What a contrived argument.  A circular diatribe that gets nowhere fast, but finally lands on what I guess might be its basic premise . . . that white people, (or unions,) don't have the right to be concerned about Sir John A. McDonald, only natives have the right to posthumously assassinate his character, or the legitimacy to do so.

Quite apart from the question of whether Sir John ought to be castigated, (I don't believe he should,) the notion that only natives should get to pass judgement on an historical figure is ludicrous.

As an aside, the idea that aboriginals receive an education at all was quite enlightened in its time.  The prevailing attitude was that "savages," were a lesser form of human, (the same attitude that justified the slavery of millions of black "savages," from Africa.)  The motive of Sir John in establishing schools for natives was a noble one, to allow the natives to progress by joining the new society in North America, to leave savagery behind.