Of What Meaning, Canadian?
November 11, 2009 · By Jonathan McLeod
There’s a new guide for new Canadians, Discover Canada: The Rights and Responsibilities of Citizenship. It’s a change from the document that used to be handed out. It’s more demanding, and, arguably, more political.
The 62-page guidebook, years in the making, replaces the “anemic, slim, stripped-down” version crafted by the Liberals in 1997 with a “more substantial treatment of Canadian history and civics,” said Rudyard Griffiths, co-founder of the Dominion Institute and among those consulted in the creation of the document.
Having not read the document, I cannot comment on the contents. However, I fully support the principle. It is demeaning to assume that new citizens can’t be expected to digest a robust document. It is unfair to fail to provide them with an exhaustive account of the history and nature of Canada. A document that demonstrates a healthy respect for the individual and the nation is the best tool we can offer our new Canadians as they build their lives in Canada.
Nonetheless, there is great room for impropriety in this document. As a supporter of relatively open immigration (and fully supporting being open to refugees), but an opponent of institutionalized multiculturalism and grotesque patriotism (that which borders on, or becomes, nationalism), I am, naturally, concerned that this sort of document will be used to enforce a particular vision of Canada.
Any document we give to immigrants must outline what it has meant to be Canadian, but it could be awfully difficult to outline what it means to be Canadian. What we need to teach new Canadians is that in liberal society, the individual is paramount; the individual is more important than the nation, than parliament, than the collective, than any particular ethnic group – the individual is more important than any concept or group that looks to subvert one’s personal autonomy.
But still we are left with the question, of what significance is it to be Canadian? What is the essence of ‘Canadianism’? Do we look to our founding, to the British North America Act, the last spike, D’Arcy McGee and the like? Does it take into account the fur trade, the National Policy or the Quiet Revolution? Does it reflect our newest ‘traditional’ values and institutions: universal health care, ‘peacekeeping’, or a charter that is younger than I?
Geez, is it now based in pop culture? Does being Canadian mean Tim Hortons, Alexander Keith’s and This Hour Has 22 Minutes?
I submit that we are a nation without a sufficient identity. Perversely, I think it is our pre-occupation with having, or obtaining, an identity that fosters this deficiency. The roots of Canada – the societies of Britain and France, the aboriginals – are worth cherishing. The incarnation and growth of this nation in the context of our southern neighbour, rather than in contrast to her, warrants pride. The accomplishments of this young nation, so many of which achieved free from anxiety about a ‘national identity’, should have been enough to sustain us.
Is it our collective neurosis that defines us? Is that the insight that we owe new Canadians?
Jonathan, well said.
For what it’s worth and IMHO.
Canada has long had more than an adequate “identity.” This identity is rooted in the history of the place. Most of our national identity origins are found to be in Aboriginal, Anglosphere and Francosphere influences.
Unfortunately for many of those new on the scene of identity debates, many feel that the defining moment in the search for a Canadian identity starts with the introduction of the B&B/Multiculturalism Cone of Exclusion. That is that all that came before B&B/Multi-culti, is expunged, leaving us in a blank slate state. All that comes after B&B/Multi-culti is the only source of that which grows into the new, improved and evolving Canadian Identity.
A new structure cannot be built upon the shambles of a destroyed historic foundation. Take what exists now, build upon that.
I know. It’s a tough proposition. Far too many citizens, for various, and often understandable, reasons, just simply do not like the various strands of our history of co-mingled origins.
I say that that’s too bad. Unfortunate really.
I say that that’s part of our history which needs no revisionism.
I say that, sight unseen, the new Guide of Rights and Responsibilities of Canadian Citizenship might well be a step in the right direction. Hopefully, this is a step forward in the rebalancing of understanding of just what exactly it means for one to be, to call oneself, to claim the rights inherent in being a citizen of one of the best nations on the face of the earth.
I say this as a retired Canadian, as a veteran and as a son of long deceased immigrants who first arrived on these shores in 1909 to settle in Montreal. They came from painfully-crushing poverty, impoverished peasant lives of suffering and deprivation in conditions of feudal fiefdoms of Eastern Europe. Deliberately kept uneducated, they were true Functional illiterates. Between them, they possessed not one word of French nor of English, yet they both were fluent in in four different languages, functional in three more.
I say this, knowing that today, they could not qualify as immigrants. They were fortunate enough to arrive here when the country was young, new and green, looking for muscle and demanding sweat, blood and tears.
I say this, knowing that they applied themselves with tremendous resolve and drive. They learned two more languages. They learned the history of this, their new Homeland – a homeland they dearly loved.
I say this as a thankful son, getting too old to really care, but thankful always for this land, with a history that must not be tampered with.
I say this as one who knows he is a Canadian, as one who knows what that means and should continue to mean. I say that as one who loves, deeply and truly loves this nation.
And while I love and wear the Maple Leaf with pride and honour, a part of me still prefers the historic Red Ensign, the flag of my Canada of my youth.
tj
t.e. & o.e.
TJ,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and history. Your comment demonstrates that there is a lot to this country to be loved and cherished. We just have to be willing to look for it.