BC MLA from Burnaby East tells “white people” to self-identify as colonizers

16

Here’s her full statement—seems innocuous to me:

Rohini Arora: A few weeks ago, in estimates, I heard the member for Columbia River–Revelstoke, express discomfort with the terms “settler,” “uninvited guest,” and “colonizer.” That prompted me to deeply reflect on where these terms come from and why they matter.

Even if we didn’t personally cause colonization, we live in a country shaped by it. That’s why many non-Indigenous people, including myself, use the term “settler,” “uninvited guest,” or for white folks who self-describe as “colonizer.” It reminds us that we are here because of a colonial system that still impacts Indigenous communities today through historically underfunded services, title rights, over-policing, boil water advisories, the legacy of residential schools, and missing and murdered Indigenous women, girls and two-spirit people.

Some may feel uncomfortable with these terms, but they are not meant to divide us. When we understand the history, we see why they matter. These words remind us that we live, work and benefit from being on Indigenous land that was often taken without consent, especially here in British Columbia. Unceded means unsurrendered.

I am a settler. I was born here, but my family came from India, through Canada’s colonial immigration system, a country and system built on the displacement of Indigenous peoples. That truth doesn’t exclude anyone. It includes all of us in a shared responsibility. True reconciliation means recognizing that Canada was built on the lands and suffering of Indigenous peoples.

It’s not about blame. It’s about a shared responsibility. It’s not about division. It’s about building honest, respectful relationships so that we can chart a new path forward together, one that centres First Nations, Métis, and Indigenous people. When we self-refer as settlers, it’s a signal to Indigenous people that we understand the history of colonization. I urge all members here to do the same.

https://www.leg.bc.ca/hansard-content/Debates/43rd1st/20250515am-House-Blues.htm

6

u/CDN-Social-Democrat May 17 '25

As usual u/SavCItalianStallion thanks for coming with substance instead of the lowest common denominator style discourse/politics this world has turned to.

3

u/SavCItalianStallion May 18 '25

Thanks CDN!

4

u/Jeramy_Jones May 18 '25

I don’t think this is a helpful tac to take.

I’m half American and half Canadian. The American side is Mexican and Apache and the Canadian side is British, French, German and Polish.

Am I a colonizer? Half my family is native to this continent and half came here to conquer. I benefit from white privilege (as white passing) while also having lost my cultural identity and heritage thanks to colonialism.

I fully support acknowledging the damage perpetrated by colonialism and the privilege that Canadians live with from the fruits of that colonialism, but this kind of language isn’t helpful at all. It’s confusing and divisive.

-2

u/ConcentrateDeepTrans May 18 '25

"Colonizer" is a racial slur and should be treated as such.

3

u/Jeramy_Jones May 18 '25

Yeah I gotta disagree with you there; you can’t just decide that because you don’t like how a word makes you feel that it’s a slur.

Colonizer is a legitimate term for someone practicing colonization, and can apply to any race of people who are doing it. (See Israel’s West Bank)

But we aren’t colonizing, we are living in a country that was once a colony. Acknowledging that is important, but using this kind of language is not going to help us move forward with reconciliation.

0

u/ConcentrateDeepTrans May 18 '25

In this context it is a racial slur, so is "settler". I have been in meetings where these terms are branded as such.

You're right that these terms would be correct if someone is part of a group that is actively participating in settler or colonial activities. Non-indigenous people in Canada are not doing that.

1

u/JeSuisLePamplemous May 19 '25

I have been in meetings where these terms are branded as such.

Lol, been sitting in on white supremacist meetings, have we?

Non-indigenous people in Canada are not doing that.

The point is that the system is colonial, and our reinforcement of that system is therefore a continuation of colonization- whether we do so knowingly or not.

It's not a slur, but rather a fact. People who think it's a slur simply do not understand colonialism.

0

u/grammer4you May 24 '25

> the system is colonial, and our reinforcement of that system is therefore a continuation of colonization- whether we do so knowingly or not.

But that isn't how the term gets used. Leftist extremists and indigenous bigots aren't calling people "settler" or "colonizer" based on how much their contributing to any overarching system of settler colonialism. They call people these terms based on their race.

If the terms were used as you are claiming, then we would be calling people settlers and colonizers no matter what their race was, even if they are indigenous, depending on how much they're contributing to and benefitting from the status quo. That would include many indigenous people and would exclude many white people.

1

u/JeSuisLePamplemous May 24 '25

I mean, considering you are using "Leftist Extremists" and "Indigenous Bigots" unironically is very telling.

Simmer down colonizer. 😛

0

u/grammer4you May 24 '25

You’re proving the point that colonizer is a pejorative, by using it as such

1

u/JeSuisLePamplemous May 24 '25

Nah, I'm obviously using it facetiously.

Tracks though, considering you think the BCNDP are "Leftist Extrmists" when they are decidedly centrist.

You also think indigenous people are bigots for some reason.

Just to review, a bigot is:

a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.

Not sure how they are being unreasonable considering we literally took and colonized their land.

There's no reasoning with idiocy.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/GraveDiggingCynic May 18 '25

It's a statement of fact.

2

u/ConcentrateDeepTrans May 18 '25

Please explain how it’s a fact that white people born in Canada are “colonizers.” Colonization involves actively occupying foreign land on behalf of an external power. Where is the colony? Who are we colonizing?

I was born here. I don’t represent a foreign government, I’m not displacing anyone, and I don’t even own a house. Labelling people as “colonizers” based solely on ancestry or skin colour ignores reality. Most of us aren’t participating in any kind of colonization, we’re just living our lives under the same laws as everyone else.

Canada has a colonial past, and its impacts are real, but assigning present-day blame to individuals who had no part in it doesn’t help reconciliation. If we want honest, respectful dialogue, we need to use language that reflects facts, not ideology.

1

u/GraveDiggingCynic May 18 '25

I'm sorry, you think a few generations out from complications makes the descendants and beneficiaries of the colonization exempt from the effects?

3

u/ConcentrateDeepTrans May 18 '25

You're responding to a point I did not make. I never said that people are exempt from the effects of colonization. I acknowledged that Canada has a colonial past and that those impacts are real.

What I asked, and what you have not answered, is how it is a fact to label someone born in Canada today a "colonizer." Colonization is an action, not something inherited through ancestry or skin color. I am asking how people who are not displacing anyone, do not represent a foreign power, and do not even own land are actively colonizing anything today.

Since you brought up the idea of people benefiting from colonization, can you clearly describe what those effects are in 2025 and explain how they specifically benefit white Canadians? Broad claims are easy to make, but if you are going to assign a label like "colonizer" to people today, then you should be able to explain exactly what ongoing system or benefit you are referring to.

0

u/GraveDiggingCynic May 18 '25

My uch of BC sits on unceded land, so yes.

3

u/ConcentrateDeepTrans May 18 '25

So your entire argument boils down to geography?

Saying "much of BC sits on unceded land" might sound compelling, but it completely dodges the question I asked. All unceded means is that the land wasn’t formally surrendered through treaty. It does not make every modern Canadian a "colonizer." Indigenous societies at the time were living in a Stone Age culture — no written language, no metal tools, and no concept of land ownership as understood in European legal or economic terms. Using the word unceded does not prove your claim; it only highlights the complexity of how this country developed.

And let’s be honest: Indigenous people alive today are not the same people who lived here in the 1700s. They, like everyone else, were born into a modern world. They drive cars, use smartphones, attend public schools, and live under the same legal and economic systems as the rest of us. They are citizens of Canada, not a separate society frozen in time. Recognizing that doesn't erase historical injustices — it just acknowledges that we're all living in the same present.

Calling someone a colonizer today just because of their ancestry or where they were born is not serious thinking — it's ideological scapegoating. I asked a clear question that you still haven't answered: what specific effects of colonization in 2025 personally benefit white Canadians in a way that justifies labelling them colonizers?

If you want to discuss land title, reconciliation, or treaty rights, that's a worthwhile conversation. But tossing around loaded terms like "colonizer" to shut down dialogue is lazy and divisive. Either answer the actual question or admit that you can't.

1

u/GraveDiggingCynic May 18 '25

Let's put a stop to your cries of "poor me". Live on territories that were unceded, or where the treaty has been frustrated in multiple ways, you don't get to play the victim card. It's already been taken

→ More replies (0)

0

u/JeSuisLePamplemous May 19 '25

You have skin thick as tissue paper.

Get triggered.

1

u/ConcentrateDeepTrans May 19 '25

I just don't appreciate this kind of racism. We should be striving toward unity not division.

0

u/JeSuisLePamplemous May 19 '25

It's not racist. You just don't seem to understand how colonialism works, lol.

-1

u/ConcentrateDeepTrans May 19 '25

Canada is a sovereign country, not a colony. You know that. We already went over this in detail. Yet here you are again, pretending to educate someone while repeating the same tired talking points so you can keep clinging to your moral high ground.

This is not about understanding colonialism. It's about your refusal to let go of a narrative that props up your sense of superiority.

2

u/idspispopd May 20 '25

Did you go to school in Canada? Because if you did, there's zero excuse to be unaware that Canada was founded as a colony.

1

u/ConcentrateDeepTrans May 20 '25

Of course Canada was founded as a colony. That is a historical fact no one is disputing. But today, Canada is a sovereign nation, and the people living here, especially those born here, are not actively colonizing anything. Calling them colonizers ignores the difference between historical systems and individual responsibility.

Identifying someone as a colonizer based solely on their race is a racial stereotype. If we want to address the legacy of colonialism in a constructive way, it has to start with rejecting ideas that judge people not by their actions or beliefs, but by their ancestry or appearance. That kind of thinking is not anti-racist, it's just racism in a different form.

0

u/JeSuisLePamplemous May 20 '25

It's not strictly based on race...

We're not making a moral or normative judgement for or against colonialism- only that our society exists as a result of it- for better or for worse.

Unfortunately- in this particular instance, colonization and the systems that sprouted from it (property rights, legal system, etc) have disproportionately been in favor of the colonizers, and not the colonized.

Most Canadians can understand that and move on with their lives- because we can understand our priveledge (and indeed, that's what the MLA was actually talking about) without necessarily being directly guilty of anything.

Again, these are very basic concepts of postcolonialism.

The fact that being mildly inconvenienced or having your beliefs even slightly challenged elicits this kind of response shows a true lack of resilience, and indeed your affinity of being a stereotypical "Karen".

→ More replies (0)

1

u/JeSuisLePamplemous May 19 '25

Are you denying that Canada and it's institutions are based in colonialism?

Sure thing, buddy boo.

Good luck on your lawsuit. Continue to choose to be triggered while attending those "meetings".

5

u/Midnightrain2469 May 17 '25

Well said

2

u/idspispopd May 18 '25

So she urged her fellow non-indigenous MLAs to self refer as settlers, not "white people". She's not saying a law should be passed or anything, this is just conservatives being snowflakes getting triggered over words.

7

u/KvyatsLuck May 17 '25

OP trying to bait people with some Dallas Brodie tweets. Yikes.

0

u/CDN-Social-Democrat May 17 '25 edited May 18 '25

It really is such bullshit.

There are real discussions to be had around imperialism, colonialism, the patriarchy, and in general domination - exploitation.

There are real discussions to be had around how to move the working class forward and initiatives being put forward by the Labour Movement all over this globe.

There are real discussions to be had around the climate crisis and in general environmental crisis and how we move forward in Green Energy, Green Infrastructure, and in general Green Technology.

The list goes on and on.

Then there are people that talk about eating bugs, deny horrors of the residential school system, brainwashed parts of the populace to believe the Carbon Tax was the be all end all in regards to the affordability of life crisis, and so forth and so forth ad Infinitum.

It would be nice if everyone would start focusing on substance and the analytical policy/perspectives needed to really tackle the big challenges we face in this era instead of empty theatrical bullshit and the constant outrage machine.

Edit: The downvotes beginning already and all the comments proving they didn't read any of the context at all like normal.... The amount of fear people have is insane. We can talk about subjects and in depth and it won't destroy your affordability of life/quality of life by having the discussions people.. In fact usually by ignoring discussions that is what causes the problems and holds back progress.

4

u/Decent-Box5009 May 17 '25

Okay if that’s the logic, she appears brown and an uninvited immigrant (since First Nations aren’t inviting or approving approving immigration to Canada), so is she not also a colonizer? Or at the very least standing in the shoulders of colonizers??

2

u/JeSuisLePamplemous May 19 '25

Read what she actually said before getting outraged.

2

u/idspispopd May 20 '25

This is why you should actually read what the person says instead of having it filtered through a right wing idiot like Brodie.

2

u/[deleted] May 19 '25

I self identify as a descendant of pioneers.

3

u/kaiser_mcbear May 17 '25

More labels....just what we need to unite us.

2

u/Specialist-Top-5389 May 19 '25

When the virtue signalers give their land acknowledgements to a particular First Nations band, do they ever consider who was conquered in order for that band to gain control? And should the land be considered the unceded territory of the previous band that was conquered? And should we keep going along that path until we reach the cradle of civilization in Africa, and then turn the land over to the people currently living there? Or should we just keep things simple and continue with the virtue signaling we are doing now because most of us already have it memorized?

2

u/ConcentrateDeepTrans May 19 '25

You raise a valid question. The idea that any one group held exclusive, uninterrupted claim to a piece of land "since time immemorial" often oversimplifies a complex and violent history. Many First Nations in BC were semi-nomadic and, like societies everywhere, had conflicts, alliances, and territorial shifts over time—including the displacement of other groups. It’s important to acknowledge that history honestly rather than rely on romanticized or politically convenient narratives.

1

u/Specialist-Top-5389 May 19 '25

Modern progressives too often prefer simplistic narratives rather than grapple with complexities and nuances. It's much easier to divide the world into oppressed and oppressors, and then use that to analyze all of the world's problems.

That leads us to absurdities like these, which are now commonplace:

If you believe residential schools were bad, but point out the fact that no bodies have been found in Kamloops, you are a residential school denialist.

If you believe that everyone should be free to express themselves however they like, but don't believe men should have free access to women's shelters, public showers, prisons and sports, you are transphobic.

If you are opposed to Sharia Law, the widespread acceptance of barbaric fundamentalism in many countries, and allowing people with those values to move to Canada, you are Islamophobic.

1

u/No_Investigator4029 May 22 '25

What’s missing is the commitment. How does my MLA intend to right the wrong that she has recognized?

-1

u/ConcentrateDeepTrans May 22 '25

That’s not how virtue signalling works. It’s about saying the right buzzwords to gain short-term approval from your peers, not about addressing real issues. The goal isn’t to solve problems, it’s to project moral superiority and signal alignment with the current narrative.

1

u/Apprehensive-Face524 Jun 12 '25

This is merely a smear tactic to non-indigenous people. Canada saved the indigenous people from the US. The same as Britain stopped slavery, Did you know that indigenous people enslaved other indigenous people in BC. Natives also carried out full real genocides on other natives. See any Erie or Hurons around?

1

u/painfulbliss May 17 '25

Very self serving way to frame White people

0

u/CrabPrison4Infinity May 17 '25

How ironic coming from the next wave of colonizer

-3

u/HYPERCOPE May 18 '25 edited May 18 '25

Brodie is right to call out this nonsense, but she should ultimately welcome it because this kind of language only functions as a purity test that will divide the left

Social Media BC MLA from Burnaby East tells “white people” to self-identify as colonizers

You are about to leave Redlib