Complex Individual Identity

In Canadian history, nationalism and sovereignty tend to be common themes prevalent since Confederation. A well-known example of this in Quebec was during the Quiet Revolution which strengthened the need for change through Premier Lesage’s reforms and in turn, developed a strong sense of nationalism in Quebec. In contrast to beliefs that the rapid modernization of the Quiet Revolution had a positive impact on Quebec, it rather had a negative impact on Quebec and its citizens and identity. The three consequences which arose in Quebec as a result of the revolution are the encouragement of separatism, the elimination of traditional values and roles and the establishment of powerful bureaucratic control. Quebec’s attempt to be more like the

Due to the bitter rivalries of their mother countries, the two sides also had a strong feels of animosity against one another. This animosity was furthered when the French surrendered New France. This cession of French territory to the British occurred after the French and Indian Wars of the mid 18th century; specifically after the treaty of Paris in February 20th of 1763. The essential annexation brought about much anger within the French. This was illustrated during the highlights of the Patriote movement (the rebellions of 1837 and 1838) and the secession of New France to become British. These events, along with prior rivalry with Britain and its colonies brought forth a substantial amount of Francophone nationalism. Though the rebellion was also caused by famine and poverty on some level, it was the strong French nationalism was the spark that brought about Canada’s first “civil war.”

Not many people recognize what the Suez Crisis is, but to those who do, they all know that Lester B. Pearson played a crucial role in the neutralization of the situation. In 1956 3 , Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal, thus triggering a crisis. Britain and France soon joined in a coalition along with Israel, in order to topple the Egyptian government. The invasion was halted due to pressure from the U.N. Lester B. Pearson understood that France, Britain and Israel could not all hold onto the Suez Canal without consequences, most thought of a war of some sort. He also understood that the war would cause NATO and the Commonwealth to crack under the pressure. Knowing this, Lester B. Pearson convinced the U.N. peacekeeping force in an impressive 57-0 4 fashion, thus diffusing the Suez Crisis altogether. For his contributions, he was awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace. This is a defining moment in Canadian history and is often regarded as the start to Canada’s humble and nice keeping persona and it all started because of this man.

Nationalism is an important aspect of national pride and identity for countries around the world. For example, Canada takes pride in its cultural identity, one that is claimed to be different from other ‘Western’ more ‘industrialized’ nations, such as countries in Europe, and the United States. Even though Canada currently has a national identity that differs greatly from that of other more established countries, history has dictated the way in which a particular national identity exists today. In Canada, Samuel De Champlain and the French established colonies that created a cultural clash between the French Europeans, and First-Nations Canadians within the country. However, this notion of French Canadian Nationalism isn’t necessarily embraced by all of the Canadian Population. This paper seeks to analyze important pieces of Canadian History that have contributed to a broken concept of what constitutes Canadian nationalism, with an emphasis on how historic events prevent and affect coherent Canadian Nationalism in modern society. Through the analysis of the notions and histories associated with ‘First-Nations Nationalism’, ‘Quebecois Nationalism’, and a broader ‘Anti-American’ identity embraced by many Canadians, this paper seeks to locate common ground within the culturally diverse Canadian population in order to progress toward a singular coherent

The Suez crisis was a conflict that could have easily turned into a third World War. With a battle between the Israelis and Egyptians at Sinai, the British and French invasion of Egypt, and nuclear threats from the Soviet Union, all of the elements were present to escalate the conflict and pull other countries into the fray. Canada had no direct ties to the Suez crisis, in terms of control or economic interest. However, Canadian Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Lester B. Pearson, persuaded the UN General Assembly to send in the United Nations Emergency Force. Even though Lester B. Pearson dismayed the Commonwealth with his measures for peace, Canada was recognized for starting the first ever United Nations Peacekeeping mission.

From the Confederation of Canada, to present day, French Canadians have always thought that Canada's path towards the future should be embodied in a different manner. Several events in Canadian History have resulted in several heated feelings between French and English Canadians. Though the majority of English Speaking Canadians have tried to reconcile with French Canadians by making several attempts to mend their relationships, the question about the needs of French Canadians still exists. Through an extremely thorough analysis of several key sources, it is evident that the needs of French Canadians were, undoubtedly, not met, which shall be plainly and exhaustively proven through an in depth analysis of French Canadian Nationalism,

Though the separatist movements came very close to achieving their goal, the steady actions of PM Chrétian show a change in attitude towards French Canadians in within the country. The fact that Chrétian managed to succeed in keeping Quebec from separating further proves that the perspective of cultural differences in Canada started to develop for the better. The language rights within Canada add depth to the sincere maturity and growth that Canada has experienced in the years after WWII. Some direct impacts were the immediate enactments of French policies within the federal government, and indirectly the language rights reduced tension within all of Canada and mainly Quebec. Over the years, language rights have helped the country learn to blend itself back into a bilingual nation of acceptance and diversity. Canada, during the years after WWII, managed to stop the cultural bond between the French and the English from further deteriorating and helped to repair previous bruises by accepting Quebec’s ideas and beliefs, by enacting language rights, and through Chrétian’s active attendance to maintaining the balance between French and English

The focus of this investigation will be “To what extend did the conflict between cultures and all they contain (languages, traditions, races) fuel the formation of the Canadian Confederation?” and will analyze how the different cultures, races, languages, and traditions fueled the formation of the Canadian confederation. There are a variety of reasons why the Canadian confederation formed, but I believe the conflict between the different cultures in Canada was a very large cause in the formation of the Confederation. I will research the specific conflicts in culture that were occurring in Canada pre-Confederation. How these conflicts affected the current government and life in Canada. Why Canadian leaders saw these conflicts as a reason to

It is a well known fact that through Canadian history, English and French Canadians did not get along very well. French and English Canadians had many differences throughout history, and as time got closer to the 21st century, situations between these two groups of people got worse and worse. Their main differences, as seen in the visual component of my CPT, were usually around times of war, when conscription was a very big topic. However, we cannot forget the post World War II situations that caused Canada to change forever. Therefore, the top three events that really caused transformations in relations of French and English Canadians were the conscription crisis of 1917, the Union Nationale of the 1930s, and the Official Languages Act of

Finally in 1867, the United Canadas joined two other British Colonies, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick to form the Dominion of Canada (McRoberts 1991, 413). French-Canadians continued to fight against assimilation and received autonomous privileges with exclusive jurisdiction over matters regarding its cultural distinctiveness***. Thus, the Francophone language and culture has always been at the forefront of Quebec priorities. Since Confederation, Quebec nationalist have felt that the Francophone language and culture has been at risk of assimilation by the rest of Canada. As a result, Quebec nationalism is fundamentally rooted in the preservation of the Francophone language and culture (Guiberneau 2006, 52). Political leaders in Quebec continuously urge for the recognition that Canada is composed of two nations or cultures (McRoberts 1991, 413). Prior to confederation Quebec enjoyed numerous autonomous privileges. Unfortunately, post-confederation Quebec did not enjoy as many autonomous privileges because Canada was created as a relatively centralized federation (Beland and Lecours 2007, 406). A centralized federation not only took several of these autonomous powers away from Quebec, but it also threatened the Francophone language and culture (Beland and Lecours 2007, 406). With this said, Quebec nationalism has placed a great deal of pressure on the federal government to decentralize, giving more powers to provincial governments.

The Suez Crisis was a military and political conflict in Egypt. Directly linking the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea, the Suez Canal was constructed by Egyptian workers under the French and British-owned Suez Canal Company. Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser seized the canal and the rationale for nationalizing the canal was to use the shipping tolls to finance the construction of the Aswan Dam. Since, the canal was a vital route for oil travelling to Britain, the move worried western governments because if Egypt blocked the flow of oil, British economy would suffer. As a result of diplomacy failing to produce a solution, without informing the NATO allies, France, Britain and Israel secretly plotted to attack. Canada’s secretary of state for external affairs (foreign minister), Lester B. Pearson, created a peaceful solution, but even though the votes were for the solution, British and French paratroops ignored the vote. The Suez Crisis relates to the themes of peacekeeping and international relations.

Suez Crisis - A military attack on Egypt by Britain, France, and Israel, beginning on 29 October 1956, with the intention to occupy the Sinai Peninsula and to take over the Suez Canal. The attack followed Egypt's decision of 26 July 1956 to nationalize the Suez Canal after the withdrawal of an offer by Britain and the United States to fund the building of the Aswan Dam. Although the Israeli invasion of the Sinai was successful, the US and USSR forced it to retreat. Even so, Israel managed to re-open the Straits of Tiran and pacified its southern

To the Egyptians, this was Nasser regularly exercising his authority, but to the majority of the surrounding countries, they saw it as an act of power. It is argued that Nasser was abusing his power since he did not communicate with any source of council or legislature about his nationalization of the canal and that he stripped the power away from the previous owners; the British and the French. Surrounding countries held a meeting given by the Australian Prime Minister, Robert Menzies, proposing that Egypt makes Suez Canal international, but Nasser denied this and claimed it to be legal and still properly functional. If Nasser and his people viewed the canal as still properly functional and legal, then Nasser’s actions were only him exercising his use of authority, not abuse of power. At this moment, Nasser rejected the proposal of making the canal international. He kept the ownership of the canal to Egypt even after they proposed a deal, showing Nasser's use of power in an international way. In a national type of way, Nasser was doing what was right for his country since the Suez Canal is in his country and the people of his country supported him. The British and the French then made an ultimatum. They turned Israel on Egypt and this caused Israel to attack Egypt and to reach the canal. Once this happened, the British and the French came and called for a ceasefire and they told the people their ultimatums. Nasser still chose to deny the deals which the British and French proposed knowing that his country will be attacked by a stronger army making the people of Egypt worried, but they still had faith in the strong leader Nasser was. The people of Egypt were worried about the casualties to come and didn’t consent to Nasser’s actions at this point. Nasser controlled his army and the people and forced them to fight for their

The Suez war began in 1956 when the President Gamal Abdel Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal. Due to the canal’s great importance to the British and they colluded with Israel and France to regain control of the canal. The Suez Canal was especially important to the British because it connected the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean through the Red Sea. (Milner) This strategic location allowed them to trade and move across the world giving them control of their colonies. However, on July 26, 1956 President Nasser decided to nationalize the Suez Canal due to his anger at the British for withdrawing their loan offer to Egypt. (Milner) Consequently, the nationalization of the canal was a strategic move to lessen the British’s economic and political control of Egypt, which had lasted since 1882. Many Egyptians were unhappy with British’s occupation of their country so Nasser’s policies were popular in the Middle East. This was because the “expression of national

Human beings naturally are social creatures. In order to survive, humans have since been working together. People rely to each other in order to remain alive, whether it be with finding food, building houses, or with finding jobs. There is one famous quote by John Donne that says “No man is an island”. Humans have this need to belong in a group. This need for co-existing is what lead people into forming nations. Nations are groups of people who have a very strong bond of identity; may it be with having the same ethnicity or with having the same interests. One known description of a nation is Benedict Anderson’s (1983) conception of nations as imagined communities. They are imagined “because the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow-members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the minds of each lives the image of their communion” (Anderson, 1983, p. 15). By belonging in a certain nation or growing up in a certain environment, one develops their own national identity. There are a lot of factors as to how you can identify to a certain nation. Certain factors would be your language, ethnicity, culture, relationship to your land, your religion, spirituality, views with politics, or your land’s geography. As social beings, having a group you identify with has a very great effect on you. However, there also are