Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Pyongshin Sangja]

What I'm saying is that the existence of millions of descendants of freed slaves (blacks) and descendants of people whose land America occupied (Latinos) isn't necessarily a good thing and doesn't make America appear more enlightened than Canada, indeed it makes you appear less so.

[Gopher]

[Nowhere Man]

Minus providing smallpox-infected blankets
Minus decades of Indian Wars
Minus the Trail of Tears

The facts are:

1) The "First Nations" population was much smaller. Almost all Indian conflict took place and still does in Eastern Canada/Quebec.

2) People were basically free to bop over the border "out west" and many headed south rather than settle the Canadian prairie. Similarly, you see Western Canada being settled more as people migrated north into BC from the US. In other words, westward expansion didn't follow the same patterns as it did in the US.

3) The plains Indians of Canada did get rooked out of their land, but it was almost exclusively by peaceful negotiation. This stands in contrast to what happened in the US, which had far more settlers and indigenous people.

However, I would question the assertion that Canada "rolled over" its indigenous peoples just like America did.

There were fewer people on both sides, so more room for peaceful conduct. Therefore, it wasn't necessarily enlightenment that brought this result. On the other hand, both sides were watching what was happening south of the border and trying to avoid similar problems.

[Gord]

[Gopher]

[Gopher]

[Nowhere Man]

Hmm...

I'm regularly dismissed by Gopher for
a) sarcasm
b) my all-consuming hatred for Bush
c) mischaracterizing him

Any evidence of that above?

I'll leave it at that.

Goph,
Any further comment?

[Pyongshin Sangja]

[Nowhere Man]

[Tiger Beer]

Gord,

I'm not entirely sure where you are going with your non-white/white conversation or exactly what you are asking.. you can manipulate these numbers into whatever percentages you want to make for your argument though:

US population:

Total population: 281,000,000
White population: 194,500,000
Mexican population: 10,000,000 - http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/facts_for_features_special_editions/005338.html for Mexican number - as from what I gather you wanted to subtract them and the black slave descendents for your hypothesis?
Latin non-Mexican population (Colombians, Dominicans, Cubans, Peruvians, etc., etc. everyone excluding Mexicans): 31,000,000
African population (descendents of slaves): 31,000,000
African population (from Africa immigrants from Africa): 1,000,000
African population (Carribean - Jamaica, Haiti, etc.): 1,000,000 (approx.)
Asian population: 10,100,000
Other (native americans, etc.) 500,000
Two or more races (white/black, white/asian, black/asian, etc.): 4,500,000



Regarding New Zealand stats:
72% white
14.2% Maori
6.6% Asian (Chinese, Indian, etc.)
6.5% Pacific Islander (Samoan, Tongan, etc.
0.8% black, latino, middle eastern

A little different than Canada:
89% white,
8-9% asian,
2-3% native Canadian, black, latino, whatever else.

(Mith note: This is all 2000/2001 data).

-------------------

Pyongshin Sangja,

Regarding your specific questions.

1) I never mentioned the US has NO threat of a terrorist attack.
2) I never mentioned Canada has a 'white only' policy.
3) Regarding your projected growth 2017 data for Toronto/Vancouver - lets keep to concrete numbers, not heresay projected growth theories.
4) Regarding Koreans in Vancouver/Toronto.. its 1.5% and 1% of each perspective city:
http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/demo27x.htm
http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/demo27k.htm
I have no idea why you think I made it up, just click on the convenient link I created for you that goes directly to the Canadian census for those cities. In fact you can take everything I quote from there, its the Canadian Census I'm quoting from repeatedly.
5) Regarding Canada being 'geographically isolated' and your quoted story about 4 rusty boats of immigrants who arrived 5 years ago in Canada making national headlines and scaring the heebee jeebies out of everyone there.. pure CTV Monday night movie material.. can't wait to see it. Canada's Miami. (This is second time I've responded to this, how many times are you going to keep asking me to respond to it again? - I'm sure its traumatic, but welcome to what happens all the time everywhere in the western world (US, Australia, Europe, etc.).. its almost like you are shocked or in trauma over it. Yes, Canada is part of that.. its a big change.. but some comparitively miniscule amounts of illegals are going to try to enter Canada too!

[Gopher]

Pyongshin Sangja: My understanding is that Canadian agriculture supports no "cash crops." It's mostly lumber and wheat.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2089.htm

Can or does Canada offer an environment suitable for tobacco, cotton, or sugar plantations? Did such plantations ever exist there?

If you're wondering where I'm going with this -- and I already know the answers to my questions -- I'll explain: I'm increasingly confident that any comparison between the U.S. and Canada, particularly one of race-relations, is simply comparing apples and oranges, and for a variety of reasons.

Professional historians make race-relations comparisons between the U.S. and Brazil, and they also include the Caribbean at times. But I've never seen the U.S.-Canada comparison in the professional literature. And, as I think you can agree, then, what we are looking at are entirely different historical trajectories totally unrelated to moral choices but rather determined by biogeographic permissiveness and subsequent economic developments.

Also, I'll point out that, with respect to comparative Indian relations, it is apples and oranges as well, because there were no major Indian civilizations in Canada. We had tribal confederations, major chiefdoms, even protoempires in the Mississippi Valley and the Pacific Northwest. The U.S. supported a great deal more Indians than Canada in pre-Contact times, then. This, too, set Canada and the U.S. on different colonial-era trajectories, and this, too, was not related to moral choices.

Of course, these numbers pale by what we see in Mesoamerica and the Andes.

But Chile south of the Atacama looks more like the U.S., namely coastal California, and that would be a good comparison, at least a better comparison than U.S. and Canada.

In any case, arguments about which one is morally superior are really quite pointless and, ultimately, arbitrary. And there is clearly something else going on besides a simple comparison in threads like this one.

Still, the bottom line is this: all colonial govts brutally wiped out, displaced, or defeated and/or, to one degree or another, assimilated the peoples and cultures they encountered between 1492 and the late nineteenth century. Canada is no better and no worse than any other govt in our hemisphere in this regard, including the U.S.

There are clearly disappointments in Guatemala, however. So if you're looking to cast aspersions, that's where I'd start...even though it seems to me that if you had placed Canadians in Guatemala five hundred years ago, and vice versa, we'd be looking at the same historical trajectory we are today in each country.

Anyway, if you're interested to see what issues the professional scholarly community is really interested in, however, go here...

http://ethnohistory.org/

Otherwise, this argument is depressingly childish. Vancouver is certainly a fine city. I've been there. I would rather live in several other cities than there, however, and for many different reasons.

[Gord]

[Gord]

[Tiger Beer]

Gord,

I see where you are coming from with everything (although I disagree with your assertion that only mexicans who border jumped account for the large latino populations - way too many non-mexican latinos all over the place.. but anyways).

Regarding this one:

[Pyongshin Sangja]