Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Canadian political culture
Self - government in canada
What is different about Canadian culture compared to American politics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Canadian political culture
Canada’s political and governmental systems, while much like our own here in the U.S., is rather different and, of course, has its own unique story and parties that clash for control during debates and elections. Much like our country, Canada’s two main political parties are the Liberals and Conservatives, but more have sprung up over the years, and the country has come up from a two party system to the multi party system it calls its own today. Canada’s governmental system, as you may already know, is one of democracy. Its early system consisted of two parties, the Conservative Party and the Liberal Party. John A. Macdonald led the Conservatives for the first few years after the forming of their first government, but the Liberal party took power after an event known as the Pacific Scandal occurred. The Pacific Scandal was an unfortunate happening where a man named Sir Hugh Allan had bribed the Conservative party when they were in a time of financial need. They rewarded him with a contract to build a railway, on the condition that he would remove any American hold on the contract- however, he couldn’t meet this requirement, as he had used American money to fund the Conservatives’ campaign in the first place. After the Liberal party revealed the scandal in April of 1873, Macdonald was forced to resign and the Liberals entered power. However, in 1878, Macdonald returned and headed the Conservative party until his death in 1891. After his death, the Conservative party began to crumble and switched leaders several times, before 1896 when the Liberal party, with Wilfrid Laurier in the chair, once again took the power back. When the 1920s rolled around, more parties began to form, creating a sort of “two-and-a-half party system.... ... middle of paper ... ...lowing 35 years, the French colonies suddenly expanded, rivalling the populations of its foreign counterparts. Countries continued to push for space, expanding their settlements until Canada’s eventual independence in 1867. Canada is a country with a rich history and a strong political system. Its history and systems mirror the United States’ in many ways, but Canada is most definitely a country of its own. It was influenced by many different European countries over the years, through colonization and immigration, and the people speaking out through their political parties have shaped the country to become the Canada we know today. Works Cited http://mapleleafweb.com/features/political-parties-and-party-system-canada-history-operation-and-issues http://www.canada.ca/aboutgov-ausujetgouv/structure/menu-eng.html http://www.slmc.uottawa.ca/?q=european_colonization
A century ago, Canada was under control by the British Empire. The battles we fought the treaties we signed and the disputes we solved all helped us gain independence from our mother country “Britain”. Canadians fought a long battle protecting others, and from these battles we gained our peaceful reputation and our independence from Britain. Canada became a nation on July, 1st 1867. Although we were an independent country, our affairs and treaties were all still signed by Britain.
...n of their cabinet, while others may choose to create a new political path without consulting the views of their party. Mellon thinks that the Canadian government is under dictatorial scrutiny, whereas Barker contradicts this belief. The idea of a prime-ministerial government is certainly an over exaggeration of the current state of Canada. There are too many outside and inside forces that can control the powers the Prime Minister of Canada. Furthermore, there are several outside sources that indicate a good government in Canada. The United Nations annually places Canada at the top, or near the top of the list of the world’s best countries in which to live. These outcomes are not consistent with the idea of a one ruler power. Canada is not ruled by one person’s ideas, suggestions, and decisions, but by government approved and provincially manipulated decisions.
Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail brings up the idea of acting in a just or unjust manner. In this letter, he’s saying that it’s moral for one to break a law if they feel it is an unjust one. He stated that any law that’s degrading a person should be considered unjust. Even though the technical reason for his arrest was just, since he was parading without a permit, it was an unjust action because it was used to maintain segregation in Birmingham. Since the reasoning for his actual arrest was unjust, he said that it’s okay to take action against it. What matters, however, is that it is done in a loving and direct way. This could be related to Socrates, who was arrested on the grounds for impiety and supposedly corrupting the youth of Athens. However, he made the argument that he was simply exposing them to what he believed was the truth, which was causing no harm other than giving them knowledge they deserved. Socrates
Dr. Martin Luther King addressed many topics in, “Letter from Birmingham Jail”. He answered all the issues that were aimed towards him in a very skillful and well thought out manner. These issues came from, “A Call For Unity”, which was a letter published by eight local clergymen expressing their feelings about what Dr. King was doing. One concern in particular that King did an outstanding job of confronting was that of the clergymen’s anxiety about him breaking the law. King addresses the question of, “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” by clarifying that there are just and unjust laws. He also goes on to explain the difference between the two, the effect of unjust laws on the people that they are aimed towards, as
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.
Currently, Canada remains the world’s second largest country, full of vast and rich resources from all corners of the nation. None of the accomplishments and achievements that Canada has made to date would have been possible without Confederation. Without intense pressure from the Americans, and without the common goal that a few men shared of unifying a country, Canada would not be the strong, free, independent and united nation that it is today.
It is cold hard fact that Canadian government is not entirely democratic. The question remains of how to deal with this. Canadian government, as effective as it currently is, has major factors in their system that have a negative effect on Canadians. Our current voting system favors the higher-populated provinces and creates a tyranny of the majority. Our Senate is distinctly undemocratic as it is an assigned position. Our head of State, the Prime Minister, holds too much power. Unless we resolve these issues, our government will remain far from a perfect governing system.
Different states have various ways of ruling and governing their political community. The way states rule reflects upon the political community and the extent of positive and negative liberty available to their citizens. Canada has come a long way to establishing successful rights and freedoms and is able to do so due to the consideration of the people. These rights and freedoms are illustrated through negative and positive liberties; negative liberty is “freedom from” and positive liberty is “freedom to”. A democracy, which is the style of governing utilized by Canada is one that is governed more so by the citizens and a state is a political community that is self-governing which establishes rules that are binding. The ‘Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms’ allow Canada’s population to live a free and secure life. This is demonstrated through the fundamental freedoms, which permit the people to freely express themselves and believe in what they choose. Canadians also have democratic rights authorizing society to have the right to democracy and vote for the members of the House of Commons, considering the fact that the House of Commons establishes the laws which ultimately influence their lifestyle. The tools that are used to function a democratic society such as this are, mobility, legal and equality rights, which are what give Canadians the luxury of living life secured with freedom and unity. Furthermore it is safe to argue that ‘The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms’, proves the exceeding level of efficiency that is provided for Canadians in comparison to other countries where major freedoms are stripped from their political community.
The culture of Canada refers to the shared values, attitudes, standards, and beliefs that are a representative of Canada and Canadians throughout Canada's history, its culture has been influenced by American culture because of a shared language, proximity, television and migration between the two countries. Overtime, Canadian-American relations have helped develop Canada’s identity during the years 1945-1982; thus introducing changing social norms , media and entertainment. In support of this, due to the United States being approximately 9.25 times larger in population and having the dominant cultural and economic influence it played a vital role in establishing Canada’s identity. With Canada being its neighbour, naturally, the United States would influence their way of life upon Canada. In other words,
...n elections and electoral reform in canada. The New England Journal of Political Science, 2(2), 122-151.
Stevenson, Garth. "Canadian Federalism: The Myth of the Status Quo." Reinventing Canada: Politics of the 21st Century. Ed. M. Janine Brodie and Linda Trimble. Toronto: Prentice Hall, 2003. 204-14. Print.
Canada is a great democratic nation, but like all other countries it also has its own political flaws. Some aspects of the Canadian political scene are questionable for their slight violation against democratic norms. Many debates have taken place for the reforms needed in the Canadian political system, in order to make it more democratic.
The Prime Minister is the Head of Government in Canada. Almost always, the Prime Minister is also the leader in the House of Commons, the assembly of ‘common’ people elected by the population to run government. Multiple steps are required to select a Prime Minister. First, there must be a vote of party members at a national convention that decide who will be their leader. If their party is already in power, or holds the majority of seats within Parliament, the chosen leader will assume the role of Prime Minister immediately. If not, the leader must lead the party through a successful election process to become Prime Minister. The Prime Minister is not elected directly by the entire population through the election. He or she is elected in an indirect manner when his or her party wins an election with the most seats in the House of Commons. The Prime Minister can lead the country for a maximum of five years before another election. However, historically and by tradition, most will call an election within four years depending on their perceived standing among the voters. If after four years, they feel that they are still held in high regard by the general public, and it is probable that they will maintain or enhance their power in government, the likelihood of calling...
Canada has a central government designed to deal with the country as a whole. Things like national defense, banking, currency, and commerce are controlled by the central government. All other matters are left to the provinces to deal with. Such as education, hospitals, and civil rights are responsibilities of the states. The Canadian Parliament consists of two houses. Their Senate is made up of 104 members who serve until the age of seventy-five.
Since federalism was introduced as an aspect of Canadian political identity, the country has undergone multiple changes as to how federalism works; in other words, over the decades the federal and provincial governments have not always acted in the same way as they do now. Canada, for example, once experienced quasi-federalism, where the provinces are made subordinate to Ottawa. Currently we are in an era of what has been coined “collaborative federalism”. Essentially, as the title would suggest, it implies that the federal and provincial levels of government work together more closely to enact and make policy changes. Unfortunately, this era of collaborative federalism may be ending sooner rather than later – in the past couple decades, the federal and provincial governments have been known to squabble over any and all policy changes in sectors such as health, the environment and fiscal issues. Generally, one would assume that in a regime employing collaborative federalism there would be a certain amount of collaboration. Lately, it seems as though the only time policy changes can take place the federal government is needed to work unilaterally. One area in which collaborative federalism has been nonexistent and unilateral federalism has prevailed and positively affected policy changes is in the Post-Secondary Education (PSE) sector.