Tag Archives: #namechange

Two name problems

One problem is the association of the name Powell with residential schools, and its history and trauma for indigenous people. This deserves recognition, & appreciation. The effects of that trauma are clearly present; including amoung others, mental health challenges & addictions.

The other problem; Powell represents identity for many people here. Questioning identity amounts to a personal threat for many who were unprepared for it. A natural reaction has been defensive and little has happened that hasn’t essentially only bolstered defensiveness. This needs recognition too, and appreciation.

Many people also want to do something about what is relatively new knowledge for many about what happened to indigenous people. Reconciliation? Change the name? This question has divided our community since we stopped doing anything about it since the last civic election in Oct. 2022.

Yes or no divides us.  The community we need now, to face increasing challenges, needs to work together to find our way forward. It doesn’t matter how slowly; we just need to do it together. Division is our real current challenge. We must deal with that within our Powell River community before we can ever reconcile with the people who first asked the name question.

The Tla’amin Nation is thriving now like never before. Strength and pride have surged culturally and acquisitions of mill lands and TFL39 promise future economic prosperity. Meanwhile, our city faces sagging revenues, increasing costs, and people suffering mental health challenges, addictions, and homelessness too. There is a lot for us to work on together.

These two “name” problems are not two sides of the same problem. We are basically two distinct peoples with very linked but different histories. Some of us, or our ancestors, migrated here so we have inherited a problem, and now it is ours. Opportunity to reconnect within our community is ours. Failing to do that these past few years has resulted in antagonism, and conflict between us, prejudice, racism, blame. This is painful at a community scale, and it has gone on too long. Let’s take a breath, step back from reacting and taking it personally, and get working together again, for the good of ourselves and our whole community.

This fall we will have opportunity in a civic election to choose new leadership. The choice is very clear. Will we choose those who make promises that focus on what we fear, and deliver continued division and misery? Or will we choose leadership committed to reconnection with each other in spite of our different views, in spite of our apparent divisions, willing to face whatever is ahead of us together, however hard that might be, together as one community.  I hope and pray we all care enough to vote with true hearts, and take the path back toward thriving together.

Let’s Listen & Talk, about identity and heritage

A little over four years ago I met with a man I respect.   He wanted to talk about something that felt urgent and important.  It was hard to address, and deeply personal.  We sat in his truck beside the ocean. I listened.  

A short time before that, the question had been asked of city council while in a C3 meeting with the Tla’amin legislative council and the qRD Board, “will you consider changing the name of Powell River?  The name Powell has painful associations for indigenous people here.  It shook and divided our community.  But the question being articulated by this brave friend was “what of my identity and my heritage? I had no good answer.   His question stuck with me.    

Back to the City, a working group was formed, and meetings and public gatherings followed, and by the summer a year later that group produced a report with 11 recommendations.  It was a serious effort to address the name change question and underlying reasons it was asked.     What it didn’t represent was the question this man had asked, “what of my identity, my heritage?    Now, four years after both those questions were asked, one very public and one not public at all, something has become clear to me. 

The name change question devolved into a simple binary; yes or no, and most of us aligned with one side or the other.   For three years there’s been division in our community.  Some want a poll to democratically decide.   Doing that now would confirm division.  It would belie that we are one community, that we all have our community’s best interests at heart and all love being here.  My friend’s question points to a way through.  What is my identity?  What is my heritage?

The answer to that question is as varied as we are.  We are from many places in the world, with many backgrounds.  We bring diverse, rich heritages and identities.  This community is world renowned for culture, athletics, and natural beauty.   We are rich in these things.   Can we unite in pride and celebration for this wealth we all happily share here?   Yes, we can!   We can remember who we are, remember we are one community.   We can grieve losses together, personal and community-wide.  We can celebrate all the good we have together.   However, we have work to do now to remember that.  There is no way around it. 

We have to start somewhere.  Council and the City have been unable to restart us; this is work for community.  If we acknowledge & celebrate everyone’s identity and heritage, maybe then we can consider our name.  

Let’s meet in the Cran Hall Tues. Oct. 28 at 7 pm to talk and to listen.    

A question for our community     

  For months I have tried to figure out how to address the festering pain in our community that has grown out of the unanswered name change question. 

I have asked various people and discussed it at length with some; how can we get this conversation started again?    They care as deeply as I do about our community and our mental health.   Apparently, no one I know on any side of this picture wants to approach it directly any more.  A lot of hurt has happened.   There are at least three camps representing at least three distinct viewpoints, probably more.     Years now of hurt, frustration, and disappointment have sent most of us into corners, far from talking, but I am convinced, talking is the only way through.   

I thought to bring this to council.   Council could discuss Strategic Priority 1-2: Take substantive steps toward reconciliation with Tla’amin Nation, by engaging the public on the topic of a name change, including a possible new name, leading up to a public opinion poll timed with the 2026 municipal election.”    It doesn’t say we will hold a referendum in Oct. 2026 to ask, yes or no, do you want a name change?    However, when the deadline comes to commit to what can be included with the election vote, it would be disingenuous to simply say no we can’t do a poll if we haven’t by then made a genuine attempt to “…take substantive steps… by engaging the public…”.   That means us.   That means talking.   Talking is how we engage. 

It is clear to me the original question “will you consider a name change?” can’t be answered by a simple yes or no.  If it could be, it would have been, long ago.  That it caused such strong reactions from both yes-supporters and no-supporters strongly suggests deeper questions must be asked first.      Both yes and no leave a lot of people out.   Leaving people out is not how community works.  We need to face it.  We are in conflict and conflict is never actually resolved by winning or losing.

Deeper questions?    How many of us have tried to figure out what they are on our own or with friends?  Nothing is resolving.   We’re quite stuck in our positions.   We need to break the logjam we all seem to be in.    Might that be possible if we got yes-camp people facing off with no-camp people?   Could that happen without just hurting each other more?  

Who has what it takes to step beyond personal beliefs, and face others who possibly believe the opposite, and talk about it.  Can our community be more important than our beliefs?   Could this work for us?   

We’re all here.   I don’t know anyone who doesn’t love our home, this community.   We have that in common.   Instead of fighting, lets find a way to talk and find our way through this mess together.        

My position on the name change question

Our community needs to change its name.  

Personally, this relates to early deaths of my brother, my dad, and my grandfather. Indigenous friends’ examples showed me my family also carries inherited trauma, though unrecognized, subconscious.   Men in my family dulled pain with alcohol.  It led to early deaths.    I am a survivor.  

Early on I knew something wasn’t right in me.  It was buried under a lot that is good.  I was raised in a loving family.   Eventually, I worked with other men similarly curious.   Answers appeared slowly.  

Like many in our community my parents and grandparents migrated here.  A common story in our culture is that they came for better opportunity.   I painfully discovered some of them buried dark backgrounds to start anew here, but what actually happened is that it got buried in their own subconscious.  It is still here and still having destructive effect, and mostly still isn’t seen.    All we have left is beliefs in the good stuff, heritage we can justly be proud of.    We are choking on any suggestion our heritage has a dark side; that collectively it is directly connected to residential schools.  Confused by only seeing the good, we cling to a name that ironically now clouds that good heritage. Only we can reconcile this.   How?   

Residential schools’ stories are an invitation for us.   How could they have happened? Surely it isn’t our fault.  Surely, we are better than that.   We are, only if we can reconcile ourselves to our collective past by facing and accepting it.   My dad buried his horrific WW2 frontlines service.   He hid it from his family, which then passed on the effects subconsciously without us knowing.    But I dug it up.   It won’t kill me and my son and hopefully my nephews and others will not die for those reasons.   The buck can stop here.   The future can be better if evils of the past are accepted and confronted.  And we can move on.   How?

We have a big opportunity to change our name for our reason, this reason, by simply accepting that by doing it we humbly accept that our heritage contains what it took to create residential schools.    A hard pill to swallow.   Then what?  More opportunity.    The mill created this town.   Its future could be our collective prosperity IF we can work with Tla’amin Nation.  

It is time to face both what we can rightly be proud of and rightly be ashamed of, own them both, and do something monumental for ourselves; change our name.    Reconciliation is for us to do with our own selves first.    And then to work with our indigenous neighbours, cooperate in any way we can for mutual prosperity.    

Pride goes before a fall it is said.   Will we cling to selfish pride, separate from our neighbours or face our past, grieve it, change it, and move forward into the future together?       

Why does the “name change” divide us?

Not long ago at a city council meeting, a sr. resident of our community stood before council during question period at the end of the meeting and pointed to us across the table exclaiming “shame!, shame!, shame!”   In many years I’d never seen anything like that before.   But I thought, he’s put his finger on something.   There is shame here, and blame.  Why?  What is really happening? 

Some of us feel it and recognize it.  Do we understand it?  Why is this coming up for us?  Why can’t we get through it, get past it?  What happened to the friendly, cooperative community we’ve always known ourselves to be?  

There’s more emotional reaction going on than ever before too.  Reaction to media articles about us, reaction to information about IW Powell, both pro and con, and it seems, the more information, the more reaction.     There’s been reaction to a silly spontaneous but straight-from-the-heart outburst by a city councillor famous for such expression, and lots of reaction to each other over that too, both condemning and defensive.   Blame is in the air, accusations of hate-speech, alienation between people who used to be friends, and on and on.    Much of the reaction is emotional, but deeply felt, and coming from many people who don’t often raise their voices.  Some of it is thought out, rationalized, justified, carefully written down.  

All of it represents different sides of our situation.  None of it represents our whole situation.   Within our community we feel divided, taking sides, opposed to each other.   How did we get here?   Can we trace back far enough to answer this?   Is there a way to do that without blaming each other and perpetuating division in our community? 

A central question might lead us forward.    What is our whole situation?   Regardless of sides we are on, there is one whole.  We are all here in it. 

What is our whole situation?   Is that too big a question to answer?   Perhaps we can take a step in the direction by starting where we find ourselves now.    Reaction based just on emotion subjects us to what stimulates the reaction.   In other words, to some degree simply by reacting we lose control of ourselves to that thing.  We become like leaves in the wind blown one way or another.   Mostly we grasp that, so we try to take a thinking approach, find a rationale for the feelings.    But if it leads only to opposition and division between us, as the old saying goes, divided, we are conquered.   Controlled by way of our own beliefs underlying our reactions.    It’s a dead end, or heading there.  We must react on our terms and our thinking must go deeper to empower our action.  

This means treading into dangerous territory, where we question beliefs we hold, that now divide us from each other.   It can be our territory if we go into it with purpose, within the safety of the trust that can come of working together.    Worthy initial purpose can well be simply to find our way past division.  We can do this if we recognize working toward a successful future for us all is more important than the beliefs that led to the divisions, even when they are beliefs we feel define who we are.    It then remains ours, in spite of how it feels to loosen our grip on positions we’ve taken, and who we think we are.  No one else can do it for us, but if we don’t do it for ourselves, we do lose control of our own thinking, we become the leaves in the wind.   We can only tread into the dangerous territory if we are willing to risk allowing our beliefs to change. 

We can’t stay where we are.   This is the only way forward.  We must risk loss, not of our lives, but of beliefs, some related to identity, our very sense of who we are.   We could find we are more than we think we are.   But that might not feel good at first.   We might feel someone is shaming us.   We might feel shame.    

Shame relates to identity, to the sense of who we are.  Its central message is personal, that I am defective, something is wrong with me.     But is that true?   Deeply, we know it is not true, and that is confusing.   Shame is rooted in beliefs and assumptions, things we have learned through our lives, some of which are not true.   

Close to three years ago when the question of our name first emerged, a friend shared with me the deep sense that it questioned his culture, his sense of where he had come from, his ancestors, his heritage.   Greif, tears appeared in his words.  How deeply he felt that, and trusted me enough to tell me has stuck with me all this time.    I believe he put words to what many people now feel.   Our name, whatever it is, is the symbol of who we are.  To question it questions who we are.   Not much deeper a question could be asked.  

To ask this question could evoke shame, or be taken as shaming.   An obvious reason for that could be for the damage our indigenous friends suffered over the past century or more.   That is a deep and painful realm of enquiry.  All cultures carry deep trauma from the past.  No one can do this work without facing ghosts.  A name change could carry intent to compensate for that history, but it’s not that simple.   A change for that reason does not answer the question of what from the past yet exists in our culture now.  

It can be argued IW Powell was a good person in his time.    He contributed to his community, and to early British Columbia.  The question about the name of our city is not primarily about him or who he was.   It is about the culture and society of which he was a part at that time, and what of it still exists today.     

BC was a colonial community.  Immigrants here moved into lands already occupied by indigenous peoples.   As hard as it may be to grasp the impact then, and the sad subsequent history for the indigenous peoples, we are starting to understand.  It takes time.  It is painful.   At that time, colonization mostly by European nations was occurring in many places in the world.   It was based largely on extraction to feed and make wealthy some of the people in those European nations.   

To defend the past without questioning it assumes that we are no more than products of it.   That is no more useful than stopping at blame personally, and feeling shame for it.   Defending the past locks our identity to it and implicitly justifies the results of that past, good or bad.  Can we give ourselves the freedom to change beliefs and assumptions of the past and the practices they justify?    This brings us back to the question, what is our situation now?   

We live in a highly developed world now.   It is a direct result and continuation of the world that existed in the 1880’s, but it’s not the same world.   We face the results of exploitation of natural resources and peoples in these colonized places including our indigenous neighbours, results particularly since the Industrial revolution and fossil fuel use.   We have magnificent advancements and applications of science and technology.    And we have a spectrum of unexpected, unintended consequences, and cumulative externalized effects.   We now face environmental crises, resource depletions, species extinctions, extreme weather effects, and social crises, now called poly-crisis.  It is hard to miss this context of our current reality.     We can not afford squabbling within our community.   

We can no longer afford failure to cooperate, failure to work together toward a resilient future for us all.  Can we see all we have to gain by working together, and supporting each other for economic reasons as well as environmental and social?    

What tears our community apart must end.   Can we work together to this end?     

I would support changing our name, but for our reasons, to declare a new identity based on values and systems inclusive of our planet-home we depend on for survival let alone to thrive.  We need to move past exploitation that lacks consideration of its effects our colonial ancestors simply took to be their right.  We can now see that was short-sighted self-interest.  

I believe it is our right and our destiny to thrive, as life has done for millions of years here.  We are a part of this beautiful creation, independent separate individuals and communities, collectively responsible for ourselves and now with the power we have, for the Earth too.  Successful civilizations of the past have known this.    Any useful shame now is for the current poly-crisis humans have allowed to occur.   How do we turn this around?   How do we re-create systems that bring us back into balance with Earth’s ecology?  By taking any issue that comes up between us and working on it together, and by eschewing what divides us; by being willing to change.   

Might we change our name for our Tla’amin Nation neighbours too?   Certainly, but not unless we own it and do it for our own reasons.  Our reasons can be large and powerful.      Our friends asked the question.  It can’t be un-asked.  It opened a Pandora’s box for us all.  We have started, but we have more to do to find our true common interest.   This is our work now.         

Who are we?  By what name shall we be known? 

Close to three years ago Tla’amin Nation asked the city of Powell River to consider changing our name.   Their reasons seem clear and simple; policies IW Powell was involved with in his time almost a century and a half ago, subsequently had very damaging consequences for Tla’amin and other first nations peoples.  

Since that request, we had community meetings, a working group, and a little action, but much reaction.  There are now those who demand an opinion poll to democratically determine the will of the people.  Does democracy offer best process to serve us in our circumstance?   Currently, it is thought that advocates of a poll by secret ballot generally oppose changing our city’s name.   There are those who advocate for the opposite, simply to change the name, and get on with it already.   But is it that simple? 

Our condition is a pretty divided community, which seems sadly familiar in this day and age.    

The gut reactions are about identity.   Naming defines the named.  Many of us have great pride in this community named after IW Powell.   There is much to be proud of, much to celebrate.   The list is long. We are proud to be from PR and feel deeply connected to this place.    

I doubt anyone in the Powell River community now would willingly allow to be set in motion the kind of suffering Tla’amin people experienced over the past century.     Simply the thought of losing my son during his growing up years here is beyond imagination for me.  This was a wonderful place and community in which to grow up.   But children being displaced has happened many times through history.   My English ancestors put priveleged children into boarding schools.  Then and now, these places teach tools for success in western society.  We now see that success from an indigenous perspective was very different.  

It is apparent that value of indigenous culture was not understood nor appreciated in the 19th century by our ancestors in western society.   It was a time of remarkable opportunity to exploit, across a whole world, and European nations competed at full bore to this end.  Limits to what could be taken were only defined by burgeoning resource-based power; energy and technology fueling its progress, and who had most.   Why wouldn’t people living in simple nature, and location-based indigenous communities want this advantage?  It is easy to understand how this question had an obvious answer 140 years ago.     

Our world is now suffering consequences of that era of development.   Resource depletion as a result of exploitation is now measurable.   Effects of energy use threaten us in diverse ways, occasionally now destroying towns and cities by flood and fire.    Understanding ecology, how we are living parts of interdependent living systems is gaining popularity as we ponder our survivability amid what is now being called poly-crisis.    Questioning is going on.    Is what we assumed to be good, now bad?   How do we even answer a question like that?   Is it possible that indigenous cultures that suffered from western expansion have some answers for western culture’s challenges now?  Apparently, yes.   It is a confusing time.  

Back to our name;

Does Powell define who we are?  IW Powell seems to have been an upstanding contributor to the early development of this province.   He was apparently an intelligent accomplished man, a contributor to early BC.  He very likely was doing his best in his world, the reality of his time.   Much has been written defending him.   Does defending him serve us now, in the realities of our time?   Or, are we actually defending values, heritage, and culture we have defined for as long as we can remember by using his name, never having questioned that?    Instead of questioning him, should we be questioning the policies of his time, and what occurred because of them?    If so, this leads to many more questions revolving around crises we now recognize.     

On one hand IW Powell is defended, perhaps for reasons not primarily emerging from him as a person; on the other, he could be scapegoated by attaching to him and his name blame for the evils suffered by our indigenous neighbours.   Could we just change the name and thereby exonerate ourselves from responsibility for those evils?     Scapegoating is an old human practice.   It allows avoidance of personal responsibility by placing blame on someone else and destroying them.   Then fundamentally, we, personally don’t have to change.   But clearly, change is required now to amend practices we now recognize have been destructive more broadly than just to indigenous peoples.     Perhaps the question of our name goes far deeper than just to the implications for indigenous peoples.       

Getting back to the evil experienced by indigenous peoples here over the past century and a half, does that make us, descendants of the culture of IW Powell’s time, inheritors of the evil that happened?  I think it does, in spite of all the good we associate with our name and with our community.    Here lies a dilemma.  How do we reconcile the good we know of our culture with evil now associated with the name Powell?    Multigenerational experience of my family extending back into my own European heritage suggests to me that deep roots of dysfunction exist that takes work to sort out, in my case years of work.    I don’t expect it ever to end, and I could have achieved little if anything by myself.  We need each other in a journey like this, of discovery, healing, re-creation.    

How do we define who we are?    How would we define and name ourselves if it was our question, if this question hadn’t been first asked by our neighbours?  The question is before us now.   What can we do with it?  Can we possess it and use it for our own good?    That’s the point to me.   What can we do with it without feeling we are being dictated to by someone else? 

Many think the question about a name change is about reconciliation.   Perhaps it is.   To reconcile means to accept, to restore harmony, congruity.       I think reconciliation first needs to happen within ourselves.   Who are we?   

When we start figuring that out maybe then we can take an obvious opportunity here where two communities can sit down together and see what reconciliation means, between us, together.  

Assumptions of what we believed true are breaking down.    Much of what we’ve identified with to define who we are is in question; our very identities are in question.    It is uncomfortable.   But amid all this I see brilliant opportunity to bring forward the gold, the value from all cultures and create something new, something that works for us all.