Hi Ray, In referrig to the three state solution in Canada you must mean the country as a whole via the Government of Canada, the provinces and territories via their governments, and Aboriginal self government -- the right of Native people to run their own affairs (even if they can't afford to do so). I'd argue that there are important differences between how Aboriginal people were treated in various parts of the Americas, in Canada versus the US for example. Let me think about it and respond more fully in a day or so.
Regards, Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: Ray Harrell To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION' Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 1:40 PM Subject: Re: [Futurework] The Shame of America, Canada,Meso-America and South America PTSD, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder continues when crimes are ignored and denied. In Spain and Northern Ireland it took hundreds of years to resolve and even the resolution proved inadequate unless they exiled the other side or just killed them. There seems to be a kind of "solution" of this type arising in the Middle East these day on both sides. The Final Solution is not new. It was the solution proposed for my people by the beloved Wizard of Oz writer L. Frank Baum when he confronted the desolation of the reservation solution. His beliefs flowed logically out of the philosophy of "usefulness" from Locke to the Utilitarians. The weren't religious or personal they were "just the market beliefs of the day." Today in Canada we have a three state solution in a kind of commonwealth but it will take hundreds of years for the Native people to recover and cease the flinching that happens when one is touched on a wound. Native people get cheloids on their scars that are lifelong and hard to forget. The path of war is not the only human solution. And it certainly the only "natural" one either. It is the path that Keith calls the "short term" solution. As long as the path of peace is unknown or worse simply believed to be the absence of war, its difficulties will go untried and unrecognized. Here are some our thoughts taught to me by my Masters, about the Path of Peace and the Path of War. We call them the Red and the White Path and once they were recognized as incompatible and studied as designed strategies for living. A society had to chose one path or the other and they did. Today the Path of War is the only path anyone takes seriously. In 2012 it will have been thirteen cycles of 52 years of continual war. 1. There are two governing strategies in existence, a duality. The Path of War and the Path of Peace. 2. Traditionally we have called these the Red or war and the White or peace governments. 3. When one government strategy was used the other was not. The both had their own distinct personnels. 4. The Path of War sees life in terms of scarcity. 5. The Path of Peace sees life in terms of plenty. 6. Both paths contain dissonance and repose. Both have their music. 7. The path of war is concerned with defense and governs defensively usually in short time spans. 8. The path of peace is concerned with growth and governs as a long term design. 9. The path of war is filled with defenders of the gate. 10. The path of peace is filled with keepers of the garden. 11. The path of war builds energy through an ever narrowing field. 12. The path of peace uses energy to create an ever widening field. 13. The path of war removes complexity through violence and growth through destruction. 14. The path of peace diminishes complexity through a growing knowledge and designs for the whole system. 15. The path of war uses violence to cull in order to feed. 16. The path of peace uses violence to accept what has been offered freely in order to continue. 17. The path of war considers food to be dead and the end of consciousness. 18. The path of peace considers food to be alive and the continuance of consciousness. 19. The path of war has winners and losers and considers life a game. 20. The path of peace does not accept the game as a metaphor for life but instead considers it a dance. 21. The path of war is concerned with winning the day and will leave tomorrow for the survivors. 22. The path of peace is concerned with choreographing the dance down to the seventh generation for the good of the whole system of life. REH PS, If I were a Roman Catholic I would say that what Natasha Kandic cries out for is the need for "confession." Mere documentation is a form of "bully bragging" and is one of the power games of the War government. June 5, 2011 The Shame of Serbia By NATASHA KANDIC Belgrade, Serbia THE arrest of Ratko Mladic on May 26 caught me off guard. I couldn't believe it. I clenched my fists, trying to grip him tightly in my hands. Finally, I breathed a sigh of relief. But then I heard the speech by the Serbian president, Boris Tadic. For him, Mr. Mladic's arrest represents the closing of a dark chapter in our history and a removal of the mark of shame that has stained the Serbian people for two decades. But there was no mention of the many other perpetrators of genocide during the 1990s or of the responsibility the Serbian state bears for those crimes. Once again, it seems, we might lose the chance to open a painful but necessary debate about the past. Not long ago, for a brief moment, it seemed that all of Serbia would side with "foreign" victims against its "own" perpetrators. That was in 2005, after my colleagues and I uncovered and released a 1995 video showing the execution of six Muslim men from the Bosnian town of Srebrenica. For the first time, the Serbian public saw incontrovertible evidence of the state's involvement in massacring 7,000 Muslims there. The government was quick to respond by dissociating the state from the massacre. Overnight, the police arrested five men and then declared them a criminal group, denying any connection the unit may have had with state institutions. At the trial, the Serbian court rejected the testimonies of the mothers and children of the six executed Muslims. There was no evidence, the court concluded, that the men were detainees from Srebrenica. That ruling was a mark of shame on all of us. And we can't wash it off by sending Mr. Mladic to the Yugoslav war crimes tribunal in The Hague. Mr. Mladic's arrest brought relief to the families of victims. It offered the Hague tribunal recognition that it is a successful agent of international justice. And it granted Serbia the long-coveted prospect of membership in the European Union. The Serbian government has managed to persuade the world that it values a European future more highly than the criminal heroes of the past. But I am not so sure that Serbia has given up on Mr. Mladic and his fellow generals, who prosecuted a genocidal war in Bosnia. The sympathy that state officials and the news media expressed for Mr. Mladic last week is yet another mark of shame on all of us. The deputy prosecutor offered him strawberries. His wish to be visited by the health minister and the president of Parliament was granted, as was his request to visit his daughter's grave. The Serbian public was constantly updated on his diet in jail, and we all learned that Mr. Mladic flew to The Hague in the suit he'd worn at his son's wedding. He was treated as a star. Such adulation of murderers is dangerous in a region where the wounds of war have not yet healed. Nationalism is still strong in Bosnia, Croatia, Kosovo and Montenegro, and sometimes even stronger than it was during the wars that tore Yugoslavia apart in the 1990s. Recently in Croatia, politicians, the press, the church and civil society groups protested the Hague tribunal's verdict that two Croatian generals were guilty of war crimes, a ruling that challenged Croatia's official interpretation of the war. They all acknowledge that some killings took place in 1995, but they deny that the state and former leaders like Franjo Tudjman, then the president of Croatia, were responsible for planning the ethnic cleansing of Serbs. In the eyes of the Bosnian political establishment and victims' families, justice for the victims of genocide and ethnic cleansing will be served only if Serbia and Bosnian Serb leaders acknowledge their role in the genocide. Yet Bosnian Serb leaders still deny it took place and demand that more Bosnian Muslim leaders face war crimes trials, too. Similarly, little has changed in Kosovo, where the public opposes trying the commanders of the former Kosovo Liberation Army. And in Montenegro, a court ruled that the policemen who handed over Muslim refugees to Bosnian Serb forces in May 1992 weren't guilty of a war crime - a slap in the face to victims' families. The region desperately needs an honest debate about the past. It is the only way to recognize all victims and to stop the lies we tell about ourselves and about others. Victims' families, 1,600 nongovernmental organizations, veterans and clergymen have signed on to the initiative for the founding of a regional commission that would compile a complete registry of victims, including dead soldiers, policemen, volunteers and those who were targets of ethnic cleansing. Later this month, a request to establish this commission will be submitted to leaders of all the successor states of the former Yugoslavia. If adopted, it will put an end to the age-old Balkan practice of leaving victims nameless. And we can only hope that it will eventually wash away the stain of the past once and for all. Natasha Kandic is the executive director of the Humanitarian Law Center in Serbia. This article was translated by Vesna Bogojevic from the Serbian. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
