This morning, while listening to the radio, my mother called me to ask, "Leah, what's 'clickbait'?" So I explained that it's a headline to tease someone into clicking a link, only to find that there's nothing particularly interesting on the webpage.
This afternoon in the Archives of Ontario, looking at microfilmed education files, I'm finding the clickbait of the early twentieth century. I could write a satirical conference paper pretending to draw out matters of substance from the most hideously dull, yet enticingly-titled, letters that I’ve found. We've all seen them: the files that are merely cover letters for other documents, acknowledgements of having received a package, and so forth, that somehow get their own individual file and a title for what the file would have been, if only it included the actual document, the actual package. The file that cruelly masquerades as a matter of substance and entices us to look inside (or scroll for ten minutes through a poorly labeled microfilm reel) only to find... “I beg sir to acknowledge the receipt of your favour of the fourth instant regarding [super exciting issue!] and will give it due consideration.” and...nothing more.
Tuesday, June 9, 2015
Sunday, June 7, 2015
Truth and Reconciliation, Canadian Mass Media, and Arguments about Genocide
Since arriving home from the Congress for the Social Sciences and Humanities this Friday, I've been trying (perhaps in vain) to catch up with the extensive media coverage of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission closing activities. This weekend, the coverage ramped up a bit, with weekend papers giving opinion pieces, including some strong articles in the Globe and Mail and a variety of less astute writing elsewhere. I planned on writing a field guide of sorts, noting who was saying what about the TRC. Then I realized that the extent of the coverage meant that I could either give a review, or merely a series of links; I chose the former. Perhaps in future days I will read and write more. I hope to read beyond the mainstream media as well, because Indigenous blogs are of course a critical source for learning more about the TRC and its implications.
I'll start with the lowest-hanging fruit: Conrad Black, of all people, argued in the National Post that Canada's treatment of Aboriginal people, though shameful, wasn't genocide. Black starts with an assertion that I would agree with - that all countries founded on immigration could be accused of cultural genocide, of either the indigenous peoples or the arrivals. Yes, indeed we can; but just because we've all been committing cultural genocide, to various degrees, doesn't make it any better. Black continues with the sorts of apologist arguments that frankly don't deserve to be quoted, alleging a primitive population that was unfortunately assimilated through violence that, in Black's opinion, does not constitute genocide. He argues this by John A. Macdonald's policies to those of Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot, who certainly terrorized people in different ways. If you click the link (which I don't endorse, if that's not already clear!), save yourself from the horrific comments.
At the moment that I'm writing this, the Sunday night panel on CBC's The National are debating whether or not this was a genocide. Jonathan Kay, from The Walrus and John Moore, host of Newstalk 1010 (both white men) are the regular panelists; tonight, they were joined by Dawn Lavell-Harvard from the Native Women's Association of Canada for a discussion of stereotypes about Aboriginal people. Kay made an argument that was relatively similar to that of Conrad Black, that because residential schools ≠ Hitler that they were not genocide. Lavell-Harvard unsurprisingly disagreed. Wendy Mesley, hosting, said to her arguing commentators that it wouldn't be possible for their panel to resolve whether residential schools were genocide. I generally respect Mesley, but resent her simply saying that the panel could not resolve the issue; indeed, it's not their role, after years of extensive research by the TRC. The TRC's publication What We have Learned: Principles of Truth and Reconciliation (PDF) notes in its second paragraph that residential schools were a component of a policy of cultural genocide. The report goes on to distinguish physical, cultural, and reproductive genocide, instantly refuting the arguments of those who dismiss statements of genocide by contrasting residential schools with Nazi concentration camps. When the TRC has taken this much time to consult survivors, to comb through documents - who are these journalists, who are Canadians at large, to persist in debating whether or not this is a genocide? Is it not time to put this argument to rest?
Doug Saunders, international affairs columnist for the Globe, notes the challenges of applying the term "genocide" to something that happened in Canada: the term "cultural genocide" itself was previously merely "an activist slogan and academic obscurity" (for the record, I'm inclined to disagree with that assertion - but since I move in academic circles, I'm not the person to make that argument); it's a label we link to the Holocaust in Germany; unlike other acts of cultural genocide, this affected a smaller percentage of the population. But he makes several comparisons to international events that should help Canadians to understand that, yes, it happened here just like it did elsewhere, in particular showing parallels between the Ukrainian Holodomor and Canadian policy. I've read several other articles today that I'd recommend, but regarding ideas about genocide, the Saunders piece is a pre-requisite for anyone who needs to be persuaded (or who is trying to persuade others) that yes, the TRC's accusations of genocide is more than reasonable in an international context.
I'll start with the lowest-hanging fruit: Conrad Black, of all people, argued in the National Post that Canada's treatment of Aboriginal people, though shameful, wasn't genocide. Black starts with an assertion that I would agree with - that all countries founded on immigration could be accused of cultural genocide, of either the indigenous peoples or the arrivals. Yes, indeed we can; but just because we've all been committing cultural genocide, to various degrees, doesn't make it any better. Black continues with the sorts of apologist arguments that frankly don't deserve to be quoted, alleging a primitive population that was unfortunately assimilated through violence that, in Black's opinion, does not constitute genocide. He argues this by John A. Macdonald's policies to those of Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot, who certainly terrorized people in different ways. If you click the link (which I don't endorse, if that's not already clear!), save yourself from the horrific comments.
At the moment that I'm writing this, the Sunday night panel on CBC's The National are debating whether or not this was a genocide. Jonathan Kay, from The Walrus and John Moore, host of Newstalk 1010 (both white men) are the regular panelists; tonight, they were joined by Dawn Lavell-Harvard from the Native Women's Association of Canada for a discussion of stereotypes about Aboriginal people. Kay made an argument that was relatively similar to that of Conrad Black, that because residential schools ≠ Hitler that they were not genocide. Lavell-Harvard unsurprisingly disagreed. Wendy Mesley, hosting, said to her arguing commentators that it wouldn't be possible for their panel to resolve whether residential schools were genocide. I generally respect Mesley, but resent her simply saying that the panel could not resolve the issue; indeed, it's not their role, after years of extensive research by the TRC. The TRC's publication What We have Learned: Principles of Truth and Reconciliation (PDF) notes in its second paragraph that residential schools were a component of a policy of cultural genocide. The report goes on to distinguish physical, cultural, and reproductive genocide, instantly refuting the arguments of those who dismiss statements of genocide by contrasting residential schools with Nazi concentration camps. When the TRC has taken this much time to consult survivors, to comb through documents - who are these journalists, who are Canadians at large, to persist in debating whether or not this is a genocide? Is it not time to put this argument to rest?
Doug Saunders, international affairs columnist for the Globe, notes the challenges of applying the term "genocide" to something that happened in Canada: the term "cultural genocide" itself was previously merely "an activist slogan and academic obscurity" (for the record, I'm inclined to disagree with that assertion - but since I move in academic circles, I'm not the person to make that argument); it's a label we link to the Holocaust in Germany; unlike other acts of cultural genocide, this affected a smaller percentage of the population. But he makes several comparisons to international events that should help Canadians to understand that, yes, it happened here just like it did elsewhere, in particular showing parallels between the Ukrainian Holodomor and Canadian policy. I've read several other articles today that I'd recommend, but regarding ideas about genocide, the Saunders piece is a pre-requisite for anyone who needs to be persuaded (or who is trying to persuade others) that yes, the TRC's accusations of genocide is more than reasonable in an international context.
The TRC and CHA - some thoughts on an opportunity lost
This year's Canadian Historical Association (CHA) annual meeting ran from May 31st to June 3rd; the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) closing activities spanned the same dates. Though both events were located in Ottawa, I am struck by how little interchange there was between the two. Where we could have had an event that was cohesive and powerful, instead the week felt fragmented and disengaged.
In panels about Aboriginal issues, presenters or audience members referred to the report and media coverage but, troublingly, none of the CHA sessions were specifically in dialogue with the TRC activities. While the TRC offered a livestream for those unable to attend in person, the University of Ottawa wifi was unable to cope with the influx of Congress attendees, much less with people streaming an hour or so of proceedings. There was no space available for people to watch a stream with a wired internet connection, in a group, with space for dialogue; no group transportation between the two events.
I think, also, of the Canadian Society for Studies in Education (CSSE). Their keynote brought in Bolivia's Vice Minister of Decolonization, Félix Cárdenas Aguilar, to speak on decolonizing education. However, only a handful of papers (which I did not attend, not being registered for the CSSE) considered the history of indigenous education, passing up a valuable opportunity for sessions that engaged with the TRC. From my cursory reading of the CSSE programme, I saw a number of papers on Indigenous pedagogies and decolonization, and on the challenges of northern reserve education, to give a couple of examples. But so much appears to be missing: where was the panel on the Truth and Reconciliation commission? If the CHA is large, the CSSE is gargantuan - getting lost in a list of sessions is hard to avoid. In contrast to the CHA, which noted that particular sessions on Aboriginal history were part of a sponsored mini-conference, papers on Indigenous education in the CSSE proceedings were scattered about, so that there was no coherent way to find them and attend them.
The Congress as a whole offered two events that dovetailed with the TRC proceedings: May 30th saw Murray Sinclair in a standing-room-only Big Thinking lecture, entitled "What do we do about the legacy of Indian residential schools?" followed by a youth panel discussion on Reconciliation and the Academy. This featured an impressive pair of pre-teen presenters, both youth leaders in Ottawa, alongside more well-known speakers such as Cindy Blackstock, Tracy Coates, Imam Zijad Delic, and moderator Waubgeshig Rice. Both of these were well-attended and informative. But in the Congress programme, these were the only two sessions I saw on reconciliation. There were likely a few here and there in the programmes for various associations - but how to find them? We have such an opportunity for interdisciplinary dialogue at Congress, and for engaging with major debates, issues, etc. - so while I had a great time at the conference this year, and thoroughly enjoyed (though exhausted) myself, I left with a nagging sense of disappointment.
CSSE sessions on indigenous people, history, and education:
(this list is partially for my own notes, so that I remember to contact these scholars - or for whoever actually reads my blog who wants this info for their own purposes. Note that it's likely that I've missed a few entries that would be of interest for me, and that I haven't listed panels that aren't about history or reconciliation)
In panels about Aboriginal issues, presenters or audience members referred to the report and media coverage but, troublingly, none of the CHA sessions were specifically in dialogue with the TRC activities. While the TRC offered a livestream for those unable to attend in person, the University of Ottawa wifi was unable to cope with the influx of Congress attendees, much less with people streaming an hour or so of proceedings. There was no space available for people to watch a stream with a wired internet connection, in a group, with space for dialogue; no group transportation between the two events.
I think, also, of the Canadian Society for Studies in Education (CSSE). Their keynote brought in Bolivia's Vice Minister of Decolonization, Félix Cárdenas Aguilar, to speak on decolonizing education. However, only a handful of papers (which I did not attend, not being registered for the CSSE) considered the history of indigenous education, passing up a valuable opportunity for sessions that engaged with the TRC. From my cursory reading of the CSSE programme, I saw a number of papers on Indigenous pedagogies and decolonization, and on the challenges of northern reserve education, to give a couple of examples. But so much appears to be missing: where was the panel on the Truth and Reconciliation commission? If the CHA is large, the CSSE is gargantuan - getting lost in a list of sessions is hard to avoid. In contrast to the CHA, which noted that particular sessions on Aboriginal history were part of a sponsored mini-conference, papers on Indigenous education in the CSSE proceedings were scattered about, so that there was no coherent way to find them and attend them.
The Congress as a whole offered two events that dovetailed with the TRC proceedings: May 30th saw Murray Sinclair in a standing-room-only Big Thinking lecture, entitled "What do we do about the legacy of Indian residential schools?" followed by a youth panel discussion on Reconciliation and the Academy. This featured an impressive pair of pre-teen presenters, both youth leaders in Ottawa, alongside more well-known speakers such as Cindy Blackstock, Tracy Coates, Imam Zijad Delic, and moderator Waubgeshig Rice. Both of these were well-attended and informative. But in the Congress programme, these were the only two sessions I saw on reconciliation. There were likely a few here and there in the programmes for various associations - but how to find them? We have such an opportunity for interdisciplinary dialogue at Congress, and for engaging with major debates, issues, etc. - so while I had a great time at the conference this year, and thoroughly enjoyed (though exhausted) myself, I left with a nagging sense of disappointment.
CSSE sessions on indigenous people, history, and education:
(this list is partially for my own notes, so that I remember to contact these scholars - or for whoever actually reads my blog who wants this info for their own purposes. Note that it's likely that I've missed a few entries that would be of interest for me, and that I haven't listed panels that aren't about history or reconciliation)
Julie Vaudrin-Charette (Ottawa); Getting Credit for White Settler Colonialism: A Historiography of
Indigenous Education Policy in Canada
A Textual Analysis of Post-Secondary Funding in Indian Affairs Annual Reports: 1947 - 1990. Josephine Steeves (Saskatchewan)
Witnessing residential school testimonial texts as self study in the preparation of future teachers: Disrupting colonial futurist logics in education. Lisa Taylor (Bishop's)
Working in Tandem: Federal-Provincial Collaboration in Indigenous Education, 1901-1951
Helen Raptis (Victoria)
Using re-storying as a pedagogical tool to examine the Indian residential school experience with young non-Indigenous students: an exploration into notions of identity and societal responsibility. Daniela Bascunan (Toronto) (roundtable)
Addressing Truth and Reconciliation: Curriculum, Non-Aboriginal Teachers, and Public Education
Nicholas Ng-A-Fook (Ottawa), Jesse Butler (Ottawa), Ferne McFadden
(Ottawa), Julie Vaudrin-Charette (Ottawa) (symposium)
A Textual Analysis of Post-Secondary Funding in Indian Affairs Annual Reports: 1947 - 1990. Josephine Steeves (Saskatchewan)
Witnessing residential school testimonial texts as self study in the preparation of future teachers: Disrupting colonial futurist logics in education. Lisa Taylor (Bishop's)
Working in Tandem: Federal-Provincial Collaboration in Indigenous Education, 1901-1951
Helen Raptis (Victoria)
Using re-storying as a pedagogical tool to examine the Indian residential school experience with young non-Indigenous students: an exploration into notions of identity and societal responsibility. Daniela Bascunan (Toronto) (roundtable)
Addressing Truth and Reconciliation: Curriculum, Non-Aboriginal Teachers, and Public Education
Engaging difficult conversations with Indigenous and non-Indigenous
preservice teachers: Taking up historical responsibilities through Story and
Literature. Lisa Taylor (Bishop's), Curran Jacobs (Bishop's)
The complexities of youth civic engagement in decolonizing territories and post-colonial nations: The challenges for Tikkun--Pedagogies of repair and reconciliation. Yvette Daniel (Windsor), Lisa Korteweg (Lakehead), Heather Koller (Lakehead), Frances Cachon (Windsor), Erwin Selimos (Windsor), Ereblir Kadriu (University of Pristhina), Janet Tower (Grand Rapids Community College), Nombuso Dlamini (York), Cynthia Kwakyewah (York)
The complexities of youth civic engagement in decolonizing territories and post-colonial nations: The challenges for Tikkun--Pedagogies of repair and reconciliation. Yvette Daniel (Windsor), Lisa Korteweg (Lakehead), Heather Koller (Lakehead), Frances Cachon (Windsor), Erwin Selimos (Windsor), Ereblir Kadriu (University of Pristhina), Janet Tower (Grand Rapids Community College), Nombuso Dlamini (York), Cynthia Kwakyewah (York)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)