[Editor’s note: This opinion piece was submitted by Denise Allen, who has filed for a court injunction to stop the proposed Africville settlement. For more on the injunction, see here.]
Let us be clear, was the “Africville deal” which was orchestrated by government, and merrily agreed to by the Africville Genealogy Society, decided in the name of Africville elders? Consider the following quote by Dr. Ruth Johnson:
“To think that they (Government) hated us so much that they destroyed our community so dogs could run free. And today, if you think I should welcome and be grateful for Africville being designated a historical sight, you’re wrong.”
In protest against City Ordinance 188, which declared the former Africville lands a dog park and prohibited the Africville protest, Irene Izzard-Mantley’s responded resolutely:
“Without mercy the government bulldozed our homes in our absence without our permission, and without compassion. They left our grandmothers without shelter at a time when they were most vulnerable and alone—my grandmother was 87 years old when the city bulldozed her home and destroyed all of her belongs. She was left with just one change of clothes amidst the rubble and ruin. Before she died, she made me vow to make the guilty pay. This is the horror I carry to this day.”
These two quotes speak profoundly to the direction the Africville people should take. In my opinion, the “deal” between the Africville Genealogy Society and government does not reflect the will of these strong and outspoken Africville matriarchs. Both quotes were captured by the media—one on the podium the day that Africville was declared a historical site, the other in protest against City Ordinance 188 at Grand Parade Square.
Moreover, they were law abiding citizens, both having said “a liar and a thief go together like a hand in glove. Never trust a liar or a thief, neither of whom follows the rules.”
In a democracy, due process, human rights based on equality, fairness and the rule of law should prevail, and no one is exempt or above reproach. The checks and balances play out through due diligence, transparency and accountability. However, when these mechanisms fail, lawyers appear to be our only option. In the case of the Africville “deal,” legal correspondence questioning the legitimacy of the Africville Genealogy’s authority to represent the Africville people in any capacity fell on the deaf ears of HRM councillors and the mayor. That the elected officials ignored the legalities of the concerns raised and rushed through the “deal” suggests that the people of Africville are, once again, being duped out of justice. Moreover, when representatives of organizations and/or elected officials are permitted to compromise the rules, ignore or manipulate governing regulations, it clearly sends the disturbing message that black people still don’t matter.
Africville was a vibrant community until all levels of government decided to invade the community with hazardous industries—three dumps, four sets of railway tracks, a coal factory, a tannery, nail factory, infectious disease hospital, Rockhead Prison, bone meal factory, fertilizer plant, etc. What they did to Africville is the most blatant and extreme illustration of environmental racism I’ve ever encountered. The purpose was to chase the people of Africville out by hook and by crook in order to control access to their valuable land.
The people of Africville were denied any consultations on any of the hazardous industries that no other community would accept in their backyards. It was treated as if the land of Africville was empty of people. Their health and safety was reduced to nothing.
We were not even considered good enough to have access to the jobs derived from those unhealthy industries.
All this occurred in spite of the fact that the people of Africville bought their property and were taxed in the same way as other Halifax residents. They were systematically denied services, including public schooling, water, sewage, firefighting, paved roads, sidewalks, recreational facilities, policing, waste removal and electricity—all services that the rest of Halifax enjoyed.
In 1912, Halifax’s attitude towards Africville was to ignore it. As a matter of fact, it was stated by government that Africville would be abandoned as a residential area, despite numerous petitions by the people of Africville for inclusion. In 1917, Africville felt the full brunt of the Halifax explosion and didn’t receive any of the medical aid or relief funds that were raised for the restoration of Halifax, even in spite of the fact there was $500,000 left over. The people of Africville had to rebuild their community, in addition to taking care of their injured and burying their dead. They did this without any outside aid.
Systemic discrimination in education and employment opportunities forced the outmigration of adults and youth, making the community more vulnerable, and it was at this point of vulnerability that the dump trucks and bulldozers came to forcibly destroy homes and ultimately the entire community.
To say that Africville reminds us of a stark example of how racism permeates Canadian society is an understatement. The people of Africville have been victimized by anti- black racism. Differential treatment based upon the colour of one’s skin is immoral and a heinous human rights crime, but it is the story of what happened to the people of Africville. It is no wonder that the UN concluded in 2004 that the people of Africville deserved reparations for all their suffering and how they were robbed.
But instead, the tragic story continues to the present. Today, Africville residents are far more likely to be tenants than homeowners. Meanwhile, the children of Africville’s descendants are forced to endure a racist educational system that limits them, criminalizes them, brands them slow learners and prevents them from improving their situation.
The compensation settlement does not come close to making up for what was stolen from the people of Africville. As a matter of fact, the issue of Africville doesn’t compare to the recreation needs of the residents of Clayton Park who will receive a $10 million soccer field, the cost of which is $7 million more that the cost of the token gestures offered to the people of Africville. Hardly the “reparations” that the UN intended for Africville people.
Racial injustice is repeating. In 1967, the people of Africville were excluded from the discussions about the future of their community. Just as it happened then, presently, the government is once again forcing its will through the Africville Genealogy Society in a patronizing way, having dictated the terms to them, hardly what you would call good faith negotiations. The Africville Genealogy Society, which the city of Halifax knew had been operating outside the Society’s Act, was nonetheless the only organization or group of citizens consulted. Just as in 1967, the vast majority of the people of Africville had no knowledge and did not approve of the racist arrangements, and some of those who agreed to the actions, now as then, did not actually understand what they were agreeing to.
The people of Africville were not part of the discussions, and were kept uninformed as the terms of the “deal” were set in the darkest corners of government back rooms.
To add insult to injury, the “deal” states that Seaview Dog Park will be renamed Africville Park. Ironically, when we had our own community, we dare not have pets outside of our home because the Halifax police used the pets as target practice.
It may be better than nothing, but the people responsible for the issue of Africville are once again getting away unscathed, burying and escaping culpability. In contrast, the struggle for reparations for the people of Africville has been sold for a dirty, dried up “dog bone deal” and tourism Dog Park.
This article appears in Mar 11-17, 2010.
Excellently written and argued. I am saddened and horrified by the extremes of the historical record, though not at all surprised about the current municipal government’s handling of the matter.
I hope Ms. Allen receives lots of support and is heard loud and clear by the city and other levels of government, who must respond with an appropriate commitment.
What Ms. Allen might do next is to set out what kinds of things she personally feels would be appropriate and just, or perhaps, by what process she envisions the city might arrive at a better plan and response to this neglected and injured community. That is the only thing missing from this article.
Excellent article – I am glad to hear the “other side” clearly and forcefully. If history is repeating itself in ignoring the wishes of the majority of Africville descendants, I would like to understand how this happened, and what can, realistically, be done to turn the injustice around?
I know that the Africville Genealogical Society has been working for years for some kind of settlement – is it the author’s contention that the society was working in bad faith, or that they did not have enough facts to bargain intelligently for the best deal it was possible to get? If so, where were the other voices all this time? Were they just not so well organized, or were there, indeed, only a few dissenters crying in the wilderness? I ask this in all sincerity, with respect – how did this happen, if a majority of Africville’s “stakeholders” disagreed with the “deal”? Was, perhaps, the deal secret until the last minute? Do the members of the Genealogical Society actually have a separate agenda from their brothers and sisters who are now calling for an injunction? And will it ever be possible to really satisfy this group, short of going back in history and “deleting” the sorry affair – which, of course, cannot happen.
I agree that what was done to this community was appalling. I agree that the systemic – and often blatant – racism in Nova Scotia has continued to this day. Perhaps I am just cynical enough to tend to agree that governments and lawyers do not always have the best interests of ordinary citizens in mind, but more often follow some other brand of expediency, when they do “deals” on MY behalf. As someone who has enjoyed “Seaview Park” with my dog, I nonetheless felt it WAS ironically insulting that people’s homes were taken – for what? A pretty place full of dog poop, basically – that could have gone anywhere else.
Still, maybe the AGS are simply being practical, getting what they can, in at least a symbolic gesture, in order to give some closure and move on. Christians – and psychologists, and no doubt many other faiths – know that holding a grudge and seeking “revenge”, no matter how warranted, only damages the avenger. Not letting go of the betrayals and what were truly “those who trespass against us” will do far more damage to a community than any despicable act done in the name of “progress” in the ’60’s did. Perhaps the AGS understands this, and feels this agreement will benefit more people in the long-run, than fighting for another 40 years for “what is actually owed” – which will likely never be agreed on by any group of people.
I honestly don’t know the answers. I was encouraged by this agreement; however, if there is significant dissent about it in the rest of the affected community, I think it must be revisited. But I certainly hope the people involved can soon achieve a measure of peace and acceptance, and work together in whatever rebuilding they can agree on. I, and I know many others not of this community, are ready to support these efforts, and applaud them for the long struggle they have endured. I wish ALL those tied together in this sad, unfair story an end to the “horror (they) carry to this day.” I would hope the Africville site could once again bring all people a sense of belonging, of peace and joy, without more stress and rancour, and the misunderstanding and disrespect from the larger community. Then, “what a wonderful world it would be!”
If you want sewer, water, sidewalks,curb and gutter, paved roads you pay for it or the developer pays for it. Has always been that way.
Black and white.
Two weeks ago the people in $400,000 houses in Beaverbank went to HRM begging them to put city water into their subdivision.
HRM agreed.
The property owners get to pay the whole shot.
I can take you to parts of Dartmouth that never got sewer & water until 20 years ago.
To bad the person who wrote the article has no idea what she is talking about, never lived in Africville, only had a great aunt who lived there. There was electricity, schools and the only building destroyed in the middle of the night was the church and noone was inside. My wife was educated at the school in Africville and as she says it wasn’t a slow learning class, she later went to QEH for the fast learners. This person has an agenda and it has nothing to do with the former residence of Africville.
The deal that was negotiaited wasn’t just for the seniors it was for all residence of the former Africville Communtiy.
Husband of A Real Former Resident
“To say that Africville reminds us of a stark example of how racism permeates Canadian society is an understatement”
You lost me right there.
Stop accusing me of being a racist, and stop slapping the hands away of those who would stand with you.
What everyone needs to be reminded of is the United Nations recommendations of 2004 regarding “Human Rights Violations” as it pertained to “Africville” those recommendations made to the Canadian Government of the day, was to make reparations to the former residents of Africville and their descendants . Why is that so difficult to understand ? Quote ” Reparations : the making of amends for a wrong one has done, by paying money to or otherwise helping those who have been wronged.” unquote . Saying you are sorry just doesn’t cut it. Sorry is a sorry word when ther is no intent behind it. How about just give the land back it was ours so just give it back . Better yet we will pay you for what you paid our Families when you razed their Homes and the Church. Much cheeper for the tax payers as opposed to the present situation. Lastly, I want to remind those of you who harken back to the days of “Uncle Tom” when you speak against your people. You not only insult your race you insult yourself and it only gives fodder to those racists who just love to poke fun at people like “Husband of A Real Former Resident”. You do us dishonor. From Theodore Gordon Carvery.
What everyone needs to be reminded of is the United Nations recommendations of 2004 regarding “Human Rights Violations” as it pertained to “Africville” those recommendations made to the Canadian Government of the day, was to make reparations to the former residents of Africville and their descendants . Why is that so difficult to understand ? Quote ” Reparations : the making of amends for a wrong one has done, by paying money to or otherwise helping those who have been wronged.” unquote . Saying you are sorry just doesn’t cut it. Sorry is a sorry word when ther is no intent behind it. How about just give the land back it was ours so just give it back . Better yet we will pay you for what you paid our Families when you razed their Homes and the Church. Much cheaper for the tax payers as opposed to the present situation. Lastly, I want to remind those of you who harken back to the days of “Uncle Tom” when you speak against your people. You not only insult your race you insult yourself and it only gives fodder to those racists who just love to poke fun at people like “Husband of A Real Former Resident”. You do us dishonor. .
As one who grew up during the demolishment of Africaville, and the building of social housing to house displaced residents, I need to play devil’s advocate…..how many deeds for real property existed? Because your home was there didn’t mean you owned the land it sat on. Did the owners of property, who had deeds for that property get fair compensation for it based on realestate values of the day..? Did many who were squatting get none? Was the expropriation required for the city to move forward? Expropriation has been done in many areas of HRM for the growth of the city, but only this one is still a thorn in our side…why? Greenbank was a community based on squatters on privately owned land, with the owners tacit approval, but squatters non the less. I’d like to know how many familys had deeds in africville, what the compensation was to them at the time based on valuation, and if we really need to keep paying! I was 10 years old, had no say in politics of the day, but some would have their hands in MY pocket for this mis-adventure…why?
It has always been and will always be my position that the dismantling of Africville and the relocation of its members was not an act of racism but of classism and urban renewal (private versus govt )
It mattered not that they were Black it mattered that they were poor and could not afford lawyers to challenge urban renewal and improved standards. We also cannot ignore the issues of deprivation and sanitation that breeds disease..
While I will continue to respect Denise’s endless efforts to have her voice heard, the article falls short in naming the real culprit in this story, Irvine Carvery. who only made deals for himself under the guise of this issue.
Urban renewal happens, it happened to my people in Glasgow when they had to disperse the Glaswegian Gorbals for sociological, crime and sanitation reasons…..it happens just like the widening of Chebucto Road and they had lawyers involved and still lost …it happens and it all about perceived urban progression and the fact that reparations were paid out when social housing was far healthier is the biggest shame of all.
Had this community not been relocated it would have imploded upon itself leaving far less survivors than we have now..but white folk (people with power and money in govt) rather not engage in intelligent discussion on this or they remain silent or passive on this issue because race relations in NS is a hostage taking power struggle and will be until the self serving ‘pimps’ (white and black) in these discussions are not invited to them…
If there is racism or corruption in this story of Africville it occurs when Peter Kelly finalized the deal with Carvery then allowed him to get another job with HRM.
If people lost their land, land they paid for then they are entitled to compensation with interest. What land did Irvine Carvery personally own?
But for the relocation this place and people would have imploded with devastating generational results far worse than they claim now.
UN should never have been involved, it was not a human rights issue it was a property issue. Since when does UN deal with private property/civil/probate court cases on property ownership? Oh yeah when they are called racist ones…..UN lost my respect on this issue.