← Front Burner
Front Burner
What’s fuelling residential school denialism?
00:32:14
<p><em>A warning: this episode discusses the trauma and harms surrounding Canada's residential school history. Please listen with care. </em></p><p><br></p><p>So much of what we know about Canada's residential schools has been established as fact. More than 150 thousand Indigenous children and youth were taken from their families and required to attend these schools. Several thousand students died.</p><p><br></p><p>Although all of this is well-documented and verified, there has been a growing discourse calling those facts into question. Researchers, commentators and some politicians have really zeroed in on the 2021 discovery of suspected graves near a former residential school in Kamloops.</p><p><br></p><p>Academics and Indigenous leaders call this residential school denialism — similar to Holocaust denialism. Many of them have called for adding the denial of residential school history to the Criminal Code as a form of hate speech.</p><p><br></p><p>Earlier this month, a Nunav...
Loading summary
Transcript68 lines
- [00:01]
A
If you're listening to this, I already know you have great taste in podcasts, but maybe if you're like me, you still wonder if you're missing out on the best stuff. That's where the Sounds Good newsletter can help you out every other Thursday. The audio files at CBC Podcast highlight one must hear show and lots of
- [00:17]
B
other new and noteworthy titles.
- [00:19]
A
They do conversation starters, they do hidden gems, and they also tell you about
- [00:24]
B
the stuff they love that they didn't make. Go to CBC CA Soundsgood to subscribe.
- [00:32]
A
This is a CBC podcast.
- [00:37]
C
Hi, I'm Jason Marcus, off in for Jamie. So much of what we know about Canada's residential schools has been established as fact through the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Decades worth of survivor testimony and research, the systematic government sponsored attempt to destroy Indigenous culture and language. More than 150,000 indigenous children and youth were taken from their families and required to attend these schools. Several thousand students died. Although all of this is well documented and verified, in recent years there has been a growing discourse calling those facts into question. Researchers, commentators and some politicians have really zeroed in on the 2021 discovery of suspected graves near a former residential school in Kamloops. They take some imprecise claims about what was found, along with the lack of excavation so far, and use that as proof to argue that the whole official narrative is wrong. Academics and Indigenous leaders call this residential school denialism, similar to Holocaust denial. Many of them have called for condoning or denying residential school history to be added to the criminal code as a form of hate speech. Earlier this month a a Nunavut Senator brought forward a Motion to amend Bill C9, the Liberals anti hate bill, to do just that, but the Senate voted it down. Sean Carleton and Ngan Sinclair have been tracking the rise of residential school denialism in Canada. They both teach in the Indigenous Studies Department at the University of Manitoba and they have a book coming out on this issue in September. It's called Truth Before Confronting Residential School Denialism. Hey Sean, hi, thanks for having me. Hey Nagan Boju hello Negan. It's great to be with you. I'm usually on a power and politics panel with you, but nice to be on the other side of the microphone from you.
- [02:27]
A
It's great to be talking.
- [02:29]
C
Like I mentioned in the introduction, the Senate rejected the amendment to C9 that would have criminalized residential school denialism. Pierre Moreau he's the Kearney government's point man in the Senate. He argued that there wasn't legal analysis or consultation before the amendment was introduced. But despite that there continues to be this big push for legislation to criminalize residential school denialism. Sean, is that something you would support?
- [02:51]
B
Well, I mean, I think we need to start actually with why the Liberal government decided not to include residential school denialism in a bill that is about commenting hate and racism, knowing how severe residential school denialism has become despite their know, efforts to say that they want to challenge it, didn't include it in the bill in the first place. And I mean I know that there is a lot of discussion about whether this is the right move and a lot of people will say it's an infringement on free speech. And Negon and I have actually explained how criminalization of Holocaust denialism, for example, hasn't necessarily been the most effective way to, of challenging it. So there's lots of different arguments. But I think what is important in this conversation is that currently in 2022 the conservatives introduced a private members bill that then got picked up by the Liberals to criminalize Holocaust denialism.
- [03:55]
C
Right.
- [03:55]
B
The willful downplay minimization of a genocide far away, a long time ago. And this has created a situation where the willful downplay denial minimization of a genocide much more recently in our own backyard is fine. And this has created I think, a legal imbalance that many indigenous leaders and legal experts have pointed out and called for the Canadian government to address. And I think that's, you know, in short, why we're here.
- [04:26]
C
Ngan, what are your thoughts on the question of whether to criminalize residential school denialism?
- [04:31]
A
What Sean said is absolutely correct. There's a legal imbalance here. And I think on top of that it's also created a situation in which there's more division. And so the federal government, by trying to pass legislation that's trying to reduce hate and division and try to perhaps deal with individuals in this country trying to wedge issues between Canadians and spread misinformation, are now completely scot free. They have no behind the blanket of what they claim to be free speech, which in fact is not really free speech because what it is is it's speech that's intended for harm. It's not intended for reasonable dialogue. Racism is never reasonable dialogue. Nor is spreading false narratives based in absolute nonsense.
- [05:18]
C
So the proposed amendment, and there was also an NDP mp, Leah Ghazan, who tried to bring this forth in the past. Survivors and their families deserve to heal from this intergenerational tragedy and, and be
- [05:32]
B
free from violent hate.
- [05:34]
C
And we cannot allow their safety and well being to be put further at risk.
- [05:39]
A
All parliamentarians must stand firm against all
- [05:42]
C
forms of damaging hate speech, including the denial of the tragedy of the residential schools in Canada. The proposal would be to make it a criminal code to willfully promote hatred against indigenous people by condoning, denying or downplaying the Indian residential school system. To give us a sense, Sean, can you give an example of what might amount to hate speech under this definition?
- [06:07]
B
Sure. Well, let me start with what won't qualify. We're not talking about having a conversation at your dinner table or a conversation of colleagues trying to understand particular issues. Really what's going on, if you read the language of the amendment, is the willful promotion of the downplay of the minimization, the attempt to cause harm. And what would qualify? Well, the creation of, you know, self published books or conspiratorial documentaries that are really propaganda, right? That are attempts to cast all survivors as liars, as untrustworthy. The people that are are deliberately willfully creating this material, benefiting from it, profiting from it, monetizing misinformation, using it for their own political gain. Just like the folks are engaging in holocaust denialism.
- [07:01]
C
There is the issue that we have hate speech laws that have been around for decades. Do those not cover it off?
- [07:07]
A
Nagan I think if we lived in a society in which we embedded a sense of respect and responsibility to indigenous peoples, we may have laws that are broad based, that may deal with these very specific issues in which indigenous peoples are targeted. But unfortunately we don't live in that situation. We don't live in that society. And for such a long period of history in virtually every single corner of this country, the normalization of hating indigenous peoples, perhaps we've seen this the most evident in government, in the justice system, in the schools that we exist within. And so we really have to take a targeted approach as opposed to a broad based approach and sort of trust the broad span of laws which as we can see, protect one group of people very, very well or a few groups of people, but do a terrible job protecting people who have been historically marginalized and continue to be now. Is criminalization the only remedy? And I think that that's the real question here. And I think that, you know, desperate times call for desperate measures. And I think many of those who are seeking criminalization have for decades. And think about my father being one, the former head of the commissioner toward Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Marie Sinclair, and also some of the many different individuals who have been in the education system for decades upon decades upon decades upon decades have said, let's do this through Education, let's do this through kindness. We set up a whole commission for six years to talk about the issue and then created 94 calls to action in a peaceful, just, institutional fashion to try to deal with the issue of the chronic ignorance, the chronic situation involving Indigenous peoples who are treated as deficient and Canadians that are treated as superior. And we have a real problem in the society. And that's. That is. That is part of every single part of our societies. I mentioned before, that doesn't seem to be doing it as much because we see this festering and this fostering of hatred towards Indigenous peoples that seems to be enduring. And people are dying in ERs, people are dying in the child welfare system and in the justice system and no one's being held to account. And as a result, I think individuals are growing impatient. They want the change to happen.
- [09:30]
C
So it's like almost a statement or as a measure?
- [09:33]
A
Well, it seems to be that some have reached that conclusion. I mean, we've written a book, so what are we saying? What we're saying is that we need more public dialogue, more conversation. And I have of the position that individuals who want to spread unreasonable, completely arbitrarily created information that poses as facts, and those who want to foster hatred based on ignorance and try to profit on misinformation, I don't think that's very reasonable. I think a reasonable dialogue can defeat that. However, others feel that we need to take more drastic steps and far be it for me to step in the way of that, because the society is a society is a society. And on top of that, you know, certainly people in the Jewish community have felt that their reasonable dialogue with those who profess hatred certainly is not a progressive way to go.
- [10:25]
B
I would add to that just, just quickly, as a historian. I mean, this is essentially how Canada's hate speech laws came into being in the first place. The rampant rise of neo Nazism, anti anti Semitism, you know, prompted a number of folks to feel that the limitation on that speech was justified in that, in that moment. I mean, the, the rise of, of anti Indigenous racism that we are seeing. People will say this is just mean things that people say on the Internet. That is not true. You know, Negan and I live in a city where there was a serial killer targeting indigenous women who was posting residential school denialism at the time of his murders. Put him away.
- [11:02]
A
Now, Jeremy Skibitsky, convicted of four counts of first degree murder for killing Morgan Harris, Mercedes Myron, Rebecca Cantois, and a fourth woman known as Buffalo Woman, identified by a jacket. This whole thing about
- [11:20]
C
racial purity.
- [11:21]
A
He explained he met the women outside homeless shelters, had sex and killed them in his apartment, thinking their lives were already wasted.
- [11:29]
B
Residential school monuments are being targeted with graffiti, racial slurs, Nazi iconography. You know, in British Columbia, where I'm originally from, you know, a guy drove his truck through a march of survivors yelling racist slurs at them. So I think, you know, this is to quote you back to yourself, Jason, we've reached this point where a number of different things need to be done and the law is only one tool, as Negan and I have argued, right? And we need to recognize also that, that actually Canada's hate speech laws, right, and haven't been very effective, actually. And many legal scholars argue that it's largely symbolic to actually get a prosecution on these issues. Like there have only been a handful, but it's still important to do because, you know, it signifies that Canada is a country that is committed to tolerance, compassion, mutual respect, and not hate and racism.
- [12:40]
C
So residential school denialists don't outright deny the existence of schools or even their documented harms necessarily. It's often about downplaying, challenging established facts and survivors accounts. Can you walk me through how this issue has evolved over the years, Sean?
- [12:54]
B
As Negan mentioned, off the top, residential school denialism is certainly on the rise, but. But it's not new. In fact, many of the arguments that denialists will try to use, it's well intentioned. It was a system of the past or of the times that we can't critique. Abuse is being over, is being exaggerated, deaths didn't happen, or they were natural. Many of these arguments have been used from the beginning of the system to justify its ongoing operation, to downplay or dismiss critiques by students or parents or community leaders.
- [13:31]
C
Arguments such as the system was well
- [13:33]
B
intentioned, that it was necessary, Indigenous people should be grateful for the education that was being provided. You know, Indigenous people are inferior and we're trying to uplift them. And you see a lot of that argument in the residential school denialist books and documentaries, right, that Canada the Good tried to help out Indigenous people. Mistakes maybe were made, but we need to move forward and realize how grateful Indigenous people should be. And that's really just putting, you know, a positive spin on a genocidal system. You know, I think we need to realize that, that the folks that are mostly engaging and creating deliberately this content have that agenda.
- [14:17]
A
The problem with dealing with many residential school denialists is it's like playing whack a mole. As soon as you Hit one, then two others pop up because it's seen as profitable and you can gain attention and eyeballs and then therefore profit, monetize that. We're always going to have individuals that want to profit on miseducation, on the fact that Canadians just generally don't know what happened in the schools. But there are increasingly more and more, if you go to any school these days, one of the most popular days at that school is Orange Shirt day where students talk about it, they talk about what it means, but also most importantly what they can do about it. And so I think this is going to perhaps be at a moment of an apex at some point in the near future. And then as younger people take over there is a, a fluency about not just indigenous history, but Canadian history because that's what residential school history is, it's Canadian history that young people understand this more than ever and they just simply won't tolerate people who want to say that there's fire in a theater when there's no fire. They just won't tolerate it.
- [15:37]
C
Imagine you've been charged with a crime and the only witness pointing the finger at you isn't even human.
- [15:44]
A
I remember thinking, are you serious?
- [15:47]
C
What is this thing? It's something artificial created by a mysterious Canadian and it's coming for all of us.
- [15:55]
A
A life defining technology crime as we
- [16:00]
C
know it will never be the same. I'm like, oh my God, he's lying. From CBC's Uncover the Expert Witness Listen
- [16:07]
A
ad free on Amazon Music
- [16:12]
C
So let's talk about who else is involved with this. So we've seen in recent years this group of about two dozen or so, maybe more retired academics, lawyers, writers who are organizing around this issue. It generates skepticism about Canada's residential school history. Frances Widdowson, a former professor of economics, justice and policy studies at Calgary's Mount Royal University, appears to be a central figure in all this. She understands her beliefs around residential schools, for example, that children benefited from the education there to be the true account of what happened. And she suggested that residential school survivors have misremembered their experiences. Can you tell me more about the people behind this movement?
- [16:49]
B
Well, I mean I think what we need to understand, and you referenced this, is that this is actually a very small group. You know, they've self acknowledged that it's a handful of folks organized, not more than about 20 in an email group that talk about how to develop talking points to challenge particular residential school stories. And then they, they create that content, they develop it, they push it out on right Wing media and it gets boosted on online. You know, one of the things I always argue is that residential school denialism is getting louder. It's not necessarily growing in the sense that it's always still the same handful of folks. And in fact it's important to point out that many of these people were promoting anti indigenous ideas before their cause was residential schools. Many of the folks, for example, one of Stephen Harper's former advisors, Tom Flanagan, Thomas Flanagan, as part of the Calgary School, has been developing anti indigenous discourse about tax policy and other kinds of issues before they've just now focused on residential schooling. This is why Negan and I always talk about we need to understand the strategy, not just the substance of residential school denialism. In fact, if we are stuck in debating the substance, their ideas, we've already lost because they try and entrap you. Right. As if it's a reasonable debate. As if it's a reasonable discussion. Just like Holocaust denialism, if you're debating whether Zilcon B was used in gas chambers or not, you've already become entrapped in the web of Holocaust denialism.
- [18:33]
C
Well, I'm not, I'm not indigenous, I am Jewish. And even hearing you talk about cyclone gas like there's, there's a resonance to
- [18:42]
B
it, of course, I mean it's, you know, you know, this is the thing is, is that the, the same, they're using deliberately the same tax of Holocaust denialism? What does this sound like? Was it 6 million Jews that died or was it 3 or maybe 2? How can we really trust survivors a testimony about the mass execution techniques if they survived? And they're trying to appeal to people who either already hate indigenous people or are fearful that reconciliation is going to take something away from them. And so I think, you know, the more we understand the strategy of residential school denialism, the better we can intervene and find ways to make sure that we don't missed our opportunity to make progress on truth and reconciliation.
- [19:27]
A
There's one strategy that Sean, that list of strategies we might have missed out on and it's, you know, and I spend a lot of time with Holocaust survivors and if you talk, talk to Holocaust survivors, they would often say, you know, like the many of the relationships I created in, well, being interned, I still have some of those relationships and I still have individuals that I know that I talk to, that I care about. Nobody would ever use that as the basis for saying the Holocaust was good. But it is amazing how many residential school denialists will say, this person who spoke about making a Friend, this person who, who spoke about learning a skill, this person who spoke about having a good day means the whole system was fine. Everything was fine. And it is the most absurd, nonsensical, unreasonable argument in bad faith you could ever make about residential schools.
- [20:31]
C
Let's unpack what's become the root in the last five years or so of the arguments of residential school denialism. Five years ago now, tkumloops to Suepmah, the first nation made a pretty definitive statement, though they later soften their language.
- [20:45]
A
They say this in this media release
- [20:48]
B
telling us that they hired a specialist
- [20:50]
A
in ground penetrating radar who carried out
- [20:52]
B
this survey of the site. And they say that those missing children were as young as three years old,
- [20:57]
A
and that to their knowledge, these deaths
- [20:59]
C
were undocumented up until a period of national grieving followed. Today, some of the children who were
- [21:06]
B
found in Kamloops and who have yet to be found in other places across the country would have been grandparents or great grandparents. They would have been elders, knowledge keepers, and community leaders. They are not, and that is the fault of Canada.
- [21:29]
A
In Brantford, mourners placed 215 pairs of shoes on the steps of Canada's oldest residential school, a similar site outside a catholic church church in Montreal, the community there marching for all indigenous kids who never returned home.
- [21:43]
C
Hundreds of millions of dollars have gone from government money toward different first nations across the country to search for missing victims at residential schools there. The first statement issued by the Kenloose first nation about the grave sites was done in more certainty, but then the explanation became more ambiguous later on. Sean, can you walk us through that? Sure.
- [22:04]
B
Well, I mean, I think the first thing that we need to start with is actually that, you know, for a lot of Canadians, this came out of nowhere. But, you know, the truth and Reconciliation commission had a whole volume, volume 4, on unmarked burials and missing children, and calls to action 71 to 76 address the need for more work to be done on learning more about deaths and missing children in residential schools because government and churches still did not give all the documents to the trc. Right. And so Kamloops was one of the nations doing this work. They already knew that more than 50 children died at that school, and they were using different forms of technology, including ground penetrating radar, to examine sites of interest. And what they did is they combined their oral history with archival information and GPR technology. And their preliminary announcement was that they had confirmed that there were these additional deaths. And what they were trying to do is, I mean, even the GPR technologist, right, who did that survey explained that GPR can't determine that there are graves or bodies, but with additional information, slights of interest can be confirmed. The problem is that this is confusing and I think a lot of folks, Indigenous, non Indigenous, in the media, in politics, didn't understand, including myself as a historian, what was being discussed. And denialists saw an opportunity in that ambiguity. And so what has happened in the last number of years is that as Indigenous people are trying to learn more about deaths and, and missing children in these institutions, denialists are trying to hive off support. They're trying to create a backlash narrative to distract people away from the fact that, for example, in Ontario, the coroner launched an investigation to get more access to records from church and state and confirmed an additional 220 deaths in that province that the TRC didn't report. That's not getting attention. What's getting attention is the mass grave conspiracy theory that a lot of these denialists have dined out on for five years and used to challenge and delegitimize Indigenous communities, denigrate Indigenous children on the Internet for money.
- [24:33]
C
Right.
- [24:34]
B
That's what's going on.
- [24:35]
C
I take your point, Sean, that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission had discussed this at length and this was known and unpacked and researched at length about, about unmarked burial sites, people who died there. But it wasn't until the discovery at Kamloops that we saw, you know, this large public outpouring of, of sorrow, of grief, of, you know, small children's shoes in memorial sites. And then seven weeks after that original statement by the First Nation came the archaeologist, as you were mentioning, Dr. Sarah Beaulieu, hired by the Nation to oversee the search, said, quote, with ground penetrating radar. We can never definitively say that they're, they are human remains until you excavate, which is why we need to pull back a little bit and say they are poor. Probable. What impact did, did the debate about that have?
- [25:24]
A
Let's be clear for just a minute here. And I think that this is where we get into the macabre element of the podcast or the discussion involving residential schools. Anyone who wants to see bodies and for as evidence that children died, were put into dire situations, tried to escape and were tragically perished, that they, the schools were chronically created as virt prisons and death traps. And that which you. Poor ventilation, poor food. The fact is that there was situations of dire harm in almost every single job that you did within the residential school, from farm work to housework to laundry. You know, and so like the whole idea that we're talking about bodies right now, is an evidence that there is a great issue of respect that's needed. When it talks about the issue of residential schools, I wonder sometimes when, what would it be like if you were a person who experienced a genocide and that you were asked to show us the bodies, show us the bodies in Rwanda, show us the bodies in Poland, show us the bodies in Bosnia, and, you know, how would you feel about that? And then how would your families feel about that? And then on top of that, if somebody said that those bodies didn't exist and they were just all made up because you're trying to make money, and how would that build into a nation? And so, you know, this whole idea, you know, anyone who wants to see bodies, a doesn't understand that science, what science is, is that when bodies are buried inappropriately, which undoubtedly was the case, you would have organic material that wouldn't just stay in a fixed location. It's going to take decades upon decades, up to a century, to be able to figure out through soil testing, because you want to treat that gravesite with the respect and dignity that it deserves. You can't just go in there with a bulldozer and just start, you know, ex. Like it's absurd just even talking about it, that we're going to go in there and sort of just start blasting away at the land and think that this is some sort of respectful process that's going to build a healthy relationship in the country. And so what I can say about the idea of searching for bodies is that I hope that we do so with a great deal of respect. I hope that there's a warning on this podcast that the fact that we're even talking about it and that it's a situation of distress for somebody like myself. When I would go to residential school events and I went to virtually a large segment, maybe more than almost anybody else, because of my father's role within the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Every single event put me into crisis. Every single event resulted in days and upon days of depression, of anxiety, of. Of great pain. Looking at photographs, looking at photographs of people who looked like my relatives, looked like those individuals who had experienced the schools that I loved and deeply admired. And then never mind the fact that I had to listen to testimonies. And in those testimonies, people wouldn't have made that up. The idea that anyone would have made that up is so egregious and so disrespectful, it can only be thought of as anyone who would say otherwise simply wasn't there? So the, the issues of bodies, if I could be so bold, is to say that this is the part of the dialogue around residential school denialism that is the most sensitive. Because what it does is it really gets to the heart of what I think is a real sickness in Canadian society and within the treatment of Indigenous people.
- [29:16]
C
The Globe Mail has reported last month that the Nation is scheduled to do a site excavation, some archaeological work. Nigan, what's the importance of that? Is that. Is that to quell the debate, or is it for the more broad pursuit of truth and continuing to do that work called on by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission?
- [29:37]
A
If there's anything that I. That is proven time and time again, it is that those who have been most impacted by Canada's aggressive, destructive, genocidal policies have been the first to step up, to talk about how we can move together positively. No excavation is being done in response to a denialist claim or to the ignorance of Canadians or the misinformation that Canadians have been fed for 150, you know, 130, 100, whatever it is, years. The reason that Indigenous communities are seeking excavations, and in whatever ways that that looks like, is because we have nephews, nieces, children, sons and daughters, and in my case, uncles and aunties, grandparents that have never been found that they went to those schools and no one ever knows what happened to them, or if we did know, we only know small shadows of what had happened to them. In order to move together, we have to understand that this is a situation all of us are going to have to deal with for the rest of our lives and probably for our generations to come. Lives. Because this is a blemish, a tragedy, a harm, a wound that all of us are carrying. And as a result, we all have a responsibility to take care of each other, to be kind and to be generous, because that's the only way that healing happens is through listening and through walking together, helping each other when we stumble and when we fall. And I think probably most of all is that, you know, we've got to build a lodge together, we've got to build a home together, we've got to build a nation together. And it's going to be done much more so through conversations like this than it will ever be through denying, you know, credentialed truth.
- [31:26]
C
To wrap up, Sean, this denial and these, this questioning of the established record, what impact do you think it's having on the relationship between Indigenous people and non Indigenous people more broadly in the country?
- [31:39]
B
Well, I think the goal of denialists is to try to shake public confidence in reconciliation generally. Right. And they're using residential schools as the wedge. And that would mean you see this questioning not of just residential school truths, but of land claims, of indigenous partnerships trying to dehumanize and discredit and delegitimize the work of reconciliation, of what Negon just said of the building of a lodge, a home, a future together. That's what is threatening. And I think that Canadians want to develop a stronger and better future that we can all be proud of. And reconciliation is an opportunity rather than a threat. And so I'm hopeful that, you know, we can learn not just the full history of residential schools, but also how people are trying to use denialism to challenge that so that we can move forward together, so that we can look towards the future with hope and optimism rather than distrust and hatred.
- [32:46]
C
Sean Nagan, thank you so much for this conversation.
- [32:49]
A
Miigwech, thanks.
- [32:50]
B
Thanks so much, Jason.
- [33:01]
C
That's all for today. I'm Jason Markusoff. Thanks for listening to frontburner.
- [33:16]
B
For more cbc podcasts, go to cbc ca podcasts.