November 1st, 2025 | ALLAN RAY

The Voters Of Richmond Got What They Asked For

Years or white guilt and performative politics have led to this.

The recent court decision in Richmond, British Columbia, granting Aboriginal title to the Cowichan Tribes over a large piece of land is not just another legal story. It is the direct and predictable outcome of years of political performance, moral vanity, and the hollow rituals of “decolonization” that have replaced serious governance in this country. The people who voted for it, supported it, or tolerated it now get to live with the consequences.

The British Columbia Supreme Court ruled that the Cowichan Tribes have Aboriginal title to nearly two thousand acres of land in Richmond. This includes sections long developed and owned under what was always assumed to be private, legal title. The court declared that many of the Crown’s old land grants were invalid because they infringed on pre-existing Indigenous ownership. The province is appealing, but the damage is done. For the first time in modern Canadian history, the idea that private land might not actually belong to the people who paid for it has moved from theory to precedent.

This is not reconciliation. It is the collapse of property rights. It is the logical endpoint of decades of Liberal and NDP governments performing land acknowledgments. The same people who built careers reciting “we recognize we are on unceded territory” are now stunned that someone finally took them at their word. They spent years turning land ownership into a kind of moral embarrassment, and now they are discovering what that embarrassment costs.

This is what true decolonization looks like and, as it turns out, no one wants it.

Every public meeting, every civic event, every school ceremony began with the same ritual. A soft voice announced that we are on land “belonging to” this or that nation. Everyone clapped, and then went on approving rezoning applications and buying investment properties. The entire culture of the Vancouver region became one long act of moral theatre. No one thought it would ever have material consequences. They thought “decolonization” was just a social performance, something to keep activists quiet while business continued as usual. They were wrong.

For years, governments at every level used this language to buy political peace. They ignored the simple fact that if land was “unceded,” then at some point that claim would have to be tested. Instead of clarifying ownership, they built a bureaucracy of guilt. They told citizens that acknowledging Indigenous ownership was virtuous, but they never explained what would happen when courts agreed. The people who voted for this now see the result. Their property rights are suddenly negotiable. Their tax dollars may have been paid on land the state had no right to sell.

The same progressive voters who filled their front yards with orange flags and “Every Child Matters” signs are now horrified that their home titles could be questioned. They voted for Liberal and NDP politicians who promised endless reconciliation without limit or definition. They endorsed land acknowledgments in schools and city halls. They made it a moral crime to question any of it. Now they are the ones who will pay. And they should.

If a homeowner in Richmond loses value or security because of this decision, the responsibility lies with the political class and the electorate that sustained it. They voted for people who replaced property rights with slogans. They voted for governments that turned the legal order into an open-ended apology. They voted for endless guilt. What they did not vote for, but will now receive, is the economic price of that guilt.

There is nothing radical or hateful about pointing this out. It is the plain truth. The majority of British Columbians who supported the Liberals and NDP did so knowing that those parties celebrated symbolic reconciliation while quietly eroding the meaning of ownership. The entire moral economy of the province has been built on pretending that virtue and property can coexist forever. That fantasy has just collapsed.

The ruling has already sent shockwaves through the legal and financial sectors. Banks are watching closely because if land title can be challenged in court decades after it was registered, mortgage security becomes uncertain. Property value depends on trust in title. Take that away, and everything from retirement plans to local business loans begins to wobble. Yet none of this should surprise anyone. When you spend twenty years treating ownership as a colonial stain, eventually someone will treat it that way in law.

The blame belongs not only to politicians but to the culture that made this possible. The universities that taught entire generations that Canada is stolen land. The media that turned every civic issue into a morality play about privilege. The bureaucrats who built careers around “truth and reconciliation” paperwork while ignoring actual outcomes. The voters who clapped along because it felt good to be on the right side of history. Together they created the moral vacuum that made this ruling inevitable.

It is not enough to shrug and say that property owners are innocent victims. Many of them voted for the very parties that advanced this ideology. They accepted the land acknowledgments as harmless. They repeated the language in schools and workplaces. They mocked anyone who questioned it. They believed it was all symbolism. They built their lives on land they were told was stolen, and they never paused to ask what that meant for their deeds and mortgages. Now they know.

The hard truth is that property rights and performative decolonization cannot coexist. You cannot declare that all land is unceded and then act surprised when a court agrees. You cannot build a legal system on apology and expect stability. The Liberal and NDP governments of British Columbia have spent decades trying to balance both. They wanted to be the moral heroes of reconciliation while collecting property taxes and development fees from land they claimed to morally disown. That contradiction has finally broken open.

If this ruling stands, every property owner in the province has reason to worry. The precedent is clear. Fee simple title is no longer guaranteed. The Court has already said that those titles were “defective and invalid” where they infringed on Indigenous rights. Even if your land is not directly affected now, the logic can spread. Once the foundation of ownership cracks, no one’s home is truly safe. And the politicians who created this system will have no answers except to issue more statements about dialogue and healing.

There is only one fair outcome if this decision survives appeal. Anyone who loses their land or sees its value collapse must be reimbursed in full. Every dollar of property tax ever paid must be returned. Every homeowner must be compensated for their investment and their trust. The state cannot spend decades assuring citizens that their property is secure, only to admit that it was not. If the government cannot guarantee ownership, it has no moral right to collect taxes on it.

That is the price of the political theatre that British Columbia has called reconciliation. Real reconciliation could have been achieved through negotiated settlements, clear compensation, and honest limits. Instead the province chose the easy path of symbolism. Politicians stood before cameras and offered words instead of policies. Bureaucrats signed statements instead of treaties. Citizens learned to mouth phrases about “unceded territory” as though that absolved them of history. No one thought it would cost them anything. Now it will.

This is what happens when moral vanity replaces governance. When voters treat politics as therapy. When governments trade hard law for soft feelings. The Liberals and the NDP built this mess. Their voters cheered them on. They turned reconciliation into a religion and property into sin. They taught an entire generation that ownership itself was suspect. Now that belief is being enforced by the courts.

There will be efforts to soften this ruling, to assure homeowners that nothing will change. They will try to appeal it. But the principle has been established. If Aboriginal title can nullify Crown grants, then private ownership in British Columbia rests on uncertain ground. The political class will try to manage the fallout with the same empty words they always use. They will talk about “dialogue” and balance. They will promise that everyone will be heard. They will hold more ceremonies, make more acknowledgments, light more candles. And nothing will change until the electorate changes.

The people of Richmond and the Lower Mainland have been told for years that progressive politics were the moral choice. They believed it. They believed that voting for the Liberals or the NDP made them compassionate and enlightened. They believed that property rights were something only greedy people cared about. Now they are discovering that their compassion has a bill attached. They are discovering that the moral posturing of “decolonization” comes with real costs.

If they lose their homes or see their titles challenged, if they find themselves negotiating for the right to remain on land they bought legally, they will finally understand the meaning of the slogans they repeated. They will understand that “land back” was not just a metaphor. And when they ask for help, the same politicians who encouraged this culture will be nowhere to be found.

The lesson is simple. Symbolic politics always ends in real consequences. Property rights cannot survive in a country that treats them as a colonial embarrassment. Liberal and NDP voters in Richmond built that culture. They wanted to live in a moral drama instead of a serious nation. Now they are living in the third act, where the curtain comes down and the applause stops.

If this decision stands, every Canadian should demand one thing. The people whose property is stripped or devalued must be reimbursed every dollar they ever paid in taxes. Because if the land was never truly theirs, the government had no right to take their money. That is the price of the fantasy that reconciliation could just be performance art. The bill has arrived. And it is being delivered to the very voters who asked for it.