![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rfmcdonaldA Canadian Press article posted yesterday, just in time for Canada Day, lamented the fact that Canadians knew little about their history, the intentional weakness of the Senate, the originally temporary nature of income tax, and the origins of the modern Royal Canadian Mounted Police in Cold War espionage scares--all featured prominently.
Illiteracy about history is a bad thing. In a certain ironic way, this does reflect the blurriness of Canadian nationhood generally. Back in 2005 I observed that the Canadian national anthem "O Canada" actually started out as a (much more stirring) French Canadian nationalist anthem. (Let's say nothing about the multiple allegiances of Québécois.) Earlier today,![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
james_nicoll noted that the 1st of July is a tragic day for Newfoundlanders, as on 1 July 1916 the Royal Newfoundland Regiment was wiped out in the Battle of the Somme. Different segments of the Canadian population have and do hold very substantially different perspectives on the major events of Canadian history. A homogeneously interpreted national identity is almost certainly impossible.
The very demographics of Canada are open to question, in fact. Oh, the Canadian population is estimated to be some 34.265 million strong, but who exactly is Canadian. Very recently, Joe Friesen has a Globe and Mail article documenting the modern Canadian diaspora (perhaps more accurately, diasporas). At one time Canada was the source of a very large diaspora in the United States, with the Franco-Americans (mostly of French Canadian descent, concentrated in New England states like Maine) remaining much more culturally distinct for a much longer time than the English Canadians who could first pass for, then become, Americans with little problem. The new Canadian diasporas are much more complicated.
These diasporas are produced by the migration of both native-born and immigrant Canadians, incidentally.
Who's part of the national community? What are the symbols of national identity shared by all Canadians? Is the very national holiday a day altogether lacking in negative sentiments in every provinces? Unknown, uncertain, no.
Over at The Search, Douglas Todd has a few suggestions as to the shared principles uniting Canadians.
Moderation, a certain xenophilia and openness to the other, a commitment to democracy and to a mixed economy and the rule of law--all feature. These, of course, are not distinctively Canadian traits. The particulars of their development, however, are. They're as good common features as any, especially in the context of a necessarily plural Canada.
Countries can blur. That's cool.
Illiteracy about history is a bad thing. In a certain ironic way, this does reflect the blurriness of Canadian nationhood generally. Back in 2005 I observed that the Canadian national anthem "O Canada" actually started out as a (much more stirring) French Canadian nationalist anthem. (Let's say nothing about the multiple allegiances of Québécois.) Earlier today,
james_nicoll noted that the 1st of July is a tragic day for Newfoundlanders, as on 1 July 1916 the Royal Newfoundland Regiment was wiped out in the Battle of the Somme. Different segments of the Canadian population have and do hold very substantially different perspectives on the major events of Canadian history. A homogeneously interpreted national identity is almost certainly impossible.The very demographics of Canada are open to question, in fact. Oh, the Canadian population is estimated to be some 34.265 million strong, but who exactly is Canadian. Very recently, Joe Friesen has a Globe and Mail article documenting the modern Canadian diaspora (perhaps more accurately, diasporas). At one time Canada was the source of a very large diaspora in the United States, with the Franco-Americans (mostly of French Canadian descent, concentrated in New England states like Maine) remaining much more culturally distinct for a much longer time than the English Canadians who could first pass for, then become, Americans with little problem. The new Canadian diasporas are much more complicated.
Nearly 2.8 million Canadians (9 per cent of the population) live in other countries, according to a study by the Asia Pacific Foundation, proportionally about five times higher than the United States and roughly the same as Britain.
[. . .]
“There’s a very deep-seated self-image in this country that we are an immigrant country and a kind of instinct that treats Canadians abroad as either failed immigrants or disloyal Canadians,” said Yuen Pau Woo, CEO of the Asia Pacific Foundation.
“We’ve got to think bigger than that. … We stand to fall behind other countries that are actively courting their diaspora communities.”
Mr. Woo said Canadian government policy discourages attachment to Canada among its diaspora. Canadians who have lived abroad for more than five years lose their right to vote in Canadian elections, for example. And citizenship can only be passed on to the first generation born abroad.
Mr. Woo said he doubts Canada is actually ready to change its attitude toward emigrants, but he wants to start the discussion.
“Canadians abroad can be seen as a balance sheet. They often have been seen more on the liability side of the ledger than the asset side of the ledger,” he said. “The trick to determining whether they’re assets or liabilities in the end has to do with government policies. There’s a choice. We’re trying to encourage the right choice.”
These diasporas are produced by the migration of both native-born and immigrant Canadians, incidentally.
The majority of Canadians abroad – 58 per cent – are Canadian born. But from 1996 to 2006, rates of exit were more than three times higher for naturalized Canadians. Immigrants from China and India, interestingly, had low exit rates, but the data go back only to 2005, when the economic boom in those countries was still accelerating and most mainland Chinese had only been in Canada a short time. Younger Canadians, aged 21 to 25, are most likely to leave. Second-generation Canadians from Eastern Europe, South Asia or the Middle East have high exit rates. Those who identify as French have high return rates, at 29 per cent. Immigrants from Taiwan and Hong Kong are most likely to leave, while those from the Caribbean, Britain and Portugal are among the least likely.
Who's part of the national community? What are the symbols of national identity shared by all Canadians? Is the very national holiday a day altogether lacking in negative sentiments in every provinces? Unknown, uncertain, no.
Over at The Search, Douglas Todd has a few suggestions as to the shared principles uniting Canadians.
n his book, Multicultiphobia, Carton University professor Phil Ryan staunchly defends multiculturalism. He almost mocks those who believe Canadians should be defining their common values in the face of high immigration.
But just when the reader thinks Ryan has washed his hands of the subject, he quietly proposes Canadians should at least buy into the idea of "citizen identification," which he defines as recognition that all residents are connected in a web of rights and obligations. For Ryan, "citizen identification" calls on all Canadians to support peace, democracy and "egalitarianism to some degree, so that all have the means to pursue, to a reasonable extent, a vision of a good life and have the potential to participate in a democratic life."
Moderation, a certain xenophilia and openness to the other, a commitment to democracy and to a mixed economy and the rule of law--all feature. These, of course, are not distinctively Canadian traits. The particulars of their development, however, are. They're as good common features as any, especially in the context of a necessarily plural Canada.
Countries can blur. That's cool.
