There have been a number of articles recently criticizing the Harper government for attempting to re-build the Canadian identity. These viewpoints are based on the notion that in a return to or acknowledgement of our British connection, we are discounting everyone else who hasn't enjoyed it.
It would be interesting to hear the viewpoints of others on this subject? I, for one, find the argument curious. Is acknowledging one group's heritage really at the detriment of all others? Is there really no place for new Canadians to partake - if only in sharing in a history that happened?
I would think that many newcomers would be curious about history here, and if coming from a place where history and heritage are valued or respected, would be appreciative of experiencing Canadians', no matter who had originally been involved.
What do you think?
I think you are probably right. Most of what goes on in the public realm of debate is posturing at best. The average Canadian, no matter where they hail from, seldom shares in those opinions.
One thought I can't seem to shake in this debate is that in multiculturalism shouldn't all heritages be celebrated. Wouldn't that mean the British legacy just as much as any others? That article I linked to in the original post, seemed to suggest that it shouldn't be - but is it still not a part of Canadian history. It's an interesting discussion.
British influence it might of been as a British Territiory of the time , British make up I fear not, Pioneers came from many lands from oversea's African Colonies : many wide and varied European Countries pioneers from all parts of the globe, seek there fortune of a new life, amonge the Native Indian population in there lands, that today you know as Canada, just look at all the different religions there where at the time, lets face it the British Army of the time, was more Irish - Scottish - than English, hence the reason so many stayed in Canada to make a new life, this is why there are greater Irish and Scottish decendants, in case you are wondering , I understand my heritage is a mixture of all three.
Identity is a very personal thing. Ive worked a lot in cultural theory and it is now well recognised that people have multiple identities, but as Ive just said in another post war is a really awful thing, but it really asks big questions of a society and individuals - what will you be prepared to fight for? If 1939-45 has any historical lessons one must surely be that there are some things which simply cannot be allowed to happen,and unfortunately we still see similar things today. I dont know if I could cope in a battle, but if I see some of the regimes that people live under I know that my identity and my family would be threatened enough for me to take action.
My ancestor came from Ireland and stopped one US invasion. he went back to a troubled country and his children went to New Zealand. I am sure he did not know his identity - British, English, Irish, Manx Kiwi?? He probably dd not feel Canadian but he still risked his life here and like many soldiers got no reward or thanks.