Replacing the System

I have noticed, over the course of my life, that when one government program is deemed to be not acceptable by those how it seeks to serve, it is often replaced with another ill-serving system. An example of this is the system of making individuals with disabilities dependent on Social Assistance, although this system does not at all meet their needs. As this program is seen as unacceptable, a new program called Saskatchewan Assured Income for Disability has been created. At the moment, this system has no marked differences from Social Assistance. It does not serve to meet the needs of the individuals in a markedly better manner. The only observable difference is that this new program does not carry with it the stigma that the welfare program does.

The renaming of programs was certainly the case when the residential school system was deemed as unsuitable to meet the needs of the First Nations peoples, as well as a failure in meeting its goals, and simply transformed into the present child welfare system. The child welfare system continues to be based on Euro-centric values, as residential schools were, and does not take into consideration Aboriginal values and worldviews (Blackstock, Brown, & Bennett, 2007). There is no acknowledgement that it was the imposition of European values that forced First Nations in economic poverty and made it difficult for families to provide for their children. This socio-economic displacement has led to more children being taken into care than were ever a part of the residential school system. The long-term impacts of the welfare system on children are very similar to the effects of the residential school system as neither system has the ability to address needs in a holistic manner (Blackstock, et al, 2007).

The child welfare system also replaced residential schools in the respect that the after effects of the welfare system are very similar to that of residential schools. Many of those who are a part of the welfare system suffer emotional and psychological side effects that place them at a higher risk of perpetuating cycles of high-risk behavior (Trocme, et al, 2006). It is necessary to break out of this cycle of unnecessary government involvement in the lives of First Nations communities. It has been proven that First Nations communities with high levels of self-sovereignty are most able to successfully support their children (Blackstock, et al., 2007). To continue to address the issues of inequality and reduce the level of government involvement in First Nations families, self-government needs to be addressed. This process should be given more support by both federal and provincial governments in order to create communities that are no longer dependent, but able to function within their own values and worldview.

References

Blackstock, C., et al. (2007). Reconciliation: Rebuilding the Canadian child welfare system to better serve Aboriginal children and youth. In I. Brown, et at., (Eds.), Purring a human face on child welfarE: Voices from the Prairies, (59-87). Regina: PCWC.

Trocmé, N., et al. (2006). Catching a drop of light. Toronto: Centre of Excellence for Child Welfare.

Sometimes There is No Resolution

"We need to recognize that there are some conflicts between people that cannot be resolved. Two sides may have hurt each other too much; they provoke too much fear and anguish in one another. They are unable to admit their own wounded state. The only solution then is a separation which can give each side the space and the time to re-find inner peace, and to reflect quietly." ~Jean Vanier

This quote arrived in my inbox immediately after the previous quote that I referenced from Jean Vanier. This seemed particularly appropriate in regards to the process of reconciliation that is ongoing within Canadian society. This reflects an ideal way in which resolution and reconciliation can take place.

It may be possible that reconciliation may never truly occur within Canada between the government and First Nations peoples. There is a lack of mutuality in how the parties are addressing reconciliation, specifically how the government is willing to compromise and admit wrongdoing in the past. This conflict may never be resolved because of all the past wrongs and the present issues. There is fear that the reconciliation process may only continue the process of colonization, which is entirely justified. This process also brings the anguish and pain that was faced by First Nations to the forefront of thought and consciousness.

The process of reconciliation is hindered by the fact that each party is not able to find space from each other to gain inner peace and reflection. First Nations cannot leave Canada because it was and is their home. There is no other country in the world that they are able to access a portion of their connection to the land and many governments may have done more damage than the Canadian government. It is not possible to gain time to reflect on what has happened as it is constantly necessary to fight for rights and funding support. The government has had the time to gain reflection and I hope that they will never be able to gain inner peace for their actions.

The process of resolution and reconciliation in Canada will never be ideal. The conditions for it be occur are compromised by the reality of daily life that are necessary for the survival of First Nations communities, as well as the daily functioning of government that needs to address a myriad of issues. Admittedly, more time could be spent on reconciliation and improving the quality of life in First Nations communities. Despite the lack of ideal conditions for reconciliation, it is necessary to ensure that reconciliation does occur in a timely fashion to address past and present wrong doings that continue to occur.

Native Peoples Have Much Too Teach

"Native people have suffered greatly, not only because of white people taking over their country but also because of missionaries who have seen them as heathen and far from God. Nowadays, fortunately, albeit a little late, we have begun to appreciate that God was present in this people well before the arrival of white people; that they were a profoundly believing and religious people with a deep sense of God. They also have a deep sense of humanity and of the earth. For far too long they have been pushed aside. And yet they have much to teach Western society which has lost the sense of what it means to be human, of the human community and of the earth." ~Jean Vanier

Jean Vanier is one of my favorite writers. He is a profoundly spiritual man who founded L'Arche, now a global organization, that functions in a community way to live in relationship with adults with disabilities. He writes about these relationships and how to be fully human and recognize that potential in others. Everyday I receive a quote from one of his books in my email and it never fails to profoundly relate to how I understand the world. This quote arrived as I was angry at how the Church had misunderstood the deep sense of spirituality that existed in First Nations communities long before missionaries ever set foot in North America. Vanier is now able to verbalize the fact that many religions ignored for centuries, that God is present in each person, regardless of how they may be labelled or categorized. It also possible to learn from each person as they reflect the divine in each of us and for each of us. We have lost much from not recognizing how the divine resides in each person, although the outward expression of each divinity may be different.

Although it may now be recognized the great wrong that has been done to First Nations peoples throughout North America, reparations can never fully be made to undo the damage that has been done to spirituality that existed for hundreds of years before contact with Europeans. There will never be the same respect held for religions that respect nature in that way and many First Nations peoples were taught to feel as though their spirituality was horrible and they would be punished in hell for it. Repairing that damage may never be possible.

We could have learned so much from the traditions of the First Nations peoples, had we been able to respect them for their unique perspectives on the world. Instead, European ethnocentrism has destroyed much in the past centuries and placed us in an environmental crisis. If we can use the knowledge that has been preserved despite the best efforts to destroy it, it may be possible to reverse a fraction of the damage that has been inflicted by the European mentality of independence and self-centered approach. Learning how we can model First Nations interdependence and spirituality may be what we need to ensure the health of our planet.

The Bloomer Story

The personal remembrance that I was most struck by in the Lomawaina article was that of the bloomer story that seemed to be a common experience for women in residential schools. The domesticity that the government attempted to impose on First Nations girls was often done through imposing control of sexuality. Controlling the sexuality of women was often used over the course of history in order to subjugate women. The missionaries continued this process in First Nations communities. They were able to mold the minds of children through the control of their bodies.

Using the regimentation of the body as a site of power, was intended to make girls more subservient and submissive (Lomawaina, 1993). Creating this submission to the will of the Church was intended to create of future of Christianity in the homes of First Nations communities. Abandoning the teachings of First Nations mothers was necessary in order to ensure that assimilation occurred. Mothers were targeted as the future of assimilation. In all cultures, much teaching stems from mothers. The Church and government were aware of this when they focused more on the moral education of girls as opposed to boys.

The aspect of regimentation that I was most struck by was the regimentation of undergarments and the most private part of girl's lives while they were at the schools. There was rebellion against this control in the schools. Girls would find creative ways to ensure that the nuns thought they were indeed compliant, while the girls were able to wear their own clothing under their outer appearance. Controlling women's sexuality is pervasive aspect of history that was only recently addressed through the rise of feminism. The ability to access birth control and allow women to have control over their bodies has allowed for women to control the path of their lives. While the rise of feminism was occurring, the girls in residential schools were still having their sexuality controlled and regulated. Sexuality remains to this day regarded as something more shameful in many First Nations communities because of the indoctrination of Christianity.

A consequence of this creation of shameful sexuality, perhaps an unforeseen one, is the reality of the lower regard for the sexuality of First Nations women and consequently a lower regard for their lives. Amnesty International has identified that Stolen Sisters in Canada as a problem that needs to be addressed. It is necessary to revalue the sexuality of First Nations women in Canada, as opposed to making them a acceptable targets for assault and rape. Teachings of the Church still need to be addressed in the present in order to revalue the lives of women. How we move forward in this vein will truly act in reconciliation.

Reference
Lomawaina, K. T. (1993, May). Domesticity in the federal Indian schools: The power of authority over mind and body. American Ethnologist, 20(2), 227-240.

The Price of a Child

Through the readings that I have done about the reincarnation of the residential school system as child welfare, I wonder about the inequities between government funding for non-Aboriginal children and Aboriginal children. These discrepancies may hinge on historical inequality, or the lack of political will to create change in the present. It is likely a combination of both systems. Regardless of which system is responsible for the inequity, the outcome is that a price is pout on the life of every child, and this price depends on the color of their skin.

Putting a price on the life of a child seems similar to ancient practices of slavery in which individuals were judged on physical characteristics for their worth. I do not know how to change the focus of government on the financial aspect of support towards a holistic understanding of how all children need to be supported in an equitable manner. Equitable treatment comes with the understanding that this is not equal treatment. Each child has individual needs and some will be higher than others. In this case, it is necessary to make a larger financial investment in the future of First Nations children so that they will be able to contribute to a healthier country in the future. The same can be said regarding providing extra financial support to children with disabilities, which is now an accepted practice in Canadian society.

How we value specific cultures also plays into the decision of how to allocate funds in governmental budgets. It is clear that less value is placed on First Nations cultures surviving in Canada and the lack of financial investment in First Nations children reflects this belief. It is necessary to change public perception of the value of First Nations cultures and communities in order for significant investment to be made to sustain these communities.

It is also necessary to move beyond numbers to consider the implications of how these decisions will effect each individual child. If it was necessary to look at a picture and read a biography of each child who will be effected by budgetary decisions, I suspect that different decisions would be made by politicians. I hope it would.

Institutions and Residential Schools

I saw a presentation from a self-advocacy group at the Saskatchewan Association for Community Living yesterday. In their presentation, they showed clips of what life was like in institutions for people with physical and cognitive disabilities. I was struck by how similar pictures from these institutions and residential schools were.

The children who were placed in these institutions were separated from their families, deprived of effective touch and affection simply because they were considered to be less intelligent and less valuable in society than other children. The pain that was caused in these institutions is not something that is being addressed through reconciliation because these efforts are still being excused as the right thing to do. It is important to work towards an understanding of how these actions were neither right nor good.



This video shows the prevalent attitudes that allowed for these institutions to be put in place, as well as how important it was for those who fought against these attitudes to forge their own path. I wonder how life was changed for First Nations children who were not a part of any residential schools. Although they may not have had the same level of access to education, they were not deprived of access to their families and their culture. They were able to retain their sense of self worth. It is very similar for the individuals who were not placed in institutions by their families, but kept in home in a loving environment.

The following report looks at the specific conditions that were a part of the lives of many individuals with disabilities. There are many parallels between these living conditions and that of residential schools. I was interested to find out that the Kennedy family was involved in improving the conditions of these institutions. This was because they had a personal stake in ensuring that institutions were respectable and welcoming places because their sister, Rose Kennedy was sent to an institution because of mental illness and then a botched lobotomy. In this case, a powerful family was involved in creating change. Parents of the students in residential schools did not wield the same level of power as the Kennedy's. It must have been terribly frustrating for parents to not have their concerns addressed because of their lack of education and status.

www.mncdd.org/parallels2/pdf/Xmas-Purgatory.pdf

As personal experiences are now being shared about residential schools, this might allow for common ground to be found between those who were sent to residential schools and those who were condemned to live in institutions. This would be a powerful bond to empower both parties to share the past in order to form a better future.

The Sacred Nature of Land

A few days ago, during a theological presentation that I attended, the nature of land and property was discussed. In Ontario, the conception of land is very different than in the Prairie provinces. Much of the discussion focused around the idea of being willing to give up church buildings in order to build stronger congregations.

Although I have not lived in Saskatchewan for long, I have become deeply aware that a very different understanding of land exists for those who live here. The members of the church I attend are not many, but they are faithful and they are willing to fight for their churches. Often the reason for this is that their church was built on a corner of their farm, their parent's farm, their grandparent's farm. This is the land that made them Canadian. The building is more sacred because it is built on land that is sacred to them and a part of their identity.

This discussion really crystallized for me exactly what was taken away from First Nations people, both through the reserve system and later, the residential schools. While I was always taught to respect nature, it was not until recently who central nature are to both my identity and my spiritual traditions. When the government implemented the reserve system for First Nation people in Canada, land was taken away without the understanding of its sacred nature. The residential schools further limited First Nations people access to the land, and with that, access to their spirituality and identity. Many students were placed behind fences and bars for much of the day. The students were also constantly observed when they were outside, which prevented any expression of traditional spirituality.

As debates continue about the value of land and how much First Nations people should be compensated for land that was stolen, I wonder if it is possible to offer any compensation that will reconcile the loss of identity. It may not be possible for politicians in Ottawa to understand the true value of land because they are so disconnected from it, as many who live in cities are. It is necessary for the sacred nature of land to be understood by the politicians who claim to be qualified to make these decisions. It is important to ensure that those who are placed in a decision making capacity really understand the sacred nature of what they are discussing.

Modelling Reconciliation

A few years ago I had the privilege to meet Michael Lapsley, an Anglican priest in South Africa who is a human rights activist. Michael lost both of his hands and one of his eyes because a letter bomb that was sent to him because he was working to end Apartheid. Since then, he has become an Anglican priest under Bishop Desmond Tutu and he continues to work for reconciliation in South Africa to heal the wounds left by Apartheid and to create a better future.

When he described the process that he enters into with the groups he works with, I was intrigued by the fact that he will never do a group made up solely of one race. There must be a mixture. There must be those who were oppressed and those who were oppressed. There must be a sharing of stories in order to make reconciliation possible. Another aspect of the reconciliation process in South Africa around Apartheid is lack of punishment for offenders.

Michael also stated that there is a large difference between forgiveness and the process of reconciliation. He focuses more on creating a way of restorative justice instead of retributive justice. Although he has lost so much himself, he states that if the person who sent him the letter bomb confessed to him, Michael would ask what he is doing now. If he were making a positive contribution such as being a paramedic, then he would not press criminal charges (Lapsley, 1998).

My favorite quote in his article is this. "I have decided to opt for revenge, and my revenge will be very sweet; it will be to be part of building a nonracial, nonsexist, democractic South Africa, and the will be the sweetest revenge of all" (Lapsley, 1998).

I wonder how the Canadian reconciliation process could more closely mirror the process that is occurring in South Africa. The reconciliation process is very successful because there is a mutual sharing and an amnesty offered. When truth is offered, forgiveness is also offered. This mutuality is something so important that has not always been offered in the reconciliation process around residential schools.

The last point that I want to mention about this article is that the reconciliation process is meant to bring about a new moral order in Canada that does not support racism or inequality. It is very clear that this new moral order is not here yet. If we continue the process of reconciliation in this vein in Canada, maybe we can create a better moral order that will support a better future.

References
Lapsley, M. (1998 Winter). Confronting the past and creating the future: The redemptive value of truth telling. Social Research, 65(4), 741-758.

White Privilege

Something that I was introduced to in another class is the concept of white privilege. This is an important concept for social workers to understand, especially those who are white and work with racialized minorities. Prior to beginning social work classes, I had never considered how my race placed me in a privileged position. I had thought of my socio-economic status placed me in a privileged position and how my gender placed me at a disadvantage, but not my race.

This class has led me to examine how my race has privileged all parts of my existence, from education to family stability as well as employment and relationship opportunities. My awareness of how my life has been a part of over-privileging has led me to wonder how I have contributed to creating a group of people who are underprivileged, regardless of how inadvertent that effect may have been. I don't want to live an over-privileged life, but it has been my personal experience.

My present concern is how I, as a social worker, address the difference between the over-privileged and underprivileged. There have been many intentions over the past years to address the issues between races, but I am not sure if much progress has been made. The main goal of social work should be to address these differences and make a difference in the lives of those we are supposed to be empowering.

The reading that I have posted below looks at the how white privilege works and areas in which racialized minorities are marginalized. This is an important reading for all social workers to examine and reflect on.

White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack

"I was taught to see racism only in individual acts of meanness, not in invisible systems conferring dominance on my group"

Peggy McIntosh

Through work to bring materials from women's studies into the rest of the curriculum, I have often noticed men's unwillingness to grant that they are overprivileged, even though they may grant that women are disadvantaged. They may say they will work to women's statues, in the society, the university, or the curriculum, but they can't or won't support the idea of lessening men's. Denials that amount to taboos surround the subject of advantages that men gain from women's disadvantages. These denials protect male privilege from being fully acknowledged, lessened, or ended.

Thinking through unacknowledged male privilege as a phenomenon, I realized that, since hierarchies in our society are interlocking, there was most likely a phenomenon of while privilege that was similarly denied and protected. As a white person, I realized I had been taught about racism as something that puts others at a disadvantage, but had been taught not to see one of its corollary aspects, white privilege, which puts me at an advantage.

I think whites are carefully taught not to recognize white privilege, as males are taught not to recognize male privilege. So I have begun in an untutored way to ask what it is like to have white privilege. I have come to see white privilege as an invisible package of unearned assets that I can count on cashing in each day, but about which I was "meant" to remain oblivious. White privilege is like an invisible weightless knapsack of special provisions, maps, passports, codebooks, visas, clothes, tools , and blank checks.

Describing white privilege makes one newly accountable. As we in women's studies work to reveal male privilege and ask men to give up some of their power, so one who writes about having white privilege must ask, "having described it, what will I do to lessen or end it?"

After I realized the extent to which men work from a base of unacknowledged privilege, I understood that much of their oppressiveness was unconscious. Then I remembered the frequent charges from women of color that white women whom they encounter are oppressive. I began to understand why we are just seen as oppressive, even when we don't see ourselves that way. I began to count the ways in which I enjoy unearned skin privilege and have been conditioned into oblivion about its existence.

My schooling gave me no training in seeing myself as an oppressor, as an unfairly advantaged person, or as a participant in a damaged culture. I was taught to see myself as an individual whose moral state depended on her individual moral will. My schooling followed the pattern my colleague Elizabeth Minnich has pointed out: whites are taught to think of their lives as morally neutral, normative, and average, and also ideal, so that when we work to benefit others, this is seen as work that will allow "them" to be more like "us."

Daily effects of white privilege

I decided to try to work on myself at least by identifying some of the daily effects of white privilege in my life. I have chosen those conditions that I think in my case attach somewhat more to skin-color privilege than to class, religion, ethnic status, or geographic location, though of course all these other factors are intricately intertwined. As far as I can tell, my African American coworkers, friends, and acquaintances with whom I come into daily or frequent contact in this particular time, place and time of work cannot count on most of these conditions.

1. I can if I wish arrange to be in the company of people of my race most of the time.

2. I can avoid spending time with people whom I was trained to mistrust and who have learned to mistrust my kind or me.

3. If I should need to move, I can be pretty sure of renting or purchasing housing in an area which I can afford and in which I would want to live.

4. I can be pretty sure that my neighbors in such a location will be neutral or pleasant to me.

5. I can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that I will not be followed or harassed.

6. I can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see people of my race widely represented.

7. When I am told about our national heritage or about "civilization," I am shown that people of my color made it what it is.

8. I can be sure that my children will be given curricular materials that testify to the existence of their race.

9. If I want to, I can be pretty sure of finding a publisher for this piece on white privilege.

10. I can be pretty sure of having my voice heard in a group in which I am the only member of my race.

11. I can be casual about whether or not to listen to another person's voice in a group in which s/he is the only member of his/her race.

12. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the staple foods which fit with my cultural traditions, into a hairdresser's shop and find someone who can cut my hair.

13. Whether I use checks, credit cards or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial reliability.

14. I can arrange to protect my children most of the time from people who might not like them.

15. I do not have to educate my children to be aware of systemic racism for their own daily physical protection.

16. I can be pretty sure that my children's teachers and employers will tolerate them if they fit school and workplace norms; my chief worries about them do not concern others' attitudes toward their race.

17. I can talk with my mouth full and not have people put this down to my color.

18. I can swear, or dress in second hand clothes, or not answer letters, without having people attribute these choices to the bad morals, the poverty or the illiteracy of my race.

19. I can speak in public to a powerful male group without putting my race on trial.

20. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.

21. I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group.

22. I can remain oblivious of the language and customs of persons of color who constitute the world's majority without feeling in my culture any penalty for such oblivion.

23. I can criticize our government and talk about how much I fear its policies and behavior without being seen as a cultural outsider.

24. I can be pretty sure that if I ask to talk to the "person in charge", I will be facing a person of my race.

25. If a traffic cop pulls me over or if the IRS audits my tax return, I can be sure I haven't been singled out because of my race.

26. I can easily buy posters, post-cards, picture books, greeting cards, dolls, toys and children's magazines featuring people of my race.

27. I can go home from most meetings of organizations I belong to feeling somewhat tied in, rather than isolated, out-of-place, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance or feared.

28. I can be pretty sure that an argument with a colleague of another race is more likely to jeopardize her/his chances for advancement than to jeopardize mine.

29. I can be pretty sure that if I argue for the promotion of a person of another race, or a program centering on race, this is not likely to cost me heavily within my present setting, even if my colleagues disagree with me.

30. If I declare there is a racial issue at hand, or there isn't a racial issue at hand, my race will lend me more credibility for either position than a person of color will have.

31. I can choose to ignore developments in minority writing and minority activist programs, or disparage them, or learn from them, but in any case, I can find ways to be more or less protected from negative consequences of any of these choices.

32. My culture gives me little fear about ignoring the perspectives and powers of people of other races.

33. I am not made acutely aware that my shape, bearing or body odor will be taken as a reflection on my race.

34. I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking.

35. I can take a job with an affirmative action employer without having my co-workers on the job suspect that I got it because of my race.

36. If my day, week or year is going badly, I need not ask of each negative episode or situation whether it had racial overtones.

37. I can be pretty sure of finding people who would be willing to talk with me and advise me about my next steps, professionally.

38. I can think over many options, social, political, imaginative or professional, without asking whether a person of my race would be accepted or allowed to do what I want to do.

39. I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race.

40. I can choose public accommodation without fearing that people of my race cannot get in or will be mistreated in the places I have chosen.

41. I can be sure that if I need legal or medical help, my race will not work against me.

42. I can arrange my activities so that I will never have to experience feelings of rejection owing to my race.

43. If I have low credibility as a leader I can be sure that my race is not the problem.

44. I can easily find academic courses and institutions which give attention only to people of my race.

45. I can expect figurative language and imagery in all of the arts to testify to experiences of my race.

46. I can chose blemish cover or bandages in "flesh" color and have them more or less match my skin.

47. I can travel alone or with my spouse without expecting embarrassment or hostility in those who deal with us.

48. I have no difficulty finding neighborhoods where people approve of our household.

49. My children are given texts and classes which implicitly support our kind of family unit and do not turn them against my choice of domestic partnership.

50. I will feel welcomed and "normal" in the usual walks of public life, institutional and social.

Elusive and fugitive

I repeatedly forgot each of the realizations on this list until I wrote it down. For me white privilege has turned out to be an elusive and fugitive subject. The pressure to avoid it is great, for in facing it I must give up the myth of meritocracy. If these things are true, this is not such a free country; one's life is not what one makes it; many doors open for certain people through no virtues of their own.

In unpacking this invisible knapsack of white privilege, I have listed conditions of daily experience that I once took for granted. Nor did I think of any of these perquisites as bad for the holder. I now think that we need a more finely differentiated taxonomy of privilege, for some of these varieties are only what one would want for everyone in a just society, and others give license to be ignorant, oblivious, arrogant, and destructive.

I see a pattern running through the matrix of white privilege, a patter of assumptions that were passed on to me as a white person. There was one main piece of cultural turf; it was my own turn, and I was among those who could control the turf. My skin color was an asset for any move I was educated to want to make. I could think of myself as belonging in major ways and of making social systems work for me. I could freely disparage, fear, neglect, or be oblivious to anything outside of the dominant cultural forms. Being of the main culture, I could also criticize it fairly freely.

In proportion as my racial group was being made confident, comfortable, and oblivious, other groups were likely being made unconfident, uncomfortable, and alienated. Whiteness protected me from many kinds of hostility, distress, and violence, which I was being subtly trained to visit, in turn, upon people of color.

For this reason, the word "privilege" now seems to me misleading. We usually think of privilege as being a favored state, whether earned or conferred by birth or luck. Yet some of the conditions I have described here work systematically to over empower certain groups. Such privilege simply confers dominance because of one's race or sex.

Earned strength, unearned power

I want, then, to distinguish between earned strength and unearned power conferred privilege can look like strength when it is in fact permission to escape or to dominate. But not all of the privileges on my list are inevitably damaging. Some, like the expectation that neighbors will be decent to you, or that your race will not count against you in court, should be the norm in a just society. Others, like the privilege to ignore less powerful people, distort the humanity of the holders as well as the ignored groups.

We might at least start by distinguishing between positive advantages, which we can work to spread, and negative types of advantage, which unless rejected will always reinforce our present hierarchies. For example, the feeling that one belongs within the human circle, as Native Americans say, should not be seen as privilege for a few. Ideally it is an unearned entitlement. At present, since only a few have it, it is an unearned advantage for them. This paper results from a process of coming to see that some of the power that I originally say as attendant on being a human being in the United States consisted in unearned advantage and conferred dominance.

I have met very few men who truly distressed about systemic, unearned male advantage and conferred dominance. And so one question for me and others like me is whether we will be like them, or whether we will get truly distressed, even outraged, about unearned race advantage and conferred dominance, and, if so, what we will do to lessen them. In any case, we need to do more work in identifying how they actually affect our daily lives. Many, perhaps most, of our white students in the United States think that racism doesn't affect them because they are not people of color; they do not see "whiteness" as a racial identity. In addition, since race and sex are not the only advantaging systems at work, we need similarly to examine the daily experience of having age advantage, or ethnic advantage, or physical ability, or advantage related to nationality, religion, or sexual orientation.

Difficulties and angers surrounding the task of finding parallels are many. Since racism, sexism, and heterosexism are not the same, the advantages associated with them should not be seen as the same. In addition, it is hard to disentangle aspects of unearned advantage that rest more on social class, economic class, race, religion, sex, and ethnic identity that on other factors. Still, all of the oppressions are interlocking, as the members of the Combahee River Collective pointed out in their "Black Feminist Statement" of 1977.

One factor seems clear about all of the interlocking oppressions. They take both active forms, which we can see, and embedded forms, which as a member of the dominant groups one is taught not to see. In my class and place, I did not see myself as a racist because I was taught to recognize racism only in individual acts of meanness by members of my group, never in invisible systems conferring unsought racial dominance on my group from birth.

Disapproving of the system won't be enough to change them. I was taught to think that racism could end if white individuals changed their attitude. But a "white" skin in the United States opens many doors for whites whether or not we approve of the way dominance has been conferred on us. Individual acts can palliate but cannot end, these problems.

To redesign social systems we need first to acknowledge their colossal unseen dimensions. The silences and denials surrounding privilege are the key political surrounding privilege are the key political tool here. They keep the thinking about equality or equity incomplete, protecting unearned advantage and conferred dominance by making these subject taboo. Most talk by whites about equal opportunity seems to me now to be about equal opportunity to try to get into a position of dominance while denying that systems of dominance exist.

It seems to me that obliviousness about white advantage, like obliviousness about male advantage, is kept strongly inculturated in the United States so as to maintain the myth of meritocracy, the myth that democratic choice is equally available to all. Keeping most people unaware that freedom of confident action is there for just a small number of people props up those in power and serves to keep power in the hands of the same groups that have most of it already.

Although systemic change takes many decades, there are pressing questions for me and, I imagine, for some others like me if we raise our daily consciousness on the perquisites of being light-skinned. What will we do with such knowledge? As we know from watching men, it is an open question whether we will choose to use unearned advantage, and whether we will use any of our arbitrarily awarded power to try to reconstruct power systems on a broader base.

Peggy McIntosh is associate director of the Wellesley Collage Center for Research on Women. This essay is excerpted from Working Paper 189. "White Privilege and Male Privilege: A Personal Account of Coming To See Correspondences through Work in Women's Studies" (1988), by Peggy McIntosh; available for $10.00 from the Wellesley College Center for Research on Women, Wellesley MA 02181 The working paper contains a longer list of privileges.

This excerpted essay is reprinted from the Winter 1990 issue of Independent School.

This was accessed May 12th, 2011 from http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/mcintosh.html

Redeeming Christianity

I was at a seminary graduation in Ontario last night and a lecture was given before the ceremony. The speaker was from the seminary in Cuba and he was discussing how theology is supposed to be kept current and relevant to the people who it is supposed to be serving. He also commented that theology is always political and contextual.

This made sense in how theology was applied to First Nations communities in Canada when missionaries arrived with the purpose of conversion. Theology was used in a political sense in order to support the assimilation of First Nations people through contact with the missionaries and education. Theology was made political through the inclusion of the government in the residential school system. The residential school system was very political, although many of schools were based on theological premises.

TI wonder how theology can now be adapted to address the needs of First Nations communities in Canada. Christianity was used in a colonial and racist way over the past centuries and also in the present. I am not sure how to redeem Christianity from its history at this point. Christianity has been used as a force of hatred and assimilation and continues to be offered as a solution for the pain it has caused in the past. This is similar to the manner in which post-Holocaust theology was offered at the end of WWII. Christianity was offered as a solution for the wrongs that were committed when many of the wrongs that were committed were done in the name of Christianity.

I am aware that many churches and denominations are beginning to offer outreach to First Nations communities in order to improve relationships between the Church and First Nations people. In my opinion, the outreach needs to move beyond individual efforts for change and become a universal change that relates to how theology is put into practice. In order for this to happen, theology must change. It must change from something that is written by predominantly white middle-class men to something that is accessible to all, regardless of race, gender or creed.

While I do not claim to know or understand how these ideals can be put into practice or how Christianity can be redeemed as I struggle with these issues myself, I do know that it is necessary to change. Christianity must adapt to the changes that are being presented and address the faith needs of First Nations people, whether through non-judgmental support or by working to make Christianity more open to the process of syncretism.

Triumph of Evil

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

This is one of me favorite quotes as it outlines the need for action at all levels to stop evil actions. I was struck by a portion of the book that stated not all those involved in the residential school system agreed with the measures that were taken in these institutions. It was the rigid hierarchy that was imposed in the Catholic Church that prevented complaints from being taken seriously or addressed. This hierarchy was reflected in the government system and led to many of the problems being constantly perpetuated for many generations.

I am not certain if the problem in this situation was truly good men doing nothing or the good men were simply overwhelmed by the bad through the imposition of hierarchies and ideologies. From the stories that I have heard, there were good people in the residential school system. Not all of them were bad. Some were inspiring, compassionate and kind. These good people were not permitted by the hierarchy to make positive changes in the system.

I see similarities between how the Church and government hierarchy prohibited positive change in the early stages of the residential school and how the government resists change now. Positive changes have not been made to the current reserve system or how First Nations people are treated in Canada. I am not sure how to improve the system of government in order to make positive changes more timely and appropriate as opposed to having to fight for rights.

How, as social workers, do we improve the systems that are in place? How do we make them more culturally appropriate? How do we stop imposing a colonial perspective on how to live or raise children? What will make us the good people who stand up against the evil? Are we allowing evil to triumph or are we creating good?

Furniss, E. (1992). Victims of benevolence: The dark legacy of the Williams Lake residential school. Arsenal Pulp: Vancouver.

Seeing Similarities

Coming from a background of Christianity in which each denomination will quickly expound on what the differences are, I was deeply struck by how similar many First Nations spiritual practices and Christian spiritual practices are. In Bilodeau's article "They honor our Lord among themselves in their own way," some of the similarities between the traditions are outlines. The most obvious similarity is between God and the Creator. TO me, they are the same. It seems as though the missionaries were splitting hairs in their insistence of making God different than the Creator.

Spirits are also a powerful spiritual belief in First Nations culture and these were equated with the Christian belief of the Holy Spirit. While these concepts are not the same in theological terms, the spirit and the intent of them are the same.

The last similarity that I found between the practice of Roman Catholicism (the major denomination of the missionaries in Canada) and First Nations spiritual practices were very similar between the veneration of saints and manitous. Saints are a very important aspect of Catholicism and are venerated and given gifts in order to provide protection, good health, return of good relationships, etc. Manitous were treated in much the same way, although manitous are found in the natural world. The tradition in First Nations culture is to leave offerings for manitous and offerings are deeply ingrained in Christian culture.

With all of these theological similarities between Christianity and First Nations spirituality, I wonder why common ground was never acknowledged or celebrated. I love finding similarities amongst drastically different spiritual traditions. While I am aware that I am applying my own ideals to another era, I wish the missionaries had not been so certain that their way was the only way. I hope that in the present we can continue seeing similarities and celebrating our differences.

References
Bilodeau, C. (2001 Summer). "They honor our Lord among themselves in their own way": Colonial Christianity and the Illinois Indian. American Indian Quarterly, 25(3), 352-377.

The Value of Children

As I read about the treatment of children in residential schools, I wonder how this treatment would have changed if there had been a different conception of childhood. In the present, we value children as full of possibility and recognize that their childhood is a unique time for development and growth. In the time when residential schools began, children were viewed as little adults who had many more responsibilities than we place on children now. Aboriginal children were specifically targeted to be educated because they were viewed as more flexible than adults and more easily indoctrinated and shaped into Christians with European values.

The disciplinary measures that were taken also reflected a very different conception of how to correct children. Physical punishment is now discouraged because we have become aware of the medical and physical side effects that are suffered by those who are physically corrected. Had those who ran residential schools been aware of the long term effects of their actions, would they have changed?

Although it has been argued that the treatment of Aboriginal children did not differ greatly from their European counterparts, it was done with the intent of shaping these children into the image of Europeans. It did also reflect the mentality at the time that stated: "Kill the Indian, save the man."

I wonder how this treatment of Aboriginal children would have changed if children were viewed with our present lens. Now we view children as full of potential and a site of wonder. I am saddened to think of how much more could have been accomplished in Aboriginal communities had they been considered with this attitude at residential schools instead of being undervalued because of their race. What have we missed out on because potential and difference was discouraged? Is there any way to regain that in our world? If we can regain it, will we be able to respect it in the communities that we have been taught to expect so little from?

Election Results

Watching election night on CBC has become a very important ritual for me. I glory when the predictions are wrong and enjoy watching how many seats my favorite party will gain. This election day was somewhat of a let down for me. Although I deeply enjoyed watching the success of the NDP, the success of the Conservative party was deeply disturbing to me. I am deeply aware of how much this change in government will mean to social services and support for marginalized groups in Canada.

After reading the Davin report, I more deeply distrust the Conservative party than I did prior to the beginning of this class. The Conservative party was responsible for the implementation of many specific aspects of the residential school system and this party continues to uphold many of the same principles that founded the residential schools. Although it was Stephen Harper who offered an apology for to the First Nations peoples for the harm done to them through the residential school system, little action has been done to create positive policies in order to support positive growth in First Nations communities to replace the destruction that has been done.

As my thoughts continue in the realm of the political, I wonder how differently other parties would treat First Nations communities. The Liberal party at one time attempted to strip First Nations people of their Indian status in Canada and the NDP have never been so close to power as they are now. The economy seems to be the most important topic of discussion. This has led to greater limitations on groups who have been marginalized in the past and the present. The conversation needs to be redirected to ensure that all groups receive equitable treatment that will lead to equality. This redirection is necessary and will not be created by a single voice, but many. Being a part of the field of social work does mean working for the redirection of political conversations in order to uphold the ethics that we live by.

Examining Bias

As I approach the readings for this class, I am aware that I do not come without biases. My overwhelming feeling is that of anger. I am angry at those who felt that their way of life is superior and must be accepted by others. I am angry at Christians who felt the lives of others only gained value at the time of conversion, regardless of whether conversion was by force or by choice. I am angry at those who have twisted and perverted religious teaching to justify their actions. I am angry at the government for the policies they put in place that systemically destroyed family ties, language and culture for First Nations people. I feel anger towards those who continue to oppress and belittle First Nations people through derogatory attitudes, stereotypes and discrimination.

I feel a deep grief for those who have suffered as a result of the residential school system; for the families that will never function in the manner they did before government policies came into effect. I grieve for the knowledge that was lost through the narrow mindedness of those who felt their way was the only right way to live. I grieve for the lost lives, lost opportunities and continual degradation of those whose cultures and ways of life predate European ways of being.

Beyond my anger and grief is a somewhat naive idealism that desires to right past wrongs and create a Canada that is worthy of its reputation. I love Canada and I am deeply ashamed of many aspects of our history that have supported racist and assimilationist policies. I want to create a Canada that does not support racism or discrimination through policies and labels that are still in existence.

My biases do not come from a place of true understanding of the daily reality of discrimination. I am a white woman who is highly educated from a middle class family. I have never personally experienced racism and it is unlikely that I will ever experience it. My faith tradition is that of Christianity and I do not fully comprehend the depth of Native American faith traditions. I am a part of the settler society that displaced First Nations peoples. My family immigrated to Canada from Ireland, Scotland and Germany to escape discrimination against them and inadvertently continued the discrimination and displacement of First Nations people in the country in which they settled.

My awareness of my privilege and biases does not preclude the interference of my biases in my understanding of the issue of residential schools and the subsequent policies and discrimination. It will be necessary for me to address these biases throughout my career as a social worker and any work I may do with First Nations people.

Releasing Strengled Truths

The title of this journal comes from a quote by Paul Eldridge. "In the spider-web of facts, many a truth is strangled." This sentiment seems applicable to relationship of First Nations people to the Canadian government. Releasing these strangled truths from their web is the work of those who choose to learn and seek the truth, rather than simply the facts.