What do you think?
Rate this book
The Strange Demise of British Canada: The Liberals and Canadian Nationalism, 1964-68
Examining cases such as the introduction of the Maple Leaf to replace the Canadian Red Ensign and Union Jack as the national flag, Champion shows that, despite what he calls Canada's "crisis of Britishness," Pearson and his supporters unwittingly perpetuated a continuing Britishness because they - and their ideals - were the product of a British world. Using a fascinating array of personal papers, memoirs, and contemporary sources, this ground-breaking study demonstrates the ongoing influence of Britishness in Canada and showcases the personalities and views of some of the country's most important political and cultural figures. An important study that provides a better understanding of Canada, The Strange Demise of British Canada also shows the lasting influence Britain has had on its former colonies across the globe.
336 pages, Hardcover
First published May 1, 2010
1 person is currently reading
37 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
October 16, 2011
Here Champion has produced a balanced account of Canadian identity, culminating in Pearson’s tenure as Prime Minister of Canada in the 1960s—specifically Canada’s new flag and the unification of the Canadian Forces. The historical interpretation of such events has produced a dichotomy. First, the traditionalists supported overt symbols of Canada’s British past and identity, led in many ways by the Tories under Diefenbaker. In turn, the neo-nationalists, led by Pearson’s Liberals, reject overt British symbols in favour of what they felt were Canadian symbols infused with “British” spirit, born in the liberal tradition.
Champion begins with an outline of “Britishness” in Canada. He successfully highlights the complexity of identity politics by pointing out that, as often as not, it was British-born Canadians who advocated for unique Canadian symbols and who derided Canadians who attempted to mimic British mannerisms and culture--of course, many, if not the majority, of British Canadians displayed strong ties to their ancestral homeland.
Contrary to the claims of many, Conservative and Liberal alike, the Liberal/neo-nationalist narrative of Canadian history and identity was as much a product of Britishness as was the traditionalist/Conservative narrative. The two narratives, born in the British tradition, went in different directions with that tradition. The traditionalists were derided for clinging to the apron strings of the mother country, and in doing so slavishly following tradition in a way that seemed to portray an unwillingness to move on and a deep-seated insecurity with being Canadian and not British. In their turn, the neo-nationalist narrative was born out ideals found in the British tradition (multiculturalism, egalitarianism, parliamentary democracy etc.). They portrayed certain symbols (The Red Ensign flag, God Save the Queen, military uniforms/traditions) as being British and not Canadian.
Champion successfully undermines certain presumptions that were used to support the neo-nationalist position. He not only dismantled the stereotype of British Canadians mindlessly supporting symbols seen as British and not Canadian, but he also pointed out that “ethnic” (i.e. non-British) Canadians were just as likely to support those same symbols. Furthermore, the push for a new flag was often heralded as a means for national unity—yet, French Canadians, if not supporting the Red Ensign, were just as likely to see the new Maple Leaf Flag as being foisted on them by an Anglo-Canadian elite. In any case, the neo-nationalists succeeded in nearly erasing the Red Ensign flag from the consciousness of Canadians, many of whom scarcely remember any other flag than the Maple Leaf flag.
The other key battleground in the history of Canadian identity was the unification of the three branches of the Canadian military. Begun as a modernization exercise aimed at increased efficiency, the secondary goal was also eradicating “Britishness”—not only in traditions and history, but also by dismantling the military culture of the time, seen as predominantly Anglophone, to the exclusion of French Canada. Since the unification in the 1960s, there has been a rollback of the changes—a return of the pre-unification branch names, a return to pre-unification ranks and uniforms etc. At the same time, the recent return of “Royal” to the RCN and RCAF was derided in some quarters as being “colonial”, as if such tradition was not earned by Canadians serving Canada with honour and distinction.
In the end, I was pleasantly surprised this book, a credible account of identity politics in Canada. The majority has rejected the traditionalist view of Canadian identity and, rightly or wrongly, it is not likely to return in force. At the same time, few Canadians are aware that a tiny group of men, almost a Canadian aristocracy of wealth and privilege, remade Canada in their own image during the 1960s, an image that has been virtually unquestioned in the intervening years. In the end, Champion is right—Canada is and will always be “British”.
Champion begins with an outline of “Britishness” in Canada. He successfully highlights the complexity of identity politics by pointing out that, as often as not, it was British-born Canadians who advocated for unique Canadian symbols and who derided Canadians who attempted to mimic British mannerisms and culture--of course, many, if not the majority, of British Canadians displayed strong ties to their ancestral homeland.
Contrary to the claims of many, Conservative and Liberal alike, the Liberal/neo-nationalist narrative of Canadian history and identity was as much a product of Britishness as was the traditionalist/Conservative narrative. The two narratives, born in the British tradition, went in different directions with that tradition. The traditionalists were derided for clinging to the apron strings of the mother country, and in doing so slavishly following tradition in a way that seemed to portray an unwillingness to move on and a deep-seated insecurity with being Canadian and not British. In their turn, the neo-nationalist narrative was born out ideals found in the British tradition (multiculturalism, egalitarianism, parliamentary democracy etc.). They portrayed certain symbols (The Red Ensign flag, God Save the Queen, military uniforms/traditions) as being British and not Canadian.
Champion successfully undermines certain presumptions that were used to support the neo-nationalist position. He not only dismantled the stereotype of British Canadians mindlessly supporting symbols seen as British and not Canadian, but he also pointed out that “ethnic” (i.e. non-British) Canadians were just as likely to support those same symbols. Furthermore, the push for a new flag was often heralded as a means for national unity—yet, French Canadians, if not supporting the Red Ensign, were just as likely to see the new Maple Leaf Flag as being foisted on them by an Anglo-Canadian elite. In any case, the neo-nationalists succeeded in nearly erasing the Red Ensign flag from the consciousness of Canadians, many of whom scarcely remember any other flag than the Maple Leaf flag.
The other key battleground in the history of Canadian identity was the unification of the three branches of the Canadian military. Begun as a modernization exercise aimed at increased efficiency, the secondary goal was also eradicating “Britishness”—not only in traditions and history, but also by dismantling the military culture of the time, seen as predominantly Anglophone, to the exclusion of French Canada. Since the unification in the 1960s, there has been a rollback of the changes—a return of the pre-unification branch names, a return to pre-unification ranks and uniforms etc. At the same time, the recent return of “Royal” to the RCN and RCAF was derided in some quarters as being “colonial”, as if such tradition was not earned by Canadians serving Canada with honour and distinction.
In the end, I was pleasantly surprised this book, a credible account of identity politics in Canada. The majority has rejected the traditionalist view of Canadian identity and, rightly or wrongly, it is not likely to return in force. At the same time, few Canadians are aware that a tiny group of men, almost a Canadian aristocracy of wealth and privilege, remade Canada in their own image during the 1960s, an image that has been virtually unquestioned in the intervening years. In the end, Champion is right—Canada is and will always be “British”.
Displaying 1 of 1 review