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

[Resolute 14]

To the surprise of nobody, the $5 plaque they put up was already vandalized:

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/plaque-that-re...ized-1.4050184

[Ducay]

Some hard hitting journalism there

On Sunday, passersby could see a large “X” scratched across the face of the plaque, which describes Macdonald’s history as “complex.”

The “X” appeared to have been done with a sharp object, extending almost from corner to corner. The two scrapes meet in the middle, near the word “violence.”

[Resolute 14]

Yeah, the article's author was pushing a hard narrative there.

[RichKlit]

So do they remove the plaque permanently now? Do they axe the plans for a permanent plaque?

[RichKlit]

I guess that’s the same question worded slightly different. Sorry.

[Fuzz]

Perhaps if they had some sort of statue to watch over the plaque...

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Fozzie_DeBear

...so while you bear no personal accountability for the situation...you might want to consider that the 'liberal circle jerk' is the attempt to make amends for some atrocious behaviour that curb-stomped the economy and spirit of indigenous people.

I know it's natural to attribute big changes to deliberate agency, especially negative changes. But the way of life of the indigenous people of Canada (and all of the Western hemisphere) was never going to survive contact with Eurasia. There is nowhere on the planet where the economy and lifestyle of indigenous people survived the introduction of radically more complex systems by more powerful groups (not to mention more virulent diseases). Nowhere.

And if Canada's indigenous people today lived like their ancestors did 300 years ago, Canada would be denounced globally for allowing such abject poverty and brutality to endure. Pre-industrial living was a horror-show.

We shouldn't ignore the injustices of the past. But we shouldn't kid ourselves that sifting through the ashes will help us move forward in any tangible way. While a lot of people in cultures with Christian origins need play out these morality tales of transgression, guilt and atonement, I struggle to think of examples of these rituals measurably improving anyone's lives.

The problem is that the real issues moving forward are deep and intractable. And no, we are not just starting to deal with them - we've been grappling with them for decades. You can find commissions, studies, editorials, rallies, calls to action, and sympathetic CBC stories on indigenous issues going back to the 70s. But another thing people seem to enjoy is believing that their generation is the first to see with clear eyes, to recognize the sins of the father.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by V

I think that's the whole point of colonialism. There is no reconciling our way of life and the way we screwed them over. Full reconciliation means the abolishment of most everything we know.

I don't know, has colonialism ever worked anywhere else better than this where the natives don't get bent over? Is there a model we should have followed and can look at as our guide for reconciliation? I'm not being glib, I honestly don't know.

How much do Spain and Portugal pay to the natives of Mexico and Brazil?

[SebC]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Please tell me this is green text.

Your unwillingness to consider it seriously exposes your dogmatism.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

Would you have said the same if it was 83% yes?

Well it is a democracy right?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Locke

How much do Spain and Portugal pay to the natives of Mexico and Brazil?

In fairness, that's not relevant. It's like asking how much England and France pay to the natives of Canada and the United States.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by SebC

Your unwillingness to consider it seriously exposes your dogmatism.

Um, what? What's the ideology that treats the proposition "books are a better source of information than statues" as a dogmatic truth? I don't really think you need dogma there...

[SebC]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Um, what? What's the ideology that treats the proposition "books are a better source of information than statues" as a dogmatic truth? I don't really think you need dogma there...

It takes a lot of belief in something else (my guess: reparationism) to cause a person to see a claim that statues and books are complimentary as something that must be sarcasm.

[station]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I know it's natural to attribute big changes to deliberate agency, especially negative changes.

I’m pretty sure the Doctrine of Discovery and the concept of terra nullius qualify as deliberate agency. Indigenous peoples, being non-Christians, were literally declared not human to justify the settlement and declaration of sovereignty of “unoccupied” lands by European monarchies.

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

But the way of life of the indigenous people of Canada (and all of the Western hemisphere) was never going to survive contact with Eurasia. There is nowhere on the planet where the economy and lifestyle of indigenous people survived the introduction of radically more complex systems by more powerful groups (not to mention more virulent diseases). Nowhere.

I agree with your premise. Certainly there was an arms race of colonization by European powers that was unsurvivable by indigenous peoples. That doesn’t justify actual policies of sovereignty, cultural genocide, eugenics, and segregation though.

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

And if Canada's indigenous people today lived like their ancestors did 300 years ago, Canada would be denounced globally for allowing such abject poverty and brutality to endure. Pre-industrial living was a horror-show.

Pre-industrial Europe and the middle east were a horror show. Feudalism and theocracy are terrible systems. I don’t think you can equate modern poverty with pre-contact North American poverty however. While hard and far from idyllic in my mind, most people were fed and clothed and lived to a relatively equal standard within their community.

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

We shouldn't ignore the injustices of the past. But we shouldn't kid ourselves that sifting through the ashes will help us move forward in any tangible way. While a lot of people in cultures with Christian origins need play out these morality tales of transgression, guilt and atonement, I struggle to think of examples of these rituals measurably improving anyone's lives.

This has zero to do with Christian atonement which is about absolving personal transgressions so as to take part in the rapture. This is a now secular nation state coming to grips with the fact that a cultural genocide took place for 100+ years, and an attempt to built a better and more cooperative future with those peoples. Not everything has a clear historical precedent. If your argument is why should we bother, my argument is why shouldn’t we try?

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The problem is that the real issues moving forward are deep and intractable. And no, we are not just starting to deal with them - we've been grappling with them for decades. You can find commissions, studies, editorials, rallies, calls to action, and sympathetic CBC stories on indigenous issues going back to the 70s. But another thing people seem to enjoy is believing that their generation is the first to see with clear eyes, to recognize the sins of the father.

40 years of gradual progress and awareness is not that long, really.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

That's quite the stretch you have yourself there, sir. A solid attempt at mind-reading as well. Perhaps the statement that people who want to learn this by reading them in books are a bunch of nerds might have put him off? Just a thought.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by SebC

It takes a lot of belief in something else (my guess: reparationism) to cause a person to see a claim that statues and books are complimentary as something that must be sarcasm.

Yeah, that’s not what you said:

Originally Posted by SebC

Books are great when you already know you want to learn something. Statues are great for telling you there's something to learn.

You assert the supremacy of books over statues but they serve different functions and engage different people with different learning styles. Not everyone's a nerd who wants to learn from a book!

Statues don’t have anything to do with different learning styles, while they may pique curiosity, they hold no informational value. Where do you learn about the things that statues inspire curiosity on? That’s right, books! The things for nerds!

There’s nothing dogmatic about it, my view that comparing books and statues is ridiculous is based not in belief in the subject, but that redacting books (the literal foundation of our history) and taking down a statue are not remotely comparable.

If your point that a statue can inspire someone to learn something (from a book), I agree, but it does do nothing to teach that person, or have anything to do with “different learning styles.” That makes no sense.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by station

I’m pretty sure the Doctrine of Discovery and the concept of terra nullius qualify as deliberate agency. Indigenous peoples, being non-Christians, were literally declared not human to justify the settlement and declaration of sovereignty of “unoccupied” lands by European monarchies.

I agree with your premise. Certainly there was an arms race of colonization by European powers that was unsurvivable by indigenous peoples. That doesn’t justify actual policies of sovereignty, cultural genocide, eugenics, and segregation though.

Invasion and subjugation is hardly a behaviour peculiar to Europeans. In the same period the British and French were colonizing Canada, the Hmong were subjugated by the Chinese and the Bantu by the Zulu. The Aztecs brutally subjugated all their neighbours, which was why it was so easy for Cortez to find allies against them. There's evidence that the indigenous people in North America at contact with Europe had previously wiped out or absorbed earlier arrivals to the continent.

Declaring neighbours who have stuff you want to be inhuman and not protected by the laws that govern your people is the default stance of humans, only recognized recently (and by those same Europeans) as something to be ashamed of.

Originally Posted by station

This has zero to do with Christian atonement which is about absolving personal transgressions so as to take part in the rapture. This is a now secular nation state coming to grips with the fact that a cultural genocide took place for 100+ years, and an attempt to built a better and more cooperative future with those peoples. Not everything has a clear historical precedent.

Can you name some countries with a non-Christian heritage where we see collective expressions of guilt and atonement over historical depredations? You might want to compare the post-war public attitudes in Japan, for instance, with those in Germany.

Originally Posted by station

If your argument is why should we bother, my argument is why shouldn’t we try?

My argument is we shouldn't be deflected by sentiment and emotionally-satisfying narratives, and instead focus in the difficult, tangible work at hand.

Originally Posted by station

40 years of gradual progress and awareness is not that long, really.

No. But it's long enough that we've pretty much diagnosed the core problems. They just happen to not be easily fixed, or to fit into satisfying narratives.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

a statue [...]does do nothing to teach that person, or have anything to do with “different learning styles.” That makes no sense.

The physical object engages people to learn (and remember) in a way that books don't.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by SebC

The physical object engages people to learn (and remember) in a way that books don't.

But these objects require layers upon layers of additional interpretation in order to effect the sort of learning outcome you are projecting.

I would rather suggest that in this particular instance invoking the argument for education as a reason to leave the John A MacDonald statue on the steps of Victoria's city hall is an odd one. On its own, this visage does not teach anyone anything. On the contrary, the decision to remove it has been made on the basis of a deeper understanding of who he is and what he did. The statue alone does not communicate anything about Canada's first Prime Minister. Its recent absence probably communicates more than its presence ever did.

[MoneyGuy]

We recently watched a Netflix episode of Scandal that was eerily similar to this Victoria thing...statue of a racist historical figure and all. It came down.