Former MRU professor shouldn’t be given a platform
By Lethbridge Herald on February 1, 2023.
NOTE: The event was cancelled but the letter still has merit.
Editor:
The Department of Indigenous Studies vehemently condemns the anti-Indigenous rhetoric routinely disseminated by former MRU professor Frances Widdowson and deplores the fact that she is being given a platform to legitimize that discourse on our campus.
Widdowson has left us in no doubt as to her positions; she has regularly espoused these views through published articles, public speaking, broadcast podcasts, and other public forums. She specifically denounces the TRC’s classification of the residential school system as genocide and disputes the veracity of the unmarked graves of Indigenous children found at the sites of multiple former residential school sites.
The facts of the residential school system and the experiences of Indigenous children within that system were rigorously established through the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
• At least 150,000 Indigenous children across multiple generations were removed from their families and communities.
• They were processed through an alien education system that was designed to forcibly remove all vestiges of their original identities, cultures, and languages.
• These policies, which are a matter of historical record within Canada, clearly meet the United Nations definition of genocide, as listed in Article II of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
• Such was the extent of the abuses suffered by Indigenous children within this system that Pope Francis formally apologized “for the evil committed by so many Christians against the Indigenous peoples.”
The University of Lethbridge’s land acknowledgement states that our university’s name is Iniskim, meaning Sacred Buffalo Stone. The university is located in traditional Blackfoot Confederacy territory.
We honour the Blackfoot people and their traditional ways of knowing in caring for this land, as well as all Indigenous peoples who have helped shape and continue to strengthen our university community.
This honouring must include a commitment from all faculty to ensure that Indigenous histories, cultures, memories, and lives, past and present, are represented faithfully, truthfully, and safely, on this campus. It must be a commitment to social justice. It must be a commitment to stand next to Indigenous students on our campus, Indigenous staff and faculty, as well as the communities upon whose territory we sit, and the communities to whom those students, faculty, and staff, belong.
It must be a commitment from all faculty to ensure that Indigenous peoples of all generations and nations are welcomed and acknowledged across campus. It must be a commitment from all faculty to vigorously reject ideologies which continue to propagate violence against Indigenous peoples through the rhetoric of historical erasure, dismissal,diminishment, and dehumanization, such as that espoused by Dr. Widdowson.
That this scheduled public lecture was granted space within Iniskim is a betrayal of every one of those commitments.
Paul McKenzie-Jones
The Department of Indigenous Studies
University of Lethbridge
18-17
Paul, My grandfather was a half -breed Cherokee Indian from southern Illinois, Herrin, who came to Alberta in 1910, and created an Indian trading post at Eastway, north east of Vulcan and traded with the Siksika Blackfoot Indians. they came across the Blackfoot Crossing on the Bow River to trade at the post. We have always had a lot of respect for any of them.
It is disturbing to see an educator at a PUBLIC institution of higher LEARNING so profoundly espouse censorship. The U of L was born as an institution of liberal education providing a broad exposure to viewpoints and affording ample opportunity for discourse, assessment and drawing one’s own conclusions. My education there helped me to understand and develop the skills to deal with opinions and positions that ran contrary to my beliefs and to, on ocassion, recognize that even my opponenets positions had some merit.
A position of censorship only serves to bolster the argument of this Speaker on the dangers of wokism. You have proven her point without a word being uttered.
It is unfortunate when educators feel their students so ill prepared to hear from those holding controversial beliefs that cnsorship is the only option they propound.
The Initial response of the President of the Uni supporting the value of the right to be heard was the right decsion.
Agree JO. Couldn’t have said it better. Selective censorship is the way of the world today. Anyone who disagrees with the dogma’s is immediately attacked and discrediting (cancelling) is attempted. I would like to think that the majority of us out here know how to think, how to interpret, and discern the truth from the BS. We do not need the “higher educated” preventing us from doing just that. Pure censorship as they don’t like her message. Look what they mob has attempted to do to Peterson.
we are best to permit all perspectives on subjects. it is in the light of day that we will best uncover truths. when we place people in charge of limiting information and opinion, at least two important things happen: 1) we lose a fundamental freedom – to be able to share our thoughts without authoritarian censorship and control; 2) we drive contentious viewpoints underground, where they tend to fester and provide a foundation for misinformation to thrive.
truth becomes stronger, more evident, when all vantage points are discussed. if the speaker, in this case, espouses anything that lacks veracity, it would best be aired in a public forum and not relegated to dingy, dank and decrepit dark spaces where lies and misinformation best thrive. thus, should the speaker share anything that lacks honesty and integrity, that all could be countered by facts. surely truth is not so fragile as to be rendered a lie simply because there might be those that hold an alternative perspective.
Awesome comment biff. Nailed it.
Totaly disappointed with the universities decision to ban an educational event. Mackenzie jones seems unwilling to discuss and analyze what the truth is. I know that the latest narrative is not the real truth. There are complicated and various events surrounding what happened with the Indians in Canada. Wouldn’t A part of learning in university be critical thinking and analyzing a different perspective on a situation ? Mackenzie-Jones suggests “commitment to ensure indigenous histories,cultures, lives – – – – represented faithfully, truthfully “ on campus. According to who I ask? Truth is found by listening to knowledgeable people, even if they don’t subscribe to the Lola’s test (your) narrative.
you know, at times we have been on different sides of concerns in this forum. however, i know you, as do i, appreciate very much that we have this fundamental freedom to share our thoughts – to agree or disagree; and, our thoughts should be seen as fluid as they are ongoing affected by a variety of life experiences, and independent learning/exploration, and social conditioning. buck, you present a magnanimity, whereby you are able to look past any brooding feelings about the “messenger” and are instead able focus on the message at hand. it is a refreshing quality, to be sure. thank you.
If preventing free speech is justified using the parameters you have suggested I have a few questions;
1) Who set the parameters?
2) When is free speech not free speech and whom shall determine that in the future?
I also disagree with what this persons espouses but better to give a platform where others can challenge her thought process then allow her the fame you are creating by stopping the appearance and becoming the new arbitrator of what is and what is not free speech!
It would appear you like to write but do not have the fortitude to standup for what you believe, and stand before this speaker, set her straight and set an excellent example for your students? Setting quill to paper is far easier than facing your enemies! It’s not easy to stand up publicly everyday, defending what you believe I can assure you but, its time to grow a set and actually teach your students that you are a defender of your truths, no matter the cost! Justifying your position by looking tough in a local paper does a Shania Twain…..that don’t impress me much!
Students led the way and were doing the right thing by demonstrating against the individual. Lethbridge University Board then decided rather than allow a democracy, and free speech to progress, they would rather a ‘fist bump’ for siding with the students? It would appear there is a lack of fortitude in the Board as well!
So we have come to a point, where students are totally right to demonstrate and the adults in the room “Cave”? Wow! We now seek ‘a fist bump from students” and it ultimately becomes more important then a free and open society!
What scares me Mr. McKenzie-Jones is you support the ‘fist bump’ over democracy and the right to speak and the right to rebuttal face to face….and you are teaching our future leaders?
Mr. McKenzie-Jones what would have a more lasting effect?
-An empty hall where the speaker spoke to the “air” and the Alumni sided with students in the boycott!
-Or students saw strong rebuttal cementing your truth in their minds!
-Or what now has happened?
If I have to explain that to you, there are a lot of people who should not be in the position they are in!
I cannot add to the message above because I have sent it in as a rebuttal to this article.
Mr McKenzie-Jones, I would have attended that presentation by the woman in question and would have looked forward to your rebuttal. I would have learned something and, I am sure any attending students, would have as well!
What do you think they, or I, have learned from the fiasco you support?
What did your students now learn in the absence of that challenge?
Perhaps:
“Most likes on a Facebook post wins”? Is that the new measure of free speech and the pursuit of truth? This is counter intuitive to what the indigenous support which is the pursuit of and support of “personal truth”.
I have found that the Indigenous support an “individuals truths because they are your truths”. So have the indigenous you speak to decided to not allow another persons truths to be voiced? Mr McKenzie-Jones you have raised more questions of your understanding of the Indigenous then you perhaps wanted too!
This is not a popularity contest, or maybe it is? Students did a great job exercising their free speech, the adults? Not so much!
First off she wasn’t even there to speak about residential schools, she was there to talk about wokeism on university campuses. And the events that happened make clear that it is present. She did address 2 classes while here. I don’t agree with her opinion on residential schools at all but what was accomplished by the mob that confronted her? It didn’t change any minds or educate anyone.