Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Canadian Political Free-for-All -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eashoa' M'sheekha who wrote (3241)	11/17/2003 2:27:04 AM
From: Gulo	Respond to of 37482

I'm sorry. I did not mean to imply that the extinction of the Beothuc was a result of official public policy. It clearly wasn't. My limited understanding of the situation leads me to believe that there were a number of clashes between Newfies and the natives that led the Beothuc to hide in the bush, where they eventually died out. My point was that any hostilities between natives and the settlers were generally limited to clashes between individuals or small communities. Official doctrine did perpetrate some unfortunate events such as forced relocations or residential schooling, but didn't take the form of the indian wars experienced by the expanding U.S. You bring up an interesting point regarding MicMaq culpability in the Beothuc extinction. Sympathy for native victims of injustice have been too eager to paint them as "noble savages" that lived peacefully and in harmony with nature. In fact, they lived the same way as any other people lived that had similar lifestyles. The hunter-gatherers violently defended and expanded their territories, while settled folk raided neighboring villages. Life was often miserable and short in the warrior society. -g