, 2:41 pm

Re: Grand Chief's snub

Post by antelee »

opportunity to graciously decline, or make political hay

He also had the opportunity to graciously accept. Accept it for what it was. A ceremony that at the end of the day really didn't mean anything. He wasn't going to be asked to sign his life away, after all.
I have the feeling that this is a very negative man - his glass is always half empty.
My God, just look at how many Natives were included in William and Kate's visit! Do you hear any non-Native voices protesting or complaining in the newspaper or on TV? I'm sure that in their own living room or in the bar there were some doing just that! I have no use for people like that - loving the sound of their own voices. Just like Stewart Phillip.
Believe nothing of what you hear and half of what you see.
rustled
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25209
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Grand Chief's snub

Post by rustled »

antelee wrote:He also had the opportunity to graciously accept. Accept it for what it was. A ceremony that at the end of the day really didn't mean anything. He wasn't going to be asked to sign his life away, after all.
I have the feeling that this is a very negative man - his glass is always half empty.
...

Yes, you're right, he had that option, too. He could have used that opportunity to politely state his case, the way Chief Kruger did.

But I think I can understand where he felt it would have been unprincipled of him to participate at all when he felt so negatively about it, so I can also understand his decision to decline. It's the political haymaking that doesn't do him, his cause, or ultimately the people he represents, any good in the long run. Too much focus on negativity and gloom and woe, and what everyone else should do about it. It seems to me he is further disempowering his own people by continually reinforcing the notion that the problems they are dealing with are something another government has to fix.
There is nothing more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - Martin Luther King Jr.
twobits
Guru
Posts: 8115
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 8:44 am

Re: Grand Chief's snub

Post by twobits »

Bottom line is it bought him political points only with the militant, and further entrenched his reputation as confrontational with non natives. Philip is a typical career politician whose longevity and paycheque are directly related to how long they can be press worthy. This snub got him way more news and attention than attending. That was good for him personally but did squat for the people he actually professes to represent.
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
sooperphreek
Lord of the Board
Posts: 4189
Joined: Oct 12th, 2006, 10:39 am

Re: Grand Chief's snub

Post by sooperphreek »

twobits wrote:did him good personally but did squat for the people he actually professes to represent.


i think its funny when the "majority" looks down on "natives" when it comes to leaders. basically insinuating that they are corrupt and lazy and self serving. the fact is that these people are leaders - and they worked hard to get where they are like everyone else. its not a fluke.
since when is any leader "majority" or not - blameless when it comes to self serving interests? or following polls. or following mandates from their constituents? are canadians better off with most of the trivial bills and laws we have from ottawa? with most probably not. its a waste of time and paper. and yet we have people that fervently stand by the democratic process and their ability to write a letter to a representative if they dont agree.
its a shame that the "majority" insult "natives" insinuating that they are not passionate about the process or what happens to their interests. simply letting crooks and career leadership run the show. they have a democratic process just like anyone else. and its manipulated just like everywhere else.
newsflash people. there are career politicians everywhere. how long has our premier been on the scene? or many in her positions of power? have they made more your lives 100 percent better? has every decision been brilliant? should we paint them with a brush as crooks and militant looking down our noses at them? i dont see this happening much. so who do people think they are doing so with natives? clean your own house and be "perfect". then maybe you can stand on the soapbox with impunity and with morality.
ive sat down with a fellow that was a council member. and members wanted him to be their leader. he was informed. and he was passionate. he also had concerns. heck he even had disappointments. it all seems like a familiar story.....one we see regardless of the "us" vs "them".
User avatar
Rosemary1
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 984
Joined: Jan 24th, 2013, 2:47 pm

Re: Grand Chief's snub

Post by Rosemary1 »

Every political leader ( native or not) is subject to scrutiny. Comes with the job. Just read posts on Justin, Harper and Christie . Political leaders are judged by what they say and their actions, and how those words and actions are seen by their constituents and others. In Phillips case, some non-natives and natives alike will agree and be supportive and others not so much.
sooperphreek
Lord of the Board
Posts: 4189
Joined: Oct 12th, 2006, 10:39 am

Re: Grand Chief's snub

Post by sooperphreek »

if that is true then christy would never have resurfaced and she wouldnt have been in power too long. people choose to let things slide. there is a hypocrisy. if you are in the "huddle" all can be forgiven. if you are an outsider - you have the full weight of sanctimony set against you.
User avatar
Rosemary1
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 984
Joined: Jan 24th, 2013, 2:47 pm

Re: Grand Chief's snub

Post by Rosemary1 »

Christie is in power because its a democracy as was pointed out, worked to get elected and got the votes she needed. Those who didn't vote for her obviously are not happy, and some who did will also have found things to be critical of her government as time passes. Those who choose not to vote lose their right to complain after the fact. There is no perfect political leader that will please all of the people all of the time.

Focusing on insiders/outsiders/huddles serves no purpose. Truth be known every Canadian who is not sitting inside of governments could be said to be outside the huddle as they can only vote based on what they are told, what they observe, and how they personally feel about it. They are not privy to what goes on in the background.
sooperphreek
Lord of the Board
Posts: 4189
Joined: Oct 12th, 2006, 10:39 am

Re: Grand Chief's snub

Post by sooperphreek »

and in that same vein of logic non natives have absolutely no reason or right to judge or scrutinize the leaders of a democratic leadership or system they have no part of.
User avatar
Rosemary1
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 984
Joined: Jan 24th, 2013, 2:47 pm

Re: Grand Chief's snub

Post by Rosemary1 »

This thread has strayed far from original comment about one individual and his action and general point that everyone has different take on what may be said or done and no political leader can ever gets 100% agreement from everyone at all times.

Using your extreme interpretation, non-natives cannot voice or hold a valid opinion on native political figures and government since they don't' vote for them.

How about this? Since the cost and salaries of tribal councils are paid for by the Federal Government, it could also be argued that Canadians who vote and pay taxes are should be entitled to not just an opinion but also the expectation of the same transparency and accountability from tribal governments that they expect of their municipal, provincial and federal governments and politicians.
sooperphreek
Lord of the Board
Posts: 4189
Joined: Oct 12th, 2006, 10:39 am

Re: Grand Chief's snub

Post by sooperphreek »

thanks for taking the bait. they money is freely given from the feds to the natives through agreements. that logic is as childish as the albertan one that they singlehandedly pay for Quebec and other not provinces. it isnt that simple or juvenile.
User avatar
Rosemary1
Generalissimo Postalot
Posts: 984
Joined: Jan 24th, 2013, 2:47 pm

Re: Grand Chief's snub

Post by Rosemary1 »

no its not that simple and I am aware of the Indian Act and issues with Quebec. Neither are subjects that will every lend themselves to any intellectual discussions because of the very emotional and political sensitivities. Your use of the word 'bait' says it all and I was well aware where you were heading. Nothing more to be said.
Post Reply

Return to “South Okanagan”