Conformity In Canada

Canada is a democratic country. Canadians elect the parliament and the Prime Minister. But because Canada is a market economy, jobs, prices and the economic situation depends on big businesses. The fact that American companies own such a huge part of Canadian industry that it puts them in control of business in Canada. In other words a straight economical dependence, where Canadian people are no longer in control of things in their own country. A good example is a situation when American corporation buys a Canadian company. They take Canadian workers only for low paid positions. Most of the managers, accountants, sales executives who really control big business operations in Canada are Americans. Most of the times the specialists who work in American owned companies in Canada are also brought from America on contracts. In this case Canada is too depended to act the way it wants without support from the U.S.

For years, Rwanda has been a hotbed of racial tension. The majority of the Rwandan population is made up of Hutu's, with Tutsi's making up the rest of it. Ever since European colonial powers entered the country and favoured the Tutsi ethnic group over the Hutu by putting Tutsi people in all important positions in society, there has been a decisive political divide between the two groups. This favouring of the Tutsi over the Hutu, and the Hutu subjugation as an ethnic lower class resulted in the civil war and revolution of 1959, where the Hutu overthrew the Tutsi dominated government, and resulted in Rwanda gaining their independence in 1962.

Canada, was once a respected peacekeeper now a disgrace to its past. Canada was once the primary contributor to the United Nations for peacekeeping. Now Canada is not even close to being regarded as a contributor. Even the people in Canada do not think that Canada has any involvement in the peacekeeping business. Many people looked at Canada as a symbol of peace which many still do, but most do not know that Canada has fled from its old ways and now is just an image of the past. Canada is no longer presented as a peacekeeping country. Therefore Canada is not the peace keeping country it used to be because of its lack of support to the United Nations, Canada’s opinion on its duty as a peacekeeper, and the loss of influence as a peacekeeper.

Canada’s role in Rwanda started in 1993, when the United Nations sent 2,500 peacekeepers that included 400 Canadians to Rwanda (Colyer,Cecillon,Draper,& Hogeveen,2010,pg 104). This was in an effort to stop the conflict over power between the Hutu and Tutsi people (Colyer,Cecillon,Draper,& Hogeveen,2010,pg 104). In an incident in 1994, the Tutsis were blamed by the Hutu for an airplane being shot down out of the sky. The Hutu became angry and went on a murderous rampage that started the genocide on April 6 1994. With the Tutsi forming rebel groups it was not long before it led to a full scale civil war ( Government

When one thinks of Canada, he/she is most likely to stereotypically comment on a subject regarding hockey, beavers, maple syrup, and cold weather. However, not many stop and wonder about how Canada became the peaceful nation it is today. Throughout Canada’s relatively short and brief history, it has managed to flourish into a strong and powerful nation. Canada’s peaceful identity has been formed with meaningful historic events that have occurred throughout our history.It’s identity has been characterized by Lester B. Pearson's role during the suez canal, their involvement in the Vietnam war, and its engagement in peacekeeping missions around the world.

When most people think of Rwanda today, the first thing that comes to mind is the 1994

Many times we may hear but not respond, we see and don’t move and having the ability to take action we don’t even move a finger until the situation is out of control. It’s amazing how ignorant and stubborn the human race can be. This is exactly the response of many nations when it comes to genocide. Genocide is the systematic killing of all the people from a national, ethnic, or religious group. Two of the most recent genocides in history are the genocide of Rwanda and the genocide of Cambodia.

Under the power of Tutsi King Rwabugiri, ethnic differences were established when the King implemented a system in which, in return for labour, access to land was given. However, this system only applied to Hutu farmers and exempted Tutsi farmers (Eriksson, 1996). During the German colonization and later the Belgian trusteeship, the Tutsi were also favoured and viewed as superior (Eriksson, 1996). The Belgians increased the emphasis on the distinction of ethnic identity by issuing cards bearing the nationality designations of Rwandans (Klinghoffer, 1998). The colonisation by both Germany and Belgium contributed to an ethnic jealousy in Rwanda through treatment of the Tutsi (O’Halloran, 1995). The general decolonisation in Africa led to the Hutu revolution in which Rwanda underwent the transition from a Tutsi dominated monarchy to a Hutu led independent republic, which resulted in tens of thousands of Tutsi fleeing into exile (Eriksson, 1996).

Before Rwanda became an independent African run country, it was under Belgian control. In the 1930s Belgium imposed indirect rule and put Tutsis in control of government. The Belgians did not invent the two ethnic groups, Hutu and Tutsi, but colonial intervention enforced a new meaning for the two ethnicities and thus engrained a hierarchy among the Rwandans . The Tutsis could be determined by their taller slighter build, lighter skin and thinner noses; in conclusion, they were the whitest Africans . By 1994 the two groups were visibly indistinguishable because of mixed parentage. This is portrayed in the movie Hotel Rwanda when a journalist asks two women what ethnicity they are; he discovers that one is Hutu and the other Tutsi. The journalist replies that the women could be twins. In the 1950s the newly established United Nations began to pressure Belgium to vacate Rwanda. Belgium introduced reforms to increase Hutu representation in politics, so from the 1950s until 1962, when Rwanda achieved independence a Hutu movement was born. The Hutu movement was gaining momentum and national recognition; the violence conducted during this period forced thousands of Tutsis to leave the country. In 1961 Belgium sponsored the federal election and a Hutu man, Gregoire Kayibanda was elected to power. This Hutu revolution excluded Tutsis from government and military. Kayibanda’s successor,

Pre-colonial Rwanda operated under a monarchical political system, controlled by the Tutsis. The terms Hutu and Tutsi originated from the social and economic distinction between farming and animal husbandry. In general, Tutsis were pastoralists of higher social standing, whilst Hutus were famers of lower social status; the categories were not determined and had variation within. If a Hutu acquired enough cattle, they could become Tutsi and vice versa . Due to German, and later Belgian, colonisers developed a structure of categories for different “tribes” that functioned of aesthetic impressions. In the 1930s, Belgian colonial officers introduced identity cards that labeled Rwadans according to their ethnicity. The colonisers had an impact on the manner in which power was allocated in the colonial system. Belgian colonisers practiced indirect rule through the Tutsis, whilst treating them as a superior race, in the process cementing Tutsi dominance and increasing the arbitrariness and repression of local rule. In essence, under colonial rule, “race” became the central determinant of power; and consequently, “race” became a symbol of oppression. After World War II, Belgian withered under the newly established United Nations and thus introduced reforms that increased Hutu political representation. Henceforth seeing a new Hutu political class emerge and instigating the

The interviews with perpetrators and survivors of the horrific tragedy were extremely difficult to hear. The descriptions, provided in vivid detail, were extremely graphic and quite emotional to bear as well. Some other surprises were the graphic nature of the footage. Understandably, when you’re dealing with genocide, images of the aftermath are expected, however, I was not expecting such inhumanity and emotional scarring from the footage shown. The grisly nature of the conflict and the stories left untold from the victims are a reminder of the absolute horror of humanity at its

Germany indirectly ruled over Rwanda through the existing Tutsi monarch (mwami) and his chiefs (Magnarella, 2005). At the end of the World War I Belgium claimed the country and it became a colony of Belgium. They thought that the monarch system of having three chiefs per hill was too complicated and therefore in 1924 the Belgians stopped this system. (Prunier, 2001). The colonists made a division between Hutu and Tutsi that seemed to be based on an ethnical base. They believed that the Tutsi were originally descendants of the ancient Egyptians, also known as the Hamitic people. The colonists used this to their advantage in creating a Hamitic Myth that in general claimed that the Tutsi were superior to the Hutu because of their origin (Magnarella, 2005). By measuring the skull and the nose it was determined whether someone was a Hutu or a Tutsi. All Rwandans had to carry identity cards stating whether they were Hutu or Tutsi (White, 2014). The direct result of this was that the Belgians favoured the Tutsi minority and this had far stretching consequences for the Rwandan people. The Belgian government only allowed members of the Tutsi elite to be politically involved, only Tutsi's got education and they were the only people allowed to move freely and so on. It must be said that before the colonial time there was already a distinction between the Hutu and the Tutsi. But then again the Belgians made

As colonialism differentiated the ethnicities, a hatred began to emerge. After World War I, Belgium controlled Rwanda as a token of war and treated the country as such. Belgian administrators falsely speculated that governmental power in Rwanda should be organized by ethnic groups. Abruptly, they decided to establish a state run by the Tutsi tribe because they thought of the Tutsi as the natural rulers of Rwanda. In order to only have Tutsi governmental officials, the colonizers convinced the ethnic tribes that there were physical

Prior to colonial era, Rwanda had larger population of Hutus compared to Tutsis and Twa. Rwanda as a country was divided into three ethnic groups i.e. Hutu (approximately about 85%), Tutsi (14%) and Twa (1%) (United Nations). Although, Tutsis were the minorities, they belonged to the higher strata compared to the other ethnic groups; Tutsis were privileged and had power and control over the Hutus and Twas. “Hutus were formerly bound to their Tutsi patrons via client ship” (Sinema, 2012). When Rwanda was colonized by Germany followed by Belgium, they favored Tutsis as they represented the upper class prior to the colonization. These created a social system like feudal system where there was a power difference between the Hutus and the Tutsis. Tutsis were considered as lord and the Hutus on the other hand, were considered as peasants. As a consequence, this created an ethic tension between the Hutus and the Tutsis and created a system more like apartheid. Nonetheless, they managed to co exist in Rwanda until they were decolonized. Although there is no social distinction between the Hutus and the Tutsis, the conflict between these tribes increased tremendously after the independence from Belgian that led to mass murder and ethnic cleansing of the Tutsi by the Hutu.

Rwanda was inhabited by two main groups, the Hutus and the Tutsis. The Hutus were traditionally crop growers whereas the Tutsis were herdsmen. This division of labour meant that the Hutus far outnumbered the Tutsis. This meant that the two groups were separated not literally but figuratively in their roles of labour. When Rwanda was colonised by Belgium, a wedge was forced in between these two groups fully separating them. This was because the practice of the colonial administrators was to select those who were more privileged or educated as factors for the decision of who would run the country and who would be run. The belgians chose the Tutsis; tall, landowners and to the Europeans eye they were more political by appearance and nature. THis introduction of classification brought an unbalance to Rwanda. Some Tutsis began to behave like aristocrats and the Hutu to feel like they were peasants or