|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003 Location: I walk along the avenue
|
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Does America provide a sort of useful "other" that can help solidify a very obvious split Canadian identity?
|
Yes, there is something to that. However, it should be noted that Quebeckers, in general, are even more opposed to American foreign policy than English Canadians are, even though they're the ones who would have the least trouble asserting an independent identity.
As for Alberta(my home province): I think it's influence on how other Canadians think is somewhat limited. Albertans, as a whole, consistently vote for the most pro-American party, but that alone doesn't accout for that party's current ascendancy. The rest of Canada has to vote for them as well, plus currently the party is supported in Parliament by the Bloc Quebecois. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 5:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think a lot of the anti-American sentiment that was mentioned earlier in this thread stems from a strong disapproval of American foreign policy.
Canadians hate war (at least the ones I know) and have a strong distrust of the "let's go kick some butt" attitude that they see in American movies and popular culture.
Perhaps many Canadians are naive to believe that there can always be a peaceful solution.... perhaps they just think it's foolish to blindly follow the Americans everywhere.... or maybe Canucks are just a bunch of rednecked hicks who don't know any better than to whine about America....
but last time I checked, at least Canada has an apparatus for removing unpopular governments and are not afraid to use it from time to time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sundubuman
Joined: 04 Feb 2003 Location: seoul
|
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 6:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Your understanding of Canadian anti-Americanism lacks a certain....psychological angle on the issue.
To think that Canadians would somehow change their complex feelings towards the States if only we changed our foreign policy is simplistic at best. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 7:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe you're right, but it sure would be a start in the right direction.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sundubuman
Joined: 04 Feb 2003 Location: seoul
|
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 8:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
I disagree. Having Canadians change their feelings about their ONLY NEIGHBOR based on that neighbor's elected government........
is not wise, regardless of which government Americans choose.
The underlying issues need to be dealt with. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
crusher_of_heads
Joined: 23 Feb 2007 Location: kimbop and kimchi for kimberly!!!!
|
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bonanzabucks wrote: |
| crusher_of_heads wrote: |
We are talking about an allegedly educated voting population that reelected John Cretin to majority governments twice.
That stands out for all the wrong reasons. |
3 times. |
Wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bonanzabucks
Joined: 09 Jun 2007 Location: NYC
|
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 11:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crusher_of_heads wrote: |
| bonanzabucks wrote: |
| crusher_of_heads wrote: |
We are talking about an allegedly educated voting population that reelected John Cretin to majority governments twice.
That stands out for all the wrong reasons. |
3 times. |
Wrong. |
I misread initially. He was elected three times, but reelected twice. Either way, I couldn't stand the guy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sundubuman wrote: |
I disagree. Having Canadians change their feelings about their ONLY NEIGHBOR based on that neighbor's elected government........
is not wise, regardless of which government Americans choose.
The underlying issues need to be dealt with. |
You're right, there is a lot more to it than I previously thought. There is a certain amount of resentment towards America on the part of Canadians and the reasons for that are not so easily pinpointed.
I've had more time to think about it and I have to say that Canadians want to run their own show.....even if that means having the government do a lot of things. They don't like to have to depend on American corporate might to do what is better done at home. We tend to look at the American way of doing things with suspicion and perhaps some of that sentiment is not entirely unjustified. It's not so good to have huge corporations run everything.....some things are better done by government.
Rightly or wrongly....that's my take on it anyway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sooke

Joined: 12 Jan 2004 Location: korea
|
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 6:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think some of these guys want us to say "Canada hates the US for no other reason than petty jealousy" or something along those lines. As is often the case, it is not a black and white issue.
The current 'Anti-Americanism' in Canada is a tad overstated, especially on this board. Sure there are some people who dislike the American way of doing things, but there are plenty of Americans who have the same opinion. I tend to think that American conservatives cannot accept the fact that a country so similar culturally, economically, etc does not just become a part of the states (Was it Reagan who said that he didn't want Canada in the Union because it would add 20 million Democrats to the voter lists?Somebody said it.)
I think that Canada's baby-boomers were very influenced by America and American culture. They grew up with American TV and Movies and an American culture that some would call 'a Golden Age' (cars, American dream suburbs, malls, movies etc.) A contemporary theme in Canadian media at the time, at least from what I can remember as a kid, was that Canada wasn't as rich or as fancy as the US. There were always a lot of jokes, especially on the CBC, about how Canada couldn't do as much as the US (smaller budgets, smaller talent pools, etc.)
When I was growing up, the government started promoting Canadian nationalism, with their NFB vignettes and history moments, Canadianized textbooks (with metric) which probably went a long way in promoting the idea of a country that was not the same as the US. Then, the marketers hopped on the badwagon, and that gave us such shining examples of Canadian culture as the Molson beer commercial and other stupid cack. I would hardly call that 'anti-American'. Maybe the baby-boomers' kids rebelled against their parents insecurities by overcompensating their nationalism.
Bottom line, disagreements do not make somebody Anti "_________". You may have disagreed with your father on certain issues growing up, but were you labeled Anti-parent? It's not like there are Canadian nationalist terrorist groups plotting the overthrow the US government. That's what I would consider anti-American.
What are some of the disagreements between the two countries that lead some on this board to call Canadians 'Anti-American'?
-Free Trade: While I didn't support it at the beginning, it seems to have worked itself out, and now I realize the value of the agreement, and support it. However, with things like softwood lumber, there are tariffs placed on it in violation of the agreement. In a similar situation, wouldn't Americans get angry. (Think of how much pissing and moaning we hear about American beef in Korea-it is an unfair issue against the states, and people complain. Natural, no?)
-Iraq: Many Canadians didn't support the Iraq invasion (as well as many Americans) because they did not see the link between Iraq and terrorism. Well, its there now, and there is some cleaning up to do. Whether Canadian solders are there or not, the government hasn't officially supported the invasion. Troops on exchange would be expected to remain in the unit and be a member of that unit until their orders were changed. This is not only SOP (Americans serving with Canadians would do the same thing) but it also gives these soldiers valuable experience which could then be passed on to troops training for Afghanistan and other future adventures.
-Vietnam?: Some Americans still get pretty pissy about Canada not going to Vietnam (officially). I even got into a fistfight with a young American who was getting in my face about it (I could handle the name calling, but when a beer was thrown in my face and was taunted with 'Canadians never fight back because they're pussies' it was on.) This was in the Phillipines, and we were both loaded. Neither of us was born before Vietnam even ended, so it is pretty ridiculous. Personally, I don't have a problem with the Vietnam war, it's history. And really, all the war did was kill lots of people and delay Vietnam's eventual capitalist development.
-Other issues: I don't think people like to hear things like :"You're not even a real country" or "You should thank us for not taking you over", or "We saved your ass in the war". Regardless of the country a person comes from, regardless of whether it is true, these things are not received well. I'm sure your grandfathers were fighting on Omaha beach thinking "well, when this war is over and Hitler is licked, I hope my snotty grandchildren will throw my sacrifice in everyone's face. That's what it's all about."
When one looks at Canadian history, the entire country has been founded as a reaction to the US. The war of 1812 created a mindset different than the American one (Some of you will not concede this mindset as being a 'canadian' one because 'duh, Canada didn't exist in 1812, duh', so let's just call it a 'not-American' mindset.) Confederation in 1867 was in response to two American events: The US Civil War (which ended with hundreds of thousands of armed and trained Union troops-hmmm where can they go next?) and the 'Annexation of Canada bill (1866) tabled, but not voted on, of course. One cannot forget the Fenian raids, which showed how unprepared for invasion Canada really was. D'oh, BNA better get it's act together. (Actually, the Fathers of Confederation looked at the American Constitution very closely to try and create a document that would not lead to a civil war, which resulted in our provinces having less rights than US states, in the hopes that a similar tragedy would not occur in Canada). I could go on, but you get the point.
Logically, Canada should be part of the US, but it is not. Somehow, somewhere, the people chose to not be American. Is that anti-Americanism? If so, then oh well.
Maybe its just better to say "Canadians hate America for no reason then petty jealousy", and you can go back to feeling superior and mighty. Thank you for not kicking our ass. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Alias

Joined: 24 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="bonanzabucks"]
| Quote: |
| If we use your logic Canada also participated in the Vietnam war. Quite possibly the Suez Canal crisis as well. History books will have to be re-written! |
| Quote: |
I admit, I don't know much about the Vietnam War. My understanding is that a lot of Canadians volunteered to go there and fight the Communists. To my knowledge, there were no troop exchanges, but if there were, correct me. |
Troop exchanges have been going on for decades now. So if there were any Canadian troops in Vietnam then history will have to be rewritten on both side, that is according to the logical that is being used.
| Quote: |
| No one considered Canada to be a participant in the US/Anglo invasion of Iraq at the time. Certainly not the neo-cons when they announced the names of the "Coaltion of the Willing". While the right wing press here at home bemoaned the fact that we were not part of it. My guess is that the reason some on the right are trying to tenuously link Canada to the war is because it is so unpopular now. Unlike before. |
| Quote: |
| That's true, but don't forget that the government went out of their way to convince everyone how against the war they were and that they were not participating in any way, shape or form. |
Out of their way? They simply announced it. The Conservatives kept the issue alive by making a big stink out of it.
| Quote: |
But that ended up being a lie because Canada had officially sanctioned troops on the battlefield fighting in the war, whether they were on an officially sanctioned troop exchange or not.
|
It was a troop exchange. So what.
| Quote: |
| Why should they? The soldiers have the option not to fight if they don't want to. |
| Quote: |
No they don't. Soldiers have to do what they're told. If they don't, they get punished. |
The soldiers in the troop exchanges do not have to fight in foreign wars.
| Quote: |
I find this quote very telling:
| Quote: |
U.S. Ambassador Paul Cellucci has said Canada has been a great partner in the war on terrorism and indirectly is giving more support to the Iraq campaign than most supporters of the U.S.-led coalition.
However, he also said Americans are disappointed Canada is not officially backing the war effort. |
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20030329/liberals_troops_030328
For a war Canada's officially against, they seemed to have done a lot more than those who supported it. |
"Indirectly". This must include all those Canadian citizens who joined the US military. Nothing we can do to stop them. It is their choice.
| Quote: |
Look, I am a Canadian citizen like you. I never really cared for the war to begin with, but I just hate hypocrisy. Chretien was fully guilty of it here and if he had any respect for his troops, he would have publicly backed him or taken them out of harms way. And he did neither. I have friends in the Canadian Armed Forces and they absolutely despise him for that and the fact that he gutted the military. |
What difference would it had made if he publicly backed him? And if he did pull out any Canadian troops on exchange with the US military there would have been a huge uproar from the Conservatives. No doubt Mr.Celluci would have been on TV bemoaning Canada like he usually did.
Cut back to the military have been ongoing for decades. Even during Mulroney's tenure. I think most were justified. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Alias wrote: |
| ...then history will have to be rewritten on both side[s]. |
Just how much attention to you think historians outside of Canada actually give Canada in world affairs anyway? Or any other media, for that matter?
Take the James Bond books and films. Out of all of these books and films, decades of storytelling, one Canadian Air Force officer appears for about ten seconds in M's office in Thunderball. M assigns Bond to Station Canada to search out the missing nukes. And the Canadian Air Force guy smiles but does not even get a line. Then Bond explains he would rather go to Nassau and that is that. Even the little Bahamian Islands get much more time than Canada.
Back to the matter at hand, how many non-Canadian textbooks or articles or anything for that matter that treat the Vietnam War do you believe concern themselves with what Canada had to say or did or did not do?
At best, then, Canada is a footnote. It is the place that harbored American deserters.
Last edited by Gopher on Sun Aug 05, 2007 9:43 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Alias

Joined: 24 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 9:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Alias wrote: |
| ...then history will have to be rewritten on both side[s]. |
Just how much attention to you think historians outside of Canada actually give Canada in world affairs anyway? Or any other media, for that matter?
|
Next to none. Which I think is kind of a good thing.
As for my quote , I meant that American historians will now have to include Canada as one of the participating countries in both the Vietnam and Iraq Wars. Actually you might as well include Mexico in that category as well.
| Quote: |
At best, then, Canada is a footnote. It is the place that harbored American deserters.
|
I am very proud that we did. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Paddycakes
Joined: 05 May 2003 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I even got into a fistfight with a young American who was getting in my face about it (I could handle the name calling, but when a beer was thrown in my face and was taunted with 'Canadians never fight back because they're pussies' it was on.) |
I take neither of you are patrons of Firing Line, tsk, tsk... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Adventurer

Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
Posted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 1:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Alias wrote: |
| ...then history will have to be rewritten on both side[s]. |
Just how much attention to you think historians outside of Canada actually give Canada in world affairs anyway? Or any other media, for that matter?
Take the James Bond books and films. Out of all of these books and films, decades of storytelling, one Canadian Air Force officer appears for about ten seconds in M's office in Thunderball. M assigns Bond to Station Canada to search out the missing nukes. And the Canadian Air Force guy smiles but does not even get a line. Then Bond explains he would rather go to Nassau and that is that. Even the little Bahamian Islands get much more time than Canada.
Back to the matter at hand, how many non-Canadian textbooks or articles or anything for that matter that treat the Vietnam War do you believe concern themselves with what Canada had to say or did or did not do?
At best, then, Canada is a footnote. It is the place that harbored American deserters. |
Do you think Canadians actually care if everyone in the world is talking about them? Does it really matter? Is it really need to massage the ego?
What is so great about the US or France having fought in Vietnam?
Anyway, Canada contributed so many soldiers in World Wars I and II
and that is more than a footnote. I am sure you heard of Vimy Ridge.
Canadians contributed heavily in World I and World War II. Canadian soldiers were present in Korea, and Canadians helped in the Iran hostage crisis. Canada is not a country that has had empires, conquered countries, and it has not led major wars. That is a good way to put yourself in the news. However, Canada has a decent image deservedly or not. You are talking more about outer strength which Canadians don't focus on. That is a cultural difference between Americans and Canadians to some degree the idea of stressing my gun is bigger than yours... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003
|
Posted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 1:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Alias wrote: |
| Gopher wrote: |
| Alias wrote: |
| ...then history will have to be rewritten on both side[s]. |
Just how much attention to you think historians outside of Canada actually give Canada in world affairs anyway? Or any other media, for that matter?
|
Next to none. Which I think is kind of a good thing.
As for my quote , I meant that American historians will now have to include Canada as one of the participating countries in both the Vietnam and Iraq Wars. Actually you might as well include Mexico in that category as well.
| Quote: |
At best, then, Canada is a footnote. It is the place that harbored American deserters.
|
I am very proud that we did. |
Yep, and if the US didn't fight the Korean war which was a lot like the Vietnam war then you wouldn't have a job. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|