Canadian nationalism has its roots in opposition to American influence as well as racist and colonial British ideas about what it means to be a “civilized” nation. We see the first part of this in Canadian cultural protectionism and the creation of institutions and programs such as the Canadian Radio-television and Communications Commission and the Canada Council for the Arts, which mandate for Canadian programming and give grants to Canadian artists for Canadian content. One of the debates that we still grapple with as a society is whether Canadian content is worth protecting and producing, and if so, how do we decide what is worthy of such protection? Canadian nationalism and cultural pride and protection is just as prevalent today as when these institutions were first introduced. Looking back at our history of Canadian nationalism, it is clear that many of the institutions and policies put in place to further Canadian culture and interests were inherently racist and based on British ideas of civility and superiority.
This is best illustrated by some of the immigration acts introduced in Canada in the early to mid-1900s. Starting chronologically, the Royal Commission on Chinese Immigration of 1885 limited Chinese immigration based on the belief that they did not have the ability to assimilate to Canadian culture, which at the time closely adhered to British cultural standards. This fear is similarly voiced in 2016 as Canadians “want minorities to do more to ‘fit in‘” to Canadian culture, a sure shift away from the multiculturalism celebrated in decades previous. The belief that Chinese immigrants could or would not assimilate, as well as other racist attitudes at the time, led to the recommendation that a head tax be imposed. The $10 tax was later raised to $50 and then lowered since Chinese immigrants were still needed to perform labour.
The Immigration Act of 1910 gave the government greater authority to admit or deport immigrants in Canada, dependent on an immigrant’s suitability “to the climate or requirements of Canada.” It is not specified what constitutes a suitable immigrant, allowing “indiscriminate” judgment as to who could land in Canada. It’s easy to draw a comparison to this document Kelly Leitch’s call that we screen immigrants for “Canadian values“, but what those values actually are is something that no one can agree on.
The Naturalization Act of 1914 approved naturalization for immigrants who “exhibit good moral character.” Again, what that actually means is incredibly vague, which allowed decisions to be made subjectively.
Finally, the Immigration Act Amendment of 1919 “authorized the governor-in-council to prohibit immigrants of any nationality, race, occupation and class if they were deemed unsuitable to the ‘climatic, industrial, social and educational, labour or other conditions or requirements of Canada,’ because of their ‘peculiar customs, habits, modes of life and methods of holding property and because of their probable inability to become readily assimilated.'”
Well, that’s a little more clear.
This demonstrates Daniel Coleman’s argument about white civility, based on white/British ideas of what civility should be. It’s a civility that views immigrants/minorities and anyone else that doesn’t fit in with white ideals as uncivilized and inferior (Coleman, p.13).
It’s critical that we recognize the racist history of Canadian nationalism, especially since we are starting to experience a backlash against multiculturalism and immigration, and that we work to ensure that our nationalism and culture includes all Canadians.
Works Cited
Coleman, Daniel. White Civility: The Literary Project of English Canada. Toronto: U of Toronto, 2006. Print.
Gagnon, Erica, Jan Raska, Lindasy Van Dyk, and Steve Schwinghamer. “Immigration Act, 1910 | Pier 21.” Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2016
Gagnon, Erica, Jan Raska, Lindasy Van Dyk, and Steve Schwinghamer. “Immigration Act Amendment, 1919.” Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2016
Gagnon, Erica, Jan Raska, Lindasy Van Dyk, and Steve Schwinghamer. “Naturalization Act, 1914 | Pier 21.” Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.
Gagnon, Erica, Jan Raska, Lindasy Van Dyk, and Steve Schwinghamer. “Royal Commission on Chinese Integration, 1885 | Pier 21.” Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.
Proctor, Jason. “CBC-Angus Reid Institute Poll: Canadians Want Minorities to Do More to ‘fit In’ – British Columbia – CBC News.” CBCnews. CBC/Radio Canada, 2016. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.
Siekierski, BJ. “Author Cited by Leitch Torpedoes Her Pitch for Immigrant ‘values’ Screening.” IPolitics. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.