This morning I was googling online coverage of the launch of Eugenics and the Firewall:Canada's Nasty Little Secret. I noticed that very few people commenting on blogs announcing my book want to own their eugenics past. They blame 'others' for it.( If you live in a Western Democracy and much of the rest of the world, there's a good chance one of your great-granddaddies believed in eugenics. And whether you consider yourself left-wing or right-wing, your political legacy includes pro-eugenics advocates.)
The on-line debate I saw between Darwinists and IDers, over whose fault eugenics was, reminded me of the question posed at the Monk Debate between Christopher Hitchens and Tony Blair last night in Toronto.
Yes, "Is religion a force for good in the world" sounds a lot like "Who should we blame for eugenics and other human rights abuses: Christians or Athiests?"
Interesting questions, to be sure. But they miss the point: Human beings seem happy to use any excuse - religion, politics, and, dare I say it, even science - to demean and kill one another.
The answer to the question, who was responsible for eugenics disasters (such as Auschwitz, the out of control Eugenics Board in Alberta,Canada, murdering Ukranians in Soviet Russia, or segregating and sterilizing blacks, criminals, and other so-called 'defectives' in the United States)is easy: People were.
The hard, hard truth for us in Alberta, Canada to accept is that it wasnt't the CCF, the communist miners, or the Father of Medicare who brought about our eugenics disaster. It was church-going Farmers, shopkeepers and populists, enamoured with how the U.S, dealt with defectives, who pushed for the Sexual Sterilzation Act brought in by the United Farmers of Alberta (UFA) government in 1928.
British Columbia was the only other jurisdiction in the Commonwealth (British Empire) that had a eugenics board. The rest of the Commonwealth rejected forced sterilization of defectives. The Commonwealth countries adopted positive eugenics ideas that were grafted to the older Christian tradition of charity and to the idea of equality of opportunity.)
It was not Adolf Hitler who removed the consent clauses for several classes of citizens in Alberta; it was an elected government led by a Christian radio evangelist. Eugenics was taught in churches. Eugenics corrupted the Calvinist doctrine of the 'Elect'. (I'm sure it's not what Calvin in mind.)
But before the athiests get too smug, they should remember that Sir Francis Galton, half cousin of Charles Darwin, is considered the founder of Eugenics. Both Galton and Darwin used the work of Thomas Malthus, a classical economist (remember trickle down theory?)who feared the poor breeding more than he feared hell's fire (Malthus was a clergyman)to create their theories.
Classical economists portrayed money markets, human greed and selfishness (self-interest) as noble natural forces that humanity shouldn't interfere with. Anything that comes of out neo-liberalism: from Marxism to Free Market economics is based on these dubious ideas.
Eugenics was particularly popular with the middle and upper class in the Commonwealth, The U.S. and Northern Europe. On both sides of the Atlantic, the middle and upper classes feared they were being overrun by poor people and foreigners. They saw only two choices: turn poor people into middle class people (positive eugenics) or stop them from breeding or even breathing (negative eugenics).
Eugenics was an an idea that resonated so much with middle class fears of crime, insanity, and moral degradation that it got grafted into Christianity (where it nearly destroyed older notions of charity, grace and redemption). It spread throughout society as far as the Communists (many of whom thought children should be owned by the state). Eugenics is one of the worst examples of 'group-think' in modern history.
Whether people are capitalists, socialists, Christians, athiests, democrats or autocrats, they will use whatever they regard as 'right' to justify their most evil acts. That's the second scariest bit of the whole saga.
The scariest bit? We don't appear to have learned anything. Instead we revert to blaming the 'other guy' or the the other guy's belief system for evil.
Saturday, 27 November 2010
Monday, 15 November 2010
Eugenics and the Firewall: What's the book about?
It’s a dirty little secret the heirs to Alberta’s populist legacy don’t want Canadians to talk about.
In 1928 the non-partisan United Farmers of Alberta passed the first Sexual Sterilization Act. The UFA’s successor, the Social Credit party, led by a radio-evangelist William Aberhart, and later by his protégé Ernest Manning, removed the need to obtain consent to sterilize “mental defectives” or Huntington’s Chorea patients with dementia.
Between 1928 and 1972 nearly three thousand citizens were sterilized, lied to, experimented on, and subjected to daily abuse at the hands of provincial staff in Alberta. Most Albertans have forgotten the victims whose names made headlines in the 1990s, and politicians and pundits have shown little empathy for the victims.
The Eugenics Board horror story has largely been buried in Canada’s mainstream national media. Conservative bloggers and columnists in Canada continue to blame the Liberals and CCF for Canada’s barbaric eugenics program. The tar sands, oil royalties, health care budgets, environmental policies, and making sure the province’s interests remain high on the federal agenda top the provincial headlines.
But the questions must be answered: How did a province that claims “strong and free” as its motto deny basic freedoms to so many of its own citizens? Why does the extent of Alberta’s eugenics past and its link to the UFA/Social Credit legacy remain the unacknowledged moral blind spots in Canadian politics?
It’s time to set the record straight.
You are welcome to attend the national launch of Eugenics and the Firewall: Canada's Nasty Little Secret (J.Gordon Shillingford Publishing.) 1:30-3:30 PM at the Galt Museum & Archives. Can't make the launch? Eugenics and the Firewall will be available in bookstores throughout Canada.
You should also be able to order it in the United States. (Distributor in the U.S. and Canada is University of Toronto Press.)
If you are in another country, contact J.Gordon Shillingford Publishing directly for information about how to order.
In 1928 the non-partisan United Farmers of Alberta passed the first Sexual Sterilization Act. The UFA’s successor, the Social Credit party, led by a radio-evangelist William Aberhart, and later by his protégé Ernest Manning, removed the need to obtain consent to sterilize “mental defectives” or Huntington’s Chorea patients with dementia.
Between 1928 and 1972 nearly three thousand citizens were sterilized, lied to, experimented on, and subjected to daily abuse at the hands of provincial staff in Alberta. Most Albertans have forgotten the victims whose names made headlines in the 1990s, and politicians and pundits have shown little empathy for the victims.
The Eugenics Board horror story has largely been buried in Canada’s mainstream national media. Conservative bloggers and columnists in Canada continue to blame the Liberals and CCF for Canada’s barbaric eugenics program. The tar sands, oil royalties, health care budgets, environmental policies, and making sure the province’s interests remain high on the federal agenda top the provincial headlines.
But the questions must be answered: How did a province that claims “strong and free” as its motto deny basic freedoms to so many of its own citizens? Why does the extent of Alberta’s eugenics past and its link to the UFA/Social Credit legacy remain the unacknowledged moral blind spots in Canadian politics?
It’s time to set the record straight.
You are welcome to attend the national launch of Eugenics and the Firewall: Canada's Nasty Little Secret (J.Gordon Shillingford Publishing.) 1:30-3:30 PM at the Galt Museum & Archives. Can't make the launch? Eugenics and the Firewall will be available in bookstores throughout Canada.
You should also be able to order it in the United States. (Distributor in the U.S. and Canada is University of Toronto Press.)
If you are in another country, contact J.Gordon Shillingford Publishing directly for information about how to order.
Saturday, 13 November 2010
Eugenics and the Firewall: National launch 17 November
You are welcome to attend the national launch of Eugenics and the Firewall: Canada's Nasty Little Secret (J.Gordon Shillingford Publishing.) 1:30-3:30 PM at the Galt Museum & Archives. Can't make the launch? Eugenics and the Firewall will be available in bookstores throughout Canada.
You should also be able to order it in the United States. (Distributor in the U.S. and Canada is University of Toronto Press.)
If you are in another country, contact J.Gordon Shillingford Publishing directly for information about how to order.
You should also be able to order it in the United States. (Distributor in the U.S. and Canada is University of Toronto Press.)
If you are in another country, contact J.Gordon Shillingford Publishing directly for information about how to order.
Tuesday, 2 November 2010
Eugenics and the Firewall heading to bookstores 12 November.
Mark 12 November 2010 on you calendar! That the day Eugenics and the Firewall will be ready for bookstores across Canada. Launch details are being pinned down as I write this.
In the meantime, here's a sneak peak at the back cover text:
It’s a dirty little secret the heirs to Alberta’s populist legacy don’t want Canadians to talk about.
In 1928 the non-partisan United Farmers of Alberta passed the first Sexual Sterilization Act. The UFA’s successor, the Social Credit party, led by a radio-evangelist William Aberhart, and later by his protégé Ernest Manning, removed the need to obtain consent to sterilize “mental defectives” or Huntington’s Chorea patients with dementia.
Between 1928 and 1972 nearly three thousand citizens were sterilized, lied to, experimented on, and subjected to daily abuse at the hands of provincial staff in Alberta. Most Albertans have forgotten the victims whose names made headlines in the 1990s, and politicians and pundits have shown little empathy for the victims.
The Eugenics Board horror story has largely been buried in Canada’s mainstream national media. Conservative bloggers and columnists in Canada continue to blame the Liberals and CCF for Canada’s barbaric eugenics program. The tar sands, oil royalties, health care budgets, environmental policies, and making sure the province’s interests remain high on the federal agenda top the provincial headlines.
But the questions must be answered: How did a province that claims “strong and free” as its motto deny basic freedoms to so many of its own citizens? Why does the extent of Alberta’s eugenics past and its link to the UFA/Social Credit legacy remain the unacknowledged moral blind spots in Canadian politics?
It’s time to set the record straight.
In the meantime, here's a sneak peak at the back cover text:
It’s a dirty little secret the heirs to Alberta’s populist legacy don’t want Canadians to talk about.
In 1928 the non-partisan United Farmers of Alberta passed the first Sexual Sterilization Act. The UFA’s successor, the Social Credit party, led by a radio-evangelist William Aberhart, and later by his protégé Ernest Manning, removed the need to obtain consent to sterilize “mental defectives” or Huntington’s Chorea patients with dementia.
Between 1928 and 1972 nearly three thousand citizens were sterilized, lied to, experimented on, and subjected to daily abuse at the hands of provincial staff in Alberta. Most Albertans have forgotten the victims whose names made headlines in the 1990s, and politicians and pundits have shown little empathy for the victims.
The Eugenics Board horror story has largely been buried in Canada’s mainstream national media. Conservative bloggers and columnists in Canada continue to blame the Liberals and CCF for Canada’s barbaric eugenics program. The tar sands, oil royalties, health care budgets, environmental policies, and making sure the province’s interests remain high on the federal agenda top the provincial headlines.
But the questions must be answered: How did a province that claims “strong and free” as its motto deny basic freedoms to so many of its own citizens? Why does the extent of Alberta’s eugenics past and its link to the UFA/Social Credit legacy remain the unacknowledged moral blind spots in Canadian politics?
It’s time to set the record straight.
Friday, 17 September 2010
Belinda Crowson`s straight shooting speech would make the Galts Dance the Highland Fling.
``To all of those people who told me that it’s not appropriate to talk about those women, to those people who told me that when 13 year-old girls enter prostitution it’s my personal fault, to those people who told me that I should go to church more (ok, that one’s probably true), and to those people who told me people were deliberately choosing not to move to Lethbridge because of the plaque we put on The Point and because of my book, I have to say loudly, clearly and resoundingly – thank you. I wouldn’t have written this book without you.``
Belnda Crowson, Author of `We Don`t Talk About Those Women`` (Lethbridge Historical Scoiety 2010) at her book launch 15 September 2010
Perhaps the ladies of the night thought we needed a bit of piano music. Or maybe the city`s founders just wanted bit of the bagpipes. But as ghouls played havoc with the microphones at our famously haunted Galt Museum last night, I glanced out the window at Sir Alexander`s ruins (the part of the hospital he commissioned and which was built while he was alive and a frequent summer resident of our city.)
For just one second, I thought I could glimpse our city`s co-founder,Canada`s First Finance Minister and creator of the Canadian Dollar, standing there in his top and tails wearing the medals Queen Victoria gave him. Was that a satisfied grin on his face? And was that his son, Elliot, standing just behind him?
There`s no doubt about it. Lethbridge`s straight talking Father of Confederation and his son would have loved his Belinda Crowson`s speech. (and the sketch about Mayor Hardie.) And Sir Alexander`s father, novelist John Galt, would have literally danced highland fling over it.
Belinda did the city proud last night. She also did writers in Canada a great service by braving the smug, self-censoring Albertans who continually try to sanitize our history and manipulate our heritage to suit their own political and social agendas.
Most imporatantly, Belinda`s given readers a great book to curl up with this winter!
Contact the Galt Musuem Bookstore or the Lethbridge Historical Society to get your copy of We Don't Talk About Those Women: Lethbridge's Red Light District 1880s to 1940 by Belinda Crowson, (Lethbridge Historical Society 2010)
Belnda Crowson, Author of `We Don`t Talk About Those Women`` (Lethbridge Historical Scoiety 2010) at her book launch 15 September 2010
Perhaps the ladies of the night thought we needed a bit of piano music. Or maybe the city`s founders just wanted bit of the bagpipes. But as ghouls played havoc with the microphones at our famously haunted Galt Museum last night, I glanced out the window at Sir Alexander`s ruins (the part of the hospital he commissioned and which was built while he was alive and a frequent summer resident of our city.)
For just one second, I thought I could glimpse our city`s co-founder,Canada`s First Finance Minister and creator of the Canadian Dollar, standing there in his top and tails wearing the medals Queen Victoria gave him. Was that a satisfied grin on his face? And was that his son, Elliot, standing just behind him?
There`s no doubt about it. Lethbridge`s straight talking Father of Confederation and his son would have loved his Belinda Crowson`s speech. (and the sketch about Mayor Hardie.) And Sir Alexander`s father, novelist John Galt, would have literally danced highland fling over it.
Belinda did the city proud last night. She also did writers in Canada a great service by braving the smug, self-censoring Albertans who continually try to sanitize our history and manipulate our heritage to suit their own political and social agendas.
Most imporatantly, Belinda`s given readers a great book to curl up with this winter!
Contact the Galt Musuem Bookstore or the Lethbridge Historical Society to get your copy of We Don't Talk About Those Women: Lethbridge's Red Light District 1880s to 1940 by Belinda Crowson, (Lethbridge Historical Society 2010)
Saturday, 11 September 2010
Who is John Galt? Well, Let me Tell You.
Somebody in Lethbridge tried to bring some fictional character named John Galt into the city debate on taxes. Very, very sad. Most Lethbridgians have no idea of the grand vision the city was founded on. It was a vision that started with the Scottish Novelist, John Galt. Not without his own foibles, he often got himself in trouble for speaking his mind when it would have been better to chill. (I find him somewhat of an inspiration.) He also didn't really like taking orders, which caused big problems with the directors of the Canada Company. But Canada owes a great debt to him.
John Galt was a social progressive who wound up in debtor’s prison for trying to build a Royal City named Guelph.He got in trouble trying to help poor Scots own their own land at prices that the Canada Company directors were not amused by.
He was a Sandemanian convert (thanks to his father-in-law, publisher and lay preacher, Alexander Torrance) who believed in sharing and in building large scale infrastructure and cultural projects. (His sons went back to Presbyterianism and Anglicanism.)
His son, Sir Alexander Galt, largely shared his father’s belief in the grand vision of Canada, but he took it further to envision a reformed British Empire with a shared monarch among equal dominions. (Ie: the modern Commonwealth but with a lot more clout.)It was a vision he arrived at after considering every option for Canada from outright republicanism, to annexation, to continued colonial status. And, I believe, it's a decision that helped create Canada's global perspective.
Member of the Provincial Parliament for Sherbrooke Quebec, Alexander Galt introduced the motion to federate British North America in the Canadian Colonial Legislature at Kingston. It was another progressive novelist and friend of Charles Dickens, Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton, who was among the first British Officials to catch on to this poetic vision. Too bad we don’t teach this stuff in School.
The City of Lethbridge (founded on that original vision first espoused in Galts original motion to the provincial assembly) survived thanks to huge financial contributions and concessions from the Federal Government and from philanthopy from benefectors such as the Baroness Coutts and Lady Galt herself.
If you want to know the real vision of Canada, read Canadian Reflections, one of the best poems ever written about the Canadian Dream. Sir Alexander Galt's father, John Galt, wrote it when he was dying pennniless in Scotland. He and his wife, Elizabeth, believed so strongly in that dream that he sent their three sons back to Canada to start over. (Elizabeth eventually joined them here.)
Alexander Galt and his brothers, John and Thomas, arrived in the country as youths: penniless, shamed, and having watched their father cheated out of his businesses. Both Thomas and John were later knighted for their contributions to Canada.
For many years, Sir Alexander Galt was a good friend of Charles Dickens, whose own social conscience was shaped by the fact that his father had also been sent to debtor’s prison. The Galts' social conscience led them to donate a huge amount of money (most for health care), facilities (a hospital for example) and land (including Galt Gardens) to the City of Lethbridge in order to that those dreams could be fulfilled. Yes, Lethbridge is the only city in Canada founded by a Father of Confederation — not that that is poltically correct to say these days.
Incidentally, Sir Alexander Galt, died fearing that his District of Alberta, NWT adventure had landed his wife and unmarried daughters in the same predicament his own father had left his mother. Elliott Galt spent his life fixing the problem.
Is it odd that when John Galt's name gets mentioned in the Muncipal Election, nobody seems to understand how really important he was to our city, our province, our country, and the Commonwealth of Nations? No, it's not odd. It downright depressing. Pathetic really. And as ungrateful as the City Council who changed the street names Sir Alexander Galt gave Lethbridge to honour its early benefactors, just a few weeks after his sons, Elliott and John, turned over a hospital and a health care endowment that continues to benefit citizens of this region -- a region they loved.
Jane Harris Zsovan, Author, Stars Appearing: The Galts’ Vision of Canada (2006), Eugenics and the Firewall: Canada’s Nasty Little Secret.(J. Gordon Shillingford Publishing, Fall 2010.)
John Galt was a social progressive who wound up in debtor’s prison for trying to build a Royal City named Guelph.He got in trouble trying to help poor Scots own their own land at prices that the Canada Company directors were not amused by.
He was a Sandemanian convert (thanks to his father-in-law, publisher and lay preacher, Alexander Torrance) who believed in sharing and in building large scale infrastructure and cultural projects. (His sons went back to Presbyterianism and Anglicanism.)
His son, Sir Alexander Galt, largely shared his father’s belief in the grand vision of Canada, but he took it further to envision a reformed British Empire with a shared monarch among equal dominions. (Ie: the modern Commonwealth but with a lot more clout.)It was a vision he arrived at after considering every option for Canada from outright republicanism, to annexation, to continued colonial status. And, I believe, it's a decision that helped create Canada's global perspective.
Member of the Provincial Parliament for Sherbrooke Quebec, Alexander Galt introduced the motion to federate British North America in the Canadian Colonial Legislature at Kingston. It was another progressive novelist and friend of Charles Dickens, Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton, who was among the first British Officials to catch on to this poetic vision. Too bad we don’t teach this stuff in School.
The City of Lethbridge (founded on that original vision first espoused in Galts original motion to the provincial assembly) survived thanks to huge financial contributions and concessions from the Federal Government and from philanthopy from benefectors such as the Baroness Coutts and Lady Galt herself.
If you want to know the real vision of Canada, read Canadian Reflections, one of the best poems ever written about the Canadian Dream. Sir Alexander Galt's father, John Galt, wrote it when he was dying pennniless in Scotland. He and his wife, Elizabeth, believed so strongly in that dream that he sent their three sons back to Canada to start over. (Elizabeth eventually joined them here.)
Alexander Galt and his brothers, John and Thomas, arrived in the country as youths: penniless, shamed, and having watched their father cheated out of his businesses. Both Thomas and John were later knighted for their contributions to Canada.
For many years, Sir Alexander Galt was a good friend of Charles Dickens, whose own social conscience was shaped by the fact that his father had also been sent to debtor’s prison. The Galts' social conscience led them to donate a huge amount of money (most for health care), facilities (a hospital for example) and land (including Galt Gardens) to the City of Lethbridge in order to that those dreams could be fulfilled. Yes, Lethbridge is the only city in Canada founded by a Father of Confederation — not that that is poltically correct to say these days.
Incidentally, Sir Alexander Galt, died fearing that his District of Alberta, NWT adventure had landed his wife and unmarried daughters in the same predicament his own father had left his mother. Elliott Galt spent his life fixing the problem.
Is it odd that when John Galt's name gets mentioned in the Muncipal Election, nobody seems to understand how really important he was to our city, our province, our country, and the Commonwealth of Nations? No, it's not odd. It downright depressing. Pathetic really. And as ungrateful as the City Council who changed the street names Sir Alexander Galt gave Lethbridge to honour its early benefactors, just a few weeks after his sons, Elliott and John, turned over a hospital and a health care endowment that continues to benefit citizens of this region -- a region they loved.
Jane Harris Zsovan, Author, Stars Appearing: The Galts’ Vision of Canada (2006), Eugenics and the Firewall: Canada’s Nasty Little Secret.(J. Gordon Shillingford Publishing, Fall 2010.)
Wednesday, 16 June 2010
Can West Global:Headlines should match the article.
Dear Canwest Global:
I tried to let you know that your headline was in error, but your email link doesn't work. Not surprising, given this morning's gaff.
The headline you splashed across the internet this morning: Canadians don't want Queen, even if she's done great job is just plain wrong according to the text of the article underneath it:
For example, according to this, the Queen's approval rating is 73% and CDNs don't want to become a republic anytime soon. (That's remarkable considering that we've had mostly pro-republican governments between 1964 and 2006 and most business interests are pro-US/Canada integration and have been using the media to foist that agenda on CDNs for decades.)
Further, if 80% of Quebeckers want a republic after the reign;and 2/3 (you conveniently don't give the actual percentage) of CDNs indicate they would favour becoming a republic after the Queen dies (in 20 or even 30 years if she lives the lifespan of women in her family); that would indicate than in many provinces most CDNs favour remaining a monarchy when Charles or William becomes King.
And that's without us even having a discussion about what the Commonwealth and our ties with the Crown mean to us culturally and economically! Thanks to the media and pro-U.S. business lobbies, most Canadians do not realize that many of the fastest growing markets are in the Commonwealth.
They don't know that they can vote if they live in Britain. They don't know that the British government does not really consider the Queen's subjects foreigners (It's still called the foreign and Commonwealth office in the U.K.)
Consider the opportunities that still remain for Canada if she capitalizes on these ties. Most Canadians answering your survey were never given that information, I bet. Even Quebecois would likely change their mind if they were given those facts. (And Anglo-Canadians would become fans of the Francophonie if they saw the opportunities there too.)
Why don't you ever do a story on trade opportunities within the Commonwealth -- a market of 2 Billion people? Surely loosening any such ties is bad from a business point of view, especially as Canada and Commonwealth is again comng to the fore in with both British and Canadian governments. (O.K. I guess I have queries to write.)
Further, most people answering your survey may not realize that there's a bigger national unity risk to republicanism than to retaining the monarchy. (Quebec isn't going anywhere if they see a trade opportunity of 2 billion customers. And it's time to tell Quebeckers about those opportunities even if their politicians and elite don't want ordinary Quebecois to hear this stuff.)
Under the Canada Act, this country cannot become a republic unless every MLA, MNA, MPP,MP and Senator agrees. Considering that many Canadians (the majority in most parts of Ontario, the Prairies -- including Alberta--and the Maritimes) do not want to change our form of government--I would expect most --7-9 --CDN provincial legislatures would refuse to endorse a republican constitution. An elected head of state would would further concentrate power in Central Canada.
And that could well mean bye, bye Alberta and bye bye Saskatchewan and bye bye Nunavut, the NWT and the Yukon. And maybe the Maritimes, BC, and Ontario. What does that leave? Quebec -- alone without a market of 2 billion people? Nah. I don't think so.
In short, if you bothered to investigate these issus and inform CDNs, the answers on that survey would change. But then you couldn't run the same old worn out story you run every time a member of the Royal family prepares to come to Canada. It's more than annoying, it's a disservice to the country.
Her Majesty is coming to celebrate Canada Day with Canadians -- something she was not allowed to do very often under previous administrations. And so, let's welcome her and invetigate the opportunities our system of government can yet give us instead of focusing on issues that are destined tear up our beloved country and its' constitution and international ties that still give us untold opportunites far beyond this continent..
I tried to let you know that your headline was in error, but your email link doesn't work. Not surprising, given this morning's gaff.
The headline you splashed across the internet this morning: Canadians don't want Queen, even if she's done great job is just plain wrong according to the text of the article underneath it:
For example, according to this, the Queen's approval rating is 73% and CDNs don't want to become a republic anytime soon. (That's remarkable considering that we've had mostly pro-republican governments between 1964 and 2006 and most business interests are pro-US/Canada integration and have been using the media to foist that agenda on CDNs for decades.)
Further, if 80% of Quebeckers want a republic after the reign;and 2/3 (you conveniently don't give the actual percentage) of CDNs indicate they would favour becoming a republic after the Queen dies (in 20 or even 30 years if she lives the lifespan of women in her family); that would indicate than in many provinces most CDNs favour remaining a monarchy when Charles or William becomes King.
And that's without us even having a discussion about what the Commonwealth and our ties with the Crown mean to us culturally and economically! Thanks to the media and pro-U.S. business lobbies, most Canadians do not realize that many of the fastest growing markets are in the Commonwealth.
They don't know that they can vote if they live in Britain. They don't know that the British government does not really consider the Queen's subjects foreigners (It's still called the foreign and Commonwealth office in the U.K.)
Consider the opportunities that still remain for Canada if she capitalizes on these ties. Most Canadians answering your survey were never given that information, I bet. Even Quebecois would likely change their mind if they were given those facts. (And Anglo-Canadians would become fans of the Francophonie if they saw the opportunities there too.)
Why don't you ever do a story on trade opportunities within the Commonwealth -- a market of 2 Billion people? Surely loosening any such ties is bad from a business point of view, especially as Canada and Commonwealth is again comng to the fore in with both British and Canadian governments. (O.K. I guess I have queries to write.)
Further, most people answering your survey may not realize that there's a bigger national unity risk to republicanism than to retaining the monarchy. (Quebec isn't going anywhere if they see a trade opportunity of 2 billion customers. And it's time to tell Quebeckers about those opportunities even if their politicians and elite don't want ordinary Quebecois to hear this stuff.)
Under the Canada Act, this country cannot become a republic unless every MLA, MNA, MPP,MP and Senator agrees. Considering that many Canadians (the majority in most parts of Ontario, the Prairies -- including Alberta--and the Maritimes) do not want to change our form of government--I would expect most --7-9 --CDN provincial legislatures would refuse to endorse a republican constitution. An elected head of state would would further concentrate power in Central Canada.
And that could well mean bye, bye Alberta and bye bye Saskatchewan and bye bye Nunavut, the NWT and the Yukon. And maybe the Maritimes, BC, and Ontario. What does that leave? Quebec -- alone without a market of 2 billion people? Nah. I don't think so.
In short, if you bothered to investigate these issus and inform CDNs, the answers on that survey would change. But then you couldn't run the same old worn out story you run every time a member of the Royal family prepares to come to Canada. It's more than annoying, it's a disservice to the country.
Her Majesty is coming to celebrate Canada Day with Canadians -- something she was not allowed to do very often under previous administrations. And so, let's welcome her and invetigate the opportunities our system of government can yet give us instead of focusing on issues that are destined tear up our beloved country and its' constitution and international ties that still give us untold opportunites far beyond this continent..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)