We
have just recently been through a Federal election and sure enough
when the competition heated up we were treated to the politics of
division - who is a real Canadian anyway – and that got me
thinking.....
Because
of course it is actually a complicated subject. Are we thinking of
old families versus the newly arrived on our shores, or those with
the right coloured skins, religions, languages or accents. Who is a
Canadian? And what degrees of Canadian are there? These are the
considerations we are encouraged to dwell on and evaluate our
neighbours by. But Canada is a nation of immigrants. That is the real
defining human category.
So
what about the various nations that arrived on our shores ten
thousand years ago or more and have more recently been swamped by new
arrivals? Have they been here on this continent long enough to
be proof against repatriation?
Before
First Nations peoples arrived and spread throughout North and South
America, who were the original inhabitants? Here is where things get
interesting because that seems a non question. Before humans, who
were the people? Because it was full of beings: animals, plains,
tundra, mountains and plants. From a human perspective it was a
larder waiting to be raided. That was the attraction then and still
is today. We call it resource extraction and think in terms of
minerals, oil, trees, but once it was woolly mammoth and other mega fauna. An
immensity of resources. All vanishing, all being used up at an ever
increasing pace.
We
do make distinctions between people and other animals, between rocks
and living things, the economics of division. That enormous open pit
mine though, the clear-cut mountainside; perhaps some of us blench a
little, as we should when the last of yet another species is hunted
down or blotted out. The history of this continent is a steady decline in diversity
since humans arrived. Hunting, chopping, digging, trapping. Roads,
farms, cities, airports, railways. We call it progress.
What
is genuinely Canadian? The cry of Loon, the splash of Beaver's
tail, the call of Raven, the ramparts of the Rocky Mountains.
.................................................
I
just finished writing this piece about what is Canadian and realized
of course that it would also work for American ( & etc.) as well.
It was the idea that we are able to place firm division between
different brands of human beings, but never make the leap
sideways and think of the rest of creation as beings too with their
rights and personalities that was my leap of concept.
We can destroy
what we place outside of our own circle. Minorities are always in
danger of being classified, whether it is peoples, religions etc. or
members of the greater natural world. Do mountains, forests and lakes
have rights? Does Raven? When we destroy 'the other' are we not
diminishing ourselves in the process?
2 comments:
I think it is the people. Diverse for sure, but with something in common.
When I ventured into this topic one of the complications was that CANADA is a political human entity but we also think of Canada as a geographical place. So 'genuinely Canadian' is usually a people (as in human) classification. My wander away from people as humans into people as all creatures and ( even further) that landscapes with lakes and rivers, mountains etc. have to be included, is a challenge to our conventional way of thought. This by the way is the way First Nations tend to conceptualize the state of things. Humans are part ( and not necessarily the important part) of something much larger. Does Raven have a voice? Obviously. Do mountains have rights? Lakes?.....
Actually I think that this way of thinking is the default one for human beings since the our beginnings and the present one is a terrible aberration. And yet we all feel ties to our familiar landscape and our domestic animals. We are deep down humans who feel beyond the human race.
Post a Comment