The Agenda with Steve Paikin (Audio) - Pushing Back on Macdonald's Cancellation

Episode Date: January 11, 2025

In recent years, Sir John A. Macdonald, Canada's first prime minister, has become a contentious subject. Statues have been taken down, his name has been removed from schools and his face has been removed from the $10 bill. However, one author is pushing back against the noise. The Agenda invites author Patrice Dutil to speak on his latest book, "Sir John A. Macdonald & the Apocalyptic Year 1885."See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I'm Matt Nethersole. And I'm Tiff Lam. From TVO Podcasts, this is Queries. This season, we're asking, when it comes to defending your beliefs, how far is too far? We follow one story from the boardroom to the courtroom. And seek to understand what happens when beliefs collide. Where does freedom of religion end and freedom from discrimination begin? That's this season on Queries in Good Faith,

a TVO original podcast. Follow and listen wherever you get your podcasts. Ten years ago this week, more than 400 history fans, including Ontario's Lieutenant Governor, the Premier, and a former Prime Minister, all gathered at the Royal York Hotel to celebrate the 200th anniversary of the birth of Canada's first prime minister.

That event could not be held today, at least certainly not without significant protests or maybe even vandalism. In the intervening years, Sir John A. Macdonald has been cancelled. Statues taken down, his name removed from schools, even taken off the $10 bill. Who would dare to push back against that overwhelming narrative? This guy. Patrice de Tille is a professor in the Department of Politics and Public Administration at Toronto Metropolitan University, and he has a new book out. It's called Sir John A. MacDonald and the Apocalyptic Year 1885.

And that brings him to our studio tonight. Good to see you again, Patrice. Thank you, Steve. Given everything I have just said, aren't you asking for a lot of trouble by trying to write a book about Sir John A. right now? I hope not. I think it's important. Ten years after that great event, I was there. I was very happy to be there. It's time to start looking at the record, move away from this new reputation that's been given to Sir John A. MacDonald,

and actually start looking at the record. So this was part of the work that I was doing. And I started looking into the MacDonald record a little bit more closely. And I found a lot of new information that I think should help restore the reputation of our first prime minister. Let us do that then.

We're going to look at, you say 1885 was the hardest of all of McDonald's years in public life, and he had a lot of them. Why was 1885 so tough? There's a running cascade of crisis after crisis. We know, of course, the second insurrection in the North, the first insurrection in the Northwest, but the second led by Louis Riel in 1885.

People will remember that. That's something that's covered in school. But there's a whole bunch of other things. There's a confrontation with the new incoming government of Grover Cleveland in the United States. There's a debate with the British. There's all sorts of stories happening month after month after month through 1885, and that really makes it,

I think, a compelling story. How much of McDonald's agenda in 1885 is protecting this, remember at the time, not even 20 year old country from being absorbed into the United States? Boy, things do change don't they? Or not. Or not. It is a running concern throughout the year. There is a real concern in McDonald's mind

that if Canada shows weakness, there will be a renewed temptation in the United States to occupy a territory in the Northwest that is barely occupied. Maybe we've got maybe 30,000 people. It's a wide open territory for an American army. There's a concern that Canada will appear weak if it doesn't manage its affairs with Great Britain. There's a concern that Canada will appear weak if it doesn't manage its affairs with Great Britain.

There's a concern about smallpox. We have an epidemic in 1885. There's all sorts of things. It really is about maintaining the sovereignty of Canada. You said something a minute ago I should have followed up on, and I'm going to do that now, because you say, oh yeah, people know Louis Riel, they learn about him in school. I don't want to make an assumption that everybody knows who Louis Riel, they learn about him in school. I don't wanna make an assumption

that everybody knows who Louis Riel was and the significance he played in our history. So let's go there for a minute or two here. Who was Louis Riel? Louis Riel is about 40 years old at that point. He's the leader of the Métis people, the French speaking Métis people. He's actually, he led an insurrection in 1870.

He was a young man, 24 years old, barely 24 years old, 25. He, after that, is removed from Manitoba. He winds up in Quebec for a little while, in what we used to call an insane asylum in those days. He then moves to the United States, becomes an American citizen, becomes a rancher, a school teacher, gets married. And in 1884, is brought back to the United States, becomes an American citizen, becomes a rancher, a school teacher, gets married. And in 1884, is brought back to the Northwest

by a few leaders in the Métis community to try to sort out the position regarding the government of Canada. The Métis people are not happy, I should say some of the Métis people are not happy, and they wanna renegotiate with Canada. They bring in Louis Riel because they thought that he would be

the right kind of agent to talk to John A. MacDonald, which is a categorical mistake. Well, some of MacDonald's advisors said, we should pay this guy to get lost because he was such a thorn in his side. And let's bring this up, Sheldon, if you would. I'm at the bottom of page one here. This is Sir John A. MacDonald responding to his advisors. He said, how would it look to be obliged to confess we could not govern the country and were obliged to bribe a man to go away?

This would never do. He has a right to remain in Canada and if he conspires, we must punish him. That's all. Given that he ended up at war with Riel, eventually putting him to death, maybe he should have tried to bribe him in the beginning? him to death, maybe he should have tried to bribe him in the beginning?

Well, that's a really interesting way to debate it. He could have. Again, he has the honor of the crown. Maybe he should have. Maybe he should have. As a counter-history, maybe that would have saved him a lot of problems. But I don't think McDonald took that kind of offer seriously.

I don't think he knew Riel was driven by a certain mission, and it would have been pointless to give him money. And he was found guilty, Steve, by a court. He was found guilty by a jury. So it wasn't McDonald's decision to declare him guilty. Right. There has been a great debate since then, though, whether he was a crazed madman or an underappreciated father of confederation.

Where do you come down? Louis Riel insisted that he was not crazy. McDonald came to the conclusion that he was not insane. He commissioned a small group of three, again we didn't have psychiatrists in those days, but three people who were familiar with criminal mentalities, and they came to the conclusion that he was not crazy,

that he was not insane. And so, I mean, that debate was put aside. However, the jury did think that he was not mentally stable and did recommend clemency, but that was not to unfold. The punishment for treason, high treason, which was what the claim against Riel was, was death. Patrice, one of the reasons that people want to see

statues of Sir John A. taken down are because of some of the things he said back in the day. And here's one thing, and you quote it in your book. Here's Sir John A. saying, the executions, after Riel was killed, the executions ought to convince the red man that the white man governs. Now you'd agree that's a pretty racist thing to say that doesn't hold up too well. Very much. So what do we do about that?

You compare it with everything else that Sir John A. MacDonald said in his life about the red man, about the indigenous people, people that he considered to be cornerstones of Canadian civilizations, people that he knew, people that he respected, people that in 1885 he insists should be given the right to vote. That's the real MacDonald. That kind of quotation, I cite it because it was witnessed, is important. But he had other meanings in mind, I suspect, at that time.

But he was driving the point that the government of Canada is the sovereign power in this country. It's not anybody else. And that, I think, was what he meant by that, beyond the obvious racist connotations of what he said. But I say put it in the context, in 1885, of the respect he demonstrated to the indigenous people in this country. 1885 is also a year when the buffalo are disappearing from the West. And it's a whole way of life that therefore is affected. The indigenous people were barely hanging on because of the loss of the buffalo.

I want to know in Ottawa, what were people urging McDonald to do to respond to that? Well, the Buffalo starts disappearing in the 1870s. So by 1885, I mean, that's gone. When McDonald returns to power in 1878, there are two ways of doing things. You could have simply left things as they were. The Liberal government under Alexander McKenzie basically did that. They provided some support. McDonald comes in and establishes a number of programs to help the indigenous people

in the prairies. It's important that it's the prairies. It's not everybody in Canada that's suffering famine. It's in the prairies. McDonald multiplies programs to help them. Now, yeah, the Liberals on the opposition are not particularly happy about this. The reality is that McDonald is always running a deficit. He's spending more money than he has.

And the liberal opposition is hammering him for spending too much money. And so at one point he says, you know, we're practically starving these people. What more do you want? He was responding to the liberals. And sometimes it's been misinterpreted as saying that we are literally forcing them to die of famine. That wasn't his intent. The people in Canada had racist views towards Indigenous people. We have to recognize that.

That's what makes MacDonald, to my mind, stand out. That he was remarkably progressive in light of the general attitudes in the country at the time. Okay, let me follow up on that. Where was he on the issue of whether or not indigenous people at the time ought to be allowed to live their way of life or be assimilated into the broader country? I think that McDonald had two views on this. First of all, they should be left alone. But they should be encouraged to join the mainstream.

He was a simulationist in that regard. Like everybody else in this country, they really considered that the old hunting-gathering method that had allowed the indigenous people in the prairies to survive was over. You had to learn how to farm. You had to learn how to use mechanics. It is very much part of the 1885 experience That's why I emphasize so much the technological developments that are happening in that one particular year He wants them to survive. He wants them to modernize and if that's me if that means letting go of some of the old ways

So there so it is They need to survive. They need to adapt. They need to join the mainstream. That's why he wants them to vote. How would you compare McDonald's treatment of indigenous people in Canada compared to how successive American presidents dealt with the same issue in the United States? There's absolutely no comparison. Let's not forget that indigenous people in the United States are finding refuge in Canada because there's no food in the United States.

There's no rations in the United States. There's no support in the United States. The indigenous people in the United States are finding refuge in Canada because there's no food in the United States. There's no rations in the United States. There's no support in the United States. The indigenous people in the United States are being eradicated. They come to Canada because under John A. McDonald, there's protection and there's food. That's not a small thing. That has to be remembered.

I'm going to bring up another quote from your book. Again, you're a pro-McDonald guy, but you're not sugarcoating the record here. Here we go, Sheldon, quote board number two. This is Sir John A. We cannot change the barbarian, the savage, into a civilized man. British spelling of the word civilized there, incidentally. Now, you do tell us that you don't think McDonald was a racist in the sense of

he believed in the supremacy of the white race and everybody else was inferior. But by the standards of the time, how would you describe his attitude to other races? The word civilized is capital here. What did John A. MacDonald mean by civilized? He meant basically people like him and the people that he hung around with, people who went to school, people who were Christians, let's be honest. People who had a god. People who had an appreciation for the modern technological society that was developing.

That's what he means by civilized. He's not casting aspersions on the various habits of people. That's not the point. That's what they meant by civilized. And it's a common term used throughout the Western world Again I don't want to I don't want to sugarcoat it, you know, he had he expressed some views about people He'll do the same thing with the Chinese. I'm sure you got a quarter. My next question Okay, let's go with the Chinese because again, you know, he's he's he's very much a person of his time

He needs to communicate in language that people understand. And so in my view, he's using words that people will recognize. He's showing them that he understands their concerns, racist as they are, but he's trying to make them move into a more progressive stance. How would you compare his treatment of Chinese immigrants to other prime ministers of the day?

Again, John A. MacDonald has the distinction of establishing a condition on Chinese immigration that was not applied elsewhere. In other words, under MacDonald in 1885, there's a $50 head tax. If you're a person of Chinese origin and you want to move to Canada, you're going to have to pay a $50 head tax. Terrible thing. Racist thing.

Absolutely. Undeniably. Compared to his successors, Sir Wilfred Lerier will come in and multiply that head tax by 10 times. It'll be $500 when they come in. Mackenzie King will bar immigration from China in the early 1920s. McDonald, compared to that, is a progressive.

By the way, Canada is the only country on the Pacific Rim that still allows Chinese immigration in 1885. That singles out Sir John A. McDonald above everybody else. And how about in comparison to Presidents Hayes or Arthur in the States? There is an absolute wall. It was undeniable.

You could not come into the United States if you were Chinese origin. What about during Mackenzie King's time, 30 years after McDonald's death? That wasn't a shining moment for Canada, either, was it? In terms of immigration? Yeah. Well, yeah.

Again, it's a liberal government in this case, and a continuation of that racism against Asians, against Chinese in particular. So Mackenzie King will bring in a law that outlaws completely Chinese immigration. There's an indication of anti-Semitism in Mackenzie King that certainly Sir John A. MacDonald did not have. He encouraged, he wanted Jews to come into Canada because he thought a lot of them could go out west and farm.

Not too many of them did, but he's on the record saying, you know, we want these people. They'd be good, they'd be good grade Canadians. That would be unusual for a guy born in Scotland and who was of upper Canada at the time to have a kind of positive impression of the Jewish community, right? He did, but you know, there's an aspect of, of, of,

of McDonald that we often forget is that he's a child of refugees himself. He comes from a Highland family. They come to Canada in 1820 with a whole wave of Scots who are leaving their country because it's not a hospitable place for them anymore. And so he comes to Canada and I think he still kept that mentality. So John A MacDonald kept a very strong link to Scotland all through his life. It meant something to him and I think that the way he saw the evolution of the Scots, which is dramatically improving. After the refugee wave is going, there's a renewal of the Scottish identity, largely

because of Queen Victoria. And there's a refreshing of that identity. And I think that that affected MacDonald particularly. He saw that civilizations can change. He saw that there's always a better tomorrow if you work at it. And I think that applied to his view of indigenous people. I think it applied to his view of Canadians in general. That there is a room for improvement and let's stick with it and see if we can find a better way.

Let me circle back to voting because you mentioned he tried to... He made efforts to get women to vote, to get indigenous people to vote. Yes. How did that go? Well, on women, that get indigenous people to vote. How did that go? Well, on women, that was a crash and burn. Liberals and conservatives would absolutely not abide by the idea that a woman could vote. I mean, that last, that debate lasted a couple of days and McDonald said, okay, I throw in

the towel, but I want the indigenous to vote. And of course, the liberals are saying saying are you saying that big bear? Who's just declared war whose whose people not big bear whose people? Have declared war on Canada should be there have the right to vote. Yes, absolutely Should black people have the right to vote? Absolutely should Indian people have vote. Yes, they are sons of the soil. They need to vote. They should vote Why not? They're good people. They know the freedom. They know they know freedom They understand free. They understand our culture. That's remarkable. He says that in the House of Commons

It doesn't apply to the Chinese. However, he doesn't think that the Chinese have an understanding of Democracy and he's under real pressure from his caucus BC caucus to make sure that that the Chinese don't vote. Because there was a real concern that they would hold a balance of power and that ultimately would be the Chinese men who were temporarily in Canada to build a railway who would ultimately decide the fate of democracy in Canada or in British Columbia. And that was a bridge too far. Well, we're talking about 1885.

The next election after he gives these groups to the franchise is 1887. What happens in that election? It's a real triumph. McDonald, I mean, he, he, the, the, the, 1885 is a massive transformation of the right to vote. Again, a lot of people are opposed. The liberals are opposed. They fear that McDonald is going to trick them into something. Yeah, and it turns out it's a trick, but it's a really good trick for us as a democracy.

So Johnny McDonald's reforms in 1885 will increase the number of voters by 40%. And in 1887, barely 14 months, 15 months after the year 1885, he is triumphantly re-elected. He loses 10 seats, Steve, but he gains 7% of the vote, including in Quebec. And four years later, in 1891, he will again win. Despite hanging Riel.

Despite hanging Riel. John A. MacDonald understood, as perhaps no other prime minister since then, the prejudices of Canadians, but also their ambitions and their dreams. And that reflected in his policies and that's why he was so successful. Okay, so that's much of the McDonald record as it sat in 1885. And now I want to bring you back full circle to today. And here's how you close the book. Sheldon, let's bring this up if you would and I'll read along for those listening on podcast. Patrice Titeel writes, it's hard

to imagine a reputation being trashed so hatefully, so suddenly and so thoroughly. Nine of McDonald's 11 statues have been removed. The smear campaigns have had an impact. While public surveys show that most Canadians continue to appreciate McDonald's significant accomplishments, he appears increasingly as a broken myth to younger generations. Students are taught appreciate McDonald's significant accomplishments, he appears increasingly as a broken myth to younger generations. Students are taught that McDonald is a person of whom Canadians should be ashamed. He is loudly derided as uniquely devoted

to pursuing power for patronage purposes. A racist, a colonialist, a prototypical Nazi, an architect of indigenous genocide, animated by the sole purpose of killing the Indian to save the child, one of the phrases routinely and falsely attributed to him that was actually uttered by an American educator. That sounds like a run on sentence, I'm sorry.

You capture what you meant to say very clearly. So the question then today becomes, you obviously would like us to have a second look at this cancellation of McDonald's. What does that look like? I think it starts with, gosh, I'm going to sound like a Canadian, maybe we should have a commission on this. I think that there has to be a new appreciation, a new willingness among governments

to lead the discussion on Sir John A. Macdonald. What I mean by that is perhaps to take another look at the curriculum and open the pages of the curriculum, open the pages that are presented to our students and explain Sir John A. Macdonald that I see, that others have seen. I'm not the only one. Let's have a public discussion. I'm talking about at the local level, where streets are being renamed, where those monuments have been taken down.

Is it not time to perhaps say, look, given the record of Sir John A MacDonald, maybe that statue that we've had hiding should come back? It's a painful discussion, perhaps. It should not be And I'm being idealistic here I think it's it's really a tragedy that the man who did so much for the creation of our country For the establishment of our country not just confederation but bringing in provinces, you know claiming territory Defending the territory defending it in Washington in London should be dismissed as utterly unimportant It's unbelievable that we have this kind of situation

I cannot think of another nation that is so dismissive of one of its most important founding fathers The flip side of that coin though is some people have observed that Canada ought to get extra marks For being prepared to sort of knock down myths about its founding fathers and find fault with them and not try to sugarcoat that part of our history. What do you say to that? But you have to compare it to the overall record. If a person did wrong and only dedicated himself or herself to wrong, I would be the first

one to claim that that statue should not stand. But when you have an overwhelming record such as the one that belongs to Sir John A. MacDonald, I think this deserves another look. We've had 10 years of discussion. Very little of it has been based on truth. We've had reputation. Here say that kind of stuff. Let's actually lead a new discussion on Sir John

M. MacDonald and rediscover some of the virtues that he bequeathed to us. Well, last question here. Give some advice to the MPPs at Queens Park who, in their wisdom, have decided to board up the statue of Sir John M. MacDonald at the southern tip of the south lawn at Queens Park. It has been boarded up for, I think, going on four years now. What should they do with it? The short answer or the long answer? The short up for I think going on four years now. What should they do with it? The short answer or the long answer the short answer. I think that I Think that they need to lead a discussion. It should not be done radically. There should be some speeches There should be some debate in the house

There should be at least the effort to try to build to rebuild the consensus around Sir John A. McDonald I'm confident that if people are allowed to speak to the record, Sir John A. McDonald. I'm confident that if people are allowed to speak to the record, Sir John A. McDonald's reputation will be restored because it's that strong. After that, let's take down that shroud. Let's maybe build up police protection for a while, because there probably will be a storm. But let's lead the province.

Hamilton should be doing the same thing. Hamilton should be doing the same thing. Kingston should be doing the same thing. And I realize that I'm speaking radical thoughts here. But at some point, those statues need to be restored. And maybe they need to be, maybe they need a better place, a safer place, let's have those places. I wish they'd be restored where they were before, because Sir John A. MacDonald deserves the recognition

and the respect that is due to him. Well, the name of the, because Sir John A. Macdonald deserves the recognition and the respect that is due to him. Well, the name of the book is Sir John A. Macdonald and the Apocalyptic Year 1885. Read the book yourself. Come to your own conclusions about Sir John A. Patrice de Tille has put his views on the record and we thank you for coming into TVO tonight to share them. Thank you so much, Steve.