Canadian Lack of Excitement Not New

[jbg]

Even at the moment of Canada's birth, the public excitement was minimal. It was time then, and remains time now, for you to realize what a great country you have. Got to get down to it.

The Dominion of Canada (link to article, maybe)

Inauguration of the Confederation - A General Holiday - Lord Monck Sworn In - Review of Troops

This day has given birth to the political infant, the Dominion of Canada.

At 12:5 (sic) o'clock last night its advent was hailed by a salute of 101 guns and a bonfire, also by the ringing of bells. The day dawned clearly and brightly on its nativity, and the capital was dressed with bunting to testify the public pleasure. The flags hung out were of course the British, with a very, very few French flags.

It was evident that the celebration of the birth of the new state was to fall upon the shoulders of the authorities, the people generally taking a passive interest in it.

There is a feeling of anxiety as to how the union will work, rather than confidence in it.

**********

If you cannot read link, PM or e-mail me [email protected] for a PDF of the article. It is fascinating.

[WestViking]

Many Canadians are still not sure that democracy is working.

[nicky10013]

Many Canadians are still not sure that democracy is working.

Frankly, they're idiots who need a civics lesson.

[tango]

I think there's a clue here:

It would appear that forms of political organization in Canada which have been thought of as growing out of the political experience of her population have actually represented an effort to hold in check the kind of political developments which that experience engendered. Responsible government developed in reaction rather than in response to the true democratic spirit of the Canadian people. [26]

The validity of this novel interpretation would depend directly on convincing proof that the rebellion had widespread support. Thus, Clark argues that the revolt was popular, but mismanaged:

... it was clear to perhaps all but the smugly righteous lieutenant governor that the province had only narrowly escaped a much more serious uprising. The battle north of Toronto was already under way before the vast majority of Upper Canadians had any hint that a rebellion was contemplated. With no immediate objects to attack local uprisings could not readily develop. Time was too short to muster in support of the larger rebel force. The result, in effect, was a running for cover on the part of many of those throughout the province who had most closely identified themselves with the reform cause." [27]

1837 was a major turning point in our history since it seems to have marked the end of ideological clash. The value systems of the Family Compact and the Mackenzie rebels could not be reconciled in the contemporary political context. One rather unnoticed outcome of the rebellion was that not only were the rebels defeated, the Compact did not survive.

Canadians, after this episode, gave up extreme opinions

, and in the 1840s R. B. Sullivan and W. H. Merritt, former Tories, could find common ground with Robert Baldwin, the Reformer.

A broad stream of opinion, seeking the middle way, has dominated our political life ever since.

Extreme opinion has found no home except for third party movements which have been relatively ineffectual. Perhaps, after all, the early whigs were right. The rebellion was a necessary step, but just so it was unsuccessful.

The shock of revolt changed the course of constitutional development. Its failure allowed that development to take place within the British tradition.

http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/transactions/3/rebellion1837.shtml

The formation of the Dominion of Canada was (and is) a compromise ... a bone offered to quell rebellion, rather than arising from a popular revolution ... not too exciting ... and still the same today.

In fact, Canada didn't believe in itself until Vimy Ridge, imo.

And the most revolutionary thing we've done is ... universal health care.

It ain't all bad!

Edited September 3, 2009 by tango

[Guest TrueMetis]

In fact, Canada didn't believe in itself until Vimy Ridge, imo.

And here a century after that it seems everyone has forgotten Vimy. Which is really depressing.

[tango]

And here a century after that it seems everyone has forgotten Vimy. Which is really depressing.

Not here. There's a commemoration every year - Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders.

Only one vet left now, but he couldn't make it this year.

I've seen the history short several times on tv this week.

The French couldn't take it.

The British couldn't take it.

The Canucks took it!

[tango]

QUOTE (WestViking @ Sep 3 2009, 12:26 AM) *

Many Canadians are still not sure that democracy is working.

Frankly, they're idiots who need a civics lesson.

We should always question. That's our democratic duty.

[Guest TrueMetis]

Not here. There's a commemoration every year - Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders.

Only one vet left now, but he couldn't make it this year.

I've seen the history short several times on tv this week.

The French couldn't take it.

The British couldn't take it.

The Canucks took it!

Lucky you, around here people know the name but no one understands the importance of it.

[nicky10013]

We should always question. That's our democratic duty.

The people running our democracy, absolutely. The democracy itself, however, is sound.

[jbg]

And here a century after that it seems everyone has forgotten Vimy. Which is really depressing.

We in America haven't and we're still grateful.