![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
blogcutterAccording to the latest Census information, the indigenous population (especially youth) has grown rapidly over the past decade, whether on account of higher birth rates, longer life expectancy, more self-reporting, or other factors. It's now cool to be indigenous.
But how much reconciliation is possible or even, dare I say, desirable? And to what extent is truth a relative or subjective or historically-shaped concept?
It is now considered almost heresy to say that there might have been any positive aspects to the residential school system. I consider this to be part of a disturbing trend towards quelling and chilling freedom of expression in various educational, political, social and cultural forums which might once have been thought of as exemplary sites of informed debate and discussion.
Disagreement should be respectful, yes. But a well thought-out argument, whether based on scientific evidence, anecdotal evidence, upbringing, education and years of experience, emotion, faith or personal conviction is not the same as name-calling, ad-hominem and ad-feminam and ad "them"-um attacks, nor should it automatically be equated with harassment, bigotry or hate-speech!
In the early and even later days of the residential school system, it was not so easy to connect, either physically or electronically, with other like-minded and like-needed people. Even today in many small communities in southern Canada, some young people have to travel long distances just to access secondary schools, let alone postsecondary education. Now imagine the challenges that would have been faced in the remote northern communities of fifty years ago!
Back in the summer of 1967, my family was one of a number of Ottawa families that hosted Inuit kids from Iqaluit, then known as Frobisher Bay. As I recall, the twelve-year-old was in grade 4 and the thirteen-year-old (who turned 14 while she was staying with us) was in grade 5. I was twelve or thirteen and about to go into grade nine. Of course, their schooling at the time was in English, which was a second language for all of them. Add to that the fact that many of the Inuit girls were thoroughly boy-crazy - seemingly it was part of their culture to date, mate and propagate very early in life - and you can easily understand the difficulties they would face in getting a decent education. Perhaps we can also begin to understand why cultural preservation and sensitivity might have been considered unaffordable luxuries not just by the white majority but also, I suspect, for many indigenous people hoping for a better life for their children and for generations to come.
We live in a different world today. But if we insist on stifling all discussion and debate about not just the negatives, but also the positives (or at least the inevitables, the necessity-as-mother-of-invention type of aspects) of past practices, then how can we hope to reach a consensus on what is needed moving forward?
But how much reconciliation is possible or even, dare I say, desirable? And to what extent is truth a relative or subjective or historically-shaped concept?
It is now considered almost heresy to say that there might have been any positive aspects to the residential school system. I consider this to be part of a disturbing trend towards quelling and chilling freedom of expression in various educational, political, social and cultural forums which might once have been thought of as exemplary sites of informed debate and discussion.
Disagreement should be respectful, yes. But a well thought-out argument, whether based on scientific evidence, anecdotal evidence, upbringing, education and years of experience, emotion, faith or personal conviction is not the same as name-calling, ad-hominem and ad-feminam and ad "them"-um attacks, nor should it automatically be equated with harassment, bigotry or hate-speech!
In the early and even later days of the residential school system, it was not so easy to connect, either physically or electronically, with other like-minded and like-needed people. Even today in many small communities in southern Canada, some young people have to travel long distances just to access secondary schools, let alone postsecondary education. Now imagine the challenges that would have been faced in the remote northern communities of fifty years ago!
Back in the summer of 1967, my family was one of a number of Ottawa families that hosted Inuit kids from Iqaluit, then known as Frobisher Bay. As I recall, the twelve-year-old was in grade 4 and the thirteen-year-old (who turned 14 while she was staying with us) was in grade 5. I was twelve or thirteen and about to go into grade nine. Of course, their schooling at the time was in English, which was a second language for all of them. Add to that the fact that many of the Inuit girls were thoroughly boy-crazy - seemingly it was part of their culture to date, mate and propagate very early in life - and you can easily understand the difficulties they would face in getting a decent education. Perhaps we can also begin to understand why cultural preservation and sensitivity might have been considered unaffordable luxuries not just by the white majority but also, I suspect, for many indigenous people hoping for a better life for their children and for generations to come.
We live in a different world today. But if we insist on stifling all discussion and debate about not just the negatives, but also the positives (or at least the inevitables, the necessity-as-mother-of-invention type of aspects) of past practices, then how can we hope to reach a consensus on what is needed moving forward?
(no subject)
Date: 2017-11-05 02:59 am (UTC)