Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz
Here's the thing.
The name Fort Calgary, kind of implies that the only history that matters, or that the place is built upon is that fort.
The name The Confluence, doesn't exclude Fort Calgary, nor does it exclude anything that existed there, before it.
The actual fort part will still be a part of the site, it's just not what it'll be named after.
I really dislike the position that rebranding something, to specifically include everything, rather than highlighting a specific part is somehow not remembering or erasing that specific part.
Also, if you're so concerned about the rise of dangerous populism, maybe using "Wokewashing" completely seriously, isn't the best place to start.
Seriously, rebranding to INCLUDE indigenous history does not equal erasing white history.
|
I'm certain that most people don't go to Fort Calgary very often or ever but the site has incorporated significant indigenous history on site along with the history of the fort and the history of Calgary. The indigenous perspective prior to Fort Calgary and during has not been lacking in what is presently at the site. Is it possible that more history can be included at the site than is currently offered? Probably yes, but it doesn't require rebranding necessarily.