Canada Steers Closer to Europe Than the U.S. on Social Issues (NYT)

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/02/international/americas/02CANA.html?ex=1070946000&en=37b83e09654ed443&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

ORONTO, Dec. 1 — Canadians and Americans still dress alike, talk alike, like the same books, television shows and movies, and trade more goods and services than ever before. But from gay marriage to drug use to church attendance, a chasm has opened up on social issues that go to the heart of fundamental values.

A more distinctive Canadian identity — one far more in line with European sensibilities — is emerging and generating new frictions with the United States.

"Being attached to America these days is like being in a pen with a wounded bull," Rick Mercer, Canada's leading political satirist, said at a recent show in Toronto. "Between the pot smoking and the gay marriage, quite frankly it's a wonder there is not a giant deck of cards out there with all our faces on it."

Mr. Mercer acknowledged in an interview that he was overstating the case for laughs — two Canadian provinces have legalized gay marriage, and Ottawa has moved to decriminalize use of small amounts of marijuana. But in the view of many experts the two countries are heading in different directions, at least for the time being
<snip>

But I hate when people sneer at "those Americans" and act all snootish by being sophisticated European. I even conversed with one netizen who claimed that Europeans were better people than Americans because they did not wage war on natives and amongst themselves like the Americans. Then I pointed out the many many activities in the most violent continent in the history of the world. Grecian brothers killing each other, imperialist Rome, the Dark Ages, the Crusades and Inquisition, Robespierre's Reign of Terror, Hitler, Stalin... Boy oh boy... I love Europe, and I really want to visit London and Rome in particular, but I hate cultural elitism.

This article is about social policy, which in Europe is undoubtedly far more progressive than it is in the US.

If Europeans seem to you to be sneering at Americans, it may be in large part that (1) Europeans in the EU have much to be proud of. Not least of which are those social policies, but also the fact that the Union was devised--and has succeeded--as a force for peace. The members of the Union have maintained a half-century of peace amongst themselves, the longest single such period in the entire history of the Continent. In creating the Union they have embarked on an unprecedented experiment in international relations.

And those sneers might also be explained by the fact that (2) Americans are largely oblivious to their own cultural elitism. Europeans, having lived through centuries of war and the loss of tens of millions of lives in the 20th century alone, put little faith in nationalism... or patriotism for that matter as it might be defined in the US. Americans, on the other hand, accept it as a patriotic article of faith that everything American is superior. Few Americans speak any language but English or know anything about what goes beyond the US border... which in a world of 6 billion people is rather elitist, don't you think, particularly since Americans pride themselves on having the best nation in the world and even "leading" the world. Europeans look at the electoral process, drug laws, capital punishment, racial inequality, environmental waste, and massive poverty in the US and say Americans are not quite what they imagine themselves to be.

Id be there in a heartbeat if they would take me. The US is not MY country anymore, even if I have to live here. Its been a coup since 2000 and remains a coup fast approaching a fascist state.

in my book..... However the word needs to get out there. Keep the pressure on!

by treating Canada like dirt, he actually raised our profile in a positive way. Canadians are very proud, by and large, that we said NO to Bush re Iraq, that we support the very things his radical right wing supporters detest. So, if there is anything Bush did I can say "Yesss" to, it is that he pissed us off enough for us to see more clearly how different we really are.


Canadian polls are clear, we aren't upset at Americans, we ARE upset at the Bush administration.

sell everything and go hunt relatives. Maybe hide there until sanity returns... In another 3-4 decades. :evilgrin:

With my ability to cross all my toes and fingers, the repubs don't have a chance, the dems will turf the pretender out and a dem will take their rightful place!

we're actually a pretty stubborn bunch when someone pisses us off. That whole polite business is just a convenient way to get out of trouble ;-)

made by an American student at McGill University, who said... "that despite her own liberal views, she sometimes tired of the anti-Americanism she encountered among Canadian students." After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, she said, an old roommate told her that "the U.S. deserved 9/11 because we're bullies.".....Anyone living in Canada during that 9/11 period will remember how the whole country mourned and empathised with Americans....A spontaneous gathering of 100,000 Canadians on Parliament Hill....(the U.S.A. Ambassador came out and commented with tears in his eyes, how touched he was)...American flags flew from millions of Canadian homes and thousands of fire fighters and medical helpers went to New York....There was a genuine outpouring of love and feeling of closeness to our southern neighbours and we all wanted to do whatever we could to help!....If some one said to the McGill student that America "deserved it because we're bullies."....Well...there is always someone who will say something like that, but that is certainly not the general consensus.....As for the we're different from you theory...well I think we're not really all that different...You've just been taken over by a terrible group of people in your government at present, but you won't always have them and things will get back to normal...:loveya:

It is very anti-American you know.

at the present time!

You assume way too much.

to me.....You and I had this conversation months ago...Are you going into the Francophone versus French Canadian thing again?....I have French Canadian Quebecers in my family...As I said before when you went into your rant about this, Francophone is a relatively recent word used to describe French Canadians....You I believe came up from the U.S.A. in recent years and now live in Quebec...That does not make you an expert....

would respond negatively to anti-French sentiments in the U.S? What's their motivation? Camarederie with the French (from France)?

I believe came up from the U.S.A. in recent years and now live in Quebec...That does not make you an expert....

So what? I live and work in Montreal, this is my home, I bought a house here and speak pretty good French, I also plan on raising my family here. I also think that I know a lot more of what is going on in my city than a casual observer - whatever their nationality.

The only exceptions are when people like De Gaulle and Chirac use Quebec Nationalism to further their political agendas. Otherwise, they're just a bunch of former colonials to them.

When the French youth is dreaming a new life abroad, for a long time, it doesn't have an US dream any more but a Canadian dream. I don't think it's a colonialist dream. ;-)

I'd be happy to be proven wrong on this one. Many French-Canadians I know feel that France does not care for them.

French speaking Canadians are almost always welcomed with particular warmth in France. We love their accents, we love their history, we love their fighting spirit in maintaining their language and culture.

And, by the way, you need to take a look a little beyond Quebec. The Acadians of Novia Scotia are adamantly pro-France--many of them still harbor real antagonism toward the English-speaking community for having deported thousands of their French-speaking ancestors to the US and France in the mid-18th century (1755-1763).

Only Quebec could hold a grudge going back to the plains of abraham ;-) They didn't want to fight in the second and first world wars because they still say the France abandoned them after that battle.

Kinda like the Serbian obsession with the battle of Kosovo field (1389?) Nationalist movements based on historical grudges are no good.

the two original founding nations in Canada....(Now don't anyone tell me about the aboriginals...Of course they are the original people in Canada!)...:)

Canada (including Quebec) and France are both active and committed members of La Francophonie, a rough equivalent to the Commonwealth, consisting of French-speaking (and bilingual or multilingual) nations around the world. The Quebec-France relationship is largely structured by those kinds of relations these days. La Francophonie engages in the same kind of cultural and political exchanges, and aid efforts, as the Commonwealth. There are even Francophonie games.

Just one more aspect of the world at large that USAmericans (and sad to say, probably most English-speaking Canadians) are unaware of.

http://www.francophonie.org/
Unfortunately, it's in French ...
The sections of the site include "peace, democracy and human rights", "cultural diversity and dialogue among cultures" and "sustainable development".

Member states: http://www.francophonie.org/membres/etats/
shown in light blue on the map below.

This is another institution through which states, peoples and cultures engage one another, in the world, to address mutual concerns and share experience.

...instead of québécois ;)

Semantics will get you into a lot of trouble here.

Good luck.

the one that can differentiate is sovreignist vs quebecois. One denotes being a quebecer the other denotes a separatist. There are many quebecers that are pro-Canada, there are no separatists that are.

All my inlaws are ardent Federalist yet describe themselves as québécois, most of my workmates of québécois origin feel the same way. It is indeed a distinct culture and society from the rest of Canada. Have you ever been to Québec?

glarius would like us to believe that half the people here that voted NON during the referendums go around saying "mais oui, je suis fier d'être canadienne francaise!", which is just a bunch of bollocks.

people in Quebec who voted "oui" thought they would still be Canadian citizens.... Of course it's a distinct society!....That is accepted as a fact. ....I think you are trying to show how proficient you are in the French language...Well...bully for you but that does not mean that you especially understand Quebec OR Canada!!!!!

P.S. You asked..have I ever been to Quebec....I said I have lived there (in the province) and was born and raised in Ontario very close to the Quebec border...Read earlier postings on this thread...

"Do you wish to renegotiate Quebec's relationship with Canada" Yes or No. That could mean anything. What a bunch of cowards the PQ are. They inserted a clause that if the negotiations failed after a year, they'd declare Independence.

I'm glad we don't have to deal with them for the next three and a half years. They left the incoming party with a $4 billion deficit!

people in Quebec who voted "oui" thought they would still be Canadian citizens...

The referendum issue was whether Québec as a province should separate. The people that wanted to be a part of Canada voted "NON", the separatists voted "OUI".

Of course it's a distinct society!....That is accepted as a fact

Which is why they refer to themselves as québécois or Quebeckers, it has nothing to do with the whole Federalist/Separatist brouhaha

bully for you but that does not mean that you especially understand Quebec OR Canada!!!!!

I rarely give opinions on Canada as a whole and i've only travelled Ontario, PEI, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick as far as provinces go, that said I know a lot more about Québec and her people than most Canadians I have met - its not arrogance, its a fact. I live here, I work here, I interact with the people of Québec and Montréal on a daily basis, what more understanding do you want?

parliament passed (thank God)...has made an unclear decision impossible...You do not understand Canada intrinsically just as Canadians do not understand Americans intrinsically....Enough said!!

Which came much later. You erroneously refered to the "YES" votes as those that wished Québec to remain a part of Canada.

Try reading comprehension.

What was said, and your reply:

people in Quebec who voted "oui" thought they would still be Canadian citizens...

The referendum issue was whether Québec as a province should separate. The people that wanted to be a part of Canada voted "NON", the separatists voted "OUI".


And SOME people who voted yes DID believe that they would retain Canadian citizenship after "separation", which is the point that you were responding to. ("People" = "some people", not "all people".) THAT was the point, I believe.

The requirement for clarity, and negotiation rather than unilateralism, was addressed by the Clarity Act and the Supreme Court's decision in Reference re Secession of Quebec.

I find discussions of Québécois sensibilities and aspirations being conducted in the absence of any actual Québécois rather pointless, myself.

.

I find discussions of Québécois sensibilities and aspirations being conducted in the absence of any actual Québécois rather pointless, myself.


;)

"Kinda like Canadians debating American politics"

... you'd care to expand. Any particular Canadians, and any particular debating points?

Surely you wouldn't be saying that Canadians should not be heard to express opinions on USAmerican FOREIGN POLICY.

Me, I just kinda see a difference between ANYONE expressing an opinion on USAmerican foreign policy and USAmericans nattering on about ... well, in this case, the thing is that I don't actually know what, but of course I don't care, either.

Any other aspect of "American politics" that you've noticed any Canadians here sticking their noses into all uninvited lately?

.

Please stop trying to tell us what we think....If I say what I really think about you, I will probanly get deleted!

the situation. I did not say that it does not have a distinct culture, the discussion was on symantics or so I read and, on that point, I agreed the term was quebecois.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Quebecor....the normal type liberals who are federalist

and the Quebecois - Chain smoking separatist who hate english people

now that the Clarity Act has come about...forcing them to ask a clear question if they hold another referendem...They won't hold one since they know from the polls that most Quebec people do not want to leave Canada.
"Quebecois - Chain smoking separatist who hate english people"...where did you get that weird definition of what Quebecois means?????

there is a tie to France, however tentative...I found your comment rude....saying I assume too much, and calling me a "casual observer"....I don't assume anything....I also lived in Quebec a few years as a young adult...and I KNOW FRENCH CANADIANS!

Just wondering. ;)

work visa?

Just wondering. :)

And a Permanent Resident of Canada. No Canadian passport for me, the American one takes me wherever I want.

that explains everything, thanks!

Why are you trying to prove you are more Canadian than people born in Canada?....That is the impression I get from your postings?

And wonder why Quebeckers don't call themselves "French Canadians"? This is rich.

British?Anglo Canadian?...We don't designate ourselves in these categories that seem so important to you...But the fact is French Canadians do call themselves French Canadians!...Why do you think that is an insult???...By the way...I am English, Irish, French, and my husband is a direct descendant of Louis Riel...Do you know who he is?...This is so stupid!!!

Canadian, unlike those who use sarcasm as their response. It speaks well for OUR Canadian manner of debate!

I just read your posting and I really appreciate what you said!

Two days after the event took place, I was on a bus from Woodstock New Brunswick to Trois Rivereis...I couldn't believe how many Quebec farmhouses were flying American flags...almost everyone.

If the real Quebecois farmer types were showing support I can't imagine Montreal being muc different.

Canadians and their government value freedom, pure and simple. The Government is not full of an elite that hovers and hides.

Average Americans value freedom but are powerless in front of the government and certain plutocratic groups who know if they can control something, anything, they can make money on it...

because they have more freedom than we have, and don't have to fear police brutality as we do. As long as they are peaceful they have noting to fear. We are in a very bad way in this country. What happened in Miami when attorneys and press people were shot and arrested marks the beginning of a police state in the USA.

Do you really think that will HELP our cause?

I don't. I think Canadian protests make it look like they protest America and aid *.

I was on 3 of the 5 protest marches/demos in my city prior to the attack on Iraq (missed the other 2 because I was with my dad in hospital in another city) -- through sleet and snow and dark of night, literally. Just as I was 35 years ago at the age of 15 when the victims were the Vietnamese people.

In both cases, we held our protests on the same days as the protests in the US, and we demonstrated *with* you. I was on the streets when Reagan was here, and I plan to be there if Bush ever decides to show his face / exhibit a little respect for his best friends in the world by paying us a visit.

Now, we do have the occasional spot of bother with police; don't think it's actually utopia up here. But yes, generally -- dissent is recognized as legitimate in Canada. Despite all the fine words spoken by those dead white guys so many USAmericans love to quote, dissent is for the most part regarded as treasonous in the US.

That's the attitude that the US takes toward its "allies" like Canada when we dare to disagree. There is no acknowledgement that a loyal friend (like a loyal citizen) can disagree, and even oppose, and still be loyal.

A loyal ally who disagrees may be acting in its own interests, which it is fully entitled to do, and may even be acting in the interests of its friend if it sees the friend doing something that is contrary to the friend's interests. We certainly see a lot of US foreign policy as being contrary not only to our interests and the interests of the rest of the world, but also as contrary to USAmericans' interests.

So have no fear, we do indeed protest, right alongside you.

.

ignores our protests while covering those in Europe and the rest of the world...This is why the average American is unaware of what is going on here...I have friends and relatives in the U.S.A who were unaware that 40,000 passengers and hundreds of planes were landed in Canada (right across the country) and looked after for almost a week when they were "diverted" on 9/11....All CNN or the other networks would say was that the planes which should have landed in the states were "diverted."....Why they didn't say Canada is anybody's guess...

P.S....One of the magazine shows, 20/20, Dateline or whatever did a story a couple of months later about the landings in Newfoundland...They made a big thing of that in that show, but never mentioned that Newfoundland was only a portion of what was actually done for the air passengers....The U.S.A. passengers themselves have been generous in their thanks to their northern neighbours, but as I said MOST AMERICANS ARE UNAWARE!

I have noticed when the US media talk about the forces in Afghanistan, they mention the German ones but not the Canadian ones. I wonder why not?

right now....All Americans hear is the likes of Bill O'Reilly or Rush Limbaugh bad-mouthing Canada as not being a true friend...(because we didn't join the Iraq attack)

... the eyes seem to glaze over when they encounter a thread with "Canada" in the title ... notice how it's just us again?

Sure, everybody'd really really like to move here, but the idea of knowing what we're all about because it simply might be worth knowing what other people are all about, well, not so popular.

I liked what Paschall said earlier in this thread:

Americans, on the other hand, accept it as a patriotic article of faith that everything American is superior. Few Americans speak any language but English or know anything about what goes beyond the US border... which in a world of 6 billion people is rather elitist, don't you think, particularly since Americans pride themselves on having the best nation in the world and even "leading" the world.

That "leading" bit. How anyone can not just claim to be the bestest without knowing what anything else actually is, let alone (claim to be entitled to) lead anyone else about whom they know pretty close to precisely nothing.

It just gets to sound an awful lot like "let them eat cake". "We" know what's best for everybody else, even though we don't know who they are or what they want or what they have.

Even those of "them" who don't claim to know what's best for the rest of us, or to want to impose their vision of it on us, don't do us any service by not knowing anything about us.

One cannot be an effective advocate for people without knowing about them. One cannot disclaim the USAmerican propensity for trying to impose US notions on the rest of the world without an understanding of that world. Otherwise, the effect is simply a push toward an isolationist mentality, which leaves the field free for those who seek to intervene in ways that are not in the rest of the world's interests -- when what is wanted and needed is involvement, engagement with the rest of the world, in all our interests.

Sunday's episode of The Practice was an ugly example of non-interventionism gone awry. The issue was a 12-yr-old girl refusing to return to Romania where her parents were going to compel her to engage in an arranged marriage with an older boy. The result would, of course, be that she would be a victim of sexual assault -- forced sexual relations with her "husband" against her will.

Such coercion and abuse is contrary to the values held and promoted by the international community -- the community of nations, the community of the inhabitants of earth -- as expressed in various international human rights instruments. The fact that some cultures permit and even encourage the abuse of some of their members -- in this case, female children -- does not mean that the practice is a "cultural value" that others must respect and not interfere in.

But the writers played on all the resentment of US interference in other cultures and attempts to impose USAmerican "values" to conclude that here was an instance of where the US should not intervene, and should permit the parents to take the child out of the US and subject her to this abuse, because it just wasn't up to USAmericans to condemn someone else's "culture".

The real story is that if the US would engage with the rest of the world in efforts to define and apply human values and standards that can be applied legitimately, because they are the subject of a broad consensus, then nobody at all would object.

We would in fact welcome such engagement. We would be overjoyed if the US and USAmericans would stop bleating about everybody in the rest of the world trying to tell it what to do (witness the US's refusal to ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the statute of the International Criminal Court), and stop trying to tell everyone else what to do, and recognize that it and they are of the world, not separate from or above it, and participate.

And a little interest in and knowledge of what the rest of us get up to when we're not thinking about the US, which is of course most of the time, would be a welcome start.

.

Canada took over ISAF command from Germany - and has now more soldiers in Afghanistan than Germany.

It is discouraging to me as a Canadian to see that my country, which shares North America with the United States, is sort of swept aside as being inconsequential by the U.S.A. media (not the American people) in the scheme of things, when I know that we are doing our share against terrorism....Thank you for what you said....The thing is ALMOST EVERYONE in the civilized world, except the Bush administration and Blair of Britain, knows that the Iraq attack was a wrong move...:)
edit---I just wanted to add that CNN did an update on the Afghanistan situation a few days ago, with Christianne Amanpour...She talked about all the non-American troops staioned there, EXCEPT CANADA!...WHY?....She had to know the truth...I don't get it!

I think every soldier in such a dangerous deployment should be paid the due respect. The one way to do this, is not to ignore or redicule any nation's role in a common endeavor (be it right, wrong or any shade of grey).

It is a strange way to thank an ally - they've stopped doing it with Germany (at least it isn't as bad anymore), I don't know why they're still doing it to Canada.

Were it not so tragic, I would find it funny how the UK moves to the USA, while Canada is pushed into the same corner as "old" Europe.

All we can do is hope for the best!

I absolutely do NOT care to live in a fundamentalist theocracy, especially one where extremists push their values on the majority. I simply do NOT believe the same things they do and neither do most people, but why should that stop them from shoving their Taliban views down the Country's throat. We really ARE heading backwards fast while the rest of the planet moves ahead.

I discussed some of the statistics in class, and there were audible gasps from the students. Who'd a thunk that AMERICANS would end up being more deferential to authority than us (Canadians are supposed to be wimps, eh?)

When CNN opened offices in Canada they brought up some managers from U.S. offices to run them and after awhile they had a rash of stress leaves. Canadians were just not prepared to be treated as poorly as apparently their American counterparts were used too.

I read all the threads people make about horrible employers and such and I can't even comprehend it. Canada and Europe have realized the better you treat your workers the more productive they. It seems the U.S. still likes to adhere to the old school sweatshop factories of the 1800's and of course there are acceptions to the rule in both countries.

Oh and about Canada in Afghanistan. I don't even think the media cares about Afghanistan much less whose there. Oh except that Laura wants to see that hospital that was named after her. Maybe she'll get to go and she can eat some babies or something. I can actually picture her eating babies you know.

Hopefully my track record as a thread-killer will work here.

I know just enough about the situation to get both sides of this coin united.

Against me.

And I LIKE Canada.

Just people feeling a bit frisky today, I guess.

It's damn cold up here, we are stuck inside so watch out!

and had to turn the AC off.

Where's your sense of humour????

The copy is from an old B. Kliban cartoon.

Mosher is???...He does great cartoons too!!!

Winters here and the rest of the year among people that don't have concealed weapon permits.

While I've travelled to europe, I've never been to Canada. The only thing I know truly about your country is that it seems to be as non-violent as we are violent killers.

My knowledge of Canada is limited to what was taught in high school a half century ago. But my feeling about the differences between the two countries is reflected in the way each began.

The US and canada had the same basic differences with england AFAIK, but the way we went about solving those differences was instructive. While Canada used diplomacy, the US, as is our want, picked up the gun and started killing human beings. The irony is that if we had waited just a little while longer we would have gotten whatever we wanted because england was at the time fighting a terribly expensive war on the other side of the atlantic and we were not much more than an irritant to them. We have been a nation of killers from our beginning, and I see no sign that we will ever change. Tho it's possible that what bush has done to us economically will make us no longer a major player.

America, first among the third world.