Metis of the Red River
posted by Anonymous on .
About the Conflict that occurred between the Selkirk settlers and the Metis, could there have been any way to prevent it? Like could a peaceful solution have been found?
What do YOU think?
Most conflicts can be avoided -- but someone has to give in. Did the settlers and the Metis gain or lose from this conflict?
The Metis won. They had to fight for their right, the leader of the settlers wasn't listening *straight*. They could have made deals or something, well they never had a government that time, maybe the government would have provided a law/rules.
This is what I think.
Could I hear your opinion please?
The settlers invaded Metis territory. It's human (and animal) nature to defend one's territory.
So no peaceful solution could have been found? Unless the leader of the settler wasn't so demanding right?
But I can't get this off of my head. Why couldn't a peaceful solution have been found?
Just cause there was no other way to fight?
If they didn't fight, the Metis would have had to accept a compromise that would have been to their disadvantage.
Some conflicts and wars are justified.
Oh okay. So it all depended on the individuals, if they were ready to listen, then fights would not have happened. But since they were not ready to listen, fights were bound to occur.