City of Victoria to remove statue of John A. Macdonald from the steps of City Hall

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by surferguy

I graduated high school in 96. I honestly cannot remember learning about residential schools in social studies. Was it part of the curriculum? I know there are lots of folks in the same age bracket on here - did you learn about residential schools in high school?

Nope, didn't learn in school. I watched some CBC documentary about it way back in the day. G&M also did a great series on them too a while back.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Or, It could be read as yet another attempt to get you to explain what the hell you mean by “whitewashing history.” I am honestly mystified by not only your puzzling use of this term, but also your flat refusal to explain what you are talking about.

Hopefully I won't be assumed to be taking up the banner of Resolute's argument by clarifying his meaning here, but I suspect it's this definition from the OED...

whitewash, v.
a. To conceal the faults or errors of; to free, or attempt to free, from blame; to provide with a semblance of honesty, respectability, rectitude, etc. Frequently with negative connotations.

In this context, and using this defintion, "whitewashing history" would be to conceal from public view any figure or event that has faults or errors associated with it. I think the phrase "sanitizing history" makes more sense, but I don't have any difficulty understanding what he's complaining about. Effectively, it's brushing things under the rug to avoid controversy or offense-taking.

These events always remind me of a line from the West Wing, where the First Lady is planning to attend a state dinner wearing jewelry that's being protested as a symbol of oppression. The Press Secretary tries to convince her not to wear it.

C.J. Cregg: Yes, but its history...
Abbey Bartlet: It's our history. Better or worse, it's our history. We're not going to lock it in the basement or brush it with a new coat of paint. It's our history.
C.J. Cregg: Well, good answer.
Abbey Bartlet: The truth'll do it almost every time.

Resolute can correct me, but I think when he's talking about "whitewashing", he's referencing that same "new coat of paint".

[Shazam]

So they want to replace the statue with a plaque? That's good.

I always thought John A. MacDonald was a dick.

[MoneyGuy]

I’d leave the statue alone and put up a history marker or some kind of display explaining what the issue is all about. Use it as an educational opportunity.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

150 years from now Canadians will view our generation with the same disgust because of how we didn't do enough to assist Native communities or give them complete autonomy.

There is only so many ways you can give legs up to a population, and you want to give them complete autonomy? There is a reason the Federal gov't has to manage a number of affairs for them, otherwise it'd the wild west of corruption and mismanagement out there.

I would imagine history will look back at the reservation system as a whole as a complete and utter failure on all sides.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Dude, read the thread.

lol. Woosh.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Ducay

There is only so many ways you can give legs up to a population, and you want to give them complete autonomy? There is a reason the Federal gov't has to manage a number of affairs for them, otherwise it'd the wild west of corruption and mismanagement out there.

I would imagine history will look back at the reservation system as a whole as a complete and utter failure on all sides.

No. But maybe 150 years from now people will look at us in disgust that Canada didn't give them complete autonomy. I doubt John A thought he'd be vilified for trying to introduce "civilized" culture to the Natives.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Not only are you only pretending to be puzzled, I've only actually responded to that multiple times. You just keep ignoring it for your convenience. We're erasing names off buildings and infrastructure, and removing statues to disappear people who have become inconvenient to a single group. It's a bad precedent, and not one that should be respected or supported...

I would agree with this if it was something that was actually happening here, but as near as I can tell, there is no effort underway by these actions to disappear John A MacDonald. On the contrary:

City Family's Witness Reconciliation Program — a group created last year to pursue issues of reconciliation with the Songhees and Esquimalt Nations — denounced the first prime minister of Canada as "a leader of violence against Indigenous peoples."

MacDonald's involvement in the Indian Act and the promotion of his colonial views towards indigenous people are a part of the public record. Based on what has been reported, it seems to me that this is something the Family Witness Reconciliation Program is rather working to include, and NOT in the service of obfuscating the events of the past.

In a lengthy statement on her website, Victoria Mayor Lisa Helps notes that a plaque will immediately replace the statue until all parties involved can "find a way to recontextualize Macdonald in an appropriate way." Until then, it will be stored in a city facility.

This is quite different than the tactics of southern US legislators who have quietly undertaken by cover of darkness to quickly and without notice remove Confederate War memorials. The Mayor's office issued a statement, and moreover the report has indicated that this is still an OPEN ISSUE. The removal of the statue is NOT permanent (at least not yet), and without seeing what will replace it in a more "contextually appropriate way" then I would continue to maintain that your charge of whitewashing history (or "sanitizing" history as CHL would prefer) is at best premature, or at worst entirely misplaced.

The problem of sanitizing history is a real thing (it is something I work through regularly as an ancient historian), but it is an enormous leap to insist that this is what is taking place in this instance.

[station]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

attempt to erase history.

You still have not explained this!!!
EDIT: In fairness you have now explained this, it just doesn’t make any sense. A statue is no more history than a tree is biology.

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

You want to try and cheapen that down to "it's just a statue"

You really do like statues hey? Maybe you could get them to deliver it to your house.

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

because it allows you to feel smug and superior about how "enlightened" and "progressive" you are.

That’s a lot of air quotes lol. I guess where we part is that I think reconciliation is a worthwhile process for our country and you clearly don’t.

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Like I told the drive-by artist: we'll see you next time when they erase something else. And, again, you will try to pretend it isn't an issue with wider context. You'll try to argue that it is "just a statue" or "just a bridge" or "just a school".

Actually I do see the wider issue you are referring to. If you care at all, you want a bootstraps approach I assume? Let them sort out their own affairs, right?. If we give in on anything then we’ll end up with Evergreen College type situations and every competing special interest group will come out of the woodwork for reparations and favourable gov’t policy, maybe even by force. In many cases I would agree with this. I definitely think we should be wary of identity politics in all its forms and I actually think a dissenting and even conservative voice is always worth hearing.

However, I think it’s false to equate First Nations with other identity groups. They are literally separate nations whose foundational relationships with our country are built on 19th century attitudes. They have been deeply wronged by our institutions and statistics around issues like youth suicide and drug use are horrific. I know you’ll say why is that our problem? But I think if you look deeper into truth and reconciliation you will realize that it really is about those two words. Let’s tell the truth about history as best we can (not erase it, the truth), and let’s build better relationships with First Nations people moving forward. It’s about First Nations reclaiming their culture so they can find themselves in a better future. If you listen you’ll find that there is a very honest conversation happening within First Nations communities about their cultural tendencies and issues (a bootstraps approach) which is where most identity politics falls short. And personally I think this is a conversation worth engaging in as a Canadian.

[rubecube]

In other news, there was a pretty sad attempt at a protest against this move at City Hall yesterday afternoon and they're apparently attempting to hold another one on Saturday.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by rubecube

In other news, there was a pretty sad attempt at a protest against this move at City Hall yesterday afternoon and they're apparently attempting to hold another one on Saturday.

Petition to: Victoria Mayor and Council

Stand Up for John A.

https://www.citizengo.org/en-ca/pc/1...&tcid=50245432

This is no less than an act of treason! We may disagree with some of his ideas - especially when it comes to his opinons on Indians.

over 1000 signatures

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by troutman

Petition to: Victoria Mayor and Council

Stand Up for John A.

https://www.citizengo.org/en-ca/pc/1...&tcid=50245432




over 1000 signatures

This is no less than an act of treason!

Okay, let's settle down, proud boys.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

No. But maybe 150 years from now people will look at us in disgust that Canada didn't give them complete autonomy. I doubt John A thought he'd be vilified for trying to introduce "civilized" culture to the Natives.

I find myself saying this far too often:

There is no 'They.'

We tend to look at the Native community as a united collective but this simply isnt true.

We think of the native community as a cohesive group, which they are not. I cannot stress that enough.

They are a divided group of various tribes who also do not get along with one another let alone the rest of Canada.

Herein lies the problem.

So one tribe can be offended by one thing that another tribe doesnt have a problem with and then we want to build a road through another tribe's land and then another tribe gets offended because they didnt get that money and on and on it goes.

[CaptainYooh]

I noticed the word "Indians" in bold font in troutman's post. I have dealt with various first nations leaders a few times. In our communications with them and internally, we go out of our way to ensure we refer to them only as "first nations", usually adding nation's name before the term. However; in all our meetings, the chiefs and tribal administrators always refer to themselves as "Indians". I find it quite comical. Similar to how the media completely abandoned the word "black" in favour of "African-American", while African-Americans themselves keep calling themselves "black" and don't see a problem doing it.

Can our forum political correctness police clarify the use of terminology?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by station

That’s a lot of air quotes lol. I guess where we part is that I think reconciliation is a worthwhile process for our country and you clearly don’t.

To be more accurate, I don't think what we are doing here is a worthwhile process because it will fail to achieve any meaningful progress as a means of reconciliation. Here's the thing: reconciliation is a two-way street. What is happening now is not.

As to the rest of your post, lets face the elephant in the room: our politicians will agree to renaming bridges and removing statues and putting "Native-inspired" art along highway overpasses because it's the path of least resistance. First Nations leaders will praise the same for the same reason. And everyone pats themselves on the back in celebration of how progressive they are.

Meanwhile none of this will achieve the slightest thing in resolving the actual issues that lead to the high drug use, high suicide rates and other systemic issues that you mention. The problem is that the reserve system sucks. We've created this awful system of segregation that has been entrenched for over a century and we've put most of these reserves in the middle of nowhere where there is no opportunity.

And nobody actually wants to deal with the reserve system because doing so will be ugly. It will create new wounds on top of old and will take multiple generations to come to terms with. And it is entirely understandable why many would not even want to try. But we're not going to actually achieve reconciliation until we come to a point where we are actually neighbours. And by that, I do not mean in the sense of Calgary and the T'suutina being adjacent municipalities. I mean when a family of First Nation descent lives beside yours and you and they work together while your children play together and go to school together and think nothing of it because that's what kids do.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Not only are you only pretending to be puzzled, I've only actually responded to that multiple times. You just keep ignoring it for your convenience. We're erasing names off buildings and infrastructure, and removing statues to disappear people who have become inconvenient to a single group. It's a bad precedent, and not one that should be respected or supported.

And Pepsi - you're one to talk about wanting to fuel outrage. Pot, meet kettle.

If only we had books and other educational materials that keep people from disappearing and didn’t have to depend solely on statues to teach our history.

Oh... wait...

I mean you’re complaining about statues and the names of stuff. I went to Wise Wood and I don’t know who Henry Wise Wood is. If the name is so educational, shouldn’t I know that? It’s just a name, and just a statue, because of just that: they have no historical value. They do nothing to preserve someone’s legacy, only their name or likeness.

Education is how we learn. Not from walking by a statue as we enter a building.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

To be more accurate, I don't think what we are doing here is a worthwhile process because it will fail to achieve any meaningful progress as a means of reconciliation. Here's the thing: reconciliation is a two-way street. What is happening now is not.

As to the rest of your post, lets face the elephant in the room: our politicians will agree to renaming bridges and removing statues and putting "Native-inspired" art along highway overpasses because it's the path of least resistance. First Nations leaders will praise the same for the same reason. And everyone pats themselves on the back in celebration of how progressive they are.

Meanwhile none of this will achieve the slightest thing in resolving the actual issues that lead to the high drug use, high suicide rates and other systemic issues that you mention. The problem is that the reserve system sucks. We've created this awful system of segregation that has been entrenched for over a century and we've put most of these reserves in the middle of nowhere where there is no opportunity.

And nobody actually wants to deal with the reserve system because doing so will be ugly. It will create new wounds on top of old and will take multiple generations to come to terms with. And it is entirely understandable why many would not even want to try. But we're not going to actually achieve reconciliation until we come to a point where we are actually neighbours. And by that, I do not mean in the sense of Calgary and the T'suutina being adjacent municipalities. I mean when a family of First Nation descent lives beside yours and you and they work together while your children play together and go to school together and think nothing of it because that's what kids do.

Yep this about sums it up.

[Flamenspiel]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Simply put, I think the first prime minister of a relatively peaceful country that has lasted 150 years deserves to have a statue in major cities across the land. He's no war criminal, nor did he have evil plans to eliminate minorities or enslave them like many a world leader.

Canadians have a long history of screwing up relations with Natives, and even though we feel morally far superior to John A, 150 years from now Canadians will view our generation with the same disgust because of how we didn't do enough to assist Native communities or give them complete autonomy. The difference is none of us were the first prime minister.

Great post! best one of the thread.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

If only we had books and other educational materials that keep people from disappearing and didn’t have to depend solely on statues to teach our history.

Oh... wait...

I mean you’re complaining about statues and the names of stuff. I went to Wise Wood and I don’t know who Henry Wise Wood is. If the name is so educational, shouldn’t I know that? It’s just a name, and just a statue, because of just that: they have no historical value. They do nothing to preserve someone’s legacy, only their name or likeness.

Education is how we learn. Not from walking by a statue as we enter a building.

That explains so much.

[TheIronMaiden]

History is found in primary sources whether they are written or artifacts such as buildings, tools and art. Destroying these items is erasing history.

Representations of history are contemporary interpretations of primary sources. present day statues, artwork, movies, video games and books are representations of history. Removing or replacing these items is not destroying history, it is reevaluating history. This is something that historians, and humanity has always done.

You can disagree with removing the statue but you can't call it destroying history. All of John A McDonald's papers and likely quite a few of his artifacts are intact and well preserved in the Library Archives of Canada if any of you JAM enthusiasts would like to see it.