- 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.
The Immigration Act of 1910 served to regulate and limit immigration to Canada. The Act outlined people who would be prohibited from immigrating to Canada and gave Cabinet power to refuse immigration to people who they did not consider qualified to enter Canada. This also meant that any immigrants who had been living in Canada for under three years, and as a result had not yet gained permanent residence status, could be deported if they failed to fit into the criteria decided by the government.
The Act sought to control immigration and limit who exactly was allowed to enter Canada – people with disabilities, prostitutes, jail inmates and political protesters were all catalogued as being prohibited from immigrating. There was also a minimum requirement for the amount of money that people had to have when immigrating, ranging from $25 to $200 depending on the individual’s race. This clearly outlines how the Immigration Act of 1910 sought to have intense control over who was allowed in Canada and what kind of society was to be created.
I think my findings on the Immigration Act of 1910 do support Coleman’s argument about white civility, as the act of prohibiting and deporting certain people from Canada added to the “fictive ethnicity” dominated by British colonialism (Coleman 7). By creating such guidelines, the idea of what it meant to be Canadian was constructed, allowing for the exclusion of people who did not fit into this “construction” of Canadian “whiteness based on the British model of civility” (Coleman 5).
Coleman outlines how Britain wanted to ensure that its ideals dominated Canada, with the effects of British colonialism still existing today and influencing Canada’s identity despite the country being multicultural. The way in which hurtful policies such as the Immigration Act of 1910 have been ignored or forgotten by society (and perhaps are not known about by many) illustrates the need for Canada to recognize the hurtful and discriminatory ways that built the idea of Canadian identity, as it no doubt still continues to impact Canadian society and its prejudice and racism.
Works Cited:
Cole, Desmond. “The Skin We’re In by Desmond Cole.” Penguin Random House Canada, www.penguinrandomhouse.ca/books/536075/the-skin-were-in-by-desmond-cole/9780385686341.
Coleman, Daniel. White Civility: The Literary Project of English Canada. University of Toronto Press Incorporated, 2006.
“Immigration Act, 1910.” Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21, pier21.ca/research/immigration-history/immigration-act-1910.
Officer, Charles. “Don’t Believe The Hype: Canada Is Not a Nation of Cultural Tolerance.” CBCnews, CBC/Radio Canada, www.cbc.ca/firsthand/m_blog/dont-believe-the-hype-canada-is-not-a-nation-of-cultural-tolerance.
Hi Indra! Do you agree with Coleman’s ideas of white civility? If you could change/tweak his ideas, how would you reimagine his ideas, or do you agree completely?
Hi Claire,
I do agree with Coleman’s ideas about white civility in Canada, as this concept is evidently a crucial part of both Canadian history and modern day events. I think Coleman’s concept does a thorough job of outlining how and why Canada built this sense of white Britishness as being ideal, and the use of discrimination and policies to ensure that this identity was promoted and adhered to. Despite Canada’s multiculturalism, it continues to struggle with discrimination, racism and prejudice, and Coleman’s ideas will always be relevant in analyzing how Canada and its identity was created through colonialism as it is a part of history that can never, and should never, be forgotten.
Thanks for your question and I’m looking forward to working together for the conference!
Indra
Hey Indra! I’m curious to know what other kinds of things you found in your research on the Immigration act. Aside from the obvious discriminative nature of the Act, was there any inciting incident for the government to put it in place? With everything going on right now with the coronavirus and the political climate, I don’t think it would be unreasonable to say that there will be more travel and immigration bans coming soon (if not already in place).
Thanks!
Nicole
Hi Nicole,
From what I could tell, the Immigration Act of 1910 was put in place to build and expand on the policies that were outlined in the Immigration Act of 1906. There was also a large increase in lower income British immigrants in 1907 which also prompted the changes in the 1910 Act. I agree that immigration policies will no doubt continue to be introduced and altered as I think immigration is one of the most complex parts of our society, so the way in which it is managed will be constantly evolving as trends in our society begin to shift.
Thanks for your comment and looking forward to working together!
Indra
Hi Indra, thanks for this detailed account of the Immigration Act, which I was painfully unfamiliar with. Reading through the guidelines is alarmingly eye opening at how racist and narrow the scope of this law was. It was clear the government at the time sought to build an exclusively white and Eurocentric state. I was particularly struck by the observation that “any immigrants who had been living in Canada for under three years, and as a result had not yet gained permanent residence status,” as such an undercutting way of removing Immigrants that did not fit the mould. As traceable by the Canadian Encyclopaedia the mass immigration that took place between 1891 and 1920 was composed largely of a Ukrainian and Italian population, 170,000 and 120,767 respectively. Upsettingly, I recall my father recounting stories of anti-Italian prejudice and slurs such as “wop” being hurled at him as a child even in the 50’s in British Columbia. It would seem that even in the Canadian governments attempts to keep Canada “white” there were certain types of whiteness that weren’t white enough. As posed in the question, “as the guide points out, the nation is an imagined community, whereas the state is a ‘governed group of people,’” and despite the state’s attempt at assimilation I think the multicultural canvas of Canada is a testament to the true perseverance of community based spirit of Canada. I would also agree with you that your findings support Coleman’s argument about white civility. I believe that what we are witnessing in Canada is a duality of an inclusivity based society at odds with a faux British and white based ideology, and the question would be how can both realities exist at once, are they reconcilable, and how can we permanently cure the racism and prejudice still imbedded in Canadian existence?