Facebook Follies of Friends and Families

[Barrister]

The Meaning Of The Native Graves
They're good, actually.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-meaning-of-the-native-graves/

It is very important to note that the entire story is made up. First, we have always known that many children died in the residential schools, which were active through the 19th and 20th centuries. Child mortality was relatively high during that period to begin with; Indian mortality overall was astronomically high; and the Church-run schools for native children were systemically underfunded by the government, resulting in subpar facilities and inadequate medical care. Second, the sites almost certainly include the graves of Christian adults from the neighboring communities, as Chief Cadmus Delorme of the Cowessess First Nation admitted with respect to the Marieval Indian Residential School, where an estimated 751 burials were detected by radar last month. The "mass graves" of public hysteria are, in fact, the ordered and intentional burial sites of people we always knew were dead, and who died of more or less natural causes. In more literate times, we might have called that a cemetery.

The author is part right, part wrong here.

First, the "we have always known" - yes, we in terms of historians, or people who are educated on the topic.  In fact yesterday I went back and looked at the final report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (issued in 1996) - and yes it talks about the large number of deaths that happened at residential schools.  As well the final report on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission mentioned it at length.  But as the public outrage has shown - the public at large was unaware.  This is a failing of education.

Indian mortality overall was extremely high.  This also is true - but to what extent was that the fault of the Canadian government?

Schools were underfunded - yes.  But again if you go back in the historical record the government was repeatedly called out for this underfunding.

That these were cemeteries, not mass graves.  Also true.  But also that the government and churches made zero effort to maintain those cemeteries (the graves of which were adorned with simple wooden crosses) so the locations were very quickly lost.


And the whole notion that the death of children is okay because at least they were saved - I don't think any serious Christian would endorse that position.

[Valmy]

It is as holy as the Franks marching the defeated army into a river where they could be baptized, then killed on the other side so they wouldn't backslide.

Well I mean best to end it when your soul is clean and pure. Somewhere in Heaven those Saxons are eternally grateful.

"Kill them all, God will know his own." or something.

Well that is different. All those Catholics killed in the Albigensian Crusade hadn't just had the magic spell sacrament of baptism. They all had lots of purgatory ahead of them.

[Valmy]

And the whole notion that the death of children is okay because at least they were saved - I don't think any serious Christian would endorse that position.

One wouldn't think so...but yet they seem to.

[Berkut]

And the whole notion that the death of children is okay because at least they were saved - I don't think any serious Christian would endorse that position.

That is not the authors claim though.

He is not saying it was ok, he is saying that it was better then the alternative.

That a system that resulted in a lot of native people dying after being saved is better than a system that perhaps allowed them to live longer, but die in a state of not being saved.

Obviously a system that lets them live a long, healthy life while also being saved is superior to either.

But that was not one of the options, so overall, the system as it existed was a net positive for all those children who died in those schools.

And that makes perfectly rational sense once you accept that there is an eternal existence that is dependent on salvation.

[crazy canuck]

The Meaning Of The Native Graves
They're good, actually.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-meaning-of-the-native-graves/

It is very important to note that the entire story is made up. First, we have always known that many children died in the residential schools, which were active through the 19th and 20th centuries. Child mortality was relatively high during that period to begin with; Indian mortality overall was astronomically high; and the Church-run schools for native children were systemically underfunded by the government, resulting in subpar facilities and inadequate medical care. Second, the sites almost certainly include the graves of Christian adults from the neighboring communities, as Chief Cadmus Delorme of the Cowessess First Nation admitted with respect to the Marieval Indian Residential School, where an estimated 751 burials were detected by radar last month. The "mass graves" of public hysteria are, in fact, the ordered and intentional burial sites of people we always knew were dead, and who died of more or less natural causes. In more literate times, we might have called that a cemetery.

The author is part right, part wrong here.

First, the "we have always known" - yes, we in terms of historians, or people who are educated on the topic.  In fact yesterday I went back and looked at the final report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (issued in 1996) - and yes it talks about the large number of deaths that happened at residential schools.  As well the final report on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission mentioned it at length.  But as the public outrage has shown - the public at large was unaware.  This is a failing of education.

Indian mortality overall was extremely high.  This also is true - but to what extent was that the fault of the Canadian government?

Schools were underfunded - yes.  But again if you go back in the historical record the government was repeatedly called out for this underfunding.

That these were cemeteries, not mass graves.  Also true.  But also that the government and churches made zero effort to maintain those cemeteries (the graves of which were adorned with simple wooden crosses) so the locations were very quickly lost.


And the whole notion that the death of children is okay because at least they were saved - I don't think any serious Christian would endorse that position.

I am not sure where to start.  It is maddening that you keep going to this apologist well BB.  I pointed out to you in the Canadian Politics thread that the TRC asked for more funding to better investigate the deaths at the Residential Schools and the Conservative government of the day denied that funding - twice! 

As a result the TRC had to make do with rough estimates.  As the new findings at Kamloops discovered those rough estimates were way off. The TRC's best guess was about 50 graves at that location - over 200 have now been found at that location. 

In relation to your last sentence, I think you need to come to grips with the fact that religious conservatives do consider themselves serious Christians and in fact have built their political brand on that identity.

 

[alfred russel]

And the whole notion that the death of children is okay because at least they were saved - I don't think any serious Christian would endorse that position.

That is not the authors claim though.

He is not saying it was ok, he is saying that it was better then the alternative.

That a system that resulted in a lot of native people dying after being saved is better than a system that perhaps allowed them to live longer, but die in a state of not being saved.

Obviously a system that lets them live a long, healthy life while also being saved is superior to either.

But that was not one of the options, so overall, the system as it existed was a net positive for all those children who died in those schools.

And that makes perfectly rational sense once you accept that there is an eternal existence that is dependent on salvation.

I don't see the argument that "a system that resulted in a lot of native people dying after being saved is better than a system that perhaps allowed them to live longer, but die in a state of not being saved".

It seems the argument is pro conversion (including separating children for conversion), and that premature deaths were the fault of the secular authorities, and that deaths were astronomically high anyway.

[crazy canuck]

AR, the article expressly states  the argument Berkut summarized.

[Barrister]

It is maddening that you keep going to this apologist well BB.

It is maddening that you can read what I wrote and then call me an apologist.

[crazy canuck]

It is maddening that you keep going to this apologist well BB.

It is maddening that you can read what I wrote and then call me an apologist.

Perhaps you should go back and read what you wrote.  You defended that trash with further inaccuracies. When I look up the definition of apologist, the word fits.

[Barrister]

It is maddening that you keep going to this apologist well BB.

It is maddening that you can read what I wrote and then call me an apologist.

Perhaps you should go back and read what you wrote.  You defended that trash with further inaccuracies. When I look up the definition of apologist, the word fits.

Yup I'm done here.

[crazy canuck]

It is maddening that you keep going to this apologist well BB.

It is maddening that you can read what I wrote and then call me an apologist.

Perhaps you should go back and read what you wrote.  You defended that trash with further inaccuracies. When I look up the definition of apologist, the word fits.

Yup I'm done here.

Good.  Then I dont have to further correct your posts...

[Barrister]

It is maddening that you keep going to this apologist well BB.

It is maddening that you can read what I wrote and then call me an apologist.

Perhaps you should go back and read what you wrote.  You defended that trash with further inaccuracies. When I look up the definition of apologist, the word fits.

Yup I'm done here.

Good.  Then I dont have to further correct your posts...

[alfred russel]

AR, the article expressly states  the argument Berkut summarized.

Can you quote that for me? I'm not seeing any acknowledgement at any point that baseline deaths in the schools were higher than outside the schools for the native population. In fact, setting the baseline of deaths overall at a very high level is the first point raised after saying the current narrative in the media is "entirely made up".

First, we have always known that many children died in the residential schools, which were active through the 19th and 20th centuries. Child mortality was relatively high during that period to begin with; Indian mortality overall was astronomically high; and the Church-run schools for native children were systemically underfunded by the government, resulting in subpar facilities and inadequate medical care.

[crazy canuck]

It is maddening that you keep going to this apologist well BB.

It is maddening that you can read what I wrote and then call me an apologist.

Perhaps you should go back and read what you wrote.  You defended that trash with further inaccuracies. When I look up the definition of apologist, the word fits.

Yup I'm done here.

Good.  Then I dont have to further correct your posts...

Rather than going full Jaron, perhaps you could counter with a substantive response.  Tell me where my criticism of your post was wrong.  Tell me that I am wrong about the Conservatives denying funding to the TRC.  Tell me I am wrong the rough estimates were way off.  Go ahead, I am waiting.

[Barrister]

Rather than going full Jaron, perhaps you could counter with a substantive response.  Tell me where my criticism of your post was wrong.  Tell me that I am wrong about the Conservatives denying funding to the TRC.  Tell me I am wrong the rough estimates were way off.  Go ahead, I am waiting.