View Full Version : British news paper salutes Canada
Is the attitude described in this article true?
"British news paper salutes Canada
Sunday Telegraph Article From today's UK wires: Salute to a brave and modest nation - Kevin Myers, 'The Sunday Telegraph' LONDON:
Until the deaths of Canadian soldiers killed in Afghanistan, probably almost no one outside their home country had been aware that Canadian troops are deployed in the region.
And as always, Canada will bury its dead, just as the rest of the world, as always will forget its sacrifice, just as it always forgets nearly everything Canada ever does.. It seems that Canada 's historic mission is to come to the selfless aid both of its friends and of complete strangers, and then, once the crisis is over, to be well and truly ignored.
Canada is the perpetual wallflower that stands on the edge of the hall, waiting for someone to come and ask her for a dance. A fire breaks out, she risks life and limb to rescue her fellow dance-goers, and suffers serious injuries. But when the hall is repaired and the dancing resumes, there is Canada, the wallflower still, while those she once helped glamorously cavort across the floor, blithely neglecting her yet again.
That is the price Canada pays for sharing the North American continent with the United States , and for being a selfless friend of Britain in two global conflicts.
For much of the 20th century, Canada was torn in two different directions: It seemed to be a part of the old world, yet had an address in the new one, and that divided identity ensured that it never fully got the gratitude it deserved.
Yet it's purely voluntary contribution to the cause of freedom in two world wars was perhaps the greatest of any democracy. Almost 10% of Canada 's entire population of seven million people served in the armed forces during the First World War, and nearly 60,000 died. The great Allied victories of 1918 were spearheaded by Canadian troops, perhaps the most capable soldiers in the entire British order of battle.
Canada was repaid for its enormous sacrifice by downright neglect, it's unique contribution to victory being absorbed into the popular Memory as somehow or other the work of the 'British.'
The Second World War provided a re-run. The Canadian navy began the war with a half dozen vessels, and ended up policing nearly half of the Atlantic against U-boat attack. More than 120 Canadian warships participated in the Normandy landings, during which 15,000 Canadian soldiers went ashore on D-Day alone.
Canada finished the war with the third-largest navy and the fourth largest air force in the world. The world thanked Canada with the same sublime indifference as it had the previous time.
Canadian participation in the war was acknowledged in film only if it was necessary to give an American actor a part in a campaign in which the United States had clearly not participated - a touching scrupulousness which, of course, Hollywood has since abandoned, as it has any notion of a separate Canadian identity.
So it is a general rule that actors and filmmakers arriving in Hollywood keep their nationality - unless, that is, they are Canadian. Thus Mary Pickford, Walter Huston, Donald Sutherland, Michael J. Fox, William Shatner, Norman Jewison, David Cronenberg, Alex Trebek, Art Linkletter and Dan Aykroyd have in the popular perception become American, and Christopher Plummer, British.
It is as if, in the very act of becoming famous, a Canadian ceases to be Canadian, unless she is Margaret Atwood, who is as unshakably Canadian as a moose, or Celine Dion, for whom Canada has proved quite unable to find any takers.
Moreover, Canada is every bit as querulously alert to the achievements of its sons and daughters as the rest of the world is completely unaware of them. The Canadians proudly say of themselves - and are unheard by anyone else - that 1% of the world's population has provided 10% of the world's peacekeeping forces.
Canadian soldiers in the past half century have been the greatest peacekeepers on Earth - in 39 missions on UN mandates, and six on non-UN peacekeeping duties, from Vietnam to East Timor, from Sinai to Bosnia.
Yet the only foreign engagement that has entered the popular non-Canadian imagination was the sorry affair in Somalia , in which out-of-control paratroopers murdered two Somali infiltrators. Their regiment was then disbanded in disgrace - a uniquely Canadian act of self-abasement for which, naturally, the Canadians received no international credit.
So who today in the United States knows about the stoic and selfless friendship its northern neighbour has given it in Afghanistan ?
Rather like Cyrano de Bergerac , Canada repeatedly does honourable things for honourable motives, but instead of being thanked for it, it remains something of a figure of fun. It is the Canadian way, for which Canadians should be proud, yet such honour comes at a high cost. This past year more grieving Canadian families knew that cost all too tragically well.
and once Canada changes govt and becomes a Liberal democracy again, we can all be proud to be Canadian again.
Lest we forget."
The attitude of Canadians, or the attitude of the world regarding us? I'd say the article is pretty accurate regarding both .. although maybe a little overflattering to us (of course, being Canadian .. I'd have to say that wouldn't I?). As a nation we have a lot to be proud of .. and a fair number of things to be so proud of. I think we've kind of adopted a national identity as being the cute but shy girl in the corner of the room. Outstanding when the light hits us just right, but for the most part content to watch and occasionally shake our head at the drunken antics of our extroverted southern neighbor ;P
I'd like to believe that as a nation, we care more about the right thing getting done.. that in getting credit for it being done.
It seems funny to me that the USA appears to think it occupies the whole of North America, blithely overlooking the fact that its northern neighbour is the second largest country in the world. But geography has never been the US's strong suit ;)
From a British point of view, I think it would be interesting to compare how the world regards strident Australia and self-effacing Canada and the roles they play in global politics and economics.
Can't speak for the world, but here neither Australia nor Canada get much media coverage. I guess Australia's just known among the people as a holiday destination and Canada as the country that brought us Justin Bieber. Oh, and maple sirup, too.
I don't guess a lot of people here think those countries actually play a role, neither in politics nor economics.
The attitude of Canadians, or the attitude of the world regarding us?
Both.
I'd say the article is pretty accurate regarding both .. although maybe a little overflattering to us (of course, being Canadian .. I'd have to say that wouldn't I?). As a nation we have a lot to be proud of .. and a fair number of things to be so proud of. I think we've kind of adopted a national identity as being the cute but shy girl in the corner of the room. Outstanding when the light hits us just right, but for the most part content to watch and occasionally shake our head at the drunken antics of our extroverted southern neighbor ;P
I'd like to believe that as a nation, we care more about the right thing getting done.. that in getting credit for it being done.
That is the impression I get - more responsibility than strutting.
It seems funny to me that the USA appears to think it occupies the whole of North America, blithely overlooking the fact that its northern neighbour is the second largest country in the world. But geography has never been the US's strong suit ;)
From a British point of view, I think it would be interesting to compare how the world regards strident Australia and self-effacing Canada and the roles they play in global politics and economics.
That is a very interesting question.
IAN 2411
12-12-2011, 05:51 AM
I have always regarded Canada, Australia and New Zealand three of the UKs biggest allies, in peace and in war. I think our relationship is a lot closer to those countries than this Special Relationship we have with the USA. I was born in the time when there was still a large commonwealth and it might just be for that reason.
I have to admit that if you ask some of the younger generation what Canada is to the UK they have no bloody idea. I remember 14 years after the war there was a disused Canadian army camp in my village. I was in Cyprus with the UN in 72 and we had very close relations with the Canadian UN at half way house. I can't remember the name of the camp.
Yes, I do believe that the UK neglect to show appreciation for the help that they have given to us over a long life span. I think a lot of that is because like Australia, Canada is a sleeping giant, just sitting back watching the rest of the world fucking up. Neither country is one to hog the lime light. Both countries slip out of allied conflicts as quietly as they slipped in, and they will always get my respect.
Be well IAN 2411
I believe the ties between Britain and Australia are weakening by the moment. Australia sees itself as multi-cultural and Asia/Pacific oriented, not British any more. America is its preferred partner now, in politics and economically. Canada, with its common border with the US cannot help but be influenced more by America than by Britain, even if it hasn't made the positive political choice that Australia made, to strengthen ties with America at the expense of ties with the Motherland.
In WW2, Australia fired the first shots of the war against a German ship, within hours of war being declared in London. Canada chose to wait a week before joining in, to emphasise its freedom from Westminster. Both countries are now taking part in the Afghanistan War, not (to my way of thinking) because Britain is there, but because they have their own relationships with America to foster, and they would have joined in even if Britain hadn't.
There are still Aussies who see themselves as Australian-Britons, and there are still many Canadians who think the same way - a few still add the letters UEL after their name, but I fear the links are weakening as both countries begin to assert their identities in the world. Canada seems to be going about this much more quietly than Australia (whose politicians (not people) seem to display resentment and scorn against Britain (the people just see Brits as a joke!)). I think it will be Canada that turns out to be the more influential of the two.
IAN 2411
12-15-2011, 02:34 AM
Australia (whose politicians (not people) seem to display resentment and scorn against Britain (the people just see Brits as a joke!)).
I think you might be a little out of touch MMI. The Queen and the UK will always have ties with Australia and Canada. I might point out that the UK might be in Europe, [But for how much longer I am unsure] but there is still a commonwealth that the queen heads. The Queen and the UK have always allowed Australia and Canada and any other commonwealth country to walk their own path, which is their God given right. The Australians took a vote a few years back on whether they should break with tradition and forget about the Queen. I think it was with their last PM that brought up the subject. It backfired in his face because there was an overwhelming yes to stay in the British Commonwealth.
So back to that little quote, [It is a minority of politicians that wish to be King or Queen of Australia. Much the same as King Paddy O Bama in the USA. I think strange people with duel identities like the thought of wearing a crown.
There are still Aussies who see themselves as Australian-Britons, and there are still many Canadians who think the same way - a few still add the letters UEL after their name, but I fear the links are weakening as both countries begin to assert their identities in the world.
There was a tour of Canada by Prince William with his new wife earlier this year. Wherever he went he was greeted by thousands of well wishers and the like waving the Union Flag. This also took place in the French sector, so what you’re saying is this show of solidarity to the Queen and her envoys was a staged side show.
Canada and Australia have no reason to assert themselves to anyone, as all countries know of their strength. At the end of the day the relationship between, Canada, Australia and the British people is just that, a relationship. We have a relationship with the USA, but I have to stress that the one between the UK, Australia and Canada is not as demanding.
In WW2, Australia fired the first shots of the war against a German ship, within hours of war being declared in London. Canada chose to wait a week before joining in, to emphasise its freedom from Westminster.
How do you know that, is it written down somewhere, and why the hell would they want to do it? At that time the commonwealth was strong and along with Australia, Canada were Britons closest allies. America if you remember had got their independence and cut the umbilicle cord.
Both countries are now taking part in the Afghanistan War, not (to my way of thinking) because Britain is there, but because they have their own relationships with America to foster, and they would have joined in even if Britain hadn't.
I doubt very much that it is because of their relationship with America or the UK. I would like to think they have a mind and conscience of their own and it has damn all to do with relationships. I would also like to think that those two countries were as disgusted with this atrocity on the World Trade Centre as the rest of the world was, and it was also done out of respect for the 24 Canadians and the 11 Australians that died in the Twin Towers along with the other 2716 innocent people.
Be well IAN 2411.
IAN 2411
12-15-2011, 03:17 AM
How do you know that, is it written down somewhere, and why the hell would they want to do it? At that time the commonwealth was strong and along with Australia, Canada were Britons closest allies. America if you remember had got their independence and cut the umbilicle cord.
This should read....At that time the commonwealth was strong and along with Australia, Canada were Britons closest allies. America if you remember had also got their independence but had cut the umbilicle cord.
Be well IAN 2411
You have a point. A survey by the Morgan Poll in May 2011 showed support for the Australian monarchy was 55% (up 17% since 1999), whereas the support for a republic was at 34% (down 20%). Quite a turnaround ... but then, this was just weeks after a glamourous Royal Wedding had taken place to take the people's minds off their other troubles.
An earlier poll by the Sydney Morning Herald indicated a substantial majority of people think Australia should become a republic, either immediately or upon the Queen's death.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanism_in_Australia.
My point, however, is that many politicians in Australia argue for a "resident President" even if they cannot yet rely on sufficient public support. I don't think any one of them seeks the Australian Crown for himself.
(As for Europe, we are in that particular organisation for our own protection against other stronger economic forces in the world, and we'll be in it for as long as the EU exists, which will be much longer than commentators are currently suggesting. We'll just make ourselves a pain in the arse for the others, like we always have been.)
so what you’re saying is this show of solidarity to the Queen and her envoys was a staged side show.
Wouldn't surprise me in the least. Wasn't there a single dissenting Québécois?
Per Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_Canada_during_World_War_II)
The Second World War officially began on September 1, 1939, with the German invasion of Poland. Britain and France declared war on the Nazi Third Reich on September 3, 1939. Seven days later, on September 10, 1939, the Parliament of Canada likewise declared war on Germany, the country's first independent declaration of war ...
...
In 1914, at the outbreak of the First World War, Canada was still a quasi-independent Dominion of the British Empire and automatically went to war when Britain did ... the 1931 Statute of Westminster had transformed Canada into a fully sovereign state ... Despite this, some commentators at the time suggested that Canada was still bound by Britain's declaration of war because it had been made in the name of their common monarch, but Canadian Prime Minister Mackenzie King was unshakable, and repeatedly declared that "[The Canadian] Parliament will decide".
I doubt very much that it is because of their relationship with America or the UK. I would like to think they have a mind and conscience of their own and it has damn all to do with relationships. I would also like to think that those two countries were as disgusted with this atrocity on the World Trade Centre as the rest of the world was, and it was also done out of respect for the 24 Canadians and the 11 Australians that died in the Twin Towers along with the other 2716 innocent people.
It would be nice to be able to think that. But we are talking about politics and politicians. They respect no-one and nothing can disgust them, nor is there any atrocity that cannot be topped: 3,000 dead in New York - how many dead in Iraq ... how many dead in Afghanistan? Oh .. Bin Laden was killed in Pakistan, so what the fuck were the invading armies in those other countries for? To make sure girls went to school? Right.
IAN 2411
12-17-2011, 03:06 AM
You have a point. A survey by the Morgan Poll in May 2011 showed support for the Australian monarchy was 55% (up 17% since 1999), whereas the support for a republic was at 34% (down 20%). Quite a turnaround ... but then, this was just weeks after a glamourous Royal Wedding had taken place to take the people's minds off their other troubles.
An earlier poll by the Sydney Morning Herald indicated a substantial majority of people think Australia should become a republic, either immediately or upon the Queen's death.
My point, however, is that many politicians in Australia argue for a "resident President" even if they cannot yet rely on sufficient public support. I don't think any one of them seeks the Australian Crown for himself.
The strangest thing about that last vote, one of her most trusted Secretaries was interviewed on TV a few months later. I believe he stated at the time that the Queen and the British Government were not exactly hoping the vote would go the other way, but they were not going to be worried if it did. As I said in my other post, the Queen is only a figure head and nothing more. I also think that the Australians are glad of their independence but the thought of a being called a Republic does not go down well with them. I do however think that the poll might turn out to be correct if the queen died. I do think that even if this takes place they will stay in the commonwealth for trading purposes. They use the UK as a back door into Europe the same as Europe use the UK as a way to trade with the commonwealth. I think at times that Europe’s trading laws are a waste of time as we all need each other to stay afloat.
(As for Europe, we are in that particular organisation for our own protection against other stronger economic forces in the world, and we'll be in it for as long as the EU exists, which will be much longer than commentators are currently suggesting. We'll just make ourselves a pain in the arse for the others, like we always have been.)
I agree with you 100%, it is inevitable that we will become intergrated with Europe in years to come, but I don’t think it will be in my lifetime. I think it will be a great many years yet though before the UK commits itself to the Euro zone. At the moment it is in a piss poor state and as soon as they get rid of Kirmit the frog things might improve. He is trying to bully the UK, and he should know that we don’t like bullies. We have a trade deficit of £1billion every year with Europe, and it will hurt them more than us to push us aside. Angela Merkal knows this and although the British public might not agree with me, she is doing no different than the UK. She is looking after her own country that has a lot more to lose than France if the Euro fails.
Wasn't there a single dissenting Québécois?
Probably thousands...lol
Be well IAN 2411
The Tester`
12-17-2011, 05:50 AM
Proud to be Canadian...
We never forget about Canada here, only speaking for my Master and myself. Every time our government does yet another stupid thing he says "Let's move to Canada". And I say "ok, I have a friend in Thunder Bay, we could go live near her". And that's the end of it.