Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
When you have to strip out 90% of the inscription - and therefore the context of its placement in its entirety - to try and argue balance, you've failed.
The entire plaque is intended to lead you by the nose to the conclusion that the only thing that matters is that some local First Nations representatives disliked its existence.
You guys see it as balanced because it is designed to lead you to where you already want to go. So that is not a surprise to me.
|
Really? That's the conclusion we are meant to draw?
My takeaway from the plaque is "this is a complicated issue because he was an important historical figure who did good and bad. The statue has been indefinitely removed as part of the process to repair the bad parts (with a little explanation of the process). This topic requires more consideration."
It's clear that a lot more people than the local FN communities take issue with how we commemorate JAM and other historical figures. Not sure why you're trying to minimize that?