In recent years Canada has become idolized in the United States, as a symbol of a better country, better people, and most importantly a better government. It can be seen during every presidential election, in which the words, “I’m moving to Canada”, are uttered perhaps more than, “I’m voting”. However, life is not always greener on the other side, as Canada also has deep scars in its history. Yet, because of its idealization the government of Canada never properly addressed one of its worst transgressions, The Purge, until now.
On November 28, 2017, in Ottawa, Ontario, Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau gave a formal apology for the events known as “The Purge”, in Canada. A time period of the 1950s to the early 1990s, in which the Canadian
…show more content…
He addresses the beginnings of gender oppression in Canada, discussing the arrival of pilgrims, until he comes to a focus on The Purge. He states the original thinking behind such policies that led to the oppression of LGBTQ2 members in stating that, “the thinking of the day was that all non-heterosexual Canadians would automatically be at an increased risk of blackmail by our adversaries due to what was called “character weakness”. They used flawed items such as the “Fruit Machine”, in which individuals were shown explicit and mundane images and had their pupils measured to determine if they were gay. Perhaps what is most terrifying about these facts is that when the Canadian government felt they had enough evidence against an individual they, “were taken to secret locations in the dark of night to be interrogated”, “Hooked up to polygraph machines”, and ”Some were sexually assaulted”. Justin Trudeau's speech is effective because he uses specific facts and states them in a way that is matter-of-fact, in showing that these actions were terrible on their own. They logically show why an apology is necessary: individuals affected by The Purge were taken from their homes, had their lives teared apart, and were forced to hide themselves or resign from positions. These facts, while they only show a small scope of The Purge, put a sense of dread in readers, combining a logical and emotional appeal. This combination is so important because instead of deciding between one’s heart and one’s brain, both are feeling and making the same analysis of The Purge. The pathos and logos have a mutualistic symbiotic relationship in this speech and by working together they create a cycle, where the facts create emotions, and the emotions heighten the
Meney, Florence. "La Peiné de Mort au Canada" ["Moving Towards Abolition"]. Radio Canada. N.p., 2007. Web. 23 Jan. 2014. .
Our government’s predecessors have attempted to eradicate Canada’s first people, which is not only an insult to the indigenous people of the past, but to the present. This country did not start off as a joint endeavor of the two general groups of people that inhabited it during its birth, but decimation and forced assimilation of great traditions and people. The assimilation of a great culture, the destruction of oral histories, and the forced loss of language destroyed the chance trust. Only by teaching disgust towards that type of attitude and action, by not excusing it or attempting to justify, will begin a new age of
Canada is known by outsiders to be a very peaceful country. But if you ask any Canadian they well tell you that is unfortunately not the case. For there is a large ongoing conflict between Canadians. The conflict is between the French and the English, or more specifically between Quebec and the rest of Canada. As a result of this conflict, along with some wrongdoing and propaganda. Quebec has considered and has gone as far to hold referendums over Separatism (Surette,2014). Separatism is that the province of Quebec separates from the rest of Canada to form its own country. Which would have immense effects on indubitably Quebec but also the rest of Canada (Martin, 2014). This report will focus on the root causes and origin of Quebec Separatism, the current state of Quebec Separatism and finally how we as a society can act towards Quebec Separatism.
May, E. (2009). Losing Confidence: Power, politics, and the crisis in Canadian democracy. Toronto, ON: McClelland & Stewart.
Canada is a society built on the promise of democracy; democracy being defined as “government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.” In order to operate at full potential, the people of Canada must voice their opinions and participate fully in the political system. This is why it’s shocking to see that people are becoming less engaged in politics and the voter turnout has steadily been declining over the last 20 years. This lack of participation by Canadians is creating a government that is influenced by fewer people, which is detrimental to the democratic system Canada is built on.
Newman, Garfield et al. Canada A Nation Unfolding. Toronto: Mc Graw – Hill Ryerson Limited, 2000.
Harold Cardinal made a bold statement in his book, The Unjust Society, in 1969 about the history of Canada’s relationship with Aboriginal peoples. His entire book is, in fact, a jab at Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s idea of ‘the just society’. Pierre Elliott Trudeau made great assumptions about First Nations people by declaring that Aboriginal people should be happy about no longer being described as Indian. His goal was to rid Canada of Indians by assimilating them into the Canadian framework. Considered by many as a progressive policy, Trudeau’s white paper demonstrates just how accurate the following statement made by Harold Cardinal at the beginning of his book is : “The history of Canada’s Indians is a shameful chronicle of the white man’s disinterest,
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 sphere of influence. Although it is true that the book was initially written as a response to the events that took place in the late 1950s, many of the points are still valid today.
Canada is viewed as being a very safe and stable place to live because people are lucky enough to have healthcare, benefits for unemployment and family needs, as well as maternity leave. Crime is something that Canadians don’t often think about because people feel as though they are out of harm's way. As Canadians, we’ve watched the world experience different threats and crime, and we’ve seen the world fight back. For example, our neighbors in North America, the United States, have gone through terrorist attacks and issues with guns and violence. Just because we are witnessing these things in other places doesn’t mean that we aren’t at risk as well, and Canada does have certain approaches and regards in place if we are ever in danger. What I wish to address in this paper is how Canada is set up for reacting to crime and jeopardy, as well as an example of where we went wrong in our past. Methods in response to crime, Canada’s legal regime and the issue of Residential schooling for Aboriginals a hundred years ago will be presented.
Thompson, John Herd, and Mark Paul Richard. "Canadian History in North American Context." In Canadian studies in the new millennium. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2008. 37-64.
Throughout history, the actions of governments have always been debated; however, occasionally there are certain events which spark much controversy, both at the time of the event and by historians today. One of these controversial acts was the invocation of the War Measures Act in 1970, an act which suspended the civil liberties of Canadian citizens. In October 1970, in what became known as the October Crisis, the Front de libération du Québec, (commonly known as the FLQ) which was a French Canadian organization advocating independence from Canada, kidnapped two politicians. This initiated a series of events, one of which was the invocation of the War Measures Act by Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau. Many historians argue that Trudeau was justified in invoking the War Measures Act because the October Crisis ended shortly after the Act was invoked. However, this argument is invalid as justification; primarily because the War Measures Act was an extreme overreaction by Trudeau, as the threat of the FLQ was largely small-scale, and the demise of the FLQ was impending with the rise of the Bloc Quebecois. Furthermore, the Act may have inspired Quebecers who favoured separatism, as they saw the government desperately employ the most extreme measure to stop the FLQ. Finally, the War Measures Act suspended the civil rights of citizens within a democracy, violating the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Canada experienced the revolution of changing politics and new ideologies, it was a necessary wave
Today Canada and the United States are major trading partners, allies, and two neighboring countries with a long history of cooperation with each other. But is it possible for Canada to protect its independence and culture living next door to the country so powerful and rich as the United States. Since the Canadian confederation, Canada started developing relations with the U.S. As the years passed by, Canada began to relay on the United States in the national defense. Many Canadians think that the military, political and economical dependence would not make a difference to their daily life. But today more then even Canadian culture is affected by the American influence. Media, American artists, economic dependence, American propaganda and political pressure from the United States is making Canada too Americanized. All of these factors reflect on the social life of ordinary Canadians threatening the heritage and the traditions that define Canada as independent country.
In conclusion Canada gained independence because of a series of events that took place during the twentieth century. If it hadn’t been for these events, Canada to this day might have been a part of the British Empire. Through discussion on the Chanak affair we signalled that we wanted autonomy. Through our hard work and lives, the world knew we had the ability to stand alone as a strong nation. While, our international reputation of being a “peacekeeping” country the right to stand as an independent self-governing nation. But finally through the Canada Act, we stood solely independent from our Empire. It is obvious that the twentieth century provided us with great chances to become an independent strong nation.
Canada’s parliamentary system is designed to preclude the formation of absolute power. Critics and followers of Canadian politics argue that the Prime Minister of Canada stands alone from the rest of the government. The powers vested in the prime minister, along with the persistent media attention given to the position, reinforce the Prime Minister of Canada’s superior role both in the House of Commons and in the public. The result has led to concerns regarding the power of the prime minister. Hugh Mellon argues that the prime minister of Canada is indeed too powerful. Mellon refers to the prime minister’s control over Canada a prime-ministerial government, where the prime minister encounters few constraints on the usage of his powers. Contrary to Mellon’s view, Paul Barker disagrees with the idea of a prime-ministerial government in Canada. Both perspectives bring up solid points, but the idea of a prime-ministerial government leading to too much power in the hands of the prime minister is an exaggeration. Canada is a country that is too large and complex to be dominated by a single individual. The reality is, the Prime Minister of Canada has limitations from several venues. The Canadian Prime Minister is restricted internally by his other ministers, externally by the other levels of government, the media and globalization.