Haligowan

Tag: History

  • Policing in Schools- A Mandated Professional Activity?

    Close-up of the sirens on a cop car.
    Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

    On August 13, 2025, Kristin Rushowy wrote in the Toronto Star:

    The controversial police-in-schools initiative is not offered at every board — Toronto’s police chief has said there are no plans to reinstate it in the city — but the memo, sent out Tuesday by Education Minister Paul Calandra and Deputy Minister Denise Cole, says in those that do, a “summary of the program’s structure and objectives” should be included. School resource officers must be covered in all boards, even if they don’t run the program.


    Activities, they wrote, should contain “information about the role of police in providing high-quality, age-appropriate educational public safety presentations to students on subjects such as cyber-crime, human trafficking, road safety and other areas of local importance. Information should also be provided about the role of police in the school community, to support trust building between educators, policing services, students and parents/guardians.”

    […]

    It also says schools need to work “co-operatively with police partners” on the two yearly lockdown drills, keeping staff up to date on procedures — and “consider adding a bomb threat drill as part of their emergency evacuation drills and that school personnel should work co-operatively with police partners on these drills.”

    It isn’t surprising that such news would “break” a few weeks out from the new school year. I have become accustomed to changes in policy being revealed at less than opportune times by this Ontario government.

    The public English school board in Ottawa (the OCDSB)had SROs in schools when I first started teaching here but within a few years they were taken out after exhaustive consulting. Ottawa’s police force (the OPS) has had a storied past of negative interactions and incidents while the SRO programme was in place. The Asilu Collective did a lot of work compiling a report on this matter (which can be helpfully read here).

    If teachers are going to be mandated to learn about the roles of police in our communities I believe it’s important we understand the scope of what that means. To that end I’m writing this post to educate the average educator on why this is a bad idea.

    I will throw in a caveat: if you bring this up in staff meetings or during the PA day itself you will probably receive push back one way or another. Teaching in Ontario is an overwhelmingly white profession. Despite lip service teachers pay to equity and progressive politics very few are willing to upset the status quo, rock the boat, or hold disruptive conversations. A majority-white staff will often have no problems with bringing police into a school serving a racialized community, no matter what books they say they’ve read. The intention of this paragraph isn’t to scare you into silence but to hopefully make you more aware of the potential dynamics should you broach this topic.

    Furthermore, this post will be written from an Ottawa-heavy lens as that is where I currently teach. I am confident you will find similar articles and arguments in local news sources. I encourage you to find these stories in the communities you’re employed in.

    History

    My background, such as it is, is in history and I like to tackle problems in the present with a historical understanding. If you were to examine the history of policing in Canada what would be the broad strokes?

    • In the early 19th century, the eastern colonies followed policing examples in England. Confederation in 1867 helped nudge the creation of provincial police forces.
    • What people now call the RCMP got its start in the 1870s as the North West Mounted Police. The organization got its genesis from Macdonald’s desire to crush Indigenous resistance (and his ongoing genocide) in the west. It was a heavily militarized police force, straying away from England’s Metropolitan Police Act, designed to enforce Canada’s “sovereignty” on its western “frontier”.
    • The NWMP (and later the RCMP) contributed to the ongoing genocide of Indigenous Peoples from the 1870s onward. They were often tasked with capturing First Nations children and placing them within the Indian Residential School System, a role ghoulishly immortalized on paraphernalia at the time. If you think the RCMP has seriously strayed from its militarized approach to Indigenous resistance in the 2020s, the documentary ‘Yintah’ is mandatory viewing (you can watch it for free, in Canada, on CBC Gem; Netflix also carries it).
    • National and provincial police forces are not the only examples of extreme police behaviours towards Indigenous Peoples. Municipal police forces are just as culpable. One notable example are the so-called “Starlight Tours”. The Saskatoon Police Service apprehended First Nations men on winter nights, drove outside the city limits and then left them to freeze to death. These murders were happening throughout the 90s and 00s.
    • Birth Alerts continue to cause trauma in many First Nations communities. Essentially, police and/or social workers are called when someone is deemed “at-risk” and their baby is taken soon after birth. First Nations women are disproportionately targeted by these actions.

    I’m of the belief that policing in Canada hasn’t strayed too far from its roots just after Confederation. There is ample evidence of the harm these forces have caused for generations. Bringing US-style tactics and training has only led to further targeting of BIPOC communities. Canada’s police forces have repeatedly trained with, and have been trained by, Israel’s security forces (a country with a similar history of subjugation, oppression, and genocide). The end result is an increasingly militant force capable of more disproportionate responses when confronted with resistance.

    Painting police forces as some kind of benevolent actor in Canadian history does a disservice. There is definitely a lot of baggage to unpack when you think of the inter-generational trauma from police actions when you consider putting them into schools.

    Role of the Police in the Local Community

    It will be difficult to be concise and focused in this section. When I moved to Ottawa from Gangeung, South Korea, I was aghast at the frequent stories of police abuse in the news. If the Ministry of Education wishes for teachers to learn about the police’s role in our schools’ communities then it’s hard to avoid the negative press.

    It can be overwhelming going through this list of incidents. It should be remembered that this list is curated; there is a multitude of news stories I could link to make my point clear. The fact the force continues to employ many of the above individuals while the province is trying to get police back into schools should be clearly problematic. This cannot be dismissed as a few bad apples when the misconduct is provided cover by continued employment and six-figure paycheques.

    Montsion easily making more than 3x the amount of the highest paid teacher after beating a Black man senseless leading to his death should make people uncomfortable. If the purpose of a system is what it does then what does this say about our police force? Elevating these individuals after such misconduct is nearly impossible to justify (although I am sure some will try).

    What About the Past Role of SROs & Police in Schools?

    As I wrote above, the OCDSB had SROs actively in schools when I first started working in Ottawa. I never got to know any personally but I would sometimes see them here and there at different sites. They would often be on school grounds with a firearm on their hip.

    The incident in Peel where a six year old Black girl was handcuffed at school was often on my mind when I heard of students interacting with police when I was a student teacher. I was waiting for city transit to take me to a school to work when Ottawa police tased and shot Greg Ritchie to death a few metres away(one of the officers involved was involved in a separate incident but was acquitted as well), so I have a particularly dim view of their role to make others safe.

    The OCDSB voted to end its relationship with the SRO programme in 2021. The trustees motioned that the Board issue a public apology for the harm done by the SRO programme. However, I can’t remember if the apology was ever produced. References are no longer easily accessible on the OCDSB’s website and only the intention of an apology can be found in archived versions of a page on the Board’s website.

    This motion came out of consultations within the OCDSB’s community. Students, parents and staff members came forward as part of the process. The firsthand accounts collected by the Asilu Collective go into detail how students felt interacting with SROs in their schools. You owe it to yourself to read it.

    The argument that assigning SROs to schools allows officers to better know the school community doesn’t hold much water when we see the evidence of their actions. Students feeling profiled by police is not how you build a caring and inclusive environment for a healthy school. Why should students be taught to feel safe around police when the police’s actions indicate otherwise?

    Saying police play a role in preventing crime doesn’t seem to hold much water in numerous studies from the USA or Canada. Arguing the presence of the police in schools will keep crime down is dubious at best as police most often react to crime after the fact (and as the linked studies suggest, they don’t exactly solve it after the fact either).

    In Conclusion

    The question we need to be asking as this PA rolls out is: who benefits from this? We are seeing the intentional underfunding of the education system in Ontario while police budgets continue to grow. You can see how stagnant the OCDSB’s budget is between the 2024-2025 school year and the 2025-2026 school year. You can then judge how the OPS’s budgets stack up in comparison. The OPS has around 2400 employees. The OCDSB is projecting around 77,000 students and over 12,000 staff according to its 2025 budget.

    Of course, since the Ministry of Education has actively taken over boards across the province, including the OCDSB, many do not have trustees to vote on this issue. I am hoping that unions start providing their members with tips on how to effectively counter yet another infringement.

    In the meantime, you are fully capable of arming yourself with knowledge. If Ottawa isn’t your locale, then look for police misconduct reports in your area. Look for firsthand accounts from populations historically oppressed by the police in Canada. Examine which groups actively call for more policing and who benefits from that expansion. Check out ‘Policing Black Lives‘ by Robyn Maynard and ‘The Skin We’re In‘ by Desmond Cole. Don’t be afraid to give dissenting opinions at staff meetings or when contact with the police is suggested. Get involved with political groups within your union to find like-minded individuals. Demand your local representative justify why this Professional Activity is necessary (and let me know their response).

  • The Nazis Did It Before

    Seeing liberal usage of the word “Nazi” thrown around in online discourse used to cause me to roll my eyes. My understanding at the time was that it was a hyperbolic charge undermining the fatal effects of Nazism. I felt invoking the word cheapened it with each use when there were more specific insults one could levy. Understandings evolve.

    The mistake I made was thinking Nazism was an artifact delegated to the past and not one contributing to echoes and repeating patterns. As I further researched far-right groups (first as a curiosity for a sociology assignment, then more seriously) I realized these groups were really borrowing from a playbook Nazis popularized.

    Nazism and Nazis never went away.

    Groomer/Predator/Pedo

    One of the most common epithets you see hurled online towards anyone daring to stand up for 2SLGBTQIA+ rights. Search my handle on Twitter and include any of the above three; you’ll be flooded with results. It’s in vogue now but the Nazis used the exact same phrasing to pass stigmatizing laws against the LGBT community of Germany at the time. These arguments would spread in the US following the Second World War. Coincidentally, so would Nazis.

    Banning and Burning Books

    Of course, if you’ve watched Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade, you’ve seen re-enactments of Nazis burning books. We’ve seen many examples of hate influencer accounts on Twitter gang up and pounce on elementary teachers here in Ontario for simply having queer friendly books in their classroom. If a teacher even mentions, or someone leaks a photo of their classroom, that they have a book about a child transitioning, these transphobic influencer accounts unleash torrents of abuse.

    If you guessed I was going to link this behaviour to Nazis in the 1930s you’re catching on. 90 years ago, a revolutionary clinic was raided and the wealth of information it contained was razed. This attempt to erase people from history leads to the misinformed thinking that trans kids pop out from the ground and haven’t always been with us.

    Antisemitism

    Most know that Nazis are antisemitic. The problem is that most can’t identify antisemitism in discourse spread by the far-right today. There are a bunch of tropes they use casually. A shadowy cabal of powerful people controlling world politics? Yeah, that garbage has been with us for a while. Mentions of The Great Reset or those including the World Economic Forum (usually shortened to ‘WEF’)? It’s the same kind of garbage.

    Once your eye is trained to notice these things, you’ll find that a lot of these transphobes also peddle in antisemitic conspiracy theories. The signs are all there but unless you are taught these things, chances are you won’t seek them out on their own. But when people of a certain political strip are hellbent to prevent that from happening, it’s because they want history to repeat itself.

    Cracking Down on Rainbow Clubs and GSAs

    There is a strong parallel between this sudden vitriolic increase in wanting to shut down rainbow clubs/GSAs in schools and gay associations in Germany as the Nazis rose to power. In Ottawa, we’ve seen protests at schools with rainbow clubs trying to shut them down or largescale walkouts for Pride activities as benign as raising a flag.

    The Nazis weren’t happy with LGBT+ people congregating and having associations, either. In fact, they went out of their way to dismantle them with brute force.

    Conservative parties in Canada are tripping over themselves to tap into queer and transphobia by outing students. This haste to either keep kids in the closet or have them go through a bureaucratic process to identify them should sound familiar to anyone who knows the history of the pink triangle.

    Learn to Take a Joke/They’re Just Trolls

    A common retort whenever a hate influencer gets called on their violence is that they weren’t actually being serious. They were just joking when they made that threat on a live stream. Those of us taking note need to lighten up.

    But if you know how violent white supremacists have always gotten their message it out, it’s through allegedly “edgy” humour. Hitler did the same thing decades before taking power. Go on any journalist’s account when she’s documenting far-right violence. Read the creepy comments not as jokes but as threats. The goal is always to intimidate and silence. A pattern emerges for whom these comments are directed towards.

    How Can They Be Homophobic/Transphobic/______ When They Associate with ________?

    I was going to use the variable x instead of blanks in the above heading but then remembered Twitter has been renamed and it might throw people off.

    But I digress.

    One of the laziest ways for the far-right to try and escape criticism is to prop up a model member from a minority group they usually persecute. Can they really be anti-Black if they have this Black person espousing their views? Can they really be homophobic if they have this lesbian agreeing with their points on their podcast?

    Yes.

    The history of the Holocaust is replete with examples of collaborators. Today, we have many examples of people trying to grift off white supremacist violence even though people from their own minority group are clearly targets.

    This is playing out in the current anti-trans panic with people claiming to be gay or lesbian fighting against the word “queer” or openly questioning the inclusion of transgender folks in the larger 2SLGBTQIA+ community. We’ve seen examples of the far-right in Canada finding a trans person they can parade around and claim their violence isn’t really all that violent. Or a queer school board trustee candidate, surrounded by open homophobes, who campaigns against the human rights of 2SLGBTQIA+ students.

    In Summary

    When you encounter someone who regularly espouses any of the above views, treat them as you would a Nazi. Don’t debate them. They aren’t interested in having their mind changed. They want to waste your time and at the very least harm your mental health. Don’t uncritically boost their garbage to your audience.

    You don’t need to play any respectability politics game with them. Respectable people don’t parrot Nazi talking points. Take note of when the account was created. Check who follows them. Check who they follow. Block as many of them as you can to protect yourself from the next online swarm (guess who else attacked others through mobs?).

  • Dispelling the Myth: Macdonald’s Statues Teach History

    Dispelling the Myth: Macdonald’s Statues Teach History

    On Saturday August 29th, 2020 a group of activists in Montreal took it upon themselves to topple a statue of Canada’s first Prime Minister. They tore it down from its pedestal and as it crashed to the ground its head spun off to the cheers of onlookers. This action has since been lauded by other activists online and derided by those of a more conservative mindset.

    The prevailing opinion by those who were aghast by the activists’ actions was that the act was an attempt to erase history. Much like opinions made on similar incidents in the United States, these people believe that statues such as Macdonald’s help retain history. By tearing them down, they argue, activists are trying to erase the past. It’s a ridiculous assertion.

    As a certified teacher in Ontario (through K-12) and one who has specialized certifications in teaching History from the Intermediate to Senior grades (7-12) allow me to dispel this myth.

    There are many public places that have Macdonald’s name emblazoned across them. From schools, to parkways, to pubs, all have leaned into the brand that is Macdonald. Yet, if you were to quiz anyone who frequents such places on Macdonald’s actual policies you’d like to get a lot of blank stares. After reading this entry, try it for yourself.

    Today, The Globe and Mail, published an opinion piece by another Canadian History teacher, J.D.M. Stewart. In it, he states:

    Critics of Macdonald act as though his regrettable actions against Indigenous peoples in the West were happening now. But his policies, which we rightly chafe against today, took place primarily in the 1880s. “Quite unlike Canadians of today,” wrote the late Richard Gwyn in his two-volume biography of one of this country’s greatest prime ministers, “nineteenth-century Canadians felt no guilt about their country’s treatment of Indians.”

    Retrieved from: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-when-we-debate-complex-legacies-such-as-sir-john-as-we-must-not-be/?fbclid=IwAR2lmNbeuyCBj5tqFHVZV81w2q7f3_zP4ro_L3MHIKdqgGSp4I4-TS8xyus

    It is with some regret I must correct the statements made by a fellow History teacher. Unfortunately, Macdonald’s actions are still echoing with us in the 21st century. Indigenous children continue to be seized by the state. Canada still chooses not to recognize Indigenous sovereignty and tramples on its own Treaty agreements. Canada has been condemned on the international stage for its treatment of Indigenous peoples and yet rather than feel shame, we continue to drag our feet to stave off any accountability when it comes to our colonialism.

    Furthermore, unlike Stewart’s insinuation, Macdonald was very much criticized for his actions in his own time.

    Political cartoon of Sir John A. MacDonald from 1888.

    The above political cartoon was published in 1888. It is doesn’t tiptoe around its criticism of Macdonald’s policies when it came to his efforts to starve First Nations as a matter of government policy, in order to save money.

    It is quite common for (white) Canadian historians to leave out contemporary opposition to Macdondald’s policy, as if everyone during that time were as racist as he. At this point History becomes less of an educational subject and more of a topic of propaganda, in that it glorifies mythological figures. Opposition within the House of Commons did indeed exist in the 19th century when it came to Macdonald.

    Dr. Timothy Stanley, of the University of Ottawa’s Faculty of Education, wrote thusly:

    Members of Parliament appeared to have been shocked by Macdonald’s
    final justification for Chinese disenfranchisement. Several members of the House, Matthew Hamilton Gault, Louis Henry Davies and Arthur Hill Gillmor challenged Macdonald’s amendment on the grounds that the Chinese were “industrious people” who had “voted in the last election” or who had “as good a right [to] be allowed to vote as any other British subject of foreign extraction” (Commons Debates, 1885, vol. xviii, p. 1585)

    Journal of Critical Race Inquiry
    Volume 3, Number 1 (2016) pp. 6-34
    Retrieved from: https://ojs.library.queensu.ca/index.php/CRI/article/view/5974/5934

    When History teachers write that Macdonald was a product of his time, and voiced the prevailing attitudes of the time, they often overlook (either by ignorance- no excuse for a History teacher- or by choice) of those negatively impacted by Macdonald’s policies.

    Stewart, in The Globe and Mail piece, argues:

    It is ahistorical to take Macdonald out of his times and thrust our causes and our fights for justice onto him. “Macdonald has been unfairly abused for being a man of the 19th century,” University of Toronto historian Robert Bothwell told Maclean’s magazine in 2016. “He had moral failings, and was sometimes indifferent to or negligent of serious problems. He did not have our sensibilities, and had many of the characteristics of his period that at the time passed without comment because they were so widely held.”

    Retrieved from: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-when-we-debate-complex-legacies-such-as-sir-john-as-we-must-not-be/?fbclid=IwAR2lmNbeuyCBj5tqFHVZV81w2q7f3_zP4ro_L3MHIKdqgGSp4I4-TS8xyus

    So widely held by whom? The majority of white Canadians? Why are their voices championed over Chinese immigrants? Why do Historians, and my fellow History teachers, continue to erase the experiences of Indigenous peoples who assuredly did not want to be ethnically cleansed from the land to make way for white settlers? Sure, many (white) power holders at that time did not want fair and equitable treatment of racialized people, a sentiment echoed today 150+ years later. Why is it by their views we cannot judge Macdonald? We have no problem saying Hitler was a monster for what he did, even if many white, straight, able bodied and cis Germans at the time had no problems with him. When it comes to other countries’ history, we examine how these leaders impacted the lives of victims and survivors, and yet we suspend that analysis when it comes to our own.

    Critics will say that we cannot levy charges of genocide against Macdonald because such vocabulary didn’t exist at the time. The word “murder” certainly did and I fail to see how it cannot be used against a man who willfully starved people to clear the land. Macdonald himself was quite capable of recognizing murder, and making light of it.

    A curious remark was once made by Sir John at the railway station at Hamilton, and whether it was a serious statement of his belief or an unappreciated stroke of humor is not known to this day. Some friends were talking of a murder that had occurred. When the case was tried there was doubt as to the prisoner’s guilt, when he remarked that in a case of murder it was better that an innocent man should be hanged than no man at all.

    Anecdotal Life of Sir John Macdonald
    By E.B. Biggar
    1881

    Perhaps the white gatekeepers at the time didn’t view the deaths of Indigenous people as murder but we do know that Indigenous people at the time were very much against Macdonald’s murderous cruelty, as is evidenced by acts of resistance and rebellion. Erasure of such experiences have led to these perspectives not being taught in school and the general public being unaware of them (thereby propagating the mythological aspects of politicians like Macdonald rather than the historical reality).

    Louis Riel, at his trial in 1885 stated:

    When I came into the North West in July, the first of July 1884, I found the Indians suffering. I found the half-breeds eating the rotten pork of the Hudson Bay Company and getting sick and weak every day. Although a half breed, and having no pretension to help the whites, I also paid attention to them. I saw they were deprived of responsible government, I saw that they were deprived of their public liberties. I remembered that half-breed meant white and Indian, and while I paid attention to the suffering Indians and the half-breeds I remembered that the greatest part of my heart and blood was white and I have directed my attention to help the Indians, to help the half-breeds and to help the whites to the best of my ability. We have made petitions, I have made petitions with others to the Canadian Government asking to relieve the condition of this country. We have taken time; we have tried to unite all classes, even if I may speak, all parties. Those who have been in close communication with me know I have suffered, that I have waited for months to bring some of the people of the Saskatchewan to an understanding of certain important points in our petition to the Canadian Government and I have done my duty. 

    Retrieved from: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/riel/rieltrialstatement.html

    Statues, such as the one toppled in Montreal, do very little in educating the public, despite being on public land. Stewart argues these statues in Canada don’t function the same as Confederate statues in the US, as they aren’t meant to intimidate an oppressed segment of the population:

    The real historical vandalism is not so much the destruction of public property, but in the singular and contemporary lens with which people are trying to judge actors from the past such as Macdonald. Unlike statues of Confederate “heroes” in the United States, which were raised in homage to the South’s support for slavery and to remind people of it, the statues of Macdonald were not put up in celebration of his genuine and ugly mistakes but for his larger legacy: his undeniable contribution to creating the Dominion of Canada.

    Retrieved from: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-when-we-debate-complex-legacies-such-as-sir-john-as-we-must-not-be/?fbclid=IwAR2lmNbeuyCBj5tqFHVZV81w2q7f3_zP4ro_L3MHIKdqgGSp4I4-TS8xyus

    This is a lazily-made argument as the creation of the Dominion of Canada was only possible by acts of genocide against Indigenous peoples. Most of these statues (if not all) are placed on stolen, unceded, territory, and as such are there to remind people of who holds power in this country and why. Celebrating the creation of “Canada” is in itself a reminder to Indigenous people what they have lost, and continue to lose. I’m not quite sure why History teachers, like Stewart, are incapable of recognizing this.

    Macdonald was a strong proponent of creating an Aryan state and upholding other white supremacist ideals. As noted in Dr. Stanley’s quotes of Macdonald concerning Chinese immigrants:

    …if they came in great numbers and settled on the Pacific coast they might control the vote of that whole Province, and they would send Chinese representatives to sit here, who would represent Chinese eccentricities, Chinese immorality, Asiatic principles altogether opposite to our wishes; and, in the even balance of parties, they might enforce those Asiatic principles, those immoralities … the eccentricities which are abhorrent to the Aryan race and Aryan principles, on this House. (1885, vol. xviii, p. 1588)

    […]

    The truth is, that all natural history, all ethnology, shows that, while the crosses of the Aryan races are successful-while a mixture of all those races which are known or believed to spring from a common origin is more or less successful-they will amalgamate. If you look around the world you will see that the Aryan races will not wholesomely amalgamate with the Africans or the Asiatics. It is not to be desired that they should come; that we should have a mongrel race, that the Aryan character of the future of British America should be destroyed by a cross or crosses of that kind. (Commons Debates, 1885, vol. xviii, p. 1589)

    Journal of Critical Race Inquiry
    Volume 3, Number 1 (2016) pp. 6-34
    Retrieved from: https://ojs.library.queensu.ca/index.php/CRI/article/view/5974/5934

    It’s quite clear from Macdonald’s own words that he viewed himself as a white (or aryan) supremacist, and wanted Canada to be a country built upon those ideals. Is there currently a statue of his in a public place that teaches people these facts, or are the statues instead a glorification of someone wanting to create an Aryan state?

    An important link that is also not taught by these statues is how Macdonald enthusiastically spoke in defence of the pro-slavery South in the US Civil War.

    I believe we shall have at length an organization that will enable us to be a nation and protect ourselves as we should. Look at the gallant defence that is being made by the Southern Republic – at this moment they have not much more than four millions of men – not much exceeding our own numbers – yet what a brave fight they have made, notwithstanding the stern bravery of the New Englander, or the fierce elan of the Irishman. (Cheers.)

    SPEECH BY JOHN A. MACDONALD – TOAST TO COLONIAL UNION, HALIFAX, SEPTEMBER 12, 1864
    Retrieved from: https://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/speech-by-john-a-macdonald-toast-to-colonial-union-halifax-september-12-1864/

    In another instance:

    When the American Civil War broke out, Mr. Macdonald was of opinion that it would result in the formation of two nations. In a speech in 1861 he said : ” He agreed with every word of regret that had been expressed at the unhappy and lamentable state of things which they now witnessed in the States, for he remembered they were of the same blood as ourselves. He still looked hopefully to the future of the United States. He believed there was a vigor, a vitality in the Anglo-Saxon character and institutions of the States that would carry them through this great convulsion, as they had carried through our mother country in days of old. He hoped that if they were to be severed in two—as severed in two he believed they would be— two great, two noble, two free nations would exist in place of one.”

    Anecdotal Life of Sir John Macdonald
    By E.B. Biggar
    1881

    Here Historians and History teachers have much less wiggle room. Macdonald champions and welcomes a sovereign state borne out of slavery. It is very telling who he expects to be free in this state (those of an Anglo-Saxon character). I’m sure there will be someone reading this ready to make an argument that the South really wasn’t fighting to protect slavery, but I’ll head that off by linking to the Confederate vice president, Alexander H. Stephens’ Cornerstone speech:

    Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

    Retrieved from: https://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/cornerstone-speech/

    It is worth noting that Macdonald’s wife, Agnes Bernard, was the daughter of a slave and plantation-owner in Jamaica. Her father, Thomas James Bernard, ran a sugar plantation in Jamaica and owned 96 slaves. As slavery was abolished throughout the British Empire, he received special compensation, amounting to £1723 (approximately 30 times the annual salary of a skilled worker in those times).

    Biographer, E.B. Biggar in 1881 noted:

    While still a mere child, Miss Agnes Bernard lost her father, and—as about the same time the family property became seriously diminished in value by the introduction of free-trade, following upon the abolition of slavery—her mother decided to remove to England. ” At first the change of environment proved very unwelcome. The difference of atmosphere between Jamaica—where the lower classes were all attention and servility—and England— where even the servants had wills of their own and dared to show them—was not to be comprehended at once.” But the years, busy with books and acquiring accomplishments, slipped by, and England, despite her exclusiveness, became very dear. In the meantime, matters in Jamaica were going from bad to worse. The planters fell into the depths of ruin, and all who could get away from the ill-fated island with any remnants of their fortunes, hastened to do so.

    Anecdotal Life of Sir John Macdonald
    By E.B. Biggar
    1881

    As has been made clear, there is an overwhelming amount of evidence against honouring Macdonald in the fashion many Canadians do. Historians and History teachers who purposefully sidestep all these historical footnotes should probably consider calling themselves something different. If you are going to make an argument that Macdonald was a product of his time, and we should restrain ourselves from criticising him with 21st century norms, you really need to ask yourself why you choose to to defend a white supremacist. There was ample criticism against Macdonald in the 19th century and he faced it in the press and in the House of Commons. Historians who choose to ignore this are making the choice to erase voices. Removing problematic statues recentres the conversation these Historians don’t want to have; they are less interested in preserving history than promoting national mythological narratives.

Haligowan

An educator's blog.

Twenty Twenty-Five

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com