In this age of anger and outrage, wisdom and moderation should be welcomed when they emerge.
Posted at 5:00 am
Indeed, we find much of this in the five-page notice recently released by the committee set up by the City of Montreal to decide the fate of the controversial statue of John A. Macdonald.
The clue doesn’t say exactly what to do with this statue, but it does mark the path Montreal could take.
And he tends towards an inspiring compromise solution.
His answer to the questions we ask ourselves will not please activists who dream of erasing all traces of John A. Macdonald from collective memory, nor those who do not want us to touch a single hair of that statue.
And… that’s a pretty good sign.
The only option ruled out by the committee was clearly the status quo.
More specifically, we oppose “the possibility of a full restoration of the monument, which would involve the identical reinstallation of the bronze statue on its base and under the canopy”.
In particular, we cite the “assimilatory and genocidal policies he pursued against the indigenous people” to conclude that “it is necessary to remind us of this legacy of John A. Macdonald and the colonial vision represented by the monument.” becomes to distance”.
It’s undeniable. The tragedy of residential Aboriginal schools has now entered our collective consciousness. We can no longer hide the role played by John A. Macdonald in this dark episode in the country’s history.
But note how nuanced the committee’s opinion is on the future of the statue, which sat on Place du Canada before it was unlocked by protesters in 2020.
“However, the committee does not rule out the use of the bronze statue or its image in a reinterpretation,” it says.
No, the members of the committee are not saying that John A. Macdonald should be doomed to stew in the dustbin of history, although their opinion may have been interpreted that way by some in recent days.
It’s important to get things straight when we consider this lead at a public study session next Wednesday.
It is also important to say that the committee is right. The controversial statue, without being placed on its pedestal as before, could certainly be placed again in the Place du Canada, but in a different context. Necessarily with the addition of interpretative text to highlight the barbaric assimilationist policies of John A. Macdonald and his colleagues.
But the statue of John A. Macdonald, for example, cannot simply be compared to those of Confederate soldiers and generals in the United States, many of whom were erected with the stated purpose of glorifying the Confederacy (and thus segregation). ).
Nor was John A. Macdonald a mere slave trader like British businessman Edward Colston, whose statue was torn down in Bristol two years ago.
His legacy is more complex…
John A. Macdonald’s role in creating Aboriginal boarding schools has been swept under the rug for too long, while other abominations, such as his responsibility for the hanging of Louis Riel, have been tolerated.
But it is undesirable to play the right man of the wrong while ignoring the achievements of the man who was one of the Canadian Confederation’s chief architects – and the country’s first prime minister.
Nuance must be in order when it comes to John A. Macdonald’s place in Canadian history. Prefer gray.
Another criticism of the committee’s opinion is that it does not adequately address the less dark side of the politician.
The reinterpretation he advocates “should clearly reject the colonial vision of Canada put forward by Macdonald and evoke the collective values that we want to instill”. Very good. But we shouldn’t fall into revisionism either.
For example, it would be abnormal not to explain who John A. Macdonald was and why he was celebrated from coast to coast for so long. Or not to evoke the context that led to the erection of his statue, as well as the symbolism of the site chosen at the time.
There is no illusion in believing that we can find a path between glorification and “annulment.” We must ensure that nuance still has its place in these types of heated debates.
If the City of Montreal Council has to make a final decision on the future of the statue of John A. Macdonald next February, it’s this passageway that it should take.