Widespread systemic racism in Canadian military ‘repulsing’ new recruits: report

[Jarnhamar]

'Establish a working group.....' at about 15.20

A working group AND an upcoming apology. Solid.

 

[Good2Golf]

Were those straight-up fights, or massacres of innocents? If the former, there's no reason to remove the honours. If we had regiments that perpetuated battles of the Seven Years War (anglo or franco), I wouldn't expect them to be removed, either.

If it turns out they hadn’t conducted a GBA+ analysis before they attacked, the battle honours may be rescinded…

 

[Infanteer]

Were those straight-up fights, or massacres of innocents? If the former, there's no reason to remove the honours. If we had regiments that perpetuated battles of the Seven Years War (anglo or franco), I wouldn't expect them to be removed, either.

Not sure why Fish Creek would be celebrated - Canadian Army walked into an ambush by an inferior Metis force. Batoche was a three day battle where the Canadian Army bumbled into a prepared defensive position and then prevailed when the Metis finally ran out of ammo.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Shades of Rorke's Drift and VCs, then...

 

[Weinie]

The bit about removing certain Battle Honours didn’t specifically name the Northwest Rebellion - but it was pretty obvious that was what they were talking about. I’m not sure if any regiments celebrate Batoche or Fish Creek as their major anniversaries, but if so, a new calendar may have to go into those regimental catechisms.

And I suppose new colours and guidons will also be needed.

You cannot erase history, you can only deny it.

 

[OldSolduer]

The bit about removing certain Battle Honours didn’t specifically name the Northwest Rebellion - but it was pretty obvious that was what they were talking about. I’m not sure if any regiments celebrate Batoche or Fish Creek as their major anniversaries, but if so, a new calendar may have to go into those regimental catechisms.

And I suppose new colours and guidons will also be needed.

Fish Creek is celebrated by The Royal Winnipeg Rifles. So we want to rewrite history to satisfy everyone. Fuck that.

 

[KevinB]

And folks wonder why I went to become an American…

My lord Canada, what you have become without adults in the room to watch.

 

[daftandbarmy]

And folks wonder why I went to become an American…

My lord Canada, what you have become without adults in the room to watch.

 

[btrudy]

You cannot erase history, you can only deny it.

You can stop celebrating things for which you should rightfully be ashamed. That's not denying history. Pretending like it didn't happen would be.

 

[TacticalTea]

Were those straight-up fights, or massacres of innocents? If the former, there's no reason to remove the honours. If we had regiments that perpetuated battles of the Seven Years War (anglo or franco), I wouldn't expect them to be removed, either.

To your point... you'll find many streets called Wolfe AND Montcalm in Quebec. Both sides are commemorated.

And in the Navy, when we sing ''To add something more to this wonderful year!'' it is in reference to:
''the Annus Mirabilis of 1759, during which British forces were victorious in several significant battles: the Battle of Minden on 1 August 1759; the Battle of Lagos on 19 August 1759; the Battle of the Plains of Abraham (outside Quebec City) on 13 September 1759.'' -Wikipedia, Heart of Oak.

 

[TacticalTea]

Some are batsh!t crazy (most of the section on chaplaincy reform)

Hooooly shit! I thought you were exaggerating, but... No. Far from it.

"For example, some churches' exclusion of women from their priesthoods violates principles of equality and social justice, as do sexist notions embedded in their religious dogmas. [...] These faiths’ dogmas and practices conflict with the commitment of the Defence Team to value equality and inclusivity at every level of the workplace.

If the Defence Team rejects gender discrimination, anti-Indigenous discrimination, and racialized discrimination in every other area and is working hard to remove systemic barriers to the employment of marginalized people, it cannot justify hiring representatives of organizations who marginalize certain people or categorically refuse them a position of leadership.

The Advisory Panel has observed that there are varying degrees of misogyny, sexism and discrimination woven into the philosophies and beliefs of some mainstream religions currently represented in the cadre of chaplains in the CAF. [...] Rather it is pointing out that the Defence Team cannot consider itself supportive of inclusivity when it employs as chaplains members of organizations whose values are not consistent with National Defence’s ethics and values—even if those members express non-adherence to the policies of their chosen religion. For example, it can be assumed that if a religion openly forbade a Black person to serve within its ranks, its members would be banned from the Chaplaincy in the CAF. The same scrutiny should be applied to those religions that forbid women to serve within their ranks or are against equal rights for same-sex couples."

Who are these people? The authors of this report are utterly insane. Completely disconnected from reality. They are suggesting the majority of the population would not be allowed to have religious representation in the chaplaincy.

 

[Kilted]

First of all, I have to say that the CAF is the most diverse and a few issues aside, I would say legitimately tolerant organizations that I have ever been part of. I honestly have trouble believing that there is any rampant issue with racism in the CAF.

Considering our general recruitment issues, I don't think that we should care and potentially start turning people away based on their skin colour.

Let other people have said, many immigrants are adverse to military service based on their experiences in their country of origin. This issue is not going to go away unless we start shifting our immigration allotments towards countries with positive views of their militaries. I've sure the NDP and liberals would love that.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Yep. To use their own principles, if they're fully committed "to value equality and inclusivity at every level of the workplace", then no-one who espouses the beliefs (ie. adheres to one of "those" religions) should be permitted on any level of the "defence team".

Chaplains exist to serve the spiritual needs of people who are of religions according to how they (religions and their adherents) define themselves, not to fill in by being sham placeholders who pick and choose from a menu of beliefs. If anyone is left out, the solution is more chaplains.

 

[Weinie]

You can stop celebrating things for which you should rightfully be ashamed. That's not denying history. Pretending like it didn't happen would be.

I didn't see much pretending that it didn't happen in the report, as it stands, they took great pains to point out any flaws, no matter how far fetched. And I am ashamed of nothing during my almost forty years in the CAF.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Isn't the official line of chaplaincy pretty big on the agnostic side of spirituality? Every chaplain I have interacted with seemed pretty happy to just talk, help find solutions and resources, and escalate further if it was out of their expertise.

There have been systemic abuses in the ChurchTM for centuries, however, the RCChS I would say is more akin to guidance counselors than anything else.

 

[Remius]

You can stop celebrating things for which you should rightfully be ashamed. That's not denying history. Pretending like it didn't happen would be.

Who is pretending things didn’t happen in that context?

So a few things to consider. There is a difference between “celebrating” and “commemorating”. Many units commemorate various actions during the north west rebellion as it was the first time those units went into battle. They also commemorate some of those actions including the losses as it would have been the first time that members of those units were killed.

Removing the NWR battle Honour won’t change any of that.

Also people on both sides of really need history lessons. Real ones before they open their traps.

 

[Furniture]

Hooooly shit! I thought you were exaggerating, but... No. Far from it.

"For example, some churches' exclusion of women from their priesthoods violates principles of equality and social justice, as do sexist notions embedded in their religious dogmas. [...] These faiths’ dogmas and practices conflict with the commitment of the Defence Team to value equality and inclusivity at every level of the workplace.

If the Defence Team rejects gender discrimination, anti-Indigenous discrimination, and racialized discrimination in every other area and is working hard to remove systemic barriers to the employment of marginalized people, it cannot justify hiring representatives of organizations who marginalize certain people or categorically refuse them a position of leadership.

The Advisory Panel has observed that there are varying degrees of misogyny, sexism and discrimination woven into the philosophies and beliefs of some mainstream religions currently represented in the cadre of chaplains in the CAF. [...] Rather it is pointing out that the Defence Team cannot consider itself supportive of inclusivity when it employs as chaplains members of organizations whose values are not consistent with National Defence’s ethics and values—even if those members express non-adherence to the policies of their chosen religion. For example, it can be assumed that if a religion openly forbade a Black person to serve within its ranks, its members would be banned from the Chaplaincy in the CAF. The same scrutiny should be applied to those religions that forbid women to serve within their ranks or are against equal rights for same-sex couples."

Who are these people? The authors of this report are utterly insane. Completely disconnected from reality. They are suggesting the majority of the population would not be allowed to have religious representation in the chaplaincy.

Interestingly, in the anti-Asian Racism section they talk about Islamophobia, and in the Chaplaincy section they essentially demand the CAF not have Islamic, Catholic, or several Protestant denominations' Chaplains....

I wonder how the government will reconcile those two recommendations when they move forward.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Interestingly, in the anti-Asian Racism section they talk about Islamophobia, and in the Chaplaincy section they essentially demand the CAF not have Islamic, Catholic, or several Protestant denominations' Chaplains....

I wonder how the government will reconcile those two recommendations when they move forward.

The entire recommendation section is full of cognitive dissonance. It reads like the minutes from a Jr. Ranks Mess Meeting:

"We want jalapeño poppers on TGIT! We also don't want to pay for them. We also don't want to have our mess dues raised. Also, we don't want to be forced to pay mess dues. Also, we shouldn't have messes anymore."

 

[dimsum]

The entire recommendation section is full of cognitive dissonance. It reads like the minutes from a Jr. Ranks Mess Meeting:

"We want jalapeño poppers on TGIT! We also don't want to pay for them. We also don't want to have our mess dues raised. Also, we don't want to be forced to pay mess dues. Also, we shouldn't have messes anymore."

Frankly, aside from the poppers, that could be any mess meeting.

 

[FSTO]

Interestingly, in the anti-Asian Racism section they talk about Islamophobia, and in the Chaplaincy section they essentially demand the CAF not have Islamic, Catholic, or several Protestant denominations' Chaplains....

I wonder how the government will reconcile those two recommendations when they move forward.

They won’t. This report will sit on the shelf like all the other ones and will be used from time to to time to beat the CAF over the head when politically convenient.