Canadians urged to confront ugly truth of residential schools

[Jester13]

Just so you know, I'm not judging you. When it comes to the term White Supremacist, it's a battle semantics. If you follow the etymology of the term, it wasn't a stretch to think you meant the contemporary meaning. I agree there is still a large component of racism in Canada, and like you mentioned, many of us are not aware of our intolerance. It is very much important to acknowledge that it is not a "white" thing. Racism is prevalent in most cultures within our multicultural country, and it shouldn't be acceptable for any group within it. Yes, the generalization of "White" is the dominant culture and makes up the bulk of the commentary. My family is mixed Anglo and First Nations. I have little to no FN "blood" but I have seen, heard and felt the pain of the intolerance from Uncles, cousins and friends. From the 50's on forward my family has experienced some terrible events.

Not one person in my family huffs glue, we don't live on reserves (those who qualify anyways), we work, pay taxes and don't wish any ill will on any culture. Generalizing is so easy. Do all Indo Canadians hate all Filipinos? No.

I totally get what you are saying now and I don't dispute there is an unacceptable level of intolerance. I also studied political science and economics for my degree and am very aware of the history of Canada. In my opinion "White Supremacist" is not the most accurate term.

Excuse my reference to Wikipedia, but it is the quickest way for me to explain why my comment is in fact an accurate term, rather than me rummaging through old course material:

White supremacy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

White supremacy or white supremacism is a form of racism centered upon the belief, and promotion of the belief, thatwhite people are superior in certain characteristics, traits, and attributes to people of other racial backgrounds and that therefore whites should politically, economically and socially rule non-whites. The term is also typically used to describe apolitical ideology that perpetuates and maintains the social, political, historical and/or industrial domination by white people (as evidenced by historical and contemporary sociopolitical structures like the Atlantic Slave Trade, colonization of theGlobal South, Jim Crow laws in the United States, and miscegenation laws in settler colonies and former settler colonies like the United States, South Africa, Australia, and Madagascar, for example).^[1] Different forms of white supremacism put forth different conceptions of who is considered white, and different white supremacists identify various racial and cultural groups as their primary enemy.^[2]

In academic usage, the term "white supremacy" can also refer to a system where whites enjoy a structural advantage (privilege) over other ethnic groups, both at a collective and an individual level (ceteris paribus, i. e., when individuals are compared that do not relevantly differ except in ethnicity).

[Mustapha]

I would disagree with you on this one, as there are lots of academics and historians who believe that Europeans did, in fact, know they were giving Indigenous peoples diseases--a past form of biological warfare.

There would have to be some extraordinary evidence to support that theory, as it is well documented that 15th and 16th century Europe did not have anything close to the modern understanding of the spreading of disease, in fact, it would be another 300 years after Columbus' final voyage before the very first rudimentary smallpox vaccine would emerge. It would be another century before the medical experts understood what a virus was and how they work.

For the colonists to wage 'biological warfare' of this magnitude would require them to understand scientific concepts that were literally centuries ahead of their current technology, even well into the 18th century.

Trying to guess their intent is a moot point however, as there was no way the Europeans could have stopped the spread of the disease whether intentional or not, as there was no guarantee in the 15th century that they would understand modern concept of virology then or even 400 years later. There was no reasonable way to avoid what had occurred given the progress of European civilization.

[Mustapha]

Since we are copying and pasting definitions on here, I thought this would be appropriate. I have read a lot of the comments on this thread and I think people should familiarize themselves with this terminology if they aren't already aware:

"Social Justice Warriors"

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term "social justice warrior" has been used to describe people who work for social justice issues, often "claiming a moral authority" and "questioning the motives and moral integrity of those they oppose".^[61]

In Internet culture, the term has been used as a pejorative for someone campaigning against things they perceive to be instances of racism, sexism, homophobia, or other social injustice. Frequently initialized as "SJW", it is used to accuse opponents of sanctimony,^[62] to insinuate pretense,^[63][64] as a pejorative,^[65][66][67] and as a general shorthand for a person believed to be overreacting to social issues.^[68][69]

For the record, I don't agree with these type of authoritarian blowhards who feel they need to speak for groups they don't actually represent. If you identify as one of these, chances are you and I will not see eye to eye. I care more about facts than I do feelings.

[otherwise]

This information is correct, but presented in a disingenuous manner.

It leads the reader to believe that Europeans slaughtered tens of millions of the native population, when in fact the majority of the deaths were caused by disease that was introduced by the Europeans simply by making contact. Considering Europeans did not know about micro-organisms at the time, these factors were beyond their prediction or control. Estimates show between 80 to 90% of the population was killed off by natural factors.

Here's one of many possible sources: http://nativeamericannetroots.net/diary/325

While it is tragic, it is not comparable to voluntary pre-meditated human genocide such as the Holocaust.

except that there is this:

Both nature and disease conspired against the aboriginal peoples of the prairies. First, the European fur traders infected them with contagious diseases – smallpox, measles, influenza – to which they had no immunity. Then climate change, the building of the CPR and the near-extinction of the bison, on which they depended for food, left them hungry and desperate.

They turned to Ottawa, expecting Macdonald to honour the treaties he had signed with them, guaranteeing food in times of famine and a livelihood in the thriving agrarian economy he envisaged for the western plains.

But he spurned their request. He ordered officials at the Department of Indian Affairs in Prince Albert to withhold food from First Nations until they moved to federally designated reserves far from the path of the CPR. Once they complied, they were trapped. They could leave only with the permission of the government’s Indian agent. Aboriginal women were raped. Men could not farm or hunt because they had no land and no freedom. If they complained, their rations were cut. Even if they were pliant, the food was substandard. One contaminated shipment triggered a mass outbreak of tuberculosis.

None of this was accidental. Daschuk found the directives Macdonald sent to federal officials telling them to deny food to them to First Nations. He found public statements in which Macdonald boasted about keeping the indigenous population “on the verge of actual starvation” to save government funds. He tracked the infected food shipment to its source, an American company in which a senior official of the Canadian government had a large financial stake.

His conclusion: “The uncomfortable truth is that modern Canada is founded upon ethnic cleansing and genocide.”

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/06/10/canada_starved_aboriginal_people_into_submission_goar.html

[WilliesStache14]

True genocide? Wow...

"Thus, according to Ward Churchill, a professor of ethnic studies at the University of Colorado, the reduction of the North American Indian population from an estimated 12 million in 1500 to barely 237,000 in 1900 represents a"vast genocide . . . , the most sustained on record." By the end of the 19th century, writes David E. Stannard, a historian at the University of Hawaii, native Americans had undergone the"worst human holocaust the world had ever witnessed, roaring across two continents non-stop for four centuries and consuming the lives of countless tens of millions of people." In the judgment of Lenore A. Stiffarm and Phil Lane, Jr.,"there can be no more monumental example of sustained genocide—certainly none involving a 'race' of people as broad and complex as this—anywhere in the annals of human history.""

http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/7302

Yeah and a good chunk of that genocide was done by their own people

native tribes were constantly warring with eachother, many tribes became extinct from tribal conflicts even before europeans showed up in Canada

[Jester13]

There would have to be some extraordinary evidence to support that theory, as it is well documented that 15th and 16th century Europe did not have anything close to the modern understanding of the spreading of disease, in fact, it would be another 300 years after Columbus' final voyage before the very first rudimentary smallpox vaccine would emerge. It would be another century before the medical experts understood what a virus was and how they work.

For the colonists to wage 'biological warfare' of this magnitude would require them to understand scientific concepts that were literally centuries ahead of their current technology, even well into the 18th century.

Trying to guess their intent is a moot point however, as there was no way the Europeans could have stopped the spread of the disease whether intentional or not, as there was no guarantee in the 15th century that they would understand modern concept of virology then or even 400 years later. There was no reasonable way to avoid what had occurred given the progress of European civilization.

You're thinking science instead of history.

There are written accounts of generals in the US, for example, writing to each other about giving infected blankets to Indigenous people as a way to "inoculate the Indians", as well as recorded testimony of Indigenous chiefs here in BC, who were about to be hanged at the time, that the Europeans were also spreading small pox with infected blankets.

Just because they wouldn't have known the scientific explanations of how diseases worked, doesn't mean it is far fetched to believe that they knew small pox and other diseases that they brought over were what was killing millions of Indigenous people throughout North America.

[Jester13]

Since we are copying and pasting definitions on here, I thought this would be appropriate. I have read a lot of the comments on this thread and I think people should familiarize themselves with this terminology if they aren't already aware:

"Social Justice Warriors"

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term "social justice warrior" has been used to describe people who work for social justice issues, often "claiming a moral authority" and "questioning the motives and moral integrity of those they oppose".^[61]

In Internet culture, the term has been used as a pejorative for someone campaigning against things they perceive to be instances of racism, sexism, homophobia, or other social injustice. Frequently initialized as "SJW", it is used to accuse opponents of sanctimony,^[62] to insinuate pretense,^[63][64] as a pejorative,^[65][66][67] and as a general shorthand for a person believed to be overreacting to social issues.^[68][69]

For the record, I don't agree with these type of authoritarian blowhards who feel they need to speak for groups they don't actually represent. If you identify as one of these, chances are you and I will not see eye to eye. I care more about facts than I do feelings.

Sounds to me like you care more about your privilege than you do about humanity.

[Tortorella's Rant]

Yeah, it's unfortunate. Life is hard. It has no intention of being fair..

[etsen3]

Yeah, it's unfortunate. Life is hard. It has no intention of being fair..

Lol @ dismissing peoples' traumatic experiences and abuse as "life being hard", as if this was all just caused by bad luck, rather than the willful decisions of people.

The whole point of this is to help the victims and prevent similar things from happening in the future. If we all had your attitude, similar atrocities would happen again and again.

[drummer4now]

Lol @ dismissing peoples' traumatic experiences and abuse as "life being hard", as if this was all just caused by bad luck, rather than the willful decisions of people.

The whole point of this is to help the victims and prevent similar things from happening in the future. If we all had your attitude, similar atrocities would happen again and again.

This..

I guess it's hard for some people to relate when they've lived a sheltered life.. and/or haven't experienced much adversity or discrimination in their lives.

Telling those victims to move on is like telling a person whose loved one is dead to instantly move on right when the death occurs.. It takes time to heal wounds..

The last residential school to close was in 1997...

[Jester13]

Since we are copying and pasting definitions on here, I thought this would be appropriate. I have read a lot of the comments on this thread and I think people should familiarize themselves with this terminology if they aren't already aware:

"Social Justice Warriors"

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term "social justice warrior" has been used to describe people who work for social justice issues, often "claiming a moral authority" and "questioning the motives and moral integrity of those they oppose".^[61]

In Internet culture, the term has been used as a pejorative for someone campaigning against things they perceive to be instances of racism, sexism, homophobia, or other social injustice. Frequently initialized as "SJW", it is used to accuse opponents of sanctimony,^[62] to insinuate pretense,^[63][64] as a pejorative,^[65][66][67] and as a general shorthand for a person believed to be overreacting to social issues.^[68][69]

For the record, I don't agree with these type of authoritarian blowhards who feel they need to speak for groups they don't actually represent. If you identify as one of these, chances are you and I will not see eye to eye. I care more about facts than I do feelings.

I just want to clarify something...

Are you saying that because I'm a non-native white male I can't speak on native issues or people of colour issues or gender issues, or any other social justice issues, for that matter?

[hsedin33]

Mods are in here and people have a right to voice opinions as long as it's done within the rules...if we've missed something (and you see it) please use the report button and we'll immediately attend to it.

Respectfully, I do believe you have missed something here deb.

3. Do not post violent, sexually explicit, hateful, racist and vulgar comments.

Explicit language and intentionally bypassing the word censors will not be tolerated. This includes starring out words, and any other method of bypassing the censor.

rac·ism

ˈrāˌsizəm/

noun

1. the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

   • prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

That was a bad time no arguing but treat natives in Canada like they do in the US and we will whats up.... Mostly all natives want is $$$$$

Just because it's subtle, doesn't mean it's not racist.

[Jester13]

Respectfully, I do believe you have missed something here deb.

3. Do not post violent, sexually explicit, hateful, racist and vulgar comments.

Explicit language and intentionally bypassing the word censors will not be tolerated. This includes starring out words, and any other method of bypassing the censor.

rac·ism

ˈrāˌsizəm/

noun

1. the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

   • prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

Just because it's subtle, doesn't mean it's not racist.

This.

Since it became unfashionable to be overtly racist, racism has morphed into many, more subtle, forms.

[Sugar baby watermelon]

Respectfully, I do believe you have missed something here deb. 3. Do not post violent, sexually explicit, hateful, racist and vulgar comments. Explicit language and intentionally bypassing the word censors will not be tolerated. This includes starring out words, and any other method of bypassing the censor.

rac·ism

ˈrāˌsizəm/

noun

• I

  the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

• prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

Just because it's subtle, doesn't mean it's not racist.

Cannot wait to see the response from the mod, this is an excellent response to racism

[Slegr]

A valuable read: http://www.chriscorrigan.com/parkinglot/reconciliation-a-practical-guide-for-non-indigenous-people/

Reconciliation: a practical guide for non-indigenous people

JUNE 2, 2015 BY CHRIS CORRIGAN FIRST NATIONS

Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission reported out this week. It has finished its work, listening to the stories of the survivors of Indian residential schools, promoting dialogue and healing and urging Canadians to understand what is implied by reconciliation.

For many Canadians, the TRC’s work will receive a minimal passing notice in their day. They will have heard of it, they will probably know something of the history of residential schools, but they are unlikely to know how the legacy of residential schools plays out in contemporary society. Most non-indigenous people think it was “all in the past.” For most non-indigenous Canadians, residential schools was something that happened to others, who suffered injustice at the hands of people who are long dead.

So if you are a non-indigenous person, what does reconciliation mean to you? I think it’s important to understand that Canada was founded on two parallel strategies: brute force colonization and agreements meant to uphold the “honour of the Crown.” It’s kind of crazy. If you are an indigenous person you’re never quite sure if Canadian society is here to live up to its obligations or smash you in the face, because since the very beginning to the present day, one hand is offered in peace and the other is a fist.

And here’s what you need to understand if you are a non-indigenous person. If you are a Canadian, you are a treaty beneficiary, end of story. No matter if your family arrived in 1532 or last Tuesday. If you have Canadian citizenship you personally benefit from the treaty relationships that, over time, have made it possible for Canadians to own land, to develop resources, to use water, to hike in the forest, to grow things and make money. In exchange for the ability of the Crown to permanently occupy and use these lands, and therefore give you personally that same right, treaties created a relationship that is just as permanent with indigenous nations. If you are an advocate of “tearing up the treaties and starting over” then you are obligated to return your private land and all the wealth you have generated from Crown lands to the bargaining table. Because the very fact that you can live in this legal frameworks is a result of you personally being a treaty beneficiary. Yes, even in places where there are no treaties.

So the first thing you can do to advance the cause of reconciliation is to understand that you benefit from treaties, and that you personally have rights and responsibilities to First Nations that flow from this relationship. Some of these responsibilities are exercised through governments, but you pay for them personally with your taxes and that is as it should be. So remember this and remind others that Canada is a land founded on relationships and legally binding contracts and you have a duty to uphold the honour of the Crown’s end of the bargain. Not only governments. You, also.

Secondly, understand that First Nations are still to this day experiencing the brutal fist of colonization. When you see socio-economic statistics that talk about homelessness, addictions, abuse, diabetes and suicide rates that are far above the national average, understand that you are seeing colonization in action. When you see the rates of missing and murdered indigenous women and you see government’s luke warm response to this crises, understand that these girls and women are taking the full force of a society that still propagates violence against indigenous people with much impunity. When you hear of First Nations being steamrolled by global corporate interests like mines and tar sands operations and pipelines and fish farms against their consent and will, you are witnessing the same dynamics that were at play in the “dark days” of colonization and western expansion. If you think it was wrong then you must see that it is wrong now. Thankfully First Nations have more and more rights recognized in the Canadian court system and so it is harder and harder to be subjected to this kind of colonial activity. But you have to understand that this is not First Nations stopping economic growth: it is indigenous peoples using the Constitution of Canada to resist the abusive power of colonization. It deserves respect and support, because when Nations do this, they are operating within the legal framework of the country that gives you your own rights. To diminish their ability to do so would weaken the rule of law that benefits you.

Understanding that these two dynamics are at play is a practical, critical thing that all Canadians can do to make reconciliation real. And you can think about these things, see how they personally play out in your own life and address those who say that “treaties need to be redone” or “Indians get stuff for free” or “all that violence happened in the past” or “it doesn’t have anything to do with me.”

We have to fundamentally restructure the relationship in Canada but it does not start with governments. it starts with you and me. Take this moment in time to take a step closer to real reconciliation and help the TRC’s process actually have a legacy. Don’t wait for other people to create that legacy for you.

[-DLC-]

Respectfully, I do believe you have missed something here deb.

3. Do not post violent, sexually explicit, hateful, racist and vulgar comments.

Explicit language and intentionally bypassing the word censors will not be tolerated. This includes starring out words, and any other method of bypassing the censor.

rac·ism

ˈrāˌsizəm/

noun

1. the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

   • prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

Just because it's subtle, doesn't mean it's not racist.

Done deal. I found it borderline (more a stereotype, but that's how it begins).

[Jester13]

Done deal. I found it borderline (more a stereotype, but that's how it begins).

I did a quick google search to see the difference between stereotypes and racism, and here's an example with the member's post in question that I think aptly shows the difference:

Mostly all rich people want is $$$$$. (Stereotype)

Mostly all natives want is $$$$$. (Racism)

I suddenly feel like we're making some progress here on CDC :D

[hsedin33]

Done deal. I found it borderline (more a stereotype, but that's how it begins).

Rock on Deb, thank you.

I think the situation is much too delicate to simply resort to racism and simple stereotypes. Many stereotypes come as a result of the Euro-Canadian cultural genocide of Aboriginals. Take for instance the 'drunken-Indian', while to some this may seem like a stereotype, the forcible removal of children from their homes may have driven helpless parents to alcoholism. This is not true in all cases of course, but it was alluded to in Native Author Richard Wagamese's fictional book, Keeper N Me. I think many people have yet to fully understand the reasons why the Canadian government pays out reparations. After having researched this topic the last month, I can say, this time in Canadian history is not one to be proud of, it's actually sickening.

Here's an interesting article, you only need to read the first two paragraphs to understand the immensity of this.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/residential-schools-findings-point-to-cultural-genocide-commission-chair-says-1.3093580

Residential schools findings point to 'cultural genocide,' commission chair says

Final report from Truth and Reconciliation Commission to be released June 2

At least 6,000 aboriginal children died while in the residential school system, says Justice Murray Sinclair, the chair of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

Sinclair, who has been tasked with studying the legacy of the residential schools, says that the figure is just an estimate and is likely much higher. Residential schools were established in the 19th century and the last ones closed in 1996.

...

---

Remember, these children died in the hands of churches run by the government who employed capital punishment, not to mention the sexual abuse. Imagine having your children (or yourself) taken from your home, then forced into a residential school, you are sometimes starved and physically beaten, you don't get to see your parents, and there is not much medical supplies to help you. Consider the reaction of the parents, the kids, and the Aboriginal society as a whole before making a stereotypical judgement.