Shouldn't We All Be Equals?

[Questions104729]

I am wondering why the United Nations have put into action the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Shouldn't we all have the same rights? The majority of these Acts just restate the rights that they already have. However, even by doing that, you're forging a barrier in between people of different ethnic origins, saying that they deserve more of a right to freedom and security than their neighbour should. As well, arguing for the different treatment of indigenous peoples is just different type of discrimination- whether that differential treatment is against, or in, their favour. It isn't right to excuse indigenous people from the same structures of law, just because their ancestors may have been oppressed. Many people were oppressed in history. But that's what it should be-history. We can decide whether or not to forge a new path, or just change the positions of the players. As a person once said, "we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes a Canadian and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin." If indigenous First Nations cease to exist, we wouldn't be dealing with an epidemic of such extreme poverty. History is meant to belong in the past. Please explain this confusing situation to me.

[Buenchico]

The rights referred to in the declaration go beyond the 'freedom and security' you've mentioned in your post.

For example, in Canada it gives the Métis and Inuit peoples, along with the First Nation tribes (such as the Cree and the Iroquois) the right to have their native languages respected and, importantly, to ensure that their children receive their tuition at school in those languages, rather than in English or French. It's akin to the right of Welsh people to have their children taught in Welsh.

The full text of the Declaration explains far more than I can though:
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf

'Equality' isn't synonymous with 'homogeneity'.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Equality before the law is a quaint concept and fairly modern.

I can't see any rational, or even moral justification for it.

[TheChair]

"I can't see any rational, or even moral justification for it".
Maybe you should rephrase that: "I can't see"

[vetuste_ennemi]

What a beautiful grasp of irony someone who has named himself after a piece of furniture shows.

[Old_Geezer]

I don't see why every generation should be forced to learn a minority language and be taught in it. Probably better to learn in their national dominant language. It maximises future opportunities. Learn other languages, if they desire, separately.

[Peter Pedant]

// Equality before the law is a quaint concept and fairly modern//
but that is history
I would put it at 1750
Wilkes - let justice be done tho the heavens fall (mansfield)
or the idea of contract - er mansfield again
or Somersett's case - slavery in England - the air of England is too pure for a slave to breathe -er Mansfield again I think
(there were other C18 judges, Ellenborough, Eldon spring to mind)

so... children and the vulnerable have the same rights as the rest of us ? well they dont do they ? They have more.

Married women have the same rights as a spinster ( feme sole) - nope they have all the rights and duties that come from being married

so it is a long question asking why one size doesnt fit all.
It can be answered with the statement "( because ) one size doesnt fit all"

this is not a spoof is it? someone asking a question he really knows the asnwer to but says he doesnt.

[Peter Pedant]

quite agree with you OG
Language is to communicate
and so doing a minority language seems a waste of time to me - more Arabic and Mandarin in schools ! ( along wid English and Spanish more than a billion speakers)

You can do Maff A level in Welsh....
yeah but what happens when you go to uni ?
relearn everything in English? ( note cute implication of the Sapir - Whorf hypothesis ) *

You remember Ruth er Ellis the bright kid at Oxford who did Maff ? She now lectures in pure maff in Israel in Hebrew which is not kinda main stream maff language - and the students whine - talk about making maff available to all.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity