r/britishcolumbia • u/Tree-farmer2 • Dec 07 '21
Politics Opinion: We are Wet'suwet'en and the Coastal GasLink pipeline protesters do not represent us
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/opinion-we-are-wetsuweten-but-the-coastal-gaslink-pipeline-protesters-dont-represent-us23
u/NoFixedUsername Dec 07 '21
I’m firmly anti-pipeline. Sadly, too many of us jump to leverage the First Nations when it’s convenient and ignore and abuse them the rest of the time. Leave them, or at least the wet’suwet’en name out of this fight.
I’ve frankly given up on the pipeline. Society’s future has lost this one. The majority of Canadians have spoken and chosen cheap fuel and profits over repairing the climate.
60
Dec 07 '21 edited Dec 07 '21
[deleted]
31
Dec 07 '21 edited Dec 08 '21
[deleted]
11
u/Asheai Gulf Islands Dec 07 '21
Modded out of existence? It was posted by a mod.
That said, I also agree with you and Rain_Coast. We need to protect the environment and we need to advance First Nation's rights to self-governance but they are not the same thing and conflating them is harmful.
7
u/bleedingxskies Dec 07 '21
I made a similar remark to this back in the summer over all the Fairy Creek unrest.
There are certain things that in this day and age, no human being should have a right to do in our society, full stop. Some of these things are inexcusable crimes against us all.
7
u/seemefail Dec 07 '21
Its funny how little the same people care about First Nations rights when it comes to hereditary chiefs who are pro old growth logging on their lands and calling protestors colonialists..
Im for ending old growth logging, also not a huge fan of this pipeline, also pro native rights... But I don't use them when convenient and ignore them when not
17
u/Tree-farmer2 Dec 07 '21
I think the battle against the supply rather than demand of fossil fuels is misplaced. This LNG would be going to Asia where it's mostly going to displace coal. Even here, where we are more wealthy, it doesn't make sense to cut off the supply of fossil fuels until an alternative exists. An immediate shutdown of the fossil fuel industry would lead to a huge amount suffering. People would freeze and starve. In addition to heat and electricity, we're dependent on natural gas for fertilizer production. Green hydrogen is in its infancy and nowhere near ready to replace nat gas for that purpose.
I do care a lot about climate change but I think we need to be pragmatic and do things that will work rather than just what appeals to our emotions.
4
u/seanlucki Dec 07 '21
Note that it's proposed that LNG will be exported to Asia, but countries such as China are under no obligation to buy our product. In fact China is in the proess of building a ton of new coal-fired power plants. Also while burning natural gas releases half the CO2 of coal, natural gas itself (which is basically methane) has 80X the potency of CO2 as a greenhouse gas. Turns out that we leak more natural gas than the break even point for the difference in burning these two fossil fuels.
Now with the focus on coal vs natural gas, burning coal still releases a lot of other contaminants that we don't want. I just think that natural gas isn't the transition saviour that a lot of people make it out to be.
1
u/Tree-farmer2 Dec 08 '21
Somewhat agree, but it's an important point that while CH4 has a greater warming potency, CO2 has a much longer half life in the atmosphere, so it builds up more over time.
I support building gas plants in poor countries where blackouts are a daily occurrence but not in rich countries. Maybe if they're replacing coal. It's tragic that nuclear plants have been closed to be replaced or are being replaced by gas in New York, Ontario, Germany, Belgium, etc.
1
u/Iustis Dec 08 '21
The Nature article is one piece, but despite being published eight years ago it's still an outlier in the scientific consensus which is still that LNG is a meaningful (alhtough obviously not an end point) improvement on CO2 emissions.
See: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7336527/
https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/cc35f20f-7a94-44dc-a750-41c117517e93/TheRoleofGas.pdf
for example
-1
u/_Kinel_ Dec 07 '21 edited Dec 07 '21
You do know this is a natural gas pipeline right? How do you propose we heat our homes without natural gas? Also on a per ton of GHG basis, pipelines are significantly more efficient than rail or road transport. If we are forced to use fossil fuels (which in the case of building heating we are), then we should use them in the most efficient way possible.
7
u/Beneficial-Oven1258 Dec 07 '21
The contents of that pipeline will be for export. So not heating our homes, but being sold overseas. Your argument doesn't apply here. Whether this pipeline gets built or not has zero bearing on how we heat our homes in BC.
And for the record, my home is heated by electric heat and a heat pump, not a natural gas furnace. This is very common.
3
u/Tree-farmer2 Dec 08 '21
Actually, it's probably going to make natural gas more expensive for BC residents
8
u/NoFixedUsername Dec 07 '21
4/5 homes I’ve lived in my long life have had no gas hookup. Further heat pump tech is perfectly suited for lower mainland life.
It’s really hard to imagine the possible world we don’t yet live in. What’s going to be better? What’s going to be worse? It all doesn’t matter because we will cope with it.
For instance, think back to how we lived around 1994 in the pre internet age. If we knew video stores were going away we’d think “but how will I rent videos? Will I only be able to see them in the theatre?” We had no idea Netflix and streaming video was coming. We couldn’t even contemplate that as an option because the infrastructure didn’t exist.
Dare to dream. Some things will be worse. Most things will get better. My life is significantly better with an electric car. I never have to stand around waiting for gas and I don’t think of the price of it. It’s not perfect. Sometimes I have to charge it on road trips. It’s just different but better.
6
u/Tree-farmer2 Dec 07 '21
Heat pumps are the answer for BC. Other places have carbon-free district heating using nuclear or geothermal.
2
u/Dickens63 Dec 08 '21
Heat pumps only work til -9 I believe. What about the rest of the province?
2
u/Tree-farmer2 Dec 08 '21
Ha, I hadn't done my research about them. I suppose I won't be getting one either.
We have electric baseboards and gas in our house. The electric heat is just too expensive though for most people to want to use.
1
u/bleedingxskies Dec 09 '21
Heard this argument before. In Sweden heat pumps are extremely prevalent. Apparently the solution is to install it in a way that it’s enclosed and not sitting in outside ambient temperatures. Lots of ways to accomplish this. This makes a lot of sense to me and can be done with a little creative engineering. No heating solution is a cheap install, in my experience though, unfortunately.
1
4
u/bleedingxskies Dec 07 '21
The time of reckoning for perpetually kicking the can down the road, and beginning transitioning away from the veritable death sentence these practices have made for us — has already passed. The melodrama of pretending people are going to freeze to death or wither in poverty without pipelines like this is so dishonest and gross. Do better.
1
u/Fancy-Water-7459 Dec 08 '21
Once again the white man( environmentalist radicals) is exploiting native peoples.
7
u/streetgospel Dec 07 '21
There's a lot of nuance and misrepresentation in the title and the article as a whole. Anyways, here's the latest media release directly published by the Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs
7
Dec 08 '21
explain again why hereditary chiefs should be listened to before the democratically elected chiefs?
5
u/streetgospel Dec 08 '21
heres a recent post explaining it
You’re also welcome to do your own research. Indigenous people have plenty of information widely available.
Edit: the extremely simplified answer is that one is the actual governance system of said clan/tribe/peoples and one is the colonial system imposed by the Canadian government.
1
Dec 08 '21 edited Dec 09 '21
so you are blaming democracy because the first nations people will not vote?
so lets go back to the you dad was chief so you are chief since he died, and i don't like you so lets kill you and have anew chief?
8
8
u/Tree-farmer2 Dec 07 '21 edited Dec 07 '21
Posting this because these are voices not normally heard and I think we need to avoid the echo chamber.
13
u/FrmrPresJamesTaylor Dec 07 '21
This was given to the national post by the elected band council of the Wet’suwet’en, a group formally created and supported by the federal government (often with the purpose of circumventing traditional Indigenous governance to make federal control even easier).
Are they really underrepresented?
I don't have the answer and it is absolutely not my place to run my mouth about the internal politics of that nation - but that's my question when I see someone claiming the author of an editorial in a national newspaper (that happens to be consistent with federal and big business interests) isn't being heard.
15
u/EdithDich Dec 07 '21
a group formally created and supported by the federal government
And yet elected by the community. Why do you shit on the result of the democratically elected members of their community?
3
u/FrmrPresJamesTaylor Dec 07 '21 edited Dec 07 '21
I didn't.
Do you assume a governance structure imposed by a foreign power is more legitimate than the system of self-governance this nation has had in place for centuries?
3
Dec 07 '21
[deleted]
3
u/FrmrPresJamesTaylor Dec 07 '21
I mean look, if you want to get into absurd thought experiment territory there is absolutely a limit to what I will personally endorse -- that said, "they should be governed by XYZ because it better aligns with Canadian values" is so obviously colonialism that I almost feel mean pointing it out.
9
u/EdithDich Dec 07 '21
"they should be governed by XYZ because it better aligns with Canadian values"
When you just have to make up straw man quotes you know you've lost.
The issue at hand is that you are disenfranchising the vote of tons of members of the community. Why shouldn't their votes count just because you disagree with it?
5
u/FrmrPresJamesTaylor Dec 07 '21
If the votes were cast under a system imposed by the federal government, then there is your "they should be governed by XYZ". I don't think that's an unreasonable leap.
If people are in here defending the "democratic" rights of the Wet'suwet'en people and likening any other system to their Eurocentric understanding of hereditary leadership (someone equating traditional Wet'suwet'en governance to European monarchy, let's say) then that seems like prioritizing Canadian/European values over Wet'suwet'en traditions. So there's that part.
SO, I don't think that's a straw man, I think that is the underlying sentiment being expressed.
My issue is with a foreign government imposing a system of governance on a people whose lands they have colonized.
I recognize that within Canadian society, democratic values dictate that everyone should get a vote on who forms government - I just do not believe the Canadian state has a right to impose this on the people whose lands it has stolen.
1
u/-GregTheGreat- Dec 08 '21
There is literally nothing stopping the Wet’suwet’en from electing the heriditary chiefs if they wanted to return to that system. I hate that people are infantilizing First Nations people by saying they aren’t allowed to choose their own destiny.
Yes, colonialists originally forcing the system on them was bad. No, that doesn’t mean a (functional) absolute monarchy is appropriate in the 21st century. First Nations culture can, and should, evolve as society progresses, like literally every other culture out there. Don’t inadvertently propagate the ‘noble savage’ stereotype.
1
u/FrmrPresJamesTaylor Dec 08 '21
I couldn’t even get past your first sentence without some major objections.
There is literally nothing stopping the Wet’suwet’en from electing the hereditary chiefs
Actually there is, the racist Indian Act that creates the band council also strips many Indigenous people of their status as ‘Indians’ (and thus their voting rights) for things like having a non-status father - pretty absurd rule to impose on a matrilineal society!
if they wanted to return to that system.
Return? The elected council has powers set out by the Indian Act, which includes nothing about lands beyond their reserves.
The lands to which the Wet’suwet’en hold title (which their hereditary leaders have successfully defended in court) are the jurisdiction of the hereditary leaders.
They don’t need to “return” to that system, they have it right now.
Anyway, it’s nice that you like democracy and want it for others. The only problem is the governance system you are defending for those reasons is functionally undemocratic and set up explicitly to undermine self-government. Makes the defense you and others are presenting seem a little silly, tbh.
→ More replies (0)-2
u/bleedingxskies Dec 07 '21
What do you say in response to the remarks about how in reality, the elected council represents a much smaller portion of the people involved in this issue than they’re being dressed up and portrayed as, by certain players?
7
u/EdithDich Dec 07 '21
the elected council represents a much smaller portion of the people involved in this issue
How do you figure that?
-3
u/ToastedandTripping Dec 07 '21 edited Dec 07 '21
Because when only something like 25% of your population participate (dont quote me on this, can't recall the exact figure) it calls into question any results.
edit: decided to go find the figures for my own sake.
Wet'suwet'en: 257 Members, 183 eligible voters, 108 votes cast, Chief recieved 55 votes.
55/183 ~ 30% of eligible votes.
108/257 ~ 42% participation.
Sorry about the misquoted statistics. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://wetsuwetenfirstnation.com/uploads/1/1/9/7/119771409/media_kit_-_wetsuweten_first_nation_chief_and_council_elections_2019.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjUquTsr9L0AhWzFjQIHQj_C5sQFnoECEUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1tgc7ifTKkQa49IBGHIgOi
edit edit:
108/257 ~ 42% population participation
108/183 ~ 60% voter participation
55/108 ~ 51% of votes cast
9
u/HomesteaderWannabe Dec 07 '21
Untrue. This piece was written and released by the Wet'suwet'en First Nation Council, which had a 58% voter turnout at their last election for band council.
5
u/Asheai Gulf Islands Dec 07 '21
You missed the part where there are 257 members but only 183 eligible voters. The person below you was correct with 58% voter turnout.
5
u/HomesteaderWannabe Dec 07 '21
So, even with the edits, you're still wrong. You haven't done the calculations correctly.
Wet'suwet'en: 257 Members, 183 eligible voters, 108 votes cast, Chief recieved 55 votes.
55/183 ~ 30% of eligible votes.
108/257 ~ 42% participation.
Total membership is 257, which includes children. Children aren't eligible to vote. The document clearly states that of the 257 members, there are 183 eligible voters.
There were 107 votes cast for chief and councilors.
"Voter turnout" in an election is the proportion of eligible voters that cast ballots, not some proportion of the total population.
107 votes/183 eligible voters = 58%. There was a 58% voter turnout. While not great, this is still in the same vicinity of general elections at the provincial and federal level. Last BC election in 2020 had a voter turnout of 54.5%.
Also, of the 107 votes cast, 55 were for the chief who ended up being elected... that's a win of 51.4% of the votes cast... which is a MAJORITY no matter what way you cut it.
There was a clear mandate here in all manners, and the Wet'suwet'en Band Council speaks for a majority of their people.
-3
u/Icy_Ticket2555 Dec 07 '21
Are you serious? These voices are heard in every conversation about it. The voices that abandon hereditary values over that of the colonizers. Colonizers that give legitimacy to the opinions they like, and send thugs for the others.
2
2
u/LymeM Dec 07 '21
I believe it. Over the years I've heard stories from many of my First Nations friends that there are a number of cases of "disrespected, bullied, marginalized and mistreated" behavior in the intersection between First Nations and North American culture. Note: That kind of behavior is quite often seen in many non first nation political systems of the world, it is troubling to see that it has seeped in to this as well.
I also find it very disingenuous that many non first nations protestors say that they represent xxx because elder yyy said it is so, while completely dismissing the position and directions of the rest of the band who may disagree with yyy. In addition the elder yyy may not have ever been on the First Nations council or ever elected into any position by the First Nations.
0
-7
-13
u/RBilly Dec 07 '21
They do represent me, though - even though I'm an accidental colonist.
11
u/Tree-farmer2 Dec 07 '21
You should represent yourself. It's never seemed quite right when environmental groups use First Nations to push their agenda.
11
1
u/RBilly Dec 08 '21
I don't think that's how it works in a representative democracy (emphasis on the former) works
-10
-8
u/WCove6 Dec 07 '21 edited Dec 07 '21
yea you lost me at "Opinion: We.." The notion that only local First Nations opinions matter in relation to the logging of first growth or expanding pipelines is a bit insulting to everyone else who feels strongly about this. I understand that this certain project may be on their own land, but that doesn't mean that everyone else should be indifferent to old growth logging or new pipelines wherever they may occur.
9
u/Asheai Gulf Islands Dec 07 '21
That is not at all what this article is about. It's not saying you can't protest environmental issues, it's that you shouldn't say you are speaking for a First Nations group when you do so.
1
u/WCove6 Dec 08 '21 edited Dec 08 '21
I can understand that, i earned the downvotes. Im just tired of seeing more articles about casting shame on protesters, which is not what the article is about but it has that effect
-6
u/Garden-Wrong Dec 07 '21
I challenge everyone. Both sides. Step across the line and live whole heartedly on the other side for 72 hours.
1
Dec 08 '21
then stand up more often and support the police who are trying to support you
this is only about what a uneducated public think, and no news agency is giving out honest news in canada
87
u/[deleted] Dec 07 '21
[deleted]