Tag Archives: Democracy

‘End the Charade’


‘Cha·rade’ (Shəˈrād): “An absurd pretense intended to create a pleasant or respectable appearance.” and “Something that is done in order to pretend something is true, when it really isn’t.” 

erblendthecharade800x800

“The drums continue to beat hard all over North America for “Native Rights”, a code-phrase for ambitions to claim vast tracts of land — up to 85% of some provinces — ‘natives’ say was wrongly appropriated. Unless it is stopped, millions of us will soon have new ‘landlords’… Many of these claims are being settled administratively, or in quiet courtrooms out of the public eye. No public consultation. No means of protest.  Continue reading ‘End the Charade’

‘Race-Based Control Of Resources?’


‘One in six ‘First Nations’ vows to block pipelines; all claim veto power’ 

Photo: TREVOR HAGAN -- THE CANADIAN PRESS
Photo: TREVOR HAGAN — THE CANADIAN PRESS

“More than 130 ‘First Nations’ {leaders} are dead-set against pipeline and energy development, Assembly of ‘First Nations’ National Chief Perry Bellegarde said Tuesday.

{Would the tribal members also be opposed if it meant no more electricity for their reserves? Where do they expect the power to come from, without any ‘energy development’?}

The rest are demanding an ‘absolute veto’ over any proposed developments before they’ll even begin negotiations with governments and energy companies. And if that slows Canadian energy development to a crawl, so be it.  Continue reading ‘Race-Based Control Of Resources?’

‘Embracing the U.N. At Canada’s Expense’


“A day after the Canadian government said it was fully endorsing the UN ‘Declaration on the Rights of ‘Indigenous’ Peoples’ (UNDR‘I’P), Chief Roland Willson of the West Moberly ‘First Nations’ {a ‘nation’ of 220 people} and Chief Lynette Tsakoza of the Prophet River ‘First Nation’ {a ‘nation’ of 249 people} said in a joint news release the move was ‘a hypocrisy in the making’.” 

“Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould also delivered a speech on the opening day at the ‘UN Permanent Forum’ WHICH CALLED ON THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY TO MAKE ‘INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ THE FOCUS OF THIS CENTURY.” ERBLEmbracingtheU.N.atCanada'sExpense800x800“‘Indigenous’ Affairs Minister Carolyn Bennett said…Canada would fully embrace the UN ‘Declaration on the Rights of ‘Indigenous’ Peoples’ (UNDR‘I’P) and remove its “permanent objector status” to the document.  Continue reading ‘Embracing the U.N. At Canada’s Expense’

‘This Election, Vote Freedom’


WHO IS WORKING FOR AVERAGE CANADIANS ANYMORE? ERBLThisElectionVoteFreedom800x800I admit I’m a bit depressed about voting in Canada’s 2015 election. I wish there was a visionary who didn’t take no for an answer when it comes to Canadian values — which BTW is not blind tolerance, so that anyone with resentments, hatred, racism, and fascist aggressions can overrule, override or overstep their boundaries with OUR DEMOCRACTICALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT. It’s democracy and freedom itself we all need to not only vote for, but to fight for. It’s our turn and we need a leader who can stand with us in building this nation as a cohesive entity, not to pander to special interest groups at every hypocritical turn, which only stands to corrode, demoralize and divide our nation.

ALL CANDIDATES NEED TO STOP PLAYING DRESS-UP, IGNORING & PRETENDING RACE LAWS AREN’T A VERY REAL THREAT TO OUR NATION.  Continue reading ‘This Election, Vote Freedom’

‘Playing Both Sides Of The Fence’


What constitutes a ‘traitor’? Here’s a northern Ontario chief who accepts the Canadian peoples’ money, uses aboriginal industry lawyers in Canadian courts to assert his ‘rights’ – but denies that he, or his people, are Canadians and insists that the Canadian and Ontario governments are ‘foreign’ and have no authority over his people, or the lands his ancestors surrendered via Treaty.

Now, this hypocrite has decided to “allow” polling stations on the reserves for the federal election, not only giving the Canadian citizens who reside there the chance to exercise their RIGHT to vote, but also tacitly admitting that they ARE, in fact, Canadians…

ERBLPlayingBothSidesOfTheFence800x800“A ‘First Nation’ in northeastern Ontario is welcoming polling stations for the first time in years, opting to give residents the chance to vote tactically, even though the community’s leader says they see the current federal campaign as a “foreign election.” Continue reading ‘Playing Both Sides Of The Fence’

Why End Race Based Law?


Canadians believe in equality, that all men and women have equal rights. We have determined that all shall be treated fairly and that no one shall be shut out of Canadian life, and especially that no one shall be shut out because of his, or her, race.

Only a policy based on this belief can enable Canadians of Aboriginal heritage to realize their needs and aspirations.

Native Aboriginal relations with other Canadians began with special treatment by government and society, and special treatment has been the rule since Europeans first settled in Canada. Special treatment has made of the Aboriginals a community disadvantaged and apart.
Obviously, the course of history must be changed.

The changes proposed recognize the simple reality that the separate legal status of Aboriginals, and the policies which have flowed from it, have kept the Aboriginal people apart from, and behind, other Canadians. The treatment resulting from their different status has often been worse, sometimes equal and occasionally better than that accorded to their fellow citizens.
What matters is that it has been different.

We can no longer perpetuate the separation of Canadians.
Now is the time to change. 

Continue reading Why End Race Based Law?

Democracy and Tribalism


“The history of progress in the world is the history of ‘detribalisation’, and the race or ethnic politics that goes with tribalised societies.

We see enough of these in today’s world to know better than to romanticise tribalism – or do we?”

**************************************************************************
“The case for ‘co-governance’ between the government and “iwi” {aboriginals} is justified, according to cultural recognition and ‘social justice’ beliefs. However, that is to make a fundamental error — one that ignores the dangers of including ethnicity into the political arrangements of a democratic nation.

” ‘Ethnicity’ refers to ‘race’ – that is, the concept that a socio-cultural group is defined in terms of its genetic ancestry. This doesn’t, of course, mean that ethnicity/ race is a scientific term. We are in fact 99.9% the same, with the remaining 0.1% being differences between individuals, not between groups. But some groups like to define themselves in terms of their genetic ancestry, as do New Zealand’s ‘retribalists’…

“Interestingly, ‘ethnicity’ has nudged race aside only recently. By the beginning of the 1970s, almost no one used the term ‘ethnicity’. By the end of the decade, almost everyone did. If our ‘Race Relations Office’ had been established even one year later than it was, it would have the ethnicity title.

“But changing a word doesn’t change the concept signified by that word. Ethnicity still means race; still means a genetic criteria for membership.

“Earlier this year, the ‘Herald’ and the ‘NZCPR’ published a piece I had written about the incompatibility of tribalism and democracy. Recently, I discovered that the ‘Nigerian Observor’, in referring to my article, had used my conclusion – that there is a fundamental incompatibility between the two sociopolitical systems – to say this:

“There is urgent need for robust public discussion, review and referendum—if needed—on the democratic and political systems in Africa, with focus on the re-introduction of parliamentarism. We need to move forward.”

“What is fascinating is that progressive discussion in Africa is advocating moving towards parliamentarianism while in New Zealand {and Canada} we, or a significant number of the politically influential, are seemingly unaware of the jewel that we have in our own parliamentary system… In that innocence, they are unaware of the threat to that system.

“From the 1980s, the rather benign idea of recognising Maori culture in the wider society became a political biculturalism that has enabled a small but extremely influential group of ‘retribalists’ to capture the moral high ground of ‘social justice’ — but in their own interests.
(It shouldn’t be forgotten that the numbers of Maori in poverty has actually grown during the bicultural decades.)

“On the way to elite status — with its associated political power and economic wealth — the retribalists have successfully manipulated the rather naïve belief that social justice comes from cultural recognition – a belief which got support for biculturalism in the first place.

“Biculturalism has a new political meaning but its ongoing support lies in the old cultural one. It now means that two so-called ‘ethnic’ groups have different political interests, which should be recognised institutionally.

{The widely-discredited ‘Separate But Equal’ nonsense. ‘Indigenous’ racism is forcing Western nations to retrace their steps…}

“This institutional recognition — beginning in education and health — began a veritable march into the heart of government. The ‘re-interpretation’ {deliberate misreading} of the Treaty as a so-called ‘partnership’ {just as in Canada} is providing the mandate for the march into the institutions… We see this in recent months, with the assumption that ‘co-governance’ is the natural next step…

“But what is the nature of the group that will be ‘co-governor’? What are the implications for New Zealand’s parliamentary democracy?

The justification for this elite’s power is its claim to represent a tribal people — so, such a people must be created and maintained — hence, the aggressive retribalisation {and ‘decolonisation’} that we have seen in recent years. Access to Treaty settlements requires individuals to belong to a tribe… Educational scholarships require applicants to name their tribe

‘Detribalisation’ is described as the problem, so ‘retribalisation’ is to be the solution — a slogan that assumes tribalism is a progressive form of social organisation — that it is worth having, that it should not have been destroyed.

“So, let us look at what the tribe or clan is.

“It is the oldest way to organise a social group. The cement is kinship. As the group gets larger, it becomes a race or ethnic group.
The group’s distinctiveness is the result of a shared history which may be very long, as with Australian Aborigines, or relatively short, as with Maori. However, a shared history does not mean that the tribe, or any group for that matter, should have a distinctive political system that never changes.

If there is no change, then those people are locked into a kin-based political system for all time. There can be no modernity, no progress, no future.

One of the benefits of colonisation, and there are a number, is the destruction of tribalism.

For slaves and lower caste people, it was liberation.

“Of course, the chiefly caste did not agree and today we see the resurgence of those who would be their inheritors.

The new elite is a self-proclaimed aristocracy, justifying their ambition in romantic appeals to an Arcadian past.

Tribalism must be destroyed for democracy to exist.
Democracy’s superiority as a political system is that it is the final stage in the separation of the kin/race character of a socio-cultural group, from its political character.

“It has achieved this separation by creating the secular public space where politics takes place, and by creating the citizen as the political subject for that space. The separation has not been easy, even in its final stages, as the turmoils of the 19th and 20th centuries remind us.

“We get fascinating accounts of the beginnings of the social-political separation from historian Peter Munz and anthropologist Alan Macfarlane. Munz describes how the Roman invasion of Europe allowed three intertwined movements to weaken European tribalisation so successfully that the pre-conditions were established for new non-kinship forms of governance — although democracy was still a long way into the future.

The Romans brought Greek civilisation, Roman law, and Christianity. This was a heady combination that undermined tribalism and laid the pre-conditions for the break-up of kin and race-based political structures.

“In his ‘Making of the Modern World’, Alan Macfarlane…also traces the rise of the modern world to the early break-up of tribalism. He refers to the legal right of women in Anglo-Saxon England to will property outside the kin-group, to show the weakening of kinship as a public political organising force by the 8th and 9th centuries.

The history of progress in the world is the history of ‘detribalisation’, and the race or ethnic politics that goes with tribalised societies

Tribal politics is necessarily undemocratic because of the criteria for membership and the system of leadership… This suits those who would lead the tribe because it guarantees a population that only they can represent. Leadership is also undemocratic because there is no clear separation of kin status and political status.

“So, the question for us is not why the ‘iwi’ elite is using retribal strategies to gain increasing political power and economic wealth – any emerging elite that chances upon a direct and easy means to get its way, will take it.
The intriguing question is how has a population with 161 years of democracy under its belt allowed this to happen.

“Whatarangi Winiata, the Maori Party’s ideologue, was the brains behind the division of the Anglican Church into three racial groups in the 1980s. He must be good because here was the ‘Universal Church’, one that had played a major role in the break-up of kinship organisation since the first centuries AD, meekly accepting a return to race-based division. Winiata has said that the Church’s three-party model is the model for New Zealand. ‘Co-governance’ is the current step…

“As an academic, I find the skill of the retribalising elite’s manipulative strategies fascinating. As a New Zealand citizen, I despair for our country when we do not know the value of what we have got.”

–‘Democracy and Tribalism’,
Dr. Elizabeth Rata, November 17, 2013

http://www.nzcpr.com/democracy-and-tribalism/#more-9879
**************************************************************************
The greatest danger to democracy comes from tribalism.

In most of the world, democracy usually fails as a direct result of tribalism. People divide up into tribes based on ethnicity, or religion, and vote exclusively along tribal lines.

The result is that it doesn’t matter what the issues are, or who the candidates are. The result is foreordained…

“Whether we’re talking Shiites in Iran, or Xhosa in South Africa, northern Italians or Japanese nationalists, tribalism covers up corruption and makes free institutions difficult to sustain. Issues don’t matter, the candidates don’t matter, charges of corruption don’t matter. What matters is power, what matters is tribe, and you follow along.”

http://www.danablankenhorn.com/2013/05/tribalism.html

♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠
#ENDRACEBASEDLAWCANADA

Website News
ERBL inc. Canada News
https://endracebasedlawcanadanews.wordpress.com

Website – Featured Stories
END RACE BASED LAW inc. Canada
https://endracebasedlaw.wordpress.com/

Twitter Featured Stories (follow us)
https://twitter.com/endracebasedlaw
@ENDRACEBASEDLAW   

Twitter – 1NATION1LAW (follow us)
https://twitter.com/1NATION1LAW
@1NATION1LAW

Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/ENDRACEBASEDLAW

END RACE BASED LAW CANADA 
https://www.facebook.com/ENDRACEBASEDLAWCANADA

ONE NATION ONE LAW CANADA 
https://www.facebook.com/ONENATIONONELAWCANADA
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠
Petition to END RACE BASED LAW
http://endracebasedlaw.net/petition/

mail to: endracebasedlawpetition@gmail.com
JOIN US IN THE FUTURE OF A UNIFIED CANADA