Jump to content

Residential Schools........ and fake info!


Recommended Posts

On 2017-03-10 at 3:08 PM, BillyBeaver said:

If you read the commission's report on residential schools you will be horrified.

6000 kids dying and many thousands more scarred for life is no joke.

60% of the abuses occurred under catholics, yet they have never apologized not offered restitution.

Trudeau's taking the hit for them like the good Jesuit he is and putting the bill on Canada, not the religious institutions that propagated the abuse.

 

They will squirm out of this, just like they have been doing for ages with the priest's abuse issue. Trudeau cares little for Canadians.  Why do you think he committed billions of dollars to the third world?  Why is he hammering Canadians with carbon taxes and carbon pricing?

On 2017-03-10 at 1:21 PM, betsy said:

What people like Romeo Saganash refuse to acknowledge is that the Residential schools weren't all that bad.  Yes, there were disastrous results.....BUT, keep in mind that the intent was for the betterment of aboriginals.   Who would honestly think that the government came up with the idea of residential schools to deliberately screw up indigenous people?

 

We are now in an era of guilt-ridden- breast-beating-atonement-and apology....and it's very much politicized.  Of course, liberals and socialists latch on to these tragic stories by those who suffered, for their own agenda.

 

Lynn Beyak, was correct in her opinion. 

 

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/paul-russell-could-it-be-that-residential-schools-werent-so-bad

There may have been a certain number of teachers who were just doing their job of teaching and not involved in the abuse.  It seems a little strong to tar every teacher as a bad actor.   But overall it was a disaster.  The bad overshadows any good teacher that might have been there.   I met a native man a few years ago who said he had his mouth washed out with soap in a residential school and he also showed me a scar he got there.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dre said:

More like "They thought it would be convenient for themselves if native culture was iradicated and they no longer had to honor the treaties that had been signed"

The Catholic church has been using Jesuits to start and run Catholic schools in Canada probably for 500 years.  Do you think it might have more to do with trying to make Catholics out of them or Anglicans in a smaller number of schools?  Of course they would think they needed to irradicate the Indian in them.  It was a disastrous endeavour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

What happened to them was a consequence of colonial wars, the same consequences from which we benefit.

It wasn't that long ago.  A couple of my friends were being fucked up the ass by the same government that had us kids all singing Ca-Na-Da (One little two little three Canadians) We love thee - you know, to celebrate our benefits. 

Quote

Think about that next time you're out for dinner at the Ponderosa.

You make me puke. I'll probably never be able to eat at Ponderosa again.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/11/2017 at 7:34 PM, dre said:

They thought they were doing the right thing for themselves. Not for natives.

 

No...they were doing it for Canada. In 1867 the Brits passed the BNA which was the start of a new country. After the war of 1812 where the Brits, French and Native fought together to protect our land it was decided that it was best to move forward as one. As such, doing it for Canada was doing it for Natives as they were part of Canada and the future of Canada. For them to survive in this new country they needed to be assimilated and become part of the new being. 

By no means do I think the ends justify the means but the reality is that the intent was to transition these people into the new world. Having them exist as their own entities was not the unifying approach required in light of a new United States that was still a threat. 

Just to be clear....I am not in favor nor am proud of the methods used to do this but I am able to see the objectivity involved. 

On 3/11/2017 at 7:34 PM, dre said:

They wanted to absolve themselves of treaty obligations, and get rid of the "indian problem".

If this was their way to absolve themselves of treaty obligations then why did only 1/3 of the students attend. Why did the other 2/3 remain on reserve or attend European schools for their education. You would think they would have forced all natives to attend...no?
 

The fact is that these residential schools were made out of necessity for remote areas in order to provide the white man education that was promised. In no way would I state that the conditions of these schools were acceptable but I do think their intent was to assimilate the 'Indian" which by 2017 standards is seen as crude but not in 1880 when these started. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Accountability Now said:

 

If this was their way to absolve themselves of treaty obligations then why did only 1/3 of the students attend. Why did the other 2/3 remain on reserve or attend European schools for their education. You would think they would have forced all natives to attend...no?

 

 

It WAS what they wanted to do. I posted a quote from the minister of Indian affairs at the time saying exactly that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dre said:

It WAS what they wanted to do. I posted a quote from the minister of Indian affairs at the time saying exactly that.

Let's be clear....we are talking about residential schools. If 'residential schools' were their way of getting rid of treaty promises then they would have make all students go to Residential schools. But they didn't. The other 2/3 were already being assimilated in regular schools and there was no need for the Residential Schools in those cases.

I don't disagree that their goal was to assimilate the native people but I don't think they intentionally made residential schools into horror shows with the idea of assimilation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Accountability Now said:

I don't disagree that their goal was to assimilate the native people but I don't think they intentionally made residential schools into horror shows with the idea of assimilation. 

No I don't think that either. What I DO think is that residential schools were part of a plan to eradicate native culture, and get rid of treaty obligations.

But I don't think that all the raping and killing was part of that plan. I think that happened simply because, even as evidenced in recent history, Catholic authority figures like to rape and mistreat little kids. They are still doing it today by the thousands, and the church has been caught covering it up by whisking pedophiles away to different jurisdictions by sweeping it under the rug. I think most catholics are great people, but I consider that organization and the people in charge of it to be pretty much nasty and evil.

Edited by dre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, dre said:

No I don't think that either. What I DO think is that residential schools were part of a plan to eradicate native culture, and get rid of treaty obligations.

Yes they were part of the plan but again I think if it were possible to have the children attend existing schools then the government would have done that. I have to wonder if natives would have fully assimilated by now if this were the case. The Residential School program was actually counter productive in the overall assimilation as it created a larger divide and more mistrust. 

21 minutes ago, dre said:

I think most catholics are great people, but I consider that organization and the people in charge of it to be pretty much nasty and evil.

I am Catholic and I couldn't agree with you more. Its troubling to know that the the Catholic church was as powerful as it was when this all happened. I know the government was condoning it but I still place the large amount of blame on the church. 

The sooner we can separate religion from state, the better off we will be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some went thru it and came out better, as in getting off the res and into the real world. But still a lot of evil shit did happen. And I for one would like to see the pope come out and say and do something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2017-03-11 at 7:19 AM, Wilber said:

Betsy, the purpose of the residential schools was to eradicate native culture by separating the next generations from that culture. 

 

We are beating the same drum because that is the drum.

I know there was a huge amount of unacceptable abuse that went on in residential schools and I don't agree with children having been taken from their families by force, but some claims about the schools stretch credibility.  Was the goal to "eradicate native culture" or was it to teach natives how to live in a society which is 95% non-native and speaks English / French and give them a basic education?  The present day reserve system has proven to be an unmitigated disaster.  School dropouts, widespread domestic abuse, alcoholism, drug addiction, no jobs on reserves, and general despair and suicide.  How's that working for them?

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem begins long before residential schools came to be. In fact the schools were practically a necessary consequence of things that happened before, namely colonization. You want to identify a real crime? Destruction of a peoples food source, the Buffalo. All slaughtered, by the millions. Why were they slaughtered? To starve the Indian. And that's what they were doing, on their reserves. We're talking in the middle of NOWHERE, and a long time ago, so you can envision the isolation and problems that arise from this. There's no doctor available when some kid breaks their leg in remote northern Alberta. Heck, it's a problem even now.

Part of the reason they were taken away from their parents was to take them out of that level of poverty. They were starving, neglected, sick, no future. Their culture was already destroyed.

Edited by OftenWrong
used underline for emphasis
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/11/2017 at 4:45 PM, dre said:

It wasn't an attempt at betterment. It was an attempt at eradicating native culture, and bring about the end of native treaties, and end natives status as a distinct legal entity.

They were not trying to help the natives. They were trying to stop natives from being a problem for white people.

Here we go with the word "white" again. You forgot to throw the word racist in there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/11/2017 at 5:49 PM, OftenWrong said:

Point is a lot more would have died if nothing had been done. Natives in 1800 were already living in complete squalor. Their children were starving. At the time the decision was made to create the schools, natives were described as brutal savages with little to no chance of becoming civilized. Their primitive way of life was not compatible with European culture. It's a pity. However the government and church at the time thought they were doing the right thing.

 

That is why it's the best that can be expected, AT THE TIME.

I agree. What happened in the past was tragic but I think that the Indians are better off today than what they were living under in the good old days. If the Indians of today want to bring back and live in the past than let them go for it but I doubt that they will give up all the toys that old whitey invented and they use today that they did not have back then. But we must admit that the Indians of today are far better off than the ones that lived hundreds of years ago. Obviously, old whitey did a lot of good things for them to help get them out of their poverty way back when. Liberals just love to always bring up the past just to stir up the chit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, blackbird said:

 Was the goal to "eradicate native culture" or was it to teach natives how to live in a society which is 95% non-native and speaks English / French and give them a basic education?  

Their goal was to make them like any other immigrant in Canada...to assimilate into what everyone else was doing. I don't think it meant they had to give up all aspects of their culture but I do think the Government was consciously trying remove the image/reality of natives being these separate groups existing within the singular unit they were trying to build. Unfortunately it backfired as reserves still exist today as natives don't want to be part of Canada, rather they would prefer to exist as their own groups which we deal with on a nation to nation basis. But you are right, it hasn't lead to a pretty situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission says the residential school system amounted to cultural genocide....

http://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/cultural-genocide-label-for-residential-schools-has-no-legal-implications-expert-says-1.3110826

Defending this practice is being an apologist for genocide.  Senator Beyak  was out of line in defending cultural genocide.  

Btw, she is another Harper appointee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎3‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 9:25 PM, OftenWrong said:

They thought they had no other choice. They wanted natives to be able to sustain themselves independently, without government financial support, which in itself is not a bad thing. They had to become westernized law abiding citizens of course. That is what the quote by the Minister refers to.

When you say they wanted natives to be able to sustain themselves independently, you are saying that the Government of Canada was signing treaties in bad faith. Those treaties were agreements that the Aboriginal people would relinquish their claims to the land in return for ongoing support from Canada. But according to you, the government was trying to get out of those treaties right from the beginning.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎3‎/‎13‎/‎2017 at 7:56 PM, blackbird said:

I know there was a huge amount of unacceptable abuse that went on in residential schools and I don't agree with children having been taken from their families by force, but some claims about the schools stretch credibility.  Was the goal to "eradicate native culture" or was it to teach natives how to live in a society which is 95% non-native and speaks English / French and give them a basic education?  The present day reserve system has proven to be an unmitigated disaster.  School dropouts, widespread domestic abuse, alcoholism, drug addiction, no jobs on reserves, and general despair and suicide.  How's that working for them?

How do you think the present day reserve system got so screwed up? Could it be that for 150 years children were taken away and placed in abusive situations where they had no chance to develop normal family relationships?

Also think about what was happening on those reserves after the children were taken away. Entire communities without children, and parents powerless to protect their kids. Those parents themselves had gone through the same schools, so they knew exactly what kind of treatment their children were getting and they could do nothing to prevent it.

School dropouts? Yes, there is a widespread mistrust of schools and authority, for good reason.

Widespread domestic abuse? Yes, when people are raised in institutions without family relationships and then expected to create families as adults, there is going to be a lot of dysfunction.

Alcoholism and drug addiction? Yes, when you've experienced long term abuse as a child and have no coping mechanisms, or when you've had to knowingly allow your child to experience that kind of abuse, addiction is a common outcome.

No jobs on reserves? Yes, when reserves are set up on some of the most inhospitable land, there tends to be little economic development.

General despair and suicide? See all the points above.

And of course, people will say that this is in the past, they should be beyond it by now. But when it takes 7 generations to create this level of dysfunction, you can't expect to completely erase it in 1 generation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Melanie_ said:

How do you think the present day reserve system got so screwed up? Could it be that for 150 years children were taken away and placed in abusive situations where they had no chance to develop normal family relationships?

Also think about what was happening on those reserves after the children were taken away. Entire communities without children, and parents powerless to protect their kids. Those parents themselves had gone through the same schools, so they knew exactly what kind of treatment their children were getting and they could do nothing to prevent it.

School dropouts? Yes, there is a widespread mistrust of schools and authority, for good reason.

Widespread domestic abuse? Yes, when people are raised in institutions without family relationships and then expected to create families as adults, there is going to be a lot of dysfunction.

Alcoholism and drug addiction? Yes, when you've experienced long term abuse as a child and have no coping mechanisms, or when you've had to knowingly allow your child to experience that kind of abuse, addiction is a common outcome.

No jobs on reserves? Yes, when reserves are set up on some of the most inhospitable land, there tends to be little economic development.

General despair and suicide? See all the points above.

And of course, people will say that this is in the past, they should be beyond it by now. But when it takes 7 generations to create this level of dysfunction, you can't expect to completely erase it in 1 generation.

Yes, I agree that is exactly the situation.  But, we must stop dwelling on the past and the blame game.  If native leaders are going to focus on the past and looking for someone or something to blame, they will never be able to help their people.  It is easy to say these things, but people have to change the present paradigm, which is dependency.  I read a book a few years ago called "Dances with Dependency"  out of poverty through self-reliance   --- by Calvin Helin.   He is a native, who finished school and went to university, became a lawyer, an author, and public speaker.  He is a kind of motivational speaker who understand the problem of dependency.  His books and messages are widely acclaimed.  Try Googling him.  I believe he has the answer.  But the will has to be there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, I'll look for that book. I understand what you're saying, but I don't think the issue is simply about dwelling on the past and looking for someone to blame. The repercussions of colonization are real, and will take time to recover from. And the system was set up to promote dependency, so there needs to be a systemic change at the national level, as well as community by community. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/17/2017 at 4:03 PM, Melanie_ said:

How do you think the present day reserve system got so screwed up? 

Having a reserve system in general is a screwed up idea and something that needs to go. I can understand that the Residential Schools worsened the effect but the reality is that any isolation technique such as reserves are meant to gradually wean that group into the mainstream. Many natives have resisted the joining of mainstream and want to keep the reserves as their way of staying separate as an indigenous community.  However any suggestion of eliminating reserves is often met with severe objection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We could just give them their country back but people get all pissy about that and say they never had a country...so instead I suggest we all just become Earthlings and do unto others yadda yadda but people get even more pissy when you talk like that.

Round and round it goes.

I have little doubt people will still be all pissy about this a 1000 years from now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, eyeball said:

so instead I suggest we all just become Earthlings and do unto others yadda yadda but people get even more pissy when you talk like that.

What are you talking about?? I love the Earthlings comment...makes me laugh every time!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,766
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    CouchPotato
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...