John A. Macdonald Legacy Review

Share your story

• No Sir John A., no Canada

  by Tommy Cranmer , almost 5 years ago
  There would be no Canada without Sir John A. Macdonald. He nearly single-handedly brought this country together while bridging several major divides or chasms, such as linguistic, cultural and religious. Those were big problems back then and he helped the MPs from both sides come together and overcome their differences so this country could form. This is what reconciliation looks like.

  
  

  You should be ashamed for removing Sir John A.'s statue. Put him back in another prominent place so we can honour and thank him.

  
  

  
  

  There would be no Canada without Sir John A. Macdonald. He nearly single-handedly brought this country together while bridging several major divides or chasms, such as linguistic, cultural and religious. Those were big problems back then and he helped the MPs from both sides come together and overcome their differences so this country could form. This is what reconciliation looks like.

  
  

  You should be ashamed for removing Sir John A.'s statue. Put him back in another prominent place so we can honour and thank him.

  
  

  
  

• Let the truth be told................however shameful.........

  by Lord Redi, almost 5 years ago

  True nation building requires us to learn the true history of Canada and all it's peoples. Failure to do this continues to perpetuate a fractured Canadian identity laced with hurt on one side and racism on the other - a weaker Canada in a dangerous world. Patriotism requires all of us to face the moments of shame and the moments of pride in our collective history as one people to build a strong country each one of us is ready to die for.............let's take action to heal the hurt and harm done to our brothers and sisters, learn the true... Continue reading

  True nation building requires us to learn the true history of Canada and all it's peoples. Failure to do this continues to perpetuate a fractured Canadian identity laced with hurt on one side and racism on the other - a weaker Canada in a dangerous world. Patriotism requires all of us to face the moments of shame and the moments of pride in our collective history as one people to build a strong country each one of us is ready to die for.............let's take action to heal the hurt and harm done to our brothers and sisters, learn the true history without sanitizing and 'whitewashing' the past in our schools, and become the Canada we want to be............the time for apologies and denial is long past - take action now!

• We don't need to idolize murderers

  by Solidarity forever, almost 5 years ago
  No matter what good he did we have to come to terms with the extreme harm he brought to the indigenous population. He is directly responsible for acts of genocide enacted upon first nations. Theres no need for us to idolize a statue of him and be in denial of history. If it goes into a museum that's fine but not in public. Victoria Park is for EVERYONE, not just white people.

  No matter what good he did we have to come to terms with the extreme harm he brought to the indigenous population. He is directly responsible for acts of genocide enacted upon first nations. Theres no need for us to idolize a statue of him and be in denial of history. If it goes into a museum that's fine but not in public. Victoria Park is for EVERYONE, not just white people.

• History belongs in museums and books but not in statues

  by VJV, almost 5 years ago
  JA Macdonald statue was rightfully removed, and it should be placed in a museum for education purposes. A standalone statue does nothing but glorify an individual and doesn't present the complicated history behind them.

  
  

  Hitler did a lot of great for Germany too - but we'd be aghast to go to Germany today and see a statue of him smack in the middle of Berlin.

  Let's call a spade a spade and ensure the entire story behind our country's founding father is told - and that doesn't happen as a random statue in the middle of the city.

  
  

  JA Macdonald statue was rightfully removed, and it should be placed in a museum for education purposes. A standalone statue does nothing but glorify an individual and doesn't present the complicated history behind them.

  
  

  Hitler did a lot of great for Germany too - but we'd be aghast to go to Germany today and see a statue of him smack in the middle of Berlin.

  Let's call a spade a spade and ensure the entire story behind our country's founding father is told - and that doesn't happen as a random statue in the middle of the city.

  
  

• The New Iconoclasts

  by The Thinker, about 5 years ago

  In short, the Sir John A. McDonald statue should not have been removed.

  It should be placed back in its original spot, spruced up and highlighted as a great piece of our shared Canadian heritage. Every politician has policies with which at least some people disagree. This does not mean we should remove, destroy, or erase that history. The legacy of founding a country is the shared essence of who we are as citizens. To remove it is to essentially say that we are ashamed of those who formed a magnificent country. This is strange as many millions of people... Continue reading

  In short, the Sir John A. McDonald statue should not have been removed.

  It should be placed back in its original spot, spruced up and highlighted as a great piece of our shared Canadian heritage. Every politician has policies with which at least some people disagree. This does not mean we should remove, destroy, or erase that history. The legacy of founding a country is the shared essence of who we are as citizens. To remove it is to essentially say that we are ashamed of those who formed a magnificent country. This is strange as many millions of people continue to vote with their feet to come to this great country and revere it for many varied reasons. How can this be a country whose founder is to now reviled by a few in a small, small minority, and revered by so many more, and yet the small, small minority (who still wish for the protection and creature comforts that this country provides the basis of) will overrule the majority opinion that this country is essentially a wonderful place? It boggles the mind of a rational person, except for the fact that so many or the majority want to sit in silence and not suffer the verbal (and other) slings and arrows from this most vocal and voracious small, small minority.

  I do have a theory of why this is coming to pass. (Note that this theory has been stated by many others and is not my original idea). It is a modern-day iconoclastic episode (Iconoclast definition from Merriam-Webster: 1. a person who attacks settled beliefs or institutions;2. a person who destroys religious images or opposes their veneration. Entomology: Medieval Latin iconoclastes, from Middle Greek eikonoklastēs, literally, image destroyer, from Greekeikono- + klan to break) . Just as in the reformation of Europe, people wanted to replace one religion with a reformed religion. After that, the counter-reformation ensued as well against this reform. During this, many symbols or icons of these religions and past history were destroyed on purpose in an attempt to erase any knowledge, image, or structure of the specific religion and the culture which surrounded it. In the PRC, during the Cultural Revolution, an iconoclasm of public artwork (among many other things) took place. This also happened with ISIS in their expansion of territory throughout Syria and northern Iraq. Rutelli (2016) more eloquently describes this return of iconoclasm of ISIS. It is no wonder if this is what is happening that many would prefer to sit in silence or 'fold up their tents' 'and as silently steal away.' (Longsfellow H., The Day is Done)

  To appease vocal minority groups (and to better appreciate our history), more statues, more culture, and more discussion about history should occur. If there is one thing that this statue incident should reveal, it is that we need to be making a concerted effort to better memorialize citizens of our great country, for all their faults and failings (as you will find no citizen who someone, somewhere will not in them find fault). If we let mob rule occur where a few (2-10) people can damage civic property without charges for at least mischief, you are also letting the rule of law cat out of the bag. This is when chaos and anarchy can start. And once that ball starts rolling, the city will empty as those with the means will flee to rural or suburban areas away from the violence and property damage. I do hold out great hope for our city; however, to shrug this off as a tempest in a teapot may be to underestimate the gravity of what might unfold slowly over time as the city center continues to decay.

  With all this said, I have given my opinion. Put the statue back in its original place, build many more statues, and uphold the rule of law with every citizen. I do not envy the position of civil servants or civic leaders as these are muddy waters through which to wade; however, it is the responsibility for which you elected to take on.

  I wish you, the elected officials and those in the general public, well in your deliberations upon the matter.

  Reference:

  Rutelli F. (2016) The Return of Iconoclasm: Barbarian Ideology and Destruction by ISIS as a Challenge for Modern Culture, Not Only for Islam. In: Charney N. (eds) Art Crime. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-40757-3_12

  Rutelli, https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-137-40757-3_12

• MacDonald both hurt and helped, lets look at both sides.

  by MisterD, about 5 years ago

  I believe the statue should be in Victoria park with an explanation of how he both hurt and helped all of us. His accomplishments were many and you can easily condemn his dark side but consider the alternative. Without his accomplishments there would be no Canada today and the Indian peoples would have suffered far worse under the US. Below is a column by Richard Gwyn that summarizes MacDonalds time as Prime Minister far better than I can.

  Among our 23 prime ministers, the first and most important was Sir John A. Macdonald.

  Had there been no Macdonald, it’s... Continue reading

  I believe the statue should be in Victoria park with an explanation of how he both hurt and helped all of us. His accomplishments were many and you can easily condemn his dark side but consider the alternative. Without his accomplishments there would be no Canada today and the Indian peoples would have suffered far worse under the US. Below is a column by Richard Gwyn that summarizes MacDonalds time as Prime Minister far better than I can.

  Among our 23 prime ministers, the first and most important was Sir John A. Macdonald.

  Had there been no Macdonald, it’s all but certain there would not be a single Canadian reading this article or others like it, never mind raising a celebratory toast to him on the 200th anniversary of his birth on Jan. 10 or 11 (the records of his father and of the local Register Office in Glasgow, where he was born, differ).

  That’s because had there been no Macdonald, there would be no Canada for anyone to be a citizen of.

  Under Macdonald’s leadership as prime minister (1867-1873 and 1878-1891), the country was extended from sea to sea, giving — at last — it a certain geographical coherence. Macdonald also led Canada to achieve the National Dream, a railway the entire way from eastern Canada to the West Coast. The railway, together with Macdonald’s policy of high tariffs to protect Canadian companies from their far more efficient American rivals, made it possible for Canadians to do business with and get to know each other despite all their differences (French vs. English, Catholic vs. Protestant, Aboriginal vs. European) and the immense distances between them.

  By other initiatives, Macdonald fashioned a distinctive Canadian way of getting things done that has stayed with us ever since.

  That unique approach was born with Macdonald’s creation in 1873 of the North-West Mounted Police (today, the RCMP), which he dispatched to the North-West (the Prairies).

  Macdonald gave his force two orders. One was to wipe out the liquor trade based in Benton, Mont., a flood of alcohol that had a devastating effect on the prairie Indians. The second was to impose the rule of law throughout the region.

  South of the U.S. border, the gun ruled. North of it, the law ruled. Below the border, not a single jury ever judged a white man guilty of mistreating native people. Above it, white men were hauled into the courts on charges of treating natives badly. Prairie Indians understood the difference. The name they gave to the border was The Medicine Line, suggesting that above it there might just be some fair play and healing.

  Sadly, as will be described later, that radical difference between the two territories didn’t last that long.

  Macdonald’s overall contribution to Canada was irreplaceable nonetheless. The best description of what he did for this country is that because of him Manifest Destiny never became manifest. This is to say that the Americans’ assumption that all of North America was intended by God or geography to be theirs would never be realized.

  Macdonald was able to do this because, even though the stage on which he performed was small and rough, as a politician he was among the ablest of the times, alongside Abraham Lincoln and Benjamin Disraeli. He was, that is, every bit as devious and cunning as they were, and far better at winning elections — six out of seven, all with majorities.

  He paid a price for being so good a politician. Our academic historians have commonly written him off as merely a clever and cynical operator with no ideas except the importance of gaining power and holding on to it for as long as possible.

  The experts have been dead wrong. Consider that Macdonald was the first national democratic leader in the world to try to extend the vote to women, introducing such legislation in the Commons in 1885. He got nowhere, but he described the future exactly, warning MPs it was “certain” that the female would “completely establish her equality as a human being and as a member of society with man.” That’s a description of the gender equality we’ve at last achieved, more or less.

  His argument for how English-Canadians had to accept the distinctiveness of French-Canadians despite the fact that they were a minority would not be matched by any English-Canadian politician for a century. It was: “Treat them as a nation and they will respond as a free people usually do, generously. Treat them as a faction and they will be factious.”

  It took until 2006 for us to recognize Quebec as a nation.

  Macdonald’s status was merely that of a member of the British delegation, a post given him, without his being told, in case Britain needed to offer Canada to the U.S. as a substitute for all of the U.S.’s financial claims. To the disbelief and fury of both these countries, he made Canadian interests, such as of our fisheries, the topic of more than half of the discussions and only shut up once Britain had pledged him a loan for the transcontinental railway.

  He most certainly had flaws. He was a drunk, the single fact about him most Canadians are aware of. Known by very few, though, is the fact Macdonald quit, an accomplishment even more difficult in that hard-drinking era than it is for addicts today.

  He was corrupt, taking money from businesses that depended on government contracts, albeit for his Conservative Party rather than himself. Later, Sir Wilfrid Laurier would adopt Macdonald’s patronage program in every respect except, cleverly, by making sure his own hands were clean.

  In the past few years, Macdonald’s reputation has been assaulted by an entirely new and a deadly accusation. This is that he was a “racist” who, once the buffalo had been exterminated, deliberately allowed Indians to starve in order to clear the way for his railway. Sometimes, “racist” is escalated into an accusation of him having a “genocidal” policy.

  He did make mistakes, the most serious being how he put the needs of his railway ahead of those of the native people of the Prairies, his attention wandering because the railway was threatened by bankruptcy. Had the railway gone down, the risk was real that the nation itself, already struggling with an economic depression, would go down, too.

  The new criticism that Macdonald was a racist is really about the present, not the past. Today, large numbers of Canadians are, justifiably, disgusted by the botch we have made in our relations with aboriginals and are outraged by the appalling treatment, including sexual abuse, of native students in residential schools.

  In effect, Macdonald is now a scapegoat so that guilt for misdeeds done in one way or other by all Canadians can be transferred to him alone. He does fit that role. He did make mistakes. He did say things that are now shocking but back then were everyday comments — as did Winston Churchill about the people of India and as did Tommy Douglas about euthanasia, which he once advocated. Best of all, he died long ago.

  The truth is, though, that for his time, Macdonald was unusually liberal-minded. Among his lifelong friends were Indians and Métis. He wasn’t in the least afraid to tell the truth about relations between native people and whites, as in: “We must remember they are the original owners of the soil of which they have been dispossessed by the covetousness or ambition of our ancestors.”

  Most remarkably, he got MPs to agree to the most imaginative reform of his time: any Indian could gain the vote while retaining all his privileges, such as freedom from taxes. Unhappily, Laurier cancelled this reform, with the measure not restored until John Diefenbaker did so in 1960, which was far too late to make any difference.

  His actual policy for getting food to the Indians — one his critics always avoid citing — was: “We cannot as Christians, and as men with hearts in our bosoms, allow the vagabond Indian to die before us . . . We must prevent them from starving, in consequence of the extinction of the buffalo and their not yet (having) betaken themselves to raising crops.”

  Circumstances made that task extremely difficult. Amid a depression, few Canadians were prepared to be generous. The opposition Liberals seized the opportunity and repeatedly charged that by feeding native people, Macdonald was turning them into permanent dependents of government.

  It’s still true that he didn’t do the job well. But no other Canadian government until the 1930s gave anyone money, food or anything else to its people just because they had no job or nowhere to live or no pension. In those days, charity was the exclusive responsibility of the churches.

  Criticism he certainly deserves. But charges of racism, let alone of genocide as in the article by Stephen Marche in the current issue of Walrus magazine, aren’t merely vicious and destructive or, to be gentler, a bid for attention.

  At stake is our connection to the leader to whom we owe Canada’s existence. The risk is that Macdonald, our most important leader and our most attractive one but for Laurier, could become a kind of contemporary version of an untouchable.

  We’d lose a lot. We’d lose the only prime minister we’ve ever had who was genuinely funny. He was one of the most intelligent we’ve had, although, unlike Pierre Trudeau, he never waved around his cleverness so all would know he was the smartest person in the room. His daughter Mary was grievously disabled; he and Lady Macdonald never once considered placing her in an institution and each day he related to her all he had been up to.

  The best description of what Macdonald did to us and for us was provided by a long-time friend of our first prime minister, George Monro Grant, the first principal of what is now Queen’s University and, incidentally, great-grandfather of one-time Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff. It was this:

  “He believed there was room on the continent of America for two nations and he was determined that Canada should be a nation. He believed in the superiority of the British constitution to any other for free men and that the preservation of the union with the mother country was necessary to the making of Canada. He had faith in the French race, and believed that a good understanding between French and English people was essential to the national welfare.”

  Who else among our 22 other prime ministers has done more than Sir John A. Macdonald did for his country?

• We are way overdue...

  by Lee Stubbe, about 5 years ago
  .... In this city, for an initiative aimed at educating white settlers (like me) in Regina about indigenous issues, past and present.

  
  

  It makes me sick to see some of the posts here. It's not surprising, though -- I've heard the same and worse from people's mouths. "It's not MY fault they're doing drugs!" "We gave them civilization and roads -- we brought them into the 20th century!" "I shouldn't be blamed for what my ancestors did."

  We need EMPATHY and LISTENING. We need those YESTERDAY. It's WELL past time for us to shut the **** up, sit down, and... Continue reading

  .... In this city, for an initiative aimed at educating white settlers (like me) in Regina about indigenous issues, past and present.

  
  

  It makes me sick to see some of the posts here. It's not surprising, though -- I've heard the same and worse from people's mouths. "It's not MY fault they're doing drugs!" "We gave them civilization and roads -- we brought them into the 20th century!" "I shouldn't be blamed for what my ancestors did."

  We need EMPATHY and LISTENING. We need those YESTERDAY. It's WELL past time for us to shut the **** up, sit down, and listen, and then ACT.

  We can listen and know that indigenous peoples have been here on Turtle Island for time immemorial. Before colonization, they had community; robust trade routes and economies; restorative justice systems; their own structures for leadership; spirituality that's not just a religion, but a way of life, baked into the language and teachings and how they interact with land and people.

  Now we're here. Our cultural genocide of the people who were here first was almost completed. Now we have communities fractured; family units broken from trauma; languages lost; teachings lost.

  Residential schools are NOT ancient history. There are people in our city NOW who went to those schools -- mothers, fathers, grandmothers and grandfathers, aunties and uncles -- who were abused for speaking their language, and still can't pray in their language without the horrors coming back. They wear scars on their body from where they were injected with substances kept secret from them.

  Regina DESPERATELY needs consciousness raising and education about these topics. And then we need action.

• Face Your History...

  by Okimakahn George Lepine , about 5 years ago

  One of the most vivid quotes (and goals) he indicated in parliament was to "do away with the tribal system and assimilate the Indian people in all respects"... He was also known to strong hold very convictions against the Metis where he even compared Riel to that of a Dog when he was hung. He openly stated that the NWMP (pre RCMP) that they "were not ambassadors of goodwill or uniformed men sent to protect Indians; they were the colonizer's occupational forces and hence the oppressors of Indians and Métis." We all can go one and on with the... Continue reading

  One of the most vivid quotes (and goals) he indicated in parliament was to "do away with the tribal system and assimilate the Indian people in all respects"... He was also known to strong hold very convictions against the Metis where he even compared Riel to that of a Dog when he was hung. He openly stated that the NWMP (pre RCMP) that they "were not ambassadors of goodwill or uniformed men sent to protect Indians; they were the colonizer's occupational forces and hence the oppressors of Indians and Métis." We all can go one and on with the things this person has done. Personally it was his government that placed a bounty on one of my ancestors as well. A a good example that I take from my father, he'd say "let the stain remain, but make them know it". I would recommend that his statue remain, but only on one condition. Erect an Indigenous Statue directly in front of him, in regalia, letting everyone know and especially him, that he did not do away with us - We are still here...

• Canada would not exist without Macdonald

  by MJM, about 5 years ago
  History is taught so poorly in our k-12 system it is no wonder that ideas such as this get started.

  
  

  Without Macdonald, Canada would be reduced to Upper Canada (southern Ontario), Lower Canada (southern Quebec) and maybe NB, NS and PEI. Western Canada would be part of the US - there would be NO Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and BC. The northern territories and northern Ontario and Quebec would have been US territories. Newfoundland would probably be still a separate country. Without the national railroad, the NWMP and settlements (including indigenous people), which are all tied up together to tell the... Continue reading

  History is taught so poorly in our k-12 system it is no wonder that ideas such as this get started.

  
  

  Without Macdonald, Canada would be reduced to Upper Canada (southern Ontario), Lower Canada (southern Quebec) and maybe NB, NS and PEI. Western Canada would be part of the US - there would be NO Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and BC. The northern territories and northern Ontario and Quebec would have been US territories. Newfoundland would probably be still a separate country. Without the national railroad, the NWMP and settlements (including indigenous people), which are all tied up together to tell the story of western Canada, the US would have been in charge

  Criticize him all you want but be realistic

• When do taxpayers get a vote on changes?

  by DeElina, about 5 years ago

  I would venture to say that more than 90% of FN people have no idea who JAMacdonald even is or that he was our first prime minister. As usual the loudest demands by a few get whatever they want. No matter what the majority of taxpayers want. Another prime example of our city council’s decisions... because 600 people signed a petition to change the name of Dewdney Park, council changed it. That’s 600 out of a city population of 216,000. When will it end. For some reason politicians these days are unable to use good old common sense. It’s time... Continue reading

  I would venture to say that more than 90% of FN people have no idea who JAMacdonald even is or that he was our first prime minister. As usual the loudest demands by a few get whatever they want. No matter what the majority of taxpayers want. Another prime example of our city council’s decisions... because 600 people signed a petition to change the name of Dewdney Park, council changed it. That’s 600 out of a city population of 216,000. When will it end. For some reason politicians these days are unable to use good old common sense. It’s time taxpayers have some say. If I don’t get a vote on the ludicrous idea of changing the name of Dewdney Avenue I will no longer pay city taxes.