Showing posts sorted by relevance for query HISTORY OF CANADIAN WEALTH. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query HISTORY OF CANADIAN WEALTH. Sort by date Show all posts

Sunday, April 09, 2006

A History of Canadian Wealth, 1914.

Gustavus Myers book on the history of wealth in Canada is an amazing work that is often overlooked. Published in the US in 1914 it was not published in Canada until 1972!

A landmark revisionist history of Canada, A History of Canadian Wealth remains as lively and startling as it was when first published.Reviews


It is the historical documentation of the shaping of Canada from a feudal regime that through rebellion, and by government largese allowed for the mercantilist creation of the modern Canadian state.
Early in the century, an American, Gustavus Myers, had written A History of Canadian Wealth (1914), describing the amassing of Canadian resources and wealth in the hands of a few wealthy individuals and families. Myers also showed how these wealthy Canadians were often the same people who governed the country. In nineteenth century Canada, the capitalist and the governing class were often the same people and, in these circumstances, there was little difficulty in identifying these as a ruling class.Canadian Social Theory


Canada has always been a state captialist regime, since its inception as a colony of both France and England. Myer's work documents Canada's transition from a fuedalist colony to a seignueral state to a mercantilist monopoly capitalist state in this amazing work. A work of course we were never taught in social studies or history classes. Ryerson and others refered to it but as a source document it has laid gathering dust on university bookshelves. Until now. It is available here, for your enjoyment and elucidation.

Myers thesis is about how the imperial powers of the Church State in Canada gained its wealth, capital by theft. Begining with aboriginal Canadians.

While such writings are starkly revealing of the wretched conditions in which Aboriginals were living, they tend to blame Aboriginal People themselves for their poverty and suffering, a tendency which serves only one purpose extremely well -- that of concealing the true reasons for the poverty. For a deeper understanding of the connection between Aboriginal poverty and the theft of their lands one needs to read only a few books, such as Gustavus Myers' History of Canadian Wealth (1914), or R.T. Naylor's Canada in the European Age (1987), or Neu and Therrien's Accounting for Genocide (2003). Some Facts Behind the Joshua Bernard Decision


Myers main point is that unlike the United States, the Capitalist rebellion of 1837-1839 did not result in a free market capitalist society, though it did smash the control of the fuedal mercantilist families. What it allowed for was a unique Canadian form of monopoly capitalism, one that relied still upon mercantilism supported by the state. In fact the creation of the Canadian state was neccasary for the furtherance of national mercantile interests, which are still in power today.

A long panel of corporate ownership data, stretching back to 1910, shows that the
Canadian corporate sector began the century with a predominance of large pyramidal corporate groups controlled by wealthy families or individuals, and relatively few widely held firms. By the middle of the century, widely held firms had become predominant. However, from the 1970s on, there has been a marked resurgence of pyramidal groups controlled by wealthy families and individuals, corresponding to a large decline in the prevalence of widely held firms. Improvements in the general institutional environment and high taxes on inherited income accompany the rise of widely held firms. A sharp abatement in taxes on large estates and a rise in the likely returns to political rent seeking accompany the resurgence of pyramidal groups.
The Rise and Fall of the Widely Held Firm in Canada


Also see my articles:

Origins of the Captialist State In Canada

Canada's State Capitalist Success

Plutocrats Rule

Crony Capitalism and Hamm

Whigs and Tory's

Voting for Capitalism On January 23

Corruption, nationalism and capitalism


Heres is an excerpt of Gustavus Myers work;



A HISTORY OF CANADIAN WEALTH

CHAPTER VII

REVOLT AGAINST FEUDALISM



William Lyon Mackenzie (1795 - 1861) The insurrection, in 1837-1838, led by William Lyon Mackenzie in Ontario and by Papineau in Quebec, was intrinsically one of upspringing capitalist forces, but superficially its character was composite, blending a variety of factors and elements. It is not the purpose here to give any perfunctory chronological or personal narrative of that movement, but to present an outline of the vital economic causes and results.


Grievances of the Rebels


The proclamation issued by Mackenzie, as Chairman pro tem of the insurrectionary Provincial Government of the State of Upper Canada, began by denouncing the “ blighting influence of military despots, strangers from Europe ruling us, not according to laws of our own choice but by the capricious dictates of their arbitrary power.

“ They,” read on the proclamation, “ have taxed us at their pleasure, robbed our exchequer and carried off the proceeds to other lands — they have bribed and corrupted ministers of the Gospel with the wealth raised by our industry — they have, in place of religious liberty, given rectories and reserves to a foreign priesthood, with spiritual power dangerous to our peace, as a people — they have bestowed millions of our lands on a company of Europeans for a nominal consideration, and left them to fleece and impoverish our country — they have spurned our petitions, involved us in their wars, excited feelings of national and sectional animosity in counties, townships and neighborhoods, and ruled as Ireland has been ruled, to the advantage of persons in other lands and to the prostration of our energies as a people. . . .”

Then declaring the movement a separatist one, the proclamation enumerated the reforms sought. These included a legislature chosen by the people, free press, civil and religious liberty, free education and other changes not the least significant of which was that of “ freedom of trade — every man to be allowed to buy at the cheapest market and sell at the dearest.”1—the very quintessence of rising capitalism, the moving principle of which was abolition of monopoly and of all feudal restraints, and the assurance of unfettered access to all resources and markets and of unhindered competition.

Dr. Robert Nelson In Lower Canada the proclamation issued by Dr. Robert Nelson, president of the insurrectionary party, declared for repudiation of all allegiance to Great Britain and provided for 17 different reforms.

Among these were : A Republican form of government ; all citizens to enjoy the same rights, and Indians were to be no longer disqualified civilly ; dissolution between Church and State ; abolition of feudal or seignorial tenure of land “as if such a tenure had never existed in Canada” ; imprisonment for debt no longer to exist except in such cases as should be specified by Act thereafter ; sentence of death no longer to be passed or executed except in cases of murder.

Other reforms called for were freedom of the press, trial by jury, general and public education, elective franchise and the like. Another provision of the proclamation declared that “all Crown lands, also such as are called Clergy Reserves, and such as are nominally in possession of a certain company of landholders in England, called the ‘British American Land Company,’ are of right the property of the State of Lower Canada,” except such parts as were bought by persons and held in good faith.2


Capital to Have a Free Hand


One of the main pleas of the insurrectionists was that capital should have a free hand, especially in the line of development of resources, the establishment of manufactories and of modern systems of navigation and transportation. They pointed to the astounding development of transportation, trade and manufacture in the United States, and asked pointedly why it was that Canada should be so backward ? Answering themselves, they replied it was because of the surviving feudalistic conditions which, variously in both Quebec and Ontario placed monopolies of trade and of land in the hands of the Church, seigneurs, officials and companies (largely absentee), and because of the feudalistic laws incompatible with the requirements of an age, the spirit of which was individual enterprise and full personal freedom of trade.3

Lord Durham In his elaborate report, Lord Durham enumerated some of the grievances. By an Act passed in 1837, he wrote, difficulties were thrown in the way of the employment of capital in banking, and that the banking laws tended to preserve the monopoly held by the few chartered banks in Canada.4 No man had a right to vote at elections until he paid the whole of the purchase money for public or Clergy land, and as it generally took a period of from four to ten years, he had to wait long before he could vote.5 There were complaints of great impediments to industrial progress.6

Old laws prohibiting the importation of particular articles except from England — laws which originally had been passed to protect the privilege of monopoly in Canada — still prevailed, although the English monopoly had been removed ; the result was that almost all of those particular articles used in Ontario were smuggled across the frontier.7

But interwoven with this general character of the insurrectionary movement were a diversity of other factors which ; although extraneously religious or sentimental, were in reality largely of a distinct economic nature.


Other Causes of the Uprising.


Irritated at the refusal of the Church of England clergy to recognize them as an established Church, the Scotch Presbyterians gave much support to Mackenzie ; this anger at the Church of England clergy was based not upon the mere refusal of a formal recognition, but because of the absence, of such recognition, which manifestly would have been a prima facie admission that the Presbyterians had an equal right in the allotment of the Clergy Reserves.

The middle and the working classes complained that the district assessment law was expressly devised to tax them and favor the rich ; that the rich not only did not pay their due proportion of the taxes but actually paid less than did those in “ middling circumstances.”8 There was a close monopoly of the professions which turned many of the professional newcomers in favor of the insurrection. A British surgeon, licensed in England, could not practice without the consent of the Ontario Board of Examiners. An attorney coming from elsewhere, had to submit to an apprenticeship of five years before he was allowed to practice. Barristers, too, hailing from other parts complained of the discriminations put upon them by Ontario laws.9

During the course of the insurrection, the clergy of the favored denominations, professing to speak in the name of God, made the strongest efforts to break down the movement, exhorting the people that they must yield submissively to constituted authority.

At a dinner given on July 25, 1837, to 140 of the Roman Catholic clergy, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Montreal was reported to have said that the clergy “ were to represent to their parishioners that it is never permitted to revolt against lawful authority, nor to transgress the laws of the land ; that they are not to absolve in the confessional any indication of the opinion either that a man may revolt against the Government under which he has the happiness to live, or that it is permitted to break the laws of the country.”10 So ran on this admonishing address.

These were, to be sure, traditionally hierarchic instructions, but they were a curious product considering that when feudalism was in its last stages a little later, and capitalism rising triumphantly, the Roman Catholic Church and clergy were among the original native investors in capitalist enterprises. With the various reforms demanded, including the abolition of the death sentence for all except capital crimes, the clergy evinced no sympathy.

The insurrection was put down, but it produced many changes, some immediate, others gradual. Imprisonment for any debt under £10 was not abolished until 1849, and other reforms were slowly enacted.


Emigration of Peasants and Workers from Canada


One of the immediate results of the insurrection was the great increase of emigration from Canada to the United States, beginning principally after the insurrections of 1837 and 1838. This emigration included both agricultural population as well as that of the workers of the cities ; and the exodus increased year after year.

The lumber market was vastly overstocked ; thirteen millions more feet of lumber were produced in 1846 than the market demand justified.11 Large fortunes had been made in the lumber trade, and the activity had continued on the supposition that further great quantities would be required in the construction of railroads abroad and at home.

Workmen of the cities of Quebec and Montreal, formerly engaged in lumbering, now left in considerable numbers for the United States ; there were few manufactories in Canada to employ this labor, and, perforce, they had to drift elsewhere. The same cause led to the exodus of laborers and raftsmen. Another class of emigrants from the Province of Quebec were young men “of good families” who could not afford to buy land at the prevailing high prices. These families were subject to the indignities of the caste system and to the “ exactions of the landed proprietors who impose even heavier conditions than the seigneurs. They hire themselves in the manufactories or on the farms of the United States.”

Still another division of migratory workers were the poor families settled on the seignories. These families were forced by debt to emigrate after having sold their lands and moveables, or after their paltry effects had been sold by officers of the law. Such workers, too, sought work on the farms or in the factories of the United States, “frequently at heavy, hard and bodily labor.”12

More than three-fourths of the Canadians in the United States belonged to the working class. There they were employed in mills, manufactories or as simple laborers, and were living “ in a state of degradation really humiliating to our country.” Dismayed at losing so many of their parishioners, the priests bitterly complained that many of the seigneurs had refused and still refused “ to encourage the establishment of profitable works and useful manufactures for the country, in order to retain exclusively without profit to themselves or the public, the numerous water powers owned by them, and for which they are offered reasonable prices.”13 The committee investigating the startling migration depended much upon the testimony of priests, who, it was critically pointed out in some quarters, had nothing to say of the exactions of the Church.

Yet another matter disquieting to the shippers was the fleeing of large numbers of seamen to the United States. Of 20,164 seamen at the port of Quebec in 1846, there were 3,549 desertions. The ship masters, studiously seeking to throw the blame upon anybody other than themselves, accused the taverns and tippling houses of luring the seamen, getting them drunk and robbing them. But between the exactions of crimp and shipping master, the seamen were effectively despoiled before any other agency plundered them ; if in debt, as they usually were, they were imprisoned ; if they deserted, the force of a special police hunted them down, and if they were detected, threw them into loathsome jails.14

At this time, it would appear from a legislative return, the seigneurs or the owners of seignories owned 7,496,000 acres of land in Lower Canada, and the Jesuits’ estates, not appropriated by the Government, covered 664,080 acres. In 1831 one in every 399 persons in Lower Canada was living upon alms ; in 1844, one in every 151 of the population was a recognized pauper subsisting upon alms. “ This shows a fearful increase in pauperism,” said the report. The number of illiterate children was astonishing.15

Despite the rebellion of 1837-1838 the Clergy Reserves were extremely safe from forfeiture or confiscation, and likewise the lands of the Canada Company and the British American Land Company.

But the contesting Protestant denominations gained their point. The legislature of Upper Canada in 1840 passed an Act distributing the lands among the various Protestant sects, but this Act was disallowed (or vetoed) ; and in the same year an Imperial Act decreed that the funds from the sale of the land were to be distributed in the proportion of 2 to 1 between the Episcopalians and the Presbyterians. As for the remainder of the Clergy Reserves to be sold, one-third of the proceeds were to go to the Episcopalians, one-sixth to the Presbyterians, and the remainder to be divided among the other denominations. Originally, it may be said, the Presbyterians had been excluded, but, contesting the case in the courts, had obtained a favorable decision in England.


Clergy Denounce Alienation of Their Land Reserves


This proposed arrangement by no means satisfied the large party intent upon obliterating the Clergy Reserves. This party comprised settlers and lumber and other capitalists.

When, in 1850, a Bill was introduced in the Legislative Assembly of Canada to alienate the vested interest held by the Clergy in the revenue from the sale of the reserves (although insuring them stipends), the prelates of the Episcopal Church raised a mighty protest, vociferously calling the measure an “ infidel ” one. In a circular to the Clergy, Archdeacon Stuart of Kingston, and the Archdeacon of York, denounced the move as one “ of direct spoliation of the Church,” and as “ flagrantly wicked and unjust.” The clergy were advised to get together impressive petitions, and were told, that if the Church members would “rise and speak in the might of their righteous cause . . . their voice would soon drown the cry of the evil-minded and ungodly faction which aims at her destruction.” The petition read that “ your petitioners would regard the success of such an attempt as a national sin of the deepest dye and a grievous moral degradation.” These petitions were to be forwarded to the Lord Bishop of Toronto before he left for England.16

On September 17 and October 18, 1852, Mr. Brown moved a motion in the Legislative Assembly that inasmuch as the Protestant Clergy had got by fraud or error 300,000 acres of land in Upper Canada, and 227,559 acres in Lower Canada — in all 527,559 acres — that measures should be taken to recover the funds paid for these particular lands.17 Whereupon, the Episcopal Bishops of Quebec, Toronto and Montreal successfully protested against this “ proposed confiscation.”18 In 1854 an Act was finally passed alienating from the Church all vested rights in the Reserves, but leaving the clergy certain stipends and allowances “ during their natural lives and incumbrances.”





Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
, , , , , ,

Thursday, April 14, 2022

For the record: Re-contextualizing Canada's history


The ways in which the general public understands the historical record are transforming. Canadians are increasingly engaging in conversations about new historical perspectives that are changing how the nation’s past is understood and remembered.

It is often said of history that it’s written by the victors, but there has been a growing push to interpret significant figures in their historical context using multiple perspectives. Manitoba offers unique examples of this phenomenon in how communities can talk about the past positively and productively.

In the public sphere, people are investigating and trying to learn more about different aspects of their community and country, said Max Hamon, associate professor in the department of history at Brandon University.

Their curiosity can be piqued by the mundane things they encounter in their community, such as a historical plaque or street sign they walk by each day.

As the public re-discovers and re-contextualizes what were once commonly accepted historical narratives, he said, they are starting to push back against what was once accepted academic "truths."

He described this process of learning as "public history." The National Council on Public History describes this concept as a movement promoting collaborative study and engagement with history. The goal of the practice is to make unique insights accessible and useful to the public, helping them better understand their past.

As people learn more about Canada’s history using multiple perspectives, the traditional focus on French and English settlements in the country can often leave people feeling like other narratives are missing from the past.

"The national narrative it’s simply not satisfactory," Hamon said. "Canada is not just French and English. Canada is so much more than those things and, in many ways, Canada is insufficient to explain the complexity of all these things. It’s a good thing to start recognizing the work that goes into this."

Hamon cited Louis Riel as an example of a trans-national history. Historians continue to expand the narrative surrounding the Métis icon to better establish his place in Canadian history.

As a historical figure, Riel exemplifies the deep divide that can exist when people are interpreting historical records, Hamon said. While he is now widely accepted and celebrated by Canadians as the father of Manitoba and a critical figure in Canadian Confederation, this interpretation is relatively new.

"It’s hard to understand how people saw it differently in the past," Hamon said. "If we’re thinking about the evolution of Riel, I do think that it’s simplified and I am always shocked to hear a historian try to say Riel is ‘such a controversial figure’ — it’s no longer controversial to recognize Riel’s significance, but that has changed through work. People have worked to better understand who he was."

Born in St. Boniface in the Red River Settlement in October 1844, Riel played a pivotal role in bringing Manitoba into Confederation. His direction of the Red River Rebellion led to the Canadian government at the time labelling him an "outlaw." In 1884, Riel was asked by Saskatchewan Valley settlers to lead them in protest against the Canadian government resulting in the North-West Rebellion in 1885.

Following the rebellion’s defeat, Riel was tried for treason and hung in Regina in November 1885.

The example of Riel demonstrates how history can be seen in a different light by embracing additional historical perspectives. Studying the historical icon over the years has helped Hamon understand Canada and its history in new ways.

"We often say history is told by the victors, by those who were able to grab and hold onto power. All the other voices and perspectives, the views of the other side … are drowned out — whether it’s women, whether it’s poor, whether it’s marginalized communities," said Kelly Saunders, Brandon University political science professor. "We only see one story and that is the story that our government institutions choose to tell us."

In Canada, there has been a carefully crafted historical and cultural narrative largely based on the country being more diverse, peaceful, respectful and civil compared to other jurisdictions such as the United States.

Using multiple viewpoints to examine Canadian history shows that it can be viewed as a country "built on genocide," she said.

"This is what history tells us, and historians, the experts who are studying what actually happened in this country and the story of how we came to be from multiple perspectives and not just what the British Crown or what the Canadian government wanted us to know, but the true history told by the voices that have been shut out — that is our story."

These nuanced conversations that take into account various historical experiences are becoming increasingly difficult to participate in and facilitate in the public sphere, because there has been a loss of trust in and respect for authority — political experts, senior experts, elected officials, historians, scientists, among others — and the insights they can provide to the historical record.

"We just dig our heels in and come at it from a very emotional point of view and that everybody is a ‘self-styled’ expert. When you add those two things together, it ends up where we are today — it’s just butting heads and there’s no sense of talking our way through and reaching consensus anymore."

Saunders saw a break from this trend after children’s bodies were rediscovered in unmarked graves at former residential schools across the country. She said these histories were known by Indigenous communities for generations and documented by the government. However, the facts about residential schools had not significantly entered the sphere of public history and discourse prior to the 215 unmarked graves located near the Kamloops Residential School in 2021, which gained international attention.

The unearthed bodies of these children broke through Canadians’ mental discomfort when it came to viewing the country’s past atrocities. Difficult conversations have forced Canadians to engage with the traumatic legacy of residential schools and the disenfranchisement of Indigenous communities and people for decades.

"We could no longer deny it because it was in front of us," Saunders said. "I noticed the conversations that started happening. People that just went about their lives, not very knowledgeable or very caring about these issues, were now texting me and saying, ‘I want to talk about this … I want to learn more.’"

Growing up, Louis Riel was spoken of with admiration in his family home and was a celebrated figure for his impact in Manitoba, said John Fleury, Minnedosa-based Manitoba Métis Federation (MMF) minister of the Indigenous skills and employment training strategy.

"But, then, of course, we heard the English version that he was a traitor and everything else. But, from our own people, he was always doing something good," Fleury said. "They [would] talk about Louis Riel and he was a traitor in the war against Canada, but they didn’t talk about how he secured the Métis’ future; he tried to protect their language, and not only the Métis language but the French language and English. He was protecting all peoples."

The new understanding of Riel as a crucial figure in Canada’s history slowly began to shift in the mid-1960s, he said, aided by the formation of the MMF. The organization was able to share views from all areas of the province with the common thread of speaking to Riel as a hero and protector of people, a father of Confederation and the father of Manitoba.


Non-Métis were not always open to this historical perspective but over time, minds slowly began to change, he said. It has been powerful and uplifting to see the monumental place Riel holds in Canadian history gain acceptance by the general public.

"It was a big shift, and I think that’s when society began becoming more open to another person’s point of view. They allowed us our point of view whether they liked it or not, and then they began accepting another point of view."

Regardless of how it is presented, people will formulate opinions based on what they have been told by their families, teachers and others in society. He said when up against these experiences, changing opinions is a slow process — but they can be transformed.

The MMF remains committed to promoting truth and education to open minds. Fleury encouraged people to push boundaries and learn as much as they can, because reconciliation cannot take place without truth.

"That’s what we need more of — more educated opinions. We all need to do our part," Fleury said. "We are now living in a new era, and education and communication is the key."

The namesake of Rosser Avenue came under scrutiny after John Simpson appeared before Brandon City Council in September 2020, requesting the name of the thoroughfare be changed. Simpson said a rechristening of the street was essential given the tainted history of its namesake.


The avenue bears the name of former late-19th-century Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) chief engineer and Confederate General Thomas Lafayette Rosser. According to the Manitoba Historical Society, Rosser worked for the railway for less than a year before departing the company "amid accusations, recriminations and scandal."

Rosser served as a Confederate general during the American Civil War and his family engaged in slavery.

"I’m not so sure that this is such a glorious, glorious past that we are looking for, particularly as I began to learn more and more about him," Simpson told the Sun. " I’m not sure that he’s someone who is really worthy of our attention and our honour here in Brandon."

The Manitoba Historical Society described Rosser as a complex figure who was "almost ruthless, action-oriented approach to getting a job done, and his ever-present eye on the possibilities for profit, are amply demonstrated through his actions during his short time with the CPR."


Simpson pushed for the Rosser Avenue name change out of a sense of indignation.

He expects these discussions around how historical figures are honoured will only broaden as the public has been forced to reckon with truth and reconciliation since the rediscovery of hundreds of unmarked graves in former residential school sites across Canada. These graves are prompting a re-examination of Canadian history.

Simpson proposed alternative names for Rosser Avenue that could honour Westman’s Indigenous history, including Tommy Captain, the first child who died at the Brandon Indian Residential School in 1896.

"Tommy and all those children who died represent lost potential, potential never realized," Simpson said. "I really hope for the sake of inclusivity, for the sake of reconciliation, for the sake of all people who don’t fit the traditional mould that Brandon has grown from, I really hope that we change and we continue to change. We can do that one way through the symbols that we proclaim within our boundaries."

It can be challenging for people to learn and accept new historical facts that challenge what was once widely accepted views. It is a positive case when it comes to Riel, Fleury said, but Rosser’s legacy stands in stark contrast.

Rosser’s motivation for coming to Canada was, in Fleury’s opinion, centred on "greed."

"He wanted to make a name for himself and he didn’t care how he did it," Fleury said. "After all of his manipulations on the railroad and elsewhere, he went out of here to the States because he was found out to be a bit of a shyster."

History shows Rosser departed Brandon with a "stain on his name."

There is a stark contrast between Riel and Rosser’s experiences in Canada. It was at a time when Indigenous people were being chased off their lands and facing the expansion of the settlers across the prairies, Fleury said.

Rosser profited during this era of Canada, while Riel fought for the future of his people.

It can be hard for people to reassess and adjust perspectives as they learn new historical facts, Fleury said, but it is even worse when people do not take the time to learn the true history of their nation.

These debates about history come down to education, especially because stories like the history of Rosser are not taught, he said.

Debates over the historical legacy or shame should be treated with care, because they can distract from more urgent and contemporary community issues. Indigenous people in Canada have experienced cultural genocide, land disposition, residential schools and other acts of trauma for the past 150 years.

The discussions around Rosser Avenue’s name need to be discussed carefully with civility and understanding, said Kris Desjarlais, Brandon Urban Aboriginal Peoples’ Council vice-chair. The name "Rosser" has largely been decoupled from the individual, and most people are unaware of the Confederate General’s controversial legacy.

It can be difficult to make a definitive decision when it comes to sites, streets or statues named after historical figures. Desjarlais cautioned there is a need to be careful in how far these conversations are pushed when looking at historical figures from a modern-day perspective.

"Where do we draw the line?" Desjarlais said. "I think in order for us to wrap our heads around these issues collectively, we need to have the dialogue. I don’t think we can just say [it’s] ‘because it’s the right thing to do.’ We need to bring people along with us to get to that place."

Seemingly trivial conversations like Rosser Avenue’s name can only increase divisions in the community. Desjarlais said there are more important things to do to support marginalized populations.

Support for First Nation, Métis and Inuit peoples needs to be centred on systemic changes that directly help and provide equity and equality for contemporary populations. This can include improving outcomes around education, health and employment, reforming child and family welfare and returning power and control to Indigenous communities.

"You end up risking fighting [for these changes] over window dressing," Desjarlais said. "I’m more interested in important things, because changing Rosser Avenue to an Indigenous name is not going to employ anybody, it’s not going to reduce the anxiety of a single mom in Brandon who is Indigenous and struggling to make ends meet."

Desjarlais is hopeful for the future of Canada. He cited how Brandon’s inaugural Truth and Reconciliation week saw around 1,000 people participate in the Orange Shirt Day walk. It was an amazing experience, he added, because it included meaningful conversations around truth and reconciliation.

"This could be a turning point in Canada … You start and you plant the seed, it creates slow and incremental gains. It’s not going to be a sea of change," Desjarlais said. "It is different than it was 25 years ago — we are making inroads, but we have a long way to go."

Rosser is not the first figure to have newly recognized historical records transform their legacy, Prof. Hamon said. Riel has been a fluid figure throughout Canadian history, with his significance and legacy gaining a positive light as he became better understood outside the traditional Western historical narrative.

"If we’re going to tell the story of Rosser and make it meaningful, it’s going to be a lot more complicated than just a road sign," Hamon said. "These local histories which focus on specific communities, they’re so rich and they’re so filled with detail, the problem is they don’t connect it to the broader context always."

The presence or lack thereof, of a statue or street name, does not change history, he said. Instead, it impacts the types of conversations being initiated based on what is in the world around you.

People need to understand the constructed nature of their worldview and how it is influenced by their life experiences, he said.

One of the most important steps is moving away from the binaries and to stop thinking in terms of settler versus Indigenous, he added. Canadians need to understand how to talk about the countless different cultures, including Indigenous, as a whole and their unique experiences in the country.

Some members of the public may choose to portray symbols like Rosser Avenue as extremes, Saunders said, but most controversies are not as polarized as presented.

"To say that we have to keep the name to honour our history — well, what history do we want to honour?" Saunders said. "What history do we really want to privilege and whose history do we want to privilege and what does that say about who we are as Canadians?"

Conversations are taking place across Canada that unpack colonialism’s ongoing role in society and how it reproduces itself in new, more nuanced and indirect ways. Saunders said a key aspect of breaking this cycle is talking and working with Indigenous communities involving them in the decision-making process and allowing them to exert power.

People are learning history is an intersectional experience, and she can see people are changing, giving her hope for the future.

"Just by having conversations, you can really change one person at a time. We just have to be open-minded and be willing to look at the world a little bit differently than what we have done before [and] ask the big questions that have to be asked."


Chelsea Kemp, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, Brandon Sun


SEE