How Did Canada Shaped Canadian Political Culture

Canadians are known for their political culture of openness and comity. Canada, in contrast to the United States, is said to be based on peace, order and good government, whereas the latter is typically known for a culture of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. According to Elizabeth Mancke, this Canadian political culture comes from the Loyalists of the British crown who emigrated to Canada in the eighteenth century, fleeing American independence. That being said, although this is what she argues, her argument is not very compelling for there are several other factors that shaped Canadian political culture. The Loyalists did have slight influence on political culture, but history bring us back to the British role in Upper Canada, it’s

institutions, the various Late Loyalists and concessions made to them, as well as other ethnic groups that arrived in Canada who also shaped this political culture.
Mancke asserts that the Loyalists of the eighteenth century largely shaped the political culture of Canada. That being said, prior to 1783 the population of Upper Canada was small, yet over the next two years, 6000 Loyalists fleeing the American independence made their way into Upper Canada, seeking refuge and loyalty to the British crown, doubling the population to 14000. Evidently, there was influence of the Loyalists on the future of political culture, given that the very foundation of Upper Canada is based on protection from a rebellion similar to what had occurred in the south. In 1791, the Canada Constitutional Act was signed, after the arrival of these loyalists and American independence. This constitutional Act divided the old province of Quebec into Upper Canada, which was predominantly English, and Lower Canada, which was predominantly French. The very constitution and foundation of Upper Canada was created to “prevent defects which hastened the independence” of America and was designed to “restrict both popular discontent and popular participation in politics”. One can argue that it’s not Loyalists themselves that have influence but rather it is the cause they fled that influenced the British to take action and shape the political culture.
Although the Loyalists and British had this original influence on the political culture that would follow with anti-republican spirit, there are also factors of accommodation towards Americans by British officials that influenced the political culture. It is mostly due to the British and their power that the political culture became the way it is. The population of Upper Canada was small in comparison to the populations in the United States, and Upper Canada needed security against this new country hostile to the empire. That being said, John Graves Simcoe, the lieutenant governor of Upper Canada sought to receive more settlers from America and believed that there were closet loyalists who sought to escape republicanism and return to the British. To attract settlers, he promised to “exempt them from both taxation and democracy, while providing cheap land”. Americans were invited in by being offered cheap land, exemption from British taxation, and a limited elected legislative assembly with very little power. It can be said that due to these concessions that seem rather liberal and American that it was not the Loyalists that influence political culture, but rather the fear of revolution and rebellion that did. This fear influenced the culture of being open to the mixing of both systems, as well as the welcoming of individuals seeking refuge. These liberal concessions would not be sought out by ordinary British Loyalists and it can be said that the constitution was a hybrid of both the conservatism and commonwealth of the British and the Liberalism of the English.
Simcoe did increase the population, and many “Late Loyalists” arrived in Upper Canada, with the population moving from 14 000 in 1791to 70 000 by 1811. That being said, the settlers were seen to be more humble in their views because many poor Americans were the ones that took these offers, and accepted a lower standard of living than in the United States. The culture of comity may derive from these poor people arriving into Canada in search of mutual benefit, and was further based on community rather than individualism that was rampant in the new republic. Mancke argues that it was Loyalists that shaped the political culture of Canada but that can be proven to not the be the case. According to Alan Taylor “most of the newcomers lacked ideological commitment to the empire republic” and were “neither good royalists of republican vipers”. They were merely individuals seeking cheap land and low taxes, and so they “cared little for the regime, so long as it demanded little from them. Upper Canada was designed to remain politically inert, the people received their land, had not been oppressed, had light taxes, and were content. It is therefore not only the Loyalists and late Loyalists that influenced the political culture of Canada, but the institutions and power instilled by the British.
It was not only British Loyalists that emigrated to Canada, but various other pacifists and cultural group also emigrated to Canada.

People such as the “German-speaking Mennonites and Dunkers (or Tunkers), as well as English-speaking Quakers” arrived as well after suffering “persecution for their pacifism, reaping arrest, confiscations, and heavy fines from rebel officials”. It is said they preferred Upper Canada to America, given that they felt nostalgic of “colonial social order that seemed more tolerant of ethno cultural minorities”, rather than the nationalism, individualism, and majoritarianism of the United States. Because of this “Upper Canada was a loosely affiliated set of dispersed and distinctive communities”. This is a very solid basis for explaining Canada’s openness towards minorities and ethnic groups, as well as multiculturalism. “The empire promised to leave” these groups alone and distinct, which lead to them forming their own distinct communities. Furthermore, this can explain Canada’s political culture of openness to multiculturalism, in which individuals retain their own culture within Canada, rather than the melting pot of America, which is a mixture of several cultures forming one big American culture. The melting pot model, which is the United States, is exactly what officials and these settlers attempted to avoid and succeeded in doing so. Mancke stating that the Loyalists are behind the organic, corporate, and hierarchical society that is Canada

“slights all subsequent migrant waves, including the Late Loyalists, as of little consequence to Canada’s political culture”.
Mancke’s argument, given the evidence listed above, is not compelling.

It was not only Loyalists that shaped the political culture of Canada, rather the power of the British government in suppressing another rebellion, the various concessions they made, as well as the arrival of “Late Loyalists” and other ethnic groups that shaped the culture of openness and comity in Canada. Mancke argues that the Loyalists deplored “both the rebels and the British for resorting to violence to solve political problems, yet the creation of a responsible government in Canada was “launched with election riots throughout the 1840s and with the burning of Parliament by a mob in 1849”, by these same Loyalists. Furthermore, it can even be argued that a “civic culture beyond official control barely existed before 1820”, and only then did liberal norms such as “newspapers, Masonic lodges, agricultural societies, and debating clubs” begin to proliferate, long after the arrival of the “original British

Loyalists”.