Blog 8: The Project of White Civility: Are You In or Are You Out?

Prompt:

Question #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.

– Lesson 3.1, ENGL 470A Canadian Studies: Canadian Literary Genres May 2015

If you were to go up to a random individual on the street, say somewhere around the bustling communities of West 4th, Commercial Drive, or Main Street, and ask how they would describe Canada in one sentence, not many would use the words “exclusion [or] racial discrimination”.  However, the overview of nationalism in Canada as covered in the CanLit guide reveals that there are “many examples of state legislation and policies” that aimed to do exactly this.  This week, I will take a brief look back into the darker side of our nation’s history and research one of these such acts, The Immigration Act of 1910, and explore the ways in which it supports David Coleman’s argument for the “project of white civility”.

An extension of the original Immigration Act of 1906, the Immigration Act of 1910 sought to expand the original initiation to regulate all forms of immigration in Canada.  The Immigration Act of 1910 emphasized the expanding of the prohibited category of immigrants to include those that the government believed would “advocate the use of force or violence” and granted the government power to place an immigrant at risk of “deportation if judged undesirable”.  Some may argue that so far, the act seems unnecessary but not guilty of outright RACIAL exclusion yet…but wait for the kicker.  The act granted the government the ability to “restrict immigrants belonging to any RACE deemed UNSUITABLE to the climate or requirements of Canada”.  This detail of the 1910 act reveals the very type of discriminatory “literary personifications [and idealistic goals] of the Canadian nation” that reveal the type of “white civility” and “Britishness” status that Canada sought to maintain.  Furthermore, the emphasis on the power to deport those that were deemed capable of “force…violence”, and incivility is in line with the construction of “white and civil” as normative and in line with the “true” Canadian identity.

Today, one would like to believe these shameful acts of discrimination and racial exclusion are a part of Canada’s (albeit important) past, but even this is not true.  New pieces of legislation, like Bill C-24, prove that there is much work to be done in our country’s dealings with race.  Are we moving forward at all, or does the existence of things like Bill C-24 prove history is bound to repeat itself? What are some other examples of race exclusion and discrimination in Canadian legislature?

 

Works Cited

CTV Staff. “Bill C-24: What Dual Citizens Need To Know About Bill C-24, The New Citizenship Law.” CTV News, 17 Jan. 2015. Web. 25 June 2015. <http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/what-dual-citizens-need-to-know-about-bill-c-24-the-new-citizenship-law-1.2426968>.

“Immigration Act Canada (1910). North American Immigration. Web. 24 June 2015. <http://northamericanimmigration.org/141-immigration-act-canada-1910.html>.

Paterson, Erika. “Lesson 3.1″. English 470A Canadian Studies: Canadian Literary Genres. UBC Blogs. Web. 25 June, 2015. <https://blogs.ubc.ca/courseblogsis_ubc_engl_470a_99c_2014wc_44216-sis_ubc_engl_470a_99c_2014wc_44216_2517104_1/unit-3/lesson-3-1/>.

4 Thoughts.

  1. Hello, thank you for your blog. I love the design of it. I am curious, where you able to come across any stats on where the immigrants were coming from who were being restricted? I would be interested to know if it was geographically focused in one area or spread out globally in which countries Canada was not interested in immigration from.

    I think it is interesting that under Bill c-24, Canada would not strip citizenship if it would leave someone stateless because the whole meaning and interpretation of modern-day states is touchy. We draw arbitrary borders and pretend it is the total means of division yet we are all one human race. Do you think the UN is right in their mandate that no one can be stateless and therefore countries may not strip citizenship of someone who would be stateless?

    • Hi Alyssa,

      First off, thanks for your comment! I did a little research and I found some details that show there was a particular emphasis on exclusion towards those with Asiatic origin:
      “Orders-in-council passed later in the year further enhanced the restrictive immigration policies. All immigrants of Asiatic origin were required to have $200 in their possession before being permitted entry (PC 926, 9 May 1910), while all other immigrants, male and female, were required to have a minimum of $25 upon their arrival in Canada (PC 924 9 May 1910).”

      I provided the link for you here if you wanted to do some further reading: http://www.pier21.ca/research/immigration-history/immigration-act-1910.

      Thanks again and have a good weekend!

  2. Hi Freda,
    I enjoyed reading the article that you linked. Living in California, I am out of the loop when it comes to Canadian news so I found this piece to be very informative. I found it alarming that legislation in 2015 can have such strong similarities to policies found in the past. What particularly strike me is the inadvertent suggestion that a group is “less Canadian” and not ” entitled to the same rights as Canadian-born citizens”. (CTV Staff “Bill C24…”). The process of inclusion and exclusion seems to suggest that “the project of white civility” is more alive and present than we realize. The image of Canada as a warm and inviting nation for immigrants seems to be more and more fictionalized as time goes on.

    -Sarah

    • Hi Sarah, thanks for your comment!
      And yes, the very fact there are still similarities to the policies of our nation’s past are what makes me so uncomfortable with the whole bill. I love what you said about how the “warm and inviting nation” image seems to be quite fictionalized, I agree completely. Thanks for reading and have a great night!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Spam prevention powered by Akismet