Trying to Erase John A. Macdonald from History

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by JHikka

This is an important point. The country to our South literally has a giant mountain with its historic leaders faces blasted into the side of it for all of eternity. We have nothing even remotely similar in Canada to speak of in regards to our idolization of our past leaders.

Which leads to the question of whether this is a good thing or not.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by JHikka

This is an important point. The country to our South literally has a giant mountain with its historic leaders faces blasted into the side of it for all of eternity. We have nothing even remotely similar in Canada to speak of in regards to our idolization of our past leaders.

Well, Quebec has kinda tried but with only partial success.

That powder keg he is holding hit a branch on its course, and fell back amongst his own men, killing them all.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Acajack

There are already signs that it is starting to fade. In my entourage, lots of immigrants and their kids feel differently about this than I do. (Keep in mind too that francophone Canadians of old establishment often have a different take as well - we're far more likely to have aboriginal blood than even old stock British Canadians.)

Several posters on this forum have also said they are sympathetic but feel no guilt.

Whether you call it sympathy or guilt, I'd say it boils down to recognition that we're all living on land that was obtained at the expense of an oppressed group. I think there is pretty wide social recognition, even among 1st and 2nd generation Canadians, that there are still some amounts owing for our national prosperity. I don't think that recognition will fade very quickly.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by esquire

I could obviously be mistaken, but it seems to me that the Justin Trudeau pro-reconciliation school of thought is closer to the mainstream than a strongly individualist, you-are-the-master-of-your-own-destiny perspective that you're talking about. Perhaps the mainstream doesn't hold to that quite to the same extent as M. Trudeau, and people might disagree over how far the state should go to rectify it, but there is still a pretty strong sense that Indigenous people have collectively received a raw deal.

Just for the record, I don't want to paint new immigrants in a selfish, me-first light.

Far from it, I think that the immigrant libertarianism is a lot less noxious than the American strain of libertarianism. For one, you encircle a lot more than your own self interests, and also loop in your extended family in a form of social support network. Secondly, I find that American libertarianism tends to be very focused on guaranteeing rights without assuming any responsibilities, and responsibilities - mostly to yourself and your family - are at the heart of the new immigrant experience.

Anyway, I think many new Canadians who understand the Aboriginal situation fall into the camp that GlassCity described (and I probably fall into this too). I think that the Canadian government made horrible wrongs that need to be rectified, but it's hard for me to feel personally responsible. I'm willing to concede that as a Canadian I may be subconsciously participating in keeping Aboriginals at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder, but I honestly don't know what I can personally do. I sometimes feel like we [non-Aboriginals] are playing a waiting game where we wait to see what final demands the FNs make as part of reconciliation. Without knowing what those are, it's very hard for us to make any meaningful action.

[esquire]

^ I get what you're saying about immigrants... there are a lot of first-gen immigrants in my family and they are precisely of the mindset that you describe.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I'm willing to concede that as a Canadian I may be subconsciously participating in keeping Aboriginals at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder, but I honestly don't know what I can personally do. .

Or at the very least, we're indirectly benefiting from prosperity that was achieved at their expense, to some degree.

[hipster duck]

deleted post

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Just for the record, I don't want to paint new immigrants in a selfish, me-first light.

Far from it, I think that the immigrant libertarianism is a lot less noxious than the American strain of libertarianism. For one, you encircle a lot more than your own self interests, and also loop in your extended family in a form of social support network. Secondly, I find that American libertarianism tends to be very focused on guaranteeing rights without assuming any responsibilities, and responsibilities - mostly to yourself and your family - are at the heart of the new immigrant experience.

Anyway, I think many new Canadians who understand the Aboriginal situation fall into the camp that GlassCity described (and I probably fall into this too). I think that the Canadian government made horrible wrongs that need to be rectified, but it's hard for me to feel personally responsible. I'm willing to concede that as a Canadian I may be subconsciously participating in keeping Aboriginals at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder, but I honestly don't know what I can personally do. I sometimes feel like we [non-Aboriginals] are playing a waiting game where we wait to see what final demands the FNs make as part of reconciliation. Without knowing what those are, it's very hard for us to make any meaningful action.

This. Aside from voting I really don't know what I can personally do to play my part in the reconciliation process.

Right now, I think we've just entered the first stage which is the widespread recognition that there is a need for reconciliation and that there is a problem that needs to be solved. But it's hard to tell what the next step is, or if full reconciliation can ever be achieved. What does their ideal Canada look like? Would that Canada be palatable to today's non-indigenous people? Will there ever be a point where reconciliation is "finished?" There isn't really much we can do until we know the answers to these questions.

[JM5]

Originally Posted by Reesonov

Pretty much exactly what I envision, just without the silly name-calling. Like it or not, the people and ideas that you disagree with are part of the "discussion" and "exploration of ideas" that you refer to. You can't just dismiss them by calling them "SJW"s and speed bumps. Marketplace of ideas, and all of that.

Ideas that ask people to voluntarily give up what they worked hard for in order to help those who they perceive as less fortunate (or as having lost out in the competition of life) are requesting a form of charity. Charity will only work until the people making the sacrifices value what they gain more (feeling of fulfillment, respect, gratefulness) than what they lose. Once these people perceive that the "less fortunate" are taking advantage of the situation or that the sacrifices have become mandatory, their charity will come to a sudden halt.

I mean this as a warning. Altruism is most developed in humans but has been shown to be present in many complex animals. It has very clear limits.

And the stupidest part of it all is the ideology that continues to put individuals into boxes of victimhood and privilege, making the resentment between groups more and more pronounced. Intergroup conflict should be minimized in a multicultural setting, instead of encouraged and propagated. Identity politics MUST end, precisely because we are so diverse. We need a common set of beliefs to rally around before we tear each other apart.

This won't be a dialing down, like the 80's were. This is shaping up to be a full paradigm shift.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by JM5

Ideas that ask people to voluntarily give up what they worked hard for in order to help those who they perceive as less fortunate (or as having lost out in the competition of life) are requesting a form of charity. Charity will only work until the people making the sacrifices value what they gain more (feeling of fulfillment, respect, gratefulness) than what they lose. Once these people perceive that the "less fortunate" are taking advantage of the situation or that the sacrifices have become mandatory, their charity will come to a sudden halt.

I mean this as a warning. Altruism is most developed in humans but has been shown to be present in many complex animals. It has very clear limits.

And the stupidest part of it all is the ideology that continues to put individuals into boxes of victimhood and privilege, making the resentment between groups more and more pronounced. Intergroup conflict should be minimized in a multicultural setting, instead of encouraged and propagated. Identity politics MUST end, precisely because we are so diverse. We need a common set of beliefs to rally around before we tear each other apart.

This won't be a dialing down, like the 80's were. This is shaping up to be a full paradigm shift.

Yep. I've said it before more subtly, but the increased salience of non-white ethnic identities, at least its increased salience in public discourse and visibility, is at least partially at play in the rise of the alt-right. As one identity strengthens, counter-identities feel pressure to strengthen as well.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I sometimes feel like we [non-Aboriginals] are playing a waiting game where we wait to see what final demands the FNs make as part of reconciliation. Without knowing what those are, it's very hard for us to make any meaningful action.

It's hard for anything to happen when the FNs themselves can't agree on any specific. There's no unified FN voice nationally when it comes to any of these issues. The AFN hardly approaches anything representing a unified front. The rest of the country, especially new immigrants who are more separated from FN issues than those currently living here, aren't going to sit around and play a waiting game for FNs to make themselves clear.

Growing up in Atlantic Canada, the FN issue is much less prevalent than in areas like Manitoba, Saskatchewan, or BC. I can't imagine what it must be like for new Syrian refugees or people immigrating from Korea who have no background with it whatsoever entering Canada in a region where it's hardly on the radar.

And really, when it comes to reconciliation, what someone in BC thinks is appropriate is different than what someone in Ontario or Newfoundland thinks is appropriate. I can't even fathom a situation where the FNs sit down with the Government of Canada for actual reconcilation discussions. We can't even properly organize a federal commission for missing FN persons.

[Migs]

I hope the left continues with this nonsense because all it does is pretty much make a Trudeau defeat & a Trump re-election win a certainty.

[Pavlov]

Originally Posted by Migs

I hope the left continues with this nonsense because all it does is pretty much make a Trudeau defeat & a Trump re-election win a certainty.

Time will tell I suppose. The world is a complex place.

[ssiguy]

By extending this truly childish debate over statues, streets, schools etc to it's natural conclusion, every one of these things everywhere in the country {very much including Native ones} must be torn down as any man can logically be seen as discriminating against women of our past as we were very much a completely patriarchal society.

Maybe these stupid School Boards should concern themselves more with whether the kids can read the name of their school and not what the school name is.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

Robert E. Lee wanted to continue to enslave black people.

Still, he's among the most prominent Virginians in history, certainly top five, maybe even top three (after Washington and Jefferson). It's absolutely normal that he'd have statues.

Note again that Washington was a slave-owner - and he certainly "wanted to continue" to enjoy his slaves as slaves, rather than as employees.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Migs

I hope the left continues with this nonsense because all it does is pretty much make a Trudeau defeat & a Trump re-election win a certainty.

Actually, it's very possible that if the left makes the NDP totally "jump the shark" while the Federal Liberals are perceived to remain sane, we'd be back to a quasi-binary situation where the natural governing party would be the red one, not the dark blue one.

In the U.S., the system is binary already, so the effect would be the opposite (in other words, your guess would apply the way you imagine, if you're correct).

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by lio45

Still, he's among the most prominent Virginians in history, certainly top five, maybe even top three (after Washington and Jefferson). It's absolutely normal that he'd have statues.

Note again that Washington was a slave-owner - and he certainly "wanted to continue" to enjoy his slaves as slaves, rather than as employees.

Yeah Washington's primary claim to fame is the founding of today's most successful state, while Lee's is the fight to preserve slavery. Again, it's primary versus secondary legacies. For a black person in Virginia when you're walking past these statues, you're not seeing a person commemorated for their outstanding nation-building contributions; you're seeing a person commemorated for doing their best to keep your ancestors enslaved. And by people fighting to keep that statue up, they're kind of saying they wish they won that war—and maybe you'd still be enslaved.

It'd be different if the war was more of a regional identity thing. If Quebec and the ROC got in a war, the losing side keeping statues would be one thing. When the war's mainly about if slaves should be kept or not, there seems to be a pretty clear right side here.

[kool maudit]

What are some other examples of nations whose culture shifted in such a way as to make their founder publicly unpalatable (without revolution)?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

This. Aside from voting I really don't know what I can personally do to play my part in the reconciliation process.

Right now, I think we've just entered the first stage which is the widespread recognition that there is a need for reconciliation and that there is a problem that needs to be solved. But it's hard to tell what the next step is, or if full reconciliation can ever be achieved. What does their ideal Canada look like? Would that Canada be palatable to today's non-indigenous people? Will there ever be a point where reconciliation is "finished?" There isn't really much we can do until we know the answers to these questions.

It's a quagmire of epic proportions for which a solution is impossible. If we are going to be truly honest.

Every single modern PM knew this was a serious problem but none of them chose to open the can of worms like JT has.

Is this a courageous righteous move or a foolish and dangerous one?

[MonctonRad]

I'd go with option #2.

Sometimes it's best to know when not to open Pandora's box.........