In the article “Advancing the Canadian Ideal” by Hugh Segal, he argues how Canadian history mirrors it’s Canadian ideal, but in order to defend this our challenge is to adapt to our policies (Segal 170). He further describes the way we move forward as a society, is to determine what the canadian ideal is allowing us to sustain it (168). In this essay I will argue that Segal makes a good argument because through my evaluation and assessments of his premises, it supports his main idea and his main allegation.
Canada is a country full of history discovered by the Europeans, and civilized by the Aboriginals (Segal 169). A country known for its fur trade, lumber and minerals, and the greatest national debate over the Trans Canada pipeline
…show more content…
In areas that we are insufficient there should be solutions to sustain and gain. Segal states that we should have determination to try new approaches and maintain in areas that we loss(171). This can be done by getting ideas from advanced and developed countries (171). He explains that “universities seek for qualified academic performance rather than government imposed delusion of excellence”. He also discloses to re engage congressional control (Segal 171). We should encourage new methods of delivering health care under the public universal insurance (Sebal 171). Coming up with different and unique methods will help the country prosper and elevate. This premise proves that we need to advance the Canadian Ideal through …show more content…
Reflecting a Canadian ideal embraces our responsibility for one another (Segal 169). Addition to that, Canadians were buried in battlefields around the world and we weren’t the ones to cut and run our allies (Segal 169).Canadian ideal has shown loyalties that moved parents, elderlies and their parents to support and find ideas like freedom and democracy (Segal 169). The soldiers then laid their lives down for the freedom we share today (Segal 169). The action they took then is how we are living the way we are today in our society. This premise proves the notion that Canadian history reflects our Canadian Ideal, through this we astrayed from the American ideal and defended the Canadian perspective.This shows that we must be defensive and independent in order to portray our Canadian Ideal. Overall I think the article shows inductive reasoning because in the last paragraph Segal claims“whatever it takes, I have little doubt that the Canadian Ideal will be sustained”(Segal 171). Hugh Segal isn’t confident with his statement which makes it questionable. He mentioned strong points describing the premises supporting the conclusion but in the end he is doubting if the Canadian Ideal would be sustained. He isn’t fully satisfied but seems like he is assuming possible outcomes and taking a
When change is thrust upon us, it can change people with it, but when it does, it’s important to remember where you’re from. The importance of this essay is it depicts a time in history when change occurred to a people who, willing or not, did not see the coming effect it would have. This will cover Al Pittman’s, The Day I Became A Canadian, and his point of view on how changing nationalities belittled his country. This will also examine how his writing, being rhetorical elements like sentence structure and diction, enhances his writing, bringing out more emotion in the reader.
I figured it was appropriate that the author did not place the blame on one party. Instead, he addressed the various individuals in Canada that were not providing a fair education in its national and political history as well as for the reasons why this is such a big deal. This book was educational as it gave readers brief and sometimes precise examples, like how Canadians lack national and political conscience within the academic curriculum. The Country’s educational system needs to do a better job training its educators and ultimately restructuring curriculums to deal with our current problems. The book's exterior appearance is bright red, and often red, is associated with power. I believe that this book has the authority to make readers think about their experience concerning Canadian history - but unfortunately, a majority of the population does not know enough of its history to learn from the mistakes and successes of our predecessors. Along with the strengths of this book (argumentative perspective, educational, and exterior appearance), there were a few weaknesses as well. To elaborate on Granasteins effort, I believe he wrote from an androcentric perspective. There were times when he sounded like a grumpy old historian man. I think his little rants reduced the effectiveness of the book. He made many prejudice remarks concerning multiculturalism and social history (gender studies, urban, economics, demographics, etc.). Since history is an accumulation of time periods and each period varies in length, and the intensity of the events, it might be tough to establish the nation's needs for clear, measurable standards for history. There is only so much information that an individual’s brain can retain for a period before they start losing
Canada like Laurence, was forced to face the hardships involved with growing up. However, the black marks in history does not define Canada , it is how Canada learns from their mistakes and moves forward. Laurence explains through her microcosm of a prairie town that along with growth comes the formation of perspective that will forever affect one's future decisions .
Many people across the globe argue that nationalism within Canada is simply not feasible. It is said that we as a people, differ so greatly with our diverse cultures, religions, and backgrounds that we cannot come together and exist together as a strong, united nation. In his book, Lament for a Nation, George Grant tells the reader that “…as Canadians we attempted a ridiculous task in trying to build a conservative nation in the age of progress, on a continent we share with the most dynamic nation on earth. The current history is against us.” (1965) Originally directed towards the Bomarc Missile Crisis, the book argues that whatever nationalism Canada had was destroyed by globalization as well as the powerful American
When it comes to Canadian History, perhaps the most controversial and widely disputable topic of debate would have to be one of Canada’s greatest wars: The War of 1812. A wide array of views are held on many aspects of the war ranging from who won to what ramifications the war would ultimately sire. In yet another discussion on the ever so controversial War of 1812, a new question was posed and deliberated by five historians: whose war, was it? Like any other question posed about this war a multitude of ideas would ultimately arise in each of their differing viewpoints. In their roundhouse discussion, the historians would ultimately serve to paint the War of 1812 as a war that transcends much further than the nationalistic view. A view that, though an important part of Canadian history, has been exaggerated to the point of choking out the many voices who fought and continue to fight for inclusion in the narrative. In their remembrance of the War of 1812, society unwittingly failed history in their lackluster commemorations which exclude important narratives and voices and stand tainted by the misuse of history to serve the nationalistic agenda.
As time goes on, some countries become more relevant in the global sphere while others start to fade away. Canada is a country that only becomes more relevant as time goes on. Since being granted full sovereignty, Canada has had a growing role as a major world player. Much of their international growth has to do with its close ties to the United States and the United Kingdom. However, the country has also undergone huge change and refocusing on a domestic level. With influence from both Europe and the United States, Canada has a very unique system of governing. This paper will focus on a few major areas of Canada. It will look into the history of Canada, the structure of its government, its politics, and many of the major issues it faces today.
Jocelyn Letourneau’s is a history professor that wrote the essay “Reconstructing the Canadian Identity”. The author argues that if one compares the Harper government's idea of conservatism against Trudeau’s idea of multiculturalism, the reader can infer that multiculturalism is failing and Canada should go back to its monarch roots. By bringing back symbols of monarchy, a new Canadian perspective would form. Letourneau’s essay is structured in a very well and composed matter. His arguments and connections are structured in proper format where his whole essay can be linked and understood easily by the average individual. Although Letourneau’s essay is structured in a proper format, it is without its faults. The essay contains many fallacies that give his arguments a weak perspective on the topic. Also throughout his essay, the author appears to be taking a side within his argument. His bias viewpoint makes himself, and his work uncredible to the reader.
Nationalism is an important aspect of national pride and identity for countries around the world. For example, Canada takes pride in its cultural identity, one that is claimed to be different from other ‘Western’ more ‘industrialized’ nations, such as countries in Europe, and the United States. Even though Canada currently has a national identity that differs greatly from that of other more established countries, history has dictated the way in which a particular national identity exists today. In Canada, Samuel De Champlain and the French established colonies that created a cultural clash between the French Europeans, and First-Nations Canadians within the country. However, this notion of French Canadian Nationalism isn’t necessarily embraced by all of the Canadian Population. This paper seeks to analyze important pieces of Canadian History that have contributed to a broken concept of what constitutes Canadian nationalism, with an emphasis on how historic events prevent and affect coherent Canadian Nationalism in modern society. Through the analysis of the notions and histories associated with ‘First-Nations Nationalism’, ‘Quebecois Nationalism’, and a broader ‘Anti-American’ identity embraced by many Canadians, this paper seeks to locate common ground within the culturally diverse Canadian population in order to progress toward a singular coherent
Pierre Elliot Trudeau was arguably one of the most vivacious and charismatic Prime Ministers Canada has ever seen. He wore capes, dated celebrities and always wore a red rose boutonniere. He looked like a superhero, and often acted like one too. Some of the landmark occurrences in Canadian history all happened during the Trudeau era, such as patriating the constitution, creating the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the 1980 Quebec Referendum. However, it is Trudeau’s 1969 “white paper” and the Calder legal challenge which many consider to be one of his most influential contributions to Canadian history.
Protection, civilization, assimilation: An outline history of Canada’s Indian policy by John L. Tobias, 1991.
In the past, Canada’s government-funded, universally accessible, health care system has been praised and admired both at home and abroad as one of the finest in the world. A great source of pride and comfort for many Canadians is that it is based on five fundamental principles. Principles that are a reflection of the values held by Canadian citizens since the formation of Medicare in 1966. These principles were reinforced in the Canada Health Act, (CHA), of 1984 and state that the Canadian system is universal, accessible, portable, comprehensive and non-profit.
The majority of Canadians normally hold similar political notion that, unlike firm beliefs that varies in due time, are more widespread and are considered as the base for political culture. It is these values and attitudes that Canadian citizens share that compose the heart of Canada nation state political culture system. The political culture in general demands other things such as regional or even linguistic aspects to be able to fully explain Canadian society and how it sees politics; nevertheless for this paper, it will only focus on the similarities that Canadian share in their political attitudes of a nation culture as a whole. It will talk about on the likeness of thought that differentiate them from other countries. To be able to understand Canada political culture, one has to understand some historical events that straightening the view point of those living in Canada. Canada is most of the time seen as a multi-cultural country, a country that is built on two society and language the French and the English; yet however there are the common beliefs that all Canadian share. Canada founded it nation through advancement, deciding to exonerate itself from the British Empire slowly with time and change, unlike our neighbor the United State who gain their independence through the revolutionary war,
It is difficult for assimilation to spontaneously occur and to prevail without a consistent driving force. The policies of successive Canadian governments from 1857 (when the Gradual Civilization Act was passed) to
What is Canada? What is a Canadian? Canada, to employ Voltaire's analogy, is nothing but “a few acres of snow.”. Of course, the philosopher spoke of New France, when he made that analogy. More recently, a former Prime Minister, Joe Clark, said that the country was nothing but a “community of communities”. Both these images have helped us, in one way or another, try to interpret what could define this country. On the other hand, a Canadian could be a beer, a hockey-playing beaver or even a canoe floating in a summer day's sunset. A Canadian could also be a “sovereigntyphobe”, refusing to see the liquefaction, albeit political, of the second largest country in the world.
As the 20th century comes to an end, Canada is a transcontinental nation whose interests and representatives span the face of the globe and extend into every sphere of human behaviour. However this was not always the case. When the four colonies of British North America united to create Canada on July 1, 1867, the new country's future was by no means secure. Canada was a small country, with unsettled borders, vast empty spaces, and a large powerful neighbour, the United States. Confronting these challenges was difficult for the young country. Though Canada was independent in domestic matters, Britain retained control over its foreign policy. Over the next fifty or so years, Canada's leaders and its