We must remember also when Sir John lived, and his culture.

I feel I should in some way let folks know something about myself here. I'm a 66 year old, retired white guy. I was raised in the '50's and '60's in one of Canada's maritime provinces, and my parents' opinions were of necessity what I was taught. My Mom is a farmers daughter and my Dad was a somewhat poorly educated man.  I was told "Indian men are either drunk, screwing or both, and 99% of the women are whores. The rest of the women are nuns."  I'm so glad I've changed, at least some. I'm still alive, so that means I still have lessons to learn.

I have listened to the news reports of the scorn heaped on the history of Canada's first Prime Minister with an unsettled mind. I honestly believe that the culture he lived in says as much to this controversy as the present ethical and moral views held by Canadians. Specifically, I refer to political correctness, which attempts to prompt us to view all past wrongs with a fully blindly jaundiced perspective. The ethics, motives and missions of the era were, I believe, formed by the same forces as we have in our culture now.

 A desire to assist others, the hungry, the poor, the sick, and the lame and the simply different, is a good thing.  To feel compassion is one of humanity's greatest accomplishments. Working to assist political opponents who just disagree and journalists jailed for doing nothing more than reporting events, and all those now abused for being themselves, whether for skin color, gender identity, religion, or any aspect misunderstood and feared, is a positive thing. It may result in actions that are misdirected, mistaken or otherwise partially or wholly inappropriate for the situation, but the motive itself is still one of humanity's best aspects.

To say this motive has always been properly applied is simply not true.

So, just what were those leaders trying to accomplish? WHY did they do what they did?

Think about it... A Victorian era person hears of or sees the conditions prevalent in an indigenous settlement. Their reaction was most likely initially one of fear, thinking of the sickness and deaths that resulted from poor sanitation, woefully inadequate housing and a complete misunderstanding of the true nature of disease and infection. This is not to say the Victorian world was full of nothing but wisdom and compassion.  That culture did, however, have many people who were honestly and fully compassionate and wished to do the right thing, a feature still thankfully prominent in our world today.What resulted is a history of much misunderstanding and pain.

To say that the system of Indian reservations is a resounding success is obviously wrong.  I also maintain that it is not a complete failure either. Reservations have allowed native communities to remain cohesive, giving them a home where they have neighbors like themselves and cultural centers where they can gather and socialize and have events. Schools staffed and run by natives are a great assistance to native culture and community. Of course, the reservations have also served to separate a society from the rest of Canada that has much to share. Other influences such as substance abuse and educational deficiencies were also concentrated in small enclaves, keeping them largely out of the public eye and untreated. We can and must learn from each other. It has to go both ways.

Giving Sir John Alexander MacDonald complete and sole responsibility for the problems of the Canadian indigenous community due to the imposition of reservations is scapegoating. Political and religious authorities of the time were much in support of government action taken then.  To tar one man,  who had strong support from many politicians, civic leaders and the religious establishment of the time and a good proportion of the general population, for actions taken in complete confidence of purpose, is completely inaccurate and misdirected.

In closing, I must say this also. One aspect of this entire issue and controversy troubles me. Media is not without blame here. Unpopular opinions held by a few among any group involved in a controversy are rarely reported. Nowhere, and at no time, have I heard a single indigenous person say anything positive could have resulted from the policies and programs that were instituted. There must be someone who felt loved or at least not hated or abused.  Medicine, and education are good things.