What Country?

No, this is not a quiz.  

There is a myth that the land we call Canada is an actual country.  But these days it certainly doesn’t feel that way.  Rather it appears to be ten individual fiefdoms each with their own agenda and no regard for other fiefdoms.  We call these fiefdoms “provinces” as if they were part of something bigger.  But more and more, each province is only concerned about looking out for its own interests.  British Columbia is at odds with Alberta.  Quebec would block a pipeline that would benefit the Maritime provinces and allow our resources to benefit the whole country.  Several provinces are threatening to or are in the process of suing the federal government over several issues. (Federal government, as seen by the provinces – an entity only good for dispensing money to provinces) 

“Whenever you have an efficient government you have a dictatorship.”
  - Harry S Truman

The provinces, most lately Ontario, are now realizing the power they have with the “not withstanding” clause of the Charter or Rights and Freedoms.  This clause, which is in no other constitution in the free world, basically says that as a premier of a province, I can basically get away with any law I want, no matter how unfair or egregious it may be. This gives a premier more power to ignore our rights than the President of the United States.  In other words, Doug Ford can trample on more rights than Donald Trump.  There is no “not withstanding” clause in the United States Constitution.  Although the government of Ontario did not use that clause in this instant because of a technical decision by an appeals court, the mere fact that the Premier threatened to use at any time for any reason should give every one of us a reason to be concerned.

The US fought a civil war over state’s rights, and a strong central government won.  Hopefully we don’t have to go through a modern-day equivalent of that.

 

So how can you hold together a country where the power of the central government can be thwarted by any province?  Or where the Supreme Court can be so easily ignored?  Mr. Ford, and others of the right wing, are even questioning the authority of courts.  They claim that they should be allowed to do whatever they want since they are elected, and judges are “only” appointed.  After fighting for hundreds of years over the idea of Common Law (which means law that applies (is common) to everyone equally) and the power of an independent judiciary to adjudicate such law, we are now to accept the idea that that is all bunkum and we should just let any head of government do whatever they like for four years with no recourse.  That to me is totally unacceptable as it should be for anyone who truly believes that governments should be held accountable.

If we truly want a country rather than ten fiefdoms we must become a mature country.  A mature country is confident in their democratic principles.  A mature country recognizes the superior authority of the federal government.  A mature country lives by its constitution and the power of the courts to uphold that constitution.  A mature country has provinces that support the ambitions of other provinces and don’t hold artificial barriers in the way of progress. Confederation, after all, was intended to allow free markets between the provinces.  A mature country does not need a “not withstanding” clause.

“Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it.”
  - George Bernard Shaw

Cultural Appropriation

As a Scotsman, I demand that only people with a Scottish background be allowed to sing Scottish songs or play Scottish music, particularly the bagpipes.  No more Auld Lang Syne by Italian tenors or non-Scottish New Year’s Eve drunks (us Scots call it Hogmanay).  No more A Scottish Soldier by Irish singers.  And while we’re at it, only Scottish actors must be allowed to act in MacBeth (even if it was written by an Englishman.  Another sign of cultural appropriation?).  Similarly, only Italians should play Julius Caesar.  And only Canadians should play Mounties or Canadian sailors.

“No man is exempt from saying silly things; the mischief is to say them deliberately.”
  - Michel de Montaigne

But that all seems a bit ridiculous, doesn’t it?  Shakespeare gave his plays to the world and the world has embraced them in many different languages.  Some of the greatest actors to play Shylock were non-Jews.  The greatest actors to play Hamlet were not Danes.  Everyone sings Auld Lange Syne because it was meant to apply to everyone.  And I love John McDermott (an Irishman) singing A Scottish Soldier.  Playwrights and authors have consistently written about other peoples and cultures without recrimination.  My son, who is a published author, has written and had published a great short story about an Ethiopian jazz musician and he never heard any criticism from Ethiopians.

So why is it that certain groups condemn anyone “appropriating” their music or stories?  One of the favourite targets for our First Nations is Joseph Boyden.  I have read several of his books and I find his depiction of First Nation’s people to be very sympathetic.  The brouhaha over the casting of a couple of plays recently has even forced the cancelation of at least one production.  The same attitude is apparent among certain African-American groups who say that only African Americans should be able to write about them.  And yet one of the oldest and most powerful books about black slavery, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, was written by a white woman, Harriet Beecher Stowe.  And it spurred on the abolition movement in the US.  

If these groups want their stories told or their music appreciated, they should give it to the world and let the world enhance it, act in it or play it.  That way, their art will be remembered and appreciated by more people.

 

Now I don’t mean that I condone those who write about other races in a derogatory or stereotypical fashion.  This type of writing is particularly favoured by fiction writers.  You know, the “all Columbian are drug lords/all Arabs are jihadists/all Russians are spies” type of adventure stories.  Nor do I support writers who distort the history of different ethnic or religious groups.  But I do support any writing that describes people sympathetically and honestly no matter what the writer’s background may be.  

So, let’s look critically and sympathetically at writing, music, art and poetry that some would label cultural appropriation.