Reconciliation Bridge

[ken0042]

I would say it would be better to rename it after somebody who fought for FN education in a way that was acceptable for everybody. Just having a read through some of the history, we could name it the "Shingwauk Bridge." Then when people asked who that was, we could say "Anishnaabe Leader Chief Shingwauk, also advocated for education of Aboriginal children, but an education that combined both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal teachings. "

Source:
http://wherearethechildren.ca/en/timeline/#5
(Interesting read, by the way.)

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Swarly

That can not be even close to true. Also, I don't believe resistance to doing something is a good indicator of if that something should be done. If a whole bunch of weirdos who worship Langevin and his horrible ideas came forward to protest you would have been fine with keeping it the same?

To the main point, I don't really care about the bridge. I had to just look up which one it was. This whole time I thought it was the bottom half of the center street bridge. I think the name should stay as it is part of our history and can drive the conversation about our past. Its great they are putting a plaque up to give a blurb about the residential system but I don't think many people will see that, no one will learn anything from it. By removing the name everyone can just go back to forgetting and not talking about that part of our history at all..... great

It's not meant to be an indicator of why it should be done, but rather, why it was successfully done. Enough people felt passionately about the change, and it completely outweighed the resistance to it, so it was done. That's not a value statement, just a fact statement. If there was push back or a completely insignificant drive for change, it may not have happened.

I'm not sure how keeping the name "Langevin" drives conversation about our history any more or less than "Reconciliation." It certainly didn't up to this point. In fact, the case for change has driven more conversation about that history than the original name ever did. So... win?

But if you think the past 100 years of not-talking about it is some indication that leaving the name the same is suddenly going to spur conversation, that's your prerogative. I just disagree.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

I think the only way the bridge will drive more conversation if it was named "The Bridge of Reckoning", which I would have preferred more.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by TheyCallMeBruce

I think the only way the bridge will drive more conversation if it was named "The Bridge of Reckoning", which I would have preferred more.

I think we should turn it into a folding bridge in the middle and then get Calatrava to design it so that each side looks like a hand, that way when the bridge is folded down it looks like hands shaking. In reconciliation.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

Originally Posted by Locke

I think we should turn it into a folding bridge in the middle and then get Calatrava to design it so that each side looks like a hand, that way when the bridge is folded down it looks like hands shaking. In reconciliation.

Oh, beautiful. Don't forget the neon lights that light up when the 2 points of the bridge connect, with giant words spelling "RECOncilIAtiON." The different upper and lower case letters will draw the eyes and enhance the pleasure centers of the brain.

[nik-]

It would be nice to have another Calatrava bridge that wasn't constrained by height restrictions.

Lets do it.

[V]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I would say it would be better to rename it after somebody who fought for FN education in a way that was acceptable for everybody. Just having a read through some of the history, we could name it the "Shingwauk Bridge." Then when people asked who that was, we could say "Anishnaabe Leader Chief Shingwauk, also advocated for education of Aboriginal children, but an education that combined both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal teachings. "

Source:
http://wherearethechildren.ca/en/timeline/#5
(Interesting read, by the way.)

That makes way too much sense. Politicians would rather just use a buzzword that they figure will do well in the polls.

Help people actually learn something real? Not a chance.

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I would say it would be better to rename it after somebody who fought for FN education in a way that was acceptable for everybody. Just having a read through some of the history, we could name it the "Shingwauk Bridge." Then when people asked who that was, we could say "Anishnaabe Leader Chief Shingwauk, also advocated for education of Aboriginal children, but an education that combined both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal teachings. "

Source:
http://wherearethechildren.ca/en/timeline/#5
(Interesting read, by the way.)

This is so right. Naming the bridge "Reconcilliation Bridge" is stupid as many have pointed out. The name represents the easy way out. One could argue it was named after a report which is kind of like all those unenforceable treaties international governments sign about the environment or even trade. You can get out at any time.

A lasting name would have selected someone in the past who stood for something the city should enshrine.

Naming the bridge after a report is just silly.

[northcrunk]

These politicians don't care about giving it a proper name like Ken suggested. This is them virtue signalling and nothing more.

[bossy22]

My grandmother who went to residential school in Grouard. The stories from my grandmother aren't very pretty. While, I think we should move on, if you are going to rename a bridge, reconcilliation bridge is a stupid name. I like Ken's idea for a name.

[Fuzz]

Well we are going to need a short form name for it that isn't so awkward. We can just drop 'Recon' from the front, and we don't really need 'ation' which leaves us with Cilli Bridge. Perfect.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I would say it would be better to rename it after somebody who fought for FN education in a way that was acceptable for everybody. Just having a read through some of the history, we could name it the "Shingwauk Bridge." Then when people asked who that was, we could say "Anishnaabe Leader Chief Shingwauk, also advocated for education of Aboriginal children, but an education that combined both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal teachings. "

Source:
http://wherearethechildren.ca/en/timeline/#5
(Interesting read, by the way.)

I mean there are issues with that as well but I fear it'd just get more of the anti-PC crowd foaming at the mouth so I'll leave it alone.

[V]

Since when are you worried about them? I'd like to hear it.

[the-rasta-masta]

I personally think we should have name the bridge after me. I've been told I'm a great guy.

[Cuz]

CP, I am disappointed. Six pages into this thread and no one has made the obvious joke about renaming it the Reconciliation bridge and being so close to the DI?

I'll see myself out...

[FireGilbert]

I suggest the Jarome Iginla bridge. Something needs to be done to make up for the top 100 snub.

[Weitz]

I didn't realize bridge names were such a hot topic.

[David Struch]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater

[Harry Lime]

Why not have everything in the city renamed for people or events that we don't care for? This bridge needed a one word addition to become Langevin's Shame. The peace bridge is Bronco's Folly, the crowchild/memorial intersection is Redford's Web of Confusion... and on and on.

Imagine how entertained visitors would be, and how interesting the road reports would become.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by David Struch

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=3&theater

Michelle is really just complaining about someone having a different opinion that her, but her comment that "reconciliation should not be trivialized" is ironically on point here. Renaming a bridge and doing nothing to follow up is absolutely a trivial change. So the question is, what is everyone - on all sides - doing to foster actual reconciliation?