Forced Assimilation of Indigenous Children: the Case of the Danish-Greenlandic Experiment
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Forced assimilation of Indigenous children: The case of the Danish-Greenlandic experiment Kirstine Høeg International Migration and Ethnic Relations Bachelor Thesis 15 credits Spring 2019: IM245L Supervisor: Christian Fernandez Word count: 13125 Abstract This thesis examines personal consequences of forced assimilation in relation to identity and belonging of 22 Greenlandic children who were sent to Denmark to participate in a ‘social experiment’ in the beginning of the 1950’s. By adopting a social psychological approach, the theoretical framework of intergroup identification and cultural trauma theories has been applied to the experiences of the children as accounted in the two books ‘For Flid og God Opførsel’ by Thiesen(2011) and ‘I den bedste mening’ by Bryld(1998). Findings of the analysis show issues of identity division and confusion, lack of belonging and severe hurt caused by forced assimilation in childhood. Furthermore, elements of cultural trauma theories such as contemporary consequences, trauma as a structural process and intergenerational effects are identified in the narratives. The thesis speaks to the larger case of Danish colonialism in Greenland and contributes to the academic field of forced assimilation of Indigenous children. Keywords: Forced assimilation, Indigenous children, identity, cultural trauma, Greenland. 2 Table of content 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 5 1.1.Research problem ....................................................................................................... 5 1.2.Research aim and questions ........................................................................................ 7 1.3.Historical background ................................................................................................. 7 1.4.Current context ........................................................................................................... 8 1.5.Thesis outline .............................................................................................................. 9 2. Review of Field ........................................................................................................ 10 2.1.Forced assimilation of Indigenous children ............................................................... 10 2.2.Danish-Greenlandic relations .................................................................................... 12 2.3.The experiment ......................................................................................................... 13 2.4.Contribution .............................................................................................................. 14 3. Theoretical Framework .......................................................................................... 15 3.1.Identity and belonging identification ......................................................................... 15 3.2.Cultural trauma theories ............................................................................................ 16 3.3.Cultural genocide ...................................................................................................... 17 4. Method and Material .............................................................................................. 19 4.1.Research design ........................................................................................................ 19 4.2.Methodology ............................................................................................................. 19 4.3.Case study method .................................................................................................... 20 4.4.Autobiographical research ......................................................................................... 21 4.5.Qualitative content analysis ....................................................................................... 21 4.6.Material .................................................................................................................... 22 4.7.Validity and reliability .............................................................................................. 23 5. Analysis ................................................................................................................... 26 5.1.Longing, homesickness and lack of answers .............................................................. 26 5.2.Intergroup boundaries as indicators of identity and belonging ................................... 28 5.3.Changes of intergroups ............................................................................................. 29 5.4.Losing part of yourself: Cultural trauma theories in relation to loss of language and culture ....................................................................................................................... 31 5.5.Contemporary consequences: Addiction and instability ............................................. 32 5.6.Intergenerational effects: The trauma continues ........................................................ 33 5.7.Summary of analysis in relation to cultural trauma theories ....................................... 34 6. Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 36 3 Reference list ........................................................................................................... 39 Appendices .............................................................................................................. 47 Appendix 1: The children ................................................................................ 47 Appendix 2: Coding scheme ............................................................................ 51 Appendix 3: Quotes in original language ......................................................... 52 4 1. Introduction 1.1. Research problem In 1951, 22 Greenlandic children(9 girls and 13 boys) were removed from their home and families and taken to Denmark to be part of a social experiment organised by the State of Denmark and implemented with the help of Save the Children Denmark and the Danish Red Cross(Thiesen, 2011:20). The aim was that the children should return to Greenland and help improve the new Greenlandic society and make up the core in the new bilingual school system. It was thought that the means through this was best done via education in which Danish was a key factor(Walling, 2004:38). In 1949 Doctor Kai Ludvigsen was sent to Greenland on behalf of Red Cross to provide the organisation with feedback on situations they might be able to improve. In his report there was a strong focus on the children as they after all were ‘the future of Greenland’ (Thiesen, 2011:19-20). Arrangements were made to open orphanages in Greenland, as it would be a good way to handle the increase in children who had lost their parents to tuberculosis. They would, according to Ludvigsen, grow up in a healthy environment with all the necessaries provided. Furthermore, they would be raised in a Danish-minded environment and hence be better prepared to handle the new modernised Greenland(Bryld, 1998:13). In July 1950 the Department of Greenland presented the idea of the experiment to its members and with the votes 4 against and 18 in favour, ‘the experiment’ became a reality(Bryld, 1998:14). The primary criteria for the selection of children were as followed; there should be 20 children, equal number of girls and boys, they should be orphans otherwise the parents should agree, they should come from disadvantaged homes, be between 6-7 years and intelligent(Walling, 2004:42). Furthermore, the stay should only last one year, as “their potential should not go to waste”(Walling, 2004:43), a clear indicator that the main concern was not about the best interest of the children, but to improve the Greenlandic society. But priests, teachers and doctors had trouble finding children that fit into the criteria which caused changes in the selection and execution of ‘the experiment’(Thisen, 2011:20). The age range was changed to 5-8 years and children classified as ‘motherless’ (not only orphans) were considered too(although in the end 6 children with mothers were selected)(Bryld:1998:15). Finally, the children were decided to live in an orphanage upon 5 return and not with their families, which seemed to not have been clear to either parents or children(Bryld, 1998:15). “At that time, you didn’t ask about anything. You were told to do this and that. No explanations as to why. The top ones were almost only Danes. Us Greenlanders didn’t have much to say1”(Bryld, 1998:111). Nevertheless, ‘the experiment’ was organised and the children were picked up from around Greenland by the ship ‘MS Disko’ and sailed to Denmark. Here they were first put together in a summer camp run by Save the Children as they adjusted to their new life in Denmark as well as attending regular health check-ups, in order to prepare them for their stay at Danish foster families, also recruited by the organisation(Bryld, 1998:14). Eventually, six of the children ended up being adopted by their new foster families even though this was never the intention to begin with(Bryld, 1998:18). After more than one year in Denmark they had learned the language and the customs of Danish culture, and in October 1952, 16 out of the 22 children returned to Greenland (Bryld, 1998:18). They were to their surprise not send back to