I have held off writing this for a while, unsure how the issue would play out, but also concerned about how my views would be received, including possible negative reactions. However, the subject keeps gnawing at me, so I will leap into it regardless. Please don't judge me too harshly.
By now the standard "Residential Schools" narrative is well known to Canadians. In the pre-confederation 19th century, the then British government decided to set up schools for Indian children in order to assimilate them into Canadian (mostly English) culture - "to take the Indian out of the child", as it was understood. After confederation, the government expanded the program, building more "industrial schools" to house and educate children from several reserves. Church groups signed up teachers and other staff to run the schools. Native children were taken, by force, if necessary, from their homes and families to distant schools where they had their hair cut off and clothing burned. They were given English names (or even just numbers) and school uniforms, forbidden from using their own languages, and forced to speak English, while undergoing harsh discipline as they attended and lived at the schools. The children were mistreated, undernourished, given little medical care, and prevented from returning home. Many were emotionally, physically and even sexually abused, and all were mistreated in various ways by the white adult staff, who looked down on them. Some were even beaten or starved and frozen to death, then secretly buried and never heard from again.
In all, spread over more than a century, around 150,000 native children attended over 100 of these schools, some of which remained open into the late 20th century. Of those children, several thousand died at the schools, and many were then buried on site in unmarked graves. Most of the children who attended these schools were emotionally traumatized and permanently bear the scars as victims of this "cultural genocide" - the stamping out of their native values, tribal history and beliefs. The government has since apologized repeatedly for the whole debacle and justifiably paid large sums to the survivors and their offspring as partial compensation for the widespread and long-term suffering that still carries over today in succeeding generations. Non-native Canadians, referred to as "settlers" - are now expected to acknowledge the widespread mistreatment and atrocities, and undergo continuing education and penance for this sad part of our national history.
Such is the story as pulled together over the past few decades and captured in the 2015 Truth and Reconciliation Commision report, and its follow-up work. This narrative has been almost universally adopted by our governments, schools, churches, service agencies, and of course, the mainstream media, who have made it their duty to refer to it in news and opinion pieces as often as possible. All Canadian "settlers" are expected to accept the narrative as part of the reconciliation work and making amends. Churches are regularly shamed for their past roles, and often held to blame for most of the problems. The narrative is now part of Canadian history taught to all school children, and officials everywhere regularly acknowledge this shameful past.
Here is a somewhat different version of the story. In the 19th century the British, and later, Canadian governments were concerned that there was no public education for native children. Tribal leaders and native parents were mostly eager to have their children educated so that they would not be left behind in the burgeoning Canadian culture. Many native reserves were too small or remote to sustain schools, so the government organized and built the residential schools in more central locations, where the children could stay during school sessions. Wanting to educate and children in the faith and give them better lives and prospects for success, church groups agreed to fill the administrative and teaching posts in these schools. Many native children attended other schools in their own communities while living at home, but most who could not were transported to the residential schools, where they lived and learned together.
The schools were largely underfunded by the government, but the often-untrained staff did their best to make do with what they had and provide good education and care. Resources were often short however, the schools were understaffed, and medical care largely unavailable. Many children arrived with infestations, diseases like tuberculosis, or other health conditions. They had to be thoroughly cleansed and given new clothing, school uniforms being the norm in those days. Some of the staff were native adults, and some non-native children attended the schools as well. As the teachers could not speak the various native languages, English was taught and used in class and group activities, although most children could speak their native tongues outside the classroom. Most of the children were also able to return home between sessions, or even on weekends.
Unfortunately, with childhood diseases uncontrolled in those days, some children did die and when they could not be sent home to their families, had to be buried in cemeteries at or near the school, with Christian burial rites and wooden markers. Records were kept at the schools and there was communication with the parents and reserves when possible. With high student-teacher ratios, including the work of food preparation and supervising the children, activities and residences 24/7, close oversight was limited. As a result, discipline had to be strict, as it was in most other schools at the time. While there were, no doubt, cases of abuse, most of it was from older to younger students, as was typical for any boarding school of that period.
While it was understandably difficult for small children to be taken from their culture, language and family, most of the children at the schools did well enough and received a fair education. There are records and photos of happy teacher-student relationships, pleasant group outings, neat classrooms, and even hockey teams and other special activities. Many students went on to use their newly learned skills and education to help their reserves and First Nations groups, or to enhance Canadian culture. Yes, in hindsight, the rationale for the schools was partially wrong, and mistakes were doubtless made. As in any culture, some children were emotionally damaged, and the whole program could probably have been improved in numerous ways.
The former, negative narrative was developed over decades as "survivors" stories were collected and sometimes perhaps embellished with hearsay and rumours. The TRC was founded to collect and publish the history and native experiences, to put together a case for government and church apologies and reparation payments. With compensation on the table, more stories came out and the news media started to focus on the horror stories; the tragic abuse and deaths, culminating in the hyped-up reports of "unmarked graves" at various school sites in the summer of 2021.
The reader will notice that these two stories are very different. It stretches credibility to claim that both are entirely true, but both are probably mostly true, albeit biased in very different ways. While the latter story may be somewhat sugar coated, yet to publicly present only the former narrative puts a very negative spin on the residential schools issue. The fact that this is the only story the public constantly sees and hears about skews the truth and makes true reconciliation elusive.
I am not an expert on this subject but have read enough to know that the standard narrative is not the whole truth and that it is being used beyond reason - at least from my (admittedly biased) perspective - to push for repentance, apologies and reparation payments. The full truth and true reconciliation will only occur when all involved act and speak honestly. Clearly, a more balanced picture is needed, one combining both of these stories, comparing the different perspectives, while deleting any false or badly unbalanced aspects.
The following are some questions I'd like to see answered in getting to the full truth and then to move on from the issue, so that native and non-native Canadians can live together without this hanging over their relationships forever.
1. First, what was the alternative? Everyone involved at the time wanted native children to be educated. Even in hindsight, how else could that have happened within the limitations and available resources of that century? How else could thousands of children from several hundred tribes and reserves have been educated? Who else would be willing to staff the schools if not nuns and other dedicated Christians, working far from their homes for a pittance? Where would the money to make the schools themselves, and the children's care better have come from? Which medical professionals would have been ready to live in the schools or nearby for improved medical care? How could children have been schooled in their various mother tongues? Even if the intent was colonialist and seems racist from our current perspective, at the time the residential school system seemed the best approach to address the native education problem.
2. Overall, what was the outcome for most native children: those who attended these schools compared to those who stayed home on the reserves, with or without schooling there? Have there been any statistical comparisons of how those children subsequently fared as adults in the Canadian milieu? Less than half of native children attended the residential schools, so there should be a large control group to provide such comparisons.
Did those on reserves learn useful skills for living in Canada? Did they suffer less sickness, abuse and death than in the schools? Comparing them as adults today, can any trends be seen in personality, mental health, and other measures of well-being? Surely some of this data must exist, but have we seen it presented in an unbiased fashion? Not all residential school reports are negative. Many children did well, learned a lot and graduated as educated youth. Many staff and teachers treated them well, within the constraints of a formal school. The whole program was not entirely wrong as implied by the narrative. (See below for various references about this.)
3. How many children actually died at the residential schools and what did they die of? Compare that with deaths back on the reserves, or even with deaths in white communities of the same areas. Recall that tuberculosis was rampant on the reserves (and many other places) along with influenza (the 2019 Spanish Flu epidemic, for example). Then there were pertussis, diphtheria, measles and various other childhood diseases, each taking its toll without vaccines or antibiotics available back then. And of course, accidents and misadventure were more common as well, with fewer safety regulations in force. Children dying was altogether too common everywhere a century or more ago. Indeed, even in settler communities, 20% of children might have died before reaching adulthood.
4. How many children's bodies have actually been found in the "unmarked graves" so often reported by the media? Not how many disturbed plots of ground there seem to be, but actual exhumed skeletal remains? As I write this, I have heard of none! There is lots of talk and speculation, but no actual diggings. Not all of the graves we actually know about may have children from the schools. Adults must have died at the schools, as well, and some of the cemeteries were also used by the local communities. Moreover, one wonders, if it is not wrong to ask, how many "unmarked graves" there are for children on the reserves? Should we take a look?
Were the graves truly unmarked, or just minimally marked and the markers lost over time? Many cemeteries across Canada have lost grave markers, and some have even been bulldozed for development! In any case, it is likely that almost all of the children buried near residential schools died from diseases rather than any mistreatment or violence at the school. We won't know until we do forensic digging or delve through whatever records still exist.
5. What other institution, active over 120 years, that kept 150,000 children 24/7 does not have a history of abuse, as viewed from the 21st century? There has been child abuse in every arena of life, and some things we call abuse today were normal disciplinary policy or children's treatment back then. Every institution has its horror stories, from English boarding schools, cadet training camps, boy scouts, hazing of college students, etc. Was the apparent mistreatment of children in residential schools worse than that seen in those venues? Or how about the legendary stories of mistreatment by nuns in Catholic schools in the last century? Any setting having children of varying ages together with few adults around the clock is going to yield abuse, especially in the years before child abuse was widely recognized and preventive measures put in place. Yet you never hear of reparations for all children who participated in those institutions.
6. Which other country has had no historical problems dealing with its indigenous populations? Canada did not have widespread "Indian wars" like in the USA. Many countries had true genocides (mass killings) in their past, which they generally downplay. I expect that Canada's record of treating native peoples, although not stellar by 21st century values, would look better than most colonizing powers, or even many modern countries. Yet the negative media hype about our residential schools has given Canada a black eye internationally, even with China; hardly a bastion of human rights. However bad the residential school experience may have been for some, it pales in comparison with past events in other countries: six million purposely killed and burned or dumped in truly mass graves in Germany in the early 1940's; millions killed in Soviet Russia from 1920 to 1950; tens of millions dead in Mao's long march and great leap forward; the killing fields of Cambodia; the massacre of Armenians in Turkey; the Rwandan massacre; the list goes on. And all of this came after the colonial period of mass slaughters, forced slavery, tribal conflicts, slavery, etc. - atrocities stretching back into pre-history. Even our peaceful First Nations are not without guilt: the Mohawks wiped out some of the Huron tribes and killed many a settler. No people or nation is innocent in this regard!
7. Are we unfairly judging the 19th century based on 21st century values, mores and cultural norms? Regarding disciplinary measures, nutritional standards, health care, class size, human rights, family structure, pedagogy, expectations on children, social welfare, communications, and so on, the norms in past centuries were very different from those today. It is chronological arrogance and grossly unfair to judge people, processes and decisions from a hundred years ago by today's standards! How much of the supposed mistreatment being remembered is largely a projection of today's views onto the past? What aspects of today's Canadian culture will be severely judged a hundred years from now?
8. How much of the negative reporting can be counted as objective truth? Any five-year-old taken from her family to an alien culture and people, given a scrubbing and haircut, unfamiliar clothing, a set of rules and procedures in an unknown language, with strict discipline, would surely feel emotionally traumatized, however well the school staff tried to make her happy. Such treatment would loom large in her memory and, when discussed with other children, would surely grow in scope and import. Later in life, those memories would serve well as the presumed cause for her ongoing problems in life, and would be recalled when solicited, to bolster the narrative and justify payments from the government. I'm not saying that many native children were not ill-treated, but many settler children also bear scars of childhood abuse and emotional trauma, without blaming Canada and the entire school system, or expecting compensation.
9. Does repeating and promoting the standard narrative today resolve the issue for our native peoples? Has it led to proper reconciliation? Hyping incomplete stories, sensationalizing poor treatment with rumours and embellishments to gain attention is surely not the way to deal with past issues. Terms like "genocide", "settlers", "mass graves", "survivors", "murder", "victim", etc. are not conducive to reasonable discussion, freely given empathy, and mutual efforts to assess and sort through the past and its effects on the present. The churches involved in the residential schools are unfairly demonized despite their best intentions at the time, as well as various recent apologies, compensations and public repentances, including now, a visit from the Pope. Meanwhile, several churches have been burned down or vandalized, alternative reports are ignored, and little evidence has been provided for the worst parts of the standard public narrative. This is not the way to resolve the deep-seated and complex issues about the residential schools.
One could go on asking questions, but the above is summarized as follows. The residential schools were well intended, even though in hindsight, apparently misguided, poorly done, and pushed too far. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the subsequent public narrative are one sided, painting an incomplete and somewhat unfair picture of the past. Many native children had good experiences, learned a lot and came out ahead. Not all were abused, damaged and scarred for life. Most of the staff did their best in difficult circumstances with what they had, based on the standards of the day. The current narrative is unhelpful in that most people can see how skewed it is and may therefore, be inclined to take it with quiet cynicism, rather than full acceptance. Without looking into these matters using hard evidence in addition to the usual verbal reports of childhood memories, we will never clarify and sort out the full truth about the residential schools.
Canadians today are surely not to blame for what happened 100 years ago, and yet, we are now trying to make amends and work with the First Nations to improve their circumstances. When he expanded the residential school program, John A. McDonald (Canada's first Prime Minister, back in 1870's) was trying to do the right thing, based on what was then known and within the resource limitations of the day. But what "the right thing" looks like is hard to sort out even now in the current melee of media hype, biased presentations, expanding grievances, shifting reserve realities, and other aspects of the issues surrounding Canada's First Nations peoples. Indeed, all recent attempts to sort out and come to agreeable terms with Canada's indigenous peoples have been mired in confusion and disagreement. No government seems to have a plan that First Nations will accept and support.
One final clarification must be made. This piece - or rant, if you prefer - is only about the residential schools issue. It is not intended to reflect my views about First Nations in Canada or indigenous peoples in general. There is no doubt that when Europeans arrived in what is now Canada, the result was devastation for the indigenous population, primarily through diseases unknowingly transmitted, but also through mistreatment and abuse. Then there were the treaties which carved more and more of the native lands away, and which were often not implemented by the settlers. Add in the cheating and swindles that went on, and the racist presumption of white cultural superiority, as well as the technological disadvantages, and the native peoples of Canada have had very poor treatment over the centuries.
Fortunately, however, this has largely shifted in recent decades as First Nations have come into their own, rebuilding much of their varied cultures, and now flexing their political power to assert their rights and wishes. But many cultural scars and serious problems on and off the reserves remain unresolved. The history of the residential school system probably contributed to both sides of this journey but adopting only the negative narrative is not fair and will probably not help the native peoples in the long run. Yes, Canada like many countries, has a problem dealing with its indigenous peoples. There are valid historical and ongoing grievances that need to be addressed, and no comprehensive solution is in sight. But there will not be a just and settled reconciliation until the full truth is available and all sides behave fairly and honestly with each other.
This piece reflects my current opinion, based on incomplete readings and partial data, so I doubtless have some errors and am likely in need of correction in some details. My writings are not entirely original, of course. I have been greatly educated and aided by various pieces written by brave souls questioning the standard media narrative, mostly through smaller publications. Here are some of the ones I have collected for further reading and edification:
http://www.edmontonchina.ca/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=756776
https://c2cjournal.ca/2018/04/letters-to-senator-beyak-uncensored/
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/12/15/tomson-highway-residential-schools_n_8787638.html
https://fcpp.org/2003/05/01/residential-schools-story-more-complicated/
https://tnc.news/2022/01/19/an-honest-conversation-about-canadas-residential-school-system/
https://www.dorchesterreview.ca/blogs/news/the-false-narrative-of-irs-burials
