Stories

Truth, Reconciliation, and Aboriginal Residential Schools: A Reply to Michael Ignatieff

Rodney A. Clifton
June 19, 2009
Late in the autumn of 2007, approximately 87,000 aboriginal people who attended the 130 residential schools, many of which were administered by the Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, Roman Catholic, and United churches, began receiving payments from the Federal government. For these people, the payment is $10,000 for their first year, or part of it, in residence, and $3,000 for each subsequent year, or part it.
Stories

Truth, Reconciliation, and Aboriginal Residential Schools: A Reply to Michael Ignatieff

Rodney A. Clifton
June 19, 2009
Late in the autumn of 2007, approximately 87,000 aboriginal people who attended the 130 residential schools, many of which were administered by the Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, Roman Catholic, and United churches, began receiving payments from the Federal government. For these people, the payment is $10,000 for their first year, or part of it, in residence, and $3,000 for each subsequent year, or part it.
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

Late in the autumn of 2007, approximately 87,000 aboriginal people who attended the 130 residential schools, many of which were administered by the Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, Roman Catholic, and United churches, began receiving payments from the Federal government. For these people, the payment is $10,000 for their first year, or part of it, in residence, and $3,000 for each subsequent year, or part it. It is strange but at the same time a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” about these schools is touring the country conducting hearings. The irony is that if people receive money for their “terrible experiences”, doesn’t that mean the truth is already known?

Michael Ignatieff, the deputy leader of the Liberal Party, certainly thinks that he knows the truth. In an op-ed article published in the National Post (June 22, 2007), “Setting the Record Straight”, he argues that every aboriginal child who attended a residential school was damaged by the experience. Indeed, he specifically says: “The residential school system…was without question, the most dismaying betrayal of Canada’s first peoples in our history”; and “The worst legacy of the residential schools experience is that it poisoned the wells of faith in education among generations of aboriginal Canadians.”

In 1966-67 I spent a year as a supervisor in an Anglican residential school, Stringer Hall, in Inuvik, North West Territories, and I kept extensive notes about the residence, the students, and my experiences. Before that, I spent four months living at Old Sun School (named after a famous Chief), an Anglican residential school, on the Blackfoot (Siksika) Reserve in Southern Alberta. Earlier, my wife (a Siksika) spent 10 years at Old Sun (full disclosure: now worth $37,000 in compensation), and even earlier, her parents attended the same school for 8 years. In addition, I completed part of my own high school education in a United Church residential school.

Overall, I interpret these experiences as suggesting that both positive and negative things happened in residential schools. In fact, when my wife is asked about her school experience, she says that Old Sun was a “private Anglican school”, and she still exchanges Christmas cards with some teachers who are, after more than forty years, personal friends.

Nevertheless, we now know that some people working in residential schools brutalized the children under their care. Some children, in fact, suffered unspeakable mistreatment at the hands of adults who were charged with caring for them. For this important reason, all people, both aboriginal and non-aboriginal, who abused children should be charged, and if they are convicted, they should pay for their crimes. Additionally, administrators from both the churches and the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs who covered-up these crimes should be charged, and if convicted, they should be punished as well.

Aboriginal residential schools were far from perfect, but so were most other schools. Many non-aboriginal children, for example, were strapped in their schools; some, unfortunately, were also sexually abused. Attempts have been made to charge and convict pedophiles, but little attempt has been made—so far at least—to charge and convict teachers and administrators who gave corporal punishment to students in non-aboriginal schools. Surprisingly, aboriginal people are being compensated, in part, for receiving corporal punishment which, at the time, was a standard—but brutal—practice in virtually all schools.

In this context, were aboriginal residential schools the unmitigated disasters as stated by Michael Ignatieff? Frankly, I doubt that his op-ed article has “set the record straight.”

Most importantly, the great majority of children who went to residential school learned how to read, write, and calculate. Many of them also learned other skills necessary for living in a modern society—the principles of democracy and common law, for example—which would help them participate more fully in both aboriginal and Canadian societies. In fact, today many of the aboriginal leaders, including Phil Fontaine, National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, learned some of their negotiating and administrative skills in residential schools. Looking at their success, we know that they learned these lessons well.

Some children had serious illnesses—TB, chronic ear infections, and ruptured appendices, for example—that were diagnosed and treated only because they attended residential schools. In fact, a number of the children arrived at Stringer Hall with seriously infected bug bites in their scalps that required having their hair washed, cut, and topical antibiotics applied. Some children arrived with serious ear infections, and residential supervisors often provided the appropriate medical treatment. Importantly, a young nurse was on staff at Stringer Hall, and doctors and dentists were on call to treat children, something that probably would not have happened if they were out on the land hunting and fishing with their parents.

Furthermore, in many residential schools, some administrators and supervisors were aboriginal. At Stringer Hall, for example, two of the six residential supervisors were young Inuit women who, contrary to the common myth, spoke to the children in their mother-tongue. A number of the other employees, both aboriginal and non-aboriginal, also spoke aboriginal languages and used aboriginal gestures in communicating with the children.

In addition, not all the children who attended residential schools were aboriginal. At Stringer Hall, about 12 percent of the 280 students were non-aboriginal, the children of merchants, missionaries, and trappers from tiny settlements where no schools existed. Of course, it would be almost impossible to build schools and find teachers for these very small settlements and especially for hunting and fishing camps where one or two families lived. For many of these children, there were no reasonable alternatives except for residential schools.

Finally, it must be noted that some aboriginal children had been physically and sexually abused in their home communities, and not surprisingly, residential schools saved some of them from continued abuse. Unfortunately, this type of abuse happened in both aboriginal and non-aboriginal communities, but it is now considered politically incorrect to say that sexual abuse happened among aboriginal people while fully admitting that it happened among non-aboriginal people.

Even though this type of information has been available to those who want to find it, Michael Ignatieff did not look very hard before he said: “Another illusion is that the intentions behind the schools were good.” Contrary to his claim, it seems to me that many of the people who worked in residential schools—but certainly not all of them—wanted to help children receive the education that was necessary to survive in the modern world. Most of these people, of course, also wanted to fulfill the evangelistic calling of committed Christians: to help the poor, tend to the weak, and treat the sick.

As a young student, Michael Ignatieff attended Upper Canada College, an exclusive private residential school in Toronto, and he probably did not know that employees in aboriginal residential schools received very little pay and many sleepless nights for their labour. In Stringer Hall, for example, I was responsible for 85 senior boys, between the ages of 12 and 21, for 22 hours a day, 6 days a week. At that time, the work was difficult even for a strong twenty-one year-old. Today, the reward for former residential school employees is denigration in the national press by people like Mr. Ignatieff and, even more surprisingly, in the churches they served. If other residential school employees are similar to me, they are hesitant to talk in public about their residential school experiences.

In fact, given the hostile climate that now exists, most former school employees—both non-aboriginal and aboriginal—will not acknowledge that they worked in residential schools, and very few will appear before the Commission. They already know that the “truth” has been pre-determined, as Michael Ignatieff says, and “reconciliation” is, in fact, financial compensation, which is now being distributed, but only to those students who were aboriginal and not to non-aboriginal students. Certainly, few people will praise residential schools, the administrators, the teachers, or the residential supervisors. Few people, including my wife, who received compensation, will publicly say that their residential school experiences were positive. If they did, morally, they would need to return their compensation cheques to the Canadian people.

In this convoluted interpretation of our history, it is obviously that justice requires truth, but it also requires full-disclosure, which unfortunately, neither Canadians nor the Truth and Reconciliation Commissioners will likely hear.

Love C2C Journal? Here's how you can help us grow.

More for you

Collaboration No More: How the Powell River, B.C. Name-Change Debate Turned Nasty

Among the fundamental freedoms guaranteed to all Canadians is the “freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression.” The liberty to speak one’s mind and engage in public discussions forms the very foundation of Canada’s democracy. And it is under attack. Investigating a prolonged and often vicious debate in Powell River, B.C. – which includes the denunciation of white British Columbians as “subhuman” – Frances Widdowson reveals how residents have had their basic freedoms denied by a group of well-placed “reconciliation” activists determined to change the name of their city regardless of public opinion or historical fact. As Widdowson discovers, expressing oneself in Powell River has become a risky business.

Robbing Western Canada’s Farmers to Pay for Eastern Canada’s Car Batteries

If one were to rank contenders in the global trade wars, Canada would likely sit somewhere between pint-sized and pipsqueak. Then why would such a nation’s government choose frontal assault against the world’s biggest and most ruthless economic combatant, one wielding a range of weapons and tactics to organize a counter-attack? Yet this is just what the Justin Trudeau government has done in imposing massive import taxes on electric vehicles from China, writes Gwyn Morgan. And worse, Morgan notes, Trudeau & Co. are sacrificing farmers from western Canada on an altar dedicated to eastern auto workers – while taxing those farmers to help pay for the vast subsidies needed to keep the auto workers employed.

If Women Make Better Surgeons, Do Men Make Better Firefighters?
In Praise of Tonic Masculinity, Part III

In a 2017 TV interview, then British Prime Minister Theresa May and her husband Philip caused a collective gasp when they admitted to splitting up “boy jobs” and “girl jobs” around the house. May went on to win the subsequent election, so her frankness did her career no harm. But the idea that tasks or occupations might be divided on the basis of sex can still cause public apoplexy. Unless, of course, the evidence shows women are better at something than men. In Part III of a special series on “tonic masculinity”, Peter Shawn Taylor looks at recent research suggesting female surgeons outperform male surgeons, and wonders what that means for life outside the operating room. (Part I can be read here and Part II can be read here.)

More from this author

They Would Call Me a “Denier” – Let Me Explain what I Believe about Residential Schools in Canada

In our largely “post-truth” society, the validity of a given statement is increasingly assessed based on who is making it. There are even those who believe that only some should be allowed to say certain things – while others should be scorned or even imprisoned for uttering the same words. This increasingly describes the discursive landscape concerning Canada’s Indian Residential Schools and whether Indigenous children disappeared from and/or were murdered there. Drawing on his lived experience as a onetime residential school employee, on his long academic record and, not least, on his personal courage in the face of those who wish to criminalize “denialism”, Rodney Clifton presents a humbly argued plea for Canadians to judge their country’s residential school record according to the truth – the actual, factual truth.

Rodney Clifton pictures standing in the snow with a large group of Inuit children

My Life in Two Indian Residential Schools

Canadians seem to think they know all about their country’s discredited Indian Residential Schools. They’ve certainly been made painfully aware by governments, Indigenous organizations and leaders, academia and the mainstream media of the official narrative – a litany of sheer horror. But what was life at and around these schools actually like? At a time when “lived experience” is all the rage, the voices of the dwindling surviving number of the many thousands of people who once worked in them have fallen silent. Rodney Clifton is one, and his lived experience includes falling in love with and marrying a Siksika woman. In this clear-eyed and deeply humane account, Clifton bares his heart in recounting his times working as a young man in the residential schools system in Alberta and the Far North.

Some Other Truths About Indian Residential Schools

The Indian Residential Schools Truth and Reconciliation Commission will release its Final Report next month. Among its findings and recommendations is expected to be a call for the history of residential schools to be taught in Canadian schools. But will the Commission, and the curricula based on its findings, tell the whole truth? Or just the parts that fit the current “genocide” narrative? Rodney Clifton worked in those schools (and his wife went to one), and his experience and research offers four key points that ought to be part of the historical record. First, only a small minority of Aboriginal children attended residential schools. Second, non-Aboriginal children also attended residential schools in significant numbers. Third, Aboriginal children were not systematically punished for speaking their native languages. And fourth, no one knows how many Aboriginal residential school students died of abuse and neglect. Acknowledging those facts might actually advance the cause of truth and reconciliation.

Share This Story

Donate

Subscribe to the C2C Weekly
It's Free!

* indicates required
Interests
By providing your email you consent to receive news and updates from C2C Journal. You may unsubscribe at any time.