The Calgary Herald (Alberta)
August 10, 2013 Saturday
Early Edition
Native leaders’ talk of genocide just fuels anger
by Susan Martinuk, Calgary Herald
Can a million dollars change how we view the course of Canadian
history? Apparently not, according to the Canadian Museum of Human
Rights. The Winnipeg museum has yet to open, but it has generated
considerable controversy by changing the proposed wording for a
proposed digital sign advertising a First Nations exhibit when the
museum opens in 2014 or later.
Initially, the sign referred to the exhibit as “Settler Colonial
Genocide.” It was recently decided that the volatile term “genocide”
would be removed as a violent descriptor of how Canada has treated its
First Nations people. After all, it really isn’t within the museum’s
mandate to make such determinations; particularly when there has been
no official recognition of such by any outside group or governing
body. This is a term used only by the First Nations themselves.
This change has greatly angered the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, who
had pledged $1 million to help the museum educate the public about
human rights and aboriginals in Canada.
According to a letter written to the museum by Grand Chief Murray
Clearsky, the assembly made the donation with the understanding that
“a true history of the treatment of First Nations people would be on
exhibit.” Of course, the implication is that the only “true history”
involves genocide. The other implication is that donated money should
be sufficient to influence the nature of exhibits.
Yes, there have been huge systemic failures in the government’s
dealing with aboriginals. The residential schools program, conducted
jointly with various churches, was a disaster. It was meant to
assimilate native children into a white society, yet seems to have
shown them the very worst of any kind of a society. There was physical
and sexual abuse, and recent news reports describe unethical
nutritional experiments. From the 1870s until the early 1990s, it is
estimated that 150,000 children went through the residential school
system and about 3,000 deaths occurred during that time.
The vast majority of these deaths were related to disease, not some
nefarious and deliberate attempts to extinguish young lives. Very
little was known about the transmission of disease, and the flu and TB
had perfect conditions to find multiple hosts in dormitory conditions.
Canada officially recognizes five genocides worldwide. The Holocaust
(six million deaths), the Holodomor (the deliberate starvation of
Ukrainians resulting in 3.5 million deaths), the Armenian genocide
(1.5 million deaths), Rwanda (800,000 deaths) and the Srebrenican
massacre in Bosnia (about 800,000 deaths).
Each of these is characterized by the deliberate, intentional and
planned death of one culture by another.
When I think of Canada’s natives and their history in residential
schools, I don’t see that. I see mistakes and ignorance, but no clear
intent to destroy aboriginals. Since then, there has been a
$1.9-billion settlement to help those harmed in the schools, a full
apology by Prime Minister Stephen Harper for “historic wrongs and
injustices” and hundreds of millions more for healing, restoration and
the public airing of grievances.
There has been a clear acknowledgment of wrongdoing but, as I wrote at
the time, words and money will never be enough, and it is always a
mistake to assume they will make a difference when someone has been
injured by another. If there is no forgiveness and the apology is not
accepted, the hurt just continues.
As a result, we have Clearsky clearly stating in his letter that
genocide is the proper term for “what has been done and is currently
being perpetrated on the First Nations through various means.” He also
mentions “ongoing attempts to assimilate and eradicate the original
peoples of this country.”
In other words, the genocide isn’t over. It is happening right now.
This attitude by native leaders continues to fuel the anger of
natives. They have tax exemptions, housing, education, health care
where benefits exceed those of non-aboriginal Canadians and special
access to any number of governmentfunded social programs. They also
receive money and benefits according to their various treaties.
It is an insult to the Jews and other genocide victims for Canadians
to give in to claims of genocide by aboriginals.
The museum is right to deny the desires of the chiefs to influence
perceptions of how they have been treated by Canada. Allow visitors to
study the facts and make their own determination as to whether
genocide or pandering is the appropriate term to describe Canada’s
treatment of its aboriginal people.
Susan Martinuk’s column appears weekly.