More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on how to write an apology essay
Essay on how to write an apology essay
Essay on how to write an apology essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The abuse of native populations has been a common theme throughout history, especially for the rising nations of the 1800s. Of the many guilty nations, Canada is one of the few to have apologized for their actions. Canada’s formal apology, titled “Statement of Apology to Former Students of Indian Residential Schools”, was delivered on Canada Day of 2008 by former Prime Minster of Canada, Stephen Harper. This apology speech not only serves as a reminder to Canadian citizens about their past actions as a nation, but also demonstrates how the Canadian perspective on native peoples has changed over one-hundred years from disgust and apathy to respect and sympathy. Specifically, this shift of attitude is demonstrated through Harper’s manner of …show more content…
Harper addresses early on that Canada made a mistake in separating “children from rich and vibrant cultures and traditions”. Later on in the speech, he supports his assertion by utilizing the very languages that were ripped from the children of indigenous peoples. Harper reads, in apology to natives for Canada’s shortcomings, “Nous le regrettons. We are sorry. Nimitataynan. Niminchinowesamin. Mamiattugut.” The first two phrases are in the languages of the European settlers, French and English. The following three are languages of the Aboriginal peoples: Cree, Ojibway, and Inuktitut. This addition to Harper’s speech showcases a dedication to the Aboriginal peoples he is working so desperately to liberate. In addition to this, it builds onto the ideology of a united Canada by integrating native languages seamlessly with the European languages. The inclusion of this cultural reference demonstrates how the Canadian outlook on indigenous peoples is no longer one of disdain, but rather one of acceptance for their differing languages, traditions, and …show more content…
Under no circumstances does Harper echo the justifications that his forefathers gave for the lack of humanity with which the native populations were treated. In fact, he outright addresses those who claimed the program to be of help by stating, “While some former students have spoken positively about their experiences…, these stories are far overshadowed by tragic accounts of emotional, physical, and sexual abuse”. Additionally, he utilizes negative language when referring to the past mistakes of Canada. He frequently compares the events that occurred as a “tragedy” and also takes the firm stance that the practices of his predecessors were inexcusable. He accomplishes this by recognizing that the “policy of assimilation was wrong, [had] caused great harm, and [had] no place in [their] country.” Moreover, Harper outlines the ways Canada is reforming and aiding the peoples who they previously harmed with the Indian Residential Schools Truth and Reconciliation Commission by “educating all Canadian on the Indian Residential Schools System” in an attempt to mend the broken relationship. Contrast this with the views of the previous Canadian government who Indian Reservations as “‘Joint-Ventures’ with Anglican, Catholic, Presbyterian, [and] United Churches”. This only serves to underscore the fact that Canadians viewed these people and their cultures as nothing more
Residential schools had a negative impact on Aboriginal people, many children suffered greatly. The government had thought Aboriginal people’s history and culture were not worth preserving.This resulted to loss of culture and assimilation, because they were stripped out of their traditional ways, and taken away from their families.Stephen Harper apologized to the former students enrolled in Indian Residential schools on behalf of the government of Canada. What
Until the 16th century, Aboriginal people were the only inhabitants of what is now Canada, hence, they were an independent and self-governing people till the Europeans had the capacity to dominate Canada's original inhabitants and possessors (Elias 1). The European Invasion brought about The 1876 Indian Act, which was developed over time through separate pieces of colonial legislation regarding Aboriginal peoples across Canada such as the Gradual Civilization Act of 1857 and the Gradual Enfranchisement Act of 1869. In 1876, these acts were consolidated as the Indian Act (Hanson). This essay aims to explain how the Indian Act tried to destroy the Aboriginal culture through residential schools and unequal recognition of women, successive acts,
Generations of native people in Canada have faced suffering and cultural loss as a result of European colonization of their land. Government legislation has impacted the lives of five generations of First Nations people and as a result the fifth generation (from 1980 to present) is working to recover from their crippled cultural identity (Deiter-McArthur 379-380). This current generation is living with the fallout of previous government policies and societal prejudices that linger from four generations previous. Unrepentant, Canada’s ‘Genocide’, and Saskatchewan’s Indian People – Five Generations highlight issues that negatively influence First Nations people. The fifth generation of native people struggle against tremendous adversity in regard to assimilation, integration, separation, and recovering their cultural identity with inadequate assistance from our great nation.
Living in Canada, there is a long past with the Indigenous people. The relationship between the white and First Nations community is one that is damaged because of our shameful actions in the 1800’s. Unnecessary measures were taken when the Canadian government planned to assimilate the Aboriginal people. Through the Indian Act and Residential schools the government attempted to take away their culture and “kill the Indian in the child.” The Indian Act allowed the government to take control over the people, the residential schools took away their culture and tore apart their families, and now we are left with not only a broken relationship between the First Nations people but they are trying to put back together their lives while still living with a harsh reality of their past.
According to conservative conflict theory, society is a struggle for dominance among competing social groups defined by class, race, and gender. Conflict occurs when groups compete over power and resources. (Tepperman, Albanese & Curtis 2012. pg. 167) The dominant group will exploit the minority by creating rules for success in their society, while denying the minority opportunities for such success, thereby ensuring that they continue to monopolize power and privilege. (Crossman.n.d) This paradigm was well presented throughout the film. The European settlers in Canada viewed the natives as obstacles in their quest of expansion by conquering resources and land. They feared that the aboriginal practices and beliefs will disrupt the cohesion of their own society. The Canadian government adopted the method of residential schools for aboriginal children for in an attempt to assimilate the future generations. The children were stripped of their native culture,...
David Garneau’s article on “Imaginary Spaces of Conciliation and Reconciliation” offers a refreshing outlook on the term and implantation of reconciliation in post-colonial culture. He argues that conciliation would evoke an individual transformation of the settler if Aboriginal history was accepted as independent yet in union with the history of Canada. Garneau’s vison of conciliation is centered on this idea of an imaginary space between the settlers and Aboriginals and, within this space, settlers are separated from Aboriginals to naturally reflect on the Aboriginal’s experiences of colonialism. However, the implications of this space also created a void in society because the residential schools are the imaginary spaces in which settlers are reconciling. The direction of Garneau’s article is insightful to understanding how reconciliation has failed in countries and how it’s practice, in accordance with religious connotations, has created an underlying tone of “charity” and “pardon” opposed to restorative justice (35).
Our government’s predecessors have attempted to eradicate Canada’s first people, which is not only an insult to the indigenous people of the past, but to the present. This country did not start off as a joint endeavor of the two general groups of people that inhabited it during its birth, but decimation and forced assimilation of great traditions and people. The assimilation of a great culture, the destruction of oral histories, and the forced loss of language destroyed the chance trust. Only by teaching disgust towards that type of attitude and action, by not excusing it or attempting to justify, will begin a new age of
“To kill the Indian in the child,” was the prime objective of residential schools (“About the Commission”). With the establishment of residential schools in the 1880s, attending these educational facilities used to be an option (Miller, “Residential Schools”). However, it was not until the government’s time consuming attempts of annihilating the Aboriginal Canadians that, in 1920, residential schools became the new solution to the “Indian problem.” (PMC) From 1920 to 1996, around one hundred fifty thousand Aboriginal Canadians were forcibly removed from their homes to attend residential schools (CBC News). Aboriginal children were isolated from their parents and their communities to rid them of any cultural influence (Miller, “Residential Schools”). Parents who refrained from sending their children to these educational facilities faced the consequence of being arrested (Miller, “Residential Schools”). Upon the Aboriginal children’s arrival into the residential schools, they were stripped of their culture in the government’s attempt to assimilate these children into the predominately white religion, Christianity, and to transition them into the moderating society (Miller, “Residential Schools”). With the closing of residential schools in 1996, these educational facilities left Aboriginal Canadians with lasting negative intergenerational impacts (Miller, “Residential Schools”). The Aboriginals lost their identity, are affected economically, and suffer socially from their experiences.
The Canadian and American governments designed a residential school system to assimilate Indigenous children into Western society by stripping them of their language, cultural practices as well as their traditions. By breaking these children’s ties to their families and communities, as well as forcing them to assimilate into Western society; residential schools were a root cause of many social problems, which even persist within Aboriginal communities today.
Fleras, Augie. “Aboriginal Peoples in Canada: Repairing the Relationship.” Chapter 7 of Unequal Relations: An Introduction to Race, Ethnic and Aboriginal Dynamics in Canada. 6th ed. Toronto: Pearson, 2010. 162-210. Print.
The creation of the Residential Schools is now looked upon to be a regretful part of Canada’s past. The objective: to assimilate and to isolate First Nations and Aboriginal children so that they could be educated and integrated into Canadian society. However, under the image of morality, present day society views this assimilation as a deliberate form of cultural genocide. From the first school built in 1830 to the last one closed in 1996, Residential Schools were mandatory for First Nations or Aboriginal children and it was illegal for such children to attend any other educational institution. If there was any disobedience on the part of the parents, there would be monetary fines or in the worst case scenario, trouble with Indian Affairs.
Canada likes to paint an image of peace, justice and equality for all, when, in reality, the treatment of Aboriginal peoples in our country has been anything but. Laden with incomprehensible assimilation and destruction, the history of Canada is a shameful story of dismantlement of Indian rights, of blatant lies and mistrust, and of complete lack of interest in the well-being of First Nations peoples. Though some breakthroughs were made over the years, the overall arching story fits into Cardinal’s description exactly. “Clearly something must be done,” states Murray Sinclair (p. 184, 1994). And that ‘something’ he refers to is drastic change. It is evident, therefore, that Harold Cardinal’s statement is an accurate summarization of the Indigenous/non-Indigenous relationship in
Both Hart and Anaquod were subjected to the cultural assimilation and social isolation that was part of the Canadian government’s policy to “kill the Indian in the child.” Where the goal to transform Indigenous children into productive members of society shifted to abuse and the church and government covering up the secrets of abuse is sitting on a blurred line. On June 11, 2008, the current Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, made a statement of apology to former students of Indian Residential Schools, on behalf of the Government of Canada for the previous government’s actions. “The government of Canada now recognizes that it was wrong to forcibly remove children from their homes and we apologize for having done this,” Harper said. “We now recognize that it was wrong to separate children from rich and vibrant cultures and traditions, that it created a void in many lives and communities and we apologize for having done this.” Harper noted that many former students have died and are unable to hear the government’s
...to identity with at least one of the countries predominate languages, English or French, dictated the degree in which they could participate in Canadian life. According to the Commission, this participation was real under two conditions: “that both societies, the French-speaking as well as the English-speaking, accept[ed] newcomers much more rapidly than they have done in the past; and that the two societies willingly allow other groups to preserve and enrich, if they so desire, the cultural values they prize[d]” (RCBB Book 1 xxv). It creates an interesting take on the acceptance of those “othered” groups, as change was necessary not only on the part of the minorities but also from Canada’s French and English-speakers. The Commissions work remains focused on language and culture, more so than ethnicity amongst a bilingual, bicultural and “othered” Canadian society.
For decades First Nations people1 faced abuse in Canada's residential school system. Native children had their culture and families torn away from them in the name of solving the perceived “Indian Problem” in Canada. These children faced emotional, physical, and sexual abuse at the hands of residential school supervisors and teachers. Since the fazing out of residential schools in the 1960's the survivors of residential schools and their communities have faced ongoing issues of substance addiction, suicide, and sexual abuse.2 These problems are brought on by the abuse that survivors faced in residential schools. The government of Canada has established a Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) to address these issues but it has been largely ineffective. Though the Government of Canada has made adequate efforts towards monetary reparations for the survivors of residential schools, it has failed to provide a means to remedy the ongoing problems of alcohol and drug addiction, sexual abuse, and suicide in the communities of residential school survivors.3