WARMINGTON: Father of Confederation's statue history but his legacy can't be erased

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,619
14,359
113
Low Earth Orbit
Are you familiar with the spiral tunnels near Field B.C.? Do you have even an inkling about planning them, calculating them and laying them out. Do you have any idea about how to calculate spiral tunnels. Do you think you could do it without a calculator? Do you think after excavating for months you could meet near the middle within a 1/10 of foot both horizontally and vertically? All this being achieved thought the toughest terrain in the world! For all your talk on pretty much every subject, I'd be willing to bet you'd emerge at the other end looking like a complete idiot! :) :)

I've been through that tunnel several times when VIA ran the CPR mainline.

Historically that wasn't the only spiral to deal with elevation on the mainline. Loop Creek did the same thing but on a trestle.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
Let's face it, folks. All 19th Century politicians were flawed characters. They were also part of their time. MacDonald's anti-First Nations policies could not have taken place without the consent of the governing majority. I suppose we could simply eliminate all historical references to every politician who has offended a racial minority, but that would be a complete distortion of history. It appears that a single mistake by any politician means that all of the good they achieved is immediately cancelled. That is a form of historical revisionism I cannot agree with.


And 21st century politicians are doing a good job of adhering to the tradition! But good, bad or ugly they are the reason we got to where we are today. You can't improve them, you can't change them.
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
I was teasing. I've actually been to Craigellachie in BC where they put in the last spike. My parents were history buffs.

I grew up in a "CPR" family, so we knew all of the lore. Craigellachie was a P.R.stunt, as big chunks of the railway in Ontario were completed well after that.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
38,912
3,585
113
GIESBRECHT: MacDonald's Mistake
Brian Giesbrecht
Published:
August 17, 2018
Updated:
August 17, 2018 7:00 AM EDT
A statue of Canada's first prime minister has been removed from the grounds outside Victoria City Hall, days after the city council voted to remove it. The statue of Sir John A. Macdonald overlooks the Imam at Masjid Al-Iman, Ismail Mohamed Nur, speaks during a vigil to honour the victims of a shooting at a Quebec City mosque, in Victoria on Tuesday, January 31, 2017. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Chad Hipolito ORG XMIT: CPT104
Victoria City Council removed John A. MacDonald’s statue from City Hall to promote reconciliation with Indigenous people. The latest of many attacks on important Canadian historical figures, bewildered officials believe an Orwellian rewriting of Canadian history will bring about “reconciliation”.
Macdonald is our greatest Canadian. If not for Macdonald, there would be no Canada. His vision included peoples from other parts of the world settling and farming the west, with a railroad tying the country together. Without Macdonald, everything west of Ontario would have become a northern extension of our troubled neighbour to the south. He made one great mistake- that mistake involved peoples then known as Indians.
By1867 Canada’s Indians had been laid low by disease, warfare, and a disappearing hunting and gathering way of life. Particularly in the west, Indian tribes were poor, scattered and few in numbers, considered of no economic importance and a minor obstacle to big plans for the west. Despite this, it would be a mistake to say that Macdonald did not think long and hard about ‘what to do’ with the Indians.
Macdonald’s critics today call him a racist bigot, but they fail to note that by today’s standards most folks in 1867 would be adjudged that. Those were times when it was taken as given that some groups of people were superior to others – Chinese workers and Ruthenian peasants were thought inferior to Anglo-Saxons, and Irish and Catholics were not to be trusted. Indians were near the bottom of the totem pole with other brown-skinned people.
The real racist bigots of the day were content to do nothing for the Indians. Macdonald was not one of those, representing the philanthropic side which urged action to save a dying people by bringing them into civilization. This applies to the creation of residential schools. Pushing aside the nineteenth-century rhetoric that is today considered racist, Macdonald wanted Indians to learn English so that they could survive in the new world. Today, successful Indigenous persons are either fluent in English or French. Macdonald’s mistake was making special reference to Indians in The British North America Act. It made necessary The Indian Act, and its dead-end reserve system.
The BNA Act could have made no reference to Indians. But, there was precedent for singling out Indians for special treatment – The Royal Proclamation of 1763. Macdonald did not have to follow it, he could have asked Westminster to omit any reference to Indians in the BNA Act and leave Parliament to make land allotments and compensation (as was done in the United States). There would have been no reserves. The end result would have been that Indians would to be ordinary Canadians (in every respect).
Macdonald should have treated Indians the way everyone else was treated. Compensation would have been made to Indians as individuals, and they would have adjusted. After all, Indians had adapted to new circumstances before. When the newly chartered Rupertsland created opportunities in the fur business, Indians adjusted and prospered. The same thing happened when a buffalo economy opened up. That is the way it works. Instead, Indians languished on reserves while the rest of the country turned into a modern and prosperous country.
Macdonald’s mistake was in not treating Indigenous people like everyone else.
Brian Giesbrecht is a retired judge, senior fellow of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.
http://torontosun.com/news/national/giesbrecht-macdonalds-mistake
 

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
76
Eagle Creek
GIESBRECHT: MacDonald's Mistake
Brian Giesbrecht
Published:
August 17, 2018
Updated:
August 17, 2018 7:00 AM EDT
A statue of Canada's first prime minister has been removed from the grounds outside Victoria City Hall, days after the city council voted to remove it. The statue of Sir John A. Macdonald overlooks the Imam at Masjid Al-Iman, Ismail Mohamed Nur, speaks during a vigil to honour the victims of a shooting at a Quebec City mosque, in Victoria on Tuesday, January 31, 2017. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Chad Hipolito ORG XMIT: CPT104
Victoria City Council removed John A. MacDonald’s statue from City Hall to promote reconciliation with Indigenous people. The latest of many attacks on important Canadian historical figures, bewildered officials believe an Orwellian rewriting of Canadian history will bring about “reconciliation”.
Macdonald is our greatest Canadian. If not for Macdonald, there would be no Canada. His vision included peoples from other parts of the world settling and farming the west, with a railroad tying the country together. Without Macdonald, everything west of Ontario would have become a northern extension of our troubled neighbour to the south. He made one great mistake- that mistake involved peoples then known as Indians.
By1867 Canada’s Indians had been laid low by disease, warfare, and a disappearing hunting and gathering way of life. Particularly in the west, Indian tribes were poor, scattered and few in numbers, considered of no economic importance and a minor obstacle to big plans for the west. Despite this, it would be a mistake to say that Macdonald did not think long and hard about ‘what to do’ with the Indians.
Macdonald’s critics today call him a racist bigot, but they fail to note that by today’s standards most folks in 1867 would be adjudged that. Those were times when it was taken as given that some groups of people were superior to others – Chinese workers and Ruthenian peasants were thought inferior to Anglo-Saxons, and Irish and Catholics were not to be trusted. Indians were near the bottom of the totem pole with other brown-skinned people.
The real racist bigots of the day were content to do nothing for the Indians. Macdonald was not one of those, representing the philanthropic side which urged action to save a dying people by bringing them into civilization. This applies to the creation of residential schools. Pushing aside the nineteenth-century rhetoric that is today considered racist, Macdonald wanted Indians to learn English so that they could survive in the new world. Today, successful Indigenous persons are either fluent in English or French. Macdonald’s mistake was making special reference to Indians in The British North America Act. It made necessary The Indian Act, and its dead-end reserve system.
The BNA Act could have made no reference to Indians. But, there was precedent for singling out Indians for special treatment – The Royal Proclamation of 1763. Macdonald did not have to follow it, he could have asked Westminster to omit any reference to Indians in the BNA Act and leave Parliament to make land allotments and compensation (as was done in the United States). There would have been no reserves. The end result would have been that Indians would to be ordinary Canadians (in every respect).
Macdonald should have treated Indians the way everyone else was treated. Compensation would have been made to Indians as individuals, and they would have adjusted. After all, Indians had adapted to new circumstances before. When the newly chartered Rupertsland created opportunities in the fur business, Indians adjusted and prospered. The same thing happened when a buffalo economy opened up. That is the way it works. Instead, Indians languished on reserves while the rest of the country turned into a modern and prosperous country.
Macdonald’s mistake was in not treating Indigenous people like everyone else.
Brian Giesbrecht is a retired judge, senior fellow of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.
http://torontosun.com/news/national/giesbrecht-macdonalds-mistake


:thumbright:
 

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
4
36
MacDonald was a train wreck.

“the Aryan races will not wholesomely amalgamate with the Africans or the Asiatics - the cross of those races, like the cross of the dog and the fox, is not successful; it cannot be, and never will be.”

John A MAcDonald
 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36
I take issue with the claim that people of their generation didn't know any better.

Just to put things in perspective, the Authorized Version of the Bible was completed in 1611 and includes the entire Sermon on the Mount. Certainly the educated classes of even Macdonald's generation would have been very familiar with it.

Then let's compare with other people of the era. Baha'u'llah, born in 1817, wrote about the oneness of mankind. Dr. Peter Bryce was born in 1853 and wrote 'The Story of a National Crime' in 1922. Dr. L. L. Zamenhof, born in 1859, initiated an international auxiliary language in 1887 to promote brotherhood between the peoples of the world. Jean-Marie-Raphaël Le Jeune, born in 1855, adapted the Duployan shorthand to Chinuk Wawa in 1891 and published different books in and about Chinuk Wawa and other indigenous languages from 1886 to 1924. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was written in 1948.

John A MacDonald was born in 1815 and served as Prime Minister from 1878 to 1891. The Canadian Indian Residential School System continued from 1876 until 1993. Even the government White Paper of 1969 was still promoting the forced assimilation of Canada’s indigenous peoples.

How is it that contemporaries of MacDonald and later politicians could have held such a strong sense of universal justice and brotherhood in their generations if they were just products of their generations?

If we had to choose between putting up statues of Zamenhof or Le Jeune vs. MacDonald, who’d be more deserving in your opinion?
 

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
76
Eagle Creek
I take issue with the claim that people of their generation didn't know any better.

Just to put things in perspective, the Authorized Version of the Bible was completed in 1611 and includes the entire Sermon on the Mount. Certainly the educated classes of even Macdonald's generation would have been very familiar with it.

Then let's compare with other people of the era. Baha'u'llah, born in 1817, wrote about the oneness of mankind. Dr. Peter Bryce was born in 1853 and wrote 'The Story of a National Crime' in 1922. Dr. L. L. Zamenhof, born in 1859, initiated an international auxiliary language in 1887 to promote brotherhood between the peoples of the world. Jean-Marie-Raphaël Le Jeune, born in 1855, adapted the Duployan shorthand to Chinuk Wawa in 1891 and published different books in and about Chinuk Wawa and other indigenous languages from 1886 to 1924. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was written in 1948.

John A MacDonald was born in 1815 and served as Prime Minister from 1878 to 1891. The Canadian Indian Residential School System continued from 1876 until 1993. Even the government White Paper of 1969 was still promoting the forced assimilation of Canada’s indigenous peoples.

How is it that contemporaries of MacDonald and later politicians could have held such a strong sense of universal justice and brotherhood in their generations if they were just products of their generations?

If we had to choose between putting up statues of Zamenhof or Le Jeune vs. MacDonald, who’d be more deserving in your opinion?


What don't you 'take issue with'?
 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36
What don't you 'take issue with'?

I have no problem with putting up statues of John A MacDonald, honestly. It's just a statue after all and we can make the argument that no one is perfect, certainly. I was taking issue with the idea that he could not possibly have known any better. Yes most Canadians supported him, but there is plenty of proof from within their own generation and previous ones and the literature available at the time that they most certainly could have known better even in their generation.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
I have no problem with putting up statues of John A MacDonald, honestly. It's just a statue after all and we can make the argument that no one is perfect, certainly. I was taking issue with the idea that he could not possibly have known any better. Yes most Canadians supported him, but there is plenty of proof from within their own generation and previous ones and the literature available at the time that they most certainly could have known better even in their generation.




The problem is, it is not a cut and dried factual matter like 2+3 = 5. It's a social issue influenced partly by the parameters of the time and place. The sentiment at the time may have been more of conquering than befriending.

I take issue with the claim that people of their generation didn't know any better.

Just to put things in perspective, the Authorized Version of the Bible was completed in 1611 and includes the entire Sermon on the Mount. Certainly the educated classes of even Macdonald's generation would have been very familiar with it.


Were people supposed to live by the supposition that the Bible was a Guide or Handbook on proper behaviour? How many people back in 1815 or even 1870 knew how to read? And for ones who could was there a stipulation in place that they were to read the Bible? The Bible was about being nice to your fellow man, but it wasn't a rule book.
 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36
The problem is, it is not a cut and dried factual matter like 2+3 = 5. It's a social issue influenced partly by the parameters of the time and place. The sentiment at the time may have been more of conquering than befriending.




Were people supposed to live by the supposition that the Bible was a Guide or Handbook on proper behaviour? How many people back in 1815 or even 1870 knew how to read? And for ones who could was there a stipulation in place that they were to read the Bible? The Bible was about being nice to your fellow man, but it wasn't a rule book.

And that's fine. That is a choice they were free to make. However, while I'm not necessarily against a statue of MacDonald, given his choice (and it was a choice), plenty of others even of his own or proximate generations might be far more deserving of a statue.

The problem is, it is not a cut and dried factual matter like 2+3 = 5. It's a social issue influenced partly by the parameters of the time and place. The sentiment at the time may have been more of conquering than befriending.




Were people supposed to live by the supposition that the Bible was a Guide or Handbook on proper behaviour? How many people back in 1815 or even 1870 knew how to read? And for ones who could was there a stipulation in place that they were to read the Bible? The Bible was about being nice to your fellow man, but it wasn't a rule book.

One point of the residential School system was in fact to beat the Christian faith into those kids.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
MacDonald was a train wreck.

“the Aryan races will not wholesomely amalgamate with the Africans or the Asiatics - the cross of those races, like the cross of the dog and the fox, is not successful; it cannot be, and never will be.”

John A MAcDonald


Because his ideas were different than yours? I think he was on the right track but he should have stopped at the word "successful". Did he mean it in a genetic sense? I guess MacDonald did do a bit of drinking, if one was inclined to hold that against him. A lot of people think better when they are drinking. (I know I could, but my physical and financial health suffered)

One point of the residential School system was in fact to beat the Christian faith into those kids.


There - you've identified one of the main problems right there!
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
And that's fine. That is a choice they were free to make. However, while I'm not necessarily against a statue of MacDonald, given his choice (and it was a choice), plenty of others even of his own or proximate generations might be far more deserving of a statue.



Perhaps, Alex MacKenzie, David Thompson and Simon Fraser come to mind, although their accomplishments were a little more one dimensional.
 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36
Because his ideas were different than yours? I think he was on the right track but he should have stopped at the word "successful". Did he mean it in a genetic sense? I guess MacDonald did do a bit of drinking, if one was inclined to hold that against him. A lot of people think better when they are drinking. (I know I could, but my physical and financial health suffered)




There - you've identified one of the main problems right there!

Yup. 'You're gonna learn to love your neighbour as yourself even if I have beat it into you damn Indian.'

I can certainly see how that kind of education can warp a kid's character well into adulthood.