A modern "Indigenous lifestyle" means a lot of things. There's no contradiction in Indigenous people wanting to preserve their historical traditions, crafts and practices while also adapting to the current state of the world. Most Native people in Canada live in cities now and face issues of racism and generational trauma from colonial government practices like Residential Schools and the 60s Scoop which sought to cut their connections to their culture.
Developing land like this is a way for the tribe to generate revenue and take care of their members, but it's also a way for them to have meaningful input into the development process. They don't have some responsibility to leave the land as a pristine untouched wilderness, they can choose to develop it in a way that aligns with their values.
I visited a museum in the North once where they were talking about preserving the practice of carving giant canoes, to travel south and trade with Europeans. It struck me how this practice was historical and important culturally, but it also arose out of colonial interactions in the past 500 years. Both can be true.
I'm wondering if you were talking to someone else but I can't figure out who.
My question was pretty simple.
How are you guys (commenters) drawing a connection between what the author quoted, and the assumption that the person being quoted opposes the building project?
What context are you using to correlate those?
Here's a logic diagram to help. Assume P1 is true, since that's what he's saying:
P1: indigenous lifestyle is not skyscrapers.
P2: skyscrapers can be built by indigenous people.
C: indigenous people can't build skyscrapers
The above is nonsensical. Your conclusion is in direct opposition to the premise.
Introducing this person's quote to the article was totally irrelevant unless you're aware of some context that is missing from the story.
Developing land like this is a way for the tribe to generate revenue and take care of their members, but it's also a way for them to have meaningful input into the development process. They don't have some responsibility to leave the land as a pristine untouched wilderness, they can choose to develop it in a way that aligns with their values.
I visited a museum in the North once where they were talking about preserving the practice of carving giant canoes, to travel south and trade with Europeans. It struck me how this practice was historical and important culturally, but it also arose out of colonial interactions in the past 500 years. Both can be true.