In a text published on October 15 in The dutyGérard Bouchard, Denys Delâge and Félix Bouvier talk about our guide Studying Genocides and the lecture we gave on the study of the genocide of First Peoples in Canada. Because we believe in the power of deliberation in a democratic and pluralistic society, we thank the authors for their critical comment and take the opportunity of this response to better present our project. Studying Genocides — accessible free online at education-genocide.ca —, which is the fruit of more than four years of work.
The objective of this tool intended for pupils of 4e and 5e secondary is to help train citizens equipped with critical thinking and better equipped to build a better way of living together. It was essential to include the difficult question of the genocide of the First Peoples in Canada in the comparative approach that we propose for the study of the genocides of the XXe century. This approach aims to help students understand a central fact: genocide can take various forms.
In the lecture commented by Bouchard, Delâge and Bouvier — which lasted only 20 minutes, let’s be clear — our objective was to present an approach allowing us to approach the genocide of the First Peoples in history class. Although discussions of the genocidal nature of this historical period are legitimate, many experts consider that there was genocide in Canada.
To arrive at this conclusion, these people base themselves on one of the analytical tools that we have also favored, namely the legal definition used by the international community, for which the crime of genocide is understood as “any the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: a. Killing of members of the group; b. Serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; vs. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of existence calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; d. Measures aimed at preventing births within the group; e. Forced transfer of children from the group to another group”. (Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948.)
Overcome the emotional charge
According to this definition, it is indeed possible to argue that the period of residential schools amounted to genocide, since the intention to destroy the First Peoples is clearly stated in the speeches and policies of the government, and that four of the five acts of genocide were committed (acts b., c., d. and e. cited above).
To better understand the extent of this phenomenon, we suggest exploring the situation in a comprehensive approach specific to the human sciences, using an analysis grid of the genocidal process that we have adapted for a school audience. This stops on the historical and ideological contexts, then on the stages specific to the genocidal process, namely: categorization, dehumanization, polarization, organization, persecution and murders, without forgetting the stage of negation. We also propose an ethical reflection on the issues of prevention, recognition and justice, which still arise today for each of the nine genocides under study.
We insist on the fact that we must avoid comparing genocides according to their methods (rudimentary or technologically advanced) or the number of victims. We cannot rank the sufferings. A crime that has fewer victims than another is no less criminal. It is for this reason that our educational tool invites students to go beyond the emotional charge and to analyze facts and testimonies, by considering the actions of the genocidaires, their effects on the victims and the possible acts of prevention.
Rather than relying on a falsely objective linear narrative, we propose an investigation based on an open question (therefore without an unequivocal answer, even if the historical facts allow us to conclude that there was genocide as defined by the UN ). This exercise equips them to take part in the public debate on this part of Canadian history and, in particular, to consider the political issues that arise during the official recognition of the crime by a wrongdoing state. These students are part of Canadian society and need to understand current issues.
Debate critically and informed
Another criticism of Bouchard, Delâge and Bouvier concerns the consultation process we conducted with the communities victimized by genocide. Contrary to what they suggest, it was not a question of obtaining their “agreement” on the educational approach proposed or on the historical facts presented. Rather, it was about including them in a process of reflection that concerns them. Each text was commented on by history specialists, by teachers, and then by members of the communities concerned.
This consultation was necessary not only in an inclusive approach that values the experiences of people who are part of the story, but also because they are particularly attentive to the way in which hate speech and propaganda are presented. We wanted to avoid reproducing stereotypes too often repeated in texts, even scholarly ones.
The result is a tool that addresses this delicate theme in an interdisciplinary approach taking into account various perspectives.
It is obviously not a question of imposing a vision of the world, but of getting the students to take part in the debate in a critical and informed way. To do this, we cannot do without the concept of genocide, even if that is uncomfortable.