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 CanLitguide, 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.

Coleman noted, in his writing in White Civility: The Literary Project of English Canada, that from the very beginning, there has existed a “literary endeavor” to “formulate and elaborate a specific form of whiteness based on the British model of civility.” This notion of thinking, however, was slowly countered upon the introduction of multiple acts that were passed during that period of time promoting immigration, wider cultural acceptance, and multiculturalism. One of these was the Canadian Multiculturalism Act, passed in 1988, recognized multiculturalism under section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Canada was essentially one of the first countries to adopt such a policy, which not only catapulted Canada into a greater, more accepting culture overall but also allowed significantly more freedom and tolerance especially regarding the Aboriginal people. The policy ensured that Aboriginal rights would be respected, and called for equality to be given to every person who lived in Canada.

One of the most notable things regarding the Canadian Multiculturalism Act was that it allowed citizens to openly practice their religion without the fear of being persecuted. This is now one of the key factors and facets of Canada’s identity toward the rest of the world: the willingness and openness to accept all individuals regardless of their religion or race. As a result of this Act, much of Canadian law today is reflective of this multiculturalism that was first spoken of in 1988. The Act itself includes two fundamental principles:

1. All citizens are equal and have the freedom to preserve, enhance and share their cultural heritage.
2. Multiculturalism promotes the full and equitable participation of individuals and communities of all origins in all aspects of Canadian society.

The Canadian Multiculturalism Act in essence respected that everyone in Canada should be considered as equals regardless of race or the culture that they may have grown up in. This contrasts largely with Coleman’s initial statement of how the fictive white and civil Canadian ethnicity forms the building blocks of Canadian identity is a skewed perception of people occupying the Canadian land. Ultimately, the Canadian Multiculturalism Act is not solely about promoting a culture of white civility. It is trying to emphasize that Canadian culture is not simply about a single color or race, but rather a culture of inclusion and Multiculturalism – something that is unique only to Canada and the various diversities in the people living in the country, even today.

Works Cited

“Language Selection – Justice Laws Website / Sélection De La Langue – Site Web De La Législation (Justice).” Justice Laws Website. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 July 2016.

Parole Board of Canada (November 4, 2008). “The Canadian Multiculturalism Act”. Government of Canada. 9 July 2016.