The Case for Canadian National Identity
This article was originally written in July 2021 for Consonancie Publications; an independent journalism platform.
‘Let us be English, let us be French, but let us always be loyal, and above all, let us be Canadians.’
Sir John A. Macdonald
The entire sense of Canadian nationalism has long been an issue of high contention. The question behind the fact and being of the Canadian nation is one defined by a struggle of contending loyalties and conflicting interests; a struggle that, ironically, has itself come to define what it means to be Canadian. Yet, throughout history, the Canadian national spirit has always prevailed over the forces that have threatened time and time again to tear the nation apart.
In recent decades, however, it has become resoundingly clear that this national spirit no longer exists. Canada has suffered – and continues to suffer – through perhaps the most divisive and most debilitative identity crisis of all the developed nations of the world. The nation’s very fact of being grows increasingly more meaningless by the day; its very reason for existence growing less and less legitimate; and the bonds of national unity that have thus far held the Dominion together for one-hundred-fifty years have become virtually nonexistent. Put simply, Canada has become, in every sense of the word, a dying nation that is threatening to tear itself apart. If the Canadian national spirit is not reinvigorated; the fire of Canadian nationalism not again rekindled; Canada is soon to find itself fractured in a manner reminiscent of the collapse of the Soviet Union. The death of the nation can be cited as the result of three main factors; the Americanisation of Canadian culture, economy, and state, the concept of official multiculturalism, and an abandonment of the founding principles established during Confederation.
Perhaps the greatest challenge facing the Canadian nation at present – and indeed, one of the few prevailing issues that have plagued the country for all its one-hundred-fifty years of existence – has been the issue of Americanisation.
In his 1965 book Lament for a Nation, Professor George Grant cites the growing influence of the United States as well as the efforts of pro-American administrations as the single biggest issue facing the Canadian nation. The Canada of Grant’s youth was under attack; the echoes of its imperial and intrinsic past becoming blanketed by the cheap consumerist brands of American capitalism and liberalism; and its unique culture, which had historically stood in stark opposition to American ideals, became bastardised and diminished. He believed that, if the death of the Canadian nation was imminent, it would occur by the extinguishment of Canadian nationalism by the hand of the domineering ‘American way’, which through its political culture of individualism, technological influence, and free-market policies would commercialise, strangle, and depose of Canada to prepare for its absorption into the ‘American Empire.’ He called this phenomena ‘continentalism’, and it stands today as a cautionary tale of securing Canada’s independence and defending its sovereignty.
‘Canada was once a nation with meaning and purpose. To be a Canadian was to build, along with the French, a more ordered and stable society than the liberal experiment in the United States. Canadians were, accordingly, “a unique species of North American”. The possibility of creating such a nation had been undermined, however, by the policies pursued by successive Liberal governments since the prime ministership of Mackenzie King. Diefenbaker, despite his failings, had attempted to find policies that would preserve an independent Canada. Those who crowed at Diefenbaker’s fall did not understand the policies of government that were essential if Canada was to survive. In their decision, they showed that they really paid allegiance to the homogenised culture of the American Empire.’
Professor George Grant, Lament for a Nation
In fact, the very existence of Canada traces its origin to a rejection of the principles of the United States; the British North American colonies in what would become Canada chose to remain loyal to the British Empire and stood tall in the face of American aggression. It can be argued that the main reason behind the Confederation of the British North American possessions in 1867 was indeed to secure Britain’s northern colonies from the expansionist United States. However, in a Canada that has, in recent decades, grown more and more indistinguishable from its southern neighbour in everything from popular culture, to politics, to the erosion of the English-Canadian collective consciousness.
Additionally, with the adoption of multiculturalism as official Canadian government policy under Pierre Trudeau, Canada began to stray even further from its core founding principles.
While the general view of Canada as a ‘mosaic of nations and cultures’ may sound appealing in theory, it is, in practice, highly problematic because it works to diminish a singular national identity. The wide range of ethnicities that make up the Canadian population places the nation in a unique place; it forces it to rely more heavily on civic nationalism than ethnic nationalism. That said, however, a nation simply cannot thrive amidst the mixing of cultures and nations. There needs to be a spirit that unites all Canadians; English, French, Aboriginal, or other; a spirit that needs to come before any regional, cultural, or religious connections an individual may possess. When that national spirit grows ever stronger, the Canadian nation will grow closer and more united.
Finally, it is only evident that subsequent Canadian administrations have subverted the founding principles of the Canadian nation set aside by Sir John A. Macdonald and the Fathers of Confederation.
The two-founding nations theory defines Canada as a nation that, at its core, derives its national identity from the union and cooperation of two founding peoples; the English and the French under a British administration. (A more representative approach may be the ‘three-founding nations theory, defined as the English, French, and Indigenous peoples, however, the point still stands. The abandonment of these principles has thus far resulted in the fracturing of the Canadian nation, the most evident case of which is that of Québec.
The Québécois have a certain determination and commitment to the preservation of their national identity, and while separatist sentiment is itself a threat to national unity, many in English Canada seem to demonise Québec for seemingly absurd reasons. What English Canada fails to see, however, is how the abandonment of the two-founding nations theory is what caused Québec’s separatist tendencies in the first place; Canada began to hold the needs of the growing Anglophone and allophone population to a higher standard than those of the Francophones, thus inciting the defensive response on part of the Québécois. The spirit of Québec – how defensive Quebeckers are of their language and culture, how hesitant and sometimes hostile they are towards outsiders who may threaten their national identity – is a mark of a great people; a respectable, noble ideal; and something that English Canada has since lost in the face of sweeping Americanisation and Globalisation.
The issue and main obstacle standing in the way of the full realisation of Canada’s national spirit lies in the fact that Canadians do not feel any connection to their nation. The French Canadians have no reason to see themselves as Canadian because Canada, at least in modern times, has done nothing but erode their culture. Multiculturalism and a lack of assimilation ultimately cause immigrants and newcomers to be disconnected from the wider Canadian social fabric. And English Canadians no longer feel any connection to their nation what with the opportunities and excitement of the United States; yet they fail to see that it is ultimately they who failed to keep the American threat at bay, who abandoned the three-founding nations principle, who allowed for Canada’s reorganisation into a ‘post-national state’, and who allowed for the flame of Confederation to be snuffed out.
line of best fit 