Canadians Toppling Statues of Queen Victoria & Queen Elizabeth ll

[Keesha]

As Rose says I believe it did, we did not treat Native Americans any better than you did. I live within a mile of the old Intermountain Indian School (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermountain_Indian_School ). My family spent 2 years in Utah when I was in High School and we used to have sporting events with the Indian School, I wrestled there a couple of times.

That was the 60s and I do not believe the mistreatment was as bad then as earlier, but still the Indian kids were forced to leave home and live at the school for years. And I know it was not a great place and many of the Indian students were not very happy about it. We also had a kind of exchange program, Indian kids were placed in the homes of whites for "education".

I had 2 such Indian friends, one I kept touch with for several years after school. He had little good to say about that program or the Indian school.

When I said I see Canada as a nice place with nice people I meant it. I know y'all are humans, not perfect, but pretty good. And I think the unfortunate events took place a long time ago, not many living Canadians involved.

Thanks for sharing such personal stories.
You know, I truly find it haunting looking back, now and remembering Indian kids who didn’t get treated well and hated it.

It must have been horrible for them.
I think there are people who do blame the church as well as the government for what happened to these kids. The church helped abuse them which is extra horrific since a church is meant to be a sacred place. A place of worship, prayer and safety.
Maybe this is why some people are upset with the church? That’s not to say that I agree with what they did cause I don’t.

 

[Alligatorob]

I think there are people who do blame the church as well as the government for what happened to these kids

I don't know much about your situation in Canada, but here in Utah the whole exchange program I spoke of was run by the Mormon Church.

The idea was to take the Indian kids off of the reservation, put them with good Mormon families and raise them as "white". I do believe the Mormons were doing what they thought best at the time for the kids, nothing wrong with their motives.

Based on the limited sampling of the Indian kids I became friends with they were not happy with it at all. They missed their parents and homes and never felt a part of the Mormon culture. I do however know from reading about it that there were some "successes", some of the Indian kids did convert and were happy with the outcome. They believe they faired better in life that they would have left to grow up on the reservation. So I think the results were mixed at best.

To my knowledge no one has accused the Mormons of abusing the Indian kids in any way other than facilitating their removal from home. And maybe pressure to join the Church.

One thing that's important is that once converted the Indians were accepted (I think) by the Mormons as equals - probably helped with some of the more positive outcomes. Anyway the program is long gone now, I think for the best, but am not always sure...

 

[Elsie]

Removal of statues is not erasing history. As an example, Germany has no statues of Hitler but I'm sure present day citizenry knows about the 12 years of the Third Reich from books, Internet and formal (classroom) education.

By saying "erasing," I didn't mean therefore the ugly parts of our (USA) history had never happened. Sorry. I was being factitious when I wrote about placing a plaque with befuddled tales on the statued men to show they were unwise fools undeserving of honor. But then, who would take the time to read the plaques anyway. Perhaps not destroy the torn down statues, but display them in a History Museum along with the truth about the despicable parts they played in history. ??

 

[Keesha]

Interestingly enough, your post speaks volumes about the main component in this entire idea of helping these Indian children. Integrity!

What was the intention or motivation behind the idea of taking them from their families and reforming them?

The last place we lived at, we were surrounded by Mormons & Mennonites. They were attracted to the fertile and vacant land which they’d use for farming.

I personally met some of these Mennonites and they were truly lovely people. They invited me to go to church with them in a horse pulled wagon and dinner afterwards which I gratefully accepted. They were exceptionally welcoming and accepting of me. I learned so much about them and why they did things.

Reading your post was soothing. I understand that not all students would embrace being ripped away from their families and welcoming a religious cult raising them but I’m so glad some of these relationships worked out.

I highly doubt these particular children were abused either and I also truly believe that the intention WAS to help them. Unfortunately not all children were treated fairly or civilly. Many were treated like savages. Even the ones who survived must have had some serious trust and abandonment issues but I’m so happy to read that some actually did work out.



1st photo are Mennonites


Second photo: Mormon

 

[StarSong]

What was the intention or motivation behind the idea of taking them from their families and reforming them?

The intention was to strip their "savage" culture from them and "save their souls" by turning them into good little Catholics or Christians.

 

[Elsie]

Native children peacefully taken away from home and family, (against their wishes), by those who believe the children's culture is not "rightious" must have been psychologically damaging to many of those children. But, of course they who took them would see their actions as rightious and best for the native children.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Oh dear, Canadians uprising against a dead Queen and one
who is almost 100 years old because of the bodies of indigenous
children, found in a mass grave.

I don't understand the logic of their actions as I am sure that they
knew nothing about it, nor would they have condoned such bad
treatment of any children.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-57693683

I am at a loss.

Mike.

Queen Victoria sent troops into the Indian subcontinent, to Africa, to the Middle East, and elsewhere. While her biography is highly idealized in the USA and elsewhere, her imperialistic colonialism killed more people than did the criminal actions of Adolf Hitler. You do not need to accept what you've read here. But go ahead and read a few history books on the subject and you will readily find proof.

 

[DaveA]

@Jules That mob mentality is real. People just go off the rails when mob mentality starts taking over the situation. Very scary.

And when they find a charismatic leader it gets really bad and sometimes irreversible. Among others both before and after his time, think Hitler in the years leading to WWII.

 

[Jules]

What was the intention or motivation behind the idea of taking them from their families and reforming them?

Some intentions were very good and some were very bad. We didn’t live then so truly don’t know.

There was no written language. Living and health conditions were very poor. If everything had been left as it was, our present society would be criticized for not providing an education and health care. Anyone suggesting they should have just sent teachers and health care in would see how difficult it is even now. Even the most idealistic would not last long. Some persevered.

On the other side, there were those who did consider them as savages and gave them no respect. It wasn’t fair. It was downright ugly! And then they arrived in Residential schools and were fodder for pedophiles, both male and female, usually under the control of Catholic Church.

A few years ago I listened to an aboriginal Member of Parliament talking about the quandary. She admitted that she probably was fortunate that her parent had gone to a residential school because that education gave her hers.

 

[Keesha]

The intention was to strip their "savage" culture from them and "save their souls" by turning them into good little Catholics or Christians.

Yeah. That’s my conclusion also. What a horrific message to send to this entire culture of people. How arrogant of humanity to rip kids away from their parents and community and make them feel ashamed for who they were really is horrid.

Native children peacefully taken away from home and family, (against their wishes), by those who believe the children's culture is not "rightious" must have been psychologically damaging to many of those children. But, of course they who took them would see their actions as rightious and best for the native children.

The psychological damage these children must have endured must have been pure hell. They no longer had stability with their own family or familiar relatives. They no longer had anything resembling their own culture since it was condemned as evil . They had religious people whom they did not know, trying to raise them to be something they weren’t all while abusing them physically, emotionally, psychologically and sexually.

 

[Keesha]

Some intentions were very good and some were very bad. We didn’t live then so truly don’t know.

There was no written language. Living and health conditions were very poor. If everything had been left as it was, our present society would be criticized for not providing an education and health care. Anyone suggesting they should have just sent teachers and health care in would see how difficult it is even now. Even the most idealistic would not last long. Some persevered.

On the other side, there were those who did consider them as savages and gave them no respect. It wasn’t fair. It was downright ugly! And then they arrived in Residential schools and were fodder for pedophiles, both male and female, usually under the control of Catholic Church.

A few years ago I listened to an aboriginal Member of Parliament talking about the quandary. She admitted that she probably was fortunate that her parent had gone to a residential school because that education gave her hers.

I completely agree. We didn’t live back then so truly don’t know why. All we can do is research and speculate.

There does seem like there were some good intentions by some but there were those who took advantage.

It seems like any good system implanted will have those willing to corrupt it, turning the entire idea into something evil.

I’m sure outside civilized society viewed our native Indians as ‘badly in need’ of rescuing
so did everything in their power to try and change them.

Good intentions gone badly?
If nothing was attempted, would the government and church have been criticized for not doing anything? I don’t know but knowing humanity as I do I can’t see why they wouldn’t. Then again, was it their business to intervene? I don’t have the answers.

Recently I’ve listened to radio interviews, podcasts , watched videos and read a lot about this and it truly haunting. I can’t imagine living a life where I wasnt accepted by anybody, even the people who were legally in charge of me. It would be horrible not having any love, acceptance or respect but instead, abused and humiliated for the rest of your life until death came.

 

[Mike]

Queen Victoria sent troops into the Indian subcontinent, to Africa, to the Middle East, and elsewhere. While her biography is highly idealized in the USA and elsewhere, her imperialistic colonialism killed more people than did the criminal actions of Adolf Hitler. You do not need to accept what you've read here. But go ahead and read a few history books on the subject and you will readily find proof.

Oldiebutgoody, I have read lots of history books, some
are very good and others not so, but I would like to point
out that Queen Victoria never ever sent troops anywhere
to conquer anybody.

Since the 17th Century the Kings and Queens of Great Britain
have been figureheads with no ruling powers, the Government
rule here and the Monarch smiles and does all the fancy stuff
with soldiers on horses.

Here are some extracts about the subject, plus a link to the whole
essay.

When and how did the British monarchy start losing its power?
How did the British monarch become the powerless figurehead
of the present day?

If you're looking for where Parliament's power undeniably eclipsed
the monarch's, this is it. The first Elector of Hanover to be King of
Great Britain was George I, who spent 20% of his reign as King of
Great Britain in Hanover and who, at least in the beginning of his
reign, didn't speak English. This allowed Parliament to become even
more powerful, and in particular, for the leader of Parliament,
Robert Walpole, to become rather entrenched there.
Walpole was particularly adept at using the civil list - in effect, the
king's allowance from Parliament - to get what he wanted.

Full Story Here.

Mike.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Queen Victoria was designated as the "Empress of India" which is a title she readily accepted: Queen Victoria and India, 1837-61 on JSTOR

Her soldiers were given "Victoria Crosses" for their valor: PBS : Empires : Queen Victoria : History of a Realm : Passage to India

Victoria the warrior queen ~ Queen Victoria's Wars: The Monarch & 19th-Century Conquest - HistoryExtra​

Whether in Khartoum, Egypt, Crimea, Indian subcontinent, Hong Kong, or wherever, Queen Victoria sent sailors and soldiers to conquer, destroy, steal resources, and rape with ceaseless rapacity. I could give you hundreds more links to prove all that. She was the greatest murderer of the 19th century. History cannot be more clear on this.

 

[Mike]

The history that I read is much different.

Mike.

 

[Packerjohn]

What to me is most upsetting is that it is happening
in Canada, a country that I thought was such a nice
place, full of nice people!

What happened?

Mike.

Hey Mike! I'm a nice guy and I know a lot of nice people; seniors and young people too. However, you never hear about us because we are just normal, nice people. You got to be crazy to get the media's attention. Just yesterday in a city near where I live a nutter killed his toddler daughter with a knife. Another crazy drove his truck up the stairs of our provincial capitol building and when police arrested him he was screaming about mass graves of children. Must of been stoned out of his mind. The media loves these stores. The more the better. You will never hear about me on the news and I'm guessing you wouldn't be on either.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

The history that I read is much different.

Mike.

I understand. After all, in my childhood I watched movies, tv programming, and read books that gave such a sanitized outlook on the genocidal murderer. For example, a recent PBS series showed her as having great solicitude for the Irish during the famine. But history gives us a very different picture as she stood by and allowed people to starve. Many fled to the USA, to Puerto Rico, to Mexico, and all points elsewhere in order to avoid death. Obviously she didn't give a s______t and likely rubbed her hands with rapturous glee at all that suffering.



Queen Victoria -The Famine Queen - History of Royal Women




This is not revisionist history, it is FACT.

Oh by the way, there was even more famine in India. Don't take my word for it. Look it up yourself and see that, again, this is not revisionist history but is FACT whether you choose to believe it or not.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Queen Victoria ~ alongside other genocidal murderers of the 19th century, from Wiki:

A shocked mandarin in Manchu robe in the back, with Queen Victoria (British Empire), Wilhelm II (German Empire), Nicholas II (Russian Empire), Marianne (French Third Republic), and a samurai (Empire of Japan) stabbing into a king cake with Chine ("China" in French) written on it. A portrayal of New Imperialism and its effects on China.




Every statue of Queen Victoria needs to melted to metals that can be used for building hospital and homes for the poor, especially in places she invaded and terrorized.