Virtual reality is a rapidly developing technology. As the technology expands, becoming more portable and affordable, the potential uses have expanded as well.

One virtual reality creator calls virtual reality the “ultimate empathy machine.” Promising research shows that virtual reality can improve empathy toward groups such as people experiencing schizophrenia, children who are refugees and people who are unhoused.

Working with an interdisciplinary research team, we put this statement to the test within the context of residential schools in Canada.

Read the full store here. 

Dr. Sean Carleton, a historian and Indigenous studies scholar from the University of Manitoba, said Ms. Murray’s report highlights a tool kit for truth and reconciliation that could help Canadians.

Criminalizing residential school denialism as a hate crime is an example of one of those tools, he said. Canadians have a long history of ignoring the truth, he added, suggesting that reports such as the one produced by Ms. Murray are invitations to change a pattern of behaviour.

To read more on this story, please visit The Globe and Mail. 

That all changed when he was six years old, and those warm words turned ice cold when he was sent to the Kamloops Indian Residential School. The priests and nuns who were tasked with looking after him constantly berated him, beat him, barred him from speaking his language and practising his culture, and sexually assaulted him.

“I didn’t know what I was getting into when I got there,” he said in an interview on Parliament Hill in front of the Survivors’ Flag, which is meant to honour and remember survivors of residential schools.

To read the full article, including comment from Assistant Professor of History and Indigenous studies, Dr. Sean Carleton, please visit The Canadian Press. 

These discoveries in Kamloops were a pivotal moment in our collective conscience that acted as a catalyst for education, community support and further discoveries. There has been a major mobilization through the centre, thanks in part to the generous support of donors and the community. This has resulted in more than $1.2 million donated to the NCTR over the past year.

National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation (NCTR)

For Phyllis Webstad, a Survivor of St. Joseph’s Mission residential school in Northern Secwpemc (Shuswap) from the Stswecem’c Xgat’tem First Nation (Canoe Creek Indian Band) BC, that impact comes in the form of record keeping.

“As a newly six-year-old, when I attended the residential school, my memories were spotty and it was good to have my records to be able to make sense of those memories and to give me some more peace of mind and a little bit of healing as well,” explains Webstad, the Executive Director of the Orange Shirt Society.

The Honourable Levinia Brown, first female Mayor of Rankin Inlet, NT and Inuit Survivor of the Chesterfield Inlet residential school, feels the impact of the NCTR through the support it gave her and other Survivors to travel across Canada hearing and sharing experiences of those who also attended residential schools. She says of this experience, “… because the NCTR was born, we were able to travel, and with the support of the organization, the events were attended by so many Survivors and others who wanted to hear the stories in three different provinces.”

Jimmy Durocher, a Survivor of the Île-à-la-Crosse boarding school in Saskatchewan says, “NCTR is building a foundation for reconciliation by promoting public education and understanding.” He goes on to explain why this is crucial to the future. “People need to understand exactly what happened with our residential school Survivors, those that are with us and those that are no longer with us as well, because that is the truth, and we need to stick to that as closely as we possibly can,” says Durocher, the President of the Métis Local in Île-à-la-Crosse.

Eugene Arcand, a Cree Survivor of St. Michael’s Indian residential school and the Lebret student residence, both in Saskatchewan, expresses gratitude for the NCTR and the work they are doing in the country. “The NCTR is an integral part of achieving the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Committee, which is why it is so important that it continues to be supported. NCTR is the only physical legacy that’s left over from the work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission,” says Arcand, a past chair of the Governing Circle.

Arcand finishes with a message for all of Canada that can never be forgotten: “Thank you to the 215 that woke up the world to the true history of this country as it relates to Indigenous people.”

As the potential for more remains to be found is high and the absolute necessity for community supports around healing continue, the importance of the NCTR remains a top priority. Donors supporting NCTR will help ensure that the Centre can continue to pave the path towards Truth and Reconciliation for communities across Canada. If you wish to support this essential work, you can donate here.

WARNING: Some information in this statement may be distressing. A national Residential School Crisis Line is available for anyone affected: 1-866-925-4419.

In the 365 days since the Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc shared their discovery of the remains of 215 children at the site of the Kamloops Indian Residential School, we have experienced palpable change as a university, as a centre of learning and keeper of truths, and as a country.

When the announcement was first made, the reaction we saw from individuals was one of anger. Anger that they were never taught this history. Anger that the story of Canada was a lie and there is a different truth to be told. Even though Indigenous people have been sharing the atrocities of the residential school system for decades, it took the spirits of 215 lost children to get through to the nation.

We saw a shift in media, who stayed on the story, refusing to let the public ignore the past. We witnessed a recognition that the systems we exist in are racist and that we must work together to change them. By July 1, the call for change was clear when Canada Day turned from red to orange.

At the University, we already had commitment from senior leadership and the board of governors to support our work to advance Indigenous engagement and to fight anti-Indigenous racism at the institution, but in the past year, there’s been a bigger appetite to learn about and become involved in this work. This has been evident through increased participation in learning opportunities, dollars from donors, and new initiatives across our campuses to support Indigenous students, communities, teaching and research.

At the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation (NCTR), Survivors are engaged in every step of our work. Because of them, the federal government committed to find and deliver records to the Centre. Significant funds were included in the federal budget to construct and operate the NCTR’s new home. Canadians at large, including the business sector, have reached out with donations, while asking “what can we do on behalf of Survivors?” Churches have committed to hand over records that were not previously held. We are receiving more support for education initiatives, and research into finding more lost children is underway.

Since May 27 of last year, thousands of additional unmarked graves have been discovered and more sites are being searched. While past truths continue to be uncovered, we must also recognize the missing children living amongst us – those who have been shifted into and become lost to other systems such as Child Family Services and correctional centres. When we wear orange shirts and say Every Child Matters, we have to include those who continue to be impacted by the legacy of residential schools. It’s our responsibility to continue to fight for systems change and a new way forward.

This summer, as many Indigenous communities searched the sites of former residential schools for dead and missing children, a small group of historians insisted on debating the applicability of the term “genocide” when referring to Canada’s Indian Residential School system.

Objecting to an earlier statement on the applicability of that term made by the Canadian Historical Association, these historians penned an open letter rejecting the notion that there is a scholarly consensus on the issue and casting doubt on whether residential schooling warrants the use of the word genocide.

The letter was republished on a few websites, including one that chose the title: “Historians Rally vs. ‘Genocide’ Myth.”

As many Canadians begin reckoning with residential school history and learn how to put truth before reconciliation, we — as a historian of residential schooling and a genocide scholar — feel it is important to explain the general scholarly agreement about Canada and genocide.

A better understanding of what most genocide scholars believe can help people understand how Canada’s Indian Residential School system fits with definitions of genocide.

Definitions and the strategy of dissent

The open letter objects to the Canadian Historical Association’s claim that there is a “broad consensus” on the applicability of genocide in the Canadian context. The authors and signatories take their presence as proof that no such consensus exists.

Yet, the entire letter rests on a narrow definition of “consensus” as implying unanimity, or agreement by all people. Consensus, however, can also be used, as it is by the Canadian Historical Association, to signify a general agreement. In this usage, there’s no requirement to account for marginal, contrary voices.

The existence of a very small group of naysayers — the vast majority of them not members of the Canadian Historical Association and some of them openly engaging in residential school denialism — does not invalidate the fact that there is a general scholarly agreement, or broad consensus, that the term genocide applies to Canada.

Claiming dissent and demanding debate from the margins is a common strategy used by genocide denialists to muddy the waters and make widely accepted claims seem less certain. It is meant to shake peoples’ confidence in the general agreement.

The open letter tries to do this by insisting there is a “lively debate among scholars” when, in reality, there is only minor disagreement within the field, with still a broad consensus coalescing around the applicability of the term genocide in Canada.

A woman wears a shirt printed with the definition of genocide printed on the back at a National Day for Truth and Reconciliation event in Toronto on Sept. 30, 2021. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Evan Buhler

What about Canada?

So, what do genocide scholars say about genocide in Canada?

Reading the open letter, the crux of the “debate” appears to be the guilt or innocence of the Canadian state. The letter implies the latter by emphasizing there is “debate” about the former. However, where disagreement exists in the field is not so much Canada’s guilt, which is not disputed, but rather how to effectively describe the crime.

The few genocide scholars who oppose labelling what Canada did as genocide suggest that the wrongs committed are better referred to as crimes against humanity. According to the field, it is therefore a matter of choosing between two serious criminal charges rather than between guilt and innocence.

Read more:
How Canada committed genocide against Indigenous Peoples, explained by the lawyer central to the determination

Genocide scholars who suggest that crimes against humanity is the more appropriate terminology point to several reasons. Scholars like William Schabas and Payam Akhavan focus on the legal challenges of determining genocide.

Their reasoning includes the fact that Article 2(e) of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which criminalizes “forcibly transferring children of the group to another,” is largely untested in the courts.

They also point to the difficulty of establishing the specific intent required by genocide law. The UN genocide convention provides a narrow conception of what intent means, suggesting there must be a purposeful desire to destroy a group of people for who they are.

The intent to ‘destroy’

This notion raises the question of what it means to intend to “destroy” a group. Historian J.R. Miller, a signatory to the open letter, reads this word narrowly as signalling only physical destruction. He argues there was no plan to physically eradicate Indigenous Peoples. But a group can only exist through cultural relationships between group members, as well as their ability to biologically reproduce.

The UNGC includes acts of biological, cultural and physical destruction. These three primary forms of destruction were originally conceptualized by the creator of the term genocide, Raphael Lemkin.

Lemkin, in fact, contributed a richer notion of cultural genocide to earlier drafts of the UN genocide convention, which included linguistic and spiritual destruction, only to have it excised from the final text at the insistence of settler colonial nations like Canada. “Forcibly transferring children,” however, was preserved.

People attend a gathering and march to honour Indigenous children, denounce genocide and demand justice after the findings at residential schools in Montréal in July, 2021. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Graham Hughes

The fact that “forcibly transferring children” has been rarely tested in court does not mean that it, and the question of cultural genocide more broadly, is not being given serious attention by jurists and scholars.

For example, in Krajišnik at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in 2006, the ICTY trial chamber noted that destruction “is not limited to physical or biological destruction of the group’s members.” They added that a group is comprised by bonds between its members.

For this reason, the ICTY trial chamber determined that the “intent to destroy” also includes efforts to destroy a group culturally. These types of statements capture a growing trend in the field of genocide studies whereby acts of cultural destruction are viewed to be as much a threat to the life of the group as acts of biological and physical destruction.

Truth and reconciliation

Recent developments in Canada have built on this evolving understanding of genocide. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, though its mandate prevented commissioners from examining the legal question of genocide, used the concept of cultural genocide to acknowledge the importance of culture to the continuity of Indigenous Peoples.

The National Inquiry for Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls had freer rein and provided a sophisticated legal analysis of genocide in Canada that injects Indigenous law and gendered perspectives into the conversation.

Unsettling the colonial status quo

In the end, a broad scholarly consensus has indeed emerged in recent years that agrees on the applicability of genocide in the Canadian context. Scholars increasingly view genocide more broadly as a process, and they understand human groups as socio-cultural, biological and physical entities that may be placed under threat through multiple processes of intended destruction.

Canadians committed to putting truth before reconciliation should ignore genocide “debaters” and denialists seemingly intent on hijacking the conversation and misrepresenting genocide scholarship to defend Canada’s reputation and the colonial status quo.

How appropriate then that June is National Indigenous History Month and the 21^st is National Indigenous Peoples Day, reminding us of the responsibility we have to educate ourselves on our present circumstances, and our past failures.

A horrific piece of history was brought to light in the discovery of the remains of hundreds of children in Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc (Kamloops) and at other former residential school sites across Canada – the lasting effects of the residential school system and colonization still poignant today. In response, the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation (NCTR) shared this message with us and with the nation on the importance of concerted national action.

The University of Manitoba, in partnership with NCTR and Indigenous partners, is committed to honouring the Calls to Action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Our alumni community is an important part of that. We all must do what we can to help this country and its people heal by continuing to push forward and demand all 94 Calls to Actions are fulfilled.

Every small step in the right direction is powerful: read the history of residential schools, read Survivors’ stories, read The Final Report of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, read the Calls to Action. We cannot say we support Truth and Reconciliation without a commitment to learn the truth.

To the more than 100 of you who reached out to the NCTR to make a gift or learn more about its mission, thank you. The NCTR has expressed to me its gratitude for the incredible generosity and compassion of our alumni community.

To our Indigenous alumni, I have not stopped thinking about you since I heard this devastating news. I want to say to you what I shared with Indigenous faculty and staff, because I hear the distress and pain you are experiencing as you grieve for the lives lost and for the unresolved injustices they represent. Processing the enormity of this tragedy is even more painful in a context where communities cannot gather for ceremony or shared grieving.

Resources are available to support you, such as:

• Indigenous Cultural Healing Supports through Manitoba Shared Health
• The National Indian Residential School Crisis Line, available 24 hours a day: 1-866-925-4419

As the Truth and Reconciliation Commission noted, “to build for the future, Canadians must look to, and learn from the past.” We all must educate ourselves and engage meaningfully in this process, even when the truth of our past and present, is shockingly dark and painful. We are still a long way from knowing the full truth of what happened, so our path of reconciliation stretches far into the future. We must walk it together.

Sincerely,

Michael Benarroch

In an online ceremony today, the NCTR, Parks Canada and the federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change announced that the Residential School System is now formally designated as an “event of national historic significance.” 

As part of this announcement, two former residential school sites, the former Portage La Prairie Residential School in Manitoba and the Former Shubenacadie Residential School in Nova Scotia, have been designated as National Historic Sites.

NCTR Director Ry Moran said, “Residential School Survivors, their families, and their communities faced a long and difficult struggle to ensure that the truth about Canada’s residential school system would be heard and acknowledged. Today’s designation is an important tool for all Canadians to learn about the cultural genocide that took place. At least 150,000 First Nations, Inuit and Métis children were taken away from their homes and their families. Only by understanding the past, can we walk on the path towards justice, an essential element of truth and reconciliation.”

The federal government designates events of national historic significance to recognize defining moments, both positive and negative, that shape the present.

In its Calls for Action, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada for national commemoration of Residential School sites and the history and legacy of Residential Schools. Today’s announcement came about through the advocacy of residential school Survivors.

Eugene Arcand, Residential School Survivor and Chair of the NCTR Governing Circle, said, “Having places where Residential School Survivors can be honoured, the children remembered, and the past acknowledged is a crucial part of reconciliation. Sites are essential to highlight to Canadians one of many reasons that First Nations, Métis and Inuit people are in the state we are in today, and to share our dreams to overcome our current challenges for a better future for everyone.”

Some former residential schools still stand while others are in disrepair or are completely gone. Some Survivors and communities wish to have the schools torn down while others prefer to use them for their community programs or residential school museums.

The designation announced today will help communities obtain support and funding to decide the best way they would like to remember and honour the Survivors and the children who never returned.

The Process

Communities and Survivors can apply to have a site or former residential school designated as a national historic site. The process for communities to apply for the designation is through Parks Canada (pc.clmhc-hsmbc.pc@canada.ca). Parks Canada will provide an historian who will develop a report about the site for the community and present it to the Historic Sites and Monuments Board for review. There is no deadline for communities to apply.  

There is no one method to commemorate the school or the site. Communities and Survivors decide how the site or school will be remembered.

How NCTR Can Help?

This announcement begins the next phase in the NCTR’s work with Survivors and their communities. The NCTR is setting up a program to help navigate the designation process. The program will include a term Liaison position to aid communities in making an application and planning events and engagements to aid in the process of commemoration.

View the announcement.

Find more information on designation of historic sites and events of national historic importance. 

Sign up for NCTR Newsletter to receive updates on the NCTR Parks Program.

Survivors are the foundation of Truth and Reconciliation work in this country and are an essential part of the NCTR. The Survivors Circle ensures that Residential School Survivors’ voices remain central to all of the NCTR’s projects and policies. They provide advice to the NCTR, Governing Circle, the University of Manitoba, and partners on the NCTR mandate, as well as important matters to the broader Survivor community.

The Governing Circle of the NCTR will select members of the Survivors Circle based on geographical regions and a balance of strengths and experiences. The Survivors Circle members serve a two-year term.

Deadline to apply: March 14, 2019

For application guidelines and how to apply, connect with us at:

www.nctr.ca

nctr.nominations@umanitoba.ca  
Toll Free: 1-855-415-4534

“When I was in [the Residential School], I saw some pretty horrid things that these so-called caregivers and mother figures and father figures, what they did to us to separate us and keep us fighting,” says McIntosh. “I went through that. Always having to fight.”

Being creative with visual arts from an early age helped McIntosh from the trauma of abuse at the school, and it’s an aspect of her life that she continues to hold very dear.

“I always felt that deep down inside there was a part that I needed to always protect, and nobody was going to go near that or destroy that,” she says.

McIntosh parlayed her passion for the visual arts into a teaching position, where she she served as an Aboriginal liaison as well as an art educator through the St. James-Assiniboia School Division. It was here that she used her artistic gifts to teach younger generations about Indigenous culture, as well as “bring teachings and culture alive through storytelling in a visual format.” She also earned an award in Spirituality and Cultural Education through the Aboriginal Circle of Educators for her work.

McIntosh was profoundly affected by her experiences in the public school system.  In one situation, an Anishinaabe boy came up to her to ask if she was the one teaching about cultural traditions.

“[The boy] said ‘good, it’s about time they brought a teacher in here.’ As soon as he said that, I thought, oh, it’s the young people that teach you. He’s looking at me like that, I thought, I need to get back to school. I need to get that piece of paper that says you’re an educator,” McIntosh says.

In 2010, McIntosh began her journey at the University of Manitoba, enrolling in the Aboriginal Wellness Program. The two-year diploma program incorporates knowledge of “western” concepts and traditional philosophies and knowledge systems of Indigenous people as they relate to mental health and wellness.

“The very first day of university was one of the scariest. I was terrified,” she says. “But seeing the other Anishinaabe in that room, we were all wanting the same thing. We wanted that education that was cheated from us in Residential Schools. It was hard, but I managed to finish the program and graduate.”

McIntosh is now pursuing her goal of becoming an educator. She’s currently enrolled in the Faculty of Education and is set to graduate in 2019 at age 60. Her long-term goal is to teach Anishinaabe traditions to the younger generations through visual arts.

“I see a lot of our young Anishinaabe people – Cree, Dene, all the different groups – and I’m looking at them, and I could just see them hungry,” she says.

“I think [incorporating Indigenous teachings in the school system] is so crucial right now. And teaching the language, because a lot of us, our kids don’t know the language, but want to learn it. I just want to be there for them, because these young people are giving me back something that was taken away from me when I was in Residential Schools.”