20 July, 2011

Canadians in the Diaspora

Dear CIC Folk, As CIC is apparently canvassing views of Canadians in the diaspora, perhaps the observations below may be of some interest.

I am a Canadian with ancestry on North American lands going back some 300 years; and with direct familial links with Howlands/ Stricklands/ Moodies (Susanna and John Wedderburn). I came to England in the 1960s for doctoral studies (politics/ West African Studies, Birmingham), and duly settled here. I attended UCC in Toronto 10 years—1946-56. Some 15 years ago (1996), prodded by bemused folk who had read ‘Old Boys,’ a book about UCC, I penned my thoughts in an effort to provide clarification. (See ‘Canada Prospects—View from Abroad’) As I received nary a whisper of response, I can only assume I either failed to provide useful clarification, or that these folk did not care for what I had to say.

A second item went in 2006 to the UCC Old Boys Association. This item was part of correspondence with the OBA, and addresses principally the ‘Independence’ issue. (See, ‘Canadian Independence and the Colonal Mentality’) . The OBA did not respond/ chose not to take the issues forward for discussion in OBA or other fora.

Should these excerpted views expressed below be of any use in CIC ponderings on relevant ‘diaspora views’, or other matters, I would be happy to engage/ elaborate on them. — mv

“——”

Dr. M. Vickers,
Burr Side,
Turners Hill Road,
East Grinstead,
West Sussex
RH19 4LX
UNITED KINGDOM

Tel/ Fax: 01342 313183
Intern’l: +44+1342+313183
E-mail: <mvickers@mvickers.plus.com

———————————————————————————

Canada Prospects—View from Abroad
(Excerpt—1996)

…As for Canada and UCC? My views remain simple. I feel it is important for Sovereign States to look after themselves and not be dependent—even if this does mean there may be only one instead of two cars in every garage. I find the Americanisation of Canada awesome, outrageous, corrupting and immensely threatening. Canada may now draw largely from a similar polyglot ethnic pool as the USA, but its traditions, cultures, attitudes and history are of course very different. Canadians have the resources—natural, human and financial—to make it on their own. It is important they fight hard for this.

But there are obstacles. Most big business, commercial and financial interests vigorously resist. And who run many of these institutions? Yes, UCC Old Boys. It broke my heart to learn that poor Michael Wilson—better known to us as "Pear-shape" in the Prep—"lost" about $13 million by going into politics. As Tory Finance Minister during the 1980s, businessman Michael was an architect and staunch supporter of the Canadian economic policy of (North American) "Continentalism".

The other issue which has eaten away at me from the time I was a child at Caledon, is the savage and brutal way we and our ancestors have treated the Canadian land—let alone its native peoples. Only now are the first green shoots of respect for this vast, bounteous, magnificent environment starting to break through. These are the sparse hopes upon which a sustainable future must develop. We all know it. Here in England, the battle has raged for centuries. Rules and restraints have been evolved through pain, conflict and constant compromise. How else, in so small a land, could so great an amount of green space, even in the most populous Regions like here in Sussex and the South-East, survive?

But in Canada? Rules and restraints have only just started in many places. The serious pain and conflict are yet to come. The Great American Business Ethic remains strong: "Take as much as you can, as quickly as you can, and bugger the consequences"!

Canadians have to ease off. But this must first start in the mind. Can UCC educate boys to think in this way? Can it go beyond a little tree planting at Norval, or canoe-trips to Algonquin Park? And what if it does? Would Old Boys who run the big institutions which depend on continued rape and export of the Nation's resources, support such an initiative for long? Would there not be what might swiftly be perceived as a dangerous, potentially terminal inconsistency? So long as benefit and reward are interpreted almost solely in terms of commercial and financial gain, must not such emphasis in teaching be deplored and vigorously resisted?

Canada is a vast land—with the break-up of the Soviet Union, it is the largest country in the world. A marginal fraction, lying mostly within 150 miles of its 2500 mile border with the USA, is inhabited. The rest must gradually be re-populated, replacing at last those First Nation peoples our ancestors displaced through murder, disease, starvation and emigration.

We see the glossy ads for Canada here in Britain. The CN Tower, Skydome, fancy shops and hotels. These, of course, are not Canada. They are the epiphenomena, the surreal, material illusions of homogenised American modernity. The real Canada is the Canada captured by the Group of Seven, by Clarence Gagnon, by Hugh MacLennan, by Inuit and Indian artists and sculptors, and others. In these lie the roots of any primary Canadian identity which eventually may emerge.

Clearly, however, there is a direct challenge here. Can such a Nationalist initiative be given more than token support by UCC? Would not a full commitment threaten gravely the material base upon which the College and the fortunes of its dominant Old Boys rest? More importantly, would it not undermine the attitudes of students who must not be alienated from the ethics of plunder, pillage and exploitation if these institutions are to be maintained and prosper?

Canadians have no integral bond with the land. Most do not understand or respect it. In fact its immense scale and prodigious variety traditionally inspire largely fear and hostility. Perhaps it is these feelings which sub-consciously validate historic and continuing assaults of comprehensive abuse and desecration. Second-Nation Canadians are still in the category of short-term guests. Yet they assert themselves as masters. Therein lies the seed of the National angst about identity and the key to eventual stable and confident growth.

As I write these words, I am made aware of the passions, the love and hopes I still harbour for Canada. Also I am made aware of the formidable challenge confronting all persons who choose to take up cudgels in support of what clearly is vital for the health and integrity, perhaps the very survival of Canada and the likes of UCC. The time is ripe for revival—albeit updated and suitably modified—of Canada First. Edward Blake, an Old Boy, and Goldwin Smith in the 1870's, said little that does not ring even more true today.

—————————————————

Canadian Independence, and the Colonial Mentality

(Excerpt—2006)

… I note the College now has an American Head. Not quite in the UCC tradition, I would have thought; but at least showing a proper regard for the replacement Imperial Power.

I remember General Alexander of Tunis making an appearance for Prize Day in 1947(?). A most splendid occasion. I do very much hope the current shift of Imperial association does not now mean that the College will be treated to the Prize Day presence of such US Military luminaries as General Tommy Franks? Perhaps Donald Rumsfeld? Deary me. Poor old Colon Powell might just be acceptable (even after being caught out peddling that trumped up 'Intelligence' which enabled Bush, with the 'Coalition' backing of our splendid Tony Blair, to unleash his 'War of Liberation' in Iraq). (See attached ‘Iraq Scenario’; sadly, it remained largely on the editor’s spike; even the UK ‘Liberal’ press had been well and truly muzzled at this pre-war juncture).

I am alarmed and depressed to note that Canada is now on board the Bush Band-wagon; with a resurrected Michael Wilson as Chief Canadian cheerleader. A nice man (at least he was as a UCC boy), deploying his restored trade/economic policies which must surely push Canada the final lap towards terminal sale/devastation of its 'family silver'/natural resources? Disaster, of course.

Sadly, as part of the US/NATO package, it seems Canada is currently having also to learn the harsh lessons of 'liberation' in the old Northern Frontier District (Afghanistan). Tis again a very high price for Oil. Yanks and 'Coalition' Forces are well on their way to learning the same painful lesson as the 19th century Brits, and more recently the Russians. Afghani Warlords have their own agendas. They do not appreciate 'Western/US' interference in their business; tramping about, shooting people (many being civilians/women and children) in their backyards. The traditional autocratic polities they operate have little use for such exotic concepts as 'freedom and democracy'. The Yanks it would seem, gradually, are starting to realise that they are facing rather more than a 19th century 'Native American Frontier War'. Any 'Manifest Destiny' lies in the power of the Warlords, not the 'expansionist' Yanks.

I am very sorry to see Canada being drawn into these ill-conceived, and indeed ill-executed wars. It is, however, the price of being a Colonial appendage (as the Brits are learning in Iraq), answering to the 'requests'/demands of the Imperial Authority. One only hopes Canada will be able to muster the courage to resist Yank 'invitations' to join the 'Coalition Forces' in Iraq. Perhaps they're already there?

Please pardon this little venting.

It is most distressing to see the direction Canada is currently going re its relations with the US; and what this means for the remaining resources, and 'independence' of Canada. Perhaps the 'Colonial mentality', as a consequence of experience over the past few hundred years, is ingrained and permanent? Perhaps Canadians are incapable of direct assertion; of taking and holding an Independent line in the face of a dominant and confident power?

As for UCC: sadly, it seems to be now nicely lined up to serve as an important institutional ally, currently of Mr. Bush (Republicans/Conservatives); and in the broader reach, of the USA.

Going by the 'Old Times' I've seen, the College seems to be doing much 'rushing about', much buffing of the images of its heritage and history; much shouting about its 'unique contribution'.

But what is this 'contribution'?

Has the College stood as the beacon of a 'proud and independent' tradition; one which through its prominent and influential Old Boys, has fought for and consolidated a firm base for a glorious and robust 'Canadian Identity'; an autonomous and muscular Canadian polity, economy and 'inclusive' society? Has it?

I rather think it has not. (Indeed my own family and relations in the 1940s and 50s would have been outraged were anyone in our milieu to propose such an ‘impertinent, disloyal’, even ‘traitorous’ Independent and Nationalist line. My father was not pleased with the new Canadian flag. ‘Land of the Rising Maple Leaf’, said he. He submitted a design of his own. Needless to say the Union Jack was prominent, with, as I recall, ‘bit parts’ for the beaver, maple leaf, and fleur de lis).

Instead we have the likes of Michael Wilson, who in keeping with historic precedent (eg, one thinks of the Masseys; and the big opportunities they had to lead in the early 20th century in an autonomous direction which they declined/failed to seize), is quite happy to undermine any remaining forces for National Independence; and to facilitate/reinforce Canadian submission to another Imperial Authority.

Whatever would dear old Sir John Colborne think?

Maybe just a shrug and a wry smile? After all the principle is the same (ie, a Colonial elite trained to adhere to the customs, and obey the orders/requests of the Metropole). Tis just that the Metropole is now Washington, not London.

Indeed the 'old' UCC did a splendid job on me.

English history, literature, customs, institutions were what we all learned about; it was the ethos in which we grew; in my case, for 10 years—together with (unrecognised by me at the time) strong familial reinforcement throughout the whole of my early life. And though I worked in America for a time, there was never any question in my mind. Twas England and the English with whom I felt 'at home'. I've lived here—with a few absences—for 40 years.

The land of Canada and North America; the rivers, streams, rocks, forests, meadows and mountains; the immense range of flora and fauna, I love. I got on well; and still feel 'at home' with it all.

As for my own folk; indeed all us European occupiers of this vast, bounteous and magical land?

I can only say that from the very start I felt more settled in England, more 'at home', more a part of a community and a heritage with which I feel an easy identity. While I love the North American land; it is not mine (though there is the possibility of an Indian connection a long way back). It is not my First Nation. The root of spiritual estrangement remains. It is planted deep. Indeed it is this, I believe, which ‘casts a shadow over the souls’ of all our European ancestors; all us occupiers of these vast and beautiful lands of North America. We are strangers. And we have made no serious efforts to get to know these lands better. Our principal contribution has been to abuse, exploit and desecrate them. (See the brief DH Lawrence items attached; he wrote them while residing at Taos, near Santa Fe, in the 1920s. In a series of articles he wrote at this time, Lawrence, in my view, had useful and important things to say, which are every bit as relevant to the America—and Canada—of today; perhaps even more so).

—————————————————

Canadian Diaspora

For a number of years I was a Canadian expat living in Asia – I did not need a government agency to remind me of my duties and responsibilities to my country Canada. Whenever occasion arose I promoted Canadian intersts. What we realy need, sad to say, is a stronger Department of Citizenship and Immigration to better define citizenships’ rights and obligations because as of late incresing emphasis has been about entitlements ignoring duties and obligatsions of good citizens. Those who like to be up to date on entitlements would like such an agency to remind them of how to access those entitlements. A patriotic citizen is by definition self aware of where his alligence lies – no reminders or solicitations needed.

John Bruk

I have lived overseas for 7 years, and in most cases, Canadian official representatives were not the least interested in what I could bring my country in terms of local knowledge, and treated expats with the disdain of the elite.

In fact, it is my impression that any time I would contact my embassy (staffed with Locally-Engaged-Staff, LES, not by Canadians), I would feel like I was bothering them.

There is a reason why 10% of Canadians live or work abroad: they don’t feel they are getting a fair share of opportunities in their home countries, and may even abandon (gradually) a feeling of being Canadian.

So no. Until the officials who live on my tax dollars actually display a minimum of genuine courtesy abroad, I will not allow myself to be drawn into national endeavours.

DEAR CIC,

I JUST FINISHED READING THE BOOK , “DEATH BY CHINA”. THIS IS A BOOK THAT SHOULD BE READ BY EVERYONE OF THE CIC FAMILY. THE CHINESE CHEAT ON THE WTO AGREEMENT, THEY SPY CONSTANTLY ON THE WEST, UNDERMINE US AT EVERY TURN, KEEP THEIR CURRENCY ARTIFICIALLY LOW, AND RESTRICT WITH ILLIGAL TARRIFFS MOST IMPORTED GOODS. THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY ARE THE WORST ACTORS IN THE WORLD AND WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEM AS THE ENEMY AS MOST ASIANS ALREADY DO. THE U.S. AND THE CANADIAN POLICY MAKERS ARE ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL AND THE CHINESE ARE TAKING FULL ADVANTAGE OF OUR LETHARGY.

THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT IS NO FRIEND OF OURS AND CONTROL EVERYTHING IN THE TRADE, ESPIONAGE AND THE CHINA/WESTERN PBUSINESS PARTNERSHIP ARRANGEMENTS THAT ARE SET UP TO PILFER THE WEST’S TECHNOLOGY AND INTILLECTUAL PROPERTY. THIS IS A NEW KIND OF WAR BEING WAGED ON US. AND WE MUST GAURD AGAINST THEIR PREDATORY NATURE. I HOPE SOMEONE WITH THE CIC RESEARCH THIS MEACING ACTIVITY OF CHINA’S AND INSIST THAT OUR POLITICIANS DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!