This week I chose question #2 to respond to. Here it is framed for your reference:
“For this blog assignment, I would like you to research and summarize one of the state or governing activities, such as The Royal Proclamation 1763, the Indian Act 1876, Immigration Act 1910, or the Multiculturalism Act 1989 – you choose the legislation or policy or commission you find most interesting. Write a blog about your findings and in your conclusion comment on whether or not your findings support Coleman’s argument about the project of white civility.”
I am choosing the Immigration act of 1910. I honestly couldn’t help myself with choosing this act to comment on. I am first generation Canadian as I have expressed before, my parents immigrated to Canada from Ghana. As a minority in Canada, as a black woman in Canada I must convince myself that I am safe in order to be free and have peace of mind. The truth is, that I am not. In Julius Caesar, Shakespeare begins his play at the Lupercalia festival. Twins Romulus and Remus were suckled and saved by the she-wolf Lupa. Romulus ends up killing his brother Remus in order to be the sole ruler of Rome and thus the cycle for the fight of tyrannical rule in the western world begins (Browne). How a nation begins, seems to determine how it will continue to be. Around 100 years ago the Immigration act of 1910 would have likely prohibited my parents from coming to Canada, as they would be deemed “unsuited to the climate requirements of Canada”(1800’s-1950’s).
So what exactly was the benevolent Immigration act of 1910. In 1910 William Scott, the superintendent of Immigration yearned to sift “the wheat from the chaff” (Lyster). What the sifting entailed was giving the Canadian cabinet the power to deny prohibited classes of individuals like, idiots, the diseased, the dumb, the blind or physically defective, felons, prostitutes, professional beggars and “Asiatic immigrants” (1800’s-1950’s).
On the surface, the Immigration act of 1910 denied people to ensure that they could secure employment in Canada and contribute to Canadian society (Van Dyk), but what it turned out to be was a law that kept out non-whites. The Canadian government offered land grants to hey offered land British, Scandinavian, Icelandic, Doukhobor, Mennonite, and Ukrainian farmers (1800’s-1950’s). These laws were written by white people for white people and it was not until the 1960’s that changes to the immigration policies finally opened the borders to non-European immigrants (1960’s onwards).
I bet you are expecting me to conclude with a decisive affirmation, that my findings support Coleman’s argument about white civility. White civility according to Coleman is the literary pursuit to create and establish a form of Canadian whiteness based off of the British model of civility. What I found was much more ambiguous than my interpretation of my research. You see, although white people can be thief’s, idiots, felons and prostitutes, the real purpose of the Immigration act was to keep out non-whites. Non-whites were not able to uphold the ideals of British white civility and required assimilation (1800’s-1950’s). The specific form of whiteness that formed in Canada was heavily influenced by Britishness and this was not explicit in my findings on the Immigration act of 1910. I saw it for myself.
Till next time,
Sarah Afful
Works Cited
Browne, Alex. “Origins of Rome :The Myth of Romulus and Remus.” Web. 26 April 2018. www.historyhit.com/origins-of-rome-the-myth-of-romulus-and-remus/. Accessed 28 February 2018.
CanLit Guides. “Reading and Writing in Canada, A Classroom Guide to Nationalism.” Canadian Literature. Web. 4 April 2013.
Lyster, Caroline. “Canada Enacts ‘Immigration Act 1910.” Web. 20 December 2014. www.eugenicsarchive.ca/discover/timeline/5495c2414dcf0b0000000001. Accessed 28 February 2020.
Van Dyk, Lyndsey. “Canadian Immigration Acts and Legislation.” Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21. Web. 2020. www.pier21.ca/research/immigration-history/canadian-immigration-acts-and-legislation. Accessed 28 February 2020.
Hi Sarah,
I really appreciate how personal and vulnerable you are in your posts.
I agree with your conclusion that the immigration act is closely linked to Coleman’s argument – by having this act, the British colony of Canada attempted to keep out all non-whites.
I’m curious – early on in your post, you say “How a nation begins, seems to determine how it will continue to be. ” which is the line that really stuck with me. Based on your personal experiences, considering the immigration act, what parts of this “project” do you see as still impacting Canada today? And especially post 1960 when immigration was opened more? I realize this is a personal question so please answer as much as you feel comfortable. Thank you!
Hi Katarina! Thank you for your kind words!
… I think for the me the most blaring shadows that the Immigration act of 1910 has left on Canada, is the insidious institutionalized racism we have. When I contrast Canada with the United States, I don’t see one nation as better than the other when it comes to discrimination, I see America as being blatant with their hate and Canada trying to being covert. We have genocide we have hate, we have racism that keeps non-whites working for less and struggling to convince employers that their education is just as good as ours.I don’t know which one is worse. Most recently we see with the Wet’suwet’en people that Canada disregards those who do not buy into it’s Eurocentric based nationalism.
Hi Sarah, I really enjoyed reading your blog post. I find that many Proclamations or Acts in history often times have a hidden agenda. I’m wondering do you see any of that impact Canada in modern times? Or what about in your daily life? Looking forward to your response!
Yes! I do see the impact of especially the Immigration act of 1910. The appearance of inclusion is not inclusion. The amount that my parents suffered/suffer in Canada, because of the colour of their skin and the sound of their voices, is because a precedent has been set that the white British model is to be revered despite the allusion that all cultures are welcome. Canada is not home for my parents. Home is where they are accepted. It’s an emotional thing nationalism.
Hi Sarah,
This post was really interesting and I appreciated your ability to offer up personal connections to this Act. My question is a little bit similar to Sashini’s but I am wondering whether you think Canadian Immigration today still is influenced by this act? I think modern Canadian immigration practices continue to have some biases but I am curious as to what you think too!
Thanks,
Eva
Hi Sarah!
It was really interesting to read your blog about the Immigration Act!
In my opinion, although it deemed understandable that a country is governed by the people of the country and thus makes laws and rules so that it favors the people of the country, however, would it also be paradoxical that the settlers were the ones who initially wrote the immigration act of 1910? Hows do you think it would have been if the Indigenous people enforced the immigration act to the settlers that came to Canada?