In the wake of outrageous and absurd ‘indigenous land claims’ being made on lands and territories where no such claims can possibly be valid, the time has long passed to settle a few issues and questions surrounding the real political agenda behind these claims.
From the issue of basic definitions and terms, to the actual history of North America’s Indians, and to their current conditions when segregated on ‘Indian reservations,’ ignorance about these factors has led to the creation of racist narratives used by the Left to justify its continual attacks against basic private property rights.
On the definition front, in his May 3 Substack article, Robert Vaughan explains that “The myth of the ‘indigenous’ somehow being special is simply that – a myth.” Citing the roots and definition of the word ‘indigenous,’ he observes that “Nobody can be considered to be ‘Indigenous’ to the place they currently live – not the English in Britain, not the Chinese in China, and not the ‘Indigenous’ peoples of North America.”
Beyond this epistemological crisis, there have been decades of fictional stories and histories told about North America’s Indians, leading to the false impression that ‘racism’ was somehow at the root of the disputes and wars between them and the new European settlers. But far from being peaceful and noble stewards of the land, as so many narratives depict them, “The Indians were brutal – to settlers and to each other.” (Matt Walsh, April 2, 2026)
To add insult to injury, efforts are now being made to silence and censure those who dare to bring these realities to the public’s attention.
Member of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia for the electoral district of Kelowna-Lake Country-Coldstream since 2024, Tara Armstrong (pictured with this post), recently earned the wrath of that province’s legislative assembly for “using the term ‘blood and soil’ in her attack on a First Nations treaty, a phrase frequently used by German Fascists before and during the Second World War.” (Canadian Press, May 1, 2026).
Calls to force her to apologize or to resign from the legislature seem to be the only way BC’s legislature can respond to Armstrong’s accurate assessment of that province’s racist land claim policies.
And then there’s the case of Lara Yates, who as a mother attending her children’s school play, was banned (via trespass laws) from entering the school for shouting “Save us your race baiting and similar comments” in opposition to the ‘indigenous land acknowledgement’ read in advance of the play.
And let’s not forget about Alberta’s University of Lethbridge which recently trespassed its own professor, Dr. Frances Widdowson, for questioning claims that mass graves of ‘indigenous’ students were found in Kamloops, B.C. despite the fact that no such evidence has ever been produced or verified.
Common to all of these incidents (and many more) is a continual push by those in power to conceal their own racist objectives, and in particular, having their objectives identified as such. Silencing those who make this racism visible to others is ironically an admission that they are unable to refute their critics.
Thus, to call out ‘indigenous’ land acknowledgements by labeling them as “race baiting” is simply one way of labeling them in a way that is Just Right.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.