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.
The Immigration Act of 1910 was an act that the Canadian government established to control the intake of immigrants that were allowed to enter Canada. This act reinforced and expanded upon The Immigration Act of 1906. If we were to go a little off topic to understand the comparison of The Immigration Act of 1910 and The Immigration Act of 1906, we could compare it to our modern day Education Act, which the BC Liberals found to please society by taking an act that was rebelled against when released, and fine tuning and changing the words of their document, but not the meaning. We can compare a similar standpoint of The Immigration Acts, because the Canadian government did not change the meaning of their actions to cater to society, they took four years and reinforced more “white man power”.
Although the new act did allow for immigrants to obtain “permanent resident status” if they have been a residing within Canada for more than three years, the act was still discriminatory. The immigration board was given the authority to pick and choose whom they thought were fit for residency and not allow any person who resembled negative characteristics such as pimping or prostitution. To add to the negative side of The Immigration Act of 1910, Asian immigrants needed to have a specific amount of money in their possession before they were allowed to enter the country, 200 dollars to be exact. This was necessary before they could receive permanent entry, or even be considered.
Not only did The Immigration Act discriminate based on equity, it gave Orders in Council the ability to turn away immigrants who did not fit the mold that they were looking for. By mold, I’m referring to the clean looking race that looks presentable, has money, and will not harm there environment of there image. The overall act was made by the typical “white man”, who wanted to make a profit out of people moving to Canada, yet still maintain an image of high-status and “peace”.
I believe The Immigration Act of 1910 does follow the project of white civility because The Immigration Act of 1910 still encompasses an ideal image of what the nation of Canada should look like. The Act attempted to create multiculturalism in a reverse manor by hand picking that could or couldn’t enter the country. The Immigration Act of 1910 falls short of any expectations I had for Canada. While studying and reading up on the act, I found myself furious at former Canada leaders, and even more furious and our Canada government now than ever before (I just did a project on the recent teacher’s strike). I know the comparison is a little off, however I think it shows a true example about how people in power are not at eye level of what is current in society and how the need for an ideal image and reflect horribly on people in power.
-Jessica
Works Cited
Government of Canada. Immigration & Citizenship. 2015. Web. 24 Feb 2015.
“Immigration Act, 1910″. Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21. Canada. Government of Canada. 1910. Web. 26 Feb. 2015.
Sánchez-Alonso, Blanca. Making sense of immigration policy. The Economic history review. 2013. Web. 24 Feb 2015.
Hi Jessica,
I found your blog interesting as I also chose to research the Immigration Act of 1910 and was also pretty horrified by it. I found your comparison to the Immigration Act of 1906 interesting, as I ignored that one as being outside the assignment. What drove the government to change that act? If sounds like there were a lot of complaints: what were they about?
I found your comparison to the Education Act quite effective. It’s something current that most (if not all) British Columbians can identify with.
I understood the charge to be $200 for people of “Asiatic origin” and $25 for all others, male or female (Immigration Act, 1910). Where did you get your details from? I think the higher $200 fee was a racist one meant to deter Asian immigration, not a sexist one.
Speaking of Education and Immigration, do you think this history should be taught in schools? We shouldn’t be surprised by this, not because it isn’t terrible, but because we should be raised aware of it. Pretending that this never happened isn’t going to fix the problems. What are your thoughts?
Heather
Works Cited:
“Immigration Act, 1910”. Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21. Canada. Government of Canada. 1910. Web. 26 Feb. 2015.
HI Heather,
As you can see at the bottom, I used the same resource as you for a lot of my research, therefore I must have just read the information wrong. I will change that.
Thank you for your comment about my unique comparison, I too found it quite helpful. It made me understand the act more and understand the arguments from both sides. However, it also emphasized the need for voices who are not in “power” position to be heard.
Yes I agree that history should be taught in schools, however our education system tends to leave out important things in their curriculum and only emphases on “the good”. As you mentioned, a lot of information is hidden. For example, I am only learning about Canadian history extensively this year because I took a few Canadian content classes this year. I was never taught Canadian history extensively in high school and I believe that is a major flaw of our system. We need to learn the good, the bad, and the ugly in order to understand it all and we shouldn’t just be told sugar coated historical events.
Thanks for your post!
Jessica
Hey Jessica, thanks for this post. Just to add some information that you (and Heather) might be interested in, this idea of choosing ‘proper’ immigrants or accepting immigrants with wealth has changed very little since this 1910 act. This economist article (http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21638191-canada-used-prize-immigrants-who-would-make-good-citizens-now-people-job-offers-have) talk about recent immigration legislation that sounds as if it is truly meant to enlist change, but potentially permits the same racism that we have historically seen. The socioeconomic discrimination has also continued, and foreigners with an extra eight-hundred grand kicking around could ‘gift’ that money to the government interest free for five years in order to jump the immigration queue (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/rich-chinese-angry-over-cancellation-of-canadian-immigrant-program/article17269390/). Through our exclusionary practices do you think that we could be creating an even less tolerable society, given that this essentially commodifies being a Canadian for many immigrants?
Whoops, forgot my name.
Cheers,
Nicolas Thomson
Hey Nick!
Thanks so much for your post and the link! In response to your question, I am not entirely sure how to respond to it without being very critical of our government. I think that we are living in a society that is trying to expand more and more I a positive way, yet arguably we are doing the opposite. The way the our immigration system is set up now, like you said, has a lot of similarities to the system we had in 1910. The emphasis being on wealth; what an immigrant will bring to canada, how much, and how much will they contribute. Yes to a point I agree with some of those terms of agreement and I understand why the government had policies in place. We live in a beautiful country, there’s no denying that. However, who are we or am I particularly to say that we should have the ability to judge someone who wants to lead a life like the one I’m living here in Canada. I don’t think we look any better than the people of 1910 who made their immigration act and I wish that I had the ability to make it fair for all parties, but the truth is I don’t know how. Any thoughts on what you would do to change our current Immigration policies or do you agree with them?
Thanks for the post Nick!
Jessica