2] In this lesson I say that it should be clear that the discourse on nationalism is also about ethnicity and ideologies of “race.” If you trace the historical overview of nationalism in Canada in the CanLit guide, you will find many examples of state legislation and policies that excluded and discriminated against certain peoples based on ideas about racial inferiority and capacities to assimilate. – and in turn, state legislation and policies that worked to try to rectify early policies of exclusion and racial discrimination. As the guide points out, the nation is an imagined community, whereas the state is a “governed group of people.” 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.

As Canadians we are taught throughout elementary and high school about being a part of a multicultural society, and how important it is to keep up with that tradition. What is sometimes skipped over, however, are the events that led up to this so-called multiculturalism. Despite our proclivity towards discussing our policies of tolerance and acceptance towards other cultures I find it to be very important to also teach about the mistakes we have made getting to where we are today, as well as the mistakes that are currently ongoing.

One of the events that we can now look back on as a ‘mistake’, or at the very least a darker part of our history, is the Immigration Act of 1910, specifically an amendment made to it in 1919, to Section 38. The amendment made it so that it was possible to prohibit “any nationality or race… any specified class or occupation…because such immigrants are deemed unsuitable” (Immigration Act, 97). ‘Unsuitable’. What sort of a term is this to use in a legal document? Who decides what is and what is not suitable? This amendment was kept intentionally broad, it seems, in order to be used against as many groups who did not fit into the vision of what the Canada government wanted its people to be.

What brought this amendment to my attention initially was a rather well known case, that of the S.S. St. Louis. The S.S St. Louis was an ocean liner that approached Canada in 1939. It carried just over 900 refugees who were fleeing Nazi persecution, the majority of them being Jews (Mullins, 393). They were denied entry first to Cuba, then the United States, and then Canada. After this, the ship returned to Europe, where several European countries gave them refuge. This refuge, however, was merely temporary. As the Nazi sphere of influence grew, the majority of the ships passengers found themselves once again under Nazi rule (Mullins, 394).

This is only one case where the amendment to Section 38 of the Immigration Act of 1910 came into play, but it is enough to illustrate exactly how easy the amendment made it to turn away any person or group whom the government did not see as ‘desirable’. Those doing the turning away may not have had malicious intent. On the contrary, they most likely saw themselves as defending Canada and her greatness, keeping the ‘unsuitable’ out. As Daniel Coleman wrote in his book, White Civility: The Literary Project of English Canada, “the borders of civility are maintained by uncivil violence and unfair exclusions” (9).

Coleman’s arguments concerning the idea of ‘white civility’ in Canada’s past, and present, do fit with what I discovered when researching the implementation and use of the Immigration Act of 1910. He alludes to the same ‘us vs. them’ mentality that has been referenced and encountered previously in this course, which is what I believe drove the creation of the amendment to Section 38 of the Act. The idea was that it was not going to be the current Canadians who would cause issue for the country, but instead troublemakers from outside our borders, uncivil aliens who would not fit in with our culture, and therefore shouldn’t be given the chance.

“An Act to Amend the Immigration Act.” Canadiana. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions. 23 February 2015. http://eco.canadiana.ca/view/oocihm.9_08048/8?r=0&s=1

Coleman, Daniel. White Civility: The Literary Project of English Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006.

Mullins, Robin Long. “The SS St. Louis and the Importance of Reconciliation.” Peace and Conflict. 19.4 (2013): 393-398. Web. 23 February 2015.

Read at least 3 students blog short stories about ‘home’ and make a list of the common shared assumptions, values and stories that you find. Post this list on your blog.

Reading through classmate’s blogs this week was an absolute pleasure. It was interesting to read through a few of the stories of my peers to see what their idea of home is, and why. Despite the idea of ‘home’ being a somewhat abstract one, the blogs that I arrived at shared several ideas.

• The idea that I found repeated most frequently, by myself as well, was that home is not a physical location, not really, it tends to be more tied to people and memories than any one location.
• Home is constantly changing and adapting as our lives do, it is not stagnant.
• When home does refer to a specific place it is one where we feel safe and accepted, surrounded by love.
• Home is wherever we want it to be, and can be multiple places at once.

After reading through the blogs one thought kept creeping into my mind, what would have happened if one of us had never felt this feeling of ‘home’, had never been in a situation where they had a real one? Would they have been able to complete the assignment?

If the majority of us have mentioned terms like ‘safety’, ‘belonging’, and ‘love’ in our posts about what home means to us, then what would home be to someone who had never been surrounded by those things? Following along with this line of thought, what would happen to someone who once had a home, but had it, and everything attached to it, be snatched away from them? If your physical home as well as your family were snatched away from you, would that knowledge of what a ‘home’ was to you remain, or can that too be taken away?

I can’t imagine this happening to me, I have no idea how I would deal with it, but I know it has happened to thousands of children in Canada’s past. I wonder if any study has been done on whether the destruction of a home, having that feeling of safety and belonging be stripped away, can permanently damage a person’s ability to construct a new one. I hope not, because the idea that someone could live unable to find a new home is incredibly frustrating and sad.