2) 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 1988 – 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.
Fore ward:
To begin: watch this video
Funny isn’t it? Some might say cute. Some a burst of nationalism.
However- is that what it is to be Canadian? Prancing around in Mounty outfits talking about maple syrup and beavers? We all know that that is just a play on our stereotypes… as we live in a multicultural society and therefore what is “Canadian” is completely up for grabs.
———————————–
Multiculturalism Act of 1988
The Canadian Multiculturalism Act of 1988 was passed to protect and enable Canada’s broad spectrum of citizens and their respective cultures. The act is supposed to govern the government’s decisions as they navigate the laws of a country that is blessed to have a diverse group of human beings living it in. The laws stem from protecting the individual to mass rights, while enabling the social, economic, political and cultural rights/freedoms. They are an amazing set of laws that mean that our country can be a fruitful and educational place to live as we can experience so much of the world right here on our soil!
However, section D was the one that stood out to me:
“recognize the existence of communities whose members share a common origin and their historic contribution to Canadian society, and enhance their development” (Canadian Multicultural Act).
When I look at the relationship between the First Nations and the Canadian Government I see nothing but a broken system where both sides are not intentionally moving forward (yes, I know that most will disagree with me on this). However, and please excuse me while I rant, any relationship therapist will tell you that hanging on to past hurts does not promote health and healing. What happened to the Aboriginals of Canada was tragic, I cannot and will not deny that. But holding onto said past does not help either- Canadians should never forget, but we also have such potential to move forward and create a better country.
I would love to see a day where we as a COUNTRY full of LOTS of cultures can ALL move forward and develop this beautiful land that we ALL call home.
Okay, rant over – sorry if that was hard to get through and I do not blame you if you chose to skip over it all together.
Back to Section D – the part that stood out to me was the sentence “enhance their development”. I think it is pretty obvious that when we look at the Aboriginal Peoples today that there is some under lying issue-which no body can give me a straight/exact answer to – that is preventing their people/culture from developing. (If someone can educate me further on this, PLEASE respond in the comment box!!!!)
Coleman’s Argument:
A key line stood out to me regarding Coleman’s argument: “White Canadian culture is obsessed and organized by its obsession, with the problem of its own civility” (Coleman 5). When I look at the Multicultural Act, made by a white government, I can see how we like to categorize our country. We made a series of laws to demonstrate how we, a civilized and multicultural country, can have so many cultures as we created an ACT to govern them.
And yes, the act was made with the intention to protect – but are we now so obsessed with multiculturalism we no longer know what our culture actually is?
Works Cited
“Canadian Multiculturalism Act (R.S.C., 1985, C. 24 (4th Supp.)).” Legislative Services Branch. Government of Canada, n.d. Web. 26 Feb. 2015. <http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C%2D18.7/page-1.html#h-3>.
Coleman, Daniel. White Civility: The Literary Project of English Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006.
Gunnarolla. “Canadian, Please | Gunnarolla & Julia Bentley.” YouTube. YouTube, 24 June 2009. Web. 26 Feb. 2015. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWQf13B8epw>.
Hi Susie, and it’s been a pleasure reading your blog, perhaps to your surprise 😉
I love the way you express your thoughts and feelings towards this issue so openly. I wrote on the Indian Act, and find many parallels in our process of reading and understanding the material. I wanted to comment particularly on several parts of your blog post in relation to my own experience and understanding of my parents’ and grandparents’ immigration to Canada.
Your direct quote from the Canadian Multicultural Act is an important one to examine, and one that I can provide some personal insight into. My family immigrated here from Taiwan in around 1992. When I ask them why they chose Canada, it seems that their answers revolve around Canada’s ability to…well, for a lack of better words…”recognize the existence of communities whose members share a common origin”. Basically, they felt like they would be included in the existing communities of Canada that shared their same nationality and culture, and Canada would do a good job of promoting these ties. I think this is a valuable asset of Canada’s, and should not be lost. However…how truly inclusive are we? And why is it that we are both getting the sense that we are not inclusive of those that occupied our land and culture originally?
Your frustration towards the development of Aboriginal peoples in Canada is warranted, and in response to your plea for help…I couldn’t possibly come close to answering that for you. However, I will give you my two cents on the issue. I think the “underlying issue” you speak of is innate in how we picture, objectify and come to think about even the word “Aboriginals or First Nations” or any group of peoples we deem underappreciated. There is a certain connotation of the past, and some might not see the value in preserving this, especially with money and the economy at the top of our government’s concerns. Also, I think we all have different meanings of a culture’s “developing”, and it becomes a dangerous and slippery slope of your meaning of development versus mine. However, I do agree with your thinking that there is a liking towards our categorizing of our country, maybe even “developed”, “developing” and “not worth developing” categorizations of our culture and people. I addressed some of these concerns and my thinking process in my own blog about the Indian Act.
To conclude, I think your question about not knowing what our culture is, is a good one. That being said, I think it’s part of Canadian identity that our culture be one that is multidimensional and multicultural. Canada is known for its multitude of cultures as our neighbors, but our support for these groups can be questioned like we are doing so in this course. Canada is one country…composed of multiple.
Here’s hoping I made sense…and forgive me if I didn’t,
Thanks for a lovely start to our discussion,
– Jeffrey
Hi Jeffrey,
Thank you so much for such a thorough bit of feedback – I really enjoyed reading your perspective!
I struggled a bit with Canada being “one country” composed of multiple because it then makes me feel like our understanding of what is ‘Canadian’ then becomes an unanswerable question! May be that is ok though? I’m not sure…..
Is it so much to ask for everyone to just like each other and get along sometimes!! Ga, it gets me frustrated because I feel like these conversations both matter and are completely silly at the same time, when there are so many other terrible things happening in the world!!!!
Thanks again for your thoughts 🙂
Susie
Hi Susie!
Forgive me for this late post, I just realized I was missing a dialogue for this assignment, and found some of the issues you raised here to be quite interesting.
Firstly, I’m pretty sure that song will be stuck in my head for the rest of the day. It’s definition of “Canadianism” is painfully narrow, and whether it’s intentional or not, it definitely adds some humor.
In response to your comment about “Aboriginals in Canada,” holding on to their tragic past, and therefore “intentionally not moving forward,” I have to admit that I’m one of those people who respectfully disagrees with you. Here’s why.
Your conclusions on the subject suggest that you consider colonialism to be obsolete; It was once a component of a past of genocide, segregation, and blatant racism that was “tragic” but has since been resolved. European colonialism aspired to be a global project of white domination, buttressed by a constructed hierarchy of civilizations- but that’s all over now. This seems to be the generalized concept of colonialism in Canada today.
I’m wondering what you made of the theme of “The Western” in Green Grass Running Water. This one-sided narrative of white bravery, adventure, and ultimate victory reflects the linear perspective of “history” in our nation. I might argue that the reproduction of such perspectives not only produces a warped idea of the past, but violently effects the present. In this way, colonialism, through its reproduction, remains an active project.
Consider, for instance, current systems of privilege and oppression within our “multicultural” society. The persistent portrayal of Indigenous Peoples as the “losers” or “victims” of Canadian history, directly effects their (mis)representation today. Whites, alternatively, as an inherently “victorious” group, continue to harvest the benefits of colonialism.
I’ll conclude with a final example. Consider the stigmatized depictions of “missing and murdered” Aboriginal women from the Lower East Side. Their constant representation as “victims” suggests that violence committed against them is inevitable, and simply a consequence of a “high-risk” lifestyle. These visible forms of violence are, in this way, normalized. Such constructions are a direct consequence of the privilege/oppression dichotomy- which, as I’ve suggested is a current form of colonialism.
So, what I’m trying to say, is that when a violent past directly (and often negatively) determines the present, it becomes a difficult task to simply “move forward.”
Thanks!
Ali
Hi Ali,
Thanks for your thoughts – I wasn’t trying to be insensitive regarding my comment, I just have one of those outlooks on life! I don’t then think that that means that there shouldn’t be conversation or a call to cultural change – but I believe that letting go brings healing! However, I could just be idealistic! 🙂
I am not sure what else we could call missing/murdered women? In spite of them being Aboriginal, surely there is a case for calling a murdered person a “victim” as much as we call a dead white woman a “victim”. I don’t think that that brings a negative connotation, and I do think that a “high-risk lifestyle” is a 2-way street! The blame is never on the victim, but there is, sadly, a risk one takes (especially in this day and age) when men or women choose to delve into that behaviour. Again, that DOES NOT IN ANY WAY make what happened to them justifiable so PLEASE do not take it as such – I just think that until we can change the world we live in and predatory women and men step up and take ownership for their role, there is always a risk! But as long as you and I keep bring voices to victims and encouraging them to step up, and take back their lives, I think society is headed in the right direction! You might disagree with me on all of this – and again, that is ok! I respect your point of view as much as you do mine, so thank you for that!
Thanks so much for your feedback, you have given me a lot to think about!
Susie
Hi Susie and Jeff and Ali
Thanks for your insights all. Susie, I will be honest, this is a difficult post for me, precisely because as you say, you are an optimist who prefers to believe that past is the past and a happy future depends on letting go of that past. On an individual level, yes, by all means, let go of the past and find happiness in the present. But, we do not live as individuals, we live as communities and societies and we divide each other into categories that are dependent on the past; not the present.
In the past, land was stolen, homes were burnt to the ground, children were kidnapped by the government, laws were passed to outlaw religious and governing practices of the people, and families and societies and cultures were destroyed. These actions were justified by stories about civilizing these peoples. In the present, young First Nation’s men represent 23% of the federal prison population (and 4% of the total population) and in the present Aboriginal women and girls represent approximately 10% of all female homicides in Canada. However, Aboriginal women make up only 3% of the female population. Not only did these peoples suffer genocide in the past, in the present they suffer an unjust judicial system and horrible economic oppression.
The point is – to understand that we justify this continuing unjust system for First Nations because we are justified by the stories we tell ourselves – “it is all in the past, get over it “– is one of those stories. But, while part of that story is true – much of to is imaginary; it is not all in the past. To give you a little context, I am not so ancient, and all my brother and sister in laws were taken from their families and away from their villages as young children, separated from each other, forced to live in institutions they called schools, some were sexually abused for years by the people who claimed to be civilizing them – and many, too many of them did not survive. My niece is one of the missing women –she was not a prostitute, not a drug addict, she was a poor young “Indian” woman taking a walk in her neighbourhood: Main and Hastings. And, you know what, she was like you in a way: young and full of optimism and ready to start finding her place in the world – in the present.
Why don’t the police and courts and ordinary people care about her murder? Because they tell themselves a story: she must have been a prostitute, a drug addict, another drunken Indian. A story that works to justify, just like the “civilizing” story, and you know a lot of people end up thinking that “everything” has been done for First Nations, they think there is free education and free monthly incomes and free houses — but, that is not true. The price that has already been paid for insufficient funding the reservations receive, is enormous.
So, Susie, your optimism is wonderful, but I want you to also think about how much the way you are treated by others impacts your individual potential, and what kinds of stories justify your optimism. I too am an optimist ☺ But, in 1988, I was very sceptical about the new Multicultural Act – and I still am; I think it is powerful story that provides the necessary illusions that justify continuing oppression of First Nations and others – ie: as the story goes, “Canada is a wonderful nation that supports all cultures”.
But, what does the act say about Aboriginal cultures? It says:
AND WHEREAS the Constitution of Canada recognizes rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada;
And that is all it says. Well, in 1988, I knew full well that Aboriginal people’s rights were, and still are, being argued in the courts – so what rights are they talking about? Here lies a part of my skepticism.
Thanks for inspiring this dialogue!
Erika